NASASpaceFlight.com Forum

SpaceX Vehicles and Missions => SpaceX Early Days Archive Section => Topic started by: Chris Bergin on 08/17/2014 11:52 am

Title: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Chris Bergin on 08/17/2014 11:52 am
Thread 3 for the above subject - which is a subject all posts must be related to.

Thread 1:
http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=28585.0

Thread 2:
http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=31544.0
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 08/17/2014 03:35 pm
Cameron County real estate online map is now showing latest SpaceX land purchases.
http://www.cameroncad.org/cadclientdb/propertymap.aspx

I've updated my composite map to reflect it.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Scylla on 08/17/2014 03:37 pm
The first small hints of activity around Boca Chica.

Road to SpaceX: Activity surrounds impending launch site
http://www.valleymorningstar.com/premium/article_abb1d126-25c7-11e4-9cde-001a4bcf6878.html
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: jfallen79 on 08/18/2014 05:00 am
So this article references 24 months for construction.  Does that mean 24 months before any launches or will the key structures go up first to get the site in business?
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Kabloona on 08/18/2014 04:46 pm
So this article references 24 months for construction.  Does that mean 24 months before any launches or will the key structures go up first to get the site in business?

Brownsville mayor says he expects first launch "18-19 months from now."

http://youtu.be/6kTy_6KVrbg
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: wannamoonbase on 08/19/2014 02:14 am
So this article references 24 months for construction.  Does that mean 24 months before any launches or will the key structures go up first to get the site in business?

I work for a construction company and have built a pad and other much larger but less cool projects.  So I can see several ways they can start using some aspects of the facility, horizontal building and erector while out buildings and some capabilities finish commissioning and check out.  But by first launch I'd expect it to be 95% complete or more. 

It will be intersting to see if they build in FH capability from the start in the RP1 & LOx systems or add capacity later.  That's one way to save some time and money. 

I think the mayor is optimistic with 18-19 months.  SpaceX moves quick but this is a green field and they don't have the advantage of plopping down on top of an existing civil structure for the pad and trench.  That is going to be a massive amount of concrete.  And you can't prefab that and bring it to site.  Also site civil for communications, data and those accessory things that have to go in.

Then what company do you use and what is there culture in building.  After award project quality and schedule are not entirely up to the end user (SpaceX).  If you make a bad pick wih a contractor it's a long hard battle to completion.

SpaceX can do some things themselves but not everything and this is significantly more than they've done previously.

Look at Orbitals experience in Virginia and how facility completion held that up.

Pick wisely SpaceX, pick wisely. 

PS: I'd love to build another pad, call me!!!
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Zed_Noir on 08/19/2014 07:58 am
...
Pick wisely SpaceX, pick wisely. 
...
Clark Construction and Wagner Construction are the contractors for the pad from the news article link by Dave G upthread..
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: wannamoonbase on 08/19/2014 11:04 am
...
Pick wisely SpaceX, pick wisely. 
...
Clark Construction and Wagner Construction are the contractors for the pad from the news article link by Dave G upthread..

I read that article to say the road work and some site.  It didn't sound like the whole scope was theirs.  But usually that gives them an inside track for the rest.  Not who I'd pick but they'll get it finished. 

Edit: I think closer to 24 months, maybe a few months longer before we see a liftoff.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: abaddon on 08/19/2014 11:50 am
Quote
Clark Construction, under contract with the Texas Department of Transportation, will be making the improvements to the state highway.
[...]
The roadway has been planned for some time, Saenz said, and has nothing to do with SpaceX’s decision on Aug. 4 to locate at Boca Chica.
[...]
Clark Construction and Wagner Construction were selected for the work.

This is TxDOT, unrelated to SpaceX.  Unless there is another article I am missing there is no indication SpaceX has picked anyone to do anything yet.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: jfallen79 on 08/21/2014 03:08 am
I just searched the TX DOT website and I couldn't find any reference to the Hwy 4 project.   Most public projects like this are normally well advertised, perhaps I am not looking in the right place.   I am curious what the full scope of the highway project is and what is the estimated completion date.   I imagine the construction at the site will need to wait for the road work to finish or at the very least plan around it.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: cuddihy on 08/21/2014 11:29 am
It's just resurfacing... Not a big project
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: oldAtlas_Eguy on 08/21/2014 03:51 pm
It's just resurfacing... Not a big project

If the road is being resurfaced it is because of the estimated axel weight the current surface can handle is insufiecent.  In other words the road needs to be resurfaced before the big concrete trucks roll through.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Kabloona on 08/21/2014 04:06 pm
It's just resurfacing... Not a big project

If the road is being resurfaced it is because of the estimated axel weight the current surface can handle is insufiecent.  In other words the road needs to be resurfaced before the big concrete trucks roll through.

Except the spokesman for TxDOT said the Hwy 4 maintenance work had been planned some time ago and has nothing to do with SpaceX.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: guckyfan on 08/21/2014 04:19 pm

Except the spokesman for TxDOT said the Hwy 4 maintenance work had been planned some time ago and has nothing to do with SpaceX.

I have no doubt that statement is true. But if not for SpaceX it may have stayed in the planning stage for anothe 5 to 20 years. ;)
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 08/21/2014 10:42 pm
It's just resurfacing... Not a big project

If the road is being resurfaced it is because of the estimated axel weight the current surface can handle is insufiecent.  In other words the road needs to be resurfaced before the big concrete trucks roll through.
They're not resurfacing, just re-sealing.  See original article for details.
http://www.valleymorningstar.com/premium/article_abb1d126-25c7-11e4-9cde-001a4bcf6878.html
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: corrodedNut on 08/22/2014 01:54 am
It's just resurfacing... Not a big project

If the road is being resurfaced it is because of the estimated axel weight the current surface can handle is insufiecent.  In other words the road needs to be resurfaced before the big concrete trucks roll through.
They're not resurfacing, just re-sealing.  See original article for details.
http://www.valleymorningstar.com/premium/article_abb1d126-25c7-11e4-9cde-001a4bcf6878.html

Have you guys seen the movie "Cool Hand Luke"? That's what they're doing, and they'll probably need to do it again after SpaceX finishes the pad.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: symbios on 08/22/2014 10:03 am
SpaceX expected to break ground soon
Cameron County approves agreements

http://www.valleymorningstar.com/news/local_news/article_14122bbc-29ab-11e4-bfbf-001a4bcf6878.html (http://www.valleymorningstar.com/news/local_news/article_14122bbc-29ab-11e4-bfbf-001a4bcf6878.html)
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 08/22/2014 10:54 am
SpaceX expected to break ground soon
Cameron County approves agreements

http://www.valleymorningstar.com/news/local_news/article_14122bbc-29ab-11e4-bfbf-001a4bcf6878.html (http://www.valleymorningstar.com/news/local_news/article_14122bbc-29ab-11e4-bfbf-001a4bcf6878.html)

More info here:
http://www.valleymorningstar.com/premium/article_7facb310-29a6-11e4-ae31-001a4bcf6878.html

In particular:
Quote
In other developments, SpaceX’s Dogleg Park LLC purchased another two tracts of land at Boca Chica, adding to the already 100 acres-plus of land that the space exploration firm methodically began to purchase in the summer of 2012.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: wannamoonbase on 08/22/2014 11:23 am
SpaceX expected to break ground soon
Cameron County approves agreements

http://www.valleymorningstar.com/news/local_news/article_14122bbc-29ab-11e4-bfbf-001a4bcf6878.html (http://www.valleymorningstar.com/news/local_news/article_14122bbc-29ab-11e4-bfbf-001a4bcf6878.html)

A word of caution,  a ground breaking ceremony is not the same as the start of work.  I've seen ceremonies happen 6 months before work really started.  Even seen them indoors with a box of dirt because it was raining.

It doesn't mean much, the most meaningful information available in the public domain is when permits are issued by the city or county.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: ChefPat on 08/22/2014 12:45 pm
SpaceX expected to break ground soon
Cameron County approves agreements

http://www.valleymorningstar.com/news/local_news/article_14122bbc-29ab-11e4-bfbf-001a4bcf6878.html (http://www.valleymorningstar.com/news/local_news/article_14122bbc-29ab-11e4-bfbf-001a4bcf6878.html)

More info here:
http://www.valleymorningstar.com/premium/article_7facb310-29a6-11e4-ae31-001a4bcf6878.html

In particular:
Quote
In other developments, SpaceX’s Dogleg Park LLC purchased another two tracts of land at Boca Chica, adding to the already 100 acres-plus of land that the space exploration firm methodically began to purchase in the summer of 2012.
"Cascos said a date for the groundbreaking is not definite, but that it would probably be held within 30 to 45 days."
It would seem they're moving right along.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: llanitedave on 08/23/2014 02:40 am
SpaceX expected to break ground soon
Cameron County approves agreements

http://www.valleymorningstar.com/news/local_news/article_14122bbc-29ab-11e4-bfbf-001a4bcf6878.html (http://www.valleymorningstar.com/news/local_news/article_14122bbc-29ab-11e4-bfbf-001a4bcf6878.html)

A word of caution,  a ground breaking ceremony is not the same as the start of work.  I've seen ceremonies happen 6 months before work really started.  Even seen them indoors with a box of dirt because it was raining.

It doesn't mean much, the most meaningful information available in the public domain is when permits are issued by the city or county.

It can go the other way, too.  "Groundbreaking" for the mine I'm involved in building occured after some major excavations had already begun.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: jfallen79 on 08/25/2014 03:46 am
An interesting article:

http://www.themonitor.com/news/local/spacex-supplier-based-in-michigan-acquires-brownsville-firm/article_1d64cbca-2a73-11e4-a096-0017a43b2370.html

Quote
Paragon hopes to be a “co-traveler” with SpaceX as it evolves in Brownsville, and aims to expand its relationship with the Hawthorne, Calif.-based aerospace company via the Brownsville facility
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Coastal Ron on 08/25/2014 04:52 am
An interesting article:

http://www.themonitor.com/news/local/spacex-supplier-based-in-michigan-acquires-brownsville-firm/article_1d64cbca-2a73-11e4-a096-0017a43b2370.html

Quote
Paragon hopes to be a “co-traveler” with SpaceX as it evolves in Brownsville, and aims to expand its relationship with the Hawthorne, Calif.-based aerospace company via the Brownsville facility

Although they are not focusing exclusively on work from SpaceX.  From the rest of the article:

"Initially, the Brownsville shop will concentrate on meeting the growing demand for quick-turnaround tooling, engineering and repair from automotive and heavy truck manufacturers in Mexico and Texas, Samrick said. Paragon ultimately hopes to service all its industry lines, including oil and gas, from Brownsville, he said."

One of it's industry lines is aerospace, which SpaceX would be part of.  No doubt having a customer near their new facility was an important factor, but likely not the main one.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: MP99 on 08/25/2014 07:32 am
An interesting article:

http://www.themonitor.com/news/local/spacex-supplier-based-in-michigan-acquires-brownsville-firm/article_1d64cbca-2a73-11e4-a096-0017a43b2370.html

Quote
Paragon hopes to be a “co-traveler” with SpaceX as it evolves in Brownsville, and aims to expand its relationship with the Hawthorne, Calif.-based aerospace company via the Brownsville facility
Is this the same Paragon that's developing WorldView balloon systems & Inspiration Mars / Mars One ECLSS?

http://www.paragonsdc.com/index.php?action=viewPost&postID=50

If so, seems strange they wouldn't mention it.

Cheers, Martin
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: docmordrid on 08/25/2014 08:49 am
Don't think so. This is Paragon Die and Engineering, a Grand Rapids MI  company with an Aerospace division.  AFAICT it's separate from the Paragon Space Development Corporation of Houston.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: MP99 on 08/25/2014 11:34 am
Don't think so. This is Paragon Die and Engineering, a Grand Rapids MI  company with an Aerospace division.  AFAICT it's separate from the Paragon Space Development Corporation of Houston.
Helpful, many thanks.

Cheers, Martin
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Mariusuiram on 08/26/2014 02:49 am
Don't think so. This is Paragon Die and Engineering, a Grand Rapids MI  company with an Aerospace division.  AFAICT it's separate from the Paragon Space Development Corporation of Houston.

I remember interviews with Elon back in the day talking about their philosophy with parts suppliers. He was pretty dismissive of the existing aerospace sub-contractors and what he considered abusive pricing.

He referenced looking at other industries where similar parts were made but maybe weren't space-qualified and then helping those firms qualify their products which ended up being much cheaper.

Is Paragon an example of that? They seem to be primarily automotive with some Aerospace & defense work, but don't explicitly reference Space systems in there.

Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 08/27/2014 12:19 am
I remember interviews with Elon back in the day talking about their philosophy with parts suppliers. He was pretty dismissive of the existing aerospace sub-contractors and what he considered abusive pricing.

He referenced looking at other industries where similar parts were made but maybe weren't space-qualified and then helping those firms qualify their products which ended up being much cheaper.

That was Max Vozoff, formerly of SpaceX.

Here's the excerpt:

Quote
There's a YouTube video of Elon speaking somewhere in 2003 saying ...  "we're really just a systems integrator, we're buying things from other people", but by the time I showed up in 2005 that had completely turned around and pretty much everything was getting done in-house. 

And you can see why when you see the interactions with these suppliers, particularly the ones in the space industry.  They think they're the only ones who can make this widget or who have the secret sauce, and when you say "no, you're too expensive", they say "well, that's what it is". And they're used to customers who, if they slip the schedule and double the price, the customer shrugs and goes back to headquarters and says, "well, it's gonna take twice as long and it's gonna cost twice as much", and that's how things go in a traditional government run program.

But SpaceX would say "no, that's not acceptable", and they'd cancel the contract.  And sometimes these suppliers were literally scoffing on the phone as you hung up, and call you back a couple of months later saying "so, have you changed your mind yet?"  And being able to say to them that "no, if you can do it, then maybe somebody else can do it too", like either SpaceX figured out how to do it themselves, because they hired some smart people and gave them the resources and tools, or you find another supplier with maybe a non-space version and you upgrade and qualify it for space.

And now what you've done, this backward supplier has bred a competitor for themselves, where they're not used to competition.  I mean, many of the suppliers in this industry would just go out of business in a heartbeat if competition were actually introduced.

So really that's the game changing stuff that SpaceX has been doing: bringing stuff in-house, not just because it gives them control of cost and schedule, but because the space suppliers, traditional suppliers just don't get it.  They're not used to being held to schedules and budgets.

And that's not true of everybody, but there is list of anecdotes I could tell you about suppliers with this attitude.  And in each case either SpaceX brings in in-house and makes it successfully, or they find another supplier and upgrade it, and that supplier is usually thrilled to have a whole new market opened up for them.

http://thespaceshow.wordpress.com/2011/03/05/max-vozoff-friday-3-4-11/
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Scylla on 08/30/2014 06:55 pm
The New Residents: Renovation planned for house linked to SpaceX
http://www.valleymorningstar.com/news/local_news/article_1a1b2c44-2fef-11e4-aa5d-0017a43b2370.html

Start of SpaceX employee housing?

Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: kamilfredo on 08/30/2014 07:32 pm
The New Residents: Renovation planned for house linked to SpaceX
http://www.valleymorningstar.com/news/local_news/article_1a1b2c44-2fef-11e4-aa5d-0017a43b2370.html

Start of SpaceX employee housing?

Here is that place from the photo...

https://www.google.com/maps/@25.992313,-97.182783,3a,75y,88.89h,90t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1sus-PJ_5ttHN5ITte7UEYOw!2e0
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: docmordrid on 08/30/2014 08:47 pm
Maybe housing for visiting staff instead of putting them up in fleabag hotels.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Elvis in Space on 08/30/2014 09:04 pm
Maybe housing for visiting staff instead of putting them up in fleabag hotels.

Whatever the reason it all starts with a beginning. I guess that's what we're seeing. Notice every house appears to have a water tank(s). I see no sign of well houses.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: docmordrid on 08/30/2014 09:09 pm
Well house? Who uses those these days? Up here in the north we use  submersible pumps and underground pipes.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Scylla on 08/30/2014 10:15 pm
Found this image in Thread 2. Looks like the house being renovated on Weems Rd. is walking distance from Launch Control and Processing.



Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Avron on 08/30/2014 10:35 pm
The New Residents: Renovation planned for house linked to SpaceX
http://www.valleymorningstar.com/news/local_news/article_1a1b2c44-2fef-11e4-aa5d-0017a43b2370.html

Start of SpaceX employee housing?

Here is that place from the photo...

https://www.google.com/maps/@25.992313,-97.182783,3a,75y,88.89h,90t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1sus-PJ_5ttHN5ITte7UEYOw!2e0

If there are renovations. maybe there are plans.. but really I don't think this house will the launch control, so maybe we should just leave it as housing .. and find something more exciting
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 08/31/2014 02:22 am
Updated composite map to include SpaceX property on Weems Road.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 08/31/2014 11:38 am
Found this image in Thread 2. Looks like the house being renovated on Weems Rd. is walking distance from Launch Control and Processing.

This is from the Environmental Impact Statement (EIS), page 2-22, available here (https://www.faa.gov/about/office_org/headquarters_offices/ast/environmental/nepa_docs/review/documents_progress/spacex_texas_launch_site_environmental_impact_statement/)

The EIS actually shows multiple locations for control centers, payload processing, etc.  But SpaceX submitted these plans a few years ago, and since then they've been able to acquire significantly more land adjacent to Parcel 1 in the EIS, and Cameron County allowed SpaceX to close and essentially annex portions of Remedios Avenue and Joanna Street  (http://www.themonitor.com/news/local/article_9b705cc4-0796-11e3-9572-001a4bcf6878.html)(see pictures below).  SpaceX has not purchased the land for Parcels 2 and 3 in the EIS.

So its possible that they will build all of the payload processing, launch vehicle processing, and control center in one location.  The EIS seems to be worded flexibly to allow these types of changes.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: MP99 on 08/31/2014 01:15 pm


Found this image in Thread 2. Looks like the house being renovated on Weems Rd. is walking distance from Launch Control and Processing.

This is from the Environmental Impact Statement (EIS), page 2-22, available here (https://www.faa.gov/about/office_org/headquarters_offices/ast/environmental/nepa_docs/review/documents_progress/spacex_texas_launch_site_environmental_impact_statement/)

The EIS actually shows multiple locations for control centers, payload processing, etc.  But SpaceX submitted these plans a few years ago, and since then they've been able to acquire significantly more land adjacent to Parcel 1 in the EIS, and Cameron County allowed SpaceX to close and essentially annex portions of Remedios Avenue and Joanna Street  (http://www.themonitor.com/news/local/article_9b705cc4-0796-11e3-9572-001a4bcf6878.html)(see pictures below).  SpaceX has not purchased the land for Parcels 2 and 3 in the EIS.

So its possible that they will build all of the payload processing, launch vehicle processing, and control center in one location.  The EIS seems to be worded flexibly to allow these types of changes.

The Final EIS (same link), describes it as:-

" The command and control functions for a launch are required to be conducted at a safe separation distance from the actual launch site, which is approximately 2 miles away. As a result, the proposed control center area is approximately 2 miles west from the vertical launch area and north of Boca Chica Boulevard. 

The proposed control center area consists of three parcels north of Boca Chica Boulevard and west of the proposed vertical launch area, which are all privately-owned. Only one of these parcels has existing infrastructure consisting of a concrete pad (a former swimming pool). Boca Chica Village, a small residential subdivision with a transient population, is adjacent to the three parcels that comprise the proposed control center area. The area surrounding the proposed control center area is primarily used for recreational purposes. The 4.0-acre Parcel 1 is located the furthest from the proposed vertical launch area and is bounded on the southeastern side by Boca Chica Boulevard and the southwestern side by Remedios Avenue. 

The 4.4-acre Parcel 2 is bounded on the southeastern side by Boca Chica Boulevard, the southern end is bounded by San Martin Boulevard, and the northwestern side is bounded by Esperson Street. 

The 4.0-acre Parcel 3, which is the closest to the proposed vertical launch area, is located northeast of Eichorn Boulevard. Proposed facility and infrastructure construction at the control center area would include the following:

• Two launch control center buildings
• Two payload processing facilities
• Launch vehicle processing hangar
• Two radio frequency transmitter/receivers
• Generators and diesel storage facilities
• Roads, parking areas, fencing, security, lighting, and utilities
• A satellite fuels storage facility

Construction at this location would generally involve grading to level the land. As a result, additional land areas inside the proposed fence lines could be disturbed at some point. "
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 08/31/2014 01:28 pm
The Final EIS (same link), describes it as: ...

"The 4.0-acre Parcel 1 is located the furthest from the proposed vertical launch area and is bounded on the southeastern side by Boca Chica Boulevard and the southwestern side by Remedios Avenue. 

The 4.4-acre Parcel 2 is bounded on the southeastern side by Boca Chica Boulevard, the southern end is bounded by San Martin Boulevard, and the northwestern side is bounded by Esperson Street. 

The 4.0-acre Parcel 3, which is the closest to the proposed vertical launch area, is located northeast of Eichorn Boulevard. Proposed facility and infrastructure construction at the control center area would include the following: ..."

Parcel 1 has changed since this was written. Parcel 1 has grown from 4 acres to 9.5 acres. 

Parcel 2 and Parcel 3 have not been purchased by SpaceX.

These facts lead me to believe that SpaceX will concentrate things around Parcel 1, at least initially.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: guckyfan on 08/31/2014 01:35 pm
Parcel 2 and 3 are owned by county and state. They can get them when needed.

Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 08/31/2014 01:53 pm
Parcel 2 and 3 are owned by county and state. They can get them when needed.

Parcel 3 is private property (see below).

Parcel 2 is owned by the Cameron County.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: guckyfan on 08/31/2014 02:03 pm
Parcel 2 and 3 are owned by county and state. They can get them when needed.

Parcel 3 is private property

You are right. The state owned property I looked at is adjacent, the next group of lots.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: MP99 on 08/31/2014 02:18 pm


Parcel 1 has changed since this was written. Parcel 1 has grown from 4 acres to 9.5 acres.

Since the Final EIS?

Cheers, Martin
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 08/31/2014 03:15 pm


Parcel 1 has changed since this was written. Parcel 1 has grown from 4 acres to 9.5 acres.

Since the Final EIS?

The final deed for the combined lot was issued on June 4th, 2014, but the process of combining lots and closing streets started in August 2013.

The language and diagrams from that part of the final EIS seem old.  It certainly hasn't changed since the draft EIS from April 2013, and I suspect its the same as the EIS scoping meeting from May 2012.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: MTom on 08/31/2014 04:54 pm
The New Residents: Renovation planned for house linked to SpaceX
http://www.valleymorningstar.com/news/local_news/article_1a1b2c44-2fef-11e4-aa5d-0017a43b2370.html

Start of SpaceX employee housing?

Here is that place from the photo...

https://www.google.com/maps/@25.992313,-97.182783,3a,75y,88.89h,90t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1sus-PJ_5ttHN5ITte7UEYOw!2e0

If there are renovations. maybe there are plans.. but really I don't think this house will the launch control, so maybe we should just leave it as housing .. and find something more exciting

This house is owned by SpaceX.
It is logical to take a rapid renovation before the start of the construction.
Some SpaceX-folks will need a harbour nearby for the next 1-2 years - better than only a hotel in Brownsville.
Isn't it?
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 09/04/2014 10:20 am
SpaceX continues to purchase land
link to article (http://www.valleymorningstar.com/news/local_news/article_5599d964-33eb-11e4-95f2-001a4bcf6878.html)
Quote
Dogleg Park LLC picked up an additional five lots, adding to the 75 tracts of land that it now owns at and around the proposed launch site and control center. The added acreage hikes its ownership to more than 100 acres of land.

I have no idea where these 5 new lots are.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 09/04/2014 10:55 am
Recent transactions are delayed by a few weeks on the online Cameron County Real Estate Appraisal Map (http://www.cameroncad.org/cadclientdb/propertymap.aspx), but poking around there I found 2 more SpaceX purchases adjacent to Parcel 1 in the Environmental Impact Statement (https://www.faa.gov/about/office_org/headquarters_offices/ast/environmental/nepa_docs/review/documents_progress/spacex_texas_launch_site_environmental_impact_statement/media/FEIS_SpaceX_Texas_Launch_Site_Vol_I.pdf) (EIS) Exhibit 2.1-4b.  Those 2 new lots bring Parcel 1 up to 10.3 acres.  Parcel 1 in the EIS was only 4 acres.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 09/04/2014 06:25 pm
Here's an image of the old Parcel 1 with the new Parcel 1 boundaries highlighted in yellow.  Note that the most recently purchased 5 lots are not included, so these could enlarge Parcel 1 further, or not, depending on the specific 5 lots involved.

In any case, the yellow boundaries below seem to show ample room for multiple payload processing facilities as well and a launch vehicle processing hangar. 

So it's possible Parcels 2 and 3 from the EIS will be unnecessary.  SpaceX has not purchased this Parcels 2 or 3.  Parcels 2 and 3 are also shown below for reference.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 09/07/2014 11:40 am
AsiaSat CEO says Cape Canaveral has its drawbacks
Quote
"There are a lot of regulations and clearances and restrictions, which I think hinders the processing of commercial satellites here," Wade said in an interview at Cape Canaveral ...

"Even though our processing has gone well, it's not been without some frustrations from the various teams just having to deal with some of the bureaucracy of the government in working at the Cape," Wade said. "Unfortunately, I think that's one of the reasons that SpaceX is looking at doing commercial launches on their own satellite base down in Texas."
http://www.spaceflightnow.com/falcon9/012/140906capecanaveral/#.VAxCSGd0yoA
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: WindyCity on 09/08/2014 08:30 pm
The Space Enterprise Institute has published a six-page report on range safety issues for orbital launches from Brownsville, Texas, authored by Daniel Adamo. You may download it at http://www.spaceenterpriseinstitute.org/2014/09/range-safety-implications-for-brownsville-texas-launches-to-earth-orbit/. Free registration is required.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: WindyCity on 09/08/2014 08:40 pm
Wow! The conclusion of Adamo's range safety issues paper raises a number of troubling questions.

Quote
The tight launch trajectory envelope out of Brownsville does not bode well for flexible operations. Rendezvous in LEO will be possible only for satellites near 26.3° inclination. Reaching GEO will be practical, but launch windows targeting cislunar and interplanetary destinations will be only a handful of minutes in duration. Because some interplanetary destinations require launch into LEO at inclinations considerably greater than 26.3° [Ref. 2, Figure 5], initiating those missions from Brownsville will not be practical. At times, destinations like Mars will be unavailable to Brownsville launches without propulsive penalties or transit delays. Other launch locations would not be subject to those penalties or delays.

In conclusion, the decision to launch rockets from the vicinity of Brownsville, Texas targeting destinations in LEO and beyond appears highly problematic if historic range safety standards apply. Some of these standards appear to be absent from considerations documented in the FAA's environmental impact statement for this launch site. At best, full assessment of range safety standards would permit only a narrow range of departure ground tracks from Brownsville at inclinations to Earth's equator near 26.3°.

Presumably, SpaceX considered these issues before signing onto the Brownsville site. What would be their justification for choosing Brownsville if range safety will dramatically restrict their launch trajectory options?

Edit/CR: excessive line breaks in quote removed
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: IslandPlaya on 09/08/2014 08:43 pm
Wow! The conclusion of Adamo's range safety issues paper raises a number of troubling questions.

Quote
The tight launch trajectory envelope out of Brownsville does not bode well for flexible operations. Rendezvous in LEO will be possible only for satellites near 26.3° inclination. Reaching GEO will be practical, but launch windows targeting cislunar and interplanetary destinations will be only a handful of minutes in duration. Because some interplanetary destinations require launch into LEO at inclinations considerably greater than 26.3° [Ref. 2, Figure 5], initiating those missions from Brownsville will not be practical. At times, destinations like Mars will be unavailable to Brownsville launches without propulsive penalties or transit delays. Other launch locations would not be subject to those penalties or delays.

In conclusion, the decision to launch rockets from the vicinity of Brownsville, Texas targeting destinations in LEO and beyond appears highly problematic if historic range safety standards apply. Some of these standards appear to be absent from considerations documented in the FAA's environmental impact statement for this launch site. At best, full assessment of range safety standards would permit only a narrow range of departure ground tracks from Brownsville at inclinations to Earth's equator near 26.3°.

SpaceX optimise for cost, not performance.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: billh on 09/08/2014 08:45 pm
Wow! The conclusion of Adamo's range safety issues paper raises a number of troubling questions.

Quote
The tight launch trajectory envelope out of Brownsville does not bode well for flexible operations. Rendezvous in LEO will be possible only for satellites near 26.3° inclination. Reaching GEO will be practical, but launch windows targeting cislunar and interplanetary destinations will be only a handful of minutes in duration. Because some interplanetary destinations require launch into LEO at inclinations considerably greater than 26.3° [Ref. 2, Figure 5], initiating those missions from Brownsville will not be practical. At times, destinations like Mars will be unavailable to Brownsville launches without propulsive penalties or transit delays. Other launch locations would not be subject to those penalties or delays.

In conclusion, the decision to launch rockets from the vicinity of Brownsville, Texas targeting destinations in LEO and beyond appears highly problematic if historic range safety standards apply. Some of these standards appear to be absent from considerations documented in the FAA's environmental impact statement for this launch site. At best, full assessment of range safety standards would permit only a narrow range of departure ground tracks from Brownsville at inclinations to Earth's equator near 26.3°.

Presumably, SpaceX considered these issues before signing onto the Brownsville site. What would be their justification for choosing Brownsville if range safety will dramatically restrict their launch trajectory options?

They have been clear that Brownsville is only for GEO missions.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: WindyCity on 09/08/2014 08:46 pm
SpaceX optimise for cost, not performance.

I understand, but if range safety drastically limits what missions they can launch from Brownsville, won't that cut into their revenue significantly?
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Lars_J on 09/08/2014 08:47 pm
Wow! The conclusion of Adamo's range safety issues paper raises a number of troubling questions.

Quote
The tight launch trajectory envelope out of Brownsville does not bode well for flexible operations. Rendezvous in LEO will be possible only for satellites near 26.3° inclination. Reaching GEO will be practical, but launch windows targeting cislunar and interplanetary destinations will be only a handful of minutes in duration. Because some interplanetary destinations require launch into LEO at inclinations considerably greater than 26.3° [Ref. 2, Figure 5], initiating those missions from Brownsville will not be practical. At times, destinations like Mars will be unavailable to Brownsville launches without propulsive penalties or transit delays. Other launch locations would not be subject to those penalties or delays.

In conclusion, the decision to launch rockets from the vicinity of Brownsville, Texas targeting destinations in LEO and beyond appears highly problematic if historic range safety standards apply. Some of these standards appear to be absent from considerations documented in the FAA's environmental impact statement for this launch site. At best, full assessment of range safety standards would permit only a narrow range of departure ground tracks from Brownsville at inclinations to Earth's equator near 26.3°.

Presumably, SpaceX considered these issues before signing onto the Brownsville site. What would be their justification for choosing Brownsville if range safety will dramatically restrict their launch trajectory options?

This has been well know - at least on this forum. There is only one launch azimuth available at the moment from Brownsville/Boca Chica, and SpaceX knows this - which is why it will be used almost exclusively for commercial GTO launches.

Brownsville was chosen because they will control their own range there, with no competing launches blocking dates. Cost (taxes) was also a major factor.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: IslandPlaya on 09/08/2014 08:49 pm
SpaceX optimise for cost, not performance.

I understand, but if range safety drastically limits what missions they can launch from Brownsville, won't that cut into their revenue significantly?
What Lars_J said.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: WindyCity on 09/08/2014 08:50 pm

They have been clear that Brownsville is only for GEO missions.

Ah. Perhaps that explains it. Odd that the author wouldn't have known that; else, why would he have written this paper, which looks at launches to LEO.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: WindyCity on 09/08/2014 08:52 pm
Thanks, Lars_J and IslandPlaya, for your explanations.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: IslandPlaya on 09/08/2014 08:53 pm

They have been clear that Brownsville is only for GEO missions.

Ah. Perhaps that explains it. Odd that the author wouldn't have known that; else, why would he have written this paper, which looks at launches to LEO.
He should join NSF. Perhaps he might learn something and be happy!  ;)
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: nadreck on 09/08/2014 08:55 pm
The justification is that the bulk of their current business outside of NASA is communications satellites and these are served well by this location. ISS flights would continue to launch from the cape, future manned ISS flights from the Cape as well, I don't know if there would be any sense to having a LEO depot/station/hotel/dry-docks in an orbit inclined 26 degrees, but if so then that could be there as well, so the potential for manned flights would exist.

Also, I presume SpaceX is planning for the eventuality (say by the 20's ) of FAA rules treating their re-usable rockets under far less stringent rules closer to aircraft since they have terminal guidance and can steer out of the way on descent even under less than nominal operating conditions.  But, the SpaceX stated goal of the Brownsville site was the GTO market.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: guckyfan on 09/08/2014 09:00 pm
MCT missions to Mars would depart from LEO after refuelling, I assume. I understand that simple refuelling runs would be possible to 26.3° inclination. TMI would be from that inclination in LEO which should not be a problem.

That's assuming they will some day get permission to launch BFR and launch them frequently. Maybe not a safe assumption at all.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: SoulWager on 09/08/2014 09:10 pm
Wow! The conclusion of Adamo's range safety issues paper raises a number of troubling questions.

Quote
The tight launch trajectory envelope out of Brownsville does not bode well for flexible operations. Rendezvous in LEO will be possible only for satellites near 26.3° inclination. Reaching GEO will be practical, but launch windows targeting cislunar and interplanetary destinations will be only a handful of minutes in duration. Because some interplanetary destinations require launch into LEO at inclinations considerably greater than 26.3° [Ref. 2, Figure 5], initiating those missions from Brownsville will not be practical. At times, destinations like Mars will be unavailable to Brownsville launches without propulsive penalties or transit delays. Other launch locations would not be subject to those penalties or delays.

In conclusion, the decision to launch rockets from the vicinity of Brownsville, Texas targeting destinations in LEO and beyond appears highly problematic if historic range safety standards apply. Some of these standards appear to be absent from considerations documented in the FAA's environmental impact statement for this launch site. At best, full assessment of range safety standards would permit only a narrow range of departure ground tracks from Brownsville at inclinations to Earth's equator near 26.3°.

Presumably, SpaceX considered these issues before signing onto the Brownsville site. What would be their justification for choosing Brownsville if range safety will dramatically restrict their launch trajectory options?
They have multiple launch sites for a reason, they're not shutting anything down in Florida.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: oiorionsbelt on 09/08/2014 09:14 pm
Quote
The tight launch trajectory envelope out of Brownsville does not bode well for flexible operations. Rendezvous in LEO will be possible only for satellites near 26.3° inclination. Reaching GEO will be practical, but launch windows targeting cislunar and interplanetary destinations will be only a handful of minutes in duration. Because some interplanetary destinations require launch into LEO at inclinations considerably greater than 26.3° [Ref. 2, Figure 5], initiating those missions from Brownsville will not be practical. At times, destinations like Mars will be unavailable to Brownsville launches without propulsive penalties or transit delays. Other launch locations would not be subject to those penalties or delays.

In conclusion, the decision to launch rockets from the vicinity of Brownsville, Texas targeting destinations in LEO and beyond appears highly problematic if historic range safety standards apply. Some of these standards appear to be absent from considerations documented in the FAA's environmental impact statement for this launch site. At best, full assessment of range safety standards would permit only a narrow range of departure ground tracks from Brownsville at inclinations to Earth's equator near 26.3°.

SpaceX seem to be keen on not using historic range safety techniques. Whether they'll be able to or not is another matter but my guess is they will try.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Kabloona on 09/08/2014 10:34 pm
It's not a question of range safety "techniques," it's a question of whether historical "standards" will be applied, eg the one-in-one-million probability of casualties, and it will be the FAA, not SpaceX, who determine and apply the appropriate standards.

Anyway, as pointed out earlier, F9's from Boca Chica will be able to reach GTO without any range safety issues under current rules.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Llian Rhydderch on 09/08/2014 11:35 pm
Wow! The conclusion of Adamo's range safety issues paper raises a number of troubling questions.

Quote
The tight launch trajectory envelope out of Brownsville does not bode well for flexible operations. Rendezvous in LEO will be possible only for satellites near 26.3° inclination. Reaching GEO will be practical, but launch windows targeting cislunar and interplanetary destinations will be only a handful of minutes in duration. Because some interplanetary destinations require launch into LEO at inclinations considerably greater than 26.3° [Ref. 2, Figure 5], initiating those missions from Brownsville will not be practical. At times, destinations like Mars will be unavailable to Brownsville launches without propulsive penalties or transit delays. Other launch locations would not be subject to those penalties or delays.

In conclusion, the decision to launch rockets from the vicinity of Brownsville, Texas targeting destinations in LEO and beyond appears highly problematic if historic range safety standards apply. Some of these standards appear to be absent from considerations documented in the FAA's environmental impact statement for this launch site. At best, full assessment of range safety standards would permit only a narrow range of departure ground tracks from Brownsville at inclinations to Earth's equator near 26.3°.

Presumably, SpaceX considered these issues before signing onto the Brownsville site. What would be their justification for choosing Brownsville if range safety will dramatically restrict their launch trajectory options?

This has been well know - at least on this forum. There is only one launch azimuth available at the moment from Brownsville/Boca Chica, and SpaceX knows this - which is why it will be used almost exclusively for commercial GTO launches.

Brownsville was chosen because they will control their own range there, with no competing launches blocking dates. Cost (taxes) was also a major factor.

Exactly.  The focus for Brownsville is GEO commsats.

And it is worth keeping in mind that Texas is not only just one launch site of four (along with CCAFS, Vandenberg AFB, NASA KSC) when it opens in a few years, Gwynne Shotwell has said that to meet their anticipated growth, they would be looking for even more launch sites beyond Brownsville.  So I would think we might see others announced as well before the decade is out; no doubt with additional launch trajectories available.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: docmordrid on 09/09/2014 12:47 am
I'm betting on a hookup with Space Georgia at the Camden County site.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Blackjax on 09/09/2014 01:40 am
The Space Enterprise Institute has published a six-page report on range safety issues for orbital launches from Brownsville, Texas, authored by Daniel Adamo. You may download it at http://www.spaceenterpriseinstitute.org/2014/09/range-safety-implications-for-brownsville-texas-launches-to-earth-orbit/. Free registration is required.

Dan Adamo is on the Space Show tomorrow (9/9/2014) at 7-8:30 PM PDT (10-11:30 PM EDT, 9-10:30 PM CDT) if you want to discuss it with him. 
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Damon Hill on 09/09/2014 03:53 am
This location appears to be within a small housing development, literally in their back yards.  Has SpaceX bought out the whole thing?  Will people continue to live there and evacuate for a few hours during launch operations?

Has Mexico weighed in with an opinion, or have they even noticed how close it is to their border, albeit salt marsh.  Looks like it'll overfly a wildlife refuge, too.

I had originally envisioned a genuinely remote and undeveloped location, and this isn't quite that.  My mind's sort of boggled, but obviously launching a rocket doesn't really require a sprawling complex.  At least up to a certain size.  I'm willing to reconsider >that< if they decide to fly Heavies out of there.

This is going to be fun to watch.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Lars_J on 09/09/2014 04:38 am
I had originally envisioned a genuinely remote and undeveloped location, and this isn't quite that.

You may have envisioned something "genuinely remote", but such areas are in short supply - especially for places where orbital launches have a free path across water.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: meekGee on 09/09/2014 05:17 am
MCT missions to Mars would depart from LEO after refuelling, I assume. I understand that simple refuelling runs would be possible to 26.3° inclination. TMI would be from that inclination in LEO which should not be a problem.

That's assuming they will some day get permission to launch BFR and launch them frequently. Maybe not a safe assumption at all.

IMO the parking orbit will not be at LEO but further up.  You'd want the Mars craft to start fueled as far away (energetically) from Earth, and this includes the desire to have it burn at high velocity and perigee.

But if I understand correctly, this will make it even easier to use Boca Chica.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: ArbitraryConstant on 09/09/2014 05:19 am
I understand, but if range safety drastically limits what missions they can launch from Brownsville, won't that cut into their revenue significantly?
SpaceX seems to think, probably reasonably, that they can capture quite a large chunk of the GEO comsat market, meaning the Texas site can probably be kept at high utilization. Even with these limitations, every launch from Texas frees up the resources on the east coast for launches with other requirements.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Damon Hill on 09/09/2014 05:33 am
This is Boca Chica Village and has a little bit of history on Wikipedia.  It was formerly named Kennedy Shores and then Kopernik (after the astronomer Copernicus) Shores.  Street level views indicate at least a few houses are apparently occupied, others are boarded up but maintained.  I wonder if any are rentable?

And the launch pad itself is going to be >right there< along the highway?  Too crazy.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Lars_J on 09/09/2014 05:47 am
I do believe that SpaceX plans on buying out the entire village. (or they have already done so) Or have the city/county/state do it for them. Any remaining houses will likely be used for SpaceX employee lodging, but will be empty during launches. The exclusion zone during launches will go back half-way to Brownsville.

See the attached map. Boca Chica village is at the blue dot, the launch pad is the star nearest the beach.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: MP99 on 09/09/2014 07:34 am


AsiaSat CEO says Cape Canaveral has its drawbacks
Quote
"There are a lot of regulations and clearances and restrictions, which I think hinders the processing of commercial satellites here," Wade said in an interview at Cape Canaveral ...

"Even though our processing has gone well, it's not been without some frustrations from the various teams just having to deal with some of the bureaucracy of the government in working at the Cape," Wade said. "Unfortunately, I think that's one of the reasons that SpaceX is looking at doing commercial launches on their own satellite base down in Texas."
http://www.spaceflightnow.com/falcon9/012/140906capecanaveral/#.VAxCSGd0yoA

"SpaceX's launch pad and processing facility is on U.S. Air Force property. The military controls access to the launch base, meaning employees and visitors must comply with Defense Department security and safety restrictions."

LC-39 is KSC rather than CCAFS.

Would it help to launch from there?

Cheers, Martin
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Zardar on 09/09/2014 11:03 am

"SpaceX's launch pad and processing facility is on U.S. Air Force property. The military controls access to the launch base, meaning employees and visitors must comply with Defense Department security and safety restrictions."

LC-39 is KSC rather than CCAFS.

Would it help to launch from there?

Cheers, Martin


It's not just the launch pad and launcher integration facilities that the "employees and visitors" need access too , it's the pre-launch-payload processing facilities too (In fact, that's probably where most of their 'hands-on' work is done).

SpaceX are planning on building their own payload processing facilities in Boca Chica, but in Floridia, they use the SPIF which i think in the CCAFS controlled zone.


Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 09/09/2014 11:15 am
I do believe that SpaceX plans on buying out the entire village. (or they have already done so) Or have the city/county/state do it for them. Any remaining houses will likely be used for SpaceX employee lodging, but will be empty during launches.
What you say makes a lot of sense, except that's not what appears to be happening. 

Looking at the online Cameron County Real Estate Map (http://www.cameroncad.org/cadclientdb/propertymap.aspx), most of the lots in the area are still privately owned, except at the launch site itself.  SpaceX has only purchased 1 of the existing houses. See my latest composite map below.
 
This whole idea of a private launch site is unprecedented.  It'll be very interesting to see it unfold.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: majormajor42 on 09/09/2014 11:25 am
is a launch azimuth that squeezes past the Cayman Islands not an option and would that azimuth provide any additional benefit?
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 09/09/2014 11:35 am

It's not just the launch pad and launcher integration facilities that the "employees and visitors" need access too , it's the pre-launch-payload processing facilities too (In fact, that's probably where most of their 'hands-on' work is done).

SpaceX are planning on building their own payload processing facilities in Boca Chica, but in Floridia, they use the SPIF which i think in the CCAFS controlled zone.

Right.  Payload processing is usually separate from the launch site.

Note that the plans SpaceX outline in the Environmental Impact Study (https://www.faa.gov/about/office_org/headquarters_offices/ast/environmental/nepa_docs/review/documents_progress/spacex_texas_launch_site_environmental_impact_statement/media/FEIS_SpaceX_Texas_Launch_Site_Vol_I.pdf) show two separate payload processing facility buildings, and a launch vehicle processing hangar, all about 1.5 miles from the Boca Chica launch site.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Zardar on 09/09/2014 11:50 am

Note that the plans SpaceX outline in the Environmental Impact Study (https://www.faa.gov/about/office_org/headquarters_offices/ast/environmental/nepa_docs/review/documents_progress/spacex_texas_launch_site_environmental_impact_statement/media/FEIS_SpaceX_Texas_Launch_Site_Vol_I.pdf) show two payload processing facility buildings, both about 1.5 miles from the Boca Chica launch site.

Any insight into why they would go to the expense of  building and running two separate payload processing buildings, as opposed to multiple bays in the same building, and sharing the cranes and environmental control etc?

Hazardous/non-hazardous payloads perhaps - but every satellite launched from there would have some toxic  propellants on-board surely?
Or would there be a need to keep different customers well apart, due to ITAR issues or something like that?
Or perhaps SpaceX wants to keep eyes away from their own private payloads such as dragons, or mars tech or reusable upper stages/tugs? (if Boca chica is to be used for anything other than commercial GTO missions?)

Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Jim on 09/09/2014 12:00 pm

Any insight into why they would go to the expense of  building and running two separate payload processing buildings, as opposed to multiple bays in the same building, and sharing the cranes and environmental control etc?

1.  Hazardous/non-hazardous payloads perhaps - but every satellite launched from there would have some toxic  propellants on-board surely?
2.  Or would there be a need to keep different customers well apart, due to ITAR issues or something like that?
3.  Or perhaps SpaceX wants to keep eyes away from their own private payloads such as dragons, or mars tech or reusable upper stages/tugs? (if Boca chica is to be used for anything other than commercial GTO missions?)



1.  yes,
2, yes,
3. no
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 09/09/2014 12:07 pm

Note that the plans SpaceX outline in the Environmental Impact Study (https://www.faa.gov/about/office_org/headquarters_offices/ast/environmental/nepa_docs/review/documents_progress/spacex_texas_launch_site_environmental_impact_statement/media/FEIS_SpaceX_Texas_Launch_Site_Vol_I.pdf) show two payload processing facility buildings, both about 1.5 miles from the Boca Chica launch site.

Any insight into why they would go to the expense of  building and running two separate payload processing buildings, as opposed to multiple bays in the same building, and sharing the cranes and environmental control etc?

Hazardous/non-hazardous payloads perhaps - but every satellite launched from there would have some toxic  propellants on-board surely?
Or would there be a need to keep different customers well apart, due to ITAR issues or something like that?
Or perhaps SpaceX wants to keep eyes away from their own private payloads such as dragons, or mars tech or reusable upper stages/tugs? (if Boca chica is to be used for anything other than commercial GTO missions?)
Your reasoning above makes sense to me, but again, who knows what SpaceX is thinking here.

I would only add that, at the time of the original EIS draft, SpaceX only had access to 3 parcels of land at about 4 acres each, so that may have forced them to two separate buildings.  Now they've increased parcel 1 to 10.3 acres, so they could co-locate things if they wish.

On the other hand, it may be good to put some physical distance between your customers, as they don't want to give away anything to their competition.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: MP99 on 09/09/2014 02:29 pm



"SpaceX's launch pad and processing facility is on U.S. Air Force property. The military controls access to the launch base, meaning employees and visitors must comply with Defense Department security and safety restrictions."

LC-39 is KSC rather than CCAFS.

Would it help to launch from there?

Cheers, Martin


It's not just the launch pad and launcher integration facilities that the "employees and visitors" need access too , it's the pre-launch-payload processing facilities too (In fact, that's probably where most of their 'hands-on' work is done).

SpaceX are planning on building their own payload processing facilities in Boca Chica, but in Floridia, they use the SPIF which i think in the CCAFS controlled zone.

Ah, of course. Thank you.

Cheers, Martin
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: WindyCity on 09/09/2014 03:45 pm
David Livingston will be asking Dan Adamo about his article on range safety issues this evening on the Space Show.

Among the topics he will explore:

(1) Whether going to GEO with sats does not exempt the launcher from range issues unless somehow they get the parameters for Brownsville modified.

(2) SpaceX received a copy of Dan's paper close to two weeks ago. Has SpaceX replied to the issues Adamo raised?

(3) Will SpaceX get some exemptions from some of the range issues which are federal, not state?

David mentioned that Gwynne Shotwell stated on his show recently that launches from Brownsville must thread a narrow needle because of range safety considerations, mainly related to the debris field parameters in the event of an aborted or terminated flight. Every launch, including those to GEO, must first transition through LEO, which might explain why Adamo focussed on low orbits in his paper. He will be asked about this in Dr. L's interview.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Lars_J on 09/09/2014 04:01 pm
I do believe that SpaceX plans on buying out the entire village. (or they have already done so) Or have the city/county/state do it for them. Any remaining houses will likely be used for SpaceX employee lodging, but will be empty during launches.
What you say makes a lot of sense, except that's not what appears to be happening. 

Looking at the online Cameron County Real Estate Map (http://www.cameroncad.org/cadclientdb/propertymap.aspx), most of the lots in the area are still privately owned, except at the launch site itself.  SpaceX has only purchased 1 of the existing houses. See my latest composite map below.
 
This whole idea of a private launch site is unprecedented.  It'll be very interesting to see it unfold.

Yep, interesting for sure.

I took the liberty of overlaying your map image on top of google maps, to illustrate that while there are lots of properties there, a tiny minority actually have buildings or any kind of development.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Space Ghost 1962 on 09/09/2014 04:59 pm
I understand, but if range safety drastically limits what missions they can launch from Brownsville, won't that cut into their revenue significantly?
SpaceX seems to think, probably reasonably, that they can capture quite a large chunk of the GEO comsat market, meaning the Texas site can probably be kept at high utilization. Even with these limitations, every launch from Texas frees up the resources on the east coast for launches with other requirements.
Absolutely. My emphasis above.

This is a launch site whose primary motivation is launch frequency gated by payloads and vehicles and not range.

Its interesting to see the choices they are making that gate the flow(s). It appears they are not attempting to over reach on frequency.

So it is also a launch site whose economics are tailored to launch frequency declines as well as up times. Looks like if they needed, they could mothball it and restart it for low cost. Fascinating. Both the good times and the bad.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 09/09/2014 05:22 pm
I took the liberty of overlaying your map image on top of google maps, to illustrate that while there are lots of properties there, a tiny minority actually have buildings or any kind of development.

True.

There are about 3 dozen houses there.  SpaceX has purchased one of them.

From what I've heard, most of the homes are only occupied seasonally.  I believe they're down to 1 permanent resident.

Also, as pointed out in thread 2, many of the lots that were sold in 1967 are now under salt water due to Hurricane Beulah changing the shore line, so these are practically worthless.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boca_Chica_Village

But still, there are many viable lots there that are privately owned, and SpaceX seems in no rush to buy them.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: MTom on 09/09/2014 08:31 pm
I do believe that SpaceX plans on buying out the entire village. (or they have already done so) Or have the city/county/state do it for them. Any remaining houses will likely be used for SpaceX employee lodging, but will be empty during launches.
What you say makes a lot of sense, except that's not what appears to be happening. 

Looking at the online Cameron County Real Estate Map (http://www.cameroncad.org/cadclientdb/propertymap.aspx), most of the lots in the area are still privately owned, except at the launch site itself.  SpaceX has only purchased 1 of the existing houses. See my latest composite map below.
 
This whole idea of a private launch site is unprecedented.  It'll be very interesting to see it unfold.

Despite the fact that these houses have to kept left during launch, if I would own a house there I would keep it for renting / for tourist, etc.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 09/09/2014 09:11 pm
Despite the fact that these houses have to kept left during launch, if I would own a house there I would keep it for renting / for tourist, etc.

The Environmental Impact Study (https://www.faa.gov/about/office_org/headquarters_offices/ast/environmental/nepa_docs/review/documents_progress/spacex_texas_launch_site_environmental_impact_statement/media/FEIS_SpaceX_Texas_Launch_Site_Vol_I.pdf) implies that residents would be at their homes during launches.
Quote
Significant increases in noise from launch vehicle operations would result in an unavoidable adverse
impact for Boca Chica Village residents. However, hearing protection measures would be implemented
to ensure the health and safety of Boca Chica Village residents during launch activities.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: MTom on 09/09/2014 09:28 pm
Despite the fact that these houses have to kept left during launch, if I would own a house there I would keep it for renting / for tourist, etc.

The Environmental Impact Study (https://www.faa.gov/about/office_org/headquarters_offices/ast/environmental/nepa_docs/review/documents_progress/spacex_texas_launch_site_environmental_impact_statement/media/FEIS_SpaceX_Texas_Launch_Site_Vol_I.pdf) implies that residents would be at their homes during launches.
Quote
Significant increases in noise from launch vehicle operations would result in an unavoidable adverse
impact for Boca Chica Village residents. However, hearing protection measures would be implemented
to ensure the health and safety of Boca Chica Village residents during launch activities.

I see the signs: "Exclusive trip to Boca Chica! Enjoy the launch from the best place ever! And don't you leave your welding helmet at home!"
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: AJW on 09/11/2014 01:06 am
Hey, it's a party!

http://www.kveo.com/news/city-brownsville-host-spacex-celebration-event

The City of Brownsville will be hosting a SpaceX celebration event this September.

The event is scheduled for Monday, September 22nd at the Brownsville Sports Park from 5:30-8 p.m. and open to the public.

There will be a variety of family oriented games, activities and educational presentations.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: AJW on 09/11/2014 02:59 pm
... and some info on road closures in Boca Chica as part of the property acquisition.   These streets appear to have been set aside as right-of-way within the subdivision, but may never have been paved and don't appear on mapquest.

http://www.valleymorningstar.com/news/local_news/article_f0c58e68-3965-11e4-a18f-0017a43b2370.html
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Stellvia on 09/11/2014 06:29 pm
Quote
Shotwell: Brownsville launch site groundbreaking Sept 21-22, will take 2 yrs to build in parallel w/Pad 39A; both to launch F9 and Heavy.

-- https://twitter.com/AvWeekParis/status/509369986851549184

Quote
Shotwell: Brownsville to give more flexibility w/launch dates. Texas to launch mainly commercial GTO sats; Air Force likes Cape, Vandenberg.

-- https://twitter.com/AvWeekParis/status/509370657088753665
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Damon Hill on 09/11/2014 07:30 pm
... and some info on road closures in Boca Chica as part of the property acquisition.   These streets appear to have been set aside as right-of-way within the subdivision, but may never have been paved and don't appear on mapquest.

http://www.valleymorningstar.com/news/local_news/article_f0c58e68-3965-11e4-a18f-0017a43b2370.html

It appears that when the developer created a master plan, he didn't plan on a major hurricane shortly after the first phase was completed in 1967.  That didn't quite wipe out the community, but it stalled further development.  There were many undeveloped lots and streets, which exist only as lines on a map.  Some are now salt marsh.

Here's hoping SpaceX has planned for hurricanes.  The tidal surge and extreme winds of a major hurricane will easily inundate those low-lying sand dunes and little islands.

The original name for the community was Kennedy Shores, later changed to Kopernik (for Copernicus, the astronomer) Shores.  It almost seems prophetic.  :) 

Any reason planetary/lunar missions couldn't be launched from Boca Chica (Spanish for 'Little Mouth')?  I understand that the primary mission is intended to be almost solely GTO/GEO, but I don't see that the launch trajectory would preclude the possibility.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Lars_J on 09/11/2014 07:48 pm

Any reason planetary/lunar missions couldn't be launched from Boca Chica (Spanish for 'Little Mouth')?  I understand that the primary mission is intended to be almost solely GTO/GEO, but I don't see that the launch trajectory would preclude the possibility.

They could, although launch windows would be fewer and/or you would lose performance by plane change maneuvers in LEO.

FH will likely have plenty of margin with most payloads, so it should be possible.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: baldusi on 09/11/2014 08:17 pm


Any reason planetary/lunar missions couldn't be launched from Boca Chica (Spanish for 'Little Mouth')?  I understand that the primary mission is intended to be almost solely GTO/GEO, but I don't see that the launch trajectory would preclude the possibility.

They could, although launch windows would be fewer and/or you would lose performance by plane change maneuvers in LEO.

FH will likely have plenty of margin with most payloads, so it should be possible.
Yea, and most escape missions should have daily windows (albeit brief ones). But those Missions will probably be best served by the Cape. There's a lot of GSE and installations at both CCAF/KSC and VAFB. Boca Chica will have just the barebones for comm sats. At most I could see something like Ob3, but nothing more sophisticated than that.
I mean, a FH could probably push quite more than NASA can pay for to an SEL1/2, but those observation satellites will usually have lots of quirky needs. 
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Arb on 09/11/2014 08:27 pm
... and some info on road closures in Boca Chica as part of the property acquisition.   These streets appear to have been set aside as right-of-way within the subdivision, but may never have been paved and don't appear on mapquest.

http://www.valleymorningstar.com/news/local_news/article_f0c58e68-3965-11e4-a18f-0017a43b2370.html

The Valley Morning Star article lists four roads:
-Meike Place Road
-Rio Grande Boulevard
-Joanna Street
-Remedios Avenue

Not sure about the first two but Joanna Street and Remedios Avenue appear to be paved...
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 09/11/2014 08:51 pm
... and some info on road closures in Boca Chica as part of the property acquisition.   These streets appear to have been set aside as right-of-way within the subdivision, but may never have been paved and don't appear on mapquest.

http://www.valleymorningstar.com/news/local_news/article_f0c58e68-3965-11e4-a18f-0017a43b2370.html

The Valley Morning Star article lists four roads:
-Meike Place Road
-Rio Grande Boulevard
-Joanna Street
-Remedios Avenue

Not sure about the first two ...

I also looked, and couldn't find Meike Place Road or Rio Grande Boulevard on the map.


... but Joanna Street and Remedios Avenue appear to be paved...

Look closer.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: AJW on 09/11/2014 09:03 pm
Not sure about the first two but Joanna Street and Remedios Avenue appear to be paved...

Google maps has the best sat views.   Shrubs down the centers of both Joanna and Remedios.  Look like candidates for vehicles with serious ground clearance.

https://www.google.com/maps/@25.9855827,-97.1881667,121m/data=!3m1!1e3
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Damon Hill on 09/11/2014 09:05 pm
A quick look with Google Earth at ground level shows that they are single-lane dirt roads with a single residence at the west end. 

A little further west is a rectangular plot of bare sand with some tanks--water treatment?  Oil well pump storage--thousands like this all over Texas.  I once owned a little piece of land in north-central Texas rather like this.




edit: west, not east!
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 09/13/2014 02:38 pm
From the online Cameron County Real Estate Map (http://www.cameroncad.org/cadclientdb/propertymap.aspx), another lot was just added to Parcel 1.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: WindyCity on 09/13/2014 09:35 pm
On The Space Show (9/9/2014), Daniel Adamo discussed range safety for launches from Brownsville, Texas, to earth orbit. I will summarize his conclusions and then pose questions I have for the forum.

First, Adamo understands clearly that SpaceX intends to launch only commercial payloads to GTO from Brownsville. He makes the point that any such mission must transit through at least a partial low earth orbit before rising to a higher orbit, cis-lunar space, or interplanetary space; therefore range safety considerations don’t vary depending on the final destination; nor do they depend in any way on the nature of the payload.

His analysis shows that all launches from Brownsville will have to “thread a needle,” launching on an azimuth of 26.3 degrees. A nominal launch will fly between Florida and Cuba. FAA standards for range safety require that an off-nominal launch have a less than 1/10,000 probability of dropping debris on people or significant property. An environmental impact statement produced by SpaceX examines the possibility of a first stage malfunction, but does not consider what would happen if the second stage failed to achieve orbital velocity. In the worst case scenario, such an event could affect land masses around the entire globe—Cuba, the Bahamas, Africa, Madagascar, Indonesia, and even parts of the Hawaiian archipelago.

Adamo asserts that SpaceX and the FAA, which will have regulatory jurisdiction over commercial launches from Brownsville, have not yet fully considered range safety constraints on launches from that site. He says such an analysis will be performed, and it remains to be seen whether the site will be qualified for orbital launches to GTO. Unless SpaceX were to receive a waiver from the FAA, Brownsville launches will have to meet the traditional standard of 1/10,000 probability of causing injury to people or loss of significant property.

He stresses that SpaceX isn’t trying to hide anything. There hasn’t been a new spaceport certified for orbital launches since Wallops Island, which had NASA’s resources to draw upon in studying its suitability. SpaceX hasn’t had the benefit of the government’s help. It simply may not have considered all the angles—yet—but it will.

My questions are the following:

(1) Is Adamo correct that SpaceX has not yet considered the full gamut of range safety issues that could affect its decision to launch from Brownsville?

(2) Are these issues as critical as Adamo states?

(3) Could SpaceX get a waiver from the FAA if it were determined that the site did not fall within the traditional guidelines?

(2) Despite SpaceX’s purchase of property in the area, is Brownsville a done deal? If the FAA concludes that range safety constraints disqualify the Texas coast for orbital flights, SpaceX will be forced to pull out. What would be the consequences of that?
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: oiorionsbelt on 09/13/2014 09:45 pm
If the FAA concludes that range safety constraints disqualify the Texas coast for orbital flights, SpaceX will be forced to pull out. What would be the consequences of that?
They'll have beach front property to sell :) (sorry couldn't resist)
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Kabloona on 09/13/2014 10:21 pm

My questions are the following:

(1) Is Adamo correct that SpaceX has not yet considered the full gamut of range safety issues that could affect its decision to launch from Brownsville?

(2) Are these issues as critical as Adamo states?

(3) Could SpaceX get a waiver from the FAA if it were determined that the site did not fall within the traditional guidelines?

(2) Despite SpaceX’s purchase of property in the area, is Brownsville a done deal? If the FAA concludes that range safety constraints disqualify the Texas coast for orbital flights, SpaceX will be forced to pull out. What would be the consequences of that?

A different question is: would SpaceX have chosen Boca Chica if they weren't confident they could meet the FAA requirements, which they are no doubt well familiar with? How does Adamo know what "gamut of range safety issues" that SpaceX has considered?

And if the FAA hasn't considered the "full range" of issues, it's either because SpaceX hasn't formally applied for a launch license yet, or because SpaceX isn't planning to use a "full range" of launch azimuths, only the 26.3 degree (or whatever latitude Boca Chica is at). So this "full gamut" of range safety issues sounds a bit overblown to me.

The only "gamut" of range safety issues involves that one launch inclination, and Gwynne Shotwell has already acknowledged that SpaceX knows it involves "threading the needle," so apparently they are well aware of the downrange debris concerns.

I don't see any basis for worry that Boca Chica won't work. SpaceX would not be making this significant investment without being very confident that they could satisfy FAA requirements.

The other question I would ask is: What is SEI, who is Adamo, and who paid him to do this "study" raising these concerns? It seems that SEI is a non-profit think tank, which means that unnamed people and corporations pay them to do "studies" that may or may not have ulterior motives. So who paid for this "study" of posible Boca Chica range safety issues? Could it possibly be a SpaceX competitor?

Call me cynical, but there are too many supposedly neutral "studies" coming out of think tanks that aren't so neutral. So I'll take Adamo's "study" with a large grain of salt.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: WindyCity on 09/13/2014 10:38 pm
A different question is: would SpaceX have chosen Boca Chica if they weren't confident they could meet the FAA requirements, which they are no doubt well familiar with? How does Adamo know what "gamut of range safety issues" that SpaceX has considered?

He based his statement, I believe, on the environmental impact statement, which does not address second stage failures that could impact land masses and populations  along a 26.3 azimuth ground track that circles the globe. There is no public record showing that the company has investigated the "full gamut" of range safety considerations.

Quote
And if the FAA hasn't considered the "full range" of issues, it's either because SpaceX hasn't formally applied for a launch license yet, or because SpaceX isn't planning to use a "full range" of launch azimuths, only the 26.3 degree (or whatever latitude Boca Chica is at). So this "full gamut" of range safety issues sounds a bit overblown to me.

Gwynne Shotwell has already stated that launches from Brownsville will have to thread the 26.3° azimuth. The "full gamut of range safety issues" refers to considerations of off-nominal first stage and second stage events. The environmental statement that SpaceX filed addresses only first stage events. I recommend listening to the interview. You can get it at http://www.thespaceshow.com/detail.asp?q=2312. I have tried, but it's possible that I have not represented accurately everything that Adamo said.

Quote
The only "gamut" of range safety issues involves that one launch inclination, and Gwynne Shotwell has already acknowledged that SpaceX knows it involves "threading the needle," so apparently they are well aware of the downrange debris concerns.

Yes, that's true, but what he said is that it appears that the company has not looked at downrange safety affected by off-nominal second stage events. I also—and I could be mistaken in this—believe he said that the environmental statement didn't look at the entire foot print of possible debris scattering for first stage malfunctions.

Quote
I don't see any basis for worry that Boca Chica won't work. SpaceX would not be making this significant investment without being very confident that they could satisfy FAA requirements.

You'd think so. That's what I thought, too. Ergo, my question:  does anybody have any evidence that SpaceX has considered the "full range of range safety issues"?

Quote
The other question I would ask is: What is SEI, who is Adamo, and who paid him to do this "study" raising these concerns? It seems that SEI is a non-profit think tank, which means that unnamed people and corporations pay them to do "studies" that may or may not have ulterior motives. So who paid for this "study" of posible Boca Chica range safety issues? Could it possibly be a SpaceX competitor?

Call me cynical, but there are too many supposedly neutral "studies" coming out of think tanks that aren't so neutral. So I'll take Adamo's "study" with a large grain of salt.

Daniel Adamo is a graduate of the University of Rochester with a degree in optical engineering. He obtained a masters degree in physical science from the University of Houston Clear Lake. From 1979 to 2008, he was employed as a contractor at JSC where he worked in space mission trajectory simulation, design, and operations. From 1990 until 2008, he supported 90 Space Shuttle flights from Mission Control at the Dynamics Officer Console. In July 2008, he retired from regular employment to pursue astrodynamics research and consulting full time. He regularly participates in educational outreach activities.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Kabloona on 09/13/2014 10:56 pm
A different question is: would SpaceX have chosen Boca Chica if they weren't confident they could meet the FAA requirements, which they are no doubt well familiar with? How does Adamo know what "gamut of range safety issues" that SpaceX has considered?

He based his statement, I believe, on the environmental impact statement, which does not address second stage failures that could impact land masses and populations  along a 26.3 azimuth ground track that circles the globe. There is no public record showing that the company has investigated the "full gamut" of range safety considerations.


There's no such public record because the only Enivronmental Impact Statement required so far has been for the immediate vicinity of Boca Chica and the impact of building a launch site there.

When SpaceX applies for a launch license, that's the time when they will need to prove to the FAA that all downrange safety requirements are being met. That's the time to ask for "public records."

Frankly, it seems Adamo is playing a bit of a game here. SpaceX will have to prove all this to the FAA when they apply for a launch license, which will happen down the road, because they can't launch without one.

So until then, yeah, SpaceX hasn't proved their case to the FAA. So, wait until they do apply for the license and read the application. Then you'll have your "public record."
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: WindyCity on 09/13/2014 11:10 pm
There's no such public record because the only Enivronmental Impact Statement required so far has been for the immediate vicinity of Boca Chica and the impact of building a launch site there.

FAA Office of Commercial Space Transportation, Draft Environmental Impact Statement SpaceX Texas Launch Site, FAA, HQ-0092-K2, April 2013. This document may be downloaded from (faa.gov) (http://www.faa.gov/about/office_org/headquarters_offices/ast/environmental/nepa_docs/review/documents_progress/spacex_texas_launch_site_environmental_impact_statement/media/SpaceX_Texas_Launch_Site_Draft_EIS_V1.pdf)

This is a quote from Adamo's paper:
Quote
The rockets SpaceX intends to launch into LEO from Brownsville are the Falcon 9 and Falcon Heavy per the FAA's environmental impact statement [Ref. 1, p. ES-1]. According to the statement [Ref. 1 p. ES-3], "All launch trajectories would be to the east over the Gulf of Mexico." One example Falcon Heavy trajectory plot following a Brownsville launch appears in the statement [Ref. 1, p. 2-11] and is accompanied by "Warning Area" regions in the Gulf of Mexico, but hazards associated with these areas are not disclosed. Falcon 9 first stage impact is "approximately 550 miles downrange" [Ref. 1, p. 2-12], but Falcon Heavy first stage and side booster [Ref. 1, p. 2-3] impact locations are not provided. The statement does disclose, "The second stage would go into orbit with the payload." [Ref. 1, p. 2-12], an assertion assumed to apply to both Falcon 9 and Falcon Heavy. In the event of launch vehicle malfunction or abort, special provisions are made according to the following excerpt [Ref. 1, p. 2-12].

I presume he has inferred that SpaceX hasn't considered the issues he raises from this limited information.

Edit/meekGee: fixed url
Edit/CR: removed unneeded line breaks
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Llian Rhydderch on 09/13/2014 11:14 pm
On The Space Show (9/9/2014), Daniel Adamo discussed range safety for launches from Brownsville, Texas, to earth orbit. I will summarize his conclusions and then pose questions I have for the forum.

First, Adamo understands clearly that SpaceX intends to launch only commercial payloads to GTO from Brownsville. He makes the point that any such mission must transit through at least a partial low earth orbit before rising to a higher orbit, cis-lunar space, or interplanetary space; therefore range safety considerations don’t vary depending on the final destination; nor do they depend in any way on the nature of the payload.

His analysis shows that all launches from Brownsville will have to “thread a needle,” launching on an azimuth of 26.3 degrees. A nominal launch will fly between Florida and Cuba. FAA standards for range safety require that an off-nominal launch have a less than 1/10,000 probability of dropping debris on people or significant property. An environmental impact statement produced by SpaceX examines the possibility of a first stage malfunction, but does not consider what would happen if the second stage failed to achieve orbital velocity. In the worst case scenario, such an event could affect land masses around the entire globe—Cuba, the Bahamas, Africa, Madagascar, Indonesia, and even parts of the Hawaiian archipelago.

Adamo asserts that SpaceX and the FAA, which will have regulatory jurisdiction over commercial launches from Brownsville, have not yet fully considered range safety constraints on launches from that site. He says such an analysis will be performed, and it remains to be seen whether the site will be qualified for orbital launches to GTO. Unless SpaceX were to receive a waiver from the FAA, Brownsville launches will have to meet the traditional standard of 1/10,000 probability of causing injury to people or loss of significant property.

He stresses that SpaceX isn’t trying to hide anything. There hasn’t been a new spaceport certified for orbital launches since Wallops Island, which had NASA’s resources to draw upon in studying its suitability. SpaceX hasn’t had the benefit of the government’s help. It simply may not have considered all the angles—yet—but it will.

My questions are the following:

(1) Is Adamo correct that SpaceX has not yet considered the full gamut of range safety issues that could affect its decision to launch from Brownsville?

(2) Are these issues as critical as Adamo states?

(3) Could SpaceX get a waiver from the FAA if it were determined that the site did not fall within the traditional guidelines?

(2) Despite SpaceX’s purchase of property in the area, is Brownsville a done deal? If the FAA concludes that range safety constraints disqualify the Texas coast for orbital flights, SpaceX will be forced to pull out. What would be the consequences of that?

Thanks for doing that, Windy!  And good questions too.

I listened carefully to the entire podcast.  Your careful notes, and putting in the effort to share them with us all, will save all of us a great deal of time!  :)
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Kabloona on 09/13/2014 11:29 pm
There's no such public record because the only Enivronmental Impact Statement required so far has been for the immediate vicinity of Boca Chica and the impact of building a launch site there.

FAA Office of Commercial Space Transportation, Draft Environmental Impact Statement SpaceX Texas Launch Site, FAA, HQ-0092-K2, April 2013. This document may be downloaded from (faa.gov) (http://www.faa.gov/about/office_org/headquarters_offices/ast/environmental/nepa_docs/review/documents_progress/spacex_texas_launch_site_environmental_impact_statement/media/SpaceX_Texas_Launch_Site_Draft_EIS_V1.pdf)

This is a quote from Adamo's paper:
Quote
The rockets SpaceX intends to launch into LEO from Brownsville are the Falcon 9 and Falcon Heavy per the FAA's environmental impact statement [Ref. 1, p. ES-1]. According to the statement [Ref. 1 p. ES-3], "All launch trajectories would be to the east over the Gulf of Mexico." One example Falcon Heavy trajectory plot following a Brownsville launch appears in the statement [Ref. 1, p. 2-11] and is accompanied by "Warning Area" regions in the Gulf of Mexico, but hazards associated with these areas are not disclosed. Falcon 9 first stage impact is "approximately 550 miles downrange" [Ref. 1, p. 2-12], but Falcon Heavy first stage and side booster [Ref. 1, p. 2-3] impact locations are not provided. The statement does disclose, "The second stage would go into orbit with the payload." [Ref. 1, p. 2-12], an assertion assumed to apply to both Falcon 9 and Falcon Heavy. In the event of launch vehicle malfunction or abort, special provisions are made according to the following excerpt [Ref. 1, p. 2-12].

I presume he has inferred that SpaceX hasn't considered the issues he raises from this limited information.

So Adamo's paper is basically an observation that the draft EIS is not yet complete. I'm still having a hard time seeing the problem, and getting more interested in who's paying him for this "study."

If and when the final EIS still has holes in it, then I might be more interested in this discussion. Until then, it seems like a case of pointing out that a draft document is not yet complete. Because it's a draft.

Edit/CR: removed unneeded line breaks from quote
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: WindyCity on 09/13/2014 11:43 pm
So Adamo's paper is basically an observation that the draft EIS is not yet complete. I'm still having a hard time seeing the problem, and getting more interested in who's paying him for this "study."

If and when the final EIS still has holes in it, then I might be more interested in this discussion. Until then, it seems like a case of pointing out that a draft document is not yet complete. Because it's a draft.

I understand your skepticism, Kabloona. Adamo claimed in the interview that the people he's talked to at FAA and in the industry say that no exhaustive analysis has been done (yet) of range safety for orbital launches from Brownsville. This is the reason Adamo wrote his paper. He feels that even if he pops SpaceX's balloon, better now than later. I find it hard to believe, as you do, that SpaceX wouldn't have looked at this question thoroughly before committing to the site. That's why I asked in my earlier post if anybody has any inside knowledge about what the company has done in that regard, hoping that it's still not a potential road block to utilizing the Texas gulf coast for its commercial operations.

As for who's "paying him," I don't think anybody is. Listen to the interview. I think he wrote it because a bunch of people in the industry were asking him for his opinion. He's written on topics like this before, and is a recognized expert.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 09/14/2014 01:53 am
SpaceX will have to prove all this to the FAA when they apply for a launch license, which will happen down the road, because they can't launch without one.

So until then, yeah, SpaceX hasn't proved their case to the FAA. So, wait until they do apply for the license and read the application. Then you'll have your "public record."

Why would the FAA go through the trouble of doing an EIS without at least an informal assessment of potential launch trajectories?

That would be like issuing a permit for a nude beach in Antarctica.  Makes no sense.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: llanitedave on 09/14/2014 02:08 am
Second stage failures can cause long downrange effects for any launcher, from any azimuth, at any launch site.  What makes you think Boca Chica is riskier than Cape Canaveral for second stage trajectories?
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: WindyCity on 09/14/2014 03:09 am
After a few days of monitoring this thread, I'll put together all the questions and thoughts people have and send them to Adamo via the Space Enterprise Institute. On the air he seemed like a person who'd be willing to address any concerns you have. He stated that he hopes that SpaceX works through the issues he raised, because he thinks that avoiding the range issues at the Cape would benefit any commercial launch company. He said that the range safety system at the Cape is antiquated and needs modernizing.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: ChrisWilson68 on 09/14/2014 05:06 am
As for who's "paying him," I don't think anybody is. Listen to the interview. I think he wrote it because a bunch of people in the industry were asking him for his opinion. He's written on topics like this before, and is a recognized expert.

Maybe, maybe not.  He's a consultant, so he needs to keep his clients happy or he won't make a living.  It's certainly possible that at least he has a conflict of interest if he takes money regularly from a competitor of SpaceX.  It's also possible that a competitor actually directly paid him to write this report.  And it's also possible it has nothing at all to do with any SpaceX competitor and he's just writing it purely because it's what he believes and he has no biases.  We don't really know.

Quote
I don't see any basis for worry that Boca Chica won't work. SpaceX would not be making this significant investment without being very confident that they could satisfy FAA requirements.

You'd think so. That's what I thought, too. Ergo, my question:  does anybody have any evidence that SpaceX has considered the "full range of range safety issues"?

Why would we have any direct evidence one way or the other?  SpaceX doesn't publish its internal research.  Neither does any other company.  As others have said, we shouldn't expect to see this information published until SpaceX goes through the formal launch license process, and it's too early for that right now.

The circumstantial evidence is very compelling: SpaceX has invested a lot of money and time and effort on Boca Chica.  It's pretty hard to believe they would do that if hadn't studied the safety requirements in great detail and had good reason to believe they would meet the requirements.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 09/14/2014 12:59 pm
The circumstantial evidence is very compelling: SpaceX has invested a lot of money and time and effort on Boca Chica.  It's pretty hard to believe they would do that if hadn't studied the safety requirements in great detail and had good reason to believe they would meet the requirements.

I'd be surprised if SpaceX hasn't already been in contact with FAA informally regarding potential show-stoppers for the launch license.

A couple more points about Daniel Adamo's Space Show interview:

1) He had no idea if SpaceX had already purchased land around the launch area.
2) He seemed to discount the idea of a dogleg trajectory, suggesting its not viable.
3) SpaceX has purchased land under the name "DOGLEG PARK LLC".


Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: RonM on 09/14/2014 01:06 pm
How much would a dogleg maneuver reduce payload to orbit? That vector change has to come at some performance cost.

Since SpaceX will be launching from three locations and four or more pads, wouldn't they pick the best one for a particular orbital inclination?
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Hauerg on 09/14/2014 01:21 pm
How much would a dogleg maneuver reduce payload to orbit? That vector change has to come at some performance cost.

Since SpaceX will be launching from three locations and four or more pads, wouldn't they pick the best one for a particular orbital inclination?
They would not necessarily pick the best. Good enough for a particular incliniation might be, well, good enough. There will be other drivers as schedule conflicts for the pads.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 09/14/2014 01:40 pm
How much would a dogleg maneuver reduce payload to orbit? That vector change has to come at some performance cost.

Since SpaceX will be launching from three locations and four or more pads, wouldn't they pick the best one for a particular orbital inclination?
They would not necessarily pick the best. Good enough for a particular incliniation might be, well, good enough. There will be other drivers as schedule conflicts for the pads.

Here's an example of "other drivers":
AsiaSat CEO says Cape Canaveral has its drawbacks
http://www.spaceflightnow.com/falcon9/012/140906capecanaveral/#.VBWaFGd0yoA
Quote
...regulations and procedures in place at Cape Canaveral are not well-suited for commercial launches, which often involve satellites and customers from overseas.

"There are certain clearances and restrictions for foreign nationals here," Wade said. "In addition to just the nationality issues, there are just regulations that all people have to abide by here, and it does make it more difficult from a commercial perspective when you have these regulations in processing, access to locations, weather restrictions and things like that, that you deal with here at the Cape that you don't typically have to deal with at other locations."
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: RonM on 09/14/2014 02:53 pm
How much would a dogleg maneuver reduce payload to orbit? That vector change has to come at some performance cost.

Since SpaceX will be launching from three locations and four or more pads, wouldn't they pick the best one for a particular orbital inclination?
They would not necessarily pick the best. Good enough for a particular incliniation might be, well, good enough. There will be other drivers as schedule conflicts for the pads.

Here's an example of "other drivers":
AsiaSat CEO says Cape Canaveral has its drawbacks
http://www.spaceflightnow.com/falcon9/012/140906capecanaveral/#.VBWaFGd0yoA
Quote
...regulations and procedures in place at Cape Canaveral are not well-suited for commercial launches, which often involve satellites and customers from overseas.

"There are certain clearances and restrictions for foreign nationals here," Wade said. "In addition to just the nationality issues, there are just regulations that all people have to abide by here, and it does make it more difficult from a commercial perspective when you have these regulations in processing, access to locations, weather restrictions and things like that, that you deal with here at the Cape that you don't typically have to deal with at other locations."

Good answers. Less red tape would be worth it, especially if the payload doesn't require the rocket's max performance. Might as well do a dogleg to use that excess fuel.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: WindyCity on 09/14/2014 05:20 pm
Another interesting topic that David Livingston and Daniel Adamo discussed in the interview was the economics of reusable launch vehicles. Livingston told me in an email that this segment of the show attracted almost all of the responses posted at his website. I'm not sure if it's appropriate for this thread, because it's not strictly germane to the Texas site. I'll just briefly recap it:

Both Livingston and Adamo thought that the greatest challenge to SpaceX in developing reusable launch vehicles wouldn't be the technological hurdle of engineering a reusable system. They both expressed their conviction that SpaceX would succeed in its R&D effort. What they said is the big unknown is whether the company's satellite customers would buy it. They felt that satellite customers would most likely elect to maximize the mass that they lofted to orbit rather than take advantage of the one-off lower launch costs. More mass, especially in satellite maneuvering propellant, would extend the useful life of their investments. The profitability of a satellite's extended serviceable lifetime would outweigh any launch cost savings. They made it clear, however, that none of these calculations have ever been put to the test. If it weren't for SpaceX, the discussion of the economics of reusability wouldn't even be taking place, so both of them hoped to see it succeed. Livingston made the case that there will be a variety of users. Some of their missions will benefit more from launch cost savings. NASA ISS resupply missions, for instance, aren't mass sensitive. Geosynchronous communications satellites customers might prefer to max out their mass to orbit. Adamo felt that that it's likely that as launch payload capacity increased users will expand the size and mass of the satellites they seek to put up, thereby continually rejecting the reusable model. They would prefer to strip down the rockets, removing their reusability components, in order to get more mass to orbit. All this, of course, remains to be seen.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: WindyCity on 09/14/2014 05:32 pm

The circumstantial evidence is very compelling: SpaceX has invested a lot of money and time and effort on Boca Chica.  It's pretty hard to believe they would do that if hadn't studied the safety requirements in great detail and had good reason to believe they would meet the requirements.

I agree with you that it's hard to believe they wouldn't have studied the range safety implications of Boca Chica long before moving forward to the point they are now. It strikes me that such an analysis would be made right at the get-go. We'll probably have to wait until the company requests FAA approval for a launch before this question gets answered. I will send Adamo a summary of the responses people have put up in this forum and see what he says.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: WindyCity on 09/14/2014 05:38 pm
Dan Adamo wrote me the following:

Quote
I'm pleased you found The Space Show on September 9 to be worthwhile.  Getting together for a conversation with David and his audience is always rewarding to me.  Your opening summary of the broadcast's "primary piece of news" is essentially correct.  Beyond simulation results reported in my Brownsville range safety paper, however, I'd appreciate you regard my remarks concerning what SpaceX and the FAA have or haven't done in this realm as "informed speculation".  I've had direct and indirect contact with both organizations, but their past/future/intended actions on Brownsville range safety assessments are opaque to me.  The only substantive information my paper can cite is in the FAA's environmental impact statement.  With that said, let me make two suggestions for your post.

A)  Please verify your questions are enumerated 1234.  I see 1232 below.

B)  Consider citing my paper as available for download at http://spaceenterpriseinstitute.org/2014/09/range-safety-implications-for-brownsville-texas-launches-to-earth-orbit/.

I'll be interested in answers to your post's questions.  Thanks for sharing my concerns with your readers!

-Dan


As I mentioned in earlier posts, I will forward any comments other forum participants make on this subject to him and will post his replies.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 09/14/2014 05:58 pm
Both Livingston and Adamo thought that the greatest challenge to SpaceX in developing reusable launch vehicles wouldn't be the technological hurdle of engineering a reusable system. They both expressed their conviction that SpaceX would succeed in its R&D effort. What they said is the big unknown is whether the company's satellite customers would buy it. They felt that satellite customers would most likely elect to maximize the mass that they lofted to orbit rather than take advantage of the one-off lower launch costs.

Again, this shows they're missing key details. 

FHR (Heavy Reusable) has an option that will lift 7mT to GTO and land all 3 cores back at the launch site. 
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: MP99 on 09/14/2014 07:43 pm
But, when customers have had the option from the Cape, they've flown to SSO (80k km, etc), not GTO.

That will cut back substantially from FH-R's max sat size, as they apparently discussed.

Cheers, Martin
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: ChrisWilson68 on 09/14/2014 08:34 pm
But, when customers have had the option from the Cape, they've flown to SSO (80k km, etc), not GTO.

That will cut back substantially from FH-R's max sat size, as they apparently discussed.

Cheers, Martin

Falcon Heavy is supposed to be able to take 21 tons to GTO.  With communications satellites maxing out around 7 tons, they've got plenty of margin for reusability of all three cores and SSO.

Ariane 5 gave satellite makers the option of larger satellites, but the satellite companies never chose to go above 7 tons.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: QuantumG on 09/14/2014 08:48 pm
1) He had no idea if SpaceX had already purchased land around the launch area.
2) He seemed to discount the idea of a dogleg trajectory, suggesting its not viable.
3) SpaceX has purchased land under the name "DOGLEG PARK LLC".

This is the same routine Dan uses to argue against propellant depots.. with the slight addition of "there's only so many windows per month when you can launch!" When numerous people have asked for the calculations, he's demanded fees.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: RedLineTrain on 09/14/2014 10:08 pm
My sense also was that Adamo was doing a little marketing.

Nothing wrong doing that, in my view.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Kabloona on 09/14/2014 10:52 pm
Quote
I'd appreciate you regard my remarks concerning what SpaceX and the FAA have or haven't done in this realm as "informed speculation". --Dan Adamo

Glad we got that cleared up.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: QuantumG on 09/14/2014 10:53 pm
My sense also was that Adamo was doing a little marketing.

Nothing wrong doing that, in my view.

At one point I tried to take him up on the offer.. he failed to give me a quote for his services.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Kabloona on 09/14/2014 10:58 pm
My sense also was that Adamo was doing a little marketing.

Nothing wrong doing that, in my view.

At one point I tried to take him up on the offer.. he failed to give me a quote for his services.

Send him a check with enough zeros and I bet he'll get right back to you.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Lar on 09/14/2014 11:05 pm
As I mentioned in earlier posts, I will forward any comments other forum participants make on this subject to him and will post his replies.

Thanks for forwarding stuff on but I'd suggest that for best results, if he truly wants to engage with the myriad experts here (plus those emitting chaff, such as myself, rather than wheat), he should register and post here. It's not hard, and he'd find himself in rather august company (plus some fan boys like me)...
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: QuantumG on 09/14/2014 11:10 pm
As I mentioned in earlier posts, I will forward any comments other forum participants make on this subject to him and will post his replies.

Thanks for forwarding stuff on but I'd suggest that for best results, if he truly wants to engage with the myriad experts here (plus those emitting chaff, such as myself, rather than wheat), he should register and post here. It's not hard, and he'd find himself in rather august company (plus some fan boys like me)...

Come on Lar, he couldn't possibly sink to our level. Members on this forum can't make wild claims and retort with FYPM when asked to back them up.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: WindyCity on 09/14/2014 11:11 pm

Thanks for forwarding stuff on but I'd suggest that for best results, if he truly wants to engage with the myriad experts here (plus those emitting chaff, such as myself, rather than wheat), he should register and post here. It's not hard, and he'd find himself in rather august company (plus some fan boys like me)...

Yes. I sent him a link to the this thread, beginning with my post recounting his interview on The Space Show. The rest would be up to him. I must say, while I am by no means his defender, nor do I subscribe to his opinions, I am somewhat offended for his sake to find some posters in this forum attacking his motives, suggesting that he's working for SpaceX's competitors, disingenuous, or he's a bald-faced mercantilist who'll say whatever his paymasters require of him. There's no evidence for anything remotely like that, so far as I know. It's really beneath the dignity of Chris Bergin's forum to make such imputations. IMHO. It greatly diminishes the quality of the discussion.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: QuantumG on 09/14/2014 11:22 pm
I am somewhat offended for his sake to find some posters in this forum attacking his motives, suggesting that he's working for SpaceX's competitors, disingenuous, or he's a bald-faced mercantilist who'll say whatever his paymasters require of him. There's no evidence for anything remotely like that, so far as I know. It's really beneath the dignity of Chris Bergin's forum to make such imputations. IMHO. It greatly diminishes the quality of the discussion.

Who are you referring to?
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 09/14/2014 11:23 pm
Falcon Heavy is supposed to be able to take 21 tons to GTO.  With communications satellites maxing out around 7 tons, they've got plenty of margin for reusability of all three cores and SSO.

According to Wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Falcon_Heavy#Reusable_technology_development):
21mT GTO: FH expendable
14mT GTO: FH, boosters reusable, center core expendable
  7mT GTO: FH, all 3 cores reusable
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Kabloona on 09/14/2014 11:29 pm
I am somewhat offended for his sake to find some posters in this forum attacking his motives, suggesting that he's working for SpaceX's competitors, disingenuous, or he's a bald-faced mercantilist who'll say whatever his paymasters require of him. There's no evidence for anything remotely like that, so far as I know. It's really beneath the dignity of Chris Bergin's forum to make such imputations. IMHO. It greatly diminishes the quality of the discussion.

Who are you referring to?

Probably me, and I simply asked the question, who paid for his study? In my limited experience living in the real world, think-tank "studies" often draw conclusions consistent with the views of those who paid for them.

If Dan Adamo is truly independent and impartial, fine. But why is it "beneath dignity" to ask the question? I'd simply like to know whether or not he has an agenda. Some people do, believe it or not.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: MP99 on 09/15/2014 07:13 am


Falcon Heavy is supposed to be able to take 21 tons to GTO.  With communications satellites maxing out around 7 tons, they've got plenty of margin for reusability of all three cores and SSO.

According to Wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Falcon_Heavy#Reusable_technology_development):
21mT GTO: FH expendable
14mT GTO: FH, boosters reusable, center core expendable
  7mT GTO: FH, all 3 cores reusable

And my guess (and it's a pure WAG) is 4-5t to SSO.

Of course, a SEP sat will use a lot less than the difference to make up the ~300m/s shortfall, but that is prop that wouldn't need to be expended on an Ariane launch, so there is a cost in reduced on-orbit lifetime. Also some time (couple of months?) extra getting to GSO, which is time when they're not earning.

Or, the client could pay extra to expend the core, and get even bigger CommSats to SSO. You pays your money and you takes your choice.

Cheers, Martin
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: ChrisWilson68 on 09/15/2014 10:21 am


Falcon Heavy is supposed to be able to take 21 tons to GTO.  With communications satellites maxing out around 7 tons, they've got plenty of margin for reusability of all three cores and SSO.

According to Wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Falcon_Heavy#Reusable_technology_development):
21mT GTO: FH expendable
14mT GTO: FH, boosters reusable, center core expendable
  7mT GTO: FH, all 3 cores reusable

And my guess (and it's a pure WAG) is 4-5t to SSO.

Of course, a SEP sat will use a lot less than the difference to make up the ~300m/s shortfall, but that is prop that wouldn't need to be expended on an Ariane launch, so there is a cost in reduced on-orbit lifetime. Also some time (couple of months?) extra getting to GSO, which is time when they're not earning.

Or, the client could pay extra to expend the core, and get even bigger CommSats to SSO. You pays your money and you takes your choice.

There's no need to guess.  Wikipedia has references.  The 7 tons full-reusability Falcon Heavy figure comes from an Aviation Week article.  Earlier in the article it talks about the 5.3 ton SES-10 that is slated to ride Falcon 9.  And it mentioned the 4.85 ton advertised performance of F9.  Then it quotes Musk talking about how to compete with Arianespace they need to do SSO, and a partial plane change, which reduces the capacity of Falcon 9 to around 3.5 tons.  Then comes the key direct quote from Musk:

Quote
“Where I basically see this netting out is Falcon 9 will do satellites up to roughly 3.5 tonnes, with full reusability of the boost stage, and Falcon Heavy will do satellites up to 7 tonnes with full reusability of the all three boost stages,”

It's clear that the 3.5 tons already includes the SSO and partial plane change to match Ariane, so it's also clear that the 7 tons for Falcon Heavy already includes SSO and the partial plane change.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 09/15/2014 10:48 am
It's clear that the 3.5 tons already includes the SSO and partial plane change to match Ariane, so it's also clear that the 7 tons for Falcon Heavy already includes SSO and the partial plane change.

Quite possible, though not stated explicitly.

And even if that doesn't work out, expending the center core is not so bad, equivalent to expending an F9, and you get 14mT to GTO.

Musk has also mentioned the idea of FH w/ cross feed recovering the center core down range, which may get you around 12mT to GTO.  Maybe that's why SpaceX is contesting the Blue Origin Sea Landing patent.

The point is that Falcon Heavy will bring a lot of options to the table, and the Brownsville EIS already covers Falcon Heavy.  The EIS also talks about returning things to the Boca Chica launch site, though I suspect that will require a separate license.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: guckyfan on 09/15/2014 12:20 pm
They will need to have that restriction of only 2 FH launches per year from Boca Chica lifted ASAP. Or is my recollection of that limitation wrong?

Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 09/15/2014 01:04 pm
They will need to have that restriction of only 2 FH launches per year from Boca Chica lifted ASAP. Or is my recollection of that limitation wrong?

The EIS does mention 2 FH launches per year.  Once they get FHR working, I suspect they'll want to amend the EIS.  But first they have to get FHR working, and then get a launch license for it in South Texas.

In other words, I suspect FAA approvals will be an evolutionary process, and the first step (the current EIS) is usually the hardest.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Lar on 09/15/2014 01:51 pm
FH payload capacity is off topic for this thread.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: MP99 on 09/15/2014 06:36 pm


Falcon Heavy is supposed to be able to take 21 tons to GTO.  With communications satellites maxing out around 7 tons, they've got plenty of margin for reusability of all three cores and SSO.

According to Wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Falcon_Heavy#Reusable_technology_development):
21mT GTO: FH expendable
14mT GTO: FH, boosters reusable, center core expendable
  7mT GTO: FH, all 3 cores reusable

And my guess (and it's a pure WAG) is 4-5t to SSO.

Of course, a SEP sat will use a lot less than the difference to make up the ~300m/s shortfall, but that is prop that wouldn't need to be expended on an Ariane launch, so there is a cost in reduced on-orbit lifetime. Also some time (couple of months?) extra getting to GSO, which is time when they're not earning.

Or, the client could pay extra to expend the core, and get even bigger CommSats to SSO. You pays your money and you takes your choice.

There's no need to guess.  Wikipedia has references.  The 7 tons full-reusability Falcon Heavy figure comes from an Aviation Week article.  Earlier in the article it talks about the 5.3 ton SES-10 that is slated to ride Falcon 9.  And it mentioned the 4.85 ton advertised performance of F9.  Then it quotes Musk talking about how to compete with Arianespace they need to do SSO, and a partial plane change, which reduces the capacity of Falcon 9 to around 3.5 tons.  Then comes the key direct quote from Musk:

Quote
“Where I basically see this netting out is Falcon 9 will do satellites up to roughly 3.5 tonnes, with full reusability of the boost stage, and Falcon Heavy will do satellites up to 7 tonnes with full reusability of the all three boost stages,”

It's clear that the 3.5 tons already includes the SSO and partial plane change to match Ariane, so it's also clear that the 7 tons for Falcon Heavy already includes SSO and the partial plane change.

I'm sorry, but that is exactly wrong.

3.5t F9 to SSO (80k km) *expendable*.

3.5t F9 to GTO (36k km) *reusable*. 7t FH to GTO reusable.

Very clear if you read the article right. Analysis is here:- http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=35533.msg1250126#msg1250126 (http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=35533.msg1250126#msg1250126).

*Do not* reply here. Reply on the linked topic. Lar is clear this is off topic (so, apologies to Lar for the follow-up, but I am redirecting! In mitigation, I will also copy my response into that thread to make it easier for CW68 to respond in-context).

cheers, Martin
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 09/16/2014 11:22 am
Here's my latest composite map, which combines various properties shown in the online Cameron County Real Estate Appraisal Map, available here (http://www.cameroncad.org/cadclientdb/propertymap.aspx).

Note that this online map seems to be updated monthly, so it still doesn't show the latest 5 lots purchased by SpaceX (http://www.valleymorningstar.com/news/local_news/article_5599d964-33eb-11e4-95f2-001a4bcf6878.html).

The Environmental Impact Statement (https://www.faa.gov/about/office_org/headquarters_offices/ast/environmental/nepa_docs/review/documents_progress/spacex_texas_launch_site_environmental_impact_statement/media/FEIS_SpaceX_Texas_Launch_Site_Vol_I.pdf) (EIS) section 2.1.2.2 describes 5 buildings located 2 miles west of the launch site:  2 Launch Control Center Buildings, 2 Payload Processing Facilities, and a Launch Vehicle Processing Hangar.  The EIS description of the Launch Vehicle Processing Hangar is particularly interesting:
Quote
The proposed 30,774 ft2, 50-65 ft tall launch vehicle processing hangar would be used to conduct
refurbishment of flown stages, or for pre-integration preparation of the launch vehicle stages before
they go to the pad hangar for final integration. Use of this facility would improve the overall vertical
launch area throughput by minimizing the vehicle’s activities associated with the launch vehicle in the
vertical launch area Hangar.

The EIS (https://www.faa.gov/about/office_org/headquarters_offices/ast/environmental/nepa_docs/review/documents_progress/spacex_texas_launch_site_environmental_impact_statement/media/FEIS_SpaceX_Texas_Launch_Site_Vol_I.pdf) also shows maps of these 5 buildings spread across 3 parcels of land, with each parcel around 4 acres.

However, the online Cameron County Real Estate Appraisal Map (http://www.cameroncad.org/cadclientdb/propertymap.aspx) shows that SpaceX has not purchased Parcels 2 or 3, and has increased the size of Parcel 1 to 11 acres.

Also note that the Brownsville Economic Development Council (BEDC) has purchased 2.3 acres of land just South-West of Parcel 1.  This may be part of the BEDC-SpaceX-University of Texas at Brownsville’s STARGATE project (http://www.valleymorningstar.com/premium/article_759acf20-2fef-11e4-81c8-0017a43b2370.html), to build a tracking center
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: WindyCity on 09/16/2014 07:21 pm
Dan Adamo has read the posts in this thread related to his study "Range Safety Implications for Brownsville, Texas Launches to Earth Orbit" (http://www.spaceenterpriseinstitute.org/2014/09/range-safety-implications-for-brownsville-texas-launches-to-earth-orbit/) and asked me to post this follow-up:

Quote
Thanks for providing the link to your Brownsville range safety discussion thread.  I've shared it with David Livingston, and we both enjoyed reading it.  After taking in this exchange, I have additional commentary I'd appreciate your adding to the thread.  In doing this, I'm cc-ing David and my fellow trustees at SEI to maintain their awareness.  Please ensure their personal email addresses are protected from disclosure to the discussion thread.

My white paper on Brownsville range safety implications is a purely academic pursuit.  I'm not being remunerated for the Brownsville paper, and its posting to the SEI website is likewise free of cost to me and to anyone wishing to download it.  Information on SEI's mission and its trustees is available at http://spaceenterpriseinstitute.org/.

The Brownsville paper is partly motivated by colleagues in and out of NASA unfamiliar with SpaceX planning.  Recently, these colleagues have been posing hypothetical questions to me about what ground tracks bound for ISS rendezvous from Brownsville would look like.  In addition, I'd published a similar white paper in January 2011 in which I'd determined a coastal location 25 mi south of Corpus Christi, Texas could conduct launches whose payloads would exit the Gulf of Mexico through the Straights of Florida using a southbound heading at a 28.5 deg inclination.  This paper raised range safety concerns similar to those for Brownsville launches with this exit strategy.  Unfortunately, the 2011 paper saw limited distribution, and my concerns went unaddressed.  In the interests of public safety and minimal impact to SpaceX, whose aspirations I admire, I felt the need to reiterate my concerns once the Brownsville launch site location became known in August 2014.

I urge my fellow SpaceX fans to recognize this firm isn't infallible.  Since we're all speculating about the thoroughness of a private company interfacing with a Federal agency in a new way, let me add mine.  In attempting to bring Brownsville online as a viable launch site, I posit SpaceX is dealing with unfamiliar regulations and analyses.  Likewise, I suggest the FAA is attempting for the first time to clear a commercially operated launch site targeting Earth orbit.  Brownsville launch certification is unfamiliar territory for both organizations.  When I recall anecdotes from the first Dragon rendezvous and associated ISS interface issues I've received from colleagues, failure to consider all range safety issues at Brownsville isn't a surprise to me.  Launches into Earth orbit are complex undertakings, and the technical "rocket science" is only the tip of the iceberg.

-Dan

Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: butters on 09/16/2014 07:37 pm
Why would SpaceX do ISS missions from Boca Chica?  They have LC-39A for that. This site is for GTO comsats.

Plus, Florida is pretty far downrange. Wouldn't the upper stage burn up if it lost thrust (and the FTS somehow failed) that late in the ascent?
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Kabloona on 09/16/2014 07:42 pm
Thank you for posting that follow-up from Dan Adamo. It answers my questions about his impartiality and what impelled his study.

I hope he will feel free to contribute to the discussion here directly.

It does seem strange, however, that he is raising questions about ISS launches from Boca Chica when SpaceX has said specifically that ISS launches will only be done from the Cape, and that Boca Chica will have only GTO (commercial) launches. So why is this even being discussed as an issue?
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: WindyCity on 09/16/2014 07:48 pm
I hesitate to speak for Dan Adamo, but my understanding is that the people who originally asked him to study the range safety implications of Brownsville launches to the ISS were unfamiliar with SpaceX's intended use for the spaceport. Adamo knows that the company plans to utilize it only for launching commercial satellites to GTO. His contention is that a rocket bound for GTO has to spend time coasting in LEO before raising its orbit; therefore, the range safety implications remain the same for a launch aimed only for LEO. (I hope I've presented his comments accurately. Please listen to the 9/9 interview. It's archived at thespaceshow.com.)
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Lars-J on 09/16/2014 07:56 pm
Why the heck is he focused on ISS launches from Brownsville? That's not happening, and it isn't what the site will be used for.

And if he is concerned about a LEO parking not being reached - and possibly impacting anywhere, then his comments apply to ANY potential SpaceX site, and I would recommend a refresher in orbital mechanics.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Kabloona on 09/16/2014 08:04 pm
Quote
In addition, I'd published a similar white paper in January 2011 in which I'd determined a coastal location 25 mi south of Corpus Christi, Texas could conduct launches whose payloads would exit the Gulf of Mexico through the Straights of Florida using a southbound heading at a 28.5 deg inclination.  This paper raised range safety concerns similar to those for Brownsville launches with this exit strategy.

I think what he's trying to say is that, in the 2011 study he looked at a different potential launch site in TX (roughly 120 miles north of Brownsville) for possible ISS launches and found potential range safety concerns.

But since his 2011 paper was ignored ("Unfortunately, the 2011 paper saw limited distribution, and my concerns went unaddressed."), he is raising those concerns again, because he see some similar issues with launches from Boca Chica going to 26.3 degrees...even though that's a slightly different inclination from a slightly different launch site. But evidently the site locations and inclinations are close enough that the perceived range safety issues he identified in 2011 remain relevant, in his view.

And I'm not trying to be snarky, just trying to understand where he's coming from.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: WmThomas on 09/17/2014 04:08 pm
Isn't it possible that Adamo is right that SpaceX may not have fully appreciated the regulatory requirements?

SpaceX has a silicon-valley-ish attitude to regulation and may think that the safety standards for launch overflights are irrational.

The FAA lets planes fly overhead all the time. If rockets could be made reliable, why not rockets?
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Kabloona on 09/17/2014 04:21 pm
Quote
In attempting to bring Brownsville online as a viable launch site, I posit SpaceX is dealing with unfamiliar regulations and analyses.  Likewise, I suggest the FAA is attempting for the first time to clear a commercially operated launch site targeting Earth orbit.  Brownsville launch certification is unfamiliar territory for both organizations.

That's probably the crux of the issue. This is terra incognita on both sides. If Dan Adamo sees valid concerns, better to raise them now so FAA and SpaceX can address them.

But in reply to WmThomas, the issue is not making rockets "more reliable." The issue is what are the appropriate standards and analyses for potential failure scenarios, and are they being applied properly.

And SpaceX is quite aware of range safety standards at the Cape and went through a good deal of effort in meeting them (viz FTS qualifcation problems, etc). Furthermore, Elon and Gwynne Shotwell are probably quite reluctant to be raining debris on downrange territory. That would be very bad press and would jeopardize their whole operation at Boca Chica. So the suggestion that SpaceX has a lax attitude towards range safety at Boca Chica is unlikely, IMO.

Ultimately, though, SpaceX's opinion is moot. What matters is the FAA requirements that SpaceX must meet, period. And apparently in Adamo's view, FAA range safety standards and analysis methods for Boca Chica are inadequate. Whatever the case, it's FAA who makes the rules.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: su27k on 09/17/2014 04:24 pm

Quote
Brownsville launch certification is unfamiliar territory for both organizations.

Is it unfamiliar territory for FAA? Who certified the Alaska launch site or SpaceX's F1 launch site?
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Jim on 09/17/2014 04:25 pm

Quote
Brownsville launch certification is unfamiliar territory for both organizations.

Is it unfamiliar territory for FAA? Who certified the Alaska launch site or SpaceX's F1 launch site?

F1 was a Army test site.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Kabloona on 09/17/2014 04:37 pm

Quote
Brownsville launch certification is unfamiliar territory for both organizations.

Is it unfamiliar territory for FAA? Who certified the Alaska launch site or SpaceX's F1 launch site?

F1 was a Army test site.

Furthermore, what's new is trying to "thread the needle" between Florida and Cuba (and Haiti/Dominican/Puerto Rico). A failure that impacts any of those landmasses is a potential big problem that  is not an issue for sites like the Cape or Kwajalein.

Also, there are oil platforms downrange in the Gulf that will be near the flight path, and that's another element of "unfamiliar territory."
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: ThereIWas3 on 09/17/2014 04:43 pm
I beleive the US military (Navy, Coast Guard, etc) takes care of clearing boats out of the path of launches from Florida.  I am guessing SpaceX will have to arrange such services itself in Texas.  Maybe the CG would do it for a fee..
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: butters on 09/17/2014 05:02 pm
Is it even possible for a significant pieces of an upper stage to impact Florida or Cuba so far downrange from Boca Chica? Wouldn't the reentry velocity be plenty fast enough by that point to ensure that the stage burns up? And isn't there an FTS that would unzip the upper stage if it could not reach orbit? Seems like it would take a vehicle failure followed by an FTS failure during a relatively low-risk phase of upper stage ascent to even have a remote chance that little bits of thrust structure might possibly survive reentry and fall on land.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Kabloona on 09/17/2014 05:11 pm
FWIW, I just downloaded and read Dan Adamo's paper. It's a brief (6 page) analysis of possible trajectories from Boca Chica.

At the risk of oversimplification, the first part of the paper looks at trajectories to ISS and concludes they will not be possible due to land overflight. The second part of the paper looks at the 26.3 degree trajectory that "threads the needle" between Florida and the West Indies and concludes that, while it may be possible, there is still the possibility of downrange impact in Florida or the islands in case of failure.

If it's permissible to quote the final paragraph of the paper:

"In conclusion, the decision to launch rockets from the vicinity of Brownsville, Texas targeting destinations in LEO and beyond appears highly problematic if historic range safety standards apply. Some of these standards appear to be absent from considerations documented in the FAA's environmental impact statement for this launch site. At best, full assessment of range safety standards would permit only a narrow range of departure ground tracks from Brownsville at inclinations to Earth's equator near 26.3°."

I'm not sure exactly which "historic standards" appear to be absent from consideration. Maybe he means the Shuttle trajectory requirements that even far downrange islands be distant from the flight path (see post below).

Edit/CR: removed excessive line breaks
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Kabloona on 09/17/2014 05:16 pm
Is it even possible for a significant pieces of an upper stage to impact Florida or Cuba so far downrange from Boca Chica? Wouldn't the reentry velocity be plenty fast enough by that point to ensure that the stage burns up? And isn't there an FTS that would unzip the upper stage if it could not reach orbit? Seems like it would take a vehicle failure followed by an FTS failure during a relatively low-risk phase of upper stage ascent to even have a remote chance that little bits of thrust structure might possibly survive reentry and fall on land.

Quoting again from the Adamo paper:

"If SpaceX conforms to the FAA's environment impact statement and is held accountable to range safety standards under which humans were launched into LEO aboard the Space Shuttle, the allowable trajectory envelope from Brownsville will be highly restricted. Space Shuttle standards require even remote Pacific islands to be well removed from the nominal ground track in case LEO cannot be achieved. The Falcon 9 and Falcon Heavy must be held to a similar restriction should their second stages malfunction short of LEO speed (an "underspeed" condition in Space Shuttle abort terminology). In many cases, such underspeeds would cause second stage and payload debris to impact Earth much farther downrange than the Gulf of Mexico. Marginal underspeed scenarios just short of LEO could have debris impacting along "footprints" hundreds of miles long nearly a full orbit after launch."

Edit/CR: removed excessive line breaks
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: butters on 09/17/2014 05:27 pm
Shuttle orbiters didn't have an FTS. Do these debris landfall scenarios depend on an FTS failure?
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Kabloona on 09/17/2014 05:34 pm
Shuttle orbiters didn't have an FTS. Do these debris landfall scenarios depend on an FTS failure?

I don't know and I don't think he does either. It seems he's at the hand-waving level of saying that, in the event of some kind of unspecified failure, debris could impact Florida or the Islands, but no one has done the analysis, or if they have it's not part of the FAA EIS, and maybe that's part of his beef.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: LouScheffer on 09/17/2014 05:59 pm

Quoting again from the Adamo paper:

"If SpaceX conforms to the FAA's environment impact statement and is held accountable to range safety standards under which humans were launched into LEO aboard the Space Shuttle, the allowable trajectory envelope from Brownsville will be highly restricted. Space Shuttle standards require even remote Pacific islands to be well removed from the nominal ground track in case LEO cannot be achieved. The Falcon 9 and Falcon Heavy must be held to a similar restriction should their second stages malfunction short of LEO speed (an "underspeed" condition in Space Shuttle abort terminology). In many cases, such underspeeds would cause second stage and payload debris to impact Earth much farther downrange than the Gulf of Mexico. Marginal underspeed scenarios just short of LEO could have debris impacting along "footprints" hundreds of miles long nearly a full orbit after launch."
I fail to see how this is a novel or difficult problem.  They are not launching Shuttles, they are launching comsats.  And all comsat launches from the Cape, in the case of underspeed, could rain down on Africa with tracks thousands of miles long over inhabited areas.  Whatever analysis/FTS/etc that applies in this case should apply equally well to Brownsville.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Kabloona on 09/17/2014 06:04 pm
Agreed; this seems in part an exercise in saying "well, we didn't do it that way on Shuttle," which was an entirely different beast.

But I'm still trying to give the author the benefit of the doubt and find some validity to his concerns, if any. So far the best I can come up with is this paragraph:

"One example Falcon Heavy trajectory plot following a Brownsville launch appears in the statement [Ref. 1, p. 2-11] and is accompanied by "Warning Area" regions in the Gulf of Mexico, but hazards associated with these areas are not disclosed. Falcon 9 first stage impact is "approximately 550 miles downrange" [Ref. 1, p. 2-12], but Falcon Heavy first stage and side booster [Ref. 1, p. 2-3] impact locations are not provided."

So there are some unspecified hazards in the "Warning Area," and the FH booster impact locations have not yet been specified. Such omissions as one might expect to find in a draft report.

Edit/CR: removed excessive line breaks - you can do this yourself, you know!
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: LouScheffer on 09/17/2014 06:24 pm
Quoting again from the Adamo paper:

"If SpaceX conforms to the FAA's environment impact statement and is held accountable to range safety standards under which humans were launched into LEO aboard the Space Shuttle, the allowable trajectory envelope from Brownsville will be highly restricted. Space Shuttle standards require even remote Pacific islands to be well removed from the nominal ground track in case LEO cannot be achieved. The Falcon 9 and Falcon Heavy must be held to a similar restriction should their second stages malfunction short of LEO speed (an "underspeed" condition in Space Shuttle abort terminology). In many cases, such underspeeds would cause second stage and payload debris to impact Earth much farther downrange than the Gulf of Mexico. Marginal underspeed scenarios just short of LEO could have debris impacting along "footprints" hundreds of miles long nearly a full orbit after launch."
Here is a ground track, from a comsat launch from the cape, that goes directly over France, which is neither remote nor sparsely populated.  Clearly comsat launches have a way to deal with this (I suspect, but do not know for sure, that if it does not achieve orbital speed they simply blow it up.)

http://www.spaceflightnow.com/atlas/ac156/010617track.html

Edit/CR: removed excessive line breaks in quote
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Zed_Noir on 09/17/2014 06:25 pm
I email Dan during the live web cast to ask if he was aware of the almost GTO only missions from Brownsville for SpaceX. He say yes, Than says off nominal second stage performance could send it to locations way off the flight footprint.

IMO you could say the same of all second stages.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Lars-J on 09/17/2014 08:36 pm
I email Dan during the live web cast to ask if he was aware of the almost GTO only missions from Brownsville for SpaceX. He say yes, Than says off nominal second stage performance could send it to locations way off the flight footprint.

IMO you could say the same of all second stages.

Yep, that can apply to *any* launch vehicle launched from *anywhere*.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: WindyCity on 09/18/2014 02:38 pm
I've enjoyed this exchange. If anything, Adamo's paper will put range safety in the spotlight. SpaceX will no doubt reexamine the issue. While I'm of the unsubstantiated opinion that it's highly unlikely that such a smart bunch of folks could have overlooked any aspect of range safety implications for orbital launches from Brownsville before selecting the site, Adamo has performed a service in focussing attention on it. SpaceX will be well prepared to answer any of the FAA's questions when the time comes.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: LouScheffer on 09/18/2014 03:19 pm
I email Dan during the live web cast to ask if he was aware of the almost GTO only missions from Brownsville for SpaceX. He say yes, Than says off nominal second stage performance could send it to locations way off the flight footprint.

IMO you could say the same of all second stages.
I don't think an off-nominal second stage can cause a way off-footprint impact for a comsat mission.  The range safety officer watches the instantaneous debris impact point during ascent.  If there is off-nominal performance (of any stage), and the impact point starts to stray too close to the edge of the flight footprint, they blow it up.  That's precisely their job and exactly why they are there.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Scylla on 09/18/2014 10:00 pm
State, federal permitting underway for SpaceX
http://www.brownsvilleherald.com/premium/article_116fc238-3ee2-11e4-a440-001a4bcf6878.html

SpaceX has initiated the state and federal permitting process toward development of its private, commercial vertical launch complex at Boca Chica in Cameron County, according to public records.
The Texas Commission on Environmental Quality has approved a request from Elon Musk’s Space Exploration Technologies for a construction general permit to discharge stormwater.
http://www2.tceq.texas.gov/wq_dpa/index.cfm?fuseaction=home.permit_list_by_permit&permit_number=TXR150012509
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Chris Bergin on 09/19/2014 09:44 pm
Media are invited to attend SpaceX’s official groundbreaking ceremony for the world’s first private commercial orbital launch facility on Monday, September 22, 2014. The facility will be built near Boca Chica Beach, Texas and expected to be complete by 2016. Following the groundbreaking ceremony in Boca Chica, media are also welcome to attend a reception in Brownsville honoring local community officials from across South Texas, whose support has made the construction of the launch facility possible.

 

WHAT:                 SpaceX Commercial Launch Facility Groundbreaking Ceremony & Reception

 

WHO:                   SpaceX representatives and state and local officials.

 

WHERE:               Brownsville Event Center

1 Event Center Boulevard

Brownsville, Texas 78526

 

WHEN:                 September 22, 2014
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Avron on 09/19/2014 10:04 pm
Media are invited to attend SpaceX’s official groundbreaking ceremony for the world’s first private commercial orbital launch facility on Monday, September 22, 2014. .....





This is so huge, we enter and new world of exploration.  Hopefully we will get good coverage   
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: nadreck on 09/19/2014 11:33 pm
Media are invited to attend SpaceX’s official groundbreaking ceremony for the world’s first private commercial orbital launch facility on Monday, September 22, 2014. .....





This is so huge, we enter and new world of exploration.  Hopefully we will get good coverage

I saw that Governor Perry will be there, there will be excellent coverage of him I am sure.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: pospa on 09/20/2014 03:01 pm
I saw that Governor Perry will be there, there will be excellent coverage of him I am sure.
Yep.
http://blog.chron.com/texaspolitics/2014/09/eyeing-white-house-again-perry-knows-to-be-prepared-this-time/
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: AncientU on 09/21/2014 12:49 am
There should be a name given to the launch site at this ceremony... Copernicus?
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Zed_Noir on 09/21/2014 05:14 am
There should be a name given to the launch site at this ceremony... Copernicus?
Nah. Spaceport South Texas  :)
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: guckyfan on 09/21/2014 06:47 am
So this is at the Brownsville Event Center. The groundbreaking will be only symbolic then, I hope. :)

Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: su27k on 09/22/2014 03:07 am
I've enjoyed this exchange. If anything, Adamo's paper will put range safety in the spotlight. SpaceX will no doubt reexamine the issue. While I'm of the unsubstantiated opinion that it's highly unlikely that such a smart bunch of folks could have overlooked any aspect of range safety implications for orbital launches from Brownsville before selecting the site, Adamo has performed a service in focussing attention on it. SpaceX will be well prepared to answer any of the FAA's questions when the time comes.

Based on http://www.jsc.nasa.gov/history/oral_histories/C3PO/KoenigsmannH/KoenigsmannH_1-15-13.htm:

Quote
Hackler: In working with the FAA and NASA, did either organization ever express a specific safety concern, for example, that you had to address?

Koenigsmann: Oh, all the time. For example, when we flew the second C2/C3 mission, or C2+ as we called it, we overflew Europe. When you overfly Europe, there’s risks that something happens and debris comes down. They do some calculations, and out comes the number that’s called the expected casualty. That expected casualty has a certain upper limit, you can go up to 100 people and that’s it. We had 120, but we had 120 because our reliability was just following a prescribed number from them. We couldn’t prove that we had a certain lower reliability; we had to take their number.

 The whole thing was just a paper game to some extent, but then we still had to apply for a waiver, and it was one case where both the range and the FAA actually said, “You need to fill out this waiver.” There were plenty of similar situations. I don’t feel that we ever did cause any public safety concern, in my opinion. The ranges are really safe places. I mean there’s miles between you and the rocket, it’s ten miles away from the next road where people move up and down, there’s range safety equipment. I don’t think anything could happen, but it certainly comes with due diligence and some scrutiny.

I think it's clear that both SpaceX and FAA are aware of the danger of 2nd stage coming down over populated areas back in 2012, so I don't think Adamo's concern is warranted.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: yg1968 on 09/22/2014 03:15 pm
A SpaceX fan (literally) in Brownsville:

https://twitter.com/jeff_foust/status/514068540979429378
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Kabloona on 09/22/2014 03:19 pm
What, no "X marks the spot" on the fan map? Who designed those things?  ::)
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Jdeshetler on 09/22/2014 03:29 pm
What, no "X marks the spot" on the fan map? Who designed those things?  ::)

Agreed, no "Lone Star" mark the spot?
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: rpapo on 09/22/2014 03:57 pm
What, no "X marks the spot" on the fan map? Who designed those things?  ::)

Agreed, no "Lone Star" mark the spot?
No, they need two stars: One for McGregor, the other for Boca Chica.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Orbiter on 09/22/2014 05:06 pm
Groundbreaking took place and is concluded. Key points is that work won't really ramp up on the site until Q3 2015, first commercial GTO flight possible in 2016 per Jeff Foust on Twitter.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Scylla on 09/22/2014 05:10 pm
SpaceX breaks ground at Boca Chica beach
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: sghill on 09/22/2014 05:30 pm
Some good tidbit Elon clarifications by way of tweets from Stephen Clark:  https://twitter.com/StephenClark1

"Musk says commercial crews (meaning non-NASA crew flights) may also launch from South Texas. Makes sense to launch NASA crews from KSC."

"Musk: first launch from South Texas site could be in late 2016 or 2017. Plan to focus on GTO missions."

"Elon Musk: plan to finish work at KSC's pad 39A before building out South Texas launch site."
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: yg1968 on 09/22/2014 05:41 pm
About $100M will be invested in developing the facility:
https://twitter.com/StarEmmaPT/status/514086113821351937
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Chris Bergin on 09/22/2014 07:06 pm
Quote time! Thanks to SpaceX PAO!

Elon Musk – CEO & Chief Designer, SpaceX

 

“We appreciate the leadership of Governor Rick Perry and numerous other federal, state and local leaders who have helped make it possible for SpaceX to build the world’s first commercial launch complex designed specifically for orbital missions. With today’s groundbreaking at Boca Chica Beach, we will begin an investment in South Texas that will create hundreds of jobs and over time contribute hundreds of millions of dollars into the local economy.”
 

Governor Rick Perry

“This announcement represents a huge step forward for our state and continues our nation’s proud legacy of scientific advancement,” Gov. Perry said. “It builds upon our pioneer heritage, our tradition of thinking bigger, dreaming bolder, and daring to do the impossible. SpaceX is the latest in a long line of forward-thinking companies that have made Texas home, and I couldn’t be prouder to help break ground on this revolutionary new facility.”

 

 

Senator Eddie Luico, Jr. (District 27)

As a member of the Senate Finance Committee, Sen. Lucio worked with the Governor’s office to allocate up to $15 million in the state’s budget, contingent upon SpaceX locating a spaceport in Texas. Sen. Lucio was also the Senate sponsor for House Bill 2623 by Rep. Rene Oliveira, which ensures the public’s right to beach access while also providing a way to protect public safety during SpaceX launches.

 

Senator Lucio’s statement follows:

 

“Today’s groundbreaking is historic. It signifies the construction of a new industry and a new future for the Rio Grande Valley. SpaceX’s launch site will soon become an invaluable economic driver for South Texas. With this site comes tens of millions of dollars in capital investment in our community annually, and hundreds of well-paying jobs over the next decade. We’ve set up South Texas as a future leader in developing bleeding-edge space technology which will influence future commerce for the whole planet.

 

“I hope the new launch site will propel a dramatic culture change in our region of the state, encouraging more of our children to pursue careers in engineering and science. Future generation of South Texas residents will look to this site and know that not even the sky is the limit for where their dreams may take them.”

 

University of Texas at Brownsville

“SpaceX has been an impressive company to work with through the entire site selection process.  They have looked for ways to engage university faculty, our students and our commercialization programs.  Clearly the SpaceX team understands the power of collaboration with the regional community and the University of Texas.” - Irv Downing, Vice President of Economic Development and Institutional Advancement
 

Brownsville Economic Development Council

“The SpaceX deal significantly changed the philosophy of Brownsville leadership, interagency collaboration and partnerships between the public sector, private industry and higher education in the quest of creating economic vitality, and not waiting for it,” said Jason Hilts, President & CEO of the Brownsville Economic Development Council.

 

“This is the first of many partnerships such as SpaceX which gives us excitement about Brownsville’s horizon and ability to reach new frontiers,” said Keith Uhles, Chairman of the Brownsville Economic Development Council.

 

“The capital investment of SpaceX in our region and its commitment to our young students, solidifies the fact that Brownsville’s human capital will have the tools to work in innovative industries and in turn, they will help the Commercial Space Industry flourish in South Texas,” said David Betancourt, Chairman of the Greater Brownsville Incentives Corporation. 

 

Harlingen Economic Development Corporation
 

“Space X’s decision to locate a launch facility in Cameron County is a great addition to our community.  Harlingen has pledged it’s support for Space X and the aerospace industry in general as has been demonstrated by our commitment to provide financial support for Space X’s efforts to create jobs in our region.  This project and the benefits it will bring go hand in hand with our efforts to enhance the region’s workforce and create an industry cluster which will create high-paying jobs and educational opportunities for our citizens.  We look forward to fostering our relationship with Space X and its suppliers and working with TSTC-Harlingen, UTRGV, and our local schools to bring about an real changes in the lives of our community.”

-Raudel Garza, CEO, Development Corporation of Harlingen, Inc.

 

Point Isabel Independent School District

Dr. Lisa Garcia | Superintendent of Schools
 

The Point Isabel Independent School District (PIISD) welcomes Space X to the Lower Rio Grande Valley area and to the Point Isabel Independent School District community. PIISD enthusiastically supports Space X as it begins its business endeavors in South Texas, recognizing that Space X presents unlimited possibilities, both economically and educationally, for the area and the nearly 3,000 students of PIISD and their families.
 

Dr. Lisa Garcia, Superintendent of Schools, maintains, “A high tide raises all ships” and with the impact of Space X on the Port Isabel community it is without a doubt the economic level of the community will be positively impacted through the creation of jobs. But, aside from the economic impact that Space X offers the community, Space X will also influence the hopes and aspirations of the students in this community.


“With scheduled rocket launches from nearby Boca Chica Beach, PIISD students will have a front row seat to history with the expansion of commercial space flight. We have great confidence the PIISD school district motto of, “Honor Tradition, Lead Innovation,” will be carried out as potential educational partnerships with Space X and the local university will allow students to explore careers in Science, Technology, Math and Engineering. As the school district prepares the next generation of forward thinkers for jobs that are yet to be invented; Space X will allow our students to not only dream, but to achieve those dreams. “
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Chris Bergin on 09/22/2014 07:09 pm
Launch site graphics!
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: sghill on 09/22/2014 07:48 pm
Launch site graphics!

Heh! If you zoom in real close on the second image, you can see someone drew fins onto the fairings on the F9 in the old engine config.  Looks cool.

Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: ThereIWas3 on 09/22/2014 07:50 pm
From @TyJohnson1 on twitter:
Quote
Musk, @SpaceX founder mentioned possibility of future Mars missions being launched from #Brownsville #rgv

This could be just a teaser to keep TX officials interested, but maybe an indicator or major future expansion in support of MCT.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Occupymars on 09/22/2014 09:00 pm
http://youtu.be/VKYB3_V7oAo
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Karlman on 09/22/2014 09:10 pm
Launch site graphics!

The second of the three pictures clear shows a Falcon 9 Heavy.. isn't the current allowance for 12 flights Falcon 9 only?

I understand not too much should be inferred from an artist drawing.. but?
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: symbios on 09/22/2014 09:15 pm
I remember that 2 flights per year are allocated to FH according to the environmental statement.

#Occupymars, thanks for the youtube clip, did Mr Musk make a speech?
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: docmordrid on 09/22/2014 09:18 pm
And no doubt two FH's is open to renegotiation if the locals see a financial/local employment benefit to it.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: rcoppola on 09/22/2014 09:43 pm
Is there any video of Elon making any comments? Can't find anything.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Zed_Noir on 09/22/2014 09:43 pm
And no doubt two FH's is open to renegotiation if the locals see a financial/local employment benefit to it.
You mean the one permanent resident at Boca Chica village AFAIK.  ;)
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: rcoppola on 09/22/2014 09:54 pm
And no doubt two FH's is open to renegotiation if the locals see a financial/local employment benefit to it.
You mean the one permanent resident at Boca Chica village AFAIK.  ;)
Ha, that but also all the services and infrastructure that will need to be built up and or modernized. Housing, hotels, pubs / restaurants etc. For tourists, crew as well as all the visiting clients and their support personnel.

I suspect this project will take on a life of its' own in 2017. If SpaceX shows itself to be a good environmental steward, the sky literally could be the limit...
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Lars-J on 09/22/2014 10:35 pm
The big question for me now is where they plan on putting the Stage 1 landing pad.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: sghill on 09/22/2014 10:39 pm
The big question for me now is where they plan on putting the Stage 1 landing pad.

Here: 2101 Nasa Pkwy, Houston, TX 77058

 :)
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: nadreck on 09/22/2014 10:43 pm
The big question for me now is where they plan on putting the Stage 1 landing pad.

Here: 2101 Nasa Pkwy, Houston, TX 77058

 :)

Or maybe, like the Beach Boys they can invent their own island "off the Florida keys, there's a place called Kokomo"
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: yg1968 on 09/22/2014 11:51 pm
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A56Xtzz9pTk
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: yg1968 on 09/23/2014 12:03 am
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NZ1ZN4_sGCM
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 09/23/2014 10:25 pm
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NZ1ZN4_sGCM

At 2:40, Elon says:
"It could very well be that the first person that departs for another planet departs from this location"

That's the second time he implied BFR would launch from South Texas.

The first time was when he testified before the Texas state legislature.  At that time, he also implied BFR would be assembled in South Texas.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Zed_Noir on 09/23/2014 10:53 pm
...
At 2:40, Elon says:
"It could very well be that the first person that departs for another planet departs from this location"

That's the second time he implied BFR would launch from South Texas.

The first time was when he testified before the Texas state legislature.  At that time, he also implied BFR would be assembled in South Texas.
Or the crew will go up on either the F9 or FH and transfer to an orbital MCT before departure to Mars.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Space Ghost 1962 on 09/23/2014 11:33 pm
...
At 2:40, Elon says:
"It could very well be that the first person that departs for another planet departs from this location"

That's the second time he implied BFR would launch from South Texas.

The first time was when he testified before the Texas state legislature.  At that time, he also implied BFR would be assembled in South Texas.
Or the crew will go up on either the F9 or FH and transfer to an orbital MCT before departure to Mars.

He's a show man. He'll say it at every pad. Because, ... it might be true.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: MP99 on 09/24/2014 06:37 am
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NZ1ZN4_sGCM

At 2:40, Elon says:
"It could very well be that the first person that departs for another planet departs from this location"

That's the second time he implied BFR would launch from South Texas.

The first time was when he testified before the Texas state legislature.  At that time, he also implied BFR would be assembled in South Texas.
In the event of an abort, would there be any advantage to the crew from splashing in the Gulf of Mexico, rather than the Atlantic?

Once they've threaded the needle, there are a lot of islands in the Caribbean which would be close to the splashdown point, which I assume would be an advantage.

Cheers, Martin
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: CuddlyRocket on 09/24/2014 08:02 am
In the event of an abort, would there be any advantage to the crew from splashing in the Gulf of Mexico, rather than the Atlantic?

The water is warmer!
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 09/24/2014 09:02 am
...
At 2:40, Elon says:
"It could very well be that the first person that departs for another planet departs from this location"

That's the second time he implied BFR would launch from South Texas.

The first time was when he testified before the Texas state legislature.  At that time, he also implied BFR would be assembled in South Texas.

Or the crew will go up on either the F9 or FH and transfer to an orbital MCT before departure to Mars.

Yes, I've always thought BFR would be better as cargo only.  More margins for human rating means less payload.  F9/Dragon can always ferry people to LEO and dock with MCT.

But then, if I remember correctly, SpaceX said BFR would be human rated.  Can anyone confirm this?

If so, Elon's comments at the ground breaking increase the likelihood that BFR will be launched from South Texas.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Roy_H on 09/25/2014 12:11 pm
I initially thought that the BFR was slated for Brownsville manufacturing and launch, now I am not so sure. This launch site is extremely restricted in launch azimuth and I expect that the BFR would be used for more than one mission type. Elon  has always said the BFR would be manufactured and launched from the same location, and I now think that location must be Florida for maximum versatility. Can't remember the name of the place just north of the Cape.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 09/25/2014 01:27 pm
Elon has always said the BFR would be manufactured and launched from the same location...

Not quite.  He's also mentioned the possibility of transporting BFR over water. 

Note that Brownsville has an excellent seaport, plus low taxes, and dirt cheap real estate. Cost of living is much less than large city metro areas, which means less expensive local labor rates.  There are already skilled machinists in the Brownsville area, so SpaceX may only need to import a dozen or so employees from other locations, with the remainder of the workforce hired locally.

In the end, it will probably boil down to cost.  If the costs of shipping plus loading/unloading is prohibitive, they'll probably assemble BFR at the Cape.  If water transport if affordable, I suspect they'll centralize BFR production in Brownsville.  In either case, the engines, avionics, and smaller structures will still probably be built in Hawthorne.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: cscott on 09/25/2014 01:39 pm
"Elon Musk: plan to finish work at KSC's pad 39A before building out South Texas launch site."

Elon has stated that they are working on propellant densification to get a bit more performance out of the F9.  I wonder if that's what he means?  It makes sense to experiment with the densification system at one site before trying to build a clone of it in Boca Chica.

Or is there other KSC work which is still in progress?  Falcon Heavy work is at Vandenburg, right?  I don't think he'd be talking about pad modifications to support crew, since that's not on the near-term horizon at Brownsville.  Propellant densification would allow for heavier comm sats, and comm sats *are* what's slated for South Texas though.

EDIT: oh, pad *39A*, right.  They are currently launching at pad 40.  So it makes sense to first build out the site which allows them to reuse their existing processing/control/etc facilities.  Thanks for pointing out my oversight, kirghizstan.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: kirghizstan on 09/25/2014 01:45 pm
"Elon Musk: plan to finish work at KSC's pad 39A before building out South Texas launch site."

Elon has stated that they are working on propellant densification to get a bit more performance out of the F9.  I wonder if that's what he means?  It makes sense to experiment with the densification system at one site before trying to build a clone of it in Boca Chica.

Or is there other KSC work which is still in progress?  Falcon Heavy work is at Vandenburg, right?  I don't think he'd be talking about pad modifications to support crew, since that's not on the near-term horizon at Brownsville.  Propellant densification would allow for heavier comm sats, and comm sats *are* what's slated for South Texas though.

Pad 39A.  SpaceX has a lease for the pad and has begun modifications to launch from it as well pad 40
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: MP99 on 09/25/2014 03:05 pm
"Elon Musk: plan to finish work at KSC's pad 39A before building out South Texas launch site."

Elon has stated that they are working on propellant densification to get a bit more performance out of the F9.  I wonder if that's what he means?  It makes sense to experiment with the densification system at one site before trying to build a clone of it in Boca Chica.

Or is there other KSC work which is still in progress?  Falcon Heavy work is at Vandenburg, right?  I don't think he'd be talking about pad modifications to support crew, since that's not on the near-term horizon at Brownsville.  Propellant densification would allow for heavier comm sats, and comm sats *are* what's slated for South Texas though.

EDIT: oh, pad *39A*, right.  They are currently launching at pad 40.  So it makes sense to first build out the site which allows them to reuse their existing processing/control/etc facilities.  Thanks for pointing out my oversight, kirghizstan.

I suspect that they have ideas to streamline pad operations, and will build them into 39A.

Once they've done a couple of flights, they may well use the experience to try to make an even more streamlined experience at Boca Chica.

cheers, Martin
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: rpapo on 09/25/2014 03:11 pm
Don't forget the jobs posting last year looking for a guy to work on automating launch, landing and relaunch operations.  They may do some very interesting things down in Texas.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 09/25/2014 05:29 pm
Don't forget the jobs posting last year looking for a guy to work on automating launch, landing and relaunch operations.  They may do some very interesting things down in Texas.

Was the job posting specifically for South Texas?
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: rpapo on 09/25/2014 06:23 pm
Don't forget the jobs posting last year looking for a guy to work on automating launch, landing and relaunch operations.  They may do some very interesting things down in Texas.

Was the job posting specifically for South Texas?
Dunno.  But here was the thread post in question:

http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=33598.msg1189873#msg1189873
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Carl G on 09/25/2014 10:28 pm
This thread title shows what this thread is about. BFR's flight rate is not for this thread. Trimmed.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: symbios on 09/26/2014 07:33 am
valleymorningstar: SpaceX makes more moves

http://www.valleymorningstar.com/news/local_news/article_85f3a5e6-452e-11e4-b810-001a4bcf6878.html (http://www.valleymorningstar.com/news/local_news/article_85f3a5e6-452e-11e4-b810-001a4bcf6878.html)

"There is a new subdivision at Boca Chica in Cameron County that is named in reference to the area’s future space connection."

“Launch Site Texas” is the second subdivision that Elon Musk’s SpaceX has re-platted through Dogleg Park LLC. The first subdivision is called “Mars Crossing.”

"Dogleg Park LLC has ac-quired seven additional lots, bringing the number of tracts of land that it now owns to 87, equaling more than 100 acres of land."
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 09/26/2014 10:38 am
valleymorningstar: SpaceX makes more moves

http://www.valleymorningstar.com/news/local_news/article_85f3a5e6-452e-11e4-b810-001a4bcf6878.html (http://www.valleymorningstar.com/news/local_news/article_85f3a5e6-452e-11e4-b810-001a4bcf6878.html)

"There is a new subdivision at Boca Chica in Cameron County that is named in reference to the area’s future space connection."

“Launch Site Texas” is the second subdivision that Elon Musk’s SpaceX has re-platted through Dogleg Park LLC. The first subdivision is called “Mars Crossing.”

"Dogleg Park LLC has ac-quired seven additional lots, bringing the number of tracts of land that it now owns to 87, equaling more than 100 acres of land."

Thanks for the link.  When I search the online Cameron County Real Estate Appraisal Map (http://www.cameroncad.org/cadclientdb/propertymap.aspx) nothing for “Launch Site Texas” yet.  It seems to take a while for new purchases to be updated in the online map.

However, I did get a hit on "UNITED LAUNCH ALLIANCE LLC", about 20 miles North of Brownsville.  I thought that was interesting.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Jcc on 09/26/2014 01:51 pm
I email Dan during the live web cast to ask if he was aware of the almost GTO only missions from Brownsville for SpaceX. He say yes, Than says off nominal second stage performance could send it to locations way off the flight footprint.

IMO you could say the same of all second stages.

has anyone really thought this out? 

From known facts F9 GTO First stage disposable.  If FH is the launcher then reusable must be working in 24 months or you have a major problem with 12 or more cores dropping into the gulf a year (very bad)

Has the EPA signed off on cores, fairings etc being dropped into the Gulf?   Sorry but a quick think sees some major issues with the location.

You have major Oil rigs, and the shipping lanes, lifelines for a few states.   Have the states signed off on this?

Well, the main toxic substance that we might worry about is whatever residual RP-1 is left in the core. I'm pretty sure that the volume from 12 cores a year is much less than the diesel fuel that leaks out of ships, or what is left in tanks when they scuttle a ship to make an artificial reef. For that matter there are natural petroleum seeps in the Gulf, which we learned about when the Deepwater Horizon spill occurred.

The economic concern for SpaceX to be able to reuse rather than expend the cores is probably a greater incentive to recover them than environmental concerns.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Jim on 09/26/2014 02:35 pm
Have the states signed off on this?


The FAA signs off on it and it had somebody to preform an EIS.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Lars-J on 09/26/2014 04:19 pm
has anyone really thought this out? 

From known facts F9 GTO First stage disposable.  If FH is the launcher then reusable must be working in 24 months or you have a major problem with 12 or more cores dropping into the gulf a year (very bad)

Has the EPA signed off on cores, fairings etc being dropped into the Gulf?   Sorry but a quick think sees some major issues with the location.

You have major Oil rigs, and the shipping lanes, lifelines for a few states.   Have the states signed off on this?

No, obviously no one has thought this out. You are the first to think of it.  ::)
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Jim on 09/26/2014 04:23 pm

You brought up the artificial reef, have you ever watched a utube video of the procedures to detoxify a ship before disposal?   Just doesn't seem that dropping cores in the gulf would be compatible.    Maybe some political friends have signed off on this, in the name of "jobs' or something.   Just see way too many barriers ahead.  Just my opinion.


Huh?  How is the  Gulf  any different than the Atlantic?  Also, the USAF had been dropping things in from Eglin for years.

There are no more barriers than flying from the Cape wrt to stage disposal.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: ncb1397 on 09/26/2014 04:31 pm
You have major Oil rigs, and the shipping lanes, lifelines for a few states.   Have the states signed off on this?

Oil rigs in the gulf are concentrated along the northern coast of the gulf. Any launch trajectory going over the oil rigs would be going over the southeastern U.S.

(http://oceanexplorer.noaa.gov/explorations/06mexico/background/oil/media/platform_600.jpg)
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: MP99 on 09/26/2014 06:30 pm
I email Dan during the live web cast to ask if he was aware of the almost GTO only missions from Brownsville for SpaceX. He say yes, Than says off nominal second stage performance could send it to locations way off the flight footprint.

IMO you could say the same of all second stages.

has anyone really thought this out? 

From known facts F9 GTO First stage disposable.  If FH is the launcher then reusable must be working in 24 months or you have a major problem with 12 or more cores dropping into the gulf a year (very bad)

Has the EPA signed off on cores, fairings etc being dropped into the Gulf?   Sorry but a quick think sees some major issues with the location.

You have major Oil rigs, and the shipping lanes, lifelines for a few states.   Have the states signed off on this?

Well, the main toxic substance that we might worry about is whatever residual RP-1 is left in the core. I'm pretty sure that the volume from 12 cores a year is much less than the diesel fuel that leaks out of ships, or what is left in tanks when they scuttle a ship to make an artificial reef. For that matter there are natural petroleum seeps in the Gulf, which we learned about when the Deepwater Horizon spill occurred.

The economic concern for SpaceX to be able to reuse rather than expend the cores is probably a greater incentive to recover them than environmental concerns.

my gut feeling given the facts; a myopic SpaceX program to make a buck. 

You brought up the artificial reef, have you ever watched a utube video of the procedures to detoxify a ship before disposal?   Just doesn't seem that dropping cores in the gulf would be compatible.    Maybe some political friends have signed off on this, in the name of "jobs' or something.   Just see way too many barriers ahead.  Just my opinion.

If it's such a desperate problem, couldn't the FTS be triggered after MECO & reentry? Would cause burnup of most of the RP-1.

cheers, Martin
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: ArbitraryConstant on 09/26/2014 07:54 pm
If it's such a desperate problem, couldn't the FTS be triggered after MECO & reentry? Would cause burnup of most of the RP-1.
Even without reusability, SpaceX has demonstrated they can keep the first stage in controlled flight after stage separation. The stage should be able to influence where it comes down even when used in expendable mode, burning RP-1 as you say, and from what we have seen, depositing the stage gently in a designated safe disposal zone.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Jim on 09/26/2014 08:20 pm

You said the magic words there Jim: USAF had been dropping things

A major difference  :-X

Not really.  They don't get a free pass anymore.
And still, there is no difference between the Atlantic and Gulf when it comes to this.  The Gulf is international waters.  The US has not drawn a line from the south tip of TX to the Keys and said everything north is US waters.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Arb on 09/26/2014 08:33 pm
valleymorningstar: SpaceX makes more moves

http://www.valleymorningstar.com/news/local_news/article_85f3a5e6-452e-11e4-b810-001a4bcf6878.html (http://www.valleymorningstar.com/news/local_news/article_85f3a5e6-452e-11e4-b810-001a4bcf6878.html)

"There is a new subdivision at Boca Chica in Cameron County that is named in reference to the area’s future space connection."

“Launch Site Texas” is the second subdivision that Elon Musk’s SpaceX has re-platted through Dogleg Park LLC. The first subdivision is called “Mars Crossing.”

Symbios omitted the penultimate paragraph which seems rather key:

"The new subdivision consists of 49.33 acres of land and is the site of the proposed launch pad."
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 09/26/2014 10:23 pm
valleymorningstar: SpaceX makes more moves

http://www.valleymorningstar.com/news/local_news/article_85f3a5e6-452e-11e4-b810-001a4bcf6878.html (http://www.valleymorningstar.com/news/local_news/article_85f3a5e6-452e-11e4-b810-001a4bcf6878.html)

"There is a new subdivision at Boca Chica in Cameron County that is named in reference to the area’s future space connection."

“Launch Site Texas” is the second subdivision that Elon Musk’s SpaceX has re-platted through Dogleg Park LLC. The first subdivision is called “Mars Crossing.”

Symbios omitted the penultimate paragraph which seems rather key:

"The new subdivision consists of 49.33 acres of land and is the site of the proposed launch pad."

As I understand it, they just took all the smaller individual lots at the launch site and made them into 1 big lot.  That's what "re-platted" means.

More interesting is the 7 new lots SpaceX purchased.  I have no idea where these are.

Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 09/27/2014 11:15 am
valleymorningstar: SpaceX makes more moves

http://www.valleymorningstar.com/news/local_news/article_85f3a5e6-452e-11e4-b810-001a4bcf6878.html (http://www.valleymorningstar.com/news/local_news/article_85f3a5e6-452e-11e4-b810-001a4bcf6878.html)

Full version of the article with additional details now available here:
http://www.valleymorningstar.com/premium/article_c1ae2e84-452f-11e4-b0a5-001a4bcf6878.html

This confirms that the 5 highlighted lots just South West of the command center will be for the STARGATE project, and will include a 12,000-square-foot tracking center.  STARGATE is a joint project that includes the Brownsville Economic Development Council (BEDC), SpaceX, and the University of Texas at Brownsville.

The full version of the article also mentions that the launch control area (highlighted in yellow) is already fenced off and is currently occupied by 2 portable buildings with floodlights.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 09/29/2014 11:04 am
More details on local and state incentives:
http://www.valleymorningstar.com/news/local_news/article_0eeda6a0-46ae-11e4-aed7-001a4bcf6878.html

Total incentives: $30 million

Also more details about STARGATE.

Quote
$9 million was pitched to advance STARGATE, including $4.4 million from the state, $4.6 million from the University of Texas System, and $500,000 from GBIC (Greater Brownsville Incentives Corp).

STARGATE, which would be the first research center for the new University of Texas Rio Grande Valley, will be a cooperative effort to develop and support phased-array technology for satellite and space vehicle communication.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 09/29/2014 11:31 am
More info on STARGATE at the University of Texas at Brownsville site:
http://www.utb.edu/stargate/Pages/default.aspx

(http://www.utb.edu/stargate/PublishingImages/STARGATE-logo-sm.jpg)
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Kabloona on 09/29/2014 03:09 pm
Good article on the Texas site over at SFN.

Elon says that the construction work will gear up to "significant activity" in 3Q 2015, after they finish pad 39A mods in 9 months or so.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: nadreck on 09/29/2014 04:53 pm
Good article on the Texas site over at SFN.

Elon says that the construction work will gear up to "significant activity" in 3Q 2015, after they finish pad 39A mods in 9 months or so.

That makes me think that the people involved in the Pad 39A mods (I mean the planning/designing people) want to learn from that process and the issues uncovered to be more efficient and create something a whole generation ahead of what Pad 39A is going to be once they have done the work over. That is, there work over of Pad 39A involves not just adapting it to their equipment needs but in a somewhat limited to modernize it too. By doing all of that work to near completion before they finalize the design of the installations at Boca Chica, I think that Boca Chica will end up with a design that avoids issues from Pad 39A's original design and from their first cut at crafting a launch facility (which they got at a cut rate and only had to do part of the process on).
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: AncientU on 09/29/2014 05:43 pm
Good article on the Texas site over at SFN.

Elon says that the construction work will gear up to "significant activity" in 3Q 2015, after they finish pad 39A mods in 9 months or so.

That makes me think that the people involved in the Pad 39A mods (I mean the planning/designing people) want to learn from that process and the issues uncovered to be more efficient and create something a whole generation ahead of what Pad 39A is going to be once they have done the work over. That is, there work over of Pad 39A involves not just adapting it to their equipment needs but in a somewhat limited to modernize it too. By doing all of that work to near completion before they finalize the design of the installations at Boca Chica, I think that Boca Chica will end up with a design that avoids issues from Pad 39A's original design and from their first cut at crafting a launch facility (which they got at a cut rate and only had to do part of the process on).

I would suspect that it is more build-out crew and cash flow limited.  This will be their fourth launch facility and third landing facility... the design is likely settled for big chunks like the TE, pad, spacecraft/stage handling buildings, etc.  Once they get LC-39A running, the pressure will come off LC-40 somewhat, and give a window for demand for the new Texas facility to build.  No reason to build two new pads in parallel, though they could do some of the heavy grade work, road beds, etc. while LC-39A is being readied.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 09/29/2014 05:50 pm
Good article on the Texas site over at SFN.

Elon says that the construction work will gear up to "significant activity" in 3Q 2015, after they finish pad 39A mods in 9 months or so.

After listening to the audio from the SFN article:
http://www.spaceflightnow.com/news/n1409/28brownsville/#.VCmQ8Gd0yoA

Musk did made it clear that launch site construction was dependent of their launch construction crew finishing work on pad 39A.

However, much of the construction at Boca Chica is not related to the actual launch site. Specifically, the EIS details:
2 Launch Control Center Buildings
2 Payload Processing Facility buildings
1 Launch Vehicle Processing Hangar
All of which are located 2 miles from the launch site. So the availability of the launch construction crew may not gate these construction activities.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: AncientU on 09/29/2014 06:01 pm
As we've been speculating...
Quote
"In terms of SpaceX, in the three-to-four year timeframe, we expect to spend on the order of about $100 million," Musk said. "But in the long term, say in 10 or 20 years, it's probably in the several hundred million dollar range because we'll be expanding the facility...

Twelve flights/year is just the starting point, IMO.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: AncientU on 09/29/2014 06:04 pm
Good article on the Texas site over at SFN.

Elon says that the construction work will gear up to "significant activity" in 3Q 2015, after they finish pad 39A mods in 9 months or so.

That makes me think that the people involved in the Pad 39A mods (I mean the planning/designing people) want to learn from that process and the issues uncovered to be more efficient and create something a whole generation ahead of what Pad 39A is going to be once they have done the work over. That is, there work over of Pad 39A involves not just adapting it to their equipment needs but in a somewhat limited to modernize it too. By doing all of that work to near completion before they finalize the design of the installations at Boca Chica, I think that Boca Chica will end up with a design that avoids issues from Pad 39A's original design and from their first cut at crafting a launch facility (which they got at a cut rate and only had to do part of the process on).

I would suspect that it is more build-out crew and cash flow limited.  This will be their fourth launch facility and third landing facility... the design is likely settled for big chunks like the TE, pad, spacecraft/stage handling buildings, etc.[/b]  Once they get LC-39A running, the pressure will come off LC-40 somewhat, and give a window for demand for the new Texas facility to build.  No reason to build two new pads in parallel, though they could do some of the heavy grade work, road beds, etc. while LC-39A is being readied.


After listening to the audio from the SFN article:
http://www.spaceflightnow.com/news/n1409/28brownsville/#.VCmQ8Gd0yoA

Musk did made it clear that launch site construction was dependent of their launch construction crew finishing work on pad 39A.


And...
Quote
"We're expecting the Cape site to be done in approximately nine months, and we'll do some advanced preparation work here at Boca Chica, but we'll probably start with more significant activity in the third quarter of next year," Musk said.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: sghill on 09/29/2014 08:49 pm
I think that Boca Chica will end up with a design that avoids issues from Pad 39A's original design and from their first cut at crafting a launch facility (which they got at a cut rate and only had to do part of the process on).

I'm sure they'll be happy not to have to loosen 45-year old salt air rusted bolts every time they want to move something too!

Twelve flights/year is just the starting point, IMO.

While I think you are right, they are going to have a giant fight on their hands if they try to change TX law again to support beach closures more than once a month for 15 hours at a time. 

That's a beach community first and foremost, and while the community seems genuinely thrilled to have a new attraction to their beaches, the closures will have a real non-positive economic impact if they become more common.

IMHO, I don't think the launch rate will go above 18 per year there because the community won't support a further dilution to the beach access law.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: oiorionsbelt on 09/29/2014 09:26 pm




IMHO, I don't think the launch rate will go above 18 per year there because the community won't support a further dilution to the beach access law.
18 BFR launches per year should just about do it.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Lars-J on 09/29/2014 09:47 pm
That's a beach community first and foremost, and while the community seems genuinely thrilled to have a new attraction to their beaches, the closures will have a real non-positive economic impact if they become more common.

IMHO, I don't think the launch rate will go above 18 per year there because the community won't support a further dilution to the beach access law.

I assume you speak on authority here because you are intimately familiar with the area? Or are you?
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Jim on 09/29/2014 11:19 pm

That makes me think that the people involved in the Pad 39A mods (I mean the planning/designing people) want to learn from that process and the issues uncovered to be more efficient and create something a whole generation ahead of what Pad 39A is going to be once they have done the work over. That is, there work over of Pad 39A involves not just adapting it to their equipment needs but in a somewhat limited to modernize it too. By doing all of that work to near completion before they finalize the design of the installations at Boca Chica, I think that Boca Chica will end up with a design that avoids issues from Pad 39A's original design and from their first cut at crafting a launch facility (which they got at a cut rate and only had to do part of the process on).

Not really.  They already have a design to work from, see SLC-4
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: nadreck on 09/30/2014 12:13 am

That makes me think that the people involved in the Pad 39A mods (I mean the planning/designing people) want to learn from that process and the issues uncovered to be more efficient and create something a whole generation ahead of what Pad 39A is going to be once they have done the work over. That is, there work over of Pad 39A involves not just adapting it to their equipment needs but in a somewhat limited to modernize it too. By doing all of that work to near completion before they finalize the design of the installations at Boca Chica, I think that Boca Chica will end up with a design that avoids issues from Pad 39A's original design and from their first cut at crafting a launch facility (which they got at a cut rate and only had to do part of the process on).
Not really.  They already have a design to work from, see SLC-4

Oops, forgot all about Vandenberg! Ok fair enough, still think it is an opportunity refine the design.

Edit/Lar: fix quotes.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: llanitedave on 09/30/2014 01:25 am
That's a beach community first and foremost, and while the community seems genuinely thrilled to have a new attraction to their beaches, the closures will have a real non-positive economic impact if they become more common.

IMHO, I don't think the launch rate will go above 18 per year there because the community won't support a further dilution to the beach access law.

I assume you speak on authority here because you are intimately familiar with the area? Or are you?

Boca Chica is not South Padre Island, its traffic has always been relatively low.  That's partly due to its lack of development over the years, and partly because, being closer to the mouth of the Rio Grande, the sand is of poorer quality -- a bit siltier and muddier.  It's just not a real first-rate beach, unless you're a surf fisherman or don't like the crowds at South Padre.

Granted, it's been a long time, but I did spend my early years in Brownsville, and my family visited both places.  We definitely preferred South Padre.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Jim on 09/30/2014 01:30 am
Not really.  They already have a design to work from, see SLC-4

Oops, forgot all about Vandenberg! Ok fair enough, still think it is an opportunity refine the design.


SLC-4 was already refined from two SLC-40 builds

Edit/Lar: Fix quotes
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Llian Rhydderch on 09/30/2014 04:38 am
Not really.  They already have a design to work from, see SLC-4

Oops, forgot all about Vandenberg! Ok fair enough, still think it is an opportunity refine the design.


SLC-4 was already refined from two SLC-40 builds

Edit/Lar: Fix quotes

Yup.  It's called iterative and incremental improvement.  It's what SpaceX does. 

Just because SpaceX already built a 2nd F9 pad at Vandenburg, and is now converting LP39A at KSC to a third F9 pad, is not at all a logical reason that they would not be making optimization and commercial-operation improvements in what they would want at Boca Chica. 

Nadreck's thinking on this is a perfectly valid perspective, and it advances the discussion.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Lars-J on 09/30/2014 06:26 am
That's a beach community first and foremost, and while the community seems genuinely thrilled to have a new attraction to their beaches, the closures will have a real non-positive economic impact if they become more common.

IMHO, I don't think the launch rate will go above 18 per year there because the community won't support a further dilution to the beach access law.

I assume you speak on authority here because you are intimately familiar with the area? Or are you?

Boca Chica is not South Padre Island, its traffic has always been relatively low.  That's partly due to its lack of development over the years, and partly because, being closer to the mouth of the Rio Grande, the sand is of poorer quality -- a bit siltier and muddier.  It's just not a real first-rate beach, unless you're a surf fisherman or don't like the crowds at South Padre.

Granted, it's been a long time, but I did spend my early years in Brownsville, and my family visited both places.  We definitely preferred South Padre.

That's what I figured. Looking at the near complete lack of development at Boca Chica, and the difficulty of finding a picture of the beach with more than a couple of people in it via a Google image search, the beach does not appear to be terribly popular. Especially if a nicer beach is just as close to the north.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Jim on 09/30/2014 12:39 pm
Yup.  It's called iterative and incremental improvement.  It's what SpaceX does. 

Just because SpaceX already built a 2nd F9 pad at Vandenburg, and is now converting LP39A at KSC to a third F9 pad, is not at all a logical reason that they would not be making optimization and commercial-operation improvements in what they would want at Boca Chica. 

Nadreck's thinking on this is a perfectly valid perspective, and it advances the discussion.

Actually, it is illogical to think that there are "special"  commercial-operation improvements that would be unique to Boca Chica.  Spacex will keep processes and procedures as similar possible across all launch sites for efficiency.  This is more reflective of  commercial-operation improvements.

This constant repeating of a supposed and unvalidated Spacex matra does not advance the discussion.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: AncientU on 09/30/2014 02:53 pm
More on Rio Grande Valley development:
Quote

Firefly Space Systems, a start-up satellite launch company, apparently “has interest in Texas’ Brownsville area launch site,” Valley Morning Star reporter Emma Perez-Treviño wrote recently quoting a statement from Firefly officials.

“We absolutely want to build a launch site here in Texas,” they wrote on Friday.

We, in the Rio Grande Valley, absolutely welcome any and all space-related prospects with wide open arms. The more, the merrier, taking safety, environmental and other factors into consideration.

http://www.themonitor.com/opinion/editorial-rgv-the-new-place-for-space/article_f38584f0-4824-11e4-b9ac-0017a43b2370.html

12-18 per year maximum may be difficult if the welcome wagon keeps a 'the more, the merrier' approach.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: sghill on 09/30/2014 04:01 pm
That's a beach community first and foremost, and while the community seems genuinely thrilled to have a new attraction to their beaches, the closures will have a real non-positive economic impact if they become more common.

IMHO, I don't think the launch rate will go above 18 per year there because the community won't support a further dilution to the beach access law.

I assume you speak on authority here because you are intimately familiar with the area? Or are you?

I do my research, and the understanding the wider affects of space launches (the whole industry really) on the community as a whole is part of my job.

If you'd like to do some of your own, feel free to start with the FAA environmental report describing the closure procedures and the closure area here (https://www.faa.gov/about/office_org/headquarters_offices/ast/environmental/nepa_docs/review/documents_progress/spacex_texas_launch_site_environmental_impact_statement/media/FEIS_SpaceX_Texas_Launch_Site_Vol_I.pdf).  You can scroll down to page 2-8 if you don't want to read that far.

You can then research the TX law here if you wish: http://www.statutes.legis.state.tx.us/Docs/NR/htm/NR.61.htm 
The Open Beaches Act enshrined a TX constitutional right to unrestricted beach access for all Texans, and that has been taken away and replaced with "It's a right so long as this company doesn't want you there."  I'm a big SpaceX fan, but that's not a small potatoes change to a meaningless law. It's a legal precedent.

They are closing the beach for five miles, plus prime boating and fishing areas off shore, three whole state parks, the national historic landmark area, two whole wildlife refuges, some Mexican parkland, and a bunch of nearby miscellaneous land- including commercial activity areas for up to 3 hours for test firings, and up to 15 hours for launches (see attached closure map).  That's nearly a whole day once a month assuming they stick with a 12 per year launch rate, and we're not even considering closures that get repeated because of scrubs (SpaceX has had a few launch scrubs in the past I'm told). 

There are plenty of advocates for any wild areas, including the many businesses of all stripes which employ far more people than SpaceX will down there to service visitors and maritime activities.  Additionally, the closure areas are public access areas that people go to precisely because they are not South Padre Island type beaches, and increasing launch rates there is going to cause dissolution of public and local business support much like we saw here in FL with the proposed Shiloh project.

We can politely discuss the degree to which this will happen all you wish, but I stand my previous comments on the matter.

Edit/Lar: PoliteJim 3000 works on other posters too, and adds excellentness... Please remember to be excellent to each other.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Lars-J on 09/30/2014 04:07 pm

It's not a crime to be unfamiliar with the area. I'm certainly not. :) But you made some rather definitive statements which made it sound like you lived there. Such as:

"the closures will have a real non-positive economic impact" (doubtful!)
and
"the community won't support a further dilution to the beach access law" (we'll have to wait and see)

Edit/Lar: PoliteJim 3000 works on other posters too, and adds excellentness... Please remember to be excellent to each other.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: StuffOfInterest on 09/30/2014 04:18 pm
One thing you can take from the map above, South Padre Island will have one heck of a view for launches.  Sit out on the beach and watch the rocket streak into the sky and the first stage come shooting back in.  Should be good for business on launch days.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: cscott on 09/30/2014 04:32 pm
You can then research the TX law here if you wish: http://www.statutes.legis.state.tx.us/Docs/NR/htm/NR.61.htm 
The Open Beaches Act enshrined a TX constitutional right to unrestricted beach access for all Texans, and that has been taken away and replaced with "It's a right so long as this company doesn't want you there."  I'm a big SpaceX fan, but that's not a small potatoes change to a meaningless law. It's a legal precedent.

So I'm reading this Act, and it doesn't seem to be as you describe.

What you've linked is not a "constitutional right", it's a simple law.  Was there actually a constitutional amendment?

And the Act is very specific about what it prohibits.  It says, "No person may display or cause to be displayed on or adjacent to any public beach any sign, marker, or warning, or make or cause to be made any written or oral communication which states that the public beach is private property or represent in any other manner that the public does not have the right of access to the public beach as guaranteed by this subchapter."  SpaceX isn't doing that, certainly.

Can you cite the specific sections of the law which you feel are at issue?
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: mcoconnor on 09/30/2014 05:10 pm
You can then research the TX law here if you wish: http://www.statutes.legis.state.tx.us/Docs/NR/htm/NR.61.htm 
The Open Beaches Act enshrined a TX constitutional right to unrestricted beach access for all Texans, and that has been taken away and replaced with "It's a right so long as this company doesn't want you there."  I'm a big SpaceX fan, but that's not a small potatoes change to a meaningless law. It's a legal precedent.

So I'm reading this Act, and it doesn't seem to be as you describe.

What you've linked is not a "constitutional right", it's a simple law.  Was there actually a constitutional amendment?

And the Act is very specific about what it prohibits.  It says, "No person may display or cause to be displayed on or adjacent to any public beach any sign, marker, or warning, or make or cause to be made any written or oral communication which states that the public beach is private property or represent in any other manner that the public does not have the right of access to the public beach as guaranteed by this subchapter."  SpaceX isn't doing that, certainly.

Can you cite the specific sections of the law which you feel are at issue?

Oddly, the right to open beaches is specified in the Texas constitution.

Article 1, Section 33:
Quote
Sec. 33.  ACCESS AND USE OF PUBLIC BEACHES.  (a)  In this section, "public beach" means a state-owned beach bordering on the seaward shore of the Gulf of Mexico, extending from mean low tide to the landward boundary of state-owned submerged land, and any larger area extending from the line of mean low tide to the line of vegetation bordering on the Gulf of Mexico to which the public has acquired a right of use or easement to or over the area by prescription or dedication or has established and retained a right by virtue of continuous right in the public under Texas common law.
(b)  The public, individually and collectively, has an unrestricted right to use and a right of ingress to and egress from a public beach. The right granted by this subsection is dedicated as a permanent easement in favor of the public.
(c)  The legislature may enact laws to protect the right of the public to access and use a public beach and to protect the public beach easement from interference and encroachments.

However, that needs to be taken in context with the nature of that document.  Texas' constitution is extremely restrictive on the power of the state government, so a ridiculous number of things have to be spelled out explicitly and there are a number of amendments up (several of which usually pass) in every election.  This is not at all like the US Constitution, where each clause and amendment is near-sacrosanct.  Also, TX HB 2623, passed earlier this year,  amended the Open Beaches law to add "launches" and "space flight activities" to the long list of things that can legally trigger a restriction to the "constitutional right" to open beaches.  If the economic impacts SpaceX has promised materialize, there will be no problem amending it again to loosen the restriction on the number of closures.

This is Texas, and the RGV one of the poorest places in the country, so expected economic benefits will likely trump other concerns.  I was in the area visiting a couple months ago and talked to some locals about the proposed site and beach closures.  Their reaction (and my observation) was that Boca Chica beach was lightly used, usually by locals.  It's not an important location for the tourist industry (like the beaches of South Padre), and it's in a place where beaches are far more plentiful than jobs.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Zed_Noir on 09/30/2014 08:38 pm
...
This is Texas, and the RGV one of the poorest places in the country, so expected economic benefits will likely trump other concerns.  I was in the area visiting a couple months ago and talked to some locals about the proposed site and beach closures.  Their reaction (and my observation) was that Boca Chica beach was lightly used, usually by locals.  It's not an important location for the tourist industry (like the beaches of South Padre), and it's in a place where beaches are far more plentiful than jobs.
So how many locals are we talking about around the Boca Chica site? Some rough numbers if known. AIUI there is only ONE permanent resident at Boca Chica.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 09/30/2014 10:31 pm
...
This is Texas, and the RGV one of the poorest places in the country, so expected economic benefits will likely trump other concerns.  I was in the area visiting a couple months ago and talked to some locals about the proposed site and beach closures.  Their reaction (and my observation) was that Boca Chica beach was lightly used, usually by locals.  It's not an important location for the tourist industry (like the beaches of South Padre), and it's in a place where beaches are far more plentiful than jobs.
So how many locals are we talking about around the Boca Chica site? Some rough numbers if known. AIUI there is only ONE permanent resident at Boca Chica.

