STKNRUD

Cool video with sound I haven't seen before.


http://www.youtube.com/watch_popup?feature=player_embedded&v=2aCOyOvOw5c#!

ByLoudDesign

Cool, thanks!!!

KFX450

My Feedback: (30)

One of the coolest vids Ive seen..Thats awesome

Vincent

My Feedback: (61)

Now that is a durable camera !!
Vin...

SinCityJets

GoPro Hero 4.5 (not yet released to the public)

STKNRUD

The camera is no doubt a sturdy one but can you imagine the strength the cameraman must have had in his arms to hold on to it?

1320Fastback

Probably the single best video I have ever seen. Simply stunning what we USED to do.

Woketman

My Feedback: (6)

Yes, such a shame that we, as a nation, are decaying so darn fast. This is just one more example......

SJN

Dont worry. New videos from china will be on the net, so we dont miss out on the cool footage like this

basimpsn

My Feedback: (5)

[&:]

oversprayer

The amount of views on this thread alone, are an indication as to why such an awesome aerospace / aviation acheivement has been lost.I was priviledged enough to work there from 06-11

Joe Westrich

My Feedback: (95)

That was one of the best videos I have ever seen. I was hypnotized by it.

Woketman

My Feedback: (6)

The shear effort and engineering horsepower that went into the entire Space Shuttle Program still boggles my mind to this day. The capability that our great nation simply threw away is astounding, and quite sad. We have truly given up human spaceflight for a long time, perhaps forever. The fool in charge right now says BS about how we will go beyond LEO and explore asteroids and Mars. Yeah right, with no budget. What a jack_ss that guy is!

I am so very priviledged to have been a part of the Shuttle Program. I miss it so very much, but have wonderful memories of being a part of such an endeavor.

FalconWings

My Feedback: (57)

It is sad to see it go, as I'm sure a lot of people also miss the Mercury V days. STS was another FRED, but still very unique and impressive (like many other FRED's C-5, B-1, B-2).
I think it is a good thing that technology has made it possible not to need to have an STS. Launching human remains, Direct TV stuff and NSYNC memebers into space has gotten a lot cheaper.

Even more impressive is that 5 years from now, we will have college grads launching a "low cost" moon rover, made with Lowe's and Home Depot's finest. This is where America shines.

It sucks that I never got to see it launch. So long to the coolest glider in history!

David

Woketman

My Feedback: (6)

Yes, the low cost moon rovers will be VERY cool, if they ever happen and if any of them succeed. But when you say "I think it is a good thing that technology has made it possible not to need to have an STS", well, if we suddenly have a need to put 50,000 lbs into LEO and have it human tended, we are screwed! We had that capability and we threw it away. The ISS is perhasp one Soyuz screw up away from a 100 billion dollar failure. It was complete idiocy to throw away STS without a successor!!!

Robrow

I echo the comments on the footage, absolutely incredible! I managed to fit in a 6 day trip to Florida from the UK last July to watch and more importantly feel STS 135 launch on my birthday....once in a lifetime experience for me.

Rob.

