Here’s Why SpaceX’s Competitors Are Crying Foul Over Starship Launch Plans

A model of protest

It’s understandable that ULA and Blue Origin wouldn’t want to interrupt work on their launch pads for multiple Starship launches each week. But this isn’t the first time SpaceX’s two main rivals in the U.S. launch industry have tried to block Elon Musk’s space company from establishing a new launch site.

In 2013, Blue Origin and SpaceX fought for the right to lease LC-39A from NASA after the space shuttle was retired. SpaceX won, signed a lease with NASA the following year, and began launching Falcon 9 rockets from the launch pad in 2017.

But not before a dispute between SpaceX and Blue Origin over whether the launch pad should be reserved for the exclusive use of a single company or for multiple users. Blue Origin offered to make LC-39A available to all launch companies, while SpaceX initially offered to take over the pad for its own needs, though the company later indicated it would be open to sharing it with other users.

At the time, SpaceX’s Falcon 9 rocket was already operational and development of Falcon Heavy was well underway. NASA selected SpaceX to develop the Crew Dragon spacecraft for humans in 2014, and it began launching astronauts from LC-39A to the International Space Station in 2020. Blue Origin had not yet launched its orbital-class New Glenn rocket, and still hasn’t, though it could finally fly before the end of this year.

During the LC-39A dispute more than a decade ago, Musk told Space News that if Blue Origin came along with a crewed spacecraft capable of docking with the space station within five years, SpaceX would be happy to welcome them. “Frankly, I think we’re more likely to find unicorns dancing in the flame vent,” Musk said.

ULA supported Blue Origin’s efforts to prevent SpaceX from taking over LC-39A. Elon Musk has accused ULA of acting maliciously to prevent a competitor from increasing its launch capacity at the Florida spaceport.

Ultimately, Blue Origin decided to build its New Glenn launch pad on military property a few miles south of LC-39A at Cape Canaveral Space Force Station.

Blue Origin again protested a decision that favored SpaceX in 2021, when Bezos’ company objected to NASA awarding SpaceX a contract for a manned lunar lander for the agency’s Artemis program. A government watchdog agency upheld NASA’s decision, but last year NASA awarded Blue Origin a similar contract to design a second human-powered lunar lander.

At full capacity

Last year, 72 orbital-class rockets launched from Florida’s Space Coast, compared to 57 in 2022. This year, the spaceport is on track to conduct about 100 launches, and possibly more if the launch pace accelerates in the coming months, as SpaceX hopes. By 2030, NASA expects 225 launches per year combined from Kennedy Space Center and Cape Canaveral.

Cape Canaveral’s launch capacity is physically limited. Last year, the military awarded three historic launch pads at Cape Canaveral Space Force Station to small startups. NASA and the Space Force want to maintain a buffer zone between the different launch pads and between the launch pads and the public areas surrounding the spaceport.

Some companies, like Rocket Lab and Firefly Aerospace, have decided to base their rockets elsewhere. Rocket Lab cited Cape Canaveral’s already busy launch cadence as one reason it chose to build a launch site in Virginia in 2018. Last month, Firefly Aerospace announced it would also place its first East Coast launch pad for its Alpha rocket in Virginia, rather than Cape Canaveral as previously planned.

The military and NASA portions of the spaceport cover more than 150,000 acres of wetlands, beaches and forests on Florida’s east coast. Most of the land is not suitable for new launch pads or hangars. “There’s not a lot of land open to development compared to what we’ve already done,” Burt Summerfield, Kennedy Space Center’s deputy director for management, said last year.

“Overall, at the Cape, we’re at our maximum capacity,” Col. James Horne, deputy director of the Space Force’s Assured Access Directorate, said in an interview with Ars last year. “There are a few additional platforms that we haven’t assigned yet, but we’re working through that process right now.”

In its letter to the FAA, Blue Origin called for “government investment in additional launch infrastructure” to make more launch pads available, which could reduce conflicts between Starship’s launch operations and those of other companies.

At the end of its filing with the FAA, ULA went further, suggesting that regulators consider opposing any Starship launch from Florida’s Space Coast. That’s unlikely to happen, but such a move would run counter to NASA’s interests in the Starship program, and perhaps the military’s as well.

“SpaceX developed a starbase in Boca Chica, Texas, for the purpose of launching Starship, and currently conducts all testing and launches from that location,” ULA wrote. “The FAA should consider Boca Chica as a reasonable alternative to the proposed action.”