photos of Moffet Field (NUQ)

David Lesher ) wrote:


: What happened to the proposal to turn it into a freight-only
: airport, to relieve SFO/Oakland?

I know there were a lot of community objections, but I don't know
if that killed it or not. There was also a proposal to put housing on
some of the base land, and that also seemed to go nowhere.
The original cargo field proposal was defeated in about 1997 but
doesn't seem to be completely dead:
http://sanjose.bizjournals.com/sanjose/stories/2002/12/09/story4.html?t=printable
Here's a summary history:
http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/facility/moffett.htm

In article ,
Merlin Dorfman wrote:

David Lesher ) wrote:


: What happened to the proposal to turn it into a freight-only
: airport, to relieve SFO/Oakland?

I know there were a lot of community objections, but I don't know
if that killed it or not. There was also a proposal to put housing on
some of the base land, and that also seemed to go nowhere.
The original cargo field proposal was defeated in about 1997 but
doesn't seem to be completely dead:
http://sanjose.bizjournals.com/sanjo...4.html?t=print
able
Here's a summary history:
http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/facility/moffett.htm


The real estate sharks run the local government -- especiallt Sunnyvale.
I was a token pilot on the Community Advisory Committee. Sunnyvale
eliminated every aviation person who applied for a spot on the
committee. Mountain View appointed three pilots but made sure that the
radicals got more representaion.

The entire structure of the committee was foregone that the
recommendation for a Moffett GA airport would be scuttled.

fudog50 ) wrote:
: Melvin,
: Thanks for responding, you might be right about the politics
: behind the base closings, I think my points were more based on the
: feelings and the sentiments of us active duty Navy people at the time,
: which was about 10-12 years ago. The sentiment is still there, about
: Feinstein and Dellums, sorry if you disagree....In response to your
: statements, some of them are way out to lunch, don't take it
: personally, I'm not saying you are out to lunch, but some of your
: statements are certainly not true.,,,,I see you have a bit of history
: about Moffett, were you stationed there?

I wasn't in the military but I worked next door at Lockheed for
almost 30 years, and I was on-base at Ames many times. (Still go
there occasionally.) My data on food stamps, relative pay of senior
NCOs vs. grocery clerks, etc., is old--I'm glad to learn that we
don't underpay them that badly any more.
(Do the Marines use the term "NCO?")
I'm interested to know where the hostility to Dellums and
Feinstein originated, especially given their (especially Dellums')
efforts on behalf of enlisted pay. Was it in the base newspapers,
communications from base command, or truly bottom-up?


: First off, Barbers and Whidbey aren't low cost, out in the
: sticks areas like Lemoore was back in 1960. Sure they were cheaper,
: back in 1994 than the south bay was, but only by about 15-20%, I know
: from personal experience, I moved to Whidbey with VP-40 when they made
: their homeport change from Moffett to Whidbey in 1993-1994. There was
: NO savings to the servicemember (remember we have BAH which pays
: between 85-100% of the average housing costs per area) and maybe only
: a slight savings in housing costs to the Navy overall, did this
: justify or make up for the hundreds of millions of dollars spent on
: moving the equipment, the people and the whole P-3 infrastructure and
: support facilities, (which has never fully recovered)??? Not even
: close, where is the savings? Just one example,,,,,It cost 12 million
: dollars to move the NAMTRA from Moffett to Whidbey,,,thats a LOT of
: housing payments for YEARS for Thousands of servicemembers,,,and that
: is just ONE unit that moved out of the dozens. I would estimate the
: entire move to Whidbey and Barbers as being in the 100's of millions
: of dollars....not even close to the difference in cost of living
: expenses,,,wheres the savings???

Then why the move? Whose idea was it? The cost of a new base
would be huge, but the cost of consolidating two existing bases into
one should not be that bad, especially since the whole was "less than
the sum of its parts," i.e., the total number of people and number of
flights per day was less than at the peak of operations of the two
separate bases. There must have been some savings somewhere or why
have BRAC at all?
I think the savings in housing costs as paid by the Navy must
be quite significant. Whidbey has got to have a much lower rent per
square foot than Silicon Valley/S.F. Peninsula, especially before the
bubble burst in 2000.

: I do agree with the overcrowding of air in the South Bay, One
: sight I'll always remember is that anytime you come up over the Santa
: Cruz mountains from the west (or inbound from any direction) you would
: see 6 beacons, only one was green/white (Moffett) we would man both
: observer windows and watch for traffic, especially form the 5 GA
: airports close by. Departures/Approaches were pretty hairy at times!

Were you around in 1975 or thereabouts when a P-3 collided with
NASA's Convair 880 research plane?

: Your statement about senior Noncoms getting foodstamps is
: ridiculous!!! Where in the heck did you get that??? To me a senior NCO
: (not a navy term, we call them petty officers and Chief petty
: officers), is like a 2-3 tour E-5 at the least, up to E-9. A married
: E5 with 6 years service makes over 50,000 dollars in the Bay area!!!
: (base pay = 25,000, BAH=25,000 and BAS= 3,000)
: How in the heck does that qualify you for foodstamps??? An E9 makes
: close to $90,000 with all 3 allowances...

