I normally skim through comments on a story to catch opposing views that are often illuminating. Many of the comments at ARS are dumpster fire horrible. The Elon hate is unbelievable to me.
That’s what comes of being able to say anything and accuse people of anything without consequence.
ARS ran off the sane commenters years ago. It’s pretty much a moderation policy they have. Anyone who dares question dogma gets burned.
Earlier today I was struck by the loss of a Shuttle pilot.
He was the first to command three Shuttle missions, and just died of old age, at 85.
NASA is still developing the replacement for the vehicle he flew, reusing much of the hardware.
That doesn’t sound like cutting-edge rapid innovation to me.
They did learn to put the capsule back on top of the launch rocket rather than on the side to prevent debris shed on critical components. Then again, they used to do that previously, so they relearned what they already knew. Unfortunately, they also relearned to expended over 95% of the vehicle rather than re-use it, and then fly so rarely that the remaining 5% becomes more valuable as museum pieces rather than flight hardware. Which also suggests that “reusing much of the hardware” is more like just pissing away what remains of the previous hardware. It is cutting-edge but in the sense of the coup de grace.
I’ve been registered at Ars for over ten years, but I refuse to subscribe because their editorial bent is so terrible. Eric Berger is just about the only decent writer they have left, and to call the comments on most articles a dumpster fire is to insult dumpster fires.
At the end of the day, whether what’s in the dumpster burns or not, it all eventually ends up in a landfill.
Berger and Stephen Clark are OK. Also some science articles about apolitical topics can be interesting. But Beth Mole is a rabid mRNA vax promoter, any article about renewables or EVs is in la la land, and anything dealing with climate winds up being “we’re all gonna fry!” The commenters are brain dead NPCs who don’t look at any real data. If you disagree with them, you are branded as a MAGA-fascist.
Lets hope so. Musk should have a conversation with DoD and let them know that their scheduling may have to be pushed back, if Starship doesn’t start flying….because business reasons.
I think SpaceX will have trouble holding to that schedule because of the environmental stuff. Hopefully, it’s something they can address and move on rather than a Keystone XL saga. But if I were in charge of that, it would be worrying to me that they still need to complete it. That’s an open-ended problem as long as those federal parties haven’t signed off on it.
What I don’t understand is how this goes forward. Will every launch require FAA & FWS review if nothing changes? I can understand changes to the rocket might require FAA review if it might affect range safety but otherwise no. If no changes made to Stage 0, I don’t see the need for FWS involvement either. There may be recommendations from FWS after the next launch because it’s first full use of water deluge system. But after that with no changes, no reviews? The emphasis needs to be to recognize this is still very much an experimental system that needs rapid turnaround to mature. Months of regulatory delay can only be harmful to that. It also indicates that not all Stages 0, 1 & 2 will incur the same amount of regulatory oversight. With Stages 0 and to a lesser extent Stage 1 incurring far more regulatory wrath than Stage 2!!
Don’t presume that just because the FWS was involved this time then they will be involved every time. The FAA recognized that the new deluge system could have an environmental impact on the surroundings. So they requested FWS for their input on that one point. If the deluge system works then there won’t be a need for any further input on that point. Not much to see here.
Amazing. The lawn sprinklers get turned on for a short time and it is an environmental concern. What about thunderstorms, let alone the hurricanes that pass through the area.
Anyone know just how much water is used in the deluge system for a launch? Then we could estimate how much equivalent rainfall that is over the surrounds of the launch pad.
Anyone know just how much water is used in the deluge system for a launch? Then we could estimate how much equivalent rainfall that is over the surrounds of the launch pad.
SpaceX is on record as saying “up to 350,000 gallons” of water per launch.
The launch site consists of quite a bit of land; I found 56 acres for the launch complex area, based on a Wikipedia article.
USGS has a rainfall volume calculator.
50 acres is the closest area in the drop-down for area calculations.
1 inch of rainfall spread over an area of 50 acres is 1,357,700 gallons; increased to 56 acres is 1.52M gallons.
So, 1 inch of rain drops anywhere from 3-4 times as much water over the entire surface of the Starbase complex as a single shot of the deluge system for a launch.
Or, one full shot of the deluge system for a launch is the equivalent of 1/4 of an inch of rain…
Granted, the water for the deluge is coming from wells drilled under Starbase and it’s concentrated over a smaller area, and SpaceX would be crazy not to try to reclaim at least SOME of it for future reuse, but your point stands as far as how little it is compared to Mother Nature doing her thing.
Thanks for that, Johnny B.
Do you think that FWS, now that it has its nose under the tent, will remove it?
No, I think they will have to be forced away from reviewing every change.
I don’t get the Musk hate either. Much seems to come from deranged lefties who don’t like the more relaxed censorship at X i.e. views slightly right of the far left are now tolerated.
Musk was a leftists darling when he was just the solar panel and electric car guy. Once he started speaking out on the woke mind virus and freedom of speech the left once again revealed themselves as the true fascists
Indeed. Suddenly, he became an enemy just like that.
Saw on Twitter that a NOTAM had been issued for a little later this month.
