The World's Busiest Spaceport Is About To Get a Lot Quieter, At Least For Now (arstechnica.com)
- Reference: 0185263568
- News link: https://science.slashdot.org/story/26/08/29/0049211/the-worlds-busiest-spaceport-is-about-to-get-a-lot-quieter-at-least-for-now
- Source link: https://arstechnica.com/space/2026/08/the-worlds-busiest-spaceport-is-about-to-get-a-lot-quieter-at-least-for-now/
> A Falcon 9 launch early Tuesday was the last planned Starlink mission from Cape Canaveral until SpaceX begins flying Starship missions from Florida, according to Kiko Dontchev, the company's vice president of launch. For at least the rest of the year, and maybe longer, this means the launch rate at the Florida spaceport will drop from eight or nine per month to perhaps two per month.
>
> It wasn't long ago when two launches per month was the norm, an indication of just how quickly SpaceX's launch cadence has grown. Cape Canaveral and Kennedy Space Center sit on adjoining property and share the same range on Florida's east coast, so it is worth considering them a single spaceport. The last time the Florida spaceport did not lead the world in space launches was in 2015.
>
> "From here on, Starlink missions out of Florida will fly on Starship," Dontchev [3]wrote on X. "The West Coast team will continue regularly launching Starlink from Vandenberg."
"Yep, that'll be louder -- but everybody knows [4]the real action will be in Louisiana, starting in 2029 or so," writes schwit1. SpaceX on Tuesday announced plans to spend up to $100 billion building a new Starship launch facility in Vermilion Parish, Louisiana, which the state says could eventually "support thousands of launches annually."
Further reading: [5]Musk's other unstated reasons for shutting down Falcon 9 in Florida (Behind The Black)
[1] https://arstechnica.com/space/2026/08/the-worlds-busiest-spaceport-is-about-to-get-a-lot-quieter-at-least-for-now/
[2] https://slashdot.org/~schwit1
[3] https://x.com/TurkeyBeaver/status/2092267257179021326?s=20
[4] https://science.slashdot.org/story/26/08/25/2337244/spacex-plans-to-build-a-100-billion-spaceport-in-louisiana
[5] https://behindtheblack.com/behind-the-black/essays-and-commentaries/musks-other-unstated-reasons-for-shutting-down-falcon-9-in-florida/
Re: (Score:2)
Meanwhile, what those evil liberals think should happen to YOU is... that you be given healthcare and a general social safety net.
Re: (Score:1)
> I have this great idea for a new TV show. The premise is simple. Just toss a liberal celebrity into the ring with a couple of Marines, and spend about an hour filming him getting the living shit beat out of him.
So you think that it would take two trained marines to beat "the living shit" out of ONE Liberal who is an untrained in hand to hand combat celebrity? You seem to have a low opinion of trained marines.
So What's the Benefit? (Score:2)
What does California have over Florida, in terms of orbital launches?
Turning down customers seems like a very odd choice, regardless of what the sycophantic and deluded blog writer thinks.
Starship launches are still "forever" away. They're not even worth consideration at this time.
Re: (Score:3)
They've been launching dummysats from Starship for a number of launches now, so I'm not sure why you think they're "forever away". The only reasons they've been using dummysats and not actual satellites is 1) Not wanting to risk more valuable payloads thusfar, and 2) wanting to keep Starship suborbital (e.g. trajectory that reintersects the atmosphere) at just under orbital velocity until they can verify deorbit reliability (failure to do so would leave that massive ship falling onto a random point on Eart
Re: (Score:2)
Because of the direction the earth orbits, California has a big ocean for failures to drop into. Plus Florida is a fucking armpit.
Re: (Score:2)
Launched to polar orbits. It's the safest location to do so outside of Alaska.
Re: (Score:1)
> Turning down customers seems like a very odd choice,
How do you get from "no more Starlink launches on Falcon 9 in Florida" to turning down customers? Starlink IS part of SpaceX. What customer is being turned down? If Amazon Leo were to say "hey SpaceX we are WAY behind on our launches can you do a few dozen launches on Falcon 9 from Florida for us", SpaceX would do them (for a price of course). They have before.
I see that Ars has AI writers (Score:2)
"cadence" is a word I saw once every several years. Now it's a word I see once a week.
Re: (Score:2)
"Launch cadence" has been a standard term in the industry for a long time. [1]https://books.google.com/ngram... [google.com]
[1] https://books.google.com/ngrams/graph?content=launch+cadence&year_start=1800&year_end=2022&corpus=en&smoothing=3
Musk hates California (Score:2)
Yet he doesn't seem to be able to decouple from it completely.
1. Vandenburg Air force base is the premier launch site in the United States to launch satellites into polar orbit due to launch safety concerns.
2. Musk's Hawthorn design center designs the rockets and the motors. I suspect Musk can't close this down unless he finds other talented engineers to work in southern states with shitty labor laws.
3. Musk hasn't closed the Tesla plant in Fremont but of all the locations which could eventually close, this
"Further Reading" is hilarious (Score:3)
> Further reading: Musk's other unstated reasons for shutting down Falcon 9 in Florida (Behind The Black)
TL/DR, the author thinks that SpaceX shutting down Falcon 9 launches from Florida was secretly a magnanimous gesture by a charitable Elon Musk to boost the competition:
> I therefore honestly believe that SpaceX’s decision was not entirely based on its own internal needs. Those needs certainly were the main motive, but based on Elon Musk’s passionate dream of making the human race multi-planetary, as well as his repeated willingness to help his competitors when they needed SpaceX to launch their satellites, I believe he recognized that SpaceX’s dominance could be hurting the rest of the rocket industry, and that the instant it made business sense to clear the field for these competitors, he was quite willing to do so.
LOL.
Re: (Score:2)
Um... no they're not?