<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article09_10_27_0640213</id>
	<title>Ares 1-X Ready On Pad, Launch Set For 1200 GMT</title>
	<author>timothy</author>
	<datestamp>1256634420000</datestamp>
	<htmltext>DynaSoar writes <i>"NASA's new Ares I-X rocket is undergoing final preparations for its planned launch test Tuesday, October 27. Launch time is scheduled for 8 AM EDT (1200 GMT). As of noon Monday it appeared that there was a 60\% chance of showers and/or high altitude clouds interfering. However, the launch has a an eight hour window of opportunity through 2000 GMT, and would require only 10 minutes of clear skies within that time to fly. Of interest to engineering types, both those who favor the new vehicle's design and its critics, will be to see whether the predicted linear 'pogo stick' oscillation will occur, and whether the dampening design built into it prevents damaging and possibly destructive shaking.  <a href="http://www.space.com/special\_reports/1x.html">Extensive coverage is being presented by Space.com</a>; for NASA TV streaming video, schedules and downlink information, visit <a href="http://www.nasa.gov/ntv">nasa.gov/ntv</a>."</i> <strong>Update 15:37 GMT by timothy: </strong> The weather did not cooperate; <a href="http://blogs.usatoday.com/ondeadline/2009/10/-nasa-scrubs-launch-of-ares-ix-rocket-because-of-weather.html">today's planned launch has been scrubbed</a>.</htmltext>
<tokenext>DynaSoar writes " NASA 's new Ares I-X rocket is undergoing final preparations for its planned launch test Tuesday , October 27 .
Launch time is scheduled for 8 AM EDT ( 1200 GMT ) .
As of noon Monday it appeared that there was a 60 \ % chance of showers and/or high altitude clouds interfering .
However , the launch has a an eight hour window of opportunity through 2000 GMT , and would require only 10 minutes of clear skies within that time to fly .
Of interest to engineering types , both those who favor the new vehicle 's design and its critics , will be to see whether the predicted linear 'pogo stick ' oscillation will occur , and whether the dampening design built into it prevents damaging and possibly destructive shaking .
Extensive coverage is being presented by Space.com ; for NASA TV streaming video , schedules and downlink information , visit nasa.gov/ntv .
" Update 15 : 37 GMT by timothy : The weather did not cooperate ; today 's planned launch has been scrubbed .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>DynaSoar writes "NASA's new Ares I-X rocket is undergoing final preparations for its planned launch test Tuesday, October 27.
Launch time is scheduled for 8 AM EDT (1200 GMT).
As of noon Monday it appeared that there was a 60\% chance of showers and/or high altitude clouds interfering.
However, the launch has a an eight hour window of opportunity through 2000 GMT, and would require only 10 minutes of clear skies within that time to fly.
Of interest to engineering types, both those who favor the new vehicle's design and its critics, will be to see whether the predicted linear 'pogo stick' oscillation will occur, and whether the dampening design built into it prevents damaging and possibly destructive shaking.
Extensive coverage is being presented by Space.com; for NASA TV streaming video, schedules and downlink information, visit nasa.gov/ntv.
" Update 15:37 GMT by timothy:  The weather did not cooperate; today's planned launch has been scrubbed.</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_0640213.29884459</id>
	<title>Re:Lots of nits to pick</title>
	<author>John Hasler</author>
	<datestamp>1256661240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>&gt; Personally, I think they should go ahead and launch it.</p><p>Sure.  And then if it doesn't seem to go quite right in a way might have been due to the wind or lightning  but the cloud cover and the broken radar mean they don't have enough data?</p><p>This is a test launch.  Better to wait for perfect conditions.  You don't want them to have to do it all over again.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>&gt; Personally , I think they should go ahead and launch it.Sure .
And then if it does n't seem to go quite right in a way might have been due to the wind or lightning but the cloud cover and the broken radar mean they do n't have enough data ? This is a test launch .
Better to wait for perfect conditions .
You do n't want them to have to do it all over again .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>&gt; Personally, I think they should go ahead and launch it.Sure.
And then if it doesn't seem to go quite right in a way might have been due to the wind or lightning  but the cloud cover and the broken radar mean they don't have enough data?This is a test launch.
Better to wait for perfect conditions.
You don't want them to have to do it all over again.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_0640213.29883801</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_0640213.29885149</id>
	<title>Re:Awesome</title>
	<author>Foobar of Borg</author>
	<datestamp>1256664540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>Obama didn't start Ares, Bush did.</p></div></blockquote><p>So then, Bush sucked ass as a president because he was too busy designing rockets? That must be why he ignored Katrina for as long as he did. He was immersed in a stability calculation.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Obama did n't start Ares , Bush did.So then , Bush sucked ass as a president because he was too busy designing rockets ?
That must be why he ignored Katrina for as long as he did .
He was immersed in a stability calculation .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Obama didn't start Ares, Bush did.So then, Bush sucked ass as a president because he was too busy designing rockets?
That must be why he ignored Katrina for as long as he did.
He was immersed in a stability calculation.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_0640213.29881719</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_0640213.29881967</id>
	<title>the last thing the other' nazis did while leaving?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256643060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>they emptied their territory's coffers, just like they (our corepirate nazis) are doing here now.</p><p>they'll need every penny &amp; it will not be enough to save them from the creators' newclear powered planet/population rescue initiative/mandate/big flash. as the expression goes; get ready to see the light.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>they emptied their territory 's coffers , just like they ( our corepirate nazis ) are doing here now.they 'll need every penny &amp; it will not be enough to save them from the creators ' newclear powered planet/population rescue initiative/mandate/big flash .
as the expression goes ; get ready to see the light .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>they emptied their territory's coffers, just like they (our corepirate nazis) are doing here now.they'll need every penny &amp; it will not be enough to save them from the creators' newclear powered planet/population rescue initiative/mandate/big flash.
as the expression goes; get ready to see the light.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_0640213.29883057</id>
	<title>Re:Cut the welfare and go to space</title>
	<author>IrquiM</author>
	<datestamp>1256654400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Flamebait</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>People like you is why the rest of the world hates USA (and not Canada)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>People like you is why the rest of the world hates USA ( and not Canada )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>People like you is why the rest of the world hates USA (and not Canada)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_0640213.29882581</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_0640213.29881883</id>
	<title>Re:Rockets are impressive, but the VAB is insane</title>
	<author>BadAnalogyGuy</author>
	<datestamp>1256641680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>I got to tour...inside a building that can withstand hurricane force winds. It is truly mind-boggling.</i></p><p>Just moved here from the jungle, have you?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I got to tour...inside a building that can withstand hurricane force winds .
It is truly mind-boggling.Just moved here from the jungle , have you ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I got to tour...inside a building that can withstand hurricane force winds.
It is truly mind-boggling.Just moved here from the jungle, have you?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_0640213.29881863</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_0640213.29885345</id>
	<title>Re:What is the point?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256665320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><b>There is certainly a benefit to SRB's in that you don't have all the complexities of cryogenic fuels, and having to fuel before launch. That's why the Air Force uses them in ICBM's, they are extremely simple to launch. They are also somewhat safer than liquid fuels in some respects. It certainly remains to be seen if they will work the way NASA is trying to use them, especially how bad the vibration will be.</b></p><p>On the other hand, there's plenty of ways that SRBs are also more dangerous. Pretty much the only failure modes SRBs have are catastrophic explosions, and since you can't shut them off like you can with liquid rockets it makes it rather difficult to launch-escape if something goes wrong. It's also considerably more difficult to handle for the ground personnel, as summarized well in this blog post by "Chair Force Engineer":</p><p><a href="http://chairforceengineer.blogspot.com/2009/10/worlds-largest-stick-of-dynamite.html" title="blogspot.com">http://chairforceengineer.blogspot.com/2009/10/worlds-largest-stick-of-dynamite.html</a> [blogspot.com] </p><p><div class="quote"><p>Just when it seemed like the history books had been closed on the Challenger disaster, I came across a review of Truth, Lies &amp; O-Rings, an interesting look at the faulty decision-making leading up to launch. (hat tip to Clark Lindsey's Hobbyspace.) The reviewer makes an interesting point about the dangers inherent in ground handling of solid rockets. Many of the inherent disadvantages of SRBs have been long-discussed, such as the inability to shut them down during abort situations. But handling and storing the motors carries all the potential dangers of riding on them. For that reason, SRB stacking operations are classified as "hazardous operations," and all non-essential personnel are banned from the Vehicle Assembly Building. The procedure is similar for stacking the stages of other solid-fuel launch vehicles. In spite of all the precautions and built-in safety mechanisms, the potential always exists for a catastrophic solid-fuel detonation, as occurred with Brazil's orbital launch vehicle.</p><p>While I tend to think that the risk is overstated (the industry has been dealing with large solid rockets since the 1940's,) it can never be entirely eliminated. For this reason, Jeff Bell predicted that the SRB would be deleted from the shuttle-derived launch vehicles under development by NASA. Many "space boosters" are dismissive of Jeff Bell, viewing him as a cynic whose arguments aren't worth the paper they're written on. I'll concede that his predictions often come with fatal flaws, but he does make a lot of solid arguments and presents plenty of pertinent facts. In the case of the aforementioned prediction, Jeff Bell's fatal flaw is assuming that NASA would choose a safe, clean-sheet launcher design over one that protects the shuttle's entrenched workforce and contractors.</p><p>The ground-handling of large solid rockets (and even the individual segments) was an issue that should have been re-examined when Ares I was designed to be "safe, simple and soon." While NASA personnel have done an admirable job in handling the SRB's up to this point, it's sobering to know that just one mistake could cost a lot of lives and pull the plug on the nation's manned space program. The Ares 5-segment SRB will be the world's largest stick of dynamite, and that risk should never be lost on anybody who works in the space business.</p></div></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>There is certainly a benefit to SRB 's in that you do n't have all the complexities of cryogenic fuels , and having to fuel before launch .
That 's why the Air Force uses them in ICBM 's , they are extremely simple to launch .
They are also somewhat safer than liquid fuels in some respects .
It certainly remains to be seen if they will work the way NASA is trying to use them , especially how bad the vibration will be.On the other hand , there 's plenty of ways that SRBs are also more dangerous .
Pretty much the only failure modes SRBs have are catastrophic explosions , and since you ca n't shut them off like you can with liquid rockets it makes it rather difficult to launch-escape if something goes wrong .
It 's also considerably more difficult to handle for the ground personnel , as summarized well in this blog post by " Chair Force Engineer " : http : //chairforceengineer.blogspot.com/2009/10/worlds-largest-stick-of-dynamite.html [ blogspot.com ] Just when it seemed like the history books had been closed on the Challenger disaster , I came across a review of Truth , Lies &amp; O-Rings , an interesting look at the faulty decision-making leading up to launch .
( hat tip to Clark Lindsey 's Hobbyspace .
) The reviewer makes an interesting point about the dangers inherent in ground handling of solid rockets .
Many of the inherent disadvantages of SRBs have been long-discussed , such as the inability to shut them down during abort situations .
But handling and storing the motors carries all the potential dangers of riding on them .
For that reason , SRB stacking operations are classified as " hazardous operations , " and all non-essential personnel are banned from the Vehicle Assembly Building .
The procedure is similar for stacking the stages of other solid-fuel launch vehicles .
In spite of all the precautions and built-in safety mechanisms , the potential always exists for a catastrophic solid-fuel detonation , as occurred with Brazil 's orbital launch vehicle.While I tend to think that the risk is overstated ( the industry has been dealing with large solid rockets since the 1940 's , ) it can never be entirely eliminated .
For this reason , Jeff Bell predicted that the SRB would be deleted from the shuttle-derived launch vehicles under development by NASA .
Many " space boosters " are dismissive of Jeff Bell , viewing him as a cynic whose arguments are n't worth the paper they 're written on .
I 'll concede that his predictions often come with fatal flaws , but he does make a lot of solid arguments and presents plenty of pertinent facts .
In the case of the aforementioned prediction , Jeff Bell 's fatal flaw is assuming that NASA would choose a safe , clean-sheet launcher design over one that protects the shuttle 's entrenched workforce and contractors.The ground-handling of large solid rockets ( and even the individual segments ) was an issue that should have been re-examined when Ares I was designed to be " safe , simple and soon .
" While NASA personnel have done an admirable job in handling the SRB 's up to this point , it 's sobering to know that just one mistake could cost a lot of lives and pull the plug on the nation 's manned space program .
The Ares 5-segment SRB will be the world 's largest stick of dynamite , and that risk should never be lost on anybody who works in the space business .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There is certainly a benefit to SRB's in that you don't have all the complexities of cryogenic fuels, and having to fuel before launch.
That's why the Air Force uses them in ICBM's, they are extremely simple to launch.
They are also somewhat safer than liquid fuels in some respects.
It certainly remains to be seen if they will work the way NASA is trying to use them, especially how bad the vibration will be.On the other hand, there's plenty of ways that SRBs are also more dangerous.
Pretty much the only failure modes SRBs have are catastrophic explosions, and since you can't shut them off like you can with liquid rockets it makes it rather difficult to launch-escape if something goes wrong.
It's also considerably more difficult to handle for the ground personnel, as summarized well in this blog post by "Chair Force Engineer":http://chairforceengineer.blogspot.com/2009/10/worlds-largest-stick-of-dynamite.html [blogspot.com] Just when it seemed like the history books had been closed on the Challenger disaster, I came across a review of Truth, Lies &amp; O-Rings, an interesting look at the faulty decision-making leading up to launch.
(hat tip to Clark Lindsey's Hobbyspace.
