<?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: Intelsat Signs First Commercial Falcon Heavy Launch Agreement</title>
	<atom:link href="http://blog.nss.org/?feed=rss2&#038;p=3650" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://blog.nss.org/?p=3650</link>
	<description>Blogging for the creation of a spacefaring civilization</description>
	<pubDate>Thu, 23 May 2013 03:27:07 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.7</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Robert Clark</title>
		<link>http://blog.nss.org/?p=3650&cpage=1#comment-34400</link>
		<dc:creator>Robert Clark</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 30 May 2012 13:10:47 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.nss.org/?p=3650#comment-34400</guid>
		<description>Must be quite a large satellite to require the Falcon Heavy to send it to GEO.
 BTW, earlier reports gave the mass to GTO as 19,000 kg, while now it's given as 12,000. Any explanation of the discrepancy?

   Bob Clark</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Must be quite a large satellite to require the Falcon Heavy to send it to GEO.<br />
 BTW, earlier reports gave the mass to GTO as 19,000 kg, while now it&#8217;s given as 12,000. Any explanation of the discrepancy?</p>
<p>   Bob Clark</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
