Water as ballast? How does that not end like my 500 part ksp rocket when I forget to add struts? "We're picking up oscillations!" "Abort Jeb! Abort!" Kaboom! And thats how one 500 part spacecraft becomes 500 small spacecrafts...
I think it's a limitation of the software she's using - it can either blur or it can fade in/out - it can't do both. 0.8 seconds - unblurred until full fade up 0:12 - it unblurrs during the transition to her opening graphic. 3:21 - the blurred image remains when everything else fades out. (See, Amy - we do pay attention to details. ;)
If you were in the right place and the detonation was done at the right time and altitude with the sun behind it, an ice cloud like that would have been a spectacular sight.
I love the pinup art intro. So much like the bomber art of WW2. Also, even with computers to model something (vs paper and pencils), you still need to do the actual effort to verify that the computer models are right. So, really the computers are short cuts once enough real data has been collected to allow modeling after that (like we've done with nukes since the treaty to ban testing real bombs). For example, think about the efforts put into modeling snow by Disney for Frozen. They filmed actual snow under various conditions and then modeled that behavior in the animation software.
What's the point of using that background if you partially blur part of it, it's kinda distracting. I don't mean to contribute to the flood of comments about it, but it has to be pointed out.
I've never even heard of this. Nice to see someone bring to light the unknown. I love the reason "doing something just for the sake of doing something" why not.
1/ Why the blurred painting? 2/ Are there still telemetric devises on the moon, that give information back to NASA? 3/ Any interesting lumps of space junk come down recently?
Hi Amy, Actual comment response to your call to action soliciting 1960's era practical testing done because there were no computer models: you should talk about the combustion instability testing in the F-1 Rocket Engines, and how they were able to solve them by setting off bombs inside the engines on the test stand. That's a really cool example. Another Saturn Rocket similar test was how they put cameras inside the fuel tanks to see how the fuel sloshed around and created baffles for the fuel to keep it from doing that.
USWaterRockets That had to be fun trying to engineer cameras if the time within cryogenic tanks while trying to keep them adequately warm at the same time, but without letting that heat disturb the fuel's behavior. But I had never heard about that aspect of testing, though it certainly makes sense as the baffles were certainly a necessity to avoid potentially destructive, and wild, shifts in the center of mass leading to dramatic instability in flight.
Ethan Poole I never knew about that aspect of liquid fuelled rockets until I stumbled across some videos on TH-cam showing the camera footage. The way I understand it, the sloshing fuel could interrupt the fuel flow to the endings and the weight sloshing around could disturb the trajectory of the rocket and make the attitude control system go nuts trying to compensate.
+USWaterRockets ["you should talk about the combustion instability testing in the F-1 Rocket Engines, and how they were able to solve them by setting off bombs inside the engines on the test stand."] Yes, that would be a great topic, not just for the F-1, but the lunar module ascent stage engine as well. Not sure if your aware of how much of a problem it was for the LM but it only received approval after it successfully passed 53 consecutive bomb test recoveries. A big part of the reason the LM wasn't ready for Apollo 8. I was curious to see what this bomb looked like and finally found a picture of it in the recently released Haynes book by David Woods titled "NASA Saturn V 1967-1973.
I wasn't aware that was part of the LM testing as well. That's interesting. One thing I did learn recently was that there were a number of flaws in the LM integration with the flight control computer, and after the fact they were discovered. The flaws could have been fatal under just the right circumstances. This brings up another test method for Amy to explore... the software for the Apollo missions was mostly tested by running actual flight simulations in the simulation hardware, with engineers playing the role of astronaut and seeing how software changes worked. They did not have automated test software like we have today.
USWaterRockets I only found out about it while reading Tom Kelly's book "Moon Lander". Excellent book btw that has one chapter devoted to all the problems encountered with designing and building the LM. It's pretty amazing to read about how they managed to overcome it all. For example, one of the titanium tanks failed during testing and trying to determine why it happened proved to be very difficult and concerning. They were able to figure out eventually that the pads used to prep the titanium surface prior to welding were pretty costly so they decided to re-use them after a thorough washing. However, there was enough residual detergent left from washing that it actually had an adverse affect on the surface being prepped which led to the failure. Just one example of the challenges they had to overcome. Great idea about the mission simulations as well.
Hi Amy excellent work as always. Request for you: In a future video can you explain why Apollo went into retrograde orbit around the moon - and not prograde? thanks!!
To everyone asking about the blurry photo, the answer is complicated. After Doc and Marty went back to the past future's past post-future, they accidentally influenced all rocket designs to stop looking like 58 Chevys. So these photos in our current time are slowly blurring into non-existence, as the past becomes... well, history.
So this video popped up on my TH-cam feed today and I can’t believe I didn’t see it before. I really share your love of that era when they could do anything, but we didn’t get to hear about a lot of it because it was classified. Thanks for bringing it into the light. Cheers from Moose Jaw Tim
Hi Amy! I love what you do here on Vintage Space and on DNews (and the other various documentaries you do)! I was wondering if you could do a video about Apollo 13. I just watched the movie for the millionth time and there were many technical questions that I still don't understand. For example, I don't understand most of the electronic issues such as why they could only power the CM with 20 amps and why a free return trajectory was a better option than a direct abort. Thank you very much!
