Brilliant! Absolutely brilliant, except for the 167 psychopathic and soulless numpties who voted it down, because it’s the only thing they have any power over in their sad little lives. But be of good cheer! You can’t even find anything by Sir David Attenborough which isn’t afflicted by these sad single-celled organisms! Anyway, keep up the most excellent work!
ok @ 2:54 there is the footage from the camera looking straight out from the rocket and you will note that there is no distortion visible the surface of the earth looks flat and straight along with everything else like the launch frame. Also a fisheye or wide angle lens distorts the image by a constant amount as the lens is a fixed shape so even if you can see a small amount of distortion at 2:54 you will note that the curve of the horizon increases as the altitude increases.
So well done .Congratulations and i especially appreciated the lack of fish eye lens in the first view.I can't wait for the next one and maybe with three camera's set in panoramic without fisheye.Yes! thats a hint.Excellent and the best video so far.Absolutely love this video.
AMAZING! The closest I've ever come to experiencing a ride on a rocket! I find the high frequency noises at around 4:07 from the flipHD microphone interesting. It almost sounds like radio frequencies of some sort.
This was literally literally insanely unbelievably breathtakingly AMAZING !! Dude, what else can i say .. Congratulations and job well done. Wish you best of best in your career!
After all this time this is still one of my favorite amateur rocket flights on all of RUclips. "Launching hard" doesn't convey the violence and acceleration of this flight. Still a joy to watch. And you shoulda won the prize.
It's so great to see something as good as this on you tube! By far one of the best pieces of civilian made machinery and filming too. I thank and applaud all those who contributed.
The amount of "stupid" in this comment thread is astounding. You can clearly see the curvature in the Earth. If the Earth was flat, you'd see EVERY-EFFING-THING and it would be seemingly endless, instead of terminating at a certain point at the horizon. Come on.
Exactly! And radio waves would always travel line of sight meaning our present radio and television stations could all over lap each other to the point where it's a garbled mess.
@nasolem I don't buy into the whole flat earth thing anyway, i am old school. At any rate, "When a terrestrial radio station broadcasts it sends the radio waves out as a half sphere (the half above the ground). As you get further away from the transmitter the field strength of the radio waves decreases as the inverse square of the distance because the energy of the transmitted wave is spread over a larger area. " Quote from Physicsstackexchange.com. However the scenario i quote above does not take in to consideration where the horizon is in relationship to the transmitter. The signal would fall off short of the horizon unless of course some other force changes the signals path such as the atmosphere above our planet which can be charged in such a way that signals can carry on further than their calculated or intended coverage area. This is why shortwave is so effective. Imagine if we lived in a vacuum like space, light which is a type of radio wave would travel great distances until something acted as a damper or blocker.
If the earth was flat, 1 million watts or 1 MW of RF would travel from one continent to another albeit a bit battered by the time it reached a receiver on that other continent thousands of miles away because it would not the curvature of the earth to change it's path, just the terrain.
Right. See 2:56 to f5:15 - FlipHD camera. No fisheye lens. The GoPro showing Fisheye was the second camera. The first camera had no fisheye and showed distinct curvature of the horizon
It isn't a fisheye and it doesn't show distinct curvature. Expand your screen, pause the video and put a straight edge on the line between land and sky. You will clearly see that it is not curved, at all.
would take a much bigger rocket to reach low orbit. and the speed of re-entry at that point would be so high it will need a serious heat shield or be disintegrated and unrecoverable. beyond that, i don't know what the legal or regulatory ramifications are at that point.
@Thane Mac hmm I think you're wrong: ruclips.net/video/jBUFNgLrykc/видео.html I can't believe this costs millions, maybe a few 10's of thousands which is within reach
I think I feel more stupid from reading those flat earther comments. One camera is fish-eye, one is not. Let's concentrate on the first camera (non-fisheye) 1) This is not a fish-eye lense. Check 2:57 - there's no distortion of the horizon, which fills the upper half of the frame, and there's not apparent curvature (Not becuase it isn't there, but because it isn't noticable at that distance). 2) If it was a fish-eye lense, the earth would not only curve down, but also curve up depending on the position of the horizon on the frame. See 3:56, if this was fish-eye, it would curve up! not continue showing a curve down. This can be compared to what the true fish-eye camera does at 6:57, where it does curve up! The idea of a flat earth, when armed with the basics of physics is fucking insane. Get an education!
C Weir Good eye Mr. Weir I also caught that @ 2:52 No FE mentioned the first camera with the regular lens. Only the fish-eye lens was mentioned. Thumbs up.
I was checking to see if some one else took note of the curve up @ 6:57, & @ 7:09 it looks like the land is curved when the rocket it only about 100 feet of the ground.
I have traced a straight line in a screenshot of the first footage. even at this altitude it is possible observe some curvature in a non fish-eye lense. Flat earth idea is a mind wank
@SgtJak1665 Outer space is said to start at about 62 miles up. The video description says the rocket went to 121,000' (approx. 22 miles) so there would still be some atmosphere to carry the sound waves.
