2004 U.S. COMMERCIAL SPACE TRANSPORTATION

DEVELOPMENTS AND CONCEPTS:

VEHICLES, TECHNOLOGIES, AND SPACEPORTS

Associate Administrator for Commercial Space Transportation

Federal Aviation Administration 

January 2004
About the Associate Administrator for Commercial Space Transportation

The Federal Aviation Administration’s Associate Administrator for 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 encourage, 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.

2004 U.S. Commercial Space Transportation Developments and Concepts

About FAA/AST
2004 U.S. Commercial Space Transportation Developments and Concepts

About the Cover

Clockwise from top: Scaled Composites’ SpaceShipOne viewed from below during a glide 

test on December 4, 2003; a Lockheed Martin Atlas 5 521 carries Cablevision’s Rainbow 

1 to geosynchronous orbit (GEO) from Cape Canaveral Air Force Station (CCAFS), 

Florida, on July 17, 2003; an aerial view of Space Launch Complex 37 at CCAFS with 

the first flight of Boeing’s Delta 4 poised to launch Eutelsat W5 in November 2002; a 

Falcon launch vehicle designed, built, and operated by Space Exploration Technologies 

Corporation (SpaceX), is unveiled to the public in December 2003; and the Aerojet AJ10-

118K second stage of a Delta 2 launch vehicle is being readied for the summer 2003 

launch of Opportunity, one of the rovers destined for Mars. 
2004 U.S. Commercial Space Transportation Developments and Concepts i

Table of Contents

Introduction.......................................................................................................... 1

 Publicati 1

 Expendable Launch Vehicle Industry..................................................................................... 1

 Reusable Launch Vehicle Industry........................................................................................ 2

 Enabling Technologies........................................................................................................... 3

 Spacepo 4

Significant 2003 Events......................................................................................... 5

Expendable Launch Vehicles.................................................................................. 7

 Current ELV Systems............................................................................................................ 7

 Athena – Lockheed Martin Corporation.......................................................................... 7

 Atlas Family – Lockheed Martin Corporation.................................................................. 7

 Delta Family – The Boeing Company............................................................................... 9

 Minotaur – Orbital Sciences Corporation........................................................................ 12

 Pegasus – Orbital Sciences Corporation......................................................................... 12

 Taurus – Orbital Sciences Corporation............................................................................ 13

 Titan Family – Lockheed Martin Corporation.................................................................. 13

 Zenit 3SL – The Sea Launch Company, LLC.................................................................... 14

 ELV Development Efforts...................................................................................................... 14

 Aquarius – Space Systems/Loral..................................................................................... 14

 Eagle S-series – E’Prime Aerospace Corporation............................................................ 15

 Eagle Flier – SpacePlane Systems................................................................................... 16

 Land Launch – The Sea Launch Company, LLC, and SIS................................................. 17

 LV-1 – Rocket Propulsion Engineering Company............................................................. 17

 Scorpius Family – Microcosm, Inc................................................................................... 18

 SLC-1 – The Space Launch Corporation........................................................................... 19

 Sounding Rockets.................................................................................................................. 19

 Black Brant...................................................................................................................... 19

 Oriole 20

 Terrier-Orion..................................................................................................................... 20

Reusable Launch Vehicles........................................................................................... 21

 Government RLV Development Efforts................................................................................ 21

 22

 Orbital Space Plane.......................................................................................................... 23

 Next Generation Launch Technology............................................................................... 24

 RA 25

 Commercial RLV Development Efforts................................................................................. 25

 X Prize Contenders.......................................................................................................... 25

 SpaceShipOne – Scaled Composites......................................................................... 28

 Black Armadillo – Armadillo Aerospace.................................................................... 28

 Rocketplane XP – Rocketplane Limited, Inc.............................................................. 29

 Other Commercial RLV Efforts........................................................................................ 32

 Falcon 1 – Space Exploration Technologies Corporation........................................... 32

 Falcon 5 – Space Exploration Technologies Corporation........................................... 32

 K-1 – Kistler Aerospace Corporation......................................................................... 33

 Pathfinder – Pioneer Rocketplane............................................................................. 34

 Xerus – XCOR Aerospace.......................................................................................... 35

 Other Commercial RLV Concepts.................................................................................... 36
ii 2004 U.S. Commercial Space Transportation Developments and Concepts

Table of Contents

Enabling Technologies.......................................................................................... 37

 Hypersonics – NASA............................................................................................................. 37

 Combined Cycle Air-Breathing Engines.......................................................................... 37

 ISTAR........................................................................................................................ 37

 Revolutionary Turbine Accelerator........................................................................... 38

 Hyper-X Series Vehicles.................................................................................................. 38

 Hybrid Rocket Motors – SpaceDev, Inc................................................................................ 39

 Hybrid Propulsion Systems – Lockheed Martin-Michoud.................................................... 39

 Liquid Engines – Rocketdyne Propulsion & Power............................................................... 40

 Liquid Engines – Microcosm, Inc........................................................................................... 40

 Liquid Engines – Space Exploration Technologies Corporation............................................. 41

 Liquid Engines – XCOR Aerospace........................................................................................ 41

 Propellant Production – Andrews Space & Technology, Inc................................................ 42

 RLV Technologies – The Boeing Company............................................................................ 42

 X-37.. 42

 X-40A 42

 Liquid Engines and Thrusters – NASA NGLT......................................................................... 43

 Booster Engine Prototype............................................................................................... 43

 Integrated Powerhead Demonstrator............................................................................ 44

Spaceports........................................................................................................... 45

 Federal Spaceports............................................................................................................... 46

 Cape Canaveral Spaceport............................................................................................. 47

 Edwards Air Force Base................................................................................................. 49

 Vandenberg Air Force Base............................................................................................ 49

 Wallops Flight Facility...................................................................................................... 51

 White Sands Missile Range............................................................................................ 52

 Non-federal Spaceports with FAA/AST Licenses................................................................ 53

 California Spaceport....................................................................................................... 53

 Kodiak Launch Complex.................................................................................................. 54

 Spaceport Operated by Florida Space Authority............................................................ 56

 Virginia Space Flight Center............................................................................................ 57

 Proposed Non-federal Spaceports....................................................................................... 59

 Gulf Coast Regional Spaceport...................................................................................... 59

 Mojave Airport Civilian Flight Test Center...................................................................... 59

 Nevada Test Site............................................................................................................. 61

 Oklahoma Spaceport...................................................................................................... 61

 South Texas Spaceport................................................................................................... 62

 Southwest Regional Spaceport...................................................................................... 63

 Spaceport Alabama........................................................................................................ 63

 Spaceport Washington................................................................................................... 64

 Utah Spaceport............................................................................................................... 64

 West Texas Spaceport.................................................................................................... 65

 Wisconsin Spaceport...................................................................................................... 65

Endnotes............................................................................................................... 69
2004 U.S. Commercial Space Transportation Developments and Concepts

1

 The Publication 

 This report, 2004 U.S. Commercial Space Transportation Developments and Concepts: 

Vehicles, Technologies, and Spaceports, reviews the major events relating to U.S. commercial 

space transportation in the past year and showcases current and planned U.S. commercial 

and commercially-oriented activities. 

 The Federal Aviation Administration’s Associate Administrator for Commercial Space 

Transportation (FAA/AST) first published the report in 1998 with an exclusive focus on 

reusable launch vehicles (RLV). The current edition addresses RLVs as well as expendable 

launch vehicles (ELV), propulsion technologies, and launch and reentry sites – commonly 

referred to as “spaceports”– to provide a complete picture of the U.S. commercial space 

transportation industry.

 This report reviews space transportation programs and projects as well as launch and 

reentry sites that will impact and support the development of commercial space activities 

and applications. The private sector plays a prominent role in the management, development, 

and funding of these activities; the federal government and several state governments 

substantially contribute to or provide leadership for many of the technologies and facilities 

described herein. With the exception of a few X Prize vehicle concepts, all activities and 

developments described in this report are being led by U.S. entities.

Expendable Launch Vehicle Industry

 U.S. commercial launch activity improved slightly over recent past years. In 2003, FAA/

AST licensed eight orbital launches out of 17 total commercial launches worldwide. Those 

eight launches were an increase from the total of seven orbital and suborbital launches 

in 2002 and six orbital and suborbital launches in 2001. Lockheed Martin Corporation’s 

Atlas had four U.S. licensed launches in 2003. In addition, the multinational Sea Launch 

Corporation completed three successful U.S. licensed launches of the Zenit 3SL in 2003. 

Orbital Sciences Corporation launched one Pegasus XL in 2003 with an FAA license. 

 There are a number of commercial ELVs under development to serve smaller payloads. 

These ELVs are primarily being developed by small entrepreneurial companies focusing on 

specific market niches, such as small government payloads. These companies are exploring 

various technologies, including new propellants and pressure-fed engines, which have 

the potential to reduce the cost of their vehicles. Indeed, there should be a number of key 

developments for these types of ELVs during 2004 as they pursue private investment and 

construct and test components needed for future launches.
2004 U.S. Commercial Space Transportation Developments and Concepts

2

Reusable Launch Vehicle Industry

 The Space Shuttle remains the first and only currently operational, partially reusable 

launch vehicle.1 Development of new RLVs nonetheless remains of great interest to many 

national governments and private companies. The appeal of RLVs rests in their ability not 

only to launch from but also to return to Earth for reuse – a quality desirable for various 

types of missions, including human trips to and from space. Many also have considered RLV 

development attractive because the construction cost of an RLV could be amortized over 

multiple launches, thus potentially reducing the cost of access to space for government 

and commercial users.

 As government and commercial RLV developers alike have come to realize in recent 

years, RLV development is an extremely challenging endeavor, not only technologically 

and operationally but also in terms of performance requirements, market development and 

costs. Government RLV development programs, which often both depend on and guide 

private RLV development, have had no shortage of these difficulties. Throughout the 1980s 

and 1990s, National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) and Department of 

Defense (DoD) efforts to develop experimental RLVs to improve reliability, reduce operating 

costs, and demonstrate routine operations were dashed due to cost overruns, technical 

setbacks, and requirement shifts. As a result, no fully operational vehicle emerged. In 1999, 

NASA sought to meet its challenges with the Integrated Space Transportation Plan (ISTP), 

an investment strategy for its space transportation needs comprising a program of Space 

Shuttle upgrades; the Space Launch Initiative (SLI), a $4.8-billion technology development 

program that would support NASA in making a decision on whether or not to build a new 

RLV to replace the Shuttle; and a program to develop the technologies for third- and fourthgeneration RLVs.

 Once again, limited funds and competing performance requirements forced NASA to 

reevaluate its RLV development efforts. In 2002, NASA proposed in an amendment to its 

fiscal year 2003 budget a new ISTP to better coordinate its space transportation efforts 

with its International Space Station (ISS) and science and research needs. The new ISTP 

continued to support the Space Shuttle but restructured SLI to accommodate the nearterm development of an ISS crew transfer vehicle called the Orbital Space Plane and the 

continued support of future generations of launch technology.

 On January 14, 2004, President George W. Bush announced a new vision for the United 

States space exploration program that commits the nation to a long-term human and robotic 

program to explore the solar system, starting with a return to the Moon that will ultimately 

enable future exploration of Mars and other destinations. The plan involves retiring the Space 

Shuttle in 2010 after completion of U.S. responsibilities on the ISS, in favor of developing 

a Crew Exploration Vehicle (CEV) that could be used to conduct manned missions to the 

Moon starting in 2015. Knowledge gained through extended visits to the Moon will be 

Introduction
2004 U.S. Commercial Space Transportation Developments and Concepts

3

used to develop technology and new space vehicles for human missions beyond the Moon, 

beginning with Mars. The plans are expected to cost $12 billion over five years, with the 

majority of the funding derived from reallocations within NASA’s existing budget.2

 In addition, some military space requirements may be met by DARPA’s Responsive 

Access, Small Cargo, and Affordable Launch (RASCAL) program, which is expected to yield 

a vehicle that can meet the demand for launch of small payloads on short notice. In March, 

the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) awarded a Phase 2 contract to 

Space Launch Corporation for the design of the RASCAL small payload launch system.

 Commercial RLV developers have met with similar technological, cost, market and 

performance requirements challenges many times in recent years. In the 1990s, several 

private RLV development companies emerged, determined to build RLVs to meet the high 

projected launch demand fueled primarily by non-geosynchronous orbit (NGSO) satellite 

telecommunications constellations, which were to deploy large numbers of satellites and 

require many replacements and follow-on satellites. Bankruptcies and the failure of many of 

the constellation concepts to materialize curbed the market RLV developers anticipated while 

also making it difficult for developers to obtain capital from private investors to turn their 

concepts into reality. Today’s low launch demand, the abundance of launch vehicles on the 

world market, and the general state of the economy have also contributed to the difficulties 

RLV developers have experienced in finding financial backers and solid markets.

 Despite the challenges, the commercial RLV industry remained resilient in 2003. Several 

commercial RLV companies remain committed to the goal of developing and operating their 

vehicles and are aggressively pursuing private investment. Many have abandoned NGSO 

payloads as their target market in favor of human space travel, which now seems to be a 

more promising enterprise. In addition, 27 organizations are vying for the X Prize, several 

of which entered contention in 2003. The X Prize offers a $10-million prize to the first team 

that launches a vehicle capable of carrying three people (or one person and ballast weight 

for two others) on a suborbital trajectory to a 100-kilometer (62-mile) altitude and repeats 

the flight within two weeks in the same vehicle. Multiple contenders, including Scaled 

Composites and Armadillo Aerospace, are testing their vehicle concepts and expect to meet 

the January 2005 deadline for winning the prize.

 The ability to reduce launch costs and thus stimulate demand will be critical to the 

success of new military and commercial RLVs given the current size of the market for small 

payloads. One company, the Space Exploration Technologies Corporation, or SpaceX, intends 

to make the first launch of its Falcon, which is intended to be mostly reusable, in 2004.

Enabling Technologies

 There are a number of efforts underway to develop new propulsion technologies for 

launch vehicles, including ELVs and RLVs. These efforts include government-funded research 

Introduction
2004 U.S. Commercial Space Transportation Developments and Concepts

4

projects as well as engines and motors being developed by companies for their own launch 

vehicles and for sale to other companies. NASA’s Next Generation Launch Technology 

program is funding several companies to conduct propulsion work. There is a trend of 

development of new liquid-propellant engines that use room-temperature propellants instead 

of cryogens or pressure-fed systems instead of turbopumps. These engines are considerably 

less complex, and potentially less expensive, than engines that use turbopumps and 

cryogenic propellants. In 2003, NASA, the Air Force, and two prime aerospace contractors 

completed tests of two innovative engine systems - a liquid-hydrogen turbopump and a 

unique oxidizer preburner, part of the Integrated Powerhead Demonstrator (IPD).

Spaceports

 Launch and reentry sites – often referred to as “spaceports” – may house launch pads 

and runways as well as the infrastructure, equipment, and fuels needed to process launch 

vehicles and their payloads prior to launch. While U.S. military and civil government agencies 

were the original and still are the primary developers and users of launch facilities, commercial 

launch activity now comprises a substantial portion of federal launch site operations. One 

of the recent major developments at federal launch sites that will benefit both commercial 

and government payload customers was the construction of new launch infrastructure at 

the two major federal sites – Cape Canaveral Spaceport and Vandenberg Air Force Base 

(VAFB) – to support the Delta and Atlas Evolved Expendable Launch Vehicles (EELV). These 

facilities were developed with commercial, federal, and state government funds.

 The commercial dimension of U.S. space activity is evident not only in the numbers of 

commercially-procured launches but also in the list of non-federal launch sites supplementing 

federally operated sites. FAA/AST has licensed the operations of spaceports in four 

different U.S. states, and these sites are currently available to serve commercial as well as 

government payload owners. With the launch market rather low, however, these spaceport 

operators now are also seeking out new opportunities such as payload processing and 

space research facility development. Organizations in several states nonetheless see the 

potential of spaceports to accommodate future launch vehicles and are actively working to 

turn their spaceport visions into reality. 

Introduction
2004 U.S. Commercial Space Transportation Developments and Concepts

5

Significant 2003 Events

February 1:

STS-107 Space Shuttle Columbia broke apart upon reentry over the west coast of the United 

States, killing all seven crew members and launching an investigation into the technical and 

organizational issues that led to the disaster.

February 18:

NASA released the top level requirements for the Orbital Space Plane – a next generation 

system of space vehicles designed to provide a crew rescue and crew transport capability 

to and from the International Space Station. These requirements set the foundation for the 

design of the vehicle and its associated systems. 

March 11:

Boeing Delta 4 delivered its first military satellite to orbit as part of the Evolved Expendable 

Launch Vehicle program. It was the second Delta 4 launch, and the first in the Medium 

configuration. The Delta 4 carried the $200 million Defense Satellite Communications System 

(DSCS III A3) satellite designed to provide secure communications to defense officials and 

battlefield commanders. 

March 13:

DARPA selected Space Launch Corporation to develop the RASCAL Phase II in which it will 

design, develop and reduce the risk of critical technology. Based on the results of phase 

two, DARPA will determine whether to continue on into phase three, fabrication, integration 

and flight-demonstration of two payloads in FY 2006.

April 11:

A Lockheed Martin Atlas 3B launched the AsiaSat4 Communication satellite from Cape 

Canaveral Air Force Station (CCAFS).

April 18:

Scaled Composites officially rolled out its suborbital launch vehicle SpaceShipOne and its 

carrier aircraft White Knight.

May 13: 

A Lockheed Martin Atlas 5-401 launched the Hellas-Sat 2 communications satellite from 

Cape Canaveral Air Force Station.

June 10:

A Sea Launch Zenit 3SL launched the Thuraya 2 communications satellite from the Odyssey 

mobile launch platform on the equator in the Pacific Ocean

June 25:

Space Exploration Technologies Corporation (SpaceX) reached an agreement with the Florida 

Space Authority to use complex 46 for launching the Falcon rocket. Missions will be staged 

from the Cape Canaveral Air Force Station pad that Florida jointly operates with the 

U.S. Navy.

2003 Events
2004 U.S. Commercial Space Transportation Developments and Concepts

6

June 26:

An Orbital Sciences Pegasus XL launched the OrbView 3 remote sensing satellite from 

Vandenberg Air Force Base (VAFB).

July 7:

In the last of seven foam impact tests conducted by the Columbia Accident Investigation 

Board in Texas, a 500 mph foam bullet punched a 16-inch by 16-inch hole in the reinforced 

carbon-carbon (RCC) panel from the Atlantis orbiter, prompting board member Scott Hubbard 

to say they had the “smoking gun” evidence of the root cause of the Columbia tragedy.

July 17:

A Lockheed Martin Atlas 5-521 launched the Rainbow 1 communications satellite from 

Cape Canaveral Air Force Station.

August 7:

A Zenit 3SL rocket lofted the Echostar IX/Telstar 13 satellite into orbit for Space Systems/

Loral.

August 11:

SpaceX completed a successful test firing of the low-cost Falcon rocket’s upper stage engine, 

called Kestrel – a liquid oxygen and rocket grade kerosene-powered engine. The upper-stage 

engine is being designed for multiple restarts in the space vacuum for placement of one or 

more spacecraft into orbit.

August 26:

The Columbia Accident Investigation Board officially released its findings on the cause of 

the loss of STS-107 and made recommendations to improve the safety of the space shuttle 

and organizational management at NASA.

September 23:

NASA completed the Orbital Space Plane Systems Design Review, evaluating the vehicles 

concept design for providing crew rescue and transfer for the International Space 

Station.

September 30:

A Sea Launch Zenit 3SL launched the Galaxy 13 Communications satellite from the Odyssey 

mobile launch platform on the equator in the Pacific Ocean.

October 30:

FAA/AST informed XCOR Aerospace that its application for an RLV mission launch license was 

deemed “sufficiently complete,” starting a 180-day process for a license determination.

December 17:

A Lockheed Martin Atlas 3B launched the UHF F11 communications satellite from Cape 

Canaveral Air Force Station.

December 17:

Scaled Composites performed the first manned supersonic flight of SpaceShipOne, firing 

the hybrid rocket motor to reach Mach 1.2 (930 mph) and gliding to a landing at Mojave 

Airport Civilian Flight Test Center.

2003 Events
2004 U.S. Commercial Space Transportation Developments and Concepts

7

Expendable Launch Vehicles

 This survey of U.S. expendable launch vehicles (ELV) is divided into three sections. The 

first section reviews the ELVs currently available to serve a wide range of commercial and 

government payloads. The second section reviews a number of proposed commercial ELVs 

under study or development that will primarily serve small commercial payloads at prices 

that are potentially much lower than available today. The final section reviews suborbital 

sounding rockets that are manufactured and operated by U.S. companies today.

Current ELV Systems 

 The ELV systems available in the United States today are summarized in Table 1.3 Three 

ELVs – Minotaur, Titan 2, and Titan 4B – are restricted to government payloads.4 The remaining 

six – Athena, the Atlas variants, the Delta variants, Pegasus, Taurus, and Zenit 3SL (the Sea 

Launch vehicle) – are available for commercial use; all but the Zenit 3SL can also carry U.S. 

government payloads. The two newest members of the U.S. launcher supply, the Atlas 5 

and Delta 4 Evolved Expendable Launch Vehicles (EELV), made their debuts in 2002. As a 

result of a new national vision to return manned missions to the Moon and eventually Mars, 

NASA may require larger vehicles to launch Crew Exploration Vehicles (CEVs) and other 

missions.

Athena - Lockheed Martin Corporation

 The Athena family of launch vehicles was created by Lockheed Martin to serve the small 

satellite market. Lockheed started development of what was first known as the Lockheed 

Launch Vehicle in 1993. The vehicle became the Lockheed Martin Launch Vehicle after 

Lockheed’s merger with Martin Marietta in 1995 and was renamed the Athena in 1997. 

The Athena vehicles use Castor 120 solid-propellant motors: the Athena 1 uses a single 

Castor 120 as its first stage, while the larger Athena 2 uses Castor 120 motors for its first 

and second stages for enhanced payload performance. Both vehicles also use one solid 

and one liquid propellant upper stage.5

 Athena launches have taken place from Vandenberg Air Force Base (VAFB), California; 

Cape Canaveral Air Force Station (CCAFS), Florida; and the Kodiak Launch Complex in Alaska. 

The latest Athena launch took place on September 29, 2001, when an Athena 1 launched 

from Kodiak and placed the Starshine 3, Sapphire, PICOSat, and PCSat spacecraft into polar 

orbit. Although no future launches are currently planned, Athena launch capability continues 

to be available on the market.

Atlas Family - Lockheed Martin Corporation

 The Atlas launch vehicle family traces its roots to the development of the Atlas Intercontinental Ballistic Missile (ICBM) in the 1950s. The Atlas family is in a stage of transition 

as older versions of the vehicle, the Atlas 2A and Atlas 2AS, as well as the Atlas 3A and 

Expendable Launch Vehicles
2004 U.S. Commercial Space Transportation Developments and Concepts

8

Atlas 3B, gradually will be retired to make way for the Atlas 5 EELV. Lockheed Martin plans 

to retire its Atlas 2 and Atlas 3 launch vehicles within the next year.

Atlas 2

 The Atlas 2A and Atlas 2AS are direct descendants of the original Atlas, incorporating 

its unique stage-and-a-half design. This design uses two powerful “booster” engines and 

one less powerful, but longer-duration “sustainer” engine on the vehicle’s first stage, as well 

as a Centaur upper stage. The Atlas 2A and 2AS are identical except for the four strap-on 

Castor 4A solid rocket motors attached to the first stage of the Atlas 2AS to improve its 

payload performance. The last Atlas 2A flight took place on December 4, 2002, with the 

launch of the NASA Tracking and Data Relay Satellite J. The Atlas 2AS launched once in 

2003 and four launches are planned for 2004. The Atlas 2AS is scheduled to retire at the 

end of 2004. 

Atlas 3

 The Atlas 3A and Atlas 3B represent a transition between the older Atlas vehicles and 

the Atlas 5 EELV. The Atlas 3 abandons the stage-and-a-half design of the older Atlases for 

a single RD-180 main engine developed by the Russian company 

NPO Energomash and marketed under a joint Russian-American 

partnership with Pratt & Whitney. The RD-180 is a derivative of 

the RD-170 used by the now-defunct Russian Energia heavy-lift 

launch vehicle. Because the RD-180 has 70-percent component 

commonality with the proven RD-170, it was less risky to develop 

than a totally new design while giving better performance than 

available U.S.-built engines. The Atlas 3A, introduced in 2000, 

uses a single-engine Centaur upper stage. The Atlas 3B, first 

launched on February 21, 2002, uses a stretched Centaur upper 

stage with one or two engines. There was one Atlas 3 launch 

of the 3B in 2003 and there are two launches slated for 2004. 

