Would be awesome to see manned spacecraft side by side here too. Soyuz, Shenzhou, STS, Gemini, Apollo
How Is failure defined? For instance yes there was one catastrophic failure. But there was a satellite or two that didn't achieve their orbits. *cough* interesting *cough*
I think the merging of launcher types, while giving a better result than keeping them completely separate, is throwing away useful data. Right now there are two levels of reliability: all launchers, and launcher type. I think reliability could be tracked on four levels: all launchers, manufacturer, type and version. And aging of data points should also give an improvement in the results, once the right weighting of parameters is found.
Yeah, it's definitely getting a bit dated where the Falcon 9 is concerned, we're at twice the launch history now. Unfortunately I lost the R script that I used, so I can't just plug in some new numbers, and I've been too busy/lazy (and really more the latter) to get around to rebuilding it. I've been wondering about shaking up the methodology too, but I'm just not enough of a statistician to do much to improve it.But soonTM I'll get around to it...
How is SpaceX reliability faring these days?
The joke that made the rounds of NASA was that the Saturn V had a reliability rating of .9999. In the story, a group from headquarters goes down to Marshall and asks Wernher von Braun how reliable the Saturn is going to be. Von Braun turns to four of his lieutenants and asks, "Is there any reason why it won't work?" to which they answer: "Nein." "Nein." "Nein." "Nein." Von Braun then says to the men from headquarters, "Gentlemen. I have a reliability of four nines."