SpaceX's Boca Chica Rule Problem
Вставка
- Опубліковано 4 сер 2021
- For your chance to win two seats on one of the FIRST commercial flights to space with Virgin Galactic and support a great cause, enter at omaze.com/PrimalSpace
With space tourism now becoming real, the amount of rocket launches happening every year is going to increase drastically. This video looks at SpaceX's Boca Chica problem, how the FAA regulates spaceflight, and how that will have to change in the future.
Credit to Nadia for the thumbnail illustration nadia.illustrat...
Thanks to the following channels for their awesome footage!
APArchive / @aparchive
Rob Whitworth / kwhi02
Airbus / airbus
Spaceport3D / @spaceport3d
The Verge / theverge
RGVAerialPhotography / @rgvaerialphotography
Infinite Space / @infinitespacemedia
TijnM / @tijn_m
FAA / faanews
Thanks for watching this Primal Space video. If you enjoyed it, let me know in the comments below and don't forget to subscribe so you can see more videos like this!
Support Primal Space by becoming a Patron!
/ primalspace
Twitter: / theprimalspace
Music used in this video:
» Stuck In The Air - The Tower Of Light
» Double You - The Mini Vandals
» In The Atmosphere - Bad Snacks
» No Return - Kevin MacLeod
» Sunset Trails - DJ Williams
» Sunrise In Paris - Dan Henig
Credits:
Written and edited by Ewan Cunningham ( / ewan_cee )
Narrated by: Beau Stucki
#SpaceX #BocaChica #SpaceTourism - Наука та технологія
For your chance to win two seats on one of the FIRST commercial flights to space with Virgin Galactic and support a great cause, enter at omaze.com/PrimalSpace
What great cause are you referring to? Extremely expensive private carnival rides for the super wealthy that are probably tax evaders is NOT a great cause!
Not old enough
@@nightlightabcd opens up an industry which could help the opening up of space infrastructure by encouraging rocket innovation, which could lead to things like asteroid mining
thx no thx
@@pancake4027 And also increase death rates
Astronauts and Tourists are not the same. Astronauts spend their lives training, millionaire tourists go on joyrides. Great video!
I don’t get why the tourists call themselves astronauts your not a pilot if you fly on a plane
i myself agree with this. it takes time effort and taking risk. tourist takes money and the risk.
As far as I'm aware, tourists still need to go through the same training an astronaut would
@@Freak80MC but not in Blue Origin and Virigin Galactic.
Absolutely agreed... When kids dreaming to become astronauts, it should have meant working hard and I'm best of the best, not get rich and I'll go drink beer in space
My plan was to disguise myself as a wheel of cheese and hang around Boca Chica, but this might work too.
Same bro, seems like a good idea
I'd prefer 8 days on ISS for 20 mio$ instead of those lousy 20 minutes
soon it'll be 2 million to get a couple hundred people to the ISS... or 150+ tons... or just make its own station, seeing is it has pretty much the same pressurized volume as the ISS.
My dads boss who’s a billionaire paid 25 million dollars to go the space station and he did this twice
@@jackyboi8832 what’s his name?
@@sidv4615 Charles simonyi and my dad is the captain of his privat yacht SKAT
@@jackyboi8832 didn’t he work with bill gates or something?
To me there'll always be a difference between 'someone who has spent years of their life training to fly into space and do work that will benefit humanity as a whole' and 'millionaire who can afford hundreds of thousands of dollars for a seat and is doing it purely for their own enjoyment'. Call them what they are: tourists, not astronauts.
Those millionaires are going to pay for the R&D to make space affordable to the general public. Just like rich people paid for the R&D for affordable commercial airlines. If that isn't doing good for humanity, I don't know what is. I don't really care if they call them astronauts or not though. I doubt they care very much either.
@@smittyjohnson9554 Thank you!
it is the same thing with plane pilots and plane passengers.
True, I think there's a huge difference in astronaut and someone whose intention for going to space is simply travel. Astronaut will always be someone, whose intentions for going to space is scientific or beneficial in any other way for mankind.
