What We Know About the Space Force's Search for a New Spaceport

The U.S. Space Force wants a third heavy-lift launch site operating by 2030 to ease pressure on its two existing spaceports in Florida and California, but officials have not decided where the new site will go or how the government would acquire the land, Lt. Gen. Philip Garrant said this week, according to Ars Technica.

Garrant, who leads Space Systems Command and oversees launch procurement for the military, described the target date as “aspirational” rather than fixed. “We need this capability by 2030, but I'm also a pragmatist,” he said, according to the outlet. “That is not an inconsequential demand to build a spaceport when you factor in orbital regimes, safety, access to commodities, the Americans that live near it. In many ways, it's much like an airport, but even louder. So there's a lot of consideration.”

Why does the Space Force say it needs a third spaceport?

Cape Canaveral Space Force Station and Kennedy Space Center, both in Florida, along with Vandenberg Space Force Base in California, have handled nearly all U.S. orbital launches for close to 70 years, Ars Technica reported. Those three locations hosted 175 orbital launch attempts last year, and Space Force officials project the country's established spaceports will need to support 700 launches annually by 2036, according to the outlet. A new base would also give the military what commanders describe as “geographic resiliency” — a hedge against a hurricane, earthquake or military attack disabling the Cape or Vandenberg at the same time, Ars Technica reported.

When did the Pentagon first flag the need for a new site?

Air Force Secretary Troy Meink raised the search publicly in May, telling the House Armed Services Committee that a congressionally mandated study of Space Force launch infrastructure had identified the need for “another site that's capable of heavy and super heavy launch capability,” according to Ars Technica. In August, the Trump administration released a space transportation policy that endorsed building more launch and reentry sites for both commercial and military missions, the outlet reported. Garrant's comments this week were the most detailed public account so far of how the service is weighing its options, though he said no decision timeline exists yet. “As far as decision timelines, we don't have anything yet,” he said, per Ars Technica.

What options is the Space Force weighing?

Garrant said building a new spaceport will require close coordination with state and local governments: “It's going to take a strong partnership with local and state governments,” he said, according to Ars Technica. The outlet reported that the Pentagon is considering several paths, including a public-private arrangement, construction at an existing federal installation, or use of land owned by a state government. The federal government already owns a third orbital-class spaceport at NASA's Wallops Flight Facility in Virginia, which currently handles suborbital tests and small- to medium-class satellite launches, Ars Technica reported. Separately, small rockets can launch from the Pacific Spaceport Complex, which is owned by the state of Alaska, according to the outlet.

Ars Technica also reported that commercial facilities could factor into the Pentagon's planning. Asked whether the Space Force might lease property from a privately owned launch base — the outlet cited a large spaceport SpaceX is developing — Garrant's response was included in the reporting but the full detail of that answer was not available in the material reviewed by HTT News. The question underscores that private companies, not just state or federal landlords, are part of the conversation as the service weighs how to move fastest.

Why not simply expand Cape Canaveral or Vandenberg?

The Ars Technica report frames the new-site search as a response to the limits of the existing footprint: both Florida and California bases face finite real estate as commercial and military launch cadence climbs toward the 700-per-year figure cited by Space Force planners for 2036. A third site would, in Garrant's words, need to account for “orbital regimes, safety, access to commodities” and the people who would live near a facility he compared to an airport — “but even louder,” he said, according to the outlet. That comparison points to a core tension facing any new location: the same proximity to coastlines and transportation infrastructure that makes a site useful for rocket launches also puts it near populated areas that would need to tolerate the noise and safety perimeters that come with heavy-lift operations.

What happens next?

No site has been named, no acquisition method has been chosen, and the Pentagon has not set a date for a decision, Ars Technica reported. Garrant's remarks this week suggest the service is still in the stage of comparing categories of solutions — federal land, state land, or private partnership — rather than evaluating specific locations. With 2030 described by its own commander as aspirational, the timeline leaves open whether the Space Force will formally identify a preferred site, and under what ownership structure, before that year arrives.

Read the original reporting at Ars Technica.