::Since this discussion in August, I've added some prose to endeavor to explicate the distinction: aiming for both stages long term, but the near-term Falcon 9 focus is only on the first stage. See what you think. [[User:N2e|N2e]] ([[User talk:N2e|talk]]) 05:38, 25 December 2015 (UTC)
== What happens to Falcon 9 Flight 20's booster now? ==
After its landing, I'd imagine that Falcon 9 Flight 20's booster will now be torn down by SpaceX into its component parts for analysis, but that's just my guess. Do we have any authoritative/[[WP:RS]] information about what SpaceX's plans are for this? -- [[User:The Anome|The Anome]] ([[User talk:The Anome|talk]]) 12:26, 23 December 2015 (UTC)
:We seem to have our answer: [http://www.theverge.com/2015/12/21/10642028/spacex-falcon-9-landing-elon-musk-wont-fly]. It looks like it's going to be taken away from the landing site, refueled and static fired once, then dismantled for analysis. -- [[User:The Anome|The Anome]] ([[User talk:The Anome|talk]]) 22:17, 23 December 2015 (UTC)
::Yes, in the main. I just added some prose to the article based on a source I found. One detail relative to what you said: I also listened to a recording of the 15-20 minute phone call teleconference that the press had with Elon Musk after the flight, and I don't believe anything was said about "dismantling" the F9 Flight 20 vehicle. I suspect what is more likely is that, after evaluating the overall structure in fine detail, some pieces from key areas of stress may be cut out or otherwise removed for [[destructive testing]]. I don't think that will happen to such an extent that the vehicle is hugely disfigured; Musk seems to want the rocket to stand as a memorial or museum piece, since he thinks they will have quite a few stages to refly in the near future (not all future flights, but thinks likely to have stages back from most of them). Cheers. [[User:N2e|N2e]] ([[User talk:N2e|talk]]) 05:09, 24 December 2015 (UTC)
