<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article09_12_07_1849226</id>
	<title>Virgin Galactic Unveils SpaceShipTwo</title>
	<author>ScuttleMonkey</author>
	<datestamp>1260213360000</datestamp>
	<htmltext>RobGoldsmith writes to tell us that Virgin Galactic has unveiled their latest take on manned space travel for the immediate future: <a href="http://spacefellowship.com/2009/12/07/virgin-galactic-unveils-spaceshiptwo/">SpaceShipTwo</a>.  The craft comes complete with matching mothership, WhiteKnightTwo, and will be officially unveiled today in the Mojave Desert just after dark.  <i>"Subject to certain US regulatory requirements that will guide the unveiling, SS2 will be attached to her WK2 mothership which was last year unveiled and named EVE after Sir Richard Branson's mother. In the future, WK2 will carry SS2 to above 50,000 feet (16 kilometers) before the spaceship is dropped and fires her rocket motor to launch into space from that altitude. In honor of a long tradition of using the word Enterprise in the naming of Royal Navy, US Navy, NASA vehicles and even science fiction spacecraft, Governor Schwarzenegger of California and Governor Richardson of New Mexico will today christen SS2 with the name Virgin Space Ship (VSS) ENTERPRISE. This represents not only an acknowledgment to that name&rsquo;s honorable past but also looks to the future of the role of private enterprise in the development of the exploration, industrialization and human habitation of space."</i></htmltext>
<tokenext>RobGoldsmith writes to tell us that Virgin Galactic has unveiled their latest take on manned space travel for the immediate future : SpaceShipTwo .
The craft comes complete with matching mothership , WhiteKnightTwo , and will be officially unveiled today in the Mojave Desert just after dark .
" Subject to certain US regulatory requirements that will guide the unveiling , SS2 will be attached to her WK2 mothership which was last year unveiled and named EVE after Sir Richard Branson 's mother .
In the future , WK2 will carry SS2 to above 50,000 feet ( 16 kilometers ) before the spaceship is dropped and fires her rocket motor to launch into space from that altitude .
In honor of a long tradition of using the word Enterprise in the naming of Royal Navy , US Navy , NASA vehicles and even science fiction spacecraft , Governor Schwarzenegger of California and Governor Richardson of New Mexico will today christen SS2 with the name Virgin Space Ship ( VSS ) ENTERPRISE .
This represents not only an acknowledgment to that name    s honorable past but also looks to the future of the role of private enterprise in the development of the exploration , industrialization and human habitation of space .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>RobGoldsmith writes to tell us that Virgin Galactic has unveiled their latest take on manned space travel for the immediate future: SpaceShipTwo.
The craft comes complete with matching mothership, WhiteKnightTwo, and will be officially unveiled today in the Mojave Desert just after dark.
"Subject to certain US regulatory requirements that will guide the unveiling, SS2 will be attached to her WK2 mothership which was last year unveiled and named EVE after Sir Richard Branson's mother.
In the future, WK2 will carry SS2 to above 50,000 feet (16 kilometers) before the spaceship is dropped and fires her rocket motor to launch into space from that altitude.
In honor of a long tradition of using the word Enterprise in the naming of Royal Navy, US Navy, NASA vehicles and even science fiction spacecraft, Governor Schwarzenegger of California and Governor Richardson of New Mexico will today christen SS2 with the name Virgin Space Ship (VSS) ENTERPRISE.
This represents not only an acknowledgment to that name’s honorable past but also looks to the future of the role of private enterprise in the development of the exploration, industrialization and human habitation of space.
"</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30363070</id>
	<title>Re:6 passengers?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260267540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>So people renting cars to drive around foreign countries also aren't tourists?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>So people renting cars to drive around foreign countries also are n't tourists ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So people renting cars to drive around foreign countries also aren't tourists?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30357072</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30357912</id>
	<title>Virgin Spaceport Chain Stores</title>
	<author>tomcode</author>
	<datestamp>1260181260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This is cool. Now when NASA finally gets to Mars, they'll be able to stop at the Virgin Galactic Megastore and get some souvenirs for the kids.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This is cool .
Now when NASA finally gets to Mars , they 'll be able to stop at the Virgin Galactic Megastore and get some souvenirs for the kids .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is cool.
Now when NASA finally gets to Mars, they'll be able to stop at the Virgin Galactic Megastore and get some souvenirs for the kids.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30361696</id>
	<title>Re:hmm...</title>
	<author>camperdave</author>
	<datestamp>1260207120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Technically anything over the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/K\%C3\%A1rm\%C3\%A1n\_line" title="wikipedia.org">100km mark</a> [wikipedia.org] counts as space because, at that altitude, the velocity you need to generate enough lift to keep you airborne is equal to the orbital velocity for that altitude.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Technically anything over the 100km mark [ wikipedia.org ] counts as space because , at that altitude , the velocity you need to generate enough lift to keep you airborne is equal to the orbital velocity for that altitude .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Technically anything over the 100km mark [wikipedia.org] counts as space because, at that altitude, the velocity you need to generate enough lift to keep you airborne is equal to the orbital velocity for that altitude.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30357848</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30356948</id>
	<title>Weird looking tails</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260219360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>With no connection between the tails of WK2, it looks like it wants to twist apart. Wouldn't that stress the wing unnecessarily? Obviously the folks at Scaled Composites know a bit than me about building airplanes, but it doesn't look right.</htmltext>
<tokenext>With no connection between the tails of WK2 , it looks like it wants to twist apart .
Would n't that stress the wing unnecessarily ?
Obviously the folks at Scaled Composites know a bit than me about building airplanes , but it does n't look right .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>With no connection between the tails of WK2, it looks like it wants to twist apart.
Wouldn't that stress the wing unnecessarily?
Obviously the folks at Scaled Composites know a bit than me about building airplanes, but it doesn't look right.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30357830</id>
	<title>Re:Whodathunk</title>
	<author>khallow</author>
	<datestamp>1260180780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>In the meantime, Virgin Galactic or whatever it is called is just a glorified thrill ride that does nothing to advance real commercial space flight.</p></div><p>Nonsense. The most important thing to remember here is that the technology is only part of commercial space flight. The more important part is finding some activity that makes money. They're answering the question "Can we make money doing this?" Virgin is exploring a virgin market (pun intended). SpaceShipTwo tests the waters to see what the space tourism market really is like. They're also developing the infrastructure for running flights and maintaining these vehicles.<br> <br>

Further the vehicle is significant progress towards an orbital vehicle. Performancewise, it generates about a quarter to third of the delta v that would be required to get to space (it'll have almost as much gravity losses as an orbital shot). Heat dissipation is a more serious problem since it probably only has to dissipate somewhere around 1/40 of the heat that would come from reentry (I'm assuming throughout this that it has similar performance to the SpaceShipOne). Extending the design to an orbital one will have to overcome some serious problems, in particular, a serious thermal protection system will need to be designed. But these are known engineering issues with existing solutions (NASA has done a number of studies on reentry of winged and lifting body designs).<br> <br>

What can be currently addressed are the processes of launching, recovering, and maintaining SpaceShipTwo. The crew handling this work will be able to apply that experience to later generations of the vehicle. It's a risky, high performance vehicle that needs a good crew to nurse it from one launch to the next.<br> <br>

In summary, it's not just a glorified thrill ride, but a stepping stone to orbital space flight. Maybe it won't pan out. If that happens, then Virgin Galactic has limited its risk by building a less ambitious project.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>In the meantime , Virgin Galactic or whatever it is called is just a glorified thrill ride that does nothing to advance real commercial space flight.Nonsense .
The most important thing to remember here is that the technology is only part of commercial space flight .
The more important part is finding some activity that makes money .
They 're answering the question " Can we make money doing this ?
" Virgin is exploring a virgin market ( pun intended ) .
SpaceShipTwo tests the waters to see what the space tourism market really is like .
They 're also developing the infrastructure for running flights and maintaining these vehicles .
Further the vehicle is significant progress towards an orbital vehicle .
Performancewise , it generates about a quarter to third of the delta v that would be required to get to space ( it 'll have almost as much gravity losses as an orbital shot ) .
Heat dissipation is a more serious problem since it probably only has to dissipate somewhere around 1/40 of the heat that would come from reentry ( I 'm assuming throughout this that it has similar performance to the SpaceShipOne ) .
Extending the design to an orbital one will have to overcome some serious problems , in particular , a serious thermal protection system will need to be designed .
But these are known engineering issues with existing solutions ( NASA has done a number of studies on reentry of winged and lifting body designs ) .
What can be currently addressed are the processes of launching , recovering , and maintaining SpaceShipTwo .
The crew handling this work will be able to apply that experience to later generations of the vehicle .
It 's a risky , high performance vehicle that needs a good crew to nurse it from one launch to the next .
In summary , it 's not just a glorified thrill ride , but a stepping stone to orbital space flight .
Maybe it wo n't pan out .
If that happens , then Virgin Galactic has limited its risk by building a less ambitious project .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>In the meantime, Virgin Galactic or whatever it is called is just a glorified thrill ride that does nothing to advance real commercial space flight.Nonsense.
The most important thing to remember here is that the technology is only part of commercial space flight.
The more important part is finding some activity that makes money.
They're answering the question "Can we make money doing this?
" Virgin is exploring a virgin market (pun intended).
SpaceShipTwo tests the waters to see what the space tourism market really is like.
They're also developing the infrastructure for running flights and maintaining these vehicles.
Further the vehicle is significant progress towards an orbital vehicle.
Performancewise, it generates about a quarter to third of the delta v that would be required to get to space (it'll have almost as much gravity losses as an orbital shot).
Heat dissipation is a more serious problem since it probably only has to dissipate somewhere around 1/40 of the heat that would come from reentry (I'm assuming throughout this that it has similar performance to the SpaceShipOne).
Extending the design to an orbital one will have to overcome some serious problems, in particular, a serious thermal protection system will need to be designed.
But these are known engineering issues with existing solutions (NASA has done a number of studies on reentry of winged and lifting body designs).
What can be currently addressed are the processes of launching, recovering, and maintaining SpaceShipTwo.
The crew handling this work will be able to apply that experience to later generations of the vehicle.
It's a risky, high performance vehicle that needs a good crew to nurse it from one launch to the next.
In summary, it's not just a glorified thrill ride, but a stepping stone to orbital space flight.
Maybe it won't pan out.
If that happens, then Virgin Galactic has limited its risk by building a less ambitious project.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30357026</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30357926</id>
	<title>Re:What "regulatory requirements"?</title>
	<author>TooMuchToDo</author>
	<datestamp>1260181320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>FAA signoffs for special use of airspace (to and fro suborbit).</htmltext>
<tokenext>FAA signoffs for special use of airspace ( to and fro suborbit ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>FAA signoffs for special use of airspace (to and fro suborbit).</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30357138</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30368272</id>
	<title>Re:What "regulatory requirements"?</title>
	<author>Agripa</author>
	<datestamp>1260300780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Range safety is <i>very</i> important.</p><p>Obscure?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Range safety is very important.Obscure ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Range safety is very important.Obscure?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30357138</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30358102</id>
	<title>Watch Online?</title>
	<author>Athens101</author>
	<datestamp>1260182520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>My google-fu has failed me. Will there be a place to watch this live online?</htmltext>
<tokenext>My google-fu has failed me .
