Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

First Look At New Mexico's Space Terminal

kdawson posted more than 6 years ago | from the ad-astra dept.

Space 131

Raver32 sends us to space.com for first light on the design of New Mexico's Spaceport America. Quoting: "The winning design is the work of URS Corporation — a large design and engineering enterprise — teamed with Foster + Partners of the United Kingdom, a group with extensive experience in crafting airport buildings. When the 100,000 square-foot facility is completed — the centerpiece of the world's first, purpose-built, commercial spaceport — the structures will serve as the primary operating base for Sir Richard Branson's Virgin Galactic suborbital spaceliner, and also as the headquarters for the New Mexico Spaceport Authority."

cancel ×

131 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Error (-1, Offtopic)

d12v10 (1046686) | more than 6 years ago | (#20473387)

Nothing for you to see here. Please move along.

Re:Error (1)

creimer (824291) | more than 6 years ago | (#20474113)

Except stainless steel cockroaches from space. Talk about illegal aliens...

But... (0, Offtopic)

hax0r_this (1073148) | more than 6 years ago | (#20473391)

Can it charge the yamatto cannons on my Battle Cruisers?

Re:But... (0, Offtopic)

fractoid (1076465) | more than 6 years ago | (#20473451)

Nope, it can construct Wraiths, but you need a control tower for cruisers. They come pre-charged by the manufacturer, but once discharged you must wait for your reactors to recharge the supercapacitor banks. Budget cuts, you know.

It shouldn't take long, anyway, since battle cruisers are only about as long as a mid-sized bus. That always bugged me, but not as much as the way that entire missions happened inside command centers that are only slightly larger than said battle cruisers... >.<

Re:But... (0, Offtopic)

zegota (1105649) | more than 6 years ago | (#20473693)

I'm pretty sure the Battle Cruisers were Russian, not New Mexican.

Good bye, Steve... (1, Troll)

clashdot (1034936) | more than 6 years ago | (#20474211)

Yes! In fact, the station's own weaponry was tested last night, and amazed observers report that plasma bolts from the main ray gun reached deep into Nevada.

The new spaceport will be a huge boon to Richard Branson's standing (and bragging rights) in billionaire circles, perhaps finally overshadowing the horrible and humiliating defeat he suffered in the "balloon around the world" race, at the hands of Steve Fossett.

ha! (2, Funny)

thatskinnyguy (1129515) | more than 6 years ago | (#20473425)

Spaceports instead of airports?! Where the hell is my flying car?! It's the 21st Century for God sake! I was promised flying cars!

Re:ha! (1)

TheSpengo (1148351) | more than 6 years ago | (#20473857)

coming soon I imagine... http://moller.com/ [moller.com] ;)

Lower Launch Costs - Using Available Tech! (4, Informative)

StCredZero (169093) | more than 6 years ago | (#20475175)

There are several things we could be doing to dramatically lower launch costs.

  • Two Stage To Orbit [spacetethers.com] - If done correctly, we can build one of these to operate like an airplane, instead of a munition. (See The Rocket Company [hobbyspace.com] for details. Single Stage To Orbit (SSTO) is right at the bleeding edge of our capabilities. But if we're willing to build big and build robustly, TSTO is doable with off-the shelf technology. (The fuel to get into space is not that much more expensive than the fuel to get a 747 over the Atlantic.)
  • Modular Laser Launch [google.com] - You can develop a laser module to launch a small unmanned test vehicle, then scale it up to launch useful payloads (5000 lbs) by building and combining multiple modules. When economies of scale kick in, you get launch costs that start to rival those hypothetical beanstalks.
  • Rotovators that rendevous with a High Altitude Airplane [wikipedia.org] - Again, it's hard to imagine a robust and reliable SSTO, but a Mach 12 high-altitude aircraft is much more reasonable. Also, a rotating tether that reaches only partly into the atmosphere and cancels only about half of orbital velocity can be built from materials that exist today! (Not unobtanium or carbon nanotubes.)
  • A Lofstrom Loop [wikipedia.org] - would also enable cheap access to space, and could be built with materials we have today. This is an arc that reaches above the atmosphere, suspended by the momentum of electromagnetically accelerated iron links. Vehicles would be launched into orbit by "stealing" a bit of the loop's momentum.


