In fact, SpaceX has a technical debt to Apollo which they've been quick to acknowledge --- pointing out, for instance, that the Merlin engine injector design uses techniques pioneered on the Apollo LEM descent engine.
What's odd here is the failure to point out what SpaceX is doing differently --- engineering not for optimal performance, but for price/performance. (Using the same basic engine design on both Falcon 9 stages, for instance, and designing the tankage so that common tooling can be used for both stages. I'm sure there are more decisions along these lines that they haven't made public.)
What's odd here is the failure to point out what SpaceX is doing differently --- engineering not for optimal performance, but for price/performance. (Using the same basic engine design on both Falcon 9 stages, for instance, and designing the tankage so that common tooling can be used for both stages. I'm sure there are more decisions along these lines that they haven't made public.)