California officials: SpaceX shouldn’t be allowed to launch from Vandenberg because we hate Elon Musk

In voting yesterday to reject a plan by the military to increase the number of launches at Vandenberg Space Force Base in California, members of the California Coastal Commission admitted openly they did so because they do not like Elon Musk and his publicly stated political preferences.

The California Coastal Commission on Thursday rejected the Air Force’s plan to give SpaceX permission to launch up to 50 rockets a year from Vandenberg Air Force Base in Santa Barbara County.

“Elon Musk is hopping about the country, spewing and tweeting political falsehoods and attacking FEMA while claiming his desire to help the hurricane victims with free Starlink access to the internet,” Commissioner Gretchen Newsom said at the meeting in San Diego.

…“I really appreciate the work of the Space Force,” said Commission Chair Caryl Hart. “But here we’re dealing with a company, the head of which has aggressively injected himself into the presidential race and he’s managed a company in a way that was just described by Commissioner Newsom that I find to be very disturbing.”

It must be noted that this vote is not legally binding on the military. Though it has always tried to work in cooperation with this commission, it has the right to decide for itself how many launches it wants to allow out of Vandenberg. Whether it will defy the commission however is uncertain, and likely depends entirely on who wins the presidential election. If Harris wins, she will likely order the Space Force to not only obey the commission but to further limit launches by SpaceX at Vandenberg. If Trump wins, he will likely tell the Space Force to go ahead and expand operations, ignoring the immoral political machinations of these commissioners.

And it must be emphasized how immoral and improper these commissioners are. Their task is to regulate the use of the California coast in order to protect it for all future users, from beach-goers to rocket companies. It is not their right to block the coast’s use to certain individuals simply because those individuals have expressed political views they oppose. Not only does this violate Musk’s first amendment rights, it is an outright abuse of power.

If anyone in California reading this article wishes to tell these commissioners what they think of their actions yesterday, you can find their contact information here.

27 comments

Fringe activists in Texas sue SpaceX to prevent further launches of Starship/Superheavy

In an obvious attempt to block SpaceX’s effort to do the fifth Starship/Superheavy orbital test launch this coming weekend, a fringe activist group dubbed Save RGV has now sued the company, accusing it of using industrial wastewater in the launchpad’s deluge system that acts to minimize damage to the pad.

The suit, filed Wednesday in U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Brownsville Division, under the Clean Water Act (CWA), seeks declaratory and injunctive relief, the imposition of civil penalties and “other appropriate relief” to bring a halt to SpaceX’s “recurring, unpermitted discharges of untreated industrial wastewater from the deluge system at the SpaceX Boca Chica Launch Site into waters of the United States,” according to the suit.

According to SpaceX, water in the deluge system is potable drinking water. Moreover, in previous launches the company obtained all the proper licenses for its use, only to have the EPA subsequently step in and claim SpaceX had “violated the Clean Water Act in deploying the deluge system. The EPA did not assess a fine, but did order SpaceX to comply with federal regulations.” That action has forced the FAA to delay issuing any further launch licenses, even as of today.

I call Save RGV a fringe group because it has almost no support from within the Rio Grande Valley surrounding Boca Chica and Brownsville. That community is overwhelming in support of SpaceX’s efforts, and wants it to grow and expand, because of all the jobs and money it is bringing to the region.

This suit is clearly an attempt to forestall any launch license approval the FAA might want to issue for SpaceX’s desire to launch this weekend, on October 13, 2024. SpaceX is ready to go that day, and is now merely waiting for the FAA to “go!”.

17 comments

Vast unveils its first preliminary design for the interior of its Haven-1 space station

Artist's rendering of Haven-1 interior
Artist’s rendering of Haven-1 interior.
Click for original.

Vast today revealed its first preliminary design for the interior of its Haven-1 space station that it hopes to launch in the second half of 2026 and immediately occupy with four astronauts for a 30-day mission.

After docking with a SpaceX Dragon spacecraft, Haven-1 crew members open the Haven-1 exterior hatch and are greeted by a sleek, functional layout upon entry. A real-time display shows the station status with temperature and lighting controls, and optimized cargo compartments ensure essential supplies are stored efficiently. Notably, Haven-1’s interior surfaces are soft and padded to provide an added safety component for crew and visitors as they float throughout.