Most high power solid rocket motors use aluminum for fuel and ammonium perchlorate as the oxidizer. It mixed in with a 2 part cured epoxy to keep it solid. That is also the same fuel that the space shuttle solid rockets and minuteman missile use.
+Justin Yeah, I'm pretty sure they didn't take that into consideration in 2011, when they fired the rocket. FE'ers weren't very numerous then. Ah, back in the day...
An altitude of 121,000 feet is 36 km / 22 mi. Outer space is defined as above the Karman line at 100 km / 62 mi, so it got about a third of the way there.
@darknessXsmash 121,000' is just under 23 miles. The official beginning of space according to NASA is 50 miles or 264,000'. Or 62.137 known as the Karman line, according to the FAI.
It is a wide angle lens. If you use a telephoto, all you'll see is a blur of things streaking by. You can't aim a camera on a rocket, so you go for a wide view.
Richard Lloyd It's not about altitude it;s about speed...to stay in orbit you will need to be going at roughly 7.7 km/s depending on your altitude...that is ridiculously fast.
Note that the atmosphere gets thinner at higher altitudes until it is next to nothing. So yes your speed needs to be very high but your frictional coefficient is greatly reduced at higher altitudes.
even with that..the rocket does not have the delta-v budget to get that speed in the first place. if it did then it would have been a suborbital rocket if launched from the ground..quite a long range one too.
that is the kewlest video ever posted on you tube. I bet joss whedon smiles real big when he see's this. suddenly space doesent seem so far any more. folks we have another browncoat! congratulations derek....
One thing your video does a beautiful job of showing - especially on the descent part of the video - is how violent our planet's atmosphere really is, higher up. Sounds like those winds were howling, up there.
2:55 to 5:14 Beautiful! 121.000 feet or 36.880 km above the ground. Finally, a camera that did not use a concave (fisheye) lense to record the curve of the earth. If it would have been a flat plane, the distance that would have been visible woud have reached way further. Which should have been even better visible in the concave lense part. But; it wasn't. Just desert and a sudden end to the landscape, like something was preventing the camera from seeing further. This should not be observable on a flat world. The starting point of the rocket looks like it was in the middle of the black rock desert. The visible distance is reaching (4:04): past "Pyramid Lake", past town "Reno" (Sun Valley), past "Lake Tahoe" and greenish land, past brown-ish land (California), ending in a blue-ish section (ocean), what I could see, comparing the footage with google maps. Math: 6.371 km Average Earth Radius = a r + rocket-elevation (36.8km) = 6.407,8 km = c sight range = b = ? c² - a² = b² b² = 470.259,84 b = 685,75 km (426.10 miles) Google ruler: 426 miles: - past "Pyramid Lake", - past town "Reno" (Sun Valley), - past "Lake Tahoe" and greenish land, - past brown-ish land (California), - ending in a blue-ish section (ocean), www.google.at/maps/@38.4018702,-121.3569884,598205m/data=!3m1!1e3?hl=de ... It fits. The math was right. Observation, Expectation, Confirmation. The start of the rocket is realy awesome! Looks like it was a very slim moon at that day. P.s.: 2695 comments. 2__69__5
There is no camera lens with a actually flat setting. All of them have a curve. Your praising this guy for not having the fisheye lens on; the fish eye lens makes exaggerated curving. Whiles other settings the the 72 or I think 7.2 is as regular lens with somewhat no curvature, even that isn’t perfect. The earth is flat but it is circular. That’s not that hard to believe. Where do you think they get the globe theory…. The prophet’s said this, people YHWH given the history of the world, it’s shape, etc.
@@ambayaoh "There is no camera lens with a actually flat setting." -> I give you right on this point. Because glass is a bit hard to bend. That's why, in the case it isn't (already) fix built in, you can swap whole objectives, depending on how much and/or what way you need your lens to be curved, depending on what you want to do. Otherwise you will need to buy a camera with the desired fix lens type, like the action-cams used on the rocket in this video. "Your praising this guy for not having the fisheye lens on; the fish eye lens makes exaggerated curving. Whiles other settings the the 72 or I think 7.2 is as regular lens with somewhat no curvature, even that isn’t perfect." -> Talking about perfection; We live in an analog universe, which means there are infinite possibilities after the comma. If you want something perfect in the sense of binary numbers... This is the wrong universe for that. *Margin of error* ---> It's flat enough for what I needed it. "The earth is flat but it is circular." -> I thought earth is bumpy. 👌 "That’s not that hard to believe." -> Depends on how well and with what information-feed-back-loops your internal filters are currently operating. "Where do you think they get the globe theory…." -> Mathematics & measurements. And experiments, which predict real live outcomes that can be expected, based on the mathematics & measurements. Guess what. The predictions come true. And now you have a computer. "The prophet’s said this, people YHWH given the history of the world, it’s shape, etc." -> The bible is full of 2000 years old outdated crap, by humans for humans to control later humans, who don't know better. I prayed my *hello* like 7 years ago and I'm *still waiting for an answer*. I came the half way, now it's god's turn. Wouldn't have been the first time YHWH talked with random mortals. 🤷♀️ Especially if all the modern people that apparently had a conversation with them can be believed as true as well. ... I don't know. Are you worth a hello for god? Maybe you have more luck then me. If you get him or her to respond, tell YHWH from me they are being impolite for ignoring me like that, and that I'm hurt. If my response made you angry: Did I attack *you as a person*? Or did I attack *the things you said*? Just saying, because some flat earthers can't differ, because they treat their convictions like personality defining traits. (Religious people too...)
