Talk:CFB Kingston

What are the references for this statement: "CFB Kingston is the home base for all CH-146 Griffon helicopters which are used to support the Canadian army's airlift requirements."

I don't think that is correct. I was posted to that base and there is no flight line there. I don't see how its possible that all the army's helos operate out of that base.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Warspite (talk • contribs) 10:08, 8 February 2005 (UTC)

It's also NOT an air base. It used to belong to Training System and its successor organization before it was taken over by Land Force Command. The Wing is merely another lodger unit, same as the Communications School. SigPig 14:49, 23 July 2005 (UTC)

---

Technically, CFB Kingston is home to 1 Wing, and it's the home station for the entire Griffon fleet, even though there are no operational squadrons posted there. It's just the Headquarters, kind of like how the Royal Canadian Regiment's headquarters remains at Wolseley Barracks in London even though none of the Battalions are actually lodged there. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 142.245.193.4 (talk • contribs) 13:44, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

My only point is that even if the entirety of Canada's air fleet was based out of Kingston, it is still an army base and controlled/"owned" by LFC (Land Force Central Area, for that matter), and would not become an air force base unless and until it was taken over by AIRCOM. If there is a list of CFBs in Canada, they should be listed under their appropriate element (LFC, AIRCOM, MARCOM, etc); major formations such as an Air Force wing which is a lodger unit on (say) an LFC base should be listed as just that: an air formation on an army base, just as 36 Brigade Group is an Army formation on a Navy base (CFB Halifax). --SigPig 19:27, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

---

Two quibbles with recent additions by User:Victoriaedwards.

• The Environmental Assessment section is better-placed in the Royal Military College of Canada article
• Is the Awards section, which is sourced from one a single page extracted from a boardroom bulletin, just too much information? I suggests this could be condensed into a single sentence, with an external link to the details in the bulletin. StevenBlack (talk) 15:34, 26 October 2008 (UTC)

I agree with all your comments and suggestions. I also think the "Awards" section is totally out of context. I wouldn't say that RMC is part of CFB Kingston either. There is a relationship, but I thought they were separate entities.BC_{talk to me} 16:55, 26 October 2008 (UTC)

Infobox airport — Helipad

Article CFB Kingston has no {{Infobox airport}}, and accordingly data Helipads. Independently I failed to find them. Help if you can. — Андрей Бондарь (talk) 14:41, 2 April 2014 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on CFB Kingston. 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://web.archive.org/web/20051216090428/http://www.cfbkingston.ca/ to http://www.cfbkingston.ca/
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110706181822/http://armyapp.forces.gc.ca/pstc-cfsp/default_e.asp to http://armyapp.forces.gc.ca/pstc-cfsp/default_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) 19:49, 4 September 2017 (UTC)