appDude

Should not be a domicile for ANY aircraft. You can't deadhead from there with any efficiency to recover freight. Should have closed for the MD11 many years ago. But YES, stay as a major hub/sort facility.

vc931

A large number of 777 pairings start out with a deadhead too ANC. Additionally, tons of ANC layovers in the 777. Might make sense to have some of that based in ANC.

Kolohe

Why would the inability to rapidly deadhead due to contingency (recover freight) infer inefficiency? ANC pairings have historically required few deadheads, which reflect an increased operational efficiency with respect to scheduling and execution. There are plenty of options from the enterprise that can meet contingency freight recovery without having to hastily deadhead from ANC.

If/when MEM continues to lose commercial pax capacity we should consider closing the domicile as well...but yes, stay as a major hub/sort facility perhaps. But first we should inform UPS in ANC that they too have it all wrong...

Adlerdriver

Several of the northern NOPAC routes don’t even require ETOPS to use them. We’re flying 767s between ICN-ANC already. Too many times to count I flew from ANC to Asia non-ETOPS on the 777, so that’s hardly a show stopper if the company wants to use the 76 out
of there. Personally I don’t see it being a widespread option. Maybe some niche cities that need supplemental lift but the 76 is hardly a replacement for the MD on most Asia cities out of ANC.

I also don’t understand the deadhead out of ANC for freight recovery being a domicile limiting issue. The company’s long time solution has always been to revise us in the field and deadhead new bodies to back fill which allows them to take multiple days to get new blood in theater. If ease of DH was a domicile killer we’d have put MEM, IND and even CGN out to pasture years ago. Shoot, sometime we can’t even build pairings with deadheads to Europe out of MEM that can be done in just one duty period.