Will there be a place to watch this live online ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>My google-fu has failed me.
Will there be a place to watch this live online?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30363420</id>
	<title>Re:It's ugly but it's the future of space explorat</title>
	<author>IrquiM</author>
	<datestamp>1260273300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>VASIMR isn't what you're lookign for when it comes to going back and forth to the Moon and NEOs. Mars and further out, and keeping ISS in a stable orbit, sure.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>VASIMR is n't what you 're lookign for when it comes to going back and forth to the Moon and NEOs .
Mars and further out , and keeping ISS in a stable orbit , sure .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>VASIMR isn't what you're lookign for when it comes to going back and forth to the Moon and NEOs.
Mars and further out, and keeping ISS in a stable orbit, sure.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30356838</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30356474</id>
	<title>Whodathunk</title>
	<author>Saint Stephen</author>
	<datestamp>1260217140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>That the guy that I guess history will say started commercial space flight for real, owned a company that used to sell cassettes and records.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>That the guy that I guess history will say started commercial space flight for real , owned a company that used to sell cassettes and records .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That the guy that I guess history will say started commercial space flight for real, owned a company that used to sell cassettes and records.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30356974</id>
	<title>Ethnic cleansing happened in the 1990s</title>
	<author>tepples</author>
	<datestamp>1260219420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>the Eugenics Wars which devastated the world</p></div><p>You mean the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yugoslav\_wars" title="wikipedia.org">Yugoslav eugenics wars</a> [wikipedia.org]?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>the Eugenics Wars which devastated the worldYou mean the Yugoslav eugenics wars [ wikipedia.org ] ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>the Eugenics Wars which devastated the worldYou mean the Yugoslav eugenics wars [wikipedia.org]?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30356664</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30357610</id>
	<title>Re:What "regulatory requirements"?</title>
	<author>rrohbeck</author>
	<datestamp>1260179580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I am curious about those "regulatory requirements" that "guide the unveiling".</p><p>Anybody know what that is all about?</p></div><p>DMV opening hours.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I am curious about those " regulatory requirements " that " guide the unveiling " .Anybody know what that is all about ? DMV opening hours .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I am curious about those "regulatory requirements" that "guide the unveiling".Anybody know what that is all about?DMV opening hours.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30357138</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30356728</id>
	<title>Might be taken more seriously if...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260218400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This might be taken more seriously, or at least might seem less silly to non-fanatics, if they weren't naming their spaceships for popular SF vehicles. What's next, the VSS <i>Falcon</i>? VSS <i>Serenity</i>? (Oh, wait, NASA did that one.) VSS <i>Galactica</i>? (Although I would object a bit less to a VSS <i>Ebon Hawk</i> or a VSS <i>Marvelous Dragonfly</i>, as at that point they'd obviously not be trying to hide it.)</p><p>And, heck, might this mothership's name have originally had an "Online" at the end of it? (We'll know that's a yes if they build a <i>Galaxies</i> or <i>Homeworld</i>...)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This might be taken more seriously , or at least might seem less silly to non-fanatics , if they were n't naming their spaceships for popular SF vehicles .
What 's next , the VSS Falcon ?
VSS Serenity ?
( Oh , wait , NASA did that one .
) VSS Galactica ?
( Although I would object a bit less to a VSS Ebon Hawk or a VSS Marvelous Dragonfly , as at that point they 'd obviously not be trying to hide it .
) And , heck , might this mothership 's name have originally had an " Online " at the end of it ?
( We 'll know that 's a yes if they build a Galaxies or Homeworld... )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This might be taken more seriously, or at least might seem less silly to non-fanatics, if they weren't naming their spaceships for popular SF vehicles.
What's next, the VSS Falcon?
VSS Serenity?
(Oh, wait, NASA did that one.
) VSS Galactica?
(Although I would object a bit less to a VSS Ebon Hawk or a VSS Marvelous Dragonfly, as at that point they'd obviously not be trying to hide it.
)And, heck, might this mothership's name have originally had an "Online" at the end of it?
(We'll know that's a yes if they build a Galaxies or Homeworld...)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30361310</id>
	<title>Re:Whodathunk</title>
	<author>florescent\_beige</author>
	<datestamp>1260203880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>You do realize that there will be a SpaceShipThree, Four, Five, etc, so long as the business remains profitable?</p></div><p>This means more than you may realize. While "Vomit Comet" is colloquially expressed, it is essentially correct. SS2's engine has a specific impulse of around 250 which is low (LOX/LH might give you around 450). What's that mean? The mass fraction to reach orbit (propellant/structure + payload weight) of a launcher that uses this type of engine would be in the low hundreds:1 compared to 7:1 for a LOX/LH engine.</p><p>At the same time SS2's oxidizer tank is heavy because the N2O is pressure fed and not pump fed. Heavy tank to withstand the pressure. The combination of low Isp and a pressurized tank means this particular arrangement will never work as an orbital launcher no matter how much it is scaled up. That's not an opinion, it just won't.</p><p>So if a hypothesized SS3 were to be orbital it would have to be a different technology altogether. Assuming BR would be allergic to going the BSR route (Big Stupid Rocket), one suspects he has something air-breathing in mind. The only two things I know of along those lines are SCRAM and Pulse Detonation and the latter might be purely tinfoil-hat. But even SCRAM has big challenges not the least of which is that nobody has made an operational vehicle using one and the best publicly available information on the concept (NASP) hints that aerodynamic heating *on the way up* was the killer. That might be why recent talk about SCRAM is in reference to really fast airplanes, not launchers.</p><p>Apart from that, almost any combination of expendable/reusable rocket-propelled boosters/launchers/orbiters has been thought of before. Early in the Shuttle program NASA looked at a great big flyback liquid fueled booster instead of a throw-away tank and solids, but the darn thing had to be the size of the Empire State building.</p><p>All that is to say I'm curious to know what he has in mind for orbital. Tempered with the memories of Rutan's early days when he was downright religious about canards due to their amazing efficiency, he said.</p><p>I notice WK2 has a conventional tail.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>You do realize that there will be a SpaceShipThree , Four , Five , etc , so long as the business remains profitable ? This means more than you may realize .
While " Vomit Comet " is colloquially expressed , it is essentially correct .
SS2 's engine has a specific impulse of around 250 which is low ( LOX/LH might give you around 450 ) .
What 's that mean ?
The mass fraction to reach orbit ( propellant/structure + payload weight ) of a launcher that uses this type of engine would be in the low hundreds : 1 compared to 7 : 1 for a LOX/LH engine.At the same time SS2 's oxidizer tank is heavy because the N2O is pressure fed and not pump fed .
Heavy tank to withstand the pressure .
The combination of low Isp and a pressurized tank means this particular arrangement will never work as an orbital launcher no matter how much it is scaled up .
That 's not an opinion , it just wo n't.So if a hypothesized SS3 were to be orbital it would have to be a different technology altogether .
Assuming BR would be allergic to going the BSR route ( Big Stupid Rocket ) , one suspects he has something air-breathing in mind .
The only two things I know of along those lines are SCRAM and Pulse Detonation and the latter might be purely tinfoil-hat .
But even SCRAM has big challenges not the least of which is that nobody has made an operational vehicle using one and the best publicly available information on the concept ( NASP ) hints that aerodynamic heating * on the way up * was the killer .
That might be why recent talk about SCRAM is in reference to really fast airplanes , not launchers.Apart from that , almost any combination of expendable/reusable rocket-propelled boosters/launchers/orbiters has been thought of before .
Early in the Shuttle program NASA looked at a great big flyback liquid fueled booster instead of a throw-away tank and solids , but the darn thing had to be the size of the Empire State building.All that is to say I 'm curious to know what he has in mind for orbital .
Tempered with the memories of Rutan 's early days when he was downright religious about canards due to their amazing efficiency , he said.I notice WK2 has a conventional tail .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You do realize that there will be a SpaceShipThree, Four, Five, etc, so long as the business remains profitable?This means more than you may realize.
While "Vomit Comet" is colloquially expressed, it is essentially correct.
SS2's engine has a specific impulse of around 250 which is low (LOX/LH might give you around 450).
What's that mean?
The mass fraction to reach orbit (propellant/structure + payload weight) of a launcher that uses this type of engine would be in the low hundreds:1 compared to 7:1 for a LOX/LH engine.At the same time SS2's oxidizer tank is heavy because the N2O is pressure fed and not pump fed.
Heavy tank to withstand the pressure.
The combination of low Isp and a pressurized tank means this particular arrangement will never work as an orbital launcher no matter how much it is scaled up.
That's not an opinion, it just won't.So if a hypothesized SS3 were to be orbital it would have to be a different technology altogether.
Assuming BR would be allergic to going the BSR route (Big Stupid Rocket), one suspects he has something air-breathing in mind.
The only two things I know of along those lines are SCRAM and Pulse Detonation and the latter might be purely tinfoil-hat.
But even SCRAM has big challenges not the least of which is that nobody has made an operational vehicle using one and the best publicly available information on the concept (NASP) hints that aerodynamic heating *on the way up* was the killer.
That might be why recent talk about SCRAM is in reference to really fast airplanes, not launchers.Apart from that, almost any combination of expendable/reusable rocket-propelled boosters/launchers/orbiters has been thought of before.
Early in the Shuttle program NASA looked at a great big flyback liquid fueled booster instead of a throw-away tank and solids, but the darn thing had to be the size of the Empire State building.All that is to say I'm curious to know what he has in mind for orbital.
Tempered with the memories of Rutan's early days when he was downright religious about canards due to their amazing efficiency, he said.I notice WK2 has a conventional tail.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30357330</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30356450</id>
	<title>First Ship!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260217020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Virgins in Space... new movie from Pr0n R Us, Inc.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Virgins in Space... new movie from Pr0n R Us , Inc .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Virgins in Space... new movie from Pr0n R Us, Inc.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30359004</id>
	<title>Re:They are already planning Space Ship Three</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260187320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>That's an old article, SS3 now is aimed for point 2 point travel. They realized that they are still not ready for orbit.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>That 's an old article , SS3 now is aimed for point 2 point travel .
They realized that they are still not ready for orbit .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That's an old article, SS3 now is aimed for point 2 point travel.
They realized that they are still not ready for orbit.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30357850</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30359736</id>
	<title>Re:Oh my</title>
	<author>DerekLyons</author>
	<datestamp>1260191580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>There's our Orient Express, people. It's a short step from tourists to passengers.</p></div></blockquote><p>Given that SS2 has a range of only a few dozen miles, it's a pretty shitty passenger aircraft.  From the SS2 to \_orbital\_ passengers is roughly as big a jump as between the DC-3 and a 747.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>There 's our Orient Express , people .
It 's a short step from tourists to passengers.Given that SS2 has a range of only a few dozen miles , it 's a pretty shitty passenger aircraft .
From the SS2 to \ _orbital \ _ passengers is roughly as big a jump as between the DC-3 and a 747 .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There's our Orient Express, people.
It's a short step from tourists to passengers.Given that SS2 has a range of only a few dozen miles, it's a pretty shitty passenger aircraft.
