<?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: Scaled fined for July accident</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.newspacejournal.com/2008/01/18/scaled-fined-for-july-accident/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.newspacejournal.com/2008/01/18/scaled-fined-for-july-accident/</link>
	<description>Tracking the entrepreneurial space industry</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 12 Sep 2014 14:33:32 +0800</lastBuildDate>
		<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
		<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>https://wordpress.org/?v=4.0.38</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Carolynne Campbell</title>
		<link>http://www.newspacejournal.com/2008/01/18/scaled-fined-for-july-accident/comment-page-1/#comment-292174</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Carolynne Campbell]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 20 Aug 2008 13:02:41 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.personalspaceflight.info/2008/01/18/scaled-fined-for-july-accident/#comment-292174</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Allow Scaled to &#039;close the door&#039;?  What about the rest of us working with powerful hybrids? The recent pess-release promises to share results with &#039;the industry&#039;.  A little sharing of facts would be a good start.  The report delivers nothing of any use in aiding others to improve safety.  We&#039;ve been using inert gas and blow-off systems for three years and yet Scaled has only just figured those things out.
We could well be doing something we shouldn&#039;t be doing. Do we just close our program, carry on regardless, or insist that the data be made public?  The latter is the only reasonable course.
Scientists share and publish results as a matter of professional ethics.  When the data relate to safety, public obligation must take precedence oover commercial secrecy.  I don&#039;t believe for one moment that Mr. Rutan is at the root of this, his credentials are impeccable - but then he doesn&#039;t call the shots at Scaled Composites now the big boys have stepped in.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Allow Scaled to &#8216;close the door&#8217;?  What about the rest of us working with powerful hybrids? The recent pess-release promises to share results with &#8216;the industry&#8217;.  A little sharing of facts would be a good start.  The report delivers nothing of any use in aiding others to improve safety.  We&#8217;ve been using inert gas and blow-off systems for three years and yet Scaled has only just figured those things out.<br />
We could well be doing something we shouldn&#8217;t be doing. Do we just close our program, carry on regardless, or insist that the data be made public?  The latter is the only reasonable course.<br />
Scientists share and publish results as a matter of professional ethics.  When the data relate to safety, public obligation must take precedence oover commercial secrecy.  I don&#8217;t believe for one moment that Mr. Rutan is at the root of this, his credentials are impeccable &#8211; but then he doesn&#8217;t call the shots at Scaled Composites now the big boys have stepped in.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
