February 2005 - Federal Aviation Administration€¦ · open new suborbital markets, including rapid deliv-ery of critical packages and, eventually, high-speed passenger transportation

Federal Aviation AdministrationOffice of Commercial Space Transportation

February 2005

Suborbital Reusable Launch Vehicles and Emerging Markets About FAA/AST

Federal Aviation Administration/Office of Commercial Space Transportation i

The Federal Aviation Administration’s Office of Commercial Space Transportation (FAA/AST) licenses

and regulates U.S. commercial space launch and reentry activity, as well as the operation of non-federal

launch and reentry sites, as authorized by Executive Order 12465 and Title 49 United States Code, Subtitle

IX, Chapter 701 (formerly the Commercial Space Launch Act). FAA/AST’s mission is to ensure public health

and safety and the safety of property while protecting the national security and foreign policy interests of the

United States during commercial launch and reentry operations. In addition, FAA/AST is directed to encour-

age, facilitate, and promote commercial space launches and reentries. Additional information concerning

commercial space transportation can be found on FAA/AST’s web site at http://ast.faa.gov.

About the Office of Commercial Space Transportation

About FAA/AST Suborbital Reusable Launch Vehicles and Emerging Markets

ii Federal Aviation Administration/Office of Commercial Space Transportation

NOTICE

Use of trade names or names of manufacturers in this document does not constitute an official endorsement of suchproducts or manufacturers, either expressed or implied, by the Federal Aviation Administration.

Suborbital Reusable Launch Vehicles and Emerging Markets Contents

Federal Aviation Administration/Office of Commercial Space Transportation iii

Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1Markets . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1Vehicles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .2Spaceports . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .2

Recent Events in Commercial Suborbital Spaceflight . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .32003 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .32004 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .3

Suborbital Markets - An Overview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .7SRLV Emerging Markets . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .7

Tourism and Adventure Travel . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .7Science and High-Speed Research . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .9Microsatellite Orbital Insertion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .10Microgravity Research . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .10Media, Advertising, and Sponsorship . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .10Hardware Qualification . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .11Commercial Remote Sensing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .12Military Surveillance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .12Space Diving . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .13

SRLV Long-Term Markets . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .13Fast Package Delivery . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .13High-Speed Aerospace Transportation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .14

Launch Company Profiles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .17Acceleration Engineering . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .17Advent Launch Services . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .17American Astronautics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .17Armadillo Aerospace . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .18Beyond-Earth Enterprises . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .18High Altitude Research Corporation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .19Masten Space Systems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .19Micro-Space . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .20PanAero, Inc. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .20Rocketplane Ltd. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .21Scaled Composites . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .21Space Transport Corporation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .23SpaceDev . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .23TGV Rockets . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .24Vanguard Spacecraft . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .24XCOR Aerospace . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .24

Space Tourism Company Profiles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .27Incredible Adventures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .27Space Adventures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .27Virgin Galactic . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .27

Table of Contents

Spaceports . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .29FAA Licensed Spaceports . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .29

Mid-Atlantic Regional Spaceport . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .29Mojave Civilian Flight Test Center . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .30

Proposed Spaceports Seeking an FAA License . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .31Oklahoma Spaceport . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .31Texas Spaceports . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .32

Appendix: A Brief History of Major U.S. Suborbital Vehicles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .33The WAC-Corporal (1944-1950) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .33The V-2 (1945-1952) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .33The Bumper-WAC (1948-1952) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .34The Viking (1946-1957) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .34The Aerobee (1946-1965) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .35The Nike (1946 to present) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .35Loki (1951-1985) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .36Honest John/Taurus (1951 to present) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .36Terrier (1959-present) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .36

Contents Suborbital Reusable Launch Vehicles and Emerging Markets

iv Federal Aviation Administration/Office of Commercial Space Transportation

Suborbital launch activity has long been over-looked by the commercial market, which for manyyears focused exclusively on launching satellites.Suborbital launch operations remained primarily inthe government sector, supporting missile tests andscientific work, and even there activity declined sig-nificantly after the end of the Cold War. Recently,however, there has been a resurgence of interest incommercial suborbital spaceflight, stimulated by theemergence of new markets, notably space tourism,and new vehicles developed by entrepreneurs. Withthe successful claiming of the Ansari X Prize, highpublic interest in space travel, and new vehiclesunder construction, entrepreneurial ventures arepushing a new industry forward at a rapid pace.

The Suborbital Reusable Launch Vehicles(SRLV) and Emerging Markets report provides thefirst comprehensive assessment by the FederalAviation Administration’s Office of CommercialSpace Transportation (FAA/AST) of the commer-cial suborbital reusable launch industry in theUnited States. This document reviews three keyareas in this commercial suborbital renaissance:new markets for suborbital spaceflight, companiesthat are developing vehicles to serve those markets,and spaceports from which these vehicles can oper-ate. This report also discusses the recent develop-ments in commercial suborbital spaceflight and thehistory of suborbital rocketry.

Markets

One of the biggest challenges for the commer-cial suborbital launch industry-arguably bigger thandeveloping the launch vehicles themselves-has beenidentifying and developing markets that can beserved by suborbital vehicles. The commercialorbital launch industry has the benefit of a major,well-defined market: launching spacecraft to servetelecommunications, remote sensing, and otherapplications for commercial, civil government andmilitary clients. By contrast, although there is agovernment market for expendable suborbitallaunch services, what exists is mostly confined tomissile defense and scientific applications that havelittle commercial applicability.

After initially pursuing the orbital satellitemarket for low Earth orbit (LEO) constellations inthe mid-and late-1990s which has since collapsed,several launch companies have switched to pursuitof suborbital vehicles in a new market: public spacetravel and space tourism. New companies have alsostarted attracting investors in the past four years.Much of the interest in suborbital space tourism hasbeen galvanized by the Ansari X Prize, a $10-million award offered to the builders of the first privately-developed reusable suborbital vehiclecapable of carrying three people to 100 kilometers(62 miles) altitude twice within two weeks. Theprize requirements were formulated to create vehicles that serve the space tourism market afterwinning the prize. In addition, market surveys haveshown considerable interest in suborbital space-flight by members of the public, including thoseable to afford ticket prices of around $100,000 to$200,000 per flight.

SRLV Proponents anticpate more markets thanspace tourism. Vehicles that can fly to altitudes of100 kilometers or more can serve commercial, civil,or military remote sensing markets, filling a nichebetween aircraft and orbiting spacecraft. The flightprofiles of such vehicles will result in several contin-uous minutes of microgravity, far longer than can becreated with aircraft like NASA’s KC-135 “VomitComet,” or its C-9 replacement, which would permitextended microgravity science applications as wellas the qualification of experiments intended for flighton the International Space Station. Suborbital vehicles can also serve as the first stage of an orbitallaunch system, carrying an expendable upper stagethat could place small spacecraft into orbit at potentially far lower costs than existing expendablelaunch vehicles. Other markets include: advertising,hardware qualification, remote sensing, and space diving.

Should some or all of these initial suborbitalmarkets prove viable, the resulting income will provide vehicle developers and operators with acash flow that will enable the development of newgenerations of more capable reusable suborbitalvehicles. These vehicles, capable of flying to higher

Suborbital Reusable Launch Vehicles and Emerging Markets Introduction

Federal Aviation Administration/Office of Commercial Space Transportation 1

Introduction

altitudes or longer distances downrange, can in turnopen new suborbital markets, including rapid deliv-ery of critical packages and, eventually, high-speedpassenger transportation. However, these marketsmay take decades to fully develop, as they requirenot just new suborbital vehicles but improvementsin the overall transportation infrastructure.

Vehicles

Suborbital launches predate their orbital counterparts by decades-centuries if one considersearly rocketry experimentation in Europe and Asia.Existing expendable suborbital rockets can tracetheir heritage back to the efforts of Robert Goddardand Wernher von Braun in the 1920s and 1930s.The early rockets were primarily sponsored for the development missiles rather than space launch vehicles. After the second world war their useswere expanded and they became the forerunners of both orbital and suborbital launch vehicles in use today.

The new generation of commercial suborbitalvehicles under development today bears littleresemblance to its predecessors. Most of these newvehicles were designed to be eligible for the AnsariX Prize, and thus are designed to safely carry threepeople and be reusable. Beyond that, however,there were few design restrictions for the prize, andthus there has been an array of different designs putforward. Vehicles under development include thosethat launch vertically and horizontally, as well asthose deployed from aircraft or balloons. Landingsystems include a combination of wings, jets, rockets, and parachutes. A variety of other uniquedesign features were also employed to permit thedevelopment of reusable suborbital vehicles thatcould meet the requirements of the prize.

Because many of these vehicles are still in theearly development and test stages, it is not clear yetwhat vehicle designs will prove optimal to servecommercial suborbital markets. It’s quite possiblethat different vehicles will emerge to serve differentmarkets, depending on the unique requirements ofthose markets and their commercial potential.Vehicle developers are also considering future gen-erations of piloted reusable suborbital spacecraft,including those with increased passenger or cargocapacity, higher peak altitudes, increased time in

microgravity, and lower operating costs. In addi-tion, standards for payloads will be important (e.g.vehicle interfaces) for suborbital payloads so as toreduce customer dependence on a single launchservices provider. This should have the effect ofreducing the risk of scheduling problems, whilefostering competition. Historically, one of theenabling elements for new markets and for marketexpansion has been the development of commonindustry-wide standards.

Spaceports

The United States currently has 10 commercialand federal spaceports. These facilities, however, aredesigned primarily to support orbital launch activity,as well as a limited number of conventional, non-commercial suborbital launches. The established federal ranges are less well suited, however, to support launch activities by the emerging generationof piloted reusable suborbital vehicles. These vehi-cles often do not require the launch pads or rangeinfrastructure of orbital launch vehicles: many needlittle more than a flat pad or runway, as well as fairlymodest tracking capabilities. Moreover, industry isconcerned about the cost and regulatory burdens offederal launch ranges and co-located spaceports, dueto suborbital vehicle operators’ desire to fly on flexi-ble schedules and minimize their range fees. In theopinion of some potential operators range fees would account for the dominant portion of theiroperations costs.1

To address the needs of suborbital vehicleoperators, several new spaceports specificallydesigned to support commercial suborbital launchactivities have been or are currently being devel-oped. Mojave Airport in California is the latestfacility to obtain an FAA/AST launch site operatorlicense, in June 2004, specifically to serve subor-bital vehicles that take off and land horizontally.Other spaceports in New Mexico, Oklahoma, andTexas, are continuing to develop and are seekingFAA/AST spaceport licenses in addition to thosealready licensed in California (at Vandenberg AirForce Base), Florida, Virginia, and Alaska. NewMexico was selected to host the X Prize Cup, anexhibition and competition of suborbital vehicles,scheduled to start in 2006.

Introduction Suborbital Reusable Launch Vehicles and Emerging Markets

2 Federal Aviation Administration/Office of Commercial Space Transportation

2003

April 9: Starchaser Industries of Cheshire,England, test-fired its Churchill Mk 2 bi-propellantengine for the first time. The engine will be used onthe company’s Thunderbird and Thunderstar subor-bital RLV vehicles.

April 16: XCOR Aerospace of Mojave, California,announced $187,500 in additional equity invest-ments. The investments qualify the company for aDefense Department program that matches privatecapital four to one. The company will use theinvestment to develop rocket pump technology for its planned suborbital RLV.

April 18: Scaled Composites of Mojave,California, unveiled its “Tier One” suborbitalspaceflight program, consisting of an aircraft,White Knight, which carries aloft a rocket-poweredspacecraft, SpaceShipOne.

May 20: Scaled Composites flew the first captivecarry flight of SpaceShipOne and White Knightfrom the Mojave Airport in California.

June 26: Canadian Arrow of London, Ontario,announced its team of six astronauts - four Canadian,one American, and one Ukrainian - who will fly thecompany’s eponymous suborbital RLV.

July 5: Armadillo Aerospace of Mesquite, Texas,performed a drop test of a prototype of its BlackArmadillo vehicle to test parachute deployment andits crushable nose cone.

July 22: Starchaser Industries conducted a drop testof its Nova 2 capsule, part of its Thunderbird subor-bital RLV, at Red Lake, Arizona.

August 7: Scaled Composites flew the first glidetest of SpaceShipOne, detaching from the WhiteKnight carrier aircraft at an altitude of 14,320meters (47,000 feet) and gliding to a landing at theMojave Airport 19 minutes later.

October 20: The FAA published a notice in theFederal Register officially defining suborbital rocketsand suborbital trajectories and stating that vehiclesthat meet these definitions will be regulated by AST.

October 28: The da Vinci Project of Toronto,Ontario, announced that it will perform the X Prizequalification flights of its Wild Fire suborbital RLVfrom Kindersley, Saskatchewan.

October 30: FAA/AST determined that XCORAerospace’s launch license application for amanned suborbital RLV was sufficiently complete.

November 22: High Altitude Research Corporation(HARC) of Huntsville, Alabama, unveiled itsLiberator suborbital RLV project.

December 15: The X Prize adds two teams to itscompetition: HARC and Space TransportCorporation of Forks, Washington.

December 17: On the centennial of the WrightBrothers’ first airplane flight, Scaled Compositesconducted the first powered flight ofSpaceShipOne, achieving a top speed of Mach 1.2and peak altitude of 20,720 meters (68,000 feet).The company also announced that Microsoft co-founder Paul Allen has been the financial sponsorof the project.

2004

January 12: Rocketplane Ltd. (formerly PioneerRocketplane) announced that it had broken groundon facilities at the Oklahoma Spaceport in BurnsFlat, Oklahoma. Those facilities will be used tobuild and operate its planned suborbital RLV.

January 21: The X Prize Foundation selectedFlorida and New Mexico as finalists to host the XPrize Cup, a competition among suborbital RLVcompanies.

February 4: The House Science Committeeapproved by voice vote H.R. 3752, the CommercialSpace Launch Amendments Act of 2004. The legis-lation specifically identifies AST as the regulatingauthority for suborbital spaceflight, establishes anexperimental permit system for RLVs, and extendsthe existing liability regime to cover commercialRLV flights, including those carrying passengers.

Suborbital Reusable Launch Vehicles and Emerging Markets Recent Events


Recent Events in Commercial Suborbital Spaceflight

March 4: The House of Representatives approvedH.R. 3752 on a vote of 402-1.

March 28: Space Transport Corporation success-fully test-fired its 53,400-newton (12,000-pounds-force) solid-propellant engine that will power thecompany’s suborbital RLV.

April 1: FAA/AST awarded a launch license toScaled Composites for SpaceShipOne, the firstmanned suborbital launch license issued by theagency.

April 8: Scaled Composites conducted the secondpowered flight of SpaceShipOne, achieving a topspeed of Mach 1.6 and peak altitude of 32,000meters (105,000 feet).