) The reviewer makes an interesting point about the dangers inherent in ground handling of solid rockets.
Many of the inherent disadvantages of SRBs have been long-discussed, such as the inability to shut them down during abort situations.
But handling and storing the motors carries all the potential dangers of riding on them.
For that reason, SRB stacking operations are classified as "hazardous operations," and all non-essential personnel are banned from the Vehicle Assembly Building.
The procedure is similar for stacking the stages of other solid-fuel launch vehicles.
In spite of all the precautions and built-in safety mechanisms, the potential always exists for a catastrophic solid-fuel detonation, as occurred with Brazil's orbital launch vehicle.While I tend to think that the risk is overstated (the industry has been dealing with large solid rockets since the 1940's,) it can never be entirely eliminated.
For this reason, Jeff Bell predicted that the SRB would be deleted from the shuttle-derived launch vehicles under development by NASA.
Many "space boosters" are dismissive of Jeff Bell, viewing him as a cynic whose arguments aren't worth the paper they're written on.
I'll concede that his predictions often come with fatal flaws, but he does make a lot of solid arguments and presents plenty of pertinent facts.
In the case of the aforementioned prediction, Jeff Bell's fatal flaw is assuming that NASA would choose a safe, clean-sheet launcher design over one that protects the shuttle's entrenched workforce and contractors.The ground-handling of large solid rockets (and even the individual segments) was an issue that should have been re-examined when Ares I was designed to be "safe, simple and soon.
" While NASA personnel have done an admirable job in handling the SRB's up to this point, it's sobering to know that just one mistake could cost a lot of lives and pull the plug on the nation's manned space program.
The Ares 5-segment SRB will be the world's largest stick of dynamite, and that risk should never be lost on anybody who works in the space business.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_0640213.29884065</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_0640213.29886201</id>
	<title>Re:I'm a rocket, man!</title>
	<author>Nyeerrmm</author>
	<datestamp>1256668920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>There are a lot of steps between Ares 1-X, and an actual Ares 1 + Orion that can take people to orbit. Augustine and crew say 2017 before that happens, and they seem to have a good idea of what they're talking about.</p><p>Whats on the pad now is largely a publicity stunt -- especially with the future of Ares 1 itself in doubt.  Its a 4-segment SRB with a dummy 5th segment, and a dummy second stage and Orion capsule.  The fact that the SRB is different means it doesn't represent the vibrations and harmonics of the actual vehicle well.  The upper parts are still under development as well.</p><p>Of course, its not a worthless test.  Its ridiculously well instrumented, thus why weather matters even though its a suborbital lob, and it has also been modeled extensively.  Being able to compare models to actual data on this scale is quite valuable.  Probably not worth the $450M this launch will cost in total, but probably worth the remaining cost in the recent decisions to go ahead and continue the launch even with Ares 1 in doubt.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>There are a lot of steps between Ares 1-X , and an actual Ares 1 + Orion that can take people to orbit .
Augustine and crew say 2017 before that happens , and they seem to have a good idea of what they 're talking about.Whats on the pad now is largely a publicity stunt -- especially with the future of Ares 1 itself in doubt .
Its a 4-segment SRB with a dummy 5th segment , and a dummy second stage and Orion capsule .
The fact that the SRB is different means it does n't represent the vibrations and harmonics of the actual vehicle well .
The upper parts are still under development as well.Of course , its not a worthless test .
Its ridiculously well instrumented , thus why weather matters even though its a suborbital lob , and it has also been modeled extensively .
Being able to compare models to actual data on this scale is quite valuable .
Probably not worth the $ 450M this launch will cost in total , but probably worth the remaining cost in the recent decisions to go ahead and continue the launch even with Ares 1 in doubt .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There are a lot of steps between Ares 1-X, and an actual Ares 1 + Orion that can take people to orbit.
Augustine and crew say 2017 before that happens, and they seem to have a good idea of what they're talking about.Whats on the pad now is largely a publicity stunt -- especially with the future of Ares 1 itself in doubt.
Its a 4-segment SRB with a dummy 5th segment, and a dummy second stage and Orion capsule.
The fact that the SRB is different means it doesn't represent the vibrations and harmonics of the actual vehicle well.
The upper parts are still under development as well.Of course, its not a worthless test.
Its ridiculously well instrumented, thus why weather matters even though its a suborbital lob, and it has also been modeled extensively.
Being able to compare models to actual data on this scale is quite valuable.
Probably not worth the $450M this launch will cost in total, but probably worth the remaining cost in the recent decisions to go ahead and continue the launch even with Ares 1 in doubt.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_0640213.29881745</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_0640213.29882591</id>
	<title>Re:Tragically, We Cannot Afford This Now</title>
	<author>MxTxL</author>
	<datestamp>1256651640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>I am hard-pressed to think of any great advances in knowledge that were not already known from by the time the cruddy but long-surviving MIR burned up in the atmosphere.</i><br>I hate it when people like you pull the what-have-you-done-for-me-lately schtick. Listen, just because you can't think of anything doesn't mean there isn't useful science coming out of NASA EVERY DAY.</p><p>You should look at the NASA Spinoff page. <a href="http://www.sti.nasa.gov/tto/" title="nasa.gov">http://www.sti.nasa.gov/tto/</a> [nasa.gov]</p><p>NASA is pushing the state of the art in materials, robotics, communications, structural engineering, environment and many others. Things that have real-world impact on our lives today. It's not just Tang and Velcro.</p><p>The ISS, despite all it's flaws and short comings, gives us lessons every day in how to survive and thrive in the harshest of all environments. It will give us the technology and know-how to do longer range and longer duration missions than were ever before possible.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I am hard-pressed to think of any great advances in knowledge that were not already known from by the time the cruddy but long-surviving MIR burned up in the atmosphere.I hate it when people like you pull the what-have-you-done-for-me-lately schtick .
Listen , just because you ca n't think of anything does n't mean there is n't useful science coming out of NASA EVERY DAY.You should look at the NASA Spinoff page .
http : //www.sti.nasa.gov/tto/ [ nasa.gov ] NASA is pushing the state of the art in materials , robotics , communications , structural engineering , environment and many others .
Things that have real-world impact on our lives today .
It 's not just Tang and Velcro.The ISS , despite all it 's flaws and short comings , gives us lessons every day in how to survive and thrive in the harshest of all environments .
It will give us the technology and know-how to do longer range and longer duration missions than were ever before possible .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I am hard-pressed to think of any great advances in knowledge that were not already known from by the time the cruddy but long-surviving MIR burned up in the atmosphere.I hate it when people like you pull the what-have-you-done-for-me-lately schtick.
Listen, just because you can't think of anything doesn't mean there isn't useful science coming out of NASA EVERY DAY.You should look at the NASA Spinoff page.
http://www.sti.nasa.gov/tto/ [nasa.gov]NASA is pushing the state of the art in materials, robotics, communications, structural engineering, environment and many others.
Things that have real-world impact on our lives today.
It's not just Tang and Velcro.The ISS, despite all it's flaws and short comings, gives us lessons every day in how to survive and thrive in the harshest of all environments.
It will give us the technology and know-how to do longer range and longer duration missions than were ever before possible.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_0640213.29882309</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_0640213.29886525</id>
	<title>Re:Question for those in-the-know</title>
	<author>Nyeerrmm</author>
	<datestamp>1256670300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The Augustine commission offered the administration about 10 options, some of which continue Ares V development, while others don't.  All options that remain within the current budget (not the extra $3B required to do anything impressive according to the report) continue Ares V development.</p><p>However, all of the options presented push for a heavy lift capability.  Other options include<br>- 'Ares V Lite': a lower-performance version of Ares V that would be human rated and could potentially reduce development costs primarily by eliminating the need for Ares 1<br>- Shuttle-derived: Either a sidemount cargo vehicle (probably requiring something like an Ares 1 for crew launch), or a top-mount shuttle derived design like Jupiter.  These would be less capable than Ares V, but still powerful and potentially cheaper -- you could achieve a lunar mission with 2 or 3 launches.<br>- EELVs: Creating larger Evolved Expendable Launch Vehicles from the Delta or Atlas family.  These would be the least capable.  These are also the biggest question mark because cost savings would come in a large part from a restructuring of rocket development to a DoD style model, where contractors are given requirements, not designs.</p><p>All of these, in combination with various targets and schedules were analyzed by the committee.  None of the options comes out as a clear winner as cheaper or better, since Ares V has some considerable sunk costs that make its cheaper relative to the others, while designing even a sidemount cargo pod is more expensive than some probably think.  Personally I like EELVs because it forces a change in the way business is done, but thats me.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The Augustine commission offered the administration about 10 options , some of which continue Ares V development , while others do n't .
All options that remain within the current budget ( not the extra $ 3B required to do anything impressive according to the report ) continue Ares V development.However , all of the options presented push for a heavy lift capability .
Other options include- 'Ares V Lite ' : a lower-performance version of Ares V that would be human rated and could potentially reduce development costs primarily by eliminating the need for Ares 1- Shuttle-derived : Either a sidemount cargo vehicle ( probably requiring something like an Ares 1 for crew launch ) , or a top-mount shuttle derived design like Jupiter .
These would be less capable than Ares V , but still powerful and potentially cheaper -- you could achieve a lunar mission with 2 or 3 launches.- EELVs : Creating larger Evolved Expendable Launch Vehicles from the Delta or Atlas family .
These would be the least capable .
These are also the biggest question mark because cost savings would come in a large part from a restructuring of rocket development to a DoD style model , where contractors are given requirements , not designs.All of these , in combination with various targets and schedules were analyzed by the committee .
None of the options comes out as a clear winner as cheaper or better , since Ares V has some considerable sunk costs that make its cheaper relative to the others , while designing even a sidemount cargo pod is more expensive than some probably think .
Personally I like EELVs because it forces a change in the way business is done , but thats me .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The Augustine commission offered the administration about 10 options, some of which continue Ares V development, while others don't.
All options that remain within the current budget (not the extra $3B required to do anything impressive according to the report) continue Ares V development.However, all of the options presented push for a heavy lift capability.
Other options include- 'Ares V Lite': a lower-performance version of Ares V that would be human rated and could potentially reduce development costs primarily by eliminating the need for Ares 1- Shuttle-derived: Either a sidemount cargo vehicle (probably requiring something like an Ares 1 for crew launch), or a top-mount shuttle derived design like Jupiter.
These would be less capable than Ares V, but still powerful and potentially cheaper -- you could achieve a lunar mission with 2 or 3 launches.- EELVs: Creating larger Evolved Expendable Launch Vehicles from the Delta or Atlas family.
These would be the least capable.
These are also the biggest question mark because cost savings would come in a large part from a restructuring of rocket development to a DoD style model, where contractors are given requirements, not designs.All of these, in combination with various targets and schedules were analyzed by the committee.
None of the options comes out as a clear winner as cheaper or better, since Ares V has some considerable sunk costs that make its cheaper relative to the others, while designing even a sidemount cargo pod is more expensive than some probably think.
Personally I like EELVs because it forces a change in the way business is done, but thats me.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_0640213.29881983</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_0640213.29882281</id>
	<title>Solid Rocket Vibrations Are Not Pogo</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256648700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>The vibrations that are commonly called 'pogo' in big rockets are caused by a feedback / resonance of thrust oscillations with inlet pressure of the turbopumps, see <a href="http://yarchive.net/space/rocket/pogo.html" title="yarchive.net" rel="nofollow">this extensive discussion</a> [yarchive.net].

Pogo is fixed by adding dampers to the propellant lines.  Ares I, like every big solid, has combustion instabilities that cause thrust oscillations, but there's no feedback like in a liquid rocket.  Only danger is hitting one of the structural resonances and ringing the rocket like a bell (and possibly causing the structure to 'diverge').</htmltext>
<tokenext>The vibrations that are commonly called 'pogo ' in big rockets are caused by a feedback / resonance of thrust oscillations with inlet pressure of the turbopumps , see this extensive discussion [ yarchive.net ] .
Pogo is fixed by adding dampers to the propellant lines .
Ares I , like every big solid , has combustion instabilities that cause thrust oscillations , but there 's no feedback like in a liquid rocket .
Only danger is hitting one of the structural resonances and ringing the rocket like a bell ( and possibly causing the structure to 'diverge ' ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The vibrations that are commonly called 'pogo' in big rockets are caused by a feedback / resonance of thrust oscillations with inlet pressure of the turbopumps, see this extensive discussion [yarchive.net].
Pogo is fixed by adding dampers to the propellant lines.
Ares I, like every big solid, has combustion instabilities that cause thrust oscillations, but there's no feedback like in a liquid rocket.
Only danger is hitting one of the structural resonances and ringing the rocket like a bell (and possibly causing the structure to 'diverge').</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_0640213.29882431</id>
	<title>It's swaying around in the wind a bit....</title>
	<author>distantbody</author>
	<datestamp>1256650380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>...I wonder if it could get blown off course<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:0</htmltext>
<tokenext>...I wonder if it could get blown off course : 0</tokentext>
<sentencetext>...I wonder if it could get blown off course :0</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_0640213.29881923</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_0640213.29881713</id>
	<title>First!</title>
	<author>Engeekneer</author>
	<datestamp>1256638380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext>First launc *Kaboooom*</htmltext>
<tokenext>First launc * Kaboooom *</tokentext>
<sentencetext>First launc *Kaboooom*</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_0640213.29882581</id>
	<title>Cut the welfare and go to space</title>
	<author>tjstork</author>
	<datestamp>1256651520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I would rather throw a few thousand people off of disability and have the spaceship, then not, if it comes to that.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I would rather throw a few thousand people off of disability and have the spaceship , then not , if it comes to that .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I would rather throw a few thousand people off of disability and have the spaceship, then not, if it comes to that.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_0640213.29882309</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_0640213.29886909</id>
	<title>Re:Lots of nits to pick</title>
	<author>Nyeerrmm</author>
	<datestamp>1256672040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The entire point and purpose of this launch is to receive telemetry from the large number of instruments on the vehicle.  Being able to compare the data to the models is the single most valuable thing that will come from this launch, since otherwise its mostly a publicity stunt (everything that is not a shuttle SRB is a dummy component) and theres a good chance that Ares 1 will be canceled.</p><p>With clouds and the potential to build up an electrical charge on the surface, there's a risk of losing data along the way.  The cost of postponing the launch is far less than the cost of wasting this $450M launch.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The entire point and purpose of this launch is to receive telemetry from the large number of instruments on the vehicle .