Yes, that's correct.  Only 1 permanent resident in Boca Chica village.  There are some seasonal residents, but less than 10 total.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: AncientU on 09/30/2014 10:44 pm
Wonder if SpaceX can work with (incentivize) the Mexican gov't to set aside large chunk(s) of the coastal wetlands as wildlife preserves across the border.  This could promote the launch site as a significant benefit to the environment and help keep the local population out of harm's way. As the launch complex grows, they are going to need lots of buffer land.

Has anything been discussed about the SpaceX/Mexican government (local or national) relations?
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Comga on 09/30/2014 10:49 pm
Quote time! Thanks to SpaceX PAO!
{snip}
Senator Lucio’s statement follows:
{snip}
We'’ve set up South Texas as a future leader in developing bleeding-edge space technology which will influence future commerce for the whole planet.
{snip}

Gee, I hope he didn't really mean that. ;)
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: docmordrid on 09/30/2014 10:50 pm
Wonder if SpaceX can work with (incentivize) the Mexican gov't to set aside large chunk(s) of the coastal wetlands as wildlife preserves across the border.  This could promote the launch site as a significant benefit to the environment and help keep the local population out of harm's way. As the launch complex grows, they are going to need lots of buffer land.

Has anything been discussed about the SpaceX/Mexican government (local or national) relations?
ISTM any communication with Mexico  about cross-border issues would have to go through the State Department.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: robertross on 09/30/2014 11:36 pm
Good article on the Texas site over at SFN.

Elon says that the construction work will gear up to "significant activity" in 3Q 2015, after they finish pad 39A mods in 9 months or so.

That makes me think that the people involved in the Pad 39A mods (I mean the planning/designing people) want to learn from that process and the issues uncovered to be more efficient and create something a whole generation ahead of what Pad 39A is going to be once they have done the work over. That is, there work over of Pad 39A involves not just adapting it to their equipment needs but in a somewhat limited to modernize it too. By doing all of that work to near completion before they finalize the design of the installations at Boca Chica, I think that Boca Chica will end up with a design that avoids issues from Pad 39A's original design and from their first cut at crafting a launch facility (which they got at a cut rate and only had to do part of the process on).

I would suspect that it is more build-out crew and cash flow limited.  This will be their fourth launch facility and third landing facility... the design is likely settled for big chunks like the TE, pad, spacecraft/stage handling buildings, etc.  Once they get LC-39A running, the pressure will come off LC-40 somewhat, and give a window for demand for the new Texas facility to build.  No reason to build two new pads in parallel, though they could do some of the heavy grade work, road beds, etc. while LC-39A is being readied.

I would say it has more to do with design, approval, build, galvanize/paint, and erect. Structures can take quite a long time behind the scenes before you see steel going up, or concrete being poured. And after all that you still have the wiring, pipework, pre-commisioning, and commmissioning time to consider.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: eriblo on 10/01/2014 12:09 pm
Wonder if SpaceX can work with (incentivize) the Mexican gov't to set aside large chunk(s) of the coastal wetlands as wildlife preserves across the border.  This could promote the launch site as a significant benefit to the environment and help keep the local population out of harm's way. As the launch complex grows, they are going to need lots of buffer land.

Has anything been discussed about the SpaceX/Mexican government (local or national) relations?

The coastal wetlands seems to be covered, although I'm sure exactly what level of protection it provides - it is a Mexican Flora and Fauna Protection Area and a Mexican Biosphere Reserve since 2005/2006 (Laguna Madre y Delta del Rio Bravo). A quick look at Google maps gives: It reaches 8.4 km (5.2 miles) inland compared to the US-side launch closure area which is more than 20 km (more or less all the way to Brownsville) according to the EIS. The closest spot outside is 9 km from the pad while the tip of South Padre Island, aka the future prime launch viewing spot, is 8 km.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: sghill on 10/01/2014 07:50 pm
The coastal wetlands seems to be covered, although I'm sure exactly what level of protection it provides - it is a Mexican Flora and Fauna Protection Area and a Mexican Biosphere Reserve since 2005/2006 (Laguna Madre y Delta del Rio Bravo). A quick look at Google maps gives: It reaches 8.4 km (5.2 miles) inland compared to the US-side launch closure area which is more than 20 km (more or less all the way to Brownsville) according to the EIS. The closest spot outside is 9 km from the pad while the tip of South Padre Island, aka the future prime launch viewing spot, is 8 km.

Hmm, I smell a business opportunity.  Put up your taco hut/ tiki bar on the Mexican side right on the beach and advertise the heck out of it on NSF! :)

http://www.webcams.travel/webcam/1401806835-Weather-Playa-Costa-Azul-%28vista-sur%29%2C-Heroica-Matamoros%2C-Tamps.%2C-M%C3%A9xico.-Playa-Lauro-Villar
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: AncientU on 10/01/2014 09:45 pm
Wonder if SpaceX can work with (incentivize) the Mexican gov't to set aside large chunk(s) of the coastal wetlands as wildlife preserves across the border.  This could promote the launch site as a significant benefit to the environment and help keep the local population out of harm's way. As the launch complex grows, they are going to need lots of buffer land.

Has anything been discussed about the SpaceX/Mexican government (local or national) relations?

The coastal wetlands seems to be covered, although I'm sure exactly what level of protection it provides - it is a Mexican Flora and Fauna Protection Area and a Mexican Biosphere Reserve since 2005/2006 (Laguna Madre y Delta del Rio Bravo). A quick look at Google maps gives: It reaches 8.4 km (5.2 miles) inland compared to the US-side launch closure area which is more than 20 km (more or less all the way to Brownsville) according to the EIS. The closest spot outside is 9 km from the pad while the tip of South Padre Island, aka the future prime launch viewing spot, is 8 km.

Thanks for the research.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Llian Rhydderch on 10/05/2014 12:53 pm
The coastal wetlands seems to be covered, although I'm sure exactly what level of protection it provides - it is a Mexican Flora and Fauna Protection Area and a Mexican Biosphere Reserve since 2005/2006 (Laguna Madre y Delta del Rio Bravo). A quick look at Google maps gives: It reaches 8.4 km (5.2 miles) inland compared to the US-side launch closure area which is more than 20 km (more or less all the way to Brownsville) according to the EIS. The closest spot outside is 9 km from the pad while the tip of South Padre Island, aka the future prime launch viewing spot, is 8 km.

Hmm, I smell a business opportunity.  Put up your taco hut/ tiki bar on the Mexican side right on the beach and advertise the heck out of it on NSF! :)

http://www.webcams.travel/webcam/1401806835-Weather-Playa-Costa-Azul-%28vista-sur%29%2C-Heroica-Matamoros%2C-Tamps.%2C-M%C3%A9xico.-Playa-Lauro-Villar

While a part of your post may have been in jest ;D , I think that some variation on this theme will likely be done on the Mexico side of the border.

While Mexican law, liability issues and political economy for founding new business ventures are quite different than US institutions, there are reasons to think that some entrepreneurial (or maybe government, with governmental entrepreneurs) enterprise might emerge to offer viewing (and eating/drinking/accommodation establishments?) somewhere to the south, where possibly "adventure tourists" might obtain a better view etc. than available on South Padre Island, or outside the rather more conservative US lockout zone. 

I'm not saying this will happen.  But generally, when benefits are there to be harvested, we find persons who endeavor to provide something of value to those who might want to pay for the privilege.  I expect this to emerge in the next decade.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: AJW on 10/05/2014 01:08 pm
Some of the plans in place to monitor the SpaceX grants and tax abatements...

http://www.valleymorningstar.com/premium/article_5470039a-4c39-11e4-8c2d-001a4bcf6878.html
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 10/06/2014 12:02 pm
I managed to identify 13 new lots purchased by SpaceX in the online Cameron County Real Estate Appraisal Map (http://www.cameroncad.org/cadclientdb/propertymap.aspx).

Latest composite map attached.  Recent purchases highlighted below that.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: symbios on 10/06/2014 12:51 pm
I like the odd plots in the upper left corner of the big map that is in the middle of the water. Who got fired for buying them? ;)

I have some radiated swamp I mean prime farm land to sell him  ::)
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: mheney on 10/06/2014 01:25 pm
I like the odd plots in the upper left corner of the big map that is in the middle of the water. Who got fired for buying them? ;)

I have some radiated swamp I mean prime farm land to sell him  ::)

Ummm - you realize that blue color indicates "State owned land", and not water, right?
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Paul_G on 10/06/2014 01:44 pm
I think if you overlay that property map over something like Google Maps, then any property 'zones' (for want of a better word), north west of Weens Rd and LBJ Boulevard are in marshland at best, rather than nice dry land.

Shortened Google Maps link http://bit.ly/1vH6zWy

Paul
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: eriblo on 10/06/2014 01:55 pm
See previous excellent post by Dave G and Lars_J, especially this one. (http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=35425.msg1253130#msg1253130)
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: JimNtexas on 10/06/2014 03:29 pm
I visited Boca Chico yesterday.  I took a bunch of aerial and ground level pictures that I will post real soon now.

I did drive down Weems road and captured a short video with my iPhone that you can watch here:

http://youtu.be/hSCsCeS1QTo

About a third of the houses have been abandoned, two or three appeared to have people living in them, the others looked unoccupied but maintained.   

I only had energy to post two pictures last night after I got back last night:

http://i.imgur.com/u4BjKEW.jpg

http://i.imgur.com/KDGI2DY.jpg

More latter, I should be working right now!
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 10/06/2014 09:11 pm
I like the odd plots in the upper left corner of the big map that is in the middle of the water. Who got fired for buying them? ;)

I have some radiated swamp I mean prime farm land to sell him  ::)

The lots were drawn in 1967, just before the area was devastated by Hurricane Beulah, which redrew the shore line.  I believe there were some plans to dredge the bay and reclaim the land, but that seems very doubtful now.

Here's a map that shows which properties are under water:

Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: JimNtexas on 10/06/2014 09:46 pm
Not sure about the first two but Joanna Street and Remedios Avenue appear to be paved...

Google maps has the best sat views.   Shrubs down the centers of both Joanna and Remedios.  Look like candidates for vehicles with serious ground clearance.

https://www.google.com/maps/@25.9855827,-97.1881667,121m/data=!3m1!1e3

I drove down Remedios yesterday in a rented Camrey.  That road may have been paved at one time, but it's just packed gravel now.  The buildings at the end seem to still be maintained, and there is a big 'lots for sale' sign at the intersection of Remedios and Highway 4.

Highway 4 will have to close to traffic when they deliver boosters.  Highway 4 is in good repair, but I think a booster on a trailer will barely fit on the whole width.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: TrevorMonty on 10/06/2014 09:53 pm




About a third of the houses have been abandoned, two or three appeared to have people living in them, the others looked unoccupied but maintained.   


Cheap housing for any SpaceX employees. Not sure how many older staff with family would like to move there.
 Looking Jim's photos, Brownsville desperately needs the money SpaceX employees and launch tourists will inject into the locally economy.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 10/07/2014 11:37 am
STARGATE to receive $1.2 million EDA grant
http://www.brownsvilleherald.com/news/local/article_c622c65a-4dd1-11e4-8768-0017a43b2370.html

So the total for the STARGATE tracking center seems to be:

$4.4 million: Texas Emerging Technology Fund
$4.6 million: University of Texas System
$0.5 million: Greater Brownsville Incentives Corporation
$1.2 million: U.S. Economic Development Administration
-----------------------------------------------
$10.7 million: Total

(http://bloximages.newyork1.vip.townnews.com/brownsvilleherald.com/content/tncms/assets/v3/editorial/c/a3/ca3780a4-4dd2-11e4-bf1c-0017a43b2370/54335f4c58857.image.jpg)
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Jcc on 10/07/2014 11:56 pm
Awesome! Located at the SpaceX launch complex, so presumably they will help fund it as well as probably benefit a great deal. I can see the spacecraft tracking part, and the research part is icing on th cake.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Llian Rhydderch on 10/08/2014 12:01 am
Awesome! Located at the SpaceX launch complex, so presumably they will help fund it as well as probably benefit a great deal. I can see the spacecraft tracking part, and the research part is icing on th cake.

SpaceX is involved in STARGATE directly.  The news sources I've read indicate that the STARGATE enterprise is a collaboration between University of Texas Brownsville, Brownsville Economic Development Corp and SpaceX. 

Haven't seen anything that clarifies the mix of SpaceX funding, nor how much SpaceX gets to use/access the facilities for, for example, tracking ascending launch vehicles or tracking and downlinking telemetry data from passing orbital spacecraft that are in view of the antenna array(s). 
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: superkuh on 10/08/2014 02:40 am
Just as an aside, the "Stargate" logo does not seem to completely fit with the "gigahertz transients" description. It prominently features LWA crossed dipole elements; they cover ~5-90 MHz. Here's to hoping for another LWA site as part of "Stargate".
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Llian Rhydderch on 10/08/2014 03:10 am
Just as an aside, the "Stargate" logo does not seem to completely fit with the "gigahertz transients" description. It prominently features LWA crossed dipole elements; they cover ~5-90 MHz. Here's to hoping for another LWA site as part of "Stargate".

Welcome to the forum, superkuh!

Might you consider expanding on your post a bit, and explaining LWA and other technical items for the non-electrical engineering RF folks who read this site?   :)
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: superkuh on 10/08/2014 03:49 am
Welcome to the forum, superkuh!

Thanks. I registered and have been lurking since 2008. The LWA is the "Long Wavelength Array", http://www.phys.unm.edu/~lwa/index.html , with the first site located upon the NRAO's VLA (Very Large Array) grounds in New Mexico. The LWA was one of the many "Pathfinder" projects to test out the concepts that are to be implemented in the Square Kilometer Array but it stands on it's own as well. It is an "all sky" radio telescope designed to monitor for transient signals in the low frequency range.

From the logo, funding level, and geographic location (close to the first LWA) it seems likely that a second LWA site will be constructed as part of Stargate. The signals from this second site would be correlated with those from the first for greater interferometric angular resolution. The costs of these types of antenna/receivers would run about ~$2000/each when not purchased in bulk.

A "crossed dipole" is just two dipoles perpendicular to each other hooked up in such a way so that the linear polarizations received by each dipole are combined to result in circular polarization. Circular polarization is important to maximize sensitivity to coherent (non-thermal) astronomical radio sources. The large width of the dipole elements increases the bandwidth of the antenna elements but preserves good omnidirectional coverage.

I am not sure an LWA site would be useful for spacecraft or the like (due to the low frequency) but the science return is high.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: cuddihy on 10/08/2014 04:01 am
For space craft tracking you want GHz.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 10/08/2014 12:22 pm
Looking Jim's photos, Brownsville desperately needs the money SpaceX employees and launch tourists will inject into the locally economy.

To clarify, Jim's pictures were of Boca Chica Village, about 17 miles East of Brownsville. 

Boca Chica Village has a population of 1 permanent resident.

Brownsville has a population of 181,860.  Brownsville also has an international airport (http://www.flybrownsville.com/), a state university (http://www.utb.edu/Pages/default.aspx), and a very capable seaport (http://www.portofbrownsville.com/). 

The Brownsville area, also known as the Rio Grande Valley (RGV), has one of the lowest cost-of-living rates in the country, which means dirt cheap real estate, low taxes, and relatively cheap labor, especially unskilled labor like janitors, security guards, secretaries, etc., but also low-cost labor rates for local machinists. 

Given that SpaceX is extremely sensitive to cost, it seems like a great place to set up shop.  At the ground-breaking ceremony, Musk said they intend to launch people to Mars from the Texas launch site.  With this in mind, its a good bet they will build BFR there.

Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: MTom on 10/08/2014 07:30 pm
Welcome to the forum, superkuh!

Thanks. I registered and have been lurking since 2008. The LWA is the "Long Wavelength Array", http://www.phys.unm.edu/~lwa/index.html , with the first site located upon the NRAO's VLA (Very Large Array) grounds in New Mexico. The LWA was one of the many "Pathfinder" projects to test out the concepts that are to be implemented in the Square Kilometer Array but it stands on it's own as well. It is an "all sky" radio telescope designed to monitor for transient signals in the low frequency range.

From the logo, funding level, and geographic location (close to the first LWA) it seems likely that a second LWA site will be constructed as part of Stargate. The signals from this second site would be correlated with those from the first for greater interferometric angular resolution. The costs of these types of antenna/receivers would run about ~$2000/each when not purchased in bulk.

A "crossed dipole" is just two dipoles perpendicular to each other hooked up in such a way so that the linear polarizations received by each dipole are combined to result in circular polarization. Circular polarization is important to maximize sensitivity to coherent (non-thermal) astronomical radio sources. The large width of the dipole elements increases the bandwidth of the antenna elements but preserves good omnidirectional coverage.

I am not sure an LWA site would be useful for spacecraft or the like (due to the low frequency) but the science return is high.

I read earlier about it, there can be found some general information in addition.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Astronomical_interferometer
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: docmordrid on 10/09/2014 07:02 am
UTB/UTRGV Center for Advanced Radio Astronomy (CARA) page has some tidbits,

http://www.utb.edu/stargate/Pages/STARGATE.aspx
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: MTom on 10/09/2014 07:02 pm
What could this mean?

Quote
STARGATE will develop new radio frequency based technologies. STARGATE has already identified specific, innovative devices and improved algorithms that will soon allow for the next generation of orbital communication systems. This new technology will be the first wave of inventions commercialized at STARGATE.

Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Scylla on 10/09/2014 07:05 pm
Was sifting through the net and ran across this photo of where the Launch Control Center will be. I believe it was taken during the ground breaking but I don't recall seeing it before.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Lars-J on 10/09/2014 07:07 pm
Interesting, I didn't know they had put some temporary buildings/stirage in place already.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Scylla on 10/09/2014 07:14 pm
The amount of lights around the two buildings seems....um....thorough. :P
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: JimNtexas on 10/09/2014 07:32 pm
Was sifting through the net and ran across this photo of where the Launch Control Center will be. I believe it was taken during the ground breaking but I don't recall seeing it before.


If I recall correctly, that's up the road a ways from where the ground breaking is.   I'm going camping this weekend, when I get back I'll post more pictures from trip down there.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Llian Rhydderch on 10/09/2014 08:16 pm
Interesting, I didn't know they had put some temporary buildings/stirage in place already.

Wikipedia has a source (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SpaceX_private_launch_site#Construction) that says these two buildings were in place before September 27th.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Llian Rhydderch on 10/09/2014 08:22 pm
Was sifting through the net and ran across this photo of where the Launch Control Center will be. I believe it was taken during the ground breaking but I don't recall seeing it before.

What is the permanent-looking small building on the left side of the Scylla's photograph?

If it wasn't for the satellite dish, I'd think it was a changing room or bath room for the beach at the nearby state park.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: JasonAW3 on 10/09/2014 09:01 pm
Was sifting through the net and ran across this photo of where the Launch Control Center will be. I believe it was taken during the ground breaking but I don't recall seeing it before.

What is the permanent-looking small building on the left side of the Scylla's photograph?

If it wasn't for the satellite dish, I'd think it was a changing room or bath room for the beach at the nearby state park.


Guard Shack?
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 10/09/2014 09:02 pm
If I recall correctly, that's up the road a ways from where the ground breaking is.

Yes, the control center area is about 2 miles from the launch site.

According to the EIS, the control center area will include:
2 Launch Control Center Buildings,
2 Payload Processing Facility buildings
1 Launch Vehicle Processing Hangar   

Quote
Launch Control Center Buildings
The one-story control center buildings would be approximately 14,186 ft2 and 30-45 ft in height, and
would be used for command and control of the launch vehicle, payload, and ground systems during
launch and test operations. Each control center building would consist primarily of several large rooms
for control consoles, conference rooms, and support rooms. In addition, each facility would house office
areas for site personnel.

Payload Processing Facilities
The payload processing facilities would be used to conduct final processing of payloads prior to
integrating them with the launch vehicle. This processing would include final spacecraft checkouts, RF
checks, payload fueling, and other activities as required. The facilities would be designed to support the
processing of two payloads simultaneously, to allow for a better throughput. Each building would be
approximately 14,669 ft2 and 65-85 ft in height

Launch Vehicle Processing Hangar
The proposed 30,774 ft2, 50-65 ft tall launch vehicle processing hangar would be used to conduct
refurbishment of flown stages, or for pre-integration preparation of the launch vehicle stages before
they go to the pad hangar for final integration. Use of this facility would improve the overall vertical
launch area throughput by minimizing the vehicle’s activities associated with the launch vehicle in the
vertical launch area Hangar. This facility would be similar to the Hangar at the vertical launch area, but
shorter.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 10/09/2014 09:07 pm
What is the permanent-looking small building on the left side of the Scylla's photograph?

If it wasn't for the satellite dish, I'd think it was a changing room or bath room for the beach at the nearby state park.

Guard Shack?

Whatever it is, its been there for years.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: JimNtexas on 10/09/2014 09:10 pm
If it's the one I'm thinking about I thought it was a telephone related facility, or perhaps something related to the Border Patrol.

I've seen similar structures elsewhere in Texas. 

On the other hand, one of the Brownsville college students I spoke to did tell me that SpaceX does have a small building somewhere near the beach.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Lars-J on 10/09/2014 09:44 pm
What is the permanent-looking small building on the left side of the Scylla's photograph?

If it wasn't for the satellite dish, I'd think it was a changing room or bath room for the beach at the nearby state park.

Guard Shack?

Whatever it is, its been there for years.

Yep, I came to the same conclusion looking at Google Maps. It is the only small square building of that type in the Boca Chica subdivision.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Scylla on 10/09/2014 09:57 pm
Interesting, I didn't know they had put some temporary buildings/stirage in place already.

Wikipedia has a source (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SpaceX_private_launch_site#Construction) that says these two buildings were in place before September 27th.

I recall reading a news story about how SpaceX had put in two buildings.

Looking closer at the photo, the slope of the roof seems to indicate two halves of a prefab that have been put together.

Is the news story and wikipedia counting the two identical halves as two buildings or is their another building someplace?
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: robertross on 10/10/2014 01:27 am
Was sifting through the net and ran across this photo of where the Launch Control Center will be. I believe it was taken during the ground breaking but I don't recall seeing it before.


Neat, thanks.

Reminds me of the old 'International Airport' of Treasure Cay, Great Abaco Bahamas. lol
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: wannamoonbase on 10/10/2014 02:36 am
Interesting, I didn't know they had put some temporary buildings/stirage in place already.

Wikipedia has a source (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SpaceX_private_launch_site#Construction) that says these two buildings were in place before September 27th.

I recall reading a news story about how SpaceX had put in two buildings.

Looking closer at the photo, the slope of the roof seems to indicate two halves of a prefab that have been put together.

Is the news story and wikipedia counting the two identical halves as two buildings or is their another building someplace?


As one who works in construction and spent years working out of such structures those simply construction trailers.

Mobilizing on site with a small trailer for site and civil work is appropriate for this time frame.

On an estimated 100 million dollar job with a 2 year schedule I'd expect to see another 2 to 4 wide trailer to show up for office and meeting facilities.

Edit: it's almost certianly setup away from any serious work. No one wants to move a trailer mid project. 
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: JimNtexas on 10/10/2014 03:59 am
I had hoped to have a blog post with some details and processed images from my trip to Brownsville last weekend, but I never found the time. 

Since I'm out of town for the next four or five days I've just posted the raw images from my aerial and ground visit in a Google docs folder:

https://drive.google.com/folderview?id=0B0NWW2tf69ZBVXJGbl9GWlFWTW8&usp=sharing

For reference, groundbreaking.jpg shows where the groundbreaking was.  Notice the asphalt pad that was laid down for the VIPs.  Thats helpful in keeping oriented.

Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Llian Rhydderch on 10/10/2014 04:46 am
I had hoped to have a blog post with some details and processed images from my trip to Brownsville last weekend, but I never found the time. 

Since I'm out of town for the next four or five days I've just posted the raw images from my aerial and ground visit in a Google docs folder:

https://drive.google.com/folderview?id=0B0NWW2tf69ZBVXJGbl9GWlFWTW8&usp=sharing

For reference, groundbreaking.jpg shows where the groundbreaking was.  Notice the asphalt pad that was laid down for the VIPs.  Thats helpful in keeping oriented.

It is really great to see a set of photos of what the undeveloped site looks like, both at the beach where the launch site will be as well as aerial photos of what this small "Boca Chica Village" collection of houses looks like, in context.

Thanks Jim for making the effort to obtain this photo documentation, and for sharing it with all the interested readers who frequent these forums!
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: guckyfan on 10/10/2014 05:48 am

It is really great to see a set of photos of what the undeveloped site looks like, both at the beach where the launch site will be as well as aerial photos of what this small "Boca Chica Village" collection of houses looks like, in context.

Thanks Jim for making the effort to obtain this photo documentation, and for sharing it with all the interested readers who frequent these forums!

I want to add my thanks too. It really gives better insight to the area.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 10/10/2014 11:59 am

It is really great to see a set of photos of what the undeveloped site looks like, both at the beach where the launch site will be as well as aerial photos of what this small "Boca Chica Village" collection of houses looks like, in context.

Thanks Jim for making the effort to obtain this photo documentation, and for sharing it with all the interested readers who frequent these forums!

I want to add my thanks too. It really gives better insight to the area.

Yes, thank you Jim for the great pics!

This particular one shows Boca Chica Village really well.  I took the liberty of adjusting the levels in Photoshop.  You can see the SpaceX Mobile home and the fence around it.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: AncientU on 10/10/2014 12:10 pm
I had hoped to have a blog post with some details and processed images from my trip to Brownsville last weekend, but I never found the time. 

Since I'm out of town for the next four or five days I've just posted the raw images from my aerial and ground visit in a Google docs folder:

https://drive.google.com/folderview?id=0B0NWW2tf69ZBVXJGbl9GWlFWTW8&usp=sharing

For reference, groundbreaking.jpg shows where the groundbreaking was.  Notice the asphalt pad that was laid down for the VIPs.  Thats helpful in keeping oriented.

Is there a way to capture these great images onto the forum for future reference?
With Jim's permission, of course...
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: JimNtexas on 10/10/2014 03:27 pm
Please consider these images as public domain.  I'd appreciate credit, but mainly I want them to be a small part of the historical record.

Anything that gets people interested in Space travel is all good as far as I'm concerned.

I hope to go back early next summer and do this again.

Edited to add:

DSC_0194 copy.JPG was taken from the top a sand dune with the Gulf at my back, looking toward where I think the launch pad will be.  DSC_0118.JPG is the same general area from the air.

I wasn't able to get good views looking from the south, ATC asked me nicely to please not cross the Rio Grande, which  is just south of highway 4.

I was struck with how nice Boca Chica beach is, it's really very unspoiled.   

Do keep in mind that between the King Ranch and the National Park Service there is about 70 to 80 miles of mostly uninhabited wetland and beach areas between Brownsville and Corpus Christi, so it's not like the SpaceX site will wipe out a whole ecosystem.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 10/10/2014 06:20 pm
DSC_0194 copy.JPG was taken from the top a sand dune with the Gulf at my back, looking toward where I think the launch pad will be.  DSC_0118.JPG is the same general area from the air.

SpaceX has already acquired all of the land at the launch site, and their plans on how that will be developed don't seem to have changed.

Less certain is the control center area, about 2 miles from the launch site, near Boca Chica Village.  The EIS shows 3 parcels of land, around 4 acres each, but SpaceX has not purchased Parcels 2 & 3, and they've expanded Parcel 1 to about 11 acres.  So that makes the control center area a lot more interesting to me.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: JimNtexas on 10/10/2014 06:30 pm
There are several 'for sale' signs on houses in Boca Chica Village, so it doesn't look like these houses are being snapped up.

I just noticed that the probable SpaceX building is visible in DSC_0185.JPG.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: oiorionsbelt on 10/10/2014 07:36 pm
Seems as though every picture I've seen of the Boca Chica site was taken at low tide. These as well as the satellite imagery. For example in this picture from JimNtexas are the flats flooded at high tide?
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: MTom on 10/10/2014 09:56 pm
DSC_0194 copy.JPG was taken from the top a sand dune with the Gulf at my back, looking toward where I think the launch pad will be.  DSC_0118.JPG is the same general area from the air.

SpaceX has already acquired all of the land at the launch site, and their plans on how that will be developed don't seem to have changed.

Less certain is the control center area, about 2 miles from the launch site, near Boca Chica Village.  The EIS shows 3 parcels of land, around 4 acres each, but SpaceX has not purchased Parcels 2 & 3, and they've expanded Parcel 1 to about 11 acres.  So that makes the control center area a lot more interesting to me.

Parcel 1 can be found about here:
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: MTom on 10/10/2014 10:14 pm
DSC_0194 copy.JPG was taken from the top a sand dune with the Gulf at my back, looking toward where I think the launch pad will be.  DSC_0118.JPG is the same general area from the air.

SpaceX has already acquired all of the land at the launch site, and their plans on how that will be developed don't seem to have changed.

Less certain is the control center area, about 2 miles from the launch site, near Boca Chica Village.  The EIS shows 3 parcels of land, around 4 acres each, but SpaceX has not purchased Parcels 2 & 3, and they've expanded Parcel 1 to about 11 acres.  So that makes the control center area a lot more interesting to me.

Parcel 2 is a county-owned territory, about here:
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: MTom on 10/10/2014 10:41 pm
DSC_0194 copy.JPG was taken from the top a sand dune with the Gulf at my back, looking toward where I think the launch pad will be.  DSC_0118.JPG is the same general area from the air.

SpaceX has already acquired all of the land at the launch site, and their plans on how that will be developed don't seem to have changed.

Less certain is the control center area, about 2 miles from the launch site, near Boca Chica Village.  The EIS shows 3 parcels of land, around 4 acres each, but SpaceX has not purchased Parcels 2 & 3, and they've expanded Parcel 1 to about 11 acres.  So that makes the control center area a lot more interesting to me.

Parcel 3 (red) is here (not purchased - yet), but there are a lot of city-owned parcels (light-blue) and SpaceX-owned parcels (yellow) next to it. As your previous maps shows, there are more smaller parcels (owned by city and SpaceX) in the direction of the arrows.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: daver on 10/11/2014 12:58 am
DSC_0173 & 4 kinda look like a landing pad being built on a ship. 


edit
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Saratoga_(CV-60 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Saratoga_(CV-60))   "On 8 May 2014, Naval Sea Systems Command announced that ESCO Marine,  Brownsville Texas will scrap Saratoga for one cent. "  :(
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Scylla on 10/11/2014 01:11 am
DSC_0173 & 4 kinda look like a landing pad being built on a ship.

Looks more like an Aircraft Carrier at the breakers. Probably USS Saratoga.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: WindyCity on 10/11/2014 01:33 pm
Thanks, Jim. Boca Chica ("Little Mouth") is going to make a gran rugido ("big roar").
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Llian Rhydderch on 10/12/2014 06:21 am
DSC_0173 & 4 kinda look like a landing pad being built on a ship.

Looks more like an Aircraft Carrier at the breakers. Probably USS Saratoga.

I hope JimNTexas puts his public domain photos in a place that they can be used on Wikipedia.  The Saratoga at the breakers (from the air) shot would be a good one for there!
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: rpapo on 10/12/2014 09:07 am
I hope JimNTexas puts his public domain photos in a place that they can be used on Wikipedia.  The Saratoga at the breakers (from the air) shot would be a good one for there!
There were two carriers sold to the ship-breakers in Brownsville, though one only just left Rhode Island a month or so ago, and probably wouldn't be so far broken up yet, if it has even gotten there yet.

EDIT: Found an article reporting the arrival of the Saratoga in Brownsville on September 19th.  I'm amazed they've already demolished that much of it, though...
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 10/12/2014 11:23 am
Here's a map of the Brownsville area that shows the USS Saratoga (http://www.escomarine.us/) relative to the Launch Site and Control Center.

As I've said before, Brownsville has a very capable sea port (http://www.portofbrownsville.com/).  The inland waterway shown below handles aircraft carriers, oil tankers, drilling rigs, etc..  There is also open real estate along this inland waterway, should a company wish to develop there.

I believe this would be an ideal location for SpaceX to build BFR.  Using this inland waterway, they could ship BFR to the Boca Chica launch site, or to Cape Canaveral, to Stennis for testing, or anywhere else that has a sea port.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: oldAtlas_Eguy on 10/12/2014 03:03 pm
Your argument about placing the BFR manufacturing facility close to the Brownsville port or within near enough distance that ground transport from factory to the port or to the Boca Chica launch site is not a problem is probably something that has a high likelyhood of taking place.

NASA currently owns a barge with a high class enviromental protection cover for a LV core diameter of 8.4meters and as least as long as the Shuttle ET.  That barge is being forcast to be used by SLS. But SpaceX could rent it to do BFR core stage transport as long as the number of transports they need is less than 8 in one year.  It takes about a month to get the barge from any Gulf Coast location to the Cape.

Another aside is that if SLS program folds then the barge would be up for cheap long lease or outright surpluse sale.

But all of this also means that such a manufacturing facility could be located anywhere on the gulf coast near a port with the docking facilities required without making any effect to the cost of transport if the use of BFR on multiple launch sites occurs.  Having the manufacturing facility next to a launch site is the reasonable answer only if the operations off that site is the primary usage of the vehicle lowering the vehicles overall operations and manufacturing cost of which transport is a small portion.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Robotbeat on 10/12/2014 03:23 pm
Good argument for return-to-launch-site from the get-go!
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: oldAtlas_Eguy on 10/12/2014 04:00 pm
Good argument for return-to-launch-site from the get-go!

Yes RTLS and use of such a barge for transport of a new vehicle 4 times a year [2 trips, one for each 1st stage and US] to a remote launch site (Cape) means with an average total number of flights as low as 5 per vehicle thats 20 flights in one year of a BFR off of the remote site. If the manufacturing facility is colocated with another site [Boca Chica] the flight rate out of the local site is unrestricted by barge transport since no barge is used.

P.S. Thats a build rate of BFR's of 4 for use at the cape [20 flights per year (~1 every 2 weeks)] and 10 for use at Boca Chica [50 flights per year (~1 every week)] for a total build rate of 14 BFR's per year.  Thats would be higher than their current F9 build rate. Assuming they are allowed to do launches every week out of Boca Chica!!!
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: MTom on 10/12/2014 06:28 pm
Is this the appropriate thread for BFR-speculations?  :-\
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 10/12/2014 07:03 pm
Is this the appropriate thread for BFR-speculations?  :-\

While testifying before the Texas state legislature (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3_iu75TFgX8), Musk heavily implied that BFR would be built near their commercial launch site. Since then, SpaceX has chosen South Texas for their commercial launch site.

Since this thread includes general discussion of how SpaceX will operate in launch site area, I would say that speculation about BFR being built near the Texas launch site belongs in this thread.

Specifically, I'm speculating that BFR will be built along the Brownsville sea port waterway.  From their web site: (http://www.portofbrownsville.com/facts/)
Quote
With abundant land for development and seventeen miles of waterfront access, the Port of Brownsville offers easy access to non-congested international bridge crossings and rail connections to your ultimate destination. At the Port of Brownsville there is no cargo that we cannot handle!
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: MTom on 10/12/2014 07:14 pm
Is this the appropriate thread for BFR-speculations?  :-\

While testifying before the Texas state legislature (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qhVNOYz5ciw), Musk heavily implied that BFR would be built near their commercial launch site. Since then, SpaceX has chosen South Texas for their commercial launch site.

Since this thread includes general discussion of how SpaceX will operate in launch site area, I would say that speculation about BFR being built near the Texas launch site belongs in this thread.

Specifically, I'm speculating that BFR will be built along the Brownsville sea port.  From their web site: (http://www.portofbrownsville.com/facts/)
Quote
With abundant land for development and seventeen miles of waterfront access, the Port of Brownsville offers easy access to non-congested international bridge crossings and rail connections to your ultimate destination. At the Port of Brownsville there is no cargo that we cannot handle!

Ok.

I only enjoyed this post until now reading the new informations about the new site without reading endless discusssions about "what would be if"-s.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Roy_H on 10/13/2014 02:41 pm
NASA currently owns a barge with a high class enviromental protection cover for a LV core diameter of 8.4meters and as least as long as the Shuttle ET.  That barge is being forcast to be used by SLS. But SpaceX could rent it to do BFR core stage transport...

The BFR core is expected to be 12m to 15m diameter.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 10/20/2014 10:33 am
Plans to lengthen the runway at the Brownsville South Padre Island International Airport:
http://brownsvillevoice.blogspot.com/
Quote
THE SPACE X RUNWAY
...This will be a game changer for Brownsville.  A 10,000 foot runway means the largest cargo planes currently in service will be able to land in Brownsville.

 
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Jet Black on 10/20/2014 12:51 pm
NASA currently owns a barge with a high class enviromental protection cover for a LV core diameter of 8.4meters and as least as long as the Shuttle ET.  That barge is being forcast to be used by SLS. But SpaceX could rent it to do BFR core stage transport...

The BFR core is expected to be 12m to 15m diameter.

I thought it was going to be 10?
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: llanitedave on 10/20/2014 02:34 pm
NASA currently owns a barge with a high class enviromental protection cover for a LV core diameter of 8.4meters and as least as long as the Shuttle ET.  That barge is being forcast to be used by SLS. But SpaceX could rent it to do BFR core stage transport...

The BFR core is expected to be 12m to 15m diameter.

I thought it was going to be 10?

My memory may be faulty, and I'm too lazy to look it up, but I seem to remember some SpaceX source saying "at least 10m", and then some people here did calculations that made 12-15m seem more realistic for the likely height and payload of the vehicle.

It's still all speculative.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: mcoconnor on 10/20/2014 03:28 pm
Plans to lengthen the runway at the Brownsville South Padre Island International Airport:
http://brownsvillevoice.blogspot.com/
Quote
THE SPACE X RUNWAY
...This will be a game changer for Brownsville.  A 10,000 foot runway means the largest cargo planes currently in service will be able to land in Brownsville.

This article appears to be pure speculation (and possibly wishful thinking) by the blogger.  There are no sources quoted and this does not appear to have been reported by any reputable news sources.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: JBF on 10/20/2014 03:35 pm
Plans to lengthen the runway at the Brownsville South Padre Island International Airport:
http://brownsvillevoice.blogspot.com/
Quote
THE SPACE X RUNWAY
...This will be a game changer for Brownsville.  A 10,000 foot runway means the largest cargo planes currently in service will be able to land in Brownsville.

This article appears to be pure speculation (and possibly wishful thinking) by the blogger.  There are no sources quoted and this does not appear to have been reported by any reputable news sources.

He's right though. If SpaceX wants to fly in some of the larger satellites they will need a decent runway.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: guckyfan on 10/20/2014 03:40 pm
Found an article by the Brownsville Herald, 3 months ago.

Two lots to be acquired for a future extension of the runway to at least 10.000 feet. It seems an old wish that may now come true.


http://www.brownsvilleherald.com/news/local/article_09ca3e3e-eb8e-11e3-b40c-0017a43b2370.html?mode=jqm
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: JimNtexas on 10/21/2014 08:01 pm
I wonder if there is any plan to widen highway 4?   Highway 4 is in good condition, but it is very narrow.  I'm not 100% sure that an F9 booster could be towed to the launch site on the road as it now exists.

For sure nothing larger than an F9 could make it as the road is now!
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Zed_Noir on 10/21/2014 11:05 pm
I wonder if there is any plan to widen highway 4?   Highway 4 is in good condition, but it is very narrow.  I'm not 100% sure that an F9 booster could be towed to the launch site on the road as it now exists.

For sure nothing larger than an F9 could make it as the road is now!
If HWY 4 is the standard 2-lane bi-direction road. Should be no problem, as long as the trailer carrying the core straddles both lanes. You might have to close section of the highway while the core is traversing that section.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Lars-J on 10/21/2014 11:22 pm
I wonder if there is any plan to widen highway 4?   Highway 4 is in good condition, but it is very narrow.  I'm not 100% sure that an F9 booster could be towed to the launch site on the road as it now exists.

For sure nothing larger than an F9 could make it as the road is now!
If HWY 4 is the standard 2-lane bi-direction road. Should be no problem, as long as the trailer carrying the core straddles both lanes. You might have to close section of the highway while the core is traversing that section.

Yep... F9 cores (and therefore FH) should be no problem on that road. And assuming that any overhead power lines are rerouted, the road doesn't have to be much wider to be able to transport BFR cores. They'll just have to close the road during transport.

Some street view links for illustration: (for others, I know you have driven there JimNTexas)

1. Here is how Boca Chica Blvd (Highway 4) looks by the airport:
https://www.google.com/maps/@25.9168538,-97.424159,3a,75y,113.87h,89.31t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1s-s7ueLX7fVpxF8Oo-YUqeQ!2e0?hl=en

2. An average section of the Boca Chica Blvd (Highway 4):
https://www.google.com/maps/@25.9517918,-97.3333937,3a,75y,93.47h,87.96t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1shhlCcaLToxjQknvztB914Q!2e0!6m1!1e1?hl=en

3. And here is how it looks out at the Boca Chica subdivision where the payload processing building will be nearby:
https://www.google.com/maps/@25.98761,-97.1840492,3a,75y,43.7h,92.27t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1sdfq87kSTmhDOSeNHCorNpw!2e0?hl=en

Transport on this road won't be much of a problem:
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: jebbo on 10/24/2014 12:38 pm
Looks like they have acquire a bit more land

Quote
In preparing the site of the world’s first commercial and vertical orbital launch complex at Boca Chica Beach in Cameron County, SpaceX continues its land purchases, public records show.
Elon Musk’s Space Ex-ploration Technologies recently purchased six more lots, bringing the number of tracts of land that it now owns to 93, which comprise approximately 110 acres of land.
The six additional lots measure slightly more than 1.2 acres of land combined. The purchases were made through SpaceX’s Dogleg Park LLC.
SpaceX plans to launch the Falcon 9 and Falcon Heavy orbital vertical rockets, which also could carry the Dragon capsule, and a variety of smaller, reusable suborbital launch vehicles from Boca Chica.
The proposed $100 mil-lion launch complex site is 17 miles east-northeast of the Brownsville South Padre Island International Airport and about 5 miles south of South Padre Is-land.

http://www.valleymorningstar.com/news/local_news/article_ea005978-5b2f-11e4-945d-0017a43b2370.html
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 10/24/2014 05:29 pm
Looks like they have acquire a bit more land
http://www.valleymorningstar.com/news/local_news/article_ea005978-5b2f-11e4-945d-0017a43b2370.html

Full article here:
http://www.valleymorningstar.com/premium/article_f1717a2e-5b30-11e4-9061-0017a43b2370.html

Quote
The purchases also follow the development of three subdivisions that encompass part of the land. These were named the Launch Site Texas Subdivision and Mars Crossing Subdivision. STARGATE Subdivision also is being planned. This is where the Brownsville Economic Development Council-SpaceX-University of Texas at Brownsville will be developing the STARGATE project that calls for a 12,000-square-foot tracking center.

Building permits have not yet been secured, but at the groundbreaking in late September, Musk said that while advance preparation work toward construction of the complex would be underway, it would not be until next year until construction would begin in earnest. At present, SpaceX is upgrading Launch Pad 39A at NASA’s Kennedy Space Center at Cape Canaveral.

Public records further reflect that SpaceX plans to have developed a facility or facilities with an approximate value of $28,340,900 in 2015 and with personal property valued at $11,267,538.

By 2024, the value of the facilities that are planned would have increased to $46,890,900. The estimated value of personal property would be $13,163,630.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Scylla on 10/26/2014 09:00 pm
Coastal parks look to accommodate SpaceX viewings

Park officials in South Texas are working on a master plan to provide tourists with better views of rocket launches from the world's first commercial orbital spaceport, which is being developed by SpaceX.
http://lufkindailynews.com/news/state/article_23b63d1c-3909-5dc6-ae3f-9f275392f9ca.html

http://www.brownsvilleherald.com/news/local/article_bca3e608-5cb9-11e4-93ac-0017a43b2370.html

Time to start saving those vacation dollars. :)
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 11/01/2014 03:51 pm
Here's a general map of the area from the EIS (https://www.faa.gov/about/office_org/headquarters_offices/ast/environmental/nepa_docs/review/documents_progress/spacex_texas_launch_site_environmental_impact_statement/media/FEIS_SpaceX_Texas_Launch_Site_Vol_I.pdf).

For the Control Center Area the map shows 3 stars, indicating 3 separate locations.  However, the EIS uses notional language for this, indicating that plans may change due to land acquisitions.  Since the EIS was written, Parcel 1 (the star on the lower left) has grown to 3 times the size shown in the EIS, and Parcels 2 and 3 (the other 2 stars) were never purchased by SpaceX.  This seems to indicate that SpaceX is converging on one Control Center Area.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 11/02/2014 03:25 pm
Here's my latest composite map.  Note that this doesn't include the latest 6 lots SpaceX purchased (http://www.valleymorningstar.com/premium/article_f1717a2e-5b30-11e4-9061-0017a43b2370.html), since there's about a 1 month delay in the online Cameron County real estate map (http://www.cameroncad.org/cadclientdb/propertymap.aspx).

Looking at the map below, I wonder what SpaceX is planning for the numerous properties between the launch site and control center.

Any ideas??
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: JBF on 11/02/2014 03:29 pm
They may be at the point where they are trying to get control of all the property in the area to make things easier for future expansion and area lock down for activities.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: PreferToLurk on 11/03/2014 02:57 am
I don't think there is any need to lock it all down.  If SpaceX needs facilities the size of that town, then truly cheap commercial space will have a hard time happening. Besides, if they start launching private crews to private space stations or free return flybys, there will be plenty of private businesses that are going to want to have a storefront/presence at the spaceport.  I mean, thats why Texas is helping this out in the first place -- SpaceX will (hopefully) be an anchor tenant drawing in more businesses and investment.  Obviously they need reasonable space to grow, but if they were to outgrow the facility (we can dream...) then they can just build another facility somewhere else. 

Just my two cents. --  I think they will keep buying some lots in piecemeal, but that the large majority will be left open to the market.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Damon Hill on 11/03/2014 03:38 am
SpaceX, and other spaceflight customers in the future, won't want to overbuild, either.  One really severe hurricane with a major tidal surge could wipe out a lot of facilities within several miles of the shoreline.  I think SpaceX is taking a chance at locating the launch control center and some of its integration facilities that close to the ocean, but that's the company's risk.   KSC and the rest of the CC area also face the same sort of risks and have dodged a couple of cannon balls in previous decades; I think they were lucky.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: JimNtexas on 11/03/2014 03:57 am
The control center could probably survive most hurricanes, but the launch complex is for all practical purposes at sea level.  Anything they build there needs to be submersible. 
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: NaN on 11/03/2014 05:15 am
The land in boca chica should be very inexpensive, so buying up lots as 'insurance' against future needs may well be worth it.

I'm curious about if/how they plan to protect the pad against storm surges; nominal height of the land is 3ft and it looks a bit soft. It seems feasible to use deep foundations and elevate the pad and its equipment to protect it. They know that the odd storm visits the region so they must be thinking about it.

Hmm, just found these storm surge maps: http://www.wunderground.com/hurricane/texsurge.asp
A cat 3 will give ~10 foot depth (worst case). That is fairly deep.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: joshcryer on 11/03/2014 11:08 am
Hehe, the holdouts, if there are any, just speculating, might want to reconsider. If Reusability happens you could see multiple launches a day out of there! Talk about property values going down!
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 11/03/2014 11:53 am
Hehe, the holdouts, if there are any, just speculating, might want to reconsider. If Reusability happens you could see multiple launches a day out of there! Talk about property values going down!

Property values are already dirt cheap.

In 1967, Hurricane Beulah wiped out all public utilities and redrew the shoreline.  Many lots now sit under water (literally).  There were some proposals to dredge the South Bay to reclaim that land and develop it, but now that seems highly unlikely.  Many of the underwater lots are assessed under $100.  Practically worthless.

For the lots on dry land, most are assessed between $1000 and $1500.  Still dirt cheap.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: cscott on 11/03/2014 04:03 pm
Here's my latest composite map.  Note that this doesn't include the latest 6 lots SpaceX purchased (http://www.valleymorningstar.com/premium/article_f1717a2e-5b30-11e4-9061-0017a43b2370.html), since there's about a 1 month delay in the online Cameron County real estate map (http://www.cameroncad.org/cadclientdb/propertymap.aspx).

Any chance you could add some indication of the waterline to the map?  Maybe indicate which unpurchased properties have assessed values under $100?  That might help explain some of the "unpurchased" lots.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 11/03/2014 05:30 pm
Any chance you could add some indication of the waterline to the map?  Maybe indicate which unpurchased properties have assessed values under $100?  That might help explain some of the "unpurchased" lots.

New composite map with underwater areas attached below.

Most of the smaller underwater lots are appraised at less than $100.  You can see for yourself here (http://www.cameroncad.org/cadclientdb/propertymap.aspx).  Just pan and zoom to Boca Chica Village, then use the "identify" tab at the top to show info on individual properties.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: guckyfan on 11/03/2014 06:01 pm
Many lots are color coded gray? Does anybody know what that means? The other colors are explained in the map.

BTW, thanks for marking the water area.

Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 11/03/2014 08:04 pm
Many lots are color coded gray? Does anybody know what that means?

The lots that don't match any of the colors in the key are privately owned. 
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: guckyfan on 11/03/2014 09:10 pm
Many lots are color coded gray? Does anybody know what that means?

The lots that don't match any of the colors in the key are privately owned.

That would be both the grey and the ones without any color?

Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Llian Rhydderch on 11/04/2014 05:56 am

New composite map with underwater areas attached below.

Most of the smaller underwater lots are appraised at less than $100.  You can see for yourself here (http://www.cameroncad.org/cadclientdb/propertymap.aspx).  Just pan and zoom to Boca Chica Village, then use the "identify" tab at the top to show info on individual properties.

Many thanks, Dave, for the work you are doing to keep these useful graphical views into the South Texas SpaceX land picture updated!
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: StuffOfInterest on 11/04/2014 10:59 am
Any chance you could add some indication of the waterline to the map?  Maybe indicate which unpurchased properties have assessed values under $100?  That might help explain some of the "unpurchased" lots.

New composite map with underwater areas attached below.

Most of the smaller underwater lots are appraised at less than $100.  You can see for yourself here (http://www.cameroncad.org/cadclientdb/propertymap.aspx).  Just pan and zoom to Boca Chica Village, then use the "identify" tab at the top to show info on individual properties.

Why in the world is SpaceX buying up random lots that are submerged?  Did the owners offer them a "buy one get one free" deal?
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Paul_G on 11/04/2014 11:26 am
Interesting that Google maps are now showing the lot layout on the land that seems to be designated as 'buildable', rather than the streets that physically exist.

https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@25.9914779,-97.1763531,16z

I wonder if we need to come up with a FAQ that clarifies that the property maps showing these purchases represents notional land 'lots', rather than buying a block of property on a road that physically exists.

Paul
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 11/04/2014 12:01 pm
Why in the world is SpaceX buying up random lots that are submerged?  Did the owners offer them a "buy one get one free" deal?

Yes, that's my assumption also.  For existing property owners with multiple lots in different places, they probably just want to sell all of them. 
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: CraigLieb on 11/04/2014 01:30 pm
Why in the world is SpaceX buying up random lots that are submerged?  Did the owners offer them a "buy one get one free" deal?

Yes, that's my assumption also.  For existing property owners with multiple lots in different places, they probably just want to sell all of them.

This could also be a defensive measure in case the channel eventually gets dredged, and the lots are back on dry land. If SpaceX owns them now while underwater, they will have bought them cheap, instead of having to buy them later at a much higher price.  They may even be planning to support dredging themselves after they own the whole area.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: AnimatorRob on 11/04/2014 04:50 pm
Property map overlaid onto Google Earth.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: MTom on 11/04/2014 08:29 pm
Here's my latest composite map.  Note that this doesn't include the latest 6 lots SpaceX purchased (http://www.valleymorningstar.com/premium/article_f1717a2e-5b30-11e4-9061-0017a43b2370.html), since there's about a 1 month delay in the online Cameron County real estate map (http://www.cameroncad.org/cadclientdb/propertymap.aspx).

Looking at the map below, I wonder what SpaceX is planning for the numerous properties between the launch site and control center.

Any ideas??

Dave, we should consider not only the SpaceX-properties.
The launch site is a mixed property too (SpaceX and State). If we adding both together in the marked place from you, there is a clear tendency getting a larger territory near the street. The purpos is unknown, I would guess this is for later developments.

Edit:
The place is optimal if we consider the post from AnimatorRob:
- at the controll center there are only "smaller" territories left, Stargate will be put also there
- next to controll center there are the houses, owned by others, not optimal
- the marked place is the next opportunity - with a modest distance from the launch site
- other territories are under water or too close to the launch site
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: cscott on 11/04/2014 08:38 pm
Here's my latest composite map.  Note that this doesn't include the latest 6 lots SpaceX purchased (http://www.valleymorningstar.com/premium/article_f1717a2e-5b30-11e4-9061-0017a43b2370.html), since there's about a 1 month delay in the online Cameron County real estate map (http://www.cameroncad.org/cadclientdb/propertymap.aspx).

Looking at the map below, I wonder what SpaceX is planning for the numerous properties between the launch site and control center.

Any ideas??

Dave, we should consider not only the SpaceX-properties.
The launch site is a mixed property too (SpaceX and State). If we adding both together in the marked place from you, there is a clear tendency getting a larger territory near the street. The purpose is unknown, I would guess this is for later developments.

I suspect the labor cost of researching the owners of the properties, negotiating a sale, writing the terms of sale and executing them probably exceeds the cost of most of the lots.  It might be efficient just to buy all the properties of any owners identified/contacted, since there's little marginal cost.  And as mentioned it's almost certainly cheaper to buy properties now, *before* the area is developed.  If property values rise, they can probably sell any unnecessary lots to finance the purchase of additional necessary lots, assuming all the lots appreciate at roughly the same rate.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Roy_H on 11/05/2014 04:10 pm
I believe that the goal of SpaceX is to own all the property closer to the launch site than their Control Center. After they have exhausted all reasonable efforts to locate owners and negotiate a deal, they will go through the legal process to appropriate the remaining lots in order to have safe clearance from the launch pad. They can't have people close to the launch pad not under their direct control (i.e. employes).
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 11/06/2014 10:21 am
SpaceX already hiring in Brownsville area: Electrical Engineer (Launch Pad Facilities), Brownsville (https://hire.jobvite.com/CompanyJobs/Careers.aspx?k=Job&c=qz49Vfwr&j=opfQZfwd&s=Indeed)
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 11/20/2014 10:13 am
http://www.valleymorningstar.com/premium/article_748fc586-705e-11e4-b149-5f6ce767a5c8.html
Quote
The Federal Aviation Administration in Wednesday’s Federal Register suggests that the agency could be working on the final leg of SpaceX’s plans to develop the world’s first commercial and vertical orbital launch complex at Boca Chica Beach
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: AJW on 11/20/2014 06:00 pm
Here is the notice from the FR.

http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2014-11-19/pdf/2014-27301.pdf

Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 11/21/2014 05:27 pm
SpaceX Brings in Other Businesses
http://www.krgv.com/news/spacex-brings-in-other-businesses/

Quote
Brownsville leaders said they are seeing growth in the manufacturing sector as a result of the space industry moving here...  Paragon D and E bought out Rio Grande Tool and Die.  The company is now the first official supplier to SpaceX in Brownsville. They will make specific parts and components for the machines used by SpaceX...
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: NaN on 11/21/2014 08:58 pm
Here is the notice from the FR.

http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2014-11-19/pdf/2014-27301.pdf

I apologize for the pointless post but ... I clicked on this link and I'm sorry that I did. It's a notice that the FAA will collect information from a respondent about a launch site, and a request for the public to comment on whether the collection of information is necessary, prior to the FAA renewing an existing request to the OMB for permission to collect information from the respondent... half a page of dense text which says nearly nothing, because of the Paperwork Reduction Act.
I hope nobody actually has to read these things.

And somehow they calculate that it will take SpaceX (which is never actually named) 2,322 hours to provide the required information.

If anything, this seems to indicate that they need more information and more time before they can certify the site, or they wouldn't have had to renew the request for information on the launch site.

Quote from: Federal Register
Federal Aviation Administration
Agency Information Collection Activities: Requests for Comments; Clearance of Renewed Approval of Information Collection: License Requirements for Operation of a Launch Site
AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.
ACTION: Notice and request for comments

... blah blah blah blah ...

Respondents: Approximately 1 applicant.
Frequency: Information is collected on occasion.
Estimated Average Burden per Response: 2,322 hours.
Estimated Total Annual Burden: 4,644 hours.

Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: S.Paulissen on 11/21/2014 09:23 pm
Here is the notice from the FR.

http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2014-11-19/pdf/2014-27301.pdf

I apologize for the pointless post but ... I clicked on this link and I'm sorry that I did. It's a notice that the FAA will collect information from a respondent about a launch site, and a request for the public to comment on whether the collection of information is necessary, prior to the FAA renewing an existing request to the OMB for permission to collect information from the respondent... half a page of dense text which says nearly nothing, because of the Paperwork Reduction Act.
I hope nobody actually has to read these things.

And somehow they calculate that it will take SpaceX (which is never actually named) 2,322 hours to provide the required information.

If anything, this seems to indicate that they need more information and more time before they can certify the site, or they wouldn't have had to renew the request for information on the launch site.

Quote from: Federal Register
Federal Aviation Administration
Agency Information Collection Activities: Requests for Comments; Clearance of Renewed Approval of Information Collection: License Requirements for Operation of a Launch Site
AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.
ACTION: Notice and request for comments

... blah blah blah blah ...

Respondents: Approximately 1 applicant.
Frequency: Information is collected on occasion.
Estimated Average Burden per Response: 2,322 hours.
Estimated Total Annual Burden: 4,644 hours.

This appears to be the standard solicitation of public comment done by government agencies do prior to implementing a policy change decision.  It's generally a formality before something actually gets done.  Unless someone creates an impressive grassroots upswell of rejection there is very little change to whatever decision that has been made.  There is no burden on SpaceX here unless the FAA takes a comment very seriously and asks SpaceX to address the concern.  The onus is on the FAA to ask.  As stated before, usually very little is requested.

I take this as a sign that the FAA is granting approval for the launch site as a rejection would be retaining the status quo and wouldn't require public comment request.  The last part is highly speculative as momentous decisions in either direction often have requests for public comment.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 11/23/2014 10:27 am
The online Cameron County real estate map (http://www.cameroncad.org/cadclientdb/propertymap.aspx) now shows SpaceX picked up 1 more lot at the control center area.

I've updated my composite map to include this.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: MTom on 11/23/2014 09:08 pm
The online Cameron County real estate map (http://www.cameroncad.org/cadclientdb/propertymap.aspx) now shows SpaceX picked up 1 more lot at the control center area.

I've updated my composite map to include this.

Thank you Dave for your work on this thread.
Keeping your map up-to-date is very informative for us!
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 11/28/2014 11:19 am
New York Times article: Lone Star State Bets Heavily on a Space Economy (http://www.nytimes.com/2014/11/28/us/lone-star-state-bets-heavily-on-a-space-economy.html?_r=0)

Not a lot of news, bet there are some new interviews with city and state officials.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 12/07/2014 12:13 pm
Looks like they re-posted the Electrical Engineer (Launch Pad Facilities) Texas position with more details about the launch site:

http://www.simplyhired.com/job/o4jh3nsv2j

Quote
Responsibilities:

* Oversee the electrical construction of a new ground up launch facility. Duties include:
* Visual inspections to assure compliance with Electrical Construction Documents
* Coordination with Local, State and Federal AHJ
* Electrical design revisions as required and maintaining accurate as-built drawings
* Electrical design for building interior build outs
* Attend construction meetings and answer RFI’s
* Maintaining and revising project schedule as required to ensure electrical milestones and deadlines are reached
* Monitoring electrical construction budget and providing advanced warning of possible cost overruns

* Work in a team environment with other engineering disciplines to provide detailed electrical design and specification for the installation of new equipment and systems. This includes, but is not limited to:
* Electrical power distribution systems
* Switchgear and motor control centers
* Exterior and interior lighting
* Ground support system controls and ladder logic
* Uninterruptible power supply (UPS) units
* Standby and emergency generators
* Automatic transfer switches
* Power monitoring hardware and software
* Data/phone distribution and wiring
* Building and site grounding systems
* Fire alarm systems
* Lightning Protection Systems

* Provide electrical engineering support to facility operation technicians  in troubleshooting existing electrical equipment and controllers
* Provide engineering support for the design, operation, and troubleshooting of all the facility electrical components and systems for our launch facility, including:
* Load flow analysis of electrical power distribution systems
* Electrical equipment evaluation
* Building and facility equipment grounding
* Power monitoring hardware and software

* Ensure that all equipment interfaces properly with other mechanical and electrical systems, including ensuring compatibility with facility power budgets
* Coordinate all electrical installations and maintenance activities  with local KSC and AFS electrical utilities personnel
* Ensure all electrical designs and installations confirm to applicable codes and regulations
* Provide code review and analysis utilizing NFPA 70E, NFPA 70 NEC, NFPA 497, NFPA 101, and IBC

Basic Qualifications:

* Bachelor of Science degree in Electrical Engineering
* Minimum of 10 years of related work experience in a similar electrical engineering role
* Experience with power distribution systems, switchgear, UPS's, and generators
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Chris Bergin on 12/07/2014 12:40 pm
Amazing link finding by Dave in here! ;D
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 12/20/2014 03:35 pm
Another new job posting for Brownsville:

https://hire.jobvite.com/CompanyJobs/Careers.aspx?k=Job&c=qz49Vfwr&j=oatd0fwA&s=Indeed

Quote

Field Contact Representative
 Rocket Launch Facility - Brownsville | Brownsville, TX, United States

Responsibilities:
•Overseeing construction related compliance, with the assistance of SpaceX management
•Ensuring implementing project Special Conservation Measures (SCMs) (from 2014 FEIS)
•Providing worker-education briefings that will include, but will not be limited to:
◦Information regarding federally and State-listed species with the potential to occur in the area, impacts that may occur, conservation measures being implemented, their responsibilities under the ESA, and avoidance and reporting procedures
◦Measures to prevent wildfires
◦Procedures to limit the spread of noxious weeds
◦Requirements for safe handling and disposal of construction waste
•Monitoring Construction Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) Compliance
•Activating our Cultural Resources Unanticipated Discovery Plan procedure, if needed
•Notifying SpaceX site management personal of any environmental or cultural resources related issues or concerns onsite
•Performing general site administration
◦Shipping/receiving
◦Day-to-day general site related tasks
◦Equipment and supplies management
◦Assisting SpaceX employees during initial visits to the site
◦Assisting SpaceX Construction Manager as needed
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: docmordrid on 12/20/2014 03:45 pm
Sounds like construction preps, in case of finding Native American artifacts.

Quote
•Activating our Cultural Resources Unanticipated Discovery Plan procedure, if needed

•Notifying SpaceX site management personal of any environmental or cultural resources related issues or concerns onsite
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: JimNtexas on 12/21/2014 02:17 am
The SX site is also very close to the last battle of the civil war.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 12/29/2014 11:15 am
The SX site is also very close to the last battle of the civil war.

Right.  Elon mentioned this in a recent interview:

http://aeon.co/magazine/technology/the-elon-musk-interview-on-mars/
Quote
‘It took us ages to get all the approvals,’ he told me. ‘There were a million federal agencies that needed to sign off, and the final call went to the National Historic Landmark Association, because the last battle of the Civil War was fought a few miles away from our site, and visitors might be able to see the tip of our rocket from there. We were like, “Really? Have you seen what it’s like around there? Nobody visits that place.”’
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: JimNtexas on 12/29/2014 03:34 pm
 “Really? Have you seen what it’s like around there? Nobody visits that place.”’

A lot of civil war buffs have visited 'that place'. There's a small roadside exhibit on highway four.

 I don't know if the public is allowed to wander the actual battlefield.   

I  doubt that the rocket launches will impact the battlefield site in an harmful way.

Since highway 4 is the only way to get to Boca Chica without a boat, they'll have to shut it down for launches anyway, I can't think too many civil war buffs will mind waiting until the highway opens again.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 12/29/2014 04:06 pm
“Really? Have you seen what it’s like around there? Nobody visits that place.”’

A lot of civil war buffs have visited 'that place'. There's a small roadside exhibit on highway four.

Then it seems Elon was wrong about this.

Can you give a more specific location for the roadside exhibit on highway four?  Is it visible on Google maps?
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 12/29/2014 04:37 pm
“Really? Have you seen what it’s like around there? Nobody visits that place.”’

A lot of civil war buffs have visited 'that place'. There's a small roadside exhibit on highway four.

Then it seems Elon was wrong about this.

Can you give a more specific location for the roadside exhibit on highway four?  Is it visible on Google maps?

Is this it?

If so, its 5.8 miles from the launch site, according to Google Maps.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: JimNtexas on 12/29/2014 04:49 pm
Yes, that the roadside exhibit, IIRC for both the civil war site and the wildlife preserve. 

I don't know what the restricted radius around the launcher will be, but just for crowd control reasons I bet they close highway four to all but residents at the border patrol station that is further west than the exhibit.   

In any case, Elon's right that the civil war site isn't a real problem, he's wrong that 'nobody visits that place'. 

I do wonder about how long and where they will close highway four for launches. 
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: RonM on 12/29/2014 04:59 pm
Yes, that the roadside exhibit, IIRC for both the civil war site and the wildlife preserve. 

I don't know what the restricted radius around the launcher will be, but just for crowd control reasons I bet they close highway four to all but residents at the border patrol station that is further west than the exhibit.   

In any case, Elon's right that the civil war site isn't a real problem, he's wrong that 'nobody visits that place'. 

I do wonder about how long and where they will close highway four for launches.

People probably visit that site because it is very close to the Palo Alto Battlefield National Historical Park, first battle of the US-Mexican War. Palo Alto Battlefield is run by the National Park Service.

http://www.nps.gov/paal/index.htm (http://www.nps.gov/paal/index.htm)
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 01/03/2015 03:37 pm
The online Cameron County real estate map (http://www.cameroncad.org/cadclientdb/propertymap.aspx) now shows SpaceX added yet another lot to the control center area.

I've updated my composite map to include this.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: MTom on 01/03/2015 06:10 pm
The online Cameron County real estate map (http://www.cameroncad.org/cadclientdb/propertymap.aspx) now shows SpaceX added yet another lot to the control center area.

I've updated my composite map to include this.

An important milestone, they reached the see!
A tini harbour could be placed there. ;D


P.S. It was a joke from me, although thanks for the informations below.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: cuddihy on 01/04/2015 04:26 am
Nope, too shallow and unlikely to be dredged for that purpose -- at least not until a new EIS with the Army Corps of Engineers...
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: JimNtexas on 01/04/2015 06:16 am
Nope, too shallow and unlikely to be dredged for that purpose -- at least not until a new EIS with the Army Corps of Engineers...

Not to mention there is a shipyard on the opposite bank.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 01/04/2015 10:23 am
Nope, too shallow and unlikely to be dredged for that purpose ...
Yes.  In fact, it appears to be underwater only at high tide, otherwise its kind of like a sandy beach. Google Maps shows tire tracks along the sandy area.

Not to mention there is a shipyard on the opposite bank.
Not really.  The water that edges the control center area is called the South Bay, and its separated from the Brownsville Shipping Channel, except for a small inlet near the Gulf of Mexico.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: rpapo on 01/05/2015 12:59 pm
Dunno if anybody saw this one already:

http://www.themonitor.com/news/local/spacex-begins-job-postings/article_affd50c6-944d-11e4-8b5d-9f1af0e4d08f.html
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 01/13/2015 09:14 pm
BEDC-UTSystem-SpaceX collaboration progresses
http://www.valleymorningstar.com/news/local_news/article_3ea495de-9ad2-11e4-8db5-e3d859c49d9a.html

Quote
The Brownsville Economic Development Council recently donated property at Boca Chica to the University of Texas System Board of Regents for the STARGATE Technology Park, a collaborative research initiative with SpaceX, according to public records...

Project STARGATE stands for Spacecraft Tracking and Astronomical Research into Giga-Hertz Astrophysical Transient Emission...

The 12,000 square feet STARGATE research facility will be adjacent to SpaceX’s command center. UT-RGV has said that when not used for launches, STARGATE faculty and student researchers will use SpaceX facilities for training, scientific research and technology development.

The research center is being funded with $4.4 million from the Texas Emerging Technology Fund, $4.6 million from the UT System and $500,000 from the Greater Brownsville Incentives Corp. The U.S. Economic Development Administration has awarded $1.2 million to the project also.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Mariusuiram on 01/14/2015 03:40 am
BEDC-UTSystem-SpaceX collaboration progresses
http://www.valleymorningstar.com/news/local_news/article_3ea495de-9ad2-11e4-8db5-e3d859c49d9a.html

Quote
The Brownsville Economic Development Council recently donated property at Boca Chica to the University of Texas System Board of Regents for the STARGATE Technology Park, a collaborative research initiative with SpaceX, according to public records...

Project STARGATE stands for Spacecraft Tracking and Astronomical Research into Giga-Hertz Astrophysical Transient Emission...

The 12,000 square feet STARGATE research facility will be adjacent to SpaceX’s command center. UT-RGV has said that when not used for launches, STARGATE faculty and student researchers will use SpaceX facilities for training, scientific research and technology development.

The research center is being funded with $4.4 million from the Texas Emerging Technology Fund, $4.6 million from the UT System and $500,000 from the Greater Brownsville Incentives Corp. The U.S. Economic Development Administration has awarded $1.2 million to the project also.

The more I hear about this STARGATE thing, the more impressed I am. Maybe my sense of scale is off, but the funding is pretty significant and the location is truly embedded in the SpaceX operations. What a great way to develop local talent that can be employed at SpaceX and what a great way for SpaceX to support development of facilities needed to track and manage their own launches.

Feeling like a bit of a dreamer right now, but you could easily see it ballooning into larger specialized space studies program if SpaceX expands operations at Brownsville to include BFR production & launch (as speculated by some).

Great for growing the economic base of the region too. Although those EDC's like to talk about finding jobs for locals. Enticing aspiring engineers from the rest of Texas or US to move to Rio Grande Valley is another useful goal. I'm sure lots of young SpaceX amazing peoples would be willing to transfer / enroll for the opportunity to study adjacent to the SpaceX command center.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 01/15/2015 12:34 pm
...you could easily see it ballooning into larger specialized space studies program if SpaceX expands operations at Brownsville to include BFR production & launch (as speculated by some).

Speculation, yes, but well founded.

At the groundbreaking ceremony for the Texas launch site, Elon Musk mentioned that they expect to launch to Mars from there eventually.

On other occasions, Elon mentioned that they don't expect to launch to Mars using an F9/FH class rocket.

When you take those statements together, its easy to see why many speculate about BFR launching from Texas. 
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: guckyfan on 01/15/2015 12:55 pm
There is that minor detail too, that they gave their subdivision the name Mars crossing.
 :)

Added:
I could imagine that they drive piles into the ground a few km out at sea. Then have the launchpad barge floating out there and settle onto the piles by flooding ballast tanks. Simpler barges with a flat top for landing.

Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: rpapo on 01/15/2015 01:52 pm
Per Google Earth, the sea-bottom five miles out, due east from the launch site, is only 75 feet deep.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: cro-magnon gramps on 01/15/2015 02:27 pm
Per Google Earth, the sea-bottom five miles out, due east from the launch site, is only 75 feet deep.

12 1/2 fathoms  :( I'm not sure that I can fathom that plus the depth from the sea floor they would need to go to hit bedrock :)

Gramps
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: rpapo on 01/15/2015 02:40 pm
Per Google Earth, the sea-bottom five miles out, due east from the launch site, is only 75 feet deep.

12 1/2 fathoms  :( I'm not sure that I can fathom that plus the depth from the sea floor they would need to go to hit bedrock :)

Gramps
I'm reasonably sure that the oil companies have that information down to the foot.  They've been up and down that whole coast with rock-penetrating echo finders.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: AncientU on 01/15/2015 02:53 pm
It's not at all crazy to imagine a continental shelf-anchored launch pad 5-10 miles offshore with the T/E a floating platform (instead of wheeled/rail vehicle) that transfers the integrated and ready for launch BFR from facilities on shore.  Certainly no more complicated than the Shuttle/Saturn V roll-out.  100 foot water depths are a no-brainer for existing off-shore platform technology.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: cro-magnon gramps on 01/15/2015 04:57 pm
ok, well, I'll bow to engineering know how... I know it has been done, but my Google Fu terrible today...
BUT  :D I did find this interesting interactive map. Though less helpful on the depth to bedrock, it did give off shore depths to the continental shelf. It looks like Elon has lots of room to put a Launch Platform if he chooses to go off shore.

Gramps

URL Link: http://www.arcgis.com/home/webmap/viewer.html?webmap=7498b9f186bc4a2a9fee6c85d863f3b6
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: RanulfC on 01/15/2015 07:00 pm
'course they COULD just float the rocket out and "SeaDragon" it :)

Randy
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: cro-magnon gramps on 01/15/2015 07:25 pm
'course they COULD just float the rocket out and "SeaDragon" it :)

Randy

Being the USA I expect that someone will, now that you have mentioned it, try to get a patent on that!! :D
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 01/15/2015 11:40 pm
Another position opening up in Brownsville.  I believe this is the third Brownsville position they've posted.

http://www.spacex.com/careers/position/6420

Quote
Brownsville Launch Operations Systems Analyst

Overview:
•The Launch and Mission IT team is responsible for supporting all networks and systems associated with SpaceX launch, mission, and recovery operations globally.
•This position will be responsible for helping the SpaceX Launch Engineering team build and operate our new launch site near Brownsville, TX.
•In addition, this position will be responsible for supporting Launch and Mission Operations administrators and engineers at our existing launch sites on Cape Canaveral Air Force Station, FL and Vandenberg Air Force Base, CA.
•This position in located in Cape Canaveral, FL and will travel to both California and Texas.

 

Responsibilities:
•Provide 1st and 2nd tier support to SpaceX employees who require assistance with their information technology resources.
•Install and configure computers, telephones, and other common technology/devices for new and existing SpaceX employees.
•Provide after-hours or weekend support when necessary to perform high-risk or planned downtime of SpaceX IT systems for upgrades and maintenance.
•Support SpaceX with the regular maintenance of monitoring, backup, and infrastructure systems.
•Provide ‘remote hands’ support for SpaceX Systems Administrators as needed to include racking of servers, network devices, and rack-mountable power systems.
•Have the ability to take on higher-level strategic projects when tactical projects stall. Areas can include network administration, systems administration, high-performance computing, information security, etc.
•Ability to write instructional documentation and convey highly technical ideas in simple terms
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: deruch on 01/16/2015 12:02 am
Another position opening up in Brownsville.  I believe this is the third Brownsville position they've posted.

http://www.spacex.com/careers/position/6420

Quote
Brownsville Launch Operations Systems Analyst

Overview:
•The Launch and Mission IT team is responsible for supporting all networks and systems associated with SpaceX launch, mission, and recovery operations globally.
•This position will be responsible for helping the SpaceX Launch Engineering team build and operate our new launch site near Brownsville, TX.
•In addition, this position will be responsible for supporting Launch and Mission Operations administrators and engineers at our existing launch sites on Cape Canaveral Air Force Station, FL and Vandenberg Air Force Base, CA.
This position in located in Cape Canaveral, FL and will travel to both California and Texas.

 

Responsibilities:
•Provide 1st and 2nd tier support to SpaceX employees who require assistance with their information technology resources.
•Install and configure computers, telephones, and other common technology/devices for new and existing SpaceX employees.
•Provide after-hours or weekend support when necessary to perform high-risk or planned downtime of SpaceX IT systems for upgrades and maintenance.
•Support SpaceX with the regular maintenance of monitoring, backup, and infrastructure systems.
•Provide ‘remote hands’ support for SpaceX Systems Administrators as needed to include racking of servers, network devices, and rack-mountable power systems.
•Have the ability to take on higher-level strategic projects when tactical projects stall. Areas can include network administration, systems administration, high-performance computing, information security, etc.
•Ability to write instructional documentation and convey highly technical ideas in simple terms

While responsible for Brownsville, the job is actually located in Cape Canaveral, FL with travel to TX and CA.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: jfallen on 01/17/2015 02:59 pm
It's not at all crazy to imagine a continental shelf-anchored launch pad 5-10 miles offshore with the T/E a floating platform (instead of wheeled/rail vehicle) that transfers the integrated and ready for launch BFR from facilities on shore.  Certainly no more complicated than the Shuttle/Saturn V roll-out.  100 foot water depths are a no-brainer for existing off-shore platform technology.

If they built a pad that far out in international waters could they launch as often as they want?  It's an interesting prospect.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 01/17/2015 03:33 pm
The Boca Chica launch site is already pretty isolated. 

The only thing within a 5-mile radius is Boca Chica Village, which consists of a few dozen houses, many of which are run down and/or boarded up.  There's only 1 permanent resident in Boca Chica Village.  The houses are dirt cheap.  SpaceX could buy them all in a heartbeat.

Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Lar on 01/17/2015 04:38 pm
And they have been doing just that.... at least one house has already been converted into something SpaceX is using and there was talk that others would be transient housing.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Lars-J on 01/17/2015 04:48 pm
And they have been doing just that.... at least one house has already been converted into something SpaceX is using and there was talk that others would be transient housing.

SpaceX is housing the homeless?  ;D
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: russianhalo117 on 01/17/2015 07:37 pm
Sounds like construction preps, in case of finding Native American artifacts.

Quote
•Activating our Cultural Resources Unanticipated Discovery Plan procedure, if needed

•Notifying SpaceX site management personal of any environmental or cultural resources related issues or concerns onsite
As well as being visited by French, Spanish, and American explorers. Maybe not at exact location, but very close to there according to published ship logs.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: groundbound on 01/18/2015 05:18 am
And they have been doing just that.... at least one house has already been converted into something SpaceX is using and there was talk that others would be transient housing.

SpaceX is housing the homeless?  ;D

No, people waiting to board a ship to mars, silly!
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Jdeshetler on 01/23/2015 06:06 am
I have always wonder what would Boca Chica site might look like IF it was chosen as the "SpaceX Spaceport" over KSC and other sites for one reason or the other.

If the State and Federal owned properties can be leased for a long term, an additional launching and landing pads can be built to the south of original launching pad and is spaced 2000' apart. The returning 2 FH boosters can landed back separately at once since the landing pads is 4000' apart. (same landing pad scheme is taken from SLC-13).

The two additional launch pads is scaled up to support SFR/BFR/MCT since Elon said this site might be the first one to go to Mars.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: llanitedave on 01/23/2015 04:00 pm
I wonder if there might be any treaty issues that close to the border.  You're getting to a proximity where there might be debris and acoustic hazards on the Mexican side.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 01/25/2015 02:38 am
If the State and Federal owned properties can be leased for a long term, an additional launching and landing pads can be built to the south of original launching pad and is spaced 2000' apart. The returning 2 FH boosters can landed back separately at once since the landing pads is 4000' apart. (same landing pad scheme is taken from SLC-13).

The two additional launch pads is scaled up to support SFR/BFR/MCT since Elon said this site might be the first one to go to Mars.

Great pictures!

Yes, there's plenty of room to expand at Boca Chica.

I have always wonder what would Boca Chica site might look like IF it was chosen as the "SpaceX Spaceport" over KSC and other sites for one reason or the other.

Gwynne Shotwell says they have no plans to stop operating from KSC or Vandenberg.  On the contrary, she implied that they will add more launch sites in other states.

So its not like they would be choosing one over the other.  They plan to expand everywhere.

I wonder if there might be any treaty issues that close to the border.  You're getting to a proximity where there might be debris and acoustic hazards on the Mexican side.

I doubt they would care.  There's nothing on the Mexican side for many miles.  Look on Google Maps:
https://www.google.com/maps/@25.9360749,-97.2322794,15942m/data=!3m1!1e3
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: darkenfast on 01/25/2015 03:36 am
It doesn't matter if they care or not.  It's a sovereignty issue and money for lawyers, if the danger zone extends past the borders.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: BobHk on 01/25/2015 05:26 am
It doesn't matter if they care or not.  It's a sovereignty issue and money for lawyers, if the danger zone extends past the borders.

Mexico and the US are ratifiers of the Liability for Damage Caused by Space Objects (1972) treaty.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space_Liability_Convention
Among other treaties (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space_law) like the Rescue Agreement (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rescue_Agreement)

Quote
" In the only known instance of an emergency landing in another country, in 1975, after a Soyuz launch abort dropped two Soviet cosmonauts across the border in Mongolia, the Soviets didn’t even bother to invoke the treaty, they just ignored the border and retrieved the crew and the spacecraft. "

http://www.au.af.mil/au/awc/space/books/oberg/ch03app2.pdf

Quote
"When the Soviet Union’s Kosmos-954 nuclear-powered satellite
fell over western Canada in 1978, the Canadians billed the USSR for
the cleanup expenses. Pursuant to the treaty, Moscow did in fact pay
Canada about half of its claim. "


Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: llanitedave on 01/25/2015 03:29 pm
I expect that if SpaceX ever does start launching regularly from Boca Chica, the Mexican side of the river nearby is going to find itself in demand by entrepeneurs selling close-up views.  I'm sure a number of people on this forum would be happy to take a cross-border day trip to the eastern tip of Mexico  to see it even closer than they could from South Padre Island.


So, I think  this is something that the Mexican government would have a real and legitimate interest in.  For fun, profit, and liability reasons.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Damon Hill on 01/26/2015 08:04 am
Mexico, and probably Mexicans, might be pleased to be part of an international spaceport, if SpaceX needs more real estate to expand operations.  I'm sure some in the Mexican government, and Mexican space fans, are watching this with interest.   Hopefully SpaceX will cultivate a positive approach to Mexican concerns and interests.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: TheWhiteZombie on 01/26/2015 08:17 am
As far as I know (which admittedly isn't much) they can't ever actually expand into Mexico because of ITAR. So unless Mexico is planning on giving up territory, they must content themselves with noise complaints or tourism.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: baldusi on 01/27/2015 06:21 pm
As far as I know (which admittedly isn't much) they can't ever actually expand into Mexico because of ITAR. So unless Mexico is planning on giving up territory, they must content themselves with noise complaints or tourism.
Actually, it depends. If they need clearance zone, they could very well lease or aqcuire Mexican land, and contract the Mexican Police and Coast Guard to clear said zones. They could probably procure lodging and catering services from Mexico, and might even use medical facilities (in theory, in prectice they might be better off using the American hospitals). They could put a power plant, and even a LOX factory, if it came to that. And if they start using methane they could buy Mexican methane and storage. What they can't do is use any non US citizen nor have anything that's ITAR protected on the Mexican side.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: JasonAW3 on 01/29/2015 03:04 pm
If the State and Federal owned properties can be leased for a long term, an additional launching and landing pads can be built to the south of original launching pad and is spaced 2000' apart. The returning 2 FH boosters can landed back separately at once since the landing pads is 4000' apart. (same landing pad scheme is taken from SLC-13).

The two additional launch pads is scaled up to support SFR/BFR/MCT since Elon said this site might be the first one to go to Mars.

Great pictures!

Yes, there's plenty of room to expand at Boca Chica.

I have always wonder what would Boca Chica site might look like IF it was chosen as the "SpaceX Spaceport" over KSC and other sites for one reason or the other.

Gwynne Shotwell says they have no plans to stop operating from KSC or Vandenberg.  On the contrary, she implied that they will add more launch sites in other states.


Think they might be interested in Wallops Island, Virginia?  I think they coul launch Falcon 9's there, but not heavies of anything larger.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: docmordrid on 01/29/2015 03:35 pm
In the aftermath of the Antares boomski it was reported the safety zone around Wallops was rather small.

ISTM a more likely location would be the proposed spaceport in Camden County Georgia. It was on SpaceX's original list and is at a lower latitude.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Zed_Noir on 01/29/2015 07:50 pm
If the State and Federal owned properties can be leased for a long term, an additional launching and landing pads can be built to the south of original launching pad and is spaced 2000' apart. The returning 2 FH boosters can landed back separately at once since the landing pads is 4000' apart. (same landing pad scheme is taken from SLC-13).

The two additional launch pads is scaled up to support SFR/BFR/MCT since Elon said this site might be the first one to go to Mars.

Great pictures!

Yes, there's plenty of room to expand at Boca Chica.

I have always wonder what would Boca Chica site might look like IF it was chosen as the "SpaceX Spaceport" over KSC and other sites for one reason or the other.

Gwynne Shotwell says they have no plans to stop operating from KSC or Vandenberg.  On the contrary, she implied that they will add more launch sites in other states.


Think they might be interested in Wallops Island, Virginia?  I think they coul launch Falcon 9's there, but not heavies of anything larger.

That might happen in the event of further Antares issues. Swap the Antares with the F9R along with an ASDS.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Lobo on 01/30/2015 06:20 pm
I think with all the land SpaceX is buying up and leasing around Boca Chica, I'm sure that's where they'll put this pad. 

Also, as I'm sure they'll be launching FH from it, they might be putting booster recover pads next to it?  or how will they recover the cores?  So it could be a layout similar to what VAFB will eventually look like with a launch complex, and a landing complex right next to it.  A nice little space port.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Zed_Noir on 01/30/2015 11:49 pm
I think with all the land SpaceX is buying up and leasing around Boca Chica, I'm sure that's where they'll put this pad. 

Also, as I'm sure they'll be launching FH from it, they might be putting booster recover pads next to it?  or how will they recover the cores?  So it could be a layout similar to what VAFB will eventually look like with a launch complex, and a landing complex right next to it.  A nice little space port.

Or SpaceX could forgo landing pads and commission a squadron of ASDS.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: JBF on 01/31/2015 01:42 am
I think with all the land SpaceX is buying up and leasing around Boca Chica, I'm sure that's where they'll put this pad. 

Also, as I'm sure they'll be launching FH from it, they might be putting booster recover pads next to it?  or how will they recover the cores?  So it could be a layout similar to what VAFB will eventually look like with a launch complex, and a landing complex right next to it.  A nice little space port.

Or SpaceX could forgo landing pads and commission a squadron of ASDS.

Boats are expensive to maintain in good condition.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: rpapo on 02/03/2015 11:25 am
New article.  SpaceX looking to line up building and supply contractors, it seems.

http://www.themonitor.com/news/local/spacex-vendor-fairs-slated/article_0067e490-ab41-11e4-8595-1f12f9c4a5c5.html
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: CuddlyRocket on 02/03/2015 06:27 pm
The headline on that article reads weird to British eyes where 'slated' means 'to criticise harshly'. Presumably it means here something like 'listed'?
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: bubbagret on 02/03/2015 06:31 pm
The headline on that article reads weird to British eyes where 'slated' means 'to criticise harshly'. Presumably it means here something like 'listed'?

North American

schedule; plan.

"renovations are slated for late June"
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: rpapo on 02/03/2015 06:32 pm
The headline on that article reads weird to British eyes where 'slated' means 'to criticise harshly'. Presumably it means here something like 'listed'?
In U.S.A. English, "slated" means "scheduled", as in written in chalk on the railway station schedule board.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: MP99 on 02/03/2015 08:10 pm
If the State and Federal owned properties can be leased for a long term, an additional launching and landing pads can be built to the south of original launching pad and is spaced 2000' apart. The returning 2 FH boosters can landed back separately at once since the landing pads is 4000' apart. (same landing pad scheme is taken from SLC-13).

The two additional launch pads is scaled up to support SFR/BFR/MCT since Elon said this site might be the first one to go to Mars.

Great pictures!

Yes, there's plenty of room to expand at Boca Chica.

I have always wonder what would Boca Chica site might look like IF it was chosen as the "SpaceX Spaceport" over KSC and other sites for one reason or the other.

Gwynne Shotwell says they have no plans to stop operating from KSC or Vandenberg.  On the contrary, she implied that they will add more launch sites in other states.


Think they might be interested in Wallops Island, Virginia?  I think they coul launch Falcon 9's there, but not heavies of anything larger.

That might happen in the event of further Antares issues. Swap the Antares with the F9R along with an ASDS.

F9 could RTLS with Cygnus, I suspect.

But if Cygnus were switched to F9 it would make more sense to launch it from LC-40, IMO.

Cheers, Martin
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Zed_Noir on 02/04/2015 06:41 am
If the State and Federal owned properties can be leased for a long term, an additional launching and landing pads can be built to the south of original launching pad and is spaced 2000' apart. The returning 2 FH boosters can landed back separately at once since the landing pads is 4000' apart. (same landing pad scheme is taken from SLC-13).

The two additional launch pads is scaled up to support SFR/BFR/MCT since Elon said this site might be the first one to go to Mars.

Great pictures!

Yes, there's plenty of room to expand at Boca Chica.

I have always wonder what would Boca Chica site might look like IF it was chosen as the "SpaceX Spaceport" over KSC and other sites for one reason or the other.

Gwynne Shotwell says they have no plans to stop operating from KSC or Vandenberg.  On the contrary, she implied that they will add more launch sites in other states.


Think they might be interested in Wallops Island, Virginia?  I think they coul launch Falcon 9's there, but not heavies of anything larger.

That might happen in the event of further Antares issues. Swap the Antares with the F9R along with an ASDS.

F9 could RTLS with Cygnus, I suspect.

But if Cygnus were switched to F9 it would make more sense to launch it from LC-40, IMO.

Cheers, Martin

There is only so many extra flights you can manifested from Florida.

Plus are you suggesting scaling down the activities at Wallops? Please explain that to the dear lady from Maryland.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Roy_H on 02/04/2015 04:13 pm
There is only so many extra flights you can manifested from Florida.

First, There will be two launch pads available at Canaveral, and second, where something is launched from depends on the customer and destination. You cannot launch to ISS orbit from Texas, only good for near equatorial orbits such as GSO and military/government will not launch from a commercial site at Boca Chica Texas either. So Texas site basically good for commercial geosynchronous satellites only.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: cro-magnon gramps on 02/04/2015 05:20 pm
There is only so many extra flights you can manifested from Florida.

First, There will be two launch pads available at Canaveral, and second, where something is launched from depends on the customer and destination. You cannot launch to ISS orbit from Texas, only good for near equatorial orbits such as GSO and military/government will not launch from a commercial site at Boca Chica Texas either. So Texas site basically good for commercial geosynchronous satellites only.

Can you give me any indication of what sites between Canaveral and Wallops might be good for, if for anything...

Thinking , Jacksonville, Savannah, Charleston, Wilmington, Greenville, and Virginia Beach,

We'll skip West Palm Beach, Miami, Puerto Rico, The Bahamas, Cuba, Haiti, Dominican Republic for now  :)

Gramps
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Zed_Noir on 02/04/2015 11:52 pm
There is only so many extra flights you can manifested from Florida.

First, There will be two launch pads available at Canaveral, and second, where something is launched from depends on the customer and destination. You cannot launch to ISS orbit from Texas, only good for near equatorial orbits such as GSO and military/government will not launch from a commercial site at Boca Chica Texas either. So Texas site basically good for commercial geosynchronous satellites only.

Don't matter how many pads you have in Florida. There is only so many Eastern Range launch slots  for LC-37, LC-40, LC-41 & LC-39A.

The Boca Chica launch site should be able to do flights for BEO missions.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Burninate on 02/05/2015 12:14 am
There is only so many extra flights you can manifested from Florida.

First, There will be two launch pads available at Canaveral, and second, where something is launched from depends on the customer and destination. You cannot launch to ISS orbit from Texas, only good for near equatorial orbits such as GSO and military/government will not launch from a commercial site at Boca Chica Texas either. So Texas site basically good for commercial geosynchronous satellites only.

Can you give me any indication of what sites between Canaveral and Wallops might be good for, if for anything...

Thinking , Jacksonville, Savannah, Charleston, Wilmington, Greenville, and Virginia Beach,

We'll skip West Palm Beach, Miami, Puerto Rico, The Bahamas, Cuba, Haiti, Dominican Republic for now  :)

Gramps

The area southeast of Georgetown, SC looks to be among the most remote bits of that map that isn't a skinny barrier island.  It's all marshland that has unfortunate amounts of regulation protecting it, but then, what coastal launchsite isn't?
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 02/07/2015 09:42 am
A couple of new articles:

Will South Texas be a gateway to Mars?
http://www.ksat.com/content/pns/ksat/news/2015/02/06/will-south-texas-be-a-gateway-to-mars-.html

United Launch Alliance is staying in Harlingen
http://riograndeguardian.com/boswell-united-launch-alliance-is-not-leaving-harlingen/

Note that Harlingen is only 15 miles from Brownsville. 
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: jfallen on 02/10/2015 10:34 am
Is there any actual news on the site?  Are they pushing dirt yet?  Have they set up a lay down yard or moved in equipment?  What about the road improvements out to the site, are they finished?  Have any contracts been sent out for bid?  I keep coming here for answers and there is more and more discussion unrelated to the Texas launch site. 
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: BrianNH on 02/10/2015 12:44 pm
SpaceX has said that major work on this site will not start until after Pad39A is completed.  They are just doing some preliminary work now.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: wannamoonbase on 02/10/2015 12:58 pm
Is there any actual news on the site?  Are they pushing dirt yet?  Have they set up a lay down yard or moved in equipment?  What about the road improvements out to the site, are they finished?  Have any contracts been sent out for bid?  I keep coming here for answers and there is more and more discussion unrelated to the Texas launch site. 

On a green site like this, unlike LC40 or LC39A, there is going to be a good deal of unsexy site work.  Getting power, utilities and communications to the site and then distribute it where it's needed takes time.  This type of work is slow, dirty and looks like much isn't going on.  I've worked on green field projects where this was about 50% of the project schedule.

As was mentioned, and not surprisingly, SpaceX seems to be focusing on one at a time.  This makes sense, you want people with direct experience if you can find them.  Plus I don't get the impression that SpaceX has a backlog of boosters and payloads sitting waiting for a pad.  They are still ramping up.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 02/10/2015 01:48 pm
SpaceX has said that major work on this site will not start until after Pad39A is completed.  They are just doing some preliminary work now.

To clarify, there are 3 distinct construction sites:
1) The SpaceX launch site
2) The SpaceX control center area
3) The Stargate tracking facility

Launch site construction will wait for the SpaceX pad construction crew currently at work on Pad39A.

From the EIS (https://www.faa.gov/about/office_org/headquarters_offices/ast/environmental/nepa_docs/review/documents_progress/spacex_texas_launch_site_environmental_impact_statement/media/FEIS_SpaceX_Texas_Launch_Site_Vol_I.pdf), the control center area will consist of:
• Two launch control center buildings
• Two payload processing facilities
• Launch vehicle processing hangar
• Two RF transmitter/receivers
• Generators and diesel storage facilities
• Roads, parking areas, fencing, security, lighting, and utilities
• A satellite fuels and gas storage facility

Given that this construction is much less specialized, my bet is they'll start construction here before the launch site.  Note that they've already put up temporary structures, fences, and lighting at the control center area. 

The Stargate tracking center is a joint project between the University of Texas, City of Brownsville, and SpaceX, with some additional funding from the federal government.  Its unclear when construction on this site will begin.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: ZachS09 on 02/10/2015 02:16 pm
I hail from Trophy Club, Texas and if the launch site in Brownsville is completed, I could drive eight hours to watch the first launch from there.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: jfallen on 02/11/2015 12:46 am
Thanks for the rundown Dave G.  In addition to being a space geek, I am a bit of a construction geek.   I was logging into forums on the Burj Dubai (Burj Khalifa) watching it grow from the dirt for its multi year construction.  I have been disappointed that there haven't been more pictures here to document what just might be the most impressive launch facility ever built that may even eventually launch humans to mars.   The effort in my opinion is worthy of a little more attention, but perhaps it is still to early in the game for that.  Although I would settle for pictures of dirt being pushed around or an office trailer with a SpaceX or Mars Xing sign hanging on the door.  "All great things start from small beginnings," -Marcus Tullius Cicero
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: jimvela on 02/11/2015 01:03 am
I hail from Trophy Club, Texas and if the launch site in Brownsville is completed, I could drive eight hours to watch the first launch from there.

When you do, you'll eventually see me there, having driven from central Colorado.
I love VAFB and KSC/CCAFS, but I'm REALLY looking forward to seeing a launch from TX...
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: JimNtexas on 02/11/2015 02:47 am
There might be enough inmates to charter a boat!
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: MP99 on 02/11/2015 08:12 am
There might be enough inmates to charter a boat!
And then we can read about "that damn boat that scrubbed the launch". ;-)

Cheers, Martin
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Jarnis on 02/11/2015 09:12 am
There might be enough inmates to charter a boat!
And then we can read about "that damn boat that scrubbed the launch". ;-)

Cheers, Martin

...and suggestions that the boat should've been sunk by the coast guard.  ;)
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: ChefPat on 02/11/2015 02:04 pm
I hail from Trophy Club, Texas and if the launch site in Brownsville is completed, I could drive eight hours to watch the first launch from there.

When you do, you'll eventually see me there, having driven from central Colorado.
I love VAFB and KSC/CCAFS, but I'm REALLY looking forward to seeing a launch from TX...
I'm hoping to make a trip there on my Goldwing this summer. We'll see.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 02/11/2015 10:47 pm
... I would settle for pictures of dirt being pushed around or an office trailer with a SpaceX or Mars Xing sign hanging on the door...

2 out of 3.

Sign in foreground.  Trailer with lighting and fence in background.  From October 2014.

Note that this is the control center area, not the launch site.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 02/12/2015 09:47 am
Here's a picture from the air, also from October.  The control center area is behind the row of houses. 

SpaceX owns property from the road on the left to the water on the right, as shown in the map below the picture.

The Stargate tracking center will be behind the control center area and to the left, also shown on the map.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: MTom on 02/12/2015 12:13 pm
... I would settle for pictures of dirt being pushed around or an office trailer with a SpaceX or Mars Xing sign hanging on the door...

2 out of 3.

Sign in foreground.  Trailer with lighting and fence in background.  From October 2014.

Note that this is the control center area, not the launch site.

Trailer with fence - you find a bigger picture here:
http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=35425.msg1268649#msg1268649

For orientation in the aerial photo:
http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=35425.msg1269183#msg1269183
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Lobo on 02/12/2015 05:29 pm
The Boca Chica launch site is already pretty isolated. 

The only thing within a 5-mile radius is Boca Chica Village, which consists of a few dozen houses, many of which are run down and/or boarded up.  There's only 1 permanent resident in Boca Chica Village.  The houses are dirt cheap.  SpaceX could buy them all in a heartbeat.

The aerial shots of the village look like a pretty cool location.  Not many people around and the beach right there.  So what happened to this little village that these houses have all been abandoned and are so cheap?
Seems like it should be a fairly desirable little place there.

Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: llanitedave on 02/12/2015 05:44 pm
The Boca Chica launch site is already pretty isolated. 

The only thing within a 5-mile radius is Boca Chica Village, which consists of a few dozen houses, many of which are run down and/or boarded up.  There's only 1 permanent resident in Boca Chica Village.  The houses are dirt cheap.  SpaceX could buy them all in a heartbeat.

The aerial shots of the village look like a pretty cool location.  Not many people around and the beach right there.  So what happened to this little village that these houses have all been abandoned and are so cheap?
Seems like it should be a fairly desirable little place there.


No city water, wells are brackish, and very, very vulnerable to hurricanes.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: JimNtexas on 02/12/2015 06:09 pm
Quote
The aerial shots of the village look like a pretty cool location.  Not many people around and the beach right there.  So what happened to this little village that these houses have all been abandoned and are so cheap?
Seems like it should be a fairly desirable little place there.

When I visited I could only see two real advantages: It's only a short drive or bike ride to the beach, and the houses are (or were) cheap.

The houses can't be more than a few feet above sea level in a hurricane target zone, many of them are abandoned, and it has to be insect hell nine months of the year. I shudder to think of the size of their cockroaches!

It must get tiresome commuting 15 or so miles into town, and having to pass through a Border Patrol checkpoint each way.   



Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: cscott on 02/12/2015 06:14 pm
So what happened to this little village that these houses have all been abandoned and are so cheap?

The short answer is Hurricane Beulah (http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=35425.msg1282296#msg1282296).
Beulah broke the finances of the developer originally building the village (http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=31544.msg1221134#msg1221134).

Take a look through the List of Texas Hurricanes (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Texas_hurricanes_(1980%E2%80%93present)) and search for Padre Island.  This area keeps getting hammered.  A category 3 hurricane will bury all this under 10' of water (http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=35425.msg1282204#msg1282204).
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Lobo on 02/12/2015 07:44 pm
So what happened to this little village that these houses have all been abandoned and are so cheap?

The short answer is Hurricane Beulah (http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=35425.msg1282296#msg1282296).
Beulah broke the finances of the developer originally building the village (http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=31544.msg1221134#msg1221134).

Take a look through the List of Texas Hurricanes (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Texas_hurricanes_(1980%E2%80%93present)) and search for Padre Island.  This area keeps getting hammered.  A category 3 hurricane will bury all this under 10' of water (http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=35425.msg1282204#msg1282204).

Ok, so bad water, bad insects, a favorite vacation spot for hurricanes and flooding...but besides that, what's the down side?

;-)

So if it can get buried under 10ft of water, how will SpaceX handle that?  I can't imagine they'd want their HIF to have water 10ft up it's sided for a couple of days if there's a hurricane.  Build it on a 10ft tall concrete burm and roll down a ramp to the pad?  What about the pad, diesel tanks, LOX tanks, etc?
They can build them to withstand hurricanes, but what about storm surges?
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Lobo on 02/12/2015 07:56 pm
So what happened to this little village that these houses have all been abandoned and are so cheap?

The short answer is Hurricane Beulah (http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=35425.msg1282296#msg1282296).
Beulah broke the finances of the developer originally building the village (http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=31544.msg1221134#msg1221134).

Take a look through the List of Texas Hurricanes (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Texas_hurricanes_(1980%E2%80%93present)) and search for Padre Island.  This area keeps getting hammered.  A category 3 hurricane will bury all this under 10' of water (http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=35425.msg1282204#msg1282204).

Seems like a good place for a house like this.

Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Zed_Noir on 02/12/2015 08:52 pm
So what happened to this little village that these houses have all been abandoned and are so cheap?

The short answer is Hurricane Beulah (http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=35425.msg1282296#msg1282296).
Beulah broke the finances of the developer originally building the village (http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=31544.msg1221134#msg1221134).

Take a look through the List of Texas Hurricanes (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Texas_hurricanes_(1980%E2%80%93present)) and search for Padre Island.  This area keeps getting hammered.  A category 3 hurricane will bury all this under 10' of water (http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=35425.msg1282204#msg1282204).

Ok, so bad water, bad insects, a favorite vacation spot for hurricanes and flooding...but besides that, what's the down side?

;-)

<snip>

There is also the the small matter of getting food and storing it. I presume currently there is only generator electricity available. Since there is only one permanent resident at Boca Chica. Too few to run power lines for.


@JimNtexas

How is the phone reception there? Somehow I don't think a land line will be available.
Couldn't imagine living in a place without some sort of Internet access.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: cro-magnon gramps on 02/13/2015 12:32 am
Sounds like the perfect place for a Winter Place for a retired person from Canada ;D not that wondering if your house will be there in November is much of an attraction... but hey, sacrifices have to be made, what with what they are telling us Global Warming will do to Canada's Winters... as for telecommunications... isn't that what Elon-Net is all about...
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Herb Schaltegger on 02/13/2015 12:42 am
I don't doubt SpaceX will lay fiber, build a generator plant and/or convince the state and community to pay for utility upgrades to all the power they'll require, and do the same for a fresh water supply.

To me, the only real question is whether they'll build some kind of seawall around their facilities to protect them from a storm surge. I guess the EIS might have discussion of that point but I admit I haven't looked.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: deruch on 02/13/2015 03:02 am
I don't doubt SpaceX will lay fiber, build a generator plant and/or convince the state and community to pay for utility upgrades to all the power they'll require, and do the same for a fresh water supply.

To me, the only real question is whether they'll build some kind of seawall around their facilities to protect them from a storm surge. I guess the EIS might have discussion of that point but I admit I haven't looked.

I assumed much of that would be covered by the agreements SpaceX inked with the state, county, and development district. 
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Coastal Ron on 02/13/2015 03:32 am
To me, the only real question is whether they'll build some kind of seawall around their facilities to protect them from a storm surge. I guess the EIS might have discussion of that point but I admit I haven't looked.

At the beginning of my career I worked at a manufacturing plant that was next to a river, and the buildings were tilt-up concrete walls.  They eventually built removable flood barriers for all the door openings so they could button up the facilities during the occasional flood (I was there for one).

I know SpaceX has been building their final assembly buildings out of steel recently, but maybe they will consider building the Texas launch site building walls out of concrete and then have removable flood barriers for the doors?  Then you just make sure you have a generator with plenty of fuel inside to take care of any minor leakage.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 02/14/2015 08:36 am
I presume currently there is only generator electricity available. Since there is only one permanent resident at Boca Chica. Too few to run power lines for.


@JimNtexas

How is the phone reception there? Somehow I don't think a land line will be available.
Couldn't imagine living in a place without some sort of Internet access.

Boca Chica Village (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boca_Chica_Village) does have public electricity and I'm pretty sure they have phone lines as well, but no city water, sewer, or natural gas.  So they all have water delivered and stored in big tanks, which you can see in the pictures.  They must also use septic tanks, and electricity for heating, cooking, hot water and laundry.

SpaceX will use the existing public electric lines, but they're also adding solar panels from Elon's other venture Solar City.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: BobHk on 02/14/2015 01:55 pm
I don't doubt SpaceX will lay fiber, build a generator plant and/or convince the state and community to pay for utility upgrades to all the power they'll require, and do the same for a fresh water supply.

To me, the only real question is whether they'll build some kind of seawall around their facilities to protect them from a storm surge. I guess the EIS might have discussion of that point but I admit I haven't looked.

I assumed much of that would be covered by the agreements SpaceX inked with the state, county, and development district.

You can find a lot of exacting information about what they'll be doing right here (http://www.faa.gov/about/office_org/headquarters_offices/ast/environmental/nepa_docs/review/documents_progress/spacex_texas_launch_site_environmental_impact_statement/media/FEIS_SpaceX_Texas_Launch_Site_Vol_I.pdf).

Edit/CR: modified link
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: docmordrid on 02/14/2015 01:57 pm
It's being reported that within a few weeks Tesla will announce batteries for solar power installations. Don't be surprised to see those as a contingency source.

WaPo link.... (http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-switch/wp/2015/02/12/this-new-tesla-battery-will-power-your-home-and-maybe-the-electric-grid-too/)
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: llanitedave on 02/14/2015 03:51 pm
I don't doubt SpaceX will lay fiber, build a generator plant and/or convince the state and community to pay for utility upgrades to all the power they'll require, and do the same for a fresh water supply.

To me, the only real question is whether they'll build some kind of seawall around their facilities to protect them from a storm surge. I guess the EIS might have discussion of that point but I admit I haven't looked.

I assumed much of that would be covered by the agreements SpaceX inked with the state, county, and development district.

You can find a lot of exacting information about what they'll be doing right here (http://www.faa.gov/about/office_org/headquarters_offices/ast/environmental/nepa_docs/review/documents_progress/spacex_texas_launch_site_environmental_impact_statement/media/FEIS_SpaceX_Texas_Launch_Site_Vol_I.pdf).

EIS doesn't mention storm mitigation or seawalls as far as I can tell.

Edit/CR: modified link in quote
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Elvis in Space on 02/14/2015 11:28 pm
So what happened to this little village that these houses have all been abandoned and are so cheap?

The short answer is Hurricane Beulah (http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=35425.msg1282296#msg1282296).
Beulah broke the finances of the developer originally building the village (http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=31544.msg1221134#msg1221134).

Take a look through the List of Texas Hurricanes (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Texas_hurricanes_(1980%E2%80%93present)) and search for Padre Island.  This area keeps getting hammered.  A category 3 hurricane will bury all this under 10' of water (http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=35425.msg1282204#msg1282204).

Ok, so bad water, bad insects, a favorite vacation spot for hurricanes and flooding...but besides that, what's the down side?

;-)

So if it can get buried under 10ft of water, how will SpaceX handle that?  I can't imagine they'd want their HIF to have water 10ft up it's sided for a couple of days if there's a hurricane.  Build it on a 10ft tall concrete burm and roll down a ramp to the pad?  What about the pad, diesel tanks, LOX tanks, etc?
They can build them to withstand hurricanes, but what about storm surges?

Part of what I do involves working with chemical plants in South Louisiana. With proper construction, drainage, generators, pumps, and preparation it isn't that difficult to mitigate hurricane weather. We held up fine during Katrina with only minor water intrusion into a poorly insulated cable tray. The amount of high water will vary greatly depending not just on the storm class but on tides, time of day, and a lot of other stuff I've forgotten about. We keep MRE's and bottled water on hand for those that have to stay and ride out anything. Point is that people who build things like this in that area are well aware of it and will design accordingly. The plants that I deal with and hundreds of other similar installations have weathered such storms without great difficulty and I'm sure Spacex will too.

As for a house I'd love to have that place in the photo above. A pallet of cans, couple hundred gallons of water, and a generator, would keep you grooving through anything short of complete apocalypse.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Lobo on 02/16/2015 06:07 pm
As for a house I'd love to have that place in the photo above. A pallet of cans, couple hundred gallons of water, and a generator, would keep you grooving through anything short of complete apocalypse.

Yup.  Not to mention probably quote a good view of SpaceX launches if you built it in Boca Chica Village.  The land looks pretty darn flat around there.  If you had a pedestal house like that, you'd probably have a pretty good view of the launch pad to the east.  :-)

A space nerd's dream home...
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 02/19/2015 08:02 pm
SpaceX picks up a few more lots.

Latest composite map attached.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: JimNtexas on 02/19/2015 08:05 pm
I can't understand why they built those Boca Chica houses at ground level.  For a long time I had a vacation home in Rockport (about a hundred miles up the Gulf Coast).  All the houses in my neighbor were on pilings, for good reasons!
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 02/19/2015 09:00 pm
I can't understand why they built those Boca Chica houses at ground level.  For a long time I had a vacation home in Rockport (about a hundred miles up the Gulf Coast).  All the houses in my neighbor were on pilings, for good reasons!

The houses were built in 1967.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boca_Chica_Village
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: rpapo on 02/19/2015 10:34 pm
I can't understand why they built those Boca Chica houses at ground level.  For a long time I had a vacation home in Rockport (about a hundred miles up the Gulf Coast).  All the houses in my neighbor were on pilings, for good reasons!

The houses were built in 1967.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boca_Chica_Village
Which begs the question: Are hurricanes that much less frequent on that part of the coast?
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: dglow on 02/19/2015 10:37 pm
I can't understand why they built those Boca Chica houses at ground level.  For a long time I had a vacation home in Rockport (about a hundred miles up the Gulf Coast).  All the houses in my neighbor were on pilings, for good reasons!

The houses were built in 1967.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boca_Chica_Village

One might suspect that early buyers weren't fully-informed as to the flood-plain status of their properties. Real estate agents the likes of Glengarry Glen Ross come to mind.

Always Be Closing
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Elvis in Space on 02/19/2015 11:01 pm
I can't understand why they built those Boca Chica houses at ground level.  For a long time I had a vacation home in Rockport (about a hundred miles up the Gulf Coast).  All the houses in my neighbor were on pilings, for good reasons!

The houses were built in 1967.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boca_Chica_Village

One might suspect that early buyers weren't fully-informed as to the flood-plain status of their properties. Real estate agents the likes of Glengarry Glen Ross come to mind.

Always Be Closing

Flood plain areas get redrawn every time there's a flood. Nashville got plastered with three months of rain in three days in 2010 and places that had never flooded in recorded history now can't get flood insurance. I've participated in several hurricane clean up efforts and the presence of those houses tells you what the real risk is. If more than a few feet of water had washed over that place since 1967 those houses wouldn't even be there.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Herb Schaltegger on 02/19/2015 11:35 pm

Flood plain areas get redrawn every time there's a flood. Nashville got plastered with three months of rain in three days in 2010 and places that had never flooded in recorded history now can't get flood insurance. I've participated in several hurricane clean up efforts and the presence of those houses tells you what the real risk is. If more than a few feet of water had washed over that place since 1967 those houses wouldn't even be there.

It was more than that; some places in western Davidson County and Dickson County got upwards of 24" as measured by Doppler composite integration; the front totally stalled over middle Tennessee. Opryland Hotel and Titans' football stadium both flooded; the Cumberland jumped its banks all the way up to 4th Avenue, which I would've thought more or less impossible had I not seen it myself, and watched cars, trailers and even a house floating down I-24 when the tributaries flooded as well.

So yeah, anyway ... builders build. Weather happens. Zoning laws change accordingly (or don't, but that's a political argument ready to happen so we'll skip that). The net result here is that SpaceX has a great opportunity to build a world class launch facility with ridiculously cheap costs for land.

So yeah, that's why all those "lots" are underwater now.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 02/25/2015 09:31 am
Transportation crucial for growth in the Rio Grande Valley
http://www.valleycentral.com/news/story.aspx?list=195030&id=1169172#.VO2iHWeBGoA
Quote
In the next 30 years, the population is conservatively predicted to reach seven million, he said. Road projects will be crucial in order to get everyone where they need to go  whether it be any of the UT-RGV campuses, Space X launches or the Port of Brownsville.

Toll Road 550 has been in the works for about two years and is nearly complete. The $14 million construction project is designed to reduce the drive time for 18-wheelers carrying goods to get to and from the Port of Brownsville.

Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: LastStarFighter on 02/25/2015 02:58 pm
Didn't see this anywhere else. Looks like first confirmed flights from BC for SES... Two falcon 9's in 2017
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: JBF on 02/25/2015 03:03 pm
Didn't see this anywhere else. Looks like first confirmed flights from BC for SES... Two falcon 9's in 2017

Where are you seeing that?
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: LastStarFighter on 02/25/2015 03:06 pm
Didn't see this anywhere else. Looks like first confirmed flights from BC for SES... Two falcon 9's in 2017

Where are you seeing that?

Twitter:
SpaceX will launch two SES telecom satellites, first confirmed flights from Texas spaceport. http://t.co/wYMYOiazEr http://t.co/3a2OL6j1kW
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Marslauncher on 02/25/2015 03:12 pm
I already know I will be there for the first launch! Camera in hand and children in tow, to document what will be a very historic moment in Texas history! Very happy to hear this confirmation!

John C
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Lars-J on 02/25/2015 03:30 pm
Another article about the SES flights from Texas in 2017:

http://spaceflightnow.com/2015/02/25/ses-reserves-two-falcon-9-launches-from-texas/
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: LouScheffer on 02/25/2015 05:22 pm
Another article about the SES flights from Texas in 2017:

http://spaceflightnow.com/2015/02/25/ses-reserves-two-falcon-9-launches-from-texas/
From the article:
Quote
We’re two-and-a-half degrees south of Cape Canaveral, and those two-and-a-half degrees are actually helpful for GTO missions.

By my estimation, I get an extra 10m/s for the faster Earth rotation at the launch site, and about 30 m/s for less inclination change needed by the satellite.

Given GEO station-keeping is about 50 m/s per year, that's about 10 months of extra satellite life from Texas as opposed to the Cape.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 02/25/2015 07:58 pm
By my estimation, I get an extra 10m/s for the faster Earth rotation at the launch site, and about 30 m/s for less inclination change needed by the satellite.

Given GEO station-keeping is about 50 m/s per year, that's about 10 months of extra satellite life from Texas as opposed to the Cape.

Dogleg flight path losses?
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 02/25/2015 08:01 pm
I already know I will be there for the first launch! Camera in hand and children in tow, to document what will be a very historic moment in Texas history!

Make that a historic moment in world history: First orbital launch from private spaceport.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Herb Schaltegger on 02/26/2015 01:17 am
Transportation crucial for growth in the Rio Grande Valley
http://www.valleycentral.com/news/story.aspx?list=195030&id=1169172#.VO2iHWeBGoA
Quote
Toll Road 550 has been in the works for about two years and is nearly complete. The $14 million construction project is designed to reduce the drive time for 18-wheelers carrying goods to get to and from the Port of Brownsville.


I wonder if SpaceX will get a break on those tolls as part of the concession for building the launch complex? ;)
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 02/27/2015 10:39 am
SpaceX meets local vendors in McAllen, Brownsville
http://www.themonitor.com/news/local/spacex-meets-local-vendors-in-mcallen-brownsville/article_c57210b6-be25-11e4-99ab-93e1c01a254f.html

Quote
“SpaceX met individually with hundreds of businesses across the Rio Grande Valley and we’re excited about the opportunity we have to work with local companies as we move forward with construction near Boca Chica Beach,” John Taylor, spokesman for Elon Musk’s Space Exploration Technologies, said.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 02/28/2015 01:46 pm
Interesting hexacopter footage of the Brownsville seaport (http://www.portofbrownsville.com/), specifically the USS Forrestal (CV-59) super carrier (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Forrestal_(CV-59)) in the early stages of being scrapped. 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LZfoleriqRY
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 03/05/2015 10:45 am
Two new SpaceX jobs at Texas launch site apparently still not filled:

Electrical Engineer (Launch Pad Facilities), Rio Grande Valley  (http://www.indeed.com/viewjob?jk=9fc742d26c96bf61&q=spacex&l=Brownsville&from=ifa&utm_source=publisher&utm_medium=cpc&utm_campaign=de_noemail&pub=5431754608249411)

Launch Operations Systems Analyst, Rio Grande Valley TX  (http://www.indeed.com/viewjob?jk=bc82071672561ad4&q=spacex&l=Brownsville&from=ifa&utm_source=publisher&utm_medium=cpc&utm_campaign=de_noemail&pub=5431754608249411)
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Prober on 03/06/2015 01:54 pm
Looks like news is looking at this a little different. (popped up on yahoo this morning)

SpaceX Still Hasn't Broken Ground at Its Texas Spaceport of Dreams

http://www.popularmechanics.com/space/rockets/a14347/spacex-spaceport-brownsville-texas-elon-musk/

"Locals expect things to happen fast when Elon Musk comes to town. But people is southern Texas are still waiting to see a new spaceport take shape"

"SpaceX says it could be launching rockets here by the end of 2016. But as of early February, when I visited, there were no visible signs of construction."


Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: gommtu on 03/06/2015 02:00 pm
I think they've stated that almost all their launch site construction resources are at Pad 39A, and that they would devote those resources to Boca Chica once Pad 39A was finished.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: JBF on 03/06/2015 02:01 pm
Looks like news is looking at this a little different. (popped up on yahoo this morning)

SpaceX Still Hasn't Broken Ground at Its Texas Spaceport of Dreams

http://www.popularmechanics.com/space/rockets/a14347/spacex-spaceport-brownsville-texas-elon-musk/

"Locals expect things to happen fast when Elon Musk comes to town. But people is southern Texas are still waiting to see a new spaceport take shape"

"SpaceX says it could be launching rockets here by the end of 2016. But as of early February, when I visited, there were no visible signs of construction."

I actually read the article, it's crap they failed to mention that SpaceX said at the ground breaking that things really wouldn't start moving in Texas until after LC-39A is done most likely 3rd quarter this year.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: dglow on 03/06/2015 04:15 pm
Link Bait
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 03/06/2015 04:57 pm
I think they've stated that almost all their launch site construction resources are at Pad 39A, and that they would devote those resources to Boca Chica once Pad 39A was finished.

That's true for the launch site itself, but what about the control center area two miles down the road?

From the EIS (https://www.faa.gov/about/office_org/headquarters_offices/ast/environmental/nepa_docs/review/documents_progress/spacex_texas_launch_site_environmental_impact_statement/media/FEIS_SpaceX_Texas_Launch_Site_Vol_I.pdf), the control center area will consist of:
• Two launch control center buildings
• Two payload processing facilities
• A Launch vehicle processing hangar
• Two RF transmitter/receivers
• Generators and diesel storage facilities
• Roads, parking areas, fencing, security, lighting, and utilities
• A satellite fuels and gas storage facility

This stuff doesn't require a specialized a launch pad construction crew.  A normal construction crew, mostly local hires, should do fine.

So what's holding that up?

According to the Popular Mechanics article (http://www.popularmechanics.com/space/rockets/a14347/spacex-spaceport-brownsville-texas-elon-musk/):
Quote
"For a project of this scale, there is a significant amount of engineering, design, and environmental work that must be completed prior to heavy construction," says SpaceX spokesman Phillip Larson. "While not immediately visible, this work is well under way."

While this makes some sense, remember that the FAA approval (http://thespacereporter.com/2014/07/spacex-wins-faa-and-air-force-approvals/) was back in July, so they've had 8 months to do this.

What's holding up construction at the control center?
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Lars-J on 03/06/2015 05:02 pm
While this seems to make sense, remember that the FAA approval (http://thespacereporter.com/2014/07/spacex-wins-faa-and-air-force-approvals/) was back in July, so they've had 9 months to do this.

What's holding up construction at the control center?

Why do it now only to have it sitting around not being used? What is the hurry? This is not a government program. People say they know it, but they still can;t seem to wrap their heads around it.

Presumably there are/will be lessons learned from the 39A build, which could affect choices made at Boca Chica. Non-critical infrastructure that is not a pacing item can be delayed until it is needed.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: cscott on 03/06/2015 06:17 pm
Right. What if they discover at LC39A (just making up an example) that their power needs are 50% higher than expected because of some discovery with the subcooling R & D project.  It would be needless waste if they'd already built the generator set at Brownsville.  Even if the plans for the control center portion are 98% nailed down, they are waiting for that last 2% to enter production at LC39A before giving final approval at Brownsville.

Plus, SpaceX is a growing company, but from their statements they are not staffing up for Brownsville---they are using the same team which is working on LC39A.    As a management matter SpaceX probably does not want them distracted from LC39A, even if only to approve plans for the "boring" part of the Brownsville site.

I'm sure they've got a big planning document for the site and everything is scheduled out "as late as possible" (including allowance for unexpected delays during construction, of course).  Once construction starts I expect the progress will be very rapid.

Or not!  It wouldn't be the first time SpaceX has published an overoptimistic schedule. So far they've always managed to get everything done eventually in the end.

Or is this just a concern troll to try to plant a false rumor?
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: dglow on 03/06/2015 06:43 pm
So what's holding that up?

According to the Popular Mechanics article (http://www.popularmechanics.com/space/rockets/a14347/spacex-spaceport-brownsville-texas-elon-musk/):
Quote
"For a project of this scale, there is a significant amount of engineering, design, and environmental work that must be completed prior to heavy construction," says SpaceX spokesman Phillip Larson. "While not immediately visible, this work is well under way."

Please stop the discussion here.
SpaceX says work is continuing and that non-immediately-visible progress is being made. I humbly suggest we take them at their words.

What about the PM article? Ginned-up FUD to generate clicks. Recipe follows:

Linkbait Tonic

 1. Mix one part popular, well-known entity... any Apple, SpaceX, Elon Musk, Tesla, Bezos or similar will do
 2. Stir in a just a hint of impending problem, legal/financial trouble, or personal scandal
 3. Shake and pour; write your headline – for extra flavor: phrase headline in the form of a question
 4. Deep in the story, include a quote or fact directly addressing nefarious questions raised
      - this last step is very important, and though it might dispel pleasant smoke and fire flavors
        established in step 2, this step critically eliminates any future notes of slander or libel

Publish and enjoy!
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 03/06/2015 06:45 pm
What if they discover at LC39A (just making up an example) that their power needs are 50% higher than expected because of some discovery with the subcooling R & D project.  It would be needless waste if they'd already built the generator set at Brownsville.
Why would a generator at the launch site power 5 control center buildings that are 2 miles away?

The control center area is not part of the launch site.

Why do it now only to have it sitting around...
Three reasons immediately spring to mind:

1) Minimize the amount of parallel construction so more equipment and non-specialized workers would be available for launch site construction.

2) Use the larger control center buildings to store construction equipment and materials for the launch site.

3) For use as shelter during periods of heavy rain.

Or not!  It wouldn't be the first time SpaceX has published an overoptimistic schedule. So far they've always managed to get everything done eventually in the end.
My thoughts exactly.

Or is this just a concern troll to try to plant a false rumor?
No.  See my previous posts on this thread.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Lars-J on 03/06/2015 06:50 pm
Why do it now only to have it sitting around...
Three reasons immediately spring to mind:

1) Minimize the amount of parallel construction so more equipment and non-specialized workers would be available for launch site construction.

2) Use the larger control center buildings to store construction equipment and materials for the launch site.

3) For use as shelter during periods of heavy rain.

Do you want them to build a control center or a garage? All so people drive up, see a single building and say ... "yup, progress!"?

EDIT: less snark
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: dglow on 03/06/2015 07:07 pm
Dude, be nice. Dave G's reasons were thought-through and constructive. Not sure the same can be said of your post above. As Chris Lar says, "Be excellent to one another."
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Lar on 03/06/2015 07:10 pm
Dude, be nice. Dave G's reasons were thought-through and constructive. Not sure the same can be said of your post above. A Chris says, "Be excellent to one another."
That's me actually.

But I'm happy to give Chris credit!

And yes, let's stay constructive.  This IS a construction thread after all...
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: cscott on 03/06/2015 09:13 pm
Oh, the other reason I thought of: I believe that SpaceX is still buying parcels of land in Boca Chica.  Deferring unnecessary construction might also be helpful in allowing them to get their real estate ducks in a row before holdouts start getting excited by all the visible new work and decide their property should be worth more.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Prober on 03/06/2015 09:15 pm
So what's holding that up?

According to the Popular Mechanics article (http://www.popularmechanics.com/space/rockets/a14347/spacex-spaceport-brownsville-texas-elon-musk/):
Quote
"For a project of this scale, there is a significant amount of engineering, design, and environmental work that must be completed prior to heavy construction," says SpaceX spokesman Phillip Larson. "While not immediately visible, this work is well under way."

Please stop the discussion here.
SpaceX says work is continuing and that non-immediately-visible progress is being made. I humbly suggest we take them at their words.

I agree discussion of Conspiracy theories should stop.

Taking people at their word would be the question then.  I can't say if E Must said SpaceX could be launching in 2016 from Texas.  If he said it to the good people of Texas then there is a problem.

I come down in the middle on this. Understanding both "points of view"  The cape design, and frankly VAFB designs are still a work in progress. These will be learning tools.

On the other side of this somewhere, someplace on NSF the exuberance of launching so many launches so very quickly out of Texas has be talked about.   If the claims for 2016 launching out of Texas pan out then land prep operations should be going on 24/7.  That's just the land prep, before any first shovel, and ribbon cutting must take place.

Might not be the best example; but Russia is building from scratch a complete launch site and its taking many years worth of construction.

It's going to take many years to build a Texas complete launch site (fact), not some lame conspiracy theory.



Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: deruch on 03/07/2015 03:11 am
For large scale projects often there are considerable amounts of infrastructure work that needs to happen first.  For example, they will be requiring water, gas&electric, sewer, communications, etc. link ups that are sufficient to support both the construction phase and future site activity.  Not all of these are readily available and may need local, county, state govt. involvement in getting them to the site.  Also, they are going to have lots of trucks coming and going to the work site delivering materials.  Are transportation routes for this capable of supporting the increase heavy traffic?  etc.  Then beyond just the design work, there's lots of plan review and permitting work that has to happen before any visible work can begin.

Basically, there are lots of things that can be happening without them being visible to outsiders.  Do we have any indication that non-readily visible progress is being made?  Why, yes.  A SpaceX spokesman says so right in the article. 
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Owlon on 03/07/2015 03:41 am
It's going to take many years to build a Texas complete launch site (fact), not some lame conspiracy theory.

Many years? Really? They're not building a whole space center, they're building a single launch pad. They said at the groundbreaking in late 2014 that construction work would only ramp up in Q3 2015 and they expect first launch NET late 2016. They're planning on 12-15ish months of major construction, and they have experience rebuilding pads already. I expect them to be correct to at least a factor of 2.

EDIT: guckyfan makes a good point, so I'll rephrase: They're not building another Kennedy Space Center, they're building a single launch pad and everything necessary to support that.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: guckyfan on 03/07/2015 06:32 am
It's going to take many years to build a Texas complete launch site (fact), not some lame conspiracy theory.

Many years? Really? They're not building a whole space center, they're building a single launch pad. They said at the groundbreaking in late 2014 that construction work would only ramp up in Q3 2015 and they expect first launch NET late 2016. They're planning on 12-15ish months of major construction, and they have experience rebuilding pads already. I expect them to be correct to at least a factor of 2.

Actually they do build a whole space center in Boca Chica. Complete with launch pad, fuel storage, launch vehicle integration facility, payload processing facilities, control center, range facilities.

They just do it more efficiently. How much time and money does NASA spend on reworking LC 39B and how much time and money does SpaceX spend on reworking LC 39A?
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: StuffOfInterest on 03/07/2015 10:53 am
I was going to write something saying that although the building construction won't take long there will probably need to be some long lead earthworks started to get a hill built and settled for the launch pad.  Then I went and found a drawing of the proposed pad.  This pad appears to sit at just about grade level with the flame ducts using natural geographic features.  There will probably be less earthworks here than was necessary for the new McGregor test stand.  When you look at the bug buildings, those are the same type SpaceX has used everywhere else.  As soon as the foundation is done those go up in a few weeks.  Finally, all the GSE near the pad appears to be modular and will come in on trucks, be craned onto a foundation, and be ready to go.  So, could this be done in a one year time frame?  I think it is possible.  I'd give it about 40% for ground prep, 10% for buildings and trucking in pre-fabs, and 50% for outfitting everything.

Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 03/07/2015 06:04 pm
I was going to write something saying that although the building construction won't take long there will probably need to be some long lead earthworks started to get a hill built and settled for the launch pad.  Then I went and found a drawing of the proposed pad.  This pad appears to sit at just about grade level with the flame ducts using natural geographic features.  There will probably be less earthworks here than was necessary for the new McGregor test stand.  When you look at the bug buildings, those are the same type SpaceX has used everywhere else.  As soon as the foundation is done those go up in a few weeks.  Finally, all the GSE near the pad appears to be modular and will come in on trucks, be craned onto a foundation, and be ready to go.  So, could this be done in a one year time frame?  I think it is possible.  I'd give it about 40% for ground prep, 10% for buildings and trucking in pre-fabs, and 50% for outfitting everything.

That's just for the launch site itself.  The entire launch complex includes 6 more buildings 2 miles west.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: AncientU on 03/07/2015 06:24 pm
And those six buildings would take how long to build?
Any reason they cannot be built in parallel?
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: cro-magnon gramps on 03/07/2015 07:51 pm
And those six buildings would take how long to build?
Any reason they cannot be built in parallel?

I'm going to take a WAG and say that it is dependent on how well a) this year and early next years launch cadence goes, b) new orders to the manifest c) how much Elon and his backers are willing to pony up front...
 
These are not the Control and Tracking Centers of the 60's... this is going to be an expensive undertaking... The Pad looks like the least expensive part of this launch site.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Lar on 03/07/2015 08:42 pm
Gramps, why do you think the control centers are going to be so expensive? Did you mean proportionally to the pad costs? I'd assumed a lot of the stuff they were going to be installing would be COTS stuff like computers, lights, projection screens, offices and the like. And that the per square foot cost would not be much more than typical class 1 IT space fully outfitted with equipment...
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: CJ on 03/07/2015 09:07 pm
I have no experience with launch control centers, but I do have experience with buildings containing complex wiring and systems standing vacant. It's always best to avoid leaving a building vacant; not only does doing so up the risk of vandalism/theft massively unless you deploy security (which costs $$$). There's also 4-legged intruders that gnaw wiring, water damage, etc, etc.

My take; by far the most practical approach is to leave the land vacant until construction needs to start per the launch schedule, thus avoiding the standing-vacant issue.   
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: AncientU on 03/07/2015 10:37 pm
I'd suspect mostly modern comm and IT equipment; fiber links and/or free space laser from pad to control buildings.  Just as their HIF is a standard COTS box, their launch complex should be as simple (and fast/inexpensive to construct).
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: dglow on 03/07/2015 11:12 pm
On the subject of tracking systems for Boca Chica... wasn't SpaceX looking to innovate/simplify requirements here, relying more on telemetry from the rocket and less from tracking radar? I seem to recall some level or disagreement with the CCAFS range over this. Anyone recall?

Seems this could be relevant again. AIUI Boca Chica will be SpaceX's own range, and they'll answer only to the FAA, not the AF. Is that correct?
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: RedLineTrain on 03/07/2015 11:26 pm
I think that you're conflating two issues.

SpaceX originally wanted a non-explosive flight termination system.  The Air Force refused to go along.  At Boca Chica, I can imagine that SpaceX will continue with an explosive flight termination system, but who knows what they will work out with the FAA.

SpaceX also wants to use rocket telemetry in lieu of range radar to inform the flight termination decision.  As I recall, this push is getting the full support of the Air Force, but this is taking some time to work out.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Llian Rhydderch on 03/07/2015 11:27 pm
On the subject of tracking systems for Boca Chica... wasn't SpaceX looking to innovate/simplify requirements here, relying more on telemetry from the rocket and less from tracking radar? I seem to recall some level or disagreement with the CCAFS range over this. Anyone recall?

Seems this could be relevant again. AIUI Boca Chica will be SpaceX's own range, and they'll answer only to the FAA, not the AF. Is that correct?

I certainly hope so. 

Neither excessive regulation nor a significant set of practices that were initiated when rocket control technology still had vacuum tubes in it will bode well for the sort of innovation we need to see in the space access business.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 03/08/2015 12:07 am
AIUI Boca Chica will be SpaceX's own range...
Not exactly.

The Stargate tracking center is a joint project between the University of Texas, City of Brownsville, and SpaceX, with some additional funding from the federal government.

http://www.utb.edu/stargate/Pages/default.aspx
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: cro-magnon gramps on 03/08/2015 12:36 am
Gramps, why do you think the control centers are going to be so expensive? Did you mean proportionally to the pad costs? I'd assumed a lot of the stuff they were going to be installing would be COTS stuff like computers, lights, projection screens, offices and the like. And that the per square foot cost would not be much more than typical class 1 IT space fully outfitted with equipment...

I maybe wrong here. But isn't this set up going to be for control and tracking of 3 pads, and to also be their BFR/MCT construction, testing and launch site. Would it not be better to begin now with the idea that incrementally improving the already existing infrastructure and technology, rather than tear down and replace in 5-8 years...
that said, I did compare it to the first launch pad itself, as being cheaper to construct than the Control and Tracking Centers...

Gramps
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Coastal Ron on 03/08/2015 02:07 am
I maybe wrong here. But isn't this set up going to be for control and tracking of 3 pads, and to also be their BFR/MCT construction, testing and launch site.

At least from what we know publicly, there has been no decision as to where (or when) the BFR production facility will be built.  So Boca Chica is for the Falcon family only at this point.

Quote
Would it not be better to begin now with the idea that incrementally improving the already existing infrastructure and technology, rather than tear down and replace in 5-8 years...

The BFR is going to be a lot bigger than even what the Pad-39A could handle, and the Saturn 5 flew from there.  So we're talking about launch facilities that are really big, and really well integrated with a production facility too.  We have no evidence that SpaceX is ready to make that commitment yet, in any of their launch locations.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: cro-magnon gramps on 03/08/2015 04:09 am
I maybe wrong here. But isn't this set up going to be for control and tracking of 3 pads, and to also be their BFR/MCT construction, testing and launch site.

At least from what we know publicly, there has been no decision as to where (or when) the BFR production facility will be built.  So Boca Chica is for the Falcon family only at this point.

Quote
Would it not be better to begin now with the idea that incrementally improving the already existing infrastructure and technology, rather than tear down and replace in 5-8 years...

The BFR is going to be a lot bigger than even what the Pad-39A could handle, and the Saturn 5 flew from there.  So we're talking about launch facilities that are really big, and really well integrated with a production facility too.  We have no evidence that SpaceX is ready to make that commitment yet, in any of their launch locations.

Mr Musk, at this Texas Appropriations meeting prior to announcing choosing Brownsville and Boca Chica as the new launch site indicated that he would be using the launch site chosen for building and launching the bigger launcher... As we have been discussing elsewhere that the time line for initial testing is 3-6 years away, I believe it is probably in the back of peoples minds over at SpaceX how they will be proceeding with creation of the site for this bigger rocket. Mr Musk begins talking about rockets at the 1:20 minute mark. So if you want "evidence" that would seem to be the "smoking rocket"... and is all I have to go on at this present time, other than a huge amount of detailed speculation here on NSF...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3_iu75TFgX8
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Zed_Noir on 03/08/2015 06:04 am
@cro-magnon gramps

The assembly facility and launch facility for the BFR will be put out to bid to various candidate US state governments for the best terms for SpaceX IMO. Just like the Tesla Gigafactory. Best terms might be the streamlining of red tape instead of money or tax incentives.

In your link video of Musk with the TX house committee. What Musk said was that the BFR assembly facility will be near the launch site, but he didn't say where the launch site will be.

It depends on SpaceX deciding how to move the BFR for siting of the future BFR assembly facility.  I think floating launch pads will be the way to launch the BFR.  There will a lot of states with ports bidding for the assembly site in that case.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: rpapo on 03/08/2015 06:23 am
SpaceX originally wanted a non-explosive flight termination system.  The Air Force refused to go along.  At Boca Chica, I can imagine that SpaceX will continue with an explosive flight termination system, but who knows what they will work out with the FAA.
Except that there has been one more data point since then: SpaceX's non-explosive approach has been demonstrated once, and worked perfectly.  F9Rdev1 / Grasshopper 2.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Damon Hill on 03/08/2015 07:13 am
SpaceX originally wanted a non-explosive flight termination system.  The Air Force refused to go along.  At Boca Chica, I can imagine that SpaceX will continue with an explosive flight termination system, but who knows what they will work out with the FAA.
Except that there has been one more data point since then: SpaceX's non-explosive approach has been demonstrated once, and worked perfectly.  F9Rdev1 / Grasshopper 2.

Yeah, with a very fractional propellant load and no upper stage.  I hope a 98% full F9H safes itself just as benignly, but I kind of think it will be dramatic.  Beats doing another Antares, at least, but given the right conditions it might break windows in Brownsville.  What was the biggest on/near pad explosion at Cape Canaveral?
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: docmordrid on 03/08/2015 08:24 am
The 1997 Delta II explosion was shortly after launch, and showered the area with burning debris.

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/GPS_IIR-1

http://youtu.be/gDnkEOKR1BE
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: LastStarFighter on 03/08/2015 08:35 am
SpaceX originally wanted a non-explosive flight termination system.  The Air Force refused to go along.  At Boca Chica, I can imagine that SpaceX will continue with an explosive flight termination system, but who knows what they will work out with the FAA.
Except that there has been one more data point since then: SpaceX's non-explosive approach has been demonstrated once, and worked perfectly.  F9Rdev1 / Grasshopper 2.

Define non-explosive...because I believe the auto termination system triggered the FTS on the fatal day in Texas. Sure looked very explosive to me!
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: guckyfan on 03/08/2015 08:44 am
Define non-explosive...because I believe the auto termination system triggered the FTS on the fatal day in Texas. Sure looked very explosive to me!

But it wasn't an explosive, that triggered the flight termination. They depressurized the tanks. As a result the tanks collapsed and the propellant burned.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 03/08/2015 09:11 am
In your link video of Musk with the TX house committee. What Musk said was that the BFR assembly facility will be near the launch site, but he didn't say where the launch site will be.

The context of that discussion strongly suggests SpaceX intends to build BFR near Boca Chica.  They were discussing where their first private launch site will be.  For Musk to bring up BFR in that context and not intend to launch it from Boca Chica, that may not be a lie, but it would be deceiving, which I don't believe is in Musk's character.

Also, if the primary purpose of BFR is to launch MCT, and MCT is a commercial venture as SpaceX suggests, then it would make sense to launch BFR from a commercial spaceport, not a government air force base.  SpaceX has said that in the future, they intend to launch all non U.S. government customers from Boca Chica.

To be clear, none of this rules out BFR being built in other locations as well.  In fact, BFR may be built and launched somewhere else first.  But the discussion in the video shows pretty clearly that SpaceX intends to build and launch BFR from Boca Chica.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Eerie on 03/08/2015 09:12 am
Isn't Boca Chica limited to 12 Falcon 9's a year? Why do we assume it can be changed to some unknown number launches of much larger (and so louder) rocket?
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: dglow on 03/08/2015 09:33 am
Isn't Boca Chica limited to 12 Falcon 9's a year? Why do we assume it can be changed to some unknown number launches of much larger (and so louder) rocket?

Why assume otherwise? Get a foot in the door, build your spaceport, demonstrate to the local and state governments the economic benefits, and – volia! – anything can happen.

FWIW, SpaceX's landing pad at CCAFS is currently restricted to a single core at a time... and SpaceX recently published a video showing all three FH cores landing there. Rules and regs are fluid things.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 03/08/2015 09:33 am
Isn't Boca Chica limited to 12 Falcon 9's a year? Why do we assume it can be changed to some unknown number launches of much larger (and so louder) rocket?

Yes, there would need to be additional FAA approvals, but the first one is usually the hardest. 

As for being loud, the closest thing around is about 5 miles away, except for Boca Chica Village.  As I've said before (http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=35425.msg1317885#msg1317885), Boca Chica Village consists of a few dozen houses, many of which are run down and/or boarded up.  There's only 1 permanent resident in Boca Chica Village.  The houses are dirt cheap.  SpaceX could buy them all in a heartbeat, or just wait for the state to come in and seize it through eminent domain.  In any case, not much there to worry about.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: dglow on 03/08/2015 09:38 am
Part of me kinda hopes that one resident remains... just 'cause. With all that will be going down in the near future, it'll be an exciting place to live. I'd buy a summer home there.  ;)
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 03/08/2015 09:44 am
Part of me kinda hopes that one resident remains... just 'cause. With all that will be going down in the near future, it'll be an exciting place to live. I'd buy a summer home there.  ;)

There was an interview with that guy a while back.  Don't have the link handy, but he seemed to like the idea of SpaceX coming to town.  Rocket launches are exiting.  IIRC, there may have been some concern over construction noise.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: guckyfan on 03/08/2015 10:03 am
To be clear, none of this rules out BFR being built in other locations as well.  In fact, BFR may be built and launched somewhere else first.  But the discussion in the video shows pretty clearly that SpaceX intends to build and launch BFR from Boca Chica.

I did not hear any indication of that in the hearing. There were hopes expressed by a politician to that end, that's all.

The strongest indication of SpaceX plans I am aware of is the name Mars Crossing of the subdivision for their control center.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 03/08/2015 11:15 am
To be clear, none of this rules out BFR being built in other locations as well.  In fact, BFR may be built and launched somewhere else first.  But the discussion in the video shows pretty clearly that SpaceX intends to build and launch BFR from Boca Chica.

I did not hear any indication of that in the hearing. There were hopes expressed by a politician to that end, that's all.

The strongest indication of SpaceX plans I am aware of is the name Mars Crossing of the subdivision for their control center.

Here's a transcript of what Musk said before the Texas state legislature, from around 1:00 to 2:00 in the video:
Quote
Actually you know that's a very important point, and I should have mentioned that, which is the current Falcon 9 rocket is something that can be manufactured in California and road transported.  In fact I set the design diameter and the dimensions of the rocket to be the maximum road transportable object without requiring lifting of power lines and that kind of thing.  So it's roughly 13 feet in diameter and about 140 foot long for the first stage.  And we'll keep doing the Falcon 9 forever in that size. 

But as we go to future rockets that are bigger than that, we would actually do the manufacturing at the launch site, or near the launch site, because otherwise the road transportation logistics become... Essentially you'd either have to put it on a big ship or build it near the launch site.  The logical thing is to build it near the launch site.  So that is something that would occur where ever this launch site occurs.

Again, note that the context of Musk's testimony here is whether or not SpaceX would build their first private launch site in Boca Chica or somewhere else (Virginia, Georgia, Puerto Rico, etc.).  So when Musk says "where ever this launch site occurs", its clear to me that he means where ever their first private launch site occurs. 

Some have speculated that he meant where ever the BFR launch site occurs, which could be at the cape or VAFB, and not at Boca Chica.  But for that to be true, since that wasn't the context of this discussion before the Texas state legislature, that would seem to imply that Musk is being deceptive, which is not in his character.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: symbios on 03/08/2015 11:18 am
In your link video of Musk with the TX house committee. What Musk said was that the BFR assembly facility will be near the launch site, but he didn't say where the launch site will be.

The context of that discussion strongly suggests SpaceX intends to build BFR near Boca Chica.  They were discussing where their first private launch site will be.  For Musk to bring up BFR in that context and not intend to launch it from Boca Chica, that may not be a lie, but it would be deceiving, which I don't believe is in Musk's character.

Also, if the primary purpose of BFR is to launch MCT, and MCT is a commercial venture as SpaceX suggests, then it would make sense to launch BFR from a commercial spaceport, not a government air force base.  SpaceX has said that in the future, they intend to launch all non U.S. government customers from Boca Chica.

To be clear, none of this rules out BFR being built in other locations as well.  In fact, BFR may be built and launched somewhere else first.  But the discussion in the video shows pretty clearly that SpaceX intends to build and launch BFR from Boca Chica.

Mr Musk is very precise in what he is saying. He can exaggerate goals/lead times but he has never to my knowledge been caught saying something factually wrong. It has been debated many times but the conclusion has always been that the way he said things is factually correct.

Texas congress was in this case pressuring him for an answer that he was clearly avoiding. He did not want to deny outright building BFR in Texas so he worded it carefully by saying that it would be built near where it was supposed to be launched. He did not specify where it would be launched.

So I agree with others here, It might be built in Texas for some future reason. But he has not stated it in any way shape of form. What people infer from his statement is up to them.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 03/08/2015 11:31 am
Texas congress was in this case pressuring him for an answer that he was clearly avoiding. He did not want to deny outright building BFR in Texas so he worded it carefully...

That wasn't my impression at all.  Elon was responding to a question about creating more SpaceX manufacturing jobs in Texas, so he starting talking about BFR.

It's true that you can deceive people while being factually correct, but I've never seen Elon do that intentionally.

Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: rokan2003 on 03/08/2015 11:40 am
I don't read it that way at all. In this part of the testimony, Musk was talking about a hypothetical future rocket, and saying that it would be built at the site from where it would be launched. If he meant Boca Chica, I believe he would've come out and said it. Why be vague about it? I think he said it in the way that he did, because no decision has been made. Sure, it could be launched at Boca Chica depending on future developments, but it could also be launched elsewhere. It's a mistake to try and parse 'BFR will launch from Boca Chica' from this testimony.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Nomadd on 03/08/2015 11:44 am
I see a place for $90,000 less than 2 miles from the launch site. I'm thinking of buying it and renting lawnchairs and selling $6 beers to NSF types.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: symbios on 03/08/2015 11:56 am
Sorry Dave, was a several month ago that I watched that hearing. You are right, the pressure to build came after his answer. But could also just be a political statement to the listeners. Never mind, irrelevant.

But I stand by my previous post on the other points. The key phrase "wherever that might be".
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: cro-magnon gramps on 03/08/2015 02:24 pm
We can agree to disagree, and leave it at that.  ;) To be sure, in 3 years or so, it will all be moot, because Mr Musk will either be working on his Major SpaceX Martian Uber Space Port, or come out with where the next generation rocket will be built, tested and launched. Let us dropped this discussion now, so we don't derail the thread.  ;D

   PAX NSF  :)

Gramps
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: cscott on 03/08/2015 06:38 pm
It's also not the case that SpaceX claimed that "all non-government" launches would be from Boca Chica. Boca Chica is for commercial GEO sats only.  There has not yet been any indication that Boca Chica will support crewed flights (just vague hints about Mars), nor any flights to non-GEO destinations.  If they were to occur, launches to a commercial Bigelow station would *not* happen from Boca Chica---at least not anytime in the near future.  The projected com sat constellation would probably also not launch from Boca Chica.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: docmordrid on 03/08/2015 07:10 pm
It's also not the case that SpaceX claimed that "all non-government" launches would be from Boca Chica. Boca Chica is for commercial GEO sats only. There has not yet been any indication that Boca Chica will support crewed flights (just vague hints about Mars), nor any flights to non-GEO destinations.  If they were to occur, launches to a commercial Bigelow station would *not* happen from Boca Chica---at least not anytime in the near future.  The projected com sat constellation would probably also not launch from Boca Chica.

Link... (http://www.texasmonthly.com/daily-post/spacex-plans-send-people-brownsville-mars-order-save-mankind)

Elon Musk, September 2014
Quote
It very well could be the first person to go to another planet could launch from this location,
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Owlon on 03/08/2015 08:23 pm
It seems to me that Boca Chica is definitely a contender for future BFR/MCT/Manned launches (and therefor also the associated factory), but that it isn't a settled matter or they would be talking it up more.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: cscott on 03/08/2015 09:58 pm
Yes, the "it very well could be" quote is making my point exactly.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 03/08/2015 10:32 pm
It seems to me that Boca Chica is definitely a contender for future BFR/MCT/Manned launches (and therefor also the associated factory), but that it isn't a settled matter or they would be talking it up more.

Right now, talking it up more could be detrimental, further scaring people with some huge new untested rocket.  Better to let people get used F9/FH launches there first.  Manage FUD factor.

And as I said before, BFR may be assembled and launched from multiple locations, so it doesn't have to be one or the other.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Lar on 03/08/2015 10:58 pm
I see a place for $90,000 less than 2 miles from the launch site. I'm thinking of buying it and renting lawnchairs and selling $6 beers to NSF types.

Someone on the Facebook SpaceX group just said he has land near the launch and plans to do just that. Not you was it? He started a FB page to gather likes and talk about his plans...
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: BobHk on 03/09/2015 02:23 am
It seems to me that Boca Chica is definitely a contender for future BFR/MCT/Manned launches (and therefor also the associated factory), but that it isn't a settled matter or they would be talking it up more.

Right now, talking it up more could be detrimental, further scaring people with some huge new untested rocket.  Better to let people get used F9/FH launches there first.  Manage FUD factor.

And as I said before, BFR may be assembled and launched from multiple locations, so it doesn't have to be one or the other.

I truly believe the first BFR should launch from Spaceport America...just to see it shatter all the windows in that godawful building:

http://www.fosterandpartners.com/media/1451342/IMG0.jpg (http://www.fosterandpartners.com/media/1451342/IMG0.jpg)
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: MP99 on 03/09/2015 06:56 am
Here's a transcript of what Musk said before the Texas state legislature, from around 1:00 to 2:00 in the video:
Quote
Actually you know that's a very important point, and I should have mentioned that, which is the current Falcon 9 rocket is something that can be manufactured in California and road transported.  In fact I set the design diameter and the dimensions of the rocket to be the maximum road transportable object without requiring lifting of power lines and that kind of thing.  So it's roughly 13 feet in diameter and about 140 foot long for the first stage.  And we'll keep doing the Falcon 9 forever in that size. 

But as we go to future rockets that are bigger than that, we would actually do the manufacturing at the launch site, or near the launch site, because otherwise the road transportation logistics become... Essentially you'd either have to put it on a big ship or build it near the launch site.  The logical thing is to build it near the launch site.  So that is something that would occur where ever this launch site occurs.

"Near" could mean somewhere like Brownsville. Much easier to attract a good skillset - or even just house the workforce required.

Cheers, Martin
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 03/09/2015 10:24 am
"Near" could mean somewhere like Brownsville. Much easier to attract a good skillset - or even just house the workforce required.

Note that Brownsville has a world class seaport (http://www.portofbrownsville.com/), and there is still a lot of undeveloped land there.  Real-estate prices are much lower than average.  Existing rail and highway infrastructure.  International airport nearby.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Lobo on 03/09/2015 09:38 pm
It seems to me that Boca Chica is definitely a contender for future BFR/MCT/Manned launches (and therefor also the associated factory), but that it isn't a settled matter or they would be talking it up more.

Right now, talking it up more could be detrimental, further scaring people with some huge new untested rocket.  Better to let people get used F9/FH launches there first.  Manage FUD factor.

And as I said before, BFR may be assembled and launched from multiple locations, so it doesn't have to be one or the other.

I didn't watch the youtube video (from here at work), but I will when I get a chance.  Sounds like Musk hinted that BFR could be built and launched from Boca Chica, but not definitive.  Is that a fair assessment?
Could be dropping that hint to get more favor from the legislature about more potential future jobs.  Not necessarily deceptive, but could just be that Boca Chica is one of several locations in consideration.  It could very well launch from there, and it could very well not, depending on how events unfold over the next few years.

Here's a few interesting nuggest.

1)  If BFR were to push SLS into cancellation shortly after it starts flying (before the additional investments of composite boosters and new RS-25E's are needed to be made) that would be Pad 39B as well as other KSC facilities would suddenly have to rocket to launch and likely be available for Rent.  That's a very tempting location for BFR obviously, if the terms can be made to SpaceX's liking.  It would centralize their operations quite a bit along with 39A and LC-40.  So there's a certain appeal.  But that really only works if SLS looks to be cancelled.  If it hangs on for the long haul, SpaceX may look for some place else as they'll want to move along the program and not wait around for SLS to possibly be cancelled later.  The next few years will probably be more telling for SLS's fate.  Particularly the next Presidentail election with the new NASA ADministrator that will most likely come.

2)  SLC-6 at VAFB.  Jim seems to think it pretty likely NGLV will use Atlas pads to launch, not Delta.  ULA has already says they'll be retiring D4M in a few years, and only maintain D4H until the USAF says they no longer need it.  That could possibly happen once FH is certified on both costs for USAF/DoD launches.  Delta flights are fairly infrequent, and even more so from VAFB, so if SLC-6 is not the new West Coast home for NGLV, they'll be looking to cut it loose as soon as it's not needed I'd assume, to cut costs.  Which would mean it'd be available for lease I suspect?  It was built to be a HLV pad, and it's in a great remote loation where SpaceX could operate with pretty good privacy and security.
I'm unsure about trajectories to Mars from there as well as potentially getting boosters back to the landing site, but it's certainly have many other merits to launch a BFR. 

3)  Boca Chica.  Certainly has appeal for reasons discussed.  Would have more freedom than CCAFS or VAFB.  However, if BFR looks like it might push SLS to cancellation, and NASA would be looking to move their BLEO HSF to BFR, they'd probably much prefer that it be launching from KSC, so again, we may be looking back at KSC. 
Also, perhaps someone could comment more on this, but that area at Boca Chica looks pretty much like a lowland marsh/swamp.  BFR facilites would be an order of magnitude more than an F9/FH facility.  Especially if they want to build it there too.  And especially if they want to be launching both F9/FH -and-BFR from the same location.  That's going to be a very large complex comparatively.  That may require repurposing a lot of coastal area, which could be a problem for environmental concerns.  Not to menion a large complex like that being much harder to "hurricane and flood" proof, as that is an area fairly prone to hurricanes and flooding.
Conversely, SLC-6 is on solid, rocky terrain not prone to floods and hurricanes.  And KSC doesn't seem to have had too much problem in that respect.  So there's that.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Nomadd on 03/10/2015 10:15 am
I see a place for $90,000 less than 2 miles from the launch site. I'm thinking of buying it and renting lawnchairs and selling $6 beers to NSF types.

Someone on the Facebook SpaceX group just said he has land near the launch and plans to do just that. Not you was it? He started a FB page to gather likes and talk about his plans...
Not me, but I just retired, am sitting on a large cash pile from a home sale and have been known to do way dumber things than that. I should be wandering through the area next month and intend to have a look.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 03/10/2015 10:52 am
I didn't watch the youtube video (from here at work), but I will when I get a chance.
Yes, please do.  I'm interested in your take.  BFR is discussed toward the beginning, within the first 2 minutes.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3_iu75TFgX8&feature=player_embedded

It could very well launch from there, and it could very well not, depending on how events unfold over the next few years.
BFR could easily launch from multiple locations.  That's one of the reasons I mentioned the capabilities of the Brownsville seaport above.  It would be possible to build BFR there and ship it to other locations.

From my point of view, Brownsville is somewhat unique.  Average income is one of the lowest in the U.S., but they have a world class seaport that currently handles aircraft carriers and large oil drilling rigs, plus an international airport just 5 miles from there, and a state university campus with a budding space engineering department, plus local machinists from shops that currently make car parts, and real estate is dirt-cheap.  All of the right ingredients.  There's also a ULA production facility just 15 miles away in Harlingen.

1)  Pad 39B as well as other KSC facilities
2)  SLC-6 at VAFB.
3)  Boca Chica.
The biggest problem with the cape and VAFB: They're military bases with a lot of extra red tape for commercial customers.  The following article spells this out very clearly:
http://spaceflightnow.com/falcon9/012/140906capecanaveral/#.VP7Pz2eBGoA

If BFR is primarily to launch MCT, and MCT is primarily a commercial venture, as SpaceX suggests, then launching from an Air Force base would be unnecessarily restrictive.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: gommtu on 03/10/2015 11:00 am

1) KSC ...
2) VAFB...
3) Boca Chica.  Certainly has appeal for reasons discussed....

Why not both Boca Chica and KSC? Musk and Shotwell have said on numerous occasions they play to have many launch sites. At the point where they are ready to launch BFR, I don't think they will lack the cap ex or personnel to develop two launch sites capable of handling BFR. Just like today they have 2 sites for F9, and a 3rd and 4th on the way for FH. Though, they may not come out and directly say so in order to maximize incentives.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: BobHk on 03/11/2015 01:50 am
As it is the FH will break windows in Mexico (i'm being a little flippant there but the EIS is pretty clear about FH dB rating at range - its high)...a BFR will do much more.  Boca Chica may be the only place, with SpaceX flag planted so far, for it to launch from to mitigate damage to surrounding facilities.  Spaceport America, if the state sells it (http://www.gizmag.com/spaceport-america-hits-snags/36200/ (http://www.gizmag.com/spaceport-america-hits-snags/36200/)), might be a good bet but its a bit further north. 
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 03/11/2015 05:16 am
As it is the FH will break windows in Mexico (i'm being a little flippant there but the EIS is pretty clear about FH dB rating at range - its high)...a BFR will do much more.
On the Mexican side, there's essentially nothing within a 20-mile radius.  Look at the map. (https://www.google.com/maps/@25.8909426,-97.2815631,30686m/data=!3m1!1e3)

On the American side, there's nothing within a 5-mile radius, except for Boca Chica Village (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boca_Chica_Village).  As I've said before (http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=35425.msg1317885#msg1317885), Boca Chica Village consists of a few dozen houses, many of which are run down and/or boarded up.  There's only 1 permanent resident in Boca Chica Village.  The houses are dirt cheap.  SpaceX could buy them all in a heartbeat, or just wait for the state to come in and seize it through eminent domain.  The EIS did its due-diligence for Boca Chica Village, but in reality there's not much there to worry about. 

Spaceport America, if the state sells it (http://www.gizmag.com/spaceport-america-hits-snags/36200/ (http://www.gizmag.com/spaceport-america-hits-snags/36200/)), might be a good bet but its a bit further north.
SpaceX said they won't launch orbital flights from Spaceport America due to its land-locked location.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Lars-J on 03/11/2015 05:40 am
Spaceport America, if the state sells it (http://www.gizmag.com/spaceport-america-hits-snags/36200/ (http://www.gizmag.com/spaceport-america-hits-snags/36200/)), might be a good bet but its a bit further north.
SpaceX said they won't launch orbital flights from Spaceport America due to its land-locked location.

Yep, there is no chance of any orbital flights from there until a reliable fully reusable system exists.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: guckyfan on 03/11/2015 05:59 am

Yep, there is no chance of any orbital flights from there until a reliable fully reusable system exists.

And flies for a few decades and a few 1000 flights before there is a non zero chance for getting permission.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Lars-J on 03/11/2015 06:07 am

Yep, there is no chance of any orbital flights from there until a reliable fully reusable system exists.

And flies for a few decades and a few 1000 flights before there is a non zero chance for getting permission.

I did say reliable. But I think you exaggerate about how long it would take, I'm not sure why people think that reusable launch vehicles should be held to such an astronomically higher standard than aircraft before they are allowed to overfly populated areas.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: guckyfan on 03/11/2015 06:11 am
I did say reliable. But I think you exaggerate about how long it would take, I'm not sure why people think that reusable launch vehicles should be held to such an astronomically higher standard than aircraft before they are allowed to overfly populated areas.

How would reliable be proven to even the most citical? By no means I think SHOULD, but I am afraid they will. "Rockets are dangeous" is deeply engrained in peoples mindset.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 03/11/2015 07:12 am
"Rockets are dangeous" is deeply engrained in peoples mindset.

And with good reason.  We only need to look a few months back (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cygnus_CRS_Orb-3) to see a rocket exploding on the launch pad.

The average Joe won't differentiate between rocket manufacturers.  Until the industry as a whole has proven reliable over a decade or two, orbital launches will be limited to isolated coastal launch sites, like Boca Chica. 

(http://www.fbnstatic.com/static/managed/img/fb2/markets/orbital_sciences_nasa_rocket_explosion.jpg)
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 03/11/2015 07:33 am
RFP - Fiber Optic Infrastructure Project
http://www.telecomintel.com/bid-opportunities/2015/03/10/6167953-RFP--Fiber-Optic-Infrastructure-Project-.html

Looks like they're running fiber optic cable from the University of Texas Brownsville campus to the Boca Chica launch complex, probably for the Stargate tracking center (http://www.utb.edu/stargate/Pages/STARGATE.aspx).
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: BobHk on 03/11/2015 12:31 pm
As I've said before any damage to that monstrosity of a replica of Branson's iris is okay with me so launch from SA all you want Musk.

Its a dream, stop treading on my dreams.

So on to the EIS for a 9 or so Raptor engine rocket...do any of you realistically think Van or KSC/Cape would be a viable launch platform considering whats already close to it versus Boca Chica?  No one seems to have addressed that part of my statement.   Falcon9 full tests in McGregor are already noticeable at 40 miles (from a recent case)...
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Maestro19 on 03/12/2015 07:09 am
The average Joe won't differentiate between rocket manufacturers.

Nor should they.. My hat's off to Spacex for the launch history they set with F9, however I still see the occasional sign of nervousness. In truth, someday it could once again be their (or anyone's) turn to have a bad day.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 03/13/2015 11:20 am
More on fiber optic run to Boca Chica

Fiber optics to link SpaceX, UT
http://www.brownsvilleherald.com/news/valley/article_8a56f706-c930-11e4-aaf2-f7515fbb1749.html
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 03/14/2015 01:51 pm
Paragon D&E acquires Texas tool shop to address demand in southern states
http://www.bedc.com/news/paragon-de-acquires-texas-tool-shop-address-demand-southern-states

Quote
Capitalizing on an expanding aerospace sector in the region may provide the catalyst for that growth, Samrick said. In early August, the California-based private space transport company Space Exploration Corp. (SpaceX) announced Brownsville as the site for its new spaceport, or launching facility. With Paragon’s previous aerospace engineering experience and the proximity of its new facility, the company hopes to work alongside SpaceX as the project develops, Samrick said. 

Paragon previously worked with SpaceX on bolt systems for its rocket segments from late 2012 through 2013 and is currently involved in several development projects, Samrick said. The company is also working with SpaceX CEO Elon Musk’s other firm, Tesla Motors Inc., on its all-electric Model X, an SUV that’s set to launch in 2015.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Elmar Moelzer on 03/14/2015 10:29 pm
"Rockets are dangeous" is deeply engrained in peoples mindset.

And with good reason.  We only need to look a few months back (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cygnus_CRS_Orb-3) to see a rocket exploding on the launch pad.

The average Joe won't differentiate between rocket manufacturers.  Until the industry as a whole has proven reliable over a decade or two, orbital launches will be limited to isolated coastal launch sites, like Boca Chica. 

(http://www.fbnstatic.com/static/managed/img/fb2/markets/orbital_sciences_nasa_rocket_explosion.jpg)
And that explosion, while it looked quite impressive, did rather little damage to the surrounding infrastructure. IIRC, even the damage to the launch pad was only moderate.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 03/15/2015 12:14 am
And that explosion, while it looked quite impressive, did rather little damage to the surrounding infrastructure. IIRC, even the damage to the launch pad was only moderate.
You're being rational.  Public fear is often irrational, but still very real.

In any case, until we have decades without these types of images, we're not going to see orbital launches from land-locked sites like Spaceport America.  People in Austin and Dallas don't want explosions like that above their heads. Orbital flight paths will need to start over the ocean for the foreseeable future.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 03/15/2015 12:16 am
Purely speculation:

Why would SpaceX want to build BFR in Brownsville?

