4 ms·

> Commercial Crew can't get here soon enough. You mean the option with 0% success rate so far is better than the one with 100% (till this incident)?

Tossrock 8y ago
You're playing some weird games with numbers here. "100% if we subtract the failures" isn't 100%, and something that hasn't been tested yet doesn't really have a 0% success rate, it just doesn't have a success rate at all. I'm not saying that Commercial Crew is "better" than the Soyuz program, but I am definitely saying that after two high profile incidents within a few weeks, I am concerned about the long term viability of relying on it for human access to space.
- gdhbcc 8y ago
  Its not unusual to remove the top and bottom outliers
  - deleted 8y ago
    [deleted]
  - village-idiot 8y ago
    Not a good habit in rocketry.
    - zaarn 8y ago
      Even in rocketry, you just need to keep even more distance to the top and bottom of any ratings on any part than in normal engineering and put in a few redundancies in case it does fail.
    - ams6110 8y ago
      We continued to fly the shuttle even after it killed 14 astronauts. By measure of total astronauts killed, it was the worst spacecraft design in history. Though not sure how it ranks in deaths per flight.
      - village-idiot 8y ago
        A good argument to not ignoring that outlier.
Piskvorrr 8y ago
Null is not zero, the comparison is meaningless.
- neuronic 8y ago
  Null is essentially a coin toss while zero is guaranteed failure. Both are questionable options compared to 100% success rate over years. The comparison isn't meaningless at all.
  - Symmetry 8y ago
    We've already done ground testing, launch abort tests, etc on the commercial crew vehicles plus a reference class of space vehicle first launches. So there's no cause to fall back on the Laplacian prior.
  - MauranKilom 8y ago
    "I haven't played the lottery yet, so it's a coin toss whether I win."
ceejayoz 8y ago
> You mean the option with 0% success rate so far is better than the one with 100% (till this incident)? If you're gonna play that sort of silly numbers game, Commercial Crew has a 0% failure rate to Soyuz's non-zero rate.

Tossrock 8y ago

You're playing some weird games with numbers here. "100% if we subtract the failures" isn't 100%, and something that hasn't been tested yet doesn't really have a 0% success rate, it just doesn't have a success rate at all. I'm not saying that Commercial Crew is "better" than the Soyuz program, but I am definitely saying that after two high profile incidents within a few weeks, I am concerned about the long term viability of relying on it for human access to space.

gdhbcc 8y ago
Its not unusual to remove the top and bottom outliers
- deleted 8y ago
  [deleted]
- village-idiot 8y ago
  Not a good habit in rocketry.
  - zaarn 8y ago
    Even in rocketry, you just need to keep even more distance to the top and bottom of any ratings on any part than in normal engineering and put in a few redundancies in case it does fail.
  - ams6110 8y ago
    We continued to fly the shuttle even after it killed 14 astronauts. By measure of total astronauts killed, it was the worst spacecraft design in history. Though not sure how it ranks in deaths per flight.
    - village-idiot 8y ago
      A good argument to not ignoring that outlier.

Piskvorrr 8y ago

Null is not zero, the comparison is meaningless.

neuronic 8y ago
Null is essentially a coin toss while zero is guaranteed failure. Both are questionable options compared to 100% success rate over years. The comparison isn't meaningless at all.
- Symmetry 8y ago
  We've already done ground testing, launch abort tests, etc on the commercial crew vehicles plus a reference class of space vehicle first launches. So there's no cause to fall back on the Laplacian prior.
- MauranKilom 8y ago
  "I haven't played the lottery yet, so it's a coin toss whether I win."

ceejayoz 8y ago

> You mean the option with 0% success rate so far is better than the one with 100% (till this incident)? If you're gonna play that sort of silly numbers game, Commercial Crew has a 0% failure rate to Soyuz's non-zero rate.