Great news for SpaceX Starship from the FAA!
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 27 май 2024
- The FAA just announced some fantastic news for Starship that could improve future testing in a big way!!
#space #spacex #nasa
Please support my channel! AS LITTLE AS 10 CENTS A DAY!!
DISCORD MEMBERSHIP, EXCLUSIVE CONTENT AND EARLY RELEASES PLUS 15% OFF MERCH!
/ angryastronaut
www.paypal.com/paypalme/Angry...
Follow me on twitter:
/ astro_angry 
Развлечения
![XO (Only If You Say Yes) - ENHYPEN エンハイプン 엔하이픈 [Music Bank] | KBS WORLD TV 240712](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/wBT1bKKwPTo/mqdefault.jpg)
There is no rule bending. The FAA is just following the rules, as they are required to.
The FAA rules are like Whose Line is It Anyway. The show where everything's made up and the points don't matter.
@@jtjames79This is within the rules. Aircraft don't automatically get grounded for an incident when no one was put at risk.
Oh you sweet summer child you still have alot to learn if you think there is “no rule bending”, the elites rule bend all the time.
@@erwina4738 I'm well aware that rules in general are sometimes bent.
But I was referring to this specific situation - the FAA approved Starship to fly without closing the mishap investigation, as they should according to the rules. If they *hadn't* given approval, they would be bending the rules, trying to sabotage Starship progress.
@@robmc3338 That depends on if you remember to pay the big guy his 10% or not.
This decision makes sense. Failure is a result of testing. As we say in the software development business, you don’t learn much from success. You learn from failures. Same with space flight. As long as there isn’t a public safety issue and it’s just some fish who have to avoid stainless steel rain showers, let them test.
If the Starship remains within its flight corridors, it shouldn’t matter what happens to it.
Rapid iteration testing should allow them to launch again and again.
Good news!
So someone in power pointed out to the FAA that SpaceX's flights aren't doing anything that other space flight providers are doing. (Letting their ships de-orbit and crash into the ocean after launch). Good.
Also, thank you for the short, and on subject video. Too many people pad these things out.
I’ve argued this point to others and they always just said it doesn’t matter. Glad to be vindicated.
It's not bending the rules when it is in the rules... that's just following the rules.
Plus the FAA makes its own rules.
Don't try to tell this asshat channel the truth.
The race for space is back on, should have been this way since the beginning. Industrialising space is the only way to move industry off this rock and bring us closer to a post scarcity civilisation.
Agreed
The 1st and 2nd launches were too disastrous to do this, the 3rd was a perfect launch until re-entry
@@cameronh3260 I'm an idiot, so I can't accurately describe how difficult it is to prototype EVERY single part of EVERY rocket without test launches. From interactions of propellant molecules at pressure, as it boosts out of a gravity well, decreasing the pull of gravity and the reverse on reentry.
Structural compression, tension and shear shear stresses as the rocket goes up and then reenters. I'd rather 1000 prototypes blow up, than have a single fault during a manned mission.
Then there's the fact that the winners of the space race decide the future of our species and planet.
As long as they hit their stated target zones at sea, it doesn’t really matter how hard they hit them. 😊
Poor ickle fishies! 😭
Thanks Jordan, you were the first to report. Your FAA contact appears to be a great asset. Hope all goes well on IFT-4, and perhaps see you at Flight 5
Bro from Little Rock Arkansas I just want to say from the bottom of my heart thank you so much for giving me this information so I didn't have to go search for it and let's pray together that what you said happens 🙏
Greeting from Benton, Arkansas, fellow Arkansan.
Little Rock internationally famous nowadays...for Evanescence, lol.
0:31 finally, this is a test rocket, in the way they use to do on 60s, it’s about time to change rules.
But won't someone please think of the bureaucrats!?
Excellent news.
Great news
SpaceX needs a high cadence of launches to prove its many new systems. I am glad the FAA is adjusting.
Great News!
Nice to have a reliable news source on everything space... so many OTHER 'space news' channels are pure clickbait, Thank you for always delivering what's promised in your video titles.images :)
I see "NASA shocked"... I pass. Out of many, many channels I watch 7: angry, Everyday Astronaut, Marcus House, Matt Lowne, What About it, Scott Manley, Engineering Today and NASA Space Flight
Good news, TY.
Nice!