April 23: FAA/AST awarded a launch license toXCOR Aerospace for its Sphinx manned suborbitalRLV.

May 5: The X Prize announced a multimillion-dollar donation from entrepreneurs AnoushehAnsari and Amir Ansari. The prize was renamed theAnsari X Prize.

May 11: The X Prize Foundation selected NewMexico as the state where the annual X Prize Cup,a series of flight competitions for suborbital vehi-cles, expected to begin in 2006, will be held.

May 17: GoFast, a suborbital rocket built by theamateur Civilian Space Exploration Team, achieveda maximum altitude of 124 kilometers (77 miles) ina launch from the Black Rock Desert, Nevada. Thelaunch was the first time an amateur-built rocketreached space.

June 15: Armadillo Aerospace conducted a successful test flight of its subscale technologydemonstrator vehicle in Mesquite, Texas, achievinga maximum altitude of 40 meters (131 feet).

June 17: FAA/AST awarded a launch site operatorlicense to the East Kern Airport District to coversuborbital spaceflight activities at Mojave Airport.

June 21: Scaled Composites conducted the thirdpowered flight of SpaceShipOne, achieving a maxi-mum speed of Mach 2.9 and a peak altitude of100,124 meters (328,491 feet). The flight was thefirst time a commercial manned suborbital space-craft reached space. The pilot, Michael Melvill, wasawarded FAA/AST commercial astronaut wings.

June 23: Starchaser Industries announced it wouldopen a U.S. office in Las Cruces, New Mexico,with plans to begin flight operations from theSouthwest Regional Spaceport as early as 2006.

July 22: The Space Commercial Human AscentServing Expeditions (CHASE) Act, S.2722, theSenate version of H.R. 3752, was introduced.

July 27: Mojave Aerospace Ventures (the officialname of the Ansari X Prize team led by ScaledComposites and funded by Paul Allen) announcedthat it would conduct the first of its two plannedAnsari X Prize qualification flights on September29 from Mojave, California.

August 5: The da Vinci Project announced that itwould conduct the first of its two planned Ansari X Prize qualification flights on October 2 fromKindersley, Saskatchewan.

August 7: A subscale technology demonstrationvehicle built by Armadillo Aerospace crashed during a test flight in Mesquite, Texas, when thevehicle ran out of propellant at an altitude ofapproximately 180 meters (600 feet).

August 8: Space Transport Corporation’s Rubicon1 vehicle was destroyed during a test flight nearQueets, Washington, when one of the vehicle’s twosolid fuel motors exploded on ignition.

August 14: Canadian Arrow conducted a successfuldrop test of its passenger capsule, dropping it 2,400meters (7,900 feet) from a helicopter into LakeOntario near Toronto.

August 16: Masten Space Systems, of Santa Clara,California, announced that it planned to develop theXA-1, a reusable unmanned suborbital vehicle capa-ble of flying to 100 km altitude to serve microgravityand other research and development markets.

Recent Events Suborbital Reusable Launch Vehicles and Emerging Markets


Suborbital Reusable Launch Vehicles and Emerging Markets Recent Events


August 17: The da Vinci Project announced it hadchanged its name to “The GoldenPalace.com SpaceProject: Powered by the da Vinci Project.”

September 23: The GoldenPalace.com SpaceProject: Powered by the da Vinci Project announcedthat its planned October 2 launch from Kindersley,Saskatchewan, would be delayed for an unspecifiedperiod because of delays in the availability of a fewkey components.

September 25: Beyond-Earth Enterprises ofColorado Springs, Colorado, conducted two flighttests of one-third scale demonstrators of its plannedrecoverable suborbital rocket from Frederick,Oklahoma; one rocket reached an altitude of over4,575 meters (15,000 feet).

September 29: SpaceShipOne, piloted by MikeMelvill, completed the first of its two Ansari XPrize qualification flights at Mojave Airport, reaching a peak altitude of 102,870 meters (337,500feet). The prize judging team declared the flight asuccessful attempt the following day.

October 1: The GoldenPalace.com Space Project:Powered by the da Vinci Project announced thatTransport Canada, the Canadian equivalent of theU.S. Department of Transportation, had awardedthe team a launch license for its Wild Fire vehicle.The license expired on November 1, 2004.

October 4: Rocketplane Ltd. announced that it hadentered into an agreement with tourism companyIncredible Adventures, of Sarasota, Florida, to market tourist flights on Rocketplane’s XP vehiclestarting in 2007, at a ticket price of $99,500.

October 4: SpaceShipOne, piloted by Brian Binnie,completed the second of its two Ansari X Prizequalification flights at Mojave Airport, reaching apeak altitude of 112,000 meters (367,442 feet). Theprize judging team declared the flight a success thesame day, and officially declared Mojave AerospaceVentures, sponsors of the SpaceShipOne team, thewinners of the prize.

November 6: Mojave Aerospace Ventures was presented with a check for $10 million dollars and a trophy for capturing the Ansari X Prize in a cere-mony at the St. Louis Science Center in St. Louis,Missouri.

November 20: U.S. House of Representativepassed H.R. 5382, a revision of H.R. 3752 by avote of 269 to 120. H.R. 5382 addressed concernsabout language definining what types of vehiclesare considered as suborbital, crew safety and passengers rights to sue operators.

December 9: U.S. Senate passes H.R. 5382 by aunanimous vote.

Recent Events Suborbital Reusable Launch Vehicles and Emerging Markets


Suborbital Reusable Launch Vehicles and Emerging Markets Suborbital Markets - An Overview


Expendable suborbital vehicles have been servingseveral distinct markets for over 40 years. However,the suborbital field has seen many changes duringthat time. The use of suborbital vehicles, includingsounding rockets, has dropped considerably sincethe Cold War period, when several hundred suchvehicles were launched annually. Suborbital vehi-cles were then used predominantly for military andscientific research funded almost entirely throughgovernment budget allocations. Universities werealso major participants in sounding rocket pro-grams, a relationship enabled by public funding inthe form of research grants. However, the numberof Ph.D. theses dedicated to atmospheric or astro-nomical research dependent on sounding rocketshas continually declined since the 1970s.

During the suborbital heyday of the Cold War, itwas not uncommon for more than 700 suborbitalrockets to be launched annually to serve the mili-tary and scientific markets. Even in the late 1980sthe average number of suborbital rockets launchedfor military, scientific, and educational purposesremained over 300 annually. A significant decreasein the early 1990s, however, has left the annualmarket for suborbital launches at well under 100.This decrease in demand for suborbital launcheshas many causes, but three factors appear as themost significant. First, with the collapse of theSoviet Union in 1991 and the end of the Cold War,the number of military suborbital research and missile test launches has dropped. Second, studentspursuing graduate research appear less likely to doso in fields requiring sounding rockets, insteadfocusing on genetics, microbiology, computer engi-neering, and other disciplines. Finally, traditionalusers of suborbital vehicle technology are increas-ingly turning to other options, such as computersimulations, stratospheric balloons, and high-altitude aircraft, to perform their research.

There are, however, a few signs that the number ofexpendable suborbital vehicles launched annuallywill increase in the near future. For example, theDepartment of Defense (DoD) will continue tolaunch interceptor and target vehicles in support ofan anti-ballistic missile shield. Another positivesign is the growing number of rocket hobbyists and

enthusiasts interested in building and launchingrockets. These rockets have become more powerful,and it is possible that a handful of these rocketamateurs may pursue business plans based on successful vehicle performance.

Reusable suborbital vehicles, on the other hand, are expected to lead a renaissance in the suborbitalmarketplace, beginning with human suborbitaladventure travel. While the idea of a human-ratedvehicle capable of suborbital missions is not new,the potential for a commercial suborbital industryis. Recent studies have demonstrated that customerdemand for suborbital adventure travel is robustenough to get an industry rolling, and it is expectedthat the winning of the Ansari X Prize will effec-tively initiate this emerging market.

Other short-term commercial suborbital marketsthat may emerge in the next ten years include science and high-speed research, microsatelliteinsertion, microgravity research, hardware qualifi-cation, military and commercial remote sensing,and advertising and sponsorship. Still more marketsare expected to emerge 30-40 years from now,when second- and third-generation vehicles allowfor point-to-point travel and are supported by moreextensive ground infrastructure.

SRLV Emerging Markets

Tourism and Adventure Travel

Space tourism and adventure travel is likely to become the first successful suborbital market toemerge during the next ten years. The birth of thismarket is expected to begin around 2007, spurred inlarge part by the emergence of suborbital vehicleentrepreneurs outside the aerospace industry mainstream and competitive pursuit of the Ansari X Prize, which was won in October 2004. The XPrize Foundation was established in 1996 to award$10 million to the first team to launch a suborbitalreusable launch vehicle (SRLV) capable of carryingthree people to an altitude of 100 kilometers, returnsafely to Earth, and repeat the exercise within twoweeks. With patronage from the Ansari family, therenamed competition produced a group of 20 plusdomestic and international contenders and symbol-

Suborbital Markets - An Overview

Suborbital Markets - An Overview Suborbital Reusable Launch Vehicles and Emerging Markets


izes the introduction of a truly reusable passenger-carrying space launch vehicle. Even though theAnsari X Prize has been won, SRLV developmentand testing by the various teams is expected to con-tinue in pursuit of recognition, business ambitionsand other prize competitions. The Foundation willsponsor special events around the world similar inprinciple to air shows, designed to promote nascentsuborbital markets and provide competitions tokeep innovation thriving. The X Prize Foundation isattempting to create a new business model for spacebusiness to include sponsorships.

To follow-on the successful X Prize, the XPrize Cup has been announced. The Cup will fea-ture a series of cash prize competitions rangingfrom fastest turn-around time, maximum number of passengers per flight and during the entire Cupevent, to maximum altitude attained and fastestflight time from take-off to landing. An overallannual X Prize Cup title will also be awarded basedon points in the other competitions. Flight competi-tions for the X Prize Cup are scheduled for October2006. A Public Spaceflight Exhibition is plannedfor October 2005. Both Cup-related events will beheld in New Mexico.

Unlike the commercial satellite launch market- the focus market of initial RLV entrepreneurs- the demand for tourism flights is expected to be significant in the coming years. Tourism companiesinvolved with marketing space travel, includingSpace Adventures, Ltd, Incredible Adventures, andVirgin Galactic, have described a high level of fas-cination and interest from the public. After Mojave

Aerospace Ventures won the Ansari X Prize, VirginGalactic alone reported that 7,000 people had regis-tered for future tourist flights on a vehicle based onSpaceShipOne to be built by Scaled Composites.

Futron Corporation produced a comprehen-sive report2 of space tourism and adventure travel in2002. Futron contracted with Zogby International tosurvey 450 individuals with annual incomes of atleast $250,000 or a net worth of at least $1 million.The study identified realistic price points: between$25,000 and $250,000 per suborbital flight, and $1 million to $25 million per orbital flight. A for-mer Space Shuttle commander with substantial experience in human spaceflight helped to draft a description of what a realistic space experiencewould be like for a private citizen.

The responses gathered from the 450 surveyedindividuals were analyzed over a period of eightmonths, and profiles of those who were most likelyto pay for a space experience were developed. Some42 percent of the respondents characterized them-selves as either “somewhat likely,” “very likely,” or“definitely likely” to pay for a suborbital ride, and 51 percent of those indicated they would pay at least$25,000 for the privilege. Customer preferences wereidentified for the basic trip scenarios and comparedwith the realistic description of a trip to space.

The analysis, which resulted in a 20-yearforecast of passengers and revenue, did not addressthe business case for a suborbital vehicle; rather, itaddressed the demand for services that might beprovided via a suborbital or orbital vehicle. The

Vehicle Operator Vehicle Name

Tourism Marketing Company*

Estimated First Operations

Flight

Advertised Price Per

Passenger

Passengers Per Flight

Passengers Registered for

Future Flights**

Launch Site

Mojave Aerospace

Ventures, LLCSpaceShipTwo Virgin Galactic 2007 $190,000 5 7,000 Mojave Airport,

California

Rocketplane Ltd Rocketplane XP Incredible

Adventures 2007 $99,500 2 Unannounced Burns Flat, Oklahoma

XCOR Aerospace Xerus Space

Adventures 2007 $98,000 1 Unannounced Mojave Airport, California

Table 1: Announced Suborbital Space Tourism Agreements

*Some operators have more than one marketing company. **Space Adventures has reported over 100 deposits for space flights for vehicles to be determined.


challenge for the aerospace industry is to develop avehicle that can most effectively meet this demand.

Results of the study showed that demand forsuborbital space adventure travel exists, and that itremains latent because of a lack of vehicles. Oncevehicles are introduced (and the assumption forpurposes of the study was that such vehicles couldcarry two passengers), the study forecast that a totalof almost 16,500 people could be traveling to suborbital altitudes by the year 2021. Those passen-gers would pay suborbital vehicle operators faresthat, combined, would total an estimated $800 million in revenues.

It should be noted that this study focused onsuborbital and orbital passenger flights, and did notaddress demand for other services in detail. In addi-tion, the scope for the study did not focus on thesupport infrastructure necessary to sustain the pro-jected number of flights. It is possible that addition-al, perhaps more significant, sources of revenueresulting from suborbital activity will emerge.Additional space tourism studies have been done bySpace Adventures, NASA, National Space Society,and Patrick Collins among others.

Science and High-Speed Research

Not long after rockets were invented, itbecame clear that instruments for measuring theupper atmosphere, imaging the Sun, and otherwisestudying the environment many hundreds of kilometers above the Earth could be installed aspayloads. In the earliest cases, data was retrievedon tapes that returned to Earth after a short flight.Often the data was destroyed, but sometimes itreturned intact and revealed information about theionosphere and the Sun’s corona. Launching spe-cialized suborbital rockets (sounding rockets are sonamed because they have been primarily limited toatmospheric research,) has continued to this day,but at a much reduced level.

Since 1989, the FAA has licensed 14 subor-bital launches by expendable vehicles, all connect-ed to government sponsors. For most universitieswith interest in flying space science experimentsand satellites, cost is the primary issue. Launcheshave been difficult to fund without governmentsupport: some universities build complete satellites

with no budget to actually launch them. Principalinvestigators funded by NASA are unable to selecttheir own commercial launch services because theirexperiment funding includes money to launch ongovernment-built suborbital vehicles, typically fromWallops Flight Facility in Virginia. This has led toU.S. government control of the vehicle market forcivil science payloads.

Because of recent budget cuts to NASA’ssounding rocket program, fewer launches areexpected and scientific review panels are takingfewer risks.3 The cost of launching solar and astro-physics missions requiring higher performancevehicles and recoverable payloads from WhiteSands Missile Range is no longer affordable.4

New, reusable suborbital launch vehicle firmsbelieve they can offer more frequent flight opportu-nities at similar or lower costs than NASA if science investigators were given funding vouchersfor selecting their own launch vehicles.

