The Story of How NASA Went From Space Shuttles To SpaceX & Commercial Rockets 

lol

Ominous...

Reading this comment and watching it back made me spit out my drink almost

its a threat to Boeing

Got a kind of Liam Neeson vibe xD

I kind of liked "menacing" Scott Manley "Fly Safe."

You have no idea how many people I’ve pushed from balconies.... in Crusader KIngs II

**Immediately devises some completely Kerbal design to hit the ground at less than 12m/s.*

@@user2C47 Could you actually design a human-shaped object to fly off a balcony, and use thrusters and a parachute to ....Fly Safely?

The flight would be completely safe; it is the landing which might trouble the aviator. :-)

Or fictional, beer drinking, Canadian brothers (McKenzie).

dont leave them up there!

Like toys on Elons bottle rocket.

We need a bob and doug kerman in KSP

@@Bluemorpho_90 You got Bob Kerman as one of the classic four.

Wow, I'm glad someone saw that. I watched it live, and they both landed on the same pad according to the live video. ... They oopsed the video and had the same video stream for the left/right booster for the live broadcast (if you can find it, you'll see them both going for the pad on the left from their own perspective). They corrected the archived footage.

the pair of triple sonic booms was pretty awesome.

LOL , that what everyone remember .

@@somedude-lc5dy It sounded like an artillery barrage.

I'll never forget that sight, it was absolutely amazing

unless they get a crewed orion up to ISS in the next 6 months they're gonna blow right past that

@@AsbestosMuffins lol its NASA so in 6 years maybe.

@@AsbestosMuffins they launched on my birthday

@@spinningsquare1325 Mine too 😁

spider0804 you do know president Obama cancelled the NASA Space Program back in 2013-2014

A formidable craft...

"these ... "shuttles" ..., they are formidable craft? [...] oh, yeah... bad day

I'm still trying to figure out how the Shuttle recovered them & the Death Gliders after destroying two Goa'uld motherships. Shuttle bays werent nearly wide enough to haul back two Death Gliders.

@@theatom7264 that's classified

That's fictionary! 📽️

What I'm excited for is people going to the moon (or Mars, or wherever) to stay for good. I'm not sure I'll see that in my lifetime (I'm 45), but that would truly start a new era for all humanity. But, in fairness, I'd really like to see the starship bellyflop, too ;-)

@@SolarWebsite sign me up, i will be the first person to get high on mars

yea bellyflop will be one for the ages!

So far, they've all flopped. :)

Yeah that'll be awsome,great times to be alive

I'm more surprised that the first landing of the Falcon 9 was almost five years ago. Still remember how that day felt.

Time flies so fast just like the rocket.

*NASA* "We have all these damn bugs in the software" *BOEING* "They are features..."

H1-B software developers?

haha I hadn't thought of that

Boeing, covering up incompetence for over 100 years. See, their PR and advertising department needs to hire me.

Boeing should have heeded the wise words of a man who once said: Check yo staging.

@@joer8854 this aged well...

The drone ship names are from a si-fi book series too

I'm gonna be waiting for a Halo.

Fascinating🖖🏼

drone ships named for The Culture sci-fi books.

Voyager was IN Star Trek, if you recall. Does that count?

I've been following since before Falcon 1's first flight! Those times were so slow, it felt like there would never be a chance SpaceX could ever have a viable space program. Here we are 16 or so years later, and landing a booster from space is boring because I want Starship to carry 50 people to the Moon.

I took notice of SpaceX after its first flight. It seemed so wild to me at the time that a private company is launching huge rockets to orbit.

@@izzad777 I honestly was a big fan of the Atlas V and while Falcon 1 seemed cool but irrelevant, Falcon 9 just didn't look very impressive. I thought, wait this is supposed to replace my beloved Shuttle? I was told they had big plans including reusing those rockets but I didn't care. All I cared about was that Shuttle had maybe 2-3 flights left and that was it. Then things got very interesting very quickly.

Well then you're not a good person. spacex is such a horrible thing.

@@spacexishorriblepleasedeleteit Care to elaborate?

Nobody is excited for spacex. Everybody hates it. spacex will not achieve anything, it will keep failing.

Paul, thank you for supporting my comments on the trump speech. Pete a.

If only they would switch fully. Make no mistake.... The taxpayer is still being raped.