oversprayer

again another example of the ignorance that the american people have about the shuttle program and what it offered. Not at all your fault to not know what it is or was capable of carrying.And Im not even going to get into the lack of respect for the "Human remains"as you put it. And Honestly dont really know where to place the blame??? Is it Nasa's fault for not marketing itself and its programs better??? or Congress's fault for not giving some more money for them to do that??? or is it just a country with a prodominetly "take everything for granted" mentality??? Heres a funny fact, The ISSis in an Orbit around the earth. That means that It will continually be falling back to earth due to gravitational forces. Therefore it must be boosted up to a higher alttitude every so often to remain in its orbit.This has been done in the past bydoing a OMS burn That stands for Orbiter manuevering Sysytem.Something that is Bolted to the Shuttle. A system which I worked on forfive years.If There was to be a problem with the Russian vehicle and we not be able to do this we could have to abandon the ISS and watch it re enter earths atmosphere.AlsoI believe there area total of six humans in space currently and the soyuz holds three. You do the math. Not everyone makes it home.Thats why we, with the shuttle program had so many, so we could have a LON vehicle thats 'LaunchOn Need'a back up, and also to continue processing for another mission. So the last shuttles payload was full of supplies and things to help ISSto continue, to sustain this home in space for research and all sorts of things. Now it is complete and we cant get ourselves there toutilize it. on our own anyways. But hey we are relying on the Russians now andthey have a great record??? I meanreally whoforgot to carry the one when doing the math problemofthere re entry angle a couple of years ago?They could have openedthat capsule and had fried cosmo and astronaut brains. Attention to Detail.The Challenger was a design flaw. in the boosterOrings. And theColumbia was caused by shedding foam andice debris strikinga leftside leading edge RCCpanel (Reinforced Carbon Carbon) creating a void in the leadingedge area of the wing that allowed hot gassesto enter and breach he TPS system and caused aun recoverable situation for the flight control system to recover from. And I dont mean elevons and rudder either. The RCSand FRCS (Reaction Controll System) and (Forward Reaction Control Systems) These systems were firing more than they had in other reentries and they noticed that. Basically the Columbia was trying to survive and get its precious cargo home. but the forces of rentering at 17,500 mph was to much. causing a such a drag on the left side and the heat making it to the left main landing gear. Ever seen a 28 ply tire explode? now think of that insidethe gear well. what do you think would happen? This is why from the return to flight we incorporated the backflip manuever. Where we would position theshuttle close to the ISSand they would use the RCSand do a backflip and take pictures of the shutles exterior TPS surfaces and make sure there werent any breachs. I hope that your college kids send there little bottle rocketsto the moon. and that they are sucessfull. but as for me I think that until we have something heavy lift, thatwe arent going to beon top of space exploration.

FalconWings

My Feedback: (57)

What if there was a military manned STS replacement already operational that YOU and I did not know about?
Can YOU tell me there isn't one?

No need to be an ignorant American to know it WAS a FRED and it was outdated. Several of my coalleagues worked at Rockwell during design phase, and I know the stories. Hope they make a movie some day.

Anyway, relax and enjoy the cool vid. We will miss it dearly.
;-)

oversprayer

definetly is old, we just should have had another launch vehicle in place so that there wouldnt have been the mass exodus/ Layoff of a highly trained and educated team. sorry to have gotten on a soap box. You just dont grow up in an area where shuttles are launched what seems like every month, and not have it be something that has a real meaning to you.

STKNRUD

That is the BIG loss....an entire generation of scientists and engineers and their collective "history" that can't be replaced except at a hugh price in terms of cost and time. When an entire program (not the same as a single defense weapon like the B2, etc) is discontinued, those scientists and engineers go on to other employers or retire. And the depth of technical ability in so many disciplines that comprised NASA, is lost. I often felt that it was such a unique organization of so many disciplines, it could have become the R&D center of the U.S. in solving a lot of other problems....if they could keep the politics, ideologies, graft and corruption of it. I better get another cup of coffee and wake-up.

George

FalconWings

My Feedback: (57)

No soapbox man! Totally understand where you are coming from. I believe Woketman was hit close to his heart also. He was close to the plant where the center tank was maintained.

Woketman

My Feedback: (6)

Well, the ISS is not falling back due to gravity! It's due to drag.

And yes, I can state without question that there definitely is no military heavy lift manned vehicle that we have not been told about. No such thing now!

Couch Potato

Ah, double negative, so such a thing DOES exist !

oversprayer

Ok Not to be a total NERDhere but I guess My inner pocket protector will now show itself. The Drag that you are talking of is a gravitational force, the pull of the earth on the ISS which slows its speed down andbynot maintaining the optimal speed to maintain the desired altitude it falls towards earth. Not like you might think where it just drops likeWiley coyote from a cliff after he holds up the sign HELP! but a gradual fall slowly drawing closer to the earth. Until it starts to experience theAtmosphere. Then It will be traveling at such aspeed that it will now have oxygen rushing across all of the unprotected surfaces and heating them up until the ISS itself looks like a shooting star streaking across the sky.About what Columbia looked like. Only ISSis bigger.There isnt any Oxygen molecules in space to produce such a drag, that I believe you are refferencing. This Same Force has been used in the calculations to go to the moon and beyond. (Slingshot) How long do we burn the OMS? how long to go around this planet and then speed up to break its gravitational pull to go in the desired pathto go tothat one?OK I dont work there any more and I have to get back to painting peoples toys. Thanks for posting earlier. And Fort worth we do not have a problem. lol...

FalconWings

My Feedback: (57)

Like a good friend from ADP (used to be Skunkworks) once told me, you can't deny nor accept something you don't know about.

Have faith.

:-)