The Atlas 3 will be phased out in favor of the Atlas 5 by the end of 2004.

Atlas 5 

 The Atlas 5 family of launch vehicles, developed under the EELV program, is based on 

a common first stage design known as the Common Core Booster (tm) that uses the NPO 

Energomash RD-180 engine introduced on the Atlas 3. The initial flights of government 

payloads on Atlas 5 vehicles will use Russian-built engines. The stretched version of the 

Centaur upper stage introduced on the Atlas 3B is also used on the Atlas 5, in both single and 

dual-engine versions. The first Atlas 5 launch took place on August 21, 2002, when an Atlas 

5-401 vehicle successfully launched the Eutelsat Hot Bird 6 spacecraft from CCAFS.

 The Atlas 5 also marks a significant departure in launch preparations compared to 

previous Atlas versions. The Atlas 5 program utilizes a “clean pad” concept at Launch 

Expendable Launch Vehicles
2004 U.S. Commercial Space Transportation Developments and Concepts

9

Complex 41 at Cape Canaveral Air Force Station in Florida. The 

launch vehicle is prepared for launch “off pad” vertically in the 

Vertical Integration Facility (VIF) near the pad. Hours before launch, 

it is moved out to the pad fully prepared for launch. The Atlas 5 

will be operational from Space Launch Complex 3E at Vandenberg 

Air Force Base, California, in mid-2005, and will be standardized 

to the operating processes at LC-41 except for the utilization of 

the more traditional “stack on pad” concept from the heritage 

launch vehicle programs.

 The Atlas 5 is available in the 400 and 500 series and will 

accommodate 4-meter (13.1 foot) and 5-meter (16.4-foot) fairings 

and up to five strap on solid rocket motors. The Atlas 400 series 

can place payloads between 4,950 and 7,640 kilograms (10,910 and 16,843 pounds) into 

geosynchronous transfer orbit (GTO), while the Atlas 500 series can place payloads between 

3,970 and 8,670 kilograms (8,750 and 19,120 pounds) into GTO.6 Lockheed Martin is 

currently finalizing its design of the Atlas 5 Heavy Lift Vehicle with a target initial operational 

capability in late 2006.7 The most recent Atlas 5 launch took place on July 17, 2003, and 

two Atlas 5 launches were conducted in 2003. At least one commercial Atlas 5 launch is 

scheduled for 2004.

Delta Family - The Boeing Company

 The Delta family of launch vehicles can trace its heritage to the Thor missile program of 

the 1950s. Like the Atlas program, the Delta family is undergoing a transition prompted by 

the introduction of the Delta 4 vehicles developed under the EELV program.

Delta 2

 The Delta 2 uses a liquid-oxygen (LOX)-kerosene first stage and a nitrogen tetroxideaerozine second stage, along with an optional solid-propellant 

upper stage. The Delta 2 can also use between three and nine 

strap-on solid rocket motors, depending on the performance 

required.8 A “heavy” version of the Delta 2, which uses the 

larger graphite epoxy motors 46 strap-on boosters developed 

for the Delta 3, entered service on August 25, 2003, with the 

launch of NASA’s Space Infrared Telescope Facility spacecraft. 

Although the Delta 2’s small payload capacity has limited 

usefulness for commercial GTO payloads, it is expected to 

remain in service through 2010, primarily launching military and 

civil government payloads. There were seven Delta 2 launches 

in 2003. Currently, there are 10 government Delta 2 launches 

scheduled for 2004.

Expendable Launch Vehicles
2004 U.S. Commercial Space Transportation Developments and Concepts

10

Delta 4 

 The Delta 4 family of launch vehicles has a common booster core first stage that uses 

the first new large liquid rocket engine developed in the United States since the Space 

Shuttle Main Engine (SSME), designed in the 1970s. This engine, the Rocketdyne RS-68, 

is based on the J-2 engine used on the second stage of the Saturn 5 launch vehicle and 

technology from the SSME. It is, however, both larger and simpler than the SSME. Two to 

four solid-fuel, graphite-epoxy motors, two types of upper stages, and three payload fairings 

depending on customer needs can supplement the RS-68. It will be launched from both 

VAFB and CCAFS. The first Delta 4 launch took place on November 20, 2002, successfully 

lofting the Eutelsat W5 spacecraft from CCAFS. 

Vehicle

Company

First Launch

Stages

Payload

Performance

(LEO)

Payload

Performance

(LEO polar)

Payload

Performance

(GTO)

Launch Sites

Athena

Lockheed Martin

1995

3(athena 1)

4(Athena 2)

820 kg (1,805 lbs.)

(Athena 1)

2,050 kg (4,520 lbs.)

(Athena 2)

545 kg (1,200 lbs.)

(Athena 1)

1,575 kg (3,470 lbs.)

(Athena 2)

N/A

CCAFS, VAFB,

Kodiak

Minotaur

Orbittal Sciences

2000

4

N/A

340 kg (750 lbs.)

(SSO)

N/A

VAFB

Pegasus

Orbital Sciences

1990

3

440 kg (975 lbs.)

330 kg (730 lbs.)

N/A

CCAFS WFF**

VAFB, EAFB,

Kwajalein, Canary

Taurus

Orbital Sciences

1994

4

N/A

1,070 kg (2,360

lbs.)

N/A

VAFB

Delta 2

Boeing

1990

3

5,125 kg

(11,300 lbs.)

3,895 kg

(8,890 lbs.)

1,870 kg

(4,120 lbs.)

CCAFS, VAFB

SMALL MEDIUM

* First launch of refurbished Titan 2 ICBM. Titan 2 was also used for Gemini program launches, 1964-1966

** Wallops Flight Facility

TABLE 1: Currently Available Expendable Launch Vehicles

Expendable Launch Vehicles
2004 U.S. Commercial Space Transportation Developments and Concepts

11

 Boeing offers five different versions of the Delta 4 to address a broad range of payload 

mass classes. These include four medium versions, each with one common booster core, 

and one heavy-lift version that will use three parallel common booster core stages. Three 

of these versions, the Delta 4 Medium-Plus vehicles, will be optimized for commercial use. 

The Medium and Heavy versions are largely intended for government use. Payload capacities 

to low Earth orbit (LEO) range from 8,120 kilograms (17,905 pounds) for the Medium to 

23,040 kilograms (50,800 pounds) for the Heavy; GTO capacities range from 4,210 to 13,130 

kilograms (9,285 to 28,950 pounds).9 The Delta 4 has also replaced the Delta 3. The last 

Delta 4 launch took place on August 29, 2003. The Delta 4 had two launches in 2003 and 

three are planned for 2004 including the first launch of the heavy variant. 

 A distinctive design feature of the Delta 4 is its use of horizontal integration. The vehicle 

is assembled, tested, and prepared for launch horizontally, away from the launch pad. When 

Expendable Launch Vehicles

Vehicle

Comany

First Launch

Stages

Payload

Performance

(LEO)

Payload

Performance

(LEO polar)

Payload

Performance

(GTO)

Launch Sites

Delta 4

Boeing

2002

2

8,120 kg

(17,905 lbs.)

(Delta 4M)

11,475 kg

(25,300 lbs.)

(delta 4M+

(5,4))

6,870 kg

(15,150 lbs.)

(Delta 4 M)

10,400 kg

(22,930 lbs.)

(Delta 4M+

(5,4))

4,210 kg

(9,285 lbs.)

(Delta 4 M)

6,565 kg

(14,480 lbs.)

(delta 4 M+

(5,4))

CCAFS, VAFB

Atlas 2

Lockheed

Martin

1990

2

7,315 kg

(16,130 lbs.)

(Atlas 2A)

8,620 kg

(19,000 lbs.)

(Atlas 2AS)

6,190 kg

(13,650 lbs.)

(Atlas 2A)

7,210 kg

(15,900 lbs.)

(Atlas 2AS)

3,065 kg

(6,760 lbs.)

(Atlas 2A)

3,720 kg

(8,200 lbs)

(Atlas 2AS)

CCAFS, VAFB

Atlas 3

Lockheed

Martin

2000

2

8,640 kg

(19,050 lbs.)

(Atlas 3A)

10,720 kg

(23,630 lbs.)

(Atlas 3B)

N/A

4,035 kg

(8,900 lbs.)

(Atlas 3A)

4,475 kg

(9,870 lbs.)

(Atlas 3B)

CCAFS

Atlas 5

Lockheed

Martin

2002

2

10,300 kg

(22,711 lbs.)

(Atlas 5 502)

20,711 lbs.)

(Atlas 5 552)

N/A

3,970 kg

(8,750 lbs.)

(Atlas 5 501)

8,670 kg

(19,10 lbs.)

(Atlas 5 551)

CCAFS

Delta 4

Heavy

Boeing

2004

2

23,040 kg

(50,800 lbs.)

20,800 kg

(45,865 lbs.)

13,130 kg

(28,950 lbs.)

CCAFS, VAFB

INTERMEDIATE HEAVY

Titan 4B

Lockheed

Martin

1997

2

21,680 kg

(47,800

lbs.)

17,600 kg

(38,800

lbs.)

5,760 kg

(12,700

lbs.) (GEO)

CCAFS, VAFB

Zenit 3SL

Sea Launch

1999

3

N/A

N/A

6,000 kg

(13,230 lbs.)

Pacific

Ocean

TABLE 1
2004 U.S. Commercial Space Transportation Developments and Concepts

12

integration is complete, the vehicle is moved to the pad, raised, and 

launched in a relatively short period of time. In addition to making the 

launch vehicle easier to work on by keeping it closer to the ground, 

this integration method also greatly reduces time spent occupying 

the launch pad. Boeing expects to reduce pad time from Delta 2’s 24 

days to a period of about a week for the Delta 4. Since the availability 

of launch pads is one of the factors limiting launch rates, Boeing’s 

integration process contributes to the economic advantages that 

are a major part of the EELV program’s goals.

Minotaur - Orbital Sciences Corporation

 The Orbital/Suborbital Program Space Launch Vehicle, also known as Minotaur, was 

developed by Orbital Sciences Corporation under contract to the U.S. Air Force to launch 

small government payloads. The booster uses a combination of rocket motors from 

decommissioned Minuteman 2 ICBMs and upper stages from 

Orbital’s Pegasus launch vehicle. The Minotaur’s first two stages 

are Minuteman 2 M-55A1 and SR-19 motors, and the upper two 

stages are Orion 50 XL and Orion 38 motors from the Pegasus 

XL. All four stages use solid propellants.10

 The Minotaur made its debut on January 26, 2000, when 

it successfully launched the FalconSat and JAWSAT satellites 

from VAFB. Minotaur’s only other launch took place on July 19, 

2000, when it launched the Air Force Research Laboratory’s 

MightySat 2.1 spacecraft, also from VAFB. The Minotaur has 

one mission slated for 2004: XSS-11.11

Pegasus - Orbital Sciences Corporation

 The Pegasus is an air-launched ELV used to place small payloads into a variety of low 

Earth orbits (LEO). Developed by Orbital Sciences Corporation in the late 1980s, Pegasus 

became the first commercial air-launch system. The Pegasus booster has three solidpropellant stages and an optional hydrazine mono-propellant upper stage.

 The booster is carried aloft under Orbital Sciences’ “Stargazer” L-1011 carrier aircraft 

(early Pegasus launches used a B-52 leased from NASA) to an altitude of 11,900 meters 

(39,000 feet), where it is released. The booster drops for five seconds before igniting its 

first stage motor and beginning its ascent to orbit. The original Pegasus booster entered 

service in 1990. Orbital Sciences created a new version of the Pegasus, the Pegasus XL, with 

stretched first and second stages to enhance the booster’s payload capacity. While the first 

Pegasus XL launch was in 1994, the first successful Pegasus XL flight did not occur until 

Expendable Launch Vehicles
2004 U.S. Commercial Space Transportation Developments and Concepts

13

1996. The original, or standard, version of the Pegasus was 

retired in 2000, and only the Pegasus XL is used today. The 

air-launched nature of the Pegasus permits launches from 

a number of different facilities, depending on the orbital 

requirements of the payload.12 Pegasus launches have been 

staged from seven sites to date: Edwards Air Force Base 

(AFB) and VAFB, California; CCAFS and Kennedy Space 

Center, Florida; NASA’s Wallops Flight Facility, Virginia; 

Kwajalein Missile Range, Marshall Islands; and Gando 

AFB, Canary Islands. The last Pegasus XL was launched 

on August 12, 2003, carrying Scisat 1 for the Canadian Space Agency. Four Pegasus XLs 

were launched in 2003 and two government launches are scheduled for 2004.13

Taurus - Orbital Sciences Corporation

 The Taurus ELV is a ground-launched vehicle based on the air-launched Pegasus. Orbital 

Sciences Corporation developed the Taurus under the sponsorship of 

the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) to develop 

a standard launch vehicle to be set up quickly in new locations to 

launch small satellites that are too large for the Pegasus. The Taurus 

uses the three stages of a Pegasus, without wings or stabilizers, 

stacked atop a Castor 120 solid rocket motor that serves as the 

Taurus’ first stage.1415

 The Taurus has successfully completed five of six launch 

attempts since entering service in 1994. A commercial Taurus is 

slated to launch Taiwan’s ROCSAT-2 spacecraft in 2004. 

Titan Family - Lockheed Martin Corporation

 In 1986 Martin Marietta (now Lockheed Martin) won a contract from the U.S. Air Force to 

refurbish 14 decommissioned Titan 2 ICBMs into launch vehicles for government payloads. 

Thirteen of these boosters have been launched since 1988, with the Titan 2’s final mission 

completed on October 18, 2003.16 The two-stage Titan 2, which uses nitrogen tetroxide 

and Aerozine-50 as propellants, can place 1,905 kilograms (4,200 pounds) into polar LEO.

 The Titan 4 program dates back to 1985, when the U.S. Air Force commissioned Martin 

Marietta (now Lockheed Martin) to develop an upgraded version of the existing Titan 34D 

ELV that could launch Space Shuttle-class payloads as an alternative to the Shuttle. The 

Titan 4A was based on the Titan 34D but featured stretched first and second stages, two 

more powerful solid rocket motors, and a larger payload fairing. The Titan 4A was used 

between 1989 and 1998. The Titan 4B, introduced in 1997, is the most powerful ELV in 

the United States today.17 It uses upgraded solid rocket motors that increase the payload 

Expendable Launch Vehicles
2004 U.S. Commercial Space Transportation Developments and Concepts

14

capacity of the vehicle by 25 percent.18 The Titan 4B is used solely for 

U.S. military payloads, with the exception of the October 1997 launch of 

NASA’s Cassini mission. There were two Titan 4B launches in 2003 and 

two launches are planned for 2004. The final Titan 4 launch is scheduled 

for early 2005.19 The Titan 4B is being phased out in favor of the heavy 

EELV variants.

Zenit 3SL - The Sea Launch Company, LLC

 The Zenit 3SL is a Ukrainian-Russian launch vehicle marketed by Sea Launch, a 

multinational joint venture led by The Boeing Company. The first two stages, each powered 

by a single engine using liquid oxygen and kerosene propellants, are provided by the Ukrainian 

firm SDO Yuzhnoye/PO Yuzhmash and are the same as those used on the Zenit 2 launch 

vehicle. The third stage is a Block DM-SL upper stage, which also uses liquid oxygen and 

kerosene propellants, provided by Russian firm RSC Energia. Boeing provides the payload 

fairing and interfaces for the vehicle.20 The Zenit 3SL is launched from the Odyssey mobile 

launch platform, which travels from its homeport in Long Beach, California, to a position 

on the Equator in the Pacific Ocean for each launch. Launch 

operations are controlled from a separate vessel, the Sea Launch 

Commander. While Sea Launch conducts commercial launches 

with a license from the FAA, the multinational nature of the 

system prevents it from carrying U.S. government payloads 

at this time. There were three Zenit launches in 2003 and five 

launches are scheduled for 2004.

ELV Development Efforts 

 A number of efforts by both established corporations and startups are currently in 

progress to develop new ELVs to carry payloads to orbit. Most of these designs are focused 

on the small-payload sector of the launch market, with the goal of placing payloads as small 

as a few hundred pounds into LEO. There is currently a limited market for such launches, 

so the success of these vehicles may rely on their ability to reduce launch costs enough to 

enable new markets.

Aquarius - Space Systems/Loral 

 Space Systems/Loral of Palo Alto, California, has proposed Aquarius, a low-cost launch 

vehicle designed to carry small, inexpensive payloads into LEO. Aquarius trades reliability for 

low launch costs. The vehicle will be primarily intended to launch into orbit bulk products, 

like water, fuel, and other consumables, that are inexpensive to replace in the event of a 

launch failure. The target launch cost is $1 million. As currently designed, Aquarius will be 

a single-stage vehicle 43 meters (141 feet) high and 4 meters (13.1 feet) in diameter and 

powered by a single engine using liquid hydrogen and oxygen propellants. The vehicle is 

Expendable Launch Vehicles
2004 U.S. Commercial Space Transportation Developments and Concepts

15

floated in the ocean prior to launch to minimize launch infrastructure and will be able to 

place a 1,000-kilogram (2,205-pound) payload into a 200-kilometer (125-mile), 52-degree 

orbit. The payload, located in the base of the vehicle, will be extracted by an orbiting space 

tug for transfer to its ultimate destination, after which the vehicle will de-orbit and be 

destroyed.21

 Space Systems/Loral studied Aquarius under a 

$110,000 grant awarded by the state of California 

in April 2001 and delivered a final report in June 

2002. Space Systems/Loral teamed with Microcosm 

of El Segundo, California, and Wilson Composite 

Technologies of Folsom, California, for the study.22

Funding of $1 million was provided in the FY 2004 

Defense Appropriations Act to develop a prototype of 

the low-cost engine for the vehicle. The engine would 

provide 400,000 pounds of thrust using liquid oxygen and liquid hydrogen as propellants. 

For the engine development, Space Systems/Loral is partnered with Aerojet, a GenCorp 

Company based in Sacramento, California, and Microcosm. This program is expected to 

proceed under the auspices of the Air Force Research Laboratory. Space Systems/Loral has 

submitted a proposal for development of the large lightweight liquid hydrogen tank required 

for this vehicle, which is currently being considered for federal funding.23

Eagle S-series - E’Prime Aerospace Corporation

 E’Prime Aerospace of Titusville, Florida, is developing a family of launch vehicles called 

the Eagle S-Series, based on the LGM-118A Peacekeeper ICBM design. Like the Peacekeeper, 

Vehicle: Aquarius

Developer: Space Systems/Loral

First Launch: To be determined

Number of stages: 1

Payload performance: 1,000 kg (2,205 lbs.) to LEO

Launch sites: To be determined, water launch following float-off from a barge

Vehicle: Eaglet/Eagle

Developer: E’Prime Aerospace

First Launch: To be determined

Number of stages: 2

Payload performance: 580 kg (1,280 lbs.) to LEO (Eaglet); 1,360 kg (3,000 lbs.) 

to LEO (Eagle)

Launch sites: Kennedy Space Center, Virginia Space Flight Center, Cape Canaveral, 

 Kodiak Launch Complex

Expendable Launch Vehicles
2004 U.S. Commercial Space Transportation Developments and Concepts

16

the vehicle will be ejected from a ground-based silo using a compressed-gas system. At 

a height of 61 meters (200 feet), the vehicle’s engines will ignite. The smallest vehicle, the 

Eaglet, could launch 580 kilograms (1,280 pounds) into LEO, while a somewhat larger version, 

the Eagle, could put 1,360 kilograms (3,000 pounds) into LEO. Both will use solid propellant 

lower stages and liquid-propellant upper stages. E’Prime has also proposed larger vehicles, 

designated S-1 through S-7, that will be able to place considerably larger payloads into LEO 

and add a geosynchronous Earth orbit (GEO) capability. The Eagle S-Series concept dates 

back to 1987, when the company signed a commercialization agreement with the Air Force 

to use Peacekeeper technology for commercial launch vehicles.24

 E’Prime signed an agreement with NASA in February 2001 that gives the company use 

of available property and services on a non-interference basis. The company plans to launch 

the Eaglet and Eagle boosters from facilities at NASA’s Kennedy Space Center (KSC) that 

the company has yet to construct. E’Prime plans to launch from Virginia Space Flight Center 

or KSC for equatorial orbits and from the Kodiak Launch Complex for polar orbits.25

 In July 2003, E’Prime Aerospace announced the Eagle Flier, to be developed by its affiliate 

SpacePlane Systems (described below) as an orbital space plane. The Eagle Flier is planned 

to be operational by 2005.26

Eagle Flier - SpacePlane Systems

 SpacePlane Systems of Titusville, Florida, is developing the next generation space plane 

vehicle based on the lifting body aircraft concept. The lifting body design with monocoque 

construction does not include heat resistant tile, which reduces failure points, and does 

not have wings. Its configuration will be modular, allowing it to be configured for multiple 

contingencies, respond quickly to new requirements, easily accommodate requirements for 

variations in crew and cargo size, minimize life cycle costs, prepare and execute missions 

in a reduced amount of time with increased launch probability, and support cargo delivery 

for the international space station.

 The Eagle Flier spaceplane is being designed to satisfy customer requirements for 

unmanned air and space applications and manned air and space flight. The company is 

pursuing unmanned markets that include scientific research of weather events such as 

tornados or hurricanes; aerial photography; marine studies; university use of low-cost 

spaceplanes; NASA, NOAA, DoD space missions; de-orbiting spacecraft; on-orbit satellite 

Expendable Launch Vehicles

Vehicle: Eagle Flier

Dimensions: From 6 ft long/3 ft wide to 32 ft long/16 ft wide (manned and unmanned)

Developer: SpacePlane Systems

First Launch: 2005 for unmanned; 2006 for manned vehicle

Payload performance: Manned and unmanned

Launch sites: To be determined
2004 U.S. Commercial Space Transportation Developments and Concepts

17

maintenance and recovery; supply of the ISS; cargo transport; munitions delivery; and military 

reconnaissance. The manned configuration will serve the market for orbital and suborbital 

commercial space flights and rapid passenger transport worldwide.

 The SpacePlane Systems design allows the vehicle to be remotely piloted while manned, 

which will allow for the crew to focus on emergency operations while the ground crew 

controls vehicle operations. Operations would not be inhibited by crew incapacitation. The 

Eagle Flier will have the capability to be stored on the ground and readied for launch in less 

than 24 hours notice.27 The company is conducting test flights of an unmanned scale model 

of the space plane.

Land Launch – The Sea Launch Company, LLC, and Space International 

Services 

 The Sea Launch Board of Directors voted on September 30, 2003, to offer launch 

services from Baikonur Cosmodrome in Kazakhstan, in addition to its sea-based launches 

at the Equator. The new offering, Land Launch, is based on the collaboration of Sea Launch 

Company and Space International Services of Russia, to meet the launch needs of commercial 

customers with medium weight satellites. The Land Launch system will use a version of 

the Sea Launch Zenit-3SL rocket to lift commercial satellites in the 2,000-3,500 kg range 

to geosynchronous transfer orbit, and heavier payloads to inclined or lower orbits. A twostage configuration of the same rocket will also be available for launching heavy payloads, 

or groups of payloads, to low Earth orbits. Payloads and vehicles will be processed and 

launched from existing Zenit facilities at the Baikonur launch site. Initial launch capability 

is slated for the fourth quarter 2005. Boeing Launch Services, Inc. will manage marketing 

and sales for the new offering, expanding on its Sea Launch marketing.28

LV-1 - Rocket Propulsion Engineering Company

 Rocket Propulsion Engineering Company of Mojave, California, has proposed developing 

the LV-1. The LV-1 is a two-stage ELV capable of launching 204 kilograms (450 pounds) 

into LEO. The vehicle uses hydrogen peroxide and kerosene pump-fed engines and graphite 

epoxy tanks. The company is working on two suborbital vehicles, the SV-1 and SV-2, that 

will test the engines and other technologies used in the LV-1 and anticipates beginning test 

launches of those suborbital vehicles no earlier than 2005.29

Expendable Launch Vehicles

Vehicle: LV-1

Developer: Rocket Propulsion Engineering Company

First Launch: No sooner than 2005

Number of stages: 2

Payload performance: 204 kg (450 lbs.) to LEO

Launch sites: To be determined
2004 U.S. Commercial Space Transportation Developments and Concepts

18

Scorpius Family - Microcosm, Inc.

