Slashdot Mirror
SpaceX Is Studying Site For 'Commercial Cape Canaveral' Near Brownsville, Texas
New submitter RealTime writes "SpaceX filed a notice with the FAA (PDF) that it is preparing an environmental impact study in consideration of a site in Texas for use as a commercial spaceport. 'The site in question is in the southern tip of the state of Texas, just outside Brownsville in Cameron County, overlooking the Gulf of Mexico, over which SpaceX's launches would fly.' The proposed site would handle up to 12 commercial launches per year. 'There's plenty of red tape associated with Kennedy Space Center, and the center is often reserved for large blocks of time by other launchers. If SpaceX had its own pad, it wouldn't have to share.'"
Hopefully, this may get Texas' congressmen to abandon their opposition to NASA's commercial space initiatives.
While Elon Musk is certainly one to stay in the limelight more than some of the other rocket builders, it seems like Jeff Bezos either was looking at or purchased land in the general region of Texas. Yes, I know Bezos has his test facility in west Texas, which is also licensed by the FAA-AST as a spaceport, so perhaps I'm mistaken.
If it wasn't Bezos, it seems like it was another group of commercial rocket developers. Benson Space Company perhaps?
Regardless, I would have to agree that some place other than KSC is going to be needed if SpaceX has anything close to the launch rates that Elon Musk is promising. While SpaceX doesn't need to compete against Shuttle launches any more, there still are all of the D.O.D. payloads that usually get higher priority over commercial flights. KSC can be a rather busy place from time to time.
I think this article misses the point. It has nothing to do with launch schedules at the Cape or politics. This has everything to do with recovering the first stage. Look at a map. He has to launch and recover in U.S. territory in order to to comply with U.S. arms export regulations. If this is true, pickup of the first stage in Florida is not much of an option. But Puerto Rico is perfectly position for a powered landing of the first stage when doing an equatorial launch from the Brownsville Texas area.
I predict the next announcement will be a landing site in Puerto Rico for recovery of the first stage. My question is, does he even need permission to land in Puerto Rico? Can't he just get permission to land at an airfield? We aren't talking about a launch, just a powered landing. I'm sure there would be regulatory hurdles, but nothing like that needed to build a launch site.
There's the obvious low latitude (for the US) advantage to this location, but I see other advantages. Texas is relatively centrally located in the US, especially compared to Florida. This, and if they need any internationally sourced parts, their stated choice of location is relatively close to Houston, and Houston has plenty of infrastructure in place for getting stuff moved off of ships and onto rail. Houston already has a big shipping port.
For latitude, Florida always seemed like a great option, but for shipping parts and materials, it seemed like a very inefficient choice.
Most likely because the most "backward" parts of the US have people that pretty much mind their own business. How's that offshore wind farm project going in Massachusetts?
I love Jesus, except for his foreign policy.
If you look at the map (actually, a globe is easier for this), the minimum energy trajectory from Brownsville takes you through the Straits of Florida, and directly over the Bahamas, which would be a natural location to recover the first stage. (Anyone with the slightest knowledge of spacecraft dynamics knows that their video, which shows the first stage returning to Cape Canaveral, is disinformation. The first stage will be recovered downrange.)
That trajectory would avoid any inhabited land before the Bahamas, passing South of Miami and North of Havana, and could probably get FAA approval.
The Bahamas are not on the list of ITAR restricted countries and there are ~ 58 airstrips there, including 3 closed ones, so SpaceX could presumably find somewhere suitable to land the first stage.
Another poster suggested Puerto Rico, which is unlikely as it would require both more energy and (worse) an overflight of Cuba. Soon after the revolution, an errant Atlas missile (launched from Cape Canaveral) landed in Cuba and killed a few cows. The Cuban government was, shall we say, unappreciative, and since then no missile trajectories have been permitted over Cuba. I don't see the FAA / Department of State making an exception for Space X, and I don't think ITAR regulations make it necessary.
No, "From the Earth to the Moon" had a launch facility in Florida, not too far from the Cape.
I hope something like this will bring enough attention to the area to start cleaning it up. Outside of the US I've never heard or seen so much violence, yet no one talks about it.
I lived in Brownsville a very short time. It's akin to living in my home town (Detroit) but with more bullets, less police and a complete media blackout. The Bush family has a home in the wealthy section of the subdivision so I suspect this has something to do with it. But I found it weird that grenade bombing of buildings in MX less than 1000ft from the border never hit the news. One spring when Brownsville campus of UofT had to be closed since the bullets from across the river were hitting cars and the classrooms the newspaper never ran an article on it. A few miles down the road duffel bags with human heads were found. National news never once said a word. The entire border seems to draw a dead zone of actual media events. The federal money that's pumped into Brownsville is staggering. Yet the crime is off the charts. I honestly found Detroit a less threatening and dangerous place to live.
No, it's because land is cheaper there, and people (i.e., people elsewhere) are less likely to notice if things get blown up.