Connect with us

Alaska

Modern Seward wasn’t the first Seward town in Alaska, or even the second

Published

on

Modern Seward wasn’t the first Seward town in Alaska, or even the second


A postcard containing a picture of Seward from around the 1920s. (Provided by David Reamer)

Part of a continuing weekly series on Alaska history by local historian David Reamer. Have a question about Anchorage or Alaska history or an idea for a future article? Go to the form at the bottom of this story.

Seward is not the first Seward in Alaska, nor the second one either. It is the third Seward worth noting, unless features besides settlements are included, in which case it falls further distant in the count. After all, creeks and glaciers and peninsulas matter. Then there was Fort Seward, completed after Seward was founded but, of course, not actually located in Seward.

Seward, not to be confused with antecedents or forgotten forts, is the fishing, whale-watching, aquarium-visiting port on Resurrection Bay. And indeed, it was not the first attempt at naming a town for William H. Seward, only the most successful, certainly the most enduring. From the 1890s into the earliest years of the 1900s, there was something of a rush to name things Seward, and that in a territory known for its mad rushes.

As regards Alaska, the existence of William H. Seward (1801-1872) is a never-to-be-forgotten piece of trivia. He was secretary of state from 1861 to 1869 and personally negotiated the 1867 purchase of Alaska. In fact, he was an avid expansionist with dreams of unifying the entire North American continent and more besides, including Greenland.

Advertisement

[When America considered trading part of Alaska for Greenland]

There is a longer history of Alaska place names encumbered by attempts to curry favor with, or otherwise honor, people who never set foot anywhere near this land. Fairbanks is named for Sen. Charles Warren Fairbanks of Indiana. Prince of Wales Island is named for George Augustus Frederick, later King George IV. Whittier — glacier and town — are named for Quaker poet and abolitionist John Greenleaf Whittier.

A portrait of Secretary of State William H. Seward, photographed by the studio of Mathew Brady between 1865 and 1872. (Public domain via Wikimedia Commons)

Yet, Seward at least visited Alaska, though not any of the locations that would later bear his name. In 1869, he made the trek north and gave a speech at Sitka, when he naturally talked about the weather like any other wandering politician. “The weather of this one broad climate of Alaska is severely criticized in outside circles for being too wet and too cold,” said Seward. “Nevertheless, it must be a fastidious person who complains of climates in which, while the eagle delights to soar, the hummingbird does not disdain to flutter.” He added, “It is an honest climate, for it makes no pretensions to constancy.”

The first earnest effort at a Seward town was Seward City, a gold-mining town established around 1890. It was located at the mouth of Sherman Creek, on the east side of the Lynn Canal, a little north of Berners Bay. It was between Haines and Juneau if that helps. The long-since abandoned settlement and its adjoining mine never quite developed enough for any permanency, let alone a significant population.

The limited documentation of Seward City suggests it may have been a rough place to live, particularly because of food shortages. In 1900, James Mathers and Alexander Irving died there after eating mussels contaminated by mine runoff. Two other men barely survived.

Fred and Marie Hanilla ran a hotel and general store there for over a decade but left due in large part to failing health. Their great-granddaughter, Beverly Keithahn, attributed their decline to the food. In 1998, she told the Juneau Empire, “Their diet, with little or no fresh food and improperly canned food, probably caused their untimely deaths in their 50s. There is no good winter anchorage at Comet, so it is supposed that they had no ships bringing food or anything else during the winter months.”

Advertisement
The steamer schedule for Seward City is included in an 1899 edition of the Douglas Island News.

From an 1899 letter published in the Douglas Island News, Seward City was a “half dozen cabins — a fisherman’s hut and the two-story frame hotel under the direction of the genial Mr. (Hanilla).” In 1908, Seattle lawyer John W. Brown traveled north, the basis for his “Abridged History of Alaska” published the next year. He wrote, “Just as we were passing the north end of the gold belt, the captain wanted to know if I saw a town on the bank. I told him I did not; but he insisted there was one, and with the aid of the glasses we observed it to be one house, and which he said was Seward City.”

Seward City’s amorphous status was reflected in its names, plural. Some called it Seward City. With the arrival of the third Seward — that is the modern town of Seward — Seward City mine owner Thomas S. Nowell renamed the outpost after himself, Nowell City. It would later be called Kensington by presumably dozens of Alaskans.