@@Websurfer1111 no chão ja tem curvatura, ou é a camera que ja deixa assim? Ate onde sei, o pai da ciência moderna afirmou que a 40km não tem curvatura, o foguete ai, chegou a 36 km ne! Tem video de 100km sem curvatura.
@@ONE-sn2bl I used google translate, because I don't understand Portuguese: "there is already curvature on the floor, or is it the camera that already leaves it like that? As far as I know, the father of modern science said that at 40km there is no curvature, the rocket there, reached 36 km ne! It has 100km video without curvature." Well. I made a video about this here: ruclips.net/video/g93o5lmiDuM/видео.html In it I took the footage of the camera and choose a picture towards the ocean. I made sure the picture is not showing distorted footage. Then I scanned it for significant landmarks and compared it with google earth, so that I know where I am. From google earth I received a good guess for how far away the horizon in the picture from the camera is: *Google maps: 424.03 miles* Then I calculated with c = square-root(a² + b²) and the available data, which is based on a ball, how far away the horizon from the camera is: *My calculation: c = 426.10 miles* I think the result talks for itself.
+Which One Is Better there are two cameras. One has fish eye and the other does not. The one who doesn't shows curvature. Is used until minute five. Go check it with a good monitor and a string youll see. Earth is not flat. Sorry
I just knew a few of you would have shown up down here. The *GoPro* has a fish-eye lens and you can *tell* it's got a fish-eye because the apparent curvature *changes* as it moves up and down on the screen. The *FlipHD* shows consistent curvature no matter where the line is on the screen and *no distortion* while standing still on the ground, so we can tell that the *FlipHD* camera does *not* have a fish-eye lens and the *curvature visible in its footage from 120,000 feet up is real curvature.* You have been shown it.
Just thought I should let you know... That's not the curvature of the earth, it's your lens. It's called spherical abberation. If it was the curve, it wouldn't change based on angle.
I took a snippet of this video from 3:58 (within the FlipHD camera section) of the video and drew a STRAIGHT line across the horizon in Paint, well guess what? Its FLAT!!! Damn! So, I'd really like to know at what point in this video do you think "the curvature of the earth is clearly visible"? ... Seriously. I am trying to debunk the flat earth on Facebook and would really like to see some curvature!!! Please help, FE trolls are busting my *balls*////
+Cole Haley That was the first i thought. The flip HD Cam shows clearly a flat horizon. Footage from a Gopro, like everybody knows who is familiar with their cameras, using fish eye lenses. I mean you can see it right at lift off. So why he put this line in the description? Most viewers would not even think about if it is not mentioned. I have never talked to someone who launched a rocket like this. But you can`t do that without a official permission from the FAA. However the footage disqualify his statement. The question is....why he mentioned it?
the clouds, atmospheric effects and the sheer size of the earth are all responsible for the earth "appearing" flat. Not to metion all of the massive land forms that curve and bend away from the camera
Here I will provide a few links to various Wikipedia articles to help explain some basic phenomenon of visual perspective: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perspective_%28graphical%29 en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vanishing_point en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Depth_perception Conflicting info on some of these pages: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Horizon
The horizon seemed slightly curved to me. Regardless, it doesn't really matter. The horizon shouldn't look very curved from that height anyway. It did seem as if the horizon dropped though
Fish-eye lense? the curvature in the film turns to flat and then concave for a moment showing that the camera can't be trusted to give us a accurate view of the horizon of the earth.
+PS massage Very valid point, but if you knew cameras like some of us do, you can judge by what you're seeing. I've seen the curve myself, not saying it's a globe, obviously because I've yet to be on the ISS, but it's not FLAT. At best it's either globed, or the land is domed itself, which would lend to a better explanation of the sun and moon cycles.
They were trying for altitude. No one had the slightest interest in providing the idiots with proof of the shape of the Earth. You want to do that? Then build your own rocket with your own cameras.
I just knew a few of you would have shown up down here. The *GoPro* has a fish-eye lens and you can *tell* it's got a fish-eye because the apparent curvature *changes* as it moves up and down on the screen. The *FlipHD* shows consistent curvature no matter where the line is on the screen and no distortion while standing still on the ground, so we can *tell* that the FlipHD camera does *not* have a fish-eye lens and the curvature visible in its footage from 120,000 feet up is *real curvature.* You have been shown it.
