1

SpaceX Starship Program / Re: Starship flight 5 preparations - DISCUSSION

« Last post by woods170 on Today at 09:42 am »

They carefuly say that the "The Starship and Super Heavy vehicles for Flight 5 have been ready to launch since the first week of August." without mentioning the Launch tower and GSE...

My understanding is that the launch was NET Early october before this, this would mean 1-1.5 months of delay...

Also it seems like the FAA disagrees that the additional time is due to environmental review: https://x.com/LauraForczyk/status/1833529377361170645

Don’t confuse cause and effect. If SpaceX knows the the feds are going to hobble launch cadence, they will take that time to work on GSE.

They quite literally said that they expected a mid-september license until recently.

"We recently received a launch license date estimate of late November from the FAA, the government agency responsible for licensing Starship flight tests. This is a more than two-month delay to the previously communicated date of mid-September"

Current modifications to the OLM and GSE are expected to be completed to support the previously communicated license date of mid-september. Remember: SpaceX is a major proponent of the JIT principle. When FAA confirms the expected license date shifts to late November, it is a given that SpaceX will use the additional time to start implementing upgrades and modications that were originally planned for AFTER a early October IFT-5 launch.

2

Blue Origin / Re: Blue Origin New Glenn Thread 2: Updates and Discussion

« Last post by dglow on Today at 09:23 am »

Are we more likely to see Blue Ring launched this year or early ‘25?

3

Advanced Concepts / Re: Valkyrie (humanoid robot)

« Last post by catdlr on Today at 09:16 am »

It's an 11-year bump...has it been that long that this robot has been in development?

Inside Valkyrie, NASA’s humanoid robot paving way to the moon and Mars

Sep 11, 2024
Part Transformer, part Star Wars stormtrooper and with hands that look like they can crush beer cans, at 1.8 metres tall and weighing 120 kilograms, NASA’s Valkyrie robot is an intimidating figure. It is currently being put through its paces at the Karda laboratory in Australia so researchers can work out what it would take to get a humanoid robot onto offshore energy facilities or into space. New Scientist's James Woodford took the controls to see what the $2 million-plus device is capable of.

Article: https://www.newscientist.com/article/2446831-i-took-control-of-nasas-valkyrie-robot-and-it-blew-my-mind/

4

SpaceX Falcon Missions Section / Re: Launch, Land, and Relaunch Party Thread

« Last post by darkenfast on Today at 09:00 am »

Ministry of Truth News Directive 09-09-2024-173

Attention, Outer Party Members! As always, we must fight harder to ensure that the Party succeeds in erasing all opposition and establishing total control as soon as possible. In light of recent developments in the field of non-Party controlled spaceflight, we must emphasize that there can be only one line promoted by all Outer Party members. Those in journalism know their tasks. All other Outer Party Members must be vigilant on all internet forums and on those (thankfully few), news sites that still allow commenting. This Directive concerns Elon Musk, and his criminal SpaceX gang.

When referencing the disgusting Polaris Dawn flight, you must always include the word “billionaire”. We have had great success in conditioning the populace to have an immediate emotional reaction when they read that word. Lower-class emotions are our allies. We must never allow them to start thinking for themselves. Be sure to minimize any scientific activities and avoid mentioning the two SpaceX engineers, as they do not fit the authorized story that this is simply a rich man’s jaunt that should not be allowed.
 
Musk’s cancerous blot on the South Texas coast has become our major concern. Too many people have begun to actually admire what he is doing there. The local population in Brownsville is resisting our Party Line that they were better off before SpaceX. This is because of ungood lies that having well-paying jobs to support their families has any relevance. Be sure to point out how much happier the citizens of Matamoros across the border are under the benevolent leadership of Comrade Amlo and his cartel allies.

It is very important to use Ministry of Truth authorized words when mentioning Musk: “controversial”, “apartheid”, “fascist”, “transphobe”, “Putin lover”, "drug addict", and “unstable”, are just a few examples.  Consult the AP Style Guide for more. We control it, of course.

We wish to commend the Outer Party Members embedded in the FAA for their heroic action this week. Realizing that there were not enough comrades in their agency to keep Musk from having another attention-grabbing launch of his dangerous Starship before the election, they successfully managed to tie approval to the USFWS, which has a much higher ratio of Party Faithful, who know their duty, and will stall for months.
 