However, for the brief periods when the town possessed a post office (1901-1902, 1936-1938), the stubborn Postal Service referred to it by another name in relatively common usage, Comet. There is a long history of post offices determining place names. Residents used to disagree on how to spell Soldotna. From 1949 to 1967, it was officially Soldatna. Note the “A” in the middle. In 1967, the Postal Service changed it to Soldotna. And more close to home, the Postal Service is why Anchorage is called Anchorage instead of Ship Creek, Woodrow, Alaska City, Terminal, Gateway, Mearsville, Strongov, Dgheyay Kaq’, or any of the other names tossed around.

A photo of Seward in 1915. (Photo by August Cohn / Library of Congress)

[In 1915, Anchorage residents voted on an official name for the new city. The name ‘Anchorage’ came in 3rd place.]

The second attempt at a Seward town was on Kachemak Bay, by McNeil Canyon and near what would become Homer. In support of yet another mining operation, a post office was activated there on Oct. 26, 1895. Some sources incorrectly list this as being the site of modern-day Seward on Resurrection Bay, for the understandable reason of why wouldn’t Seward be at Seward. It closed a year later when a new location opened on the Spit, this time named Homer after con man mining promoter Homer Pennock.

Before introducing the third Seward settlement, there are all the other features adorned with Seward’s name, many of them likewise gaining the moniker before the modern town of Seward existed. The Seward Mountains are a small part of the Boundary Ranges in Southeast Alaska, named in 1868 by Staff Cmdr. David Pender of the British Royal Navy, who was surveying the adjacent Portland Canal region. Geologist Israel Russell named Seward Glacier in 1891.

Alaska Gov. John Green Brady proposed the Seward Peninsula name sometime around 1898. That moniker eventually won out over other contenders, such as Nome Peninsula, Kaviak Peninsula and Sumner Peninsula. The Seward Creek southeast of Eagle gained its name during the Klondike gold rush. There are other creeks, a passage and so many streets. There were and are ships and businesses. Certainly, there are more common place names in Alaska, but the state is absolutely lousy with Sewards.

Advertisement

As for the Seward Highway, it was built in increments over decades. In 1923, the road out of Seward ran 18 miles to Kenai Lake. By the late 1930s, it was possible to drive from Seward to Hope but not to Anchorage. Motorists from Anchorage would have their cars delivered via railroad to Moose Pass, where they could continue driving. The highway was completed in 1951, then paved and widened to two lanes throughout in 1954. The term “Seward Highway” was in use by the late 1920s, an informal designation that gained gravitas over the years, from back when the road was definitely not a highway as people would understand it now.

Vehicles travel north along the Seward Highway in Indian on Oct. 6, 2022. (Emily Mesner / ADN)

Then there is Seward, the third and most successful settlement of its name. In 1901, Seattle businessman John E. Ballaine decided to, in his own words, “organize and promote a railroad from the Pacific Coast through Central Alaska to the Yukon valley.” The Alaska Central Railway was organized in March 1902, and construction began the following year.

For a base of operations, he wrote, “my first aim was to establish the ocean terminus on a harbor easy of access and free from obstruction every hour of every day of the year.” Several locations were considered, including Cordova Bay, Iliamna, Resurrection Bay, Seldovia, Tyonek, Valdez, Whittier and Knik. The latter location was opposite Ship Creek on the Knik Arm. Ballaine narrowed his choices to Cordova Bay, Valdez and Resurrection Bay, settling on what would become Seward, where he “found every requirement to my complete satisfaction.”

That left the name of the new settlement. If Terminal and Lane sound like dire options for Anchorage, consider the alternatives for Seward. The other contenders were Almouth and Vituska, both given serious consideration by Alaska Central Railway bosses. Almouth was supposed to suggest the port was the mouth of Alaska. And Vituska was a combination of “Vitus” from Vitus Bering and the last two letters of “Alaska.” Bering was the Danish-born leader of two 18th-century Russian expeditions to Alaska.

In 1902, a group of Alaska Central Railway engineers made the acquaintance of Seattle journalist and historian Edmond S. Meany while traveling north aboard the steamer Bertha. Meany taught at the University of Washington and established the Washington Historical Quarterly journal. In 1907, he published an article in that journal that included relevant correspondence. So, the name of Seward is surprisingly well documented for Alaska of that era.

