A short cinematic video I made using archival footage from NASA's Artemis 1 mission. Soundtrack: "Heroes" - Richard Blair-Oliphant (a.k.a. the When We Left Earth theme)
The power of the SLS solid rocket boosters upon ignition was powerful enough to knock both elevator systems out of commission on the mobile launch platform blowing the doors into the shafts and wrecking the hell out of the lifts. Mighty human engineering
When I was a kid, my biggest ambition was to be a space shuttle commander, landing a giant glider with the aerodynamics of a brick from 400 kilometers up. I was disappointed to hear that they would be retired in 2011. But I think I’ll settle for the space shuttle’s true successor.
Amazing video with the music of When We Left Earth. I love how you synchronized the images with the music. Congratulations on your work, looking forward to Artemis II 🤜🤛👨🚀
Kick ass - Keep em coming video tech people! Can’t wait for the smokiest day launches - The key ingredients for a block buster is Fire noise and smoke - When all 3 of these factors are captured, directed and displayed at the correct realistic db -low and normal speeds and various Angles and positions you will make a blockbuster-
Have to admit this music suits Saturn V launch than Artemis... The sound, vibrations and the trail of those mighty F1 engines is unmatchable to any space launch vehicle.. That was a majestic creation indeed..
Incredible work! If I make make a suggestion, Scott Buckley made a song called "Artemis" dedicated to this launch and all future a lunches and I have yet to see someone make a cinematic with that 👀
Интересно! Подача воды осуществляется сразу после включения кислородно-водородных двигателей. Для отвода лишнего тепла и во избежании подгорания нижней части ракеты-носителя.
"Nearly fifty years after the last flight of Project Apollo, NASA launches the first of a new generation of moon rockets - The Space Launch System. Though built using Space Shuttle-era hardware, it's one of the most powerful rockets since the Saturn V. And with this first launch, NASA will set the stage for a new era of human spaceflight..."
Starship is more powerful, let alone the N-1. Before you say N-1 didn’t make it to space, N-1 flew. And you’d probably accept starship as a contender anyway Bc it’s so new.
@@yeetusdeletus742 It is not false, but the SATURN V can carry 130 tons in low orbit instead of 95 tons for the SLS. ,Moreover SATURN V did not need a rocket propellant and was able to simultaneously launch into space and towards the Moon a second spacecraft capable of landing on the moon. We don't share the same notion of power: you're talking about thrust!
@@idk_itsme1 I don't quite understand your comment: The Lunar module on board the Saturn V was able to land on any place on the Moon at a desired time. I emphasized that Saturn V was capable of carrying two spacecraft the CSM and the Lunar Module simultaneously, no other rocket does and will do the same. The SLS rocket is unable to do this.
@@erebus8579 but with the station (the program includes the moon station) they would access any zones in a desired time and they would do experiments directly onto that station and eventually colonize the Moon
Well this is all great, but, let's get this rocket up and running. It took too long for its maiden voyage, without astronauts. Apollo 10 was deemed to "Sort out the unknowns" Have NASA do the same. Put a couple of astronauts on board and have them circle the moon and figure out what it would take to fully put this vehicle into operation.
NASA flew the Saturn V twice before they ever tried putting humans on it. Plus an unmanned Saturn 1B launch to test the LM, and another crewed Saturn 1B to test the CM in Earth orbit. Only after all that did they fly humans around the moon - and that was still considered a pretty big stretch. With Artemis, they had one unmanned flight and now it's considered ready to take folks to the moon. I'd say they're doing alright.
@@SynchronizorVideos exactly, and the only reason Artemis is taking longer to reach its second flight than Apollo did is because NASA literally has 1/10 of the money they had back then now
@@glopnessm0nster144 Using what technology precisely? Ion and nuclear drive are the way forward and this the R&D that you speak of will rely upon private sector funding.
@@glopnessm0nster144 R&D relates to perfecting and developing technologies as much as nascent and novel ones. In terms of applied rocketry, ion drive and nuclear drive are new technologies that don't exist yet.
How come they never took pictures of the former Apollo sites? I was looking forward to that, and silenced all the conspiracy people who said We never went to the moon.
THEY DID: Japanese moon mission "KAGUYA" (SELENE) in 2007 & American mission LRO (Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter) in 2009 both did take pictures of all Apollo landing sites!
@@nizaru100 People now days are just ignorant even with facts and quick to judge. Same one's that do not believe in life on other planets and solar systems can exist either. Often saying why then? Do they not make contact? Because if they have light speed capability we are primates compared to them. take care Marruecos! Apprerciate the comeback. age "56"
@@RFKFANTS67 Well Thank you Sir (I love the English formal speech, thus i hate ''dude'', ''hey, Men!! '' etc..), but Marruecos means Morocco in Spanish , thus I meant I'm from Morocco, But, as a scientist (by my studies) we must not confuse between believing the authenticity of a fact (moon landing) & opinions or speculations about life on other planets etcc , these questions are still in debates between scientist.
ARTEMIS 1 : CINEMATIC CINEMATIC 303 CINEMATIC 306 CINEMATIC 303 CINEMATIC 304 CINEMATIC 204 CINEMATIC 207 CINEMATIC 104 ARTIMES 1 : 1. 3 = Tiga wilayah cina 0. = 0 bulatan di tiga wilayah cina 3. = sama di bulatin di 1 kepingan 2. Sama seperti di cina 304 sama beandingnya tidak ada bedanya 🕋🌈🌈🌈🌈👍👍👍👍👍👍
You think it’s outdated because you don’t know why they chose to use old rocket parts and designs. This rocket is an extension of the STS and constellation program (space shuttle program and a program that uses the space shuttle solid rocket boosters) It is 80s tech, not 60s tech. Throwing away perfectly good rocket parts isn’t what nasa wanted to do so here we are, using parts from old rockets and saving money from old programs.
So Americans are struggling to survive, let's throw billions at this....time and a place, and this isn't either one. Fix your country first before wasting money you don't have.
NASA’s budget as a percent of the US’s total has only steadily declined since the 60s. The device you typed that on is directly descended from the technology development from the Apollo guidance computer. Spaceflight returns 3-14x the money invested into it in terms of economic impact to the U.S. and regularly leads to life changing technological developments. I’d say our space program is doing fine. We can afford to take care of our citizens and keep a strong focus on progress. There are much more pressing issues in the US budget than 0.2% of it (Artemis budget) for a program that has only returned good.