FAA are the ones who make the rules.. They can't bend the rules, they always had this options, it was never legally said that mishap is essential for licensing
Let's goo
Let's Go!
So pumped
Definitely good news that they aren't pressing on this issue to hard.
As long as SpaceX is making forward progress and not endangering people/property then why shouldn't the FAA allow them to continue progress?
HUZZAH! Common sense prevails at the FAA.
Luck seems with Elon.
Thank you for making this video! It's an awesome news and you didn't make the video 10 minutes long. If I could sub twice I would.
We knew this two weeks ago.
Red tape slowing down innovation. FAA adjusting to new technology and new strategies is how it should always be, but government works often too slow. This is just adjusting to how SpaceX are doing things differently compared to old guard.
No doubt he’ll be first to report UFOs surrounding the launch of Starship.
I think they have been very lucky so far with these launches.
in what way?
Great engineering and management is what SpaceX is about.
Are you getting old? Last year you knew very well why these last minute policies were followed. Also: there is *no* rule bending, and there is no real mishap when a rocket performs exactly like all other competing rockets on the planet.
To prevent time robbing investigations, it would be more clever if SpaceX omitted the landing attempts from the official flight plan. If they mention it as a bonus, but not as a part that must be attended. The reentry of Starship is the most difficult part of the mission. Especially for something of that size.
🚀🏴☠️🎸
I have a question about the jettisoning of the hot stage ring, at nine tons, is this something they plan to do for all launches (I guess no)? How would that work above a site that captures a booster? Or is it removed before entering the atmosphere at all so it just burns up?
I'm pretty sure the ring is part of the booster. Not a separate part that gets discarded.
The reason they grant the launch licenses in the last few days right before launch is because environmentalists in Boca Chica have threatened to try use the courts to stop specific launches from happening. By waiting until close to the launch date to grant the license it gives those environmentalists virtually no time to head to court and stop a launch from happening.
This may mean that SpaceX is clear to launch the Starship IFT4 under the IFT-3 license, as long as all Public Safety measures are taken into account and are in place.
No, the license specificly states flight 3. They need the license to be updated before they can fly again but this will allow that to happen.
👍🖖🏽
Are you going to south padre island to watch ?
No
Finally fn faa lol
Hey, thanks for taking a break from your UFO conspiracy videos to come see us again...
Reactions like this show the fate of the Angry Astronaut channel may already be sealed. The only good news is that Jordan's contact with the FAA graced him with this communication. That shows they haven't dismissed Jordan entirely yet. But more of the UFO weirdness will result in Angry Astronaut being frozen out of relationships with NASA, Sierra Space and other space agencies and companies, which will understandably wish not to join the UFO nuttiness. It's probably too late to split the channel in two to serve the two entirely incompatible audiences.
Credibility is important. It is much easier to lose credibility than it is to build it. This channel is quickly losing credibility.
@@RockinRobbins13it worked for the History Channel.
@@executivesteps Just because something is popular doesn't mean you should do it. Some people actually care about promoting disinformation, lies, delusions, absolute tripe for the sake of viewership numbers. I'm one of them.
These weird denialists' so-called "theories" are based on an irrational accusation of scientists, engineers, celestial mechanics gurus, planetary scientists, physicists, ship captains, airline pilots, astronauts, astronomers, meteorologists, news anchors, who dedicate their lives in service to all mankind, attempting to convince us that our trust in these people has been betrayed by a vast, airtight, long-standing conspiracy among those people to kill us or control us or otherwise victimize us.
The end game of the History Channel conspiracy enthusiast hobby is the destruction of the true currency of civilization: the trust we have in experts.
The result of success in their efforts is the end of all civilization and the reestablishment of thuggery as the arbiter of human behavior. That must be fought to the death. It cannot be allowed to succeed.
Historical, scietific, legal denialism is nothing more than wanton destruction of humanity. It's the equivalent to the anarchists of the late 1800s and early 1900s, who caused tens of millions of gruesome human deaths. History Channel isn't harmless entertainment. Flat Earth is not fun ridiculousness to joke about. Sovereign Citizens aren't harmless anachronisms. Conspiracy UFO enthusiasts are part of that same destructive crowd. To let their proclamations stand unrebutted has grave consequences for mankind. And more popularity for such despicable lies means there is more danger.
We just don’t have enough YT hosts covering the launch. No doubt UFOs will be surrounding the launch.
