> SpaceX does nothing out of pure tradition This deserves a separate reply. SpaceX - correctly - speeds up the process by maximally reusing the known solution

> SpaceX does nothing out of pure tradition This deserves a separate reply. SpaceX - correctly - speeds up the process by maximally reusing the known solutions for the problems - this not only makes development faster, but saves a whole lot of money on testing the variants which will be found not working. I disagree that SpaceX does nothing out of pure tradition. In many areas, where invention is hard, unlikely and expensive, SpaceX instead opts to optimize the known solutions rather than invent new ones. Practically everywhere - landing first stages, full-flow combustion Raptor, reusing Dragon, all of that has good precedents in Delta-Cliper, RD-270, Gemini and VA TKS - SpaceX makes a right commercial decision to use proven technologies, which brings us results and doesn't break the bank. Note that truly innovative things, like spinning detonation wave engines, are still in the research labs, and not - at least in a big way - in the SpaceX factories. That's correct way to go considering that we have and know a lot already which we don't use fully. > if that hasn’t been made clear by their approach so far. No it hasn't. They just need to be read differently. The fact that they brought - well-tested and beneficial - traditions from computer industry into rocketry doesn't make them doing everything strictly from the first principles.