Thanks for your kind words! I've done a whack of videos about Apollo 13... hopefully these will answer some of your questions! th-cam.com/video/OmCzZ-D8Wdk/w-d-xo.html th-cam.com/video/BuN0SXJ0Tj8/w-d-xo.html th-cam.com/video/Ehw60sLgBzM/w-d-xo.html th-cam.com/video/UHQjQmYiJCo/w-d-xo.html And here's a blog I did about how Apollo 13 launched basically with a bomb on board: www.popsci.com/how-apollo-13-launched-bomb-board
The reason for doing free return trajectory was actually explained in the film. At the time of the accident, the spacecraft was still coasting towards the moon at high speed. A direct abort would have required decelerating to zero, then accelerating back towards the earth. That is an incredibly large change in velocity. The SPS engine on the service module was in theory capable of doing that, but because of the explosion, it was considered far too risky to attempt firing it. The only remaining engine was the LM descent engine, which was not powerful enough for a direct abort. So free return trajectory was the only realistic option. The electrical issues were to do with the failure of the fuel cells. These were the primary electrical source for the command module and ran on the hydrogen and oxygen from tanks in the service module. But of course the oxygen tanks had been blown up, causing the fuel cells to fail. The only other source of power was a set of three batteries, capable of powering every instrument in the command module, but only for an hour. These were referred to as the "re-entry batteries", since they were only intended to be used after the service module had been jettisoned, shortly before landing the ship. However, when the explosion caused the fuel cells to fail, they had to switch over to using the batteries while they figured out what to do next. So the batteries had already been partially drained before they completely shut the command module down. This meant that they were desperately short of power as they approached re-entry. Had the batteries died before the ship had made it down through the atmosphere, they would have completely lost communications, navigation, thruster control, everything. They may have even lost the ability to fire the parachutes. So it was vitally important that they used as little power as possible, meaning using only the most essential instruments.
One topic I think would be interesting for you to look into is the tapered pins and dies that were attached to the hold-down posts and the Saturn V so that during the launch, the soft metal pins were pulled through the dies deforming them and in the process, "reducing transient stresses resulting from abrupt disengagement of a vehicle from its launch stand." Looks like they used a trial and error process tp determine the optimum number to use per hold-down post. There's not a whole lot of info about this and it would be interesting to hear how they came up with this in the first place. Did they use this on earlier rockets? On the Shuttle?
Space tools please! What tools do spacecraft carry, how are they different from terrestrial tools? How do they work in zero-G, how are they secured during launch and reentry? How do you not lose wrenches and bolts on EVA, and what cautions are taken to prevent puncturing a spacesuit?
Extra large and clumsy and they’re made out of aluminum and plastic. They serve no real purpose but to make the show look interesting. NASA doesn’t have the budget to dramatize the puncturing of a space suit.
I know they have hammers. They had a stuck relay on Skylab, did a spacewalk out to it's general area, and hit things with an hammer, and it came unstuck.
One thing for sure is that they'd never have a "TOOL" like you on any flight, because they dont need a tool asking questions that have NOTHING to do with the subject (of this vid)
@@marekkelin1181 I'm an intellectual property lawyer. There are rights in just about every item you can see in her room. Why blur that picture in particular? You can see it briefly at 0:13. If they would be infringing anyone's rights by showing the picture then that moment is enough for them to be sued. So the question then remains, why blur it out at all?
G'day, I never heard of that one... By the way, congratulations on capturing the "Gidget Goes To Space...!" look ; I'm assuming that's intentional (?) ! If you want a fascinating Old Tech/Rocket story to build a Show around..., try this. In 1947 the USAAC was fascinated by the Human Physiological Response to different Accelerations, so they cobbled-up a Railway Sled with a Seat, a Rocket Engine, & a Variable Water-Brake, so as to subject the Test Specimen to a calculated pre-set G-Loading when decelerating from a known speed... So the (Volunteer) Specimen was fitted with 36 old-fashioned 1947 Electrical Skin-Current Sensors, basically a 2-inch Paper Disc with a 1-inch Aluminium-Foil Disc glued onto it's Centre with a Wire coming off the Aluminium...; a Medical Orderly applied the Sensors, having being instructed to "put some Electrically-Conductive Gel onto each Aluminium Disc, before applying the Gum Skin-Glue to the Paper, then apply each Sensor & connect it's Lead into the (Wire) Recorder's Harness....". So, after the first manned Test Shot, which severely bruised the Volunteer, all 36 Sensors turned out to have produced no Data at all whatsoever, *BECAUSE ALL 36 WERE GLUED-ON UPSIDE-DOWN...!* Whereupon, USAAC Colonel MURPHY made his famous Observation, which has since gone into History & been abbreviated & otherwise mangled & defiled..., to wit, that ; "If ever there exists a Task which is SO Simple that there are only two possible ways it can be performed, amd one way is 100% correct while the other way is completely & utterly & hopelessly & obviously WRONG...; then somewhere, some time, there will be someone who manages to do it the wrong way EVERY TIME...!" The amputated version, as popularly concieved, ie...; "Whatever can go wrong, will go wrong...!" captures maybe 60% of the sentiment of the original, and you'd be doing Humanity a service if you ammended their underconstumblings regarding Colonel Murphy's brilliant insight... Have a good one, ;-p Ciao !
