Tag: regulation

SpaceX completes six-engine static fire test of Starship prototype #25

9:43 am

SpaceX yesterday successfully completed a six-engine static fire test of Starship prototype #25, the prototype that will be stacked on top of Superheavy prototype #9 and flown on the next orbital test flight.

Musk said in an interview on Saturday that more than a thousand upgrades were planned before the next flight of the Starship/Super Heavy. Including a significant change to the stage separation system that will see the Starship ignite its engines while still attached to the Super Heavy. Improvements are also being made to the Raptor engines to prevent leaks of super-heated gas which resulted in multiple engine failures during the April launch.

Major repair work and modifications are also underway to the Starship launch pad, after extensive damage occurred during the April 20 test flight.

Musk has also said the company will be ready to launch by August. While it is certainly possible that engineering will cause a slight delay to that schedule, more likely SpaceX will be ready, and then have to sit and wait for the FAA and the Biden administration to issue a launch permit. I am predicting it will not be issued by then, and likely not for months afterward.

4 comments

Will the wreck of the submersible Titan and the death of its five passengers impact space tourism?

10:57 am

OceanGate's Titan submersible
OceanGate’s Titan submersible

Three articles today all asked the same question as I pose above in the headline, noting the similarity in the business model of the deepsea tourism company OceanGate Expeditions and the burgeoning space tourism business, including both suborbital and orbital flights.

Without question there will be many more such articles in the coming days, as more information is gathered about what caused the failure of the Titan. As these three articles do, all will note the similarities and differences between deep sea tourism and space tourism.

First the differences. » Read more

34 comments

Update on SpaceX’s work leading to next Starship/Superheavy test launch

10:29 am

Link here. A static fire engine test program has begun for Starship prototype #25, which will fly on top of a Superheavy prototype. Also, work on the launchpad, badly damaged by the first test flight in April, has proceeded quickly.

During the first integrated test flight of Starship, Super Heavy Booster 7’s 30 working engines dug a sizable hole under the OLM [Orbital Launch Mount] during liftoff. The first images of it pictured a dramatic scene and pointed at some tough repair work ahead for SpaceX teams. Over the last two months, the hole was covered and reinforcements have been installed deep into the ground to strengthen the soil.

More recently, teams have been installing several tons of rebar underneath the OLM. While some rebar remains to be installed, as seen from aerial pictures captured by NSF, this work is expected to be finished soon and should be followed by a convoy of concrete trucks to fill up the pit. SpaceX will then install water-cooled steel plates over this concrete which will help support them and serve as an anchor for them.

The update also describes the numerous additional prototypes SpaceX is building at Boca Chica for further flight tests. It also notes this disturbing fact about the company’s planned Starship/Superheavy launch facility in Florida:

Work on the second set of tower sections, chopsticks, carriage system, and QD arm at SpaceX’s Roberts Road facility has come to a halt. Contractor equipment has visibly disappeared and other construction equipment has been removed. The Florida Mega Bay parts have also made their way to Starbase, becoming the second Mega Bay at the Texas facility. The two big cranes that were previously at Roberts Road were also moved to Starbase to aid in the construction of that new Mega Bay.

On top of this, SpaceX has changed the use of the building previously thought to be the factory for Starship sections. This facility is now being used to process Starlink payload integration with Falcon 9’s fairings.

This slow down is probably because NASA has forbidden Starship/Superheavy launches from this launchpad because it is near the launchpad SpaceX uses for NASA’s manned missions. The agency wants SpaceX to be able to launch Dragon from its other more distant pad, and that work needs to be completed first before the Starship/Superheavy pad can be used.

8 comments

FAA finally reduces airspace restrictions for some launches out of Cape Canaveral

9:46 am

On June 15, 2023 FAA announced that it has at last reduced the airspace restrictions for some launches out of Cape Canaveral, thus allowing more launches while reducing the disruption to commercial airline traffic.

The move is part of broader efforts to address the conflicts between launches and commercial aviation, particularly in Florida’s congested airspace. In April, the FAA released a set of factors when considering whether to allow a launch to proceed or ask the launch company to identify alternative windows for the launch.

Among those factors are the timing of the launch, particularly relative to holidays or other special events that cause increases in air traffic, and the duration of the launch window. “The FAA encourages commercial space operations to take place during nighttime hours (to the extent practicable) when other flight operations tend to be reduced,” the guidelines state.

