White House is considering unprecedented move of HALTING the SpaceX Starship program. FAA & EPA will reportedly ground for investigations that could take *YEARS* 🚀 👨‍🚀 🚫

[JackSeal]

 The multi-year bureaucratic clash over the environmental impact of the world’s largest rocket considered everything from endangered birds and historical monuments to exhaust and construction noise, but the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) didn’t anticipate one thing...

Dust 🚀🌪 

As SpaceX’s Starship rocket took flight last week in Texas, more than two dozen powerful rocket engines fired at once, pushing the enormous vehicle into space—and blasting away at the launch gantry and the ground below it with more than 6,000 metric tons of force.

The dust thrown up by the rocket’s engines was more broadly felt: A thick layer of sand descended on the surrounding communities, notably the nearby city of Port Isabel. 

While the dust isn’t known to be contaminated with any chemicals, breathing particulate matter in general is hazardous to health. 

Last year, when evaluating the air quality risks of a Starship launch, the FAA concluded that it was “not expected to result in significant impacts to air quality.”

Asked about the dust, the FAA didn’t directly address the question.

“The FAA is providing oversight to ensure SpaceX complies with its FAA-approved mishap investigation plan and other regulatory requirements,” a spokesperson told Quartz Science News. 

“The FAA will review, and must approve, the final report before the mishap investigation can be closed.”

Why didn’t SpaceX plan for the massive rocket’s exhaust?

Typically, rocket launch sites have large concrete trenches that redirect energy away from the pad and the vehicle, while thousands of gallons of water deluge the area (such as the Space Shuttle flame trench).

It’s not clear why SpaceX didn’t use this kind of infrastructure, which is part of the launch setup for its Falcon rockets. 

Elon Musk, SpaceX’s CEO, said on Twitter that the company had begun building a “massive water-cooled, steel plate to go under the launch mount” three months ago. 

However, Musk said the plate wasn’t ready in time, and engineers went ahead with the launch thinking that the high-strength concrete below the rocket could withstand the force. 

When will Starship launch again?

Beyond preventing environmental contamination, Musk and company have good reason to solve this problem: It’s possible that debris thrown up by the rocket contributed to the failure of multiple Starship engines and, in turn, the failure of the vehicle to make it into space. 

Final word on any links between destruction at the site and destruction in flight will wait on a thorough engineering analysis.

Besides figuring out what went wrong with the rocket itself, the company will need to repair its launch infrastructure and win the approval of the FAA again.
 

[Hitman]

Zuzubi. He will easily come up with a solution. 

[argadorn]

1 minute ago, Hitman said:

Zuzubi. He will easily come up with a solution. 

Do you musk is pro democratic 

[Pavanonline]

Thatha Boeing vadilesi cycle meeda pothada mari 

[basha786]

Plays $TSLA puts price target $78

[Hitman]

15 minutes ago, basha786 said:

Plays $TSLA puts price target $78

Space X is not part of Tesla 

[pakeer_saab]

2 hours ago, JackSeal said:

 The multi-year bureaucratic clash over the environmental impact of the world’s largest rocket considered everything from endangered birds and historical monuments to exhaust and construction noise, but the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) didn’t anticipate one thing...

Dust 🚀🌪 

As SpaceX’s Starship rocket took flight last week in Texas, more than two dozen powerful rocket engines fired at once, pushing the enormous vehicle into space—and blasting away at the launch gantry and the ground below it with more than 6,000 metric tons of force.

The dust thrown up by the rocket’s engines was more broadly felt: A thick layer of sand descended on the surrounding communities, notably the nearby city of Port Isabel. 

While the dust isn’t known to be contaminated with any chemicals, breathing particulate matter in general is hazardous to health. 

Last year, when evaluating the air quality risks of a Starship launch, the FAA concluded that it was “not expected to result in significant impacts to air quality.”

Asked about the dust, the FAA didn’t directly address the question.

“The FAA is providing oversight to ensure SpaceX complies with its FAA-approved mishap investigation plan and other regulatory requirements,” a spokesperson told Quartz Science News. 

“The FAA will review, and must approve, the final report before the mishap investigation can be closed.”

Why didn’t SpaceX plan for the massive rocket’s exhaust?

Typically, rocket launch sites have large concrete trenches that redirect energy away from the pad and the vehicle, while thousands of gallons of water deluge the area (such as the Space Shuttle flame trench).

It’s not clear why SpaceX didn’t use this kind of infrastructure, which is part of the launch setup for its Falcon rockets. 

Elon Musk, SpaceX’s CEO, said on Twitter that the company had begun building a “massive water-cooled, steel plate to go under the launch mount” three months ago. 

However, Musk said the plate wasn’t ready in time, and engineers went ahead with the launch thinking that the high-strength concrete below the rocket could withstand the force. 

When will Starship launch again?

Beyond preventing environmental contamination, Musk and company have good reason to solve this problem: It’s possible that debris thrown up by the rocket contributed to the failure of multiple Starship engines and, in turn, the failure of the vehicle to make it into space. 

Final word on any links between destruction at the site and destruction in flight will wait on a thorough engineering analysis.

Besides figuring out what went wrong with the rocket itself, the company will need to repair its launch infrastructure and win the approval of the FAA again.
 

dems revenge on Musk mowa for aligning with conversative ideas