Above and below the corridor, the station’s four private crew quarters offer astronauts a space to rest and recharge. Slightly larger than the crew quarters aboard the ISS, these expanded personal rooms are uniquely designed to allow for changing, entertainment, online communication with loved ones back on Earth (enabled by SpaceX Starlink connectivity), and, most importantly, a good night’s rest. Experience has shown that sleeping in space can be a restless endeavor. Maximizing sleep efficiency and comfort remains critical to the overall experience aboard the Vast station. Historically, zero gravity sleep has been uncomfortable for astronauts due to a lack of standardized and consistent restraint systems during weightless sleep and a deficit in the distributed gravity forces humans are accustomed to on Earth. Vast’s patent-pending signature sleep system is roughly the size of a queen bed, provides a customized amount of equal pressure throughout the night, and accommodates side and back sleepers alike.

Additionally, each room features a built-in storage compartment, vanity, and a custom amenities kit

Beyond the corridor with the crew quarters is a common area which also includes a laboratory rack system on one wall, where experiments can be installed, monitored, and performed.

Overall the interior of this single module station in many ways harks back to the early Soviet Salyut stations, as the amount of interior space is somewhat comparable. One feature of Vast’s design however that is truly original is the use of “genuine safety-tested, fire-resistant maple wood veneer slats” on the interior’s walls.

Though definitely designed with that 30-day mission in mind, this first release clearly looks preliminary, with the graphics appearing far simpler than things will look in reality.

2 comments

SpaceX says it is targeting October 13, 2024 for 5th Starship/Superheavy launch

Superheavy being captured by the tower chopsticks at landing
Artist rendering of Superheavy being captured by
the tower chopsticks at landing. Click for video.

The hint last week that SpaceX might attempt its fifth test orbital launch of Starship/Superheavy launch by mid-October was confirmed yesterday by the company. It announced on its Starship/Superheavy webpage that it is now targeting October 13, 2024 for 5th Starship/Superheavy launch, “pending regulatory approval.”

SpaceX’s announcement noted that the flight’s primary goals will be an attempted chopstick landing of Superheavy at the launch tower in Boca Chica and a test of Starship’s ability to return and land using its newly redesigned heat shield.

The returning booster will slow down from supersonic speeds, resulting in audible sonic booms in the area around the landing zone. Generally, the only impact to those in the surrounding area of a sonic boom is the brief thunder-like noise with variables like weather and distance from the return site determining the magnitude experienced by observers.

Starship will fly a similar trajectory as the previous flight test with splashdown targeted in the Indian Ocean. » Read more

20 comments

FAA and the Biden administration proves it is out to destroy SpaceX

The FAA to SpaceX
The FAA to SpaceX “Nice company you got here.
Sure would be a shame if something happened to it.”

In the past week the FAA proved unequivocally that it is abusing its regulatory powers for political reasons, imposing much harsher regulatory restrictions on SpaceX while allowing other companies much more free rein.

That reality became most evident first with the FAA response to the serious failure of one of the strap-on solid-fueled boosters during the second test launch of ULA’s Vulcan rocket on October 4, 2024. During that launch something went seriously wrong with that booster 38 seconds after launch, involving an explosion and what appeared to be ejection of that booster’s nozzle. Though the launch succeeded in placing its payload into the correct orbit, it required the rocket’s main engines to compensate aggressively.

Despite this, the FAA decided no investigation by it was necessary.

The Federal Aviation Administration, which licenses commercial space launches in the United States, said in a statement that it assessed the booster anomaly and “determined no investigation is warranted at this time.” The FAA is not responsible for regulating launch vehicle anomalies unless they impact public safety.

This decision is correct, but the contrast with the FAA’s treatment of SpaceX is quite striking. If the FAA applied the absurd standard it has been using against SpaceX, it would claim that this Vulcan launch threatened public safety because the incident occurred 38 seconds after launch and was thus relatively close to Florida, where an out of control rocket could potentially threaten public safety.

Such a threat of course really doesn’t exist, as the FAA correctly concluded, because the rocket has a self-destruct system to prevent it from crashing in habitable areas.

