DOCSLIB.ORG

Commercial Spaceports

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Commercial Spaceports TR N EWS NUMBER 300 NOVEMBER –DECEMBER 2015 Commercial Spaceports Plus Big Data to Boost Driving Safety Applying Greenhouse Gas Measures Adapting to Extreme Weather Events Tips for a Brain-Friendly Presentation —And More! Commercial Spaceports Building the Foundation of a Commercial Space Transportation Network RICHARD M. ROGERS P H O T O : The author is Spaceport N A S Planning Lead, RS&H, A / M A S Inc., Merritt Island, T E Florida. N (Above:) Xombie, a verti - cal-takeoff, vertical-land - he word “spaceport” may trigger visions of motes the use of government assets for access to ing experimental rocket, some far-off place, millennia into the future, space, including commercial launch facilities, rock - lifts off from Mojave Air with spacecraft zipping around between plan - ets, personnel, and missions. and Space Port in a test T ets. Yet spaceports are here, on Earth, and are inch - After the retirement of the Space Shuttle in 2011, for the National Aeronau - tics and Space Administra - ing ever closer to the spaceports envisioned in the NASA programs—such as Commercial Crew and tion’s Jet Propulsion imagination and depicted in the movies. In the not Cargo—have inspired several private companies to Laboratory; the project is too distant future, spacecraft will be zipping people fill the gaps in space access. Some companies are evaluating an algorithm from the surface of the Earth into space and back building on past designs; others are working for a for planetary pinpoint again. Space flight no longer will be the privilege of cheaper, more accessible, way to space by applying landing of spacecraft. a few astronauts. The Commercial Space Trans - new ideas, new designs, and unique engineering. T (Below:) Commercial R portation Network is in development now. New designs in development are attempting to build- N spaceports may expedite E in significant cost savings. Some of the innovations W the recreational space S 3 travel imagined in the Diversified Space Race are revolutionary—such as stage reusability, vertical 0 0 1902 French silent film A Traditionally, spaceports were federally owned facil - takeoff–vertical landing, and horizontal reusable N O Trip to the Moon. ities for launching large government rockets. launch vehicles. V E M Kennedy Space Center and Cape Canaveral Air Force The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) B S E N R O – M Station in Florida and Vandenberg Air Force Base in Office of Commercial Space regulates many aspects D M O E C California are the primary government facilities that of the commercial space sector. FAA has licensed 10 C A I E D E M M I have managed rocket launches in the United States commercial spaceports, each with a unique role and B K I E W R : for more than 60 years. capability. E G 2 A 0 M I In the past two decades, the U.S. Congress has The U.S. spaceport network includes several types 1 passed several pieces of legislation that are ushering of facilities, government- and commercially owned. 5 in a new commercial space race. The legislation pro - Some require large expanses of land with gigantic 9 After its retirement in ets and vertical takeoff–vertical landing rockets 2011, the Space Shuttle require a similar type of infrastructure with an was flown over Washing - expanse of land. The rocket-specific infrastructure of ton, D.C., on delivery to these sites limits the number of users. the Air and Space Museum. Private u Launch facilities that cater to large rockets companies now are also occasionally handle the smaller sounding rock - working to fill the gaps ets. A sounding rocket does not require as much in space access. room, but if the rocket is unguided and launched with a rail launcher, a location near a coast may be steel infrastructure; some only need small pads of necessary. These types of launches do not receive the concrete. Some are located at airports, mostly on the media coverage that launches of larger satellites coasts, although recently some are inland. Each attract but are important to the scientific community, serves a specific purpose and a specific subset of enabling short, recoverable, suborbital flights into launch vehicles. microgravity at a much lower cost. u Sites for winged launch vehicles —or hori - Types of Launch Sites zontal takeoff-and-land launch vehicles—have For spaceports, one size does not fit all. The addition gained interest, and many are in development. The of commercially owned and operated launch facili - Virgin Galactic SpaceShipTwo and XCOR Aerospace ties to the repertoire of federal launch sites has Lynx aim to conduct space tourism, carrying pas - allowed diverse missions and users to gain access to sengers and payloads into suborbital space flight. space. Commercial launch facilities and operations Other versions of these horizontal takeoff-and-land can be more businesslike than their government launch vehicles use an expendable second stage to counterparts. Each of the following types of launch insert payloads into orbit. Winged launch vehicles A rendering of the sites has commercial and federal versions: take off horizontally via a runway and operate simi - Houston Spaceport at larly to an airplane until rocket ignition. Ellington Airport in u Traditional vertical launch sites require an Texas, which was approved by the Federal infrastructure specific to the rocket. Many of the A spaceport that can support horizontal takeoff- Aviation Administration vehicles are large and require substantial storage and-land launch vehicles typically is colocated at an in June to host the 10th depots for propellants, as well as secure