SpaceX has effectively outgrown the FAA

What lies beyond the FAA

Relations between SpaceX and the Federal Aviation Association (FAA) have been fairly rocky for years, until recently when matters came to a head. SpaceX was ready for the fifth flight of Starship in August, except the FAA decided to withdraw their consent until they had thoroughly consulted every conceivable agency (Fish & Wildlife Service, Environmental Protection Agency etc) to ensure everyone was happy. Essentially the FAA are failing in their role as regulator and their actions are now counterproductive to the space sector – something even congress can agree on.

Timely Starship tests are vital for NASA’s Artemis Program and national security, by delaying them unnecessarily the FAA is hazarding our future, considering the mounting competition from China. After their failings were made public, the FAA responded by retroactively fining SpaceX for using a new launch control room and ground support equipment. These measures were designed to improve launch safety, which effectively means the FAA are trying to regulate for less safe launches. Rather predictably...

“SpaceX will be filing suit against the FAA for regulatory overreach” ~ Elon Musk

To summarize, not only is the FAA delaying urgent advance, they are also attempting to confiscate the capital SpaceX requires to make that progress possible. Ironically the FAA published a new set of regulations for the commercial space sector in 2021, aimed at speeding the permitting process, which in practise did the opposite. Overall the FAA can expect some tough questions in court, regarding the reasons for their seemingly arbitrary decisions.

Why FAA derailed

The FAA’s core concern is regulating the aviation industry, with the space industry added to their portfolio because it also requires airspace for launches. No doubt they view space companies as a minority who are disruptive to their core business i.e. facilitating fast and safe air transport.

“We don’t have fleets of rockets like there are fleets of certain types of aircraft, we don’t ground [rockets] we ‘hold onto the license’ while the investigation proceeds.” Dan Murray, FAA executive director, office of operational safety

This attitude is clearly anachronistic because SpaceX currently operate a fleet of reusable launch vehicles; director Murray even uses an outdated term, calling them rockets... Simply put, the FAA doesn’t have the flexibility to respond to this new situation in the space launch industry and attempting to regulate it in the same way as the past, when ‘rockets’ were highly experimental.

Current SpaceX fleet of launch vehicles, credit WAI/Rykllan

The FAA is comprised of bureaucrats, who like to work 9 to 5 at their own pace. However, SpaceX has increased their flight rate exponentially, placing an exceptional burden on FAA staff, which requires them to work overtime and weekends. Yes they made a rod for their own back with the new regulations but it’s only natural to blame SpaceX for their woes and act accordingly.

“FAA Administrator Whitaker made several incorrect statements today regarding SpaceX. In fact, every statement he made [to congress] was incorrect. It is deeply concerning that the Administrator does not appear to have accurate information immediately available to him with respect to SpaceX licensing matters.” ~ SpaceX

You might think Whitaker would keep the FAA on an even keel, but he’s a political appointee and relations have reached a new low with the current administration. Elon Musk has been quite vocal over the administration’s attempts to marginalize his companies, and even endorsed Donald Trump by way of protest. Realistically there’s no love lost between the two, and criticism by SpaceX has been scathing.

“Unfortunately, we continue to be stuck in a reality where it takes longer to do the government paperwork to license a rocket launch than it does to design and build the actual hardware.” ~ SpaceX

Of course the FAA has an ulterior motive for slow walking launch permits, in addition to their apparent animosity. Whenever they are called to testify before congress they claim any delays are caused by insufficient funding. Effectively they are using their position of trust to leverage more money from congress in order to build a bureaucratic empire, instead of reducing the number of staff needed through lessening red tape. Ironically, congress has repeatedly instructed the FAA not to regulate commercial spaceflight, to allow the industry an opportunity to learn how best to operate, without undue hindrance or penalties.

“The learning period was enacted in a commercial space bill in 2004 and originally set to expire in eight years. The intent of the learning period was to give industry time to build up flight experience that would inform future regulations. The slow development of commercial human spaceflight vehicles, though, led to several extensions of the learning period.” ~ Spacenews.com

The Way Forward

Modern launch vehicles like SpaceX’s Falcon 9 ascend and descend vertically, so there’s no need to cordon off huge areas downrange for aircraft and shipping, a relatively small column of airspace is all that’s required above the launch and landing site. These columns will climb all the way to space and be restricted to launch vehicles only, ensuring they don’t interfere with local air traffic and vice versa.

Some new federal body will be required to administer spaceflight, and regulate commercial operators. Ideally they will implement a minimum set of regulations instead of attempting to micromanage operations like the FAA. Happily this would leave the FAA responsible for low altitude airspace, allowing them to concentrate on what they do best, i.e. regulating commercial aircraft. As commercial spaceflight develops it’s becoming increasingly apparent that commercial aviation and spaceflight are two separate industries, hence require two separate regulatory bodies. Realistically it might take some time for congress to enact the necessary legislation, although this could happen during the next term of government. Certainly creating a dedicated ‘Space Administration’ would be a feather in their cap – and get them out of a sticky situation.

In conclusion

The FAA has shown it’s poorly suited to nurturing commercial spaceflight, as it grows into a mainstream industry. Growing things need to be handled with care, not bound by restrictions and deprived of resources. Best to make a clean start with a new regulatory body for space, accompanied by a more practical set of regulations. We can only hope the next person in the White House will see the urgent need and move swiftly to resolve this growing problem.

Chris Prophet