From the SS2 to \_orbital\_ passengers is roughly as big a jump as between the DC-3 and a 747.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30357418</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30360266</id>
	<title>Re:6 passengers?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260195720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>When talking about mass market in space flight you don't measure things in numbers of passengers per flight, or even necessarily number of craft, but number of flights.  A one week turnaround time is mass market compared to anything that has come before in this area.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>When talking about mass market in space flight you do n't measure things in numbers of passengers per flight , or even necessarily number of craft , but number of flights .
A one week turnaround time is mass market compared to anything that has come before in this area .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>When talking about mass market in space flight you don't measure things in numbers of passengers per flight, or even necessarily number of craft, but number of flights.
A one week turnaround time is mass market compared to anything that has come before in this area.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30357072</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30359758</id>
	<title>Re:It's ugly but it's the future of space explorat</title>
	<author>DerekLyons</author>
	<datestamp>1260191700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>As much as I love NASA and the space program, it is time to private companies to start building an industry out of it.</p></div></blockquote><p>Private space industry has existed since the dawn of the space age.<br>
&nbsp; </p><blockquote><div><p>Only when private companies find profits in space will we see real progress. Unfortunately, no one has thought of a way to make money off of it yet.</p></div></blockquote><p>Boeing, LockMart, Arianespace, etc. have been making a profit off of space for decades.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>As much as I love NASA and the space program , it is time to private companies to start building an industry out of it.Private space industry has existed since the dawn of the space age .
  Only when private companies find profits in space will we see real progress .
Unfortunately , no one has thought of a way to make money off of it yet.Boeing , LockMart , Arianespace , etc .
have been making a profit off of space for decades .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>As much as I love NASA and the space program, it is time to private companies to start building an industry out of it.Private space industry has existed since the dawn of the space age.
  Only when private companies find profits in space will we see real progress.
Unfortunately, no one has thought of a way to make money off of it yet.Boeing, LockMart, Arianespace, etc.
have been making a profit off of space for decades.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30356502</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30356876</id>
	<title>Long way to orbital</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260219000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Not to downplay this milestone, but don't forget to get to orbital speeds SS2 would need around 60 times more energy. It is and stays a wannabe astronaut toy. SpaceX or some scramjet stuff is the way to go.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Not to downplay this milestone , but do n't forget to get to orbital speeds SS2 would need around 60 times more energy .
It is and stays a wannabe astronaut toy .
SpaceX or some scramjet stuff is the way to go .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Not to downplay this milestone, but don't forget to get to orbital speeds SS2 would need around 60 times more energy.
It is and stays a wannabe astronaut toy.
SpaceX or some scramjet stuff is the way to go.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30361890</id>
	<title>Can this be used for air travel?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260209220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>How far off is this from the fabled 3-hour New York to Tokyo flight?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>How far off is this from the fabled 3-hour New York to Tokyo flight ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How far off is this from the fabled 3-hour New York to Tokyo flight?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30366006</id>
	<title>Re:Enterprise, sure!</title>
	<author>MachineShedFred</author>
	<datestamp>1260291060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Good thing there have been 15 Royal Navy ships named Enterprise, 6 in the US Navy including the technological marvel with hull number CVN-65 which was launched in 1960, before the first episode of Star Trek was even close to written.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Good thing there have been 15 Royal Navy ships named Enterprise , 6 in the US Navy including the technological marvel with hull number CVN-65 which was launched in 1960 , before the first episode of Star Trek was even close to written .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Good thing there have been 15 Royal Navy ships named Enterprise, 6 in the US Navy including the technological marvel with hull number CVN-65 which was launched in 1960, before the first episode of Star Trek was even close to written.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30356784</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30357956</id>
	<title>Re:That's cool, but...</title>
	<author>mcgrew</author>
	<datestamp>1260181560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Wait until 2063 when the Vulcans don't come here to see the warp drive we never invented! Unless the Borg...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Wait until 2063 when the Vulcans do n't come here to see the warp drive we never invented !
Unless the Borg.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Wait until 2063 when the Vulcans don't come here to see the warp drive we never invented!
Unless the Borg...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30356518</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30358160</id>
	<title>Re:Might be taken more seriously if...</title>
	<author>zippthorne</author>
	<datestamp>1260182820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You sure about that? <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HERO\_(robot)" title="wikipedia.org">R?-Unit?</a> [wikipedia.org]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You sure about that ?
R ? -Unit ? [ wikipedia.org ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You sure about that?
R?-Unit? [wikipedia.org]</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30357046</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30357046</id>
	<title>Re:Might be taken more seriously if...</title>
	<author>Tekfactory</author>
	<datestamp>1260176580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>We have insufficient Astromech Droid technology to name anything the Ebon Hawk.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>We have insufficient Astromech Droid technology to name anything the Ebon Hawk .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>We have insufficient Astromech Droid technology to name anything the Ebon Hawk.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30356728</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30361156</id>
	<title>Re:Whodathunk</title>
	<author>camperdave</author>
	<datestamp>1260202620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>We should cancel the ARES program in favour of DIRECT.  The DIRECT plan uses existing shuttle infrastructure, manufacturing, and personnel.  The DIRECT plan relies flight proven engines and existing hardware, not brand new, untested designs.  The DIRECT plan uses the J-130 rocket along with an extended shuttle plan to close the US manned space flight gap.  Doing this gives commercial endeavours time to develop their rockets.  Once ready, NASA can switch to commercial for ISS resupply.  In the mean time, the J-130 can loft crew, cargo, and even new ISS modules.  ARES can't.  DIRECT can be done within NASA's current budget, and will save tens of thousands of jobs.</htmltext>
<tokenext>We should cancel the ARES program in favour of DIRECT .
The DIRECT plan uses existing shuttle infrastructure , manufacturing , and personnel .
The DIRECT plan relies flight proven engines and existing hardware , not brand new , untested designs .
The DIRECT plan uses the J-130 rocket along with an extended shuttle plan to close the US manned space flight gap .
Doing this gives commercial endeavours time to develop their rockets .
Once ready , NASA can switch to commercial for ISS resupply .
In the mean time , the J-130 can loft crew , cargo , and even new ISS modules .
ARES ca n't .
DIRECT can be done within NASA 's current budget , and will save tens of thousands of jobs .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>We should cancel the ARES program in favour of DIRECT.
The DIRECT plan uses existing shuttle infrastructure, manufacturing, and personnel.
The DIRECT plan relies flight proven engines and existing hardware, not brand new, untested designs.
The DIRECT plan uses the J-130 rocket along with an extended shuttle plan to close the US manned space flight gap.
Doing this gives commercial endeavours time to develop their rockets.
Once ready, NASA can switch to commercial for ISS resupply.
In the mean time, the J-130 can loft crew, cargo, and even new ISS modules.
ARES can't.
DIRECT can be done within NASA's current budget, and will save tens of thousands of jobs.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30357026</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30360962</id>
	<title>Re:Whodathunk</title>
	<author>rossy</author>
	<datestamp>1260200820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>RE: In the meantime, Virgin Galactic or whatever it is called is just a glorified thrill ride that does nothing to advance real commercial space flight.<br><br>Not so... the media and the public "believe" that it is commercial space flight... and if successful, business folk will say "there is money to be made in commercial space flight".<br><br>Where the money goes... advancement will likely follow IMHO.<br><br>So I believe that simply pushing the framework of "commercial space flight" as a business is a positive thing.<br>But like aviation.... it is said:<br>The only way to make a small fortune in aviation, start with a large one.</htmltext>
<tokenext>RE : In the meantime , Virgin Galactic or whatever it is called is just a glorified thrill ride that does nothing to advance real commercial space flight.Not so... the media and the public " believe " that it is commercial space flight... and if successful , business folk will say " there is money to be made in commercial space flight " .Where the money goes... advancement will likely follow IMHO.So I believe that simply pushing the framework of " commercial space flight " as a business is a positive thing.But like aviation.... it is said : The only way to make a small fortune in aviation , start with a large one .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>RE: In the meantime, Virgin Galactic or whatever it is called is just a glorified thrill ride that does nothing to advance real commercial space flight.Not so... the media and the public "believe" that it is commercial space flight... and if successful, business folk will say "there is money to be made in commercial space flight".Where the money goes... advancement will likely follow IMHO.So I believe that simply pushing the framework of "commercial space flight" as a business is a positive thing.But like aviation.... it is said:The only way to make a small fortune in aviation, start with a large one.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30357026</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30356668</id>
	<title>Re:How much for hte tickets</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260218100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>About $200k per seat.  Much like aviation's early days, when air travel was reserved for the wealthy.   Give it a few decades and some healthy competition, and the price will come down by an order of magnitude or more.  Right now, there's enough customers at that price point to serve the market for years given three or four operating vehicles.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>About $ 200k per seat .
Much like aviation 's early days , when air travel was reserved for the wealthy .
Give it a few decades and some healthy competition , and the price will come down by an order of magnitude or more .
Right now , there 's enough customers at that price point to serve the market for years given three or four operating vehicles .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>About $200k per seat.
Much like aviation's early days, when air travel was reserved for the wealthy.
Give it a few decades and some healthy competition, and the price will come down by an order of magnitude or more.
Right now, there's enough customers at that price point to serve the market for years given three or four operating vehicles.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30356584</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30356936</id>
	<title>In an unrelated coincidence</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260219240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Patrick Stewart will be christening the ship...</htmltext>
<tokenext>Patrick Stewart will be christening the ship.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Patrick Stewart will be christening the ship...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30357072</id>
	<title>6 passengers?</title>
	<author>QJimbo</author>
	<datestamp>1260176700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>an entirely new vehicle capable of carrying up to 6 passenger astronauts and up to 2 pilot astronauts into space on a sub-orbital flight.</i></p><p>No offense... but only 6 passengers? That's not not really that impressive. In my opinion you need at least 20 to 30 passengers before you can start saying it's really mass-market space tourism.</p><p>That aside, it's an interesting craft, and I'll be watching the launch.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>an entirely new vehicle capable of carrying up to 6 passenger astronauts and up to 2 pilot astronauts into space on a sub-orbital flight.No offense... but only 6 passengers ?
That 's not not really that impressive .
In my opinion you need at least 20 to 30 passengers before you can start saying it 's really mass-market space tourism.That aside , it 's an interesting craft , and I 'll be watching the launch .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>an entirely new vehicle capable of carrying up to 6 passenger astronauts and up to 2 pilot astronauts into space on a sub-orbital flight.No offense... but only 6 passengers?
That's not not really that impressive.
