6 ms·

Are you familiar with the Boardroom Meeting Suggestion meme, where the guy says something audacious (or simply reasonable) and gets thrown out the window? Your

Are you familiar with the Boardroom Meeting Suggestion meme, where the guy says something audacious (or simply reasonable) and gets thrown out the window? Your comment fits that meme perfectly. Yes, SpaceX is a private company, and no, they're not a weapons manufacturer at the moment... but only because the DoD has only asked them to loft surveillance equipment and not told them to launch warheads, and only because they've aimed for orbital targets above the atmosphere rather than on a different continent. They've no doubt signed their life away on not exporting Merlin, Draco, and Raptor engine designs. You may be annoyed at the NSA's attempts to control and restrict "military grade cryptography" in the 90s, or at various bureaucracies that attempt to license which trades and businesses are allowed or not allowed to do various kinds of work. But in rocketry, they're deadly serious about their job. SpaceX cannot run to Mexico.

alooPotato 3y ago
can they do ocean launches?
- yardie 3y ago
  There was Sealaunch[0] a Russian company. And they had a pretty good track record of launches. But it eventually fell into bankruptcy. At the moment, SpaceX does not have the capability to do ocean launches. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sea_Launch https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sea_Launch
- cmsj 3y ago
  They had planned to convert old oil rigs into launch platforms, but abandoned the idea earlier this year: https://spacenews.com/spacex-drops-plans-to-covert-oil-rigs-into-launch-platforms/ https://spacenews.com/spacex-drops-plans-to-covert-oil-rigs-...
pmontra 3y ago
I'm sure about that. What I wonder is if their strategic importance can buy them some slack with the FAA. Apparently not, or not yet.
twic 3y ago
Anyway the cartels have probably already built better rockets in a garage somewhere.
ChuckMcM 3y ago
I love that meme! And yes, its kind of like that. I am actually reasonably familiar with ITAR, including part 121, category 4 (or IV). And Mexico has 'special trading partner' status under the USMCA (formerly NAFTA) and there are carve outs between the US and Mexico. I recognize the reality of such a move would be complicated, require licensing and review, and have geopolitical consequences that everyone would want to weigh in on. All that said, SpaceX could start that process in earnest (which is to say, announce it, start knocking down the regulatory hurdles) and that would give them tremendous leverage in their discussions with the FAA. It would take a while, it would take persistence, but the longer they pushed for it the closer it would get to reality. It would create a credible alternative (if somewhat longer) path to launch against the push back by the US Gov't agencies. The politics of space flight are complicated, but they are politics. I would think that the people here who watched Uber take on the politics of the cab monopolies, or the EU's politics of privacy reaching in and impacting US companies, would begin to understand that laws and regulation are an expression of the prevailing politics and when the politics change the laws change to support the current point of view. Those examples are clearly not as significant as national security politics but history tells us that even those change. The crypto wars, which I was in the middle of, are a good example of going from "you can't do that" here are the laws, regulations, etc. To "okay fine." To be clear, I don't expect SpaceX to advocate for building a launch facility in Mexico. Their somewhat mercurial "technical guy" with the billions of dollars at his disposal however doesn't seem to shy away from politically difficult strategies if he sees an advantage in them. That makes betting against SpaceX opting to build a launch facility further south not as safe a bet as it would be say for Blue Origin doing something like that.
whycome 3y ago
How about...Guantanamo? There's precedent for these sort of foreign enclaves that would still be a part of the host country but fall within the geographical borders of another. Mexico could be open to some sort of agreement. France keeps French Guiana and the ESA gets to launch rockets there. It's strategically valuable.
- ChuckMcM 3y ago
  Logistically that would be a nightmare, everything by boat. Not to mention its surrounded by Cuba.
  - whycome 3y ago
    Guantanamo was more just an example of a foreign presence that avoids the challenges of actually working in a foreign country. A "rocket embassy" in Mexico would probably just have some of the same challenges of getting stuff to Texas.
kjkjadksj 3y ago
Lockheed and others operate in Mexico already.
- wolverine876 3y ago
  What do they operate there? Factories? Launch sites?
ggm 3y ago
The launch site is 20 feet from the border. (hyperbole, but they are pretty much on the edge. You can walk there.) The FAA directions explicitly tell them they're bound, obligated to seek clearances from Mexico to do work which impacts Mexicans. I read the doc: The VLA is approximately 2.2 miles north of the U.S./Mexico border and the LLCC is approximately 1.3 miles north of the U.S./Mexico border. ... SpaceX would coordinate with the Secretariat of Communications and Transportation–Mexico if any airspace, land, or water access restrictions in Mexico were required.

