Alaska legislators push Eielson as new home for F-35s
3 months ago | 2539 views | 20 
| 18 
| 
| 
| 18 | |
The letter, dated Oct. 1 and signed by Rep. Don Young and Sens. Mark Begich and Lisa Murkowski, calls Eielson “the perfect base geographically” for the fighters, given the large amount of available airspace.
The letter to Air Force Secretary Michael Donley also touts the strategic importance of Alaska in facing possible future threats from China, Russia and North Korea.
“Alaska is on the front lines when it comes to adversarial countries like North Korea and should be at the forefront of defense technology,” Young said in a statement. “Eielson is the best place for the F-35s, and I hope that the Department of Defense can recognize that.”
One flight-ready F-35 costs $83 million to produce and is capable of close air support, tactical bombing and air defense missions. Three variants of the F-35, each capable of a different type of takeoff and landing, are being produced by Lockheed Martin.
The Air Force is reviewing which of the more than 200 U.S. military bases worldwide will receive the fighters. An announcement narrowing the list of prospective bases to six is expected Thursday.
In October 2008, an Eielson spokesman said the base, along with Shaw Air Force Base in South Carolina, Mountain Home Air Force Base in Idaho, Moody Air Force Base in Georgia, Hill Air Force Base in Utah and Eglin Air Force Base in Florida, were in the final running to receive the F-35. The fighter likely will go to more than one of those bases.
No formal announcement was made by Air Force higher-ups. Air Force Secretary Michael W. Wynne and Air Force Chief of Staff Gen. T. Michael Moseley resigned in June 2008 following discovery of lapses in the Air Force’s handling of nuclear weapons and fuses and in nuclear stockpile security. Donley was sworn in as Air Force secretary in October 2008.
Members of Congress with military bases in their districts reportedly have been vigorously lobbying Air Force officials to bring the stealth-capable F-35 to their states.
According to one local observer, the makeup of Alaska’s congressional delegation could be one factor hurting Eielson’s chances of getting the new fighter. Last year, when it was announced the F-35 was coming to Eielson, Alaska was represented by Sen. Ted Stevens, whose seniority made him the top Republican on the Senate Appropriations Committee’s defense panel.
Begich defeated Stevens in last year’s election.
“It is a huge liability,” said Jim Dodson, president and CEO for the Fairbanks Economic Development Corp. “If you can imagine, they only built 180 F-22s, and two wings were stationed at Elmendorf.”
Dodson said even if Eielson doesn’t receive an F-35 wing in 2012 when the planes are introduced, they could come to Alaska a few years later.
Bringing the F-35 to Eielson and the construction that would come with it is a potential boon for the base and surrounding areas.
“We in the borough and FEDC have worked very hard to ensure Eielson is on the short list,” said Jim Whitaker, Fairbanks North Star Borough mayor.
Contact staff writer Chris Freiberg at 459-7545.
"...at over 80 million a pop, it will need to be some airplane. Who are we trying to outgun? Osama?"
Perhaps you are not aware of it but the 'former Soviet Union' (now the Russian Republic of Independent Federated States or some such, I believe) STILL manufactures State-of-the-art air superiority fighter planes. They then offer to sell them to anyone who can afford the price (AND IT DOESN'T MATTER TO VLADAMIR PUTIN WHETHER THE TWO-BIT LITTLE DICTATOR IS BOTHERING TO FEED THE PEOPLE OF THEIR COUNTRY EITHER)!
The United States still builds airplanes that are a generation ahead of the Russian (or most European for that matter) planes. As long as we can keep "El Presidente to the World" Barack Obama from NATIONALIZING our Air Craft Manufacturing Companies (like he has done for the Car Companies, and the Banking and Mortgage Companies, and like he is TRYING to do for the Medical Industry) we may survive the next three years until the people of this nation have one more opportunity to reverse the grievious mistake they made in electing this BOZO to the Executive Mansion.
Yes, he is still my President BUT THAT DOESN'T STOP HIM FROM BEING A COMPLETE AND UTTER BOZO! I'd like to use stronger adjectives in describing him but in the interest of NOT being deleted (and/or subsequently banned), I'll stick with BOZO!
