Author Topic: SpaceX Starship : Texas Prototype(s) Thread 16 : Discussion  (Read 531954 times)

Offline khorton

  • Member
  • Posts: 13
  • Green Bay, WI
  • Liked: 35
  • Likes Given: 9
Re: SpaceX Starship : Texas Prototype(s) Thread 16 : Discussion
« Reply #860 on: 01/28/2021 08:03 pm »
https://twitter.com/wapodavenport/status/1354892602907258883

Quote
Statement from the FAA just now re the SpaceX SN9 flight: “We will continue working with SpaceX to resolve outstanding safety issues before we approve the next test flight.”

Not a surprise, still no flight TFR
And it is very unlikely that a TFR would be issued on short notice, as pilots need to be informed of it before starting a flight.  There is no requirement that pilots be talking to Air Traffic Control in the Boca Chica area, so if the TFR was issued now, aircraft already flying may not learn about it.  These facts don't change no matter how loud Elon yells.

Offline Kabloona

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4847
  • Velocitas Eradico
  • Fortress of Solitude
  • Liked: 3432
  • Likes Given: 741
Re: SpaceX Starship : Texas Prototype(s) Thread 16 : Discussion
« Reply #861 on: 01/28/2021 08:07 pm »
Not an exact match to the quoted phrase, but pretty close. What's interesting is that it gives Secretary of Treasury Transportation carte blanche to nix any launch, re-entry, or launch site operation he/she deems "detrimental."


Quote
Sec. 70108. Prohibition, suspension, and end of launches, operation
 of launch sites and reentry sites, and reentries
 (a) General Authority. - The Secretary of Transportation may
 prohibit, suspend, or end immediately the launch of a launch
 vehicle or the operation of a launch site or reentry site, or
 reentry of a reentry vehicle, licensed under this chapter if the
 Secretary decides the launch or operation or reentry is detrimental
 to the public health and safety, the safety of property, or a
 national security or foreign policy interest of the United States.
« Last Edit: 01/28/2021 08:30 pm by Kabloona »

Offline mlindner

  • Software Engineer
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2919
  • Space Capitalist
  • Silicon Valley, CA
  • Liked: 2213
  • Likes Given: 820
Re: SpaceX Starship : Texas Prototype(s) Thread 16 : Discussion
« Reply #862 on: 01/28/2021 08:10 pm »
https://twitter.com/wapodavenport/status/1354892602907258883

Quote
Statement from the FAA just now re the SpaceX SN9 flight: “We will continue working with SpaceX to resolve outstanding safety issues before we approve the next test flight.”

Not a surprise, still no flight TFR
And it is very unlikely that a TFR would be issued on short notice, as pilots need to be informed of it before starting a flight.  There is no requirement that pilots be talking to Air Traffic Control in the Boca Chica area, so if the TFR was issued now, aircraft already flying may not learn about it.  These facts don't change no matter how loud Elon yells.

Don't post non-updates in the update thread.

Also there's no requirement that TFRs need warning to be put up. TFRs can (and have) been put down on top of aircraft already in the airspace.
LEO is the ocean, not an island (let alone a continent). We create cruise liners to ride the oceans, not artificial islands in the middle of them. We need a physical place, which has physical resources, to make our future out there.

Offline sdsds

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7221
  • “With peace and hope for all mankind.”
  • Seattle
  • Liked: 2072
  • Likes Given: 1978
— 𝐬𝐝𝐒𝐝𝐬 —

Offline daveglo

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 550
  • "a big enough engine, even a water tower can fly"
  • St. Louis, MO, USA
  • Liked: 681
  • Likes Given: 638
Re: SpaceX Starship : Texas Prototype(s) Thread 16 : Discussion
« Reply #864 on: 01/28/2021 08:11 pm »
Like this Delta flight cruising overhead, from Flightradar24.

Offline _MECO

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 722
  • Central KY, USA
  • Liked: 775
  • Likes Given: 447
Re: SpaceX Starship : Texas Prototype(s) Thread 16 : Discussion
« Reply #865 on: 01/28/2021 08:15 pm »
It was not a full depress or de-tank. Currently looking like they're loading propellant again (rocket venting).

