RAF Mildenhall Closure?
 

Evening All

With reading about RAF Mildenhall going to close at some point in the future, what will become of Mildenhall another deserted airfield like the rest of the other USAF bases that have closed ?

And we have all this debate about runway capacity (or lack of) in the south east. Wouldn't Greenham Common have been an ideal location?

A problem with a lot of the former US airfields is the remediation costs. Their electrical systems are usually 110v and many other systems are designed around US requirements. When Bentwaters was handed back to Defence Training Estate it was a poisoned chalice.

Greenham Common would have been an ideal base for a civil airport, where they could have built a large cargo hub like at East Midlands Airport. With the growing population of the UK it seems to be houses etc, but why spend money on an airfield improving the taxiways and ramp when it is down for closure at some point.

Investment in infrastructure has traditionally been an indicator of impending disposal.

Good selection of Greenham how it is now here

Marshalls
 

Keep an eye on the house prices.. They are going to tank, along with the economy in that area.

Doubt it, house prices are booming in that area. People will gladly commute to Cambridge and Bury St Edmunds. As Lakenheath is staying open there will still be healthy demand for local businesses and services.

The A11 corridor, now it's all dual carriageway, is attracting a lot of regional investment and focus.

Absolutely, the future for Mildenhall (IF) it closes is likely to be thousands of new houses, to serve the booming Cambridge economy. The MoD is under massive pressure to release as much land as possible in order to feed our Governments perverse desire to concrete over as much of the UK as possible. Quite why the worlds 5th largest economy still has an insatiable appetite for "growth" is beyond me, but there you go.

Have a read about the Ox-MK-Cam corridor if you are in any doubt about the madness that our elected officials want to unleash on us.

" in order to feed our Governments perverse desire to concrete over as much of the UK as possible. "

actually it's to try and build houses for people to live in where they're needed

Fundamentally Harry there is no "Housing Crisis", it's more an affordability issue. The current house buillding cycle and planning system is rigged to ensure maximum ROI for the developers. If you think differently you are deluded, sorry.

In an Island nation as densely packed as ours only a dotard (or people being bribed) would sanction national housebuilding targets of 300k per annum, let alone a million new homes inbetween Oxford and Cambridge and related "expressway".

Amazes me that large swathes of the population actually swallow the utter twaddle that officialdom feed us, with little or no challenge.

I see your location is Nairobi, so I'm guessing BBC World News is giving endlessly depressing updates on how the UK is heading for economic collapse and global isolation post-brexit?

The truth, especially in that part of the UK, is somewhat different. The regional assemblies, LEPs and house builders cant wait for the Americans to leave so they can get their greedy paws on the land.

Personally I still live in hope of a reversal on the Mildenhall closure decision.

from the Beeb:-

UK National Ecosystem Assessment (NEA) .Five hundred experts analysed vast quantities of data and produced what they claim is the first coherent body of evidence about the state of Britain's natural environment.Having looked at all the information, they calculated that "6.8% of the UK's land area is now classified as urban" (a definition that includes rural development and roads, by the way).The urban landscape accounts for 10.6% of England, 1.9% of Scotland, 3.6% of Northern Ireland and 4.1% of Wales.

Put another way, that means almost 93% of the UK is not urban. But even that isn't the end of the story because urban is not the same as built on. In urban England, for example, the researchers found that just over half the land (54%) in our towns and cities is greenspace - parks, allotments, sports pitches and so on.Furthermore, domestic gardens account for another 18% of urban land use; rivers, canals, lakes and reservoirs an additional 6.6%.

Their conclusion? In England, "78.6% of urban areas is designated as natural rather than built". Since urban only covers a tenth of the country, this means that the proportion of England's landscape which is built on is… 2.27%

That's certainly their stated position, but rumour has it that it was a sop to the older generation of the family, and once they were gone, and the price was right, they would sell up and move (with Mildenhall a likely candidate).

Oh dear, resorting to meaningless statistics - always a sure sign the argument is being lost :)

Have you tried "urbanising" Ben Nevis, or the Peaks, or mid Wales. Not really possible is it? So when you take out the large swathes that are practically uninhabitable you are left with what we have, which is a fairly small area to chuck 70M people, 20M cars and 300k additional houses per annum.

If you dont believe me, leave your ivory tower and take a drive on most major roads and motorways at any time of the day and I'll think you'll see what I mean.

Anyway, this is degenerating, but thanks again for the useless stats; I recall the beeb regurgitating this garbage a couple of years ago just prior to the Govt ripping up planning policy guidelines!

If I was in MCE position and I held all the ace cards I'd be holding out for as long as was necessary really....