SpaceX Texas launch site Discussion and Updates - Thread 12

[alugobi]

This post-static fire fire is not a good look at all.  Grassland burning on a protected area and it can't be approached because the rocket is not yet safed hours later. 

They're going to have to berm off that test stand or something.  And if that's an extension for another test stand beyond Stand B--might have to rethink that or design in some protection of some kind. 

I'm an enthusiastic supporter, but this is not good.

[meekGee]

This post-static fire fire is not a good look at all.  Grassland burning on a protected area and it can't be approached because the rocket is not yet safed hours later. 

They're going to have to berm off that test stand or something.  And if that's an extension for another test stand beyond Stand B--might have to rethink that or design in some protection of some kind. 

I'm an enthusiastic supporter, but this is not good.

Or they can burn off the grass before the test.

[su27k]

Grass fire at launch site is not that unusual, the most recent one is the fire near LC-16 that was started by Terran-1 static fire in July, nobody made a big deal of that, likely because there's no 24x7 3rd party video surveillance there.

[EL_DIABLO]

It's not a big deal but it gives ammo to those that like to make a big deal out of it. It's silly when with a little more attention to detail it could have been avoided.

[robot_enthusiast]

This post-static fire fire is not a good look at all.  Grassland burning on a protected area and it can't be approached because the rocket is not yet safed hours later. 

They're going to have to berm off that test stand or something.  And if that's an extension for another test stand beyond Stand B--might have to rethink that or design in some protection of some kind. 

I'm an enthusiastic supporter, but this is not good.

They cleared all the vegetation that they're allowed to touch, but the part that burned is outside their property line where they can't do anything.

[Hog]

This post-static fire fire is not a good look at all.  Grassland burning on a protected area and it can't be approached because the rocket is not yet safed hours later. 

They're going to have to berm off that test stand or something.  And if that's an extension for another test stand beyond Stand B--might have to rethink that or design in some protection of some kind. 

I'm an enthusiastic supporter, but this is not good.

They cleared all the vegetation that they're allowed to touch, but the part that burned is outside their property line where they can't do anything.

Maybe they need to buy some more property, if that's an option?  Amazing display of rocket power nonetheless.

[Jeff Lerner]

Doesn’t the problem now go away as anything that could burn has burnt ??

[DigitalMan]

I used to live in an area where local or state folks regularly did controlled burns of different areas, in some kind of staggered pattern.

It seems likely SpaceX might need to do it on a regular basis to keep things under control.

[Nomadd]

Doesn’t the problem now go away as anything that could burn has burnt ??

It's mostly grassy stuff. You won't be able to tell it was burnt in a couple of months. Some Mesquite and Prickly Pear, but that's actually kind of invasive species, since they didn't exist there until the dams and ship channel prevented yearly flooding.

[cpushack]

This post-static fire fire is not a good look at all.  Grassland burning on a protected area and it can't be approached because the rocket is not yet safed hours later. 

They're going to have to berm off that test stand or something.  And if that's an extension for another test stand beyond Stand B--might have to rethink that or design in some protection of some kind. 

I'm an enthusiastic supporter, but this is not good.

Occasional burning of grass lands is actually GOOD for them.  Helps eradicate noxious weeds and insect pests that can harm native species.

[Eka]

If you watch the videos of the fire you will see them doing burning out front of the fire front to control it. These are otherwise known as back fires. Done right they starve than main fire front of fuel and make the fire easier to put out.

[edzieba]

It seems likely SpaceX might need to do it on a regular basis to keep things under control.

Outside the launch site boundaries, the land is not SpaceX's to manage. Any controlled burns would be USFWS' decision. The wetlands (composed of invasive species or otherwise) are currently home to various animal species - mostly birds - who next there, so controlled burns to manage flammable scrub has to be balanced with not losing that nesting habitat.

Remote robotic firefighting hardware (essentially small tracked vehicles hooked up to hoses) are not uncommon for firefighting in industrial areas where hazardous chemicals are present, often the the firefighting hardware owned by the property owner but operations coordinated by (or operated by) the local fire department. That could be a COTS option for catching wildfires early immediately after test or launch operations without the need to bring people in the the hazard area.

[FutureSpaceTourist]

https://twitter.com/RGVaerialphotos/status/1568655145860308992

Just noticed the fire extinguisher behind the burnt dumpster... just in case

[DanClemmensen]

This post-static fire fire is not a good look at all.  Grassland burning on a protected area and it can't be approached because the rocket is not yet safed hours later. 

They're going to have to berm off that test stand or something.  And if that's an extension for another test stand beyond Stand B--might have to rethink that or design in some protection of some kind. 

