They are doing more than Virgin Galactic launches. The spin launches are going on. And vertical launches as well. Virgin Galactics future may or may not be viable, but I think the Spaceport is very viable.
@@pamlove421 No, it's not viable. Nothing other than suborbital is possible until there is an orbital vehicle the FAA would allow to fly over _people_ (launch or landing). There's a reason real launch facilities in decent countries are on the coast... check out Chinese boosters raining down on villages to see how bad people do launches. So this is a complete waste of money. I'm a total spaceflight nerd, BTW, I'm all in for spaceflight-but it's not happening in NM, sorry.
@@mmeiselph7234 I 💯 appreciate what you say! I don't know if Virgin Galactic will survive or not? I hope they do. I've enjoyed watching their launches the past 15 months. I think WSMR would disagree with you about the coastal launching. Of course cheap Chinese rocket would explode 🤣. But I've thought more than once about debris falling on my head... like Friday night when the Boeing Starliner landed. I live in Sierra county & there's a lot of big money investments going on around here. I attribute it to Spaceport I guess. I feel Spaceport America's future is more than just Virgin Galactic. That's just me though.
@@pamlove421 I watched starliner reentry from ABQ, actually. Launch facilities are on the coast because when stages are dropped, they end up downrange. Launches are East, to take advantage of the tangential velocity of the Earth, so any launch to _orbit_ results in either landing first stages E of NM in TX/OK (like Falcon 9), flying them back to NM, or coming up with a new design that flies them back like aircraft. The problem is that any failure results in a huge rocket booster possibly coming down on someone's house. There is no escaping this. Watch videos here on Falcon 9 failed landings when they were first learning, or failed launches for any launch vehicle. NM will never be a "spaceport" for the foreseeable future, IMO. Suborbital flight is useless.
@@mmeiselph7234 I guess time will tell. You seem to understand better than I. I was heading back from Alb & jumped off the freeway at San Antonio & headed east to WSMR Stallion gate area & saw the reentry. Very cool stuff for sure!
Genny: aide-toi, le ciel, t' aidera; latin: Uranus.
For a purpose built spaceport, it looks very...Isolated and quiet. Just sayin. Hope it finds some business one day.
Where you want to launch a flying saucer! This is not 1964, the technology exists; the Can Do Spirit does not exist!
Very expensive. It will never make enough money to be feasible . New Mexico looses again.
The altitude is meaningless giver the aircraft launched nature of the Virgin flights. These suborbital flights will never make large amounts of money.
They are doing more than Virgin Galactic launches. The spin launches are going on. And vertical launches as well. Virgin Galactics future may or may not be viable, but I think the Spaceport is very viable.
@@pamlove421 No, it's not viable. Nothing other than suborbital is possible until there is an orbital vehicle the FAA would allow to fly over _people_ (launch or landing). There's a reason real launch facilities in decent countries are on the coast... check out Chinese boosters raining down on villages to see how bad people do launches.
So this is a complete waste of money.
I'm a total spaceflight nerd, BTW, I'm all in for spaceflight-but it's not happening in NM, sorry.
@@mmeiselph7234
I 💯 appreciate what you say!
I don't know if Virgin Galactic will survive or not? I hope they do. I've enjoyed watching their launches the past 15 months. I think WSMR would disagree with you about the coastal launching. Of course cheap Chinese rocket would explode 🤣. But I've thought more than once about debris falling on my head... like Friday night when the Boeing Starliner landed.
I live in Sierra county & there's a lot of big money investments going on around here. I attribute it to Spaceport I guess. I feel Spaceport America's future is more than just Virgin Galactic. That's just me though.
@@pamlove421 I watched starliner reentry from ABQ, actually. Launch facilities are on the coast because when stages are dropped, they end up downrange. Launches are East, to take advantage of the tangential velocity of the Earth, so any launch to _orbit_ results in either landing first stages E of NM in TX/OK (like Falcon 9), flying them back to NM, or coming up with a new design that flies them back like aircraft. The problem is that any failure results in a huge rocket booster possibly coming down on someone's house. There is no escaping this. Watch videos here on Falcon 9 failed landings when they were first learning, or failed launches for any launch vehicle.
NM will never be a "spaceport" for the foreseeable future, IMO. Suborbital flight is useless.
@@mmeiselph7234
I guess time will tell. You seem to understand better than I.
I was heading back from Alb & jumped off the freeway at San Antonio & headed east to WSMR Stallion gate area & saw the reentry. Very cool stuff for sure!