Are there advantages to launching space missions from the Arctic/North Pole?

  • Context: Undergrad 
  • Thread starter Thread starter Arctic Fox
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Arctic Launch Space
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

Launching space missions from the Arctic or North Pole presents significant challenges, primarily due to the loss of the Earth's rotational boost, which necessitates rockets to carry more fuel and less payload. Polar orbits, while advantageous for global coverage, still intersect the equatorial belt of space debris, increasing collision risks. Historical context reveals that while there have been launches from near the poles, such as ICBMs, the inefficiency and high fuel costs associated with polar launches limit their practicality for most missions. The required velocity to escape Earth's gravity is approximately 11 km/s, further complicating polar launch strategies.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of orbital mechanics and inclination angles
  • Knowledge of rocket propulsion and fuel requirements
  • Familiarity with polar and equatorial orbits
  • Awareness of space debris and its implications for satellite missions
NEXT STEPS
  • Research the mechanics of polar orbits and their applications
  • Study the impact of Earth's rotation on launch efficiency
  • Explore historical launches from polar regions, including facilities in Alaska
  • Investigate advanced propulsion techniques for deep-space missions
USEFUL FOR

Aerospace engineers, mission planners, and researchers interested in launch strategies and orbital mechanics will benefit from this discussion.

Arctic Fox
Messages
176
Reaction score
0
Thinking that there is quite a bit of junk orbiting around the equator, what would be the disadvantages (if any) of conducting a launch from the Arctic/North Pole?

Any comments on launching from the Magnetic North Pole?
 
Astronomy news on Phys.org
Well for one, you would lose the ‘boost’ of the Earth’s rotation that you get near the Equator, thus meaning your rocket would need to carry more fuel and less payload to get it into orbit.
While the bulk of space junk is probably concentrated near the equator, this is simply because all orbiting debris crosses the equator twice during their orbit.
Anyway, the orbits of satellites are selected to achieve a certain goal. Placing a satellite in a polar orbit specifically to shield it from space junk isn’t very efficient.
 
A polar orbit would still past through the equatorial belt of junk twice per orbit. Any collision that did occur in one of those encounters would of necessity be a high-speed one. When an object is in a west-to-east orbit, at least it is going the same direction as most of the other stuff there, so a collision with a tiny bolt might not be catastrophic.
 
I was thinking of a launch completely into space, not orbit. It seems like everything is launched into some sort of Earth or sun orbit. I know a gravity slingshot is a good way to save fuel, but is it always required?

I guess I’m wondering if there have ever been anything ever launched from the poles... besides ICBMs in the 80's :(
 
Arctic Fox said:
I was thinking of a launch completely into space, not orbit.

If that's the goal then all you need is a rocket powerful enough to accelerate your cargo to Earth escape velocity, 11km/s.

And there have been rockets launched from near the poles. There are a few launch facilities in Alaska if I'm not mistaken.
 
The reason you wouldn't want to launch from the poles has already been mentioned here.

The orbit has to pass over the equator twice per orbit. Since your orbit must also pass (more or less) over the point you launched from, that limits your choice of inclination for the orbit to anything higher than your launch latitude. At the poles, you've only got the option of a 90 degree inclination orbit. Since most sites you'd want to visit outside of LEO are in the ecliptic at 23.5 degrees, you'd need to do an immensely expensive (fuel-wise) burn to change your inclination. Think: spend 9.2 km/sec dV to get into orbit. Then burn ~6-8km/sec to stop that polar motion and ~6-8km/sec to start going in the ecliptic direction. All that and you haven't even fired off the "leave Earth vicinity" burn. Wasteful.
 
Arctic Fox said:
I was thinking of a launch completely into space, not orbit. It seems like everything is launched into some sort of Earth or sun orbit. I know a gravity slingshot is a good way to save fuel, but is it always required?
Gravity slingshots and leaving Earth's gravity are only applicable to deep-space probes. There have only been a couple of dozen. There are thousands of satellites and they must be in orbit to be useful.
 
Arctic Fox said:
I was thinking of a launch completely into space, not orbit. It seems like everything is launched into some sort of Earth or sun orbit. I know a gravity slingshot is a good way to save fuel, but is it always required?

I guess I’m wondering if there have ever been anything ever launched from the poles... besides ICBMs in the 80's :(

I don't know of any such launches, probably because by launching from the equator you get about a thousand mph for free. It is possible to launch from elsewhere, but very expensive and innefficient.
 
LURCH said, "I don't know of any such launches, probably because by launching from the equator you get about a thousand mph for free."

Actually from Florida, where most (all?) of our satellites are launched you probably only get about 500mph for free. Even in low Earth orbit a satellite has to be going around 18,000mph. I suppose every little bit helps, but if there were a good reason to launch farther north, I don't think that losing the free 500mph would be a deal breaker.
 
  • #10
Israel launched its first satellite 'backward', IIRC; against the Earth's rotation - they were concerned that if the launch failed the fallout over nations to the east would be unmanageable.

Polar LEO orbits are a good idea if you want hi-res coverage of the whole globe, e.g. for mapping (or spying) purposes.
 

Similar threads

High School Interplanetary travel, Arctic sea ice
  • · Replies 85 ·
3
Replies
85
Views
9K
High School Direction in Space: Do We Launch Straight Up from the North and South Poles?
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
Undergrad Why is the ISS at a 51.6 degree orbital inclination?
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
High School Feasibility of a L1 Gravity Swing Cold Launch?
  • · Replies 18 ·
Replies
18
Views
3K
Undergrad Revolutionize Space Travel with Innovative Vacuum Launch Method
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
3K
Graduate Why do pulsars emit radiation from both poles?
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
Undergrad Orb.mec: Is the inclination of an ecliptic-perpendicular orbit 113,4º?
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
Stargazing Movement of Stars seen from the North Pole
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
5K
Could a nuclear powered rocket be safely launched from Earth?
  • · Replies 21 ·
Replies
21
Views
2K
Undergrad Orientation of the Earth, Sun and Solar System in the Milky Way
  • · Replies 142 ·
5
Replies
142
Views
135K