6 ms·
My "expected value" knowledge has atrophied, but I'm guessing this is just a weird way of saying a success rate of 99.5% or something. 0.995^135 is about 0.5, s
by zellyn 10y ago
My "expected value" knowledge has atrophied, but I'm guessing this is just a weird way of saying a success rate of 99.5% or something. 0.995^135 is about 0.5, so you blow up on average half the time in 135 flights, or once every 270 flights.
- froindt 10y ago> no more than one projected astronaut fatality in 270 flights > success rate of 99.5% or something. 0.995^135 is about 0.5 Method seems pretty good, but unfortunately that math would only work if there was exactly one astronaut per flight. Per Wikipedia, the capacity is up to 7 crew members, so I reckon at full capacity, that would be 1 full vehicle failure with 7 lives lost in 1,890 flights. My math is a bit rusty too though. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dragon_2 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dragon_2
- Already__Taken 10y agoNot a rocket buff but I thought the soyuz rocket (R-7) was one of the most proven and reliable rockets there are. In 60 years that family has had 1,859 launches[1]. So statistics aside it's interesting just how high those standards are if you bore them out. Going to look stupid with some maths here; If spacex launch every 2 weeks which I thought was the goal, that's like 72 years to prove that reliability record. 72.69 = (1890 * 2) / 52 Number of 1 week periods divided by weeks in a year. 1: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/R-7_(rocket_family)#Summary_of_variants https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/R-7_(rocket_family)#Summary_of...