1) Cost of living is one of the lowest in the nation (http://247wallst.com/special-report/2013/10/24/americas-the-richest-and-poorest-cities/).  That means inexpensive labor for locally hired machinists, construction workers, secretaries, security guards, electricians, janitors, etc., etc.  Lowering costs is a major goal for SpaceX.  Affordable labor aligns with that goal.  My guess: Of the 100 or so people working at a BFR assembly plant, perhaps only 12 would need to be imported.  The rest could be local hires.  Note: This assumes Raptor engines, avionics, etc. are still manufactured in Hawthorne.  Brownsville would just do the large tank manufacturing and core assembly.

2) World class seaport (http://www.portofbrownsville.com/), capable of handling huge ships (aircraft carriers (http://www.valleycentral.com/news/story.aspx?id=1172745), oil drilling rigs, etc.).  Setting up a manufacturing facility along this port would easily allow BFR to be shipped to the KSC, VAFB, etc.   There's also a new toll road (http://www.valleycentral.com/news/story.aspx?list=195030&id=1169172#.VO2iHWeBGoA) specifically built to handle freight to/from the seaport, bypassing Brownsville's city center.

3) An international airport (http://www.flybrownsville.com/) for getting people to/from Brownsville, and for air freight.  Note that this airport is just 5 miles from the seaport.  Very convenient.  They're also going to extend the main runway (http://www.kveo.com/news/brownsville-airport-undergo-renovations-coming-months) in order to handle large air freight.

4) A state university campus (http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&sqi=2&ved=0CC0QFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.utb.edu%2F&ei=RYYEVcfCH4umgwSHrYCYCA&usg=AFQjCNHApoYzBq6fuBmyTPeNr5EV0wQjvQ&bvm=bv.88198703,d.eXY) with a budding space engineering department.  Note that SpaceX and UT Brownsville are already working together on the STARGATE tracking center (http://www.utb.edu/stargate/Pages/STARGATE.aspx), just 2 miles from the launch site.  Lots of future synergy also possible there.

5) Some local talent.  The area now has some local aerospace machine shops (http://www.bedc.com/news/paragon-de-acquires-texas-tool-shop-address-demand-southern-states), and ULA also has a manufacturing plant (http://www.valleymorningstar.com/news/local_news/article_285c0712-3c38-11e2-9949-0019bb30f31a.html) just 15 miles away in Harlingen.

6) Available land (https://www.google.com/maps/@25.9458812,-97.3953836,16117m/data=!3m1!1e3) is plentiful and cheap.  Lots of room to expand.  Low property taxes.  Low taxes in general.

7) Clean slate.  Many have played down Brownsville as not having enough existing infrastructure for an aerospace manufacturing plant, but for SpaceX, this may actually be a perceived advantage.  For cost and schedule reasons, SpaceX has often steered clear of established aerospace companies.

To be clear, Brownsville wouldn't have been my first thought for building rockets, but after digging deeper, it seems to have all the right ingredients.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Robotbeat on 03/15/2015 01:30 am
Low cost of living often (but not always) means that not a lot of people actually want to live there. Compared to LA or Denver or Seattle or something, Brownsville doesn't really have that much appeal for a 20-something engineer.

...worlds better than McGregor, though.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: dorkmo on 03/15/2015 03:20 am
LA is so great, its like the melting pots of melting pots, all cultures and all levels of socioeconomics. and its like manifest destiny hit the coast and decided to go up. i like to think spacex couldnt have happened without LA.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Elvis in Space on 03/15/2015 04:15 am
Ultimately they will decide to build BFR where it fits. Anyone who really wants to work on it isn't going to care if it's in Hell's Kitchen.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: llanitedave on 03/15/2015 04:30 am
Low cost of living often (but not always) means that not a lot of people actually want to live there. Compared to LA or Denver or Seattle or something, Brownsville doesn't really have that much appeal for a 20-something engineer.

...worlds better than McGregor, though.


Brownsville is actually a very nice area.  Not just low costs, but great climate.  Water is a challenge.  Semi-tropical temperatures, a vibrant border community, great beaches nearby.  All that's been lacking is jobs.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Coastal Ron on 03/15/2015 04:58 am
Ultimately they will decide to build BFR where it fits. Anyone who really wants to work on it isn't going to care if it's in Hell's Kitchen.

The BFR and it's associated support infrastructure is going to require a sustainable workforce, which means that wherever they locate there better be a good quality of life (i.e. schools, shopping, etc.).  Because at a certain point in your career your family makes the career decisions, not just the applicant.  And people within SpaceX are going to be participating in making the decisions too since some of them will have to relocate there to set up and run the operations.

I have no idea about the quality of life in Brownsville, I'm just saying that wherever they do locate the BFR ecosystem that it will probably have access to a decent quality of life for families.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: deruch on 03/15/2015 05:25 am
http://www.valleymorningstar.com/premium/article_71cd85c0-cab5-11e4-817a-c3b9c142f45a.html

SpaceX Prepping For Construction
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 03/15/2015 09:45 am
Brownsville doesn't really have that much appeal for a 20-something engineer.
Right. 

Most of the engineering jobs will continue to be in Hawthorne.  A BFR plant would be mostly manufacturing jobs.  They'll need a few manufacturing engineers in a BFR plant, but I doubt they'll want 20-somethings in those positions.

And SpaceX will continue to manufacture BFR engines in Hawthorne. Same for avionics, and anything else that can be road transported.  Wherever possible, SpaceX likes to have their development engineers physically close to manufacturing, but for the large BFR core structures that's not really possible.

So they'll need to fly their development engineers into the BFR assembly plant(s) periodically.  That's one of the reasons having an international airport (http://www.flybrownsville.com/) just 5 miles away is important.

Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Jakusb on 03/15/2015 12:19 pm

Brownsville doesn't really have that much appeal for a 20-something engineer.
Right. 

Most of the engineering jobs will continue to be in Hawthorne.  A BFR plant would be mostly manufacturing jobs.  They'll need a few manufacturing engineers in a BFR plant, but I doubt they'll want 20-somethings in those positions.

And SpaceX will continue to manufacture BFR engines in Hawthorne. Same for avionics, and anything else that can be road transported.  Wherever possible, SpaceX likes to have their development engineers physically close to manufacturing, but for the large BFR core structures that's not really possible.

So they'll need to fly their development engineers into the BFR assembly plant(s) periodically.  That's one of the reasons having an international airport (http://www.flybrownsville.com/) just 5 miles away is important.

I guess a Tech University and a closely associated Space Port with potential Space graded components construction would create a very attractive combination for any wannabe space industry engineer or construction worker. Wouldn't it?
I think the right people will go to SpaceX almost regardless where their operation will be located. Especially at the target age 20-30, who do have not yet settled with a family and kids.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Elvis in Space on 03/15/2015 12:44 pm
Ultimately they will decide to build BFR where it fits. Anyone who really wants to work on it isn't going to care if it's in Hell's Kitchen.

The BFR and it's associated support infrastructure is going to require a sustainable workforce, which means that wherever they locate there better be a good quality of life (i.e. schools, shopping, etc.).  Because at a certain point in your career your family makes the career decisions, not just the applicant.  And people within SpaceX are going to be participating in making the decisions too since some of them will have to relocate there to set up and run the operations.

I have no idea about the quality of life in Brownsville, I'm just saying that wherever they do locate the BFR ecosystem that it will probably have access to a decent quality of life for families.

I understand that but there certainly wasn't much in central Florida in the early 60's, or northern Alabama, or...I'm sure you get my meaning. Sort of a "If you build it they will come" situation. I think we fret too much on such issues.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: spacenut on 03/15/2015 12:45 pm
I disagree about not having appeal for 20 somethings.  San Padre Island a little to the north, is a resort area.  Gulf coast beaches are almost pure white sand from Texas to Florida.  Young people like the beach areas.  Once SpaceX gets up and running, believe me, people will come.  Doesn't have to be a big city for people to "have fun".  I know, I live in a Gulf coast state and have grown kids.  All along the Florida panhandle to New Orleans is nothing but resorts and hotels.  Gulf deep sea fishing is excellent.  Texas coast, from what I have read, is the same.  College kids all across the south flock to the beaches during summer and spring breaks. 
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 03/15/2015 01:40 pm
I think its a bit strange that we're focused on SpaceX relocating young people to Brownsville.

As I said before, if they assemble BFR there, I'm guessing around 90% will be local hires. Plenty of machinists already living in Brownsville area, and local labor rates are much better than bringing in people from outside.  Same for construction workers, electricians, secretaries, security guards, etc.

For the relatively few people that they bring in from elsewhere, they will probably lead and train the local hires, so these would be people with more experience.

Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Kabloona on 03/15/2015 02:07 pm

Brownsville doesn't really have that much appeal for a 20-something engineer.
Right. 

Most of the engineering jobs will continue to be in Hawthorne.  A BFR plant would be mostly manufacturing jobs.  They'll need a few manufacturing engineers in a BFR plant, but I doubt they'll want 20-somethings in those positions.

And SpaceX will continue to manufacture BFR engines in Hawthorne. Same for avionics, and anything else that can be road transported.  Wherever possible, SpaceX likes to have their development engineers physically close to manufacturing, but for the large BFR core structures that's not really possible.

So they'll need to fly their development engineers into the BFR assembly plant(s) periodically.  That's one of the reasons having an international airport (http://www.flybrownsville.com/) just 5 miles away is important.

I guess a Tech University and a closely associated Space Port with potential Space graded components construction would create a very attractive combination for any wannabe space industry engineer or construction worker. Wouldn't it?
I think the right people will go to SpaceX almost regardless where their operation will be located. Especially at the target age 20-30, who do have not yet settled with a family and kids.

There is also reportedly a big demand for welders along the Gulf coast, and many young people are learning the trade and taking advantage of good-paying welding jobs in that area.

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/03/11/business/economy/as-demand-for-welders-resurges-community-colleges-offer-classes.html?_r=0
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: spacenut on 03/15/2015 03:40 pm
Yes, I know an underwater welder who works about half a year on offshore rigs.  He makes over $100,000 a year.  He took welding, learned to pipe weld, then took scuba diving.  Never went to college.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Coastal Ron on 03/15/2015 05:36 pm
I understand that but there certainly wasn't much in central Florida in the early 60's, or northern Alabama, or...I'm sure you get my meaning. Sort of a "If you build it they will come" situation. I think we fret too much on such issues.

We've come a long way baby!

The 60's were generations ago, and besides a more enlightened family situation where spouses are treated more like equals, companies have also become more enlightened and educated about how to attract and keep employees.  Remember highly competent employees have choices, so you're competing against all their choices, not just whether Location X is a nice place to live or raise a family.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Elvis in Space on 03/15/2015 09:43 pm
I understand that but there certainly wasn't much in central Florida in the early 60's, or northern Alabama, or...I'm sure you get my meaning. Sort of a "If you build it they will come" situation. I think we fret too much on such issues.

We've come a long way baby!

The 60's were generations ago, and besides a more enlightened family situation where spouses are treated more like equals, companies have also become more enlightened and educated about how to attract and keep employees.  Remember highly competent employees have choices, so you're competing against all their choices, not just whether Location X is a nice place to live or raise a family.

I'm not disagreeing with you. Get back to me in five years and I bet the area looks a lot different. In ten years the changes may appear way out of proportion to the impact of a single launch pad. Where I live was nowhere and in that amount of time it became the place everyone wants to be. In a way I feel sorry for the natives but I'm willing to bet something similar happens in the Brownsville area by the time we're getting real about the BFR.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Beittil on 03/16/2015 08:06 am
Yes, I know an underwater welder who works about half a year on offshore rigs.  He makes over $100,000 a year.  He took welding, learned to pipe weld, then took scuba diving.  Never went to college.
Slightly off topic of course, but it is no surprise that he makes such figures considering he has a rather dangerous job :)
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Lobo on 03/16/2015 05:28 pm
Brownsville doesn't really have that much appeal for a 20-something engineer.
Right. 

Most of the engineering jobs will continue to be in Hawthorne.  A BFR plant would be mostly manufacturing jobs.  They'll need a few manufacturing engineers in a BFR plant, but I doubt they'll want 20-somethings in those positions.

And SpaceX will continue to manufacture BFR engines in Hawthorne. Same for avionics, and anything else that can be road transported.  Wherever possible, SpaceX likes to have their development engineers physically close to manufacturing, but for the large BFR core structures that's not really possible.

So they'll need to fly their development engineers into the BFR assembly plant(s) periodically.  That's one of the reasons having an international airport (http://www.flybrownsville.com/) just 5 miles away is important.

I'm still unsure about how they'd do a BFR in Brownsville.  If they are built in Brownsville, how to they get them to a pad at Boca Chica?   I'd think they are too big for a helicopter.  You ca't barge them because while there's a seaport at Brownsville, there's none on the beach there at Boca Chica.  Can a 10m wide or larger core be driven from downtown Brownsville out to Boca Chica?  Will powerlines and such need to be removed for that, and all the roads closed from whever the factory is out to Boca Chica?
And actually Elon said they want to manufacture right on the launch facility so they don't need to transport these big cores anywhere.   And the Boca Chica land area they have seems way too small for anything other than the current F9/FH plan.  The area around it looks low, swampy/marshy, and very vulnerable to storm surges.  To have a BFR pad and production facilities there, they'll need a far large plot of land right there.  Is such additional land available for purchase?  What about environmental considerations for such a complex?  Or an LV that at the very least will be double what FH is, if not more.
Not to mention I'd think they'd still want F9/FH operations still there too, which means the complex needs to be even larger.

Can someone address all of that?  To my limited knowledge about such things, that would appear fairly problematic.   Compared to VAFB or CCAFS where there's dock facilities, available land for production faciliteis, areas already zoned for very large rocket launches, etc.  As well as population centers in the area so attracting professionals shouldn't be any more difficult than Brownsville.

FH/F9 makes more sense in Browsnville to me, as planned.  That would still be a very busy launch facility packing with bread and butter launches, but there's no issue with transportation as all the stages and payloads can get ther via road easily enough.  And while it's getting blowback by environmentalists, the EIS doesn't seem to be causing too many -real- concerns.   The amount of land currently slated isn't all that large and shouldn't be -too- hard to protect against flooding and hurricanes.

Although, I suppose with the land they are buying around Boca Chica Village, maybe they'd put the factory there, and then build up the road from there to the pad, paid to bury any power lines and remove any trees/obstructions that run along the road (if any do) and use those multi-wheeled transporters to ferry the cores from the factory to the pad facility along the road.  I could see that working perhaps.  That road would be easy to close when they are transporting cores.  The work force lives in Brownsville and drives out to Boca Chica Village for work.  The production facility doesn't need to actually be on the port.  Hawthone isn't on a dock after all.  The raw materials, engines, components, etc.  get trucked to the plant at Boca Chica Village, and turned into cores and assembled.  Then the cores are driven to a big HIF at the pad where they are integrated and the payload installed. 
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: The Amazing Catstronaut on 03/16/2015 05:37 pm
<<See above>>

Good answer and something I agree with, but how would you transport the MTC down there for missions that are going to require it? It's the most sophisticated element of the BFR puzzle and something that seems a wee bit beyond assembling at Boca, unless they're going to put a massive manufacturing facility there.

I reckon the MTCs are going to come out of Hawthorne. Slight catch with that reckoning; going off what we're estimating, it's going to be as wide as the core and very, very long (not to mention heavy and probably delicate to some degree, along with being subject to sterilisation, all that fun stuff). How on earth do you move that effectively, get it all the way over to the launch site, and then integrate it with the stack?  Seems like a logistical hell.  :o

I'm sure they'll figure it out though.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: spacenut on 03/16/2015 05:57 pm
There is a deep water shipping canal just north of Boca Chica Village going to Brownsville.  It would not be hard to build the BFR in Brownsville alongside this canal, ship it to Boca Chica via barge to south bay coming off this canal.  Then transported to the launch site whatever way they see fit.  Probably special trucking and wide equipment.  They will have to build a large flame trench and launch tower that could possibly handle the Falcon series as well.  They could also lay a dual rail line from the barge landing to the launch pad which is only about a one mile or a little more. 
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Zed_Noir on 03/16/2015 06:02 pm
<<See above>>

Good answer and something I agree with, but how would you transport the MTC down there for missions that are going to require it? It's the most sophisticated element of the BFR puzzle and something that seems a wee bit beyond assembling at Boca, unless they're going to put a massive manufacturing facility there.

I reckon the MTCs are going to come out of Hawthorne. Slight catch with that reckoning; going off what we're estimating, it's going to be as wide as the core and very, very long (not to mention heavy and probably delicate to some degree, along with being subject to sterilisation, all that fun stuff). How on earth do you move that effectively, get it all the way over to the launch site, and then integrate it with the stack?  Seems like a logistical hell.  :o

I'm sure they'll figure it out though.

I think you meant the MCT, not MTC.

If I understand it correctly. The MCT will be assemble next to the BFR at where ever they located the BFR factory. Presuming the BFR and MCT have similar external diameters.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Lars-J on 03/16/2015 06:09 pm
Driving a massive MCT/BFR stage from a Brownsville port/factory out to the pad won't be a big issue. Spacex will be practically by themselves and can modify the road to handle the transport. Power lines are easily moved under the road, and the road can be widened. Not an issue at all.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Lobo on 03/16/2015 06:12 pm
<<See above>>

Good answer and something I agree with, but how would you transport the MTC down there for missions that are going to require it? It's the most sophisticated element of the BFR puzzle and something that seems a wee bit beyond assembling at Boca, unless they're going to put a massive manufacturing facility there.

I reckon the MTCs are going to come out of Hawthorne. Slight catch with that reckoning; going off what we're estimating, it's going to be as wide as the core and very, very long (not to mention heavy and probably delicate to some degree, along with being subject to sterilisation, all that fun stuff). How on earth do you move that effectively, get it all the way over to the launch site, and then integrate it with the stack?  Seems like a logistical hell.  :o

I'm sure they'll figure it out though.

That's a good question.  Spacenut might be on to something with having a barge dock along the shipping canal in the area of Boca Chica Village.  They could offload an MCT that is barged in that way, and then have specialy heavy transportation to move it to a HIF.  But then again, where will MCT be built?  Not Hawthorne.  Now way to transport it out of there.  At least not whole.  It could be built in Brownsville as Spacenut said and barged out to a new dock facility new Boca Chica Village.  Same with cores.  That would also allow them to be barged to a 2nd BFR/MCT launch location if there ever actually were more than two launch locations. 
Or, if not, they could simply put the manufacturing facility out by Boca Chica village, build BFR stages and MCT itself there, and then no need to mess around with barges and docks at all for the finished product.  A dock by Boca Chica Village could still be used to bring in large components and raw materials that might be cheaper to ship than haul over the road.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Zed_Noir on 03/16/2015 06:15 pm
There is a deep water shipping canal just north of Boca Chica Village going to Brownsville.  It would not be hard to build the BFR in Brownsville alongside this canal, ship it to Boca Chica via barge to south bay coming off this canal.  Then transported to the launch site whatever way they see fit.  Probably special trucking and wide equipment.  They will have to build a large flame trench and launch tower that could possibly handle the Falcon series as well.  They could also lay a dual rail line from the barge landing to the launch pad which is only about a one mile or a little more.

Will be easier to just load the BFR stack on a floating launch platform from the BFR factory pier and launch it offshore. Minimum new land infrastructure require. Of course you have to build a few large maritime vessels.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: spacenut on 03/16/2015 06:21 pm
You are right, barge launching could be done, even out of the calm bay area and not offshore.  They might opt for a short wide BFR instead of the long and skinny like Falcon is.  Say 12m wide or something like that.  Barge could be twin hull so the rocket exhaust would go down to the water.  Of course we are all speculating. 
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: cdleonard on 03/16/2015 06:39 pm
I'm still unsure about how they'd do a BFR in Brownsville.  If they are built in Brownsville, how to they get them to a pad at Boca Chica?   I'd think they are too big for a helicopter.  You ca't barge them because while there's a seaport at Brownsville, there's none on the beach there at Boca Chica.  Can a 10m wide or larger core be driven from downtown Brownsville out to Boca Chica?  Will powerlines and such need to be removed for that, and all the roads closed from whever the factory is out to Boca Chica?

Brownsville is only ~25 km from Boca Chica. They could just build they own private infrastructure linking the factory directly to the launch paid, perhaps with a hangar along the way. The KSC crawlerway (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crawlerway) between the VAB and LC-39A/B is several kilometers long so this would not be unprecedented. I think linking the factory and launch pad this way is the entire point of building them close to each other.

Maybe somebody should watch for SpaceX buying lots of land to the east of brownsville?
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Mongo62 on 03/16/2015 07:02 pm
As far as the BFR launch complex itself, I expect that it would be located well offshore at the end of a causeway heading out into the Gulf. It looks like the water is quite shallow to a great distance from the current shoreline.

A launch from 10 km offshore should be a lot more acceptable from a safety and noise mitigation perspective. How much would 10 km of causeway (with propellant pipelines?) and a decent BFR-sized launch/landing  complex cost?
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: meekGee on 03/16/2015 08:10 pm
When people talk about "build it in Brownsville" because there's support infrastructure and available skilled labor, then for this context, building the factory in Boca Chica is exactly the same as building it in Brownsville.

It's only 10-15 miles away.

If (for the sake of argument) the launch pad was in FL and the factory in Boca Chica, then everyone would be saying the rocket was build "right outside Brownsville"...

That said, if you place the factory near the border patrol checkpoint (on the "US" side) then it's really simple to drive the stage down the road (meaning the cost of modifications is low), and you're already half way to the center of town.

Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: spacenut on 03/16/2015 08:16 pm
It wouldn't really have to be that far offshore, a few 100 meters. The water would cut the sound.  No flame trench to build, just a bridge type structure to handle the weight of a rocket.  High rise condos are built right on the beaches by driving piles deep for the foundation.  Same could be done for the rocket ramp and launch pad.  Most high rise condos can resist hurricanes.  Bottom floors are usually the swimming pool and exercise facilities.  Water from a storm surge just washes right through them.  Second floors are usually where they begin occupancy and the offices.  Cape Kennedy has survived through hurricanes.  Most damage was one time metal siding pealed off the VAB. 

Where ever the factory is built, it needs to be on higher ground to avoid loosing the facility to a storm surge.  Roads, ramps, bridge structures, and launch pad should be not only higher, but at least CAT 5 hurricane proof.  No need to have to rebuild, just clean up.  New Orleans survived the hurricane, but not the broken levee from all the flooding afterwards since it was mostly below sea level. 

Hope the BFR is 10-12m wide and 200 tons to LEO. 
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: BobHk on 03/16/2015 08:42 pm
Dogleg Park LLC (nonclassifiable, 1 ROCKET RD, HAWTHORNE, CA) and The Flats at Mars Crossing LLC

keep tabs on these companies as well as SpaceX to get an idea of total land owned and leased by SpaceX in the area.

from previous reports a 6.5 acre area will be used for a solar panel field through Dogleg Park LLC
http://www.slashgear.com/spacex-launch-facility-goes-green-will-have-solar-panel-field-07340269/

I've been looking through tax assessments and public information for any tidbits on purchases, back at you if I find any.  or any new 'companies' making purchases.

Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 03/16/2015 08:56 pm
I'm still unsure about how they'd do a BFR in Brownsville.  If they are built in Brownsville, how to they get them to a pad at Boca Chica?   I'd think they are too big for a helicopter.  You can't barge them because while there's a seaport at Brownsville, there's none on the beach there at Boca Chica.  Can a 10m wide or larger core be driven from downtown Brownsville out to Boca Chica?  Will power lines and such need to be removed for that, and all the roads closed from whever the factory is out to Boca Chica?
One solution would be to build a simple wooden pier on Boca Chica beach, and roll BFR from a large ship onto that.  Remember that while BFR cores are big, they're relatively light until fueled, so you wouldn't need a heavy weight pier.  When not being used for launches, the pier would be open to the public.  Lots of public beaches have piers.  People like them.

Another possibility would be to drive BFR to the launch site.  They would probably need to raise some power lines for this, but not many.  Much of the land along the Brownsville seaport is well east of Brownsville, with not much around.  Look at the map:
https://www.google.com/maps/@25.9458812,-97.3953836,16117m/data=!3m1!1e3

And actually Elon said they want to manufacture right on the launch facility...
Not quite.  Elon has said they will probably build it at or near the launch site.  Elon has also mentioned transporting BFR by ship.

Not to mention I'd think they'd still want F9/FH operations still there too, which means the complex needs to be even larger.
As shown here:
http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=35425.msg1320233#msg1320233

There is a deep water shipping canal just north of Boca Chica Village going to Brownsville.  It would not be hard to build the BFR in Brownsville alongside this canal, ship it to Boca Chica via barge to south bay coming off this canal.
I thought of that previously, but someone else reminded me that the south bay is extremely shallow.  Dredging isn't cheap.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 03/16/2015 08:59 pm
Dogleg Park LLC (nonclassifiable, 1 ROCKET RD, HAWTHORNE, CA) and The Flats at Mars Crossing LLC

keep tabs on these companies as well as SpaceX to get an idea of total land owned and leased by SpaceX in the area.
Been doing that for many months now.  Here's my latest map.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: BobHk on 03/16/2015 09:09 pm
(http://blog.chron.com/sciguy/files/2012/06/bocachica_inholding_49acres-600x427.jpg)

Heres the (green highlighted) Texas State Wildlife Refuge holdings map.  The 49 acre lease for the launch pad is mostly surrounded by govt owned land.

Dogleg Park LLC owns 57 parcels listed in the http://propaccess.cameroncad.org/clientdb/?cid=1 (http://propaccess.cameroncad.org/clientdb/?cid=1)
website, The Flats at Mars Crossing LLC isn't listed as owning any in Cameron County. 

Has anyone looked for other 1 Rocket Road 'front' nonclassified corps that own land elsewhere, like in close contendot areas (Florida, PR and was it Georgia?)?

This map:
http://i.imgur.com/ip5vC7V.png (http://i.imgur.com/ip5vC7V.png)

Linked from reddit seems to have some plots highlighted that the map you posted does not.  Just to the NE of Mars Crossing plots.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: docmordrid on 03/16/2015 10:06 pm
>
The Flats at Mars Crossing LLC isn't listed as owning any in Cameron County. 
>

Just did a search for "The Flats at Mars Crossing LLC" and it shows 2 properties,

172119   82-4000-0870-0020-00

and
 
173023   82-6020-0190-0010-00   
   
both owned by The Flats at Mars Crossing LLC at an address in Washington DC.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 03/17/2015 09:37 am
>
The Flats at Mars Crossing LLC isn't listed as owning any in Cameron County. 
>

Just did a search for "The Flats at Mars Crossing LLC" and it shows 2 properties,

172119   82-4000-0870-0020-00

and
 
173023   82-6020-0190-0010-00   
   
both owned by The Flats at Mars Crossing LLC at an address in Washington DC.

Those 2 lots circled below.

By the way, what type of search did you do to find these?
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 03/17/2015 09:59 am
This map:
http://i.imgur.com/ip5vC7V.png (http://i.imgur.com/ip5vC7V.png)

Linked from reddit seems to have some plots highlighted that the map you posted does not.  Just to the NE of Mars Crossing plots.

That map doesn't have a key to show what the colors mean, but just by looking, it seems like:
Blue = lots that have houses
Red = lots that SpaceX owns
Yellow = lots shown in section 2.1.2 of the EIS (https://www.faa.gov/about/office_org/headquarters_offices/ast/environmental/nepa_docs/review/documents_progress/spacex_texas_launch_site_environmental_impact_statement/media/FEIS_SpaceX_Texas_Launch_Site_Vol_I.pdf) that SpaceX doesn't yet own

Note that SpaceX now owns more lots than that map shows in red, so it hasn't been updated recently.

In any case, I'd be interested to know who drew that map.  Maybe we can pool our resources.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: docmordrid on 03/17/2015 10:51 am
>
The Flats at Mars Crossing LLC isn't listed as owning any in Cameron County. 
>

Just did a search for "The Flats at Mars Crossing LLC" and it shows 2 properties,

172119   82-4000-0870-0020-00

and
 
173023   82-6020-0190-0010-00   
   
both owned by The Flats at Mars Crossing LLC at an address in Washington DC.

Those 2 lots circled below.

By the way, what type of search did you do to find these?

I searched,

http://propaccess.cameroncad.org/clientdb/?cid=1

For the string,

The Flats at Mars Crossing LLC

Popped right up.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 03/17/2015 12:20 pm
I searched,
http://propaccess.cameroncad.org/clientdb/?cid=1

Unlike the search I was using, the one you list above seems to sort by newest purchases.

Using this, I was able to quickly locate a few new purchases.  Updated map below.

Also, since all of the land at the launch site has already been purchased by SpaceX or the state, I've cropped that off so as to concentrate on land purchases for the control center and other possible launch related real estate.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: deruch on 03/17/2015 03:55 pm
I searched,
http://propaccess.cameroncad.org/clientdb/?cid=1

Unlike the search I was using, the one you list above seems to sort by newest purchases.

Using this, I was able to quickly locate a few new purchases.  Updated map below.

Also, since all of the land at the launch site has already been purchased by SpaceX or the state, I've cropped that off so as to concentrate on land purchases for the control center and other possible launch related real estate.

Dave, great work!  Would it be possible for you to color code the new additions to any new version of the map?  Except when it's been large parcels, I've always had difficulty in identifying what properties are changed from the previous map to the most current one.  In the future, could you mark them so they are identifiable? 

Thanks for keeping up this topic so well.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: cscott on 03/17/2015 05:35 pm
Dave, great work!  Would it be possible for you to color code the new additions to any new version of the map?  Except when it's been large parcels, I've always had difficulty in identifying what properties are changed from the previous map to the most current one.  In the future, could you mark them so they are identifiable? 

Maybe just post them in pairs, previous map next to new map?  Then you can more easily look between them to find differences.  That might be less work than specially color coding the new additions?
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: guckyfan on 03/17/2015 05:45 pm
Maybe just post them in pairs, previous map next to new map?  Then you can more easily look between them to find differences.  That might be less work than specially color coding the new additions?

That would be very helpful, especially if they are the same format. Switching back and forth between the two images will make the difference obvious. The way star maps used to be searched for any differences with a blink comparator. :)
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: abaddon on 03/17/2015 06:15 pm
At that point, make it an animated GIF, flipping between the two versions :D.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 03/17/2015 08:05 pm
Dave, great work!  Would it be possible for you to color code the new additions to any new version of the map?  Except when it's been large parcels, I've always had difficulty in identifying what properties are changed from the previous map to the most current one.  In the future, could you mark them so they are identifiable? 

Maybe just post them in pairs, previous map next to new map?  Then you can more easily look between them to find differences.  That might be less work than specially color coding the new additions?

Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: AnalogMan on 03/17/2015 10:35 pm
My attempt at animation of Dave G's two property maps.

(click to animate)
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Mariusuiram on 03/18/2015 12:50 am
Great gif, Analog. Very easy to spot the new ones.

One contribution to the discussion of manufacturing vs design. SpaceX is already having trouble recruiting engineers (specifically software) to LA so have opened an office in Seattle and plan to open one in SF.

If you cant convince these 20-somethings to move to LA, you certainly wont move them to any remote location.

More likely we will see a slow shift in SpaceX philosophy regarding integrating design and production.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 03/18/2015 09:42 am
One contribution to the discussion of manufacturing vs design. SpaceX is already having trouble recruiting engineers (specifically software) to LA so have opened an office in Seattle and plan to open one in SF.

If you cant convince these 20-somethings to move to LA, you certainly wont move them to any remote location.

More likely we will see a slow shift in SpaceX philosophy regarding integrating design and production.

Right.

SpaceX likes to locate their design engineers close to the manufacturing area, but that's not a hard rule.

And to be clear, many parts of BFR will likely be manufactured in Hawthorne.  The Raptor engines will continue to be built there.  Any BFR subassembly small enough for road transport will likely be manufactured in Hawthorne.

A BFR plant would only need to manufacture the large tank structures, and then do the final core assembly.  For this limited amount of manufacturing, having design engineers travel to the manufacturing site once a month or so seems reasonable.  The fact that Brownsville has an international airport makes this possible.

I doubt SpaceX has any plans to locate design engineers in the BFR assembly plant.  There may be a few manufacturing engineers located there, but I suspect these will be people with more experience, not 20-somethings.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 03/18/2015 09:53 am
SpaceX is already having trouble recruiting engineers (specifically software) to LA so have opened an office in Seattle...
Pardon me, but may have more to do with that software group not being attractive to work for than anything else.

By the way, I believe the SpaceX Seattle area hires were mostly hardware electrical engineers, not software.

From the original article (http://www.geekwire.com/2014/spacex-launching-seattle-area-office-recruiting-squadrons-microsoft-engineers/):
Quote
Examples include a former Microsoft senior electrical engineer and a former principal electrical engineering lead at Microsoft who worked on “an incubation team developing proprietary hardware concepts” for the Redmond company.

And the additional job posting for a Senior Antenna Engineer Avionics - Hardware Design | Seattle, WA:
http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=35797.msg1268439#msg1268439


Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 03/27/2015 12:36 pm
SpaceX at the center of Brownsville's growth (video)
http://www.onenewspage.com/video/20150327/2693615/SpaceX-at-the-center-of-Brownsville-039.htm

The "East Loop" seems to be a new outer-belt south and east of Brownsville city center, connecting the bridge to Mexico with the Brownsville seaport (see below).

The "West Rail" project seems to be aimed at moving rail freight away from the city to a more rural location in order to improve traffic delays associated with rail/road intersections.  The West rail also seems to connect with the Brownsville seaport.

The video also mentions continuing improvements to Brownsville's international airport.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 03/30/2015 11:05 pm
FAA releases environmental impact statement for Brownsville airport expansion:
http://www.brownsvilleherald.com/news/local/article_421f35e2-d683-11e4-b9f6-3b9341ab2364.html

Quote
A draft environmental assessment of the impact of building a new terminal at the Brownsville South Padre Island International Airport is now available.
 
The assessment, required by federal law, examines the likely environmental, social and economic impact of the project, which includes a new 55,000-square-foot passenger terminal with four gates and separate inspection area, expanded terminal apron, relocated and expanded parking for 400 to 600 vehicles, and road closure and construction.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: BobHk on 03/31/2015 06:01 pm
Interesting agreement between SPI (South padre) and SpaceX on staff living in SPI:

http://portisabelsouthpadre.com/2015/03/27/city-of-spi-proposes-official-agreement-with-spacex/ (http://portisabelsouthpadre.com/2015/03/27/city-of-spi-proposes-official-agreement-with-spacex/)
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: StuffOfInterest on 03/31/2015 07:59 pm
Interesting agreement between SPI (South padre) and SpaceX on staff living in SPI:

http://portisabelsouthpadre.com/2015/03/27/city-of-spi-proposes-official-agreement-with-spacex/ (http://portisabelsouthpadre.com/2015/03/27/city-of-spi-proposes-official-agreement-with-spacex/)

I'd be curious to know what's in it for SpaceX.  And how is SpaceX going to require 10% of their people to live on SPI?  Unless SPI is going to offer up a ferry service direct to the SpaceX facility (hey, they did buy property all the way up to the water) then it is over a 50 minute drive.

https://goo.gl/maps/vOI23

Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: philw1776 on 03/31/2015 10:51 pm
Get a bad performance review at SpaceX?  You're sent to live there.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: CJ on 03/31/2015 10:53 pm
Interesting agreement between SPI (South padre) and SpaceX on staff living in SPI:

http://portisabelsouthpadre.com/2015/03/27/city-of-spi-proposes-official-agreement-with-spacex/ (http://portisabelsouthpadre.com/2015/03/27/city-of-spi-proposes-official-agreement-with-spacex/)

I'd be curious to know what's in it for SpaceX.  And how is SpaceX going to require 10% of their people to live on SPI?  Unless SPI is going to offer up a ferry service direct to the SpaceX facility (hey, they did buy property all the way up to the water) then it is over a 50 minute drive.

https://goo.gl/maps/vOI23

Bolding mine.

That's a very good question.

As far as I know, it'd be illegal for a company to dictate where an employee may reside, except for cases where the employee is on call as part of their job (for example, in some cases fire departments require a fireman to reside within so many miles of their station). And even then, it's about time and distance, rather than being able to specify a specific location.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: starsilk on 03/31/2015 10:59 pm
Interesting agreement between SPI (South padre) and SpaceX on staff living in SPI:

http://portisabelsouthpadre.com/2015/03/27/city-of-spi-proposes-official-agreement-with-spacex/ (http://portisabelsouthpadre.com/2015/03/27/city-of-spi-proposes-official-agreement-with-spacex/)

I'd be curious to know what's in it for SpaceX.  And how is SpaceX going to require 10% of their people to live on SPI?  Unless SPI is going to offer up a ferry service direct to the SpaceX facility (hey, they did buy property all the way up to the water) then it is over a 50 minute drive.

https://goo.gl/maps/vOI23

Bolding mine.

That's a very good question.

As far as I know, it'd be illegal for a company to dictate where an employee may reside, except for cases where the employee is on call as part of their job (for example, in some cases fire departments require a fireman to reside within so many miles of their station). And even then, it's about time and distance, rather than being able to specify a specific location.

doesn't mean they can't provide incentives - monetary or otherwise - for example better pay, travel expenses, extra vacation etc.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Llian Rhydderch on 04/01/2015 01:56 am

doesn't mean they can't provide incentives - monetary or otherwise - for example better pay, travel expenses, extra vacation etc.

This!  I would think this is pretty much the standard way.

If the City of South Padre Island doc is correct on the 10%, I would imagine SpaceX would be prepared to offer certain incentives to employees to "sweeten the pot" if 10% don't choose to live there on their own.

I suspect many of their employees in Hawthorne put up with commutes of 30 to 50 mins. already, so the marginal cost of that commute is not that onerous, and South Padre likely offers some lifestyle benefits that would be attractive to a subset of their employee base.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Mariusuiram on 04/01/2015 02:54 am
Interesting agreement between SPI (South padre) and SpaceX on staff living in SPI:

http://portisabelsouthpadre.com/2015/03/27/city-of-spi-proposes-official-agreement-with-spacex/ (http://portisabelsouthpadre.com/2015/03/27/city-of-spi-proposes-official-agreement-with-spacex/)

The article references a presentation (which would be nice to see) and mentions the scale of the housing:

Quote from: Article
According to Stahl, the Island has been on a “challenging” trend in regards to sales tax revenue. The tentative deal would require 10% of SpaceX staff to reside on SPI, which is estimated to be 50 persons on the low end and 600 on the high end in three to four years.

So there are 2 ways to read this:
1. SpaceX would need to have at minimum 10% of their staff housing on SPI which is ~50. And could have up to 600 staff total (and there is some tiny possibility that they all live on SPI). So total staff is estimated at 500-600

2. 10% of SpaceX staff could range from 50 to 600 staff. So SpaceX could be employing between 500 and 6,000 people in 3-4 years. This seems crazy, but of course in the back of my head, that little voice is saying: "What requires 6,000 staff? A whole new manufacturing facility?"
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: gongora on 04/01/2015 03:36 am
It's sloppy reporting, don't try to read too much into those numbers.  Either the number of employees or the timeframe is way off.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 04/01/2015 09:25 am
STARGATE Attracting Technology Giants
http://utbcollegian.com/index.php/news/on-campus/item/3891-stargate-attracting-technology-giants
Quote
The director of UT Brownsville’s STARGATE says the program has started to attract many of the “big players” in technology, including Google and the National Radio Astronomy Observatory...

STARGATE is a public-private partnership between UT Brownsville’s Center for Advanced Radio Astronomy (CARA) and SpaceX.

The STARGATE research center, which will be located next to SpaceX’s future command and control center at Cameron County’s Boca Chica Beach, will develop “new radio-frequency-based (RF) technologies for a wide range of academic and commercial applications,” according to the program’s page on the utb.edu website.

“Since its inception, the center has been striving to attract big companies, national labs … by creating a talent pool that is very attractive, both for hightech industry as well as science and engineering,” Jenet said.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 04/01/2015 10:05 am
SpaceX picks up another lot, just across the street from the launch site area.  Animated gif below.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Syrinx on 04/01/2015 06:01 pm
I'd be curious to know what's in it for SpaceX.  And how is SpaceX going to require 10% of their people to live on SPI?  Unless SPI is going to offer up a ferry service direct to the SpaceX facility (hey, they did buy property all the way up to the water) then it is over a 50 minute drive.

https://goo.gl/maps/vOI23

Does the agreement state that SPI residents are required to work at the Boca Chica site?

SpaceX might have facilities (offices, gift shop, whatever) in Port Isabel or Brownsville or even on SPI.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: deruch on 04/01/2015 10:38 pm
SpaceX picks up another lot, just across the street from the launch site area.  Animated gif below.

Great!  That was the lone outstanding lot in that area.  Now they've got the whole launch site area locked up between what they own and the state/federal lots (though I think there are still a few privately owned lots mixed in with the federal lots south of the edge of the map).
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: cosmicvoid on 04/02/2015 05:39 am
Interesting agreement between SPI (South padre) and SpaceX on staff living in SPI:

http://portisabelsouthpadre.com/2015/03/27/city-of-spi-proposes-official-agreement-with-spacex/ (http://portisabelsouthpadre.com/2015/03/27/city-of-spi-proposes-official-agreement-with-spacex/)

I'd be curious to know what's in it for SpaceX. ...snip...

I'm a bit puzzled by this 10% residency requirement, as I haven't seen any reason mentioned why SpaceX would be interested in this burden.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: DanseMacabre on 04/02/2015 06:03 am
Interesting agreement between SPI (South padre) and SpaceX on staff living in SPI:

http://portisabelsouthpadre.com/2015/03/27/city-of-spi-proposes-official-agreement-with-spacex/ (http://portisabelsouthpadre.com/2015/03/27/city-of-spi-proposes-official-agreement-with-spacex/)

I'd be curious to know what's in it for SpaceX. ...snip...

I'm a bit puzzled by this 10% residency requirement, as I haven't seen any reason mentioned why SpaceX would be interested in this burden.

In a phrase: You scratch my back I'll scratch yours.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: cosmicvoid on 04/02/2015 06:19 am
In a phrase: You scratch my back I'll scratch yours.

What does South Padre Island have that SpaceX is interested in?  ???
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: DanseMacabre on 04/02/2015 06:29 am
In a phrase: You scratch my back I'll scratch yours.

What does South Padre Island have that SpaceX is interested in?  ???

It's the other way around. The state/county/local government has properties/permits/oversight relating to SpaceX operations. In return for these operations, the state/county/local government would like intelligent, high-rate tax-payers in return.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 04/02/2015 06:37 am
In a phrase: You scratch my back I'll scratch yours.

What does South Padre Island have that SpaceX is interested in?  ???

It's the other way around. The state/county/local government has properties/permits/oversight relating to SpaceX operations. In return for these operations, the state/county/local government would like intelligent, high-rate tax-payers in return.

I haven't seen anything about SpaceX buying land or operating in South Padre Island. 

South Padre Island is about 5 miles from the launch site, as the bird flies, but its over 40 miles by car.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: a_langwich on 04/02/2015 06:39 am
In a phrase: You scratch my back I'll scratch yours.

What does South Padre Island have that SpaceX is interested in?  ???


I agree with you, and the other questioners...re-read that article:  what evidence is there that SpaceX has agreed to anything?  The language is about a proposed agreement, about a proposal for an agreement with SpaceX.  In which case, the answer may be that SpaceX is not interested in the least in being tied down by such an agreement, and does not plan to base 10% of its workforce on SPI, and this is all wishful thinking by the SPI locality who are missing the fact that the other municipality agreements are mutually beneficial and this one may not be. 
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: DanseMacabre on 04/02/2015 06:43 am
In a phrase: You scratch my back I'll scratch yours.

What does South Padre Island have that SpaceX is interested in?  ???


I agree with you, and the other questioners...re-read that article:  what evidence is there that SpaceX has agreed to anything?  The language is about a proposed agreement, about a proposal for an agreement with SpaceX.  In which case, the answer may be that SpaceX is not interested in the least in being tied down by such an agreement, and does not plan to base 10% of its workforce on SPI, and this is all wishful thinking by the SPI locality who are missing the fact that the other municipality agreements are mutually beneficial and this one may not be.

This is the correct interpretation - pending the status of the proposal.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: JamesH on 04/02/2015 08:49 am
In a phrase: You scratch my back I'll scratch yours.

What does South Padre Island have that SpaceX is interested in?  ???

It's the other way around. The state/county/local government has properties/permits/oversight relating to SpaceX operations. In return for these operations, the state/county/local government would like intelligent, high-rate tax-payers in return.

I haven't seen anything about SpaceX buying land or operating in South Padre Island. 

South Padre Island is about 5 miles from the launch site, as the bird flies, but its over 40 miles by car.

Powerboat? That would be a very quick commute indeed.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: AncientU on 04/02/2015 12:07 pm
Where do I sign up?
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: JasonAW3 on 04/02/2015 02:24 pm
In a phrase: You scratch my back I'll scratch yours.

What does South Padre Island have that SpaceX is interested in?  ???

It's the other way around. The state/county/local government has properties/permits/oversight relating to SpaceX operations. In return for these operations, the state/county/local government would like intelligent, high-rate tax-payers in return.

I haven't seen anything about SpaceX buying land or operating in South Padre Island. 

South Padre Island is about 5 miles from the launch site, as the bird flies, but its over 40 miles by car.

Insane solution;

     Buy a couple of government surplus LCACs from the Navy.  (LCACs for those who don't know, are the REALLY big Hovercraft/Landing craft, hence, Landing Craft, Air Cushioned)  These could be used to ferry people and equipment over the five mile distance, (Maybe even the first stage?) fairly quickly and with minimal actual environmental damage.  Other than Noise, that is).
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: JasonAW3 on 04/02/2015 02:34 pm
My attempt at animation of Dave G's two property maps.

(click to animate)

Is it just me or is there a WHOLE lot of water where the city is proposing to build?
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: woods170 on 04/02/2015 03:22 pm
My attempt at animation of Dave G's two property maps.

(click to animate)

Is it just me or is there a WHOLE lot of water where the city is proposing to build?
Correct. The coast-line has moved inland quite a bit over time. As a result, a good deal of those property lots are now underwater.
But, as we Dutch like to say: All you need is a good dike.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: cscott on 04/02/2015 03:41 pm
Correct. The coast-line has moved inland quite a bit over time.
My understanding is that it's not so much "over time" as it is, "suddenly, with Hurricane Beulah in 1967".

Although I'd love to see a timelapse of the coastline over the years from 1967 to the present if there is indeed yearly erosion.

But, as we Dutch like to say: All you need is a good dike.

As an electrical engineer, I more often need a pair of dikes (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diagonal_pliers).
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: dglow on 04/02/2015 05:21 pm
In a phrase: You scratch my back I'll scratch yours.

What does South Padre Island have that SpaceX is interested in?  ???

Maybe nothing directly. But if you plan to launch large – and, over time, ever-larger – rockets just down the way from a populated community, it seems wise to make-nice with them early.

These launches will be loud. Folks in SPI's penthouse condos may object, if they haven't already.

Many of us here (like to) think SpaceX will outgrow their 12 launch/yr permit. When they hit that ceiling, any bonds established with SPI's city hall and chamber of commerce will likely prove valuable.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: SpunkyEnigma on 04/02/2015 08:37 pm

Insane solution;

     Buy a couple of government surplus LCACs from the Navy.  (LCACs for those who don't know, are the REALLY big Hovercraft/Landing craft, hence, Landing Craft, Air Cushioned)  These could be used to ferry people and equipment over the five mile distance, (Maybe even the first stage?) fairly quickly and with minimal actual environmental damage.  Other than Noise, that is).

Less insane solution.  As part of the deal have SPI provide dock space and parking for a small passenger ferry (50-100 person) to the SpaceX launch site.  FerryX would operate it for free to employees and charge tourists that want to check out a launch site.  With a ferry it would easily be the closest place to live near the facilities.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Space Ghost 1962 on 04/02/2015 09:08 pm
In the ninety's was a "dot com" executive at a start-up in San Francisco's SOMA area. Had an engineer working for me who use a small inflatable boat to commute most days across the bay home - said he got exercise that way and always beat the traffic. :) BTW one of many stories of similar kind.

This commute would be easier.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: groundbound on 04/02/2015 09:12 pm

Insane solution;

     Buy a couple of government surplus LCACs from the Navy.  (LCACs for those who don't know, are the REALLY big Hovercraft/Landing craft, hence, Landing Craft, Air Cushioned)  These could be used to ferry people and equipment over the five mile distance, (Maybe even the first stage?) fairly quickly and with minimal actual environmental damage.  Other than Noise, that is).

Less insane solution.  As part of the deal have SPI provide dock space and parking for a small passenger ferry (50-100 person) to the SpaceX launch site.  FerryX would operate it for free to employees and charge tourists that want to check out a launch site.  With a ferry it would easily be the closest place to live near the facilities.

Alternative that would appeal to Elon's tendency to get easily distracted: a very short underwater hyperloop.  :)
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: QuantumG on 04/02/2015 09:16 pm
Alternative that would appeal to Elon's tendency to get easily distracted: a very short underwater hyperloop.  :)

Over water.. floating pylons.

Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: RedLineTrain on 04/02/2015 09:46 pm
I always assumed that most SpaceX-ers would live in SPI.  Having never visited, I don't know the vibe.  But I assume that it is at least moderately more pleasant for some compared to, say, Brownsville.

One thing about those high-rises and penthouses:  they do not appear to have many windows/terraces toward the launch area.  May not be ideal for launch day viewing.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 04/03/2015 10:06 am
Less insane solution.  As part of the deal have SPI provide dock space and parking for a small passenger ferry (50-100 person) to the SpaceX launch site.  FerryX would operate it for free to employees and charge tourists that want to check out a launch site.  With a ferry it would easily be the closest place to live near the facilities.

How would a ferry get to the SpaceX launch site?  I don't think they would allow daily ferry boat traffic on a public beach, and the South Bay is basically a shallow tidal pool, half empty most of the time, see map below.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: JimNtexas on 04/03/2015 12:00 pm
Hovercraft?
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Shanuson on 04/03/2015 12:53 pm
What do Californians always do? They surf (at least if you believe in some movies), and there is a beach right there. So simply take your board, and a few nice waves later you are at work :D

Also Mr. Musk bought a submarine car a few years ago, maybe this his is way to find enough test persons for the prototypes/copies.

Honestly, Bownsville is still 30m away so its only 20m more and you live right next to the beach. I would take 20m more time to work for this I guess.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: QuantumG on 04/03/2015 12:55 pm
What do Californians always do? They surf (at least if you believe in some movies), and there is a beach right there. So simply take your board, and a few nice waves later you are at work :D

Not a good idea.. before you know it SpaceX employees are robbing banks.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: swampcat on 04/03/2015 12:56 pm
Jet skis.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 04/03/2015 02:14 pm
Honestly, Bownsville is still 30m away so its only 20m more and you live right next to the beach. I would take 20m more time to work for this I guess.

Brownsville is more like 15 miles from the launch site.  Lot's of nice houses around there.  Brownsville is not some ghost town.  Nearly 200,000 people live there.  They have a state university, international airport, and a nice zoo for the kids.  As I said before, I suspect most of the people SpaceX brings in will be more experienced, and these people lead and train the local hires. 

There are also 36 houses in Boca Chica Village, 35 of which are currently vacant.  That's 2 miles from the launch site, and a 1/4 mile to the control center. I suspect SpaceX will end up owning all of these houses, possibly through eminent domain.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Comga on 04/03/2015 02:23 pm
I haven't seen anything about SpaceX buying land or operating in South Padre Island. 
South Padre Island is about 5 miles from the launch site, as the bird flies, but its over 40 miles by car.

SpaceX has WiFi on buses going to Hawthorne....
They own a few of those lots below the waterline in the bay where they could build a "bus station".
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Nomadd on 04/03/2015 02:46 pm


There are also 36 houses in Boca Chica Village, 35 of which are currently vacant.  That's 2 miles from the launch site, and a 1/4 mile to the control center. I suspect SpaceX will end up owning all of these houses, possibly through eminent domain.
Sort of vacant. Two are occasionally occupied by owners and several are habitable and rented part of the year. I'm actually checking out a couple of them in a few weeks. They only have electrical service and have water tanks and way below code septic for utilities. Their big problem is that they're pretty much uninsurable.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 04/03/2015 02:56 pm
They own a few of those lots below the waterline in the bay where they could build a "bus station".

OK, OK.  If you pose a problem to a bunch of engineers, you're likely to get a solution.

And in fact, Hydra-Terra may be a better fit.  The Terra Wind you pictured is an RV.  The Hydra-Terra is a bus.

But again, this pre-supposes that a lot of SpaceX employees want to live in South Padre Island, basically a resort town full of vacationers, as opposed to Brownsville, which is more of a normal city. 

That, and the fact that the Hydra-Terra costs around $1 million. 
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 04/03/2015 03:33 pm
There are also 36 houses in Boca Chica Village, 35 of which are currently vacant.  That's 2 miles from the launch site, and a 1/4 mile to the control center. I suspect SpaceX will end up owning all of these houses, possibly through eminent domain.
Sort of vacant. Two are occasionally occupied by owners and several are habitable and rented part of the year. I'm actually checking out a couple of them in a few weeks. They only have electrical service and have water tanks and way below code septic for utilities. Their big problem is that they're pretty much uninsurable.

You mean you're looking to buy?  That seems like a risky proposition.  You could be forced to sell at a price set by the state through eminent domain. 

And if not, who would buy it?  For a bank mortgage, I believe they require the property to be located within an incorporated village or township, which Boca Chica Village is not.  From a bank's point of view, Boca Chica Village is basically a Colonia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Colonia_(United_States)).  So you would be limited to cash buyers only.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: JimNtexas on 04/03/2015 03:43 pm
Access to the SpaceX launch is going to be a PIB for sure.  Highway 4 (the only road to the site) is in good shape, but it's very narrow.

Every car has to go through a border patrol checkpoint.   Show up with a bus full of people and you're looking a possible long delay.

Highway 4 will have to be closed to the public when they deliver a booster to the site because the road is way to narrow to accommodate passing a rocket booster.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: cscott on 04/03/2015 04:32 pm
There are also 36 houses in Boca Chica Village, 35 of which are currently vacant.  That's 2 miles from the launch site, and a 1/4 mile to the control center. I suspect SpaceX will end up owning all of these houses, possibly through eminent domain.
Sort of vacant. Two are occasionally occupied by owners and several are habitable and rented part of the year. I'm actually checking out a couple of them in a few weeks. They only have electrical service and have water tanks and way below code septic for utilities. Their big problem is that they're pretty much uninsurable.

You mean you're looking to buy?  That seems like a risky proposition.  You could be forced to sell at a price set by the state - eminent domain.

...and presumably any owner has already been made an offer by SpaceX, so would be looking to sell only for a price *above* what SpaceX is willing to pay.

But if I recall correctly, the property values here are pretty low, so it might not be that much of a financial hit to take in exchange for the (slim?) chance that SpaceX/the state would let you sit on your property and watch a rocket launch for Mars someday.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 04/03/2015 04:48 pm
But if I recall correctly, the property values here are pretty low, so it might not be that much of a financial hit to take in exchange for the (slim?) chance that SpaceX/the state would let you sit on your property and watch a rocket launch for Mars someday.

from zillow.com
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Nomadd on 04/03/2015 05:25 pm
There are also 36 houses in Boca Chica Village, 35 of which are currently vacant.  That's 2 miles from the launch site, and a 1/4 mile to the control center. I suspect SpaceX will end up owning all of these houses, possibly through eminent domain.
Sort of vacant. Two are occasionally occupied by owners and several are habitable and rented part of the year. I'm actually checking out a couple of them in a few weeks. They only have electrical service and have water tanks and way below code septic for utilities. Their big problem is that they're pretty much uninsurable.

You mean you're looking to buy?  That seems like a risky proposition.  You could be forced to sell at a price set by the state through eminent domain. 

And if not, who would buy it?  For a bank mortgage, I believe they require the property to be located within an incorporated village or township, which Boca Chica Village is not.  From a bank's point of view, Boca Chica Village is basically a Colonia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Colonia_(United_States)).  So you would be limited to cash buyers only.
Just checking out the details. I'm retired and roaming around the land in any case, so I figured I might as well roam in that direction and find out the facts.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: spacenut on 04/03/2015 05:35 pm
Couldn't they build a bridge across from South Padre Island, or across the canal to Brownsville that would make for easier access without having to go through customs inspection?  Once SpaceX buys up all the private land in the area, the rest is Federal, State, and County land.  I believe the state and county would not be a problem with their use since it would bring jobs into the area.  Federal might require environmental laws and they might not allow use of their land, so it would just ending up being an uninhabited buffer zone. 
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: BobHk on 04/03/2015 05:48 pm
Couldn't they build a bridge across from South Padre Island, or across the canal to Brownsville that would make for easier access without having to go through customs inspection?  Once SpaceX buys up all the private land in the area, the rest is Federal, State, and County land.  I believe the state and county would not be a problem with their use since it would bring jobs into the area.  Federal might require environmental laws and they might not allow use of their land, so it would just ending up being an uninhabited buffer zone.

I think there was a pre-existing ship channel there last time I was down there to lounge around on Padre.

*changed 'is' to 'was'
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 04/03/2015 06:23 pm
Couldn't they build a bridge across from South Padre Island, or across the canal to Brownsville ...

The bridge would need to be really, really tall.  That canal serves aircraft carriers, huge oil drilling rigs, and  other very tall ships.

Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: RonM on 04/03/2015 06:51 pm
Hovercraft?

Yes, one of these would have no problems with South Bay at low tide.

Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: SpunkyEnigma on 04/03/2015 06:51 pm
Less insane solution.  As part of the deal have SPI provide dock space and parking for a small passenger ferry (50-100 person) to the SpaceX launch site.  FerryX would operate it for free to employees and charge tourists that want to check out a launch site.  With a ferry it would easily be the closest place to live near the facilities.

How would a ferry get to the SpaceX launch site?  I don't think they would allow daily ferry boat traffic on a public beach, and the South Bay is basically a shallow tidal pool, half empty most of the time, see map below.

Good point on the bay.  In a later post I mentioned using the amphibious busses to do it.  As to beach access, in Texas it's a historical right to have free access to beaches, including cars.  Check out the General Land Office document on this.

http://www.glo.texas.gov/what-we-do/caring-for-the-coast/_publications/texas-beach-accessibility-guide.pdf
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: llanitedave on 04/04/2015 12:32 am

Insane solution;

     Buy a couple of government surplus LCACs from the Navy.  (LCACs for those who don't know, are the REALLY big Hovercraft/Landing craft, hence, Landing Craft, Air Cushioned)  These could be used to ferry people and equipment over the five mile distance, (Maybe even the first stage?) fairly quickly and with minimal actual environmental damage.  Other than Noise, that is).

Less insane solution.  As part of the deal have SPI provide dock space and parking for a small passenger ferry (50-100 person) to the SpaceX launch site.  FerryX would operate it for free to employees and charge tourists that want to check out a launch site.  With a ferry it would easily be the closest place to live near the facilities.


Still insane.  It would take  lot of dredging. That water is very shallow, and low tide exposes large mud flats. Less insane?  A causeway and bridge.  Least insane?  Don't make the agreement.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: BobHk on 04/04/2015 12:50 am
Or they could just drive on existing roads to the site from SPI.  No bridge required.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Damon Hill on 04/04/2015 01:16 am
Drawbridge.  Or swing/pivot bridge.  It'd have to be a fairly wide one.

Tunnel's a possibility too, but that will be expensive, probably as much as a very tall bridge.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: TripD on 04/04/2015 01:45 am
Load the Commuter-pult!
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: DanseMacabre on 04/04/2015 02:02 am
Perhaps a more thematic method of launching commuters...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pJdrlWR-yFM (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pJdrlWR-yFM)

Perhaps re-assign some engineering expertise whilst reviews are going through? :D
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: go4mars on 04/04/2015 02:16 am
You mean the cowboy on Grasshopper wasn't a proof of concept for this commute?  Free beaches yo.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 04/04/2015 10:32 am
Drawbridge.  Or swing/pivot bridge.  It'd have to be a fairly wide one.

Tunnel's a possibility too, but that will be expensive, probably as much as a very tall bridge.

A helicopter could also work.  Probably cheaper than a drawbridge or tunnel, and more versatile.

(http://www.refinedguy.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/08/Sikorsky-S-92-VVIP-Configuration-helicopter-exterior1.jpg)

Least insane?  Don't make the agreement.
Exactly.

The proposed agreement assumes that a lot of SpaceX employees want to live in South Padre Island, basically a resort town full of vacationers, as opposed to Brownsville, which is more of a normal city. 

I suspect the people SpaceX brings in will be a little older, with more experience, and these people will lead and train the local hires.  I doubt SpaceX would want to bring in twenty-somethings and locate them in South Padre Island so they can party every night.  Not a good recipe for reliability.

Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: llanitedave on 04/04/2015 05:18 pm
BTW, URS Corp operates a fleet of 737s to commute employees of Area 51 back and forth from Las Vegas. I guess is having employees in South Padre Island is important enough...


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Janet_(airline)#/media/File:JanetN319BD.jpg (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Janet_(airline)#/media/File:JanetN319BD.jpg)
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 04/04/2015 06:58 pm
SpaceX visits Texas State Technical College in Harlingen to talk about jobs.
http://www.valleymorningstar.com/education/tstc/article_ea75ec18-da57-11e4-9457-534768718f9c.html

More evidence of SpaceX's intention to hire locally.

Quote
More than 300 students from different programs convened in the Cultural Arts Center last week to listen to presentations by SpaceX about the company and potential jobs with the space transport services company...
 
After a brief presentation and a question-and-answer portion with students then faculty, the representatives toured the Engineering Center and met with students and faculty...

Brownsville’s Alandra Avelar gave SpaceX visitors a brief presentation on one of the robots the Mechatronics students have built.

Avelar said she was honored to represent not just her program but the student body in front of SpaceX.

“It’s very exciting just to have them on campus,” Avelar said. “But to be able to share my passion for engineering and show them what we’re doing here was a great honor for me. I think there’s going to be a lot of opportunities for our students in a company like SpaceX.”

Students from the Industrial and Manufacturing, Engineering and Computer Information Systems Divisions were in attendance during the presentation.

One SpaceX representative described a need for some from each of the programs in attendance ranging from Auto Collision Technology to Computer Networking and Security Technology to Mechatronics Technology...
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: JamesH on 04/04/2015 08:21 pm
Brownsville is more like 15 miles from the launch site.  Lot's of nice houses around there.  Brownsville is not some ghost town.  Nearly 200,000 people live there.  They have a state university, international airport, and a nice zoo for the kids.

TBH, if they keep their children in a zoo, perhaps South Padre IS a better bet.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: llanitedave on 04/04/2015 09:00 pm
Nah, a zoo is a great place for them.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 04/05/2015 11:23 am
More details on fiber optic run from the University of Texas Brownsville campus to the Boca Chica launch area.
http://esbd.cpa.state.tx.us/bid_show.cfm?bidid=116108

Looks like they want to lay 1.25" buried conduit 48" underground along both sides of Hwy 4 (i.e. geographic separation of the two fiber paths).  In addition to running fiber to the STARGATE (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/STARGATE) tracking center, it seems the state is also willing to pay for fiber connections to the SpaceX control center and to the launch site.

I have to wonder, if they're digging 48" down, why not run city water pipes at the same time?
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Blackjax on 04/05/2015 05:08 pm
Hovercraft?

Or even better, hoverwing:
http://hovercraft.com/content/index.php?main_page=index&cPath=1_2


Honestly though I think the most apropos option would be to use a Falcon as a ferry...
http://www.seafalcon.net/introduction.html
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Prober on 04/05/2015 10:30 pm
BTW, URS Corp operates a fleet of 737s to commute employees of Area 51 back and forth from Las Vegas. I guess is having employees in South Padre Island is important enough...


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Janet_(airline)#/media/File:JanetN319BD.jpg (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Janet_(airline)#/media/File:JanetN319BD.jpg)

hush, you wish the guys in the black suits to come after you ;D
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: starsilk on 04/06/2015 03:14 am
I have to wonder, if they're digging 48" down, why not run city water pipes at the same time?

they'll most likely be running a mole rather than digging an open trench. much cheaper, as long as you're not digging through green fields.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 04/06/2015 05:41 pm
Found this tidbit:
Quote
In the case of Brownsville, Texas, a string of hotel franchises already are looking to invest in South Texas to accommodate the visitors planning to view the launches of SpaceX rockets.
http://www.texas-aerospace.com/space-industry.php

And this:
Quote
According to a national ranking by Industry Week Magazine, Brownsville is now the sixth fastest growing manufacturing region in the United States.
http://www.texas-aerospace.com/manufacturing.php

This site also features a page on the Port of Brownsville's capabilities 
http://www.texas-aerospace.com/port-of-brownsville.php
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: RedLineTrain on 04/06/2015 05:49 pm
Funny error on the front page of that web site...

Quote
Companies calling Texas home include Space Exploration Technologies, Blue Origin, XCOR Aerospace, Orbital Outfitters, Firefly, and SpaceX
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 04/08/2015 10:54 am
One resident questions the exact tax bill for bringing SpaceX to Brownsville:
http://rrunrrun.blogspot.com/2015/04/a-citizens-open-letter-to-current-city.html

Quote
* Just how much was the cost that the residents of Brownsville paid – or that we will pay – for bringing SpaceX here?
* As residents of this city, we want to get a full listing of all the real estate purchases made by the city during your administration: who the owners were, what appraised value they had, and how much the city ended up paying for them.

I do know that Brownsville has added $500,000 to the pot for the STARGATE (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/STARGATE) Tracking center. 

Total STARGATE funding includes:
• $4.6 million from the University of Texas System
• $4.4 million from the Texas Emerging Technology Fund
• $1.2 million from the US Economic Development Administration
• $0.5 million from the Greater Brownsville Incentives Corporation
For a total of $11.7 million.

I also know that Brownsville purchased 4 lots for the STARGATE tracking center.  Land values in Boca Chica are pretty cheap, so that should be $10K-20K for all 4 lots.

To be determined is if the city or state will lay pipe to bring fresh water to the Boca Chica.  The EIS (https://www.faa.gov/about/office_org/headquarters_offices/ast/environmental/nepa_docs/review/documents_progress/spacex_texas_launch_site_environmental_impact_statement/media/FEIS_SpaceX_Texas_Launch_Site_Vol_I.pdf) mentions the possibility of SpaceX digging wells, but IIRC there are well water quality issues in that area.  Well water may be good enough for a deluge system at the launch site, but may not good enough for drinking.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Lobo on 04/08/2015 07:17 pm
A helicopter could also work.  Probably cheaper than a drawbridge or tunnel, and more versatile.

(http://www.refinedguy.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/08/Sikorsky-S-92-VVIP-Configuration-helicopter-exterior1.jpg)


I find that to be the most likely...
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: ArbitraryConstant on 04/09/2015 06:06 am
I'd bet on a bus with wifi.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Shanuson on 04/09/2015 11:50 am
There will be a Tesla unveil event at the end of the Month. Everybody thinks its about batteries, but it will be the solution: ADOCs  ;D
The Autonomous Driving Office Containers. You enter your office on your front lawn in SPI, can work your mails for a hour and have your first meeting with colleagues / hands on the rocket when your office reaches the ADOC - Rags at your Company/the launch pad.  ::)
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 04/09/2015 05:22 pm


STARGATE TALKS to feature Google senior engineer
http://www.brownsvilleherald.com/news/local/article_0952c5b6-de68-11e4-bbe6-d7cd6f459e81.html

Quote
STARGATE (Spacecraft Tracking and Astronomical Research into Giga-Hertz Astrophysical Transient Emission) is a public-private partnership between the Center for Advanced Radio Astronomy (CARA) at the University of Texas at Brownsville and SpaceX, which broke ground on the world’s first commercial rocket launch pad at Boca Chica on Sept. 22.
 
STARGATE TALKS is meant to focus the public eye on activities of the partnership, which itself is designed to create opportunities for students and businesses in high-tech industries, including SpaceX (or Space Exploration Technologies), while supplying those same industries with homegrown talent.

In addition to its research and academic roles, which include developing new radio frequency-based technologies and involving students in every aspect of actual space missions, STARGATE will serve as an incubator to grow high-tech companies to support SpaceX operations as part of a local aerospace “cluster.”

A key priority will be commercialization of new technology already under development, and fostering innovation and commercialization among the region’s academic researchers.

Fredrick Jenet, UTB associate professor of physics and astronomy and director of STARGATE and CARA, said STARGATE TALKS is meant to promote the “vision and activity” of the partnership by introducing the community to what it does in terms of technology development and collaboration.

“One of the goals of STARGATE TALKS is to spark that idea of sort of a Silicon Valley here in the Rio GrandeValley,” he said.

Christopher R. Wren, a Google senior software engineer and an architect of the Android smartphone operating system, will be the keynote speaker for the inaugural STARGATE TALK, scheduled for April 14 and presented by United Brownsville.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: The Amazing Catstronaut on 04/09/2015 09:37 pm



Quote

“One of the goals of STARGATE TALKS is to spark that idea of sort of a Silicon Valley here in the Rio GrandeValley,” he said.


The possibility of an aerospace/space related tech area in Rio Grande is a really exciting one, and it's a prime time for one to start. It'll be interesting to see how far STARGATE TALKS goes beyond just talk.  :D
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: cscott on 04/10/2015 01:03 am


STARGATE TALKS to feature Google senior engineer
http://www.brownsvilleherald.com/news/local/article_0952c5b6-de68-11e4-bbe6-d7cd6f459e81.html

Quote
STARGATE (Spacecraft Tracking and Astronomical Research into Giga-Hertz Astrophysical Transient Emission) is a public-private partnership between the Center for Advanced Radio Astronomy (CARA) at the University of Texas at Brownsville and SpaceX, which broke ground on the world’s first commercial rocket launch pad at Boca Chica on Sept. 22.
 
STARGATE TALKS is meant to focus the public eye on activities of the partnership, which itself is designed to create opportunities for students and businesses in high-tech industries, including SpaceX (or Space Exploration Technologies), while supplying those same industries with homegrown talent.

In addition to its research and academic roles, which include developing new radio frequency-based technologies and involving students in every aspect of actual space missions, STARGATE will serve as an incubator to grow high-tech companies to support SpaceX operations as part of a local aerospace “cluster.”

A key priority will be commercialization of new technology already under development, and fostering innovation and commercialization among the region’s academic researchers.

Fredrick Jenet, UTB associate professor of physics and astronomy and director of STARGATE and CARA, said STARGATE TALKS is meant to promote the “vision and activity” of the partnership by introducing the community to what it does in terms of technology development and collaboration.

“One of the goals of STARGATE TALKS is to spark that idea of sort of a Silicon Valley here in the Rio GrandeValley,” he said.

Christopher R. Wren, a Google senior software engineer and an architect of the Android smartphone operating system, will be the keynote speaker for the inaugural STARGATE TALK, scheduled for April 14 and presented by United Brownsville.
It's a very "academic" thing to do, to start a series of talks in order to increase visibility of a project/subject area.  Always very popular with the students, provided free food is included. ;)
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 04/10/2015 11:01 am
In addition to the article, they now have a STARGATE TALKS video as well:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=12Teyo8Aa08

http://unitedbrownsville.com/why-is-google-coming-to-brownsville/
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: mme on 04/11/2015 03:10 am
In addition to the article, they now have a STARGATE TALKS video as well:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=12Teyo8Aa08

http://unitedbrownsville.com/why-is-google-coming-to-brownsville/
<persnickety>
Good stuff, but I cringe every time I see a new article/video using the F9 v1.  It's so 2010.  But using a shot of the prototype with the black interstage?  There are so many great shots and video of F9 v1.1 in the factory, on the TLE, launching, and with legs.  Why can't they show a rocket with legs? Sigh.
</persnickety>

Oh well, I'm glad there's a community outreach effort and that SpaceX and (lower case) space exploration are getting coverage.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 04/11/2015 06:45 am
<persnickety>
Good stuff, but I cringe every time I see a new article/video using the F9 v1.  It's so 2010.  But using a shot of the prototype with the black interstage?  There are so many great shots and video of F9 v1.1 in the factory, on the TLE, launching, and with legs.  Why can't they show a rocket with legs? Sigh.
</persnickety>

Yeah, I thought the same thing while watching it. 
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 04/14/2015 01:35 am
Construction for future Space X launch site to hit off this summer
http://www.rgvproud.com/news/local-news/construction-for-future-space-x-launch-site-to-hit-off-this-summer

Quote
While Space-X continues to make headlines from its Florida location, things from its future new home in Brownsville still look pretty quiet.

"They've had a job fair, they've had a vendor fair. It's just a matter of time. Of course it'll take us a while to get us built, but pretty soon we're going to be like, okay, what's next?" says Mayor Tony Martinez.

According to Brownsville Mayor Tony Martinez, two European companies have signed and sealed contracts to get the launch pad completed on this five-acre plot about two miles from the Boca Chica beach.

"They work fast. I mean, if you've historically tracked the Elon Musk- driven companies whether it's Pay Pal, whether it's Solar City or it's the Tesla, they don't spend a whole lot of time not moving. So, they're quite active," says mayor Martinez.

The contracts call for completion in order to start launching from the new site in 2017. In the meantime, UTRGV's new Stargate program and its 27 aerospace students are getting attention… and Google is in town to help.

"So, these guys are thinking about looking out into the galaxies, you know. Are we going to mars? Where are we going to go? It's so exciting to me. I see the race for space is on," says the mayor.

According to Brownsville's Economic Development Council, most of the Space X launch pad construction is expected during this summer.

"You know everything is happening in Brownsville! And I said, and rightfully so," says Martinez.

Stargate's inaugural talk tomorrow at UTB  is entitled "Just Google It" and it features keynote speaker Dr. Christopher Wren, maker of the Android network.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: dglow on 04/14/2015 02:34 am
Quote from: Brownsville Mayor Tony Martinez
"So, these guys are thinking about looking out into the galaxies, you know. Are we going to mars? Where are we going to go? It's so exciting to me. I see the race for space is on," says the mayor.

;D  I'll tell you where we're going, Tony: INTO THE GALAXIES
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: meekGee on 04/14/2015 03:14 am
Quote from: Brownsville Mayor Tony Martinez
"So, these guys are thinking about looking out into the galaxies, you know. Are we going to mars? Where are we going to go? It's so exciting to me. I see the race for space is on," says the mayor.

;D  I'll tell you where we're going, Tony: INTO THE GALAXIES

Priceless.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 04/14/2015 05:03 am
Quote from: Brownsville Mayor Tony Martinez
"So, these guys are thinking about looking out into the galaxies, you know. Are we going to mars? Where are we going to go? It's so exciting to me. I see the race for space is on," says the mayor.

;D  I'll tell you where we're going, Tony: INTO THE GALAXIES

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/STARGATE
Quote
The Spacecraft Tracking and Astronomical Research into Gigahertz Astrophysical Transient Emission was proposed in 2012 by Fredrick (Rick) Jenet, director of the Center for Advanced Radio Astronomy (CARA) and an associate professor of physics and astronomy at the University of Texas-Brownsville (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/University_of_Texas_at_Brownsville)."

So in addition to tracking SpaceX rockets and spacecraft, STARGATE also plans to do Astronomical Research - i.e. radio astronomy (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radio_astronomy) using new devices and new algorithms.

Quite literally "looking out into the galaxies".  Perhaps that's what the mayor was referring to.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: meekGee on 04/14/2015 08:20 am
Quote from: Brownsville Mayor Tony Martinez
"So, these guys are thinking about looking out into the galaxies, you know. Are we going to mars? Where are we going to go? It's so exciting to me. I see the race for space is on," says the mayor.

;D  I'll tell you where we're going, Tony: INTO THE GALAXIES

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/STARGATE
Quote
The Spacecraft Tracking and Astronomical Research into Gigahertz Astrophysical Transient Emission was proposed in 2012 by Fredrick (Rick) Jenet, director of the Center for Advanced Radio Astronomy (CARA) and an associate professor of physics and astronomy at the University of Texas-Brownsville (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/University_of_Texas_at_Brownsville)."

So in addition to tracking SpaceX rockets and spacecraft, STARGATE also plans to do Astronomical Research - i.e. radio astronomy (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radio_astronomy) using new devices and new algorithms.

Quite literally "looking out into the galaxies".  Perhaps that's what the mayor was referring to.

Fair enough... I'm therefore begrudgingly giving him the benefit of the doubt  :)
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: dglow on 04/14/2015 10:35 am
So in addition to tracking SpaceX rockets and spacecraft, STARGATE also plans to do Astronomical Research - i.e. radio astronomy (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radio_astronomy) using new devices and new algorithms.

Quite literally "looking out into the galaxies".  Perhaps that's what the mayor was referring to.

Understood – I was just pokin' a little fun. Mr. Martinez sounds genuinely jazzed, as well he should be!

(The quoting author didn't do him any favors. Transcribing spoken words directly doesn't often read well, especially when conveying excitement or tangential streams of thought.)

Being the Mayor of Brownsville, at this period in time, must be very excellent indeed.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 04/17/2015 02:49 am
SpaceX throws it support behind Texas State Legislature aerospace bill.
https://riograndeguardian.com/spacex-throws-its-support-behind-lucios-big-aerospace-bill/

Quote
“Over the past 12 months SpaceX has partnered with over 250 Texas vendors, a majority of whom are considered small or disadvantaged businesses...

“Last fall, SpaceX broke ground on the world’s first commercial orbital launch site in Cameron County. SpaceX selected that location due in large part to our strong supplier base in Texas and the state’s southern and coastal geography, the state’s business friendly climate and the legislature’s great efforts last session.”
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 04/18/2015 11:30 am
Brownsville, Texas, Wins S&P Upgrade to AA
https://eresearch.fidelity.com/eresearch/markets_sectors/news/story.jhtml?storyid=201504171908

Quote
Still to be seen is how large of an impact the southernmost Texas city will suffer from slumping oil prices. As one of Texas' largest port cities, Brownsville also serves as a port for northern Mexico.

With a population of 181,860, Brownsville is part of a highly populated but largely impoverished network of cities in the Lower Rio Grande Valley. Brownsville, the seat of government for Cameron County, has one of the highest poverty rates in the nation.

The city was chosen in 2014 as the site of Space-X's new rocket launching facility and is expecting an economic boost from expansion of the University of Texas Rio Grande Valley that will include a medical school in nearby Edinburg.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 04/20/2015 08:54 pm
Man Denied Building Permits by the County at Boca Chica Village
http://www.krgv.com/news/local-news/man-denied-building-permits-by-the-county-at-boca-chica-village/32390862

Quote
Sam Clauson planned to spend his golden years at Boca Chica Village.

"I thought maybe I could build a house, eventually a retirement home," he said.

That dream was squashed. Cameron County said his property was too close to sea level to dig the required sewer and water lines. They also wouldn't provide electricity hookup.

"He says, 'if we start granting you electricity, we have to grant other people electricity so we can't start a new trend,'" Clauson said.

The county gave him a permit to build a garage.

"It is 24 feet wide and 46 feet long," he said.

Still, he was in the dark.

"I applied for electricity … they denied it," Clauson said.

Clauson said he spent months getting permits and paperwork to do things the right way. Now, all he has is a cement slab.

"Cameron County does not want to expand this village, even though Space-X will have one of their buildings right across the street here," he said.

CHANNEL 5 NEWS asked the county how Space-X plans to build a rocket launch site and facilities without water, sewer and electricity.

"We have not received the documentation from them for the utilities," Interim Cameron County Administrator David Garcia said.

Garcia said the county does not ask questions during the planning process. He said they only approve or deny permit applications.

Garcia said Space-X will have to follow the same guidelines that prohibited Clauson from building his dream home.

"They would have to meet all the criteria the county has set in place to be able to operate at that facility for water, electrical," he said.

Clauson said he will move forward with his plans.

"We're going to build our garage," he said. Even if it's just to sit-in and watch a launch in the dark.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Kabloona on 04/20/2015 10:23 pm
Quote
CHANNEL 5 NEWS asked the county how Space-X plans to build a rocket launch site and facilities without water, sewer and electricity.

Well, at least SpaceX will be able to build a garage...
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Robotbeat on 04/21/2015 12:04 am
Elon Musk may be able to hook him up with some solar and battery power.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: cscott on 04/21/2015 12:14 am
Seems like the article is about the village not wanting to invest in providing infrastructure services like common water, sewer, and electric?  I bet SpaceX will be handling all of that themselves, not relying on the village to provide service.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 04/21/2015 12:41 am
From what I've read, Boca Chica Village has no water or sewer service available.  So it seems the article got this detail wrong. 

Local residents must truck in their own fresh water, which is held in large above ground tanks, usually toward the front of the property. 

Residents must also install their own septic systems.  Note that the property shown in the article is a bit closer to the water line than the SpaceX control center area.  Perhaps the property in question is not far enough above sea level to dig a septic system.

Boca Chica Village does have electrical service, but probably just enough for the houses that are there already.  SpaceX plans to install 6.5 acres of solar panels at Boca Chica to supply additional electrical power.  More about that here: http://www.valleymorningstar.com/premium/article_a3cdf116-1dec-11e4-b4f5-001a4bcf6878.html

Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Jdeshetler on 04/21/2015 12:42 am
There is a 3 years gap in this aerial photo. He might have applied and got garage permit before the SpaceX make the "formal" announcement.

His concrete pad is 9800 ft from the "launch pad". I hope thing can work out positive for him in one way or the other.

The county gave him a permit to build a garage.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: BobHk on 04/21/2015 05:03 am
9800 feet?  He needs to add a berm to deflect the shockwaves.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 04/21/2015 08:28 am
9800 feet?  He needs to add a berm to deflect the shockwaves.

I measure a little over 10,000 feet, but in either case, 9800 feet and 10,000 feet are both about 1.9 miles.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Rebel44 on 04/21/2015 10:05 am
9800 feet?  He needs to add a berm to deflect the shockwaves.

I would love that site for watching rocket launches, but I wouldnt want to live that close to a launch pad.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Nomadd on 04/21/2015 03:22 pm
Seems like the article is about the village not wanting to invest in providing infrastructure services like common water, sewer, and electric?  I bet SpaceX will be handling all of that themselves, not relying on the village to provide service.
There is no "village" to provide anything. The developer is long gone and these are just houses in the middle of nowhere. One or two are occupied by owners on occasion and a few more are rented out. I haven't gotten any real answer yet, but as far as I can tell, it's not practical to install septic that meets today's codes on that land. It might not be possible to get any type of flood insurance either. Elon hasn't returned my calls yet, but I'd bet it's SpaceX's intention to bulldoze the whole community.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 04/22/2015 12:44 pm
There is no "village" to provide anything.
The existing houses in Boca Chica Village do have electrical service.  From the news article, it looks like Cameron County provides access to this service.

I haven't gotten any real answer yet, but as far as I can tell, it's not practical to install septic that meets today's codes on that land.
From the Environmental Impact Statement (https://www.faa.gov/about/office_org/headquarters_offices/ast/environmental/nepa_docs/review/documents_progress/spacex_texas_launch_site_environmental_impact_statement/media/FEIS_SpaceX_Texas_Launch_Site_Vol_I.pdf): "The septic system would consist of a mobile above ground processing unit and holding tank."  The EIS also mentions getting septic permits from Cameron County. 

It might not be possible to get any type of flood insurance either.
I've heard this also.  Since Boca Chica is not an incorporated township or village, you can't get a mortgage to buy a house there, and you can't buy insurance for it.

Elon hasn't returned my calls yet, but I'd bet it's SpaceX's intention to bulldoze the whole community.
I suspect SpaceX intends to purchase all of the property at Boca Chica eventually, perhaps though eminent domain.  That will give them more control over the area.

But why destroy the existing houses?  A couple dozen homes could be quite handy for visiting SpaceX employees, customers, suppliers, etc.  Although many are in disrepair, the houses look sturdy - all-brick construction.  With relatively minor repairs and upgrades, the houses could be made to be quite nice.  And I suspect there are some grandfather clauses for those homes which would make them attractive to keep.  There are a few houses that sit out all by themselves - those may be torn down.  But the neighborhood of homes along Weems St. - I can imagine some awesome SpaceX parties there...
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: spacenut on 04/22/2015 02:28 pm
Parties will probably be held at South Padre Island since it is a resort area only about 40 miles from their launch site.  They may need all the space they can get if BFR is to be launched from there, especially if multiple pads are needed.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: NovaSilisko on 04/22/2015 03:14 pm
"The septic system would consist of a mobile above ground processing unit and holding tank.

Well, that'd certainly be one of the worst possible things a failing rocket could hit.  :P
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Nomadd on 04/22/2015 03:17 pm

Elon hasn't returned my calls yet, but I'd bet it's SpaceX's intention to bulldoze the whole community.
I suspect SpaceX intends to purchase all of the property at Boca Chica eventually, perhaps though eminent domain.  That will give them more control over the area.

But why destroy the existing houses?  A couple dozen homes could be quite handy for visiting SpaceX employees, customers, suppliers, etc.  Although many are in disrepair, the houses look sturdy - all-brick construction.  With relatively minor repairs and upgrades, the houses could be made to be quite nice.  And I suspect there are some grandfather clauses for those homes which would make them attractive to keep.  There are a few houses that sit out all by themselves - those may be torn down.  But the neighborhood of homes along Weems St. - I can imagine some awesome SpaceX parties there...
I'll be there in about 3 weeks. Too many conflicting stories and rumors about the place, so I figure a little 1st hand info is needed. The attitude of Cameron decision makers will probably mean more than codes.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 04/22/2015 06:09 pm
I'll be there in about 3 weeks. Too many conflicting stories and rumors about the place, so I figure a little 1st hand info is needed.

While there's no substitute for being there, note that Google has scanned the neighborhood with street level views:
https://www.google.com/maps/@25.991647,-97.183297,3a,75y,31.02h,66.85t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1s7AEGa6hJ4T7x1-n-rylIgw!2e0
Using your mouse, you can look all around (360 degrees), zoom in on areas of interest, look up, look down, move up or down the street, turn onto other streets, etc.  Almost as good as being there.  Definitely enough to get a basic sense of the place.

The main difference would be what's changed since Google Maps scanned the area, especially with regards to the control center area.  Last we heard, there was just a couple of trailers there, with some lights and fences around it.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: philw1776 on 04/22/2015 08:51 pm
Looks to me as if the adjacent Las Palomas Wildlife Management Area become the Las Palomas Quick Fry Wildlife Area.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 04/24/2015 05:15 pm
Two new SpaceX jobs at Texas launch site apparently still not filled:

Electrical Engineer (Launch Pad Facilities), Rio Grande Valley  (http://www.indeed.com/viewjob?jk=9fc742d26c96bf61&q=spacex&l=Brownsville&from=ifa&utm_source=publisher&utm_medium=cpc&utm_campaign=de_noemail&pub=5431754608249411)

Launch Operations Systems Analyst, Rio Grande Valley TX  (http://www.indeed.com/viewjob?jk=bc82071672561ad4&q=spacex&l=Brownsville&from=ifa&utm_source=publisher&utm_medium=cpc&utm_campaign=de_noemail&pub=5431754608249411)

It looks like these 2 positions may not have been filled yet, although the "Launch Operations Systems Analyst" position is now "Launch Operations Systems Technician"

Electrical Engineer (Launch Pad Facilities), Rio Grande Valley (https://hire.jobvite.com/CompanyJobs/Careers.aspx?k=Job&c=qz49Vfwr&j=opfQZfwd)

Launch Operations Systems Technician, Rio Grande Valley TX (https://hire.jobvite.com/CompanyJobs/Careers.aspx?k=Job&c=qz49Vfwr&j=oJLg0fwu)
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 04/27/2015 12:35 pm
Internet billionaires face off in renewed Texas space race
http://www.brownsvilleherald.com/news/texas/article_28f4ffd2-c04c-52b4-9ceb-b1e8f3f2ce6d.html

Quote
The presence of Blue Origin, LLC, the brainchild of Amazon founder Jeff Bezos, barely registers in nearby Van Horn, a way station along Interstate 10, a full decade after he began buying land in one of Texas' largest and most remote counties...

At the opposite end — of Texas and the competition — is the highly visible SpaceX venture, led by PayPal co-founder and electric car maker Elon Musk.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: mark_m on 04/28/2015 07:58 pm
I've heard this also.  Since Boca Chica is not an incorporated township or village, you can't get a mortgage to buy a house there, and you can't buy insurance for it.

I've seen this mentioned a few times, but it's not the case. You very well may not be able to get a mortgage for those houses, but it wouldn't be because Boca Chica is unincorporated. I don't know how it works elsewhere, but it's common in Texas for houses to be built outside of any incorporated city or town (including three I've owned), and getting a mortgage isn't any more difficult than it is inside a town.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Lar on 04/28/2015 09:16 pm
I've heard this also.  Since Boca Chica is not an incorporated township or village, you can't get a mortgage to buy a house there, and you can't buy insurance for it.

I've seen this mentioned a few times, but it's not the case. You very well may not be able to get a mortgage for those houses, but it wouldn't be because Boca Chica is unincorporated. I don't know how it works elsewhere, but it's common in Texas for houses to be built outside of any incorporated city or town (including three I've owned), and getting a mortgage isn't any more difficult than it is inside a town.

thanks for that clarification (It's true in Michigan as well, although all land is in some township or another whether it's in a village/town/city or not) and welcome to the forum!
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: russianhalo117 on 04/28/2015 09:36 pm
I've heard this also.  Since Boca Chica is not an incorporated township or village, you can't get a mortgage to buy a house there, and you can't buy insurance for it.

I've seen this mentioned a few times, but it's not the case. You very well may not be able to get a mortgage for those houses, but it wouldn't be because Boca Chica is unincorporated. I don't know how it works elsewhere, but it's common in Texas for houses to be built outside of any incorporated city or town (including three I've owned), and getting a mortgage isn't any more difficult than it is inside a town.

thanks for that clarification (It's true in Michigan as well, although all land is in some township or another whether it's in a village/town/city or not) and welcome to the forum!
According to the United States Fire Administration and other agencies including FEMA if they have a Volunteer Fire Department they don't need to be incorporated to get insurance. My grandfather founded his areas VFD in 1950 and has 8 VF stations now. It has worked well for him because that allowed him to get funding to build a golf course, his mansion of a house and create a 2,600 lot property for a future subdivision, all of which would not have been allowed without a VFD.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: mark_m on 04/29/2015 04:02 am
I didn't know about the VFD requirement, but it makes sense, and definitely existed in the areas of my houses.  :)

I'm excited about the launch site. It's a bit more than 300 miles south of me, close enough so that I'll definitely be planning some trips once launches start, if not before.

Thanks for the welcome, Lar! I've been lurking for a while, and love the site, but haven't previously had anything to contribute to the discussions. Pretty sure I'll be showing my appreciation with an L2 subscription before long.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 05/01/2015 10:12 am
Stargate 1:  rocket science and the RGV (Rio Grande Valley)
http://www.valleybusinessreport.com/recent-news/stargate-1-rocket-science-and-the-rgv/

Quote
The stars are, in fact, aligning to make the area near the SpaceX facility into a research and commercialization hub with a business incubator only two miles from the launch site. SpaceX, which designs, manufactures and launches advanced rockets and spacecraft, chose Boca Chica beach in part because of regional resources, which include UTB’s deep space research programs and United Launch Alliance’s Harlingen plant...

UTB (University of Texas at Brownsville) researchers are exploring the galaxy through the Arecibo Remote Command Center (the world’s largest radio telescope) and the Center for Advanced Radio Astronomy. Valley astrophysicists have identified over 60 new radio pulsars in recent years, accounting for more than a third of the total discoveries. So it’s no surprise that UTB (soon to be UT-RGV) now collaborates with top researchers at JPL, NASA, the Max-Planck Institute and other prestigious organizations.

UTB is only the university with an active agreement with a private space industry company, said Mike Gonzalez of United Brownsville, a major participant in the public-private STARGATE enterprise.   Aiming to connect students and the Valley community to new technological developments and business opportunities, STARGATE also is building momentum for a local angel investor network to back start-ups.

Full article here: http://www.valleybusinessreport.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/04/VBR_May2015_new.pdf
starting on page 8.

More info on STARGATE here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/STARGATE
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 05/01/2015 11:30 am
Couldn't find any SpaceX land purchases within the last month.

Here's my latest map.  If anyone can locate new SpaceX property, let me know, and I'll add it to the map.

Links to search for SpaceX properties:
http://propaccess.cameroncad.org/clientdb/?cid=1
http://www.cameroncad.org/cadclientdb/propertymap.aspx

So far, SpaceX has purchased land under 3 different names:
1) DOGLEG PARK LLC
2) DOGLEZ PARK LLC
3) THE FLATS AT MARS CROSSING LLC

Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: cscott on 05/01/2015 01:29 pm
Doglez?  Tell me that's a typo in the filing.  Can anyone find incorporation documents for "doglez"?
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 05/01/2015 06:52 pm
Doglez?  Tell me that's a typo in the filing.  Can anyone find incorporation documents for "doglez"?

Could be a typo, or some kind of SpaceX humor.  In any case, it's been that way in the Cameron County Appraisal database since January 2014.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 05/03/2015 11:14 am
Local news site posts 5 new pictures with captions.
http://www.valleymorningstar.com/gallery/news/collection_4466dd62-f057-11e4-9802-0317c4aa5907.html


It appears SpaceX is using "CAPA" as a local supplier for concrete and/or asphalt.
http://capatexas.com/about-us/

(http://capatexas.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/11/about-slider01.jpg)

(http://capatexas.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/11/about-slider02.jpg)

(http://capatexas.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/11/about-slider03.jpg)
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: AncientU on 05/03/2015 11:22 am
Nice find!
One of many newly flourishing companies -- Happy CAPAs!

Perimeter fence is up.  Let the earth moving begin.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Roy_H on 05/03/2015 12:10 pm
Is the fence around this property?
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 05/03/2015 12:33 pm
Is the fence around this property?
Yes, the perimeter fence shown in the last 2 of the 5 pictures (http://www.valleymorningstar.com/gallery/news/collection_4466dd62-f057-11e4-9802-0317c4aa5907.html) corresponds to the control center area, about 2 miles away from the launch site.  Not sure if the fence follows that exact property line, but that's the general area.

No recent pictures of the launch site itself, so no idea what's going on there.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Okie_Steve on 05/03/2015 10:35 pm
Reading through this thread and seeing the "under water" lots that SpaceX owns got me to wondering. What is the legal status of property like that which is now underwater part or full time? Can you in fact own a piece of the ocean bottom? And regardless, at least in Oklahoma if you cease to pay property taxes on a piece of land it will eventually become the property of the county out right. They got rid of public sales for back taxes, here,  some years back. What is it like in Texas? Does someone really pay taxes on all those lots that are not marked as SpaceX, City/County/State/Federal property on the small hope that the landscape may change again and give them value - sort of like people who buy expiring stock options for a few cents hoping to cash in on the occasional huge last second swing in the stock price? :o
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: deruch on 05/04/2015 01:17 am
Reading through this thread and seeing the "under water" lots that SpaceX owns got me to wondering. What is the legal status of property like that which is now underwater part or full time? Can you in fact own a piece of the ocean bottom? And regardless, at least in Oklahoma if you cease to pay property taxes on a piece of land it will eventually become the property of the county out right. They got rid of public sales for back taxes, here,  some years back. What is it like in Texas? Does someone really pay taxes on all those lots that are not marked as SpaceX, City/County/State/Federal property on the small hope that the landscape may change again and give them value - sort of like people who buy expiring stock options for a few cents hoping to cash in on the occasional huge last second swing in the stock price? :o

Property taxes are based on the lot's assessed value.  Any lot under water is not worth much and consequently, the property taxes on it are almost nothing.  I don't know TX's tax rates.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Okie_Steve on 05/04/2015 02:06 am
True enough, but I would still expect most people to blow it off. Writing a $1 check and mailing it is just as much hassle as something larger and in my experience, hassle factor has a lot to do with what gets done, especially when it's "not important". Given that the county does not own all of them by now I would think that a small number of individuals or corporations have been collecting them and now own most of those lots.

Any one with access to the records care to chime in? 
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: The Amazing Catstronaut on 05/04/2015 10:54 am
I'm sure this has been discussed, but is there any reason why they might intend to reclaim any of that land in the future? If not, what kind of water based infrastructure could they develop there? Would they have any incentive to put a jetty, or a sea wall there?
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 05/04/2015 11:40 am
After Hurricane Beulah changed the shore line in 1967, I believe there was some talk about dredging the South Bay to reclaim the land, but they were never able to raise the funds. 

Today, the appraised value of a typical underwater lot is less than $100 (see example), so taxes would be less than $1 a year.  With that in mind, it wouldn't surprise me if Cameron County didn't bother collecting taxes on them.

Spot checking the SpaceX owned underwater lots, it appears they were all acquired along with 1 or more normal above water lots, i.e. purchased from the same seller at the same time. 
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 05/04/2015 12:08 pm
UT-RGV fiber optic ring to serve as information backbone
http://www.brownsvilleherald.com/careers/article_3ee7a2e8-f202-11e4-984a-8f40fbccaad3.html

Quote
UTRGV will employ two fiber optic cables — among 50 currently available — to create an ultra-high speed Internet backbone at its campuses across the Rio Grande Valley...
 
Last month, The Brownsville Herald reported that the UT System would connect SpaceX’s facility in Boca Chica to the existing data ring.

The University of Texas Rio Grande Valley (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/University_of_Texas_Rio_Grande_Valley) (UTRGV) is a new university that will be formed in 2015 from the consolidation of the University of Texas at Brownsville (UTB) and University of Texas–Pan American (UTPA).  So it appears the STARGATE (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/STARGATE) tracking center for SpaceX launches will be part of the newly consolidated UTRGV.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: deruch on 05/04/2015 01:24 pm
After Hurricane Beulah changed the shore line in 1967, I believe there was some talk about dredging the South Bay to reclaim the land, but they were never able to raise the funds. 

Today, the appraised value of a typical underwater lot is less than $100 (see example), so taxes would be less than $1 a year.  With that in mind, it wouldn't surprise me if Cameron County didn't bother collecting taxes on them.

Spot checking the SpaceX owned underwater lots, it appears they were all acquired along with 1 or more normal above water lots, i.e. purchased from the same seller at the same time.

Also possible that there is a lower threshold for the taxes to apply.  i.e. only applies to properties with assessed value over $X.  Maybe with the condition that the lots are unimproved, etc. 
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: JoerTex on 05/04/2015 07:00 pm
After Hurricane Beulah changed the shore line in 1967, I believe there was some talk about dredging the South Bay to reclaim the land, but they were never able to raise the funds. 

Today, the appraised value of a typical underwater lot is less than $100 (see example), so taxes would be less than $1 a year.  With that in mind, it wouldn't surprise me if Cameron County didn't bother collecting taxes on them.

Spot checking the SpaceX owned underwater lots, it appears they were all acquired along with 1 or more normal above water lots, i.e. purchased from the same seller at the same time.

Also possible that there is a lower threshold for the taxes to apply.  i.e. only applies to properties with assessed value over $X.  Maybe with the condition that the lots are unimproved, etc.



Each county has a Tax-Assessor/Collector and there is typically a Central Appraisal District.  These contract with the various taxing entities; school districts, cities, counties, community colleges, health districts, and so forth.  The appraisal district determines a value, subject to appeal.  Each of the entities sets its' own policy on taxes and rates.  The appraisals are public, the taxes are not.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: DavidP on 05/04/2015 09:11 pm
Hi Guys,

I'm the photographer for these images... went back today to get a couple more - they've been added to that same gallery.  We have an update running tomorrow.  There is NOTHING happening down where the launch site will be - where the groundbreaking ceremony took place.

I did remove the images of the CAPA signs... the reporter says they're denying any relationship to SpaceX (the sign there right next to the command center is just... coincidence.)  (In fact, that's how I found this thread - looking for a mention of CAPA and SpaceX together)

The only new thing I've seen there - is the command center now has a 2nd barbed wire fence around the facility - much larger areas, coming all the way up to the road.  And without going back through my older pictures, I don't remember seeing that large shipping crate there either.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 05/05/2015 08:48 am
Hi Guys,

I'm the photographer for these images... went back today to get a couple more - they've been added to that same gallery.  We have an update running tomorrow.  There is NOTHING happening down where the launch site will be - where the groundbreaking ceremony took place.

I did remove the images of the CAPA signs... the reporter says they're denying any relationship to SpaceX (the sign there right next to the command center is just... coincidence.)  (In fact, that's how I found this thread - looking for a mention of CAPA and SpaceX together)

The only new thing I've seen there - is the command center now has a 2nd barbed wire fence around the facility - much larger areas, coming all the way up to the road.  And without going back through my older pictures, I don't remember seeing that large shipping crate there either.

Thanks for the update, and welcome to the forum! 

With the lack of any activity at the launch site, it seems SpaceX may start construction at the control center area first.  From the online Cameron Appraisal District property map (http://www.cameroncad.org/cadclientdb/propertymap.aspx), it appears the control center area will include the highlighted lot numbers shown below, so I suspect the 2nd barbed wire fence encompasses that area.

According to the Environmental Impact Statement (https://www.faa.gov/about/office_org/headquarters_offices/ast/environmental/nepa_docs/review/documents_progress/spacex_texas_launch_site_environmental_impact_statement/media/FEIS_SpaceX_Texas_Launch_Site_Vol_I.pdf), the control center area will consist of:
• Two launch control center buildings
• Two payload processing facilities
• Launch vehicle processing hangar
• Two RF transmitter/receivers
• Generators and diesel storage facilities
• Roads, parking areas, fencing, security, lighting, and utilities
• A satellite fuels and gas storage facility

As for the CAPA sign right next to the control center area, yes, that does seem like a rather odd coincidence.  What other construction is happening in that area?
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: DavidP on 05/05/2015 01:43 pm
Quote
As for the CAPA sign right next to the control center area, yes, that does seem like a rather odd coincidence.  What other construction is happening in that area?

Nope, other than the new SpaceX stuff - no new construction - and probably hasn't had any for the last 20 years.  This is WAY out in the middle of nowhere.  When I lived closer to the area, we would drive out to the beach to fish, bonfire, and that's about it.  Nothing out here - the road just comes to an end on the beach.  No parking, etc.

The COPA sign, and the building it's in front of (I have no evidence that they're connected...) would be at the lot # 173640.

It's interesting to look at this map - I'm sure you've looked at the satellite view on google maps... Weems has some houses on it, and Esperson has a few... other than that, it's just scrub grass.  I got to talk to some people at the house there that SpaceX bought when they were moving in.  Friendly folks, but obviously secretive.  The neighbors say that they've been very nice. 

All the homes are brick - I'm curious to see how things hold up with the rumble of rocket launches nearby.  We're built for hurricanes here - not earthquakes. 

I'll attach the image of the building next to the command center with the COPA sign so you can see it's unclear if they're connected.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: DanielW on 05/05/2015 01:52 pm
Maybe just highly targeted advertising directed at SpaceX?
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: DavidP on 05/05/2015 01:55 pm
Maybe just highly targeted advertising directed at SpaceX?

You know... after I hit "post" I started thinking along similar lines.  Maybe they want to give the appearance they're working with SpaceX - drum up business by perceived association?
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: cscott on 05/05/2015 02:48 pm
Or the reverse: actually working with SpaceX but instructed to keep quiet about it.  It wouldn't be surprising if SpaceX contracts had NDA clauses, and a small contractor might be quite cowed by that and err on the side of dishonesty. They might not want to risk violating the NDA, without having a totally solid grasp on what it allows them to say/admit.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Jim on 05/05/2015 02:54 pm

All the homes are brick - I'm curious to see how things hold up with the rumble of rocket launches nearby.  We're built for hurricanes here - not earthquakes. 


It doesn't make the earth shake.  Hurricanes are worse.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Beittil on 05/05/2015 02:54 pm
I suppose the area can expect a lot of media and visitor attention when SpaceX does start construction work there later this year! And as for the owner of the house on the lot next to where the command center is going to be... well, looks like he is getting some money out of it for letting CAPA place their sign in his front yard :D
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 05/05/2015 03:49 pm
It's interesting to look at this map - I'm sure you've looked at the satellite view on google maps... Weems has some houses on it, and Esperson has a few... other than that, it's just scrub grass.

Back in October, another forum member took a bunch of aerial shots (http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=35425.msg1268906#msg1268906) of the area.  This one shows Boca Chica Village.

If you zoom in, you can make out the inner fence at the SpaceX control center area.  The 2nd outer fence wasn't there yet.

Also, zooming in, it looks like the CAPA sign also wasn't there in October.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: DavidP on 05/05/2015 06:22 pm

[/quote]

It doesn't make the earth shake.  Hurricanes are worse.
[/quote]

That's good to know!  SpaceX has already been a good neighbor out there from what I've seen - let everyone know if they had any concerns or problems, to let them know
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: llanitedave on 05/06/2015 12:36 am

All the homes are brick - I'm curious to see how things hold up with the rumble of rocket launches nearby.  We're built for hurricanes here - not earthquakes. 


It doesn't make the earth shake.  Hurricanes are worse.


True, much worse.  The silty, sandy soil isn't going to transmit vibrations very well.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 05/06/2015 07:48 pm
A few more of the aerial shots from JimNtexas (http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=35425.msg1268906#msg1268906).

First shot includes the launch site and Boaca Chica Beach.

Second shot is of the house that now has the CAPA sign in front.

Third shot is Boca Chica Village from another angle.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 05/06/2015 08:15 pm
For reference, here are the renderings for the launch site alongside the aerial shot from JimNtexas.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 05/07/2015 12:58 pm
County eyes new name for road
Portion of Joanna Street could become Rocket Road
http://www.brownsvilleherald.com/news/local/article_24602ad8-f466-11e4-9c33-776ea72941ba.html
Quote
Cameron County continues to prepare for the arrival of SpaceX and its commercial launch pad at Boca Chica Beach today as commissioners will consider changing the name of a road off of Highway 48 to better represent the area’s skyward vision.

Looks like a typo there.  Joanna Street is close to Highway 4, not Highway 48.

Joanna Street is highlighted in green below.  Not sure which part would be renamed.

Note that the county closed portions of Joanna Street and Remedios Avenue (http://www.brownsvilleherald.com/news/local/article_6f177afc-07b1-11e3-a736-0019bb30f31a.html) back in 2013.  Now that SpaceX has expanded their holdings in the area, perhaps the county will close additional portions of Remedios Avenue and Annette Street, highlighted in purple below.

Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 05/09/2015 07:08 pm
Hotel/conference center project is just the start for San Benito
https://riograndeguardian.com/torres-hotelconference-center-project-is-just-the-start-for-san-benito/
Quote
A new $13 million hotel and $6 million conference center set to be built on the frontage of I-69 East just south of Harlingen Medical Center will be the catalyst for more exciting projects for San Benito, predicts the city’s EDC director...

Asked if the development of the SpaceX rocket launch facility in Brownsville was a factor in the decision to build a hotel on the expressway in San Benito, Torres said: “SpaceX was assessed in projecting sales. The hotels that are now being built in Brownsville are to accommodate that flurry of visits from tourists. This hotel will be packed, booked solid, 100 percent occupancy, whenever a launch approaches and when it occurs. We expect San Benito to benefit from that because we are on the way to Brownsville.”
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Okie_Steve on 05/10/2015 02:42 am
County eyes new name for road
Portion of Joanna Street could become Rocket Road
I finally realized what was confusing me about these maps. Looking at the pictures a few posts up that sure looks like water also on the East side of highway 4. Pulling up google maps shows the State park to the West and the Federal wildlife management area to the East and they look the same on the Satellite view - like they are both underwater at least part time. Would it be possible to treat both side the same with the water overlay? As it is the maps and the photos have been causing me mental whiplash trying to reconcile the two.

https://www.google.com/maps/place/Boca+Chica+State+Park/@25.9842916,-97.1715532,4855m/data=!3m1!1e3!4m2!3m1!1s0x0:0xedb977874a319811!6m1!1e1

Edit: added google earth link
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 05/10/2015 01:38 pm
Looking at the pictures a few posts up that sure looks like water also on the East side of highway 4. Pulling up google maps shows the State park to the West and the Federal wildlife management area to the East and they look the same on the Satellite view - like they are both underwater at least part time. Would it be possible to treat both side the same with the water overlay?

Yes, much of that area seems to be shallow tidal pools and/or salt marsh, but there are no lots over there for SpaceX to buy or build on.  On my main map, I use that area for a color key of who owns what lots.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Okie_Steve on 05/10/2015 03:43 pm
I was taking that tan color as Terra firma unplatted private property
 Check my assumptions next time
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: baldusi on 05/10/2015 04:52 pm
I know we have gone over dogleg trajectories from Boca Chica a while ago. But I was worried that launches from there wouldn't be compatible with launches from the Cape. Now I've seen two (roughly possible) launch trajectories that would end up at around 28.5~29deg inclinations. I've also calculated that the time between the plane from trajectory that goes below Cuba and when it passes through the cape is about 2:50hs. If they take the one that goes above Cube, it would be around that time, too.
So, they could (conceivably) launch a FH from Boca Chica, and then three ours later a FH from KSC and have them on the same orbital plane. I don't believe that they could do same orbit rendezvous. But same day docking wouldn't be out of the question. This could mean a 100tonne stack in LEO within the day! If you thought of FH it could probably do an 80 tonne mission, at reusable cost. The possibilities are very interesting.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 05/10/2015 10:30 pm
So, they could (conceivably) launch a FH from Boca Chica, and then three ours later a FH from KSC and have them on the same orbital plane.

This got me to thinking...

According to the EIS (https://www.faa.gov/about/office_org/headquarters_offices/ast/environmental/nepa_docs/review/documents_progress/spacex_texas_launch_site_environmental_impact_statement/media/FEIS_SpaceX_Texas_Launch_Site_Vol_I.pdf), the SpaceX Boca Chica complex will include 2 launch vehicle hangars, one at the launch site, and another 2 miles down the road at the Control Center Area.  So SpaceX could easily have 2 FH launchers mated with payloads, essentially ready to go.  With this in mind, how long would it take to launch 2 vehicles from the same pad?
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Roy_H on 05/11/2015 12:30 am
According to the EIS (https://www.faa.gov/about/office_org/headquarters_offices/ast/environmental/nepa_docs/review/documents_progress/spacex_texas_launch_site_environmental_impact_statement/media/FEIS_SpaceX_Texas_Launch_Site_Vol_I.pdf), the SpaceX Boca Chica complex will include 2 launch vehicle hangars, one at the launch site, and another 2 miles down the road at the Control Center Area.  So SpaceX could easily have 2 FH launchers mated with payloads, essentially ready to go.  With this in mind, how long would it take to launch 2 vehicles from the same pad?
I couldn't find any mention of a second hangar at the Control center. What it says is that payloads are processed at the Payload Processing Center which is at the Control Center complex. Payloads are then trucked to the HIF to be mated to the rocket.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Llian Rhydderch on 05/11/2015 12:44 am
So, they could (conceivably) launch a FH from Boca Chica, and then three ours later a FH from KSC and have them on the same orbital plane.

This got me to thinking...

According to the EIS (https://www.faa.gov/about/office_org/headquarters_offices/ast/environmental/nepa_docs/review/documents_progress/spacex_texas_launch_site_environmental_impact_statement/media/FEIS_SpaceX_Texas_Launch_Site_Vol_I.pdf), the SpaceX Boca Chica complex will include 2 launch vehicle hangars, one at the launch site, and another 2 miles down the road at the Control Center Area.  So SpaceX could easily have 2 FH launchers mated with payloads, essentially ready to go.  With this in mind, how long would it take to launch 2 vehicles from the same pad?

Baldusi can correct me, but it would seem like approx. 24 hours later would be the first time slot that would allow a launch that would intersect with the same plane of the first BocaChica launch you mention.

But if the missions were unrelated, and did not need a dual-stack line up in the same plane, then the determining factor would be how fast SpaceX could ready the pad (including on-site propellant loading capacity, TEL umbilicals, etc.).  While anything faster than about ten days would set pad reuse records for US launch pads, I would think SpaceX is long term aiming for under a day since they are also aiming long-term for rapid reuse of returnable stages. 

Exciting times to be in the position to be discussing these possibilities!
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 05/11/2015 01:50 am
I couldn't find any mention of a second hangar at the Control center.

EIS (https://www.faa.gov/about/office_org/headquarters_offices/ast/environmental/nepa_docs/review/documents_progress/spacex_texas_launch_site_environmental_impact_statement/media/FEIS_SpaceX_Texas_Launch_Site_Vol_I.pdf) page 2-21
Quote
Proposed facility and infrastructure construction at the control center area would include the following:
• Two launch control center buildings
• Two payload processing facilities
Launch vehicle processing hangar
• Two RF transmitter/receivers
• Generators and diesel storage facilities
• Roads, parking areas, fencing, security, lighting, and utilities
• A satellite fuels and gas storage facility

EIS (https://www.faa.gov/about/office_org/headquarters_offices/ast/environmental/nepa_docs/review/documents_progress/spacex_texas_launch_site_environmental_impact_statement/media/FEIS_SpaceX_Texas_Launch_Site_Vol_I.pdf) page 2-24
Quote
Launch Vehicle Processing Hangar
The proposed 30,774 ft2, 50-65 ft tall launch vehicle processing hangar would be used to conduct
refurbishment of flown stages, or for pre-integration preparation of the launch vehicle stages before
they go to the pad hangar for final integration. Use of this facility would improve the overall vertical
launch area throughput by minimizing the vehicle’s activities associated with the launch vehicle in the
vertical launch area Hangar. This facility would be similar to the Hangar at the vertical launch area, but
shorter.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Lars-J on 05/11/2015 02:02 am

So, they could (conceivably) launch a FH from Boca Chica, and then three ours later a FH from KSC and have them on the same orbital plane.

This got me to thinking...

According to the EIS (https://www.faa.gov/about/office_org/headquarters_offices/ast/environmental/nepa_docs/review/documents_progress/spacex_texas_launch_site_environmental_impact_statement/media/FEIS_SpaceX_Texas_Launch_Site_Vol_I.pdf), the SpaceX Boca Chica complex will include 2 launch vehicle hangars, one at the launch site, and another 2 miles down the road at the Control Center Area.  So SpaceX could easily have 2 FH launchers mated with payloads, essentially ready to go.  With this in mind, how long would it take to launch 2 vehicles from the same pad?

Probably around a week.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Jim on 05/11/2015 02:21 am
According to the EIS (https://www.faa.gov/about/office_org/headquarters_offices/ast/environmental/nepa_docs/review/documents_progress/spacex_texas_launch_site_environmental_impact_statement/media/FEIS_SpaceX_Texas_Launch_Site_Vol_I.pdf), the SpaceX Boca Chica complex will include 2 launch vehicle hangars, one at the launch site, and another 2 miles down the road at the Control Center Area.  So SpaceX could easily have 2 FH launchers mated with payloads, essentially ready to go.  With this in mind, how long would it take to launch 2 vehicles from the same pad?

No.  The LV hangar near the control center area is only a staging area for stages.  It would not have facilities for payloads nor could it accommodate the TEL.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 05/11/2015 11:51 am
Activity picks up in SpaceX’s Boca Chica area
http://www.themonitor.com/news/local/activity-picks-up-in-spacex-s-boca-chica-area/article_b6f75702-f77e-11e4-b8a3-5bf79e65893e.html
Quote
Cameron County Judge Pete Sepulveda Jr. said he understands the larger fence delineates the site of the complex’s command or control center. Sepulveda said he believes the command center would be constructed first. “That’s the plan,” he said.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 05/11/2015 12:06 pm
Five from BISD earn Gates Millennium Scholarships
Quote
http://www.brownsvilleherald.com/news/local/article_e890a036-f786-11e4-9a1f-a7373d1c0f5d.html
Five of the Brownsville Independent School District’s top students have won Gates Millennium Scholarships, meaning that all of their college expenses are covered through graduate school and that they will receive an abundance other support...

After completing her Ph.D., Llanas said she hopes to “come back down to Brownsville and go to work for SpaceX. I’m hoping with a Ph.D. from MIT they’ll say, “of course we’ll hire you to be an engineer for SpaceX. Come on over and join our engineering team.’”

Llanas said her interest in MIT and the Gates Millennium program started during her junior year, when she started taking higher-level science classes. The following summer, news broke that Space Exploration Technologies, or SpaceX, was strongly considering Boca Chica Beach as the site for a facility to launch re-supply missions to the International Space Station — and eventually manned missions to Mars and beyond.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 05/11/2015 12:17 pm
Expanding the future
http://www.valleymorningstar.com/premium/article_55d1b2b6-f782-11e4-bcb4-536546669d18.html

Starts off the same as the "Activity picks up in SpaceX’s Boca Chica area" I posted, but continues with additional details, such as:
Quote
In other developments, the county earlier this year transferred ownership of 25 lots to the Cameron County Spaceport Development Corp. Sepulveda said that these lots are in the vicinity of the launch area, and that his understanding is that the properties would be used to develop parking.

Residents contacted at Boca Chica Village shared that they are still somewhat torn about SpaceX’s arrival in their tranquil world, but that SpaceX people have been both respectful and gracious, and they trust that should there be any damage to their properties, it would be taken care of.

A property owner has also placed a banner welcoming SpaceX to Boca Chica, while security also seems to have been stepped up at several properties at the village, which, in some segments, seems to have been noticeably improved.

Some business activity also is noticeable. A Rio Grande Valley firm that deals in infrastructure work has placed a sign just off Highway 4. The business sign and home-improvement project it highlights is on property not owned by SpaceX, but it has lined up work from other property owners in the village area.

While the banner that had been placed during September’s ground breaking ceremony, pointing to the launch pad site, no longer stands and has succumbed to the elements, the “SpaceX South Texas Launch Site” is now included in SpaceX’s website under the link for its launch facilities.

“SpaceX maintains launch sites at Cape Canaveral Air Force Station (CCAFS), Kennedy Space Center in Florida, Vandenberg Air Force Base (VAFB) in California, and Boca Chica, Texas. Each location offers key benefits to support our customers’ missions,” the website notes.

Specific to the Boca Chica site, the website notes: “SpaceX is building the world’s first commercial launch site designed for orbital missions in the Boca Chica area of South Texas. The site’s southern, coastal location is uniquely optimized for orbital space launches from the continental United States — it is as close to the equator as possible, while remaining distanced from populated areas. SpaceX South Texas will be optimized for commercial launches, and will support launches of the Falcon 9 and Falcon Heavy to low-Earth orbit, geostationary orbit, and beyond.”

SpaceX also continues with job postings for a launch operations systems technician and for an electrical engineer for the launch pad facilities.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Robotbeat on 05/11/2015 01:45 pm

So, they could (conceivably) launch a FH from Boca Chica, and then three ours later a FH from KSC and have them on the same orbital plane.

This got me to thinking...

According to the EIS (https://www.faa.gov/about/office_org/headquarters_offices/ast/environmental/nepa_docs/review/documents_progress/spacex_texas_launch_site_environmental_impact_statement/media/FEIS_SpaceX_Texas_Launch_Site_Vol_I.pdf), the SpaceX Boca Chica complex will include 2 launch vehicle hangars, one at the launch site, and another 2 miles down the road at the Control Center Area.  So SpaceX could easily have 2 FH launchers mated with payloads, essentially ready to go.  With this in mind, how long would it take to launch 2 vehicles from the same pad?

Probably around a week.
I bet they could do much better if the second payload was fully integrated (and the rocket hot-fired) before the first payload launched. They could probably launch almost the next day. Remember they snuck in a hot-fire test in between two launches just 13 days apart.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: deruch on 05/11/2015 05:08 pm
So, they could (conceivably) launch a FH from Boca Chica, and then three ours later a FH from KSC and have them on the same orbital plane.

This got me to thinking...

According to the EIS (https://www.faa.gov/about/office_org/headquarters_offices/ast/environmental/nepa_docs/review/documents_progress/spacex_texas_launch_site_environmental_impact_statement/media/FEIS_SpaceX_Texas_Launch_Site_Vol_I.pdf), the SpaceX Boca Chica complex will include 2 launch vehicle hangars, one at the launch site, and another 2 miles down the road at the Control Center Area.  So SpaceX could easily have 2 FH launchers mated with payloads, essentially ready to go.  With this in mind, how long would it take to launch 2 vehicles from the same pad?

I think that hangar is going to be used like hangar AO at CCAFS.  But we may not know until more of their final plans are released.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 05/13/2015 09:58 am
Heavy industry eyes Brownsville
http://www.brownsvilleherald.com/news/local/article_e3b546b6-f8e9-11e4-8ad5-d351f8928d99.html
Quote
Brownsville is in the running with Monterrey, Mexico, for a $400 million machining-foundry operation that would employ some 300 people within five years, according to local economic development officials.
 
Gilberto Salinas, executive vice president of the Brownsville Economic Development Council, declined to name the two companies involved, but said they have a global presence in the automotive and heavy-industry sectors.

BEDC has been in talks with the principals for almost three years, he said. Whether Brownsville lands the project or not depends largely on whether funding incentives go through, including incentives from the Texas Enterprise Fund, he said.

Money from TEF and other incentive programs was leveraged to lure SpaceX to Brownsville, and success in this instance will depend on the same approach, Salinas said.

(http://bloximages.newyork1.vip.townnews.com/brownsvilleherald.com/content/tncms/assets/v3/editorial/0/51/051922f0-f8ea-11e4-b561-4b5e3b51bb42/55526a4b94393.image.png?resize=300%2C181)
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 05/16/2015 03:46 pm
Last week I posted a reference to this article (http://www.valleymorningstar.com/premium/article_55d1b2b6-f782-11e4-bcb4-536546669d18.html) which says:
Quote
In other developments, the county earlier this year transferred ownership of 25 lots to the Cameron County Spaceport Development Corp. Sepulveda said that these lots are in the vicinity of the launch area, and that his understanding is that the properties would be used to develop parking.

I finally managed to find these 25 properties.  The online Cameron County property database (http://www.cameroncad.org/cadclientdb/propertymap.aspx) has a typo in the owners name - "CAMERON COUNTY SPACESPORT DEVELOPMENT CORP". 

It turns out that the 25 properties mentioned in the article correspond to "Parcel 2" in the EIS (https://www.faa.gov/about/office_org/headquarters_offices/ast/environmental/nepa_docs/review/documents_progress/spacex_texas_launch_site_environmental_impact_statement/media/FEIS_SpaceX_Texas_Launch_Site_Vol_I.pdf). 

The EIS shows the Control Center Area spread out over 3 separate parcels of land, as shown in the pictures below.  But the EIS also says: "However, the final site design may only include portions of one or two of the parcels."  After the EIS was written, SpaceX purchased many additional lots around Parcel 1.  Today, Parcel 1 is about 3 times larger than the originally specified area, as shown in the yellow outline below. 

Parcel 2 is owned by the county, and the referenced article indicates this will become a parking lot. Parcel 3 is still privately owned.

With construction set to begin in the next few months, it appears the launch site area will follow the map below.  Note that the map shows that SpaceX owns many other undeveloped lots.  It's not clear how these properties will be used.  SpaceX also owns 1 developed lot with a small brick house, about 1/4 mile from the control center area, and a stones throw from the parking area.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Nomadd on 05/17/2015 01:36 pm
The magnificent new SpaceX headquarters at Boca Chica, along with a patented Texas security system.
The neighboring lot already has a great viewing platform. (Unfortunately, not for sale)
There's some sort of advance prototype structure in the back lot. Possibly a new type of TEL.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Okie_Steve on 05/17/2015 03:26 pm
 In terms of access, it looks like that beach area more or less North of parcel 1 is part of federally owned  lot #171651 and is not privately owned. Combined with the state owned property on the waters edge at San Martin Blvd and maybe even some 'street closure' it secures a bit more of the perimeter.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 05/17/2015 05:53 pm
There's some sort of advance prototype structure in the back lot. Possibly a new type of TEL.
LOL!

Any more pics of the area?

In terms of access, it looks like that beach area more or less North of parcel 1 is part of federally owned  lot #171651 and is not privately owned. Combined with the state owned property on the waters edge at San Martin Blvd and maybe even some 'street closure' it secures a bit more of the perimeter.
Wow, I never knew that area had a lot #.  Google Maps labels it "Boca Chica State Park" and "Las Palomas Wildlife Management Area".  Looks like tidal pools and salt marsh with a few scraps of dry land here and there, probably not enough to build on.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: b ramsey on 05/18/2015 06:19 pm
Nice pics. These aren't the only pictures of  homes in Boca Chica village that I've seen with chain link fences with barbed wire. Is there really a crime problem there?
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Syrinx on 05/18/2015 09:03 pm
Vacation homes on warm beaches, sporadically and very infrequently occupied by the owners, are often used as free hotels by adolescent tourists.  Not at all unique to Boca Chica.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Norm Hartnett on 05/18/2015 09:40 pm
I gotta tell you; this looks a whole lot like California to me.  8) :-*

We got a lota cats named "Dog" around here.  ;D

A lot of stray starfish too.  :o
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Nomadd on 05/18/2015 10:26 pm
Nice pics. These aren't the only pictures of  homes in Boca Chica village that I've seen with chain link fences with barbed wire. Is there really a crime problem there?
Very few are fenced. Just the SpaceX house and two with dogs in the yard as far as I remember. Not that much crime when everybody has a minimum of three guns in reach at all times. A little more than half the homes looked occupied. I was looking to buy one house, but whatever genius listed it with Zillow didn't leave any contact information. Even a friendly realtor couldn't figure it out.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 05/19/2015 08:30 am
Very few are fenced. Just the SpaceX house and two with dogs in the yard as far as I remember.

Right.  Google Maps scanned Street Views of Boca Chica Village (https://www.google.com/maps/@25.99236,-97.182747,3a,75y,56.77h,68.1t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1s7A0DLqviiDqrRTsGF6Vi1Q!2e0) in April 2011.  Using this link, you can drive around virtually, using your mouse to pan around or zoom in on various properties.  Not many fences.

I did notice that the tall brown house behind the playground is relatively new (see images below).

Also, there was no fence around the SpaceX house, so that must be new as well.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Kabloona on 05/19/2015 05:12 pm
I was looking to buy one house, but whatever genius listed it with Zillow didn't leave any contact information. Even a friendly realtor couldn't figure it out.

Is that 5 Esperson St?
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Nomadd on 05/19/2015 10:12 pm
I was looking to buy one house, but whatever genius listed it with Zillow didn't leave any contact information. Even a friendly realtor couldn't figure it out.

Is that 5 Esperson St?
Yup.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Kabloona on 05/19/2015 11:15 pm
I was looking to buy one house, but whatever genius listed it with Zillow didn't leave any contact information. Even a friendly realtor couldn't figure it out.

Is that 5 Esperson St?
Yup.

That'd be cool if you could buy it and invite us all down for launch parties.  ;)

The Google street view link that DaveG posted above shows a For Sale sign in the window but I guess they didn't write a phone number on it.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 05/21/2015 12:07 pm
This position was just re-posted 5 days ago, so it appears they're still looking:

Launch Operations Systems Technician, Rio Grande Valley TX
https://hire.jobvite.com/CompanyJobs/Careers.aspx?k=Job&c=qz49Vfwr&j=oJLg0fwu&s=Indeed
Quote
Basic Qualifications:
•Must have 3+ years work experience building, deploying and troubleshooting computer systems
•Must have worked within a mid to large enterprise environment.
•Must be able to troubleshoot computer hardware, printers, and software, Microsoft technologies (Windows 7), and IP networks.

Preferred Skills and Experience:
•Associates or Bachelor’s degree in Computer Science or related field is preferred but not required.
•A+, Network+, MCSE, and other technical certifications preferred but not required.
•Working knowledge of audio visual equipment.
•Must be comfortable working with mission critical and sensitive systems, with a sense of urgency appropriate to the responsibilities.
•Ability to address and resolve information technology issues promptly, effectively and independently.
•Motivated self-starter personality, able to work independently while maintaining patience with the constant interruptions of needy coworkers.

Additional Requirements:
•Must be physically fit enough to regularly lift up to 30 lbs. for duties such as delivering computers, unpacking and rack-mounting equipment, etc.
•The ideal candidate will be flexible and flourish in a fast paced and challenging environment.
•He or she should be a self-starter and have excellent motivation, leadership, and ingenuity to excel at this position.

Windows 7, MCSE, looks like launch operations is Microsoft centric.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: oldAtlas_Eguy on 05/21/2015 03:23 pm
This position was just re-posted 5 days ago, so it appears they're still looking:

Launch Operations Systems Technician, Rio Grande Valley TX
https://hire.jobvite.com/CompanyJobs/Careers.aspx?k=Job&c=qz49Vfwr&j=oJLg0fwu&s=Indeed
Quote
Basic Qualifications:
•Must have 3+ years work experience building, deploying and troubleshooting computer systems
•Must have worked within a mid to large enterprise environment.
•Must be able to troubleshoot computer hardware, printers, and software, Microsoft technologies (Windows 7), and IP networks.

Preferred Skills and Experience:
•Associates or Bachelor’s degree in Computer Science or related field is preferred but not required.
•A+, Network+, MCSE, and other technical certifications preferred but not required.
•Working knowledge of audio visual equipment.
•Must be comfortable working with mission critical and sensitive systems, with a sense of urgency appropriate to the responsibilities.
•Ability to address and resolve information technology issues promptly, effectively and independently.
•Motivated self-starter personality, able to work independently while maintaining patience with the constant interruptions of needy coworkers.

Additional Requirements:
•Must be physically fit enough to regularly lift up to 30 lbs. for duties such as delivering computers, unpacking and rack-mounting equipment, etc.
•The ideal candidate will be flexible and flourish in a fast paced and challenging environment.
•He or she should be a self-starter and have excellent motivation, leadership, and ingenuity to excel at this position.

Windows 7, MCSE, looks like launch operations is Microsoft centric.

Does not mean that MS Win 7 is used in the launch ops systems. But office systems because of the rich applications available would use MS Win 7. For Launch ops still would be advantageous to use Ubuntu/Linux OS since all software is controllable and bugs can be fixed by the SpaceX software group, even those in the OS. All software running on the ops systems would need to be highly controlled and would also not be accessible from the Internet. A physical or virtual disconnect of the network such as a private VPN but without access to general Internet.

BTW office PCs will greatly outnumber the ops systems PCs.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 05/21/2015 05:06 pm
For Launch ops still would be advantageous to use Ubuntu/Linux OS since all software is controllable and bugs can be fixed by the SpaceX software group...

What you say makes a lot of sense, and is sort of what I expected. 

But if that were the case, wouldn't SpaceX list Ubuntu/Linux OS in the "Preferred Skills and Experience" section?
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: rpapo on 05/21/2015 05:14 pm
For Launch ops still would be advantageous to use Ubuntu/Linux OS since all software is controllable and bugs can be fixed by the SpaceX software group...

What you say makes a lot of sense, and is sort of what I expected. 

But if that were the case, wouldn't SpaceX list Ubuntu/Linux OS in the "Preferred Skills and Experience" section?
Not if it was a listing for a standard IT staffer to support the rest of the office.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: abaddon on 05/21/2015 05:19 pm
Not if it was a listing for a standard IT staffer to support the rest of the office.
Exactly.  SpaceX will presumably supply the necessary experience for their custom stuff from in-house.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 05/21/2015 07:10 pm
Not if it was a listing for a standard IT staffer to support the rest of the office.
The job is listed as "Launch Operations Systems Technician"

SpaceX will presumably supply the necessary experience for their custom stuff from in-house.
Yeah, that makes sense.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: cscott on 05/21/2015 07:19 pm
Not if it was a listing for a standard IT staffer to support the rest of the office.
The job is listed as "Launch Operations Systems Technician"

Yes, but the responsibilities include setting up A/V equipment.  So perhaps the title is a little bit sexier than the job actually is.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 05/22/2015 06:33 pm
Nice background write-up on Brownsville:
http://99-funtastic.blogspot.com/2015/05/brownsville-texas.html
Quote
Brownsville is the sixteenth most populous city in the state of Texas with a population of 181,860. It is located on the southernmost tip of Texas, United States on the northern bank of the Rio Grande, directly north and across the border from Matamoros, Tamaulipas, Mexico. The 2013 U.S. Census Bureau estimate places the Brownsville-Harlingen metropolitan area population at 417,276 allotting it the eighth most populous metropolitan area in the state of Texas. In addition, the Matamoros-Brownsville Metropolitan Area counts with a population of 1,136,995.

The Brownsville urban area is one of the fastest growing in the United States. The city's population dramatically increased after it experienced a boom in the steel industry during the first decade of the 1900s, when steel output tripled. In recent times, the Port of Brownsville has become a major economic hub for South Texas, where shipments from Mexico, other parts of the United States and the world arrive. Brownsville's economy is mainly based on its international trade with Mexico through the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), and is home to one of the fastest growing manufacturing sectors in the nation. In addition, Brownsville's climate has often been recognized among the best pro-business climates in the United States, and the city has also been ranked among the least expensive places to live in the U.S...

SpaceX is building the South Texas Launch Site, a private space launch facility east of Brownsville on the Gulf Coast. The new launch facility is expected to draw US$85 million to the city of Brownsville and eventually generate approximately US$51 million in annual salaries from some 500 jobs created by 2024.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 05/22/2015 06:40 pm
Quote
The proposed site for SpaceX spaceport with the Kopernik Shores neighborhood in the distance near Boca Chica Beach...
(http://ww3.hdnux.com/photos/27/55/65/6217054/15/960x540.jpg)
http://www.chron.com/news/science-environment/slideshow/SpaceX-Projects-84599/photo-6217054.php
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 05/22/2015 06:47 pm
Interesting juxtaposition...

Quote
Did you know that Space X, a private rocket launch facility, has broken ground on Boca Chica beach just five miles south of South Padre Island? Many believe that South Texas will become the leader of future space travel and that the monthly rocket launches will attract millions of new tourists to South Padre Island fueling a new real estate demand for the island.

Did you know that there is a gambling bill in front of the Texas legislation that if passed, would pave the way for Las Vegas style gambling on South Padre Island?
(http://images.craigslist.org/01414_1GIq4ARK3Hp_600x450.jpg)
http://mcallen.craigslist.org/reo/5034468556.html
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: JasonAW3 on 05/22/2015 06:49 pm
Not if it was a listing for a standard IT staffer to support the rest of the office.
The job is listed as "Launch Operations Systems Technician"

Yes, but the responsibilities include setting up A/V equipment.  So perhaps the title is a little bit sexier than the job actually is.

Sounds like a job I ought to put in for!
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 05/22/2015 07:19 pm
Quote from Bill Hardwood, CBS News:
Quote
SpaceX has a really interesting program going. 

You know, one of the problems with launching spacecraft from Cape Canaveral, you have conflicts with military missions that can have high priority, everything has to be scheduled into a very complex matrix between civilian, military, and commercial missions.  What Elon Musk, the founder of SpaceX wants is a launch site where he doesn't have those conflicts, where he can take a commercial satellite, for example a communications satellite, and launch it when he wants to launch it, and not have to worry about conflicts with competing missions. 

And so the Texas site gives him that.  They're in the process of building it.  They hope to have it ready for first launch next year, and they're in the process now of building the infrastructure that they need there to do that: The processing hangars, the pad itself, the control center, all of that.  But once he gets this established, he's going to be able to launch communications satellites, other commercial missions that don't involve NASA, don't involve the Air Force.  He can do it on his own. 

And that's really interesting.  This will be the first orbital launch site, one where spacecraft are going to orbit, that isn't operated or has some connection to a government agency.  And that's a pretty interesting thing.  You know Musk has even said that at some point down the road they may be launching astronauts out of Texas, and perhaps even planetary missions.

Link with audio available here (https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=6&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0CEcQFjAF&url=https%3A%2F%2Fthespaceshow.wordpress.com%2F&ei=4XBfVcvgCpLhsATG-YCIBw&usg=AFQjCNGpeKiZael-sV5J9iF5-LPe_PC5xQ&sig2=QkhlmLpa1zC6Oz-WHEL-rw)
Quote above starts around 8:30 into the mp3 audio program.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: watermod on 05/26/2015 02:07 pm
http://water.weather.gov/ahps2/index.php?wfo=bro (http://water.weather.gov/ahps2/index.php?wfo=bro)  Flood alerts for Brownsville region.

Is the launch facility area safe from this type of flooding as it is near the mouth of the Rio Grande?
I  will admit the question was brought on by Austin's rather dramatic photos
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Nomadd on 05/26/2015 03:06 pm
Interesting juxtaposition...

Quote
Did you know that Space X, a private rocket launch facility, has broken ground on Boca Chica beach just five miles south of South Padre Island? Many believe that South Texas will become the leader of future space travel and that the monthly rocket launches will attract millions of new tourists to South Padre Island fueling a new real estate demand for the island.

Did you know that there is a gambling bill in front of the Texas legislation that if passed, would pave the way for Las Vegas style gambling on South Padre Island?

It's closer to 50 miles as the crow drives a car.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: abaddon on 05/26/2015 03:37 pm
It's closer to 50 miles as the crow drives a car.
It's closer to 5 miles as the crow watches the rocket launch.  I think that was probably the point...
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: groundbound on 05/26/2015 04:18 pm
It's closer to 50 miles as the crow drives a car.
It's closer to 5 miles as the crow watches the rocket launch shock wave from RUD travels.  I think that was probably the point...
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: elvis on 05/26/2015 06:28 pm
Quote from Bill Hardwood, CBS News:
Quote
SpaceX has a really interesting program going. 
  This will be the first orbital launch site, one where spacecraft are going to orbit, that isn't operated or has some connection to a government agency. 


Except Sea Launch been doing that since 1999
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: spacenut on 05/26/2015 08:35 pm
The Rio Grande has dams that can hold back flood waters, don't know about other tributaries coming into this area. 
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 05/26/2015 08:58 pm
The Rio Grande has dams that can hold back flood waters, don't know about other tributaries coming into this area.

There are no tributaries near the launch area, only tidal pools and salt marsh.  So rain isn't an issue, unless it comes with a hurricane.  For example, in 1967, the area was devastated by Hurricane Beulah (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hurricane_Beulah), which redrew the shoreline of Boca Chica Village (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boca_Chica_Village). 

To this day, half the lots sold in Boca Chica Village are under salt water.  There was some talk about dredging the South Bay to reclaim the land, but funds never materialized.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Nomadd on 05/28/2015 07:32 am
 After I drove around Boca Chica explaining it's possible importance to the spread of the human race to my long suffering partner, we passed Brownsville International.
 She casually said "I guess that'll make Boca Chica "Brownsville Interplanetary"
 
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: The Amazing Catstronaut on 05/28/2015 08:36 am
Quote from Bill Hardwood, CBS News:
Quote
SpaceX has a really interesting program going. 
  This will be the first orbital launch site, one where spacecraft are going to orbit, that isn't operated or has some connection to a government agency. 


Except Sea Launch been doing that since 1999

First on land is still a significant milestone. You couldn't enlarge the dimensions of sea launch all that effectively as demand grew.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 05/28/2015 05:33 pm
Quote from Bill Hardwood, CBS News:
Quote
SpaceX has a really interesting program going. 
  This will be the first orbital launch site, one where spacecraft are going to orbit, that isn't operated or has some connection to a government agency. 

Except Sea Launch been doing that since 1999

Energia owns 95% of Sea Launch.  The Russian government owns 38% of Energia.  That would seem to qualify as "some connection to a government agency".

Also, the term "launch site" strongly implies a land-based facility.

In any case, the Texas launch site is really interesting.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: elvis on 05/29/2015 12:24 am

Quote

Energia owns 95% of Sea Launch.  The Russian government owns 38% of Energia.  That would seem to qualify as "some connection to a government agency".

Also, the term "launch site" strongly implies a land-based facility.

In any case, the Texas launch site is really interesting.

Well Energia owns the joint NOW.  Didn't for the first 10 years.  Orbital Launch site implies a site that launches rockets to orbit, no mention of land in the description.  If the Odyssey is not an "orbital launch site", what is it then?

But we digress off-topic....Go SpaceX
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 05/29/2015 04:17 pm
Brownsville international airport has major projects in the works
http://www.bedc.com/news/brownsville-international-airport-has-major-projects-works
Quote
“Before we invested a lot of money expanding north and south on this footprint, we came to the realization that we need to move the terminal so that we can accommodate much larger aircraft in the future,” he said. “Part of the new terminal will involve putting in new concrete to park larger airplanes.”
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Comga on 05/30/2015 11:31 pm
That map got me thinking.

The southernmost tip of South Padre Island is 8.12 km from the launch site, according to Google Maps.  That means that one could see the shore  from a 5.2 meter (16.9 foot) high position, and conversely, can see anything 5 meters above the ground at the launch site while lying on the beach.  Given that the launch platform is probably more than 3 meters off the ground, and we are all close to 2 meters high, we should be able to see the entire rocket while standing on the beach, if we are so fortunate as to be there at the right time.  There are some buildings not far away that would put people on them close to that 5 meter mark.

Any idea from the publicly shown renderings how high the launch platform would be?

edit:  Goggle maps also shows a four square houses across the Brazos Santiago Pass from SPI.  Not obvious how one gets there, which may be part of "Clark Island", other than driving up the beach from Rt 4 by the future launch pad.  The southernmost of these is less than 7.5 km from the pad.  People have posted many photos of the houses on Weems St in Boca Chica, but I haven't seen any of the Clark Island houses.  Anyone been there?
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Damon Hill on 05/30/2015 11:39 pm
Good luck seeing much through all the salt haze and heat turbulence at that distance.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Jdeshetler on 05/31/2015 12:09 am
Good luck seeing much through all the salt haze and heat turbulence at that distance.

And sun glares in your eyes as the rockets rise, best view from the south.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Robotbeat on 05/31/2015 12:27 am
Falcon Heavy is a dang big rocket. You won't have a problem seeing it.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: spacenut on 05/31/2015 01:39 am
Yes, Falcon 9 first stage is about 9 stories high.  BFR/MCT will probably be over 100 meters high at least unless it is short and fat. 
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 05/31/2015 10:41 am
edit:  Goggle maps also shows a four square houses across the Brazos Santiago Pass from SPI.  Not obvious how one gets there, which may be part of "Clark Island", other than driving up the beach from Rt 4 by the future launch pad.  The southernmost of these is less than 7.5 km from the pad.  People have posted many photos of the houses on Weems St in Boca Chica, but I haven't seen any of the Clark Island houses.  Anyone been there?

Good catch!  I never noticed these before.

Actually, looking closer, there are 7 structures in that area.  Three of them have brown roofs, so they are harder to spot.  There are no paved roads in the area, so I guess you would drive along the beach to get there.  The second satellite picture below actually shows a vehicle parked along the beach.

I have no idea what these structures are.

I looked this area up in the online Cameron County Real Estate Map (http://www.cameroncad.org/cadclientdb/propertymap.aspx), and there are some lots up that way, but without a point of reference, its hard to correlate these lots to the satellite images.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: corrodedNut on 05/31/2015 12:08 pm
Since you got me looking at Google Earth, looks like there's new imagery from this January the showing the SpaceX fence-line.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 05/31/2015 12:59 pm
Since you got me looking at Google Earth, looks like there's new imagery from this January the showing the SpaceX fence-line.
Nice image!  How exactly did you get it?  My version of Google Earth still shows the earlier imagery, without any SpaceX stuff.

Edit: I finally figured it out - using the "Show historical imagery" icon at the top of the page.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Robotbeat on 05/31/2015 01:06 pm
Yes, Falcon 9 first stage is about 9 stories high.  BFR/MCT will probably be over 100 meters high at least unless it is short and fat.
It will be much squatter than F9. Past a certain point, scaling laws prevent rockets from scaling higher as much as becoming larger in cross-section.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 05/31/2015 01:57 pm
Since you got me looking at Google Earth, looks like there's new imagery from this January the showing the SpaceX fence-line.
Nice image!  How exactly did you get it?  My version of Google Earth still shows the earlier imagery, without any SpaceX stuff.

Edit: I finally figured it out - using the "Show historical imagery" icon at the top of the page.

Looking closer, the outer fence follows the SpaceX property line, except at the north-western tip, when they've mowed down the vegetation, but left some area by the water line unfenced.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Nomadd on 05/31/2015 08:49 pm
 Found the owners of 5 Esperson. A 91 year old couple who don't use computers. Now I just need to look at all these diagrams and see how many 160 ft tall buildings SpaceX is going to block my view with.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Kabloona on 05/31/2015 09:00 pm
Found the owners of 5 Esperson. A 91 year old couple who don't use computers. Now I just need to look at all these diagrams and see how many 160 ft tall buildings SpaceX is going to block my view with.

Can't build a launch complex without a high bay or two. But, hey, you'll be right there at ground zero, so to speak!
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 05/31/2015 10:08 pm
Found the owners of 5 Esperson. A 91 year old couple who don't use computers. Now I just need to look at all these diagrams and see how many 160 ft tall buildings SpaceX is going to block my view with.
It was boarded up in April 2011.  Maybe the old couple winters there.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Nomadd on 05/31/2015 11:45 pm

It was boarded up in April 2011.  Maybe the old couple winters there.

They haven't been to the house in three years and want to be rid of it. Turns out they live about ten miles from my home base in Michigan. Their daughter told me where to get a key to the place if I go back in a couple of weeks.
 Anybody know how to build an elevated, air conditioned observation deck with a tiki bar?
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: llanitedave on 05/31/2015 11:46 pm

It was boarded up in April 2011.  Maybe the old couple winters there.

They haven't been to the house in three years and want to be rid of it. Turns out they live about ten miles from my home base in Michigan. Their daughter told me where to get a key to the place if I go back in a couple of weeks.
 Anybody know how to build an elevated, air conditioned observation deck with a tiki bar?


Yep.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: meekGee on 06/01/2015 12:01 am

It was boarded up in April 2011.  Maybe the old couple winters there.

They haven't been to the house in three years and want to be rid of it. Turns out they live about ten miles from my home base in Michigan. Their daughter told me where to get a key to the place if I go back in a couple of weeks.
 Anybody know how to build an elevated, air conditioned observation deck with a tiki bar?

Rent a scissor lift.  The drinks will be shaken though.

But you can rent-a-scaffold and that's pretty stable.  I have some.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: darkenfast on 06/01/2015 01:04 am
Hah! The NASASpaceflight Intelligence Directorate - Brownsville Station. 
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Okie_Steve on 06/01/2015 03:27 am
Would it be possible to overlay the new sat image and county lot map?
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: cscott on 06/01/2015 04:49 am
Will the tiki bar have a 24/7 web cam?  Pointed in an interesting direction?
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Beittil on 06/01/2015 07:40 am
Wait what, Nomad. Are you saying you are actually going to be buying that property or have you gotten permission from the owners to set up a webcam or something out there?
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 06/01/2015 10:05 am
Wait what, Nomad. Are you saying you are actually going to be buying that property or have you gotten permission from the owners to set up a webcam or something out there?

Actually, it appears there may be more than one NSF member posting here who is interested in purchasing that house.

Owner is asking $63,500.
http://www.zillow.com/homedetails/5-Esperson-St-Brownsville-TX-78521/2114014851_zpid/
Quote
3 bed, 2 bath, tile floors, (2) 1600 gallon water tanks, large living room, laundry room, stove, refrigerator and microwave stay, immediate occupancy. Ceiling fans, patio, covered front porch, screen doors. One mile to Boca Chica beach.
◾Cooling: Central
◾Floor size: 1,700 sqft

At that price, maybe a bunch of us here could throw in few thousand and do a time-share.  It would be nice for launch parties.  1.9 miles from the launch site.

The drinks will be shaken though.
Shaken, not stirred.

Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Elvis in Space on 06/01/2015 01:46 pm
Wait what, Nomad. Are you saying you are actually going to be buying that property or have you gotten permission from the owners to set up a webcam or something out there?

Actually, it appears there may be more than one NSF member posting here who is interested in purchasing that house.

Owner is asking $63,500.
http://www.zillow.com/homedetails/5-Esperson-St-Brownsville-TX-78521/2114014851_zpid/
Quote
3 bed, 2 bath, tile floors, (2) 1600 gallon water tanks, large living room, laundry room, stove, refrigerator and microwave stay, immediate occupancy. Ceiling fans, patio, covered front porch, screen doors. One mile to Boca Chica beach.
◾Cooling: Central
◾Floor size: 1,700 sqft

At that price, maybe a bunch of us here could throw in few thousand and do a time-share.  It would be nice for launch parties.  1.9 miles from the launch site.

It would cut down on a lot of confusion if one person bought it and charged the rest of us when we show up. The real potential is in the future resale value. If all this actually works I'd love to own that house ten years from now.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Nomadd on 06/01/2015 01:57 pm
Wait what, Nomad. Are you saying you are actually going to be buying that property or have you gotten permission from the owners to set up a webcam or something out there?
There are a dozen possible problems, but I'm planning on going back to look again in a week or so. SpaceX doesn't seem like the type to rip homeowners off through eminent domain, but it could happen. Insurers might not touch it, which would make it a little risky. SpaceX might put so much stuff around it, it'll be in a hole with no view. The county could get stupid regarding any improvements. Aliens could bombard the site to prevent the spread of humanity throughout the cosmos.
 Or, it could have a great view, Elon might stop by for a beer and let me tie into water and sewer and a cheerleader bus might get stuck in the sand, requiring all of them to be put up for the night.
 I figure I could make up for the cost of the house with free beers from NSFers.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Roy_H on 06/01/2015 02:38 pm
I expect all property to become SpaceX via eminent domain. These properties are within the safety zone for rocket launch. I don't see any way they are going to be occupied via non-SpaceX personnel and likely vacated during a launch.

Edit: To back this opinion up a little, why would SpaceX buy all the non-grouped properties it already has if they didn't plan on eventually owning the whole area? For eminent domain I expect they have to provide proof of property values in the area, so the best way to do this is purchase from anyone who is willing to sell at this time. I expect that eventually they will fence in the whole area with a gate on Hwy 4 near the Control Center and no one will be allowed past except by SpaceX permission (employees, customers, media reps etc.) and will certainly not allow a house owner and friends to roam their launch grounds particularly during a launch.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Kabloona on 06/01/2015 03:00 pm
Wait what, Nomad. Are you saying you are actually going to be buying that property or have you gotten permission from the owners to set up a webcam or something out there?
There are a dozen possible problems, but I'm planning on going back to look again in a week or so. SpaceX doesn't seem like the type to rip homeowners off through eminent domain, but it could happen. Insurers might not touch it, which would make it a little risky. SpaceX might put so much stuff around it, it'll be in a hole with no view. The county could get stupid regarding any improvements. Aliens could bombard the site to prevent the spread of humanity throughout the cosmos.
 Or, it could have a great view, Elon might stop by for a beer and let me tie into water and sewer and a cheerleader bus might get stuck in the sand, requiring all of them to be put up for the night.
 I figure I could make up for the cost of the house with free beers from NSFers.

Here's a thought. Start a Kickstarter campaign asking for $100 donations to buy the house. 500 donations gets you $50k. Each donation entitles the donor to spend one night in your guest room as a visitor on a SpaceX launch-viewing trip. So if you can handle 500 guest-nights spread over a period of several years, you could buy the house for practically nothing out of pocket.  ;)
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Okie_Steve on 06/01/2015 03:02 pm
Even with eminent domain as a possibility, you would be unlikely to lose money. When the University here was buying up property for an expansion they had to use eminent domain to acquire some of it, but they gave very generous settlements. Someone I knew went from a small frame place on one side of campus to a nice brick place about the same distance on the other side. She did not want to sell, but she did not get hosed either. A recent sale for $X is called a "Comp" in the real estate industry and it proof positive of the actual property value. At least here, the County will use the sale value to update the appraised value.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: JoerTex on 06/01/2015 03:44 pm
I expect all property to become SpaceX via eminent domain. These properties are within the safety zone for rocket launch. I don't see any way they are going to be occupied via non-SpaceX personnel and likely vacated during a launch.

Edit: To back this opinion up a little, why would SpaceX buy all the non-grouped properties it already has if they didn't plan on eventually owning the whole area? For eminent domain I expect they have to provide proof of property values in the area, so the best way to do this is purchase from anyone who is willing to sell at this time. I expect that eventually they will fence in the whole area with a gate on Hwy 4 near the Control Center and no one will be allowed past except by SpaceX permission (employees, customers, media reps etc.) and will certainly not allow a house owner and friends to roam their launch grounds particularly during a launch.

I'm looking at the parallel situation in McGregor.  For years a public road passed within 200ft of the base of the main test stand.  They had an agreement with the rancher who was just west of their site, and during firing access was limited.  They flew the hover tests over another rancher's pasture so the cows could watch up close.

Then, leases were renegotiated and SpaceX now fully controls access.  The cows have moved to an adjacent pasture.  The ranch has become shops.  SpaceX has to maintain 'agricultural use' but no one is checking.

Another issue at Boca Chica for access during launch is the beach itself.  Texas beaches are public, no rental/lease/ownership of the area seaward of the dune line.  This could be an issue as much as boats sailing off Florida.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Kabloona on 06/01/2015 04:04 pm
Quote
Another issue at Boca Chica for access during launch is the beach itself.  Texas beaches are public, no rental/lease/ownership of the area seaward of the dune line.  This could be an issue as much as boats sailing off Florida.

The appropriate authorities have agreed to close off the beach during SpaceX launches so it seems that issue has already been dealt with. Presumably there will have to be security details keeping people from sneaking onto the beach. Hopefully that will be easier than keeping stray boats away from the Cape.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Comga on 06/01/2015 05:38 pm
Lookng at the maps on an earlier post (http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=35425.msg1375145#msg1375145) it appears that the view to the launch site, about 7 degrees north of east, will not be blocked by the hangar, but will look over "roads and parking" and a lot not (yet) planned for development, although it is also marked as "parking" on another map.

Clear sailing (viewing) from 5 Epsperson!
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 06/01/2015 06:10 pm
I expect all property to become SpaceX via eminent domain.
Yes, I expect this as well, eventually.

These properties are within the safety zone for rocket launch. I don't see any way they are going to be occupied via non-SpaceX personnel and likely vacated during a launch.
The EIS (https://www.faa.gov/about/office_org/headquarters_offices/ast/environmental/nepa_docs/review/documents_progress/spacex_texas_launch_site_environmental_impact_statement/media/FEIS_SpaceX_Texas_Launch_Site_Vol_I.pdf) strongly implies residents can stay during launches. 
For example:
Quote
ES.9
Significant increases in noise from launch vehicle operations would result in an unavoidable adverse
impact for Boca Chica Village residents. However, hearing protection measures would be implemented
to ensure the health and safety of Boca Chica Village residents during launch activities.
Also, I expect there would be legal implications to kicking someone out of their home.

Edit: To back this opinion up a little, why would SpaceX buy all the non-grouped properties it already has if they didn't plan on eventually owning the whole area?
Many of the lots SpaceX purchased are underwater.  I mean literally under 2-3 feet of salt water, due to the devastation of Hurricane Beulah (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hurricane_Beulah).  When I looked at the details of these underwater purchases, there was always another lot that was sold to SpaceX by the same owner on the same date.  In other words, SpaceX may be buying lots they're not particularly interested in as part of package deals negotiated by owners.



Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 06/01/2015 06:27 pm
Another issue at Boca Chica for access during launch is the beach itself.  Texas beaches are public, no rental/lease/ownership of the area seaward of the dune line.
This was dealt with 2 years ago: Perry signs SpaceX bill for S. Texas beach closures (http://www.mysanantonio.com/news/politics/texas_legislature/article/Perry-signs-SpaceX-bill-for-S-Texas-beach-4547676.php)

Presumably there will have to be security details keeping people from sneaking onto the beach.
Also covered in the EIS (https://www.faa.gov/about/office_org/headquarters_offices/ast/environmental/nepa_docs/review/documents_progress/spacex_texas_launch_site_environmental_impact_statement/media/FEIS_SpaceX_Texas_Launch_Site_Vol_I.pdf):
Quote
On the day of a launch operation, the Boca Chica Beach would be closed to the public... As necessary, SpaceX would monitor the beach area using video surveillance, an ATV or SUV, or small unmanned aerial vehicle to ensure that the area is clear before a launch operation.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Nomadd on 06/01/2015 10:42 pm
"Government personnel, SpaceX personnel, emergency personnel, and anyone with property beyond this soft
checkpoint could pass, but the general public would be denied access."
 Page 12. Kinda puts a damper on parties.

"The second checkpoint would be
a hard checkpoint, just west of the control center area, which is a “no pass” area determined by
an FAA approved hazard area. No one would be permitted to pass by this hard checkpoint during launch
operations."
 It looks like the residence would be OK, but anyone there would be trapped there for up to 15 hours (Insert beer/hours conversion ratio reference here) since the road would be closed.
 Restoring the garage to hide the vehicle and hiding in the shadows if they knock on the door is a possibility. Evil laugh would be optional.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Roy_H on 06/01/2015 10:51 pm
"The second checkpoint would be
a hard checkpoint, just west of the control center area, which is a “no pass” area determined by
an FAA approved hazard area. No one would be permitted to pass by this hard checkpoint during launch
operations."
 It looks like the residence would be OK, but anyone there would be trapped there for up to 15 hours (Insert beer/hours conversion ratio reference here) since the road would be closed.
 Restoring the garage to hide the vehicle and hiding in the shadows if they knock on the door is a possibility. Evil laugh would be optional.

Not sure how you come to that conclusion. "Just west of the Control Center" is well before you get to Boca Chica village. This seems to confirm my earlier statement about SpaceX owning the entire area. This village will disappear.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: QuantumG on 06/01/2015 11:07 pm
My wild guess: there's flood damage because it's uninsurable.

Buying it does sound like a fun exercise, if you've got that kind of money to burn (or personal credit, as I doubt you'll get a mortgage for what is probably seen as a bad investment.)
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Elvis in Space on 06/01/2015 11:17 pm
My wild guess: there's flood damage because it's uninsurable.

Buying it does sound like a fun exercise, if you've got that kind of money to burn (or personal credit, as I doubt you'll get a mortgage for what is probably seen as a bad investment.)

My dad and grandfather were in the real estate business. Most of what they bought was considered a "bad investment" but they noticed that nobody was making any more land in town so they figured it was a safe bet. Over time they were very right.

Once Walt Disney had 17,000 acres for Disney World he was approached by one of his executives to see if Walt wanted to act on an opportunity to get 10,000 more. The executive didn't think it was needed and almost failed to mention it. Walt told him to buy it right away. "Wouldn't you like to own that much near Disneyland now?"

This won't be like flipping a condo. If anyone can get anything around there and hold it for a while they will likely do very well. If I thought my wife would not run me out of the house at gunpoint I'd buy it myself.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: QuantumG on 06/01/2015 11:28 pm
My dad and grandfather were in the real estate business. Most of what they bought was considered a "bad investment" but they noticed that nobody was making any more land in town so they figured it was a safe bet. Over time they were very right.

There's land to buy right next door.


Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Nomadd on 06/02/2015 12:46 am
"The second checkpoint would be
a hard checkpoint, just west of the control center area, which is a “no pass” area determined by
an FAA approved hazard area. No one would be permitted to pass by this hard checkpoint during launch
operations."
 It looks like the residence would be OK, but anyone there would be trapped there for up to 15 hours (Insert beer/hours conversion ratio reference here) since the road would be closed.
 Restoring the garage to hide the vehicle and hiding in the shadows if they knock on the door is a possibility. Evil laugh would be optional.

Not sure how you come to that conclusion. "Just west of the Control Center" is well before you get to Boca Chica village. This seems to confirm my earlier statement about SpaceX owning the entire area. This village will disappear.
So, I take you think the several pages describing the effects of construction and launches on the residents of the village are intentional misdirections by SpaceX since they intend to level the village anyhow?
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Roy_H on 06/02/2015 05:45 am
"The second checkpoint would be
a hard checkpoint, just west of the control center area, which is a “no pass” area determined by
an FAA approved hazard area. No one would be permitted to pass by this hard checkpoint during launch
operations."
 It looks like the residence would be OK, but anyone there would be trapped there for up to 15 hours (Insert beer/hours conversion ratio reference here) since the road would be closed.
 Restoring the garage to hide the vehicle and hiding in the shadows if they knock on the door is a possibility. Evil laugh would be optional.

Not sure how you come to that conclusion. "Just west of the Control Center" is well before you get to Boca Chica village. This seems to confirm my earlier statement about SpaceX owning the entire area. This village will disappear.
So, I take you think the several pages describing the effects of construction and launches on the residents of the village are intentional misdirections by SpaceX since they intend to level the village anyhow?

Ok, I admit to being wrong. But mostly because the quoted statement of "Just west of the Control Center" turns out to be in error. The Hard check point is East of the Control center area as per map above and well past Boca Chica village. Therefore Boca Chica village is not inside the FAA approved hazard area.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 06/02/2015 08:43 am
Even with eminent domain as a possibility, you would be unlikely to lose money. When the University here was buying up property for an expansion they had to use eminent domain to acquire some of it, but they gave very generous settlements.

Right.

In our area, they used eminent domain to acquire some properties for a new interstate outer belt.  From what I heard, the prices were more than fair, around 20% over market value before the project started.  Some owners held out and got more, but not much more, not enough to pay the legal fees to fight it.

Rather than trying to screw existing property owners, I believe the aim of eminent domain is usually the opposite, to keep existing property owners from price gouging the buyer.

I've noticed that many of the properties around the control center area have been recently purchased by investment companies.  It will be interesting to see how this all plays out...
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Beittil on 06/02/2015 08:54 am
Well, I would definitely drop by some time there to party with you guys during a launch event :D Even if it first requires up to 10-12 hours of flying to get there in the first place :)
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 06/02/2015 10:09 am
... the quoted statement of "Just west of the Control Center" turns out to be in error. The Hard check point is East of the Control center area as per map above and well past Boca Chica village.
Yes, I noticed this discrepancy in the EIS as well.  Either the text or the map image is wrong.  I assume its the text because other areas of the EIS imply residents can stay during launches.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Nomadd on 06/02/2015 03:17 pm
 I've been roaming North America and Africa without a home since I retired last year. Having a cheap place near the beach to rest and kayak and work on a computer project of mine wouldn't be bad no matter how the rest works out. Losing a few grand on the deal just means I'll be staying at Super 8s and riads in the medina instead of Wyndams for a while. And a place to hang out along with residence in an income tax free state will save me a lot.
 I should be back there in three days or so for a serious look.
 
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Chris Bergin on 06/02/2015 04:18 pm
Heads up, I'll be starting thread 4 in the coming days in preparation for some exciting things per the near-future.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: starsilk on 06/02/2015 04:19 pm
I've been roaming North America and Africa without a home since I retired last year. Having a cheap place near the beach to rest and kayak and work on a computer project of mine wouldn't be bad no matter how the rest works out. Losing a few grand on the deal just means I'll be staying at Super 8s and riads in the medina instead of Wyndams for a while. And a place to hang out along with residence in an income tax free state will save me a lot.
 I should be back there in three days or so for a serious look.

internet connectivity probably sucks, and I'm willing to bet SpaceX won't be inclined to hook you up to the fat fiber connection they are paying to have run.

you'll be cellular (if you're lucky) or dialup.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: abaddon on 06/02/2015 04:48 pm
Heads up, I'll be starting thread 4 in the coming days in preparation for some exciting things per the near-future.

Oooh, exciting.  Any guesses from the peanut gallery?  Things I can think of off the top of my head:
- New underground test stand complete
- FH on new test stand
- DragonFly related stuff
- ... ?
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Syrinx on 06/02/2015 04:55 pm
you'll be cellular (if you're lucky) or dialup.

Dish. Not that it doesn't suck, but it's better than dialup.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: cscott on 06/02/2015 07:11 pm
Heads up, I'll be starting thread 4 in the coming days in preparation for some exciting things per the near-future.

Oooh, exciting.  Any guesses from the peanut gallery?  Things I can think of off the top of my head:
- New underground test stand complete
- FH on new test stand
- DragonFly related stuff
- ... ?
None of those ideas make sense for this thread.

It would be something Boca Chica-related, maybe a schedule for an inaugural flight?
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: rcoppola on 06/02/2015 07:20 pm
Heads up, I'll be starting thread 4 in the coming days in preparation for some exciting things per the near-future.

Oooh, exciting.  Any guesses from the peanut gallery?  Things I can think of off the top of my head:
- New underground test stand complete
- FH on new test stand
- DragonFly related stuff
- ... ?
None of those ideas make sense for this thread.

It would be something Boca Chica-related, maybe a schedule for an inaugural flight?
In all fairness, Chris' original post had McGregor mentioned, so they did make sense in that context. McGregor was then removed from the sentence

*This post can be deleted but wanted to support abaddon's enthusiasm.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: abaddon on 06/02/2015 08:05 pm
Thanks rcoppola, I was thinking I was going crazy :).  Read the McGregor and didn't even think that this thread would not be the correct place for it, unfortunately.