A small but proven international commercialmarket for expendable suborbital vehicles has beena high-speed test bed for scientific experiments.Australia’s University of Queensland flew twosupersonic combustion ramjet (scramjet) test mis-sions called Hyshot from Woomera, Australia, onAstrotech’s Terrier-Orion vehicles. Even though thelaunch was not conducted for or by the U.S. gov-ernment, the Terrier-Orion vehicle was built by anAmerican company, Astrotech and therefore thesemissions were licensed by the FAA. The 2001 and2002 flights will be repeated with future missionsby DTI (formerly Astrotech), possibly in 2005.

Other countries have emerged as majorproviders of suborbital launch services, includingNorway, Japan, Brazil, and India. No particularcountry dominates the field of suborbital high-altitude research.

SRLVs may introduce a resurgence in subor-bital high-altitude research, perhaps akin to the phenomenally successful joint NASA-Air Force X-15 vehicle flights of the 1960s. One advantage ofthe X-15, beyond its high speed, was the ability tochange out instrument racks quickly and efficiently,reducing turn-around time in order to accommodateresearchers’ schedules. Such an approach would be




ideal for a commercial vehicle used for researchand other purposes. In addition, a single SRLV canbe used to monitor the Earth’s upper atmosphereover the span of many years at potentially a muchlower total cost than to conduct the same researchusing many expendable rockets.

Microsatellite Orbital Insertion

Suborbital vehicles can be designed as a firststage for launching small satellites into LEO.Essentially, a piloted SRLV would reach a specificaltitude determined by such parameters as orbitdesired, atmospheric conditions, and mass of thepayload, and then release an upper stage with thepayload attached. The upper stage - in much thesame way an upper stage would send a satellite togeosynchronous orbit (GEO) after separating froman orbital launch vehicle - would boost the smallsatellite to the required orbit. The SRLV would thencoast back to a landing site, either powered orunpowered depending on the design.

A similar concept already being pursued bythe Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency(DARPA) is called RASCAL, or ResponsiveAccess, Small Cargo, Affordable Launch. RASCALwill be composed of an air-breathing first stagecapable of reaching 61 kilometers (200,000 ft) alti-tude while carrying a small upper stage. The com-plete system will be capable of deploying 50 kilo-gram (110 pound) microsatellites directly intoorbits with any inclination. The RASCAL vehiclewill be able to take off within one hour of a launchcommand and refly again within 24 hours at a costof no more than $750,000 per flight. The programhas progressed past the Preliminary Design Reviewstage due to the efforts of the Space LaunchCorporation contractor team. Phase 3 developmentis scheduled to begin during 1st quarter of 2005.During Phase 3 prototype vehicles will be construt-ed. The first satellite launches are expected to occurin 2008.5

The market for microsatellites is not wellunderstood, but enough data exists to indicate thatat least two customer groups would be interested ina very low-cost method of launching “throwaway”microsatellites. One Stop Satellite Solutions(OSSS), based in Utah, builds microsatellites pri-marily for university clients. According to OSSS,

several of their satellites remain on the shelvesbecause universities simply cannot afford thelaunch costs. The satellite may cost as little as afew thousand dollars, but the launch is orders ofmagnitude more expensive. If a vehicle couldlaunch them at lower costs, OSSS foresees thou-sands of its satellites being launched annually intwenty years.

Similarly, agencies like DARPA have an interest in studying technologies related tomicrosatellites, including constellations of maneu-verable mini-spacecraft. Some high technologyresearch and development efforts end withoutachieving actual space testing. If the price tag of such projects could be reduced by utilizing inexpensive launch options, more money could be spent on satellites and related technologies.

Microgravity Research

SRLVs may participate in and stimulate microgravity research. While suborbital RLVs cannotmatch the extended microgravity research possible inorbit, more experiments can be sent up than might beotherwise possible for customers waiting for orbitalflights with a faster turnaround. SRLVs can alsoallow researchers greater flexibility at lower coststhan for researchers who must depend on the occa-sional orbital launch that costs hundreds of millionsof dollars. For example, physiological researchcould be conducted on a routine basis, a particular-ly useful scenario if the vehicle can maneuver (asopposed to a ballistic vehicle whose maneuverabilityis relatively limited). Indeed, the researcher himselfor herself can go along for the ride on a SRLV, ratherthan depend on a professional astronaut who must be trained.

Media, Advertising, and Sponsorship

Entertainment media outlets, advertisingagencies, and sponsorship by a wide variety ofinterested parties is expected to show interest innew suborbital launch vehicles. While these groupswill not necessarily purchase a launch, they willprovide an important source of revenue for SRLVoperators. In addition, it is probable that there willbe an initial spike of interest among these groups toexploit the “newness” of SRLV technologies, fol-lowed by a gradual flattening out as the overall mar-ket matures. Feature and documentary filmmakers

may have an interest in pursuing new opportunitiespresented by access to space on suborbital vehicles.The Discovery Channel paid for rights to telecasttwo documentaries about the Ansari X Prize inOctober 2004. Similarly, access to Russian sub-mersibles, previously unavailable to the commercialsector, allowed filmmaker James Cameron to visitthe sunken Titanic up close for the movie “Titanic”and documentary “Ghosts of the Abyss.” Realisticmicrogravity scenes in “Apollo 13” were filmedaboard a modified KC-135 (“Vomit Comet”) air-plane, which has since been turned into a commer-cial business by the Zero-Gravity Corporation.Commercial SRLV operators may provide a newoutlet for visual entertainment in the decades ahead.

Advertising is a tried-and-true method of selling products and ideas. Commercial SRLVs, andeven non-commercial ones, will likely be embla-zoned with the livery of the manufacturers andsponsors in the same tradition we see today withorbital launch vehicles. It is rare that a third partywill pay for the privilege to advertise on a launchvehicle, but it has been done. Pizza Hut, in onefamous example, paid to have its logo pasted to theside of a Russian Proton vehicle. During the finalAnsari X Prize qualifying flight SpaceShipOne featured the Virgin Group logo on its fuselage.

Advertising could also come from companieswho provided subcomponents, engineering, design,and other services for the prime contractor or SRLVoperator. Other opportunities exist for non-profitorganizations and political campaigns. SRLVs present a unique opportunity for advertisers notonly because of their novelty, but also becauseSRLVs represent an opportunity to link the once-distant idea of space with the average consumer.Media exposure also makes SRLV advertisingattractive to potential advertisers.

Finally, sponsorship, which has a long historyin jump-starting nascent markets, will have a role to play as the emerging SRLV industry gains afoothold. Sponsorship can come in a variety offorms, including sending people into space as aresult of winning a lottery or prize paid for by thesponsor, or providing astronauts and passengerswith jumpsuits covered in patches representingdonor organizations (similar to the suits worn byNASCAR drivers). Another opportunity already

exploited in orbit is granting astronauts the right toutilize a product in space in exchange for the novel-ty of simply seeing the product used in space.

Public sponsorship through the collection ofmonies from interested organizations and individu-als to create prizes to be awarded for a variety ofcontests related to SRLVs, such as the Ansari XPrize and the X Prize Cup will perhaps profoundlyaffect the development of SRLVs. Contests takeadvantage of the competitive streak in humanbeings and promote creativity, innovation, andteamwork, often across traditional political barriers.These contests by necessity break through stagnantthinking and the status quo, which is why they areeffective in jump-starting emerging markets.

Prizes sponsored by companies and wealthyinvestors were awarded for a variety of aviation firsts and were key motivators in sparking what hasbecome the commercial aviation industry today.Prizes often promote more spending than the amountof the purse. They allow the promoter to advance hisgoal without choosing a technology or a vehicle.Development of the required technology often con-tinues after the reward has been claimed. An histori-cal example of this is the Vin Fiz-sponsored crosscountry flight in 1911, in which Cal Rogers flew aWright Flyer from Long Island to Long Beach inpursuit of the Hearst Prize. Publisher WilliamRandolph Hearst offered a $50,000 prize to the firstaviator to cross the country in 30 days or less.Rogers took 84 days, 16 stops and endured 19 crash-es during the flight, but kept going even after it wasclear he could not win the prize. In a more recentexample, Canada’s Da Vinci Project, CanadianArrow, America’s Armadillo Aerospace and othershave continued development of their vehicles, eventhough Mojave Aerospace Ventures has already wonthe Ansari X Prize.

Hardware Qualification

Another potential use of SRLVs would be tosubject equipment to the launch and microgravityenvironment prior to certification on manned spaceplatforms like the International Space Station.However, this market would compete with cheapertesting methods currently available such as aircraft and ground-based load-testing facilities.Furthermore, the loads offered by the piloted





vehicles currently in development might only beattractive to equipment developers intending theirhardware for transport and use aboard manned spacevehicles. Unmanned rockets subject equipment tosounds, loads, and vibrations in excess of human tolerances. Aircraft offer about 30 seconds of microgravity during the arcing flight paths they useto generate microgravity conditions. The currentgeneration of SRLVs while offering several minutesof microgravity, are not envisioned to conduct air-craft style flight profiles. SRLV operators wouldhave to develop a method to repeat or extend themicrogravity times during a single flight in order tooffer a competing experience to hardware develop-ers. The aircraft in current use also offer more volume for experimentation. While no SRLVs arecurrently being offered with similar accommoda-tions, as the designs mature larger vehicles mayappear. However, it is conceivable that if an equipment item is small enough to share a flightwith other cargo or passengers then cost mightbecome low enough to make SRLVs a viable alternative to established methods of manned flight hardware qualifications.

Commercial Remote Sensing

The remote sensing industry consists of four main parts: aerial imagery, ground stations,value-added products (often called geographicinformation systems, or GIS), and satellites. Totalsales for all sectors of the U.S. remote sensingindustry amounted to an estimated $2 billion in2001, with the bulk attributable to the sales of GISsoftware and services and aerial imagery. Worldwidesales of raw commercial satellite remote sensingimagery generated an estimated $200 million inrevenues for 2001, with a projected revenue totalapproaching $500 million by 2010.

Typical platforms (aircraft and satellites) hosta suite of passive sensors designed to detect reflect-ed light and include panchromatic (visible imagery,such as that produced by a camera) and infrared(IR) sensors. Active sensors providing radar andlidar imagery are also examples of services offeredby aerial and satellite remote sensing providers.While aerial imagery is obtained relatively close tothe Earth, yielding high-resolution imagery andreal-time data across a broad spectrum, the servicesprovided are expensive. In addition, legal and inter-national restrictions prevent aircraft from flying

over selected territories. Remote sensing satellites,in contrast, orbit high above the Earth providingessentially the same types of services at less expen-sive rates relative to aerial methods, though gener-ally with a slightly degraded resolution (this is rap-idly changing, however). Also, real-time commer-cial satellite remote sensing products are not yetavailable. Some emerging SRLV businesses haverecognized a “gap” between altitudes exploited byaerial platforms and those occupied by LEO satel-lites. This niche, the suborbital remote sensingrealm, may prove useful for some clients interestedin high-resolution, quick-turnaround imagery cover-ing a larger area than an aircraft could. A satellitecould cover the same area, but its orbit may not tra-verse the area of interest for several days.

Potential clients include disaster relief agen-cies, insurance companies, oil companies, interna-tional banks, meteorologists, and military organiza-tions. These groups have a strong interest in inex-pensive, real-time, high-resolution, quick-turn-around remote sensing products. The challenge forcommercial SRLV operators will be to keep thecost of operating and maintaining their SRLVs low,so that inexpensive services relative to aerial plat-forms can be provided. And like aircraft, a SRLVconducting remote sensing flights would need tooperate near the target area of interest. The flexibil-ity of operating from multiple locations and localairspace regulations would need to be considered.Some emerging SRLV providers, like TGVRockets, expect to reap the benefits of thisuntapped market.

Military Surveillance

Collection of national security imagery isdone by both aerial platforms and satellites. Crewedaircraft have been used by the military for almost acentury. Uncrewed aerial vehicles (UAVs) are relatively new to modern warfare, with projectionsshowing that many such vehicles will be flyingaround the war zones of the future. As it is today,these systems cover several “layers” in terms ofremote sensing platforms. Satellites adequatelycover the ultimate high ground but have limitedmaneuvering ability, while UAVs and crewedreconnaissance aircraft like the U-2 are deployedwithin the Earth’s atmosphere and are highlymaneuverable.



Suborbital launch vehicle remote sensing sys-tems have been proposed as a method of “filling in”the layer between satellites and aircraft. Such a system is envisioned by TGV Rockets, as a “pop-up”capability giving military leaders a near real-timesnapshot (perhaps even video for short periods) of theater-wide operations. TGV plans to offer itsmobile platform launched MICHELLE B vehiclefor this purpose.6 The challenge for suborbital systems is to be cost-competitive with other aerial vehicles while offering unique services.

Space Diving

During the late 1950s and early 1960s, theU.S. Navy and the U.S. Air Force conductedmanned parachute jumps from high altitude bal-loons, prior to the first NASA Mercury astronautsuborbital and orbital missions. Joe Kittinger of theUnited States Air Force, who successfully jumpedfrom an altitude of 31,300 meters (102,800 feet) in1960, currently holds the world record for a humanhigh-altitude dive.7 During the 1960s, the NationalAeronautics and Space Administration (NASA)researched orbital escape systems for astronauts.Several “space parachutes” were designed featuringmaneuvering thrusters, conical drag skirts, inflat-able cones, and spray-on ablative shielding to protect a single astronaut during reentry. It was concluded that a self-contained ballistic recoverysystem could be designed to bring a stranded astronaut safely to the ground.

Recently, there have been plans by some tobreak Joe Kittinger’s 31-kilometer (19 miles) alti-tude record. Several teams from across the globeare intent on jumping from altitudes of almost 45kilometers (28 miles). Some of the competitors are:Cheryl Sterns, who will make an attempt from anundisclosed site in the western United States duringSeptember 2005; Michel Fournier of France; andRodd Millner of Australia. These jumps will beconducted using stratospheric balloons. The balloonis the limiting factor for the world record pursuers.The use of an SRLV, which is less reliant on atmos-pheric conditions, will allow competitors to easilybreak any previously held altitude records usingballoons as platforms.

The Canadian Arrow team, a competitor forthe Ansari X Prize, is proposing a new extreme

sport called “spacediving.”8 As Canadian Arrowenvisions it, future spacedivers could routinely take60-second suborbital flights, reach apogee, thenproceed to jump out while wearing a counter pres-sure suit, and free fall to Earth from an altitude of64 kilometers (40 miles) or more. Today, reachingan altitude of 37,000 meters (121,400 feet) to makea high-altitude jump requires a balloon ride ofmany hours. An SRLV, on the other hand, couldtake spacedivers from the ground to this altitude inminutes. This sport will likely start with jumps ini-tially at lower altitude; with higher record-breakingjumps following as experience is gained.

