NASA is worried SpaceX's Starship could destroy its launch pad 39A

NASA is worried SpaceX’s Starship could destroy its launch pad 39A#STARSHIPFANS
Voices on the channel belong to:

Huge thanks to:
Cosmic Perspective:
Project Road to Mars:
C-bass Productions:
Starship Gazer:
Tony Bela – Infographic news:
Greg Scott:

Source of thumb:
Starship Gazer:
The Biden government is apparently toying with Elon Musk’s Starship.
After nearly a year of delay, SpaceX finally can continue developing and testing its giant Starship vehicle in South Texas, provided SpaceX must take more than 75 actions to mitigate its environmental impact on the area.
This is “one step closer to the first orbital flight test of Starship”.
But ironically, in another situation, SpaceX has just got a serious hurdle from NASA for the Starship backup launch pad.
What the heck?
Why would Nasa do this to the rocket that will be part of their Lunar project?
Let’s find out more about this interesting subject in today’s episode of SpaceX Fans:

For many years, SpaceX has already conducted various high-altitude test flights with Starship prototypes from Starbase, but now, the company hopes to actually launch the Starship to space for the first time and send the vehicle to orbit.

In order to launch Starship to orbit from Starbase, SpaceX first needs a launch license from the FAA. And the fate of SpaceX’s Starbase facility in Boca Chica has been hanging in the balance for the last year and a half as the FAA has been conducting an environmental review of how the company’s launch operations would impact the surrounding area.
NASA is worried SpaceX’s Starship could destroy its launch pad 39A

Advertisers who want to place ads on our channel, please contact the email manager: [email protected]
We use images and content in accordance with the YouTube Fair Use copyright guidelines:
Any questions about copyright please send us via gmail:
[email protected]
To be resolved, thank you.


  1. They are reaching on this one…..Darn government….it is always something pushing away from progression…..It is kinda sad..

  2. SpaceX should go their own way I see no benefit to allying with NASA they don’t bring much to the table, other than expensive old used up ideas

  3. As much as I enjoy your content, I do not like your tabloid style headline. Unprofessional.

  4. Elon has built the moon rocket that Nasa decided against in the 1960's for that very same reason. Direct ascent: send a rocket to the moon that lands on the surface and returns to earth. It requires a very big booster. Elon''s booster is twice the power of the Saturn 5 and may very well destroy Pad 39A if it explodes on lift off.

  5. Hate to say it, but Bezos had the right idea. Who cares if something goes BOOM in far West Texas? Choosing Boca for all this AND building the Florida site ON the 39a site… Just asking for trouble. SpaceX detracters are salivating on an accident at either facility.

  6. NASA does not want to be embarrassed by the young upstart private company. So NASA, the FAA, and the current administration are doing everything they can do to stop SpaceX.

  7. Enough with your BS propaganda! why don't you report some real stuff about SpaceX huh?

  8. I am going to try to be as nice about this as I can be keep in mind my name is Rebel… That pad would still be decrepitating if it wasn't for Elon and SpaceX. If anything were to cause any distraction to launch pad 39a it is with all certainty that I can say that SpaceX would completely rebuild and it's exact image it's replica. The United States government is in no way shape or form concerned about SpaceX and their new launch Tower at Cape Kennedy.
    I know this because I work in the industry.

  9. If NASA is so concerned with damage to Kennedy launch complexes while developing/testing Starship, NASA should convince the FAA to reduce the restrictions on SPACEX for doing launches at Boca Chica. Once Boca Chica testing produces reliable rockets (like Falcon9) then they can move to Kennedy. It was the FAA that forced SPACEX to move to Kennedy before they were ready so development could continue. Stop blocking SPACEX progress just so ATREMIS and the SLS can catch up!