Isn't Starship more the latter without the wealth? At least in theory...
One day we will look back on our previous space travel and realize how advanced we have become.
I think that the exact moment when that happens for me, is when we manage to assemble a craft in space that journeys to another celestial body.
I look at space x ,and say that everyday.
That day won't come because of climate change.
@@thesauce1682 yee of little faith.
Really? SpaceX fans here are more impressed by Falcon 9 and Dragon 2 than Mercury, Gemini, and Apollo? Hmm
I’d make the distinction between professional astronauts and commercial astronauts.
They're astropassengers or something like that. The first millionares who rode in big planes weren't in the same league as ace pilots.
@@jack.h99 They're literally Space tourists. Why trying to invent a new word when there's already an existing one? It's like people are trying to solve a non-existent problem
@@jack.h99 Although almost no astronaut is piloting their spaceship. Most are payload specialists, which in an aircraft analogy is cabin crew (passengers bring the payload of a commercial aircraft).
You also can't just say commercial, because the actual pilot of virgin galactic are also commercial
Such a distinction already exists. NASA created “commercial astronaut wings” for a reason.
Astrotourists
5:40 the launch of SN11 being delayed was due to SpaceX telling the FAA director that he could go home after him already being there a week. They then changed their minds on a weekend when the FAA guy was off work, so he didn’t see his email and couldn’t book a flight back to Boca.
sneaky
if your job is that important check your email on weekends
@@ronblack7870 but he was off on the weekends. He didn’t need to check his emails if he was off work. He was probably tired sitting there for a week already doing nothing while SpaceX was trying to make up their minds.
This is exactly why people complaining about problems in a non constructive way are a waste of time.
"Astronaut" 😂🤣 By that logic then I'm a pilot, a sailor and a bus driver because I've been a passenger on an aeroplane, a cruise ship and a London bus.
There haven’t been any astronauts so far. Astronaut is derives from ancient Greek, meaning “sailor to the stars”. If you’re referring to people going to space, the correct term in Greek would be kosmonaut (as long as they’re not on an interstellar voyage). Of course you could also use the German word “Raumfahrer”, Chinese “Taikonaut”, French “Spationaut”, Indian “Viomanaut” but they all mean the same: “Sailor trough space”. Since sailor is a profession, these terms should only be used for professionals (and not tourists).
@@Mitch.Buchannon there have. Perhaps not in a word to word definition but amerikan kosmonauts are named astronauts.
Bro, your a Time Traveler!😂
8:05 incorrect. The "two additional test flights" MIGHT have been necessary, but it turned out only one was needed. And those were required to get the license. They have the license, and there were no additional required flights once that happened.
Not everyone who travels by car is a *_driver._*
Not everyone who travels by boat is a *_sailor._*
Not everyone who travels by plane is a *_pilot._*
Not everyone who travels by rocket is an *_astronaut._*
The rest are all *_passengers._*
astronaut: a person who is trained to travel in a spacecraft. *All of these recent passengers received training to travel in a spacecraft made for space.
Thing is: driver, captain, and pilot refer to operating the vehicle more than the word astronaut does. I realized you said sailor but captain would make more sense given the other two terms.
If the FAA had existed in 1903 the Wright brothers would never have been able to make their first flight
LOL!
Can't govern something that hasn't even happened yet
@@DavidHRyall but governments claim to have the right to tax people that haven't been born yet. :)
Uhmm you do realize that there was a recent 10 year period where there were NO FATAL commercial plane crashes in the US? FAA is doing a pretty do job at keeping air travel in the US safe...
@@nczioox1116 You know what I am talking about. I am talking about excesive regulations, permissions and etc etc Wright bros had really freedom to make everything they wanted and that is the natural way the creative human activities should be. In the same way an artist like a musician should not be reglulated in his/her creative process, the inventors should not be regulated if you want a pure creative process that is the force behind the modern society progress
your transitions to sponsors are always SO smooth, i never see it coming
A well known aviation joke:
_"I am from the FAA,_ *AND* _I am here to help you."_
😊😊😊
20 mil for 8 days is cheep compared to 250 for 5 minutes close to space.
