Forums before death by AOL, social media and spammers... "We can't have nice things"
|    sci.space.policy    |    Discussions about space policy    |    106,651 messages    |
[   << oldest   |   < older   |   list   |   newer >   |   newest >>   ]
|    Message 105,164 of 106,651    |
|    Snidely to All    |
|    Re: SpaceX and the FAA    |
|    04 Feb 21 23:48:51    |
      From: snidely.too@gmail.com              JF Mezei asserted that:       > On 2021-02-04 15:52, Snidely wrote:       >       >> SN8 clearly was over the water when it started down, and moved inland       >> over the landing pad once it was clear it wasn't heading for South       >> Padre. I haven't watched the SpaceX video enough to be sure it did the       >> same thing, but the cameras of the NSF crew had to pan a fair bit       >> during flight.       >       >       > FAA concerns are about the "boom" of an explosion damaging structures       > (aka: windows) outside of SpaceX land. It wasn't about Starship itself       > landing on populated areas.              And so far, SN1, SN4, SN7, SN7.1, SN8, and SN9 haven't broken windows       in Boca Chica village, much less South Padre Island.              During static fires, the siren tells the BCV residents when to be       outside, just in case of an overpressure event. Not happened yet.       Landing off balance with full tanks might do it, though.              /dps                     --       As a colleague once told me about an incoming manager,       "He does very well in a suck-up, kick-down culture."        Bill in Vancouver              --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05        * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)    |
[   << oldest   |   < older   |   list   |   newer >   |   newest >>   ]
(c) 1994, bbs@darkrealms.ca