Alternative Space Launch Sites

Delta Force

Banned
In my Need for Speed timeline, large conventional rockets and nuclear thermal rockets are going to play a prominent role. I know about some of the US launch sites that were historically considered, but I'm not so sure about where other countries would build spaceports, especially for launches of nuclear thermal rockets. I was wondering if people could recommend launch sites for the following countries/purposes:

Argentina: Capable of launching satellites for commercial and military purposes. The major South American space faring nation. Needs a location or locations to launch small/medium sized rockets and air launched rockets.

Commonwealth/France: Capable of launching people into space and maintaining long duration Earth orbit missions/space stations for use by Commonwealth industry. For the Commonwealth it is mainly Canada and the UK, but Australia might be involved as well. The Commonwealth side closely collaborates with the American space program, with Canada's air launch systems widely used by the US DoD and commercial industry. Both countries come together to carry out programs that would be too expensive to do alone, such as developing nuclear thermal rockets, lunar outposts, etc. They might even develop rockets and capsules together, but still produce them domestically (think Concorde program). Otherwise they largely carry out their own programs with their own facilities. Needs spaceports for large rocket launches, including nuclear thermal rockets. Canada also has a large air launch rocket business and needs a spaceport or spaceports for launch (perhaps the Caribbean).

European Consortium: A private European consortium will exist, likely with air launched vehicles and small rockets (perhaps human capable). Mostly Italian, West German, and possibly Spanish companies. Think Airbus with rockets. Needs a location or locations to launch small/medium sized rockets and air launched rockets.

Imperial Iran: Aerospace technology is an area of focus for the Shah and his successors as a way to diversify the economy. The major Middle Eastern space faring nation, likely has major collaboration with the Western space programs. Needs a location or locations to launch small/medium sized rockets and air launched rockets.

Japan: Capable of launching people into space and maintaining long duration Earth orbit missions/space stations for use by Japanese industry. A major economic competitor to Western space firms. Needs spaceports for large rocket launches, including nuclear thermal rockets, as well as for air launches.

People's Republic of China: Has a large military and industrial low Earth orbit program. Other countries are concerned about their military ambitions in space. Needs spaceports for large rocket launches, including nuclear thermal rockets, as well as for air launches.

Soviet Union: One of the top three space programs. Has nuclear thermal rockets, Nova sized conventional rockets, manned lunar research stations, and an extensive probe program. Working on a mission to Mars. Needs spaceports for large rocket launches, including nuclear thermal rockets.

United States: One of the top three space programs. Has nuclear thermal rockets, Nova sized conventional rockets, manned lunar research stations, and an extensive probe program. Working on a mission to Mars. Needs spaceports for large rocket launches, including nuclear thermal rockets.
 
For the soviets, I would recommend building their spaceport on the pacific coast near Vladivostok. However, this would require major efforts in improving transport infrastructure.
 
Well the most important aspects with regards to a suitable Launch Site are location, stability of the region, and ease of access.

Generally you want it to be as close to the equator as is possible, where the Earth's own rotation can add up to 465 m/s of delta-v which reduces the effort required on the Launch Vehicle to place a payload into the desired orbit. Additionally, stage impact zones should be well away from inhabited areas, which favours ocean impact zones, or land where nobody lives.

Geographically and Politically Stable areas are to ensure that you can use the Launch Site whenever you need to.

Ease of access is to make sure that you can send the Launch Vehicle parts to it for Final Assembly without incurring too much complexity and expense.

This is why Baikonur Cosmodrone (USSR), Cape Canaveral (NASA), Kourou Launch Centre (ESA), Tanegashima Space Centre (JAXA), and Jiuquan Satellite Launch Center (CNSA) are located where they are.


As for recommendations, I would keep Commonwealth/France at Kourou, located in French Guiana, since it fulfils the requirements stated above. With the same applying to the US, USSR, and Japan.

But one very important word of warning. Nuclear Thermal Rockets (NTRs) are not as great as believed to be. While it is true that they can provide double the Isp of even the best LOX/LH2 Bi-Propellant Rocket Engine, they are extremely heavy, with a low T/M Ratio - almost never going above 7:1 - though this applies to the Solid Core NTR only.
 
