The spaceport conundrumby Jeff Foust
|
| In 2017, the Eastern Range announced an initiative called “Drive to 48” with the goal of being able to host 48 launches a year. At the time that seemed like a stretch goal, but in 2024 the range nearly doubled it, with 93 launches. |
Some of the ideas submitted were obvious: vertical and horizontal launch as well as adjacent areas like testing of UAVs or hypersonic systems, or serving as reentry sites for capsules returning from orbit. Some other likely ancillary markets like manufacturing and payload processing also popped up. Both “space tourism” and “entertainment” were popular, although it wasn’t clear if people thought that meant spaceports supporting space tourism missions or themselves being tourism destinations, like the Kennedy Space Center, let alone other “entertainment” uses.
Many of the ideas went further and further afield from what one might traditionally associate with a spaceport, like hosting data centers or solar or wind power farms. One entry suggested “SCIF rental space,” a reference to secure facilities for classified activities; another was titled “incarceration facilities”—in other words, jails, another kind of secure facility.
That exceedingly broad range of potential markets highlights the curious situation that spaceports find themselves in. There are more spaceports, or at least prospective spaceports, than ever. This year’s summit had 400 people registered, organizers said, double the attendance of a year ago, with participants coming from as far away as Japan, Nigeria, and Uruguay.
The number of launches is also growing. There were more than 250 orbital launches worldwide as well as some suborbital launches in 2024; it was not long ago that 100 orbital launches constituted a busy year. That growth in launches would seem an opportunity for those new spaceports.
That is not, though, what is happening. In the United States, the surge in launches is driven by SpaceX, flying from Cape Canaveral Space Force Station and Kennedy Space Center in Florida and Vandenberg Space Force Base in California, as well as its own Starbase site in Texas for Starship. SpaceX has not shown interest in other launch sites in the US.
That’s created a situation where a few spaceports are struggling to keep up with launches while others struggle to host any launches. In 2017, the Eastern Range, which includes the Cape and KSC, announced an initiative called “Drive to 48” with the goal of being able to host 48 launches a year: one a week with two two-week downtimes. At the time that seemed like a stretch goal, but in 2024 the range nearly doubled it, with 93 launches.
That growth is not slowing down. “The launch cadence is going to be higher in 2025 than it was in 2024,” said Space Force Brig. Gen. Kristin Panzenhagen, whose multiple roles include commander of Space Launch Delta 45, which oversees the Eastern Range, as well as director of launch and range operations for Space Systems Command.
Speaking at the Space Mobility conference the day after the GSA summit, Panzenhagen said the increasing launch activity at both the Eastern Range and the Western Range, which includes Vandenberg, will continue beyond 2025. “We’ve been going up pretty steadily at a 25–30% increase per year, and I think we’ll continue to increase at that rate for at least the next couple years.”
That increase is putting a strain on the ranges, she said, as staffing is based on 2017 launch rates, which greater automation of processes and procedures has only partially addressed. There are bottlenecks in payload processing facilities at both the Cape and Vandenberg as well as limited space at Port Canaveral, the port adjacent to Cape Canaveral Space Force Station heavily used by launch companies and cruise lines alike.
There is also investment in spaceport infrastructure. The Space Force has projected spending $1.3 billion from fiscal years 2024 through 2028 on its “Spaceport of the Future” initiative to improve infrastructure at the Eastern and Western Ranges. The effort is intended to increase the capacity of the spaceports and their resilience.
“A lot of these projects are relatively pedantic,” said Mark Bontrager, technical director for launch and range operations at Space Systems Command, during a talk at the GSA summit. “They’re not sexy projects here. We’re talking about roads, we’re talking about reliable water systems, we’re talking about electrical and HVAC projects.”
He said the initiative was tracking 192 projects at both ranges over the five-year effort. “We’re one year in, and we’re still on track.”
| “They’re not sexy projects here,” said Bontrager. “We’re talking about roads, we’re talking about reliable water systems, we’re talking about electrical and HVAC projects.” |
Earlier at the summit, Dale Ketcham, vice president at Space Florida, offered a similar message. “Our priority is on basic meat-and-potatoes, blocking-and-tackling infrastructure,” he said. “What we need in order to meet the cadence of launch that the country expects out of Florida going forward is infrastructure.”
Space Florida has estimated about $3 billion in infrastructure needs, much of that for a proposed long-term effort to add wharf space at Port Canaveral for space companies. Other needs range from wastewater and roads to liquefied national gas required for launch vehicles like New Glenn, Starship, and Vulcan.
He said that while state and federal funding would cover at least some of those investments, Space Florida is looking for private investments into spaceport infrastructure: “That’s where the money is.” Space Florida supported a bill introduced in Congress last year that would allow spaceports to issue tax-exempt bonds like airports and seaports; the bill did not pass but Ketcham said they would seek to get similar legislation through the new Congress.
Even with the state and federal efforts, there are gaps. On a panel at the Space Mobility conference, Bontrager described one challenge with the somewhat confusingly named Roy D. Bridges Bridge, a bridge named after a former astronaut and KSC director that spans the Banana River and links the center with Cape Canaveral Space Force Station. The aging bridge can’t accommodate heavy loads, requiring trucks to take alternative, longer routes. That includes Blue Origin shipping launch vehicles and other equipment from its factory just outside the KSC gates to Launch Complex 36 on the Cape.