Isn't housing allowance non-taxable? (So it winds up costing
the govt. more because of reduced tax collections; and maybe it doesn't
count in eligibility for food stamps. As I say, the info is old and I
hope we pay you guys more than that now, but I believe it was good info
at the time.

: Maybe you are talking about
: media stories that don't tell the whole truth? Like maybe an E4 or
: below with 9 kids??? They'd be on foodstamps wherever they worked at
: with no college educaton at 20-24 years old. (just like the recent
: media stories about injured Iraq War vets having money "taken away"
: for being in the hospital, I'll explain that BS and show you how spun
: up that one is if you have time someday and are buying the beer).

Are you still in the Bay Area? My e-mail address is valid, I'd
be more than happy to buy the beers and hear the story. But be aware
that grocery clerks among others have a good union and get well paid
regardless of ecucation...and maybe regardless of ability and
performance, but I digress.

: I'm happy you keep thinking a grocery clerk makes more than a
: senior NCO, it certainly is false but, it can only help their cause to
: get paid what they are worth and what they deserve, (I was an
: underpaid NCO for 18 years). Go to this link and you might be
: surprised at what an enlisted guy/gal really makes.

: http://usmilitary.about.com/library/.../pay/blpay.htm

Yeah, looks pretty good, but it also seems to validate that
it costs the Navy a lot to have people in the Bay Area and it does
make sense to close bases here and station people in lower-cost
areas.

: Don't forget to add in the nontaxable housing allowance (BAH) and
: subsistance allowance (BAS), and any other special pays (flight pay,
: medical pay, dive pay, sea pay, hazardous duty pay, etc), oh yeah and
: bonuses, (ACIP, SRB's, etc).

Housing allowance varies by more than a factor of two even
within California. Look at all the money the Navy would save by
having all military bases in Arkansas or Mississippi!
(BTW thanks for the URL.)

: I still maintain that the operational costs of Moffett Field
: are still being paid with your taxdollars, doesn't matter to your
: wallet which pot of money that it goes to (Navy, DoD, F.A.A., Federal
: Airfield, whatever, ) Its still government run and paid for. While I
: agree the Navy saved money, where's the savings to the taxpayer???

It has GOT to cost less to run Moffett than when squadrons of
P-3s were based there. I mean, is the whole BRAC thing a farce?

: Yeah Barbers is long gone, all the P-3's moved up the Island
: to MCAS Kanehoe a couple years ago, but they originally did move from
: Moffett to Barbers in 1993-1994.
: Again, thanks for responding, I'll look into the political
: stuff about Dellums and Feinstein again, but I don't think it will
: change my mind about them,,,have a Happy Holiday!

Happy holidays to you too. I sort of understand why the Brass
hates Feinstein and Dellums, they kept them from geting all the
fancy expensive toys at taxpayer expense, but I'm baffled as to why
enlisted personnel feel that way too.

On Fri, 26 Dec 2003 05:17:08 +0000 (UTC), Merlin Dorfman wrote:



Happy holidays to you too. I sort of understand why the Brass
hates Feinstein and Dellums, they kept them from geting all the
fancy expensive toys at taxpayer expense, but I'm baffled as to why
enlisted personnel feel that way too.


Mainly because those "fancy, expensive, toys" are the tools that they
use to keep from getting killed or wounded. Feinstein never, rpt never,
supported US troops, she only supported the jobs that the troops brought
to town.

Al Minyard

On 2 Dec 2003 01:27:03 -0800, (miso) wrote:

http://www.lazygranch.com/nuq.htm
I took a few aerial photos of this federal airfield. The FA18 photo
may be of interest to the group.

The C-141 that you couldn't find much on the Web about is all over the
place. Look for "Kuiper Airborne Observatory". There's a 36"
reflecting telescope just in front of the wing, as you can see.

Mary

--
Mary Shafer Retired aerospace research engineer

You can't make a blanket statement that every toy requested by the
military saved the lives of troops. Look at how few of the Reagan era
projects ever worked, though we added trillions to the national debt.

Dellums did much to investigate Agent Orange.

Alan Minyard wrote in message . ..
On Fri, 26 Dec 2003 05:17:08 +0000 (UTC), Merlin Dorfman wrote:



Happy holidays to you too. I sort of understand why the Brass
hates Feinstein and Dellums, they kept them from geting all the
fancy expensive toys at taxpayer expense, but I'm baffled as to why
enlisted personnel feel that way too.


Mainly because those "fancy, expensive, toys" are the tools that they
use to keep from getting killed or wounded. Feinstein never, rpt never,
supported US troops, she only supported the jobs that the troops brought
to town.

Al Minyard

miso ) wrote:
: You can't make a blanket statement that every toy requested by the
: military saved the lives of troops. Look at how few of the Reagan era
: projects ever worked, though we added trillions to the national debt.