 Microcosm, Inc. of El Segundo, California, is developing the Scorpius family of ELVs. 

The boosters feature a modular design, using a number of identical propulsion pods, each 

with its own liquid propellant engines and graphite-composite propellant tanks. The Sprite 

Mini-Lift vehicle, the smallest orbital version of the Scorpius family, will use six booster pods, 

each with a 89,000-newton (20,000-pound-force) engine, clustered around a sustainer pod 

with a wider expansion ratio of the same engine. The Sprite Mini-Lift will be able to place 

315 kilograms (700 pounds) into LEO and 150 kilograms (330 pounds) into sun-synchronous 

orbit (SSO). Three larger Scorpius vehicles are under study: the Sprite Heavy, capable of 

launching 640 kilograms (1,400 pounds) into LEO, the Liberty Light Lift capable of 1,280 

kilograms (2,800 pounds), the Antares Intermediate-Lift, capable of launching 2,950 kilograms 

(6,500 pounds) into LEO, and the Exodus Medium-Lift, capable of placing 6,800 kilograms 

(15,000 pounds) into LEO.

 In March 2001, Microcosm successfully launched its SR-XM-1 sounding rocket from 

the White Sands Missile Range, New Mexico. The Sprite Mini-Lift’s sustainer pod has the 

same design but utilizes the larger 20,000-pound thrust engine as the SR-XM-2. The Sprite’s 

booster pods will also use the same design as the SR-XM-2, but with sea level expansion 

ratio engines. Microcosm is currently developing the SR-XM-2 sounding rocket to test the 

larger engine. The company anticipates performing the first test launch of the Sprite Mini-Lift 

from Vandenberg by late 2006 or early 2007, with the vehicle entering commercial service 

nine months later at a cost per launch to Microcosm of $2.7 million.

 Microcosm is also conducting preliminary studies under the DARPA Force Application 

and Launch from CONUS (FALCON) contract for the Sprite Heavy that will deliver twice the 

capability as the standard Sprite, but for less than twice the cost.30 DARPA Falcon is intended 

to develop a Common Aero Vehicle capable of delivering up to 1,000 pounds of munitions 

to a target 3,000 nautical miles downrange and an Operational Responsive Spacelift (ORS) 

booster vehicle that will place CAV at the required altitude and velocity. The FALCON program 

will develop a low cost rocket booster to meet these requirements and demonstrate this 

capability in a series of flight tests culminating with the launch of an operable 

CAV-like payload.31

Expendable Launch Vehicles

Vehicle: Scorpius Sprite Mini-Lift

Developer: Microcosm

First Launch: Late 2006 or early 2007

Number of stages: 3

Payload performance: 315 kg (700 lbs.) to LEO, 150 kg (330 lbs.)

to sun-synchronous orbit (SSO)

Launch sites: Vandenberg AFB, Wallops Flight Facility, and

Cape Canaveral
2004 U.S. Commercial Space Transportation Developments and Concepts

19

SLC-1 - The Space Launch Corporation

 The Space Launch Corporation of Irvine, California, is in the initial development stages 

of its SLC-1 launch system. The SLC-1 will use a small expendable booster consisting of 

multiple, custom-built stages based on existing technology. The booster will be deployed 

from a turbo-jet powered aircraft and be able to place payloads of up to 150 kilograms 

(330 pounds) into a 500-kilometer (311-mile) orbit inclined at 28.5 degrees. The company 

is targeting microsatellites and other small payloads that would otherwise be launched as 

secondary payloads on larger vehicles.32 The company anticipates the first launch of this 

system by the end of 2006. The Space Launch Corporation was also selected as the sole 

prime contractor for DARPA’s RASCAL program in March 2003.33 RASCAL is a new tactical 

launch system that will provide the U.S. military with the capability to launch time critical 

space-based assets within hours of detection of an emerging threat. Under the DARPA 

RASCAL program, Space Launch expects to achieve mission recurring costs of less than 

$10,000/kg.

Sounding Rockets

 In addition to orbital launch vehicles, there are a number of suborbital ELVs, or sounding 

rockets, in use today. These vehicles, which use solid propellants, support a variety of 

applications, including astronomical observations, atmospheric research, and microgravity 

experiments.

Black Brant

 Black Brant rockets have been manufactured since 1962, with over 800 

vehicles having been launched during that time. The Black Brant motor 

and Nihka motors used on some Black Brant versions are manufactured 

in Canada by Bristol Aerospace while the Nike, Talos, and Taurus motors 

used on some Black Brant versions are built in the United States. The 

vehicles are integrated by the launch operator. In the United States, NASA 

has been a frequent user of Black Brant vehicles. Versions of the Black 

Brant can carry payloads ranging from 70 to 850 kilograms (154 to 1,874 

pounds) to altitudes of 150 to 1,500 kilometers (93 to 932 miles). Black Brant vehicles can 

provide up to 20 minutes of microgravity time during a flight.34

 The smallest version of the Black Brant family is the single-stage Black Brant 5 vehicle. 

The rocket is 533 centimeters (210 inches) long and 43.8 centimeters (17.26 inches) in 

diameter, and produces an average thrust of 75,731 newtons (17,025 pounds force). The 

Expendable Launch Vehicles

Vehicle: SLC-1

Developer: The Space Launch Corporation

First Launch: Late 2006

Number of stages: Three (including the launch aircraft)

Payload performance: 150 kg (330 lbs.) to LEO

Launch sites: To be determined
2004 U.S. Commercial Space Transportation Developments and Concepts

20

Black Brant 5 motor is used as the second or third stage in larger multi-stage versions of 

the Black Brant. The most powerful Black Brant model, the Black Brant 12, is a four-stage 

vehicle that uses the Black Brant 5 motor as its third stage. The Black Brant 12 can launch 

a 113-kilogram (250-pound) payload to an altitude of at least 1,400 kilometers (870 miles), 

or a 454-kilogram (1,000-pound) payload to an altitude of at least 400 kilometers (249 

miles).35

Oriole

 Astrotech Space Operations developed the Oriole sounding rocket in the late 1990s to 

provide launch services for commercial and scientific payloads. The Oriole was the first 

new sounding rocket developed in the United States in 25 years and is the first privatelydeveloped sounding rocket. The Oriole is a single-stage vehicle with a graphite epoxy 

motor 22 manufactured by Alliant Techsystems in Rocket Center, West Virginia. The vehicle 

can also be combined with other motors to create two-stage sounding rockets with the 

Oriole serving as the second stage. The Oriole is 396 centimeters (156 inches) long and 56 

centimeters (22 inches) in diameter, and generates an average thrust 

of 92,100 newtons (20,700 pounds-force). The Oriole can provide 

payloads with six to nine minutes of microgravity during flight. The first 

flight of the Oriole took place on July 7, 2000, when the Oriole was 

launched from the NASA Wallops Flight Facility in Virginia. The launch 

took place in a two-stage configuration with the Oriole serving as the 

second stage and a Terrier Mk 12 motor as the first stage. The Oriole 

reached a peak altitude of 368.5 kilometers (229 miles) 315 seconds 

after launch during the test flight.36 In July 2001, SPACEHAB sold the 

Oriole program to DTI Associates, who integrates the vehicle and offers 

it commercially.37

Terrier-Orion 

 Terrier-Orion is a two-stage, spin-stabilized sounding rocket using a Terrier Mk 12 Mod 

1 engine for the first stage and an Improved Orion motor for the second stage. The Terrier 

is a surplus U.S. Navy missile motor, while the Orion is a surplus U.S. Army missile motor. 

DTI Associates of Arlington, Virginia (formerly a part of Astrotech Space Operations, a 

SPACEHAB, Inc., subsidiary), is the general contractor for vehicle integration. The TerrierOrion is 10.7 meters (35.1 feet) long; the Terrier stage is 46 centimeters (18 inches) in 

diameter, and the Orion is 36 centimeters (14 inches) in diameter. The TerrierOrion can place payloads of up to 290 kilograms (639 pounds) to altitudes of 

up to 190 kilometers (118 miles).38

 A different version of the Terrier-Orion booster uses the more powerful 

TerrierMk 70 motor on the first stage. This version was used for two FAA/AST 

licensed suborbital launches carried out by Astrotech Space Operations/DTI at the 

Woomera Instrumented Range in Australia in 2001 and 2002. The second flight, 

in July 2002, successfully flew the HyShot scramjet engine experiment.39

Expendable Launch Vehicles
2004 U.S. Commercial Space Transportation Developments and Concepts

21

Reusable Launch Vehicles

This section describes active and emerging reusable launch vehicle (RLV) programs in 

the United States. Emphasis is placed on vehicles being developed by private companies 

without the assistance of the government; many of these companies are developing space 

hardware for the first time. Government RLV programs are also included to provide context, 

particularly since the Space Shuttle is considered a first generation RLV and the precursor 

of what may become a long line of commercial and government next-generation systems. 

Experiences gained by operating the Space Shuttle for more than 20 years have helped solve, 

as well as highlight, crucial problems related to the design of more efficient RLV systems. 

Current government programs to develop follow-on RLVs (such as the restructured Space 

Launch Initiative [SLI]) may utilize some private sector innovation and may help to lay the 

foundation for future, privately developed RLVs for commercial and selected government 

applications. The first section addresses three RLV developments being pursued by the 

National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) as a well as a project sponsored 

by the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA). Commercial RLV projects 

underway or under consideration, including those vying for the X Prize, comprise the balance 

of the section.

Government RLV Development Efforts

 Both NASA and the Department of Defense (DoD) have long been interested in the 

development of RLVs. During the late 1950s and 1960s, NASA and the Air Force developed 

the X-15 to study hypersonic flight. Following the successes of this program, NASA went 

on to great human space flight accomplishments with the Mercury, Gemini, Apollo, Skylab, 

Apollo Soyuz Test Project, Space Shuttle, and the International Space Station programs. 

Throughout the 1980s and 1990s, both NASA and DoD continued with several joint 

and independent experimental RLVs to improve reliability, minimize operating costs, and 

demonstrate “aircraft-like” operations. None of these concepts, however, resulted in a fully 

operational vehicle. 

 Today, both NASA and DoD still endeavor to develop new, reliable RLVs. Still the world’s 

only existing RLV, NASA’s Space Shuttle is aging and never achieved the launch rates and 

economies of scale the space agency originally anticipated for the vehicle. In 1999, NASA 

introduced its Integrated Space Transportation Plan (ISTP), an investment strategy for its 

space transportation needs. The ISTP included a program of Space Shuttle upgrades; SLI, 

originally a technology development program to support NASA in making a decision on a 

new RLV to replace the Shuttle; and a program to develop the technologies for third- and 

fourth-generation RLVs. The space agency also funded several RLV research vehicles. DoD 

studied an assortment of military space plane and related technology concepts.

 In 2002, both NASA and the military reevaluated their RLV efforts. NASA implemented 

a revised ISTP to better coordinate its space transportation efforts with its International 

Reusable Launch Vehicles
2004 U.S. Commercial Space Transportation Developments and Concepts

22

Space Station (ISS) and science and research needs. The revised ISTP continued to support 

the Space Shuttle with a Service Life Extension Program (SLEP), and it restructured SLI to 

accommodate the development initially of an ISS crew rescue vehicle (CRV), and then the 

development of a crew transfer vehicle (CTV) called the Orbital Space Plane (OSP). The 

restructured SLI also has a component called the Next Generation Launch Technology 

(NGLT) to continue development of next generation and subsequent generations of launch 

vehicle technology. The Air Force and NASA also conducted a joint study to explore their 

respective RLV requirements and, after finding common requirements, agreed to cooperate 

as appropriate on RLV development, although in what form remains to be determined. In 

addition, some military space requirements may be met by DARPA’s Responsive Access, 

Small Cargo, and Affordable Launch (RASCAL) program, which is expected to yield a vehicle 

that can meet the demand for launch of small payloads on short notice.

 On January 14, 2004, President George W. Bush announced a new vision to retire the 

Space Shuttle and develop a new vehicle capable of carrying astronauts to the ISS and 

explore space beyond low Earth orbit. Initially, the United States will return the Space Shuttle 

to flight in accordance with the recommendations of the Columbia Accident Investigation 

Board to complete its work on the ISS by 2010, after which the Shuttle will be retired. 

The United States will also begin developing a new manned exploration vehicle, the Crew 

Exploration Vehicle (CEV), to be tested by 2008 and conduct its first manned mission 

in 2014. The CEV will transport astronauts and scientists to the ISS after the Shuttle is 

retired. Extended manned missions to the Moon could begin as early as 2015, following a 

series of robotic missions. Knowledge gained through extended visits to the Moon will be 

used to develop technology for human missions beyond the Moon, beginning with Mars. 

The plans are expected to cost $12 billion over five years, with the majority of the funding 

derived from reallocations within NASA’s existing budget. NASA, utilizing the advice of a 

new President’s Commission on the Implementation of the U.S. Space Exploration Policy, 

will review all existing space flight and exploration programs and develop a plan for longterm implementation of the President’s vision in 2004.40

Space Shuttle

 Consisting of an expendable external tank, two reusable solid rocket boosters, and a 

reusable Orbiter, NASA’s Space Transportation System (STS), commonly referred to as the 

Space Shuttle, remains the world’s only existing RLV. The Space Shuttle has conducted 

Vehicles: Space Shuttles Discovery, Atlantis, and Endeavour

Developer: Rockwell International (now Boeing). Fleet is managed, operated and maintained

on the ground by United Space Alliance, a joint venture between Boeing and Lockheed Martin

First launch: April 12, 1981

Number of stages: 1.5

Payload performance: 24,900 kg (54,890 lbs.) to low Earth orbit (LEO)

Launch site: Kennedy Space Center (KSC), Florida

Markets served: Non-commercial payloads and ISS access

Reusable Launch Vehicles
2004 U.S. Commercial Space Transportation Developments and Concepts

23

113 launches since its introduction in 1981. Unfortunately, on 

its first mission in 2003, the Space Shuttle Orbiter Columbia 

suffered a catastrophic failure on reentry that resulted in the loss 

of its seven astronauts and the vehicle. Fortunately, there were 

no casualties on the ground as the breakup of the vehicle and 

the resultant debris field covered a long swath of land primarily 

through sparsely inhabited Northeast Texas. The Columbia 

Accident Investigation Board (CAIB) has completed its report on 

the cause of the accident and its recommendations on actions 

required to be completed by NASA to return the STS safely to 

flight status.41

 The three remaining Orbiters, Discovery, Atlantis, and Endeavour have been grounded 

since the Columbia accident. The Space Shuttle is the only means available today for 

completing assembly of the ISS. Intending to fly the Shuttle until 2010, NASA is committed 

to investing in the Space Shuttle fleet to maintain safety and reliability and extend orbiter 

service life until its responsibilities constructing the ISS are complete. In 2002, the space 

agency restructured its Shuttle upgrades program to better align investments with agency 

goals and the ISTP. Now called the Service Life Extension Program, the program’s primary 

objective is to reduce risk and preserve Shuttle safety and viability through investments 

in Shuttle upgrades and infrastructure revitalization. NASA will consider factors including 

safety, reliability, supportability, performance, and cost reduction in prioritizing improvement 

projects. The Space Shuttle’s day-to-day operations have been managed by United Space 

Alliance, a Boeing-Lockheed Martin joint venture, since 1996. NASA, as well as others in 

the space community, has raised the possibility that even more responsibility for the Shuttle 

might be shifted from government to private sector control. A task force commissioned by 

NASA to examine this possibility suggested in 2002 a variety of options through which the 

space agency could further competitive outsourcing of Shuttle operations. NASA has not 

yet announced how it will proceed.42

Orbital Space Plane

 One of NASA’s key requirements for space 

transportation is ensuring the ability to transport 

crews to and from the ISS, both under normal 

operations and emergency return situations. While 

the Space Shuttle, when it returns to flight status, 

and the Russian Soyuz vehicles currently serve these 

needs, these options may not exist for the duration 

of ISS operations, which will extend until at least 

2016. In 2002, NASA cancelled the X-38, a full-scale 

prototype of a crew return vehicle that was intended 

to serve as a lifeboat for the ISS.

Reusable Launch Vehicles
2004 U.S. Commercial Space Transportation Developments and Concepts

24

 The newest component of NASA’s SLI, the Orbital Space Plane, is NASA’s proposed 

vehicle architecture to meet the space agency’s requirements for the ISS with minimal 

cost and risk. NASA anticipates the vehicle beginning as a crew return vehicle that will be 

launched to the ISS atop an Evolved Expendable Launch Vehicle (EELV). Crew rescue vehicle 

(CRV) operations will begin at least by 2010, and the initial capability may be accelerated 

to as early as 2008. By 2012, the Orbital Space Plane will be able to support the transfer 

of crew as well as limited cargo both to and from space. NASA envisions that the Orbital 

Space Plane will serve as a complement to the Space Shuttle for launching crews into space 

and could potentially fulfill ISS logistical needs.

 NASA expects to approach the program aggressively and complete preliminary designs 

by 2005. The space agency awarded SLI contracts in November 2002 to Boeing and 

Lockheed Martin for flight demonstrator technologies to reduce the risks associated with 

the development of the Orbital Space Plane. Boeing will continue development of the X-37 

experimental vehicle to demonstrate key flight technologies (described in greater detail in 

the “Enabling Technologies” section), while Lockheed Martin will develop a launch pad abort 

demonstrator to prove emergency crew escape technologies. Orbital Sciences Corporation 

was also awarded an SLI flight demonstration project for a Demonstrator for Autonomous 

Rendezvous Technologies (DART). It is a flight demonstrator vehicle to test technologies 

required to autonomously find and rendezvous with other spacecraft without having an 

astronaut on board. These plans are subject to change as NASA reevaluates its space flight 

programs as part of the new space exploration vision.

Next Generation Launch Technology

 Another component of NASA’s restructured SLI, the Next Generation Launch Technology 

(NGLT) program combines elements of two previous research efforts: the original SLI program, 

which sought to reduce the risk associated with developing and flying a second-generation 

RLV around 2012, and NASA’s former Advanced Space Transportation Program, which 

pursued propulsion, launch and flight technologies to produce options for third generation 

RLV concepts capable of flight in the 2025 timeframe. NGLT consists of investments for 

new research in propulsion, structures, vehicle systems and ground and flight operations. 

It is focusing on four significant technology research areas: 1) development of a reusable 

liquid-oxygen/liquid kerosene rocket booster engine; 2) development of hypersonic airbreathing propulsion and airframe systems; 3) development of cross-cutting launch vehicle 

system technologies; and 4) analysis activities to guide program investment and to ensure 

an appropriate fit with NASA’s needs and the needs of NASA’s civilian and government 

customers. In 2004, the program is slated to decide whether to proceed with a Next 

Generation Launch Vehicle risk-mitigation phase, which would include research and testing 

of large-scale tanks, structures and engines. NASA does not intend to make a decision on 

the development of a next-generation RLV any earlier than 2009. Also, a decision may be 

reached late in the next decade concerning future development of a hypersonic reusable 

launch vehicle, based on current air-breathing propulsion systems in development. NASA 

Reusable Launch Vehicles
2004 U.S. Commercial Space Transportation Developments and Concepts

25

plans to work with DoD to assess common requirements and opportunities for cooperation 

on future RLV development efforts.43 NASA’s NGLT plans are subject to change pending its 

reevaluation of space flight programs.

RASCAL

 The Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) 

started work in 2002 on a project to create a low-cost partially 

reusable launch vehicle for small payloads. The Responsive 

Access, Small Cargo, and Affordable Launch (RASCAL) program 

seeks to develop a two-stage air launch system that can place 

payloads weighing up to 100 kilograms (220 pounds) into Low 

Earth Orbit (LEO). The RASCAL first stage will be a jet aircraft 

that flies to an altitude of at least 61 kilometers (200,000 feet). The aircraft will then deploy 

an expendable rocket to place the payload into orbit. The vehicle will be able to put at least 

50 kilograms (110 pounds) into any inclination, including 75 kilograms (165 pounds) into 

sun-synchronous orbit (SSO) and heavier payloads into equatorial orbits. The RASCAL 

vehicle will be able to take off within one hour of a launch command and fly again within 

24 hours at a cost of no more than $750,000 per flight.

 To achieve these performance goals, RASCAL will use an engine technology called 

Mass Injected Pre-Compressor Cooling (MIPCC) on its aircraft stage. A MIPCC engine 

injects a coolant, such as water or liquid oxygen, into the engine inlet. This process cools 

and compresses the airflow, extending the engine’s limits and allowing it to operate at 

higher altitudes and greater speeds than otherwise possible. MIPCC will allow a vehicle 

powered by conventional turbofan engines to achieve a speed of Mach 4, an altitude over 

61 kilometers (200,000 feet), and a dynamic pressure of less than 48 Pascals (1 pound per 

square foot). At that dynamic pressure, the rocket’s upper stage can be released without a 

fairing to protect the payload. In 2003, DARPA selected Space Launch Corporation as the 

only RASCAL Phase II award winner. Phase II is an 18-month design phase that will advance 

the design of the RASCAL system and allow for risk reduction testing. Phase III will serve 

as the construction, test, and demonstration phase of the RASCAL program. Flight tests 

are scheduled to begin in FY 2005 with final system demonstrations - including the launch 

of at least two orbital payloads - in FY 2006.44

Commercial RLV Development Efforts

X Prize Contenders

 In the spirit of the early 20th-century aviation prizes, such as the Orteig Prize that Charles 

Lindbergh won for crossing the Atlantic in 1927, the X Prize Foundation was established in 

1995 as an educational, non-profit corporation dedicated to inspiring private, entrepreneurial 

advancements in space travel. The X Prize is being offered to help speed development 

of space vehicle concepts that will reduce the cost of access to space and allow human 

Reusable Launch Vehicles
2004 U.S. Commercial Space Transportation Developments and Concepts

26

spaceflight to become routine. The St. Louis-based X Prize Foundation is offering a $10 

million prize to the first team that launches a vehicle capable of carrying three people (or 

one person and ballast weight for two others) on a suborbital trajectory to a 100-kilometer 

(62-mile) altitude and repeats the flight within two weeks in the same vehicle. The X Prize 

is fully funded through January 1, 2005. 

 In June of 2003, the X Prize Foundation selected a former Space Shuttle Commander, 

Rick Searfoss, as the Chief Judge of the X Prize competition. His first job will be to finish 

forming the pool of aviation and space experts to judge the X Prize competition. The judges 

will ensure that the X Prize is awarded to the first team to meet the requirements of the X 

Prize.45

 In 2003, eight new teams joined the X Prize competition, bringing the total to 27 entrants 

from seven countries proposing a variety of RLV concepts (see Table 2 for a complete 

listing of all of the X Prize competitors). Most of the commercial vehicles 

under development for the X Prize competition are uniquely designed for 

suborbital space tourism operations carrying three passengers. These 

vehicles use a variety of launch and landing design concepts.

 Dov Chartarifsky led the first new team to enter the X Prize in 2003, 

IL Aerospace Technologies (ILAT) of Israel, and became the seventh 

nation to compete for the X Prize on January 13, 2003. ILAT’s vehicle, 

Negev, launches from a helium stratospheric balloon at 82,000 ft with a 

commercially available solid rocket motor. The ILAT team is dedicating its 

X Prize attempt in honor of the first Israeli astronaut, Col. Ilan Ramon who perished along 

with the rest of the Space Shuttle Columbia crew.

 On January 14, 2003, Micro-Space Inc., of Denver, Colorado, registered its X Prize vehicle, 

Crusader X. The Crusader X vehicle uses a pressure-fed methyl 

alcohol and hydrogen peroxide engine. The cockpit core frame’s 

seats and windshield are situated in a bobsled configuration. The 

propulsion modules are strapped onto the sides of the vehicle. 

The core also holds the attitude control jets, tiny flight controller, 

and parachute packages. Micro-Space plans to launch from Texas 

and recover the vehicle after a parachute water landing in the 

Gulf of Mexico. 

