Okay

What is the reason space shuttle discontinued?????very sad...

😬🤭😦😬🤔🤔😾😻 Dhaka

@@ThesanPitt h

@@ThesanPitt To expensive, to many crashes. Challenger explode 1986 after 79 seconds. Columbia burned up upon entry into the Atmosphere.

The fact that it was riddled with compromises, shortcuts and designed around a ridiculous set of starting criteria only makes the shuttle even more amazing. No matter what happens in the future, we will never see its like again.

It’s a lie like everything else NASA put out! Conspiracy music Guru on UKposts sings the truth?

@@jetplane5295 bro

@@jetplane5295 What about this landing was fake? How did the craft get sooted? Not all things from NASA are fake, even if some things could be. It's what has been true for all things of all ages: "The truth is somewhere in the middle".

So I would assume that if the Shuttle never existed we would have landed on Mars by now.

Endeavor is pictured in Google Earth in the Vehicle Assembly building, north/western shop bay, at the Kennedy Space center undergoing some TLC. They have the nose section opened up and dust proofed with plastic sheeting. I believe it is being restored to primo condition. Atlantis is there too. The first and last shuttles to fly . Jan 2012 dated pics. Probably before you saw it being delivered.

One of my customers was on holiday in the US and was staying in San Francisco. One morning, he heard a loud noise in the sky getting louder and stepped outside to see Endeavour fly past on its 747. When he returned home, he came to see me at work to tell me about it, because he knew that I have a bit of an interest in this sort of thing. How neat that he saw it. I was very pleased for him.

I was in Disneyland when the 747 transporting Endeavor to the museum flew over. I was in the Tomorrowland part of of the park by Space mountain. Couldn't ask for a more fitting spot to see it happen

@@MarsFKA I Saw it fly by the golden gate bridge it was the coolest thing ever. There are some great photos

@@scotttild Excellent! I have a photo of Endeavour that I took on its last orbit. I was watching on NASA TV when it made its de-orbit burn west of Australia. Its orbit then took it south of Australia and New Zealand, so I went outside and set up the camera. The sky was clear and when Endeavour came into view I started taking long exposures. I took a last one as the Orbiter moved further to the east and was about to release the shutter when I saw the Space Station a couple of hundred kilometres behind Endeavour. I kept the shutter open for another ten seconds and got two spacecraft for the price of one. Rather pleased with that photo. Half an hour later, Endeavour was on the ground at the KSC and I remembered the last time I did the same trip, it took me seventeen hours in two aircraft. Less next time, now that Air New Zealand has a direct Auckland/Houston connection.

You should watch a documentry on the Saturn 5 Rocket. It is one of the greatest inventions ever made by humans.

Rocket science is actually pretty simple, flamey end down, pointy end up

@@nukedukem6 👀

@@nukedukem6 Well, you're not wrong.

I’m amazed that they attach these shuttles to the top of 747’s to transport.

The nose wheel hold off was a routine procedure for all shuttle landings.

Correct 100% Yep - computers and machines are very routine - they have to be - otherwise it ends in tears n misery especially in this case-

@@sailorman8668 : It's standard procedure for all aircraft. You don't just slam the nosewheel (or the tailwheel, in the convential landing gear layout) into the ground...

Butter landing

oh man, same...

except it was a failure

When werner von braun was born, people light up their houses with gaslamps or candles and transported themselves and goods with horse and wagon. So from candels and horses to the moon and back in just one human lifetime. And now 50 years later since the first man on the moon, an average smartphone has millions of times more power than the computers of the entire apollo missions all together. And when i was a kid in the 70's, i never would believe that there would be such thing as a 2x2 inch micro toy drone would be possible in my lifetime, because my matchbox cars were that size, so impossible to fit motors, batteries, controllers etc etc. And only 25 years ago i bought a combat flightsim that was insane big for that time, a whopping 100mb! And it took an entire day to install it on my very first PC. Now we have gigabytes and before this decade is over petabytes wil be common. The world never moved so fast forewards as in the past century.

I am also amazed at this

Slickpickle The space shuttle program was an absolute failure. Please try to prove me wrong.

@James Muecke How many lives have been saved because of smoke detectors? Smoke detectors developed from technology first invented by NASA for use in human space flight. That is just one thing that has improved human life that might not have been developed when it was if it wasn't for the existence of NASA. And in addition to the massive space dividends from inventions like the smoke detector, there is all the money spent by NASA employees on things like housing, food, clothing, cars, entertainment, et cetera . . . in and around Houston and Cape Canaveral and other cities with NASA facilities. And there there is the scientific knowledge that helps us understand our climate and our planet, and also know when solar flares from the Sun will impact the Earth causing issues with wireless telecommunications in particular and electronics in general or when a comet or meteor is passing near by (and how near). Oh and if you like Google Maps in Satellite view, those photos come from satellites sent up by NASA. Same for improved weather forecasting brought to us by satellites put in to orbit by NASA.

@James Muecke Science has real value for humanity. From consumer products derived from NASA inventions, like life-saving smoke detectors, to improved weather forecasting due to NASA-launched weather satellites, we Americans have all benefited from NASA.

@Hazard Hawk I believe he was intentionally using hyperbole. You, though I think, are using insolence..

Neil Sheldon, my dad and I have the same color circle like yours!

Absolutely

Well yes. Though i would say the primary purpose is rather to connect the main fuel Tank where the fuel is also feed across

@@MigotRen Yes, that is where the EFT connects and feeds fuel through. When it disconnects that door would close and cover up with the heat tiles.

Stronk

math + brute strength

@Blob B but it may not take off/land with 250 people in at the same time.

yes i loved when it blew up and killed a teacher

Expensive white elephant. The whole programme was a waste of money with the use of this craft.