Lol fly flat earthers up to this altitude so they can no longer claim it's "fish eye" lenses causing the Earth to curve. They will never doubt that the Earth 🌏 is round AGAIN.
Personally I could not care less if the earth is flat,round,concave or even square for that matter, but it did sound and act as if it hit something at one point. Cool none the less. I would like to see another one with the camera's facing up just for giggles! :)
+shazizz I totally agree, it is irrelevant if the earth is flat or round or anything in between, ;but it seems there is an invisible barrier, a ceiling or a force shield or whatever you want to call it, that stops objects from going 'outside' whatever that is hehe, and that barrier in itself is the real mystery, who and why put it there, could be 'the guy upstairs' watching over us or is that by 'design', and who's design is this..etc etc
+shazizz Are you referring to the noise? That was the cone ejecting. Are you referring to the sudden change in orientation of the camera, as if it bounced off something? That was the cone/weight tugging the body back towards the surface after being ejected and pulling taught the connecting line.
Yes but I read that the shuttle's solid boosters had a mixture of oxidiser . To avoid the balloons is why I thought have 3 with a thin plastic tube to separate them.The rocket blasts off in the middle. I'm so amazed at what you have accomplished.
For all you "Flat Earthers", let me help out a bit. . . See that image at about 6:15 with the "Fish Eye Lens" that you fellas use for your RIDICULOUS claim of being the cause of the curve? ok. See that very large mass of land down there? Yeah, the one taking up 90% of the realestate down there... yeah, that's ONE continent. There's not even enough room for all of your continents on your topographic map. IT STILL DIPS OFF! ... but you'll never accept that, would you? There's no debating with closed minded people (which funny enough, FE's claim to be open minded) who have already made up your minds. There's never enough evidence when you think you already know it all.
+Allen Howe After rethinking that, I may have to rub your noses in the point for you to get it... see, with your Flat Earth idea, the landmass would be so great, and so vast that it wouldn't even end in the camera, but since it does you have to look at the fact that not all of the map is there... but you can see the edge.... So I beg you, please, PLEASE respond with 'how come that is'.... I'd love to hear that one.
+Allen Howe Oh and one more thing, in the later scenes where you can see the chute's rope whipping around, if your "Fish Eye Lens" truly was the excuse for the curvature, the rope would've distorted in view... but it doesn't... the curvature remains without curving the rope as well. Yes, it does curve, but not THAT much... damn people...
+Allen Howe I#m not a flat Earther, and the thought of it just sounds, extremely, INSANELY stupid, but I'm saved and studying to show myself approved. It wasn't 'til the bottom view camera, right at the beginning, that I noticed ANYTHING curved! And, it's quite obvious that lens was definately fish eye. Iwatched the video in entirety, no pauses, speed adjustments, just watched and observed. Only bottom view camera was a fish eye, at least that's the only fish-eye view I witnessed. As for the first views, everything seemed to support those flat-earther's, and now, I'd be stupid to not further investigate this, situation? Just because ur taught something don't make it true, just makes u accept it as reality, til further notice. Think of breaking a horse from the wild, vs breaking a horse from a ranch.. Wild horse is like, "I'm coo'." Horse from the ranch already is in acceptance cuz it's raised that way, just waitin' it's trun for a rider...
+Allen Howe And the camera at 4:08 isn't a fish eye lens. That's were you see the curvature of earth. We are only 37km high when the earth has a radius of 6371 km. We are still not in space. Tonight is a lunar eclipse - if someone want's to see the circular shadow of the earth on the moon.
TakeoFR Yeah man. I was try'n to peep that out, but here in Austria, it was cloudy, etremely! But u know, I agree with the curve, it's evident there's a curve and anybody refuting against it is a sensless do-do-brain, u feel? However, that doesn't mean the Earth is a globe. Seem's to me, if anything, from my researching, a half, round earth, sorta like the flat-earthers believe, instead, their flat portion being, a rounded half so to speak, is supported. Still too many questions and answers awaiting to decide, but I'll always be a global earth believer, and in the universe as well until it's PROVEN otherwise..
Yes, a GoPro camera was used, but it seems you're ignorant of the fact that the standard wide-angle lens was swapped out with a rectilinear lens (link below), which totally eliminates any distortion. If a standard wide-angle lens was used, the curvature would be evident in the footage right from the start, as it's sitting on the launch pad - it's not and is a completely straight line, as you'd expect. community.gopro.com/t5/Cameras/Rectilinear-lens-option-ability-to-convert-to-360/td-p/171921
ALL lenses are curved (if it wasn't curved it would be a window) as brian says ...at 2:52 looks like a regular wide angle lens to me (and i should know... I've been a photographer for over 25 years) clearly you have no clue what you are talking about
Well old son, this was an altitude attempt. Nothing more. Not one of these people had the slightest interest in proving to you what they already knew. No one bothers to try and teach you anything because you are no one. You run no agencies, you control no budgets, you don't have jobs with anyone important, you don't teach at any real universities. You are the village idiot who, when shown proof in the past, just dismisses it without any evidence as being fake. So we don't even try any more. You are a lost cause. Why don't you build your own rocket and then you can pick what camera and lens go onto it? Of course, living in your mothers basement with a dollar a week allowance might make it a little difficult.