Are we supposed to halt improving the technology that protects us because we are not currently being attacked?
Obamas giving money to everyone, why not use it for something tangible instead of it disappearing in a whirlwind like the rest of it
Would this be the "plane to nowhere"
at over 80 million a pop, it will need to be some airplane. Who are we trying to outgun? Osama?
Hasn't there been enough high tech equipment bought and paid for with tax money to keep the hoards at bay? I like cool toys as much as the next guy, but allowing for cost overruns, and increased costs of maintenance and cost of support programs, shouldn't we have an indentifiable threat worthy of this expense?
After all shouldn't we be paying back the trillion or so we owe the CHICOMS?
Thank you for thanking me.
I don't have to support or agree with the government cause I'm a war veteran.
I don't have to want more of it's influence in my life cause I served time in it.
I'm no military hater either. I enjoyed it.
But I don't agree that that most of the people in the military are good people.
It's a job.
Most of these people didn't join cause they wanted to serve their country. Lots of them joined to get citizenship, or avoid jail, or medical malpractice, or get out of their poverty. Preach your military propaganda to someone else. I have served in many countries around the world. Near every base/post is a line of bars, prostitution and crime. It runs through the ranks. The military keeps it hush hush, and they don't fire people, they just get transfered to places like Fairbanks Alaska.
So No!!!
I don't need your military expansion of personnel and weapons near my residence. Taking jobs, beating natives, and pushing their diversity on us, so our heritage is stamped out faster and we become more like your precious lower 48.
Thanks but nothanks.
I hope, No. I pray they choose somewhere else.
So go tell that to your godless mercenaries.
Only $83,000,000.00.
What is the hourly cost to run one?
I guess we've got to give Begich a chance to use his 'close ties' with the Democrats to see just how far catering to their egos will get him.
5 more years and I'm hoping a better candidate steps up.
Thank you to our Congressional delegation for realizing the importance of planning for the future instead of reacting after it is too late and thank you Jim Dodson, for your tireless efforts to keep Eielson open and viable. You are a great asset to the community.
Diane
“There are those of us who would really prefer to see the bases, and Fairbanks, NOT get bigger. We came up here to live in a small town at the edge of the wilderness; and there is a lot more town and a lot less wilderness than there was.”
Why would you move next to two major military installations if you expected this? Fort Wainwright (Ladd) has been here since the 30s. If I wanted to move to a small town (as described above) I would not move to one with 2 military installations next to it. And actually both the Post and the Base are smaller than they have been in the past. The bases themselves have not increase in physical size since forever. Sounds like one of those people that move to the end of a runway at a large airport and complain about the noise.
There are those of us who would really prefer to see the bases, and Fairbanks, NOT get bigger. We came up here to live in a small town at the edge of the wilderness; and there is a lot more town and a lot less wilderness than there was. Why do our elected officials always assume that development/growth/etc is automatically good?
And as far as Mr. Dodson's concern about political clout... Sure hope our military leaders have America's defense as a priority over political shenanigans. Because I don't think Paul Revere and his horse can get a head of an in-coming ICBM.
I can't wait either. The only sign I see of 'gang banging military' are the quiet, sedate, young men and women wearing the digicam uniforms in businesses and restaurants around town. Of course, I don't tend to 'frequent' the bars and 'short-time' motels so I probably don't see the same few 'bad apples' you mention.
"More racism, violence, crime, (and) over crowded schools?" Really? I wouldn't think it's possible for military members to be more racist that some of the posters who regularly 'attend' this forum. I know I have my moments but I really do try to "keep it under control" (until someone else with a load of 'racist' manure like CurtJ starts taunting everyone who is not him).
Perhaps, more Americans are what we need to allow people like you and CurtJ to have a target for your bile and venom...
Just because the military has a few bad apples it doesn't mean they are all rotten.
You should be thankful of the business the military brings to your community and the job they do. Now if you want to get rid of someone, then I suggest you try to run off the meth heads and the pot smokers.