Yet the agency failed to use this logic with SpaceX. Instead the FAA decided anything SpaceX launches that doesn’t work perfectly poses a serious public safety threat, no matter where or how it happens, and thus has repeatedly grounded SpaceX launches. A first stage, flown already 23 times, falls over after soft-landing successfully on its drone ship in the middle of the Atlantic, and somehow this justified the FAA grounding SpaceX due to the threat to public safety. A second stage, after successfully placing two astronauts into orbit, misfires during its de-orbit burn but still lands in the middle of the ocean, far from any habitable regions, and somehow this justified the FAA grounding SpaceX due to the threat to public safety.

And the fact that a Superheavy returning to its launchpad at Boca Chica will cause a sonic boom — as do every Falcon 9 landings at Cape Canaveral or Vandenberg — is now justification for grounding Starship/Superheavy test launches, even though sonic booms pose zero threat to anyone other than startling them with the sudden noise.

The FAA further illustrated its bias against SpaceX when it decided to allow the company to do its launch this morning of Europe’s Hera asteroid mission, but specifically stated that the company’s other launches remain grounded.
» Read more

38 comments

SpaceX launches Europe’s Hera asteroid mission

SpaceX today successfully launched the European Space Agency’s (ESA) Hera asteroid mission to the binary asteroid Didymos and Dimorphos, its Falcon 9 rocket lifting off from Cape Canaveral.

The first stage completed its 23rd rocket, but was not recovered in order to maximum the fuel used to send Hera on its proper route. The fairings completed their 13th and 19th flights respectively.

Hera will do a follow-up rendezvous with the binary asteroids to get a close-up look at the consequences of the Dart impact back in 2022 of Dimorphos.

The leaders in the 2024 launch race:

96 SpaceX
44 China
11 Russia
11 Rocket Lab

American private enterprise now leads the rest of the world combined in successful launches 113 to 67, while SpaceX by itself now leads the entire world, including American companies, 96 to 84.

For SpaceX, this launch ties the record the company set last year for the number of launches of a private company in a single year, and it did so in just more than three-quarters of the year. The company’s goal of 144 launches in 2024 remains possible, assuming the federal government stopped blocking its operations. For example, the FAA granted the company permission for this one launch, but maintained its grounding of further launches because an upper stage did not land safely in the ocean in the exact right spot.

0 comments

FAA: No Starship/Superheavy launch before late November

In response to speculation that the fifth Starship/Superheavy test launch could happen in mid-October — based on a recent notice to mariners from the Coast Guard, the FAA on Wednesday made it clear that its stonewalling of SpaceX will continue.

“We are not issuing launch authorization for a launch to occur in the next two weeks — it’s not happening,” an FAA spokesman said Wednesday afternoon. “Late November is still our target date.”

The report comes from the San-Antonio Express-News, and as is typical of the reporting in the propaganda press, the article only gives the FAA’s side of this story, making absolutely no mention of SpaceX’s detailed and very public objections. As far as this news outlet is concerned, the FAA is god, whatever it says must be true. So much for a skeptical free press whose goal is supposed to be to hold government accountable.

16 comments

European phone companies demand the FCC stop SpaceX’s cell-to-satellite Starlink plans

Several European phone companies have now submitted a request to the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) to block a waiver that would allow SpaceX to operate its new cell-to-satellite Starlink satellites at radio frequencies normally not permitted.

This request follows similar requests by Verizon and AT&T to the FCC. The fear is that the use of these frequencies in the low orbit of Starlink satellites will interfere with satellites in the much higher geosynchronous orbits that these phone companies presently use.

While those concerns might be valid (SpaceX says no), these companies also fear the competition of Starlink itself, as its low orbit means it can provide better service, and are clearly hoping the FCC will act to protect them from that competition.

In a more sane world, the FCC would decide this issue on purely technical grounds. It was formed expressly to police the frequencies so that users would not interfere or pirate each others licenses, and had done that job quite well for decades.

Sadly, the FCC no longer confines itself to this one job. For the past four years the FCC has arbitrarily decided its job should include many other things not listed in its statutory authority, such as policing the de-orbiting of satellites and determining the acceptable lifespans of orbiting spacecraft, while also making many decisions based entirely on political factors, sometimes even favoring some companies over others for partisan reasons.

Thus we should have no confidence that the FCC will make this decision on purely technical grounds, especially since it has shown a clear hostility to SpaceX in its recent decisions.

3 comments

Mid-October date for the 5th Starship/Superheavy test orbital launch?