GrimnastyTV....riddle me this dumbass. Takeoff from a base on the US east coast on 26L and maintain basically the same westerly heading and after a non-stop flight and the 5th inflight refueling op heading west over Europe then land on the same strip 26L at the same base....explain that one!
+tecnockicken57 Not True! According to NASA, only like 71 miles up and you're in space. This thing was only ~22 miles up and I could see the curvature of the earth in this video! I think you're way off with your numbers.
Does the name mean MaxQ is at 8K feet? My Dad used to work for Lockheed Missiles & Space and I remember as a kid laying on our front lawn looking up at the stars and him explaining how difficult it was to find a material for the nose cone of the Polaris missile. It had to be strong enough to withstand the differences in pressure from below the surface of the ocean, to Max Q, as well as temperature differences...and there was a weight limitation. His solution was laminated wood. It worked.
***** learn something about cameras you degenerate. A $50 camera will not produce the same quality video as a gopro. I bet you are another loser who cannot afford one
This documentary is as good as anyone could hope for, and I assume you have all GPS data ready for review... Surely you have all the prerequisites to claim the prize (I sincerely wish you will get it). The raw onboard video at times looks like it had been tastefully choreographed (I am not questioning its authenticity!). Its just so thrilling to watch, and the sound is almost orgazmic, especially near the apogee. Best video I've seen in ages.
No. See 2:56 to f5:15 - FlipHD camera. No fisheye lens. The GoPro showing Fisheye was the second camera. The first camera had no fisheye and showed distinct curvature of the horizon
Isaiah Prevo No, there's no fish-eye lens. This structure is 100% straight wich means NO fish-eye lens: drive.google.com/file/d/1DUjTa7PnCNuA8IhtTazbC-peo9cDO_8S/view?usp=sharing You can see the original one at 2:55 Now look at the horizon on 4:02 Curvature detected: drive.google.com/file/d/18pN-I0SEq47qIqFZ-RMYxo3RhXc_Ttl6/view?usp=sharing (I just corrected the brightness and the contrast so that way the curvature will be even more clear)
I just knew a few of you would have shown up down here. The GoPro has a fish-eye lens and you can tell it's got a fish-eye because the apparent curvature changes as it moves up and down on the screen. The FlipHD shows consistent curvature no matter where the line is on the screen and no distortion while standing still on the ground, so we can tell that the FlipHD camera does not have a fish-eye lens and the curvature visible in its footage from 120,000 feet up is real curvature. You have been shown it.
If a fish eye lens was used, then the view when Q8K was on the ground would be distorted as well. It isn't, the world is round and if you don't believe it is, you're a crank.
AWESOME!!!!! Thanks for sharing. My kids loved watching it, and asked me why they couldn't see the planets... Maybe you could work on that for your next mission. Very cool!!!
I'm amazed you got it back in the same area it was launched from. Spending that much time going that high, I would think it would be almost impossible not to have it miles away afterward.
It is great!!! Thank you so much that you show my space! I would be glad to see you in Dominican Republic for show you a beauty of underwater space like you show me a beauty of sky and space!
![Seungmin "그렇게, 천천히, 우리(As we are)" | [Stray Kids : SKZ-PLAYER]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/kAzmhLHePqU/mqdefault.jpg)
![Blox Fruits Dragon Rework Update [Full Stream]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/EqDAp8udhm0/mqdefault.jpg)
The engineering that went into this design is absolutely brilliant. Very impressive. Thank you for sharing, sir.
North Korea need to hire them!😂
Brilliant! Absolutely brilliant, except for the 167 psychopathic and soulless numpties who voted it down, because it’s the only thing they have any power over in their sad little lives. But be of good cheer! You can’t even find anything by Sir David Attenborough which isn’t afflicted by these sad single-celled organisms! Anyway, keep up the most excellent work!
@@Johnny-sj9sj why are you so triggered over some people disliking a vid lmao
@1link2fun I use Ammonium Perchlorate Composite Propellant
What is the range of the rockets you make?
The slow motion shot of lift off showing the shadow of the accent on the desert sand is worthy of a large framed picture in my opinion. A work of art.
ok @ 2:54 there is the footage from the camera looking straight out from the rocket and you will note that there is no distortion visible the surface of the earth looks flat and straight along with everything else like the launch frame. Also a fisheye or wide angle lens distorts the image by a constant amount as the lens is a fixed shape so even if you can see a small amount of distortion at 2:54 you will note that the curve of the horizon increases as the altitude increases.
Congratulations, Derek ! Everything about this mission was incredible !
Beautiful!
"hey bob?"
"yea"
"I forgot to press record"
XD
Just beautiful. Thanks for sharing.
