totm nov 2023 SpaceX Discussion Thread

[SpaceFace545]

5 minutes ago, RealKerbal3x said:

Exactly. It's a trade-off - if Starship works as intended, then the implications of that are way more important than a tiny village and a few square kilometres of wetland. 

also no, patiently no. I am screaming no. 

Just now, tater said:

(More than half the size of RI)

im from ri, i would miss my other half.

[tseitsei89]

2 minutes ago, SpaceFace545 said:

No

Yeah, great argument there dude! You got me convinced.

But seriously: Yes, this happens all the time very regularly all across the world.

[YNM]

17 minutes ago, RealKerbal3x said:

If a US company were to fly rockets from Mexico, they would still be under FAA jurisdiction. Look at Rocket Lab, they fly Electron from New Zealand, but since they're incorporated in the US, they still have to get FAA permission.

Yeah but RocketLab also have to get permission from NZCAA, surely ? (and given it's a carrier rocket it wouldn't surprise me if they also have to involve NZRAF...)

And something similar should be going on with the hypothetical Mexico-launched rockets, with AFAC and FAM ?

Also, how close is it that it's considered to still be a safe distance from a rocket launch ? 3 mi ? Cape Canaveral (at least the launch pads that are still used for orbital launches) is quite a whole lot further away from any settlement than that... So if some of the restricted area were to extend to Mexico, whose jurisdiction does it become ?

Edited May 7, 2021 by YNM

[RealKerbal3x]

3 minutes ago, SpaceFace545 said:

also no, patiently no. I am screaming no. 

I guess we should just stop all space exploration efforts then, because no matter where we launch or build infrastructure, we're going to upset someone.

[Spaceman.Spiff]

1 minute ago, tater said:

People don’t have to sell. Some haven’t. The “town” is ~40 houses.

the whole SpaceX facility in Boca Chica is a few hundred acres? Less? 

Bezos flew around TX in a helo looking at land. He bought >400,000 acres under shell company names so they’d not see what he was doing and charge more. That’s the BO facility near Van Horn, TX.

My concern is that they are using their "starbase" BS to gain eminent domain, which is dirty, and very bad for a company to have control of something like that. 

Wow that's bad.

[GuessingEveryDay]

Just now, RealKerbal3x said:

I guess we should just stop all space exploration efforts then, because no matter where we launch or build infrastructure, we're going to upset someone.

[tater]

There are limited places for orbital launches. Ideally eastern coasts. Gotta take what you can get.

[SpaceFace545]

Just now, RealKerbal3x said:

I guess we should just stop all space exploration efforts then, because no matter where we launch or build infrastructure, we're going to upset someone.

we should just stop it when it impedes our ability to enjoy our natural world. Building your infrastructure in dwindling and precious environments is cruel. 

Just now, tater said:

There are limited places for orbital launches. Ideally eastern coasts. Gotta take what you can get.

But taking boca chica is taking a wildlife habitat.

[GuessingEveryDay]

Just now, SpaceFace545 said:

we should just stop it when it impedes our ability to enjoy our natural world. Building your infrastructure in dwindling and precious environments is cruel. 

'Kay, time for the nukes! And wait 10000 years, then we can relax! Unless you know an easier way?

[Beccab]

4 minutes ago, SpaceFace545 said:

we should just stop it when it impedes our ability to enjoy our natural world. Building your infrastructure in dwindling and precious environments is cruel. 

But the infrastructure wasn't built in the "dwindling and precious environment", it was built separately from that and leaving it alone. The only time stuff ended up there was with SN11's debris, and it wasn't normal at all, not to mention that there's only two more iterations of starship (three if SN15 will refly) that are going to do the hop that ended up that way

[SpaceFace545]

3 minutes ago, GuessingEveryDay said:

'Kay, time for the nukes! And wait 10000 years, then we can relax! Unless you know an easier way?

wdym?

Just now, Beccab said:

But the infrastructure wasn't built in the "dwindling and precious environment", it was built separately from that and leaving it alone. The only time stuff ended up there was with SN11's debris, and it wasn't normal at all, not to mention that there's only two more iterations of starship (three if SN15 will refly) that are going to do the hop that ended up that way

spacex has plans to fill those marshes which surround the site. I don't know you understand what filling in a marsh means but it means bye bye marshland. Marshland is one of the most needs types of ecosystems in the US and the protect the mainland from coastal erosion and hurricanes.

[Spaceman.Spiff]

2 minutes ago, Beccab said:

SN11's debris

And it's still there BTW.

