Author: Dr. Thomas J. Colvin, Dr. Moon J. Kim, and Dr. Akhil Rao

Publisher: Commercial Space Federation

Publication Date: May 2026

Link: CSF Website or Download Here

There were over 180 launches from the United States in 2025, straining launch infrastructure that takes years to develop or upgrade. Investments in new launch infrastructure should be sized to meet future demand for launch services; however, most such demand estimates are relatively opaque. They rely on simple growth rates and overlook mission-specific considerations like payload masses, orbital destinations, and launch azimuth constraints. This paper, developed in collaboration with the Commercial Space Federation, addresses this gap by 1) assessing potential future demand for U.S. launch while accounting for mission-specific parameters, 2) identifying potential gaps in meeting the future launch demand, and 3) provides potential actions for addressing launch capacity gaps using traditional, inland, and sea-based spaceports.

Findings

• Proposed space data centers represent a step change in potential launch demand. The paper builds three progressively larger demand scenarios from FCC licensing data: approved satellites plus government and GEO demand (Scenario A), pending FCC applications (Scenario B), and proposed space data centers (Scenario C). With over one million data center satellites proposed, Scenario C dwarfs all other sources of potential demand for U.S. launch services. To meet this demand would require around 7,000 launches per year–nearly 20 launches per day–of the largest launch vehicles ever built.
• Companies that have vertically integrated their satellites with a launch vehicle may saturate capacity with their own internal demand. Such vertically integrated companies also appear to own the largest launch vehicles on the market. If they reach capacity while trying to launch their own satellites, this would drive other customers that do not own a launch vehicle to launch on smaller vehicles. Capacity constraints will predominantly affect the vertically integrated companies because they may have a large number of undelivered satellites. Market customers with smaller constellations or single satellites may still be able to find a way to launch their assets.
• There are plausible futures where launch demand stays within reasonable limits. For each type of launch vehicle simulated, we used its number of annually licensed launches as the constraint on launch capacity. Licensed levels are drawn from what those vehicles already have or are pursuing based on regulatory filings. Taking satellite operators’ regulatory filings at face value, the biggest constellations may have satellites with masses of two to three metric tons each; this may create launch capacity gaps almost immediately. However, if all constellations with more than 1,000 satellites reduce their per-satellite mass to 30 percent of their stated values, launch demand may remain within the licensed limits for the foreseeable future. A 30 percent reduction appears plausible based on limited historical data and the general incentives that push an operator to reduce the mass of their satellites if possible.
• Potential actions exist for traditional and non-traditional launch sites to accommodate potentially required capacity. For traditional sites, these include a central authority to manage U.S. launch sites, coordinated infrastructure investment, shared resource scheduling, and smaller evacuation zones based on modern propellant analysis. For non-traditional sites, they include government-endorsed trajectory and cost analyses, extension of federal range services, and federal funding or anchor tenancy. Actions benefiting both include improved flight safety tools, dynamic airspace management, and updated overflight regulations. These are presented as potential paths forward, not recommendations.