I think we already have some payloads that have been announced as scheduled for Boca Chica in FY17, so I'm guessing it isn't that.  Now I'm really curious, maybe it's just related to building out the site that it's about, but if not, what could it be?

Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: groundbound on 06/02/2015 08:06 pm
It would seem a little early for a first test firing of a complete engine, but bigger surprises have happened.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Elvis in Space on 06/02/2015 08:18 pm
I've been roaming North America and Africa without a home since I retired last year. Having a cheap place near the beach to rest and kayak and work on a computer project of mine wouldn't be bad no matter how the rest works out. Losing a few grand on the deal just means I'll be staying at Super 8s and riads in the medina instead of Wyndams for a while. And a place to hang out along with residence in an income tax free state will save me a lot.
 I should be back there in three days or so for a serious look.

internet connectivity probably sucks, and I'm willing to bet SpaceX won't be inclined to hook you up to the fat fiber connection they are paying to have run.

you'll be cellular (if you're lucky) or dialup.

Twelve meg sat connection isn't awful. Going to need a service for NASA channel anyway.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Kabloona on 06/02/2015 08:26 pm
It would seem a little early for a first test firing of a complete engine, but bigger surprises have happened.

I assume you're talking about Raptor. Here's a recent quote from Gwynne:

Quote
In the meantime, SpaceX is working on a new LOX/methane engine that will power the company's Mars rocket (also known as the “BFR”) at NASA's Stennis Space Center in Hancock Country, Mississippi. “We call it Raptor, it will be the engine that should take folks to Mars, that's the plan. The vehicle architecture to do that is a little bit in flux. So the engine performance is in flux. But it'll be a big engine. I don't have the final specs on that engine, we're in development, we're testing injectors right now at Stennis and working on a capability to test in Texas as well. It'll be a very different rocket, the densities are different and the diameters are going to change.

http://aviationweek.com/blog/spacexs-gwynne-shotwell-talks-raptor-falcon-9-crs-2-satellite-internet-and-more

If they're testing injector configurations, that's still a long way from a finished engine. More likely the next step at McGregor would be the "working on a capability to test in Texas", ie building a test stand.

They may also be making news-worthy progress on the FH test stand.

On that subject, has it been confirmed that the new "submerged" test stand with the in-ground flame duct is in fact for FH as has been assumed? Or is it possible that it's actually for Raptor engine tests? Anyone?
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: abaddon on 06/02/2015 09:00 pm
On that subject, has it been confirmed that the new "submerged" test stand with the in-ground flame duct is in fact for FH as has been assumed? Or is it possible that it's actually for Raptor engine tests? Anyone?
I am not sure if it is confirmed, but it is the only thing that makes sense.  FH can't be tested on the elevated test stand.  I guess it is remotely possible they could build out LC39A to support a full-duration firing and do the qual testing there, but I think we can discount that possibility.  FH is scheduled and needed much earlier than Raptor.

That said, this is all off-topic for the thread, which is at least partly my fault :).  News about the Texas launch site would not include McGregor work except possibly tangentially.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Kabloona on 06/02/2015 09:31 pm
Oops, sorry for the off topic question.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: meekGee on 06/02/2015 09:49 pm
Heads up, I'll be starting thread 4 in the coming days in preparation for some exciting things per the near-future.

Oooh, exciting.  Any guesses from the peanut gallery?  Things I can think of off the top of my head:
- New underground test stand complete
- FH on new test stand
- DragonFly related stuff
- ... ?
None of those ideas make sense for this thread.

It would be something Boca Chica-related, maybe a schedule for an inaugural flight?
In all fairness, Chris' original post had McGregor mentioned, so they did make sense in that context. McGregor was then removed from the sentence

*This post can be deleted but wanted to support abaddon's enthusiasm.

I hope this is not about McGregor.

We all expect a number of exciting things out of there already, so this just confirms that any of them may have just happened.

OTOH if there's something exciting in the near term about Boca Chica, I'm all ears.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Robotbeat on 06/03/2015 12:29 am
you'll be cellular (if you're lucky) or dialup.

Dish. Not that it doesn't suck, but it's better than dialup.
SpaceX's constellation should be up in 5 years, should be available by the time BFR starts test launches. :D
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: The Amazing Catstronaut on 06/03/2015 08:41 am
SpaceX's constellation should be up in 5 years, should be available by the time BFR starts test launches. :D

Coincidence... I think not? twirls moustache evilly.

This is assuming BFR isn't prone to Falcon Heavy iterative design delays, but yes, economically, it checks out. Their Mars funding revenue stream would start to come in just as their Mars enabling LV starts its roll out. Exciting times!
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 06/03/2015 11:17 am
I've been roaming North America and Africa without a home since I retired last year. Having a cheap place near the beach to rest and kayak and work on a computer project of mine wouldn't be bad no matter how the rest works out.
In that case, I would say go for it!
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Okie_Steve on 06/03/2015 10:48 pm
And a place to hang out along with residence in an income tax free state will save me a lot.
Yup my father in law did that. Said moving to Amarillo tx for two years saved them a bundle in taxes when rolling fund out of tax deferred account after retiring.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Nomadd on 06/05/2015 06:14 pm
 All taken from the launch pad site. I only cheated a little and stood on a 12 foot high dune right about where the pad will be. I felt like a ten year old standing there half the morning, picturing what was on it's way.
 The heat distortion was pretty severe, but not bad for a pocket camera.

 The tree in the front yard at 5 Esperson looks like the only thing keeping one from sitting in his lounge chair in the air conditioned, mosquito free living room and watching the launch as long as they don't put a parking lot or something in the way.
 The rooms at South Padre are a little further off, but should still be a heck of a show. I'm thinking they might need to shut down traffic on the bridge a few minutes before launch so people don't drive off the edge when that sucker lights.
 A neighbor told me the observation deck to the rear of the SpaceX house was a guy who bought the lot, poured the pad and was then refused electrical service from the county, so that's as far as he'll build.
 The building to the left of the Esperson houses is in very good shape and waiting for someone to turn it into a bar and grill. My partner suggests "Stairway to Heaven".
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Nomadd on 06/05/2015 06:29 pm
 This is the payload processing facility on the left and the launch vehicle processing hangar on the right at present. Some minor improvements are anticipated.
 These guys were wandering around the control center site. Good to see some sort of activity.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: JoerTex on 06/05/2015 09:11 pm
This is the payload processing facility on the left and the launch vehicle processing hangar on the right at present. Some minor improvements are anticipated.
 These guys were wandering around the control center site. Good to see some sort of activity.

A survey would be expected before any real development plan or building design starts.  That what the guys 'wandering around' are doing.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 06/06/2015 04:49 am
A neighbor told me the observation deck to the rear of the SpaceX house was a guy who bought the lot, poured the pad and was then refused electrical service from the county, so that's as far as he'll build.
I'm confused.  Looking at the map, the back yard of the SpaceX house connects with the back yard of 9 Esperson, shown below.  Is this what you mean by "to the rear of the SpaceX house"?

The building to the left of the Esperson houses is in very good shape and waiting for someone to turn it into a bar and grill. My partner suggests "Stairway to Heaven".
Which left?
 - as you're looking toward the house from the street?
 - as you're looking toward the street from the house?

Are you talking about the 2-story brown structure?
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 06/06/2015 05:19 am
For a common point of reference, here's an aerial map with house numbers. 

SpaceX owns the house at 13 Weems.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Lar on 06/06/2015 05:28 am
I'd love to see some sort of Crowdsourced NSF entertainment complex develop here. If Nomadd is buying one maybe the next door bar and grille one could be bought by a consortium of NSFers...  before someone else does.

assuming the access is sorted that is.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 06/06/2015 05:36 am
By the way, is the convenience store down the street still open?

Doesn't look like much, but they sell beer!
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: The Amazing Catstronaut on 06/06/2015 06:53 am
By the way, is the convenience store down the street still open?

Doesn't look like much, but they sell beer!

It will if we buy it up and make that the Crowdsourced Nasa Space Flight Entertainment Complex of Lar's invention (CNSFEC). This seems like a plan here. This website needs a forward operating base.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: parham55 on 06/06/2015 11:52 am
I'd love to see some sort of Crowdsourced NSF entertainment complex develop here. If Nomadd is buying one maybe the next door bar and grille one could be bought by a consortium of NSFers...  before someone else does.

assuming the access is sorted that is.

My thoughts on the matter...


(Mods, please delete if this detracts from the quality of this thread.)
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 06/06/2015 12:02 pm
LAST MINUTE SPACEX FIX: ADDITIONAL WASHOUT AT BOCA CHICA
http://rrunrrun.blogspot.com/2015/06/last-minute-spacex-fix-additional.html
Quote
On May 7, 2015, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (http://www.swg.usace.army.mil/Media/PublicNotices/tabid/2217/Article/587971/swg-2012-00381-spacex-cameron-county.aspx) issued a public notice (http://www.swg.usace.army.mil/Portals/26/docs/regulatory/PN%20May/PN.%20201200381_2.pdf), regarding permit number SWG-2012-00381, that Space X had underestimated their impact (http://www.swg.usace.army.mil/Portals/26/docs/regulatory/PN%20May/SpaceX_Texas_Launch_Project_Plan_Drawings_042215.pdf) on the wetlands and estuaries they will occupy near Boca Chica Beach within the Bahia Grande watershed.

Originally SpaceX had estimated that they would need to fill in 3.3 acres of the area to build their launch facility.  Now in an addendum (http://www.swg.usace.army.mil/Portals/26/docs/regulatory/PN%20May/SpaceX_Texas_Launch_Site_Wetland_Mitigation_Plan_Addendum_042215.pdf) to that approved application, they now claim they need to expand their wetland fill by an additional 2.13 acres – an increase of 64 percent.

The reason given is to add vehicular access areas around the site so they can access to parts of the  facility they would need to service.

Fair enough. Except when you look at the map of the new fill areas (see below) there seems to be a problem with that request. Yes, most of the area would be consistent with the vehicular access request (the areas in yellow and blue) but one stands out as serving the purpose of acting as a barrier or berm to inhibit water flow and hydrology of the area. This would be the section to the south separate from the facility.

Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 06/06/2015 01:12 pm
That tall brown structure next door to 5 Esperson, the more I look, the more odd it seems. 

1) Lot confusion.  According to the Comeron County online property map/database (http://www.cameroncad.org/cadclientdb/propertymap.aspx), tall brown structure seems to straddle a property line, as shown in the pictures below.  The owner of the house on the corner of LBJ and Esperson owns all 3 lots, so maybe the County sort of counts this as 1 big lot.  The fences seem to break this into 2 lots, but in the rear, there seems to be a common driveway with a gate in the fence.

2) When was it built?  In January 2011, the tall brown structure didn't exist.  In January 2014, it does exist.  Was this structure built after SpaceX announced their plans to build a launch site there?

3) What is it's purpose?  It seems too small to be a house.  Was it built specifically to observe SpaceX launches? or just have a nice view of the beach?

4) From a local code point of view, is this like a deck with an enclosed porch?  As a wooden structure, it seems out of place with all the brick homes. 

5) What utilities does it have?  The picture shows some Christmas lights around the front deck areas, so it appears to have electricity, but I don't see any water tanks around, so it may not have a bathroom.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Nomadd on 06/06/2015 03:31 pm
That tall brown structure next door to 5 Esperson, the more I look, the more odd it seems. 

1) Lot confusion.  According to the Comeron County online property map/database (http://www.cameroncad.org/cadclientdb/propertymap.aspx), tall brown structure seems to straddle a property line, as shown in the pictures below.  The owner of the house on the corner of LBJ and Esperson owns all 3 lots, so maybe the County sort of counts this as 1 big lot.  The fences seem to break this into 2 lots, but in the rear, there seems to be a common driveway with a gate in the fence.

2) When was it built?  In January 2011, the tall brown structure didn't exist.  In January 2014, it does exist.  Was this structure built after SpaceX announced their plans to build a launch site there?

3) What is it's purpose?  It seems too small to be a house.  Was it built specifically to observe SpaceX launches? or just have a nice view of the beach?

4) From a local code point of view, is this like a deck with an enclosed porch?  As a wooden structure, it seems out of place with all the brick homes. 

5) What utilities does it have?  The picture shows some Christmas lights around the front deck areas, so it appears to have electricity, but I don't see any water tanks around, so it may not have a bathroom.

That's the one I was talking about. It has no utilities because the county won't add any new electrical services. The lights might be from when it was one big lot with the Esperson/LBJ house. They might change that once SpaceX runs new stuff in, but the guy I talked to says SpaceX hasn't finished the permit process yet, so nobody knows just how things will work. I'm not sure about the map you posted. Those properties are both fenced, (dogs and cats are all friendly) and what's marked as three lots is pretty evenly divided into two. Maybe someone combined three into one, subdivided into two and sold SpaceX the eastern one
 The structure permit says it's a garage. The owner may have stretched that definition a tad, but the county seems to be pretty easy about such things.
 Working with rumors, third hand info, ancient and contradictory diagrams and mostly guesswork isn't making this whole process any easier. Nothing I say is gospel, but mostly from residents and confused sounding county workers who could be mistaken about some things.
 The "SpaceX house" is the big white roofed one on LBJ next to that two story wooden structure on Eperson. I'm not sure where 13 Weems comes into the picture.
 Left and right just means left and right in the photo of Esperson I took from the launch pad. The potential bar & grill I was talking about is actually just off of Hwy 4 when you turn onto Eichorn.
 
 I'm not real happy about the lack of real work at the site, out of code septic at the house, contradictory predictions on county support for the village, idiot developers who go into the wide open spaces and cram the houses together like they're in the French Quarter, being 4 inches above high tide, the vagueness of the plans for dealing with critical wetland and wildlife issues or any of a dozen other things that could kill the spaceport or render the homes impractical. I've lived in the jungles of South America and central Africa, and the mosquitoes here are the worst I've ever seen.
 But I think of being 80 years old and remembering the time I had a chance for a front row, center seat to this show, and passing it up because I didn't want to take a risk.
 
 
 
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Nomadd on 06/06/2015 03:34 pm
 And, by the way, according to a street sign near the house about 1/2 mile SW of Boca Chica village, Joanna St. has been renamed Rocket Road. That's the house I really wish was for sale.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Llian Rhydderch on 06/06/2015 06:53 pm
That tall brown structure next door to 5 Esperson, the more I look, the more odd it seems. 

---snip---

4) From a local code point of view, is this like a deck with an enclosed porch?  As a wooden structure, it seems out of place with all the brick homes. 

---snip---

I take your point, but I believe that the two-story piling-foundation structure, with blow-out walls on the first floor, is the most modern code-approved structural form for hurricane areas with likely high storm surge on occasion.  The older solid-walled structures are much less robust in hurricane/high-water conditions.

So methinks the 2-story brown structure has it about right, and may be what the Nomadd/Crowdsourced-NSF-entertainment-complex should consider.   ;D

Cheers,
Llian
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Kabloona on 06/06/2015 10:35 pm
At least he'll get a new garage for his efforts.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 06/07/2015 01:14 pm
Working with rumors, third hand info, ancient and contradictory diagrams and mostly guesswork isn't making this whole process any easier. Nothing I say is gospel, but mostly from residents and confused sounding county workers who could be mistaken about some things.
 The "SpaceX house" is the big white roofed one on LBJ next to that two story wooden structure on Eperson. I'm not sure where 13 Weems comes into the picture.
First, thanks for all the info.  Having an NSFer on the ground is way cool.

According to the online Cameron County real estate database (http://www.cameroncad.org/cadclientdb/propertymap.aspx), the house on the corner of LBJ and Esperson belongs to Frank Kawalski and Dana Hollinger, who purchased it in May of 2010.  The online database also shows SpaceX purchased 13 Weems in May of 2014.

I'm not sure about the map you posted. Those properties are both fenced, (dogs and cats are all friendly) and what's marked as three lots is pretty evenly divided into two. Maybe someone combined three into one, subdivided into two and sold SpaceX the eastern one.
 The structure permit says it's a garage. The owner may have stretched that definition a tad, but the county seems to be pretty easy about such things.
Looking at pictures from the ground, the fence certainly makes it look like 2 lots, but from the air I notice there's a common driveway between them, toward the back of the property, shown in the picture below. 

Also, looking at the house address numbers from the air (http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=35425.msg1385545#msg1385545), notice how the first house on Weems St is #5, and your house is also #5, but much further down.  That would seem indicate that the white roofed house on the corner and the tall brown garage structure are both part of 1 large lot, with an address on LBJ.

Another big hint, looking at Google Maps street level view images from 2011, there was no tall brown structure there, and no fence around the rear half of the lot, but there was a German Shepard dog within the fence of the corner lot.  The picture you took a few weeks ago shows the same dog near the tall brown structure, on the other side of the fence.  This seems to indicate that both fenced in areas belong to the same owner, and that it's the same owner since 2011.

Also, since you add that the tall brown structure's permit is as a garage, my bet is that it gets electricity from the house on the corner, like any garage, probably with an underground cable.

So basically, it appears to be a garage with an observation deck built on top, part of which is enclosed and air conditioned, but may not have running water, and it belongs to the house on the corner of LBJ and Esperson.

So... be a friendly neighbor!
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 06/07/2015 01:32 pm
By the way, I just Googled "Frank Kawalski boca chica spacex", and found this:

http://www.brownsvilleherald.com/image_9988e082-c840-11e3-b234-0017a43b2370.html
Quote
Frank Kawalski a long term resident of Boca Chica Village is looking forward to the establishment of SpaceX at Boca Chica. Kawalski believes SpaceX will be good for the area, bringing jobs and more people. (AP Photo/The Brownsville Herald, Brad Doherty)
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Llian Rhydderch on 06/07/2015 02:08 pm
By the way, I just Googled "Frank Kawalski boca chica spacex", and found this:

http://www.brownsvilleherald.com/image_9988e082-c840-11e3-b234-0017a43b2370.html
Quote
Frank Kawalski a long term resident of Boca Chica Village is looking forward to the establishment of SpaceX at Boca Chica. Kawalski believes SpaceX will be good for the area, bringing jobs and more people. (AP Photo/The Brownsville Herald, Brad Doherty)

Dave or Nomadd,

Perhaps we should designate an emissary to contact Frank, introduce him to the best spaceflight-related site on the web, and get Chris to offer an L2 membership in return for what would obviously be great on-the-ground reporting of goings-on at Boca Chica.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 06/07/2015 02:57 pm
The guy who bought the lot, which is on the north side of the Weems/Eichorn intersection, actually expected the county to run water and sewer all the way out there just for him.
http://www.krgv.com/news/local-news/man-denied-building-permits-by-the-county-at-boca-chica-village/32390862
Right.  Sam Clauson (named in that article), owns 3 lots.  Another potential neighbor.

By the way, it seems Eichorn Ave and LBJ Blvd are the same thing.  Not sure which name is right.  Google Maps shows LBJ Blvd.  The Cameron County real estate map (http://www.cameroncad.org/cadclientdb/propertymap.aspx) shows Eichorn, but many of the deeds show LBJ.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: deruch on 06/07/2015 03:26 pm
My only evidence for Frank's house being SpaceX was the big SpaceX sign on the fence. Maybe there's another explanation for that. If you search the Cameron database using his name, he seems to own a lot of those properties, including 7 Esperson. Guess I need to talk to that guy.

Yeah, but that sign read, "Welcome SpaceX" didn't it?  That could be put up by the local landowner as a welcome to the company, as opposed to having been put up by the company.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Nomadd on 06/07/2015 08:57 pm
My only evidence for Frank's house being SpaceX was the big SpaceX sign on the fence. Maybe there's another explanation for that. If you search the Cameron database using his name, he seems to own a lot of those properties, including 7 Esperson. Guess I need to talk to that guy.

Yeah, but that sign read, "Welcome SpaceX" didn't it?  That could be put up by the local landowner as a welcome to the company, as opposed to having been put up by the company.
Yeah, I may have screwed up there. My first mistake ever.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 06/08/2015 03:48 am
Left and right just means left and right in the photo of Esperson I took from the launch pad. The potential bar & grill I was talking about is actually just off of Hwy 4 when you turn onto Eichorn.
OK, I see which one you mean now.

Actually, I think this is the same building that was the convenience store back in 2011.  Looks like they've made major changes.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 06/08/2015 04:40 am
South Padre Lobbies for Flexibility in Hotel Occupancy Tax for Space Tourism (https://padreeliteteam.wordpress.com/2015/05/22/south-padre-lobbies-for-flexibility-in-hotel-occupancy-tax-for-space-tourism/)
Quote
South Padre Island has been vying to capitalize on the launches by creating a space tourism industry similar to those that sprung up at Cape Canaveral and Houston thanks to decades of NASA shuttle launches. Through construction of possible launch watch platforms, museums, and other space-related infrastructure, the Island hopes to become a space mecca.

To that end, City leaders have been lobbying hard to gain more flexibility in how they can use monies from the Hotel Occupancy Tax (HOT). Councilwoman Julee LaMure explained that, as of now, that money ‘s use is defined narrowly: a portion can be used for beach maintenance, another portion can be used for events that fill up hotel beds. “HOT is the largest source of revenue that SPI has. We’re tourism dependent and that HOT is vital,” LaMure said.



Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Gordon Widera on 06/08/2015 07:27 pm
Not sure this has been posted so just in case....

The Monitor

"SpaceX requests more wetlands covered for rocket launch site, public comment open"

http://www.themonitor.com/news/local/spacex-requests-more-wetlands-covered-for-rocket-launch-site-public/article_6dfe84de-0de6-11e5-a61d-930f216a22ef.html
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: WmThomas on 06/08/2015 08:14 pm
My only evidence for Frank's house being SpaceX was the big SpaceX sign on the fence. Maybe there's another explanation for that. If you search the Cameron database using his name, he seems to own a lot of those properties, including 7 Esperson. Guess I need to talk to that guy.

Yeah, but that sign read, "Welcome SpaceX" didn't it?  That could be put up by the local landowner as a welcome to the company, as opposed to having been put up by the company.
Yeah, I may have screwed up there. My first mistake ever.

Yeah. I wondered why you and others were taking that sign as being official. It didn't look like a SpaceX sign.

But thanks so much for all your sleuthing.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 06/08/2015 10:47 pm
Not sure this has been posted so just in case....

The Monitor

"SpaceX requests more wetlands covered for rocket launch site, public comment open"

http://www.themonitor.com/news/local/spacex-requests-more-wetlands-covered-for-rocket-launch-site-public/article_6dfe84de-0de6-11e5-a61d-930f216a22ef.html

Previously covered here:
http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=35425.msg1385607#msg1385607
from a different article with a few more details.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: cscott on 06/09/2015 12:36 am
The other (first) article read as if the author had a chip on their shoulder about something.  As far as I can tell, the new "land bridge" has a legitimate purpose in allowing access to the "island" when water levels are high.  It may well be that this changes the hydrology in a negative way, but that sorry of checking is what the permitting process is for.  Can't see anything wrong with spacex proposing the cheapest means of access in their initial application.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 06/09/2015 09:43 am
The other (first) article read as if the author had a chip on their shoulder about something...
Yes, I noticed that as well.  I'm guessing it may have something to do with the runoff election for mayor.  The incumbent mayor scored political points for bringing in SpaceX, so anything that casts doubt on that could benefit the challenger.

I'm all for enabling SpaceX to make the launch site best suited to their needs, but it's good to know different points of view, especially if they point out more details. 

Specifically, the author of the other article questions why SpaceX wants additional wetlands mitigation a little south of the launch site, as shown in blue below.  This makes me wonder (purely speculation) if they may be planning to put landing pads somewhere near there.  If all goes well, one version of Falcon Heavy will do 7 tonnes to GTO with all 3 boost stages returning to the launch site (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Falcon_Heavy#Reusable_technology_development).  7 tonnes would cover all current commercial satellites.  So there would need to be 3 landing pads somewhere.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: cscott on 06/09/2015 10:35 am
Mitigation areas are where SpaceX plants vegetation/creates habitats to compensate for habitat they destroyed elsewhere.  So again, it makes sense to me that SpaceX would choose a mitigation area that is not currently a useful habitat, although the article author makes a reasonable point that you don't want to choose an area where your efforts will be futile.

But it's a fair bet that the mitigation areas are as far from any future development as possible.  So likely no landing pads down there.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: guckyfan on 06/09/2015 12:34 pm
Those 3 patches they proposed for mitigation just happen to be 3 lots they own. All the area around them are owned by the state.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: JBF on 06/09/2015 12:43 pm
Those 3 patches they proposed for mitigation just happen to be 3 lots they own. All the area around them are owned by the state.

The current permit requires the SpaceX to “purchase and transfer for preservation of 50 acres of high quality tidal flats, wetlands and uplands to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. " According to the Brownsville Herald SpaceX will add an addition 4.3 acres to that to maintain the 10:1 ratio with this latest request.

http://www.brownsvilleherald.com/premium/article_7ea658a2-0e4f-11e5-b66c-07caa85cc98f.html (http://www.brownsvilleherald.com/premium/article_7ea658a2-0e4f-11e5-b66c-07caa85cc98f.html)
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: guckyfan on 06/09/2015 12:56 pm
Those 3 patches they proposed for mitigation just happen to be 3 lots they own. All the area around them are owned by the state.

The current permit requires the SpaceX to “purchase and transfer for preservation of 50 acres of high quality tidal flats, wetlands and uplands to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. " According to the Brownsville Herald SpaceX will add an addition 4.3 acres to that to maintain the 10:1 ratio with this latest request.

http://www.brownsvilleherald.com/premium/article_7ea658a2-0e4f-11e5-b66c-07caa85cc98f.html (http://www.brownsvilleherald.com/premium/article_7ea658a2-0e4f-11e5-b66c-07caa85cc98f.html)

So these lots would be transfered to the state?
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: rpapo on 06/09/2015 12:59 pm
So these lots would be transfered to the state?
The "state" in the larger sense: to the U.S. Federal Government (Fish and Wildlife Service), not to the Republic of Texas.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Nomadd on 06/09/2015 03:20 pm
So these lots would be transfered to the state?
The "state" in the larger sense: to the U.S. Federal Government (Fish and Wildlife Service), not to the Republic of Texas.
That can get kind of complicated in Texas. They're not real big on transferring land to federal ownership. Ownership could be state, but under federal control.

 I had a talk with Frank Kawalski. He owns and is trying to sell 7 Esperson and 16 Weems in addition to owning the big house on LBJ. (The three homes with the ugly, rusting white metal roofs) He also owns a whole lot of lots.
 Frank has talked to the store owner, who recently fixed it up. The guy isn't interested in selling and is waiting for construction activity to pick up so he can re-open. Maybe once he does, someone can talk to him about investing in a viewing deck in return for the permanent rights to a table in the corner and free beer.

 One tree off of Eichorn is blocking the view of the pad from 5 Esperson. I'm trying to figure how much time it would cost me in Purgatory or karma credits or whatever to sneak over one night and whack it.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Damon Hill on 06/09/2015 11:01 pm
Plant some more trees elsewhere and your net balance of karma points should increase.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: RonM on 06/09/2015 11:33 pm
So these lots would be transfered to the state?
The "state" in the larger sense: to the U.S. Federal Government (Fish and Wildlife Service), not to the Republic of Texas.
That can get kind of complicated in Texas. They're not real big on transferring land to federal ownership. Ownership could be state, but under federal control.

 I had a talk with Frank Kawalski. He owns and is trying to sell 7 Esperson and 16 Weems in addition to owning the big house on LBJ. (The three homes with the ugly, rusting white metal roofs) He also owns a whole lot of lots.
 Frank has talked to the store owner, who recently fixed it up. The guy isn't interested in selling and is waiting for construction activity to pick up so he can re-open. Maybe once he does, someone can talk to him about investing in a viewing deck in return for the permanent rights to a table in the corner and free beer.

 One tree off of Eichorn is blocking the view of the pad from 5 Esperson. I'm trying to figure how much time it would cost me in Purgatory or karma credits or whatever to sneak over one night and whack it.


It's the State of Texas. It stopped being the Republic of Texas in 1846 when it joined the Union.

There are National Wildlife Management Areas and state parks in the area. If there is an issue, the Texas Parks and Wildlife Department can manage the land.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Nomadd on 06/09/2015 11:38 pm


It's the State of Texas. It stopped being the Republic of Texas in 1846 when it joined the Union.

You might want to avoid certain Texas bars.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: RonM on 06/09/2015 11:42 pm


It's the State of Texas. It stopped being the Republic of Texas in 1846 when it joined the Union.

You might want to avoid certain Texas bars.

Fortunately, I live in a different former Confederate state. And in certain bars here I'd better not say former.  :)
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Nomadd on 06/10/2015 06:27 pm
 Spent some time with Weems neighbors and finally got this right. This is the SpaceX house. It's 11 Weems. The company put the fence and the bars up after they bought it. It's just to give people a place to hang out or stay for the night when they're working in the area for now.

 Before and after of the store. Somebody did a heckuva restoration.

 You know they're serious when you see this.

 The big news in the village today was a rumble between two large coyote packs in the middle of the highway. I have a picture of one of the losers, with four buzzards working on him, but it didn't seem quite on topic.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Okie_Steve on 06/10/2015 11:25 pm
Looks like a bunker. No windows and welded steel porch.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: groundbound on 06/11/2015 12:48 am
Looks like a bunker. No windows and welded steel porch.

Add ECLSS and you might weather a storm surge.

Then again, maybe not.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 06/11/2015 02:16 am
This is the SpaceX house. It's 11 Weems. The company put the fence and the bars up after they bought it. It's just to give people a place to hang out or stay for the night when they're working in the area for now.
Here's a comparison of the SpaceX house now (using your photo), and back in 2011 (using Google street level view).  Note that in 2011, there was a house number on the door.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Nomadd on 06/11/2015 03:45 am
 Looks like you're right. I got the 11 address from the guy living at 12, so I took his word for it.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 06/11/2015 09:57 am
I'm not real happy about the lack of real work at the site, out of code septic at the house, contradictory predictions on county support for the village, idiot developers who go into the wide open spaces and cram the houses together like they're in the French Quarter, being 4 inches above high tide, the vagueness of the plans for dealing with critical wetland and wildlife issues or any of a dozen other things that could kill the spaceport or render the homes impractical. I've lived in the jungles of South America and central Africa, and the mosquitoes here are the worst I've ever seen.

 But I think of being 80 years old and remembering the time I had a chance for a front row, center seat to this show, and passing it up because I didn't want to take a risk.

Questions:

1) Do you happen to know if the mosquito problem year-round, or more seasonal?

2) You mention "out of code septic at the house".  Is it an underground system?  Is there some type of grandfather clause for exiting residents in Boca Chica Village?  As a new home owner, are you required to upgrade the system? 

3) How do other Boca Chica Village residents generally feel about SpaceX?

4) Did Frank Kawalski talk about his garage with the viewing deck on top?

5) Is there any more activity at the control center area?

Thanks
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: foltster on 06/11/2015 03:52 pm
How SpaceX of someone to hang that lucky horseshoe that was sitting on top of the light.  Reminds of the clover on the launch patches.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: rickyramjet on 06/11/2015 04:41 pm
I'm trying to figure out buyable lots. I'd love to have the one the guy complaining about no utilities has. A garage with a deck there would be great. Part of my last job was taking very quiet Multiquip generators and making them quieter, so you could barely tell they were running. I also handled solar setups. Restroom could be some sort of RV type setup.
Restroom alternative: incinerating toilets http://www.ecojohn.com/ecojohn_sr.html.  There are a couple of other manufacturers as well.  Some are propane, some are electric.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Nomadd on 06/11/2015 04:49 pm
 I installed Incinolets on some of our barges. They might be good for some purposes, but using them in an environment of a dozen large men whose main source of calories is the grease they use for cooking everything is not the best idea.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Nomadd on 06/11/2015 06:43 pm
I'm not real happy about the lack of real work at the site, out of code septic at the house, contradictory predictions on county support for the village, idiot developers who go into the wide open spaces and cram the houses together like they're in the French Quarter, being 4 inches above high tide, the vagueness of the plans for dealing with critical wetland and wildlife issues or any of a dozen other things that could kill the spaceport or render the homes impractical. I've lived in the jungles of South America and central Africa, and the mosquitoes here are the worst I've ever seen.

 But I think of being 80 years old and remembering the time I had a chance for a front row, center seat to this show, and passing it up because I didn't want to take a risk.

Questions:

1) Do you happen to know if the mosquito problem year-round, or more seasonal?

2) You mention "out of code septic at the house".  Is it an underground system?  Is there some type of grandfather clause for exiting residents in Boca Chica Village?  As a new home owner, are you required to upgrade the system? 

3) How do other Boca Chica Village residents generally feel about SpaceX?

4) Did Frank Kawalski talk about his garage with the viewing deck on top?

5) Is there any more activity at the control center area?

Thanks
Mosquitoes are three season around there.

 Septic is drainfields and grandfathered in, but major repairs would be verboten.

 Most residents don't really want their peaceful paradise disturbed, but hope the complex will help property values and seem to understand that progress always has a price.

 Frank said that he stretched the permit a bit for the platform, but needed it high enough to clear the trees. He seems very entrepreneurial.

 I haven't seen much activity but for pickups stopping at the fenced buildings. They seem to just be checking the locks.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 06/13/2015 11:32 am
Not sure if anyone noticed this already, but reading the SpaceX Texas Launch Site Wetland Mitigation Plan Addendum (http://www.swg.usace.army.mil/Portals/26/docs/regulatory/PN%20May/SpaceX_Texas_Launch_Site_Wetland_Mitigation_Plan_Addendum_042215.pdf), I found this tidbit:
Quote
It should be noted that the proposed crossing to the south of the site, which has been included to allow vehicular access to the southern portion of the site, would include culverts...

This "proposed crossing to the south of the site" is circled in red in the first picture below.  I've also included a reference photo of a crossing using multiple culverts, to show what SpaceX may have in mind.

So the question is: Why does SpaceX want "to allow vehicular access to the southern portion of the site"?

To help answer this, I've added a 3rd picture below showing a larger view of the launch site, with the "proposed crossing to the south of the site" added in.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Nomadd on 06/13/2015 12:51 pm
Not sure if anyone noticed this already, but reading the SpaceX Texas Launch Site Wetland Mitigation Plan Addendum (http://www.swg.usace.army.mil/Portals/26/docs/regulatory/PN%20May/SpaceX_Texas_Launch_Site_Wetland_Mitigation_Plan_Addendum_042215.pdf), I found this tidbit:
Quote
It should be noted that the proposed crossing to the south of the site, which has been included to allow vehicular access to the southern portion of the site, would include culverts...

This "proposed crossing to the south of the site" is circled in red in the first picture below.  I've also included a reference photo of a crossing using multiple culverts, to show what SpaceX may have in mind.

So the question is: Why does SpaceX want "to allow vehicular access to the southern portion of the site"?

To help answer this, I've added a 3rd picture below showing a larger view of the launch site, with the "proposed crossing to the south of the site" added in.

They might need to set up equipment, like cameras and sensors or monitor everything within a certain distance of the pad for effects on plants and critters. There are a lot of quicksand like patches in that wetland and you really don't want to go slogging through the muck to get somewhere.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Space OurSoul on 06/13/2015 01:31 pm
Is that where the landing pad(s) will go, perhaps?
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 06/14/2015 09:54 am
Brownsville just re-elected their current Mayor, Tony Martinez, by a wide margin.
http://www.brownsvilleherald.com/news/article_de0e602a-1235-11e5-9367-bb7ea5197d1d.html?mode=jqm
Quote
Unofficial votes indicate Martinez received 4,280 votes to Ahumada's 2,557.

From what I saw on local news web sites, SpaceX was a common topic in the mayoral election.  The current mayor vigorously supports SpaceX.  For example, the city donated land plus $0.5 million in cash for the STARGATE tracking center (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/STARGATE).
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 06/15/2015 11:14 am
More on the Brownsville airport expansion.

https://riograndeguardian.com/martinez-time-is-now-for-brownsville/

Quote
In his interview with the Rio Grande Guardian, Martinez was asked about his plans to revamp Brownsville South Padre Island International Airport. He said: “When SpaceX came they said we really need an elongated runway, like 12,000 or 13,000 feet. Our longest one is 7,400 feet. The FAA said we need a letter of interest from whoever wants to use it. We said, it is Elon Musk and SpaceX and they said, oh, okay, no problem. They also said, you are kind of outdated with some of your airplanes and with the way your terminal sits you are going to have to move them eventually. So, that kind of spurred on everything. We said: how long have we had this airport? It has been a long time and it has not been done. The FAA will reimburse you for all things you put in there but you have got to make the initial outlay. When I found all that out we started acquiring properties and we are probably about 92 percent there to do the extension. The rest of it is just money.”
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: oldAtlas_Eguy on 06/15/2015 04:29 pm
More on the Brownsville airport expansion.

https://riograndeguardian.com/martinez-time-is-now-for-brownsville/

Quote
In his interview with the Rio Grande Guardian, Martinez was asked about his plans to revamp Brownsville South Padre Island International Airport. He said: “When SpaceX came they said we really need an elongated runway, like 12,000 or 13,000 feet. Our longest one is 7,400 feet. The FAA said we need a letter of interest from whoever wants to use it. We said, it is Elon Musk and SpaceX and they said, oh, okay, no problem. They also said, you are kind of outdated with some of your airplanes and with the way your terminal sits you are going to have to move them eventually. So, that kind of spurred on everything. We said: how long have we had this airport? It has been a long time and it has not been done. The FAA will reimburse you for all things you put in there but you have got to make the initial outlay. When I found all that out we started acquiring properties and we are probably about 92 percent there to do the extension. The rest of it is just money.”

The airport is one logistical problem that needs to be solved before launch operations begin. Large cargo planes must be able to land and have suitable hangers. These would be carrying the multi 100s of million dollar payloads from as far away as Europe. Also charted international large jet flights for 50-100 payload processing personnel from payload manufacturers like Airbus would also need to be handled by the airport. Making the airport a full internation capable airport handling direct international flights of large jets.

Another logistical item is hotel space for long duration stay (up to 2 months of as many as 4 different payload processing crews) is needed closer to the payload processing sites. Along with that is additional eating establishments is also needed to be collocated with the hotels and also closer to the work locations. Although these two items would probably occur after the start of launch operations they would represent a development growth of the general Boca Chica area or the area between Brownsville and Boca Chica.

The spending by payload processing crews could be as much as $6,000-24,000/day, $2.2-8.8M/year. That is 27-100 support type jobs added in this area. This is why Brownsville is so enthusiastic with SpaceX coming into the area. This is only the base increase. Other additional jobs are created to support the support personnel (construction, building maintenance, and services [garbage, water, power, and entertainment]). With such spending the local government gets anywhere from 5% or more in sales taxes that is an increase in taxes collected of $100K to $400K/year just from the base added needs of the payload processing crews. Add to the the secondary and the primary spending and taxes made by the SpaceX crew members and the yearly local taxes gathered could be $1M or more.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 06/15/2015 07:16 pm
The airport is one logistical problem that needs to be solved before launch operations begin. Large cargo planes must be able to land and have suitable hangers.
Yes, they'll need to expand the airport in order for the launch site to become commercially viable long term.  But in the short term, if expanding the airport takes a while, aren't there interim solutions that would allow launch operations to begin?  There are larger airports not far away.  Brownsville also has a world class seaport.  Probably not ideal solutions, but maybe good enough to get the ball rolling.

Another logistical item is hotel space for long duration stay (up to 2 months of as many as 4 different payload processing crews) is needed closer to the payload processing sites. Along with that is additional eating establishments is also needed to be collocated with the hotels and also closer to the work locations. Although these two items would probably occur after the start of launch operations they would represent a development growth of the general Boca Chica area or the area between Brownsville and Boca Chica.
Good point.  There are dozens of hotels in the Brownsville area, but none within a 20-mile radius of the launch site. 

Note that the Boca Chica area has no sewer system, and local codes for new development don't allow underground septic, so they won't be able to build a hotel there.  Maybe a few miles inland.

I suspect SpaceX will also buy more of the unoccupied houses in Boca Chica Village, especially since they have underground septic systems with grandfather clauses.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: cuddihy on 06/15/2015 07:54 pm
This is where a ferry from South Padre meets the need.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 06/15/2015 08:05 pm
This is where a ferry from South Padre meets the need.

A ferry from South Padre to where?  Everything around the launch site is public beaches, tidal pools, and salt marsh.  No place for a ferry to dock.

Someone before mentioned amphibious craft, but I doubt codes would allow that on a public beach, and the wetlands are environmentally protected by the state.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Nomadd on 06/16/2015 12:42 am
 Frank Kawalski's big house and the big wreck on the north corner of the village are actually old motels. That big concrete tank about 800 feet to the east of the village use to be the common water supply. The story is, the operator came to work three sheets to the wind one day and pumped salt water the wrong way, ruining all the pipes and equipment. Nobody seemed to know why it was hooked to salt water in the first place.
 I'm out of there by the way. The house had problems and best guess to it's value was about half what they're asking. If anybody else wants to try, I think the guy is about ready to take any offer.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Kabloona on 06/16/2015 02:47 am
Sorry to hear it wasn't worth the price, Nomadd. We were hoping to come down and party with you!
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: cuddihy on 06/16/2015 03:18 am
Reading through the airport expansion EIS, I was a bit surprised that the runway expansion is not a near-term thing--at least they're not yet planning for it. So it's really more "down the road" than the stories have suggested.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 06/16/2015 05:11 pm
Reading through the airport expansion EIS, I was a bit surprised that the runway expansion is not a near-term thing--at least they're not yet planning for it. So it's really more "down the road" than the stories have suggested.

Good point.  I hadn't thought of reading the airport expansion environmental assessment (http://www.flybrownsville.com/Notices/Brownsville_Draft_EA%20%281%29.pdf) document.

Now that I've paged through it, it looks like they're doing things in phases.  The current environmental assessment document mainly covers the new passenger terminal, but they do mention planned future projects:
Quote
In addition to the Proposed Action, planned future projects include security enhancements, the extension of runway 13/31, taxiway rehabilitation, national weather service radar relocation, and dual customs cargo facility. Section 4.3.5 further described the investigation of past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future actions in the vicinity of the airport that might have the potential to contribute to cumulative impacts when considered in combination with the effects of the Proposed Action.

Section 4.3.5 includes the table in the attached picture below.  The runway extension is planned for 2019.

Section 4.3.5 also includes this tidbit.
Quote
The nearest previously conducted archaeological survey was conducted for a runway expansion approximately ½ mile to the southeast of the APE (Exhibit A-2 in Attachment A).
Exhibit A-2 in Attachment A seems to highlight the area of the runway extension, also attached below.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 06/16/2015 07:01 pm
A glimpse into Brownsville Mayor Tony Martinez second term
http://www.rgvproud.com/news/local-news/a-glimpse-into-brownsville-mayor-tony-martinez-second-term
Quote
"Space X, I think we still have to get ready for all the amenities that go along with having the aerospace industry in your backyard. I think the logistics, we're talking about the west rail, we're talking about the east loop," says Martinez.

In addition to the first commercial rocket launch pad and the new international rail between the U.S and Mexico to launch in a month… the mayor looks forward to working on the new Brownsville airport, the restoration of Brownsville's downtown and opening up more to the public through the live streams of meetings.

"Other than that, I think the next four years are going to be really fun, fun to be around because we have the chance, we have the opportunity to really build on what we started the last four years," says Martinez.

The East Loop (http://www.ccrma.org/projects/eastloop/resources/) is an outer belt to the South and East of Brownsville.  Maybe they'll built some new hotels along this outer belt.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 06/20/2015 02:39 pm
This position is still posted on the SpaceX website, so it may not be filled yet.

http://www.spacex.com/careers/position/5954
Electrical Engineer (Launch Pad Facilities), Rio Grande Valley
Quote
Responsibilities:

•Oversee the electrical construction of a new ground up launch facility. Duties include:
◦Visual inspections to assure compliance with Electrical Construction Documents
◦Coordination with Local, State and Federal AHJ
◦Electrical design revisions as required and maintaining accurate as-built drawings
◦Electrical design for building interior build outs
◦Attend construction meetings and answer RFI’s
◦Maintaining and revising project schedule as required to ensure electrical milestones and deadlines are reached
◦Monitoring electrical construction budget and providing advanced warning of possible cost overruns

•Work in a team environment with other engineering disciplines to provide detailed electrical design and specification for the installation of new equipment and systems. This includes, but is not limited to:
◦Electrical power distribution systems
◦Switchgear and motor control centers
◦Exterior and interior lighting
◦Ground support system controls and ladder logic
◦Uninterruptible power supply (UPS) units
◦Standby and emergency generators
◦Automatic transfer switches
◦Power monitoring hardware and software
◦Data/phone distribution and wiring
◦Building and site grounding systems
◦Fire alarm systems
◦Lightning Protection Systems

•Provide electrical engineering support to facility operation technicians in troubleshooting existing electrical equipment and controllers

•Provide engineering support for the design, operation, and troubleshooting of all the facility electrical components and systems for our launch facility, including:
◦Load flow analysis of electrical power distribution systems
◦Electrical equipment evaluation
◦Building and facility equipment grounding
◦Power monitoring hardware and software

•Ensure that all equipment interfaces properly with other mechanical and electrical systems, including ensuring compatibility with facility power budgets
•Coordinate all electrical installations and maintenance activities  with local KSC and AFS electrical utilities personnel
•Ensure all electrical designs and installations confirm to applicable codes and regulations
•Provide code review and analysis utilizing NFPA 70E, NFPA 70 NEC, NFPA 497, NFPA 101, and IBC

 


Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: deruch on 06/20/2015 09:29 pm
This position is still posted on the SpaceX website, so it may not be filled yet.

http://www.spacex.com/careers/position/5954
Electrical Engineer (Launch Pad Facilities), Rio Grande Valley

May also be that they are looking for more than a single Engineer.  Wouldn't surprise me to learn that they were trying to hire a handful of them and are just using a single listing.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 06/26/2015 10:36 am
Cameron County Precinct 1 Commissioner Benavides to announce reelection bid for third term
http://rrunrrun.blogspot.com/2015/06/benavides-announces-for-relection-at.html
Quote
Precinct 1 covers an economic and socially diverse area encompassing the area from the Gateway Bridge eastward to Southmost, Boca Chica Beach and South Padre Island...

*Space X: I am proud to say that I was personally involved in bringing Space X to Pct. 1. Not only will it bring an estimated 300 jobs and create $85 million in capital investment in South Texas, But it will also make us the center of the commercial space industry with jobs and economic opportunity for our people and educational opportunities for our children.

Benavides seems to be involved in the Boca Chica land deals with SpaceX.

Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: oldAtlas_Eguy on 06/26/2015 06:53 pm
This position is still posted on the SpaceX website, so it may not be filled yet.

http://www.spacex.com/careers/position/5954
Electrical Engineer (Launch Pad Facilities), Rio Grande Valley

May also be that they are looking for more than a single Engineer.  Wouldn't surprise me to learn that they were trying to hire a handful of them and are just using a single listing.

They are looking for a EE with a PE license who has the ability to legally sign drawings.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 07/04/2015 10:22 pm
SpaceX launch mishap not expected to affect STARGATE program, director says (http://www.themonitor.com/news/local/spacex-launch-mishap-not-expected-to-affect-stargate-program-director/article_8bccd09e-2298-11e5-aebf-03303ee8aa0b.html)

Quote
In the wake of SpaceX’s loss of its Falcon 9 rocket and Dragon spacecraft a week ago, the aerospace firm’s collaboration in the STARGATE program is not expected to be impacted.
 
STARGATE is a spacecraft tracking and astronomical research program designated as the first research Center for Excellence at the new University of Texas Rio Grande Valley.
 
“This event will have little, if any, effect on the STARGATE timeline,” program Director Fredrick A. Jenet said.

Pointing out SpaceX builds its systems in-house, Jenet suspects SpaceX will get to the bottom of the explosion faster than similar events in other cases.

When not used for launches, STARGATE faculty and student researchers will use SpaceX facilities for training, scientific research and technology development, UTRGV officials have said.

The STARGATE Space Technology and Innovation Exposition is planned for September.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 07/05/2015 11:41 am
http://www.brownsvilleherald.com/news/valley/article_e2625afc-22b9-11e5-899e-67aeabe803d8.html

Quote
The loss came amid SpaceX’s plans to begin, in earnest, construction of the launch site at Boca Chica this fall.

The explosion is not expected to affect the aerospace firm’s planned schedule for the Boca Chica site.

“At this time we see no immediate impact,” SpaceX officials told the Valley Morning Star.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 07/08/2015 05:17 pm
Another aircraft carrier entering Port of Brownsville for scrap.

Decommissioned USS Ranger Headed to Brownsville
http://www.nbcdfw.com/news/local/Decommissioned-USS-Ranger-Headed-to-Brownsville-312206451.html
(http://media.nbcdfw.com/images/652*367/uss-ranger-usnavy.jpg)

Note that this too big to fit through the Panama Canal.  The Port of Brownsville handles really huge ships.

There's also open land along that channel.  If someone wanted to build something huge and ship it over water...
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Barrie on 07/08/2015 05:58 pm
Tenuous space connection: This is the USS Ranger on which scenes for Star Trek IV were filmed, I believe.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: llanitedave on 07/08/2015 08:31 pm
But it wasn't one of the nuclear wessels.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Prober on 07/08/2015 09:45 pm
make a good stable landing platform ;D
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Jim_LAX on 07/11/2015 05:01 pm
I served on the Ranger (CVA-61) in 1965-67 running the (cable) TV system, KRAN TV. Yes, it was NOT a nuclear wessel.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 07/17/2015 11:11 am
The 9 Best Undiscovered Beaches in The U.S.
http://www.maxim.com/maxim-man/travel/article/9-best-undiscovered-beaches-us
Quote
3. Boca Chica Beach, Texas

Ok, this Gulf Coast spot on the U.S.-Mexico border is amazingly remote and beautiful, but only if you really like roughing it. There are zero services, so bring your own water; then get excited for dog-friendly beaches, surfing, and swimming in the pristine blue waters. Camping is one option, or you can easily stay inland in nearby Brownsville. Soon Boca Chica will be known as the ideal place to watch rockets take off: SpaceX is building a launch pad next door.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: billh on 07/17/2015 02:28 pm
The 9 Best Undiscovered Beaches in The U.S.
http://www.maxim.com/maxim-man/travel/article/9-best-undiscovered-beaches-us
Quote
3. Boca Chica Beach, Texas

Ok, this Gulf Coast spot on the U.S.-Mexico border is amazingly remote and beautiful, but only if you really like roughing it. There are zero services, so bring your own water; then get excited for dog-friendly beaches, surfing, and swimming in the pristine blue waters. Camping is one option, or you can easily stay inland in nearby Brownsville. Soon Boca Chica will be known as the ideal place to watch rockets take off: SpaceX is building a launch pad next door.

Zero services is a little unkind. They do have trash barrels. :)
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Kansan52 on 07/17/2015 02:50 pm
What do they mean, 'no water'? I see lot's of water in that picture!!


Oh, drinking water. Never mind.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: chrisking0997 on 07/17/2015 05:30 pm
I have a suspicion that it will be somewhat difficult to view a launch from that ideal location  :o
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: ChefPat on 07/19/2015 02:47 pm
The 9 Best Undiscovered Beaches in The U.S.
http://www.maxim.com/maxim-man/travel/article/9-best-undiscovered-beaches-us
Quote
3. Boca Chica Beach, Texas

Ok, this Gulf Coast spot on the U.S.-Mexico border is amazingly remote and beautiful, but only if you really like roughing it. There are zero services, so bring your own water; then get excited for dog-friendly beaches, surfing, and swimming in the pristine blue waters. Camping is one option, or you can easily stay inland in nearby Brownsville. Soon Boca Chica will be known as the ideal place to watch rockets take off: SpaceX is building a launch pad next door.
I want to go there before they really get started on construction. I'd hoped to make it this month, but that ain't happening. Maybe I'll be able to make it in September.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Nomadd on 07/19/2015 08:10 pm
 I got the owner of 5 Esperson to correct most of the stuff wrong with the listing. I'm going to make her an offer I know she won't like, but with the abandoned houses still in reasonable shape selling for $30k, even the new price is too high.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 07/19/2015 09:41 pm
I got the owner of 5 Esperson to correct most of the stuff wrong with the listing. I'm going to make her an offer I know she won't like, but with the abandoned houses still in reasonable shape selling for $30k, even the new price is too high.

Let us know, and good luck!
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 07/23/2015 09:32 am
Governor signs bill giving South Padre Island control over funds to boost space tourism activities.

http://unitedbrownsville.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/07/UBLegislativeRoundUpFINAL9.pdf

Quote
... the City of South Padre Island seeks greater flexibility with the use of revenue from the municipal hotel occupancy tax for promotional and event expenses related to ecological tourism events and the development of space launch viewing facilities in anticipation of growing tourism due to the SpaceX facility and the draw of local birding, the Laguna Madre, and the Gulf of Mexico. The purpose of C.S.H.B. 1717 is to provide for that flexibility.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: sghill on 07/23/2015 06:48 pm
The Final FAA Environmental Impact Statement for the Texas site is out!

https://www.faa.gov/about/office_org/headquarters_offices/ast/environmental/nepa_docs/review/launch/spacex_texas_launch_site_environmental_impact_statement/

Now we can see some earth movers on the beach!
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: JasonAW3 on 07/23/2015 07:08 pm
Governor signs bill giving South Padre Island control over funds to boost space tourism activities.

http://unitedbrownsville.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/07/UBLegislativeRoundUpFINAL9.pdf

Quote
... the City of South Padre Island seeks greater flexibility with the use of revenue from the municipal hotel occupancy tax for promotional and event expenses related to ecological tourism events and the development of space launch viewing facilities in anticipation of growing tourism due to the SpaceX facility and the draw of local birding, the Laguna Madre, and the Gulf of Mexico. The purpose of C.S.H.B. 1717 is to provide for that flexibility.

     I can just imagine hotels with a SpaceX view with Stadium styled balconies, so people can watch the space launches, view unimpeaded.  I can also imagine a Texas steak house with Stadium arranged seating and a tinted Greenhouse style roof for the same reason. (Tinted to both cut down on that lower Texas heat and to make it easier to watch launches rather than loose the craft in the haze).  And at that Steakhouse?  A Launch Clock projected on the tinted glass!
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: rcoppola on 07/23/2015 07:14 pm
The Final FAA Environmental Impact Statement for the Texas site is out!

https://www.faa.gov/about/office_org/headquarters_offices/ast/environmental/nepa_docs/review/launch/spacex_texas_launch_site_environmental_impact_statement/

Now we can see some earth movers on the beach!
Hmm. It appears there is still no mention of a return pad, unless I missed it. So they'll either attempt to amend over the next 24 months of construction or they'll keep an ASDS near by? (FH will be another story but they've got 2 years to figure returns out I suppose)
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: JasonAW3 on 07/23/2015 07:17 pm
Another aircraft carrier entering Port of Brownsville for scrap.

Decommissioned USS Ranger Headed to Brownsville
http://www.nbcdfw.com/news/local/Decommissioned-USS-Ranger-Headed-to-Brownsville-312206451.html
(http://media.nbcdfw.com/images/652*367/uss-ranger-usnavy.jpg)

Note that this too big to fit through the Panama Canal.  The Port of Brownsville handles really huge ships.

There's also open land along that channel.  If someone wanted to build something huge and ship it over water...

Wonder what would be needed to reinforce the flight deck for vertical landing rockets?

     Imean, if it's gonna be sold for scrap, why not consider it for a full up recovery vessel?  Not just for the stages, but for any Atlantic landings of the Dragon Capsules?

     For manned flights, fix up some of the officers quarters and come home in style!
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: JasonAW3 on 07/23/2015 07:26 pm
Is that where the landing pad(s) will go, perhaps?

Maybe, but that culvert set up looks pretty hefty to me.  Maybe a Launch Pad B?
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: JasonAW3 on 07/23/2015 07:31 pm
This is where a ferry from South Padre meets the need.

A ferry from South Padre to where?  Everything around the launch site is public beaches, tidal pools, and salt marsh.  No place for a ferry to dock.

Someone before mentioned amphibious craft, but I doubt codes would allow that on a public beach, and the wetlands are environmentally protected by the state.

LCACS!  "Where we're going, we don't need ... roads!"
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: JasonAW3 on 07/23/2015 07:39 pm


It's the State of Texas. It stopped being the Republic of Texas in 1846 when it joined the Union.

You might want to avoid certain Texas bars.

Some in Texas would suggest that the U.S. joined THEM!
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: rcoppola on 07/23/2015 08:43 pm
The Final FAA Environmental Impact Statement for the Texas site is out!

https://www.faa.gov/about/office_org/headquarters_offices/ast/environmental/nepa_docs/review/launch/spacex_texas_launch_site_environmental_impact_statement/

Now we can see some earth movers on the beach!
Hmm. It appears there is still no mention of a return pad, unless I missed it. So they'll either attempt to amend over the next 24 months of construction or they'll keep an ASDS near by? (FH will be another story but they've got 2 years to figure returns out I suppose)

The only landings they refer to in the document are ocean landings (pages 4-52, 4-72, and 4-79):
"After a Falcon launch, the first stage of the launch vehicle would land in the Gulf of Mexico,
approximately 550 miles downrange, and would potentially be recovered by a salvage ship. The salvage
ship would be able to locate the first stage through telemetry signals from the stage. The recovered first
stage would be returned to SpaceX facilities in Hawthorne, California. In the event the expended first
stage becomes damaged and could not be located, it would subsequently sink. "
Very strange wording. Must be old copy never updated.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Owlon on 07/23/2015 11:28 pm
The only landings they refer to in the document are ocean landings (pages 4-52, 4-72, and 4-79):
"After a Falcon launch, the first stage of the launch vehicle would land in the Gulf of Mexico,
approximately 550 miles downrange, and would potentially be recovered by a salvage ship. The salvage
ship would be able to locate the first stage through telemetry signals from the stage. The recovered first
stage would be returned to SpaceX facilities in Hawthorne, California. In the event the expended first
stage becomes damaged and could not be located, it would subsequently sink. "
Very strange wording. Must be old copy never updated.

Indeed. It sounds like they're talking about fishing the stage out of the water like their pre-ASDS recovery attempts, which we know isn't going to happen anymore.

EDIT: broken quotes
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 07/24/2015 01:51 am
The Final FAA Environmental Impact Statement for the Texas site is out!

https://www.faa.gov/about/office_org/headquarters_offices/ast/environmental/nepa_docs/review/launch/spacex_texas_launch_site_environmental_impact_statement/

Now we can see some earth movers on the beach!
That's from May 2014.  More recent addendum here:
http://www.swg.usace.army.mil/Portals/26/docs/regulatory/PN%20May/SpaceX_Texas_Launch_Project_Plan_Drawings_042215.pdf

It appears there is still no mention of a return pad, unless I missed it.
Return to launch site will require additional FAA approvals.

Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 07/24/2015 02:13 am
Another aircraft carrier entering Port of Brownsville for scrap.

Decommissioned USS Ranger Headed to Brownsville
http://www.nbcdfw.com/news/local/Decommissioned-USS-Ranger-Headed-to-Brownsville-312206451.html

Note that this too big to fit through the Panama Canal.  The Port of Brownsville handles really huge ships.

There's also open land along that channel.  If someone wanted to build something huge and ship it over water...

Wonder what would be needed to reinforce the flight deck for vertical landing rockets?

     Imean, if it's gonna be sold for scrap, why not consider it for a full up recovery vessel?  Not just for the stages, but for any Atlantic landings of the Dragon Capsules?

     For manned flights, fix up some of the officers quarters and come home in style!
Maintaining an aircraft carrier would be very expensive.  Maintaining a simple barge is much cheaper.  Return to launch site is much cheaper still.  Remember that reducing costs is a key goal for SpaceX.

Once they get RTLS running like clockwork, they probably won't need a landing barge or ship.  With all 3 cores returning to the launch site, Falcon Heavy will lift 7 tons to GTO.  That's enough to handle all commercial satellites.  For the few missions that require heavier loads, expending the center core would probably be cheaper than maintaining a barge or ship year round.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: groundbound on 07/24/2015 03:48 am

Maintaining an aircraft carrier would be very expensive.  Maintaining a simple barge is much cheaper.  Return to launch site is much cheaper still.  Remember that reducing costs is a key goal for SpaceX.

This can be offset by occasionally acting as a contractor to carry out air strikes against hapless small countries.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: QuantumG on 07/24/2015 03:51 am
This can be offset by occasionally acting as a contractor to carry out air strikes against hapless small countries.

Hey, this isn't a Lockheed Martin thread.

Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: billh on 07/24/2015 11:22 pm
I can't believe the soft checkpoint is going to be 14-16 miles away on Hwy 4! The only way to get closer is to own property. I bet the hotels in South Padre are happy about that.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Nomadd on 07/25/2015 01:36 am
 
I can't believe the soft checkpoint is going to be 14-16 miles away on Hwy 4! The only way to get closer is to own property. I bet the hotels in South Padre are happy about that.
I'm already in the planning stages of a profitable smuggling service for watchers if the owner of the Esperson house takes my low ball offer. A six pack of real beer (Lites and Corona need not apply.) gets you a ride through the front lines and one of those cheap $5 vinyl chairs.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: cosmicvoid on 07/25/2015 02:15 am
... a profitable smuggling service for watchers if the owner of the Esperson house takes my low ball offer.

I wonder what the gatekeepers will think of dozens of people who all claim to 'live at' or 'own' property at that address.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: watermod on 07/25/2015 02:55 am
... a profitable smuggling service for watchers if the owner of the Esperson house takes my low ball offer.

I wonder what the gatekeepers will think of dozens of people who all claim to 'live at' or 'own' property at that address.

No different then the rooftop "restaurants" by Wriggly Field.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: D_Dom on 07/25/2015 03:16 am

 I'm already in the planning stages of a profitable smuggling service for watchers if the owner of the Esperson house takes my low ball offer. A six pack of real beer (Lites and Corona need not apply.)

I see your six and. Raise twelve.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: nadreck on 07/25/2015 05:33 am

 I'm already in the planning stages of a profitable smuggling service for watchers if the owner of the Esperson house takes my low ball offer. A six pack of real beer (Lites and Corona need not apply.)

I see your six and. Raise twelve.

how about Smithwicks
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Zed_Noir on 07/25/2015 09:26 am
This can be offset by occasionally acting as a contractor to carry out air strikes against hapless small countries.

Hey, this isn't a Lockheed Martin thread.

But I thought SX wants to pick up some DOD contracts.  ;)

Seriously you don't need something as big as even a small aircraft carrier. Something like a mid-size stripped down LST should provide adequate landing footprint for a F9R core.

But you could still can mounted a vtol/helo assault from such a ship for some riff-rats removal.  :D
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Ed on 07/25/2015 12:10 pm

 I'm already in the planning stages of a profitable smuggling service for watchers if the owner of the Esperson house takes my low ball offer. A six pack of real beer (Lites and Corona need not apply.) gets you a ride through the front lines and one of those cheap $5 vinyl chairs.

Hey nomadd

Ill take you on that offer.

Since customs will most probable not allow me to bring a keg of my self brewed over from Germany
Ill would offer a sixpack of your choice from Brooklyn Brewery as a substitute.

Would that in any way agreeable to you?

Of course I would dutiful double up in an event of a scrub.

Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 07/25/2015 12:26 pm
But I thought SX wants to pick up some DOD contracts.  ;)

Seriously you don't need something as big as even a small aircraft carrier. Something like a mid-size stripped down LST should provide adequate landing footprint for a F9R core.

OK, let's approach this logically, step by step:

Q: Why is SpaceX in business?  What is their stated goal?
A: To help establish a colony on Mars.

Q: How do they intend do it?
A: 1) Get as much business as possible. 2) Lower costs wherever possible.  3) Use resulting profits to develop MCT.
Business includes launching commercial satellites, NASA payloads, DoD payloads, and building their own array of Internet satellites.  Lowering costs includes reusability, plus a lot of other mundane things.

Q: How does the Texas launch site fit into this?
A: 1) Together with the Cape and VAFB, it will allow more launches.  2) It should lower launch and range costs.
3) A U.S. Air Force base is not the best place to launch commercial satellites.  More on that here:
http://spaceflightnow.com/falcon9/012/140906capecanaveral/#.VbNv4Hmh1hE

Q: How does reusability fit into this?
A: It's all about saving money.  SpaceX isn't doing this because its cool.  If reusability ends up costing more, they'll use an expendable solution.

Q: How does reusability become cost effective?
A: By landing stages very close to the launch site (RTLS).  Landing on a barge or other large ship is much more expensive, so SpaceX will only do this when they have no other choice.

Q: Why doesn't the EIS for the Texas launch site include landing pads.
A: Because the initial approval is usually hardest.  Once things get going, additional approvals are generally much easier.  So SpaceX limited what they asked for in the first approval.   Also, SpaceX hasn't successfully landed a stage yet.  Why ask for something you don't know works?  Better to get RTLS working reliably at the Cape before asking for approvals to land things in Texas.  Most approvals require known quantities.

Q: How could reusability be more expensive than an expendable solution?
A: By requiring SpaceX to maintain a barge or other large ship for the very few cases where stages can't be returned to the launch site. 

To understand this better, let's define the potential launch profiles SpaceX has mentioned so far:
F9E:  Expendable. 20 tons to LEO, 6 tons to GTO.
F9R:  First stage returns to launch site.  13 tons to LEO, 4.8 tons to GTO.
F9R2: First stage lands downrange.  Max payload somewhere between F9R and F9E.
FHR:  All 3 cores return to launch site. 7 tons to GTO.
FHR2: Two boosters return to launch site. Center core expendable. 14 tons to GTO.
FHR3: Two boosters return to launch site. Center core lands downrange. 7 tons < GTO payload < 14 tons.
FHE:  Expendable. 53 tons to LEO, 21 tons to GTO.
BFR:  Huge single core returns to launch site.

Note that a barge or other large ship would only be required for two of these profiles (F9R2 and FHR3).

Assuming return to launch site cranks up, and SpaceX can refurbish stages cheaply (the whole basis of reusability), then FHR will probably be cheaper than F9E, and roughly the same price as F9R2, so I suspect both of these profiles will be discontinued. 

Note that FHR lifts 7 tons to GTO.  That will handle all commercial satellites, NASA payloads, and DoD payloads.  In other words, F9R and FHR will cover the entire current launch market, with all cores returning to the launch site.

So until BFR comes along, FHR2, FHR3, and FHE would only be used for pioneering missions, e.g. beyond earth orbit.  Very low flight rate.  If its a decision between FHR2 and FHR3 for 1 or 2 flights a year, I suspect FHR2 would be cheaper than maintaining a barge or other large ship year round.

EDIT: Updated F9R and F9E payload specs based on comments from friendly3 and kraisee.
EDIT2: Removed FH crossfeed based on comments by nadreck .
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: friendly3 on 07/25/2015 01:31 pm
F9E can launch 20 tons to LEO, and soon 6 tons to GTO (F9E 1.2)
But they don't intend to use F9E's, they will use FHR instead because it will be cheaper.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: MP99 on 07/25/2015 02:09 pm
Once they get RTLS running like clockwork, they probably won't need a landing barge or ship.  With all 3 cores returning to the launch site, Falcon Heavy will lift 7 tons to GTO.  That's enough to handle all commercial satellites.  For the few missions that require heavier loads, expending the center core would probably be cheaper than maintaining a barge or ship year round.

I still maintain that FH centre cores will land at Florida, rather than needing a barge.

But, if they do need a barge, one of the Florida ones can do it, since it overflies anyway.

Response to "land in Florida" question:-

Elon Musk (@elonmusk) tweeted at 7:55 PM on Fri, May 03, 2013:
@yatpay Side boosters fall short & center core goes too far + Florida is heavily populated. Landing permission tricky :)
(https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/330395232564826112)

Cheers, Martin
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: kraisee on 07/25/2015 02:27 pm
Dave G,
   I believe your figures for F9v1.1E and F9v1.1R are incorrect.   Elon and Shotwell have both indicated publicly that the performance figure published on their website are for the F9v1.1R configuration and do assume first stage re-use, at 13,150kg/4,850kg to LEO/GTO respectively.

   The F9v1.1E has (IIRC) somewhere a little over 16,500kg LEO performance, though I'm unsure what the GTO performance is in fully expendable form.

   I may have missed it elsewhere, but I personally have not yet seen clarification whether the rumoured F9v1.2 performance of >20,000kg is for the E or R configuration.   Assuming the 30% increase figure that has been mentioned publicly, it sounds to me like the expendable performance envelope (21,450kg?), which would mean the reusable would be somewhere around 17,000kg.   But I await correction on that.

Ross.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Kabloona on 07/25/2015 02:48 pm
... a profitable smuggling service for watchers if the owner of the Esperson house takes my low ball offer.

I wonder what the gatekeepers will think of dozens of people who all claim to 'live at' or 'own' property at that address.

Nomadd will also be selling fake Texas drivers licenses, all listing his Esperson address. ;-)
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 07/25/2015 05:08 pm
... a profitable smuggling service for watchers if the owner of the Esperson house takes my low ball offer.

I wonder what the gatekeepers will think of dozens of people who all claim to 'live at' or 'own' property at that address.

Nomadd will also be selling fake Texas drivers licenses, all listing his Esperson address. ;-)

According to the EIS (https://www.faa.gov/about/office_org/headquarters_offices/ast/environmental/nepa_docs/review/launch/spacex_texas_launch_site_environmental_impact_statement/media/FEIS_SpaceX_Texas_Launch_Site_Vol_I.pdf), section 2.1.1.5, the soft checkpoint would stop allowing visitors at T-6 hours.  After T-6 hours, you need to be a property owner to pass the soft checkpoint.

My guess is that they'll allow some number of visitors to remain with the homeowner during the launch, provided:
a) they pass the soft checkpoint before T-6 hours, and
b) they're not causing any trouble.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Jim on 07/25/2015 05:15 pm
The number of people will be determined by range safety analysis
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 07/25/2015 05:26 pm

I still maintain that FH centre cores will land at Florida, rather than needing a barge.

But, if they do need a barge, one of the Florida ones can do it, since it overflies anyway.
Maybe you missed my point.  With all 3 cores returning to the launch site, FHR will lift 7 tons to GTO. 
As far as I know, that covers the entire current launch market.

So what type of mission would require a crossfed center core?  and how often would that fly?   

If we're talking about a really low flight rate, reusing the center core may be more trouble than its worth.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: nadreck on 07/25/2015 05:40 pm

I still maintain that FH centre cores will land at Florida, rather than needing a barge.

But, if they do need a barge, one of the Florida ones can do it, since it overflies anyway.
Maybe you missed my point.  With all 3 cores returning to the launch site, FHR will lift 7 tons to GTO. 
As far as I know, that covers the entire current launch market.

So what type of mission would require a crossfed center core?  and how often would that fly?   

If we're talking about a really low flight rate, reusing the center core may be more trouble than its worth.

Dave G there is no cross feed option anymore, however, by reducing the thrust of the centre core to 70% shortly after launch then shutting down 4 of the 9 engines of the centre core, you can have somewhere around 50% (depends whether you are expending the side boosters or landing them on a barge down range or RTLS'ing them) propellant left in the centre core when the booster core's separate.  Depending on the mission profile the centre core continues on to somewhere between 4 and 6.5km/s approximately.  The 6.5km/s came from back calculating how fast the US had to be going at first ignition to allow for the advertised mass to TMI.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: shooter6947 on 07/25/2015 05:48 pm
if the owner of the Esperson house takes my low ball offer.
If they don't take the lowball, start a kickstarter campaign for it.  I'd donate!
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 07/25/2015 06:33 pm
The 6.5km/s came from back calculating how fast the US had to be going at first ignition to allow for the advertised mass to TMI.

So we're talking about Falcon Heavy center core reusability for some type of mission to Mars (TMI).  How many of those per year?  Maybe 0.5? 

Also, with any type of reuse, you're going to lose payload mass, usually an issue for Mars missions.

As I said before, reuse may not always be the lowest cost option, especially with a really low flight rate.

To be clear, once BFR and MCT are flying regularly, then reuse makes sense. 

But with Falcon Heavy to Mars, or other BEO destinations, we're talking about pioneering missions with a very low flight rate.  Rather than maintaining a landing barge just for such missions, its probably cheaper for the center core to be expendable.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: nadreck on 07/25/2015 08:46 pm
The 6.5km/s came from back calculating how fast the US had to be going at first ignition to allow for the advertised mass to TMI.

So we're talking about Falcon Heavy center core reusability for some type of mission to Mars (TMI).  How many of those per year?  Maybe 0.5? 

Absolutely not, you can not reuse the centre core if it is moving that speed. And to get to 6.5 km/s that is required to meet the 13,200kg TMI spec on SpaceX website advertises you would need to expend all 3 cores.


Also, with any type of reuse, you're going to lose payload mass, usually an issue for Mars missions.

As I said before, reuse may not always be the lowest cost option, especially with a really low flight rate.

To be clear, once BFR and MCT are flying regularly, then reuse makes sense. 

But with Falcon Heavy to Mars, or other BEO destinations, we're talking about pioneering missions with a very low flight rate.  Rather than maintaining a landing barge just for such missions, its probably cheaper for the center core to be expendable.

The way I see it at the most efficient in the future lifespan I see for the Falcon Series an FH3R will cost roughly $40M and an FH2R about $60M, the FHE $100M
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Damon Hill on 07/26/2015 05:26 am
What will be the checkpoint for Mexico?  Think the Federales will do anything at all about security on their side of the Rio Grande?

There will be, of course, other hazards.  This being Mexico in the here and now.  :/
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 07/26/2015 11:16 am
What will be the checkpoint for Mexico?  Think the Federales will do anything at all about security on their side of the Rio Grande?

There will be, of course, other hazards.  This being Mexico in the here and now.  :/

I suggest reading the EIS (https://www.faa.gov/about/office_org/headquarters_offices/ast/environmental/nepa_docs/review/launch/spacex_texas_launch_site_environmental_impact_statement/media/FEIS_SpaceX_Texas_Launch_Site_Vol_I.pdf), section 2.1.1.5, subsection titled "Security Plan Implementation".  Its only about 2 pages, plus the table and picture included below, and it gives a good overview of how all this will work.

Also, looking at Google Maps satellite view (https://www.google.com/maps/@25.9218733,-97.2462843,25725m/data=!3m1!1e3), the part of Mexico south of the launch area - there's really nothing there.  No roads, no buildings, just salt marsh and other wetlands.  If the tide was low, I suppose someone in an all-terrain vehicle could get closer to the launch site legally.  If they crossed the Rio Grande into the U.S., the EIS implies that SpaceX UAVs would spot them, and local law enforcement and/or SpaceX security would take action.  The EIS doesn't mention anything about the U.S. Border Patrol.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 07/26/2015 12:12 pm
Absolutely not, you can not reuse the centre core if it is moving that speed. And to get to 6.5 km/s that is required to meet the 13,200kg TMI spec on SpaceX website advertises you would need to expend all 3 cores.

I think we're saying the same thing.

Some have proposed that the FH center core could be landed downrange, either in Florida or on a barge.

My point is this: With all 3 cores returning to the launch site, Falcon Heavy can lift 7 tons to GTO, and that covers the entire current launch market.  So the types of missions that would go beyond that would be pioneering missions, probably beyond earth orbit, and for those types of missions, an expendable launcher probably makes more sense.

So the whole idea of landing on a barge, from Texas or anywhere else, I see this as a short term thing.  Eventually SpaceX will get rid of their landing barges.  On the rare occasions that they can't return all stages to the launch site, they'll just use expendable cores.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: guckyfan on 07/26/2015 12:22 pm
So the whole idea of landing on a barge, from Texas or anywhere else, I see this as a short term thing.  Eventually SpaceX will get rid of their landing barges.  On the rare occasions that they can't return all stages to the launch site, they'll just use expendable cores.

It all sounds true. But then why did they build two of them? For proof of concept of landing one would be enough.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 07/26/2015 12:32 pm
But then why did they build two of them? For proof of concept of landing one would be enough.

I suspect the boost back flight profiles at VAFB are different than flying East from the Cape or Texas, so that needs to be demonstrated separately before landing at VAFB.

Also, I'm not sure, but with the additional wings to make the landing barge wider, it may not fit through the Panama canal.

Or it may just be that the demonstration periods overlap, and they want more experience trying to land before attempting RTLS.

EDIT: By the way, I just checked, and there are actually 3 landing barges:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Autonomous_spaceport_drone_ship
The first (Just Read the Instructions) was retired in June and replaced by a second (Of Course I Still Love You).  A third barge is currently in-transit to Los Angeles, where they will add the wings to make it wider.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: ClayJar on 07/26/2015 01:36 pm
Also, I'm not sure, but with the additional wings to make the landing barge wider, it may not fit through the Panama canal.

[...]

EDIT: By the way, I just checked, and there are actually 3 landing barges:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Autonomous_spaceport_drone_ship
The first (Just Read the Instructions) was retired in June and replaced by a second (Of Course I Still Love You).  A third barge is currently in-transit to Los Angeles, where they will add the wings to make it wider.
Over in the SpaceX Reusable Rockets Section (http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?board=66.0), we've been covering the ASDSes in depth.  MARMAC 303 had the JRtI wings (originally from MARMAC 300) on deck while transiting the Panama Canal, as that was the only way to fit.  The wing sections are currently being installed (http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=36326.msg1409330#msg1409330), as documented in our very, very thorough "SpaceX's Autonomous Spaceport Drone Ship Discussion Thread 2".
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Zed_Noir on 07/26/2015 03:35 pm
@Dave G

Have doubts about the economics of RTLS for the FH without expending the center core. The performance hit with RTLS is fairly high. However recovering all the cores downrange carries a very minor performance hit.

If core recovery is required than barges are just too slow for downrange operations. Barge towing speed of about 5 knots means you need at least 60 hours to go 300 NM. As compare to about 16 hours with a ship travelling at about 19 knots. Recovery of cores beyond 300 NM with barges will tie up maritime assets for too long.

SpaceX will always need some maritime presence along the flight path from Texas. Maybe for supplemental tracking & telemetry relay. But mostly for contingencies so they don't have to called upon the USCG, USN & local maritime authorities for resources. A ship with a helopad will be useful.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: symbios on 07/26/2015 08:49 pm
@Dave G

Have doubts about the economics of RTLS for the FH without expending the center core. The performance hit with RTLS is fairly high. However recovering all the cores downrange carries a very minor performance hit.

If core recovery is required than barges are just too slow for downrange operations. Barge towing speed of about 5 knots means you need at least 60 hours to go 300 NM. As compare to about 16 hours with a ship travelling at about 19 knots. Recovery of cores beyond 300 NM with barges will tie up maritime assets for too long.

SpaceX will always need some maritime presence along the flight path from Texas. Maybe for supplemental tracking & telemetry relay. But mostly for contingencies so they don't have to called upon the USCG, USN & local maritime authorities for resources. A ship with a helopad will be useful.

Performance hit has nothing to do with it if there is no customers that require that extra capacity. Since it is speculated that >95% of payloads will be meet with full RTLS. Run the rest from the cape and keep the ASDS there. ASDS problem in Texas solved.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Comga on 07/26/2015 09:59 pm
@Dave G

Have doubts about the economics of RTLS for the FH without expending the center core. (snip)

Performance hit has nothing to do with it if there is no customers that require that extra capacity. Since it is speculated that >95% of payloads will be meet with full RTLS. Run the rest from the cape and keep the ASDS there. ASDS problem in Texas solved.

Other than landing pads and berthing facilities for an ASDS, these discussions and the ones about payloads and cross-feed, etc,  are OT for this "Discussion and Updates" thread about the "SpaceX Texas launch site".  Please take them somewhere else.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Nomadd on 07/27/2015 02:41 am
@Dave G

Have doubts about the economics of RTLS for the FH without expending the center core. (snip)

Performance hit has nothing to do with it if there is no customers that require that extra capacity. Since it is speculated that >95% of payloads will be meet with full RTLS. Run the rest from the cape and keep the ASDS there. ASDS problem in Texas solved.

Other than landing pads and berthing facilities for an ASDS, these discussions and the ones about payloads and cross-feed, etc,  are OT for this "Discussion and Updates" thread about the "SpaceX Texas launch site".  Please take them somewhere else.
Cross feed makes it less likely or impossible for FH core to RTLS, so it's not exactly unrelated to the launch site. It has elements of ASDS, launch site and FH in it and you can't keep making separate threads for every aspect of the program.
 As the mods have said 64,345 times, tell them is you have an issue. Don't argue on the thread. (Like I'm doing now)
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 07/28/2015 09:16 am
Looks like SpaceX is really having problems filling this position.  If I remember correctly, this was first posted back in December.
http://www.spacex.com/careers/position/5954
Electrical Engineer (Launch Pad Facilities), Rio Grande Valley
Quote
Responsibilities:
•Oversee the electrical construction of a new ground up launch facility. Duties include:
  ◦Visual inspections to assure compliance with Electrical Construction Documents
  ◦Coordination with Local, State and Federal AHJ
  ◦Electrical design revisions as required and maintaining accurate as-built drawings
  ◦Electrical design for building interior build outs
  ◦Attend construction meetings and answer RFI’s
  ◦Maintaining and revising project schedule as required to ensure electrical milestones and deadlines are reached
  ◦Monitoring electrical construction budget and providing advanced warning of possible cost overruns

•Work in a team environment with other engineering disciplines to provide detailed electrical design and specification for the installation of new equipment and systems. This includes, but is not limited to:
  ◦Electrical power distribution systems
  ◦Switchgear and motor control centers
  ◦Exterior and interior lighting
  ◦Ground support system controls and ladder logic
  ◦Uninterruptible power supply (UPS) units
  ◦Standby and emergency generators
  ◦Automatic transfer switches
  ◦Power monitoring hardware and software
  ◦Data/phone distribution and wiring
  ◦Building and site grounding systems
  ◦Fire alarm systems
  ◦Lightning Protection Systems

•Provide electrical engineering support to facility operation technicians  in troubleshooting existing electrical equipment and controllers

•Provide engineering support for the design, operation, and troubleshooting of all the facility electrical components and systems for our launch facility, including:
  ◦Load flow analysis of electrical power distribution systems
  ◦Electrical equipment evaluation
  ◦Building and facility equipment grounding
  ◦Power monitoring hardware and software

•Ensure that all equipment interfaces properly with other mechanical and electrical systems, including ensuring compatibility with facility power budgets

•Coordinate all electrical installations and maintenance activities  with local KSC and AFS electrical utilities personnel

•Ensure all electrical designs and installations confirm to applicable codes and regulations

•Provide code review and analysis utilizing NFPA 70E, NFPA 70 NEC, NFPA 497, NFPA 101, and IBC

Basic Qualifications:
•Bachelor of Science degree in Electrical Engineering
•Minimum of 10 years of related work experience in a similar electrical engineering role
•Experience with power distribution systems, switchgear, UPS's, and generators

 Preferred Skills and Experience:
•Experience with Variable Frequency Drives (VFDs) and Industrial Pumps
•Previous experience working as an electrician
•Experience with medium voltage distribution
•Experience with control panel design and production
...
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Nomadd on 07/28/2015 01:01 pm
 The BSEE requirement knocks out about 90% of the best candidates for that job.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: billh on 07/28/2015 01:04 pm
Maybe because it's too hard to coordinate with "local KSC and AFS electrical utilities personnel" when you're in South Texas.  :o
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: cscott on 07/28/2015 01:31 pm
The BSEE requirement knocks out about 90% of the best candidates for that job.
Hey, I've got the BSEE... but not the ten years' experience as a working electrician.  As a college kid I remember explaining over and over to family members that "Electrical Engineering" was not the same as an "Electrician" and thus I could not help them with their home wiring projects, except in a superficial sense.  I'd wager that most BSEEs you might survey have no idea how to wire a three-way switch...

I wonder if SpaceX's problem here is just lack of on-the-ground recruiting and networking.  There ought to be a number of local folks working at the university or the port who could be persuaded to work on rockets for better pay...
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: philw1776 on 07/28/2015 04:54 pm
Spot on about many EEs.
I'd favor an electrician with the experience who had enough post HS formal EE training such that he/she understood the theory enough to evaluate equipment & requirements properly.
If can't find someone who passes the theory interview test, I'd have the work & regulatory experienced electrician "supervised" (not in daily work but in the calc & #s) or at least part time teamed by a power systems EE who does the cals.  They's each make the other a better employee.

I know >1 employee where minimum=1 is better may not be the SpaceX way.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 07/28/2015 05:31 pm
Spot on about many EEs.
I'd favor an electrician with the experience who had enough post HS formal EE training ...

Just wondering, are there any formalities that would require an EE to signoff?

If so, would anyone with a BSEE degree qualify?

Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: cscott on 07/29/2015 02:06 am
The other way 'round: most places will require sign off by a licensed electrician.  Nothing in the law requires an EE degree AFAIK.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Lobo on 07/29/2015 06:13 pm
@Dave G

Have doubts about the economics of RTLS for the FH without expending the center core. The performance hit with RTLS is fairly high. However recovering all the cores downrange carries a very minor performance hit.

If core recovery is required than barges are just too slow for downrange operations. Barge towing speed of about 5 knots means you need at least 60 hours to go 300 NM. As compare to about 16 hours with a ship travelling at about 19 knots. Recovery of cores beyond 300 NM with barges will tie up maritime assets for too long.

SpaceX will always need some maritime presence along the flight path from Texas. Maybe for supplemental tracking & telemetry relay. But mostly for contingencies so they don't have to called upon the USCG, USN & local maritime authorities for resources. A ship with a helopad will be useful.

Performance hit has nothing to do with it if there is no customers that require that extra capacity. Since it is speculated that >95% of payloads will be meet with full RTLS. Run the rest from the cape and keep the ASDS there. ASDS problem in Texas solved.

Yes, exactly. 

If FH can return all 3 cores to launch site, it will be essentially as cheap to launch as an F9R returning it's one core to the launch site.  This will essentially "retire" the F9E.  Any payload needing an F9E will fly on FHR.

The most likely rare payload that would need more than the FHR with all 3 cores RTLS, could use a barge to recover the central core down range, or just expend it all together.   We need to remember that such a payload will most likely be very expensive, and an FHR with the central core expended is essentially the same price as an F9E...which is not an expensive LV.   If you have a $500M payload and you are looking at (for example) $30M for FHR with all 3 cores RTLS, or $50M for FHR with central core expended...that's still going to be a real nominal price increase in the overall cost of the payload...and much cheaper than anything else in that class like a single payload Ariane V, D4H, or AV-551.

I believe the primary reason for the F9v1.2 upgrade is because F9v1.1 is just a little performance shy to launch these small commercial comsats to GTO and recover the booster (either on a barge or at the launch site).  The F9v1.2 with the upgraded upper stage should allow those payloads to move to F9R.  Above that will go to FHR(3) and then above that they will go to FHR(2) or FHR(3) with the central core recovered down range.

Payloads that may be on the "bubble" between recovering all 3 cores at the launch site and needing a central core recovered down range or expended could then possibly be moved to Boca Chica to take advantages of the additional performance there so then all 3 cores could RTLS.

NOTE: 

FH(3)=all 3 cores recovered
FH(2)=Central core expended.

Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: JBF on 07/29/2015 11:07 pm
No it won't be as cheap as an F9R.  You have 3 cores to prep, that's 2x the parts and labor, you have 3 cores to fuel and that is 2X the fuel cost.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: cscott on 07/30/2015 02:00 am
Surely you mean 3x.  Or 200% more, or 2x more.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 07/31/2015 10:17 am
Rocket Company to Stay in Harlingen
ULA builds 10 rockets a year
http://www.krgv.com/news/local-news/Rocket-Company-to-Stay-in-Harlingen/34452220
(article also includes embedded video)
Quote
For nearly three decades, people in Harlingen have been building rockets and sending satellites into space...

Tim Pillar is the leader of the Harlingen operation. He said the company has chosen to keep a low profile for the past 28 years.

A direct competitor to ULA is coming to the Valley.

“The biggest difference is we've been in the business for 50 years… SpaceX has been doing this for eight to ten years,” Pillar said.

Pillar said the private sector for rocket launches is growing, creating room for new companies like SpaceX to also find a home in south Texas.

United Launch Alliance’s rockets are built in Harlingen and Alabama, and then they are sent to Florida and California for lift-off.

Note that Harlingen is just 20 miles from Brownsville.
Both cities are part of the Rio Grande Valley (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rio_Grande_Valley), referred to locally as "the Valley".
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Kabloona on 07/31/2015 12:27 pm
SpaceX is coming, but will ULA be going if Atlas V shuts down and/or Vulcan gets canceled? Seems a bit strange for the article to claim "ULA is staying" without mentioning the raging debate over Atlas V engines and ULA's implicit threat to shut it down if they don't get relief on the RD-180 ban.

And I didn't quite understand this from the article linked above:

Quote
A rocket launch is scheduled to take place at Boca Chica Beach in the next two years. ULA’s Harlingen plant is building that rocket.

That may be news to SpaceX.

Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Herb Schaltegger on 07/31/2015 01:50 pm
The other way 'round: most places will require sign off by a licensed electrician.  Nothing in the law requires an EE degree AFAIK.

There are some things, in some regulated fields, that require a licensed PE (Professional Engineer) to sign off on.

SpaceX's issue filling the job here might be that they're trying to conflate multiple job with one person, when really the tasks they need to accomplish would be better split among two people - a licensed electrician to meet particular codes and standards of construction, and licensed EE PE to sign off on drawings and/or meet particular launch contract technical requirements.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: watermod on 07/31/2015 02:01 pm
SpaceX is coming, but will ULA be going if Atlas V shuts down and/or Vulcan gets canceled? Seems a bit strange for the article to claim "ULA is staying" without mentioning the raging debate over Atlas V engines and ULA's implicit threat to shut it down if they don't get relief on the RD-180 ban.

And I didn't quite understand this from the article linked above:

Quote
A rocket launch is scheduled to take place at Boca Chica Beach in the next two years. ULA’s Harlingen plant is building that rocket.

That may be news to SpaceX.

It might be time to stop and think.   What sort of revenue could SpaceX derive with selling access to their private (working) space port with room for competitors pads.   Considering their rocket pricing they might well be able to competitively price launch facilities compared to the government ports. It would allow them to learn a lot about their competitor's rockets too.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 07/31/2015 02:45 pm
And I didn't quite understand this from the article linked above:

Quote
A rocket launch is scheduled to take place at Boca Chica Beach in the next two years. ULA’s Harlingen plant is building that rocket.

That may be news to SpaceX.

Right.  Obviously the reporter got that part wrong.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 07/31/2015 03:01 pm
It might be time to stop and think.   What sort of revenue could SpaceX derive with selling access to their private (working) space port with room for competitors pads.   Considering their rocket pricing they might well be able to competitively price launch facilities compared to the government ports. It would allow them to learn a lot about their competitor's rockets too.

SpaceX doesn't own the area.  Most of it is government owned property.  See below.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 08/06/2015 08:13 am
Brownsville Herald: Home prices, sales up
http://www.brownsvilleherald.com/news/valley/article_28d2b2de-3bec-11e5-8b30-c773630d9b4a.html
Quote
The median price for a single family home the Brownsville-Harlingen metro area is $123,000 — a 6 percent increase since last year...

Cameron County also saw home sales jump 7.1 percent in 2015...

“Each one is a reflection of its own market and not in comparison to the other market,” said Mickey Furcron, president of the Brownsville-South Padre Island Board of Realtors about the report. “We’ve got some great weather here, the beach attraction, SpaceX coming into Brownsville and the port has some LNG companies interested.”
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Nomadd on 08/06/2015 06:09 pm
 I made an offer on 5 Esperson today. Considerably less than asking price, but made it cash and "As is", so maybe it'll fly.
 I feel a little like some guy who casually proposed to his girlfriend and keeps thinking “Oh God, what if she says yes”
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: PahTo on 08/06/2015 06:44 pm
I made an offer on 5 Esperson today. Considerably less than asking price, but made it cash and "As is", so maybe it'll fly.
 I feel a little like some guy who casually proposed to his girlfriend and keeps thinking “Oh God, what if she says yes”

Right on!  When do we start the "Party at Nomadd's house!" thread?
:)
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: rickyramjet on 08/07/2015 01:13 am
I made an offer on 5 Esperson today. Considerably less than asking price, but made it cash and "As is", so maybe it'll fly.

Good luck!
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: meekGee on 08/07/2015 08:18 pm
I made an offer on 5 Esperson today. Considerably less than asking price, but made it cash and "As is", so maybe it'll fly.
 I feel a little like some guy who casually proposed to his girlfriend and keeps thinking “Oh God, what if she says yes”
I can think of several more expensive ways to make friends...  And, you get a house!
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Ed on 08/09/2015 11:58 am
I made an offer on 5 Esperson today. Considerably less than asking price, but made it cash and "As is", so maybe it'll fly.
 I feel a little like some guy who casually proposed to his girlfriend and keeps thinking “Oh God, what if she says yes”

Just the normal second thoughts after making a binding commitment I would say.

And for the "As is" part of your offer:
My impression is that if you would offer first line seats for a SpaceX rocket launch
here on NSF (perhaps with some nice refreshements)
in excange for pairs helping hands for your home improvments projects there might be
surprising number of takers. Maybe not so many in the texan summer but still.
And probably quite a few even with helpful background in engineering and construction.  ;)



Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: zodiacchris on 08/09/2015 12:42 pm
Big fridge and bunk beds, that'll do the trick! I'll come over from Oz for a launch :-)
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 08/09/2015 12:52 pm
My impression is that if you would offer first line seats for a SpaceX rocket launch
here on NSF (perhaps with some nice refreshements)
in excange for pairs helping hands for your home improvments projects there might be
surprising number of takers. Maybe not so many in the texan summer but still.
And probably quite a few even with helpful background in engineering and construction.  ;)

If I remember correctly, Nomadd said the main issue was the septic system.  Beyond that, the house appears to be in reasonably good shape, for what it is.  Nomadd, did I get this right?

Pictures from real estate listing below:
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Nomadd on 08/09/2015 02:33 pm
 The house is completely empty except for one rusting kitchen table. I told them one of the conditions is a chance to fire up the pump and check the plumbing and drain field. I also need to look in the attic to be sure they didn't wait too long to put that new roof on. The work it needs all seems to be minor. Interior is fine, but after sitting for three years, you often have to repaint just to get rid of that abandoned house smell. Electrical was done wrong in the addition, but I can handle that. I'm pretty good with the NEC. I might want to put a wooden fence up, like SpaceX did on their Weems place.
 The owners seem agreeable to everything, but haven't actually accepted the offer yet, so I'm still waiting.
 If this insanity happens, I figured a Widow's watch or deck would wait till they were finished with the site. It's still a little uncertain, what they'll put where.
 Can't really make many plans regarding guests until I talk to SpaceX about smuggling people in. Two miles is so close to the launch pad, they might get a little antsy about liability and security.
 There's an immigration checkpoint on the highway. That might be where they close it to strangers during a launch. The Feds could be harder to bribe with a pizza.
 I'd be glad to have anybody who wanted to poke around the site over, but I tend to be on the road about 80% of the time. 10 days waiting for a new transmission in Portland, Maine is the longest I've been in one place since December.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Kabloona on 08/09/2015 05:49 pm
Awesome, so there'll be plenty of room for house guests while you're on the road. ;-)
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: darkenfast on 08/09/2015 07:16 pm
Well, I hope the house works out well, and every NSF'r who comes to visit is able to chip in some help for you in some way. 
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Wonger on 08/09/2015 07:17 pm
The house is completely empty except for one rusting kitchen table. I told them one of the conditions is a chance to fire up the pump and check the plumbing and drain field.
...

I wonder how high the water table is that close to the water and if that limits the capacity of the leach field.  Even so, you can always rent Porta Pottys for launches and have everyone chip in. 

Excellent move, by the way! You will be a nomad with roots.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Damon Hill on 08/09/2015 08:03 pm
I suspect the water table is slightly short of "swamp".  I don't see any swimming pools out there (rising water tables in some coastal locations have been known to pop pools up out of the ground).  The ground water salinity will be slightly short of "ocean".  My sister lives near Mims, FL which is ten miles inland from the Atlantic, and her ground water is still too brackish to be drinkable.

Porta-Johns will be mandatory given the hordes of NSFers who will be showing up as hopeful launch viewers, else you may require your many new friends to pack out what they packed in--I recommend hoarding empty two-liter pop bottles and gallon milk jugs.  My Big Trip in 2017 will be down to Oregon to view the solar eclipse, so I won't be one of them, but I don't think SpaceX will be quite ready by then anyway...
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 08/10/2015 11:30 am
I suspect the water table is slightly short of "swamp".  I don't see any swimming pools out there (rising water tables in some coastal locations have been known to pop pools up out of the ground).
Correct.  Local codes don't allow in-ground pools.

The ground water salinity will be slightly short of "ocean".  My sister lives near Mims, FL which is ten miles inland from the Atlantic, and her ground water is still too brackish to be drinkable.
All water for drinking, bathing, etc., has to be trucked in and stored in above-ground tanks.  If I remember correctly, 5 Esperson has 800 gallons of storage, and the SpaceX house has 1200 gallons.  See picture of water tank below.

Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Nomadd on 08/10/2015 01:04 pm
 That tank is 1600 gallons and has what looks like a pair of 400 gallon tanks behind it
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: spacenut on 08/10/2015 01:43 pm
They can dredge the canal or even the ocean, or bring in soil from somewhere else to fill in areas before building.  They did it at the cape when they built pads 39a and 39b.  They can also install water mains for fresh water and fire protection.  They might also install a sewage system.  A lot of infrastructure might need to be built before the launch facility. 

I think the long term goal of the Texas site is for the BFR.  They will soon have three launch facilities for Falcon 9 and Heavy.  If the two east coast ones can launch once a week that is 100 launches a year not counting Texas.  Once a week is not out of the question with the right manpower.  The Hawthorne facility can only make 40 cores a year, so they will have to get reuse working to do 100 a year.  That is not even counting the west coast. 
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: cscott on 08/10/2015 03:28 pm
They've stated before that the same crew is going to work on LC-39 and boca chica.  We were told not to expect significant work on boca chica before LC-39 comes online, but that work would pick up quickly after that.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Nomadd on 08/10/2015 04:48 pm
 They already have plans for utilities, but i think sewage will be enclosed tanks. If they do go with the BFR the Port of Brownsville is close, but transporting a 12 meter stage would still be interesting. I'd wondered if production facilities might be in the future. Or, they could always drop them off right at the pad with a big honkin LST.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 08/11/2015 06:08 pm
They've stated before that the same crew is going to work on LC-39 and boca chica.  We were told not to expect significant work on boca chica before LC-39 comes online, but that work would pick up quickly after that.

How is the LC-39 pad work going?  Are they almost done?
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 08/11/2015 06:19 pm
If they do go with the BFR the Port of Brownsville is close, but transporting a 12 meter stage would still be interesting. I'd wondered if production facilities might be in the future. Or, they could always drop them off right at the pad with a big honkin LST.

If SpaceX manufactured BFR tanks and assembled stages along the Brownsville sea port, they could probably transport it via land, as shown below.  They'd have to build a new stretch of road, about 1 mile, that connects the port frontage road (RL Ostos Rd) to Highway 4.  Beyond that, I believe Hwy 4 is free of obstructions - no stop lights or telephone wires.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 08/11/2015 06:21 pm
SpaceX picks up 6 more properties.  Click the animated GIF below to show which properties are new.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: sghill on 08/11/2015 06:53 pm
I just noticed that the USS Misspillion is being scrapped at the yard there.  My grandfather was skipper of that boat during the Korean War.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: llanitedave on 08/11/2015 11:02 pm
I just noticed that the USS Misspillion is being scrapped at the yard there.  My grandfather was skipper of that boat during the Korean War.

Interesting that she had a 5" gun and conducted shore bombardment.  Never would have expected that from a tanker.

Now all I have to do is somehow link this post to SpaceX...
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Nomadd on 08/11/2015 11:17 pm
 
I just noticed that the USS Misspillion is being scrapped at the yard there.  My grandfather was skipper of that boat during the Korean War.

Interesting that she had a 5" gun and conducted shore bombardment.  Never would have expected that from a tanker.

Now all I have to do is somehow link this post to SpaceX...
Spelled Mispillion.
 My 378 had one of those 5" guns. Mispillion also had 4 3" guns.

 Hey, it's on topic. SpaceX might need to fend off a ULA invasion force some day or use an oiler to refuel Falcon cores at sea or something.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: wannamoonbase on 08/12/2015 02:50 am
They already have plans for utilities, but i think sewage will be enclosed tanks. If they do go with the BFR the Port of Brownsville is close, but transporting a 12 meter stage would still be interesting. I'd wondered if production facilities might be in the future. Or, they could always drop them off right at the pad with a big honkin LST.

This is 1 part on thread, 1 part off thread.

Not everyone building 39 will need to stay till its operational. Some trades will be free but the SpaceX brain trust maybe the limiting item.  So expect some demobilization of trades and subs before remobilizing in TX.  But hopefully the long dean out civil work is underway.

Off thread, I think the BFR fab site makes sense to be on the CCAFS site.  Lots of empty area in the old area.  Great haul roads. No transportation needed to launch site.  Just have to test on the stand or build a test stand and there is room for that too. 
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 08/12/2015 07:22 am
Off thread, I think the BFR fab site makes sense to be on the CCAFS site.  Lots of empty area in the old area.  Great haul roads. No transportation needed to launch site.  Just have to test on the stand or build a test stand and there is room for that too.

Here's what Elon said about it. 
Quote
Texas Legislator:
What would be ideal is if we can have that take place where we launch the commercial site off Boca Chica Blvd there in Brownsville.  And ideally, we don't like those 2000 jobs being in California, we need you to manufacture those rockets over here.

Elon Musk:
Actually you know that's a very important point, and I should have mentioned that, which is the current Falcon 9 rocket is something that can be manufactured in California and road transported... 

But as we go to future rockets that are bigger than that, we would actually do the manufacturing at the launch site, or near the launch site, because otherwise the road transportation logistics become... Essentially you'd either have to put it on a big ship or build it near the launch site.  The logical thing is to build it near the launch site.  So that is something that would occur where ever this launch site occurs.

Texas Legislator:
And it needs to be at Boca Chica, so that would be great. We would love to see that happen.  Very good.  Thank you again for what you do.

Note that this was before Texas had been selected for their private launch site, and the testimony before the Texas state legislature was all about where their private launch site would be located.  Finalists included Georgia, California, Virginia, Puerto Rico, and Texas.  Basically, Musk was asking what incentives they would offer SpaceX to locate their private launch site in Texas, and to gauge their response, legislators were trying to figure out how many new jobs SpaceX would bring to Texas.  So when Musk says BFR will be manufactured "where ever this launch site occurs", he's referring to where ever their private launch site occurs, since that was the whole context of the discussion.

So it's Musk that ties building BFR to the Texas launch site.  To me, that makes it on-thread.

But that doesn't mean BFR would only be built in Texas.  BFR tanks may be manufactured in many locations.  And I'm assuming the Raptor engines that power BFR would still be built in California.  Same with BFR avionics.  Basically, any part that can be road transported will probably be built in Hawthorne.  So BFR manufacturing sites would probably be limited to core tanks and final stage assembly.

You can see the discussion about building BFR in Texas here, starting around 40 seconds into the video:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3_iu75TFgX8&t=0m40s
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Nomadd on 08/12/2015 12:21 pm
.

Not everyone building 39 will need to stay till its operational. Some trades will be free but the SpaceX brain trust maybe the limiting item.  So expect some demobilization of trades and subs before remobilizing in TX.  But hopefully the long dean out civil work is underway.

That looked like a Google translation.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: sghill on 08/12/2015 01:05 pm
I just noticed that the USS Misspillion is being scrapped at the yard there.  My grandfather was skipper of that boat during the Korean War.

Interesting that she had a 5" gun and conducted shore bombardment.  Never would have expected that from a tanker.


Heh.  Granddad earned his third Navy letter of commendation for that bombardment!  In addition to the Navy Cross with two Gold Stars in lieu of additional awards, the Commendation Ribbon with two stars and Combat "V", the Presidential Unit Citation Ribbon, and the Navy Commendation Ribbon, Granddad also had the American Defense Service Medal with star; Asiatic-Pacific Campaign Medal with two operation stars; American Campaign Medal; World War II Victory Medal; China Service Medal (extended); National Defense Service Medal; Korean Service Medal; and United Nations Service Medal. 

Needless to say, if he had a gun and an enemy to fire it at, he was going to use it.

Other than the USS Mispillion's (sorry for the ham-handed misspelling) current proximity to the SpaceX pad, this little side story is linked to spaceflight development in otherways. 

After the Korean War, Granddad was integral to the development of the nuclear submarine fleet and the development of submarine launched cruise missiles and ICBMs in his role as Systems Director for Nuclear Applications with the Navy (he had a masters degree in physics and was a Navy's "test pilot" for new submarines).  He supervised the launch of the very first Loon and Regulus cruise missiles from submarines and as the Navy's chief Hydrographer (map maker) he plotted the circumnavigation route for the USS Triton.  He also directed the placement of target fleets to get hydrogen bombs dropped on them during Operation Redwing. I think he also had a hand in the development of the microchip control systems for Polaris ICBM's later on while at RCA labs in Princeton (he knew Einstein!), but I don't know much about that part of his life- it was serious black budget development work!

Now back to our regularly scheduled discussions about flooded real-estate while we wait for concrete to start pouring...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=Nsj8lmUUcZ8
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Llian Rhydderch on 08/12/2015 09:12 pm
They already have plans for utilities, but i think sewage will be enclosed tanks. If they do go with the BFR the Port of Brownsville is close, but transporting a 12 meter stage would still be interesting. I'd wondered if production facilities might be in the future. Or, they could always drop them off right at the pad with a big honkin LST.

I think the BFR fab site makes sense to be on the CCAFS site.  Lots of empty area in the old area.  Great haul roads. No transportation needed to launch site.  Just have to test on the stand or build a test stand and there is room for that too.

I believe you may be, to use a term brought into regular English by US president Bush II, misunderestimating the additional costs on any private manufacturer who may elect to manufacture private goods on US government property, even with a fairly friendly long-term lease.

In my view, Musk will avoid such costs, and such overweening regulatory and agency "helpful oversight" of his manufacturing facility.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Jarnis on 08/13/2015 04:08 pm
I sincerely doubt they will launch BFRs out of Brownsville. It will be big, requiring a very big area around the pad to be clear in case of Kaboom.

Mexican border too close, existing housing too close... plus you probably wouldn't bulldoze a working F9/FH pad to make room anyway. Somewhere on the Gulf coast? Maybe, haven't looked if there are suitable areas, but Brownsville seems highly doubtful to me.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Jim on 08/13/2015 05:04 pm

In my view, Musk will avoid such costs, and such overweening regulatory and agency "helpful oversight" of his manufacturing facility.

You are "misoverestimating" the issue and really have no idea what is involved.

There is no such costs or oversight of a completely commercial activity on a gov't facility and it actually cheaper to use a gov't facility.  Utilities are cheaper and security already exists.  Safety oversight is provided by OSHA and not the gov't agency.  Military facility is a complete different item. 

Boeing and LM have complete autonomy in their "new" facilities at KSC.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: llanitedave on 08/13/2015 05:21 pm

In my view, Musk will avoid such costs, and such overweening regulatory and agency "helpful oversight" of his manufacturing facility.

You are "misoverestimating" the issue and really have no idea what is involved.

There is no such costs or oversight of a completely commercial activity on a gov't facility and it actually cheaper to use a gov't facility.  Utilities are cheaper and security already exists.  Safety oversight is provided by OSHA and not the gov't agency.  Military facility is a complete different item. 

Boeing and LM have complete autonomy in their "new" facilities at KSC.

Not so sure about that.  I worked for a private company on a government facility, and the costs were outrageous.  The buildings and grounds were owned by the government, which had contracted another corporation to maintain them.  Any such maintenance meant that the site contractor would negotiate with and bill the user as they saw fit.  Parking lot maintenance, and the pouring of an 8' x 12' concrete slab to hold a piece of external equipment was far more expensive than it would have been -- at least triple -- had we been located on private land.  Maintenance and repairs to the heating and cooling system was a nightmare to schedule, and then another nightmare of paying for multiple man-hours of labor for far more people than necessary to perform the work, many of which would only show up for a few minutes and then bill a minimum of two hours labor.  Utilities were NOT cheaper than on the outside, and "security" meant having to pay an extra $500,000 a year to have access to our buildings that didn't involve an extra 30 mile loop.

Before our project shut down, our main goal was simply to move our own facility off the government reservation, just so that we could operate an adequately built and maintained structure at an affordable cost.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Jim on 08/13/2015 05:57 pm

Not so sure about that.  I worked for a private company on a government facility, and the costs were outrageous.  The buildings and grounds were owned by the government, which had contracted another corporation to maintain them

Not applicable, the company is responsible for maintenance of the facilities it is using.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: meekGee on 08/15/2015 05:16 pm

In my view, Musk will avoid such costs, and such overweening regulatory and agency "helpful oversight" of his manufacturing facility.

You are "misoverestimating" the issue and really have no idea what is involved.

There is no such costs or oversight of a completely commercial activity on a gov't facility and it actually cheaper to use a gov't facility.  Utilities are cheaper and security already exists.  Safety oversight is provided by OSHA and not the gov't agency.  Military facility is a complete different item. 

Boeing and LM have complete autonomy in their "new" facilities at KSC.

Not so sure about that.  I worked for a private company on a government facility, and the costs were outrageous.  The buildings and grounds were owned by the government, which had contracted another corporation to maintain them.  Any such maintenance meant that the site contractor would negotiate with and bill the user as they saw fit.  Parking lot maintenance, and the pouring of an 8' x 12' concrete slab to hold a piece of external equipment was far more expensive than it would have been -- at least triple -- had we been located on private land.  Maintenance and repairs to the heating and cooling system was a nightmare to schedule, and then another nightmare of paying for multiple man-hours of labor for far more people than necessary to perform the work, many of which would only show up for a few minutes and then bill a minimum of two hours labor.  Utilities were NOT cheaper than on the outside, and "security" meant having to pay an extra $500,000 a year to have access to our buildings that didn't involve an extra 30 mile loop.

Before our project shut down, our main goal was simply to move our own facility off the government reservation, just so that we could operate an adequately built and maintained structure at an affordable cost.

It swings both ways.

When you "negotiate" for your contract with a government entity (the quotes are there because it's not really a negotiation in the commercial sense of the word....   and civil servants are often surprised by that, since they don't know what real negotiations are like) it's a surreal experience, since the other party is not really opposing you.  It's more like "what can I get away with under the circumstances", and if someone else (like your aforementioned contractor) got there first and negotiated exclusive control over, say, infrastructure maintenance, then you're hosed.

On the other hand, you might actually come out of such a "negotiation" with more than you ever intended to ask for, just because you were working with someone who is simply going out of their way to be helpful.

Like I said - surreal.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: llanitedave on 08/17/2015 04:40 am

In my view, Musk will avoid such costs, and such overweening regulatory and agency "helpful oversight" of his manufacturing facility.

You are "misoverestimating" the issue and really have no idea what is involved.

There is no such costs or oversight of a completely commercial activity on a gov't facility and it actually cheaper to use a gov't facility.  Utilities are cheaper and security already exists.  Safety oversight is provided by OSHA and not the gov't agency.  Military facility is a complete different item. 

Boeing and LM have complete autonomy in their "new" facilities at KSC.

Not so sure about that.  I worked for a private company on a government facility, and the costs were outrageous.  The buildings and grounds were owned by the government, which had contracted another corporation to maintain them.  Any such maintenance meant that the site contractor would negotiate with and bill the user as they saw fit.  Parking lot maintenance, and the pouring of an 8' x 12' concrete slab to hold a piece of external equipment was far more expensive than it would have been -- at least triple -- had we been located on private land.  Maintenance and repairs to the heating and cooling system was a nightmare to schedule, and then another nightmare of paying for multiple man-hours of labor for far more people than necessary to perform the work, many of which would only show up for a few minutes and then bill a minimum of two hours labor.  Utilities were NOT cheaper than on the outside, and "security" meant having to pay an extra $500,000 a year to have access to our buildings that didn't involve an extra 30 mile loop.

Before our project shut down, our main goal was simply to move our own facility off the government reservation, just so that we could operate an adequately built and maintained structure at an affordable cost.

It swings both ways.

When you "negotiate" for your contract with a government entity (the quotes are there because it's not really a negotiation in the commercial sense of the word....   and civil servants are often surprised by that, since they don't know what real negotiations are like) it's a surreal experience, since the other party is not really opposing you.  It's more like "what can I get away with under the circumstances", and if someone else (like your aforementioned contractor) got there first and negotiated exclusive control over, say, infrastructure maintenance, then you're hosed.

On the other hand, you might actually come out of such a "negotiation" with more than you ever intended to ask for, just because you were working with someone who is simply going out of their way to be helpful.

Like I said - surreal.

That's true, our project was definitely a late-comer, and "poor cousin" to the overall site organization.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 08/19/2015 11:39 am
Study shows Brownsville least educated
http://www.rgvproud.com/news/local-news/study-shows-brownsville-least-educated
Quote
A new study by Wallet Hub shows the Brownsville-Harlingen area as the least educated area that they studied in the United States. McAllen and Corpus Christi where not too far behind.

That's a number the University of Texas Rio Grande Valley professor Reynaldo Ramirez Jr. hopes can change.

"We're hoping that things like Space x and other industries that are being attracted into this area are going to raise our per capita income," Ramirez said.

Ramirez Jr. says that income is a big factor in low graduation rates.

"In a low socioeconomic situation it may cause some of them to make decisions. Sometimes bad decisions about leaving school and supporting the family," Ramirez said.

That's why he says places like Michigan with higher wages rank highest.

"Those at a higher social economic status are pretty stable," Ramirez said.

With the average wage in Brownsville at $37,000, around half of what the average income is in the United States...

As I've said before, unskilled labor in Brownsville is cheap.  Security guards, secretaries, janitors, construction workers, machinists, etc.  Basically anyone without a college degree, wages are much lower than average.

Real estate and taxes are also cheap. 

For a commercial company that wants to cut costs, Brownsville seems like an ideal location.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Nomadd on 08/20/2015 12:39 am
 I guess the owner of that Esperson house got tired of messing with it. He just accepted my informal, ludicrously low offer. Pending a bunch of formalities, it looks like I'll be watching rockets launch from my living room, or wherever I have to walk to if somebody builds something that obstructs my view.

 I'll still be on the road most of the time. Maybe, if my survivalist looking neighbor doesn't mind, I'll look into a 30' pole or tower to put a webcam on. Assuming satellite home internet has a lot better upload speed than it did a few years back.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: cscott on 08/20/2015 02:01 am
Congratulations!
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Roy_H on 08/20/2015 04:57 am
From: http://www.bestsatelliteproviders.com/satellite-internet-providers/
"When you request a specific website from your home computer, it is transmitted through your modem to your satellite dish, then to the orbiting satellite, then to the operations center, which in turn sends the Web site info back to the orbiting satellite, then back to your home dish, through your modem, then ultimately to your computer, "

"#1 – Exede

Exede, owned by ViaSat, launched the highest capacity communications satellite about a year ago, called ViaSat-1. An FCC report released in 2013 and 2014 showed that Exede Internet delivered the best performance in terms of promised speeds to its subscribers, with 140% or better performance at their advertised download speed of 12Mbps during peak hours. Exede also offers “The Fress Zone” with five hours of unmetered internet each day. Uploads and downloads during The Free Zone are at full speed and do not count toward your monthly data allowance.

This combined with competitive pricing, excellent service and an ever expanding customer base has convinced the staff at BestSatelliteProviders.com to place Exede to our number #1 ranking for satellite Internet providers. Free installation deals are available in many areas. Exede also offers a range of packages based on bandwidth usage from 10GB per month to 25GB per month.

Exede Satellite Internet Plans
Exede    All Plans
Late Night Bandwidth
(12am to 5am)    The Free Zone
Download Speed    12 Mbps
Upload Speed    3 Mbps
Email    10 e-Mail addresses
Specials    F-Secure antivirus for 3 months
$100 off one time setup fee of $150


Bandwidth Allowance Per Month,
Plan #1    10 GB      $49.99 /month
Plan #2    15 GB    $79.99 /month
Plan #3    25 GB       $129.99 /month

So, is 3 Mbps enough? This is the highest of all the ones listed. I watch a lot of Netflix so I use about 50GB/mth, but I only pay $45 for unlimited. For satellite service I would choose the lowest cost and rent/buy movies.  ;D

Would it be possible to have 2 web cams, one pointed at launch site and the other at control center without overloading upload speed? What about slow frame rates? Not like we would miss anything at 1 frame/sec or slower.

I  suppose that the monthly bandwidth would be upload + download.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Jarnis on 08/20/2015 05:23 am
SpaceX will be building very very fast internets to their site, better be on the ball and try to get your own wired internet to piggyback that buildup :)

This assumes they buy the connectivity as a service from some internet provider. If they lay down their own fiber past your property, then you may be out of luck.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 08/20/2015 11:49 am
SpaceX will be building very very fast internets to their site, better be on the ball and try to get your own wired internet to piggyback that buildup :)

This assumes they buy the connectivity as a service from some internet provider. If they lay down their own fiber past your property, then you may be out of luck.

Here's a diagram for the new fiber-optic cables.  Should be running these soon.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: guckyfan on 08/20/2015 12:31 pm
Nice to see they are running redundant cables on both sides of Highway 4. Both feeding into the Stargate facility and into the SpaceX facility.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Jdeshetler on 08/20/2015 02:57 pm
I'll still be on the road most of the time. Maybe, if my survivalist looking neighbor doesn't mind, I'll look into a 30' pole or tower to put a webcam on.

Congratulations!

http://www.portaking.com/productgallery/pre-fabricated-towers/prefabricated-observation-towers.html

Recommended Checklists:
- Reclined Leather Chairs
- Mini-refrigerator
- A/C unit on the roof
- Wet bar in the rear
- Wall to wall carpet
- Metal hooks for holding sound muffled headphones
- All typical windows replace with blast proof/ tinted windows

Cheers,
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: nadreck on 08/20/2015 03:00 pm

Recommended Checklists:
- Reclined Leather Chairs
- Mini-refrigerator
- A/C unit on the roof
- Wet bar in the rear
- Wall to wall carpet
- Metal hooks for holding sound muffled headphones
- All typical windows replace with blast proof/ tinted windows

Cheers,

Hardwood floor please and a sound system, we might as well kill time waiting with some salsa dancing
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Syrinx on 08/20/2015 05:24 pm
Nomadd, have I ever told you that you are my favorite poster? I bet we'd make great pals. What a coincidence, I like rockets too! And the internet!
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Okie_Steve on 08/20/2015 07:14 pm
I'm sure that Chris can send him a list of all his best^^^^L2  friends  ;D
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Nomadd on 08/20/2015 07:57 pm
 My one condition was a good drainfield. Turned out to be a good condition since it needs new lines. I guess they don't take too well to sitting unused for three years. I already have an agreement with the owner for those.
 I'm still a little nervous about Musk Inc. changing their minds about houses two miles from the pad.
 I'm wondering about some of their policies. Like, will they try to chase non residents out when they set up the soft checkpoint. That would suck for the guy with the little store or bar or whatever that brown building will be, who I intend to talk into a deck. He'd have captive customers for 6 or 7 hours on launch day.
 Any salsa dancing would have to be by someone a hell of a lot cuter than anybody I've seen on this site.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: UberNobody on 08/20/2015 08:02 pm
I have a question.  Is it possible for SpaceX to use Boca Chica for building/launching/landing BFR?  Would it require an off-shore launch pad?  Does SpaceX own enough land there to do this?

Elon did say during the ground breaking that the first people to visit Mars might launch from there.  Depending on the architecture choice, that could mean going up in a Dragon to meet MCT waiting in orbit, or launching in a MCT directly.

Edit:  fixed typos.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: nadreck on 08/20/2015 08:19 pm

 Any salsa dancing would have to be by someone a hell of a lot cuter than anybody I've seen on this site.

A few of my performance and competitive partners are also geeks ;)
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Ed on 08/20/2015 08:51 pm
I guess the owner of that Esperson house got tired of messing with it. He just accepted my informal, ludicrously low offer. Pending a bunch of formalities, it looks like I'll be watching rockets launch from my living room, or wherever I have to walk to if somebody builds something that obstructs my view.

 I'll still be on the road most of the time. Maybe, if my survivalist looking neighbor doesn't mind, I'll look into a 30' pole or tower to put a webcam on. Assuming satellite home internet has a lot better upload speed than it did a few years back.

Congrats Nomadd

I think you helped yourself to a ringside seat or rather a fairly sized ringside box in the arena.
Not only quite some time before the first fight started but just in time before the arena is beeing build.
Which is a very good time in terms of real estate development, I would come to think.

But let yourself not get ahead of yourself.
More important than on the checklist than some recliner seats are the tricky formalities of contracts and official registration.
And only if you hold both of them firmly in your hands you can proclaim proudly towardy SpaceX:
'Let the constructions begin!'
Of course with a little wink and a nod of appreciation. ;)

And I sincerly wish you a friendly and cooperative neighborhood.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 08/20/2015 09:02 pm
I have a question.  Is it possible for SpaceX to use Boca China for building/launching/landing BFR?
Yes.  SpaceX would probably need to buy all of the houses in Boca Chica Village in order to launch BFR.  All of the houses together would probably cost around $2 million.  Not a big deal for SpaceX.  They might need approval from Mexico as well, but as I've said before, the Mexican side is just salt marsh and tidal pools for miles.  Look on Google Maps saleilte view, and you'll see what I mean.  So I doubt Mexico would stand in the way of BFR launches.

Would it require an off-shore launch pad?
No.

Does SpaceX own enough land there to do this?
No, but there is plenty of state land to the south of the F9/FH launch site, and the government is very friendly with SpaceX.

Elon did say during the ground breaking that the first people to visit Mars might launch from there.
Musk has made more direct references to launching BFR from Boca Chica. 

Before Texas had been selected for their private launch site, Elon Musk testified before the Texas state legislature.   Basically, Musk was there to ask what incentives they would offer SpaceX to locate their private launch site in Texas, as opposed to Georgia, California, Virginia, Puerto Rico, etc.  To gauge their response, Texas legislators were trying to figure out how many new jobs SpaceX would bring there.

Here's a partial transcript of that testimony that deals with BFR:
Quote
Texas Legislator:
What would be ideal is if we can have that take place where we launch the commercial site off Boca Chica Blvd there in Brownsville.  And ideally, we don't like those 2000 jobs being in California, we need you to manufacture those rockets over here.

Elon Musk:
Actually you know that's a very important point, and I should have mentioned that, which is the current Falcon 9 rocket is something that can be manufactured in California and road transported... 

But as we go to future rockets that are bigger than that, we would actually do the manufacturing at the launch site, or near the launch site, because otherwise the road transportation logistics become... Essentially you'd either have to put it on a big ship or build it near the launch site.  The logical thing is to build it near the launch site.  So that is something that would occur where ever this launch site occurs.

Note: When Musk says BFR will be manufactured "where ever this launch site occurs", he's referring to where ever their private launch site occurs, since that was the whole context of the discussion. So here Musk directly ties BFR to the Texas launch site.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Kansan52 on 08/20/2015 09:30 pm
Congrats Nomadd!
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Chris Bergin on 08/20/2015 10:03 pm
I guess the owner of that Esperson house got tired of messing with it. He just accepted my informal, ludicrously low offer. Pending a bunch of formalities, it looks like I'll be watching rockets launch from my living room, or wherever I have to walk to if somebody builds something that obstructs my view.

 I'll still be on the road most of the time. Maybe, if my survivalist looking neighbor doesn't mind, I'll look into a 30' pole or tower to put a webcam on. Assuming satellite home internet has a lot better upload speed than it did a few years back.

Ok, that's nuts! Congrats and we want photos! ;D Thanks to QG for the tweet or else I'd have missed this.

I'll bring the beer if you've got a spare spot in your garden for me to park my backside!  8)
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Guspaz on 08/20/2015 10:26 pm
So, is 3 Mbps enough? This is the highest of all the ones listed. I watch a lot of Netflix so I use about 50GB/mth, but I only pay $45 for unlimited. For satellite service I would choose the lowest cost and rent/buy movies.  ;D

Would it be possible to have 2 web cams, one pointed at launch site and the other at control center without overloading upload speed? What about slow frame rates? Not like we would miss anything at 1 frame/sec or slower.

I  suppose that the monthly bandwidth would be upload + download.

Those plans are out of date. Their top package now has 30GB, and they don't do the "free pass" thing anymore. They used to have plans with up to 150GB, but that seems to be gone now.

They do let you buy more bandwidth by the gigabyte (there does not appear to be a limit), but they don't publish the pricing: you need to be a customer to see the prices on their customer portal. In 2012, they were reportedly charging $10/GB in overages.

That said, I heard about some crazy plan from this California company who wanted to put a ton of satellites in LEO to offer broadband...
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Ed on 08/20/2015 10:27 pm
SpaceX will be building very very fast internets to their site, better be on the ball and try to get your own wired internet to piggyback that buildup :)

This assumes they buy the connectivity as a service from some internet provider. If they lay down their own fiber past your property, then you may be out of luck.



From the limited amount of information known about the fiber link I would not expect a material change in available internet connectivity for Boca Chica residents.

The owner of the link will lay a cable with quite a few fiber pairs. In most cases I know personally the fiber cable itself was not the main cost block but rather the laying and the active components inbetween.
So normally cable with massive grow capabilites was put into the earth.

These fibers will be then rented out by the owner.

One would assume that SpaceX as well as the University of Texas in Brownsville go for a wholesale rent of some fiber pairs between its locations in Boca Chica as well between Boca Chica and Bronsville. This is called reting a"dark fiber" since you have to provide you own equipment on the end points. But it has the unbeatable advantages that there is no interference from other users and you can use whatever protocol you deem suitable. Probably some additional fibers will be sub rented by a provider choosen by Space X to facilitate their network between their various Locations.

For private customers a provider would have to step in renting either a dark fiber itself of some amount of bandwith on one or more fiber pairs to a dedicated point in Boca Chica. Which leaves only the problem of the "last mile" which could be bridged by wireless Connections for which you will have to errect some kind of pole or tower. This company will then advertise this bandwith to local residents for a price with the intention of overbooking their rented bandwith at least 10 to 50 fold.

We all know the number of permanent residents in Boca Chica currently to be in the low single digits numbers.
Barring a law that supporting a certain minimum Internet bandwith to avaiable for all citizen in all places in Texas the business case for Boca Chica might be a hard sell to the finacial department of any commercial provider.

I would further presume that any houses owned by SpaceX and used by SpaceX employees will not count towards the business case since it would be only logical and prudent for SpaceX to provide their internet connectivity needs via a local wireless extension. 

If however an commercial provider has be enticed to lay and manage this fiber link then it might decide to offer the capabilities the link offers within their existing product range anyway. Which could give you suddently a good deal of bandwith for a reasonable price.

But from the other side of the pond were I live these details are not so easy to recognize correctly so I could be wrong with my assumptions by quite a margin.


Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Sam Ho on 08/20/2015 10:48 pm
So, is 3 Mbps enough? This is the highest of all the ones listed. I watch a lot of Netflix so I use about 50GB/mth, but I only pay $45 for unlimited. For satellite service I would choose the lowest cost and rent/buy movies.  ;D

Would it be possible to have 2 web cams, one pointed at launch site and the other at control center without overloading upload speed? What about slow frame rates? Not like we would miss anything at 1 frame/sec or slower.

I  suppose that the monthly bandwidth would be upload + download.

Those plans are out of date. Their top package now has 30GB, and they don't do the "free pass" thing anymore. They used to have plans with up to 150GB, but that seems to be gone now.

They do let you buy more bandwidth by the gigabyte (there does not appear to be a limit), but they don't publish the pricing: you need to be a customer to see the prices on their customer portal. In 2012, they were reportedly charging $10/GB in overages.

That said, I heard about some crazy plan from this California company who wanted to put a ton of satellites in LEO to offer broadband...

According to Exede's website, the 10GB plan has free use 0300-0800.  The other plans (12-30GB) provide throttled access (1-5Mbps) when over your cap.  Normal speeds are max 12Mb/s down and 3Mb/s up.  Up and down both count towards the usage meter.

http://www.exede.com/services-pricing/?zip=78520
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Nomadd on 08/20/2015 11:57 pm
I guess the owner of that Esperson house got tired of messing with it. He just accepted my informal, ludicrously low offer. Pending a bunch of formalities, it looks like I'll be watching rockets launch from my living room, or wherever I have to walk to if somebody builds something that obstructs my view.

 I'll still be on the road most of the time. Maybe, if my survivalist looking neighbor doesn't mind, I'll look into a 30' pole or tower to put a webcam on. Assuming satellite home internet has a lot better upload speed than it did a few years back.

Ok, that's nuts! Congrats and we want photos! ;D Thanks to QG for the tweet or else I'd have missed this.

I'll bring the beer if you've got a spare spot in your garden for me to park my backside!  8)
Any time boss. None of it would have happened without this site.
 Of course, if it all goes to hell, that means I'll blame you.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: SpaceXfan on 08/21/2015 05:43 pm
I guess the owner of that Esperson house got tired of messing with it. He just accepted my informal, ludicrously low offer. Pending a bunch of formalities, it looks like I'll be watching rockets launch from my living room, or wherever I have to walk to if somebody builds something that obstructs my view.

 I'll still be on the road most of the time. Maybe, if my survivalist looking neighbor doesn't mind, I'll look into a 30' pole or tower to put a webcam on. Assuming satellite home internet has a lot better upload speed than it did a few years back.

That's great news and it sounds like you've got a bargain regardless!
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: PahTo on 08/21/2015 05:45 pm

Congrats Nomad!
Umm, if "first come first served" rules apply, I'd like to be first in line for viewing (okay, maybe second behind the founder of this forum), as I posted on Aug 6th immediately after you made the offer, or at least posted that you had.  Woot!
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: DecoLV on 08/22/2015 06:21 pm
First of all, congratulations Nomaad! I would be thinking about a purchase like that myself if I did not live in Massachusetts.

But if I could take this a little more meta, there are great sideline opportunities for SpaceX here to generate some savings/ cash. Start with hydrogen, which it needs anyway. Could you do commercial power from a massive fuel cell? Generates fresh water too. Add wind and solar and SX could get to net savings and enough excess to sell...maybe. And in real estate, clubs, restaurants, SpaceX gift shops, thrill rides...being the lessor for all that would be sweet. Maybe  I should move to Texas after all...
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Roy_H on 08/23/2015 06:39 pm
First of all, congratulations Nomaad! I would be thinking about a purchase like that myself if I did not live in Massachusetts.

But if I could take this a little more meta, there are great sideline opportunities for SpaceX here to generate some savings/ cash. Start with hydrogen, which it needs anyway. Could you do commercial power from a massive fuel cell?

Why does SpaceX need hydrogen? The Raptor engine is designed to run on LOX and liquid methane CH4. SpaceX is planning to supplement some of their power needs with solar cells and I would think that is the best option for Nomadd as well.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: CraigLieb on 08/24/2015 01:13 am
Congrats Nomad you could actually start paying off the purchase price by hosting parties for us enthusiasts even before the first launch ! And we get to see the construction up front and maybe even sponsor spaces with a tag on it for our lawn chairs.  Kind of like "buy a brick" campaigns at school. Even if it is all tongue-in-cheek and not real.
Put my name in the reservation list.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: mr. mark on 08/29/2015 12:49 am
Road construction has started leading into the launch site.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Jdeshetler on 08/29/2015 02:54 am
Road construction has started leading into the launch site.
Which location is it at? Control Control Area or Vertical Launch Area?
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 08/29/2015 10:45 am
Which location is it at? Control Control Area or Vertical Launch Area?
mr. mark says its at the launch site.

By the way, the map you show is old.  Based on various info from this thread, here's the latest map:
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: meekGee on 08/29/2015 03:54 pm
I'm missing something obvious.

Who owns the light green colored areas ?

The legend covers Federal, State, County, City, SpaceX.

The other lots are private, I assume, and are colored the same as the rest of the land.

EDIT:  Are those maybe BLM green areas, which are differentiated from federal ownership of "regular" lots?
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: guckyfan on 08/29/2015 04:17 pm
I am looking at that wedge shaped area of lots. SpaceX owned together with state owned that they can easily get they are close to having that wedge complete. Is it just coincidence or are they trying to get that whole area? Any idea what they would want to do with it?

Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: meekGee on 08/29/2015 05:40 pm
I am looking at that wedge shaped area of lots. SpaceX owned together with state owned that they can easily get they are close to having that wedge complete. Is it just coincidence or are they trying to get that whole area? Any idea what they would want to do with it?

I've always assumed that.

I don't know if they'll develop it, but the state guarantees a buffer area which SpaceX doesn't have to own.  Meanwhile, SpaceX owns the land it's developing on, making the development easier.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Zed_Noir on 08/29/2015 05:51 pm
@Dave G

Can you indicated @Nomadd's future NSF clubhouse in future maps?  :)
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 08/29/2015 06:21 pm
Who owns the light green colored areas ?

The light green colored enclosed lots are privately owned. 

The large areas of light green without any lot numbers are state owned.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: meekGee on 08/29/2015 08:04 pm
Who owns the light green colored areas ?

The light green colored enclosed lots are privately owned. 

The large areas of light green without any lot numbers are state owned.

Thanks - So what's the difference between the two type of state ownership?  (light blue and unenclosed light green?)

Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 08/29/2015 08:16 pm
@Dave G

Can you indicated @Nomadd's future NSF clubhouse in future maps?  :)
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 08/29/2015 08:24 pm
So what's the difference between the two type of state ownership?  (light blue and unenclosed light green?)

The light blue lots are real estate that can be bought or sold.

The unenclosed light green areas correspond to roads, state park land - basically anything that hasn't been listed as real estate property to be bought or sold.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: TrevorMonty on 08/29/2015 09:26 pm
I guess the owner of that Esperson house got tired of messing with it. He just accepted my informal, ludicrously low offer. Pending a bunch of formalities, it looks like I'll be watching rockets launch from my living room, or wherever I have to walk to if somebody builds something that obstructs my view.

 I'll still be on the road most of the time. Maybe, if my survivalist looking neighbor doesn't mind, I'll look into a 30' pole or tower to put a webcam on. Assuming satellite home internet has a lot better upload speed than it did a few years back.
Congratulations.

Make sure your insurance covers this.

 http://t.co/S2VNVhx8E2
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: dglow on 08/30/2015 12:43 am
Make sure your insurance covers this.

 http://t.co/S2VNVhx8E2

Ha! Note the back & forth from Tory Bruno in response...
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Nomadd on 08/30/2015 12:49 am
 The diagram is a little premature. I don't own it yet.
 I'm hoping to get that empty lot behind 5 Esperson just to keep it empty. It would be a good spot for parking and a decent shop.
 The owner is still promising to get a contract to me. I'm stuck in Virginia for two and a half more weeks, then I'll head to Brownsville to get things moving from that end.
 A lot of lots are being picked up in tax sales for pocket change. One of the residents has bought a bunch of them hoping to make money off them. SpaceX might just be buying some of the ones available for a song to keep them off the market.
 
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: symbios on 08/30/2015 09:02 am
SpaceX rocket site grows

Construction set to begin this fall

Valley morning star
http://www.valleymorningstar.com/premium/article_af3a90cc-4eba-11e5-ae8f-9fa91a864d44.html (http://www.valleymorningstar.com/premium/article_af3a90cc-4eba-11e5-ae8f-9fa91a864d44.html)

Quote
Cameron County earlier this year transferred ownership of 25 lots to the Cameron County Spaceport Development Corp. Those lots now have been conveyed to Elon Musk’s SpaceX.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 08/30/2015 11:55 am
SpaceX rocket site grows

Construction set to begin this fall

Valley morning star
http://www.valleymorningstar.com/premium/article_af3a90cc-4eba-11e5-ae8f-9fa91a864d44.html (http://www.valleymorningstar.com/premium/article_af3a90cc-4eba-11e5-ae8f-9fa91a864d44.html)

Quote
Cameron County earlier this year transferred ownership of 25 lots to the Cameron County Spaceport Development Corp. Those lots now have been conveyed to Elon Musk’s SpaceX.

Thanks for the link.

Note: The 25 lots mentioned in the new article are colored purple and labeled "Parking Area" in the map below.  This was originally reported (http://www.valleymorningstar.com/premium/article_55d1b2b6-f782-11e4-bcb4-536546669d18.html) back on May 10, and is now confirmed.

Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 08/30/2015 01:23 pm
A lot of lots are being picked up in tax sales for pocket change... SpaceX might just be buying some of the ones available for a song to keep them off the market.
Right.  Empty lots around there aren't worth much.  Developed lots with grandfathered codes for septic tanks, they're worth significantly more.

One of the residents has bought a bunch of them hoping to make money off them.
Looking at the online real estate map (http://www.cameroncad.org/cadclientdb/propertymap.aspx), I've also seen many empty lots being purchased by investment companies, real estate holding companies, etc. 

Musk is on record tying BFR launches to their private launch site, so its quite possible SpaceX will eventually want to own the entire area.  If so, with SpaceX's close ties to local and state government, they may resort to eminent domain.  In that case, they'll probably offer fair market value plus maybe 20% or so to make it palatable. 

So yes, people may make a few bucks buying cheap empty lots, but I doubt they'll make any serious money. 

By the way, they used eminent domain in my area a few years back.  Most people were happy with their settlements, typically 20% higher than market value.  A few residents tried to fight it, mostly to get more money.  As I remember they did get a little more money, but not a lot more, not enough to pay the extra legal fees to fight it.  Anyway, in my experience, eminent domain isn't such a horrible thing.  They don't try to screw people.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: cscott on 08/30/2015 02:30 pm
Another option is that the local government enforce building and access regulations in such a strict way that the properties become effectively worthless and unoccupiable, and then SpaceX can just wait out the owners.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: JoerTex on 08/30/2015 02:44 pm
Another option is that the local government enforce building and access regulations in such a strict way that the properties become effectively worthless and unoccupiable, and then SpaceX can just wait out the owners.

The houses at the launch site are not located in an organized city, only in Cameron County.  In Texas, counties don't have "Rule Making Power"  They have no land use codes.  They can enforce standard building codes, fire codes, and they enforce health and safety standards [for say septic systems] through a county health department.  Very minimal regulation of land use.  If folks are willing to truck-in water [they do now] and install off-grid solar electric, there will be little administrative interference.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Nomadd on 08/30/2015 03:56 pm
 That's one of the things that worries me a little. Fair market value is kind of vague in a place like this. Terry Heaton on Weems has expanded his house and put a lot into it. He says he'll be glad to sell for $250,000. Other houses have gone for $30,000. Frank Kawalski doesn't seem like the sort to go down without a fight. I might end up putting more into the place than I paid for it. Eminent domain could get ugly.
 The F9 is big enough to worry some folks that close. It's hard to see them launching BFRs 2 miles away from private homes. If everything works out, any guests I have better not be squeamish because they'll be signing liability wavers in blood.
 But, I don't think I'll regret it. I never really outgrew being one of those kids who'd hang out watching construction sites all day. It'll be a good show, and if they kick me out, I'll make them throw in a bunch of guest passes as part of the deal.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: mme on 08/30/2015 04:42 pm
... If everything works out, any guests I have better not be squeamish because they'll be signing liability wavers in blood.
Not a problem, as long as it's not my blood. :)

But, I don't think I'll regret it. I never really outgrew being one of those kids who'd hang out watching construction sites all day. It'll be a good show, and if they kick me out, I'll make them throw in a bunch of guest passes as part of the deal.
I think buying the house was brilliant.  No idea if it will be a good investment money wise.  I can see the America Express ad now, "House, $XX,XXXX.  Improvements, $YY,YYYY.  Uncrowded beaches and the roar of rockets, priceless."
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Vultur on 08/30/2015 05:51 pm
IIRC in Texas eminent domain cannot be used for the benefit of private companies - the law was changed after a controversial case of this in some other state several years back.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 08/30/2015 06:21 pm
I never really outgrew being one of those kids who'd hang out watching construction sites all day.
Ditto.  I've always been interested in the process of building things, seeing the potential, and seeing how they go about realizing it.

Anyway, I don't think you'll have anything to worry about with your house.   Worst case scenario, they may be able to force you to sell, but if you have receipts for home improvements, you're not going to lose money.  For the relatively few homes there, they'll want keep owners happy, within reason.

Vacant lots are a different story.  People buying land, speculating that values will increase, especially with the codes there for new development, I don't really see than panning out.

In Texas, counties don't have "Rule Making Power"  They have no land use codes.  They can enforce standard building codes, fire codes, and they enforce health and safety standards [for say septic systems] through a county health department.  Very minimal regulation of land use.  If folks are willing to truck-in water [they do now] and install off-grid solar electric, there will be little administrative interference.
Not quite. 

The main issue is wastewater/sewage.  For new development, it has to stay above ground.  So in addition to trucking water in, a new home would have to truck sewage out as well.  Existing homes have grandfather clauses for underground septic systems.

Here's a real world example:
Man Denied Building Permits by the County at Boca Chica Village
http://www.krgv.com/news/local-news/man-denied-building-permits-by-the-county-at-boca-chica-village/32390862
Quote
CAMERON COUNTY -

A man says his dream home turned into dust after the county denied his building permits. Now he's watching as Space-X designs a rocket launch facility next door.

Sam Clauson planned to spend his golden years at Boca Chica Village.

"I thought maybe I could build a house, eventually a retirement home," he said.

That dream was squashed. Cameron County said his property was too close to sea level to dig the required sewer and water lines...
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: guckyfan on 08/30/2015 07:11 pm
So he cannot dig. Tanks can be built above ground.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Nomadd on 08/30/2015 09:30 pm



The main issue is wastewater/sewage.  For new development, it has to stay above ground.  So in addition to trucking water in, a new home would have to truck sewage out as well.  Existing homes have grandfather clauses for underground septic systems.

Here's a real world example:
Man Denied Building Permits by the County at Boca Chica Village
http://www.krgv.com/news/local-news/man-denied-building-permits-by-the-county-at-boca-chica-village/32390862
Quote
CAMERON COUNTY -

A man says his dream home turned into dust after the county denied his building permits. Now he's watching as Space-X designs a rocket launch facility next door.

Sam Clauson planned to spend his golden years at Boca Chica Village.

"I thought maybe I could build a house, eventually a retirement home," he said.

That dream was squashed. Cameron County said his property was too close to sea level to dig the required sewer and water lines...
I talked to Sam. His main problem was that Cameron is refusing to supply any new electrical. He could have handled above ground tanks. I think his lot is also on the wrong side of the hard checkpoint, so that could have been a problem. I couldn't spot any electrical vaults and I'm hoping they'll service existing lines if they start going bad. Just about everything is underground.
 It all might change when SpaceX starts bringing utilities in. I know they're paying for the lines, but I don't know if that means they'll be private. I'm guessing that the single phase 12kv line will be expanded to 3 phase. I can't think of anything that would use all that much power. It's mainly offices, cranes and a big honkin transporter/erector right? And lots of lights.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: OnWithTheShow on 08/30/2015 09:48 pm
If not I know a couple companies that can sell you some solar panels and a battery system for your home...
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: TrevorMonty on 08/30/2015 10:38 pm
If the place is not occupied for most of the time. It may work out cheaper to be off the grid,  use solar with a backup generator.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: S.Paulissen on 08/30/2015 11:18 pm
Time to hit up

www.solarcities.com
and
http://www.teslamotors.com/powerwall

:p
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: meekGee on 08/30/2015 11:40 pm
It all might change when SpaceX starts bringing utilities in. I know they're paying for the lines, but I don't know if that means they'll be private. I'm guessing that the single phase 12kv line will be expanded to 3 phase. I can't think of anything that would use all that much power. It's mainly offices, cranes and a big honkin transporter/erector right? And lots of lights.

I think filling up the rocket with fuel takes a bit of power.  Pretty easy to calculate...   Liftoff mass * g * half-height (give or take) / time-to-fill / pumping efficiency.

Then there's some fuel chillin' (which might be done over longer periods of time), air conditioning, the lighting you mentioned, charging up the Teslas in the parking lot, the gates at the guard booth...  it adds up.   Maybe some radars too, right?
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Nomadd on 08/31/2015 02:15 am
 Didn't think of chilling. I guess some uber insulated tanks would let them spread that out.
 If only there was some company who sold lithium batteries you could hang on the wall and hook to the grid to even out electrical. Or a company that specialized in solar installations.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Jim on 08/31/2015 02:49 am
I'm guessing that the single phase 12kv line will be expanded to 3 phase. I can't think of anything that would use all that much power.

Air Conditioning.  Payload processing buildings are large open facilities that require frequent air changes and temperatures that are typically lower than office spaces.  The launch vehicle prep buildings and pad hangar will need AC too.  And if the pad hangar has a clean area, that will require more HVAC.  The fairing air at the pad and hangar will be conditioned and high flow rates and it is a single pass through (not recirculated).  The rest of the power requirements (offices and lights) are minor compared to this (outside of prop conditioning)
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 08/31/2015 09:50 am
It all might change when SpaceX starts bringing utilities in. I know they're paying for the lines, but I don't know if that means they'll be private. I'm guessing that the single phase 12kv line will be expanded to 3 phase...

I haven't seen any articles for SpaceX running new electrical lines.  Doesn't mean they won't, just that I haven't heard anything about it.

There is an article saying SpaceX plans to install 6.5 acres of solar panels:
Solar project planned for SpaceX
http://www.valleymorningstar.com/premium/article_a3cdf116-1dec-11e4-b4f5-001a4bcf6878.html
Quote
Elon Musk’s Space Exploration Technologies, through subsidiary Dogleg Park LLC, proposes to place solar panels off-grid on up to 6.5 acres at the project site...
 
The acreage where the solar panels, or arrays, would be placed is in the area of the launch control center, according to the application filed.

SolarCity is the general contractor on the project.

6.5 acres of solar is a lot.  Also, in addition to their residential PowerWall product, Tesla makes an industrial version of their grid battery for power companies and commercial installations.  It's called the "PowerPack", shown below.  Add a backup generator, and they may not need to run new electrical lines.  In the end, building their own solar power plant may be cheaper than running new underground electrical lines many miles from the nearest grid substation.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 08/31/2015 10:01 am
SpaceX rocket site grows

Construction set to begin this fall

Valley morning star
http://www.valleymorningstar.com/premium/article_af3a90cc-4eba-11e5-ae8f-9fa91a864d44.html (http://www.valleymorningstar.com/premium/article_af3a90cc-4eba-11e5-ae8f-9fa91a864d44.html)

It seems SpaceX is getting desperate to hire an electrical engineer for their Texas launch site.  They're now using news outlets to advertise the position, which hasn't been filled in months.  "Here's a quote from the article symbios posted above.

Quote
Amid the nonstop developments this summer, SpaceX continues to seek an electrical engineer for the launch pad facilities.

“We seek future colleagues with a rare mix of drive, passion, scrappiness, intelligence, and curiosity to seek what’s beyond the stars,” the job posting states.

“Playing a direct role in advancing the course of human history is no small endeavor. Join us, and find your place in the SpaceX legacy.”

After all, “This is SpaceX. We are not like most companies. Our goal is to do what has never before been done — enabling mankind to live on other planets. We push the boundaries of what is currently possible, and understand it takes rare individuals to help us make this happen.

“If you’re undaunted by the impossible, actively seeking out insanely challenging projects under tight schedules, and want to work with a remarkable organization pushing the envelope of human exploration, then you will want to be part of the SpaceX legacy,” the aerospace firm states.

Also, here's a link to the position on the SpaceX web site:
http://www.spacex.com/careers/position/5954


Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 08/31/2015 10:52 am
6.5 acres of solar is a lot.

To quantify this, I looked around on the web and found:
http://www.americanenergyindependence.com/solarenergy.aspx
Quote
at 30% efficiency, one acre has enough solar energy potential to yield 7.26 megawatt-hours of electricity per day

So 6.5 acres would have a theoretical maximum of over 47 megawatt-hours per day.  Even after adding in real world factors, and assuming 24/7 use of power, we're still in the ballpark of 1 megawatt constant power.

Is 1 megawatt enough to run a launch site?
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Mader Levap on 08/31/2015 12:26 pm
Is there any reason that SpaceX did not bought every lot here they wanted and could long ago?
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: LouScheffer on 08/31/2015 01:11 pm
I'm guessing that the single phase 12kv line will be expanded to 3 phase. I can't think of anything that would use all that much power.

Air Conditioning.  Payload processing buildings are large open facilities that require frequent air changes and temperatures that are typically lower than office spaces.  The launch vehicle prep buildings and pad hangar will need AC too.  And if the pad hangar has a clean area, that will require more HVAC.  The fairing air at the pad and hangar will be conditioned and high flow rates and it is a single pass through (not recirculated).  The rest of the power requirements (offices and lights) are minor compared to this (outside of prop conditioning)
If you need humidity control it gets even more power hungry .  If you have hot, humid outside air, and want inside at 21 degrees C (70 F) and 50% humidity, you'll need to cool the outside air to about 10 C (50 F) to condense out enough water, then re-heat it to 70.  This can take several megawatts for a reasonable size building.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: cscott on 08/31/2015 02:09 pm
Is there any reason that SpaceX did not bought every lot here they wanted and could long ago?
I believe the evidence is that they have been doing just that.

Apparently just tracking down the land owners is a non trivial task, as the properties aren't occupied.

The related question is how much of the land they "want" to buy.  I don't think any of their plans are waiting for "just one more parcel".  They are buying cheap lots when available, but I don't think they *need* to buy the whole town.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: symbios on 08/31/2015 02:17 pm
What is not talked about alot is the SpaceX wetland mitigation. They have to dedicate a lot of land to this. This could explain a lot of strange land lots that they own.

From the article previously posted above:
Quote
SpaceX now owns about 140 acres of land in the area. The purchases mostly have been made through SpaceX’s Dogleg Park LLC.

The Brownsville Navigation District, a nearby neighbor, pitched in by dedicating an additional 50 acres for SpaceX’s wetland mitigation plan, public records show.

SpaceX, in turn, transferred, or will transfer, the land to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to mitigate impacts to wetlands.

SpaceX’s 2013 mitigation plan has gone through 10 revisions through April of this year, public records show.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Kabloona on 08/31/2015 02:36 pm
6.5 acres of solar is a lot.

To quantify this, I looked around on the web and found:
http://www.americanenergyindependence.com/solarenergy.aspx
Quote
at 30% efficiency, one acre has enough solar energy potential to yield 7.26 megawatt-hours of electricity per day

So 6.5 acres would have a theoretical maximum of over 47 megawatt-hours per day.  Even after adding in real world factors, and assuming 24/7 use of power, we're still in the ballpark of 1 megawatt constant power.

Is 1 megawatt enough to run a launch site?

That 7.26 MWhr/day per acre figure is a theoretical maximum assuming you had a one-acre sized Concentrating Solar Power (CSP) system which is not how SolarCity would operate. They'd presumably use PV panels, which are much less effficient, and the panel area per acre ratio is going be be less than 1. So for practical puprposes, I believe that number is way too high.

Table ES-1 in the following paper gives averages for a number of large solar installations. Assuming fixed PV panels, the average is 4.1 acres total per GWhr/yr, which for 6.5 acres works out to around 4.4 MWhr/day.

http://www.nrel.gov/docs/fy13osti/56290.pdf

Then bump that figure up because Texas will be sunnier than average. And they can get more power if they use one or two axis tilt tracking for the panels.

So a range of 5-10 MWhr/day for a 6.5 acre installation seems to me like a more reasonable guesstimate. But that's still well short of 1 MW average.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Okie_Steve on 08/31/2015 02:48 pm
As soon as you start paying a premium the "comp" price from previous sales goes up and the spiral starts. Offering to buy any and all lots in area "ABC" for 2014 appraised value + X% and leaving it at that will assure a steady trickle I expect. Let other people deal with tracking down owners and dealing with tax sales then buy from them if/when they contact *you* about selling. They get a profit for their work, you get stuff at a good price with less hassle.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Nomadd on 08/31/2015 03:03 pm
I'm guessing that the single phase 12kv line will be expanded to 3 phase. I can't think of anything that would use all that much power.

Air Conditioning.  Payload processing buildings are large open facilities that require frequent air changes and temperatures that are typically lower than office spaces.  The launch vehicle prep buildings and pad hangar will need AC too.  And if the pad hangar has a clean area, that will require more HVAC.  The fairing air at the pad and hangar will be conditioned and high flow rates and it is a single pass through (not recirculated).  The rest of the power requirements (offices and lights) are minor compared to this (outside of prop conditioning)
I'm guessing a big part of that would be to keep condensation down. Keep the air a little cooler than the equipment. As bad as the humidity is there, I'm surprised they even need water lines. The A/Cs will probably supply enough water to fill a swimming pool every day.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Callezetter on 08/31/2015 03:05 pm
sorry for x-post. Shotwell on AIAA Space 2015 panel about to start now:

http://livestream.com/AIAAvideo/SPACE2015
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 09/03/2015 05:41 pm
Want to build rockets? SpaceX seeks welder for launches
http://www.brownsvilleherald.com/news/local/article_7d09d47c-51ea-11e5-97e9-27bda57e02e3.html
Quote
The structural welder will be tasked with the assembly and fabrication of various complex structures and equipment to supporting launching Falcon 9, Falcon Heavy, Cargo Dragon and Crew Dragon, the posting states.
Some examples of these projects include rocket structure and propulsion component manipulation equipment, air bearing systems, robotic drilling solutions, friction stir weld machines, roadway transportation systems, and static and dynamic fixturing. The main task of a launch site welder is to complete welds on tooling structures and ground support systems, SpaceX said.

Furthermore, welders lay out, fit and fabricate metal components to assemble structures, such as tooling, erector parts and pressure vessels. Tooling welders also typically participate in additional areas, such as training outside contractors and constructing additional equipment on launch sites.

The successful candidate must pass Air Force background checks for Cape Canaveral and Vandenberg.
She or he also must be willing to travel for months at a time to SpaceX’s launch sites in Florida and California.
Basic qualifications include at least three years of experience in structural welding, welding on steel, aluminum and stainless steel projects, and layout and fitting experience.

Here's the job positing from the SpaceX web site.
http://www.spacex.com/careers/position/8260

By the way, it looks like they finally filled the position for "electrical engineer, launch pad facilities."  That job posting is no longer on the SpaceX web site.  I guess it pays to have local news outlets advertise open positions.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 09/04/2015 02:41 pm
SpaceX launch site still in design phase; construction to begin within a few months
http://www.rgvproud.com/news/local-news/spacex-launch-site-still-in-design-phase-construction-to-begin-within-a-few-months
Quote
"We don't anticipate seeing dirt being moved until before year's end," said Brownsville Economic Development Council (BEDC) Exec. VP Gilbert Salinas. "So in the mean time, they're still in the process of wrapping things up"...

"The construction timetable for this particular project is anywhere between 18 months and 24 months, and that's just in general with projects of this size, scope and magnitude," said Salinas.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: symbios on 09/09/2015 10:39 am
Well, Nomadd made the news on Bloomberg :)

The Tiny Town That Hates Elon Musk and His Space-X Launches:
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2015-09-09/elon-musk-making-enemies-fast-in-town-hosting-space-x-launches (http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2015-09-09/elon-musk-making-enemies-fast-in-town-hosting-space-x-launches)

Quote
"I’m like, ‘Are you out of your mind?’" said Cheryl Stevens, 55, who settled in Boca Chica Village a decade ago in search of quiet, rustic beauty. "It’s like Nazi Germany."

Quote
"When we first moved here, I just felt closer to the Lord," said Bonnie Heaton, a retired hairdresser, who worries that one day SpaceX will somehow seize her beloved home on Weems Street. "Well, that peace has kind of gone out the window."

Quote
Outside Boca Chica, space fans are giddy over SpaceX’s plans to send a man to Mars and debate how best to view the launches. On a message board called NASASpaceFlight.com, one person said he made an offer on a home in Boca Chica Village listed for $55,000 with hopes of hosting lavish launch parties.

"Anybody know how to build an elevated, air-conditioned observation deck with a tiki bar?" asked the person, who goes by Nomadd on the site.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Beittil on 09/09/2015 11:06 am
Heh, off topic... but I noticed this in the article:

"SpaceX spokesman John Taylor declined to comment."

Why does that guy even have a job with SpaceX, this is basically all he seems to have to say, ever :P
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: billh on 09/09/2015 12:44 pm
Heh, off topic... but I noticed this in the article:

"SpaceX spokesman John Taylor declined to comment."

Why does that guy even have a job with SpaceX, this is basically all he seems to have to say, ever :P
Well, somebody needs to say "No comment!"
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Semmel on 09/09/2015 01:35 pm
-removed due to authors responds-

Please be reasonable in your responses. The people from Boca Chica might read this. It cant be pleasant to have a controlled bomb explosion (which a rocket launch basically is) 2 miles from your home every month. And sometimes even an uncontrolled one. Their reservations against the whole process is totally understandable and I hope SpaceX handles the situation in a respectful and empathic manner. And I hope we do the same on this forum.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Prober on 09/09/2015 01:49 pm
Well, Nomadd made the news on Bloomberg :)

The Tiny Town That Hates Elon Musk and His Space-X Launches:
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2015-09-09/elon-musk-making-enemies-fast-in-town-hosting-space-x-launches (http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2015-09-09/elon-musk-making-enemies-fast-in-town-hosting-space-x-launches)

Quote
"I’m like, ‘Are you out of your mind?’" said Cheryl Stevens, 55, who settled in Boca Chica Village a decade ago in search of quiet, rustic beauty. "It’s like Nazi Germany."

Quote
"When we first moved here, I just felt closer to the Lord," said Bonnie Heaton, a retired hairdresser, who worries that one day SpaceX will somehow seize her beloved home on Weems Street. "Well, that peace has kind of gone out the window."

Quote
Outside Boca Chica, space fans are giddy over SpaceX’s plans to send a man to Mars and debate how best to view the launches. On a message board called NASASpaceFlight.com, one person said he made an offer on a home in Boca Chica Village listed for $55,000 with hopes of hosting lavish launch parties.

"Anybody know how to build an elevated, air-conditioned observation deck with a tiki bar?" asked the person, who goes by Nomadd on the site.

This article just brought a  :) this morning.

SpaceX’s proposed methods to enforce the safety rules -- sweeping the beach with drones and video surveillance -- aren’t helping matters. While the rules still might change, all this makes residents wish SpaceX would go away, with some even talking about acts of civil disobedience or maybe a lawsuit.


"I’m like, ‘Are you out of your mind?’" said Cheryl Stevens, 55, who settled in Boca Chica Village a decade ago in search of quiet, rustic beauty. "It’s like Nazi Germany."


Methinks SX needs to hold more community meetings :D

It does/did look peaceful in this pic.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Prober on 09/09/2015 01:57 pm
From the same article, looks like Ed has new material about how close buildings are ;D

"Experts say the safety issues are real. David Kanipe, an associate professor in the aerospace-engineering department at Texas A&M University and retired NASA engineer, said that during Cape Canaveral shuttle launches, viewers typically were required to be at least three miles away from the site. Boca Chica Village is less than two miles away. Residents could be exposed to dangerous chemicals used during launches, such as hydrazine, and falling debris in the event of an explosion, he said."

Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: spacenut on 09/09/2015 02:00 pm
Well, sometimes that is the way things go.  I lived on a nice peaceful one way street.  Now, they cut it through and it is a short cut for a lot of people going to and from work.  On top of that they are going to build a new high school about two blocks away on this cut through street.  If housing prices go back up, we are going to move to a quieter place since I am retired. 
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: BrianNH on 09/09/2015 02:01 pm
Good point Semmel.  I'm actually fighting against a natural gas pipeline planned to go through our community and we have similar safety concerns about that as well, so I should be able to empathize.  Flippant post removed.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: PahTo on 09/09/2015 02:06 pm

"Hopes of hosting LAVISH launch parties".  Hear that Nomadd?  We're not going to be satisfied with a front row seat; you're going to need fancy catering with top shelf food, live music, gilded swimming pools, the works!
:)
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: baldusi on 09/09/2015 02:37 pm
If I ever can attend one such a party, I'll handle cooking and bar duties. That much I can promise.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: spacenut on 09/09/2015 03:16 pm
BrianNH, I worked as and engineer with a natural gas company for 39 years.  A new natural gas pipeline will not be a problem for at least 75 years.  Welding is inspected, probably x-rayed for flaws in the welding, it would also be under cathodic protection.  If it is a transmission main, it is inspected once a month for leaks.  Leaks will probably not occur for 50-75 years if installed properly.  Leaks also would rise and dissipate into the atmosphere until detected, as long as no one builds or installs anything OVER the main, in which the gas could be trapped.  Most of the problems with natural gas pipelines is the old cast iron piping installed from the late 1800's until around WWII.  All of the cast iron in two towns I was in charge of was replaced during my tenure.  All is new steel or plastic (for distribution mains under 60 psi).  I wouldn't worry too much about it.  Most of the inconvenience is during construction. 

Back to SpaceX and Boca Chica, once SpaceX begins construction and launching, the prices of the homes will go up.  The people who own them could then sell at a higher price and move somewhere more quiet if they so choose. 
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Prober on 09/09/2015 03:31 pm
Back to SpaceX and Boca Chica, once SpaceX begins construction and launching, the prices of the homes will go up.  The people who own them could then sell at a higher price and move somewhere more quiet if they so choose.

think more like SX buying up everything, and if not trying the eminent Doman process to get the rest. :o


 
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Nomadd on 09/09/2015 03:44 pm
 I didn't talk to that person because they left me a vague message with no email or reason to believe they were a real reporter.
 After seeing that lame hatchet job, I'm still not sure.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: woods170 on 09/09/2015 03:45 pm

Well, Nomadd made the news on Bloomberg :)

The Tiny Town That Hates Elon Musk and His Space-X Launches:
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2015-09-09/elon-musk-making-enemies-fast-in-town-hosting-space-x-launches (http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2015-09-09/elon-musk-making-enemies-fast-in-town-hosting-space-x-launches)

Quote
...register with the county, wear badges and pass through checkpoints on launch days...

Quote
"I’m like, ‘Are you out of your mind?’" said Cheryl Stevens, 55, who settled in Boca Chica Village a decade ago in search of quiet, rustic beauty. "It’s like Nazi Germany."

Obviously, the woman has no clue as to what is was like to live in Nazi Germany. My maternal grandfather did however (having been a forced-labor victim) and has conveyed some of his eye-witness accounts to me and my relatives.

In short: It is highly unlikely that SpaceX is going to shoot and kill ms. Stevens for not staying indoors while a launch is occuring. Nor is it very likely that she will be forcibly removed, at gunpoint, from her home because it needs to make way for some SpaceX structure. Also, the clearing/guarding of beaches by drones is very much more benign compared to how it was done in 1944. And that's putting it mildly.

I can understand that she is upset that some of her peace-and-quiet will likely go away, but comparing her situation to Nazi Germany is as silly as one can make it.

With regards to some of the safety measures like registering, wearing a badge and passing checkpoint: my work at one of my two day-jobs has me do that every single working-day of the week. SOP and no big deal. Funny that such a minor thing causes such a big stir, particularly given the fact that it will happen at most once a month.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: PreferToLurk on 09/09/2015 03:50 pm
Well, Nomadd made the news on Bloomberg :)

The Tiny Town That Hates Elon Musk and His Space-X Launches:
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2015-09-09/elon-musk-making-enemies-fast-in-town-hosting-space-x-launches (http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2015-09-09/elon-musk-making-enemies-fast-in-town-hosting-space-x-launches)


Don't want to dismiss the residents' legitimate concerns, but this article was hardly written from a neutral perspective.  I wouldn't want to be forced from my home either, or have my neighborhood surrounded by a security perimeter.  But the exact security protocol is hardly written in stone yet, and a lot of the article appears to be based on hearsay from two residents and an "expert" without detailed knowledge of the actual safety situation at this site. I wouldn't even bother with this post except that Bloomberg posted this in their Business News section without any kind of editorial or opinion flags attached to it -- and when something so one sided gets posted as "news" it gets me annoyed. 

But then, [sarcasm] to top it all off, the offenses of offenses, Ms. Etter had this line: "On a message board called NASASpaceFlight.com" ---  Message board?  Message board!?! [/sarcasm]  But seriously..  this is a news site with an attached forum. A news site which happens to be fairly well respected in the industry. 

[more sarcasm]I don't want to be hyperbolic or anything, but many of the people reading her article on my laptop think that it reads like a piece of Nazi propaganda. [/sarcasm]  *rolls eyes*

If I were the SpaceX rep and was given an advanced copy of this article to comment on, I doubt i would have said anything either.  I wouldn't want to give the appearance of flippantly dismissing their concerns, even if I thought it was all unfounded.  Best to just say "no comment" and get back to the real job of talking to the village and addressing concerns face to face.

