SpaceX slams regulatory ‘headwinds’ for holding up Starship, risking US dominance in space | CNN
Sort by:
Best
Open comment sort options
Best
Top
New
Controversial
Old
Q&A
![r/spacex - ON THE PATH TO RAPID REUSABILITY [official recap on Starship Flight 3]](https://b.thumbs.redditmedia.com/3gDXyz5y4HzdScxdRSFdyoJYSEZ60w1zngvOH9x-AHc.jpg)
![r/spacex - SpaceX (@SpaceX) on X: [Video] “First video call on @X completed through @Starlink Direct to Cell satellites from unmodified mobile phones! We’re excited to go live with @TMobile later this year 🛰️🌎”](https://b.thumbs.redditmedia.com/XlCvkBbi2wW607O075X3MzINpYTnuPCCQ2ElhcIeemI.jpg)
![r/spacex - SpaceX (@SpaceX) on X: “[Ship] Splashdown confirmed! Congratulations to the entire SpaceX team on an exciting fourth flight test of Starship!”](https://b.thumbs.redditmedia.com/G1Igux-Iq1t43Cz7ohxHtWmHG3EodPI1crmp2l2de1Q.jpg)
![r/spacex - Flight 4 Slow Motion 4K Compilation [Everyday Astronaut / Cosmic Perspective]](https://b.thumbs.redditmedia.com/JxDVJsvgL_Q10TmhZKg7A-298_SK0a7845Pm0bmqDEQ.jpg)
Sorry in advance for the "slams" headline but the actual article seems fairly balanced.
As always remember that the journalist who writes the article does not write the headline.
It’s a fairly balanced article.
The FAA and the FWS do very important work, and they work for the safety of people, property and the natural environment.
SpaceX recognise the significant uptick in their workload and are lobbying for more funding and staff in these departments, which can only be a good thing for all involved.
They are not saying “damn this bureaucracy” they are saying “we recognise this needs to be done, and it’s importance, but it’s too slow to keep our competitive edge. We want you to pay to double their departments”.
SpaceX is bringing attention to a government-wide problem that affects everything - lack of civil servants:
https://www.noahpinion.blog/p/america-needs-a-bigger-better-bureaucracy
Realistically anything spacex is doing is just political pressure to beef up the regulatory bodies so they can handle the increasing workload. It's not a complaint about the actual bodies as much as it is about their lack of funding.
Edit: FAA is lacking funding ofc, not spacex
Perfect summary.
How so? I replied to that guy and like I said, how does spacex have lack of funding? I work for them. They get so much money off starlink and nasa plus private companies. Plus the richest man in the world owns it. So tell me about funding?
I'm pretty sure they're referring to the FAA's funding there bud.
...how would you know this? This is pure speculation on your part.
Not a complaint? Their guy testifying to congress the other day certainly could have fooled me.
I would say no to lack of funding, yes to less regulation. This has been proven to be the correct path time and time again.
They need less BS rules to deal with so they can perform their inspections for the metrics that actually matter.
Those "BS rules" are important. They protect native habitats and ensure minimal risk to life and property. SpaceX chose to build starbase in a location where they knew they would have regulatory issues.
Your assumption that all the rules are important is precisely the issue. I did not say ALL the rules are BS rules, I said they need less BS rules, of which there are likely an excessive amount.
Comment deleted by user
He (and his followers) should vote for people that increase taxes for the wealthy then, so we can fund more regulatory bodies.
See how this works?
He wants his cake and to eat it too, he can start complaining when he (and his friends) pay their fair share.
This is a PR stunt because he knows he's been getting rubber stamped for a while and his latest fuckup is a much bigger deal than he's trying to make it out to be.
He misses paperwork deadlines, and the stated goal is to NOT do due diligence in his testing (I don't remember the term for the kind of testing this is).
He should also know better than to "offer to pay for it". That's a bribe, and if he paid his fair share of taxes, maybe we could pay for better regulatory bodies.
Comment removed by moderator
Legal does not mean fair.
But "fair" is in the eye of the beholder; you sound like one of those who feel that as soon as he sold Paypal "fair" would have meant taxing him to the point that he didn't have resources to buy Tesla and when Tesla became successful, he CERTAINLY should have been taxed heavily enough to keep him from starting SpaceX, because "FAIR is making sure nobody is allowed to amass the resources to become a billionaire" and we'd be far better off without those money factories being poured into Starlink and Stareship.
Lack of funding? I work for spacex and they have zero problem with funding. Take your pick, richest man in the world, plus starlink? Plus all the nasa money plus private companies paying for launch
Post your sources
Our stock has gone up so much since I’ve been there with 750M in private investments every half year, so I’m curious what you mean
It is not spaceX funding, but the FAA.
"F&W...told CNN on Wednesday that it’s working to begin an official consultation with the FAA."
[Edit: Per Scott Manley's video of today, 10/19/23, Fish and Wildlife have delivered their report to the FAA and the FAA has 30 days to respond. Was this possibly a preliminary report listing stuff F&W wants further insight on? That'd make it fit with this CNN article.]