When one of those engineers wrote to Meany for place name suggestions, the professor quickly offered Seward. He wrote, “I thank you for the opportunity of suggesting a name for the southern terminus of the new railroad. The name above all others most appropriate for a prominent city in Alaska is Seward … More than any other one man is he responsible for American ownership of Alaska.” As regards the naming of Seward, that was essentially that. It speaks to the relative anonymity of Seward City that a Seattle journalist well familiar with Alaska was seemingly unaware of its existence.

Advertisement
An undated postcard featuring Fort Seward and Haines. (Provided by David Reamer)

As the concluding offering of trivia, there is Fort William H. Seward. From 1925 to 1940, it was the single permanent military facility in Alaska. And naturally it was not in Seward. Construction began in 1902 outside Haines and was completed in 1904. After it was deactivated in 1945 and eventually sold, it became Port Chilkoot, which was later merged into Haines.

The Alaska Central Railway was less successful than the town formed in its wake. The railroad only made it about 50 miles out of Seward before bankruptcy in 1907. But consider the opportunity costs, what was lost. Alas, scenic Almouth that we never had. ALMOUTH. It just rolls off the tongue and lands on the floor with a thud.

• • •

Key sources:

Ballaine, John E. “Where Seward Got Its Start and Name.” Seward Weekly Gateway. January 6, 1906, 1, 4.

“A Breezy Letter.” Douglas Island News. September 13, 1899, 1.

Advertisement

Brown, John W. An Abridged History of Alaska. Seattle: Gateway Printing Co., 1909. Washington D.C.:

Knopf, Adolph. Geology of the Berners Bay Region Alaska. Washington D.C.: Government Printing Office, 1911.

Meany, Edmond S. “The Naming of Seward in Alaska.” Washington Historical Quarterly 1, no. 3 (1907): 159-161.

Orth, Donald J. Dictionary of Alaska Place Names, Geological Survey, Professional Paper 567. Washington, D.C.: United States Government Printing Office, 1971.

“Seward City to Become Nowell City.” [Skagway] Daily Alaskan. September 23, 1904, 3.

Advertisement

Seward, William H. Alaska Speech of William H. Seward at Sitka, August 12, 1869. Washington, D.C.: James J. Chapman, 1879.

Thomson, Lori. “Area’s Early Mining Days Detailed.” Juneau Empire. February 17, 1998, 1, 8.

“Two Men Killed at Seward by Poison.” [Skagway] Daily Alaskan. June 14, 1900, 1.





Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Alaska

Characteristics of Leadership: Recklessness – Alaska Business Magazine

Published

on

Characteristics of Leadership: Recklessness – Alaska Business Magazine


Picture it: an 800-mile engineering marvel traversing Alaska’s rugged wilderness. An immense zinc mine powering Northwest Alaska’s economy. World-class sustainable harvests feeding global markets with seafood.

The Trans Alaska Pipeline System, Red Dog mine, and the Alaska fishing industry: These massive ventures represent high-stakes investments in infrastructure and resources that have transformed Alaska into a powerhouse of global energy, minerals, and food. Today, we call these ventures inspired, but that label masks a fundamental nuance and common misconception: there is a distinction between the risky and the reckless.

That line between bold visionary and reckless gambler is usually written in ink only after the dust settles and the checks clear. Winners are often labeled as geniuses while thousands of leaders who made similar bets but went bust are ignored. When you see any winner in the marketplace, their strategy can look like a guaranteed blueprint for success. This is survivorship bias in action, obsessing over the front-runners while ignoring the graveyard of those who made the same choices. Recklessness is a classic leadership trap, in part, because it is very easy to mistake good luck for repeatable strategy. Our brains are wired to find patterns in chaos, even when they don’t exist, and when a gamble pays off, it is easy to invent a story to explain why it worked. This explains, in part, why high-risk behavior is often rebranded as “visionary” in the business world.

Understanding the mechanics of recklessness can help a leader spot the difference between a smart move and a predictable bad one. It is the contrast between a high-wire artist using a safety net and having practiced the route, versus one who just hopes they don’t fall. The first one is making calculated moves, and the second is wishing for the best.

Advertisement



Source link

Continue Reading

Alaska

Smokejumpers, aircraft responding to new fire near Ambler

Published

on

Smokejumpers, aircraft responding to new fire near Ambler


Smoke from the Jade Fire (#285) to west of Ambler as shown on this FAA Weather Camera at 5 p.m. on June 23, 2026.

