It irritates me that they "spin" the results of this launch claiming it was a success. To me, it was a dismal failure.
Okay, it cleared the launch pad. Does that really mean the mission was a success? Not to me. If that was the goal, that should have been the stated goal.
The first stage was supposed to separate. It didn't. The first stage was then supposed to return back to Earth
intact. It didn't. The second stage was supposed to demonstrate it could fire up its engines a few seconds after separation, ascend into space and deliver a payload into Earth orbit. It didn't. None of that happened, or even demonstrated it could happen.
To me, at the very least, in order to declare this mission successful, the system should have detected a malfunction and shutdown the engines BEFORE the entire rocket (first
and second stages) were obliterated.
Yes, no doubts much will be learned from this and that certainly is a good thing. But what's wrong with saying much can be learn from this "failure"? Isn't "learning from our failures" a natural part of learning and growing and improving?
I say, "Man up!" Admit it did not go as planned and that it was not a success.
