Knowledge should be free, but he should be paid for making it. It's a hard problem and I'm not sure advertising is the solution, but nobody has any money for anything else.
There's something to say about how even today, the Space Shuttle is still shown in media and across the internet as the default option for a modern spaceship.
It was an incredible piece of engineering, but it also unintentionally put the idea in the mind of the public that spaceplane configurations are the best solution for all space exploration, when in reality Shuttle was exactly what it said on the tin: just a shuttle bus for getting astronauts and payloads to and from orbit, that's all. Not an appropriate design for deep space or long-duration missions, yet every few years someone else comes out with a never-to-be-built concept design for another fancy looking spaceplane. As laymen we just can't get the image of a sexy winged starship out of our minds, and accept that vertically stacked rockets are the way to go.
That's because its superior to anything we have today with the possible exception of SpaceXs reusable rockets. Building new Shuttles today with modern materials technology and manufacturing techniques would make them almost foolproof. Mothballing them and going back to 1960s "space capsules" was short sighted. Thank fuck we have SpaceXs Starship reusable ships.
You need to get see it in person - I went to see the Endeavour in Los Angeles… breathtaking doesn’t describe it. I got to see it when it was on stilts about 10-15ft above your head, got to walk underneath it - absolutely stunning. Tried to take my Dad to see it later that year but they closed it down because they were building an enclosure to put it into launch position with an external tank and boosters. - The museum was completely free, but I would’ve paid $100’s to go inside the shuttle - unfortunately it was a No when I asked! 😂
@@sekelus and the fact that, as amazing as it was, it’s still considered an overall failure as program. Just goes to show how insanely difficult manned spaceflight really is.
Thank fuck, I thought it was just me. Spent some time troubleshooting Bluetooth before I tried with the built-in speakers and it was still very out of sync
I grew up in Florida in the 80-90s. My father and I would go out on my back porch and watch the Space Shuttle. To this day the Shuttle has a special place in my heart.
The Endeavor’s first flight sounds like a nail-biting adventure, especially the part where they rescued a satellite with their bare hands. Anyone else fascinated by the sheer complexity of the shuttle's launch mechanics?
Even with all it's flaws, the shuttle line is one of my favorite things ever made. I saw STS 3 launch in person as a lil 9 year old, and it left an impression I will never forget.
I work with an engineer who worked on SLS's RS-25 Block D program. Ive studdied the RS-25 and had a pretty good understanding of how it worked. But when we sat down and went over the design of the powerhead I was dumbfounded at the little design aspects that actually make it work, especially the high pressure oxidizer pump. Its a miracle that thing works at all let alone 100% reliably.
Waste of a good engineers time, SLS is criminal. NASA is paying over $100 million just to refurbish these old engines, that’s 3 billion for the full Artemis program. An entire starship cost less than a single engine
That's really cool. Rocket engines are honestly just unfathomably amazing pieces of engineering that I really don't think can be appreciated by just looking at them, the number of little tweaks.
As a fan of space stuff this video didnt tell me anything I didnt already know, but I really love how it's all packaged in a single video. So very densly packed with comprehensive information it's amazing. I planned to have it on in the background but the stunning visuals meant I couldn't keep my eyes off it.
I currently have pneumonia and today I wrote a 4h30 linear algebra final exam on 3h of sleep. Worst day ever. I just got home, opened youtube and discovered that real engineering just uploaded a 1h20 video on the space shuttle. Best day ever.
I'm 20 minutes in and have learned so much that I didn't know and that's someone that was obsessed with the shuttle. This is going to be a great video I'll have to save!
National Geographic cover a wide range of topics , create educational textbooks, English learning courses and decades of proven success. They are the kind of people who go into such depth as a dedicated engineering content creator. It's harsh to compare.
@@cwg73160 NatGeo is trash no matter how much more they cover. Volume is irrelevant. Trash but with high volume is not impressive, it's just a mountain of trash.
Man the quality of this video is insane. The density of information, well-informed graphics, interview storyline, footage... it's the perfect video, thank you.
Reading “Truth, Lies and O-Rings” turned me on to how dangerous making those SRB’s really was. I walked away being amazed there weren’t more accidents in manufacturing. I also never really grasped just how much engineering went into them. Made me feel rather insignificant for my small additions to the HTTP protocol in the 90’s which felt like massive work.
I love that Bruce's first job was to take a photo of the free-falling external tank, but I forgot, like a giddy kid in a candy store! I don't think any human could fault him for doing that; I sure know I would have had the same response!
I greatly enjoyed the description of all the challenges/solutions during the descent phase. The speeds and forces involved during its transition from spacecraft to glider are simply incredible, esp. when one considers the requirement for a precision landing w/ no chance of a go around. Wow.