9:50 p.m. Update, June 23, 2026: Another load of 12 smokejumpers is en route to join the 11 already working on the Jade Fire (#285), which is burning about 3 miles west of Ambler and west of the Kopshesut Fire. Two single‑engine water scoopers — highly effective in calming the Kopshesut Fire in its early days — along with personnel aboard an air attack platform, are working the incident. The air attack platform is used to coordinate airspace and relay information between aircraft and firefighters on the ground.

The larger multi‑engine water scoopers were requested but were unable to respond due to weather at Ladd Airfield on Fort Wainwright.

At about 8:42 p.m., the fire was reported at 10 acres and was torching and active on all sides. It was burning toward the Kopshesut Fire, which stands between it and Ambler

Advertisement

Use this link for an interactive map to zoom in and out for a closer look at the location of the fire: https://arcg.is/1XLmHm8

8:45 p.m., June 23, 2026: U.S. Wildland Fire Service contracted aircraft and smokejumpers are en route to Ambler after receiving reports of a new fire near the Kobuk River community.

Numberous reports from locals reporting the fire is west of the Kopeshusut Fire (#137) that escaped from the landfill June 4 and threatened the community before being contained last week.

More information will be released when it’s available.

Contact U.S. Wildland Fire Service Public Affairs Specialist Beth Ipsen at elizabeth_ipsen@ios.doi.gov or (907)388-2159 for more information.

Advertisement
A new fire broke out 3 miles west of Ambler Tuesday night. The Jade Fire is also west of the Kopshesut Fire that escaped the Ambler landfill on June 4 and was contained last week. Click on the map for a PDF version.
Here’s a closer look at the Jade Fire (#285) burning west of the Kopshesut Fire and about 3 miles west of Ambler. Use this link for an interactive map to zoom in and out for a closer look at the location of the fire.

-USWFS-

U.S. Wildland Fire Service, P.O. Box 35005 1541 Gaffney Road, Fort Wainwright, AK 99703

Need public domain imagery to complement news coverage of the USWFS in Alaska? Visit our Flickr channel! 
Learn more online, and on Facebook.

‹ Delta Area fires receive rain as suppression efforts continue
Firefighters reach 50% containment on Starry Fire ›

Categories: Active Wildland Fire, AK Fire Info, US Wildland Fire Service

Tags: 2026 Alaska Fire Season

Advertisement



Source link

Continue Reading

Alaska

Air Force’s Fightertown Alaska Plan Takes Shape

Published

on

Air Force’s Fightertown Alaska Plan Takes Shape


The U.S. military has released new details about the massive Fightertown Recapitalization (FTR) program at Joint Base Elmendorf-Richardson (JBER), in Anchorage, southeastern Alaska. This is a huge effort valued at approximately $7 billion that would effectively create an entirely new fighter hub to support future Air Force operations in the strategically important Arctic and Pacific regions.

The details emerged in a special notice announcing an upcoming virtual industry day, where government officials plan to brief contractors on the scope of the program and gather feedback on construction risks, industry capabilities, and acquisition strategies before moving toward a formal procurement process.

A U.S. Air Force F-22 Raptor from Joint Base Elmendorf-Richardson flies over the Joint Pacific Alaska Range Complex. U.S. Air Force photo by Staff Sgt. James Richardson

While the notice, from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, is intended primarily as market research, it offers one of the clearest looks yet at the scale and ambition of the Fightertown recapitalization effort.

According to the notice, existing airfield facilities cannot support the program’s requirements, prompting the selection of a new site to expand the current airfield infrastructure. Rather than a collection of isolated projects, the government describes the effort as a “complete campus approach” intended to synchronize facility construction with aircraft procurement, personnel movements, and logistical requirements.

Advertisement

The envisioned campus would include aircraft hangars, squadron operations facilities, corrosion control facilities, maintenance shops, and other aviation support infrastructure. Extensive airfield improvements are also planned, including new taxiways, aprons, shoulders, and specialized aircraft operating surfaces.

A picture of a so-called “elephant walk” readiness exercise at Joint Base Elmendorf-Richardson showing 24 of the resident 3rd Wing’s F-22s, as well as a C-17 and an E-3. U.S. Air Force

Highly likely to be included in the recapitalization efforts will be measures to help reduce vulnerability and ensure critical operations could continue in wartime. After all, in a potential fight against China or Russia, JBER would be high on the list of priority targets in the opening phases of a large-scale conflict. As we have repeatedly outlined in the past, aircraft shelters with varying degrees of hardening are suddenly very much back on the agenda in response to growing drone and missile threats. 

