"Because the Dragon 2 lands in the sea, it can't be reused for manned flights again..." NASA is allowing SpaceX to reuse the capsule for crewed flights! While "Crew 1" launching early next month will be a new-construction Dragon 2, the "Crew 2" mission launching next Spring will reuse "Endeavour" from the Demo-2 Bob & Doug mission.
@@fcgHenden Pretty much an entire new exterior, and thrusters exposed to salt water have to be replaced. The more sophisticated thrusters are protected so they can be reused.
Salt water isn't that bad folks, in fact NASA successfully tested and proved dunking spacecraft and parts into the water wasn't a big a deal as claimed so often. They don't do it because for the most part "re-use" wasn't a thing so the effort wasn't seen as cost-effective given how most space programs were run. On the other hand EARLY space programs were more heavily aimed at various types of re-use so the concepts actually got tested more even if they were never used. Early Saturn-1 testing was originally aimed at recovering the first stage for post-flight examination and possible re-use with the H1 engines subjected to extensive dunk/soak/re-furbish testing which pinned a price of about 5% of the original engine costs to refurbishment and reuse of an engine even with days of exposure to salt-water, minimum cleaning, (spray down with fresh water) and then stored for two weeks before refurbishment. Similarly the Air Force extensively studied recovery and reuse of the Gemini capsule for the MOL program and found that while some design changes were needed to make the process easier the Gemini could be refurbished and reflown for a vastly lower cost than a new capsule. The reason NASA is allowing SpaceX to reuse the Dragon II capsules is because they now have an example of how much effect and effort will be needed and what the end quality of a refurbished Dragon will be. It should probably be clear the Dragon is more damaged by flight and reentry than by landing in the water and that is where the majority of 'refurbishment' comes from.
@@CuriousDroid>>> FWIW: In regards to your age, which you reference in the video, I was born in 1961. *_"Seems a thousand centuries ago."_* - APOCALYPSE NOW [1979]
I'm a bit disappointed there was no mention of the Soyuz two stage Launch Escape System, which saved people in the recent Soyuz failure. They already ditched the tower, but still had engines in the shroud.
Yep, that's a prime example of launch escape gone right! To be fair (if i recall correctly) when the Soyuz failed, it had already jettisoned the tower, so if the video is about abort motors, they weren't used. also Spacex's F9/D2 in-flight abort test didn't get any love in this video.
This historic walkthrough of crew escape systems really exposes the reckless decision not to have any escape plan for the shuttle. I am amazed that anyone would fly that thing voluntarily.
Have you seen the new Netflix series about the Challenger disaster? I didn't know this before but apparently the astronauts who flew the Shuttle were strongly opposed to NASA's decision to allow civilians on board. They knew it was dangerous and signed up knowing what risks they were taking, and didn't think it was right to risk the life of a civilian no matter how much good publicity they would get from it.
Jared Freeland Yes I have seen it. It was very interesting. As one of them said, they still regarded it as a test vehicle. I’m just very happy that the newer rocket designs happening right now, take crew safety more seriously. So much exciting stuff going on in manned space flight again.
15:58 Actually that's not accurate anymore. NASA authorized SpaceX to reuse Dragon's for crewed missions. The DM2 capsule, Endeavour, will be used by the Crew-2 mission.
Very true but required a contract modification if I remember because original did not allow them to reuse the dragon for manned flights but Elon usually gets his way
You deserve more than a simple thumb-up! Your videos impress me for the completeness of both the research and the delivery style. As "Space fan" I followed the evolution of escape systems through the years; Willy Schirra got lucky with Gemini 6. The integrators forgot to remove the dust caps from the fuel feed duct, so the engine never started really, only the turbines did. There were all conditions to fire the ejection seats, but he trusted his sensorial perception that the rocket hadn't moved from the pad, so he didn't fire the ejection seats. I later learned there were risks due to the seat motors firing in the pure oxygen atmosphere inside the capsule, possibly causing harm to the astronauts. Nice to learn that you too were a electronic music expert... My most complex build was a full keyboard synth with (then expensive) 88 x ICL8038 waveform generators, a polyphonic dream for the time. Thank you again for the outstanding video...
@Alpha Centauri The tower jettisoned by Soyuz has secondary launch escape shroud which fired and pulled crew module from the rocket. So abort system was actually used
Great video! I'm sure others have already pointed out that the Dragon 2 is now fully reusable, and not turned into a Cargo Dragon 2 after splashing. NASA accepted SpaceX's submission to reuse it. In fact DM2's Dragon is Crew 2's Dragon, planning for a return to the ISS in early 2021. Cheers and keep up the awesomeness
Side note, the Artemis LAS attitude control motor is *not* the first solid rocket motor to be thrust-vectored. Not only were the Space Shuttle's Solid Rocket Boosters equipped with thrust vectoring--which was the *only* means of control until they were jettisoned--but all solid-fuel ballistic missiles (including Minuteman, Polaris, Trident, etc.) use thrust vectoring to steer during boost, too.