The pilot actually only follows computer's guidance, idk why they didn't make that thing just land itself. I'm replying to 2yrs old comment, I know.

They become legends

@Hazard Hawk get a life kid they are poor because they don't know how to earn money these dudes who made shuttle had studied hard to make this so go, get a life kid.

And women

@Hazard Hawk everyone does what is better for them.

@Hazard Hawk it may be bad for others but better for them, this is how business works

a380.

@@TheBoysTopSecretisOrganization A380 is cool but doesn’t nearly have the reputation the 747 does

@Vibhaath Chirukandoth no....

Abyan Khan at least they are trying. When was the last time Pakistan sent a rocket for space exploration of any kind?

@@youssefcamara3916 Sorry My Brother I'm Just Joking🙅🙅🙅

@@abyankhan6868 no problem brother.

Jai Hind

Yeah, but planes, commercial ones, are still falling off and failing.

At least it won’t be as dangerous and costly anymore

Glad you liked it! Take a look at this playlist, it's all the shuttle related videos in our channel :) ukposts.info/slow/PLAqZ0jsH2nEJCwaTyw8JmMZ07PQGrcV4t

You are amazed very easily, remember Hollywood movies aren't real.

You clearly haven't seen a femboy in thigh highs

Thank you. Take a look at the other videos (links at the description) for more :)

TindDK, my dad and I have the same color circle like yours!

What I can’t get my head around, apart from the obvious difference in size between the two vehicles, is how the smaller one can travel into space where the 747 can’t

My dad and I have the same color circle like yours!

Ahahaha

🤣🤣🤣

Hooo

Hooo

I read awhile back that the 747 shifts quite a bit during a space shuttle ferry....I guess because of the stabilizers and everything constantly adjusting for the heavy ass payload. I read it described as a rumbling or vibrating sensation. Must feel kinda weird, even though the pilots are pros and they're used to it. It's amazing seeing humans fly these massive machines 🙏✈

@@Freimopp777 its not an antonov. antonov has 3 engines on each side and a much larger landing gear among other features; and the shuttle is the US's, not buran (the words "united states" kinda give it away lol). it looks like a modified 747, but i can't be 100% sure. (edit: it is! here's the link to it, specially built for transporting the shuttle: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shuttle_Carrier_Aircraft) Buran and Energya were amazing pieces of engineering, and i wish we would have got to see them in action. I must recommend Curious Droid's video on the subject (as well as Mustard's channel). ukposts.info/have/v-deo/kHyAd4eubKlqtqs.html

Did you mean: *_Queen of the Skies_*

What I can’t get my head around is, apart from the difference in size between the two vehicles but also how a vehicle smaller than a plane can go into space but a passenger plane can’t

@@hollymackenzie9923 Because it has to be rocket powered, a jet or piston engine will not have enough power or oxygen to burn in space, nor the oxygen going into space, a passenger aircraft would not have oxygen on board, nor would it withstand the pressures coming back from space. Why does the Virgin Space Plane get there, I hear you ask? Well it doesn't, only part of it get there, even then it is not properly into space, close, but not quite. Then it comes back using a different method, but as it is not fully into deep space, it does not come back so fast as to generate all the heat one would do entering from space. However, one day they might manage to do what Branson's team are thinking, it is just a matter of time. Look at the reusable rocket boosters that can now return to earth by controlled flight, to be used again, 20 years ago it would not have been thought possible.

@Me you and the Animal Do you need an ambulance, my good friend?

take a look at the other two videos (links at description) they are similar from two other STS missions :)

等嘛!

Lol... Looking around like, where's everyone at? 😂

Probably don’t know how to deal with gravity

@@howardjones6432 lol

😂😂😂😂😂😂

Probably forgot everything about the Earth

@Pine Nut your mom.

@Pine Nut ok dumbass

I started breathing heavily while watching it

So do I Hard to use controls like airplane!

They don;t do it for the benefit of humanity. They do it for the benefit of their satanic masters

ISS missions are a very long duration in comparison.

It is dead now because it is not feasible to use.

L BAI I know but still an iconic machine

США и СССР это две страны которые сумели создать подобные машины. Действительно это чудо инжинерной мысли. СССР к стати сумел отправить и приземлить свой челнок в беполётном, автоматическом режиме. Умерла страна и умер этот проект.

Now imagine what kind of technology awaits the human race in another 80 years! Or in 500!

@@blackshirtsd9916 but we've now really done nothing over the 40 years since 1980....obviously things like the internet, telecommunications, but transport and specifically space flight has really gone nowhere and if anything, maybe even backwards.

My grandmother always thought it wonderful that she had been alive for the first powered flight and the first Moon landing.

@@stanner6169 very true statement. Never realized it’s been 40 years since we first landed on Mars. And 41 since the moon.

Sanjay

Couldn’t agree more.

But nothing will ever look as cool as the shuttle

100%

I think it can take off like a plane without a rocket carrier, and then fly to space and then return to earth, just your government definitely does not want to develop this something hinders, Salam from Kazakhstan

Upblike a rocket don't think.so.it is carried.ona rocket

@@interestingtv_ uhm no with the amount of fuel required it wouldn't be able to get off the ground.

My dad and I have the same color circle like yours!

Before the Space Shuttle was at the California Science Center!

Absolutely! Here here ! 100% ! Well said !!!

Did you see the first launch? 1981?

@@sidv4615 Yes

@@marksamuelsen3202 do you remember challenger? What was it like sir? Also we’re you a pilot in the Air Force? If so which plane did you fly?

Try coming back through the Earth's atmosphere and slowing down from 28,000 mph and you might understand ;)

They always looked battered, even when they were just about to launch again. That's part of their charm.