Beyond flight-line infrastructure, the project encompasses a substantial support ecosystem. Plans call for a munitions complex, petroleum operations facilities, warehousing and supply functions, dining facilities, visitor control infrastructure, firefighting facilities, training centers, simulators, and housing for unaccompanied airmen.

The government also notes that the campus design remains flexible and could ultimately involve modifications to, or demolition of, existing facilities as planning progresses.

Rather than relying solely on traditional military construction contracting approaches, the Army Corps of Engineers says the program intends to leverage authorities provided in the Fiscal Year 2026 National Defense Authorization Act. Those authorities could allow the use of Other Transaction Authority (OTA), Progressive Design-Build (PDB), and other alternative execution methods.

The sprawling Joint Base Elmendorf-Richardson (JBER), in Anchorage, southeastern Alaska, as seen in a satellite image from May of this year. Google Earth

The notice explicitly states that the government intends to capitalize on private-sector innovation while avoiding what it describes as costly and time-consuming federal contracting burdens. It also emphasizes that the execution strategy will encourage industry partners to propose novel technical and construction solutions.

The scale of the investment underscores Alaska’s growing importance as a hub for U.S. airpower. JBER already serves as one of the Air Force’s premier fighter installations and occupies a critical geographic position between North America, the Arctic, a part of the world that has only grown in strategic significance in recent years, and the Indo-Pacific theater, where strategic planning is highly focused on a potential future conflict with China.

Advertisement

Joint Base Elmendorf-Richardson hosts the headquarters of the 11th Air Force, the service’s top command in Alaska, and its 3rd Wing, which operates a mix of F-22 Raptor stealth fighters, E-3 Sentry Airborne Warning Control System (AWACS) radar planes, C-17 Globemaster III airlifters, and C-12 light utility aircraft. It is also home to the Alaska Air National Guard’s 176th Wing, which has additional C-17s, as well as HC-130 Combat King rescue aircraft and HH-60 rescue helicopters.

U.S. Air Force HH-60W Jolly Green II helicopter aircrew assigned to the 210th Rescue Squadron, 176th Wing, Alaska Air National Guard, hoist a simulated downed pilot during a full mission profile training exercise at Malemute Drop Zone, Joint Base Elmendorf-Richardson, Alaska, March 31, 2026. The training included search and rescue, high-altitude parachute drops, emergency medical response, personnel recovery, and rescue hoist. Participants included HH-60W Jolly Green II aircrew of the 210th RQS, HC-130J Combat King II aircrew of the 211th RQS, and pararescuemen, and combat rescue officers of the 212th RQS. The three squadrons compose the 176th Wing’s Rescue Triad and are among the busiest search and rescue units in the Department of War. (Alaska National Guard photo by Alejandro Peña)
HH-60W Jolly Green II helicopter aircrew assigned to the 210th Rescue Squadron, 176th Wing, Alaska Air National Guard, hoist a simulated downed pilot during a full mission profile training exercise at Malemute Drop Zone, Joint Base Elmendorf-Richardson, Alaska, March 31, 2026. Alaska National Guard photo by Alejandro Peña

In addition, in 2023, the Air Force announced the creation of the 55th Operations Group, Detachment 1 at the base, as a detachment of the 55th Wing at Offutt Air Force Base in Nebraska.

“The new detachment will… serve as a strategic launch and recovery point for RC-135V/W Rivet Joint operations and exercises in the region,” according to the Air Force.

The move reflected increased demand for RC-135V/W Rivet Joint spy plane sorties in the Pacific, with JBER being well-positioned for these aircraft to gather intelligence on areas of interest in the northern end of the Pacific and the increasingly strategic Arctic region.

The arrival of the Rivet Joint prompted a previous reconstruction effort at JBER. In what the Air Force described as a “mega-project,” one of the two runways there was extended to help it better support operations involving larger aircraft like these.

A satellite image of Elmendorf Air Force Base taken in July 2023. Evidence of the runway extension “mega-project” is plainly visible at the northeastern end of the base. You can see an RC-135 Rivet Joint sitting on the southwest ramp area as well. PHOTO © 2023 PLANET LABS INC. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. REPRINTED BY PERMISSION

In the future, the strategic location of JBER, as well as its current status as one of the few F-22 bases, suggests that it could well eventually host the F-47 sixth-generation stealth fighter, the first of which is expected to make its first flight sometime in 2028. The F-47 could therefore well end up as the centerpiece of the Alaskan Fightertown, in keeping with the vision for the jet serving as a critical force multiplier that can bring together other crewed and uncrewed assets. With that in mind, at least some of the Fightertown Recapitalization program may be specifically tailored to the requirements of the F-47.

