Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Space Science

Commercial Use of Shuttle Landing Facilities Planned 103

Posted by CowboyNeal from the open-for-business dept.
VeganBob writes "There may be future non-NASA uses of the Shuttle Landing Facilities. At 15,000 feet long and 300 feet wide, the landing strip is larger than those at most commercial airports. From the article: 'NASA today issued a formal request for expressions of interest by non-NASA organizations, including commercial space companies, for use of the Shuttle Landing Facility (SLF) at the Kennedy Space Center (KSC), Fla. The announcement is the first step in considering how and when NASA can expand access to available capacity at the SLF by government, commercial, and academic organizations.' SPACE.com also covers this announcement."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Commercial Use of Shuttle Landing Facilities Planned More

Commercial Use of Shuttle Landing Facilities Planned

Comments Filter:
  • to see things not going to waste, like facilities not being used.

  • Forget space - (Score:4, Funny)

    by tomhudson ( 43916 ) <barbara.hudson@b ... m ['on.' in gap]> on Saturday July 09, 2005 @12:09PM (#13021306) Journal
    ... it'll make a really good drag-strip for rocket-propelled cars doing the 1/4-mile.

    Or regular races - sell lots of tickets - you could call it the NASACAR races.

  • This is great! (Score:3, Funny)

    by Krankheit ( 830769 ) on Saturday July 09, 2005 @12:10PM (#13021310)
    I need to get in on this so I can start my new business, named Doublelook, Inc. Companies like GEICO and Vonage will pay me to display thier banner ads on large 10-mile-wide orbiting displays. And everynight, an eclipse caused by a circular display. Maybe it could say "This eclipse brought to you by Coca-Cola?" I just need to work out my pricing model. Maybe a cost per impression, but how am I going to know when someone looks at the space banner?
    • You can't have an eclipse at night. the earth is already doing all the eclipsing possible.
    • ... but how am I going to know when someone looks at the space banner?

      Don't complicate things. Just use the RIAA model and assume that everyone is looking at it and sue them. Alternatively, you could assume that nobody is looking at it, and claim that they are destroying your industry.
  • Couldn't it be a bad thing for companies to start launching stuff into space. Not just say, satelites, but perhaps other stuff including space marketing? Shouldn't there be a limit on what goes into space and what doesn't?
  • Landing fee is $0.99 and parking fee is Arm Leg and First Born
  • NASA today issued a formal request for expressions of interest by non-NASA organizations

    I'd like to use the Shuttle Landing Facility (SLF) at the Kennedy Space Center (KSC) please.

    Contact details as above.

  • SpaceShipTwo (Score:2, Insightful)

    by gcnaddict ( 841664 )
    This would be a good launch site for SpaceShipTwo... or rather, five SpaseShipTwos loaded onto their respective Whight Knights as the same time! That's a huge runway...

  • That is huge! (Score:5, Interesting)

    by (H)elix1 ( 231155 ) <slashdot.helix@nOSPaM.gmail.com> on Saturday July 09, 2005 @12:24PM (#13021393) Homepage Journal
    That is an enormous runway. Back in the day, I flew into Fargo ND's hector field [fltplan.com] as one of the way points on my solo cross-country. As I landed the C152, the thought that I could probably land on the runway sideways did cross my mind.

    The runway at 9000x150 was rumored to be a 747 training ground for the airlines. With a longer and wider runway, I can see it getting use for folks learning how to fly the big jets.
    • Is there a market for huge-ass air transport among the relatively few huge-ass airstrips?

      I remember one of the limitations of the new Airbus jumbo passenger plane was the maximum wingspan which needed to work within the space allocated for a 747. Is this a limitation run into with air cargo planes, and might huge and durable airstrips like the NASA facilities help with this, or is it just easier to put two planes in the air because they can land anywhere?
      • I think the wingspan limit had more to do with Airbus expecting the US (with prodding by Boeing) to give them crap about airports not being able to 'handle' what would have been the optimal wingspan for those new 800 passenger cattle cars.
    • Japan Air Lines was using the runway at Moses Lake, WA (13500 ft) for training Boeing 747 pilots.

      That's a HUUUUGE runway for a town that can reach out and slap the Middle of Nowhere.
    • I did my first 30 hours or so of flying lessons with the USAF aero club at the former Kelly AFB, TX ( http://www.airnav.com/airport/KSKF [airnav.com]), 11550 x 300'. The club had a strict limit on allowed crosswinds, being something like 8 kts for junior pilots. I tried to argue that by angling across that huge runway I could always get the crosswind component below 8 kts, but they wouldn't hear of it.

      You could take off into a breeze on a cold day, climb to pattern altitude, and land without having to make a single tu
      • A buddy of mine submitted a flight plan to land at Logon and it was actually accepted.

        He lands perfectly on the numbers.... and then had to taxi a mile to the first turn off...

        At least in Massachusetts, other than Logon and Springfield, Hanscom AFB has a huge runway.

