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.
Zeta0001 it could have been avoided look at the issues at nasa command they literally said ohh there has been damage to the tiles before and it came through fine so it should be ok same thing happened with the O rings
@@wargey3431 The engineers also were at fault as in testing they thought it was impossible for the foam to damage the carbon carbon, and told management not to worry. It took just the right angle and size of foam for damage to the carbon carbon to occur, and sadly it was from a part that didnt need the foam.
@@wargey3431 The O rings even more. Thiokol engineers where begging NASA not to launch, predicting disaster. The administrator famously exclaiming: "So when do you want me to launch in Spring??!"
About 7 years ago I was a college freshman learning to play KSP watching your videos, Scott. Last week I was in MCC-X as Life Support Specialist of the Demo-2 mission. You are doing great work, I would not have made it here without your channel. Congrats on 1M, please carry on with your great work, and please fly safe!!!
Imagine how many more shuttle disasters we might have seen in that time ... Really, I'd say the decisions leading to the current situation were made during the development of the shuttle. Continuous underfunding led to far too many design compromises.
Well there was one accident every decade and a half so maybe one issue? But at the same time every accident is a hard learned lesson increasing safety for each subsequent launch. O rings and shielding got a lot more attention
Landing a rocket was exciting, falcon heavy was exciting, launching men into space was exciting. But what I’m really excited for is to see them make a starship bellyflop.
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 ;-)
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.
8:36 - I cannot believe the single constellation test flight cost so much. I had a bit of nostalgia for constellation, cause it was the big space plan when I was a kid, but looking back it was just proto SLS.
There is no limit to cost on a “cost plus (profit)” contract, simple arithmetic proves that the incentives are to increase costs since the profit increases proportionally. Whoever came up with this idea in the government should be Publicly executed.
phoenix rising The F 35 is the worst fighter ever for the money with the most cost overruns ever. What are you thinking? It is not a $400 million boondoggle like that one space shot, it is 1000 times worse at $400 billion and rising!
I remember thinking I would want to go see one of those big Ares V launchers go. 188t to LEO would have surpassed even the Saturn V's performance of 140t to LEO. SLS is currently slated to top out at 130t for block 2.
Scott you’re one of the very best at what you do here on this platform, thank you very much for your contributions to all things space and congrats on 1m! All the best to you sir.
Thanks for keeping the politics out and real info in! Great to see someone made it clear it took 4 presidential terms to get to this point...this deserve to be in US History text book.
@@lawrenceallen8096 The commerical crew program was started in 2011, which was during the presidency of Obama. Last week's US manned launch was in part thanks to the actions of Barrack Obama, along with Bush who started the privatization of launch capabilities.
Aside from the political problems, I think Constellation also had some image problems. In particular, the almost complete lack of a public image. In summer of 2007, I was working with many fellow college students as a summer engineering intern between my Junior and Senior years of college at a USAF aerodynamics testing facility. This particular facility was not very far away from one of the NASA facilities where a significant part of the Constellation development was being conducted and that NASA facility's prime contractor was the same company that we worked for at the USAF base. So, they took us all over there for a tour one day. In this room full of super-geeky engineers who were working in the aerospace research industry, few if any of us were familiar with the Ares rockets at all, despite the fact that, at the time, they were the entire planned future of U.S. manned spaceflight. It becomes a lot easier for politicians to cancel the entire planned future of U.S. manned spaceflight when much of the general public isn't even aware of the plan.
It's always so satisfying to hear "Fly safe". And I never get bored, I start to watch these videos about the stuff I can make lectures about, yet still I just listen and enjoy. Thank you, Scott Manley, and thank all your audience. It's all so nice to be united about space technologies.
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.
@@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.
I want to thank you for being you. Your attention to detail is amazing. Every time I get into a NASA conversation or when I talk about space for that matter, with my friends, I refer them to you. I do so because I respect your accounting. Keep up the good work, Scott.
@@Brixxter Not the point. I don't know of any space enthusiast who posted an off topic video after the DM-2 launch. Would it be feasible for NBC news to cover the cake baking contest as the the top story for tonight as opposed to a 9.2 earthquake that wold hit LA? I don't think so.
As this video shows, over the last few months the part timers, semi pros, amateurs and enthusiasts have raised the bar so much I think they deserve a dedicated Space\Science Channel. As dreams go this may seem far fetched but, as showed with SpaceX, from small beginnings an awful lot can change in 10 years.