safety areas. airport and is known as an aerospaceport. FAA has licensed commercial u Sites for vertical takeoff–vertical landing vehi - licensed four spaceports at active airports: Cecil spaceport in the United cles also require specific infrastructure for launches Spaceport in Jacksonville, Florida; Houston Space - States. and a clear area for landing. Smaller traditional rock - port in Texas; Oklahoma Air and Space Port in Burns P H O T O : H O U S T O N A I R P O R T S Y S T E M 5 1 0 2 R E B M E C E D – R E B M E V O N 0 0 3 S W E N R T 10 A S The SpaceX Falcon 9 A N , S rocket carries NOAA’s R E W Deep Space Climate O P M I Observatory spacecraft T D N from a traditional launch A Y A R site at Cape Canaveral G Y N Air Force Station in O T : O Florida. T O H P Flat; and Midland International Air and Space Port components requires a coordinated logistics effort in Texas. Sometime in the future, aerospaceports also that often spans every mode—air, ground, ship, and will be used for high-speed, point-to-point trans - rail. The commercial spaceport network relies on the portation. local transportation infrastructure to support launch operations. Spaceport Services Several secondary industries also are associated Spaceports offer much more than the infrastructure to with spaceports, such as spaceflight and pilot train - launch a rocket. A spaceport offers a range of services ing, museums, tours, education, and retail outlets. As to users and to the supporting aerospace industry: the commercial spaceflight network grows, the A model of an XCOR neighboring aerospace industries increase, helping to Aerospace Lynx on u Aerospace design and manufacturing capabil - build the community economically and socially. display at Mediamarkt ities, to support the launch vehicle and the payload Amsterdam, Netherlands. XCOR and other winged providers; Inspiration and Motivation launch vehicles are being u Range support and telemetry services for safe The array of services and capabilities offered by a space - developed to conduct launches and for the transmission of data during a port also inspires the growth of the commercial space payloads into suborbital launch or test; network. High technology, science, and engineering space flight. u Payload processing and integration facilities, L N . S to support satellite development, manufacturing, and E G N A R O testing; and T 4 R 2 : N u Other services, such as propellant supply and O T E O H W storage, secure facilities, weather monitoring, light - P S 3 ning protection, and more. 0 0 N O These same manufacturing, integration, and engi - V E M neering services also may extend beyond the aero - B E R space industry to support research and development – D E for the Department of Defense, universities, and C E commercial manufacturers. M B E Many transportation modes play a role at a space - R 2 port. Large rocket components, such as propellant 0 1 tanks or solid boosters, commonly are fabricated at 5 locations away from the launch site. Delivery of these 11 P H O T biomedical industry, for instance, seeks access to O : K I M space to research new medicines, biological prod - S H I F ucts, and medical devices. Other industries, such as L E T T , N aerospace, technology, optics, and materials, want to A S A use space to research and develop new manufactur - ing techniques, materials, and devices. University researchers, scientists, and students may need to con - duct microgravity experiments on a suborbital or orbital mission. As the number of spaceports within the commercial spaceport network increases, so does the access to space. Regulations and Standards The NASA Railroad train jobs are often abundant in the area surrounding a Originally, government organizations such as the transports the final set of spaceport and provoke community interest in space. A Department of Defense and NASA exclusively oper - solid rocket booster spaceport and related aerospace industry can inspire ated spaceports.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Quality and Reliability: APL's Key to Mission Success
    W. L. EBERT AND E. J. HOFFMAN Quality and Reliability: APL’s Key to Mission Success Ward L. Ebert and Eric J. Hoffman APL’s Space Department has a long history of producing reliable spaceflight systems. Key to the success of these systems are the methods employed to ensure robust, failure-tolerant designs, to ensure a final product that faithfully embodies those designs, and to physically verify that launch and environmental stresses will indeed be well tolerated. These basic methods and practices have served well throughout the constantly changing scientific, engineering, and budgetary challenges of the first 40 years of the space age. The Space Department has demonstrated particular competence in addressing the country’s need for small exploratory missions that extend the envelope of technology. (Keywords: Quality assurance, Reliability, Spacecraft, Spaceflight.) INTRODUCTION The APL Space Department attempts to be at the and development is fundamentally an innovative en- high end of the quality and reliability scale for un- deavor, and any plan to carry out such work necessarily manned space missions. A track record of nearly 60 has steps with unknown outcomes. On the other hand, spacecraft and well over 100 instruments bears this out conventional management wisdom says that some de- as a success. Essentially, all of APL’s space missions are gree of risk and unpredictability exists in any major one-of-a-kind, so the challenge is to get it right the first undertaking, and the only element that differs in re- time, every time, by developing the necessary technol- search and development is the larger degree of risks.