  10. The FAA wasn't around when Boeing was building a defective 737 MAX.
    It was cost cutting inspector jobs, at the behest of republicans and democrats, allowing BOEING to inspect its own Jets. ALLOWING
    Boeing to buy-back $14 billion in stock instead of doing 'right' with the 737 refit.
    Boeing now moves it's headquarters from Chicago to Virginia….to be closer to government contracts ( they bald-faced admit it), 3rd headquarters move in 20 years.
    So .. we have a toothless FAA (no action on Boeing) going after the greatest inventor of our time.
    Smell that smell…bloated cow ?
    NASA is a pawn in this purposeful SLOW DOWN on SPACEX.
    This is the POWER POLITICS of corruption….for BOEING and LOCKHEED and other CORPORATE weasels.
    Democrats are showing they are equally corrupt, equally ' bought ' by the Corporate elites. Which have always treated the Space Program as a display of our technological progress.
    FAKE TROPHIES for fake programs. Like George W. Bush announcement in 2003 ' u.s.a. was going to MARS by 2020'. Bush lied to every American, on a nationally broadcasted SPEECH on SPACE.. Bush gutted the country for WAR, for WALL STREET. AND NASA got tidbits. nada. zipola.

    I am hard-core socialist now. …I despise corrupt government/corporations working in unison. I want the government to attack the corruption
    …I want companies that perform to be fast- tracked.
    I want BILDENSTINE back at NASA.

    I WANT wholesale firings at DOT and FAA headquarters. I want technological savvy replacements and a STRENGTHENING of the DOT, FAA, DOE.

    CORPORATE CORRUPTION has infested every element of government. The FAA is doing the bidding of Boeing to slow SPACEX down.
    Welcome to the gutting of U.S.A.
    BOEING ATTACK what they cannot do.
    737 MAX

    …and we, those of us citizens that have brains, are thwarted by citizens that are brain-dead zombies, that feed on spoon fed PABLUM.
    Speaking of PABLUM …make my 👉 wtf !!
    FDA, who gutted you. Pharma and Food shortages. ….crippled for WALL STREET quarterly profit.


  11. Click bait title. NASA does not want to stop SpaceX at all. They simply want to make sure pad 39A is not damaged in the event of a catastrophic failure of a Starship launch. It is sad that this site is going down the click bait road. I refuse to watch the videos anymore.

  12. do it… cut off your only access to space right now. what they gonna use ula? lmao. screw nasa

  13. Yeah we don't want to worry the taxpayer about paying for a 70 year old rocket that doesn't work or a launch pad for an Artemis rocket mission that is not updated enough for the rocket itself. This is a clear example of taxes fraud waste and abuse But using Elong Musk SpaceX rockets well we can't do that because it works and we can't use things at work.

  14. And yet NASA sent Challenger crew to their deaths when the engineers said abort the launch and NASA told them to launch, let alone the Columbia crew.

  15. Elon should be building offshore, until the feds to go pound sand with their BS regulations and interference.

  16. The career bureaucrats embarrassed that Artemis is a one-use, over-priced, forever-delayed, antiquated failure. . .

  17. Clearly the Biden Administration is doing everything they can to hold SpaceX back from moving us forward to the Moon and Mars.

  18. Elon has to come to Brazil, because this is where it all started in an interview.

  19. The real reason is the Biden administration is upset, that Elon is going to vote Republican. Period.

  20. You want to help solve this (and many more) problems?? Vote the Democrats OUT!! Go register, then vote! Vote ALL Democrats OUT.

  21. I'd just tell em no more commercial crew. And no more Falcon Heavy launches ever, so no risk! Musk can afford the cancelation fees.

  22. BS. There are other pads across the country that can lanch dragon… this is political

  23. Are you serious or just click baiting! SpaceX is building their own pad and Tower. 39a is not even an issue.!!

  24. Insane increases in sensor telemetry, more automation, and less actual bodies needed at crucial moments means that level of damage is most likely off the table. It's a new age. SpaceX 'fails faster' but more often than not still within the expected scope. Who do you think this is? Boeing?

  25. I'm confused by most of the comments here. Nasa's worries are legitimate. The amount of fuel that will be in a Starship warrants extra precautions. Need only look to history to see how devastating the consequences can be of something going wrong.

  26. Screw NASA and the FAA move the launch facilities to Mexico, and they won't have any problems
    and then charge $1 Billion for a US astronaut to the space station, heck make that $5 billion

  27. How many launch failures occurred at Cape Canaveral? I liked the image of the Falcon Heavy taking off from Cape Canaveral with its 27 engines roaring.