  • the longest tarp ever would help... (Score:3, Funny)

    by zionwillnotfall ( 876558 ) on Saturday July 09, 2005 @12:28PM (#13021423)
    does anyone else see the world's first proffessional slip 'n slide tournament?

  • Whee (Score:2, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward
    I expect this to be the first step in a long-awaited "privatization" of the space program which is actually a code word for "dismantling", as the pieces of our space program are taken apart and sold off to various commercial interests which, while they definitely do something useful with them, don't once you think about it have anything whatsoever to do with space. (What, you thought the shuttle landing strip was going to be leased to private space ventures? Nah. There's only a couple of those right now, th
  • Bad Idea - even a moderate sized aircraft hitting the VAB at the wrong time (with a shuttle and SRBs present) would be a hit of several billion dollars.

    Either accident or terrorism, the potential damage is too great to take any chances we don't have to.

    • A northwest approach to the SLF would put the VAB on the other side of the runway, and a southeast approach still puts you a considerable ways west of the VAB. Even if you hit the VAB, it was designed to withstand pretty strong winds (hurricanes and all) as well as aircraft impacts (the old 707 certification, I think). Sure, you might peel off some of the exterior panels (like a hurricane did last summer), but you probably won't penetrate too far into the structure or strike a vehicle inside. Besides, si
    • 1) That's what air traffic control is for 2) Even if it's not open to the public, how would that stop terrorists from flying into it? Go back to hiding in your hole, idiot.
      • He's not an idiot. If you have more traffic going through KSC, you have a greater risk for hijacked craft crashing into things. Right now, if NASA sees anything non-Kosher flying towards the VAB, I'm sure they can get on the phone with the Air Force in a few seconds. That'd be much more difficult with commerical traffic.
      • You might notice that I listed "accident" before "terrorism". Natural disaster is also a hazard, but that's not impacted by potential commercial use so I didn't mention it.

        I'm sure that there's presently an exclusion zone around KSC; commercial use would relax that to a degree. By not allowing air traffic nearby, time to respond to an off course (navigation error, hijacking, mechanical failure) aircraft is provided.

        I think the risk of any of these is small. But the assets at KSC are one-of-a-kind and not

        • For an asset to be worth something it has to have some use. After the shuttle program is finally shut down, of what use is the VAB? I don't see why you would need it - as far as I know there's no project on the horizon that would require it. Lakehurst, NJ has three enormous buildings they used to use for airships, but they've been a financial millstone since the Navy stopped running blimps in the '60s.

          These kinds of structures need to be maintained at enormous expense. You think painting your house is

          • After the shuttle program is finally shut down, of what use is the VAB?

            I don't know where they currently stack Titans and Deltas. After the Shuttle retires, though, I'd like to see NASA reuse some of the components into a partly recyclable unmanned heavy booster - redesign the tank to have 3 equally spaced mount points for SRBs, extend the top upward to include a large payload area, and mount SSMEs on a detachable plate under it, with a heat shield and recovery system. Also a few smaller solids to provide

  • NASA should turn it into the world's first commerical spaceport, something like Mos Eisley [starwars.com]. :P
  • The vast investment the US has made, over several generations, into space launches, has paid of very well (huge ROI). The ongoing subsidies to commercial aerospace are still appropriate, in leveraging that sunk investment into pushing US industry over the edge into sustained self-development. The people planning the use of these public facilities should be sure that such subsidies are only those necessary to ensure a robust domestic space industry, rather than underwriting all the risks of entrepreneurs in

  • if i recall... (Score:2, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward
    i believe that the shuttle runway is specialized for the shuttle itself. meaning the surface is matched to the tires of the shuttle and graded more aggressively then normal airport runways. meaning, in short, it will shred tires of normal airliners, if not on landing, then on repeated use. the shuttle's tires are replaced every flight, not so with commercial airliners.

    why make it this way? they were concerned with keeping the runway functional regardless of weather, so that the shuttle crew could come down

    • Re:if i recall... (Score:4, Informative)

      by cyclone96 ( 129449 ) on Saturday July 09, 2005 @03:16PM (#13022239)
      The runway was specialized in that it's a lot higher quality than typical airport runways (as well as pretty big), but any aircraft can land on it.

      The shuttle main tires are replaced every flight because they take a much higher beating than normal aircraft tires. The orbiter lands at 220 miles/hour at a vertical sink rate of 9 feet/second. That's a crash landing for other aircraft that size (which is about that of a DC-9). It's also cheaper to buy a new set than certify the tires for reuse (and theres some weight savings since multiple use tires would need to be thicker).

      By the way, you'll notice the shuttle landing gear and that of the B-1 bomber look very similar, they were both developed by Rockwell in the late 70's.

      The shuttle never lands (nor was at ever designed to) land in anything but clear weather. Rain would sandblast the very fragle tiles, which would degrade the aerodynamics of the orbiter on the way down and cause handling problems (not to mention tile replacement). Diversion to alternate air bases are what is used to handle weather, primarily Edwards and White Sands in the US as well as a few dozen secondary sites scattered around the world. In a pinch, it can be dropped onto about any 10,000 foot runway and is never more than a couple of hours from ground. Some failures would cause such a lickity split landing, such as a cabin leak or cooling failure.

