<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Members of Congress weigh in on NASA</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.spacepolitics.com/2010/04/15/members-of-congress-weigh-in-on-nasa/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.spacepolitics.com/2010/04/15/members-of-congress-weigh-in-on-nasa/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=members-of-congress-weigh-in-on-nasa</link>
	<description>Because sometimes the most important orbit is the Beltway...</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 17 Sep 2014 13:35:41 +0000</lastBuildDate>
		<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
		<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>https://wordpress.org/?v=4.0.38</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: casual observer</title>
		<link>http://www.spacepolitics.com/2010/04/15/members-of-congress-weigh-in-on-nasa/#comment-297732</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[casual observer]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 21 Apr 2010 20:49:23 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.spacepolitics.com/?p=3364#comment-297732</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[America is on the decline, just like Great Britain in the 20th century.  

Good luck doing anything in the future &quot;not because they are easy, but because they are hard&quot;.   You are just not going to do it.  Most Americans would rather numb their brains watching too much TV and suck off the gov&#039;t teat, while getting way too fat in the process.

Space in the 60&#039;s compelled a generation of engineers who latched onto a goal of epic proportions into accomplishing the unimaginable.  Now you&#039;re in the process of blowing the global advantages in every area of American dominance.  All of the things that America did to make itself prosperous it is now doing less and less, while the things that will bankrupt them it is doing more and more.  Where&#039;s the vision?  People don&#039;t give a darn about space because there&#039;s no vision and there&#039;s no vision because there&#039;s no leadership.  Instead of funding research into energy, america&#039;s giving money to people who don&#039;t pay taxes or who bought a bigger house then they could afford. I suppose it&#039;s important to support the habit of being stupid, and let&#039;s be honest, when you fund something, you get more of it.  Trust me, you&#039;re going to need good engineers, not more stupid people. Meanwhile, Nasa&#039;s share of the federal budget is less than it was at any time previous, except when the program was just in its infancy.

Bottom line is, Nasa will get cut, America won&#039;t go to the moon, nor to mars, and America will be lucky just to keep the space station a viable enterprise.  You may think this is all harsh, but Nasa went to the moon-something never done before- in 8 years. Today, even with all the advanced technology and knowledge gained from experience, I would be shocked if America could do the same today.  Some people are so blinded by their political leanings that they give a pass to a policy that they&#039;d curse the other party for doing.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>America is on the decline, just like Great Britain in the 20th century.  </p>
<p>Good luck doing anything in the future &#8220;not because they are easy, but because they are hard&#8221;.   You are just not going to do it.  Most Americans would rather numb their brains watching too much TV and suck off the gov&#8217;t teat, while getting way too fat in the process.</p>
<p>Space in the 60&#8217;s compelled a generation of engineers who latched onto a goal of epic proportions into accomplishing the unimaginable.  Now you&#8217;re in the process of blowing the global advantages in every area of American dominance.  All of the things that America did to make itself prosperous it is now doing less and less, while the things that will bankrupt them it is doing more and more.  Where&#8217;s the vision?  People don&#8217;t give a darn about space because there&#8217;s no vision and there&#8217;s no vision because there&#8217;s no leadership.  Instead of funding research into energy, america&#8217;s giving money to people who don&#8217;t pay taxes or who bought a bigger house then they could afford. I suppose it&#8217;s important to support the habit of being stupid, and let&#8217;s be honest, when you fund something, you get more of it.  Trust me, you&#8217;re going to need good engineers, not more stupid people. Meanwhile, Nasa&#8217;s share of the federal budget is less than it was at any time previous, except when the program was just in its infancy.</p>
<p>Bottom line is, Nasa will get cut, America won&#8217;t go to the moon, nor to mars, and America will be lucky just to keep the space station a viable enterprise.  You may think this is all harsh, but Nasa went to the moon-something never done before- in 8 years. Today, even with all the advanced technology and knowledge gained from experience, I would be shocked if America could do the same today.  Some people are so blinded by their political leanings that they give a pass to a policy that they&#8217;d curse the other party for doing.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Rhyolite</title>
		<link>http://www.spacepolitics.com/2010/04/15/members-of-congress-weigh-in-on-nasa/#comment-296491</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Rhyolite]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 17 Apr 2010 05:33:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.spacepolitics.com/?p=3364#comment-296491</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[&quot;I think 9 pump fed engines that the base of F9 is insane.&quot;

The Saturn I and IB used eight pump fed engines at its base and had 19 successful flights out of 19.  The extrapolation from eight engines to nine is not that great.  

