Talk:RAF Alconbury

Early comments

Good editing/proofreading job Reverendlinux ! - bwmoll3

Thanks! Let me know if you have any questions about the current state of the base. I'm there now. - reverendlinux

I used to live at 1151A Cedar Drive on RAF Alconbury from 1977 - 1984. Saw the page was a stub and felt it deserved better - just saw a google earth image and looks pretty much the same. Although Site 5 looks like it's now gone and lots of new buildings .. Not in bad shape for 10 years since it was active :) - bwmoll3

This is my second round here. Did four years in 1998 on a TDY. Loved it. When the chance came up, I grabbed it. A few things have changed. Lots didn't. Still a great base to be at. - reverendlinux

1 April - One F-5E was thought to be retained at Alconbury for static display as a gate guard.

In reality this is a plastic/fiberglass model with an authentic windscreen and canopy.

??? OMG . you're joking ???

Okay, I'm going to have to walk out there and take a closer look. Neat info! Reverendlinux 20:49, 2 April 2006 (UTC)

I altered the heading and caption for the WWII "patches". What is portrayed are the official unit crest Coat of Arms. Patches below numbered air force or command level were not authorized until air division and wing unit patches came into being. In WWII 8th AF groups did not have group patches--they wore 8th AF patches

Context?

Great article, but it's difficult for me to put it in perspective. It seems that for much of it's lifetime it was either a secondary to a nearby RAF base, or alternately one of three US bases that were sort of grouped together. Was this airbase a major US base, IE, was it much larger and busier than the other two that formed the Tri-Base group? Was any one of the airfields bigger or more important than the others? Maury 12:32, 26 April 2006 (UTC)

Your confusion is justifiable. Although RAF Alconbury had a flying mission for most of its life, the base saw a lot of coming and going of units. It's importance in the Cold War rose and fell depending on the Pentagon's (and NATO's) plans for possible war in Europe. Basically, it was just another pawn in the bigger scheme of things. After the flying mission ended in the mid-1990s, the base lost its airfield and switched from being a primary base with support from RAF Upwood to a support base for nearby RAF Molesworth. Reverendlinux 19:57, 28 April 2006 (UTC)

By 1978, RAF Alconbury was a single base. There was no 'tri-group' base by that time. I think there was some base housing at Molesworth, but we were not using it for flying. I'm not sure where Upwood was. Some of the bases over in England had common runways. Bentwaters and Woodbridge shared runways I believe, Lakenheath and Mildenhall also shared runways. Alconbury did not share a runway the two years I was there. PhantomPhixer 01:07, 28 May 2006 (UTC)

Until its phasedown in the mid 90's, Alconbury was always a front-line base. When I was with the 527th, I would spend 2 weeks a month TDY somewhere in Europe.. And we would have a lot of transient aircraft from other bases.. not always American. Ironically, up until the early 1980s, when the IRBM's were moved into Molesworth, the R&M facility at Molesworth, along with the Rifle Range and base housing there were satellites of Alconbury. Along with the base housing at Chelveston, Upwood and also at Wethersfield which was all managed by Alconbury. Molesworth was almost totally rebuilt in the 80's, because I recall in the 70's you could drive over the old WWII runway and see a lot of the old WWII buildings there in various forms of decay. With the end of the Cold War and Alconbury's phasedown.. it is the modern facilties at Molesworth that is really the only reason Alconbury is still open. bwmoll3 07:12, 2 June 2006 (UTC)

Just to set the record straight (a whopping 18 years late!), none of these bases mentioned had 'shared runways'. It is true that RAF Bentwaters and RAF Woodbridge (both USAFE bases in reality) were twin-bases supporting a common unit (81st TFW, tailcode 'WR'), and their aircraft switched between the two locations on a daily basis, but the air bases were two proximate but distinct locations separated by several miles of thick forest. Each airbase definitely had its own runway, and full associated facilities (control tower, radio frequencies, etc.)

