The NOTAMS issued for the launch only closed the air space around the launch site though, and didn't cover the full path out to the Turks and Caicos and beyond. ATC where the debris was falling was scrambling to figure out what was going. At the very least SpaceX or the FAA should be notifying all ATC along the route when a launch is happening.

 

7 hours ago, martin-w said:

What do you mean by "believe"?

I'll go with Jon's words: "What does this even mean?" What part of the statement is giving you trouble? If you're confused you might google it.

I've found it's often better to ask questions rather than make statements. Your second post was better than your first in this case.

Hook

On 1/18/2025 at 8:02 AM, HiFlyer said:

Euphemisms meant to conceal are phrases used to soften or disguise unpleasant realities, often by substituting a more polite or indirect term, effectively hiding the true nature of something, like "downsizing" instead of "firing employees" or "passed away" instead of "died.". 

Examples of euphemisms used to conceal:

• "Let go" instead of "fired"
• "Rightsizing" instead of "laying off"
• "Performance improvement plan" instead of "disciplinary action"
• "Passed away" instead of "died"
• "Rapid unscheduled disassembly" instead of exploded....

Never been a fan.

 

These days, thanks to YouTube's aggressive algorithms, enemies are "neutralized" instead of being "killed..."

Using the latter, more concise term most often result in a video being "demonetized."

16 hours ago, kangoat said:

The NOTAMS issued for the launch only closed the air space around the launch site though

 

"Closed" maybe.

But I read yesterday that there were also NOTAMs warning of potential debris issued for locations along the launch corridor where debris was likely to fall. 🤔

Edited January 23, 20251 yr by martin-w

11 hours ago, LHookins said:

I'll go with Jon's words: "What does this even mean?" What part of the statement is giving you trouble? If you're confused you might google it.

 

What gave me trouble, or more accurately,  confused me was that "believe" wasn't relevant.  I merely asked questions in the post you replied to. Specifically, what troubled Jon about the incident and what the FAA could have done better. 

If you meant my first post, then regardless of levels of expertise, questioning  opinions and interpretation of events, especially when only a few minutes of a video is watched, is valid, and more so when the individual states they don't know much about the launch. We have to think for ourselves and not just appeal to authority. 

I value Jon's opinion, but a different pilot had another opinion. Hence why I'm interested in what Jon thinks the FAA could have done better.

We have to test these space vehicles and when we do, disintegration of a prototype is possible, in fact likely with the SpaceX rapid prototyping philosophy. So if the FAA can do better in this respect that's desirable.

Edited January 23, 20251 yr by martin-w

On 1/22/2025 at 1:22 AM, martin-w said:

How far away from the launch corridor where you?

What are you saying should have been done better?

The lady in the video was pointing out that there was no danger to aircraft and that the FAA plans for the launch worked as it should, do you disagree?

 

On 1/21/2025 at 10:02 AM, jon b said:

There were no NOTAMS issued in the Caribbean region for a rocket launching in Texas, 

 

Because the Caribbean was not under the designated launch corridor. 

From what I've read, NOTAMs were issued to airmen of potential debris falling "in certain areas" so where debris could fall. 

If by the launch corridor we are talking about the red line drawn on a chart that’s appeared on the internet where the rocket travelled from its launch to it’s final end , I was going straight through the middle of if routing northbound from Jamaica over Cuba landing into the Bahamas.

Retrospectively looking at the only grainy image I can find on the internet it looks like I passed between the DRA areas 3 & 4 passing I’d say within 20nm to the west of DRA 4, which we remained oblivious to.

The only NOTAMed airspace restriction for this launch was the immediate area around the launch site. The DRAs only became active and published after a catastrophic event, by definition such “ rapid unscheduled “ events and the areas they will affect are not known about until they actually happen.

From what I understand the local airspace closure around the launch site is to protect from expected falling debris from the launch and also an early abort and return of the vehicle.

This lady is obviously entitled to her own personal opinion, but spouting that opinion publicly to a naive audience as the authoritative opinion of experienced airline pilots is just wrong, especially when no other airline pilot I’ve spoken to shares that opinion, in fact they strongly disagree with it.

The video linked to by @kangoat by Blancolirio , a senior airline captain who’s opinion I personally would respect a lot more and who always gives a well balanced educated view on aviation events also has a completely contrasting view to the Lady FO in which he says “ Airline pilots and air traffic controllers, we have enough on our plate to keep this form of transportation the safest form of transportation that there is, without the risk of unexpected debris falling out of space right across our flight path and potentially ripping right through an airliner’

Of those 2 conflicting opinions made by the 2  youtube commentators one was made by someone who apparently is a prominent member of the “Tesla investor “ community….. I’ll leave it to you to join the dots and form your own opinion on which one that might be, and why their opinion might seem 180 degrees opposed to the other.

