4 ms·
That isn't a very useful statistic - all you should really glean from it is that landing on Mars is hard. The US has done it 9 out of the 10 times it tried, so
by SECProto 2y ago
That isn't a very useful statistic - all you should really glean from it is that landing on Mars is hard. The US has done it 9 out of the 10 times it tried, so it seems reasonable that it would succeed.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Mars_landers https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Mars_landers
- sangnoir 2y agoIt was done by NASA, who have a culture of triple/ quadriple checking and being very careful about mitigating risk in ways that may seem inefficient to some. I don't see NASA leading the effort to Mars in any meaningful way besides being a conduit for money from the treasury.
- Robotbeat 2y agoIf NASA astronauts are on board, they will be triple and quadruple checking things, like they did for commercial crew and are doing for HLS.
- somenameforme 2y agoSpaceX's Falcon 9 is the most reliable rocket ever launched, by a rather wide margin. It's had 439 successful launches and 2 failures. NASA's Space Shuttle had 133 launches and 2 failures. People who don't normally follow space may be confused by recent things re: Starship because the media is being intentionally deceptive, as usual. These are not normal flights. They are purely experimental flights, mostly expected to fail, to gradually work the kinks out of the system. It's the difference between hitting compile and launching something to production.
- sangnoir 2y agoCool story. The Falcon 9 is not going to Mars any time soon.
- somenameforme 2y agoThere's no reason to think the Starship won't be at least as reliable. The point is that this culture of double and triple checking everything certainly adds a bunch of bureaucracy, but doesn't necessarily translate to positive outcomes.
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]