alooPotato 3y ago

can they do ocean launches?

yardie 3y ago
There was Sealaunch[0] a Russian company. And they had a pretty good track record of launches. But it eventually fell into bankruptcy. At the moment, SpaceX does not have the capability to do ocean launches. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sea_Launch https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sea_Launch
cmsj 3y ago
They had planned to convert old oil rigs into launch platforms, but abandoned the idea earlier this year: https://spacenews.com/spacex-drops-plans-to-covert-oil-rigs-into-launch-platforms/ https://spacenews.com/spacex-drops-plans-to-covert-oil-rigs-...

pmontra 3y ago

I'm sure about that. What I wonder is if their strategic importance can buy them some slack with the FAA. Apparently not, or not yet.

twic 3y ago

Anyway the cartels have probably already built better rockets in a garage somewhere.

ChuckMcM 3y ago

I love that meme! And yes, its kind of like that. I am actually reasonably familiar with ITAR, including part 121, category 4 (or IV). And Mexico has 'special trading partner' status under the USMCA (formerly NAFTA) and there are carve outs between the US and Mexico. I recognize the reality of such a move would be complicated, require licensing and review, and have geopolitical consequences that everyone would want to weigh in on. All that said, SpaceX could start that process in earnest (which is to say, announce it, start knocking down the regulatory hurdles) and that would give them tremendous leverage in their discussions with the FAA. It would take a while, it would take persistence, but the longer they pushed for it the closer it would get to reality. It would create a credible alternative (if somewhat longer) path to launch against the push back by the US Gov't agencies. The politics of space flight are complicated, but they are politics. I would think that the people here who watched Uber take on the politics of the cab monopolies, or the EU's politics of privacy reaching in and impacting US companies, would begin to understand that laws and regulation are an expression of the prevailing politics and when the politics change the laws change to support the current point of view. Those examples are clearly not as significant as national security politics but history tells us that even those change. The crypto wars, which I was in the middle of, are a good example of going from "you can't do that" here are the laws, regulations, etc. To "okay fine." To be clear, I don't expect SpaceX to advocate for building a launch facility in Mexico. Their somewhat mercurial "technical guy" with the billions of dollars at his disposal however doesn't seem to shy away from politically difficult strategies if he sees an advantage in them. That makes betting against SpaceX opting to build a launch facility further south not as safe a bet as it would be say for Blue Origin doing something like that.

whycome 3y ago

How about...Guantanamo? There's precedent for these sort of foreign enclaves that would still be a part of the host country but fall within the geographical borders of another. Mexico could be open to some sort of agreement. France keeps French Guiana and the ESA gets to launch rockets there. It's strategically valuable.

ChuckMcM 3y ago
Logistically that would be a nightmare, everything by boat. Not to mention its surrounded by Cuba.
- whycome 3y ago
  Guantanamo was more just an example of a foreign presence that avoids the challenges of actually working in a foreign country. A "rocket embassy" in Mexico would probably just have some of the same challenges of getting stuff to Texas.

kjkjadksj 3y ago

Lockheed and others operate in Mexico already.

wolverine876 3y ago
What do they operate there? Factories? Launch sites?

ggm 3y ago

The launch site is 20 feet from the border. (hyperbole, but they are pretty much on the edge. You can walk there.) The FAA directions explicitly tell them they're bound, obligated to seek clearances from Mexico to do work which impacts Mexicans. I read the doc: The VLA is approximately 2.2 miles north of the U.S./Mexico border and the LLCC is approximately 1.3 miles north of the U.S./Mexico border. ... SpaceX would coordinate with the Secretariat of Communications and Transportation–Mexico if any airspace, land, or water access restrictions in Mexico were required.