FAA administrator claims SpaceX wasn’t following regulations; SpaceX says that’s false
FAA administrator Mike Whitaker today to SpaceX:
“Nice company you have there. Shame if something
happened to it.”
In a hearing today before the House transportation committee, the FAA administrator Mike Whitaker claimed repeatedly that the red tape his agency has imposed on SpaceX, as well as the fines it recently imposed on the company, were due to safety concerns as well as SpaceX not following the regulations and even launching without a license.
Mike Whitaker, the administrator of the FAA, told lawmakers on the House Transportation Committee that his decision to delay SpaceX’s launch for a few months is grounded in safety, and defended the $633,000 fine his agency has proposed against SpaceX as the “only tool” the FAA has to ensure that Musk’s company follows the rules.
… [Kevin Kiley (R-California)] argued those reviews don’t have anything to do with safety, prompting Whitaker to shoot back: “I think the sonic boom analysis [related to returning Superheavy back to Boca Chica] is a safety related incident. I think the two month delay is necessary to comply with the launch requirements, and I think that’s an important part of safety culture.”
When Kiley asked what can be done to move the launch up, Whitaker said, “complying with regulations would be the best path.”
SpaceX immediately responded with a detailed letter, published on X, stating in summary as follows:
FAA Administrator Whitaker made several incorrect statements today regarding SpaceX. In fact, every statement he made was incorrect.
The letter then detailed very carefully the falseness of each of Whitaker’s claims. You can read images of the letter here and here. The company noted:
It is deeply concerning that the administrator does not appear to have accurate information immediately available to him with respect to SpaceX licensing matters.
Based on SpaceX’s detailed response, it appears its lawyers are extremely confident it has a very good legal position, and will win in court. Moreover, the politics strongly argue in favor of fighting now. Though such a fight might delay further Superheavy/Starship test launches in the near term, in the long run a victory has a good chance of cleaning up the red tape for good, so that future work will proceed without this harassment.
Whitaker’s testimony also suggests strongly that he — a political appointee by the Biden administration –is likely the source of many of the recent delays and increased red tape that SpaceX has been forced to endure. He clearly thinks he knows better than SpaceX on these technical areas, even though his education and work history has never had anything to do with building rockets.
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.
FAA administrator Mike Whitaker today to SpaceX:
“Nice company you have there. Shame if something
happened to it.”
In a hearing today before the House transportation committee, the FAA administrator Mike Whitaker claimed repeatedly that the red tape his agency has imposed on SpaceX, as well as the fines it recently imposed on the company, were due to safety concerns as well as SpaceX not following the regulations and even launching without a license.
Mike Whitaker, the administrator of the FAA, told lawmakers on the House Transportation Committee that his decision to delay SpaceX’s launch for a few months is grounded in safety, and defended the $633,000 fine his agency has proposed against SpaceX as the “only tool” the FAA has to ensure that Musk’s company follows the rules.
… [Kevin Kiley (R-California)] argued those reviews don’t have anything to do with safety, prompting Whitaker to shoot back: “I think the sonic boom analysis [related to returning Superheavy back to Boca Chica] is a safety related incident. I think the two month delay is necessary to comply with the launch requirements, and I think that’s an important part of safety culture.”
When Kiley asked what can be done to move the launch up, Whitaker said, “complying with regulations would be the best path.”
SpaceX immediately responded with a detailed letter, published on X, stating in summary as follows:
FAA Administrator Whitaker made several incorrect statements today regarding SpaceX. In fact, every statement he made was incorrect.
The letter then detailed very carefully the falseness of each of Whitaker’s claims. You can read images of the letter here and here. The company noted:
It is deeply concerning that the administrator does not appear to have accurate information immediately available to him with respect to SpaceX licensing matters.
Based on SpaceX’s detailed response, it appears its lawyers are extremely confident it has a very good legal position, and will win in court. Moreover, the politics strongly argue in favor of fighting now. Though such a fight might delay further Superheavy/Starship test launches in the near term, in the long run a victory has a good chance of cleaning up the red tape for good, so that future work will proceed without this harassment.
Whitaker’s testimony also suggests strongly that he — a political appointee by the Biden administration –is likely the source of many of the recent delays and increased red tape that SpaceX has been forced to endure. He clearly thinks he knows better than SpaceX on these technical areas, even though his education and work history has never had anything to do with building rockets.
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.
Ship 30 is currently stacked on the launch pad under booster 12. Any chance there will be a flight 5 soon, flying under the approved flight 4 profile?
https://youtu.be/NoYuXCDWSq8?si=Oi6c2n-iyueL0WTW
“He clearly thinks he knows better than SpaceX on these technical areas, even though his education and work history has never had anything to do with building rockets.”
I disagree, this is not technical or safety related, and that person knows it.
Whitaker is probably so deranged he can only see his psychotic truths over any facts. Saving democracy, hitler, racism, and misinformation; that is what this hero is doing.
Dear FAA admin –
WE don’t need no stinkin BAHDJUS.
Turn us lose, and we will make Space Travel Great Again. !
(subject to E.M.’s approval)
A.
You fought in the meme wars?
https://t.ly/tKKzb
(language)
Kind of scary to me how uninformed the space public is on this FAA/SpaceX debate. When I sample the comments on YouTube and Twitter few discuss the fact that SpaceX is approved to send Starship from Boca into orbit and land in the Indian ocean. That is hardly the stuff of the assertion of many of the comments, that SpaceX is deliberately being blocked by the FAA.
And yeah, the FAA blocking the tower landing out of concern for the sonic boom makes no sense either. After all, the best way to measure the effect of the boom is to do just that. Allow the tower landings and tally the wildlife carnage.
The ostensible FAA concerns are water deluge, sonic boom and public safety from a returning booster RUD. The water thing can’t be a show stopper since the water is used during the already approved launch. The sonic boom could be a problem, but the best way to know if it is is to observe the effects in real time. And SpaceX can answer public safety concerns by proceeding with the FAA approved flight 5 and executing a flawless booster landing in the Gulf.
Allow the tower landings and tally the wildlife carnage.
There’s been so much wildlife carnage already at Boca Chica, after all, LOL
And SpaceX can answer public safety concerns by proceeding with the FAA approved flight 5 and executing a flawless booster landing in the Gulf.
The loss of one raptor notwithstanding, I think IFT-4 demonstrated the ability of the booster to make a precision landing. I don’t think that’s the concern at this point. The question is what would be gained by a repeat of IFT-4 that could justify the expenditure of the resources and time involved (which are far from insignificant).
“… The question is what would be gained by a repeat of IFT-4 that could justify the expenditure of the resources and time involved (which are far from insignificant). …”
What would be gained is twofold. FAA approval for launch tower landing and critical testing of Starship. Is survival of Starship during reentry a given? The X-37B survives reentry. The space shuttle did not. Will Starship come back intact? I am under the impression that SpaceX has a lot of work to do before Starship is operational. Conducting a test flight now is like an obvious thing for SpaceX to do.