Space diving could bring about new advancesin spacesuit design. One anticipated development is the counter pressure suit. This type of suit useselastic material instead of gas pressure to protect an astronaut from the vacuum of space.

A detailed market analysis on the demand forspace diving remains to be pursued. According toChristchurch Parachute School in New Zealand,

“there are a growing number of people who aretrying skydiving in the search for the ultimateleisure activity. Consequently, the skydivingindustry is experiencing rapid growth in theadventure tourism market to cater for this need.This demand is creating a whole new industryfor people to become involved in and creatingmany new full-time positions not previously considered as serious career options.”

If leisure skydiving is increasing in popularity, itstands to reason that a small but growing minoritywill be interested in pushing the envelope everhigher. Skydivers will make excellent suborbitalcustomers, as they understand safety proceduresand systems. The adventurous few who have madehigh-altitude jumps will be familiar with oxygensystems and high-altitude survival.

SRLV Long-Term Markets

Fast Package Delivery

In a typical business as services become moreefficient, competition will become fiercer and cus-tomers will demand more. Delivering packages isan excellent example of this phenomenon. Considerthat before 1973, when Federal Express began

operations, people had to wait weeks before pack-ages were delivered. This was mainly because ofoperational issues rather than the vehicles involved.In 1965, Yale University undergraduate Fred Smithwrote a term paper about passenger route systemsused by most airfreight shippers, and concludedthat operationally, these routes were being usedinefficiently. Smith wrote of the need for shippersto have a system designed specifically for airfreightthat could accommodate time-sensitive shipmentssuch as medicines, computer parts, and electronics.Apparently, Smith’s paper received an averagegrade, but the student knew he had an idea thatcould serve as a business plan. After several yearsof planning, he founded Federal Express in 1971and started operations with a small fleet of aircraftin 1973.9

The key to success was less about aircraft andmore about smart logistics. The subsequent intro-duction of laser tracking technologies, more effi-cient long-range aircraft, satellite asset tracking,better management applications, and streamlinedcollection nodes made FedEx and some of its com-petitors known and trusted commodities on a globalscale. In 2003, FedEx reported total revenue of$22.5 billion,10 generated through the work of214,000 employees.11 Its main competitor, UnitedParcel Service (UPS), is actually a larger company,having generated about $30 billion in revenues during the past year. UPS was founded in 1907 as amessenger company in the United States, and hasgrown by focusing on enabling commerce aroundthe globe. Other competitors include DHL andEmery.

It is possible that, if effectively integratedwithin a larger logistical framework, SRLVs couldbecome a valuable asset for companies like FedExand UPS. “Effectively integrated” means that theSRLV would operate more or less like an aircraft,and thus not require its own specialized launch pad,exotic fuels, and a high degree of maintenance.These factors alone demonstrate that SRLVs usedas fast package deliverers is some time off, sinceSRLVs have yet to be introduced and proven asreliable, safe, and effective modes of transportation.It was only after aircraft had been used for 60 yearsthat a Federal Express business model becameachievable. UPS was founded four years after theWright brothers’ first successful heavier-than-air

flight, but the company did not ramp up air operations until it became clear Federal Expresswas a serious competitor.

Whether a significant market exists for pack-ages to be delivered halfway around the planetwithin hours remains unclear. It is probable that, ina world faster-paced than the one we live in today,the notion of packages delivered from Tokyo toParis within several hours will be desired. Perhapsorgan donation is a market for charter SRLVs,though advances in biomedical research (such asgrowing organs) may negate the demand for suchextreme transportation services.

Companies will likely not invest in SRLVsunless they can be successfully integrated into theiralready highly-efficient operations, and this isdependent on the technologies and processes intrinsic to the vehicle itself. If a low-cost vehicle operates in the same manner as an aircraft, it is verylikely one will see FedEx and UPS SRLVs at aero-spaceports one day in the future. This application isconsidered far-term because it may take decades forSRLVs to become efficient, reliable, and safeenough to operate within a logistical framework.

High-Speed Aerospace Transportation

High-speed aerospace transportation from onepoint to another on the surface of the Earth is per-haps the “holy grail” of the suborbital industry. Theidea of taking a suborbital flight from New York toSydney, Australia in two hours has been around fordecades, and several attempts to pursue the concepthave started enthusiastically only to be shut downwhen reality sets in. It is very easy to look at a newBoeing 777 or even the older, now-decommissionedConcorde, and extrapolate a near-term future inwhich special aircraft can travel farther and fasterfor the same ticket price one might be chargedtoday for first-class service. However, many thingsmust take place for this to become a reality.

Current commercial air travel is hampered byserious logistical problems linked in large part to anadherence to a very old concept involving hub airports and directed flight routes. In a sense very little has changed, other than the aircraft themselves,since the 1930s. As SRLVs must accelerate to hypersonic velocities their use will likely be more



effective in long-distance, point-to-point travel. Aswith fast package delivery, the issue regarding passenger-carrying SRLVs has less to do with tech-nologies and more to do with processes. Changingprocesses related to a national infrastructure depend-ed upon by millions of people each day is a dauntingproblem beyond the scope of this report. But effortsare underway to radically rethink how airplanes areoperated and how assets are transported. Once thesecomplicated problems are solved, at least partially,then it might become apparent that a need for largepassenger-carrying SRLVs exists.

If the new SRLV developers produce a systemthat can be operated by a profit-making serviceprovider over a sustained period, this could constitute the beginning of high-speed transporta-tion. Travel could go from one spaceport to anotheror to an existing airport runway. As the distancesincrease, so do requirements for cross-rangemaneuvering, fuel storage, and navigation. Thedesign of the vehicle may become bigger, perhapsallowing for the transport of additional people orcargo. Point-to-point travel will become a reality ifSRLVs prove to be as operable, maintainable, andsafe as passenger and cargo aircraft.

Two major sectors may benefit from SRLVs:Charter service and long-distance transportation ofpassengers and goods. In the former case, SRLVscould be used for the transport of people and cer-tain types of cargo via transcontinental suborbitalroutes. For example, transporting key personnel andequipment to disaster zones will require that theseassets be deployed as soon as possible. Severalhours can make a big difference in many scenarios.The military may be interested in an SRLV for similar reasons, but these vehicles may not be operated by a commercial entity.

Long distance suborbital transportation ofpassengers and goods is what people imagine as thepinnacle application of suborbital technology. Thisconcept involves a large vehicle capable of takingoff from a runway and reaching an altitude ofaround 100 kilometers (62 miles), maintaining theapex altitude for several minutes to an hour or sodepending on destination, then returning to an aerospaceport similar to the one it departed from.This scenario oversimplifies the problem, however.Assuming a market exists the technology necessary

to develop a vehicle capable of such a transit isdaunting. The vehicle must not only transition froma sea level-pressure environment of 80 percentnitrogen and 20 percent oxygen to a vacuum micro-gravity environment, but must also return safely.While propulsion poses obvious difficulties, effi-ciency is perhaps a more challenging area. Insteadof three types of engines (turbofan to scramjet torocket), perhaps a hybrid of the three can be devel-oped. This would, however, represent a level ofefficiency possibly requiring decades of practicalapplication and research. A more near-term designmay feature a two-staged system similar to Mojave Aerospace Venture’s White Knight andSpaceShipOne. In addition, the airframe must be designed to maximize efficiency as the vehicle transitions from sea level to vacuum to the high-temperature environment of reentry, and then do itagain and again as it fulfills “airline-like” opera-tions. Lifting bodies and waveriders are just twoexamples of these airframe concepts.

An additional concern could be that of pas-senger comfort. Space motion sickness (SMS) is acondition that typically occurs during the first 72hours of spaceflight and during transitions from different gravity environments. A 1990 study12 byJ.R. Davis and others indicated about 67 percent of Shuttle astronauts express symptoms of SMS.Scientists have not been able to determine the exactcause, but SMS appears to stem from several rootcauses. In general, it may be a result of imbalancesin the inner ear caused by conflicting signalsbetween fluid in the semicircular canals of the earnot having a gravity reference and visual disorienta-tion. Mercury and Gemini astronauts did not reportmotion sickness, possibly because of close sur-roundings inside the small capsules and because amajority of the flight was spent buckled up. On theother hand, advances in biomedical research couldmitigate the problem, either with drugs (e.g. phen-ergan, scopolamine) or with surgery (for businesstravelers who might take suborbital flights routine-ly). Scopolamine patches have proven themselvesto be very effective in preventing terrestrial motionsickness and may also help with preventing spacesickness. The results of a 1993 study indicate thatPhenergan (Promethazine hydrochloride) appears tobe even more effective in treating the symptoms ofSMS.13 It is likely that initial passengers will be



required to be strapped in for the duration of theirsuborbital excursions. One of the results from the2002 Futron Corporation space tourism marketstudy indicates that if customers were required tobe strapped in for the whole flight 36% of thepotential clients would be somewhat less likely totake the flight versus the requirement not making adifference to 34% of the respondents.14

The same arguments made earlier for fastpackage delivery apply to high-speed aerospacetransportation: people will demand more efficientservices in the future as our world becomes moreand more intricately linked by transportation andtelecommunications routes. In the case of SRLVs,as in computer processing, low-cost, high-speedservices will likely always be in demand. AsSRLVs demonstrate reliably safe and efficient operations, more people, including investors, will become interested in their potential services.

In addition, as suborbital transportationbecomes routine, the pursuit of orbital flights willlikely become a new incentive and challenge.



Acceleration Engineering

Micky Badgero formedAcceleration Engineering todevelop a rocket ship calledLucky Seven in pursuit of theAnsari X Prize. Lucky Sevenemploys methane/oxygen liquidrocket engines to generate72,000 newtons (16,200pounds-force) of thrust to lift

the 2,515-kilogram (5,532-pound) vehicle to altitude. Engine cutoff is planned to occur at 52kilometers (32 miles). Peak acceleration duringascent is 3 g. The vehicle will perform a ballisticreentry and deploy a parafoil to guide the vehicle toa vertical landing within one kilometer (0.6 miles)of the launch site.

The one-person company has released fewdetails about the vehicle, which has been underdevelopment since the mid-1990s. Badgero, a computer science graduate student at MichiganState University, has stated that the vehicle is privately funded and that construction will continue in his garage as funds permit.

Advent Launch Services

Houston-based Advent LaunchServices is developing the sea-launched Advent vehicle for theAnsari X Prize competition andbeyond. The Advent is a wingedbooster rocket 11 meters (35feet) high with a gross liftoffmass of about 5,700 kilograms(12,600 pounds). The rocketwill burn liquid methane and

oxygen to produce a thrust of 84,100 newtons(18,900 pounds-force). It takes off vertically froman ocean launch site, firing its engines for 97 sec-onds. The vehicle continues on a ballistic trajectory,reaching a peak altitude of 105 kilometers (65miles); passengers experience three-and-a-half min-utes of microgravity during this phase of the flight.Advent then performs an aerodynamic controlledglide, landing horizontally back at the launch loca-tion in the ocean.

Advent Launch Services president JimAkkerman, a former NASA engineer with extensivepropulsion systems experience, has assembled an11-member core team and a volunteer network tomake his concept a reality. Development of theAdvent has thus far been confined to subscale models and engine testing. The company hoped tocomplete qualification of the propulsion system bythe end of 2004.15 The Advent is considered to be aforerunner of an orbital space tourism vehicle thatthe company hopes to construct.

American Astronautics

American Astronautics, headquarteredin Lake Tahoe, Nevada, entered itsSpirit of Liberty vehicle concept intothe Ansari X Prize competition inJanuary 2003. The vehicle, 17 meters(56 feet) tall and weighing 9,950 kilo-grams (21,875 pounds), is powered by

a single kerosene/liquid oxygen liquid fuel boosterthat generates 155,700 newtons (35,000 pounds-force) of thrust. The main engine will fire for 81seconds, generating accelerations of up to 4 gs.After engine burnout a seven-person crew cabinseparates from the vehicle and continues a ballisticascent, reaching a peak altitude of 110 kilometers(68 miles). The booster and capsule each descendusing controlled aerobraking and parafoils; airbagscushion the landing of both vehicle sections.

American Astronautics is led by Bill Sprague,a 30-year veteran of a wide range of missile andlaunch vehicle programs. Construction of theLiberty is reportedly proceeding at a steady pace,although the company has released few detailsabout the progress of its efforts.

Suborbital Reusable Launch Vehicles and Emerging Markets Launch Company Profiles


Launch Company Profiles

Armadillo Aerospace

Armadillo Aerospace, based inMesquite, Texas, is activelydeveloping suborbital vehicleconcepts for manned flight. Itscurrent design, Black Armadillo,will use liquid propellant enginesgenerating 133,500 newtons(30,000 pounds-force) of thrustthat burn for 144 seconds. Thevehicle, 7 meters (24 feet) tall

and weighing 6,350 kilograms (14,000 pounds),will lift off vertically and achieve a maximum altitude of 108 kilometers (67 miles). BlackArmadillo will then perform a ballistic descent and land vertically under rocket power; a previousdesign incorporated a parachute landing using acrushable nose cone.

Armadillo has made considerable progress todate, performing a number of tests of engines andother vehicle technologies and incorporating thoseresults into the design of their suborbital vehicle.Armadillo originally planned to use hydrogen peroxide propellant, but switched to a “mixedmonopropellant” of methanol and a 50% hydrogenperoxide solution after encountering difficultiesobtaining high-quality hydrogen peroxide. Thecompany is also considering developing a liquidoxygen/ methanol bipropellant engine. In 2002 theteam demonstrated the potential of the engines bycreating a rocket-powered hover chair. As recentlyas the first quarter of 2004, Armadillo completedshort hops with its propulsion unit as it workedtowards a demonstration of the vehicle’s ability tohover, key to the powered descent design.

The Armadillo flight concept was finally successfully demonstrated June 15, 2004, when asubscale demonstrator flew to 40 meters (131 feet)altitude and landed. However, a second demonstra-tion flight in August 2004 failed when the vehiclecrashed after exhausting its propellant supply.Despite this setback, the Armadillo team remainscommitted to maturing its design, and has complet-ed work on a second demonstrator vehicle. Flighttesting of the design is expected to resume in 2005.

Armadillo Aerospace is led by John Carmack,a software developer who cofounded the computergames developer id Software. Carmack is fundingthe development effort using his personal funds. Inlate April 2004, Armadillo began the process ofapplying for an FAA launch license. Flight tests todate have been under the amateur exclusion to thelaunch licensing regulations.