[JcoolTheShipbuilder]

1 minute ago, Spaceman.Spiff said:

And it's still there BTW.

Would a hovercraft be a good idea to be able to go and collect the debris? Or is it not wet where people would sink?

Edited May 7, 2021 by JcoolTheShipbuilder

[SpaceFace545]

1 minute ago, Spaceman.Spiff said:

And it's still there BTW.

their actually asking for volunteers if you want to help

Just now, JcoolTheShipbuilder said:

Would a hovercraft be a good idea to be able to go and collect the debris?

Are you joking? and if you aren't then no. Hovercraft stir up alot of dirt and dust. the best way is the slowest way and thats people with metal detectors and rakes.

[tseitsei89]

11 minutes ago, SpaceFace545 said:

But taking boca chica is taking a wildlife habitat.

Yeah, and taking any other place on earth has some other downsides to someone (wildlife, or human settlements or something else) as well, like already mentioned earlier in this thread. Who are you to decide which downsides are acceptable and which are not?

[SpaceFace545]

Just now, tseitsei89 said:

Yeah, and taking any other place on earth has some other downsides to someone (wildlife, or human settlements or something else) as well, like already mentioned earlier in this thread. Who are you to decide which downsides are acceptable and which are not?

Well for example, clearing a patch of forest is bad but that patch of forest is everywhere and reasonably abundant. clearing marsh land is bad because marsh land is very rare and crucial to the way coastlines work.

[Spaceman.Spiff]

2 minutes ago, SpaceFace545 said:

their actually asking for volunteers if you want to help

3 minutes ago, JcoolTheShipbuilder said:

While I would if I was down there:

A. I live roughly 1500 miles away,

B. They created the debris, so they are liable and should clean it up. They have more than enough money that they don't need volunteers.

[SpaceFace545]

Just now, Spaceman.Spiff said:

While I would if I was down there:

A. I live roughly 1500 miles away,

B. They created the debris, so they are liable and should clean it up. They have more than enough money that they don't need volunteers.

But by volunteering to clean up potentially dangerous debris you would be advancing humanity to the stars and for the greater good of humanity even if they don't know it yet.

[tseitsei89]

2 minutes ago, SpaceFace545 said:

Well for example, clearing a patch of forest is bad but that patch of forest is everywhere and reasonably abundant. clearing marsh land is bad because marsh land is very rare and crucial to the way coastlines work.

As stated earlier, they kind of need a coastal location for the launches in order to not cause risk to people by flying over land (where people live) and there is only so much coastline available in US.

[SpaceFace545]

1 minute ago, tseitsei89 said:

As stated earlier, they kind of need a coastal location for the launches in order to not cause risk to people by flying over land (where people live) and there is only so much coastline available in US.

As stated earlier, marshland shouldn't be touched for the reasons stated above.

https://www.pbs.org/newshour/science/wetlands-stopped-650-million-property-damage-hurricane-sandy-can-help-houston#:~:text=Wetlands are nature's sponges during,impeding water from sloshing onshore.&text=Coastal wetlands thwarted %24625 million,published Thursday in Scientific Reports.

[tseitsei89]

Just now, SpaceFace545 said:

As stated earlier, marshland shouldn't be touched for the reasons stated above.

That is your opinion. My opinion is that a batch of marshland is  a small price to pay if that means we can enter an entirely new era of space exploration.

[SpaceFace545]

2 minutes ago, tseitsei89 said:

That is your opinion. My opinion is that a batch of marshland is  a small price to pay if that means we can enter an entirely new era of space exploration.

It promotes a culture of ignorance and one that believes that mars and space is just a fresh start of humanity so screw earth. 

[Beccab]

4 minutes ago, SpaceFace545 said:

It promotes a culture of ignorance and one that believes that mars and space is just a fresh start of humanity so screw earth. 

...how did you get from Spacex seeking to fill 6 acres of wetlands to "screw earth"?

From the news article you posted

"Texas lost 52 percent — 8.4 million acres — of its wetlands from 1780 to 1980"

Edited May 7, 2021 by Beccab

[YNM]

Just now, tseitsei89 said:

a batch

ok that sounds like a whole lot more than a patch XD

[RealKerbal3x]

Just now, SpaceFace545 said:

It promotes a culture of ignorance and one that believes that mars and space is just a fresh start of humanity so screw earth. 

Building on a few kilometres of marshland isn't 'screwing earth'. There's absolutely no reason why we can't explore new worlds while still protecting this one.