I suspect that if F9 has a problem it will be during staging.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;I think 9 pump fed engines that the base of F9 is insane.&#8221;</p>
<p>The Saturn I and IB used eight pump fed engines at its base and had 19 successful flights out of 19.  The extrapolation from eight engines to nine is not that great.  </p>
<p>I suspect that if F9 has a problem it will be during staging.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: googaw</title>
		<link>http://www.spacepolitics.com/2010/04/15/members-of-congress-weigh-in-on-nasa/#comment-296448</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[googaw]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 16 Apr 2010 23:30:30 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.spacepolitics.com/?p=3364#comment-296448</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[&lt;i&gt;How is something â€œcommercialâ€ is the government is the sole customer and the service is heavily subsidized by the government? That doesnâ€™t sound like commercialism to me.&lt;/i&gt;

Get with the program, Mark.    Fixed price government contracts are &quot;commercial&quot; and taxpayers are &quot;customers&quot; of the IRS.    Government works just like the private sector, as long as it uses the right buzzwords.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><i>How is something â€œcommercialâ€ is the government is the sole customer and the service is heavily subsidized by the government? That doesnâ€™t sound like commercialism to me.</i></p>
<p>Get with the program, Mark.    Fixed price government contracts are &#8220;commercial&#8221; and taxpayers are &#8220;customers&#8221; of the IRS.    Government works just like the private sector, as long as it uses the right buzzwords.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: amightywind</title>
		<link>http://www.spacepolitics.com/2010/04/15/members-of-congress-weigh-in-on-nasa/#comment-296226</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[amightywind]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 15 Apr 2010 23:23:25 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.spacepolitics.com/?p=3364#comment-296226</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Bennett wrote

&quot;Having worked out the Merlin engineâ€™s â€œexcess residual thrustâ€ issue on F1-Flight 3, I give the first F9 flight a better than 80% chance. (OK, I lie. I give it 100%)&quot;

The F3 issue was not a proud engineering moment. Residual thrust is an obvious staging issue if you had done a hazard analysis. From the video it looks like you may have 2nd stage nozzle heating issues as well.

Personally, I think 9 pump fed engines that the base of F9 is insane. It will be an interesting flight.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Bennett wrote</p>
<p>&#8220;Having worked out the Merlin engineâ€™s â€œexcess residual thrustâ€ issue on F1-Flight 3, I give the first F9 flight a better than 80% chance. (OK, I lie. I give it 100%)&#8221;</p>
<p>The F3 issue was not a proud engineering moment. Residual thrust is an obvious staging issue if you had done a hazard analysis. From the video it looks like you may have 2nd stage nozzle heating issues as well.</p>
<p>Personally, I think 9 pump fed engines that the base of F9 is insane. It will be an interesting flight.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Doug Lassiter</title>
		<link>http://www.spacepolitics.com/2010/04/15/members-of-congress-weigh-in-on-nasa/#comment-296199</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Doug Lassiter]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 15 Apr 2010 21:47:18 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.spacepolitics.com/?p=3364#comment-296199</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[&quot;â€œthat is one tough impact for a person, one giant leap for the rest of the crewâ€:?&quot;

Good on ya.

That&#039;s one very shallow footprint for a man, and one giant leap when you sneeze.

Rocks with no gravity. Gotta love it.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;â€œthat is one tough impact for a person, one giant leap for the rest of the crewâ€:?&#8221;</p>
<p>Good on ya.</p>
<p>That&#8217;s one very shallow footprint for a man, and one giant leap when you sneeze.</p>
<p>Rocks with no gravity. Gotta love it.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Robert G. Oler</title>
		<link>http://www.spacepolitics.com/2010/04/15/members-of-congress-weigh-in-on-nasa/#comment-296195</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Robert G. Oler]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 15 Apr 2010 21:37:31 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.spacepolitics.com/?p=3364#comment-296195</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Bennett wrote @ April 15th, 2010 at 4:56 pm 

I give Elon about 60 percent all based on the first stage.  If they get that burn behind them, they in my view have a pretty easy ride to orbit.

From a systems standpoint what would  raise flags for me (and I am sure that they have looked at pretty hard)

are

1.  the thermal environment in the engine area
2.  the guidance equations including thrust vectoring
3.  getting off the pad.

I&#039;m conservative by nature...

Robert G. Oler]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Bennett wrote @ April 15th, 2010 at 4:56 pm </p>
<p>I give Elon about 60 percent all based on the first stage.  If they get that burn behind them, they in my view have a pretty easy ride to orbit.</p>
<p>From a systems standpoint what would  raise flags for me (and I am sure that they have looked at pretty hard)</p>
<p>are</p>
<p>1.  the thermal environment in the engine area<br />
2.  the guidance equations including thrust vectoring<br />
3.  getting off the pad.</p>
<p>I&#8217;m conservative by nature&#8230;</p>
<p>Robert G. Oler</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Robert G. Oler</title>
		<link>http://www.spacepolitics.com/2010/04/15/members-of-congress-weigh-in-on-nasa/#comment-296193</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Robert G. Oler]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 15 Apr 2010 21:35:03 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.spacepolitics.com/?p=3364#comment-296193</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Doug Lassiter wrote @ April 15th, 2010 at 5:00 pm 

&quot;that is one tough impact for a person, one giant leap for the rest of the crew&quot;:?