Beyond-Earth Enterprises

Beyond-Earth Enterprises ofColorado Springs, Colorado isdeveloping unmanned subor-bital vehicles to serve the spacememorabilia and related mar-kets. The company’s “Road toSpace” program features thedevelopment of a progression ofrecoverable suborbital launchvehicles eventually capable offlying to 100 kilometers (62

miles). The latest flights of its test program tookplace on September 25, 2004, when the companylaunched a pair of one-third-scale demonstratorsfrom Frederick, Oklahoma. One rocket, dubbedSapphire, reached an altitude of over 4,572 meters(15,000 feet); its payload capsule landed by parachute and was successfully recovered.

Beyond-Earth Enterprises has a six-personstaff led by CEO Joe Latrell. The company is ini-tially marketing its rockets to glean revenue fromthe “gee-whiz” aspect of space flight, believing thatthere is a market for any item or object that hastouched space. For fees as low as $80, the companyis offering to launch small objects like businesscards or photos on suborbital trajectories into space.Beyond-Earth hopes its suborbital rocket, with its23-kilogram (50-pound) payload capacity, generatesbetween $100,000 and $200,000 per flight. Eachrecoverable vehicle is expected to be capable of tenflights before retirement. This initial endeavor isexpected to cost the company about $2 million. The company expects to have sufficient demand toallow at least one flight per month in order to keepits business and development plans on track.16

Launch Company Profiles Suborbital Reusable Launch Vehicles and Emerging Markets


Fundamental Technology Systems

In Orlando, Florida, Fundamental TechnologySystems is developing a rocket plane called Aurora.A ride on the Aurora will be similar to that of otherhigh-performance craft operating closer to Earth.The Aurora has an 11-meter (36-foot) fuselage anda 9-meter (30-foot) wingspan, and is powered by a44,480-newton (10,000-pounds-force) hydrogenperoxide and kerosene rocket engine. The vehiclefeatures a pressurized cabin to allow the three-person crew (pilot, co-pilot, and mission special-ist/passenger) to enjoy the flight without the aid ofpressure suits. The flight profile is similar to that of a regular aircraft, with a horizontal takeoff,climb to altitude, descent, and runway landing.

Both co-founders, Ray Nielsen and Jim Toole,have over 25 years of experience designing high-performance aircraft. Recent work on the Auroravehicle has focused on avionics and rocket enginedevelopment, although little progress on vehicledevelopment has been reported to date. The companyalso assisted another suborbital vehicle developer,Scaled Composites, by providing the flight naviga-tion unit for SpaceShipOne.

High Altitude Research Corporation

Huntsville, Alabama-based High AltitudeResearch Corporation (HARC) enteredthe Ansari X Prize competition inNovember 2003 with its Liberator vehi-cle. The Liberator, 13 meters (43 feet)tall and weighing 4,536 kilograms(10,000 pounds) at launch, is a single-stage design using two LOX/kerosene

liquid-fuel engines that generate a total of 106,800newtons (24,000 pounds-force) of thrust. Theengines were originally designed by Space

America, a defunct venture from the late 1990s todevelop a low-cost orbital launch vehicle. HARC,which has developed a number of hybrid rocketmotors, initially planned to use a small hybridengine for an escape tower mounted on the top ofthe vehicle, but elected instead to develop a smallliquid-propellant engine. Although the cabin ispressurized, the crew will wear pressure suitsthroughout the flight.

HARC has substantial experience conductinglaunches from sea-borne platforms, which it plansto use for the Liberator vehicle. The main engineswill fire for one minute, after which the boosterstage will separate and parachute back into theocean, while the crew cabin continues on its ballis-tic trajectory to 100 kilometers (62 miles). Duringdescent the cabin will deploy its own parachute andfall to an ocean landing point. Passengers canexpect acceleration and deceleration of up to 5 gs.

HARC, led by Gregory Allison, has extensiveexperience developing suborbital launch vehicles. It has produced hybrid rockets for atmosphericresearch since 1994, and held the world record forthe highest amateur rocket flight until the GoFast private space launch in 2004. The corporation alsoclaims one hundred successful firings of its hybridrocket motors, as well as several launches from highaltitude balloons. The company raised about $5 mil-lion as of the end of 2003, but expects it will requirean additional $9.5 million in order to complete thefull-scale Liberator.

Masten Space Systems

Masten Space Systems (MSS) ofSanta Clara, California is a newentrant to the commercial subor-bital spaceflight field, havingopened for business in August2004. The Masten concept is todevelop a series of vertical take-off vertical landing (VTVL)rockets called the ExtremeAltitude (XA) line. These vehi-

cles will cater to suborbital research markets such ashigh-altitude atmospheric measurements, low-costsolar astronomy, space particle and plasma research,low-cost exoatmospheric astronomy, near Earthobject detection, microgravity research, and Earth



observation. The XA-1.0 is planned to be able to lifta 100-kilogram (220-pound) payload to 100 kilome-ters (62 miles), and be able to repeat that flight sev-eral times in a single day. MSS plans to offer flightsfor between $20,000 and $30,000.

David Masten, a 12-year veteran of the infor-mation technology and management consultingfields, leads the company. The rest of the five-member core team is composed of members fromvarious engineering fields; most team members arealso members of grassroots space societies like theExperimental Rocket Propulsion Society andArtemis Society International. The company plansto follow an evolutionary approach and design asuborbital version to earn revenue and gain opera-tions experience before scaling up the design intoan orbital version.

Micro-Space

Micro-Space, based in Denver, Colorado, is developing the Crusader X vehicle, whose design is spartan compared to most other designs. CrusaderX consists of a “sled” pulled aloft by two parallelclusters of rockets. Six hydrogen peroxide and alco-hol liquid-fuel engines will generate 1,334-2,224newtons (300-500 pounds-force) of thrust each topropel the vehicle. The crew will rely on pressuresuits to provide life support. Passengers will experi-ence lift-off accelerations of 4 gs after a ten-secondengine run-up. Powered flight will last 60 seconds,after which the vehicle will then enter a ballistictrajectory. Presumably, at apogee a passenger mightbe able to jump off for a solo parachute descent.The launch vehicle will descend to a water landingusing a ballute and parafoil.

Micro-Space is a six-person team led byRichard Speck. The team is currently engaged inthe testing and development of the Crusader X.

Subscale versions of the liquid booster rockets havebeen flown. A crew cabin mock-up and a half-scaleversion of the vehicle’s inter-rocket pod structurehave also been fabricated. Parts of the full-scaleboosters are said to be in the company’s possession.Initial flight-testing was to have begun in late 2003, but there have been no public reports of the proceedings.

PanAero, Inc.

PanAero, Inc. is a Chantilly, Virginia-based firmthat has developed numerous two-stage-to-orbitvehicle concepts, including the Condor-X rocketglider. It features a fuselage mounted in front of alarge wing that supports eight rocket pods forpropulsion. The flight profile calls for a horizontaltakeoff followed by a slow climb to 35 kilometers(22 miles) at a speed of 370 kilometers per hour(226 miles per hour). This slow cruise through thedensest layer of the atmosphere is needed to pre-vent air pressure from damaging the fabric-coveredaluminum structure. Once at that altitude, the vehiclepitches up for a near-vertical climb through 70 kilo-meters (43 miles), after which the rocket enginesare shut down.

After burnout, the Condor-X continues on aparabolic trajectory with a 100-kilometer (62-mile)apogee. Its large wing design serves as a speedbrake and parachute during reentry to slow thevehicle down. The cabin is lowered by cablesbeneath the wing to enable the structure to act likea parachute for part of the descent profile, until thevehicle falls to an altitude of 6,000 meters (20,000feet). Following this, the cabin retracts, and a gliderlanding brings the vehicle back to Earth at the orig-inal takeoff airstrip.

Len Cormier, a former naval aviator and engi-neer, leads the four-member team. If the Condor-Xdesign is successful, the company will then focus





on payload-carrying suborbital missions in order tofund further activities. Serving space tourists isviewed as a tertiary goal for the company’s newvehicle. Little information is available about theCondor X development status beyond the conceptdefinition stage.

Development of the Condor-X concept has continued past the awarding of the X Prize.PanAero seeks to convert the design into a scaled-down aircraft with an extremely low wing loading.The new vehicle is intended to: set altitude recordsfor rocket-propelled aircraft; launch a one-ton rock-et from 35 kilometers (22 miles) capable of placing20-kilogram (44-pound) payloads into orbit for$100,000 a flight; and perform other high-altitudelong-duration missions at a lower cost than existingaircraft.17

Rocketplane Ltd.

Rocketplane Ltd.,formerly known asPioneer Rocketplane,is proceeding withthe development ofits Rocketplane XPsuborbital vehicle.

The Rocketplane XP traces its heritage to an early1990s Air Force spaceplane concept called BlackHorse. Pioneer Rocketplane developed a derivativedesign that it called Pathfinder that has since evolvedinto the Rocketplane XP vehicle. The RocketplaneXP is powered by two conventional jet engines anda single 133,440-newton (30,000-pounds-force) liquid oxygen/kerosene rocket engine developed byORBITEC. The 8,165-kilogram (18,000-pound) XPwill take off under jet power from an airport andclimb to about 6096 meter (20,000 feet), and thenignite its rocket engine for a two-minute burn. Thevehicle flies a ballistic trajectory to an altitude ofover 100 kilometers (62 miles). After reentry theRocketplane XP reignites its jet engines for a runway landing.

Rocketplane Ltd. moved its offices fromCalifornia to Oklahoma in 2004, opening offices inOklahoma City. The company has raised over $30million and qualified for investment tax creditsfrom the State of Oklahoma in January 2004.George French is president of Rocketplane, while

company co-founder Mitchell Burnside Clapp wasnamed Director of Flight Systems at the companyin August 2004. The company plans to begin commercial flights of the XP from the OklahomaSpaceport in Burns Flat, Oklahoma, by January2007. In October 2004 the company announced it had entered into a partnership with IncredibleAdventures, of Sarasota, Florida, to market touristflights on the XP once it enters service. The passenger price will be $99,500.

Scaled Composites

Scaled Composites of Mojave, California, has longbeen recognized as a creator of revolutionary aircraft. They are the developers of the Voyager air-craft that became the first to fly around the worldnonstop without refueling. The company with sponsorship from computer magnate, Paul Allenrecently completed privately funded human spaceefforts with its Tier One program.

Tier One consists of two vehicles: a carrieraircraft called White Knight and a rocketplanenamed SpaceShipOne. White Knight is a jet aircraftpowered by two J-85-GE-5 engines that generate34,250 newtons (7,700 pounds-force) of thrust.White Knight features a 25-meter (82-foot) wingwith the fuselage mounted at the top of an anhedral.Equally-spaced twin booms serve as both landinggear and tail assemblies. SpaceShipOne is mountedexternally below the fuselage.

SpaceShipOne is carried aloft by White Knightto an altitude of about 15,240 meters (50,000 feet), ajourney that takes about one hour from takeoff. Atthat point SpaceShipOne detaches from WhiteKnight and fires its single rocket engine. The SpaceDev-developed engine is a hybrid rocket motorusing hydroxyl-terminated polybutadiene (HTPB),and nitrous oxidizer. The engine burns for up to 90

seconds, propelling the vehicle to a maximum altitude of over 100 kilometers (62 miles) andspeeds in excess of Mach 3.

SpaceShipOne’s wing employs variablegeometry to a safe or “carefree” descent. Afterapogee, the rear of the wing tilts up at a 60-degreeangle into a “feather” position. This high-drag attitude permits the craft to descend in a stable configuration, requiring little effort by the pilot tomaintain. Once below 24,384 meters (80,000 feet),the wing reverts to its original position for theunpowered drop back to the originating runway.

Since the public unveiling of the Tier Oneprogram in April 2003, Scaled Composites has putboth vehicles through an extensive flight programat Mojave Airport, California. Captive carry flights,where SpaceShipOne remained attached to WhiteKnight, started in May 2003, with glide tests ofSpaceShipOne beginning in August. On December17, 2003, SpaceShipOne performed its first pow-ered flight, igniting its engine for 15 seconds,reaching Mach 1.2 and 20,665 meters (67,800 feet)altitude. Scaled conducted two more powered testflights on April 8 and May 13, 2004, flying up toMach 2.5 and 64,435 meters (211,400 feet) on theMay flight.

On June 21, 2004, SpaceShipOne performedits fourth powered test flight and its first attempt tobreak the 100-kilometer (62-mile) boundary ofspace. A roll oscillation shortly after engine ignitionand a trim control malfunction late in the poweredportion of the flight caused a trajectory excursion of approximately 30 kilometers (19 miles). Thatexcursion kept the vehicle from achieving itsplanned maximum altitude of nearly 110 kilometers(68 miles), but it did make it to 100,124 meters(328,491 feet), just above the 100-kilometer (62-mile) mark. For that achievement the FAA awardedpilot Mike Melvill the first-ever pair of commercialastronaut wings.

On July 27, 2004 Scaled Composites formallyannounced its intent to perform the two flightsrequired to win the Ansari X Prize, with the firstscheduled for September 29, 2004. On that flight,also flown by Melvill, SpaceShipOne avoided the

trajectory excursion experienced in June, but did gointo a roll near the end of the powered portion ofthe flight. Despite the roll the vehicle reached analtitude of 102,870 meters (337,500 feet) and glidedback to a safe landing. The flight was officially certified by the Ansari X Prize judging team as asuccessful first X Prize attempt flight dubbed X1.

On October 4 SpaceShipOne flew its secondAnsari X Prize flight, X2, with Brian Binnie pilot-ing the spacecraft. The vehicle avoided the rollsexperienced during the previous flight and easilybroke the 100-kilometer milestone, reaching a peakaltitude of 112,000 meters (367,442 feet) beforegliding back to a successful landing at MojaveAirport. The prize judging team certified this a successful flight the same day and declaredSpaceShipOne the winner of the prize.

Scaled Composites entered the history booksin April 2004 when it received the world’s firstlicense for a reusable, suborbital, piloted launchvehicle from the FAA. The license, LRLS 04-067,became effective on April 1, 2004. The license covers SpaceShipOne launch activities fromMojave Airport and remains in effect for one year.

The Tier One effort has been financially sup-ported exclusively by Paul Allen, a billionaire whoco-founded software company Microsoft. Allen andScaled Composites CEO Burt Rutan formed a jointventure called Mojave Aerospace Ventures (MAV)that owns the intellectual property of the Tier Oneprogram. On September 27, 2004, MAV signed anagreement to license that technology to VirginGroup, a British conglomerate run by Sir RichardBranson. Virgin has created a new subsidiary,Virgin Galactic, which plans to contract with ScaledComposites to build suborbital vehicles based onSpaceShipOne, but with the ability to carry up tofive passengers. The first of those vehicles, dubbedVirgin SpaceShip (VSS) Enterprise, is expected toenter service in 2007.

In November 2004 Mojave AerospaceVentures was presented with a check for $10 mil-lion and a trophy for capturing the Ansari X Prizein a ceremony at the St. Louis Science Center in St.Louis, Missouri.