In my opinion you need at least 20 to 30 passengers before you can start saying it's really mass-market space tourism.That aside, it's an interesting craft, and I'll be watching the launch.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30357138</id>
	<title>What "regulatory requirements"?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260177000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I am curious about those "regulatory requirements" that "guide the unveiling".</p><p>Anybody know what that is all about?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I am curious about those " regulatory requirements " that " guide the unveiling " .Anybody know what that is all about ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I am curious about those "regulatory requirements" that "guide the unveiling".Anybody know what that is all about?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30356518</id>
	<title>That's cool, but...</title>
	<author>starglider29a</author>
	<datestamp>1260217380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>The display on NCC-1701x that shows several ships and a Space Shuttle prototype is now inaccurate... unless Gary Seven sabotages the Virgin craft... hmmm....</htmltext>
<tokenext>The display on NCC-1701x that shows several ships and a Space Shuttle prototype is now inaccurate... unless Gary Seven sabotages the Virgin craft... hmmm... .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The display on NCC-1701x that shows several ships and a Space Shuttle prototype is now inaccurate... unless Gary Seven sabotages the Virgin craft... hmmm....</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30357848</id>
	<title>hmm...</title>
	<author>ZenDragon</author>
	<datestamp>1260180840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'm certainly no expert on the subject but is this even really "space" flight or just "extremely high altitude" flight? At best I think all they have there is simply a novel launching system that allows "slightly cheaper than nasa" low earth orbit, nothing revolutionary in my opinion. But I suppose its a start in the right direction.</p><p> I do however applaud the trend towards privatizing space travel. I think a corportation with some financial incentive and without all the red tape can do this much more efficiently than the government possibly could. </p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm certainly no expert on the subject but is this even really " space " flight or just " extremely high altitude " flight ?
At best I think all they have there is simply a novel launching system that allows " slightly cheaper than nasa " low earth orbit , nothing revolutionary in my opinion .
But I suppose its a start in the right direction .
I do however applaud the trend towards privatizing space travel .
I think a corportation with some financial incentive and without all the red tape can do this much more efficiently than the government possibly could .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm certainly no expert on the subject but is this even really "space" flight or just "extremely high altitude" flight?
At best I think all they have there is simply a novel launching system that allows "slightly cheaper than nasa" low earth orbit, nothing revolutionary in my opinion.
But I suppose its a start in the right direction.
I do however applaud the trend towards privatizing space travel.
I think a corportation with some financial incentive and without all the red tape can do this much more efficiently than the government possibly could. </sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30356838</id>
	<title>Re:It's ugly but it's the future of space explorat</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260218880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Well as a recent Slashdot story told, Helium3 just hit $20,000 per pound, the moon has plenty of it. The Rare Earth metals that China is hording are likely plentiful in the Near Earth Objects.</p><p>For each mining venture, you send up a module with two units inside with two solar arrays, a VASIMR drive gets them out to the resources. Unload the mining-module and attach the VASIMR to the transport module, the miner makes ingots which the transporter takes from the mine to LEO, and back. Possibly the VASIMR is always attached to the transporter, and the miner is berthed inside its cargo bay for the first trip.</p><p>My two oddest notions here are using mechanical gecko feet to attach the miner to an asteroid, and then using cutting lasers to make oblique cuts into an asteroid producing cones of ore, and footholds for itself at the same time.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Well as a recent Slashdot story told , Helium3 just hit $ 20,000 per pound , the moon has plenty of it .
The Rare Earth metals that China is hording are likely plentiful in the Near Earth Objects.For each mining venture , you send up a module with two units inside with two solar arrays , a VASIMR drive gets them out to the resources .
Unload the mining-module and attach the VASIMR to the transport module , the miner makes ingots which the transporter takes from the mine to LEO , and back .
Possibly the VASIMR is always attached to the transporter , and the miner is berthed inside its cargo bay for the first trip.My two oddest notions here are using mechanical gecko feet to attach the miner to an asteroid , and then using cutting lasers to make oblique cuts into an asteroid producing cones of ore , and footholds for itself at the same time .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Well as a recent Slashdot story told, Helium3 just hit $20,000 per pound, the moon has plenty of it.
The Rare Earth metals that China is hording are likely plentiful in the Near Earth Objects.For each mining venture, you send up a module with two units inside with two solar arrays, a VASIMR drive gets them out to the resources.
Unload the mining-module and attach the VASIMR to the transport module, the miner makes ingots which the transporter takes from the mine to LEO, and back.
Possibly the VASIMR is always attached to the transporter, and the miner is berthed inside its cargo bay for the first trip.My two oddest notions here are using mechanical gecko feet to attach the miner to an asteroid, and then using cutting lasers to make oblique cuts into an asteroid producing cones of ore, and footholds for itself at the same time.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30356502</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30357128</id>
	<title>Theme song?</title>
	<author>TheJodster</author>
	<datestamp>1260176940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If any vehicle in the history of human flight needed to play this song on it's maiden voyage, this is the one... "I'm leavin' on a jet plane.  Don't know when I'll be back again..."</p><p>How much are the tickets?  I'm willing to fly coach.  I bet there are already a bunch of dates blacked out.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If any vehicle in the history of human flight needed to play this song on it 's maiden voyage , this is the one... " I 'm leavin ' on a jet plane .
Do n't know when I 'll be back again... " How much are the tickets ?
I 'm willing to fly coach .
I bet there are already a bunch of dates blacked out .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If any vehicle in the history of human flight needed to play this song on it's maiden voyage, this is the one... "I'm leavin' on a jet plane.
Don't know when I'll be back again..."How much are the tickets?
I'm willing to fly coach.
I bet there are already a bunch of dates blacked out.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30356750</id>
	<title>the rich have a tendency of footing the</title>
	<author>Shivetya</author>
	<datestamp>1260218460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>development bill.  There seems to always be a sufficient number of them who are free with their money to get new modes of travel off the ground (no pun intended)</p><p>Time is one commodity which for some has a lot of value.  In the current incarnation SS2 and such are simple frivolity but the questions becomes, how can this be extended to get somewhere else on the globe is a shortened amount of time?  Granted in this day of video conferencing and such the need to be there isn't as great.</p><p>Carrying people up is neat, carry them from point to point faster is something that has value too.  Yeah, the cost is more than its value but further development would bring it down to where it would fit within "exceptional need"</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>development bill .
There seems to always be a sufficient number of them who are free with their money to get new modes of travel off the ground ( no pun intended ) Time is one commodity which for some has a lot of value .
In the current incarnation SS2 and such are simple frivolity but the questions becomes , how can this be extended to get somewhere else on the globe is a shortened amount of time ?
Granted in this day of video conferencing and such the need to be there is n't as great.Carrying people up is neat , carry them from point to point faster is something that has value too .
Yeah , the cost is more than its value but further development would bring it down to where it would fit within " exceptional need "</tokentext>
<sentencetext>development bill.
There seems to always be a sufficient number of them who are free with their money to get new modes of travel off the ground (no pun intended)Time is one commodity which for some has a lot of value.
In the current incarnation SS2 and such are simple frivolity but the questions becomes, how can this be extended to get somewhere else on the globe is a shortened amount of time?
Granted in this day of video conferencing and such the need to be there isn't as great.Carrying people up is neat, carry them from point to point faster is something that has value too.
Yeah, the cost is more than its value but further development would bring it down to where it would fit within "exceptional need"</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30356502</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30357932</id>
	<title>How far could it go?</title>
	<author>jfengel</author>
	<datestamp>1260181440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I know this thing is sub-orbital, but in theory, how far could it go, if you let it go?</p><p>It seems to me that your next tourist market might be launching it in the US and landing it in, say, Japan.  It would hit a market a bit like the Concorde: a somewhat faster trip with a really high markup for coolness.</p><p>I doubt you'd make it a daily flight, but it wouldn't surprise me if you could drum up enough business to make a flight from the US to Japan and back once a month.  Or maybe even once a week, once the price tag comes down below six figures.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I know this thing is sub-orbital , but in theory , how far could it go , if you let it go ? It seems to me that your next tourist market might be launching it in the US and landing it in , say , Japan .
It would hit a market a bit like the Concorde : a somewhat faster trip with a really high markup for coolness.I doubt you 'd make it a daily flight , but it would n't surprise me if you could drum up enough business to make a flight from the US to Japan and back once a month .
Or maybe even once a week , once the price tag comes down below six figures .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I know this thing is sub-orbital, but in theory, how far could it go, if you let it go?It seems to me that your next tourist market might be launching it in the US and landing it in, say, Japan.
It would hit a market a bit like the Concorde: a somewhat faster trip with a really high markup for coolness.I doubt you'd make it a daily flight, but it wouldn't surprise me if you could drum up enough business to make a flight from the US to Japan and back once a month.
Or maybe even once a week, once the price tag comes down below six figures.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30357418</id>
	<title>Oh my</title>
	<author>Nefarious Wheel</author>
	<datestamp>1260178620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"></div><p>Gods that's a beautiful spaceship.  I will toast their success with fine wine.</p><p>This is exactly the sort of thing that got me interested in science as a young boy.  Granted that was in the day of Von Braun and Willey Ley and Chesley Bonestell (yes I am that old) but the Universe wrote large in my imagination back then, and I wanted something more than cars that tried to look like airplanes.  I wanted the stars.  There is nothing as hungry as the imagination of the young.</p><p>I was fortunate to work for NASA for a short while in my career, writing software for the Pioneer spacecraft.  I've gone on a bit since then, still in the IT industry and laid a lot of networks.  But nothing compares with having been lucky enough to work on something that fired my imagination as a boy.</p><p>Did I mention that's a beautiful spaceship?  If form follows function, then something with that form has to be awfully functional.</p><p>There's our Orient Express, people.  It's a short step from tourists to passengers.</p><p>I salute you, Sir Richard.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Gods that 's a beautiful spaceship .
I will toast their success with fine wine.This is exactly the sort of thing that got me interested in science as a young boy .
Granted that was in the day of Von Braun and Willey Ley and Chesley Bonestell ( yes I am that old ) but the Universe wrote large in my imagination back then , and I wanted something more than cars that tried to look like airplanes .
I wanted the stars .
There is nothing as hungry as the imagination of the young.I was fortunate to work for NASA for a short while in my career , writing software for the Pioneer spacecraft .
I 've gone on a bit since then , still in the IT industry and laid a lot of networks .
But nothing compares with having been lucky enough to work on something that fired my imagination as a boy.Did I mention that 's a beautiful spaceship ?
If form follows function , then something with that form has to be awfully functional.There 's our Orient Express , people .
It 's a short step from tourists to passengers.I salute you , Sir Richard .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Gods that's a beautiful spaceship.
I will toast their success with fine wine.This is exactly the sort of thing that got me interested in science as a young boy.
Granted that was in the day of Von Braun and Willey Ley and Chesley Bonestell (yes I am that old) but the Universe wrote large in my imagination back then, and I wanted something more than cars that tried to look like airplanes.
I wanted the stars.
There is nothing as hungry as the imagination of the young.I was fortunate to work for NASA for a short while in my career, writing software for the Pioneer spacecraft.
I've gone on a bit since then, still in the IT industry and laid a lot of networks.
But nothing compares with having been lucky enough to work on something that fired my imagination as a boy.Did I mention that's a beautiful spaceship?
If form follows function, then something with that form has to be awfully functional.There's our Orient Express, people.
It's a short step from tourists to passengers.I salute you, Sir Richard.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30356474</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30358328</id>
	<title>So Trekkies are duty bound to sabotage the VSS?</title>
	<author>fantomas</author>
	<datestamp>1260183600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>So you're saying that to make sure the stories in the Star Trek films stay factually correct (in their fictional fantasy way), Trek fans are duty bound to destroy the Virgin Space Ship and make sure it never flies?<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:-)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>So you 're saying that to make sure the stories in the Star Trek films stay factually correct ( in their fictional fantasy way ) , Trek fans are duty bound to destroy the Virgin Space Ship and make sure it never flies ?