Back in the 1960's the Curtis-Wright X-19 was a huge passenger quadcopter with no computers and the pilot had to stabilise it himself. It was not electric and had many mechanical parts, everything was manual controled and after a few breakdowns it was deemed too complex. And so the the idea was scrapped [(until now) with the much simpler electric manned multicopters].
Amy, for the Saturn I you where describing the stages of the block II version, project Highwater was on the second and third flights which used Block I Saturn Is and these had a water-ballasted dummy S-IV and S-V stages.
A3Kr0n , If the objection from some copyright holder only mentioned this video then she might have only been required by TH-cam to blur it for this video. It would be nice for her to clear it up, but this would not be the first time copyright weirdness has happened on TH-cam.
A picture on the wall shows a flat Earth. According to your ilk, all pictures of Earth that do not show what you want are CGI fakes, yet this blurred picture somehow has proof of your claim? You are a pathetic failure of an excuse for a human being.
Fascinating, I'd never heard of this project before. Interesting it was water they released too. Because the two upper stages of the Saturn V moon rocket (which is what they would have been most concerned with at the time) used LO2 + LH2 propellant - so if one had actually exploded up there... chemistry!
Amy/Vintage Space . . . a suggestion for another topic: "Project Fishbowl," in 1962, which was the detonation of a megaton nuclear bomb about 400 km above earth. It was a test to see "what would happen" of a nuclear blast in space.
I'll do some searching as well although I'm sure you are more knowledgeable on where to look. Either way I'll try to get in contact if I find anything. Cheers
www.greenwichworkshop.com/images/gallery/images/open/AB00044lg.jpg This is the poster. When it is going into the intro it unblurs, also for about 0.8 seconds at 0:00.
Hi Amy - I've worked in the propulsion business for 32 years (Aerojet) and was always curious about how the Gemini, Mercury and Apollo era rockets were set up for self-destruct by a range safety officer. Can you cover how that all worked?
Another question: it's my understanding that there is no gradation in temperature in space between full sunlight and darkness, as in the demarcation line on the moon. When astronauts go into orbit and they cross the light threshold from sunlight to darkness, doesn't the constant change in temperature lead to stress and metal fatigue on the spacecraft/space station and in spacesuits? Which has potentially deadly results.
I did...and all it said was there was a cloud and it disrupted transmissions for a little while. If that is it, it hardly seems worth it - let alone trying it a second time.
They wanted to know what would happen if large amounts of fuel got into the ionosphere. They were already using the water as ballast so they used that. They learned that the fluid could form clouds that could disrupt radio signals. It's all there in the video.
McRocket I agree with u she didn't or nasa didn't give any valuable infos like after the cloud formed did it get back or gone to deep space I mean u don't need to test it to know it would forum a cloud once it's there it's common sense
Project High-water is cool. I've always been fascinated by the Echo satellites. It would have been a trip to have been able to look up and see those pass by.
ptonpc I didn't know inspirational photos where copy righted. I thought they where all free to the public. Oh well. Still can catch a glimpse of between the transitions.
Yes, I was just watching on TH-cam unclassified tests done for the original Project Orion using conventional explosives for proof of concept. Pretty interesting in the fact that NASA is considering today something similar for long distance space trips. It would be a great topic for Vintage Space.
Not only no computer models but not even a pocket calculator. Those guys did it all with a slide rule and #2 pencil. That amazes me more than no computers.
I grew up just outside Huntsville. I don't know if it actually happened, but I heard a story from multiple people when I was growing up about an experiment where they put two rockets nose to nose to see what would happen. Have you heard about this? I can't find any information on it, and all the guys that told the tale are dead now.
I've never heard of Project highwater it's funny to think of how much money and effort was spent on such a (seemingly) trivial question. I'd have loved to sit in on the board meeting where they decided on this, there must have been at least a few giggles
Lord Turtle Ⓥ But seriously why did you post that? It's not the least bit important nor is it something that matters. It also had no need to be said / pointed out.
I think there were experiments done in the early 1960's where they released barium into space and studied how the resulting plasma clouds behaved. That might make an interesting video ^_^
Francois Lacombe See my question on midnight thirty above. What I saw was in early 80s and 90s but it was a chemical release at high altitude. I tried to give her all the info I had above.
the westford needles! that is definitely an interesting topic. I have not checked if you already did a video on them, but launching thousands of needles in to space to reflect radio waves. resonant dipoles to be precise..
I find all of the Apollo launch and pad abort tests to be interesting especially the ones launched on the Little Joe II rockets so i'd love to see Amy do a lengthy article on the various Apollo abort tests.