In fact, part of the thinking behind the ejection seats on gemeni was, that it was planned to land the capsule on wheels with a paraglider, where the ejection seats would be also required in case of emergency
Those shirts and Tangerine Dream go so well together! I wish you would make a few videos about your hobby and electronic music from the 70'. Maybe on a separate channel, but it would be glorious!
Get Readly with 1 month FREE here: gb.readly.com/2020-curiousdroid EDIT 16-10-2020 : A few people have mentioned that I don't say anything about the Soyuz LES, well at 5:30 I show and caption the 1983 Soyuz T-10 launch abort, the only manned one to happen so far anywhere, i just didn't mention it in the commentary. I was going to include the 2018 Soyuz abort but the only footage was from the cabin interior showing the crew being bouncing around a bit and as the length was a bit long I dropped it in favour of more on the Dragon and its integrated escape system compared the the disposable Artemis/Orion one. There are several little bits about the Dragon which have now changed like the man rating of the sea landing Dragon but SpaceX are a quick moving company and I may have out of date info on some details, my bad really :-(
I liked this video because of how well he done his advert. Honestly never seen someone market something like this before. I'm impressed. I've also never liked a video because of their sponsor/advert lol, in particular one as long as this. Again excellently done.
I'm surprised there was no mention of Soyuz T-10-1. It's so far the only use of a LES tower with a crew onboard. The rocket was on the launchpad when a failure in the rocket caused it to light on fire. The launch escape system was fired, pulling the crew capsule away with about 15 g of acceleration, and a split second later the rocket violently exploded. The LES saved the lives of the crew, who immediately requested cigarettes and vodka when they were greeted by recovery crews.
Another point worth mentioning with Gemini capsules: You'd be launching through a 100% pure oxygen environment using your ejection seat. AKA blasting on a small rocket through a very very combustable atmosphere. Aside from the additonal propulsion boost, quite detrimental to the crew's health. (This major design flaw of the Gemini escape system was pointed out on another YT chanel I happened upon some time back. Got me a huge grin.)
@@Fred_the_1996 as I understand it, they chose the pure oxygen environment for weight and size considerations and then work with the side effects from there on. Still, up to Apollo 1, nobody took fire hazzards serious enough, though.
16:00 the crewed dragon will actually be reused for crewed mission’s (recent change) 16:12 and the SuperDracos aren’t actually used for orbital maneuvering or station orbit raising, they use the Draco RCS thrusters for that.
@@originalmin Thanks for asking. I don't have a link or something I can provide you know. I remembered from commentary from the Everyday Astronaut on the Demo 1 mission I think, but I am now starting to doubt myself. One hint I just found is "This high-thrust hypergolic engine-about 200 times larger than the Draco RCS thruster hypergolic engine-offers deep throttling ability and just like the Draco thruster, has multiple restart capability and uses the same *shared* hypergolic propellants." (from en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SpaceX_Draco#SuperDraco - my empasis.) Another source (also poor) source is this discussion, where it is suggested that they share tanks but not the pressurization system, or they at least are able to cross-feed: www.reddit.com/r/SpaceXLounge/comments/elq9lt/rcs_and_super_draco_shared_fuel/
The closest we've ever came to an Abort/Astronaut Launch escape was Gemini VI....in which the engines shut down just as they powered up. Thanks to Astronaut Wally Schirra's courage NOT to turn the abort handle, the Gemini VI + VII rendezvous flight was able to launch soon after & the program remained on schedule.
3 года назад
You're even make ads sound interesting. Thanks a lot for this channel.
Yes, it seemed all so simple back then, 3 TV channels, no mobile phones (that you could afford), no internet, no satellite TV, no GPS and we all got by fine. Now every other person has their head in a phone, and cant find their way without the sat nav and as for that there internet..... jeees
Oh man, I usually tune out when the sponsored ad bit happens but the mention of Future Music magazine snapped me back to attention instantly. I bought every copy from '95 until 2004. Best electronic music mag ever! I only read and imported the UK version as the American version was terrible. Good memories 🙂
Thank you for the insight into your personal life. It has been fascinating to a fellow enthusiast. I was born in the mid 80's and we had a 186 based PC. I could use DOS before i started Kindergarden and got pulled out of class to help office staff with the computers regularly. Curious where it all starts indeed. Eventually i got into music and had to modify everything i could get my hands on. There's still a stack of magazines in the shed i probably won't throw out too.
