Thats why they show the spaceport out at sea, as it kills the standard NIMBY objections. Also the cities they want to fly out of don’t have enough room to easily build a spaceport.
I'm not entirely sure how serious SpaceX are about their E2E idea anyway, I took it as more of a "hey, isn't this neat? totally physically possible and practical too." I imagine it would take a long time to scale up to that point though, probably decades(?) after the Moon/Mars.
[1] https://www.un.org/Depts/los/convention_agreements/texts/unc...
Non coastal cities have a problem...
In any case it takes care of most nimby as it's to far away for the neighbors to care. So reasonable, in that aspect.
Of course ITAR, fear of nuclear strikes etc... general FAA/EASA regulations remain issues for this business plan.
Weather will also be an issue. Flights rarely get canceled for weather issues. But transferring from a ferry onto a barge at high sea in bad wind seems like an non fun experience in a three piece suit.
yes you are right, I wasn't factoring in the fact that currently airline travel requires you to travel to an airport which is usually very far from the city centre.
I suspect putting the spaceport at sea is mainly a security issue. Failing to reach the landing pad is certainly less catastrophic on water than on the ground.
And that would actually be better than aircraft, there isn't such thing as a water landing there it's called crashing in the ocean.
You also want your rocket to land in an uninhabited area, in case something goes terribly bad. Sea makes much sense in this regard.