Wow. I hadn't known before that the KSP2 project managers were known rapists. You just broke my heart, but thankfully tempered my expectations. Another WOW... I just did a quick search of "private division monetization" and they EXPLICITLY state that they will take action against anybody who tries to make money off of their derivative works, whether it is through advertisements or merchandising. And then: They go on to make claims against "any other big reveal in the story." Seriously, showing off a landing on the Mun, Minmus, or Duna could be considered a "big reveal in the story." They need to do some serious re-thinking of their policies if they expect to maintain a healthy relationship with the KSP community.
I don't even play KSP, and I'm pissed-off about how Star Theory was treated! I hope the Kerbal Kommunity sticks it to Take-Two, but given how "DGAF" most gamers are I doubt it.
@@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!"
I think the first Falcon Heavy launch was also relevant to the Commercial Crew Program, while not technically, it further fueled the excitement toward SpaceX and space in general and further legitimized SpaceX as a company that can actually achieve its objectives
@@KnightRanger38 So if I build a car in my Garage, but order a crate engine for it, I didn't really build a car in my Garage? Or if I build a Computer in my basement, but install an Intel processor, I didn't build the computer?
@@ShelburneCountry you assembled it. I think that's enough to get you a "made in garage" sticker under the eyes of the law, but you have to admit the hardest parts of the build were not done in-house.
@@JohnDoe-420 This is such a stupid argument. So nobody had ever in the history of the world ever thought of building a plane, done any science on it before the wright brothers. They just out of thin air decided, Hey I'm going to build something to fly. That's when they started work on designing and creating the worlds first internal combustion engine, a thought never before had in history. Every advancement ever made in the history of the world used knowledge and items created by those who came before them. Nobody ever got there completely 100% on their own. Building an engine doesn't mean you own and get credit for everything that engine will ever get used in from that point on. For that matter, most of the US space program and their advances using your criteria belongs to the Russians. They've used Russian engines for decades.
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!
Not to get political, but I remember when the Obama administration was heavily criticized for effectively ending the Constellation program. Everyone was crying "Oh, waily waily waily, 'tis the sound o' Doom..." Interesting now to see how that decision was absolutely the right way to go. If it hadn't been for the bias toward the commercial programs back then, it would have been at least another five years before a manned launch from the US.
Thank you for just giving a history lesson. Probably the only UA-camr I’ll be watching so that I can focus on something other than the world burning. Also, could you do a video on small rocket engines like Curie, Rutherford, engines on the sky crane for the mars landers, etc? I feel like everyone knows the big boy rockets on the boosters and second stages but the little engines that could never get the recognition they deserve.
Bravo for saying "new president" at several points instead of naming names. It's a great idea that avoids creating the temptation for culture war nonsense in the comments.
I still have two questions. 1. Was there an alternative to the SLS before Richard Shelby got his hands on it? 2. What what is the total amount of time lost during the commercial crew program not attributable to government funding shortfalls? I know that Dragon had to lose its Landing legs and The DM one Capsule had A rapid unscheduled disassembly, but what was the original projected date of launch after the first year of full commercial crew funding because I thought it was supposed to be 2017-2018.
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.
I like your content Scott, but I'm no fan of premieres. At least this seems like an instant-start premiere. *edit - I guess we'll see how this video performs compared to his normal video publications in terms of views/likes.
@@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?
The Shuttle was the worst thing to happen to NASA; it was the White Elephant that bankrupted NASA while keeping it in LEO. After Apollo, NASA could have gone to a low cost 25 ton to LEO ELV with one F1A engine on the first stage and one J2S on the upper stage. Performance would be slightly better than the F9 1.2 in throwaway mode to LEO and substantially better to GEO or Earth Escape. It would have built a Space Station faster than the Shuttle could. And, it would have sent probes to the outer planets better than the collection of Titans, Deltas and Atlases -- possibly with the probes having a 20 ton kicker 3rd stage with an AJ10 or something so it can help with both Earth Escape and the Capture Burn years into the mission.
Like it says in the CAIB.. Nixon cut the development budget in half. That's why the shuttle happened. There's a whole chapter about it in the CAIB report.
