<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>NewSpace Journal &#187; Planetspace</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.newspacejournal.com/category/business/planetspace/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.newspacejournal.com</link>
	<description>Tracking the entrepreneurial space industry</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 19 Jun 2024 09:26:09 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en-US</language>
		<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
		<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>https://wordpress.org/?v=4.0.38</generator>
	<item>
		<title>No Lockheed money for PlanetSpace</title>
		<link>http://www.newspacejournal.com/2007/11/02/no-lockheed-money-for-planetspace/</link>
		<comments>http://www.newspacejournal.com/2007/11/02/no-lockheed-money-for-planetspace/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 02 Nov 2007 11:21:25 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Jeff Foust]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Planetspace]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.personalspaceflight.info/2007/11/02/no-lockheed-money-for-planetspace/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[<p>Lost in all the developments surrounding the X Prize Cup was a report that Lockheed Martin would invest $45 million towards the development of a spaceport in Nova Scotia for PlanetSpace. Well, so much for that. The Globe and Mail reported a day later that Canadian officials had quashed any such investment plans, which were [...]]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Lost in all the developments surrounding the X Prize Cup was a report that <a href="http://www.personalspaceflight.info/2007/10/26/planetspace-lockheed-martin-and-spaceport-funding/">Lockheed Martin would invest $45 million towards the development of a spaceport in Nova Scotia for PlanetSpace</a>. Well, so much for that.  <i>The Globe and Mail</i> reported a day later that <a href="http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/LAC.20071027.SPACE27/TPStory/National">Canadian officials had quashed any such investment plans</a>, which were tied to the Canadian government&#8217;s purchase of Lockheed-built C-130 cargo planes.  &#8220;There have been no discussions between Industry Minister Prentice or any member of his staff regarding Lockheed Martin investing $45-million of its own money in the so-called PlanetSpace space-tourism project in Cape Breton. Nor will there be any such discussions,&#8221; a spokesman for Canada&#8217;s industry minister told the paper. Apparently government officials flinched at investing anything linked to space tourism: &#8220;Space tourism will be left to tourists.&#8221;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.newspacejournal.com/2007/11/02/no-lockheed-money-for-planetspace/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>25</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>PlanetSpace, Lockheed Martin, and spaceport funding</title>
		<link>http://www.newspacejournal.com/2007/10/26/planetspace-lockheed-martin-and-spaceport-funding/</link>
		<comments>http://www.newspacejournal.com/2007/10/26/planetspace-lockheed-martin-and-spaceport-funding/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 26 Oct 2007 14:32:16 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Jeff Foust]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Planetspace]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Spaceports]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.personalspaceflight.info/2007/10/26/planetspace-lockheed-martin-and-spaceport-funding/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[<p>US-Canadian space transportation company PlanetSpace appears to have found an unlikely benefactor to help fund development of a planned spaceport for the company in Nova Scotia, Canadian newspaper The Globe and Mail reported Friday. Lockheed Martin is reportedly offering to contribute $45 million over six years to help pay for the development of a spaceport [...]]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>US-Canadian space transportation company PlanetSpace appears to have found an unlikely benefactor to help fund development of a planned spaceport for the company in Nova Scotia, <a href="http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/LAC.20071026.SPACE26/TPStory/National">Canadian newspaper <i>The Globe and Mail</i> reported Friday</a>.  Lockheed Martin is reportedly offering to contribute $45 million over six years to help pay for the development of a spaceport on Cape Breton, about a third the cost of the overall project.  It&#8217;s part of a complicated transaction that starts with a deal by the Canadian government to purchase 17 C-130 cargo planes from the company; as part of the deal, Lockheed has to invest the purchase price, $3.2 billion, in &#8220;the form of regional benefits&#8221;, according to the paper, and the spaceport showed up on Lockheed&#8217;s proposed list of investments.</p>