The CGI shots of the engines and SRBs firing was surprisingly nostalgic. I used to have VHS's of space shuttle footage and that's exactly how they look in my memory.
I am so happy I found the Real Engineering UA-cam channel. Expertly explained, fantastic footage, immersive animations.. May this channel upload over a thousand videos!
Yeah, no, these are two different maneuvers with two different purposes. The roll to heads down is, well, a roll. This serves many purposes, including limiting aerodynamic loads on the orbiter and providing line of sight for radio transmitters to the ground. Once the TRDS satellites were all operating, the radios NASA had operated in Bermuda were retired and this became "roll to head UP." Note that due to the orientation of the shuttle on the pad, if it didn't roll at all the shuttle's orientation would have had one of the _wings_ pointing at the ground -- thus, a roll maneuver was always required. At roughly the same time, the shuttle performs a pitch and yaw maneuver to match the required launch azimuth for the desired orbital inclination.
44 years after it first flew & 14 years since its last flight, you have provided the ultimate, definitive resource (graphics, instructional narrative, video, photos) on the STS shuttle! Kudos to you, Bruce Melnick and your staff. So much was invested in STS, there was nowhere else to go after Challenger; thus we had Columbia.
53:17: as seen in Star Trek The Next Generation's first season, where Picard guides a runaway cadet to bounce his shuttle off of the atmosphere to prevent him from burning up. what an incredibly great documentary. well done
This is the most interesting and detailed doc I have seen in years. Great job. This should be sent to Discovery Channel as a reminder of what they used to be when they were respectable.
Місяць тому
Yeah. I stopped watching Discovery Channel when I was 14 (24 years ago) because everything they said was things I could figure out by looking at a picture myself. I had no interest in the constant "sharks, snakes and crocodiles". Things like the plane crash investigations they did were three times the length they had to be, and filled with pointless dramatization - that had the potential to include some interesting science, but they squandered it. It's such a shame that they forgot about trying to educate people.
Throttle is such a brilliant idea for a company and I'm so glad they are tied to this channel. UA-cam may be a risky business but unmatched quality physics/engineering animations is not! Long live Real Engineering!
As a space vehicle that is considered a museum piece now, I think retiring it was a huge mistake, but I appreciate the level of detail that went into describing something that we will never see fly again yet was a part of my childhood. I remember watching on TV the test flights to show proof of concept, and then the first launch... A wow moment in my life that was for me, as special as my parents must've felt watching the first moon landing.
The longer they continued to fly the greater the chances of another fatal accident. What is a shame is that they never tried to update it but that's likely because that would have been little more than a complete re-design of the whole stack.
It was retired for good reason. Lack of abort during liftoff is an unacceptable risk(challenger) once those solid boosters are lit, whatever happens happens until they are spent. Add that egregious safety risk to the inherent design limitations of the shuttle, youve got a craft that is admittedly very cool, but not for anything requiring more than low earth orbit, or anything remotely approaching acceptable risk for that limited usability. Very cool, but flawed. And those flaws killed people.
@@TheEvilmooseofdoomthe biggest issue was the liftoff. The use of solid boosters meant there was no abort procedure once liftoff was achieved, as was very poignantly realized with the Challenger disaster. You can not do anything until those boosters are empty. The safety factor could be mitigated by replacing those boosters with liquid fuel rockets, though. Two Rocketdyne F1 engines (the saturn V engines) per side would get you close to par at about 3 million pounds of thrust on the two, for a total of 6 million. And being liquid, they could be shutdown. Or 8 Raptor 1 engines each side. Or 5 raptor 2. You get the idea.
Both are incredible. Falcon 9 is no chump. It’s by far one of the most advanced rockets ever built and set new boundaries for rocket design Starship also builds on that. But shuttle is ofc iconic
@ thankfully. It VERY nearly ended in disaster too The acoustic levels were higher than expected and damaged the vehicle, the shock of SRB ignition also did the same and the control surfaces were actually pushed well beyond limits and thankfully didn’t fail because if they did they’d either have had to attempt an RTLS abort (dangerous af) or survive entry and descent low enough to eject and parachute down (also dangerous)
@@weekiely1233 The statisticians Bendat and Piersol were hired to analyze acoustic data from static tests, in order to estimate the combined effects ahead of first flight. They mostly got it right ; ) Not just control surfaces: The basic wing structure out near the tips was also inadequate for reentering with a design payload weight. Fortunately they had strain gauge data from the first flight before such a flight occurred.
It was a complete piece of shit that murdered 14 people through utterly incompetent engineering. Imagine stanning for something that managed to kill nearly 4x the number of cosmonauts that have died, ever. Completely idiotic.
