Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Cape Breton Enters Space Race

Posted by ryuzaki0 on from the take-off dept.

thatguywhoiam writes "A private deal has been put into place to construct a large space facility in Cape Breton. The Toronto Star says '...that Nova Scotia has signed a "team agreement" to provide 300 acres of land — and perhaps even some funding — for a massive orbital launch facility that will involve industry giants and could eventually be on scale with huge NASA operations. "We're basically building a private manned space program for Canada," says Chicago's Dr. Chirinjeev Kathuria, chairman of the PlanetSpace firm that lit the fuse for this deal. "The facility will see orbital flights, similar to the Kennedy Space Center."'"

11 of 55 comments (clear)

  1. More spaceports than airport hubs by andrewman327 · · Score: 4, Interesting
    I am pleased by the massive growth of spaceport proposals lately. If all of the proposals come to fruition (which is unlikely) there will be as many spaceports as there are major airline hubs today.


    I hope that the Canadian government doesn't present too many miles of red tape. Won't there be negative impact to launching from a high latitude? I know that other spaceports boast about how close to the equator they are.


    The biggest difference between this facility and other proposals is the larger scope of this project. Instead of $20mil a shot tourists, the Canadians are playing catch up with the Americans, Russians, Europeans, etc. to have a real non-commercial space program. From TFA:

    Earlier this year, the pair began negotiations with the province and other players in the aerospace industry to build a facility and spacecraft they hope will eventually shuttle astronauts and supplies to the international space station.
    --
    Information wants a fueled airplane waiting at the hangar and no one gets hurt.
    1. Re:More spaceports than airport hubs by Ironsides · · Score: 4, Informative

      I hope that the Canadian government doesn't present too many miles of red tape. Won't there be negative impact to launching from a high latitude? I know that other spaceports boast about how close to the equator they are.

      There is both a pro and a con to launching from the higher latitude.

      Con: It takes more energy (fuel) to get to orbit as you have less of a "push" from the earth's rotation to help you get to orbital velocity.

      Pro: If your destination is in a relatively highly inclined orbit (as the International Space Station is), you use less energy (fuel) changing your orbital inclination compared to starting from the equator.

      As you quoted, it is intended to supply the ISS. A higher inclination than Canaveral would be beneficial. However, for anything beyond (such as the moon), a more equatorial launching pad would be better.

      --
      Fly me to the moon Let me sing among those stars Let me see what spring is like On jupiter and mars
    2. Re:More spaceports than airport hubs by Dinosaur+Neil · · Score: 4, Informative

      Won't there be negative impact to launching from a high latitude?

      There is an impact, though how much of one depends on what sort of orbit you're shooting for. The ISS is in low earth orbit, so you need around 8000 meters/second for a nice circular orbit at that altitude. Launching into an equitorial orbit from the equator gives you a 460 m/s start on that. By the time you reach Nova Scotia, you're down to 320 m/s boost. OTOH, the empty mass to fueled mass ratio is a log function (IIRC), so that 140 m/s can make a difference. However, a pole-to-pole orbit doesn't take advantage of Earth's spin at all, so it doesn't matter what latitude you launch from.

      Why is it that the only use I get out of my graduate level orbital mechanics course is on Slashdot?

      --
      "I'm a scientist! I don't think, I observe!" - Dr. Clayton Forrester
    3. Re:More spaceports than airport hubs by Curtman · · Score: 2, Interesting

      It's too bad we let Fort Churchill rust away. A few years ago it was claimed to be one of the best sites for launching missions to ISS, and there's very few people around if things go wrong.

    4. Re:More spaceports than airport hubs by YA_Python_dev · · Score: 2, Informative

      Why this is modded informative? It's almost completely wrong!

      A high latitude is completely non-influential for a launch to the moon, but suffers from a high penalty for launching to any orbit with an inclination lower than the latitude.

      OTOH there are almost no benefits at all for a launch to a high inclination orbit wrt a spaceport near the equator.

      IOW: if you want to reach orbit, you should launch from a site that has a latidute less than or equal to the inclination of your orbit.

      --
      There's a hidden treasure in Python 3.x: __prepare__()
  2. Well it's ab.. by Dutch_Cap · · Score: 2, Funny

    Well, it's aboot time!

  3. I think I speak for all of us in Nova Scotia... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    WTF

    1. Re:I think I speak for all of us in Nova Scotia... by theshowmecanuck · · Score: 2, Insightful

      But you are drunk, right?

      --
      -- I ignore anonymous replies to my comments and postings.
  4. Cape Bretoner dumbfounded by xtal · · Score: 4, Informative

    This would be great, but there is NO infrastructure here to support this kind of endeavour. There is no city here. There is little university support, with the nearest school granting engineering degrees over 4 hours away. The airport service is limited, there isn't even a double divided highway from the nearest major center.

    Amazing, shocking news if it were to happen. I just can't see it.

    --
    ..don't panic
  5. Re:46 degrees of Cape Breton by Noishe · · Score: 3, Informative

    Actually, the tangential velocity relative to the axis is a function of cosine. So your velocity at 46 degrees is cos(46) of what it is at the equator.

    cos(46) is 0.69465837045899728665640629942269, so the post above you is correct, when it mentions that the speed is aprox 70%, and you are wrong, when you say it is half.

    Of course, energy is a function of the square of speed, 1/2 * mv^2 , so to make up for the resultant loss in speed, you'd have to spend 1/v^2 more energy, which is 2.0723230307791953476036712451503 more energy.

    BTW: I like decimals...

  6. location, location, location by The+Fun+Guy · · Score: 2, Insightful
    The USSR chose the location for the Baikonur Cosmodrome for the same reason the USA chose the location for the Kennedy Space Center... it's flat and it's about as close to the equator as you can get while still being within your territory. Had they known that it would end up in another country (Kazakhstan), they would have put it at a southernmost point within the boundaries of Russia. The closer you are to the equator, the more efficient your launches are.

    The orbit of the ISS was chosen based on the latitude of Baikonur. In that respect, the Cape Breton latitude is OK, in that it matches Baikonur, and therefore matches ISS. To claim that this is a good latitude for launches that do anything other than match LEO stuff launched from Baikonur is overstating it.

    Also, the TFA says
    "Nova Scotia has signed a "team agreement" to provide 300 acres of land -- and perhaps even some funding -- for a massive orbital launch facility."

    They provided some land rights, nothing more. No money, no personnel, no new roads or other infrastructure. This is pretty vaporous.
    --
    The man who does not read good books has no advantage over the man who cannot read them. - Mark Twain