Being able to compare the data to the models is the single most valuable thing that will come from this launch , since otherwise its mostly a publicity stunt ( everything that is not a shuttle SRB is a dummy component ) and theres a good chance that Ares 1 will be canceled.With clouds and the potential to build up an electrical charge on the surface , there 's a risk of losing data along the way .
The cost of postponing the launch is far less than the cost of wasting this $ 450M launch .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The entire point and purpose of this launch is to receive telemetry from the large number of instruments on the vehicle.
Being able to compare the data to the models is the single most valuable thing that will come from this launch, since otherwise its mostly a publicity stunt (everything that is not a shuttle SRB is a dummy component) and theres a good chance that Ares 1 will be canceled.With clouds and the potential to build up an electrical charge on the surface, there's a risk of losing data along the way.
The cost of postponing the launch is far less than the cost of wasting this $450M launch.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_0640213.29883801</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_0640213.29884065</id>
	<title>Re:What is the point?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256659560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Solid-fuel boosters keep jobs in the state of Utah so you can count on Orrin Hatch, very powerful senator from Utah supporting NASA's budget....</p><p>Someone said on a previous thread the Ares 1 has such a goofy look because the SRB's built in Utah have to pass through a train tunnel so they can't be increased in diameter which is why it looks so top heavy.</p><p>There is certainly a benefit to SRB's in that you don't have all the complexities of cryogenic fuels, and having to fuel before launch.  That's why the Air Force uses them in ICBM's, they are extremely simple to launch.  They are also somewhat safer than liquid fuels in some respects.  It certainly remains to be seen if they will work the way NASA is trying to use them, especially how bad the vibration will be.</p><p>It certainly would have been better if NASA could have finished the SRB facility in Mississippi, which was killed twice, so they could be shipped to Kennedy on barges and the diameter constraints would have been removed.  I wager Utah's senators helped kill it to keep the jobs in Utah.</p><p>NASA's manned space program is 90\% jobs program, 10\% space program at this point, in case you hadn't noticed.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Solid-fuel boosters keep jobs in the state of Utah so you can count on Orrin Hatch , very powerful senator from Utah supporting NASA 's budget....Someone said on a previous thread the Ares 1 has such a goofy look because the SRB 's built in Utah have to pass through a train tunnel so they ca n't be increased in diameter which is why it looks so top heavy.There is certainly a benefit to SRB 's in that you do n't have all the complexities of cryogenic fuels , and having to fuel before launch .
That 's why the Air Force uses them in ICBM 's , they are extremely simple to launch .
They are also somewhat safer than liquid fuels in some respects .
It certainly remains to be seen if they will work the way NASA is trying to use them , especially how bad the vibration will be.It certainly would have been better if NASA could have finished the SRB facility in Mississippi , which was killed twice , so they could be shipped to Kennedy on barges and the diameter constraints would have been removed .
I wager Utah 's senators helped kill it to keep the jobs in Utah.NASA 's manned space program is 90 \ % jobs program , 10 \ % space program at this point , in case you had n't noticed .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Solid-fuel boosters keep jobs in the state of Utah so you can count on Orrin Hatch, very powerful senator from Utah supporting NASA's budget....Someone said on a previous thread the Ares 1 has such a goofy look because the SRB's built in Utah have to pass through a train tunnel so they can't be increased in diameter which is why it looks so top heavy.There is certainly a benefit to SRB's in that you don't have all the complexities of cryogenic fuels, and having to fuel before launch.
That's why the Air Force uses them in ICBM's, they are extremely simple to launch.
They are also somewhat safer than liquid fuels in some respects.
It certainly remains to be seen if they will work the way NASA is trying to use them, especially how bad the vibration will be.It certainly would have been better if NASA could have finished the SRB facility in Mississippi, which was killed twice, so they could be shipped to Kennedy on barges and the diameter constraints would have been removed.
I wager Utah's senators helped kill it to keep the jobs in Utah.NASA's manned space program is 90\% jobs program, 10\% space program at this point, in case you hadn't noticed.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_0640213.29882357</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_0640213.29883139</id>
	<title>Re:I'm a rocket, man!</title>
	<author>mcgrew</author>
	<datestamp>1256654880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>It's about bloody time they got this thing started</i></p><p><a href="http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20091027/ap\_on\_sc/us\_sci\_moon\_rocket\_test;\_ylt=Ajn\_OmCjdHPZ4ZbUDS5ooDas0NUE;\_ylu=X3oDMTFlMGI3MTAxBHBvcwMxMTUEc2VjA2FjY29yZGlvbl9zY2llbmNlBHNsawNuYXNhdGVzdGZsaWc-" title="yahoo.com">Actually, it's past time.</a> [yahoo.com] </p><blockquote><div><p>NASA test flight delayed, bad weather still looms</p><p>By MARCIA DUNN, AP Aerospace Writer Marcia Dunn, Ap Aerospace Writer - 59 mins ago</p><p>CAPE CANAVERAL, Fla. - NASA's newest rocket is on the verge of blasting off on a test flight, but minor problems are causing last-minute delays.</p><p>The Ares I-X rocket is set to lift off Tuesday morning. But forecasters are monitoring upper-level winds and clouds that could delay the experimental flight. <b>It's already 1 1/2 hours late</b> because of extra time needed for the countdown and minor communication system trouble.</p><p>This is the first step in NASA's effort to return astronauts to the moon.</p><p><b>The flight will last two minutes.</b> Parachutes will drop the first-stage booster into the Atlantic for recovery. The upper portion of the rocket -- all fake parts -- will fall uncontrolled into the ocean.</p><p>NASA expects to learn a lot, even if it's for another type of rocket. The White House is re-evaluating the human spaceflight program.</p></div></blockquote></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's about bloody time they got this thing startedActually , it 's past time .
[ yahoo.com ] NASA test flight delayed , bad weather still loomsBy MARCIA DUNN , AP Aerospace Writer Marcia Dunn , Ap Aerospace Writer - 59 mins agoCAPE CANAVERAL , Fla. - NASA 's newest rocket is on the verge of blasting off on a test flight , but minor problems are causing last-minute delays.The Ares I-X rocket is set to lift off Tuesday morning .
But forecasters are monitoring upper-level winds and clouds that could delay the experimental flight .
It 's already 1 1/2 hours late because of extra time needed for the countdown and minor communication system trouble.This is the first step in NASA 's effort to return astronauts to the moon.The flight will last two minutes .
Parachutes will drop the first-stage booster into the Atlantic for recovery .
The upper portion of the rocket -- all fake parts -- will fall uncontrolled into the ocean.NASA expects to learn a lot , even if it 's for another type of rocket .
The White House is re-evaluating the human spaceflight program .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's about bloody time they got this thing startedActually, it's past time.
[yahoo.com] NASA test flight delayed, bad weather still loomsBy MARCIA DUNN, AP Aerospace Writer Marcia Dunn, Ap Aerospace Writer - 59 mins agoCAPE CANAVERAL, Fla. - NASA's newest rocket is on the verge of blasting off on a test flight, but minor problems are causing last-minute delays.The Ares I-X rocket is set to lift off Tuesday morning.
But forecasters are monitoring upper-level winds and clouds that could delay the experimental flight.
It's already 1 1/2 hours late because of extra time needed for the countdown and minor communication system trouble.This is the first step in NASA's effort to return astronauts to the moon.The flight will last two minutes.
Parachutes will drop the first-stage booster into the Atlantic for recovery.
The upper portion of the rocket -- all fake parts -- will fall uncontrolled into the ocean.NASA expects to learn a lot, even if it's for another type of rocket.
The White House is re-evaluating the human spaceflight program.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_0640213.29881745</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_0640213.29884159</id>
	<title>Re:Number one in what exactly?</title>
	<author>johno.ie</author>
	<datestamp>1256659920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Agreed.</p><p>It bugs me that the PR spin around this launch is praising NASA for developing a totally new launch vehicle in just 4 years. Like you said it's just a SRB with some weight on top of it and some new avionics.</p><p>I'm also bothered about the launch because I think that there should be a list of criteria that will decide whether this launch can be deemed a successful test or not, and as far as I am aware this hasn't been done. I've said it many times before that the Ares I design is seriously flawed, without a set of pass/fail criteria to judge the results by, NASA cannot recognize the flaws in it's own design. It's the wrong way to design science experiments or engineer any kind of project. You should start with an honest unbiased hypothesis/goal and compare everything back to that.</p><p>It is projected that the launch of Ares 1-Y will be in 2013, that means 4 more years of wasted R&amp;D if the fundamental flaws aren't recognized during this launch.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Agreed.It bugs me that the PR spin around this launch is praising NASA for developing a totally new launch vehicle in just 4 years .
Like you said it 's just a SRB with some weight on top of it and some new avionics.I 'm also bothered about the launch because I think that there should be a list of criteria that will decide whether this launch can be deemed a successful test or not , and as far as I am aware this has n't been done .
I 've said it many times before that the Ares I design is seriously flawed , without a set of pass/fail criteria to judge the results by , NASA can not recognize the flaws in it 's own design .
It 's the wrong way to design science experiments or engineer any kind of project .
You should start with an honest unbiased hypothesis/goal and compare everything back to that.It is projected that the launch of Ares 1-Y will be in 2013 , that means 4 more years of wasted R&amp;D if the fundamental flaws are n't recognized during this launch .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Agreed.It bugs me that the PR spin around this launch is praising NASA for developing a totally new launch vehicle in just 4 years.
Like you said it's just a SRB with some weight on top of it and some new avionics.I'm also bothered about the launch because I think that there should be a list of criteria that will decide whether this launch can be deemed a successful test or not, and as far as I am aware this hasn't been done.
I've said it many times before that the Ares I design is seriously flawed, without a set of pass/fail criteria to judge the results by, NASA cannot recognize the flaws in it's own design.
It's the wrong way to design science experiments or engineer any kind of project.
You should start with an honest unbiased hypothesis/goal and compare everything back to that.It is projected that the launch of Ares 1-Y will be in 2013, that means 4 more years of wasted R&amp;D if the fundamental flaws aren't recognized during this launch.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_0640213.29882153</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_0640213.29884545</id>
	<title>Re:More NasaTV Feeds and launch data</title>
	<author>bill\_mcgonigle</author>
	<datestamp>1256661600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><tt>mplayer rtsp://a1364.l1856753153.c18567.g.lr.akamaistream.net/live/D/1364/18567/v0001/reflector:53153</tt></p><p>rescheduled for 8AM tomorrow.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>mplayer rtsp : //a1364.l1856753153.c18567.g.lr.akamaistream.net/live/D/1364/18567/v0001/reflector : 53153rescheduled for 8AM tomorrow .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>mplayer rtsp://a1364.l1856753153.c18567.g.lr.akamaistream.net/live/D/1364/18567/v0001/reflector:53153rescheduled for 8AM tomorrow.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_0640213.29881923</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_0640213.29882357</id>
	<title>What is the point?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256649900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Why is NASA so bent on using the solid-fuel boosters, when the military already has the much cheaper Delta iV Heavy and Atlas V rockets that have been proven?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Why is NASA so bent on using the solid-fuel boosters , when the military already has the much cheaper Delta iV Heavy and Atlas V rockets that have been proven ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Why is NASA so bent on using the solid-fuel boosters, when the military already has the much cheaper Delta iV Heavy and Atlas V rockets that have been proven?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_0640213.29886213</id>
	<title>Re:Solid Rocket Vibrations Are Not Pogo</title>
	<author>EvilBudMan</author>
	<datestamp>1256668980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>What I always wondered is how the  direction of the burn is controlled? On the shuttle you have those little but powerful liquid fuel nozzles to control which way the thing will go. I would just like to see wht the plan is for using a shuttle booster as the main thing doing the steering? It might point it's way into the ground too if this hasn't been thought through.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>What I always wondered is how the direction of the burn is controlled ?
On the shuttle you have those little but powerful liquid fuel nozzles to control which way the thing will go .
I would just like to see wht the plan is for using a shuttle booster as the main thing doing the steering ?
It might point it 's way into the ground too if this has n't been thought through .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What I always wondered is how the  direction of the burn is controlled?
On the shuttle you have those little but powerful liquid fuel nozzles to control which way the thing will go.
I would just like to see wht the plan is for using a shuttle booster as the main thing doing the steering?
It might point it's way into the ground too if this hasn't been thought through.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_0640213.29882281</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_0640213.29881983</id>
	<title>Question for those in-the-know</title>
	<author>blind biker</author>
	<datestamp>1256643360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>What is going to happen with the Ares V? I heard rumors about it being scrapped. I hope they were wrong?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>What is going to happen with the Ares V ?
