> It's the business case that failed. They failed technically and in business. Their lunch success rate was far to late and the rockets they built were always

> It's the business case that failed. They failed technically and in business. Their lunch success rate was far to late and the rockets they built were always behind what the market actually demanded. They moved from rocket model to rocket model and never managed to stable produce any of them. > Mass-produced expendable rockets was a brilliant idea prior to SpaceX. No it wasn't. Their whole idea of 'its fine if half the rockets fail' doesn't actually work. There are not enough payloads to mass-produce rockets (specially small rockets). Its a total misunderstanding of the economics of mass manufacture to think this was gone get the price low enough. > It would have worked two decades ago. No it wouldn't have. Because a decade ago they would not have gotten the money for so many failed launches in the first place. Its only because SpaceX and RocketLab proved the viability, that companies like Astra got the money to even attempted what they did. The reason why they survived as long as they did is because the were able to SPAC when the market was high. The readability is Astra was a technical failure of a company. The only success they had was because their CEO was good at twitter and selling the company.