Can I get some independant confirmation on this bit below ?

I don't trust DH as a source.

In article >,
says...
>
> "Henrietta K Thomas" > wrote in message
> ...
> > Dave Casey is right, Daryl. Buckley was converted into
> > an active-duty air force base in 2000. Here are some
> > excerpts from a news story at the time, found on the web
> > at http://www.pmel.org/Buckley.htm.
>
> I already posted where that Release was a bit premature of back dated
> considering the Active Duty 460th was not redesignated until April 2001 and
> not activated until October 2001. The base is currently not all the way
> activated and still as much a National Guard Base as an AFB. Go to
> http://www.buckley.af.mil/his.htm and read it there. You already know that
> they leave out the parts or edit out the parts that will blow thier stories
> into the next county.
>
> The name did change in October of 2000 when the 821st took over th command
> but the 821st was inactivated. Call it a holding outfit from the Space
> Command while the 460th was being activated. The Base was still largely a
> Guard Base at this point and is slowly being transformed. Base Housing has
> yet to be completed as well as most of the support buildings that an Active
> Duty Base requires.
>
> I request you take a good hard look at the stark differences between a Guard
> Base and an Active Duty Base. Regardless of the timeline of organization
> (which is still being organized even today), a Guard Base can be one
> building with a Chain link fence around the back yard. An Active Duty Base
> or Post is a totally self contained community and Buckley is far from that
> as of yet.
>
> You will note that it does state that the 460th Air Wing is largely
> Administrative in nature. That will change with the available Air Assets
> return I suspect. Until then, the 460th is there to support the Navy,
> Marines, Coast Guard, Air Force, Reserves and Guard Units that are there.
> You will also note that they are behind on their building schedule by at
> least a year and the cost has risen past the 100+ Million price tag.
>
> This was brought on by the closure of Lowry Training Center (AFB) and the
> closure of Fitzimins AFB Regional Hospital during the time when the past
> administration was overzealous about shutting down military facilities. It
> left one hell of a void. Actually, no a lot will change at Buckley except
> that its going to be a lot more crowded and the Guards need not have so
> many support personnel like Security Police, Law Enforcement and a bunch of
> other support people. That, alone, translates to a reduction if the Guard
> roster.
>
> Now for the coup de whatever (can't speak french). One moron of the
> :"Group" stated it was the wrong Service. LOL. There is a very large
> contingent of Air Army National Guard there as well.
> http://www.buckley.af.mil/organ3.htm . Once again, they only report what
> supports them and not the real truth. Buckley is one of the most diverse
> places I have ever seen in the number of Branches and types of Units that is
> represented. But it always has been. With it being the only Military
> Runway in Colorado except for the runway in Grand Junction Colorado
> authorized to land High Perfomance Military Aircraft on a regular basis,
> it's been used all along by the Actives as well as the Guards.
>
> What is changing is who commands what, not who does what. Buckley has over
> 3000 acres to grow on so it's a very good choice. It's been underused as a
> primary Guard Base and the area is in need of an expansion that is far
> beyond the economics of the Air or Army Guards pocket books. When you sleep
> with the devil to get something, it may end up owning you. This is a primary
> example.
>
> HKT, it's still primarily a Guard Base for the Colorado Air and Army
> National Guard but that lessens on a daily basis and will continue to do so.
> Right now, the Guards far outnumber the Regulars but it is progged to change
> in the near future. Something about 5 to 7 years starting in October of
> 2000 when the 821st took command of the base from the 140th Air National
> Guard. With the expansions happening, there are going to be a lot more than
> 15 ANG F-16s there in the end.
>
> BTW, one of the mentions on the site is the term, "Total Force". That is
> used in the context of ALL the branches of Service including the Air Force,
> Navy, Marine, Army and National Guard. When you utilize that term or any
> dirivitive of it, you just included all the branches as one. The "Group" is
> correct in that term but it has a much, much broader meaning than they are
> using it as. It always has.
>
> There is some good reading for you there. I found it quite interesting and
> none of it is the PR from the PR of 2000.
>
>


--
--
Remember, Friendly fire, Isn't :

Tank Fixer > wrote:

>
>Can I get some independant confirmation on this bit below ?
>
>I don't trust DH as a source.

