A couple of minor points from what members have said above: I am quite sure that if Sarah had wanted to live 'on base' that the Queen would immediately have permitted it. Apart from the fact that she herself began her career as a 'naval wife', I am sure that she would have done everything she could to grant Sarah's reasonable requests. Don't forget that with the Wales' marriage RAPIDLY unravelling behind the scenes, I am sure the Queen would have been anxious to faciliate ANY reasonable request made by Sarah. For a start, I am certain that despite what I have seen one or two people mentioning here as a reason, there would be no security worries on a naval base. For my own part, I can never even remember Sarah wanting to live on base as ever being an issue - I never remember hearing it raised in either the press or by the Palace and my boss never raised it. However, if there ever was such a question raised, IMHO I rather think that the newly-married Sarah, [an inveterate party-girl] with brand new Royal title and (to her) almost limitless funds, with her friends all in London [when they were not vacationing in the Alps or Ibiza etc] and with her close-royal buddy Diana nearby in KP, would have elected to stay in London, and NOT the other way about [i.e. with Sarah being the one wanting to live on base!!]
Whilst it is hard for me to adduce direct evidence in support of my case, my gut feeling - particularly based on the rapidity of the way the Sarah's relationship developed - is that she married the man as much for his position as for love. That is not to say that she did not experience what I would call 'loving feelings for him', but I do know from what people at Guards Polo Club began saying as soon as the cracks started appearing in the relationship that 'Sarah would not have looked twice at Andrew' had he not be Royal........ Proving this is hard, but Sarah's enjoyment of the Royal Status and Perks, coupled with her disinclination to undertake the relatively small number of Royal Duties demanded of her with much good grace does leave me to feel that there is more than a grain of truth in what people said:
As a side note: Royal Duties are not ''workers' playtime" but at Sarah's level they are not too hard either: I think that most of us think of a Royal Duty based as an ADDITION to what we have to do on our own busy lives, which can make it seem burdensome: don't forget that whilst back at your base a full staff is taking care of all the domestic matters [cleaning, cooking, food ordering, laundry etc] someone has brought your fuelled car, complete with chauffeur, right to your doorstep, an umbrella will be held so you don't get wet, your staff will have timed everything, worked out your route, briefed you, organised refreshment and 'comfort stops' for you etc. You will be perfectly groomed and wearing fashionable and expensive Designer or even couture clothing, all kept in perfect order by your dresser. Your haidresser will have attended on YOU - no trip to the Salon to be fitted in. Your private Secretary and Lady-in-Waiting and personal detective will all be at hand during the engagment. Usually a Press Secretary as well. On arrival, you are warmly welcomed by people really pleased and grateful to see you, curtsied-to, thanked profusely etc and then in return simply have to shake a few hands, smile and be pleasant, receive a bouquet from your hosts [often with a little piece of jewellery hidden inside!!] and/or other little presents. [sometimes quite generous]. People are pleased to see you, they cheer you, they give you flowers and the whole engagement is probably closely related to your interests [the Princess of Wales used to 'corner the market' in child and illness related matters for example]. And when you get home, there will be acres of fawning newsprint praising your 'hard work', when a lot of this in fact has been done by your staff........... In short, it is not a bad life - look how Princess Michael of Kent, who, when she married was not expected or required to do ANY royal duties at all, quickly did her level best to build up a round of 'royal' work. It can be fun and quite 'lucrative'. I have been present at a good many Royal occasions and can tell you that from what I have observed, unless the occasion is a solemn one [e.g. aftermath of a disaster etc] it is quite a good life, often in some very interesting places.
Second side note: I think that Sarah had up to 15 staff at the point where Andrew took over when Sarah became virtually bankrupt after the 'Fake Sheikh scandal' - from memory it was 15 members of staff who had to be sacked. Some of the staff with her at the moment, particularly from the sound of them, are provided by her publisher: for example, I would not expect Sarah to have a 'publicist' present - it sounds like an add-on from her book publisher.
Thirdly: living off her daughters' trust funds: English trust law does have strict rules about who can be a beneficiary of a trust, which is as much caught up with tax rules rather than anything else. I think that official palace Legal eyes will be watching to make sure that Trust Property is not being put to an inappropriate use.
Fourthly: Related also to the above, Sarah's income ,given as £100,000pa in a quotation attributed to Sarah, will not, in my very humble opinion, last long with Sarah's current level of spending; for example, very often the expenses of a publicity tour, [hotel, travel, presence of the publisher's staff etc] are then all deducted from the proceeds of the book sale. Sarah's projected earnings could therefore be vastly reduced from what she is expecting. Hotels, First Class Travel and Food plus 6 staff 'don't come cheap'. To me, even if the needle is not quite yet stuck in the groove, it is certainly nearing the end of the record, so to speak!!
Fifthly: Although I have NO formal proof of this, I am sure that Sarah's latest escapades will be being discussed at some length at Balmoral. Traditionally, the Queen is always rather diffident at intervening, but I am sure that both the Queen's staff and certainly Prince Philip, will be thinking that this state of affairs cannot continue. In the tabloids yesterday and at the weekend, there were pictures of Andrew 'canoodling' with 'beauties' on exotic holidays etc. To me, I wonder whether the fact that he enabled himself to be thus-photographed was his own way of letting Sarah know that their [supposed] 'close' relationship is based only on that of a couple who have a civilised divorce arrangement, rather than the 'hinted-at closeness' peddled by Sarah over the past few months - her (alleged) closeness to the BRF is her greatest stock-in-trade - as is clearly evidenced by the way she is often photographed clutching the hands of her daughters.... (I am reminded of that old English comedy film of a father who followed his newly-married daughter on honeymoon ....'and father came too....')
I end with my usual disclaimer: just my thoughts and not meant to offend.
Alex