Your videos of late remind me of the good ol’ days of the Discovery Channel and the History channel when they made high quality factual content. Now both channels are reality tv and ancient aliens. And I can’t believe this channel doesn’t have at least like 10 million subs yet
Pilot here who’s a huge shuttle geek who’s been to many launches and followed it since I was a kid. I think this is the most comprehensive video I’ve seen on the topic! Generally these videos are redundant for me, but I learned several new things watching this. Well done! 👍
I've was a huge spaceshuttle Fan back when i was little. Understanding the technology now thanks to this vid. Its pretty cool. Good work, and thank you for this gem.
38:25 is basically “The missile knows where it is at all times. It knows this because it knows where it isn't. By subtracting where it is from where it isn't, or where it isn't from where it is (whichever is greater), it obtains a difference, or deviation. The guidance subsystem uses deviations to generate corrective commands to drive the missile from a position where it is to a position where it isn't, and arriving at a position where it wasn't, it now is. Consequently, the position where it is, is now the position that it wasn't, and it follows that the position that it was, is now the position that it isn't. In the event that the position that it is in is not the position that it wasn't, the system has acquired a variation, the variation being the difference between where the missile is, and where it wasn't.”
1:50 correction needed - the SRBs were them and are now the largest solids ever *flown* by any metric, but the largest solids ever *built* and static fired were the Aerojet 260” experimentals. Had they been turned into full-scale rockets, one 260 would’ve been equal to most of a Saturn V’s first stage. The 260 remains to date the largest and most powerful rocket motor ever fired.
This is one of the best things I’ve ever seen on UA-cam. Absolutely stunning work guys. I don’t quite know what your revenue model is, but this should be on Netflix or something because it’s outstanding absolutely outstanding.
I read somewhere that right after booster separation the shuttle is too heavy to go up with the SSME only (technically speaking it has a thrust to weight ratio below 1) so it temporarily decelerates. This phase lasts a couple seconds because the Shuttle + tanks become lighter due to burning propellant and oxydizer, the thrust to weight ratio becomes greater than 1 and the Space Shuttle starts accelerating once again.
Even in Kerbal Space Program, the number 1 rule of rocket building is to keep each stage above a TWR of 1. I often use Asparagus or Onion staging for getting bigger crafts into orbit, and I check the TWR all the time to ensure when a booster set drops, the ratio stays above 1.0. If the ratio drops from 1.7 at launch to 1.4 with 2 boosters gone, it's fine, but if it was to drop from 1.4 to 0.7 while still in the atmosphere, the craft would lose speed and apogee height while burning fuel until it reaches a TWR of >1.0 again, wasting fuel in the process and making the whole ascent less efficient... Sorry for nerding out
Awesome video. So much astonishing engineering. It is truly a wonder that we were able to accomplish this many years before I was born, and it is wild looking back to see just how long this marvel of engineering lasted in today's ever-advancing landscape. Thanks for the great watch.
19:12 I’ve been a fan of rockets and space since I was a young. Even built and flew model rockets as a kid. I’ve known about the center of mass but not about the center of pressure and the dynamic interplay of the two. This is the first time I’ve intuitively understood why rockets are shaped the way they are. Thank you.
If you’ve never seen it, the video, titled ‘How to Land the Space Shuttle….From Space,’ is a must watch. It’s a real time, pilots view of the Shuttle landing in Cape Canaveral, narrated by Bret (also the name of the channel where you can find the video), who works with NASA & is giving us (and an in person audience) a power point presentation. It’s a lot of fun & has a lot of information about landing what is, essentially, an aerodynamic brick.
Wonderful detail, both engineering and human factors!. Your storyline from engine development and blast-off, to orbit and mission, to descent and landing motivates the fine details and makes them memorable. Thank you, Real Engineering!
Decommissioned for more than a decade and it still amazes me. Think it's because it is the closest thing to a spaceship little me grew up dreaming off. Hopefully starship will make that dream live longer
The fact that they managed to put that engine on the satellite so it can boost up to where it shouldve been and it did its job for over 2 decades after that is just absolutely incredible.
at 3:27 you say it's ready to enter "OPEN LOOP" this is INCORRECT... it's been in open loop.. it's entering "CLOSED LOOP" at this time.. just sayin.. FYI..
The shuttle is without a doubt the most beautiful machine that man has built for space exploration. It's a shame that we don't see them in service anymore, I would love it if, as much as possible, sticking to the original shape of the shuttle itself, NASA would build a version 2.0, with all the knowledge and technology they have today. That would be something amazing.
Shout out to Mike Ridolfi, used to love your personal UA-cam channel and I’m now an engineer because of this channels inspiration.Just completed an exam on nickel superalloy microstructure and use in turbine blades.
