NASA, DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE NIXED SPACE PORT IN BROWNSVILLE IN 1961

By Juan Montoya

With all the hoopla surrounding the potential construction of a launch port for space missions in Boca Chica Beach, it might serve us well to remember history lest we repeat the same mistakes.

The media frenzy surrounding the possible launch site by SpaceX in Brownsville using Falcon 9 commercial space vehicles has overlooked the fact that the U.S. Government – through the National Aeronautics Space Administration and the Department of Defense – considered doing just that when they were searching for a possible launch site for the manned lunar missions back in 1961.

In a document titled numbered MT 61-109546 and tittled "Joint Report on Facilities and Resources Required at Launch Site to Support NASA Manned Lunar Program" authored by personnel of both entities, Brownsville was one of eight sites being considered for the launches.

Other sites included the White sands Missile range, Cape Canaveral (on-shore), Cumberland Island (Ga.), Brownsville, Cape Canaveral (off-shore), Hawaii, Mayaguana and Christmas Island.

Granted, that the size of the lunar mission operation would have to be much bigger than the commercial launch zone envisioned by the promoters of the SpaceX site, yet there are some issues assocaiated that have not changed much in the past 51 years since the initial search was being conducted.

One of the criteria was cost to the government. At Canaveral, for example, they were looking at an approximate cost of $75 million for 81,000 acres, a quotation that eliminated the Christmas Island, Mayaguana and Hawaii, all of which were over 100 million. Additional costs (systems procurement, etc.) proved prohibitive ranging from $435 million at Christmas island, $251 million at Hawaii and $205 in Mayaguana.
Brownsville, however, made the cut with the real estate estimated at $14 million, and additional long-range cost pegging the price at $125 million, competitive with the remaining sites.
However, there were some problems with establishing the launch site in Brownsville, the planners concluded. For one, Both the Georgia site and the one in Brownsville would require the intermittent closing of the Intercoastal Waterway that "could cause political problems," according to the report.
Further, under the section titled "Launch Vehicle Impact and Overflight Hazards," the report stated that the launch azimuth would be limited to approximately 80 to 90 degrees to minimize land impact of first and second stages hitting populated areas. Today, if a commercial launch to supply the International Space Station were to be launched from Brownsville, it would have to be directed to a 60 degree azimuth which would take the stages dropping over populated areas like Corpus Christi, Houston and other U.S. cities to the interior.
Related to the issue of overflight hazard, the planners then found that "large portions of U.S, and possibly Cuba, would have to be overflown through second-stage burnout. With the possibility of abort during first and second stage burning, especially during the early phases of the program, some sizable population centers such as Tampa, St. Petersburg, Palm Beach and Miami, Fla., would be endangered."
Taking into consideration "maximum economy" and existing national resources, the planners then concluded that "it would be more advantageous to expand existing physical plants and the technical organizations than to build new ones. Accordingly, this consideration would favor White Sands Missile Range, New Mexico, and Cape Canaveral, Fla."
There were other more critical considerations besides cost and overflight hazards. In everyone of the sites studied, the government requires huge amounts of water be available for safety and health considerations. The use of liquid and solid fuels to achieve an escape trajectory and reach orbital velocity.
With all the highly-toxic and flammable materials being used and the very possible potential for a fire emergency or explosion, water was a critical component of the launch site considerations. There is no water available at Boca Chica Beach or along Highway 4. Ask the residents of Koepernick Shores when was the last time they had running water.
The lone existing water plant there was in the early 80s when the Texas Department of Health shut it down because of unsatisfactory coliform levels and dense concentrations of other heavy metals.
The SpaceX proponents have suggested that they will use "gray water," whatever that means.
A Wikipedia definition indicates that it "gets its name from its cloudy appearance and from its status as being between fresh, potable water (known as "white water") and sewage water (black water). In a household context, greywater is the leftover water from baths, showers, hand basins and washing machines only. Some definitions of greywater include water from the kitchen sink. Any water containing human waste is considered black water.
Now, given that, where are they going to acquire the white water that would make the "grey water" available?" If you remember, the only reason that the Playa del Rio Resort project died on the books was because (aside from the scamming of Polish residents from Chicago) of the lack of drinking water out at the same site being considered for the launch site by SpaceX.
Lest you think that this blog is a nay-sayer to anything progressive for our area, let us assure you that we wish these private enterprise commercial launches the best and hope they succeed.
The planners of the 1961 study were not only motivated by dollar costs and related matters. In a telling quote in the DOD facet of the report, they state unequivocally that among one of its goals is "the restoration of a measure of prestige lost to the USSR....the United States has the scientific manpower, the engineering data, know-how, the industrial base, and more than sufficient experience with missile and space operations to do the task. If the Nation decides to authorize and fund the project – and if we fail to achieve our goals, it will be because of failure to organize our efforts and discipline our operations in an efficient manner."

The price for that failure, the DOD planners concluded "will be the cause of our loss of scientific and industrial leadership in world affairs."

There were back then, obviously, other considerations besides money. That's about the major difference between that effort and the current push for a launch site.
But we have learned to be more careful and to beware of not being led down the primrose path when we ended up holding the bag for enterprises and corporations that squeezed us until they couldn't get anymore blood from the turnip and then simply left.