Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Space Earth

Space Drugs Factory Denied Reentry To Earth (gizmodo.com) 66

Posted by BeauHD from the left-hanging dept.
After manufacturing crystals of an HIV drug in space, the first orbital factory is stuck in orbit after being denied reentry back to Earth due to safety concerns. Gizmodo reports: The U.S. Air Force denied a request from Varda Space Industries to land its in-space manufacturing capsule at a Utah training area, while the U.S. Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) did not grant the company permission to reenter Earth's atmosphere, leaving its spacecraft hanging as the company scrambles to find a solution, TechCrunch first reported. A spokesperson from the FAA told TechCrunch in an emailed statement that the company's request was not granted at this time "due to the overall safety, risk and impact analysis."

Gizmodo reached out to Varda Space to ask which regulatory requirements have not been met, but the company responded with a two-word email that ominously read, "no comment." The California-startup did provide an update on its spacecraft through X (formerly Twitter). "We're pleased to report that our spacecraft is healthy across all systems. It was originally designed for a full year on orbit if needed," Varda Space wrote on X. "We look forward to continuing to collaborate w/ our gov partners to bring our capsule back to Earth as soon as possible." Varda Space Industries launched its first test mission on June 12, "successfully sending a 200-pound (90-kilogram) capsule designed to carry drug research into Earth's orbit," reported CNN. "The experiment, conducted in microgravity by simple onboard machines, aims to test whether it would be possible to manufacture pharmaceuticals in space remotely."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Space Drugs Factory Denied Reentry To Earth More

Space Drugs Factory Denied Reentry To Earth

Comments Filter:
  • And the US wont let them land in Utah, why not just land it in a willing third country for a fee and retrieve it there?

  • What changed? (Score:5, Interesting)

    by YuppieScum ( 1096 ) on Wednesday September 20, 2023 @02:36AM (#63862366) Journal

    I would have thought that, if the whole idea was to return the payload to earth, they would have sought the requisite permissions before spending the money building and launching.

    In fact, they clearly were given permission to launch, so did the submitted mission profile not include the payload return?

    Or has someone at the FAA recently watched "The Andromeda Strain"?

    • Re:What changed? (Score:5, Informative)

      by fahrbot-bot ( 874524 ) on Wednesday September 20, 2023 @02:56AM (#63862392)

      In fact, they clearly were given permission to launch, so did the submitted mission profile not include the payload return?

      According to TFA ...

      Varda’s capsule was originally scheduled for reentry on September 5 or 7, but the company’s application was denied on September 6, according to TechCrunch.

      So it looks like it was scheduled for re-entry and permission was revoked. Obviously, it's going to come down sooner or later unless the FAA can revoke gravity ...

      I'm cynically guessing that the drug crystals created effectively cure HIV and allowing it to return would cut into the huge profits pharmaceutical companies get from life-long treatments using their drugs.

      • More likely they developed a new form of SpaceAIDS that'll kill us all.

      • I'm cynically guessing that the drug crystals created effectively cure HIV

        They are making an existing drug.

      • Re:What changed? The rules, in mid-flight. (Score:5, Informative)

        by sabbede ( 2678435 ) on Wednesday September 20, 2023 @06:33AM (#63862594)
        Here's why I think the FAA and Air Force are lying -

        UTTR has previously hosted other capsule recovery missions, [...] But despite these precedents, Varda’s proposed reentry cadence — monthly by 2026 — is completely new. This is perhaps one reason why the reentry clearances are taking so long; indeed, the Air Force spokesperson said the process is to “set the correct precedents” for future commercial reentry activity."

        “We also stress this is a whole-of-government and interagency process to set the correct precedents for future activities such as these.”

        So, they are trying to change the existing rules and precedents for capsule recovery between the scheduled launch and re-entry. That the reporters have to speculate on what the government's problem with the re-entry is - "maybe they want to land too many capsules?" - itself indicates that the government is making this up as they go. You can't do that with regulations. You can't change the rules mid-stride.

        Unless they have a good reason to think the capsule would land in the middle of Provo instead the 500 square-mile recovery site, they need to let the company operate under existing precedent while they mull over what to change.

        • "Gizmodo reached out to Varda Space to ask which regulatory requirements have not been met, but the company responded with a two-word email that ominously read, “no comment.”"

          That's why the reporters "have to speculate on what the government's problem with the re-entry is".

        • There doesn't seem to be any evidence that re-entry was ever granted, or that the rules changed mid-flight. As startups do, the company probably went ahead with the launch even without re-entry permission, because "we'll worry about that later."