Didn't really notice any poster, was more interested in the science they learned from exploding those tanks so high up in the air. Did they learn how to make stronger fuel tanks from these experiments, or how to get around that radio blocking?
Hey Amy, if you're looking for other topics regarding practical tests without computer simulations, maybe take a look at Air Force Colonel John Stapp, the original crash test dummy? The standards he set outlining survivable forces on the human body are still used today, to my knowledge.
The lobster trying to grab the mic is stealing the show :)
Another space lobster
NASA funding meeting 1960s - " So gentlemen we only have funding for one mission. Will it be Project Hell or Highwater?"
Pipe2DevNull project hell was to release a trillion gallons of liquid nitrogen into the sun!
Pipe2DevNull aka preparation H.
Frank Yanez because preparations A through G were complete failures.
Pipe2DevNul
That new intro graphic is hilarious! (In a good way!)
Keith Gaughan ikr
Keith Gaughan Reminds me of the Wood Rocket logo.
( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) if you know what I mean.
The only thing missing is the theme song to I Dream of Jeanie.
You mean "Bewitched", right?
USWaterRockets Bewitched is another fun, silly 1960s show, but I Dream of Jeanie has more astronauts.
That obfuscated painting in the back makes me so curious what's on it!!
Just pause it at the beginning. It's an al bean poster
It's an art nude of Trace, from his naked DNews video.
www.greenwichworkshop.com/images/gallery/images/open/AB00044lg.jpg
Pause the video at 12.5 seconds to see the painting
Is there a copywrite issue?
Why is a picture blurred in the background?
Copyright
Porn. LOL
Binziong a porn alan bean poster
Imsorryimimmatureok
Keystone Science It's not blurred at 0:01
Excellent work @Z0MG lol
Water as ballast? How does that not end like my 500 part ksp rocket when I forget to add struts?
"We're picking up oscillations!" "Abort Jeb! Abort!"
Kaboom!
And thats how one 500 part spacecraft becomes 500 small spacecrafts...
Why the Alan Bean poster blur in the background??
Actually I like the poster. Here it is: www.greenwichworkshop.com/images/gallery/images/open/AB00044lg.jpg
Even more curious is why it's NOT blurred in the very beginning.... Is it only a copyright infringement if you show it for more than 0.8 seconds?
If you look close enough you can barely make out he shape of what looks to be an alien. I think they call them the greys.
I think it's a limitation of the software she's using - it can either blur or it can fade in/out - it can't do both.
0.8 seconds - unblurred until full fade up
0:12 - it unblurrs during the transition to her opening graphic.
3:21 - the blurred image remains when everything else fades out.
(See, Amy - we do pay attention to details. ;)
There's another option, of course. Move the poster to the opposite wall and replace it with something else.
I was there (4/25/1962) for SA-2. It is one of my earliest memories.
1:34 Proof that every video on the internet is actually a cat video.
ROTFL!
wof
MrGoodVibes 115 really?
your theory is wrong
MrGoodVibes 115 then explain how earthquake happen? an hollywood make 933 million families say they lost their members?
I have never heard of project Highwater. This is why I love your videos. I still have a lot to learn. Keep up the good work.
If you were in the right place and the detonation was done at the right time and altitude with the sun behind it, an ice cloud like that would have been a spectacular sight.
I love the pinup art intro. So much like the bomber art of WW2.
Also, even with computers to model something (vs paper and pencils), you still need to do the actual effort to verify that the computer models are right. So, really the computers are short cuts once enough real data has been collected to allow modeling after that (like we've done with nukes since the treaty to ban testing real bombs). For example, think about the efforts put into modeling snow by Disney for Frozen. They filmed actual snow under various conditions and then modeled that behavior in the animation software.
A thumbs up for the new Vintage Graphic logo at the beginning alone =oD
Love 60's ! And i return to my mind " Portal 2 " story... for science !!!
What's the point of using that background if you partially blur part of it, it's kinda distracting. I don't mean to contribute to the flood of comments about it, but it has to be pointed out.
It was rocket porn.
RedStefan can be a piece of red rocket lol
Thanks for pointing out something completely irrelevant.
FalloutHeaven As always you are welcomed :p
She could just paint fins on it.
I've never even heard of this. Nice to see someone bring to light the unknown. I love the reason "doing something just for the sake of doing something" why not.
"Vintage Nasa"'s headquarters:
-Any ideas?
-What if we launch like a lot of water into space?
-Why?
-Why not?
I lived through all of that, grew up watching every space mission on fuzzy black and white TV's but never heard of this. Thanks!
Great stuff!
I spent a lot of time on this channel last weekend and loved every minute!
Keep up the great work and as always thank you!
Cheers! Thanks for your kind words and I'm so glad you're enjoying Vintage Space!
Vintage Space I've enjoyed it ever since it was contemporary space all those year ago. lol
Michael Thompson h
1/ Why the blurred painting?
2/ Are there still telemetric devises on the moon, that give information back to NASA?
3/ Any interesting lumps of space junk come down recently?
theonlyantony 4/ who cut her hair?
hahahahaha at 0:00 the poster on the wall is visible, at 0:01 its blurred out. dont try to keep alan bean from us!