: - )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So you're saying that to make sure the stories in the Star Trek films stay factually correct (in their fictional fantasy way), Trek fans are duty bound to destroy the Virgin Space Ship and make sure it never flies?
:-)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30356784</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30357850</id>
	<title>They are already planning Space Ship Three</title>
	<author>frank249</author>
	<datestamp>1260180840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Some have commented that Space Ship Two is only a thrill ride.  That may be so for now but the company is already on record as saying that if SS2 is successful, then there will be a <a href="http://www.flightglobal.com/articles/2005/08/23/201097/spaceshipthree-poised-to-follow-if-ss2-succeeds.html" title="flightglobal.com">SS3 that will be orbital</a> [flightglobal.com].  There is some speculation that SS3 will be only hypersonic point to point but if there is money in it, I am sure Branson will go for an orbital verson some day.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Some have commented that Space Ship Two is only a thrill ride .
That may be so for now but the company is already on record as saying that if SS2 is successful , then there will be a SS3 that will be orbital [ flightglobal.com ] .
There is some speculation that SS3 will be only hypersonic point to point but if there is money in it , I am sure Branson will go for an orbital verson some day .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Some have commented that Space Ship Two is only a thrill ride.
That may be so for now but the company is already on record as saying that if SS2 is successful, then there will be a SS3 that will be orbital [flightglobal.com].
There is some speculation that SS3 will be only hypersonic point to point but if there is money in it, I am sure Branson will go for an orbital verson some day.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30357978</id>
	<title>Enterprise?</title>
	<author>Whispers\_in\_the\_dark</author>
	<datestamp>1260181680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>No way!  It should have been the "Galactica"!</htmltext>
<tokenext>No way !
It should have been the " Galactica " !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>No way!
It should have been the "Galactica"!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30358392</id>
	<title>VSS Enterprise?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260183960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>So, how long till someone vandalizes the V to a U?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>So , how long till someone vandalizes the V to a U ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So, how long till someone vandalizes the V to a U?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30356804</id>
	<title>Re:It's ugly but it's the future of space explorat</title>
	<author>sopssa</author>
	<datestamp>1260218700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I doubt that true exploration will ever be done privately.  There's no money to be made that way.</p></div><p>What? You might want to tell that to the whole computer technology and pharmaceutical industry. Or pretty much every other industry. They're always exploring new ways to generate income.</p><p>Of course, currently real space exploration (as in, space shuttles flying to see different places) is still too costly and we don't have the necessary technology yet. But it's being developed.</p><p>You never know what kind new energy source or other rich things you will find from these pretty much infinite number of planets. When possible return on investment comes to acceptable levels, you can be sure there will be tons of people trying to get rich that way. It's a real goldmine, almost completely unexplored area.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I doubt that true exploration will ever be done privately .
There 's no money to be made that way.What ?
You might want to tell that to the whole computer technology and pharmaceutical industry .
Or pretty much every other industry .
They 're always exploring new ways to generate income.Of course , currently real space exploration ( as in , space shuttles flying to see different places ) is still too costly and we do n't have the necessary technology yet .
But it 's being developed.You never know what kind new energy source or other rich things you will find from these pretty much infinite number of planets .
When possible return on investment comes to acceptable levels , you can be sure there will be tons of people trying to get rich that way .
It 's a real goldmine , almost completely unexplored area .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I doubt that true exploration will ever be done privately.
There's no money to be made that way.What?
You might want to tell that to the whole computer technology and pharmaceutical industry.
Or pretty much every other industry.
They're always exploring new ways to generate income.Of course, currently real space exploration (as in, space shuttles flying to see different places) is still too costly and we don't have the necessary technology yet.
But it's being developed.You never know what kind new energy source or other rich things you will find from these pretty much infinite number of planets.
When possible return on investment comes to acceptable levels, you can be sure there will be tons of people trying to get rich that way.
It's a real goldmine, almost completely unexplored area.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30356628</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30358112</id>
	<title>Re:That's cool, but...</title>
	<author>NiceGeek</author>
	<datestamp>1260182520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>There was a novel a while back called The Eugenics Wars Vol 1: The Rise and Fall of Kahn Noonien Singh, that explained that the Eugenics Wars were something that primarily went on behind the scenes.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>There was a novel a while back called The Eugenics Wars Vol 1 : The Rise and Fall of Kahn Noonien Singh , that explained that the Eugenics Wars were something that primarily went on behind the scenes .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There was a novel a while back called The Eugenics Wars Vol 1: The Rise and Fall of Kahn Noonien Singh, that explained that the Eugenics Wars were something that primarily went on behind the scenes.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30356664</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30357174</id>
	<title>Shortage of customers?  I think not.</title>
	<author>geekmux</author>
	<datestamp>1260177240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><nobr> <wbr></nobr></p><div class="quote"><p>...Unfortunately, no one has thought of a way to make money off of it yet. Other than insanely rich tourists.</p></div><p>Yes, and if you're wondering where you can find any of those "insanely rich tourists" for your customer base, ah, the line forms to the left...</p><p>Smart billionaires tend to at least try and see if there's a customer base out there before starting something like this.  REALLY smart billionaires ask for deposits years ago and enjoy the compounding interest.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>...Unfortunately , no one has thought of a way to make money off of it yet .
Other than insanely rich tourists.Yes , and if you 're wondering where you can find any of those " insanely rich tourists " for your customer base , ah , the line forms to the left...Smart billionaires tend to at least try and see if there 's a customer base out there before starting something like this .
REALLY smart billionaires ask for deposits years ago and enjoy the compounding interest .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> ...Unfortunately, no one has thought of a way to make money off of it yet.
Other than insanely rich tourists.Yes, and if you're wondering where you can find any of those "insanely rich tourists" for your customer base, ah, the line forms to the left...Smart billionaires tend to at least try and see if there's a customer base out there before starting something like this.
REALLY smart billionaires ask for deposits years ago and enjoy the compounding interest.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30356502</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30358194</id>
	<title>Don't worry...</title>
	<author>Radical Moderate</author>
	<datestamp>1260183060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>they can get George Lucas to fix it.</htmltext>
<tokenext>they can get George Lucas to fix it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>they can get George Lucas to fix it.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30356518</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30356502</id>
	<title>It's ugly but it's the future of space exploration</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260217320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>As much as I love NASA and the space program, it is time to private companies to start building an industry out of it. Only when private companies find profits in space will we see real progress.

Unfortunately, no one has thought of a way to make money off of it yet. Other than insanely rich tourists.</htmltext>
<tokenext>As much as I love NASA and the space program , it is time to private companies to start building an industry out of it .
Only when private companies find profits in space will we see real progress .
Unfortunately , no one has thought of a way to make money off of it yet .
Other than insanely rich tourists .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>As much as I love NASA and the space program, it is time to private companies to start building an industry out of it.
Only when private companies find profits in space will we see real progress.
Unfortunately, no one has thought of a way to make money off of it yet.
Other than insanely rich tourists.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30415634</id>
	<title>Re:subject-verb agreement</title>
	<author>edittard</author>
	<datestamp>1260645000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>they're collective nouns and could go either way</p></div></blockquote><p>That's why I included two alternatives, with "or" in between.  It still doesn't mean you can say "they is"  or "it are".</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>they 're collective nouns and could go either wayThat 's why I included two alternatives , with " or " in between .
It still does n't mean you can say " they is " or " it are " .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>they're collective nouns and could go either wayThat's why I included two alternatives, with "or" in between.
It still doesn't mean you can say "they is"  or "it are".
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30357810</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30359212</id>
	<title>Original Press Release + More Pictures</title>
	<author>thrackle</author>
	<datestamp>1260188340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>
The actual press release:
<br>
<a href="http://www.virgingalactic.com/news/item/virgin-galactic-unveils-spaceshiptwo-the-worlds-first-commercial-manned-spaceship/" title="virgingalactic.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.virgingalactic.com/news/item/virgin-galactic-unveils-spaceshiptwo-the-worlds-first-commercial-manned-spaceship/</a> [virgingalactic.com]
<br>
with more pictures:
<br>
<a href="http://www.virgingalactic.com/multimedia/album/spaceshiptwo-unveil/" title="virgingalactic.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.virgingalactic.com/multimedia/album/spaceshiptwo-unveil/</a> [virgingalactic.com]</htmltext>
<tokenext>The actual press release : http : //www.virgingalactic.com/news/item/virgin-galactic-unveils-spaceshiptwo-the-worlds-first-commercial-manned-spaceship/ [ virgingalactic.com ] with more pictures : http : //www.virgingalactic.com/multimedia/album/spaceshiptwo-unveil/ [ virgingalactic.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>
The actual press release:

http://www.virgingalactic.com/news/item/virgin-galactic-unveils-spaceshiptwo-the-worlds-first-commercial-manned-spaceship/ [virgingalactic.com]

with more pictures:

http://www.virgingalactic.com/multimedia/album/spaceshiptwo-unveil/ [virgingalactic.com]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30356812</id>
	<title>Re:That's cool, but...</title>
	<author>FauxPasIII</author>
	<datestamp>1260218760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You mean you haven't caught on yet ?</p><p><i>This is the mirror universe!</i></p><p>Long live the Terran Empire!  Long live the Emperor!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You mean you have n't caught on yet ? This is the mirror universe ! Long live the Terran Empire !
Long live the Emperor !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You mean you haven't caught on yet ?This is the mirror universe!Long live the Terran Empire!
Long live the Emperor!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30356664</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30366820</id>
	<title>Re:Whodathunk</title>
	<author>icebrain</author>
	<datestamp>1260294420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Part of the other problem with NASP is that it was intended to run air-breathing engines all the way up to Mach 25 (essentially, all the way to orbit).  Not only is it really f'ing hard to make an airbreathing engine that still produces positive thrust at that speed (due to temperature and pressure rises from slowing the incoming air down for combustion), but running said engine also requires you to be down lower, where heating becomes a bigger issue.  Most of the more recent scramjet-powered launch vehicle proposals use rockets for the final acceleration (from around Mach 8-12 up to orbital velocity).</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Part of the other problem with NASP is that it was intended to run air-breathing engines all the way up to Mach 25 ( essentially , all the way to orbit ) .
Not only is it really f'ing hard to make an airbreathing engine that still produces positive thrust at that speed ( due to temperature and pressure rises from slowing the incoming air down for combustion ) , but running said engine also requires you to be down lower , where heating becomes a bigger issue .
Most of the more recent scramjet-powered launch vehicle proposals use rockets for the final acceleration ( from around Mach 8-12 up to orbital velocity ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Part of the other problem with NASP is that it was intended to run air-breathing engines all the way up to Mach 25 (essentially, all the way to orbit).
Not only is it really f'ing hard to make an airbreathing engine that still produces positive thrust at that speed (due to temperature and pressure rises from slowing the incoming air down for combustion), but running said engine also requires you to be down lower, where heating becomes a bigger issue.