My Try

Argentina
best north near the sea, the samborombon Bay to Mar del Plata, would be ideal for launches to equator or polar orbit

Commonwealth/France:
British or french Guyana would be ideal
but in this group would power struggle between Australia and the rest for launch site in Woomera, Australia.

European Consortium: aka Airbus on rockets
there biggest problem is to get a launch site that is not taken away by foreign government, see OTRAG ordeal in Congo and Libya !
the best way is they use a ship as launch platform for there rocket.

Imperial Iran:
OTL Iran space program use three launch site Schahrud , Qom and in province of Semnan
only the gulf of Oman near Darya-ye Omman would useful alternative.

Japan:
It's major problem there not much space in that nation and it's neighbors are hostile foreign government (two Korea, China USSR)
so the Tanegashima Space Center and Uchinoura Space Center would be also in this TL

People's Republic of China:
they problems are similar to Japan, so there OTL launch site would be same like in this TL
Jiuquan Satellite Launch Center
Xichang Satellite Launch Center
Taiyuan Satellite Launch Center
Wenchang Satellite Launch Center

Soviet Union:
there first launch site was Kapustin Yar but to close to Iran Turkish border and CIA radars system.
so for the test of ICBM, the Soviet decide to build a more centralized launch site were could monitor the flight over total USSR area far away from CIA.
That became Baikonur Cosmodrome.
Plesetsk Cosmodrome was build as ICBM site but evolved to military launch site, because it's close to rocket production site near Leningrad and Moscow
again not much change between TL and OTL

United States:
Again a launch site on coast is needed, you don't want a falling rocket stage specifically it rocket with nuclear engine blow up over center of US.
Cape Canaveral AFS and Vandenberg AFB are Ideal
but there allot study for launch site in USA some example here http://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/19620007182_1962007182.pdf
 

Delta Force

Banned
But one very important word of warning. Nuclear Thermal Rockets (NTRs) are not as great as believed to be. While it is true that they can provide double the Isp of even the best LOX/LH2 Bi-Propellant Rocket Engine, they are extremely heavy, with a low T/M Ratio - almost never going above 7:1 - though this applies to the Solid Core NTR only.

True, but once in space the thrust to weight issues are lessened. It would probably be too dangerous to launch a running nuclear reactor anyways, as if the rocket were to crash the reactor might keep running and contaminate the ocean. I imagine standard practice would be to launch the nuclear thermal rocket into space, check for problems, and then clear it for use.

The big question I have is if it would make more sense to build a launch facility in an area with nuclear testing or weapons infrastructure (or the reactor factory), or if it would make more sense to bring the reactor to an existing launch complex. Does anyone know what the standard practice is with naval nuclear reactors for new ships, in terms of if they are shipped fueled to the shipyard or not?
 

JJohnson

Banned
My Try


United States:
Again a launch site on coast is needed, you don't want a falling rocket stage specifically it rocket with nuclear engine blow up over center of US.
Cape Canaveral AFS and Vandenberg AFB are Ideal
but there allot study for launch site in USA some example here http://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/19620007182_1962007182.pdf

For all the alternate USA's out there, where else would be a good place for a space launch site?

For example:
1. OTL USA+ Republic of Rio Grande
2. (1) + Sonora, Chihuahua, Baja California
3. (2) + Canada or just OTL + Canada
4. (3) + Bermuda, Bahamas, or just OTL+ the two island groups.
 

Delta Force

Banned
For all the alternate USA's out there, where else would be a good place for a space launch site?

For example:
1. OTL USA+ Republic of Rio Grande
2. (1) + Sonora, Chihuahua, Baja California
3. (2) + Canada or just OTL + Canada
4. (3) + Bermuda, Bahamas, or just OTL+ the two island groups.

1. A Rio Grande spaceport might end up dropping stages on Florida for Atlantic launches and would have to fly over Mexico for Pacific and southern launches, possibly risking staging over them and at the very least adding political complications.

2. Baja California would be a good Pacific and polar orbit spaceport (at least for southern launches).

3. A Canadian Spaceport might be useful for Molniya orbits to spy on the Soviet Union, monitor Arctic activities, and improve communication in Canada.

4. They are closer to the United States than Hawaii and one of the islands could be developed for its geographic advantage for launches and relative isolation/low population. However, it would probably be a US territory with no one to lobby on its behalf in Congress.
 