So well done .Congratulations and i especially appreciated the lack of fish eye lens in the first view.I can't wait for the next one and maybe with three camera's set in panoramic without fisheye.Yes! thats a hint.Excellent and the best video so far.Absolutely love this video.
I thought I ran across that GoPro at an REI attic sale... Tremendous work gentlemen. This really is incredible.
wow just amazing! some of those images are incredible!
what can one say. thank you for the awesome pictures. the videos are amazing. thank you sir
AMAZING! The closest I've ever come to experiencing a ride on a rocket! I find the high frequency noises at around 4:07 from the flipHD microphone interesting. It almost sounds like radio frequencies of some sort.
Check in 3 minutes 58 seconds there's something running away from the rocket or trying to get away from it
This was literally literally insanely unbelievably breathtakingly AMAZING !!
Dude, what else can i say .. Congratulations and job well done.
Wish you best of best in your career!
After all this time this is still one of my favorite amateur rocket flights on all of RUclips. "Launching hard" doesn't convey the violence and acceleration of this flight. Still a joy to watch. And you shoulda won the prize.
That is sick man!
Leave me a comment
Thanks man. Glad you enjoyed it. Get involved. www.tripoli.org
d3deville checking for flat earth theory-seems to be true that Terra is flat :)))
andalex777
This theory looks realy silly !
Glider FS yes- at first look :) the same thing i believed BUT ...look for proof, globe or flat, experiments
Very, very great.
Congratulations to all
Amazing. Why don´t you share some figures about this flight. Max altitude? Top speed?
Awesome engineering. The very fact that the rocket stays in the vertical line even when rotating is praise worthy. Great job!!
It's so great to see something as good as this on you tube! By far one of the best pieces of civilian made machinery and filming too. I thank and applaud all those who contributed.
Oh man this is absolutely amazing!!
The amount of "stupid" in this comment thread is astounding. You can clearly see the curvature in the Earth. If the Earth was flat, you'd see EVERY-EFFING-THING and it would be seemingly endless, instead of terminating at a certain point at the horizon. Come on.
Exactly! And radio waves would always travel line of sight meaning our present radio and television stations could all over lap each other to the point where it's a garbled mess.
@nasolem I don't buy into the whole flat earth thing anyway, i am old school. At any rate, "When a terrestrial radio station broadcasts it sends the radio waves out as a half sphere (the half above the ground). As you get further away from the transmitter the field strength of the radio waves decreases as the inverse square of the distance because the energy of the transmitted wave is spread over a larger area. " Quote from Physicsstackexchange.com. However the scenario i quote above does not take in to consideration where the horizon is in relationship to the transmitter.
The signal would fall off short of the horizon unless of course some other force changes the signals path such as the atmosphere above our planet which can be charged in such a way that signals can carry on further than their calculated or intended coverage area. This is why shortwave is so effective. Imagine if we lived in a vacuum like space, light which is a type of radio wave would travel great distances until something acted as a damper or blocker.
If the earth was flat, 1 million watts or 1 MW of RF would travel from one continent to another albeit a bit battered by the time it reached a receiver on that other continent thousands of miles away because it would not the curvature of the earth to change it's path, just the terrain.
Can someone explain to me how 2:52 is a fish-eye/wide angle lens?
Well... in theory first there was a singularity and then the universe expanded.... this might take awhile feel free to use the restroom.
I'm not sure if trolling....that's when you know you've found a good troll.
It's not fish-eye. The camera that comes later is
Right. See 2:56 to f5:15 - FlipHD camera. No fisheye lens. The GoPro showing Fisheye was the second camera. The first camera had no fisheye and showed distinct curvature of the horizon
It isn't a fisheye and it doesn't show distinct curvature. Expand your screen, pause the video and put a straight edge on the line between land and sky. You will clearly see that it is not curved, at all.
Thank you for posting the full version. I love this kind of stuff.
One of the best launches I've seen with multiple perspectives! I hope you got the prize
The only thing it was missing was a warhead.
On your second camera angle what is that that comes over the screen. My best guess is melted plastic.
Yep, it's the melted camera shroud.
I was wondering the same thing
So respectable. Cheers!
Nice video. It is amazing how the camera lens melted due to high speed in thick air!!!
Awesome Rocket launch & it's a good thing you guys had the Gopro because for a minute there i was actually starting to think the earth was flat !
I was wondering if you have any plans to go further? Bigger, longer, or even a complete orbit?
Complete orbit would cost millions and a bunch of certifications
would take a much bigger rocket to reach low orbit. and the speed of re-entry at that point would be so high it will need a serious heat shield or be disintegrated and unrecoverable. beyond that, i don't know what the legal or regulatory ramifications are at that point.
@Thane Mac Why would it cost millions for a small scale rocket?
@Thane Mac I wouldn't consider the rocket in this video small scale though, so how much bigger are we talking? x2? x200000 ?
