totm nov 2023 SpaceX Discussion Thread

[tater]

At least it's not coming from some rainbirds—that would be a disaster!

[Superpluto126]

37 minutes ago, tater said:

At least it's not coming from some rainbirds—that would be a disaster!

Wonder how this will affect the Trout Season Launch Cadence

[tater]

Related ^^^

FAA now saying late Nov... meanwhile Stabase is flooded with salt water—instead of a small patch of concrete being briefly flooded (then collected!) by drinking water.

[mikegarrison]

2 minutes ago, tater said:

Related ^^^

FAA now saying late Nov... meanwhile Stabase is flooded with salt water—instead of a small patch of concrete being briefly flooded (then collected!) by drinking water.

I will point out that being flooded with saltwater is a normal part of a beach ecosystem. Being flooded with fresh water is not. Much less if that water is carrying with it accumulated oils, greases, and other such contaminants.

I personally find it annoying that the SpaceX apologist crowd seem to constantly push back on the idea that SpaceX is subject to the same laws that the rest of the country is subject to, including environmental and airspace safety laws.

[tater]

3 minutes ago, mikegarrison said:

I will point out that being flooded with saltwater is a normal part of a beach ecosystem. Being flooded with fresh water is not. Much less if that water is carrying with it accumulated oils, greases, and other such contaminants.

I personally find it annoying that the SpaceX apologist crowd seem to constantly push back on the idea that SpaceX is subject to the same laws that the rest of the country is subject to, including environmental and airspace safety laws.

More rain was mixed with that seawater than ever floods the concrete—which is then collected. The flooding was part of a storm—fresh water pouring down over the entire area, which is also 100% normal. As I calculated up thread someplace (and others have done as well), the deluge, even if it was NOT collected (and it is) is equal to a brief squall over the pad area.

I'd wager the largest environmental impact from Starbase are the vehicles of the employees and suppliers—and I'd bet this is true by at least an order of magnitude over the other impacts (which are nonzero, obviously, as is true of all industry, everywhere, it's always a trade).

Direct air pollution (a lot of industrial workers in TX choose large PU trucks as their vehicle).

Leaking fluids (most ICE vehicles have a nonzero amount of oils/etc dripping off).

Rubber (abraded off tires and bushings)

Cleansers washed off by rain (wiper fluid, car wash residue, etc).

All the above for a couple thousand cars a day, plus semis.

I would imagine there is some launch cadence at which launch impacts would start to dominate—probably way higher than a few a year though.

Edited September 10 by tater

[darthgently]

I wonder if IFT-5 will somehow be delayed until after New Glenn launches.  Looks like it.

Spoiler

If a company or individual collected rainwater that would have fallen on an area then released it into the same area with no intervening industrial process the rain would have fallen on there would be bureaucrats furrowing their brows trying to find something to be upset about.  But if a state agency did the same there would not be a single peep.  There are things to be concerned about in this world.  This is not it.  The mindset that chevron deference produced  in regulatory agencies over the decades still has inertia that outlives its recent demise in the Supreme Court.  Only the legislature can create laws, not bureaucrats.  The party is over.

 

Edited September 10 by darthgently

[magnemoe]

On 9/9/2024 at 4:09 PM, darthgently said:

Probably.  The lunar mascons are an annoyance but I think between not being too low and newer ion thrusters combined with using solar pressure and such it isn’t hard to maintain a stable orbit for decades.  Not sure though

China is doing it

Yes, you would also use medium or higher orbits I assume, starlink fly low to increase bandwidth and reduce latency, none is is not much of an factor on the moon, this reduces the number of satellites needed to a 4-5. 
At mars I see that directly controlling rovers from an surface base could be relevant but latency is still not critical as they would be slow. 

[RCgothic]

Also the shipping channel is not exactly free from contaminants either. 

Of course SpaceX shouldn't be releasing contaminants into the environment. But I struggle to see how the deluge system puts anything into the ecosystem other than would be washed in by the regular storms.

[PakledHostage]

Lots of Yabuts live in this swamp... 

[Ultimate Steve]

If any of you had read the actual post, you would know that this new grievance has nothing to do with the deluge.

The splashdown point of the hot stage ring on IFT 5 will "marginally" change (no details there). Because of this change, the FAA approved a 60 day consultation with the national Marine fisheries service. If any new questions are raised, the 60 day timer "can" be reset. Unsure what can means here. If it's automatic or optional. SpaceX notes that this can go on indefinitely.