@@jshepard152 Theyre trying, but Congress really wants likes them, and Congress has a lot of control over NASA's contracts

​@@RandomCommentDue It's really a mystery why congress repeatedly screws the american taxpayer by advocating for cost-plus... Also a mystery how so many politicians end up as consultants and lobbyists for Defense Contractors... Weird.

@ShallowAbyss it's no mystery... The congress/senator persons voting for these ridiculous contracts are voting for the promise of the contractors setting up production/development facilities in their voting districts. The congress/senator/consultant/lobbyist gets to say "I created 5000 jobs in by passing this contract!" (never mind that the people employed by the contract were not already residents in the district, and are guaranteed to abandon the district as soon as the contract is complete) "and you can count on me creating more ((net zero value)) jobs the next time I vote to overpay for basic services!"

@@Kineth1 That is exactly why the government should have way less money than they do now. You can't trust they will spend it wisely.

Up ! It would be great, i'm searching it...

Search for "spaceref fratricide report" (comments with links seem to get hidden, so you'll have to google). Scott has mentioned it multiple times before. However, note that NASA has issued a statement afterwards saying that "We have analysis that tells today that the capsule will fly free of the danger". You can find that statement by searching "orlandosentinel ares I report" Since SLS is also using the same SRBs (2x!) and Orion LES hasn't really changed, I assume that the same situation would exist with SLS. But I haven't heard anything about this issue in the recent years, so I assumed that this has been buried as an unsupported theory. Scott's voice while saying "great" also sounds kinda sarcastic, so I'm not sure if he means "great" as good, or "great" as dramatically entertaining (which the report certainly is starting with the title "100% FRATRICIDE") But you never know when some "unsupported theory" will resurface after something happens, as has many time before. It's always good to be aware!

The hosers took off!

@@dwayneschmetsky eh

Just as they docked, they reported how many bottles of water they consumed. CANADIANs knew what they meant.

This.

Yeah. :( Boeing seems to be pushing too hard and taking shortcuts.

1: Look at the RAC1-3 concepts, which were the proposed designed to replace Constellation. RAC1 I believe was what became SLS and was picked because it was the only one that maintained Shuttle contracts, which NASAknew would be the easiest sell 2:Its hard to quantify how much it extended the time. It certainlt did, just hard to say how long, especially as there are always delays in spaceflight.

I remember something pitched called Jupiter that would have relied more on several new core technologies such as another giant f1 style engine, methane upper stage, and such but i don't think it ever went past a white paper as for how delayed CC is because of underfunding is not really easy to quantify since spacex has done quite a lot of development outside of nasa launches. the thing is full funding could have allowed nasa to fund more than 2 vehicles, and possibly got ULA to test their stuff more thoroughly

Well as far as SLS goes, There were 3 main options RAC-1, 2, and 3. RAC-1 was shuttle-derived 8.4m wide core Hydrolox & SRBs RAC-2 was the 10m wide "modern Saturn V" powered by RP-1 RAC-3 was basically a combination of different components from various launch vehicles. Ultimately RAC-1 became SLS.

PsychoLucario I actually disagree, The funding had a specific time timeline attached to it. 2016 was to be if Full funding had started in 2012, actual full funding started in 2014, specifically CCIp was completed in 2014 it should’ve been done in 2012. I could be wrong.

What are you talking about? What's a premiere, what's wrong?

premieres are great tho, why don't you like them?

@@animationspace8550 What premiere? What are you talking about? Is this a new thing when you are "premiere" when it's first minutes after publishing? Wh- why? Why do people care about this?

👋

He already has but I can't find it. Basically if it ever had to abort while still on the first stage the flight termination system would have created a giant cloud of burning rocket fuel particles, that would have burned the parachutes of the crew trying to land. They would have most likely lost their parachutes and died on impact. And the whole point of the abort system was to get away from stage 1, since you could abort using the Orion propulsion system on top of stage two after ditching that. So the abort system with the tower was a death trap and the safest option would have been to have none, so back to Shuttle safety, basically no realistic chance of aborting until the boosters are jettisoned. After that once those where gone you had options with Shuttle (and Ares I).

I was subscribed but I realized I forgot to turn on notifications. To think I was missing his videos!

Yes exactly :) It was a demonstration version of the capsule

NASA publishes a lot of stuff, I usually write these from memory without sources to hand, but, here's some of the COTS history www.nasa.gov/sites/default/files/files/SP-2014-617.pdf

@@scottmanley Thank you!