SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
takyon (881)
takyonNO@SPAMsoylentnews.org
10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org] Jango Raid [soylentnews.org]
A fresh Starship scrub, apparently due to an FAA inspector not showing up on time.
https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1376558233624666120
FAA inspector unable to reach Starbase in time for launch today. Postponed to no earlier than tomorrow.
SpaceX Starship launch delayed to Tuesday by poor FAA planning
(Before the update in the story was added, the headline was changed to "SpaceX’s fourth high-altitude Starship launch pushed to Tuesday by FAA ineptitude". Now it has been softened a little.)
Update: CEO Elon Musk says that SpaceX’s fourth high-altitude Starship launch has been delayed from Monday to Tuesday after an FAA inspector – recently required to be onsite for launches – was inexplicably more than six hours late.
https://twitter.com/wapodavenport/status/1376564374870102026
Given the crazy high cadence of SpaceX Starship launches, you'd think the FAA would have an inspector down there permanently at this point.
While the smallest grain of salt is warranted given Musk’s recently vitriolic relationship with the FAA, the CEO has every reason not to lie about a federal regulatory agency that SpaceX almost fundamentally depends on. As such, the implication is that a lone FAA inspector – only recently required by the FAA itself to be onsite for SpaceX Starship launches – was somehow more than four or five hours away from Boca Chica, Texas by 11am CDT, March 29th.
The only possible explanation for such a delay is that a single inspector – lacking virtually any of the resources afforded to large government agency – missed a flight on a public airline, had a flight canceled at the last second, or was somehow stranded in the middle of nowhere by car issues. As any sane human familiar with air or car travel would know, those issues happen and should always be anticipated. Knowing full well that it had just changed SpaceX’s Starship launch license just two weeks prior to prevent flights without an inspector present, the FAA does not appear to have prepared for those issues in even the most basic sense, failing to ensure alternate methods of transport or two redundant inspectors.
Starship SN11 launch moved to Tuesday – Super Heavy BN1 rollout to follow
Starship SN11 is now tracking a Tuesday launch attempt. Following a second static fire on Friday morning, with the firing of the repaired SN46 Raptor, launch was set to take place later on Friday’s before scrubbed to allow for additional checkouts to take place, setting up a realigned Monday target, only for the launch to be moved to Tuesday after the FAA inspector failed to arrive on time.
[...] The new target was noted as Monday afternoon. However, Elon tweeted the required attendance of an FAA inspector – who had not arrived at Boca Chica in time – pushed the launch to Tuesday.
https://twitter.com/spacex360/status/1376559237124489217
Sue, sue, sue!
(Score: 2, Interesting) by fustakrakich on Monday March 29 2021, @06:11PM (9 children)
What did Musk do to piss them off?
Maybe this? [yahoo.com] They'll send the inspector when he answers the subpoena
La politica e i criminali sono la stessa cosa..
(Score: 2) by takyon on Monday March 29 2021, @09:08PM (3 children)
Whatever environmental assessment they originally got for the Boca Chica site isn't going to cut it in the long run. I think the FAA is concerned about the noise pollution of the exploding rockets too.
https://www.faa.gov/space/stakeholder_engagement/spacex_starship/ [faa.gov]
Musk also called out the FAA on Twitter during the last dustup.
https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1354862567680847876 [twitter.com]
[SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 2, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Monday March 29 2021, @09:17PM (2 children)
The violation that started this looks like they changed the rules after the fact. Now they require an on site inspector who doesn't bother to show up? When regulators start playing games like that it means that they are deliberately obstructing, looking for any excuse (or opportunity to create an excuse) to delay, increase costs, and if possible shut down the target. From the timing this is a power play by the Biden administration and the prime beneficiaries are Boeing and Lockheed Martin. SpaceX and their Starship are a direct threat to the established players, and they want it gone.
(Score: 2) by takyon on Tuesday March 30 2021, @03:54AM (1 child)
This may end up being a one day delay (to a day with better weather) that we forget about in the long run. I'm not convinced yet that the Biden administration or Bill Nelson are going to throw significant amounts of red tape at SpaceX.
But this is another warning sign after the January nonsense, and SpaceX is going to have more problems with the FAA's environmental assessment. I'm not sure that SpaceX will ever launch at a 6-24 hour pace from Boca Chica. I think they will have better luck launching from Florida, and could end up launching Starships from Texas, Florida, and California.
[SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday March 30 2021, @05:22AM
I hope so but I'm not confident. When a regulator wants to unfairly screw with you things can get nasty, and this is only what we're seeing in public. We don't know what is happening behind the scenes and this is a change not only from the Trump administration but also Obama. I don't recall Falcon development having these requirements, although there were arbitrary delays and double booking pad time, so this could just be that mess starting up again.
