Town Square

Post a New Topic

Concerns about job losses, national security

Original post made on May 22, 2012

With rescue missions, disaster relief efforts and two major employers depending on the unique aspects of Moffett Federal Airfield, closing it down could be a big mistake. At least that's the opinion of Congresswoman Anna Eshoo and city officials from Mountain View and Sunnyvale in letters recently sent to NASA.

Read the full story here Web Link posted Tuesday, May 22, 2012, 12:10 PM

Comments (5)

Like this comment
Posted by Spelling police
a resident of Rex Manor
on May 22, 2012 at 5:01 pm

The plural of spacecraft is spacecraft.

Like this comment
Posted by Otto Maddox
a resident of Monta Loma
on May 22, 2012 at 8:13 pm

Is there some reason they can't ship satellites out of San Jose or San Francisco?

I find it hard to believe next closest suitable airfield is McClellan. If the President of the United States can take off from SFO (which he has) then I'm sure a sattelite can as well.

I don't know if Eshoo has been paying attention but the U.S. no longer has a manned space program. One less thing this rescue squadron needs to worry about right?

When our military becomes just another welfare program (for companies) it will lose effectiveness. It already has in lots of ways. We end up with weapons the military doesn't want and we keep bases open the military would rather close.

All because of where these weapons are built or what district the base is in. Not because of the role they play in our national defense.

The military gave up Moffett long ago. Seems like no one is paying attention to that fact. Now NASA is saying they don't need it.

Time to say goodbye to Moffett once and for all.

Like this comment
Posted by cd
a resident of Rex Manor
on May 23, 2012 at 12:02 am

Loral and Lockheed build satellites in Bay Area, and their revenue are in tens of billions. They employed thousands of high-paid engineers and scientist locally. Shutting down Moffett will drive them out, and thousands of families will be impacted.

There are not much manufacturing job left in Bay Area. Let's be careful what we wish for.

Like this comment
Posted by Allison
a resident of Shoreline West
on May 23, 2012 at 5:32 pm

SFO and OAK are built on fill land. Both SUSTAINED DAMAGE in the last quake.

Once you lose an airport, you will never get it back. The bay area has NO military installations if Moffett Field is bulldozed, not to mention the historic buildings on base as well.

Moffett works for military shipping because it's private, out of the way. While so can handle the president, it shut down the airspace completely and caused massive delays. At NUQ, it affects Much less traffic.

Because what we need more of in the Bay Area is MORE HOUSING!

If you're not a fan of planes flying over...why did you move next to an import int he first place? I can assure you the base was there well before your house was...

Like this comment
Posted by mpumas
a resident of another community
on May 30, 2012 at 11:38 am

After looking at the NASA position and the many comments here and with over 50 years of experience at Moffett, here is my 2 cents worth:

1. After NASA aircraft were transferred to Edwards Air Force Base, the flying mission for NASA Ames went away. NASA has no aircraft at Moffett.

2. As such, NASA wants to get out of the airfield business and wants the GSA to look for others to be the landlord. That could be the Air National Guard or local government. There are many, including Google and NASA, who would pay the $7 million operating costs to keep the field open.

3. The east side of the field is not part of the NASA wrequest. The Air National Guard is firmly entrenched and its time for the Coast Guard to relocate their long range rescue aircraft from McCellan to Moffett. Commonality of aircraft between the two organizations at the same location makes sense to me.

4. It is time to allow the freight carriers to relocate to Moffett. It is an ideal location with quick access to the freeway and San Jose, east bay and the pennisula. Early morning landings over the bay and afternoon/evening take-offs over the bay will mitigate the noise problem.

5. I can't see the airfield closing but can see NASA not being the landlord.

Sorry, but further commenting on this topic has been closed.

Burger chain Shake Shack to open in Palo Alto
By Elena Kadvany | 5 comments | 2,703 views

Eat, Surf, Love
By Laura Stec | 3 comments | 1,005 views

Couples: So You Married Mom or Dad . . .
By Chandrama Anderson | 0 comments | 974 views

The Cost of Service
By Aldis Petriceks | 2 comments | 628 views