> Parachutes work better at sea than land; water becomes far softer as you reduce speeds.
Sorry, my comment was ambiguous. I meant "Why would parachutes work better than rockets at sea?" not "Why would parachutes work better at sea than land?"
> a powered landing on a 30 foot wave seems like a rather complex problem
This is only an issue if you're greatly decelerating in the last 30 feet, since then that window is shifting up and down with the ocean. However, I'd guess that all the major deceleration has already happened by this point, and the rockets are just maintaining a slow steady descent speed for the last 30 (or 100) feet. (Would greatly appreciate anyone who can tell me I'm wrong here.) In this case, they function just like a parachute.
> Worse, powered landings have little redundancy where a sea landing with 2/3 of your parachutes is not a major issue.
As simonh mentions, the capsule has redundant thrusters, which again seems very analogous to a parachute.
Sorry, my comment was ambiguous. I meant "Why would parachutes work better than rockets at sea?" not "Why would parachutes work better at sea than land?"
> a powered landing on a 30 foot wave seems like a rather complex problem
This is only an issue if you're greatly decelerating in the last 30 feet, since then that window is shifting up and down with the ocean. However, I'd guess that all the major deceleration has already happened by this point, and the rockets are just maintaining a slow steady descent speed for the last 30 (or 100) feet. (Would greatly appreciate anyone who can tell me I'm wrong here.) In this case, they function just like a parachute.
> Worse, powered landings have little redundancy where a sea landing with 2/3 of your parachutes is not a major issue.
As simonh mentions, the capsule has redundant thrusters, which again seems very analogous to a parachute.