Which is the best location for a spaceport?

[Workable Goblin]

...very active tectonically...

Which is why he specified off the coast. Tectonic activity doesn't mean much when you're floating on a few miles of water.

 

[NothingNow]

Which is why he specified off the coast. Tectonic activity doesn't mean much when you're floating on a few miles of water.

Except for when you've got to deal with surface waves, or local volcanism. Also, not having the earth side of the elevator not actually tied into a stable geological formation could be something of a bad idea, especially considering that the Humboldt current would be constantly pushing on the terminal and dock, which would thus need to constantly have to fight the current to stay in position. This means there'd be a lot of vibration.

I'd say somewhere in the Bismarck Archipelago would also be a good location for a launch site.

Meanwhile, Molnya orbits are pretty useful, so there might be a few high-latitude launch facilities just to maintain a number of important satellites covering pretty much pretty much everything past 45* North/South latitude.

 

[Workable Goblin]

Except for when you've got to deal with surface waves, or local volcanism.

...again, I'm assuming a deep-water "anchoring" location. Local volcanism is just not an issue on any reasonable timescale (unless you think the elevator will sit there for thousands of years while a volcano builds its way through a huge amount of water). And surface waves are hardly a threat specific to Ecuador's EEZ.

Also, not having the earth side of the elevator not actually tied into a stable geological formation could be something of a bad idea, especially considering that the Humboldt current would be constantly pushing on the terminal and dock, which would thus need to constantly have to fight the current to stay in position. This means there'd be a lot of vibration.

There's a lot of current thinking that puts space elevators on mobile sea-based platforms, not giant mountains, and I doubt they haven't considered this. Besides, even on a mountain there are going to be a ton of vibrational drivers; it's all about the damping available on-wire and the resonant frequencies.

Meanwhile, Molnya orbits are pretty useful, so there might be a few high-latitude launch facilities just to maintain a number of important satellites covering pretty much pretty much everything past 45* North/South latitude.

You don't need a high-latitude launch site to hit Molniya orbits. As long as you have clear azimuths along inclined launch paths, even an equatorial site can do just fine. American military communications satellites (for communicating with spy satellites over the Soviet Union) used Molniya-type orbits just fine, for instance, despite Vandenberg being at a latitude of 34 degrees north.

 

[Flocculencio]

Singapore is in an impossibly bad position for a space launch site, as e of pi said, whatever its other virtues. There's no range worth speaking of, and the very business that makes it logistically attractive means its impossibly risky to actually use; even the ocean has enough ships that there's a nontrivial chance of dropping your boosters/first stages on someone's head.
.

Good points- I still think Singapore would be a great place for a space elevator though

 

[Iori]

While it's the most efficient, you don't need to be on the equator for a spaceport, I mean their are lots of proposed and planned ones much further North.

 

[Shogun]

Other -Arizona.

 

[Mr.J]

There's a lot of current thinking that puts space elevators on mobile sea-based platforms, not giant mountains, and I doubt they haven't considered this.

With a properly balanced space elevator, there should be little to no load/tension at the surface: if you snipped the cable at the surface, the whole structure would just float there, as it's center of mass is in geosynchronous orbit.

So yeah, the plan I've heard is to put it on a big ship, so you can just drive it out of the way of large pieces of space junk

 

[katchen]

The Chinese have most of their space flights, including manned space flights out of Juiquang in Inner Mongolia near the Kansu and Sinkiang borders, the better to launch over unpopulated Gobi Desert before hitting populated areas at Shenzi. But the Chinese are building a new space launch facility that opens this year (2013) at Wenchang on the Northeast coast of Hainan Island, the better for equatorial launches.

 

[katchen]

The Japanese have their space facility at Uchinoura near Kagoshima, which is about as far South in the Japanese main islands as it is possible to get.
India's space launch facility is on the Bay of Bengal about 60 miles north of Chennai where the Indian coast bends (the facility is actually in Andhra Pradesh the better for both equatorial and polar launches.
For the US, Johnston Island , Southeast of Hawaii (and legally part of the Stte of Hawaii) would be an excellent location. The problem with islands like Baker and Jarvis is that Congress keeps declaring US owned uninhabited islands national parks. But Johnston Island has been used as a toxic waste dump for the military. Clean it up and it would make a good launch facility.

