Do we honour the first place a supersonic aircraft flew?
Do we honour the first place a jet engine was developed?Do we honour the first place a rocket engine was developed?
Well, SLS/Orion will launch crews, and I am uncomfortable with SpaceX building on the actual crawler tracks at 39A. Just seems 39B would be more appropriate. As for lesser historical sites, I'm all in favor of memorializing in some form - rather then honoring more in the breach than observance. But not relevant to 39A vs. 39B question.
What was the rationale for leasing SpaceX Pad 39A and not 39B? I'm a supporter of SpaceX, but given the role of 39A in the Apollo program (including Apollo 11) and Shuttle program (STS 1, etc.), I would argue that 39A could be considered a 'world historical site' worthy of 'preservation' to the extent practicable.
One interesting detail from the video... Although a lot of it seems notional (some artistic license), it does show is that FH is held anchored/held down by 8 hold-downs, as many speculated. 2 for the core, 3 for each side booster. (F9 is help by 4)
The side boosters do not appear to be longer than the central core in this video.
Very interesting and well done video.Regarding the center stage: from what I read here in the threads, the center stage will be too far away to attempt a flight back to the launchpad and is forced to land on the ASDS. Maybe something changed?
...Utilizing an Autonomous Spaceport Drone Ship positioned downrange of Vandenberg, allowing it to refuel and make the “hop” back to the West coast would become a potential solution....