Author Topic: Camden County Georgia USA FAA Launch Site Operator License, referendum rejection  (Read 19601 times)

Offline rdale

  • Assistant to the Chief Meteorologist
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10402
  • Lansing MI
  • Liked: 1458
  • Likes Given: 175
I’m not sure how familiar you are with the private launch industry - but there is no demand for more launch sites. Even if they did employ  a few dozen full time  - that’s not going to contribute much to the economy.

Offline Jim

  • Night Gator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 37813
  • Cape Canaveral Spaceport
  • Liked: 22033
  • Likes Given: 430
Almost a third of those who voted disagree. As do I.


Which means they lost by a landslide.

Offline RedLineTrain

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2596
  • Liked: 2506
  • Likes Given: 10522
I’m not sure how familiar you are with the private launch industry - but there is no demand for more launch sites. Even if they did employ  a few dozen full time  - that’s not going to contribute much to the economy.

I am ambivalent about this spaceport.  I don't agree that there is no demand for more launch sites.  There is demand in fits and starts, but the demand will probably be offshore and in different weight classes than provided by this spaceport.

Offline rdale

  • Assistant to the Chief Meteorologist
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10402
  • Lansing MI
  • Liked: 1458
  • Likes Given: 175
You have to agree it’s a loss. Regardless of what some politicians say - more no votes than yes votes means it lost.

Online Robotbeat

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 39358
  • Minnesota
  • Liked: 25386
  • Likes Given: 12163
I’m not sure how familiar you are with the private launch industry - but there is no demand for more launch sites. Even if they did employ  a few dozen full time  - that’s not going to contribute much to the economy.

I am ambivalent about this spaceport.  I don't agree that there is no demand for more launch sites.  There is demand in fits and starts, but the demand will probably be offshore and in different weight classes than provided by this spaceport.
(mostly to rdale)

the only non-federal “east” coast launch site in the US is in Texas, and it has major restrictions in launch trajectory, launch frequency, and is only used by a single launch provider.

Astra claims federal launch sites are 3 times the operational/fee cost per launch. For micro launchers, that’s most of the cost of the launch (~$1 million?). In other words, smallsat launchers (especially on the small end) aren’t competitive UNLESS you have a Camden-like site, and Camden is currently the only one. How many US smallsat launchers are there that are actually operational at a significant launch rate? There’s RocketLab. Who launches entirely from a non-federal launch site in New Zealand (and probably will continue most smallsat launches there for exactly the reason I mentioned: federal launch site have higher fees).

But sure, fine. Water under the bridge, now.
« Last Edit: 03/10/2022 04:39 pm by Robotbeat »
Chris  Whoever loves correction loves knowledge, but he who hates reproof is stupid.

To the maximum extent practicable, the Federal Government shall plan missions to accommodate the space transportation services capabilities of United States commercial providers. US law http://goo.gl/YZYNt0

Offline Lars-J

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6809
  • California
  • Liked: 8487
  • Likes Given: 5385
Almost a third of those who voted disagree. As do I.


Which means they lost by a landslide.
I don’t deny it. That doesn’t mean I have to agree it’s not a loss. Come on, a little reading comprehension wouldn’t be too hard, would it?

Looking at this thread - Robotbeat - I am at a loss why you seem to be so upset by this vote. There are plenty of spaceports, and there is plenty of capacity. Nobody needed this. Camden residents don't want it, and I doubt there is a "silent majority" out there that felt otherwise and just didn't vote... So what is there to be so up in arms about?

If there is a smallsat launch company where its business case rests on being able to launch from Camden, it was not a good business case to begin with.
« Last Edit: 03/10/2022 04:41 pm by Lars-J »

Online Robotbeat

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 39358
  • Minnesota
  • Liked: 25386
  • Likes Given: 12163
Almost a third of those who voted disagree. As do I.


Which means they lost by a landslide.
I don’t deny it. That doesn’t mean I have to agree it’s not a loss. Come on, a little reading comprehension wouldn’t be too hard, would it?

Looking at this thread - Robotbeat - I am at a loss why you seem to be so upset by this vote. There are plenty of spaceports, and there is plenty of capacity. Nobody needed this. Camden residents doesn't want it, and I doubt there is a "silent majority" out there that felt otherwise and just didn't vote... So what is there to be so up in arms about?

Really? What other non-federal orbital-class launch sites that can launch east are there?

I’m allowed to think people made a poor decision with poor information, am I not?
Chris  Whoever loves correction loves knowledge, but he who hates reproof is stupid.

To the maximum extent practicable, the Federal Government shall plan missions to accommodate the space transportation services capabilities of United States commercial providers. US law http://goo.gl/YZYNt0

Offline Jim

  • Night Gator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 37813
  • Cape Canaveral Spaceport
  • Liked: 22033
  • Likes Given: 430
Really? What other non-federal orbital-class launch sites that can launch east are there?


Mid Atlantic Regional
Cecil
Space Coast Regional Airport

Don't see an abundance of users


Offline Comga

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6502
  • Liked: 4617
  • Likes Given: 5340
Really? What other non-federal orbital-class launch sites that can launch east are there?