If we were really serious about lowering launch costs, we would be pouring money into researching these. But we're not. (Too easy to make money off the government doing what we're doing now.)

Re:Lower Launch Costs - Using Available Tech! (1)

MobyDisk (75490) | more than 6 years ago | (#20478203)

Those are some awesome links.

I'm reading a PDF about Modular Laser Launch [usra.edu] and I'm realizing nobody will ever fund this. However! If you had a tracking system that could follow a pinpoint location on a launch vehicle, and a 100MW laser that could continuously fire, then you could take down an incoming ICBM. It seems like this is the way to get this project started. Tell the DOD that the same device that can launch things into space can also destroy them.

Launch Tower (1)

Darkman, Walkin Dude (707389) | more than 6 years ago | (#20479599)

What about 11km high launch towers with electromagnetic rails on the inside, powered by nuclear power plants?

What about air? (1)

p3d0 (42270) | more than 6 years ago | (#20479889)

Even if an 11km-high tower were feasible (given that it would be 20 times the tallest tower ever built) and sufficient (given that reaching escape velocity within 11km would require a steel-crushing, organ-liquefying 560 Gs of acceleration), there's still the fact that you'd end up traveling at orbital velocity at an altitude where the air still has fully 1/5 of its sea-level density. Result: fireball.

Re:What about air? (1)

Darkman, Walkin Dude (707389) | more than 6 years ago | (#20480669)

First of all, think pylons, not towers as in skyscrapers. This I assure you is technically feasible. Second, 11km puts you above most of the drag of the lower atmosphere (although I'll grant you it is only a few %), and crucially, above high winds and storms. Thirdly you don't need to reach escape velocity, just orbital. From there you can do what you like.

If you can make orbital velocity, even low orbit easy and cheap to reach, its orders of magnitude more easy to reach escape velocity from there. If you really needed to reach escape, you can pack rockets into the flyer as well to give it a post launch boost. This has the advantage that you can save on the enormous amounts of fuel required to get to escape velocity, leaving more room for whatever you like.

Simple! :D

Re:Launch Tower (1)

StCredZero (169093) | more than 6 years ago | (#20479949)

Unfortunately, 11km is far too short an acceleration distance for anything but unmanned cargoes. (Think of how far downrange the Shuttle gets, accelerating all the while. You'd need a structure with length on that scale!) Also, getting altitude is only a small part of the problem. It's getting up to orbital velocity which is the big sticking point.

That reminds me of another one. Apparently, some NASA researcher has determined that we could create super-strong cylindrical columns using Boron balloon tanks filled with super-pressurized gas. (A latex balloon is pretty flabby, but if one inflates one of the long skinny ones, one finds that it makes a usable column.) Such a structure would be super strong and super light, to the extent that we could build 100km tall towers. These would be incredibly costly, but a series of these could support an accelerator above the atmosphere. This would give us the same access to space as a basic space elevator.

A "Null Prize" if you can find that one.

Re:Launch Tower (1)

Darkman, Walkin Dude (707389) | more than 6 years ago | (#20480885)

Unfortunately, 11km is far too short an acceleration distance for anything but unmanned cargoes. (Think of how far downrange the Shuttle gets, accelerating all the while. You'd need a structure with length on that scale!) Also, getting altitude is only a small part of the problem. It's getting up to orbital velocity which is the big sticking point.

I had this discussion with a few people before, apparently you can reach orbital velocity with reasonable Gs within such a structure, which would need no space age materials, but rather be more of a pylon-like arrangement (I haven't the figures handy now). Even if you need to add a rocket booster for post-launch orbital velocity, you still save orders of magnitude on fuel, making cargo and manned missions considerably cheaper per kilo.

Fascinating about the boron balloons though, I didn't know that...

