• Please take a moment and update your account profile. If you have an updated account profile with basic information on why you are on Air Warriors it will help other people respond to your posts. How do you update your profile you ask?

    Go here:

    Edit Account Details and Profile

OKC

CommodoreMid

Whateva! I do what I want!
None
Super Moderator
Contributor
Paging Statesman/OUSooner...

As a tube type I know the short answer is yes, though under what exact circumstances I don't know...
 

magnetfreezer

Well-Known Member
Regarding notions of building longer runways to accommodate the big white jet, which a lot of people haven't even heard of (E-6... that's the jamming one that flies off the carriers, right???),

It's been over fifteen years since the JPATS contracts started getting signed and just this year the Navy finally started digging (note: no concrete poured yet) to expand runways at the training command OLFs (the new airplanes need a lot more runway than the T-34s did). The decision to buy hundreds of these airplanes were made during the Clinton administration. Maybe I'm just being cynical about this :rolleyes:

I agree though- it'd be neat for those Navy airplanes to call a Navy base their home.
Probably dealing with all the noise complaints/encroachment issues/surrounding property owners whose land just doubled in fair market value. The environmental impact statements alone miight kill them; the AF has been trying to expand a MOA (badly needed) that sits in some of the lowest population density areas in the lower 48. The process - for something that should take no more cost than reprinting sectionals on the next re-issue and signing a new LOA with center - has dragged on for over 10 years, and the amount of conspiracy theories from ranchers, complaints from "environmentalists", and posturing by pretty much everyone involved has resulted in little to no movement on the issue.
 
Top