 The third new team of 2003 was Interorbital Systems (IOS) 

of Mojave, California, with its SOLARIS X Vehicle on January 16, 

2003. The IOS rocket team led by Roderick and Randa Milliron 

has been developing its launch vehicle since 1996. The Solaris X rocket is designed to carry 

four people to 152 km (52km higher than required to win the X Prize). White Fuming Nitric 

Reusable Launch Vehicles
2004 U.S. Commercial Space Transportation Developments and Concepts

27

Acid and Hydrocarbon X are used as propellants in the Solaris X’s main engine. While the 

Solaris X can be launched vertically from either land or sea, IOS plans to launch from three 

possible sites: the Mojave Civilian Flight Test Center, South Texas Spaceport, or Spaceport 

Tonga. IOS also announced that the SOLARIS X will be piloted by a woman, Wally Funk, 

one of the original “Mercury 13” female astronaut trainees in the early 1960s. IOS is the 

first woman-owned team and female-piloted vehicle in the X Prize competition.46 

 The fourth new X Prize team was Bill Sprague’s American 

Astronautics with The Spirit of Liberty vehicle on January 17, 2003. 

The booster uses one primary liquid oxygen/RP-1 liquid engine. After 

apogee, an aerobraking device reduces the velocity; then the main 

parafoil is deployed and unreefed in stages to control acceleration 

forces during deployment; and finally the vehicle touches down 

with deployed pressurized bags. The Spirit of Liberty also features 

an emergency escape system for the seven passengers.

 

 On June 3, 2003, the fifth new team entered the X Prize 

competition, Vanguard Spacecraft Team with its vehicle, Eagle. The 

team is lead by Steve McGrath of Bridgewater, Massachusetts. 

The Eagle uses a three-stage combination of 12 liquid engines and 

four solid rocket motors to boost the vehicle up to 100 km. The 

Eagle has both drogue and main parachutes that deploy to slow 

the vehicle’s speed for splashdown.47

 The sixth team to register was the High Altitude Research Corporation, Inc. (HARC) 

team in November 2003 with its Liberator vehicle. 

HARC began as a spin-off of the High Altitude LiftOff (HALO) program of the National Space Society’s 

Huntsville chapter. The Liberator uses a single 

stage LOX-Kerosene pressure-fed engine that is 

launched from an ocean going vessel and reaches 

approximately 70 miles altitude before parachuting 

back for a water landing. The Liberator is designed 

with a crew escape system to allow the occupants 

to jettison the capsule from a malfunctioning booster 

and parachute downrange from the launch platform. 

The HARC team is based in Huntsville, Alabama.48

 Space Transport Corporation was the seventh team to enter the X Prize competition 

in November of 2003 with its Suborbital Tourism Vehicle (STV) the “Rubicon.” Eric Meier 

and Phillip Storm established Space Transport Corporation in August of 2002 in Forks, 

Reusable Launch Vehicles
2004 U.S. Commercial Space Transportation Developments and Concepts

28

Washington. The STV will have a gross lift-off weight of approximately 4000 lbs and stand 

20 feet high. The STV has seven identical eight-foot long twelve-inch solid rocket engines; 

six of them are in a ring configuration around the seventh central engine. The outer engines 

are fired in opposing pairs and then the central engine is fired alone to make up four firing 

stages.49

 The eighth and final team to register for the X Prize in 2003 was Blue Ridge Nebula 

Airlines. The Blue Ridge entrant is an asymmetric rotating lifting body, which is designed 

for vertical takeoff and landing.

SpaceShipOne – Scaled Composites

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 Scaled Composites, the first team to register for the X Prize, unveiled its vehicle on 

April 18, 2003. Led by Burt Rutan, Scaled Composites has started flight-testing its launch 

vehicle, SpaceShipOne. SpaceShipOne is a three-person vehicle designed to be air-launched 

at an altitude of 50,000 ft from a carrier aircraft, called White Knight. During 2003, Scaled 

conducted 11 flights, starting with three captive carry flights and seven drop tests. On 

December 17, 2003, the 100th anniversary of the Wright Brother’s first powered flight, 

SpaceShipOne had its first powered flight. The hybrid propulsion system roared to life for 

15 seconds pushing the vehicle past the speed of sound and reached an apogee of 68,000 

feet. At apogee the pilot configured the vehicle into its feathered high-drag configuration for 

about one minute, and then reconfigured the vehicle for a glide back to the Mojave Civilian 

Flight Test Center.50

Black Armadillo - Armadillo Aerospace

 For Armadillo Aerospace, succeeding in the development of an X Prize vehicle is the first 

step to considering future suborbital and potentially orbital launch services. The company’s 

specific objective beyond winning the X Prize is to adapt its X Prize vehicle for space tourism 

and provide a suborbital platform for small microgravity research payloads. The X Prize 

Reusable Launch Vehicles

Vehicle: SpaceShipOne

Developer: Scaled Composites

First Launch: 2003

Number of Stages: 1

Possible Launch Sites: Mojave, California

Targeted Markets: Research and Development

Vehicle: Black Armadillo

Developer: Armadillo Aerospace

First Launch: expected 2004

Number of Stages: 1

Possible Launch Sites: White Sands, New Mexico

Targeted Markets: Public space transportation and other emerging markets
2004 U.S. Commercial Space Transportation Developments and Concepts

29

vehicle, Black Armadillo, will consist of an autonomously guided single stage powered 

by four canted motors fueled by a bi-modal monopropellant hydrogen peroxide/methanol 

mixture. The vehicle is about six feet in diameter and 30 feet in height and about 1,700 

lbs.51 Armadillo has been making significant progress in the development of test articles and 

components. In 2003, Armadillo Aerospace tested the parachutes and crushable nose cone 

landing system by drop testing their vehicle from a helicopter. Armadillo Aerospace also 

spent considerable time fine-tuning its propellant mixture. They switched from 90 percent 

hydrogen peroxide to a mixture of 50 percent hydrogen peroxide with water and methanol 

that is cheaper and more readily available. In 2004, Armadillo plans to start its flight test 

program with some captive hover tests at its 100-acre test facility in Texas, followed by 

low altitude amateur launches before making its attempt at the X Prize. 

Rocketplane XP - Rocketplane Limited, Inc. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 Pioneer Rocketplane’s Rocketplane Limited, Inc. is concurrently developing a scaleddown version of its Pathfinder vehicle, called the Rocketplane XP, to provide passenger 

service along suborbital trajectories. The Rocketplane XP is a four-seat fighter-sized vehicle 

powered by two jet engines and two rocket engines, enabling it to reach altitudes of 350,000 

feet. Rocketplane has an agreement with the U.S.-based company Space Adventures to 

offer suborbital flights to customers paying between $98,000 and $100,000 per seat. The 

company recently contracted with a cost analysis team to conduct a technical appraisal 

on Pathfinder and its infrastructure as a requirement to receive financial support from the 

state of Oklahoma, where it plans to operate. Rocketplane’s first suborbital spaceplane to be 

developed is a half-scale version of the Pathfinder without the payload bay. This spaceplane 

is intended to service the suborbital adventure travel market, and is also Rocketplane’s X 

Prize vehicle. The spaceplane will carry a minimum of two passengers, plus a pilot and copilot. The half-scale vehicle takes off fully fueled and does not require the tanker operations 

that the larger spaceplane needs for LEO satellite launch operations.52

 The Oklahoma Department of Commerce, the Oklahoma Space Development Authority 

and the Oklahoma Tax Commission certified Rocketplane in early 2004 as a qualified space 

transportation vehicle. Certification means investors in Rocketplane Limited will be eligible 

to receive state tax credits of up to 59.9 percent of the value of their investment.

Reusable Launch Vehicles

Vehicle: Rocketplane XP

Developer: Rocketplane Limited, Inc.

First launch: September 2006

Number of stages: 1

Possible launch sites: Oklahoma Spaceport

Targeted markets: Suborbital space tourism
2004 U.S. Commercial Space Transportation Developments and Concepts

30

Reusable Launch Vehicles

X Prize Team

Leader 

Location

Acceleration Engineering

Mickey Badgero

Bath, Michigan

Advent Launch Services

Jim Akkerman

Houston, Texas

Aeronautics and Cosmonautics Romanian

Association (ARCA)

Dimitru Popescu Romania

American Astronautics Corporation

Bill Sprague

Oceanside, California

Armadillo Aerospace

John Carmack

Dallas, Texas

Blue Ridge Nebula Airlines

Douglas Haynes

Bristol Spaceplanes

David Ashford –England

Canadian Arrow

Geoff Sheerin

Canada

The da Vinci Project

Brian Feeney

Canada

Pablo de León and Associates

Pablo de León

Argentina

Discraft Corporation

John Bloomer

Portland, Oregon

Flight Exploration

Graham Dorington

England

Fundamental Technology Systems

Ray Nielsen

Orlando, Florida

Vehicle and Website

Lucky Seven

Mayflower

www.ghg.net/jimakkerman 

Orizont

www.arcaspace.ro 

The Spirit of Liberty

www.americanastronautics.com

Black Armadillo

www.armadilloaerospace.com

El Jimmile 

www.blueridgeairlines.com

Ascender

www.bristolspaceplanes.com

Canadian Arrow 

www.canadianarrow.com

Wild Fire

www.davinciproject.com

Gauchito

(Little Cowboy)

www.pablodeleon.com

The Space Tourist

The Green Arrow

Aurora

www.funtechsystems.com 

Launch System and

Mission Description

Cone-shaped vehicle powered by rocket

engines. The vehicle will launch

vertically and land using a parafoil. 

Cyclinder-shaped glider powered by

LOX/methane rocket engines. The vehicle 

will launch vertically from water and land

horizontally at the launch site. Hardware 

has been built and tested.

Cylinder-shaped vehicle of standard

rocket design with vertical launch plan.

Hardware has been built and tested.

Cylinder-shaped vehicle of standard

rocket design with single stage LOX/RP-1

engine. This vehicle will launch vertically

and glide to a landing with a parafoil and

airbags.

Development work has focused on monoand bi-propellant hydrogen peroxide 

engines. Hardware has been built and

tested.

Asymmetric rotating lifting body, saucer

shaped, designed for vertical take off and

landing with ramjet/rocket hybrid engines.

RLV powered by two conventional jet

engines and a liquid-fueled rocket engine.

The vehicle will take off horizontally and

land horizontally. Hardware has been built

and tested.

Stretched, two-stage version of the V-2

rocket. It launches vertically and performs

a parachute, water landing of the booster 

and passenger stages. Hardware has 

been built and tested.

Air-launched, LOX/kerosene rocket

deployed from a large helium balloon.

Recovery system features a high-drag

reentry ballute and a Global

Positioning System-guided parafoil.

Hardware has been built and tested.

Single-stage vehicle that will launch

vertically. The first stage booster and

the passenger capsule return to

Earth using parachutes. Hardware

has been built and tested.

Disc-shaped vehicle powered by air-breathing

“blastwave-pulse jets.” The vehicle will take

off and land horizontally.

Cylinder-shaped rocket using liquid-fueled

rocket engines. The vehicle will launch

vertically and land vertically using parachutes

and air bags.

Horizontal takeoff and landing double-deltawinged RLV powered by a single kerosene

and hydrogen peroxide engine capable of

being throttled.

TABLE 2: X Prize RLV Concepts
2004 U.S. Commercial Space Transportation Developments and Concepts

31

TABLE 2: X Prize RLV Concepts (Cont'd)

High Altitude Research Corporation (HARC)

Tim Pickens

Huntsville, AL

IL Aerospace Technologies (ILAT)

Dov Chartarifsky

Israel

Interorbital Systems (IOS)

Roderick and Randa Milliron

Mojave, California

Kelly Space & Technology

Michael Gallo

San Bernardino, California

Lone Star Space Access

Norman LaFave

Houston, Texas

Micro-Space, Inc.

Richard Speck

Denver, Colorado

PanAero

Len Cormier

Fairfax, Virginia

Pioneer Rocketplane

Mitchell Clapp

Solvang, California

Scaled Composites

Burt Rutan

Mojave, California

Space Transport Corporation

Eric Meier and Phillip Storm

Forks, Washington

Starchaser Industries

Steve Bennet

England

Suborbital Corporation

Sergey Kostenko

Russia

TGV Rockets

Kent Ewing

Bethesda, Maryland

Vanguard Spacecraft

Steve McGrath

Bridgewater, Massachusetts

The Liberator

www.harcspace.com 

Negev

www.ilat.co.il 

Solaris X

www.interorbital.com 

LB-X

www.kellyspace.com

Cosmos Mariner

www.lonestarspace.com 

Crusader X

www.micro-space.com 

SabreRocket

www.tour2space.com 

Pioneer XP

www.rocketplane.com 

White Knight and SpaceShipOne

www.scaled.com 

Suborbital Tourism Vehicle “Rubicon”

www.space-transport.com

Thunderbird

www.starchaser.co.uk 

Cosmopolis-21

M.I.C.H.E.L.L.E.-B

www.tgv-rockets.com 

Eagle

Cylinder-shaped rocket with single stage

LOX-Kerosene pressure-fed engine launched

from an ocean going vessel and parachute

landing.

Solid rocket engine ignition at 30km via

Helium Balloon ascent. Unpowered descent

via three parachutes to a land or water

landing.

Cylinder-shaped rocket using liquid-fueled

rocket engines. The vehicle will launch

vertically and land vertically.

Air-launched, lifting body vehicle that is taken

to altitude by a tow aircraft. The vehicle will

perform an unpowered horizontal landing.

Hardware has been built and tested.

RLV powered by two air-breathing engines

and one rocket engine. The vehicle will launch

and land horizontally.

Multiple cylinder-shaped rockets using liquidfueled rocket engines with a bobsled type

capsule configuration. The vehicle will launch

vertically and land under parachutes.

Modified Sabre Jet with seven small LOX/

Kerosene engines. The vehicle will perform a

horizontal takeoff and powered, horizontal

landing.

Powered by both air-breathing jet engines

and LOX/kerosene rocket engines. XP will

takeoff horizontally and perform a powered,

horizontal landing.

Two-stage vehicle consisting of a

turbo-fan-powered carrier aircraft and a

rocket-powered second stage. Hardware has

been built and tested.

Cylindrical-shaped rocket using seven solid 

rocket engines. Some hardware is built.

Traditional, multi-stage rocket using solid booster

and liquid-fueled rocket engines. The vehicle will

launch vertically and make a ballistic, guided--

parachute landing. Hardware has been built and

tested.

Space plane carried to take-off altitude on the

back of an M55-X carrier aircraft. The vehicle

ejects the solid rocket motor after burn-out and

glides to a horizontal landing. Hardware has

been built and tested.

MICHELLE-B will launch vertically, perform a

straight-up, straight-down flight trajectory,

and perform a powered, vertical landing.

Cylinder-shaped rocket using both solid and

liquid-fueled rocket engines. The vehicle will

launch vertically and land using parachutes.

Reusable Launch Vehicles
2004 U.S. Commercial Space Transportation Developments and Concepts

32

Other Commercial RLV Efforts 

Falcon 1 - Space Exploration Technologies Corporation

 Elon Musk, an Internet entrepreneur, founded Space Exploration Technologies Corporation 

(SpaceX) of El Segundo, California, in June 2002. The company is developing the Falcon 1 

launch vehicle, which is a mostly reusable rocket capable of placing either 1,250 pounds in 

the standard configuration or 4,000 pounds in the heavy configuration into low Earth orbit. 

The Falcon’s first launch is scheduled for May 2004, to loft the TacSat-1 data communications 

satellite into orbit for the Office of the Secretary of Defense’s Office of Force Transformation 

from Vandenberg Air Force Base in California.53

 SpaceX is privately developing the entire two-stage vehicle from the ground up, including 

first and second stage LOX/kerosene engines, the turbo-pump, the cryogenic tank structure 

and the guidance system.54 SpaceX initially plans to launch the Falcon two to three times a 

year from Space Launch Complex (SLC)-3W at VAFB, Launch Complex (LC)-46 at CCAFS, 

and the Kwajalein Atoll in the western Pacific Ocean, eventually ramping up to five to six 

flights a year at a price of $6 million per launch.

Falcon 5 - Space Exploration Technologies Corporation

 Drawing from its experience with the single engine Falcon 1, due to launch in mid-2004, 

Space Exploration Technologies Corporation (SpaceX) is developing a five engine version 

that will be the first U.S. rocket capable of losing any three of the five engines and still 

complete its mission. Like Falcon 1, Falcon 5 is a two stage, liquid oxygen and rocket grade 

kerosene (RP-1) powered launch vehicle. It also makes use of the same engines, structural 

architecture (with a wider diameter), avionics and launch system.

Reusable Launch Vehicles

Vehicle: Falcon 1

Developer: Space Exploration Technologies Corporation

First launch: May 2004

Number of stages: 2

Payload performance: 454 kg (1,000 lbs.) to LEO

Launch sites: Vandenberg Air Force Base, Cape Canaveral

Air Force Station, Kwajalein Atoll

Vehicle: Falcon 5

Developer: Space Exploration Technologies Corporation

First launch: mid-2005

Number of stages: 2

Payload performance: 4,173 kg (9200 lbs.) to LEO

Launch sites: Vandenberg Air Force Base, Cape Canaveral Air Force Station, Kwajalein Atoll
2004 U.S. Commercial Space Transportation Developments and Concepts

33

 The Falcon 5 also will increase the capability of the Falcon launch vehicle family with 

a capacity of over 4,000 kg (9,200 lbs.) to low Earth orbit and up to a 4 meter (13.1 

foot) diameter payload fairing. The vehicle also will be capable of launching missions to 

geostationary orbit and the inner solar system as well as carrying supplies to the International 

Space Station with the addition of a lightweight automated transfer vehicle. Contract pricing 

will be set at a firm $12 million per flight plus range costs, resulting in an unprecedented 

cost of $1,300 per pound to orbit.55

K-1 - Kistler Aerospace Corporation

 Kistler has been developing the K-1 for commercial launches of LEO payloads. The K-1 

design was developed in the mid-1990s as a two-stage-to-orbit (TSTO) vehicle with a payload 

capacity of approximately 4,535 kilograms (10,000 pounds) to LEO and a then-expected 

market price of $17 million per launch. Kistler has completed a conceptual design for an 

Active Dispenser that will deploy payloads to medium Earth orbits (MEO), geosynchronous 

transfer orbits (GTO), and interplanetary trajectories. The Active Dispenser will expand 

the K-1’s capability beyond LEO (approximately 1,570 kilograms [3,460 pounds] to GTO) 

at a launch price of $25 million. The K-1 also will be capable of providing cargo re-supply 

and return services for the ISS. The K-1 will be able to launch multiple small payloads on 

dedicated missions or as secondary payloads. Kistler is working with Astrium, Ltd., in the 

United Kingdom to develop reusable payload dispensers for multiple small payloads. The 

K-1 will launch vertically like a conventional expendable launch vehicle (ELV) but will use 

a unique combination of parachutes and air bags to recover its two stages. The vehicle, 

designed to operate with a small complement of ground personnel, will be transported to 

the launch site and erected with a mobile transporter. The K-1 will measure about 37 meters 

(121 feet) in height and have a launch mass of 382,300 kilograms (843,000 pounds).

 The K-1 employs off-the-shelf technology and components in its design. The first stage, 

known as the Launch Assist Platform, is powered by three liquid oxygen (LOX)/kerosene 

GenCorp Aerojet AJ26 engines. These engines include elements of the NK-33 engines 

originally built by the Soviet Union in the 1960s. After launch, the Launch Assist Platform 

separates from the second stage and restarts its center engine to fly a return trajectory to 

a landing area near the launch site. The Launch Assist Platform deploys parachutes and 

descends to the landing area where air bags are deployed to cushion its landing. The second 

Reusable Launch Vehicles

Vehicle: K-1

Developer: Kistler Aerospace Corporation

First launch: To be determined

Number of stages: 2

Payload performance: 4,535 kg (10,000 lbs.) to LEO; 1,570 kg (3,460 lbs.) to geosynchronous

 transfer orbit (GTO)

Possible launch sites: Woomera, Australia; Nevada Test Site

Targeted markets: Deployment of LEO payloads GTO payloads (with Active Dispenser), ISS

re-supply and cargo return missions.
2004 U.S. Commercial Space Transportation Developments and Concepts

34

stage, or Orbital Vehicle, continues into LEO, where it releases its payload. The Orbital Vehicle 

is powered by a single Aerojet AJ26-60 engine (derived from the Russian NK-43 engine).

 Following payload separation, the Orbital Vehicle continues on orbit for about 24 hours, 

after which a LOX/ethanol orbital maneuvering system performs a deorbit burn. The Orbital 

Vehicle ends its ballistic re-entry profile by deploying parachutes and air bags in a manner 

similar to the Launch Assist Platform. Kistler expects to operate the K-1 from two launch 

sites: Woomera, Australia, and the Nevada Test Site. Kistler Woomera Pty., Ltd., a wholly 

owned subsidiary of Kistler Aerospace Corporation, will operate the K-1 from Woomera. 

Kistler received authorization from the Australian government to begin construction of 

launch facilities at Woomera in April 1998 and held a groundbreaking ceremony at the site 

several months later. The launch pad’s design is complete, and Kistler will conduct its initial 

K-1 flights and commercial operations from Woomera. In 1998, Kistler signed an agreement 

with the Nevada Test Site Development Corporation to permit Kistler to occupy a segment 

of the U.S. Department of Energy’s Nevada Test Site for its launch operations. The FAA/AST 

environmental review process was completed for the Kistler project in 2002. In 2003, Kistler 

filed to reorganize under Chapter 11 of the U.S. Bankruptcy Code. However, the company 

expects to emerge with a reorganization plan once it has secured long term financing and 

continue vehicle development.56

Pathfinder - Pioneer Rocketplane

 The Pathfinder traces its heritage to a military space plane concept called “Black Horse,” 

which was promoted within the Air Force in the early 1990s. Pioneer Rocketplane developed 

a derivative design that it called Pathfinder and proposed a precursor to it as a potential 

design for NASA’s now cancelled X-34 vehicle. Pioneer Rocketplane continued Pathfinder 

development, and in June 1997 it was awarded one of four, $2-million NASA Low Cost 

Boost Technology Program contracts to develop detailed preliminary designs and to conduct 

wind tunnel tests for concepts to launch small satellites.

 The vehicle will be operated by a crew of two pilots with experience in high performance 

aircraft and will have accommodations to carry two passengers. Both air-breathing jet engines 

and LOX/kerosene rocket engines will power the vehicle. The 23-meter- (75-foot-) long 

vehicle will take off horizontally using conventional turbofan jet engines. When it reaches 

an altitude of 6,000 meters (19,685 feet), Pathfinder will receive 59,000 kilograms (130,000 

Reusable Launch Vehicles

Vehicle: Pathfinder

Developer: Pioneer Rocketplane

First Launch: To be determined

Number of stages: 2 (Second “stage” is an air refueling aircraft)

Payload performance: 1,818 kg (4,000 lbs.) to LEO

Possible launch sites: Oklahoma Spaceport

Targeted markets: Launch of small- and medium class payloads to LEO
2004 U.S. Commercial Space Transportation Developments and Concepts

35

pounds) of LOX from a tanker aircraft. After disconnecting from the tanker, Pathfinder will 

ignite its RD-120 rocket engine and climb to an altitude of 112 kilometers (70 miles) at a 

speed of about Mach 12. Once out of the atmosphere, Pathfinder will be able to open its 

cargo bay doors and release its payload with a conventional rocket upper stage. The payload 

will proceed to its orbit while the Pathfinder re-enters the atmosphere. After deceleration 

to subsonic speeds, Pathfinder will re-start its turbofan engines and land horizontally. 

Pathfinder’s maximum payload capacity to LEO will be 1,818 kilograms (4,000 pounds). 

The first air-breathing test flights are planned for three to four years after the acquisition 

of funding and will be followed two to three months later by rocket-powered test flights. 

Pioneer Rocketplane is designing Pathfinder as a low-cost alternative for small- to mediumclass payloads to LEO. 

Xerus - XCOR Aerospace

 Since XCOR’s founding in 1999, the company has been focusing on the development 

of reusable engines with high reliability, efficient turnaround and maintenance, and safe 

operations. XCOR has developed an airborne platform called the EZ-Rocket to test the most 

successful of its engine designs (see the “Liquid Engines - XCOR Aerospace” entry in the 

“Enabled Technologies” section). The EZ-Rocket is powered by two engines, each capable 

of 1,779 newtons (400 pounds force) of thrust, and is piloted by veteran test pilot Dick 

Rutan. By demonstrating the reusability, efficiency, and safety of its engines, XCOR expects 

to gather enough data and experience to pursue its follow-on suborbital vehicle project. 