Another seriously high quality video from CD. Consistent, entertaining, educating... there are few better channels!!!!! I learn so much from these. Thank you :)
Actually, the shroud on the Apollo LES, that was to protect the Windows from shattering since the SR motors are closer. If you notice, Mercury had windows but the tower was higher. Same with SLS. But blue origin and SpaceX don’t cover theirs because 1. Not solid rocket abort systems, 2. Under the windows.
Saturn V first stage too fast during separation? Add retro rockets to slow it down. Rocket needs to lift bigger and heavy payloads? Add more rocket boosters. SpaceX wants more redundant launch vehicles? Add more rocket engines.
Nice, that looked like a BBC Model A? I learned to program in BBC BASIC using a BBC Mobel B here in Australai. BBC micro has some presence in schools here. Nostalgia. Then we got the Acorn Archimedes RISC computers - they were amazing for their time.
Cool sponsored part actually! I am not personally reading much, but found it being interesting news and it fit well into the video. Also could be used for research I guess. Regarding the video itself: I think you did all the music yourself, didn't you? Is there any reason for the sparse usage lately? Loved the typical Curious Droid music.
Great video! One minor issue: The Super Dracos can‘t be used to lift the ISS because after that explosion 💥 on the test stand SpaceX replaced the fuel valves with some break through plates. Therefore the Super Dracos can only be started once and then burn until they run out of fuel, hence they are really just a launch escape system now.
Given your short intro about your younger years, it seems we followed the same mags, and had the same interests (music, especially), at the same time! I built an Elektor Formant which taught me a lot about practical electronics (my first use of PCBs, incidentally) before going on to make it a career. Now I need to start wearing spectacular shirts. Great episode, very informative.
Never knew you are a synth guy! Cool! One fundamental problem is that the pod has no secure lines to hang it undependantly from the rocket, preventing it to fall down after an explosion.
The Launch Escape System on the Apollo was not switched off automatically. The Astronauts switched it from "Auto" to "Manual" a short time before Staging the S-IC during the boost phase. They depict this in the launch sequence in the movie Apollo 13, although they erroneously show the escape tower jettisoning as a result of that switch change (which didn't happen in real life, as the tower was jettisoned moments after skirt-sep some time after S-IC staging) .
@Mr Prongles Contact with salt water, which is on its own the reason so many things have a "marine" version meant to put up with that corrosive torture slightly longer than the normal stuff everyone uses. If SpaceX got the ok, then presumably their stuff has also been shown to survive a brief bit of friendly etching action.
Not mentioned is that the launch abort tower MUST separate every time for the crew in the capsule to survive. If it doesn't separate, it is in the way of the parachutes and too heavy to either reach orbit or land softly. They would crash to death. So SpaceX putting the abort rockets on the right side of the capsule, is not only much more efficient it is also much safer.
There is one thing worth mentioning about the risk of the Gemini ejection seats, and that was the 100% oxygenated atmosphere. Because the crew would be soaking in that for hours leading up to the launch, it would turn them into Roman candles if you light of an ejection seat with a six foot flame coming out the bottom in there. If the Apollo 1 fire proved anything, it's that basically everything can burn in that kind of atmosphere, so it would have almost certainly killed the crew in the event of an abort.
At least in the case of the Challenger, it could be argued that the crew could still be alive, had they had an escape system, or at least some parachutes, as the crew compartment is believed to have survived the disintegration of the spacecraft intact, and the crew was killed only by the impact. In the case of Columbia, however, the only way to save the crew would have been to send another spacecraft up to bring them home. But this just shows how reckless the Space Shuttle really was. I can remember STS-1 as a10-year old boy, and there was much fear back then that the heat shield would not withstand the stresses of the launch, and the orbiter would burn up during reentry, but those were premature. And on STS-2, the rubber O-rings of the SRB failed, but melted slag plugged the hole, and everything went fine
I was watching a documentary about the columbia and i wondered that if they had known about the hole in the wing if they could have docked at the ISS and set the crew off there whilst they readied another shuttle. I don't know if they carried the docking port or maybe they could have done a short space walk if the didn't, maybe some out there knows more about that.
@@CuriousDroid Unfortunately, Columbia doing a rendezvous with the ISS would have been impossible as Columbia was not launched into the same inclination as the ISS.
Surprised there was no mention of the unmanned Mercury/Atlas test flight that failed and the launch escape system took over and worked well. There’s nice video of it somewhere.
"Unintentionally tested during a test."
Well, test failed successfully I guess.
At least it was still on the ground, not in mid air.
those two sentences are both confusing and makes sense.
"Sir, we successfully f#cked up, but it wasn't a f#ck up..Well, it was, but it was a success!" Lol
@@barryphillips7327 I've heard it described as a "catastrophic success"
Lol
"Because the Dragon 2 lands in the sea, it can't be reused for manned flights again..."
