Posted on 08/07/2014 9:59:17 PM PDT by Jet Jaguar
FAIRBANKS - Eielson Air Force Base is the leading candidate among Pacific air bases to house two squadrons of the new F-35 Joint Strike Fighter aircraft.
Eielson, near North Pole, had been on a short list of five candidates prior to an announcement Thursday morning. Eielson is named as the preferred site for the F-35s, although the announcement notes that the final decision will depend on an environmental study scheduled to finish in November 2015.
Each squadron consists of 24 planes and would require hundreds of civilians and airmen at the base, a potential boon to the economy of whichever community is picked.
The Air Force on Thursday did not name alternatives to Eielson among the five former candidates.
It wasn't immediately clear Thursday if the other four bases will be subject of further study now that Eielson has been identified as a preferred alternative. The other candidates were Joint Base Elmendorf-Richardson in Anchorage and three overseas Pacific bases. The Air Force kept the names of the overseas bases classified during the selection.
Sen. Mark Begich said Thursday morning that it's unusual for this kind of process to not name alternatives to the preferred alternative. The final decision will be made after the finalizing of the environmental impact statement, being conducted under the National Environmental Policy Act. "It's very rare," Begich said. "Even when I was mayor (of Anchorage), we did (environmental impact statements) and I don't recall one that's never had an alternative. Usually you have four or five options."
Begich, U.S. Sen. Lisa Murkowski and U.S. Rep. Don Young learned the news Thursday morning in a 10-minute conference call with Secretary of the Air Force Deborah James.
In a News-Miner telephone interview, Murkowski said James had "enthusiasm and bubbliness" in her voice when conveying the news. She said it was immediately clear James had good news for the Alaska delegation.
Murkowski also noted that Eielson's selection as the only alternative was notable. She said it's her understanding that the other candidate bases, including the foreign ones, won't be the subject of further study.
"The fact that no reasonable alternative is being studied or considered I think means that it is just an examination into Eielson moving forward," she said.
James praised Eielson's access to training ranges in an Air Force news release Thursday afternoon.
"Basing the F-35s at Eielson (AFB) will allow the Air Force the capability of using the Joint Pacific Alaska Range Complex for large force exercises using a multitude of ranges and maneuver areas in Alaska," James said. "This, combined with the largest airspace in the Air Force, ensures realistic combat training for the DOD."
James did not say whether Eielson's existing active-duty aircraft — a training squadron of F-16s — will move out if Eielson is ultimately chosen for the F-35s, according to both Alaska senators.
The Air Force news release states the F-16 squadron will not be subject to a "strategic basing process." Keeping them at Eielson will be one of the options.
Adding two F-35 squadrons at Eielson without removing the F-16s would mean more than 3,000 additional Department of Defense jobs at Eielson, according to a study by the Fairbanks Economic Development Corp. That would more-than double the base's current work force of 2,950. The same study calculated that such a move would bring an additional $379 million in payroll to the Fairbanks area.
After making its decision in 2015, the Air Force plans to invest $37 million at the new F-35 base location, followed by $130 million the next year. The planes would arrive in about 2019, according to the Air Force memo about the F-35 basing decision.
In addition to a potential boost to Eielson's workforce, Fairbanks leaders have also touted the F-35 as a way to protect Eielson's future. Eielson boasts the nation's second-longest runway and access to the largest military training space in the country, but it also has high energy costs. In 2005, Eielson was targeted for base closure through the national Base Realignment and Closure Commission system. The base wasn't closed but did lose a unit of A-10 Warthog aircraft. In 2011, the Air Force proposed cutting costs by moving the F-16s, the base's sole remaining active-duty aircraft, to Anchorage. The Air Force later abandoned that plan.
In April the Fairbanks North Star Borough Assembly approved an ordinance allocating $250,000 in borough funds to advocate for military "mission growth" in the Fairbanks area. Borough Mayor Luke Hopkins called the F-35 mission the "really big gold star" Thursday among military expansions for which the borough has been advocating.
"This is a huge stepping stone, but the biggest step is the decision (in November 2015 )," he said.
"I'm focusing on can we accommodate two squadrons of F-35s ... more families more traffic, more construction at Eielson?" he said.
Active Duty ping.
Sounds like a base that is only still open because of politics
Not really. If you look at globe, planes deployed from Eielson can be in Korea or Germany or Russia in 8 hours or less.
Murkowski said James had “enthusiasm and bubbliness” in her voice when conveying the news.
Awww,,, just like Curtis Lemay!
All they have right now is an F-16 training squadron and a tanker. Doesn’t sound like enough to have a real AFB.
We have an agressor squadron and a tanker squadron. We have the largest training airspace and provide red air training for USAF, USMC, Navy and allied air forces.
With the addtion of the 35’s, we can project US air power quickly to the pacific region.
Would this have something to do with Begich running for re-election?
He will claim it. But, the real sale came from General Kelly who just departed to the AOR.
Yes, and Putin now is putting his Cold War bombers in Western U.S. airspace with increasing frequency. Eilson could be a good base from which to intercept & escort the Commie Gomers flying their Great Circle routes.
Just no one tell the Pussy of the United States (POTUS), or he’ll squash the plan as being “provocative.”
How in the world can you have a decent golf course at Eielson? The AF can't really mean it.
/johnny
F-35 has a range 700 miles less than the F-18 E/F.
You never heard of snow golf?
Seriously, we had a golf course at Woomera Air Station in Australia... The problem was it was all sand trap and absolutely no greens. We used a steam roller to pack the sand where greens and fairways were supposed to be. All else was roughs. Couldn’t really make sand traps because everything else was sand trap.
Good to know where all the hangar queens will be and probably at a greater rate due to the harsh environment. The amount of resources that will be expended to keep these planes flying will be horrendous, eventually passing the acquisition costs that have already been out of control. It will require significant inventive book-cooking to keep this squadron’s availability in a satisfactory rating.
Is your statement based on facts or merely your opinion based on the numerous negative articles and posts made available?
Just curious as there are many who try to pass themselves off as some kind of expert when in fact, they are the polar opposite...In God I trust, all others I verify.
I guess the A-10s moved on a long time ago?
Yep. They shut down in 2007.
Google is your friend and regular reading of FR enhances your information quotient. Right now, I’m making my statement on the basis of the preponderance of the articles that I encounter. The information that is coming out seems based on solid evidence that is coming through reliable sources. YMMV...
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.