<p>The particular form of Lockheed&#8217;s contribution would be &#8220;to invest the money on Athena rockets that would propel the PlanetSpace craft into space&#8221;; as noted here earlier this week, <a href="http://www.personalspaceflight.info/2007/10/25/isps-day-1-wrap-up/">PlanetSpace is studying the use of Lockheed&#8217;s planned-but-never-built Athena 3 rocket as a launch vehicle for PlanetSpace&#8217;s COTS proposal</a>.  PlanetSpace has hired a lobbyist, Fred Doucet (described by the paper as &#8220;former prime minister Brian Mulroney&#8217;s chief of staff and political troubleshooter&#8221;), to help the company secure the investment.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.newspacejournal.com/2007/10/26/planetspace-lockheed-martin-and-spaceport-funding/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>7</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>ISPS Day 1 wrap-up</title>
		<link>http://www.newspacejournal.com/2007/10/25/isps-day-1-wrap-up/</link>
		<comments>http://www.newspacejournal.com/2007/10/25/isps-day-1-wrap-up/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 25 Oct 2007 11:59:25 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Jeff Foust]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Benson Space Company]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[EADS Astrium]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Events]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[People]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Planetspace]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Rocketplane Kistler]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[SpaceDev]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Virgin Galactic]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.personalspaceflight.info/2007/10/25/isps-day-1-wrap-up/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[ <p>(The picture above doesn&#8217;t have anything to do directly with the conference, it&#8217;s just a nice view of the Moon rising around sunset Wednesday as seen from the conference site in Las Cruces.)</p> <p>Yesterday&#8217;s sessions of the International Symposium for Personal Spaceflight didn&#8217;t have any groundbreaking revelations, but there were still some interesting developments [...]]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<div align="center"><img src='http://www.personalspaceflight.info/wp-content/uploads/2007/10/isps-moon.jpg' alt='Moon over Las Cruces' width='350' height='477'/></div>
<p>(The picture above doesn&#8217;t have anything to do directly with the conference, it&#8217;s just a nice view of the Moon rising around sunset Wednesday as seen from the conference site in Las Cruces.)</p>
<p>Yesterday&#8217;s sessions of the <a href="http://spacegrant.nmsu.edu/isps/index2.php">International Symposium for Personal Spaceflight</a> didn&#8217;t have any groundbreaking revelations, but there were still some interesting developments and news from the various conference sessions, which I&#8217;ll summarize below:</p>
<ul>
<li>One of the most informative presentations during the day was the first, by Valin Thorn, deputy program manager of NASA&#8217;s Commercial Crew &#038; Cargo Program.  He addressed head-on the recent decision to terminate the funded COTS agreement with Rocketplane Kistler, saying that they had missed milestones not only for their financing, but also a cargo module critical design review.  He called the K-1 concept &#8220;outstanding&#8221; and said he wouldn&#8217;t be surprised to see them resubmit a revised proposal in the new round of COTS bidding.
</li>
<li>John Herrington, filling in for George French in the same morning session (French was at the conference but called away to a board meeting), confirmed earlier reports that the company had lined up commitments from investors for $300 million of the sought-for $450 million (not $500 million as reported elsewhere), but those plans fell through because of a variety of reasons, including NASA&#8217;s agreement to buy Progress and Soyuz flights from Russia as well as comments by unnamed NASA officials that appeared to be disparaging towards COTS.
</li>
<li>Herrington did say that work was proceeding with the XP suborbital spaceplane, and the company plans to announce a revised design of the vehicle on Friday.  From what I understand, this will be more than a minor tweak to the existing modified-Learjet approach.  Herrington said that some of the investors who has expressed an interest in the K-1 may also be interested in investing in the XP (which is done by a separate subsidiary company, Rocketplane Global), but didn&#8217;t have anything specific to say about XP financing.
</li>
<li>Thorn&#8217;s talk also revealed some new developments by other companies that have unfunded COTS agreements. SPACEHAB is working on a concept called ARCTUS to develop a cargo spacecraft based on the Centaur upper stage.  PlanetSpace, in addition to their work on their Nova booster and spaceplane, is also working on a less-ambitious concept that would use a launch vehicle called the Athena 3 (a Lockheed Martin Athena 2 augmented with two shuttle SRB segments) for carrying cargo to the station.
</li>
<li>SpaceDev CEO Mark Sirangelo said his company is continuing work on its Dream Chaser design for both orbital and suborbital applications, including working with NASA on an unfunded COTS agreement.  The company&#8217;s operations have been disrupted because of the San Diego wildfires that forced them to evacuate their Poway, California headquarters; he said their team is working on their new COTS proposal from a trailer on a beach near San Diego.
</li>
<li>Sirangelo added that SpaceDev may work with Benson Space Company on engine technology for BSC&#8217;s suborbital vehicle, but plans no additional involvement on that project.
