The first is a fair, but I'm not assuming that it has to work exactly as claimed. It's so far ahead of current tech that if it even marginally succeeds the stat

The first is a fair, but I'm not assuming that it has to work exactly as claimed. It's so far ahead of current tech that if it even marginally succeeds the stated objectives it will transform the industry. The second, I disagree, reusable is definitely better in every way. I'm sure there are edge cases where it needs to be proven or a particular mission, but no other machines are as costly and disposable. Rocket designs haven't evolved much over the last 50 years. Competitors all claim to want reusability but none of the major players are pursuing it seriously. Engine design and manufacturing is hilariously obsolete. NASA has become a jobs program instead of a innovator. I'm just happy to see a radical new approach to design, manufacturing and testing.