IMHO, this is what happens when your CEO is a click bait media magnet.  SpaceX probably thought they had a lot more time to soothe everyone's nerves and may not have even realized that there were residents who were willing to compare them to the Nazis. Time for that spokesman to go knock on some doors, listen more than talk, and start to allay some fears. 
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: billh on 09/09/2015 04:05 pm
SpaceX really does need to be working a lot harder to communicate with these people and address their concerns. They don't need the PR problems of an article like this. Maybe John Taylor could be spending some time with them, since he's not busy making comments on articles.  :D
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Chris Bergin on 09/09/2015 04:10 pm
Well, Nomadd made the news on Bloomberg :)

Mass media churning out any old crap to get hits and numbers for advertisers. You know these sites, as they have those "suggested stories" and "From the Web" embedded adverts made to look like news stories, such as "You won't believe what 50 Cent did here!" and such. PS We'll NEVER do that here. A lot of money in that, but no - it's horrendous.

Saving grace was the mental image of Nomadd's "lavish launch parties" ;D
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Chris Bergin on 09/09/2015 04:11 pm
SpaceX really does need to be working a lot harder to communicate with these people and address their concerns. They don't need the PR problems of an article like this. Maybe John Taylor could be spending some time with them, since he's not busy making comments on articles.  :D

John's a nice fella. It literally is his job to give the no comment responses. Elon controls the message, big time.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: baldusi on 09/09/2015 04:42 pm

Well, Nomadd made the news on Bloomberg :)

The Tiny Town That Hates Elon Musk and His Space-X Launches:
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2015-09-09/elon-musk-making-enemies-fast-in-town-hosting-space-x-launches (http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2015-09-09/elon-musk-making-enemies-fast-in-town-hosting-space-x-launches)

Quote
...register with the county, wear badges and pass through checkpoints on launch days...

Quote
"I’m like, ‘Are you out of your mind?’" said Cheryl Stevens, 55, who settled in Boca Chica Village a decade ago in search of quiet, rustic beauty. "It’s like Nazi Germany."

...

With regards to some of the safety measures like registering, wearing a badge and passing checkpoint: my work at one of my two day-jobs has me do that every single working-day of the week. SOP and no big deal. Funny that such a minor thing causes such a big stir, particularly given the fact that it will happen at most once a month.
There are some big stadiums right in the middle of the city here. All neighbours get a badge, car calcs and special permits for match days where there's a line of policemen in a three block radius. And yes, it is for their own safety in a very non-dictatorial way. Is like registering your car to be able to park at night without getting a ticket on some places.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: ChefPat on 09/09/2015 04:45 pm

"Hopes of hosting LAVISH launch parties".  Hear that Nomadd?  We're not going to be satisfied with a front row seat; you're going to need fancy catering with top shelf food, live music, gilded swimming pools, the works!
:)
I'll be happy to help out with planning on any such event. :D
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: abaddon on 09/09/2015 05:28 pm
SpaceX really does need to be working a lot harder to communicate with these people and address their concerns. They don't need the PR problems of an article like this. Maybe John Taylor could be spending some time with them, since he's not busy making comments on articles.  :D
Why are you assuming they aren't?  Sometimes, people will complain no matter what you do.  I am not saying that is the case here, just that we don't know how SpaceX is engaging (or not engaging) these folks.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Prober on 09/09/2015 06:29 pm
I didn't talk to that person because they left me a vague message with no email or reason to believe they were a real reporter.
 After seeing that lame hatchet job, I'm still not sure.

at least someone reads NSF ;)
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Brovane on 09/09/2015 07:27 pm
Wasn't the beach closure's and security procedures for launch day, agreed to before SpaceX even signed up to use Brownsville as a launch site? 
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: symbios on 09/09/2015 07:40 pm
Wasn't the beach closure's and security procedures for launch day, agreed to before SpaceX even signed up to use Brownsville as a launch site?

Yes, it is in the documentation before everything was decided. Drones was mentioned and the location of checkpoints and the restrictions of passing it.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: docmordrid on 09/09/2015 08:20 pm
SpaceX really does need to be working a lot harder to communicate with these people and address their concerns. They don't need the PR problems of an article like this. Maybe John Taylor could be spending some time with them, since he's not busy making comments on articles.  :D
Why are you assuming they aren't?  Sometimes, people will complain no matter what you do.  I am not saying that is the case here, just that we don't know how SpaceX is engaging (or not engaging) these folks.

Also known as NIMBY's: not in my back yard.

"Filling in the property mosquito farm to build a <pick anything higher than weeds> will ruin the view!!"

Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Nomadd on 09/09/2015 08:25 pm
 I liked the tinfoil hat comment about the sinister reasons for SpaceX wanting to buy the houses on Weems.
 From the way the article twisted Terry and Bonnie's words to make them sound like they hate SpaceX and referenced vague "possibilities" along with making simple ID passes to get you through the checkpoint into requirements to wear them full time or face the consequences, I'm glad I never called back. This hack obviously had no use for anything that didn't support her tabloid headline.

 Terry and Bonnie are possibly the two nicest people I've ever met. They like their peace and quiet, but realize you can't always keep the world out. They'd make up for having to live next to a martyr complex queen.
 In two weeks there, in the middle of summer, I saw exactly three people on the beach. I don't think closing it for 6 hours a month is going to affect the Texas economy a whole lot. It doesn't even have a parking lot.
 
 I've been walking the hills of Virginia for the last month and am going to head back to Brownsville in a week to try and move this deal along.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: CraigLieb on 09/09/2015 08:26 pm
The obvious solution is for all us us to buy the houses in the neighborhood. Then we can have a block party every launch (while we patiently wait for our scheduled trip to Mars).
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Senex on 09/09/2015 09:35 pm
I would just like to thank Nomadd for giving us something fun to distract us as we wait for Return-to-Flight.  If it wasn't for discussions of Drone Ships and Boca Chica water tanks I might have given up on SpaceX long ago.

Keep up the good work!
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 09/09/2015 10:07 pm
I didn't talk to that person because they left me a vague message with no email or reason to believe they were a real reporter.
 After seeing that lame hatchet job, I'm still not sure.

at least someone reads NSF

I see the opposite problem.  We like to report real news and updates here, but now we seem to be making news.

In any case, I believe level heads will see the Bloomberg article for what it is - a hatchet job, with no new information to speak of.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: MattMason on 09/09/2015 10:42 pm
I wonder if the former residents that lived on the lands, made the orange groves around Cape Canaveral felt the same way as Port Canaveral was built and later the Air Force station.

Back then, the push to make rockets against the Red Threat gave the military a lot of influence in displacing what people lived there to test their rockets. And, given the threat, some people might have been happy to be displaced.

I recall my last visit to the Kennedy Space Center tourist center. It's located near an apparently untended orange grove. I think, now, that it didn't make itself.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: 411rocket on 09/10/2015 01:14 am

"Hopes of hosting LAVISH launch parties".  Hear that Nomadd?  We're not going to be satisfied with a front row seat; you're going to need fancy catering with top shelf food, live music, gilded swimming pools, the works!
:)
I'll be happy to help out with planning on any such event. :D



With a handle like yours, probably catering the events..........   ;D ;D 8)

Do not worry, you will be allowed to watch the launches, as long as nothing is burning, in the kitchen.............................
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: guckyfan on 09/10/2015 09:02 am
During launch there will be checkpoints to keep visitors out. But residents have access, correct? Probably complete stop of traffic from fuelling to launch. Are residents supposed to be inside during that time or only asked to go inside in case of an accident to avoid toxic fumes?

There is wild discussion that residents will be evicted by the company of an evil billionaire on every launch on the website that is not to be mentioned here. :)
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 09/10/2015 11:28 am
During launch there will be checkpoints to keep visitors out. But residents have access, correct? Probably complete stop of traffic from fuelling to launch. Are residents supposed to be inside during that time or only asked to go inside in case of an accident to avoid toxic fumes?

According to the environmental impact statement (https://www.faa.gov/about/office_org/headquarters_offices/ast/environmental/nepa_docs/review/launch/spacex_texas_launch_site_environmental_impact_statement/media/FEIS_SpaceX_Texas_Launch_Site_Vol_I.pdf), there will be 2 security checkpoints on launch days (see diagram below). 

The Soft Checkpoint will be around 15 miles West of the launch site. "Government personnel, SpaceX personnel, emergency personnel, and anyone with property beyond this soft checkpoint could pass, but the general public would be denied access."

The Hard Checkpoint will be just East of Eichorn / LBJ Blvd.  There are no homes beyond the Hard checkpoint.  Boca Chica Village is between the Soft and Hard checkpoints.  So residents can move freely within Boca Chica Village, or anywhere else West of the Hard Checkpoint.  They'll just need to show an ID to get past the Soft Checkpoint on Launch days.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Nomadd on 09/10/2015 03:20 pm


According to the environmental impact statement (https://www.faa.gov/about/office_org/headquarters_offices/ast/environmental/nepa_docs/review/launch/spacex_texas_launch_site_environmental_impact_statement/media/FEIS_SpaceX_Texas_Launch_Site_Vol_I.pdf), there will be 2 security checkpoints on launch days (see diagram below). 

The Soft Checkpoint will be around 15 miles West of the launch site. "Government personnel, SpaceX personnel, emergency personnel, and anyone with property beyond this soft checkpoint could pass, but the general public would be denied access."

The Hard Checkpoint will be just East of Eichorn / LBJ Blvd.  There are no homes beyond the Hard checkpoint.  Boca Chica Village is between the Soft and Hard checkpoints.  So residents can move freely within Boca Chica Village, or anywhere else West of the Hard Checkpoint.  They'll just need to show an ID to get past the Soft Checkpoint on Launch days.

 There is actually a trailer parked just inside the hard checkpoint, but I imagine they'll figure something out to keep everybody happy. I'm going to suggest they cut down those scrub trees blocking the view from my front yard for security reasons. If I could figure out how to make it a safety issue, they can't say no.
 Just got word from the owner yesterday that it's going slow because he changed a few details in the contract, but everything looks good.
 One more week of tripping over bears because I have to watch my feet on these rocky, pre-Columbian trails full time, and I'll be headed that way.
 That FAA statement isn't exactly right. 15 miles would put you in town. The Border checkpoint is about 10 miles straight line. Maybe they're talking about road distance from the pad.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: MP99 on 09/10/2015 05:12 pm

You know these sites, as they have those "suggested stories" and "From the Web" embedded adverts made to look like news stories, such as "You won't believe what 50 Cent did here!" and such. PS We'll NEVER do that here. A lot of money in that, but no - it's horrendous.

Well said, well said.

Though, I'm honestly not sure how much you could make. A lot of people are here because they trust you, and know that you wouldn't.

Cheers, Martin
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: JoerTex on 09/10/2015 05:26 pm
During launch there will be checkpoints to keep visitors out. But residents have access, correct? Probably complete stop of traffic from fuelling to launch. Are residents supposed to be inside during that time or only asked to go inside in case of an accident to avoid toxic fumes?

According to the environmental impact statement (https://www.faa.gov/about/office_org/headquarters_offices/ast/environmental/nepa_docs/review/launch/spacex_texas_launch_site_environmental_impact_statement/media/FEIS_SpaceX_Texas_Launch_Site_Vol_I.pdf), there will be 2 security checkpoints on launch days (see diagram below). 

The Soft Checkpoint will be around 15 miles West of the launch site. "Government personnel, SpaceX personnel, emergency personnel, and anyone with property beyond this soft checkpoint could pass, but the general public would be denied access."

The Hard Checkpoint will be just East of Eichorn / LBJ Blvd.  There are no homes beyond the Hard checkpoint.  Boca Chica Village is between the Soft and Hard checkpoints.  So residents can move freely within Boca Chica Village, or anywhere else West of the Hard Checkpoint.  They'll just need to show an ID to get past the Soft Checkpoint on Launch days.

And, the guards will get to know the residents.  After a few tacos are delivered, they'll just wave you through when they see your car.  How well this works will depend on the personality of the SpaceX manager.  I see parallels with Edwards days and Pancho Barns.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Prober on 09/10/2015 07:16 pm


According to the environmental impact statement (https://www.faa.gov/about/office_org/headquarters_offices/ast/environmental/nepa_docs/review/launch/spacex_texas_launch_site_environmental_impact_statement/media/FEIS_SpaceX_Texas_Launch_Site_Vol_I.pdf), there will be 2 security checkpoints on launch days (see diagram below). 

The Soft Checkpoint will be around 15 miles West of the launch site. "Government personnel, SpaceX personnel, emergency personnel, and anyone with property beyond this soft checkpoint could pass, but the general public would be denied access."

The Hard Checkpoint will be just East of Eichorn / LBJ Blvd.  There are no homes beyond the Hard checkpoint.  Boca Chica Village is between the Soft and Hard checkpoints.  So residents can move freely within Boca Chica Village, or anywhere else West of the Hard Checkpoint.  They'll just need to show an ID to get past the Soft Checkpoint on Launch days.

 There is actually a trailer parked just inside the hard checkpoint, but I imagine they'll figure something out to keep everybody happy. I'm going to suggest they cut down those scrub trees blocking the view from my front yard for security reasons. If I could figure out how to make it a safety issue, they can't say no.
 Just got word from the owner yesterday that it's going slow because he changed a few details in the contract, but everything looks good.
 One more week of tripping over bears because I have to watch my feet on these rocky, pre-Columbian trails full time, and I'll be headed that way.
 That FAA statement isn't exactly right. 15 miles would put you in town. The Border checkpoint is about 10 miles straight line. Maybe they're talking about road distance from the pad.

If your handy Nomad you might be able to upgrade your home to the new "hurricane standards" used in some parts of the country.  Look up how they build homes on stilts now. Basically, you would build a deck over your roofline as an upgrade to the design in place.   
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Llian Rhydderch on 09/10/2015 09:32 pm
Back to SpaceX and Boca Chica, once SpaceX begins construction and launching, the prices of the homes will go up.  The people who own them could then sell at a higher price and move somewhere more quiet if they so choose.

think more like SX buying up everything, and if not trying the eminent Doman process to get the rest. :o

I do not believe that we have any evidence on this thread of SpaceX trying to go the route of getting the government to force the takeover of any land for their purposes, ala the "eminent domain (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eminent_domain#United_States)" route.  SpaceX seem to be purchasing the land they are using for the south Texas launch site via ordinary market exchanges between existing owners and the SpaceX land holding companies (Mars Crossing, etc.).

Do we have any evidence to the contrary?  If not, I would suggest that such unfounded speculation is unwarranted on a forum such as NSF.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Prober on 09/10/2015 11:19 pm
Back to SpaceX and Boca Chica, once SpaceX begins construction and launching, the prices of the homes will go up.  The people who own them could then sell at a higher price and move somewhere more quiet if they so choose.

think more like SX buying up everything, and if not trying the eminent Doman process to get the rest. :o

I do not believe that we have any evidence on this thread of SpaceX trying to go the route of getting the government to force the takeover of any land for their purposes, ala the "eminent domain (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eminent_domain#United_States)" route.  SpaceX seem to be purchasing the land they are using for the south Texas launch site via ordinary market exchanges between existing owners and the SpaceX land holding companies (Mars Crossing, etc.).

Do we have any evidence to the contrary?  If not, I would suggest that such unfounded speculation is unwarranted on a forum such as NSF.

Don't put words in my mouth.... and as far as unfounded speculation goes...NSF is full of it when it's regarding SpaceX. :-X
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Roy_H on 09/11/2015 04:50 pm
I fully expect "eminent domain" purchases of all properties inside the hard check point (Just beyond the village). SpaceX has to have full control of all property close enough to be a safety issue if a rocket explodes on the pad. At Cape Canaveral I think this is 3 miles. Boca Chica Village is just over 2 miles and I am actually surprised that it is not inside the hard check point.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Jim on 09/11/2015 04:52 pm
I fully expect "eminent domain" purchases of all properties inside the hard check point (Just beyond the village).

Can't be done.  The state can't do it on the behalf of Spacex
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Roy_H on 09/11/2015 05:02 pm
I fully expect "eminent domain" purchases of all properties inside the hard check point (Just beyond the village).

Can't be done.  The state can't do it on the behalf of Spacex

So someone who owns a piece of property say just over a mile from the launch pad, can go and picnic on launch day, and SpaceX cannot do anything about it? Would this prevent a launch? They can clear public beaches but not private property.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Jim on 09/11/2015 05:16 pm

So someone who owns a piece of property say just over a mile from the launch pad, can go and picnic on launch day, and SpaceX cannot do anything about it? Would this prevent a launch? They can clear public beaches but not private property.

I believe Spacex has bought up all the property is that close.  So that issue doesn't exist.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: RonM on 09/11/2015 05:25 pm
I fully expect "eminent domain" purchases of all properties inside the hard check point (Just beyond the village).

Can't be done.  The state can't do it on the behalf of Spacex

The Supreme Court in Kelo v. City of New London (2005) ruled that a community could use eminent domain to transfer land from one private owner to another private owner to further economic development.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kelo_v._City_of_New_London (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kelo_v._City_of_New_London)

Texas may have enacted a law to restrict eminent domain, but it's not listed in the Wikipedia article. However, Wikipedia isn't know for its accuracy.

The point is that unless Texas passed a law to prevent it, the state can use eminent domain to benefit a company.

If SpaceX hasn't bought the land, they probably don't need it.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Jim on 09/11/2015 05:27 pm

Texas may have enacted a law to restrict eminent domain, but it's not listed in the Wikipedia article. However, Wikipedia isn't know for its accuracy.

The point is that unless Texas passed a law to prevent it, the state can use eminent domain to benefit a company.


They did, it is in the upthread
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: RonM on 09/11/2015 05:49 pm

Texas may have enacted a law to restrict eminent domain, but it's not listed in the Wikipedia article. However, Wikipedia isn't know for its accuracy.

The point is that unless Texas passed a law to prevent it, the state can use eminent domain to benefit a company.


They did, it is in the upthread

I did a search and I didn't see where it is mentioned upthread.

I did a Google search and found that Texas did ammend their state code to limit eminent domain.

http://www.statutes.legis.state.tx.us/SOTWDocs/GV/htm/GV.2206.htm (http://www.statutes.legis.state.tx.us/SOTWDocs/GV/htm/GV.2206.htm)
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: symbios on 09/11/2015 06:39 pm
I wonder if you could call a spaceport a "transportation project" accroding to section (C) subsection (1):  ;D

Quote
(c)  This section does not affect the authority of an entity authorized by law to take private property through the use of eminent domain for:

(1)  transportation projects, including, but not limited to, railroads, airports, or public roads or highways;

But I assume it has to be a "public" spaceport for that to work...  :o


Texas may have enacted a law to restrict eminent domain, but it's not listed in the Wikipedia article. However, Wikipedia isn't know for its accuracy.

The point is that unless Texas passed a law to prevent it, the state can use eminent domain to benefit a company.


They did, it is in the upthread

I did a search and I didn't see where it is mentioned upthread.

I did a Google search and found that Texas did ammend their state code to limit eminent domain.

http://www.statutes.legis.state.tx.us/SOTWDocs/GV/htm/GV.2206.htm (http://www.statutes.legis.state.tx.us/SOTWDocs/GV/htm/GV.2206.htm)
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 09/11/2015 09:40 pm

So someone who owns a piece of property say just over a mile from the launch pad, can go and picnic on launch day, and SpaceX cannot do anything about it? Would this prevent a launch? They can clear public beaches but not private property.

I believe Spacex has bought up all the property is that close.  So that issue doesn't exist.

Not true.  According to public records (http://www.cameroncad.org/cadclientdb/propertymap.aspx), there are many undeveloped private lots within a mile of the launch site.  See map below.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: AnalogMan on 09/11/2015 09:47 pm

So someone who owns a piece of property say just over a mile from the launch pad, can go and picnic on launch day, and SpaceX cannot do anything about it? Would this prevent a launch? They can clear public beaches but not private property.

I believe Spacex has bought up all the property is that close.  So that issue doesn't exist.

Not true.  According to public records (http://www.cameroncad.org/cadclientdb/propertymap.aspx), there are many undeveloped private lots within a mile of the launch site.  See map below.

Would it be possible to add a scale to the map you attached to give an idea of distances involved?
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 09/12/2015 12:08 am
Would it be possible to add a scale to the map you attached to give an idea of distances involved?

Not easily.  The online Cameron County real estate map (http://www.cameroncad.org/cadclientdb/propertymap.aspx), which my map is based on doesn't have a scale or legend. 

I use google maps (https://www.google.com/maps/@25.9945132,-97.157596,14.5z) and right-click to measure distances.  You can pretty much eyeball where things are with that.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Jim on 09/12/2015 12:56 am
You can pretty much eyeball where things are with that.

And I say they are more than a mile away.  Spacex and TX own all the land around the launch site. 
The issue doesn't exist.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Mader Levap on 09/12/2015 01:03 am
There is wild discussion that residents will be evicted by the company of an evil billionaire on every launch on the website that is not to be mentioned here. :)
And, of course, one obvious troll is fault of that "unmentionable" ::) site. Why you guys are at each other's throats anyway? I find both sites useful.

Boca Chica Village is just over 2 miles and I am actually surprised that it is not inside the hard check point.
It is not inside because what this dumb article mentioned (three miles) was about shuttle launch.

Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: AnalogMan on 09/12/2015 02:19 am
Would it be possible to add a scale to the map you attached to give an idea of distances involved?

Not easily.  The online Cameron County real estate map (http://www.cameroncad.org/cadclientdb/propertymap.aspx), which my map is based on doesn't have a scale or legend. 

I use google maps (https://www.google.com/maps/@25.9945132,-97.157596,14.5z) and right-click to measure distances.  You can pretty much eyeball where things are with that.

This is my best estimate of a 1 mile radius circle from the launch site added to your graphic.  I've been conservative and taken the mid-point of the left-hand north-south boundary of the launch site as my center.  It is pretty much exactly 1 mile to the south-west corner of Parcel 173487 from my chosen center point (that's the plot owned by SpaceX on Boca Chica Blvd - they also own the adjacent one to the east).

I also marked what I think is the nearest existing building structure to the launch site based on satellite imagery (Parcel 172928 opp Eichorn/Esperson junction).

[Distance measured using Google Earth Pro, which also allows US Parcel Data to be displayed]
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: docmordrid on 09/12/2015 02:19 am
I fully expect "eminent domain" purchases of all properties inside the hard check point (Just beyond the village).

Can't be done.  The state can't do it on the behalf of Spacex

Yes they can. Unless Texas has a state law prohibiting it the 2005 SCOTUS Kelo v. City of New London decision says the govt., any govt. - even a village, can take private property and give it to another private entity (such as a developer or company) for economic development purposes.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Nomadd on 09/12/2015 02:32 am
I fully expect "eminent domain" purchases of all properties inside the hard check point (Just beyond the village).

Can't be done.  The state can't do it on the behalf of Spacex

Yes they can. Unless Texas has a state law prohibiting it the 2005 SCOTUS Kelo v. City of New London decision says the govt., any govt. - even a village, can take private property and give it to another private entity (such as a developer or company) for economic development purposes.
That's wrong. The decision just states that the process isn't barred by the US constitution. It doesn't in any measure say it's allowed unless specifically permitted by state law.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: docmordrid on 09/12/2015 02:36 am
I fully expect "eminent domain" purchases of all properties inside the hard check point (Just beyond the village).

Can't be done.  The state can't do it on the behalf of Spacex

Yes they can. Unless Texas has a state law prohibiting it the 2005 SCOTUS Kelo v. City of New London decision says the govt., any govt. - even a village, can take private property and give it to another private entity (such as a developer or company) for economic development purposes.
That's wrong. The decision just states that the process isn't barred by the US constitution. It doesn't in any measure say it's allowed unless specifically permitted by state law.

Which is basically what I said in the second sentence. Its up to state law, and absent a state law its up to the state constitution. Generally no state ban at either level = open season.

The Texas Constitution Article I, Section Seventeen says the taking is legal as long as the owner is compensated, which is a fairly generic state law.

http://www.statutes.legis.state.tx.us/Docs/CN/htm/CN.1.htm#1.17
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Nomadd on 09/12/2015 02:41 am
Would it be possible to add a scale to the map you attached to give an idea of distances involved?

Not easily.  The online Cameron County real estate map (http://www.cameroncad.org/cadclientdb/propertymap.aspx), which my map is based on doesn't have a scale or legend. 

I use google maps (https://www.google.com/maps/@25.9945132,-97.157596,14.5z) and right-click to measure distances.  You can pretty much eyeball where things are with that.

This is my best estimate of a 1 mile radius circle from the launch site added to your graphic.  I've been conservative and taken the mid-point of the left-hand north-south boundary of the launch site as my center.  It is pretty much exactly 1 mile to the south-west corner of Parcel 173487 from my chosen center point (that's the plot owned by SpaceX on Boca Chica Blvd - they also own the adjacent one to the east).

I also marked what I think is the nearest existing building structure to the launch site based on satellite imagery (Parcel 172928 opp Eichorn/Esperson junction).

[Distance measured using Google Earth Pro, which also allows US Parcel Data to be displayed]


 The Texas senate bill 18 in 2011 pretty much made eminent domain for any reason but public use pretty difficult.
 Funny thing about that Kelo/New London decision...
 
 "The final cost to the city and state for the purchase and bulldozing of the formerly privately held property was $78 million. The promised 3,169 new jobs and $1.2 million a year in tax revenues had not materialized. As of 2014 the area remains an empty lot."

The developer would have paid $1 a year for the land. That decision sparked a lot of eminent domain law changes.
 
 The pad should be at the east end of that site, pretty close to the beach. It looks like some of the homes will still be within a 2 mile radius.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 09/12/2015 03:18 am

This is my best estimate of a 1 mile radius circle from the launch site added to your graphic...

[Distance measured using Google Earth Pro, which also allows US Parcel Data to be displayed]

Right.  I don't have Google Earth Pro, but your radius matches my measurements.

Bottom line: At least a dozen privately owned lots within a 1 mile radius of the launch site, none of which are developed.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 09/12/2015 03:51 am
The pad should be at the east end of that site, pretty close to the beach. It looks like some of the homes will still be within a 2 mile radius.

I measured 2.3 miles from the launch pad to the control center +/- .1 mile accuracy.  So yes, a few homes may be within a 2 mile radius.

This is one of the reasons I'm so interested in this thread.  It will be interesting to see how all of these issues play out.

As for whole eminent domain issue, I'm guessing it will go something like this:
2015-2019: SpaceX will buy properties when they become available at reasonable prices.
2020-2021: SpaceX will start offering higher prices to get people to sell
2022: SpaceX may offer even higher prices to the last few holdouts.
2023: If there are still holdouts, SpaceX may seek eminent domain from the state as a last resort.

In any case, I highly doubt any current property owners will lose money.  In my experience, eminent domain isn't used to rip people off.  In fact, it's usually the other way around, where a few property owners are holding out for outrageously high prices, looking to strike it rich, and the state steps in to prevent profiteering.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: JBF on 09/12/2015 10:37 am
The pad should be at the east end of that site, pretty close to the beach. It looks like some of the homes will still be within a 2 mile radius.

I measured 2.3 miles from the launch pad to the control center +/- .1 mile accuracy.  So yes, a few homes may be within a 2 mile radius.

This is one of the reasons I'm so interested in this thread.  It will be interesting to see how all of these issues play out.

As for whole eminent domain issue, I'm guessing it will go something like this:
2015-2019: SpaceX will buy properties when they become available at reasonable prices.
2020-2021: SpaceX will start offering higher prices to get people to sell
2022: SpaceX may offer even higher prices to the last few holdouts.
2023: If there are still holdouts, SpaceX may seek eminent domain from the state as a last resort.

In any case, I highly doubt any current property owners will lose money.  In my experience, eminent domain isn't used to rip people off.  In fact, it's usually the other way around, where a few property owners are holding out for outrageously high prices, looking to strike it rich, and the state steps in to prevent profiteering.

I'll just quote Nomadd and mention the Kelo/New London decision.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Jim on 09/12/2015 11:29 am
I fully expect "eminent domain" purchases of all properties inside the hard check point (Just beyond the village).

Can't be done.  The state can't do it on the behalf of Spacex

Yes they can. Unless Texas has a state law prohibiting it the 2005 SCOTUS Kelo v. City of New London decision says the govt., any govt. - even a village, can take private property and give it to another private entity (such as a developer or company) for economic development purposes.

Wrong.  Read the thread.  It was discussed 8 posts before yours.

http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=35425.msg1425122#msg1425122
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Jim on 09/12/2015 11:31 am

2023: If there are still holdouts, SpaceX may seek eminent domain from the state as a last resort.


No, we just showed that TX doesn't allow it.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Jim on 09/12/2015 11:36 am

Right.  I don't have Google Earth Pro, but your radius matches my measurements.

Bottom line: At least a dozen privately owned lots within a 1 mile radius of the launch site, none of which are developed.

"launch site" is not the origin, the actual pad is and that is further to the east and so there are no privately owned lots within a mile.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Kabloona on 09/12/2015 12:57 pm

And, the guards will get to know the residents.  After a few tacos are delivered, they'll just wave you through when they see your car.  How well this works will depend on the personality of the SpaceX manager.  I see parallels with Edwards days and Pancho Barns.

Because Nomadd's new house will become the site of the next Happy Bottom Riding club where he will offer Elon and the launch crew a free steak dinner every time their Falcon 9 breaks the sound barrier?  ;)
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 09/12/2015 01:34 pm
"launch site" is not the origin, the actual pad is and that is further to the east and so there are no privately owned lots within a mile.

We've shown our measurements.  Please show yours.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Jim on 09/12/2015 01:45 pm
I see parallels with Edwards days and Pancho Barns.


Not really.   Those days of the space programs happened at the Cape long ago.  This isn't the beginnings of the rocket age or the jet age like Edwards.  This is a commercial business.  This is like when any business decides to build out in the boondocks. 

Actually, it will be no different than other remote launch sites like Kourou or Baikonur, which have a small local contingent and see an influx of spacecraft personnel for each launch
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Jim on 09/12/2015 01:49 pm
"launch site" is not the origin, the actual pad is and that is further to the east and so there are no privately owned lots within a mile.

We've shown our measurements.  Please show yours.

Its the same measurements, your origin is wrong as I stated.  The "origin" which is the pad is on the east  and not the west end of launch site block
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Nomadd on 09/12/2015 02:45 pm
"launch site" is not the origin, the actual pad is and that is further to the east and so there are no privately owned lots within a mile.

We've shown our measurements.  Please show yours.

Its the same measurements, your origin is wrong as I stated.  The "origin" which is the pad is on the east  and not the west end of launch site block
Ownership of some of those 50 year old developer drawn lots is kind of fuzzy. The county data base they publish isn't always up to date and is sometimes plain wrong. The developer is long gone and lots can revert to county or state ownership if no improvements are ever made, even if the minuscule taxes are up to date.
 I'm not a Texas land law expert by any means, but I'd be wary of using publicly available maps and drawings as rock hard evidence of anything. 5 Esperson isn't even listed as a home when you go into the database from some directions, even though all the other homes are there. New developments are a lot like homesteads in some states.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Jdeshetler on 09/12/2015 03:01 pm
Here it is.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 09/12/2015 03:44 pm
Here it is.
Great map, thanks! So it appears all of the homes in Boca Chica Village are within 2 miles of the launch pad.

Ownership of some of those 50 year old developer drawn lots is kind of fuzzy. The county data base they publish isn't always up to date and is sometimes plain wrong...
 I'm not a Texas land law expert by any means, but I'd be wary of using publicly available maps and drawings as rock hard evidence of anything.
Good point.  There are many errors in that database.  However, the lot lines where SpaceX started work on the Control Center area turned out to be pretty accurate, as shown below.

The developer is long gone and lots can revert to county or state ownership if no improvements are ever made, even if the minuscule taxes are up to date.
That sounds a lot like eminent domain.  If you own property, have the deed, and are up to date on taxes, how can the state just take it from you?
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: RonM on 09/12/2015 04:34 pm
Ownership of some of those 50 year old developer drawn lots is kind of fuzzy. The county data base they publish isn't always up to date and is sometimes plain wrong...
 I'm not a Texas land law expert by any means, but I'd be wary of using publicly available maps and drawings as rock hard evidence of anything.
Good point.  There are many errors in that database.  However, the lot lines where SpaceX started work on the Control Center area turned out to be pretty accurate, as shown below.

My family had problems with inaccurate information about our property from the county.

Before the data was moved to computers, the county would publish a list of properties for developers. One year there was a typo in the book, they left the decimal point out of our 2.2 acre lot. The county records were correct, but the book the real estate agents were looking at was wrong. My father would get calls about selling his 22 acres. He would say, "If you can find the other 20 acres I'll sell it to you."  :)

Just a few years ago, when the county was adjusting the database because of land sold to the state to widen the road, they accidentally tacked on 1 acre to my lot. I was surprised when I got my tax bill. I talked to the county and someone had correctly adjusted the lot size, but now there was a second entry of 1.0 acres. The system added the two together. Fortunately, it was easily fixed.

Back to Texas, since most of the lots were never developed, there are probably many errors in the database that no one has noticed. However, somewhere there are deeds on paper that can be used to sort it out.

The developer is long gone and lots can revert to county or state ownership if no improvements are ever made, even if the minuscule taxes are up to date.
That sounds a lot like eminent domain.  If you own property, have the deed, and are up to date on taxes, how can the state just take it from you?

They can't unless there is a clause in the sale about developing the land. That could happen if someone buys public land from the government. It might even apply to individuals who bought lots from the developer. That's why you should always have a lawyer look over documents and research the property. Also, there's a good chance you don't own the mineral rights to your land and the state can let someone drill for oil below your property. Now days, rigs don't have to be on your land because they no longer have to drill straight down to reach the oil or gas.

Getting back on topic, looks like all the houses are over 1.75 miles from the pad. Probably not an issue with F9 launches, but I doubt that would work for the BFR/MCT.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Prober on 09/12/2015 05:45 pm
The pad should be at the east end of that site, pretty close to the beach. It looks like some of the homes will still be within a 2 mile radius.


In any case, I highly doubt any current property owners will lose money.  In my experience, eminent domain isn't used to rip people off.  In fact, it's usually the other way around, where a few property owners are holding out for outrageously high prices, looking to strike it rich, and the state steps in to prevent profiteering.

Don't assume anything when it comes to money ;)   This next story will be of interest; regarding Groom lake NV aka Area 51 and the USAF trying to obtain land in the family since the 1800's.  Its a mess. 

http://www.reviewjournal.com/news/military/air-force-decides-condemn-private-land-near-area-51

There's lots of Silver, Gold and other minerals that's in Nevada mines, so who knows the true value of the property.  My guess is that the location (even if they can't use it atm) gives it a high value. 

Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Prober on 09/12/2015 06:01 pm

 Ownership of some of those 50 year old developer drawn lots is kind of fuzzy. The county data base they publish isn't always up to date and is sometimes plain wrong...
 I'm not a Texas land law expert by any means, but I'd be wary of using publicly available maps and drawings as rock hard evidence of anything.
Good point.  There are many errors in that database.  However, the lot lines where SpaceX started work on the Control Center area turned out to be pretty accurate, as shown below.

That sounds a lot like eminent domain.  If you own property, have the deed, and are up to date on taxes, how can the state just take it from you?
Quote

They can't unless there is a clause in the sale about developing the land. That could happen if someone buys public land from the government. It might even apply to individuals who bought lots from the developer. That's why you should always have a lawyer look over documents and research the property. Also, there's a good chance you don't own the mineral rights to your land and the state can let someone drill for oil below your property. Now days, rigs don't have to be on your land because they no longer have to drill straight down to reach the oil or gas.

Getting back on topic, looks like all the houses are over 1.75 miles from the pad. Probably not an issue with F9 launches, but I doubt that would work for the BFR/MCT.

Jim has posted, and has insight into the Launch complex 17 closure for further development. Keep in mind the Delta II was ELV class not even near the projected FH levels.   

This whole Texas launch site project becomes a great story to watch.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Hauerg on 09/12/2015 06:09 pm
Here it is.
Great map, thanks! So it appears all of the homes in Boca Chica Village are within 2 miles of the launch pad.

Ownership of some of those 50 year old developer drawn lots is kind of fuzzy. The county data base they publish isn't always up to date and is sometimes plain wrong...
 I'm not a Texas land law expert by any means, but I'd be wary of using publicly available maps and drawings as rock hard evidence of anything.
Good point.  There are many errors in that database.  However, the lot lines where SpaceX started work on the Control Center area turned out to be pretty accurate, as shown below.

The developer is long gone and lots can revert to county or state ownership if no improvements are ever made, even if the minuscule taxes are up to date.
That sounds a lot like eminent domain.  If you own property, have the deed, and are up to date on taxes, how can the state just take it from you?

Here in Austria (socialist from American POV, I know) sometimes the public owner will sell you land and you HAVE to build there within eg. 5 or 10 years. If you don't, the community has the right to buy back the land at the price they sold. And since contract fees are yours anyway, not a good deal.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Nomadd on 09/12/2015 08:12 pm

The developer is long gone and lots can revert to county or state ownership if no improvements are ever made, even if the minuscule taxes are up to date.
That sounds a lot like eminent domain.  If you own property, have the deed, and are up to date on taxes, how can the state just take it from you?
I'm not claiming I really know with Texas or Cameron. But the basis for granting developers or individuals rights to these areas in the first place in many states is is the purpose to which they'll be put. Like a homestead, a certain level of improvements can be required or the rights will revert back. A lot of these lots have been abandoned and gone to the county or new owners through tax sales. But the reasoning behind which ones go on the block, or which regulations and laws are enforced, and when, can be pretty Byzantine in some places.

 I actually have some land with an abandoned gold mine in California I filed homestead on, and pay $100 a year in taxes. But I haven't been there in so many years I know California or Mojave will probably take it back some day.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 09/13/2015 12:04 am
Here in Austria (socialist from American POV, I know) ...
We drove around Austria back in the early 90's, and my wife was in Vienna for Mozart's 200th anniversary.  Very nice.  Nothing like Eastern Europe at that time. 

... sometimes the public owner will sell you land and you HAVE to build there within eg. 5 or 10 years. If you don't, the community has the right to buy back the land at the price they sold. And since contract fees are yours anyway, not a good deal.
As Nomadd mentions, U.S. contracts are sometimes similar, and maybe that's the case here.  If so, that may have the same effect as eminent domain for the undeveloped lots.  But without knowing the specifics of the land deeds, it's all speculation at this point.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: CraigLieb on 09/13/2015 01:43 am
On the side topic of Texas and eminent domain, they do allow it. We were renting a space in a commercial building which got bought out using eminent domain. The 5 year lease was canceled after 10 months and no compensation had to be made because the lease had an eminent domain exception. The city did end up making things right, helping pay some relocation expenses. One example but it demonstrates that eminent domain is alive and active in Texas.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Herb Schaltegger on 09/13/2015 01:20 pm
There's a difference between classic, "true" eminent domain (i.e., the State taking your property for PUBLIC use, like building a school or rebuilding a highway interchange) and the sort of "private" eminent domain like what the Supreme Court allowed in the New London case. There, the State took property on behalf of a private enterprise that promised to provide community benefits through commercial redevelopment of the property.

In the wake of the New London case, several states passed laws or even floated state constitutional amendments prohibiting the latter, but so far as I know, the former remains used in every state for true public use, subject to the same federal Constitutional "takings clause" restrictions and provisions of the Fifth Amendment.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: PreferToLurk on 09/13/2015 10:22 pm
Here it is.

Thanks.  So at least 1.7 miles to the village. About 9000 ft or 2700 m.

Did some googling and after wading through FEMA docs, and DOD studies on high explosives, I finally found a nice study aimed specifically at launch vehicle explosions and survivability. AN OVERVIEW OF THE LAUNCH VEHICLE BLAST ENVIRONMENTS DEVELOPMENT EFFORTS  (http://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/20150002597.pdf) This was conducted by the Marshall Spaceflight Center, and is focused on crew survivability and H/O2 (for SLS) but also contains reference data on RP/O2.  I highly recommend a read, it is a very accessible and thorough report.

Did some more googling and discovered this gem: Autoignition - A liquid propellant explosive potential limiting phenomena
 (http://commons.erau.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2789&context=space-congress-proceedings) It is only searchable on the Nasa ntrs website, they dont have the full text available, but its available at the above link.  Essentially this report details that autoignition will occur when large amounts of rp/lox (and also H/lox) due primarily to electrostatic charge buildup.  This effect will limit the explosive yield of rp/lox to about 20% of TNT. 

TL;DR version:  While further study is still needed, even assuming the worst possible scenarios (which are extremely unlikely even if not able to be completely ruled out), even a 1 psig overpressure event 9000 feet away would certainly be impossible with a F9/F9H.  Maybe with a BFR - I don't see methane blast data anywhere. 

Worst case scenario is a bulkhead breach due to tank overpressure with extensive mixing time before ignition, and autoignition is suppressed (somehow), and the mix is ignited with detonating source.  In such a situation the explosive yield can be nearly 40% of the yield of TNT. So a simultaneous bulkhead breach of all three FH cores with plenty of pre-ignition mixing would yield something like a .6 Kt explosion (assuming 500K kg of propellant per core).  Not counting in the upper stage because assuming 3 simultaneous bulkhead breaches on the 3 boosters is, i think, enough. The upper stage will definitely contribute to the resulting fireball, but not the shockwave. 

So a FH would appear to incapable of creating a shockwave greater than .9 psig.  Which might break windows (and therefore might cause some minor injuries), but will otherwise be plenty safe.  A BFR with 6 times the propellant than a FH, with an equivalently unlikely detonation would still only be able to produce a 2.0 psig blastwave.  Which will do much more than break a few windows (might blow a door off it's hinges, definitely knock you on your ass, and of course more potential injuries from debris) but still outside the range associated with severe or fatal injuries.

A few things that I learned in the research:  No previous launch failure (as of the 2015 Nasa report) has ever actually produced a true, supersonic, detonation. There doesn't appear to be enough research to entirely rule out the possibility, but it hasn't happened yet. So the above figures are likely WAY too high, as they rely on a mock stem to achieve those psig figures. A subsonic blast wave will produce over-pressures about half as strong.  Also, autoignition will prevent a 40% yield explosion - so 20% yield + no mock stem = 1/4 of the over-pressure.

In conclusion: 
In my humble (if fairly well researched over the last two days) opinion:
The village of Boca Chica is safe and does not need to be evacuated prior to a launch.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: watermod on 09/13/2015 10:47 pm
As to land titles in Texas - that's always an iffy situation.    Various Spanish Kings and Queens kept issuing overlapping land grants so if you take any random title back far enough in Texas and have a prior claimant, then it can be messy.   That's why hard core title insurance companies like to avoid Texas, Florida and much of the old Spanish land grant regions.
 
It's too bad that the territories were not required to clear up land titles before admission into the USA as a state. 
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 09/13/2015 11:02 pm
In my humble (if fairly well researched over the last two days) opinion:
The village of Boca Chica is safe and does not need to be evacuated prior to a launch.
The environmental impact statement (https://www.faa.gov/about/office_org/headquarters_offices/ast/environmental/nepa_docs/review/launch/spacex_texas_launch_site_environmental_impact_statement/media/FEIS_SpaceX_Texas_Launch_Site_Vol_I.pdf) came to the same conclusion.

Maybe with a BFR - I don't see methane blast data anywhere. 
Right.  If/when SpaceX launches BFR from there, I suspect they'll want to own all the property within 3 miles.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Nomadd on 09/13/2015 11:51 pm

In conclusion: 
In my humble (if fairly well researched over the last two days) opinion:
The village of Boca Chica is safe and does not need to be evacuated prior to a launch.
That would be a lot more credible if you repeated it from my front porch 60 seconds before launch.  ;D
 I'd like to think there's something preventing a perfect methane/LOX/air mixture during a launch failure. A Bleve would be bad enough. A 5,000 ton fuel/O2 enriched air bomb would be like a nuke going off.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: DAZ on 09/14/2015 03:27 am
Here it is.

Thanks.  So at least 1.7 miles to the village. About 9000 ft or 2700 m.

Did some googling and after wading through FEMA docs, and DOD studies on high explosives, I finally found a nice study aimed specifically at launch vehicle explosions and survivability. AN OVERVIEW OF THE LAUNCH VEHICLE BLAST ENVIRONMENTS DEVELOPMENT EFFORTS  (http://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/20150002597.pdf) This was conducted by the Marshall Spaceflight Center, and is focused on crew survivability and H/O2 (for SLS) but also contains reference data on RP/O2.  I highly recommend a read, it is a very accessible and thorough report.

Did some more googling and discovered this gem: Autoignition - A liquid propellant explosive potential limiting phenomena
 (http://commons.erau.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2789&context=space-congress-proceedings) It is only searchable on the Nasa ntrs website, they dont have the full text available, but its available at the above link.  Essentially this report details that autoignition will occur when large amounts of rp/lox (and also H/lox) due primarily to electrostatic charge buildup.  This effect will limit the explosive yield of rp/lox to about 20% of TNT. 

TL;DR version:  While further study is still needed, even assuming the worst possible scenarios (which are extremely unlikely even if not able to be completely ruled out), even a 1 psig overpressure event 9000 feet away would certainly be impossible with a F9/F9H.  Maybe with a BFR - I don't see methane blast data anywhere. 

Worst case scenario is a bulkhead breach due to tank overpressure with extensive mixing time before ignition, and autoignition is suppressed (somehow), and the mix is ignited with detonating source.  In such a situation the explosive yield can be nearly 40% of the yield of TNT. So a simultaneous bulkhead breach of all three FH cores with plenty of pre-ignition mixing would yield something like a 600 Mt explosion (assuming 500K kg of propellant per core).  Not counting in the upper stage because assuming 3 simultaneous bulkhead breaches on the 3 boosters is, i think, enough. The upper stage will definitely contribute to the resulting fireball, but not the shockwave. 

So a FH would appear to incapable of creating a shockwave greater than .9 psig.  Which might break windows (and therefore might cause some minor injuries), but will otherwise be plenty safe.  A BFR with 6 times the propellant than a FH, with an equivalently unlikely detonation would still only be able to produce a 2.0 psig blastwave.  Which will do much more than break a few windows (might blow a door off it's hinges, definitely knock you on your ass, and of course more potential injuries from debris) but still outside the range associated with severe or fatal injuries.

A few things that I learned in the research:  No previous launch failure (as of the 2015 Nasa report) has ever actually produced a true, supersonic, detonation. There doesn't appear to be enough research to entirely rule out the possibility, but it hasn't happened yet. So the above figures are likely WAY too high, as they rely on a mock stem to achieve those psig figures. A subsonic blast wave will produce over-pressures about half as strong.  Also, autoignition will prevent a 40% yield explosion - so 20% yield + no mock stem = 1/4 of the over-pressure.

In conclusion: 
In my humble (if fairly well researched over the last two days) opinion:
The village of Boca Chica is safe and does not need to be evacuated prior to a launch.

Very interesting.  The research you’ve uncovered seems to indicate that because there’d be a low probability of a perfect mix that the resulting explosion would tend to be limited in the amount of overpressure that it could generate.  This doesn’t mean that all the fuel would not be eventually burned in the resulting fireball only that some smaller percentage of than total would have the proper mixture to detonate and generate large overpressures.

There have been multiple incidences where firefighters have been fighting large chemical fires and in some of these fires an explosion, a BLEVE for example, have resulted.  Some severe burns to firefighters and damage to surrounding structures have resulted from the thermal radiation from these explosions.  In some cases these burns were to firefighters at what was considered a safe distance.  These safe distances were determined by what was considered safe overpressure and shrapnel distances.

These explosions generated in an extreme thermal pulse measured in time frames of seconds to minutes.  This is considerably different than the thermal pulse generated by most explosions which is usually in fractions of seconds.  This longer timeframe makes a considerable difference as it greatly increases the amount of total thermal energy absorbed by an object at distance.  Objects that are exposed to temperatures of thousands of degrees for only fractions of  a second may not spontaneously combust but objects exposed to temperatures of only hundreds of degrees but measured in many seconds may spontaneously combust and in the case of people suffer grave damage.

So in the case of such a large burning liquid/gaseous explosions the safe distance may not need to be based on overpressure but what would be the safe distance from excessive thermal exposure.  So the question here is what is that distance and is it greater or less than the overpressure safe distance.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: cscott on 09/14/2015 04:59 am
Radiative energy is inversely proportional to distance squared, so very unlikely to be a factor at mile-plus distances.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: PreferToLurk on 09/14/2015 06:56 am
So in the case of such a large burning liquid/gaseous explosions the safe distance may not need to be based on overpressure but what would be the safe distance from excessive thermal exposure.  So the question here is what is that distance and is it greater or less than the overpressure safe distance.

That is interesting, in that I never strongly considered it while researching the blast effects. With a quick review, it would appear that the thermal energy in the fireball, while impressively large, would also likely be spread over 15-20 seconds and be unlikely to cause significant damage at the village. Which would leave just the thermal energy generated in the initial detonation (if any occurs), as well as the thermal energy of the gas in the shockwave front (direct relationship with the psig, so thats not going to be much at 1-2 psig).  I am not taking the time right now to exhaustively research this, but ill look into it more over the next couple days because now my curiosity on this topic is fairly well piqued.


Also, just noticed quite a doozy of an error in my first post that i will edit now.  I had the 40% explosive yield of a FH at 600 megatons instead of 600 kilotons.  Heh.  if it was 600 megatons, Mexico would be objecting to launch site.    :o :-[ ::)
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Herb Schaltegger on 09/14/2015 01:08 pm
I think you're vastly over-estimating the explosive potential of a FH. Even 600 kilotons is enough to cause over pressure events out to several miles and fatal thermal injury over many miles. Google Alex Wellerstein's amazing Nukemap site if you want to play with modeling the effects. 600 kilotons is also substantially larger than the warheads on most US ICBMs and SLBMs.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: kdhilliard on 09/14/2015 01:35 pm
Also, just noticed quite a doozy of an error in my first post that i will edit now.  I had the 40% explosive yield of a FH at 600 megatons instead of 600 kilotons.

I still don't follow your numbers.  Your corrected post says:
Worst case scenario is a bulkhead breach due to tank overpressure with extensive mixing time before ignition, and autoignition is suppressed (somehow), and the mix is ignited with detonating source.  In such a situation the explosive yield can be nearly 40% of the yield of TNT. So a simultaneous bulkhead breach of all three FH cores with plenty of pre-ignition mixing would yield something like a 600 Kt explosion (assuming 500K kg of propellant per core).  Not counting in the upper stage because assuming 3 simultaneous bulkhead breaches on the 3 boosters is, i think, enough. The upper stage will definitely contribute to the resulting fireball, but not the shockwave. 

Your rough assumption of 500K kg of propellant per core is 0.5K metric tons (that is, 500 metric tons, not 500K metric tons) of propellant, so with three cores and 40% equivalent yield, isn't the result a 0.6 Kt explosion, not a 600 Kt explosion?

~Kirk
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: PreferToLurk on 09/14/2015 02:14 pm
I think you're vastly over-estimating the explosive potential of a FH. Even 600 kilotons is enough to cause over pressure events out to several miles and fatal thermal injury over many miles. Google Alex Wellerstein's amazing Nukemap site if you want to play with modeling the effects. 600 kilotons is also substantially larger than the warheads on most US ICBMs and SLBMs.

First, it is huge, but the math is solid. (i believe).  Take total weight of propellant (and I am including LOX here, someone might correct me and tell me to leave the LOX out of the weight) multiply by a TNT yield equivalent factor (as determined by a combination of models and real world testing), and there you go.  I think people overestimate the destructive force of even a very large explosion at a range of 2700 meters. 

UN blast parameter calculator (http://www.un.org/disarmament/un-saferguard/kingery-bulmash/)

You will need to convert the kPa pressure to something a little more relate-able. I went with psi overpressure (psig). 600000 kg of TNT produce an incident pressure of 3.25 kPa and a reflected pressure of 6.59. 
So I am pretty sure that I am not underestimating the blast wave of a 600 kT TNT explosion.    That said, i checked out the nuke calculator you referenced as well as a few others, and they seem to produce significantly larger values for overpressure.  Looking into the discrepancy now.  Will report back.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: kdhilliard on 09/14/2015 02:19 pm
Google Alex Wellerstein's amazing Nukemap site if you want to play with modeling the effects.

Nice!

Here (http://nuclearsecrecy.com/nukemap/?&kt=0.6&lat=25.996&lng=-97.154&airburst=0&hob_ft=0&zm=14) is a Nukemap for a 0.6 Kt surface detonation centered at Boca Chica's 25.996°N 97.154°W vertical launch area.

I can't seem to get a probe location to encode in the permalink, but Boca Chica village are those streets on the left side of the map

~Kirk
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Herb Schaltegger on 09/14/2015 02:36 pm
Aside: This little side discussion brought to you by "Metric is hard!" ;)
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: acsawdey on 09/14/2015 02:38 pm
I think you're vastly over-estimating the explosive potential of a FH. Even 600 kilotons is enough to cause over pressure events out to several miles and fatal thermal injury over many miles. Google Alex Wellerstein's amazing Nukemap site if you want to play with modeling the effects. 600 kilotons is also substantially larger than the warheads on most US ICBMs and SLBMs.

Also be cautious when using nuclear explosion effects calculators for this. Because this is a chemical explosion, the time scale of the energy release is going to be probably at least 3 orders of magnitude longer than a nuclear explosion. This will change both the pressure and thermal effects. And of course there is no prompt radiation from this ...
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: PreferToLurk on 09/14/2015 02:39 pm
Your rough assumption of 500K kg of propellant per core is 0.5K metric tons (that is, 500 metric tons, not 500K metric tons) of propellant, so with three cores and 40% equivalent yield, isn't the result a 0.6 Kt explosion, not a 600 Kt explosion?

~Kirk

Indeed!  That's why the nuke calculators and my figures where so far off.  I was calculating correctly, but labeling things wrong.   600000 kg of TNT is indeed a .6 Kt explosion, not a 600 Kt explosion.  I am still very confident on the over-pressure results however. 

And again, my final conclusion was that 40% yield is extremely over conservative due to autoignition preventing propellant mixing.  Should be something closer to 20%.  Also, assuming all three cores explode simultaneously is also fairly silly.  even if they did go at the same time, it would be 3 explosions and I don't think you get to just add those together when calculating a blast wave --  right? Or maybe you do...  Similar to the mach stem, the first wave front will accelerate the air, allowing the subsequent waves to catch up.  by the time you get to 2700 meters, certainly all the blast waves would have merged.  Ok.. talked myself back into that.

You do need all three to detonate individually, otherwise they just make a big fireball.  But when looking at worst case scenarios, hypothetically a problem with the ground propellant loading system could lead to all three cores to over-press and breach their bulkheads at roughly the same time... I guess.   For a BFR, at least you don't have to look at quite so unlikely scenarios to get one big explosion. 
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Prober on 09/14/2015 03:03 pm
Looks like this story is hitting the Dallas papers. Says an updated story, looked the same to me.
Nice pic on this one. From

http://www.dallasnews.com/business/headlines/20150913-elon-musk-making-enemies-fast-in-town-hosting-space-x-launches.ece

Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: PreferToLurk on 09/14/2015 03:28 pm
Google Alex Wellerstein's amazing Nukemap site if you want to play with modeling the effects.

Nice!

Here (http://nuclearsecrecy.com/nukemap/?&kt=0.6&lat=25.996&lng=-97.154&airburst=0&hob_ft=0&zm=14) is a Nukemap for a 0.6 Kt surface detonation centered at Boca Chica's 25.996°N 97.154°W vertical launch area.

I can't seem to get a probe location to encode in the permalink, but Boca Chica village are those streets on the left side of the map

~Kirk

Thanks.  I played with the settings and made a map that only has two circles: 1.5 psi and a ring of "no thermal damage".  As suggested up thread the thermal effects might extend beyond the pressure effects.  But this is optimized for a nuclear weapon and not an actual chemical detonation, so grain of salt with the thermal characteristics.

modified nuke map (http://nuclearsecrecy.com/nukemap/?&kt=0.6&lat=25.996&lng=-97.154&airburst=0&hob_ft=0&fireball=0&psi=1.5&rem=&therm=_noharm-100&zm=15)
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Zed_Noir on 09/14/2015 06:01 pm

Try out the airburst option on the Nukemap. To get a feel for something similar to the Antares Orb-3 mishap. The two effects radius circles extended out about 30% further. Off course this presumes the perfect mixing of the propellants in the air along with optimum ignition point.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: woods170 on 09/14/2015 06:03 pm
Aside: This little side discussion brought to you by "United States customary units are Metric is hard!" ;)

There. Fixed that for ya!
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Herb Schaltegger on 09/14/2015 06:40 pm

Aside: This little side discussion brought to you by "United States customary units are Metric is hard!" ;)

There. Fixed that for ya!

Way to miss my point. :)
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Prober on 09/14/2015 07:36 pm
I think you're vastly over-estimating the explosive potential of a FH. Even 600 kilotons is enough to cause over pressure events out to several miles and fatal thermal injury over many miles. Google Alex Wellerstein's amazing Nukemap site if you want to play with modeling the effects. 600 kilotons is also substantially larger than the warheads on most US ICBMs and SLBMs.

If you wish to see a shock wave this is good material for review.   The plant Pepcon manufactured the early shuttle SRB's etc.  But also a natural gas line was involved. 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_1kTAX9uWcw
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Elmar Moelzer on 09/14/2015 07:51 pm
Worst case scenario is a bulkhead breach due to tank overpressure with extensive mixing time before ignition, and autoignition is suppressed (somehow), and the mix is ignited with detonating source.  In such a situation the explosive yield can be nearly 40% of the yield of TNT. So a simultaneous bulkhead breach of all three FH cores with plenty of pre-ignition mixing would yield something like a .6 Kt explosion (assuming 500K kg of propellant per core).  Not counting in the upper stage because assuming 3 simultaneous bulkhead breaches on the 3 boosters is, i think, enough. The upper stage will definitely contribute to the resulting fireball, but not the shockwave. 
I am pretty sure that it is not easy to get the same explosive effect of TNT. The total energy expelled may be the same, but the energy over time is not. Plus the explosion would not be contained by the thin skin of the rocket stages. So in my theory the majority of the fuel would experience something closer to a fast combustion than an explosion.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: PreferToLurk on 09/14/2015 10:05 pm
Worst case scenario is a bulkhead breach due to tank overpressure with extensive mixing time before ignition, and autoignition is suppressed (somehow), and the mix is ignited with detonating source.  In such a situation the explosive yield can be nearly 40% of the yield of TNT. So a simultaneous bulkhead breach of all three FH cores with plenty of pre-ignition mixing would yield something like a .6 Kt explosion (assuming 500K kg of propellant per core).  Not counting in the upper stage because assuming 3 simultaneous bulkhead breaches on the 3 boosters is, i think, enough. The upper stage will definitely contribute to the resulting fireball, but not the shockwave. 
I am pretty sure that it is not easy to get the same explosive effect of TNT. The total energy expelled may be the same, but the energy over time is not. Plus the explosion would not be contained by the thin skin of the rocket stages. So in my theory the majority of the fuel would experience something closer to a fast combustion than an explosion.

I completely agree, but i just wanted to look at the worst possible scenario (even if somewhat unrealistic) to create the largest possible potential danger zone, and then see if Boca Chica would be impacted.  --  It isn't. 

The new Nasa report that i linked in my first post on this topic was very doubtful that a detonation would even be possible, but they needed further tests to completely rule it out. 
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 09/15/2015 11:31 am
I'm going to suggest they cut down those scrub trees blocking the view from my front yard for security reasons. If I could figure out how to make it a safety issue, they can't say no.

Terrorists can hide in those scrub trees...  and foreign spies...  Definitely a security issue ;)

Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Space Opera on 09/15/2015 11:46 am
How about observing the launches from Mexico ? Seems to be one of the best spots, almost as close as Boca Chica. And they might use this opportunity for toursits to be welcomed to observe this from their beach.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: philw1776 on 09/15/2015 02:45 pm
How about observing the launches from Mexico ? Seems to be one of the best spots, almost as close as Boca Chica. And they might use this opportunity for toursits to be welcomed to observe this from their beach.

Less security hassle!

The Mexican tourist board promoting observations should advertise, "Badges? You doan need no steenkin' badges!"
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: OnWithTheShow on 09/15/2015 02:48 pm
So I posted this over the launch manifest thread too but does anyone find it odd the two recently announced commercial GEO launches for 2017 were assigned to CCAFS instead of Boca Chica? The pad should be up and running by then right? Are they behind or is Boca already at their 10 launch limit for 2017?
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: BrianNH on 09/15/2015 03:31 pm
I wouldn't read anything into it.  They can change the launch site when Boca Chica is up and running.

On the spacex web site launch manifest, they don't make a distinction between Canaveral AFB and Kennedy, listing all east coast Falcon 9 and Falcon Heavy launches as "Cape Canaveral".
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: abaddon on 09/15/2015 03:34 pm
Two launches have been tentatively designated as Boca Chica launches, both F9's: http://spaceflightnow.com/2015/02/25/ses-reserves-two-falcon-9-launches-from-texas/, and as far as I know those are the only ones so far.  So BC is definitely not full.

SpaceX will be adding their second east-coast pad this fall, and I would imagine they will be able to move launches between those pads and the BC site pretty easily as things develop.  So I wouldn't read too much into any of this.  (LOL at using exactly the same phrase as BrianH did right before me in our simul-posting).

In my opinion, SpaceX is usually over-optimistic on their dates and this will be the case here.  And, unless they really ratchet up the launch rate over what they've accomplished to date (ignoring stand-down due to CRS-7 failure), they should have enough capacity with two EC pads through 2017.  So I would not be at all surprised to see the first flights from BC come in early 2018.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Zed_Noir on 09/15/2015 03:48 pm
So I posted this over the launch manifest thread too but does anyone find it odd the two recently announced commercial GEO launches for 2017 were assigned to CCAFS instead of Boca Chica? The pad should be up and running by then right? Are they behind or is Boca already at their 10 launch limit for 2017?

Maybe Astrotech is going to processes the 2 satcoms.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Lars-J on 09/15/2015 05:09 pm
So I posted this over the launch manifest thread too but does anyone find it odd the two recently announced commercial GEO launches for 2017 were assigned to CCAFS instead of Boca Chica? The pad should be up and running by then right? Are they behind or is Boca already at their 10 launch limit for 2017?

I don't think the customer really cares where it is launched from, as long as they have access and the appropriate payload support facilities are available.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Space Opera on 09/15/2015 09:05 pm
How about observing the launches from Mexico ? Seems to be one of the best spots, almost as close as Boca Chica. And they might use this opportunity for toursits to be welcomed to observe this from their beach.

Less security hassle!

The Mexican tourist board promoting observations should advertise, "Badges? You doan need no steenkin' badges!"
Yep, I'm curious to see what will really be happening the launch days. If mexicans are really that open, it may be more convenient (and offer a better sighting) for many people to cross the border. It would be funny to go abroad to have the best view to a national restricted area. ;D
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: llanitedave on 09/15/2015 09:13 pm
You won't be able to see it through The Wall.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Space Opera on 09/15/2015 09:27 pm
Naaah, we'll bring some step-ladders ;)

With a bit of luck, the frontier will even be totally virtual if the Rio Grande do not reach the sea, as it already happened:

http://texaslivingwaters.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/08/Rio-Grande-Not-Reaching-Bay-2001-TPWD-.jpeg

And I'm really surprised by the short distance between US and Mexico there, as can be seen on this panorama just taken at the border/sea level, 2.5 miles south from the launchpad. The view should be awsome from this point !

http://static.panoramio.com/photos/1920x1280/118543768.jpg

And sorry if there's something obvious I'm missing about Mexico, I'm not a US citizen (nor a mexican  ;) ) and I may lack the appropriate cultural background. I get the jokes about mexicans and immigration (at least as far as my skill in english can bring me), but I'm still asking seriously the possibility about crossing the border. Particularly for a foreigner from another continent like me for who it is approximately the same deal to go to US or to Mexico...
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 09/19/2015 07:26 am
Road Improvements Under Way for SpaceX
Launch site construction expected to begin in fall
http://www.krgv.com/news/local-news/Road-Improvements-Under-Way-for-SpaceX/35357956
Quote
Cameron County is investing thousands into roadwork out at Boca Chica Village.

The county said it’s in anticipation of heavy traffic to come this fall, when construction is expected to begin for the SpaceX launch site.

Homeowners said the roadwork is long needed. CHANNEL 5 NEWS found out less than ten families live along these streets.

Dana Hollinger and her family moved to Boca Chica Village six years ago. They love the nature and privacy. They learned to deal with the remote downfalls. “If I had to call the village anything, it would be The Forgotten,” she said. “Almost all the roads out here were desperate need of repair.”

Six streets in the area were repaved, one was reconstructed. Cameron County Administrator David Garcia said they do have a priority list for all county roads. Boca Chica Village streets were placed on that list this year. But they moved to the top, when the roadwork on other projects was stalled.

“We figured we’d do these public roads now, get them ready, get them out of the way and get them improved so we can get them off of our to-do list,” Cameron County Administrator David Garcia said.

Three of the streets are inside Boca Chica Village. The other three lead directly to the current SpaceX working site.

The total cost for materials add up to $150,000; it’s the money that was ear-marked road construction.

Hollinger said they have patiently waited for years to see this work done. “We are only 26 out here, but we are important,” she said. “Since SpaceX has announced that they're coming out here with their commercial launch site, we are no longer the forgotten."

She said she believes it took a dream to land on Mars to finally see a return on her county taxes.

The county’s budget for road repairs and improvement this past fiscal year was $2.3 million. Garcia said each year they look at all roads that need attention and rank them in order of importance.

He said they’re still working to finalize the list for the new fiscal year, which begins next month.

Magic Valley Electric Co-op said they’re also working on improvements for people living near Boca Chica Village. They said an already existing service line is expected to be upgraded, in light of the upcoming development with new construction.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 09/20/2015 03:58 am
And, by the way, according to a street sign near the house about 1/2 mile SW of Boca Chica village, Joanna St. has been renamed Rocket Road. That's the house I really wish was for sale.

Looks like you may have gotten your wish, although perhaps a bit late:
http://www.brownsville-realty.com/listing/63171-000-jo-ann-ln-brownsville-tx-78521/
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Roy_H on 09/20/2015 04:49 am
So this has been on the market for more than a year. I expect SpaceX has been trying to bargain down the price.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Nomadd on 09/20/2015 06:57 am
And, by the way, according to a street sign near the house about 1/2 mile SW of Boca Chica village, Joanna St. has been renamed Rocket Road. That's the house I really wish was for sale.

Looks like you may have gotten your wish, although perhaps a bit late:
http://www.brownsville-realty.com/listing/63171-000-jo-ann-ln-brownsville-tx-78521/

I talked to that guy. There was a considerable gap between what I thought that place was worth and what he thought it was worth to say the least.
 I'll be getting to Brownsville Monday to wrap the Esperson deal up. They just need to finish the title search.
 I guess I need to find someone in SpaceX to give me the indoctrination. Unlike a certain person, I think an ID to get through the front lines will be pretty freakin cool.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: woods170 on 09/21/2015 09:04 am
And, by the way, according to a street sign near the house about 1/2 mile SW of Boca Chica village, Joanna St. has been renamed Rocket Road. That's the house I really wish was for sale.

Looks like you may have gotten your wish, although perhaps a bit late:
http://www.brownsville-realty.com/listing/63171-000-jo-ann-ln-brownsville-tx-78521/ (http://www.brownsville-realty.com/listing/63171-000-jo-ann-ln-brownsville-tx-78521/)

I talked to that guy. There was a considerable gap between what I thought that place was worth and what he thought it was worth to say the least.
 I'll be getting to Brownsville Monday to wrap the Esperson deal up. They just need to finish the title search.
 I guess I need to find someone in SpaceX to give me the indoctrination. Unlike a certain person, I think an ID to get through the front lines will be pretty freakin cool.

Within the context of some earlier comments by a Boca Chica resident the phrase "getting to the front lines" is remarkably appropriate. ;)
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Kansan52 on 09/23/2015 11:46 pm
Did some Google map searching but it would appear that to get to the closest location to the launch site, you would need a four wheeler (maybe a boat that could beach somewhere in the marsh). Appx 3.5 miles from Mexico to launch complex.

Doing a few others, the south point of South Padre Island is less than 6 miles and is a resort area. Post Isla is appx 7 and has a motel. Along the highway that goes through Port Isla and onto South Padre, there are several site about the same as South Padre that might be developed.

Nothing as good as being there!
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: ThereIWas3 on 09/24/2015 05:27 pm
The Isla Blanca campground (http://www.co.cameron.tx.us/parks/isla_blanca.htm) (600 RV sites) is at the very southern tip of South Padre Island, with easy access to the beach.
Under 5 miles to the SpaceX facility.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Kansan52 on 09/24/2015 06:07 pm
The Isla Blanca campground (http://www.co.cameron.tx.us/parks/isla_blanca.htm) (600 RV sites) is at the very southern tip of South Padre Island, with easy access to the beach.
Under 5 miles to the SpaceX facility.

Sounds good!
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Nomadd on 09/24/2015 09:34 pm
 They're paving all three village roads and putting a new, divided one about where the San Martin goat track is. That and Cameron promising to improve village services, whatever that means, makes my timing look pretty good. It only cost me bottle of Coke to break out after the road crew blocked me in. Gotta love barter societies.
 Turns out the woman I'm dealing with was wrong about drainfields. That never did make sense in sand, that close to the water. The homes have conventional septic tanks. And 48 year old, 50 ft long lines that are packed with tree roots and cost $2,000 to replace.
 I took a look at those structures on the beach, south of Padre Island. A few still look occupied with plants on the porch, little wind turbines and rain water collection tanks on the roof. Most look abandoned since the 40s. I drove about 8 miles of beach and saw six people.
 There are ruins from an army site built for the Mexican American war nearby, but an encounter two weeks ago convinced me to invest in a pair of snake boots before tromping through the brush.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Kansan52 on 09/24/2015 10:25 pm
"There are ruins from an army site built for the Mexican American war nearby, but an encounter two weeks ago convinced me to invest in a pair of snake boots before tromping through the brush."

Would that be Battle of Palmito Hill Historical Monument? If so, there were protests that the Space X launch site would ruin the view for the ruin!
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: mtakala24 on 09/24/2015 10:33 pm
Sightseeing-type pictures would be fantastic. Its kind of distant and difficult to get the general feeling of the area. But one of my neighbours turns out to be Mexican, so there you go.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: ChefPat on 09/24/2015 10:34 pm
"There are ruins from an army site built for the Mexican American war nearby, but an encounter two weeks ago convinced me to invest in a pair of snake boots before tromping through the brush."

Would that be Battle of Palmito Hill Historical Monument? If so, there were protests that the Space X launch site would ruin the view for the ruin!

The Battle of Palmito Ranch took place at the end of The War Between the States.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Kansan52 on 09/24/2015 10:58 pm
Sure puts a damper on that, eh?!

Any idea if this was the location that people worried about how the launch site would ruin the view?
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Nomadd on 09/30/2015 09:39 pm
 Just had a long talk with a SpaceX rep on the phone. He said that, contrary to some stories SpaceX won't have a problem with people watching FH as well as F9 launches from their yards in the village. The main reasons for Boca Chica launches being bumped to 2018 was Vandenberg and Florida having plenty of capacity till then and more environmental remediation being needed.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Prober on 10/03/2015 09:46 pm
And, by the way, according to a street sign near the house about 1/2 mile SW of Boca Chica village, Joanna St. has been renamed Rocket Road. That's the house I really wish was for sale.

Looks like you may have gotten your wish, although perhaps a bit late:
http://www.brownsville-realty.com/listing/63171-000-jo-ann-ln-brownsville-tx-78521/

good eye for homes.....wouldn't mind that one myself ;)

kind of off topic but I did find the sleepy little town outside Vandenberg with its own charm.  Would be buying some property there if it wasn't in Calif.  If however that town was located say in Nevada with our taxes and laws, would be all over it.  :)
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Nomadd on 10/10/2015 02:15 am
 Signed papers and gave someone a lot of money today. I finally have my name on the house I've been working on for two weeks. I contacted several lot owners, and nobody is selling at this point. I think Dogleg has already scooped up all the easily available lots. $2,000 was the going price for one before Elon got involved.
 There's some serious utility work going on Hwy 4 at the east edge of town. A worker told me they decided to increase the waterline size last year, do some major vault upgrades and run two more conduits to the edge of town. He spoke about as much English as I spoke Spanish, but it sounds like they might be preparing for the run out to the site.

Road construction has started leading into the launch site.
That road is San Martin by the way. Two miles from the pad. It got paved last week.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: guckyfan on 10/10/2015 06:05 am
Signed papers ..............

Congratulations and good luck with it.

Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: friendly3 on 10/13/2015 11:59 am
I just found this on a french science website, click on the picture to enlarge :

(http://fr.cdn.v5.futura-sciences.com/builds/images/thumbs/2/2470490af4_BocaChica_pasdeTir_spaceX.jpg)
 (http://fr.cdn.v5.futura-sciences.com/builds/images/thumbs/2/2470490af4_BocaChica_pasdeTir_spaceX.jpg)
Three launch pads and two landing pads at Boca Chica? Did I miss something or isn't it serious?
Here is the link to the article : http://www.futura-sciences.com/magazines/espace/infos/actu/d/acces-espace-spacex-ouvre-nouvelle-base-spatiale-faire-face-succes-60070/
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: ChefPat on 10/13/2015 12:23 pm
I just found this on a french science webiste, click on the picture to enlarge :

(http://fr.cdn.v5.futura-sciences.com/builds/images/thumbs/2/2470490af4_BocaChica_pasdeTir_spaceX.jpg)
 (http://fr.cdn.v5.futura-sciences.com/builds/images/thumbs/2/2470490af4_BocaChica_pasdeTir_spaceX.jpg)
Three launch pads and two landing pads at Boca Chica? Did I miss something or isn't it serious?
Here is the link to the article : http://www.futura-sciences.com/magazines/espace/infos/actu/d/acces-espace-spacex-ouvre-nouvelle-base-spatiale-faire-face-succes-60070/
Sorry partner, but I can't read the article (I don't speak French). Can you provide a translation?
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: friendly3 on 10/13/2015 12:32 pm
Well, I don't have the time but the text on the picture is in english, and below the picture it is written "the future SpaceX launch complex located at Boca Chica in Texas, near Brownsville. It will have three launch pads and landing pads for the return of reusable stages". And then there is the © SpaceX
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: a1dutch on 10/13/2015 12:35 pm
https://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&sl=auto&tl=en&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.futura-sciences.com%2Fmagazines%2Fespace%2Finfos%2Factu%2Fd%2Facces-espace-spacex-ouvre-nouvelle-base-spatiale-faire-face-succes-60070%2F
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Beittil on 10/13/2015 01:58 pm
Hmm, this might be some fantasy futuristic dreaming, but not even remotely what is going to happen for now :) It would have been in de applictions, the EIS, etc.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Zardar on 10/13/2015 02:13 pm
I just found this on a french science website, click on the picture to enlarge :

(http://fr.cdn.v5.futura-sciences.com/builds/images/thumbs/2/2470490af4_BocaChica_pasdeTir_spaceX.jpg)
 (http://fr.cdn.v5.futura-sciences.com/builds/images/thumbs/2/2470490af4_BocaChica_pasdeTir_spaceX.jpg)
Three launch pads and two landing pads at Boca Chica? Did I miss something or isn't it serious?
Here is the link to the article : http://www.futura-sciences.com/magazines/espace/infos/actu/d/acces-espace-spacex-ouvre-nouvelle-base-spatiale-faire-face-succes-60070/

That looks a little bit familiar.....
I think I saw it here (last jan): http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=35425.msg1320233#msg1320233
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Nomadd on 10/13/2015 02:34 pm
 I think they'd need to start making agreements with Mexico if they went that far down.
 It looks like Jdeshetler is learning how the media works.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: meekGee on 10/13/2015 03:38 pm
It's from this site, someone was speculating about a year ago.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Jdeshetler on 10/13/2015 05:13 pm
Oh boy, I find it rather amusing.... :o

Sadly, it showed that even the respected international web site would take anything from the internet without double checking the facts from speculations first.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 10/13/2015 05:14 pm
Oh boy, I find it rather amusing.... :o

Sadly, it showed that even the respected international web site would take anything from the internet without double checking the facts from speculations first.
Right. I recognized it as a picture from this thread.  Guess we're making news...

I think they'd need to start making agreements with Mexico if they went that far down.
Yeah, but the agreements would probably be easy.  That part of Mexico is just tidal pools and salt marsh.  Nothing within a 15-mile radius.  Look on Google maps:
https://www.google.com/maps/@25.9090615,-97.2493269,22331m/data=!3m1!1e3
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: PreferToLurk on 10/13/2015 05:16 pm
Definitely JDeshetler's drawing as linked up by Zarder.  The "© SpaceX" in the caption is kinda funny though. The full caption as translated by google:

"The future complex SpaceX launches is located in Boca Chica, Texas, near Brownsville. It will have three firing and landing areas for the return of reusable floors. © SpaceX"

They seem to be under the impression that JDeshetler's image actually came from SpaceX, although a simple "boca chica spaceX" google images search clearly link up that image to the original post on this website.  Either they got the image third hand from someone else who was confused, found it themselves but cant read English and just assumed that something so polished (it is a very good image) must be from SpaceX, or they are intentionally misattributing the source for sensationalism/legitimacy.  Either way, shoddy journalism, IMHO.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Lars-J on 10/13/2015 05:27 pm
Definitely JDeshetler's drawing as linked up by Zarder.  The "© SpaceX" in the caption is kinda funny though. The full caption as translated by google:

"The future complex SpaceX launches is located in Boca Chica, Texas, near Brownsville. It will have three firing and landing areas for the return of reusable floors. © SpaceX"

They seem to be under the impression that JDeshetler's image actually came from SpaceX, although a simple "boca chica spaceX" google images search clearly link up that image to the original post on this website.  Either they got the image third hand from someone else who was confused, found it themselves but cant read English and just assumed that something so polished (it is a very good image) must be from SpaceX, or they are intentionally misattributing the source for sensationalism/legitimacy.  Either way, shoddy journalism, IMHO.

Yes, but it also points out that people on this site (and others) should make it REAL clear when making these kinds of images that they are not from SpaceX. On the image.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Jdeshetler on 10/13/2015 05:47 pm
Here it is, from now on with this water mark...

Yes, but it also points out that people on this site (and others) should make it REAL clear when making these kinds of images that they are not from SpaceX. On the image.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Lars-J on 10/13/2015 06:39 pm
Here it is, from now on with this water mark...

Yes, but it also points out that people on this site (and others) should make it REAL clear when making these kinds of images that they are not from SpaceX. On the image.

Wow, fast response! :D
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Tomness on 10/13/2015 06:55 pm
Wow, Chris B needs to get ad money or rollities for ya'lls stuff lol
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Zed_Noir on 10/13/2015 08:15 pm
@Jdeshetler too bad you didn't go for quin pads in that image.  ;D

Think of the silly stories that could gets generated by the rag sheets and net trolls.  :o

Of course trying for a quin padspace port will most likely snow SpaceX under from the paperwork required.  :(
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Nomadd on 10/13/2015 08:22 pm
 It always makes me a little sad, driving to Boca Chica and passing these guys in the distance. I'm not sure which one this is, but I think Constellation, Forrestal, Ranger and Saratoga have all headed that way in recent years.

 I don't mean to make this a Facebook page, but I figure old carriers have enough of a tie-in to spaceflight to qualify.

Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: rpapo on 10/13/2015 08:52 pm
It always makes me a little sad, driving to Boca Chica and passing these guys in the distance. I'm not sure which one this is, but I think Constellation, Forrestal, Ranger and Saratoga have all headed that way in recent years.
What an ASDS it could have made...
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: edkyle99 on 10/13/2015 09:04 pm
Today it has been reported that ULA's Vulcan will use SLC 41 and SLC 3E, and that is all.  ULA will slim down to only two launch pads to be efficient.

SpaceX is using or building four launch sites.  How can SpaceX justify the cost of building and maintaining all of these launch pads?

 - Ed Kyle
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: docmordrid on 10/13/2015 09:11 pm
By not hiring as many lobbyists, not donating to as many congresscritters, and by not buying full page ads in expensive ad spaces like the Washington Post etc?
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: abaddon on 10/13/2015 09:35 pm
Today it has been reported that ULA's Vulcan will use SLC 41 and SLC 3E, and that is all.  ULA will slim down to only two launch pads to be efficient.

SpaceX is using or building four launch sites.  How can SpaceX justify the cost of building and maintaining all of these launch pads?

 - Ed Kyle
They plan to launch a lot more rockets than ULA.  But then, you knew that already, right?
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Jim on 10/13/2015 09:42 pm
Today it has been reported that ULA's Vulcan will use SLC 41 and SLC 3E, and that is all.  ULA will slim down to only two launch pads to be efficient.

SpaceX is using or building four launch sites.  How can SpaceX justify the cost of building and maintaining all of these launch pads?

 - Ed Kyle

3 sites, four pads
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: oiorionsbelt on 10/13/2015 11:47 pm
Today it has been reported that ULA's Vulcan will use SLC 41 and SLC 3E, and that is all.  ULA will slim down to only two launch pads to be efficient.

SpaceX is using or building four launch sites.  How can SpaceX justify the cost of building and maintaining all of these launch pads?

 - Ed Kyle

3 sites, four pads
Isn't it four sites? CCAFS, Kennedy Space center, Vandenberg and Boca Chica.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: The Amazing Catstronaut on 10/14/2015 01:24 am
Today it has been reported that ULA's Vulcan will use SLC 41 and SLC 3E, and that is all.  ULA will slim down to only two launch pads to be efficient.

SpaceX is using or building four launch sites.  How can SpaceX justify the cost of building and maintaining all of these launch pads?

 - Ed Kyle

By potentially dominating (part of) the world's logistics of information distribution and exchange, over the long term. They have a lot of satellites to launch and pads take a while to build - it makes sense to get them running so  pad availability isn't one of their limitations. In the short term, by fulfilling their manifest. If you want to do serious BEO colonisation, it doesn't hurt to have the capability to run your own launch infrastructure and to be able to send payload skyward practically on a whim.

SpaceX believes that there is a commercial space market which is profitable enough to earn the yearly multi-billions required to colonise the Solar System, thus they are doing their damndest to impose that interpretation of reality onto everyone else - having the possibility of an extremely high launch cadence is one way of doing that. Of course, there's a lot of financial risk involved there.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Jim on 10/14/2015 01:40 am

Isn't it four sites? CCAFS, Kennedy Space center,

Those count as one site, two pads
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 10/14/2015 02:18 am
3 sites, four pads
Isn't it four sites? CCAFS, Kennedy Space center, Vandenberg and Boca Chica.
If we're getting all technical, does SLC-13 count as a pad?
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: ncb1397 on 10/14/2015 03:26 am
Today it has been reported that ULA's Vulcan will use SLC 41 and SLC 3E, and that is all.  ULA will slim down to only two launch pads to be efficient.

SpaceX is using or building four launch sites.  How can SpaceX justify the cost of building and maintaining all of these launch pads?

 - Ed Kyle

SpaceX has a 60+ mission backlog with the latest commercial agreements targeting a 2018 launch date. With only 3 years to complete 60+ missions (2016, 2017,2018), they need to launch 20 missions per year starting in 2016. On the other hand, ULA historically has launched 100 missions over about 10 years of operations yielding half the flight rate. Maybe twice the launch rate would justify twice the pads?
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Llian Rhydderch on 10/14/2015 05:14 am

Isn't it four sites? CCAFS, Kennedy Space center,

Those count as one site, two pads

No, they don't.  The US government clearly considers KSC, the civilian space arm of the USG, to be a very separate entity than the US DOD USAF site, CCAFS.  That's two sites, two pads.

Unless, that is, you are following the linguistics advice of Humpty from "Through the Looking Glass" by Lewis Carroll:
Quote
'When I use a word,' Humpty Dumpty said, in rather a scornful tone, 'it means just what I choose it to mean — neither more nor less.'
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Nomadd on 10/14/2015 05:15 am

Isn't it four sites? CCAFS, Kennedy Space center,

Those count as one site, two pads

No, they don't.  The US government clearly considers KSC, the civilian space arm of the USG, to be a very separate entity than the US DOD USAF site, CCAFS.  That's two sites, two pads.

That kind of depends on what the two facilities have in common. Tracking radars, comms, ultimate decision authority. It's sort of like Pluto being a planet. You're not really defining the thing. Just the word.

 They need Vandenberg for polar. They need Florida because that's what they have. 40 was available first and 39 is being custom built. But in the long run, they've always known they'd need their own facility.
 It's not so much that they need four places to launch. That's just the way it worked out. They can't be sure how things will be in 5 years. They can just do everything they can to be ready.
 Trying to create a market by offering a service seems backwards to lots of people, but it's how it needs to be done in this case. They can't wait for 100 orders a year to start building the facilities to fill them. It's a crapshoot, and it takes somebody with the cojones to go for it.

 On a creepier note, this was guarding my door yesterday. These Texans aren't kidding about the size of their critters. The Falcon is going to be interestingly decorated out here.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Lars-J on 10/14/2015 06:02 am

Isn't it four sites? CCAFS, Kennedy Space center,

Those count as one site, two pads

No, they don't.  The US government clearly considers KSC, the civilian space arm of the USG, to be a very separate entity than the US DOD USAF site, CCAFS.  That's two sites, two pads.

Are you deliberately trying to misunderstand Jim? Yes, there are two pads, but they share at lot of SpaceX facilities and employees. (as well as NASA/Air Force support that applies to both) They also have the same launch azimuth restrictions. And the landing pad(s) are planned to be used for launches from both pads.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: woods170 on 10/14/2015 06:53 am
Today it has been reported that ULA's Vulcan will use SLC 41 and SLC 3E, and that is all.  ULA will slim down to only two launch pads to be efficient.

SpaceX is using or building four launch sites.  How can SpaceX justify the cost of building and maintaining all of these launch pads?

 - Ed Kyle
For starters: by not erecting expensive, and difficult to maintain, fixed launch towers and mobile service structures. The only exception being LC-39A. And there the cost of maintenance will be going down once the RSS is gone and the FSS is enclosed. And naturally SpaceX didn't bear the cost of constructing the FSS in the first place. It was already there. They only need to modify it.
And mind you, so far Space hasn't had the cost of constructing new massive concrete structures such as flame trenches at the pads currently in use or under construction. Boca Chica will be the first all-new flame trench for a SpaceX launchpad.
Further: the TEL's are relatively simple constructions and they are spending much of their time indoors. That helps to keep maintenance cost down.
What also helps is that SpaceX likes to use local companies for many construction jobs. Also helps to keep the cost down.
The HIF's primary structures are very standard structures and thus relatively inexpensive.
Etc, etc, etc.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Jim on 10/14/2015 11:47 am

Further: the TEL's are relatively simple constructions and they are spending much of their time indoors. That helps to keep maintenance cost down.


They actually spend most of the time outside.  They can't assemble a vehicle while the erector is inside.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: woods170 on 10/14/2015 12:28 pm

Further: the TEL's are relatively simple constructions and they are spending much of their time indoors. That helps to keep maintenance cost down.


They actually spend most of the time outside.  They can't assemble a vehicle while the erector is inside.
I'm well aware that the TEL does not reside in the HIF when a vehicle is being assembled. However, I didn't say most, I said much. And that is in fact correct according to the (D)EIS issued for all the SpaceX launch sites.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Jim on 10/14/2015 12:48 pm
I'm well aware that the TEL does not reside in the HIF when a vehicle is being assembled. However, I didn't say most, I said much. And that is in fact correct according to the (D)EIS issued for all the SpaceX launch sites.


Every time I go by SLC-40, it is outside
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: JamesH on 10/14/2015 02:43 pm
I'm well aware that the TEL does not reside in the HIF when a vehicle is being assembled. However, I didn't say most, I said much. And that is in fact correct according to the (D)EIS issued for all the SpaceX launch sites.


Every time I go by SLC-40, it is outside

As a species, we seem pretty good at applying waterproof coating to objects outside. Like paint. On ships and oil rigs. I'm not seeing leaving the TEL outside as a big problem for maintenance.

Not designing it to be left outside is more of a problem.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: edkyle99 on 10/14/2015 07:42 pm
Today it has been reported that ULA's Vulcan will use SLC 41 and SLC 3E, and that is all.  ULA will slim down to only two launch pads to be efficient.

SpaceX is using or building four launch sites.  How can SpaceX justify the cost of building and maintaining all of these launch pads?

 - Ed Kyle

SpaceX has a 60+ mission backlog with the latest commercial agreements targeting a 2018 launch date. With only 3 years to complete 60+ missions (2016, 2017,2018), they need to launch 20 missions per year starting in 2016. On the other hand, ULA historically has launched 100 missions over about 10 years of operations yielding half the flight rate. Maybe twice the launch rate would justify twice the pads?
Not too many years ago, Boeing said that it had a 60+ mission backlog for Delta 3 and Delta 4.

 - Ed Kyle
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Coastal Ron on 10/14/2015 08:00 pm
Not too many years ago, Boeing said that it had a 60+ mission backlog for Delta 3 and Delta 4.

Are you implying that Boeing frittered away a large customer backlog when they created ULA?  How does that apply to SpaceX?
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: meekGee on 10/14/2015 08:12 pm
Today it has been reported that ULA's Vulcan will use SLC 41 and SLC 3E, and that is all.  ULA will slim down to only two launch pads to be efficient.

SpaceX is using or building four launch sites.  How can SpaceX justify the cost of building and maintaining all of these launch pads?

 - Ed Kyle

Firstly, I am pretty sure they're getting their pads done a lot cheaper.
Second, their commercial upside is much higher.
Third, they have Mars on their minds, and I don't think 4 pads is the end of it.

You may as well ask - how do they justify Raptor, BFR and MCT?   If you are comparing SpaceX to "Old Space", what would be the price tag for that little side project?
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: BrianNH on 10/14/2015 08:14 pm
Over the last page, the only post that was related to the Texas launch site was a picture of a large insect.  If there are no new developments, then let's let this thread go dormant until there is something new to report/discuss.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: edkyle99 on 10/14/2015 08:14 pm
Not too many years ago, Boeing said that it had a 60+ mission backlog for Delta 3 and Delta 4.

Are you implying that Boeing frittered away a large customer backlog when they created ULA?  How does that apply to SpaceX?
No, I'm pointing out that backlog predictions for new rockets don't always come true.  Boeing's backlog died in part with Teledesic and others of similar ilk, long before ULA was contemplated.

 - Ed Kyle
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: meekGee on 10/14/2015 08:47 pm
Over the last page, the only post that was related to the Texas launch site was a picture of a large insect.  If there are no new developments, then let's let this thread go dormant until there is something new to report/discuss.

I thought the discussion of whether the two pads in Florida constitute one or two launch sites was fascinating, and deserves a thread all on its own.    If I ever got a chance to ask Musk one thing, without a doubt, that would be it.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Sam Ho on 10/14/2015 09:07 pm
Over the last page, the only post that was related to the Texas launch site was a picture of a large insect.  If there are no new developments, then let's let this thread go dormant until there is something new to report/discuss.

That's a centipede, not an insect.  It looks like it might be Scolopendra Heros, the Texas redheaded centipede.  Nomadd didn't include anything in the image for scale, so I can't tell how big this specimen is, but S. Heros can reach sizes of around 20cm.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Senex on 10/14/2015 10:53 pm
Ok.  Spacex REALLY has to launch something before this gets worse!
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: russianhalo117 on 10/15/2015 12:00 am
Ok.  Spacex REALLY has to launch something before this gets worse!
Spacecraft or Centipedes??
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 10/15/2015 12:16 am
https://www.superiorjobs.com/JobDetails.aspx?job_number=351084&sourcename=Indeed&JobId=351084
Quote
Structural Welder
City: Brownsville
State/Province: TX
Postal/Zip Code: 78520
Position Type: Temporary
Duration: 3 - 6 Months
Job Description: Superior Group is actively seeking for many Structural Welders for our client located in Brownsville, TX 78520 contract opportunity.

Pay Rate:  $25.00 per hour (DOE)
Hours:  1st shift;  OT and weekend shifts are available.
Duration: Temp to Perm (Direct Hire)

Overview:
Work as part of a traveling team of elite individuals building and improving the mechanical systems at our rocket launch facilities.
Be there on the ground floor, getting your hands dirty and contributing directly to the success of future launches.

Responsibilities:
Structural Welding is an important function of the Launch Site Engineering and Build  team. The Structural welder will be tasked with assembly and fabrication of various, complex structures and equipment to supporting launches and testing
 
Some examples of these projects include: Rocket structure and propulsion component manipulation equipment, air bearing systems, robotic drilling solutions, friction stir weld machines, roadway transportation systems, static and dynamic fixturing, etc.
 
The main task of a launch site welder is to complete welds on tooling structures and ground support systems according to specified standards AWS D1.1 & AWS D1.2
Lay out, fit, and fabricate metal components to assemble structures, such as tooling, erector parts, and pressure vessels, using knowledge of welding techniques,
In addition to welding, tooling welders typically participate in additional areas - training outside contractors and construction additional equipment on launch sites

Job Requirements:
Required Skills / Qualifications:
Minimum 3 years of structural welding experience
Minimum 3 years of experience welding on steel and aluminum, and stainless steel projects
Minimum 3 years of experience of layout and fitting experience

Preferred Skills / Qualifications:
5+ years of structural welding experience welding large scale structures, jigs, and fixtures
Strong understanding of AC and DC processes
Proficient in blueprint reading and lay out
Proficient in Flux core, GTAW, GMAW
Proficient in Plasma Cutting as well as Oxyacetylene cutting
Experience working with overhead cranes & forklifts
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Nomadd on 10/15/2015 12:41 am

That's a centipede, not an insect.  It looks like it might be Scolopendra Heros, the Texas redheaded centipede.  Nomadd didn't include anything in the image for scale, so I can't tell how big this specimen is, but S. Heros can reach sizes of around 20cm.
Sure I did. 1/2" brick joints. He came in at about 18cm.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Herb Schaltegger on 10/15/2015 12:45 am
That's a big damn bug. You know what this means, right? You gotta track down a cab to play at your new beach house in between launch/landing ops. :)

http://my.ign.com/atari/centipede
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Jim on 10/15/2015 12:55 am

No, they don't.  The US government clearly considers KSC, the civilian space arm of the USG, to be a very separate entity than the US DOD USAF site, CCAFS.  That's two sites, two pads.


Really?  Wrong.  It is one site. Who manages the actual land masses is meaningless.     NASA has pads and facilities on the Cape and the USAF has pads and facilities on KSC.  Launches from both facilities are served by one range.   The combined land masses are referred to as the Cape Canaveral Spaceport
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Kansan52 on 10/16/2015 07:07 pm
One of the main reasons the Texas launch site is being built is to avoid, the Air Force requirements to allow people through the gate and to the pad. Customers like to have access to the launch site when the payload is there.

Plus, the range assets are theirs. The CC range takes, if memory serves, at least 2 days to prepare for a launch. So, at the Cape, if ULA has a launch scheduled before you do for the 3rd, your NET can not be better than the 6th even if you are ready to launch on the 3rd. If you schedule first, then ULA waits unless it's a priority government launch.

Texas relieves much of that.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Jim on 10/16/2015 07:45 pm
One of the main reasons the Texas launch site is being built is to avoid, the Air Force requirements to allow people through the gate and to the pad. Customers like to have access to the launch site when the payload is there.


Not true. 
1.  Spacecraft customers have no problems accessing the launch site at the Cape
2.  The same safety rules will be applicable in Texas because the FAA is using the USAF rules as a baseline for theirs.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: RedLineTrain on 10/16/2015 07:58 pm
I recall that one of SpaceX's Asian customers expressed some frustration with the access to CCAFS, perhaps with one or more of their Chinese nationals.  Maybe it was Asia Broadcast Satellite.  Space News reported it.

Unknown whether SpaceX has changed its process since then.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: oldAtlas_Eguy on 10/16/2015 09:29 pm
One of the main reasons the Texas launch site is being built is to avoid, the Air Force requirements to allow people through the gate and to the pad. Customers like to have access to the launch site when the payload is there.

Plus, the range assets are theirs. The CC range takes, if memory serves, at least 2 days to prepare for a launch. So, at the Cape, if ULA has a launch scheduled before you do for the 3rd, your NET can not be better than the 6th even if you are ready to launch on the 3rd. If you schedule first, then ULA waits unless it's a priority government launch.

Texas relieves much of that.
Actually range scheduling is first come first served. No priorities. But you are only able to lock in a few days in a row for minor slips (for weather mainly) else if you slip more you then have to request a new date that is not already taken by someone else unless you can negotiate that someone else to let you use their dates. The range does do other activities than orbital launch. But this is where there is a priority element in that orbital launches have priority over these other tests since they have less of specific operation window that must be met. But this 2 or 3 days of locked in for launch plus the 2-3 days of changeover means the Eastern Range can only support about 50 orbital launches in a year if they could actually fit such a regular weekly timeline which some cannot having to launch only on just one or two days out of a whole week cause the launch event to block out almost equivalent of a week and a half. This means that effectively because of window constraints the max number of orbital launches able to be scheduled at the ER is more like 33 launches a year.

If SpaceX launches at a average rate of 10 off of each pad SLC-40 and LC-39A that's 20 leaving only 13 schedule slots for everyone else! In a year for SpaceX launches would break out something like this: 4 CRS, 2 CC, 4 FH, 4 non polar gov F9, 8 GEO commercial, 4 LEO commercial, and 6 polar LEO commercial and gov. That is a total of 32 of which 6 from VAFB, 10 from LC39A, 10 (4CRS and 6 other commercial) from SLC-40, and 6 more commercial GEO from Boca Chica. There is a possibility that some of the FH launches could be switched to Boca Chica (2 or 3 of them) raising the launches from Boca Chica to 8 or 9 and lowering the launches from LC39A to 8 or 7.

The result is that SpaceX will be the majority client for ER launches, greater than 60% of all launches.

Scheduling conflicts at the ER even between SpaceX's own launches will cause SpaceX to move as many launches as it can to Boca Chica. This means that as soon as Boca Chica starts launching they could  see a fast ramp up to over 6 launches per year within a year from the first launch.

Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: zubenelgenubi on 10/16/2015 09:31 pm
I recall that one of SpaceX's Asian customers expressed some frustration with the access to CCAFS, perhaps with one or more of their Chinese nationals.  Maybe it was Asia Broadcast Satellite.  Space News reported it.

Unknown whether SpaceX has changed its process since then.

SpaceX launches AsiaSat8
http://www.floridatoday.com/story/news/2014/08/03/spacex-asiasat-mission-flies-early-tuesday/13553769/ (http://www.floridatoday.com/story/news/2014/08/03/spacex-asiasat-mission-flies-early-tuesday/13553769/)
Quote
William Wade, AsiaSat president and CEO, is excited for the upcoming launches, but confirmed the company's experience here has not been as easy as at other launch sites.

Access to Cape Canaveral Air Force Station for roughly 60 employees, shareholders and customers now in town — most not U.S. citizens and many who are Chinese nationals – has been difficult.

"That is proving to be somewhat cumbersome," Wade said. "We have to go through all the security clearances, which is expected, but we are finding as a foreign company that it is a bit more difficult conducting our launches there."

The company found the process easier when it last flew from the Cape in 2003, on an Atlas IIIB rocket.

Here, Wade said, the company also worries more about the potential for launch delays because of federal government missions that may be given higher priority, which adds uncertainty to its financial forecasting and marketing of satellite services.

"The government launches, those are a little bit unpredictable," Wade said. "You don't really know whether you're going to get bumped, whether issues might come up that could create a situation where they take precedence. So that has proven to be a little bit more worrisome, whereas in some of our previous experiences elsewhere, we haven't seen that to be as big a factor."

Is Mr. Wade mistaken?
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 10/17/2015 11:39 am
AsiaSat CEO says Cape Canaveral has its drawbacks

http://www.spaceflightnow.com/falcon9/012/140906capecanaveral/#.ViIy5n6rRhE

(http://www.spaceflightnow.com/falcon9/012/140906capecanaveral/wade_400503.jpg)

Quote
"I think Cape Canaveral is a great place to launch, but it does have its downside, which is it's quite bureaucratic here," said William Wade, AsiaSat's president and CEO.

"There are a lot of regulations and clearances and restrictions, which I think hinders the processing of commercial satellites here," Wade said in an interview at Cape Canaveral. "I think that's too bad because it is a bit of a negative."

SpaceX's launch pad and processing facility is on U.S. Air Force property. The military controls access to the launch base, meaning employees and visitors must comply with Defense Department security and safety restrictions.

"Even though our processing has gone well, it's not been without some frustrations from the various teams just having to deal with some of the bureaucracy of the government in working at the Cape," Wade said. "Unfortunately, I think that's one of the reasons that SpaceX is looking at doing commercial launches on their own satellite base down in Texas."

...

"There are certain clearances and restrictions for foreign nationals here," Wade said. "In addition to just the nationality issues, there are just regulations that all people have to abide by here, and it does make it more difficult from a commercial perspective when you have these regulations in processing, access to locations, weather restrictions and things like that, that you deal with here at the Cape that you don't typically have to deal with at other locations."
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Jim on 10/17/2015 12:17 pm
The statement was made that "Customers like to have access to the launch site when the payload is there. "
And the point is that they can access their spacecraft, and are not prevented from doing it. The point wasn't about the process to get access.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Kansan52 on 10/17/2015 04:19 pm
The statement was made that "Customers like to have access to the launch site when the payload is there. "
And the point is that they can access their spacecraft, and are not prevented from doing it. The point wasn't about the process to get access.

True. Mr. Wade's statement was part of what I remembered and he is talking about the process.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: mvpel on 10/18/2015 03:03 am
If anyone has been to Ford Island to visit the USS Missouri and the Pacific Aviation Museum, you'll recall that there's a visitor's center with a huge parking lot across the causeway, and they shuttle you over to the island on a tour bus. In order to go anywhere other than the designated locations with tour-guide chaperones, you need a CAC card and your name on the gate guard's list (https://www.google.com/maps/@21.3697817,-157.9374648,88m/data=!3m1!1e3).

I spent a week out there working on the SBX-1 (https://www.google.com/maps/@21.3713302,-157.9595801,221m/data=!3m1!1e3) about three years ago, and I was enjoying ambling through the Missouri after work one day, reading the various displays along with a group of other visitors. I was walking slowly, and found myself alone in the mess hall near closing time, quietly contemplating my honorary grandpa's experience of dining in a ship like the Mighty Mo in the middle of the Pacific during WW-II, and the stories he could never bring himself to tell us kids.

A tour guide emerged from the forward hallway: "There you are! We held the bus for you!"

Oops.  :o

I showed him my CAC card, explained that my car was parked across the way, and apologized for the misunderstanding.

It took me quite a bit of paperwork and effort over the course of several weeks, including a visit to my local National Guard Armory, to get a CAC card issued to me, and I'm a US citizen with a clearance. And it was probably a week worth of processing to get me on the Ford Island authorized visitors list after that. Like Ford Island, CCAFS is a military installation.

The paperwork to get approval for a foreign-national visitor to my office is not quite as onerous, but it's onerous enough - with an extra layer of approvals required days in advance - to mean that I usually meet with the Canadian guy from one of our vendors at his office or a coffee shop, rather than my office.

The principal concern there is the International Traffic in Arms Regulations - even allowing a foreign national to lay eyes on an unclassified but ITAR-restricted piece of information or revealing bit of technology is considered an "export," and unlicensed exports are subject to significant penalties. This means that I am also very mindful about what I say about the problem the Canadian guy is helping me with.

And considering that China is our most fierce and persistent adversary in industrial and economic espionage, I would imagine that the level of scrutiny SpaceX has to go through to allow Chinese-national space-industry executives from AsiaSat access to CCAFS is time-consuming, to say the least, and the amount of planning and effort needed to manage their visit properly is undoubtedly no small matter. That's what Mr. Wade's getting at.

At Boca Chica, while SpaceX will still need to be mindful of ITAR restrictions and the debarred persons list, they'll be in control of the entire visitor approval procedure themselves, rather than having to throw part of it over the fence to an Air Force office.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Jim on 10/18/2015 12:14 pm

It took me quite a bit of paperwork and effort over the course of several weeks, including a visit to my local National Guard Armory, to get a CAC card issued to me, and I'm a US citizen with a clearance. And it was probably a week worth of processing to get me on the Ford Island authorized visitors list after that. Like Ford Island, CCAFS is a military installation.



CCAFS is a restricted military installation (always has been).  A CAC card does not give you access.  There is a separate ID badge to access to it.  A military ID does not gave one access, been that way for decades.  Same with KSC. 

Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Bob Shaw on 10/18/2015 12:21 pm
At Boca Chica, while SpaceX will still need to be mindful of ITAR restrictions and the debarred persons list, they'll be in control of the entire visitor approval procedure themselves, rather than having to throw part of it over the fence to an Air Force office.

I work in an ITAR restricted environment, and have to say that if somebody came along and offered (demanded!) to be in charge of any of that stuff then I would imagine that any sensible company would jump at the opportunity to hand that particular monkey over. Monkeys bite, and busy companies have to invest far too much time and effort on ITAR already, so let someone else bear the burden!
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 10/18/2015 01:15 pm
Construction Jobs in Brownsville, Texas
http://jobs.monster.com/v-construction-l-brownsville,-tx.aspx

Obviously, not all of these are SpaceX related, but it does seem hiring for construction related jobs has picked up significantly, so some of these are probably related.  I also saw some listings for new security guard positions. 

One position for a structural welder was obviously for SpaceX, but even that was being hired out through a contractor outfit.  So none of these are SpaceX direct hires, it's all indirect hires through rental companies, contractors, etc.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: LouScheffer on 10/19/2015 12:22 am

It took me quite a bit of paperwork and effort over the course of several weeks, including a visit to my local National Guard Armory, to get a CAC card issued to me, and I'm a US citizen with a clearance. And it was probably a week worth of processing to get me on the Ford Island authorized visitors list after that. Like Ford Island, CCAFS is a military installation.

The paperwork to get approval for a foreign-national visitor to my office is not quite as onerous, but it's onerous enough - with an extra layer of approvals required days in advance - to mean that I usually meet with the Canadian guy from one of our vendors at his office or a coffee shop, rather than my office.

Even non-military NASA facilities can have significant hurdles.  I have a friend from India (India passport) with a son (American passport), both big space fans.  They asked me it was possible to see JPL on a trip to the USA, but the public tours fill up many months in advance and they were only in the USA for a few weeks.  So I asked a friend who works at JPL, and he graciously agreed to show us around a bit, but we'd need the visitor paperwork.  Starting a few weeks in advance, the USA approvals came through in time,  but not the foreign one, so the dad was unable to visit JPL.  Not so serious in this case, but perhaps a bad sign if you need a foreign-born expert to come and help on short notice, as might easily happen in the commercial launch business.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Jim on 10/19/2015 01:37 am

Even non-military NASA facilities can have significant hurdles.

All NASA facilities are non military
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Herb Schaltegger on 10/19/2015 01:54 am

Even non-military NASA facilities can have significant hurdles.

All NASA facilities are non military

I think he meant those that aren't colocated on military sites (like, for example, MSFC and Redstone Arsenal) or with adjacent military sites (e.g., KSC/CCAFS). But what do I know? It's been decades since I had my Arsenal pass to get onto MSFC regularly. :)
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: LouScheffer on 10/19/2015 03:25 pm
Even non-military NASA facilities can have significant hurdles.
All NASA facilities are non military
Yes, that's what I meant.  I should have perhaps written "Government facilities, even non-military ones such as NASA sites, can have significant  bureaucratic hurdles for entry."
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Newton_V on 10/19/2015 03:38 pm

CCAFS is a restricted military installation (always has been).  A CAC card does not give you access.  There is a separate ID badge to access to it.  A military ID does not gave one access, been that way for decades.  Same with KSC.

Is CCAFS different from VAFB?  I thought a CAC card ("coded" for VAFB) gets you on base at VAFB.  For those without CAC cards, a VAFB base access card is required.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Llian Rhydderch on 10/19/2015 07:00 pm
Yes, the SpaceX Texas launch site will, at the margin, reduce some overhead and inconveniences of working on US government facilities.

Here's some background on it:  Another wakeup call for the Cape Canaveral Spaceport (http://www.thespacereview.com/article/2598/1)

You might start with Concern #1: Too many cooks, or no. 2: Range access and scheduling, or no. 3: Range technology, or maybe no. 5, as has been being discussed now by several commenters on this thread: 5: Customer access.

Now certainly SpaceX will incur costs in all these areas at their own range in south Texas.  There is no free lunch.  But it amazes me to see here in this thread someone assert "Spacecraft customers have no problems accessing the launch site at the Cape", and then fall on his sword repeatedly trying to defend that against mounting evidence from many sources that there are problems and high costs associated with access at the Cape. 
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Space Ghost 1962 on 10/19/2015 07:22 pm
We've never had a "private range" before. It should be no surprise that it's easy to argue to work such by prior rules - that is a careful, pragmatic approach for a extremely serious, consequential activity of commercial space launch.

Let's skip ahead after a decade of operations (or less). Eastern/Western ranges likely won't have improved much during those times (likely no increased funds to "modernize" as many have long complained, possibly additional rules to meet as well, and little incentive to optimize cost structure). But the private range here will be able to make significant argument for altering the rules to suit use, winning some of these. Chipping away at the prior edifice through leadership.

In the end, they'll likely become the cheaper to operate facility, as they have many fewer "stakeholders" to please.

That's the long term advantage, in addition to the short term advantage of schedule.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Jim on 10/19/2015 08:55 pm
  But it amazes me to see here in this thread someone assert "Spacecraft customers have no problems accessing the launch site at the Cape", and then fall on his sword repeatedly trying to defend that against mounting evidence from many sources that there are problems and high costs associated with access at the Cape. 


And the assertion is 100% correct.  The customer can get access.  They are not prohibited from getting access, hence "no problems". 

As stated in the thread, 

http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=35425.msg1436989#msg1436989

the amount of paperwork or bureaucracy to get the access was not part of the discussion.
Nowhere was there any discussion about costs.

So,this post didn't add anything to the discussion or the forum in general
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Jim on 10/19/2015 09:11 pm
In the end, they'll likely become the cheaper to operate facility, as they have many fewer "stakeholders" to please.

Maybe not, they will have few users to share the costs with.  Users at the Cape pay only for the use of resources and not the upkeep.  The FAA will be charging fees for safety reviews.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: ClayJar on 10/19/2015 09:32 pm
And the assertion is 100% correct.  The customer can get access.  They are not prohibited from getting access, hence "no problems". 

As stated in the thread, 

http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=35425.msg1436989#msg1436989

the amount of paperwork or bureaucracy to get the access was not part of the discussion.
Nowhere was there any discussion about costs.

I believe therein lies the disconnect.  As I understand you, the fact that it is possible to get access to their spacecraft means there is no problem, and the paperwork, time, or expense involved is irrelevant.  It certainly makes sense (considering commercial launches have happened) that you are correct in that if a customer considers launching with SpaceX worthwhile, they can deal with what paperwork or issues arise.  Your "problems" would then seem to be analogous to what programmers may call "show-stoppers".

As I understand the others, the fact something is possible does not mean there are no problems, and the paperwork, time, or expense involved is entirely the point.  It certainly makes sense (considering what commercial customers have said) that they are correct in that if a customer has the option, they would much prefer to minimize their paperwork, time, and expense.  The posters, then, are using "problems" not to mean "show-stoppers" but to mean "undesirable things but ones that can be worked around if necessary".

There's really no point to all of us going back and forth on whether there are "problems" or not when it's only the semantic interpretation that's at issue.  If it takes a few more words to explain what we're saying, surely that must be better than posting in circles around each other.  Customers *can* access their spacecraft when launching from wherever, and customers *would* like to make things easier, cheaper, or otherwise more streamlined.  Those points certainly can be agreed on, yes?
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Space Ghost 1962 on 10/19/2015 11:20 pm
In the end, they'll likely become the cheaper to operate facility, as they have many fewer "stakeholders" to please.

Maybe not, they will have few users to share the costs with.  Users at the Cape pay only for the use of resources and not the upkeep.  The FAA will be charging fees for safety reviews.

The way your point would apply is if they did not have enough commercial launch activity to justify its use. Then cost sharing would underwrite sparse launch activity (as it has in the past), less than 10% of maximum utilization.

The way your point would fail to apply is if a constant consumption/addition of commercial launch manifest occurs, such that facilities utilization of above 20% happens (above break even). At 50% I'd be willing to bet that the shared cost model loses, as it probably also would do at LC-40/41.

So if they address significant global market share and can keep up with it, Texas beats Florida hands down (as well WFF).

However they'll never get away from Florida for the unique capabilities at CCAFS. For those, the sparse. shared model is absolutely ideal to keep costs on all of those at a minimum, so you are pointing out a critical issue as you often do.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Jim on 10/19/2015 11:32 pm

The way your point would fail to apply is if a constant consumption/addition of commercial launch manifest occurs, such that facilities utilization of above 20% happens (above break even). At 50% I'd be willing to bet that the shared cost model loses, as it probably also would do at LC-40/41.


You forgot the Navy, which is a user of the range.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Brovane on 10/20/2015 02:26 am
In the end, they'll likely become the cheaper to operate facility, as they have many fewer "stakeholders" to please.

Maybe not, they will have few users to share the costs with.  Users at the Cape pay only for the use of resources and not the upkeep.  The FAA will be charging fees for safety reviews.

The way your point would apply is if they did not have enough commercial launch activity to justify its use. Then cost sharing would underwrite sparse launch activity (as it has in the past), less than 10% of maximum utilization.

The way your point would fail to apply is if a constant consumption/addition of commercial launch manifest occurs, such that facilities utilization of above 20% happens (above break even). At 50% I'd be willing to bet that the shared cost model loses, as it probably also would do at LC-40/41.

So if they address significant global market share and can keep up with it, Texas beats Florida hands down (as well WFF).

However they'll never get away from Florida for the unique capabilities at CCAFS. For those, the sparse. shared model is absolutely ideal to keep costs on all of those at a minimum, so you are pointing out a critical issue as you often do.

Isn't SpaceX restricted to the amount of Launches they can do from Brownsville to around 10-12 a year? 
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 10/20/2015 02:31 am
Isn't SpaceX restricted to the amount of Launches they can do from Brownsville to around 10-12 a year?
For the initial EIS, yes.  But the initial EIS has already been amended in other areas, as described here (http://rrunrrun.blogspot.com/2015/06/last-minute-spacex-fix-additional.html).

Getting initial approval is usually the hardest.  Additional incremental approvals are usually much easier. 

So if 10-12 launches a year becomes limiting, they'll probably apply for additional approvals to raise the limit.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 10/20/2015 02:51 am
STARGATE Tracking Center:
http://www.utb.edu/stargate/Pages/default.aspx

Quote
The Spacecraft Tracking and Astronomical Research into Giga-hertz Astrophysical Transient Emission (STARGATE) complex is a public-private partnership between the Center for Advanced Radio Astronomy at UTB and SpaceX.​​

STARGATE is a space exploration based technology park that combines higher education, research, economic development, and commercialization. It will be located adjacent to the SpaceX launch site command center, space craft assembly facility, and spacecraft tracking hardware. STARGATE resources will give students and faculty unprecedented opportunities for near and deep space exploration research and technology development.​​

STARGATE will significantly improve the research, education, and commercialization infrastructure in the region and establish UT as a leader in space exploration research.​​

(http://www.utb.edu/stargate/PublishingImages/STARGATE-logo-sm.jpg)


The STARGATE Tracking Center is shown on the lower left corner of the map below.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Prober on 10/21/2015 02:19 pm
In the end, they'll likely become the cheaper to operate facility, as they have many fewer "stakeholders" to please.

Maybe not, they will have few users to share the costs with.  Users at the Cape pay only for the use of resources and not the upkeep.  The FAA will be charging fees for safety reviews.

and the FAA will be making the rules dealing with the security drones.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 10/21/2015 08:34 pm
In the end, they'll likely become the cheaper to operate facility, as they have many fewer "stakeholders" to please.

Maybe not, they will have few users to share the costs with.  Users at the Cape pay only for the use of resources and not the upkeep.  The FAA will be charging fees for safety reviews.

and the FAA will be making the rules dealing with the security drones.

Actually, the FAA has already made the rules dealing with security drones.  No joke.

For example, look at the EIS (https://www.faa.gov/about/office_org/headquarters_offices/ast/environmental/nepa_docs/review/launch/spacex_texas_launch_site_environmental_impact_statement/media/FEIS_SpaceX_Texas_Launch_Site_Vol_I.pdf), page 2-10:
Quote
During a closure, monitoring would be done by vehicle along existing roads including State Highway 4, as well as by video surveillance (e.g., high definition video camera with zoom lenses placed well above ground level on the water tower and/or lightning towers). SpaceX and law enforcement would monitor the area to the east of the checkpoints to ensure that the area is clear. Unless there is an emergency, SpaceX would not conduct ground sweeps in adjacent TPWD or USFWS land. Only in the case that video surveillance is insufficient would other monitoring methods be used such as:
  • unmanned aerial surveillance (no more than two unmanned vehicles at the same time),
  • manned aerial surveillance (one fixed-wing aircraft with flight time less than 30 minutes at an altitude of less than 1,000 ft),
  • beach sweeps using ground vehicles suitable for beach travel (e.g., one all-terrain [ATV] or one sport utility vehicle [SUV]), or
  • USCG vessel.

Other areas of the EIS also talk about security drones.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Nomadd on 10/22/2015 02:27 am
 It's getting entirely too serious in here with all the unmanned security drone talk. Bloomberg will probably turn it into that giant enforcer robot from Robocop being sent through the village to eliminate opposition.
 So, in the interest of lighter fare, I thought I'd brag about the Lavish Party House restoration a bit. What belongs in the world's most serious, technical spaceflight forum more than me trying to get mildew stains off bricks?
 The vents are sort of SpaceX inspired. I used stainless screws instead of the supplied aluminum ones because of the salt air. There were 14 of those suckers, and they were the easiest part of the job.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 10/22/2015 04:09 am
It's getting entirely too serious in here with all the unmanned security drone talk. Bloomberg will probably turn it into that giant enforcer robot from Robocop being sent through the village to eliminate opposition.

No more than 2 OmniCorp assult droids patrolling Boca Chica Village...

(special note to Lauren Etter - that's a joke)
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 10/22/2015 04:15 am
So, in the interest of lighter fare, I thought I'd brag about the Lavish Party House restoration a bit...

 The vents are sort of SpaceX inspired. I used stainless screws instead of the supplied aluminum ones because of the salt air. There were 14 of those suckers, and they were the easiest part of the job.

Nice work on the soffit vents.  I also like to use stainless hardware outside.  Worry free.

What belongs in the world's most serious, technical spaceflight forum more than me trying to get mildew stains off bricks?

This looks promising...
http://www.doityourself.com/stry/removing-mold-and-stains-from-brick-and-stucco#b
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: oiorionsbelt on 10/22/2015 05:40 am
Nomadd, you can post anything about your house in this thread and it's 100% on topic (I love that) but I count 16 screws and why would the FAA limit SpaceX to only two drones?
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: symbios on 10/22/2015 07:49 am
Soil headed to Boca Chica for SpaceX:

http://www.valleymorningstar.com/news/article_394ec4e2-785d-11e5-b676-1baf3e1b66c1.html (http://www.valleymorningstar.com/news/article_394ec4e2-785d-11e5-b676-1baf3e1b66c1.html)


Quote
BOCA CHICA -- Arrangements are in full gear to start preparing land, which will house the world’s first commercial and vertical rocket launch site here.
 
   Truckload after truckload after truckload of soil soon will be spotted traveling to the site.
 
   “This fall, in order to stabilize the ground at the site, SpaceX will begin a process known as soil surcharging,” John Taylor, spokesman for Elon Musk’s Space Exploration Technologies, told the Star.

  “Between now and January 2016, the company will be transporting 310,000 cubic yards of new soil to the locations where all the major facilities will be built at the complex,” Taylor said.

  That’s a lot of soil.

  “That’s enough to cover a football field in 13 stories worth of dirt,” Taylor said.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 10/22/2015 08:54 am
Soil headed to Boca Chica for SpaceX:

http://www.valleymorningstar.com/news/article_394ec4e2-785d-11e5-b676-1baf3e1b66c1.html (http://www.valleymorningstar.com/news/article_394ec4e2-785d-11e5-b676-1baf3e1b66c1.html)

This relates to one of my previous posts.  SpaceX has revised the the amount of soil they need many times since the initial EIS was finalized.  Most of these addendums have to do with underestimating the amount of soil needed within the launch site area itself.  That all seems normal.

But the revised soil estimates also include one unusual addition...

Just south of the fenced-in launch site area, SpaceX has added a land bridge (circled in red in first image below). 

The SpaceX Texas Launch Site Wetland Mitigation Plan Addendum says:
Quote
It should be noted that the proposed crossing to the south of the site, which has been included to allow vehicular access to the southern portion of the site, would include culverts...
The second image below shows an example of a land bridge using culverts. 

The third picture below shows where this land bridge leads.  It's a sizable piece of firm land.

My guess: SpaceX is planning to use this area for one or more landing pads.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Nomadd on 10/22/2015 01:17 pm
Nomadd, you can post anything about your house in this thread and it's 100% on topic (I love that) but I count 16 screws and why would the FAA limit SpaceX to only two drones?
14 vents. I'm out of there for a few weeks. I stopped at McGregor and poked around yesterday. A surprisingly well informed guard talked with me for a while and said he'd like to transfer to the Boca Chica site. He thought a home there would be a good idea.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: mto on 10/22/2015 01:32 pm
Soil headed to Boca Chica for SpaceX:

http://www.valleymorningstar.com/news/article_394ec4e2-785d-11e5-b676-1baf3e1b66c1.html (http://www.valleymorningstar.com/news/article_394ec4e2-785d-11e5-b676-1baf3e1b66c1.html)
I think this refers to construction 'fill' rather than soil (growing medium).
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: symbios on 10/22/2015 01:36 pm
Soil headed to Boca Chica for SpaceX:

http://www.valleymorningstar.com/news/article_394ec4e2-785d-11e5-b676-1baf3e1b66c1.html (http://www.valleymorningstar.com/news/article_394ec4e2-785d-11e5-b676-1baf3e1b66c1.html)
I think this refers to road construction 'fill' rather than soil (growing medium).

No, this is a quote from SpaceX and it mention site not road construction:

Quote
“This fall, in order to stabilize the ground at the site, SpaceX will begin a process known as soil surcharging,” John Taylor, spokesman for Elon Musk’s Space Exploration Technologies, told the Star
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: rpapo on 10/22/2015 01:42 pm
Quote
“This fall, in order to stabilize the ground at the site, SpaceX will begin a process known as soil surcharging,” John Taylor, spokesman for Elon Musk’s Space Exploration Technologies, told the Star
If I had to guess, I would say it is something to make the ground firmer than the sand currently there.  Sand, when subjected to heavy vibration, effectively liquefies.  You want something with a little more adhesion between the grains.

Question for the KSC folks: Was something like this needed at the cape?
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: mto on 10/22/2015 01:43 pm
No, this is a quote from SpaceX and it mention site not road construction:
I should have just said construction fill (original post changed)
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Jim on 10/22/2015 01:47 pm
Quote
“This fall, in order to stabilize the ground at the site, SpaceX will begin a process known as soil surcharging,” John Taylor, spokesman for Elon Musk’s Space Exploration Technologies, told the Star

If I had to guess, I would say it is something to make the ground firmer than sand currently there.  Sand, when subjected to heavy vibration, effectively liquefies.  You want something with a little more adhesion between the grains.

Question for the KSC folks: Was something like this needed at the cape?

yes. 

http://www.hq.nasa.gov/pao/History/SP-4204/ch12-1.html
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Nomadd on 10/22/2015 01:57 pm
Quote
“This fall, in order to stabilize the ground at the site, SpaceX will begin a process known as soil surcharging,” John Taylor, spokesman for Elon Musk’s Space Exploration Technologies, told the Star
If I had to guess, I would say it is something to make the ground firmer than the sand currently there.  Sand, when subjected to heavy vibration, effectively liquefies.  You want something with a little more adhesion between the grains.

Question for the KSC folks: Was something like this needed at the cape?
I know that in the keys, sometimes they have to put footings a hundred feet deep to the ancient coral beds for good foundations. But this stuff around Boca Chica looks more like delta soil than sand, so it might be a little more stable. Or less. It can go either way depending on what the river has bought down over the millennia and how old it is.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: rocketguy101 on 10/22/2015 04:37 pm
It's getting entirely too serious in here with all the unmanned security drone talk. Bloomberg will probably turn it into that giant enforcer robot from Robocop being sent through the village to eliminate opposition.
 So, in the interest of lighter fare, I thought I'd brag about the Lavish Party House restoration a bit. What belongs in the world's most serious, technical spaceflight forum more than me trying to get mildew stains off bricks?
 The vents are sort of SpaceX inspired. I used stainless screws instead of the supplied aluminum ones because of the salt air. There were 14 of those suckers, and they were the easiest part of the job.
I don't have the photoshop skills for this, but somebody should take the NSF logo, give it a glow effect to look like neon lights, and put it on the roof in your last image, with a big arrow pointing down with "Lavish Party House Here!!!"
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: DanseMacabre on 10/22/2015 04:41 pm
It's getting entirely too serious in here with all the unmanned security drone talk. Bloomberg will probably turn it into that giant enforcer robot from Robocop being sent through the village to eliminate opposition.
 So, in the interest of lighter fare, I thought I'd brag about the Lavish Party House restoration a bit. What belongs in the world's most serious, technical spaceflight forum more than me trying to get mildew stains off bricks?
 The vents are sort of SpaceX inspired. I used stainless screws instead of the supplied aluminum ones because of the salt air. There were 14 of those suckers, and they were the easiest part of the job.
I don't have the photoshop skills for this, but somebody should take the NSF logo, give it a glow effect to look like neon lights, and put it on the roof in your last image, with a big arrow pointing down with "Lavish Party House Here!!!"

If the party thread for the first Boca Chica launch isn't "The Lavish Party Thread at Nomadd's" and hosted on guest servers at Nomadd's house, I'm cancelling L2.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: CraigLieb on 10/22/2015 06:38 pm
...

If the party thread for the first Boca Chica launch isn't "The Lavish Party Thread at Nomadd's" and hosted on guest servers at Nomadd's house, I'm cancelling L2.

We all know this is an idle threat because nobody in their right mind would cancel L2. And I assume you aren't crazy.
 ;D
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: meekGee on 10/22/2015 07:51 pm
The more constructive approach is to establish a next-higher membership level, called "Nomadd level", which gives you access to a live feed from the house and two guest passes per year.  Plus, you get to have one Selfie with him.

Quick math shows that the Nomadd house should be profitable at about the same time the Colony is self sufficient.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Nomadd on 10/22/2015 07:51 pm
...

If the party thread for the first Boca Chica launch isn't "The Lavish Party Thread at Nomadd's" and hosted on guest servers at Nomadd's house, I'm cancelling L2.

We all know this is an idle threat because nobody in their right mind would cancel L2. And I assume you aren't crazy.
 ;D
I find it safer never to assume anybody in here isn't crazy.
 One problem none of these 50 year old houses seem to have is settling. The soil appears to be pretty stable. And, SpaceX is building on a lot of below high tide level land, so a lot of fill Is called for in any case.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: dorkmo on 10/23/2015 02:30 am
did somebody say party house party thread??
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Nomadd on 10/23/2015 04:03 am
The more constructive approach is to establish a next-higher membership level, called "Nomadd level", which gives you access to a live feed from the house and two guest passes per year.  Plus, you get to have one Selfie with him.

Quick math shows that the Nomadd house should be profitable at about the same time the Colony is self sufficient.
You'll see me taking selfies about the same time the first Andromeda galaxy colony is self sufficient.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: enzo on 10/23/2015 06:30 am
I don't have the photoshop skills for this, but somebody should take the NSF logo, give it a glow effect to look like neon lights, and put it on the roof in your last image, with a big arrow pointing down with "Lavish Party House Here!!!"
I started with your concept but went off in a wistful direction.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: CT Space Guy on 10/23/2015 11:09 am
This thread needs a party thread...This is getting to be a little much
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: rocketguy101 on 10/23/2015 02:09 pm
I don't have the photoshop skills for this, but somebody should take the NSF logo, give it a glow effect to look like neon lights, and put it on the roof in your last image, with a big arrow pointing down with "Lavish Party House Here!!!"
I started with your concept but went off in a wistful direction.
You nailed it enzo!!!  thanks!  now just waiting for this image to show up in popular media....
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: woods170 on 10/23/2015 02:51 pm
Quote
“This fall, in order to stabilize the ground at the site, SpaceX will begin a process known as soil surcharging,” John Taylor, spokesman for Elon Musk’s Space Exploration Technologies, told the Star
If I had to guess, I would say it is something to make the ground firmer than the sand currently there.  Sand, when subjected to heavy vibration, effectively liquefies.  You want something with a little more adhesion between the grains.

Question for the KSC folks: Was something like this needed at the cape?
I know that in the keys, sometimes they have to put footings a hundred feet deep to the ancient coral beds for good foundations. But this stuff around Boca Chica looks more like delta soil than sand, so it might be a little more stable. Or less. It can go either way depending on what the river has bought down over the millennia and how old it is.

Delta soil is usually unstable as hell until you get down to a nice stable layer such as thick sand-deposits or hard-rock.
In fact my hometown is located smack on top of an ancient river-delta. It later became permanently flooded by water intruding from the North Sea. In the 1960's it was turned into a polder and the minute it was drained the former seabed started subsiding rather unevenly, nicely following the contours of the former delta gullies.
That's no problem for buildings as those have foundation piles driven into a deep and very stable sand-layer. However, most roads are not founded on piles and simply lay on top of an artificially deposited sand-layer on top of the partially excavated former seabed. The result is that the roads start resembling washboards over time due to subsidence of the clay-like seabed material. The roads require reconstruction every 20 years-or-so to straighten them out again. Subsidence of the former seabed is expected to continue for another two-to-three decades, albeit at a slowly decreasing rate.

About a decade ago we had a minor construction incident in my home town. The piles for a new set of homes were not driven correctly and ended up several feet above the stable sand-layer. When the walls were erected on top of the foundations it took only 3 days for the first cracks to appear due to sinking of the foundations. The contractor ended up tearing down everything and extracting the foundation completely to start all-over again, this time making sure the piles were driven well into the stable sand-layer.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Kabloona on 10/23/2015 04:05 pm
Quote
“This fall, in order to stabilize the ground at the site, SpaceX will begin a process known as soil surcharging,” John Taylor, spokesman for Elon Musk’s Space Exploration Technologies, told the Star
If I had to guess, I would say it is something to make the ground firmer than the sand currently there.  Sand, when subjected to heavy vibration, effectively liquefies.  You want something with a little more adhesion between the grains.

Never heard of this before, but it apparently involves building up a heavy layer of fill in order to cause the existing soil to settle over time before construction.

http://www.straits-engineers.com/publications_pdf/publication_20.pdf
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Nomadd on 10/23/2015 05:12 pm
 The Rio Grande come down through a lot of rock and caliche type land. The soil it deposits at the delta is different than what you'll find with lots of rivers. But, a lot of the places they're building are under water part time, so that's a whole other situation. The highway shows no signs of the problems you tend to see with roads through sandy soils and it doesn't seem to have that much of a base.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Req on 10/23/2015 10:38 pm
Hopefully Hurricane Patricia doesn't do more remodeling of the water line...

From the video at http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/world/2015/10/23/hurricane-patricia-strongest-ever-measured/74446334/

"Models have it moving over mexico, weakening some, and then  ... moving into Texas ... We're already seeing heavy rains along the Texas coast line ... Some serious flooding potential for folks along the texas coastline all the way from Brownsville northward toward Houston ..."
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: llanitedave on 10/24/2015 01:32 am
Quote
“This fall, in order to stabilize the ground at the site, SpaceX will begin a process known as soil surcharging,” John Taylor, spokesman for Elon Musk’s Space Exploration Technologies, told the Star
If I had to guess, I would say it is something to make the ground firmer than the sand currently there.  Sand, when subjected to heavy vibration, effectively liquefies.  You want something with a little more adhesion between the grains.

Question for the KSC folks: Was something like this needed at the cape?
I know that in the keys, sometimes they have to put footings a hundred feet deep to the ancient coral beds for good foundations. But this stuff around Boca Chica looks more like delta soil than sand, so it might be a little more stable. Or less. It can go either way depending on what the river has bought down over the millennia and how old it is.

Delta soil is usually unstable as hell until you get down to a nice stable layer such as thick sand-deposits or hard-rock.
In fact my hometown is located smack on top of an ancient river-delta. It later became permanently flooded by water intruding from the North Sea. In the 1960's it was turned into a polder and the minute it was drained the former seabed started subsiding rather unevenly, nicely following the contours of the former delta gullies.
That's no problem for buildings as those have foundation piles driven into a deep and very stable sand-layer. However, most roads are not founded on piles and simply lay on top of an artificially deposited sand-layer on top of the partially excavated former seabed. The result is that the roads start resembling washboards over time due to subsidence of the clay-like seabed material. The roads require reconstruction every 20 years-or-so to straighten them out again. Subsidence of the former seabed is expected to continue for another two-to-three decades, albeit at a slowly decreasing rate.

About a decade ago we had a minor construction incident in my home town. The piles for a new set of homes were not driven correctly and ended up several feet above the stable sand-layer. When the walls were erected on top of the foundations it took only 3 days for the first cracks to appear due to sinking of the foundations. The contractor ended up tearing down everything and extracting the foundation completely to start all-over again, this time making sure the piles were driven well into the stable sand-layer.


Piror to extensive irrigation and damming upstream, the Rio Grande was a petty strong river, with fairly regular flood cycles.  The delta there near the mouth is likely to be a thick, slowly subsiding set of interbedded silt, fine sand, coarse sand, clays, and maybe occasional thin limestone beds.  It will be sitting on top of reworked sea floor sediments which will itself likely be mostly fine current-sorted sand with shale and limestone interbeds.


It's hard to say how deep you'd have to go to get a firm layer, but below the firm layer will be another soft layer, and the whole shebang is sinking gradually.


SpaceX will probably have to bring in fill of one kind or anothe rmore than once -- especially if they're going to be a long term facility with sea levels rising around them.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Nomadd on 10/24/2015 02:17 am
There's always the Kansai solution.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: cro-magnon gramps on 10/24/2015 02:58 am
There's always the Kansai solution.


You might get a sinking feeling if you take Kansai as proof of concept... going to take some serious study of the base layer to reassure people... not that it's a totally bad idea...

http://kansaiairportwaveanalysis.weebly.com/background.html
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 10/24/2015 01:26 pm
Hopefully Hurricane Patricia doesn't do more remodeling of the water line...

From the video at http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/world/2015/10/23/hurricane-patricia-strongest-ever-measured/74446334/

"Models have it moving over mexico, weakening some, and then  ... moving into Texas ... We're already seeing heavy rains along the Texas coast line ... Some serious flooding potential for folks along the texas coastline all the way from Brownsville northward toward Houston ..."

Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 10/25/2015 12:00 pm
No news of flooding in Boca Chica Village, but some flooding in surrounding area...

Hurricane remnants arrive
http://www.valleymorningstar.com/news/local_news/article_993fe64e-7ac7-11e5-ba63-37482a2948b1.html
Quote
Wave after wave of heavy rain drenched the Valley as the remnants of the “strongest storm ever recorded” arrived yesterday.
Remnant moisture from Hurricane Patricia mixed with other weather elements to cause the down-pour, which flooded various locations throughout the region, the National Weather Service reported.
Weslaco received the brunt of the storm, with anywhere from 5 to almost 10 inches of rain, according to various estimates.
From the Weslaco area, multiple bands of heavy rain spread east and north.
In Harlingen, the Expressway 77/83 frontage road was flooded out at Ed Carey Drive. But only minor street flooding was reported in the rest of the city.

(http://bloximages.newyork1.vip.townnews.com/valleymorningstar.com/content/tncms/assets/v3/editorial/0/8b/08bacc6c-7ac5-11e5-90f1-175942a11b08/562c469dd0d53.image.jpg?resize=300%2C210)
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Nomadd on 10/28/2015 01:46 pm
No news of flooding in Boca Chica Village, but some flooding in surrounding area...

Hurricane remnants arrive
http://www.valleymorningstar.com/news/local_news/article_993fe64e-7ac7-11e5-ba63-37482a2948b1.html
Quote
Wave after wave of heavy rain drenched the Valley as the remnants of the “strongest storm ever recorded” arrived yesterday.
Remnant moisture from Hurricane Patricia mixed with other weather elements to cause the down-pour, which flooded various locations throughout the region, the National Weather Service reported.
Weslaco received the brunt of the storm, with anywhere from 5 to almost 10 inches of rain, according to various estimates.
From the Weslaco area, multiple bands of heavy rain spread east and north.
In Harlingen, the Expressway 77/83 frontage road was flooded out at Ed Carey Drive. But only minor street flooding was reported in the rest of the city.


Boca Chica just saw the first benefit of SpaceX coming in. Since the company plans finally spurred the county to pave the roads, and they were regraded for the new paving, drainage was much improved and the problems they use to have with standing water went away. The only damage I heard of was the dirt collapsing where some unfortunate new resident had a septic line replaced because the numbnuts plumbers left voids when they refilled the hole. Total cost of repair is estimated to be $8.49 for a six pack of Shiner Bock to fuel a little dirt moving. (Always drink plenty of liquids while working in the heat)
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Kansan52 on 10/28/2015 01:52 pm
Maybe we can start a Kickstarter to raise that $8.49!!

Serious question, any news on the convenience store? Someone has posted before and after shots of it. The repairs make it look like the owner may open it again.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: spacenut on 10/28/2015 02:08 pm
The Rio Grand has several dams along its route, mostly for irrigation of South Texas/North Mexico.  They probably let a lot of water go downstream (controlled) before the hurricane hit so as to allow the rainwater to replenish the back waters.  So, flooding might not be as bad as what was in South Carolina with almost continuous rain for over a week.  Texas was already dry, so there would be a lot of soaking and replenishing of groundwater.  May just be localized flooding in city streets and such. 
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Nomadd on 10/28/2015 02:38 pm
Maybe we can start a Kickstarter to raise that $8.49!!

Serious question, any news on the convenience store? Someone has posted before and after shots of it. The repairs make it look like the owner may open it again.
He's waiting for things to pick up before reopening. Me and others have asked him about selling, but he's planning on making a working business out of it again.

 A little update for DaveG's map. The seven lots near the store, 173003-173009 are owned and for sale by Frank Kawalski. I haven't asked him the price yet, but he wants to sell them together.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Prober on 10/28/2015 04:45 pm
Maybe we can start a Kickstarter to raise that $8.49!!

Serious question, any news on the convenience store? Someone has posted before and after shots of it. The repairs make it look like the owner may open it again.
He's waiting for things to pick up before reopening. Me and others have asked him about selling, but he's planning on making a working business out of it again.

 A little update for DaveG's map. The seven lots near the store, 173003-173009 are owned and for sale by Frank Kawalski. I haven't asked him the price yet, but he wants to sell them together.

What office do you need approval to build?
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: JoerTex on 10/28/2015 04:54 pm
Maybe we can start a Kickstarter to raise that $8.49!!

Serious question, any news on the convenience store? Someone has posted before and after shots of it. The repairs make it look like the owner may open it again.
He's waiting for things to pick up before reopening. Me and others have asked him about selling, but he's planning on making a working business out of it again.

 A little update for DaveG's map. The seven lots near the store, 173003-173009 are owned and for sale by Frank Kawalski. I haven't asked him the price yet, but he wants to sell them together.

What office do you need approval to build?

Boca Chica isn't a Home Rule City, so basically no permits.  The County will enforce building code [structure, electrical, plumbing] and County may want fees.  But as long as the work is construction [not a commercial complex] the permits and paper is minimal.  A Commercial Development will require filing a site plan, drainage review, road easement review, etc.  But minimal.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Nomadd on 10/28/2015 05:33 pm
Maybe we can start a Kickstarter to raise that $8.49!!

Serious question, any news on the convenience store? Someone has posted before and after shots of it. The repairs make it look like the owner may open it again.
He's waiting for things to pick up before reopening. Me and others have asked him about selling, but he's planning on making a working business out of it again.

 A little update for DaveG's map. The seven lots near the store, 173003-173009 are owned and for sale by Frank Kawalski. I haven't asked him the price yet, but he wants to sell them together.

What office do you need approval to build?

JoerTex has it down. I asked about doing some semi major electrical work, and nobody seemed concerned about using licensed electricians or needing permits and inspections as long as it was done right. You fill out a form and pay a fee for a structure, but it's not like most cities with inspections, strict codes and a stack of requirements a mile high. The permits are more for tax and records. The county needs to know what's out there that they might have to worry about fire, law enforcement or otherwise. Right now, you won't get new electrical service, but that could change when they finish the new utility runs. Or not. SpaceX might have an informal agreement with the county to dampen new development out there.

 When I get back, I'm going to find out more about those houses on the north end of the beach. I wouldn't mind taking a shot at rehabilitating one of those, but the legal status could be complicated on them.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Prober on 10/28/2015 06:01 pm
Maybe we can start a Kickstarter to raise that $8.49!!

Serious question, any news on the convenience store? Someone has posted before and after shots of it. The repairs make it look like the owner may open it again.
He's waiting for things to pick up before reopening. Me and others have asked him about selling, but he's planning on making a working business out of it again.

 A little update for DaveG's map. The seven lots near the store, 173003-173009 are owned and for sale by Frank Kawalski. I haven't asked him the price yet, but he wants to sell them together.

What office do you need approval to build?

JoerTex has it down. I asked about doing some semi major electrical work, and nobody seemed concerned about using licensed electricians or needing permits and inspections as long as it was done right. You fill out a form and pay a fee for a structure, but it's not like most cities with inspections, strict codes and a stack of requirements a mile high. The permits are more for tax and records. The county needs to know what's out there that they might have to worry about fire, law enforcement or otherwise. Right now, you won't get new electrical service, but that could change when they finish the new utility runs. Or not. SpaceX might have an informal agreement with the county to dampen new development out there.

 When I get back, I'm going to find out more about those houses on the north end of the beach. I wouldn't mind taking a shot at rehabilitating one of those, but the legal status could be complicated on those.

Let me know, could use a beach home...... ;D
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: CuddlyRocket on 10/29/2015 02:30 am
... I thought I'd brag about the Lavish Party House restoration a bit.

You need your own mission patch! Maybe run a competition (with Chris' permission). :)
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 10/29/2015 03:33 am
Right now, you won't get new electrical service, but that could change when they finish the new utility runs. Or not. SpaceX might have an informal agreement with the county to dampen new development out there.
From what I can tell, no lots have been developed since Hurricane_Beulah (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hurricane_Beulah) in 1967.  Another hurricane could cause similar devastation.  That may be why the County is discouraging new residential development. 

From a code standpoint, septic seems like the major issue.  Lots that were developed before 1967 have grandfathered underground septic systems, but they no longer allow that for new development. 

According to the EIS (https://www.faa.gov/about/office_org/headquarters_offices/ast/environmental/nepa_docs/review/launch/spacex_texas_launch_site_environmental_impact_statement/media/FEIS_SpaceX_Texas_Launch_Site_Vol_I.pdf), SpaceX will be using above ground septic storage tanks.  As I understand it, these don't drain into the ground, so they need a truck to drain them frequently. Kind of like a mobile home system, only bigger.  So that would be a lot more expensive to run than an underground septic system.

When I get back, I'm going to find out more about those houses on the north end of the beach. I wouldn't mind taking a shot at rehabilitating one of those, but the legal status could be complicated on those.
I'm guessing these are government owned, perhaps to monitor shipping traffic.
 
Here's another possibility: There's an old hotel on the NW corner of LBJ and Weems.  The roof is essentially gone, and it's in bad shape, but from a code point of view, it's already a developed lot, so the septic system may be grandfathered.  I'm sure it would require significant work, but if it's grandfathered, they may allow it.  Also, I'm guessing it already has underground electrical hook-up.  If you're looking for a fixer upper, that may fit the bill.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Nomadd on 10/29/2015 04:01 am
 I was just looking for a spot of land with a good view of the pad to build a gazebo on.
 One good thing about an elevated house is installing above ground septic. No pumps needed. It would be easy if they allow gray water discharge. My dad grew some great trees in the desert from the washing machine and shower drain water.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 10/29/2015 04:05 am
Serious question, any news on the convenience store? Someone has posted before and after shots of it. The repairs make it look like the owner may open it again.
He's waiting for things to pick up before reopening. Me and others have asked him about selling, but he's planning on making a working business out of it again.

Here's are the pics.  From what I remember, this will change from a convenience store to a bar & grill.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Nomadd on 10/29/2015 04:13 am
A pic from May, I think.
 Those are the only overhead lines in the village. It looks like he bought them in himself from a lot across the road.
 That old motel would be a monster. There's not really anything left to fix.  It would be easier to build on an empty slab. Frank's wasn't much better when he bought it. He did a beautiful job on it inside, with arched doorways and every wall, ceiling and floor surface custom done.
 There are contradictory statements from county people on new electrical accounts. I need to ask the supplier, Magic Valley co-op, about it.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 10/29/2015 04:37 am
One good thing about an elevated house is installing above ground septic. No pumps needed. It would be easy if they allow gray water discharge. My dad grew some great trees in the desert from the washing machine and shower drain water.
Be sure to check the codes carefully.  I don't have the details, but as part of an environmentally protected wetlands area, both grey water and black water may be banned for ground leaching, except for the existing grandfathered developed lots.

I was just looking for a spot of land with a good view of the pad to build a gazebo on.
That got me to thinking, what would be really cool, take that existing run-down hotel and build it into a 3-story structure, with ground level parking, and the second and third floors for large suites.  From a septic code standpoint, the idea would be to have the same number of occupants as originally specified, but the rooms would be twice the size for added luxury, and higher to enable a better view.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Nomadd on 10/29/2015 04:40 am


I was just looking for a spot of land with a good view of the pad to build a gazebo on.
That got me to thinking, what would be really cool, take that existing run-down hotel and build it into a 3-story structure, with ground level parking, and the second and third floors for large suites.  From a septic code standpoint, the idea would be to have the same number of occupants as originally specified, but the rooms would be twice the size for added luxury, and higher to enable a better view.
  I think the payload processing building might be in the way. I'm still not sure exactly where everything is going. The FAA report doesn't always match other drawings.
 Personally, I picture myself watching the launches from an open field. It's one of those things you can't explain to some people and don't need to explain to others.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 10/29/2015 05:43 am
What office do you need approval to build?

Cameron County building permit.

Here's an example where they denied:
http://www.krgv.com/news/local-news/man-denied-building-permits-by-the-county-at-boca-chica-village/32390862
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 10/29/2015 05:47 am
I was just looking for a spot of land with a good view of the pad to build a gazebo on.
That got me to thinking, what would be really cool, take that existing run-down hotel and build it into a 3-story structure, with ground level parking, and the second and third floors for large suites.  From a septic code standpoint, the idea would be to have the same number of occupants as originally specified, but the rooms would be twice the size for added luxury, and higher to enable a better view.
  I think the payload processing building might be in the way. I'm still not sure exactly where everything is going. The FAA report doesn't always match other drawings.
While anything is possible, it seems unlikely at this point.

Here are the facts:

1) The EIS (https://www.faa.gov/about/office_org/headquarters_offices/ast/environmental/nepa_docs/review/launch/spacex_texas_launch_site_environmental_impact_statement/media/FEIS_SpaceX_Texas_Launch_Site_Vol_I.pdf) lays out the possibility of the control center area spread across 3 parcels, around 4 acres each, 12 acres total, as shown in the first and second pictures below. 

2) The EIS also makes clear that this layout is just an example.  Specifically, the EIS says:
"SpaceX has not identified the final design of the proposed control center area. Therefore, this EIS includes the most conservative scenario and assumes that the proposed control center would comprise portions of all three privately-owned parcels, as described below. However, the final site design may only include portions of one or two of the parcels."

3) Since the EIS was finalized, SpaceX has not purchased parcels 2 or 3, but they did manage to purchase many more lots around parcel 1, increasing its size to around 13 acres, as shown in the first and third pictures below.

4) Local news outlets quote county officials saying parcel 2 will be used as a parking area (http://www.valleymorningstar.com/premium/article_55d1b2b6-f782-11e4-bcb4-536546669d18.html).

5) Parcel 3 is still privately owned.

To me, these facts seem to indicate that all buildings for the Control Center will be within Parcel 1, but we'll know for sure soon enough.

Personally, I picture myself watching the launches from an open field. It's one of those things you can't explain to some people and don't need to explain to others.
Right, but the key will be getting past the checkpoints, and not getting kicked out during the launch.  Unless you know someone who owns property, a hotel may be the only option to see a launch up close.




Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: chalz on 10/29/2015 09:40 am
Maybe you could get a flat bottomed water craft and go out into the marshes?
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Nomadd on 10/29/2015 02:31 pm
Maybe you could get a flat bottomed water craft and go out into the marshes?
There's almost no tides around there, so even at high tide those marshes are only inches deep. I can see birds 200 yards out standing in 4 inches of water. Maybe I'll dig up that 40 year old Popular Mechanics article on building your own hovercraft.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Prober on 10/29/2015 03:57 pm
Serious question, any news on the convenience store? Someone has posted before and after shots of it. The repairs make it look like the owner may open it again.
He's waiting for things to pick up before reopening. Me and others have asked him about selling, but he's planning on making a working business out of it again.

Here's are the pics.  From what I remember, this will change from a convenience store to a bar & grill.

That looks to be an old gas station and if it was I wonder.  See the old gas tanks must have been pulled to prevent rust and future leakage. 

Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Prober on 10/29/2015 04:03 pm
Right now, you won't get new electrical service, but that could change when they finish the new utility runs. Or not. SpaceX might have an informal agreement with the county to dampen new development out there.
From what I can tell, no lots have been developed since Hurricane_Beulah (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hurricane_Beulah) in 1967.  Another hurricane could cause similar devastation.  That may be why the County is discouraging new residential development. 

From a code standpoint, septic seems like the major issue.  Lots that were developed before 1967 have grandfathered underground septic systems, but they no longer allow that for new development. 

about those undeveloped lots (the ones underwater).....who owns them or are they up for sale?


Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Nomadd on 10/29/2015 06:21 pm
Right now, you won't get new electrical service, but that could change when they finish the new utility runs. Or not. SpaceX might have an informal agreement with the county to dampen new development out there.
From what I can tell, no lots have been developed since Hurricane_Beulah (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hurricane_Beulah) in 1967.  Another hurricane could cause similar devastation.  That may be why the County is discouraging new residential development. 

From a code standpoint, septic seems like the major issue.  Lots that were developed before 1967 have grandfathered underground septic systems, but they no longer allow that for new development. 

about those undeveloped lots (the ones underwater).....who owns them or are they up for sale?



  I ran a few of the property IDs out there and they came up "Texas Parks and Wildlife".
 You can put a property ID in here and see the information. You have to switch the search type to account number.
 http://propaccess.cameroncad.org/clientdb/?cid=1
 This site will show you a map of the IDs. That map won't work with the mouse on my computer for some reason. I had to use a trackpad.
 http://www.cameroncad.org/cadclientdb/propertymap.aspx
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Space Ghost 1962 on 10/29/2015 08:17 pm
Is this the unofficial Boca Chica Chamber of Commerce thread?

You guys seem to be rather deep into redevelopment / planning like one ;)
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: DAZ on 10/29/2015 09:29 pm
about those undeveloped lots (the ones underwater).....who owns them or are they up for sale?

I believe Texas has a state law that individuals cannot own property below the high tide mark.  If somebody should own property that was above the high tide mark and after a storm comes in it is now below the high tide mark that property then reverts to the state.  So even if someone wanted to back fill the property after a storm to its original state before the storm state law doesn’t allow this.  More than a few people in Texas have lost their property after a storm with a perfectly good house still standing on it.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Nomadd on 10/29/2015 10:42 pm
about those undeveloped lots (the ones underwater).....who owns them or are they up for sale?

I believe Texas has a state law that individuals cannot own property below the high tide mark.  If somebody should own property that was above the high tide mark and after a storm comes in it is now below the high tide mark that property then reverts to the state.  So even if someone wanted to back fill the property after a storm to its original state before the storm state law doesn’t allow this.  More than a few people in Texas have lost their property after a storm with a perfectly good house still standing on it.
There is also the federally protected wetland rules. You don't lose ownership of the land, but you can't do anything with it without going through the sort of procedures SpaceX just had to, and I'm pretty sure I don't have that kind of political support. People have lost the right to develop their land over occasional puddles forming after a rain. The rules and enforcement can be a little insane.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Herb Schaltegger on 10/30/2015 12:22 am
Serious question, any news on the convenience store? Someone has posted before and after shots of it. The repairs make it look like the owner may open it again.
He's waiting for things to pick up before reopening. Me and others have asked him about selling, but he's planning on making a working business out of it again.

Here's are the pics.  From what I remember, this will change from a convenience store to a bar & grill.

That looks to be an old gas station and if it was I wonder.  See the old gas tanks must have been pulled to prevent rust and future leakage. 



I have no knowledge of this particular location but I can tell you, there are a LOT of places around the country (and the world, in fact) where UST (underground storage tanks) are in dire need of removal and surrounding soil/groundwater in need of remediation to remove contamination. Old, long-unused gas stations and places like that make up a lot of such sites. Not all of them are well-documented, and many old sites changed hands so many times that the current owners have no idea what the sites were once used for. Similarly, others were once owned by now-defunct oil companies - owners of the former assets of such companies often have only sketchy and incomplete records of former sites. There are tens of thousands of such locations around the country, many very poorly documented and characterized.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Nomadd on 10/30/2015 01:44 am


Maybe the building can be a station again. Just put in a few Tesla destination HPWC chargers and a few powerpack units plus some solar arrays.  ;)
That would fit right in with my suggestion to SpaceX that their partners could create a lot of goodwill by giving all the permanent residents a Model S.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 10/30/2015 01:45 am
about those undeveloped lots (the ones underwater).....who owns them or are they up for sale?
  I ran a few of the property IDs out there and they came up "Texas Parks and Wildlife".
 You can put a property ID in here and see the information. You have to switch the search type to account number.
 http://propaccess.cameroncad.org/clientdb/?cid=1
 This site will show you a map of the IDs. That map won't work with the mouse on my computer for some reason. I had to use a trackpad.
 http://www.cameroncad.org/cadclientdb/propertymap.aspx
For the underwater lots, the map below shows which ones are privately owned, and which ones have reverted to state ownership.

After Hurricane Beulah (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hurricane_Beulah), there was some talk of dredging the South Bay to restore the original shore line, but that never happened.  Theoretically, that could happen in the future, which may be the only reason these underwater lots have any value today.

Note that SpaceX has purchased some of these underwater lots, but spot checking, it looks like they were all purchased together with one or more lots on solid ground (same seller and date of sale).  These package deals tend to indicate that SpaceX isn't really interested in dredging the bay to reclaim those lots, but who knows for sure?
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 10/30/2015 02:05 am
Maybe the building can be a station again. Just put in a few Tesla destination HPWC chargers and a few powerpack units plus some solar arrays.  ;)
That would fit right in with my suggestion to SpaceX that their partners could create a lot of goodwill by giving all the permanent residents a Model S.

That begs the question: How many permanent residents are there in Boca Chica Village?  According to Wikipedia (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boca_Chica_Village):
"As of 2008, only 6 people were permanently living in the village."

I guess that leads to another question: What exactly is a "permanent resident"?  Maybe you would need to live there more than half the time, or at least 183 days/year?
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Nomadd on 10/30/2015 04:25 am
Maybe the building can be a station again. Just put in a few Tesla destination HPWC chargers and a few powerpack units plus some solar arrays.  ;)
That would fit right in with my suggestion to SpaceX that their partners could create a lot of goodwill by giving all the permanent residents a Model S.

That begs the question: How many permanent residents are there in Boca Chica Village?  According to Wikipedia (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boca_Chica_Village):
"As of 2008, only 6 people were permanently living in the village."

I guess that leads to another question: What exactly is a "permanent resident"?  Maybe you would need to live there more than half the time, or at least 183 days/year?
The Kawalskis, Heatons and Cheryl make 7. There were at least 6 more there most of the time I was around but I don't know how many days a year they're present. One guy asked for my help with some solar arrays when I get back, so I'll see what he knows. From the maintained houses, at least 30 full or part time plus seasonal guests and relatives. If they bought in a water hookup, you might see 100 residents in two years. I'm harder to classify. It's my only permanent residence, but I'll be on the road most of the time, living out of a Mountaineer, cabin, hotel room, on the ground or in some riad or tent. Esperson will be the address on my driver's license.
 
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: dorkmo on 10/30/2015 04:45 am
Is this the unofficial Boca Chica Chamber of Commerce thread?

You guys seem to be rather deep into redevelopment / planning like one ;)

http://workboatsinternational.com/dredger-fmd793.html

As members of the UBCCC i think the first order of business it to buy up all the underwater lots and then buy a dredge to greatly increase their value.

(sorry for dipping into party thread mode)
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Prober on 10/30/2015 09:02 pm


Maybe the building can be a station again. Just put in a few Tesla destination HPWC chargers and a few powerpack units plus some solar arrays.  ;)
That would fit right in with my suggestion to SpaceX that their partners could create a lot of goodwill by giving all the permanent residents a Model S.

and Uber service in that area would work, with "service" being the key word.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Prober on 10/30/2015 10:58 pm
ouch was checking that news link and flipped over to the weather....the site got hit hard.

http://www.krgv.com/weather
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Nomadd on 10/30/2015 11:41 pm
That's about 20 miles from the site.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Okie_Steve on 10/31/2015 01:00 am
Nomadd

What you need is a nice patriotic TALL flag pole.  To be storm safe it ought to telescope up/down. I'm sure NSF members would help out. Of course something that complicated should have an inspection camera on top.  :D
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Nomadd on 10/31/2015 02:20 pm
Nomadd

What you need is a nice patriotic TALL flag pole.  To be storm safe it ought to telescope up/down. I'm sure NSF members would help out. Of course something that complicated should have an inspection camera on top.  :D
I could always binge watch Hogan's Heroes and try to duplicate their secret pole antenna.

 Hopefully, I'll be back in two weeks and get some riveting photos of dump trucks working.
 
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Prober on 10/31/2015 08:52 pm
Playing with some ideas. 

hypothetical: lets say I owned a nice lot near some water and I wanted to make a boat dock for it.  Haven't had the chance to read all 3 threads (hence the question).   How far down into the sand/ground would I need to drive down before I hit rock or a solid base.  Anyone know ?

Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: corrodedNut on 10/31/2015 09:32 pm
Playing with some ideas. 

hypothetical: lets say I owned a nice lot near some water and I wanted to make a boat dock for it.  Haven't had the chance to read all 3 threads (hence the question).   How far down into the sand/ground would I need to drive down before I hit rock or a solid base.  Anyone know ?

Don't bother with that, just get a floating dock. At low tide it'll just rest on the mud. Buy a kit or make your own using barrels or styrofoam rafts for flotation.

http://www.dockaccents.com./
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Llian Rhydderch on 10/31/2015 09:33 pm
Playing with some ideas. 

hypothetical: lets say I owned a nice lot near some water and I wanted to make a boat dock for it.  Haven't had the chance to read all 3 threads (hence the question).   How far down into the sand/ground would I need to drive down before I hit rock or a solid base.  Anyone know ?

Not sure there is bedrock anywhere nearby down there within reasonable depth. 

The usual approach on much of the Gulf coast (especially, the Missipippi River mouth, but I imagine also the Rio Grande mouth area) is to use pilings, driven deep, which then depend on side loads to support the gravity load.  There is some info here: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Piling (https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Piling)
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Nomadd on 11/01/2015 12:23 am
 I keep looking at the amount of land SpaceX is actually building on and that 310,000 yards seems high. 31,000 would make more sense to me. Most trucks only hold 10 to 14 yards 20-30,000 runs is hard to imagine.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: meekGee on 11/01/2015 12:43 am
I keep looking at the amount of land SpaceX is actually building on and that 310,000 yards seems high. 31,000 would make more sense to me. Most trucks only hold 10 to 14 yards 20-30,000 runs is hard to imagine.

An Acre is 4840 square yards.  So if they're working on some 30 acres, and filling in 1 yard, that's ~150,000 yards...

1 truck every 5 minutes, that's 100 per 8-hour day.  150 days - voila.  Kind of.

Wow.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Prober on 11/01/2015 01:12 am
I keep looking at the amount of land SpaceX is actually building on and that 310,000 yards seems high. 31,000 would make more sense to me. Most trucks only hold 10 to 14 yards 20-30,000 runs is hard to imagine.

Don't know; but a local builder took some worthless land (aprox the same size as the SX land). For 5 years every summer would dump soil, spray water on it and run rollers etc to compact it.  He then went in a built homes for $350,000 each.  My guess in general is that build up was at least 1-11/2 yards built on top of Caliche.



Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Prober on 11/01/2015 01:14 am
Playing with some ideas. 

hypothetical: lets say I owned a nice lot near some water and I wanted to make a boat dock for it.  Haven't had the chance to read all 3 threads (hence the question).   How far down into the sand/ground would I need to drive down before I hit rock or a solid base.  Anyone know ?

Don't bother with that, just get a floating dock. At low tide it'll just rest on the mud. Buy a kit or make your own using barrels or styrofoam rafts for flotation.

http://www.dockaccents.com./

better yet, a tethered houseboat :D
lots of possibilities.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 11/01/2015 02:02 am
Playing with some ideas. 

hypothetical: lets say I owned a nice lot near some water and I wanted to make a boat dock for it.  Haven't had the chance to read all 3 threads (hence the question).   How far down into the sand/ground would I need to drive down before I hit rock or a solid base.  Anyone know ?

Before thinking about how to build a dock, you probably want to:

1) Make sure boats are allowed.  If the area is environmentally protected wetlands, they may not allow boats.

2) Make sure the water is deep enough for a boat.  Shallow tidal pools would require serious dredging for boats to work.

3) Have a conversation with the office that issues permits.  They'll tell you what is, and isn't allowed.  Also, if multiple methods meet code, the guys at the permit office often offer guidance on the trade-offs between them.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 11/01/2015 11:15 am


Maybe the building can be a station again. Just put in a few Tesla destination HPWC chargers and a few powerpack units plus some solar arrays.  ;)
That would fit right in with my suggestion to SpaceX that their partners could create a lot of goodwill by giving all the permanent residents a Model S.
The nearest supercharger is 336 miles from Boca Chica Village.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Prober on 11/01/2015 01:45 pm
Playing with some ideas. 

hypothetical: lets say I owned a nice lot near some water and I wanted to make a boat dock for it.  Haven't had the chance to read all 3 threads (hence the question).   How far down into the sand/ground would I need to drive down before I hit rock or a solid base.  Anyone know ?

Before thinking about how to build a dock, you probably want to:

1) Make sure boats are allowed.  If the area is environmentally protected wetlands, they may not allow boats.

2) Make sure the water is deep enough for a boat.  Shallow tidal pools would require serious dredging for boats to work.

3) Have a conversation with the office that issues permits.  They'll tell you what is, and isn't allowed.  Also, if multiple methods meet code, the guys at the permit office often offer guidance on the trade-offs between them.

All true

Just playing with ideas atm.
see the pics below....they are "lessons learned".   
1) they deal with the opposite problem of the Texas site; a decline in water levels
2) you can see the decline in water levels from the pics and this private companies solution to stay in business. Its unique as their business is a private business in a public park (grandfathered in).
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Lar on 11/02/2015 02:52 pm


Maybe the building can be a station again. Just put in a few Tesla destination HPWC chargers and a few powerpack units plus some solar arrays.  ;)
That would fit right in with my suggestion to SpaceX that their partners could create a lot of goodwill by giving all the permanent residents a Model S.
The nearest supercharger is 336 miles from Boca Chica Village.

How far supercharger stations are from Boca Chica is probably a bit off topic. We "auto" not go there but get back on the main road of discussion...
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: dorkmo on 11/03/2015 03:58 pm
I keep looking at the amount of land SpaceX is actually building on and that 310,000 yards seems high. 31,000 would make more sense to me. Most trucks only hold 10 to 14 yards 20-30,000 runs is hard to imagine.

An Acre is 4840 square yards.  So if they're working on some 30 acres, and filling in 1 yard, that's ~150,000 yards...

1 truck every 5 minutes, that's 100 per 8-hour day.  150 days - voila.  Kind of.