I heard rumors about it being scrapped .
I hope they were wrong ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What is going to happen with the Ares V?
I heard rumors about it being scrapped.
I hope they were wrong?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_0640213.29883801</id>
	<title>Lots of nits to pick</title>
	<author>Vexar</author>
	<datestamp>1256658240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>First, it was a piece of string hanging off the top of the sensors, then it was a stray wisp of puffy cloud.  After that, it was a ship that was somewhere around the launch location, although how close, I'll never doubt it was far enough not to get caught up in the blast, perhaps in danger of falling bits if the thing exploded.  Presently, more wispy clouds and a failed radar system are plaguing a large but mostly harmless activity.  <p>
Personally, I think they should go ahead and launch it.  The amount of money wasted in the hundreds of people running amok in Florida is outstanding.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>First , it was a piece of string hanging off the top of the sensors , then it was a stray wisp of puffy cloud .
After that , it was a ship that was somewhere around the launch location , although how close , I 'll never doubt it was far enough not to get caught up in the blast , perhaps in danger of falling bits if the thing exploded .
Presently , more wispy clouds and a failed radar system are plaguing a large but mostly harmless activity .
Personally , I think they should go ahead and launch it .
The amount of money wasted in the hundreds of people running amok in Florida is outstanding .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>First, it was a piece of string hanging off the top of the sensors, then it was a stray wisp of puffy cloud.
After that, it was a ship that was somewhere around the launch location, although how close, I'll never doubt it was far enough not to get caught up in the blast, perhaps in danger of falling bits if the thing exploded.
Presently, more wispy clouds and a failed radar system are plaguing a large but mostly harmless activity.
Personally, I think they should go ahead and launch it.
The amount of money wasted in the hundreds of people running amok in Florida is outstanding.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_0640213.29882309</id>
	<title>Tragically, We Cannot Afford This Now</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256649240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Flamebait</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Though I have always adored the thought and reality of space travel--this is just a luxury we cannot afford now. There is no <i>pressing problem</i> that would cause this need to travel to the Moon or Mars to occur.<br>
<br>
We have so many problems in the United States right now and I really don't see why this is necessary. Since this just recycles Space Shuttle technology, I don't see that this Ares I rocket represents any innovation that would justify the expense.<br>
<br>
Though I know all the Aerospace Engineers are going to hate me for killing off their jobs program, there are other scientific needs--such as the need to develop clean energy sources and stop global Climate Change in its tracks--that warrant priority over any dough we spend at NASA.<br>
<br>
<b>Example of International Space Station</b> <br>
Currently, for example, the ISS is slated to be decommissioned in a few short years. I ask you, what sort of great innovation has resulted from the ISS? I am hard-pressed to think of any great advances in knowledge that were not already known from by the time the cruddy but long-surviving MIR burned up in the atmosphere.<br>
<br>
Again, though I adore seeing these rockets take off and follow every STS-n mission with great interest, it's just a joyride and is not justified in a country like ours that is in danger of becoming a has-been global power.<br>
<br>
NASA should halt the Ares-I and, even more painful because it would have been the biggest rocket to date, the Ares V. They are boondoggles that do not solve a <b>pressing problem</b>.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Though I have always adored the thought and reality of space travel--this is just a luxury we can not afford now .
There is no pressing problem that would cause this need to travel to the Moon or Mars to occur .
We have so many problems in the United States right now and I really do n't see why this is necessary .
Since this just recycles Space Shuttle technology , I do n't see that this Ares I rocket represents any innovation that would justify the expense .
Though I know all the Aerospace Engineers are going to hate me for killing off their jobs program , there are other scientific needs--such as the need to develop clean energy sources and stop global Climate Change in its tracks--that warrant priority over any dough we spend at NASA .
Example of International Space Station Currently , for example , the ISS is slated to be decommissioned in a few short years .
I ask you , what sort of great innovation has resulted from the ISS ?
I am hard-pressed to think of any great advances in knowledge that were not already known from by the time the cruddy but long-surviving MIR burned up in the atmosphere .
Again , though I adore seeing these rockets take off and follow every STS-n mission with great interest , it 's just a joyride and is not justified in a country like ours that is in danger of becoming a has-been global power .
NASA should halt the Ares-I and , even more painful because it would have been the biggest rocket to date , the Ares V. They are boondoggles that do not solve a pressing problem .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Though I have always adored the thought and reality of space travel--this is just a luxury we cannot afford now.
There is no pressing problem that would cause this need to travel to the Moon or Mars to occur.
We have so many problems in the United States right now and I really don't see why this is necessary.
Since this just recycles Space Shuttle technology, I don't see that this Ares I rocket represents any innovation that would justify the expense.
Though I know all the Aerospace Engineers are going to hate me for killing off their jobs program, there are other scientific needs--such as the need to develop clean energy sources and stop global Climate Change in its tracks--that warrant priority over any dough we spend at NASA.
Example of International Space Station 
Currently, for example, the ISS is slated to be decommissioned in a few short years.
I ask you, what sort of great innovation has resulted from the ISS?
I am hard-pressed to think of any great advances in knowledge that were not already known from by the time the cruddy but long-surviving MIR burned up in the atmosphere.
Again, though I adore seeing these rockets take off and follow every STS-n mission with great interest, it's just a joyride and is not justified in a country like ours that is in danger of becoming a has-been global power.
NASA should halt the Ares-I and, even more painful because it would have been the biggest rocket to date, the Ares V. They are boondoggles that do not solve a pressing problem.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_0640213.29883137</id>
	<title>Re:More NasaTV Feeds and launch data</title>
	<author>zrq</author>
	<datestamp>1256654820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Is anyone else having problems with these feeds on Linux with VLC ?</p><p>The 200k/s Windows Media stream seems to work ok, but the higher resolution streams just display a few frames of video and then lock up.</p><p>The Real Media stream only provides audio, but it seems to be at about 60 seconds ahead of the Windows Media streams.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Is anyone else having problems with these feeds on Linux with VLC ? The 200k/s Windows Media stream seems to work ok , but the higher resolution streams just display a few frames of video and then lock up.The Real Media stream only provides audio , but it seems to be at about 60 seconds ahead of the Windows Media streams .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Is anyone else having problems with these feeds on Linux with VLC ?The 200k/s Windows Media stream seems to work ok, but the higher resolution streams just display a few frames of video and then lock up.The Real Media stream only provides audio, but it seems to be at about 60 seconds ahead of the Windows Media streams.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_0640213.29881923</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_0640213.29881719</id>
	<title>Awesome</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256638440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This is awesome. It shows that the US is still number one, and that all you haters don't know what you are talking about. And btw. Obama didn't start Ares, Bush did.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This is awesome .
It shows that the US is still number one , and that all you haters do n't know what you are talking about .
And btw .
Obama did n't start Ares , Bush did .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is awesome.
It shows that the US is still number one, and that all you haters don't know what you are talking about.
And btw.
Obama didn't start Ares, Bush did.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_0640213.29884283</id>
	<title>Re:Tragically, We Cannot Afford This Now</title>
	<author>demachina</author>
	<datestamp>1256660520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"stop global Climate Change"</p><p>Only case I can make for manned space flight is for when the fossil fuels lobbies in the U.S. or China kill any effective caps on carbon emissions, we eventually hit a tipping point in CO2 levels and the runaway green house effect starts. Then there would be a compelling case for having a colony on Mars to keep our species alive when we make Earth uninhabitable.  Of course as badly as our species is botching this planet not sure we deserve the reprieve.  Its become pretty clear the intense greed in our species is a fatal flaw in our evolutionary development that needs to be eliminated by natural selection.  Greed is a desirable trait for motivation but its become clear in our species it drives people to indulge in pathological behavior with complete disregard for the long term consquences of short term gains.   Let's just hope that enough other species survive that evolution can start over on Earth, and in a few hundred million years plants will have sequestered enough CO2 to return the planet to stability and new intelligent life forms develop that don't suck as bad as homo sapiens.</p><p>The only other rationale for manned space exploration is it does restore a sense of adventure and frontiers to conqueror which is something our species has always had until the last century, and life is a little bleak when we become rutted as a species.  There are no longer any frontiers on this planet with the possible exception of the deep oceans.  Of course NASA in particular has turned the manned space program in to such a complete yawner no one believes they will break through any frontiers if you did give them the funding.  Robotic spacecraft are the only ones breaking frontiers at this point so they deserve the money until you are going to commit to colonizing Mars.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" stop global Climate Change " Only case I can make for manned space flight is for when the fossil fuels lobbies in the U.S. or China kill any effective caps on carbon emissions , we eventually hit a tipping point in CO2 levels and the runaway green house effect starts .
Then there would be a compelling case for having a colony on Mars to keep our species alive when we make Earth uninhabitable .
Of course as badly as our species is botching this planet not sure we deserve the reprieve .
Its become pretty clear the intense greed in our species is a fatal flaw in our evolutionary development that needs to be eliminated by natural selection .
Greed is a desirable trait for motivation but its become clear in our species it drives people to indulge in pathological behavior with complete disregard for the long term consquences of short term gains .
Let 's just hope that enough other species survive that evolution can start over on Earth , and in a few hundred million years plants will have sequestered enough CO2 to return the planet to stability and new intelligent life forms develop that do n't suck as bad as homo sapiens.The only other rationale for manned space exploration is it does restore a sense of adventure and frontiers to conqueror which is something our species has always had until the last century , and life is a little bleak when we become rutted as a species .
There are no longer any frontiers on this planet with the possible exception of the deep oceans .
Of course NASA in particular has turned the manned space program in to such a complete yawner no one believes they will break through any frontiers if you did give them the funding .
Robotic spacecraft are the only ones breaking frontiers at this point so they deserve the money until you are going to commit to colonizing Mars .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"stop global Climate Change"Only case I can make for manned space flight is for when the fossil fuels lobbies in the U.S. or China kill any effective caps on carbon emissions, we eventually hit a tipping point in CO2 levels and the runaway green house effect starts.
Then there would be a compelling case for having a colony on Mars to keep our species alive when we make Earth uninhabitable.
Of course as badly as our species is botching this planet not sure we deserve the reprieve.
Its become pretty clear the intense greed in our species is a fatal flaw in our evolutionary development that needs to be eliminated by natural selection.
Greed is a desirable trait for motivation but its become clear in our species it drives people to indulge in pathological behavior with complete disregard for the long term consquences of short term gains.
Let's just hope that enough other species survive that evolution can start over on Earth, and in a few hundred million years plants will have sequestered enough CO2 to return the planet to stability and new intelligent life forms develop that don't suck as bad as homo sapiens.The only other rationale for manned space exploration is it does restore a sense of adventure and frontiers to conqueror which is something our species has always had until the last century, and life is a little bleak when we become rutted as a species.
There are no longer any frontiers on this planet with the possible exception of the deep oceans.
Of course NASA in particular has turned the manned space program in to such a complete yawner no one believes they will break through any frontiers if you did give them the funding.
Robotic spacecraft are the only ones breaking frontiers at this point so they deserve the money until you are going to commit to colonizing Mars.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_0640213.29882309</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_0640213.29882319</id>
	<title>Re:Number one in what exactly?</title>
	<author>damburger</author>
	<datestamp>1256649360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>SpaceX is yet to really prove themselves as a launch company, let alone Armadillo. You want a low-cost heavy lift launch, you go to Russia and buy a Proton, simple as that.</htmltext>
<tokenext>SpaceX is yet to really prove themselves as a launch company , let alone Armadillo .
You want a low-cost heavy lift launch , you go to Russia and buy a Proton , simple as that .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>SpaceX is yet to really prove themselves as a launch company, let alone Armadillo.
You want a low-cost heavy lift launch, you go to Russia and buy a Proton, simple as that.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_0640213.29882153</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_0640213.29886069</id>
	<title>Re:Solid Rocket Vibrations Are Not Pogo</title>
	<author>jstults</author>
	<datestamp>1256668260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>You might want to read up on the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ares\_I#Upper\_stage" title="wikipedia.org" rel="nofollow">Ares I</a> [wikipedia.org] and note that is has a <i>liquid</i> second stage.</p></div><p>I'm curious, by what mechanism would the liquid propellant in the *second stage* have any positive feedback (not damping) to thrust oscillations in the *first stage*?

</p><p>The reason longitudinal oscillations (call them what you like) can be really huge in a liquid is because of the positive feedback loop in which a thrust oscillation causes a reinforcing change in the inlet pressure of the pumps, this mechanism does not exist in a solid; that was my only point.

</p><p>I guess I just disagree that 'any longitudinal vibration is pogo'.  YMMV.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>You might want to read up on the Ares I [ wikipedia.org ] and note that is has a liquid second stage.I 'm curious , by what mechanism would the liquid propellant in the * second stage * have any positive feedback ( not damping ) to thrust oscillations in the * first stage * ?
The reason longitudinal oscillations ( call them what you like ) can be really huge in a liquid is because of the positive feedback loop in which a thrust oscillation causes a reinforcing change in the inlet pressure of the pumps , this mechanism does not exist in a solid ; that was my only point .
I guess I just disagree that 'any longitudinal vibration is pogo' .
YMMV .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You might want to read up on the Ares I [wikipedia.org] and note that is has a liquid second stage.I'm curious, by what mechanism would the liquid propellant in the *second stage* have any positive feedback (not damping) to thrust oscillations in the *first stage*?
The reason longitudinal oscillations (call them what you like) can be really huge in a liquid is because of the positive feedback loop in which a thrust oscillation causes a reinforcing change in the inlet pressure of the pumps, this mechanism does not exist in a solid; that was my only point.