Today's money too.
Even as a GA pilot most of us think the FAA is slow, outdated, and just overall a pain in the butt
Elon just ignored them, Trump commented on it too. He's like: good for him.
I am reminded, not for the first time, of the whole FAA subplot in John Ross' novel _Unintended Consequences._
If they're astronauts, then I'm a pilot!
I hate how they call rich people who go to space “Astronauts”, at least real astronauts had a contribution to science and space exploration
But rich people also have contribution in science by going to space if you wider Ur veiw.
A Space tourist is completely different from an Astronaut in my opinion
Astronaut has its own meaning, called them Space tourists will be more suited.
A$$tronauts
They contribute a fraction of their wealth to personally explore space. At least we get the small benefit of them encouraging everyday people to work toward space.
4:34 Kerbal Space Program Music
Yay
TIL, the US’s FAA controls a trip to space from anywhere in the world?
For US based companies only of course.
"Everyone needs approval from the FAA, the FAA controls all aspects of aviation!"
...except if you are, like, anywhere except the US. Typically american :)
@@huvudpersson7344 well most people in his audience are likely amerikan.
Good video. I didn't know the FAA condensed those four regulations. Cheers to the FAA for that.
Do you have any more information on the launch tower thing? I thought the FAA only has jurisdiction over then using the launch tower. Not building it.
Funfact: Virgin Galactic doesnt go above the Karman line (the official definition of space)
Funfact: The ACTUAL Kármán line is at 83km: the minimum height needed for a sattelite where aerodynamic forces are drasticly reduced.
The US 80km (50 miles) definition of space is closer to the truth than the 100km internationally defined line.
@@daanydoomboy5593 Pretty sure no satellites orbit under 100km. typically 160km is the lowest for satellites
@@Fummy007 no sattelites orbit at 100km also. That's not the point. Go read the part about technical considerations en.wikipedia.org/wiki/K%C3%A1rm%C3%A1n_line
FUN FACT: The atmosphere extends up for 300 miles, so there isn't a clear line between the atmosphere and space. Or do you expect space tourists to fly to an altitude of 1.5 million feet before getting a certificate?
@@texaswunderkind it even extends up to 1000 miles, and further.
Its just 0.00001%
Where is part 450? I'm not seeing it in the FAR AIM
Also, I get that the FAA can be difficult to deal with, but you can't really blame them when SpaceX is actively going against their rulings. As a pilot myself, I know not to mess with the FAA because they can be horrible to deal with, SpaceX doesn't just get to bend the rules in the name of innovation.
It won't be something in the FAR AIM, I feel, you'd need to look in a directory of the CFRs.
They really should just go by the rules, anyway. The FAA is very clearly changing them as things develop, too, I remember in March there were a few changes that went into effect.
The idea of earth to earth rocket travel is unbelievably stupid. Not only would it be far too expensive to be successful (RE: Concorde), but the environmental impacts would be exponentially larger than regular air travel.
Ye but cool. BWWGGAAAAHHHHHH space man
And it wud become commonplace among the hyperwealthy who alrdy are causing untold environmental damage in every way they can. This is maddening that these flights are allowed at all.
Airplanes are also orders of magnitude more redundant. A single flap failure would mean certain death for the passengers on Starship. Many people seem to think that no abort system whatsoever would be a good idea for Starship and I absolutely don't agree with that.
You didn't talk about public safety at all, which is the main objective behind the FAA's actions. They definitely should work more efficiently but you portray them like they're just in the way, which is very one sided.
Yea, mentioned how when the FAAs rules were ignored that it caused a major explosion; and completely glosses over it after stating such to go on to claim that the FAA is outdated and needs to be less stringent.
If anything, the FAA shud make it so their person holds one of the launch keys for every flight and that none of these rich fuckwits cant fly without full authorization.
