Comments by "ke6gwf - Ben Blackburn" (@ke6gwf) on "" video.

  1. Of course, if it is a problem caused by the ground equipment, by the test setup, or something unrelated to the flight hardware, this theory goes out the window. Also, if it is related to damage sustained during reentry or salt water immersion, those are never before tested conditions, so this is the first time they have been able to test it under these conditions, which is important for reusiblity. So unless this is some new defect discovered unrelated to the fact that it has already been flown, it doesn't reflect badly on their test program, because it is a reusiblity issue, which could not be fully tested until it actually went to space. It could also be a cycle count issue, and they just reached the limit for some component after extensive testing burns, which would not happen with a production capsule, because they don't burn the engines this much. It also could be a fatal flaw in a design, but we have no evidence of that, either way, but we have a lot of possibilities that don't spell disaster or prove major errors.
    5