The vehicle, called Xerus, will be designed to carry one commercial pilot and one passenger. 

XCOR’s philosophy is to take one step at a time toward suborbital, and perhaps later orbital, 

launch operations. XCOR hopes to provide suborbital flights on Xerus for about $10,000 

per passenger and may develop a “stretched” version capable of taking two passengers at 

a time. XCOR expects to build Xerus within 18 months of securing $3 million and expects 

to offer commercial flights three years later. In 2003, XCOR Aerospace submitted a launch 

license application to FAA/AST for an intermediate technology demonstration vehicle.

Reusable Launch Vehicles

Vehicle: Xerus

Developer: XCOR Aerospace

First launch: To be determined

Number of stages: 1

Payload performance: To be determined

Possible launch sites: Mojave Civilian Flight Test Center

Targeted market: Suborbital space tourism
2004 U.S. Commercial Space Transportation Developments and Concepts

36

Program

Bladerunner

Hyperion

Millennium Express

Neptune

Pogo

SC-1

SC-2

Space Cruiser

SpaceCub

Starlifter and Aquila

Star-Raker

Swiftlaunch

The ET Scenario

XPV

(unnamed)

Developer

Air Force Research Laboratory (AFRL)

Applied Astronautics

Third Millennium Aerospace

Interorbital Systems Corporation

Olson

Space Clipper International

Space Clipper International

Vela Technology Development

Burkhead

Starcraft Boosters, Inc.

Star-Raker Associates

University of California at Davis

Formation

Canyon Space Team

SpaceDev

Vehicle Type

Horizontally-launched orbital vehicle

Horizontally-launched suborbital/orbital vehicle

Horizontally-launched orbital TSTO vehicle

Sea-launched orbital vehicle

Horizontally-launched orbital vehicle

Vertically-launched suborbital vehicle developed by spin-off 

from Universal Space Lines

Vertically-launched orbital vehicle developed by spin-off from 

Universal Space Lines

Horizontally-launched suborbital vehicle specifically designed 

to ferry passengers

Vertically-launched suborbital vehicle

Vertically-launched suborbital vehicle

Horizontally-launched orbital vehicle

Horizontally-launched orbital vehicle

Vertically-launched orbital vehicle

Horizontally-launched suborbital vehicle

Suborbital

TABLE 3: Other Commerical RLV Concepts

Reusable Launch Vehicles
2004 U.S. Commercial Space Transportation Developments and Concepts

37

Enabling Technologies

 There are a number of efforts underway to develop new propulsion technologies for 

launch vehicles, including expendable launch vehicles (ELV) and reusable launch vehicles 

(RLV). These efforts include government research projects as well as engines and motors 

being developed by companies for their own launch vehicles and for sale to other companies. 

Many companies are attempting to build considerably less complex and potentially less 

expensive rocket engines. Some of these designs use room-temperature propellants instead 

of cryogenics, while others use pressure-fed engines instead of turbopumps. The gains 

achieved in simplifying the engines, however, may be offset by reduced performance. NASA is 

working to advance new space vehicle and flight technologies in its Next Generation Launch 

Technology Program. This program incorporates elements of the original Space Launch 

Initiative and NASA’s former Advanced Space Transportation Program. The Next Generation 

Launch Technology program seeks to develop and mature innovative technologies in the 

areas of propulsion, structures, vehicle systems, and ground and flight operations.57

Hypersonics - NASA

 NASA’s hypersonics research and development is intended to develop enabling 

technologies to support the creation of third-generation RLVs. With this program, NASA 

hopes to:

 • Dramatically reduce the cost of access to space

 • Dramatically reduce the trip time between destinations

 • Cut turnaround time between flights from weeks to hours

 • Maintain aircraft-like levels of safety and reliability

Combined Cycle Air-Breathing Engines

 “Combined cycle” engines use multiple engine technologies within a single engine. Two 

combined cycle engine concepts are rocket-based combined cycle (RBCC) and turbinebased combined cycle (TBCC). For take-off, an RBCC engine uses a rocket and a TBCC 

engine uses turbomachinery (like a turbojet engine). Both transition to using a ramjet at 

about Mach 3 and then transition to a scramjet, a supersonic combustion ramjet, between 

Mach 5 and Mach 7 to accelerate up to about Mach 12. An on-board rocket (integral to the 

RBCC configuration, but separate in the TBCC configuration) would then be used to reach 

orbit.58

ISTAR

 The Integrated System Test of an Air-breathing Rocket (ISTAR) is the first RBCC developed 

by NASA. The ISTAR industry development team includes the Rocketdyne Propulsion & 

Power business unit of The Boeing Co., the Pratt & Whitney Space Propulsion business 

unit of United Technologies Corp., and the Aerojet Missile and Space Propulsion business 

unit of GenCorp, Inc.

 

Enabling Technologies
2004 U.S. Commercial Space Transportation Developments and Concepts

38

 The ISTAR program is currently developing a ground test engine to demonstrate the 

technologies of a rocket-based combined cycle engine. The ISTAR prototype engine is 

named ARGO. Testing of a flight-weight, fuel-cooled engine flowpath is scheduled to begin 

in 2008.59

Revolutionary Turbine Accelerator

 The Revolutionary Turbine Accelerator (RTA) represents 

NASA’s proposed TBCC system. The RTA is being developed 

by NASA Glenn Research Center with General Electric Aircraft 

Engines. The RTA is intended to show the feasibility of using 

an ultra-high-speed turbine engine to accelerate a hypersonic 

vehicle to speeds well above Mach 4. This project is expected 

to be ready for ground testing in 2006.

Hyper-X Series Vehicles

 NASA’s Hyper-X program is designed to study and improve air-breathing hypersonic 

engine technologies. Three different vehicle designs, designated X-43A, B, and C, are planned 

to conduct a variety of tests of hypersonic vehicle design. In an X-43A flight, the 3.7-meter- 

(12-foot-) long vehicle is accelerated to Mach 7 (for the first two 

flights) or Mach 10 (for the third flight) by the first stage of an 

Orbital Sciences Corporation Pegasus XL launch vehicle and is 

then separated from the booster for independent flight at high 

speed. The X-43A program involves three flights in an effort to 

understand intake and combustion chamber airflow patterns. 

The first X-43A flight, on June 2, 2001, had to be aborted due 

to an in-flight incident. Following the investigation of this failure, 

there will be several changes for the second flight. The NASA B-52 will release the vehicle 

at 40,000 ft altitude, instead of 23,000 ft as in the first attempt, in order to reduce the 

aerodynamic loads on the booster’s control surfaces. The second X-43A was built at NASA 

Dryden Flight Research Center in 2002 and is being prepared for flight-testing in 2003.60

 

 The X-43A will be followed by the X-43C, a 4.9-meter- 

(16-foot-) long vehicle that will test a different scramjet 

engine design. The X-43C will use three Ground Demonstrator 

Engine-1 engines developed by Pratt & Whitney for the U.S. 

Air Force’s HyTech project, reaching speeds of Mach 5 to 7 for 

up to ten minutes. Like the X-43A, the vehicle will use a rocket 

booster stage to accelerate to speeds where the scramjet can 

function. 

 In October 2003, NASA selected Micro Craft, which was acquired by ATK Alliant 

Techsystems in November 2003, to provide three flight-ready demonstrator vehicles that 

Enabling Technologies
2004 U.S. Commercial Space Transportation Developments and Concepts

39

will fly about 5,000 miles per hour under a contract estimated 

at $150 million. Other team members include Pratt & Whitney, 

Boeing Phantom Works, and RJK Technologies.61 The first X-43C 

flight is scheduled for 2008. The last Hyper-X vehicle, the X-43B, 

will test a rocket- or turbine-based combined-cycle engine to 

accelerate to hypersonic speeds. The first flight of the 12.2-meter 

(40-foot) long X-43B is planned for between 2010 and 2012.

Hybrid Rocket Motors - SpaceDev, Inc.

 In 1998, SpaceDev, Inc., of Poway, California, acquired exclusive rights to the intellectual 

property of the American Rocket Company, which had developed hybrid rocket motor 

systems in the 1980s. SpaceDev is currently developing a series of small hybrid motors, 

using hydroxyl-terminated polybutadiene (rubber) or polymethyl methacrylate (Plexiglas) 

as solid fuel and storable nitrous oxide as a gaseous oxidizer. SpaceDev completed tests 

in August 2001 of a small hybrid rocket motor that is designed for use in the company’s 

Maneuver and Transfer Vehicle, an upper stage that can move small spacecraft, such as 

secondary payloads on larger launch vehicles, from geosynchronous transfer orbit (GTO) to 

low Earth orbit (LEO) or geosynchronous orbit (GEO). In May 2002, the Air Force Research 

Lab awarded SpaceDev a contract to develop a hybrid propulsion module to deploy small 

payloads from the Space Shuttle.62 In September 2003, Scaled Composites announced that 

it had selected SpaceDev for propulsion support for Scaled’s SpaceShipOne project.63

Hybrid Propulsion Systems - Lockheed Martin-Michoud

 Michoud Operations is leading an industry/

government team studying hybrid propulsion technology 

to decrease the cost, and increase the reliability and 

safety of launch vehicles. The hybrid system under study 

is powered by a combination of solid, non-explosive 

fuel and a liquid oxidizer. Unlike solid rockets currently 

in use, the hybrid system can be throttled, shut off and 

restarted during flight. 

 The industry team working on the Hybrid Propulsion 

Demonstration Program (HPDP) includes: United Space 

Technologies Chemical Systems Division of San Jose, 

CA., Rocketdyne of Canoga Park, CA., Allied Signal of 

Torrance, CA., Environmental Aerosciences Company of Miami, FL., Thiokol of Brigham City, 

Utah, Lockheed Martin Astronautics of Denver, CO., and Michoud Operations, Lockheed 

Martin Space Systems Company of New Orleans, LA. NASA’s Marshall Space Flight Center 

will provide the test facilities and various technical support. 

Enabling Technologies
2004 U.S. Commercial Space Transportation Developments and Concepts

40

 HPDP consists of the development and testing of 11-inch and 24-inch diameter hybrid 

motors, four flight demonstrations by hybrid-powered sounding rockets and development 

and static firing of several 250,000 foot-pound thrust (lbf) motors.

 Hybrid motors of the 250,000 lbf thrust class are being studied for possible use on 

current and future launch vehicles. Hybrid boosters would increase Atlas’ payload-carrying 

capabilities to about 11,000 pounds. Funding for the hybrid team comes from the Department 

of Defense Technology Reinvestment Program, from NASA monetary and in-kind support, 

and from the contributions of industry team members.64 In late 2002, Lockheed Martin 

launched a 57-foot-long sounding rocket at NASA Wallops Flight Facility on Wallops Island, 

VA, using liquid oxygen and solid fuel. The rocket generated 60,000 pounds of thrust during 

a burn time of 31 seconds while reaching an altitude of about 43 miles.65

Liquid Engines - Rocketdyne Propulsion & Power

 Rocketdyne Propulsion & Power, a division of The Boeing 

Company in Canoga Park, California, is developing a series of 

new engines for launch vehicles. Rocketdyne is developing 

two main engines as part of NASA’s Next Generation Launch 

Technology program. The RS-83 is a reusable liquid hydrogen/

liquid oxygen engine designed to produce 664,000 lbs of thrust 

at sea level. The engine is being designed to run 50 times 

between major overhauls, and a total lifetime of 100 missions. 

The RS-84 is the first reusable hydrocarbon staged-combustion 

rocket engine. This engine is designed to produce 1,064,000 lbs of thrust at sea level with 

a design life of 100 missions.66 In 2003, Rocketdyne successfully tested a key component 

of the RS-84 engine. In the test, a subscale preburner, which produces high-pressure, 

oxidizer-rich combustion gases to spin the engine’s oxidizer and fuel turbopumps, achieved 

a chamber pressure in excess of 6,800 pounds per square inch, well beyond the levels seen 

in current domestic oxygen/kerosene rocket engines. Hot-fire tests of the preburner will 

conclude in 2004, paving the way for development of the full-scale version by 2007.67

 Rocketdyne developed the XRS-2200 linear aerospike engine for the X-33 program. 

Aerospike engines offer significant efficiency advantages over fixed-nozzle-geometry engine 

designs. The engine provides up to a 909,305-newton (204,420-pound) thrust at sea level, 

using liquid hydrogen and liquid oxygen as propellants.68 

Liquid Engines - Microcosm, Inc.

 Microcosm is developing liquid-propellant rocket engines for its Scorpius series of ELVs 

(see the ELV section for a description of Scorpius). The company has built a pressure-fed, 

ablatively-cooled, 22,250-newton (5,000-pound) thrust engine using liquid oxygen and jet 

fuel as propellants. This engine was successfully tested on the company’s SR-S and SRXM-1 sounding rockets launched in January 1999 and March 2001. The engine will also 

Enabling Technologies
2004 U.S. Commercial Space Transportation Developments and Concepts

41

be used as the upper stage engine for the Sprite Mini-Lift orbital vehicle. A larger version, 

an 89,000-newton (20,000-pound) engine is in development.69 This engine will be used on 

the booster pods and sustainer stage of the Sprite Mini-Lift.70

Liquid Engines - Space Exploration Technologies Corporation

 Space Exploration Technologies Corporation (SpaceX) of El Segundo, California, is 

developing two new liquid-propellant engines for use on its Falcon launch vehicle. The first 

stage engine, the Merlin, is a 267,000-newton (60,000-pound) 

engine that operates on a gas generator cycle.71 The second stage 

engine, the Kestrel, is a pressure-fed engine that produces 33,300 

newtons (7,500 pounds) vacuum thrust.72 Both engines will use 

liquid oxygen and kerosene propellants. SpaceX began testing 

the Merlin in March 2003 and began testing the Kestrel in August 

2003.

Liquid Engines - XCOR Aerospace

 XCOR Aerospace, located in Mojave, California, specializes in 

the development of engines for use on launch vehicles and spacecraft. The company has 

developed and extensively tested three different liquid-propellant engines. XCOR’s largest 

engine, designated XR4AE, is a 1,780-newton (400-pound), pressure-fed, regenerativelycooled, liquid-oxygen and alcohol engine. Four such engines have been built and, combined, 

have been fired 558 times for over 6,434 seconds. The engines have also been flown on EZRocket, a modified Long-EZ aircraft fitted with two of the engines. EZ-Rocket has completed 

15 successful flight tests since July 2001, including two flights at the Experimental Aircraft 

Association’s AirVenture 2002 air show in Oshkosh, Wisconsin, in July 2002. XCOR has built 

two smaller engines. A 67-newton (15-pound) engine, designated XR2P1, using nitrous oxide 

and ethane as propellants, was initially built to test the design of proposed larger engines. 

This engine has made more than 950 firings, with a cumulative burn time of 94.8 minutes. 

XCOR’s XR3B4 regeneratively-cooled engine is capable of a 220-newton (50-pound) thrust 

using nitrous oxide and isopropyl alcohol as propellants. This engine has completed 216 

firings with a cumulative burn time of more than 812 seconds. XCOR designed this engine 

for use as a maneuvering thruster on spacecraft. 

 In April 2002, XCOR acquired selected intellectual property assets of the former Rotary 

Rocket Company, including a 22,250-newton (5,000-pound) liquid oxygen and kerosene 

engine developed and tested by the company as well as hydrogen 

peroxide engine technology. XCOR has completed development 

of their third generation igniter and is now testing a 1,800 lb 

thrust engine, which uses LOX and kerosene as propellant. This 

engine is of the same class of engine as will be used to power 

its Xerus suborbital vehicle.73

Enabling Technologies
2004 U.S. Commercial Space Transportation Developments and Concepts

42

Propellant Production - Andrews Space & Technology, Inc.

 Andrews Space & Technology, Inc., of Seattle, Washington, has proposed a propulsion 

system that will generate liquid oxygen propellant from the atmosphere. The “Alchemist” 

Air Collection and Enrichment System (ACES) will take high-pressure air from a turbofan 

jet engine flying at subsonic speeds and liquefy it by passing it through a series of heat 

exchangers cooled by liquid nitrogen and/or liquid hydrogen. Liquid oxygen will then be 

separated out and stored in propellant tanks for use by liquid hydrogen-liquid oxygen rocket 

engines. This will allow a horizontal-takeoff launch vehicle to leave the ground without 

any oxidizer, reducing its takeoff weight. The company has proposed ACES in conjunction 

with its own two-stage to-orbit (TSTO) RLV design as well as for use in other horizontaltakeoff launch vehicles. Andrews Space & Technology carried out initial studies of the 

ACES concept, in cooperation with Pratt & Whitney, using internal funds and a NASA SBIR 

contract. A detailed feasibility and risk analysis study has been carried out under a NASA SLI 

contract. Andrews now supports the NASA NGLT technology and architecture evaluation 

efforts, which includes Alchemist configuration studies.74

RLV Technologies - The Boeing Company

X-37

 Boeing is currently developing the X-37 reusable aerospace vehicle under a cooperative 

agreement with NASA signed in July 1999. Based on the design 

of a proposed Air Force Space Maneuver Vehicle, the X-37 

will serve as a test bed for multiple airframe, propulsion, and 

operations technologies intended to reduce the cost of space 

transportation operations. X-37 flights will permit the testing of a 

wide variety of experiments and technologies, including thermal 

protection systems, high-temperature structures, and advanced 

guidance, navigation, and control systems. In addition, the X-37 

has a 2.1-by-1.2-meter (7-by-4-foot) experiment bay, which will 

allow the testing of additional technologies in the future. In November 2002, NASA awarded 

Boeing Phantom Works of Seal Beach, California, a $301-million contract to complete work 

on the X-37. As part of the X-37 program, two vehicles will be produced. The first is the 

Approach and Landing Test Vehicle (ALTV), which will validate system performance of the 

approach, landing, and turnaround operations needed for flight. This vehicle will be released 

from a B-52 at altitudes up to 42,000 ft.75 A series of drop tests of the ALTV are scheduled 

to begin in late 2004. The second vehicle, the Orbital Vehicle (OV), is planned to test key 

embedded technologies and flight experiments in relevant environments of ascent, on-orbit, 

reentry and landing phases of flight. NASA temporarily halted work on the OV in late 2003 

due to funding constraints.

X-40A 

 The X-40A is a concurrent test program designed to explore the low-speed atmospheric 

flight dynamics of the X-37 design. Originally developed as a prototype of the Air Force’s 

Enabling Technologies
2004 U.S. Commercial Space Transportation Developments and Concepts

43

proposed Space Maneuver Vehicle, the X-40A is an 80-percent scale 

atmospheric precursor to the X-37. It uses the X-37’s guidance, 

navigation, and control software and simulates its aerodynamic 

performance. It also uses the X-37’s flight operations control 

center. The X-40A completed a program of seven successful flights 

at NASA’s Dryden Flight Research Center in May 2001. During 

these flights, the uncrewed X-40A was released from a CH-47 Chinook helicopter at 4,570 

meters (15,000 feet) and autonomously guided itself to the target runway and landed in a 

fashion similar to a conventional aircraft.76 

Liquid Engines and Thrusters - NASA Next Generation Launch Technology

 As part of the Next Generation Launch Technology Program and Space Launch Initiative, 

NASA has supported development of several new engine designs that will reduce the cost 

and increase the reliability, efficiency and safety of launch vehicles. One area of research 

includes studies of engines that use liquid oxygen and kerosene propellants that can 

generate approximately 4.5 million newtons (1 million pounds) of thrust. A second area of 

research has focused on liquid oxygen and liquid hydrogen engines than can generate at 

least 2.67 million newtons (600,000 pounds) of thrust. Both engine designs will be reusable 

and designed for the first and second stages, respectively, of an RLV. In addition, SLI has 

funded development of reaction control thruster systems that use liquid oxygen and liquid 

hydrogen propellants; these thrusters will be used to maneuver spacecraft in orbit.

Booster Engine Prototype

 Under the Booster Engine Prototype (BEP) Project, the TR107 engine technologies 

activity is developing innovative components that could be integrated into a new liquidoxygen/kerosene-propelled engine system. Led by Northrop Grumman Space Technology 

Group, formerly TRW Inc., of Redondo Beach, CA, the TR107 is one of several technology 

developments competing for BEP. TR107 development was initiated in 

2001 via a $15.5 million contract awarded to TRW. In April 2003, under 

the second cycle of the research project, NASA awarded an additional $21 

million to Northrop Grumman to refocus the TR107 project. Concentrating 

on key booster engine technologies, the NASA/Northrop Grumman team is 

developing two critical engine components: a single-pintle injector for the 

engine’s oxygen-rich preburner, and a duct-cooled combustion chamber 

intended to eliminate conventional engine cooling channels. In 2004, NASA 

will select a single booster engine system, which could make use of the 

component technologies delivered by the TR107. The design of the final 

flight engine is expected to begin in 2007.77

 Boeing-Rocketdyne is also competing for BEP with its RS-84 engine, which met testing 

milestones in 2004 (above).

Enabling Technologies
2004 U.S. Commercial Space Transportation Developments and Concepts

44

Integrated Powerhead Demonstrator

 The Integrated Powerhead Demonstrator (IPD) is a joint venture between NASA’s Next 

Generation Launch Technology program, and the Integrated High Payoff Rocket Propulsion 

Technologies program, managed for the Department of Defense 

by the U.S. Air Force Research Laboratory at Edwards Air Force 

Base, California. The project is the first phase of a full-scale effort 

to develop a flight-rated, full-flow, hydrogen-fueled, stagedcombustion rocket engine in the 250,000-pound thrust class. The 

IPD will employ dual preburners that provide both oxygen-rich 

and hydrogen-rich staged combustion, which is expected to keep 

engines cooler during flight, achieve higher system efficiency and 

reduce exhaust emissions. Boeing’s Rocketdyne Propulsion and 

Power is developing the liquid-hydrogen fuel turbopump and the 

demonstrator’s oxygen pump, main injector and main combustion 

chamber. Aerojet Corporation of Sacramento, CA, designed and 

tested the oxidizer preburner, which initiates the combustion 

process with oxygen-rich steam. Aerojet also is responsible for 

development of the demonstrator engine’s fuel preburner, designed to supply the fuel 

turbopump’s turbine with hot, hydrogen-rich steam. Boeing-Rocketdyne will lead overall 

system integration once component-level development and testing is complete.78 In 2003, 

tests of the liquid-hydrogen turbopump and the oxidizer preburner were successfully 

completed. Integrated system testing is scheduled for late 2004 at NASA’s Stennis Space 

Center.79

Enabling Technologies
2004 U.S. Commercial Space Transportation Developments and Concepts

45

Spaceports

Launch and reentry sites – often referred to as “spaceports” – are the nation’s gateways to 

and from space. Although their individual capabilities vary, these facilities may house launch 

pads and runways as well as the infrastructure, equipment, and fuels needed to process 

launch vehicles and their payloads prior to launch. The first such facilities in the United 

States emerged in the 1940s, when the federal government began to build and operate 

space launch ranges and bases to meet a variety of national needs.

 While U.S. military and civil government agencies were the original and still are 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 to and from 

space. Indeed, the commercial dimension of U.S. space activity is evident not only in the 

numbers of commercially-procured launches but also in the presence of non-federal launch 

sites supplementing federally operated sites. FAA/AST has licensed the operations of four 

non-federal launch sites. These spaceports have served both commercial and government 

payload owners. This section describes both the federal and non-federal spaceports capable 

of supporting launch and landing activities that currently exist in the United States. A subsection detailing state and private proposals for future spaceports with launch and landing 

capabilities is also included. Table 4 shows which states have non-federal, federal, and 

proposed spaceports. Tables 5, 6, and 7, located at the end of this section, summarize each 

spaceport’s major characteristics.

Spaceports

State

Alabama

Alaska

California

Florida

Nevada

New Mexico

Oklahoma

Texas

Utah

Virginia

Washington

Wisconsin

Non-federal

√

√

√

√

Federal

√

√

√

√

TABLE 4: Spaceport Summary By State

Proposed

√

√

√

√

√

√

√

√

√
2004 U.S. Commercial Space Transportation Developments and Concepts

46

National Coalition of Spaceport States80

Throughout 2003 the National Coalition of Spaceport States (NCSS) continued the 

aggressive pursuit of its Vision Statement: “The National Coalition of Spaceport States 

envisions a future where space serves as an extension of the nation’s industrial and 

economic base; and space transportation becomes and integral part of the nation’s space 

transportation system.”

