Hacker News Reader

Comment by bloopernova | Hacker News Reader

Are there any alternatives in the continental USA?

Will the super heavy need to launch from as near to the equator as possible? Or does it require higher latitudes?

Closer to the equator makes it easier to achieve an equatorial orbit and some slight benefits from the initial speed of the Earth's rotation but Super Heavy is so ridiculously over sized it doesn't need it. Things like the ISS are highly inclined so they're easier to reach from Russia's launch site as your latitude is essentially the default inclination you're be in when you hit orbit without spending the fuel to change it.

Coastal is still better from the perspective of being able to safely abort. The further inland you go the more risk you run of failed launches resulting in big pieces of the craft coming down over populated areas.

Any possibility of going outside Continental USA? A boat? Mexico?

Converted oil platforms in the Gulf of Mexico:

https://spaceexplored.com/2021/07/07/update-on-spacexs-gulf-...

Elon recently admitted (again) the planned frequency of Starship launches could be too high even to Cape Canaveral (10/day), so ocean-based launch platform may become necessity. By the same logic Boca Chica doesn't look like a long-term high-frequency launch place.

It does scream 'Research and Development' site way more than literal spaceport. If they get all the other issues fixed and the rockets are mostly reusable it might still be good enough as a production line.

I'm pretty sure ITAR prevents US companies from exporting orbital rocket technology, as it's dual-use. Any government with access to a SpaceX rocket could learn a lot about how to develop long range missiles.

There’s a launch site in the Kwajalein Atoll, part of the Marshall Islands, and I’m pretty sure we don’t share tech with them. The ESA probably doesn’t share tech with the countries who host launches, IIRC they are French “territories” anyway.

I'd be wary of putting anything on an island chain like the Marshall Island. Their max elevation is only 10 meters and it's only going to get worse and they'll be hard pressed to build the sea walls needed to keep your space port open.

It also doesn't solve the ITAR issues which are strict when it comes to rocket technology because it's so close to the tech needed for ICBMs.

Unless I'm missing something, the ESA does its launches from overseas France in French Guyana and since France takes part in building the Ariane rockets, they would already have access to the tech

It's not feasible to transport Starship or Super Heavy halfway across the Pacific. Even if you could, the launch site on Omelek Island is part of the Ronald Reagan Ballistic Missile Defense Test Site[1] which is controlled by the US military. The Republic of the Marshall Islands never has access to the restricted technology.

It's hard to overstate how restrictive ITAR is. For example, ITAR covers generation 3 night vision devices. The US is hesitant to allow their export to allies, even for peaceful purposes.[2] When I bought a night vision device, I had to sign an acknowledgement that I wouldn't take it out of the country or even allow non-citizens to look through it (even on US soil). People caught violating these rules can be imprisoned for years.

1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ronald_Reagan_Ballistic_Missil...

2. From page 10 of https://www.aviation.govt.nz/assets/publications/vector/Vect... "New Zealand operators must ensure restricted access to the goggles to comply with the US requirements."

ITAR feels... outdated. Mate recently went from boat building to rocket building by acquisition. Suddenly place got retinal scans and wireless buttplugs, even tho they've been building same thing for months now.

SpaceX's first launch attempts "were launched from Kwajalein Atoll using the SpaceX launch facility on Omelek Island and range facilities of the Reagan Test Site."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Falcon_1

There is also the "Kodiak Launch Complex (KLC), is a dual-use commercial and military spaceport for sub-orbital and orbital launch vehicles." Private companies Astra and ABL Space Systems have launched from it.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pacific_Spaceport_Complex_%E2%...

They gave up on Kwaj mostly from the terrible logistics and corrosive environment though. If it was hard getting an F1 there, I can't imagine the pain of assembling Starship...

Yes, even Alaska is a bit much. I think south Texas is a great spot along with KSC, Vandenburg and Wallops Island VA.

In the big picture though, given part of Starship's goal is intercontinental travel, spaceflight will happen to and from everywhere on the globe.

Rumour is that SpaceX was seriously considering Puerto Rico before it secured the Boca Chica location.

USA (!) company Sea Launch managed to launch Zenit rockets from equator, so here's the precedent...

The Spaceport Company is also trying to develop a system for providing near coastal ocean launch facilities that they call it Spaceport as a Service. Their team includes a person who helped to write the Part 450 regulations while at the FAA previously.

https://thespaceportcompany.com/

IIRC it was Boeing and about a half of ex-USSR space industry. So not exactly or even mostly USA. I had a girlfriend back then whose father worked on the program. Great times those 1990s.

Yeah, that was a bit odd - the main part Boeing - seemingly! - provided was the connection to the markets and to the regulatory environment. The rocket was Ukrainian, with Russian engine and a booster stage, and the launch platform was of Norway origin. But the company was still based in USA.

It isn't completely out of the question, Rocketlab has a launch site in New Zealand for instance. But, it does involve a lot of red tape, making it more expensive and less easy to move fast with. Probably also comes with a pretty limited list of options of significant US allies in stable regions (a large number of which likely aren't meaningfully cheaper/less regulated).

Reply on news.ycombinator.com