5 ms·
FAA now requires reentry vehicles to get licensed before launch
- wkat4242 3y agoGetting flying and landing stuff certified by the agency that is in charge of certifying flying things is indeed a pretty good idea :) I'm surprised this never happened before.
- BSDobelix 3y agoNormally re-entry vehicles fall, not fly/glide (except the shuttle), and as we know the FAA is bad...eh good at both "modes" (Boeing).
- rtkwe 3y agoThe only thing this is changing is that launchers have to get reentry approval before the launch is approved because a company messed up and thought they didn't need it or it was already approved and caused issues. Also your distinction isn't as clear as it seems the Apollo capsule for example was able to use it's RCS to steer during reentry because the lift generated by the capsule was not directly on the center line. Where's the line between gliding and falling when even a brick can act like a lifting body due to the extreme speeds?
- BSDobelix 3y ago>Where's the line between gliding and falling when even a brick can act like a lifting body due to the extreme speeds? Good point, and also not, but overall i would make the biggest distinction that one is a full ballistic object (reentry vehicle), and one is a gliding brick (shuttle) that makes s-turns to slow down, it's also a ballistic object but with much more freedom. The Insane Engineering of Re-Entry https://youtu.be/ivLX9o6Ayl8?t=1333 https://youtu.be/ivLX9o6Ayl8?t=1333
- muaytimbo 3y ago[flagged]
- forgetfreeman 3y agoDefinitely. It's not like there's any credible reason why any of this should be regulated... https://www.cbsnews.com/news/space-station-space-junk-nasa-naples-florida-home/ https://www.cbsnews.com/news/space-station-space-junk-nasa-n...
- richwater 3y agoMost space junk, especially from the ISS is government-created. Your point kind of falls flat.
- forgetfreeman 3y agoOnly if you're dimwitted enough to pretend that private firms are somehow exempt from gravity.
- bullfightonmars 3y agoFeel free to develop, launch, and land your rockets without any tax sponsored infrastructure, educated employees, managed airspace, or you know direct sponsorship to develop and purchase launch services.
- dkjaudyeqooe 3y agoPromoting safety is a tax? I guess you're ok with skimping on safety as long as it's some one else's safety.
- neuronexmachina 3y agoOfficial notice: https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2024/04/17/2024-08156/launch-of-a-reentry-vehicle-as-a-payload-that-requires-a-reentry-authorization-to-return-to-earth https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2024/04/17/2024-08...
- underseacables 3y agoIf it moves, regulate it. Can't see a reasonable need for yet another government regulation.
- Denvercoder9 3y ago> Can't see a reasonable need for yet another government regulation. You really can't see a need for regulation of things that are purposefully put on an intersection course with Earth at 8km/s, and made to survive that?
- thfuran 3y agoThe right to engage in recreational orbital bombardment is the very essence of freedom.
- forgetfreeman 3y agoApplauds in 2nd Amendment
- Onavo 3y agoGlory to the Terran empire!
- rtkwe 3y ago"I own an orbital rail cannon for home defense, since that's what the founding fathers intended. Four ruffians break into my compound...." Someone more creative than me can finish this alt version of the copypasta. [0] [0] https://www.reddit.com/r/copypasta/comments/9sc91k/own_a_musket_for_home_defense/ https://www.reddit.com/r/copypasta/comments/9sc91k/own_a_mus... For those unfamiliar with the copypasta.
- imglorp 3y agoYeah kinetic energy, plus hazmat sometimes like hydrazine, plus maybe there's no control over its trajectory. Also important for FAA, if it's a domestic landing, is they may need to create an ATC window to keep aircraft out of the area, which they need advance notice for. So it's not all pointless regs, this is real, practical, coordination.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]