NASA is allowing SpaceX to reuse the capsule for crewed flights!
While "Crew 1" launching early next month will be a new-construction Dragon 2, the "Crew 2" mission launching next Spring will reuse "Endeavour" from the Demo-2 Bob & Doug mission.
Really? Wonder what kind of refurb that needs with seawater being corrosive and such.
@@fcgHenden Pretty much an entire new exterior, and thrusters exposed to salt water have to be replaced. The more sophisticated thrusters are protected so they can be reused.
I was sure I heard that reported as well, fair play, maybe he needs a bigger research team ☺️
Salt water isn't that bad folks, in fact NASA successfully tested and proved dunking spacecraft and parts into the water wasn't a big a deal as claimed so often. They don't do it because for the most part "re-use" wasn't a thing so the effort wasn't seen as cost-effective given how most space programs were run. On the other hand EARLY space programs were more heavily aimed at various types of re-use so the concepts actually got tested more even if they were never used. Early Saturn-1 testing was originally aimed at recovering the first stage for post-flight examination and possible re-use with the H1 engines subjected to extensive dunk/soak/re-furbish testing which pinned a price of about 5% of the original engine costs to refurbishment and reuse of an engine even with days of exposure to salt-water, minimum cleaning, (spray down with fresh water) and then stored for two weeks before refurbishment. Similarly the Air Force extensively studied recovery and reuse of the Gemini capsule for the MOL program and found that while some design changes were needed to make the process easier the Gemini could be refurbished and reflown for a vastly lower cost than a new capsule. The reason NASA is allowing SpaceX to reuse the Dragon II capsules is because they now have an example of how much effect and effort will be needed and what the end quality of a refurbished Dragon will be. It should probably be clear the Dragon is more damaged by flight and reentry than by landing in the water and that is where the majority of 'refurbishment' comes from.
I read that as well. Also, fun fact: Bob’s wife will be flying on the Crew-2 mission!
That little background on your childhood was very wholesome, not gonna lie. Great video!
Yea, a little stroll down memory lane, happy days :-)
Not to mention that lush hairdo.
@@CuriousDroid>>> FWIW: In regards to your age, which you reference in the video, I was born in 1961.
*_"Seems a thousand centuries ago."_*
- APOCALYPSE NOW [1979]
I'm a bit disappointed there was no mention of the Soyuz two stage Launch Escape System, which saved people in the recent Soyuz failure. They already ditched the tower, but still had engines in the shroud.
I was almost convinced I must have missed it somehow, but apparently it really wasn't mentioned - so weird...!
@@jim9930 you know that apollo 1 burn in testing sadly killing all 3 people inside???
Yep, that's a prime example of launch escape gone right! To be fair (if i recall correctly) when the Soyuz failed, it had already jettisoned the tower, so if the video is about abort motors, they weren't used. also Spacex's F9/D2 in-flight abort test didn't get any love in this video.
@@jim9930 you didnt realize why i write as reply to you what i write dont you??? :D
@@marcocasati6953 but in 1983 was LES used saving 3 kozmonauts in one of the few sojuz failures
Best sponsored in video ad I’ve ever seen! Thought you was cool anyway, but now knowing you dabble in the synth zone made you 100% cooler! 😄
Thank you Maurice, I made the same reply above to Paul. He really is a diamond in the rough. We're so lucky to have his videos.
I'm hoping Paul may indulge us with a synth/electronic music video one day.
@@andyronayne7947 I agree. I totally relate to his musical likes and a passion for electronics and technology. Even all that is outdated.
Agreed. This felt personal and not forced. Although i am not naive, i know it was just like any other ad, it well executed.
i’m a stickler for nostalgia, always comforting when someone never forgets there roots
Their*
@@thestrays815 good to see someone’s on top of there english (see what i did there)
@@aranstuart566 NO GOD PLEASE NO
This guy takes "here's a fun fact" to a whole nother level
+well as an expert I'd say that's an epic name lol
I think its quite incredible that you can even make advertising appealing to listen to.
Ikr. I actually looked up that thing he was sponsoring. Neat idea, plus we get to see into his past as well.
This historic walkthrough of crew escape systems really exposes the reckless decision not to have any escape plan for the shuttle. I am amazed that anyone would fly that thing voluntarily.
Have you seen the new Netflix series about the Challenger disaster? I didn't know this before but apparently the astronauts who flew the Shuttle were strongly opposed to NASA's decision to allow civilians on board. They knew it was dangerous and signed up knowing what risks they were taking, and didn't think it was right to risk the life of a civilian no matter how much good publicity they would get from it.
Jared Freeland Yes I have seen it. It was very interesting. As one of them said, they still regarded it as a test vehicle.