      The T-38s astronauts use to go between Johnson and Kennedy routinely land there on the shuttle strip, as well as the Shuttle Training Aircraft (STA) - a modified Gulfstream business jet that is used to simulate the landing qualities of the orbiter. NASA also has a small number of business aircraft that land there from time to time. There's nothing in the runway that's shredding tires.

  • For massive runways, you can't beat those at old SAC bases. I was stationed at Loring AFB and the runway there is 12,000' x 300'. I'm sure similar runways exists at other former B-52/B-36 bases. Talk about a way to revitalize a community...space travel!
    • I used to live in Pleasanton, California and would fly out of Livermore into the former Castle Airforce Base in Atwater, CA which was home to 93rd Bombardment Wing's B-52s for almost 30 years ( Castle Airport [airnav.com]). It's now officially 11,802 by 150, in reality the runway is 13,000 by 300 but they striped it down to reduce maintenance costs. It's an uncontrolled field but it does get some use for flight testing and training and the FBO there does do heavy maintenance so I have shared the pattern with a 737 once

  • Risk Inversion (Score:1, Offtopic)

    by Baldrson ( 78598 ) *
    Its good to see the government doing something it can actually do: Pour concrete.

    From A Net Asset Tax Based On The Net Present Value Calculation and Market Democracy [geocities.com]

    CURRENT ECONOMIC CONDITIONS AND RISK INVERSION

    A fundamental problem with our economy at present is what might be called "risk inversion" where households with high net worth disproportionately invest in low risk instruments while households with low net worth find their savings unwisely invested at high risk by deregulated but relative

  • VeganBob writes (VBW) "There may be (TMB) future non-NASA uses (NNU) of the Shuttle Landing Facilities (SLF). At 15,000 feet long (FFL) and 300 feet wide (TFW), the landing strip (TLS) is larger than those (LTT) at most commercial airports (MCA). From the article (FTA): 'NASA today issued (NTI) a formal request for expressions (FRE) of interest by non-NASA organizations (NNO), including commercial space companies (CSC), for use of (FUO) the Shuttle Landing Facility (SLF) at the Kennedy Space Center (KSC), F
  • Folks like RocketPlane are lining up their own resources, such as a 12,000' surplus runway. NASA is afraid of getting passed by by the upcoming non-governmental space projects. They want to sell/rent resources so they can stay relevant. If Florida has any sense, they'll jump in make sure this happens. We are, after all, talking about tourism. "See Space! And then see Disney World!" How much money do you think the Orlando airport makes due to tourist traffic? KSC wants some of that.

  • With NASA making plans to phase out the STS, and it's need for landing on an immense runway at ridiculous touchdown speeds, it's hardly suprising that they'll want to find another use for the landing strip. I reckon that NASA's new stuff are going to be traditional vertical launch, parachute landing jobs, and won't need the big long strip.

  • NASA to buy commercial ISS transportation (Score:4, Interesting)

    by FleaPlus ( 6935 ) on Saturday July 09, 2005 @02:36PM (#13022029) Journal
    A few weeks ago I tried submitting the following story to slashdot, but it kept on getting rejected (same with these stories [slashdot.org]). As seems to be becoming tradition, I thought it would be relevant to the current topic, so I've pasted the text here. And no, it's not Karma-whoring if my Karma's already been maxed out for years. :)

    At a recent talk, Michael Griffin outlined NASA's plans [space.com] for helping to generate a robust and competitive commercial market in orbital spaceflight. The speech [spaceref.com] and Q&A [spaceref.com] transcripts from the talk are available. In a move reminiscent of the US government kickstarting the early airline industry by purchasing airmail services, NASA plans on supplementing government-derived transport by purchasing cargo delivery services to the International Space Station from commercial providers, followed by crew transportation after the systems have proven themselves. Unlike traditional government contracts, sellers wouldn't see a profit before the services are delivered and the emphasis will be on actual performance instead of process and specifications. Aviation Week has some commentary [ecnext.com] on the announcement.

    I also think I remember seeing something before about NASA selling one of the launch complexes at Kennedy Space Center to SpaceX, but can't find more info. Does anybody have a link to more on that?
  • These runways would make incredible settings for autocross courses (google SCCA Solo). I'm sure it won't happen, but I can dream.
  • It is I think the world's largest commercial and the nations 2'nd largest runway. It is something like 16000 x 200 feet. In fact, It is now a back up for the shuttle.
  • It could be used for drag racing. That would be cool.

    I mean, what the heck other uses are there for a landing strip, except drag racing? Drag racing is what life is all about. Life revolved around drag racing. There is nothing else in life except drag racing. What the hell is a drag racer doing posting in /.? Well, let me tell you. One year, I rolled my car at the drags and ended up in the hospital for a long time. My only connection to the outside world was a computer with an Internet connection. I didn't

Slashdot Top Deals

To the landlord belongs the doorknobs.

Close