Bcuz ignoring them **will** cause death and destruction.
@@SylviaRustyFae SpaceX not listening to the FAA didn't cause the explosion of SN8 but I get your point and I agree. While there is unnecessary bureaucracy involved in their procedures the main idea behind them shouldn't be abandoned. Removing critical steps from the approval requirements to "streamline" the approval process will inevitably cause companies to neglect human safety more and more, which is bound to cause disaster.
@@Brixxter although spacex is rapidly prototyping So SN8 is actually worth
@@sadiqahmed4143 worth what
@@Brixxter Ah yes because the government has NEVER valued anything above human safety.... there's a dead teacher in the middle of the ocean who'd like to speak to you.
The FAA is the least of their problems with the 1,000 passenger ship. It is physically impossible to fit that many people in the said spaceship.
Who said 1000? I've only ever heard 100 which I think is possible with Starship, and with weight to spare.
oops, I'm an order of magnitude too high on the 1,000.
100 is not feasible either
Watch: "'How Starship Will SQUASH Long Haul Aviation' : BUSTED!!"
ua-cam.com/video/ENBn-W3uPXQ/v-deo.html
@@Y.M... Even he gets 1000 from somewhere lol. I can't remember what video turned me off watching Thunderfoot but it wasn't this one. I'm not a Musk fanatic but I am glad SpaceX exists. I know that this stuff had been done a lot. Landing rockets on Earth most definitely has not. I watched 15 minutes of the video so sorry if I didn't get to the part where he debunks stuff. I am saying that Starship could carry 100 people from one part of Earth to another. I'm not saying it's a viable business model or that it's better than air travel. But it could be done. Technically Starship could abort during launch using the second stage but that's hella risky. It will be one hell of a rocket, not like anything so far. There's a reason it had been chosen for the Human Lander System. No other rocket in existence will have the ability to carry a large volume of people with lots of cargo to the moon. Yes, it will need many launches, 7 to fuel it back up in orbit. Without refueling, a max-weight starship only has enough fuel to deorbit I think. Not even enough to get to the ISS.
The Raptor engine is also one of a kind and I doubt SpaceX are going to fail in designing a reliable turbopump. Raptor V2 will obviously be better and that design is being finalised.
It doesn't matter that some of this stuff had been done before, it hasn't all been done on the same launch vehicle.
@@2KOOLURATOOLGaming Musk himself said 1000. He just likes to throw these numbers out there without thinking about them.
Nicely done. SpaceX and the FAA as well as Blue Origin and all the rest, will get along. They have too and to see this video, thanks for the input that the FAA is streamlining the process. Cheers.
0:41 actually, astronaut means something like "space sailor" or something like that
Star navigator?
Astro-Naut (like nautilus)
I've heard that Cosmonaut is actually a more fitting description for space travelers instead of just someone who stays around Earth but I don't know if the American government would ever like using that lol
@@2KOOLURATOOLGaming star navigator, what ever something like that, not that one from the video
@@michelbruns What, I don't understand you?
@@2KOOLURATOOLGaming space sailor, star navigator, something like that doesnt matter, it was definitely not what he said in the video
A lifetime of commitment, and even then you might not get to be an astronaut. I welcome this entirely.
I can't wait to see where private spaceflight is a decade from now!
I feel like the idea of commercial travel via a starship would face too many obstacles to be worth it. It also feels like a waste of Space X's time when they probably would rather focus mainly on the Moon and Mars. I know their main goals have generally changed and they are now building Starship to get humanity multi-planetary so it does seem like they have noticed amount of issues that would crop up if they used the largest and most powerful rocket ever for quick hops across the world. My idea of the best scenario would be that Virgin Galactic get focused on raising enough money to make their trips cheaper and more accessible for the public. This is because they literally have a space plane; it would be way better suited for normal people than a rocket would. Blue Origin obviously needs to pick up the pace and stop filing lawsuits like there's no tomorrow as their ideas are extremely promising and would be great for the environment on Earth.