A similar 60 day thing is in place for the fish and wildlife services because of a slightly larger area experiencing a sonic boom (possibly either due to coming in over land or the hsr area not overlapping as much with the sh area, im guessing and they didnt say).

It does kind of seem maddening that splashing a rocket part in a slightly different spot could trigger a 2+ month delay when literally every other operational orbital rocket does that except for Falcon and sometimes Electron. Granted, maybe that's because everything else lands in international waters. Danger to marine life was analyzed a lot for the previous flight. Seems unreasonable to spring a delay to November on SpaceX this late in the process when they were ready to go in August. Sonic boom I'm much less versed in.

Granted, I've only heard one side of the story.

Edited September 10 by Ultimate Steve

[tater]

I'm sorta shocked that the mild sonic boom footprint is somehow concerning, but the decent % chance of the landing failing (Boom!) is not... also:

The Polaris "skywalker" hatch.

Edited September 10 by tater

[magnemoe]

1 hour ago, Ultimate Steve said:

If any of you had read the actual post, you would know that this new grievance has nothing to do with the deluge.

The splashdown point of the hot stage ring on IFT 5 will "marginally" change (no details there). Because of this change, the FAA approved a 60 day consultation with the national Marine fisheries service. If any new questions are raised, the 60 day timer "can" be reset. Unsure what can means here. If it's automatic or optional. SpaceX notes that this can go on indefinitely.

A similar 60 day thing is in place for the fish and wildlife services because of a slightly larger area experiencing a sonic boom (possibly either due to coming in over land or the hsr area not overlapping as much with the sh area, im guessing and they didnt say).

It does kind of seem maddening that splashing a rocket part in a slightly different spot could trigger a 2+ month delay when literally every other operational orbital rocket does that except for Falcon and sometimes Electron. Granted, maybe that's because everything else lands in international waters. Danger to marine life was analyzed a lot for the previous flight. Seems unreasonable to spring a delay to November on SpaceX this late in the process when they were ready to go in August. Sonic boom I'm much less versed in.

Granted, I've only heard one side of the story.

Makes me wonder if they could eject the hot stage ring before boost back burn? Anyway, its not an stage, its an stainless steel tube. It might have the electrical decouplers for separating upper stage but nothing much more outside an data buss perhaps.  Note that pouting international water is illegal by treaty but its deals with larger fishes than rocket stages. 

[darthgently]

2 hours ago, PakledHostage said:

Lots of Yabuts live in this swamp... 

Contrary to popular conception, not all that is called “whataboutism” is invalid or a logical fallacy.  Some of it, yes.  But not all.  When one is trying to navigate what “following the rules” pragmatically means, what others do without repercussions, or even the blessing of authorities, is incredibly salient.  It sheds a light on selective enforcement and favoritism.  Which are true threats to a civilization

[tater]

 

[PakledHostage]

49 minutes ago, darthgently said:

Contrary to popular conception, not all that is called “whataboutism” is invalid or a logical fallacy.  

Very fair. But there's a lot of suggestion that SpaceX should be given free pass where others are bound by the rules. It goes both ways. Some of the rules may not make sense in the strictest sense, but that's a problem with the rules specifically,  not the process.

Edited September 10 by PakledHostage

[tater]

 

https://twitter.com/PolarisProgram/status/1833648070011109784

 

 

 

 

Edited September 10 by tater

[Ultimate Steve]

The length of the update had me worried, but it seems like everything is going well!

[tater]

1 hour ago, PakledHostage said:

Very fair. But there's a lot of suggestion that SpaceX should be given free pass where others are bound by the rules. It goes both ways. Some of the rules may not make sense in the strictest sense, but that's a problem with the rules specifically,  not the process.

No one else moves fast enough to notice the rules, and this dropped out of nowhere—nothing in that update was new information, all of it was known at the time of the last flight, and/or when SpaceX submitted their accounting of what happened with IFT-4. By all accounts, they thought they would be getting this license around now, not thrown a 60 day delay. I think their issue is the unpredictability, not a demand for special treatment. The staging ring thing, for example, it's 100% less impactful than every single expended booster dumped randomly into the ocean (or interstages from expendables, etc, ad nauseum).

Is the spacewalk tonight?

[darthgently]

1 hour ago, PakledHostage said:

ut there's a lot of suggestion that SpaceX should be given free pass where others are bound by the rules

Where?

