Elon Musk @elonmusk
He needs to resign
9:25 AM · Sep 25, 2024
https://x.com/elonmusk/status/1838978117072805999

Whittaker is completely. insufferable, a smarmy self-righteous jackass. (Please, don’t edit out the ‘colorful’ language.) I hope he’s getting a very good bonus for lying his head off

And this is the latest insanity: Seems that FAA now wants SpaceX to do an environmental hazard evaaluation of the new tiles, Because, you know, they could fall on someone’s head, And the material they’re made of could be dangerous.

I don’t know how anyone could see that last one as anything but harassment by the administration. They’ve been going fishing in the past…reminds me of that famous comment by Beria,”you show me the man, I’ll show you the crime”

Those Dalkon Shields were murder–like butterfly mines I suppose.

And yet…

The wreckage of SuperHeavy showed the outer ring of engines almost intact.

Part of me wonders if you could slid out ta kage..cargo…or even a second stage with annular platforms.

and:

“What would be gained is twofold. FAA approval for launch tower landing and critical testing of Starship.”

Test flight 4 already accomplished a flawless booster landing. The FAA is not approving launch tower landing even with the success of Super Heavy on test flight 4, so another success would not gain FAA approval, either.

Since the public is well clear of the landing zone, there is no public safety concern — that is a red herring. Sonic booms are not a new phenomenon. Indeed, Falcon Heavy launches come with a pair of sonic booms during side-booster return to launch site. A sonic boom could be loud and scary, but the noise of launch is worse, and an exploding Starship at launch would be even worse than that. The sonic boom concern is another red herring. The water deluge merely adds more water to a swamp, so the deluge is a third red herring.

Testing of Starship can also be accomplished with the same test launch as a test of a tower landing, so why would SpaceX want to waste a launch only to have to wait yet another six months before it can move ahead in Starship’s development? The problem is that the FAA is now citing minor changes as reasons for long delays. It is also citing approved ground hardware as reasons to fine SpaceX. If the company allows government to run roughshod over it now, then government will always do so. We need this regulatory overreach to end now, and we need Part 450 to be implemented as intended: not as a further impediment but as a streamlined process.
____________
FAA administrator Mike Whitaker is projecting his own stupidity onto rocket scientists, showing just how stupid he really is. Lying to Congress shows that Whitaker also believes them to be stupid. Everyone knows that the FAA is following Obama’s instructions to punish the Democratic Party’s enemies and reward its friends, but Democrats think that this is the whole purpose of government. Democrats will do anything in order to get their way. For them the end justifies the means, allowing for lying to Congress and the public; cheating on elections; or assassinating opposition candidates, legislators (e.g. at baseball practice), or Supreme Court Justices (e.g. Chuck Schumer vs. Brett Kavanaugh) and the attempted assassination. Choosing winners and losers among America’s commerce is outside the scope of the FAA’s responsibilities and doing so is unprofessional.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RA7DLwZtYtA (13 minutes, Ellie in Space: “Elon Musk calls on FAA chief to resign after telling lies, according to SpaceX”)

Did he only use outside evidence sent to him to delay the flights or did he send his own people out to do investigations?

The food type of flies match whatever it is the fish are eating when you are chasing them. The better you match the food (size, shape, color, movement thru the water, action, etc), the more likely the fish is to hit the fly and try to eat.

Second type are attractants, which also trigger a strike. Lots of reasons fish will strike something when they aren’t hungry. Problem is the fish won’t tell you, but it happens often enough that you can figure it out over time. Protection of a nest from predators (salmon and sticklebacks) is one example.

Appears to me that SpaceX loud public response to FAA intransigence / speed-bumpery over the last month or so was intended to smoke out a public response from someone high in the FAA hierarchy. With this testimony, appears they were successful, giving SpaceX an opening in federal court for a TRO aimed at the FAA. Cheers –

“Whitaker is a private pilot, holds bachelor’s degrees in political science and French from the University of Louisville and a juris doctorate degree from Georgetown University Law Center,”

Ship 30 is currently stacked on the launch pad under booster 12.

Seems that what the FAA ought to really be looking into is how the heck that happened. :)

Richard M,

Carnage alright. There’s an obvious epidemic of avian obesity going on at Starbase from the ubiquitous native birds eating all the french fries and other leavings discarded by the ever-growing Starbase workforce. Loud noises don’t bother the wildlife. Sonic booms will just be interpreted as the latest type of dinner bell by our teeming furry and feathered friends at the Starbase sandspit. Or perhaps a hint by local crustacean “gangs” to swarm again as that always seems to be good for a viral video or two on social media. Arthropods gotta represent too.

As for the FAA, the time to confront a problem is when it first arises. The hirelings of the – one devoutly hopes – soon-to-be-ended Biden regime are, in essence, asserting that future American technological progress will not be allowed to proceed at a pace faster than bureaucracy. That needs to be slapped down good and hard and right now.

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.

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).

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.

Turn us lose, and we will make Space Travel Great Again. !

(subject to E.M.’s approval)

A.

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.