FAA releases proposed environmental assessment of Boca Chica permitting more Starship/Superheavy launches
Superheavy/Starship lifting off on March 14, 2024
In advance of several planned public meetings, the FAA today released [pdf] its proposed environmental assessment of SpaceX’s proposal to increase the number of orbital launches allowed per year from Boca Chica from 5 to 25.
The report makes for some fascinating reading. First and foremost it indicates the FAA’s general approval of this new launch cadence. That approval however must also be given by the public in comments at those meetings, as well as by the National Park Service (NPS), U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), the U.S. Coast Guard (USCG), and the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA). Expect serious objections from the NPS and USFSW, both of which have acted to slow or stop SpaceX in the past, when each was given the opportunity. Both have a new opportunity here.
The report also indicates that SpaceX is considering building new drone ships for Superheavy and Starship landings, once it has completed the development program where both land or crash in the ocean. The company “anticipates no more than 20 explosive events at the surface of the water for each vehicle for the life of the program. These scenarios would occur within the first five years of the program.” That it is considering drone ship landings for Superheavy is intriguing, as this would require some form of tower capture system on the drone ship, making that ship a very spectacular item indeed.
Also revealed in the report is some significant delays in any Superheavy/Starship launches out of Florida, where the FAA and the military are both doing new environmental impact statements. No approvals are expected before “late 2025”, which means SpaceX will not be able to resume construction until then. The impact on the schedule of NASA’s Artemis program will thus be significant. This almost certainly pushes back that manned lunar landing several years, possibly into the 2030s (something I have long been predicting).
The report also includes a large section detailing the potential impact of this increased launch rate on many local wildlife species, a section that is in general utter crap. While it is possible that rocket launches at Boca Chica might have an negative effect on some wildlife, the evidence from the past seven decades at both Cape Canaveral and Vandenberg says it will not. Instead the presence of the spaceport will be in general a positive thing. It will create a wildlife refuge where these species will prosper, as they have in Florida and California.
Nonetheless, the NPS and Fish&Wildlife will spend a lot of time trying to say otherwise, and thus to limit or block SpaceX.
We shall have to wait and see how this red tape plays out. Without doubt its main consequence will be to delay development of Superheavy and Starship, with grave consequences for both NASA and SpaceX.
The support of my readers through the years has given me the freedom and ability to analyze objectively the ongoing renaissance in space, as well as the cultural changes -- for good or ill -- that are happening across America. Four years ago, just before the 2020 election I wrote that Joe Biden's mental health was suspect. Only in the past two weeks has the mainstream media decided to recognize that basic fact.
Fourteen years ago I wrote that SLS and Orion were a bad ideas, a waste of money, would be years behind schedule, and better replaced by commercial private enterprise. Even today NASA and Congress refuses to recognize this reality.
In 2020 when the world panicked over COVID I wrote that the panic was unnecessary, that the virus was apparently simply a variation of the flu, that masks were not simply pointless but if worn incorrectly were a health threat, that the lockdowns were a disaster and did nothing to stop the spread of COVID. Only in the past year have some of our so-called experts in the health field have begun to recognize these facts.
Your help allows me to do this kind of intelligent analysis. I take no advertising or sponsors, so my reporting isn't influenced by donations by established space or drug companies. Instead, I rely entirely on donations and subscriptions from my readers, which gives me the freedom to write what I think, unencumbered by outside influences.
Please consider supporting my work here at Behind the Black.
You can support me either by giving a one-time contribution or a regular subscription. There are five ways of doing so:
1. Zelle: This is the only internet method that charges no fees. All you have to do is use the Zelle link at your internet bank and give my name and email address (zimmerman at nasw dot org). What you donate is what I get.
2. Patreon: Go to my website there and pick one of five monthly subscription amounts, or by making a one-time donation.
3. A Paypal Donation:
5. Donate by check, payable to Robert Zimmerman and mailed to
Behind The Black
c/o Robert Zimmerman
P.O.Box 1262
Cortaro, AZ 85652
You can also support me by buying one of my books, as noted in the boxes interspersed throughout the webpage or shown in the menu above. And if you buy the books through the ebookit links, I get a larger cut and I get it sooner.
“Captain Obvious”
As Robert observes, “[t]he impact on the schedule of NASA’s Artemis program will thus be significant. This almost certainly pushes back that manned lunar landing several years, possibly into the 2030s (something I have long been predicting).” And, [w]ithout doubt its main consequence will be to delay development of Superheavy and Starship, with grave consequences for both NASA and SpaceX.”
Exactly. Can we now just state what is becoming increasingly obvious? This administration, for whatever reasons, does not really *want / intend* to go back to the moon, and they have adopted this passive aggressive methodology to insure that it doesn’t happen.
Meanwhile, the Chinese comrades apparently *are* very serious about establishing bases / colonies on the moon, and that seems perfectly fine with the lovely people behind the Harris-Biden Administration. What conclusions might be drawn from this?
Quote “What conclusions might be drawn from this?”
Elon didn’t pay the 10% for the Big Guy.
No approvals are expected before “late 2025”, which means SpaceX will not be able to resume construction until then.
They’ve been saying that consistently about the EIS’s for the two locations at the Cape all along, actually.
Which, yes, is very disappointing. But it’s no worse than the norm for an EIS timeline like this, and better than some (which says something about how the FAA and these other agencies work). It is clear, at any rate, that a lot of work will be done nonetheless by SpaceX at the LC-39A location, where the launch tower is already largely complete, and work has recently resumed on ground infrastructure. That may at least accelerate *its* timeline when the EIS is finally granted, if not for the SLC-37/SLC-50 locations. Until then, all Starship launch tests are going to have to be done from Boca Chica, which is no doubt why SpaceX is working double tides to get the second orbital launch pad into operation as quickly as possible.
Exactly. Can we now just state what is becoming increasingly obvious? This administration, for whatever reasons, does not really *want / intend* to go back to the moon, and they have adopted this passive aggressive methodology to insure that it doesn’t happen.
Honestly, whilst they obviously hate and loathe Elon Musk now, I don’t think anyone at the White House cares much about Artemis either way (though they seem to moderately appreciate the diplomatic leverages of the Artemis Accords, as they interpret them). But if NASA does not swing much stick in the administration, the Defense Department certainly does. And DoD sees at least as much value in Starship as NASA does, if not more! Odds are, in fact, that the DoD will end up spending *a lot* more on Starship operations than NASA will over the next ten years. Heaven knows, DoD and NRO would be completely up the creek sans paddles if it weren’t for Falcon 9 right now!
So this leaves Biden’s team (and if she is elected, God help us, Harris’s) in a sticky jam. They get hard pushback from across the river and at Fort Meade if they get too obvious throwing spanners into SpaceX’s gears. The result seems to be opting for more indirect forms of lawfare, with various employment enforcement actions or selective leaks to friendly media that could slowly bleed SpaceX or even intimidate Elon while, they hope, other more docile launch providers eventually emerge to supply enough of the deficit for DoD’s needs. Even this might be crediting them with more actual planning or cleverness than they deserve, though.
Agreed Richard M
If anything I expect Harris to embrace space–you have to be pro-something.
The gender/race thing is getting old with voters.