Launching to the east, the Earth's rotation gives over 5% of the velocity needed to achieve orbit. Launching against the rotation, you not only lose that 5%, you have to provide another 5% to reach orbital velocity. The amount of addition propellant required to make up the difference severely cuts into a rocket's payload capacity. Depending on the booster and launch site, launching into a sun-synchronous orbit from Vandenberg instead of to the east from the Cape can cut payload capacity by 40% or more. More steeply retrograde orbits than sun-synchronous would cut payload even more.
Here's a good overview on boosters and launch facilities. If you scroll down to section 6-4, it discusses US launch sites and the range of azimuths you can safely use to avoid overflying populated land. The lowest orbital inclination you can directly launch into is equal to the launch site's latitude. Launching in any other azimuth other than due east results in a higher inclination and decreased payload capacity.
The Cape is at 28.5 degrees North latitude. Launching due east results in the most payload capacity to orbit and an inclination of 28.5 degrees. The range of launch azimuths you can use at the Cape is from 035 through 120 degrees. If you launch on an azimuth of 035 degrees, you'll get an inclination of 57 degrees to the equator. If the azimuth is 120 degrees, the inclination is 39 degrees but the orbital plane is very different. Launching to the ISS requires an azimuth of about 45 degrees and does reduce the lift capacity significantly.
From Vandenberg, the range of azimuths you can safely use for orbital flights is 140 degrees through 201 degrees, resulting in an inclination of 70 through 104 degrees respectively. You simply can't launch to the ISS from Vandenberg.
The most extreme inclination that I can recall offhand was used by the Israeli Offeg satellites. There azimuth window is extremely narrow due to hostile neighbors, Israeli Offeq satellites have an inclination of about 143 degrees.
Launching to the ISS is a special case. The orbital inclination was chosed to accommodate the Russian missions out of Tyuratam (Balkinor). The Russians built some key ISS components and launched them. They also launch unmanned Progress resupply ships and manned Soyuz vehicles to the ISS. With the Shuttles being grounded, the Russian launchers are the only thing keeping the ISS operational. The ISS is in a 51.5 degree inclination, the minimum you can launch into from Balkinor, so we have to accommodate them. This is a less than desireable orbit from the standpoint of doing things like orbital assembly of deep space missions. It would require a lot more energy to fly from a 51.5 degree inclination to the moon or Mars than from a 28.5 degree inclination.
Space/Science » in reply to Thanks. But for ISS launches, aren't the savings minimal from Florida?
The Earth's rotation isn't exactly a minor boost
The whole thread (24 posts)
- MER-A launch postponed until tomorrow.
- Do the RUSSIANS have these kinds of delays, or can they not afford OVERTIME pay? ;-)
- You need a reality check
- Taxpayers pay for these delays, and future Mars missions suffer. Why not launch from elsewhere?
- And where would you suggest?
- South Texas, perhaps?
- South Texas?
- re: And where would you suggest?
- And where would you suggest?
- Taxpayers pay for these delays, and future Mars missions suffer. Why not launch from elsewhere?
- re: Do -40 to +40°
- You need a reality check
- Do the RUSSIANS have these kinds of delays, or can they not afford OVERTIME pay? ;-)