I’m just very happy that the newer rocket designs happening right now, take crew safety more seriously. So much exciting stuff going on in manned space flight again.
@@twisterwiper laughs in Starship
Well, can't the same be said for all the pilots flying towards almost certain doom during WW2? For some fame or loyalty is more important than safety.
I think my grandfather had Robert Moog in one of his engineering classes. (My grandfather taught engineering at Cornell.)
Very interesting.
Wish i was his grandson lol. That sounds really cool
This guys needs more subs he has such high quality content
15:58 Actually that's not accurate anymore. NASA authorized SpaceX to reuse Dragon's for crewed missions. The DM2 capsule, Endeavour, will be used by the Crew-2 mission.
Came here to say this. :)
Anyone wishing to confirm can visit the Wikipedia page for "Crew Dragon Endeavour", and visit the cited links from there.
Nice for spaceX. Will save them money
This is true
Very true but required a contract modification if I remember because original did not allow them to reuse the dragon for manned flights but Elon usually gets his way
@@firefly4f4 yup, and reusing crew dragons for cargo was never a real plan. It was just speculation on space nerd forums and some clickbait websites.
You deserve more than a simple thumb-up! Your videos impress me for the completeness of both the research and the delivery style.
As "Space fan" I followed the evolution of escape systems through the years; Willy Schirra got lucky with Gemini 6. The integrators forgot to remove the dust caps from the fuel feed duct, so the engine never started really, only the turbines did. There were all conditions to fire the ejection seats, but he trusted his sensorial perception that the rocket hadn't moved from the pad, so he didn't fire the ejection seats. I later learned there were risks due to the seat motors firing in the pure oxygen atmosphere inside the capsule, possibly causing harm to the astronauts.
Nice to learn that you too were a electronic music expert... My most complex build was a full keyboard synth with (then expensive) 88 x ICL8038 waveform generators, a polyphonic dream for the time.
Thank you again for the outstanding video...
now I feel like you should make a video on that synth of yours! 😁😉
1:02 So weird seeing young droid with hair I always imagined him born as this all knowing bald wizard
Even Dumbledore or Gandalf were babies once.
Hair today, gone tomorrow! ( I had all sorts of hair in the 80's too...)
@@sheevone4359 Gandalf was born as an all knowing hairy and long bearded wizard.
@@sheevone4359 Gandalf and DUMBledore have NOTHING IN COMMON
@@sylvain7277 they're both human. That's one thing
Straight up, the host ALWAYS has the coolest shirts haha.
He used to advertise the source as a site called madcap England I think
@@rbmk__1000 haha I don't think I could ever actually pull them off myself, but mad respect to him for rockin' it.
Come to Indonesia or Malaysia, you will find a lot of clothes with the same pattern like his
I started wearing paisley and floral prints because of him.
Surprised you didn't even mention the successful unintended Soyuz abort a couple years ago.
@Alpha Centauri The tower jettisoned by Soyuz has secondary launch escape shroud which fired and pulled crew module from the rocket. So abort system was actually used
Great video! I'm sure others have already pointed out that the Dragon 2 is now fully reusable, and not turned into a Cargo Dragon 2 after splashing. NASA accepted SpaceX's submission to reuse it. In fact DM2's Dragon is Crew 2's Dragon, planning for a return to the ISS in early 2021.
Cheers and keep up the awesomeness
Does someone know how many times dragon can be reused?
@@_mikolaj_ one time but reusable
@@theyaregone if it would be 1 time, it wouldn't be reusable
@@_mikolaj_ if you had a sense of humor you would laugh
@@theyaregone i'm sorry but i grew out from simplistic jokes
Side note, the Artemis LAS attitude control motor is *not* the first solid rocket motor to be thrust-vectored. Not only were the Space Shuttle's Solid Rocket Boosters equipped with thrust vectoring--which was the *only* means of control until they were jettisoned--but all solid-fuel ballistic missiles (including Minuteman, Polaris, Trident, etc.) use thrust vectoring to steer during boost, too.
While true is still not full correct the difference is that the LAS uses valves formte vectoring, the SRB use there nozzle to controllable vector
@Alpha Centauri maybe he meant exactly that new version on the sls LES because is hasn’t done before. Maybe just bad phrasing of words ;)
Damn! Even that sponsor presentation was an amazing "Mr Shillito style" one.
Great ad. Thanks for letting us a glimpse of your personal life. We know you were cool but had no idea you were that cool. Rock on
In fact, part of the thinking behind the ejection seats on gemeni was, that it was planned to land the capsule on wheels with a paraglider, where the ejection seats would be also required in case of emergency
Right; I suspect that is one of the reasons the ejection seats were used. Like Vostok, they might also be used during landing.
*February 1, 2003*
_We will always remember you.._
Who?
