The SpaceX incident is murky, but it seems they believed their weather
modeling was done to an acceptable level but the FAA side was having
problems with it, perhaps at least partly technical (i.e. getting it to run
on their end). SpaceX seems to have believed that they finally got their
point across and launched, but the FAA disagreed. A lot of that seems due
to communication problems (and maybe a bit of wilful ignorance? hard to
say), brought about due to SpaceX being in a hurry and the FAA personnel
being remote.
SpaceX subsequently made a number of procedural changes, more or less
forced, including the requirement to have an FAA person on site during
launch, presumably to avoid a literal game of telephone.
On Fri, Oct 1, 2021 at 2:32 PM Norman Yarvin <yarvin@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Fri, Oct 01, 2021 at 01:56:43PM +0000, Ian M. Garcia wrote:
I admit I haven't been following VG closely, but their FAA violation
seemed accidental to me. However, didn't SpaceX and SWARM openly and
knowingly break the law in the cases Ben mentions?
Yes, Swarm launched satellites after getting a disapproval from the
FCC. But in addition to admitting guilt and paying the fine, they
entered into a consent decree where they promised to clean up their
regulatory act. There are heavier penalties waiting in the wings if
they don't, such as raising
" the question of Swarm Technologies’ basic qualifications to
hold or obtain any Commission license or authorization."
which seems like it'd effectively be the corporate death penalty.
https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/FCC-18-184A1_Rcd.pdf
SpaceX also did some kowtowing to the FAA after whatever that breach
of rules was. (I'm not clear on the details either.)
If you're looking for open defiance, perhaps the strongest example is
Elon's defiance of coronavirus shutdown orders, where he tweeted that
if they were going to arrest anyone it should be him.