Working to begin IS beginning. The clock for the 135 days should have already started. As it is, the review should take about 135 hours. I'm being serious; F&W just needs a quick read of the small parts that apply to them of all the other reviews and then take a simple look at the difference between the immensely thick OLM concrete pad and its deluge plate vs the concrete that failed on the first flight. A competent civil engineer and two interns should be able to do that in 2 weeks.
Back in late September, FAA said that the clock started when they sent the request in August... FWS says it started when (after that public rebuke) they finally opened the request that had been sitting on somebody's desk for 2 months and said "OH! we never noticed this before; we'll start to look at it now."
Even outside of a bloated massive organization like the US federal government, expecting another agency/department to be an expert about what is or is not relevant to your agency’s department is definitely a bad call. Sure, the FAA could probably get 98% of it right with enough experience but why should they be spending time marking things for F&W, and why would F&W rely on the FAA to tell them what they do or don’t need to read?
Comment deleted by user
Do you even bother reading comments that you reply to or do you just pick random ones to start your rants over?
LOL. This is the perfect coda to two people not having a conversation, but talking outwards without any understanding at all.
SpaceX is the only Private company in the US that is going to be able to go to the moon very very very soon and the FAA and the US government is strangling them to death
Correction: SpaceX is the only Private company in the US that is going to be able to go to the moon very very very soon and because of this the US government is paying them billions of dollars to be part of the Artemis Program. If Starship gets behind schedule the development of the Starship Human Lander System that NASA has contracted for will be behind schedule. NASA will only be able to get to the Moon and orbit it, with no landing, without this HLS.
Are there contradictory elements among all the numerous government agencies? Absolutely.
Yes but they are not going to be giving them the money until they can actually launch Starship and refuel it in space so right now they are stoping that progress and it does not matter how much money they are going to give them in the end if they are stopping them from getting there while the company has to spend money for every day that they have to wait
You mean strangle as in giving them billions of dollars? Sign me up! I would love to be “strangled” like they “strangle” Space x.
The "billions of dollars" they're giving them is payment for services rendered. SpaceX doesn't have cost-plus contracts like literally every other defense/launch contractor does. They foot the bill for development of their launch hardware.
Boeing doesn't have cost plus either iirc, they're fixed price and are eating shit because of it.
SpaceX only receive payments for milestones on HLS after they have been achieved. The next big milestone payment is probably for demoing orbital refueling, which SpaceX can't do until they can get Starship to orbit.
And even when all is said and done, the HLS contract won't come anywhere near covering all Starship's development. Starship's development has already cost on the order of 5 billion and is probably going to end up closer to 10 billion, while the HLS contract is only for 4.2 billion, and a significant portion of that money (quite possibly a majority) will have to go towards paying for the dozens of launches needed to pull off the three landings they're contracted for, rather than development costs.
Even when you add in the likes of CRS and CCP, it seems unlikely that they'll even manage to break even on Starship. Most of the money from those went into development of Falcon 9, Dragon, and their associated infrastructure, as well as the dozens of operational launches. Even if SpaceX made a 20% profit when all was said and done, that's a little under 2 billion, and frankly I think that's optimistic. This also assumes that SpaceX invested all of their profits from those programs solely into Starship, rather than split between Starship and Starlink, which is much more likely.
TL;DR: SpaceX will likely take a significant loss on the Starship program in terms of government funding, and the longer they're delayed from achieving HLS milestones the larger that loss will be.
They're hoping that Starship will be the key to making Starlink profitable, and thus be able to pay for itself that way. However, the longer it remains grounded the more money they have to spend continuing to launch Starlink on Falcon 9 instead.
The US government is so huge with different agencies having different powers and jurisdictions that it's quite possible, even believable, for some parts of the US government to be giving them billions of dollars while other parts of the US government strangle them.
Giving them how? There is a big difference between,
A. Here is 1 billion dollars to do with how you see fit. B. Here is a 1 billion dollar low or no interest loan. C. Here is 1 billion dollars to purchase the product/service you are providing.
even with all the money in the world, if they aren't allowed to launch then how are they to make progress? The environment is obviously important but they just need to get spacex to minimise as much damage as they can then let them launch at a faster rate. Realistically our only way out of climate change is technological development, which a space race would definitely help with
Your entire third paragraph, while correct, is contingent on the parties in question acting in good faith. That's not the case here so this is all moot.
I thought it was a Steele plate now?
The primary issue iirc is actually the water coming out of the plate into the nearby wetlands. They need to verify that that water, and the chemical runoff either within it or washed away by it isn't harmful to the surrounding wetlands.
It's not a 135 day job for sure, but it is a job that kind of needs to happen considering they are kind of in the middle of a nature preserve.
The issue is less than they are doing it, rather moreso how long it's taking.
if it turns out to be an issue, that would be a shame, considering the deluge system was used multiple times already.
Yes, but this is a compounding issue. If the result is polluting, it’s a much bigger deal if SpaceX launches three times a day. Wasn’t that the plan?
Are they in a nature reserve? Boca Chica beach allows cars and trucks right onto the beach, and on weekends it can be filled with people and their cars polluting the local environment.
Yes. Las Palomas Wildlife Management Area.