Most of the more recent scramjet-powered launch vehicle proposals use rockets for the final acceleration (from around Mach 8-12 up to orbital velocity).</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30361310</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30363216</id>
	<title>Re:Oh my</title>
	<author>Yvanhoe</author>
	<datestamp>1260269640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I am still a bit sad that this is still a sub-orbital vehicle. I find it borderline to call it a spaceship. Sure it can go into space, but the only thing it can do in space is to fall. It is like calling a boat a floating planch without sail, engine or oars. I wish we could see a space travel company (at least to LEO).<br> <br>Still a great achievement though !</htmltext>
<tokenext>I am still a bit sad that this is still a sub-orbital vehicle .
I find it borderline to call it a spaceship .
Sure it can go into space , but the only thing it can do in space is to fall .
It is like calling a boat a floating planch without sail , engine or oars .
I wish we could see a space travel company ( at least to LEO ) .
Still a great achievement though !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I am still a bit sad that this is still a sub-orbital vehicle.
I find it borderline to call it a spaceship.
Sure it can go into space, but the only thing it can do in space is to fall.
It is like calling a boat a floating planch without sail, engine or oars.
I wish we could see a space travel company (at least to LEO).
Still a great achievement though !</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30357418</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30357126</id>
	<title>Isn't he supposed to be broke?!?</title>
	<author>geekmux</author>
	<datestamp>1260176940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>That the guy that I guess history will say started commercial space flight for real, owned a company that used to sell cassettes and records.</p></div><p>Yeah, but what really makes me wonder is how did he afford it?  I thought everyone went bankrupt after the "collapse" of the Recording and Movie industry?  At least that's what the MPAA and RIAA said.</p><p>I hear Bill gates isn't doing too well either, according to the BSA.  He's a couple dozen pirated Win7 keys away from begging on a street corner I hear.../p</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>That the guy that I guess history will say started commercial space flight for real , owned a company that used to sell cassettes and records.Yeah , but what really makes me wonder is how did he afford it ?
I thought everyone went bankrupt after the " collapse " of the Recording and Movie industry ?
At least that 's what the MPAA and RIAA said.I hear Bill gates is n't doing too well either , according to the BSA .
He 's a couple dozen pirated Win7 keys away from begging on a street corner I hear.../p</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That the guy that I guess history will say started commercial space flight for real, owned a company that used to sell cassettes and records.Yeah, but what really makes me wonder is how did he afford it?
I thought everyone went bankrupt after the "collapse" of the Recording and Movie industry?
At least that's what the MPAA and RIAA said.I hear Bill gates isn't doing too well either, according to the BSA.
He's a couple dozen pirated Win7 keys away from begging on a street corner I hear.../p
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30356474</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30357470</id>
	<title>Who thinks manned space flight is a good idea?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260178920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I mean seriously, dragging a person into orbit, life support systems, food, etc.  Thats a major waste of time and effort.  Want to invest, invest in the people who call BS and put unmanned, fairly smart computer-controlled ships in orbit for profit.  The rest is just for tourists.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I mean seriously , dragging a person into orbit , life support systems , food , etc .
Thats a major waste of time and effort .
Want to invest , invest in the people who call BS and put unmanned , fairly smart computer-controlled ships in orbit for profit .
The rest is just for tourists .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I mean seriously, dragging a person into orbit, life support systems, food, etc.
Thats a major waste of time and effort.
Want to invest, invest in the people who call BS and put unmanned, fairly smart computer-controlled ships in orbit for profit.
The rest is just for tourists.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30357756</id>
	<title>Really?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260180300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Can that thing actually achieve orbit? Is it really a spaceship if it can't? Otherwise I'd think it's just a glorified bottle rocket...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Can that thing actually achieve orbit ?
Is it really a spaceship if it ca n't ?
Otherwise I 'd think it 's just a glorified bottle rocket.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Can that thing actually achieve orbit?
Is it really a spaceship if it can't?
Otherwise I'd think it's just a glorified bottle rocket...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30357056</id>
	<title>Re:That's cool, but...</title>
	<author>Palpatine\_li</author>
	<datestamp>1260176700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>maybe it just happened a little earlier?

<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iron\_Sky" title="wikipedia.org" rel="nofollow">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iron\_Sky</a> [wikipedia.org] [wikipedia.org]</htmltext>
<tokenext>maybe it just happened a little earlier ?
http : //en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iron \ _Sky [ wikipedia.org ] [ wikipedia.org ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>maybe it just happened a little earlier?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iron\_Sky [wikipedia.org] [wikipedia.org]</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30356664</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30356628</id>
	<title>Re:It's ugly but it's the future of space explorat</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260217860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I doubt that true exploration will ever be done privately.  There's no money to be made that way.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I doubt that true exploration will ever be done privately .
There 's no money to be made that way .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I doubt that true exploration will ever be done privately.
There's no money to be made that way.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30356502</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30357444</id>
	<title>subject-verb agreement</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260178740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>It's either "has released its" or "have released their".</htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's either " has released its " or " have released their " .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's either "has released its" or "have released their".</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30356904</id>
	<title>Re:Enterprise, sure!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260219120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>They really like Microsoft Visual SourceSafe?<br>
<br>
Good God, I hope that isn't it...</htmltext>
<tokenext>They really like Microsoft Visual SourceSafe ?
Good God , I hope that is n't it.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They really like Microsoft Visual SourceSafe?
Good God, I hope that isn't it...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30356542</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30356664</id>
	<title>Re:That's cool, but...</title>
	<author>Nebulious</author>
	<datestamp>1260218100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Weeeeeeeeeell, the the Star Trek timeline really diverges from ours drastically from this point.  By now we're supposed to have driven Khan into space after the Eugenics Wars which devastated the world and be on the way to WWIII. You could say that the path is very different now.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Weeeeeeeeeell , the the Star Trek timeline really diverges from ours drastically from this point .
By now we 're supposed to have driven Khan into space after the Eugenics Wars which devastated the world and be on the way to WWIII .
You could say that the path is very different now .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Weeeeeeeeeell, the the Star Trek timeline really diverges from ours drastically from this point.
By now we're supposed to have driven Khan into space after the Eugenics Wars which devastated the world and be on the way to WWIII.
You could say that the path is very different now.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30356518</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30358246</id>
	<title>Indeed!</title>
	<author>denzacar</author>
	<datestamp>1260183300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It is a translation of an ancient Ferengi concept, meaning "a business organization".</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It is a translation of an ancient Ferengi concept , meaning " a business organization " .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It is a translation of an ancient Ferengi concept, meaning "a business organization".</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30356542</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30358408</id>
	<title>Failure rate?</title>
	<author>WrongMonkey</author>
	<datestamp>1260184020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>This whole project isn't going to last past its first accident. Some millionaire going up in flames will kill idea of space tourism.</htmltext>
<tokenext>This whole project is n't going to last past its first accident .
Some millionaire going up in flames will kill idea of space tourism .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This whole project isn't going to last past its first accident.
Some millionaire going up in flames will kill idea of space tourism.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30357916</id>
	<title>Re:Who thinks manned space flight is a good idea?</title>
	<author>confused one</author>
	<datestamp>1260181260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The same argument, circa late 16th and early 17th century:  </p><p>I mean seriously, dragging a person across the ocean, water, food, etc.  That's a major waste of time and effort.  Want to invest, invest in the people who rightly put to sea and run trade vessels around Africa and into the Indian Ocean.  The rest is just for fools.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The same argument , circa late 16th and early 17th century : I mean seriously , dragging a person across the ocean , water , food , etc .
That 's a major waste of time and effort .
Want to invest , invest in the people who rightly put to sea and run trade vessels around Africa and into the Indian Ocean .
The rest is just for fools .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The same argument, circa late 16th and early 17th century:  I mean seriously, dragging a person across the ocean, water, food, etc.
That's a major waste of time and effort.
Want to invest, invest in the people who rightly put to sea and run trade vessels around Africa and into the Indian Ocean.
The rest is just for fools.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30357470</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30359350</id>
	<title>Re:Enterprise, sure!</title>
	<author>tomcode</author>
	<datestamp>1260189000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Yes, the details of temporal mechanics can be difficult to grasp at first. I flunked my first semester at Starfleet Academy. Once you realize that [tech] doesn't necessarily require [tech] to [tech], the equations become easier to manage.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yes , the details of temporal mechanics can be difficult to grasp at first .
I flunked my first semester at Starfleet Academy .
Once you realize that [ tech ] does n't necessarily require [ tech ] to [ tech ] , the equations become easier to manage .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yes, the details of temporal mechanics can be difficult to grasp at first.
I flunked my first semester at Starfleet Academy.
Once you realize that [tech] doesn't necessarily require [tech] to [tech], the equations become easier to manage.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30356784</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30356542</id>
	<title>Enterprise, sure!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260217500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>In honor of a long tradition of using the word Enterprise in the naming of Royal Navy, US Navy, NASA vehicles and even science fiction spacecraft, Governor Schwarzenegger of California and Governor Richardson of New Mexico will today christen SS2 with the name Virgin Space Ship (VSS) ENTERPRISE.</p></div><p>Oh, come on.  We all know why they <i>really</i> named it that.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>In honor of a long tradition of using the word Enterprise in the naming of Royal Navy , US Navy , NASA vehicles and even science fiction spacecraft , Governor Schwarzenegger of California and Governor Richardson of New Mexico will today christen SS2 with the name Virgin Space Ship ( VSS ) ENTERPRISE.Oh , come on .
We all know why they really named it that .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>In honor of a long tradition of using the word Enterprise in the naming of Royal Navy, US Navy, NASA vehicles and even science fiction spacecraft, Governor Schwarzenegger of California and Governor Richardson of New Mexico will today christen SS2 with the name Virgin Space Ship (VSS) ENTERPRISE.Oh, come on.
We all know why they really named it that.
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30356964</id>
	<title>Am I the only one?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260219420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Every time I see Sir Richard Branson, my brain says "Zaphod Beeblebrox".  Am I the only one?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Every time I see Sir Richard Branson , my brain says " Zaphod Beeblebrox " .
Am I the only one ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Every time I see Sir Richard Branson, my brain says "Zaphod Beeblebrox".
Am I the only one?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30357550</id>
	<title>Wireless aboard? Electronics?</title>
	<author>cpscotti</author>
	<datestamp>1260179340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>One thing no one said anything about is the "facebook" compatibility. If they restrain electronics inside why the hell would a millionaire's daughter take such a trip... If she can't upload pictures to Facebook, that's not fun for her! <br>
If they seek for complete success, they need to enable wireless on board so people can tweet their pics at real time and even stream video to their loved (less wealthier) ones.</htmltext>
<tokenext>One thing no one said anything about is the " facebook " compatibility .
If they restrain electronics inside why the hell would a millionaire 's daughter take such a trip... If she ca n't upload pictures to Facebook , that 's not fun for her !
If they seek for complete success , they need to enable wireless on board so people can tweet their pics at real time and even stream video to their loved ( less wealthier ) ones .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>One thing no one said anything about is the "facebook" compatibility.
If they restrain electronics inside why the hell would a millionaire's daughter take such a trip... If she can't upload pictures to Facebook, that's not fun for her!