Boca Chica is in Texas and FAA is Federal so it won't matter what state they move to. It isn't about the place. It makes me wonder what kind of regulatory obstructionism they're going to hit those sea based launch platforms SpaceX is setting up.
Good regulation, like a good referee, isn't a political weapon. It is about making sure that everyone is playing fair. It shouldn't ever play favourites.
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Monday March 29 2021, @09:09PM (3 children)
The FAA crackdown started right after Biden's inauguration, and we also have two senators calling for tighter controls on all private launches, citing six 'mishaps' this year as the reason. The real reason is that the commercial launch sector is a direct threat to billions of dollars per year in no-bid cost plus government contracts. SLS alone is worth $2 billion per year and will be dead in the water if Starship becomes operational. The replacement of Bridenstein with Nelson declares Biden's opinion on that issue loud and clear.
(Score: 2) by takyon on Monday March 29 2021, @09:21PM (2 children)
Source?
Was Senator Jerry Moran one of them?
https://spacenews.com/op-ed-the-next-space-race/ [spacenews.com]
https://twitter.com/SciGuySpace/status/1374465831334125576 [twitter.com]
[SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 1, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday March 30 2021, @02:28AM (1 child)
(Score: 2) by takyon on Tuesday March 30 2021, @03:30AM
Thanks. Ok, so Mr. Six Mishaps is the FAA Administrator:
I'm not too worried about that. Representatives DeFazio and Larsen (who are not U.S. Senators) are the real assholes:
[SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday March 29 2021, @09:22PM
Maybe the inspector had a choice between a Max-8 or walk?
(Score: 2) by Socrastotle on Monday March 29 2021, @07:04PM (2 children)
"Artemis" is a kind of meh book by Andy Weir, guy who also wrote "The Martian." The plot basically comes down to a thriller on a near future colonization on the moon. The book was pandering hardcore for a Hugo, which means identity politics. So for instance the lead, Jazz, is a hyper-sexual Saudi girl (living on the moon). And her childhood best friend pen pal is a guy from Kenya, and the Kenya Space Administration is one of the leading forces for space in the world.
But the interesting thing is, that part isn't identity politics. Kenya is right on the equator, which means you get the maximal free speed boost when launching (for reasons outside the scope of this post), and right to the east of Kenya (which is the direction you want to launch towards) is nothing but the Indian Ocean so when things go boom as they occasionally do, that's okay. Realpolitik would never allow this to happen, but damned if Kenya isn't genuinely a dream spot to setup a space industry. Cheap labor, minimal regulations, one of the single best geographic location on Earth, and more.
It's at least fun to imagine such a thing happening. I mean it'd be great for just about everybody on Earth. Kenya gets some amazing development, space entrepreneurs get a dream location for setting up shop, the whole world advances into space even faster, and the FAA no longer has to to bother themselves with complex tasks like driving to places at prearranged times.
(Score: 2) by deimtee on Monday March 29 2021, @08:36PM (1 child)
If you really want the best spot for a launch site you flatten the top of Mt Kilimanjaro and put it there. Only 3 degrees from the equator and 5.8 km high. The Earth's spin is only about 450 m/s. 5.8 km of altitude is worth about 340 m/s, and it also lets you optimise the rockets for a lower air pressure.
No problem is insoluble, but at Ksp = 2.943×10−25 Mercury Sulphide comes close.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday March 29 2021, @10:28PM
I don't know about Mt Kilimanjaro. Is it a desert? That counts too. Condensation and ice are a huge problem. We need thick insulation on the cryogenic tanks. Phase change takes a lot of energy; plain air is less of a problem. (you could possibly liquefy the air but that is far less likely) We lost a space shuttle due to ice causing a chunk of foam to be heavy and break off. Lifting the insulation and associated condensation means a lot more weight.
For the USA, a good spot is southern Arizona. There is a high desert there.
The best place in the world is probably the Atacama Desert in Chile. It also has very low wind shear, which helps. Lots of launches are cancelled due to wind sheer. Turbulence is very minimal because the air passes over the Pacific Ocean (calming it down) and then simply rises upward over one simple mountain range.
(Score: 2) by Gaaark on Monday March 29 2021, @10:18PM
No surprise: he was stuck behind the Ever Given, looking at that damn bumper sticker reading "How's my driving? Call 555-POWERFAILURE-MY-ASS-I-WAS-DRUNK!"
--- Please remind me if I haven't been civil to you: I'm channeling MDC. ---Gaaark 2.0 ---
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday March 29 2021, @10:55PM (1 child)
They should just buy their own FAA inspector.
Oh, wait, that's exactly what happened with the presidency this time around.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday March 30 2021, @05:28AM
In a world where money buys political power even SpaceX can't afford to play that game against companies that make more in a year than they've made in their entire history and have spent half a century or more cultivating corrupt political allies to ensure that it stays that way. Remember that SpaceX is only here because they managed to get an honest judge for the commercial ISS supply contract lawsuit.