I absolutely love the new opening! My wife, the kids, and myself think you're great.
Cheers! Glad to hear your kids are enjoying some science!
Hi Amy, Actual comment response to your call to action soliciting 1960's era practical testing done because there were no computer models: you should talk about the combustion instability testing in the F-1 Rocket Engines, and how they were able to solve them by setting off bombs inside the engines on the test stand. That's a really cool example. Another Saturn Rocket similar test was how they put cameras inside the fuel tanks to see how the fuel sloshed around and created baffles for the fuel to keep it from doing that.
USWaterRockets That had to be fun trying to engineer cameras if the time within cryogenic tanks while trying to keep them adequately warm at the same time, but without letting that heat disturb the fuel's behavior. But I had never heard about that aspect of testing, though it certainly makes sense as the baffles were certainly a necessity to avoid potentially destructive, and wild, shifts in the center of mass leading to dramatic instability in flight.
Ethan Poole I never knew about that aspect of liquid fuelled rockets until I stumbled across some videos on TH-cam showing the camera footage. The way I understand it, the sloshing fuel could interrupt the fuel flow to the endings and the weight sloshing around could disturb the trajectory of the rocket and make the attitude control system go nuts trying to compensate.
+USWaterRockets ["you should talk about the combustion instability testing in the F-1 Rocket Engines, and how they were able to solve them by setting off bombs inside the engines on the test stand."]
Yes, that would be a great topic, not just for the F-1, but the lunar module ascent stage engine as well. Not sure if your aware of how much of a problem it was for the LM but it only received approval after it successfully passed 53 consecutive bomb test recoveries. A big part of the reason the LM wasn't ready for Apollo 8.
I was curious to see what this bomb looked like and finally found a picture of it in the recently released Haynes book by David Woods titled "NASA Saturn V 1967-1973.
I wasn't aware that was part of the LM testing as well. That's interesting. One thing I did learn recently was that there were a number of flaws in the LM integration with the flight control computer, and after the fact they were discovered. The flaws could have been fatal under just the right circumstances. This brings up another test method for Amy to explore... the software for the Apollo missions was mostly tested by running actual flight simulations in the simulation hardware, with engineers playing the role of astronaut and seeing how software changes worked. They did not have automated test software like we have today.
USWaterRockets I only found out about it while reading Tom Kelly's book "Moon Lander". Excellent book btw that has one chapter devoted to all the problems encountered with designing and building the LM. It's pretty amazing to read about how they managed to overcome it all. For example, one of the titanium tanks failed during testing and trying to determine why it happened proved to be very difficult and concerning. They were able to figure out eventually that the pads used to prep the titanium surface prior to welding were pretty costly so they decided to re-use them after a thorough washing. However, there was enough residual detergent left from washing that it actually had an adverse affect on the surface being prepped which led to the failure. Just one example of the challenges they had to overcome.
Great idea about the mission simulations as well.
Hi Amy excellent work as always. Request for you: In a future video can you explain why Apollo went into retrograde orbit around the moon - and not prograde? thanks!!
why is the picture in the back blurred?
+
copyright?
It's a "magic eye" poster. Stare at it long enough and you see who really killed JFK. :)
Stare at it long enough and /you/ killed JFK.
porn
To everyone asking about the blurry photo, the answer is complicated. After Doc and Marty went back to the past future's past post-future, they accidentally influenced all rocket designs to stop looking like 58 Chevys. So these photos in our current time are slowly blurring into non-existence, as the past becomes... well, history.
why is the alan bean picture censored???????????
I've heard of it. I was in grade school when Alan Shephard sat on top of a Redstone 3 Rocket and blasted off for the first suborbital flight in 1961.
Why did you hide the "Alan Bean Painting Apollo" poster in your video ?
So this video popped up on my TH-cam feed today and I can’t believe I didn’t see it before. I really share your love of that era when they could do anything, but we didn’t get to hear about a lot of it because it was classified. Thanks for bringing it into the light. Cheers from Moose Jaw
Tim
Hi Amy! I love what you do here on Vintage Space and on DNews (and the other various documentaries you do)! I was wondering if you could do a video about Apollo 13. I just watched the movie for the millionth time and there were many technical questions that I still don't understand. For example, I don't understand most of the electronic issues such as why they could only power the CM with 20 amps and why a free return trajectory was a better option than a direct abort. Thank you very much!
Thanks for your kind words! I've done a whack of videos about Apollo 13... hopefully these will answer some of your questions!
th-cam.com/video/OmCzZ-D8Wdk/w-d-xo.html
th-cam.com/video/BuN0SXJ0Tj8/w-d-xo.html
th-cam.com/video/Ehw60sLgBzM/w-d-xo.html
th-cam.com/video/UHQjQmYiJCo/w-d-xo.html
And here's a blog I did about how Apollo 13 launched basically with a bomb on board: www.popsci.com/how-apollo-13-launched-bomb-board
The reason for doing free return trajectory was actually explained in the film. At the time of the accident, the spacecraft was still coasting towards the moon at high speed. A direct abort would have required decelerating to zero, then accelerating back towards the earth. That is an incredibly large change in velocity.
