While we can all snark about whether this was a resounding success or a predictable failure, this doesn't seem like the result you'd want for a rocket that's aiming to eventually carry humans.
Credit where it's due -- they've made clear and impressive improvements. But those improvements seem to largely have been some of the more straightforward engineering challenges.
The reliability issues with the engines seem much more existential. While SpaceX have admittedly done some impressive work to enable the vehicle to compensate for the loss of an engine, they're nevertheless playing with some very risky odds. I could see those odds eventually becoming acceptable for some payloads, but I'm not sure the humans sitting on top are going to be comfortable with "on average, at least one engine explodes per flight, hopefully not in the wrong place" particularly when we have safer options at our disposal.
Credit where it's due -- they've made clear and impressive improvements. But those improvements seem to largely have been some of the more straightforward engineering challenges.
The reliability issues with the engines seem much more existential. While SpaceX have admittedly done some impressive work to enable the vehicle to compensate for the loss of an engine, they're nevertheless playing with some very risky odds. I could see those odds eventually becoming acceptable for some payloads, but I'm not sure the humans sitting on top are going to be comfortable with "on average, at least one engine explodes per flight, hopefully not in the wrong place" particularly when we have safer options at our disposal.
Upvote
-104
(17
/
-121)