The rule states they can request license no bent rules . Faulty reporting do a better job Jordan
Glad the activists -DFWS and DNR cooled there jets !
so why are you angry? 🤦🏿♂️
It makes him seem knowledgeable and concerned.
Likely he’ll be whisked away to the domed city by space aliens to silence him.
@@executivesteps in his original essays on youtube he was angry for good reasons. he showed how there are viable reasons to suspect there is ET life out there. and so on. he was really authentic. but now he has become a mouthpiece for the government. telling us the FAA or whoever, responds in "6 minutes". lol. reminder - these are the guys grounding spacex. lol. what a complete clown.
The FAA is another of those US government agencies that needs a refresh / reboot as it has become so narrow thinking and risk adverse that it has a hard time seeing the difference between the passenger airlines and a development program.
And I seriously wonder if the military industrial complex has to jump though all these hoops, I'd bet not because the FAA and the defense contractors have a revolving door employment backdoor scheme going on.
All cultures / societies become Senescent and 'die' and some other political structure takes its place, I have come to believe that the US is in its final collapse and just hope SpaceX really does establish a colony out there to save the seeds for the future because I suspect what waits the US is very grim and dystopian
I'm afraid I disagree. I've spoken extensively with the FAA officials who actually make the decisions on these matters, and they definitely understand the difference between commercial air travel and developmental programs.
To my knowledge, I'm the only RUclipsr who has secured an interview with the FAA official in charge of spaceflight development.
Check this out:
ruclips.net/video/1Q1dHf1fIJE/видео.htmlsi=SF5O5gAAwPrd3xQR
@@TheAngryAstronaut OK, but as a pilot (before my heart problem lost me my license) the FAA of 30 years ago was there to help the aviation community and make things work smoother, they were trying to be helpful, if anFAA inspector walked up you were glad to see him. Now they seem to be officious prigs looking for something to cite you for and if asked for advice act like they are eating lemons. And now when one appears at your hanger there's that faint fear that they will make a mountain out of a mole hole so they can cite you for something. Very uncomfortable.
I don't know any of the FAA involved with SpaceX, I accept your view that there might be a different culture in a different division of FAA.
How does the FAA have jurisdiction in the middle of the Gulf of Mexico or the Indian Ocean?
They have jurisdiction because the flight originated in Texas.
every contry has jurisdiction for space launches originating in their territory per international treaty.
Every country is responsible for activities in space, that are undertaken by any private company headquartered in that country. Doesn't matter, where on Earth the launch or landing actually occurs; the only thing that matters is that SpaceX is a U.S. company, and therefore the U.S. is responsible for any repercussions stemming from SpaceX's launch/landing activities. The U.S., in turn, has delegated that oversight responsibility for all commercial space launches, to a specific agency - the FAA.
JFGI
The FAA has figured out that this is a test program and not a commercial human rated launch? I guess boeing screwing up constantly is forcing the FAA to acknowledge reality just like NASA had to when they quickly approved dragon capsule reuse so spacex could take over the starliner missions that were already on the schedule. If the FAA kept slowing down spacex's ability to iteratively test and make their rocket safe, they would hurt the entire launch industry and prevent the moon missions from happening.
Iterative testing is the only way to make a safe rocket. Companies like boeing and blue origin don't do iterative testing, so they don't care if the FAA doesn't regulate test launches differently than human launches.
Let's face it, who else has a Rocket to fly?
NASA is schtuck!
No rules were bent. A rule was followed to allow them to fly. How despicable can you get? Hint… stop doing it.
Government exists to make rules and then either bend or break the rules they created in the first place.
The exception is in the rules, it's just rare for companies to be confident enough that there was no safety breach to make the request.
NO RULE BENDING. STOP MR NEGATIVE.
In europe, we would call special requests like this corruption and deny them. However, this is the great kind of corruption if so
In Europe we just hide them. Von der Leijen isn't even elected
Its not a special request, its the published exception to the mishap clause and applies to every aerospace company not just spacex. They just didnt feel confident to try to invoke it before ift3.
Oh goody another space launch disaster up and coming. By the way can't you pay your bus fares like other people.....
Great news!! Elon gets to explode another useless rocket and make a billion dollars.
"RIGHT NOW!"
"STAY ANGRY ABOUT SPACE!"
Great news