The SPS engine on the service module was in theory capable of doing that, but because of the explosion, it was considered far too risky to attempt firing it. The only remaining engine was the LM descent engine, which was not powerful enough for a direct abort. So free return trajectory was the only realistic option.
The electrical issues were to do with the failure of the fuel cells. These were the primary electrical source for the command module and ran on the hydrogen and oxygen from tanks in the service module. But of course the oxygen tanks had been blown up, causing the fuel cells to fail. The only other source of power was a set of three batteries, capable of powering every instrument in the command module, but only for an hour.
These were referred to as the "re-entry batteries", since they were only intended to be used after the service module had been jettisoned, shortly before landing the ship. However, when the explosion caused the fuel cells to fail, they had to switch over to using the batteries while they figured out what to do next. So the batteries had already been partially drained before they completely shut the command module down.
This meant that they were desperately short of power as they approached re-entry. Had the batteries died before the ship had made it down through the atmosphere, they would have completely lost communications, navigation, thruster control, everything. They may have even lost the ability to fire the parachutes. So it was vitally important that they used as little power as possible, meaning using only the most essential instruments.
Thank you very much! This is great information
One topic I think would be interesting for you to look into is the tapered pins and dies that were attached to the hold-down posts and the Saturn V so that during the launch, the soft metal pins were pulled through the dies deforming them and in the process, "reducing transient stresses resulting from abrupt disengagement of a vehicle from its launch stand."
Looks like they used a trial and error process tp determine the optimum number to use per hold-down post. There's not a whole lot of info about this and it would be interesting to hear how they came up with this in the first place. Did they use this on earlier rockets? On the Shuttle?
Ok, why did you have to fuzz out the Alan Bean poster in the background?
Space tools please! What tools do spacecraft carry, how are they different from terrestrial tools? How do they work in zero-G, how are they secured during launch and reentry? How do you not lose wrenches and bolts on EVA, and what cautions are taken to prevent puncturing a spacesuit?
Extra large and clumsy and they’re made out of aluminum and plastic. They serve no real purpose but to make the show look interesting. NASA doesn’t have the budget to dramatize the puncturing of a space suit.
I know they have hammers. They had a stuck relay on Skylab, did a spacewalk out to it's general area, and hit things with an hammer, and it came unstuck.
One thing for sure is that they'd never have a "TOOL" like you on any flight, because they dont need a tool asking questions that have NOTHING to do with the subject (of this vid)
Why's the alan bean poster blurred out? It wasn't blurred in the last satellite video.
Might be a copyright issue. Just a guess.
Rocket porn.
Herbert Miller obviously part of the conspiracy. she is a false flag Fembot
Never heard of Project Highwater in any of the NASA documentaries. That is very interesting! Thanks for bringing this to our attention!
They should have used Tang instead of regular water.
It's nice to watch TH-cam and feel smarter after watching.
What's on the wall behind her and why is it blurred?
@@marekkelin1181 I'm an intellectual property lawyer. There are rights in just about every item you can see in her room. Why blur that picture in particular? You can see it briefly at 0:13. If they would be infringing anyone's rights by showing the picture then that moment is enough for them to be sued. So the question then remains, why blur it out at all?
You move your head around so fast that it looks like a special effect; it's very impressive.
G'day,
I never heard of that one...
By the way, congratulations on capturing the "Gidget Goes To Space...!" look ; I'm assuming that's intentional (?) !
If you want a fascinating Old Tech/Rocket story to build a Show around..., try this.
In 1947 the USAAC was fascinated by the Human Physiological Response to different Accelerations, so they cobbled-up a Railway Sled with a Seat, a Rocket Engine, & a Variable Water-Brake, so as to subject the Test Specimen to a calculated pre-set G-Loading when decelerating from a known speed...
So the (Volunteer) Specimen was fitted with 36 old-fashioned 1947 Electrical Skin-Current Sensors, basically a 2-inch Paper Disc with a 1-inch Aluminium-Foil Disc glued onto it's Centre with a Wire coming off the Aluminium...; a Medical Orderly applied the Sensors, having being instructed to "put some Electrically-Conductive Gel onto each Aluminium Disc, before applying the Gum Skin-Glue to the Paper, then apply each Sensor & connect it's Lead into the (Wire) Recorder's Harness....".
So, after the first manned Test Shot, which severely bruised the Volunteer, all 36 Sensors turned out to have produced no Data at all whatsoever, *BECAUSE ALL 36 WERE GLUED-ON UPSIDE-DOWN...!*
Whereupon, USAAC Colonel MURPHY made his famous Observation, which has since gone into History & been abbreviated & otherwise mangled & defiled..., to wit, that ; "If ever there exists a Task which is SO Simple that there are only two possible ways it can be performed, amd one way is 100% correct while the other way is completely & utterly & hopelessly & obviously WRONG...; then somewhere, some time, there will be someone who manages to do it the wrong way EVERY TIME...!"
