No F-35s for Alaska base: Eielson left out of decision for new jets' home
3 months ago | 1303 views | 9 
| 3 
| 
| 
| 3 | |
In fact, while the Air Force announced last year that Eielson was at the top of a short list to be considered for the next generation fighter, the base has now been labeled as being in the middle third of more than 200 bases that were reviewed for basing of the F-35.
The decision left Alaska’s congressional delegation wondering what went wrong during the past year. In a letter sent Thursday to Secretary of the Air Force Michael Donley, the delegation said warfighting commanders described Eielson as a preferred base last year. Thursday’s decision came from a scoring system, they said.
The scoring system takes into consideration several aspects of a base’s location, including weather, airspace and its capacity to house the planes and the infrastructure needed to support them. The Air Force did not release exact details of how Eielson scored.
“This morning we were disappointed to learn that Eielson AFB has not only been removed from consideration for initial basing but, given its position in the scoring, may never see the permanent basing of F-35s,” the delegation letter stated.
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 has ordered more than 1,700 of the fighters.
In October 2008, Brig. Gen. Mark Graper, commander of Eielson’s 354th Fighter Wing, sent a letter to community leaders announcing that 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.
Of that initial list, only Eielson and Moody no longer have the Air Force’s top consideration.
The congressional delegation’s letter ends with a request for a meeting to explain why Eielson scored so differently using the two different criteria.
“My commitment at this point is to really try to get to the bottom of this and find out what happened, from last year Eielson going to a pretty sweet position on a short list to where it is today,” said Sen. Lisa Murkowski, R-Alaska.
Murkowski compared the formula used to determine F-35 placement to that used for the 2005 Base Realignment and Closure process, which almost resulted in the closure of Eielson.
“It’s not unlike the most recent BRAC round, which some said was an infallible formula,” she said. “In fact, it was not infallible. It was a joke in some circles.”
Sen. Mark Begich, D-Alaska, released a statement in support of the Air Force’s selection process, but he still said he was disappointed to see that no Alaska bases would receive F-35s.
“The Air Force designed this current selection process to be more objective and less political than those in the past, and I appreciate that,” he said. “But I still plan to inquire how this process was managed and that the advantages of Alaska’s bases were clearly understood and taken into account in this decision.”
The junior senator added that he will use his seat on the Senate Armed Services Committee to find other opportunities for military growth in Alaska.
The Air Force is expected to make more basing decisions about the F-35 in 2013.
Rep. Don Young, R-Alaska, also issued a statement expressing his disappointment about the Air Force’s decision.
“Alaska is on the front line when it comes to adversarial countries like North Korea and should be at the forefront of defense technology,” Young said. “Eielson is the best place for the F-35s, and I’m sorry that the Department of Defense could not recognize that.”
The Air Force’s decision came after members of Congress with military bases in their districts vigorously lobbied Air Force officials to bring the F-35s to their states. In last year’s election, Begich defeated former Sen. Ted Stevens, whose seniority had made him the top Republican on the Senate Appropriations Committee’s defense panel.
Fairbanks North Star Borough Mayor Jim Whitaker expressed hope that Eielson could move into a higher position if the borough addresses the military’s concerns.
While the lack of F-35s at Eielson means less money coming into Interior Alaska during the next few years, Whitaker said, the Department of Defense’s decision does not mean it plans to close Eielson during the next BRAC round, expected to begin around 2014.
Whitaker noted Eielson could host some of the numerous F-16s returning to the U.S. from bases abroad.
Contact staff writer Chris Freiberg at 459-7545.
to do more than send a letter to Secretary of Air Force.
The question that needs to be asked, "Is the United States Air Force;
1.) protecting golf courses, or ..
2.) defending America from hostile intruders?"
Because if the Air Force isn't willing to put the best aircraft available at Eielson AFB where the F-35s can defend America, then maybe they don't need any airplanes, just more golf carts.
This is just one of many spending areas Alaska is now shut out from with Stevens gone.
And for what? As it turned out, he was exonerated.
And even if he wasn't - voting against his Senate power for a $130,000 remodel?
Fools, all of those who voted for Begich.