Thank you for uploading. I had the opporunity to witness a rocket launch in 2018. Amazing experience. I shared a pretty awesome clip of the experience to my channel.
Bob and Doug are such Kerbal-sounding names.
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.
imagine standing on your balcony when scott manley suddenly appears behind you and says "fly safe" before pushing you over the railing
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. :-)
Today's "fly safe" sounded more like a threat rather than an advice.
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
The most amazing thing I remember from the Falcon Heavy launch was the sight of both boosters landing on adjacent pads.
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
"Hey Doug you want to fly this shuttle cobbled together out of spare parts? " "When?" he asks.
Rip Sumrall - gotta love Endeavour! Lol
He loved it so much he kept the name for C206 DM-2.
Zeta0001 it could have been avoided look at the issues at nasa command they literally said ohh there has been damage to the tiles before and it came through fine so it should be ok same thing happened with the O rings
@@wargey3431 The engineers also were at fault as in testing they thought it was impossible for the foam to damage the carbon carbon, and told management not to worry. It took just the right angle and size of foam for damage to the carbon carbon to occur, and sadly it was from a part that didnt need the foam.
@@wargey3431 The O rings even more. Thiokol engineers where begging NASA not to launch, predicting disaster. The administrator famously exclaiming: "So when do you want me to launch in Spring??!"
🙂“I’m Scott Manley” 😐 “Fly safe”
'As late as 2020'
Well, finally a spaceflight date that was hit bang on.
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
About 7 years ago I was a college freshman learning to play KSP watching your videos, Scott.
Last week I was in MCC-X as Life Support Specialist of the Demo-2 mission. You are doing great work, I would not have made it here without your channel.
Congrats on 1M, please carry on with your great work, and please fly safe!!!
1:30 "the date of retirement was pushed back from 2012 to 2020"
Imagine still seeing shuttle flying today
Arnav Mummineni - what a wild thought. Just had nostalgia
Well, I mean, I'm sure there are still _parts_ of it still flying today...
Just give a Shuttle to SpaceX and they refurbish, split the weight and mount it to a F9 Superheavy to get it up, I bet!
Imagine how many more shuttle disasters we might have seen in that time ...
Really, I'd say the decisions leading to the current situation were made during the development of the shuttle. Continuous underfunding led to far too many design compromises.
Well there was one accident every decade and a half so maybe one issue? But at the same time every accident is a hard learned lesson increasing safety for each subsequent launch. O rings and shielding got a lot more attention
Landing a rocket was exciting, falcon heavy was exciting, launching men into space was exciting. But what I’m really excited for is to see them make a starship bellyflop.
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
Every time SG-1 ended near earth needing rescue, space shuttle was ready to help. Damn fine ships.
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! 📽️
8:36 - I cannot believe the single constellation test flight cost so much.
I had a bit of nostalgia for constellation, cause it was the big space plan when I was a kid, but looking back it was just proto SLS.
Thats not including the cost repairing the launch pad. Ares I damaged it during the launch.
@keith moore F35 had nothing on the pork barrel that has been constellation/SLS
There is no limit to cost on a “cost plus (profit)” contract, simple arithmetic proves that the incentives are to increase costs since the profit increases proportionally. Whoever came up with this idea in the government should be Publicly executed.
phoenix rising The F 35 is the worst fighter ever for the money with the most cost overruns ever. What are you thinking? It is not a $400 million boondoggle like that one space shot, it is 1000 times worse at $400 billion and rising!
I remember thinking I would want to go see one of those big Ares V launchers go. 188t to LEO would have surpassed even the Saturn V's performance of 140t to LEO. SLS is currently slated to top out at 130t for block 2.
wait falcon heavy is already two years ago?? seems like yesterday...
boeing having software problems? seems like business as usual
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?
14:31
Boeing...software problems. Huh, where have I heard this before?
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...
Congrats on the 1M subscribers.Great content!
I honestly thought he had more than that. Just never looked.
The automatic subtitles start with: "although it's got manly here" and I approve!
From Star Wars: c3po and falcon. From Star Trek: Vulcan, Starship, enterprise (test vehicle)... did I forget anything?
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?
Scott you’re one of the very best at what you do here on this platform, thank you very much for your contributions to all things space and congrats on 1m! All the best to you sir.