The amputated version, as popularly concieved, ie...; "Whatever can go wrong, will go wrong...!" captures maybe 60% of the sentiment of the original, and you'd be doing Humanity a service if you ammended their underconstumblings regarding Colonel Murphy's brilliant insight...
Have a good one,
;-p
Ciao !
Back in the 1960's the Curtis-Wright X-19 was a huge passenger quadcopter with no computers and the pilot had to stabilise it himself. It was not electric and had many mechanical parts, everything was manual controled and after a few breakdowns it was deemed too complex. And so the the idea was scrapped [(until now) with the much simpler electric manned multicopters].
why is your picture on the wall blurred? lol
I actually have heard of Project Highwater before. Pretty cool that you did a segment on it! Love the rocket-riding logo!!!
I'm NOT going to mention the blurred Alan Bean poster in my post
d'ooooh
Came here from Life Noggin and super glad that I did! I've subscribed and look forward on binging on your other videos!
That blur frame is very disturbing. Just saying, love the videos though
Amy, for the Saturn I you where describing the stages of the block II version, project Highwater was on the second and third flights which used Block I Saturn Is and these had a water-ballasted dummy S-IV and S-V stages.
Why is the background picture blurry ?
Copyright issues is the leading guess.
It's shown in other videos.
A3Kr0n , If the objection from some copyright holder only mentioned this video then she might have only been required by TH-cam to blur it for this video. It would be nice for her to clear it up, but this would not be the first time copyright weirdness has happened on TH-cam.
It shows the flat earth. Must keep that hidden!
A picture on the wall shows a flat Earth. According to your ilk, all pictures of Earth that do not show what you want are CGI fakes, yet this blurred picture somehow has proof of your claim? You are a pathetic failure of an excuse for a human being.
Fascinating, I'd never heard of this project before. Interesting it was water they released too. Because the two upper stages of the Saturn V moon rocket (which is what they would have been most concerned with at the time) used LO2 + LH2 propellant - so if one had actually exploded up there... chemistry!
Why is that picture in the background blurred? And I love the new intro!
Copyright compliance.
Amy/Vintage Space . . . a suggestion for another topic: "Project Fishbowl," in 1962, which was the detonation of a megaton nuclear bomb about 400 km above earth. It was a test to see "what would happen" of a nuclear blast in space.
Is there any video of the highwater???
Not that I could find, which means whatever exists hasn't been digitized and put online... I'll keep hunting!
I'll do some searching as well although I'm sure you are more knowledgeable on where to look. Either way I'll try to get in contact if I find anything. Cheers
to our group of 6th grade experts at Patrick Elementary in 1962 it looked more like an iceberg in the sky..
@Vintage Space: th-cam.com/video/6JrpL_k-jQo/w-d-xo.html at about 14:30
Yes, here:
th-cam.com/video/WgcqihPTlio/w-d-xo.html
I guess I'd be interested in the specific engineering difficulties faced 1st to get into orbit and 2nd to do so with a human (assuming safe return)
Amy, am i in a rocket? Because i think my heart is taking off.
whys the poster blurred out? We can still read it lol
Whats so important on the wall that its blurred out ??
alan bean apollo painting :p
It is the basic human desire to know the unknown.
Looks like some planet.
Steve Benson it's actually considered the "Human condition".
www.greenwichworkshop.com/images/gallery/images/open/AB00044lg.jpg This is the poster. When it is going into the intro it unblurs, also for about 0.8 seconds at 0:00.
I just found your Channel and Love it. You are a Great Presenter, please keep the videos coming !
Why is part of the wall blurred? Is NASA hiding something?!
TheHelleri Was thinking the same thing. May have something to do with her sneaky cat.
pron
TheHelleri copyright claims. $$$$. Don't wanna get sued/copyright strikes
Hi Amy - I've worked in the propulsion business for 32 years (Aerojet) and was always curious about how the Gemini, Mercury and Apollo era rockets were set up for self-destruct by a range safety officer. Can you cover how that all worked?
Never heard of the project, how did they pump the water to the stage?
JD Kempton Going out on a limb here, but I'd guess with pumps. Probably big ones. ;)
Robert Destree LOL, ok you got me
I'm a brand new sub. Hiya! now going back to binge-watch older vids. *the best part of being a new sub*
I love this channel!
Awww, cheers! Thanks!
@vintage Space can you make video of an astronaut releasing water outside of spacecraft and watching how it reacts in the vacuum of space please?
what's the blurred thing behind you ?
Remi YAZIGI it's a cat
Peter Loftus i mean on the wall hanging some kind of picture
Another question: it's my understanding that there is no gradation in temperature in space between full sunlight and darkness, as in the demarcation line on the moon. When astronauts go into orbit and they cross the light threshold from sunlight to darkness, doesn't the constant change in temperature lead to stress and metal fatigue on the spacecraft/space station and in spacesuits? Which has potentially deadly results.
Never herd of Project High Water.
What did it prove? What did they learn?
How about watching the video to find out...
I did...and all it said was there was a cloud and it disrupted transmissions for a little while.
