NASA and the Private Sector - Page 165

SpaceX’s Starhopper is ramping up test operations at Boca Chica, Texas, ahead of what’s anticipated to be the first, a few feet off the ground hop tests in the coming days.

In the past several days, observers at the east Texas test and launch facility have documented numerous cryogenic tests of Starhopper’s propellant tanks that hold Liquid Oxygen (LOX) and Liquid Methane to fuel the vehicle’s Raptor engines.

These tests involved fueling Starhopper with LOX and liquid methane and testing the pressurization systems, observed via icing of propellant lines leading to the vehicle and the venting of cryogenic boil off at the launch/test site.

These tanking and pressurization tests occurred after Starhopper was transported from its build location to its launch/test stand down the road and proceeded without any of the vehicle’s Raptor engines installed, something Elon Musk noted would happen in short order.

This was followed by visual confirmation last week of the first Raptor engine’s arrival at the Texas site and subsequent installation to Starhopper.

In quick order, residents of Boca Chica Village were notified via mail of imminent tests and road closures that would occur as early as this week, the week of 18 March.

The notice to residents revealed that a security checkpoint would be set up on the road leading to Boca Chica Village and that residents would have to show proof of residence in order to gain access to their homes; any passengers in those vehicles would also have to show proof of residence.

This indicates that no guests will be allowed past the security checkpoint during the coming flight test operations of Starhopper.

A hard checkpoint beyond which no access to Boca Chica Beach will be granted will be further down the road.

With the recent arrival and installation of the first Raptor engine into Starhopper, there was speculation as to whether the test Boca Chica residents were told of would be a hold down static fire or the first hop of Starhopper.

Elon Musk confirmed via Twitter at the weekend that it would “hopefully” be a hop – but only a barely getting off the ground hop and not a low-altitude suborbital hop.

Those suborbital hops require all three of Starhopper’s Raptor engines be installed.

This is quite a departure from how SpaceX has previously proceeded with vehicle testing – forgoing a hold down static fire and instead allowing the single Raptor to lift Starhopper off the ground – albeit only slightly – on its very first integrated firing.

In January, Mr. Musk indicated that Starhopper flight tests could begin as soon as February-March 2019 – which might come true – if no unforeseen circumstances occurred.

On March 19 2019 18:26 opisska wrote:
How the fuck can SpaceX determine who is allowed to go to a village?

On March 20 2019 01:38 CuddlyCuteKitten wrote:


Asking the local authority nicely and providing good reasons I would assume. That is generally how it is done.

On March 20 2019 02:46 ZerOCoolSC2 wrote:
If it is at their facility and they're conducting tests, I'm assuming it is more from a safety standpoint than a privacy thing. By restricting nonessential people from access, they minimize collateral.

On March 20 2019 01:40 opisska wrote:


Yeah I read something about it and I must tell you, this would not fly in 2019 Europe (to be fair, they would never have gotten away by building a potential local doomsday device so close to inhabited buildings). I guess my lack of US perspective has me confused quite too often.

On March 20 2019 02:54 CuddlyCuteKitten wrote:


To my knowledge local authorities in Europe also have a long and proud history of helping out (some would say bending over for) big companies in a variety of ways. It can be everything from fairly benign things (allowing the construction of a small local railway that will stop traffic at some points) to much larger scale stuff.

If the local town is small enough and the economic project important enough it's even possible to relocate an entire city in order to keep the company going which has recently happened (or is ongoing) in Sweden.

It seems to be the local sheriffs office that is handling the perimiter issue and it seems to be a safety zone. So probably everyone involved agrees that it's a good idea.

"NOTICE TO BOCA CHICA VILLAGE RESIDENTS"

"SpaceX is planning to conduct testing as soon as the week of March 18, 2019 at the company's site located near Boca Chica Beach, Cameron County, Texas. During those tests, SpaceX will establish a safety zone perimeter in coordination with local law enforcement. Signage will be in place prior to testing to alert the community of any temporary closures of Highway 4 and Boca Chica Beach.

"Boca Chica Village residents will have access to their homes during testing."

The alleged notice also included a labeled Google Map, reproduced below, and the following text to accompany it:

"[T]wo temporary checkpoints will be established on Highway 4. Individuals who provide proof of residence between the two checkpoints will be allowed to proceed through the soft checkpoint. Access beyond the hard checkpoint will not be permitted during temporary closures."

On March 20 2019 03:13 opisska wrote:


And how exactly does holding a resident's ID help you being safe within the zone, whereas someone without such an ID is not? Are the local residents somehow immunized against exploding rockets?

And no, not everyone involved agrees:

“I’m like, ‘Are you out of your mind?’” said Cheryl Stevens, 55, who settled in Boca Chica Village a decade ago in search of quiet, rustic beauty. “It’s like Nazi Germany.”

http://www.parabolicarc.com/2015/09/09/spacex-wears-boca-chica-village/

But mainly, Heaton said, he is frustrated because the company hasn’t talked to residents directly in two years.

https://www.marketplace.org/2018/05/11/business/neighbors-concerned-spacex-could-transform-south-texas

Residents aren't amused. Cheryl Stevens says she's consulted with attorneys about the legality of closing down the public beach, which she argues is protected by the Texas Open Beaches Act enshrined in the state constitution.

https://www.dailyherald.com/article/20150913/business/150919727/

Just first page of Google with no knowledge of what some more relevant local papers could be.

On March 20 2019 03:26 ZerOCoolSC2 wrote:
Either get onboard wit progress or be ran over by it. This is a minor inconvenience while they conduct tests. They're not kicking them out forever. Fucking hell hillbillies.

It isn't about having the land. It's about weather. Launching in the south is better because weather is more consistent and provides better flight windows for rockets. Try launch in in north dakota or montana.

On March 20 2019 03:25 opisska wrote:
Btw. the most fun thing I found while looking this up is that the spaceport location is in a danger to be cut in half by The Wall
- which probably won't ever happen, but it is still amusing.

I mean, the choice here is relatively clear, the place must be the closest point to the equator in the US, but for how "cool" SpaceX is trying to act, this is surely some bad PR happening for them here. It's not like the US doesn't have scores of completely uninhabited land in it ...

On March 20 2019 03:26 ZerOCoolSC2 wrote:
Either get onboard wit progress or be ran over by it. This is a minor inconvenience while they conduct tests. They're not kicking them out forever. Fucking hell hillbillies.

It isn't about having the land. It's about weather. Launching in the south is better because weather is more consistent and provides better flight windows for rockets. Try launch in in north dakota or montana.

On March 20 2019 03:36 CuddlyCuteKitten wrote:
Amazon HQ in New York is one example on how it's easily possible to change the mind of a company on where to build.

On March 20 2019 03:40 ZerOCoolSC2 wrote:

They rarely launch during hurricane season. And the hillbilly isnjn reference to the myriad ways companies have tried to kickstart a local economy with a new project, but the locals don't want it. Look at the coal miners. Now, to the point of having civic rights, they do. As is stated above, file a petition to have it on the ballot that SpaceX has to go. Vote them away. HQ Amazon is a perfect example.

P6, I havent read anything that says this is a temporary deal. In fact, if the test goes to plan, then I expect the surrounding areas to start getting business to facilitate the staff there. How do you see this as not a good thing?

On March 20 2019 04:44 ZerOCoolSC2 wrote:

For a progressive, you seem really backwards on this. This launch happens, then believe that the surrounding area will take off. NASA didn't improve all of their locations immediately. Give it time and allow some policies to be written to fix things. Shooting off the hip without knowing all the details (I'm just as guilty) isn't helpful.