Wow.

i witnessed something like this in cleveland, oklahoma. Walmart hauled dirt for many months to the side of a hill to build up a new location.

almost rented out an entire motel for all the truckers.

https://www.google.com/maps/@36.2999081,-96.4631198,3a,75y,204.
24h,87.43t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sb9uN1mwkpAysTetIIKSzug!2e0!5s20080
201T000000!7i3328!8i1664!6m1!1e1

https://www.google.com/maps/@36.2999111,-96.463122,3a,75y,204.24h,87.43t/data=
!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sfT8KVOkLGBqT-Wzq7M2B0w!2e0!5s20150801T000000!7i13312!8i6656!6m1!1e1
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Prober on 11/04/2015 02:32 pm
Took a serious look as some of the homes in that area.  The pictures were taken in 2011 but there are some decent looking (brick) homes in the area.

Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: spacenut on 11/04/2015 02:44 pm
That home looks like it has an air condition unit under the living room window.  It may not even have central heat/ac.  Also looks very small, like 1000-1200 sq ft.  Not bad for somewhere to stay watching a SpaceX launch.  One could put up a portable elevated hunting blind in the back yard for an observation post for a launch. 
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Nomadd on 11/04/2015 06:35 pm
That home looks like it has an air condition unit under the living room window.  It may not even have central heat/ac.  Also looks very small, like 1000-1200 sq ft.  Not bad for somewhere to stay watching a SpaceX launch.  One could put up a portable elevated hunting blind in the back yard for an observation post for a launch. 
All were built with small A/Cs but a few have converted to central. The big hole in the front of 5 Esperson is where someone stole the unit while it was on the market.
 They were generally 1200-1300 sq ft, 2br with some expanded into the back yard. The Heaton's, to the right of the house pictured, is up to something like 2200 sq ft from add-ons. The two big ones on Eichorn are former motels. One is a home and one is apartments.
 The brickwork looks great for a 50 year old houses. I'd hate to see the attics and interiors of the abandoned ones with rotten roofs, but about half the homes look relatively well maintained. Mostly, they'd make good project for someone who knows which end of the hammer hits the nail, but using contractors to rehabilitate them might not be worth it.
 Eventually, I don't think the county will be able to put off condemnation proceedings on some of them. You don't see that a lot in rural Texas, but it's getting more common for safety (officially) reasons.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 11/08/2015 01:35 pm
Not sure if this has been posted here before:
STARSTRUCK - The fights and flights behind the new Texas space race (http://apps.texastribune.org/starstruck/)

Seems somewhat balanced, on the whole, except they fail to mention that the beach would only be closed 12 times a year, and never on a weekend or holiday.  Additionally, if you visit that beach, the number of other people you'll see there is typically zero.  It's not a popular spot.  Some of the photos in this piece seem to imply otherwise.

I like the fact that environmentalists who specialize in sea turtles are supporting SpaceX, saying that wildlife has flourished at the cape.  The private land that SpaceX purchased for the launch site could have become a hotel or condo building, with far more effect on local wildlife.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 11/14/2015 03:26 am
Bloomberg article on Brownsville economy:
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2015-11-13/is-america-s-poorest-place-due-for-a-boom-or-just-another-bust-
Quote
Brownsville, on the southernmost tip of Texas, has had more than its share of booms and busts.

Shipping, steel, cotton, Civil War-era smuggling, trade with Mexico -- they all helped the city prosper. But Union Carbide shut its chemical plant. A big shopping mall closed in the 1990s. Airbus Group SE and steel producers passed it up for new plants. Today Brownsville is America’s poorest metro area, with 35 percent of residents living below the poverty level, twice the national average. The school district and the county are its two biggest employers.

Enter the shale boom, which has the U.S. producing more natural gas than it can burn. Three groups are now deciding whether to build plants in Brownsville that would liquefy the fuel and send it abroad. If they make good on their plans, the city’s fortune changes...

Brownsville’s deepwater channel and large amount of available land -- only about 7,000 acres of the roughly 40,000 acres of port-owned land are developed -- make it an attractive opportunity for LNG investors...

Elon Musk’s commercial space-transport firm, SpaceX, is building a commercial launchpad east of Brownsville with help from more than $20 million in state and local incentives. Local officials believe it will create 500 jobs over a decade and require as much as $100 million in capital investment.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 11/20/2015 09:41 pm
Now news for a while now.  Time for some discussion, and speculation.

As I said back in post 1317 (http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=35425.msg1438307#msg1438307), SpaceX has filed EIS addendums that show plans for a land bridge to an area just south of the fenced in launch site.  This is a fact.  The public record clearly shows SpaceX's intention to build this land bridge.

The question is: Why?

Speculation: The EIS (https://www.faa.gov/about/office_org/headquarters_offices/ast/environmental/nepa_docs/review/launch/spacex_texas_launch_site_environmental_impact_statement/media/FEIS_SpaceX_Texas_Launch_Site_Vol_I.pdf) also has references to launch vehicles returning to the launch site.  This will probably require additional approvals, but it's right there in the initial EIS.

With this in mind, I've drawn up a possible scenario for landing pads near the Texas launch site (see below).
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Nomadd on 11/21/2015 05:03 am
 I'm not sure where the dirt is going to come from, but I'd guess it was from the port area. If it's coming down 511, they're probably waiting for the utility work on that road to finish since it's down to one lane near Hwy 4 most of the time. About the only possible visible progress is new 3" orange PVC conduits on both sides of Hwy 4 heading east. They're around 5 and 6 miles from the 511 intersection so far and have 1 1/4" offshoots now and then, so they're not dedicated SpaceX, but 6 pairs of fiber don't take much space.
 Lesson for today is not to forget a conduit nut for your new breaker box when the Nearest Home Depot is 20 miles away.
 Apparently, there are active phone lines in the village. I dug up a cut off 3pr cable near the house today and checked it out since I'm a little OCD about anything comms related. It had 42 volts DC on the red/green pair.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 11/21/2015 06:08 am
Apparently, there are active phone lines in the village. I dug up a cut off 3pr cable near the house today and checked it out since I'm a little OCD about anything comms related. It had 42 volts DC on the red/green pair.

Do you have phone service in 5 Esperson?  Do other residents have phone service?  How is the cellular coverage in Boca Chica Village?  What is your current internet connection?

How are the homes heated in the winter?  Are all appliances electric? (water heater, range, dryer)?  Do you have a propane tank?

What's the electrical service (amps)?  Is the breaker box surface mounted or in the wall?  Why are you replacing it?
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Nomadd on 11/21/2015 06:52 am
Apparently, there are active phone lines in the village. I dug up a cut off 3pr cable near the house today and checked it out since I'm a little OCD about anything comms related. It had 42 volts DC on the red/green pair.

Do you have phone service in 5 Esperson?  Do other residents have phone service?  How is the cellular coverage in Boca Chica Village?  What is your current internet connection?

How are the homes heated in the winter?  Are all appliances electric? (water heater, range, dryer)?  Do you have a propane tank?

What's the electrical service (amps)?  Is the breaker box surface mounted or in the wall?  Why are you replacing it?
I haven't had wired phone service in 15 years, but it's there if homeowners want it. I see a few cable burial markers with AT&T's name on them. Internet for me is a weak Verizon LTE connection. DSL seems unlikely that far out.
 I've seen one house with a 5 gallon propane tank for their stove. Everything public is electric.
 My breaker box was corroded and part of an embarrassing charlie foxtrot of a jury rigged system, so it was informed it's services were no longer required. Some sheetrock devastation was required because of a larger new box and replacement of a run of old cloth covered Romex.
 Service is 100 amp.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: MP99 on 11/21/2015 09:00 am
Internet for me is a weak Verizon LTE connection.

Famously, people have used pringles cans to extend WiFi range.

Wondering if there's anything similar for LTE. Basically, a directional antenna going to some sort of router that supports an LTE connection.

Cheers, Martin
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Prober on 11/21/2015 02:43 pm
Apparently, there are active phone lines in the village. I dug up a cut off 3pr cable near the house today and checked it out since I'm a little OCD about anything comms related. It had 42 volts DC on the red/green pair.

Do you have phone service in 5 Esperson?  Do other residents have phone service?  How is the cellular coverage in Boca Chica Village?  What is your current internet connection?

How are the homes heated in the winter?  Are all appliances electric? (water heater, range, dryer)?  Do you have a propane tank?

What's the electrical service (amps)?  Is the breaker box surface mounted or in the wall?  Why are you replacing it?
I haven't had wired phone service in 15 years, but it's there is homeowners want it. I see a few cable burial markers with AT&T's name on them. Internet for me is a weak Verizon LTE connection. DSL seems unlikely that far out.
 I've seen one house with a 5 gallon propane tank for their stove. Everything public is electric.
 My breaker box was corroded and part of an embarrassing charlie foxtrot of a jury rigged system, so it was informed it's services were no longer required. Some sheetrock devastation was required because of a larger new box and replacement of a run of old cloth covered Romex.
 Service is 100 amp.

If you have access to copper phone lines grab it and get yourself locked in.  I can't even express the horrors of the loss of the copper lines vs the new fiber optic replacement.  The security features of copper phone lines (always on) is worth the cost.  If power goes off the majorly of time you still have the service. 

You also might be able to lock in DSL service as most homes have two sets of phone lines coming in copper. 
 
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: cscott on 11/21/2015 02:43 pm
Now news for a while now.  Time for some discussion, and speculation.

As I said back in post 1317 (http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=35425.msg1438307#msg1438307), SpaceX has filed EIS addendums that show plans for a land bridge to an area just south of the fenced in launch site.  This is a fact.  The public record clearly shows SpaceX's intention to build this land bridge.

The question is: Why?

Speculation: The EIS (https://www.faa.gov/about/office_org/headquarters_offices/ast/environmental/nepa_docs/review/launch/spacex_texas_launch_site_environmental_impact_statement/media/FEIS_SpaceX_Texas_Launch_Site_Vol_I.pdf) also has references to launch vehicles returning to the launch site.  This will probably require additional approvals, but it's right there in the initial EIS.

With this in mind, I've drawn up a possible scenario for landing pads near the Texas launch site (see below).
You keep mentioning this, but as I recall the EIS stated that the land bridge was to allow ongoing environmental monitoring, also called for in the EIS.  I'm not saying there won't be landing pads eventually, but they don't necessarily bear any relation to the land bridge.  They'll need a new EIS for the landing pads, and they could just as easily build a new land bridge at that time.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: RonM on 11/21/2015 03:05 pm
Apparently, there are active phone lines in the village. I dug up a cut off 3pr cable near the house today and checked it out since I'm a little OCD about anything comms related. It had 42 volts DC on the red/green pair.

Do you have phone service in 5 Esperson?  Do other residents have phone service?  How is the cellular coverage in Boca Chica Village?  What is your current internet connection?

How are the homes heated in the winter?  Are all appliances electric? (water heater, range, dryer)?  Do you have a propane tank?

What's the electrical service (amps)?  Is the breaker box surface mounted or in the wall?  Why are you replacing it?
I haven't had wired phone service in 15 years, but it's there is homeowners want it. I see a few cable burial markers with AT&T's name on them. Internet for me is a weak Verizon LTE connection. DSL seems unlikely that far out.
 I've seen one house with a 5 gallon propane tank for their stove. Everything public is electric.
 My breaker box was corroded and part of an embarrassing charlie foxtrot of a jury rigged system, so it was informed it's services were no longer required. Some sheetrock devastation was required because of a larger new box and replacement of a run of old cloth covered Romex.
 Service is 100 amp.

If you have access to copper phone lines grab it and get yourself locked in.  I can't even express the horrors of the loss of the copper lines vs the new fiber optic replacement.  The security features of copper phone lines (always on) is worth the cost.  If power goes off the majorly of time you still have the service. 

You also might be able to lock in DSL service as most homes have two sets of phone lines coming in copper.

With so few people in the area there probably isn't DSL service.

SpaceX will need high speed fiber optic service. While AT&T or whoever runs that, they'll run extra fiber. As long as SpaceX doesn't buy up all the property in the area, other people and businesses will move in to the area. I'm sure you'll be able to get some sort of broadband service before the first launch.

If running the service to your house turns out to be expensive, you can try raising funds on gofundme.com or one of the other crowdfunding sites. Use the money to setup the service and a webcam for observing SpaceX. You'll get donations.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 11/21/2015 09:31 pm
You keep mentioning this, but as I recall the EIS stated that the land bridge was to allow ongoing environmental monitoring, also called for in the EIS.  I'm not saying there won't be landing pads eventually, but they don't necessarily bear any relation to the land bridge.  They'll need a new EIS for the landing pads, and they could just as easily build a new land bridge at that time.

To be clear, the EIS (https://www.faa.gov/about/office_org/headquarters_offices/ast/environmental/nepa_docs/review/launch/spacex_texas_launch_site_environmental_impact_statement/media/FEIS_SpaceX_Texas_Launch_Site_Vol_I.pdf) has no information of a land bridge.  This was added in a group of addendums that had to do with adding more soil to the launch site.  These addendums were filed with the US Army Corps of Engineers, and were online (http://www.swg.usace.army.mil/Media/PublicNotices/tabid/2217/Article/587971/swg-2012-00381-spacex-cameron-county.aspx) for a while, but have since been removed.  When they were online, I looked through them, and don't remember seeing anything that linked the land bridge to environmental monitoring.  Instead, one of the parts of the addendum I quoted says the land bridge "has been included to allow vehicular access to the southern portion of the site".

As for environmental monitoring, the tidal pools are sandy most of the time.  You can just walk around.  Google Earth also shows tire tracks all over those sandy areas. Even at high tide, its usually just an inch or two of water.  All-terrain vehicles can get around easily.  The EIS also mentions the possibility of SpaceX using all-terrain vehicles.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 11/21/2015 09:35 pm
I haven't had wired phone service in 15 years, but it's there if homeowners want it. I see a few cable burial markers with AT&T's name on them. Internet for me is a weak Verizon LTE connection. DSL seems unlikely that far out.
 I've seen one house with a 5 gallon propane tank for their stove. Everything public is electric.
 My breaker box was corroded and part of an embarrassing charlie foxtrot of a jury rigged system, so it was informed it's services were no longer required. Some sheetrock devastation was required because of a larger new box and replacement of a run of old cloth covered Romex.
 Service is 100 amp.

Thanks for the info.

For LTE, it looks like there are a number of products (http://www.amazon.com/s/?ie=UTF8&keywords=wilson+4g+booster&tag=googhydr-20&index=aps&hvadid=49844207905&hvpos=1t2&hvexid=&hvnetw=g&hvrand=1224422717354123911&hvpone=&hvptwo=&hvqmt=b&hvdev=c&ref=pd_sl_d89mrs4fp_b) that will boost the signal.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Nomadd on 11/22/2015 12:20 am
 Welcome to Boca Chica island.
 When you're about three miles from the village and think this must be as high as the water gets.
 When you're going back to town that night and find out you were wrong the first time.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 11/22/2015 11:19 am
Welcome to Boca Chica island.
 When you're about three miles from the village and think this must be as high as the water gets.
 When you're going back to town that night and find out you were wrong the first time.

What caused it?  Some kind of storm?
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Ed on 11/22/2015 11:39 am
Welcome to Boca Chica island.
 When you're about three miles from the village and think this must be as high as the water gets.
 When you're going back to town that night and find out you were wrong the first time.

Oh the endearing treats of tidal marches.
Do you remember some persistent easterly winds by any chance?


But this picture brings clearly to the mind the problems SpaceX as well as Nomadd might encounter.

With all that dirt movments announced Im wondering if SpaceX is planning to become a mound builder.

Im thinking in the line of Warfts found on the southern and western shores of North Sea
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Artificial_dwelling_hill

It might be expensive to get this much of material moved, but I think will prove its worth with the first hurrican.

You certainly dont want to have -among other things- your payload processing facilities prone to flooding.
Any insurance underwriter would most likely not amused.

A mound of something between ten to fiveteen foot in both areas would most likely keep you dry in all but the most severe cases.

And would give Nomadd a place to turn to, in case he gets his feet wet at home.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Nomadd on 11/22/2015 02:16 pm
Welcome to Boca Chica island.
 When you're about three miles from the village and think this must be as high as the water gets.
 When you're going back to town that night and find out you were wrong the first time.

What caused it?  Some kind of storm?
There was a very stiff north-east wind all day. That's South Padre on the left in the night photo. I turned around to get the shot after driving through the water. I'm not sure if I'd want to take a Model S through that.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Ed on 11/22/2015 02:49 pm
Welcome to Boca Chica island.
 When you're about three miles from the village and think this must be as high as the water gets.
 When you're going back to town that night and find out you were wrong the first time.

What caused it?  Some kind of storm?
There was a very stiff north-east wind all day. That's South Padre on the left in the night photo. I turned around to get the shot after driving through the water. I'm not sure if I'd want to take a Model S through that.

Figures
Due to the wind the water from high tide cannot run of.
With the next tide a new amount of water arrives and drives the new tide even higher.
Works especially well when the height differences are low and the estuarines reach far inland.


I would expect the salt marches near Boca Chica currently well filled with water as well.
It will be interesting to know how long the water would need to dissipate back to normal when the wind abates.

Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Prober on 11/22/2015 03:11 pm
Welcome to Boca Chica island.
 When you're about three miles from the village and think this must be as high as the water gets.
 When you're going back to town that night and find out you were wrong the first time.

What caused it?  Some kind of storm?
There was a very stiff north-east wind all day. That's South Padre on the left in the night photo. I turned around to get the shot after driving through the water. I'm not sure if I'd want to take a Model S through that.

is that some new road, the stripes make it look recent?
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Nomadd on 11/23/2015 01:34 am
Welcome to Boca Chica island.
 When you're about three miles from the village and think this must be as high as the water gets.
 When you're going back to town that night and find out you were wrong the first time.

What caused it?  Some kind of storm?
There was a very stiff north-east wind all day. That's South Padre on the left in the night photo. I turned around to get the shot after driving through the water. I'm not sure if I'd want to take a Model S through that.

is that some new road, the stripes make it look recent?

Just the old Rte 4. They re-striped it like that recently in an attempt to curb head on collisions.
 I was trying to imagine squeezing by an Falcon stage on the narrower sections of that road today That spot that flooded was one of the skinniest.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: CraigLieb on 11/23/2015 01:54 pm
Apparently, there are active phone lines in the village. I dug up a cut off 3pr cable near the house today and checked it out since I'm a little OCD about anything comms related. It had 42 volts DC on the red/green pair.

Do you have phone service in 5 Esperson?  Do other residents have phone service?  How is the cellular coverage in Boca Chica Village?  What is your current internet connection?

How are the homes heated in the winter?  Are all appliances electric? (water heater, range, dryer)?  Do you have a propane tank?

What's the electrical service (amps)?  Is the breaker box surface mounted or in the wall?  Why are you replacing it?
I haven't had wired phone service in 15 years, but it's there is homeowners want it. I see a few cable burial markers with AT&T's name on them. Internet for me is a weak Verizon LTE connection. DSL seems unlikely that far out.
 I've seen one house with a 5 gallon propane tank for their stove. Everything public is electric.
 My breaker box was corroded and part of an embarrassing charlie foxtrot of a jury rigged system, so it was informed it's services were no longer required. Some sheetrock devastation was required because of a larger new box and replacement of a run of old cloth covered Romex.
 Service is 100 amp.

If you have access to copper phone lines grab it and get yourself locked in.  I can't even express the horrors of the loss of the copper lines vs the new fiber optic replacement.  The security features of copper phone lines (always on) is worth the cost.  If power goes off the majorly of time you still have the service. 

You also might be able to lock in DSL service as most homes have two sets of phone lines coming in copper.

With so few people in the area there probably isn't DSL service.

SpaceX will need high speed fiber optic service. While AT&T or whoever runs that, they'll run extra fiber. As long as SpaceX doesn't buy up all the property in the area, other people and businesses will move in to the area. I'm sure you'll be able to get some sort of broadband service before the first launch.

If running the service to your house turns out to be expensive, you can try raising funds on gofundme.com or one of the other crowdfunding sites. Use the money to setup the service and a webcam for observing SpaceX. You'll get donations.
Consider not wasting money on GoFundMe since they take a cut.. just consider allowing people to individually contacting you through private messaging and we will send checks... simple easy, nobody else gets a cut.
<edit: cutting out the harsh language, and clarify the suggestion>
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Elvis in Space on 11/23/2015 07:38 pm
Consider not wasting money on GoFundMe since they take a cut.. just consider allowing people to individually contacting you through private messaging and we will send checks... simple easy, nobody else gets a cut.
<edit: cutting out the harsh language, and clarify the suggestion>

GoFundMe also provides visibility and a scoreboard to rally around. That's worth something and generally results in getting more raised than the cut takes. Just something to think about. I'm in either way.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: nadreck on 11/23/2015 08:27 pm

You also might be able to lock in DSL service as most homes have two sets of phone lines coming in copper.

Most telcos can share DSL and voice on the same pair now, but if not, go for DSL over dry copper then use an IP phone.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Nomadd on 11/24/2015 02:37 am

You also might be able to lock in DSL service as most homes have two sets of phone lines coming in copper.

Most telcos can share DSL and voice on the same pair now, but if not, go for DSL over dry copper then use an IP phone.
DSL has always been on the phone pair as far as I can remember. In fact, one of the things people wanted that phone companies didn't want to do was to get naked DSL without having to pay for phone service. But when you're 16 miles from the phone gear, DSL, which isn't usually good for much over 3 miles, isn't a good bet anyhow. The AT&T conduit is a big one, so there could be some powered repeaters/switches along the line.
 It looks like those new conduits have offshoots at every home and business along the highway so far, so I'm hoping fiber is in the future.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 11/24/2015 08:37 am
It looks like those new conduits have offshoots at every home and business along the highway so far, so I'm hoping fiber is in the future.

The new fiber lines are being run by the University of Texas.  From the RFP (http://esbd.cpa.state.tx.us/docs/720/116108_1.pdf), they appear to be dedicated lines to the Stargate tracking center, SpaceX control center, and launch complex. See my previous post (http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=35425.msg1354648#msg1354648) for more details.

Pictures from the RFP (http://esbd.cpa.state.tx.us/docs/720/116108_1.pdf) are included below. Note that the RFP (http://esbd.cpa.state.tx.us/docs/720/116108_1.pdf) specifies 1.25" buried conduit, as shown in the first diagram below. 

Your previous post (http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=35425.msg1447949#msg1447949) mentioned that someone is laying 3" PVC conduits, and your last post says these have offshoots at every home and business along the highway so far.  So these may be something else.  Upgraded electrical service? City water?
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Nomadd on 11/24/2015 03:34 pm
 There are 3" and 1.25" conduit reels up and down the highway, so they could be doing a 1.25" the whole way too. I haven't caught them with an open trench yet to get a look. Doing the university job the same time the county is upgrading sounds like a good idea. Or, they might have changed plans and arranged to have the fiber run in the new county conduit. The conduit is labeled communications and doesn't seem big enough for water unless they're going to have a tank at Boca Chica. That's how it originally was until the hurricane or the drunk operator, depending on where you hear the story, trashed the system. Conduits tend to fill with water no matter how well you think they're sealed, so the gel filled stuff is still a good idea.
 There is direct burial fiber but a lot of time they still put it in conduit for extra reliability.
 I've worked with that gel filled cable. Cleanup is always a lot of fun.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: RonM on 11/24/2015 03:43 pm
If SpaceX and Stargate don't need all 24 strands then some of that might be available to other users.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 11/24/2015 08:04 pm
If SpaceX and Stargate don't need all 24 strands then some of that might be available to other users.

Yes, dark fiber strands are relatively cheap. 

But to light them up, you need additional equipment on each end.  To route data at that speed, this equipment isn't cheap.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Prober on 11/24/2015 09:35 pm

You also might be able to lock in DSL service as most homes have two sets of phone lines coming in copper.

Most telcos can share DSL and voice on the same pair now, but if not, go for DSL over dry copper then use an IP phone.
DSL has always been on the phone pair as far as I can remember. In fact, one of the things people wanted that phone companies didn't want to do was to get naked DSL without having to pay for phone service. But when you're 16 miles from the phone gear, DSL, which isn't usually good for much over 3 miles, isn't a good bet anyhow. The AT&T conduit is a big one, so there could be some powered repeaters/switches along the line.
 It looks like those new conduits have offshoots at every home and business along the highway so far, so I'm hoping fiber is in the future.

What kind of speed are you talking about for DSL?   Have had 10mb service over copper for years from the remnants of the Sprint phone system.   The new company Centurylink has been upgrading to fiber and its not worth it, see my older post. AT&T infrastructure has to be better than Sprint & Direct TV is now owned by AT&T.
Depending on your budget I've seen an uplink via phone line, with downlink a Direct TV dish.

Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: nadreck on 11/24/2015 10:12 pm

You also might be able to lock in DSL service as most homes have two sets of phone lines coming in copper.

Most telcos can share DSL and voice on the same pair now, but if not, go for DSL over dry copper then use an IP phone.
DSL has always been on the phone pair as far as I can remember. In fact, one of the things people wanted that phone companies didn't want to do was to get naked DSL without having to pay for phone service. But when you're 16 miles from the phone gear, DSL, which isn't usually good for much over 3 miles, isn't a good bet anyhow. The AT&T conduit is a big one, so there could be some powered repeaters/switches along the line.
 It looks like those new conduits have offshoots at every home and business along the highway so far, so I'm hoping fiber is in the future.
When I first was involved with DSL it was only available on naked copper (1996) and could not be added to existing phone service, that did change within a few years though. Currently I have DSL but no land line, but while the naked copper comes from the phone company, I get my DSL from a different provider that charges me extra for the copper rental.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: docmordrid on 11/25/2015 03:22 am
We cirrently have DSL from Detroit AT&T, but Rocket Fiber is installing 1 & 10 gigabit service - downtown D first, suburbs later.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Lars-J on 11/25/2015 03:28 am
A wee bit off-topic now, perhaps??
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 11/25/2015 07:31 am
There are 3" and 1.25" conduit reels up and down the highway, so they could be doing a 1.25" the whole way too. I haven't caught them with an open trench yet to get a look. Doing the university job the same time the county is upgrading sounds like a good idea.

Back in April, when the university posted the RFP (http://esbd.cpa.state.tx.us/docs/720/116108_1.pdf) to run the fiber to the SpaceX launch site, I made a similar comment (http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=35425.msg1354814#msg1354814) and received this response:

I have to wonder, if they're digging 48" down, why not run city water pipes at the same time?

they'll most likely be running a mole rather than digging an open trench. much cheaper, as long as you're not digging through green fields.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 11/29/2015 12:20 pm
Local group helps advance space industry statewide
http://www.brownsvilleherald.com/premium/article_d054d2ee-9646-11e5-9d4a-97eaa42dc190.html
Quote
“Of interest for us is trying to develop supply chains and logistics for SpaceX and STARGATE,” he said. “Part of our outreach and recruiting effort is knocking on doors. When everybody’s under one roof, all the better.”

STARGATE is a planned spacecraft-tracking, research and education center that is a public-private partnership between SpaceX and the Center for Advanced Radio Astronomy (CARA) at the University of Texas Rio Grande Valley in Brownsville.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Nomadd on 11/29/2015 01:39 pm
Local group helps advance space industry statewide
http://www.brownsvilleherald.com/premium/article_d054d2ee-9646-11e5-9d4a-97eaa42dc190.html
Quote
“Of interest for us is trying to develop supply chains and logistics for SpaceX and STARGATE,” he said. “Part of our outreach and recruiting effort is knocking on doors. When everybody’s under one roof, all the better.”

STARGATE is a planned spacecraft-tracking, research and education center that is a public-private partnership between SpaceX and the Center for Advanced Radio Astronomy (CARA) at the University of Texas Rio Grande Valley in Brownsville.
That article is kind of funny. I use to live in Midland, but before XCOR made themselves known. Me and NewSpace seem to like the same places.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Nomadd on 12/01/2015 05:37 am

Back in April, when the university posted the RFP (http://esbd.cpa.state.tx.us/docs/720/116108_1.pdf) to run the fiber to the SpaceX launch site, I made a similar comment (http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=35425.msg1354814#msg1354814) and received this response:

I have to wonder, if they're digging 48" down, why not run city water pipes at the same time?

they'll most likely be running a mole rather than digging an open trench. much cheaper, as long as you're not digging through green fields.
I did see a mole along Hwy 4 today, but in town, in places they couldn't trench. It's all just ditches along the highway outside Brownsville so far. I was talking to some workers at 511 and 4 today about the plans to reconstruct the intersection. They didn't think it needed any changes since everybody knows SpaceX is assembling the rockets on site. I didn't have much luck convincing them that a 136 ft long 1st stage was either going to have to make that corner or get hauled through town. The utility work there should be finished in a month, and hopefully, the dirt will start flowing so we can get better updates than security people checking the locks on the gates and me swearing vengeance upon anybody who ever did any electrical work in that house.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 12/01/2015 08:51 am
I did see a mole along Hwy 4 today, but in town, in places they couldn't trench. It's all just ditches along the highway outside Brownsville so far...
Did you manage to find out what the 3" conduit is for?

I was talking to some workers at 511 and 4 today about the plans to reconstruct the intersection. They didn't think it needed any changes since everybody knows SpaceX is assembling the rockets on site. I didn't have much luck convincing them that a 136 ft long 1st stage was either going to have to make that corner or get hauled through town.
Excellent point.  As I've said before, in the end, SpaceX may opt to pave a connection between RL Ostos Road and Hwy 4, as shown in the picture below. RL Ostos Road is a wide frontage road used for the Brownsville sea port (http://www.portofbrownsville.com). The land for the 1.5 mile connection appears to be owned by the state, and I'd think the seaport would be eager to do business with SpaceX.

The utility work there should be finished in a month, and hopefully, the dirt will start flowing so we can get better updates than security people checking the locks on the gates and me swearing vengeance upon anybody who ever did any electrical work in that house.
I hear ya...
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: watermod on 12/04/2015 10:56 pm
Again today, and over the years, watching many scrubs for weather at the cape I can't help wondering if Boca Chica will average better or worse launch weather than the cape.

Has anybody reported on it?
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: the_other_Doug on 12/05/2015 01:31 am
Well -- I know that once or twice every 20 years or so every single structure in the area gets totally washed and/or blown away by a hurricane.  Other than that, I think the weather should be fine... ;)
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Nomadd on 12/05/2015 03:31 am
Well -- I know that once or twice every 20 years or so every single structure in the area gets totally washed and/or blown away by a hurricane.  Other than that, I think the weather should be fine... ;)
The floor under my chair at the moment is 3 feet above high tide and hasn't seen water in 47 years.
 (note to the universe....That was not a double dog dare or anything like that)
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: CraigLieb on 12/07/2015 06:14 pm
Well -- I know that once or twice every 20 years or so every single structure in the area gets totally washed and/or blown away by a hurricane.  Other than that, I think the weather should be fine... ;)
The floor under my chair at the moment is 3 feet above high tide and hasn't seen water in 47 years.
 (note to the universe....That was not a double dog dare or anything like that)

Hi Nomadd,
 If you wanted to build a 15 foot high 'safe zone' platform (in case the water rises suddenly), and put a 10-20 deck chairs on it, a grill, some large umbrellas, a wet bar and a few big screen TVs (for launch broadcast repeaters), we might be able to come by on certain days in the future to perform structural integrity and usability tests (even if the creek don't rise..)
 ;-)
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Prober on 12/08/2015 12:06 am
Well -- I know that once or twice every 20 years or so every single structure in the area gets totally washed and/or blown away by a hurricane.  Other than that, I think the weather should be fine... ;)
The floor under my chair at the moment is 3 feet above high tide and hasn't seen water in 47 years.
 (note to the universe....That was not a double dog dare or anything like that)

Hi Nomadd,
 If you wanted to build a 15 foot high 'safe zone' platform (in case the water rises suddenly), and put a 10-20 deck chairs on it, a grill, some large umbrellas, a wet bar and a few big screen TVs (for launch broadcast repeaters), we might be able to come by on certain days in the future to perform structural integrity and usability tests (even if the creek don't rise..)
 ;-)

might be more than one location to watch a launch, you never know  :D
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 12/11/2015 10:46 am
Fast-growing New York-style pizza chain comes to Brownsville
http://www.brownsvilleherald.com/news/business/article_f5c76cd4-9fbb-11e5-8169-c73bcf1c4926.html
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: cscott on 12/11/2015 02:44 pm
Do they cater parties in Boca chica?
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Kabloona on 12/11/2015 10:34 pm
Do they cater parties in Boca chica?

And will Nomadd invite us?
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Prober on 12/12/2015 02:07 am
Do they cater parties in Boca chica?

And will Nomadd invite us?

I don't get the posting Brownsville has a population of 180,000 people.
Now if it was Boca Chica is might be considered major news ::)
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Nomadd on 12/12/2015 03:50 am
Do they cater parties in Boca chica?

And will Nomadd invite us?

I don't get the posting Brownsville has a population of 180,000 people.
Now if it was Boca Chica is might be considered major news ::)
Get your pizza delivered to Mars in 6 months or it's free?
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: JBF on 12/12/2015 12:12 pm
Do they cater parties in Boca chica?

And will Nomadd invite us?

I don't get the posting Brownsville has a population of 180,000 people.
Now if it was Boca Chica is might be considered major news ::)
Get your pizza delivered to Mars in 6 months or it's free?

Must be ordered at least 2 years in advance. =)
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: CraigLieb on 12/16/2015 05:52 pm
Looks like #7 Esperson  St is for sale  near Nomadd's house (next door?).
 We could have a regular NSF take-over.
Another one on the next street over Weems St. popped on the market too.

Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: JBF on 12/16/2015 06:30 pm
16 Weems is listed at $68,500 and 7 Esperson at $65.500.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Prober on 12/16/2015 07:24 pm
Looks like #7 Esperson  St is for sale  near Nomadd's house (next door?).
 We could have a regular NSF take-over.
Another one on the next street over Weems St. popped on the market too.

you mean this one?

http://www.southpadreproperty.com/idx/mls-85717-7_esperson_st_brownsville_tx_78521
enough room for a pool in the backyard
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Nomadd on 12/16/2015 07:32 pm
 Frank Kawalski owns both. I put a new water heater into 7 Esperson yesterday. The place is a mix of beautiful granite work in the kitchen, floors and bathroom, and the most Mickey Mouse plumbing and electrical I've ever seen. Nothing that can't be fixed in quick order by someone who knows a pipe wrench from a burrito.
 Those Salt Cedars in the yard need to go away. If there was ever an evil tree, they're it.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: mfck on 12/17/2015 10:27 pm



 (...)

 Those Salt Cedars in the yard need to go away. If there was ever an evil tree, they're it.

"That's a bit rich, coming from a homo sapience" - thought the salt cedar

Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Nomadd on 12/21/2015 03:20 pm
 I think I understand the need for the buildup of the site a little better now. Much of the land is made up of clay. Wet, slimy, tread clogging, quicksand like clay. Fairly firm under pressure, but almost liquid on the surface. First time I've been stuck in 20 years. Google Earth will probably show the escape path I spent all day digging out. I swear the coyote watching me was laughing.
 On the other hand, I had the leaders of the pro and anti SpaceX factions helping out and actually speaking to each other and riding in my newly extracted Mountaineer together. Closest to a Christmas miracle as I've seen in a while.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Prober on 12/21/2015 03:56 pm
I think I understand the need for the buildup of the site a little better now. Much of the land is made up of clay. Wet, slimy, tread clogging, quicksand like clay. Fairly firm under pressure, but almost liquid on the surface. First time I've been stuck in 20 years. Google Earth will probably show the escape path I spent all day digging out. I swear the coyote watching me was laughing.
 On the other hand, I had the leaders of the pro and anti SpaceX factions helping out and actually speaking to each other and riding in my newly extracted Mountaineer together. Closest to a Christmas miracle as I've seen in a while.

think you need to buy a bag of grit, been a long time think a bag of kitty litter would work in the ground?
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: acsawdey on 12/21/2015 06:37 pm
Kitty litter is pretty good for ice. Here you need a more macroscopic traction enhancer - like some chunks of 2x4. Or you could strap a piece to your tire like in a video that made the rounds on FB a while back.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Nomadd on 12/21/2015 07:35 pm
 This was sunk to the axles stuck. You spend the first two hours digging down to get a base for the jack and making a sump for the water that keeps oozing into your hole. And hoping you can find enough junk to put under the wheels once you get jacked up a bit. Then you build a road out of the soft spot so you don't get stuck again as soon as you move. Then you realize you're getting too old to spend two days shoveling really heavy mud.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: woods170 on 12/21/2015 08:05 pm
This was sunk to the axles stuck. You spend the first two hours digging down to get a base for the jack and making a sump for the water that keeps oozing into your hole. And hoping you can find enough junk to put under the wheels once you get jacked up a bit. Then you build a road out of the soft spot so you don't get stuck again as soon as you move. Then you realize you're getting too old to spend two days shoveling really heavy mud.

Excellent story, and very similar to an experience my grandfather had in the early 1960's in the freshly drained eastern Flevopolder. Sea clay sucks. Literally!
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: darkenfast on 12/22/2015 05:49 pm
Nomadd, after last night, I think we can all agree that you are going to have some SPECTACULAR neighborhood entertainment when SpaceX does its first Boca Chica RTLS! 
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Nomadd on 12/22/2015 07:40 pm
Nomadd, after last night, I think we can all agree that you are going to have some SPECTACULAR neighborhood entertainment when SpaceX does its first Boca Chica RTLS! 
I'm waiting to see if the rtls bingo thread has my living room as a choice.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Kabloona on 12/22/2015 07:58 pm
Nomadd, after last night, I think we can all agree that you are going to have some SPECTACULAR neighborhood entertainment when SpaceX does its first Boca Chica RTLS! 
I'm waiting to see if the rtls bingo thread has my living room as a choice.

The party & launch viewing threads will definitely have your living room as a choice.  ;)
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Bubbinski on 12/23/2015 12:26 am
How's the Boca Chica site coming? Is there any chance it will be ready this year or next?
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Nomadd on 12/23/2015 01:04 am
How's the Boca Chica site coming? Is there any chance it will be ready this year or next?
No. It's been put off till early 2018. Between much more environmental remediation than expected and plenty of capacity in Florida and Vandenburg, they're not in that much of a hurry. They also need to haul in a gigantic amount of dirt to build up and pack down the site before building.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Bubbinski on 12/23/2015 01:12 am
Ah ok thanks. When the site does become operational I'll go and watch a launch from there. Hopefully Southwest still flies there as that's my preferred airline.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: cscott on 12/23/2015 02:28 pm
Their stated goal has always been "start working on boca chica after LC-39A is online".  It gives the pad engineers currently hard at work on LC-39A future employment.  So as a rough time of thumb, you can assume that boca chica is dormant until you see the first launch from LC-39A.

(The "huge amount of dirt" might be an exception; I don't think it takes a launch pad engineer to start the fill process.  It might need one to complete it, though, to ensure that all the right spots can support all the right amounts of weight.)
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Req on 12/30/2015 12:05 am
Time to invest in a winch.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Jcc on 12/30/2015 11:55 am
The main market for Texas launches will be commercial GTO launches. Maybe part of the calculation as to when they need the Texas site on line is when the Cape pads will be so busy with LEO and Government launches that they need to off- load the GTO launches to Texas. That will be greatly helped when they start to refly used stages so they don't need to build new cores for every launch.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 12/30/2015 02:30 pm
The main market for Texas launches will be commercial GTO launches. Maybe part of the calculation as to when they need the Texas site on line is when the Cape pads will be so busy with LEO and Government launches that they need to off- load the GTO launches to Texas. That will be greatly helped when they start to refly used stages so they don't need to build new cores for every launch.

I can think of 3 reasons SpaceX wants a private launch site:
1) To reduce launch costs
2) To handle higher launch rates
3) To provide a better environment for commercial customers

As you say, 2) may be the near-term driver, but long-term 1) and 3) are equally important.

For 3), SFN has a good article detailing the issues for commercial customers at the cape.

AsiaSat CEO says Cape Canaveral has its drawbacks
http://www.spaceflightnow.com/falcon9/012/140906capecanaveral/#.ViIy5n6rRhE
Quote
"I think Cape Canaveral is a great place to launch, but it does have its downside, which is it's quite bureaucratic here," said William Wade, AsiaSat's president and CEO.

"There are a lot of regulations and clearances and restrictions, which I think hinders the processing of commercial satellites here," Wade said in an interview at Cape Canaveral. "I think that's too bad because it is a bit of a negative."

SpaceX's launch pad and processing facility is on U.S. Air Force property. The military controls access to the launch base, meaning employees and visitors must comply with Defense Department security and safety restrictions.

"Even though our processing has gone well, it's not been without some frustrations from the various teams just having to deal with some of the bureaucracy of the government in working at the Cape," Wade said. "Unfortunately, I think that's one of the reasons that SpaceX is looking at doing commercial launches on their own satellite base down in Texas."

...

"There are certain clearances and restrictions for foreign nationals here," Wade said. "In addition to just the nationality issues, there are just regulations that all people have to abide by here, and it does make it more difficult from a commercial perspective when you have these regulations in processing, access to locations, weather restrictions and things like that, that you deal with here at the Cape that you don't typically have to deal with at other locations."
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 12/30/2015 11:04 pm
County approves transportation reinvestment zone, which has the potential to raise $1.6 billion for future projects
http://www.brownsvilleherald.com/news/local/article_c370c572-ae9e-11e5-9b7f-c75e6e7f2802.html

I'm guessing this will be used to fund the Airport runway expansion, East loop corridor (state highway 32),
port entrance road, and a number of other projects that will benefit SpaceX as well as the entire community.


Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 12/31/2015 02:01 am
SpaceX acquires 1 new property.  Animated GIF below.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: macpacheco on 12/31/2015 02:55 am
What kind of speed are you talking about for DSL?   Have had 10mb service over copper for years from the remnants of the Sprint phone system.   The new company Centurylink has been upgrading to fiber and its not worth it, see my older post. AT&T infrastructure has to be better than Sprint & Direct TV is now owned by AT&T.
Depending on your budget I've seen an uplink via phone line, with downlink a Direct TV dish.
I work for a small telco here in Brazil.
100% fiber.
All it takes is one fiber strand to handle 64 subscribers.
Distance from GPON switch to most distant subscriber up to 10 miles.
And the remote office equipment (at the center of that 10 mile range) fits in a tiny 8U rack, including UPS.
The GPON switch itself is 1U, I'm assuming 8U for a remote office (to split one upstream fiber with a 10Gbps link into a bunch of downstream GPON optical ports)
Fibers go through passive splitters.
We deliver up to 500Mbps dedicated links using this tech (2.5Gbps per fiber port).
The active equipment is quite cheap as long as there are at least a few hundred subscribers.

The big issue is USA labour costs are much higher than Brazil's.
But the equipment itself is dirt cheap nowadays.
Most of the cost is laying fiber up to each customer.

DSL is living on borrowed time.
The main reason DSL is stil mainstream is telcos don't want to invest long term, want to stretch financial returns on existing infrastructure for another decade.

Mods, delete this freely.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Nomadd on 12/31/2015 06:11 pm
County approves transportation reinvestment zone, which has the potential to raise $1.6 billion for future projects
http://www.brownsvilleherald.com/news/local/article_c370c572-ae9e-11e5-9b7f-c75e6e7f2802.html

I'm guessing this will be used to fund the Airport runway expansion, East loop corridor (state highway 32),
port entrance road, and a number of other projects that will benefit SpaceX as well as the entire community.


That makes all that major utility work along 4 understandable. The city and county said it was to bring services to the colonia type communities out there, but the expansion and crossing are probably what got them the money to do it.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 01/01/2016 02:43 pm
That makes all that major utility work along 4 understandable.

Also, looking at the map of future transportation projects, the new East Loop (State Highway 32) will take over part of Highway 4, and offer SpaceX a route to truck in Falcon 9 first stages without any sharp turns or traffic lights (Interstate 69E to State Hwy 32 to Hwy 4).

Or, depending on how they do the intersection, they may be they may be able to truck in stages around the Port of Brownsville (Hwy 550 to RL Ostos Road to State Hwy 32 to Hwy 4), something like the the second picture below.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Prober on 01/01/2016 03:23 pm
The main market for Texas launches will be commercial GTO launches. Maybe part of the calculation as to when they need the Texas site on line is when the Cape pads will be so busy with LEO and Government launches that they need to off- load the GTO launches to Texas. That will be greatly helped when they start to refly used stages so they don't need to build new cores for every launch.

Wonder what the future look (number of launches) for 2020's might be.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 01/03/2016 02:07 pm
Wonder what the future look (number of launches) for 2020's might be.

If SpaceX can get RTLS reusability working with minimal refurbishment, and they can get FAA approval to use RTLS at Boca Chica, that combination should dramatically reduce launch costs.  Once that happens, then within 2-3 years, we'll suddenly have a lot more customers wanting to launch stuff into orbit.

Note that when SpaceX was looking at where they wanted to build their first private launch site, both Elon and Gwynne mentioned that their long-term plan was for multiple private launch sites in different states.  Using this as leverage, I'm guessing Texas will eventually raise the limit of 12 launches per year at Boca Chica.  The current EIS (https://www.faa.gov/about/office_org/headquarters_offices/ast/environmental/nepa_docs/review/launch/spacex_texas_launch_site_environmental_impact_statement/media/FEIS_SpaceX_Texas_Launch_Site_Vol_I.pdf) already specifies multiple payload processing facility buildings at the Boca Chica control center area.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 01/05/2016 01:51 pm
A lot of new manufacturing plants opening up in Brownsville area:

http://virtualbx.com/industry-news/in-feature-story/23567-project-sizzle-roman-spacex-and-the-brownsville-miracle.html

Quote
For much of 2015, Brownsville residents have been left to wonder about the corporate identity of Project Sizzle Roman...

During a Dec. 8 workshop session before the City Commission, BEDC Vice President Gilberto Salinas said, "We all love SpaceX. It has taken Brownsville to a whole different level."  He then compared Project Sizzle Roman as comparable in economic impact to SpaceX. Both companies, for instance, will generate other corporate moves as suppliers set up operations nearby.

Over the next decade, as the company expands, it will put in place a machining operation, a foundry complex and forging facility, a die-casting operation, plastic injection molding and a distribution center, he said.

The mystery company produces products for the Big Three U.S. automotive manufacturers, as well as numerous European auto manufacturers, Salinas said...

MVP Plastics, a Middlefield, Ohio plastics molder that supplies parts to the auto industry, committed over the summer to bringing 50 jobs when it opens a 30,000-square-foot plant.

Paragon D&E, a die and engineering company that will supply parts to SpaceX, plans to open its operation with 40 workers that will earn an average $24/hour wage.

CK Technologies, a Cascade Engineering company, added another 75 jobs to the 120 already in place, Salinas said. He also noted that the president of Cascade Engineering said that with the way the auto industry is taking off with plants in northern Mexico,  they have huge plans for growth.

All of these moves have made Brownsville the hottest town south of San Antonio. It is the only city in the Lower Rio Grande Valley to secure four Texas Enterprise Fund awards from the Governor's Office; Edinburg received one...

Salinas said one large mixed-use retail development and a food manufacturing and distribution company are looking to close deals on land. These represent a capital investments of $250 million for the retail project and $24 million for the food distributor.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 01/09/2016 01:10 pm
Want to Work for Elon Musk? Move to 1 of These 5 Cities
http://dcinno.streetwise.co/2016/01/07/where-elon-musk-hiring-spacex-tesla-jobs-cities/
Quote
Humans who walk on Mars may one day leave Earth from SpaceX's launch facility at Boca Chica Beach, just east of Brownsville. SpaceX passed up alternative sites in Florida and Puerto Rico when it named Boca Chica as its destination. Unlike SpaceX's other launch sites at Florida's Cape Canaveral Air Force Station and California's Vandenberg Air Force Base, the 50-acre Brownsville property will belong to SpaceX alone and be used exclusively for commercial flights.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: hopalong on 01/11/2016 11:30 am
This may be a little off topic, but things reported in the UK news item below must be a concern to the SpaceX security team on the Brownville site.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/the-death-of-mexican-news-in-the-age-of-drug-cartels-a6804916.html

They are building basically next to a country which the rule of law and the state apparatus is getting more and more fragile.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Nomadd on 01/11/2016 04:06 pm
This may be a little off topic, but things reported in the UK news item below must be a concern to the SpaceX security team on the Brownville site.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/the-death-of-mexican-news-in-the-age-of-drug-cartels-a6804916.html

They are building basically next to a country which the rule of law and the state apparatus is getting more and more fragile.
Why would drug cartels concern SpaceX security? As violent as they are, the cartels are businesses.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Jarnis on 01/11/2016 04:09 pm
Nomadd, after last night, I think we can all agree that you are going to have some SPECTACULAR neighborhood entertainment when SpaceX does its first Boca Chica RTLS! 
I'm waiting to see if the rtls bingo thread has my living room as a choice.

Calling dibs on it on the first Boca Chica bingo!
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 01/11/2016 07:24 pm
This may be a little off topic, but things reported in the UK news item below must be a concern to the SpaceX security team on the Brownville site.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/the-death-of-mexican-news-in-the-age-of-drug-cartels-a6804916.html

They are building basically next to a country which the rule of law and the state apparatus is getting more and more fragile.
Why would drug cartels concern SpaceX security? As violent as they are, the cartels are businesses.
For a while now, I've been doing a daily Google of "SpaceX Brownsville" and "SpaceX Boca Chica" links posted within the last 24 hours, looking for newsworthy items to post on this thread.  Most of these search results don't pertain to SpaceX directly, but some have to do with issues that will affect SpaceX, so I've learned how to scan these links quickly to find pertinent info.

In the course of scanning these news items, I've noticed a fair number of violent murders, with bodies discarded along isolated roads in the Brownsville area.  I'm not an expert, but it seems like a significantly higher amount that you would see in a similar size city elsewhere.

Note that Brownsville just opened up the West Rail Bridge, the first new bridge between Mexico and the U.S. in 105 years. http://www.brownsvilleherald.com/news/local/article_08233c84-4b9b-11e5-b445-bfe2de4ccd95.html
and they're planning to eventually build another bridge just East of Brownsville (see picture below).

Lets hope more states legalize marijuana.  Like prohibition, keeping it illegal just encourages corruption.  El Chapo is the new Al Capone.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: docmordrid on 01/11/2016 07:36 pm
>
Lets hope more states legalize marijuana.  Like prohibition, keeping it illegal just encourages corruption.  El Chapo is the new Al Capone.

Weed is only part of El Chapo's business. Meth, ecstacy, heroin etc. plus other smuggling. He'll adapt to the market.

Also, (per FBI) Brownsville has about 240 violent crimes per 100,000 people. Los Angeles has about 408, Chicago about 885 and Detroit about 2,140.

Brownsville doesn't look so bad.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Kansan52 on 01/11/2016 07:38 pm
This may be a little off topic, but things reported in the UK news item below must be a concern to the SpaceX security team on the Brownville site.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/the-death-of-mexican-news-in-the-age-of-drug-cartels-a6804916.html

They are building basically next to a country which the rule of law and the state apparatus is getting more and more fragile.
Why would drug cartels concern SpaceX security? As violent as they are, the cartels are businesses.

Also, the higher population and additional security would normally cause them to move to a quieter spot.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Nomadd on 01/11/2016 08:08 pm
The killings here are amost all "business" as Don Corleone would put it. I feel much safer and more relaxed here than in the bad parts of almost any major city. After New Jersey, it took a while to get use to people who look you in the eye and nod when they pass. It's more like west Texas than Houston or Dallas.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 01/11/2016 08:09 pm
Weed is only part of El Chapo's business. Meth, ecstacy, heroin etc. plus other smuggling. He'll adapt to the market.
I don't have the link handy, but I read that over 60% of Mexico's drug business is marijuana.  More than half of of El Chapo's drug empire.  With this in mind, I wouldn't be surprised if El Chapo was making campaign contributions to state lawmakers to keep marijuana illegal, through shell corporations of course.

Also, (per FBI) Brownsville has about 240 violent crimes per 100,000 people. Los Angeles has about 408, Chicago about 885 and Detroit about 2,140.

Brownsville doesn't look so bad.
That's good news.  I hadn't seen the statistics on that.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: hopalong on 01/11/2016 08:31 pm
This may be a little off topic, but things reported in the UK news item below must be a concern to the SpaceX security team on the Brownville site.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/the-death-of-mexican-news-in-the-age-of-drug-cartels-a6804916.html

They are building basically next to a country which the rule of law and the state apparatus is getting more and more fragile.
Why would drug cartels concern SpaceX security? As violent as they are, the cartels are businesses.

I suspect that the cartels themselves would not cause an issue, as you say, they are businesses. My concern is what looks like from this side of the pond, is the degrading and break down of the State due to their activities. This may allow other groups get very close to the launch site to launch a spectacular against a symbol of the US.

Living in a country which as lived with terrorism or the threat of terrorism all my adult life, and I am no spring chicken, and have worked in sites, both in the UK and overseas, which can be consided targets for such a spectacular, awareness of such threats has been drummed into me, hence that nagging worry in the back of my mind.

On a sad note: farewell to Major Tom (David Bowie), 69 is far to young.

Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Nomadd on 01/11/2016 08:48 pm
Hopefully, someone in SpaceX is world wise enough to understand the ins and outs of encouraging an increased Federale presence in the area while the Falcon is vertical. Doing business on the border takes a special sort of diplomacy.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 01/13/2016 01:33 pm
More details on STARGATE tracking center web page.
http://www.utb.edu/stargate/Pages/STARGATE.aspx

It looks like they'll be using a phased array antenna system instead of a traditional dish-type.  Also, here's the wiki page (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/STARGATE) for reference.

(http://www.utb.edu/stargate/PublishingImages/STARGATE-logo-sm.jpg)
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Nomadd on 01/13/2016 03:33 pm
 I've been thinking about some sort of tracking camera. I don't really want to watch the launches through a lens. Kinda defeats the whole zen, standing in the open field becoming one with the Falcon thing. Too bad they're not using a dish. I could just sneak in and stick a webcam on it.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: guckyfan on 01/13/2016 04:30 pm
When I heard of phased arrays antennae and Stargate for the first time, I thought of the SpaceX satellite project and was thinking Elon Musk is playing a kind of multi dimensional chess and we never anticipate what he is doing until it becomes obvious reality.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Johnnyhinbos on 01/13/2016 04:40 pm
More details on STARGATE tracking center web page.
http://www.utb.edu/stargate/Pages/STARGATE.aspx

It looks like they'll be using a phased array antenna system instead of a traditional dish-type.  Also, here's the wiki page (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/STARGATE) for reference.

(http://www.utb.edu/stargate/PublishingImages/STARGATE-logo-sm.jpg)
Considering there's a typo in the second paragraph of the link, it's not much of an example of the quality of their work... :-O
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 01/14/2016 12:41 pm
http://www.spacex.com/careers/position/8822

FIELD CONTACT REPRESENTATIVE, BROWNSVILLE

Quote
RESPONSIBILITIES:
• Overseeing construction related compliance, with the assistance of SpaceX management
• Ensuring implementing project Special Conservation Measures (SCMs) (from 2014 FEIS)
• Providing worker-education briefings that will include, but will not be limited to:
   - Information regarding federally and State-listed species with the potential to occur in the area, impacts that may occur, conservation measures being implemented, their responsibilities under the ESA, and avoidance and reporting procedures
   - Measures to prevent wildfires
   - Procedures to limit the spread of noxious weeds
   - Requirements for safe handling and disposal of construction waste
• Monitoring Construction Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) Compliance
• Activating our Cultural Resources Unanticipated Discovery Plan procedure, if needed
• Notifying SpaceX site management personal of any environmental or cultural resources related issues or concerns onsite
• Performing general site administration
   - Shipping/receiving
   - Day-to-day general site related tasks
   - Equipment and supplies management
   - Assisting SpaceX employees during initial visits to the site
   - Assisting SpaceX Construction Manager as needed
   
BASIC QUALIFICATIONS:
• Bachelor’s degree in a science discipline
• Previous academic lab/research experience

PREFERRED SKILLS AND EXPERIENCE:
• Master’s degree
• Strong working knowledge of the local ecology
• Experience working with United States Forrest and Wildlife Services
• SCUBA certified
• Strong proficiency with Microsoft Office Suite
• Previous experience as a Field Contact Representative or Construction Compliance Representative
• Previous experience working on construction related compliance

ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENTS:
• Perform hands-on work in all environments (heat, cold, rain), in tight quarters or at heights
• Must be able to work extended hours and weekends as needed
• Remain focused while working in hazardous environments, while wearing appropriate PPE
• Must be able to lift up to 25lbs unassisted
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: cscott on 01/14/2016 01:32 pm
Scuba certified, huh?
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 01/14/2016 02:52 pm
Scuba certified, huh?

In the future, I suspect SpaceX may want to build a pier on Boca Chica Beach.  This would allow them to bring in large items from the Gulf, or from the Brownsville seaport.

Normally this pier would be open to the public.  A lot of beaches have piers.  People like them.

Of course, this all hinges on having a good relationship with the community. I suspect this will improve once SpaceX starts launching from there.  And they'll need environmental approvals.

But if SpaceX is even thinking about something like this, they may include it in preferred skills.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Nomadd on 01/14/2016 03:26 pm
Scuba certified, huh?
Maybe they're building their own WETF.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Herb Schaltegger on 01/14/2016 03:40 pm
Strange mix of skills required. With all the ecological and lab/science items listed, I think the scuba cert is more likely in connection with ecological studies and environmental monitoring and compliance. Tech diving is a very specialized skill set that would normally be called out specifically.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: RonM on 01/14/2016 03:44 pm
Scuba certified, huh?

In the future, I suspect SpaceX may want to build a pier on Boca Chica Beach.  This would allow them to bring in large items from the Gulf, or from the Brownsville seaport.

Normally this pier would be open to the public.  A lot of beaches have piers.  People like them.

Of course, this all hinges on having a good relationship with the community. I suspect this will improve once SpaceX starts launching from there.  And they'll need environmental approvals.

But if SpaceX is even thinking about something like this, they may include it in preferred skills.

A pier and later an offshore launch pad and causeway for the BFR.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 01/15/2016 11:01 am
SpaceX picks up more property.  See animated GIF below.  Also added high res version of map.

Areas of change include:
1) Control center lots combined into 1 big lot.
2) 24 lots changed from county to SpaceX ownership.
3) SpaceX buys 2 smaller lots, 1 of which is underwater.

Note: For the 24 lots that changed from county to SpaceX ownership, I mark these as "Parking Area" because that's the latest info we have from this (http://www.valleymorningstar.com/news/local_news/article_23597364-4eb2-11e5-9057-bf743c98e894.html) and other similar news sources.  But now that SpaceX owns these lots, I guess they can do whatever they want with them.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: rpapo on 01/15/2016 11:27 am
I presume the red lot is the official NSF party location . . . I mean, Nomadd's house?
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: guckyfan on 01/15/2016 12:03 pm
Thanks for the .gif.

I noticed one interesting point. They have bought one state owned property under water. I wonder why they would do that? We have always assumed the under water lots came with other lots from the same owner. That reasoning does not apply to this lot.

Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: spacenut on 01/15/2016 02:10 pm
Is the "underwater" area a shallow marsh that is to be drained? 
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Nomadd on 01/15/2016 02:19 pm
Thanks for the .gif.

I noticed one interesting point. They have bought one state owned property under water. I wonder why they would do that? We have always assumed the under water lots came with other lots from the same owner. That reasoning does not apply to this lot.


Those are mud half the time. I doubt if any development is allowed there with todays laws. Maybe Dogleg just has instructions to acquire anything they can as long as it's available for a reasonable price, unlike those 7 lots near the store. Somebody bought those for $2k each and is trying to sell them for $25k each. I wanted to build a big viewing gazebo on 173003.
 With the county tax assessor who made a bunch of these available for tax sales in recent years being busted last week for organized crime activity and bribery, acquiring abandoned lots might be a little tricky for a while.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: symbios on 01/15/2016 02:33 pm
Could be part of the environmental mitigation plan?
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Prober on 01/15/2016 05:58 pm
Looks like the Walmart closings will hit the Brownsville area? 
Saw the map and it looks to be 2 stores or more.

Not sure if that's meaningful or not, but its information.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: te_atl on 01/15/2016 06:45 pm
Thanks for the .gif.

I noticed one interesting point. They have bought one state owned property under water. I wonder why they would do that? We have always assumed the under water lots came with other lots from the same owner. That reasoning does not apply to this lot.

Underwater lots eh?   Now we see the need for the scuba certification.  :)
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 01/15/2016 06:47 pm
I noticed one interesting point. They have bought one state owned property under water. I wonder why they would do that? We have always assumed the under water lots came with other lots from the same owner. That reasoning does not apply to this lot.

Looking closer at that lot in the online Cameron County real estate database (http://www.cameroncad.org/cadclientdb/propertymap.aspx), it seems to be grouped together with the 24 lots that make up the parking area, which Cameron County granted to SpaceX.

I'm guessing the original owner of the parking area lots also owned that underwater lot, so the county got a package deal, and then passed it onto SpaceX.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: guckyfan on 01/15/2016 08:51 pm
Looking closer at that lot in the online Cameron County real estate database (http://www.cameroncad.org/cadclientdb/propertymap.aspx), it seems to be grouped together with the 24 lots that make up the parking area, which Cameron County granted to SpaceX.

I'm guessing the original owner of the parking area lots also owned that underwater lot, so the county got a package deal, and then passed it onto SpaceX.

It seems still somewhat strange. The parking area lots were county owned. The underwater lot was owned by the state according to the color coding. Anyway it is probably not important and thanks for your effort.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Nomadd on 01/15/2016 10:31 pm
 It looks like a mystery buyer has snatched up 16 Weems, 7 Esperson and all seven lots by the store (173003-173009). I asked Frank if the buyer had a t-shirt saying "Free shipping for orders over $35" but found out inside jokes like that just get you strange looks.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Roy_H on 01/17/2016 12:28 am
It looks like a mystery buyer has snatched up 16 Weems, 7 Esperson and all seven lots by the store (173003-173009). I asked Frank if the buyer had a t-shirt saying "Free shipping for orders over $35" but found out inside jokes like that just get you strange looks.

So,if these lots were available, why didn't SpaceX buy them? Do you think this mystery buyer paid a premium price (too high for SpaceX) or do you think SpaceX just isn't interested in purchasing more lots around there. I would have thought SpaceX wanted to buy everything east of their launch center.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 01/17/2016 01:26 am
So,if these lots were available, why didn't SpaceX buy them? Do you think this mystery buyer paid a premium price (too high for SpaceX)
Yes.

SpaceX already has ample land for their control center and launch site.  They don't need to buy vacant lots at inflated prices.

And the county codes for Boca Chica Village essentially won't allow those vacant lots to be developed (no electricity, no sewer or septic, etc.), so the only viable lots are ones that have been developed already.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Nomadd on 01/17/2016 03:00 am
 They were trying to get $25k each for lots they bought for $2k. I doubt if they sold for that much.
 I'm not sure about the electric out here. There's a 3 phase 13kv line going underground at the Border Patrol checkpoint and a single phase line going underground a few miles from the village, so I'm not sure how much power they could deliver. I'd assume that they'll discourage non spaceport related development this close to the pad, but official decision making has baffled better minds than mine.
 Frank doesn't drink, so I can't go that path to get the buyer's identity from him.
  I had a fox waiting in my yard when I got home tonight. I've also had a deer, a coyote, a raccoon, a feral pig, an army of crabs, a SpaceX engineer and what I think was a red tailed hawk show up. And they say there are lynxes out here.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: 411rocket on 01/17/2016 04:52 am
They were trying to get $25k each for lots they bought for $2k. I doubt if they sold for that much.
 I'm not sure about the electric out here. There's a 3 phase 13kv line going underground at the Border Patrol checkpoint and a single phase line going underground a few miles from the village, so I'm not sure how much power they could deliver. I'd assume that they'll discourage non spaceport related development this close to the pad, but official decision making has baffled better minds than mine.
 Frank doesn't drink, so I can't go that path to get the buyer's identity from him.
  I had a fox waiting in my yard when I got home tonight. I've also had a deer, a coyote, a raccoon, a feral pig, an army of crabs, a SpaceX engineer and what I think was a red tailed hawk show up. And they say there are lynxes out here.

Quite the yard full of critters (over time), how many of the crabs ended up in the cook pot?
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Semmel on 01/17/2016 10:31 am
They were trying to get $25k each for lots they bought for $2k. I doubt if they sold for that much.
 I'm not sure about the electric out here. There's a 3 phase 13kv line going underground at the Border Patrol checkpoint and a single phase line going underground a few miles from the village, so I'm not sure how much power they could deliver. I'd assume that they'll discourage non spaceport related development this close to the pad, but official decision making has baffled better minds than mine.
 Frank doesn't drink, so I can't go that path to get the buyer's identity from him.
  I had a fox waiting in my yard when I got home tonight. I've also had a deer, a coyote, a raccoon, a feral pig, an army of crabs, a SpaceX engineer and what I think was a red tailed hawk show up. And they say there are lynxes out here.

I love how the SpaceX engineer made its way into the list of other ... visitors ...
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: llanitedave on 01/19/2016 05:12 am
They were trying to get $25k each for lots they bought for $2k. I doubt if they sold for that much.
 I'm not sure about the electric out here. There's a 3 phase 13kv line going underground at the Border Patrol checkpoint and a single phase line going underground a few miles from the village, so I'm not sure how much power they could deliver. I'd assume that they'll discourage non spaceport related development this close to the pad, but official decision making has baffled better minds than mine.
 Frank doesn't drink, so I can't go that path to get the buyer's identity from him.
  I had a fox waiting in my yard when I got home tonight. I've also had a deer, a coyote, a raccoon, a feral pig, an army of crabs, a SpaceX engineer and what I think was a red tailed hawk show up. And they say there are lynxes out here.


I'm hoping you'll soon be seeing Falcons as well.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Nomadd on 01/19/2016 05:48 am
They were trying to get $25k each for lots they bought for $2k. I doubt if they sold for that much.
 I'm not sure about the electric out here. There's a 3 phase 13kv line going underground at the Border Patrol checkpoint and a single phase line going underground a few miles from the village, so I'm not sure how much power they could deliver. I'd assume that they'll discourage non spaceport related development this close to the pad, but official decision making has baffled better minds than mine.
 Frank doesn't drink, so I can't go that path to get the buyer's identity from him.
  I had a fox waiting in my yard when I got home tonight. I've also had a deer, a coyote, a raccoon, a feral pig, an army of crabs, a SpaceX engineer and what I think was a red tailed hawk show up. And they say there are lynxes out here.


I'm hoping you'll soon be seeing Falcons as well.
The place is swarming with Ospreys. They tell me Peregrines are pretty common too, but I haven't seen one yet.
 Merlins are suppose to winter around here. They could be the SpaceX mascot. One bird is a Merlin, a falcon and a raptor.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: ChefPat on 01/19/2016 03:48 pm
Foundation Problems Delay SpaceX Launch (http://www.krgv.com/story/30994915/foundation-problems-delay-spacex-launch)
BROWNSVILLE- The countdown is on to launch the first rocket in the Rio Grande Valley. Construction on SpaceX’s new launch site at Boca Chica Beach is well underway. They have to fix the soil that will hold the launch pad, first.

There is not much out at SpaceX’s new launch site, just a few men and a bulldozer. People wait patiently for the first blastoff.

Down the road, The Schumann family lives in Boca Chica Village. They’re Winter Texans. Soon they’ll sell their home and give up the long drive from the north.

Edward Schumann said it’s time to sell.

“If there is SpaceX out here, there’s interest out here,” he said. “SpaceX may not buy it, but somebody interest in watching SpaceX, working for them may be interested.”

The Schumanns hope they will still be in the area for the first SpaceX launch.

At the SpaceX site, truckloads of new soil will be dumped. Currently, the ground is not stable enough to hold the complex. The added dirt will stabilize the ground.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Nomadd on 01/19/2016 06:52 pm
 Ed's house is 11 Esperson. Big, double lot. I wish I'd been buying when it was available.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Prober on 01/20/2016 04:45 pm
Ed's house is 11 Esperson. Big, double lot. I wish I'd been buying when it was available.

room to build a viewing stand  :D
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: guckyfan on 01/20/2016 05:22 pm
How big are these lots? They have 24 lots for parking space. That's for a lot of cars if they are as big as I expect, like 800m².
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Space Ghost 1962 on 01/20/2016 06:12 pm
Foundation Problems Delay SpaceX Launch (http://www.krgv.com/story/30994915/foundation-problems-delay-spacex-launch)
BROWNSVILLE- The countdown is on to launch the first rocket in the Rio Grande Valley. Construction on SpaceX’s new launch site at Boca Chica Beach is well underway. They have to fix the soil that will hold the launch pad, first.

There is not much out at SpaceX’s new launch site, just a few men and a bulldozer. People wait patiently for the first blastoff.

Down the road, The Schumann family lives in Boca Chica Village. They’re Winter Texans. Soon they’ll sell their home and give up the long drive from the north.

Edward Schumann said it’s time to sell.

“If there is SpaceX out here, there’s interest out here,” he said. “SpaceX may not buy it, but somebody interest in watching SpaceX, working for them may be interested.”

The Schumanns hope they will still be in the area for the first SpaceX launch.

At the SpaceX site, truckloads of new soil will be dumped. Currently, the ground is not stable enough to hold the complex. The added dirt will stabilize the ground.

Introduced SX to a soil scientist for this reason at Hawthorne. As with most in his area, a very underspoken youngish postgrad who very much wanted to work for them, but was a bit too bashful - and this was his fort. Sure hope they talk to him soon - he's brilliant on exactly this ...

Sometimes you don't recognize a gift when you receive one.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Nomadd on 01/20/2016 07:49 pm
 They might have to do the trick where they dump a hundred thousand tons of soil and drill hundreds of tiny wells to squeeze the water out of the base. That takes a little time.

 Frank Kawalski is putting the big LBJ/Eichorn house up for sale. He seemed very happy with the price he got for the smaller houses, so I imagine it won't be too cheap. The guy who bought all the properties insisted on anonymity. I'll bug him about subdividing and selling the lot with the observation tower separately.
 Ed Schulman is still trying to figure out what to sell his place for. He just wants to head back to Minnesota and spend the rest of his days there.

How big are these lots? They have 24 lots for parking space. That's for a lot of cars if they are as big as I expect, like 800m².
They're about 75wx100d
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Nomadd on 01/20/2016 08:24 pm
 Ok. Good thing I'm not getting paid for this. I haven't gone to the beach for a week, and when I finally do, somebody's building a launch pad. Lots of photos of dirt, but one of my shoes is apparently going to be permanently interred beneath the Boca Chica launch pad, so everybody can deal with it.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Comga on 01/20/2016 08:56 pm
John Alan, acsawdey, pmenstrom:
It takes a particular kind of person to "like" photos of machine tracks in fairly flat mud. ;)

edit: Those were the first three people to "like" Nomadd's post.  They have since been obscured by billh, matthewkantar, and Jdeshetler, who will in turn be obscured by new names.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: woods170 on 01/20/2016 09:00 pm
John Alan, acsawdey, pmenstrom:
It takes a particular kind of person to "like" photos of machine tracks in fairly flat mud. ;)
That's exactly how my hometown looked like 3 decades ago and I like it there a lot. Machine tracks in mud is good.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: acsawdey on 01/20/2016 09:20 pm
John Alan, acsawdey, pmenstrom:
It takes a particular kind of person to "like" photos of machine tracks in fairly flat mud. ;)

It has to start somewhere. I had to grin at the thought of Nomadd's shoe entombed under the foundation of the pad.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: John Alan on 01/20/2016 10:22 pm
John Alan, acsawdey, pmenstrom:
It takes a particular kind of person to "like" photos of machine tracks in fairly flat mud. ;)

Actually I was liking the source of those tracks... the Cat dozer in the background of two pics...
I may of been involved in building that Cat D6 Dozer...  ;)
Well at least the powershift transmission in that...  ;D
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: pmenstrom on 01/21/2016 02:22 pm
John Alan, acsawdey, pmenstrom:
It takes a particular kind of person to "like" photos of machine tracks in fairly flat mud. ;)

That occurred to me as I liked the post  :)

I was too young to be aware of all the work that lead up to the Apollo missions. But the launches, lunar rovers and splash downs are indelibly etched into my memory. I find myself delighted by each step being taken, however mundane, that could potentially lead to a manned mission to Mars in my lifetime.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Prober on 01/21/2016 03:52 pm
Ok. Good thing I'm not getting paid for this. I haven't gone to the beach for a week, and when I finally do, somebody's building a launch pad. Lots of photos of dirt, but one of my shoes is apparently going to be permanently interred beneath the Boca Chica launch pad, so everybody can deal with it.

great work Nonmadd you building a nice historical database ;)

looks like someone is building a gate/checkpoint?

Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: CraigLieb on 01/21/2016 04:39 pm
Ok. Good thing I'm not getting paid for this. I haven't gone to the beach for a week, and when I finally do, somebody's building a launch pad. Lots of photos of dirt, but one of my shoes is apparently going to be permanently interred beneath the Boca Chica launch pad, so everybody can deal with it.

great work Nonmadd you building a nice historical database ;)

looks like someone is building a gate/checkpoint?

Yes but will they put up a billboard that Elon can hide his Tesla behind?
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: chrisking0997 on 01/21/2016 05:36 pm
John Alan, acsawdey, pmenstrom:
It takes a particular kind of person to "like" photos of machine tracks in fairly flat mud. ;)

It has to start somewhere. I had to grin at the thought of Nomadd's shoe entombed under the foundation of the pad.

I prefer to imagine it flying out of the flame trench on the first launch, ala Rocket Frog
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Space Ghost 1962 on 01/21/2016 07:39 pm
John Alan, acsawdey, pmenstrom:
It takes a particular kind of person to "like" photos of machine tracks in fairly flat mud. ;)

It has to start somewhere. I had to grin at the thought of Nomadd's shoe entombed under the foundation of the pad.

I prefer to imagine it flying out of the flame trench on the first launch, ala Rocket Frog

Nomadd should "contribute" the other shoe, so the alien archaeologist a million years hence backtracking the exodus of humans into the universe won't be caught up searching for it to complete his diorama ;)
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Prober on 01/21/2016 07:56 pm
John Alan, acsawdey, pmenstrom:
It takes a particular kind of person to "like" photos of machine tracks in fairly flat mud. ;)

It has to start somewhere. I had to grin at the thought of Nomadd's shoe entombed under the foundation of the pad.

I prefer to imagine it flying out of the flame trench on the first launch, ala Rocket Frog

Nomadd should "contribute" the other shoe, so the alien archaeologist a million years hence backtracking the exodus of humans into the universe won't be caught up searching for it to complete his diorama ;)

at least he should have put a note in the shoe capsule  :D
some poor fool in the future now will waste efforts to look for a body.


Enjoy the video find

https://vimeo.com/118864374
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Nomadd on 01/24/2016 02:02 am
 While discussing the sub optimal combination of D6 dozers and quicksand I got a few details on what they're doing out there. This guy, before they discovered that bulldozers don't float, was working on the perimeter so they could put up a fence before bringing the dirt in. The amount of dirt is because they're raising the site 24 feet. The flame trench will be directed east and exhaust needs to avoid harming the dunes between the pad and the beach.
 They said they'll be packing the dirt down as they go and it will be ready to build on as soon as they're done.They'll be installing something like 500 wick drains down to 120 feet to remove the water as everything's compacted.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: JBF on 01/24/2016 02:52 am
How far from the road did that sink?
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Nomadd on 01/24/2016 03:53 am
How far from the road did that sink?
About 100'. The operator was waiting for extraction. He hadn't been stuck in 30 years. I feel about 7% less dumb now for sinking my Mountaineer in that goop. The soft spots are almost impossible to spot.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: acsawdey on 01/24/2016 04:40 am
And I note from your photo that is the "low ground pressure" version of the D6, even. Quicksand, indeed.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Nomadd on 01/24/2016 05:42 am
Ok. Good thing I'm not getting paid for this. I haven't gone to the beach for a week, and when I finally do, somebody's building a launch pad. Lots of photos of dirt, but one of my shoes is apparently going to be permanently interred beneath the Boca Chica launch pad, so everybody can deal with it.

great work Nonmadd you building a nice historical database ;)

looks like someone is building a gate/checkpoint?


Those are just road signs that came out funny looking in the photos from the way the sun glared off them. My pocket camera tries to stitch several exposures together when there's too much contrast, and you get some strange results sometimes.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Kabloona on 01/24/2016 11:32 am
Looks like Gold Rush out there with the dozers sinking in melting permafrost.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Ed on 01/24/2016 12:47 pm
.... The amount of dirt is because they're raising the site 24 feet. The flame trench will be directed east and exhaust needs to avoid harming the dunes between the pad and the beach. ....
 

So SpaceX will definitly become a moundbuilder in Texas.
And from what I can gather from afar the raising includes quite a healthy bit of safety margin that will make the engineers happy. Avoiding to harm the dunes goes in the same sensible direction, not only because it mandated or protects the environment. It maintains integrity of the principal protection against the sea. Without the grip of vegetation sand can shift faster the most people think.
IMHO the place is designed to be safe even in a case of a Cat5 hurrican hitting directly.
Again the SpaceX culture of carefully listening to knowledgable people -and following their suggestions- at work it would seem to me.
Lets see if SpaceX will raise the other area to the same height.

I would expect the soil being in almost same the conditions as in a wadden sea.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wadden_Sea
Only it will be flooded irregulary instead twice a day.

But the estuarine silt and clay has most likely never been exposed to any serious compactive pressure since it has being deposited. So it contains a lot of water even if the uppermost layer appear dry.
And the water would be most likely very unevenly distributed over the place. This is very treacherous stuff. Even foxes can manage to get struck in those conditions.
Very glad you made it out unharmed -except for the little dent in your self esteem- Nomadd.  ;)

It could be interesting to know if and how often the Rio Grande river experiences flash floods which deposits a new layer of silt into the estuary. After such event the area could become completly inaccessible for months for anyone except small birds.

But of course the are solutions for this conditions. When they build coastal fortifications near Bremen into the wadden sea they had to cover first the whole place with fascines several foot high before the actual foundations could be laid on top. Its still there even if its now only a bird sanctuary.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Langl%C3%BCtjen
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fascine
I could imagine that currently a similar measure is being contemplated for Boca Chica,
but of course with modern materials.

Difficult conditions met with prudent and lasting solutions have a fascination of their own to watch.
It will be interesting to see which solution SpaceX will choose.

Im really looking forward you future reports Nomadd. :)


Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Nomadd on 01/24/2016 04:50 pm
 I think they'll be hauling the rocket up a 2% grade to the pad. The hangar is right on the road, so it's going to have to be pretty close to road level unless they do something like a long ramp that's not in the concepts. Or, the site could be completely different from the old plan. Since the pad and ramp will take the most dirt, concrete and compacting, they need to start now, but the rest of the port could still change some.

:Federal Aviation Administration - US government, FAA agency, April 2013 Draft Environmental Impact Statement for SpaceX Texas Launch Site, April 2013 "Vertical Launch Area Layout" of the Proposed SpaceX Texas Orbital Launch Site, from the FAA draft EIS, April 2013 - Public Domain:
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: meekGee on 01/24/2016 06:49 pm
I think they'll be hauling the rocket up a 2% grade to the pad. The hangar is right on the road, so it's going to have to be pretty close to road level unless they do something like a long ramp that's not in the concepts. Or, the site could be completely different from the old plan. Since the pad and ramp will take the most dirt, concrete and compacting, they need to start now, but the rest of the port could still change some.

:Federal Aviation Administration - US government, FAA agency, April 2013 Draft Environmental Impact Statement for SpaceX Texas Launch Site, April 2013 "Vertical Launch Area Layout" of the Proposed SpaceX Texas Orbital Launch Site, from the FAA draft EIS, April 2013 - Public Domain:

Well this plan is still missing a number of landing pads and a road from them back to a hanger (which may or may not be the pre-launch integration hangar)

If you're reusing cores, you need some place to store cores, and maybe a post-flight facility that's separate from the pre-flight facility.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: John Alan on 01/24/2016 07:36 pm
The D6N LGP has one of the lowest ground pounds per square inch weighs around... 4.8psi
Source...
http://www.ritchiespecs.com/specification?type=Con&category=Crawler+Tractor&make=Caterpillar&model=D6N+LGP&modelid=90518 (http://www.ritchiespecs.com/specification?type=Con&category=Crawler+Tractor&make=Caterpillar&model=D6N+LGP&modelid=90518)
If you sink one in the mud... it's REALLY soft stuff underfoot...  :o

And to clarify my earlier statement... I thought it was a D6T LGP I was seeing in the earlier pics...
T model is a powershift based unit built in East Peoria, IL...
N model is a hydrostatic based unit built somewhere else...
There is also a K model (hydro)... it is not elevated sprocket drive however... also built elsewhere...

The Cat D6 line is the most popular dozer Cat sells...
The reason is simple... It's the largest dozer by weight you can put on a semi truck and haul with no restrictions...
Makes it very popular with owner/operators who go job-site to job-site making a living...

Anyway... just adding my 0.02 to topic...  :)
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Nomadd on 01/24/2016 07:45 pm
I think they'll be hauling the rocket up a 2% grade to the pad. The hangar is right on the road, so it's going to have to be pretty close to road level unless they do something like a long ramp that's not in the concepts. Or, the site could be completely different from the old plan. Since the pad and ramp will take the most dirt, concrete and compacting, they need to start now, but the rest of the port could still change some.

:Federal Aviation Administration - US government, FAA agency, April 2013 Draft Environmental Impact Statement for SpaceX Texas Launch Site, April 2013 "Vertical Launch Area Layout" of the Proposed SpaceX Texas Orbital Launch Site, from the FAA draft EIS, April 2013 - Public Domain:

Well this plan is still missing a number of landing pads and a road from them back to a hanger (which may or may not be the pre-launch integration hangar)

If you're reusing cores, you need some place to store cores, and maybe a post-flight facility that's separate from the pre-flight facility.

It's an old plan. That hangar looks to be something like 120 feet across. Maybe sized for two Heavies side by side with room to work. Or, that could just be the lot the hangar's on. The vehicle and payload processing buildings have been moving around and I don't know if they've settled on a layout yet. Dave G probably keeps better track of that than I do.
 It's possible the return pad design is waiting for a few more landings so they can get a confidence level for precision.
 I have this vision of a Youtube video showing me in a field watching the return with binoculars that move until they're pointed straight up, and then breaking the 200 yard dash record.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 01/24/2016 07:47 pm
Here's the amended launch site plans filed with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers in May 2015.  These new plans were online (http://www.swg.usace.army.mil/Media/PublicNotices/tabid/2217/Article/587971/swg-2012-00381-spacex-cameron-county.aspx) for the public comment period, which is when I copied the picture below, then they were removed from the site.

As I've mentioned before, note the addition of the land bridge just to the South of the launch site.  The addendum said that this was for vehicular access to the southern part of the site.  If they're raising the launch pad by 24 feet with a ramp up from the hangar, I wonder how that will work with this land bridge.

By the way, the the addendum also said this new land bridge would include culverts, so tidal water would still be able to flow beneath it.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: jfallen on 01/25/2016 02:16 pm
No indication of potential landing sites.  How does this compare with the land that SpaceX has purchased in the area?  Is there a logical location for a landing site?
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: acsawdey on 01/25/2016 02:50 pm
No indication of potential landing sites.  How does this compare with the land that SpaceX has purchased in the area?  Is there a logical location for a landing site?

If the primary purpose of this site is commercial payloads to GTO, they can't do RTLS for most of those anyway and landing will be on an ASDS in the middle of the gulf somewhere. They could always add a landing pad later if there is a need.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: cscott on 01/25/2016 02:59 pm
I believe Dave G's speculation was that landing pads would be on the other side of that "land bridge".
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: sghill on 01/25/2016 04:04 pm
Can we drop on-shore landing talk for Boca Chica for a while please? There has been no (public) discussion of landing pads in relation to that launch site.  None of the applications or environmental documents discuss them.  I've read them. 

They do discuss launch monthly and yearly rates.  Off-shore landings won't be an issue as discussed in the final FAA EIS:

"After a launch, the first stage of the Falcon 9 would land in the open waters of the Gulf of Mexico, approximately 550 miles downrange, and would potentially be recovered by a salvage ship. The salvage ship would be able to locate the first stage through telemetry signals from the stage. If the expended first stage could not be located, it would likely be due to damage. It would subsequently sink, and therefore, it would not be recovered. Spent first stages falling into the Gulf of Mexico are a potential source of pollution to marine environments. Depending on the vehicle, varying quantities of LOX and RP-1 would remain in the fuel tanks at the time of the splashdown. Localized temporary adverse impacts on marine waters in the immediate area surrounding this landing may occur. However, long-term impacts would be negligible due to the vast volume of the Gulf of Mexico and dissipation that would quickly occur from any contamination that could potentially be associated with this activity. For the reasons above, the Proposed Action would not have a significant adverse direct impact on surface waters."

IMHO, There will be no on-shore landing facilities.  Furthermore, I don't see Boca Chica launch operations expanding further than has already been announced.  The natives are already more than a little restless- (and called out NSF user Nomadd by name! (this is old news))...  http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2015-09-09/elon-musk-making-enemies-fast-in-town-hosting-space-x-launches 

I happen to agree with the residents here.  If some security guard told me I couldn't enter or leave my neighborhood for 15 hours at a time on launch day once a month (PLUS additional closures for static firings and wet dress rehearsals on top of that), I'd be hopping mad and on the phone non-stop with my local, state, and federal representatives until this madness was fixed.   To think that they are going to be allowed to make the situation worse with higher launch tempo and on-shore landings is stretching the imagination to the point of giggle factor.  It was shady politics that allowed the deal to go through on the backs of the residents and wetlands to begin with (again, IMHO, but I do happen to work in the economic incentives field).  The final EIS is full of "this may impact..." language instead of the usual "this will have no significant impact" wording you see in these things.

There are also a whole host of agencies and sensitive areas affected by each launch that would have to accommodate a higher launch tempo with their own financial and manpower resources.  These include: U.S. Customs and Border Protection; Cameron County and State of Texas law enforcement agencies; the cities of Brownsville and South Padre Island; NPS; Palo Alto Battlefield National Historic Park; USFWS, Lower Rio Grande Valley NWR; TPWD; TGLO; TxDOT; and USCG. They aren't going to do this for free.

Proposed launch operations would consist of up to 12 commercial launch operations per year, including launches of the Falcon 9, a maximum of two Falcon Heavy launches, and/or associated mission rehearsals and static fire
engine testing, through the year 2025.

The whole area will be underwater in 20 years anyway.

Just several more reasons to have an off-shore launch and lading facility anywhere the public supports one...

Changing topics completely.  This is pretty cool recent news from down there that made the paper:  http://portisabelsouthpadre.com/2016/01/15/city-moves-forward-with-viewing-facility/
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: rockets4life97 on 01/25/2016 04:31 pm
Sghill I understand your concern, but you might want to remember the Brownsville is in Texas. Texas is corporation friendly and I expect that SpaceX's money and government support (read: the governor) will make all of this go away. Now I'm not saying it should work that way, but until I see otherwise, I think we can expect SpaceX to get more or less whatever it wants.

If reusability is proven (by future relights of landed stages), there is no reason to think there won't eventually be landing pad at this site.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Kansan52 on 01/25/2016 04:39 pm
Wasn't the false story of residents being stopped on launch days already covered? All residents can come and go even on launch days but will have to stop at the guard station entering and exiting. A hassle but not a lock down.

No resident will be allowed past the second guard station close to the launch site and the beach will be closed on launch days. That may be the reason for these lock down rumors.

I'm curious, how will launches effect Palo Alto Park? My understanding was business as usual on launch days. Same with the cities although there will be more tourists on those days.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: JamesH on 01/25/2016 06:15 pm
Can we drop on-shore landing talk for Boca Chica for a while please? There has been no (public) discussion of landing pads in relation to that launch site.  None of the applications or environmental documents discuss them.  I've read them. 

They do discuss launch monthly and yearly rates.  Off-shore landings won't be an issue as discussed in the final FAA EIS:

"After a launch, the first stage of the Falcon 9 would land in the open waters of the Gulf of Mexico, approximately 550 miles downrange, and would potentially be recovered by a salvage ship. The salvage ship would be able to locate the first stage through telemetry signals from the stage. If the expended first stage could not be located, it would likely be due to damage. It would subsequently sink, and therefore, it would not be recovered. Spent first stages falling into the Gulf of Mexico are a potential source of pollution to marine environments. Depending on the vehicle, varying quantities of LOX and RP-1 would remain in the fuel tanks at the time of the splashdown. Localized temporary adverse impacts on marine waters in the immediate area surrounding this landing may occur. However, long-term impacts would be negligible due to the vast volume of the Gulf of Mexico and dissipation that would quickly occur from any contamination that could potentially be associated with this activity. For the reasons above, the Proposed Action would not have a significant adverse direct impact on surface waters."

IMHO, There will be no on-shore landing facilities.  Furthermore, I don't see Boca Chica launch operations expanding further than has already been announced.  The natives are already more than a little restless- (and called out NSF user Nomadd by name! (this is old news))...  http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2015-09-09/elon-musk-making-enemies-fast-in-town-hosting-space-x-launches 

I happen to agree with the residents here.  If some security guard told me I couldn't enter or leave my neighborhood for 15 hours at a time on launch day once a month (PLUS additional closures for static firings and wet dress rehearsals on top of that), I'd be hopping mad and on the phone non-stop with my local, state, and federal representatives until this madness was fixed.   To think that they are going to be allowed to make the situation worse with higher launch tempo and on-shore landings is stretching the imagination to the point of giggle factor.  It was shady politics that allowed the deal to go through on the backs of the residents and wetlands to begin with (again, IMHO, but I do happen to work in the economic incentives field).  The final EIS is full of "this may impact..." language instead of the usual "this will have no significant impact" wording you see in these things.

There are also a whole host of agencies and sensitive areas affected by each launch that would have to accommodate a higher launch tempo with their own financial and manpower resources.  These include: U.S. Customs and Border Protection; Cameron County and State of Texas law enforcement agencies; the cities of Brownsville and South Padre Island; NPS; Palo Alto Battlefield National Historic Park; USFWS, Lower Rio Grande Valley NWR; TPWD; TGLO; TxDOT; and USCG. They aren't going to do this for free.

Proposed launch operations would consist of up to 12 commercial launch operations per year, including launches of the Falcon 9, a maximum of two Falcon Heavy launches, and/or associated mission rehearsals and static fire
engine testing, through the year 2025.

The whole area will be underwater in 20 years anyway.

Just several more reasons to have an off-shore launch and lading facility anywhere the public supports one...

Changing topics completely.  This is pretty cool recent news from down there that made the paper:  http://portisabelsouthpadre.com/2016/01/15/city-moves-forward-with-viewing-facility/

Surely if any or all of this were true, SpaceX would never have chosen the site? (especially the bit about being underwater in 20 years, considering Musk's knowledge on the global warming issue)
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: JBF on 01/25/2016 06:26 pm
Surely if any or all of this were true, SpaceX would never have chosen the site? (especially the bit about being underwater in 20 years, considering Musk's knowledge on the global warming issue)

There is a reason they are elevating the pad area by 24 feet.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: llanitedave on 01/25/2016 06:29 pm
If Boca Chica is under water in 20 years, so will all the other East Coast launch sites be.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: cscott on 01/25/2016 06:47 pm
Much of the Netherlands is "under water".  Just sayin'.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: kch on 01/25/2016 07:02 pm
Surely if any or all of this were true, SpaceX would never have chosen the site? (especially the bit about being underwater in 20 years, considering Musk's knowledge on the global warming issue)

There is a reason they are elevating the pad area by 24 feet.

Building their off-shore launch facility while it's still easy to do (before it's off-shore) ... ;)


If Boca Chica is under water in 20 years, so will all the other East Coast launch sites be.

Exactly -- doing likewise at the Cape and Wallops would seem prudent.

Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Nomadd on 01/25/2016 10:30 pm
I think people are getting Palo Alto mixed up with Palmito hill. Palo Alto is nowhere near Boca Chica.
 And Bloomburg isn't a very good place to get your information.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: sghill on 01/26/2016 12:26 am
Surely if any or all of this were true, SpaceX would never have chosen the site? (especially the bit about being underwater in 20 years, considering Musk's knowledge on the global warming issue)

There is a reason they are elevating the pad area by 24 feet.

Just the pad.  The picture of the bulldozer ought to tell you how much water is around that place.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Nomadd on 01/26/2016 02:59 am
 A few people were standing around the gear waving their hands today. I think the problem is that they want to scrape the vegetation off the surface before they start filling, but that's turning out to be a problem. The dozer operator told me the hill that's appearing is the layer with all the plants. I guess they're trying to avoid little voids and methane pockets, but that might be overkill considering how much they're building it up. (avoiding voids just doesn't sound right somehow)
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: 411rocket on 01/26/2016 06:51 am
A few people were standing around the gear waving their hands today. I think the problem is that they want to scrape the vegetation off the surface before they start filling, but that's turning out to be a problem. The dozer operator told me the hill that's appearing is the layer with all the plants. I guess they're trying to avoid little voids and methane pockets, but that might be overkill considering how much they're building it up. (avoiding voids just doesn't sound right somehow)

Could be that they are required, to remove the organics layer first, before adding fill. That is how it is up here. If digging down, the organics layer is piled separately from the lower layer & when filling back in, organics layer goes back on top. Also the compacting is usually done, after every 12" - 18" of fill is added, could be less due to current conditions.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: woods170 on 01/26/2016 07:24 am
Much of the Netherlands is "under water".  Just sayin'.

Yeah, and I have surprisingly dry feet despite being "under water".
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: woods170 on 01/26/2016 07:44 am
A few people were standing around the gear waving their hands today. I think the problem is that they want to scrape the vegetation off the surface before they start filling, but that's turning out to be a problem. The dozer operator told me the hill that's appearing is the layer with all the plants. I guess they're trying to avoid little voids and methane pockets, but that might be overkill considering how much they're building it up. (avoiding voids just doesn't sound right somehow)
You most certainly wanna get rid of most of the vegetation before adding heaps of earth. I will explain why.
I live in a polder in the Netherlands. After it had been milled dry in the 1960's and 70's it was not actually all that dry. To get the top soil layers to compact and dry-out (after all this was the former seabed) reed was sown. Reed sucks a lot of water from the soil. The reed was subsequently burned in place in to get rid of the water. This was repeated a few times. Next rapeseed was sown to help cultivate the top soil layers.
When construction of the first expeditionary camps was started in the 1960's a 4-to-6 foot layer of sand was added on top of the now dried-out former seabed, with the rapeseed still in place. This proved to be a big mistake. Within months pockets of gas developed creating sinkholes in the sand layer. So the procedure was quickly altered. Before adding the sand layer the rapeseed was harvested.
The reason for adding a sand layer before starting construction is to put additional weight on the soil, causing it to compact further and be a better ground for foundations.
Nowadays the former seabed has had over half century to dry-out and compact on it's own. New construction projects therefore no longer require the addition of a sand layer first.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: ArbitraryConstant on 01/26/2016 06:45 pm
Much of the Netherlands is "under water".  Just sayin'.
Florida's worse off as much of the bedrock is porous limestone, the water will just come up from underneath.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 01/27/2016 02:04 pm
Can we drop on-shore landing talk for Boca Chica for a while please?
Why?  This is a discussion thread, so everything is on the table.

Furthermore, I don't see Boca Chica launch operations expanding further than has already been announced.
Elon Musk has already talked publicly about launching BFR from Boca Chica, and at the groundbreaking he said "it could very well be that the first person that departs for another planet could depart from this location".  These statements imply expanding launch operations.  Note that there's is plenty of federally owned land to the south of the launch site.  Also, SpaceX has been buying vacant lots in the area (see map below).

I happen to agree with the residents here.  If some security guard told me I couldn't enter or leave my neighborhood for 15 hours at a time on launch day once a month...
You've been misinformed.  Residents of Boca Chica Village will be required to show their driver's license to pass checkpoints within 6 hours of launch, but there are no restrictions on their movement in and out of Boca Chica Village.  Boca Chica Beach will be evacuated 6 hours prior to launch.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Nomadd on 01/27/2016 04:52 pm


Could be that they are required, to remove the organics layer first, before adding fill. That is how it is up here. If digging down, the organics layer is piled separately from the lower layer & when filling back in, organics layer goes back on top. Also the compacting is usually done, after every 12" - 18" of fill is added, could be less due to current conditions.
Packing the soil every 12"-18" is exactly what the dozer driver said they're going to do.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: AncientU on 01/27/2016 05:39 pm
Can we drop on-shore landing talk for Boca Chica for a while please?
Why?  This is a discussion thread, so everything is on the table.

Furthermore, I don't see Boca Chica launch operations expanding further than has already been announced.
Elon Musk has already talked publicly about launching BFR from Boca Chica, and at the groundbreaking he said "it could very well be that the first person that departs for another planet could depart from this location".  These statements imply expanding launch operations.  Note that there's is plenty of federally owned land to the south of the launch site.  Also, SpaceX has been buying vacant lots in the area (see map below).


Gwynne Shotwell also talked about their goal of launching every two weeks from each site... approximately 100 launches per year. This includes Boca Chica.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: The_Ronin on 01/27/2016 06:26 pm
I have a hard time seeing 24 launches a year out of VAFB.  Boca, LC41, and LC39A?  Sure.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: AncientU on 01/27/2016 06:31 pm
Vandenberg will host the constellation launches, I believe.
These might not get going until 2019-2020, but there will be lots of them.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: oldAtlas_Eguy on 01/27/2016 08:47 pm
Vandenberg will host the constellation launches, I believe.
These might not get going until 2019-2020, but there will be lots of them.
The "CommX" constellation estimates for launches start at 32 FH launches and go up from there for a full population. There are lower numbers for a partial 256 sat constellation initial that would be put up by a few FH or several F9 launches. But no matter which conditions it will occur over a 2 or more years, most likely more than 3 years at about 10 per year of whatever number is on board a FH or F9. The launch rate is more likely a constraint of the satellite build rate than of the pad launch rate capability.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 01/28/2016 12:28 pm
Gwynne Shotwell also talked about their goal of launching every two weeks from each site... approximately 100 launches per year. This includes Boca Chica.

This would require an addendum to the EIS, which currently limits SpaceX to 12 flights per year.

But I suspect it would require minimal expansion of the launch site area, if any.  The current EIS (https://www.faa.gov/about/office_org/headquarters_offices/ast/environmental/nepa_docs/review/launch/spacex_texas_launch_site_environmental_impact_statement/media/FEIS_SpaceX_Texas_Launch_Site_Vol_I.pdf) already specifies 2 full-size launch vehicle hangars (one near the launch pad, the other in the control center area).  The EIS also specifies multiple payload processing facilities in the control center area.

By pipe-lining pre-launch activities in this way, I suspect SpaceX can do 25 launches per year with a single pad.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Prober on 01/28/2016 03:33 pm
Can we drop on-shore landing talk for Boca Chica for a while please?
Why?  This is a discussion thread, so everything is on the table.

Furthermore, I don't see Boca Chica launch operations expanding further than has already been announced.
Elon Musk has already talked publicly about launching BFR from Boca Chica, and at the groundbreaking he said "it could very well be that the first person that departs for another planet could depart from this location".  These statements imply expanding launch operations.  Note that there's is plenty of federally owned land to the south of the launch site.  Also, SpaceX has been buying vacant lots in the area (see map below).


Gwynne Shotwell also talked about their goal of launching every two weeks from each site... approximately 100 launches per year. This includes Boca Chica.
Lots of problems if true.  How large is the BFR? 
The launches, test fires etc go way beyond the stated 12 launches the site was signed up for. 
So when is this number of launches planned on happening?



Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: whitelancer64 on 01/28/2016 03:51 pm
Can we drop on-shore landing talk for Boca Chica for a while please?
Why?  This is a discussion thread, so everything is on the table.

Furthermore, I don't see Boca Chica launch operations expanding further than has already been announced.
Elon Musk has already talked publicly about launching BFR from Boca Chica, and at the groundbreaking he said "it could very well be that the first person that departs for another planet could depart from this location".  These statements imply expanding launch operations.  Note that there's is plenty of federally owned land to the south of the launch site.  Also, SpaceX has been buying vacant lots in the area (see map below).


Gwynne Shotwell also talked about their goal of launching every two weeks from each site... approximately 100 launches per year. This includes Boca Chica.
Lots of problems if true.  How large is the BFR? 
The launches, test fires etc go way beyond the stated 12 launches the site was signed up for. 
So when is this number of launches planned on happening?

Even 12 launches per year per site is 48 launches total.

Baby steps, guys. We're nowhere near that yet, the Brownsville launch site won't even be operational until 2018. This is several years down the road at best.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: AncientU on 01/28/2016 09:04 pm
Late-2016 or 2017 at the ground breaking:

Some good tidbit Elon clarifications by way of tweets from Stephen Clark:  https://twitter.com/StephenClark1

"Musk says commercial crews (meaning non-NASA crew flights) may also launch from South Texas. Makes sense to launch NASA crews from KSC."

"Musk: first launch from South Texas site could be in late 2016 or 2017. Plan to focus on GTO missions."

"Elon Musk: plan to finish work at KSC's pad 39A before building out South Texas launch site."

Think one of the FH launches was advertised as 2017 from Boca Chica... don't remember which.
Also, two SES sats from Texas in 2017:
http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=32503.msg1337321#msg1337321

2018 might not be too far off, but I wouldn't close the door on 2017 just yet.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Nomadd on 01/29/2016 05:02 am
Late-2016 or 2017 at the ground breaking:

Some good tidbit Elon clarifications by way of tweets from Stephen Clark:  https://twitter.com/StephenClark1

"Musk says commercial crews (meaning non-NASA crew flights) may also launch from South Texas. Makes sense to launch NASA crews from KSC."

"Musk: first launch from South Texas site could be in late 2016 or 2017. Plan to focus on GTO missions."

"Elon Musk: plan to finish work at KSC's pad 39A before building out South Texas launch site."

Think one of the FH launches was advertised as 2017 from Boca Chica... don't remember which.
Also, two SES sats from Texas in 2017:
http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=32503.msg1337321#msg1337321

2018 might not be too far off, but I wouldn't close the door on 2017 just yet.

Phil Larson said about a month ago that it was 2018 because they had plenty of capacity at Vandenburg and Florida till then and environmental stuff was taking longer than originally anticipated at Boca Chica.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Jarnis on 01/29/2016 07:04 am
I sincerely doubt they'll hit once per two weeks until they have multiple processing hangars at each pad. Too often one rocket or payload has a snag that adds a week or two and everything else gets bumped back. If they instead could just swap around boosters & payloads on the manifest at that point - next one will come from "Hangar A" instead of "Hangar B" where they work the issue - then *maybe* they'd get to twice-a-month launch rate.

In theory they could do this at LC39-A since the hangar can easily fit two F9s and I guess if they do "Heavy-sized" hangar to Texas, maybe there too. Existing older hangars need another hangar or increase current one in size.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: AncientU on 01/29/2016 02:34 pm
I sincerely doubt they'll hit once per two weeks until they have multiple processing hangars at each pad. Too often one rocket or payload has a snag that adds a week or two and everything else gets bumped back. If they instead could just swap around boosters & payloads on the manifest at that point - next one will come from "Hangar A" instead of "Hangar B" where they work the issue - then *maybe* they'd get to twice-a-month launch rate.

In theory they could do this at LC39-A since the hangar can easily fit two F9s and I guess if they do "Heavy-sized" hangar to Texas, maybe there too. Existing older hangars need another hangar or increase current one in size.

Took nine months or so to put up the huge hanger at LC-39A.
Hanger space shouldn't be the constraint.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: guckyfan on 01/29/2016 02:45 pm
In theory they could do this at LC39-A since the hangar can easily fit two F9s and I guess if they do "Heavy-sized" hangar to Texas, maybe there too. Existing older hangars need another hangar or increase current one in size.


Took nine months or so to put up the huge hanger at LC-39A.
Hanger space shouldn't be the constraint.

It will be a good indicator for their intentions what size hangar they build at Boca Chica. For 1 a month and only two Falcon Heavy a year they won't need a LC-39A size hangar.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: StuffOfInterest on 01/29/2016 05:02 pm
In theory they could do this at LC39-A since the hangar can easily fit two F9s and I guess if they do "Heavy-sized" hangar to Texas, maybe there too. Existing older hangars need another hangar or increase current one in size.


Took nine months or so to put up the huge hanger at LC-39A.
Hanger space shouldn't be the constraint.

It will be a good indicator for their intentions what size hangar they build at Boca Chica. For 1 a month and only two Falcon Heavy a year they won't need a LC-39A size hangar.

I thought the LC-39A hangar was the size you need for assembling a Falcon Heavy.  You need the ability to have five cores across inside so that you can have one off to each side and one hanging on the crane with the TE is rolled in.  The crane can then drop the first core in the center slot followed by dropping each side core on.  Any less and you have to have a way to suspend all three cores in the air while rolling in the TE.  Maybe I'm wrong but I don't think they plan on attaching the cores and then lifting as a group.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: guckyfan on 01/29/2016 10:30 pm
There are 2x3 cranes in the hangar of LC-39A. So they can suspend all 3 FH cores while bringing the TE in. The extra space could hold two more cores.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Robotbeat on 01/30/2016 01:20 am
The LC39A hangar is bigger than the Vandenberg one, which is also capable of handling a Falcon Heavy. LC39A has more space than strictly needed just for Falcon Heavy.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Herb Schaltegger on 01/30/2016 01:23 am
The LC39A hangar is bigger than the Vandenberg one, which is also capable of handling a Falcon Heavy. LC39A has more space than strictly needed just for Falcon Heavy.

I seem to remember a thread where it was conjectured (with superficially not-obviously-wrong reasoning), that the hangar at LC39A is appropriately-sized to handle a Heavy and a single-core F9 simultaneously, for instance if one or the other is in near-term launch preparations and the core(s) for the next mission arrive during the prior launch campaign.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: StuffOfInterest on 01/31/2016 10:48 am
The LC39A hangar is bigger than the Vandenberg one, which is also capable of handling a Falcon Heavy. LC39A has more space than strictly needed just for Falcon Heavy.

By "2x3" I'm guessing you mean two cranes with three lift points each.  I presume the same thing could be accomplished with two cranes and one lift point each if you have a fixture to spread the loads.  Either way, I stand corrected on doing a three core lift when putting the rocket on the TE.

My first inclination is to say that SpaceX wouldn't want another rocket so close to the pad during a launch in case of a catastrophic failure.  But, when you consider the odds of that sort of event, they probably considered the risk minimal compared to the benefits of being able to start prepping cores for the next launch before the previous one is gone.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: guckyfan on 01/31/2016 12:29 pm
By "2x3" I'm guessing you mean two cranes with three lift points each. 

Yes, that's what I meant. 3 lift points on one crane were visible in a photo from the tour bus. That the second crane has 3 lift points too is very plausible conjecture from that.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 01/31/2016 06:21 pm
My first inclination is to say that SpaceX wouldn't want another rocket so close to the pad during a launch in case of a catastrophic failure. 
The current EIS (https://www.faa.gov/about/office_org/headquarters_offices/ast/environmental/nepa_docs/review/launch/spacex_texas_launch_site_environmental_impact_statement/media/FEIS_SpaceX_Texas_Launch_Site_Vol_I.pdf) specifies 2 full-size launch vehicle hangars (one near the launch pad, the other in the control center area).  The EIS also specifies 2 separate payload processing facilities in the control center area.

It seems like this arrangement should allow a pipeline of activity leading to launch.

Also, according to the EIS (https://www.faa.gov/about/office_org/headquarters_offices/ast/environmental/nepa_docs/review/launch/spacex_texas_launch_site_environmental_impact_statement/media/FEIS_SpaceX_Texas_Launch_Site_Vol_I.pdf),

1) the hangar at the launch pad will be 43,200 square feet (360 x 120 x 65 ft high)

2) the hangar at the control center will be 30,774 square feet, 50-65 ft tall, and will be used to conduct refurbishment of flown stages, or for pre-integration preparation of the launch vehicle stages before they go to the pad hangar for final integration.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Nomadd on 02/02/2016 06:43 pm
 Just in case pictures of dirt weren't riveting enough, we now have pictures of dirt and rocks, along with the equipment that moves and compacts them. Also, a photo of one of the local residents inspecting the project.
 The fence surrounds what looks like the spot the pad warehouse will be on.

Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 02/02/2016 07:17 pm
Digging deep to shed light
http://www.valleybusinessreport.com/recent-news/digging-deep-to-shed-light/

Quote
When SpaceX decided to build their rocket launch site at Boca Chica Beach, as good corporate citizens the company ordered an archeological survey of the entire area around the control facility and launch parcels. For Jack Keller, principal investigator for Southern Archeological Consultants Inc., the job was a short drive from his office in Bayview.

Two bridges once ran from Boca Chica Island to the mainland: Gen. Zachary Taylor’s wagon bridge was built in 1846 and Sheridan’s Bridge for trains was built 1866.  Remnants of the bridges, consisting of  cypress and palmetto pilings ranging from nubbins to three-feet-tall stubs, are within one-half mile of the SpaceX launch site.

“We ended up updating the documentation on all those pilings. They are among the most tangible connections to those times,” Keller said. He recorded and photographed the bridge sites, which are under federal and state ownership. “The pilings had already been determined to be eligible for the National Register of Historic Places...”
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: sewebster on 02/02/2016 08:27 pm
What counts as Boca Chica Island?
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Kabloona on 02/02/2016 09:23 pm
What counts as Boca Chica Island?

Sounds like they mean Brazos Island:

Quote
A road was built down Brazos Island, across Boca Chica Bay to the Rio Grande in 1846. To cross Boca Chica Bay, General Zachary Taylor built a floating bridge[when?] to transport military supplies. Some of the cypress pilings still stand north of a monument.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boca_Chica_State_Park
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Nomadd on 02/03/2016 03:43 am
What counts as Boca Chica Island?

Sounds like they mean Brazos Island:

Quote
A road was built down Brazos Island, across Boca Chica Bay to the Rio Grande in 1846. To cross Boca Chica Bay, General Zachary Taylor built a floating bridge[when?] to transport military supplies. Some of the cypress pilings still stand north of a monument.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boca_Chica_State_Park
The maps you see today are different from the maps 150 years ago. Boca Chica/Brazos island/South Bay sands have shifted quite a bit. The narrow place about three miles west of the beach was underwater a lot before they built the highway, so they called the whole thing an island. The jetty on the north end of Brazos Island stabilized things quite a bit and is a great place to watch dolphins and sea turtles all day when you're suppose to be painting the living room. The pilings are on the north side of the highway and you can see bits of them for about 1/2 mile, almost to the beach. There are also pier pilings going out into the water. Brazos Island is pretty much the part 1 to 3 1/2 miles north of the highway.
 Boca Chica actually refers to the narrow place on the beach a mile north of the highway, which use to be open water. What the article calls Boca Chica Bay is mostly just South Bay.
 Source: The bartender at Shenanigan's and a Civil war buff on the beach who looks old enough to have been there.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Kabloona on 02/03/2016 06:45 pm
Tweet from James Dean of Florida Today:

Quote
James Dean ‏@flatoday_jdean
Shotwell re. Brownsville launch site: soil isn’t particularly stable, so 2 years of dirt work ahead. More expensive than were planning.

2 years of dirt work. Ouch.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Halidon on 02/04/2016 06:13 am
24 months of soil stabilization would be less than fun. I wonder how much the launches will be a threat to destabilize it further on, especially the rather large rockets we have speculated on here.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: rpapo on 02/04/2016 10:07 am
It shall be interesting to see if they get any issues with soil liquefaction under the vibrations produced by the Falcon Heavy, or later perhaps by the BFR. 
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: StuffOfInterest on 02/04/2016 10:37 am
When construction does start up I wonder if we'll see pilings to rival those used on the Vehicle Assembly Building at KSC?

http://www.nasa.gov/content/vehicle-assembly-building-prepared-for-another-50-years-of-service (http://www.nasa.gov/content/vehicle-assembly-building-prepared-for-another-50-years-of-service)

Quote
4,225 pilings were driven down 164 feet to bedrock
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: JamesH on 02/04/2016 12:50 pm
When construction does start up I wonder if we'll see pilings to rival those used on the Vehicle Assembly Building at KSC?

http://www.nasa.gov/content/vehicle-assembly-building-prepared-for-another-50-years-of-service (http://www.nasa.gov/content/vehicle-assembly-building-prepared-for-another-50-years-of-service)

Quote
4,225 pilings were driven down 164 feet to bedrock

Here in the Fenland area of the UK, we have to pile up to 20m/65ft (not to bedrock) just for residential houses, by regulations, which I suspect were written by piling companies.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: cscott on 02/04/2016 02:38 pm
In her talk, Gwynne explicitly compared the work to the "concrete mountains" at the KSC launch pads.  The Brownsville work won't be unusual.  I trust the geotechnical engineers to know what needs to be done to stabilize the site, and then Gwynne mentioned they'd lay concrete over everything to finish it off.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: abaddon on 02/04/2016 02:44 pm
24 months of soil stabilization would be less than fun. I wonder how much the launches will be a threat to destabilize it further on
Why would they be a threat?
Quote
especially the rather large rockets we have speculated on here.
Anyone counting on a BFR launched from this site is being unrealistic, unless SpaceX could buy out all of Boca Chica, which seems very unlikely.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Burninate on 02/04/2016 04:20 pm
Does anyone have a copy of the video of Shotwell making statements about falcon 9/heavy at the ISDC in DC?
Here's a link to Shotwell's talk:
She's on at 2:43:00
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2cT7_iySwP8
Boca Chica site seems to have unstable soil, turns out to be more expensive than expected, we need to build the giant concrete mountains you see at the Cape.  Need "about two years of dirt work".
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Burninate on 02/04/2016 04:33 pm
24 months of soil stabilization would be less than fun. I wonder how much the launches will be a threat to destabilize it further on
Why would they be a threat?
Quote
especially the rather large rockets we have speculated on here.
Anyone counting on a BFR launched from this site is being unrealistic, unless SpaceX could buy out all of Boca Chica, which seems very unlikely.
I fully expect them to buy out all of the Boca Chica Village houses.  They're way too close to launch FH without doing that - only 1.5 - 2 miles.  The problem is South Padre Island at 5 miles away.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Lars-J on 02/04/2016 07:06 pm
I fully expect them to buy out all of the Boca Chica Village houses.  They're way too close to launch FH without doing that - only 1.5 - 2 miles.  The problem is South Padre Island at 5 miles away.

They are never going to be able to do anything about South Padre Island, and they knew that going in. It will be a prime rocket launch (and landing) viewing area.  :D
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Halidon on 02/04/2016 08:00 pm
24 months of soil stabilization would be less than fun. I wonder how much the launches will be a threat to destabilize it further on
Why would they be a threat?
Sorry, I posted a thought fragment. I have a little familiarity with Rail industry soil stabilization work, and I was speculating that the more extensive "dirt work" than they were initially planning came not just from the state of the soil as-is today but concern re: how the launches might effect the soil. In rail, an embankment in a location that is normally dry but occasionally has very wet storms/floods (like the coast of Texas) will sometimes experience soil liquefaction when train-induced vibrations are added to the mix.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Nomadd on 02/04/2016 08:44 pm
24 months of soil stabilization would be less than fun. I wonder how much the launches will be a threat to destabilize it further on
Why would they be a threat?
Quote
especially the rather large rockets we have speculated on here.
Anyone counting on a BFR launched from this site is being unrealistic, unless SpaceX could buy out all of Boca Chica, which seems very unlikely.
I fully expect them to buy out all of the Boca Chica Village houses.  They're way too close to launch FH without doing that - only 1.5 - 2 miles.  The problem is South Padre Island at 5 miles away.
A SpaceX spokesman personally assured me they were OK with village residents watching FH launches from their yards. They figure a small chance of structural damage at that range, but I don't think anyone will mind new, pressure rated windows paid for by Elon. Crank up hurricane shutters would also be acceptable.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Nomadd on 02/05/2016 06:10 am
Boca Chica site seems to have unstable soil, turns out to be more expensive than expected, we need to build the giant concrete mountains you see at the Cape.  Need "about two years of dirt work".
What did they expect to find in a tidal flat? One of the guys working at the site told me that once the fill starts coming in, with all the wick drains they're installing, the site should be dry, stable and ready to build on in 8 months. Of course, being strong enough for a "giant concrete mountain" might take longer. The stories conflict some. One person said they're building up the site to construction level, but couldn't explain how the warehouse could be close to road level if they were adding fill to compact the underlying dirt but not scraping the top off before construction. Maybe it will be 120 foot deep pilings for the warehouse, or an approach not in the old EIS.
 The problem might be that they accounted for the salt water near the surface, but not the fresh water layer from 60 feet to 100 feet or so. I don't know if the wick drains were planned from the beginning or added later.
 In any case, eyes on will have to wait for a while unless someone else makes it down there. I'm off taking care of some stuff in a much colder place for a month or so.
 
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Nomadd on 02/09/2016 11:56 pm
 A little news story from the local station with Ed's interview, along with an interesting find.

http://www.onenewspage.com/video/20160119/3812727/Foundation-Problems-Delay-SpaceX-Launch.htm

https://youtu.be/cftBm-UjILA
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Lar on 02/10/2016 12:30 am
Nomadd:

Who did that Boca Chica flyover vid? And who wrote that somewhat corny song :) ???
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Nomadd on 02/10/2016 12:40 am
Nomadd:

Who did that Boca Chica flyover vid? And who wrote that somewhat corny song :) ???
Just click the "Watch on Youtube" button and you'll know as much as I do.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: launchwatcher on 02/10/2016 12:58 am
Nomadd:

Who did that Boca Chica flyover vid? And who wrote that somewhat corny song :) ???
Skip to the end - there are credits at 10:33

"Pilot & Editor: Tommy J. Saenz, DJI Inspire 1 Quadcopter"
"Music: BongoDogs, Boca Chica - Puro Caliche album".
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: OnWithTheShow on 02/10/2016 01:17 am
Am I just confused or does the camera pan towards Northeast and then Northwest toward South Padre while the screen says "Mexico"
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Nomadd on 02/10/2016 02:28 am
Am I just confused or does the camera pan towards Northeast and then Northwest toward South Padre while the screen says "Mexico"
You're not confused. It was pointed at Port Isabel when it said Mexico. He probably just got the timing off.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: llanitedave on 02/10/2016 02:28 am
Am I just confused or does the camera pan towards Northeast and then Northwest toward South Padre while the screen says "Mexico"
You're not confused. It was pointed at Port Isabel when it said Mexico.


Music videos never tell the truth!
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Llian Rhydderch on 02/10/2016 02:28 am
Am I just confused or does the camera pan towards Northeast and then Northwest toward South Padre while the screen says "Mexico"

Yeah, I think you are correct.  I noticed that too.  That part of the vid where the "Mexico" label appears is a mistrake.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: chrisking0997 on 02/10/2016 04:30 pm
I give...what was the interesting find?  and what is in that stand of trees at the north end of the main road?
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 02/10/2016 08:24 pm
I give...what was the interesting find?
Nomad posted 2 links:

1) A little news story from the local station with Ed's interview:
http://www.onenewspage.com/video/20160119/3812727/Foundation-Problems-Delay-SpaceX-Launch.htm

2) The YouTube video of the drone flying over Boca Chica, which he called an interesting find.

and what is in that stand of trees at the north end of the main road?
Sam Clauson's trailer.

Man Denied Building Permits by the County at Boca Chica Village
Quote
Sam Clauson planned to spend his golden years at Boca Chica Village.

"I thought maybe I could build a house, eventually a retirement home," he said.

That dream was squashed. Cameron County said his property was too close to sea level to dig the required sewer and water lines. They also wouldn't provide electricity hookup.

"He says, 'if we start granting you electricity, we have to grant other people electricity so we can't start a new trend,'" Clauson said.

The county gave him a permit to build a garage.

"It is 24 feet wide and 46 feet long," he said.

Still, he was in the dark.

"I applied for electricity … they denied it," Clauson said.

Clauson said he spent months getting permits and paperwork to do things the right way. Now, all he has is a cement slab.

"Cameron County does not want to expand this village, even though Space-X will have one of their buildings right across the street here," he said.

CHANNEL 5 NEWS asked the county how Space-X plans to build a rocket launch site and facilities without water, sewer and electricity.

"We have not received the documentation from them for the utilities," Interim Cameron County Administrator David Garcia said.

Garcia said the county does not ask questions during the planning process. He said they only approve or deny permit applications.

Garcia said Space-X will have to follow the same guidelines that prohibited Clauson from building his dream home.

"They would have to meet all the criteria the county has set in place to be able to operate at that facility for water, electrical," he said.

Clauson said he will move forward with his plans.

"We're going to build our garage," he said. Even if it's just to sit-in and watch a launch in the dark.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: CraigLieb on 02/10/2016 08:51 pm
Can't he install solar panels and a battery system? seems like a  few panels, a battery and some LED lighting would work very effectively. No service needed.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Johnnyhinbos on 02/10/2016 10:44 pm
He should eventually have pretty good candle light a few times a week...
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: spacenut on 02/10/2016 11:54 pm
If he has a garage that big, he might want to have a hoist, an air compressor, electric drills, bench grinder, etc.  Electricity will be needed.  However, I think the county, etc, knows and wants SpaceX to buy up all the property in hopes they manufacture their BFR/MCT there as well as build launch facilities. 
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Nomadd on 02/11/2016 12:21 am
Can't he install solar panels and a battery system? seems like a  few panels, a battery and some LED lighting would work very effectively. No service needed.
I've offered to help. I've already fixed one system in the village where they thought you just hook the panels straight to the battery.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Donosauro on 02/11/2016 01:04 am
If he has a garage that big, he might want to have a hoist, an air compressor, electric drills, bench grinder, etc.  Electricity will be needed.  However, I think the county, etc, knows and wants SpaceX to buy up all the property in hopes they manufacture their BFR/MCT there as well as build launch facilities.

Unless there's no intent to use most of the garage as such, but to use it as a house. Solar power is obvious, and it would be easy and quick to add a rudimentary system. Bottled water, chemical toilet, and a solar shower could provide a first cut at creature comforts. People have been known to do their cooking outdoors on barbeque pits. Add an ice chest to keep the beer cold.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 02/12/2016 10:22 pm
Another local news story including an interview with Rayford Pointer.

SpaceX working to stabilize land at rocket launch site
http://valleycentral.com/news/local/spacex-working-to-stabilize-land-at-rocket-launch-site
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 02/12/2016 10:36 pm
Looks like the local university at Brownsville was part of the recent discovery of gravitational waves.
http://www.valleymorningstar.com/news/local_news/article_6f6fc5fe-d144-11e5-af55-27487a0bbab0.html

Quote
University of Texas Rio Grande Valley physicists, some who’ve worked decades on the project, are among more than 1,000 international collaborators with the Laser Interferometer Gravitational-wave Observatory (LIGO). The Brownsville-based research center has been home to more than 20 authors of a paper published Feb. 11 by the peer-reviewed Physical Review Letters.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Vultur on 02/12/2016 11:11 pm
Why do they need to spend 2 years working on the soil? Why not just build the pad etc. on pilings down to bedrock? Is the bedrock in the area unrealistically deep?
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: HIP2BSQRE on 02/12/2016 11:41 pm
Another local news story including an interview with Rayford Pointer.

SpaceX working to stabilize land at rocket launch site
http://valleycentral.com/news/local/spacex-working-to-stabilize-land-at-rocket-launch-site


How come they did not know this before they selected the site????
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Lars-J on 02/12/2016 11:43 pm
Another local news story including an interview with Rayford Pointer.

SpaceX working to stabilize land at rocket launch site
http://valleycentral.com/news/local/spacex-working-to-stabilize-land-at-rocket-launch-site

How come they did not know this before they selected the site????

Because sometimes estimates, even by experienced contractors, are not accurate? Or are you fishing for another answer, like "they are incompetent"?  :o
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Roy_H on 02/12/2016 11:58 pm
Another local news story including an interview with Rayford Pointer.

SpaceX working to stabilize land at rocket launch site
http://valleycentral.com/news/local/spacex-working-to-stabilize-land-at-rocket-launch-site


How come they did not know this before they selected the site????

The short answer is that they did know. However the amount of dirt required exceeded their original estimates.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Nomadd on 02/13/2016 02:11 am
 I already got in trouble for this once, but don't take Gwynne's remarks as technically accurate. Elon is a rare executive who knows the business down to the nuts and bolts. Most top level execs come from a different place.
 I don't know if they took cores in the early days, but even if they did, they could have underestimated how variable the soil is from one spot to the next, or the underlying terrain. There's a lot of guesswork in figuring relatively newly deposited land like that. And, spending six months taking hundreds of cores, samples and doing seismic surveys probably wouldn't have been faster, cheaper or better than just getting on with the job and doing what they need to do to rectify any problems. It sort of reflects their philosophy in building rockets.
 They're not in any big hurry. They have all the launch capacity they need for the next few years.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: JoerTex on 02/13/2016 01:46 pm
Why do they need to spend 2 years working on the soil? Why not just build the pad etc. on pilings down to bedrock? Is the bedrock in the area unrealistically deep?

Vultur, go look at the geology.  The Texas gulf coast isn't like most places.  I've seen piles for a drill platform go over 900ft.  This is all sandy deposits from the Rio Grande, all the way to Louisiana.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: JoerTex on 02/13/2016 01:56 pm
Another local news story including an interview with Rayford Pointer.

SpaceX working to stabilize land at rocket launch site
http://valleycentral.com/news/local/spacex-working-to-stabilize-land-at-rocket-launch-site


How come they did not know this before they selected the site????

They chose the site for orbital access parameters and proximity to industrial capability.  Site conditions were low in the criteria.  The lobby efforts in the Legislature and work to secure permits preceded any on-site geo-tech studies, but the geology is well known to petroleum community.  The cost benefit trades were done at that level of detail.

Site costs at Boca Chica are lower than getting the infrastructure in -place at another location  - look at what it cost Arianespace to set-up Guiana site.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: the_other_Doug on 02/13/2016 02:19 pm
Why do they need to spend 2 years working on the soil? Why not just build the pad etc. on pilings down to bedrock? Is the bedrock in the area unrealistically deep?

Vultur, go look at the geology.  The Texas gulf coast isn't like most places.  I've seen piles for a drill platform go over 900ft.  This is all sandy deposits from the Rio Grande, all the way to Louisiana.

Honestly, they have the same issues getting down to bedrock along a lot of the ocean coastal areas in the U.S.  Don't even ask how many piles were driven, and how deep, to keep the VAB at KSC from blowing away in the wind like a gigantic box kite...
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: billh on 02/13/2016 02:57 pm
Why do they need to spend 2 years working on the soil? Why not just build the pad etc. on pilings down to bedrock? Is the bedrock in the area unrealistically deep?

Vultur, go look at the geology.  The Texas gulf coast isn't like most places.  I've seen piles for a drill platform go over 900ft.  This is all sandy deposits from the Rio Grande, all the way to Louisiana.

Honestly, they have the same issues getting down to bedrock along a lot of the ocean coastal areas in the U.S.  Don't even ask how many piles were driven, and how deep, to keep the VAB at KSC from blowing away in the wind like a gigantic box kite...

When you sink pilings along the Gulf Coast, the objective isn't to hit bedrock. You just drive them far enough that the friction with the surrounding soil allows them to bear the load without sinking further. In Houston, which is probably typical of the whole Gulf Coast, there's nothing but sand and clay down to maybe 300 feet or more.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: JamesG123 on 02/13/2016 07:40 pm
If they could sink pilings in the 19th century for brick forts that sit in the middle of a swamp (like Ft. Polaski (http://www.nps.gov/fopu/index.htm)), they will have no trouble with a pad.  Its well understood engineering.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: oldAtlas_Eguy on 02/13/2016 07:49 pm
Why do they need to spend 2 years working on the soil? Why not just build the pad etc. on pilings down to bedrock? Is the bedrock in the area unrealistically deep?

Vultur, go look at the geology.  The Texas gulf coast isn't like most places.  I've seen piles for a drill platform go over 900ft.  This is all sandy deposits from the Rio Grande, all the way to Louisiana.

Honestly, they have the same issues getting down to bedrock along a lot of the ocean coastal areas in the U.S.  Don't even ask how many piles were driven, and how deep, to keep the VAB at KSC from blowing away in the wind like a gigantic box kite...

When you sink pilings along the Gulf Coast, the objective isn't to hit bedrock. You just drive them far enough that the friction with the surrounding soil allows them to bear the load without sinking further. In Houston, which is probably typical of the whole Gulf Coast, there's nothing but sand and clay down to maybe 300 feet or more.
A bit of trivia. The reason Florida exists at all is the on the East cost the bedrock is close to the surface and even reaches the surface at 150 miles south of KSC and then goes back under tracing down through the keys. Its this ridge that created the Florida peninsula by catch sand an sediment from winds and waves pushing out of the Gulf going east.

I don't believe there is anything similar along the Texas coast so winds have been eroding the area flat and slowly eating away the coastline.

You would really need geologic maps of bedrock depths numbers to really determine all of this. The Texas coast is similar to the Florida west coast with bedrock not really reachable by pilings.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Vultur on 02/13/2016 10:30 pm
Why do they need to spend 2 years working on the soil? Why not just build the pad etc. on pilings down to bedrock? Is the bedrock in the area unrealistically deep?

Vultur, go look at the geology.  The Texas gulf coast isn't like most places.  I've seen piles for a drill platform go over 900ft.  This is all sandy deposits from the Rio Grande, all the way to Louisiana.

Honestly, they have the same issues getting down to bedrock along a lot of the ocean coastal areas in the U.S.  Don't even ask how many piles were driven, and how deep, to keep the VAB at KSC from blowing away in the wind like a gigantic box kite...

When you sink pilings along the Gulf Coast, the objective isn't to hit bedrock. You just drive them far enough that the friction with the surrounding soil allows them to bear the load without sinking further. In Houston, which is probably typical of the whole Gulf Coast, there's nothing but sand and clay down to maybe 300 feet or more.

OK, I figured it would be hundreds of feet, but didn't know how long of pilings was practical.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Nomadd on 02/14/2016 04:22 pm
24 months of soil stabilization would be less than fun. I wonder how much the launches will be a threat to destabilize it further on
Why would they be a threat?
Sorry, I posted a thought fragment. I have a little familiarity with Rail industry soil stabilization work, and I was speculating that the more extensive "dirt work" than they were initially planning came not just from the state of the soil as-is today but concern re: how the launches might effect the soil. In rail, an embankment in a location that is normally dry but occasionally has very wet storms/floods (like the coast of Texas) will sometimes experience soil liquefaction when train-induced vibrations are added to the mix.
Halidon might be right on. Even if they had pilings that didn't move, they'd probably still want a base that launch vibration isn't going to affect.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: JamesG123 on 02/14/2016 09:26 pm

only one slight problem; they didn't launch FH off the forts :D

But they did shoot (and were hit by) a lot of cannon.  :-[

I picked the old gun forts as an example because the masses and structure (low and heavy) are comparable to a modern launch pad. And they are very, very old and yet still stable on very unstable ground.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: sdsds on 02/14/2016 09:42 pm
soil liquefaction
Halidon might be right on. Even if they had pilings that didn't move, they'd probably still want a base that launch vibration isn't going to affect.

Ugh! I suppose a solution could be to pour the concrete for the pad in the shape of a ship's hull, so when the ground beneath liquifies the pad will float....
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Jim_LAX on 02/15/2016 07:00 pm
Would that be a brief "shake down cruise"?  Oh, I regret that one already!
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: rpapo on 02/15/2016 07:25 pm
Would that be a brief "shake down cruise"?  Oh, I regret that one already!
The better to settle the matter...
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: D_Dom on 02/15/2016 09:40 pm
Whatever floats your launch pad!
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: SWGlassPit on 02/15/2016 09:55 pm
Why do they need to spend 2 years working on the soil? Why not just build the pad etc. on pilings down to bedrock? Is the bedrock in the area unrealistically deep?

Vultur, go look at the geology.  The Texas gulf coast isn't like most places.  I've seen piles for a drill platform go over 900ft.  This is all sandy deposits from the Rio Grande, all the way to Louisiana.

This.

It's sand and clay down hundreds and hundreds of feet -- anywhere from 300 to over 1000 feet before you get to bedrock.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: llanitedave on 02/16/2016 03:26 am
Why do they need to spend 2 years working on the soil? Why not just build the pad etc. on pilings down to bedrock? Is the bedrock in the area unrealistically deep?

Vultur, go look at the geology.  The Texas gulf coast isn't like most places.  I've seen piles for a drill platform go over 900ft.  This is all sandy deposits from the Rio Grande, all the way to Louisiana.

This.

It's sand and clay down hundreds and hundreds of feet -- anywhere from 300 to over 1000 feet before you get to bedrock.


Going the other direction, it's about 60 miles west of Boca Chica, just past McAllen, before you get any rock outcrops on the surface at all.  A little bit of dip in the strata goes a long way down over that distance.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: sghill on 02/16/2016 03:59 pm
If they could sink pilings in the 19th century for brick forts that sit in the middle of a swamp (like Ft. Polaski (http://www.nps.gov/fopu/index.htm)), they will have no trouble with a pad.  Its well understood engineering.

But the tolerances are totally different.

Go look at Castillo De San Marcos in St. Augustine.  It's got huge cracks from the top of the castle to the bottom at every corner from uneven settling.  That's fine if you are expecting nothing but a few French or British sloops to plink it with cannon shot.  It's not fine if you've got a launch tower on top of it.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Danny Dot on 02/16/2016 05:50 pm
The foundations of the sky scrapers in Houston do not rest on bedrock.  Bedrock is way too deep.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: rickyramjet on 02/16/2016 06:01 pm
If they could sink pilings in the 19th century for brick forts that sit in the middle of a swamp (like Ft. Polaski (http://www.nps.gov/fopu/index.htm)), they will have no trouble with a pad.  Its well understood engineering.

But the tolerances are totally different.

Go look at Castillo De San Marcos in St. Augustine.  It's got huge cracks from the top of the castle to the bottom at every corner from uneven settling.  That's fine if you are expecting nothing but a few French or British sloops to plink it with cannon shot.  It's not fine if you've got a launch tower on top of it.
Considering the stone masonry fort was built over 340 years ago I'd say it's holding up pretty well.  I also don't think it can be used as a valid comparison to modern steel reinforced high strength concrete.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: D_Dom on 02/17/2016 03:47 pm
Modern steel reinforced high strength concrete would have crumbled under the shelling of Dubrovnik during the '90s. The stone walls withstood extensive artillery fire as a testament to engineering practices dating back to the thirteenth century.
http://whc.unesco.org/en/list/95
 Apples and oranges I know, indeed off topic as well. Just saying, as long as SpaceX sticks with sound engineering they will be fine.
 Wonder what it is we are building in the 21st century that will still be in use 500 years from now?
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Lar on 02/17/2016 08:27 pm
Peeps!

Song Lyrics? Architects are losers? Stuff isn't built to last? The siege of Dubrovnik?

Need I say more?  ... Topic... It's thataway, C'mon guys, let's travel back.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Johnnyhinbos on 02/18/2016 02:00 pm

Peeps!

Song Lyrics? Architects are losers? Stuff isn't built to last? The siege of Dubrovnik?

Need I say more?  ... Topic... It's thataway, C'mon guys, let's travel back.


translate to english please :o
I think a proper translation would be, "Hey guys, please get this thread back on track!"
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 02/23/2016 10:52 am
More launch site construction pictures
https://imgur.com/a/mRCzd
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: bocachicagal on 02/25/2016 08:37 pm
Is this what you call a flag farm?   ;D
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: rpapo on 02/25/2016 08:52 pm
Is this what you call a flag farm?   ;D
Gotta grow something while the field is lying fallow...  ;D
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: rocx on 02/25/2016 08:58 pm
Is this what you call a flag farm?   ;D
Welcome to the forum! Very nice to have another member from Boca Chica joining us!
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: CraigLieb on 02/25/2016 09:00 pm
Is this what you call a flag farm?   ;D
Welcome to the forum! Very nice to have another member from Boca Chica joining us!

becoming a significant percentage of the resident population it seems...
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: bocachicagal on 02/26/2016 01:31 am
A sign that SpaceX is the "mystery" buyer of 16 Weems (and 7 Esperson) was when the water tank was taken from behind the house and transported to the construction site!
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Nomadd on 02/26/2016 04:56 am
A sign that SpaceX is the "mystery" buyer of 16 Weems (and 7 Esperson) was when the water tank was taken from behind the house and transported to the construction site!
Frank had never heard of Dogleg. I don't think he knows who the buyer is representing. Maybe Bloomberg will do some first class investigative reporting on the matter.
  (I'm still about three weeks from returning home myself)
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: CraigLieb on 02/26/2016 02:00 pm
A sign that SpaceX is the "mystery" buyer of 16 Weems (and 7 Esperson) was when the water tank was taken from behind the house and transported to the construction site!
wonder if they are going to take the house too?  usage ideas: storage shed?  block house? one of those buildings in the 1950's nuclear blast movies we saw as kids?
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Nomadd on 02/26/2016 03:20 pm
A sign that SpaceX is the "mystery" buyer of 16 Weems (and 7 Esperson) was when the water tank was taken from behind the house and transported to the construction site!
wonder if they are going to take the house too?  usage ideas: storage shed?  block house? one of those buildings in the 1950's nuclear blast movies we saw as kids?
Good luck moving a brick house on a concrete slab.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Lar on 02/26/2016 05:35 pm
Good luck moving a brick house on a concrete slab.
Two Merlins should do it. Dunno about reentry though... you're gonna need a bigger ... barge
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: CraigLieb on 02/26/2016 08:00 pm
A sign that SpaceX is the "mystery" buyer of 16 Weems (and 7 Esperson) was when the water tank was taken from behind the house and transported to the construction site!
wonder if they are going to take the house too?  usage ideas: storage shed?  block house? one of those buildings in the 1950's nuclear blast movies we saw as kids?
Good luck moving a brick house on a concrete slab.

I mean that little shed in the front of the crane in the picture.. seems like a nice shed.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Prober on 02/26/2016 08:58 pm
A sign that SpaceX is the "mystery" buyer of 16 Weems (and 7 Esperson) was when the water tank was taken from behind the house and transported to the construction site!
wonder if they are going to take the house too?  usage ideas: storage shed?  block house? one of those buildings in the 1950's nuclear blast movies we saw as kids?

 Good luck moving a brick house on a concrete slab.

I mean that little shed in the front of the crane in the picture.. seems like a nice shed.


We missed out on a serious story; what if that crane started to sink or get stuck in the backyard?  Guess that yard is all torn up now....what will the neighbors think :o
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Nomadd on 02/26/2016 10:46 pm
I just helped fix the pipeline to that tank too. I feel so used.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Syrinx on 02/26/2016 10:55 pm
Maybe they come for your tank next.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: bocachicagal on 02/26/2016 11:22 pm
Was a quiet day in the neighborhood.  ;) Nomadd......no barking dogs next to you!!!!! Just one more pic from the construction site.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Nomadd on 02/26/2016 11:31 pm
Maybe they come for your tank next.
I hope this doesn't dissuade the guy buying Ed's house.
 Then again, he did seem a little cagey. He might be part of the water tank abduction conspiracy.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Lar on 02/27/2016 12:13 am
This is getting almost as good as Wisteria Lane drama. (not that I ever watch TV)
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Marslauncher on 02/27/2016 01:04 am
So the Engineer I talked with on my flight said they (at McGregor) are really excited for the Brownsville ops, that quite a few of them will end up going down to help, He said it is going to be huge and that they are talking about it being a one stop shop for the launch site. (Rocket building, Testing, Launching).

Thought that was extremely interesting.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Chris_Pi on 02/27/2016 06:20 am
I just helped fix the pipeline to that tank too. I feel so used.


let's turn this thinking around 8)


Nomadd you got to work on a tank that went into the SpaceX site.  Better?

And if you're in the market for another tank you already know where to find one and equipment to move it. Since it probably doesn't really fit into Spacex's plans you'd really be doing them a favor disposing of it for free...
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Chris Bergin on 02/27/2016 09:54 pm
Let's keep this very interesting thread productive. A little too many "Mud! LOLZ! I see MUD!" posts. Trimmed ;D
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: bocachicagal on 02/29/2016 09:49 pm
Another pic from the construction site.  8)
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Jdeshetler on 02/29/2016 09:55 pm
Another pic from the construction site.  8)

Looks like re- soil sample, not pilling concrete posts due to lack of jack hammer?
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: bocachicagal on 02/29/2016 10:39 pm
Video from construction site!
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: JBF on 02/29/2016 11:01 pm
Video from construction site!

That looks like the, ...soiling wicking strips??, that we talked about earlier in this thread. I can't find the exact post any more.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Nomadd on 02/29/2016 11:10 pm
Video from construction site!

That looks like the, ...soiling wicking strips??, that we talked about earlier in this thread. I can't find the exact post any more.
The dozer driver told me they're putting 500 or so wicks down to 120'.

Was a quiet day in the neighborhood.  ;) Nomadd......no barking dogs next to you!!!!!
Just give Thunder and Major a dog biscuit each and they'll be polite all day.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: bocachicagal on 03/02/2016 11:29 pm
The flag farm has indeed produced wicks! ;) Still more than half yet to do!
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Retired Downrange on 03/03/2016 12:12 am
More about wick drains:
"Wick Drains (Prefabricated Vertical Drains, Vertical Strip Drains)
When a structure or embankment is constructed on a site that is underlain by soft wet soils, the load on the soft soil is initially partially supported by the incompressible water in the soil pores. Over time, the excess pore water pressure dissipates as the water slowly drains out from under the load. As this occurs, the load is transferred to the soil, the soil consolidates and settlement occurs. This process could take years to occur and result in damage to the structure.

One solution is to compress the soil prior to construction by placing a temporary fill load on the site. The time required for this preload to achieve the required compression can be shortened by installing wick drains. The drains shorten the pore water drainage path thereby permitting the consolidation to occur in weeks instead of years.

Wick drains, also known as Prefabricated Vertical (PV) drains and Vertical Strip Drains (VSD), consist of synthetic band-shaped material that is installed vertically into soft soils in order to accelerate preconstruction preloading programs. The drains are approximately 4 inches wide by ¼ inch thick and composed of a plastic strip with drainage channels, wrapped in a filter fabric. The installation of the drains is performed using vibratory hammers and/or static methods, and the wick drain layout typically consists of a triangular or square pattern."

From: http://www.hbwickdrains.com/WhatWeDo/WickDrains/default.aspx
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: guckyfan on 03/03/2016 07:05 am
@bocachicagal

Your reporting is much appreciated. Interesting to see how work progresses.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 03/05/2016 10:41 pm
More about wick drains:

This animations in this video explain the process nicely.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eTGa0fG9HWY
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: bocachicagal on 03/08/2016 12:36 am
Progress has been slow the past 5 days. Wick drain installation is about 3/4 done. 
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: GeneBelcher on 03/09/2016 03:58 pm

But the tolerances are totally different.

Go look at Castillo De San Marcos in St. Augustine.  It's got huge cracks from the top of the castle to the bottom at every corner from uneven settling.  That's fine if you are expecting nothing but a few French or British sloops to plink it with cannon shot.  It's not fine if you've got a launch tower on top of it.

That's an old photo. They drained all the water out of the moat years ago to stop the fort from falling apart.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 03/09/2016 11:25 pm
According to the online Cameron County Real-Estate database (http://propaccess.cameroncad.org/clientdb/SearchResults.aspx), SpaceX purchased no new lots in the last month, so the property map stands as shown below.

I've heard rumors of 7 Esperson and 16 Weems, but nothing yet in the online database (http://www.cameroncad.org/cadclientdb/propertymap.aspx).
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Nomadd on 03/10/2016 01:57 am
 It took almost three months for my house to be reflected in the database. The title/deed process is kind of glacial in Cameron County.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: rockets4life97 on 03/10/2016 02:08 am
Would it be possible to distinguish on the map the privately owned lots with structures from those that are empty?
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 03/11/2016 04:26 pm
Would it be possible to distinguish on the map the privately owned lots with structures from those that are empty?
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 03/11/2016 04:32 pm
Larger version:
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 03/20/2016 02:50 pm
County temporarily closes three county beach accesses
http://www.brownsvilleherald.com/news/local/article_cb02faf8-ee36-11e5-9b61-37885d159e1c.html
Quote
Cameron County Judge Pete Sepulveda Jr. has ordered the temporary closure until further notice of three county beaches on South Padre Island.

Those are Boca Chica Beach Access, County Beach Access No. 5 and County Beach Access No. 6.

“These county beaches are being temporarily closed to vehicular and pedestrian traffic due to extremely high tides and undriveable conditions. It is very important that all citizens pay attention to all warnings and stay out of harms way,” the county said in a statement.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Nomadd on 03/20/2016 04:04 pm
County temporarily closes three county beach accesses
http://www.brownsvilleherald.com/news/local/article_cb02faf8-ee36-11e5-9b61-37885d159e1c.html
Quote
Cameron County Judge Pete Sepulveda Jr. has ordered the temporary closure until further notice of three county beaches on South Padre Island.

Those are Boca Chica Beach Access, County Beach Access No. 5 and County Beach Access No. 6.

“These county beaches are being temporarily closed to vehicular and pedestrian traffic due to extremely high tides and undriveable conditions. It is very important that all citizens pay attention to all warnings and stay out of harms way,” the county said in a statement.
I'm finally getting back tomorrow. I guess I better check the tide tables before I hit the stretch of road that's normally about 6"above the high tide line.
 I didn't know I lived on South Padre, but the press is never wrong.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: bocachicagal on 03/23/2016 06:10 pm
Dump trucks have been running steady for the past two weeks building up the construction site!
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Nomadd on 03/24/2016 05:09 pm
 Finally got back. I was delayed when I got too close to the JSC in Houston and got caught in it's gravitational field. I couldn't escape until I saw the restored Saturn V. It was a sight to behold.

 They have a 5 foot thick 500'(E/W) x 300'(N/S) pad of dirt where the pad warehouse and other buildings will be. They haven't touched the grass where the ramp and pad are going. Makes sense they want to get a good staging area done for the real work.

 Texas kids don't mind a little sandblasting when they play at the beach. Her brothers were out boogie boarding in the surf.

https://youtu.be/cazFaCM0Dpw
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Kansan52 on 03/24/2016 05:21 pm
Did you tell them that is the wrong place to look for clams?
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: JBF on 03/24/2016 05:24 pm
Nomadd have you seen any revised estimates on how long the soil work will take?
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Nomadd on 03/24/2016 05:38 pm
Nomadd have you seen any revised estimates on how long the soil work will take?

 Nope. I just hope the highway doesn't delay them. It's not holding up too well in a few spots to the truck traffic.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: TomTX on 03/26/2016 02:56 pm
Nomadd have you seen any revised estimates on how long the soil work will take?

 Nope. I just hope the highway doesn't delay them. It's not holding up too well in a few spots to the truck traffic.

Highway upgrade was supposed to be the largest portion of the State incentives for locating the launch site in Texas.  I'm not finding any projects that look right in Cameron County.

http://apps.dot.state.tx.us/apps-cq/project_tracker/

You could probably contact the TxDOT District Office to find out the status (they may redirect you to an Area Office) I'd start with Public Information, if that doesn't get you a substantive answer, try the Director of Construction or Director of TPD.

http://www.txdot.gov/inside-txdot/district/pharr/contact.html
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: bocachicagal on 03/27/2016 06:50 pm
Road construction on Hwy 4 from Brownsville to Boca Chica Beach was completed last summer/fall. The streets in Boca Chica Village were also resurfaced. San Martin Blvd which was a dirt road and when it rained could not be used is now blacktopped giving residents two ways to enter and exit the Village. When dump trucks started hauling to the construction site it only took a few days for the road surface to deteriorate. So now all that is done is patch jobs which do not hold!!!
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Lar on 03/27/2016 07:34 pm
Maybe they figure they'll rebuild again after the heaviest of the construction traffic is done, as long as the road is fairly passable.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Nomadd on 03/27/2016 08:47 pm
The worst hole is where the eastbound trucks swerve around the Border Patrol checkpoint. I almost disappeared in that one the night I returned. That road base just wasn't made for that kind of traffic. I bet Lar is right, and they just muddle along until the job is finished, then resurface again.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Arb on 03/27/2016 09:25 pm
Even when construction is done there should still be fleets of trucks: lox, rp1, methane, rocket stages, spacecraft...
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Herb Schaltegger on 03/27/2016 09:38 pm
Yeah, they're eventually - at some point - gonna have to dig out the entire road down to the bed and rebuild everything to handle the regular heavy loads. Merely resurfacing the existing road is not gonna cut it forever.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Damon Hill on 03/27/2016 11:06 pm
If the road is periodically resurfaced and the thickness of the asphalt builds up, it may start to hold together better.  But this is a two-lane road that will eventually need to be at least four lanes wide plus a generous paved shoulder--some big loads will be headed down it to nearly the end of the pavement.

Yeah, the county and state are going to have to get their planning together and allocate sufficient funding to do the job well.  If SpaceX does start flying BFR out of there, that would benefit from long-term planning to accommodate that growth, depending somewhat on whether it's built locally or barged in.  I'm figuring SpaceX really wants a clean new facility to build locally and save the hassle of shipping it thousands of miles, unless they decide to fabricate it in Florida.  I doubt they want multiple factories, so it'll be interesting to see which way the planning goes.

There's going to be a big impact on the corridor to Boca Chica all the way out to the beach so is it going to end up like Port Canaveral/Cocoa Beach, or Merritt Island?
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Nomadd on 03/28/2016 01:39 am
 The road could use an extra foot in some areas anyhow if they don't want to haul rockets through water some days. Reconstruction with culvert pipes could do a lot to return the wetland to it's original state, since the road acts as a dam now when the wind driven water moves around. Of course, the jettys and dredging screw the currents and silt deposits up so much, nothing will ever be the same in any case. There a lot of "expert" theories regarding delta changes, but from what I see, nothing is a bigger factor than maintaining a ship channel.

 In much more important news, Sam Clauson finally got his electrical service and found out the hard way that aluminum isn't code for underground runs.

 In much, much more important news, the buyer of 11 Esperson is SpaceX friendly, but wishes to remain anonymous for now. I also noticed that some lots which were listed as privately owned are popping up as Texas park department or Cameron county owned now, including the ones across the street from me, which I would have loved to have bought. Others belong to a shell corporation owned by one person.
 Too much drama for the wilderness.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 03/28/2016 12:47 pm
I also noticed that some lots which were listed as privately owned are popping up as Texas park department or Cameron county owned now...
If you can list specific lot numbers, I'll update my map.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Nomadd on 03/29/2016 03:26 am
 Combining my math skills with my sitting on the porch drinking beer skills today, I came up with 36 dump trucks an hour.

 I give up on the Cameron county database. 3 lots changed owners while I was looking at them. The lots that had gone to Texas Parks and Wildlife or Cameron county have reverted back to the tax delinquent owner.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: JBF on 03/29/2016 10:35 am
Combining my math skills with my sitting on the porch drinking beer skills today, I came up with 36 dump trucks an hour.

 I give up on the Cameron county database. 3 lots changed owners while I was looking at them.

That is a lot of dirt. Any idea where it is coming from?
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: bocachicagal on 03/29/2016 02:09 pm
Combining my math skills with my sitting on the porch drinking beer skills today, I came up with 36 dump trucks an hour.

 I give up on the Cameron county database. 3 lots changed owners while I was looking at them.

Due to the lack of beer drinking on my part when I looked online at the lots across from you yesterday I did not find that any had changed ownership. Dave G your map looks awesome  :)
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: bocachicagal on 03/29/2016 02:16 pm
A couple pics from the site.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: dorkmo on 03/29/2016 02:51 pm
just guessing here but i think the amount of dirt we will be seeing is going to blow all our minds.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Retired Downrange on 03/29/2016 02:58 pm
It's interesting what I learn from simple pictures... I didn't know about "grade control" for bulldozers until I saw the "antenna" on the corner of the blade in this photo, and google image searched to learn about this....

http://construction.trimble.com/products/machine-control/grade-control-for-dozers
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Lar on 03/29/2016 03:09 pm
GPS positioning and good GIS data lets you do some remarkable things... disperse less fertilizer in the corners of the fields, furrows that are arrow straight (or better, follow the contours of the land exactly) and this application, dozing very precisely.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: mlow on 03/29/2016 03:28 pm
So I don't know a whole lot about grading and dozing, but does the appearance of such precise shaping like this have any implications as to the progress of the site? Or would this type of work have this level of control through the whole process? That is to say I'm curious if this is a "finishing" step. The amount of dirt shown in the photos is impressive, it's hard for me to believe there is much more dirt possible to pile without some support or walls or something.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Nomadd on 03/29/2016 03:42 pm
It's interesting what I learn from simple pictures... I didn't know about "grade control" for bulldozers until I saw the "antenna" on the corner of the blade in this photo, and google image searched to learn about this....

http://construction.trimble.com/products/machine-control/grade-control-for-dozers
I put something like that on ships for precise station keeping. Two GPS antennas don't need to know absolute position. Just position relative to each other for very accurate direction, roll and rate of turn. Three antenna systems give you accurate yaw (not really a factor here) and pitch. Add a stationary antenna with known 3d position programmed in, and you can get sub centimeter accuracy in three dimensions. Sort of like a local WAAS. They have little tiny gyros or inertial sensors inside to take over if the GPS signal gets ratty for a time. That's not that expensive any more. Your iPhone has better inertial sensors than some older hundred thousand dollar systems.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: rpapo on 03/29/2016 03:45 pm
Another factoid from the photo: The contractor apparently being used in this phase of the project: http://www.terracon.com/
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Kansan52 on 03/29/2016 03:49 pm
So I don't know a whole lot about grading and dozing, but does the appearance of such precise shaping like this have any implications as to the progress of the site? Or would this type of work have this level of control through the whole process? That is to say I'm curious if this is a "finishing" step. The amount of dirt shown in the photos is impressive, it's hard for me to believe there is much more dirt possible to pile without some support or walls or something.

Looking at the Cat website and the one listed above, the GPS can be used in all phases to improve efficiency. They discuss that the GPS and using that precision can reduce the workload and fuel usage.

Basically, fewer mistakes, less redo, so quicker.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 03/29/2016 06:33 pm
So I don't know a whole lot about grading and dozing, but does the appearance of such precise shaping like this have any implications as to the progress of the site? Or would this type of work have this level of control through the whole process? That is to say I'm curious if this is a "finishing" step. The amount of dirt shown in the photos is impressive, it's hard for me to believe there is much more dirt possible to pile without some support or walls or something.

This video shows the process.  Start around 1:15 for the current phase.

Looks like they have a lot more dirt to go, and then a few months of settling time.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eTGa0fG9HWY&t=1m13s
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: bocachicagal on 03/30/2016 12:36 am
A few pics after the busy work day.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: bilboleo1 on 03/30/2016 04:35 pm
Another factoid from the photo: The contractor apparently being used in this phase of the project: http://www.terracon.com/

Terracon is most likely the engineering / construction management firm (similar to my own employer Stantec), with the construction activity and equipment by a local contractor hired by Terracon. SpaceX pays Terracon to 'take care of it all', sort of like a general contractor in the housing industry, including having personnel on site or visiting regularly for construction oversight.  Was their name on the original/revised EIS for this project?

For the gps-enabled dozers, also helps to lay down the fill in even layers (6, 12, 24 inches thick) to reduce un-even settling, even dispersal of the materials, etc.

Cheers
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: rpapo on 03/30/2016 04:59 pm
Was their name on the original/revised EIS for this project?
As for the EIS, I have no idea.  I got the name from the photos posted earlier.  Terracon's logo was present on the sign on the fence towards the left side of one of the photos posted yesterday here.  From there I just googled.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Kansan52 on 03/30/2016 05:08 pm
Never knew that area had sea turtle nesting!
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Nomadd on 03/30/2016 05:26 pm
Quote from: Kansan52 nlink=topic=35425.msg1509658#msg1509658 date=1459357720
Never knew that area had sea turtle nesting!
We've been wondering if someone was going to relocate nests to a distance where the takeoffs wouldn't scramble the eggs.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: rpapo on 03/30/2016 05:36 pm
Never knew that area had sea turtle nesting!
IIRC, it was in the EIS.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Space Ghost 1962 on 03/30/2016 06:17 pm
Never knew that area had sea turtle nesting!
We've been wondering if someone was going to relocate nests to a distance where the takeoffs wouldn't scramble the eggs.
"Welcome to Chez Boca. Our breakfast special is tenderly scrambled sea turtle eggs, gently cooked over a Merlin 1d flame at %30 throttle for 11 milliseconds, and subtly flavored with RP1 detergent residue, with a touch of sage." ;)
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: CraigLieb on 03/30/2016 06:28 pm
Never knew that area had sea turtle nesting!
We've been wondering if someone was going to relocate nests to a distance where the takeoffs wouldn't scramble the eggs.
"Welcome to Chez Boca. Our breakfast special is tenderly scrambled sea turtle eggs, gently cooked over a Merlin 1d flame at %30 throttle for 11 milliseconds, and subtly flavored with RP1 detergent residue, with a touch of sage." ;)

These folks may be able to help with any sea turtle issues.
Turtle farm in Grand Cayman, Cayman Islands raises  sea turtles and sells sea turtle products. They also they introduce quite a few turtles back into the wild to help with the sea-turtle population.  It is not too far from a town called "Hell" which has a post office, allowing you to send a card postmarked Hell!
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: cscott on 03/30/2016 06:29 pm
"Welcome to Chez Boca. Our breakfast special is tenderly scrambled sea turtle eggs, gently cooked over a Merlin 1d flame at %30 throttle for 11 milliseconds, and subtly flavored with RP1 detergent residue, with a touch of sage." ;)

...and pancakes, carefully flattened by tons and tons of dirt and wicked dry.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: the_other_Doug on 03/30/2016 06:58 pm
"Welcome to Chez Boca. Our breakfast special is tenderly scrambled sea turtle eggs, gently cooked over a Merlin 1d flame at %30 throttle for 11 milliseconds, and subtly flavored with RP1 detergent residue, with a touch of sage." ;)

...and pancakes, carefully flattened by tons and tons of dirt and wicked dry.

Yum, yum!   :D
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: wannamoonbase on 03/30/2016 08:26 pm
Never knew that area had sea turtle nesting!
We've been wondering if someone was going to relocate nests to a distance where the takeoffs wouldn't scramble the eggs.
"Welcome to Chez Boca. Our breakfast special is tenderly scrambled sea turtle eggs, gently cooked over a Merlin 1d flame at %30 throttle for 11 milliseconds, and subtly flavored with RP1 detergent residue, with a touch of sage." ;)

Ewww! I don't like sage.

Seems this pad is on a slow burn.  Makes sense, until 40 and 39A are busy no need to rush this one, regardless of how much we want to see it.

If they go a little slower, maybe they can build it for Raptor powered vehicles from the start and not go through that pesky RP1 stage.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Zed_Noir on 03/30/2016 08:36 pm
<snip>
Seems this pad is on a slow burn.  Makes sense, until 40 and 39A are busy no need to rush this one, regardless of how much we want to see it.

If they go a little slower, maybe they can build it for Raptor powered vehicles from the start and not go through that pesky RP1 stage.
That will required a new EIS.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: leetdan on 03/30/2016 08:57 pm
Never knew that area had sea turtle nesting!

It happens to include the most critically endangered sea turtle, the Kemp's Ridley.  Worldwide, they are only known to nest on the Northern Mexico / Southern Texas Gulf coast.  Boca Chica had 2 nests in 2014, none last year.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 03/30/2016 10:06 pm
Never knew that area had sea turtle nesting!

It happens to include the most critically endangered sea turtle, the Kemp's Ridley.  Worldwide, they are only known to nest on the Northern Mexico / Southern Texas Gulf coast.  Boca Chica had 2 nests in 2014, none last year.

http://apps.texastribune.org/starstruck/13/
Quote
The reason that Sea Turtle Inc., our directors actually endorsed the SpaceX proposal, is because we see it as the least environmental concern for that primitive undeveloped stretch of beach.  If you look at Cape Canaveral, the wildlife of Cape Canaveral in Florida has flourished is because it's a launch site, and there are no hotels, there are no condos or restaurants there.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Nomadd on 03/31/2016 12:24 am
 Got a little more of the saga while getting Sam's lights on today. It seems that the original proposal to put the payload processing hangar on LBJ caused quite an issue, as in "No, we flat out won't permit that" from the residents. Can't say I blame em on that one. I'm not sure how that would have made sense anyhow.
 A friendly guy in a hardhat said they're taking the pad warehouse area up to 16', but couldn't tell me if that was the final height or they were just doing it for soil surcharging and would level it off later.
 I also tried to explain the math of a single neutral wire serving two circuits as long as the circuits were on opposite phases, but got mostly glazed over looks. It was a bad idea for other reasons anyhow.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: bocachicagal on 03/31/2016 01:12 am
Never knew that area had sea turtle nesting!

It happens to include the most critically endangered sea turtle, the Kemp's Ridley.  Worldwide, they are only known to nest on the Northern Mexico / Southern Texas Gulf coast.  Boca Chica had 2 nests in 2014, none last year.

http://apps.texastribune.org/starstruck/13/
Quote
The reason that Sea Turtle Inc., our directors actually endorsed the SpaceX proposal, is because we see it as the least environmental concern for that primitive undeveloped stretch of beach.  If you look at Cape Canaveral, the wildlife of Cape Canaveral in Florida has flourished is because it's a launch site, and there are no hotels, there are no condos or restaurants there.
During nesting season interns and volunteers from Sea Turtle Inc. located on South Padre Island patrol the beaches of SPI and Boca Chica for nesting female sea turtles and their tracks. When a nest is found the eggs are relocated to a protective corral on SPI for the incubation period. Once hatched the hatchlings are released on the beach of SPI. When possible the release of the hatchlings are open to the public.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Nomadd on 03/31/2016 01:32 am

During nesting season interns and volunteers from Sea Turtle Inc. located on South Padre Island patrol the beaches of SPI and Boca Chica for nesting female sea turtles and their tracks. When a nest is found the eggs are relocated to a protective corral on SPI for the incubation period. Once hatched the hatchlings are released on the beach of SPI. When possible the release of the hatchlings are open to the public.
That's good to know since I'm not sure if folks who throw their trash on the beach when there's a barrel 20 feet away would be all that respectful of a nest.
 Do you know if the Great Blue Herons nest there?
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: bocachicagal on 03/31/2016 02:15 am

During nesting season interns and volunteers from Sea Turtle Inc. located on South Padre Island patrol the beaches of SPI and Boca Chica for nesting female sea turtles and their tracks. When a nest is found the eggs are relocated to a protective corral on SPI for the incubation period. Once hatched the hatchlings are released on the beach of SPI. When possible the release of the hatchlings are open to the public.
That's good to know since I'm not sure if folks who throw their trash on the beach when there's a barrel 20 feet away would be all that respectful of a nest.
 Do you know if the Great Blue Herons nest there?
The trash on the beach here is just unbelievable! I don't understand why people think it's okay to leave their garbage on the beach instead of putting it in the barrels or taking it home. I don't know of any other area that this is acceptable. Cameron County would rather have their employees come out once a week to empty the barrels and pick up the garbage.???
Not sure where the Great Blue Heron nest. Looked in my bird book and usually in trees 20-60 feet above ground or water; sometimes in low shrubs. They are permanent residents here  :)
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 03/31/2016 10:59 am
The road could use an extra foot in some areas anyhow if they don't want to haul rockets through water some days. Reconstruction with culvert pipes could do a lot to return the wetland to it's original state, since the road acts as a dam now when the wind driven water moves around.

That makes a lot of sense. 

Someone upthread said Boca Chica was originally an island, then they connected it with a road, now Route 4.  The result is a tidal pool barrier.  Bad for the environment.  Bad for flooding.

Culverts would break this land barrier, basically allowing the tidal pools to return to their original ecological state. It would also raise that stretch of Route 4 up one or two feet.  Both would help to prevent flooding.

The only question would be how to do it, i.e. how to allow cars to access the area during construction...

I also wonder how it would affect the new fiber-optic and electrical lines they just installed.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Nomadd on 03/31/2016 03:37 pm
 The conduits are kind of patchwork so far. They put a mile stretch in where they can pull it through an old pipe or conduit and leave other stretches undone. The undone ones might need trenching. There's a big trailer full of reels about two and a half miles from the village at the west end of that narrow causeway. Two 1 1/4" Dura-line conduits, one black and one orange on the north side of the road.
 If SpaceX can't stand down the construction traffic for a few months, they might have to build a new highway next to the old one with lots of single lane closures, then redo the old one. I'd guess a solid two lane with wide shoulders, which would be about twice as wide as the current road. A port with 150 workers and occasional oversize load doesn't really justify 4 lanes.
 Maybe when the hordes of Mars colonists start showing up.
 