So hit those keyboards, Comrades, and get busy dominating forums and comment sections everywhere, especially on so-called “space forums”, where there are far too many deluded people who would actually be happy to see spaceflight that isn’t under Party Control. Their day of reckoning is coming. Those who perform heroically will be considered for Inner Party Membership. Those who don’t will have a doubleplusungood status filed in their Party dossier.

Be on your guard against satire. Sometimes, faithful Outer Party comrades fail to recognize it.

Remember: Big Sister is watching!

5

SpaceX Falcon Missions Section / Re: F9/Crew Dragon : Polaris Dawn : KSC LC-39A : 10 Sep 2024 (09:23 UTC) UPDATES

« Last post by catdlr on Today at 08:53 am »

6

Other US Launchers / Re: US Launch Schedule

« Last post by Salo on Today at 08:39 am »

https://www.spacex.com/updates/#make-life-multiplanetary

We recently received a launch license date estimate of late November from the FAA, the government agency responsible for licensing Starship flight tests. This is a more than two-month delay to the previously communicated date of mid-September. This delay was not based on a new safety concern, but instead driven by superfluous environmental analysis. The four open environmental issues are illustrative of the difficulties launch companies face in the current regulatory environment for launch and reentry licensing.

7

SpaceX Starship Program / Re: FAA, FWS & other permits/licenses for Boca Chica DISCUSSION (Thread 5)

« Last post by steveleach on Today at 08:21 am »

Well SpaceX likes to "move fast and break things". Including the law apparently.

There's little evidence that they broke any laws or rules, at least rules that they knew about.

Ok fair enough. I figured that the fact they got penalized was enough evidence that they broke the law but maybe not.

SpaceX believe they were unjustly penalised because the EPA disagreed with TCEQ about what paperwork was required...

The subsequent fines levied on SpaceX by TCEQ and the EPA are entirely tied to disagreements over paperwork. We chose to settle so that we can focus our energy on completing the missions and commitments that we have made to the U.S. government, commercial customers, and ourselves. Paying fines is extremely disappointing when we fundamentally disagree with the allegations, and we are supported by the fact that EPA has agreed that nothing about the operation of our flame deflector will need to change. Only the name of the permit has changed.

8

SpaceX Falcon Missions Section / Re: SpaceX F9 : Starlink group 9-6 : VSFB SLC-4E : 11/12 September 2024 (~02:45 UTC)

« Last post by FutureSpaceTourist on Today at 08:20 am »

https://twitter.com/tskelso/status/1833773481160507900

CelesTrak has pre-launch SupGP data for the @Starlink Group 9-6 launch from Vandenberg SFB on 2024-09-12 at 02:47:00 UTC: celestrak.org/NORAD/elements…. Deployment of 21 satellites is at 03:47:58.080 UTC. Data for 1 backup launch opportunity also provided: https://celestrak.org/NORAD/elements/supplemental/

9

SpaceX Starship Program / Re: FAA, FWS & other permits/licenses for Boca Chica DISCUSSION (Thread 5)

« Last post by thespacecow on Today at 08:14 am »

As I said before, this is not just about SpaceX, many other stakeholders are also complaining about FAA. So any excuses for FAA that is focused solely on SpaceX is totally invalid: Congress, industry criticize FAA launch licensing regulations

Witnesses at the House hearing made clear those concerns have not abated. “The way it is being implemented today has caused severe licensing delays, confusion and is jeopardizing our long-held leadership position,” said Dave Cavossa, president of the Commercial Spaceflight Federation, an industry group whose members include several launch companies.

Mike French, vice chair of the FAA’s Commercial Space Transportation Advisory Group (COMSTAC), agreed with those concerns, noting that the committee had offered several recommendations to FAA on ways to address problems with the Part 450 regulations.

“We have a licensing regime with a lack of certainty, a lack of transparency and significant delays,” said Pamela Meredith, chair of the space law practice group at KMA Zuckert LLC.

Members on both sides if the aisle shared frustrations about Part 450. “License processing under the new Part 450 process is moving at a snail’s pace,” said Rep. Brian Babin (R-Texas), chairman of the subcommittee.

...

“We are in a bureaucratic soup,” said Rep. Haley Stevens (D-Mich.) later in the hearing. “We know we’re not getting to the moon unless we get some commercial spacecraft. So something’s not working here.”

10

Chinese Launchers / Re: Landspace - ZhuQue-3 (ZQ-3) launcher

« Last post by FutureSpaceTourist on Today at 08:14 am »