[panick21_]

Do you not understand anything about aerospace engineering? These concepts are not some independent variables that are unconnected with each other.

Maybe I have to spell it out for the slow ones.

it would have added time and complexity --> because proving the safety of additional system takes TIME.

it would have been expensive --> TIME is money

it wasn’t necessary --> The parachutes system was mandatory anyway.

[wat10000]

I don't understand much about aerospace engineering, but adding time, complexity, and expense sure sounds a lot like "extremely difficult to make safe" to me.

I guess people just want to argue. I have three different people replying to me effectively saying, "you're wrong, it's not because it's difficult to make it safe, it's because it was difficult to make it safe because of reasons X Y and Z."

[panick21_]

I explained what the issue was in technical terms, as I was following these issues in real time as it was developed and what communication from NASA and SpaceX was at the time. Then you made a smart-ass comment about how I was wrong and it was actually about safety. That wasn't incorrect if you want a one word answer but it also doesn't explain the 'why', and that's what I did.

[wat10000]

If that wasn’t incorrect then why did you start off with “that is completely false”?

[swores]

It's possible to disagree with people without being an asshole about it. It's even encouraged in this site's guidelines :)