“It’s a NASA bridge, but NASA has no requirement to fix that bridge,” he said. “The Space Force would love to see that bridge fixed, but the Space Force doesn’t own the bridge.”
“It’s one of those things that we’ve been admiring for too long and we don’t know how to fix it because our rules tie our hands on both sides of the river,” he said.
 Houston Spaceport at Ellington Airport hasn’t hosted a single launch but has generated an estimated 2,000 jobs from businesses there. (credit: Houston Airport System) |
From haves to have-nots
For other spaceports, though, there are few options for infrastructure funding. The Spaceport of the Future program, Bontrager said, is focused on the Cape and Vandenberg, because that’s where the vast majority of launches are taking place from, particularly national security missions.
| “Everything we do in space starts at a spaceport and yet our existing launch sites are struggling to keep up with demand and are not robust or resilient,” Nield said. |
He said there may be an opening in the future, though, as new entrants offer launches through what is known as “Lane 1” of the National Security Space Launch Phase 3 contract, which is tailored to support new launch providers not necessarily launching from the Cape or Vandenberg. An example is Rocket Lab, which plans to offer its Neutron medium-lift rocket, launching from Wallops Island, Virginia, through that program.
“How is it going to play out specifically? There’s a lot of effort there,” he said, but didn’t elaborate on how that might open up funding
George Nield, a former associate administrator for commercial space transportation who is now chairman of the Global Spaceport Alliance, called the situation the “spaceport paradox” at the summit. “Everything we do in space starts at a spaceport and yet our existing launch sites are struggling to keep up with demand and are not robust or resilient,” he said. “There is no current federal program to provide funding to develop, maintain, or upgrade spaceport infrastructure.”
His organization has promoted legislation that would, among other features, fund a spaceport infrastructure matching grant program already authorized at the FAA but not currently funded. Others agree.
“The funding issue is key,” said former NASA administrator Jim Bridenstine during a panel at the Space Mobility conference. He recalled when, as a congressman, he proposed using Airport Improvement Program funds for spaceports. “Let’s just say that wasn’t popular with the FAA.”
“All that being said, there’s got to be funding that comes from somewhere,” he said. “The time is now. We’re at a point now where everybody understands we need launch resiliency, we need alternative access to space.”
Another, more fundamental question is what spaceports are available for funding to meet the needs of the launch industry today. Many facilities have secured FAA spaceport licenses but have yet to host a launch. They include airports that sought to attract horizontal launch vehicles that have failed to materialize and are ill-suited to support vertical launch systems in demand today.
Some of those facilities are looking elsewhere for revenue. “If you base the success of a horizontal spaceport on launch, you’re going to fail,” said Matt Bocchino, director of Cecil Spaceport, a former naval air station outside Jacksonville, Florida, at the GSA summit. He noted the spaceport has found a niche supporting engine testing, such as for hypersonics vehicle company Hermeus.
| Bridenstine recalled when, as a congressman, he proposed using Airport Improvement Program funds for spaceports. “Let’s just say that wasn’t popular with the FAA.” |
Last week, officials in Adams County, Colorado, announced plans to work with AltitudeX Aviation Group, a private equity firm, to “transform” the Colorado Air and Space Port, the former Front Range Airport outside Denver, into “a premier nexus for aviation and aerospace growth and innovation.” The announcement said little about launch other than stating the airport would be a “Space Center of Excellence” without explaining what that meant.
The best example of this is Houston Spaceport, located at Ellington Airport. The facility has not hosted a launch or landing but instead has focused on becoming a space industry hub, attracting companies such as Axiom Space, Collins Aerospace, and Intuitive Machines. The spaceport is responsible for more than 2,000 direct jobs, said Arturo Machuca, director of spaceport, at the GSA summit.
The spaceport, run by the Houston Airport System, is working on the next phase of expansion that will go beyond facilities for aerospace companies but supporting businesses, including hotels and restaurants. “Today, with 2,000 people there, I hear it all the time, ‘Hey, when are we going to have a restaurant here?’” he said of people who work at the spaceport.
Those comments came during that final panel that served as brainstorming for what else spaceports can do to generate revenue. “If you have a spaceport like Arturo’s in Houston, you’re not going to attract the same set of customers or ‘off-centerline’ business opportunities as Scott McLaughlin,” executive director of Spaceport America in New Mexico, said Andrew Nelson, vice president at RS&H, an architecture and engineering firm that has specialized in spaceports.
Facilities like Spaceport America and Mojave Air and Space Port in California have long runways, he said, that have been used for high-speed tests of cars. Such remote desert sites can also host solar power plants, he suggested, which could power data centers to serve the growing demand in the ongoing AI boom.
“You’ve got to triage. You can’t be everything to everybody,” he said. “You’ve got to understand what your strengths are.”
At the session wound down, organizers tabulated the final results of the poll on new revenue opportunities for spaceports. “Tenant leasing” was at the top, and some other obvious options also ranked highly, like vertical launch, rocket testing, and manufacturing. But ranking second was the infamous “incarceration facilities.”
It wasn’t clear how serious that proposal was; perhaps it was just a joke at the end of a long day. But Nelson didn’t immediately dismiss it. “Why not?” he said, noting the remote locations of some spaceports. No one is planning to build jails at spaceports—at least, not yet.
Note: we are now moderating comments. There will be a delay in posting comments and no guarantee that all submitted comments will be posted.