The Free State Project and space regs

This is awesome what all of you are trying to do; humanity will thank you one day. I thank you *now!*

While you're working to open space, the 5,000 member Free State Project is trying to liberate one U.S. state from the burdensome regulations that stand in your way.

Next month we pick the state. Front runners are Wyoming and New Hampshire, already bastions of the free market. I hope some of you will consider moving there with us and bringing your operations into the sphere of enhanced liberty we and current residents hope to generate.

Our main site: http://freestateproject.org

Our space discussion (where you guys came up):

http://www.freestatecafe.org/forum/foru ... ID=83&PN=1

See you in the Free State!

Dada

Liberty in Your Lifetime
www.freestateproject.org

Thanks for the info. My company, BCML CORP., is incorporated in the state of Wyoming.

Thanks for the reply, bcm!

BTW I invite all of you to drop by and let us know ways you think a state government - and a state's people - could help clear the way for what you're trying to do. If you can, leave contact info that will be valid a year or two from now when us Free Staters start to gain more influence than we have now. Virtually all of us are regulation-averse, so our success may be your success if you set up shop where we do.

http://www.freestatecafe.org/forum/foru ... ID=83&PN=1

Very good!

This website http://freestateproject.org indicates that New Hampshire has been chosen as the state, to which 20,000 liberty-minded people will move.

As this occurs, NH promises to become even more of a haven for business-minded entrepreneurs in any industry, but especially space development and exploration.

A problem that I see in making rocket launches, government or private, from New Hampshire is that it is very far from the equator, farther north even than Baiknour. Even though it might be easier to get by regulations in the "free state", the laws of physics don't care about politics and it will take more fuel and money to get to orbit from the eastern seaboard than from the Florida coast.

I hope another country such as Austrailia, Brazil, or India that's close to the equator makes friendly launch laws. It's not that I oppose what you're doing, but anyone that's going to launch to orbit from New Hampshire is going to need to put about 15-20% more ful on their rocket than they would if they were launching from the Tropic of Cancer. Nonetheless, I don't see any problem with it being a suborbital launch point.

A problem that I see in making rocket launches, government or private, from New Hampshire is that it is very far from the equator, farther north even than Baiknour. Even though it might be easier to get by regulations in the "free state", the laws of physics don't care about politics and it will take more fuel and money to get to orbit from the eastern seaboard than from the Florida coast.

I hope another country such as Austrailia, Brazil, or India that's close to the equator makes friendly launch laws. It's not that I oppose what you're doing, but anyone that's going to launch to orbit from New Hampshire is going to need to put about 15-20% more ful on their rocket than they would if they were launching from the Tropic of Cancer. Nonetheless, I don't see any problem with it being a suborbital launch point.

New Hampshire's business environment, especially with the effect of the Free State Project is what is most important to any business pursuit. Yes the state's latitude is a challange for land rocket launches. But the actual launch is only a part of this effort.

Also keep in mind, there are many launch methods which don't require land, rocket launch: sea launch, aircraft launch, balloon launch.

Plus, for the moment we are only talking about suborbital flights.

New Hampshire does have an Atlantic coast.