</li>
<li>Hugues Laporte-Weywada, senior vice president of EADS Astrium, didn&#8217;t offer a lot of new details about his company&#8217;s suborbital space tourism vehicle.  That effort started in early 2006 with market and design studies; the Rocketplane-like spaceplane won out over rocket-and-capsule and air-launched spaceplane approaches.  The company is continuing work on both technology and financing, and hopes to have all the money lined up to develop the vehicle as soon as possible in early 2008.
</li>
<li>The government-commercial synergy panel was a crowded mix of familiar topics (operationally responsive space, the Marine Corps&#8217; SUSTAIN concept, and other RLV technology development work), without a lot of new developments announced.
</li>
<li>Two afternoon panels featuring past and expectant space travelers were combined into one, with Anousheh Ansari and two NASA astronauts (Michael Lopez-Alegria and Dan Barry) discussing what their orbital flights were like, as well as expectant or would-be space tourists Reda Anderson (Rocketplane), Craig Willan (Virgin Galactic), and Lori Garver (who tried to arrange a trip to the ISS in 2002) discussing their expectations.  One theme that emerged: when you&#8217;re in space, take time to simply soak in the experience rather than get caught up in tasks or taking pictures.
</li>
</ul>
<p>Thursday&#8217;s sessions appear focused on spaceport development, financing, and more discussions with astronauts.  I will continue, as schedule and technology permits, to microblog some insights from the conference <a href="http://twitter.com/tsr">on Twitter</a> during the day.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.newspacejournal.com/2007/10/25/isps-day-1-wrap-up/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>2</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>PlanetSpace looks beyond tourism</title>
		<link>http://www.newspacejournal.com/2007/02/15/planetspace-looks-beyond-tourism/</link>
		<comments>http://www.newspacejournal.com/2007/02/15/planetspace-looks-beyond-tourism/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 15 Feb 2007 11:23:41 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Jeff Foust]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Planetspace]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.personalspaceflight.info/2007/02/15/planetspace-looks-beyond-tourism/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[<p>SPACE.com published yesterday an overview of PlanetSpace and its plans to develop the Silver Dart spaceplane. What&#8217;s noteworthy about this review is that space tourism is a relatively low priority for the company, which is instead pursuing orbital flights to the ISS (and presumably other destinations, if any) as well as point-to-point flights, taking advantage [...]]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>SPACE.com published yesterday <a href="http://space.com/businesstechnology/070214_techwed_planetspace.html">an overview of PlanetSpace</a> and its plans to develop the Silver Dart spaceplane.  What&#8217;s noteworthy about this review is that space tourism is a relatively low priority for the company, which is instead pursuing orbital flights to the ISS (and presumably other destinations, if any) as well as point-to-point flights, taking advantage of the Silver Dart&#8217;s designed capability to glide for long distances. &#8220;This is the killer application for space industry,&#8221; GEO Geoff Sheerin said of point-to-point flights. &#8220;You&#8217;ve got a destination already.&#8221;  Later in the article, Sheerin ranked suborbital tourism flights third in the list of preferred missions for the Silver Dart. &#8220;If they&#8217;re not flying to orbit, then I&#8217;d like to fly them point-to-point and if they&#8217;re not flying point-to-point than I&#8217;d like to be flying them on short jaunts into space on space tourist flights, &#8221; he said.  Of course, the company first has to raise money and develop the vehicle&#8212;neither of which will be an easy task.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.newspacejournal.com/2007/02/15/planetspace-looks-beyond-tourism/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Deals for PlanetSpace, t/Space</title>
		<link>http://www.newspacejournal.com/2007/02/02/deals-for-planetspace-tspace/</link>
		<comments>http://www.newspacejournal.com/2007/02/02/deals-for-planetspace-tspace/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 02 Feb 2007 12:06:13 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Jeff Foust]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Planetspace]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[t/Space]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.personalspaceflight.info/2007/02/02/deals-for-planetspace-tspace/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[<p>NASA announced yesterday that it has signed Space Act agreements with PlanetSpace and t/Space, two companies that competed for COTS awards last year but failed to win any money. The agreements provide neither company with any money, but do involve the sharing of information and the creation of &#8220;milestones and objective criteria by which the [...]]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>NASA announced yesterday that <a href="http://www.nasa.gov/home/hqnews/2007/feb/HQ_0720_COTS_agreements.html">it has signed Space Act agreements with PlanetSpace and t/Space</a>, two companies that competed for COTS awards last year but failed to win any money.  The agreements provide neither company with any money, but do involve the sharing of information and the creation of &#8220;milestones and objective criteria by which the companies can gauge their own progress&#8221;, according to the statement.</p>