Mid Atlantic Regional
Cecil
Space Coast Regional Airport

Don't see an abundance of users
Jim’s in-depth knowledge :)
Had to look up Cecil Spaceport
It’s for “horizontal launch” i.e. Virgin Orbit style.
Has one potential customer
Heading directly east goes right over Jacksonville

Space Coast Regional Airport is directly west of KSC/CCSFS.  :o


But the point remains valid
Look at Spaceport America in New Mexico.
It’s a failure for the taxpayers in New Mexico
And they have “customers” with real hardware and financial backing


I’m a rocket enthusiast and I would have voted against it.
What kind of wastrels would dump a perfectly good booster in the ocean after just one use?

Offline darkenfast

  • Member
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1563
  • Liked: 1855
  • Likes Given: 9083
In 2017, Vector and Cantrell conducted their test launch in this area with a rocket that wasn't guided, didn't have the real fuel tanks, and basically rose out of camera view, only to crash in the woods. I'm sure some of the local voters remembered that stunt.
Writer of Book and Lyrics for musicals "SCAR", "Cinderella!", and "Aladdin!". Retired Naval Security Group. "I think SCAR is a winner. Great score, [and] the writing is up there with the very best!"
-- Phil Henderson, Composer of the West End musical "The Far Pavilions".

Online Robotbeat

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 39358
  • Minnesota
  • Liked: 25386
  • Likes Given: 12163
Really? What other non-federal orbital-class launch sites that can launch east are there?

Mid Atlantic Regional
Cecil
Space Coast Regional Airport

Don't see an abundance of users
Jim’s in-depth knowledge :)
Had to look up Cecil Spaceport
It’s for “horizontal launch” i.e. Virgin Orbit style.
Has one potential customer
Heading directly east goes right over Jacksonville

Space Coast Regional Airport is directly west of KSC/CCSFS.  :o


But the point remains valid
Look at Spaceport America in New Mexico.
It’s a failure for the taxpayers in New Mexico
And they have “customers” with real hardware and financial backing


I’m a rocket enthusiast and I would have voted against it.
Fair.
Chris  Whoever loves correction loves knowledge, but he who hates reproof is stupid.

To the maximum extent practicable, the Federal Government shall plan missions to accommodate the space transportation services capabilities of United States commercial providers. US law http://goo.gl/YZYNt0

Online gongora

  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10436
  • US
  • Liked: 14349
  • Likes Given: 6148
I live in Georgia (not near Camden) and have always thought that was an odd choice of location for a spaceport.  I'd have no problem with it being canned.

Offline rdale

  • Assistant to the Chief Meteorologist
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10402
  • Lansing MI
  • Liked: 1458
  • Likes Given: 175

Offline TrevorMonty

Still no mention of launch providers that plan to use site.

Sent from my SM-G570Y using Tapatalk


Offline rdale

  • Assistant to the Chief Meteorologist
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10402
  • Lansing MI
  • Liked: 1458
  • Likes Given: 175

Online Robotbeat

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 39358
  • Minnesota
  • Liked: 25386
  • Likes Given: 12163
Still no mention of launch providers that plan to use site.

Sent from my SM-G570Y using Tapatalk
Why would there be any if the status is up in the air like this from NIMBYs?

Usually places actually beg for companies to develop in their area for jobs. If powerful NIMBYs oppose it and all the benefits it brings to the area, why get involved?
« Last Edit: 07/15/2022 04:06 pm by Robotbeat »
Chris  Whoever loves correction loves knowledge, but he who hates reproof is stupid.

To the maximum extent practicable, the Federal Government shall plan missions to accommodate the space transportation services capabilities of United States commercial providers. US law http://goo.gl/YZYNt0

Offline rdale

  • Assistant to the Chief Meteorologist
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10402
  • Lansing MI
  • Liked: 1458
  • Likes Given: 175
Part of the reason for NIMBYs in this case seems to be the way it was presented. From the getgo there never was word of users for the space port. Just hand waving with “space is the way of the future.”

Online Robotbeat

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 39358
  • Minnesota
  • Liked: 25386
  • Likes Given: 12163
Part of the reason for NIMBYs in this case seems to be the way it was presented. From the getgo there never was word of users for the space port. Just hand waving with “space is the way of the future.”
The New Mexico spaceport did this project no favors either.
Chris  Whoever loves correction loves knowledge, but he who hates reproof is stupid.

To the maximum extent practicable, the Federal Government shall plan missions to accommodate the space transportation services capabilities of United States commercial providers. US law http://goo.gl/YZYNt0

Offline rdale

  • Assistant to the Chief Meteorologist
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10402
  • Lansing MI
  • Liked: 1458
  • Likes Given: 175
But that's where being one of the first is different... Being the 13th when the #6-12 aren't being used doesn't offer much advantage.

Offline spacenut

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5226
  • East Alabama
  • Liked: 2604
  • Likes Given: 2920
Spaceports that Musk envisions for Starship are probably going to be offshore due to noise, but may be offshore from large cities. 

Tags:
 

Advertisement NovaTech
Advertisement Northrop Grumman
Advertisement
Advertisement Margaritaville Beach Resort South Padre Island
Advertisement Brady Kenniston
Advertisement NextSpaceflight
Advertisement Nathan Barker Photography
0