| Submit your comments on this article |
| Government Corruption |
| Reps. Peter DeFazio (D-Ore.) and Rick Larsen (D-Wash.) attempt to halt SpaceX development. |
| 2021-03-30 |
| [SpaceNews] Congress raises concerns about FAA’s handling of Starship launch license violation As SpaceX gears up for another test flight of a Starship prototype, the Federal Aviation Administration is facing new scrutiny from Congress for how it handled SpaceX’s violation of its launch license on an earlier test flight. SpaceX had planned to launch its SN11 Starship vehicle March 29 from its Boca Chica, Texas, test site. That flight will be similar to those of previous Starship prototypes, going to an altitude of 10 kilometers before landing on a nearby pad. However, SpaceX called off the March 29 launch attempt because an FAA inspector could not arrive to observe the flight during a five-hour window. “FAA inspector unable to reach Starbase in time for launch today,” tweeted Elon Musk, chief executive of SpaceX, using the proposed new name for the Boca Chica site. “Postponed to no earlier than tomorrow.” The requirement for an FAA presence on site at the test site is new for the SN11 launch. The latest version of SpaceX’s FAA launch license for the Starship suborbital test flight program, issued March 12, allows those test flights to take place “only when an FAA Safety Inspector is present at SpaceX’s Boca Chica launch and landing site.” The FAA cleared SpaceX to proceed with launches, with SN9 and SN10 launching and landing — and both exploding upon or shortly after landing — on Feb. 2 and March 3, respectively. Neither caused any damage outside of the SpaceX test site. The FAA’s response to SpaceX’s launch license violation, including the lack of any penalties beyond the investigation, prompted criticism from two key members of Congress. In a March 25 letter to FAA Administrator Steve Dickson, Reps. Peter DeFazio (D-Ore.) and Rick Larsen (D-Wash.) sought to “register our concerns” with the incident. DeFazio is chair of the House Transportation Committee and Larsen the chair of its aviation subcommittee. “Given the high-risk nature of the industry, we are disappointed that the FAA declined to conduct an independent review of the event and, to the best of our knowledge, has not pursued any form of enforcement action,” they wrote after summarizing the incident and investigation. In the letter, DeFazio and Larsen called on the FAA to “resist any potential undue influence on launch safety decision-making” by taking “all the time and actions necessary” to evaluate proposed launches. They also urged the FAA to implement “a strict policy to deal with violations of FAA launch and reentry licenses” that includes civil penalties, and to evaluate its current approach to safety oversight and enforcement for commercial space activities. Related: Peter DeFazio: 2020-10-19 Portland protests drive powerful Dem's Oregon district toward young Republican rival Peter DeFazio: 2010-12-08 Liberals Try to Prevent Pelosi From Bringing Tax Bill to the Floor Peter DeFazio: 2010-11-17 Nancy Pelosi: The Gift That Keeps on Giving! Related: Steve Dickson: 2021-02-22 FAA Demands Boing 777 Engine Inspections Steve Dickson: 2020-12-30 US to Allow Small Drones to Fly Over People at Night |
| Posted by:3dc |
| #14 International waters are just a few miles away, Brownsville has a good port, and SpaceX will soon have mobile launching and recovery platforms as noted above. And Elon can always buy a convenient island someplace nearby, outside the territorial grasp of the Communist US government. They are in a good position to tell the US Government to go piss up a rope. |
| Posted by: Ho Chi Snemp6051 2021-03-30 16:55 |
| #13 Really. It reads like our FAA official wanted his hotel bill picked up or "can't make it in time." |
| Posted by: swksvolFF 2021-03-30 16:41 |
| #12 Musk had to move from California to Texas because of Democrats. Will he have to move from the United States to, say, Australia because of Democrats? |
| Posted by: Abu Uluque 2021-03-30 13:52 |
| #11 RWR: "If it moves, tax it. If it keeps moving, regulate it..." |
| Posted by: Matt 2021-03-30 13:09 |
| #10 Representatives from such well run states as Oregon and Washington are surely more competent than some "hacker" entrepreneur and his gaggle of "unwoke" mechanics. |
| Posted by: AlmostAnonymous5839 2021-03-30 10:36 |
| #9 Maybe I need another cup of coffee, but what was the actual violation by SpaceX? They scrubbed a flight because some Federal hack with a polyester tie wasn't there to watch; doesn't sound like a foul to me. |
| Posted by: Raj 2021-03-30 09:56 |
| #8 The "stuck" the unexpected explosive failure again this morning at the Boca Chica Fireworks Emporium. |
| Posted by: M. Murcek 2021-03-30 09:55 |
| #7 Those oil drilling platforms they are converting to mobile launch and recovery facilities are looking like a smart investment. |
| Posted by: Greater the Anonymous5721 2021-03-30 08:58 |
| #6 If hampered too much. Mr. Musk could just move to his backup launch site outside of the USA. Then do it quicker at a lower cost, now caused by Less Red Tape and LIBERAL BS. |
| Posted by: NN2N1 2021-03-30 06:04 |
| #5 Just seeing "(D-Wash)" & "(D-Ore)" says it all. |
| Posted by: Clem 2021-03-30 04:14 |
| #4 It's SpaceX or China, geniuses. |
| Posted by: g(r)omgoru 2021-03-30 03:57 |
| #3 Doubt this will happen, they would get better results attempting to stop a freight train doing 50 MPH. You guys are Decades late, and Billions short. Good luck. |
| Posted by: Cloluque Flomoting5546 2021-03-30 03:20 |
| #2 They used to call Senator 'Scoop' Jackson the Representative from Boeing. Looks like that mantle has passed on to Larsen. |
| Posted by: CrazyFool 2021-03-30 00:28 |
| #1 Of course they do. Can't have a maverick making the government sponsored shit look bad. And he is independently thinking too! |
| Posted by: DarthVader 2021-03-30 00:16 |