Talk:CFB Goose Bay

Untitled

Goose Bay WAS NOT NOT NOT NOT NOT part of the "lend-lease" agreement.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 192.197.82.203 (talk • contribs) 2006-08-17

Airport Closed

DND has closed this airport. Right? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Apassley (talk • contribs) 00:52, 22 February 2007 (UTC).

According to [DND] dated 03 Oct 07:

Formerly geared to support allied military flying training, 5 Wing is evolving to meet the challenges of the 21st century. 5 Wing staff are actively working to enhance the training opportunities at Goose Bay and market our facilities to national and international clients.

Sounds like it is still open to me! - Ahunt (talk) 13:09, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

Space Shuttle Landing Site

This article has now twice had text inserted indicating that it is an alternate landing site for the Space shuttle and twice I have removed it. Global Security has a list of Space Shuttle landing sites and none of them are in Canada. If someone has a better ref that shows that Goose is indeed a Space Shuttle landing site then let's by all means put the information and that reference back in. Until someone can show a ref that says it is true I consider it an Urban legend and it doesn't belong in an encyclopedia

Well...

The city of Happy Valley makes that claim on their website: http://www.happyvalley-goosebay.com/home/5_wing_goose_bay.htm — Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.72.207.88 (talk) 22:30, 4 September 2012 (UTC)

They probably read it on Wikipedia, and besides that the Shuttle fleet has been retired. - Ahunt (talk) 00:00, 5 September 2012 (UTC)

Shuttle Space: 1983

This page says that he traveled from Canada, but says he was in Goose Bay, nor says landed there first:

Nasa

There is also no mention about being "the first time the U.S. space shuttle landed outside of your country."

I did not find anything talking about the Enterprise landings in Goose Bay, I guess it never occurred.

And the image of the landing has no source and required to be removed from the Commons.

If anyone know any reliable page, please insert the text. Thank you. Brunonar (talk) 23:45, 9 August 2009 (UTC)

Suitability to accomodate larger airliners

I just get off a plane (DL-209) which made an emergency landing at Goose Bay. It was a widebody aircraft (Boeging 767-300ER), and therefore hosted more than 200 passangers. We've been cleared through customs after some delay, so the article's statement about not being able to handle larger airliners might need fixing. I'm not familiar with wp's policies and I feel that I'd have to provide a source for such a statement, so I wonder what's the best way to proceed now?

12.130.119.147 (talk) 04:16, 14 November 2009 (UTC) -- Jkt (talk) 04:30, 14 November 2009 (UTC)

I just checked the source and it still says only 15. As you point out that was an emergency landing and there was a delay in clearing customs. If there is only one plane and a limited number of people then it would be easy to do. It's probably to stop the airlines from scheduling multiple flights that would overwhelm the airport and funnel them to Gander instead. The 15 is to limit the international flights to private aircraft and small charters only. Of course in an emergency situation then it would be different. By the way based on the time stamp on your comment it looks as if the customs officer(s) had to go to work about 8 hours early. They work from 12:00 - 20:00 Z. Enter CambridgeBayWeather, waits for audience applause, not a sausage 13:10, 14 November 2009 (UTC)

External links modified (January 2018)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on CFB Goose Bay. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://www.collectionscanada.gc.ca/webarchives/20071116053558/http://www.airtraining.forces.gc.ca/goosebay/ch3_e.asp to http://www.airtraining.forces.gc.ca/goosebay/ch3_e.asp
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070126072117/http://www.airforce.forces.gc.ca/5wing/squadron/444hist_e.asp to http://www.airforce.forces.gc.ca/5wing/squadron/444hist_e.asp

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 04:27, 23 January 2018 (UTC)

Surface

The runway surfaces are composed of Asphalt concrete. The material underneath—by definition—is not the "surface". 142.109.149.199 (talk) 20:29, 5 September 2019 (UTC)

The term asphalt concrete is not used in Canada. Here it is called "asphalt", as that linked article notes. "Concrete with asphalt overlay" is a much more complete and accurate description of the runway's composition. Why would we want to use a term not used in Canadian English and one that is less precise and complete? - Ahunt (talk) 01:24, 6 September 2019 (UTC)