This really shouldn’t be free but I’m grateful we got this quality for free
Knowledge should be free, but he should be paid for making it. It's a hard problem and I'm not sure advertising is the solution, but nobody has any money for anything else.
lol, imagine thinking that things are 'free' just because you didn't pay monetarily ...
Just get YT premium its worth it
Nothing is free. If you aren’t paying with money, you’re paying with attention.
Agreed, would totally pay for this. We're blessed with such brilliant and dedicated people 👍
There's something to say about how even today, the Space Shuttle is still shown in media and across the internet as the default option for a modern spaceship.
It was an incredible piece of engineering, but it also unintentionally put the idea in the mind of the public that spaceplane configurations are the best solution for all space exploration, when in reality Shuttle was exactly what it said on the tin: just a shuttle bus for getting astronauts and payloads to and from orbit, that's all. Not an appropriate design for deep space or long-duration missions, yet every few years someone else comes out with a never-to-be-built concept design for another fancy looking spaceplane. As laymen we just can't get the image of a sexy winged starship out of our minds, and accept that vertically stacked rockets are the way to go.
And yet it's a terrible piece of tech. It was expensive and too dangerous. Some rich guys have a cheaper and safer option now.
I think that's mainly due to not wanting to associate with SpaceX
That's because its superior to anything we have today with the possible exception of SpaceXs reusable rockets.
Building new Shuttles today with modern materials technology and manufacturing techniques would make them almost foolproof.
Mothballing them and going back to 1960s "space capsules" was short sighted. Thank fuck we have SpaceXs Starship reusable ships.
@@Toefoo100 Rule of cool.
i will NEVER get tired of watching awesome documentary on the space shuttle
Is that curse even possible?
You need to get see it in person - I went to see the Endeavour in Los Angeles… breathtaking doesn’t describe it.
I got to see it when it was on stilts about 10-15ft above your head, got to walk underneath it - absolutely stunning.
Tried to take my Dad to see it later that year but they closed it down because they were building an enclosure to put it into launch position with an external tank and boosters.
- The museum was completely free, but I would’ve paid $100’s to go inside the shuttle - unfortunately it was a No when I asked! 😂
This was meant for nebula ... He uploaded by mistake
@@sekelus and the fact that, as amazing as it was, it’s still considered an overall failure as program. Just goes to show how insanely difficult manned spaceflight really is.
Can't help but notice that there is audio-drift. By 30 ish minutes in, interview audio is pretty off... Maybe it's just me?
No you’re not alone 😅
I noticed it too. It’s also off later in the video as well
No, your right. I noticed there is some audio desync at around 31 minutes
Synchronising audio and video requires real engineering! 🙂
Thank fuck, I thought it was just me. Spent some time troubleshooting Bluetooth before I tried with the built-in speakers and it was still very out of sync
Your channel has been as AWESOME as the Space Shuttle itself. Great job and thanks for featuring this incredibly designed BEAST of a machine!!! 👍👍👍
I knew some day this absolute legend would star in a full hour video of Real Engineering
Is this not a collection of a few of his video's?
0:57 and then get basic altitude numbers wrong
@@MADmoschedid he? 22,000 miles is geostationary
I grew up in Florida in the 80-90s. My father and I would go out on my back porch and watch the Space Shuttle. To this day the Shuttle has a special place in my heart.
40:01 “allowing any two spacecraft to mate, as Goddard intended” 😂 didn’t catch that on the first video but that’s hilarious!
39:51 actually haha
I caught it on the first listen and had a giggle 😆 my kind of witty humor
@@sarkaranish39:48 Achtualee 🥸 doesn't say "Mate"
your timestamp is too late. it's around 39:30.
Even if this was accompanied by 10 sponsors, this would still be better than a high budget 60 minute tv documentary with 3 hours of Commercials.
The problem with the TV programs is that they would have immediately asked the astronaut if he saw any aliens or if he's met the Men in Black.
@chrisplacido4737 Not to mention leaving you with more questions than answers.
Well I’ve had 8 ad breaks in 24 minutes
@@bradwatson2085 Still better than 10 minutes of Ads every 3 minutes of film at least in my country. At the very least, some are skippable.
Its more detailed then any of those cable tv documentaries from the 90's-00's
This video is a gift, thank you!
The Endeavor’s first flight sounds like a nail-biting adventure, especially the part where they rescued a satellite with their bare hands. Anyone else fascinated by the sheer complexity of the shuttle's launch mechanics?
Even with all it's flaws, the shuttle line is one of my favorite things ever made. I saw STS 3 launch in person as a lil 9 year old, and it left an impression I will never forget.
Agree, many from NASA have since come out and said it was moments from disaster on many occasions though, not unlike riding a wild bull.
