From our Swindon Correspondent:
From the BBC
Highland Council officials have recommended councillors give planning permission for a space port.
Highlands and Islands Enterprise (HIE) wants to build the satellite launch site on peatland on the Moine Peninsula near Tongue.
HIE has approved up to £17.3m in funding towards designing and building the space hub. HIE would contribute £9.8m, the Nuclear Decommissioning Authority £5m and the UK Space Agency £2.5m.
The language we use matters - it provides clarity to our own thoughts and enables…
It is now generally acknowledged that the structure of the NHS needs to be overhauled…
In the film Apollo 13, a loss of oxygen causes the crew to start inadvertently…
There's an idea out there which seems intuitive but then so many ideas do seem…
When we think about the darkly opaque goals of modern central bankers as they relate…
As the papers recently filled with the distressing images of desperate souls looking to escape…
View Comments
This is what I was Taught all those years ago
http://www.qrg.northwestern.edu/projects/vss/docs/navigation/2-why-launch-from-equator.html
In my ignorance I would never have guessed that "peatland" would be an ideal substrate for a space port.
"Peatland is a terrestrial wetland ecosystem in which the production of organic matter exceeds its decomposition and a net accumulation of peat results."
The Kennedy space center is built on a swampy sandbank, so maybe it's not so bad.
The substrate probably doesn't matter. It would have more to do with there isn't anything there, because it's a swamp, and nothing but polar ice to the north.
Polar ice? Gonna report you for climate wrongthink there.
Polar orbits are indeed useful for many purposes - they enable a satellite to view ALL of the Earth without changing orbit, as the Earth revolves beneath them.
Equatorial launches give you a bit more speed, which is useful if you have a big payload or are using an early unsophisticated rocket. But te difference is not huge - about 100 m/sec - and modern rockets can easily absorb this difference.
Much more important is logistics and geography. You REALLY do not want to launch over populated territory. So equatorial launch sites want clear water to the East of them, while polar sites want clear water North or South....
Baikonur fails on the not launching over populated territory, in both directions, north or east. But then I guess the Russians in the 50's didn't really care (to the east is Mongolia, not their problem). It was about as far south as the USSR could manage I guess. But they did do manned missions and stuff from there way back in the 60s and it's still up and running, so presumably latitude is not as much of an issue as people think.
It's a cosine function, so at 45ºN you get 70m/s rather than 100m/s. Kennedy is around 30ºN so ~85m/s.
You REALLY do not want to launch over populated territory.
[cough] Vandenberg [cough]. Still, I suppose Vegas could be counted as unpopulated (by humans, anyway).
The rationale is that the proposed space port will launch small satellites, which benefit less from equatorial launches. 40% of all small and 25% of all large satellites launched world-wide are UK made. A UK based launching site makes a great deal of sense, whether it needs state subsidy is another matter entirely.
It’s to go with the railway set that Boris wants but isn’t needed.
As Musk, for all his faults, seems able to launch dozens of satellites for thruppence-ha'penny each, this looks very much like Tim's favourite example of every African government wanting its own blast furnace.
Quite. Is there any evidence of demand for one more launch pad (especially as no one yet knows what fees it might charge), or is this a case of, "This will put us on the map!"?
If all you want to do is create 177 "jobs," it would be cheaper to just pay 177 people to pretend they are doing work. Except that the funds are taxed away from people who created 177 jobs that really were.
I wrote about this in a bit more detail a couple of years ago:
https://www.continentaltelegraph.com/2018/07/oops-we-got-it-wrong-excellent/