Re:Lower Launch Costs - Using Available Tech! (1)

DerekLyons (302214) | more than 6 years ago | (#20480861)

Too easy to make money off the government doing what we're doing now.

Nice theory. Somewhat at odds with the facts however - that only about 20% or less of US launches are goverment sponsored. The remainder are commercial.
 
 

If we were really serious about lowering launch costs, we would be pouring money into researching these.

That's the rub - we don't need any new technologies to lower launch costs. We could cut them by half or more simply by using existing vehicles but mass producing them and using automated checkout systems. You make things cheap by lowering your fixed and direct costs as much as possible - and by amortizing your overhead across a bunch of units rather than a handful. You don't lower launch costs by spending billions up front on R&D in absence of a proven market.
 
One of the most persistent, and harmful, myths in the alt.space community is the belief that space acess is somehow 'different' and the normal rules of engineering and accounting don't apply.
 
Of course there is also the elephant in the room that the alt.space community really tries very hard to wish away - flight demand. To dramatically lower costs, by any method, requires a demand at least an order or two of magnitude above the current - and no amount of handwaving can disguise the fact that the demand simply doesn't exist. Which is ultimately why the big companies don't really do what can be done to reduce launch costs - after spending the money up front to reduce costs (which won't be cheap) there is very little probability of recouping it.

Anybody else (2, Interesting)

sirknz (955428) | more than 6 years ago | (#20473433)

Get the mental image of it looking like a run down backwater airport in about 20 years time?

Re:Anybody else (5, Funny)

ashitaka (27544) | more than 6 years ago | (#20473837)

Dibs on being the first to say:

"You will never find a more wretched hive of scum and villainy. We must be cautious."

Re:Anybody else (1, Interesting)

sjf (3790) | more than 6 years ago | (#20474919)

Am I the only one who thinks that the spaceport looks like the Millenium Falcon ?

Re:Anybody else (1)

zero_offset (200586) | more than 6 years ago | (#20477129)

Offtopic? You got screwed.
Since the story amounts to "LOOK! PICTURES!" you're about as on-topic as you could possibly get.

And yes, the Millennium Falcon was my first thought.
It looks so much like it, in fact, that you just might deserve a -1 Redundant...

Re:Anybody else (1)

aplusjimages (939458) | more than 6 years ago | (#20478037)

I was thinking it look more like a vagina. "Welcome to the womb."

Re:Anybody else (1)

stungod (137601) | more than 6 years ago | (#20478503)

You might be. The first thing I thought of was vagina, followed closely by toilet seat. Once you get past that, it's just an airport.

Re:Anybody else (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#20479389)

Re:Anybody else (Score:5, Funny)
by ashitaka (27544) on Tuesday September 04, @10:52PM (#20473837)

Dibs on being the first to say:

"You will never find a more wretched hive of scum and villainy. We must be cautious."


You were the third to say it. But at least you got credited for it, while the first two posters were modded down for being redundant.

Obligatory Obi-Wan Quote (Score:-1, Redundant)
by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday September 04, @10:31PM (#20473633)

"Mos Eisley spaceport: You will never find a more wretched hive of scum and villainy. We must be cautious."


and

oblig. Kenobi quote (Score:0, Redundant)
by Gothmolly (148874) on Tuesday September 04, @10:36PM (#20473681)

You will never find a more wretched hive of scum and villany.

Re:Anybody else (3, Informative)

Harmonious Botch (921977) | more than 6 years ago | (#20473995)

...a run down backwater airport in about 20 years time?
Maybe. There is going to be plenty of competition. From Seed magazine:

New Mexico isn't the only state with atmospheric ambitions. In March the Wisconsin legislature voted for a $15-million spaceport in Sheboygan. Oklahoma is converting a former B-52 base into a launch site for things like rocket-powered Learjets. Amazon.com founder Jeff Bezos is quietly building mission control for his space company, Blue Origin, on his West Texas ranch, while Virginia-based Space Adventures plans two enormous facilities in the United Arab Emirates and Singapore. Spaceports in Florida, Virginia, Nevada and Alabama are also in the pipeline.
And as happens when growing industries begin to mature, there is a winnowing process in which only the most fit survive. Since they are the closest one to me, I do hope they make it.