<p>T/Space was one of the six finalists for the COTS awards, but reportedly just barely lost out to Rocketplane Kistler and SpaceX.  The company said in <a href="http://www.transformspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=news.view&#038;newsid=7F2AC3EA-D8D6-2305-B3F4768809786AAF">a statement</a> that they are proceeding with their plans to develop its Crew Transfer Vehicle that would be launched by a scaled-up version of the QuickReach launcher being developed by AirLaunch LLC.  A manned orbital flight could take place in late 2010, if all goes well (and an agreement like this can&#8217;t hurt, for even though it doesn&#8217;t provide the company any money, it does give it additional legitimacy in the eye of potential investors.)</p>
<p>A <a href="http://www.planetspace.org/pdf/PressRelease020107.pdf">PlanetSpace statement</a> includes some illustrations of its NOVA booster and Silver Dart vehicle that have not previously been widely circulated.  The NOVA launcher is a cluster of seven boosters, each with four Alchemy engines that the  company says are derived from the engine used in the V-2 over 60 years ago.  The Silver Dart would have a glide range of 40,000 kilometers and a crossrange of about 6,500 kilometers, according to release, which would open up a number of point-to-point transportation possibilities.  Indeed, PlanetSpace chairman Chirinjeev Kathuria said earlier this week that the company <a href="http://www.ibnlive.com/news/fly-to-us-in-less-than-an-hour/32401-11.html">was looking into flights from New York to Mumbai, India in 45 minutes</a>, an intriguing but certainly very long-term market.</p>
<p>PlanetSpace claims that <a href="http://thechronicleherald.ca/Front/556729.html">its first atmospheric test flight of the Silver Dart could occur as soon as late 2008</a>,  with the vehicle launching from the company&#8217;s planned spaceport on Cape Breton, Nova Scotia, to an altitude of 6,500 meters and a downrange distance of over 6,000 kilometers. An orbital flight would follow in late 2009. Of course, neither the Silver Dart nor the spaceport exist yet, although PlanetSpace hopes the NASA deal will help them raise $200 million in funding in the form of &#8220;private investors and bank loans&#8221;.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.newspacejournal.com/2007/02/02/deals-for-planetspace-tspace/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>2</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Spaceport news update</title>
		<link>http://www.newspacejournal.com/2007/01/29/spaceport-news-update/</link>
		<comments>http://www.newspacejournal.com/2007/01/29/spaceport-news-update/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 29 Jan 2007 12:02:20 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Jeff Foust]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Planetspace]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Spaceports]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Virgin Galactic]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.personalspaceflight.info/2007/01/29/spaceport-news-update/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[<p>Some developments at commercial spaceport projects in the US and Europe:</p> On Friday the Swedish government officially announced Spaceport Sweden, including an agreement to have Virgin Galactic conduct suborbital tourist flights from the facility near Kiruna. According to SPACE.com, the government doesn&#8217;t plan to invest any money into the site, saying that there is sufficient [...]]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Some developments at commercial spaceport projects in the US and Europe:</p>
<ul>
<li>On Friday the Swedish government <a href="http://www.ssc.se/default.asp?groupid=2004517104342856">officially announced Spaceport Sweden</a>, including an agreement to have Virgin Galactic conduct suborbital tourist flights from the facility near Kiruna. <a href="http://www.space.com/news/070128_sweden_virgin.html">According to SPACE.com</a>, the government doesn&#8217;t plan to invest any money into the site, saying that there is sufficient infrastructure there now to support SpaceShipTwo flights.  However, the government has agreed to establish a regulatory framework similar to what exists in the US to permit those flights to take place, and will tackle export control issues as well on behald of Virgin.
</li>
<li>New Mexico governor <a href="http://www.lcsun-news.com/ci_5099177">Bill Richardson is scheduled to make an appearance in Las Cruces later today</a>, but not for his nascent presidential campaign.  Instead, Richardson will be stumping for the local tax referenda that would, if approved, provide the local share of funding for Spaceport America.