Robert G. Oler]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Doug Lassiter wrote @ April 15th, 2010 at 5:00 pm </p>
<p>&#8220;that is one tough impact for a person, one giant leap for the rest of the crew&#8221;:?</p>
<p>Robert G. Oler</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: taka</title>
		<link>http://www.spacepolitics.com/2010/04/15/members-of-congress-weigh-in-on-nasa/#comment-296184</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[taka]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 15 Apr 2010 21:05:32 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.spacepolitics.com/?p=3364#comment-296184</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[&lt;cite&gt; Mark R. Whittington &lt;/cite&gt; wrote:
&lt;blockquote&gt;The Obama speech was singularly unimpressive. Heâ€™s embraced â€œLook But Donâ€™t Touchâ€ and has eschewed actually settling and developing space, Under Obamaspace it will be Apollo to an asteroid, Apollo to Mars orbit, and Apollo to Mars.&lt;/blockquote&gt;

hmmm... it&#039;s going to be more than Apollo to an asteroid... the current draft National Space Policy states, &quot;&lt;q&gt;...characterize near Earth objects.... to identify potentially resource laden planetary objects&lt;/q&gt;&quot;

Sounds like they want to do more than just plant a flag and leave footprints.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><cite> Mark R. Whittington </cite> wrote:</p>
<blockquote><p>The Obama speech was singularly unimpressive. Heâ€™s embraced â€œLook But Donâ€™t Touchâ€ and has eschewed actually settling and developing space, Under Obamaspace it will be Apollo to an asteroid, Apollo to Mars orbit, and Apollo to Mars.</p></blockquote>
<p>hmmm&#8230; it&#8217;s going to be more than Apollo to an asteroid&#8230; the current draft National Space Policy states, &#8220;<q>&#8230;characterize near Earth objects&#8230;. to identify potentially resource laden planetary objects</q>&#8221;</p>
<p>Sounds like they want to do more than just plant a flag and leave footprints.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Doug Lassiter</title>
		<link>http://www.spacepolitics.com/2010/04/15/members-of-congress-weigh-in-on-nasa/#comment-296182</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Doug Lassiter]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 15 Apr 2010 21:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.spacepolitics.com/?p=3364#comment-296182</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[&quot;You still havnâ€™t learned that flags can be planted and footprints made on the surfaces of asteroids?&quot;

Actually, it&#039;s pretty hard to put a footprint on an asteroid, at least a low mass NEO-type. You&#039;d have to launch an astronaut on an impact trajectory with some substantial velocity, and grab the spacesuit as he or she bounces off. That&#039;s all for one set of prints. 

So much for NEOs. But maybe just launch a boot at it? I suppose that could even be done robotically!

Well, flags are easy, though one should probably tie them down.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;You still havnâ€™t learned that flags can be planted and footprints made on the surfaces of asteroids?&#8221;</p>
<p>Actually, it&#8217;s pretty hard to put a footprint on an asteroid, at least a low mass NEO-type. You&#8217;d have to launch an astronaut on an impact trajectory with some substantial velocity, and grab the spacesuit as he or she bounces off. That&#8217;s all for one set of prints. </p>
<p>So much for NEOs. But maybe just launch a boot at it? I suppose that could even be done robotically!</p>
<p>Well, flags are easy, though one should probably tie them down.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Bennett</title>
		<link>http://www.spacepolitics.com/2010/04/15/members-of-congress-weigh-in-on-nasa/#comment-296181</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Bennett]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 15 Apr 2010 20:56:40 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.spacepolitics.com/?p=3364#comment-296181</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[As the President&#039;s entourage pulled away from Air Force One I had a thought, I wonder if he&#039;s saying &quot;Let&#039;s go see the Falcon 9!&quot;  (I would have).

Knowing that Elon was waiting at the pad for his personal visit speaks volumes about both men, and of their excitement at what the weeks ahead will bring.

-------------------------------

Having worked out the Merlin engine&#039;s &quot;excess residual thrust&quot; issue on F1-Flight 3, I give the first F9 flight a better than 80% chance.  (OK, I lie.  I give it 100%)]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>As the President&#8217;s entourage pulled away from Air Force One I had a thought, I wonder if he&#8217;s saying &#8220;Let&#8217;s go see the Falcon 9!&#8221;  (I would have).</p>
<p>Knowing that Elon was waiting at the pad for his personal visit speaks volumes about both men, and of their excitement at what the weeks ahead will bring.</p>
<p>&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;-</p>
<p>Having worked out the Merlin engine&#8217;s &#8220;excess residual thrust&#8221; issue on F1-Flight 3, I give the first F9 flight a better than 80% chance.  (OK, I lie.  I give it 100%)</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