Thanks for keeping the politics out and real info in! Great to see someone made it clear it took 4 presidential terms to get to this point...this deserve to be in US History text book.
I also appreciate the zero politics. he didnt even use names, just generalizations.
Well this is literally politics... What are you talking about?
@@lawrenceallen8096 The commerical crew program was started in 2011, which was during the presidency of Obama. Last week's US manned launch was in part thanks to the actions of Barrack Obama, along with Bush who started the privatization of launch capabilities.
@@lawrenceallen8096 Gee, thanks for the intense political reply to a comment about *keeping out* political comments.
@@erilgaz thanks Obama ... though I think this is not the proper usage of this phrase, at least not near lawrence "nomiddlename" allen
They actually named the office c3po lmao
Mike Cooper
At least they didn't name it CCCP
Live The Future
oof
@@livethefuture2492 CCCP is better than C3PO
There has never been a more steely eyed missile man than Scott Manley.
Aside from the political problems, I think Constellation also had some image problems. In particular, the almost complete lack of a public image. In summer of 2007, I was working with many fellow college students as a summer engineering intern between my Junior and Senior years of college at a USAF aerodynamics testing facility. This particular facility was not very far away from one of the NASA facilities where a significant part of the Constellation development was being conducted and that NASA facility's prime contractor was the same company that we worked for at the USAF base. So, they took us all over there for a tour one day. In this room full of super-geeky engineers who were working in the aerospace research industry, few if any of us were familiar with the Ares rockets at all, despite the fact that, at the time, they were the entire planned future of U.S. manned spaceflight.
It becomes a lot easier for politicians to cancel the entire planned future of U.S. manned spaceflight when much of the general public isn't even aware of the plan.
It's always so satisfying to hear "Fly safe". And I never get bored, I start to watch these videos about the stuff I can make lectures about, yet still I just listen and enjoy. Thank you, Scott Manley, and thank all your audience. It's all so nice to be united about space technologies.
Congratulations on 1 million subscribers, Scott! Thanks for the details of all of the in between, hope you are doing well!
The space shuttles were so cool. Being able to land back on earth just like an airplane.
That "Fly Safe" gave me nightmares.
Such a clear presentation. I can see why you have a million folks tuning in for your stuff. Great work.
I've been following SpaceX closely ever since its second Falcon 9 flight. What a ride.
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?
I want to thank you for being you. Your attention to detail is amazing. Every time I get into a NASA conversation or when I talk about space for that matter, with my friends, I refer them to you. I do so because I respect your accounting. Keep up the good work, Scott.
Detail? He literally gave 5 seconds to the actual launch and re-hashed all his past Space X videos as a review session.
@@lextacy2008 this video isn't about the launch. It's about the whole history. Reading the title might help.
@@Brixxter Not the point. I don't know of any space enthusiast who posted an off topic video after the DM-2 launch. Would it be feasible for NBC news to cover the cake baking contest as the the top story for tonight as opposed to a 9.2 earthquake that wold hit LA? I don't think so.
Love the thoroughness of these videos! Future generations will thank you!
As this video shows, over the last few months the part timers, semi pros, amateurs and enthusiasts have raised the bar so much I think they deserve a dedicated Space\Science Channel. As dreams go this may seem far fetched but, as showed with SpaceX, from small beginnings an awful lot can change in 10 years.
This one was so good, that I had to watch it twice.
S. Manley, the no. 1 source on how stuff actually goes on.
Hey Scott, will you cover the KSP 2 situation? I think its kinda sad that a company known for its monetisation schemes has got the contract now.
Wow. I hadn't known before that the KSP2 project managers were known rapists. You just broke my heart, but thankfully tempered my expectations.
Another WOW... I just did a quick search of "private division monetization" and they EXPLICITLY state that they will take action against anybody who tries to make money off of their derivative works, whether it is through advertisements or merchandising.
And then: They go on to make claims against "any other big reveal in the story." Seriously, showing off a landing on the Mun, Minmus, or Duna could be considered a "big reveal in the story." They need to do some serious re-thinking of their policies if they expect to maintain a healthy relationship with the KSP community.
@@Kineth1 Who?
What's wrong with Uberent?
I don't even play KSP, and I'm pissed-off about how Star Theory was treated! I hope the Kerbal Kommunity sticks it to Take-Two, but given how "DGAF" most gamers are I doubt it.