I suspect the cars in the beach thing is a cultural grandfathered in practice. It always wierds me out when I go to the states and they have cars in the beaches (Daytona mostly)
Indeed, it's important to protect those protected wetlands from inundations of fresh water. We're just extraordinarily lucky that there are never severe rainfalls on the Texas Gulf Coast.
People keep repeating that and ignoring the part that you ignored, about
Are there significant chemicals of a type to worry about? We won't know for sure until someone checks.
This. Muskrat knew he was building his playpen in a conservation area. If you can't play by the rules in a conservation area, then you shouldn't be allowed to play at all. It's that simple. Should have built somewhere that wasn't so sensitive.
I'm not aware of SpaceX running afoul of any rules.. what rules are they not willing to play by?
Is there a rule that the referee be extremely slow to start the game clock?
fws vehicles were spotted outside of starbase. other than vibing, i don't see any valid reason to be there. so they don't seem to be in a hurry.
Those vehicles were accompanied by SpaceX workers, and we're pretty obviously there to oversee a cleanup effort, as they were removing chunks of concrete from the wetlands. This was frankly obvious if you were paying attention...
Huh? They were there to do this very job, ya dolt.
Yep, article is fine, headline (which article author does not write) is clickbaity nonsense. (any headline with "SLAMS" in it should get headline writer fired.)
Unfortunately, the true reasons for aerospace development is not well communicated nor understood by the Amerocan public. Initially obviously it was about building long range missles, then it became about communication and earth observation satellites. These concepts are more or less well understood. Now however, I do think people fail to understand that for the good of all humanity we need to open another frontier for economic expansion. It's technically wrong to say earth is overpopulated, but it's not wrong to say we are hitting a point where economic opportunity and resources are stretched pretty thin and the law of diminishing returns has begun taking hold. A project like Starship represents a step change in what is possible in orbit. Both in terms of getting mass to orbit, but also technology surrounding on orbit refueling of cryogenic fuels. Making space more accessible and us as a species more capable in orbit and eventually deep space is critical to our future. By expanding the bounds of our habitat, the geo-political pressures that lead to violence and war on earth can be lessened.
I think NASA and the aerospace industry need to do a better job of highlighting the importance of the technological development that comes from the industry. The ISS is awesome but the scale is too small and the practical benefits too understated and esoteric for the average person to understand. The overriding concept of raising humanities technological ability is the real goal, with more specific targets used as waypoints.
The debates around NASA funding, especially SLS, as well as the idea that companies like SpaceX and Blue Origins are simply so crazy billionaire can have fun demonstrate basic misunderstandings about why aerospace development is so important.
I support exploration and the pursuit of knowledge but large scale human settlement of other planets is hundreds of years away. We need to create a technological civilization that can last for many hundreds of years not the just brief 100-200 year, rapidly dwindling lifespan of our current petroleum age.
When the first oil well was drilled in 1859, there were 1.2 billion humans on Earth and 164 years later there are 8 billion of us all wanting large homes, frequent air travel, and personal automobiles. As the climate/energy/population problem bites harder, more people will wake up to facts that economists and politicians have denied since the 1970s:
Unlimited growth for an unlimited number of people on a planet with finite resources is not possible.
Mining the asteroid belt or inhabiting other planets is not possible with current technology.
We can't become a spacefaring species until we first become a sustainable species.
You are wrong. You are giving an answer as if this is 20 years ago . Take a look at where we actually are and reevaluate. It’s not a RULE anywhere expecepr in some people’s mind that living in space is 100 years away . This statement has nothing backing it up
Your number three isn’t true. But one thing is true. If we don’t ever take that first step then we will never be a spacefaring species.
It’s not so much about colonizing the moon/planets…more so about opening up space for more economic activity.
Maybe we can colonize our orbit…
Then we're still using the Earth's dwindling resources for that activity in orbit. The idea is to sustain a viable industrial civilization until technology can be developed or discovered that will allow us to mine the asteroid belt or establish a human colony on another planet. Our current fossil fuel based civilization is accelerating toward disease, famine, mass migrations, and resource wars due to the climate/energy/population problem.
We are the wealthiest, healthiest, smartest, most free population of humans to have ever existed. You're bordering on conspiracy theory level irrationality.
Nukes or shut up.
The second point will be true right up until we try to develop that technology, so saying it doesn't exist today isn't meaningful. People have used that exact argument as a reason to put off tackling climate change for decades - even today you get people saying that modern society can't exist without the use of fossil fuels. Those sorts of things are true right up until they're not, because someone put in the research and resources to change them.
Climate change is a huge problem, but we're finally reaching a point where we have the technology to solve it without sacrificing civilization as we know it. Decades of work have made renewables some of the cheapest power we've ever had access to, and batteries are becoming cheap enough to make that energy reliable without breaking the bank. Better heat pumps, cheap electrolyzers, and biofuels/e-fuels can get us the rest of the way to net zero without dropping people's quality of life.
All of that's to say, living sustainably is an important goal but throwing out the potential of new technologies makes that dramatically harder to do. Minerals for green energy already involve a lot less mining than fossil fuel extraction does, but getting resources from space could drop our impact on Earth even further.
