That is possible. But, so far, the decision-making has been faulty: the decision to go ahead without, at least, the flame diverter, was a poor decision. Elon wi

That is possible. But, so far, the decision-making has been faulty: the decision to go ahead without, at least, the flame diverter, was a poor decision. Elon will be loathe to make any decision other than "Patch it up and add a flame diverter that fits between the legs of the launch mount." Secondly, no decision at this point will save them two months. They are in for many months of reconstruction, apart from all the other design changes needed. They are also in for FAA scrutiny that will take at least several months. There is a large incentive to be unrealistic about this: A realistic view of delays makes an already very optimistic schedule for supplying a Starship-based lunar lander to the Artemis project look very risky. What we are seeing is the limits to scaling an iterative project. It is transitioning from learning how to weld stainless steel, which can evolve quickly, to learning how to fix multiple large problems when every iteration costs 39 rocket engines, 200 tankers of fuel/oxidizer, etc.