Wisconsin? (2, Interesting)

NotQuiteReal (608241) | more than 6 years ago | (#20474033)

Isn't farther south better? Equatorial ideal, for launching spacecraft?

Of course if you don't plan on achieving orbit maybe it doesn't matter.

IANARS

Re:Wisconsin? (3, Informative)

FleaPlus (6935) | more than 6 years ago | (#20474937)

Isn't farther south better? Equatorial ideal, for launching spacecraft?

Of course if you don't plan on achieving orbit maybe it doesn't matter.
Right. The Wisconsin spaceport is intended only for suborbital spacecraft:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spaceport_Sheboygan [wikipedia.org]

Re:Anybody else (1)

mcrbids (148650) | more than 6 years ago | (#20474105)

Actually, my mental image is like much of Mexico - partially done. It's something I've seen lots of in Mexico, but just don't see here in the states - buildings and structures stopped halfway. It's weird to see nice, quality brick houses and the like built up about halfway and then just... abandoned!

So, I figure the tarmac would be all laid out, the foundation for the buildings poured, and then whatever mysterious forces cause projects to die halfway would kick in and we'd have another open wound in the Earth facing the sky.

Re:Anybody else (1)

McFadden (809368) | more than 6 years ago | (#20474433)

Given the amount it's likely to be used, I can't understand the size of the place. Just how many people do they expect to be queueing at the check-in desk brandishing their $200,000 tickets?

Presumably, the vastness is to allow the entire roster of passengers plus crew for a single day to play a little 5-a-side soccer before they take off. Providing they can find a couple of janitors to make up the numbers.

Mexico? (1)

Teetoc (1152141) | more than 6 years ago | (#20474645)

Is one of our fifty missing? This is New Mexico.

Re:Anybody else (1)

AGMW (594303) | more than 6 years ago | (#20476347)

Actually, my mental image is like much of Mexico - partially done. It's something I've seen lots of in Mexico, but just don't see here in the states - buildings and structures stopped halfway.

You see the same sort of thing in Spain too. A single storey [thefreedictionary.com] building with the rebar [wikipedia.org] poking out the top where the concrete supports would be for the second storey.

I believe in Spain there's some tax loophole where you don't have to pay something if the building isn't completed. Is it local/council taxes/rates perhaps. Anyway, if there's a similar deal in Mexico, that could explain it.

Re:Anybody else (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#20478943)

>> buildings and structures stopped halfway

This is common in countries where inflation is rampant. In this situation, cash becomes worthless very quickly, so individuals try to turn cash into hard goods that hold their value. Building is a good way of doing this. Often people will build a house, one room at a time, while living in it.

Re:Anybody else (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#20475427)

i was expecting two large posts driven into the ground with a giant rubber band stretched between them

Re:Anybody else (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#20475437)

To be honest, the mental image I got was more like a vagina. To be honest.

Re:Anybody else (1)

frycarson (704980) | more than 6 years ago | (#20476229)

Yeah, a vagina is what that looks like. Like bad cg pr0n.

Re:Anybody else (1)

owlnation (858981) | more than 6 years ago | (#20476721)

Vagina was the first thing I thought of too. Mind you, it is one of the first things I always think about.

The fact that this will be run by a company called Virgin doesn't help.

Man, re-entry is going to be fun.

The real question (5, Funny)

Weaselmancer (533834) | more than 6 years ago | (#20473435)

Can they get a killer whale to the moon?

Re:The real question (1)

syrinje (781614) | more than 6 years ago | (#20473497)

...or at least a bowl of petunias!?

Re:The real question (1)

Joe The Dragon (967727) | more than 6 years ago | (#20473557)

We can do it for $1.50 US

Re:The real question (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#20473785)

mod parent up

also, please tag this article masa

Re:The real question (1)

Dragonslicer (991472) | more than 6 years ago | (#20479527)

Can they get a killer whale to the moon?
What about the Big Whale?