</li>
<li>Officials in Ohio <a href="http://www.columbusdispatch.com/business-story.php?story=dispatch/2007/01/28/20070128-G1-00.html">are still in negotiations to lure PlanetSpace to an airport outside Columbus</a> that would be the landing site for the company&#8217;s Silver Dart vehicle, as well as host manufacturing.  One quibble: the article claims that &#8220;According to the most recent study by the Federal Aviation Administrationâ€™s Office of Commercial Space Transportation, commercial space transportation and related industries accounted for more than $98 million in economic activity in 2004.&#8221;  In fact, <a href="http://www.faa.gov/about/office_org/headquarters_offices/ast/media/Ecoimpactreportweb06.pdf">that report</a> put the total at $98 <em>billion</em>.  Million, billion, who&#8217;s counting?
</li>
</ul>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.newspacejournal.com/2007/01/29/spaceport-news-update/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>PlanetSpace and NASA: what&#8217;s the deal(s)?</title>
		<link>http://www.newspacejournal.com/2007/01/08/planetspace-and-nasa-whats-the-deals/</link>
		<comments>http://www.newspacejournal.com/2007/01/08/planetspace-and-nasa-whats-the-deals/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 08 Jan 2007 17:58:11 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Jeff Foust]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Planetspace]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.personalspaceflight.info/2007/01/08/planetspace-and-nasa-whats-the-deals/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[<p>Today&#8217;s issue of the Halifax (Nova Scotia) Daily News provides an update on PlanetSpace and its plans to establish a spaceport in the Cape Breton region of the province. A couple curious things come out of the article: it states that &#8220;the Chicago-based company has signed one contract with NASA and is said to be [...]]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Today&#8217;s issue of the <i>Halifax (Nova Scotia) Daily News</i> <a href="http://www.hfxnews.ca/index.cfm?sid=10620&#038;sc=2">provides an update on PlanetSpace and its plans to establish a spaceport in the Cape Breton region of the province</a>.  A couple curious things come out of the article: it states that &#8220;the Chicago-based company has signed one contract with NASA and is said to be very close to signing another&#8221;, according to an official with the province&#8217;s business development corporation.  The deal that has been signed is with NASA Marshall and is for &#8220;co-development of hardware&#8221;; presumably this is the Space Act Agreement the company has previously indicated it has with NASA.  The other in negotiations right now, though, is with the COTS office at JSC and &#8220;should be signed shortly&#8221;, according to the article.  It&#8217;s not clear what sort of contract that would be, since PlanetSpace wasn&#8217;t a finalist for the original COTS awards.  If it&#8217;s another Space Act agreement or small-scale study agreement of some kind, is PlanetSpace the only venture to get one or are other companies, including the finalists who didn&#8217;t get awards, also getting something similar?  PlanetSpace isn&#8217;t saying: they failed to respond to several requests for details by the newspaper.</p>
<p>The article also quotes Cecil Clarke, the member of provincial parliament who represents the Cape Breton North area, as saying that because there has been a lack of criticism of the company&#8217;s vehicle plans, they must be sound: &#8220;Usually with the aerospace or aeronautics community, if there was question as to the validity of the project, usually there would be sharp criticism of it. I don&#8217;t recall nor have I seen, any experts in the industry saying that what they&#8217;re talking about is not feasible.&#8221;  The problem with this assessment is that PlanetSpace has released few details about their plans, therefore, there is little out there to criticize (other than the lack of information, which is understandable and not unique to PlanetSpace.) </p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.newspacejournal.com/2007/01/08/planetspace-and-nasa-whats-the-deals/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>2</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Ohio&#8217;s offer to PlanetSpace</title>
		<link>http://www.newspacejournal.com/2006/12/28/ohios-offer-to-planetspace/</link>
