SpaceX gets license for 2nd launch of giant Starship rocket
space.com
space.com
https://twitter.com/CSI_Starbase/status/1724824319413436515
But SpaceX is limited to 30 launches per year:
https://twitter.com/BCCarCounters/status/1724821414144823601
IANAL. What I would like to understand is: What supernatural being descended on earth and gave governments the supreme right to own the path from earth into space.
OK, yes, I do understand the safety argument (both in terms of danger and weaponized access to space). However, if those factors are not issues, well, why?
At a micro level it would be like having to get permission for me to drive to the beach. Or, worse, walk there.
What body of law allows government to prevent a private company from using the atmosphere to get to space?
Again, don't say "safety". That's well understood. You don't want 200 rocket companies launching at the same time from the same area. Got it. The difference is, that scenario is about traffic control and not about having to get permission to travel.
Does the atmosphere really belong to countries?
OK, so, if you could launch from a ship in the middle of the ocean you would be free to launch as you wish? Is that the case?
This is a higher subset of
“God created men, Col. Colt made them equal,”
And that is, governments have the supreme authority of violence, and if you would like to do anything about it, at the end of the day you have to keep violence open as an option.
So, in theory, yes you could launch from the middle of the ocean if you wanted. But I suspect at the end of the day you having both the ability to potentially put weapons in space, and the lack of your own military to defend your sovereignty means you'll get offed by a hostile government first chance they get. That or if you travel anywhere you'll be abducted by the US and put in prison forever.
'Listen. Strange supernatural beings descending on earth is no basis for a system of government. Supreme executive power derives from a mandate from the masses...'
> OK, so, if you could launch from a ship in the middle of the ocean you would be free to launch as you wish?
Couldn't that possibly be mistaken by countries around the world as an icbm launch. Given that danger, I'm pretty sure no private company would be allowed to launch rockets without government approval. But I'm just guessing.
"Col Sanders, we've just detected an icbm launch from the middle of the pacific ocean!"
"Who launched it?"
"Err... no idea". <-- probably the important point ;)
At which point these theoretical observers would probably be trying to get some kind of visual on the object, plus likely trajectory, etc.
Barring some really unfortunately co-incidents / accidents, they'd hopefully realise it's not an icbm.
If you try to drive to the beach but other people stop you and put you in prison, it happens because other people choose to exercise their freedom that way. If you believe that everyone should have the right to access the beach, it's up to you to convince other people. And to find enough muscle to enforce that right against those who inevitably disagree.
There are no rights in the nature. There is only freedom. If you want to make something a right – going to the beach or launching a rocket, for example – you need to convince other people of that. And you need a mechanism for enforcing the right.
The only hard laws are laws of physics. Those laws say that, ultimately, if I can beat you to death, my wants trump yours. Everything else is built on top of that.
"Might makes right" never went away. It just got pushed upwards to nation states with monopoly on violence, which can create conditions that allow its populations to enjoy different rules. It still holds between nation states, which is why everyone keeps an army.
The world being mostly at peace in the past decades is a result of a multi-layered Mexican standoff. Nuclear powers are locked in MAD, and everyone else allies themselves with one.
So, to answer the original question:
> What supernatural being descended on earth and gave governments the supreme right to own the path from earth into space.
Nuclear weapons do. Or, in general, superior military strength. Governments are free to regulate whatever they want, however they want. They're limited from by self-preservation from both directions - from the bottom, avoiding a civil war; from the top, avoiding breaking the Mexican standoff.
And yes, but if your launch disturb a commercial plane flight, you might have issues anyway.
If your analogy is ATC, getting permission to takeoff/land your plane in controlled airspace _is part of_ said traffic control - there are simply much fewer factors that need considering for planes (compared to orbital rockets) so that permission can usually be given fairly quickly without much coordination. As the pace of commercial launches increases (and experimental rockets turn into proven designs) you should expect it to become a more routine exercise.
Humanity, itself alone, made this decision. Its the same fundamental postulate that gives governments the 'right' to invade and destroy other governments' people - without the people involved making the decision, no rockets get built in the first place.
Permission? You only need permission because you also need help - from the rest of the people who make life, as it is on Earth for humankind, what it is.
Note that you do have to get permission from the government to drive (to the beach). You need:
* A driving licence
* A registered and insured car
Roads are a shared space so regulations about how people use them help the common good. Noise and hazards presented by cars affect everyone so there is regulation about exhaust mufflers and pedestrian safety features. Uncontrolled driving would result in crashes so we have traffic lights, roundabouts etc.
These are all the same considerations with rockets - is it safez is it going to affect the surrounding area, is it going to conflict with other air users.
Similar to just driving your well tested car to the beach, SpaceX doesn't have to go through anywhere near as annoying of a process to launch F9 every 4 days.
Why? It would be analogous to international waters. Is it legal for the US to sink a Swedish ship in international waters just because it dislikes its position?
> at a high altitude that doesn't interfere with air traffic
Which would mean outside of the scope of FAA's jurisdiction?
The US military blows up stuff outside of the scope of FAA jurisdiction all the time. It’s kind of their thing.
Those Russian balloons could be there just to display Yandex ads.
U.S. Code, specifically Title 51, Subtitle V, Chapter 509, also known as the Commercial Space Launch Act.
> OK, so, if you could launch from a ship in the middle of the ocean you would be free to launch as you wish? Is that the case?
If you are a U.S. citizen, you are required to comply with FAA regulations and obtain the necessary licenses for commercial space launches. This is in line with the Outer Space Treaty, which places responsibility for space activities on the country of origin, regardless of where those activities actually take place.
The public safety interest doesn't end at launch, it covers the entire lifecycle of the equipment until it de-orbits. Amateur launch operators will also bring less sophistication around collision avoidance.