I was stationed at Ft. Eustis from 1975 to 1978 and then was sent to Ft. Davis in the Canal Zone. At this time, Ft. Eustis was a very well usedand populated military base. I did drive down to the base a few years ago and it did surprise me that there was no Military Police or Gate at the entrence! I was able to drive around the base and it sure did look dead to me! I even drove down to the Dock, which at my time of service was very filled up with the boats, this was dead to me also! what did happen to all there Comapanys amd all the troops that were once there? This Base was an important part of my life and to see it the way I did, did make me feel like I lost a part of me.
I have been stationed at Fort Eustis several times over my 25+Years career in the Army, and I can tell you exactly what has happened. The Transportation Corps has been fully deployed around the world in support of the various field operations that are taking place. SSG Cornelius Seon (Retired) 03:46, 11 February 2006 (UTC)
USAALS is NOT moving to Ft. Rucker
As an AIT student at Ft. Eustis, I've been told by my brigade CSM that it's not moving to Ft. Rucker.
WikiProject Military history/Assessment/Tag & Assess 2008
I came across this article as part of the WikiProject Military history/Assessment/Tag & Assess 2008 project. One of the very first lines in this article: "existing entirely within the post boundaries of the United States Army Transportation Center and Fort Eustis (USATCFE), Fort Eustis, Virginia." I believe supports that this article should actually be a sub-section in the Fort Eustis article. --dashiellx (talk) 17:27, 29 April 2008 (UTC)
- Okay, if the article (to be merged) is small and limited, I support the merger.--THE FOUNDERS INTENT TALK 19:24, 29 April 2008 (UTC)
- Oppose. The article to be merged is not small and limited. It is actually longer than this article, and will distort this articles coverage. They are legitimately different articles. One thing being within another geographically is not relevant. -- Chris j wood (talk) 01:30, 30 April 2008 (UTC)
- I do not feel the length of the article should be taken into account. IMHO, the point is not to create and maintain multiple pages just for the sake of having multiple pages. IMHO, the point is to have one place where a user can find all the information related to a subject. The article to be merged describes an integral aspect of the fort which makes it unique and the articles should be merged. --dashiellx (talk) 11:25, 1 May 2008 (UTC)
- Oppose. This article clearly refers to the railroad and its operations, and is worth a separate article for those interested in railroads and the U.S. Army Transportation Museum. It should remain linked to Fort Eustis as a stand-alone article. Jllm06 (talk) 20:20, 15 May 2008 (UTC)