<?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: First US Rocket Lab launch delayed until &#8217;21	</title>
	<atom:link href="https://behindtheblack.com/behind-the-black/points-of-information/first-us-rocket-lab-launch-delayed-until-21/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>https://behindtheblack.com/behind-the-black/points-of-information/first-us-rocket-lab-launch-delayed-until-21/</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 16 Nov 2020 03:23:25 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>
	hourly	</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>
	1	</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>https://wordpress.org/?v=6.9.4</generator>
	<item>
		<title>
		By: MDN		</title>
		<link>https://behindtheblack.com/behind-the-black/points-of-information/first-us-rocket-lab-launch-delayed-until-21/#comment-1093932</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[MDN]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 16 Nov 2020 03:23:25 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://behindtheblack.com/?p=70821#comment-1093932</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[Yes it is reasonable to be skeptical for the reasons you state. 

That said, since they report having found actual software errors (note the s, implying more than one), this seems like a justified action. We aren’t China, and rightly take range safety for our rocket industry seriously. 

I know this is frustrating, but flight control systems must be unfailingly robust and built to operate reliably even in the event of hardware failures and unexpected fault conditions. This makes them among the hardest to design and even harder to validate. And, is one domain where the NASA collective likely still provides some really credible value, especially for smaller companies like Rocket Labs.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Yes it is reasonable to be skeptical for the reasons you state. </p>
<p>That said, since they report having found actual software errors (note the s, implying more than one), this seems like a justified action. We aren’t China, and rightly take range safety for our rocket industry seriously. </p>
<p>I know this is frustrating, but flight control systems must be unfailingly robust and built to operate reliably even in the event of hardware failures and unexpected fault conditions. This makes them among the hardest to design and even harder to validate. And, is one domain where the NASA collective likely still provides some really credible value, especially for smaller companies like Rocket Labs.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