Surviving in space flat out demands a higher degree of sustainability than we have here on Earth, simply because you don't have a whole biosphere backing you up for free. If sustainability-minded people were more onboard with spaceflight it could be an incredible opportunity to push the concept forward, so the idea that we can't go to space until we've solved all of our problems on Earth always saddens me.
Climate change is no longet believed to be an existential threat to the human race.
The primary expected impediment - that clean energy will stunt the growth of developing economies, so they will bypass them has not borne out as accurate. Economies are transitioning and maintaining growth.
True, a few hunter gatherers will survive.
Comment removed by moderator
Well said!
I am getting rather tired of this perpetual growth mindset. It is flawed and I hope we find an alternative in time.
there’s basically infinite ressources in space, infinite growth still has a lot of room
Comment removed by moderator
Comment removed by moderator
that's a remarkably stupid thing to say
I agree. That's what classical economics teaches, that growth is the be all and end all of capitalism and there is no alternative. Steady state economics and doughnut economics are new ways of thinking about things.
You know what's in outer space? NOTHING. This quote: "Making space more accessible and us as a species more capable in orbit and eventually deep space is critical to our future " is pure delusion. We literally have everything we need on Earth to survive - what more could you want? Astro-rubies? Space dust?
I mean. That’s just not true. There’s plentiful resources in space not to mention the technological advancements that come with space travel. Our destiny isn’t to just stay here forever, we need to expand, grow among the cosmos to better understand the cosmos.
There is nothing in space that we don't have on Earth, save some obscure isotopes in the center of stars. In fact, because life is unique to Earth, we have a vast array of resources here that can never be found anywhere else. Not on Mars. Not on some stupid asteroid. Not on a dead comet. Focus on managing these resources correctly, and we wouldn't have to waste time or money on sending some boob back to the Moon.
Lab grown organs. Higher quality pharmaceuticals. Pollution free manufacturing. Scientific advancement that could help millions of people on Earth. Resources you don't need to dig up huge tracts of land to get to.
We have better prosthetics, firefighting gear, computers, insulation, bedding, lenses, food safety, hearing aids, touchless thermometers, air purifiers, water purifiers, shoe soles, and many other technologies because of space travel. CAT scans, space blankets, and lots of other technologies wouldn't even exist if not for space travel.
To say we have nothing to gain from going to space is the height of ignorance.
I have to laugh at how ridiculous you sound. My man, there is literally more of every possible resource in space than earth with the possible exception (as far as we are aware) of life. But you know how we expand life? Using extraterrestrial resources.
What about tachyon crystals? Gotcha
Who offered $100 million dollar prize to develop carbon removal ? See https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BN88HPUm6j0 Who gave an hour talk on taxing petroleum out of existence at COP21 in Paris eight years ago? See https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BMskI6G9ty0 Who broke open the lie of the impossible electric car that has been fed to us for just 100 years? See https://www.hagerty.com/media/automotive-history/gm-ev1-true-inside-story/ Who broke open the lie that mined petroleum is a limited "fossil" fuel at an 90 minute talk at Cambridge eleven years ago? See https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c1HZIQliuoA Who gave up 9 homes to live in a 375 sq,ft. rental so as to focus on improving this planet, the next, & is building an entire 3D printed community in Bastrop, Texas? See https://www.curbed.com/2023/02/elon-musk-neighborhood-lennar-texas.html Please reply, I'll wait. See https://google.com/ And You?
You know what people said about trying to cross the ocean?…
Yeah well, they didn't have multi-billion-dollar telescopes and probes to tell them what was across the Atlantic. Gimme a call me when you find arable land on Mars.
Your probably the same kinda person who screams about wealth distribution and all that nonsense. You know how many people are employed in the space industry right now? Not just laborer jobs; but good, high skilled, high paying jobs?
Do you have any idea about the technology that’s being developed for this process? Do you know how many technologies we use everyday from the space race?
Yeah, we will probably never get to Mars. It might be a dud. But your walking around with blinders on if you think we don’t get anything out of it.
Nothing?
What?
Do you know what's in space. A metric shit ton of resources. Sure it's not easily accessible at the moment. But there was also a point in time where resources we take for granted now were not accessible due to technology limitations. Space exploration can open new frontiers for technology both in space and on the ground. Imagine a world where heavy polluting industries and mining was done off world and not destroying rainforests.
Micro Gravity, hard vacuum, and near absolute zero temperatures to make manufacturing things like next generation micro circuitry and ultra pure medicines come to mind right off the top of my head. and then there's that pure metal asteroid that would be worth trillions if they could bring it down to earth in pieces or be another civilization ending disaster if it happened to collide uncontrolled.
I mean… literally EVERYTHING is in Space!
Relevant
Off the top of my head:
Human/civilization survival of extinction level events (which have happened throughout Earth's history)
Overturning of the Club of Rome's "Limits to Growth" thesis, thus permitting unfettered expansion.
Given SpaceX's mission statement is: “To revolutionize space technology, with the ultimate goal of enabling people to live on other planets,” I wonder why you're here in this SpaceX subreddit.