Just imagine three large scale space companies all doing different things that not only make them profit but progress and help humanity and Earth. Space X on colonising the Moon and Mars, Blue Origin putting factories on the Moon so they don't pollute Earth, and Virgin Galactic providing much faster flights than any aircraft.
Just because you were a passenger doesn't make you an astronaut for the same reason riding in 1st class doesn't make you a pilot.
Your understanding of the word Astronaut is flawed.
Most astronauts aren't pilots either. They are payload specialists.
And most of the pilots never actually end up flying the rocket.
Nobody has ever piloted a vehicle into orbit, and most reentry is automatic, asside from the shuttle
@@HALLish-jl5mo They are trained in operations of the mission, I doubt the rich kids were as PR payloads.
Call them what they were: passengers.
There haven’t been any astronauts so far. Astronaut is derives from ancient Greek, meaning “sailor to the stars”. If you’re referring to people going to space, the correct term in Greek would be kosmonaut (as long as they’re not on an interstellar voyage). Of course you could also use the German word “Raumfahrer”, Chinese “Taikonaut”, French “Spationaut”, Indian “Viomanaut” but they all mean the same: “Sailor trough space”. Since sailor is a profession, these terms should only be used for professionals (and not tourists).
I love KSP soundtrack in the background there
"It needs to be as easy as booking a plane ticket" in 2021, booking a flight just keeps getting harder and harder... We want it easier than that, or it will never be something for the masses.
Very useful video, thanks 👍
Amazing
The background KSP music made this video perfect
Honestly, i wouldn't want to be on one of the FIRST flights. Flight 42? Maybe...
Just rich people doing whatever they want whenever the rules don't make sense to them.
I can't even build a shed on my own property without the local government shitting a brick.
Imagine being able to catch rain water that falls from the sky for free without the local government getting in your way
@@jack.h99 wtf??
I want you and all the other space nerds out there to win these two seats.
Great choice KSP music!
The perfect sponsorship offers doesn't exis..
@ 8:28 "Please Mr. Branson...I already told you can´t open the windows..."
My man uploads once a year
So technically throwing a paper airplane into the air would require an license and jumping or jumping on a trampoline would require license
Then the FAA would be getting about 8 billion flights!
Something about *powered* flights i.e. any aircraft that has an engine and radio communications. Drones also fall under this category. It's also made complicated because these are commercial i.e. dealing with other humans so there's a need to mitigate potential disputes (and tax them). Thing is the FAA is subject to the international conventions of the IATA. We can't break rules, only petition to change them (or in some cases, bend them into loopholes). I feel these things go both ways. If a company wants the government to clear the airspace, give tax breaks, provide security, financial grants etc, the least it can do is to not break regulations. It can petition them to be changed or granted exemptions etc, but shouldn't break them on their own accord. If you disrespect your work colleague, they will still help you (cos it's part of their job) but won't go the extra mile. Sorry, this turned out very long.
"regulation will always lag behind"
Well it is it's job to keep the extremes in bay. It's whole job is to be the brake man in the breakneck speed technological world. To take the time and make sure "These guys won't be dropping 500 tons of LOX on middle of Manhattan and burning couple hundred people due to horrible guidance design and no flight termination system."
I would be really worried, if SpaceX, Blue Origin and other new space companies weren't complaining about how much time and effort passing the regulatory scrutiny takes.
When Company is happy with regulator.... something is off. Either one has found the worlds most saintly company or the regulator is not doing their job.
We're not first,
We're not last,
When we see primal space,
We click as fast as light boi
Worth noting that the FAA has jurisdiction in the USA, so a there’s still opportunity non American company launching outside the USA to make things easier.
Personally, I’m crossing my fingers for a strong space travel startup scene somewhere with the scientific ability to make big gains, but lower safety barriers. Romania, Australia…maybe Wales?
*sits in passenger seat.* ima astronaut lawl xD
INCRÍVEL..ESPETACULAR...
you're messing me up with that "RGV-music" :D.
