lb3 said:

---

PJYoung said:

---

Jared Isaacman, less than six months after the historic Inspiration4 mission, announces he is going back to orbit with SpaceX – purchasing up to three private flights, including another free-flying Crew Dragon mission set for late this year:https://t.co/7DT8a1usAF

— Michael Sheetz (@thesheetztweetz) February 14, 2022

---

A good friend of mine is in that picture. Couldn't be more excited!!!

---

Me too!

...you're talking about Starship right?

Decay said:

---

lb3 said:

---

PJYoung said:

---

Jared Isaacman, less than six months after the historic Inspiration4 mission, announces he is going back to orbit with SpaceX – purchasing up to three private flights, including another free-flying Crew Dragon mission set for late this year:https://t.co/7DT8a1usAF

— Michael Sheetz (@thesheetztweetz) February 14, 2022

---

A good friend of mine is in that picture. Couldn't be more excited!!!

---

Me too!

...you're talking about Starship right?

---

Yes. The starship one on the left.

FAA ****s SpaceX again. Once more, these paper pushers have known how many comments they have to 'review' since they set their original timeline.

FAA delays Starship launch site determination another month. pic.twitter.com/XUW2cCWiNp

— Eric Berger (@SciGuySpace) February 14, 2022

19,000 comments.

You know how many comments the new Waters of the US rule is gonna get? And how fast it'll get pushed through?

Over 1 million comments and less than 3 months

Once again, the number of comments were known before the original January timeline was set. And then extended, and then extended again, with an explicit threat that 'we might not ever approve this.'



Short of saying 'we're worried several sea turtles and large defense contractors might be adversely impacted by this, if approved' I am not sure how much more explicit the bureaucrat speak could be.

I'm not gonna comment on the FAA. 1) it'll get me banned, and 2) it's all been said before.

On another note, looks like the Lockheed-Aerojet merger is dead

Quote:

---

Feb 13 (Reuters) - U.S. arms maker Lockheed Martin Corp (LMT.N) called off plans on Sunday to acquire rocket engine maker Aerojet Rocketdyne Holdings Inc (AJRD.N) for $4.4 billion amid opposition from U.S. antitrust enforcers.

The Federal Trade Commission sued to block the deal in late-January on the grounds that it would allow Lockheed to use its control of Aerojet to hurt other defense contractors. Missile maker Raytheon Technologies (RTX.N) was an outspoken opponent of the proposed acquisition.

---

nortex97 said:

---

Once again, the number of comments were known before the original January timeline was set. And then extended, and then extended again, with an explicit threat that 'we might not ever approve this.'



Short of saying 'we're worried several sea turtles and large defense contractors might be adversely impacted by this, if approved' I am not sure how much more explicit the bureaucrat speak could be.

---

Time to move the launch pad south of the Rio Grande or some other place more welcoming.

nortex97 said:

---

FAA ****s SpaceX again. Once more, these paper pushers have known how many comments they have to 'review' since they set their original timeline.

FAA delays Starship launch site determination another month. pic.twitter.com/XUW2cCWiNp

— Eric Berger (@SciGuySpace) February 14, 2022

---

First time dealing with the FAA?

Governments don't want private companies sending things to space.

FAA: We are not happy until you are not happy.

Let's see if this posts properly, super detailed panorama of Starship yesterday. At full res it's over five feet tall!

Looks like TA won't allow you to see the full detail so whatever here's a compressed version at full resolution (don't post it anywhere else): link

Was just there this weekend. Amazing in person. Every Texan should go see it.

You can definitely imagine some NASA jerkwad forcing Starship to launch from Kennedy so history isnt made in Texas. Not saying thats what happened (my money is 100% on defense contractors and their fairy God Senators (take that any way you want) applying pressure), but I could imagine it.

aezmvp said:

---

You can definitely imagine some NASA jerkwad forcing Starship to launch from Kennedy so history isnt made in Texas. Not saying thats what happened (my money is 100% on defense contractors and their fairy God Senators (take that any way you want) applying pressure), but I could imagine it.

---

I'll tell you one that that certainly isn't happening. A straight forward environmental review of the launch site. There is definite frickery going on here.

https://www.politico.com/news/2022/02/12/elon-musk-space-freaking-out-competitors-00008441

TexAgs91 said:

---

**** the FAA and **** this whole *********administration. The America I know would be rolling out the red carpet for Elon Musk.

We're going to have to wait to see Starship launch at Kennedy.

---

FWIW, the FAA doing this right now is almost ALL just the FAA and not the Biden admin.

They get off on power plays...

Can't wait to spend the next 3 days with them...

PJYoung said:

---

https://www.politico.com/news/2022/02/12/elon-musk-space-freaking-out-competitors-00008441

---

That's gotta make you smile.

aezmvp said:

---

You can definitely imagine some NASA jerkwad forcing Starship to launch from Kennedy so history isnt made in Texas. Not saying thats what happened (my money is 100% on defense contractors and their fairy God Senators (take that any way you want) applying pressure), but I could imagine it.

---

I put the probability that NASA is encouraging the FAA to drag their heels on Boca Chica at near zero. NASA has been gung ho that SpaceX' success means their success for about a decade now.

I think the most likely scenario is that the FAA is being challenged to make decisions they've never had to make before, and in absence of crystal clear precedent, they lack the courage to act. I think it's a classic "don't attribute to malice what you can attitude to incompetence" situation.

That said, my unpopular take is that the bureaucratic delays are honestly pretty small and overblown given the magnitude of what SpaceX is attempting. Delaying the completion of this study by a month is frankly small potatoes in the timeline of a project on this scale.

What is NASA's true purpose these days?

This will be real in our lifetime

— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) February 15, 2022

Mars is freezing ass cold. Astronauts need some coats in that vid.

