I think the question is, imagine we built 10 — and got an outcome like: 2x — failed to deploy, mission lost 4x — early operation error, 6mo lifetime 3x — low

I think the question is, imagine we built 10 — and got an outcome like: 2x — failed to deploy, mission lost 4x — early operation error, 6mo lifetime 3x — lower performance, 3 year lifetime 1x — mission successful, 10 year lifetime …do we get a better deal building them with larger faults, at a lower cost? A lot of expense is in developing technologies, assembly tooling, and test rigs — all of which is easier if we don’t need them to be as assured because only 1 in 10 needs to succeed.