13 ms·
Proton? It has about 89 percent success, nowhere close to Falcon 9’s 99 percent success rate.
by plasticchris 2y ago
Proton? It has about 89 percent success, nowhere close to Falcon 9’s 99 percent success rate.
- computerex 2y agoNo, Soyuz. And Soyuz has like 4x-5x number of launches of Falcon 9 so direct comparisons like yours don't work. Soyuz is the most reliable launch vehicle and spacecraft that's ever existed.
- Workaccount2 2y agoNote that your original comment made no acknowledgement of the number of launches by each country. But now when it suites you, it's all important.
- computerex 2y agoWhat? I was responding to the person saying falcon 9 is the most reliable vehicle we have. I was merely pointing out that soyuz has like 1500+ launches over Falcon 9 and that there is no comparison.
- JumpCrisscross 2y ago> pointing out that soyuz has like 1500+ launches over Falcon 9 Not the current variants. If we’re integrating everything called Soyuz we may we well do the same with Long March and every American rocket that uses similar engines. Falcon is widely considered the most reliable platform you can launch on today.
- computerex 2y agoWidely considred by whom? Elon Musk? Soyuz has like a 98% average success rate over all the variants.
- JumpCrisscross 2y ago> Widely considred by whom? Every statistical audit I’ve seen by someone with a background in aerospace engineering. > Soyuz has like a 98% average success rate over all the variants Great. You don’t get to fly on “all the variants,” you fly on the most recent. The RD-107A, 108A and Soyuz-2 are not as reliable as Falcon 9.
- trothamel 2y agoAs I mention in a sibling post, Soyuz might have more launches, but it also has way more launch failures.
- computerex 2y agoNot just more launches, over a THOUSAND more launches. Soyuz has a 98% success rate. Falcon 9 needs to do A LOT more launches before it can be comparable.
- BobbyJo 2y ago> And Soyuz has like 4x-5x number of launches of Falcon 9 so direct comparisons like yours don't work. You made the comparison first. Are you taking it back then?
- computerex 2y agoJesus please go back to reddit. I was simply pointing out that Soyuz has had a LOT MORE launches than Falcon 9, literally over a thousand more, so no one can in good faith that Falcon 9 is more reliable given the numbers and statistics.
- BobbyJo 2y agoBut they can claim, in good faith, that Soyuz is? Im afraid thats not how logic works. Either the error bars are too large to take a position, or they aren't. You can't have it both ways.
- computerex 2y agoFact remains that Soyuz has over a thousand more launches than Falcon 9 with an average success rate of 98% over all its variants. It's the single most reliable launch vehicle mankind has ever made.
- BobbyJo 2y agoA thousand more isn't very much when you consider "Soyuz" (the way you're using it) has been around since the 60s. Falcon 9 had its first flight in... 2010. Id personally rather ride Falcon, but to each his own I guess.
- trothamel 2y agoLooking at the three most recent Soyuz variants: Soyuz-U had 765 successes in 786 flights. (97.3%) Soyuz-FG had 69 successes in 70 flights (98.5%) Soyuz-2 has 160 successes in 166 flights (96.3%) Falcon 9 has 362 successes in 365 flights. (99.1%). That includes the partial failure of the CRS-1 mission, which successfully delivered CRS-1 to the space station but released secondary payloads into a lower than expected orbit. It does't include the AMOS-6 fire, which would bring Falcon 9 down 98.9%. Falcon 9 is more reliable than Soyuz.
- dash2 2y agoInterestingly none of those numbers is enough to give a significant difference between failure rates in a chi-squared test with p < 0.05 - not even if you pool all the Soyuz variants. Though they do all hit p < 0.10.
- trothamel 2y agoThanks for running the numbers, which I think prove that it's impossible to say that Soyuz is more reliable than Falcon, even if you count AMOS-1 (which feels like it should be counted) and CRS-1 (which I don't).