I work with an engineer who worked on SLS's RS-25 Block D program. Ive studdied the RS-25 and had a pretty good understanding of how it worked. But when we sat down and went over the design of the powerhead I was dumbfounded at the little design aspects that actually make it work, especially the high pressure oxidizer pump. Its a miracle that thing works at all let alone 100% reliably.
Waste of a good engineers time, SLS is criminal. NASA is paying over $100 million just to refurbish these old engines, that’s 3 billion for the full Artemis program. An entire starship cost less than a single engine
That's really cool. Rocket engines are honestly just unfathomably amazing pieces of engineering that I really don't think can be appreciated by just looking at them, the number of little tweaks.
Definitely not 100% reliability
Mmm hmmmm yeah yeah totally 🤦
considering it's reliability and working with the hardest fuel (hydrogen) I'd say pretty good
As a fan of space stuff this video didnt tell me anything I didnt already know, but I really love how it's all packaged in a single video. So very densly packed with comprehensive information it's amazing. I planned to have it on in the background but the stunning visuals meant I couldn't keep my eyes off it.
I currently have pneumonia and today I wrote a 4h30 linear algebra final exam on 3h of sleep.
Worst day ever.
I just got home, opened youtube and discovered that real engineering just uploaded a 1h20 video on the space shuttle.
Best day ever.
It's all old videos.
I'm 20 minutes in and have learned so much that I didn't know and that's someone that was obsessed with the shuttle. This is going to be a great video I'll have to save!
Maybe you will unemploy NatGeo
Natgeo is no where near the research and information density of the current Real Engineering video. Good luck on keeping up the incredible work
National Geographic cover a wide range of topics , create educational textbooks, English learning courses and decades of proven success. They are the kind of people who go into such depth as a dedicated engineering content creator. It's harsh to compare.
When Real Engineering starts covering every aspect of Earth, then you can talk.
@@cwg73160 NatGeo is trash no matter how much more they cover. Volume is irrelevant. Trash but with high volume is not impressive, it's just a mountain of trash.
Man the quality of this video is insane. The density of information, well-informed graphics, interview storyline, footage... it's the perfect video, thank you.
Reading “Truth, Lies and O-Rings” turned me on to how dangerous making those SRB’s really was. I walked away being amazed there weren’t more accidents in manufacturing. I also never really grasped just how much engineering went into them. Made me feel rather insignificant for my small additions to the HTTP protocol in the 90’s which felt like massive work.
Nice story pal. What are these "additions" to HTTP that you're trying to brag about? By the way, adding protocol after HTTP is redundant.
Built in the 70s but damn she is still a beauty all these years later
I love that Bruce's first job was to take a photo of the free-falling external tank, but I forgot, like a giddy kid in a candy store! I don't think any human could fault him for doing that; I sure know I would have had the same response!
Your comment made me look at the credits, where I found this: "Head of Moral: Shia LeWoof."
That detail really moved me.
A new Real Engineering video? That's over an hour? On space?
This is gonna be a good day
Not new. More like an omnibus edition of an old series. V interesting though
Same space shuttle Video he posted like before, but just complicated
I can't begin to explain the level of gratitude I have for something like this being of this quality, and free online. Thank you!
Is this a re-upload? I feel like I've already watched this
It’s the 3 episodes of the Space Shuttle series combined
@@RealEngineeringjust as I thought so
I had the same vibes. But worth the re-watch. 👍
Excellent video
@@brianuuuSonicReborn It's maximize add revenue, minimal effort.
The 3d animation is insane, thanks a lot to the author of the chanel, I always follow the videos of this chanel from Uzbekistan, Tashkent
The space shuttle is still the most amazing thing humanity has engineered. Amazing.
I greatly enjoyed the description of all the challenges/solutions during the descent phase.
The speeds and forces involved during its transition from spacecraft to glider are simply incredible, esp. when one considers the requirement for a precision landing w/ no chance of a go around. Wow.
The sheer engineering genius of the Shuttle will always be remembered over any of it's shortcomings, thank you for this!👍👍
The CGI shots of the engines and SRBs firing was surprisingly nostalgic. I used to have VHS's of space shuttle footage and that's exactly how they look in my memory.
Danke!
Thanks!
I am so happy I found the Real Engineering UA-cam channel. Expertly explained, fantastic footage, immersive animations.. May this channel upload over a thousand videos!
Correction. The Shuttle rolls to align to whatever inclination the orbit its supposed to be. That is the reason for the roll. Not the pad orientation.
its both from what I've read
Yeah, no, these are two different maneuvers with two different purposes.