		<comments>http://www.newspacejournal.com/2006/12/28/ohios-offer-to-planetspace/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 28 Dec 2006 11:35:46 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Jeff Foust]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Planetspace]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Spaceports]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.personalspaceflight.info/2006/12/28/ohios-offer-to-planetspace/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[<p>According to a report in Wednesday&#8217;s issue of the Columbus Dispatch, the state of Ohio has made a preliminary incentive offer to PlanetSpace to lure the venture to establish operations in the state. (See previous coverage of Ohio&#8217;s plans to get PlanetSpace to establish a landing site and/or manufacturing facility near Columbus.) Details about the [...]]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>According to a report in Wednesday&#8217;s issue of the <i>Columbus Dispatch</i>, <a href="http://www.columbusdispatch.com/business-story.php?story=dispatch/2006/12/27/20061227-D1-03.html">the state of Ohio has made a preliminary incentive offer to PlanetSpace to lure the venture to establish operations in the state</a>.  (See <a href="http://www.personalspaceflight.info/2006/12/02/spaceport-ohio/">previous coverage</a> of Ohio&#8217;s plans to get PlanetSpace to establish a landing site and/or manufacturing facility near Columbus.) Details about the offer weren&#8217;t disclosed, but the article said the state was proposing a &#8220;multimilliondollar package of tax credits, grants and other incentives&#8221;, some of which would require matching contributions from the city of Columbus and Franklin County, where Columbus and Rickenbacker International Airport, the proposed landing site for PlanetSpace&#8217;s Silver Dart vehicle, are located. Chirinjeev Kathuria, chairman of PlanetSpace, said he hoped to have a deal in place in 60 days to keep the company on a schedule that would have a vehicle ready to fly by late 2008 (which seems like a very aggressive schedule, given the company&#8217;s current standing.)  Kathuria also hinted that &#8220;one other state is interested in talking to us&#8221;.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.newspacejournal.com/2006/12/28/ohios-offer-to-planetspace/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>The seasick astronaut</title>
		<link>http://www.newspacejournal.com/2006/12/27/the-seasick-astronaut/</link>
		<comments>http://www.newspacejournal.com/2006/12/27/the-seasick-astronaut/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 27 Dec 2006 11:48:08 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Jeff Foust]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[People]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Planetspace]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.personalspaceflight.info/2006/12/27/the-seasick-astronaut/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[<p>Today&#8217;s Toronto Star has an article about Terry Wong, a member of the astronaut corps of Canadian Arrow/PlanetSpace first announced back in 2003. Wong, a Canadian Forces pilot, used to suffer something that would seem to be a disadvantage to a pilot or astronaut: airsickness (including an incident on his first solo airplane flight that [...]]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Today&#8217;s <i>Toronto Star</i> has <a href="http://www.thestar.com/News/article/165388">an article about Terry Wong</a>, a member of <a href="http://www.canadianarrow.com/astro-announce.htm">the astronaut corps of Canadian Arrow/PlanetSpace</a> first announced back in 2003.  Wong, a Canadian Forces pilot, used to suffer something that would seem to be a disadvantage to a pilot or astronaut: airsickness (including an incident on his first solo airplane flight that required a bit of maneuvering.)  He doesn&#8217;t suffer from airsickness now, but seasickness is another story: &#8220;I&#8217;m no good in a boat if the water&#8217;s rough.&#8221;</p>
<p>There are a few interesting items in the article beyond Capt. Wong&#8217;s motion sickness woes.  The seasickness is an issue because the Canadian Arrow spacecraft will splash down in the Atlantic after launching from the Cape Breton spaceport in Nova Scotia, starting around 2010, according to the article.  However, when <a href="http://www.personalspaceflight.info/2006/08/16/spaceport-nova-scotia/">the Cape Breton project was announced in August</a>, it was intended only for orbital flights of its Silver Dart orbital spacecraft, not the suborbital Canadian Arrow capsule, which would operate from a &#8220;Midwestern&#8221; state.  Earlier this month, <a href="http://www.personalspaceflight.info/2006/12/02/spaceport-ohio/">when Ohio was revealed as that Midwestern state</a>, the focus was on suborbital flights of the Silver Dart, a winged vehicle that could land on a runway, rather than the Canadian Arrow capsule that requires a water landing.  (To make things more confusing, the spacecraft described later in the article does sound like the Silver Dart.) Has there really been a change in plans, or is the company (inadvertently) sending out mixed messages? </p>
<p>Wong also tells the <i>Star</i> that NASA is taking Canadian Arrow and PlanetSpace &#8220;seriously&#8221;, including offering unspecified technical expertise. &#8220;They know we can do this,&#8221; Wong said.  Does that mean PlanetSpace has a Space Act agreement with NASA (something hinted at in the original report about the Cape Breton spaceport), or something more informal?  Wong adds that Canadian Arrow has &#8220;partnership deals&#8221; with undisclosed aerospace companies in the US and Canada.</p>