: Dellums did much to investigate Agent Orange.

I worked at Lockheed at the time and just about every crazy idea
was being funded. Even in an emergency that kind of thing is not
justified because the good ideas get insufficient funding. (The bad
ideas were being funded way beyond the point where it was obvious that
the money could be better used elsewhere.) The money was coming in way
faster than we could effectively spend it--we were hiring people who
could only charitably be described as "marginally qualified."
I understand that this was part of a conscious strategy to force
the USSR to try to match us which they clearly could not do. But it
had many negative consequences for the US, for the defense industry,
and of course for the individual employees who were inevitably the
first and worst hurt when the time of reckoning came.
SDI ("Star Wars") is of course one of the best examples...
------------------------------------------------------
: Alan Minyard wrote in message . ..
: On Fri, 26 Dec 2003 05:17:08 +0000 (UTC), Merlin Dorfman wrote:
:
:
:
: Happy holidays to you too. I sort of understand why the Brass
: hates Feinstein and Dellums, they kept them from geting all the
: fancy expensive toys at taxpayer expense, but I'm baffled as to why
: enlisted personnel feel that way too.
:
:
: Mainly because those "fancy, expensive, toys" are the tools that they
: use to keep from getting killed or wounded. Feinstein never, rpt never,
: supported US troops, she only supported the jobs that the troops brought
: to town.
:
: Al Minyard

On Sat, 27 Dec 2003 19:25:22 +0000 (UTC), Merlin Dorfman wrote:

miso ) wrote:
: You can't make a blanket statement that every toy requested by the
: military saved the lives of troops. Look at how few of the Reagan era
: projects ever worked, though we added trillions to the national debt.

: Dellums did much to investigate Agent Orange.

I worked at Lockheed at the time and just about every crazy idea
was being funded. Even in an emergency that kind of thing is not
justified because the good ideas get insufficient funding. (The bad
ideas were being funded way beyond the point where it was obvious that
the money could be better used elsewhere.) The money was coming in way
faster than we could effectively spend it--we were hiring people who
could only charitably be described as "marginally qualified."
I understand that this was part of a conscious strategy to force
the USSR to try to match us which they clearly could not do. But it
had many negative consequences for the US, for the defense industry,
and of course for the individual employees who were inevitably the
first and worst hurt when the time of reckoning came.
SDI ("Star Wars") is of course one of the best examples...

Of course you, through your "special knowledge", know better than
the US Military what its needs are. Yeah, right.

Al Minyard

(miso) wrote in
om:

You can't make a blanket statement that every toy requested by the
military saved the lives of troops. Look at how few of the Reagan era
projects ever worked, though we added trillions to the national debt.

Which you would have us believe all came from defense spending.
Nice try but no cigar.
Just the increase in domestic programs during the Reagan years
about equals the entire defense budget.

Dellums did much to investigate Agent Orange.

So what excuse does his hand picked successor have.

IBM

__________________________________________________ _____________________________
Posted Via Uncensored-News.Com - Accounts Starting At $6.95 - http://www.uncensored-news.com
The Worlds Uncensored News Source

Alan Minyard ) wrote:
: On Sat, 27 Dec 2003 19:25:22 +0000 (UTC), Merlin Dorfman wrote:

: miso ) wrote:
: : You can't make a blanket statement that every toy requested by the
: : military saved the lives of troops. Look at how few of the Reagan era
: : projects ever worked, though we added trillions to the national debt.
:
: : Dellums did much to investigate Agent Orange.
:
: I worked at Lockheed at the time and just about every crazy idea
: was being funded. Even in an emergency that kind of thing is not
: justified because the good ideas get insufficient funding. (The bad
: ideas were being funded way beyond the point where it was obvious that
: the money could be better used elsewhere.) The money was coming in way
: faster than we could effectively spend it--we were hiring people who
: could only charitably be described as "marginally qualified."
: I understand that this was part of a conscious strategy to force
: the USSR to try to match us which they clearly could not do. But it
: had many negative consequences for the US, for the defense industry,
: and of course for the individual employees who were inevitably the
: first and worst hurt when the time of reckoning came.
: SDI ("Star Wars") is of course one of the best examples...

: Of course you, through your "special knowledge", know better than
: the US Military what its needs are. Yeah, right.

Much is forced on the US military by Congress, which the military
doesn't want or need. Congress knows better than the military what it
wants and needs of course. Starting with many useless/needless bases
that the military would love to close, but Congress won't give up the
pork barrel. And much is funded by Congress based on industry lobbying
that the services don't want or need.
As for my "special knowledge," I believe I have enough knowledge
to know when money is being wasted. Whether the military wanted or
needed what was asked for, they were _not_ getting it, for reasons as
described above.
In other words, any relationship between what industry was asked
to build (much less what actually got built) and what the US military
believes its needs are, was highly coincidental.
And if you don't know that, your knowledge of US military needs
is far from special.