Seeing galactic wars happening from a very very very very very far distance would be nice to watch but this is 2021 not the far far far future
My problem with Space x's plan right now is there is absolutely nothing to do in space. They need to build a moon carnival or something that's worth my money.
Me who gets spacex notifications of starlink launches constantly: how
Astronaut is a profession, not an Xbox Achievement...
who cares about the title? Is still a great experience. You can float around for a bit and see the earth from space. Is a great view and wonderful experience that will get cheaper and better over time. I hope one day is cheap enough so I can ride it with a few years of saving but not long enough to the point I have to piss and shit in space. I think if they can meet the 1-2 hours of fly in 0 gravity, we can call a huge success.
@@nocivolive it's not easy bro 🙂
If I'm not wrong, FAA only monitors American spaceflight and air travel. I don't think this applies internationally as other countries have their own spaceflight administrations
The FAA should charge a fee for the spaceport, and make sure they have a Starbucks at the departure port.
Virginia galactic and blue origin customers aren't astronauts, they're space travellers. SpaceX customers are trained to pilot and override the autonomous dragon, so despite not being the same level of astronaut as Armstrong, I still consider them astronauts
The FAA in US airspace. There are lots of places where the FAA has no jurisdiction.
Imagine training your entire life to become an elite ISS astronaut, only to be joined by an annoying Tiktok millionaire...
The FAA also only have jurisdiction over US airspace and vehicles flying there.
What's the name of the movie in the middle of the video?
Airplane!
That KSP space thme in the background...
If tickets are that expensive, I’d imagine there won’t be much supply after 5 years. Even if the tickets get cut in half, most people probably don’t have 250,000 dollars to spend on a 1 day vacation. Ha. It’s a very cool moment to be alive nonetheless
Its not meant for most ppl. Its meant to give the alrdy hyperwealthy another way of putting themselves above us mere peasants; while they wastefully expend thousands of tons of carbon per flight.
250k still beats 40-80million that methods before this cost
@@SylviaRustyFae the amount of carbon it produces compared to how much the energy industry or cars produce makes its carbon completely irrelevant
@@flopez425 hey that’s less than what my house costs, I could technically go to space. That’s nice to know ( of course I’ll be homeless after that but still worth it)
@@willwin4744 Air traffic alrdy accounts for a third as much as all the cars on the roads combined. This is despite there being 1-2 flights per American per year, and over 14000 miles driven by car per year.
Air traffic only accounts for such a "small amount" bcuz it isnt as commonplace as car trarfic. If the idea is to make space traffic commonplace... Then it will lead to a future where space traffic accounts for at least as much (likely far more given its far more wasteful) carbon waste as air traffic does currently. And air traffic carbon waste will raise right alongside it.
There is no need for space travel between locations on earth; air travel and car travel alrdy exist and are much more efficient in terms of carbon spent per miles traveled.
This is the one of the many reasons why commercial supersonic flight nvr became commonplace and the only planes that did such were nvr commercially viable even with high govt subsidies. It was too wasteful and expensive.
Interplanetary citizens may ignore Earthbound regulators who are pulled down by gravity.
“Huge advancements”
Shows new Shepard
The Merriam-Webster dictionary defines astronaut as "a person who travels beyond the earth's atmosphere". It makes no mention at all to being "trained". There is a difference between fighter pilots, commercial pilots, and private pilots. They all require different trainings and qualifications, but they are ALL pilots. The same must be applied to astronauts. There is a difference between government astronauts (NASA/Military), commercial astronauts (like the crew operating SpaceShipTwo), and private astronauts. They all require different trainings and qualifications, but they are ALL astronauts.
If you're going to argue your definitions then get it right. "Beyond Earth's atmosphere" does not simply mean you reach a zero gravity state (technically falling) it goes wayyy beyond that. Even the ISS is still inside "Earth's atmosphere".
If you're going to call all persons who reached the upper atmosphere all astronauts, then I'll call myself an Airplane Pilot because I rode an airplane and achieved lift.
This sounds more like a SpaceX not listening to the regulator problem!