@@lifeisstr4nge uh duh February 1, 2003
Rip kalpana :(
ejections seat wouldve been useless in the columbia disaster but couldve worked in challenger althought unlikely
Those shirts and Tangerine Dream go so well together! I wish you would make a few videos about your hobby and electronic music from the 70'. Maybe on a separate channel, but it would be glorious!
Get Readly with 1 month FREE here: gb.readly.com/2020-curiousdroid
EDIT 16-10-2020 : A few people have mentioned that I don't say anything about the Soyuz LES, well at 5:30 I show and caption the 1983 Soyuz T-10 launch abort, the only manned one to happen so far anywhere, i just didn't mention it in the commentary. I was going to include the 2018 Soyuz abort but the only footage was from the cabin interior showing the crew being bouncing around a bit and as the length was a bit long I dropped it in favour of more on the Dragon and its integrated escape system compared the the disposable Artemis/Orion one. There are several little bits about the Dragon which have now changed like the man rating of the sea landing Dragon but SpaceX are a quick moving company and I may have out of date info on some details, my bad really :-(
Great video.
Спасибо за вашу работу!
are you into modular?
I still have a fully working ARP 2600, probably the only thing in my life I well never sell.
@@thetruthwillout9094 wow... Id have to lock myself in a room with it for a month.
I really love your channel Droid, thank you so much for all the entertaining and interesting content.
Paul you're a blessing to us I for one am glad to have you around! Thanks for the great content. Great production!
Juicy bit of Curious Droid to start your day right.
I liked this video because of how well he done his advert. Honestly never seen someone market something like this before. I'm impressed. I've also never liked a video because of their sponsor/advert lol, in particular one as long as this. Again excellently done.
Escaping from exploding rockets - story of my life.
I see you've met my ex...
@Terence never caught your dad's name, he couldn't talk with his mouth full.
The best Ridley add I've seen so far.
No finer edification when you're enjoying some herbal enlightenment. Nice work. As always
Very cool to have this as your hobby back in the day!
I'm surprised there was no mention of Soyuz T-10-1. It's so far the only use of a LES tower with a crew onboard. The rocket was on the launchpad when a failure in the rocket caused it to light on fire. The launch escape system was fired, pulling the crew capsule away with about 15 g of acceleration, and a split second later the rocket violently exploded. The LES saved the lives of the crew, who immediately requested cigarettes and vodka when they were greeted by recovery crews.
Love the way you explain... Would have aced in my academics if my teachers explained like you 😁
Another point worth mentioning with Gemini capsules:
You'd be launching through a 100% pure oxygen environment using your ejection seat.
AKA blasting on a small rocket through a very very combustable atmosphere.
Aside from the additonal propulsion boost, quite detrimental to the crew's health.
(This major design flaw of the Gemini escape system was pointed out on another YT chanel I happened upon some time back. Got me a huge grin.)
It's not that hard to just add nitrogen, America
@@Fred_the_1996 as I understand it, they chose the pure oxygen environment for weight and size considerations and then work with the side effects from there on. Still, up to Apollo 1, nobody took fire hazzards serious enough, though.
@@MichaelRapp_Lichtgeplauder yeah. The soviets did, though. Even with Vostok they mixed nitrogen
I dimly remember having heard that the Gemini ejection seats would probably have killed their users.
@@Mike-oz4cv I think that's the one I was referring to.
ruclips.net/video/5IRdZjjq1Ik/видео.html
Would somebody please help this guy hit a million subs!? His videos are some of the best!!!!
I don't read magazines and I know I won't, but that ad really made me want too.
Mad respect for building your own Synth at that age, what a story!
Nice plug for Readly. Didn't feel like an advertisement 👍
How do u not have more subscribers???!! This channel is amazing and you are brilliant. Shout out from Arizona
Loved the synth ad. I had no idea you were a synth nut!
Thank goodness for Sponsor Block
Always exciting to see rocket blowing up.
Some reason, these videos always make me feel good.
16:00 the crewed dragon will actually be reused for crewed mission’s (recent change) 16:12 and the SuperDracos aren’t actually used for orbital maneuvering or station orbit raising, they use the Draco RCS thrusters for that.
Yup. It is true though that the fuel is shared between the super draco's and the RCS trusters, further reducing weight.
@@AndreSomers I’m fairly certain this is false. Do you have a source?
@@originalmin Thanks for asking. I don't have a link or something I can provide you know. I remembered from commentary from the Everyday Astronaut on the Demo 1 mission I think, but I am now starting to doubt myself.
One hint I just found is "This high-thrust hypergolic engine-about 200 times larger than the Draco RCS thruster hypergolic engine-offers deep throttling ability and just like the Draco thruster, has multiple restart capability and uses the same *shared* hypergolic propellants." (from en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SpaceX_Draco#SuperDraco - my empasis.)