I'm an enthusiastic supporter, but this is not good.

Occasional burning of grass lands is actually GOOD for them.  Helps eradicate noxious weeds and insect pests that can harm native species.

The area that burned is not a pristine ecosystem. It has been radically modified many times in many ways for over a century by successive waves of human use. Most of the vegetation is invasive. Nevertheless, the ecosystems of barrier islands are incredibly resilient, so the existing ecosystem of the burned area was thriving prior to the burn even though it was nothing like it would have been had it been undisturbed for a century. The burn will change it again at the detailed level, but a successor ecosystem will arise very quickly.

[Herb Schaltegger]

This post-static fire fire is not a good look at all.  Grassland burning on a protected area and it can't be approached because the rocket is not yet safed hours later. 

They're going to have to berm off that test stand or something.  And if that's an extension for another test stand beyond Stand B--might have to rethink that or design in some protection of some kind. 

I'm an enthusiastic supporter, but this is not good.

Occasional burning of grass lands is actually GOOD for them.  Helps eradicate noxious weeds and insect pests that can harm native species.

The area that burned is not a pristine ecosystem. It has been radically modified many times in many ways for over a century by successive waves of human use. Most of the vegetation is invasive. Nevertheless, the ecosystems of barrier islands are incredibly resilient, so the existing ecosystem of the burned area was thriving prior to the burn even though it was nothing like it would have been had it been undisturbed for a century. The burn will change it again at the detailed level, but a successor ecosystem will arise very quickly.

That’s true enough.

However, one thing that will undoubtedly get some scrutiny is how and why the initial grass fires were started so far from the suborbital launch site following the static fire. This occurrence belies some of the conclusory statements contained in the final EIS to the effect that static fires and launches were not likely to cause fires in the surrounding area because they occurred over concrete surfaces with no flammable items nearby, etc. (I’m paraphrasing - the EIS is 300+ pages and I was scanning for context). To the extent that the dumpster caught fire, at least it was on the SpaceX complex grounds. But the grassfires started quite a linear distance from the pad. I have no doubt that SpaceX and county/state officials will probably be searching the ignition points for potential hot debris items which might have started the fires.

[DanClemmensen]

This post-static fire fire is not a good look at all.  Grassland burning on a protected area and it can't be approached because the rocket is not yet safed hours later. 

They're going to have to berm off that test stand or something.  And if that's an extension for another test stand beyond Stand B--might have to rethink that or design in some protection of some kind. 

I'm an enthusiastic supporter, but this is not good.

Occasional burning of grass lands is actually GOOD for them.  Helps eradicate noxious weeds and insect pests that can harm native species.

The area that burned is not a pristine ecosystem. It has been radically modified many times in many ways for over a century by successive waves of human use. Most of the vegetation is invasive. Nevertheless, the ecosystems of barrier islands are incredibly resilient, so the existing ecosystem of the burned area was thriving prior to the burn even though it was nothing like it would have been had it been undisturbed for a century. The burn will change it again at the detailed level, but a successor ecosystem will arise very quickly.

That’s true enough.

However, one thing that will undoubtedly get some scrutiny is how and why the initial grass fires were started so far from the suborbital launch site following the static fire. This occurrence belies some of the conclusory statements contained in the final EIS to the effect that static fires and launches were not likely to cause fires in the surrounding area because they occurred over concrete surfaces with no flammable items nearby, etc. (I’m paraphrasing - the EIS is 300+ pages and I was scanning for context). To the extent that the dumpster caught fire, at least it was on the SpaceX complex grounds. But the grassfires started quite a linear distance from the pad. I have no doubt that SpaceX and county/state officials will probably be searching the ignition points for potential hot debris items which might have started the fires.

Sure. I'm not in favor of of burning a habitat for no good reason even it is not a "natural" habitat. I was just trying to put it in perspective.

[harrystranger]

Satellite imagery gives us a perspective on the area that was burnt by the fire.
https://twitter.com/Harry__Stranger/status/1568596750553972737
https://twitter.com/Harry__Stranger/status/1568596781650579459

[WTF]

Herd of goats to signicantly reduce the brush.
Probabky need to hire a shepherd.

[baking]

Herd of goats to signicantly reduce the brush.
Probabky need to hire a shepherd.

This is NSF Forums.  Please use the proper terminology.  It's a goat herder

[John Santos]

Herd of goats to signicantly reduce the brush.
Probabky need to hire a shepherd.

This is NSF Forums.  Please use the proper terminology.  It's a goat herder

A goat herder is the new shepherd.