I normally skim through comments on a story to catch opposing views that are often illuminating. Many of the comments at ARS are dumpster fire horrible. The Elon hate is unbelievable to me.
That’s what comes of being able to say anything and accuse people of anything without consequence.
ARS ran off the sane commenters years ago. It’s pretty much a moderation policy they have. Anyone who dares question dogma gets burned.
Earlier today I was struck by the loss of a Shuttle pilot.
Karol J. Bobko
He was the first to command three Shuttle missions, and just died of old age, at 85.
NASA is still developing the replacement for the vehicle he flew, reusing much of the hardware.
That doesn’t sound like cutting-edge rapid innovation to me.
They did learn to put the capsule back on top of the launch rocket rather than on the side to prevent debris shed on critical components. Then again, they used to do that previously, so they relearned what they already knew. Unfortunately, they also relearned to expended over 95% of the vehicle rather than re-use it, and then fly so rarely that the remaining 5% becomes more valuable as museum pieces rather than flight hardware. Which also suggests that “reusing much of the hardware” is more like just pissing away what remains of the previous hardware. It is cutting-edge but in the sense of the coup de grace.
I’ve been registered at Ars for over ten years, but I refuse to subscribe because their editorial bent is so terrible. Eric Berger is just about the only decent writer they have left, and to call the comments on most articles a dumpster fire is to insult dumpster fires.
At the end of the day, whether what’s in the dumpster burns or not, it all eventually ends up in a landfill.
Berger and Stephen Clark are OK. Also some science articles about apolitical topics can be interesting. But Beth Mole is a rabid mRNA vax promoter, any article about renewables or EVs is in la la land, and anything dealing with climate winds up being “we’re all gonna fry!” The commenters are brain dead NPCs who don’t look at any real data. If you disagree with them, you are branded as a MAGA-fascist.
Lets hope so. Musk should have a conversation with DoD and let them know that their scheduling may have to be pushed back, if Starship doesn’t start flying….because business reasons.
I think SpaceX will have trouble holding to that schedule because of the environmental stuff. Hopefully, it’s something they can address and move on rather than a Keystone XL saga. But if I were in charge of that, it would be worrying to me that they still need to complete it. That’s an open-ended problem as long as those federal parties haven’t signed off on it.
What I don’t understand is how this goes forward. Will every launch require FAA & FWS review if nothing changes? I can understand changes to the rocket might require FAA review if it might affect range safety but otherwise no. If no changes made to Stage 0, I don’t see the need for FWS involvement either. There may be recommendations from FWS after the next launch because it’s first full use of water deluge system. But after that with no changes, no reviews? The emphasis needs to be to recognize this is still very much an experimental system that needs rapid turnaround to mature. Months of regulatory delay can only be harmful to that. It also indicates that not all Stages 0, 1 & 2 will incur the same amount of regulatory oversight. With Stages 0 and to a lesser extent Stage 1 incurring far more regulatory wrath than Stage 2!!
Don’t presume that just because the FWS was involved this time then they will be involved every time. The FAA recognized that the new deluge system could have an environmental impact on the surroundings. So they requested FWS for their input on that one point. If the deluge system works then there won’t be a need for any further input on that point. Not much to see here.
Amazing. The lawn sprinklers get turned on for a short time and it is an environmental concern. What about thunderstorms, let alone the hurricanes that pass through the area.
Anyone know just how much water is used in the deluge system for a launch? Then we could estimate how much equivalent rainfall that is over the surrounds of the launch pad.
Anyone know just how much water is used in the deluge system for a launch? Then we could estimate how much equivalent rainfall that is over the surrounds of the launch pad.
SpaceX is on record as saying “up to 350,000 gallons” of water per launch.
The launch site consists of quite a bit of land; I found 56 acres for the launch complex area, based on a Wikipedia article.
USGS has a rainfall volume calculator.
50 acres is the closest area in the drop-down for area calculations.
1 inch of rainfall spread over an area of 50 acres is 1,357,700 gallons; increased to 56 acres is 1.52M gallons.
So, 1 inch of rain drops anywhere from 3-4 times as much water over the entire surface of the Starbase complex as a single shot of the deluge system for a launch.
Or, one full shot of the deluge system for a launch is the equivalent of 1/4 of an inch of rain…
Granted, the water for the deluge is coming from wells drilled under Starbase and it’s concentrated over a smaller area, and SpaceX would be crazy not to try to reclaim at least SOME of it for future reuse, but your point stands as far as how little it is compared to Mother Nature doing her thing.
Thanks for that, Johnny B.
Do you think that FWS, now that it has its nose under the tent, will remove it?
No, I think they will have to be forced away from reviewing every change.
I don’t get the Musk hate either. Much seems to come from deranged lefties who don’t like the more relaxed censorship at X i.e. views slightly right of the far left are now tolerated.
Musk was a leftists darling when he was just the solar panel and electric car guy. Once he started speaking out on the woke mind virus and freedom of speech the left once again revealed themselves as the true fascists
Indeed. Suddenly, he became an enemy just like that.
Saw on Twitter that a NOTAM had been issued for a little later this month.