How many dead end roads are there with most of their traffic in one direction? Will Mars residents visiting Earth need Red cards to get through the Border Patrol checkpoint? So many unanswered questions.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: ChefPat on 04/01/2016 12:47 pm
Never knew that area had sea turtle nesting!
We've been wondering if someone was going to relocate nests to a distance where the takeoffs wouldn't scramble the eggs.
"Welcome to Chez Boca. Our breakfast special is tenderly scrambled sea turtle eggs, gently cooked over a Merlin 1d flame at %30 throttle for 11 milliseconds, and subtly flavored with RP1 detergent residue, with a touch of sage." ;)
That Sir, is an excellent recipe!!! :D
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Nomadd on 04/01/2016 11:03 pm
 Was talking to Larry Massey of Massey's gun range today. He said that after bitchin to county about blocking people from getting to his business, they agreed to move the soft checkpoint to the entrance of his range, about 6 miles from the pad. He's setting up elevated bleachers for spectators.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: TomTX on 04/02/2016 02:27 am
The road could use an extra foot in some areas anyhow if they don't want to haul rockets through water some days. Reconstruction with culvert pipes could do a lot to return the wetland to it's original state, since the road acts as a dam now when the wind driven water moves around.

That makes a lot of sense. 

Someone upthread said Boca Chica was originally an island, then they connected it with a road, now Route 4.  The result is a tidal pool barrier.  Bad for the environment.  Bad for flooding.

Culverts would break this land barrier, basically allowing the tidal pools to return to their original ecological state. It would also raise that stretch of Route 4 up one or two feet.  Both would help to prevent flooding.

The only question would be how to do it, i.e. how to allow cars to access the area during construction...

I also wonder how it would affect the new fiber-optic and electrical lines they just installed.

You do it in parallel with the existing road as part of a widening to 4 lanes. Build 2 new lanes parallel to existing roadway (including culverts/basework/etc) - shift traffic to new lanes, shut down and rebuild existing lanes properly.

Alternately, close and work on 1 lane, while the other is signalized for alternating traffic direction. Which sucks in the meantime.


Just patching and throwing more hot mix layers will not fix the road if the base is compromised. Not for truck traffic. No way, no how.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Nomadd on 04/04/2016 07:10 am
Combining my math skills with my sitting on the porch drinking beer skills today, I came up with 36 dump trucks an hour.


That is a lot of dirt. Any idea where it is coming from?
So far, I've seen trucks coming from the port area, west of town and south of the airport. The site looks like about 40-50,000 yards of dirt so far, and that's packed. I'm not sure how much loose dirt from the trucks that translates to.
 And it's not the only construction site in town. I finally started building a shed. I need to clear out the converted garage for those lavish parties.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: BioBritt on 04/05/2016 06:34 pm
Hey all!
Just found out about this place after posting a set of pictures of the Brownsville site over on the Reddit SpaceX sub - excited to see this is where the local SpaceX nerds gather, though it would be a lot more fun to drink some beers, count dirt trucks, and talk SpaceX on the beach!

Anyway, hi, I'm Britt, moved to Brownsville a year ago. My husband works at SpaceX McGregor and I work here in the valley, and we're stalking the sh*t out of the site because we can't live together until it is operational!
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: James54 on 04/05/2016 06:53 pm
Hey all!
Just found out about this place after posting a set of pictures of the Brownsville site over on the Reddit SpaceX sub - excited to see this is where the local SpaceX nerds gather, though it would be a lot more fun to drink some beers, count dirt trucks, and talk SpaceX on the beach!

Anyway, hi, I'm Britt, moved to Brownsville a year ago. My husband works at SpaceX McGregor and I work here in the valley, and we're stalking the sh*t out of the site because we can't live together until it is operational!

Hey, BioBritt, welcome to this site.  Pretty exciting stuff watching the development of a new space launch complex.  We will welcome your input, and your husband's input, along with the others who are in the area.  This site has an international group of enthusiasts who value responsible reporting of the space industry.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Comga on 04/05/2016 06:53 pm
Hey all!
Just found out about this place after posting a set of pictures of the Brownsville site over on the Reddit SpaceX sub - excited to see this is where the local SpaceX nerds gather, though it would be a lot more fun to drink some beers, count dirt trucks, and talk SpaceX on the beach!

Anyway, hi, I'm Britt, moved to Brownsville a year ago. My husband works at SpaceX McGregor and I work here in the valley, and we're stalking the sh*t out of the site because we can't live together until it is operational!

Welcome to the site!

You could also post your photos here. (Attach, don't embed, etc. etc.)

We also have threads on McGregor, both public (http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=39182.msg1467303#msg1467303) and L2 (http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=34957.msg1213364#msg1213364).  Perhaps your husband can disabuse us of some of our incorrect guesses, within the limits of his obligations of course, about happenings at McGregor.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: philw1776 on 04/05/2016 07:43 pm
Hey all!
Just found out about this place after posting a set of pictures of the Brownsville site over on the Reddit SpaceX sub - excited to see this is where the local SpaceX nerds gather, though it would be a lot more fun to drink some beers, count dirt trucks, and talk SpaceX on the beach!

Anyway, hi, I'm Britt, moved to Brownsville a year ago. My husband works at SpaceX McGregor and I work here in the valley, and we're stalking the sh*t out of the site because we can't live together until it is operational!

Welcome!
You'll feel comfortable as here are many Brits posting to this site.
Oh wait, my bad. Never mind.
Again welcome and keep us up to date.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Joaosg on 04/05/2016 09:25 pm
Welcome Brit. It's  great to know that now we  have not only 3 spies at Boca Chica but we can also have an internal source from McGregor giving us some (allowed) feedback about our guesses here in the forum. It's like Christmas came early.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Nomadd on 04/05/2016 09:50 pm
 Hey Britt. If you're ever in the village, I hold multiple degrees in beer drinking, counting dirt trucks and talking SpaceX on the beach. Just look for the Mountaineer in the driveway with a scraggly old guy in the back yard who looks like he really shouldn't be holding that chainsaw.
 A video of the site. It starts out pointed at the beach and pans to the construction. As far as I could figure, I'm standing right about where the launch pad will be.

 This is a pretty poor photo, but that's my mailbox in the foreground, so I kind of liked it. It's the first day clear enough to see the site from the yard since I've been back. Still a lot of heat distortion at that range.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qL9QjApYpzQ

Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: BioBritt on 04/06/2016 01:44 am
Thanks everyone for the welcome! I'll try to help out with all your speculations where I can, but as you might imagine, everyone is super concerned with getting busted for divulging too much information - most people (at least outside of informal conversation) tend to err on the side of "if it isn't already out there, don't put it out there." There's stuff I can definitely clarify and will where I can, but hubs isn't much of a forum-goer (no time!) and I'll check with him before I post something. If there are ever any direct questions, I'll answer best I can!

Yes, I know everything about February 8. No, I'm not telling, even after 5 glasses of champagne and a good promise to humanely disappear my neighbor's dogs.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: BioBritt on 04/06/2016 01:47 am
Hey Britt. If you're ever in the village, I hold multiple degrees in beer drinking, counting dirt trucks and talking SpaceX on the beach. Just look for the Mountaineer in the driveway with a scraggly old guy in the back yard who looks like he really shouldn't be holding that chainsaw.
 I figured I might as well waste some of Chris's storage on a video of the site. It starts out pointed at the beach and pans to the construction. As far as I could figure, I'm standing right about where the launch pad will be.

 This is a pretty poor photo, but that's my mailbox in the foreground, so I kind of liked it.

Very cool, I'm down that way quite often actually! You're totally on for beer and chit chat.
Offhand, you wouldn't happen to have a couple dogs would you? Shepherd types?
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Craig_VG on 04/06/2016 02:08 am
Thanks everyone for the welcome! I'll try to help out with all your speculations where I can, but as you might imagine, everyone is super concerned with getting busted for divulging too much information - most people (at least outside of informal conversation) tend to err on the side of "if it isn't already out there, don't put it out there." There's stuff I can definitely clarify and will where I can, but hubs isn't much of a forum-goer (no time!) and I'll check with him before I post something. If there are ever any direct questions, I'll answer best I can!

Yes, I know everything about February 8. No, I'm not telling, even after 5 glasses of champagne and a good promise to humanely disappear my neighbor's dogs.

I don't think we even knew the exact date before now so every little bit helps! Glad you're sticking to your guns on the info, good to err on the side of caution.

Welcome to the forum and the community, hopefully we can have some parties on the beach before a Boca Chica launch someday. And to your man, thanks for all your hard work and dedication to the company. It takes every person to push spaceflight forward!

(Also I think I was the one who referred you here on the SpaceX subreddit, I am glad to help)
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 04/06/2016 02:16 am
Another month, no new SpaceX lots in the online Cameron County Real-Estate database (http://propaccess.cameroncad.org/clientdb/SearchResults.aspx), so the property map still stands as shown below.

If anyone has more info, I'll update the map.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Lar on 04/06/2016 02:20 am
Yes, I know everything about February 8. No, I'm not telling, even after 5 glasses of champagne and a good promise to humanely disappear my neighbor's dogs.
You know, if you hadn't said a date some of us wouldn't now be wondering what we missed. :)  Thanks a lot! :)
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Nomadd on 04/06/2016 04:01 am
Very cool, I'm down that way quite often actually! You're totally on for beer and chit chat.
Offhand, you wouldn't happen to have a couple dogs would you? Shepherd types?
Nope. If you mean the German shepard and black one in the village, those were Major and Thunder, Frank Kawalski's dogs.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: BioBritt on 04/06/2016 04:47 am

I don't think we even knew the exact date before now so every little bit helps! Glad you're sticking to your guns on the info, good to err on the side of caution.

Welcome to the forum and the community, hopefully we can have some parties on the beach before a Boca Chica launch someday. And to your man, thanks for all your hard work and dedication to the company. It takes every person to push spaceflight forward!

(Also I think I was the one who referred you here on the SpaceX subreddit, I am glad to help)

Well the date thankfully wasn't a secret, that's info that's already out there, along with a couple theories. (Some of which are really funny to me)

We are definitely looking forward to some great launch parties - hopefully the hubs can party for some of them and not work them all!

And thanks for the referral!
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: BioBritt on 04/06/2016 04:49 am
Yes, I know everything about February 8. No, I'm not telling, even after 5 glasses of champagne and a good promise to humanely disappear my neighbor's dogs.
You know, if you hadn't said a date some of us wouldn't now be wondering what we missed. :)  Thanks a lot! :)

https://m.reddit.com/r/spacex/comments/4dgk9x/spacex_prepares_for_falcon_9_static_fire_ahead_of/ (https://m.reddit.com/r/spacex/comments/4dgk9x/spacex_prepares_for_falcon_9_static_fire_ahead_of/)
Here's some more info and quite a lot of speculation
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: BioBritt on 04/06/2016 04:52 am
Nope. If you mean the German shepard and black one in the village, those were Major and Thunder, Frank Kawalski's dogs.
Yes, those dogs! Was exploring the village last year by car and stopped to talk to him for a minute. Would have been a funny coincidence if it had been you.
Really wanted to live there...are most of those houses seasonally occupied or largely abandoned?
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Nomadd on 04/06/2016 05:26 am
Nope. If you mean the German shepard and black one in the village, those were Major and Thunder, Frank Kawalski's dogs.
Yes, those dogs! Was exploring the village last year by car and stopped to talk to him for a minute. Would have been a funny coincidence if it had been you.
Really wanted to live there...are most of those houses seasonally occupied or largely abandoned?
Most are seasonal. Some winter Texans and some locals. Even Frank is gone for now. About 1/4 are abandoned and need to be torn down. Once you lose electrical service, you can't get it back without passing all kinds of inspections most of the abandoned houses would never pass.
 Right now, me and the Heatons are the only full time residents. You just missed a house for sale on Esperson. The day the construction started, everything available started going within days.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: mlindner on 04/06/2016 06:17 am
Hey Britt. If you're ever in the village, I hold multiple degrees in beer drinking, counting dirt trucks and talking SpaceX on the beach. Just look for the Mountaineer in the driveway with a scraggly old guy in the back yard who looks like he really shouldn't be holding that chainsaw.
 I figured I might as well waste some of Chris's storage on a video of the site. It starts out pointed at the beach and pans to the construction. As far as I could figure, I'm standing right about where the launch pad will be.

 This is a pretty poor photo, but that's my mailbox in the foreground, so I kind of liked it. It's the first day clear enough to see the site from the yard since I've been back. Still a lot of heat distortion at that range.

<video>

Just to let you know, a youtube video doesn't use any of Chris's bandwidth or storage.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: mlindner on 04/06/2016 06:36 am
A bunch of site photos from a user on Reddit: http://imgur.com/a/9fxSQ

Source: https://www.reddit.com/r/spacex/comments/4dbshd/brownsville_launch_site_construction_update_april/

Photos taken on April 3rd.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: cscott on 04/06/2016 02:36 pm
Where do you think SpaceX employees who work at Boca Chica will live?  Any chance some of the SpaceX-owned land might become employee housing?
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Lar on 04/06/2016 03:01 pm
Yes, I know everything about February 8. No, I'm not telling, even after 5 glasses of champagne and a good promise to humanely disappear my neighbor's dogs.
You know, if you hadn't said a date some of us wouldn't now be wondering what we missed. :)  Thanks a lot! :)

https://m.reddit.com/r/spacex/comments/4dgk9x/spacex_prepares_for_falcon_9_static_fire_ahead_of/ (https://m.reddit.com/r/spacex/comments/4dgk9x/spacex_prepares_for_falcon_9_static_fire_ahead_of/)
Here's some more info and quite a lot of speculation

Oh.

That's in the PAST, I thought you were talking about something that was going to be announced next year (and I was wondering why something that far out would have a fixed date given SpaceX time dilation)  Grin.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Nomadd on 04/06/2016 03:39 pm

Just to let you know, a youtube video doesn't use any of Chris's bandwidth or storage.
I switched it to Youtube later.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: bocachicagal on 04/06/2016 04:33 pm
Hey all!
Just found out about this place after posting a set of pictures of the Brownsville site over on the Reddit SpaceX sub - excited to see this is where the local SpaceX nerds gather, though it would be a lot more fun to drink some beers, count dirt trucks, and talk SpaceX on the beach!

Anyway, hi, I'm Britt, moved to Brownsville a year ago. My husband works at SpaceX McGregor and I work here in the valley, and we're stalking the sh*t out of the site because we can't live together until it is operational!

Hi Britt! Nice to have another spy in the area.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: bocachicagal on 04/06/2016 04:49 pm
Pics of the site today. The dirt is being hauled from a pit off Hwy 4 on S Oklahoma Ave. The pit is a couple miles down behind the border fence.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: bocachicagal on 04/06/2016 04:58 pm
Another month, no new SpaceX lots in the online Cameron County Real-Estate database (http://propaccess.cameroncad.org/clientdb/SearchResults.aspx), so the property map still stands as shown below.

If anyone has more info, I'll update the map.

There was a property tax sale yesterday in Brownsville. In the newspaper there were only 3 lots listed up for sale from the Boca Chica area. This is only a partial list of properties that would have been sold yesterday. As you know it takes months for the database to be updated.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Lar on 04/06/2016 05:03 pm
Pics of the site today. The dirt is being hauled from a pit off Hwy 4 on S Oklahoma Ave. The pit is a couple miles down behind the border fence.

Behind the border fence? Do you mean it's in Mexico? Is the pit going to fill up with water eventually or is it a lot higher above sea level?
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: rpapo on 04/06/2016 05:09 pm
Pics of the site today. The dirt is being hauled from a pit off Hwy 4 on S Oklahoma Ave. The pit is a couple miles down behind the border fence.

Behind the border fence? Do you mean it's in Mexico? Is the pit going to fill up with water eventually or is it a lot higher above sea level?
Are we talking about this place (https://www.google.com/maps/dir/25.8726301,-97.3707435/SpaceX+Space+Launch+Facility,+Boca+Chica+Boulevard,+Brownsville,+TX/@25.9359181,-97.3383999,47583m/data=!3m2!1e3!4b1!4m8!4m7!1m0!1m5!1m1!1s0x866fb3b7acdd5343:0x6de33c09fd1e48ce!2m2!1d-97.1552485!2d25.9973489")?  That's about twenty miles away by road, and shows an altitude of 21 feet on Google Earth.

UPDATE1: You may notice, if you switch on Satellite View, that both the Launch Area and the sand pit are showing activity.  The imagery on Google Maps was updated this year, according to the web view.

UPDATE2: Snooping around some more, I found these images attached to the placeholder for the SpaceX launch control center.  I have no idea whether these are official from SpaceX.

Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: bocachicagal on 04/06/2016 05:46 pm
Nope. If you mean the German shepard and black one in the village, those were Major and Thunder, Frank Kawalski's dogs.
Yes, those dogs! Was exploring the village last year by car and stopped to talk to him for a minute. Would have been a funny coincidence if it had been you.
Really wanted to live there...are most of those houses seasonally occupied or largely abandoned?
Most are seasonal. Some winter Texans and some locals. Even Frank is gone for now. About 1/4 are abandoned and need to be torn down. Once you lose electrical service, you can't get it back without passing all kinds of inspections most of the abandoned houses would never pass.
 Right now, me and the Heatons are the only full time residents. You just missed a house for sale on Esperson. The day the construction started, everything available started going within days.
There are 34 homes, 1 apartment building (also used to be a motel), the remnants of another motel and a couple of campers. These are all located on LBJ, Esperson and Weems. There are currently 7 homes that have permanent Texas residents. There are about 5 homes that need extensive work. The only structure that probably should be torn down is what is left of the old motel. All the homes are repairable if you want to put the money into them. Would it be worth it?? I guess that would also depend on the purchase price. Will you be able to obtain the necessary permits???
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: tleski on 04/06/2016 06:00 pm

UPDATE2: Snooping around some more, I found these images attached to the placeholder for the SpaceX launch control center.  I have no idea whether these are official from SpaceX.

Looks like fan art. Apparently created by a guy named Alex Balderas, who seems to live nearby.

Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: bocachicagal on 04/06/2016 06:11 pm
Pics of the site today. The dirt is being hauled from a pit off Hwy 4 on S Oklahoma Ave. The pit is a couple miles down behind the border fence.

Behind the border fence? Do you mean it's in Mexico? Is the pit going to fill up with water eventually or is it a lot higher above sea level?

No it's not in Mexico! The Rio Grande River divides Mexico and the US. When the border fence was built there is privately owned land that was divided by the fence.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: bocachicagal on 04/06/2016 06:18 pm
Pics of the site today. The dirt is being hauled from a pit off Hwy 4 on S Oklahoma Ave. The pit is a couple miles down behind the border fence.

Behind the border fence? Do you mean it's in Mexico? Is the pit going to fill up with water eventually or is it a lot higher above sea level?
Are we talking about this place (https://www.google.com/maps/dir/25.8726301,-97.3707435/SpaceX+Space+Launch+Facility,+Boca+Chica+Boulevard,+Brownsville,+TX/@25.9359181,-97.3383999,47583m/data=!3m2!1e3!4b1!4m8!4m7!1m0!1m5!1m1!1s0x866fb3b7acdd5343:0x6de33c09fd1e48ce!2m2!1d-97.1552485!2d25.9973489")?  That's about twenty miles away by road, and shows an altitude of 21 feet on Google Earth.

UPDATE1: You may notice, if you switch on Satellite View, that both the Launch Area and the sand pit are showing activity.  The imagery on Google Maps was updated this year, according to the web view.

UPDATE2: Snooping around some more, I found these images attached to the placeholder for the SpaceX launch control center.  I have no idea whether these are official from SpaceX.

Not sure. It was about a couple miles down S Oklahoma Ave. There are two openings in the border fence and the trucks go in the far opening when empty and come out of the other opening when full.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: BioBritt on 04/06/2016 06:40 pm
A bunch of site photos from a user on Reddit: http://imgur.com/a/9fxSQ

Source: https://www.reddit.com/r/spacex/comments/4dbshd/brownsville_launch_site_construction_update_april/

Photos taken on April 3rd.

That was me  :)
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: BioBritt on 04/06/2016 06:44 pm
Where do you think SpaceX employees who work at Boca Chica will live?  Any chance some of the SpaceX-owned land might become employee housing?

I imagine most will live in eastern Brownsville, convenient to Boca Chica. There were rumors of a ferry from South Padre Island to Boca Chica, if that actually happens (very skeptical of this) I imagine most will opt to live on the Island.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: BioBritt on 04/06/2016 06:52 pm
Pics of the site today. The dirt is being hauled from a pit off Hwy 4 on S Oklahoma Ave. The pit is a couple miles down behind the border fence.

Behind the border fence? Do you mean it's in Mexico? Is the pit going to fill up with water eventually or is it a lot higher above sea level?

The "border fence" isn't actually on the border in most places - in fact there are several places you can go where you have to drive through the border fence to get there. (Like the Sabal Palm sanctuary) - it's not a check point and you don't need a passport, it's just there to funnel people crossing illegally into areas that are patrolled instead of having to patrol the entire fence line. You can see the fence itself on Google maps - in some places it's very close to the border, and much further in other areas.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 04/07/2016 11:43 am
Where do you think SpaceX employees who work at Boca Chica will live?  Any chance some of the SpaceX-owned land might become employee housing?

Building a new house on an empty lot is highly doubtful.

There's no sewer, and local codes don't allow digging a new septic system.  The thirty-something existing homes have grandfather clauses for their septic systems, but digging a new one is verboten.

With this in mind, I think the value of empty lots in the area will stay fairly low, but the value of existing houses will increase significantly, even if the houses are in bad shape.  Supply and demand...

Note: In the Environmental Impact Statement (https://www.faa.gov/about/office_org/headquarters_offices/ast/environmental/nepa_docs/review/launch/spacex_texas_launch_site_environmental_impact_statement/media/FEIS_SpaceX_Texas_Launch_Site_Vol_I.pdf), for the new SpaceX facilities, it says:
Quote
"The septic system would consist of a mobile above ground processing unit and holding tank."
This meets local codes, but its somewhat expensive to maintain.  Not a desirable solution for a home.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 04/07/2016 12:15 pm
There were rumors of a ferry from South Padre Island to Boca Chica, if that actually happens (very skeptical of this) I imagine most will opt to live on the Island.

Right now, there's no place in Boca Chica to dock.  The water in the South Bay is way too shallow, and the whole area is environmentally protected wetlands.

If they built a pier on Boca Chica Beach, that may work.  Many public beaches have piers. (https://www.google.com/search?q=beach+pier&biw=1464&bih=918&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwih-5XVwfzLAhXDHB4KHSN3AAkQ_AUIBigB)  People seem to like them.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 04/07/2016 12:28 pm
The only structure that probably should be torn down is what is left of the old motel.

I know it's an eye-sore right now, but it does have an underground septic system, probably with a grandfather clause. 

If someone could get the permits to rebuild it, it could turn into something special.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: bocachicagal on 04/07/2016 02:53 pm
The only structure that probably should be torn down is what is left of the old motel.

I know it's an eye-sore right now, but it does have an underground septic system, probably with a grandfather clause. 

If someone could get the permits to rebuild it, it could turn into something special.

I was just thinking the same thing this morning! The biggest obstacle is obtaining the permits. Sam Clauson obtained his electrical  permit for his garage but from what I hear the county says there will be no more permits issued for out here. I have heard that a time or two before though  :)
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: cscott on 04/07/2016 03:15 pm



Note: In the Environmental Impact Statement (https://www.faa.gov/about/office_org/headquarters_offices/ast/environmental/nepa_docs/review/launch/spacex_texas_launch_site_environmental_impact_statement/media/FEIS_SpaceX_Texas_Launch_Site_Vol_I.pdf), for the new SpaceX facilities, it says:
Quote
"The septic system would consist of a mobile above ground processing unit and holding tank."
This meets local codes, but its somewhat expensive to maintain.  Not a desirable solution for a home.

I was thinking along the lines of employer-owned housing that SpaceX would rent to employees working at the site.  SpaceX could reuse it's existing septic contract (presumably a guy with a truck who comes around once in a while, right?) and maybe also piggyback on SpaceX's own electricity and Internet hookups.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 04/07/2016 04:21 pm
Sam Clauson obtained his electrical permit for his garage but from what I hear the county says there will be no more permits issued for out here.

I'm not an expert on permits, but note that Sam Clauson's case is somewhat different.  He started with an undeveloped lot.  No pre-existing structure.

For renovating an existing structure, the permits may be easier.  For example, I suspect the old motel already has electric and phone lines.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Nomadd on 04/07/2016 05:25 pm
 One reason I said the trashed houses should be torn down is the septic. You're not going to rennovate a structure on a foundation with rotten 50 year old cast iron pipes under the slab, clay to tanks that are way too small to meet todays codes, and leech fields that are clogged with roots. Throw in probable leftover damage from the 67 hurricane, leaky roofs with rotted eaves and probable structural water damage, bad sheetrock and termite infestations, it would be much easier and faster to build on an empty lot. And, I'm pretty sure new leech fields wouldn't be allowed out here now, so houses without electric service would have a pretty hard time ever passing the inspections needed to get it back. Having electric lines isn't the problem. Having electric service is.
 I've done work on 7 of the places in the village so far and spent some time talking with the owners about their experience with the county and MVEC.
 Sam is trying to get an above ground tank approved so he can live there. That's not too bad a solution if you can have a gray water drainfield. He has an extra problem, being so low and close to the water.

 Looking at the base for my shed, I might have gotten a little carried away anchoring it to the ground. If they ever decide to move the whole village in one piece, they'll be able to use it as a lift point.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: DAZ on 04/07/2016 10:37 pm
Not all septic systems are below ground, you can build an aboveground one.  It could be either a two-stage septic system with a leech mound instead of a leach field or a 3 stage septic system with a leech mound.  With the 3 stage system the water that comes out is usually considered good enough to put right into a nearby body of water.  They are used in environmentally sensitive areas.  The leech mound is used when the ground doesn’t perk.  If you have enough property all of this can work out very well.  You build your leech mound and put your freshwater tank on the top of it.  You contact Solar City and have them install you an off the grid solar system with batteries from the new giga battery plant.  Depending on the size of your freshwater tank you would only have to have someone come out every couple weeks to a month to deliver water.  You would of course also install a cistern to capture all the rainwater you could which would be used for watering the plants, washing the car, and flushing the toilet, etc.  These types of systems are becoming more and more popular and in some places (like some parts of the Hawaiian Islands) even becoming the predominant methods.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Kansan52 on 04/07/2016 11:00 pm
Seems like the road block would be permits. But if someone had all the ducks in a row, something like Daz posted, and approach the council with a request and not a demand, it might open up development. More property taxes without investment (beyond what is happening for SX).
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: bocachicagal on 04/07/2016 11:30 pm
Pics of the site today. The dirt is being hauled from a pit off Hwy 4 on S Oklahoma Ave. The pit is a couple miles down behind the border fence.

Behind the border fence? Do you mean it's in Mexico? Is the pit going to fill up with water eventually or is it a lot higher above sea level?
Are we talking about this place (https://www.google.com/maps/dir/25.8726301,-97.3707435/SpaceX+Space+Launch+Facility,+Boca+Chica+Boulevard,+Brownsville,+TX/@25.9359181,-97.3383999,47583m/data=!3m2!1e3!4b1!4m8!4m7!1m0!1m5!1m1!1s0x866fb3b7acdd5343:0x6de33c09fd1e48ce!2m2!1d-97.1552485!2d25.9973489")?  That's about twenty miles away by road, and shows an altitude of 21 feet on Google Earth.

UPDATE1: You may notice, if you switch on Satellite View, that both the Launch Area and the sand pit are showing activity.  The imagery on Google Maps was updated this year, according to the web view.

UPDATE2: Snooping around some more, I found these images attached to the placeholder for the SpaceX launch control center.  I have no idea whether these are official from SpaceX.

Not sure. It was about a couple miles down S Oklahoma Ave. There are two openings in the border fence and the trucks go in the far opening when empty and come out of the other opening when full.

You were pretty darned close!!! There is an opening in the border fence at Alaska. It was the opening just north of there about 2 tenths of a mile north that the trucks were going in. 
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: bocachicagal on 04/08/2016 12:16 am
One reason I said the trashed houses should be torn down is the septic. You're not going to rennovate a structure on a foundation with rotten 50 year old cast iron pipes under the slab, clay to tanks that are way too small to meet todays codes, and leech fields that are clogged with roots. Throw in probable leftover damage from the 67 hurricane, leaky roofs with rotted eaves and probable structural water damage, bad sheetrock and termite infestations, it would be much easier and faster to build on an empty lot. And, I'm pretty sure new leech fields wouldn't be allowed out here now, so houses without electric service would have a pretty hard time ever passing the inspections needed to get it back. Having electric lines isn't the problem. Having electric service is.
 I've done work on 7 of the places in the village so far and spent some time talking with the owners about their experience with the county and MVEC.
 Sam is trying to get an above ground tank approved so he can live there. That's not too bad a solution if you can have a gray water drainfield. He has an extra problem, being so low and close to the water.

 Looking at the base for my shed, I might have gotten a little carried away anchoring it to the ground. If they ever decide to move the whole village in one piece, they'll be able to use it as a lift point.

From what I understand with the existing homes is that to obtain electric service you first have to put in a new above ground septic system and if the meter box needs to be replaced it will be required to be changed. I do not know exactly which septic system they are being told to use. Once that has been done then you can get electric service???? The cast iron pipes can be replaced as well as termite damage, roofs, rotted eaves etc. etc.  I have been told by the county that there will be no building permits issued for new homes out here. Due to the lack of available homes someone may want to put the $$ in to have a exceptional view of a launch. 8)
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: bstrong on 04/08/2016 02:28 am
There were rumors of a ferry from South Padre Island to Boca Chica, if that actually happens (very skeptical of this) I imagine most will opt to live on the Island.

Right now, there's no place in Boca Chica to dock.  The water in the South Bay is way too shallow, and the whole area is environmentally protected wetlands.

If they built a pier on Boca Chica Beach, that may work.  Many public beaches have piers. (https://www.google.com/search?q=beach+pier&biw=1464&bih=918&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwih-5XVwfzLAhXDHB4KHSN3AAkQ_AUIBigB)  People seem to like them.

They'll use a hovercraft, of course. Just have to dodge the sea turtle nests. :)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SR.N4
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Zed_Noir on 04/08/2016 10:21 am
...
They'll use a hovercraft, of course. Just have to dodge the sea turtle nests. :)
...
Hovercraft are noisy and not cheap to maintain & support.

Maybe something like the LARV-V (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LARC-V) motorized wheeled boat will work out better. After all the SpaceX CTO have his side business at Fremont California.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: JamesH65 on 04/08/2016 12:51 pm
...
They'll use a hovercraft, of course. Just have to dodge the sea turtle nests. :)
...
Hovercraft are noisy and not cheap to maintain & support.

Maybe something like the LARV-V (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LARC-V) motorized wheeled boat will work out better. After all the SpaceX CTO have his side business at Fremont California.

This is our local 'device'

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bKEkAXG1wpI

Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 04/08/2016 08:36 pm
...
They'll use a hovercraft, of course. Just have to dodge the sea turtle nests. :)
...
Hovercraft are noisy and not cheap to maintain & support.

Maybe something like the LARV-V (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LARC-V) motorized wheeled boat will work out better. After all the SpaceX CTO have his side business at Fremont California.

This is our local 'device'

This was already covered up thread (http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=35425.msg1354148#msg1354148).  The Hydra-Terra (http://www.camillc.com/hydraterra.htm) would probably work best.

But would they allow such a thing on a public beach?  I doubt it.

And they certainly wouldn't allow it in the South Bay, or any of the other tidal pools.  The whole area is environmentally protected wetlands.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 04/08/2016 08:49 pm
As I said before, a simple wooden pier may work best.  This would allow a passenger ferry from South Padre Island to dock at the end, and it would allow beach goers to fish or sight-see along the pier.

Many public beaches have piers.  People like them.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: BioBritt on 04/08/2016 09:11 pm
Only problem I can see with the pier is it would prohibit people from driving off the ferry from wherever they live on SPI and then driving to the work site. There's really nowhere to live on the southern point of South Padre as it's all hotels and commercial buildings. There's also not very good public transportation - as far as I know there's one small shuttle that takes people from Port Isabel onto the Island, but no buses or anything on the island itself.

As I said - I doubt it'll happen. SpaceX gets people to move to McGregor, which is arguably more boring than Brownsville. To drive in from most places in Browntown takes about 30-40 minutes, and a.) I imagine a ride from wherever you live on SPI to Boca Chica would take about that amount of time and b.) Most people live in Waco or Woodbury if they work at McGregor and that drive is 20-40 minutes, so it's all the same.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 04/08/2016 09:38 pm
As I said - I doubt it'll happen. SpaceX gets people to move to McGregor, which is arguably more boring than Brownsville. To drive in from most places in Browntown takes about 30-40 minutes, and a.) I imagine a ride from wherever you live on SPI to Boca Chica would take about that amount of time and b.) Most people live in Waco or Woodbury if they work at McGregor and that drive is 20-40 minutes, so it's all the same.

Agreed.  In fact, from what I can tell, Brownsville isn't so bad.  Around 200,000 people. The zoo (http://gpz.org/) is highly rated.  And once they build the east loop and expand the airport runway, East Brownsville may see some new hotels, houses, etc.. A 17 minute drive from the outer-belt to the launch pad.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: BioBritt on 04/08/2016 09:55 pm

Agreed.  In fact, from what I can tell, Brownsville isn't so bad.  Around 200,000 people. The zoo (http://gpz.org/) is highly rated.  And once they build the east loop and expand the airport runway, East Brownsville may see some new hotels, houses, etc.. A 17 minute drive from the outer-belt to the launch pad.

It's not so bad - maybe for a younger person it could be as there's not a lot of diversity of culture, not a lot of diversity of restaurants (hope you like tacos), and there aren't any "big cities" nearby where you can go to big-name concerts or plays. It's a very poor city and there absolutely are bad and worse parts of town. But cost of living is very inexpensive, the beach is right there, and what you save not buying tickets to see Justin Bieber, you can buy enough margaritas and micheladas to drown all your sorrows, buy a house where you couldn't afford it elsewhere in the nation, and save the rest for your vacations. That being said, having experience in Waco and Brownsville, I think I'd stick with Brownsville. The weather is amazing all year, and I love being around the ocean.

And yes, the zoo is quite nice. But I'm really, really biased.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: launchwatcher on 04/08/2016 10:03 pm
Only problem I can see with the pier is it would prohibit people from driving off the ferry from wherever they live on SPI and then driving to the work site. There's really nowhere to live on the southern point of South Padre as it's all hotels and commercial buildings. There's also not very good public transportation - as far as I know there's one small shuttle that takes people from Port Isabel onto the Island, but no buses or anything on the island itself.
Current practice in silicon valley (to work around inadequate mass transit) is for large employers to run their own vanpool or bus service.   Not clear how many people will need to work at the launch site but that might be an option.   
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 04/09/2016 11:33 am
Only problem I can see with the pier is it would prohibit people from driving off the ferry from wherever they live on SPI and then driving to the work site. There's really nowhere to live on the southern point of South Padre as it's all hotels and commercial buildings. There's also not very good public transportation - as far as I know there's one small shuttle that takes people from Port Isabel onto the Island, but no buses or anything on the island itself.
Current practice in silicon valley (to work around inadequate mass transit) is for large employers to run their own vanpool or bus service.   Not clear how many people will need to work at the launch site but that might be an option.
Right, but this all pre-supposes that SpaceX would want to locate employees on South Padre Island (SPI), which is basically a tourist resort.  As BioBritt said above, Brownsville is more of a real city, and driving times from Brownsville to the SpaceX site are on par with McGregor.

About a year ago, someone up-thread (http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=35425.msg1353240#msg1353240) posted a link to an article (http://portisabelsouthpadre.com/2015/03/27/city-of-spi-proposes-official-agreement-with-spacex/) about South Padre Island proposing tax breaks for SpaceX to locate employees there.  That started a lot of discussion/speculation about ferries, piers, bridges, amphibious craft, helicopters, etc. from SPI to Boca Chica.  But since then, I haven't seen anything about SpaceX agreeing to such a proposal.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: cuddihy on 04/09/2016 12:40 pm
Ferries just don't work for commuting unless they're the big kind you drive on like in Puget Sound.

It all just takes too long to load, cross, and unload, and the limited schedule means lack of flexibility.

I lived in Everette, WA for a year while working in Bremerton across the Sound. Commute driving around the sound via Tacoma narrows bridge was 50-75 min each way , with the ferry it was more relaxing but 90 min - 2 hrs each way and significantly more expensive.

The only place I've seen it work with a pedestrian ferry is Pearl Harbor, where people cross from the residential Ewa Beach side to the very busy Hickam air field/ Navy base side... That works because the harbor channel is only a few hundred yards across whereas the drive is 45 minutes stuck on the H1 in heavy traffic...not very applicable to Brownsville.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: AncientU on 04/09/2016 02:38 pm
Why a car ferry?
SpaceX will surely run shuttles around their real estate, so a pedestrian ferry across from SPI would suffice.  The light hydrofoils used across the world would make the trip in <10 min.  (Might even be too short to use them.)
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: bocachicagal on 04/10/2016 10:23 pm
More pics from the site. Dump trucks quit early today so not sure if they are done hauling or if they quit early because it's Sunday. This morning they were just dumping on what I would consider the east side of the site (closest to the dunes). Hwy 4 is starting to break up on just a few spots on the west bound lane! East bound is pretty bad so hopefully if the trucking is done for now the road can once again be repaired!  ;D
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Johnnyhinbos on 04/10/2016 10:49 pm
From what I read on the Facebook group, they still have some 11,000 loads to go still...
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: bocachicagal on 04/10/2016 11:07 pm
From what I read on the Facebook group, they still have some 11,000 loads to go still...

Will expect to wake up to the sound of dump trucks in the morning  : ;D
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: cscott on 04/11/2016 03:36 pm
From what I read on the Facebook group, they still have some 11,000 loads to go still...
Approximately how many loads per day are they achieving?
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Johnnyhinbos on 04/11/2016 03:50 pm
From what I read on the Facebook group, they still have some 11,000 loads to go still...
Approximately how many loads per day are they achieving?
This is according to the Facebook group "SPI Life" (South Pedro Island) - about 53 truckloads a day, which sounds kinda high to me.

(EDIT: That was supposed to be per hour, not per day)
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Retired Downrange on 04/11/2016 04:02 pm
Combining my math skills with my sitting on the porch drinking beer skills today, I came up with 36 dump trucks an hour.


Re: question about how many loads per day...
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: cscott on 04/11/2016 04:42 pm
Combining my math skills with my sitting on the porch drinking beer skills today, I came up with 36 dump trucks an hour.


Re: question about how many loads per day...
Using nomadd's numbers, and a 10 hour day (probably not realistic) I get the remaining 11,000 loads in about 33 days.

Using 53 loads/day, my approximation skills say 220 days.

Let's say they'll be done before the year's up.

EDIT: using 53 loads/*hour* (see correction above) and (let's be conservative) a six hour day, I get ~35 days.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Johnnyhinbos on 04/11/2016 05:28 pm
Combining my math skills with my sitting on the porch drinking beer skills today, I came up with 36 dump trucks an hour.


Re: question about how many loads per day...
Using nomadd's numbers, and a 10 hour day (probably not realistic) I get the remaining 11,000 loads in about 33 days.

Using 53 loads/day, my approximation skills say 220 days.

Let's say they'll be done before the year's up.

LOL - my bad - that was meant to be 53 loads per HOUR, not day! Corrected...
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Nomadd on 04/11/2016 06:32 pm
I've driven the  road a dozen times since then and come up with 20 to 38 trucks an hour. 10 hours a day is very realistic.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: BioBritt on 04/11/2016 06:50 pm
Why a car ferry?
SpaceX will surely run shuttles around their real estate, so a pedestrian ferry across from SPI would suffice.  The light hydrofoils used across the world would make the trip in <10 min.  (Might even be too short to use them.)

Mostly because as I stated before, there's no public transportation on the island and nowhere to live on the south side of SPI, so SpaceX would have to hire someone to run a shuttle from the pier on Boca Chica to the site and from people's homes to the ferry terminal, (which would get insane knowing launch schedules and all the strange times people would be reporting to work and going home)
Also it would be pretty expensive to do all of the above: to build a pier, to run transportation, to buy and run shuttles from the "mission control" area to the launch site every time someone needed to go from the pad to the control rooms - if everyone had their car things would run a lot smoother and faster. I seriously don't see it happening unless SPI is giving SpaceX (the company, not the employees) millions upon millions of dollars to make that happen. And I don't see that happening either. Not when Brownsville is a perfectly good town to live in and people can just drive their cars over "for free".
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: BioBritt on 04/11/2016 06:53 pm
I've driven the  road a dozen times since then and come up with 20 to 38 trucks an hour. 10 hours a day is very realistic.

Yup, I heard 35 trucks running an average of...8 loads a day? (If memory serves.) So 280 loads of dirt per day.
I also heard they're averaging about 1 elevation per day.

I *also* heard that they're building everything up to above the FEMA 100 year flood plain, so it is possible that that area won't be the launch pad - everything has to come up. (Though why they haven't started on all the areas, I'm not sure.) I imagine they'll build everything up to 14', then let it settle and see how much more they have to pack in. Maybe repeat that process. Then maybe we'll see some real construction!
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Nomadd on 04/11/2016 10:14 pm
I've driven the  road a dozen times since then and come up with 20 to 38 trucks an hour. 10 hours a day is very realistic.

Yup, I heard 35 trucks running an average of...8 loads a day? (If memory serves.) So 280 loads of dirt per day.
I also heard they're averaging about 1 elevation per day.

I *also* heard that they're building everything up to above the FEMA 100 year flood plain, so it is possible that that area won't be the launch pad - everything has to come up. (Though why they haven't started on all the areas, I'm not sure.) I imagine they'll build everything up to 14', then let it settle and see how much more they have to pack in. Maybe repeat that process. Then maybe we'll see some real construction!
The guys working on it have told me 24' for the actual pad, which will be about 1/4 mile east of where they're working now. Since they're so close to the water, they have to worry about waves on top of the 100 year surge, so it makes sense they're going so high.
 
 Regarding the "other" truck count, if you took an average group of people and said "If you're driving down a 60mph (Everybody's going that fast) highway and pass 15 oncoming trucks in 15 minutes, how many trucks an hour are going down the road", how many would say 60 trucks?
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: fthomassy on 04/11/2016 10:59 pm
Regarding the "other" truck count, if you took an average group of people and said "If you're driving down a 60mph (Everybody's going that fast) highway and pass 15 oncoming trucks in 15 minutes, how many trucks an hour are going down the road", how many would say 60 trucks?
Perhaps it would help if you hinted that truck speeds were non-relativistic. :D
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: CraigLieb on 04/12/2016 02:27 am
The closing speed is 120 mph you are going 60mph and so are the trucks going the opposite way. So since the closing speed is 2 miles a minute and you pass a truck every minute they are two miles apart. So the trucks spaced two miles apart will pass a stationary point at 60 mph every two minutes so 30 trucks per hour will do so.

What do I win?  ::)
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Nomadd on 04/12/2016 02:55 pm


What do I win?  ::)
I never could understand how so many people pass high school algebra but seem completely incapable of applying basic logic to simple math problems. (Don't tell Lar I ranted)
 I'm guessing they're going to have to add a long ramp to the west side of that site if they're leaving the warehouse that high. They must be getting close to working on that or the causeway to the pad.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: CraigLieb on 04/12/2016 03:46 pm


What do I win?  ::)
I never could understand how so many people pass high school algebra but seem completely incapable of applying basic logic to simple math problems. (Don't tell Lar I ranted)
 I guess they're going to have to add a long ramp to the west side of that site if they're leaving the warehouse that high. They must be getting close to working on that or the causeway to the pad.

Now of course from a spaceship passing Earth going at .98c along the road in the same direction you are going, their relativistic perception of distance between trucks would be shrunk by 
(edited) sqrt( (1-V**2)/C**2),  or AND time would be dilated slowing down their watches (relative to your lame Earth based digital watch), so that sends the whole calculation out the window.    ::)

(edit to make it slightly more on topic:) .... but you would notice through your TRANS-ALUMINUM window that there was a big pile of dirt being created to bring these silly humans into the modern space age to allow them to get out of their back yards, FINALLY!
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Nomadd on 04/12/2016 04:16 pm

Now of course from a spaceship passing Earth going at .98c along the road in the same direction you are going, their relativistic perception of distance between trucks would be shrunk by (1-V**2)/C**2,  or time would be dilated slowing down their watches (relative to your lame Earth based digital watch), so that sends the whole calculation out the window.    ::)
Let's see....$24 for each 1 mph over the limit....I wonder if the traffic cameras and radars could handle the Doppler shift.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 04/12/2016 05:22 pm
Now of course from a spaceship passing Earth going at .98c along the road in the same direction you are going, their relativistic perception of distance between trucks would be shrunk by (1-V**2)/C**2,  or time would be dilated slowing down their watches (relative to your lame Earth based digital watch), so that sends the whole calculation out the window.    ::)

Need a square root in there, i.e.  √(1 - V²/C²)

Also, at high speeds, distances shrink and time slows down.  Not one one or the other, but both. 

And, at the same time, mass increases by 1/√(1 - V²/C²).  This property led to the famous E = mc².

But all of these effects are only visible to a stationary observer.  From the traveler's perspective, everything is normal.  This property may eventually allow inter-stellar travel.  For example, if you build a spaceship that constantly accelerates at 1g, you can reach the Andromeda Galaxy in 30 years, or 60 years round trip.  Of course that assumes you would want to return home, since 5 million years would have passed on Earth.

Within the last year, both Elon and Gwynne have mentioned interstellar travel in passing.  After Mars, that will be the next thing.

It's all gonna happen, and I think Texas will play a big part...

Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Nomadd on 04/12/2016 06:20 pm
 


As long as you don't hit a speck of dust. Even plowing through hydrogen atoms at that Andromeda speed is going to be interesting.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: meekGee on 04/13/2016 12:36 am


What do I win?  ::)
I never could understand how so many people pass high school algebra but seem completely incapable of applying basic logic to simple math problems. (Don't tell Lar I ranted)
 I guess they're going to have to add a long ramp to the west side of that site if they're leaving the warehouse that high. They must be getting close to working on that or the causeway to the pad.

Now of course from a spaceship passing Earth going at .98c along the road in the same direction you are going, their relativistic perception of distance between trucks would be shrunk by (1-V**2)/C**2,  or time would be dilated slowing down their watches (relative to your lame Earth based digital watch), so that sends the whole calculation out the window.    ::)

You can't open a window at .98c, silly.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: dorkmo on 04/13/2016 02:34 am


As long as you don't hit a speck of dust. Even plowing through hydrogen atoms at that Andromeda speed is going to be interesting.

thats what movie magic is for
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 04/13/2016 11:45 am
Back to earth (specifically, dirt) ...

From what I understand, the wick drains installed by SpaceX will require months of settling time, during which the elevation will fall significantly.

Has anyone figured out more details on this process? more specific settling time?  expected amount of elevation lowering after settling?

Also, while they're waiting for the launch site to settle, will they start construction at the control site? 
According to the EIS (https://www.faa.gov/about/office_org/headquarters_offices/ast/environmental/nepa_docs/review/launch/spacex_texas_launch_site_environmental_impact_statement/media/FEIS_SpaceX_Texas_Launch_Site_Vol_I.pdf), the Control Center will include:
• Two launch control center buildings
• Two payload processing facilities
• Launch vehicle processing hangar
• Two radio frequency transmitter/receivers
• Generators and diesel storage facilities
• Roads, parking areas, fencing, security, lighting, and utilities
• A satellite fuels storage facility
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: cscott on 04/13/2016 01:53 pm
You might have hit upon why they are concentrating the dirt in one corner first: get the settling started there while they shift to filling the launch pad area.  Then they can starting building on the first corner while they wait for the launch pad to settle.

Perhaps.

But they are filling the whole site, and it would be foolish to start construction until the land you're building on had finished settling.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Nomadd on 04/13/2016 03:53 pm
 There's a big difference between building on the beach and building 2 miles inland. (sort of inland) You have to worry about big waves during a hurricane at the pad, but not at the control center. The pad area is also tidal marsh, so drying it out will take more time and pressure. The control center area should be a much quicker, simpler process.
 The guys I've talked to so far seem to think settling won't take much time because of the large number of wicks they put in. The water doesn't have to travel more than a few feet anywhere to hit a drain. Fill without drains could settle for a decade in a place like that.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 04/14/2016 08:48 am
You might have hit upon why they are concentrating the dirt in one corner first: get the settling started there while they shift to filling the launch pad area. 

Hmmm.... interesting concept!

I hadn't thought of it before, but maybe they're strategically adding the weight of the dirt in a "wave" in order to squeeze out the underlying water in a particular direction, starting at one end, then working toward the other.   

Sort of like squeezing toothpaste out of a tube.  Start applying pressure at the back, then work your way toward the nozzle.  This gets all of the toothpaste out.  By contrast, if you apply pressure to the whole tube equally, you may be left with small pockets of toothpaste when you're finished.

That's one theory anyway.

By the way, does anyone know if they added a few inches of crushed rock before they started adding dirt?  That could allow the water from the wick drains to flow out faster.  Or maybe the surface sand that naturally covers the area already allows water to flow easily.

Interesting stuff...
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: JBF on 04/14/2016 12:15 pm
Has anyone actually seen wicks in action? Do you get visible water flow?
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Lar on 04/14/2016 02:03 pm
Back to earth (specifically, dirt) ...

Good job self moderating, gang....  Because travel times to Andromeda are not at ALL off topic for a thread about launch pad and control center construction!
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: bocachicagal on 04/14/2016 03:20 pm
Day 2 without dump trucks going to the site!
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Nomadd on 04/14/2016 03:37 pm
Back to earth (specifically, dirt) ...

Good job self moderating, gang....  Because travel times to Andromeda are not at ALL off topic for a thread about launch pad and control center construction!
Not yet.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: bocachicagal on 04/14/2016 04:31 pm
Looks like Space Mountain is shaping up nicely  ;D
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: JBF on 04/14/2016 05:31 pm
And once again the Americans become mound builders.  ;)
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 04/14/2016 06:38 pm
Has anyone actually seen wicks in action? Do you get visible water flow?

OK, I know I've posted the video before, so if you've already seen it, please disregard.

But for those who haven't seen it, the video explains the process really well, especially from 1:14 to 1:40.

Specifically, to answer your question above, it appears the wick drains don't become active until after you dump a huge layer of dirt on top of them.  The weight of the added dirt layer appears to "squeeze" out the water in the earth layers below it.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eTGa0fG9HWY
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: JBF on 04/14/2016 07:09 pm
Has anyone actually seen wicks in action? Do you get visible water flow?

OK, I know I've posted the video before, so if you've already seen it, please disregard.

But for those who haven't seen it, the video explains the process really well, especially from 1:14 to 1:40.

Specifically, to answer your question above, it appears the wick drains don't become active until after you dump a huge layer of dirt on top of them.  The weight of the added dirt layer appears to "squeeze" out the water in the earth layers below it.

The video is interesting, but I was hoping someone here would have practical experience with them.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Sam Ho on 04/14/2016 07:23 pm
You might have hit upon why they are concentrating the dirt in one corner first: get the settling started there while they shift to filling the launch pad area. 

Hmmm.... interesting concept!

I hadn't thought of it before, but maybe they're strategically adding the weight of the dirt in a "wave" in order to squeeze out the underlying water in a particular direction, starting at one end, then working toward the other.   

Sort of like squeezing toothpaste out of a tube.  Start applying pressure at the back, then work your way toward the nozzle.  This gets all of the toothpaste out.  By contrast, if you apply pressure to the whole tube equally, you may be left with small pockets of toothpaste when you're finished.

That's one theory anyway.

By the way, does anyone know if they added a few inches of crushed rock before they started adding dirt?  That could allow the water from the wick drains to flow out faster.  Or maybe the surface sand that naturally covers the area already allows water to flow easily.

Interesting stuff...
The point of vertical wick drains is to accelerate movement of water up to the surface, at which point it can be dispersed in whatever direction you want.  Moving the water laterally toothpaste-style or through crushed rock doesn't really help.  The wick drains are supposed to be close enough to each other that the water spends minimal time travelling laterally before it hits a wick drain and heads for the surface.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Lar on 04/14/2016 07:29 pm
The point of vertical wick drains is to accelerate movement of water up to the surface, at which point it can be dispersed in whatever direction you want.  Moving the water laterally toothpaste-style or through crushed rock doesn't really help.  The wick drains are supposed to be close enough to each other that the water spends minimal time travelling laterally before it hits a wick drain and heads for the surface.

Thanks! What is done with it when it gets there? Is it expected that it will be a small enough volume at any given time that it just evaporates away? or is there so much that provision has to be made for removal?
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Nomadd on 04/14/2016 07:54 pm
The point of vertical wick drains is to accelerate movement of water up to the surface, at which point it can be dispersed in whatever direction you want.  Moving the water laterally toothpaste-style or through crushed rock doesn't really help.  The wick drains are supposed to be close enough to each other that the water spends minimal time travelling laterally before it hits a wick drain and heads for the surface.

Thanks! What is done with it when it gets there? Is it expected that it will be a small enough volume at any given time that it just evaporates away? or is there so much that provision has to be made for removal?
If there are no contaminents they can let it flow into the marsh.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Sam Ho on 04/14/2016 08:15 pm
The point of vertical wick drains is to accelerate movement of water up to the surface, at which point it can be dispersed in whatever direction you want.  Moving the water laterally toothpaste-style or through crushed rock doesn't really help.  The wick drains are supposed to be close enough to each other that the water spends minimal time travelling laterally before it hits a wick drain and heads for the surface.

Thanks! What is done with it when it gets there? Is it expected that it will be a small enough volume at any given time that it just evaporates away? or is there so much that provision has to be made for removal?
If there are no contaminents they can let it flow into the marsh.
The surcharge dirt dumped on top is generally more permeable than the stuff you're trying to drain (silt), so the water soaks into the dirt and disperses.  Also, you usually put down a sand layer before punching the wicks.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 04/14/2016 09:01 pm
The point of vertical wick drains is to accelerate movement of water up to the surface, at which point it can be dispersed in whatever direction you want.  Moving the water laterally toothpaste-style or through crushed rock doesn't really help.  The wick drains are supposed to be close enough to each other that the water spends minimal time travelling laterally before it hits a wick drain and heads for the surface.

Sounds like you've have a little experience with this, which is great!

Maybe you can help us solve the mystery...

Just observing what SpaceX is doing, it appears they're starting with just one part of the site, and building that up to the full dirt height first, before adding any dirt to the rest of the site, including the launch pad itself.

Why wouldn't they build the dirt up evenly across the entire site?  Why build one spot up to the full height first?
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: jg on 04/14/2016 09:58 pm
The point of vertical wick drains is to accelerate movement of water up to the surface, at which point it can be dispersed in whatever direction you want.  Moving the water laterally toothpaste-style or through crushed rock doesn't really help.  The wick drains are supposed to be close enough to each other that the water spends minimal time travelling laterally before it hits a wick drain and heads for the surface.

Sounds like you've have a little experience with this, which is great!

Maybe you can help us solve the mystery...

Just observing what SpaceX is doing, it appears they're starting with just one part of the site, and building that up to the full dirt height first, before adding any dirt to the rest of the site, including the launch pad itself.

Why wouldn't they build the dirt up evenly across the entire site?  Why build one spot up to the full height first?

It may be the first part of the site they want to build on....  The sooner it's done, the sooner building construction could start.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 04/14/2016 10:27 pm
It may be the first part of the site they want to build on....  The sooner it's done, the sooner building construction could start.

Not sure about that.

The wick drains require months of settling time, and the amount of elevation change due to settling may vary across the site.  So if you start building in one area before others, they may not end up level with each other.

Better to let the whole site settle completely, then re-grade everything level, then start building.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Nomadd on 04/15/2016 01:27 am
 The warehouse is going to be on a large area, relatively thin chunk of concrete where you don't want even an inch of settling once you build. Not sure exactly what the "concrete mountain" launch pad will be, but the required base will be different, and maybe not as sensitive to settling. The causeway is just a causeway.
 Those wicks create a low pressure area at the bottom compared to surrounding pressure. Sort of artificial Artesian springs. You only need over 45psi to force water up a wick at 100 feet, and with that muck and all the extra dirt on top, they're going to have a lot more than that.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: JBF on 04/15/2016 10:55 am
How is this for a theory.  They are over building one area to get the wicking done faster.  When that section is done they will push the excess off to start the next section.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: eriblo on 04/15/2016 12:27 pm
It may be the first part of the site they want to build on....  The sooner it's done, the sooner building construction could start.

Not sure about that.

The wick drains require months of settling time, and the amount of elevation change due to settling may vary across the site.  So if you start building in one area before others, they may not end up level with each other.

Better to let the whole site settle completely, then re-grade everything level, then start building.
I have no experience in earth moving/site prepping, but I can't see this as being the case. It sounds like you expect further movement after construction?
Different areas of the site will settle to various degrees, but as long as you let everything settle completely it shouldn't matter what the other parts of the site are doing at the time. I imagine everything will be surveyed using some external reference to within construction limits anyway (i.e. "make this a plane surface X.xx m above MSL", not "make it as high as that area over there" :) ).
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Kabloona on 04/15/2016 01:46 pm
It may be the first part of the site they want to build on....  The sooner it's done, the sooner building construction could start.

Not sure about that.

The wick drains require months of settling time, and the amount of elevation change due to settling may vary across the site.  So if you start building in one area before others, they may not end up level with each other.

Better to let the whole site settle completely, then re-grade everything level, then start building.

Yes, and according to this paper, the correct way to obtain a final grade height "Hf" is to remove some, but not all, of the surcharge, because the soil will continue to settle after the bulk of surcharge is removed, and of course further due to the weight of the slab and structure on top.

The paper deals with construction of embankments, so may not be quite the same thing. But I imagine SpaceX will want the final grade to be a few feet higher than surrounding area to protect against storm surge and sea level rise.

http://www.straits-engineers.com/publications_pdf/publication_20.pdf

They also say a common pitfall is removing the surcharge too early, resulting in insufficient settlement. But since SpaceX has said they plan 2 years of earthwork due to poorer than expected soil condition, it seems they may be trying to avoid that pitfall.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Okie_Steve on 04/15/2016 02:00 pm
If they have to remove some amount of dirt then it has to go somewhere else, like say landing pads ...
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 04/15/2016 03:06 pm
If they have to remove some amount of dirt then it has to go somewhere else, like say landing pads ...
My speculation for landing pads is upthread (http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=35425.msg1447864#msg1447864).
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: sewebster on 04/15/2016 04:33 pm
FYI, this could be helpful:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Consolidation_(soil)

My guess at why they would focus on one area first is so that they can start building on that area first. However, the time difference may not be that large...
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Nomadd on 04/15/2016 06:24 pm
 Have fun speculating. That might be all we have now, since someone has asked the contractors to stop talking with the local riffraff about the project. The last thing I got was that even the guys doing the dirt work didn't know how much they planned on leveling off the site, but they don't expect any rebounding with this type of deposit.
 It's possible plans could change a bit as they measure the settling effect of what they've done so far. I don't know if they did any core sampling, so there could be some degree of guesswork.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Kabloona on 04/15/2016 08:52 pm
Two years of watching dirt get moved around...this is gonna be fun... ::)
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: sewebster on 04/15/2016 09:05 pm
Two years of watching dirt get moved around...this is gonna be fun... ::)

Perhaps we should look into setting up a webcam...
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: DAZ on 04/15/2016 09:35 pm
All the buildings, structures, and concrete slabs subject to heavy loading that cannot be allowed to shift will be supported on deeply driven piles.  Because these structures are supported by these deep piles they will be relatively immune to changes in elevation of the surrounding ground.  Most of the surrounding ground that is not on piles will be for things like parking lots and to ease access to these structures.  With the need to support the structures on these deep piles they will probably start pile driving way in advance of the earth settling to its approximate final height.  The earth will probably never settle to a stable height in our lifetimes and will probably continue to slowly sink (although measured in inches per decade) for the entire life of the site.  The height of the surrounding ground will be determined by the maximum storm surge to actuary risk/cost that SpaceX is willing to assume.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: llanitedave on 04/15/2016 10:35 pm
Not to mention that the entire delta zone near the mouth of the Rio Grande is slow subsiding due to compaction of the clay and silt brought in over the millenia by the river.  It's the same reason New Orleans is now below sea level, just a different river.  Dams upstream prevent the arrival of new sediment to layer on top of the settling stuff, and not enough new sand to maintain the dunes, so even without climate change, the coastline is gradually going to be moving inward.  The piles of dirt and the pilings will be settling both on the surface and at depth.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: JBF on 04/15/2016 11:11 pm
Have fun speculating. That might be all we have now, since someone has asked the contractors to stop talking with the local riffraff about the project. The last thing I got was that even the guys doing the dirt work didn't know how much they planned on leveling off the site, but they don't expect any rebounding with this type of deposit.
 It's possible plans could change a bit as they measure the settling effect of what they've done so far. I don't know if they did any core sampling, so there could be some degree of guesswork.

Oh well so much for this thread until the buildings go up.  I wonder from how high up that order came.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: StuffOfInterest on 04/16/2016 11:21 am
At least the launch site shouldn't have to deal with as much settling as Kansai Airport in Osaka

From https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kansai_International_Airport (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kansai_International_Airport):
Quote
The sink rate fell from 50 cm (20 in) per year during 1994 to 7 cm (2.8 in) per year in 2008.

I saw something years ago where they have crews which use hydraulic jacks to lift support beams and insert spacers at the bottom to keep the above structure level while the ground is settling underneath.  Probably not a practical solution with a slap of concrete on top. 

I flew through that airport 15 years ago, and I recall it looking quite nice, but I don't remember too much as it was after a 13 hours flight and not many brain cells are firing with that much time in a tube.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Nomadd on 04/16/2016 03:47 pm
At least the launch site shouldn't have to deal with as much settling as Kansai Airport in Osaka

From https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kansai_International_Airport (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kansai_International_Airport):
Quote
The sink rate fell from 50 cm (20 in) per year during 1994 to 7 cm (2.8 in) per year in 2008.

I saw somethings years ago where they have crews which use hydraulic jacks to lift support beams and insert spacers at the bottom to keep the above structure level while the ground is settling underneath.  Probably not a practical solution with a slap of concrete on top. 

I flew through that airport 15 years ago, and I recall it looking quite nice, but I don't remember too much as it was after a 13 hours flight and not many brain cells are firing with that much time in a tube.
Kansai was designed with built in jacks. It was obvious early on that the engineers had supplied the estimates regarding island settling their superiors required to get the project going.
 One problem none of the houses have here in 50 years is settling. Of course, none of them are built on top of wetlands like the pad warehouse and pad itself, but the land here seems a lot more stable than in some places.
 I wouldn't take the "2 years of dirt work" comment as gospel. They plan to launch in 2 years, and there will be a bit of construction before that.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Lar on 04/16/2016 05:12 pm
Two years of watching dirt get moved around...this is gonna be fun... ::)

Perhaps we should look into setting up a webcam...
Maybe we need to develop a modular, self contained, secured, weatherproof webcam package that we can deploy wherever we need to... :) And make it reusable...

We could put the NSF logo on it along with a tagline "Smile, space geeks are watching you" and sell advert space to other outfits...
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Johnnyhinbos on 04/16/2016 06:01 pm
And if it's refuelable and has deployable landing legs and we can fly it from site to site, then I guarantee some other forum will start obsessively watching it with their own web camera, which will then gain the attention of another forum, which will then...

Never mind...
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: muazcatalyst on 04/16/2016 06:09 pm
And if it's refuelable and has deployable landing legs and we can fly it from site to site, then I guarantee some other forum will start obsessively watching it with their own web camera, which will then gain the attention of another forum, which will then...

Never mind...

But will the legs be retractable? ; )
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Johnnyhinbos on 04/16/2016 06:24 pm

And if it's refuelable and has deployable landing legs and we can fly it from site to site, then I guarantee some other forum will start obsessively watching it with their own web camera, which will then gain the attention of another forum, which will then...

Never mind...

But will the legs be retractable? ; )
Only with the assistance of a team of tiny NASASpaceFlighters...
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: topo334 on 04/16/2016 06:45 pm
do you mean it's webcams all the way down?
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Lar on 04/16/2016 06:47 pm
Urk, I started a monster.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 04/16/2016 08:08 pm
Maybe Nomadd knows a spot where we can mount a webcam
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: bocachicagal on 04/16/2016 09:16 pm
Just buy a vacant lot near the launch site! Put up a tower to mount the webcam to  ;)
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: docmordrid on 04/16/2016 10:46 pm
Put up a TV antenna tower, with options ;)
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: russianhalo117 on 04/16/2016 10:56 pm
Put up a TV antenna tower, with options ;)
We can establish the North American NSF Broadcast and L2 Command Centre with annexes at launch sites where we can get access. NSF International HQ is in the UK of course. Then we can get NEC guys merged in for Japan launch coverage and we'll be golden. I don't know who else we have here that can cover the other world launch sites.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Space Ghost 1962 on 04/16/2016 11:24 pm
Put up a TV antenna tower, with options ;)
We can establish the North American NSF Broadcast and L2 Command Centre with annexes at launch sites where we can get access. NSF International HQ is in the UK of course. Then we can get NEC guys merged in for Japan launch coverage and we'll be golden. I don't know who else we have here that can cover the other world launch sites.

International Launch News Network ;)
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: russianhalo117 on 04/16/2016 11:57 pm
Put up a TV antenna tower, with options ;)
We can establish the North American NSF Broadcast and L2 Command Centre with annexes at launch sites where we can get access. NSF International HQ is in the UK of course. Then we can get NEC guys merged in for Japan launch coverage and we'll be golden. I don't know who else we have here that can cover the other world launch sites.

International Launch News Network ;)
yeah my grand mad scientist master plan is to then combine all other world space media and forum into one corporation.

So now we need mod and Chris and Mark approval to proceed to turn us into an untouchable mainstream media corporation.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: russianhalo117 on 04/17/2016 12:02 am
Urk, I started a monster.
umm... last time I checked you were a Mod and are not supposed to create. Instead you are supposed to prevent and enforce. yet since a mod did started it, it must be allowed just like cheating glitches in games that were never fixed.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: The Amazing Catstronaut on 04/17/2016 12:29 am
I think we should crowdfund a few webcam satellites. Only way to nip this issue in the bud.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Nomadd on 04/17/2016 12:53 am
 Is it OK if I keep working on my shed while we're planning the first interplanetary media conglomerate? 
 bocachicagal can post updates if she wants.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Johnnyhinbos on 04/17/2016 02:51 am

Is it OK if I keep working on my shed while we're planning the first interplanetary media conglomerate? 
 bocachicagal can post updates if she wants.
That's ok, but you gotta let BioBritt in on the action too, 'cause she's a fellow aquarist...
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Kabloona on 04/17/2016 03:02 am
Is it OK if I keep working on my shed while we're planning the first interplanetary media conglomerate? 

Yes, because your shed will be Boca Chica satellite office.  ;)
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: CraigLieb on 04/17/2016 04:50 am
Put up a TV antenna tower, with options ;)
We can establish the North American NSF Broadcast and L2 Command Centre with annexes at launch sites where we can get access. NSF International HQ is in the UK of course. Then we can get NEC guys merged in for Japan launch coverage and we'll be golden. I don't know who else we have here that can cover the other world launch sites.

International Launch News Network ;)

I can see it now
Exciting shows like
 - Dirt pile truckers
 - Crane cam specials
 - Our favorite game show " Don't rock the ASDS"
 - cooking with RP1
 - 24 hour repeat music videos of "Launch Land and Relaunch"
 - etc.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: enzo on 04/17/2016 07:07 am
In all seriousness, I'm sure if the locals hosted a virtual tailgate type show for launches, it would be a big hit. No pretension, just a view of the action on top and some sizzling BBQ on the bottom.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Lar on 04/17/2016 03:10 pm
Urk, I started a monster.
umm... last time I checked you were a Mod and are not supposed to create. Instead you are supposed to prevent and enforce. yet since a mod did started it, it must be allowed just like cheating glitches in games that were never fixed.

That's a NOPE.   
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: bocachicagal on 04/17/2016 03:54 pm
 An article in the Brownsville Herald today.
 http://m.brownsvilleherald.com/premium/article_d5e1e324-044a-11e6-9c24-13e8f83ab605.html?mode=jqm
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 04/17/2016 08:22 pm
New Google Maps imagery:
https://www.google.com/maps/@25.9928135,-97.1726307,2784m/data=!3m1!1e3
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: gospacex on 04/17/2016 09:00 pm
At least the launch site shouldn't have to deal with as much settling as Kansai Airport in Osaka

From https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kansai_International_Airport (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kansai_International_Airport):
Quote
The sink rate fell from 50 cm (20 in) per year during 1994 to 7 cm (2.8 in) per year in 2008.

I saw something years ago where they have crews which use hydraulic jacks to lift support beams and insert spacers at the bottom to keep the above structure level while the ground is settling underneath.  Probably not a practical solution with a slap of concrete on top.

It may be practical, if the "slab of concrete" is designed for it. If it is foreseen that uneven settling can be a problem, the foundation may be designed so that it can be leveled by injecting concrete or epoxy resins under high pressure under the sections which are settling more. Foundation needs to be designed to be resistant to loads occurring during such operations.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Robotbeat on 04/17/2016 11:45 pm
Or sand-jacking works, too.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Comga on 04/18/2016 04:04 am
From the Terraserver image of 2016-02-14 (http://bit.ly/1TdY8P8)
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Jdeshetler on 04/18/2016 06:35 am
The earth mount seems to be shift southwest by 65' when compare with the original plan (in light greens).

Is it to make the ramp from HWY 4 to the top of earth mount less steep? 

And according to the red circle in insert photo, the driveway between the Hanger and Pad seems to be shifted 120' southwest, too?
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: bocachicagal on 04/18/2016 12:50 pm
The earth mount seems to be shift southwest by 65' when compare with the original plan (in light greens).

Is it to make the ramp from HWY 4 to the top of earth mount less steep? 

And according to the red circle in insert photo, the driveway between the Hanger and Pad seems to be shifted 120' southwest, too?

I think what is showing in the red circled area is the pile of organics that was removed from the construction site.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Nomadd on 04/18/2016 03:36 pm
The earth mount seems to be shift southwest by 65' when compare with the original plan (in light greens).

Is it to make the ramp from HWY 4 to the top of earth mount less steep? 

And according to the red circle in insert photo, the driveway between the Hanger and Pad seems to be shifted 120' southwest, too?

I think what is showing in the red circled area is the pile of organics that was removed from the construction site.
It is. That's the first thing that appeared when they started working.
 That ramp you see looks way too steep for an assembled rocket. It goes straight to the top from the road, not to mention making the turn. I've been wondering if they might be putting in a causeway from the west.
 Everything probably shifted away from the road when they realized how much they'd have to raise the site.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Nomadd on 04/19/2016 07:18 pm
 I might be wrong about the ramp. There's a survey team out working on the ramp and across the road. They could be planning to regrade it and make a wide access turn on the north side of the highway.
 The site looks a little over 2 D6's high now, so I think they're finished with that stage. It'll give the highway crew a chance to flatten the road back out.
 The problem with the highway is obvious once you look at it. They widened the skinny two lane road when they resurfaced it last year by paving over the shoulders, but didn't do anything to the base. The collapsing spots are almost all in the three foot wide strips to the outside where the old shoulders were.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: mlindner on 04/20/2016 08:28 am
Nomadd what's the actual prospects of us setting up a webcam on a pole in your front yard?
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Nomadd on 04/20/2016 01:56 pm
Nomadd what's the actual prospects of us setting up a webcam on a pole in your front yard?
I'm thinking about it. Ground level wouldn't be much good because of the haze and heat distortion most days.
 It's better if you're 20 feet up. I use to use 2 10' sections of heavy 2" electrical conduit for my homemade scada remotes in the oil field. Plant a heavy, 6' piece of angle steel half way in the ground for a mount and a person can stand the thing up or take it down on his own. With nothing but a small camera and a little TV antenna, the pole will handle hurricane winds easy.
 The main problem at the moment is the "web" part of webcam. There isn't any out here except for cellphone. Satellite internet isn't any cheaper than LTE and isn't nearly as good, so nobody gets that. Two new conduits are in as far as the gas well a few hundred yards down the road, so we're waiting to see what they do with those.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: JamesH65 on 04/20/2016 02:18 pm
Nomadd what's the actual prospects of us setting up a webcam on a pole in your front yard?
I'm thinking about it. Ground level wouldn't be much good because of the haze and heat distortion most days.
 It's better if you're 20 feet up. I use to use 2 10' sections of heavy 2" electrical conduit for my homemade scada remotes in the oil field. Plant a heavy, 6' piece of angle steel half way in the ground for a mount and a person can stand the thing up or take it down on his own. With nothing but a small camera and a little TV antenna, the pole will handle hurricane winds easy.
 The main problem at the moment is the "web" part of webcam. There isn't any out here except for cellphone. Satellite internet isn't any cheaper than LTE and isn't nearly as good, so nobody gets that. Two new conduits are in as far as the gas well a few hundred yards down the road, so we're waiting to see what they do with those.

Actions isn't really going to be 'awesome', doesn't need to be realtime, so you could get away with a timelapse system. Download to laptop, then convert the JPEGS to a movie and upload to YouTube when you have bandwidth elsewhere. Raspberry Pi on a pole, 32GB SD card, needs some sort of power supply. 32GB gives you over 12k frames. What you do with those is up to you, one a minute gives a LOT of video. Add some timing so it only takes frames during working hours.

Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: mvpel on 04/20/2016 02:31 pm
Powering a Raspberry Pi from Solar Power (http://www.voltaicsystems.com/blog/powering-a-raspberry-pi-from-solar-power/)

Quote
This post will walk you though how to protect your Raspberry Pi while powering it from a solar-powered system, and provide some tips for reducing the power consumption. Our desired goal is to power the Raspberry Pi with only a 9W solar panel (which you’ll see is not easy considering how power-hungry these boards are), so we’ll provide you with the know-how and tools necessary to reduce the power consumption.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: JamesH65 on 04/20/2016 03:05 pm
Powering a Raspberry Pi from Solar Power (http://www.voltaicsystems.com/blog/powering-a-raspberry-pi-from-solar-power/)

Quote
This post will walk you though how to protect your Raspberry Pi while powering it from a solar-powered system, and provide some tips for reducing the power consumption. Our desired goal is to power the Raspberry Pi with only a 9W solar panel (which you’ll see is not easy considering how power-hungry these boards are), so we’ll provide you with the know-how and tools necessary to reduce the power consumption.

You could get away with an A+, lower power SoC than the current top models. Pi camera takes about 250mA when running - they are quite hungry - the H264 encoder about 75mA.

Or just run a power cable up the pole. Stick Wifi dongle on the board, set up as access point, and you would be able to connect to it to download stuff.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: mlindner on 04/20/2016 06:37 pm
Powering a Raspberry Pi from Solar Power (http://www.voltaicsystems.com/blog/powering-a-raspberry-pi-from-solar-power/)

Quote
This post will walk you though how to protect your Raspberry Pi while powering it from a solar-powered system, and provide some tips for reducing the power consumption. Our desired goal is to power the Raspberry Pi with only a 9W solar panel (which you’ll see is not easy considering how power-hungry these boards are), so we’ll provide you with the know-how and tools necessary to reduce the power consumption.

I wouldn't bother with a solar power system, just run an outdoor extension cord up the pole and wire it in to the breaker box in the house.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: acsawdey on 04/20/2016 06:56 pm
Powering a Raspberry Pi from Solar Power (http://www.voltaicsystems.com/blog/powering-a-raspberry-pi-from-solar-power/)

Quote
This post will walk you though how to protect your Raspberry Pi while powering it from a solar-powered system, and provide some tips for reducing the power consumption. Our desired goal is to power the Raspberry Pi with only a 9W solar panel (which you’ll see is not easy considering how power-hungry these boards are), so we’ll provide you with the know-how and tools necessary to reduce the power consumption.

I wouldn't bother with a solar power system, just run an outdoor extension cord up the pole and wire it in to the breaker box in the house.

Or do something like this and run power + ethernet over a standard ethernet cable:

http://astrobeano.blogspot.com/2012/10/24v-passive-poe-for-raspberry-pi.html (http://astrobeano.blogspot.com/2012/10/24v-passive-poe-for-raspberry-pi.html)

40 meters should be enough, right?
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 04/21/2016 12:04 am
Space industry insider speaks on ‘Creating New Space City’ (http://www.brownsvilleherald.com/news/local/article_471431fa-06a3-11e6-a329-1bdcd7a9ed2e.html)

Quote
Like Silicon Valley, Boston, the UK and Europe, Brownsville is faced with the chore of having to figure out what commercial opportunities the privately fueled “new space” sector will spawn and how to take advantage of them.

That’s according to Sean Casey, managing director of the Silicon Valley Space Center in Palo Alto, California, and keynote speaker at Tuesday’s “Project Space: STARGATE TALKS” gathering at the Brownsville Event Center. The name of his talk was “CreatingNewSpaceCity.”

SpaceX, which expects to begin launching rockets from BocaChicaBeach in 2018, represents the top tier of the new-space sector. Casey said the sector is full of opportunities for payload specialists, rocket developers, entrepreneurs, students and professionals, and that Brownsville can be a player.

“SpaceX launching rockets is about access to space,” he said. “Once you’re in space you’re like, ‘OK, now what are we going to do? What are the advantages of that?’”

STARGATE is the commercial arm of the Center for Advanced Radio Astronomy, part of the University of Texas Rio Grande Valley, and is a public-private partnership among SpaceX, UTRGV and the governor’s office.

“The facilities that SpaceX is providing are going to reduce the cost of access to space,” Casey said. “As you reduce the cost of access to space, a larger number of people can participate in those endeavors.”

(http://bloximages.newyork1.vip.townnews.com/brownsvilleherald.com/content/tncms/assets/v3/editorial/b/e6/be68798c-069e-11e6-8872-73517f202ec9/5716e7eb0ee7f.image.jpg?resize=760%2C512)
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: DanielW on 04/23/2016 06:45 pm
Powering a Raspberry Pi from Solar Power (http://www.voltaicsystems.com/blog/powering-a-raspberry-pi-from-solar-power/)

Quote
This post will walk you though how to protect your Raspberry Pi while powering it from a solar-powered system, and provide some tips for reducing the power consumption. Our desired goal is to power the Raspberry Pi with only a 9W solar panel (which you’ll see is not easy considering how power-hungry these boards are), so we’ll provide you with the know-how and tools necessary to reduce the power consumption.

I wouldn't bother with a solar power system, just run an outdoor extension cord up the pole and wire it in to the breaker box in the house.

Or do something like this and run power + ethernet over a standard ethernet cable:

http://astrobeano.blogspot.com/2012/10/24v-passive-poe-for-raspberry-pi.html (http://astrobeano.blogspot.com/2012/10/24v-passive-poe-for-raspberry-pi.html)

40 meters should be enough, right?

As seeing how basically the whole world knows nomadd's address, I propose that anyone with a good idea of how to get a webcam up and running should start sending him hardware.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 04/24/2016 11:27 am
The main problem at the moment is the "web" part of webcam. There isn't any out here except for cellphone. Satellite internet isn't any cheaper than LTE and isn't nearly as good, so nobody gets that. Two new conduits are in as far as the gas well a few hundred yards down the road, so we're waiting to see what they do with those.

The RFP for the fiber run (http://esbd.cpa.state.tx.us/bid_show.cfm?bidid=116108) says it's being funded as part of the Stargate project, from the University of Texas in Brownsville to the SpaceX control center and launch site.  No mention of a local drop in Boca Chica Village.

Specifically, the RFP says:
Quote
Upon completion, the entire cable system will be the property of University. No other fiber strands will be installed in the University infrastructure.

But who knows?  Anything can happen.

In the event that they don't add wired internet service to Boca Chica Village, you could buy an LTE router (http://www.amazon.com/dp/B00JL57PMG/) with an external antenna (http://www.amazon.com/dp/B00RLRA5T6).
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Nomadd on 04/24/2016 02:28 pm
 There's a pedestal at the end of the conduits near the village marked "University of Texas". There are also new AT&T splice pedestals along the route. I never did see how they ran those new conduits a mile or so at a time without digging, but assume they either pulled them through the big, 5" AT&T conduit or the old water line. The runs are together and not on both sides of the highway like the original proposal. So, there's a possibility the runs they've made are one UT and one AT&T with the second (protected conduit, whatever that means) UT one still to be done on the south side of the road. If they pulled the two conduits through the AT&T conduit, they might be using one to replace the existing phone company lines.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: rcoppola on 04/24/2016 03:05 pm
What are the chances AT&T will set up Hot Spots and repeaters and blanket the village and surrounding area with WiFi. Visitors and employees will be in and around the village, no? Especially when that sites becomes active, the population will increase as will the importance of a wide, consistent, strong signal.

In the North East, albeit a more dense population center, our Cable company has essentially built out a WiFi network made up of thousands of Hot Spots that I can practically access anywhere within a 50 mile radius. As long as I have a subscription to the service.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: meberbs on 04/24/2016 03:53 pm
There's a pedestal at the end of the conduits near the village marked "University of Texas". There are also new AT&T splice pedestals along the route. I never did see how they ran those new conduits a mile or so at a time without digging, but assume they either pulled them through the big, 5" AT&T conduit or the old water line. The runs are together and not on both sides of the highway like the original proposal. So, there's a possibility the runs they've made are one UT and one AT&T with the second (protected conduit, whatever that means) UT one still to be done on the south side of the road. If they pulled the two conduits through the AT&T conduit, they might be using one to replace the existing phone company lines.

There are some other options to lay new cables underground without digging a whole trench:

I have seen this (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Directional_boring) used to lay new internet cables before. The machines can dig a tunnel for a cable right under roads without having to dig up the road.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: launchwatcher on 04/24/2016 04:33 pm
The runs are together and not on both sides of the highway like the original proposal. So, there's a possibility the runs they've made are one UT and one AT&T with the second (protected conduit, whatever that means)
Generally the cables include multiple fibers or fiber pairs.   

"protected" sounds like it could refer to some form of armor on the conduit, but it's also common to have "protection" circuits which are backup paths -- preferably taking a different route, often forming a bidirectional ring.

Multiple fibers in the same conduit can be used to protect against equipment failures on the ends but that isn't ideal when your threat model also includes rogue backhoes or the occasional rogue rocket...
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: the_other_Doug on 04/24/2016 05:51 pm
The runs are together and not on both sides of the highway like the original proposal. So, there's a possibility the runs they've made are one UT and one AT&T with the second (protected conduit, whatever that means)
Generally the cables include multiple fibers or fiber pairs.   

"protected" sounds like it could refer to some form of armor on the conduit, but it's also common to have "protection" circuits which are backup paths -- preferably taking a different route, often forming a bidirectional ring.

Multiple fibers in the same conduit can be used to protect against equipment failures on the ends but that isn't ideal when your threat model also includes rogue backhoes or the occasional rogue rocket...

I'm assuming the site doesn't have the fire ant problem that helped to doom the SCSC?  If not, maybe the "protected" line is armored against being eaten into by such things?
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: bocachicagal on 04/24/2016 06:21 pm
A Spacex representative had stated that the Village would be provided with internet service. This is being provided as SpaceX wants to be a good community member and that the fiber optics had to be ran out to the Launch Site.  ;D
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: rocx on 04/24/2016 09:31 pm
A Spacex representative had stated that the Village would be provided with internet service. This is being provided as SpaceX wants to be a good community member and that the fiber optics had to be ran out to the Launch Site.  ;D
http://www.bocachicawebcam.com, here we come!
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Nomadd on 04/24/2016 11:42 pm

There are some other options to lay new cables underground without digging a whole trench:

I have seen this (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Directional_boring) used to lay new internet cables before. The machines can dig a tunnel for a cable right under roads without having to dig up the road.

The runs are between 1.3km and 1.9km. I haven't seen the sort of rigs that could bore that distance, but I could have missed them. Or, they might have bored smaller stretches at a time with the the rigs which can do about 300 meters. This soil would seem to be perfect for boring. Few rocks or cobblestones. Most of the sections seem to have been terminated or spliced and are in concrete vaults now, but there are still a few sticking out of the ground.
 Two wi-fi repeaters would cover the whole metropolis out here. I think my back yard would be a perfect place for them to put a freestanding 40' Rohn 45 for the eastern site. With a good internet connection, Verizon could put a microcell out here. (Because Verizon doesn't make tethering a pain in the ass like the other major phone company)
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: bocachicagal on 04/25/2016 06:18 pm
A new banner at the construction site!
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Nomadd on 04/25/2016 07:51 pm
 It looks like they are collecting and hauling off water.  They have the site pretty well damned off, but I can't see it being much good for rain during storms. It might be mainly for the stuff coming up the wicks.

Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Lar on 04/25/2016 08:03 pm
It looks like they are collecting and hauling off water.  They have the site pretty well damned off, but I can't see it being much good for rain during storms. It might be mainly for the stuff coming up the wicks.



What's that green thing in the first pic? Portable scale to tell how much material came in?
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: acsawdey on 04/25/2016 08:11 pm
It looks like they are collecting and hauling off water.  They have the site pretty well damned off, but I can't see it being much good for rain during storms. It might be mainly for the stuff coming up the wicks.



What's that green thing in the first pic? Portable scale to tell how much material came in?

"Model 60/200E High Volume Dual De-Muck System"

http://www.hydroblaster.com/files/60-200E.pdf (http://www.hydroblaster.com/files/60-200E.pdf)

Looks like it's to keep the bulldozers and other things clean and operational at the site?

I think the green thing is part of it too.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: zodiacchris on 04/25/2016 08:12 pm
Yes, green thing looks like weight bridge for trucks, though there is nothing portable about these puppies  :)
The water tanks could be for washing off truck wheels so soil is not tracked onto the public road...
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: mto on 04/25/2016 08:37 pm
"Model 60/200E High Volume Dual De-Muck System"

http://www.hydroblaster.com/files/60-200E.pdf (http://www.hydroblaster.com/files/60-200E.pdf)
So basically just a big pressure washer.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: acsawdey on 04/25/2016 08:39 pm
Yes, green thing looks like weight bridge for trucks, though there is nothing portable about these puppies  :)
The water tanks could be for washing off truck wheels so soil is not tracked onto the public road...

The green thing is in the picture in hydroblaster's spec pdf -- I think it is what recovers the water, which it then filters and reuses.

Quote
Heavy mud and dirt accumulations can be remove quickly with the Hydroblaster Demucking system.  Water is fully recycled from your wastewater collection system, just place our wastewater pickup (pumping) system in your sump.  Water is automatically fed to the Demucking systems solids separation tank.  Particulates as low as 40 microns will be removed before water is used by the pumping system(s).

At a rate of 30 gallons per minute water is forced through an adjustable nozzling system at 200 PSI allowing the operator to use a gentle fan or direct stream of water for heavy accumulations. Dozers, front end loaders, back hoes and all heavy equipment can be cleaned much faster with this system.

Standard equipment includes; NEMA 4X electrical enclosure, push button on/off pump controls, pressure gauge, low intake water protection system, automatic fresh water makeup and pump bypass system.

Single and Dual operator systems are available, call us for more information on this unique system.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: JoerTex on 04/25/2016 10:09 pm
It looks like they are collecting and hauling off water.  They have the site pretty well damned off, but I can't see it being much good for rain during storms. It might be mainly for the stuff coming up the wicks.

They have sediment barriers attached to the fencing; it's part of the State environmental regulation to control silt around creeks and wet lands.  Same issue with the mud on trucks. and the washer.  I would expect to see invasive specie controls too.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 04/25/2016 11:44 pm
SPI eyes Chaos building as SpaceX viewing site
http://www.brownsvilleherald.com/premium/article_041a4484-0a95-11e6-bb18-abdfe5478152.html
Quote
SOUTH PADRE ISLAND — A city eyesore is now considered an ideal location for a SpaceX rocket launch viewing center.

The idea of the city purchasing the Chaos building and property is on hold for now as city leaders say they need for more time to decide whether to move forward with the project.

“We’re not completely abandoning the project. The City Council will revisit that in the near future,” Mayor Barry Patel said.

But the mayor adds, “I would love to see that building purchased and torn down to have a nice SpaceX viewing building there.”
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Nomadd on 04/26/2016 01:31 am
 That green tank/bridge is the only way in or out. With trucks coming as often as every 2 minutes, that system must be fast. It looks like a little conveyor belt or something dumps the muck at the end. I'll catch it in action when they start the next phase.

 I circumnavigated the site just to see if I'd get attacked by a Predator drone or something, but I think they save those for Reddit people. If you zoom in, you can see Organics mountain under the earthmovers, which someone circled in the Google shot. Also surrounded by a plastic barrier.


What's that green thing in the first pic? Portable scale to tell how much material came in?


Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: acsawdey on 04/26/2016 02:38 pm
That green tank/bridge is the only way in or out. With trucks coming as often as every 2 minutes, that system must be fast. It looks like a little conveyor belt or something dumps the muck at the end. I'll catch it in action when they start the next phase.

Yet another Hydroblaster product, apparently: https://www.hydroblaster.com/HydropadPortableWashRack.htm (https://www.hydroblaster.com/HydropadPortableWashRack.htm)

Doesn't seem like you could do more than a cursory spray-off of a dump truck in 2 minutes though.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Sam Ho on 04/26/2016 06:52 pm
That green tank/bridge is the only way in or out. With trucks coming as often as every 2 minutes, that system must be fast. It looks like a little conveyor belt or something dumps the muck at the end. I'll catch it in action when they start the next phase.

Yet another Hydroblaster product, apparently: https://www.hydroblaster.com/HydropadPortableWashRack.htm (https://www.hydroblaster.com/HydropadPortableWashRack.htm)

Doesn't seem like you could do more than a cursory spray-off of a dump truck in 2 minutes though.
Looks like they got a Hydroblaster instant carwash.

The demucker has two spray lines, 30gpm each.  The water drains onto the Hydropad (giant dishrack), under the spray wall into the gutter.  The gutter has a conveyor in it that pulls solids uphill, and lets water drain downhill where it gets recycled.

The demucker and Hydropad were linked earlier.  Here's the self-cleaning gutter:
https://www.hydroblaster.com/SelfCleaningGutters.htm
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Nomadd on 04/27/2016 09:43 pm
 So much for the "It looks like they're finished with this stage" theory. The trucks are going at it full tilt today.

Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Kabloona on 04/27/2016 11:06 pm
So much for the "It looks like they're finished with this stage" theory. The trucks are going at it full tilt today.

With that Hydroblaster installation, maybe they are just getting started...
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 04/30/2016 12:43 pm
Why 2018 Will Be the Make-Or-Break Year for SpaceX
https://www.yahoo.com/news/why-2018-break-spacex-153351838.html
Quote
2) Opening the World's First Commercial Orbital Launch Site

View photos
SpaceX's plan to dominate the solar system includes building a spaceport on the beach in Brownsville, Texas. The site was supposed to be open in 2016, but problems have pushed that back to 2018. According to local media, the delay was caused by troubles stabilizing the foundation. For months, dump trucks have been bringing dirt to create a decent place to build the facilities. By the end of the process, 310,000 cubic yards of soil will be needed.

Building a custom-made spaceport is a colossal challenge, but it'd be worth it for Musk. There are many more players at the established spaceports in Florida and California, which means SpaceX has to wait its turn for a launch. When you're sharing the queue with NASA and the Air Force, your private space missions can be put at the back of the line. Reaching a fast launch and recovery tempo is vital to making access to space easier and cheaper. That's why SpaceX has been pushing the recoverable rocket program so hard, and why this launch site is so important.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: darkenfast on 05/01/2016 10:01 am
Seeing as how Elon has just tweeted that Falcon Heavy will have a lift-off thrust of 5.1 million pounds, I think Nomadd may have to invest in some good earplugs!  Gonna be exciting times in Boca Chica.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 05/01/2016 03:22 pm
Seeing as how Elon has just tweeted that Falcon Heavy will have a lift-off thrust of 5.1 million pounds, I think Nomadd may have to invest in some good earplugs!  Gonna be exciting times in Boca Chica.

Right.  No joke, the EIS (https://www.faa.gov/about/office_org/headquarters_offices/ast/environmental/nepa_docs/review/launch/spacex_texas_launch_site_environmental_impact_statement/media/FEIS_SpaceX_Texas_Launch_Site_Vol_I.pdf) mentions the phrase "hearing protection" 13 times.  They even have a table on it.

But if Nomadd wants to save a copule of bucks, the EIS also says:
Quote
SpaceX would also make hearing protection devices available to residents to reduce noise levels below 115 dBA at distances up to approximately 2.1 miles for the Falcon Heavy.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Nomadd on 05/01/2016 04:35 pm
 118db probably wouldn't make me much deafer, but it's getting close, and acoustics can do funny things. I don't think I'd want to bet what hearing I have left after 4 years in the infantry on a chart.

 I can't say that quote really makes much sense to me.

 "SpaceX would also make hearing protection devices available to residents to reduce noise levels below 115 dBA at distances up to approximately 2.1 miles for the Falcon Heavy."
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: rcoppola on 05/01/2016 04:43 pm
I'm assuming those new thrust figures have been calculated into the Pad designs and how much dirt and concrete they'll ultimately be placing out there? I'm sure they've already built in margin for that...right?
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 05/01/2016 08:19 pm
I can't say that quote really makes much sense to me.

 "SpaceX would also make hearing protection devices available to residents to reduce noise levels below 115 dBA at distances up to approximately 2.1 miles for the Falcon Heavy."

I read it this way: The FAA said anything over 115 dB is unacceptably loud, so SpaceX volunteered to hand out earplugs to all Boca Chica residents for every Falcon Heavy launch.  Problem solved.

If you're lucky, the earplugs will have a SpaceX logo on them. A little memento.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Comga on 05/01/2016 08:55 pm
I can't say that quote really makes much sense to me.

 "SpaceX would also make hearing protection devices available to residents to reduce noise levels below 115 dBA at distances up to approximately 2.1 miles for the Falcon Heavy."

I read it this way: The FAA said anything over 115 dB is unacceptably loud, so SpaceX volunteered to hand out earplugs to all Boca Chica residents for every Falcon Heavy launch.  Problem solved.

If you're lucky, the earplugs will have a SpaceX logo on them. A little memento.

At work, they are quart sized plastic bags with individually packed pairs of closed-cell foam plugs.
Perhaps SpaceX would get some customized but odds are they will just be industrial bags of plugs.
But I basically agree with Dave G's reading of the statement, except that the "acceptable" level could be lower than 115 dB.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: CraigLieb on 05/02/2016 02:37 am
After watching a falcon heavy launch from Nomadds we will have to put our eyes back in our heads and pick our tongues off the ground. Who cares about the ears!
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 05/05/2016 10:27 am
Italian company commits to $114 million investment in Brownsville
http://www.brownsvilleherald.com/news/local/article_249452c4-1277-11e6-a165-574668188cd1.html

The company is the the SATA Group, a large machining company that makes parts for heavy equipment makers Caterpillar and John Deere as well as auto manufacturers such as GM and Fiat-Chrysler Automotive.

Note that SpaceX already uses Paragon D&E as a supplier, another machining company with ties to the auto industry, also with a new branch in Brownsville.
http://www.themonitor.com/news/local/spacex-supplier-based-in-michigan-acquires-brownsville-firm/article_1d64cbca-2a73-11e4-a096-0017a43b2370.html
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Hauerg on 05/05/2016 11:53 am
I can't say that quote really makes much sense to me.

 "SpaceX would also make hearing protection devices available to residents to reduce noise levels below 115 dBA at distances up to approximately 2.1 miles for the Falcon Heavy."

I read it this way: The FAA said anything over 115 dB is unacceptably loud, so SpaceX volunteered to hand out earplugs to all Boca Chica residents for every Falcon Heavy launch.  Problem solved.

If you're lucky, the earplugs will have a SpaceX logo on them. A little memento.

At work, they are quart sized plastic bags with individually packed pairs of closed-cell foam plugs.
Perhaps SpaceX would get some customized but odds are they will just be industrial bags of plugs.
But I basically agree with Dave G's reading of the statement, except that the "acceptable" level could be lower than 115 dB.

Hm. F1 is still complaing that you cannot hear the 128dB 2016 cars.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: hamerad on 05/05/2016 11:58 am
I can't say that quote really makes much sense to me.

 "SpaceX would also make hearing protection devices available to residents to reduce noise levels below 115 dBA at distances up to approximately 2.1 miles for the Falcon Heavy."

I read it this way: The FAA said anything over 115 dB is unacceptably loud, so SpaceX volunteered to hand out earplugs to all Boca Chica residents for every Falcon Heavy launch.  Problem solved.

If you're lucky, the earplugs will have a SpaceX logo on them. A little memento.

At work, they are quart sized plastic bags with individually packed pairs of closed-cell foam plugs.
Perhaps SpaceX would get some customized but odds are they will just be industrial bags of plugs.
But I basically agree with Dave G's reading of the statement, except that the "acceptable" level could be lower than 115 dB.

Hm. F1 is still complaing that you cannot hear the 128dB 2016 cars.
That could be because they've gone deaf front listening to the louder cars they used to have though :-)

Would be nice of Spacex if they gave residents electronic noise cancelling headphones though, but yea probably disposable to save costs.

edit/Lar: fix quotes... check your quotes, friends!
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: launchwatcher on 05/05/2016 03:00 pm
That could be because they've gone deaf front listening to the louder cars they used to have though :-)

Would be nice of Spacex if they gave residents electronic noise cancelling headphones though, but yea probably disposable to save costs.
in my experience active noise cancellation headphones don't attenuate all that well in very loud spaces.   (I was much happier with foam earplugs under a cheap pair of earcup-style hearing protectors after the Bose QC3's didn't cut it)

On the other hand, you can get pairs of earplugs printed with your logo for pennies a pair:

http://www.earplugstore.com/cuimearpl.html
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: mfck on 05/05/2016 10:37 pm


That could be because they've gone deaf front listening to the louder cars they used to have though :-)

Would be nice of Spacex if they gave residents electronic noise cancelling headphones though, but yea probably disposable to save costs.
in my experience active noise cancellation headphones don't attenuate all that well in very loud spaces.   (I was much happier with foam earplugs under a cheap pair of earcup-style hearing protectors after the Bose QC3's didn't cut it)

On the other hand, you can get pairs of earplugs printed with your logo for pennies a pair:

http://www.earplugstore.com/cuimearpl.html

While safety and health are paramount, one should not reduce the FH launch experience to visual and tactile alone.

HiFi earplugs overview (http://www.hearingreview.com/2014/07/high-notes-musicians-earplugs)

Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Nomadd on 05/06/2016 12:28 am
 I looked at my long list of things to work on today, and naturally decided to go to the beach instead.

 The thing in the new Google shots that looked like a Dragon turned out to be some old concrete slabs.

 I'm not sure what they're rolling out on the west side of the mesa. I'll have to get a closer look when things are quieter. Something to keep the hill from winding up in Cuba when the winds pick up I'd guess.

 Somebody is way ahead of us on remote camera installation. Pretty sloppy wiring with the winds you get out here. I'm thinking of bringing some tie wraps out next time to fix it up. I guess it could be a Border Patrol camera, but it's right across the road, staring at the hill, so I assume it's SpaceX security.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: mlindner on 05/06/2016 12:45 am
Somebody is way ahead of us on remote camera installation. Pretty sloppy wiring with the winds you get out here. I'm thinking of bringing some tie wraps out next time to fix it up. I guess it could be a Border Patrol camera, but it's right across the road, staring at the hill, so I assume it's SpaceX security.

SpaceX beat you to the punch. You need to catch up.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Lar on 05/06/2016 01:51 am
Fixing their cam for them just seems neighborly somehow.

And when the cops ask you what you're up to you can whip out offer to slowly show them your tapatalk and show that post...

edit: fixed
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Johnnyhinbos on 05/06/2016 02:41 am

Fixing their cam for them just seems neighborly somehow.

And when the cops ask you what you're up to you can whip out your tapatalk and show that post...
Helpful hint: When the cops ask you something, I highly recommend against whipping anything out...
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Nomadd on 05/06/2016 03:33 pm

Fixing their cam for them just seems neighborly somehow.

And when the cops ask you what you're up to you can whip out your tapatalk and show that post...
Helpful hint: When the cops ask you something, I highly recommend against whipping anything out...

https://youtu.be/HgRE6BPhN2I
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: bocachicagal on 05/06/2016 05:26 pm
I wonder if this is what they are trying to prevent. This pic was taken after a couple heavy rains.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: bocachicagal on 05/06/2016 05:34 pm
This is what they are covering the mound with. It looks like burlap.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: cscott on 05/06/2016 05:40 pm
Probably something like http://www.amleo.com/jute-fabric-blanket-roll-4ft-x-225ft/p/JE1/

The main difference between the different products seems to be whether you want to allow or discourage plant growth while the cloth is in place.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: bocachicagal on 05/09/2016 06:06 pm
It's just about all wrapped up.  ;D
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Nomadd on 05/09/2016 08:21 pm
 There are people poking around the spot where the UT site will be, mowing and messing with the new fiber conduit drops. Maybe work there is close to commencing.
 Also, oyster beds in South Bay were discovered by some dumbass kayaker who stayed out too long and had to tow the boat back the last few hundred yards when the tide went out. Those suckers are sharp. At least nobody was watching.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Chris_Pi on 05/10/2016 03:27 am
Upside: Launch cookout site located  ;D
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: TMI on 05/10/2016 12:33 pm
This is what they are covering the mound with. It looks like burlap.

It's basically a mat that aims to reduce silt and soil movement and provides a foundation for plants to establish on. Hydro seeding seems to be a popular way of getting grass or other native seeds to take hold of the new ground. Have a look at some videos on youtube for the hydro seeding, most of it seems to be small guys but they use it on slopes around highways a fair bit.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Kabloona on 05/10/2016 03:43 pm
Reminds me of the Cahokia Mounds, minus grass.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 05/11/2016 04:14 pm
More on the SATA Group (http://www.sata-group.com/) opening a plant in Brownsville, along with future plans to bring more manufacturing companies into the area:
https://riograndeguardian.com/how-brownsville-landed-a-114-million-heavy-manufacturing-project-part-ii/
Quote
Discussing BEDC’s success in landing first SpaceX and now SATA USA, Hilts said: “I love SpaceX. They are great for our community...”

Hilts then explained that SATA USA’s arrival in Brownsville is just the first piece of larger heavy manufacturing jigsaw.

“We are working to bring a foundry with this. Along with that a forging operation. Hopefully steel aluminum die casting, and plastic injection molding. Just imagine the type of suppliers and support industries we can bring in. Also, how many entrepreneurs we can potentially create from these kinds of companies and jobs coming into the community? To me this is huge. It is a starting point.”

Hilts ran through the names of other manufacturing companies BEDC has brought to Brownsville in the recent years and months – companies such as CK Technologies, True-Tone, Fisher Dynamics, MVP Plastics, and Cardone. “This (SATA USA) is just the next piece. We are going to keep adding pieces,” Hilts said.

Regarding SATA, Hilts said the company is a “value-added” machining operation. “They are a piece of a puzzle we are working to put together. They are the first piece coming. They are a machining operation doing value-added machining for companies like Caterpillar, John Deere. They are in the automotive industry, heavy equipment industry, trucks, construction, agriculture. They are very diversified.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Kansan52 on 05/11/2016 04:32 pm
Nomadd, you probably already know this but just in case. When doing the tie wraps, don't cinch them down overly tight. Was told a tale of woe about by an installer about replacing Cat 5 cable that had been cinched tightly enough to deform the cable.


(removed duplicate material.)
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 05/11/2016 04:59 pm
...you can get pairs of earplugs printed with your logo for pennies a pair:
http://www.earplugstore.com/cuimearpl.html

Very cool.

I have to wonder if these posts affect SpaceX behavior in any way.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Nomadd on 05/11/2016 05:36 pm
 I completed the BCSKAS (Boca Chica spaceport kayak accessibility study) Almost became the last Civil war casualty when I found one of General Sheridans submerged pilings. You can get within about 800 feet of the gate.


Nomadd, you probably already know this but just in case. When doing the tie wraps, don't cinch them down overly tight. Was told a tale of woe about by an installer about replacing Cat 5 cable that had been cinched tightly enough to deform the cable. Had to be replaced.
I've installed over 1,000 SCADA remotes in west Texas and New Mexico and figure I've gone through close to 20 miles of Cat 5 over the years and have wired 16 ships with network and comms. I can't start to count the bags of 1,000 tie wraps I've bought. (Except for Commercial Electric. I bought exactly one of those)
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Kansan52 on 05/11/2016 05:40 pm
Yep, figured you knew!!
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Nomadd on 05/11/2016 05:49 pm
Yep, figured you knew!!
Of course, now that I said that, I'll probably screw it up.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: abaddon on 05/11/2016 06:43 pm
Yep, figured you knew!!
Of course, now that I said that, I'll probably screw it up.
Why would you use a screw?
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: starhawk92 on 05/11/2016 07:04 pm
I completed the BCSKAS (Boca Chica spaceport kayak accessibility study) Almost became the last Civil war casualty when I found one of General Sheridans submerged pilings. You can get within about 1/4 mile of the gate.

I agree, that is exactly where you should put NSF Channel 1 Live Feed camera!!
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Barrie on 05/11/2016 07:14 pm
Yep, figured you knew!!
Of course, now that I said that, I'll probably screw it up.
Why would you use a screw?

I think you're on the wrong thread  :)
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: StuffOfInterest on 05/12/2016 12:24 pm
I completed the BCSKAS (Boca Chica spaceport kayak accessibility study) Almost became the last Civil war casualty when I found one of General Sheridans submerged pilings. You can get within about 1/4 mile of the gate.

Maybe we need a drone kayak that can get in position for launches for that up close and personal view.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: mvpel on 05/12/2016 12:27 pm
Why would you use a screw?

(http://ak-i21.geccdn.net/site/images/n-picgroup/DEC_9651.jpg)
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: John Alan on 05/12/2016 01:49 pm
They may outlaw it... but just put a drone in the air just outside the fence ...  ;)
I know I would If I was in the area with my two drones...  8)

A DJI Inspire 1 Pro w/X5 camera and the right lens for the zoom to frame the shot would be nice...
No sound of course (all you would hear is prop buzz if so)... but it could record 4K video...  ???
They call these "tripods in the sky"... because they can sit motionless under GPS control and hover in place...
15 minutes at a time on station per battery... there is an HDMI out on the remote with a 720p live video feed...
Stream that live onto the web... follow up latter with the 4K posted to YouTube...

For live sound... I use a digital recording mic and sync it during video post processing...
I have put the mic on farm tractors then chased the tractor across the field taking video...
Once you sync it... the effect works well...
Drones will fly sideways or backwards just fine getting the shot on a moving target...
Just have situational awareness and don't fly into a tree or something... 

Just throwing another idea out there...  :)
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 05/16/2016 09:52 pm
Manufacturing training
Texas A&M looking at pilot program in Brownsville
http://www.brownsvilleherald.com/news/local/article_b543f08a-1b15-11e6-983a-5f4515c9a0df.html

Quote
The pilot project is a response to the realities posed by SpaceX’s plans for a launch site in CameronCounty and the attention the county is receiving from the international aerospace and automotive industries, which paves the way for “significant foreign direct investment” by companies eyeing Brownsville, TEEX said.

SATA USA Inc., a subsidiary of an Italian company, the SATA Group, announced on May 4 that it will invest $114 million in Brownsville for construction of a machining plant to make heavy-equipment parts for the likes of Caterpillar and John Deere. The company is meant to be the first component of a vertically integrated manufacturing complex at the 17,000-acre North Brownsville Heavy Manufacturing Campus.

Despite gains, the lack of an appropriately trained workforce remains an impediment to attracting manufacturers to Brownsville. The proposed TEEX project seeks to remedy that.

According to the overview, at least three of seven targeted industries in the region — aerospace, heavy industry and automotive — require welders, machinists, industrial mechanics and machine-tool operators. While manufacturing training provides the biggest bang for the buck in terms of skilled employment across the widest range of target industries, BrownsvilleIndependentSchool District offers it in only two of its six high schools, says TEEX.

Establishing a manufacturing training program would create the opportunity to put such training into all BISD high schools, tripling current training capacity.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: RedLineTrain on 05/19/2016 02:48 pm
Residents complain about truck and curious outsider traffic.

http://valleycentral.com/news/local/spacex-construction-causing-problems-for-surrounding-residents
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: BobHk on 05/19/2016 03:11 pm
They may outlaw it... but just put a drone in the air just outside the fence ...  ;)
I know I would If I was in the area with my two drones...  8)

A DJI Inspire 1 Pro w/X5 camera and the right lens for the zoom to frame the shot would be nice...
No sound of course (all you would hear is prop buzz if so)... but it could record 4K video...  ???
They call these "tripods in the sky"... because they can sit motionless under GPS control and hover in place...
15 minutes at a time on station per battery... there is an HDMI out on the remote with a 720p live video feed...
Stream that live onto the web... follow up latter with the 4K posted to YouTube...

For live sound... I use a digital recording mic and sync it during video post processing...
I have put the mic on farm tractors then chased the tractor across the field taking video...
Once you sync it... the effect works well...
Drones will fly sideways or backwards just fine getting the shot on a moving target...
Just have situational awareness and don't fly into a tree or something... 

Just throwing another idea out there...  :)

I bet its a no drone zone already (or will be as soon as they start testing the pad).
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Nomadd on 05/19/2016 03:52 pm
Residents complain about truck and curious outsider traffic.

http://valleycentral.com/news/local/spacex-construction-causing-problems-for-surrounding-residents
That article reads like it was written by someone flunking remedial English for the third time. Neither statement by the residents makes sense.
 A realtor told me yesterday the all 9 of those properties Frank sold in January were bought by SpaceX, but she's seen it take up to six months for sales to be reflected in the county database.
 I still haven't exactly figured out the Dogleg, Flats at Mars Crossing thing.

 And, by the way, Terry mentioned that the highway was always dangerous and that a person died on it recently. He never implied it was related to the truck traffic. It was a 92 year old man towing a truck off the beach who rolled his truck when the strap broke.
http://valleycentral.com/news/local/92-year-old-brownsville-man-killed-in-wreck-near-boca-chica-beach

 This project seems to be some sort of magnet for reporters who wouldn't know professional ethics from a hole in the ground.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Jdeshetler on 05/19/2016 04:50 pm
Officials say trucks will not be passing by for several months since phase one of soil stabilization has completed.

I thought they will move on to the next site much closer to the beach where the launch pad is. Any clearing yet by the bulldozers?
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Nomadd on 05/20/2016 02:10 am
Officials say trucks will not be passing by for several months since phase one of soil stabilization has completed.

I thought they will move on to the next site much closer to the beach where the launch pad is. Any clearing yet by the bulldozers?
Nope. Since they are using surcharging and not building as soon as the dirt is down, as an unnamed dozer operator said, They should be using the dirt they knock off the top of the present pad for later work. The base of a launch pad with a 4 foot thick (wild guess) heavily reinforced concrete cap might be a lot faster job than the base for a 50,000 square foot, relatively thin warehouse foundation that has to stay level to within an inch or two for many decades.
 About the only other progress is somebody spraying and killing all the vegetation inside the control center perimeter fence.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Wolfram66 on 05/20/2016 06:01 pm
I completed the BCSKAS (Boca Chica spaceport kayak accessibility study) Almost became the last Civil war casualty when I found one of General Sheridans submerged pilings. You can get within about 800 feet of the gate.


Nomadd, you probably already know this but just in case. When doing the tie wraps, don't cinch them down overly tight. Was told a tale of woe about by an installer about replacing Cat 5 cable that had been cinched tightly enough to deform the cable. Had to be replaced.
I've installed over 1,000 SCADA remotes in west Texas and New Mexico and figure I've gone through close to 20 miles of Cat 5 over the years and have wired 16 ships with network and comms. I can't start to count the bags of 1,000 tie wraps I've bought. (Except for Commercial Electric. I bought exactly one of those)
I always "LOVED" having to run transducer cables MWD equipment on OffShore Rigs using the Stainless Steel tie-wraps. i may still have scars from removing them (mental and physical   :o  >:( ) #MEH
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Nomadd on 05/20/2016 07:28 pm
I always "LOVED" having to run transducer cables MWD equipment on OffShore Rigs using the Stainless Steel tie-wraps. i may still have scars from removing them (mental and physical   :o  >:( ) #MEH
I took a lot of flack for tightening those with two pairs of pliers instead of the $800 special Panduit tool they bought for the job. I had to go to Congo-Brazzaville once when the Norwegian contractor used about a hundred of them on a rig and went home before it started working. He tightened them perfectly. The only problem was that he mounted the cables to a part of the rig that moved.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 05/29/2016 07:52 am
Any activity around the Control Center, Stargate Tracking Center, or the 24 lots one news article said would be used as a Parking Area ?
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Mangala on 05/29/2016 08:51 am
Sorry, I understand that somebody may have already asked for this and someone gave the answer but I didn't see it. So there is my question: In this map, there is yellow parts (SpaceX owned properties) that are under water. What for spending money in these properties?
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: symbios on 05/29/2016 09:13 am
If I remember correctly from previous answer in this thread…
They were bought together with other lots or it might be part of environmental mitigation plan.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 05/29/2016 10:52 am
These lots were originally above water, purchased by private owners as part of the Kennedy Shores (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boca_Chica_Village,_Texas) development project.  Then in 1967, Hurricane Beulah (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hurricane_Beulah) devastated the area, redrawing the shoreline, causing many of the original lots to be under water.  There has been some talk about dredging the South Bay (https://www.google.com/maps/@26.0029062,-97.1691301,14.25z) to reclaim these lots, which is probably why they're still in the real estate database (http://www.cameroncad.org/cadclientdb/propertymap.aspx), but those plans never materialized.

Today, these under water lots are basically worthless, with typical appraised values around $100 each.

When I spot checked a few of the SpaceX purchases for these under water lots, there was always another purchase from the same seller on the same day. So as symbios suggests, it appears they were bought together with other lots.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Mangala on 05/29/2016 09:58 pm
Thanks for your answers guys.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Nomadd on 05/30/2016 01:30 am
Any activity around the Control Center, Stargate Tracking Center, or the 24 lots one news article said would be used as a Parking Area ?
An armadillo got hit on the road. Otherwise, nothing's going on since they finished the mesa.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Herb Schaltegger on 05/30/2016 02:06 am
Any activity around the Control Center, Stargate Tracking Center, or the 24 lots one news article said would be used as a Parking Area ?
An armadillo got hit on the road.

Big news ... those little possum-on-the-half-shell start to stink after a couple hours, and the broken shells are SHARP.

Saw the first dead one on the road up here in middle Tennessee last summer. Already seen a few this summer. Who said climate change isn't real? Between those little armored SOBs and fire ants moving in, it's like we've moved about 5º south in the last ten years. The way I figure it, if things keep going as they are, we'll have an equatorial launch site right here in the mid-south in another quarter-century.

Too bad orbital mechanics doesn't work like that tho'.  :\
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: guckyfan on 05/30/2016 04:57 am
The way I figure it, if things keep going as they are, we'll have an equatorial launch site right here in the mid-south in another quarter-century.

Too bad orbital mechanics doesn't work like that tho'.  :\

You must see the bright side. Nobody will live near the equator any more and you can build launch sites there without having to contend with local population.

 :(
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 05/31/2016 11:02 am
Economist forecasts slow growth for 2016
http://www.valleymorningstar.com/news/local_news/article_4bc94d96-260d-11e6-a1df-936b527b0418.html
Quote
BROWNSVILLE — Despite the economic potential companies like SpaceX and the SATA Group present for the Lower Rio Grande Valley, for the time being Cameron County is still one of the very poorest places in the nation, with an unemployment rate that persistently exceeds the rest of Texas and the United States...

It could be worse. The recession is over. Unemployment is high at 6.9 percent, but that’s still several percentage points lower than during the height of the recession, and only one percentage point higher than the lowest unemployment rate in the boom times leading up to the recession, said Nathanial Karp, chief economist for BBVA Compass Bank...

Still, he predicted sluggish economic growth for the Brownsville region in 2016. While the region has some things going for it demographically — strong population growth and relatively low cost of living for instance — other aspects aren’t so terrific...
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 06/05/2016 10:34 am
SPACEX CALLS ON LEGISLATORS TO SUPPORT TEXAS SPACEPORT TRUST FUND
https://riograndeguardian.com/spacex-calls-on-legislators-to-support-texas-spaceport-trust-fund/

Quote
BROWNSVILLE, RGV – SpaceX is urging the state legislature in Texas to fund the aerospace industry in the same way Florida does.

At a recent joint legislative committee hearing held at UT-Rio Grande Valley in Brownsville, Caryn Schenewerk, senior counsel and director of governmental affairs for SpaceX, pointed out that zero dollars were appropriated to the Texas Spaceport Trust Fund during last year’s legislative session...

“By contrast, Florida consistently funds its space infrastructure fund to a tune of $20 million a year. Those infrastructure matching grants go to exactly the kind of activities that we are undertaking at Boca Chica...”

“SpaceX selected Boca Chica beach due in large part to the strong supplier base we have in Texas, the state’s southern coastal geography, its business friendly climate and the local, county and state partnerships...

“Today, we have more than 310,000 cubic yards of soil that are being piled and compressed at the site. That soil will help us form a solid foundation for our future launch pad...”

Schenewerk said SpaceX will soon begin work on a water tower, solar farm, support buildings and other necessary infrastructure at Boca Chica...

“We are particularly excited as we sit here at UTRGV about the STARGATE partnership with the University of Texas for space research and commercialization...
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Rocket Science on 06/07/2016 10:49 pm
Well the NIMBYs are out it seems...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZSMTFgWtSqs
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: docmordrid on 06/07/2016 11:31 pm
We see the same kind of complaint reports on the news every time major construction is ongoing. Doesn't matter if it's in the boonies, suburbs or along a major highway in the metro Detroit area.

SSDD
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Rocket Science on 06/07/2016 11:35 pm
We see the same kind of complaint reports on the news every time major construction is ongoing. Doesn't matter if it's in the boonies, suburbs or along a major highway in the metro Detroit area.

SSDD
Everybody should get to watch a rocket launch while stuck in road construction traffic... :)
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 06/08/2016 11:17 am
We see the same kind of complaint reports on the news every time major construction is ongoing. Doesn't matter if it's in the boonies, suburbs or along a major highway in the metro Detroit area.

Also, before something happens, people often imagine the worst.

Once rockets start flying, I suspect attitudes will change.  There won't be a big influx of people.  There won't be huge crowds on launch days.  It will still be a nice little remote village.  But property values will increase, roads will be improved, and things will generally be a little better.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: ThereIWas3 on 06/08/2016 12:46 pm
How high above sea level are these facilities?  In April, at a seminar for the insurance industry, the part of NOAA that worries about such things came out with a revised estimate extrapolating current rates of sea level rise, based on new information from Antarctica.  The new estimates are kinda scarey for owners of ocean front property.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Elvis in Space on 06/08/2016 01:17 pm
We see the same kind of complaint reports on the news every time major construction is ongoing. Doesn't matter if it's in the boonies, suburbs or along a major highway in the metro Detroit area.

SSDD

Here in Nashville we are into another major growth period. The complaints from the natives, of which I am a sixth generation, about the destruction of history and disruption of their lives are relentless. There's even a Facebook page where people vent how awful all of the good things coming to them are. People generally get comfortable with a particular way of life and dislike change even if it's for the long term good. Over time they forget and move on and future generations take up the flag. It might be best described by a joke I go back to every time I listen to this -

Q: How many good ol' boys does it take to change a light bulb?
A: Three. One to change the light bulb and two to stand around and talk about how good the old light bulb was.

That's what we're facing here.  :)
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Nomadd on 06/08/2016 02:48 pm
 I'm picturing a jug with 3 Xs on it, sitting in a rocking chair on the porch with a double barrel shotgun and yelling "Git off my property" at SpaceX folks when they arrive.

 But, give the locals a break. They have a spot in the world to themselves most of the time, in the middle of a wildlife refuge where they can walk for miles on a beach without seeing another soul 5 days a week. It's going away and they aren't likely to find another. It had to happen someday and whining to every pretend reporter who stops by isn't going to help matters, but they have a good reason to feel bad about the world moving in.
 After all the logical reasons for buying the shack and fixing it up, damned if I didn't fall in love with this place. I think having a home in a spaceport will be about the coolest thing on Earth, but I can understand the folks who don't want to live in the middle of a factory complex.
 Yesterday, we were wondering if the scraggly old coyote, with the highly original name of Wily, would still show up at our back doors looking for handouts when activity picks up. Funny, the little things you'd miss.

 By the way, the old guy in that video does complain about things, but also shows up on your doorstep whenever you need a hand, no matter what. He doesn't just talk about how people and the world should be, he lives it and is one of the best people I've ever known.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: abaddon on 06/08/2016 04:39 pm
Thanks for a great piece of perspective, Nomadd.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: starhawk92 on 06/08/2016 04:53 pm
I'm picturing a jug with 3 Xs on it, sitting in a rocking chair on the porch with a double barrel shotgun and yelling "Git off my property" at SpaceX folks when they arrive.

 But, give the locals a break. They have a spot in the world to themselves most of the time, in the middle of a wildlife refuge where they can walk for miles on a beach without seeing another soul 5 days a week. It's going away and they aren't likely to find another. It had to happen someday and whining to every pretend reporter who stops by isn't going to help matters, but they have a good reason to feel bad about the world moving in.
 After all the logical reasons for buying the shack and fixing it up, damned if I didn't fall in love with this place. I think having a home in a spaceport will be about the coolest thing on Earth, but I can understand the folks who don't want to live in the middle of a factory complex.
 Yesterday, we were wondering if the scraggly old coyote, with the highly original name of Wily, would still show up at our back doors looking for handouts when activity picks up. Funny, the little things you'll miss.

 By the way, the old guy in that video does complain about things, but also shows up on your doorstep whenever you need a hand, no matter what. He doesn't just talk about how people and the world should be, he lives it and is one of the best people I've ever known.

Maybe the locals can bring this perspective to SpaceX and make them an even more ingenious company.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: The_Ronin on 06/08/2016 06:53 pm
Here in Nashville we are into another major growth period. The complaints from the natives, of which I am a sixth generation, about the destruction of history and disruption of their lives are relentless. There's even a Facebook page where people vent how awful all of the good things coming to them are. People generally get comfortable with a particular way of life and dislike change even if it's for the long term good. Over time they forget and move on and future generations take up the flag. It might be best described by a joke I go back to every time I listen to this -

Q: How many good ol' boys does it take to change a light bulb?
A: Three. One to change the light bulb and two to stand around and talk about how good the old light bulb was.

That's what we're facing here.  :)

'Sup fellow NashVegas NSF member!
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: mfck on 06/08/2016 08:17 pm


I'm picturing a jug with 3 Xs on it, sitting in a rocking chair on the porch with a double barrel shotgun and yelling "Git off my property" at SpaceX folks when they arrive.

 But, give the locals a break. They have a spot in the world to themselves most of the time, in the middle of a wildlife refuge where they can walk for miles on a beach without seeing another soul 5 days a week. It's going away and they aren't likely to find another. It had to happen someday and whining to every pretend reporter who stops by isn't going to help matters, but they have a good reason to feel bad about the world moving in.
 After all the logical reasons for buying the shack and fixing it up, damned if I didn't fall in love with this place. I think having a home in a spaceport will be about the coolest thing on Earth, but I can understand the folks who don't want to live in the middle of a factory complex.
 Yesterday, we were wondering if the scraggly old coyote, with the highly original name of Wily, would still show up at our back doors looking for handouts when activity picks up. Funny, the little things you'd miss.

 By the way, the old guy in that video does complain about things, but also shows up on your doorstep whenever you need a hand, no matter what. He doesn't just talk about how people and the world should be, he lives it and is one of the best people I've ever known.

Do you think anything at all can be done to make amends with Terry and the rest of the folk? What would he accept for his grievances?
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Herb Schaltegger on 06/08/2016 11:22 pm
Here in Nashville we are into another major growth period. The complaints from the natives, of which I am a sixth generation, about the destruction of history and disruption of their lives are relentless. There's even a Facebook page where people vent how awful all of the good things coming to them are. People generally get comfortable with a particular way of life and dislike change even if it's for the long term good. Over time they forget and move on and future generations take up the flag. It might be best described by a joke I go back to every time I listen to this -

Q: How many good ol' boys does it take to change a light bulb?
A: Three. One to change the light bulb and two to stand around and talk about how good the old light bulb was.

That's what we're facing here.  :)

'Sup fellow NashVegas NSF member!

There are at least three of us then. ;)
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 06/11/2016 10:41 am
Boca chica drone footage
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eiwYirO47p4
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Nomadd on 06/11/2016 02:42 pm
 That low, sandy area in the dunes around 2:38 is what Boca Chica (Little Mouth) actually refers to. That was the inlet to South Bay before they cut the ship channel.
 The road here swarms with all sorts of interesting critters after the rain. The tarantula is a little blurry because he moved faster than my camera wanted to focus, right for my foot. I wish I had something in there for scale. He looked big enough to eat one of the chihuahuas around here. I counted 16 of those things on the road a few nights ago while coming back from town.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: philw1776 on 06/11/2016 04:01 pm
Now cancelling plans to buy Boca Chica property!   :o
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: docmordrid on 06/11/2016 04:14 pm
What's wrong with a spider or rattler? We have 50 rattlers/acre in a MI metropark. Just wear good boots ;)
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Johnnyhinbos on 06/11/2016 04:28 pm
(Shudder)

Change in topic - how is the range going to be managed for this facility?
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: jon.amos on 06/11/2016 04:38 pm
(Shudder)

Change in topic - how is the range going to be managed for this facility?

Trained spiders and rattle snakes for perimeter security, sharks with lasers downrange. ;D
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: billh on 06/12/2016 08:18 pm
That low, sandy area in the dunes around 2:38 is what Boca Chica (Little Mouth) actually refers to. That was the inlet to South Bay before they cut the ship channel.
 The road here swarms with all sorts of interesting critters after the rain. The tarantula is a little blurry because he moved faster than my camera wanted to focus, right for my foot. I wish I had something in there for scale. He looked big enough to eat one of the chihuahuas around here. I counted 16 of those things on the road a few nights ago while coming back from town.
Welcome to Texas, son.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: BobHk on 06/12/2016 09:57 pm
That low, sandy area in the dunes around 2:38 is what Boca Chica (Little Mouth) actually refers to. That was the inlet to South Bay before they cut the ship channel.
 The road here swarms with all sorts of interesting critters after the rain. The tarantula is a little blurry because he moved faster than my camera wanted to focus, right for my foot. I wish I had something in there for scale. He looked big enough to eat one of the chihuahuas around here. I counted 16 of those things on the road a few nights ago while coming back from town.
Welcome to Texas, son.

I work as an inspector in north Texas and its not uncommon to walk out of a field with copperheads attached to your boots.  Boots are kind of necessary.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: fthomassy on 06/13/2016 02:23 pm
I work as an inspector in north Texas and its not uncommon to walk out of a field with copperheads attached to your boots.  Boots are kind of necessary.
Copperheads I fear because they don't have the obvious rattle ... gotta look at the head!  I pick up a lot of rat snakes but always look twice.  For venomous snakes all I ever see (Texas Hill Country) are dimondbacks, and rarely.  They are prettier when they are young like the one Nomadd photographed.  Thanks for the diversion, at least tangentially on topic.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: chrisking0997 on 06/13/2016 04:40 pm
looking forward to rocketsnake and rocketspider launch pics
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: watermod on 06/13/2016 07:48 pm
Coming to a theater near you...
Snakes On a Rocket
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: ThereIWas3 on 06/13/2016 08:08 pm
Sweetwater, Texas, is home to the annual Rattlesnake Roundup (http://www.rattlesnakeroundup.net/).  I've been there.  Out walking the dog we kept running into all the shedded skins.   Shudder.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: mvpel on 06/13/2016 08:11 pm
looking forward to rocketsnake and rocketspider launch pics

We've got the rocketwasp checked off in Florida, at least.  ;D

(https://i.ytimg.com/vi/uSOWx6FsyKs/maxresdefault.jpg)
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 06/13/2016 08:55 pm
What's wrong with a spider or rattler?

Rattlesnake Cocktail

1 1/2 oz whiskey
1 tsp lemon juice
1/2 oz. Southern Comfort
1 egg white
1 tsp. sugar
Shake all ingredients with ice, strain into a cocktail glass, and serve with a cherry.


Tarantula

1 oz. Amaretto
1 oz. Baileys Irish Cream
1 tsp. Crown Royal
Layer Amaretto and Bailey's Irish Cream and with a bar spoon top with Crown Royal.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Nomadd on 06/13/2016 09:28 pm
 For some reason, crabs keep swarming my to my front door and dying there. Then ants come to eat the crabs, frogs come to eat the ants and Rat snakes come to eat the frogs. Beetles are also involved somehow. I have an entire eco-system living on my welcome mat. I have to sneak out the back door after dark or the seven plagues of Boca Chica pour into my living room.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: docmordrid on 06/13/2016 09:41 pm


What's wrong with a spider or rattler?

Rattlesnake Cocktail

1 1/2 oz whiskey
1 tsp lemon juice
1/2 oz. Southern Comfort
1 egg white
1 tsp. sugar
Shake all ingredients with ice, strain into a cocktail glass, and serve with a cherry.


Tarantula

1 oz. Amaretto
1 oz. Baileys Irish Cream
1 tsp. Crown Royal
Layer Amaretto and Bailey's Irish Cream and with a bar spoon top with Crown Royal.

Rattlesnake is also good BBQ'd. Coat with peanut or canola, apply a good rub and grill 40-45 min over mesquite charcoal. Yummy.

The only tarantulas here are our  grandsons Chilean Rose and my Goliath Bird Eater.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Space Ghost 1962 on 06/13/2016 10:15 pm
Reminds me of...
Quote from: Firesign Theater - Future Fair - Jim
"Well, Mr. President, it’s the bees and spiders again! They stole my food stamps, and sold ’em to the rats. And I tried to get down to my car, for to honk the horn for help, but the snakes has gotten it for the cockroaches. I go back upstairs, but the spiders has jammed the police lock! I ain’t been inside for a week, and I know that my wife is sleepin’ with the bees!"
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: billh on 06/13/2016 10:41 pm
For some reason, crabs keep swarming my to my front door and dieing there. Then ants come to eat the crabs, frogs come to eat the ants and Rat snakes come to eat the frogs. Beetles are also involved somehow. I have an entire eco-system living on my welcome mat. I have to sneak out the back door after dark or the seven plagues of Boca Chica pour into my living room.
Do you have a porch light? Maybe they are drawn to the light.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: the_other_Doug on 06/14/2016 01:40 am
Reminds me of...
Quote from: Firesign Theater - Future Fair - Jim
"Well, Mr. President, it’s the bees and spiders again! They stole my food stamps, and sold ’em to the rats. And I tried to get down to my car, for to honk the horn for help, but the snakes has gotten it for the cockroaches. I go back upstairs, but the spiders has jammed the police lock! I ain’t been inside for a week, and I know that my wife is sleepin’ with the bees!"

"Aw, man, he broke the President!"

"Go ahead, give the wheeze a squeeze!"
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Lar on 06/14/2016 02:22 am
Apparently it's a slow news week...

Are you guys going to make me move all these posts to the party thread?
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: llanitedave on 06/14/2016 04:13 am
Apparently it's a slow news week...

Are you guys going to make me move all these posts to the party thread?

Maybe we need a dedicated Texas party thread.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Lar on 06/14/2016 04:26 am
Apparently it's a slow news week...

Are you guys going to make me move all these posts to the party thread?

Maybe we need a dedicated Texas party thread.
it would just be bigger.  And we can't have that. So no. Straighten up and fly right. Or something.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: 216pi on 06/14/2016 11:49 am
Apparently it's a slow news week...

Are you guys going to make me move all these posts to the party thread?

Maybe we need a dedicated Texas party thread.
We really, really, urgently do.

Sent from my Nexus 5X using Tapatalk

Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: CT Space Guy on 06/15/2016 11:28 am
WOW this really needs a party thread!
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: 411rocket on 06/15/2016 12:30 pm
Apparently it's a slow news week...

Are you guys going to make me move all these posts to the party thread?

Maybe we need a dedicated Texas party thread.
it would just be bigger.  And we can't have that. So no. Straighten up and fly right. Or something.

Watching ground compacting, is worse than watching paint dry. In the meantime, there seems to be a virtual party @ Nomadd's house.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Nomadd on 06/18/2016 03:17 am


Watching ground compacting, is worse than watching paint dry. In the meantime, there seems to be a virtual party @ Nomadd's house.
Funny you should say that, because for the last few weeks you'd be watching paint dry here.

 There's a new section fenced off on the northeast side of the control center area, with people standing around now and then. Maybe some hope for new activity to liven up the thread. I had a brief talk with Joe Anonymous from UT yesterday and he said they were waiting for a firmer schedule from SpaceX before starting on the StarGate facility. He looked a little like that MacGyver guy.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 06/18/2016 12:51 pm
There's a new section fenced off on the northeast side of the control center area, with people standing around now and then.

The Cameron County online real estate database (http://www.cameroncad.org/cadclientdb/propertymap.aspx) shows SpaceX picked up a new lot near the Control Center area.

Is that the new fenced off section ?
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Nomadd on 06/18/2016 03:49 pm
There's a new section fenced off on the northeast side of the control center area, with people standing around now and then.

The Cameron County online real estate database (http://www.cameroncad.org/cadclientdb/propertymap.aspx) shows SpaceX picked up a new lot near the Control Center area.

Is that the new fenced off section ?
No. it's the big yellow offshoot to the main spot. It wasn't fenced before. (My graphics software consists of the Preview program that came with my 10 year old Mac.)
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Comga on 06/18/2016 03:53 pm
The other change illustrated by Dave G's GIF is that three lots to the east of the Control Center and adjacent to the newly fenced part, 173639, 173641, and 173642, have changed from private ownership to state owned.
Is this also a real ownership change?
Has the state of Texas previously acquired other lots in the area during this development?
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 06/18/2016 04:34 pm
The other change illustrated by Dave G's GIF is that three lots to the east of the Control Center and adjacent to the newly fenced part, 173639, 173641, and 173642, have changed from private ownership to state owned.
Is this also a real ownership change?
Has the state of Texas previously acquired other lots in the area during this development?

Yes, the 3 lots were sold by a private owner to "THE UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS RIO GRANDE VALLEY FOUNDATION".

Maybe something to do with the Stargate tracking center.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 06/18/2016 04:57 pm
how is the range going to be managed for this facility?

According to the EIS (https://www.faa.gov/about/office_org/headquarters_offices/ast/environmental/nepa_docs/review/launch/spacex_texas_launch_site_environmental_impact_statement/media/FEIS_SpaceX_Texas_Launch_Site_Vol_I.pdf), security will be handled by SpaceX and local law enforcement, according to the table and diagram below.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 06/18/2016 05:11 pm
There's a new section fenced off on the northeast side of the control center area, with people standing around now and then.

The Cameron County online real estate database (http://www.cameroncad.org/cadclientdb/propertymap.aspx) shows SpaceX picked up a new lot near the Control Center area.

Is that the new fenced off section ?
No. it's the big yellow offshoot to the main spot. It wasn't fenced before. (My graphics software consists of the Preview program that came with my 10 year old Mac.)

Strange.  The Google Earth picture from January seems to show a fence around that area already.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Nomadd on 06/18/2016 07:06 pm
There's a new section fenced off on the northeast side of the control center area, with people standing around now and then.

The Cameron County online real estate database (http://www.cameroncad.org/cadclientdb/propertymap.aspx) shows SpaceX picked up a new lot near the Control Center area.

Is that the new fenced off section ?
No. it's the big yellow offshoot to the main spot. It wasn't fenced before. (My graphics software consists of the Preview program that came with my 10 year old Mac.)

Strange.  The Google Earth picture from January seems to show a fence around that area already.
A neighbor says they took it down while I was gone because of a property dispute and put it back up a little differently about 3 weeks ago. It's actually fenced in sections now. I spend too much time on the road.
 I don't know why the county is dragging their feet on the two houses and seven lots Frank sold. It's been 5 months now and they're still in his name.
 If Larry Massey is right, the soft checkpoint has been moved to about a mile east of where the 4 is on the road.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Comga on 06/18/2016 07:35 pm
(snip)
 I don't know why the county is dragging their feet on the two houses and seven lots Frank sold. It's been 5 months now and they're still in his name.
(snip)

Which houses and lots are those?
Can you (however crudely) point to them on the map?
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Nomadd on 06/18/2016 10:05 pm
(snip)
 I don't know why the county is dragging their feet on the two houses and seven lots Frank sold. It's been 5 months now and they're still in his name.
(snip)

Which houses and lots are those?
Can you (however crudely) point to them on the map?
7 Esperson, 16 Weems and the 7 adjacent lots just behind the old store. Everybody says SpaceX owns them, but I still haven't seen proof. Frank won't talk. As soon as 16 Weems sold, they appropriated the water tank for the site, and he did tell me the same people bought everything at once.
 Dogleg doesn't seem to be actively pursuing village properties, but they do show up fast if you put them on the market.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Nomadd on 06/18/2016 10:22 pm
Speaking of the old store, the owner just told me he no longer has any interest in using it for anything but a shop/storage place. It would be terrible if we don't get a bar and grill out here.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Kabloona on 06/18/2016 11:40 pm
Speaking of the old store, the owner just told me he no longer has any interest in using it for anything but a shop/storage place. It would be terrible if we don't get a bar and grill out here.

Sounds like the perfect place for a new Happy Bottom Riding Club...or a Fishlips...
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: rpapo on 06/19/2016 06:21 pm
Speaking of the old store, the owner just told me he no longer has any interest in using it for anything but a shop/storage place. It would be terrible if we don't get a bar and grill out here.

Sounds like the perfect place for a new Happy Bottom Riding Club...or a Fishlips...
Once they have a full staff working in the control center and the launch pad, there will be market enough for 2-3 places, and given SpaceX working hours, they might not even have to close on weekends.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: mfck on 06/21/2016 10:46 pm
Speaking of the old store, the owner just told me he no longer has any interest in using it for anything but a shop/storage place. It would be terrible if we don't get a bar and grill out here.

Sounds like the perfect place for a new Happy Bottom Riding Club...or a Fishlips...
Once they have a full staff working in the control center and the launch pad, there will be market enough for 2-3 places, and given SpaceX working hours, they might not even have to close on weekends.
That would be the Restaurant at the End of the World as We Know It
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: MarsInMyLifetime on 06/21/2016 11:46 pm
It would be quite literally the USA's own version of Tierra Del Fuego, for sure.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: rpapo on 06/21/2016 11:50 pm
It would be quite literally the USA's own version of Tierra Del Fuego, for sure.
But with a much more appropriate meaning.  The story goes that Tierra Del Fuego (Land of Fire) was named because of the campfires of the indigenous people.  Boca Chica has the heat to deserve the name, though nothing like what we've seen in the southwest states this past week.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Nomadd on 06/22/2016 03:55 am
 My friend suggested "Stairway to Heaven" for the bar.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: mfck on 06/22/2016 06:15 am
My friend suggested "Stairway to Heaven" for the bar.
Stairways are for ladies and bezos
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Jim on 06/22/2016 12:57 pm

Once they have a full staff working in the control center and the launch pad, there will be market enough for 2-3 places, and given SpaceX working hours, they might not even have to close on weekends.

Not really, Spacex feeds its own.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: JamesH65 on 06/22/2016 01:56 pm

Once they have a full staff working in the control center and the launch pad, there will be market enough for 2-3 places, and given SpaceX working hours, they might not even have to close on weekends.

Not really, Spacex feeds its own.

Sometimes though, you just need to get out of the canteen. Otherwise restaurants would not exist!
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: rpapo on 06/22/2016 02:03 pm

Once they have a full staff working in the control center and the launch pad, there will be market enough for 2-3 places, and given SpaceX working hours, they might not even have to close on weekends.

Not really, Spacex feeds its own.

Sometimes though, you just need to get out of the canteen. Otherwise restaurants would not exist!
When the company I worked for moved to downtown Detroit in 2003, they built a really nice cafeteria in the second floor of the new building.  The prices were not too bad, but even so the various eateries in the buildings nearby all saw a sharp uptick in business over the next few years.  People get the itch to eat away from the office, if the effort and time required isn't too great.  But Jim's right: if the company provides a good alternative in house, it limits the amount of traffic to outside providers, and below a certain level, it stops being a real business opportunity.

Lunch at Nomadd's place!
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Nomadd on 06/23/2016 05:58 pm
 This is what we call a really slow news month.
 The mystery of the orange cherry picker was solved when it was caught putting a pole up at SpaceX mountain. Camera pointed at the entrance and antenna pointed at the control center. Obviously security catching up.
 The cables flopping in the wind, 70s camera, solar array hooked to a battery sitting in the mud with no controller setup turned out to be a standard UT install. Hopefully, not the same guy who will be installing the Stargate gear.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: meberbs on 06/26/2016 04:34 pm
I just came across this article (http://www.i4u.com/2016/06/112773/spacex-south-texas-launch-sites-unkown-impact-people-living-boca-chica-village) which includes claims such as Boca Chica residents considering suing SpaceX. It doesn't have so much as a single direct quote from residents, and half of the claims don't make any sense to me.

I don't see how it could be illegal for the state to close down state owned beaches, and even if there are 2 contradictory laws, I assume the newer one would be considered to override the older one. The "can't leave their homes during launch" seems exaggerated compared to what we have seen of SpaceX's launch day plans. Can any of the Boca Chica NSFers in this thread confirm anything from this article, such as rumors of someone wanting to sue SpaceX?
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 06/26/2016 06:28 pm
I just came across this article (http://www.i4u.com/2016/06/112773/spacex-south-texas-launch-sites-unkown-impact-people-living-boca-chica-village) which includes claims such as Boca Chica residents considering suing SpaceX. It doesn't have so much as a single direct quote from residents, and half of the claims don't make any sense to me.

Thanks for posting the link.

As you imply, the article is a mix of true statements and stuff they just made up. 

For example:
Quote
The Boca Village residents will have no access to the beach during launch days. It is also possible that the village has to be evacuated on launch days.
The first sentence is true.  The EIS (https://www.faa.gov/about/office_org/headquarters_offices/ast/environmental/nepa_docs/review/launch/spacex_texas_launch_site_environmental_impact_statement/media/FEIS_SpaceX_Texas_Launch_Site_Vol_I.pdf) says the beach will be closed to the public on launch days.  But the second part is just made up.  The EIS just says local residents should use hearing protection if they're outdoors, and that SpaceX will provide this hearing protection for free.  Of course, the article prefaces it by saying "It is also possible".  Well, it's also possible that aliens will invade tomorrow and turn us all to jello.  Anything is possible.  That doesn't mean it's likely to happen.

Another example:
Quote
Former Governor Rick Perry has put a law into place that allows for closing down beaches for rocket launches.
That makes it sound like Rick Perry did this all by himself.  In reality, the Texas State Legislature sponsored the bill to allow these public beach closures, and the Governor signed the bill.  It wasn't some type of executive order by the Governor.

The time to bring up any of these potential issues was during the EIS public hearing, or in writing during the subsequent EIS review period, or when the State Legislature was debating the beach closure bill.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Jim on 06/26/2016 08:39 pm
It doesn't matter, EIS is not all encompassing. The residents have a right no matter what the time frame
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: RedLineTrain on 06/26/2016 09:27 pm
The radio report from which the article was written is pretty interesting, setting aside the snide remarks of the reporters.

http://fm4.orf.at/player/20160625/RC

Cheryl Stevens and Ellie Garcia, local residents, say that a lawsuit is being planned (by them?) to the recent amendment to the Open Beaches Act.  They also say that they understand that if they go to a doctor's appointment on launch day, they may be unable to return to their houses in Boca Chica Village.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: BobHk on 06/26/2016 10:28 pm
The radio report from which the article was written is pretty interesting, setting aside the snide remarks of the reporters.

http://fm4.orf.at/player/20160625/RC

Cheryl Stevens and Ellie Garcia, local residents, say that a lawsuit is being planned (by them?) to the recent amendment to the Open Beaches Act.  They also say that they understand that if they go to a doctor's appointment on launch day, they may be unable to return to their houses in Boca Chica Village.

12 launches a year max unless Spacex gets permission for more.  Might have to explain why you can't schedule around those 12 days out of 365 in a year.  And if you are going far away for an appointment in the first place...getting back same day might not be an issue at all.  Odd they'd focus on that issue.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: meberbs on 06/26/2016 11:38 pm
The radio report from which the article was written is pretty interesting, setting aside the snide remarks of the reporters.

http://fm4.orf.at/player/20160625/RC

Cheryl Stevens and Ellie Garcia, local residents, say that a lawsuit is being planned (by them?) to the recent amendment to the Open Beaches Act.  They also say that they understand that if they go to a doctor's appointment on launch day, they may be unable to return to their houses in Boca Chica Village.

The reporters seemed like they really were only concerned with getting one side of the story, and their final statements seemed to ignore some of the information they gathered.

They prompted someone from the Fish and Wildlife Service with false info asking if they agreed with the FAA's conclusion there would be no environmental impact, when the FAA stated in the record of decision:
Quote from: FAA
  There  would  be unavoidable, significant direct and indirect impacts related to land use compatibility, noise, light emissions and visual  impacts,  and  floodplains.
And the person they asked said that SpaceX was doing a good job being conservation oriented as part of their response.

I can't imagine the residents would get far with a lawsuit, they don't even seem to understand any of the facts, and think a law can be "unlawful." They later say unconstitutional, but I don't know of any constitutional right to go to the beach whenever you want, and nothing I have seen indicates they wouldn't be able to freely travel to and from their homes.

It sounds like SpaceX could do with providing some more informational materials to the residents to clarify things, but based on the attitude of the resident interviewed here, I doubt that resident would actually read or pay attention to what SpaceX says.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Nomadd on 06/27/2016 02:39 am
 Somebody took up a collection for the lawsuit a while back. They got enough money for about 12 seconds of lawyer time. The plans for who can use the highway between soft and hard checkpoints at various points before launch seem a little fuzzy. Everybody's waiting for something more final. As far as I can tell, only three houses are primary residences. Everybody else just comes out when they feel like it.

 12 launches a year isn't 12 closures. If they keep doing hot fires before every launch, there will be closures for those. There will be closures for every weather or technical scrub. It will only matter to a few hardcore fishermen most days, but if they keep Saturdays and Sundays open for launches or hot fires, people in town will probably start getting a little aggravated, not knowing if they'll be able to go to the beach or not on a weekend.
 My advice is not to worry about the details this far in advance. Even if SpaceX clarified some things, they could just change again in a year and a half. "Most" people are pretty easy going around here and understand the situation, despite a few news articles done by reporters who know what they're going to say before they bother talking to anyone. (I wonder why they never ask me for interviews any more)

 We had a town meeting in my back yard a few days ago. The main issue was why somebodies pepper plant was looking sickly. I voted fungal infection. Kinda gives you an idea of the pace here.

 I've been looking at the site from different angles. If you can't get smuggled into the village, I think the best viewing point will be standing on the jetty north of the pass.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: guckyfan on 06/27/2016 03:53 am
Maybe SpaceX could provide a shuttle bus service to the nearest open beach?
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: CuddlyRocket on 06/27/2016 05:07 am
We had a town meeting in my back yard a few days ago. The main issue was why somebodies pepper plant was looking sickly. I voted fungal infection. Kinda gives you an idea of the pace here.

I assume complaints are coming from people who - unlike Nomadd :) - moved to Boca Chica precisely because it was out of the way; quiet and peaceful, lots of nature etc. It might be worth SpaceX's while to offer financial assistance to relocate to somewhere that still meets those criteria.

Anyone moving into the area now will have far fewer grounds to complain!
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Zed_Noir on 06/27/2016 11:00 am
I assume complaints are coming from people who - unlike Nomadd :) - moved to Boca Chica precisely because it was out of the way; quiet and peaceful, lots of nature etc. It might be worth SpaceX's while to offer financial assistance to relocate to somewhere that still meets those criteria.
....
Not really practical. There is not too many places like that in the US that is cheap like Boca Chica Village.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 06/27/2016 11:31 am
The radio report from which the article was written is pretty interesting, setting aside the snide remarks of the reporters.

http://fm4.orf.at/player/20160625/RC

Thanks.  I didn't have time to listen to the radio piece.

They also say that they understand that if they go to a doctor's appointment on launch day, they may be unable to return to their houses in Boca Chica Village.
I don't understand why people keep saying things like this.  EIS (https://www.faa.gov/about/office_org/headquarters_offices/ast/environmental/nepa_docs/review/launch/spacex_texas_launch_site_environmental_impact_statement/media/FEIS_SpaceX_Texas_Launch_Site_Vol_I.pdf) section 2.1.1.5 says property owners will be able to pass the soft checkpoint.  It doesn't say "residents" or "permanent residents".  It' says "property owners".

So anyone that owns property in Boca Chica Village will be able to pass the soft check-point.

There will be a hard check-point between Boca Chica Village and the launch site, but no one lives past the hard check-point, so that should be a non-issue.

The EIS doesn't say anything about evacuating residents.  It doesn't say anything about restricting the movements of anyone authorized beyond the soft checkpoint.

For me, the implication is obvious.  They don't want to deal with a huge crowd of people on launch days.  Since Boca Chica residents seem enjoy their privacy, I would think that's a good thing.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 06/27/2016 11:54 am
"Most" people are pretty easy going around here and understand the situation, despite a few news articles done by reporters who know what they're going to say before they bother talking to anyone. (I wonder why they never ask me for interviews any more)
Right.  That's what I figured.  News people like to stir the pot.

If you can't get smuggled into the village, I think the best viewing point will be standing on the jetty north of the pass.
South Padre Island is talking about building a viewing tower with an observation deck.
http://valleycentral.com/news/local/south-padre-island-may-buy-chaos-club-build-spacex-observation-deck

As for getting "smuggled into the village", the way I read it, the EIS seems to allow guests of property owners to enter as long as they arrive before T-6 hours.

After T-6 hours, if a guest is traveling in the same vehicle as a property owner, I doubt they'll say anything. 

Again, I believe the main reason for the soft check-point - they don't want to deal with big crowds on launch days.  I doubt SpaceX or local police will go nazi on local residents.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: the_other_Doug on 06/27/2016 12:51 pm
So, what does this mean for the plans to have Nomadd host launch parties for a couple of thousand of us, once a month or so...?

:D
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Nomadd on 06/27/2016 03:31 pm


The EIS doesn't say anything about evacuating residents.  It doesn't say anything about restricting the movements of anyone authorized beyond the soft checkpoint.

Apparently, a rep at the early orientation thought FH launches would require evacuation, but three different SpaceX people since then have told me residents are welcome to stay and watch from their yards if they want. It's one of the things that could use official clarification. It might have to do with the FAAs 115db limit, but requiring a resident roundup for 2db over that seems a little insane as long as everyone is aware of the situation and has hearing protection.

 Has anyone ever seen a comparison of launch volume compared to exploding rocket volume?



I assume complaints are coming from people who - unlike Nomadd :) - moved to Boca Chica precisely because it was out of the way; quiet and peaceful, lots of nature etc. It might be worth SpaceX's while to offer financial assistance to relocate to somewhere that still meets those criteria.

Anyone moving into the area now will have far fewer grounds to complain!
Whatever my original motivation was and no matter how the project goes, I don't think I could have found a much better place to live out my years. I love the middle of nowhere. Living in a spaceport in the middle of nowhere is like a dream, but even if Elon changes his mind and decides to go somewhere else, I won't go anywhere as long as the electricity and water keep coming.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Kabloona on 06/27/2016 03:42 pm
Quote
Has anyone ever seen a comparison of launch volume compared to exploding rocket volume?

Apples and oranges, because an exploding rocket generates (primarily) a shock wave instead of an acoustic wave, so exploding rocket "volume" is measured in terms of shock wave overpressure, in psi.

SpaceX has probably already been required to generate overpressure "maps" for the Cape and VAFB showing overpressure iso-lines in case of launch pad explosions (like Antares), but I don't think we've actually seen them. (Though we did see an overpressure map for the OG-2 returning stage shock waves, which is analogous).

Probably they have had to do the same thing too for Boca Chica to evaluate potential impact on local residents and structures.

Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Nomadd on 06/27/2016 03:47 pm
Quote
Has anyone ever seen a comparison of launch volume compared to exploding rocket volume?

Apples and oranges, because an exploding rocket generates (primarily) a shock wave instead of an acoustic wave, so exploding rocket "volume" is measured in terms of shock wave overpressure, in psi.

SpaceX has probably already been required to generate overpressure "maps" for the Cape and VAFB showing overpressure iso-lines in case of launch pad explosions (like Antares), but I don't think we've actually seen them. (Though we did see an overpressure map for the OG-2 returning stage shock waves, which is analogous).

Probably they have had to do the same thing too for Boca Chica to evaluate potential impact on local residents and structures.


I take it the possibility of fuel/air/vaporizing LOX mixing just right to make a really loud bang isn't considered likely. I was never clear on if the FTS actually ignited the fuel or just split the tanks.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Kabloona on 06/27/2016 03:58 pm
Quote
I take it the possibility of fuel/air/vaporizing LOX mixing just right to make a really loud bang isn't considered likely. I was never clear on if the FTS actually ignited the fuel or just split the tanks.

Don't know for sure how they do the analysis, but they're probably required to make a worst-case assumption based on TNT-equivalent energy content of the LOX and RP-1. I seem to recall we saw some of that analysis discussed earlier at VAFB when there was some issue with the marine inversion layer potentially reflecting a shock wave from a pad explosion.

BTW, here's the overpressure map for the OG-2 RTLS.

Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: BrianNH on 06/27/2016 04:01 pm
So anyone that owns property in Boca Chica Village will be able to pass the soft check-point.

So Nomadd, would you be willing to sell a 1 square foot piece of your land?   :D
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 06/27/2016 04:48 pm
I take it the possibility of fuel/air/vaporizing LOX mixing just right to make a really loud bang isn't considered likely. I was never clear on if the FTS actually ignited the fuel or just split the tanks.

As I understand it, when rockets "explode", it's really more of a rapid burning than a real explosion.  Lots of light and flames, very dramatic on film, but nothing like the "bang" sound or shock wave of a real explosion.

For the flight termination system, I believe it uses a sequence of relatively small explosive charges to sort of unzip the stage.  In other words, the FTS tries to avoid the bang and shock wave as much as possible.

Apparently, a rep at the early orientation thought FH launches would require evacuation, but three different SpaceX people since then have told me residents are welcome to stay and watch from their yards if they want. It's one of the things that could use official clarification. It might have to do with the FAAs 115db limit, but requiring a resident roundup for 2db over that seems a little insane as long as everyone is aware of the situation and has hearing protection.

Maybe an earlier EIS draft recommended evacuation for Falcon Heavy, but later they changed their minds on this.

EIS (https://www.faa.gov/about/office_org/headquarters_offices/ast/environmental/nepa_docs/review/launch/spacex_texas_launch_site_environmental_impact_statement/media/FEIS_SpaceX_Texas_Launch_Site_Vol_I.pdf) section 4.3 deals with sound issues.  This section is quite lengthy with a lot of tables and figures.  It seems like someone spent a good deal of time trying to justify the final EIS decision that allows residents to stay.

Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: rpapo on 06/27/2016 04:57 pm
As I understand it, when rockets "explode", it's really more of a rapid burning than a real explosion.  Lots of light and flames, but nothing like the "bang" sound or shock wave of a real explosion.
IIRC, the Antares explosion was quite loud, though I would not characterize it as a shock wave like the sonic booms we heard in the OG-2 RTLS landing.  And certainly nothing like the place that blew up in Nevada some years back:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LvaaWwRWJ9I

Of course, the Falcon is a different animal: no solids.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Jim on 06/27/2016 05:01 pm

As I understand it, when rockets "explode", it's really more of a rapid burning than a real explosion.  Lots of light and flames, but nothing like the "bang" sound or shock wave of a real explosion.


Delta 241 was the loudest sound I ever heard.  That was at Jetty Park
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: docmordrid on 06/27/2016 05:19 pm

As I understand it, when rockets "explode", it's really more of a rapid burning than a real explosion.  Lots of light and flames, but nothing like the "bang" sound or shock wave of a real explosion.


Delta 241 was the loudest sound I ever heard.  That was at Jetty Park

Didn't that start with a chain reaction failure of the GEMs ?
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: fthomassy on 06/27/2016 05:29 pm
As I understand it, when rockets "explode", it's really more of a rapid burning than a real explosion.  Lots of light and flames, but nothing like the "bang" sound or shock wave of a real explosion.
IIRC, the Antares explosion was quite loud, though I would not characterize it as a shock wave like the sonic booms we heard in the OG-2 RTLS landing.  And certainly nothing like the place that blew up in Nevada some years back:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LvaaWwRWJ9I

Of course, the Falcon is a different animal: no solids.
Should emphasize "nothing like" it.  The Pepcon incident is the explosion of a stored constituent of solid propellant so is several steps removed from this conversation.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Nomadd on 06/27/2016 05:30 pm
 I've had an idiot F-4 pilot glide in around 0400 while I was in a tent and kick in afterburners what sounded like 6 feet from my eardrums. Nobody had any fillings left in their teeth that morning. It helps explain why 40% of my sentences consists of "What?".
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Mike_1179 on 06/27/2016 05:36 pm

As I understand it, when rockets "explode", it's really more of a rapid burning than a real explosion.  Lots of light and flames, but nothing like the "bang" sound or shock wave of a real explosion.


Delta 241 was the loudest sound I ever heard.  That was at Jetty Park

Didn't that start with a chain reaction failure of the GEMs ?

Yeah, but in the end it was the FTS was initiated. You've got about 100,000 kg of propellants in a Delta II first stage compared with around 1,300,000 kg in a Falcon Heavy. Can't imagine it would be quieter if the tanks were unzipped.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Jim on 06/27/2016 05:50 pm

As I understand it, when rockets "explode", it's really more of a rapid burning than a real explosion.  Lots of light and flames, but nothing like the "bang" sound or shock wave of a real explosion.


Delta 241 was the loudest sound I ever heard.  That was at Jetty Park

Didn't that start with a chain reaction failure of the GEMs ?

A GEM started it but the FTS took over
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Kabloona on 06/27/2016 06:16 pm
Quote
As I understand it, when rockets "explode", it's really more of a rapid burning than a real explosion.  Lots of light and flames, very dramatic on film, but nothing like the "bang" sound or shock wave of a real explosion.

That's true, launch vehicle explosions are usually a "deflagration", not a "detonation."

Nevertheless, AIUI, for the purpose of calculating theoretical peak overpressure, launch vehicle providers are required to make "TNT equivalent" calculations for the propellants, even though actual "detonations" are rare in launch vehicle failures.

Using the TNT equivalent method makes it relatively straightforward to calculate peak overpressure, even though in most cases a vehicle explosion will be only a deflagration and won't achieve that theoretical "peak" overpressure.

The Pepcon explosion in Nevada was highly unusual, because it started as a fire that spread into the ammonium perchlorate (AP) storage bins. The AP caught fire, and when the fire got big enough, the reaction transitioned from a deflagration to a detonation, resulting in the huge shock wave caught on camera. I was working at the Air Force Rocket Propulsion Laboratory at the time, and we did studies on how that accident occurred and why the AP finally detonated. But that deflagration to detonation mechanism rarely occurs in launch vehicle explosions, even with solid propellants that contain AP.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Nomadd on 06/27/2016 08:40 pm
Methane is another issue. I'm  not sure how close I'd want to be to a thousand tons of it mixed with air/vaporizing LOX going off.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: docmordrid on 06/27/2016 09:07 pm
The Cleveland East Ohio Gas Co. NG explosion in 1944 is as close as we're likely to find; 2.43 kt equivalent. A big above ground tank leaked out and it entered the sewers etc. Boom. Leveled a square mile.

Image collection

Link.... (http://www.clevescene.com/cleveland/scenes-from-the-1944-east-ohio-gas-co-explosion/Slideshow/4391825)
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Prober on 06/28/2016 02:10 am
Quote
Has anyone ever seen a comparison of launch volume compared to exploding rocket volume?




Nomadd where is the nearest boarder security station with Mexico?


Any talk of the wall near you? 
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Nomadd on 06/28/2016 03:01 am

Nomadd where is the nearest boarder security station with Mexico?

Any talk of the wall near you? 
No, I haven't met anybody here dumb enough to think you can wall off Mexico yet. Brownsville has three crossings in town. There's a border patrol checkpoint is about 15 miles from the site just outside of town. Security is mostly Border Patrol SUVs driving around the dirt roads.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Blackjax on 06/28/2016 03:23 am
So anyone that owns property in Boca Chica Village will be able to pass the soft check-point.

So Nomadd, would you be willing to sell a 1 square foot piece of your land?   :D

Heh, well there is sort of a precedent for this kind of thing, although it didn't work out so great all told...

http://www.missedinhistory.com/podcasts/the-klondike-big-inch-land-promotion/
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 06/28/2016 11:57 am

Nomadd where is the nearest boarder security station with Mexico?

Any talk of the wall near you? 
No, I haven't met anybody here dumb enough to think you can wall off Mexico yet. Brownsville has three crossings in town. There's a border patrol checkpoint is about 15 miles from the site just outside of town. Security is mostly Border Patrol SUVs driving around the dirt roads.
Seems like Brownsville is more interested in building bridges than walls.

The plans for the new outer-belt (a.k.a. East Loop) include a new bridge.  There's also a proposed new Flor De Mayo bridge.  Both are marked on the map below.

That's in addition to the 4 existing Brownsville area bridges.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Space Opera on 06/28/2016 12:00 pm
If I understand correctly, Boca Chica beach will be authorized to the public until several hours before launch. Then I imagine that, unlike the Cape beach that is never opened to the public, everybody can put GoPro and other cameras everywhere on the beach and remotely take pictures of the launches from very, very close ?
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 06/28/2016 12:34 pm
If I understand correctly, Boca Chica beach will be authorized to the public until several hours before launch.
The soft checkpoint will cut off public access at T-6 hrs.  The hard checkpoint will cut off public access at T-4 hrs.  See table below.

Then I imagine that, unlike the Cape beach that is never opened to the public, everybody can put GoPro and other cameras everywhere on the beach and remotely take pictures of the launches from very, very close ?
First, there's the obvious question: Will SpaceX allow such a thing?

Second, assuming they allow it, how would it work?  You wouldn't be in wireless range to trigger a still or start rolling video.  And if you're looking for any sort of high quality video, I don't know of a camera that will shoot 4-6 hours on an internal card.  In theory, you could use some sort of delay start feature, but I'm not aware of any high quality cameras with this feature.  If you have a more pro setup, I suppose you could store HDMI or HD/SDI output onto some type of external storage device, but it would need to be a very large external storage device.  Uncompressed HDMI or HD/SDI uses several Gbytes per minute.

Third, why bother?  I'm sure SpaceX will shoot high quality 4K video of the liftoff from multiple angles.  If they aren't willing to show this to the public, then they probably won't be willing to let you leave your camera setup on the beach.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Robotbeat on 06/28/2016 12:44 pm
....
Seems like Brownsville is more interested in building bridges than walls.....
Is there a way I can vote for Brownsville for president?
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Space Opera on 06/28/2016 12:49 pm
First, there's the obvious question: Will SpaceX allow such a thing?
Good question. Other questions: Why not ? Are they allowed to forbid such things ?

Second, assuming they allow it, how would it work?  You wouldn't be in wireless range to trigger a still or start rolling video.  And if you're looking for any sort of high quality video, I don't know of a camera that will shoot 4-6 hours on an internal card.  In theory, you could use some sort of delay start feature, but I'm not aware of any high quality cameras with this feature.
Believe me, it is very easy to start a camera after X hours and/or to activate a camera with a remote controller (range of several kilometers over flat landscape). I have already made such devices for sunset shooting or timelapses. Many other methods can be easily implemented, such as camera triggered by sound, by GSM, etc, etc...

Third, why bother?  I'm sure SpaceX will shoot high quality 4K video of the liftoff from multiple angles.  If they aren't willing to show this to the public, then they probably won't be willing to let you leave your camera setup on the beach.
Don't you know people love taking their own pictures ? Wouldn't you like raw uncut videos of rocket launches as seen from the beach ?
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: meberbs on 06/28/2016 12:57 pm

First, there's the obvious question: Will SpaceX allow such a thing?

Second, assuming they allow it, how would it work? ...

Considering remote camera Cape Canaveral launch pictures available in L2, there is definitely a solution to this. SpaceX most likely has no say on if it is allowed, since they don't own the beach, and it isn't a safety risk.