If they seek for complete success, they need to enable wireless on board so people can tweet their pics at real time and even stream video to their loved (less wealthier) ones.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30356882</id>
	<title>Re:That's cool, but...</title>
	<author>Tekfactory</author>
	<datestamp>1260219060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Khan was supposed to rule the world in the 1990s, instead of Kahn in 1996 we got a second term for Bill Clinton.</p><p>I remember Picard and Riker bumper stickers back then and thought they truly lacked the imagination of the superior intellect party.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Khan was supposed to rule the world in the 1990s , instead of Kahn in 1996 we got a second term for Bill Clinton.I remember Picard and Riker bumper stickers back then and thought they truly lacked the imagination of the superior intellect party .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Khan was supposed to rule the world in the 1990s, instead of Kahn in 1996 we got a second term for Bill Clinton.I remember Picard and Riker bumper stickers back then and thought they truly lacked the imagination of the superior intellect party.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30356664</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30356978</id>
	<title>Re:That's cool, but...</title>
	<author>rhyder128k</author>
	<datestamp>1260219420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>That fact certainly isn't on the history tapes.</htmltext>
<tokenext>That fact certainly is n't on the history tapes .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That fact certainly isn't on the history tapes.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30356518</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30357330</id>
	<title>Re:Whodathunk</title>
	<author>jollyreaper</author>
	<datestamp>1260178140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Not really. It's just a glorified vomit comet with some spectacular views. The real pioneers in commercial space flight are companies like Space-X who are very close to having launch capacity capable of being man-rated for orbital flight! We probably should cancel the Aries launch system and instead partner with Space-X.</p><p>In the meantime, Virgin Galactic or whatever it is called is just a glorified thrill ride that does nothing to advance real commercial space flight.</p></div><p>NASA didn't build the Saturn V as the very first project out the gate. While they had no mission to turn a profit on the venture, they broke the development up into tiny steps to make sure nothing went wrong. Virgin Galactic has to turn a profit. The first system was proof of concept. The second system here is about making money. You do realize that there will be a SpaceShipThree, Four, Five, etc, so long as the business remains profitable?</p><p>This is not a zero-sum game. Space-X can compete building unmanned rockets. They're getting pretty good at it. Rutan and crew can concentrate on putting the people up there. SpaceShipOne was not a vomit comet, it was like the Redstone suborbital launch. SpaceShipTwo is the same with paying passengers. Three or Four will probably make the step of getting into a proper orbit.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Not really .
It 's just a glorified vomit comet with some spectacular views .
The real pioneers in commercial space flight are companies like Space-X who are very close to having launch capacity capable of being man-rated for orbital flight !
We probably should cancel the Aries launch system and instead partner with Space-X.In the meantime , Virgin Galactic or whatever it is called is just a glorified thrill ride that does nothing to advance real commercial space flight.NASA did n't build the Saturn V as the very first project out the gate .
While they had no mission to turn a profit on the venture , they broke the development up into tiny steps to make sure nothing went wrong .
Virgin Galactic has to turn a profit .
The first system was proof of concept .
The second system here is about making money .
You do realize that there will be a SpaceShipThree , Four , Five , etc , so long as the business remains profitable ? This is not a zero-sum game .
Space-X can compete building unmanned rockets .
They 're getting pretty good at it .
Rutan and crew can concentrate on putting the people up there .
SpaceShipOne was not a vomit comet , it was like the Redstone suborbital launch .
SpaceShipTwo is the same with paying passengers .
Three or Four will probably make the step of getting into a proper orbit .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Not really.
It's just a glorified vomit comet with some spectacular views.
The real pioneers in commercial space flight are companies like Space-X who are very close to having launch capacity capable of being man-rated for orbital flight!
We probably should cancel the Aries launch system and instead partner with Space-X.In the meantime, Virgin Galactic or whatever it is called is just a glorified thrill ride that does nothing to advance real commercial space flight.NASA didn't build the Saturn V as the very first project out the gate.
While they had no mission to turn a profit on the venture, they broke the development up into tiny steps to make sure nothing went wrong.
Virgin Galactic has to turn a profit.
The first system was proof of concept.
The second system here is about making money.
You do realize that there will be a SpaceShipThree, Four, Five, etc, so long as the business remains profitable?This is not a zero-sum game.
Space-X can compete building unmanned rockets.
They're getting pretty good at it.
Rutan and crew can concentrate on putting the people up there.
SpaceShipOne was not a vomit comet, it was like the Redstone suborbital launch.
SpaceShipTwo is the same with paying passengers.
Three or Four will probably make the step of getting into a proper orbit.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30357026</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30359836</id>
	<title>Re:Whodathunk</title>
	<author>RJFerret</author>
	<datestamp>1260192180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>That the guy that I guess history will say started commercial space flight for real, owned a company that used to sell cassettes and records.</p></div><p>Ums...  <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Burt\_Rutan" title="wikipedia.org">Burt Rutan</a> [wikipedia.org] has been famous in aerospace for decades, providing designs for <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rutan\_VariEze" title="wikipedia.org">homebuilt</a> [wikipedia.org] aircraft in the '70s, the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rutan\_Voyager" title="wikipedia.org">Voyager</a> [wikipedia.org] aircraft, which was the first to circumnavigate the globe without refueling (in the '80s).</p><p>The first private astronauts (yes, they were given "wings" by the FAA) flew Rutan's SpaceShipOne to win the X Prize in 2004.</p><p>The prize was a fraction of the development costs, which Wikipedia says were funded by Paul Allen (but it's unsourced, yet confirmed on his page)--but I doubt Paul Allen will be credited with making commercial space flight available any more than the current company selling flights.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>That the guy that I guess history will say started commercial space flight for real , owned a company that used to sell cassettes and records.Ums... Burt Rutan [ wikipedia.org ] has been famous in aerospace for decades , providing designs for homebuilt [ wikipedia.org ] aircraft in the '70s , the Voyager [ wikipedia.org ] aircraft , which was the first to circumnavigate the globe without refueling ( in the '80s ) .The first private astronauts ( yes , they were given " wings " by the FAA ) flew Rutan 's SpaceShipOne to win the X Prize in 2004.The prize was a fraction of the development costs , which Wikipedia says were funded by Paul Allen ( but it 's unsourced , yet confirmed on his page ) --but I doubt Paul Allen will be credited with making commercial space flight available any more than the current company selling flights .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That the guy that I guess history will say started commercial space flight for real, owned a company that used to sell cassettes and records.Ums...  Burt Rutan [wikipedia.org] has been famous in aerospace for decades, providing designs for homebuilt [wikipedia.org] aircraft in the '70s, the Voyager [wikipedia.org] aircraft, which was the first to circumnavigate the globe without refueling (in the '80s).The first private astronauts (yes, they were given "wings" by the FAA) flew Rutan's SpaceShipOne to win the X Prize in 2004.The prize was a fraction of the development costs, which Wikipedia says were funded by Paul Allen (but it's unsourced, yet confirmed on his page)--but I doubt Paul Allen will be credited with making commercial space flight available any more than the current company selling flights.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30356474</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30357026</id>
	<title>Re:Whodathunk</title>
	<author>caseih</author>
	<datestamp>1260176520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Not really.  It's just a glorified vomit comet with some spectacular views.  The real pioneers in commercial space flight are companies like Space-X who are very close to having launch capacity capable of being man-rated for orbital flight!  We probably should cancel the Aries launch system and instead partner with Space-X.</p><p>In the meantime, Virgin Galactic or whatever it is called is just a glorified thrill ride that does nothing to advance real commercial space flight.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Not really .
It 's just a glorified vomit comet with some spectacular views .
The real pioneers in commercial space flight are companies like Space-X who are very close to having launch capacity capable of being man-rated for orbital flight !
We probably should cancel the Aries launch system and instead partner with Space-X.In the meantime , Virgin Galactic or whatever it is called is just a glorified thrill ride that does nothing to advance real commercial space flight .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Not really.
It's just a glorified vomit comet with some spectacular views.
The real pioneers in commercial space flight are companies like Space-X who are very close to having launch capacity capable of being man-rated for orbital flight!
We probably should cancel the Aries launch system and instead partner with Space-X.In the meantime, Virgin Galactic or whatever it is called is just a glorified thrill ride that does nothing to advance real commercial space flight.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30356474</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30358678</id>
	<title>explains Bush</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260185520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>That explains the Bush Administration and Iraq. If so, September 11th WAS an inside job.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>That explains the Bush Administration and Iraq .
If so , September 11th WAS an inside job .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That explains the Bush Administration and Iraq.
If so, September 11th WAS an inside job.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30356812</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30357478</id>
	<title>Re:Weird looking tails</title>
	<author>MichaelSmith</author>
	<datestamp>1260178920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Wings are designed to be stressed. Think about the engines on a B777 pushing the body of the aircraft through the air. But in this case you can think of WK2 as being two airplanes joined at the wing. Rudder inputs could be used to counteract the tendency for the two noses to twist inwards.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Wings are designed to be stressed .
Think about the engines on a B777 pushing the body of the aircraft through the air .
But in this case you can think of WK2 as being two airplanes joined at the wing .
Rudder inputs could be used to counteract the tendency for the two noses to twist inwards .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Wings are designed to be stressed.
Think about the engines on a B777 pushing the body of the aircraft through the air.
But in this case you can think of WK2 as being two airplanes joined at the wing.
Rudder inputs could be used to counteract the tendency for the two noses to twist inwards.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30356948</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30357268</id>
	<title>Re:Whodathunk</title>
	<author>MichaelSmith</author>
	<datestamp>1260177720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It costs $20 million dollars to fly to orbit right now. With new technology from companies like Space-X the price <b>could</b> come down, but will this happen before the supply of millionaires dries up? There is more demand at the $200 000 price point. Demand is needed to drive research.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It costs $ 20 million dollars to fly to orbit right now .
With new technology from companies like Space-X the price could come down , but will this happen before the supply of millionaires dries up ?
There is more demand at the $ 200 000 price point .
Demand is needed to drive research .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It costs $20 million dollars to fly to orbit right now.
With new technology from companies like Space-X the price could come down, but will this happen before the supply of millionaires dries up?
There is more demand at the $200 000 price point.
Demand is needed to drive research.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30357026</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30357810</id>
	<title>Re:subject-verb agreement</title>
	<author>Stone Rhino</author>
	<datestamp>1260180600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>It's a style issue because they're collective nouns and could go either way: <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American\_and\_British\_English\_differences#Formal\_and\_notional\_agreement" title="wikipedia.org">Wikipedia goes into detail</a> [wikipedia.org]</htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's a style issue because they 're collective nouns and could go either way : Wikipedia goes into detail [ wikipedia.org ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's a style issue because they're collective nouns and could go either way: Wikipedia goes into detail [wikipedia.org]</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30357444</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30356846</id>
	<title>Re:It's ugly but it's the future of space explorat</title>
	<author>drgould</author>
	<datestamp>1260218880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>Unfortunately, no one has thought of a way to make money off of it yet. Other than insanely rich tourists. </i></p><p>...RIGHT NOW at least. If "insanely rich tourists" are willing to pay to drive down the price of the technology so that I can afford it in 20 years (and all the other benefits that cheap access to space can offer), I'm all for that.</p><p>Hell of a lot better use of their money than the government taxing them and giving it to Al Gore in exchange for carbon credits.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Unfortunately , no one has thought of a way to make money off of it yet .