    [Show full text]
  • The Regulatory Role of the Federal Aviation Administration
    The Regulatory Role of the Federal Aviation Federal Aviation Administration Administration Presented to: Legal Subcommittee of the United Nations Committee on the Peaceful Uses of Outer Space By: Laura Montgomery, Senior Attorney, FAA Regulatory Structure • Congress • Executive Branch – Federal Aviation Administration – space transportation – Federal Communications Commissions – space communications – National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration – remote sensing from space • Judiciary Federal Aviation 2 2 Administration March 2010 Administrative Procedure Act • Rulemaking • Authorizations: licenses and permits • Adjudication Federal Aviation 3 3 Administration March 2010 Statutory Authority • 49 U.S.C. Subtitle IX, chapter 701 (Ch. 701) – Authorizes the Secretary of Transportation to authorize launch and reentry and operation of launch and reentry sites as carried out by U.S. citizens or within the United States. – Directs the Secretary to • Exercise this responsibility consistent with public health and safety, safety of property, and national security and foreign policy interests of the United States. • Encourage, facilitate and promote commercial space launches and reentries by the private sector. Federal Aviation 4 Administration March 2010 Statutory Mission ELV Air Launch Launch & Reentry Sites RLV Launch & Reentry Sea Launch Human Space Flight Federal Aviation 5 5 Administration March 2010 Types of Launch Sites Oklahoma Spaceport ELV California Spaceport Sea Launch Florida Kodiak Launch Spaceport Complex Mid-Atlantic Mojave Air
    [Show full text]
  • Orion First Flight Test
    National Aeronautics and Space Administration orion First Flight Test NASAfacts Orion, NASA’s new spacecraft Exploration Flight Test-1 built to send humans farther During Orion’s flight test, the spacecraft will launch atop a Delta IV Heavy, a rocket built than ever before, is launching and operated by United Launch Alliance. While into space for the first time in this launch vehicle will allow Orion to reach an altitude high enough to meet the objectives for December 2014. this test, a much larger, human-rated rocket An uncrewed test flight called Exploration will be needed for the vast distances of future Flight Test-1 will test Orion systems critical to exploration missions. To meet that need, NASA crew safety, such as heat shield performance, is developing the Space Launch System, which separation events, avionics and software will give Orion the capability to carry astronauts performance, attitude control and guidance, farther into the solar system than ever before. parachute deployment and recovery operations. During the uncrewed flight, Orion will orbit The data gathered during the flight will influence the Earth twice, reaching an altitude of design decisions and validate existing computer approximately 3,600 miles – about 15 times models and innovative new approaches to space farther into space than the International Space systems development, as well as reduce overall Station orbits. Sending Orion to such a high mission risks and costs. altitude will allow the spacecraft to return to Earth at speeds near 20,000 mph. Returning
    [Show full text]
  • Spacecraft & Vehicle Systems
    National Aeronautics and Space Administration Marshall Space Flight Center Spacecraft & Vehicle Systems Engineering Solutions for Space Science and Exploration Marshall’s Spacecraft and Vehicle Systems Department For over 50 years, the Marshall Space Flight Center has devel- for assessment of the orbiter’s thermal protection system prior oped the expertise and capabilities to successfully execute the to reentry and for debris anomaly resolution. In addition, the integrated design, development, test, and evaluation of NASA Natural Environments group supported the day-of -launch I-Load launch vehicles, and spacecraft and science programs. Marshall’s Updates, provided the mean bulk propellant temperature forecast Spacecraft and Vehicle Systems Department (EV) has been a prior to each Shuttle launch, and performed radiation assessments major technical and engineering arm to develop these vehicles of Shuttle avionics systems. Members in the department also and programs in the areas of Systems Engineering & Integration co-chaired several propulsion SE&I panels including panels for (SE&I), flight mechanics and analysis, and structural design and Aerodynamics, Thermal, and Loads disciplines. analysis. EV has performed advanced research and development for future spacecraft and launch vehicle systems, and has estab- EV provides design and analysis support to numerous Science and lished technical partnerships and collaborations with other NASA Mission Systems projects, including the Environmental Control & centers, the Department of Defense, the Department of Energy, Life Support System (ECLSS), the Microgravity Science Research industry, technical professional societies, and academia in order Rack, and the Node elements for the International Space Station. to enhance technical competencies and advanced technologies The department also developed and maintains the Chandra for future spacecraft and vehicle systems.