Spyderman said:

---

What is NASA's true purpose these days?

---

Nasa will turn into the NIH someday and basically just distribute grant funding.

This, delays are disappointing, but 6 months in the face of what they're trying to accomplish is nothing. They never get it to orbit from Boca China I'll cry foul, but as it stands it's a pretty pathetic stonewall.

If you doubt the FAA's good intentions, just Google up what they did to Bob Hoover, perhaps the best pilot who ever lived.


It will confirm every doubt you ever had.

CanyonAg77 said:

---

If you doubt the FAA's good intentions, just Google up what they did to Bob Hoover, perhaps the best pilot who ever lived.


It will confirm every doubt you ever had.

---

Watch the whole thing to see Hoover do same amazing flying...

And at 8:30 to see him do a TRUE 1 G barrel roll...

There's a reason Chuck Yeager called him the best pilot he'd ever seen...

bthotugigem05 said:

---

Let's see if this posts properly, super detailed panorama of Starship yesterday. At full res it's over five feet tall!

Looks like TA won't allow you to see the full detail so whatever here's a compressed version at full resolution (don't post it anywhere else):

---

I assume (forgive my non-technical terminology) the missing and broken hexagon tiles are replaced prior to any launch?

BTW - That's a freaking awesome picture.

Elon Musk donates $5.5+ billion worth of Tesla (TSLA) shares to charity https://t.co/cFuBNAsZMg

— Drive Tesla 🇨🇦 (@DriveTeslaca) February 15, 2022

There's a lot of mystery right now about what vehicle/configuration they will actually use for the first orbital launch attempt. SN21 and 22 now are basically built, and while both were started a ways back it accelerated on them lately and there hasn't been a lot of test fires/proofing for SN20, which may just be a prop. I think they also had some issues with their new tank farm on the methane side as they haven't even tried to fill/proof it all the way yet.

See here:

Quote:

---

Given that Starship S20 effectively completed qualification testing with three successful static fires in December 2021 and a fourth in early January 2022 and has been seemingly ready to fly ever since, its Super Heavy booster readiness not ship readiness that appears to be holding SpaceX back. Perhaps because of pad readiness issues, SpaceX has yet to perform a single Super Heavy static fire test or even a less risky wet dress rehearsal at the orbital launch site. As such, it's hard to say why SpaceX has suddenly decided to finish Ship 22 instead of focusing on a newer version of Starship (S24) and Super Heavy (B7) both of which are expected to debut upgrades.

It's possible that Ship 22 is being completed merely as practice for the Starbase workforce, who have gone half a year without fully assembling another ship prototype, but then there would have been no reason not to install Ship 21's nose on Ship 21's tank section instead of withholding it for Ship 22. Ship 22 could also be a replacement for Ship 21 if appearances are misleading and SpaceX uncovered issues with the older prototype during testing but again, no booster is ready to launch either ship.

Regardless of the outcome or purpose of Ship 22, seeing any new Starship prototype completed is an exciting and interesting change of pace after half a year of following the windy paths of Ship 20, Booster 5, and Ship 21 to their uncertain goals.

---

My guess/swag is that they are hesitant to do much more fabrication of iterative prototypes until they do finally get one off the pad (or a pad, whether in BC or Florida). I wouldn't think it would matter too much to them as they plan to expend at least the first couple anyway, but why build more until the final configuration (with tanks and raptor 2's) for the next phase is at least confirmed internally? SN20 with raptor 1's and without the total number of engines/stretched tanks etc. planned for actual use down the road may just be a practice toy for the cameras/cranes to work with.

They must internally have a fairly complicated flowchart of objectives, evolving toward a final design and roughly using something like the below;



Elon talked in his speech about Raptor 2 challenges; this stuff has to be resolved before they can really spec/build a ship to use it, imho (also, kind of humorous that this is exactly the type of stress rocketlab wants to avoid in their new/next engine).

Quote:

---

The only remaining issue that we are aware of is melting the chamber. So, that thing really wants to melt, you know. It's got like on the order of a gigawatt of heat, so it pretty hot. Like, a gigawatt is, like, what a nuclear power plant produces, so it really is desperately trying to melt at any point in time. So, we've got - You know, we're flowing an immense amount of cryogenic fuel to cool the chamber in the channels. We have head-end film cooling. We've got throat film cooling. And we're just trying to get the exact sort of balance between head-end film cooling and throat film cooling to not melt the chamber. I think we're pretty close. Like, we have a couple of engines in the stand that have, I think, 700 or 800 seconds of operation and several start cycles, so it's looking positive, but that's the remaining issue; melting the chamber.

---

I think the big reason for no booster static fire has to do with the methane tanks. I saw somewhere (and I cannot find a source for the life of me, sorry) that the "homebuilt" vertical tanks aren't usable for methane for some reason, thus why they had to get the 2 huge horizontal tanks. They finally got the first loads of methane to the orbital tank farm on Sunday, so we may finally be nearing a booster lightup.

Edit: And they're getting another load of methane right now. Really starting to think we may get a Booster 4 static fire in the near future.

Spyderman said:

---

What is NASA's true purpose these days?

---

Same as it's always been. To foster research and development in aeronautics and space flight. Anything else is a deviation from their true purpose.

will25u said:

---

Elon Musk donates $5.5+ billion worth of Tesla (TSLA) shares to charity https://t.co/cFuBNAsZMg

— Drive Tesla 🇨🇦 (@DriveTeslaca) February 15, 2022

---

And now Elon bends the knee. It's not enough that he has to pay more taxes than anyone ever.

TexAgs91 said:

---

Spyderman said:

---

What is NASA's true purpose these days?

---

Same as it's always been. To foster research and development in aeronautics and space flight. Anything else is a deviation from their true purpose.

---

You misspelled "jobs program"