Starbase, LA

(spacex.com)

73 points | by bilsbie 2 hours ago ago

70 comments

  • chasd00 an hour 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 an hour ago

      A lot of good, hard working people in that area that would love to have these jobs open up.

      • pinkmuffinere 33 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 :(

    • whyage 24 minutes ago

      Are "3,000 new jobs" enough to make a dent though?

      • chasd00 17 minutes ago

        it doesn't fix everything wrong in the state but it's > 0. There's a lot of additional economic activity that comes with the construction too. Restaurants get busier, Walmart gets busier, lots of auto repair/servicing will be needed etc. Som e people will move for construction and end up staying there. It can be a shock to the local communities though but i think the positives still outweigh the negatives.

        • rtkwe 4 minutes ago

          The biggest issue is these kinds of construction jobs are temporary. It's similar to but not quite as bad as datacenters where you get a very short term influx of skilled highly paid labor but those jobs don't stick around after the construction is over. Starbase will require more people on site at least.

    • sigmoid10 41 minutes ago

      If the figures in this announcement hold up, they're gonna spend like $20k per resident of LA. That's insane.

      • ryandvm a minute ago

        Lol. I can't imaging the figures from a Musk venture not holding up.

  • ianm218 42 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 32 minutes 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.)

      • sockaddr 5 minutes ago

        Elon-types won't "dig us out" of our mess.

        Removing parasitic elements in government spending and policy will. This starts with politics. We first need a healthy, educated, engaged, and safe population. All else follows. These are all things Elon actively works against. You aren't part of his future.

      • zoomaboom 29 minutes ago

        Golden Dome might be "economically meaningful" but it will also lead to WWIII so, no thank you.

      • UltraSane 29 minutes ago

        Musk has done a huge amount to put us INTO this situation.

    • jrflowers 19 minutes ago

      I love that people see a website about one of musk’s ideas and go “wow this is real and happening” in the year of our lord 2026

      • xboxnolifes 10 minutes ago

        Of all of Musk's ventures, SpaceX seems to actually do things and not just say they do things.

  • cwal37 an hour 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 an hour 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 44 minutes ago

        I did briefly consider something along those lines, but shoreline and marshlands are materially different, plus they've already changed the text.

    • schiffern an hour 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.

    • bobchadwick an hour ago

      Maybe the site developer saw your comment. They're different now.

  • mrtnmcc 42 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"

  • maeln 24 minutes ago

    Feels like an impossible project that will end up being 5% of what was advertised (the 5% being what was actually planned all along), but is made with folie des grandeurs to pump a stock who's hype has died down.

  • kemotep an hour 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 an hour 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.

      • randallsquared 25 minutes ago

        They may not have to ship many or any. The first launch of a Texas-constructed Starship could just land the booster in Louisiana for a small fuel penalty, and then ships could likewise land there.

    • checker an hour 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 44 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 32 minutes ago

          Thanks for the extra context!

        • UltraSane 26 minutes ago

          Space data centers still make absolutely no sense.

          • lesuorac 19 minutes ago

            When nobody lets you build a land data center they're going to make a lot of sense.

    • Tuna-Fish 39 minutes ago

      They want to launch to sun-synchronous.

    • beerandt an hour ago

      There's also a due south launch path at play.

    • jauntywundrkind an hour 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.

    • UltraSane 27 minutes ago

      I expect Musk picked Louisiana because it has some of the weakest corporate regulations of any state and will probably let SpaceX get away with almost anything.

  • krunck 25 minutes ago

    I used to be interested in SpaceX development. Then I came to the realization that SpaceX is going to be used primarily for the militarization of space: hauling space based weaponry, weaponry drop ships, surveillance satellites, etc.

    I still feel glad for the SpaceX engineers and scientists who succeed and doing new and innovative stuff. But their employer is just like every other military contractor sucking on the unlimited teets of the US Government. What a waste of taxpayer money.

    I grew up in during the Cold War and I'm sick of this shit. America always thinking it has to dominate any country that doesn't bow down before it.

  • estearum 33 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 they're promising not to develop one-hundred 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 than the wetlands."

    • ceroxylon 27 minutes ago

      I agree, and the premise is that we're supposed to believe the remaining waterfowl are going to coexist peacefully with... rocket launches?

      Evolution has done stranger things, but my bet is that the birds will find somewhere else to be over learning to not be startled by nearby earth-rumbling explosions.

      • bryanlarsen 19 minutes ago

        The wetlands around Cape Canaveral/Kennedy are thriving. Men with guns prevent people from getting too close to the rockets, and people do far more damage to wetlands than a rocket launch once every few days.

        A rocket launch every hour or so as SpaceX is promising might be quite different.

  • timcobb an hour ago

    Why does this need to be built on the beach?

    • Tuna-Fish 41 minutes ago

      Because as China has shown, people get 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 42 minutes ago

      So the (eastward) flight path isn't over populated land. Rapid disassembly and all that.

      • Tuna-Fish 41 minutes ago

        In this case, southward.

    • stronglikedan an hour ago

      Presumably so rockets can get out over water as quickly as possible in case they fail.

    • jgdxno an hour ago

      it is to ensure that nothing fall on people's heads

    • stonogo 40 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.

      • edm0nd 13 minutes ago

        it needs to be built so they can launch from it so yes it does

      • Tuna-Fish 35 minutes ago

        Huh? Stennis Space Center is a propulsion research site, it's not usable for orbital launches. There are towns south of it.

  • MeetingsBrowser an hour 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 32 minutes 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 challenges they have taken on and succeeded in.

      [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 42 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-...

      • MeetingsBrowser 26 minutes ago

        SpaceX and Tesla are both successful companies doing really impressive things, but the more ambitious claims are almost always silently discarded.

        Including robotaxis, tesla semi-trucks, hyperloop, optimus, roadster 2.0, cheap whole home batteries, true FSD, Mars landing, nueralink, and more I'm sure.

        It is difficult for me to get excited about a decades long, ambitious project when the follow through rate is <10%.

        • mindwok 4 minutes ago

          He is definitely overly optimistic on timelines but pretty much all those things you mentioned are actually still happening, it's too early to say they haven't followed through.

        • randallsquared 17 minutes ago

          Several of these do exist already, and one of them was never a promised project. This objection seems like it's from 2016.

  • BugsJustFindMe an hour ago

    > Building a new space coast

    But are they building it ghost to ghost?

    • giancarlostoro an hour 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 an hour ago

        Oh, I've never thought that Florida was uninteresting. Florida is nothing but ~interesting~.

        • giancarlostoro an hour 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.

  • johnyzee 14 minutes ago

    "Watch Now" just shows a black screen with an audio track for me.

    • xyst 12 minutes ago

      same , you probably have ad blocking on and this video element has tracking/telemetry

  • 1auralynn an hour ago

    I mean, isn't the LA coast going to be underwater in 50 years?

    • nxm an hour ago

      Nope

  • xyst 10 minutes ago

    Space exploration is a pipe dream and fantasy that billionaires hope to have up and running just in time to "escape" the world they have helped destroy.

    Prove me wrong bro

  • ramesh31 an hour ago

    Ah, Louisiana — when even Texas won't let you pollute enough.