FAA Wants Your Opinion On Commercial Space Rules 160
coondoggie writes "If you have an opinion about how you think the commercial space flight world should be regulated, the FAA wants to hear from you. On Thursday, May 26, 2011 at the DoubleTree by Hilton Hotel Cocoa Beach Oceanfront in Florida it will hold a public hearing where the FAA says it wants to gather information about how to define what it calls a regulatory framework for orbital human spaceflight."
Rule #1 (Score:5, Insightful)
No exploding
No jurisdiction (Score:0, Insightful)
The US FAA has no jurisdiction over space.
They can collect comments and input till they turn blue.
They still have no juris-my-diction.
Sorry, FAA. Also, stop adding controllers to unused towers. Add controllers to BUSY towers.
E
Re:No jurisdiction (Score:4, Insightful)
At the moment, no one has jurisdiction. It's a wild-ass frontier up there. However, it is reasonable to assume that the USA's FAA should have some authority over space vehicles taking off and landing in American lands. Furthermore, it is also reasonable to suppose that the FAA will be likely to have some input or influence on what rules are put into place, when the requisite international body is formed for managing orbital and interstellar flights, as I would also expect other flight safety agencies from around the world to have.
Re:Rule #1: No exploding (Score:3, Insightful)
Disagree. I'm happy with "No exploding unless you've got enough insurance to clean up whatever the exploded bits land on", and would have no problem compromising on "No exploding over populated areas."
But as for the appropriate level of safety the FAA should target with its regulations, all I want as a prospective passenger is the same level of safety you get when you do your first tandem skydive. Everyone signs a waiver that says they realize they might not come back alive, but the company has a pretty strong incentive to make sure everybody comes back safely, and the experienced jumper, to whom the n00bs are strapped, has a very strong incentive to bring both of you back safely.
If the spacecraft's pilot thinks it's safe enough to fly, then I'll fly with him.
So long as we don't damage anything or anyone in their path, it's nobody's business but ours whether we come back high-fiving each other saying "that was awesome!", or as the first snowflake of the season [pbfcomics.com].
Re:so how many people will have to die before safe (Score:5, Insightful)
so how many people will have to die before for some safety rules are in place?
3007.
Back in the real world, pushing rules that expect 99.99999% safety would simply kill the industry in America and hand space travel over to the Chinese or some other country which is happy for people to make their own decision about whether they think a flight is safe. All that's really required is some basic standard that companies have to meet to avoid punitive lawsuits when someone does die.
Re:No jurisdiction (Score:3, Insightful)
but they have jurisdiction of airspace from 1000 to 50,000 feet. It's kind of hard to get to space without that "first mile". Well I guess you can get there... it's when you get back that you get in trouble.
Re:America (Score:5, Insightful)
Killing business before it even starts. The US is probably the most unfriendly country in the world to start a business in. Then you wonder why there's no growth.
Blatant falsehood. We're the third best country [cnn.com] to start a business in.
Yeah, I have a suggestion: (Score:4, Insightful)