@@Aldnon "Private Division" is the company that is publishing KSP2.
Congrats on 1M subscribers AND on cramming all that history into a 15min-ish video. Both great accomplishments!
Thanks for the recap. It has been a wild ride and it is far from over.
Has anyone else noticed Scott's scary eyes, when he says, 'Fly safe!'?
Loss of congressional control over space supply is the minute space supply started to actually be a thing.
Awesome recap Scott! Lots of great footage of so many memories of the last couple decades.
Scott Manley never fails to present meaningful information, rather than simply repeating other's video content. Great work!
How Nasa shifted from cost-plus to fixed-cost contracts.
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.
They set a new record today, so that was neat I suppose
Awesome recap. Thanks
One of the your best Scott, nice work.
I think the first Falcon Heavy launch was also relevant to the Commercial Crew Program, while not technically, it further fueled the excitement toward SpaceX and space in general and further legitimized SpaceX as a company that can actually achieve its objectives
Nobody is excited for spacex. Everybody hates it. spacex will not achieve anything, it will keep failing.
Wow! In just 15 minutes you covered a lot of history. Can you put it all into a book or pdf?
What a ride! I've been following SpaceX the whole way
Great video Scott. Congrats on your 1m subscribers!
I'm so pumped for the next 5-10 years of spaceflight - we're going back to the moon! Heck yeah!
HA!HA! They never got there in the first place.
herbbearingseed we did go to the moon...
somebody forgot to check their staging at 6:18
The engine shut down, but the remaining thrust collided with the upper stage.
That was a case where a slight delay in staging might have led to the third Falcon 1 rocket putting its payload into orbit.
@@KnightRanger38Thanks for fixing your apostrophe! Fly safe!
Bravo! This was an excellent summary of the last 20 years leading up to last Saturdays flight. Very well researched and presented!
Excellent summary of this history: thank you, Scott!
"At least according to one account somebody who was going to build a rocket engine in their garage." - Starhopper
The rocket engine for Starhopper was actually built in a factory. Everything but the engine and electronics though were put together in a empty field.
@@KnightRanger38 So if I build a car in my Garage, but order a crate engine for it, I didn't really build a car in my Garage? Or if I build a Computer in my basement, but install an Intel processor, I didn't build the computer?
@@ShelburneCountry you assembled it. I think that's enough to get you a "made in garage" sticker under the eyes of the law, but you have to admit the hardest parts of the build were not done in-house.
@@JohnDoe-420 This is such a stupid argument. So nobody had ever in the history of the world ever thought of building a plane, done any science on it before the wright brothers. They just out of thin air decided, Hey I'm going to build something to fly. That's when they started work on designing and creating the worlds first internal combustion engine, a thought never before had in history.
Every advancement ever made in the history of the world used knowledge and items created by those who came before them. Nobody ever got there completely 100% on their own. Building an engine doesn't mean you own and get credit for everything that engine will ever get used in from that point on. For that matter, most of the US space program and their advances using your criteria belongs to the Russians. They've used Russian engines for decades.
@@joer8854 you're right but it has absolutely nothing to do with the post you replied to which is about where something was manufactured...
9:15 - You mention a really great paper about safety aspects of Ares/Antares. Reference or URL please ???
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!
Thank you, Scott, I really love your Vlog and they are informative and stick the important facts thank you so much
Great summary video, thanks Scott!
Huh! When you describe it all like that it seems much less chaotic. As if they were all working towards goals and achieving them over time.
Bob and Doug always gets a laugh from Canadians.
The hosers took off!
@@alexwoloshyn9222
eh
Just as they docked, they reported how many bottles of water they consumed. CANADIANs knew what they meant.
Very interesting, thanks Scott!
Bob and Doug just sound so Kerbel I smile every time.
Bob and Doug. "Take off! Eh?" How many of you "hosers" get that reference?
Great White North! Eh?
On ly everyone from Canada
"Strang brew" i think it was called.
Yeah, it was cool when they said "let's light this candle," but i would have cheered louder if they had said "take off, eh!"
Cooo, loo, coo, coo, coo, coo, coo, coooo!
Cooo, loo, coo, coo, coo, coo, coo, coooo!
Boeing having software problems, where have I heard that before...... (looks over at grounded 737 max's)
This.
