Starbase, LA

(spacex.com)

52 points | by bilsbie 1 hour ago

11 comments

  • chasd00 43 minutes ago
    Man if this actually starts to happen it's a good time to be a welder, concrete worker, or any general contractor or tradesman in Louisiana. Coastal Louisiana is some of the poorest areas in the US even more so than the valley in Texas where Starbase Texas is located. Probably 10-20 years worth of solid work building out that site.
    • swingandamiss 42 minutes ago
      A lot of good, hard working people in that area that would love to have these jobs open up.
      • pinkmuffinere 2 minutes ago
        somewhat topical video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O3dSjY4j7Ak

        tl;dw -- louisiana has a ton of natural resources and wonderful harbors, but has allowed corporations to get away with almost anything without paying their fair share of taxes, cleaning up their waste, or generally being held accountable. And likely related, there is a long history of rampant corruption in the area. With sea levels rising and cancerous pollution filling densely populated areas, life in Louisiana has generally become very difficult :(

      • ActorNightly 15 minutes ago
        [flagged]
    • sigmoid10 10 minutes ago
      If the figures in this announcement hold up, they're gonna spend like $20k per resident of LA. That's insane.
  • cwal37 37 minutes ago
    I wonder if anyone read the copy on this page or if it mostly came out of an LLM.

    The "Restoring the shoreline" and Rebuilding the marshlands" paragraphs below the images are almost exactly the same. The first sentence is exactly the same.

    • beerandt 27 minutes ago
      Maybe, but there's some very specific legal language that cpra and the state requires everyone use in referring to some of these issues, and at least part of the land SpaceX is acquiring is involved in coastal restoration lawsuits or deep water horizon settlements or both.

      As an engineer working on cpra projects in the past, I've wanted to reword a variety things but was forced to use their legal language.

      It's mostly a good thing as it keeps things properly defined in a political context that are meant to have specific technical meanings (like marsh, beach, rebuild vs restore).

      • cwal37 13 minutes ago
        I did briefly consider something along those lines, but shoreline and marshlands are materially different, plus they've already changed the text.
    • bobchadwick 19 minutes ago
      Maybe the site developer saw your comment. They're different now.
    • schiffern 27 minutes ago
      For me that makes it more likely to be human-generated. Seems like a "rushing person juggling revs and copy-pasting" mistake.

      FWIW, the writing style and tone match pre-LLM SpaceX writing. Of course you can prompt an LLM to mimic style, but somehow the regression-to-average blandness shines through. That can be hard to distinguish from bog-standard corporate speak though.

  • estearum 2 minutes ago
    > Pecan Island and nearby wetlands are high-value habitat for migratory waterfowl, shorebirds, wading birds, and other coastal wildlife. SpaceX is not developing the full footprint of the land and will preserve wetlands and wildlife habitat.

    Pretty cynical corpo-ambiguity-speak, even by Musk standards.

    We're supposed to be happy that they're promising not to develop 100% percent of the land footprint? They will leave at least 0.00001% of land area as wetlands and therefore we oughta be happy?

    Such empty bullshit it's more insulting they even put an environment-leaning section on the site. Just say "fuck it, our space fetish is more important biostability here on earth."

  • ianm218 11 minutes ago
    It’s easy to be pessimistic about Musk timelines/ big tech but I am thrilled that ambitious, real world, hard projects are happening in the US again.
    • adamtaylor_13 1 minute ago
      You're being down-voted (and so shall I) but I think you're right. Despite all the animosity towards him, Musk is doing things that are economically meaningful for our nation.

      We'll need a few more of "him" to dig us out of this situation I reckon, but overall I still hope it's possible.

      (Anyone asking antagonistic questions can go ahead and save their fingers, I won't respond to the petty comments.)

  • mrtnmcc 12 minutes ago
    A way to get back at Texas for datacenter restrictions?

    Ten pads and thousands of flights per year sure will accelerate Golden Dome, err... I mean "going to Mars"

  • kemotep 36 minutes ago
    It’s hard to imagine that Cocoa Beach/Titusville isn’t receptive to this. I guess it’s probably cheaper? They don’t have to share the airspace with NASA and other launch companies and it becomes a fully owned and operated Freeport for Musk’s ventures.
    • chasd00 27 minutes ago
      > I guess it’s probably cheaper?

      State of Louisiana was probably on their hands and knees begging. The construction would last decades and anyone with a strong back that can be told what to do and do it will have a job. It would help lift a lot of people in that area out of poverty.

      logistically, i wonder how long it takes to ship from Starbase Texas to Louisiana via barge. It has to be easier to get Starships to Louisiana than the East side of Florida.

    • checker 26 minutes ago
      No expert - but from what I've heard, Florida and Texas are constrained for efficent polar (North/South) orbit launches due to restrictions over populated areas. Whereas Louisiana has the Gulf to the south so no/fewer restrictions to worry about.
      • piloto_ciego 14 minutes ago
        It's for sun-synchronous orbits, almost assuredly. This is for space data centers.

        Man, I was hoping they would pick Alaska (as it's even better for launching into those orbits) - we could really use new industries other than just resource extraction, but Louisiana makes a lot of sense, I just am surprised that there's actually the available land there to do this. Interesting.

