4 ms·

God forbid if a quails nest is disturbed or charred as we attempt to reach the stars. I'll contemplate the moral dilemma as I head to the grocery store to buy

God forbid if a quails nest is disturbed or charred as we attempt to reach the stars. I'll contemplate the moral dilemma as I head to the grocery store to buy some quail eggs.

ggoo 3y ago
You sound like a pretty hateful person.
- wrycoder 3y ago
  “Vegetation within a few hundred yards of the launch pad was singed. A little more than a quarter mile south of the launch pad, a fire burned about three acres, charring a quail’s nest.”
  - test098 3y ago
    > The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) documented that the debris cloud deposited material as far as six-and-a-half miles north of the launch pad. The agency said in a statement that the debris cloud was made of pulverized concrete. > Broken concrete — some pieces the size of golf balls, others the size of car engine blocks or larger — was spread out over nearly three-quarters of a mile in some directions. > Craters from large pieces of concrete were as large as six feet across and a few feet deep. Some pieces hit the ground so hard they were submerged in the sand, leaving only an empty crater with rebar jutting from it. > If SpaceX starts launching routinely — as it plans to — wildlife may leave the area around the launch site. > "If these major disturbances, in addition to actual damage to the habitat, happen consistently every month, every week, birds and other other wildlife are not likely to use that habitat," LeClaire said. > "It sure seemed like the decision to not do these very basic channels or flame protection or systems that you see everywhere else was a matter of convenience," Roesch said. > SpaceX initially had plans to extend its launch pad facility another 17 acres into the wetlands surrounding Boca Chica Beach. But after the company gave conflicting and insufficient information, the Army Corps of Engineers pulled its permit application for the project.
- AYBABTME 3y ago
  Well, I don't think I am. I merely disagree. Have a great day.
rdez6173 3y ago
Hey, sure, let's destroy the Earth and its inhabitants with zero regard for anything! As long as we get to take vacations to the moon! Right? This is preventable, and should be prevented. I don't care if it's Elon Musk or anyone else. Engineers should not be reckless in their endeavors.
object-a 3y ago
Not only did this rocket not make it close to the stars, the damage could have been prevented by following fire diversion best practices. It's even possible that the rocker exploded because they failed to follow those practices
- grecy 3y ago
  The rocket was always going to wind up in the ocean, and certainly the upper stage (starship) was always expected to be in many pieces when it did.
- AYBABTME 3y ago
  I agree they should have done better, but I think the article's comparison of relatively minor localized damage, versus the completely ignored potential, makes the line of argument of the author quite unreasonable. Most outages are caused by engineers shipping code. We still ship code. We try to minimize damage and we still fail. Most times the fail was obviously preventable in insight.
  - object-a 3y ago
    That’s true, but if you shipped code that caused ecological damage due to a failure to follow correct procedures, there would be corrective measures. For example: - You might not be allowed to ship code without oversight - You might have to complete a post mortem and analysis of what went wrong - If you were negligent (e.g., you skipped protocol to ship on a 4/20 joke), you might be fired The FAA is basically saying “Something went way outside parameters here and you caused a lot of damage. Take a pause and figure that out”, and the parent poster is mad about that
elihu 3y ago
The launch pad wasn't supposed to disintegrate and shower the surrounding area with large quantities of all sizes of concrete debris. It's pretty reasonable for them to get push-back for their inadequate engineering when it causes unanticipated negative side-effects. Now they'll have to re-design their launch pad, but they were going to have to do that anyways. (Article says they planned to use a water-cooled steel plate under the launch pad but it wasn't ready in time. Maybe that's enough, or maybe they'll have to install a proper flame trench and water deluge system which they were trying to avoid for some reason.)

God forbid if a quails nest is disturbed or charred as we attempt to reach the stars. I'll contemplate the moral dilemma as I head to the grocery store to buy some quail eggs.

ggoo 3y ago

You sound like a pretty hateful person.

wrycoder 3y ago
“Vegetation within a few hundred yards of the launch pad was singed. A little more than a quarter mile south of the launch pad, a fire burned about three acres, charring a quail’s nest.”
- test098 3y ago
  > The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) documented that the debris cloud deposited material as far as six-and-a-half miles north of the launch pad. The agency said in a statement that the debris cloud was made of pulverized concrete. > Broken concrete — some pieces the size of golf balls, others the size of car engine blocks or larger — was spread out over nearly three-quarters of a mile in some directions. > Craters from large pieces of concrete were as large as six feet across and a few feet deep. Some pieces hit the ground so hard they were submerged in the sand, leaving only an empty crater with rebar jutting from it. > If SpaceX starts launching routinely — as it plans to — wildlife may leave the area around the launch site. > "If these major disturbances, in addition to actual damage to the habitat, happen consistently every month, every week, birds and other other wildlife are not likely to use that habitat," LeClaire said. > "It sure seemed like the decision to not do these very basic channels or flame protection or systems that you see everywhere else was a matter of convenience," Roesch said. > SpaceX initially had plans to extend its launch pad facility another 17 acres into the wetlands surrounding Boca Chica Beach. But after the company gave conflicting and insufficient information, the Army Corps of Engineers pulled its permit application for the project.
AYBABTME 3y ago
Well, I don't think I am. I merely disagree. Have a great day.

rdez6173 3y ago

Hey, sure, let's destroy the Earth and its inhabitants with zero regard for anything! As long as we get to take vacations to the moon! Right? This is preventable, and should be prevented. I don't care if it's Elon Musk or anyone else. Engineers should not be reckless in their endeavors.

object-a 3y ago

Not only did this rocket not make it close to the stars, the damage could have been prevented by following fire diversion best practices. It's even possible that the rocker exploded because they failed to follow those practices

grecy 3y ago
The rocket was always going to wind up in the ocean, and certainly the upper stage (starship) was always expected to be in many pieces when it did.
AYBABTME 3y ago
I agree they should have done better, but I think the article's comparison of relatively minor localized damage, versus the completely ignored potential, makes the line of argument of the author quite unreasonable. Most outages are caused by engineers shipping code. We still ship code. We try to minimize damage and we still fail. Most times the fail was obviously preventable in insight.
- object-a 3y ago
  That’s true, but if you shipped code that caused ecological damage due to a failure to follow correct procedures, there would be corrective measures. For example: - You might not be allowed to ship code without oversight - You might have to complete a post mortem and analysis of what went wrong - If you were negligent (e.g., you skipped protocol to ship on a 4/20 joke), you might be fired The FAA is basically saying “Something went way outside parameters here and you caused a lot of damage. Take a pause and figure that out”, and the parent poster is mad about that

elihu 3y ago

The launch pad wasn't supposed to disintegrate and shower the surrounding area with large quantities of all sizes of concrete debris. It's pretty reasonable for them to get push-back for their inadequate engineering when it causes unanticipated negative side-effects. Now they'll have to re-design their launch pad, but they were going to have to do that anyways. (Article says they planned to use a water-cooled steel plate under the launch pad but it wasn't ready in time. Maybe that's enough, or maybe they'll have to install a proper flame trench and water deluge system which they were trying to avoid for some reason.)