Likewise RAF Mildenhall and RAF Lakenheath (also USAFE, and both still operational in 2024) are separated by several miles of farmland and housing, and each location has it's own runway. In their case, the two bases have/had different roles and units, and are therefore quite distinctive from each other, with Mildenhall servicing the air tanker fleet (KC-135, KC-10, etc), together with 7th SOS MC-130s and CV-22Bs, whilst Lakenheath supports the F-15s & F-35s of the 48th Fighter Wing (Tailcode 'LN'). WendlingCrusader (talk) 10:22, 24 August 2024 (UTC)

Current

I flew over this base in about 2001 - the old runway was packed (as in solid) with hundreds of parked cars. Anyone know why?? 86.141.244.131 21:48, 10 October 2007 (UTC)

Several car manufacturers use the old runway area for storing new cars before they are trucked out to the various local dealerships. Ford, Jaguar and Land Rover are the two I see almost everyday being hauled in and out of there. Also, if you go to maps.google.co.uk and enter PE28 4DA as the location, you'll get an aerial shot taken sometime between 2003 and 2005. Tons of cars! Reverendlinux 09:44, 13 October 2007 (UTC)

How interesting. Looks like a load of transit vans especially on the photo... I remember even more than that, though. There was a rather busier base in the area, other than the one I was flying out of. Very strange land to be above as well, especially the straight twin canals a bit to the north.81.153.168.73 18:17, 14 October 2007 (UTC)

4th Tactical Depot Squadron

I see no mention of the 4th TDS, yet I spent three years of my life there, 1956-59! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.104.253.114 (talk) 01:52, 10 September 2009 (UTC)

Still Active?

Looking at the location with google maps / satellite view and streetview, this doesn't look like an active airfield, or even an active US military base! Is the article up to date? DMcMPO11AAUK/Talk/Contribs 15:08, 26 August 2011 (UTC)

I don't believe it is. In this article the BBC say it was sold in 2009 for £27.5m. There is even an Act of Parliament (or similar) relating to the sale dating from 2003: The Alconbury Airfield (Rail Facilities and Connection to East Coast Main Line) Order 2003 relating to the change. Here is an update explaining why the rail freight connection has still not been built. PeterEastern (talk) 13:40, 28 November 2012 (UTC)

If you read the BBC reference at the bottom it says "RAF Alconbury, separate to the airfield, will continue in its normal capacity as a non-flying facility for the American Air Force" so the installation is still open. Gavbadger (talk) 14:44, 28 November 2012 (UTC)

I understand now. However, would it be appropriate to add a section about this current usage of the airfield? I say that because it probably isn't appropriate to create a separate article for the airfield. As such, this is probably the place for it. PeterEastern (talk) 17:10, 28 November 2012 (UTC)

Yes, it might have it's own article in the future depending on what actually happens. Gavbadger (talk) 17:29, 28 November 2012 (UTC)

The airfield was sold by the MOD back in the 1990s. It is known now as the "Alconbury Enterprise Zone" and is in private ownership. Alconbury Enterprise Zone website

It is interesting that the part of RAF Alconbury currently in military use is the former Abbots Ripton Airfield which was merged with Alconbury in the early 1950s when the base was reopened by the USAF. The airfield area is the original Alconbury airfield that was used in World War II. Bwmoll3 (talk) 18:21, 28 November 2012 (UTC)

Possible Nuclear Weapons at Alconbury

I was the unit training manager for the 10th Equipment Maintenance Squadron for most of 1983 and part of 1984. Our unit did have about ten airmen with the Air Force Specialty Code of 463X0 (at the time) with the X being an odd number that indicated the holder's skill level. The 463 part meant the person holding that code was a Nuclear Weapons Mechanic. Given that, I suspect that some B-61 or other nuclear bombs were stored at Alconbury even if none of the flying units were actually nuclear trained and capable. I was only allowed 'inside the wire' one time to inspect training records and never saw what was in the igloos. Can anyone else shed some more light on this? Remember the RF-4C's were unarmed and I believe the F-5E's were the same but had the easy possibility of fitting machine guns. We also had some 462X0's, (Aircraft Weapons Mechanic) in the squadron.

Michou 13 (talk) 23:54, 22 May 2017 (UTC)

Glorious baseball history

1961 Haarlem Baseball Week champs?