I guess I just disagree that 'any longitudinal vibration is pogo'.
YMMV.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_0640213.29884983</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_0640213.29897307</id>
	<title>Re:Scrub</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256744760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Few minutes for launch, get your seats!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Few minutes for launch , get your seats !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Few minutes for launch, get your seats!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_0640213.29884271</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_0640213.29883803</id>
	<title>Re:Solid Rocket Vibrations Are Not Pogo</title>
	<author>jggimi</author>
	<datestamp>1256658240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p> <i>feedback / resonance of thrust oscillations</i></p></div> </blockquote><p>Wouldn't NASA's ocillation overthruster would handle the feedback.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>feedback / resonance of thrust oscillations Would n't NASA 's ocillation overthruster would handle the feedback .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> feedback / resonance of thrust oscillations Wouldn't NASA's ocillation overthruster would handle the feedback.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_0640213.29882281</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_0640213.29887749</id>
	<title>Re:What is the point?</title>
	<author>EvilBudMan</author>
	<datestamp>1256675400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>A great deal of their budget goes for aeronautics. In that part, there is a great deal that they have done that affects us but it's not publicized much at all.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>A great deal of their budget goes for aeronautics .
In that part , there is a great deal that they have done that affects us but it 's not publicized much at all .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>A great deal of their budget goes for aeronautics.
In that part, there is a great deal that they have done that affects us but it's not publicized much at all.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_0640213.29884065</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_0640213.29884983</id>
	<title>Re:Solid Rocket Vibrations Are Not Pogo</title>
	<author>DerekLyons</author>
	<datestamp>1256663640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>The vibrations that are commonly called 'pogo' in big rockets are caused by a feedback / resonance of thrust oscillations with inlet pressure of the turbopumps</p></div></blockquote><p>Pogo is any oscillation along the vehicle's longitudinal thrust/flight axis.  It's most familiar form is caused by interactions with liquid fuel, but that's a specific case not the general one.<br>
&nbsp; <br>Pogo in solids attracts much less attention because either the solids are attached to a liquid fueled rocket (and the Pogo is damped in the liquid fuel system) or they are part of a big military rocket, which the general public as well as many space experts are largely unfamiliar with.<br>
&nbsp; <br>
&nbsp; </p><blockquote><div><p>Ares I, like every big solid, has combustion instabilities that cause thrust oscillations, but there's no feedback like in a liquid rocket.</p></div></blockquote><p>You might want to read up on the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ares\_I#Upper\_stage" title="wikipedia.org">Ares I</a> [wikipedia.org] and note that is has a <i>liquid</i> second stage.<br>
&nbsp; <br>On top of that, vibrations caused by combustion instabilities occur along all vehicle axes - including the longitudinal (I.E. the 'pogo' axis).  Which means you can also get feedback by having combustion instability induced vibrations at a frequency that matches a structural resonance frequency - the same failure mode that destroyed the original <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tacoma\_Narrows\_Bridge#Galloping\_Gertie" title="wikipedia.org">Tacoma Narrows Bridge</a> [wikipedia.org].</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>The vibrations that are commonly called 'pogo ' in big rockets are caused by a feedback / resonance of thrust oscillations with inlet pressure of the turbopumpsPogo is any oscillation along the vehicle 's longitudinal thrust/flight axis .
It 's most familiar form is caused by interactions with liquid fuel , but that 's a specific case not the general one .
  Pogo in solids attracts much less attention because either the solids are attached to a liquid fueled rocket ( and the Pogo is damped in the liquid fuel system ) or they are part of a big military rocket , which the general public as well as many space experts are largely unfamiliar with .
    Ares I , like every big solid , has combustion instabilities that cause thrust oscillations , but there 's no feedback like in a liquid rocket.You might want to read up on the Ares I [ wikipedia.org ] and note that is has a liquid second stage .
  On top of that , vibrations caused by combustion instabilities occur along all vehicle axes - including the longitudinal ( I.E .
the 'pogo ' axis ) .
Which means you can also get feedback by having combustion instability induced vibrations at a frequency that matches a structural resonance frequency - the same failure mode that destroyed the original Tacoma Narrows Bridge [ wikipedia.org ] .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The vibrations that are commonly called 'pogo' in big rockets are caused by a feedback / resonance of thrust oscillations with inlet pressure of the turbopumpsPogo is any oscillation along the vehicle's longitudinal thrust/flight axis.
It's most familiar form is caused by interactions with liquid fuel, but that's a specific case not the general one.
  Pogo in solids attracts much less attention because either the solids are attached to a liquid fueled rocket (and the Pogo is damped in the liquid fuel system) or they are part of a big military rocket, which the general public as well as many space experts are largely unfamiliar with.
  
  Ares I, like every big solid, has combustion instabilities that cause thrust oscillations, but there's no feedback like in a liquid rocket.You might want to read up on the Ares I [wikipedia.org] and note that is has a liquid second stage.
  On top of that, vibrations caused by combustion instabilities occur along all vehicle axes - including the longitudinal (I.E.
the 'pogo' axis).
Which means you can also get feedback by having combustion instability induced vibrations at a frequency that matches a structural resonance frequency - the same failure mode that destroyed the original Tacoma Narrows Bridge [wikipedia.org].
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_0640213.29882281</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_0640213.29882733</id>
	<title>Re:What is the point?</title>
	<author>icebrain</author>
	<datestamp>1256652480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Well, Delta and Atlas don't keep former shuttle employees busy.  And everyone knows that reusing large components of something entirely different will make the end result cheaper... because you never have to do rework and the reused components are always optimal for the design.</p><p>Oh, I'm sorry, I'll wipe up the extra sarcasm I spilled there...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Well , Delta and Atlas do n't keep former shuttle employees busy .
And everyone knows that reusing large components of something entirely different will make the end result cheaper... because you never have to do rework and the reused components are always optimal for the design.Oh , I 'm sorry , I 'll wipe up the extra sarcasm I spilled there.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Well, Delta and Atlas don't keep former shuttle employees busy.
And everyone knows that reusing large components of something entirely different will make the end result cheaper... because you never have to do rework and the reused components are always optimal for the design.Oh, I'm sorry, I'll wipe up the extra sarcasm I spilled there...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_0640213.29882357</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_0640213.29886193</id>
	<title>Re:Question for those in-the-know</title>
	<author>camperdave</author>
	<datestamp>1256668920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I hope they do scrap it.  Take the $35+billion dollars it will take to develop this beast, and spend half of it getting DIRECT going, and spend the other half on actual science.  After all, why develop all new heavy lift vehicles when the STS system is working fine?  Just remove the orbiter, stick the engines on the bottom, and the payload on the top, and Go!</htmltext>
<tokenext>I hope they do scrap it .
Take the $ 35 + billion dollars it will take to develop this beast , and spend half of it getting DIRECT going , and spend the other half on actual science .
After all , why develop all new heavy lift vehicles when the STS system is working fine ?
Just remove the orbiter , stick the engines on the bottom , and the payload on the top , and Go !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I hope they do scrap it.
Take the $35+billion dollars it will take to develop this beast, and spend half of it getting DIRECT going, and spend the other half on actual science.
After all, why develop all new heavy lift vehicles when the STS system is working fine?
Just remove the orbiter, stick the engines on the bottom, and the payload on the top, and Go!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_0640213.29881983</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_0640213.29882723</id>
	<title>Re:Question for those in-the-know</title>
	<author>Geoffrey.landis</author>
	<datestamp>1256652480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>What is going to happen with the Ares V? I heard rumors about it being scrapped. I hope they were wrong?</p></div><p>No decisions as yet.  Stay tuned.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>What is going to happen with the Ares V ?
I heard rumors about it being scrapped .
I hope they were wrong ? No decisions as yet .
Stay tuned .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What is going to happen with the Ares V?
I heard rumors about it being scrapped.
I hope they were wrong?No decisions as yet.
Stay tuned.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_0640213.29881983</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_0640213.29884921</id>
	<title>Re:Number one in what exactly?</title>
	<author>DynaSoar</author>
	<datestamp>1256663340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>[Accurate design observations not quoted]</p><p><div class="quote"><p>Or am I a 'hater' because I a a little sceptic about this project of NASA because you cannot understand discourse? Personally, I am much more impressed with SpaceX and Armadillo, who seem to come up with nice projects for much less money. Wasn't there a new SpaceX big rocket on the launchpad soon?</p></div><p>I'm much more impressed with the others also. However, Ares was never intended to be a 'new' vehicle. It was NASA's own call for proposals that specified the designs for the new vehicle be based as much as possible on existing designs and preferably existing hardware. When von Braun did this with Redstones and came up with the Saturn 1 booster he was called a genius and everyone remembers him for it. When NASA proposed and got a repeat based on shuttle parts everyone's critical and if they were ever aware of the fact this was a redesign project from the start, they apparently can't remember.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>[ Accurate design observations not quoted ] Or am I a 'hater ' because I a a little sceptic about this project of NASA because you can not understand discourse ?
Personally , I am much more impressed with SpaceX and Armadillo , who seem to come up with nice projects for much less money .
Was n't there a new SpaceX big rocket on the launchpad soon ? I 'm much more impressed with the others also .
However , Ares was never intended to be a 'new ' vehicle .
It was NASA 's own call for proposals that specified the designs for the new vehicle be based as much as possible on existing designs and preferably existing hardware .
When von Braun did this with Redstones and came up with the Saturn 1 booster he was called a genius and everyone remembers him for it .
When NASA proposed and got a repeat based on shuttle parts everyone 's critical and if they were ever aware of the fact this was a redesign project from the start , they apparently ca n't remember .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>[Accurate design observations not quoted]Or am I a 'hater' because I a a little sceptic about this project of NASA because you cannot understand discourse?
Personally, I am much more impressed with SpaceX and Armadillo, who seem to come up with nice projects for much less money.
Wasn't there a new SpaceX big rocket on the launchpad soon?I'm much more impressed with the others also.
However, Ares was never intended to be a 'new' vehicle.
It was NASA's own call for proposals that specified the designs for the new vehicle be based as much as possible on existing designs and preferably existing hardware.
When von Braun did this with Redstones and came up with the Saturn 1 booster he was called a genius and everyone remembers him for it.
When NASA proposed and got a repeat based on shuttle parts everyone's critical and if they were ever aware of the fact this was a redesign project from the start, they apparently can't remember.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_0640213.29882153</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_0640213.29882999</id>
	<title>Delayed to 9:44 EDT</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256654100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>As I write, delayed till 9:44 EDT</htmltext>
<tokenext>As I write , delayed till 9 : 44 EDT</tokentext>
<sentencetext>As I write, delayed till 9:44 EDT</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_0640213.29884271</id>
	<title>Scrub</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256660460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>Launch scrub for today due to weather.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Launch scrub for today due to weather .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Launch scrub for today due to weather.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_0640213.29882999</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_0640213.29891719</id>
	<title>Re:What is the point?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256649840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I used to work on the SRM at what was then Thiokol, and the plant at Missippi would have been a disaster.  It wasn't just building it somewhere else - it was building an entirely new design by folks who'd not build such large motors, untried production techniques (like monolithic casting), new igniters that had a tendancy to explode instead of start the motor...</p><p>Switching to a wider diameter motor would have dictated redesigning the Shuttle and the launch pads - that was never in the works, just transferring jobs from Utah to Missippi.</p><p>Solids are easy to make, extremely reliable, and produce a lot of thrust.  Just don't ride alongside of one, or expect to be able to throttle it.  I was very happy to see NASA put the astronauts on top of things with an ejection system (which, by the way is also powered by solid rockets, also by ATK) for safety.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I used to work on the SRM at what was then Thiokol , and the plant at Missippi would have been a disaster .
It was n't just building it somewhere else - it was building an entirely new design by folks who 'd not build such large motors , untried production techniques ( like monolithic casting ) , new igniters that had a tendancy to explode instead of start the motor...Switching to a wider diameter motor would have dictated redesigning the Shuttle and the launch pads - that was never in the works , just transferring jobs from Utah to Missippi.Solids are easy to make , extremely reliable , and produce a lot of thrust .
Just do n't ride alongside of one , or expect to be able to throttle it .
I was very happy to see NASA put the astronauts on top of things with an ejection system ( which , by the way is also powered by solid rockets , also by ATK ) for safety .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I used to work on the SRM at what was then Thiokol, and the plant at Missippi would have been a disaster.
It wasn't just building it somewhere else - it was building an entirely new design by folks who'd not build such large motors, untried production techniques (like monolithic casting), new igniters that had a tendancy to explode instead of start the motor...Switching to a wider diameter motor would have dictated redesigning the Shuttle and the launch pads - that was never in the works, just transferring jobs from Utah to Missippi.Solids are easy to make, extremely reliable, and produce a lot of thrust.
Just don't ride alongside of one, or expect to be able to throttle it.
I was very happy to see NASA put the astronauts on top of things with an ejection system (which, by the way is also powered by solid rockets, also by ATK) for safety.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_0640213.29884065</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_0640213.29887635</id>
	<title>Re:Solid Rocket Vibrations Are Not Pogo</title>
	<author>jstults</author>
	<datestamp>1256674920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Pogo is any oscillation along the vehicle's longitudinal thrust/flight axis.</p> </div><p> Not so, I <a href="http://j-stults.blogspot.com/2009/10/stick-does-not-pogo.html" title="blogspot.com" rel="nofollow">ripped some figures and a couple paragraphs</a> [blogspot.com] from a 1970 report on what pogo is and how to prevent it in case you are interested.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Pogo is any oscillation along the vehicle 's longitudinal thrust/flight axis .