Last edited:
In USA, they ruled remote island out for Launch site in favor of launch site on US coast.

here some other proposal

Matagorda Island on the Texas Gulf coast for Shuttle
Brownsville, Texas also for Shuttle and SpaceX

and the off shore launch Platforms or towed launch platforms
before the coast of south carolina for Nova booster
same in case Cape Canaveral.
also entire Merritt Island National Wildlife Refuge, north of Cape Canaveral AFS and Kennedy space center for Nova boosters
 

Incognito

Banned
In my Need for Speed timeline, large conventional rockets and nuclear thermal rockets are going to play a prominent role. I know about some of the US launch sites that were historically considered, but I'm not so sure about where other countries would build spaceports, especially for launches of nuclear thermal rockets.

Soviet Union: One of the top three space programs. Has nuclear thermal rockets, Nova sized conventional rockets, manned lunar research stations, and an extensive probe program. Working on a mission to Mars. Needs spaceports for large rocket launches, including nuclear thermal rockets.
Not sure if it matches your specifications, but OTL Russia is working on a new spaceport in the Far East: http://rt.com/politics/putin-yanukovich-cosmodrome-ukraine/
 

Archibald

Banned
As Michel Van said - Matagorda could replaced both Cape Canaveral and Vandenberg

Australia: Woomera can't launch in Polar orbit, but from 1986 to 2005 there werea host of private companies seeking alternate launch sites.
Along the years they considered the following sites
- Darwin
- Cape York
- Christmas Island
- Manus and Emirau (a pair of islands near Papua New Guinea)

Kenya is also a good contender for a British or Italian space program (British, because Kenya was part of the empire; Italy, because OTL they had the San Marco launch platform there)
 
Archibald:
Australia: Woomera can't launch in Polar orbit,

Uups the x-3 satellite (Prospero) was Launch into Polar Orbit by Black arrow
Form woomera
Also the F-10 flight of Europa rocket had to bring a satellite in Polar Orbit.


Matagorda Island for Polar Orbit Launch ?
If the mexico goverment has no Problem with us Rockets
Thunder Allong the mexico Coast and Pass near mexico City into Orbit.
 
Last edited:
How about Ascension Island for the US, they already have Wideawake Airbase stationed their and the UK and Canada could join with them also.
 
1. OTL USA+ Republic of Rio Grande
2. (1) + Sonora, Chihuahua, Baja California
3. (2) + Canada or just OTL + Canada
4. (3) + Bermuda, Bahamas, or just OTL+ the two island groups.

1. Somewhere in southern Tamaulipas/“Rio Grande”, if that’s the name of the single US state.
2. Same.
3. If plus 2, same, otherwise Florida/Texas as per OTL.
4. Maybe an island (set of islands?) in the Turks & Caicos are dedicated specifically to said launches?

However, it would probably be a US territory with no one to lobby on its behalf in Congress.

Depends on how they enter the Union, of course.
 
And just for good measure, it's nearer the Equater than Cape Canaveral. More help from the spin of the Earth.

Although Ascension is British, we don't mind the US and Canada using it so long as we'd be an equal partner and the US and Canada payed for the upkeep like they do with Wideawake Airbase.

Now that i'm thinking about it, we could even invite the Aussies and Kiwi's!
 
for the euro consortium: if suriname is still dutch, that would be a suitable launch location.

If portugal is in, how about cape verde islands, azores maybe, but they are more north.
 
I think there's one at the National Space Museum in Leicestershire!

Let's start a whip-round and get it back up and running! lols, i'll put the first few quid in the pot.
 
I think there's one at the National Space Museum in Leicestershire!

Let's start a whip-round and get it back up and running! lols, i'll put the first few quid in the pot.

There is complete Europa 2 rocket in museum near Munich, Germany
in perfect condition, with modification on flight computer and check up & refuel, it could fly...
 
There is complete Europa 2 rocket in museum near Munich, Germany
in perfect condition, with modification on flight computer and check up & refuel, it could fly...
So...modify the 50 year old flight computer, with what spares? Check up according to what manuals? With what GSE, and what pad? A lot of the technical knowledge that doesn't get written down is gone. And the end result is...a 1 ton launcher that never had a successful test flight in that configuration? I really hope you're being romantic, not actually suggesting it, because it's just not worth it. Let it stay in peace, a reminder of what might have been and the eventual origins of the European space program.
 
Top