<?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: &#8220;It all sort of kept working out&#8221;: MacCallum on the development of a human Mars flyby mission</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.newspacejournal.com/2013/02/27/it-all-sort-of-kept-working-out-maccallum-on-the-development-of-a-human-mars-flyby-mission/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.newspacejournal.com/2013/02/27/it-all-sort-of-kept-working-out-maccallum-on-the-development-of-a-human-mars-flyby-mission/</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: Terence Clark</title>
		<link>http://www.newspacejournal.com/2013/02/27/it-all-sort-of-kept-working-out-maccallum-on-the-development-of-a-human-mars-flyby-mission/comment-page-1/#comment-788306</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Terence Clark]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 01 Mar 2013 16:18:32 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.newspacejournal.com/?p=1909#comment-788306</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Yeah, you mean we can go to Mars without a 130t vehicle?  Or even a 70t vehicle?  I&#039;m shocked, I tell you, shocked.    Now to be fair an orbital or landing mission would take more gear, more fuel, more everything and yes, it would probably exceed what a single F Heavy would be able to loft, but I&#039;m glad someone else noticed the distinct lack of the Senate Launch System in the discussion.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Yeah, you mean we can go to Mars without a 130t vehicle?  Or even a 70t vehicle?  I&#8217;m shocked, I tell you, shocked.    Now to be fair an orbital or landing mission would take more gear, more fuel, more everything and yes, it would probably exceed what a single F Heavy would be able to loft, but I&#8217;m glad someone else noticed the distinct lack of the Senate Launch System in the discussion.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Fred Willett</title>
		<link>http://www.newspacejournal.com/2013/02/27/it-all-sort-of-kept-working-out-maccallum-on-the-development-of-a-human-mars-flyby-mission/comment-page-1/#comment-787435</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Fred Willett]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 28 Feb 2013 04:42:13 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.newspacejournal.com/?p=1909#comment-787435</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[And not an SLS in sight.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>And not an SLS in sight.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Scott Bass</title>
		<link>http://www.newspacejournal.com/2013/02/27/it-all-sort-of-kept-working-out-maccallum-on-the-development-of-a-human-mars-flyby-mission/comment-page-1/#comment-787241</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Scott Bass]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 27 Feb 2013 22:00:09 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.newspacejournal.com/?p=1909#comment-787241</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I was all prepared to be a naysayer but they have my full support .... It is really the kind of thing we have not seen since Mercury]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I was all prepared to be a naysayer but they have my full support &#8230;. It is really the kind of thing we have not seen since Mercury</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Coastal Ron</title>
		<link>http://www.newspacejournal.com/2013/02/27/it-all-sort-of-kept-working-out-maccallum-on-the-development-of-a-human-mars-flyby-mission/comment-page-1/#comment-787233</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Coastal Ron]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 27 Feb 2013 21:41:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.newspacejournal.com/?p=1909#comment-787233</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I like the approach everyone is taking with this - very methodical.

The biggest stumbling block appears to be money, which is in someways a surprise, since we&#039;ve all believed that there were many technical issues that have kept us from going.  Of course that would be for a NASA-led mission, and NASA has less tolerance for risk, and in any case would be attempting something a little more ambitious than just a flyby.

But I guess this shows the difference between what NASA thinks is needed and what, in business terms, &quot;the market will bear&quot;.  If Tito is able to find enough funding, then it will show that the tolerance for risk vs reward is as high for those wanting adventure in space as it is here on Earth.  Not that NASA needs to follow suit, since that&#039;s not really their mission.  But it will show that American&#039;s continue to support risk, which is something that NASA has been trying to avoid more and more, and Congress is not helping.

Hard to see how they&#039;ll be able to afford to do this mission without using the low cost Falcon Heavy, but I wonder if their options for capsules could include the composite version of the Orion that ATK was showing off for their Liberty system?  Buy a MPCV heatshield for it, and finish it off just enough to be that low-tech lifeboat that they need.  Launch it on a Falcon Heavy (with no LAS), then launch the crew on a Falcon 9/Dragon (with an engineer to fix any last minute issues).  Lots of different options, but the simplest would be if they go with a Dragon and Falcon Heavy.  Guess we&#039;ll have to hear what Elon thinks.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I like the approach everyone is taking with this &#8211; very methodical.</p>
<p>The biggest stumbling block appears to be money, which is in someways a surprise, since we&#8217;ve all believed that there were many technical issues that have kept us from going.  Of course that would be for a NASA-led mission, and NASA has less tolerance for risk, and in any case would be attempting something a little more ambitious than just a flyby.</p>
<p>But I guess this shows the difference between what NASA thinks is needed and what, in business terms, &#8220;the market will bear&#8221;.  If Tito is able to find enough funding, then it will show that the tolerance for risk vs reward is as high for those wanting adventure in space as it is here on Earth.  Not that NASA needs to follow suit, since that&#8217;s not really their mission.  But it will show that American&#8217;s continue to support risk, which is something that NASA has been trying to avoid more and more, and Congress is not helping.</p>
<p>Hard to see how they&#8217;ll be able to afford to do this mission without using the low cost Falcon Heavy, but I wonder if their options for capsules could include the composite version of the Orion that ATK was showing off for their Liberty system?  Buy a MPCV heatshield for it, and finish it off just enough to be that low-tech lifeboat that they need.  Launch it on a Falcon Heavy (with no LAS), then launch the crew on a Falcon 9/Dragon (with an engineer to fix any last minute issues).  Lots of different options, but the simplest would be if they go with a Dragon and Falcon Heavy.  Guess we&#8217;ll have to hear what Elon thinks.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Transterrestrial Musings - Inspiration Mars</title>
		<link>http://www.newspacejournal.com/2013/02/27/it-all-sort-of-kept-working-out-maccallum-on-the-development-of-a-human-mars-flyby-mission/comment-page-1/#comment-787145</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Transterrestrial Musings - Inspiration Mars]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 27 Feb 2013 18:16:56 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.newspacejournal.com/?p=1909#comment-787145</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[[...] Here&#8216;s an interview that Jeff Foust did with Taber yesterday. [...]]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[&#8230;] Here&#8216;s an interview that Jeff Foust did with Taber yesterday. [&#8230;]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
