The FAA has expanded the “aircraft hazard area” for SpaceX’s ninth test launch of its Starship system in hopes of avoiding the air traffic scramble that resulted from the previous two failed launches. In January and March, Starship vehicles disintegrated over the Caribbean, diverting aircraft in flight and grounding others. For the next launch, which could happen as early as Tuesday, the agency has declared a 1600-nm hazard area stretching from the launch site in Starbase, Texas, to the Turks and Caicos. In the previous flights, the corridor was about half that size. The agency said the expansion was done because of the previous experience and because there’s a new element of risk with this launch.
For the first time, SpaceX will be using a refurbished Super Heavy booster rocket that had been used and recovered on the launch tower on one of the previous flights. The primary mission is to test a new heat shield on the Starship. The vehicle will splash down in the Indian Ocean if the flight goes as planned. The previous two tests ended before the shield could be used. It’s suspected fuel leaks caused by stronger than expected vibrations brought those vehicles down. Fuel lines have been rerouted and bigger propellant tanks installed. New control flaps have also been installed.
Approval for the launch was granted by the FAA late last week and the posting of warnings suggest the earliest launch time is the evening of May 27. SpaceX has been told to schedule the launches for “off-peak” hours for air travel and the FAA says flight delays of from 40 minutes to two hours are anticipated to accommodate the flight.
Can you imagine if Boeing had such an abysmal record with their SLS?
There are two different questions here. First, did the system specifications bidders were given for SLS ask for the right system, and has execution on the project as bid been reasonably conducted. I think we’d agree the answer to the first question, in hindsight is probably not. I am not involved to have an idea how to answer the 2nd question. Over the years I’ve seen some reports that indicate some very useful engineering, materials, and manufacturing techniques have been developed in the SLS program. I hope that learning can translate to something of more lasting value for the money spent. You can look back at Apollo and the Shuttle and say the same thing. The system requirements and resulting designs were not the right thing by current standards, but they enabled progress and the money spent was of long term value.
However neither of those are the point of my original post which was that there is a double standard. If Boeing were doing a project with successes and failures that paralleled those of SpaceX they’d still be ridiculed in a way that SpaceX is not. The same could be said for NASA, at this point they could not afford a string of failures and the condemnation it would bring from the public and Congress.
Looks like Elon had another rough night.