3 ms·
How would this ever be acceptable, given that rockets have a failure rate that’s not zero?
by pintxo 3y ago
How would this ever be acceptable, given that rockets have a failure rate that’s not zero?
- acidburnNSA 3y agoEveryone suggests throwing it into the sun until they think about this fact. Stable geologic formations are far preferable, by orders of magnitude, for this reason.
- simmerup 3y agoThe impossibility of getting an insurance policy to cover this downside probably makes it dead in the water unless a state starts doing it
- pintxo 3y agoDidn’t stop us from using fission for energy production. But weapons production might have played a relevant role here.
- panick21_ 3y agoIf there were sea launch platforms its perfectly acceptable I would thin. And governments don't need insurance.
- pintxo 3y agoHow is a sea launch going to help with a late first stage, or 2nd stage malfunction leading to RUD?
- panick21_ 3y agoNuclear waste falling into the sea isn't optimal but it also isn't a huge issue. Nuclear waste falling onto a city or exploding on the launch pad would be an issue. The 2nd stage flight can be planned not to go over populated land. But anyways, I don't think its a good solution but it would be possible.