<?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: The failure of the past and a hint of the future	</title>
	<atom:link href="https://behindtheblack.com/behind-the-black/essays-and-commentaries/the-failure-of-the-past-and-a-hint-of-the-future/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>https://behindtheblack.com/behind-the-black/essays-and-commentaries/the-failure-of-the-past-and-a-hint-of-the-future/</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 05 Aug 2010 04:06:49 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>
	hourly	</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>
	1	</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>https://wordpress.org/?v=6.9.4</generator>
	<item>
		<title>
		By: Doug		</title>
		<link>https://behindtheblack.com/behind-the-black/essays-and-commentaries/the-failure-of-the-past-and-a-hint-of-the-future/#comment-723</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Doug]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 05 Aug 2010 04:06:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://behindtheblack.com/?p=1799#comment-723</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[The ISS is just a destination to justify congress and senate pork jobs program. A very costly destination and if we are not going anywhere for the next 30 plus years why maintain it???? Let the tinker toy spam can station re-enter and burn then transfer the funding towards sub-orbital and point to point R&#038;D and development. I never did like the thing from start the ISS and mega shuttle have sucked the funding out many a good program in past 30 years. If we aren&#039;t going anywhere other than the LEO and the ISS I would happy to see all manned orbital flights suspended and entire budget transferred to development of a small reusable space plane. Pick up where the X-15 ended and build from there. Do it right this time without the splash down capsule detour.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The ISS is just a destination to justify congress and senate pork jobs program. A very costly destination and if we are not going anywhere for the next 30 plus years why maintain it???? Let the tinker toy spam can station re-enter and burn then transfer the funding towards sub-orbital and point to point R&amp;D and development. I never did like the thing from start the ISS and mega shuttle have sucked the funding out many a good program in past 30 years. If we aren&#8217;t going anywhere other than the LEO and the ISS I would happy to see all manned orbital flights suspended and entire budget transferred to development of a small reusable space plane. Pick up where the X-15 ended and build from there. Do it right this time without the splash down capsule detour.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: Kelly Starks		</title>
		<link>https://behindtheblack.com/behind-the-black/essays-and-commentaries/the-failure-of-the-past-and-a-hint-of-the-future/#comment-678</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Kelly Starks]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 03 Aug 2010 18:21:35 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://behindtheblack.com/?p=1799#comment-678</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[Good point Robert.
More then a few folks have wondered how long ISS can keep going after shuttle.

ISS was designed to be paired with shuttle.  Its construction and maintenance was designed based on the assumption something like a shuttle would be there to do it.  Now ISS will be on its own, and NASA and the world are taking a giant leap back to ‘60’s era capabilities, which are no where near enough to do something as complex as a big station, much less significant lunar or Mars missions.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Good point Robert.<br />
More then a few folks have wondered how long ISS can keep going after shuttle.</p>
<p>ISS was designed to be paired with shuttle.  Its construction and maintenance was designed based on the assumption something like a shuttle would be there to do it.  Now ISS will be on its own, and NASA and the world are taking a giant leap back to ‘60’s era capabilities, which are no where near enough to do something as complex as a big station, much less significant lunar or Mars missions.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: Marcus van Bavel		</title>
		<link>https://behindtheblack.com/behind-the-black/essays-and-commentaries/the-failure-of-the-past-and-a-hint-of-the-future/#comment-676</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Marcus van Bavel]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 03 Aug 2010 15:32:36 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://behindtheblack.com/?p=1799#comment-676</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[Hey Robert

If the Dragon can orbit a line replaceable unit, can it not bring it back as well?

If the unit can be dismantled in orbit, can you not bring back the failed part instead of the unit entire?

Dragon/Cygnus etc do not have robot arms but the station has it own arm, as well as the Dextre with 2 arms and six astronauts with two arms each, correct? :)

Are the all-in-one capabilities of the Shuttle worth the two bil$/yr standing army?

If we&#039;re going to Moon or Mars don&#039;t we need to learn/practice how to keep systems alive without a steady stream of large parts going in both directions? Or does that require some kind of new technology that we don&#039;t have right now? If so how, or when, are we ever going to develop that?

Thanks for writing &quot;Leaving Earth&quot; - Great book]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hey Robert</p>
<p>If the Dragon can orbit a line replaceable unit, can it not bring it back as well?</p>
<p>If the unit can be dismantled in orbit, can you not bring back the failed part instead of the unit entire?</p>
<p>Dragon/Cygnus etc do not have robot arms but the station has it own arm, as well as the Dextre with 2 arms and six astronauts with two arms each, correct? :)</p>
<p>Are the all-in-one capabilities of the Shuttle worth the two bil$/yr standing army?</p>
<p>If we&#8217;re going to Moon or Mars don&#8217;t we need to learn/practice how to keep systems alive without a steady stream of large parts going in both directions? Or does that require some kind of new technology that we don&#8217;t have right now? If so how, or when, are we ever going to develop that?</p>
<p>Thanks for writing &#8220;Leaving Earth&#8221; &#8211; Great book</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