The lack of official communication on what is actually going on with this test is infuriating. Why are they tanking and detanking and tanking again? Why is the NOTAM only to 7200 feet?
« Last Edit: 01/28/2021 08:16 pm by _MECO »

Offline rakaydos

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2835
  • Liked: 1872
  • Likes Given: 69
Re: SpaceX Starship : Texas Prototype(s) Thread 16 : Discussion
« Reply #866 on: 01/28/2021 08:18 pm »
Quote
Sec. 70108. Prohibition, suspension, and end of launches, operation
 of launch sites and reentry sites, and reentries
 (a) General Authority. - The Secretary of Transportation may
 prohibit, suspend, or end immediately the launch of a launch
 vehicle or the operation of a launch site or reentry site, or
 reentry of a reentry vehicle, licensed under this chapter if the
 Secretary decides the launch or operation or reentry is detrimental
 to the public health and safety, the safety of property, or a
 national security or foreign policy interest of the United States.
zubenelgenubi edit
« Last Edit: 01/28/2021 09:28 pm by zubenelgenubi »

Offline Herb Schaltegger

It was not a full depress or de-tank. Currently looking like they're loading propellant again (rocket venting).

The lack of official communication on what is actually going on with this test is infuriating. Why are they tanking and detanking and tanking again? Why is the NOTAM only to 7200 feet?

Please stop posting comments and discussion in the Updates thread, people!

7,200’ is safety altitude for pressure testing, WDR and static fire operations.
« Last Edit: 01/28/2021 08:20 pm by Herb Schaltegger »
Ad astra per aspirin ...

Offline fatdeeman

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 134
  • Liked: 112
  • Likes Given: 29

Offline mlindner

  • Software Engineer
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2919
  • Space Capitalist
  • Silicon Valley, CA
  • Liked: 2213
  • Likes Given: 820
Re: SpaceX Starship : Texas Prototype(s) Thread 16 : Discussion
« Reply #869 on: 01/28/2021 08:30 pm »
Is this a new TFR?

https://tfr.faa.gov/tfr2/list.html?fbclid=IwAR2ybhrnT4X0UhXo-MLsUKtldECqxY1NyxAc1ydgMQbGmfq0s9j0uan4sCM

No. And it looks like your post got moved into this thread twice, so delete the other one. Don't post in the updates thread with non-updates.
« Last Edit: 01/28/2021 08:30 pm by mlindner »
LEO is the ocean, not an island (let alone a continent). We create cruise liners to ride the oceans, not artificial islands in the middle of them. We need a physical place, which has physical resources, to make our future out there.

Offline r8ix

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 300
  • Liked: 287
  • Likes Given: 93
Re: SpaceX Starship : Texas Prototype(s) Thread 16 : Discussion
« Reply #870 on: 01/28/2021 08:32 pm »
Is this a new TFR for today?

https://tfr.faa.gov/tfr2/list.html?fbclid=IwAR2ybhrnT4X0UhXo-MLsUKtldECqxY1NyxAc1ydgMQbGmfq0s9j0uan4sCM

The TFRs currently showing as posted today (including that one), and effective today through tomorrow, and tomorrow through Saturday, respectively, are both limited to 7200 feet, so not compatible with a hop.

Offline mlindner

  • Software Engineer
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2919
  • Space Capitalist
  • Silicon Valley, CA
  • Liked: 2213
  • Likes Given: 820
Re: SpaceX Starship : Texas Prototype(s) Thread 16 : Discussion
« Reply #871 on: 01/28/2021 08:34 pm »
Oh my bad. It says new and it says 28th. I'm so sorry I'm not psychic.

Try being less rude.

People have notifications on the updates thread, so you ping a whole bunch of people when you post non-updates to an updates thread, especially during a fast moving event like this. I wasn't being rude, I was just being direct.
LEO is the ocean, not an island (let alone a continent). We create cruise liners to ride the oceans, not artificial islands in the middle of them. We need a physical place, which has physical resources, to make our future out there.

Offline fatdeeman

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 134
  • Liked: 112
  • Likes Given: 29
Re: SpaceX Starship : Texas Prototype(s) Thread 16 : Discussion
« Reply #872 on: 01/28/2021 08:36 pm »
Oh my bad. It says new and it says 28th. I'm so sorry I'm not psychic.

Try being less rude.

People have notifications on the updates thread, so you ping a whole bunch of people when you post non-updates to an updates thread, especially during a fast moving event like this. I wasn't being rude, I was just being direct.

Yes I have notifications too and I've seen stuff that isn't even attempting to be an update. I was just trying to be helpful.

Offline mlindner

  • Software Engineer
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2919
  • Space Capitalist
  • Silicon Valley, CA
  • Liked: 2213
  • Likes Given: 820
Re: SpaceX Starship : Texas Prototype(s) Thread 16 : Discussion
« Reply #873 on: 01/28/2021 08:41 pm »
Oh my bad. It says new and it says 28th. I'm so sorry I'm not psychic.

Try being less rude.

People have notifications on the updates thread, so you ping a whole bunch of people when you post non-updates to an updates thread, especially during a fast moving event like this. I wasn't being rude, I was just being direct.