Not so , I ripped some figures and a couple paragraphs [ blogspot.com ] from a 1970 report on what pogo is and how to prevent it in case you are interested .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Pogo is any oscillation along the vehicle's longitudinal thrust/flight axis.
Not so, I ripped some figures and a couple paragraphs [blogspot.com] from a 1970 report on what pogo is and how to prevent it in case you are interested.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_0640213.29884983</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_0640213.29883745</id>
	<title>Re:More NasaTV Feeds and launch data</title>
	<author>zrq</author>
	<datestamp>1256658060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>VLC 0.8.7 (Fedora 8) and VLC 1.0.2 (Fedora 11) both seem to be able to cope with the low bitrate Yahoo links.</p><p>I selected OpenNetworkStream from the File/Media menu and pasted the URL in the http stream box and VLC managed to decode the real stream URLs from the Yahoo links ok.<br>On the higher bitrate links both versions of VLC hang after a few frames.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>VLC 0.8.7 ( Fedora 8 ) and VLC 1.0.2 ( Fedora 11 ) both seem to be able to cope with the low bitrate Yahoo links.I selected OpenNetworkStream from the File/Media menu and pasted the URL in the http stream box and VLC managed to decode the real stream URLs from the Yahoo links ok.On the higher bitrate links both versions of VLC hang after a few frames .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>VLC 0.8.7 (Fedora 8) and VLC 1.0.2 (Fedora 11) both seem to be able to cope with the low bitrate Yahoo links.I selected OpenNetworkStream from the File/Media menu and pasted the URL in the http stream box and VLC managed to decode the real stream URLs from the Yahoo links ok.On the higher bitrate links both versions of VLC hang after a few frames.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_0640213.29883433</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_0640213.29881923</id>
	<title>More NasaTV Feeds and launch data</title>
	<author>agentgonzo</author>
	<datestamp>1256642280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>NasaTV Feeds at different resolutions:<br>
<a href="http://playlist.yahoo.com/makeplaylist.dll?id=1368161" title="yahoo.com">100k/s</a> [yahoo.com], 320/240<br>
<a href="http://playlist.yahoo.com/makeplaylist.dll?id=1368162" title="yahoo.com">200k/s</a> [yahoo.com], 320/240<br>
<a href="http://playlist.yahoo.com/makeplaylist.dll?id=1368570" title="yahoo.com">500k/s</a> [yahoo.com], 480x360(I think)<br>
<a href="http://playlist.yahoo.com/makeplaylist.dll?id=1368163" title="yahoo.com">1200k/s</a> [yahoo.com], 640/480<br>
All Windows Media format<br>
<br>
<a href="http://www.nasa.gov/ram/35037main\_portal.ram" title="nasa.gov">Real media format</a> [nasa.gov] <br>
<a href="http://www.nasa.gov/qtl/151335main\_NASA\_TV\_QT.qtl" title="nasa.gov">Quicktime</a> [nasa.gov] <br>
<br>
<a href="http://countdown.ksc.nasa.gov/elv/" title="nasa.gov">Launch data</a> [nasa.gov]</htmltext>
<tokenext>NasaTV Feeds at different resolutions : 100k/s [ yahoo.com ] , 320/240 200k/s [ yahoo.com ] , 320/240 500k/s [ yahoo.com ] , 480x360 ( I think ) 1200k/s [ yahoo.com ] , 640/480 All Windows Media format Real media format [ nasa.gov ] Quicktime [ nasa.gov ] Launch data [ nasa.gov ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>NasaTV Feeds at different resolutions:
100k/s [yahoo.com], 320/240
200k/s [yahoo.com], 320/240
500k/s [yahoo.com], 480x360(I think)
1200k/s [yahoo.com], 640/480
All Windows Media format

Real media format [nasa.gov] 
Quicktime [nasa.gov] 

Launch data [nasa.gov]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_0640213.29884073</id>
	<title>Re:Delayed to 9:44 EDT</title>
	<author>burisch\_research</author>
	<datestamp>1256659560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Go for launch, just waiting for weather window to open up. T-4 resume imminent.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Go for launch , just waiting for weather window to open up .
T-4 resume imminent .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Go for launch, just waiting for weather window to open up.
T-4 resume imminent.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_0640213.29882999</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_0640213.29886771</id>
	<title>Re:Tragically, We Cannot Afford This Now</title>
	<author>IndigoDarkwolf</author>
	<datestamp>1256671380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Only case I can make for manned space flight is for when [...] we eventually hit a tipping point in CO2 levels and the runaway green house effect starts.</p></div><p>You know, or the sun explodes. Granted, that's a ways off, but it's far more certain to occur regardless of human intervention.</p><p><div class="quote"><p>Of course as badly as our species is botching this planet not sure we deserve the reprieve.</p></div><p>That's why my proposed solution is to just nuke the entire planet from orbit. When we're as barren as the surface of Mars and our species is little more than a memory, we can stand assured that we will no longer be an ecological hazard.</p><p><div class="quote"><p>Let's just hope that enough other species survive that evolution can start over on Earth</p></div><p>...an asteroid the size of a football field wasn't able to kill off all of life, neither was the collision event scientists currently believe is ultimately responsible for the moon, in fact it seems life is extremely hardy and its ingredients are not only capable of surviving re-entry but some actually require impact energies to be formed...</p><p><div class="quote"><p>and in a few hundred million years</p></div><p>K-T boundary 'till ecological recovery was less than 50 million years...</p><p><div class="quote"><p>The only other rationale for manned space exploration is it does restore a sense of adventure and frontiers to conquer</p></div><p>History 101: Mankind's early ventures across the ocean were in search of unclaimed mineral wealth (read: GOLD).</p><p><div class="quote"><p>There are no longer any frontiers on this planet with the possible exception of the deep oceans.</p></div><p>Spelunkers would beg to differ.</p><p><div class="quote"><p>Of course NASA in particular has turned the manned space program in to such a complete yawner</p></div><p>No, the politicians and press did that after we beat the Russians to the moon, even before the Cold War had ended.</p><p><div class="quote"><p>no one believes</p></div><p>...except Slashdotters, amatuer astronomers, space fans, or and <i>scientists around the world</i> </p><p><div class="quote"><p>they will break through any frontiers if you did give them the funding.  Robotic spacecraft are the only ones breaking frontiers at this point</p></div><p>...Itself no small feat, though admittedly easier and less risky than sending living organisms...</p><p><div class="quote"><p>so they deserve the money until you are going to commit to colonizing Mars.</p></div><p>Well, I seem to recall that a recent U.S. president had tried to commit us to colonizing Mars within a few decades, but then some bad people ran a couple of airplanes into a few buildings, and things kind of went to shit and the Mars things got forgotten about.</p><p>If I had mod points, you'd totally be getting modded down.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Only case I can make for manned space flight is for when [ ... ] we eventually hit a tipping point in CO2 levels and the runaway green house effect starts.You know , or the sun explodes .
Granted , that 's a ways off , but it 's far more certain to occur regardless of human intervention.Of course as badly as our species is botching this planet not sure we deserve the reprieve.That 's why my proposed solution is to just nuke the entire planet from orbit .
When we 're as barren as the surface of Mars and our species is little more than a memory , we can stand assured that we will no longer be an ecological hazard.Let 's just hope that enough other species survive that evolution can start over on Earth...an asteroid the size of a football field was n't able to kill off all of life , neither was the collision event scientists currently believe is ultimately responsible for the moon , in fact it seems life is extremely hardy and its ingredients are not only capable of surviving re-entry but some actually require impact energies to be formed...and in a few hundred million yearsK-T boundary 'till ecological recovery was less than 50 million years...The only other rationale for manned space exploration is it does restore a sense of adventure and frontiers to conquerHistory 101 : Mankind 's early ventures across the ocean were in search of unclaimed mineral wealth ( read : GOLD ) .There are no longer any frontiers on this planet with the possible exception of the deep oceans.Spelunkers would beg to differ.Of course NASA in particular has turned the manned space program in to such a complete yawnerNo , the politicians and press did that after we beat the Russians to the moon , even before the Cold War had ended.no one believes...except Slashdotters , amatuer astronomers , space fans , or and scientists around the world they will break through any frontiers if you did give them the funding .
Robotic spacecraft are the only ones breaking frontiers at this point...Itself no small feat , though admittedly easier and less risky than sending living organisms...so they deserve the money until you are going to commit to colonizing Mars.Well , I seem to recall that a recent U.S. president had tried to commit us to colonizing Mars within a few decades , but then some bad people ran a couple of airplanes into a few buildings , and things kind of went to shit and the Mars things got forgotten about.If I had mod points , you 'd totally be getting modded down .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Only case I can make for manned space flight is for when [...] we eventually hit a tipping point in CO2 levels and the runaway green house effect starts.You know, or the sun explodes.
Granted, that's a ways off, but it's far more certain to occur regardless of human intervention.Of course as badly as our species is botching this planet not sure we deserve the reprieve.That's why my proposed solution is to just nuke the entire planet from orbit.
When we're as barren as the surface of Mars and our species is little more than a memory, we can stand assured that we will no longer be an ecological hazard.Let's just hope that enough other species survive that evolution can start over on Earth...an asteroid the size of a football field wasn't able to kill off all of life, neither was the collision event scientists currently believe is ultimately responsible for the moon, in fact it seems life is extremely hardy and its ingredients are not only capable of surviving re-entry but some actually require impact energies to be formed...and in a few hundred million yearsK-T boundary 'till ecological recovery was less than 50 million years...The only other rationale for manned space exploration is it does restore a sense of adventure and frontiers to conquerHistory 101: Mankind's early ventures across the ocean were in search of unclaimed mineral wealth (read: GOLD).There are no longer any frontiers on this planet with the possible exception of the deep oceans.Spelunkers would beg to differ.Of course NASA in particular has turned the manned space program in to such a complete yawnerNo, the politicians and press did that after we beat the Russians to the moon, even before the Cold War had ended.no one believes...except Slashdotters, amatuer astronomers, space fans, or and scientists around the world they will break through any frontiers if you did give them the funding.
Robotic spacecraft are the only ones breaking frontiers at this point...Itself no small feat, though admittedly easier and less risky than sending living organisms...so they deserve the money until you are going to commit to colonizing Mars.Well, I seem to recall that a recent U.S. president had tried to commit us to colonizing Mars within a few decades, but then some bad people ran a couple of airplanes into a few buildings, and things kind of went to shit and the Mars things got forgotten about.If I had mod points, you'd totally be getting modded down.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_0640213.29884283</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_0640213.29881723</id>
	<title>Vibrations</title>
	<author>hyperion2010</author>
	<datestamp>1256638560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>As long as they are good....</p><p>Query: are rockets spaceships and if so are they female like normal ships?  They've always seemed a bit to... phallic and gaseous to be female.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>As long as they are good....Query : are rockets spaceships and if so are they female like normal ships ?
They 've always seemed a bit to... phallic and gaseous to be female .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>As long as they are good....Query: are rockets spaceships and if so are they female like normal ships?
They've always seemed a bit to... phallic and gaseous to be female.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_0640213.29881801</id>
	<title>Re:Vibrations</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256640060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>They explode easily, so they are female.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>They explode easily , so they are female .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They explode easily, so they are female.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_0640213.29881723</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_0640213.29883037</id>
	<title>Re:Tragically, We Cannot Afford This Now</title>
	<author>damburger</author>
	<datestamp>1256654280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Considering the banks here in the UK alone received &pound;1 trillion, the amount spent on a space program is a drop in the ocean and is frankly spent in a far more responsible manner (rather than give greedy sociopathic bankers massive bonuses despite the fact they fucked us all).</htmltext>
<tokenext>Considering the banks here in the UK alone received   1 trillion , the amount spent on a space program is a drop in the ocean and is frankly spent in a far more responsible manner ( rather than give greedy sociopathic bankers massive bonuses despite the fact they fucked us all ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Considering the banks here in the UK alone received £1 trillion, the amount spent on a space program is a drop in the ocean and is frankly spent in a far more responsible manner (rather than give greedy sociopathic bankers massive bonuses despite the fact they fucked us all).</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_0640213.29882309</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_0640213.29885087</id>
	<title>Re:What is the point?</title>
	<author>DynaSoar</author>
	<datestamp>1256664240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Why is NASA so bent on using the solid-fuel boosters, when the military already has the much cheaper Delta iV Heavy and Atlas V rockets that have been proven?</p></div><p>The military doesn't 'have' those boosters. They buy those boosters from Douglas and Lockheed Martin respectively, as NASA could (and has for other programs). The distinction is minor, but the accusations and criticisms continually leveled often hang on this too often repeated error that started out as an intentional misdirection by critics with no cleaner agenda than what NASA and Morton Thiokol are credited with having.</p><p>Similarly the answer to 'why' is a matter of public record, as the entire process was publicly announced and conducted. If the news media is to cumbersome to sift through, very even handed summaries are available at <a href="http://www.astronautix.com/" title="astronautix.com">http://www.astronautix.com/</a> [astronautix.com]</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Why is NASA so bent on using the solid-fuel boosters , when the military already has the much cheaper Delta iV Heavy and Atlas V rockets that have been proven ? The military does n't 'have ' those boosters .
They buy those boosters from Douglas and Lockheed Martin respectively , as NASA could ( and has for other programs ) .
The distinction is minor , but the accusations and criticisms continually leveled often hang on this too often repeated error that started out as an intentional misdirection by critics with no cleaner agenda than what NASA and Morton Thiokol are credited with having.Similarly the answer to 'why ' is a matter of public record , as the entire process was publicly announced and conducted .