I hear that KSP music in the background lmao
The people in space suits you ask to take a picture of your family keep floating off never to be seen again? One hand for the ship and one hand for the camera people....
"Oh and look at omaze"
3 minutes earlier
"Omaze ad"
faa: you can’t fly sn8 today
spacex: ok cry me a river ima do it anyway 😒
Going up high is not really going into space. When we can orbit the planet for a day & then return, that is really going into space.
I disagree. First men were making suborbital flights and this was science, but if you make a distinction between first test flights and the other ones, it looks ok for me :) but what about first flights of every New type of rocket, like the New sheppard ? Cause in this case, as first crew/passengers, they did a bit of science data, at least for the company, and so they deserve the 'astronaut' title, exactly like Alan Sheppard and his suborbital flight ;)
Elon: "Hello, Mexico, I'm shutting down SpaceX and starting a new rocket company called SpaceX2, outside the U.S. Would you be interested in hosting my new company?
Mexico: "YES YES YES YES YES YES YES!!!
Government: "You need our permission."
Elon: 🖕🏻
Safety first. Great an agency like the FAA exists.
Too much safety
@@srgmattidbju2614 which is better than too few safety
@@srgmattidbju2614 with explosive rocket testing, that is expected.
@@daanydoomboy5593 yes
Looks like someone didn't get the *FAA's* recent memo about who can call him/herself an *Astronaut,* eh? 🤔
Most astronauts are not pilot/fly rocket to space anymore. It's all automate and they're just rider. However, they are still Astronauts because after they arrives at ISS...you know. They're still in space and they are continuing to live and work in space. Tourist on the other hand, just riding to space and come back without do any job during the time they are spent in Space.
All of them have to pass a flight physical and certify in a fighter jet as part of their training.
Astronauts - a train person riding a spacecraft
Space Tourist - a person touring in space.
I don't know why this is so hard to grasp. You don't get to call yourself an airplane pilot just because you rode an airplane.
Also the term "space" is rather loose. Do you mean passing the Karman Line? Being in or outside Earth's orbit? Or falling down from a high place?
Then by the same token, if you jumped then "technically" you've been in "space" for a few milliseconds.
Why does the FAA have a say in the launch tower?
I will die with my two feet firm on planet earth and I am perfectly fine with that
This is getting personal
astronaut/cosmonaut is a title given to folks that did at least one orbit around earth. also hundreds of rockets: it takews hours to fule a rocket and that time the thing is on the ramp. only esa fuels its rockets before launch.
yes but have you been an astronaut in the ocean?
FAA isnt great for airplanes either considering they messed up the boeing 737 max situation pretty bad
A space tourist is not an astronaut.. the same way a passenger on a ship is not a sailor...
> "Just like traditional aircraft, each vehicle needs to be approved by the FAA in order for it to start flying regular passengers. The FAA is in charge of regulating all aspects of aviation..."
Not true. The FAA only has jurisdiction in the United States and over international waters where it has been delegated such authority by ICAO. Russia, China and other countries don't need permission from the U.S.
Thanks for this video!
If I would be older than 18, I definitely would try to win these wo seats, but I'm 16...
Maybe I'll try it again in the future...
That's the problem with modern private enterprise stuck with dinosaur like institution that have not evolved since the early time of aviation history.
FAA inspector couldn't make it down in time?? I'd be there 3 days early.
When things change as quickly as they can / do, there should be a permanent FAA person stationed within driving distance at all times .
you forgot to put the " " in space for Virgin and Blue Origin. They never reached space, in fact not even sub orbital
Cant take him seriously with the KSP music😂
Lol nice airplane reference
Earth to earth travel !!!! 😑😑😕
Me: Am I in the wrong place?
Was it just me or was that window open in the beginning
Fromcnow on, I'll call former "astronauts" "professional astronauts" and keep the old name for tourists
How about launching rockets in Australia instead?
How the hell is the STATIC GROUND MOUNTED launch tower is under any FAA jurisdiction? 🤦♂️
Certification and training?