    [Show full text]
  • Space Launch System (Sls) Motors
    Propulsion Products Catalog SPACE LAUNCH SYSTEM (SLS) MOTORS For NASA’s Space Launch System (SLS), Northrop Grumman manufactures the five-segment SLS heavy- lift boosters, the booster separation motors (BSM), and the Launch Abort System’s (LAS) launch abort motor and attitude control motor. The SLS five-segment booster is the largest solid rocket motor ever built for flight. The SLS booster shares some design heritage with flight-proven four-segment space shuttle reusable solid rocket motors (RSRM), but generates 20 percent greater average thrust and 24 percent greater total impulse. While space shuttle RSRM production has ended, sustained booster production for SLS helps provide cost savings and access to reliable material sources. Designed to push the spent RSRMs safely away from the space shuttle, Northrop Grumman BSMs were rigorously qualified for human space flight and successfully used on the last fifteen space shuttle missions. These same motors are a critical part of NASA’s SLS. Four BSMs are installed in the forward frustum of each five-segment booster and four are installed in the aft skirt, for a total of 16 BSMs per launch. The launch abort motor is an integral part of NASA’s LAS. The LAS is designed to safely pull the Orion crew module away from the SLS launch vehicle in the event of an emergency on the launch pad or during ascent. Northrop Grumman is on contract to Lockheed Martin to build the abort motor and attitude control motor—Lockheed is the prime contractor for building the Orion Multi-Purpose Crew Vehicle designed for use on NASA’s SLS.
    [Show full text]
  • The Space Race
    The Space Race Aims: To arrange the key events of the “Space Race” in chronological order. To decide which country won the Space Race. Space – the Final Frontier “Space” is everything Atmosphere that exists outside of our planet’s atmosphere. The atmosphere is the layer of Earth gas which surrounds our planet. Without it, none of us would be able to breathe! Space The sun is a star which is orbited (circled) by a system of planets. Earth is the third planet from the sun. There are nine planets in our solar system. How many of the other eight can you name? Neptune Saturn Mars Venus SUN Pluto Uranus Jupiter EARTH Mercury What has this got to do with the COLD WAR? Another element of the Cold War was the race to control the final frontier – outer space! Why do you think this would be so important? The Space Race was considered important because it showed the world which country had the best science, technology, and economic system. It would prove which country was the greatest of the superpowers, the USSR or the USA, and which political system was the best – communism or capitalism. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xvaEvCNZymo The Space Race – key events Discuss the following slides in your groups. For each slide, try to agree on: • which of the three options is correct • whether this was an achievement of the Soviet Union (USSR) or the Americans (USA). When did humans first send a satellite into orbit around the Earth? 1940s, 1950s or 1960s? Sputnik 1 was launched in October 1957.
    [Show full text]
  • The SKYLON Spaceplane
    The SKYLON Spaceplane Borg K.⇤ and Matula E.⇤ University of Colorado, Boulder, CO, 80309, USA This report outlines the major technical aspects of the SKYLON spaceplane as a final project for the ASEN 5053 class. The SKYLON spaceplane is designed as a single stage to orbit vehicle capable of lifting 15 mT to LEO from a 5.5 km runway and returning to land at the same location. It is powered by a unique engine design that combines an air- breathing and rocket mode into a single engine. This is achieved through the use of a novel lightweight heat exchanger that has been demonstrated on a reduced scale. The program has received funding from the UK government and ESA to build a full scale prototype of the engine as it’s next step. The project is technically feasible but will need to overcome some manufacturing issues and high start-up costs. This report is not intended for publication or commercial use. Nomenclature SSTO Single Stage To Orbit REL Reaction Engines Ltd UK United Kingdom LEO Low Earth Orbit SABRE Synergetic Air-Breathing Rocket Engine SOMA SKYLON Orbital Maneuvering Assembly HOTOL Horizontal Take-O↵and Landing NASP National Aerospace Program GT OW Gross Take-O↵Weight MECO Main Engine Cut-O↵ LACE Liquid Air Cooled Engine RCS Reaction Control System MLI Multi-Layer Insulation mT Tonne I. Introduction The SKYLON spaceplane is a single stage to orbit concept vehicle being developed by Reaction Engines Ltd in the United Kingdom. It is designed to take o↵and land on a runway delivering 15 mT of payload into LEO, in the current D-1 configuration.