@Thane Mac hmm I think you're wrong: ruclips.net/video/jBUFNgLrykc/видео.html I can't believe this costs millions, maybe a few 10's of thousands which is within reach
according to the info page the top speed of this thing is about 950m/s...damn
That's Mach 2.76 at sea level.
About the same speed as the bullets from most high powered rifles
I think I feel more stupid from reading those flat earther comments.
One camera is fish-eye, one is not.
Let's concentrate on the first camera (non-fisheye)
1) This is not a fish-eye lense. Check 2:57 - there's no distortion of the horizon, which fills the upper half of the frame, and there's not apparent curvature (Not becuase it isn't there, but because it isn't noticable at that distance).
2) If it was a fish-eye lense, the earth would not only curve down, but also curve up depending on the position of the horizon on the frame. See 3:56, if this was fish-eye, it would curve up! not continue showing a curve down. This can be compared to what the true fish-eye camera does at 6:57, where it does curve up!
The idea of a flat earth, when armed with the basics of physics is fucking insane. Get an education!
C Weir Good eye Mr. Weir I also caught that @ 2:52 No FE mentioned the first camera with the regular lens. Only the fish-eye lens was mentioned. Thumbs up.
*One camera is fish-eye, one is not.*
Wouldn't that be called the Marty Feldman affect¿
I was checking to see if some one else took note of the curve up @ 6:57, & @ 7:09 it looks like the land is curved when the rocket it only about 100 feet of the ground.
So many people buying the flat earth concept is more mind blowing than the concept itself.
Liberals are responsible for this.
I have traced a straight line in a screenshot of the first footage. even at this altitude it is possible observe some curvature in a non fish-eye lense. Flat earth idea is a mind wank
@SgtJak1665 Outer space is said to start at about 62 miles up. The video description says the rocket went to 121,000' (approx. 22 miles) so there would still be some atmosphere to carry the sound waves.
Best video on youtube. This is awesome. Congratulations to the crew.
Wonder how much it costs in total?
***** Wondering the same.
Couple thousand or hundred.
They said more than the prize money which was 10k. So the rocket costed more than 10k USD.
Great work! Just out of interest, what kind of fuel do you use?
Most high power solid rocket motors use aluminum for fuel and ammonium perchlorate as the oxidizer. It mixed in with a 2 part cured epoxy to keep it solid. That is also the same fuel that the space shuttle solid rockets and minuteman missile use.
@@jmarler2010 Hope no one breathes in that aluminum oxide.
@@DANGJOS Congrats on understanding the chemical reaction byproducts. Other fun byproducts are aluminum chloride, water, and nitrogen.
@@jmarler2010 Aluminum chloride? Eeee!
@@DANGJOS If you look on my channel you can see some of the launches I have done with high power motors.
2016, where you have to worry about what lenses you use because there is people who think the earth is flat.
Justin Baker
And they have the right to vote. It's quite scary.
+Justin
Yeah, I'm pretty sure they didn't take that into consideration in 2011, when they fired the rocket. FE'ers weren't very numerous then. Ah, back in the day...
What did you see.. ? Think. !! Your eyes don’t lie.
An altitude of 121,000 feet is 36 km / 22 mi. Outer space is defined as above the Karman line at 100 km / 62 mi, so it got about a third of the way there.
@darknessXsmash
121,000' is just under 23 miles. The official beginning of space according to NASA is 50 miles or 264,000'. Or 62.137 known as the Karman line, according to the FAI.
Thank you for not using a stupid fish eye lens! It allows us to see the true curvature of the earth & get a real sense of relative size & speed!
????????? Não entendi? Essa curva ai e falsa.
Why use a camera with a fisheye lens? It just distorts everything that isn't close up and in front of the camera.
Mike Holliday To film wide field of view.
+Mike Holliday (Hollidaytech) This is clearly not a fish eye lens
It is a wide angle lens. If you use a telephoto, all you'll see is a blur of things streaking by. You can't aim a camera on a rocket, so you go for a wide view.
There were 2 cameras, one fisheye, one not.
Why not launch your rocket from a helium weather balloon platform at 100,000 feet? I am sure you would reach orbit.
It would no where close to be going fast enough to reach orbit.
If it can reach 120,000 feet from the surface of the earth how high would it go if you launched it from 120,000 feet? I bet you triple the altitude.
Richard Lloyd It's not about altitude it;s about speed...to stay in orbit you will need to be going at roughly 7.7 km/s depending on your altitude...that is ridiculously fast.
Note that the atmosphere gets thinner at higher altitudes until it is next to nothing. So yes your speed needs to be very high but your frictional coefficient is greatly reduced at higher altitudes.
even with that..the rocket does not have the delta-v budget to get that speed in the first place. if it did then it would have been a suborbital rocket if launched from the ground..quite a long range one too.
that is the kewlest video ever posted on you tube. I bet joss whedon smiles real big when he see's this. suddenly space doesent seem so far any more. folks we have another browncoat! congratulations derek....