      • "So it looks like it was scheduled for re-entry and permission was revoked."

        Actually, if I'm reading this right, they scheduled for re-entry before their application for it was processed, and then it was denied. It was not revoked, because it was never granted in the first place; they just said they were going to do it before permission was granted.

      • Comment removed based on user account deletion

      • I'm cynically guessing that the drug crystals created effectively cure HIV and allowing it to return would cut into the huge profits pharmaceutical companies get from life-long treatments using their drugs.

        And modded up as well!

        What we could really use right now is a space drug to cure people dwelling in a dystopia of their own imagination.

      • Denied, yes, but not necessarily revoked. As startups often do, they probably went charging ahead with the launch, saying "We'll worry about re-entry later."

    • Re:What changed? (Score:5, Informative)

      by Tx ( 96709 ) on Wednesday September 20, 2023 @02:58AM (#63862396) Journal

      It sounds like they launched while the re-entry license was still pending, I'm seeing articles from months ago about that. It seems they are applying under a new licensing scheme, so maybe that's why they are hitting a few kinks. Here's a quote from an Ars article;

      "The FAA ensures commercial launch and re-entry operations don’t endanger the public. The FAA has licensed 53 commercial launches so far in 2023 for SpaceX, Rocket Lab, Virgin Galactic, Virgin Orbit, Relativity Space, and ABL Space Systems. But it has only licensed five re-entries this year, all for SpaceX’s Dragon crew and cargo missions returning from the International Space Station.

      Once its license is approved, Varda Space will become just the third company to receive a commercial FAA re-entry license and the first under streamlined commercial spaceflight regulations known as Part 450.

      “We would be the first to operate within this new regulatory regime (for a re-entry),” Asparouhov said.

      In-space manufacturing startup aces pharma experiment in orbit [arstechnica.com]

  • A few mg of drugs are now threatening to the entire planet because they were made in space? I thought the FAA might employ like, a scientist. Maybe they're on vacation.

  • Won't someone think of the poor junkies ? There's got to be a huge market for space drugs !!!

  • Just read the highlights and the Air Force is correct to do this.
    "...regulatory requirements have not been met...", "No Comment" to that one.
    "The experiment, conducted in microgravity by simple onboard machines,..." OH NO. No AI?? No way Jose.

  • If the FAA is refusing, I rather suspect there are lots of places in the world that would approve the landing for a nominal fee in the right pocket.
    So what's really up here?

  • Why? Just say nothing.
  • Seriously stop calling it X. Don't acknowledge its new name or identity. You know, like Elon does with his daughter.
  • RTA

    Gizmodo reached out to Varda Space to ask which regulatory requirements have not been met, but the company responded with a two-word email that ominously read, "no comment." https://gizmodo.com/space-phar... [gizmodo.com]

    It's amazing people commenting on this story gloss over this important bit of information. Varda Space was asked what regulatory requirements were not met and Varda Space replied, "No comment".

    That's pretty important. Varda Space should be able to tell you why. The fact that they are not te
  • to come back to earth?
  • Not clear on the logic with that.

    Also would ignoring the reg be a civil or criminal matter?

  • I know it's gawker spawn and all that, but that's a pretty piss poor article even by gizmodo standards. The author should have included the specifics on exactly what these so-called safety concerns are. That's kind of Journalism 101.

    After all, it's not like returning a payload capsule dropped from an orbiting satellite is anything new. We've been doing it since the Corona/Keyhole days back in the early '60s. So what's changed? What are Varda trying to do differently that presents a safety concern where p

  • Body-snatching bean pods? What the hell do they have up there?

  • The FAA doesn't have any authority whatsoever about who enters earths atmosphere.

    They're the ones who should be brought down to earth !

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by jonwil ( 467024 )

      The FAA has jurisdiction over anything that lands in the US from outer space since it has to pass through airspace controlled by the FAA.

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by PPH ( 736903 )

        Land it in Mexico and pay a coyote to wade across the Rio Grande with it.

  • This is the FAA is just holding out their hands for additional bribes/fees. I used to operate in this space.

    Not all bribes are monetary; for most government officials, all they want is you to kowtow before them so they feel powerful.

    I was the one assigned to take people from FDA out to dinner/resorts and butter them up with how wonderful and powerful and all-knowing they must be, and how lucky the US people are to have them protecting us unwashed peasants. Our medical device was approved the following wee

  • atmosphere? Well who died and made them god?

Slashdot Top Deals

Real Programmers think better when playing Adventure or Rogue.

Close