A US Coast Guard announcement issued today includes a notice to mariners of a rocket launch window at Boca Chica from October 12th to October 19th, suggesting that SpaceX has gotten an update from the FAA that a launch license will be issued for those dates, more than a month earlier than previously predicted by the FAA.

It must be emphasized that this notice is from the Coast Guard, not the FAA. The FAA has said nothing new about SpaceX’s launch license application. This notice suggests several possiblilites, all or none of which may be true:

1. The FAA has told SpaceX privately that it expects to issue that license in time for a launch in two weeks, and SpaceX then moved quickly to get the Coast Guard in line.

2. SpaceX and the Coast Guard are working together to increase the pressure on the FAA to get out of the way.

3. The public condemnations of the FAA by SpaceX in the past few weeks have worked to force that agency to back off its hardnosed regulatory over-reach.

All of this is wild speculation. For all we know, this Coast Guard notice is something it always issues prior to major static fire tests at Boca Chica. We shall have to wait to get a better sense of what is happening.

Hat tip to reader Steve Richter.

4 comments

Gogo buys competitor Satcom Direct

Gogo, which provides internet access for business jets, has now purchased its main competitor Satcom Direct, in order to provide a service that can better compete with Starlink.

Satcom Direct would get $375 million in cash and five million shares from Gogo under a deal announced Sept. 30, subject to regulatory approvals, and up to $225 million in extra payments tied to performance targets over the next four years, suggesting around $636 million in maximum total proceeds.

Gogo has historically dominated the small and midsize part of the business aviation market and connects about 7,000 planes, according to William Blair analyst Louie DiPalma, while Satcom Direct has a commanding market share for long-haul.

Combined, William Blair estimates the companies are providing Wi-Fi to around 8,200 of the 9,200 business jets that currently have connectivity — or nearly 90% of the market.

Gogo’s share price has dropped 70% since 2022 in the face of Starlink’s recent signing of numerous airline companies. The stock market obviously thinks Starlink is eventually going to capture the business jet customer as well. This deal will possibly allow Gogo to compete more effectively.

8 comments

FAA grounds SpaceX again

According to a report in Reuters, the FAA yesterday announced that it has grounded SpaceX from any further launches, two days after SpaceX had already paused launches, the action triggered when the second stage of Saturday’s Falcon 9 launch to ISS failed to fire its de-orbit burn properly, thus causing the stage to splashdown outside its target zone in the Pacific.

This action is a perfect example of the FAA’s extraneous interference. SpaceX was already on the case. It doesn’t need the FAA to kibbitz it, since no one at the FAA has any qualifications for providing any useful advice. All the FAA accomplishes here is get in the way.

The FAA’s action also likely falls outside its statutory authority. The stage landed in the ocean, causing no damage or threat to public safety, the only areas the FAA’s authority resides. And if the agency now deems returning equipment part of its licensing requirements, why did it didn’t say anything about the uncertain nature of the return of Boeing’s Starliner capsule, which targeted a landing on land and could have easily ended up crashing in the wrong spot because its own thrusters were untrustworthy?

The FAA is playing favorites here, and needs to be reined in, badly.

7 comments

SpaceX pauses launches after de-orbit of Falcon 9’s second stage misfires

SpaceX today announced that, after its Falcon 9 rocket had successfully placed two astronauts in orbit in its Freedom capsule, the engine burn designed to de-orbit the rocket’s upper stage in a safe zone in the ocean misfired, and for this reason the company was scrubbing a planned launch today until the root cause was found.

After today’s successful launch of Crew-9, Falcon 9’s second stage was disposed in the ocean as planned, but experienced an off-nominal deorbit burn. As a result, the second stage safely landed in the ocean, but outside of the targeted area.

We will resume launching after we better understand root cause

The company provided no further details on exactly what happened. We know the engine fired, and the stage was successfully de-orbited safely over the ocean, but we do not know how far outside its target zone. Nor do we know the extent of the “off-nominal deorbit burn.”

At present today’s scrubbed launch, placing three satellites of Starlink’s competitor OneWeb into orbit, is scheduled for tomorrow, but that is likely a contigency scheduling. SpaceX’s launch teams have gotten very good at rescheduling launches day-to-day, so that as soon as it gets the go-ahead it can go ahead.

8 comments
1 44 45 46 47 48 234