Another source (also poor) source is this discussion, where it is suggested that they share tanks but not the pressurization system, or they at least are able to cross-feed: www.reddit.com/r/SpaceXLounge/comments/elq9lt/rcs_and_super_draco_shared_fuel/
The closest we've ever came to an Abort/Astronaut Launch escape was Gemini VI....in which the engines shut down just as they powered up.
Thanks to Astronaut Wally Schirra's courage NOT to turn the abort handle, the Gemini VI + VII rendezvous flight was able to launch soon after & the program remained on schedule.
You're even make ads sound interesting. Thanks a lot for this channel.
I bet Synthesizer Shillito could perfect the basoon
This is one of my favourite channels on youtube. Excellent research and presentation - please keep up for the good work :)
A genuine ad? Woah. I unfortunately never had electronics magazines, just car ones that my doctor would give me lol.
Very nice opening, with that authentic story and Readly. Fantastic concept also, cool sponsor that I hadn't heard of! :)
Ah, the 80's. Good times. Great music. The "way back times" before the internet. Plus, I had hair back then too. ;-)
Yes, it seemed all so simple back then, 3 TV channels, no mobile phones (that you could afford), no internet, no satellite TV, no GPS and we all got by fine. Now every other person has their head in a phone, and cant find their way without the sat nav and as for that there internet..... jeees
Surprised the first thought wasn't, "Eh, it's an honor just to be in the can."
Probably partially was but I imagine the astronauts /and training are considered much too expensive to be expendable
Dead astronauts might also have a negative impact on funding.
Little bit of personal history and you are now even cooler! ;)
Oh man, I usually tune out when the sponsored ad bit happens but the mention of Future Music magazine snapped me back to attention instantly. I bought every copy from '95 until 2004. Best electronic music mag ever! I only read and imported the UK version as the American version was terrible. Good memories 🙂
Thank you for the insight into your personal life. It has been fascinating to a fellow enthusiast.
I was born in the mid 80's and we had a 186 based PC. I could use DOS before i started Kindergarden and got pulled out of class to help office staff with the computers regularly. Curious where it all starts indeed. Eventually i got into music and had to modify everything i could get my hands on. There's still a stack of magazines in the shed i probably won't throw out too.
Yes. New content. Happy days.
yay! Finally something space related
Man, you're a nerd and so am I, but you wear psychedelic shirts and I wear only t-shirts... You win!
Another seriously high quality video from CD. Consistent, entertaining, educating... there are few better channels!!!!! I learn so much from these. Thank you :)
Appreciate that :-)
Always something new I learnt keep it up!
You forgot to mention the semi-recent use (2018) of the soviet LES for MS-10 with NASA Astronaut Nick Hague
Excellent. Another fascinating subject explained with your usual clarity! Looking forward to the next on.
My guys 58. Respect dude, love the content and effort you put in
Actually, the shroud on the Apollo LES, that was to protect the Windows from shattering since the SR motors are closer. If you notice, Mercury had windows but the tower was higher. Same with SLS. But blue origin and SpaceX don’t cover theirs because 1. Not solid rocket abort systems, 2. Under the windows.
Never regret Curious Droid.
I can't wait for you to hit 1 million subs. Definitely deserve it!
Well, great vidéo but missing the soyouz escape last year!!!! So unfortunate.
Sponsorblock volunteers have really come here early. Thank you!
_How do you escape an exploding rocket?_
Ignite more rockets!
Omg if the Rockets xplode that fast yikes I don’t think anyone can escape even with a ‘scape system
Saturn V first stage too fast during separation? Add retro rockets to slow it down.
Rocket needs to lift bigger and heavy payloads? Add more rocket boosters.
SpaceX wants more redundant launch vehicles? Add more rocket engines.
@@CausticLemons7 lol
When all you have is a hammer . . .
@@R_C420 get a bigger hammer??
Make bigger nails??
Best sponsored in video ad I’ve ever seen! Thought you was cool anyway, but now knowing you dabble in the synth zone made you 100% cooler! 😄
I dig today's shirt! Thanks for offering us these videos.
MUCH more interesting than US military stuff. Thank you Mr. S.
Varys transitioned from being the spymaster of multiple kings & queens to running a tech channel on youtube? YES!
Nice, that looked like a BBC Model A? I learned to program in BBC BASIC using a BBC Mobel B here in Australai. BBC micro has some presence in schools here.
Nostalgia. Then we got the Acorn Archimedes RISC computers - they were amazing for their time.
Cool sponsored part actually! I am not personally reading much, but found it being interesting news and it fit well into the video. Also could be used for research I guess.
