RE: B/E Training Facility

["Eric Benson" <ebenson@xxxxxxxx>]

> The options would seem to be;

> Expand the Atlanta facility.

Probably the first choice.  With a single training center, you guarantee a
certain level of quality.  Separate is never equal.

Two duplicate basic training facilities are redundant.  While the company is
expanding, it can't afford to spend money repeating the same capability.  On
the other hand, if the second training site provides significantly different
capability, that's a different argument.

> Go with a new facility in Europe or Australia.  Any European facility is
> going to lack easy access to a jungle training site.

If you are going to build a new facility, I would think they would build in
Australia.  Europe and Atlanta would have redundant terrain and climate,
while Australia would provide new capability.  Given the generally dismal
European response to military activity (in unison now: "Let's cut the
military budget"), I doubt a paramilitary training base would go over well.
Noise abatement, pollution control, tougher safety requirements and stricter
gun controls are just a few of the issues that come to mind in the more
densely populated Europe.

I looked for Australian land costs this morning.  While I didn't see any
sites that compared US/Aus/Eu land costs, I suspect that it would be much
cheaper to buy a large plot of land in Australia than Europe.  Between
actual training area, buffer zones and future expansion, BE would want a
relatively large piece of contiguous land.

It is also possible that the Atlanta land is too valuable and too close to a
large growing metro area.  Given the growth of the Atlanta area, BE/BE could
sell the land at a profit and relocate the base.  Atlanta has grown up in a
big way recently; according to census data, Atlanta is the second fastest
growing area in the nation (www.about.com).

-Eric