NAS Keflavik

[Jim]

I'm reading that a very sudden "realignment" of NAS Keflavik is in the
works. News reports are rather sketchy whether it is a total pull-out
or not.

Might someone have more details?


ACC USN ret.
NKX, BIKF, NAB, CV-63, NIR
67-69 69-71 71-74 77-80 80-85
&
74-77

Founder: RAMN (rec.aviation.military.naval)

[Jeroen Wenting]

realignment in neo-military doublespeak means base closure.

"Jim" > wrote in message ...
> I'm reading that a very sudden "realignment" of NAS Keflavik is in the
> works. News reports are rather sketchy whether it is a total pull-out or
> not.
>
> Might someone have more details?
>
>
> ACC USN ret.
> NKX, BIKF, NAB, CV-63, NIR
> 67-69 69-71 71-74 77-80 80-85
> &
> 74-77
>
> Founder: RAMN (rec.aviation.military.naval)

[Jim]

Jeroen Wenting wrote:
> realignment in neo-military doublespeak means base closure.
>
>

Sometimes. Other times it might mean becoming a Naval Air Facility, or
Outlying Landing Field. Although the latter is rather uncommon outside
the CONUS. As an NAF the overall support structure and amenities would
be less.

Jim


ACC USN ret.
NKX, BIKF, NAB, CV-63, NIR
67-69 69-71 71-74 77-80 80-85
&
74-77

Founder: RAMN (rec.aviation.military.naval)

[PoBoy]

See
http://www.naskef.navy.mil/template5.asp?PageID=51&newsid=318

Jim wrote:
> I'm reading that a very sudden "realignment" of NAS Keflavik is in the
> works. News reports are rather sketchy whether it is a total pull-out
> or not.
>
> Might someone have more details?
>
>
> ACC USN ret.
> NKX, BIKF, NAB, CV-63, NIR
> 67-69 69-71 71-74 77-80 80-85
> &
> 74-77
>
> Founder: RAMN (rec.aviation.military.naval)

[PoBoy]

Also see:
http://www.military.com/features/0,15240,91699,00.html?ESRC=dodnews.RSS

Jim wrote:
> I'm reading that a very sudden "realignment" of NAS Keflavik is in the
> works. News reports are rather sketchy whether it is a total pull-out
> or not.
>
> Might someone have more details?
>
>
> ACC USN ret.
> NKX, BIKF, NAB, CV-63, NIR
> 67-69 69-71 71-74 77-80 80-85
> &
> 74-77
>
> Founder: RAMN (rec.aviation.military.naval)

[Jim]

PoBoy wrote:
> Also see:
> http://www.military.com/features/0,15240,91699,00.html?ESRC=dodnews.RSS
>
> Jim wrote:
>
>> I'm reading that a very sudden "realignment" of NAS Keflavik is in the
>> works. News reports are rather sketchy whether it is a total pull-out
>> or not.
>>
>> Might someone have more details?
>>
>>
>> ACC USN ret.
>> NKX, BIKF, NAB, CV-63, NIR
>> 67-69 69-71 71-74 77-80 80-85
>> &
>> 74-77
>>
>> Founder: RAMN (rec.aviation.military.naval)

Read both earlier, more questions than answers.

[Jeroen Wenting]

"Jim" > wrote in message ...
> Jeroen Wenting wrote:
>> realignment in neo-military doublespeak means base closure.
>>
>>
>
> Sometimes. Other times it might mean becoming a Naval Air Facility, or
> Outlying Landing Field. Although the latter is rather uncommon outside
> the CONUS. As an NAF the overall support structure and amenities would be
> less.
>
> Jim
>
That's why I classified "neo-military", in the old days it would indeed more
often mean the base were to be transferred to another branch.