Edited January 23, 20251 yr by jon b

Oh lordy.

Is this a case of The People Who Love Elon versus The People Who Hate Elon? If so, there's no point in even discussing it. The rest of us don't fit in those two categories. In this case I sincerely hope I'm wrong. The modern world has altogether too much polarization as it is.

What is the usual method to protect air traffic from falling rocket stages? I would hope there is one. Is there any other method in the case of a rocket or rocket stage Blowing All To Heck (BATH, my preferred acronym "Well, we took a BATH on that one") and debris raining down in a traffic area? And what was done in this case?

I hope this is how one properly asks the question without obviously taking sides.

Since I don't think we want to shut down the entire space program (no matter who is doing the launches) these procedures are important.

Although I'll never be flying through such areas, I am definitely interested in the answers. Actually, after my last flight some years ago, I'll never be flying again.

Hook

Edited January 24, 20251 yr by LHookins

7 hours ago, jon b said:

“Tesla investor “ community….. I’ll leave it to you to join the dots and form your own opinion on which one that might be, and why their opinion might seem 180 degrees opposed to the other.

As soon as I heard her opinion pretty much downplaying the heck, out of things, I was suspicious, and started thinking, "Follow the money......"

I tried to do a bit of research, but the data seemed a bit sparse, so I left it for more knowledgeable people.

Thanks, Devon.

Jon, don't bother answering those questions unless you just want to. It was mainly a demonstration of how to ask questions without displaying bias.

Hook

13 hours ago, jon b said:

“ Airline pilots and air traffic controllers, we have enough on our plate to keep this form of transportation the safest form of transportation that there is, without the risk of unexpected debris falling out of space right across our flight path and potentially ripping right through an airliner’

 

So Jon, you seem to share the same opinion as the quote... so what do you think the FAA could have done better? How where they in error? 

One of the points the lady in the video made was that Starship was in space, at such a high altitude that there's plenty of time to warn airliners flying much lower and divert them, do you disagree with this? Starship broke up at an altitude of 93 miles. Airliners fly at what, 6 or 7 miles? 

Personally, in my non-pilot opinion, the FAA would not have granted the launch licence if they thought that there would be no time to divert aircraft and there was a possibility of "ripping airliners apart." If anything, the FAA have been ultra cautious with these tests in the past, delaying launch licences when required.

Where any airliners, at any time, anywhere close to being "ripped apart"? Or did the FAA make sure all airliners were safely moved out of the way?

I know there's inconvenience for airliners, but I'm not sure how else we test such prototype vehicles.

Interesting that the lady pilot was a Tesla investor and certainly could imply bias.

Edited January 24, 20251 yr by martin-w

7 hours ago, LHookins said:

Is this a case of The People Who Love Elon versus The People Who Hate Elon?

I certainly don't love him given his recent activities, but I do know that cheaper, cleaner, access to space and making us, ultimately, a multiplanetary species, is vital. 

1 hour ago, martin-w said:

One of the points the lady in the video made was that Starship was in space, at such a high altitude that there's plenty of time to warn airliners flying much lower and divert them

Boggles the mind. No wonder real world pilots are disagreeing with her.

I'd love it if we could put a man on mars in my lifetime. Elon has a chance.

Electric cars would be nice to be available for those who want them. Don't force them on everyone.

AI has potential to do much good. Besides, it's too late to put that genie back in the bottle.

H1B can be a really good idea if handled properly. After all, it was a form of H1B that let the Russians beat the US to space: their German rocket scientists were better than our German rocket scientists. 🙂 I.e. we could have handled it a bit better. 😄 

Hook

PS. Oops. Forgot Starlink.

H.

Edited January 24, 20251 yr by LHookins
add Starlink

20 minutes ago, LHookins said:

Boggles the mind. No wonder real world pilots are disagreeing with her.

 

Why? Starship was at 93 miles altitude. Airliners are at 6 miles or so. Why do you think 87 miles of separation isn't enough?

Calculating the speed of a falling object, from space, on a parabolic path is fairly complex, but plenty of time was available. Especially as Starship lost communication a few minutes after launch, so plenty of time to warn of an issue and divert anything that needed to be diverted.

Which airliner in question was in danger of hot debris raining down? Which airliner reported a near miss? The answer is none. Seems to me that the FAA's arrangements for the test launch worked. No airliner was ever in danger. Inconvenienced, yes. 

The FAA would never have allowed the launch license if they thought there was a danger to airliners. 