The fact people are interested in seeing those pictures when we already get launch videos should answer the "why bother" as well.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Craig_VG on 06/28/2016 12:57 pm

First, there's the obvious question: Will SpaceX allow such a thing?

Second, assuming they allow it, how would it work?  You wouldn't be in wireless range to trigger a still or start rolling video.  And if you're looking for any sort of high quality video, I don't know of a camera that will shoot 4-6 hours on an internal card.  In theory, you could use some sort of delay start feature, but I'm not aware of any high quality cameras with this feature.  If you have a more pro setup, I suppose you could store HDMI or HD/SDI output onto some type of external storage device, but it would need to be a very large external storage device.  Uncompressed HDMI or HD/SDI uses several Gbytes per minute.

Third, why bother?  I'm sure SpaceX will shoot high quality 4K video of the liftoff from multiple angles.  If they aren't willing to show this to the public, then they probably won't be willing to let you leave your camera setup on the beach.

Why couldn't they use sound triggers like they do at the cape? If that fails there are many inexpensive intervalometers available, and Nikon cameras have them built in. You'd have to assume SpaceX launches at the right time, but taking the risk is better than not.

As a photographer I'm confused by your last argument. Currently multiple people set up their cameras at the cape for a launch, what makes you think people wont want to for SpaceX launches in Texas? Do you not like all the fan long exposures of launches?
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Jim on 06/28/2016 01:50 pm
unlike the Cape beach that is never opened to the public

It is open to fishing
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Nomadd on 06/28/2016 04:03 pm
 I've had doubts about a launch pad only a few hundred feet from public land for several reasons, including parties with lite beer drinking, gun toting Texans every weekend just outside the fence. I hope SpaceX is taking security seriously enough. I'd think every square inch of land within several hundred yards of the pad would be under constant surveillance.
 They have no legal right to do anything like confiscate cameras off their property, but maybe a county ordinance stating that unattended property on the beach or in the park is subject to cleanup would be a way if they feel the need. I think it's more likely they won't care that much and might even ask for copies of the videos if anything goes wrong.
  I'll probably get around to looking at power specs for various cameras and think about it eventually. I see GoPro cameras that can store close to 8 hours of compressed 1080-60 on a 64GB card, and it's almost always too hazy out here for good videos over a mile away. Keeping a stable picture 500 feet from a launch might be challenging. But I'm not doing anything SpaceX asks people not to do.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: david1971 on 06/28/2016 04:51 pm
  I'll probably get around to looking at power specs for various cameras and think about it eventually. I see GoPro cameras that can store close to 8 hours of compressed 1080-60 on a 64GB card, and it's almost always too hazy out here for good videos over a mile away. Keeping a stable picture 500 feet from a launch might be challenging. But I'm not doing anything SpaceX asks people not to do.

I suspect this forum will provide plenty of camera advice and funding.  Put me down for ten bucks...
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 06/28/2016 06:59 pm
I see GoPro cameras that can store close to 8 hours of compressed 1080-60 on a 64GB card...

With that much compression, the picture quality will suffer greatly, especially if things are moving around.

Resolution isn't just about pixels, it's about the ability to resolve details within the image.  Large amounts of compression tends to blur those details.  If you ask a cinematographer, they'll say the resolution of 1080p video varies greatly depending on the amount of compression.  H.264 is notorious for blurring details, especially if there's a lot of motion.  Uncompressed or lightly compressed 1080p video is dramatically sharper.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Robotbeat on 06/28/2016 08:35 pm
I see GoPro cameras that can store close to 8 hours of compressed 1080-60 on a 64GB card...

With that much compression, the picture quality will suffer greatly, especially if things are moving around.

Resolution isn't just about pixels, it's about the ability to resolve details within the image.  Large amounts of compression tends to blur those details.  If you ask a cinematographer, they'll say the resolution of 1080p video varies greatly depending on the amount of compression.  H.264 is notorious for blurring details, especially if there's a lot of motion.  Uncompressed or lightly compressed 1080p video is dramatically sharper.
Dynamic compression is certainly possible. 95% of the time, almost nothing is moving, so you can use a much lower bitrate without losing detail.

Additionally, you can get 512GB SD cards nowadays (and 200GB microSD cards). You don't need much compression.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Space Opera on 06/28/2016 08:59 pm
Anyway, remotely start an acquisition from a distance of 5 miles at sea shore is something we all can do with a <100$ radio device set. It is not hard to do. And many amateur do this everyday.

And with a small dish (~ centimeters), you could even see it live and control the view direction with FPV device. For those who are not familiar with all that, radio-control cameras have dramatically evolved for 10 years since the success of drones for public. Controlling in real-time a camera from a distance is the very basics of RC planes and other drones now. This was quiet an achievement several years from now, but it is currently very common and sold all integrated in every RC stors.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 06/28/2016 09:35 pm
Dynamic compression is certainly possible. 95% of the time, almost nothing is moving, so you can use a much lower bitrate without losing detail.

While this is conceptually possible, I've never seen a camera that does this.  All the camera's I'm familiar with record at a fixed bit rate, or at a bit rate that doesn't vary a lot (e.g. 25-35 MBits/sec).

By the way, to do a good job at VBR compression, you need to make multiple passes though the whole video.  That's how they render DVDs and BluRays.  But it's not possible in a camera, since they record real-time.

So again, any camera that shoots high quality video doesn't use a lot of compression.  For a camera left on a beach, that means you need some sort of delayed or remote start.  Since I'm more familiar with feature films and shorts, I don't know much about these.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Nomadd on 06/28/2016 09:39 pm
 Since Cisco took them over, some simple Linksys radios have  been about as sensitive as I've seen. A pair of LOS 14db panels would be fine in uncontested area at 2 miles for 802.11g with decent units. Maybe a 24db grid at the base for better margin. 2 24db grids  if the area is really saturated with wifi. You can use that up to 9 miles with no loss of speed from propogation delay. I'm not that familiar with 802.11n specs.
 
 How much power would a busy 3TB hard drive require?
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: dorkmo on 06/28/2016 09:55 pm
i dont know anything about go pros but could you use a arduino with a cellphone package to trigger recording via text message?

http://world.arduino.org/en/arduino-gsm-shield-2-integrated-antenna.html
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Space Opera on 06/28/2016 10:05 pm
Yes, of course you can, with text or other kind of messages. For instance, you can directly connect your phone to internet and control it the same way you do for any device connected on the web. Nowadays, there are plenty of ways to control a camera remotely.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: billh on 06/28/2016 10:58 pm
SpaceX may not care about any cameras in the vicinity, but I'd be willing to bet they will care about any radio transmitters near the launch site!
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: jg on 06/28/2016 11:35 pm
Ubiquity makes very nice WiFi routers for outdoor use, at very good prices.  There are also directional antennae available.  I'd use their equipment long before I would touch Linksys indoor gear.

I expect we can help Nomadd build his network empire :-).
               - Jim

P.S. this posting made over a Ubiquity Nanostation, mounted on the peak of my house, that covers my front, back and side yards (up to about .15 miles away; point to point you can go many miles).
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: StuffOfInterest on 06/29/2016 12:02 am
Since Cisco took them over, some simple Linksys radios have  been about as sensitive as I've seen. A pair of LOS 14db panels would be fine in uncontested area at 2 miles for 802.11g with decent units. Maybe a 24db grid at the base for better margin. 2 24db grids  if the area is really saturated with wifi. You can use that up to 9 miles with no loss of speed from propogation delay. I'm not that familiar with 802.11n specs.

Amateur radio operators have been pushing WiFi over miles using Pringles can antennas.  Their frequencies overlap with some of the 2.4GHz WiFi channels so it is legal for them to do the modifications.  This has an advantage as well of being highly directional so there won't be a lot of signal noise at the pad itself, not that they are likely to be doing much in the open 2.4GHz bands.

Quote

How much power would a busy 3TB hard drive require?

Considering how much the price has dropped on solid state drives lately, a 1 or 2 TB SSD may be a better option.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: envy887 on 06/29/2016 12:36 am
Laptop hard drives or SSDs will both pull 2 to 3 watts.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Robotbeat on 06/29/2016 12:50 am
Dynamic compression is certainly possible. 95% of the time, almost nothing is moving, so you can use a much lower bitrate without losing detail.

While this is conceptually possible, I've never seen a camera that does this.  All the camera's I'm familiar with record at a fixed bit rate, or at a bit rate that doesn't vary a lot (e.g. 25-35 MBits/sec).

By the way, to do a good job at VBR compression, you need to make multiple passes though the whole video.  That's how they render DVDs and BluRays.  But it's not possible in a camera, since they record real-time.

So again, any camera that shoots high quality video doesn't use a lot of compression.  For a camera left on a beach, that means you need some sort of delayed or remote start.  Since I'm more familiar with feature films and shorts, I don't know much about these.
Some cameras have a VOX setting to only record when there's movement.

But anyway, this is all irrelevant and overcomplicated. You can get a 512GB SD card, record at 36Mbps (>4 times higher than typical 1080 stream), and you'll be fine for 24 hours easily.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Nomadd on 06/29/2016 12:58 am


Amateur radio operators have been pushing WiFi over miles using Pringles can antennas.  Their frequencies overlap with some of the 2.4GHz WiFi channels so it is legal for them to do the modifications.  This has an advantage as well of being highly directional so there won't be a lot of signal noise at the pad itself, not that they are likely to be doing much in the open 2.4GHz bands.

I could have gone the rest of my life without hearing that Pringles can nonsense again. And I can't make any sense at all out of "Their frequencies overlap with some of the 2.4GHz WiFi channels so it is legal for them to do the modifications"
 I'm not an amateur. A good part of my business was getting wireless going at disaster sites and troubleshooting other people's setups.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Helodriver on 06/29/2016 01:26 am
How many cans of Pringles would you use for a typical disaster area?  Do you think barbecue or sour cream and onion would be better for SpaceX remote camera bandwidth? ;)
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: QuantumG on 06/29/2016 01:44 am
How many cans of Pringles would you use for a typical disaster area?

Once you pop you can't stop.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Lar on 06/29/2016 01:57 am
Can we chip away all the Pringles related puns?
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: docmordrid on 06/29/2016 02:00 am
I could have gone the rest of my life without hearing that Pringles can nonsense again.

They don't work that well as a waveguide antenna, but a 4"w x 6"h stew can or 6"w coffee can does. 1.25" element stuck in an N connector.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Req on 06/29/2016 02:09 am
Dynamic compression is certainly possible. 95% of the time, almost nothing is moving, so you can use a much lower bitrate without losing detail.
By the way, to do a good job at VBR compression, you need to make multiple passes though the whole video.  That's how they render DVDs and BluRays.  But it's not possible in a camera, since they record real-time.

No, you don't, and it's not called VBR anymore.  It's called CRF.  H264 is different from whatever you may have known previously (was it divx?)  Once you've set CRF the quality is fixed, and adding multiple passes or for example using the "veryslow" preset in ffmpeg just make the file smaller at the expense of more CPU time, and they have very diminishing returns.  Maybe squeeze 10% off of the filesize for making it take 10x+ longer.

I host a number of streaming media servers that do real-time transcoding if needed, and it's really not that big a deal anymore.  Even just for a single X86 socket with a low CRF value on 1080p video, nevermind something with a better instruction set than CISC/MMX/SSE for the purpose.

Edit for verbosity
Edit/Lar: PoliteJim3000 works on other posters too.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: StuffOfInterest on 06/29/2016 10:49 am
I could have gone the rest of my life without hearing that Pringles can nonsense again.

They don't work that well as a waveguide antenna, but a 4"w x 6"h stew can or 6"w coffee can does. 1.25" element stuck in an N connector.

I should have used the more generic "cantenna (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cantenna)" term instead of Pringles can in my post.

As for the modification of equipment point, I was referring to how Amateur Radio licensed operators can modify communications equipment under their FCC licensing (Part 97).  Consumer equipment, which includes most WiFi routers, fall under different licensing (Part 15 I believe) which excplicity prohibits end user modification.  Of course, Nomadd is working on a whole different level dealing with commercial grade equipment.  I have no idea what licensing regime that falls under.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: 216pi on 06/29/2016 11:08 am
Gentlemen, Ladies, I know it is a slow thread. But could I ask you kindly to not convert this into a photo/video forum?

Sent from my Pixel C using Tapatalk

Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Nomadd on 06/29/2016 02:10 pm
Gentlemen, Ladies, I know it is a slow thread. But could I ask you kindly to not convert this into a photo/video forum?

Sent from my Pixel C using Tapatalk


No, you can't.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 06/29/2016 02:29 pm
Another article with the familiar mix of some true statements combined with dis-information:

Small Texas Town Must Deal With Living Next to Rocket Launchpad
http://texashillcountry.com/small-town-rocket-launchpad/

Quote
SpaceX South Texas launchpad sits inside Boca Chica State Park near a beach which will be closed off to residents once a month for launch days.
This is true.  The beach will be closed on launch days.

Quote
But this isn’t the main concern for Boca Chica Villagers, the town itself might have to be “cut off” on launch days, which means no ins or outs since they must adhere to SpaceX’s safety requirements on active days.
I've found no credible source for this.  The Final EIS (https://www.faa.gov/about/office_org/headquarters_offices/ast/environmental/nepa_docs/review/launch/spacex_texas_launch_site_environmental_impact_statement/media/FEIS_SpaceX_Texas_Launch_Site_Vol_I.pdf) says just the opposite.  Anyone who owns property in Boca Chica Village will be allowed to come and go as they please.  They just need to show ID at the soft checkpoint.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: 216pi on 06/29/2016 04:41 pm
Gentlemen, Ladies, I know it is a slow thread. But could I ask you kindly to not convert this into a photo/video forum?

Sent from my Pixel C using Tapatalk


No, you can't.
I think I successfully did. Not much you can do about it now.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Nomadd on 06/29/2016 04:42 pm
They might not want traffic on the road right at launch time. I'm sure the details will be set before launch day. If someone leaves, they don't really have a way to stop them unless they post a guard at every driveway. I'm pretty sure the soft checkpoint won't  force a westbound vehicle to head back toward the rocket.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: envy887 on 06/29/2016 05:18 pm
They might not want traffic on the road right at launch time. I'm sure the details will be set before launch day. If someone leaves, they don't really have a way to stop them unless they post a guard at every driveway. I'm pretty sure the soft checkpoint won't  force a westbound vehicle to head back toward the rocket.

Why would they need to prevent local traffic west of the hard checkpoint? I don't think I'd want to be there at the time of launch, but I don't really see how it hinders SpaceX operations at all.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 06/29/2016 06:04 pm
They might not want traffic on the road right at launch time. I'm sure the details will be set before launch day. If someone leaves, they don't really have a way to stop them unless they post a guard at every driveway. I'm pretty sure the soft checkpoint won't  force a westbound vehicle to head back toward the rocket.

Why would they need to prevent local traffic west of the hard checkpoint? I don't think I'd want to be there at the time of launch, but I don't really see how it hinders SpaceX operations at all.

Right.  Since the number of Boca Chica property owners is relatively small, it shouldn't be hard for SpaceX to figure out which cars belong to them, so I don't see an issue patrolling the range.

I really doubt SpaceX will go nazi on locals.  Property owners are authorized to be there, while the general public isn't.  It's kind of like a back-stage pass.  As long as everyone's cool, you can probably do whatever you want.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Nomadd on 06/29/2016 06:07 pm
They might not want traffic on the road right at launch time. I'm sure the details will be set before launch day. If someone leaves, they don't really have a way to stop them unless they post a guard at every driveway. I'm pretty sure the soft checkpoint won't  force a westbound vehicle to head back toward the rocket.

Why would they need to prevent local traffic west of the hard checkpoint? I don't think I'd want to be there at the time of launch, but I don't really see how it hinders SpaceX operations at all.
It's not really too hard to understand why they might not want people driving around less than two miles from the launch. It could be a tad distracting to a driver.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: darkenfast on 06/30/2016 03:10 am
Especially if they're NSF members!
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: LouScheffer on 06/30/2016 12:28 pm
It's not really too hard to understand why they might not want people driving around less than two miles from the launch. It could be a tad distracting to a driver.
Conversely, some drivers are really hard to distract.  I once drove to see a total eclipse of the sun, a spectacular event that you can't possibly miss if you are outdoors.  When it got completely dark, a lot of cars just turned on their headlights and kept driving, pulling into McDonalds, and so on.   
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: envy887 on 06/30/2016 01:25 pm
...It could be a tad distracting to a driver.

Are you saying it's a liability issue? Because I can't envision a distracted driver affecting SpaceX ops. They won't let anyone within about mile and a half of the pad during launches, and will be controlling access to all other facilities.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: IntoTheVoid on 07/01/2016 05:11 pm
Regardless of distraction, could there be a hearing protection issue? I know in the U.S. it's generally illegal to drive with headphones on. If the hearing protection falls within the bounds of those same laws, one could find oneself with the choices of 1) staying home, 2) driving illegally with hearing protection, 3) driving without hearing protection and risking your hearing possibly at SpaceX liability if they don't have the authority to require choices 1 or 2.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 07/01/2016 07:53 pm
Regardless of distraction, could there be a hearing protection issue? I know in the U.S. it's generally illegal to drive with headphones on. If the hearing protection falls within the bounds of those same laws, one could find oneself with the choices of 1) staying home, 2) driving illegally with hearing protection, 3) driving without hearing protection and risking your hearing possibly at SpaceX liability if they don't have the authority to require choices 1 or 2.
For Falcon Heavy, they are only 2dB over the OSHA limit.  A car will easily dampen 2dB.  In any case, the EIS (https://www.faa.gov/about/office_org/headquarters_offices/ast/environmental/nepa_docs/review/launch/spacex_texas_launch_site_environmental_impact_statement/media/FEIS_SpaceX_Texas_Launch_Site_Vol_I.pdf) says SpaceX will distribute hearing protection to local residents for all FH launches.

Quote
Hearing protection measures would be implemented to ensure the health and safety of Boca Chica
Village residents during launch activities. For example, the residents would be notified of each
scheduled launch event and potential noise hazards well in advance of the launch day (see Section
2.1.1.5, Pre-Launch Activities). Residents would be encouraged to remain indoors during a launch event,
which can reduce noise exposure. SpaceX may also make hearing protection devices available to
residents to reduce noise levels below 115 dBA at distances up to approximately 2.1 miles for the Falcon
Heavy.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: IntoTheVoid on 07/02/2016 03:14 am
Regardless of distraction, could there be a hearing protection issue? I know in the U.S. it's generally illegal to drive with headphones on. If the hearing protection falls within the bounds of those same laws, one could find oneself with the choices of 1) staying home, 2) driving illegally with hearing protection, 3) driving without hearing protection and risking your hearing possibly at SpaceX liability if they don't have the authority to require choices 1 or 2.
For Falcon Heavy, they are only 2dB over the OSHA limit.  A car will easily dampen 2dB.  In any case, the EIS (https://www.faa.gov/about/office_org/headquarters_offices/ast/environmental/nepa_docs/review/launch/spacex_texas_launch_site_environmental_impact_statement/media/FEIS_SpaceX_Texas_Launch_Site_Vol_I.pdf) says SpaceX will distribute hearing protection to local residents for all FH launches.

I'll concede that if FH is only 2dB over the limit, then the car itself is probably sufficient hearing protection. But my point wasn't that SpaceX didn't provide hearing protection. My point was that it might be illegal to drive with the SpaceX provided protection, and in that case you are effectively restricted in your movement, forced to choose between the three choices I originally gave. But again, if the numbers end up as close as you say, then the issue pretty much goes away.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: envy887 on 07/02/2016 01:48 pm
My understanding was that hearing protection was only required outdoors, as normal building construction would also attenuate the launch noise to non-dangerous levels. Shouldn't driving a car be much the same from a noise perspective?
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dante80 on 07/02/2016 02:01 pm

Conversely, some drivers are really hard to distract. 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1TmBXciVr1k
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 07/02/2016 05:17 pm

Conversely, some drivers are really hard to distract. 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1TmBXciVr1k

Given that residents must be notified before every launch (the EIS requires this), it shouldn't be a big surprise if they're driving 2 miles away during the launch window.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Nomadd on 07/03/2016 05:22 am
 There are fence posts appearing along the road. This pic is old. They stretch around three furlongs now, or about the length of the site.
 They're getting a little more serious about the highway with a mile of new, slightly wider base on one side. I guess someone figured out that two inches of asphalt on the sand isn't going to do the job.
 The first and most important component of the NSF Boca Chica headquarters has been procured. Frank said he decided to sell the big place on LBJ today. He seemed open to subdividing and selling the half with the tower separately.

Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Oersted on 07/03/2016 01:58 pm
Observation tower with Xmas decoration garlands? - Christmas comes early to NSF, someone snap it up!
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: tdemko on 07/03/2016 11:22 pm
The first and most important component of the NSF Boca Chica headquarters has been procured.

Mmmm...Shiners, Lone Stars, Saint Arnold's, Negro Modelos, Pacificos, Coronas....
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: BobHk on 07/04/2016 12:16 am
Regardless of distraction, could there be a hearing protection issue? I know in the U.S. it's generally illegal to drive with headphones on. If the hearing protection falls within the bounds of those same laws, one could find oneself with the choices of 1) staying home, 2) driving illegally with hearing protection, 3) driving without hearing protection and risking your hearing possibly at SpaceX liability if they don't have the authority to require choices 1 or 2.
For Falcon Heavy, they are only 2dB over the OSHA limit.  A car will easily dampen 2dB.  In any case, the EIS (https://www.faa.gov/about/office_org/headquarters_offices/ast/environmental/nepa_docs/review/launch/spacex_texas_launch_site_environmental_impact_statement/media/FEIS_SpaceX_Texas_Launch_Site_Vol_I.pdf) says SpaceX will distribute hearing protection to local residents for all FH launches.

I'll concede that if FH is only 2dB over the limit, then the car itself is probably sufficient hearing protection. But my point wasn't that SpaceX didn't provide hearing protection. My point was that it might be illegal to drive with the SpaceX provided protection, and in that case you are effectively restricted in your movement, forced to choose between the three choices I originally gave. But again, if the numbers end up as close as you say, then the issue pretty much goes away.

You forgot 4) Plan ahead and dont be in a position to be distracted/forced to wear ear protection when a launch occurs.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: the_other_Doug on 07/04/2016 04:26 am
The first and most important component of the NSF Boca Chica headquarters has been procured.

Mmmm...Shiners, Lone Stars, Saint Arnold's, Negro Modelos, Pacificos, Coronas....

Don't forget a Pearl or two... ;)
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 07/04/2016 02:49 pm
The first and most important component of the NSF Boca Chica headquarters has been procured. Frank said he decided to sell the big place on LBJ today. He seemed open to subdividing and selling the half with the tower separately.

I think the codes for that tower are sort of like a garage. 

I'm guessing electricity comes from the main house, probably with an underground wire.  So if you bought it, you may need to dig a new trench. 

I'm also guessing no septic, so no bathrooms.  And I don't see a water tank near that tower.

Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Nomadd on 07/04/2016 03:29 pm
The first and most important component of the NSF Boca Chica headquarters has been procured. Frank said he decided to sell the big place on LBJ today. He seemed open to subdividing and selling the half with the tower separately.

I think the codes for that tower are sort of like a garage. 

I'm guessing electricity comes from the main house, probably with an underground wire.  So if you bought it, you may need to dig a new trench. 

I'm also guessing no septic, so no bathrooms.  And I don't see a water tank near that tower.


  I'm not that hopeful. They'd have to subdivide the middle lot to sell it separately, and that would probably be too much trouble if the not so mystery group offers to buy everything at once.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 07/04/2016 10:25 pm
According to the online Cameron County real estate database (http://www.cameroncad.org/cadclientdb/propertymap.aspx), SpaceX picked up 2 new lots within the last month.

Again, 16 Weems, 7 Esperson, and the other 7 lots still show no change of ownership in the online database (http://propaccess.cameroncad.org/clientdb/?cid=1).
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Nomadd on 07/05/2016 12:00 am
 I talked to Frank yesterday and he said the deal only took a few days to close last January, so I don't know if it's the county just being slow or they have other reasons.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 07/05/2016 11:56 am
This popped up on my Google search list today.

Possible routing of a rail spur to the Boca Chica spaceport facilities.
https://www.google.com/maps/d/viewer?mid=1beFcpJcFu9C30DTYVMchjIUHgC4&hl=en_US

Not sure where this came from, maybe one of the other discussion forums.

Note that this roughly mirrors an idea I posted here a while back, except I think a rail spur is unnecessary.  At that point along Route 4, there are no more traffic lights, and all electric lines are buried, so there are no obstructions that would prevent very large objects from being driven down a road on a truck.  All that would be required is a new stretch of road, circled in red below.

The first picture is from the link above.  The second picture is a zoom of the first, with my added red circle.  The last picture is something I posted up-thread a while back.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: docmordrid on 07/05/2016 02:53 pm
Dated 2014. And "rail spur 1." Is there a possible 2?

Assuming it's real,

And starting on the shipping channel at that.

Rocket/spacecraft factory on the channel to receive raw material shipments, rail the birds to the launch site?

BFR/BFS?
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Nomadd on 07/05/2016 03:26 pm
 A rail spur might be something to think about if serious BFR traffic ever materializes. It might look bad, but it would have some logistical and environmental advantages over a wide 4 lane highway.
 But this just looks like some casual speculation by someone.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: BobHk on 07/05/2016 04:21 pm
transport of manufactured stages, yeah; and LNG by the tanker car load (if you cant get a ship close and have no pipes and dont want to improve the road for large tanker trucks)
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 07/05/2016 05:07 pm
Dated 2014.
Where?  I didn't see that.  It came up on a Google search that was limited to the last 7 days, so I thought it was recent.

And starting on the shipping channel at that.
At a minimum, using the shipping channel route may be a good way to avoid more congested areas (downtown, airport, etc.).

And yes, I wouldn't rule out SpaceX buying land along the shipping channel and setting up an assembly plant to build BFR tanks and assemble stages.  Brownsville's seaport (http://www.portofbrownsville.com/) is world class, with huge aircraft carriers and drilling rigs, there's plenty of cheap undeveloped land along the channel, and local labor rates are among the lowest in the U.S.  Yes, they would need to bring in a some manufacturing engineers, and fly in design engineers for visits, but most of the labor force could be hired locally (machinists, material handlers, welders, secretaries, security guards, janitors, etc., etc.).

From Brownsville, they could ship BFR anywhere to launch.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: docmordrid on 07/05/2016 09:42 pm
Dated 2014.
Where?  I didn't see that.  It came up on a Google search that was limited to the last 7 days, so I thought it was recent.
>
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 07/06/2016 12:01 pm
Dated 2014.
Where?  I didn't see that.  It came up on a Google search that was limited to the last 7 days, so I thought it was recent.
>
What browser are you using?  I don't see this in Chrome or IE.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: docmordrid on 07/06/2016 01:11 pm
Chrome 51, Android 6
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 07/06/2016 04:54 pm
Very strange.  I'm using Chrome 51, and all I see is this:
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: envy887 on 07/06/2016 05:43 pm
I saw both the version with the date, and the one without... one different computers both running current Chrome. I think it's due to your Google account settings affecting how you view Google Maps.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: docmordrid on 07/06/2016 06:09 pm
What I see on my G4, minus the info bar. The tablet shows a smaller info bar.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Nomadd on 07/06/2016 11:00 pm
 I did a little measuring at the site. The fence goes a little further west than you might expect. It's exactly 2,000 ft long with the gate to the hill right in the middle.
 Since every attempted 1st stage return has been dead on target, even if some wound up less than vertical, maybe they decided to put the landing pads west of the warehouse. Or they're just fencing an approach ramp from the highway.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 07/07/2016 12:36 am
My  bet for where the landing pads will be:
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: cscott on 07/07/2016 01:59 am
If Dave G is correct, the mound is just for the hangars, and they haven't even begun to fill the ramp and the launch pad area.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Nomadd on 07/07/2016 02:12 am
If Dave G is correct, the mound is just for the hangars, and they haven't even begun to fill the ramp and the launch pad area.
That's been known since they started. That diagram isn't real accurate. The buildings will be farther from the road than in the old EIS. If the buildings are oriented about the same, the approach from the west should be longer and diverge from the highway further down. The fence line tends to support that. The diagram looks like it was made when they didn't realize how high everything would be.
 With the new fence going up, I bet we know more shortly.
 The new work on the highway looks like they're putting down a new base for the shoulders and making them a couple feet wider. That should be just enough to let people squeeze by the stages when they come down the road.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 07/07/2016 02:31 am
If Dave G is correct, the mound is just for the hangars, and they haven't even begun to fill the ramp and the launch pad area.
That's been known since they started.

To clarify, the picture I posted above is a combination of 3 things:

1) The launch site layout, taken from the EIS (https://www.faa.gov/about/office_org/headquarters_offices/ast/environmental/nepa_docs/review/launch/spacex_texas_launch_site_environmental_impact_statement/media/FEIS_SpaceX_Texas_Launch_Site_Vol_I.pdf)

2) The additional land bridge just south of the launch site fenced in area, as specified in the SpaceX Texas Launch Site Wetland Mitigation Plan Addendum, dated April 22, 2014, filed with the Army Corp of Engineers.  This document was available online for a while and then removed (http://www.swg.usace.army.mil/Portals/26/docs/regulatory/PN%20May/SpaceX_Texas_Launch_Site_Wetland_Mitigation_Plan_Addendum_042215.pdf), but I still have copies of some of the pictures from that document.

3) The 3 landing pad locations, which are a total guess on my part
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 07/07/2016 12:18 pm
A pair of new articles offers more details on the STARGATE partnership between SpaceX and the University of Texas at Brownsville.

http://www.utrgv.edu/en-us/about-utrgv/news/press-releases/2016/july-06-high-school-astronomers-shoot-for-the-stars-during-utrgv-s-stargate-academy/index.htm

http://acuriousguy.blogspot.com/2016/07/brownsville-stargate-and-spacex.html
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 07/09/2016 04:05 pm
How This Texas Town Owns The U.S. Naval Ship-Recycling Industry
http://www.fastcompany.com/3002137/how-texas-town-owns-us-naval-ship-recycling-industry
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Nomadd on 07/11/2016 05:05 pm
 According to the person I called to complain about all my frozen food melting, they're upgrading the power lines coming out here this week. According to someone who claims to know these things, the underground lines are good for 26KV but only carry 13KV, so they might just be upgrading junction boxes, insulators and transformers in preparation for a voltage jump.
 I hate it when I can't work on the place and have to go to the beach to watch dolphins and sea turtles, but I endeavor to persevere.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: ChrisC on 07/11/2016 06:10 pm
I just wanted to say I love this thread so much.  Can't wait to get out there someday and see it in person.  In the meantime, I'll live vicariously through you guys and Google Streetview and the EIS filings.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Space Opera on 07/11/2016 11:01 pm
The same here, perhaps the best thread on this forum along with L2. Please keep talking Nomadd & Co., we are probably a lot here to enjoy reading you. This topic illustrates the actual progression of SpaceX in the real world, and with these trucks one can easily imagining they are paving a way to Mars. Awesome, can't wait to see the before/after at Boca Chica.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: baldusi on 07/12/2016 01:20 am
Some day I'm gonna invoque the first invitation for a launch party in your home. And if the house is full I will draw the 6000mile trip and all that. :-p
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Nomadd on 07/12/2016 01:54 am
Some day I'm gonna invoque the first invitation for a launch party in your home. And if the house is full I will draw the 6000mile trip and all that. :-p
I'll probably be in your neighborhood in a couple of months. Somebody was bragging about Argentina having the best steaks on the planet, and being from Texas, I decided they needed to prove that.

 An unreliable source told me SpaceX won't be allowed to mess with those ponds west of the hill because of a large migratory bird presence and would need to go around the south side of the water if they wanted a ramp up the west side of the hill. That sort of jives with the end of the new fence line.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Johnnyhinbos on 07/12/2016 02:06 am

I'll probably be in your neighborhood in a couple of months. Somebody was bragging about Argentina having the best steaks on the planet, and being from Texas, I decided they needed to prove that.

(I think you probably heard that from a Texas longhorn, Nomadd...)
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Lar on 07/12/2016 02:19 am
Texas, where even the cows talk a big game (when they're not being blase about rocket engine tests...)

If the fence line ends where the ramp starts (kind of a j on its side going south and then hooking east is how I'm visualizing it) wouldn't there be more fencing on the other side of the to be ramp??
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Nomadd on 07/12/2016 02:26 am
Texas, where even the cows talk a big game (when they're not being blase about rocket engine tests...)

If the fence line ends where the ramp starts (kind of a j on its side going south and then hooking east is how I'm visualizing it) wouldn't there be more fencing on the other side of the to be ramp??
The new fence is only along the highway so far. Fencing elsewhere will be a little more complicated because of the muck in some places where they'll have to put it up.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: the_other_Doug on 07/12/2016 02:35 am
Some day I'm gonna invoque the first invitation for a launch party in your home. And if the house is full I will draw the 6000mile trip and all that. :-p
I'll probably be in your neighborhood in a couple of months. Somebody was bragging about Argentina having the best steaks on the planet, and being from Texas, I decided they needed to prove that.

I hate to tell you this, Nomadd, but -- I've eaten steaks in Texas, and I've eaten steaks in Argentina.

Argentina wins hands-down.  Better than any American steak I've ever had, and I've had some really, really good ones here.  But the steaks I had in Argentina just went beyond...

So, you need to get with your friend, go on down and get convinced, and then import some Argentinian beef for the Texas barbeque we'll be having at your place to inaugurate the first Boca Chica launch... ;)
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: baldusi on 07/12/2016 02:52 am
It's not the meat itself, it's the way it's cooked. I've done some of my best asado with Texan premium steak. If I'm ever able to witness one launch in your house I will cook a true asado. I will even forward instructions to make a true Argentine grill (parrilla). And you better contact me if you ever come around. I'll take you to a place where steak is, literally cut with spoons ;-)
But I digress, I'm failing miserably on how to connect this barbecue with the SpaceX launch without a Boca Chica SpaceX Physical Party. I guess the beauty of this thread is that it does has a bit of party in its heart.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Herb Schaltegger on 07/12/2016 01:21 pm
Indeed. Nomadd's slice-of-life updates and commentary, salted with tidbits from BocaChicaGal make this thread a treasure.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 07/12/2016 05:54 pm
HOW SPACEX CAN HELP BROWNSVILLE DEVELOP AN INNOVATION CORRIDOR
http://riograndeguardian.com/salinas-how-spacex-can-help-brownsville-develop-an-innovation-corridor/
Quote
In terms of branding, Salinas told the United Brownsville board of directors that Brownsville has a “huge” marketing advantage. “Pushing space and Brownsville. We want the Brownsville brand to be the space industry. To do that we must own it.”

That marketing effort will be helped by the fact that 15,000 visitors per month are projected to visit Brownsville each month to watch a SpaceX rocket being launched from Boca Chica beach. “What are we doing to capture those tourism dollars? Again, we have to build excitement early on,” Salinas said.

Salinas also revealed that Brownsville Airport is looking to develop a spaceport designation. Salinas said this makes sense since it is the closest airport to the SpaceX facility. Salinas said the Cameron County Spaceport Development Corporation could approach the state-run Spaceport Trust Fund for infrastructure funding.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: matthewkantar on 07/12/2016 06:13 pm
If things work out as Spacex envisions, traveling to watch rockets take off will be as common as traveling to watch airliners take off. Not sure if they should be banking on so many tourists.

Matthew
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: groundbound on 07/12/2016 06:23 pm
If things work out as Spacex envisions, traveling to watch rockets take off will be as common as traveling to watch airliners take off. Not sure if they should be banking on so many tourists.

Matthew

I don't know what share of the economy is taken up by executive lounges, concourse bars and gift shops, airport hotels, and airport car rental counters. It has to add up to a lot of money though.
 :)
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Jim on 07/12/2016 07:07 pm

That marketing effort will be helped by the fact that 15,000 visitors per month are projected to visit Brownsville each month to watch a SpaceX rocket being launched from Boca Chica beach. “What are we doing to capture those tourism dollars? Again, we have to build excitement early on,” Salinas said.


That is a little high.  They don't generate that many at the Cape.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: whitelancer64 on 07/12/2016 07:11 pm
If things work out as Spacex envisions, traveling to watch rockets take off will be as common as traveling to watch airliners take off. Not sure if they should be banking on so many tourists.

Matthew

You might be surprised. There are some very dedicated planespotters out there.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Comga on 07/12/2016 07:30 pm
Quote
Salinas also revealed that Brownsville Airport is looking to develop a spaceport designation. Salinas said this makes sense since it is the closest airport to the SpaceX facility. Salinas said the Cameron County Spaceport Development Corporation could approach the state-run Spaceport Trust Fund for infrastructure funding.

That does not seem to be the nature or purpose of the "spaceport designation".
Under that concept "spaceport" could apply to Orlando because it is the closest airport to Disney's Space Mountain. :P
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Jim on 07/12/2016 08:06 pm
If things work out as Spacex envisions, traveling to watch rockets take off will be as common as traveling to watch airliners take off. Not sure if they should be banking on so many tourists.

Matthew

You might be surprised. There are some very dedicated planespotters out there.

I have done both.  And regularly see about 10 launches per year (as a minimum).
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: matthewkantar on 07/12/2016 08:15 pm
Checked Wikipedia, says the Visitor's Complex at Kennedy got 1.5 million visitors in 2009, thats 125,000 a month. Of course that is for a lot more than viewing launches. It is a lot also many more visitors than I would have imagined. Attendance is probably increased quite a bit by being an hour away from Disney and Universal. The Texas location does not seem to have that sort of mega tourist draw near by.

If I remember right, the EIS was for a dozen launches per year, 15,000 a launch is hard to imagine after the first one.

Matthew
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Nomadd on 07/12/2016 08:23 pm
 Brownsville better do something just outside the soft checkpoint if they don't want everybody going to South Padre to watch.

It's not the meat itself, it's the way it's cooked. I've done some of my best asado with Texan premium steak. If I'm ever able to witness one launch in your house I will cook a true asado.
But I digress, I'm failing miserably on how to connect this barbecue with the SpaceX launch without a Boca Chica SpaceX Physical Party. I guess the beauty of this thread is that it does has a bit of party in its heart.
I'll let Elon and Tom know they're welcome to come over. I'm not much for getting my picture taken, but one with those two and Chris Bergin, using your steaks as a bribe, would be a keeper.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: groundbound on 07/12/2016 08:34 pm

 I'll let Elon and Tom know they're welcome to come over.

While I'm sure baldusi can prepare a tasty steak, it seems to me that you would do better inventing your own "Boca Chica Roast." Might I suggest a preparation where it is flash-broiled in a Lox/RP1 flame?
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: mvpel on 07/12/2016 08:43 pm
Checked Wikipedia, says the Visitor's Complex at Kennedy got 1.5 million visitors in 2009, thats 125,000 a month. Of course that is for a lot more than viewing launches. It is a lot also many more visitors than I would have imagined. Attendance is probably increased quite a bit by being an hour away from Disney and Universal. The Texas location does not seem to have that sort of mega tourist draw near by.

I waited in a traffic jam for about half an hour on our way to the visitor center for the CRS-8 / BEAM launch. Luckily we left extra time. The place was utterly mobbed - I think they said there were about 15,000 people just at the visitor center, and there were tens of thousands more lining the beaches and causeways. A clerk at Wal*Mart the next day said that people were staking out spots on the causeways first thing in the morning, and in the run up to the launch there was not a single open spot for miles on any of them. There were around 450 people in the VIP event at OSB-II alone - standing room only. It was really an incredible experience. You could feel the electricity in the air - the pride and excitement in a vision for the future reawakening after a long slumber.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Nomadd on 07/12/2016 08:43 pm

 I'll let Elon and Tom know they're welcome to come over.

While I'm sure baldusi can prepare a tasty steak, it seems to me that you would do better inventing your own "Boca Chica Roast." Might I suggest a preparation where it is flash-broiled in a Lox/RP1 flame?
Baldusi seems like a nice guy, but he'd probably have my kneecaps broken if I cooked a steak with kerosene. Maybe methane. Call it a Raptor Roast or something.

 I need to keep my camera ready. There was a Merlin sitting on the fence over the SpaceX sign at the hill today, but I was too slow. I'm trying to figure out how to get 8 of them to sit in a circle with one in the middle.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Jim on 07/12/2016 08:54 pm
- I think they said there were about 15,000 people just at the visitor center, and there were tens of thousands more lining the beaches and causeways.

It was nothing like for shuttle launches (SR-528 backup from toll booth to Airport and cars on the side of the road from SR-520 to I-95 split) .  CRS-8 wasn't that bad and wasn't that many people. 

And your last line was over the top.  You can't compare it to other launches.  It was just a launch.  You were just with an isolated group.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Nomadd on 07/12/2016 09:03 pm
- I think they said there were about 15,000 people just at the visitor center, and there were tens of thousands more lining the beaches and causeways.

It was nothing like for shuttle launches.  CRS-8 wasn't that bad.

And your last line was over the top.  You can't compare it to other launches.  It was just a launch.  You were just with an isolated group.
I like it here, but I think Orlando is probably a little more attractive area for most people to visit than Brownsville. The restricted area in the Gulf will be interesting to see defined. Tour/fishing boats should be able to make a killing. From the EIS, it looks like they'll be able to sit less than 5 miles away, just outside the ship channel.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 07/12/2016 09:36 pm

That marketing effort will be helped by the fact that 15,000 visitors per month are projected to visit Brownsville each month to watch a SpaceX rocket being launched from Boca Chica beach. “What are we doing to capture those tourism dollars? Again, we have to build excitement early on,” Salinas said.


That is a little high.  They don't generate that many at the Cape.

Seems high to me as well.

Maybe they're thinking South Padre Island (SPI) will be part of the draw.  SPI is a popular resort spot just 5 miles North of the launch site, and they're talking about building an observation tower:
http://valleycentral.com/news/local/south-padre-island-may-buy-chaos-club-build-spacex-observation-deck

(https://media-cdn.tripadvisor.com/media/photo-s/01/b0/9d/d9/south-padre-island-aerial.jpg)
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: mvpel on 07/12/2016 10:07 pm
And your last line was over the top.  You can't compare it to other launches.  It was just a launch.  You were just with an isolated group.

It was my first launch ever in my 45 years of life with 41 as an avid space fan, so hopefully my over-exuberance can be excused.  ;D
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: darkenfast on 07/13/2016 02:46 am

That marketing effort will be helped by the fact that 15,000 visitors per month are projected to visit Brownsville each month to watch a SpaceX rocket being launched from Boca Chica beach. “What are we doing to capture those tourism dollars? Again, we have to build excitement early on,” Salinas said.


That is a little high.  They don't generate that many at the Cape.

If they can get closer and it doesn't cost too much, it might be fairly popular.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 07/13/2016 04:30 am
Maybe they're thinking South Padre Island (SPI) will be part of the draw.  SPI is a popular resort spot just 5 miles North of the launch site, and they're talking about building an observation tower:
http://valleycentral.com/news/local/south-padre-island-may-buy-chaos-club-build-spacex-observation-deck

Looking closer at the site where South Padre Island is considering building a SpaceX observation deck, the line-of-sight to the launch pad is well behind all the tall resort hotels, most notably the 31-story Sapphire resort.  The tallest visual obstruction would be the more modest "La Ilsa" 4-story apartments away from the beach.  So I guess the the observation deck would need to be at least 5-6 stories high to see over that row of apartments.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 07/13/2016 05:04 am
Another picture showing the line-of-sight from the proposed South Padre Island SpaceX launch observation deck:
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: D_Dom on 07/13/2016 05:51 am
Baldusi seems like a nice guy, but he'd probably have my kneecaps broken if I cooked a steak with kerosene.

Seems like wood fired is the Argentine tradition, as with all good barbecue. Only time I have heard of actually using rocket fuel is a fire starting competition "fastest to cooking temperature".
Safety warning is mandatory

 "Trained professionals only! DO NOT TRY THIS AT HOME!"

Record is measured in milliseconds or so the legend goes, trick is controlling the process such that you actually have usable fire with no residual "accelerants".

When I cook for launch events I prefer to cook low and slow, three hours on the grill is just about right for 200# of tri-tip. Obviously I am not in a rush, I would never use LOX, RP1 etc to light the fire! Quality control is priority one, delayed perfection is better than ontime mediocrity.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: woods170 on 07/13/2016 10:43 am
And your last line was over the top.  You can't compare it to other launches.  It was just a launch.  You were just with an isolated group.

It was my first launch ever in my 45 years of life with 41 as an avid space fan, so hopefully my over-exuberance can be excused.  ;D
No need for any excuse. Launches never become boring.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: rpapo on 07/13/2016 01:15 pm
And your last line was over the top.  You can't compare it to other launches.  It was just a launch.  You were just with an isolated group.

It was my first launch ever in my 45 years of life with 41 as an avid space fan, so hopefully my over-exuberance can be excused.  ;D
No need for any excuse. Launches never become boring.
Especially once you've seen one blow up.  There are so many ways things can go wrong...
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: baldusi on 07/13/2016 04:34 pm


 I'll let Elon and Tom know they're welcome to come over.

While I'm sure baldusi can prepare a tasty steak, it seems to me that you would do better inventing your own "Boca Chica Roast." Might I suggest a preparation where it is flash-broiled in a Lox/RP1 flame?
Baldusi seems like a nice guy, but he'd probably have my kneecaps broken if I cooked a steak with kerosene. Maybe methane. Call it a Raptor Roast or something.

 I need to keep my camera ready. There was a Merlin sitting on the fence over the SpaceX sign at the hill today, but I was too slow. I'm trying to figure out how to get 8 of them to sit in a circle with one in the middle.

I'm generally against unnecessary violence. Barbecue fueled by gas or kerosene clearly fall outside of the latter definition.  :P
But it would be a rocket launch, so I can tell you a secret. Some secret recipes for asado include marinating the raw cuts in wine or beer the night before the barbecue. So, while kerosene is clearly not an option, ethylic alcohol is not only acceptable but encourageable. I wrote the first Raptor article so I have a very soft sport for anything on the ethylene group. Including malbec.

Regarding the Merlin, I would try leaving some bait, like bread crumbs in said structure.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: chalz on 07/13/2016 07:59 pm

That marketing effort will be helped by the fact that 15,000 visitors per month are projected to visit Brownsville each month to watch a SpaceX rocket being launched from Boca Chica beach. “What are we doing to capture those tourism dollars? Again, we have to build excitement early on,” Salinas said.


That is a little high.  They don't generate that many at the Cape.

If they can get closer and it doesn't cost too much, it might be fairly popular.
Wherever the MCT leaves from I keep imagine Burning Man scale parties outside the fence to celebrate the occasion. Two weeks every two years crowds would come to say bon voyage.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Jim on 07/13/2016 08:00 pm

Wherever the MCT leaves from I keep imagine Burning Man scale parties outside the fence to celebrate the occasion. Two weeks every two years crowds would come to say bon voyage.

What says MCT is flying from there?
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Nomadd on 07/13/2016 08:21 pm

Wherever the MCT leaves from I keep imagine Burning Man scale parties outside the fence to celebrate the occasion. Two weeks every two years crowds would come to say bon voyage.

What says MCT is flying from there?
I do. My "Last stop for 68 million miles" business depends on it.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Jim on 07/13/2016 08:24 pm

Wherever the MCT leaves from I keep imagine Burning Man scale parties outside the fence to celebrate the occasion. Two weeks every two years crowds would come to say bon voyage.

What says MCT is flying from there?
I do. My "Last stop for 68 million miles" business depends on it.

I bet safety requirements will prevent it.  Saturn V was at least 3.5 mile clear zone of nobody except rescue crews.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: CraigLieb on 07/13/2016 08:49 pm

Wherever the MCT leaves from I keep imagine Burning Man scale parties outside the fence to celebrate the occasion. Two weeks every two years crowds would come to say bon voyage.

What says MCT is flying from there?
I do. My "Last stop for 68 million miles" business depends on it.

I totally want a picture of your house with that sign posted!  That would be a frame-able item.  like the old Route 66 signs.  ;)
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: envy887 on 07/13/2016 09:09 pm
I bet safety requirements will prevent it.  Saturn V was at least 3.5 mile clear zone of nobody except rescue crews.
Whose safety requirements? For which hazards, exactly?

FFA launch license requirements (14 CFR 420 appendix E) don't appear to require more than 3000 feet of standoff for a 1,000 ton Net Explosive (equivalent) Weight. Saturn V was about 500 ton NEW.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: rocketguy101 on 07/13/2016 09:16 pm

Wherever the MCT leaves from I keep imagine Burning Man scale parties outside the fence to celebrate the occasion. Two weeks every two years crowds would come to say bon voyage.

What says MCT is flying from there?
I do. My "Last stop for 68 million miles" business depends on it.

I totally want a picture of your house with that sign posted!  That would be a frame-able item.  like the old Route 66 signs.  ;)
It can go with the neon party house sign http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=35425.msg1438641#msg1438641 (http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=35425.msg1438641#msg1438641)
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Ionmars on 07/13/2016 09:24 pm
Baldusi seems like a nice guy, but he'd probably have my kneecaps broken if I cooked a steak with kerosene.

Seems like wood fired is the Argentine tradition, as with all good barbecue. Only time I have heard of actually using rocket fuel is a fire starting competition "fastest to cooking temperature".
...
...
A trick learned by American soldiers in WWII North African campaign to make a cooking fire when no wood is available: Pour a modest amount of gasoline into a pot of sand. Carefully light it.

This actually worked for me in one of my boyhood experiments. Only the fumes at the surface will burn so there is no explosion. The process of combustion draws a little more to the surface continuously. As the surface flame threatens to go out,  use a stick to stir a little more fuel from the bottom of the pot. Should also work with RP-1.

And I managed to became older, just never grew up.  :)
   
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: woods170 on 07/14/2016 09:40 am
I bet safety requirements will prevent it.  Saturn V was at least 3.5 mile clear zone of nobody except rescue crews.
Whose safety requirements? For which hazards, exactly?

FFA launch license requirements (14 CFR 420 appendix E) don't appear to require more than 3000 feet of standoff for a 1,000 ton Net Explosive (equivalent) Weight. Saturn V was about 500 ton NEW.
The clear zone requirements are not merely driven by explosive standoff distance.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: JamesH65 on 07/14/2016 10:02 am
I bet safety requirements will prevent it.  Saturn V was at least 3.5 mile clear zone of nobody except rescue crews.
Whose safety requirements? For which hazards, exactly?

FFA launch license requirements (14 CFR 420 appendix E) don't appear to require more than 3000 feet of standoff for a 1,000 ton Net Explosive (equivalent) Weight. Saturn V was about 500 ton NEW.
The clear zone requirements are not merely driven by explosive standoff distance.

So what else requires a 3.5mile exclusion zone?
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: MP99 on 07/14/2016 06:56 pm

Wherever the MCT leaves from I keep imagine Burning Man scale parties outside the fence to celebrate the occasion. Two weeks every two years crowds would come to say bon voyage.

What says MCT is flying from there?
I do. My "Last stop for 68 million miles" business depends on it.

I bet safety requirements will prevent it.  Saturn V was at least 3.5 mile clear zone of nobody except rescue crews.
This is why I suspect that BFR will launch offshore from Brownsville.

Cheers, Martin
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Semmel on 07/14/2016 07:04 pm
I bet safety requirements will prevent it.  Saturn V was at least 3.5 mile clear zone of nobody except rescue crews.
This is why I suspect that BFR will launch offshore from Brownsville.

Cheers, Martin

I dont think that will be possible if Elon wants to launch by 2022. Even with a launch pd at the shore, its pretty tight.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: envy887 on 07/14/2016 07:22 pm
I bet safety requirements will prevent it.  Saturn V was at least 3.5 mile clear zone of nobody except rescue crews.
Whose safety requirements? For which hazards, exactly?

FFA launch license requirements (14 CFR 420 appendix E) don't appear to require more than 3000 feet of standoff for a 1,000 ton Net Explosive (equivalent) Weight. Saturn V was about 500 ton NEW.
The clear zone requirements are not merely driven by explosive standoff distance.

So what else requires a 3.5mile exclusion zone?

Anybody have solid information for this? The FAA seems to only require about 1 mile from a LV this size to a public area or highway.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: joek on 07/14/2016 07:47 pm
Anybody have solid information for this? The FAA seems to only require about 1 mile from a LV this size to a public area or highway.

You were looking at Appendix E, which is for propellant and explosive siting; instead see CFR §420.21 Launch site location review—launch site boundary (http://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-idx?SID=64a2da290142446c91519129a705ac03&mc=true&node=pt14.4.420&rgn=div5#se14.4.420_121).  F9, would be considered "large" with minimum distance from launch point to launch site boundary of 13000 feet.[1]  Presumably BFR minimum distance would be higher.

[1] See also Appendix D Impact Dispersion Areas and Casualty Expectancy Estimate for an Unguided Suborbital Launch Vehicle, which defines the minimum impact dispersion radius, which is the same (2.14nm = 130000ft).  Those are minimums; actual may be higher depending on analysis results.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: envy887 on 07/14/2016 08:20 pm
Anybody have solid information for this? The FAA seems to only require about 1 mile from a LV this size to a public area or highway.

You were looking at Appendix E, which is for propellant and explosive siting; instead see CFR §420.21 Launch site location review—launch site boundary (http://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-idx?SID=64a2da290142446c91519129a705ac03&mc=true&node=pt14.4.420&rgn=div5#se14.4.420_121).  F9, would be considered "large" with minimum distance from launch point to launch site boundary of 13000 feet.[1]  Presumably BFR minimum distance would be higher.

[1] See also Appendix D Impact Dispersion Areas and Casualty Expectancy Estimate for an Unguided Suborbital Launch Vehicle, which defines the minimum impact dispersion radius, which is the same (2.14nm = 130000ft).  Those are minimums; actual may be higher depending on analysis results.

Thank you for providing the link. Their definition of "large orbital vehicle" is 18500 lbs to 100 nm circular LEO, which makes both F9 and FH "large" vehicles. That doesn't of itself explain why BFR couldn't launch when F9 and FH clearly will be able to.

BFR/BFS will not be an unguided system, suborbital or otherwise; it will have a FTS and won't get nearer to populated areas than the pad is... so I can't imagine how that's applicable.

Good point about the expected casualty calculation. I also saw a requirement for a calculation of expected hazards from flying glass due to broken windows from sub-1 psi overpressures. Do you have any idea how to calculate either of those?
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: joek on 07/14/2016 09:22 pm
Thank you for providing the link. Their definition of "large orbital vehicle" is 18500 lbs to 100 nm circular LEO, which makes both F9 and FH "large" vehicles. That doesn't of itself explain why BFR couldn't launch when F9 and FH clearly will be able to.

BFR/BFS will not be an unguided system, suborbital or otherwise; it will have a FTS and won't get nearer to populated areas than the pad is... so I can't imagine how that's applicable.

BFR will have much more propellant (if any of the speculation is close to correct) with greater destructive potential than F9 or FH.  Minimums assume it goes boom on the pad, and why minimums for guided and unguided are the same, and why those minimums increase with increasing vehicle size; FTS or no FTS.

That is why it is applicable and why BFR may not be allowed to launch from places F9 and FH launches are allowed.

Quote
Good point about the expected casualty calculation. I also saw a requirement for a calculation of expected hazards from flying glass due to broken windows from sub-1 psi overpressures. Do you have any idea how to calculate either of those?

The 1 psi blast overpressure line calculation was discussed in this post (https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=39162.msg1552570#msg1552570) (see CFR §A417.23 Flight hazard areas).

Note that analysis of the debris impact area, distant focused overpressure (DFO), reasonably accurate expected casualty calculations (among other things) are difficult to impossible based on public information.

In any case, probably want to take such BFR discussion over to the Where will BFR launch from? (https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=39162.0) thread.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Nomadd on 07/14/2016 10:36 pm
 The windows on my place look like a butterfly sneezing would take them out.  And they'll be less than 9,000 feet away from FH launches.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: joek on 07/14/2016 11:10 pm
The windows on my place look like a butterfly sneezing would take them out.  And they'll be less than 9,000 feet away from FH launches.

Lucky you.  How much pressure does a butterfly sneeze produce?  On the positive side, those numbers for 1 psi over-pressure (of which you appear to be outside the radius) assumes the rocket goes boom on the pad; if it gets off the pad to any elevation and then goes boom, could be worse.  Which we all hope and expect will be a rare occurrence.  But think of the stories you will have to tell should that happen.  And likely you would never have to buy yourself another drink.  Which your liver may or may not thank you for.  But certainly the rest of us living vicariously through you will.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: envy887 on 07/15/2016 12:41 am
This seems somewhat relevant to this thread. You showed that the 1 psi radius for an on-pad Falcon Heavy RUD is approximately 3200 feet, no problem for the SpaceX LCC which is about 9000 feet from the pad.

If the 1 psi limit is at R_op = 45*NEW^(1/3), the LH2/LOX relation is NEW=prop_mass*.14, then we can calculate a lower bound on propellant mass to create a 1 psi overpressure at the LCC: prop_mass = (9000^3)/(45*.14).

This yields 116 billion lbs of LH2/LOX. I know BFR is going to be big, but that's like 4 orders of magnitude bigger than it can possibly be, so I think we can confidently state that the 1 psi overpressure won't be a determining factor.

In fact any factor that scales with radius^1/3 most likely will not be an issue with BFR at Boca Chica.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: joek on 07/15/2016 01:04 am
Except maybe debris impact, or DFO, or any number of other things.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Robotbeat on 07/15/2016 01:53 am
Except maybe debris impact, or DFO, or any number of other things.
Debris isn't likely to travel that far unless the FTS doesn't work.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: the_other_Doug on 07/15/2016 03:07 am
IIRC, the closest viewing stands to Pad 39A during the Apollo years, when they were launching Saturn V's from it, were sited about three and a half miles from the pad.  So, that was obviously considered a relatively safe distance.

The Firing Room was much closer than that, of course, but had the added advantage of huge blast shields that could louver down and cover over the large panoramic windows that offered a view of the pad to the launch controllers.

One of the Launch Directors once mused, I have read, that if the Saturn V had exploded on the pad or while close to the ground, he wasn't sure he would have closed the blast doors.  He said he was pretty sure he would have just stood there and watched...
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: IainMcClatchie on 07/15/2016 03:22 am
Why would it scale by a 1/3 power?  Most things (gravity and EM radiation for instance) drop as the inverse square of distance.  Things that drop as the third power are like magnetic fields where you have both positive and negative charges locally and they cancel better as you get farther away.

A blast wave drops off as inverse square.  I've attached the critical figure from an interesting report on this issue.  (How do you make inline images with this board software?)  Note the log/log plot scales.  Overpressure drops from nearly 300 to nearly 3 psi as range goes from 2 to 20 feet with a 1.6 kt airburst.

BTW: I'm not sure I believe those scales, but this report seems pretty well sourced:  http://www.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/341065.pdf (http://www.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/341065.pdf)
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Robotbeat on 07/15/2016 04:00 am
Shocks heat the air as they travel, so they do dissipate faster than inverse square over large distance. that's why at least over larger distances it's not merely inverse square.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: 1 on 07/15/2016 04:23 am
This seems somewhat relevant to this thread. You showed that the 1 psi radius for an on-pad Falcon Heavy RUD is approximately 3200 feet, no problem for the SpaceX LCC which is about 9000 feet from the pad.

If the 1 psi limit is at R_op = 45*NEW^(1/3), the LH2/LOX relation is NEW=prop_mass*.14, then we can calculate a lower bound on propellant mass to create a 1 psi overpressure at the LCC: prop_mass = (9000^3)/(45*.14).

This yields 116 billion lbs of LH2/LOX. I know BFR is going to be big, but that's like 4 orders of magnitude bigger than it can possibly be, so I think we can confidently state that the 1 psi overpressure won't be a determining factor.

In fact any factor that scales with radius^1/3 most likely will not be an issue with BFR at Boca Chica.

In the paper, only the NEW part of that equation is cube root-ed. That turns into (9000/45)3/.14 which gives a far more plausible value of 5.7 million lbs. Overpressure could very likely still be in play.

edit: typo
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: joek on 07/15/2016 04:43 am
Except maybe debris impact, or DFO, or any number of other things.
Debris isn't likely to travel that far unless the FTS doesn't work.
And you know that how?  Care to show your work?  Because the FAA seems to disagree with you.  Has nothing to do with FTS BTW.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: JamesH65 on 07/15/2016 08:32 am
My question above was what else apart from blast radius would require > 3.5Mile exclusion. I've read the posts above, and am still none the wiser. Can someone explain in words of up to 3 syllables please.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: envy887 on 07/15/2016 12:19 pm
This seems somewhat relevant to this thread. You showed that the 1 psi radius for an on-pad Falcon Heavy RUD is approximately 3200 feet, no problem for the SpaceX LCC which is about 9000 feet from the pad.

If the 1 psi limit is at R_op = 45*NEW^(1/3), the LH2/LOX relation is NEW=prop_mass*.14, then we can calculate a lower bound on propellant mass to create a 1 psi overpressure at the LCC: prop_mass = (9000^3)/(45*.14).

This yields 116 billion lbs of LH2/LOX. I know BFR is going to be big, but that's like 4 orders of magnitude bigger than it can possibly be, so I think we can confidently state that the 1 psi overpressure won't be a determining factor.

In fact any factor that scales with radius^1/3 most likely will not be an issue with BFR at Boca Chica.

In the paper, only the NEW part of that equation is cube root-ed. That turns into (9000/45)3/.14 which gives a far more plausible value of 5.7 million lbs. Overpressure could very likely still be in play.

edit: typo

 ;D yeah good point... but still not right. 9000/45 is 200, which cubed is 8,000,000, divided by .14 gives 57.14 million pounds of LH2/LOX required. Still an order of magnitude too big for BFR.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: jg on 07/15/2016 12:39 pm
This seems somewhat relevant to this thread. You showed that the 1 psi radius for an on-pad Falcon Heavy RUD is approximately 3200 feet, no problem for the SpaceX LCC which is about 9000 feet from the pad.

If the 1 psi limit is at R_op = 45*NEW^(1/3), the LH2/LOX relation is NEW=prop_mass*.14, then we can calculate a lower bound on propellant mass to create a 1 psi overpressure at the LCC: prop_mass = (9000^3)/(45*.14).

This yields 116 billion lbs of LH2/LOX. I know BFR is going to be big, but that's like 4 orders of magnitude bigger than it can possibly be, so I think we can confidently state that the 1 psi overpressure won't be a determining factor.

In fact any factor that scales with radius^1/3 most likely will not be an issue with BFR at Boca Chica.

In the paper, only the NEW part of that equation is cube root-ed. That turns into (9000/45)3/.14 which gives a far more plausible value of 5.7 million lbs. Overpressure could very likely still be in play.

edit: typo

 ;D yeah good point... but still not right. 9000/45 is 200, which cubed is 8,000,000, divided by .14 gives 57.14 million pounds of LH2/LOX required. Still an order of magnitude too big for BFR.
Guys, you are barking up the wrong tree.   Big rockets are LOUD...  see the table in the following article:

http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/the-loudest-sound-in-the-world-would-kill-you-on-the-spot/
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: JamesH65 on 07/15/2016 01:05 pm
This seems somewhat relevant to this thread. You showed that the 1 psi radius for an on-pad Falcon Heavy RUD is approximately 3200 feet, no problem for the SpaceX LCC which is about 9000 feet from the pad.

If the 1 psi limit is at R_op = 45*NEW^(1/3), the LH2/LOX relation is NEW=prop_mass*.14, then we can calculate a lower bound on propellant mass to create a 1 psi overpressure at the LCC: prop_mass = (9000^3)/(45*.14).

This yields 116 billion lbs of LH2/LOX. I know BFR is going to be big, but that's like 4 orders of magnitude bigger than it can possibly be, so I think we can confidently state that the 1 psi overpressure won't be a determining factor.

In fact any factor that scales with radius^1/3 most likely will not be an issue with BFR at Boca Chica.

In the paper, only the NEW part of that equation is cube root-ed. That turns into (9000/45)3/.14 which gives a far more plausible value of 5.7 million lbs. Overpressure could very likely still be in play.

edit: typo

 ;D yeah good point... but still not right. 9000/45 is 200, which cubed is 8,000,000, divided by .14 gives 57.14 million pounds of LH2/LOX required. Still an order of magnitude too big for BFR.
Guys, you are barking up the wrong tree.   Big rockets are LOUD...  see the table in the following article:

http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/the-loudest-sound-in-the-world-would-kill-you-on-the-spot/

OK, so the exclusion zone is also about sound levels. Anything else?

(Corollary, are the sounds levels from a rocket dependant on the fuel used, volume of fuel used, nozzle size etc?)
Title: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Herb Schaltegger on 07/15/2016 01:06 pm
My question above was what else apart from blast radius would require > 3.5Mile exclusion. I've read the posts above, and am still none the wiser. Can someone explain in words of up to 3 syllables please.
Possibly acoustics. Possibly worries about hypergolic fume plumes and winds in the event of a pad event ... just spitballing. Be curious to know myself.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Nomadd on 07/15/2016 02:31 pm
My question above was what else apart from blast radius would require > 3.5Mile exclusion. I've read the posts above, and am still none the wiser. Can someone explain in words of up to 3 syllables please.
Possibly acoustics. Possibly worries about hypergolic fume plumes and winds in the event of a pad event ... just spitballing. Be curious to know myself.
Don't forget safety managers/committees who love to double margins on general principles.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: envy887 on 07/15/2016 02:32 pm
Regarding acoustics, from the EIS:

Link to EIS: https://goo.gl/DwV1nG

Quote
The nearest house location, located 1.8 miles from the proposed vertical launch area, was modeled as a
specific point of interest to determine the sound levels from a single launch event of a Falcon 9 and
Falcon Heavy. The model predicted a maximum OASPL of 114 dBA for the Falcon 9 and 119 dBA for the
Falcon Heavy at the nearest house location. Although the nearest house may experience noise levels
above the 115 dBA hearing conservation guideline from a Falcon Heavy launch, the noise levels above
115 dBA would only last approximately 45 seconds, and proposed launches of the Falcon Heavy would
only occur a maximum of two times per year (Appendix D). The results of the noise study conclude that
noise levels may exceed the 115 dBA guideline within distances up to approximately 1.2 miles for the
Falcon 9 and 2.1 miles for the Falcon Heavy (Appendix D). For a launch of the Falcon 9, the short-term
impacts based on the hearing conservation guideline are not anticipated to be adverse as there are no
housing developments within 1.2 miles of the proposed vertical launch area. However, the short-term
impacts based on the hearing conservation guideline within 2.1 miles from the proposed launch of the
Falcon Heavy are anticipated to be adverse, as the 115 dBA guideline is exceeded at these distances,
albeit for less than 1 minute.
Hearing protection measures would be implemented to ensure the health and safety of Boca Chica
Village residents during launch activities. For example, the residents would be notified of each
scheduled launch event and potential noise hazards well in advance of the launch day
(see Section 2.1.1.5, Pre-Launch Activities). Residents would be encouraged to remain indoors during a launch event,
which can reduce noise exposure. SpaceX would also make hearing protection devices available to
residents to reduce noise levels below 115 dBA at distances up to approximately 2.1 miles for the Falcon
Heavy.
During a launch, workers would normally be at the control center area, which is approximately 2 miles
from the vertical launch area. Any workers potentially exposed to noise greater than OSHA standards at
the control center area would be required to wear adequate hearing protection to comply with all
applicable OSHA occupational noise exposure regulations. Therefore, adverse impacts to workers at the
control center area during launches are not anticipated."

The 115 dB limit is an occupational limit from OSHA, not a FAA requirement to get a launch license, and SpaceX's proposed solution is to notify residents, give them earplugs and tell them to stay indoors during launches.

The noise level at the nearest house rises an estimated 3 to 5 dB with the 3-fold larger Falcon Heavy compared to F9. BFR would be again 3 to 4 times larger, and should see another 3 to 5 dB increase to about 125 dB. That's about as loud as a the stands at a rock concert or a NASCAR race. I'd wear hearing protection, but it's not a serious public safety hazard and I don't see any regulatory issues.

Quote
Studies based on ground testing of rocket systems indicate an expectation of 1 damage claim in 1,000
households exposed to an average continuous noise level of 111 dB, and 1 in 100 households at 119 dB.
Accordingly, the unweighted noise levels of 111 dB and 119 dB are used as a general guideline for
assessing potential risk for structural damage claims (Appendix D).
The area exposed to levels of 119 dB or greater is included within 3.4 miles of the vertical launch area
for the Falcon 9 and within 6.4 miles of the vertical launch area for the Falcon Heavy. The area exposed
to unweighted noise levels of 111 dB or greater is included within 9.1 miles of the vertical launch area
for the Falcon 9 and within 17.3 miles of the vertical launch area for the Falcon Heavy. The unweighted
noise levels at the nearest house, which is 1.8 miles from the vertical launch area, suggest the
probability of a noise induced structural vibration damage claim would be greater than 1 in 100
(Appendix D).
Areas exposed to unweighted noise levels of 111 dB or greater would extend to South Padre Island and
into Mexico. Because FAA is required to analyze transboundary impacts, areas in Mexico are also
considered in the analysis. The FAA sent a letter, dated February 27, 2013, to the Mexico Secretary of
Communications and Transportation to request comments on the Proposed Action. The unweighted Lmax
levels indicate the probability of a noise induced structural vibration damage claim at South Padre Island
would be less than 1 in a 100 for a Falcon 9 launch and greater than 1 in a 100 for a Falcon Heavy launch.
Sound levels indicate the maximum A-weighted OASPL levels on the island would be less than 115 dBA
hearing conservation guidelines.

All the houses in Boca Chica village are within the 100:1 probability limit of a structural damage complaint for both F9 and FH; damage is probably roughly proportional to unweighted sound levels which close to double from F9 to FH and would certainly double form FH to BFR.

The structural affected radius doubles for F9 to FH and would likely double again for BFR to about 12 miles. There are a lot of structures in the 6-12 mile range on SPI, so the chances of a damage complaint are probably quite a bit higher than FH and definitely much higher than F9.

In short, the noise isn't likely to be a serious issue to human hearing in any public area with any vehicle, but it might damage buildings (likely broken glass) even on San Padre Island with a Falcon Heavy launch.

Edit: removed long link.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: envy887 on 07/15/2016 02:39 pm
My question above was what else apart from blast radius would require > 3.5Mile exclusion. I've read the posts above, and am still none the wiser. Can someone explain in words of up to 3 syllables please.
Possibly acoustics. Possibly worries about hypergolic fume plumes and winds in the event of a pad event ... just spitballing. Be curious to know myself.
Don't forget safety managers/committees who love to double margins on general principles.
The FAA launch licence requires a documented plan to evacuate potential downwind areas (outside the launch boundary) in the event of a toxic fume release, but they don't require that those areas be evacuated before or during the launch.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: the_other_Doug on 07/15/2016 03:20 pm
And it's not like they're launching a Titan II or Proton there -- the use of hypergolics will be limited to payloads.  So, again, while there is some hazard inherent there, it's far less than if you are launching a rocket with an entire stage (or more) that's fueled with hypergolics.

I would guess that launches to GTO are most likely to contain vehicles with hypergolics in their fuel tanks.  Dragon 2 will have hypergolics for its Superdracos, of course, but AFAIK they won't be launched from Boca Chica...
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Jim on 07/15/2016 04:16 pm
Also, certain weather conditions can focus the blast. 
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: llanitedave on 07/15/2016 06:08 pm
Also, certain weather conditions can focus the blast.

Conditions which I think are much more common at Vandenberg than at Boca Chica.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: envy887 on 07/15/2016 06:56 pm
Also, certain weather conditions can focus the blast.

And others can attenuate it significantly. Interesting read on environmental impacts of SSME testing, which cites Saturn S-II test data: http://goo.gl/RR34It
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: IainMcClatchie on 07/15/2016 11:38 pm
What kind of weather focusses blast waves?  I presume fog or rain would attenuate pressure waves, as the two phases in the mix will move differently and thus convert some wave energy into small scale turbulence.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: envy887 on 07/16/2016 12:55 am
Pressure waves reflect off boundaries between layers, such as the bottom of low lying clouds. The NASA report I linked above includes a discussion of meteorological factors that affect sound propagation from rocket engine testing.

By limiting tests to days with favorable atmospheric conditions,  NASA was able to test full 1 million lbf Saturn S-II stages without any complaints from residential areas only 5500 feet away.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Kabloona on 07/16/2016 02:29 am
What kind of weather focusses blast waves?  I presume fog or rain would attenuate pressure waves, as the two phases in the mix will move differently and thus convert some wave energy into small scale turbulence.

Marine layer inversion at Vandenberg reflects blast waves back down towards ground level.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: ChrisC on 07/16/2016 02:43 am
What kind of weather focusses blast waves?

The term you want to, uh, focus on is "Distant Focusing Overpressure".

NSF Q+A thread: http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=33769

KSC Range Safety report, with pretty pictures:  http://kscsma.ksc.nasa.gov/Range_Safety/Annual_Report/2006/Printpages/SII-Distant-Focusing-Overpressure-images.pdf

And search NSF for "DFO"  (http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?action=search)and you'll see lots of references.  I vaguely recall DFO constraints coming up as an issue during the countdown on the Ares I-X (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ares_I-X) Constellation test at KSC in 2009, but it might have been a SpaceX flight.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: IainMcClatchie on 07/16/2016 04:52 am
Three great answers.

Thank you, ChrisC (great, simple paper), Kabloona, and envy887.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 07/16/2016 05:32 am
My question above was what else apart from blast radius would require > 3.5Mile exclusion. I've read the posts above, and am still none the wiser. Can someone explain in words of up to 3 syllables please.

To launch BFR from Boca Chica Beach, SpaceX will probably need to buy all the homes in Boca Chica Village.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: JamesH65 on 07/16/2016 12:41 pm
My question above was what else apart from blast radius would require > 3.5Mile exclusion. I've read the posts above, and am still none the wiser. Can someone explain in words of up to 3 syllables please.

To launch BFR from Boca Chica Beach, SpaceX will probably need to buy all the homes in Boca Chica Village.

Why? Blast radius? Probably not. Acoustic radius? Probably not.  (both according to how I read the posts above)

What's left?
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: DAZ on 07/16/2016 03:39 pm
As you asked, although I don't think this is a limiting factor there is thermal effects.  The amount of fuel being discussed here combined with the amount of oxygen available will produce one absolutely humongous fireball.  The heat wave from this fireball could possibly be more hazardous, at some distance, then the pressure wave created by the blast.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: docmordrid on 07/16/2016 04:20 pm
Nuclear blast simulations of a 5kt airburst (upthread), which is an order of magnitude larger than a Saturn V going boom, showed no significant thermal effects at Boca Chica Village or anywhere near it. A BFR going boomski will be no nuke.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 07/16/2016 05:30 pm
My question above was what else apart from blast radius would require > 3.5Mile exclusion. I've read the posts above, and am still none the wiser. Can someone explain in words of up to 3 syllables please.

To launch BFR from Boca Chica Beach, SpaceX will probably need to buy all the homes in Boca Chica Village.

Why? Blast radius? Probably not. Acoustic radius? Probably not.  (both according to how I read the posts above)

What's left?

Acoustics are already over the limit for FH, but only by 2dB, and only twice a year, so the EIS made an exception, allowing SpaceX to hand out earplugs to locals for FH launches.

For BFR, acoustics would be way over the limit, so I doubt they will make another exception.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 07/16/2016 07:12 pm
Dragon 2 will have hypergolics for its Superdracos, of course, but AFAIK they won't be launched from Boca Chica...

I while back there was a lot of speculation about Dragon using NOFBX (a mono-propellant) instead of hypergolics.  NOFBX is a lot less toxic.  Has anyone heard about this recently?

Also, if a market develops for commercial human spaceflight, I see no reason whey they wouldn't want to launch that from Boca Chica.  Obviously they would need to get additional approvals, but once F9/FH is flying regularly from Boica Chica, additional approvals will get easier.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 07/16/2016 07:17 pm
The Cameron County online real estate database (http://www.cameroncad.org/cadclientdb/propertymap.aspx) shows SpaceX picked up 3 additional lots, one in the parking area, and 2 near the control center area.

The database still shows no change for 7 Esperson, 16 Weems, or the 7 lots near the parking area.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: rpapo on 07/16/2016 07:44 pm
Dragon 2 will have hypergolics for its Superdracos, of course, but AFAIK they won't be launched from Boca Chica...

I while back there was a lot of speculation about Dragon using NOFBX (a mono-propellant) instead of hypergolics.  NOFBX is a lot less toxic.  Has anyone heard about this recently?

Also, if a market develops for commercial human spaceflight, I see no reason whey they wouldn't want to launch that from Boca Chica.  Obviously they would need to get additional approvals, but once F9/FH is flying regularly from Boica Chica, additional approvals will get easier.
Don't your typical commercial communications satellites have hypergolics?  Not speaking of the all-electric birds, of course, but rather your average comsat.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Comga on 07/17/2016 03:12 am
Dragon 2 will have hypergolics for its Superdracos, of course, but AFAIK they won't be launched from Boca Chica...

I while back there was a lot of speculation about Dragon using NOFBX (a mono-propellant) instead of hypergolics.  NOFBX is a lot less toxic.  Has anyone heard about this recently?

Also, if a market develops for commercial human spaceflight, I see no reason whey they wouldn't want to launch that from Boca Chica.  Obviously they would need to get additional approvals, but once F9/FH is flying regularly from Boica Chica, additional approvals will get easier.

NOFBX appears to have disappeared after an "energetic event".  There has been no new on it for years.

The Green Propellant Infusion Mission will have only small (4N?) thrusters. It won't prove engines big enough to replace Dracos, never mind Super Dracos.

Dream Chaser is supposed to use propane and nitrous oxide, but that's still in the future.

There does not appear to be a proven green alternative to the hydrazine for either monoprop or biprop engines.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: HMXHMX on 07/17/2016 03:35 am
Dragon 2 will have hypergolics for its Superdracos, of course, but AFAIK they won't be launched from Boca Chica...

I while back there was a lot of speculation about Dragon using NOFBX (a mono-propellant) instead of hypergolics.  NOFBX is a lot less toxic.  Has anyone heard about this recently?

Also, if a market develops for commercial human spaceflight, I see no reason whey they wouldn't want to launch that from Boca Chica.  Obviously they would need to get additional approvals, but once F9/FH is flying regularly from Boica Chica, additional approvals will get easier.

NOFBX appears to have disappeared after an "energetic event".  There has been no new on it for years.

The Green Propellant Infusion Mission will have only small (4N?) thrusters. It won't prove engines big enough to replace Dracos, never mind Super Dracos.

Dream Chaser is supposed to use propane and nitrous oxide, but that's still in the future.

There does not appear to be a proven green alternative to the hydrazine for either monoprop or biprop engines.

To coin a phrase, "It's dead, Jim!"
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: DAZ on 07/17/2016 09:09 pm
Nuclear blast simulations of a 5kt airburst (upthread), which is an order of magnitude larger than a Saturn V going boom, showed no significant thermal effects at Boca Chica Village or anywhere near it. A BFR going boomski will be no nuke.

I was replying to the following post.

Why? Blast radius? Probably not. Acoustic radius? Probably not.  (both according to how I read the posts above)
What's left?

I replied with.

As you asked, although I don't think this is a limiting factor there is thermal effects.  The amount of fuel being discussed here combined with the amount of oxygen available will produce one absolutely humongous fireball.  The heat wave from this fireball could possibly be more hazardous, at some distance, then the pressure wave created by the blast.

All I was trying to do was point out that although blast and acoustic had been discussed thermal effects have not really been discussed in this thread.

As an example using a nuclear blast (staying with the same 5 kt) the 5 psi overpressure distance would be approximately 2500 feet (for a surface burst but 3900 feet and for an airburst) but the distance for third-degree burns from the same blast would be approximately 3400 feet (for a surface burst but 4000 feet for an airburst).  For the 5 psi overpressure versus the third-degree burn distances the third-degree burn distances are greater than the overpressure hazards.  All calculations from NUKEMAP by Alex Wellerstein http://nuclearsecrecy.com/nukemap/

Again I’m not saying that this is the limiting factor only that it was a factor that hasn’t been discussed in great detail in this thread.  Additionally a nuclear detonation might not be the best model to use even if only considering worst case.  A nuclear detonation could possibly be the worst case for peak overpressure but not for duration.  Objects will respond differently for the same peak overpressure but different duration. 

We tend to think of a nuclear detonation as the worst possible but this might not be the case.  Because of the differences in the ways that energies are produced between nuclear and chemical reactions the resulting effects could be strikingly different.  For example, obviously all the energy produced by a nuclear detonation in the form of ionizing radiation would not be produced at all in a chemical reaction.  But this ionizing radiation is still part of the calculation of the total energy produced by the nuclear blast.  Some of this ionizing radiation, x-rays for example, will be converted into thermal and blast energy.  This would result in higher peak outputs over shorter durations.  The chemical reaction that would be produced by the BFR on the other hand will probably be predominantly in thermal radiation in timescales measured in tens (not 1/10s) of seconds.  This could have a vastly different affect not only of the possible burns to people but the possibility of starting fires in distant objects.  All of this I am bringing up as a point of discussion not because I believe this is a limiting factor.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: the_other_Doug on 07/17/2016 09:17 pm
I will certainly agree that I don't believe thermal effects from and exploding FH or BFR would be the limiting factor in safe distance from the launch site.

How much energy was released suddenly when Orbital's Antares booster suffered possibly the worst case scenario -- pad fallback?  The total energy had to be somewhere in the same neighborhood as what you would see if the same thing happened to a Falcon 9.

ISTR that there were spectators in boats and such across the little bay from the Wallops launch site, not more than two miles from the pad, when that thing created a huge, energetic fireball.  I don't recall any reports of hearing damage or burns from anyone who was that close to the conflagration...
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: joek on 07/17/2016 10:36 pm
FAA regulations indicate primary concerns are (not necessarily in order of importance): acoustic, overpressure and debris.  There are defined minimums for some, subject to modeling and analysis based on nominal or off-nominal behavior which may increase minimums or require specific clearances; e.g., nominal sonic boom and overpressure footprint vs. off-nominal explosive overpressure and debris footprint.

edit p.s. Need to be clear about which: nominal vs. off-nominal.  Nominal limits typically have absolute minimums as codified in CFRs (or discussions between provider and FAA/range), which may be extended by launch-specific modeling and analysis (LV and payload).  Off-nominal will likely involve additional probabilistic analysis.  All involve more knowledge of the LV and payload than is available to the public.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Zed_Noir on 07/18/2016 03:32 am
I will certainly agree that I don't believe thermal effects from and exploding FH or BFR would be the limiting factor in safe distance from the launch site.

How much energy was released suddenly when Orbital's Antares booster suffered possibly the worst case scenario -- pad fallback?  The total energy had to be somewhere in the same neighborhood as what you would see if the same thing happened to a Falcon 9.
...
Think the energy discharge from a similar F9 scenario will be less due to the solid motor upper stage in the Antares.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: joek on 07/19/2016 02:24 am
Think the energy discharge from a similar F9 scenario will be less due to the solid motor upper stage in the Antares.

Or maybe not depending on debris footprint.  Do you have any analysis to support your assertion?  I think you are probably correct as solids generally have a higher insurance requirement, but have never seen a credible analysis as to why.
Title: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Lars-J on 07/19/2016 03:34 am
Think the energy discharge from a similar F9 scenario will be less due to the solid motor upper stage in the Antares.

Or maybe not depending on debris footprint.  Do you have any analysis to support your assertion?  I think you are probably correct as solids generally have a higher insurance requirement, but have never seen a credible analysis as to why.

This should be credible enough:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z_aHEit-SqA

Exploding solids can fragment like a fragmentation grenade, throwing propellant that is still burning quite the distance. And this example was only a Delta II, roughly in Antares class.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: IntoTheVoid on 07/19/2016 05:20 am
Think the energy discharge from a similar F9 scenario will be less due to the solid motor upper stage in the Antares.

Or maybe not depending on debris footprint.  Do you have any analysis to support your assertion?  I think you are probably correct as solids generally have a higher insurance requirement, but have never seen a credible analysis as to why.

I'm no rocket scientist, but I presume this is because even when a solid breaks up, the fuel and oxidizer are always optimally mixed, just in smaller chunks. Liquids, starting in separate tanks, are unlikely to mix perfectly and most fuel will wind up burning atmospheric oxygen at sub-optimal ratios.
(Just my non-rocket engineer assumption)
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: guckyfan on 07/19/2016 05:36 am

I'm no rocket scientist, but I presume this is because even when a solid breaks up, the fuel and oxidizer are always optimally mixed, just in smaller chunks. Liquids, starting in separate tanks, are unlikely to mix perfectly and most fuel will wind up burning atmospheric oxygen at sub-optimal ratios.
(Just my non-rocket engineer assumption)

This, plus chunks of it will fly quite a distance as flaming debris. I think Antares mishap videos showed this. I did not recheck though.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave H on 07/19/2016 02:44 pm
Solid rocket propellant will burn at a slow rate when not under pressure.  It will burn kind of like a road flare.  So the pieces would continue to burn for a long time.

When the propellant is contained in a motor casing it is under much higher pressure, and burns at a much higher rate.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: envy887 on 07/19/2016 04:21 pm
Think the energy discharge from a similar F9 scenario will be less due to the solid motor upper stage in the Antares.

Or maybe not depending on debris footprint.  Do you have any analysis to support your assertion?  I think you are probably correct as solids generally have a higher insurance requirement, but have never seen a credible analysis as to why.

SpaceX calculated the worst-case debris radius for a F9-booster RUD at barge landing to be about 1200 ft based on remaining fuel equivalent to 500 lb of TNT (this is all in their seal-killing permit application).

F9 on pad will have about 520 tonnes of kerolox, equivalent to 120,000 lb of TNT, and since radius scales with the cube [edit: cube root] of explosive mass (every calculation that I can find for safe IED stand-off distances scales with the cube [edit: cube root] of explosive mass) would have a max debris radius of 7500 ft. FH would have 300,000 lb TNT equivalent and a max debris radius of 10,000 ft.

Based on this, if you're standing in a backyard in Boca Chica Village during a FH launch there's an off chance you'll get hit by a flying COPV or maybe a piece of a Merlin.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Lars-J on 07/19/2016 04:40 pm
Think the energy discharge from a similar F9 scenario will be less due to the solid motor upper stage in the Antares.

Or maybe not depending on debris footprint.  Do you have any analysis to support your assertion?  I think you are probably correct as solids generally have a higher insurance requirement, but have never seen a credible analysis as to why.

SpaceX calculated the worst-case debris radius for a F9-booster RUD at barge landing to be about 1200 ft based on remaining fuel equivalent to 500 lb of TNT (this is all in their seal-killing permit application).

F9 on pad will have about 520 tonnes of kerolox, equivalent to 120,000 lb of TNT, and since radius scales with the cube of explosive mass (every calculation that I can find for safe IED stand-off distances scales with the cube of explosive mass) would have a max debris radius of 7500 ft. FH would have 300,000 lb TNT equivalent and a max debris radius of 10,000 ft.

Based on this, if you're standing in a backyard in Boca Chica Village during a FH launch there's an off chance you'll get hit by a flying COPV or maybe a piece of a Merlin.

That just makes no sense, from a physics point of view.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: JamesH65 on 07/19/2016 04:55 pm
Think the energy discharge from a similar F9 scenario will be less due to the solid motor upper stage in the Antares.

Or maybe not depending on debris footprint.  Do you have any analysis to support your assertion?  I think you are probably correct as solids generally have a higher insurance requirement, but have never seen a credible analysis as to why.

SpaceX calculated the worst-case debris radius for a F9-booster RUD at barge landing to be about 1200 ft based on remaining fuel equivalent to 500 lb of TNT (this is all in their seal-killing permit application).

F9 on pad will have about 520 tonnes of kerolox, equivalent to 120,000 lb of TNT, and since radius scales with the cube of explosive mass (every calculation that I can find for safe IED stand-off distances scales with the cube of explosive mass) would have a max debris radius of 7500 ft. FH would have 300,000 lb TNT equivalent and a max debris radius of 10,000 ft.

Based on this, if you're standing in a backyard in Boca Chica Village during a FH launch there's an off chance you'll get hit by a flying COPV or maybe a piece of a Merlin.

That just makes no sense, from a physics point of view.

Quite. Radius changes with the cube of explosive mass? That's the bit I find counterintuitive.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: envy887 on 07/19/2016 06:53 pm
safe IED stand-off distances scales with the cube of explosive mass
That just makes no sense, from a physics point of view.
Quite. Radius changes with the cube of explosive mass? That's the bit I find counterintuitive.

And yet, both the US Dept. of Homeland Security and the Canadian Dept. of Transportation publish figures with radii proportional to explosive mass^1/3 in regard to safe IED standoff distances.

Also: https://www.tc.gc.ca/eng/canutec/guide-training_ppt-229.htm
Quote
Boiling Liquid Expanding Vapour Explosin: A BLEVE happens if a container holding a pressurized liquefied gas fails catastrophically. Catastrophic failure of the vessel is followed by the explosive release of boiling liquid and expanding vapour. The following table gives a summary of tank properties, critical times, critical distances and cooling water flow rates for various tank sizes that may be involved in a BLEVE.

Do the math on any pair of distance/mass combinations in the tables, and see that they have standoffs proportional to explosive mass^1/3:
 
Edit: clarity on cube proportions. Standoff scales with the cube root of explosive mass, e.g. 8x the mass needs 2x the standoff, and 64x the mass needs 4x the standoff.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 07/19/2016 07:12 pm
Exploding solids can fragment like a fragmentation grenade, throwing propellant that is still burning quite the distance. And this example was only a Delta II, roughly in Antares class.

Good thing SpaceX doesn't use solids.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Lars-J on 07/19/2016 07:15 pm
safe IED stand-off distances scales with the cube of explosive mass
That just makes no sense, from a physics point of view.
Quite. Radius changes with the cube of explosive mass? That's the bit I find counterintuitive.

And yet, both the US Dept. of Homeland Security and the Canadian Dept. of Transportation publish figures with radii proportional to explosive mass^1/3 in regard to safe IED standoff distances.

Also: https://www.tc.gc.ca/eng/canutec/guide-training_ppt-229.htm
Quote
Boiling Liquid Expanding Vapour Explosin: A BLEVE happens if a container holding a pressurized liquefied gas fails catastrophically. Catastrophic failure of the vessel is followed by the explosive release of boiling liquid and expanding vapour. The following table gives a summary of tank properties, critical times, critical distances and cooling water flow rates for various tank sizes that may be involved in a BLEVE.

Do the math on any pair of distance/mass combinations in the tables, and see that they have standoffs proportional to explosive mass^1/3:
 
Edit: clarity on cube proportions. Standoff scales with the cube root of explosive mass, e.g. 8x the mass needs 2x the standoff, and 64x the mass needs 4x the standoff.

Which is completely different than what you claimed. The difference between scaling with the cube (mass^3) vs cube ROOT (mass^1/3) is night and day. NOT the same thing, not even close!

You claimed that FH - Having 2.5 times as much propellant as F9 - would have a 6.25 multiplier of the safe distance.
BUT... With the using the cube *ROOT*, you only get a ~1.35 multiplier of the safe distance.
See the difference?
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Space Ghost 1962 on 07/19/2016 07:47 pm
Liquid props deflagrate, they don't explode. Because they are in tanks. To make the propellants explode, you have to disperse them like a fuel air bomb first. So its a case of geometry/topology, not that just they react chemically.

Did you know that its possible for props to actually snuff out combustion? It's unlikely, but is possible to happen (assume partitioning of fuel/oxidizer, and that the chemical reaction of the oxidizer is with air components as a low yield, and that the fuel doesn't ignite because it never reaches flash point). E.g. the opposite of dispersion mentioned above.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: envy887 on 07/19/2016 08:01 pm
Which is completely different than what you claimed. The difference between scaling with the cube (mass^3) vs cube ROOT (mass^1/3) is night and day. NOT the same thing, not even close!

You claimed that FH - Having 2.5 times as much propellant as F9 - would have a 6.25 multiplier of the safe distance.
BUT... With the using the cube *ROOT*, you only get a ~1.35 multiplier of the safe distance.
See the difference?
My math is right, my description was wrong. I meant to say cube of radius scales with mass, which is mass^1/3 as you say.

I claimed FH standoff = 10k ft and F9 standoff =7.5k ft, which is a 1.33 multiplier, quite the same as your 1.35. Seems we are in complete agreement.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Lars-J on 07/19/2016 09:22 pm
Which is completely different than what you claimed. The difference between scaling with the cube (mass^3) vs cube ROOT (mass^1/3) is night and day. NOT the same thing, not even close!

You claimed that FH - Having 2.5 times as much propellant as F9 - would have a 6.25 multiplier of the safe distance.
BUT... With the using the cube *ROOT*, you only get a ~1.35 multiplier of the safe distance.
See the difference?
My math is right, my description was wrong. I meant to say cube of radius scales with mass, which is mass^1/3 as you say.

I claimed FH standoff = 10k ft and F9 standoff =7.5k ft, which is a 1.33 multiplier, quite the same as your 1.35. Seems we are in complete agreement.

Ok... I guess I read you quote a SpaceX figure of 1200 ft (so not sure what your 7500 ft comes from), and then compared that to your 10000 ft for FH.

I'm still having trouble with how you seem to interpret two separated Kero and LOX tanks as some sort of ideal explosive to come up with your 7500 ft figure, since SpaceX seems to think it is closer to 1200 ft.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: envy887 on 07/19/2016 10:29 pm
SpaceX calculated the worst-case debris radius for a F9-booster RUD at barge landing to be about 1200 ft based on remaining fuel equivalent to 500 lb of TNT ... F9 on pad will have about 520 tonnes of kerolox, equivalent to 120,000 lb of TNT...

That's the difference between a RUN on the launchpad and a RUD on the droneship.

The conversion of kerolox to TNT is estimated by the FAA as 10% of kerolox mass is equal to TNT mass (see 14 CFR 420 appendix E). The Falcon 9 holds about 1,200,000 lb of kerolox at launch, thus equivalent to 120,000 lbs of TNT.

SpaceX stated:
Quote
The explosive equivalence with maximum fuel and oxidizer is 503 pounds of trinitrotoluene (TNT) which is capable of a maximum projectile range of 384 m (1,250 ft)

https://www.federalregister.gov/articles/2016/03/31/2016-07191/takes-of-marine-mammals-incidental-to-specified-activities-taking-marine-mammals-incidental-to

Since we know the maximum projectile radius and TNT equivalence for a booster RUD, and the TNT equivalence of a fully fueled F9 RUD, we can estimate the maximum projectile radius for the F9: d = (120000/503)^(1/3)*1250 = 7750 ft. The calculation for the FH is similarly: d = (300000/503)^(1/3)*1250 = 10,500 ft

The latter is larger than the distance from the pad to the SpaceX hard checkpoint near the Boca Chica LCC, which is some 9,000 feet; they will probably have to do an estimation of expected casualties before getting a license to launch Heavy.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Nomadd on 07/20/2016 12:04 am

Since we know the maximum projectile radius and TNT equivalence for a booster RUD, and the TNT equivalence of a fully fueled F9 RUD, we can estimate the maximum projectile radius for the F9: d = (120000/503)^(1/3)*1250 = 7750 ft. The calculation for the FH is similarly: d = (300000/503)^(1/3)*1250 = 10,500 ft

The latter is larger than the distance from the pad to the SpaceX hard checkpoint near the Boca Chica LCC, which is some 9,000 feet; they will probably have to do an estimation of expected casualties before getting a license to launch Heavy.
Dude, you're harshing my buzz.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: joek on 07/20/2016 12:10 am
... they will probably have to do an estimation of expected casualties before getting a license to launch Heavy.

They have to do an Ec for every launch in order to be issued a launch license (or if a launch operator license, for a class of similar vehicle-payload-azimuth).  Question is whether they will require a waiver should Ec exceed limits.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: joek on 07/20/2016 12:33 am
Dude, you're harshing my buzz.

Take comfort from the fact that you are incorporated into an Ec analysis, and may be reason for SpaceX requiring a waiver.  If so, hang it on the wall as a badge and be consoled by the fact that you played your part.  And be sure to point it out to any visitors as proof of your courage, fortitude, and virility.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: the_other_Doug on 07/20/2016 12:39 am
Dude, you're harshing my buzz.

Take comfort from the fact that you are incorporated into an Ec analysis, and may be reason for SpaceX requiring a waiver.  If so, hang it on the wall as a badge and be consoled by the fact that you played your part.  And be sure to point it out to any visitors as proof of your courage, fortitude, and virility.

And should you meet your demise via a violently spinning, rapidly moving chunk of Falcon or Raptor debris, we will all remember how you courageously stood by your now-destroyed homestead to the last... ;)
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: biosehnsucht on 07/20/2016 01:56 am
Since the FH's fuel is not distributed in a perfect circle / column, but as 3, could that make for a less obvious minimum safe distance? A "worst case scenario" in which everything goes at once might have an ellipsoid rather than circle shape, or 3 overlapped smaller circles, or perhaps there'll be some interesting "shaped charge" effect that causes it to be much stronger than even the simplified calculation in one direction and very minimal in another?
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: envy887 on 07/20/2016 02:35 am
Dude, you're harshing my buzz.

Take comfort from the fact that you are incorporated into an Ec analysis, and may be reason for SpaceX requiring a waiver.  If so, hang it on the wall as a badge and be consoled by the fact that you played your part.  And be sure to point it out to any visitors as proof of your courage, fortitude, and virility.

Also, if it's any comfort, you're much more likely to get hit by lightning than by significant rocket debris.  ;D
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Nomadd on 07/20/2016 04:37 am
Dude, you're harshing my buzz.

Take comfort from the fact that you are incorporated into an Ec analysis, and may be reason for SpaceX requiring a waiver.  If so, hang it on the wall as a badge and be consoled by the fact that you played your part.  And be sure to point it out to any visitors as proof of your courage, fortitude, and virility.

Also, if it's any comfort, you're much more likely to get hit by lightning than by significant rocket debris.  ;D
Actually, I've been hit by lightning.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Lar on 07/20/2016 11:59 am
Dude, you're harshing my buzz.

Take comfort from the fact that you are incorporated into an Ec analysis, and may be reason for SpaceX requiring a waiver.  If so, hang it on the wall as a badge and be consoled by the fact that you played your part.  And be sure to point it out to any visitors as proof of your courage, fortitude, and virility.

Also, if it's any comfort, you're much more likely to get hit by lightning than by significant rocket debris.  ;D
Actually, I've been hit by lightning.

That certainly explains a lot...
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Nomadd on 07/20/2016 04:11 pm
Dude, you're harshing my buzz.

Take comfort from the fact that you are incorporated into an Ec analysis, and may be reason for SpaceX requiring a waiver.  If so, hang it on the wall as a badge and be consoled by the fact that you played your part.  And be sure to point it out to any visitors as proof of your courage, fortitude, and virility.

Also, if it's any comfort, you're much more likely to get hit by lightning than by significant rocket debris.  ;D
Actually, I've been hit by lightning.

That certainly explains a lot...

 I'm highly offended. It's a good thing I won't remember it in two days.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: kch on 07/20/2016 04:19 pm
Dude, you're harshing my buzz.

Take comfort from the fact that you are incorporated into an Ec analysis, and may be reason for SpaceX requiring a waiver.  If so, hang it on the wall as a badge and be consoled by the fact that you played your part.  And be sure to point it out to any visitors as proof of your courage, fortitude, and virility.

Also, if it's any comfort, you're much more likely to get hit by lightning than by significant rocket debris.  ;D
Actually, I've been hit by lightning.

That certainly explains a lot...

 I'm highly offended. It's a good thing I won't remember it in two days.

Remember what?  ;)
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: matthewkantar on 07/20/2016 07:13 pm
Actually, I've been hit by lightning.

That would make you pre-disastered according to Garp.

Matthew
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 07/21/2016 10:58 am
Interesting perspective on SpaceX coming to Boca Chica / Brownsville.
http://www.texasmonthly.com/articles/countdown-to-liftoff/
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Kabloona on 07/21/2016 04:24 pm
Interesting perspective on SpaceX coming to Boca Chica / Brownsville.
http://www.texasmonthly.com/articles/countdown-to-liftoff/

Great essay, thanks for finding it. Instead of saying "here comes the neighborhood," maybe they should be saying "here comes outer space!" Big changes ahead, no doubt. Hope it's a win-win for everyone.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Comga on 07/21/2016 08:30 pm
Interesting perspective on SpaceX coming to Boca Chica / Brownsville.
http://www.texasmonthly.com/articles/countdown-to-liftoff/

Great essay, thanks for finding it. Instead of saying "here comes the neighborhood," maybe they should be saying "here comes outer space!" Big changes ahead, no doubt. Hope it's a win-win for everyone.

I agree. A good piece of writing.
"And not that I ever visited it, but what about the sanctuary of the Battle of Palmito Ranch, the scene of the final battle of the Civil War? The Civil War, people! This is history! Are we going to just  give that away?
Short answer: absolutely."
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Kansan52 on 07/21/2016 09:34 pm

I agree. A good piece of writing.
"And not that I ever visited it, but what about the sanctuary of the Battle of Palmito Ranch, the scene of the final battle of the Civil War? The Civil War, people! This is history! Are we going to just  give that away?
Short answer: absolutely."

One of the things you could say the author got wrong. Early on it was made clear the ranch was protected. He may be correct in a future we don't envision, but the current answer is 'No'.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Nomadd on 07/22/2016 12:42 am
I never understood the hoopla about Palmito Hill. None of the battlefields are on Boca Chica island and SpaceX will have nothing to do with the site. Or why closing the beach a few hours a month will change everything.
 The author writes a good article, but I think he confuses his own changes with the times changing. The beach and the way people use it is about the same as 50 years ago and probably won't change much.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 07/22/2016 01:27 am
I never understood the hoopla about Palmito Hill. None of the battlefields are on Boca Chica island and SpaceX will have nothing to do with the site. Or why closing the beach a few hours a month will change everything.
 The author writes a good article, but I think he confuses his own changes with the times changing. The beach and the way people use it is about the same as 50 years ago and probably won't change much.

Right.

The closest reference to the Battle of Palmito Ranch is a historical marker 5.8 miles down the road from the launch site, as shown below.

Also, the bill passed by the Texas State Legislature says SpaceX may not close Boca Chica Beach on weekends or holidays.  I suspect the author's childhood visits were on weekends and holidays, so no change there.

But I still liked the article.

Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Nomadd on 07/22/2016 02:36 am
Dude, you're harshing my buzz.

Take comfort from the fact that you are incorporated into an Ec analysis, and may be reason for SpaceX requiring a waiver.  If so, hang it on the wall as a badge and be consoled by the fact that you played your part.  And be sure to point it out to any visitors as proof of your courage, fortitude, and virility.

Also, if it's any comfort, you're much more likely to get hit by lightning than by significant rocket debris.  ;D
Actually, I've been hit by lightning.
I should probably clarify that. I had my arm jammed into some microwave gear in New Mexico when the tower got hit. It turns out internal burns suck and take forever to heal.
 Waa freakin waa.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: JBF on 07/22/2016 11:59 am
Dude, you're harshing my buzz.

Take comfort from the fact that you are incorporated into an Ec analysis, and may be reason for SpaceX requiring a waiver.  If so, hang it on the wall as a badge and be consoled by the fact that you played your part.  And be sure to point it out to any visitors as proof of your courage, fortitude, and virility.

Also, if it's any comfort, you're much more likely to get hit by lightning than by significant rocket debris.  ;D
Actually, I've been hit by lightning.
I should probably clarify that. I had my arm jammed into some microwave gear in New Mexico when the tower got hit. It turns out internal burns suck and take forever to heal.
 Waa freakin waa.

and itch like crazy.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: rpapo on 07/22/2016 02:24 pm
Actually, I've been hit by lightning.
I should probably clarify that. I had my arm jammed into some microwave gear in New Mexico when the tower got hit. It turns out internal burns suck and take forever to heal.
 Waa freakin waa.

and itch like crazy.
Internal radiation burns are like that too.  Like sunburn you can't put lotion on.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: ChrisC on 07/23/2016 03:03 am
Interesting perspective on SpaceX coming to Boca Chica / Brownsville.
http://www.texasmonthly.com/articles/countdown-to-liftoff/

Another endorsement.  Great article.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Nomadd on 07/23/2016 04:08 pm
 They're putting a pad down near the southeast corner of the control center area fence on what looks like a state owned lot. It might be a staging area for the highway work, which now stretches 4 miles from the Camp Belknap marker to the village. Storing asphalt directly on the dirt is probably unacceptable.
 It looks like they're only doing the base work on the eastbound shoulder, which makes sense if they don't have to haul every returned stage west by then. I think they're going to add a layer to the whole width of the road when they're done with the shoulder.

Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Arb on 07/23/2016 05:35 pm
That marker appears to be around here (http://wikimapia.org/#lang=en&lat=25.964064&lon=-97.232126&z=16&m=b&search=Camp%20Belknap).

To the south and west is what appears to be a canal or drainage ditch. Anyone know its purpose?
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Nomadd on 07/23/2016 05:53 pm
That marker appears to be around here (http://wikimapia.org/#lang=en&lat=25.964064&lon=-97.232126&z=16&m=b&search=Camp%20Belknap).

To the south and west is what appears to be a canal or drainage ditch. Anyone know its purpose?
That's an old canal that's been abandoned for many decades. It still has water in spots but is non existent in most areas. I haven't met anybody who knows much about it yet. It might have been an offshoot of the Gulf Intracoastal Waterway, linking it to Brownsville or the Rio Grande before they carved the ship channel to the port.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 07/25/2016 07:08 pm
8 Cities in Texas With An Eye On Space
http://www.dallasobserver.com/news/8-cities-in-texas-with-an-eye-on-space-8512802
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: dglow on 07/27/2016 02:49 pm
A few pages back several shared their love of this thread, with special props to Nomadd and BocaChicaGal. I'd like to join in that praise.

And how about a shout-out to Dave G as well? NSF couldn't ask for a more regular and committed contributor. Thank you for the constant stream of news articles, up-to-date maps (with animated deltas!), and more.

Dave G, you moderate this thread exceptionally well... yet without being a moderator. And that is a compliment.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Lar on 07/27/2016 03:01 pm
A few pages back several shared their love of this thread, with special props to Nomadd and BocaChicaGal. I'd like to join in that praise.

And how about a shout-out to Dave G as well? NSF couldn't ask for a more regular and committed contributor. Thank you for the constant stream of news articles, up-to-date maps (with animated deltas!), and more.

Dave G, you moderate this thread exceptionally well... yet without being a moderator. And that is a compliment.

Hopefully he feels more than moderately complimented by that!

So what is the current 50,000 foot view or progress? Is work progressing on the big hill area? Is it almost done? has water started flowing out of any of the drains? Have they started moving (or bringing in) earth anywhere else?  We've heard about some road improvements, and some fiber being laid. How is that coming along? What's the temper of the residents, is it  (on average) getting more content or more upset?

Just a few questions :)
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Comga on 07/27/2016 03:30 pm

I agree. A good piece of writing.
"And not that I ever visited it, but what about the sanctuary of the Battle of Palmito Ranch, the scene of the final battle of the Civil War? The Civil War, people! This is history! Are we going to just  give that away?
Short answer: absolutely."

One of the things you could say the author got wrong. Early on it was made clear the ranch was protected. He may be correct in a future we don't envision, but the current answer is 'No'.

Or you could say that the writer was being....  writerly.  It's not literal.  No one is abandoning anything except the moment, as we do every day.  The monument will be preserved, as will the environment.  He's making light of people who don't want anything disturbed, even if they don't really care about it, even if the current condition is shabby, and particularly when the future is brighter.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Nomadd on 07/27/2016 03:42 pm
A few pages back several shared their love of this thread, with special props to Nomadd and BocaChicaGal. I'd like to join in that praise.

And how about a shout-out to Dave G as well? NSF couldn't ask for a more regular and committed contributor. Thank you for the constant stream of news articles, up-to-date maps (with animated deltas!), and more.

Dave G, you moderate this thread exceptionally well... yet without being a moderator. And that is a compliment.

Hopefully he feels more than moderately complimented by that!

So what is the current 50,000 foot view or progress? Is work progressing on the big hill area? Is it almost done? has water started flowing out of any of the drains? Have they started moving (or bringing in) earth anywhere else?  We've heard about some road improvements, and some fiber being laid. How is that coming along? What's the temper of the residents, is it  (on average) getting more content or more upset?

Just a few questions :)
I've always considered this Dave G's thread and greatly appreciate the effort he puts into it.

 Nothing much is happening since they built the hill. I'm not sure where the drains discharge, and there's no evident flow. They might terminate beneath the soil. Nobody seems to know how much, if any dirt they'll knock off the top of the hill after it's done settling. Probably not too much if they want it to be safe from 500 year storm surges plus waves during the next Cat 5.
 They're not going to do much while the highway work is going on. It's a one lane road where they're reconstructing the shoulder. The under construction stretch is controlled by traffic lights at both ends and I'm in the middle. So, when I turn on to the highway, I'm heading the wrong way down a one way road about 50% of the time.
 Terry and Bonnie are fine. I'm still a crotchety old coot, but I was pretty much born that way and it's been downhill ever since. The village is mostly abandoned in the summer except for weekenders and three houses with full time residents.
 Bocachicagal will have to handle updates if she's around this fall. I'm planning on roaming Argentina and Chile for a couple of months and taking Baldusi's Buenos Aires steak tour.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 07/27/2016 04:12 pm
Thanks!
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 07/27/2016 04:37 pm
I'm not sure where the drains discharge, and there's no evident flow. They might terminate beneath the soil.

Someone back thread said that the water forced up through the wick drains mostly just evaporates within the surcharge layer soil. 
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Nomadd on 07/27/2016 06:26 pm
 Well, I knew that if I said nothing would happen while they were working on the road, something would happen. It's sort of a superpower of mine.
 They're starting work on the Stargate facility lot.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: TomNTex on 07/29/2016 01:17 am
SpaceX to Bring 2 Satellites to RGV
http://www.krgv.com/story/32567441/spacex-to-bring-2-satellites-to-rgv (http://www.krgv.com/story/32567441/spacex-to-bring-2-satellites-to-rgv)
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Nomadd on 07/29/2016 03:03 am
SpaceX to Bring 2 Satellites to RGV
http://www.krgv.com/story/32567441/spacex-to-bring-2-satellites-to-rgv (http://www.krgv.com/story/32567441/spacex-to-bring-2-satellites-to-rgv)
OK. 30 years in the business and I never knew that "satellite" was another term for tracking antenna.
 I'm a little surprised they're going through with using those old things. We scrapped a bunch of similar ones and replaced a room full of hydraulics with two tiny electric motors (three if you count the rarely used crosspol motor) on new balanced dishes. Maybe they need these beasts if they're going to be close to the pad.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Zed_Noir on 07/29/2016 06:10 am
....
I'm a little surprised they're going through with using those old things. We scrapped a bunch of similar ones and replaced a room full of hydraulics with two tiny electric motors (three if you count the rarely used crosspol motor) on new balanced dishes. Maybe they need these beasts if they're going to be close to the pad.
Those dish are NASA cast off from CCAFS according to the linked news article. SpacX probably pay scrap metal prices for them. So real cheap.

Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: wannamoonbase on 07/29/2016 05:12 pm
I'm not sure where the drains discharge, and there's no evident flow. They might terminate beneath the soil.

Someone back thread said that the water forced up through the wick drains mostly just evaporates within the surcharge layer soil. 

That's what I've seen in the past on projects.  It's not like you ever see pools of water.  A hot Texas summer wouldn't hurt either.

It's frustrating just waiting for things to settle before starting.  But once they start they should be pretty darn efficient with this one after the previous 3 sites. 
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: TomNTex on 07/30/2016 12:12 am
SpaceX to Bring 2 Satellites to RGV
http://www.krgv.com/story/32567441/spacex-to-bring-2-satellites-to-rgv (http://www.krgv.com/story/32567441/spacex-to-bring-2-satellites-to-rgv)
OK. 30 years in the business and I never knew that "satellite" was another term for tracking antenna.
 

Same link, but the story headline was updated to "SpaceX to Bring 2 Ground Stations Antennas to RGV"
Quote
... Pieces of the antennas are expected to be in the Valley as early as September ...
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: deruch on 08/01/2016 05:44 pm
SpaceX to Bring 2 Satellites to RGV
http://www.krgv.com/story/32567441/spacex-to-bring-2-satellites-to-rgv (http://www.krgv.com/story/32567441/spacex-to-bring-2-satellites-to-rgv)
OK. 30 years in the business and I never knew that "satellite" was another term for tracking antenna.
 I'm a little surprised they're going through with using those old things. We scrapped a bunch of similar ones and replaced a room full of hydraulics with two tiny electric motors (three if you count the rarely used crosspol motor) on new balanced dishes. Maybe they need these beasts if they're going to be close to the pad.

You've got to remember that a big part of this is going to be a "training opportunity" for students.  So, of course, you want to get the wonkiest, glitchiest stuff available so that you can make sure that they are really putting in their dues and having to get through all the crap that the old timers had to deal with.  "Back in my day......", etc.  No skating on the wonderful advances of modern technology for them.  :)

On an unconnected note, I think SpaceX should petition the FAA to change its interpretation of the rules so that SpaceNuts who specifically and intentionally move to launch areas in the hopes of having front row seats to rocket launches are no longer counted as "persons uninvolved in the launch activity" for the purposes of determining the Ec.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Nomadd on 08/01/2016 09:30 pm
On an unconnected note, I think SpaceX should petition the FAA to change its interpretation of the rules so that SpaceNuts who specifically and intentionally move to launch areas in the hopes of having front row seats to rocket launches are no longer counted as "persons uninvolved in the launch activity" for the purposes of determining the Ec.
Are they launching rockets here?
 I came for the poisonous snakes, fire ants and unending heat.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Kansan52 on 08/01/2016 11:31 pm
And had your dreams fulfilled!!  ;D
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 08/02/2016 11:19 am
Astronomers shoot for the stars during UTRGV’s STARGATE Academy
http://www.foxrio2.com/astronomers-shoot-for-the-stars-during-utrgvs-stargate-academy/
Quote
Brownsville (KFXV)– Area high school students are getting an early boost to their college careers through the UT-RGV Stargate Academy program...

STARGATE – Spacecraft Tracking and Astronomical Research into Giga-hertz Astrophysical Transient Emission – is a collaboration between SpaceX and CARA (the Center for Advanced Radio Astronomy) at UTRGV.

STARGATE Academy Program Director Andy Miller said the students who participate are achievement oriented, focused, and seek summer enrichment, and he tries to make sure the theories and formulas of physics are simplified so the topic is less daunting for youngsters.

“Once you learn the language, it’s doable,” he said.

This is the first year the students taking the camp can receive Dual Enrollment credit through the UT System, by taking the three-hour Astronomy 1401 course and an accompanying one-hour lab credit.

Miller said exposing students to the types of research that might be done by a physicist or an astronomer can help them decide if physics is for them.

“If they do like it, then we can help guide them,” Miller said. “When we talk about physics, a lot of people don’t understand what physics is, and they don’t have a sense for what physicists do.”

Physics and engineering are, in many ways, closely related, he said...
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Nomadd on 08/02/2016 02:51 pm
 
Astronomers shoot for the stars during UTRGV’s STARGATE Academy


 It's a little ironic. I was out staring at the Milky Way last night, but once the facilities are in place, that will probably go away out here.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Kansan52 on 08/02/2016 03:16 pm
Yes, light pollution. I have a problem with my eyes adapting from bright to low light. Makes a mess of driving at night and so many lights at farms and businesses and even the highway ramps.

Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: docmordrid on 08/02/2016 03:58 pm
Lucky me: extreme night vision
Unlucky me: more senitive to snow blindness, in Michigan

😕
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: bilboleo1 on 08/02/2016 09:38 pm
On an unconnected note, I think SpaceX should petition the FAA to change its interpretation of the rules so that SpaceNuts who specifically and intentionally move to launch areas in the hopes of having front row seats to rocket launches are no longer counted as "persons uninvolved in the launch activity" for the purposes of determining the Ec.
Are they launching rockets here?
 I came for the poisonous snakes, fire ants and unending heat.

Ah Nomadd, I enjoy your appreciation of the beauty of the natural world in which you have chosen to reside (seven plagues of Boca Chica really got me earlier), BUT there are no poisonous snakes in Texas. Or anywhere else. Venomous ones, though, those will get ya. sorry I'm a biologist and occasionally that sneaks out.

Cheers to you and BocaChicaGirl and Dave G for keeping us up to date on your little slice of paradise. ;)
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: enzo on 08/03/2016 01:50 am
Astronomers shoot for the stars during UTRGV’s STARGATE Academy
It's a little ironic. I was out staring at the Milky Way last night, but once the facilities are in place, that will probably go away out here.
You have some leverage, petition them to take measures limiting light pollution (Earth-directional fixtures, avoiding unnecessary lighting, turn them off when areas are not in use). I'm sure the sentiment will be well-received.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: JamesH65 on 08/03/2016 10:08 am
Astronomers shoot for the stars during UTRGV’s STARGATE Academy
It's a little ironic. I was out staring at the Milky Way last night, but once the facilities are in place, that will probably go away out here.
You have some leverage, petition them to take measures limiting light pollution (Earth-directional fixtures, avoiding unnecessary lighting, turn them off when areas are not in use). I'm sure the sentiment will be well-received.

They will presumably be using modern lighting systems; LED's, proper shrouds, which all mean less light pollution. Not none, but much better than your average streetlight.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: CraigLieb on 08/03/2016 02:04 pm
Astronomers shoot for the stars during UTRGV’s STARGATE Academy
It's a little ironic. I was out staring at the Milky Way last night, but once the facilities are in place, that will probably go away out here.
You have some leverage, petition them to take measures limiting light pollution (Earth-directional fixtures, avoiding unnecessary lighting, turn them off when areas are not in use). I'm sure the sentiment will be well-received.

They will presumably be using modern lighting systems; LED's, proper shrouds, which all mean less light pollution. Not none, but much better than your average streetlight.

LEDs with electronic controls can be dimmed in  small increments, so they could use motion sensors, IR cameras and schedules to turn off lighting yet retain safety lighting.
Keep the area very dim, or off unless motion detected. Have lights on only until 10 PM, etc.
Seen it used in a factory setting in buildings that are not scheduled to be used at night. Saves a bunch of money and still provides safety if off-shift production, machine repair, or guards walk through the area. After 15 minutes of no motion, the lights can go back to low levels, or off.  Companies can Leverage technology to preserve dark sky's  and remain good neighbors.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: the_other_Doug on 08/03/2016 03:13 pm
Astronomers shoot for the stars during UTRGV’s STARGATE Academy
It's a little ironic. I was out staring at the Milky Way last night, but once the facilities are in place, that will probably go away out here.
You have some leverage, petition them to take measures limiting light pollution (Earth-directional fixtures, avoiding unnecessary lighting, turn them off when areas are not in use). I'm sure the sentiment will be well-received.

They will presumably be using modern lighting systems; LED's, proper shrouds, which all mean less light pollution. Not none, but much better than your average streetlight.

LEDs with electronic controls can be dimmed in  small increments, so they could use motion sensors, IR cameras and schedules to turn off lighting yet retain safety lighting.
Keep the area very dim, or off unless motion detected. Have lights on only until 10 PM, etc.
Seen it used in a factory setting in buildings that are not scheduled to be used at night. Saves a bunch of money and still provides safety if off-shift production, machine repair, or guards walk through the area. After 15 minutes of no motion, the lights can go back to low levels, or off.  Companies can Leverage technology to preserve dark sky's  and remain good neighbors.

Yes, but -- unless forced via regulation, when has any U.S. company ever spent a lot more than the minimum necessary on anything just to relieve what they consider a minor concern by a fringe group?

As long as a, say, $5 million investment in lighting one's physical plant becomes an $8 million investment to make said lighting system more dark-sky-friendly, again unless forced, most corporations will decide it's not worth the extra investment just to satisfy a small and not-very-vocal group that doesn't even consume their end product...
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: rsdavis9 on 08/03/2016 03:25 pm
Ah but elon is a space nut...

EDIT: and a environment nut too!
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Nomadd on 08/03/2016 04:01 pm
 If UT gets seriously into radio astronomy out here, being able to walk down to the site and look up at the galaxy the dishes are exploring would be a helluva an experience when you add it to the rocket launches. I could probably even talk Terry into accepting some more sky friendly streetlights on Weems.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Damon Hill on 08/03/2016 05:42 pm
If UT gets seriously into radio astronomy out here, being able to walk down to the sight and look up at the galaxy the dishes are exploring would be a helluva an experience when you add it to the rocket launches. I could probably even talk Terry into accepting some more sky friendly streetlights on Weems.

I once drove through the VLA in New Mexico, at night.  It was overcast (and about to snow) and so bloody dark I couldn't see ANYTHING much beyond arm's length.  It was really disappointing, but yeah, the skies are >really< dark out there.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Jim on 08/03/2016 05:57 pm
If UT gets seriously into radio astronomy out here, being able to walk down to the sight and look up at the galaxy the dishes are exploring would be a helluva an experience when you add it to the rocket launches. I could probably even talk Terry into accepting some more sky friendly streetlights on Weems.

Launch site and radio astronomy don't mix
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Nomadd on 08/03/2016 06:02 pm
If UT gets seriously into radio astronomy out here, being able to walk down to the sight and look up at the galaxy the dishes are exploring would be a helluva an experience when you add it to the rocket launches. I could probably even talk Terry into accepting some more sky friendly streetlights on Weems.

I once drove through the VLA in New Mexico, at night.  It was overcast (and about to snow) and so bloody dark I couldn't see ANYTHING much beyond arm's length.  It was really disappointing, but yeah, the skies are >really< dark out there.
Then again, seeing that site under the full moon is something to remember.

If UT gets seriously into radio astronomy out here, being able to walk down to the sight and look up at the galaxy the dishes are exploring would be a helluva an experience when you add it to the rocket launches. I could probably even talk Terry into accepting some more sky friendly streetlights on Weems.

Launch site and radio astronomy don't mix
Comms rf can be OK since the right gear on both sides can be far superior in receive filtering and transmitting off band emissions than FCC requirements, but simple things from any industrial complex from arc welding to sparking brushes or cheap radar detectors could cause much grief. I used to walk around with an LNB on a feedhorn with a battery powered Avcom to find stuff that was jamming sat dishes.
 I've always wondered about rf emissions from rocket engine exhaust. Been thinking about a 0-12ghz spectrum analyzer to see what I could pick up, but the sensitive ones aren't cheap. I'd have to pick some bands and get some decent front end amps and antennas.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 08/03/2016 06:54 pm
Launch site and radio astronomy don't mix

That's exactly what STARGATE is:
Spacecraft Tracking and Astronomical Research into Gigahertz Astrophysical Transient Emission
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/STARGATE
http://www.utb.edu/stargate/Pages/STARGATE.aspx


Comms rf can be OK since the right gear on both sides can be far superior in receive filtering and transmitting off band emissions than FCC requirements...
Or they could just forgo any radio astronomy 12 days a year.


If UT gets seriously into radio astronomy out here, being able to walk down to the sight and look up at the galaxy the dishes are exploring ...

From their patch, it appears they won't use just dishes.  Looks like there's also a cluster of smaller receivers, probably tuned to a much higher frequency range.

(http://www.utb.edu/stargate/PublishingImages/STARGATE-logo-sm.jpg)
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Jim on 08/03/2016 06:59 pm
Launch site and radio astronomy don't mix

That's exactly what STARGATE is:
Spacecraft Tracking and Astronomical Research into Gigahertz Astrophysical Transient Emission
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/STARGATE
http://www.utb.edu/stargate/Pages/STARGATE.aspx


No, nothing there mentions anything about radio astronomy.  It is all about spacecraft tracking research
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 08/03/2016 07:08 pm
Launch site and radio astronomy don't mix

That's exactly what STARGATE is:
Spacecraft Tracking and Astronomical Research into Gigahertz Astrophysical Transient Emission
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/STARGATE
http://www.utb.edu/stargate/Pages/STARGATE.aspx


No, nothing there mentions anything about radio astronomy.  It is all about spacecraft tracking research

How would you define the phrase "Astronomical Research" ?
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Jim on 08/03/2016 07:13 pm

How would you define the phrase "Astronomical Research" ?


"Space" research and a way to make an acronym.  Read the posts you linked.  Not one mentions astronomy.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Semmel on 08/03/2016 07:39 pm
They do radio astronomy, read their web page. But they dont have the antennas on site as far as I could see. So both of you are right.

http://www.utb.edu/stargate/Pages/CARA.aspx

Also, Boca Chica is a damn bad place for radio astronomy: ground level and lots of humidity. Both very bad for astronomy. There is a reason ALMA for instance is in the desert at 5000m altitude and faaaar away from any terrestrial radio signals.

Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Jim on 08/03/2016 07:55 pm
They do radio astronomy, read their web page. But they dont have the antennas on site as far as I could see. So both of you are right.

http://www.utb.edu/stargate/Pages/CARA.aspx

Also, Boca Chica is a damn bad place for radio astronomy: ground level and lots of humidity. Both very bad for astronomy. There is a reason ALMA for instance is in the desert at 5000m altitude and faaaar away from any terrestrial radio signals.



No, STARGATE does not nor does it do it at the STARGATE site.   CARA, a separate organization, that helped form STARGATE does it but from different locations. 
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 08/03/2016 08:30 pm
Sea Turtle biology graduate assistantship/internship
http://wfscjobs.tamu.edu/jobs/sea-turtle-biology-university-of-texas-rio-grande-valley/
Quote
We are inviting applications for a Sea Turtle biology graduate assistantship/internship sponsored by Sea Turtle Inc. (see: http://www.seaturtleinc.org), SpaceX, and the University of Texas Rio Grande Valley (UTRGV). Sea Turtle Inc. is a non-profit organization responsible for rehabilitation of injured sea turtles, public education to tourists and school children, and nest conservation for southernmost 50 miles of Texas Gulf coastline...
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Kansan52 on 08/03/2016 08:37 pm
To build on what has been posted, all radio astronomy they accomplished is examining data from existing radio telescopes. No plans for any radio telescope arrays at Boca Chica.

Also, my understanding of radio telescopes, like the one recent one China, need radio free zones. Complete elimination of any RF source.

A side note, they chose Stargate from the movie and TV series and forced the acronym to fit.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: mvpel on 08/03/2016 09:06 pm
A side note, they chose Stargate from the movie and TV series and forced the acronym to fit.

Gotta love backronyms, eh? Our "PATRIOT" missile system is from "Phased Array Tracking Radar to Intercept On Target."  ???  I'll have to ask around among the graybeards to see if anyone knows who came up with it, but nobody actually writes it as an acronym anymore.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Nomadd on 08/04/2016 05:29 am
The UT program has a past and a future.

Also, my understanding of radio telescopes, like the one recent one China, need radio free zones. Complete elimination of any RF source.

That's not possible. There are a buttload of satellites spewing out rf on all bands no matter where you are. The Startgate program seems to be more about training than cutting edge research. You can do training without perfect conditions. In fact, it's probably better that way, since any radio astronomy training program will involve determining signal sources and identifying interference. If antenna and receiver design are part of the program, a place like Boca Chica wouldn't be bad at all. The constant low level barrage jamming from town and the spaceport would just be part of the program. There's a lot of low level interference here, but little medium level jamming. Any crap from the SpaceX site can be identified and planned for. Arc welding is the biggest problem. Just about any other rf source, like switches, sparking motor brushes and certain types of lighting can be dealt with. Things like WiFi are a convenience and not really needed in most situations. Hell, I'll wire every room in town with Ethernet myself if necessary.
 
 I thought I had the Comms tech job at the VLA back in 01. It turned out they didn't want anyone without perfect hearing for some reason.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: starhawk92 on 08/04/2016 12:26 pm
Dude, you're harshing my buzz.

Take comfort from the fact that you are incorporated into an Ec analysis, and may be reason for SpaceX requiring a waiver.  If so, hang it on the wall as a badge and be consoled by the fact that you played your part.  And be sure to point it out to any visitors as proof of your courage, fortitude, and virility.

Also, if it's any comfort, you're much more likely to get hit by lightning than by significant rocket debris.  ;D
Actually, I've been hit by lightning.

So therefore you are more than safe -- odds of being hit by lightning multiplied by hit by rocket-at-launch debris has to end up somewhere far north of winning the lottery.  Take heart, the universe and mathematics are on your side!!
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: JamesH65 on 08/04/2016 12:35 pm
Dude, you're harshing my buzz.

Take comfort from the fact that you are incorporated into an Ec analysis, and may be reason for SpaceX requiring a waiver.  If so, hang it on the wall as a badge and be consoled by the fact that you played your part.  And be sure to point it out to any visitors as proof of your courage, fortitude, and virility.

Also, if it's any comfort, you're much more likely to get hit by lightning than by significant rocket debris.  ;D
Actually, I've been hit by lightning.

So therefore you are more than safe -- odds of being hit by lightning multiplied by hit by rocket-at-launch debris has to end up somewhere far north of winning the lottery.  Take heart, the universe and mathematics are on your side!!

I don't think statistics works like that....

His chances of being struck by lightning are still the same, as are his chances of being struck by rocket debris.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 08/04/2016 12:39 pm
Hell, I'll wire every room in town with Ethernet myself if necessary.

And it would be cheap.  I just got 1000 feet of Cat 5e cable from B&H for $59.95.

Going back to the Stargate patch, in addition to the traditional RF dish, they also show a phased array (see below).  From what I understand, this uses sophisticated algorithms to help filter out common mode earth noise.  These algorithms also play with the phase of each antenna signal to form a tight beam into a very specific area of space.  So the antenna array is aimed using software rather than hardware.  Seems like a perfect sandbox for a university program.

(http://www.utb.edu/stargate/PublishingImages/STARGATE-logo-sm.jpg)
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Kansan52 on 08/04/2016 03:52 pm
Sorry, radio free zones are ground based. They ban RF devices like cell phones and Wifi devices in zones like in West Virginia and China to reduce interference. These are ground level free zones. Yep, they have to just deal with the other stuff.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Nomadd on 08/04/2016 04:15 pm

So therefore you are more than safe -- odds of being hit by lightning multiplied by hit by rocket-at-launch debris has to end up somewhere far north of winning the lottery.  Take heart, the universe and mathematics are on your side!!
That's probably what they'll put on my tombstone.

 I figured something similar regarding swimming in the Gulf. I currently look like a barber pole after finding a jellyfish big enough to wrap tentacles around me from my ankles to my chest. The universe seems to find my low odds of something bad happening a source of amusement.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Ed on 08/04/2016 06:40 pm

So therefore you are more than safe -- odds of being hit by lightning multiplied by hit by rocket-at-launch debris has to end up somewhere far north of winning the lottery.  Take heart, the universe and mathematics are on your side!!
That's probably what they'll put on my tombstone.

Then you should perhaps start planning for a decent concrete bunker.
Of course with elaborate lighting protection. ;)
Just dont forget the escape hatch on the roof in case of flooding. 
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: D_Dom on 08/05/2016 12:06 am

 I've always wondered about rf emissions from rocket engine exhaust. Been thinking about a 0-12ghz spectrum analyzer to see what I could pick up, but the sensitive ones aren't cheap. I'd have to pick some bands and get some decent front end amps and antennas.
Think DC to daylight.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: pmonta on 08/05/2016 02:48 am

 I've always wondered about rf emissions from rocket engine exhaust. Been thinking about a 0-12ghz spectrum analyzer to see what I could pick up, but the sensitive ones aren't cheap. I'd have to pick some bands and get some decent front end amps and antennas.
Think DC to daylight.

Yes, it will be a broadband thermal source, so as long as you're close enough it should be detectable.  The Sun or the Moon can be detected easily at X-band and are sometimes used as sources to estimate system noise temperature.  The rocket plume will be cooler than the Sun, though, and unless you're very close indeed, may not subtend as large a solid angle.

A simple horn or dish pointed at the pad, plus a radiometer.  The LNAs for satellite TV have featured in projects of this sort I think.  If you have another antenna, point it at 15 or 20 degrees elevation along the rocket's path so as to avoid some of the warm-earth noise.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: guckyfan on 08/05/2016 05:28 am
I am really way of my knowledge base here but what would the flow of ionized gas alone do? Black body radiation won't be much.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Nomadd on 08/06/2016 03:06 am
 Interesting truck poking (literally) around the control center area.
 (Taken with the best camera you can buy for $90 at the Kmart going out of business sale)
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: docmordrid on 08/06/2016 04:43 am
Based on the sign it's doing cone penetrometer tests

https://youtu.be/0YWbIWerbvE
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Nomadd on 08/06/2016 05:55 am
I am really way of my knowledge base here but what would the flow of ionized gas alone do? Black body radiation won't be much.
That's sort of what I was wondering. RF from electrical activity caused by all those really hot, moving like tiny little bats outa hell exhaust molecules. (I might have spent too many hours looking for interesting sources of rf interference)
 I'm still trying to come up with reasons for the sat link dropout on the barges. Vibration shouldn't be doing it on those dishes.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: pmonta on 08/06/2016 06:31 am
I am really way of my knowledge base here

Same here

but what would the flow of ionized gas alone do? Black body radiation won't be much.

Some searching brings up a mention of bremsstrahlung as an emission mechanism for ionic flows in rocket plumes.  But I was thinking more of just the blackbody emission.  The soot might help a good deal, since hot particles will certainly be good broadband emitters all the way down to RF, but I don't know the soot's mass fraction in the plume (a few percent?) and whether it results in a plume that's opaque at RF with high emissivity.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Kabloona on 08/06/2016 08:20 am
Based on the sign it's doing cone penetrometer tests

Good find. And here's more than we ever wanted to know about CPT, featuring the Fugro truck.

http://web.mst.edu/~rogersda/umrcourses/ge441/CPT-Soundings.pdf
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Nomadd on 08/08/2016 02:24 am
 That lot they're working on to the east of the control center area doesn't look like a road work staging area. It looks like they might be getting ready to pour a nice, thick pad. Could be for a tracking dish. There's a clean view of the launch area from there.

 They're still just pushing dirt around at the Stargate site, but it's getting flatter, so maybe construction is near.

 The guy who's doing my elevation study says he'd probably want a six foot base on top of the land around the control center. (or in the village) There was three feet of water over the whole area during Beulah in 67. But it's not a V flood zone, so as long as you keep all the good stuff off the floor, it shouldn't be too bad.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 08/08/2016 12:32 pm
Could be for a tracking dish. There's a clean view of the launch area from there.

Sounds like a good guess.  The Cameron County online real estate public database (http://www.cameroncad.org/cadclientdb/propertymap.aspx) shows lot 173639 was recently purchased by the University of Texas Rio Grande Valley (UTRGV). Lots 173641 and 173642 were also purchased by UTRGV at the same time.  Lot 173640, sandwiched between, still shows as privately owned.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: guckyfan on 08/08/2016 02:05 pm
So these dishes were purchased by SpaceX but will be used by Stargate? Or probably they work together using them.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 08/08/2016 06:08 pm
So these dishes were purchased by SpaceX but will be used by Stargate? Or probably they work together using them.
It seems like Stargate is some kind of partnership between the university, SpaceX, and the city of Brownsville.  For example, the city bought most of the land, the university paid to run fiber to the launch site, and SpaceX purchased the dishes.  I don't know the exact legal status of the partnership, but it appears they're all contributing.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Jdeshetler on 08/09/2016 08:07 pm
"Now building new pads, including a commercial pad in Texas" say Ms. Gwynne Shotwell.

Cool, I wonder where this landing pad would be at? And she say pad instead of pads.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Kabloona on 08/09/2016 08:31 pm
"Now building new pads, including a commercial pad in Texas" say Ms. Gwynne Shotwell.

Cool, I wonder where this landing pad would be at? And she say pad instead of pads.

Here's a master plan map from last year for the Texas launch site.

https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=35425.msg1320233#msg1320233
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Jdeshetler on 08/09/2016 09:06 pm
Here's a master plan map from last year for the Texas launch site.
https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=35425.msg1320233#msg1320233

Ha, that's my rendered "Master Plan B" that I created in Jan 2015 on what it might look like if they were to add more launching & landing pad(s) down the road.

This rendering was even picked up by French Space web site as the SpaceX's Texas future Master plan...
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: biosehnsucht on 08/09/2016 10:23 pm
Did the context of the quote indicate for sure she meant landing pads, not launch pads? We know they're building (well, upgrading / modifying) a pad at KSC, as well as building a commercial pad in Texas.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 08/10/2016 12:20 pm
Cool, I wonder where this landing pad would be at? And she say pad instead of pads.

Here's my guess (see picture below).

The launch pad layout is from the EIS (https://www.faa.gov/about/office_org/headquarters_offices/ast/environmental/nepa_docs/review/launch/spacex_texas_launch_site_environmental_impact_statement/media/FEIS_SpaceX_Texas_Launch_Site_Vol_I.pdf).  As Nomadd mentioned up-thread, the driveway may need to come in on the other side of those pools of water in order to ramp up to the hangar height, so that may change the layout.

The land bridge just south of the fence is documented in the SpaceX Texas_Launch Site Wetland Mitigation Plan Addendum. This was submitted through the Army Corp of Engineers on May 22 2015, and was available online (http://www.swg.usace.army.mil/Portals/26/docs/regulatory/PN%20May/SpaceX_Texas_Launch_Site_Wetland_Mitigation_Plan_Addendum_042215.pdf) for a while, but then removed.  Note that this land bridge will be built using culverts, to allow water to flow back and forth between the tidal pools.

The pad locations are pure conjecture on my part.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Kabloona on 08/10/2016 12:25 pm
Here's a master plan map from last year for the Texas launch site.
https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=35425.msg1320233#msg1320233

Ha, that's my rendered "Master Plan B" that I created in Jan 2105 on what it might look like if they were to add more launching & landing pad(s) down the road.

This rendering was even picked up by French Space web site as the SpaceX's Texas future Master plan...

Good work, then!

Strange that their EIS apparently doesn't show the landing pads.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Nomadd on 08/10/2016 03:39 pm
 A little trivia about the area. Since the highway was put in, the water on the north and south side of the road is two completely different systems. The north side is a tidal bay, while the south side is part of the river system and has it's main connection to the Rio Grande about 2 miles upstream from the gulf. That tends to make the water level more constant on the south. There hasn't been enough water to float a rubber duck in the offshoot of the South Bay near the village in a month and a half because of the never ending south wind, which makes a greater difference than the tides.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: IntoTheVoid on 08/10/2016 07:26 pm
Ha, that's my rendered "Master Plan B" that I created in Jan 2105 on what it might look like if they were to add more launching & landing pad(s) down the road.

This rendering was even picked up by French Space web site as the SpaceX's Texas future Master plan...

Of course, if you did it in 2105, I'd expect it to be a historical retrospective. When do they have the first launch  ;)
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 08/10/2016 09:06 pm
A little trivia about the area. Since the highway was put in, the water on the north and south side of the road is two completely different systems. The north side is a tidal bay, while the south side is part of the river system and has it's main connection to the Rio Grande about 2 miles upstream. That tends to make the water level more constant on the south. There hasn't been enough water to float a rubber duck in the offshoot of the South Bay near the village in a month and a half because of the never ending south wind, which makes a greater difference than the tides.

Let me see if I have this right:

1) The body of water to the North of Route 4 is called the "South Bay".  This is a salt-water tidal pool, and is currently very low due to prevailing winds from the South.

2) The body of water to the South of Route 4 is a fresh-water pool fed by the Rio Grande, and the water level there is more stable.

If I remember correctly, you also mentioned up-thread that it might be best to connect these bodies of water using culverts under Route 4.  This would restore the wetlands area to what it was before Route 4 cut it in half.

Yes?
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Nomadd on 08/10/2016 10:12 pm
 It's definitely not fresh to the south. I guess occasional influxes of water from South Bay and the beach during good storms bring in salt, but most of it never exits. It's pretty much a Dead Sea most of the time.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Nomadd on 08/11/2016 10:18 pm
 This thing appeared at the lot east of the control center area today. A good sign that something besides earth moving is near. The pit is probably just for a temporary septic tank.
 It's a good walk to the UT site is, but probably the best they could do with this patchwork of lots. It's about 100 feet to a fiber drop, so maybe they'll use the building to finally get some internet going, which UT and SpaceX should both appreciate during construction. I was just starting to use wimax gear when I retired. That would work great for an area like this on unlicensed bands. But it's probably easier to just mount some solar WiFi repeaters around.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: RonM on 08/12/2016 12:10 am
Looks like the contractor has dropped off a temporary office to manage the construction site.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 08/14/2016 01:23 pm
SpaceX moving two giant antennas to Boca Chica
http://www.brownsvilleherald.com/premium/article_d8b149a2-61b3-11e6-bfa1-8b38c37d8d4c.html

Quote
The 86-ton antennas... will be used to track flights of the crewed version of SpaceX’s Dragon spacecraft from Cape Canaveral to the International Space Station, probably in 2017...

As one of the contract’s “milestones,” NASA requires SpaceX to track the flights from ground stations at various locations, thus the Boca Chica antennas.

SpaceX said the first ground station antenna will arrive at Boca Chica via tractor-trailer in October. A thick concrete foundation will have to be poured first and allowed to cure for at least one month before the antenna is installed, the company said.

The antenna’s heavy hydraulics will be removed prior to shipping and replaced by electronics once at Boca Chica.

According to the contract, SpaceX must have the first antenna installed before the end of the year and “qualified” (certified by NASA as being installed correctly) by spring, SpaceX said. No date has been set for shipment of the second antenna, the company said.

NASA spokeswoman Tabatha Thompson said SpaceX has been awarded two “post-certification” missions to ISS, which can proceed only after two successful test flights are completed.

“The way the program works is we’ll have two test flights: one uncrewed — obviously that would come first — then crewed,” she said.

Thompson said the crewed test flight will involve two astronauts, though she didn’t know how many would be traveling to ISS on the first actual mission. All flights are scheduled to take place in 2017, though Thompson said specific dates haven’t been set.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Nomadd on 08/14/2016 03:09 pm
 That makes sense. I was wondering if they realized what a nightmare the hydraulics could be on those things but if they don't have to move all that fast, like some fire control radars do, you just have to balance them extremely well, and small electric motors are better, cheaper and easier. I'd never seen one converted before.
 Unfortunately, I'll be gone in October.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: oiorionsbelt on 08/14/2016 04:33 pm
I believe they are these ones they bought for the price of scrap from NASA
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: mfck on 08/14/2016 07:23 pm
I believe they are these ones they bought for the price of scrap from NASA
This is so Vintage
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: oiorionsbelt on 08/14/2016 08:17 pm
I believe they are these ones they bought for the price of scrap from NASA
This is so Vintage
They just look that way because of the F9 v1 in the background. :)
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Semmel on 08/14/2016 08:29 pm
That makes sense. I was wondering if they realized what a nightmare the hydraulics could be on those things but if they don't have to move all that fast, like some fire control radars do, you just have to balance them extremely well, and small electric motors are better, cheaper and easier. I'd never seen one converted before.
 Unfortunately, I'll be gone in October.

You dont need hydraulics at all. I as at the Cala Alto Observatory in south Spain for telescope operation training. The 3.5m telescope sits in a steal structure, several 100 metric tonnes in mass of movable parts. It was so well balanced, you could move it by hand.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: mfck on 08/14/2016 09:21 pm


That makes sense. I was wondering if they realized what a nightmare the hydraulics could be on those things but if they don't have to move all that fast, like some fire control radars do, you just have to balance them extremely well, and small electric motors are better, cheaper and easier. I'd never seen one converted before.
 Unfortunately, I'll be gone in October.

You dont need hydraulics at all. I as at the Cala Alto Observatory in south Spain for telescope operation training. The 3.5m telescope sits in a steal structure, several 100 metric tonnes in mass of movable parts. It was so well balanced, you could move it by hand.

Yep, tracking Dragons with a 86t dish, by hand - that's a Man's Job
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Damon Hill on 08/14/2016 09:29 pm
That makes sense. I was wondering if they realized what a nightmare the hydraulics could be on those things but if they don't have to move all that fast, like some fire control radars do, you just have to balance them extremely well, and small electric motors are better, cheaper and easier. I'd never seen one converted before.
 Unfortunately, I'll be gone in October.

You dont need hydraulics at all. I as at the Cala Alto Observatory in south Spain for telescope operation training. The 3.5m telescope sits in a steal structure, several 100 metric tonnes in mass of movable parts. It was so well balanced, you could move it by hand.

Also known as an "Armstrong" mount.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: kaiser on 08/15/2016 03:44 am
I believe they are these ones they bought for the price of scrap from NASA

Ah, that makes sense then.  I was going to say that it was too much not like SpaceX to build an 86 ton monstrosity for talking to something as close as the ISS.  Was going to propose starting my own company and selling them a new antenna for less than the cost of just pouring the concrete and moving those suckers, but they already poured the concrete.

Darn it. 

I used to take scrap antennas (tv, radar, satcom, point-to-point link, whatever had a reflector) from DRMO and refurb them into pretty hot telemetry trackers before we got enough working capital to build our own.  Man is that a great learning experience.  Sometimes I wish that I was back doing that, really hones those troubleshooting skills and makes you very flexible :)
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Nomadd on 08/15/2016 04:08 am
I believe they are these ones they bought for the price of scrap from NASA

Ah, that makes sense then.  I was going to say that it was too much not like SpaceX to build an 86 ton monstrosity for talking to something as close as the ISS.  Was going to propose starting my own company and selling them a new antenna for less than the cost of just pouring the concrete and moving those suckers, but they already poured the concrete.

Darn it. 

I used to take scrap antennas (tv, radar, satcom, point-to-point link, whatever had a reflector) from DRMO and refurb them into pretty hot telemetry trackers before we got enough working capital to build our own.  Man is that a great learning experience.  Sometimes I wish that I was back doing that, really hones those troubleshooting skills and makes you very flexible :)
No concrete yet.
 I've seen managers brag about saving tons of money by buying old gear and refurbishing it a dozen times, and every single time it would have been faster, better and cheaper to use new gear. Maybe this will break the trend. But seeing how it looks like the reflectors are gone and they're trying to make a huge antenna adapt to a different drive than it was designed for, I wouldn't bet my house on it. Making an antenna that's perfectly balanced at every position is challenging enough when it wasn't designed that way in the first place. Even getting ones that were designed for it perfect is almost more of an art form than a science. You must become one with the counterweights. With the advancement in rf gear, I'd be surprised if they were using the old amps and converters.
 I'm sure there are plenty of factors in the decision I'm not aware of and would love to know the whole story. It could be that they're already supremely balanced and they just didn't have small, instantaneous high torque electric motors they needed back when they were designed. Archimedes might have been able to move the world, but he wouldn't have been able to move it fast enough to track a rapidly moving target. Damned inertia anyhow.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: meekGee on 08/15/2016 05:02 am
Any chance the large size is for DSN communications?
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Nomadd on 08/15/2016 05:30 am
Any chance the large size is for DSN communications?
Nope. They're not so much large as heavy. Made to move fast and be resistant to vibration. DSN dishes are something like 26-70 meters. These things are tiny compared to them.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: meekGee on 08/15/2016 06:09 am
Any chance the large size is for DSN communications?
Nope. They're not so much large as heavy. Made to move fast and be resistant to vibration. DSN dishes are something like 26-70 meters. These things are tiny compared to them.

That makes sense - thanks.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 08/15/2016 11:28 am
Same article repeated in the Valley Morning Star, but this one adds pictures

Eyes on the sky
http://www.valleymorningstar.com/premium/article_dccf7bb4-61c5-11e6-93a4-5b5706fb61fd.html

(http://bloximages.newyork1.vip.townnews.com/valleymorningstar.com/content/tncms/assets/v3/editorial/8/37/837b46dc-61c6-11e6-a35f-a36311c29b79/57afd6d7d4e1e.image.png?resize=458%2C258)

(http://bloximages.newyork1.vip.townnews.com/valleymorningstar.com/content/tncms/assets/v3/editorial/9/db/9dbec5f0-61c6-11e6-afce-fb5c2d77d170/57afd703e64c6.image.jpg?resize=507%2C760)
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: oldAtlas_Eguy on 08/15/2016 05:34 pm
I see that there is a conical scan antenna attached to the dish. Which looks like an X band size for an X band radar tracker. It could also be a close to X band frequency telemetry antenna with a conical scan for acquisition. Too small for C band but could be used for Ku band.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: AnalogMan on 08/15/2016 10:28 pm
I see that there is a conical scan antenna attached to the dish. Which looks like an X band size for an X band radar tracker. It could also be a close to X band frequency telemetry antenna with a conical scan for acquisition. Too small for C band but could be used for Ku band.

If you mean the small antenna mounted on the edge of the main 30-ft (9m) dish, then that is known as the "acquisition antenna" in the terminology of the "Unified S-Band" (USB) tracking and communications system.  This system was originally developed for Apollo missions using 30-ft and 85-ft dishes.

The main S-band antenna has a beam-width of only around 1 degree, so to aid initial acquisition of the target spacecraft a smaller auxiliary S-band antenna with a wider beam-width was used.  The one you see has a dish of about 3ft diameter (hidden under its radome), giving a beam-width around 10 degrees, well within the dead-reckoning spacecraft locating accuracy of the system.  No separate mechanical scanning is used.

The system was originally designed to operate at: Tx 2090 – 2120 MHz, Rx 2270 - 2300 MHz.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Ionmars on 08/16/2016 12:46 am
Same article repeated in the Valley Morning Star, but this one adds pictures

Eyes on the sky
http://www.valleymorningstar.com/premium/article_dccf7bb4-61c5-11e6-93a4-5b5706fb61fd.html

(http://bloximages.newyork1.vip.townnews.com/valleymorningstar.com/content/tncms/assets/v3/editorial/8/37/837b46dc-61c6-11e6-a35f-a36311c29b79/57afd6d7d4e1e.image.png?resize=458%2C258)

(http://bloximages.newyork1.vip.townnews.com/valleymorningstar.com/content/tncms/assets/v3/editorial/9/db/9dbec5f0-61c6-11e6-afce-fb5c2d77d170/57afd703e64c6.image.jpg?resize=507%2C760)
Am I the only one seeing a second image of a beautiful closeup shot of Dragon V2? Where did this come from?
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: IntoTheVoid on 08/16/2016 01:07 am
Am I the only one seeing a second image of a beautiful closeup shot of Dragon V2? Where did this come from?
Looks to be the Pad Abort launch fixture. Don't know why it would be in a Texas article, unless it also mentioned the DragonFly, which was this capsule's next life as I recall.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 08/16/2016 02:15 am
Am I the only one seeing a second image of a beautiful closeup shot of Dragon V2? Where did this come from?
The article (http://www.valleymorningstar.com/premium/article_dccf7bb4-61c5-11e6-93a4-5b5706fb61fd.html) says both images are courtesy of SpaceX.

Don't know why it would be in a Texas article, unless it also mentioned the DragonFly, which was this capsule's next life as I recall.
From the article (http://www.valleymorningstar.com/premium/article_dccf7bb4-61c5-11e6-93a4-5b5706fb61fd.html):
Quote
SpaceX plans to install two massive ground station antennas at Boca Chica beach for the purpose of tracking manned space flights, though not flights from Boca Chica, at least not yet.

The 86-ton antennas will be used to track flights of the crewed version of SpaceX’s Dragon spacecraft from Cape Canaveral to the International Space Station, probably in 2017...

As one of the contract’s “milestones,” NASA requires SpaceX to track the flights from ground stations at various locations, thus the Boca Chica antennas.

Launches from Boca Chica will be no earlier than 2018, so ironically, the first use of the South Texas launch site will be for Dragon 2.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Nomadd on 08/16/2016 02:53 am
Am I the only one seeing a second image of a beautiful closeup shot of Dragon V2? Where did this come from?
Looks to be the Pad Abort launch fixture. Don't know why it would be in a Texas article, unless it also mentioned the DragonFly, which was this capsule's next life as I recall.
It's in the SpaceX photo gallery.
http://www.spacex.com/media-gallery/detail/129171/5276
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: catdlr on 08/16/2016 04:03 am
Am I the only one seeing a second image of a beautiful closeup shot of Dragon V2? Where did this come from?
Looks to be the Pad Abort launch fixture. Don't know why it would be in a Texas article, unless it also mentioned the DragonFly, which was this capsule's next life as I recall.
It's in the SpaceX photo gallery.
http://www.spacex.com/media-gallery/detail/129171/5276

and that was from 2015

MAY 18, 2015 PHOTO CREDIT — SPACEX
CREW DRAGON

PART OF COLLECTION —
CREW DRAGON PAD ABORT TEST
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 08/16/2016 12:06 pm
CNN article about Mexico wall also mentions SpaceX

http://www.cnn.com/interactive/2016/08/politics/trump-border-photos/

Quote
Elon Musk’s SpaceX is building a launch site -- with the Loop family’s soil -- at the end of Highway 4, just outside the city. That, he says, is a better story. Perhaps next year.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 08/16/2016 04:05 pm
CNN article about Mexico wall also mentions SpaceX
http://www.cnn.com/interactive/2016/08/politics/trump-border-photos/
Quote
Elon Musk’s SpaceX is building a launch site -- with the Loop family’s soil -- at the end of Highway 4, just outside the city. That, he says, is a better story. Perhaps next year.

Another quote from this article:
Quote
Brownsville Mayor Tony Martinez mused on the particular set of circumstances that has attracted a steady flow of national reporters to his city -- now one of the safest in all of Texas.

That got me to thinking: What are the general demographics of the area, and how might this affect SpaceX?

Checking up on the crime rate:
http://www.houston-criminalattorney.com/most-dangerous-cities-texas/
Brownsville is indeed very safe, with a violent crime rate of 304.  For comparison, if the population of Brownsville increased from it's current 180,000 to 250,000 - that would make it one of the 10 safest large cities in the U.S.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_United_States_cities_by_crime_rate_(2014) (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_United_States_cities_by_crime_rate_(2014))

For average income, Brownsville is one of the lowest in the U.S. (see green map below).  That means relatively cheap labor for unskilled and semi-skilled workers (secretaries, janitors, security guards, construction workers, welders, machine operators, etc.).

For politics, although Texas as a whole is heavily Republican, the Lower Rio Grande Valley seems to lean more Democratic (see red/blue map below).

Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Nomadd on 08/22/2016 11:55 pm
 The UT site looks like it's about to do some serious piling work. I'm not sure exactly how this is going to work. They have two 24" x 50' steel tubes and a couple dozen 24' long cages made up. Trying to figure out FEMA numbers, it looks like they'd need about 8' elevation if they wanted to stay out of 500 year surges.

Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: acsawdey on 08/23/2016 01:37 am
Those tubes have got to be just to line the hole until they get it filled with concrete and rebar. Been watching a similar process used to make foundations for the new HV power lines along US 52 in MN (CAPX-2020 project) -- those were just a lot larger, some as much as 6' across and about 30' tall. Pipes were removed from the outside after the concrete got poured and set. Of course here you won't have issues with having to drill/blast limestone out of the way like they did here in MN...
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Nomadd on 08/23/2016 02:36 am
Those tubes have got to be just to line the hole until they get it filled with concrete and rebar. Been watching a similar process used to make foundations for the new HV power lines along US 52 in MN (CAPX-2020 project) -- those were just a lot larger, some as much as 6' across and about 30' tall. Pipes were removed from the outside after the concrete got poured and set. Of course here you won't have issues with having to drill/blast limestone out of the way like they did here in MN...
That's what I guessed. They have the built up area on one end that the types you pull back out of the ground have. I see them around the wet areas of Louisiana a lot doing concrete elevation piling. I guess they pull them out while the concrete is still soft until the bottom of the tube is just below the surface. I'll see if I can find an umbrella and a cooler full of something and go watch for a while.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Nomadd on 08/25/2016 12:20 am
 49 feet of those 50 foot tubes at the Stargate site are underground now. I've heard 50 to 60 feet to hit centuries undisturbed ground around here, so it makes sense if you need a base that won't move.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: IainMcClatchie on 08/25/2016 05:39 am
Concrete, even with a lot of rebar in it, is just 2.4 g/cc.  A 1 foot diameter pipe will hold the concrete in it so long as the concrete to steel bond has at least 1800 Pa shear strength.  That's a quarter psi.  Greasy pasta sticks better than that.

Assuming they coat the steel pipe interior with grease, it seems really difficult to pull it up off the piling.  And even if they did, they'd lose all the side friction between the piling and the undisturbed soil.  That side friction is a major component of how pilings work.

Something doesn't seem right here.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: xpete on 08/25/2016 08:50 am
"SpaceX said the first ground station antenna will arrive at Boca Chica via tractor-trailer in October. A thick concrete foundation will have to be poured first and allowed to cure for at least one month before the antenna is installed, the company said.

The antenna’s heavy hydraulics will be removed prior to shipping and replaced by electronics once at Boca Chica.

According to the contract, SpaceX must have the first antenna installed before the end of the year and “qualified” (certified by NASA as being installed correctly) by spring, SpaceX said. No date has been set for shipment of the second antenna, the company said."

http://www.brownsvilleherald.com/premium/article_d8b149a2-61b3-11e6-bfa1-8b38c37d8d4c.html
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: rsdavis9 on 08/25/2016 09:55 am
I've seen a lot of pilings poured for bridges in portsmouth nh. They always leave the steel tubes around the pilings. They just rust away. They may cut some of the tubing above the water line. It makes it look better.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: acsawdey on 08/25/2016 12:36 pm
Concrete, even with a lot of rebar in it, is just 2.4 g/cc.  A 1 foot diameter pipe will hold the concrete in it so long as the concrete to steel bond has at least 1800 Pa shear strength.  That's a quarter psi.  Greasy pasta sticks better than that.

Assuming they coat the steel pipe interior with grease, it seems really difficult to pull it up off the piling.  And even if they did, they'd lose all the side friction between the piling and the undisturbed soil.  That side friction is a major component of how pilings work.

Something doesn't seem right here.

Well, seemed like the most plausible explanation for why they had only 2 pipes and a whole pile of rebar.

Another plausible explanation. I didn't see a good picture of the boring tool but if it's the type that can expand after it clear the end of the tube, maybe these aren't friction piles but have a bulbed end. Another method a quick search turned up is this:

http://theconstructor.org/geotechnical/driven-cast-in-situ-concrete-piles-construction-process/7088/ (http://theconstructor.org/geotechnical/driven-cast-in-situ-concrete-piles-construction-process/7088/)

Which looks like exactly what we have here. The tube is removed while the concrete is wet, which ought to result in an irregular shape and increase friction.

Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Beittil on 08/25/2016 12:41 pm
Is the terrain unsuitable for driving in prefab pilings?
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: rsdavis9 on 08/25/2016 12:46 pm
I've seen a lot of pilings poured for bridges in portsmouth nh. They always leave the steel tubes around the pilings. They just rust away. They may cut some of the tubing above the water line. It makes it look better.

also all the pilings in portsmouth nh hit bedrock pretty quickly. :-)
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Nomadd on 08/25/2016 03:21 pm
Concrete, even with a lot of rebar in it, is just 2.4 g/cc.  A 1 foot diameter pipe will hold the concrete in it so long as the concrete to steel bond has at least 1800 Pa shear strength.  That's a quarter psi.  Greasy pasta sticks better than that.

Assuming they coat the steel pipe interior with grease, it seems really difficult to pull it up off the piling.  And even if they did, they'd lose all the side friction between the piling and the undisturbed soil.  That side friction is a major component of how pilings work.

Something doesn't seem right here.
All they have to do is pull the pipe as they pour the concrete. We'll know shortly.
Title: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Johnnyhinbos on 08/25/2016 03:32 pm
Living in the heart of Boston I watch a LOT of very large scale construction and have watched just about every sort of foundation work - from driven piles to slurry walls to drilled footings. The gear shown in Nomad's pics is pretty small stuff and it looks like they're only vibrating in small circular sleeves. Is there a drill on site for excavating out the soil within the sleeves? Typically the rebar inserts are already preformed into the proper diameter cages and dropped into the excavated hole. Is the rebar in site straight runs or preformed cages?
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Nomadd on 08/25/2016 04:01 pm
Living in the heart of Boston I watch a LOT of very large scale construction and have watched just about every sort of foundation work - from driven piles to slurry walls to drilled footings. The gear shown in Nomad's pics is pretty small stuff and it looks like they're only vibrating in small circular sleeves. Is there a drill on site for excavating out the soil within the sleeves? Typically the rebar inserts are already preformed into the proper diameter cages and dropped into the excavated hole. Is the rebar in site straight runs or preformed cages?
You can see the drill and rebar cages in the photos.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Dave G on 08/25/2016 06:53 pm
Living in the heart of Boston I watch a LOT of very large scale construction and have watched just about every sort of foundation work - from driven piles to slurry walls to drilled footings. The gear shown in Nomad's pics is pretty small stuff and it looks like they're only vibrating in small circular sleeves. Is there a drill on site for excavating out the soil within the sleeves? Typically the rebar inserts are already preformed into the proper diameter cages and dropped into the excavated hole. Is the rebar in site straight runs or preformed cages?
You can see the drill and rebar cages in the photos.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Nomadd on 08/25/2016 07:36 pm
 They're pulling the pipes out, dropping the cages in and pumping concrete. (They might be dropping the cages first. I missed that part) I guess the pipes were drill guides and keep the hole from deforming overnight.

 Four done and enough parts for 18 more. It looks like they're just using the 3/4" cages in the top half of the hole and running a single 1" rebar all the way down. I guess you don't have to worry so much about off vertical hurricane loads more than 24 feet down.

 The portable building east of the control center has been emptied and gutted down to the studs.

 This may be enough posts and pictures of pilings. I need to save myself for really important stuff like wiring and grounding systems. That's the good part about building in muck. You don't have to sink a 300 foot well for a decent ground.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Nomadd on 08/26/2016 12:32 am
Is the terrain unsuitable for driving in prefab pilings?
It's mostly sand and no bedrock for something like 1,000 feet. I'm not sure what's going where, but 150 mph hurricane winds can make for some pretty serious loads, and poured concrete is probably the most immovable type of piling they could have here.
 I'm getting to be an expert on soil here. (For the first 4 feet at least) I finally figured out my drain problems were because some genius put the leach field 16 inches higher than the sewer line from the house. I've spent the last week digging a 4'x4'x13' hole for some Home Depot leach chambers. There was only one 8" layer of hard clay and the rest was sand.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: IainMcClatchie on 08/26/2016 06:55 am
I'm not saying it's unusual, but those piling tops look terribly dirty to me.  When they pour the concrete that goes over the top, they'll have to dig out around the top of that poured piling, and then blast it clean.  What a pain in the butt.  And they'll never completely seal the joint between the two pours.

I'm impressed they were able to pull 50' long 1' diameter pipes out of the ground.  I would have expected that to take a huge amount of hammering, basically a pile driver running in reverse.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Nomadd on 08/26/2016 07:48 am
I'm not saying it's unusual, but those piling tops look terribly dirty to me.  When they pour the concrete that goes over the top, they'll have to dig out around the top of that poured piling, and then blast it clean.  What a pain in the butt.  And they'll never completely seal the joint between the two pours.

I'm impressed they were able to pull 50' long 1' diameter pipes out of the ground.  I would have expected that to take a huge amount of hammering, basically a pile driver running in reverse.
Those are 2' diameter pipes. The vibrating whatchamacallit should make pulling the pipes a lot easier than just hammering them out. There's no rock at all in the ground here so it's a lot easier than in some places.
 Sometimes they throw dirt on top of fresh concrete to keep it from drying too fast while it cures. That doesn't seem like it would be a factor here, but I'm not all that well versed in cementology.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: woods170 on 08/26/2016 08:47 am
I'm not saying it's unusual, but those piling tops look terribly dirty to me.  When they pour the concrete that goes over the top, they'll have to dig out around the top of that poured piling, and then blast it clean.  What a pain in the butt.  And they'll never completely seal the joint between the two pours.

I'm impressed they were able to pull 50' long 1' diameter pipes out of the ground.  I would have expected that to take a huge amount of hammering, basically a pile driver running in reverse.
Not quite a pain in the butt. I see that happening around here all the time with regards to poured concrete pilings. The top is dug out and blasted clean with high-pressure water. The joint between the two pours does not need to be perfectly sealed. The pilings are just there to make sure the actual foundation does not sink into the ground. It just basically 'sits' on top of the pilings. The level of rigidity between the pilings and the rest of the foundation only needs to be capable of preventing the foundation of 'sliding off' the piles when the building is exposed to lateral forces (such as wind). To achieve this, the interface between the top of a pile and the foundation beams is often 'over-poured'.
Title: Re: SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 3
Post by: Chris Bergin on 08/27/2016 04:45 pm
On to Thread 4!
https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=41017.0