Space Transport Corporation

Space TransportCorporation (STC),located in Forks,Washington, entered theAnsari X Prize compe-tition in December2003. The companyplans to develop theRubicon Space TourismVehicle, which, unlikemost other vehicles ofcompeting teams, usessolid-propellant motors.Its initial design incor-porates a cluster ofseven, 30-centimeter

(12-inch) diameter, 3-meter (10-foot) long solidrocket motors capped by a cylinder and nose coneassembly that will contain the crew compartment,avionics, and recovery system. Overall, the vehiclewill be about 7 meters (23 feet) tall, 97 centimeters(38 inches) in diameter, and weigh 2,494 kilograms(5,500 pounds) at takeoff.18

Launch will occur from a location near the Pacific coast of the Olympic Peninsula inWashington State. The motors will ignite sequential-ly in opposed pairs, with the central engine ignitinglast. The Rubicon will then follow a computer-guided parabolic flight path to reach suborbit. Aparachute recovery system will be used to slow thevehicle down enough to permit a safe ocean landing.Total flight time is expected to be about 25 minutes.The Rubicon will use GPS to advise the recoveryvessels of its location. Following extraction, STCplans to refurbish the vehicle’s motor casings for upto five launches before they are discarded.

The firm’s two founders and sole employees,Eric Meier and Phillip Storm, began testing compo-nents for their Rubicon Space Tourism Vehicle in2002. A number of volunteers work on the project,which has been supported by local businesses.Although STC plans to initially focus on the subor-

bital tourist market, the company is also looking tothe small payload market as a potential revenuesource for its long-term endeavors, and is designingan unmanned launch vehicle called the Nano-Satellite Orbital Launch Vehicle (N-SOLV).

The STC team is currently involved in testingand production of components for their vehicle. It states that development of the Rubicon’s attitudecontrol system and associated inertial sensing sys-tems is complete and that the systems are ready forinstallation. In March 2004, STC conducted a suc-cessful test firing of its full-scale solid rocket motor.STC conducted an unsuccessful test flight of ascaled-down version of the Rubicon in August 2004.The vehicle exploded shortly after leaving thelaunch pad due to a rupture of one of its solid rocket motors.

SpaceDev

SpaceDev, a company that has established itself inthe small satellite and propulsion fields, has recent-ly signaled its intent to enter the commercial subor-bital vehicle market as well. In September 2004 thecompany announced plans to develop DreamChaser, a SRLV. The vehicle, superficially similarin shape to NASA’s cancelled X-34 vehicle, is awinged vehicle that will take off vertically using asingle hybrid rocket motor. The motor, using HTPBand nitrous oxide, will generate 444,800 newtons(100,000 pounds-force) of thrust. The vehicle, capa-ble of carrying several passengers, will fly to 160kilometers (100 miles) altitude before gliding backto a runway landing.

SpaceDev, based in Poway, California, andrun by company founder Jim Benson, has alreadydeveloped a number of smaller hybrid rocketmotors based on intellectual property from thedefunct American Rocket Company (AMROC). InSeptember 2003 SpaceDev won a contract fromScaled Composites to provide the hybrid rocketmotors for the Tier One program. SpaceDev plansto have the Dream Chaser enter service as soon as2008 if the program is fully funded.



TGV Rockets

TGV Rockets, ofNorman, Oklahoma, isactively developing asuborbital vehiclecalled MICHELLE-B.MICHELLE (anacronym for ModularIncremental CompactHigh Energy Low-costLaunch Experiment),will be 15 meters (48

feet) tall and weigh 38,556 kilograms (85,000pounds). The vehicle will use six pressure-fed liq-uid oxygen and kerosene engines, each capable ofgenerating 133,440 newtons (30,000 pounds-force)of thrust. MICHELLE-B’s flight profile calls for avertical launch to an altitude of over 100 kilometers(62 miles) followed by a vertical descent with theassistance of a drag augmentation system involvingdrag panels deployed from the sides of the vehicle.The engines are used later for landing after thevehicle has descended below 3,000 meters (10,000feet). Passengers in the pressurized cabin shouldexpect to experience over 3 minutes of microgravi-ty and no more than 4.6 gs during the flight; theywill experience only 30 seconds over 3 gs as thevehicle descends. Unlike some other vertical take-off, vertical landing SRLV designs, theMICHELLE-B will be actively piloted during itsdescent. TGV believes that manual control willimprove the system’s reliability and shorten thevehicle’s development cycle.

TGV moved from Maryland to Oklahoma in2003 and has a working relationship with theUniversity of Oklahoma, involving sponsoredresearch for several students and professors. TGVexpects to spend about $50 million building theMICHELLE-B SRLV - approximately the sameamount spent to build the DC-X a decade ago.MICHELLE-B served as TGV’s entry in the AnsariX Prize competition, but the vehicle is primarilyintended to serve science and technology cus-tomers. The company anticipates initiating a flight-testing program by late 2007 followed by its proposed revenue service if all goes as planned.19

Vanguard Spacecraft

Vanguard Spacecraft entered theAnsari X Prize competition in May2003 with its vehicle, Eagle. TheEagle uses a three-stage combinationof twelve liquid engines and four solidrocket motors, with a total thrust of1.78 million newtons (400,000pounds-force), to boost the vehicle to an altitude of 100 kilometers (62miles). It has both drogue and mainparachutes that deploy to slow the

vehicle prior to splashdown. The vehicle will be able to transport three passengers or 270 kilograms (595 pounds) of payload while exerting a maximumof 3 g of acceleration force during the trip. The bal-listic flight profile will also offer up to five minutesof microgravity.

Steve McGrath, of Bridgewater, Massachusetts,leads the six-person team, primarily drawn from thehigh-power amateur rocketry community. The teamhas performed a number of small-scale modellaunches to date, but has made limited publicprogress on the actual vehicle.

XCOR Aerospace

XCOR Aerospace of Mojave, California seeks todevelop rocket-powered aerospace vehicles to bringspace closer to the public. The company was founded in November 1999 with a small group ofemployees, many of whom previously worked forRotary Rocket Company. Its primary focus hasbeen engine development, and has built and testedengines with thrust ratings ranging from 67 to8,000 newtons (15 to 1,800 pounds-force).





XCOR is taking an incremental approach toits reusable suborbital vehicle. To understand rock-et-propelled aircraft operations, it initially createdthe EZ-Rocket. The EZ-Rocket is an adaptation ofthe Long-EZ homebuilt aircraft. The EZ-Rocketemploys twin isopropyl alcohol/LOX liquid-fuelrocket engines to produce 3,560 newtons (800pounds-force) of thrust. The engines give the craft amaximum speed of 360 kilometers per hour (220miles per hour). The estimated ceiling is 3,000meters (10,000 feet). To date, the aircraft has beenflown fifteen times, demonstrating safe, reliablerocket-powered flight operations.

The long-term goal of the firm is the creationof its general-purpose suborbital vehicle calledXerus. This small canard and delta-winged craft isexpected to carry space tourists and scientific pay-loads to the edge of space and back. Maximumspeeds are foreseen to be around Mach 4. The vehicle will use a cluster of liquid oxygen/keroseneengines to take off from a runway and fly to 65kilometers (40 miles) altitude, after which theengines shut down. Xerus then coasts to 100 kilometers (62 miles) altitude before gliding back for a runway landing.

XCOR foresees several markets for the Xerus.The vehicle can carry a pilot and single passengeron space tourism missions, or a pilot and scientificpayloads that need to experience microgravity orextreme altitudes. Additionally, the Xerus will constitute the first stage of a future microsatellite delivery system. XCOR plans to offer launches of10-kilogram (22-pound) satellites for $500,000.

An intermediate vehicle called the Sphinx isalso currently in development. Specific perform-ance details are currently not available. A crew oftwo will control the vehicle, which is intended tooperate somewhere between the performance of EZ Rocket and Xerus to demonstrate XCOR’s versatility in launch vehicle technology.

On April 21, 2004, XCOR received an FAAlaunch license, the second ever awarded. Thelicense, LRLS 04-068, covers 35 missions of theSphinx vehicle, a technology demonstrator for theXerus, at Mojave Airport through the end of 2006.

The license does not cover passenger or other revenue flights until after the initial test flights are completed.



Company Vehicle Name Vehicle Type Takeoff Recovery/LandingAcceleration Engineering Lucky Seven Liquid Fuel Rocket Vertical/Land Parafoil/Land

Advent Launch Services Advent Liquid Fuel Winged

Rocket Vertical/Water Glide/Water

American Astronautics The Spirit of Liberty Liquid Fuel Rocket Vertical/Land Parachute/Land

Armadillo Aerospace Black Armadillo Liquid Fuel Rocket Vertical/Land Powered Descent/Land

Beyond-Earth Enterprises Sapphire Solid Fuel Rocket Vertical/Land Parachute/Land

Blue Origin Not Announced Liquid Fuel Rocket Vertical/Land Powered Descent/Land

Fundamental Technology Systems Aurora Liquid Fuel Rocket

Spaceplane Horizontal / Land Glide/Land

High Altitude Research Corporation Liberator Liquid Fuel Rocket Vertical/Water

Platform Parachute/Water

Masten Space Systems XA Liquid Fuel Rocket Vertical/Land Powered

Descent/Land

Micro-Space Crusader X Bipod Rocket Sled Vertical/Land Parafoil/Water

PanAero Condo- X Multi-pod Rocket Glider Horizontal/Land Glide/Land

Rocketplane Limited Rocketplane XP Liquid Fuel Rocket/ Jet Spaceplane Horizontal/Land Horizontal/Land

Scaled Composites SpaceShipOne/ White Knight

Two Stage Aircraft, Rocket Horizontal/Land Glide/Land

Space Transport Corporation Rubicon Solid Fuel Rocket Vertical Parachute/Water

SpaceDev Dream Chaser Hybrid Engine Spaceplane Vertical/Land Glide/Land

TGV Rockets MICHELLE-B Liquid Fuel Rocket Vertical/Land Powered Descent/Land

Vanguard Spacecraft Eagle Three Stage Rocket Vertical/Land Parachute/Water

XCOR Aerospace Xerus Liquid Fuel Rocket Spaceplane Horizontal/Land Glide/Land

Table 2: U.S. Commercial Suborbital Vehicles


Incredible Adventures

Incredible Adventures (IA) of Sarasota, Floridaand Moscow, Russia has been catering to thrill seek-ers since 1993. The company started under the nameMIGS etc, and introduced the concept of touristflights aboard Russian MiG fighter jets. Over theyears IA has expanded its business to include space-related adventures like zero-gravity flights usingRussian IL-76 aircraft, cosmonaut training at StarCity, Russia and high-altitude flights aboard MiG-25fighter jets. In 1996, controlling interest in the com-pany was sold to Norman Fast, a venture capitalistwith experience in the adventure travel industry. Inaddition to Florida and Moscow, IA offers flyingadventures in Australia and South Africa.

Incredible Adventures offers a diversified tourcatalog. Customers can book adventure vacationsfeaturing rides on high performance jet aircraft, his-toric war aircraft, racecars, high-speed power boats,military armored vehicles and submersibles. IA alsooffers a variety of fantasy military missions, body-guard training, high-altitude skydiving, and sharkdiving experiences.

Incredible Adventures recently added subor-bital flights to its offerings. IA has partnered withRocketplane Ltd. to offer flights to 100 km aboardthe Rocketplane XP. Flights are scheduled to beginlaunching from a spaceport in Oklahoma in early2007. The adventure, referred to as CivilianAstronaut Spaceflight Training, is anticipated to be priced at $99,500.20

Space Adventures

Established in 1998, Space Adventures Ltd,headquartered in Arlington, Virginia, has the distinc-tion of being the first provider of orbital trips tospace. At a price reported to be about $20 million,Dennis Tito became the first commercial space pas-senger in April 2001with his 10-day orbital flight tothe International Space Station (ISS), via the RussianSoyuz rocket. Tito was followed by MarkShuttleworth the following April. A third orbitalclient, Gregory Olsen, commenced training in 2004but has been temporarily removed from Soyuz flight

status, pending resolution of a medical issue.Additional orbital candidates are in various stages of discussions or preparations for orbital flight.

Space Adventures expects to offer suborbitalflights by the 2007 timeframe. As with orbital spacetourist flights, the company is positioned to serve asthe tour operator and/or broker between crewed sub-orbital launch vehicle vendors and space travelers.Space Adventures has arrangements with several ofthe Ansari X Prize competitors and other start-updevelopers for transporting passengers. The Xerusspacecraft from XCOR Aerospace and SuborbitalCorporation’s C 21, a mini-shuttle design SOV vehi-cle under development by Russian MyashishchevDesign Bureau; Burt Rutan’s Ansari X-Prize winner-SpaceShipOne ; and Rocketplanes hybrid rocket-powered aircraft design are some of the possible sub-orbital vehicles now featured in Space Adventurescompany publications. Currently, Space Adventuressays that it will offer its flights for fares around$100,000, and has received deposits from over 100 potential customers.21

Virgin Galactic

Even before it won the Ansari X Prize, theefforts of Mojave Aerospace Ventures had begun to attract more investment in space tourism. OnSeptember 27, 2004, MAV signed a $26-millionagreement to license their SRLV technology toVirgin Group, a British conglomerate run by SirRichard Branson. Virgin has created a new sub-sidiary, Virgin Galactic, which plans to contractwith Scaled Composites to build suborbital vehiclesbased on SpaceShipOne, but with the ability tocarry at least five passengers.22 The first of thosevehicles, dubbed Virgin SpaceShip (VSS)Enterprise, is expected to enter service in 2007.

While the vehicle is under development,Virgin Galactic is proceeding with its marketingplans. The company expects to begin takingdeposits on reservations in 2005. An initial pricepoint espoused by the company is $215,000 forthree days of flight training followed by a flight tosuborbital space.

Suborbital Reusable Launch Vehicles and Emerging Markets Space Tourism Company Profiles

Space Tourism Company Profiles

Tourism Company Profiles Suborbital Reusable Launch Vehicles and Emerging Markets


Launch and reentry sites – often referred to as“spaceports” – are the nation’s gateways to andfrom space. Although their individual capabilitiesvary, these facilities provide launch pads and run-ways as well as the infrastructure, equipment, andfuel needed to process launch vehicles and theirpayloads prior to launch. The first such facilities inthe United States emerged in the 1940s, when thefederal government began to build and operatespace launch ranges and bases to meet a variety ofnational needs. While U.S. military and civil gov-ernment agencies were the original and are still the primary users and operators of these facilities, commercial payload customers have become frequent users of federal spaceports as well.