The roll to heads down is, well, a roll. This serves many purposes, including limiting aerodynamic loads on the orbiter and providing line of sight for radio transmitters to the ground. Once the TRDS satellites were all operating, the radios NASA had operated in Bermuda were retired and this became "roll to head UP." Note that due to the orientation of the shuttle on the pad, if it didn't roll at all the shuttle's orientation would have had one of the _wings_ pointing at the ground -- thus, a roll maneuver was always required.
At roughly the same time, the shuttle performs a pitch and yaw maneuver to match the required launch azimuth for the desired orbital inclination.
Another correction, Orbiters solid rocket boosters are not the biggest ever made. The SLS has bigger by 1 segment.
44 years after it first flew & 14 years since its last flight, you have provided the ultimate, definitive resource (graphics, instructional narrative, video, photos) on the STS shuttle! Kudos to you, Bruce Melnick and your staff. So much was invested in STS, there was nowhere else to go after Challenger; thus we had Columbia.
53:17: as seen in Star Trek The Next Generation's first season, where Picard guides a runaway cadet to bounce his shuttle off of the atmosphere to prevent him from burning up.
what an incredibly great documentary. well done
This is the most interesting and detailed doc I have seen in years. Great job.
This should be sent to Discovery Channel as a reminder of what they used to be when they were respectable.
Yeah. I stopped watching Discovery Channel when I was 14 (24 years ago) because everything they said was things I could figure out by looking at a picture myself.
I had no interest in the constant "sharks, snakes and crocodiles". Things like the plane crash investigations they did were three times the length they had to be, and filled with pointless dramatization - that had the potential to include some interesting science, but they squandered it.
It's such a shame that they forgot about trying to educate people.
Throttle is such a brilliant idea for a company and I'm so glad they are tied to this channel. UA-cam may be a risky business but unmatched quality physics/engineering animations is not! Long live Real Engineering!
As a space vehicle that is considered a museum piece now, I think retiring it was a huge mistake, but I appreciate the level of detail that went into describing something that we will never see fly again yet was a part of my childhood. I remember watching on TV the test flights to show proof of concept, and then the first launch... A wow moment in my life that was for me, as special as my parents must've felt watching the first moon landing.
The longer they continued to fly the greater the chances of another fatal accident. What is a shame is that they never tried to update it but that's likely because that would have been little more than a complete re-design of the whole stack.
It was retired for good reason. Lack of abort during liftoff is an unacceptable risk(challenger) once those solid boosters are lit, whatever happens happens until they are spent.
Add that egregious safety risk to the inherent design limitations of the shuttle, youve got a craft that is admittedly very cool, but not for anything requiring more than low earth orbit, or anything remotely approaching acceptable risk for that limited usability.
Very cool, but flawed. And those flaws killed people.
@@TheEvilmooseofdoomthe biggest issue was the liftoff. The use of solid boosters meant there was no abort procedure once liftoff was achieved, as was very poignantly realized with the Challenger disaster. You can not do anything until those boosters are empty. The safety factor could be mitigated by replacing those boosters with liquid fuel rockets, though. Two Rocketdyne F1 engines (the saturn V engines) per side would get you close to par at about 3 million pounds of thrust on the two, for a total of 6 million. And being liquid, they could be shutdown.
Or 8 Raptor 1 engines each side.
Or 5 raptor 2.
You get the idea.
SpaceX has done a great job in efficiency and cost cutting. But the shuttle is such an engineering flex, it’ll always be awesome.
Both are incredible.
Falcon 9 is no chump. It’s by far one of the most advanced rockets ever built and set new boundaries for rocket design
Starship also builds on that.
But shuttle is ofc iconic
It is a different engineering approach. The first shuttle launch was mand and landed a beautiful touchdown.
@ thankfully. It VERY nearly ended in disaster too
The acoustic levels were higher than expected and damaged the vehicle, the shock of SRB ignition also did the same and the control surfaces were actually pushed well beyond limits and thankfully didn’t fail because if they did they’d either have had to attempt an RTLS abort (dangerous af) or survive entry and descent low enough to eject and parachute down (also dangerous)
@@weekiely1233 The statisticians Bendat and Piersol were hired to analyze acoustic data from static tests, in order to estimate the combined effects ahead of first flight. They mostly got it right ; )
Not just control surfaces: The basic wing structure out near the tips was also inadequate for reentering with a design payload weight. Fortunately they had strain gauge data from the first flight before such a flight occurred.
It was a complete piece of shit that murdered 14 people through utterly incompetent engineering. Imagine stanning for something that managed to kill nearly 4x the number of cosmonauts that have died, ever. Completely idiotic.
Your videos of late remind me of the good ol’ days of the Discovery Channel and the History channel when they made high quality factual content. Now both channels are reality tv and ancient aliens. And I can’t believe this channel doesn’t have at least like 10 million subs yet
Audio sync issues at 43:45 and around there.