As a Colorado resident, let me comment. Buckley has indeed become an
AFB.
>
>>
>> "Henrietta K Thomas" > wrote in message
>> ...
>> > Dave Casey is right, Daryl. Buckley was converted into
>> > an active-duty air force base in 2000. Here are some
>> > excerpts from a news story at the time, found on the web
>> > at http://www.pmel.org/Buckley.htm.
>>
>> The name did change in October of 2000 when the 821st took over th command
>> but the 821st was inactivated. Call it a holding outfit from the Space
>> Command while the 460th was being activated. The Base was still largely a
>> Guard Base at this point and is slowly being transformed. Base Housing has
>> yet to be completed as well as most of the support buildings that an Active
>> Duty Base requires.
>>
>> I request you take a good hard look at the stark differences between a Guard
>> Base and an Active Duty Base. Regardless of the timeline of organization
>> (which is still being organized even today), a Guard Base can be one
>> building with a Chain link fence around the back yard. An Active Duty Base
>> or Post is a totally self contained community and Buckley is far from that
>> as of yet.

While Buckley may not be the sprawling complex that larger AFB's are,
it certainly has all the functions normally found in a base, including
runways, maintenance, radar, ATC, weather, operations, munitions,
numerous tenants, personnel/finance, supply, BX/Commissary,
dormitories, etc.
>>
>> This was brought on by the closure of Lowry Training Center (AFB) and the
>> closure of Fitzimins AFB Regional Hospital during the time when the past
>> administration was overzealous about shutting down military facilities.

Fitzsimmons (note spelling) was a ARMY Medical Center, never an AFB.

>> It
>> left one hell of a void. Actually, no a lot will change at Buckley except
>> that its going to be a lot more crowded and the Guards need not have so
>> many support personnel like Security Police, Law Enforcement and a bunch of
>> other support people. That, alone, translates to a reduction if the Guard
>> roster.

Even as an ANG Base, Buckley had considerable security forces in
place, as it has long been home to NORAD and Space Command radar and
communications facilities.
>>
>> Buckley is one of the most diverse
>> places I have ever seen in the number of Branches and types of Units that is
>> represented. But it always has been. With it being the only Military
>> Runway in Colorado except for the runway in Grand Junction Colorado
>> authorized to land High Perfomance Military Aircraft on a regular basis,
>> it's been used all along by the Actives as well as the Guards.

Duh? Have we overlooked Peterson AFB with its 11,000 and 13,000 foot
parallel runways, home to the 302nd Airlift Wing as well as USSpace
Command? And, while Walker Field at Grand Junction is "authorized", it
isn't, by definition, a "joint use" airfield since it doesn't host
military support units. You could also accept Akron (with it's huge
747 training facility) as well as Pueblo which certainly has more than
enough runway and maintenance facilities.
>>
>> HKT, it's still primarily a Guard Base for the Colorado Air and Army
>> National Guard but that lessens on a daily basis and will continue to do so.
>> Right now, the Guards far outnumber the Regulars but it is progged to change
>> in the near future. Something about 5 to 7 years starting in October of
>> 2000 when the 821st took command of the base from the 140th Air National
>> Guard. With the expansions happening, there are going to be a lot more than
>> 15 ANG F-16s there in the end.

It should be noted that the 140th Tac Fighter Group has long been at
Buckley, with A-7D equippage before the current F-16Cs. It is an
"augmented" squadron with 24 UE, not 15--which is a "non-standard"
number by any definition.
>>



Ed Rasimus
Fighter Pilot (ret)
***"When Thunder Rolled:
*** An F-105 Pilot Over N. Vietnam"
*** from Smithsonian Books
ISBN: 1588341038

Ed Rasimus > wrote in message >...

<snip>

>
> It should be noted that the 140th Tac Fighter Group has long been at
> Buckley, with A-7D equippage before the current F-16Cs. It is an
> "augmented" squadron with 24 UE, not 15--which is a "non-standard"
> number by any definition.

Non-standard? I thought 15 PAA was the norm for ANG fighter squadrons?

Brooks

> >>
>
>
>
> Ed Rasimus
> Fighter Pilot (ret)

Back in the early 70's we were stationed at Lowry AFB but
lived in the suburbs of Aurora (way out in the boonies at that time)
under Buckley's traffic pattern and Air Nat'l Guard F-100's.
There was also a couple of Convair T-29's based out of there
that my Dad would fly from time to time (it just didn't seem right
to watch an old fighter jock head off into the wild blue wearing
a shirt and tie like an airline pilot!) SLUF's had just replaced the
Huns by the time we moved, but Buckley was still an ANG base
in the middle of fields and prairies. I imagine that Buckley is now
surrounded by urban sprawl.

-Mike Marron

> but Buckley was still an ANG base
>in the middle of fields and prairies. I imagine that Buckley is now
>surrounded by urban sprawl.
>

Yes, at the west gate the suburbs are filling in.
VL