Other than insanely rich tourists .
...RIGHT NOW at least .
If " insanely rich tourists " are willing to pay to drive down the price of the technology so that I can afford it in 20 years ( and all the other benefits that cheap access to space can offer ) , I 'm all for that.Hell of a lot better use of their money than the government taxing them and giving it to Al Gore in exchange for carbon credits .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Unfortunately, no one has thought of a way to make money off of it yet.
Other than insanely rich tourists.
...RIGHT NOW at least.
If "insanely rich tourists" are willing to pay to drive down the price of the technology so that I can afford it in 20 years (and all the other benefits that cheap access to space can offer), I'm all for that.Hell of a lot better use of their money than the government taxing them and giving it to Al Gore in exchange for carbon credits.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30356502</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30370442</id>
	<title>Re:Whodathunk</title>
	<author>khallow</author>
	<datestamp>1260267300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>SS2's engine has a specific impulse of around 250 which is low (LOX/LH might give you around 450). What's that mean? The mass fraction to reach orbit (propellant/structure + payload weight) of a launcher that uses this type of engine would be in the low hundreds:1 compared to 7:1 for a LOX/LH engine.</p></div><p>Use a different oxidizer then. LOX/HTPB hybrid has a theoretical ISP of 359 seconds. You should be able to get pretty close with a real world version. That's in LOX/kerosene territory and we already have vehicles (Proton, Soyuz, Falcon I) that use that fuel combination to get to orbit. If for some reason, that isn't good enough, then you can use liquid fuel stages or other tricks to get enough ISP to make it work.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>SS2 's engine has a specific impulse of around 250 which is low ( LOX/LH might give you around 450 ) .
What 's that mean ?
The mass fraction to reach orbit ( propellant/structure + payload weight ) of a launcher that uses this type of engine would be in the low hundreds : 1 compared to 7 : 1 for a LOX/LH engine.Use a different oxidizer then .
LOX/HTPB hybrid has a theoretical ISP of 359 seconds .
You should be able to get pretty close with a real world version .
That 's in LOX/kerosene territory and we already have vehicles ( Proton , Soyuz , Falcon I ) that use that fuel combination to get to orbit .
If for some reason , that is n't good enough , then you can use liquid fuel stages or other tricks to get enough ISP to make it work .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>SS2's engine has a specific impulse of around 250 which is low (LOX/LH might give you around 450).
What's that mean?
The mass fraction to reach orbit (propellant/structure + payload weight) of a launcher that uses this type of engine would be in the low hundreds:1 compared to 7:1 for a LOX/LH engine.Use a different oxidizer then.
LOX/HTPB hybrid has a theoretical ISP of 359 seconds.
You should be able to get pretty close with a real world version.
That's in LOX/kerosene territory and we already have vehicles (Proton, Soyuz, Falcon I) that use that fuel combination to get to orbit.
If for some reason, that isn't good enough, then you can use liquid fuel stages or other tricks to get enough ISP to make it work.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30361310</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30357636</id>
	<title>Re:Whodathunk</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1260179760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I totally agree. That is similar to the contributions the p0rn industry has made to the internet. Oh wait...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I totally agree .
That is similar to the contributions the p0rn industry has made to the internet .
Oh wait.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I totally agree.
That is similar to the contributions the p0rn industry has made to the internet.
Oh wait...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30357026</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30358336</id>
	<title>Re:Enterprise, sure!</title>
	<author>sjames</author>
	<datestamp>1260183660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Yet another temporal paradox. I can't imagine Janeway or Cisco flaunting directives for amusement that way, perhaps Paris suggested the name.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yet another temporal paradox .
I ca n't imagine Janeway or Cisco flaunting directives for amusement that way , perhaps Paris suggested the name .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yet another temporal paradox.
I can't imagine Janeway or Cisco flaunting directives for amusement that way, perhaps Paris suggested the name.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30356784</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30356584</id>
	<title>How much for hte tickets</title>
	<author>OrangeMonkey11</author>
	<datestamp>1260217620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Have they release any sort of flight prices to the public or we can all assume right now the flight cost would be completely out of the range of the general population.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Have they release any sort of flight prices to the public or we can all assume right now the flight cost would be completely out of the range of the general population .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Have they release any sort of flight prices to the public or we can all assume right now the flight cost would be completely out of the range of the general population.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30356784</id>
	<title>Re:Enterprise, sure!</title>
	<author>JoshuaZ</author>
	<datestamp>1260218640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>It is worse than that. The shuttle Enterprise was explicitly named with the USS Enteprise as a spaceship in mind. To confuse matters even more, there have now been official references in Star Trek books and other material to the shuttle Enteprise as the first spaceship of that name. So in the Star Trek universe, the Enterprise shuttle existed but wasn't named after the fictional Enterprise (because Star Trek wasn't a television show in the Star Trek universe). Have a headache yet?</htmltext>
<tokenext>It is worse than that .
The shuttle Enterprise was explicitly named with the USS Enteprise as a spaceship in mind .
To confuse matters even more , there have now been official references in Star Trek books and other material to the shuttle Enteprise as the first spaceship of that name .
So in the Star Trek universe , the Enterprise shuttle existed but was n't named after the fictional Enterprise ( because Star Trek was n't a television show in the Star Trek universe ) .
Have a headache yet ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It is worse than that.
The shuttle Enterprise was explicitly named with the USS Enteprise as a spaceship in mind.
To confuse matters even more, there have now been official references in Star Trek books and other material to the shuttle Enteprise as the first spaceship of that name.
So in the Star Trek universe, the Enterprise shuttle existed but wasn't named after the fictional Enterprise (because Star Trek wasn't a television show in the Star Trek universe).
Have a headache yet?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30356542</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30357516</id>
	<title>Vss</title>
	<author>Saija</author>
	<datestamp>1260179160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Visual source safe?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Visual source safe ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Visual source safe?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30357052</id>
	<title>Richard Branson can be the new Willy Wonka</title>
	<author>mattwrock</author>
	<datestamp>1260176640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Everybody can buy Virgin media to for chance to get the golden ticket and a free flight. Watch out Apple!</htmltext>
<tokenext>Everybody can buy Virgin media to for chance to get the golden ticket and a free flight .
Watch out Apple !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Everybody can buy Virgin media to for chance to get the golden ticket and a free flight.
Watch out Apple!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30356764</id>
	<title>Anyone else tired of eco speak?</title>
	<author>mdarksbane</author>
	<datestamp>1260218580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Did that article seriously try to argue that a new spaceplane was going to be an ecological breakthrough? No, no, no! SS2 is cool because it's a spaceship, not because it's engines are fricking low-carbon.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Did that article seriously try to argue that a new spaceplane was going to be an ecological breakthrough ?
No , no , no !
SS2 is cool because it 's a spaceship , not because it 's engines are fricking low-carbon .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Did that article seriously try to argue that a new spaceplane was going to be an ecological breakthrough?
No, no, no!
SS2 is cool because it's a spaceship, not because it's engines are fricking low-carbon.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30358022</id>
	<title>Re:That's cool, but...</title>
	<author>lennier</author>
	<datestamp>1260181980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Gary Seven is Seven of Nine after an accident with a time machine and a sex-change booth... right?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Gary Seven is Seven of Nine after an accident with a time machine and a sex-change booth... right ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Gary Seven is Seven of Nine after an accident with a time machine and a sex-change booth... right?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30356518</parent>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_07_1849226_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30357478
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30356948
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_07_1849226_23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30356668
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30356584
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_07_1849226_37</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30358336
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30356784
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30356542
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_07_1849226_40</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30356804
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30356628
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30356502
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_07_1849226_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30361696
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30357848
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_07_1849226_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30360266
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30357072
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_07_1849226_38</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30356846
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30356502
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_07_1849226_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30358194
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30356518
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_07_1849226_29</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30359350
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30356784
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30356542
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_07_1849226_28</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30363070
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30357072
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_07_1849226_35</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30356750
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30356502
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_07_1849226_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30356882
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30356664
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30356518
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_07_1849226_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30359004
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30357850
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_07_1849226_27</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30368272
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30357138
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_07_1849226_30</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30366006
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30356784
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30356542
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_07_1849226_32</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30358678
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30356812
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30356664
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30356518
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_07_1849226_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30357056
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30356664
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30356518
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_07_1849226_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30358328
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30356784
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30356542
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_07_1849226_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30359758
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30356502
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_07_1849226_22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30359836
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30356474
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_07_1849226_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30357126
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30356474
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_07_1849226_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30361156
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30357026
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30356474
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_07_1849226_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30356904
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30356542
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_07_1849226_43</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30370442
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30361310
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30357330
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30357026
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30356474
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_07_1849226_39</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30357174
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30356502
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_07_1849226_42</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30359736
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30357418
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30356474
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_07_1849226_21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30357610
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30357138
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_07_1849226_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30357268
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30357026
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30356474
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_07_1849226_20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30357916
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30357470
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_07_1849226_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30360962
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30357026
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30356474
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_07_1849226_36</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30358160
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30357046
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30356728
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_07_1849226_41</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30358022
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30356518
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_07_1849226_26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30358112
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30356664
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30356518
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_07_1849226_31</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30358246
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30356542
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_07_1849226_33</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30356978
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30356518
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_07_1849226_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30363216
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30357418
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30356474
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_07_1849226_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30357830
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30357026
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30356474
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_07_1849226_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30357636
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30357026
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30356474
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_07_1849226_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30356974
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30356664
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30356518
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_07_1849226_34</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30415634
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30357810
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30357444
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_07_1849226_25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30357926
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30357138
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_07_1849226_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30363420
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30356838
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30356502
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_07_1849226_24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30357956
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30356518
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_07_1849226_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30366820
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30361310
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30357330
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30357026
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30356474
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_07_1849226.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30356964
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_07_1849226.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30357138
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30357926
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30357610
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30368272
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_07_1849226.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30357052
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_07_1849226.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30361890
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_07_1849226.18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30356728
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30357046
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30358160
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_07_1849226.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30356474
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30357418
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30359736
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30363216
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30357026
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30357330
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30361310
----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30366820
----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30370442
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30357830
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30361156
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30360962
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30357636
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30357268
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30357126
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30359836
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_07_1849226.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30356876
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_07_1849226.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30356948
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30357478
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_07_1849226.19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30356450
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_07_1849226.12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30357444
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30357810
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30415634
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_07_1849226.10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30357850
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30359004
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_07_1849226.13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30356542
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30358246
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30356784
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30366006
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30358328
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30358336
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30359350
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30356904
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_07_1849226.16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30357128
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_07_1849226.11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30357072
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30363070
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30360266
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_07_1849226.14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30357470
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30357916
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_07_1849226.17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30357756
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_07_1849226.15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30356584
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30356668
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_07_1849226.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30356502
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30356750
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30356838
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30363420
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30359758
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30356846
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30356628
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30356804
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30357174
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_07_1849226.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30356518
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30358194
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30356978
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30358022
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30356664
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30356812
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30358678
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30356974
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30358112
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30356882
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30357056
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30357956
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_07_1849226.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30357848
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_07_1849226.30361696
</commentlist>
</conversation>