Also 31:15 it seems.
Pilot here who’s a huge shuttle geek who’s been to many launches and followed it since I was a kid. I think this is the most comprehensive video I’ve seen on the topic! Generally these videos are redundant for me, but I learned several new things watching this. Well done! 👍
Man your the hero we asked for and the hero we needed!!! Thank you for producing the highest quality content on UA-cam
I've was a huge spaceshuttle Fan back when i was little. Understanding the technology now thanks to this vid. Its pretty cool. Good work, and thank you for this gem.
Little busy now, will back soon to watch this video, i know it will be a wonderful video. . .
It's amazing honestly.
I'll read your comment later. I promise. I'm just so busy.
THIS is how you show off your company. My God this is cool, pretty AND informative. It’s not an ad it’s a showcase where all
Parties win
38:25 is basically “The missile knows where it is at all times. It knows this because it knows where it isn't. By subtracting where it is from where it isn't, or where it isn't from where it is (whichever is greater), it obtains a difference, or deviation. The guidance subsystem uses deviations to generate corrective commands to drive the missile from a position where it is to a position where it isn't, and arriving at a position where it wasn't, it now is. Consequently, the position where it is, is now the position that it wasn't, and it follows that the position that it was, is now the position that it isn't.
In the event that the position that it is in is not the position that it wasn't, the system has acquired a variation, the variation being the difference between where the missile is, and where it wasn't.”
This will forever be one of my favourite videos on youtube!
This is exactly how my doctor reassured me after my groin injury. 7:16
An hour long documentary about the Space Shuttle? What did we do to deserve this? Christmas came early!
What a brilliant marketing move of making this video!
This type of insightful content is not easy to come by. Thank you, Real Engineering.
1:50 correction needed - the SRBs were them and are now the largest solids ever *flown* by any metric, but the largest solids ever *built* and static fired were the Aerojet 260” experimentals. Had they been turned into full-scale rockets, one 260 would’ve been equal to most of a Saturn V’s first stage. The 260 remains to date the largest and most powerful rocket motor ever fired.
A legendary craft covered by a phenomenal channel. Thank a bunch!
41:57 audio out of sync
It was earlier than this but glad it wasn't just me.
This is one of the best things I’ve ever seen on UA-cam. Absolutely stunning work guys. I don’t quite know what your revenue model is, but this should be on Netflix or something because it’s outstanding absolutely outstanding.
For those curious, those 88x771mm hold down bolts were equal to 3.5"x30"
Absolute monster bolts.
Thank you, just wow
I read somewhere that right after booster separation the shuttle is too heavy to go up with the SSME only (technically speaking it has a thrust to weight ratio below 1) so it temporarily decelerates. This phase lasts a couple seconds because the Shuttle + tanks become lighter due to burning propellant and oxydizer, the thrust to weight ratio becomes greater than 1 and the Space Shuttle starts accelerating once again.
Yes although those boosters get it far enough for the vehicle to compensate well
Even in Kerbal Space Program, the number 1 rule of rocket building is to keep each stage above a TWR of 1. I often use Asparagus or Onion staging for getting bigger crafts into orbit, and I check the TWR all the time to ensure when a booster set drops, the ratio stays above 1.0. If the ratio drops from 1.7 at launch to 1.4 with 2 boosters gone, it's fine, but if it was to drop from 1.4 to 0.7 while still in the atmosphere, the craft would lose speed and apogee height while burning fuel until it reaches a TWR of >1.0 again, wasting fuel in the process and making the whole ascent less efficient... Sorry for nerding out
That would feel horrible to the occupants
Absolutely wonderful!! Thanks for such a detailed documentary!!
This is by far THE BEST SPACE SHUTTLE documentary on the Internet
As an 80's kid I always loved this thing. When you grow up with something, it just seems like the new normal.
Oh, this is gonna be a HIT
Awesome video. So much astonishing engineering. It is truly a wonder that we were able to accomplish this many years before I was born, and it is wild looking back to see just how long this marvel of engineering lasted in today's ever-advancing landscape. Thanks for the great watch.
I would give anything to see this planet from orbit just once in my life......amazing video, thank you!!
Give 500k to Daddy Bezos.
@ I’ll just put it out of my petty cash… 😎
@@Zerobar78.yeah to think he makes that in about 1 millisecond! 😳🤣
19:12 I’ve been a fan of rockets and space since I was a young. Even built and flew model rockets as a kid. I’ve known about the center of mass but not about the center of pressure and the dynamic interplay of the two. This is the first time I’ve intuitively understood why rockets are shaped the way they are. Thank you.
Most in depth video I’ve ever seen on it covering the entire flight
I just wanted to acknowledge and thank you for the obvious extreme effort your channel puts in to bring us facts that might otherwise go overlooked.