If the news media is to cumbersome to sift through , very even handed summaries are available at http : //www.astronautix.com/ [ astronautix.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Why is NASA so bent on using the solid-fuel boosters, when the military already has the much cheaper Delta iV Heavy and Atlas V rockets that have been proven?The military doesn't 'have' those boosters.
They buy those boosters from Douglas and Lockheed Martin respectively, as NASA could (and has for other programs).
The distinction is minor, but the accusations and criticisms continually leveled often hang on this too often repeated error that started out as an intentional misdirection by critics with no cleaner agenda than what NASA and Morton Thiokol are credited with having.Similarly the answer to 'why' is a matter of public record, as the entire process was publicly announced and conducted.
If the news media is to cumbersome to sift through, very even handed summaries are available at http://www.astronautix.com/ [astronautix.com]
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_0640213.29882357</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_0640213.29884909</id>
	<title>Re:Tragically, We Cannot Afford This Now</title>
	<author>daid303</author>
	<datestamp>1256663340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>What's a more pressing problem then the human race getting fried by the sun in about 5 billion years?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>What 's a more pressing problem then the human race getting fried by the sun in about 5 billion years ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What's a more pressing problem then the human race getting fried by the sun in about 5 billion years?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_0640213.29882309</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_0640213.29881863</id>
	<title>Rockets are impressive, but the VAB is insane</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256641200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>I'm watching the stream now of them assembling the Ares and I must say the VAB is the most impressive building I've ever seen. I got to tour the inside (way back in the early 90s) and the amount of empty space available, inside a building that can withstand hurricane force winds. It is truly mind-boggling.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm watching the stream now of them assembling the Ares and I must say the VAB is the most impressive building I 've ever seen .
I got to tour the inside ( way back in the early 90s ) and the amount of empty space available , inside a building that can withstand hurricane force winds .
It is truly mind-boggling .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm watching the stream now of them assembling the Ares and I must say the VAB is the most impressive building I've ever seen.
I got to tour the inside (way back in the early 90s) and the amount of empty space available, inside a building that can withstand hurricane force winds.
It is truly mind-boggling.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_0640213.29884143</id>
	<title>Re:Tragically, We Cannot Afford This Now</title>
	<author>Gulthek</author>
	<datestamp>1256659860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Nothing would speed our journey to becoming a has-been superpower faster than the cessation of government funding for scientific research. Especially critical is government funding of pure research: that is, research that has no immediate and obvious commercial benefit. Even if you think that space exploration/research is a luxury you should argue for doing as much of it as possible to keep our science on the cutting (leading) edge.</p><p>Of course, if you think that space is a luxury with no benefit then you are, simply, either woefully underinformed or an idiot. Weather satellites, NASA's projects have directly led to the creation of dozens of industries that have revolutionized the world. <a href="http://er.jsc.nasa.gov/seh/spinoff.html" title="nasa.gov">http://er.jsc.nasa.gov/seh/spinoff.html</a> [nasa.gov]</p><p>Science is what catapulted us to being the dominate superpower. Applied science is money today, pure science is money tomorrow. We can't afford to cut any of it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Nothing would speed our journey to becoming a has-been superpower faster than the cessation of government funding for scientific research .
Especially critical is government funding of pure research : that is , research that has no immediate and obvious commercial benefit .
Even if you think that space exploration/research is a luxury you should argue for doing as much of it as possible to keep our science on the cutting ( leading ) edge.Of course , if you think that space is a luxury with no benefit then you are , simply , either woefully underinformed or an idiot .
Weather satellites , NASA 's projects have directly led to the creation of dozens of industries that have revolutionized the world .
http : //er.jsc.nasa.gov/seh/spinoff.html [ nasa.gov ] Science is what catapulted us to being the dominate superpower .
Applied science is money today , pure science is money tomorrow .
We ca n't afford to cut any of it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Nothing would speed our journey to becoming a has-been superpower faster than the cessation of government funding for scientific research.
Especially critical is government funding of pure research: that is, research that has no immediate and obvious commercial benefit.
Even if you think that space exploration/research is a luxury you should argue for doing as much of it as possible to keep our science on the cutting (leading) edge.Of course, if you think that space is a luxury with no benefit then you are, simply, either woefully underinformed or an idiot.
Weather satellites, NASA's projects have directly led to the creation of dozens of industries that have revolutionized the world.
http://er.jsc.nasa.gov/seh/spinoff.html [nasa.gov]Science is what catapulted us to being the dominate superpower.
Applied science is money today, pure science is money tomorrow.
We can't afford to cut any of it.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_0640213.29882309</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_0640213.29886309</id>
	<title>Re:What is the point?</title>
	<author>recharged95</author>
	<datestamp>1256669580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><i>"As of noon Monday it appeared that there was a 60\% chance of showers and/or high altitude clouds interfering." </i>
<br>

<i>"It certainly would have been better if NASA could have finished the SRB facility in Mississippi,"</i>
<br>

<br>

Or better yet, just move <b>everything</b> into the desert (or NM's new spaceport) and have places/spaces to build it correctly and without freaking weather issues.
<br>
<br>
If the gov't space program dies, we can blame everything on the politicans involved. Pure political fiasco. "Hi Mr. Engineer, I want to build rockets in illogical areas and launch in high risk areas, just so I can move $$ to my state"...</htmltext>
<tokenext>" As of noon Monday it appeared that there was a 60 \ % chance of showers and/or high altitude clouds interfering .
" " It certainly would have been better if NASA could have finished the SRB facility in Mississippi , " Or better yet , just move everything into the desert ( or NM 's new spaceport ) and have places/spaces to build it correctly and without freaking weather issues .
If the gov't space program dies , we can blame everything on the politicans involved .
Pure political fiasco .
" Hi Mr. Engineer , I want to build rockets in illogical areas and launch in high risk areas , just so I can move $ $ to my state " .. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"As of noon Monday it appeared that there was a 60\% chance of showers and/or high altitude clouds interfering.
" 


"It certainly would have been better if NASA could have finished the SRB facility in Mississippi,"




Or better yet, just move everything into the desert (or NM's new spaceport) and have places/spaces to build it correctly and without freaking weather issues.
If the gov't space program dies, we can blame everything on the politicans involved.
Pure political fiasco.
"Hi Mr. Engineer, I want to build rockets in illogical areas and launch in high risk areas, just so I can move $$ to my state"...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_0640213.29884065</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_0640213.29882351</id>
	<title>Re:Awesome</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256649840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>&gt;And btw. Obama didn't start Ares, Bush did.</p><p>Oh come on. Bush could find his own arse in the dark.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>&gt; And btw .
Obama did n't start Ares , Bush did.Oh come on .
Bush could find his own arse in the dark .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>&gt;And btw.
Obama didn't start Ares, Bush did.Oh come on.
Bush could find his own arse in the dark.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_0640213.29881719</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_0640213.29882929</id>
	<title>Re:Awesome</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256653680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>There's nothing like a giant phallic symbol shot into space to prove your superiority, is there?</htmltext>
<tokenext>There 's nothing like a giant phallic symbol shot into space to prove your superiority , is there ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There's nothing like a giant phallic symbol shot into space to prove your superiority, is there?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_0640213.29881719</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_0640213.29885431</id>
	<title>Re:What is the point?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256665740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>IIRC, neither the Delta IV nor the Atlas V are currently human rated, though they have the potential to be.  This would take more time and money, and the SSRB's have a pretty good track record, with dozens of launches with only a single failure (due in part to it being used outside it's spec range).</p><p>I think reusing the SSRB's in this manner is actually a pretty smart idea.  There's a lot of infrastructure already in place to support them that would be costly to build to suit the other rockets.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>IIRC , neither the Delta IV nor the Atlas V are currently human rated , though they have the potential to be .
This would take more time and money , and the SSRB 's have a pretty good track record , with dozens of launches with only a single failure ( due in part to it being used outside it 's spec range ) .I think reusing the SSRB 's in this manner is actually a pretty smart idea .
There 's a lot of infrastructure already in place to support them that would be costly to build to suit the other rockets .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>IIRC, neither the Delta IV nor the Atlas V are currently human rated, though they have the potential to be.
This would take more time and money, and the SSRB's have a pretty good track record, with dozens of launches with only a single failure (due in part to it being used outside it's spec range).I think reusing the SSRB's in this manner is actually a pretty smart idea.
There's a lot of infrastructure already in place to support them that would be costly to build to suit the other rockets.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_0640213.29882357</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_0640213.29883433</id>
	<title>Re:More NasaTV Feeds and launch data</title>
	<author>burisch\_research</author>
	<datestamp>1256656440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Can somebody provide direct links to the media streams, especially lower bitrates? The yahoo links above seem to insist on playing only in the browser. I'd rather be using VLC. I'm in Johannesburg, and my bandwidth is unpredictable / slowish (supposedly 1mbps connection, actually i can only really get about 120kbps from nasa)</htmltext>
<tokenext>Can somebody provide direct links to the media streams , especially lower bitrates ?
The yahoo links above seem to insist on playing only in the browser .
I 'd rather be using VLC .
I 'm in Johannesburg , and my bandwidth is unpredictable / slowish ( supposedly 1mbps connection , actually i can only really get about 120kbps from nasa )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Can somebody provide direct links to the media streams, especially lower bitrates?
The yahoo links above seem to insist on playing only in the browser.
I'd rather be using VLC.
I'm in Johannesburg, and my bandwidth is unpredictable / slowish (supposedly 1mbps connection, actually i can only really get about 120kbps from nasa)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_0640213.29881923</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_0640213.29891881</id>
	<title>Knock off the censorship, moderators.</title>
	<author>tjstork</author>
	<datestamp>1256650860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You know I have 10 mod points, but I already posted this thread, so I can't mod you up.  But let me say to others with points that you should not be modded down for what you wrote.  This is not flamebait.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You know I have 10 mod points , but I already posted this thread , so I ca n't mod you up .
But let me say to others with points that you should not be modded down for what you wrote .
This is not flamebait .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You know I have 10 mod points, but I already posted this thread, so I can't mod you up.
But let me say to others with points that you should not be modded down for what you wrote.
This is not flamebait.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_0640213.29882309</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_0640213.29882469</id>
	<title>Re:Tragically, We Cannot Afford This Now</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256650740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>They are boondoggles that do not solve a pressing problem.</i></p><p>Wrong. In the fullness of time, space exploration will be understood to be the most important thing 21st century man ever did.</p><p>Climate change, on the other hand, will be seen to have been complete bollocks.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>They are boondoggles that do not solve a pressing problem.Wrong .
In the fullness of time , space exploration will be understood to be the most important thing 21st century man ever did.Climate change , on the other hand , will be seen to have been complete bollocks .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They are boondoggles that do not solve a pressing problem.Wrong.
In the fullness of time, space exploration will be understood to be the most important thing 21st century man ever did.Climate change, on the other hand, will be seen to have been complete bollocks.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_0640213.29882309</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_0640213.29882109</id>
	<title>Fp GNAA</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256645700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext>end, 3e need you there are about 700 the reaper In a</htmltext>
<tokenext>end , 3e need you there are about 700 the reaper In a</tokentext>
<sentencetext>end, 3e need you there are about 700 the reaper In a</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_0640213.29881745</id>
	<title>I'm a rocket, man!</title>
	<author>BadAnalogyGuy</author>
	<datestamp>1256638860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It's about bloody time they got this thing started. Of course, being on the pad is just the first step.</p><p>Once we've verified the structural integrity of the design, it would be nice to go ahead with astronaut insertion and extended earth orbit. People have been ragging on this design for a while, but I have high hopes that a return to the rocket-centric designs of yesteryear will put us back in the forefront of space exploration.</p><p>Tampon.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's about bloody time they got this thing started .
Of course , being on the pad is just the first step.Once we 've verified the structural integrity of the design , it would be nice to go ahead with astronaut insertion and extended earth orbit .
People have been ragging on this design for a while , but I have high hopes that a return to the rocket-centric designs of yesteryear will put us back in the forefront of space exploration.Tampon .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's about bloody time they got this thing started.
Of course, being on the pad is just the first step.Once we've verified the structural integrity of the design, it would be nice to go ahead with astronaut insertion and extended earth orbit.
People have been ragging on this design for a while, but I have high hopes that a return to the rocket-centric designs of yesteryear will put us back in the forefront of space exploration.Tampon.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_0640213.29884527</id>
	<title>Re:Cut the welfare and go to space</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1256661600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>I would rather throw a few thousand people off of disability</i></p><p>Sorry, but you're a heartless bastard. The entire NASA budget for an entire year wouldn't pay for one day of the Iraq war nonsense. It costs each American something like $.07 per day for NASA's operation, well worth it IMO. Do you have any idea how much technological progress has come from the space program? Apparently not.</p><p>I think IHBT...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I would rather throw a few thousand people off of disabilitySorry , but you 're a heartless bastard .
The entire NASA budget for an entire year would n't pay for one day of the Iraq war nonsense .
It costs each American something like $ .07 per day for NASA 's operation , well worth it IMO .
Do you have any idea how much technological progress has come from the space program ?
Apparently not.I think IHBT.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I would rather throw a few thousand people off of disabilitySorry, but you're a heartless bastard.
The entire NASA budget for an entire year wouldn't pay for one day of the Iraq war nonsense.
It costs each American something like $.07 per day for NASA's operation, well worth it IMO.
Do you have any idea how much technological progress has come from the space program?