Free Willzyx! (1)

acordes (69618) | more than 6 years ago | (#20473445)

I initially read the headline as "First Look at Mexico's New Space Terminal" and I immediately thought of the South Park episode where they send the whale to the moon. God, what a great episode. /Si, fly.

Re:Free Willzyx! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#20474811)

Is that the same one where Cartman hires a Mexican laborer to write an essay?

Re:Free Willzyx! (1)

asm2750 (1124425) | more than 6 years ago | (#20475613)

We're whalers on the moon, We carry a harpoon. But there ain't no whales So we tell tall tales And sing our whaling tune.

Funny looking plane in picture (1)

The_Fire_Horse (552422) | more than 6 years ago | (#20473461)

That is a strange looking plane in the second 'photo' - is this just an artists impression or is that how they will be designed?

Fi8sT (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#20473473)

Since we made the Rules are This as liitle overhead website. Mr. de they want you to of its core it transforms into AMERICA) might be theorists - website Third, you

WOW! (0, Offtopic)

Corpuscavernosa (996139) | more than 6 years ago | (#20473507)

I thought it said "First look at Mexico's Space Terminal". While clearly I have nothing against Mexico, it seemed like a poor placement of resources considering the widespread poverty. All's clear now, thank you.

Re:WOW! (1)

megaditto (982598) | more than 6 years ago | (#20473865)

You got the wrong country, but I think your larger point is relevant: with all the unemployment, illiteracy, crime and hate in New Mexico, should they really be spending all this money to build a spaceport at this time?

Wow yourself (1)

Teetoc (1152141) | more than 6 years ago | (#20474799)

What are you from Texas or something? New Mexico unemployment is at an all-time low. We have "issues" here but we also host a booming high-tech industry. Illiteracy seems to be much more of an issue where ever you are. Ever been here? Sheesh!

Re:WOW! (1)

d0rp (888607) | more than 6 years ago | (#20480807)

As someone who lives in New Mexico (and spent most of my life here), I can say things really aren't that bad. There's actually a lot going on in the state. We've got two national laboratories, three air force bases, and a number of companies have facilities here including Intel. Ever heard of the atomic bomb? That was made in New Mexico.

I think not... (1, Informative)

djupedal (584558) | more than 6 years ago | (#20473521)

"...the centerpiece of the world's first, purpose-built, commercial spaceport"

I take it whomever spit out that little piece of wishful marketing spin never visited the 'Nazca Lines' [crystalinks.com] on the Plains de' Peru, eh, Bunky?

Re:I think not... (1)

p0tat03 (985078) | more than 6 years ago | (#20474003)

How did that get modded informative? Are the mods subscribing to unsubstantiated low-budget conspiracy theory shows now? The Nazca Lines are important archaeologically, but there's nothing to suggest that they are of extraterrestrial origin, or that it was involved with spacecraft at all.

Re:I think not... (1)

hador_nyc (903322) | more than 6 years ago | (#20474025)

um are you saying that Nazca was a spaceport? Riiiight, keep watching your X-Files re-runs!

Re:I think not... (2, Funny)

Max Littlemore (1001285) | more than 6 years ago | (#20474191)

Pffffft. You're a crackpot. The Nazca Lines wasn't a commercial spaceport, it was run by a not for profit collective.

Re:I think not... (1)

The One and Only (691315) | more than 6 years ago | (#20475471)

Put down the bong and close your copy of "Chariots of the Gods". It is not a work of reputable archeology.

Re:I think not... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#20478435)

Poor djupedal. Slashdotters have no sense of humour until they've had their second triple espresso. I thought it was a hilarious comment...

Millennium Falcon (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#20473547)

Am I the only one who thinks their spaceport looks a little too much like Han Solo's ship?

Re:Millennium Falcon (1)

yummy1991 (546737) | more than 6 years ago | (#20473759)

Looks like a pussy to me. Being slashdot... Im probably the only one who sees it :P

Re:Millennium Falcon (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#20480295)

You're not the only one. The resemblance is totally amazing

My first thought... (2, Funny)

Hawthorne01 (575586) | more than 6 years ago | (#20473559)

"What a piece of junk!"

