You are treating hardware like software by arguing with the experience we have made so far with a given model. Environmental conditions as well as it being different physical objects is a huge problem for hardware. The data about error cases is also simply not recorded. You get at best statistical reliability with small sounding chances for errors that are still happening all the time.
You can also not make any statement about reality by arguing with feasibility.
edit: I am unfortunately not qualified to tell you how feasible ways to deal with reality in this case could look. Which doesnt mean that i cant identify some error cases. You also require different levels of competence for designing a rocket and recognizing a non functioning one.
You can also not make any statement about reality by arguing with feasibility.
edit: I am unfortunately not qualified to tell you how feasible ways to deal with reality in this case could look. Which doesnt mean that i cant identify some error cases. You also require different levels of competence for designing a rocket and recognizing a non functioning one.
edit1: In regards to the usage of statistics as a basis one should also remember confidence and these cases https://www.science.org/content/article/unlucky-numbers-figh...