Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

You have it mixed up. I've worked with the stats at NASA. Mission success and failure counts. Test quantity and quality count, test freedom counts, how they learn from test counts, but the test result does not count. This isn't a mission.


Where did I suggest this was a mission?

This was a partially successful test nothing more and nothing less. I get people really really think SpaceX had done an excellent job and I don’t disagree but people who are comparing the end result of a long process Aka the current state of falcon 9 with a new system like Starship are going to be disappointed.

Starship is extremely likely to fail repeatedly before achieving anything close to the same streak as the Falcon 9 has. That’s not an issue with SpaceX that’s an inherent aspect of doing something really difficult.


I don't think you realize this, but when you said that we can't exclude the test failure from the risk/reliability assessment, that's exactly what you're saying. I didn't realize until just now that you're actually defending the test failure as being acceptable.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: