The audio is chilling.
It would be amazing to hear an AMA fron the booster recovery team.
What is the housing that holds these cameras? What type of camera are they and how to they capture and store footage? Are they PTZ?
Video shot from the Space Shuttle during launch
31–40 of 63 posts
Re: Video shot from the Space Shuttle during launch
#32Can someone explain what the nominal "velocity" counter means? I thought it made sense going up (although I wasn't sure why its rate of change---which would be the acceleration---seemed to increase a bit), but then I was totally baffled after the separation. It goes down from 2900 to 2500, then back up to 2920, then it plummets to around 300, then gently lowers down to the 50 or so that it's at for splashdown; there…
When they separate they are no longer flying straight up, they are moving toward a more orbital trajectory.
Re: Video shot from the Space Shuttle during launch
#33Can someone explain what the nominal "velocity" counter means? I thought it made sense going up (although I wasn't sure why its rate of change---which would be the acceleration---seemed to increase a bit), but then I was totally baffled after the separation. It goes down from 2900 to 2500, then back up to 2920, then it plummets to around 300, then gently lowers down to the 50 or so that it's at for splashdown; there…
The velocity counter means airspeed. The reason you aren't seeing the results you expect is that the shuttle launches in a ballistic arc to enter orbit. The boosters also follow that same trajectory, but lack orbital velocity. So what you see is them losing speed until they reach the peak of that arc, then gaining speed as they are drawn back towards the earth.
This gives you an idea of the arc:
http://media.tcpalm.com/media/img/photos/2010/04/05/0406_LOC...
Re: Video shot from the Space Shuttle during launch
#34Can someone explain what the nominal "velocity" counter means? I thought it made sense going up (although I wasn't sure why its rate of change---which would be the acceleration---seemed to increase a bit), but then I was totally baffled after the separation. It goes down from 2900 to 2500, then back up to 2920, then it plummets to around 300, then gently lowers down to the 50 or so that it's at for splashdown; there…
The shuttle isn't going straight upward at separation. It's actually going mostly eastward, so when the boosters separate they retain most of their speed, and even regain a bit as they drop through the ultra-thin upper atmosphere.
You're right about the rest -- a decrease to terminal velocity and then a big decrease as the chutes take effect.
Re: Video shot from the Space Shuttle during launch
#35Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is an appropriate place as any. WE have an ambitious start up idea to launch loaves of bread into space so that they will re-enter as toast, perfectly cooked to perfection and delivered right to your door.
I won't invest until you demonstrate your solution to the fundamental physical principle that causes it to land butter side down.
[deleted]
Re: Video shot from the Space Shuttle during launch
#36Can someone explain what the nominal "velocity" counter means? I thought it made sense going up (although I wasn't sure why its rate of change---which would be the acceleration---seemed to increase a bit), but then I was totally baffled after the separation. It goes down from 2900 to 2500, then back up to 2920, then it plummets to around 300, then gently lowers down to the 50 or so that it's at for splashdown; there…
The rocket engine was still running after separation and we could not see when it stopped propelling the rocket so it is difficult to really understand its motion by just using its interaction with gravity and the athmosphere as our only variables affecting its behavior.
Re: Video shot from the Space Shuttle during launch
#37I'm surprised they landed so close together. amazing. Also, can anyone tell me why they are slowing down as they fall towards earth (before the parachutes deploy)? Shouldn't they be speeding up by 9.8m/s as they fall?
> I'm surprised they landed so close together. this doesnt make sense to me. On the orbit they look like they gaining a distance between each other. Any distance on that altitude would be 150-fold back on earth. How come they landed less than 20m from each other, no idea. Anyone?
The 150-fold figure might apply if they actually took divergent paths back to Earth by a degree or two, but that doesn't seem to be the case--they took very nearly parallel tracks, with a few meteres of random jostling one way or the other. I'm not sure how much effect the explosive detachment from the shuttle+main tank has though / which way those forces are directed.
Interesting reading here on the details of the booster rockets: http://science.ksc.nasa.gov/shuttle/technology/sts-newsref/s...
Re: Video shot from the Space Shuttle during launch
#38The audio is chilling. It would be amazing to hear an AMA fron the booster recovery team. What is the housing that holds these cameras? What type of camera are they and how to they capture and store footage? Are they PTZ?
Agreed on the audio track - it does an excellent job of reflecting the extremely inhospitable conditions to which the boosters are subjected. I'm also curious about the cameras, although I wish they had been running at fixed sensitivity rather than constantly trying to balance between black space and a very reflective Earth.
Re: Video shot from the Space Shuttle during launch
#39Earlier quoted context omitted.
You probably only get the "For cheap." requirement fullfilled if you also leave out the so-far out-of-spec "and get me back again alive" requirement…
I hear what you saying, but is there anything else than an issue of material being burnt in atmosphere due to speed lost/air friction? Gravity will make sure you will get back on Earth so its not like you have to spend another million bucks to get on earth. Given you have a heat/damage-proof can and know when to open parachutes (I know its more complicated than that), you should be good to go (I mean - come back).
I would guess that just getting from the ground into space requires more fuel than traveling by plane 180 degrees around the world (the longest possible great circle route for air travel). And it's not just a maturer of waiting for improved efficiency. Reaching a given altitude will always require energy proportional to mass and desired altitude (until we build a space elevator and can offset that by dropping a counterweight down shaft number 2).
Re: Video shot from the Space Shuttle during launch
#40I'm surprised they landed so close together. amazing. Also, can anyone tell me why they are slowing down as they fall towards earth (before the parachutes deploy)? Shouldn't they be speeding up by 9.8m/s as they fall?
> I'm surprised they landed so close together. this doesnt make sense to me. On the orbit they look like they gaining a distance between each other. Any distance on that altitude would be 150-fold back on earth. How come they landed less than 20m from each other, no idea. Anyone?
Once they hit the atmosphere, their lateral motion (groundspeed) is probably greatly reduced by air resistance, while theory downward motion is maintained by gravity. So shortly after reentry, they probably mostly stop diverging.
Still, though, I feel like I would be hard-pressed to throw two objects from space and have them land within sight of each other.