 The year 2003 has seen a number of critical developments in the commercial space sector 

and NCSS member states have been involved in nearly every one of them. As an organization, 

NCSS has been actively encouraging the commercialization of space and highlighting the 

critical role that non-federal launch facilities play in facilitating this process. Also, NCSS has 

maintained constant support for the still nascent, but promising, suborbital space sector. 

The development of small, private, reusable suborbital spacecraft marks the beginning of 

what could be a major change for the entire industry. Additionally, many of these vehicles 

currently under development would be well suited for operations from some NCSS members 

that have yet to commence actual flight activity such as the Oklahoma Spaceport. 

 Recognizing the continuing critical nature of federal launch sites, NCSS has continued 

its involvement in a number of projects that have the potential to reshape how space access 

operations are conducted. NCSS continues to be a regular contributor to both the Advanced 

Range Technology Working Group (ARTWG) and the Advanced Spaceport Technology 

Working Group (ASTWG), two NASA and Air Force-led initiatives aimed at creating roadmaps 

for the development of the nation’s space transportation infrastructure in the years to come. 

Additionally, NCSS member states have continued working with Congress to ensure that 

the interests of non-federal space launch facilities are represented at the national level. 

As a representative of the interests of the various operational and emerging space access 

facilities throughout the country, NCSS will continue to be actively involved in all of the 

issues that have the potential to affect its membership.

Federal Spaceports

 Since the first licensed commercial orbital launch in 1989, the federal ranges have 

continually supported commercial launch activity. The importance of commercial launch is 

evident in the changes taking place at federal launch sites. Launch pads have been developed 

with commercial, federal, and state government support at the two major federal sites 

for U.S. orbital launches for the latest generation of the Delta and Atlas launch vehicles, 

including the Evolved Expendable Launch Vehicles (EELV). Cape Canaveral Spaceport 

(consisting of Cape Canaveral Air Force Station [CCAFS] and the National Aeronautics and 

Space Administration’s [NASA] Kennedy Space Center [KSC])81 hosts pads for Delta 4 and 

Atlas 5. Vandenberg Air Force Base currently accommodates the Delta 4 and a pad is under 

construction to accommodate the Atlas 5.

Spaceports
2004 U.S. Commercial Space Transportation Developments and Concepts

47

 Recognizing that the ranges are aging, the U.S. government is engaged in range 

modernization. This effort includes the ongoing Range Standardization and Automation 

program, a key effort to modernize and upgrade the Eastern Range at CCAFS and portions of 

the Western Range at VAFB. The Air Force, the Department of Commerce, and the FAA signed 

a Memorandum of Agreement in January 2002 that established a process for collecting 

commercial sector range support and modernization requirements, communicating them 

to the Air Force, and considering them in the existing Air Force requirements process.

Cape Canaveral Spaceport

 Cape Canaveral Spaceport (CCAFS and KSC) is located on the “Florida Space Coast” 

at Cape Canaveral and also encompasses the launch complex owned by the Florida Space 

Authority (FSA) (see the FSA description below). The Cape 

Canaveral area has endured several name changes and an 

expanding list of tenants. In 1948, the Banana River Naval Air 

Station was transferred to the Air Force for use as a joint service 

missile range. NASA’s Launch Operations Center was renamed 

for President Kennedy in 1963. Air Force Space Command 

redesignated Cape Canaveral Air Station as CCAFS in February 

2000. The Cape developed rapidly during the space race of 

the 1950s and 1960s supporting Mercury, Gemini, and Apollo 

programs, as well as ballistic missile testing. 

Spaceports
2004 U.S. Commercial Space Transportation Developments and Concepts

48

 Today, CCAFS encompasses six active launch pads for Delta, Atlas, Titan and Athena 

launch vehicles, while the Space Shuttle operates from two pads at KSC. NASA oversees 

launch operations for the Space Shuttle and checkout of its payloads, while the 45th Space 

Wing, headquartered at nearby Patrick AFB, conducts launch operations and provides range 

support for military, civil, and commercial launches.

 The 45th Space Wing’s Range Operations Control Center provides flight safety, weather, 

scheduling, and instrumentation control, along with target designation information and 

tracking data to and from inter- and intra-range sensors in real or near real time for missile 

and space launch support. Range tracking capabilities extend over the Atlantic Ocean as 

far north as Canada and as far southeast as Africa. There is currently one active launch 

complex (LC), LC-40, for remaining Titan 4 vehicles launching from the East Coast. In 1999, 

Lockheed Martin began to work on new facilities for Atlas 5 at LC-41. FSA has entered 

into an arrangement for ownership of LC-41 and support integration facilities and is leasing 

them to Lockheed Martin. Refurbishment and construction of the launch pad, gantry, and 

support facilities was completed in 2001. The first Atlas 5 launch from LC-41 occurred on 

August 21, 2002.

 Boeing has a similar agreement with FSA for lease of the Delta 4 Horizontal Integration 

Facility. LC-37 has been inactive since the 1960s when it served as the site for eight Saturn 

1 and Saturn 1B launches. The launch tower and launch pad at LC-37 were completed in 

2001. The first Delta 4 launch occurred on November 20, 2002.

 KSC maintains its own launch complex, LC-39. LC-39’s pads A and B were originally 

built to support the Apollo program. After the end of the lunar landing program in 1972, 

they served to launch Skylab, Apollo-Soyuz, and now the Space Shuttle. LC-39 launch and 

processing facilities are all located on Merritt Island, between the Florida mainland and 

Cape Canaveral. LC-39 support facilities include the Vehicle Assembly Building, the Launch 

Control Center, the Mobile Launcher Platform, the Crawler Transporter, the Orbiter Processing 

Facilities, the Payload Processing Facility, and the Shuttle Landing Facility. KSC also provides 

five hangars for non-hazardous payload processing, the Shuttle Payload Integration Facility, 

the Satellite Assembly Building, and an explosive safe area.

 In 2001, KSC began construction of a new office building near the Vertical Assembly 

Building. The building was completed in 2003. Also in 2001, KSC broke ground for the new 

Space Life Sciences Laboratory that will replace CCAFS’s Hangar L for International Space 

Station (ISS) experiment processing and constructed a road leading into a 1.6-squarekilometer (400-acre) area that will be developed as an international space research park. 

The state of Florida provided $26 million for the development of the Space Life Sciences 

Laboratory and another $4 million for road construction in the facility’s vicinity.82

Spaceports
2004 U.S. Commercial Space Transportation Developments and Concepts

49

Edwards Air Force Base

 Located in California, Edwards Air Force Base (AFB) was the 

original landing site for the Space Shuttle. The first two Shuttle 

flights landed on Rogers Dry Lake, a natural hard-pack riverbed 

measuring about 114 square kilometers (44 square miles). 

Unfortunately, the normally dry lakebed was flooded in 1982, 

rendering the site unavailable for the third Shuttle landing (the 

Space Shuttle landed at White Sands, New Mexico instead). 

Today, NASA prefers to use KSC as the primary landing site for 

the Space Shuttle and uses Edwards AFB as a back-up site.

 Before its cancellation, X-33 was to use Edwards AFB as a test site. In December 1998, 

NASA completed construction of a launch site at Edwards AFB. The site consisted of an 

X-33-specific launch pad, a control center to be used for launch monitoring and mission 

control, and a movable hangar, where the vehicle was to be housed and serviced in a 

horizontal position. The site was equipped with hydrogen and nitrogen gas tanks, as well as 

liquid-hydrogen and oxygen tanks capable of holding more than 1.1 million liters (291,000 

gallons) of cryogenic materials. A water tower with a height of 76 meters (250 feet) could 

supply nearly 1 million liters (265,000 gallons) of water to the concrete flame trench during 

launch. X-33 telemetry and tracking functions would have been performed using existing Air 

Force and NASA facilities at Edwards AFB and Wallops Flight Facility, Virginia. With X-33’s 

cancellation, the government and associated contractors redistributed the components of 

the X-33 infrastructure for SLI projects.

 The federal government is investing several million dollars to refurbish and modernize 

two large-scale rocket test stands at the Air Force Research Laboratory’s Edwards Research 

Site. One is a component test stand and the other is an engine test stand. Plans are also 

being developed to continue refurbishing additional rocket stands in the future for purposes 

of rocket testing.

 Edwards AFB, along with NASA’s co-located, premier aeronautical flight research 

facility, Dryden Flight Research Center, hosts other NASA reusable X-vehicle demonstration 

programs. In 2001, NASA used a Pegasus XL launch vehicle to conduct a drop test of the 

X-43A demonstrator and a second test flight of this hypersonic vehicle is scheduled early 

in 2004. NASA used a helicopter to conduct seven successful X-40A flight tests during 

2001. NASA will fund X-37 atmospheric approach and landing testing at Edwards AFB in 

2004 and 2005.83

Vandenberg Air Force Base

 In 1941, the Army activated this site in Lompoc, California, as Camp Cook. In 1957, 

Camp Cook was transferred to the Air Force, and in 1958 it was renamed Vandenberg 

AFB (VAFB) in honor of General Hoyt S. Vandenberg, the Air Force’s second Chief of Staff. 

Spaceports
2004 U.S. Commercial Space Transportation Developments and Concepts

50

VAFB is currently the headquarters of the 

30th Space Wing, which conducts space and 

missile launches and operates the Western 

Range. Range tracking capabilities extend into 

the Pacific Ocean as far west as the island of 

Kwajalein, with boundaries to the north as 

far as Alaska and to the south near Central 

America.

 VAFB infrastructure used for space 

launches includes a 4,500-meter (15,000-foot) 

runway, boat dock, launch facilities, payload 

processing facilities, tracking radar, optical 

tracking and telemetry facilities, and control 

centers. The 401-square-kilometer (155-square-mile) base also houses 53 government 

organizations and 49 contractor companies in 1,843 buildings. VAFB hosts a variety of 

federal agencies and attracts commercial aerospace companies and activities, including the 

California Spaceport effort (see the California Spaceport description below).

 VAFB partnered with Boeing to develop launch infrastructure for the Delta 4 EELV. 

Space Launch Complex (SLC)-6 has been converted from a Space Shuttle launch pad into 

an operational facility for the Delta 4. The SLC-6 refurbishment has been completed. The 

new launch table, which arrived at VAFB in October 2001, weighs 650,000 kilograms (1.4 

million pounds) and stands 7 meters (23 feet) high, 14 meters (46 feet) wide, and 26 meters 

(85 feet) long. Other construction at SLC-6 included enlarging the existing mobile service 

tower and completing the construction of the West Coast Horizontal Integration Facility, 

where the Delta 4 is assembled.

 In preparation for five Atlas 5 EELV launches from Vandenberg, Lockheed Martin will 

upgrade the Space Launch Complex (SLC)-3 East launch pad in time for the first launch in 

late 2005. Lockheed Martin anticipates spending $200 million to upgrade the pad, which 

was previously used to launch the Atlas 2AS. The upgrades starting in January 2004 will 

include adding 30 feet to the mobile service tower to accommodate the larger rocket, and 

replacing the crane capable of lifting 20 tons with a crane that can lift 60 tons. The concrete 

exhaust tunnel will be enlarged and crews will install a stationary launch platform and retrofit 

the existing umbilical tower to fit the Atlas 5.84

 VAFB is also upgrading its range instrumentation and control centers to support the 

space launch industry. These upgrades are scheduled to be completed by 2010. In addition, 

the state of California is looking into developing an alternate range operations control center 

to demonstrate Unmanned Aerial Vehicle wideband communication downlink technology. 

Spaceports
2004 U.S. Commercial Space Transportation Developments and Concepts

51

In 2001, VAFB opened a customer support office to provide a centralized interface for 

customers of launch and base services.

 Current launch vehicles using VAFB include Atlas 2, Delta 2, Titan 4, Taurus, Minotaur, 

and Pegasus XL families. NASA operates SLC-2, from which Boeing Delta 2 vehicles 

are launched. Orbital Sciences’ Taurus is launched from 576-E. Pegasus XL vehicles are 

processed at Orbital Sciences’ facility at VAFB and then flown to various worldwide launch 

areas. A new commercial launch vehicle, Falcon, being developed by Space Exploration 

Technologies Corporation, plans to launch from VAFB in March 2004.

 The final Titan 2 launch from Vandenberg took place in October 2003. Under a $3 million 

Air Force contract, Lockheed Martin will “safe” and deactivate Space Launch Complex-4 

West, which served as the launch pad for Titan 2 since 1988. Space Launch Complex-4 

East, which hosts the Titan 4, will see its final launch in February 2005 after which it will 

also be safed. The Air Force will oversee efforts to dismantle the mobile service and umbilical 

towers for both launch vehicles starting in 2007.85

 At this time, VAFB has active partnerships with nine private organizations in which 

VAFB provides launch property and launch services and the private companies use the 

government facilities to do their own payload and booster processing work. VAFB houses 

three commercially-owned facilities/complexes: Boeing’s Horizontal Integration Facility, 

Spaceport Systems International’s (SSI) California Spaceport, and Astrotech’s Payload 

Processing Facility.

Wallops Flight Facility

 The National Advisory Committee for Aeronautics, the 

predecessor of NASA, established an aeronautical and 

rocket test range at Wallops Island, Virginia in 1945. Since 

then, over 15,000 rocket launches have taken place from 

the site, which is currently operated by NASA’s Goddard 

Space Flight Center.86 The first orbital launch occurred in 

1960, when a Scout launch vehicle deployed Explorer 9 

to study atmospheric density. There have been 29 orbital 

flight attempts from Wallops, including six Pegasus 

launches, the most recent in 1999. The retired Scout made 

its last orbital launch from Wallops in 1985. 

 In April 1996, the Air Force designated Wallops as a launch site for converted Minuteman 

2 missiles under the Orbital/Suborbital Program (along with Kodiak Launch Complex and 

the California Spaceport), so possible future vehicle users include the Minotaur and other 

vehicles developed under that program.

Spaceports
2004 U.S. Commercial Space Transportation Developments and Concepts

52

 Although Wallops has not attempted any orbital flights (beyond support of the airlaunched Pegasus) since the Conestoga failure in 1995, NASA is committed to maintaining 

the existing infrastructure that will be used by both orbital and suborbital missions for 

government and commercial users. Three blockhouses and numerous payload and vehicle 

preparation facilities are operational. Wallops launches about 10 to 20 suborbital vehicles 

per year. The facility also supports northerly launches from KSC and CCAFS as well as 

worldwide orbital and suborbital launches with transportable range instrumentation and 

safety equipment. Wallops equipment was used to support the first orbital launch from 

Kodiak, Alaska. The Virginia Space Flight Center (VSFC) is co-located with Wallops. Wallops 

also contains several research facilities, a research airport, machine shops, and a center that 

consolidates the control of launch range and research airport operations. Wallops assets 

also support aeronautical testing and U.S. Navy testing.

 In March 2002, $6.8 million in launch range modernization projects were initiated, 

including upgrades in range clearance radars, vehicle-tracking systems, launch data 

acquisition and management systems, and range control center interfaces. Along with the 

launch range modernization projects, $3.2 million in support facilities improvement projects 

were started, including a new, 1,115-square-meter (12,000-square-foot) payload processing 

and integration facility; a high-security area in the range control center; upgrades to the 

existing hazardous vehicle processing facility; and a cryogenic fueling capability for smallto mid-sized vehicles. All of these projects were completed in 2003.

White Sands Missile Range

 Situated 26 kilometers (16 miles) northeast of Las 

Cruces, New Mexico, White Sands Missile Range, which 

includes the NASA White Sands Flight Test Center, 

covers 8,100 square kilometers (3,127 square miles). 

It is operated by the U.S. Army and is used mainly for 

launching sounding rockets. White Sands also supports 

Missile Defense Agency flight-testing and is used 

as a test center for rocket engines and experimental 

spacecraft. Facilities at White Sands include seven 

engine test stands and precision cleaning facilities 

including a class-100 clean room for spacecraft parts.

 Starting in 2003, all test operations were run out of the new J.W. Cox Range Control 

Center. This $28 million facility was designed to meet current and future mission requirements 

with the latest networking, computing, and communications for effective interaction between 

test operations and customers.87

 White Sands is also the Space Shuttle’s tertiary landing site after Edwards AFB and KSC. 

This landing site consists of two 11-kilometer- (6.8-mile-) long, gypsum-sand runways.

Spaceports
2004 U.S. Commercial Space Transportation Developments and Concepts

53

Non-federal Spaceports with FAA/AST Licenses

 While the majority of licensed launch activity still occurs at U.S. federal ranges, much 

future launch and landing activity may originate from private or state-operated spaceports. 

In order for a non-federal entity to operate a launch or landing site in the United States, it is 

necessary to obtain a license from the federal government through FAA/AST. To date, FAA/

AST has licensed the operations of four non-federal launch sites, all of which are described 

in this subsection. Three of these are co-located with federal launch sites, including the 

California Spaceport at VAFB, the spaceport facilities operated by Florida Space Authority 

(FSA) at Cape Canaveral, and Virginia Space Flight Center (VSFC) at Wallops Flight Facility. 

The fourth licensed, non-federal spaceport is Kodiak Launch Complex in Alaska. The first 

orbital launch from an FAA/AST-licensed site occurred on January 6, 1998, when a Lockheed 

Martin Athena 2 carrying NASA’s Lunar Prospector spacecraft successfully lifted off from 

FSA’s LC-46.

California Spaceport

 On September 19, 1996, the California Spaceport 

became the first launch site licensed by FAA/AST. 

In June 2001, FAA/AST renewed the spaceport’s 

license for another five years. The California 

Spaceport offers commercial launch services and 

is operated and managed by Spaceport Systems 

International (SSI), a limited partnership between 

ITT Federal Service Corporation and California 

Commercial Spaceport, Inc. Co-located with VAFB 

on the central California coast, SSI signed a 25-year 

lease in 1995 for 0.44 square kilometers (0.17 square 

miles) of land. Located at 34o North latitude, the 

California Spaceport can support a variety of mission profiles to low polar orbit inclinations, 

with possible launch azimuths ranging from 220o to 150o.

 Initial construction at California Spaceport’s Commercial Launch Facility began in 1995 

and was completed in 1999. The design concept is based on a “building block” approach. 

Power and communications cabling is routed underground to provide a “flat pad” with 

the flexibility to accommodate a variety of different launch systems. Although the facility 

currently is configured to support solid propellant vehicles, plans are in place to equip it 

with commodities required by liquid fueled boosters. The current configuration consists 

of the following infrastructure: pad deck, support equipment building, launch equipment 

vault, launch duct and stand, communications equipment, and launch control room. Final 

configuration awaits customer requirements. When fully developed, the Commercial 

Launch Facility will be able to accommodate a wide variety of launch vehicles including the 

Minuteman-based Minotaur and Castor 120-based vehicles.

Spaceports
2004 U.S. Commercial Space Transportation Developments and Concepts

54

 Originally, the focus of the California Spaceport’s payload processing services was on 

the refurbishment of the Payload Preparation Room. This room, located near SLC-6, is a 

clean room facility designed to process three Space Shuttle payloads simultaneously. It is 

now leased and operated by the California Spaceport as the Integrated Processing Facility. 

Today, payload-processing activities occur on a regular basis. The facility supports booster 

processing and administrative activities. It is capable of handling all customer payloadprocessing needs. This includes Delta 2- and Delta 4-class payloads as well as smaller 

payloads as required. The spaceport receives limited financial support from the state in 

the form of grants. In 2000, it received about $180,000 to upgrade the breech load doors 

in the Integrated Processing Facility transfer tower. The modification was completed in 

March 2001, and the new transfer tower is now capable of accommodating 18-meter (60-

foot) payloads. This will enable SSI to process and encapsulate satellites in support of the 

EELV program. In May 2001, SSI received approximately $167,000 to upgrade the satellite 

command and telemetry systems. There are plans to upgrade the launch site infrastructure 

for liquid vehicles and to build a new launch control center in the future, as well as a mobile 

access tower.

 The state of California has also provided some support for California Spaceport business. 

In 2001, legislation was passed to remove the “sunset” clause on tax exemptions for 

commercial satellites and boosters launched from VAFB, including California Spaceport.

 The California Spaceport provides payload processing and orbital launch support 

services for both commercial and government users. The California Spaceport provided 

payload-processing services for three NASA satellites: Landsat 7, 1995; TIMED/Jason, 

December 2001; and Aqua, May 2002. The California Spaceport’s first orbital launch was 

that of JAWSAT, a joint project of the Air Force Academy and Weber State University, on a 

Minotaur launch vehicle in July 2000. To date, the site has launched two Minotaur launch 

vehicles. In 2002, SSI won a ten-year Air Force satellite-processing contract for Delta 4-

class four- and five-meter payloads. This contract complements an existing 10-year NASA 

payload-processing contract for Delta 2-class three-meter payloads. SSI is working with 

several launch providers for National Missile Defense support.

 The National Reconnaissance Office has contracted with SSI to provide space vehicle 

processing until 2011. This includes Delta 4-class payload processing support for multiple 

missions to be launched from VAFB. NASA and commercial Delta-class payloads are also 

processed for launch on the Delta 2, launched from SLC-2W on VAFB. In 2003, California 

Spaceport continued improvements to the IPF and supported Air Force Pathfinders including 

the EELV 5 M Pathfinder.88

Kodiak Launch Complex

 In 2000, the Alaska Aerospace Development Corporation (AADC) completed the $40-

million, two-year construction of the Kodiak Launch Complex at Narrow Cape on Kodiak 

Spaceports
2004 U.S. Commercial Space Transportation Developments and Concepts

55

Island, Alaska. This launch complex is the first new 

U.S. launch site since the 1960s and is the only nonfederal spaceport not co-located with a federal launch 

site. In 1991, the Alaska state legislature created the 

AADC as a public company to develop aerospace 

related economic, technical, and educational 

opportunities for the state of Alaska. Owned by the 

state of Alaska and operated by the AADC, the Kodiak 

Launch Complex has received funding from the Air 

Force, Army, NASA, the State of Alaska, and private 

firms. The commercial spaceport on Kodiak Island 

is located on a 12.4-square-kilometer (4.8-squaremile) site about 419 kilometers (260 miles) south of 

Anchorage and 40 kilometers (25 miles) southwest of the city of Kodiak. The launch site 

itself encompasses a nearly 5-kilometer (3-mile) arch around Launch Pad 1. 

 Kodiak facilities currently include the Launch Control Center; the Payload Processing 

Facility, which includes a class-100,000 cleanroom, an airlock, and a processing bay; the 

Integration and Processing Facility/Spacecraft Assemblies Transfer Facility; and the Launch 

Pad and Service Structure. These facilities are designed such that they allow the transfer 

of vehicles and payloads from processing to launch without exposure to the outside 

environment. This protects both the vehicles and those working on them from exterior 

conditions, allowing all weather launch operations. The Kodiak Launch Complex Range 

Safety and Telemetry System (RSTS) was delivered in September 2003. The RSTS consists 

of two fully redundant systems: one for on-site, the other for off-axis. Each part of the 

RSTS consists of two 5.4-meter dishes with 8 telemetry links with command destruct. The 

KLC RSTS #1 system will be located on a newly constructed multi-elevation antenna field 

that also supports customer unique instrumentation.89

 The AADC is also supporting the development of ground station facilities near Fairbanks, 

Alaska, in cooperation with several commercial remote-sensing companies. The high-latitude 

location makes the Fairbanks site favorable for polar-orbiting satellites, which typically pass 

above Fairbanks several times daily. NASA’s Wallops Flight Facility currently provides mobile 

tracking equipment.

 Located at 57° North latitude, Kodiak provides a wide launch azimuth and unobstructed 

downrange flight path. Kodiak’s markets are military launches and government and 

commercial telecommunications, remote sensing, and space science payloads weighing up 

to 990 kilograms (2,200 pounds). These can be delivered into low Earth orbit (LEO), polar, 

and Molniya orbits. Kodiak is designed to launch Castor 120-based vehicles, including the 

Athena 1 and 2, and has been used on a number of occasions to launch military suborbital 

rockets.