"She made not look like much, kid, but she's got it where it counts. I made a lot of special modifications myself, but if you don't mind, we're in a bit of a hurrry, so..."

space still available, terminal is yOUR condition (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#20473565)

sun's newclear power repels unprecedented evile
(Score:-1, Offtopic)
by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday September 04, @08:20AM (#20462703)
it's both a fairytail & whoreabull malady @once?

previously (dis)allowed post(s):

many of US never look up (or ever really see anything)
(Score:?)
by Anonymous Coward on Monday September 03, @09:34PM
too busy getting somewhere? we could still afford to pay attention, as it is cost effective, & time efficient.

it's not as though we weren't already being treated to more misinformation than we could ever disbelieve.

infactdead corepirate nazis still WAY off track
(Score:-1, Offtopic)
by Anonymous Coward on Saturday September 01, @09:35AM (#20433195)
it's only a matter of time/space/circumstance.

previous post:
mynuts won 'off t(r)opic'???
(Score:-1, Offtopic)
by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 30, @10:22AM (#20411119)
eye gas you could call this 'weather'?

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=8004881114 [google.com] 646406827 [google.com]

be careful, the whack(off)job in the next compartment may be a high RANKing corepirate nazi official.

previous post:
whoreabull corepirate nazi felons planning trips
(Score: mynuts won, robbIE's 'secret' censorship score)
by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday August 01, @12:13PM (#20072457)
in orbit perhaps? we wouldn't want to be within 500 miles of the naykid furor at this power point.

better days ahead?

as in payper liesense hypenosys stock markup FraUD felons are on their way out? what a revolutionary concept.

from previous post: many demand nazi execrable stop abusing US

we the peepoles?

how is it allowed? just like corn passing through a bird's butt eye gas.

all they (the felonious execrable) want is... everything. at what cost to US?

for many of US, the only way out is up.

don't forget, for each of the creators' innocents harmed (in any way) there is a debt that must/will be repaid by you/US as the perpetrators/minions of unprecedented evile will not be available after the big flash occurs.

'vote' with (what's left in) yOUR wallet. help bring an end to unprecedented evile's manifestation through yOUR owned felonious life0cidal glowbull warmongering execrable.

some of US should consider ourselves very fortunate to be among those scheduled to survive after the big flash/implementation of the creators' wwwildly popular planet/population rescue initiative/mandate.

it's right in the manual, 'world without end', etc....

as we all ?know?, change is inevitable, & denying/ignoring gravity, logic, morality, etc..., is only possible, on a temporary basis.

concern about the course of events that will occur should the ife0cidal execrable fail to be intervened upon is in order.

'do not be dismayed' (also from the manual). however, it's ok/recommended, to not attempt to live under/accept, fauxking greed/fear/ego based pr ?firm? scriptdead mindphuking hypenosys.

consult with/trust in yOUR creators. providing more than enough of everything for everyone (without any distracting/spiritdead personal gain motives), whilst badtolling unprecedented evile, using an unlimited supply of newclear power, since/until forever. see you there?

New Mexico has a Spaceport Authority? (2, Funny)

Pinkfud (781828) | more than 6 years ago | (#20473605)

When did that happen? Well, I guess since they have Roswell, it makes sense.

Obligatory Obi-Wan Quote (-1, Redundant)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#20473633)

"Mos Eisley spaceport: You will never find a more wretched hive of scum and villainy. We must be cautious."

oblig. Kenobi quote (0, Redundant)

Gothmolly (148874) | more than 6 years ago | (#20473681)

You will never find a more wretched hive of scum and villany.

Note on the photo.... (5, Funny)

daemonenwind (178848) | more than 6 years ago | (#20473791)

...the planned gardens around the disk-like space terminal will be exquisite, keeping dozens of local workers employed on a daily basis.

(yeah, I know I'm going to hell for that one)

Sounds like a scam (1)

zymano (581466) | more than 6 years ago | (#20473877)

Is it achieving real space flight?

