Would you have gone off course to Icarus I?

"i think it's a sound decision that the chance of 2 bombs were better than one "

Kappa's physics may be on point, but his logic is absurd.

It's no different from saying "two crap shots are better than one for beating the casino".

The ONLY 2 possible reasons to justify a deviation were (assuming Icarus I were still operational and payload deliverable):
- A second attempt would increase success probability (a second crap shot doesn't increase your chance from one)
- Combining two payloads would increase success probability

Barring those 2 outcomes, moot point. End of conversation.

No. It's insane. Everything would have had to go 100%, absolutely right to get the second warhead, use it, and get it into the sun. Going off course like that was a true dereliction of duty by the captain.

It's only in the movie as a plot device to create lots of havoc for the characters and the screenplay.

I. Drink. Your. Milkshake! [slurp!] I DRINK IT UP! - Daniel Plainview - There Will Be Blood

I don't think there is any justification to believe that the volume of explosion of both bombs is more likely to succeed the mission objective (unless i missed it). Its two unconnected binary outcomes. Either bomb is a hit or miss. Reading another thread here, a theory as to why the sun is dying in the first place is due to Q-ball particles inside the sun, but this is not explained in the movie. If we consider this with the binary outcome, then the effect would be either bomb somehow destroys these particles which are essentially eating away at the sun from the inside (and furthermore reignites the fusion of the sun?).

There is also no hint that one would be used after noticing the first one didn't work.
Logically, that would be an unbelievable premise. That is, they would have to coordinate both missions independently.

I think Kappas opinion is therefore logically sound. Given that the entire mission/apparatus was setup for this, i dont think there's justification that the detraction would compromise the Icarus 2 mission. In hindsight its easy to say that there might be unforeseen consequences from the detraction.

Perhaps Kappa did quantify the risk of reaching Icarus 1? (i need to watch it again).
But we do learn that the complications occurred due to unbelievable human error. Trey has to use manual override, but there is no requirement for dual manual operation in such a mission critical task? This is the unbelievable bit.

I don't think there is any justification to believe that the volume of explosion of both bombs is more likely to succeed the mission objective (unless i missed it). Its two unconnected binary outcomes. Either bomb is a hit or miss. Reading another thread here, a theory as to why the sun is dying in the first place is due to Q-ball particles inside the sun, but this is not explained in the movie. If we consider this with the binary outcome, then the effect would be either bomb somehow destroys these particles which are essentially eating away at the sun from the inside (and furthermore reignites the fusion of the sun?).

There is also no hint that one would be used after noticing the first one didn't work.
Logically, that would be an unbelievable premise. That is, they would have to coordinate both missions independently.

I think Kappas opinion is therefore logically sound. Given that the entire mission/apparatus was setup for this, i dont think there's justification that the detraction would compromise the Icarus 2 mission. In hindsight its easy to say that there might be unforeseen consequences from the detraction.

Perhaps Kappa did quantify the risk of reaching Icarus 1? (i need to watch it again).
But we do learn that the complications occurred due to unbelievable human error. Trey has to use manual override, but there is no requirement for dual manual operation in such a mission critical task? This is the unbelievable bit.

Absolutely not. For one thing, delivering the I1 payload meant splitting the crew into 2 lots of 4 so both craft could be piloted. Meaning an inexperienced pilot would be flying one of them, with crew doing jobs they are not trained to do.

2nd, thats assuming the 2nd ship even works and the bomb is still there. Without hearing from the crew, explaining what prevented them from completing the mission, that's 2 massive assumptions to risk the only KNOWN functional ship and bomb, as these sorts of procedures are inherently risky, and both ships and payloads could be destroyed.

Then... The crew have 4 minutes from delivery to detonation. In those 4 minutes, they need to recede to minimum safe distance or be destroyed. The implication through the whole film, is that Capa is the only person able to 'explode' the bomb. It's safe to assume it takes longer than 4 minutes to suit up, depressurise the ships hatch, spacewalk to the second ship, pressurize that hatch, unsuit, walk to the second bomb, and fire that off. And remember, if the rendezvous went ahead without a hitch, it would still be a 2 way mission (they could still return to Earth safe). With all that in mind, IF the first bomb does detonate, the other bomb is destroyed anyway, along with all 8 crew. Even if it doesn't, the first crew will likely want to use those 4 minutes to leave ground zero, because they don't know it won't detonate.

Besides which, Capa is seen testing the bomb at various points. If this is a routine he has to perform during the trip, he can't test both bombs without a huge amount of time wasted on spacewalk in between ships, after all, only Capa can do this.

Overall, these risks and disadvantages overtake the possible gains.

But, hey, I'm not a pilot, bomb expert, scientist, astronaut, mechanic or theoretical physicist. So what do I know!