    [Show full text]
  • L AUNCH SYSTEMS Databk7 Collected.Book Page 18 Monday, September 14, 2009 2:53 PM Databk7 Collected.Book Page 19 Monday, September 14, 2009 2:53 PM
    databk7_collected.book Page 17 Monday, September 14, 2009 2:53 PM CHAPTER TWO L AUNCH SYSTEMS databk7_collected.book Page 18 Monday, September 14, 2009 2:53 PM databk7_collected.book Page 19 Monday, September 14, 2009 2:53 PM CHAPTER TWO L AUNCH SYSTEMS Introduction Launch systems provide access to space, necessary for the majority of NASA’s activities. During the decade from 1989–1998, NASA used two types of launch systems, one consisting of several families of expendable launch vehicles (ELV) and the second consisting of the world’s only partially reusable launch system—the Space Shuttle. A significant challenge NASA faced during the decade was the development of technologies needed to design and implement a new reusable launch system that would prove less expensive than the Shuttle. Although some attempts seemed promising, none succeeded. This chapter addresses most subjects relating to access to space and space transportation. It discusses and describes ELVs, the Space Shuttle in its launch vehicle function, and NASA’s attempts to develop new launch systems. Tables relating to each launch vehicle’s characteristics are included. The other functions of the Space Shuttle—as a scientific laboratory, staging area for repair missions, and a prime element of the Space Station program—are discussed in the next chapter, Human Spaceflight. This chapter also provides a brief review of launch systems in the past decade, an overview of policy relating to launch systems, a summary of the management of NASA’s launch systems programs, and tables of funding data. The Last Decade Reviewed (1979–1988) From 1979 through 1988, NASA used families of ELVs that had seen service during the previous decade.
    [Show full text]
  • Paper Session IA-Shuttle-C Heavy-Lift Vehicle of the 90'S
    The Space Congress® Proceedings 1989 (26th) Space - The New Generation Apr 25th, 2:00 PM Paper Session I-A - Shuttle-C Heavy-Lift Vehicle of the 90's Robert G. Eudy Manager, Shuttle-C Task Team, Marshall Space Flight Center Follow this and additional works at: https://commons.erau.edu/space-congress-proceedings Scholarly Commons Citation Eudy, Robert G., "Paper Session I-A - Shuttle-C Heavy-Lift Vehicle of the 90's" (1989). The Space Congress® Proceedings. 5. https://commons.erau.edu/space-congress-proceedings/proceedings-1989-26th/april-25-1989/5 This Event is brought to you for free and open access by the Conferences at Scholarly Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in The Space Congress® Proceedings by an authorized administrator of Scholarly Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. SHUTTLE-C HEAVY-LIFT VEHICLE OF THE 90 ' S Mr. Robert G. Eudy, Manager Shuttle-C Task Team Marshall Space Flight Center ABSTRACT United States current and planned space activities identify the need for increased payload capacity and unmanned flight to complement the existing Shuttle. To meet this challenge the National Aeronautics and Space Administration is defining an unmanned cargo version of the Shuttle that can give the nation early heavy-lift capability. Called Shuttle-C, this unmanned vehicle is a natural, low-cost evolution of the current Space Shuttle that can be flying 100,000 to 170,000 pound payloads by late 1994. At the core of Shuttle-C design philosophy is the principle of evolvement from the United State's Space Transportation System.