I hate to break it to you but space exploitation for profit isn’t going to happen because there is no profit to be had. There is no resource in space worth the huge expenditure.
Rare earth minerals in asteroid belts? My dude, on Earth digging that up is literal child’s play.
SpaceX’s Gerstenmaier’s comments:
https://x.com/spacesudoer/status/1714987801207607447?s=46&t=gBppRUgBv1dnyapLEq4SGg
Gerstenmaier is a fucking G.
Thanks for the X link.
Fish and Wildlife only got the biological assessment report on 5 October, so it's hardly a delay by them at all yet.
The delay potentially comes later.
https://spaceflightnow.com/2023/10/18/spacex-battles-regulatory-process-that-could-hold-up-starship-test-flight-for-months/
The fact that we're even considering impact to fish is absolutely wild to me. China is over there not even trying to deorbit boosters safely
Enough with the scape goating. There's a reason the developed world doesn't behave like China.
Edit. Typo
Yes they should 100% see so that people on the surface is protected and that the rocket does not crash down on land or where there are people but they should realy prioritize this project over the fish
The people at South Padre Island were covered in a debris cloud and the rocket was out of control for 45 seconds which could have changed its trajectory toward populated areas.
This project should continue with proper regulation to protect the people and the sensitive habitats that Elon failed to protect.
What's the reason?
Not an expert, but dropping boosters on inhabited villages is bad.
Because china has no reservations in dropping rockets on their own people and poisoning them with toxic gases.
The regulatory oversight that the rest of the developed world employs prevents exactly that.
There needs to be due diligence. Did you not see the videos of the first test? People were getting gravel hailed onto them miles away. Does the rocket exhaust and this water form anything else when mixed in the middle of an explosion? Are the water tanks/pumps free of lubricants/oil? How about we mix those in and see what happens. For all we know something catastrophic could happen to the preserve, or the ocean.
I want to see this thing take off just as much as anyone, but I also want my great great great grandkids to see grass. We beat China with the gloves on, just like always
Lawyers
Why is the Fish and Wildlife given a say in all this? Don't the US say something like "fuck this minuscule part of our territory" when national security is at risk?
Does the military also have to get approval from F&W when testing new artillery weapon or?
I don't know, I don't get it, it looks like asking Hippies if they like wars...
I have nothing but deep respect for NASA, some amazing things and people work for an organization that makes so much with so little. However, I feel like the one thing holding them back is the government. Too many regulations and red tape is preventing them to advance like SpaceX. Big government agencies aren’t known for being efficient.
I’m also a big fan of SpaceX, the things they have been able to accomplish in such a short time is amazing. Great things happen when you ease off the brakes and let smart people do what they do.
Bureaucracy is the killer of progress. I know that we can remove some of these “headwinds” while safely maintaining progress and innovation. Hopefully this issue can be resolved.
Its good to see Nasa finally getting into the fray as represented by:
Pamela Melroy, Nasa deputy Administrator
“As global interest and capabilities in space exploration continue to expand at a rapid rate, America must continue to lead in human exploration with the return to the Moon under Artemis and the first human mission to Mars to search for life farther in the solar system. To be successful in achieving NASA’s goals, it’s important our regulatory partners have the resources they need to carry out their oversight duties and keep pace with commercial industry progress.”
She said that as early as Wednesday evening only just after Gerstenmaier's contribution the same day. So they will have been talking beforehand. It would have been even better if she had been able to make her statement available ahead of the meeting. But there may be some kind of etiquette that prevented her from doing so.
What's the status of SpaceX building SS in Cape Canaveral?
CNN mixed metaphor warning:
Um... SpaceX blowback at regulatory headwinds
Isn’t this the point of the trial by fire development ? Why spacex has multiple starships at multiple stages to quickly work out the kinks? And keep them coming? There will be explosions, crashes and lots of fire. But also lots of learning and progress as well. If were gonna start doing things like NASA always has we will all be dead and gone before a starship ever sees orbit. Get the usual govt bureaucracy out of the f’ing way.
lol those explosions and crashes occur within a wildlife refuge mate... It's a pretty important and rare habitat and I'm glad the FWS is making sure SpaceX doesn't rain concrete all over it again or some other unforeseen mishap.
Cape Canaveral is within a wildlife refuge too. No one ever protested its experiments or launch cadence.
Actually, the wildlife refuge exists because of Cape Canaveral. Without the spaceport, it would have certainly been condos by now.
I have no idea how to go about evaluating that.
> wildlife refuge Boca Chica is not a "wildlife refuge". It is literally un-buildable land that was isolated from Developers® by the Brownsville Navigation District and the US southern border with Mexico. Numerous Federal and State War monuments, periodic storm surge flooding that wipes out everything but a few abandon railroad posts and a true mosquito heaven. Incidentally, Boca Chica was a failed petroleum mining reserve. "Protecting Wildlife" is a green paint-job for a $2 billion a year federal budget to support recreational sport fishing, gun hunters and the personal speedboat industry.
This has nothing to do with that. As stated in other comments, the investigation is about the changes they made post IFT 1.