Federal facilities are not the only portals toand from space. The commercial dimension of U.S.space activity is evident not only in the numbers ofcommercially-procured launches but also in thepresence of non-federal launch sites supplementingfederally-operated sites. FAA/AST has licensed theoperations of five non-federal launch sites. Thesespaceports serve both commercial and governmentpayload owners.

This section describes the non-federal domes-tic spaceports capable of supporting reusable subor-bital launch and landing activities. Descriptions andhistories for Mojave, Oklahoma, New Mexico,Mid-Atlantic Regional and Texas spaceports areincluded.

FAA Licensed Spaceports

While the majority of licensed launch activity stilloccurs at U.S. federal ranges, much future launchand reentry activity may originate from private orstate-operated spaceports. In order for a non-federalentity to operate a launch or reentry site in the UnitedStates, it is necessary to obtain a license from thefederal government through FAA/AST. To date,FAA/AST has licensed the operations of five non-federal launch sites, two of which are described inthis section. Three spaceports are co-located withfederal launch sites, including the CaliforniaSpaceport at Vandenberg AFB, California, thespaceport facilities operated by Florida SpaceAuthority (FSA) at Cape Canaveral, and Mid-Atlantic Regional Spaceport (MARS) at WallopsFlight Facility, Virginia. The fourth licensed, non-federal spaceport is Kodiak Launch Complex inAlaska.23 East Kern Airport District of Mojave,California, was awarded the fifth non-federal launchsite operators license in June of 2004. It is also thefirst inland launch siteto receive a license.

Mid-Atlantic Regional Spaceport

The Virginia Space Flight Center (VSFC)traces its beginnings to the Center for CommercialSpace Infrastructure, created in 1992 at Virginia’sOld Dominion University to establish commercialspace research and operations facilities in the state.In 1995, the organization became the VirginiaCommercial Space Flight Authority (VCSFA).

Suborbital Reusable Launch Vehicles and Emerging Markets Spaceports


State/Location Federal Non-Federal Proposed

Alabama √Alaska √

California (Vandenberg AFB) √ √

Florida √ √Mojave Airport, CA √

Nevada √New Mexico √ √Oklahoma √

Texas √Utah √

Virginia √ √Washington √Wisconsin √

Spaceports

Mid-Atlantic Regional Spaceport

Table 3: U.S. Spaceports

Spaceports Suborbital Reusable Launch Vehicles and Emerging Markets


In late 2003, the states of Virginia and Marylandjoined together to cooperatively operate the com-mercial spaceport at Wallops Island. Following thisnew partnership, the spaceport was renamed theMid-Atlantic Regional Spaceport (MARS).

On December 19, 1997, FAA/AST issuedVCSFA a launch site operator’s license for the VSFC.This license was renewed in December 2002 foranother five years. In 1997, VCSFA signed withNASA a Reimbursable Space Act Agreement to usethe Wallops center’s facilities in support of commer-cial launches. This 30-year agreement allows VCSFAaccess to NASA’s payload integration, launch opera-tions, and monitoring facilities on a non-interference,cost reimbursement basis. NASA and VSFC personnel work together to provide launch services.

MARS owns two launch pads at Wallops.Launch Pad 0-B is capable of supporting a varietyof small- and medium-sized expendable launchvehicles (ELV) with gross liftoff weights of up to225,000 kilograms (496,000 pounds) that can placeup to 4,500 kilograms (9,900 pounds) into LEO. In September 2004, MARS completed constructionof a 31-meter (103-foot) tall Movable ServiceStructure (MSS) on Launch Pad 0-B. The MSS pro-vides access and protection from the environmentfor launch vehicles while they are on the launchpad. The site also includes a complete command,control, and communications interface with thelaunch range. An Air Force Orbital/SuborbitalProgram (OSP) Minotaur mission is currentlyscheduled for this site.24

In March 2000, VSFC acquired a secondlaunch pad from EER Systems of Maryland.Launch Pad 0-A was built in 1994 for theConestoga launch vehicle, which launched once inOctober 1995. VSFC started refurbishing LaunchPad 0-A and its 25-meter (82-foot) service tower inJune 2000. Launch Pad 0-A will support launchesof small ELVs with gross liftoff weights of up to90,000 kilograms (198,000 pounds) and that arecapable of placing up to 1,350 kilograms (3,000pounds) into LEO. Launch Pad 0-A can support anumber of small solid-propellant boosters, includ-ing the Athena 1, Minotaur, and Taurus. LaunchPad 0-B can support larger vehicles, including the

Athena 2. MARS also has an interest in supportingfuture RLVs, possibly using its launch pads or threerunways at Wallops Flight Facility.

NASA is in the process of constructing a $4-million logistics and processing facility at theWallops facility, capable of handling payloads of upto 5,700 kilograms (12,600 pounds). MARS assist-ed in developing the facility requirements and willbe working with tenants and programs in the facili-ty.25 Phase 1 of construction is nearing completion.The facility will include high bay and clean roomenvironments. In conjunction with NASA Wallops,MARS is adding a new mobile Liquid FuelingFacility (LFF) capable of supporting a wide rangeof liquid-fueled and hybrid rockets. Construction ofthe LFF is currently in final integration phase.26

Mojave Civilian Flight Test Center

The East Kern County, California, govern-ment established Mojave Airport in 1935 inMojave, California. The airport is owned and operated by the East Kern Airport District, which isa special district with an elected Board of Directorsand a General Manager. The airport serves as aCivilian Flight Test Center, the location of theNational Test Pilot School (NTPS), and as a basefor modifications of major military jets and civilian aircraft.

Major facilities at the Mojave Airport includethe terminal and industrial area, hangars, offices,maintenance shop, and fuel services facilities.Rocket engine test stands are located in the north-

Mojave Airport Civilian Flight Test Center

Suborbital Reusable Launch Vehicles and Emerging Markets Spaceports


ern portion of the airport. Aircraft parking capacityincludes 600 tie downs and 60 T-hangars. TheMojave Airport also includes aircraft storage and areconditioning facility and is home to several indus-trial operations, such as BAE Systems, Fiberset,Scaled Composites, AVTEL, XCOR Aerospace,Orbital Sciences Corporation, Interorbital Systems,and General Electric. The Civilian Flight TestCenter consists of several test stands, an air controltower, a rocket test stand, engineering facilities, anda high bay building.

In the last two years, XCOR Aerospace hasbeen performing flight tests at this facility andrecently had multiple successful tests with the EZ-Rocket. On the 100th anniversary of the WrightBrothers’ first powered flight, December 17, 2003,Scaled Composites flew its SpaceShipOne fromMojave, breaking the speed of sound in the firstmanned supersonic flight by an aircraft developedby a small company’s private, non-governmentaleffort.

A major development milestone was reachedJune 17, 2004, when the FAA/AST awarded alaunch site operator license to the East Kern AirportDistrict. This license permits suborbital spaceflights to be conducted from Mojave Airport. Thesite license was not a requirement for launches ofSpaceShipOne because the vehicle is air-launched;but is required for XCOR Aerospace RLV missionsthat are FAA-licensed.

The international news media descended onMojave Airport for the first privately built mannedspaceship to break the barrier of space in June 2004by Scaled Composites and then again in lateSeptember and early October 2004 when MojaveAerospace Ventures won the Ansari X Prize withtwo flights of SpaceShipOne.

Proposed Spaceports Seeking an FAALicense

Oklahoma Spaceport

The State of Oklahoma is interested in developing a broader space industrial base and aspaceport. In 1999 the Oklahoma State Legislaturecreated the Oklahoma Space Industry DevelopmentAuthority (OSIDA). OSIDA promotes the develop-ment of spaceport facilities, space exploration,space education, and space-related industries inOklahoma. In 2000, the state legislature passed aneconomic incentive law offering tax credits, taxexemptions, and accelerated depreciation rates forcommercial spaceport-related activities. In 2002,OSIDA awarded a contract to SRS Technologies toconduct an environmental impact study. The study,expected to continue through Summer 2005,27 is acritical step toward receiving a launch site opera-tor’s license from FAA/AST. In the fall of 2003,OSIDA took another step toward receiving itslicense by awarding a contract to The AerospaceCorporation to conduct a safety study of the pro-posed site and operations.

Clinton-Sherman Industrial Airpark, located atBurns Flat, is the preferred site for a future space-port in Oklahoma. Existing infrastructure includes a4,100-meter (13,500-foot) runway, a large mainte-nance and repair hangar, utilities, a rail spur, and 12 square kilometers (5 square miles) of open land.The Oklahoma Spaceport will provide launch andsupport services for RLVs and may become opera-

Burns Flat, Proposed Site of the Oklahoma Spaceport

Spaceports Suborbital Reusable Launch Vehicles and Emerging Markets


tional in late 2006 or early 2007, becoming one ofthe first inland launch sites in the United States.The State of Oklahoma offers several incentives,valued at over $128 million over 10 years, to attractspace companies to the state. Also, the state willprovide a $15-million tax credit to the first corpora-tion that meets specific qualifying criteria, includ-ing equity capitalization of $10 million and the creation of at least 100 Oklahoma jobs. Someorganizations also may qualify for other state taxcredits, tax refunds, tax exemptions, and trainingincentives. OSIDA has signed Memoranda ofUnderstanding with several companies for use ofthe Burns Flat site.

Southwest Regional Spaceport

The State of New Mexico continues to makeprogress in the development of the SouthwestRegional Spaceport (SRS). The proposed site of thespaceport is a 70-square-kilometer (27-square-mile)parcel of open land in the south central part of thestate at approximately 1,430 meters (4,700 feet)above sea level. The spaceport concept is to supportall classes of RLVs serving suborbital trajectoriesas well as equatorial, polar, and ISS orbits, and toprovide support services for payload integration,launch, and landing. The facility will be able toaccommodate both vertical and horizontal launchesand landings, and will include two launch complex-es, a runway, an aviation complex, a payloadassembly complex, other support facilities, and acryogenic fuel plant. The SRS is supported by thestate through the New Mexico Office for SpaceCommercialization, part of the New MexicoEconomic Development Department. New Mexicowas selected to host the X Prize Cup in May 2004.The X Prize Cup Exhibition is scheduled forOctober 2005 at White Sands Missile Range(WSMR) and the X Prize Cup First Flight competi-tions are scheduled for October 2006 at WSMR.

Starchaser, a former X Prize contender basedin the United Kingdom, has established a U.S. com-pany and is also interested in launching from NewMexico. Starchaser Industries Incorporated, theAmerican branch of Starchaser Industries, hopes tooffer microsatellite launches and eventually spacetourism from SRS beginning as early as 2006.

Texas Spaceports

Although several spaceports are currentlybeing planned in the state of Texas, none haveannounced plans to accommodate SRLVs.However, Armadillo Aerospace does use a site inRockwall County, Texas for short developmental“boosted hops” of their vehicle.28 Armadillo plansto move testing to SRS once they earn a FAAlaunch license and are permitted to conduct enginefirings longer than 15 seconds. Details on thedevelopment of the other Texan spaceports, such as the West Texas Spaceport, can be found in the FAA's 2005 U.S. Commercial SpaceTransportation Developments and Concepts:Vehicles, Technologies and Spaceports report, available from http://ast.faa.gov.

Suborbital Reusable Launch Vehicles and Emerging Markets A Brief History of Major U.S. Suborbital Vehicles


Historically, suborbital ELVs have been used tocarry experiments designed to sample or otherwisemeasure the upper atmosphere and its behaviors,test new technologies related to spaceflight, andconduct astronomical observations. SuborbitalELVs also include intercontinental ballistic missiles(ICBMs), some intermediate range ballistic missiles(IRBMs), and anti-missile targets and interceptors.

The remainder of this section describes the evolution of nine different suborbital vehiclesdeveloped, tested, and launched between the early1940s and the present.

The WAC-Corporal (1944-1950)

The Army pursued a rocketprogram during World WarII that eventually led to asuborbital rocket calledWAC. It is not clear whatthe term “WAC” means,though some have suggest-ed that it was an acronymfor “Without AttitudeControl,” referring to thefact that the simple rockethad no stabilization orguidance system. In 1944,the Army Ordnance

Department began funding a rocket developmentprogram for the California Institute of Technology(CIT). The ORDCIT (for “Ordnance” and CIT) pro-ject’s first product was the Private A, a small solid-propellant rocket designed to test basic principles oflaunch operations and flight stability. Over twentyPrivate A rockets were flown during December1944. The ultimate goal of ORDCIT was the development of the Corporal, a liquid-fueled surface-to-surface missile. By late 1944, enoughprogress had been made to initiate the developmentof a small sounding rocket based on Corporal.

The planned sounding rocket was calledWAC-Corporal, and was to carry 11 kilograms (25pounds) of instrumentation to an altitude of at least30 kilometers (100,000 feet). The WAC-Corporalwas boosted into the air by a Tiny Tim solid-fueled

booster (a heavy air-to-surface missile of the U.S. Navy), and powered by a liquid-fueled sustainer engine.

Following preliminary booster tests with subscale and dummy WACs, the first flight of a full WAC-Corporal occurred in October 1945. Itreached an altitude of 70 kilometers (43 miles), but the nose-cone recovery mechanism failed.

After the initial WAC-Corporal rounds hadbeen expended in 1946, a slightly improved WACB model was built. This rocket had a lighter engine,a modified structure, and a new telemetry system.Between December 1946 and mid-1947, eight WACB rockets were launched, after which the WAC-Corporal program was terminated. Although it wassoon overshadowed as a high-altitude researchrocket by the V-2, the WAC-Corporal formed thebase for the development of a more capable anduseful general-purpose sounding rocket, the RTV-N-8 Aerobee. Slightly modified WAC Corporalrockets were also used as the second stage of theRTV-G-4 Bumper test vehicle.

The WAC-Corporal was the first Americanrocket to escape the Earth’s atmosphere and wouldlead to the Aerobee sounding rocket, the Vanguardlaunch vehicle, the Titan missile, and (according tosome experts) the Chinese Long March family.

The V-2 (1945-1952)

Operation Paperclip was initiat-ed in 1945 by the United Statesmilitary. American (and Soviet)forces recruited German engi-neers and scientists responsiblefor the development and launchof rocket-propelled vehicles forthe Nazi army at the conclusionof World War II. The U.S.Government recognized that theV-2 represented a giant leap in

technology, and set up Operation Paperclip toacquire rocket engineers, rocket components, andany other form of technology deemed critical toAmerican national security.

Appendix: A Brief History of Major U.S. Suborbital Vehicles

A Brief History of Major U.S. Suborbital Vehicles Suborbital Reusable Launch Vehicles and Emerging Markets


Using about a hundred acquired V-2s, thou-sands of components, and a few hundred Germanengineers and scientists, the Americans succeededin learning about advanced rocket technology. TheV-2s launched by the United States Army fromWhite Sands Missile Range in New Mexico duringthe 1940s were modified and improved with eachflight. Early V-2 launches included telemetry packages, but it became clear that the V-2s couldalso carry scientific payloads. It was not knownuntil much later that the Germans had alreadylaunched scientific experiments with even earlierversions of the rocket during World War II.