        • checker 2 minutes ago
          Thanks for the extra context!
    • Tuna-Fish 8 minutes ago
      They want to launch to sun-synchronous.
    • beerandt 25 minutes ago
      There's also a due south launch path at play.
    • jauntywundrkind 32 minutes ago
      Seems geography constrained. There's wetlands sure but how much they re allowed to build that out, vs LA where any effort to keep the state from shrinking as it does seems fairly welcome.
  • BugsJustFindMe 43 minutes ago
    > Building a new space coast

    But are they building it ghost to ghost?

    • giancarlostoro 40 minutes ago
      Lol this is a reference to Florida (though I love your Space Ghost reference), we have the Kennedy Space Center, and an Airforce base (I guess its a Space Force base now) which has led to this area being referred to as "Space Coast" adding this in case anyone else might be unaware.

      Florida is more interesting than people realize.

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space_Coast

      • jakeydus 32 minutes ago
        Oh, I've never thought that Florida was uninteresting. Florida is nothing but ~interesting~.
        • giancarlostoro 29 minutes ago
          I'm sort of projecting (I've been here most of my life, I got tired of it, now regaining appreciation for Florida the last few years), but I've also noticed others (not you) don't realize there's more to Florida than most people realize.
  • timcobb 23 minutes ago
    Why does this need to be built on the beach?
    • Tuna-Fish 10 minutes ago
      Because as China has shown, people are angry when you drop hundreds of tons of steel and propellant on people.

      Rockets sometimes fail. SpaceX has one of the lowest failure rates in the industry, but that's still ~0.5%. When they fail near launch, they cause humongous explosions. Because of this, anyone with even a tiny bit of care for people launches over the ocean, so that when it goes oops, it only harms some fish.

      The existing launch sites SpaceX uses are good for launching into prograde (Starbase, TX and Cape Canaveral, FL) and retrograde (Vandenberg SFB, CA) orbits, but they are all either unable or kind of marginal for launching into polar/very highly inclined orbits. (Starbase, TX cannot do it at all, Vandenberg SFB, CA has limitations on when you can launch, and Cape Canaveral, FL needs to fly a dogleg which reduces performance.)

      Part of their plans for the space datacenters involve launching a lot of mass into sun-synchronous (which is very highly inclined) orbits. For that, they need a launch site with the ocean either to the north or to the south.

    • block_dagger 12 minutes ago
      So the (eastward) flight path isn't over populated land. Rapid disassembly and all that.
      • Tuna-Fish 10 minutes ago
        In this case, southward.
    • stronglikedan 16 minutes ago
      Presumably so rockets can get out over water as quickly as possible in case they fail.
    • UltraSane 0 minutes ago
      So that failed rockets land in the ocean instead of on people. This is a big problem in China.
    • jgdxno 15 minutes ago
      it is to ensure that nothing fall on people's heads
    • stonogo 10 minutes ago
      It doesn't. It doesn't even need to be built, since the Stennis Space Center is already there and already has an excluson zone. This is a vanity project.
      • Tuna-Fish 4 minutes ago
        Huh? Stennis Space Center is a propulsion research site, it's not usable for orbital launches. There are cities south of it.
  • MeetingsBrowser 19 minutes ago
    > Starbase, Louisiana will be built to support thousands of Starship flights a year. This self-sustaining spaceport will have propellant production, power generation, deep-water shipping capabilities, vehicle processing facilities, and an airport.

    Sounds really neat, but "incredibly ambitious announcement" from an Elon Musk company is starting to wear thin.

    Is this real, or will it join the graveyard of other incredibly ambitious projects that were eventually abandoned to focus on the next incredibly ambitious project.

    • DarmokJalad1701 1 minute ago
      I can count plenty of incredibly ambitious announcements from them that have turned out amazing! In fact, they are an outlier in how many they have taken on and succeeded in.wh

      [x] Partially reusable rocket that dropped cost to orbit by an order of magnitude. And no, the space shuttle (while an amazing piece of engineering), doesn't really count. It cost a billion+ to refurbish and did nothing to make space more accessible. Now we have businesses that exist purely because the Falcon 9 exists. Heck, the entire new space industry got validated (and hence got investment) due to SpaceX's success.

      [x] Returning human spaceflight capability to the US at a fraction of the price, using the same reusable rocket platform after the old defense primes failed to do so. And then making it cheap enough that it has now also flown about half as many private missions as it did for NASA.

      [x] Global satellite constellation providing gigabit-scale internet with 10000+ satellite (once written off by "experts" as yet another "incredibly ambitious project" that will never happen).

      [x] Commercializing and bringing down the cost of electric cars to the point where they are actually a viable option now (unlike the compliance cars made by OEMs 10 years ago).

      [x] Building the largest rocket to ever exist that now has a clear path to being the first ever fully reusable launch vehicle.

      [x] A BCI implant that has now brought back mobility and communication ability to multiple patients with debilitating conditions.

      Given that each of these were things that no one had done successfully before, or had failed spectacularly - I don't really care that they took longer than initially planned.

      There is, in fact, a graveyard here. It is mostly filled with confident predictions that his companies would never do the things they have since done.

    • bhelkey 11 minutes ago
      He often promises incredibly ambitious things that don't happen. But, with a fairly reasonable frequency, he promises incredibly ambitious that do happen.

      For example, SpaceX is responsible for a massive spike in orbital launches [1].

      [1] https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/yearly-number-of-objects-...

  • 1auralynn 37 minutes ago
    I mean, isn't the LA coast going to be underwater in 50 years?
  • ramesh31 36 minutes ago
    Ah, Louisiana — when even Texas won't let you pollute enough.