* Starship/Superheavy is huge and will likely mean far larger safety exclusion zones when launch/landing than with other current rockets.
* The current launch pads at the Cape are too close together.
* This would mean we’d not be able to work on our launch sites (and possibly other facilities) when Starship/Superheavy is operating (they have a factory at the Cape).
* Starship/Superheavy are planning 44 launches a year, how are we going to get any work done ?
* Please let us build some more launch sites a bit further apart
Please limit the number of Starship/Superheavy launches until this happens.
It very much isn’t “the environment is at risk, stop Starship/Superheavy from flying”.
7 comments
[ 3.4 ms ] story [ 31.5 ms ] thread“To sum up their filling it is basically:
* Starship/Superheavy is huge and will likely mean far larger safety exclusion zones when launch/landing than with other current rockets.
* The current launch pads at the Cape are too close together.
* This would mean we’d not be able to work on our launch sites (and possibly other facilities) when Starship/Superheavy is operating (they have a factory at the Cape).
* Starship/Superheavy are planning 44 launches a year, how are we going to get any work done ?
* Please let us build some more launch sites a bit further apart Please limit the number of Starship/Superheavy launches until this happens.
It very much isn’t “the environment is at risk, stop Starship/Superheavy from flying”.
https://old.reddit.com/r/space/comments/1do8pn0/blue_origin_...