The deluge system (the only point of contention FWS is studying at present) delivers the same (or less depending on how much is vaporized by the engines) amount of the same level of contaminated water as 0.02" of rain falling on Starbase. The temperature is not a problem; the water is caught and retained by the same flood control ponds put in due to Army Corps of Engineers regulations limiting the outflow from sudden thunderstorms. The potential for explosions and crashes were dealt with in the 2 year EIS that obsoleted the 4/20 flight before it could take place and the deluge system had proven it can prevent pad erosion at 50% thrust before FWS shut down further testing. So I guess the feds are going for a catch 22... you can't use the deluge system at all until you prove it can work at full thrust and you can't prove anything until you actually test the system...
To clarify one thing. The Boca Chica launch facility is located in a Wildlife Management Area. The wildlife refuge (and yes, there is one) is entirely north of Port Isabel. What's the difference you ask? A wildlife management area allows, with consideration, industry to operate on the land whereas the wildlife refuge is supposedly much more restricted and only allows things like towns, RV parks, marinas, prisons, Walmarts and so forth (all located within the outer perimeter of the Laguna Atascosa National Wildlife Refuge).
It’s not rare. There are several hundred miles of barrier island along the Texas coast.
SpaceX is actually PROTECTING the wildlife, because no one can build condos on that beach now.
By the way, NASA has been exploding rockets and space shuttles for decades in a wildlife refuge at Cape Canaveral.
There are quite a few different species that don't extend very far northward into Texas, including some shore birds and sea turtles. And yes if done well the facility can be beneficial to wildlife, though I'd be interested to see some more information on the hearing damage they incur from these launches.
You are claiming a sea turtle out under the sea is going to get hearing damage?
Comment deleted by user
1st…..Prove that launch pad debris went 6 miles
2nd….are you being dense or do you truly believe condos and pavement would be better use of the area?
You're saying that despite NASA operating a rocket test facility for over half a century in the middle of a National Wildlife Refuge the FWS can't figure out how to deal with a rocket test facility in the middle of a National Wildlife Refuge?
I don't remember anything like this after Falcon 9 had the pad explosion in 2016.
Because this wasn't just one accident, there's been many starship explosions and debris contamination of the refuge. Also that's a different situation, it was land that NASA bought originally and then turned it into a refuge since they have to have a giant exclusion zone anyways around their facility, while this is an existing refuge that a private company moved into.
Mishaps in spaceflight is unavoidable, that's just a fact of life, if you don't want mishaps the only way is to stop launching and cede space to China, it's as simple as that.
Besides, debris gets thrown into nearby state park (not a federal wildlife refuge) is expected in a launch anomaly, this is covered in PEA section 2.1.3.7, there's nothing unforeseen here. And the current FWS review is for adding the new water deluge system, this review will happen even if they didn't launch IFT-1 or it didn't fail.
Hence the new water deluge system, trial by fire. Are we going to mars in a friggin space ship or aren’t we? Wildlife? 🙃 this is space travel mate. Elons/SpaceX process works. Thats why they are the premier launch entity they are today.
While i agree, Earth > Mars.
Cutting corners is cutting corners, regardless of if you happen to agree for the reasons.
Space is cool and I'm very excited about what SpaceX is doing, but I feel like people don't appreciate the nature we have here. It seems complex life is extremely rare, and especially in vibrant and sensitive ecosystems like these coastal estuarine ones we should be really focused on conservation. Not at ALL costs, but it should trump just about everything else imo.
If we become a widespread space-colonizing civilization, I think we'll have a much greater appreciation for Earth and all the creatures we share it with.
No because you can never do that. Humans will always have an impact because we are linked to the ecosystem. If you truly want to have perfect sync with ecosystem then humans should abandon everything including agriculture and live how ancient humans lived because that is how nature keeps control and balance.
You have no idea what you're talking about..
You were born in the wrong century. Sounds like a robber baron.
I’m not too excited about lots of explosions, crashes and fire, tyvm.
As long as SpaceX isn't dumping hydrazine into the groundwater, they should be given carte blanche over that little strip of beach. EPA/FAA should protect local residents for sure, but Fish and Wildlife should really have zero say.
Why?
Who didn't fully expect this.
Thank you for participating in r/SpaceX! Please take a moment to familiarise yourself with our community rules before commenting. Here's a reminder of some of our most important rules:
Keep it civil, and directly relevant to SpaceX and the thread. Comments consisting solely of jokes, memes, pop culture references, etc. will be removed.
Don't downvote content you disagree with, unless it clearly doesn't contribute to constructive discussion.
Check out these threads for discussion of common topics.
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.
Perfect way of putting it, also a hell of a selling point to people moving in a bureaucracy:
It’s a matter of national security.
Oh, wow, yeah, I'm sure they'll get right on it. You know, because the acting federal government is totally known for protecting national security and how much it loves and cares about the country. For sure.
BTW -- Starship now, yes -- a hundred times yes.
But WTF is this thing "beating China back to the Moon". Why would it make ANY POSSIBLE difference to ANYBODY if China lands people on the Moon before the US next lands people on the Moon? If China performs a crewed Lunar landing next year does that mean we just stop? Do they get all our hard candy or something? Will they suck up all the Lunar ice and say "none for YOU (ha ha ha)!"?
