Astra's first launch was July 20 2018.
...that commercial customer P120 had a successful launch, however the flight was not successful. Flight damage was limited to the Integration Processing Facility (IPF) exterior siding without causing any structural or internal damage to the facility.
So they got off the rail and then suffered a mishap which was so significant that they damaged the exterior of the integration building.
They then flew again in late November...
“The recent launch mishap is an example of why I’m confident we’re on the right track,” he said. “Look, rockets are complex, powerful vehicles that fail every now and again.
followed with...
“Even though all five engines failed, all debris landed in the spaceport boundary and there were no injuries or property damage to the uninvolved public.”
I guess in some ways it's even harder when you're a newspace entity with VC funding and an expectation that you'll succeed on a shoestring budget when compared to nation state entities of the past.
Let's also not forget that Falcon 1 nearly bankrupted Elon/SpaceX and their first three launches bewteen March 2006 and August 2008 were all failures. It wasn't until late Sept 2008 on their fourth try that they placed a 165kg mass simulator on orbit.
And being completely blunt none of the above five failures blamed a third party component for their lack of success, at least to my knowledge. Even if they could have, they didn't. There's a level of maturity that doesn't seem to be replicated with Gilmour. But hey, what would I know? I'm not a gymnast.
sauces
https://spacenews.com/alaska-launch-shrouded-in-secrecy/
http://www.akaerospace.com/sites/default/files/minutes/2018%2009%2013%20Board%20of%20Directors%20Minutes.pdf
https://spacenews.com/astra-space-suborbital-launch-fails/
https://arstechnica.com/science/2018/09/inside-the-eight-desperate-weeks-that-saved-spacex-from-ruin/
