This is actually really important. The dollar figure is not the important part, but the signals of both confidence and ambition are going to be heard, by the groups already in the field, by small business, by investors and industries, even by other countries. This shows vision that has been lacking in Canada for decades and it’s a vision that I think many people will be able to get onboard with, if we can overcome the trust issues that come from the fact that so often things like this end up getting sabotaged and burned.
This is a strategic investment, and while it’s small by national standards, it both consists of and requires strategy. We have to acknowledge we are starting from behind, and we are probably not going to be a real leader in this field anytime soon, but instead of admitting defeat and laying down in submission and supplication to the existing leaders, we are saying that we are going to join the race ourselves and participate anyway, maybe we’ll find a niche we can succeed in and maybe we’ll continue to fall behind but at least we can say we are trying, as long as we continue trying and don’t just throw away the whole investment and everyone involved in it under the bus in 5 or 10 or 20 years and completely give up again until next time we decide to wastefully start over from scratch. Where this is really going to succeed or fail is if we continue supporting it into growth, even when it gets hard to justify, or if we just forget about it in a few years and let it die.
Don’t listen to and give airtime to the people who will inevitably tell you that it’s a waste of money, it’s learning and self-improvement and development and that is never a waste. And the other maybe is that, over time, maybe we can start steadily making up ground and gradually eroding the lead that others have, and trying to do that is absolutely the right decision. Existence is an endurance race not a sprint and none of us know what the future holds besides the fact that whatever it does hold, we want to be a part of it.
This is good news, but its gonna be tough to compete with reusable space rockets.
This is good news, but its gonna be tough to compete with reusable space rockets.
This makes no sense.
The biggest limiting factor for space launch cadence is the need shut down of air and shipping space. They have to share it.
The other limiting factor is that certain spaceports are good for particular orbits.
There is no reason Spacex wouldn’t use a spaceport in Canada if one was built there.
Considering how much stuff they plan to put into orbit they need all the spaceports they can find.
I hipe not. Space can fuck right off. I dont want to give them money. It might be useful for getting into certain orbits, but if spacex wanted that, they could just build that in Alaska. I think this is for Canadians to use for Canadians. If this was 10 years ago I could see us using this to host american launches, but I dont think we are in that political climate anymore. But hey, I could be wrong.
Not sure if I care much about competition if it means Canada can launch its own stuff without relying on the US to do it for us.
Even if it’s a money sink and not profitable it’s still something incredibly useful for our independence and security.
Ya, hopefully they can develop their own reusable rockets, and also weapons.
Telesat Canada needs to launch but has a launch contract with SpaceX, which puts SpaceX in conflict with Starlink. So…there could be a launch ‘accident’ that will benefit Starlink.
Yes, we need to get Canada as far away from Musk as possible.
Isn’t it necessary to launch closer to the equater? Or is that not really necessary for modern rockets? They get something like a 500mph speed boost at the equator compared to Nova Scotia.
It’s not necessary, just cheaper. It also depends on what orbit you want the satellite to go to and what direction the coast is facing. The extra speed you get from spinning slightly faster at the equator than at 45 deg latitude is not significant (500mph vs 25,000mph). Inclination of the orbit is way more important, since Inclination changes are VERY VERY expensive. So if you are launching geostationary satellites, like DirecTV or some other regional capability, then you want very close to the equator. If you are launching an inclined orbit, like GPS or LEO satellites like Starlink, then you can choose a location that is close in latitude to the inclination you want to hit. Or you can choose a location that has a coastal direction that allows you to aim your rocket over water at the inclination angle you want to hit.
Necessary, no. Better, yes.
The more delta-v you require (so plus or minus that 500km/h) and the more payload you have, the more rocket you need. If you have fixed rocket size and/or a fixed budget, launching at high latitude translates into either less delta-v left over to go places or less payload.
There are partial or full exceptions if you’re launching into certain orbits. For a mapping satellite that goes straight north/south as the Earth rotates below I would guess you might even prefer a higher-latitude launch.
Isn’t Nova Scotia poorly located to be an efficient spaceport since it won’t get nearly the same boost from the Earth’s rotation as it would if it launched closer to the equator? I imagine that a Caribbean or South American country would gladly take $200 million to lease them a spaceport location.
What’s cheaper?
Losing the ‘free’ ∆v from being far from the equator?
Or shipping a rocket and everything else all the way down to the Caribbean?
Also, there’s the pure national security aspect of it.
This’d be soveriegn Canadian territory, and if Canada is looking to build up more of its own domestic space industry… now that the US has proven to be between an ‘unreliable ally’ to ‘potential invading and occupying force’…
Nova Scotia seems like a pretty reasonable plan to me.
It depends on what they want to launch. It is poorly located for a geostationary satellite, yes. It is actually really good for a GPS launch, though. Nova Scotia is at 45 deg latitude with a coast line facing East/Southeast. That allows them to launch into orbits that are medium Inclination very cheaply, since Inclination changes are way more expensive than adding the extra speed launching at the equator adds. GPS is a 55 deg inclination. Starlink is between 43 and 70 deg inclination. Proliferated LEO constellations are the new hotness, and those will all be inclined, so this isn’t a terrible location.
Yep, I was gonna say, yeah you do lose a tiny bit of that effective ‘free’ ∆v from equatorial proximity, but the trade off is that its easier to establish orbits of greater inclination, which are actually pretty common, desired trajectories.
Higher lattitude launch sites can be better for certain trajectories leaving the earth-moon system, sun-synchronous orbits, polar orbits… basically spy satellites / scientific earth observation sats… rendevouz trajectories with various high inclination asteroids, kuiper belt objects, comets.
Vandenberg is at ~35⁰, Plesetsk (sp?) is at ~68⁰… they’re fairly commonly used for spy sat launches, but I think a fair number of StarLink sats have launched from Vandenberg as well.
And it shouldn’t be understated, the benefit of having basically a bunch of nothing to the East.
China’s had a number of fairly recent incidents of launch muckups raining shit down over populated areas… as has Musk from Boca Chica.
Yeah I mean Canada overall just doesn’t have good launch spots… still, having a smaller sovereign site for small sats, cubesats and stuff like that is probably worthwhile. I would imagine this launch site will be limited to relatively small payloads.
Plus, lots of that $200 mill is gonna go directly to Magellan and other Canadian jobs.
Non-paywalled article: https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/space-launch-pad-nova-scotia-9.7130406
So what ever happened to floating launchpads? Did they really work that poorly?
It can work for landing pads.
But for launching?
Seas tend to… not be placid.
Rocket fuel tends to do ‘funny’ things when you repeatedly oscilate it and shake it about.
You are talking about Sea Launch, a subsidiary of Boeing (I think). They repurposed an old oil rig to launch rockets from the equator and had a cruise ship to take rockets and crew to the launch site and back to mainland.
The issue was the logistics of getting everything/everyone out to the oil rig. It isn’t enough to just launch from the equator; you also have to launch far away enough from land that any mishaps won’t rain debris all over people. So you have to put that floating pad REALLY far away from land (plus however far your host country is from the equator). Additionally, rockets require a bunch of consumables to even get ready to fly. Liquid Helium, Nitrogen, Oxygen, fuel, etc. Those have to be shipped out to replenish them, and they can’t be easily replenished if you have too many launch scrubs. Plus the cost of paying/feeding the crew being on a cruise ship for weeks on end.
It says something interesting about the economics if, even with the massive penalty of the exponential rocket equation, just paying more crew and shipping more stuff by boat comes out as not worth it.