Spaceports
2004 U.S. Commercial Space Transportation Developments and Concepts

56

 Kodiak has conducted a total of six launches to date. The first launch from Kodiak was 

that of a suborbital vehicle, Ait-1, built by Orbital Sciences for the Air Force in November 

1998. A second Ait launch followed in September 1999. A joint NASA-Lockheed Martin 

Astronautics mission on an Athena 1 became the first orbital launch from Kodiak on 

September 29, 2001. In April 2002, Orbital Sciences launched a suborbital rocket, the Quick 

Reaction Launch Vehicle (QRLV-2), for the U.S. Air Force. The mission of the launch was 

missile defense flight testing.

 The Missile Defense Agency has awarded a five-year contract to AADC launch services 

and support for target launches in support of the MDA flight test program.

Spaceport Operated by Florida Space Authority

 Established by the state of Florida as the Spaceport Florida Authority in 1989, the Florida 

Space Authority (FSA), renamed as such in 2001, is empowered like an airport authority 

to serve the launch industry and is responsible for statewide 

space-related economic and academic development. FSA owns 

and operates space transportation-related facilities on about 0.29 

square kilometers (0.11 square miles) of land at CCAFS owned 

by the Air Force. FAA/AST first issued the state organization a 

license for spaceport operations on May 22, 1997, and renewed 

the license in 2002 for another five years.

 Under an arrangement between the federal government and 

FSA, underutilized facilities at CCAFS have been conveyed to FSA 

for improvement and use by commercial entities on a dual-use, 

non-interference basis with Air Force programs. FSA’s efforts have 

concentrated on CCAFS’s LC-46, an old Trident missile launch 

site. LC-46 has been modified to accommodate small commercial launch vehicles as well 

as the Navy’s Trident. The philosophy guiding the development of LC-46 was to build a 

public transportation infrastructure for several competing launch systems rather than to 

tailor a facility for a single launch system. As a result, LC-46 can currently accommodate the 

Athena 1 and Athena 2. In the future, LC-46 could accommodate vehicles carrying payloads 

in excess of 1,800 kilograms (4,000 pounds) to LEO.

 Currently, LC-46 is configured for Castor 120 or similar solid-motor-based vehicles. Its 

infrastructure can support launch vehicles with a maximum height of 36 meters (120 feet) 

and diameters ranging from 1 to 3 meters (3 to 10 feet). An Athena 2 carrying NASA’s Lunar 

Prospector was the first vehicle launched into orbit from the spaceport in January 1998. 

This was followed by launch of the ROCSAT satellite in January of 1999.

 Thus far FSA has invested over $500 million in new space industry development. It has 

upgraded LC-46, built an RLV support complex (adjacent to the Shuttle landing site on KSC 

Spaceports
2004 U.S. Commercial Space Transportation Developments and Concepts

57

grounds), and developed a new space operations support complex. It has also financed $292 

million for Atlas 5 launch facilities at CCAFS Launch Complex-41, financed and constructed 

the $24 million Delta 4 Horizontal Integration Facility for Boeing at Launch Complex-37, and 

provided financing for a Titan 4 storage and processing facility. SpaceX plans to use FSA’s 

Launch Complex-46 for operations on the east coast.

 As part of an overall effort to expand the utilization of the Cape for research and 

development and educational activities, FSA obtained a five-year license from the Air Force 

to use LC-47. The complex was upgraded to support a significant number of suborbital and 

small LEO launches carrying academic payloads for research and training purposes.

 FSA published a Space Transportation Master Plan for the State of Florida in November 

2002, detailing the current status of all intermodal transportation-related functions and 

assets on and near the Cape Canaveral Spaceport. Based on the Master Plan, FSA is now 

developing a Five-Year Work Program in cooperation with NASA/KSC and the U.S. Air Force 

45th Space Wing to identify transportation-related improvements needed at the spaceport 

and its intermodal connections to the surrounding community. The plan will be submitted 

in 2004 to the Brevard Metropolitan Planning Organization for inclusion in the county’s 

Transportation Improvement Program.

 In collaboration with NASA and the state, FSA is helping develop the International Space 

Research Park on about 400 acres at NASA/KSC. Contracts for development of the research 

park are anticipated in 2004, with implementation planned for 2005. The recently completed 

Space Life Sciences Laboratory, which FSA helped finance, serves as a magnet facility for 

the commerce park.

 The state of Florida is competing for the X PRIZE Cup, an exhibition intended to spark 

the suborbital space tourism market by bringing together space vehicle developers every 

year for two weeks at a selected spaceport to race and set new records. A site selection 

for the event is expected in 2004.90

Virginia Space Flight Center

 The Virginia Space Flight Center (VSFC) traces its beginnings 

to the Center for Commercial Space Infrastructure, created in 

1992 at Virginia’s Old Dominion University to establish commercial 

space research and operations facilities in the state. The Center 

for Commercial Space Infrastructure worked with NASA’s Wallops 

Flight Facility on Wallops Island, Virginia, to develop commercial 

launch infrastructure at Wallops. In 1995, the organization 

became the Virginia Commercial Space Flight Authority (VCSFA), 

a political subdivision of the Commonwealth of Virginia, focused on promoting growth of 

aerospace business while developing a commercial launch capability in Virginia.

 

Spaceports
2004 U.S. Commercial Space Transportation Developments and Concepts

58

 On December 19, 1997, FAA/AST issued VCSFA a launch site operator’s license for 

the VSFC. This license was renewed in December 2002 for another five years. The VSFC 

is designed to provide “one-stop shopping” for space launch facilities and services for 

commercial, government and scientific and academic users. In 1997, VCSFA signed with 

NASA a Reimbursement Space Act Agreement to use the Wallops center’s facilities in 

support of commercial launches. This 30-year agreement allows VCSFA access to NASA’s 

payload integration, launch operations, and monitoring facilities on a non-interference, costreimbursement basis. Both NASA and VSFC personnel work together to provide launch 

services, providing little, if any, distinction in the areas of responsibility for each.

 VCSFA has a partnership agreement with DynSpace Corporation, a Computer Sciences 

Corp. company, of Reston, Virginia, to operate the spaceport. Funded by a contract with the 

state and through any spaceport revenues, DynSpace operates the VSFC for the VCSFA. 

The state maintains ownership of the spaceport’s assets. VSFC is located at NASA Wallops 

Flight Facility under a long-term use agreement for real estate on which the Space Flight 

Center has made real property improvements. The VCSFA receives the majority of its funding 

from operations. The remainder of its support comes from the state.

 VCSFA owns two launch pads at Wallops. Launch pad 0-B, its first launch pad, was 

designed as a “universal launch pad,” capable of supporting a variety of small- and mediumsized expendable launch vehicles (ELV) with gross liftoff weights of up to 225,000 kilograms 

(496,000 pounds) that can place up to 4,500 kilograms (9,900 pounds) into LEO. Phase 

1 construction of launch pad 0-B, including a 1,750-square-meter (18,830-square-foot) 

pad made of reinforced concrete, above-ground flame deflector, and launch mount, took 

place between March and December 1998. In 2003, VSFC committed to the design and 

construction of a new 113-foot Mobile Service Structure. The new $1.3 million Mobile Service 

Structure offers complete vehicle enclosure, flexible access, and can be readily modified to 

support specific vehicle operations. The site also includes a complete command, control, 

and communications interface with the launch range. An Air Force Orbital Space Plane (OSP) 

Minotaur mission is currently scheduled for this site.

 In March 2000, VSFC acquired a second pad at Wallops, launch pad 0-A. EER Systems of 

Seabrook, Maryland, built this site in 1994 for its Conestoga launch vehicle. The Conestoga 

made one launch from launch pad 0-A in October 1995 but failed to place the METEOR 

microgravity payload in orbit. VSFC started refurbishing launch pad 0-A and its 25-meter 

(82-foot) service tower in June 2000. Launch pad 0-A will support launches of small ELVs 

with gross liftoff weights of up to 90,000 kilograms (198,000 pounds) and that are capable 

of placing up to 1,350 kilograms (3,000 pounds) into LEO. Completion of the refurbishing 

project is pending future business opportunities. From its location on the Atlantic coast, 

VSFC can accommodate a wide range of orbital inclinations and launch azimuths. Optimal 

orbital inclinations accessible from the site are between 38 and 60 degrees; other inclinations, 

Spaceports
2004 U.S. Commercial Space Transportation Developments and Concepts

59

including sun synchronous orbits (SSO), can be reached through in-flight maneuvers. Launch 

pad 0-A can support a number of small solid-propellant boosters, including the Athena 1, 

Minotaur, and Taurus. Launch pad 0-B can support larger vehicles, including the Athena 2. 

VSFC also has an interest in supporting future RLVs, possibly using its launch pads or three 

runways at Wallops Flight Facility.

 VSFC also provides an extensive array of services including the provision of supplies 

and consumables to support launch operations, facility scheduling, maintenance, inspection 

to ensure timely and safe ground processing and launch operations, and coordination 

with NASA on behalf of its customers. VSFC is in the process of constructing a $4-million 

logistics and processing facility at NASA Wallops, capable of handling payloads of up to 

5,700 kilograms (12,600 pounds). The facility, which includes high bay and clean room 

environments now in construction, is scheduled for completion in early 2004. In conjunction 

with NASA Wallops, VSFC is adding a new mobile Liquid Fueling Facility capable of supporting 

a wide range of liquid-fueled and hybrid rockets. Construction of the LFF is currently in final 

integration and test phase.91

Proposed Non-federal Spaceports

 Several states are planning to develop spaceports offering a range of launch and landing 

services. Two common characteristics of many of the proposed spaceports are inland 

geography – a contrast to the coastal location of all present-day U.S. spaceports – as well as 

interest in hosting RLV operations. Descriptions of specific efforts to establish spaceports, 

which are in various stages of development, are presented below.

Gulf Coast Regional Spaceport

 The Gulf Coast Regional Spaceport Development Corporation has proposed constructing 

a spaceport in Brazoria County, Texas, 80 kilometers (50 miles) south of Houston. The 

Corporation has identified undeveloped land currently used for agriculture as a potential 

site and is working with the private owner of the land to acquire the property.

 Local governments invested nearly $300,000 in the project between 1999 and 2001, 

primarily for site selection work. In February 2002, the state approved the Gulf Coast Regional 

Spaceport board’s access to the first installment of $500,000 in state grant money. The 

initial $150,000 paid contractor fees for an in-depth safety analysis of the site based on 

the use of different types of launch systems. The development plan will determine what 

infrastructure is necessary.92 The Amateur Spaceflight Association launched a 12-foot 

long amateur rocket from this site on May 3, 2003. The website for the spaceport is www.

gulfcoastspaceport.org. 

Mojave Airport Civilian Flight Test Center

 The East Kern County, California, government established the Mojave Airport in 1935 

in Mojave, California. The original facility was equipped with taxiways and basic support 

Spaceports
2004 U.S. Commercial Space Transportation Developments and Concepts

60

infrastructure for general aviation. A short time 

after its inception, the Mojave Airport became a 

marine auxiliary air station. Mojave is currently the 

largest general aviation airport in Kern County. The 

airport is owned and operated by the East Kern 

Airport District (EKAD), which is a special district 

with an elected Board of Directors and a General 

Manager. The airport serves as a Civilian Flight 

Test Center, the location of the National Test Pilot 

School (NTPS), and as a base for modifications 

of major military jets and civilian aircraft. The 

NTPS operates various aircraft types including 

high performance jet aircraft, single-and twin-engine propeller aircraft and helicopters. 

Numerous large air carrier jet aircraft are currently being stored and maintained at the Mojave 

Airport. 

 The Mojave Airport consists of three runways with associated taxiways and other support 

facilities, Runway 12-30, Runway 8-26, and Runway 4-22. Runway 12-30 is 2,896 meters 

(9,502 feet) long and is the primary runway for large air carrier jet and high performance 

civilian and military jet aircraft. Runway 8-26 is 2,149 meters (7,050 feet) long and is primarily 

used by general aviation jet and propeller aircraft. Runway 4-22 is 1,202 meters (3,943 feet) 

long and is used by smaller general aviation propeller aircraft and helicopters.

 Major facilities at the Mojave Airport include the terminal and industrial area, hangars, 

offices, maintenance shop, and fuel services facilities. Rocket engine test stands are located 

in the northern portion of the airport. Aircraft parking capacity includes 600 tie downs 

and 60 T-hangars. The Mojave Airport also includes aircraft storage and a reconditioning 

facility and is home to several industrial operations, such as BAE Systems, Fiberset, Scaled 

Composites, AVTEL, XCOR Aerospace, Orbital Sciences Corporation, Interorbital Systems, 

and General Electric. The Civilian Flight Test Center consists of several test stands, an air 

control tower, a rocket test stand, engineering facilities, and a high bay building.

 In the last two years, XCOR Aerospace has been performing flight tests at this facility 

and recently had multiple successful tests with the EZ-Rocket. XCOR Aerospace had three 

Rocketplane test flights up to 3,657 meters (12,000 feet) in 2002. In addition, rocket engines 

of up to 133,000 newtons (30,000 pounds) of thrust were tested at the site in 2002 and 

2003. 

 On the 100th anniversary of the Wright Brother’s first powered flight, December 17, 

2003, Scaled Composites flew its SpaceShipOne from Mojave, breaking the speed of sound 

in the first manned supersonic flight by an aircraft developed by a small company’s private, 

non-governmental effort.

Spaceports
2004 U.S. Commercial Space Transportation Developments and Concepts

61

 Mojave’s application for a launch site license is currently 

under review by FAA/AST. A public meeting was held in 

December 2003 regarding the airport’s environmental 

assessment, as required by the National Environmental 

Policy Act and the California Environmental Quality Act.

Nevada Test Site

 The Nevada Test Site, located 100 kilometers (62 miles) 

northwest of Las Vegas, is a remote highly secure facility 

covered by restricted airspace.93 Kistler Aerospace Corporation selected it as a spaceport 

for the K-1 RLV in addition to its Woomera, Australia, facility in order to increase scheduling 

flexibility and to widen the range of launch azimuths available to customers.94 Kistler filed 

for reorganization under Chapter 11 of the bankruptcy laws in July 2003. Although it does 

not have any launch infrastructure, the Nevada Test Site has existing basic infrastructure 

such as a paved runway, water, roads, and power that can be used to support launch and 

landing activities.

 The Nevada Test Site Development Corporation obtained an economic development use 

permit in 1997 from the U.S. Department of Energy. Shortly thereafter, the Corporation issued 

a sub-permit allowing Kistler to operate a launch and recovery operation at the Nevada Test 

Site. The web site of the test site is http://www.nv.doe.gov/nts/default.htm. 

Oklahoma Spaceport

 The state of Oklahoma is interested in developing 

a broader space industrial base and a spaceport. 

In 1999 the Oklahoma state legislature created the 

Oklahoma Space Industry Development Authority 

(OSIDA). Consisting of five full-time employees 

and directed by seven governor-appointed board 

members, OSIDA promotes the development of 

spaceport facilities, space exploration, space 

education, and space-related industries in Oklahoma. 

Currently, the state of Oklahoma provides operating 

costs for OSIDA, but the organization expects to be financially independent in five years. 

 In 2000, the Oklahoma state legislature passed an economic incentive law offering 

tax credits, tax exemptions, and accelerated depreciation rates for commercial spaceportrelated activities. In 2002, OSIDA awarded a contract to SRS Technologies to conduct an 

environmental impact study. The study, expected to continue through September of 2004, 

is a critical step toward receiving a launch site operator license from FAA/AST. In the fall of 

2003, OSIDA took another step toward receiving its license by awarding a contract to The 

Aerospace Corporation to conduct a safety study of the proposed site and operations.

Spaceports
2004 U.S. Commercial Space Transportation Developments and Concepts

62

 Clinton-Sherman Industrial Airpark, located at Burns Flat, is the preferred site for a future 

spaceport in Oklahoma. Existing infrastructure includes a 4,100-meter (13,500-foot) runway, 

a large maintenance and repair hangar, utilities, a rail spur, and 12.4 square kilometers (4.8 

square miles) of open land. The city of Clinton conveyed ownership of the spaceport site to 

OSIDA in 2003, and has requested that the FAA’s Southwest Region approve the transfer. 

The launch activities proposed will not greatly impact the continued use of the CSIA as an 

active airport for general aviation and for USAF training.

 The Oklahoma Spaceport will provide launch and support services for RLVs and may 

become operational in late 2006 or early 2007, becoming one of the first inland launch sites 

in the United States. The state of Oklahoma offers several incentives, valued at over $128 

million over 10 years, to attract space companies to the state. For example, a jobs program 

provides quarterly cash payments of up to 5 percent of new taxable payroll directly to 

qualifying companies for up to 10 years. Also, the state will provide a $15-million tax credit 

to the first corporation that meets specific qualifying criteria, including equity capitalization 

of $10 million and the creation of at least 100 Oklahoma jobs. Some organizations also 

may qualify for other state tax credits, tax refunds, tax exemptions and training incentives. 

Besides state funding, NASA issued $241,000 to OSIDA for space-related educational 

grants to be used throughout the state. OSIDA has signed Memoranda of Understanding 

with several companies for use of the Burns Flat site. 

South Texas Spaceport

 Willacy County Development Corporation was created in 2001 to manage the spaceport 

site evaluation and other technical and administrative elements of the project under a Texas 

Aerospace Commission grant. In February 2002, the Texas Aerospace Commission awarded 

a $500,000 contract to the South Texas Spaceport.

 The proposed spaceport site is a 40-square-kilometer (15.4-square-mile) undeveloped 

portion of Willacy County adjacent to the Laguna Madre and the Gulf of Mexico approximately 

150 kilometers (93 miles) south of Corpus Christi and 65 kilometers (40 miles) north of 

Brownsville. The site initially may support the suborbital and small orbital launch systems 

currently in service or being developed for service in the near future, with a long term focus 

on RLVs. Due to its extreme southern location, the site would become the U.S. site capable 

of supporting the largest payload launches to geosynchronous Earth orbit (GEO).

 In 2003, a 150-pound sounding rocket and an 11-foot Super Loki suborbital rocket were 

launched near the site in efforts to generate awareness and encourage state funding of the 

South Texas Spaceport.95 96

 To date, no infrastructure has been built. Initial planning will focus on the infrastructure 

needed to support activities of launch operators with current development programs.97

Spaceports
2004 U.S. Commercial Space Transportation Developments and Concepts

63

Southwest Regional Spaceport

 The State of New Mexico continues to make progress in the development of the Southwest 

Regional Spaceport (SRS). The SRS is being developed for use by private companies and 

government organizations conducting space activities and operations. The proposed site 

of the spaceport is a 70-square-kilometer (27-square-mile) parcel of open land in the south 

central part of the state at approximately 1,430 m (4,700 ft) above sea level. The spaceport 

concept is to support all classes of RLVs serving suborbital trajectories as well as equatorial, 

polar, and ISS orbits, and to provide support services for payload integration, launch, and 

landing. The facility will be able to accommodate both vertical and horizontal launches and 

landings, and will include two launch complexes, a runway, an aviation complex, a payload 

assembly complex, other support facilities, and a cryogenic fuel plant. The SRS is supported 

by the state through the New Mexico Office for Space Commercialization, part of the New 

Mexico Economic Development Department. In 2001, the state legislature approved $1.5 

million in funds for fiscal years 2002 through 2004 for spaceport development, including 

environmental studies and land acquisition; this funding, however, is contingent on the 

state receiving a written commitment from a private company or government organization 

to host an RLV program. 

 The state has provided several other incentives for the spaceport, including gross receipt 

deductions, industrial revenue bonds, and investment and job training credits. In 2002, the 

state of New Mexico and the U.S. Army White Sands Missile Range signed a Memorandum 

of Agreement supporting the development of the SRS. The agreement enables the spaceport 

to share resources and integrate launch scheduling and operations with the Army test 

range. In 2003, New Mexico updated environmental studies for the SRS, and performed a 

comprehensive analysis of the advantages of launching from high altitude for vertical launch 

vehicles.98

 In December 2003, New Mexico submitted its proposal to host the X Prize Cup 

competition.99

Spaceport Alabama

Proposed as a next-generation spaceport, Spaceport Alabama will be a full-service departure 

and return facility supporting both orbital and suborbital space access vehicles. Spaceport 

Alabama is currently in the planning phase under direction of the Aerospace Development Center 

of Alabama. Upon completion of the Spaceport Alabama plan, a proposal will be presented to 

the Alabama Commission on Aerospace Science and Industry and the Alabama Legislature for 

formal adoption. Under the current plan, the Alabama Legislature would establish the Spaceport 

Alabama Authority, which would oversee the development of Spaceport Alabama. While no land 

has been acquired for Spaceport Alabama, a green field site is under consideration in Baldwin 

County, across the bay from the city of Mobile. This site is seen as ideal for supporting both 

government and commercial customers operating next-generation reusable flight vehicles that 

are designed for access to LEO, medium Earth orbit (MEO), and GEO.

Spaceports
2004 U.S. Commercial Space Transportation Developments and Concepts

64

 Under the current spaceport development plan, a spaceport facility could become 

operational within 10 years depending on market demand. The current plan calls for the 

establishment of a “total spaceport enterprise” concept, consisting of a departure and 

return facility, processing and support facilities, full support infrastructure, a research and 

development park, a commerce park, supporting community infrastructure, intermodal 

connectivity, and other services and infrastructure necessary for providing a “turn key” 

capability in support of space commerce, research and development, national security, 

science and related services. Given that the site currently under consideration is adjacent 

to the Gulf of Mexico, Spaceport Alabama would service primarily RLVs, although some 

suborbital ELVs in support of scientific and academic missions could be supported.100

Spaceport Washington

 Spaceport Washington, a public/private partnership, has identified Grant County 

International Airport in central Washington, 280 kilometers (174 miles) east of Seattle, as the 

site of a future spaceport. The airport, formerly Larson AFB and now owned and operated 

by the Port of Moses Lake, is used primarily as a testing and training facility. Spaceport 

Washington proposes to use Grant County International Airport for horizontal and vertical 

takeoffs and horizontal landings of all classes of RLVs. The airport has a 4,100-meter (13,452-

foot) main runway and a 3,200-meter (10,500-foot) crosswind runway, and is certified as an 

emergency-landing site for the Space Shuttle. No additional infrastructure has been planned 

for the site. Spaceport Washington has received $350,000 and staff support from the state 

of Washington.101

Utah Spaceport

 In 2001, the state of Utah passed the Utah Spaceport Authority Act, creating a Utah 

Spaceport Authority with the power to develop and regulate spaceport facilities in the state. 

The Act also created a seven-member advisory board appointed by the governor to advise 

the Authority on spaceport issues. Since the Act was signed into law, the advisory board 

has been created but no other actions have been taken. The Wah Wah Valley Interlocal 

Cooperation Entity proposed to construct and operate a commercial launch site utilizing 

approximately 280 square kilometers (108 square miles) of Utah state trust lands located 

50 kilometers (31 miles) southwest of Milford, Utah. The proposed spaceport’s mission is 

to provide a cost-effective launch and recovery facility for RLVs.

 There is no existing or planned infrastructure at this time. The state of Utah appropriated 

$300,000 to conduct a spaceport feasibility study and appointed a Spaceport Advisory 

Board to research the economic development opportunities of the X-33 and other RLVs. 

The study was put on hold after the cancellation of the X-33 and VentureStar programs. 

The state did not provide funding for the Spaceport Authority in 2002 and 2003, and no 

funding was approved for 2004.102

Spaceports
2004 U.S. Commercial Space Transportation Developments and Concepts

65

West Texas Spaceport

 The Pecos County/West Texas Spaceport Development Corporation, established in mid2001, has proposed the development of a spaceport 29 kilometers (18 miles) southwest 

of Fort Stockton, Texas. Spaceport infrastructure will include a launch site with a 4,570-

meter (15,000-foot) safety radius, an adjacent recovery zone 4,570 meters (15,000 feet) in 

diameter, and payload integration and launch control facilities.

 In February 2002, the Texas Aerospace Commission awarded a $500,000 contract to 

the West Texas Spaceport. In June 2002, the Air Force approved the site for various testlaunch projects. JP Aerospace began launching small suborbital rockets from the site in 

October 2002.103

Wisconsin Spaceport

 On August 29, 2000, the Wisconsin Department of Transportation officially approved the 

creation of the Wisconsin Spaceport, located on Lake Michigan in Sheboygan, Wisconsin. 

The city of Sheboygan owns the spaceport, which strives to support space research and 

education through suborbital launches for student projects. 