I say “at last” because SpaceX have been pushing for this reduction for years. It knows its rockets will fly very reliably, and even if a rare failure forces their destruction, the territory threatened is much smaller than what was once considered necessary in the past. It just took years to get the federal bureaucracy to recognize these facts.

3 comments

World Economic Forum decides its business is running space too!

8:13 am

We’re the government and we’re here to help you! The World Economic Forum (WEF) yesterday released its proposed new set of guidelines for mitigating space junk in orbit, even though some of the most important commercial satellite operators (SpaceX and Viasat) have not signed on.

The Space Industry Debris Mitigation Recommendations document, released by the WEF June 13, outlines recommendations to avoid collisions that can create debris by limiting the lifetime of satellites in orbit after they have completed their missions and improving coordination among satellite operators.

Among those recommendations is to establish a success rate for “post-mission disposal,” or removal of satellites from orbit after the end of their missions, to 95% to 99%. That disposal should be completed no more than five years after the end of each satellite’s mission.

You can read the guidelines here [pdf], which the WEF is pushing governments worldwide to adopt. Though SpaceX and Viasat have not signed on, 27 companies have endorsed the guidelines, including OneWeb, Airbus, Axiom, and a host of orbital tug and space junk removal startups, the latter of which all benefit from these guidelines.

While the proposals makes some sense, everyone in the space industry should remain skeptical, and resist the call for more government regulation. Once this power is given to government it will never be recanted, and will only grow with time. Moreover, all signs indicate that such interference by law by government is unnecessary. Both satellite operators and most rocket companies (the exception mostly China) have been making strong efforts to deal with the issue of space junk, for profit. The fact that there are a host of orbital tug and space junk startups right now illustrates this. Investors have realized there is money to be made removing satellites and space junk. They don’t need government telling them what to do.

6 comments

New House bill proposes giving FAA responsibility for monitoring space junk

10:10 am

A just proposed House bill for reauthorizing the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) also proposes giving that agency the responsibility for monitoring space junk.

The bill instructs the FAA to establish a program to track objects “that are potential sources of covered airborne debris” with a focus on identifying those about to reenter and could pose a risk to aircraft in airspace. That program would coordinate with the FAA’s air traffic control system to identify airspace that needs to be closed for a reentry. It would allow the FAA to establish its own space situational awareness (SSA) facilities and work with other federal agencies, companies or international organizations for data on such objects.

While the focus of the bill is tracking debris to assess airspace risks, the bill does enable additional uses of the data the FAA collects. In particular, it directs the FAA to offer “a basic level of data, information, and services” at no charge. That includes maintaining a public catalog of space objects and “emergency conjunction notifications” of such objects.

The article at the link notes that this new FAA job would also duplicate work of the Space Force, as well as a new Commerce Department office tasked with similar responsibilities. It also duplicates the same responsibilities the FCC has created for itself, outside of its statutory authority.

In other words, there is a factional turf war going on within the swamp, with each faction attempting to establish its territory and control over this work.

The result? Expect Congress to allow this duplication to go forward, funding all three efforts. As we all know, money grows on trees, and hiring as many Washington bureaucrats is the most important thing Congress can do, even if those bureaucrats don’t do anything useful.

5 comments

The evidence shows clearly that Biden has worked to squelch Elon Musk and SpaceX

12:41 pm

Starship #15 about to land
Starship prototype #15, during its successful suborbital test flight in May 2021

The public concerns expressed last week by one NASA official about the regulatory delays caused by the FAA to SpaceX’s Starship/Superheavy development program illustrated once again my sense that there had been a stark change in how SpaceX was being regulated by the federal government, from the Trump to the Biden administration. Under Trump, SpaceX was moving fast, launching test flights frequently. Under Biden, all such test flights appeared to grind to a halt.

For example, it seemed to me that during the Trump administration the FAA allowed SpaceX to complete its investigations of explosions or launch failures quickly, so they could proceed as quickly to another test launch, sometimes only weeks later. After the first orbital test flight of Superheavy/Starship on April 20, 2023, however, the FAA responded quite differently, demanding the right to oversee a full investigation that it also implied would take many months.