In 1946, the Naval Research Laboratory(NRL) was invited to participate in the Army’s V-2rocket program. As an established group ready tocarry out upper atmospheric research, the NRLbecame the prime agency for conducting researchwith the V-2 program and for developing the tech-nology to carry out the missions. Eighty experi-ments were performed between 1946 and 1951. Asa result, new and valuable information was gainedabout the nature of the Earth’s upper atmosphereand ionosphere.

The Bumper-WAC (1948-1952)

The Army also merged eight V-2s with the WAC-Corporal tosupport “Project Hermes,” aresearch effort conductedbetween 1948 and 1952. Thisproject aimed to study technicalproblems associated with rocketstage separation, high altitudeflight dynamics and high alti-tude rocket stage ignition. TheWAC-Corporal’s liquid-fueledstage was simply mounted onthe nose of the V-2 to create the

Bumper-WAC. The WAC-Corporal second stageremained atop the nose of the V-2 for the firstminute of flight. The V-2 then shut down, after providing a high altitude “bump” for the WAC-Corporal second stage. Following the first stageshutdown, the WAC-Corporal second stage ignitedand fired for 45 seconds, completing the remainderof the flight.

The first six Bumper-WAC rockets werelaunched from White Sands. The first of these waslaunched on May 13, 1948. The vehicle flew to analtitude of 129 kilometers (80 miles) at a maximumspeed of 4,410 kilometers per hour (2,740 miles perhour). Five more test flights were conducted atWhite Sands with mixed results. Bumper #5,launched on February 24, 1949, was the most successful launch test in the White Sands Bumper-WAC series and marked the first time a man-madeobject reached space. In 1950, Bumper-WAC testsmoved to Cape Canaveral.

The Viking (1946-1957)

Meanwhile, recognizing that ithad run out of V-2s to use forresearch projects, the NRLdirected the development of anew sounding rocket calledViking, which was designed andbuilt by the Glenn L. MartinCompany in 1946. Vikingemployed a new innovation, agimbaled motor for steering andintermittent gas jets for stabiliz-

ing the vehicle after the main power cutoff. Theengine was one of the first three large, liquid-pro-pelled, rocket-powered engines produced in theUnited States. A total of twelve Viking rockets werelaunched from 1949 to 1954. The first attained an80-kilometer (50-mile) altitude and the eleventhViking rose to 254 kilometers (158 miles), an alti-tude record for a single-stage rocket at the time.Through these Viking firings, the NRL was first tomeasure temperature, pressure, and winds in theupper atmosphere and electron density in the iono-sphere, and to record the ultraviolet spectra of thesun. NRL also took the first high-altitude picturesof the Earth.

On October 5, 1954, during a launch overNew Mexico, a camera mounted in an NRL Vikingrocket took the first picture of a hurricane and atropical storm, from altitudes as high as 160 kilo-meters (100 miles). The picture covered an areamore than 1,600 kilometers (1,000 miles) in diame-ter, including Mexico and an area from Texas toIowa. This was also the first natural color picture ofEarth from rocket altitudes. The success NRL



achieved in this series of experiments encouragedLaboratory scientists to believe that, with a morepowerful engine and the addition of upper stages,the Viking rocket could be made a vehicle capableof launching an Earth satellite. This eventually ledto the Navy’s Vanguard project.

The Aerobee (1946-1965)

The NRL also used the Aerobee,supplementing the Viking capa-bility for research. The Aerobeewas developed from the Army’ssuccessful WAC-Corporal program. The rocket, whichemerged in 1946 from a sound-ing rocket program managed bythe U.S. Navy Bureau ofOrdnance, was developedbecause the Navy wanted a

vehicle that was less expensive and less cumber-some than the V-2. The first live firing of anAerobee occurred in November 1947, and theAerobee was in wide use by U.S. military researchagencies from 1950 until the 1970s. These relative-ly inexpensive rockets were used for 31 upperatmosphere experiments specially suited to theircapability. Later redesigned into the Aerobee-Hiwith an enlarged fuel tank, it was used for threeflights in 1957 in conjunction with the InternationalGeophysical Year.

In the 1950s, the NRL used a balloon-rocketcombination called Rockoon in experiments toinvestigate solar radiation and cosmic rays. Theplastic balloon lifted the Deacon rocket to 21,300meters (70,000 feet) where it was fired by a pressure-sensing device. Using this technique, therocket could carry a 23-kilogram (50-pound) payload to an altitude of more than 130 kilometers(80 miles). Finally, the NRL devised systems usingNike boosters with several different second-stagerockets. These vehicles were used primarily tostudy the sun during the 1957-1958 InternationalGeophysical Year. The NRL also launched Arcassounding rockets (together with Air ForceCambridge Research Laboratory) from 1959 to the late 1960s, and the Arcon rocket from 1958 to 1959.

The Nike (1946 to present)

The Nike booster was intro-duced in 1946 during the development of the Nike-Ajaxsurface-to-air missile for theDepartment of Defense. Later itwas used occasionally as asounding rocket, but much moreoften as the boost stage of amulti-stage sounding rocket.The Nike-Deacon version (17flights) used from 1953 to 1957was much cheaper than the

Aerobee, and unlike Rockoon could be launchedfrom fixed launchers in two-and-a-half hours. Itwas used for “falling sphere” air density studies,atmospheric soundings, and for heat transfer studieslaunched from Wallops Island (then operated by theNational Advisory Committee on Aeronautics, orNACA). From 1956 to 1961, Nike-Recruit andNike-T40 versions were introduced to test ballisticcapsule models for a total of eight flights. NACAused a Nike-Nike combination in the 1950s to studyaerodynamic and thermodynamic effects on sub-scale aircraft models. Twenty years later the AirForce flew a series of Nike-Nike Smoke rockets,each with a payload consisting of a separable ten-degree nose cone filled with titanium tetrachloridesolution. This left a smoke trail in the sky, allowingwinds aloft to be determined by optical measure-ment. The Air Force was firing the rocket as late as1979, when its 16th and final flight was conductedfrom Chilca in Peru.

Perhaps the most successful version of theNike was the Nike-Cajun combination, introducedin 1956. The Nike-Cajun was the most oftenlaunched sounding rocket in the United States at714 total flights, and second worldwide only to theSoviet MMR-06. The Cajun motor was developedfor the NASA in the 1950s by Thiokol, providing amore modern but still affordable replacement forthe World War II-era Deacon. This rocket was usedto launch a wide variety of payloads, including gen-eral upper atmosphere experiments, magnetic fieldexperiments, horizon photography to obtain weath-er data, ionosphere experiments, and astronomypayloads. While the Nike-Cajun was selected as theNike-Deacon replacement by the Air Force and

NACA, the Navy selected the competing Asp motorin 1957 for its sounding rocket projects, havinglaunched the variant 78 times until 1963. AfterNASA took over the Navy’s sounding rockets, thenew organization fired the remaining rockets andthen converted to their favored Nike-Cajun configu-ration in 1963. NASA also used a Nike-Apacheconfiguration from 1958 to late 1980 (697 flights),and the Nike-Tomahawk from 1963 to 1995 (395flights). These rockets were launched from sites allover the world, including those mentioned abovefor earlier Nike variants, and from lesser-knownsites like Alcantara in Brazil, Fort Churchill inCanada, and Arecibo in Puerto Rico. There werenine variants of the Nike.

The Nike-Tomahawk, Nike-Orion and Taurus-Nike-Tomahawk versions are still used today,launched primarily from NASA’s Wallops FlightCenter. A Nike-Black Brant version is also in usetoday, and is a combination Nike booster with aCanadian Black Brant first stage.

Loki (1951-1985)

The Loki was anAmerican unguidedsolid-propellant anti-aircraft rocket adapted to use as ameteorologicalsounding rocket. In1956, the CooperDevelopmentCorporation (CDC)

received a contract for large-scale production ofsounding rockets of the Loki-Dart type for use asweather research vehicles. This resulted in theRocksonde family of sounding rockets, of whichseveral thousand were built in the following years.The Rocksonde could reach an altitude of about 60 kilometers (37 miles), and the falling chaff wastracked by a ground-based wind-sensing system toobtain wind speed and direction data from high tomedium altitudes. It continued to be used through-out the 1960s, but was eventually replaced as theAir Force’s Loki-Dart.

In the early 1960s, the low-cost Loki-Dartsounding rockets could only carry a passive chaffpayload to high altitude. For more sophisticatedpayloads like temperature transmitters, the Air

Force had to use the significantly more expensiveArcas rocket. The Loki Dart was eventuallyreplaced in the early 1970s by the larger Super Lokifamily of sounding rockets. The last U.S.Government launch of a Loki series rocket was onDecember 30, 1985 from Wallops Island. However,surplus Lokis continue to support amateur and educational flights in the U.S. and Australia.

Honest John/Taurus (1951 to present)

The Honest John wasthe U.S. Army’s firstnuclear-tipped sur-face-to-surface rocket.This missile’s boosterwas mated to a Nikebooster from 1955 to1967 for a total of 39flights designed to testgliding characteristics,

heat transfer issues, and the parachute system des-tined for use on the Viking Mars lander missions.Other heat transfer tests were conducted between1956 and 1960 using an Honest John-Nike-Recruit(16 flights), Honest John-Nike-T40 (one flight),Honest John-Nike-Deacon (one flight), and HonestJohn-Nike-Nike (21 flights) combinations. Later,the Honest John was incorporated into a rocketcalled the Exos, developed by the University ofMichigan with the assistance of NACA under acontract from the Air Force Cambridge ResearchCenter (AFCRC). It was a three-stage rocket com-bining an Honest John first stage, a Nike Ajax sec-ond stage, and a Thiokol Recruit third stage. Thefirst flight test of an all-up Exos rocket occurred inJune 1958, and the rocket was flown until 1965only 10 times.

The direct descendant of the Honest John missile still in use today is the Taurus (introducedin 1977 and not to be confused with the Taurusorbital launch vehicle from Orbital SciencesCorporation), now mainly used as a booster forsuborbital rockets launched from Wallops.

Terrier (1959-present)

The Terrier missile, developed as the U.S.Navy’s first operational shipborne medium-rangesurface-to-air missile, became the stock from whicha long lineage of sounding rockets emerged.

A Brief History of Major U.S. Suborbital Vehicles Suborbital Reusable Launch Vehicles and Emerging Markets


Several missiles were converted in 1959 as theTerrier-Asp and Terrier ASROC Cajun soundingrockets, and later the very successful Terrier-Tomahawk, launched from Barking Sands, Hawaiiand Eglin, Florida between 1964 to 1980. TheTerrier-Sandhawk was introduced in 1967 and wasused until 1977, having been launched fromJohnston Atoll in the Pacific, Poker Flat in Alaska,and Barking Sands to altitudes of between 350 to450 kilometers (217 to 280 miles). The largerTerrier-Malemute was developed in 1977 and waslaunched until 1990 from Barking Sands, WallopsIsland, Andoya (in Norway), Poker Flat, KwajaleinAtoll, Punta Lobos (in Peru), and Sonde Stromfjord(in Greenland).

The Terrier-Orion is the most recent versionof the Terrier rocket series, first launched in 1994from Wallops Island. This version uses an Orionrocket, developed in the 1960s, as the second stage.The rocket is still in service today, launching fromWallops Island and Woomera in Australia. Slightlydifferent versions of this rocket, the Terrier-Malemute and Terrier-Oriole, are also launchedfrom time to time.



1 Communication with Beyond Earth Enterprises, 15 April 2004.

2 The Futron Corporation study is available for download attheir website http://www.futron.com/spacetourism/

3 Kristina A. Lynch, "Saving the NASA Rocket Program,"Space News, July 19, 2004, p. 13.

4 Ibid.5 Space Launch Corporation Press Release, “The Space

Launch Corporation Successfully Completes Phase 2 ofthe RASCAL Program,” 20 November 2004.

6 TGV Rockets, “Product Description, Section 3.0Commercialization Plan” (http://www.tgv-rockets.com/frm_prod.htm) accessed 20 April 2004.

7 Craig Ryan, “The Pre-Astronauts: Manned Ballooning onthe Threshold of Space,” Naval Institute Press, 1995.

8 Canadian Arrow, “Canadian Arrow Spacediving”,(http://www.canadianarrow.com/spacediving.htm)accessed 28 April 2004.

9 Yahoo Business Week Online, “Fred Smith on the Birthof FedEX”, (http://yahoo.businessweek.com/magazine/content/04_38/b3900032_mz072.htm) accessed 10January 2005.

10 FedEX Corporation, “Fourth Quarter Fiscal 2003 Report,”(http://www.fedex.com/us/investorrelations/downloads/releases/Q4FY03.pdf?link=4) accessed 10 January 2005.

11 Computer World.com “Best Places to Work in 2003:FedEX”, (http://www.computerworld.com/careertopics/careers/bestplaces2003/company/0,5432,541,00.html)accessed 10 January 2005.

12 Churchill, Susanne E. , "Fundamental of Space LifeSciences" Vol. 1, p.77, 1997.

13 Davis, J.R., Jennings, R.T., and Beck BG. "Comparison oftreatment strategies for Space Motion Sickness." ActaAstronaut. Aug. 1993. 29(8):587-91.

14 Futron Corporation, "Space Tourism Market Study", p.16,2002.

15 Advent Launch Services website, April 2004.16 Communication with Beyond Earth Enterprises,

15 April 2004.17 Communication with PanAero, 21 January 2005.18 Communication with Space Transport Corporation,

6 January 2005.19 Communication with TGV Rockets, 6 January 2005.20 Communication with Incredible Adventures,

11 January 2005.

21 Communication with Space Adventures, 14 January 2005.22 Virgin Galactic Press Release, “Virgin Group Sign Deal

with Paul G. Allen's Mojave Aerospace: Licensing theTechnology To Develop The World's First CommercialSpace Tourism Operator,” 27 September 2004.

23 For a complete description of U.S. spaceports, see theFAA's 2005 U.S. Commercial Space TransportationDevelopments and Concepts: Vehicles, Technologies andSpaceports report, available from http://ast.faa.gov.

24 Communication with Virginia Space Flight Center, 2004.25 Communication with Virginia Space Flight Center,

10 January 2005.26 Communication with Virginia Space Flight Center,

21 January 2005.27 Communication with Oklahoma Space Industry

Development Authority, 21 January 2005.28 Communication with Armadillo Aerospace,

5 October 2004.

Endnotes Suborbital Reusable Launch Vehicles and Emerging Markets


Documents

February 2005 - Federal Aviation Administration€¦ · open new suborbital markets, including rapid deliv-ery of critical packages and, eventually, high-speed passenger transportation