<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" ?>
<rss version="2.0">
	<channel>
		<title>gdp's Comments</title>
		<language>en-us</language>
		<link>https://www.intensedebate.com/users/633018</link>
		<description>Comments by spacefrontier</description>
<item>
<title>Space Frontier Foundation (SFF) : D-Day for NewSpace</title>
<link>http://spacefrontier.org/2010/07/14/d-day-for-newspace/#IDComment86844171</link>
<description>Please read &amp;quot;Real Socialism in America&amp;quot; by Bob Werb |  &lt;a href=&quot;http://spacefrontier.org/2010/07/06/real-socialism-in-america/&quot; target=&quot;_blank&quot;&gt;http://spacefrontier.org/2010/07/06/real-socialis...&lt;/a&gt; </description>
<pubDate>Thu, 15 Jul 2010 20:04:54 +0000</pubDate>
<guid>http://spacefrontier.org/2010/07/14/d-day-for-newspace/#IDComment86844171</guid>
</item><item>
<title>Space Frontier Foundation (SFF) : Space Frontier Foundation Applauds NASA&#039;s Bold New Direction</title>
<link>http://spacefrontier.org/2010/01/31/space-frontier-foundation-applauds-nasas-bold-new-direction/#IDComment54886494</link>
<description>Statement by NASA Administrator Charlie Bolden  &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.nasa.gov/pdf/420994main_2011_Budget_Ad...&quot; target=&quot;_blank&quot;&gt;http://www.nasa.gov/pdf/420994main_2011_Budget_Ad...&lt;/a&gt;   &amp;quot;...Now let&amp;rsquo;s discuss the Constellation Program. The Program was planning to  use an approach similar to Apollo to return astronauts to the Moon some 50  years after that program&amp;rsquo;s triumphs. The Augustine Committee observed that this  path was not sustainable, and the President agrees. They found that  Constellation key milestones were slipping, and that the program would not get  us back to the moon in any reasonable time or within any affordable cost. Far  more funding was needed to make our current approach work. The Augustine  Committee estimated that the heavy lift rocket for getting to the moon would not  be available until 2028 or 2030, and even then they found &amp;ldquo;there are insufficient  funds to develop the lunar lander and lunar surface systems until well into the  2030s, if ever.&amp;quot; So as much as we would not like it to be the case, and taking  nothing away from the hard work and dedication of our team, the truth is that we  were not on a path to get back to the moon&amp;#039;s surface. And as we focused so  much of our effort and funding on just getting to the Moon, we were neglecting  investments in the key technologies that would be required to go beyond.  So this budget cancels the Constellation Program, including the Ares I and V  rockets and the Orion crew exploration vehicle. NASA intends to work with the  Congress to make this transition smooth and effective, working responsibly on  behalf of the Taxpayers...&amp;quot;  </description>
<pubDate>Mon, 1 Feb 2010 20:25:45 +0000</pubDate>
<guid>http://spacefrontier.org/2010/01/31/space-frontier-foundation-applauds-nasas-bold-new-direction/#IDComment54886494</guid>
</item><item>
<title>Space Frontier Foundation (SFF) : The News Today</title>
<link>http://spacefrontier.org/2010/02/01/the-news-today/#IDComment54886010</link>
<description>Statement by NASA Administrator Charlie Bolden &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.nasa.gov/pdf/420994main_2011_Budget_Administrator_Remarks.pdf&quot; target=&quot;_blank&quot;&gt;http://www.nasa.gov/pdf/420994main_2011_Budget_Ad...&lt;/a&gt;  &amp;quot;Now let&amp;rsquo;s discuss the Constellation Program.  The Program was planning to  use an approach similar to Apollo to return astronauts to the Moon some 50  years after that program&amp;rsquo;s triumphs.  The Augustine Committee observed that this  path was not sustainable, and the President agrees.  They found that  Constellation key milestones were slipping, and that the program would not get  us back to the moon in any reasonable time or within any affordable cost.  Far  more funding was needed to make our current approach work.   The Augustine  Committee estimated that the heavy lift rocket for getting to the moon would not  be available until 2028 or 2030, and even then they found &amp;ldquo;there are insufficient  funds to develop the lunar lander and lunar surface systems until well into the  2030s, if ever.&amp;quot;  So as much as we would not like it to be the case, and taking  nothing away from the hard work and dedication of our team, the truth is that we  were not on a path to get back to the moon&amp;#039;s surface.  And as we focused so  much of our effort and funding on just getting to the Moon, we were neglecting  investments in the key technologies that would be required to go beyond&amp;quot; </description>
<pubDate>Mon, 1 Feb 2010 20:21:35 +0000</pubDate>
<guid>http://spacefrontier.org/2010/02/01/the-news-today/#IDComment54886010</guid>
</item><item>
<title>The Space Frontier Foundation : Test Featured Post</title>
<link>http://wp.spacefrontier.org/2009/08/15/test-2/#IDComment30879286</link>
<description>This is a test comment. </description>
<pubDate>Sat, 15 Aug 2009 19:51:36 +0000</pubDate>
<guid>http://wp.spacefrontier.org/2009/08/15/test-2/#IDComment30879286</guid>
</item>	</channel>
</rss>