 

That isn't to say that falling debris from space isn't an issue. It most certainly is. Recently a huge junk of a rocket landed near an occupied village.

 

https://www.sciencealert.com/massive-space-debris-crash-lands-in-kenyan-village

Edited January 24, 20251 yr by martin-w

5 hours ago, martin-w said:

So Jon, you seem to share the same opinion as the quote... so what do you think the FAA could have done better? How where they in error? 

Personally I have no issue whatsoever with Mr Musk, his rockets, or the FAA response, the ATC System in particular did an amazing job, that’s not what I’m saying here.

My concern is not about the response, which I would agree worked as planned ,nor for the actual rocket explosion which as you say was way up high, but for the absolute chaos that ensued afterwards as crews were oblivious to any potential airspace closures and so contingency plans were not in place.

What has annoyed me somewhat is someone going on a public platform  metaphorically wearing a big badge saying ‘TRUST ME IM AN AIRLINE PILOT “  proclaiming this was just a run of the mill , everyday minor event nothing to see here, people commenting to the contrary are just ill informed.

 

There are just so many statements made in that interview which are just factually wrong or distorted it beggars belief. I don’t think they would be made in front of an audience of fellow pilots that’s for sure. I can only conclude that this is a coordinated attempt to run PR damage control.

I’ll just run through a couple of the comments which cause me concern.

“Everybody flying around that area already knew about it”

”nothing was a surprise “

”it would not have been a surprise to pilots flying that day”

”if pilots didn’t check NOTAMS they are in violation of federal rules”

As already mentioned the ONLY NOTAM published was an airspace closure around the actual launch site in Texas. Aircraft flying into, out of, or around the Caribbean would not routinely receive or have any interest in this NOTAM. Once again the DRA airspace and NOTAMS were only activated after the mishap. There was no contingency planning by airlines or crews put in place that evening as this was a complete unknown. What NOTAMS is she suggesting needed to be checked? There were none.
If one existed stating a potential for a large block of airspace measuring several hundred NM in length SFC-UNLIMITED to be closed for 90 minutes at very short notice, then believe me , pilots would have sat up and paid attention and contingency plans made.

This event came as a complete surprise to all in the air that night, believe me, I was there.

“ no different to flying into Houston with a thunderstorm, such a non event ,nothing at all abnormal here”

”aircraft can hold for debris which has a limited time period”

”aircraft would only divert if they were fuel limited they could have taken cargo off and added more fuel”

As it turns out the airspace was closed for 90 minutes, with short notice. Once again there was no pre warning.Is it seriously being suggested here that an aircraft departing Europe to the Caribbean 10 hours earlier should somehow obtain a NOTAM for a rocket launch in Texas a thousand NM from their destination.Then workout out somehow on the back of a fag packet the potential debris path on the off chance the rocket should fail, estimate they need 90 minutes to allow the debris to fall and then off load 15 tonnes of cargo to carry the fuel? And if they they don’t, it’s implied,well they’re just amateurs. This is beyond ridiculous.

 

4 hours ago, martin-w said:

Which airliner in question was in danger of hot debris raining down? Which airliner reported a near miss? The answer is none. Seems to me that the FAA's arrangements for the test launch worked. No airliner was ever in danger. Inconvenienced, yes. 

Iberia 379.

This poor crew after a 9 hour flight from Madrid arrived in the area at midnight on their body clock,with presumably their standard fuel reserves and were faced with the short notice 90 minute closure of both their destination , alternate airports and surrounding airspace.

The captain had no choice other than to declare a mayday and penetrate the closed ACTIVE DRA in which presumably by definition and spacex/ FAA calculations debris was still falling, as he’d run out of options. The captain ultimately has the authority to depart from any regulations where they deem it necessary for the safety of their aircraft.

So this aircraft was indeed in harms way, but he had no option.

We all know the consequence of a small piece of metal on the runway being kicked up by a tyre had on the Air France Concorde and its ruptured fuel tank. I seriously dread to think of what flying into even just a single small piece of metal at 475kts at altitude would do to an airframe or engine.
Because let’s remember for every large glowing piece of metal seen by pilots and people on the ground on those videos that this pilot was “ super envious “ of , there’s going to be thousands of small unseen pieces ready to shred a turbine or fuel tank.

There may have been others, the rest were as you say were inconvenienced, but when when aircraft with limited fuel reserves are inconvenienced, then danger is never far behind.

”such a non event”

”nothing at all abnormal here”

”the pilot who was viewing this was probably really enjoying it”

Good grief, let’s ask the captain of Iberia 379 how much he enjoyed his evening shall we ?

Edited January 24, 20251 yr by jon b