[tekla]

Failure of 1 chute was designed for, though yes, it wasn't a great look.

> It poses substantial safety concerns in the case of an accident where you need to abort the flight

SRBs are in general very safe, which is why they're still used for human rated rockets.

[somenameforme]

Well we shall see I suppose. SRB's go back to the Apollo era and NASA safety qualifications often come down to 'are you doing what we've done before'? Hence them refusing to even consider SpaceX retropulsive crew landings, even though that would be a huge step forward.

I would also observe that NASA has a relatively poor safety record contrasted against the Soyuz (which has not lost crew since 1971 in spite of flying more manned missions), and one of the few completely catastrophic crashes we have had, Challenger, was directly related to the SRB. In either case, I expect variance is playing a much larger role than most might appreciate.