Importantly, JBER also serves as the focal point for the Red Flag-Alaska and Northern Edge exercises.

Advertisement

The Red Flag-Alaska exercises can take place up to four times a year and mirror those flown over the Nellis Range Complex in Nevada, with some differences. Namely, the ranges in Alaska, many of which are instrumented, are enormous, and can include a more varied array of assets.

A U.S. Air Force E-3 Sentry starts takeoff for a flight during exercise Red Flag Alaska 26-1 at Joint Base Elmendorf-Richardson, Alaska, April 29, 2026. The E-3 provides advanced information-collection capabilities, which enable the U.S. and allies to make combat-credible decisions in the Indo-Pacific to deter aggression and provide insights in homeland-defense missions. (U.S. Air Force photo by Tech. Sgt. Joseph Miller)
A U.S. Air Force E-3 Sentry takes off during exercise Red Flag Alaska 26-1 at Joint Base Elmendorf-Richardson, Alaska, April 29, 2026. U.S. Air Force photo by Tech. Sgt. Joseph Miller

From JBER and other bases in the region, Red Flag-Alaska participants have access to the Joint Pacific Alaska Range Complex (JPARC). Covering an area of more than 67,000 square miles and providing 77,000 square miles of airspace above, JPARC is the “largest instrumented air, ground and electronic combat training range in the world,” according to the Air Force. It is regularly used to provide a realistic training environment for full-spectrum engagements, ranging from individual skills to large-scale joint engagements.

JPARC’s role could grow further in the coming years as the Air Force pushes large-scale exercises further and further out into the broad expanses of the Pacific. Other range complexes further down along the West Coast are seeing increasing use, as well. Even very large overland ranges, such as the sprawling Nevada Test and Training Range (NTTR) adjacent to Nellis Air Force Base, are increasingly constrained when attempting to replicate modern scenarios based on ever-growing adversary anti-access and aerial denial (A2/AD) bubbles.

Meanwhile, Northern Edge also occurs in and around Alaska every two years, with these large-scale events being used to test and evaluate new systems and capabilities from across the U.S. military.

One of the Air Force’s tiny force of semi-retired F-117 Nighthawk stealth jets, now used for test and evaluation purposes, at Elmendorf during Northern Edge 2023. U.S. Air Force

In the past, the Air Force has described Northern Edge as a demonstration of “the U.S. commitment to the region by building interoperability, advancing common interests and a commitment to our allies and partners in ensuring a free and open Indo-Pacific,” as well as showcasing U.S. ability to defend the homeland from and throughout Alaska.

As planning advances, we will learn more about what this new Alaskan Fightertown will look like. What is already clear is that the Air Force and the Pentagon are preparing for a long-term expansion and modernization effort on a scale rarely seen at an operational fighter base.

More details could emerge during the industry day scheduled for June 30, when government officials will provide a comprehensive update on the program and solicit feedback from industry partners on how to execute one of the Air Force’s biggest military infrastructure projects.

Advertisement

Update: 3:45 PM ET –

“We are deliberately investing in Pacific Air Force’s critical infrastructure by replacing and upgrading operations and maintenance facilities in addition to making repairs to existing buildings and funding mission-ready materiel, storage, and sustainment necessary for homeland defense and Agile Combat Employment operations,” a U.S. Air Force official has now told us in response to our queries for more information about the Fightertown plan. “We are also extending the runway and building a Joint Integrated Test and Training Center at JBER.”

“We are in the design stage now and will have a better idea of timelines once we receive an appropriation,” they added.

Contact the author: thomas@thewarzone.com

Thomas Newdick is a staff writer at TWZ, where he covers military aviation, defense technology, weapons systems, and international security. Based in Berlin, Germany, he reports on conflicts, military modernization efforts, and emerging aerospace technologies around the world, with a particular interest in airpower and its role in contemporary warfare. His reporting is informed by deep expertise in modern and historical airpower, particularly in Europe, with a focus on military aviation, air campaigns, and aerospace developments across the continent and beyond.

Advertisement



Source link

Continue Reading
Advertisement

Trending