Trying to get the russian share of billionaires wanting to go to space.

Re:Sounds like a scam (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#20477877)

Russian Billionaires (the non exiled ones) can presumably use Russian assets to get into space, what with the Russians being insanely good in that field.

New Mexico Spaceport (1, Funny)

Joe the Lesser (533425) | more than 6 years ago | (#20473919)

You will never find a more wretched hive of scum and villainy.

Re:New Mexico Spaceport (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#20474749)

Not much of a space port yet. Someone left the Millenium Falcon parked outside though.

Re:New Mexico Spaceport (1)

ashitaka (27544) | more than 6 years ago | (#20475031)

Sorry, redundant by just 13 minutes.

Don't ya just hate that?

!Mexico (1)

SKPhoton (683703) | more than 6 years ago | (#20473923)

Did anyone else read that as Mexico's New Space Terminal?

I guess we're not sending chihuahuas and tacos into space quite yet.

Re:!Mexico (1)

danwat1234 (942579) | more than 6 years ago | (#20473975)

Yeah, until I looked at the pictures, I thought it was about a new terminal in space, not a terminal-to-space in Mexico. Pleh

Re:!Mexico (1)

polygamous coward (1127507) | more than 6 years ago | (#20475655)

Read the comments, most of them did.

Re:!Mexico (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#20480017)

Paris Hilton was never interested.

In a related note... (1)

raftpeople (844215) | more than 6 years ago | (#20473933)

the first ever lost space luggage arrived at the facility today.

trade Yamak sauce for ticket (1)

danwat1234 (942579) | more than 6 years ago | (#20473955)

I wonder if I can trade in some Cardassian Yamak sauce for a space flight, say 45 kilograms of it for a one way ticket to space? It's high in sugar content though. (I think they are coming out with the sugar-free version though. Perhaps that will be worth more.)

Re:trade Yamak sauce for ticket (1)

dr_dank (472072) | more than 6 years ago | (#20474177)

Don't be such a nerd.
.
.
.
.
Um, do you suppose they'll have Klingon bloodwine in the duty-free shop?

Re:trade Yamak sauce for ticket (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#20474553)

Both of you losers, give me your lunch money now.

Re:trade Yamak sauce for ticket (1)

earlymon (1116185) | more than 6 years ago | (#20475443)

Lunch money? Uhhhhh.... how 'bout some self-sealing stem bolts? (Been trying to get rid of those for a while now...)

actually not bad (1, Insightful)

TheSpengo (1148351) | more than 6 years ago | (#20473981)

That actually looks half decent. They got the 'ooo fancy' look down at any rate, we'll see about functionality. Still, it's more than NASA's done in the past 20 years. :P A lot of you are posting as if it were a small backwater project because it's based in new mexico, but if you think about it an isolated location is ideal for such an installment. If something goes wrong there is lots of big empty desert to crash into, no windows to break if for some reason you had to go supersonic speeds near the ground, and I imagine the noise level created as suborbital planes hit the boosters would not be appreciated in a densely populated area. Give this place half a chance and it might turn out pretty sweet!

Re:actually not bad (5, Funny)

tompaulco (629533) | more than 6 years ago | (#20474083)

And in 30 years the success of he spaceport will have launched an industrious little town surrounding it, and then developers will come in and build houses right next to it, and people will move in, and complain about the noise, and get the spaceport successfully shut down.

Re:actually not bad (1)

chaoticzen (631995) | more than 6 years ago | (#20480843)

And in 30 years the success of he spaceport will have launched an industrious little town surrounding it, and then developers will come in and build houses right next to it, and people will move in, and complain about the noise, and get the spaceport successfully shut down.
To be honest, about 70% of the land out here in New Mexico is owned by two entities, The Federal Government and Ted Turner. So I doubt there will be a lot of houses built near by, just like at White Sands the population is pushed out far enough away to not be a burden to the project. Personally, I fear if this project really gets going that somehow they are going to raise our state taxes and make us pay for it and support it. As corrupt as Bill Richardson and his appointed officials are (several have been accused and/or indicted on bribery and extortion charges) he'll find a way to appease the investors, take a load of cash under the table, and then land us into a binding tax hike to pay for it.