Yeah. :( Boeing seems to be pushing too hard and taking shortcuts.
Outstanding video!! Nice job Scott
Damn good overview, Mr. Manley. This fine journalism.
The last time someone said "Fly safe" that stern towardsme , i found my self in a 3 month 0.0 war campaign
Not to get political, but I remember when the Obama administration was heavily criticized for effectively ending the Constellation program. Everyone was crying "Oh, waily waily waily, 'tis the sound o' Doom..."
Interesting now to see how that decision was absolutely the right way to go. If it hadn't been for the bias toward the commercial programs back then, it would have been at least another five years before a manned launch from the US.
Paul, thank you for supporting my comments on the trump speech. Pete a.
Such a great insight into how things relating to space has progressed 👌
Great video as always Scott 👍
Thank you for just giving a history lesson. Probably the only UA-camr I’ll be watching so that I can focus on something other than the world burning.
Also, could you do a video on small rocket engines like Curie, Rutherford, engines on the sky crane for the mars landers, etc? I feel like everyone knows the big boy rockets on the boosters and second stages but the little engines that could never get the recognition they deserve.
Bravo for saying "new president" at several points instead of naming names.
It's a great idea that avoids creating the temptation for culture war nonsense in the comments.
I still have two questions.
1. Was there an alternative to the SLS before Richard Shelby got his hands on it?
2. What what is the total amount of time lost during the commercial crew program not attributable to government funding shortfalls?
I know that Dragon had to lose its Landing legs and The DM one Capsule had A rapid unscheduled disassembly, but what was the original projected date of launch after the first year of full commercial crew funding because I thought it was supposed to be 2017-2018.
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.
Great summery! Crazy to see it all recaped and see how far we have come
Another great video making space flight and our future more accessible to everyone
Hello from India 🇮🇳👋
👋
C3PO
*Sounds familiar*
This isn't the office you're looking for.
CP30
There, I rearranged it to reflect Chris Paul's total rings
Amazing to see the friendship and comraderie within the spaceflight community. Its inspiring
Great description of the timeline.
Greetings from Munich, Tom.
"It was cobbled together with spare parts... in a cave!"
By Robert Downey Jr !
Hello from arizona USA!
Florida checkin' in.
love your vids Scotty, thanks for the SN4 Explosion review, your vid on that was amazing.
Great walkthrough 👍
Thanks for sharing 👍😀
What do you do?
"I'm with C3PO."
As others have sort of stated, better than saying you're with "CCCP"
I like your content Scott, but I'm no fan of premieres.
At least this seems like an instant-start premiere.
*edit - I guess we'll see how this video performs compared to his normal video publications in terms of views/likes.
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?
Fantastic documentary on this history!
Very good research. Well-done!
Hullllllloooooooo
SpaceX working hard while the rest just fumble around
Great informative video as always. Thanks!
Great video Scott!
The Shuttle was the worst thing to happen to NASA; it was the White Elephant that bankrupted NASA while keeping it in LEO. After Apollo, NASA could have gone to a low cost 25 ton to LEO ELV with one F1A engine on the first stage and one J2S on the upper stage. Performance would be slightly better than the F9 1.2 in throwaway mode to LEO and substantially better to GEO or Earth Escape. It would have built a Space Station faster than the Shuttle could. And, it would have sent probes to the outer planets better than the collection of Titans, Deltas and Atlases -- possibly with the probes having a 20 ton kicker 3rd stage with an AJ10 or something so it can help with both Earth Escape and the Capture Burn years into the mission.
Like it says in the CAIB.. Nixon cut the development budget in half. That's why the shuttle happened. There's a whole chapter about it in the CAIB report.
Have my likes, sir.
The Shuttle was created by NASA. They created their own problems.
@@dalecomer5951 Wrong - the shuttle project was doomed by the US Air Force's requirements that were forced on it
Excellent Report on the history of space flight since the end of the Space Shuttle.
Thanks for the history lesson
Great coverage!
Man I love Scott's videos!
Excellent! Thanks Scott.
thanks always, concise-accurate, stay the course
Thank you for uploading. I had the opporunity to witness a rocket launch in 2018. Amazing experience. I shared a pretty awesome clip of the experience to my channel.
nice summary... thx
awesome .. just awesome ... thank you
An inspiration! Thank you!
Well done. Well thought out and logically presented.