Regarding the video itself: I think you did all the music yourself, didn't you? Is there any reason for the sparse usage lately? Loved the typical Curious Droid music.
Great video! One minor issue: The Super Dracos can‘t be used to lift the ISS because after that explosion 💥 on the test stand SpaceX replaced the fuel valves with some break through plates. Therefore the Super Dracos can only be started once and then burn until they run out of fuel, hence they are really just a launch escape system now.
Given your short intro about your younger years, it seems we followed the same mags, and had the same interests (music, especially), at the same time! I built an Elektor Formant which taught me a lot about practical electronics (my first use of PCBs, incidentally) before going on to make it a career. Now I need to start wearing spectacular shirts. Great episode, very informative.
Actually Crew Dragon will now also be reused for crewed flights ;) Crew-2 will reuse the capsule of the Demo-2 mission for example
Never knew you are a synth guy! Cool!
One fundamental problem is that the pod has no secure lines to hang it undependantly from the rocket, preventing it to fall down after an explosion.
I need someone says "however" like this in my life when I am daydreaming in the middle of an important meeting
Big difference in efficiency when a private company is the designer. Never thought I'd say that. They seem to get things done more safely.
The Launch Escape System on the Apollo was not switched off automatically. The Astronauts switched it from "Auto" to "Manual" a short time before Staging the S-IC during the boost phase. They depict this in the launch sequence in the movie Apollo 13, although they erroneously show the escape tower jettisoning as a result of that switch change (which didn't happen in real life, as the tower was jettisoned moments after skirt-sep some time after S-IC staging) .
NASA actually gave SpaceX the ok to reuse crew dragon again for crewed flight after splashdown
@Mr Prongles Contact with salt water, which is on its own the reason so many things have a "marine" version meant to put up with that corrosive torture slightly longer than the normal stuff everyone uses. If SpaceX got the ok, then presumably their stuff has also been shown to survive a brief bit of friendly etching action.
Nearly 1 million well done 👍
Great narration, kept me gripped and i dont even like rockets or crew safety deployment systems lol!
Excellent video as usual. Can't wait till the next moon missions!
Excellent! Many thanks
I thought Little Joe was a test / accident of the safety system for Apollo.
I had no idea it was used for Mercury
Not mentioned is that the launch abort tower MUST separate every time for the crew in the capsule to survive. If it doesn't separate, it is in the way of the parachutes and too heavy to either reach orbit or land softly. They would crash to death. So SpaceX putting the abort rockets on the right side of the capsule, is not only much more efficient it is also much safer.
I think SpaceXs pusher style is the way to go. The escape fuel can be used for some more delta-v if it isn't needed to escape a failure.
Thank you , watched the Apollo take offs at 4am as a kid on a black and white.....
Nice video, nice shirt and nice 80's bedroom
There is one thing worth mentioning about the risk of the Gemini ejection seats, and that was the 100% oxygenated atmosphere. Because the crew would be soaking in that for hours leading up to the launch, it would turn them into Roman candles if you light of an ejection seat with a six foot flame coming out the bottom in there. If the Apollo 1 fire proved anything, it's that basically everything can burn in that kind of atmosphere, so it would have almost certainly killed the crew in the event of an abort.
At least in the case of the Challenger, it could be argued that the crew could still be alive, had they had an escape system, or at least some parachutes, as the crew compartment is believed to have survived the disintegration of the spacecraft intact, and the crew was killed only by the impact. In the case of Columbia, however, the only way to save the crew would have been to send another spacecraft up to bring them home.
But this just shows how reckless the Space Shuttle really was. I can remember STS-1 as a10-year old boy, and there was much fear back then that the heat shield would not withstand the stresses of the launch, and the orbiter would burn up during reentry, but those were premature. And on STS-2, the rubber O-rings of the SRB failed, but melted slag plugged the hole, and everything went fine
I was watching a documentary about the columbia and i wondered that if they had known about the hole in the wing if they could have docked at the ISS and set the crew off there whilst they readied another shuttle. I don't know if they carried the docking port or maybe they could have done a short space walk if the didn't, maybe some out there knows more about that.
@@CuriousDroid Unfortunately, Columbia doing a rendezvous with the ISS would have been impossible as Columbia was not launched into the same inclination as the ISS.
Acorn Atom alert!!!!!!!!! Transcendent 2000 alert!!!!!!!
So cool...... Me too ;-)
Surprised there was no mention of the unmanned Mercury/Atlas test flight that failed and the launch escape system took over and worked well. There’s nice video of it somewhere.
That's awesome to see a bedroom not too dissimilar to mine back in the "good old days".
I'm laughing way too hard at 9:18 "M. A. FAGET"... I'm still 12 years old in my head
Just that intro with your life experiences got me to like your vid.
This channel is amazing
Simply brilliant!