    [Show full text]
  • View / Download
    www.arianespace.com www.starsem.com www.avio Arianespace’s eighth launch of 2021 with the fifth Soyuz of the year will place its satellite passengers into low Earth orbit. The launcher will be carrying a total payload of approximately 5 518 kg. The launch will be performed from Baikonur, in Kazakhstan. MISSION DESCRIPTION 2 ONEWEB SATELLITES 3 Liftoff is planned on at exactly: SOYUZ LAUNCHER 4 06:23 p.m. Washington, D.C. time, 10:23 p.m. Universal time (UTC), LAUNCH CAMPAIGN 4 00:23 a.m. Paris time, FLIGHT SEQUENCES 5 01:23 a.m. Moscow time, 03:23 a.m. Baikonur Cosmodrome. STAKEHOLDERS OF A LAUNCH 6 The nominal duration of the mission (from liftoff to separation of the satellites) is: 3 hours and 45 minutes. Satellites: OneWeb satellite #255 to #288 Customer: OneWeb • Altitude at separation: 450 km Cyrielle BOUJU • Inclination: 84.7degrees [email protected] +33 (0)6 32 65 97 48 RUAG Space AB (Linköping, Sweden) is the prime contractor in charge of development and production of the dispenser system used on Flight ST34. It will carry the satellites during their flight to low Earth orbit and then release them into space. The dedicated dispenser is designed to Flight ST34, the 29th commercial mission from the Baikonur Cosmodrome in Kazakhstan performed by accommodate up to 36 spacecraft per launch, allowing Arianespace and its Starsem affiliate, will put 34 of OneWeb’s satellites bringing the total fleet to 288 satellites Arianespace to timely deliver the lion’s share of the initial into a near-polar orbit at an altitude of 450 kilometers.
    [Show full text]
  • Minotaur I User's Guide
    This page left intentionally blank. Minotaur I User’s Guide Revision Summary TM-14025, Rev. D REVISION SUMMARY VERSION DOCUMENT DATE CHANGE PAGE 1.0 TM-14025 Mar 2002 Initial Release All 2.0 TM-14025A Oct 2004 Changes throughout. Major updates include All · Performance plots · Environments · Payload accommodations · Added 61 inch fairing option 3.0 TM-14025B Mar 2014 Extensively Revised All 3.1 TM-14025C Sep 2015 Updated to current Orbital ATK naming. All 3.2 TM-14025D Sep 2018 Branding update to Northrop Grumman. All 3.3 TM-14025D Sep 2020 Branding update. All Updated contact information. Release 3.3 September 2020 i Minotaur I User’s Guide Revision Summary TM-14025, Rev. D This page left intentionally blank. Release 3.3 September 2020 ii Minotaur I User’s Guide Preface TM-14025, Rev. D PREFACE This Minotaur I User's Guide is intended to familiarize potential space launch vehicle users with the Mino- taur I launch system, its capabilities and its associated services. All data provided herein is for reference purposes only and should not be used for mission specific analyses. Detailed analyses will be performed based on the requirements and characteristics of each specific mission. The launch services described herein are available for US Government sponsored missions via the United States Air Force (USAF) Space and Missile Systems Center (SMC), Advanced Systems and Development Directorate (SMC/AD), Rocket Systems Launch Program (SMC/ADSL). For technical information and additional copies of this User’s Guide, contact: Northrop Grumman
    [Show full text]
  • Spaceport Infrastructure Cost Trends
    AIAA 2014-4397 SPACE Conferences & Exposition 4-7 August 2014, San Diego, CA AIAA SPACE 2014 Conference and Exposition Spaceport Infrastructure Cost Trends Brian S. Gulliver, PE1, and G. Wayne Finger, PhD, PE2 RS&H, Inc. The total cost of employing a new or revised space launch system is critical to understanding its business potential, analyzing its business case and funding its development. The design, construction and activation of a commercial launch complex or spaceport can represent a significant portion of the non-recurring costs for a new launch system. While the historical cost trends for traditional launch site infrastructure are fairly well understood, significant changes in the approach to commercial launch systems in recent years have required a reevaluation of the cost of ground infrastructure. By understanding the factors which drive these costs, informed decisions can be made early in a program to give the business case the best chance of economic success. The authors have designed several NASA, military, commercial and private launch complexes and supported the evaluation and licensing of commercial aerospaceports. Data from these designs has been used to identify the major factors which, on a broad scale, drive their non-recurring costs. Both vehicle specific and location specific factors play major roles in establishing costs. I. Introduction It is critical for launch vehicle operators and other stakeholders to understand the factors and trends that affect the non-recurring costs of launch site infrastructure. These costs are often an area of concern when planning for the development of a new launch vehicle program as they can represent a significant capital investment that must be recovered over the lifecycle of the program.
    [Show full text]