The only arguments Musk has presented is that there is too much red tape for everyone

Edited September 11 by darthgently

[mikegarrison]

5 hours ago, Ultimate Steve said:

If any of you had read the actual post, you would know that this new grievance has nothing to do with the deluge.

The splashdown point of the hot stage ring on IFT 5 will "marginally" change (no details there). Because of this change, the FAA approved a 60 day consultation with the national Marine fisheries service. If any new questions are raised, the 60 day timer "can" be reset. Unsure what can means here. If it's automatic or optional. SpaceX notes that this can go on indefinitely.

A similar 60 day thing is in place for the fish and wildlife services because of a slightly larger area experiencing a sonic boom (possibly either due to coming in over land or the hsr area not overlapping as much with the sh area, im guessing and they didnt say).

It does kind of seem maddening that splashing a rocket part in a slightly different spot could trigger a 2+ month delay when literally every other operational orbital rocket does that except for Falcon and sometimes Electron. Granted, maybe that's because everything else lands in international waters. Danger to marine life was analyzed a lot for the previous flight. Seems unreasonable to spring a delay to November on SpaceX this late in the process when they were ready to go in August. Sonic boom I'm much less versed in.

Granted, I've only heard one side of the story.

Splashing rockets down into the deep ocean is different than splashing them down in busy and well-fished coastal waters.

But from what you say, I suspect the issue is more of one I have touched on before. When a test plan (or an operational plan) is approved, it is approved. When changes get made ... well, then it is not the same plan anymore. That changed plan needs to get approved. This isn't backyard rocketry. Operators filing plans like this are expected to know what they are asking for when they file the plan. Otherwise, delays happen.

[Hotel26]

I can only say that I am annoyed that Starship launches are not being conducted from equatorial regions.  It doesn't make sense to me for reasons of a) physics!, b) economics (out-sourcing^[1]), c) regulation and d) pollution.

Musk is a smart guy and I am just waiting for him to figure this out.  (What applies to  the social-network-formerly-known-as-Twitter also applies to <fill in anything you really care about>.)  People will object that the costs of relocating are prohibitive ('astronomical'); and yes, this is precisely the trap.  Read the tea leaves.

I want my IFT-5 launch and I want it NOW.

[1] truthfully,  I think there may be quite many  dedicated, well-credentialled Americans who would not mind at all being offered the opportunity to live somewhere else with very much lower costs but still having a high-power career path with a cutting-edge company.  Like SpaceX.

 

Edited September 11 by Hotel26

[darthgently]

1 hour ago, Hotel26 said:

I can only say that I am annoyed that Starship launches are not being conducted from equatorial regions.  It doesn't make sense to me for reasons of a) physics!, b) economics (out-sourcing^[1]), c) regulation and d) pollution.

Musk is a smart guy and I am just waiting for him to figure this out.  (What applies to  the social-network-formerly-known-as-Twitter also applies to <fill in anything you really care about>.)  People will object that the costs of relocating are prohibitive ('astronomical'); and yes, this is precisely the trap.  Read the tea leaves.

I want my IFT-5 launch and I want it NOW.

[1] truthfully,  I think there may be quite many  dedicated, well-credentialled Americans who would not mind at all being offered the opportunity to live somewhere else with very much lower costs but still having a high-power career path with a cutting-edge company.  Like SpaceX.

 

Little St. James Island could be redeemed for this purpose.  It needs redemption.  Or another of the private US VI.  That would be ~8° more southronish.  Still 18°N is better than Starbase at 26°N.  Logistics and employee commutes would get very gnarly though.

Honestly, a mega platform / seastead in the gulf of Mexico seems promising, but the southern area there is pirate waters.  Literally.  Especially off Venezuela.

The Galapagos are right on the equator off the coast of Peru, but yeah, no.  Turtles, birds, history and such.  Not no mention Quito down range.

The east coast of Brazil would be ideal.  Elon gets along great with those guys, lol

 

[tater]

Moving launch to some island is not going to happen. A US island has an identical regulatory culture, plus they'd need cheap housing for 1000s, schools, propellant depots (and a deep port), etc. A non-US island has all that, plus ITAR concerns. Oh, and all beach real estate near the US is insanely expensive. Not gonna happen.

[Nuke]

at some point i think they should give large oceangoing platforms or rocket catching ships a revisit.

[magnemoe]

1 hour ago, Nuke said:

at some point i think they should give large oceangoing platforms or rocket catching ships a revisit.

Think this was the idea for the oil platform idea, they was later sold off.