Apparently not.I think IHBT...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_0640213.29882581</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_0640213.29882153</id>
	<title>Number one in what exactly?</title>
	<author>nietsch</author>
	<datestamp>1256646540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This 'new' rocket is basically a solid booster from the space shuttle, that needs to be extended with a 5th segment, but it now flies with a 5th dummy segment. On top of that is more dummy weight. This is just a test of an existing and older booster. Now why do you think there is some kind of competition in rocketry that the US can be number one in? Or are you just happy you or your parents paid taxes for this upcoming show?<br>Or am I a 'hater' because I a a little sceptic about this project of NASA because you cannot understand discourse? Personally, I am much more impressed with SpaceX and Armadillo, who seem to come up with nice projects for much less money. Wasn't there a new SpaceX big rocket on the launchpad soon?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This 'new ' rocket is basically a solid booster from the space shuttle , that needs to be extended with a 5th segment , but it now flies with a 5th dummy segment .
On top of that is more dummy weight .
This is just a test of an existing and older booster .
Now why do you think there is some kind of competition in rocketry that the US can be number one in ?
Or are you just happy you or your parents paid taxes for this upcoming show ? Or am I a 'hater ' because I a a little sceptic about this project of NASA because you can not understand discourse ?
Personally , I am much more impressed with SpaceX and Armadillo , who seem to come up with nice projects for much less money .
Was n't there a new SpaceX big rocket on the launchpad soon ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This 'new' rocket is basically a solid booster from the space shuttle, that needs to be extended with a 5th segment, but it now flies with a 5th dummy segment.
On top of that is more dummy weight.
This is just a test of an existing and older booster.
Now why do you think there is some kind of competition in rocketry that the US can be number one in?
Or are you just happy you or your parents paid taxes for this upcoming show?Or am I a 'hater' because I a a little sceptic about this project of NASA because you cannot understand discourse?
Personally, I am much more impressed with SpaceX and Armadillo, who seem to come up with nice projects for much less money.
Wasn't there a new SpaceX big rocket on the launchpad soon?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_0640213.29881719</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_0640213.29886003</id>
	<title>Re:Vibrations</title>
	<author>Nyeerrmm</author>
	<datestamp>1256668080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>The rockets are male.  The spacecraft that ride on top of them are female.</htmltext>
<tokenext>The rockets are male .
The spacecraft that ride on top of them are female .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The rockets are male.
The spacecraft that ride on top of them are female.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_0640213.29881723</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_0640213.29884941</id>
	<title>Re:Number one in what exactly?</title>
	<author>cyn1c77</author>
	<datestamp>1256663460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>This 'new' rocket is basically a solid booster from the space shuttle, that needs to be extended with a 5th segment, but it now flies with a 5th dummy segment. On top of that is more dummy weight. This is just a test of an existing and older booster. Now why do you think there is some kind of competition in rocketry that the US can be number one in? Or are you just happy you or your parents paid taxes for this upcoming show?
Or am I a 'hater' because I a a little sceptic about this project of NASA because you cannot understand discourse? Personally, I am much more impressed with SpaceX and Armadillo, who seem to come up with nice projects for much less money. Wasn't there a new SpaceX big rocket on the launchpad soon?</p></div><p>That's it.  Keep knocking NASA, who is able to consistently put payloads in space with decreasing and inconsistent funding from the Congress that we elect and with increasing red tape... again from the government we elect.    </p><p>I don't know why you are impressed with SpaceX... NASA was producing superior products to them in the 1960's.  They talk a good game, but how many payloads have they put into orbit?  1?  All of their launchers have payloads that are a fraction of that of the shuttle or Ares 1, except the Falcon 9 heavy lift, which they have not fielded.  They are simply using technology established by NASA and avoiding the government red tap to reduce costs.  </p><p>Want to see more cool stuff come out of NASA?  Make Congress stop changing their mission every 4 years and give them a consistent budget so they can plan properly.  </p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>This 'new ' rocket is basically a solid booster from the space shuttle , that needs to be extended with a 5th segment , but it now flies with a 5th dummy segment .
On top of that is more dummy weight .
This is just a test of an existing and older booster .
Now why do you think there is some kind of competition in rocketry that the US can be number one in ?
Or are you just happy you or your parents paid taxes for this upcoming show ?
Or am I a 'hater ' because I a a little sceptic about this project of NASA because you can not understand discourse ?
Personally , I am much more impressed with SpaceX and Armadillo , who seem to come up with nice projects for much less money .
Was n't there a new SpaceX big rocket on the launchpad soon ? That 's it .
Keep knocking NASA , who is able to consistently put payloads in space with decreasing and inconsistent funding from the Congress that we elect and with increasing red tape... again from the government we elect .
I do n't know why you are impressed with SpaceX... NASA was producing superior products to them in the 1960 's .
They talk a good game , but how many payloads have they put into orbit ?
1 ? All of their launchers have payloads that are a fraction of that of the shuttle or Ares 1 , except the Falcon 9 heavy lift , which they have not fielded .
They are simply using technology established by NASA and avoiding the government red tap to reduce costs .
Want to see more cool stuff come out of NASA ?
Make Congress stop changing their mission every 4 years and give them a consistent budget so they can plan properly .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This 'new' rocket is basically a solid booster from the space shuttle, that needs to be extended with a 5th segment, but it now flies with a 5th dummy segment.
On top of that is more dummy weight.
This is just a test of an existing and older booster.
Now why do you think there is some kind of competition in rocketry that the US can be number one in?
Or are you just happy you or your parents paid taxes for this upcoming show?
Or am I a 'hater' because I a a little sceptic about this project of NASA because you cannot understand discourse?
Personally, I am much more impressed with SpaceX and Armadillo, who seem to come up with nice projects for much less money.
Wasn't there a new SpaceX big rocket on the launchpad soon?That's it.
Keep knocking NASA, who is able to consistently put payloads in space with decreasing and inconsistent funding from the Congress that we elect and with increasing red tape... again from the government we elect.
I don't know why you are impressed with SpaceX... NASA was producing superior products to them in the 1960's.
They talk a good game, but how many payloads have they put into orbit?
1?  All of their launchers have payloads that are a fraction of that of the shuttle or Ares 1, except the Falcon 9 heavy lift, which they have not fielded.
They are simply using technology established by NASA and avoiding the government red tap to reduce costs.
Want to see more cool stuff come out of NASA?
Make Congress stop changing their mission every 4 years and give them a consistent budget so they can plan properly.  
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_0640213.29882153</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_0640213.29882789</id>
	<title>Re:Tragically, We Cannot Afford This Now</title>
	<author>Geoffrey.landis</author>
	<datestamp>1256652840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Though I have always adored the thought and reality of space travel--this is just a luxury we cannot afford now. There is no <i>pressing problem</i> that would cause this need to travel to the Moon or Mars to occur.</p></div><p>No, actually, space exploration is  essentailly done on the bubble-gum budget of the US.  Deleting NASA or doubling NASA would have no noticible effect on the US budget-- the funding level is down in the noise compared to the main budget items.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Though I have always adored the thought and reality of space travel--this is just a luxury we can not afford now .
There is no pressing problem that would cause this need to travel to the Moon or Mars to occur.No , actually , space exploration is essentailly done on the bubble-gum budget of the US .
Deleting NASA or doubling NASA would have no noticible effect on the US budget-- the funding level is down in the noise compared to the main budget items .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Though I have always adored the thought and reality of space travel--this is just a luxury we cannot afford now.
There is no pressing problem that would cause this need to travel to the Moon or Mars to occur.No, actually, space exploration is  essentailly done on the bubble-gum budget of the US.
Deleting NASA or doubling NASA would have no noticible effect on the US budget-- the funding level is down in the noise compared to the main budget items.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_0640213.29882309</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_0640213.29883911</id>
	<title>Re:Delayed to 9:44 EDT</title>
	<author>burisch\_research</author>
	<datestamp>1256658720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Just announced, T-4 resume delayed to 1500Z (11:00 EDT) putting the launch at 1504Z</htmltext>
<tokenext>Just announced , T-4 resume delayed to 1500Z ( 11 : 00 EDT ) putting the launch at 1504Z</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Just announced, T-4 resume delayed to 1500Z (11:00 EDT) putting the launch at 1504Z</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_0640213.29882999</parent>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_27_0640213_29</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_0640213.29886069
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_0640213.29884983
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_0640213.29882281
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_27_0640213_32</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_0640213.29882733
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_0640213.29882357
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_27_0640213_28</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_0640213.29887635
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_0640213.29884983
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_0640213.29882281
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_27_0640213_22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_0640213.29885149
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_0640213.29881719
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_27_0640213_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_0640213.29883037
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_0640213.29882309
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_27_0640213_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_0640213.29897307
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_0640213.29884271
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_0640213.29882999
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_27_0640213_27</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_0640213.29884159
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_0640213.29882153
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_0640213.29881719
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_27_0640213_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_0640213.29886771
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_0640213.29884283
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_0640213.29882309
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_27_0640213_30</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_0640213.29885087
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_0640213.29882357
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_27_0640213_21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_0640213.29885345
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_0640213.29884065
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_0640213.29882357
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_27_0640213_44</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_0640213.29881883
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_0640213.29881863
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_27_0640213_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_0640213.29882929
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_0640213.29881719
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_27_0640213_20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_0640213.29884143
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_0640213.29882309
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_27_0640213_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_0640213.29882469
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_0640213.29882309
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_27_0640213_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_0640213.29883803
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_0640213.29882281
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_27_0640213_43</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_0640213.29883745
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_0640213.29883433
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_0640213.29881923
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_27_0640213_39</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_0640213.29881801
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_0640213.29881723
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_27_0640213_42</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_0640213.29886193
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_0640213.29881983
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_27_0640213_33</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_0640213.29884073
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_0640213.29882999
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_27_0640213_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_0640213.29884909
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_0640213.29882309
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_27_0640213_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_0640213.29882431
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_0640213.29881923
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_27_0640213_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_0640213.29886201
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_0640213.29881745
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_27_0640213_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_0640213.29885431
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_0640213.29882357
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_27_0640213_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_0640213.29886309
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_0640213.29884065
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_0640213.29882357
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_27_0640213_34</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_0640213.29882723
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_0640213.29881983
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_27_0640213_36</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_0640213.29884527
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_0640213.29882581
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_0640213.29882309
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_27_0640213_41</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_0640213.29883139
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_0640213.29881745
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_27_0640213_26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_0640213.29882319
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_0640213.29882153
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_0640213.29881719
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_27_0640213_31</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_0640213.29891719
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_0640213.29884065
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_0640213.29882357
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_27_0640213_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_0640213.29886525
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_0640213.29881983
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_27_0640213_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_0640213.29884921
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_0640213.29882153
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_0640213.29881719
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_27_0640213_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_0640213.29883137
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_0640213.29881923
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_27_0640213_23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_0640213.29884459
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_0640213.29883801
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_27_0640213_25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_0640213.29886909
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_0640213.29883801
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_27_0640213_24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_0640213.29883057
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_0640213.29882581
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_0640213.29882309
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_27_0640213_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_0640213.29882351
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_0640213.29881719
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_27_0640213_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_0640213.29891881
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_0640213.29882309
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_27_0640213_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_0640213.29882789
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_0640213.29882309
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_27_0640213_35</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_0640213.29887749
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_0640213.29884065
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_0640213.29882357
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_27_0640213_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_0640213.29886003
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_0640213.29881723
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_27_0640213_37</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_0640213.29884545
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_0640213.29881923
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_27_0640213_40</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_0640213.29884941
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_0640213.29882153
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_0640213.29881719
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_27_0640213_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_0640213.29886213
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_0640213.29882281
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_27_0640213_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_0640213.29882591
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_0640213.29882309
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_10_27_0640213_38</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_0640213.29883911
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_0640213.29882999
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_27_0640213.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_0640213.29882309
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_0640213.29883037
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_0640213.29882591
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_0640213.29882789
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_0640213.29884143
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_0640213.29884909
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_0640213.29884283
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_0640213.29886771
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_0640213.29882469
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_0640213.29882581
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_0640213.29884527
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_0640213.29883057
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_0640213.29891881
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_27_0640213.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_0640213.29883801
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_0640213.29884459
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_0640213.29886909
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_27_0640213.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_0640213.29881723
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_0640213.29881801
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_0640213.29886003
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_27_0640213.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_0640213.29882281
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_0640213.29884983
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_0640213.29886069
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_0640213.29887635
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_0640213.29883803
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_0640213.29886213
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_27_0640213.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_0640213.29881863
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_0640213.29881883
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_27_0640213.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_0640213.29881923
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_0640213.29884545
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_0640213.29882431
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_0640213.29883137
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_0640213.29883433
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_0640213.29883745
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_27_0640213.10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_0640213.29882999
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_0640213.29884271
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_0640213.29897307
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_0640213.29884073
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_0640213.29883911
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_27_0640213.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_0640213.29881719
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_0640213.29882153
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_0640213.29884159
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_0640213.29884941
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_0640213.29882319
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_0640213.29884921
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_0640213.29882351
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_0640213.29885149
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_0640213.29882929
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_27_0640213.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_0640213.29882357
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_0640213.29884065
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_0640213.29885345
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_0640213.29887749
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_0640213.29886309
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_0640213.29891719
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_0640213.29882733
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_0640213.29885431
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_0640213.29885087
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_27_0640213.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_0640213.29881745
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_0640213.29886201
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_0640213.29883139
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_10_27_0640213.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_0640213.29881983
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_0640213.29886525
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_0640213.29886193
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_10_27_0640213.29882723
</commentlist>
</conversation>