What makes New Mexico a backwater? (1)

Quadraginta (902985) | more than 6 years ago | (#20475285)

I mean...quite a lot of the country lives pretty close to New Mexico, e.g. in Arizona, California, Colorado, and Texas.

It's a bit of a haul from the East Coast, I guess. But if you're forking out $200,000 for a once in a lifetime ride I can't see the extra $500 airfare from the Sprawl making you blink.

Golden, CO? (1)

Compholio (770966) | more than 6 years ago | (#20474045)

GOLDEN, Colorado -- Architectural and engineering teams have begun shaping the look and feel of New Mexico's Spaceport America, taking the wraps off new images today that showcase the curb appeal of the sprawling main terminal and hangar at the futuristic facility.
What does this have to do with Golden? Granted, the Colorado School of Mines has the Center for Space Resources [mines.edu] - but the article doesn't reference them or say anything about their involvement in the project. Does anyone know?

Re:Golden, CO? (1)

DeepHurtn! (773713) | more than 6 years ago | (#20474745)

Bylines often reflect where the writer of the article was actually located, so it's probably telling us that Leonard David, author of TFA, wrote aforementioned FA in Golden.

What about looking up? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#20474309)

At a spaceport you better damnwell have windows on the roof so I can see the launch. Looked all closed-in like a normal airport.

As a person who loves New Mexico (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#20474443)

I would like to ask a couple questions about the spaceport:

1. Red or Green?

2. You want an egg on that?

Thank You

Re:As a person who loves New Mexico (1)

chaoticzen (631995) | more than 6 years ago | (#20480933)

I would like to ask a couple questions about the spaceport: 1. Red or Green? 2. You want an egg on that? Thank You
Let's see:

1. Make it Christmas

2. Put the egg on the side

....and don't forget the basket of sopapias!!!

design inspiration (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#20474509)

I understand that design inspiration can come from a variety of places, often from memories not directly associated with the process. Perhaps the architects should stay away from hospitals...

...it looks like an overblown bedpan.

jim burns painting (1)

fearanddread (836731) | more than 6 years ago | (#20474901)

The interior shot [akamaitech.net] of the spaceport reminds me of a Jim Burns painting [velero25.net] .

Re:jim burns painting (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#20478359)

That's beautiful. I need to look that guy up, I know nothing about him.

fi8st (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#20475221)

first image (1)

Doctrinal Enforcer (886607) | more than 6 years ago | (#20476509)

that plane has completely missed the runway.

observation (1)

dalpeh (450604) | more than 6 years ago | (#20477329)

Am I the only one who noticed that this looks like a toliet seat or bed pan ?

Umm...sure (1)

sabernet (751826) | more than 6 years ago | (#20477809)

Is the spaceport inside the giant steel vagina? [akamaitech.net]

Re:Umm...sure (1)

superflippy (442879) | more than 6 years ago | (#20478429)

I suppose that's the architectural equivalent of a chastity belt, to keep hostile aliens from penetrating our planet's defenses.

Re:Umm...sure (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#20480439)

Looks more like a giant steel toilet seat cover

If there is a God that has a sense of humor (1)

Timogen (1073018) | more than 6 years ago | (#20478257)

The New Mexico Spaceport will be called 'Mos Eisely'

Re:If there is a God that has a sense of humor (1)

eutychus_awakes (607787) | more than 6 years ago | (#20480831)

Actually, we already have that. When you drive over the top of San Augustine pass and look down on the White Sands Missile Range [army.mil] HQ area, it looks remarkably like Mos Eisely as seen in Episode IV. Maybe if I have time someday, I'll take a picture and post it along with a screen capture side-by-side on Google Earth.

Docking Bay 94 (2, Funny)

40ozFreak (823002) | more than 6 years ago | (#20479193)

Finally I've got a place to park the Millenium Falcon when I need to run out to Toshii station and pick up power converters.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>