Talk:Mid-Atlantic Regional Spaceport Launch Pad 0

Need a recent photo of the NEW reconstructed launch pad
The article would be much improved with a recent photo of the NEW, reconstructed-since-2009, launch pad, Launch Pad 0 (without the Wallops Flight Facility NASA facilities in the background). After all, only LP 0 is a part of the State of Virginia Mid-Atlantic Regional Spaceport, and so the photo LP0 should not really be the same old 2008 photo of the entire US Federal Government Wallops Flight Facility when it used to, jurisdictionally, include LP0. Will add a reqphoto. N2e (talk) 00:56, 5 July 2012 (UTC)
 * ✅ Morgan Riley (talk) 14:41, 19 April 2013 (UTC)

Rename

 * The following discussion is an archived discussion of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section. 

The result of the proposal was no consensus. --BDD (talk) 19:02, 11 May 2013 (UTC)

Mid-Atlantic Regional Spaceport Launch Pad 0 → Mid-Atlantic Regional Spaceport Launch Complex 0 – Unable to find any supporting documentation that the two pads (Pad 0A and Pad 0B) are collectively referred to as "Pad 0". Propose move to either "Mid-Atlantic Regional Spaceport Launch Complex 0" (the FAA's term for it) or "Mid-Atlantic Regional Spaceport Launch Area 0" Relisted. BDD (talk) 21:57, 3 May 2013 (UTC) Morgan Riley (talk) 22:09, 23 April 2013 (UTC) Reading up on WFF/MARS, I have yet to find it ever referred to as "Launch Pad 0", but rather sources mention either Launch Area 0, or as in its FAA license, as "Launch Complex 0", both of which are is more technically accurate, as the complex has two pads. I propose renaming it to "Mid-Atlantic Regional Spaceport Launch Complex 0". Morgan Riley (talk) 21:01, 23 April 2013 (UTC) (Strikethrough earlier motion found lacking reliable source support upon brief investigation: Morgan Riley (talk) 14:24, 24 April 2013 (UTC))
 * Here is the link to the FAA license. Morgan Riley (talk) 21:03, 23 April 2013 (UTC)
 * I agree it's not ideal, but the term complex is hardly ever used with regards to these pads - they are almost always referred to as LP-0A and LP-0B. Just because complex is the correct term at other sites doesn't mean it is correct here. For that reason, I oppose moving. -- W.  D.   Graham  21:55, 23 April 2013 (UTC)
 * See the attached document from the FAA which uses it. A properly sourced usage is preferable over an unsourced conjectural usage. Morgan Riley (talk) 21:58, 23 April 2013 (UTC)
 * That document uses both "Launch Complex" and "Launch Pad". -- W.  D.   Graham  22:11, 23 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Where in the document? When collectively referring to BOTH pads it uses only Launch Complex 0 and/or (Launch Pad-0A and Launch Pad-0B). Please show me where it uses "Launch Pad 0" to collectively refer to both. Cheers.Morgan Riley (talk) 22:14, 23 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Additional documentation from MARS itself: 2007 Facility Access Plan, see 1.2.2.Morgan Riley (talk) 22:26, 23 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Quoted here: "Facilities owned by the Authority and operated by MARS include . . . Launch Complex 0 consisting of launch pads 0A and 0B." Morgan Riley (talk) 22:28, 23 April 2013 (UTC)


 * Oppose - it appears that it is more common to use the LP-0 or LA-0 reference, and the navigation at the bottom of the page also references an LA-5. As such, it would appear the WP:COMMONNAME would be LA-0 or Launch Area 0 and would be consistent with Launch Area 5. Complex is not used in the LEAD however Area is. Tiggerjay (talk) 11:27, 24 April 2013 (UTC)
 * The trick is upon searching after making this nomination, I have yet to find any good reliable sources calling it "Launch Area 0" that isn't this page or a mirror/derivative of this page, moreso, that the majority of the sources yet found still favor "Launch Complex 0". Please help try to find some. As for the lead, that is just as unsourced as the title, and should be changed to reflect the sourced named "Launch Complex 0".Morgan Riley (talk) 14:10, 24 April 2013 (UTC)


 * Support the move to " Mid-Atlantic Regional Spaceport Launch Complex 0"—with no sources identifying it at either Launch Area... or LA-0, and with two Launch Pads, we should go with the source we have: Launch Complex 0.  And as for consistency, this is essentially a new complex, being built on a new-State-operated pad, that just happens to be where a former Federal set of launch pads used to be.  Jurisdiction has changed.  Wikipedia should move on and reflect current reality.  N2e (talk) 01:07, 4 May 2013 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Graphic overview of Pad 0A
Here is a new and useful graphic of the pad layout, tankage locations, etc. Looks like a NASA graphic, so we can probably locate a public domain free-use version of it from NASA: Overview graphic of Pad 0A. N2e (talk) 13:10, 18 September 2013 (UTC)

Significant damage
claims that the damage was not significant, but the repairs are listed as costing 50 million dollars. What is it, significant or not? --Ysangkok (talk) 22:40, 25 May 2015 (UTC)
 * As the article says, damage was significant. A fully fueled rocket crashed back on the pad after only a few meters of flight. However estimates I've seen are in the $20 million dollars range. This includes more than repairing and replacing equipment on the pad, this also includes remediating environmental damage which requires things like like removal of contaminated soil.  $20 million to repair a $190 spaceport isn't too bad, especially considering what happened.--RadioFan (talk) 02:33, 26 May 2015 (UTC)

I'm sorry, it was Cygnus_CRS_Orb-3 that claimed the damage was insignificant. --Ysangkok (talk) 20:47, 26 May 2015 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 one external links on Mid-Atlantic Regional Spaceport Launch Pad 0. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/20081016101817/http://www.marsspaceport.com:80/facilities.php to http://www.marsspaceport.com/facilities.php
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/20080704080504/http://www.marsspaceport.com/pdfs/0-B%20FacStudy.pdf to http://www.marsspaceport.com/pdfs/0-B%20FacStudy.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

Cheers.—cyberbot II  Talk to my owner :Online 12:01, 24 February 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Mid-Atlantic Regional Spaceport Launch Pad 0. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20131203075617/http://www.spaceflightnews.net/special/minotaur/tacsat-3/docs/facilities_access_plan_final_7_31_07.pdf to http://www.spaceflightnews.net/special/minotaur/tacsat-3/docs/facilities_access_plan_final_7_31_07.pdf
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20081120215219/http://astronautix.com/sites/waldla0a.htm to http://www.astronautix.com/sites/waldla0a.htm
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20111115161524/http://www.astronautix.com/sites/waldla0b.htm to http://www.astronautix.com/sites/waldla0b.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 06:06, 11 November 2017 (UTC)