I mean it was silly enough during the Cold War but it's just ridiculous now.
Convincing the American public that Artemis is a good idea for several basic reasons requires far more of an attention span than it will ever get. Thumping the words "China will beat us to the Moon!" will work much better on the public and, in turn, their Congress-critters. China is dominating the Western economies in several ways. This is a genuine concern that the public is aware of. If China lands people on the Moon in a relative handful of years compared to the US' sdrawn out floundering it'll make a huge impression on all the world except the US's close allies, affecting geopolitics. The Apollo program went from the last Gemini flight to the Moon landing in 3 years. 2023 to 2026 is 3 years and China has been building up experience in human spaceflight for 10 years. Yes, they started with a borrowed Russian space capsule design but if they move at Apollo-speed and the US lags behind due to space suits or a slowed down development of Starship then China has a real chance.
From what I understand, it's the fear that if China establishes a presence on the moon first they might deny other nations, namely the U.S. access. It's essentially an extension of the space race with China as the emerging opponent.
disarm nippy aromatic homeless wine yoke sophisticated wasteful badge pet
This post was mass deleted and anonymized with Redact
And if we land Artemis there first we get to say "Nuh-uh!"? How does it make the slightest possible difference?
Yes that is the exact reason if the US and private companies in the US can build things on the moon first they can stop China from even landing on the Moon. So they are both going to race to get there first and the parties that get there first can take the resources first and claim more land / space on the surface of the moon than those that land there after the first one
Now is the best time to buy property on the Moon! Don't waste this one-in-a-lifetime chance! https://lunarregistry.com/
Exactly. And even with what u/oknight said, silly? Sure. Does it help to have some other guy trying to get there too who also happens to be nominally Communist? Absolutely. We’re just very smart apes after all, lol. Anything that pushes us further into space is alright by me.
We established international law for this very reason. China is also a signatory to the Outer Space Treaty. They have agreed to not deny other nations access just as they are not being denied access.
Diplomacy is pretty awesome, isn’t it?
This is a bad take.
Nations are clamoring for the he3 reserves on the south pole
Edit: Cool down votes
https://thehill.com/opinion/technology/3647216-china-has-returned-helium-3-from-the-moon-opening-door-to-future-technology/
https://www.esa.int/Enabling_Support/Preparing_for_the_Future/Space_for_Earth/Energy/Helium-3_mining_on_the_lunar_surface
https://www.nasa.gov/directorates/stmd/space-tech-research-grants/harnessing-power-from-the-moon/
Clamoring! Clamoring, I say!
Of course we don't even have the slightest beginning of an idea of a notion as to how to actually USE Helium-3, much less, if we could use it, how to get any significant volume of the material (if we could extract it) back to the Earth to use for anything... but that doesn't stop all those nations from CLAMORING!
(How can we hear anything through all that clamoring? Just so much clamoring.)
"...the moon could become the Persian Gulf of the mid to late 21st century."
And my butt could become the propulsion source that opens up the outer solar system, but it isn't very likely to.
It's the fuel for fusion and there's very little on earth.
It is literally 100 times harder to get aneutronic fusion with deuterium and He3 than it is to use deuterium and tritium.
Except... it ISN'T. It's A fuel that theoretically could be used for fusion without some waste products but is MUCH HARDER to use as fuel for fusion than what is CURRENTLY being used (and even that doesn't work to generate net energy -- much less usable energy over time).
Put your head back in the sand.
You're saying my head used to be in the sand because I didn't understand the significance of China landing humans on the Moon before the US does AGAIN? But now it's not in the sand because now I'm saying I still don't see any significance to it?
This seems a very unclear response.
Because anyone can be at those controls, including a woman.
Having to tell American girls that the US was the first to put a man on the moon, but not the first to put a woman on the moon because Americans felt "it was silly" to spend that kind of effort on a woman would be a national embarrassment.
That seems a pretty weirdly specific and labored argument. So it's just for the Guinness Book of Records "first woman on the moon" entry?
To people like this, yes. They worship their god of "DiVeRsiTy"
In terms of domestic politics, beating China to the Moon ticks the boxes for the insular, xenophobic portion of the US populace, which is handy ammo to swing senators around to the SpaceX cause.
In terms of military strategy, the US armed forces' credibility has always been in over-matching its potential opponents both in quantity and quality, to provide a strong deterrent effect. Painting SpaceX as essential to achieving dominance in the space domain against China, who is the nearest competitor in this regard, which is now taken seriously by the armed forces, helps swing military organisations over to the SpaceX cause
In terms of geopolitics, the United States' prosperity is predicated on being the global center of gravity for trade, culture, and geopolitics. Its vast military might, its strong competitive advantage in large sectors of the world economy, and its healthy cooperation with a large number of partner states across Europe are at the same time the tools it uses to achieve this central position, and also themselves intensified by this central position. New entrants onto the global stage find it far more profitable to align themselves with the US, for the advantages it brings across every metric a country uses to judge its own success. In this sense, a rising China is a way to destabilise this system, by introducing a second center of gravity on the world stage. This has the opportunity to convert some of the US' partners in trade and security cooperation over to the China camp, which is unacceptable from the standpoint of US foreign policy. SpaceX touting themselves as key to beating China is at once a good marketing tool for the US to re-assert its dominance on the world stage (look at us, we can go to the Moon together and accomplish great things) and also a way of demonstrating the US is continuing its march to develop new areas of comparative advantage instead of resting on its laurels and stagnating, which would otherwise give some of its partners impetus to considering a closer relationship with China. Either way, it paints SpaceX as useful even for US foreign policy, which while perhaps a tiny bit far-fetched, is indeed a page straight out of the US foreign policy playbook, as can be seen with the Artemis Accords.