Should definitely do some on relativity or other space startups. That would be cool.
This was absolutely incredible. You gave us a textbook worth of information, along with great video work and narration. Thank you 👍
Liked even before watching the video
I always do with this channel. I hit play & like, one right after the other.
The amount of research, testing, and engineering behind this vehicle and the entire system and infrastructure behind it, is absolutely mind boggling!
Hey Brian, I think you should make more merch. Awesome video btw!
Very impressive video RE! Really thankful for making it metric
I can’t be the only one who notices Umbilical pronounced “umbiblical” 😂
Thank you for making this video and putting it for free on youtube, groundbreaking engineering.
If you’ve never seen it, the video, titled ‘How to Land the Space Shuttle….From Space,’ is a must watch. It’s a real time, pilots view of the Shuttle landing in Cape Canaveral, narrated by Bret (also the name of the channel where you can find the video), who works with NASA & is giving us (and an in person audience) a power point presentation. It’s a lot of fun & has a lot of information about landing what is, essentially, an aerodynamic brick.
“For a brick, it flew pretty good”
~~ Sgt Maj. Avery Johnson, UNSC Marine.
Wonderful detail, both engineering and human factors!.
Your storyline from engine development and blast-off, to orbit and mission, to descent and landing motivates the fine details and makes them memorable.
Thank you, Real Engineering!
Decommissioned for more than a decade and it still amazes me. Think it's because it is the closest thing to a spaceship little me grew up dreaming off.
Hopefully starship will make that dream live longer
The fact that they managed to put that engine on the satellite so it can boost up to where it shouldve been and it did its job for over 2 decades after that is just absolutely incredible.
34:58 Unsynced audio
It started before that point, but it became more noticeable at that time.
This is one of my favorite youtube videos you've ever made
at 3:27 you say it's ready to enter "OPEN LOOP" this is INCORRECT... it's been in open loop.. it's entering "CLOSED LOOP" at this time.. just sayin.. FYI..
I’m glad I’m not the only one that caught that. Controls experience coming in clutch there
The shuttle is without a doubt the most beautiful machine that man has built for space exploration. It's a shame that we don't see them in service anymore, I would love it if, as much as possible, sticking to the original shape of the shuttle itself, NASA would build a version 2.0, with all the knowledge and technology they have today. That would be something amazing.
Wonderful video, thank you for this information
Our country was born from the appetite of exploration, and our continued successes are what I am most proud of.
Beans
Found u
@@LarryC_HQman hunt complete ✅
Found him 🙌
Nvm this is the right one
Found you, it took a while. 100% worth it
Although I was very sleepy, I felt awake when watching your video. It was so interesting. Thank you.
Aren’t SLS’s solid rocket motors now the largest in history? They’re 5 segments vs the shuttle’s 4 segments??
correct 💪
Thank you for the time and effort. This is one of the most complete and interesting documentary about the shuttle I've ever seen
It's just a compilation of his old shuttle videos. Guess you don't get new views by putting that in the title, huh?
1:50 no they arent... the sls srbs are bigger... theyre literally the same booster with a new segment added so they're definitely bigger
Biggest of there time
And even then, there were solid rocket motors tested, that were MUCH bigger still. I don’t remember the name though.
Beat me to it
@@marcusrauch4223AJ-260?
He said "to date"
This is a fantastically detailed illustration of the shuttle program and a great reference for future study. Thank you so much for this!
0:35 narration says Endeavor but the shuttle in the video is the Atlantis
😂I caught that to
What an excellent well thought out and executed documentary on the space shuttle. FANTASTIC
3:27 I think you meant "exiting open loop"?
Hell no. I'm not watching this right now. I need to make a proper dinner and buy a good bottle of wine first.
That's the best video about the space shuttle I've ever seen. Well done!
Heheh... "Umbiblical...". Every time. Teehee... But still, incredible work! Thanks!
And the astronaut says it correctly in the video...lol still great vid though. Sounds like
uhm·bi·luh·kl
Also, the solid rocket motors burn a "call-yoom" of fuel.
Call yoom, I get. I think that's just the lovely Irish brogue that keeps us all coming back. :)
But getting biblical about EVA's....wait maybe that's an effect of dominant Catholicism in the beautiful island.... ;)
@23:59 Gotta have those umbiblical plates for the "oh god we're going to space" moment.
Shout out to Mike Ridolfi, used to love your personal UA-cam channel and I’m now an engineer because of this channels inspiration.Just completed an exam on nickel superalloy microstructure and use in turbine blades.
I've never heard "column" pronounced as "colliume" before XD
I love anything space. I also love your work you did here, it was amazing.