Others have disputed this assertion. For example, space reporter Doug Messier commented about my analysis, stating that the FAA’s insistence on a lengthy investigation into the April 20, 2023 Superheavy/Starship orbital test flight failure was simply standard procedure. “I don’t think this represents any change in policy. This is how it’s been done for years,” Messier wrote. “It’s easy to scapegoat FAA as THE cause of the problem, and speculate about nefarious actions by the Biden Administration.”

Who is right? Am I being paranoid? Or is Messier being naive? As Howard Cosell used to say on Monday Night Football, “Let’s go to the videotape!” Or in this case, let’s take a hard detailed look at how SpaceX’s test program for Starship/Superheavy came to a screeching halt when Joe Biden took over the White House from Donald Trump.

From 2018, when SpaceX began first cutting metal on Starship prototypes, to May 2021, the company did eight suborbital test flights and at least six tank and static fire engine tests, with some resulting in explosive destruction. Below is a list of those tests (There were more such engine and tank tests during that time, but these were ones I could quickly find).
» Read more

37 comments

NASA worried FAA launch permit delays to Starship/Superheavy will delay first lunar landing

10:36 am

During a public meeting on June 7, 2023, a NASA official expressed concerns that the FAA’s slow launch permit process for SpaceX’s test program for developing Starship/Superheavy will end up seriously delaying the first Artemis manned lunar landing, presently targeting a December 2025 launch date.

The official, Jim Free, was very careful how he worded his comments, but the FAA issue loomed large in his mind.

Free said NASA met with the Federal Aviation Administration recently to discuss the importance of the Starship rocket to the space agency’s moon exploration plans. The FAA is overseeing SpaceX’s investigation into the problems encountered on the April 20 test launch, when the flight termination system took longer to destroy the rocket than expected. The destruct system is designed to terminate the flight before an errant rocket threatens populated areas.

The FAA is not expected to grant SpaceX another Starship launch license until the investigation is complete, and federal regulators are satisfied with changes to the rocket to address any public safety concerns. “They just have to get flying,” Free said of SpaceX. “When you step back and you look at (it), that’s a lot of launches to get those missions done, so our FAA partners are critical to that.”

For the FAA to treat SpaceX’s test program like ordinary launches, requiring a detailed investigation by it after every test flight, will likely delay the development of Starship/Superheavy by years.

Following the early suborbital tests of Starship, the FAA did not “oversee” the investigations. The FAA merely observed closely SpaceX’s investigation, and let it move forward when SpaceX was satisfied. Now the FAA wants to determine for itself when each launch will occur, even though there is no one at the FAA truly qualified to do that. The result will be endless delays and paperwork, and many fewer flights spaced many more months apart, none of which will do anything to aid the development.

NASA is obviously trying to get the FAA to see this, but we must remember that the change in policy at the FAA almost certainly came from the Biden administration, which doesn’t care as much for getting to the Moon as it does wielding its power to hurt Elon Musk, whom it now sees as a political opponent. Expect NASA’s pleas to fall on deaf ears.

22 comments

SpaceX confirms Starship prototype to fly on next Superheavy test flight

9:19 am

SpaceX has confirmed that it will use Starship prototype #25 to fly on top of Superheavy prototype #9 on the next orbital test flight.

Starship #25 does not include a lot of the upgrades that have been installed on later Starship prototypes, but by using it SpaceX tells us its focus on that next orbital test flight will be to test Superheavy. Using this less capable Starship gets it used and out of the way so that the kinks in Superheavy can more quickly be worked out.

It also means SpaceX’s prime focus on that second flight will not be reaching orbit, though the company will try nonetheless.

The article at the link also notes that this next orbital test cannot take place any sooner than August, based simply on engineering requirements.

Ship 25 is now at the launch site and awaiting a six-engine static fire test, with Elon Musk noting the pad modifications should be complete in a month, ahead of another month of testing before the next test flight.

This gives the FAA two full months to approve the launch license. I predict however that come August, that launch license will still not be approved, and we will still have no clear idea of when that approval will come. Nor should we be surprised if approval does not come before the end of this year.

2 comments

Spaceport startup launches small amateur rockets from ship

9:56 am

A company dubbed The Spaceport Company on May 22, 2023 launched two small amateur rockets from a ship in the Gulf of Mexico in order to demonstrate the logistics of such launches in advance of developing a floating launchpad.