Yes I have notifications too and I've seen stuff that isn't even attempting to be an update. I was just trying to be helpful.

When you see something that's not an update it, click the "report to moderator" button in the lower right with "not an update" as the reason and it'll quickly get removed. If you look back for those posts that are non-updates they're likely gone now or moved to this thread like yours was.
LEO is the ocean, not an island (let alone a continent). We create cruise liners to ride the oceans, not artificial islands in the middle of them. We need a physical place, which has physical resources, to make our future out there.

Offline abaddon

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3082
  • Liked: 3945
  • Likes Given: 5376
Re: SpaceX Starship : Texas Prototype(s) Thread 16 : Discussion
« Reply #874 on: 01/28/2021 09:01 pm »
The lack of official communication on what is actually going on with this test is infuriating.
...and our daily quotient of enraged entitlement on the Internet has now been met.

Offline wannamoonbase

  • Elite Veteran
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5459
  • Denver, CO
    • U.S. Metric Association
  • Liked: 3163
  • Likes Given: 3921
Re: SpaceX Starship : Texas Prototype(s) Thread 16 : Discussion
« Reply #875 on: 01/28/2021 09:12 pm »
The lack of official communication on what is actually going on with this test is infuriating.
...and our daily quotient of enraged entitlement on the Internet has now been met.

Oh my yes.  For the one billionth time, SpaceX is a private company.  They could be providing even less information than Blue Origin.  They don't have to share anything other than public notices.

I love that we get to see as much as we do.  But I grew up pre-internet when we had to go to libraries to get out of date information in a hardcopy.
Wildly optimistic prediction, Superheavy recovery on IFT-4 or IFT-5 (Welp a little early on IFT-4, but still have a shot at 5)

Offline zubenelgenubi

  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 11522
  • Arc to Arcturus, then Spike to Spica
  • Sometimes it feels like Trantor in the time of Hari Seldon
  • Liked: 7651
  • Likes Given: 74693
Re: SpaceX Starship : Texas Prototype(s) Thread 16 : Discussion
« Reply #876 on: 01/28/2021 09:14 pm »
Moderator:
If what you have to say is NOT directly relevant to discussing Texas/Boca Chica prototypes, then it doesn't belong here.
Thread trim(s).
« Last Edit: 01/28/2021 09:34 pm by zubenelgenubi »
Support your local planetarium! (COVID-panic and forward: Now more than ever.) My current avatar is saying "i wants to go uppies!" Yes, there are God-given rights. Do you wish to gainsay the Declaration of Independence?

Offline sdsds

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7221
  • “With peace and hope for all mankind.”
  • Seattle
  • Liked: 2072
  • Likes Given: 1978
Re: SpaceX Starship : Texas Prototype(s) Thread 16 : Discussion
« Reply #877 on: 01/28/2021 09:22 pm »
I wonder if there's a way SpaceX can get some visibility into today's test flight (or lack thereof) when Secretary-Designate Buttigieg is being confirmed by the Senate?

EDIT: I'm too late! Cantwell, Committee Approve Buttigieg Nomination, January 27, 2021

https://www.commerce.senate.gov/2021/1/cantwell-committee-approve-buttigieg-nomination
« Last Edit: 01/29/2021 05:05 am by sdsds »
— 𝐬𝐝𝐒𝐝𝐬 —

Offline hartspace

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 329
  • Liked: 307
  • Likes Given: 150
Re: SpaceX Starship : Texas Prototype(s) Thread 16 : Discussion
« Reply #878 on: 01/28/2021 09:34 pm »
I wonder if there's a way SpaceX can get some visibility into today's test flight (or lack thereof) when Secretary-Designate Buttigieg is being confirmed by the Senate?
I would imagine that someone from SpaceX's safety or quality assurance department is working directly with the FAA OCST civil servant who is working on the flight license.  I just think that Elon is just frustrated that it is taking longer than expected to get the approval.  And the last thing that a career civil servant will be motivated by is some company executive or senior government management putting pressure on them to complete their safety review for an experimental flight vehicle.

Offline cailes

  • Member
  • Posts: 55
  • PNW
  • Liked: 58
  • Likes Given: 76
Re: SpaceX Starship : Texas Prototype(s) Thread 16 : Discussion
« Reply #879 on: 01/28/2021 09:44 pm »
Its probably overstating things, but when the Challenger incident occurred, it was a result of weak oversight. Nobody wants anything like that (or not like that but still deadly and embarrassing) under their watch.

Tags:
 

Advertisement NovaTech
Advertisement Northrop Grumman
Advertisement
Advertisement Margaritaville Beach Resort South Padre Island
Advertisement Brady Kenniston
Advertisement NextSpaceflight
Advertisement Nathan Barker Photography
0