Which other country is competing here?
China
India
Elon's politics and behavior have not helped him win any friends in government.
This has nothing to do with his politics. It’s just regulation, and SpaceX has been singing the praises of the FAS in this, but recognizing they’re understaffed.
That’s not true. Just ask Gavin Newsome who begged him to not move Tesla’s HQ to texas.
"That guy's politics are different than mine so he's obviously behaving badly".
Those are intentional regulatory headwinds. This is 100% democrats hating on Elon. SpaceX’s development of starship halted in its tracks when Biden was elected.
There it is. The intellectually inept tribalism. SpaceX's cargo program started under bush The crew program started under Obama. The starship program started under Obama. Starship contracted under Biden. Approved And first flew under Biden.
Arguing your persecution fetish only shows your ignorance.
True, but you can’t deny the DOJ current investigation into SpaceX is clearly politically driven. That’s an absurd charge and waste of tax payer money.
For the discrimination? You know Elon and his companies have a history of discrimination, abuse, sexual misconduct, OSHA violations and regulation violations, right? A federal investigation when those allegations occur within a federal contract is perfectly justified.
Comment removed by moderator
Well, the US Senate is not controlled by Biden's minions, and Senator SLS-Shelby has strong representation by his office sycophant, elected onto his senate seat this year. Katie Britt serves on the "Subcommittee on Commerce" responsible for discretionary spending at the National Aeronautics and Space Administration.
It doesn’t matter how much they hold back American ingenuity we are always, and will be the best forever freedom, and allows us that
Elon is humiliating NASA and the automotive communities. The government doesn’t like to look bad, and Starship will do just that. This is a thinly veiled plot by Joe’s Jokers to stop anyone who exposes the socialist agenda.
It really isn't, if you took the time to do just a little research you would see that the FAA and the FWS have been short of funding and staff for decades (yes, even during the reign of the pustulent orange blob). As a result of this they are woefully understaffed and their systems are antiquated.
It really isn't targeted against Musk, you are not looking at the undisputable fact that other US-based rocket companies (and other aviation industries) are also affected by the FAA's lack of staff (and that of course includes Blue Origin). The FAA (and FWS) simply aren't equipped to deal with the increasing amount of private rocket developments and launches, therefore leading to bottlenecks in the pipeline. Just to reiterate: remember that they also deal with civil aviation (therefore aircraft, not rockets).
So please take off your conspiracy hat and look into things properly before making silly statements. Oh yes, and stop watching Fox 'News' (or your far right wing media of choice).
That headline is not quite professional. The more accurate, nuanced one would be:
"Elon Musk's SpaceX dumps on regulators for grounding Elon Musk's Starship, jeopardizing USA's position in the space race with China"
/s
Just to be clear (if the "/s" was not clear enough) I was just making fun of click-baiting titles (in general. If you ignore "slams" this one is not that bad). I'm not a SpaceX or Elon Musk hater.
But if you think the attempt at humor was lame, then, by all means, downvote me to oblivion 😅
Just the Biden Administration trying to fuck Elon - again.
I don't remember Biden being the head of the FAA and the F&W
Not too bright, are you?
What previous times has he? This seems like a pretty odd statement
Please tell the people under which party was SpaceX selected for the crew program? Under who contracted starship for Artemis? and under who approved starships first flight?
Happened long before Biden, didn't it.
Wow, that sure got the bots out in force.
Technically the truth.
Well, there you have it. In all probability we may not see another launch this year! Christmas is comin fast! Space X's biggest mistake? Building a complex like that in the middle of a nature reserve!
Because we absolutely have a barren wasteland to choose! /s
Acronyms, initialisms, abbreviations, contractions, and other phrases which expand to something larger, that I've seen in this thread:
NOTE: Decronym for Reddit is no longer supported, and Decronym has moved to Lemmy; requests for support and new installations should be directed to the Contact address below.
Decronym is a community product of r/SpaceX, implemented by ^request
18 acronyms in this thread; the most compressed thread commented on today has 51 acronyms.
[Thread #8145 for this sub, first seen 19th Oct 2023, 21:13] [FAQ] [Full list] ^[Contact] [Source code]
It is not about the launches. It is about the reentries.
SpaceX should move quickly Starship to JFK or a military base where those FCC and licensing are not required for prototypes, because airspace is already restricted.
*Elon dominance in space
I predicted 4 months ago that these reviews would take at least 6 months. Got massively downvoted but looks like I’m right.
Been around and have seen this many times now unfortunately.