We were curious if @SpaceX could use the time until the catch attempt license modification is approved, to fly another "Flight 4" like, Starship attempt.We also were curious if the TPS would already require a modification of the launch license. Regarding that, the FAA said:
"The FAA requires a license modification if an operator proposes a change that is material to public safety. A change is material to public safety if it alters or affects the following: class of payload; type of launch or reentry vehicle; type or quantity of hazardous material; flight trajectory; launch site or reentry site or other landing site; or any system, policy, procedure, requirement, criteria, or standard that is safety critical.A proposal to conduct a return to launch site for the booster, if the FAA has not previously evaluated and authorized it for prior flights, is a change that is material to public safety. A change of a vehicle's thermal protection system (TPS) may be a material change if the TPS is a safety critical system or component that could affect public safety."The FAA responding to NSF
SpaceX president calls regulatory infractions 'nonsense,' seeks more Texas cooperation, funding [paywalled]QuoteSpaceX President and Chief Operating Officer Gwynne Shotwell updated lawmakers Tuesday on the company’s progress and urged them to continue their support. As part of a panel of members from the Texas Space Commission, Shotwell told the House Appropriations Committee that SpaceX hasn’t had “specific issues” with Texas regulators but has with federal entities. “We work very closely with organizations such as the (Texas Commission on Environmental Quality),” she said. “You may have read a little bit of nonsense in the papers recently about that, but we’re working quite well with them.”Shotwell said she’s worried government red tape will impede progress as the company works to resume launches of its Starship mega-rocket from South Texas, grow its Bastrop-area satellite internet business and refine engine testing operations at its McGregor test site.QuoteAt Starbase, it’s been fined by state and federal regulators for the company’s deluge system, which sprays more than 100,000 gallons of water to dampen the force, heat and noise of Starship’s engines at liftoff. On Tuesday, Shotwell maintained that the the system — which she said resembles “an upside down shower head” — was “licensed and permitted by TCEQ … EPA came in afterwards and didn’t like the license or the permit that we had for that and wanted to turn it into a federal permit, which we are working on right now.” However, TCEQ fined the company for operating without the proper permit and has not confirmed giving SpaceX permission for the deluge system. The state agency has said the company received a stormwater permit — a type that’s usually quickly approved — but did not have the permit required for discharge of industrial wastewater produced by launches. That type of permit requires significant technical review and usually takes almost a year to approve. SpaceX applied for that permit July 1, after operating the deluge system several times since its installation last year.
SpaceX President and Chief Operating Officer Gwynne Shotwell updated lawmakers Tuesday on the company’s progress and urged them to continue their support. As part of a panel of members from the Texas Space Commission, Shotwell told the House Appropriations Committee that SpaceX hasn’t had “specific issues” with Texas regulators but has with federal entities. “We work very closely with organizations such as the (Texas Commission on Environmental Quality),” she said. “You may have read a little bit of nonsense in the papers recently about that, but we’re working quite well with them.”Shotwell said she’s worried government red tape will impede progress as the company works to resume launches of its Starship mega-rocket from South Texas, grow its Bastrop-area satellite internet business and refine engine testing operations at its McGregor test site.
At Starbase, it’s been fined by state and federal regulators for the company’s deluge system, which sprays more than 100,000 gallons of water to dampen the force, heat and noise of Starship’s engines at liftoff. On Tuesday, Shotwell maintained that the the system — which she said resembles “an upside down shower head” — was “licensed and permitted by TCEQ … EPA came in afterwards and didn’t like the license or the permit that we had for that and wanted to turn it into a federal permit, which we are working on right now.” However, TCEQ fined the company for operating without the proper permit and has not confirmed giving SpaceX permission for the deluge system. The state agency has said the company received a stormwater permit — a type that’s usually quickly approved — but did not have the permit required for discharge of industrial wastewater produced by launches. That type of permit requires significant technical review and usually takes almost a year to approve. SpaceX applied for that permit July 1, after operating the deluge system several times since its installation last year.
https://twitter.com/bccarcounters/status/1838980463081251278QuoteWe were curious if @SpaceX could use the time until the catch attempt license modification is approved, to fly another "Flight 4" like, Starship attempt.We also were curious if the TPS would already require a modification of the launch license. Regarding that, the FAA said:Quote"The FAA requires a license modification if an operator proposes a change that is material to public safety. A change is material to public safety if it alters or affects the following: class of payload; type of launch or reentry vehicle; type or quantity of hazardous material; flight trajectory; launch site or reentry site or other landing site; or any system, policy, procedure, requirement, criteria, or standard that is safety critical.A proposal to conduct a return to launch site for the booster, if the FAA has not previously evaluated and authorized it for prior flights, is a change that is material to public safety. A change of a vehicle's thermal protection system (TPS) may be a material change if the TPS is a safety critical system or component that could affect public safety."The FAA responding to NSF
Wow. So even a change to the TPS could be grounds for licensing delay? IS there any clarity on what criteria the FAA would use to determine when a change constitutes "a safety critical system or component that could affect public safety?"
What does the law dictate in the event of an unauthorized rocket launch? Is there a possibility of arrest for those involved due to the risk to public safety, and could it be considered a threat to U.S. airspace? I wonder what the reaction of the FAA, NASA and other directly linked agencies would be.
Quote from: Athelstane on 09/26/2024 10:48 amWow. So even a change to the TPS could be grounds for licensing delay? IS there any clarity on what criteria the FAA would use to determine when a change constitutes "a safety critical system or component that could affect public safety?"I think it would be up to SpaceX to demonstrate that the changes are not safety critical if they want to bypass the full review, which seems perfectly reasonable to me. However, public safety reviews aren't really what is being argued over at the moment. SpaceX seem reasonably comfortable with the safety review parts of the FAA process, they just get annoyed when they are blocked by paperwork or inter-agency environmental reviews.
(6)providing launch services and reentry services by the private sector is consistent with the national security and foreign policy interests of the United States and would be facilitated by stable, minimal, and appropriate regulatory guidelines that are fairly and expeditiously applied;(7)the United States should encourage private sector launches, reentries, and associated services and, only to the extent necessary, regulate those launches, reentries, and services to ensure compliance with international obligations of the United States and to protect the public health and safety, safety of property, and national security and foreign policy interests of the United States;
SpaceX needs to design and construct a water deluge system for Mechazilla during Starship landings. Testing should include static firings of a SHB that is suspended from Mechazilla’s chopsticks in the same position as it will be at the moment of capture. This type of testing might sound dangerous; however, it is no more dangerous than a SHB landing.
Not a dumb idea?
In a comment on the pending TCEQ permit, Andrew Granston writes in part:Quote from: GRANSTON,ANDREWSpaceX needs to design and construct a water deluge system for Mechazilla during Starship landings. Testing should include static firings of a SHB that is suspended from Mechazilla’s chopsticks in the same position as it will be at the moment of capture. This type of testing might sound dangerous; however, it is no more dangerous than a SHB landing.Not a dumb idea?
Quote from: sdsds on 09/26/2024 04:31 pmNot a dumb idea?Please tell me this is a joke? That would be impossible to do.
