FAA plans to fine SpaceX $630,000 for alleged launch violations

[Admin]

The FAA has proposed fining SpaceX more than $630,000 for allegedly failing to comply with regulations on two launches in 2023.

FAA plans to fine SpaceX $630,000 for alleged launch violations : Read more

 

[SDelMonte]

The FAA has proposed fining SpaceX more than $630,000 for allegedly failing to comply with regulations on two launches in 2023.

FAA plans to fine SpaceX $630,000 for alleged launch violations : Read more

Or as Elon Musk calls it, a nickel.

 

[Temple]

The tyranny of the bureaucrats

 

[Unclear Engineer]

Wait minute - didn't the FAA eventually approve those things?

It seems that the real issue is that the FAA did not approve them soon enough to avoid disruptions to the launch schedules, and SpaceX launched instead of waiting for approval of support facility change and pre-launch protocols - not actual flight plans.

Unless the FAA can show that changes had to be made to eventually get approval for those modifications, the FAA statement that "safety" is their top priority seems to be inapplicable to these particular issues.

This is starting to look like an ego battle between bureaucrats and Musk.

I am sure Musk would rather pay a few hundred thousand dollars in fines and launch on schedule, so this isn't really about changing behavior at SpaceX. It seems to be more about trying to prove who is "the boss".

Or, maybe it is a ploy for the FAA to get more funding so they can be faster?

It certainly smells more like political posturing than public safety assurance.

 

[COLGeek]

Please keep the political speculation out of this, please.

 

[Dr. Evil]

So Boeing Starliner can send a pile of junk to space leaking the whole way, be forced to leave the most precious cargo in space up there, have 1.6 billion dollars in overruns with the first Starliner launch coming, after delays, late by 4 years and they feel the need to mess with SpaceX? Seems like only one company is actually doing anything. The government is not doing its job by supplying quick enough responses to changes. Boeing dropped the ball and now with the strike will never be a threat to SpaceX because they are already years behind. SpaceX rules

 

[Unclear Engineer]

And Musk has replied that he intends to sue the FAA for "regulatory overreach". See https://www.axios.com/2024/09/17/elon-musk-spacex-fines-faa-violations .

So far as I have seen FAA's justifications for its legal actions, it seems that SpaceX has a strong case about the FAA getting into issues beyond its enabling legislation. And, it is apparently a matter of slow decision-making rather than disagreement with the actual procedural and physical factors that is causing delays for SpaceX.

The recent U.S. Supreme Court decision to set aside the "Chevron Defense" for regulatory agencies to be presumed correct in their technical positions probably encouraged Musk to make his decision to fight the FAA.

But, an ego battle between the government regulators and the county's leading (by far) provider of launches is not good for either SpaceX or the country.

 

[COLGeek]

Musk would not be the first someone to sue a federal agency, even the FAA. Lets see where this go before getting all worked up.

In spite of suspicions and speculation, FAA decisions are not political. Don't let support of SpaceX skew reality, folks.

 

[North42]

Government time frames and company time frames are not in sync. While waiting around for the government you just might go broke.

 

[COLGeek]

Government time frames and company time frames are not in sync. While waiting around for the government you just might go broke.

That is true, from a certain perspective. All of those checks/balances/processes take time.

If it was quicker, there would be other complaints about jumping to conclusions, etc.

 

[Unclear Engineer]

The decision to fine SpaceX was definitely not "quick" with respect to the time frame of the actual events that are claimed to be violations.

But, it was very quick in the time frame of Musk publicly complaining about the delay in the StarShip launch license.

As was Musk's announcement that he intends to sue the FAA after they made their announcement about the fines.

No matter what anybody says, their actions are clearly apparent. So, I tend to form my opinions on the basis of what is actually done, with little weight given to what is said by people who are "explaining" how they want me to think differently than what their actions would lead me to believe.

 

[SimsterModel Everything]

This is not Good.

FAA is funded by passenger Taxs on flights (AATF excise taxes), The US General Fund, “America’s Checkbook,” supplemental or temporary budgets established by acts of Congress, like the CARES Act of 2020, and the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act of 2021.

So the funding of the FAA comes from 'passenger use' and from the FEDS, so at least two stream of funding is political. So if you do not think that politics come into play, you have not been paying attention.

Something to think about

 

[JAS]

It seems to me that the FAA is fining SpaceX for the FAA's failure to regulate on a timely basis, thus putting their 'monkey' on the back of SpaceX where it doesn't belong. Except for acting before the FAA stamp of approval was made, the FAA has not claimed that SpaceX's actions did not otherwise meet regulatory requirements, and this seems to me to be the real issue, since this whole regulatory process is intended to ensure that aerospace companies operate within necessary safety and prudence boundaries. The fact that the FAA is not citing specific non-compliance except for jumping the gun on a delayed permission seems petty and bureaucratic. Such a focus on petty nit-picking is likely contributing to the ongoing lack of timely response by the FAA.