Originally Posted by
rickair7777
Liquid fuel engines are VERY complex, and often stressed right to the engineering limits (no 150% ultimate load).
Look at recent history...I can't recall any solid fuel booster failures in the last two decades, but there have been numerous, recent, major malfunctions of liquid engines.
Even the shuttle Challenger booster did not fail...it leaked, but it continued to function normally. The leak ignited the liquid fuel tank.
The military invariably uses solid boosters in all applications for reliability and safety...the only justification for the cost and risk of liquid is if you have to get something heavy into orbit, or move it around once you get there.
The Lynx was designed to be used 8 times a week (I'm not sure if that will happen). Solids like the nitrocellulose-nitroglycerin with repeated use could be a problem.
SPACE.com -- Brazil Mourns 21 Dead in Rocket Disaster
Six killed in rocket fuel blast at Sriharikota-Hyderabad-Cities-The Times of India
Fatal blast at rocket fuel plant / 2nd explosion in 5 weeks kills worker
PEPCON disaster - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
I didn't say that liquid motors are not complex... just that solid motors are not "easy" to engineer and produce their own unique set of challenges.