<?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: Putting the SpaceX (test) launch into perspective</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.newspacejournal.com/2012/05/18/putting-the-spacex-test-launch-into-perspective/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.newspacejournal.com/2012/05/18/putting-the-spacex-test-launch-into-perspective/</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: Robert Clark</title>
		<link>http://www.newspacejournal.com/2012/05/18/putting-the-spacex-test-launch-into-perspective/comment-page-1/#comment-626112</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Robert Clark]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 16 Jun 2012 21:53:43 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.newspacejournal.com/?p=1692#comment-626112</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Two posts to my blog.
This first one argues that the importance of what SpaceX accomplished is that other
companies can do it too and at similar costs. There was nothing particularly
innovative about the SpaceX engines or of their structures. All that would be
required is to use normal good business practice in privately developing the
launchers and the spacecraft:

On the lasting importance of the SpaceX accomplishment.
http://exoscientist.blogspot.com/2012/06/on-lasting-importance-of-spacex.html


And this one proposes the orbital DC-Y as a private, commercial passenger
launcher at a few hundred million development cost:

On the lasting importance of the SpaceX accomplishment, Page 2.
http://exoscientist.blogspot.com/2012/06/on-lasting-importance-of-spacex_15.html


  Bob Clark]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Two posts to my blog.<br />
This first one argues that the importance of what SpaceX accomplished is that other<br />
companies can do it too and at similar costs. There was nothing particularly<br />
innovative about the SpaceX engines or of their structures. All that would be<br />
required is to use normal good business practice in privately developing the<br />
launchers and the spacecraft:</p>
<p>On the lasting importance of the SpaceX accomplishment.<br />
<a href="http://exoscientist.blogspot.com/2012/06/on-lasting-importance-of-spacex.html" rel="nofollow">http://exoscientist.blogspot.com/2012/06/on-lasting-importance-of-spacex.html</a></p>
<p>And this one proposes the orbital DC-Y as a private, commercial passenger<br />
launcher at a few hundred million development cost:</p>
<p>On the lasting importance of the SpaceX accomplishment, Page 2.<br />
<a href="http://exoscientist.blogspot.com/2012/06/on-lasting-importance-of-spacex_15.html" rel="nofollow">http://exoscientist.blogspot.com/2012/06/on-lasting-importance-of-spacex_15.html</a></p>
<p>  Bob Clark</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