If that is it, it hardly seems worth it - let alone trying it a second time.
They wanted to know what would happen if large amounts of fuel got into the ionosphere. They were already using the water as ballast so they used that. They learned that the fluid could form clouds that could disrupt radio signals.
It's all there in the video.
that most are waterheads
McRocket I agree with u she didn't or nasa didn't give any valuable infos like after the cloud formed did it get back or gone to deep space I mean u don't need to test it to know it would forum a cloud once it's there it's common sense
Project High-water is cool. I've always been fascinated by the Echo satellites. It would have been a trip to have been able to look up and see those pass by.
why did you blur the poster in the background?
Copyright issues.
ptonpc I didn't know inspirational photos where copy righted. I thought they where all free to the public. Oh well. Still can catch a glimpse of between the transitions.
ReformedThe It is not a generic photo. it is a limited edition poster of an astronaut. (There are many comments on her videos with the exact details)
greyson mueller because you touch yourself at night.
Rocket porn.
PERFECT pin-up opening too LOVE it
LOOK INTO PROJECT ORION!
I'm working on it. I am so busy I just need more time!
Take all the time you need. Love the show.
Yes, I was just watching on TH-cam unclassified tests done for the original Project Orion using conventional explosives for proof of concept. Pretty interesting in the fact that NASA is considering today something similar for long distance space trips. It would be a great topic for Vintage Space.
Not only no computer models but not even a pocket calculator. Those guys did it all with a slide rule and #2 pencil. That amazes me more than no computers.
Never heard of that mission before - but, DAMN you are so CUTE!
You should tell the story of the NASA pickup truck that burned to the ground just after the WCDDT for Apollo 13. Love your channel!
the blurred poster is really distracting
You riding the rocket in into is too funny, but very vintage.....Great job on keeping the theme.
well kiddo , what are we "Greying out" back there ??? ;) i see conspiracy somewhere :D
pops wrench Alan bean
I grew up just outside Huntsville. I don't know if it actually happened, but I heard a story from multiple people when I was growing up about an experiment where they put two rockets nose to nose to see what would happen. Have you heard about this? I can't find any information on it, and all the guys that told the tale are dead now.
amys cute
endojoe420 Cuteaswell as hot.I love smart chicks,smart with boobs' is even better
Cold Heartt I would 👌
Kevin Oloane You mean Pete? :)
Kevin Oloane I didn't know so many Asians watched this channel...
I've never heard of Project highwater it's funny to think of how much money and effort was spent on such a (seemingly) trivial question. I'd have loved to sit in on the board meeting where they decided on this, there must have been at least a few giggles
I'm gay.
Lord Turtle Ⓥ Ha! GAAAAAYY!!
yep ;)
Lord Turtle Ⓥ But seriously why did you post that? It's not the least bit important nor is it something that matters. It also had no need to be said / pointed out.
I was just bored. plus I'm bullied. pls help.
Lord Turtle Ⓥ No.
This at&t commercial was very informative.
awesome vid/info as always Amy. pls keep them coming ☺
0:10 why is that picture in the background blured? And why do you leave a few seconds at 0:13 to see it anyway. No point in bluring it at all.
I'd love to hear about Project West Ford! Something about a bunch of tiny dipole antennas which ended up vacuum welded together.
Easy Way to get everyone to research something: Blur it out in a video. We're all Alan Bean Experts now.
I love all the weird testing rigs they used developing the Apollo capsule.
The intro is perfect. Victory rolls and all!
starfish prime. "wonder what would happen if we set a nuke off in space!" "alright, let's see."
Never heard of it, but interesting. I'm learning so much from you channel.
your titles may be clickbait , but the videos answer my questions and ate accurate
I think there were experiments done in the early 1960's where they released barium into space and studied how the resulting plasma clouds behaved. That might make an interesting video ^_^
Francois Lacombe See my question on midnight thirty above. What I saw was in early 80s and 90s but it was a chemical release at high altitude. I tried to give her all the info I had above.
the westford needles! that is definitely an interesting topic. I have not checked if you already did a video on them, but launching thousands of needles in to space to reflect radio waves. resonant dipoles to be precise..
I find all of the Apollo launch and pad abort tests to be interesting especially the ones launched on the Little Joe II rockets so i'd love to see Amy do a lengthy article on the various Apollo abort tests.
A quick question!
during the moonwalks...when LM was left unpressurized...with hatch open....what did the temperature inside the LM get to be?
Didn't really notice any poster, was more interested in the science they learned from exploding those tanks so high up in the air. Did they learn how to make stronger fuel tanks from these experiments, or how to get around that radio blocking?
Fascinating! Never heard of this project. Excellent research, and enjoyed the video much.
I applaud you for the really interesting videos. keep up the good work !
Hey Amy, if you're looking for other topics regarding practical tests without computer simulations, maybe take a look at Air Force Colonel John Stapp, the original crash test dummy? The standards he set outlining survivable forces on the human body are still used today, to my knowledge.
Most of what you talk about I haven't heard. Which is why I'm here. ^___^