[wongarsu]

A lot of the success of SpaceX can be attributed to their rapid incremental development model that they established with Falcon 9 and continued with Starship.

But at least with civilian rockets all the competitors have clear success metrics: they all launch with some regularity, and it's obvious if those launches were a success. Lots of weapon systems have one or two tests and then take a decade before they see any action, if at all.

Fore example the Patriot system is operational since 1981, but when first used in combat a decade later its accuracy came under heavy scrutiny, and continues to look suspect on a per-missile basis [1]. But that's one of the weapons systems that actually sees active combat, and sees improvements based on that. Now think of all the systems that are deployed but never used.

1: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MIM-104_Patriot#Operational_hi...

[jandrese]

It should be noted that the Patriot was being used outside of its original design goal when tasked with shooting down missiles. It was designed to shoot down Soviet interceptors, but had to pivot when the Soviet Union collapsed. Missiles were a stretch goal of the original project, but ended up being its primary mission.

[jvanderbot]

And in particular, many of the failures were from lack of proper operation, such as keeping the system on far too long, causing timer overflows.

https://www-users.cse.umn.edu/~arnold/disasters/patriot.html

[jasonwatkinspdx]

Yeah, one last point on this subthread is, the modern Patriot system is also not at all the same beast, with a lot of upgrades in the decades since.