The Spaceport Company, based in northern Virginia, launched on Monday 4-inch and 6-inch diameter rockets from a vessel about 30 miles south of Gulfport, Miss. The one-year-old company wanted to demonstrate its operations and logistics, which included getting approval from federal regulators, before developing larger floating platforms that would send satellites into orbit.

These offshore launches, as small as they were, were the first such ocean launches in U.S. history.

It appears that the company wants to offer an alternative launch option that might avoid the problems created by regulators in the UK that destroyed Virgin Orbit.

7 comments

Three government agencies now investigating the safety of methane-fueled rockets

9:42 am

We’re here to help you! It appears that three different federal agencies have been tasked to investigate the safety of methane-fueled rockets, which SpaceX, Relativity, Blue Origin, and others are beginning to use for their rockets. It burns cleaner and with more power than kerosene and is easier to handle than hydrogen.

Yet, the federal government under Biden now seems worried a new innovation in rocketry is being developed. First, the FAA is studying the explosive potential of such rockets, according to Brian Rushforth, the manager of the innovation division.

The FAA has set up a test stand at the Dugway Proving Ground in Utah. A crane 43 meters tall will be used to drop stainless steel containers containing mixtures of LOX and methane. A series of tests is planned to start in June on three-week intervals to measure the explosive power of that propellant combination. A second phase, tentatively scheduled for next year, will conduct similar tests with varying velocities. He said the data from those tests will be shared with other government agencies, such as NASA and the U.S. Space Force, along with launch vehicle developers.

Meanwhile, NASA and the Space Force are jointly doing a separate study on how methane-fueled rockets threaten the launch range and other nearby launchpads.

In all three cases it can be argued that these studies make sense. It also can be argued that the Biden administration is putting pressure on these agencies to find ways to squelch this new technology, especially because it is central to the development of SpaceX’s Superheavy/Starship rocket, and there is real hostility in Democrat/leftist circles to Elon Musk. This latter argument is further strengthened when you consider the explosive possibilities of hydrogen fuel, used by the space shuttle for decades as well as NASA’s SLS rocket. I can’t imagine its danger is less than methane. If hydrogen has been determined to be okay why should methane now be considered a threat?

Either way, we can be sure of one thing: These studies will slow down development by SpaceX and others of these new methane-fueled rockets. They will also provide ammunition for outside environmental groups who want to file further lawsuits against these companies to stop their rockets from launching.

11 comments

Pushback: Three teachers blacklisted by Rhode Island for refusing the jab score total victory in court

12:24 pm

Rhode Island: haven to oppression
Oppressive Rhode Island

Bring a gun to a knife fight: After a legal battle lasting more than a year, three teachers in Rhode Island have won a full victory in court after their school district fired them for refusing the COVID jab in 2021.

The school committee has agreed to full reinstatement with back pay, as well as attorney’s fees, it announced today: “The three teachers have the opportunity to return to teaching positions within the Barrington School District should they choose to do so, at the steps they would have been at had they worked continuously. Each individual will receive a payment of $33,333, along with back payments: Stephanie Hines ($65,000), Kerri Thurber ($128,000), and Brittany DiOrio ($150,000). Attorney fees totaling $50,000 will be paid to the teachers’ legal counsel.”

Piccirilli says the school has also agreed to pay punitive damages totaling $100,000 to be split three ways among the teachers. The teachers’ two-year battle with the district also took a toll on their names and reputations. The agreement requires their termination records to be expunged, Piccirilli explained today in an interview.

The teachers have been made whole in every respect, he says. It is as if they were never fired. [emphasis mine]

These three teachers join the small select group of blacklisted individuals who lost their jobs because they refused the jab but later won in court. Sadly, they are the exception, not the rule. In general, the vast majority of people hurt by all the COVID mandates — from lockdowns to jab mandates — have not been made whole. For example, even though the Biden administration has lost in court repeatedly over its attempt to force government employees to get the jab, it continues to refuse to rehire the many military and civilian employees it fired. In the case of the military this refusal is even more insane and petty, as the Pentagon has been in the last few years falling far short of its recruitment quotas.

Note also that the full announcement by the Barrington school district (available here) not only admits no error, it even underlines how correct it considered its draconian policies. Despite extensive data beginning in the summer of 2021 that the various COVID shots did nothing to prevent transmission, the district still claims everything it did was proper. To quote:
» Read more

10 comments
1 … 27 28 29 30 31 … 175