 

[Michel Van]

islands like Johnston, Baker Jarvis and Christmas Island (pacific) were consider as Launch site in early days of Space Flight
the French look on for Launch Site in French Polynesia or French West-Indies

ELDO had long list for potential launch site for EUROPA-2 rocket in 1969
The Seychelles archipelago
Trincomale (Sri Lanka)
Fort Dauphin (Madagascar Republic)
Mogadishu (Republic of Somalia)
Djibouti (French coast of Somaliland)
Port-Etienne (Islamic Republic of Mauritania)
San Marco platform Italy (coast of Kenya)
Darwin (Australia)
The island of Nuku-Hiva Hiva (Marquises, French Polynesia)
The Touamotu archipelago (island of Rairoa, French Polynesia)
The island of Desirade (French West-Indies)
The island of Marie-Galante (French West-Indies)
The island of Trinidad
Cayenne (French Guiana)
Belem (Brazil)
NOTE all French location was also under consideration by CNES for a French Launch Site, in end it became Kourou (French Guiana).
for more read this link http://www.secretprojects.co.uk/forum/index.php/topic,14520.0.html

So why were they not used ?
one reason was long distance for transport from France or USA over 20000 km to launch site (i know, the british and ELDO was so mad to do this).
another was lack of Infrastructure on most on Islands ( Guiana space port infrastructure like roads buildings were build by french Foreign Legion !)
the NASA had problem that Johnston Island and Jarvis were used by the USAF and Atomic Energy Commission for ICBM test or launch Atomic bomb testing
there were no more space for NASA Launch site and also was there some problems with radioactive fallout.

the ELDO list reduce fast mostly on political reason ( Somalia or transport true suez canal) or logistic reason and lack of Infrastructure.
in same time the french had there French Guiana launch site already in servis.

Heisenberg, you could use ELDO in your TL, were Canada is member and not Australia.
in this case you got already in 1960s the Blue Streak, maybe a version build by AVRO canada ?

 

[katchen]

Israel has launched a number of Ofeq reconnisance satellites, but because Israel is so narrow with hostile nations to the East of it, Israel has had to launch it's reconnisance satellites into retrograde orbits (West to East)---the only nation that has to do that

 

[Alternate History Geek]

...Has to be (a) equatorial

Not necessarily exactly on the equator, just close. Actually, if it's close to the equator but not actually on it, the space elevator can have two "legs", on opposite sides of the equator. One for going up, one for going down.

EDIT: Actually it can be at any latitude, see here.

 

[Alternate History Geek]

Israel has launched a number of Ofeq reconnisance satellites, but because Israel is so narrow with hostile nations to the East of it, Israel has had to launch it's reconnisance satellites into retrograde orbits (West to East)---the only nation that has to do that

Why?

Even if they're launched east-to-west, they'll still pass over the countries to the east of Israel within a few minutes.

 

[Michel Van]

Why?

Even if they're launched east-to-west, they'll still pass over the countries to the east of Israel within a few minutes.

only that every alert in middle east nation goes off...
some of them could this consider as israel attack on them and could strike back.

so Israel goes for save option and launch in direction west.

 

[e of pi]

Why?

Even if they're launched east-to-west, they'll still pass over the countries to the east of Israel within a few minutes.

Just a point: it's about 90 minutes for most of those orbits. So it's the difference between "pass over almost immediately" and "pass over more than an hour later." It's a lot easier to distinguish the latter from a weapons system launch.

 

[Alternate History Geek]

Israel has launched a number of Ofeq reconnisance satellites, but because Israel is so narrow with hostile nations to the East of it, Israel has had to launch it's reconnisance satellites into retrograde orbits (West to East)---the only nation that has to do that

Retrograde is east to west, not west to east!

 

[Kevin Renner]

Geosync, close to the Equator. Global survey, the farther north the better. GPS mid latitudes. It all depends on the mission.

 

[Cook]

Singapore. It's essentially at the crossroads of most international terrestrial trade and transport routes and already has highly sophisticated logistics infrastructure.

You have a downrange problem. You would have to lease land on Bintan Island or on the east coast of Johor, or launch from a rig in the South China Sea. However you are correct in that it makes far more commercial sense to have a site in S.E. Asia rather than the Caribean.

 

[Cook]

Why? Even if they're launched east-to-west, they'll still pass over the countries to the east of Israel within a few minutes.

Because to launch in an easterly direction they would have to get permission to fly through their neighbour’s airspace during the climb to orbit, but once in orbit you don’t need permission from the nations you pass over. In the unlikely event that they did get such permission, there is also the potential risk of a launch failure that would potentially deliver a sophisticated Israeli intelligence satellite into the hands of unfriendly neighbours.

 

[Workable Goblin]

However you are correct in that it makes far more commercial sense to have a site in S.E. Asia rather than the Caribean.

Thinking about it...not really. Most satellite manufacturers and launch firms are American or European, especially when existing spaceports were being built. The Caribbean is far more proximate to them than a SE Asian site, and has the advantage of not needing to transit the Suez Canal or Bab-el-Mandeb (or round the Cape) to reach the launch site. So SE Asia would have no real logistical advantage, and even certain disadvantages (especially in the modern world, what with piracy around Somalia and in SE Asia itself).

Since then, of course, India, China, and Japan have become major satellite launch states as well; but they all have their own domestic launch sites, meaning questionable demand for a foreign SE Asian launch site. Some SE Asian countries themselves have satellite programs, but they don't manufacture, let alone launch those satellites domestically, so it hardly matters.

In any case, the most popular commercial launch site in the world presently is probably Baikonur because of its low prices, despite that being the most logistically unattractive launch site on the planet...which suggests logistical advantages (or being near your customers advantages) don't really mean much in the launch business.