<p>However, the best line of the article is not about space, but about Wong&#8217;s preference for flying helicopters rather than jets. &#8220;It&#8217;s nice to take off in snow in Moose Jaw and a couple of hours later be warm in Vancouver. But I like helicopters, too. It&#8217;s great to be able to land, pee and fly on.&#8221;  The ultimate in quick turnaround time.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.newspacejournal.com/2006/12/27/the-seasick-astronaut/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>1</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Spaceport Ohio?</title>
		<link>http://www.newspacejournal.com/2006/12/02/spaceport-ohio/</link>
		<comments>http://www.newspacejournal.com/2006/12/02/spaceport-ohio/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sat, 02 Dec 2006 14:35:36 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Jeff Foust]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Planetspace]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Spaceports]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.personalspaceflight.info/2006/12/02/spaceport-ohio/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[<p>MSNBC reports, in a surprising development, that PlanetSpace is in negotiations with the state of Ohio about establishing a spaceport at a cargo airport on the outskirts of the state capital, Columbus. Rickenbacker International Airport, a former Air Force base that is today a cargo and passenger charter airport, would be the landing site for [...]]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>MSNBC reports, in a surprising development, that <a href="http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/15993507/">PlanetSpace is in negotiations with the state of Ohio about establishing a spaceport at a cargo airport on the outskirts of the state capital, Columbus</a>.  Rickenbacker International Airport, a former Air Force base that is today a cargo and passenger charter airport, would be the landing site for suborbital flights of PlanetSpace&#8217;s Silver Dart vehicle, and potentially also serve as a manufacturing site for it.  Local and state government officials are in negotiations with PlanetSpace on an investment package potentially worth up to $20 million.</p>
<p>A few items of interest from this article: This is the first time that I can recall PlanetSpace saying that they plan to use the Silver Dart, which they originally proposed for orbital missions for NASA&#8217;s COTS demonstration program, for suborbital flights.  Previously, they planned to use a capsule that would splash down (that capsule is still shown on <a href="http://www.planetspace.org/lo/index.htm">the PlanetSpace web site</a>.)  That approach does make sense, though, if they&#8217;re still interested in developing the Silver Dart for orbital flights, which they are (chairman Chirinjeev Kathuria told MSNBC&#8217;s Alan Boyle that they&#8217;re still interested in NASA&#8217;s COTS program once it moves out of its current demonstration stage.)  The Ohio site would not be used for orbital operations: PlanetSpace is still planning on developing a spaceport for that in Nova Scotia, <a href="http://www.personalspaceflight.info/2006/08/16/spaceport-nova-scotia/">as announced this summer</a>.</p>
<p>Another issue is flight operations of the suborbital Silver Dart.  PlanetSpace doesn&#8217;t intend to conduct launches from Rickenbacker, instead launching &#8220;from a floating barge or from a land-based pad&#8221;.  Unless SilverDart has significantly different flight characteristics than other early-generation suborbital vehicles, which have limited crossranges, that launch site would have to be relatively close to the airport; perhaps no more than a few hundred kilometers.  (Maybe Lake Erie?)  That means that PlanetSpace may require two different spaceport licenses, one for launch and one for landing&#8212;which could be further complicated if the Canadian-American company decided to carry out launches from, say, Southern Ontario or the Canadian side of Lake Erie.  Coordination with air traffic control would also pose more problems than for spaceports in California, New Mexico, or Oklahoma, especially since Rickenbacker is about 20 kilometers from Port Columbus International Airport, the city&#8217;s main passenger airport.</p>
<p>There&#8217;s also the question of where the money will come from for PlanetSpace to develop the Silver Dart and its Canadian Arrow-derived launcher.  Kathuria, the article notes, is a millionaire who has had success in several industries (although a previous space venture he invested in, MirCorp, didn&#8217;t turn out so well).  Apparently PlanetSpace&#8217;s funding is not a concern for Ohio officials, who cited &#8220;Kathuria&#8217;s confidential list of partners and backers&#8221; as one of the reasons why they&#8217;re in serious negotiations with the company.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.newspacejournal.com/2006/12/02/spaceport-ohio/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>3</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