 Suborbital sounding rocket launches to altitudes of up to 55 kilometers (34 miles) have 

been conducted at the site. Additionally, Rockets for Schools, a student program founded 

in Wisconsin by Space Explorers, Inc. and developed by the Aerospace States Association, 

has conducted suborbital launches at Spaceport Sheboygan since its inception in 1995. 

Each year, hundreds of students from Wisconsin, Illinois, Iowa and Michigan participate in 

these launches. Rockets for Schools is currently a firmly established, high-quality program 

of the Great Lakes Spaceport Education Foundation.

 The spaceport’s existing infrastructure includes a vertical pad for suborbital launches 

in addition to portable launch facilities, such as mission control, which are erected and 

disassembled as needed. The pier from which launches take place was widened and 

strengthened during 2002. Additionally, some existing structures were removed from the 

property to clear space for the construction of a proposed mission control and education 

center. 

 Plans for developing additional launch infrastructure are ongoing. Future projects include 

adding orbital launch capabilities for RLVs. Spaceport developers are in the process of 

creating a development plan. Draft legislation for the creation of a spaceport authority is 

under review by the Wisconsin Senate and is anticipated to be passed in 2004.104

Spaceports
2004 U.S. Commercial Space Transportation Developments and Concepts

66

Spaceport

Cape Canaveral

Spaceport

(CCAFS/KSC)

Edwards AFB

Vandenberg AFB

Wallops Flight Facility

White Sands Missile

Range

Location

Cape Canaveral,

Florida

California, near Mojave

Lompoc, California

Wallops Island,

Virginia

White Sands,

New Mexico

Current Development

Status

RLV and ELV spaceport is

operational.

Site is operational.

VAFB has started negotiations

with several commercial

companies. Existing

infrastructure is operational.

Upgrades may or may not be

required depending on vehicle

requirements.

Wallops Flight Facility has not

supported any orbital flights since

the failure of the Conestoga in

1995. NASA is committed to

maintaining the existing

infrastructure.

NASA flight test center is

operational. RLV-specific

upgrades will probably be

required.

TABLE 5: Federal Spaceports: Infrastructure and Status

Owner/

Operator

U.S. Air Force, NASA,

Florida Space Authority

U.S. Air Force

U.S. Air Force

NASA

U.S. Army

Launch

Infrastructure

Telemetry and tracking

facilities, jet and shuttle

capable runways, launch

pads, hangar, vertical

processing facilities and

assembly building.

Telemetry and tracking

facilities, jet and shuttle

capable runways, Delta 4

launch pad, operations

control center, movable

hangar, fuel tanks, and

water tower.

Launch pads, vehicle

assembly and processing

buildings, payload

processing facilities,

telemetry and tracking

facilities, control center

engineering office space,

shuttle-capable runways.

Telemetry and tracking

facilities, heavy jet and

shuttle-capable runway,

launch pads, vehicle

assembly and processing

buildings, payload

processing facilities,

range control center,

blockhouses, large aircraft

hangars, and user office

space.

Telemetry and tracking

facilities, runway engine

and propulsion testing

facilities.

Spaceport

California Spaceport

Kodiak Launch Complex

Spaceport owned by

Florida Space Authority

Virginia Space Flight

Center

Location

Lompoc,

California

Kodiak Island,

Alaska

Cape Canaveral,

Florida

Wallops Island,

Virginia

Current Development

Status

The Integrated Processing

Facility has an upgraded power

system, digital control systems,

secure communication, HVAC

systems, fuel and oxidized pads

and fairing encapsulation in Cell 1.

A new 30-ton crane has been

added to the Transfer Tower as

well as a new interior blast door.

The IPF is now fully configured to

support Delta 2- and Delta 4-class

payloads. Concrete flame ducts

communication, electrical and

water infrastructure are in place.

Construction of the launch control

center, payload processing facility,

and integration and processing

facility was completed in 2000.

Has invested over $500 million to

upgrade launch sites, build an RLV

support complex adjacent to the

Shuttle landing facilities, and

develop a new space operations

support complex.

Currently completing $6.6 million

in launch range improvements.

Invested $1.3 million to design and

build a new Mobile Service

Structure. Construction of a

$4 million logistics and processing

facility at NASA Wallops underway.

VSFC is adding a new mobile

Liquid Fueling Facility capable of

supporting a wide range of

liquid-fueled and hybrid rockets.

Table 6: Licensed Non-federal Spaceports: Infrastructure and Status

Owner/

Operator

Spaceport Systems

International

Alaska Aerospace

Development

Corporation

Florida Space Authority

Virginia Commercial

Space Flight Authority

Launch

Infrastructure

Existing launch pads,

runways, payload

processing facilities,

telemetry and tracking

equipment.

Launch control center,

payload processing

facility, and integration

and processing facility.

Limited range support

infrastructure (uses

mobile equipment).

One launch complex

including a pad and a

remote control center, a

small payload preparation

facility and an RLV

support facility.

Two orbital launch pads,

payload processing and

integration facility vehicle

storage and assembly

buildings, on-site and

downrange telemetry and

tracking, and payload

recovery capability.

Spaceports
2004 U.S. Commercial Space Transportation Developments and Concepts

67

Spaceport

Gulf Coast Regional

Spaceport

Mojave Airport Civilian

Flight Test Center

Nevada Test Site

Oklahoma Spacport 

South Texas Spaceport

Southwest Regional

Spaceport

Spaceport Alabama

Spaceport Washington

Location

Brazoria County,

Texas

Mojave,

California

Nye County,

Nevada

Washita County,

Oklahoma

Willacy County,

Texas

Upham,

New Mexico

Baldwin County,

Alabama

Grant County

International Airport,

Washington

Current Development

Status

The final Texas Spaceport site(s)

has not been selected yet. Three

sites are being considered at this

time. Grant money was provided to

conduct a safety analysis and the

site has supported an amateur

launch.

FAA/AST is currently reviewing

site s application for a launch site

license. Site has supported testing

by XCOR Aerospace and Scaled

Composites.

Kistler was issued a sub-permit

allowing it to operate a launch and

recovery operation by NTS. Nevada

Test Site Development Corporation

is actively promoting the site as a

spaceport for both RLVs and

conventional launchers.

The Clinton-Sherman AFB at Burns

Flat was designated as the future

spaceport. OSIDA is conducting a

safety study of the proposed site

and operations. An environmental

impact study is underway.

The final Texas Spaceport site(s)

has not been selected yet. Three

sites are being considered at this

time. Suborbital rockets have been

launched near the proposed site.

Plans for this site include a

spaceport central control facility, an

airfield, a maintenance and

integration facility, a launch and

recovery complex, a flight operations

control center, and a cryogenic plant.

Environmental and business

development studies conducted.

Open field space with basic power,

water, and utilities. Development

plan calls for departure and return

facility, processing and support

facilities, full support infrastructure,

a research and development park, a

commerce park, supporting

community infrastructure, intermodal

connectivity, and other services and

infrastructure.

The site is certified as an

emergency-landing site for the Space

Shuttle. No additional infrastructure

has been planned for this site.

Table 7: Proposed Non-federal Spaceports: Infrastructure and Status

Owner/

Operator

To be determined

East Kern Airport

Department of

Energy/Nevada Test

Site Development

Corporation

Oklahoma Space

Industry Development

Authority

To be determined

New Mexico Office of

Space

Commercialization

To be determined

Port of Moses Lake

Launch

Infrastructure at

Site

No infrastructure at this

time.

Air control tower, runway,

rotor test stand,

engineering facilities, high

bay building.

No launch infrastructure at

this time. Power and basic

facilities available.

4,115-meter (13,500-foot)

runway, a 5,200-squaremeter (56,000-square-foot)

manufacturing facility, a

2,7850-square-meter

(30,000-square-foot)

maintenance and painting

hangar, and 435 square

kilometers (168 square

miles) of land available for

further construction.

No infrastructure at this

time.

No infrastructure at this

time.

No infrastructure at this

time. 4,100-meter

(13,452-foot) main runway

and a 3,200-meter

(10,500-foot) crosswind

runway.

Spaceports
2004 U.S. Commercial Space Transportation Developments and Concepts

68

Spaceport

Utah Spaceport

West Texas Spaceport

Wisconsin Spaceport

Location

Wah Wah Valley,

Utah

Pecos County, Texas

Sheboygan,

Wisconsin

Current Development

Status

Plans for the proposed Utah 

Spaceport include a central 

administrative control facility an 

airfield, maintenance and integration 

facility for payloads and spacecraft, 

launch pads, a flight operation 

control center, and a propellant 

storage facility. State funding for 

development has not been provided 

since 2001.

The final Texas Spaceport site(s) has 

not been selected yet. Three sites 

are being considered at this time. 

Site has supported suborbital 

launches. Plans for development 

include a launch site with a 

4,570-meter (15,000-foot) safety 

radius, an adjacent recovery zone 

4,570 meters (15,000 feet) in 

diameter, and payload integration 

and launch control facilities.

Plans for developing additional 

launch infrastructure are ongoing, 

and include creation of a 

development plan that includes 

support for orbital RLV operations.

Table 7: Proposed Non-federal Spaceports: Infrastructure and Status (Cont'd)

Owner/

Operator

Utah Spaceport 

Authority

To be determined

Owner: City of 

Sheboygan; 

Operator: Rockets for 

Schools

Launch

Infrastructure at

Site

No infrastructure at this 

time.

No infrastructure at this 

time.

A vertical pad for 

suborbital launches in 

addition to portable launch

 facilities, such as mission 

control.

Spaceports
2004 U.S. Commercial Space Transportation Developments and Concepts

69

Endnotes

1 The orbiter main engines, and solid rocket boosters are refurbished and reused, but the 

external tank is irrecoverable.

2 White House news release. “Fact Sheet: A Renewed Spirit of Discovery,” 14 January 

2004.

3 Although used in a multinational venture, Sea Launch’s Zenit 3SL is included here because 

of U.S.-based Boeing’s strong involvement in the venture and also because FAA/AST licenses 

Sea Launch launch operations.

4 The Air Force has made at least one exception to fly a non-U.S. government payload on 

a Minotaur vehicle.

5 Lockheed Martin Space Systems. “Athena - Facts” (http://www.ast.lmco.com/launch_

athenaFacts.shtml) accessed 31 December 2003.

6 Lockheed Martin Space Systems. “Atlas-Facts” (http://www.ast.lmco.com/launchatlasFacts.shtml), accessed 31 December 2003.

7 Communication with Lockheed Martin Corporation, 12 January 2004.

8 The Boeing Company. “Delta II Launch Vehicle” (http://www.boeing.com/defense-space/

space/delta/delta2/delta2.htm), accessed 31 December 2003.

9 The Boeing Company. “Delta IV Launch Vehicles” (http://www.boeing.com/defense-space/

space/delta/delta4/delta4.htm), accessed 31 December 2003.

10 U.S. Air Force. “Fact Sheet: The OSP Space Launch Vehicle (‘Minotaur’)” (http://www.

losangeles.af.mil/SMC/PA/Fact_Sheets/minotaur_fs.htm), accessed 31 December 2003.

11 Orbital Sciences Corporation press release. “Orbital Receives $11 million Order for Minotaur 

Space Launch Vehicle from the U.S. Air Force,” 2 October 2003.

12 Orbital Sciences Corporation. “Pegasus” (http://www.orbital.com/LaunchVehicle/

SpaceLaunchVehicles/Pegasus/index.html), accessed 31 December 2003.

13 Communication with Orbital Sciences Corporation, 9 January 2004.

14 Orbital Sciences Corporation. “Taurus” (http://www.orbital.com/LaunchVehicle/

SpaceLaunchVehicles/Taurus/index.html), accessed 31 December 2003.

15 The first stage of a Peacekeeper ICMB was used as the Taurus’ first stage for the first 

Taurus launch.

16 U.S. Air Force press release. “Final Titan II Launches,” 20 October 2003.

17 The Delta 4 Heavy is planned for first launch in 2004. Once operational, the Delta 4 Heavy 

would become the only launch vehicle with more lift capability than the Titan 4B.

18 Lockheed Martin Space Systems. “Titan IV - Facts” (http://www.ast.lmco.com/launch_

titanIVfacts.shmtl), accessed 31 December 2003.

19 Communication with Lockheed Martin Corporation, 12 January 2004.

20 Sea Launch. “Sea Launch Launch Vehicle” (http://www.sea-launch.com/sllaunch_vehicle.

htm) accessed 31 December 2003.

21 Turner, Andrew E. “Aquarius Launch Vehicle: Failure is an Option,” (http://www.

Endnotes
2004 U.S. Commercial Space Transportation Developments and Concepts

70

astronautical.org/pubs/vol40i3Feat.htm), Space Times, vol. 40, no. 3, May-June 2001. 22

Space Systems/Loral. “Aquarius: Economic Value of a Consumables Launcher,,” Final briefing 

on Competitive Space Grant C00-0200 for the California Technology, Trade and Commerce 

Agency and the California Space Authority, 25 June 2002.

23 Interview with Space Systems/Loral, 30 December 2003.

24 Communication with E’Prime Aerospace, 8 January 2004.

25 E’Prime Aerospace. “EPAC Eagle S-Series Vehicles” (http://www.eprimeaerospace.com/

familychart.html ), accessed 31 December 2003.

26 E’Prime Aerospace press release. “E’Prime Aerospace Introduces Spaceplane Systems’ 

Eagle Flier,” 8 July 2003.

27 Communication with SpacePlane Systems, 7 January 2004.

28 Boeing Launch Services, Inc. press release. “Sea Launch to Offer Land-Based MediumLift Launches from Baikonur in Cooperation with Space International Services.” 20 October 

2003.

29 Interview with Rocket Propulsion Engineering Company, 25 November 2003.

30 Communication with Microcosm, Inc., 6 January 2004.

31 DARPA. “Force Application and Launch from CONUS,” (http://www.darpa.mil/tto/

programs/falcon.html), accessed 7 January 2004.

32 The Space Launch Corporation. “Microsatellite Launch Service” (http://www.spacelaunch.

com/products.asp), accessed 31 December 2003.

33 The Space Launch Corporation press release. “DARPA’s RASCAL Program Selects Space 

Launch Corporation as Phase Two Contractor,” 13 March 2003.

34 Bristol Aerospace, Ltd. “Black Brant Sounding Rockets” (http://www.bristol.ca/BlackBrant.

html), accessed 31 December 2003.

35 NASA Wallops Flight Facility. “Sounding Rocket Program Handbook” (http://www.nsroc.

com/front/what/SRHB.pdf), accessed 31 December 2003.

36 SPACEHAB, Inc. press release. “SPACEHAB’s Astrotech Unit Completes Successful First 

Launch of New Oriole Sounding Rocket,” 13 July 2000.

37 SPACEHAB, Inc., press release. “SPACEHAB’s Astrotech Sells Sounding Rocket Assets,” 

2 August 2001.

38 NASA Wallops Flight Facility. “Terrier-Orion Characteristics” (http://www.wff.nasa.gov/

pages/terrier-orion.html), accessed 31 December 2003.

39 University of Queensland. “HyShot program secures place in flight history,” 16 August 

2002.

40 White House news release. “Fact Sheet: A Renewed Spirit of Discovery,” 14 January 

2004.

41 Columbia Accident Investigation Board. “The CAIB Report: All Volumes” (http://www.

nasa.gov/columbia/caib/html/start.html), accessed 2 January 2004.

42 Space Shuttle Competitive Sourcing Task Force. “Alternative Trajectories: Options for 

Competitive Sourcing of the space Shuttle Program” (executive summary), September 2002. 

43 NASA Marshall Space Flight Center. “NASA’s Space Launch Initiative: The Next Generation 

Launch Technology Program” (http://www1.msfc.nasa.gov/NEWSROOM/background/facts/

Endnotes
2004 U.S. Commercial Space Transportation Developments and Concepts

71

ngltfacts.pdf), accessed 2 January 2004.

44 The Space Launch Corporation. “RASCAL Overview” (http://www.spacelaunch.com/rascal.

asp), accessed 1 October 2003.

45 X Prize Foundation Press Release. “Space Shuttle Commander Richard Searfoss Selected 

as Chief Judge of the X Prize Competition,” (http://www.xprize.org/press/release_035.html 

), 22 April 2003.

46 X Prize Foundation Press Release. “Interorbital Systems Enters X Prize Competition with 

“Solaris X” Rocket Plane,” (http://www.xprize.org/press/release_029.html), 23 January 

2003. 47 X Prize Foundation. “Team Registration Information,” (http://www.xprize.org/pdfs/

xprize_teamregistration.pdf), 3 June 2003.

48 High Altitude Research Corporation. http://www.harcspace.com, accessed 6 January 

2004.

49 Space Transportation Corporation. http://www.space-transport.com, accessed 6 January 

2004.

50 Scaled Composites press release. “Scaled Breaks Sound Barrier,” (http://www.scaled.

com/projects/tierone/New_Index/news/121703.htm), 17 December 2003.

51 Armadillo Aerospace news update. “Hydrotest, Big vehicle work, Engine work,” (http://

www.armadilloaerospace.com/n.x/Armadillo/Home/News?news_id=238), 27 December 

2003.

52 X Prize Foundation. “Pioneer Rocketplane,” (http://www.xprize.org/pdfs/Pioneer.pdf), 

accessed 8 January 2004.

53 Space Exploration Technologies Corporation press release. “SpaceX Announces Defense 

Department Launch Customer,” 16 October 2003.

54 Space Exploration Technologies Corporation. “Falcon LV Vehicle Explorer” (http://www.

spacex.com/falcon/falcon2.htm), accessed 2 January 2004.

55 SpaceX press release. “Announcing the Falcon V Launch Vehicle from SpaceX,” 7 January 

2004.

56 Kistler Aerospace Corporation press release. “Kistler Aerospace Corporation Restructures 

its Finances to Achieve the Reusable Launch Vehicle’s First Flight,” 15 July 2003.

57 NASA Fact Sheet. “NASA’s Space Launch Initiative,” (FS-2003-05-63-MSFC), May 2003. 

58 NASA Fact Sheet. “Hypersonics Research and Development,” (FS-2003-01-01-MSFC), 

January 2003.

59 NASA Fact Sheet. “Integrated System of an Air Breathing Rocket,” (FS-2003-01-02-MSFC), 

January 2003.

60 NASA Fact Sheet. “NASA ‘Hyper-X’ Program Demonstrates Scramjet Technology,” (FS2003-07-77-LaRC), July 2003.

61 NASA press release. “NASA Selects Allied Team to Provide Hypersonic Vehicles,” 8 

October 2003.

62 SpaceDev. “SpaceDev Hybrid Rocket Propulsion Technology” (http://www.spacedev.

com/newsite/templates/subpage3.php?pid=185), accessed 15 October 2003.

Endnotes
2004 U.S. Commercial Space Transportation Developments and Concepts

72

63 Scaled Composites press release. “Scaled Composites completes the development phase 

for the SpaceShipOne rocket propulsion system and selects a motor component vendor for 

the flight test phase,” 18 September 2003. 

64 Lockheed Martin-Michoud. “Hybrid Propulsion Demonstration,” (http://www.

lockheedmartin.com/michoud/products/hybrid.htm), accessed 6 January 2004.

65 Lockheed Martin Space Systems Company press release. “Lockheed Martin-built Sounding 

Rocket Demonstrates Hybrid Propulsion Technology,” 7 January 2003.

66 The Boeing Company. “Space Launch Initiative,” (http://www.boeing.com/defense-space/

space/propul/SLI.html), accessed 21 October 2003.

67 Boeing press release. “Boeing Tests Future Rocket Engine Component To Record Levels,” 

9 December 2003.

68 The Boeing Company. “XRS-2200 Linear Aerospike Engine,” (http://www.boeing.com/

defense-space/space/propul/XRS2200.html), accessed 21 October 2003.

69 Communication with Microcosm, Inc., 6 January 2004.

70 Conger, Robert, James R. Wertz, and Jack Kulpa. “The Scorpius Expendable Launch Vehicle 

Family and Status of the Sprite Small Launch Vehicle,” published by American Institute of 

Aeronautics and Astronautics, Inc., AIAA-LA Section/SSTC 2003-9005, April 2003.

71 SpaceX press release. “SpaceX Performs Rocket Engine Firing,” 19 March 2003.

72 SpaceX Press Release. “SpaceX Launch Vehicle on Track for First Launch,” 11 August 

2003.

73 XCOR Aerospace. “Rocket Engines,” (http://www.xcor.com/engines.html), accessed 21 

October 2003.

74 Crocker, Andrew M., et al. “Progress on Alchemist ACES: Technology for Next Generation 

Space Transportation,” published by American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, 

Inc., AIAA 2003-4890, July 2003.

75 NASA Fact Sheet. “X-37 Demonstrator to Test Future Launch Technologies in Orbit and 

Reentry Requirements,” (FS-2003-05-65-MSFC), May 2003.

76 The Boeing Company. “X-37 Reusable Spaceplane/X-40A Space Maneuver Vehicle,” 

(http://www.boeing.com/phantom/x37.html), accessed 21 October 2003.

77 NASA Next Generation Launch Technology News. “Booster Engine Prototype Project: 

TR107 Engine Component Technologies,” (FS-2003-11-142-MSFC), November 2003.

78 NASA Fact Sheet. “Next Generation Launch Technology: Integrated Powerhead 

Demonstrator,” (FS-2003-11-145-MSFC), November 2003.

79 NASA news release. “NASA, Air Force achieve key milestones on next-generation engine,” 

20 November 2003.

80 Communication with National Coalition of Spaceport States, 10 November 2003.

81 A 50-year comprehensive Master Plan for the future development of Cape Canaveral 

Spaceport was released in 2002. The Plan was prepared in partnership between NASA, the 

Air Force, and Florida Space Authority. Other participants were the Merritt Island National 

Wildlife Refuge, Canaveral National Seashore, and Navy Ordnance Test Unit.

82 Interview with Cape Canaveral Spaceport, 25 November 2003.

83 Communication with Edwards Air Force Base, 9 January 2004.

Endnotes
2004 U.S. Commercial Space Transportation Developments and Concepts

73

84 Scully, Janene. “What once was old will soon be new again,” Santa Maria Times (http://

www.santamariatimes.com/articles/2003/11/30/news/local/news02.txt), accessed 2 

January 2004.

85 Ray, Justin. “Titan 2 rocket’s Vandenberg launch pad to be torn down,” SpaceFlight Now

(http://www.spaceflightnow.com/titan/g9/031019slc4west.html), accessed 2 January 2004. 

86 Survey response from Wallops Flight Facility, 23 October 2003.

87 Communication with White Sands Missile Range, 23 October 2003.

88 Survey Response from Spaceport Systems International, 20 October 2003.

89 Interview with Alaska Aerospace Development Corporation, 1 December 2003.

90 Florida Space Authority annual report. Florida: Advancing the State of Space, 2003.

91 Survey Response from Virginia Space Flight Center, 21 October 2003.

92 Communication with Texas Governor’s Office of Aerospace and Aviation, 9 January 2004. 

93 Nevada Department of Energy. “Nevada Test Site,” (http://www.nv.doe.gov/nts/default.

htm), accessed 7 January 2004.

94 Communication with Kistler Aerospace Corporation, 7 January 2004.

95 Ross, Janell. “T-minus one day to a rocket’s blast-off,” Corpus Christi Caller-Times, (http://

www.caller.com), 11 May 2003.

96 Collins, Quincy C. “Rocket launches hopes,” Corpus Christi Caller-Times, (http://www.

caller.com), 18 February 2003.

97 Communication with Texas Governor’s Office of Aerospace and Aviation, 9 January 2004. 

98 Communication with Southwest Regional Spaceport, 5 January 2004.

99 New Mexico Office of Space Commericalization Milestones (http://www.edd.state.nm.us/

SPACE/milestones.html), accessed 14 January 2004.

100 Communication with Alabama Aerospace Development Center, 17 December 2003.

101 Communication with Washington Office of Trade and Economic Development, 18 

December 2003.

102 Utah Governor’s Office of Planning and Budget. Detailed Budget Information by Year

(http://www.governor.utah.gov/gopb/budget.html), accessed 6 January 2004.

103 Communication with Texas Governor’s Office of Aerospace and Aviation, 9 January 

2004.

104 Communication with Space Explorers, Inc. (representing Wisconsin), 5 January 2004.

Endnotes

009504.indd