<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: &#8220;Maximizing&#8221; NASA&#8217;s Potential in Flight and on the Ground</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.opennasa.com/2009/01/30/maximizing-nasas-potential-in-flight-and-on-the-ground/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.opennasa.com/2009/01/30/maximizing-nasas-potential-in-flight-and-on-the-ground/</link>
	<description>Your NASA, My NASA, OUR NASA</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 23 Jun 2011 16:14:56 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: rquintanilla</title>
		<link>http://www.opennasa.com/2009/01/30/maximizing-nasas-potential-in-flight-and-on-the-ground/comment-page-1/#comment-11233</link>
		<dc:creator>rquintanilla</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 11 Feb 2009 05:35:50 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.opennasa.com/?p=364#comment-11233</guid>
		<description>My only concern with the proposal is that it will have NASA change direction AGAIN.  I believe that we should have flexible plans, so that we can innovate.  NASA should have strong central leadership, but political whims must be minimized.

That being stated the constellation program is overpriced and has a low probability of meeting deadlines.  I think that a better plan should be made, that is adaptable.  Part of that plan could be to eliminate the ARES I.  

I am all for doing more types of work at NASA, but ask for more funding.  It is a good investment for the future and it creates jobs now.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>My only concern with the proposal is that it will have NASA change direction AGAIN.  I believe that we should have flexible plans, so that we can innovate.  NASA should have strong central leadership, but political whims must be minimized.</p>
<p>That being stated the constellation program is overpriced and has a low probability of meeting deadlines.  I think that a better plan should be made, that is adaptable.  Part of that plan could be to eliminate the ARES I.  </p>
<p>I am all for doing more types of work at NASA, but ask for more funding.  It is a good investment for the future and it creates jobs now.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Natalie</title>
		<link>http://www.opennasa.com/2009/01/30/maximizing-nasas-potential-in-flight-and-on-the-ground/comment-page-1/#comment-11218</link>
		<dc:creator>Natalie</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 10 Feb 2009 20:58:53 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.opennasa.com/?p=364#comment-11218</guid>
		<description>Really? No commnents? I would have thought that people would either love or hate this proposal.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Really? No commnents? I would have thought that people would either love or hate this proposal.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

