NewSpace nemesis at Transportation Dept?

I'll have to second Rand's "Uh Oh" here: Uh Oh - Transterrestrial Musings. I remember in the Congressional hearings on the Commercial Space Launch Amendments Act that Oberstar was particularly obtuse when it came to the concept that a brand new technology in a small embryonic industry offering adventure experiences should be treated differently than a mature transportation system in a giant industry providing mass passenger services. (See this article by Taylor Dinerman.)

As Transportation Secretary he could not explicitly modify the CSLAA rules but he could obviously influence their implementation. There is a lot of leeway for regulators and it is very expensive and time consuming to fight them. See how easily the FAA began to require a permit for tethered vehicle testing just with a new interpretation of existing language.

And, of course, he could always encourage the insertion of stricter rules on commercial space launch into new transportation legislation as it comes along.

I hope that friends of NewSpace with influence on the new administration will help either to block this appointment or to get a commitment from Oberstar not to stymie this vulnerable industry.

Posted 11/06/08 | 13:20:46 by TopSpacer | Filed under: Space Law and Regs

Comments

I think the fellow who would have the most
interesting opinion would be Burt Rutan.
Burt is doing SpaceShip Two as his swan song.
He has done production aircraft (Starship),
worked at production aircraft companies,
and worked military flight test as well as
producing dozens of experimental aircraft.

Burt may well welcome a strict regulator, as
he has had numerous run ins with AST, and
has a philisophical split with the AST.

Before we listen to Rand, we should discuss,
this with industry.

Posted by anonymous at 11/06/08 13:53:25

I've added some info to Jim Oberstar's wikipedia article to try to document his positions on private spaceflight regulation. Please add to it if you can, although be sure to attempt to maintain neutrality: http://en.wikipedia.org/wik...

Posted by Neil H. at 11/06/08 15:33:12

Anon,
The industry already discussed this ad nauseum long ago. We were all subject to a "fact finding" effort by Oberstar to find some evidence that we were all dangerous lunatics. The report was reasonable but Oberstar still said he wants to regulate us the same way airlines are regulated.
No need to "discuss this with industry". Its universally considered a bad idea....

Posted by Michael Mealling at 11/06/08 15:56:27

Burt always approached the problem from his experience in the kit building aircraft industry. He was sued a few times and that colors his views.

He maintained that having the certification process the same as commercial aircraft would reduce the risk of being sued, or if sued, losing. I find it hard to argue with that view. There is some truth in that.

The real question is do we pay more in advance (during development) or after operations begin (in higher insurance and potential legal expenses). Most of the NewSpace industry has come down in favor or "later" but we might not have the choice in the near future as the current rules expire.

Posted by Gary C Hudson at 11/06/08 16:10:41

Also, it is important to remember that companies that have a lead in industry tend to not mind having regulations that make it harder on their competitors. Big companies like Scaled might very well be able to deal with more regulatory overhead. But it would likely squash smaller players.

More importantly, nobody knows what technologies and techniques will lead to safe RLVs. We all have ideas, but prematurely codifying design practices before we've had a chance to learn is a great way to actually increase the odds of people getting killed.

~Jon

Posted by Jonathan Goff at 11/06/08 16:37:17

Like surprised....? Obama starts to show his colors. Get ready to be regulated into extinction. Only "government" based entities will flourish. Enjoy.....

Posted by Doug at 11/06/08 18:27:49

Oberstar would not be very welcome to aviation interests, either.

The same attitude which makes him make dumb proclamations about commercial space shows up as obstructing advances in aviation technology.

There's a reason that innovation in space is coming from a small crowd of enthusiasts and entrepreneurs, and not from NASA or Lockheed Martin.

Of course, if we redistribute the wealth of the entrepreneurs they will stop making NASA look clumsy and bureaucratic.

Or emigrate. Some nation somewhere probably would welcome a commercial space industry if we don't want it.

Richardson would be a better choice than Oberstar for several reasons (and Mr Obama owes him one for shanking Hillary early). I wouldn't be surprised to see Rick Homans, a guy from Richardson's administration, somewhere in the commerce or transport end of an Obama admin either.

Posted by Kevin O-Brien at 11/07/08 00:20:09

Add Comment

Note: HTML code will not work except for bare URLs (i.e. http://www...). Also, for postings older than 1 week, comments are filtered manually to prevent spam and so may not appear for a few days.
Note: Trash talking and name calling, especially in anonymous comments, won't be tolerated.