An Aborted Launch Is Not a Failed Mission

[Space Racer]

It's a method of ensuring success.

4 Reasons Why the SpaceX Launch Was Not A Failure

http://www.policymic.com/articles/8612/4-reasons-why-the-spacex-launch-was-not-a-failure

[tunnel_rat]

If Edison had thought like that, we'd still be reading by candle light. If everything always goes your way, you'll never learn anything. You ever heard of Apollo 1? Yet we still got to the moon in record time. Nothing you learn from can be considered a failure, that's the way it works.

[allan38]

I think Space X will do fine. They have to have a certain level of performance to get paid. It was a lot cheaper to abort the Space X than it would have been to abort the shuttle and it's not the same level of catastrophy due to design differences.
They don't have to replace the engine after their post ignition abort, unlike the space shuttle's experience.

It's cheap enough to try another element in the light bulb, Edison didn't have the potential of death if it happened to fail.

[Space Racer]

Gwynne Shotwell, the president of SpaceX, bristled at the post-launch briefing on 19 May when a reporter asked her about the failure of SpaceX. His question was inaudible, but Gwynne retorted, “This is not a failure. We aborted with purpose."

I got the impression that some people in the press might have been quick to call an aborted launch by SpaceX a failure to complete the mission, even though aborted launches were standard practice at NASA.

[tunnel_rat]

And they are now docked with the ISS.... How ya like us now...?Omama