One thing your video does a beautiful job of showing - especially on the descent part of the video - is how violent our planet's atmosphere really is, higher up. Sounds like those winds were howling, up there.
Does rocket has any damage because of landing?
Valeo Sosnov llittle bit,
Come on, how is it possible that in the 21st century there are still people that believe Earth is flat?
because it is flat lol change ur eyes to see
Claudi M. earth is Flat No Doubt
IQ < 30 maybe
It's this thing called lead poisoning.
because it's flat
So the planet is round huh?
***** wait a second, you mean there is no hollow earth ? if that's true than where all the nazzis go? the moon?
***** hehe when it comes to conspiracy theories I do nothing but troll :)
No it's just the fisheye lenses that makes it look round. Haha
The view from the GoPro is round even before take off at 5:17. So yeah it's definitely the fish-eye lens that made it look round
***** You may be right. I'm just saying that's why it looked round in this video
....the sky seems a little closer now. very inspirational in a way. beautiful, thank you for shareing
For me this is one of the best videos I have seen on RUclips
2:55 to 5:14
Beautiful! 121.000 feet or 36.880 km above the ground.
Finally, a camera that did not use a concave (fisheye) lense
to record the curve of the earth.
If it would have been a flat plane, the distance that would have been visible woud have reached way further.
Which should have been even better visible in the concave lense part.
But; it wasn't.
Just desert and a sudden end to the landscape, like something was preventing the camera from seeing further.
This should not be observable on a flat world.
The starting point of the rocket looks like it was in the middle of the black rock desert.
The visible distance is reaching (4:04):
past "Pyramid Lake",
past town "Reno" (Sun Valley),
past "Lake Tahoe" and greenish land,
past brown-ish land (California),
ending in a blue-ish section (ocean),
what I could see, comparing the footage with google maps.
Math:
6.371 km Average Earth Radius = a
r + rocket-elevation (36.8km) = 6.407,8 km = c
sight range = b = ?
c² - a² = b²
b² = 470.259,84
b = 685,75 km (426.10 miles)
Google ruler: 426 miles:
- past "Pyramid Lake",
- past town "Reno" (Sun Valley),
- past "Lake Tahoe" and greenish land,
- past brown-ish land (California),
- ending in a blue-ish section (ocean),
www.google.at/maps/@38.4018702,-121.3569884,598205m/data=!3m1!1e3?hl=de
... It fits.
The math was right.
Observation, Expectation, Confirmation.
The start of the rocket is realy awesome!
Looks like it was a very slim moon at that day.
P.s.:
2695 comments.
2__69__5
🤣🤣
There is no camera lens with a actually flat setting. All of them have a curve. Your praising this guy for not having the fisheye lens on; the fish eye lens makes exaggerated curving. Whiles other settings the the 72 or I think 7.2 is as regular lens with somewhat no curvature, even that isn’t perfect. The earth is flat but it is circular. That’s not that hard to believe. Where do you think they get the globe theory…. The prophet’s said this, people YHWH given the history of the world, it’s shape, etc.
@@ambayaoh "There is no camera lens with a actually flat setting."
-> I give you right on this point. Because glass is a bit hard to bend. That's why, in the case it isn't (already) fix built in, you can swap whole objectives,
depending on how much and/or what way you need your lens to be curved, depending on what you want to do.
Otherwise you will need to buy a camera with the desired fix lens type, like the action-cams used on the rocket in this video.
"Your praising this guy for not having the fisheye lens on; the fish eye lens makes exaggerated curving. Whiles other settings the the 72 or I think 7.2 is as regular lens with somewhat no curvature, even that isn’t perfect."
-> Talking about perfection; We live in an analog universe, which means there are infinite possibilities after the comma. If you want something perfect in the sense of binary numbers... This is the wrong universe for that. *Margin of error* ---> It's flat enough for what I needed it.
"The earth is flat but it is circular."
-> I thought earth is bumpy. 👌
"That’s not that hard to believe."
-> Depends on how well and with what information-feed-back-loops your internal filters are currently operating.
"Where do you think they get the globe theory…."
-> Mathematics & measurements. And experiments, which predict real live outcomes that can be expected, based on the mathematics & measurements.
Guess what. The predictions come true. And now you have a computer.
"The prophet’s said this, people YHWH given the history of the world, it’s shape, etc."
-> The bible is full of 2000 years old outdated crap, by humans for humans to control later humans, who don't know better.
I prayed my *hello* like 7 years ago and I'm *still waiting for an answer*. I came the half way, now it's god's turn.
Wouldn't have been the first time YHWH talked with random mortals. 🤷♀️
Especially if all the modern people that apparently had a conversation with them can be believed as true as well.
... I don't know. Are you worth a hello for god? Maybe you have more luck then me.
If you get him or her to respond, tell YHWH from me they are being impolite for ignoring me like that, and that I'm hurt.
If my response made you angry:
Did I attack *you as a person*? Or did I attack *the things you said*?
Just saying, because some flat earthers can't differ, because they treat their convictions like personality defining traits. (Religious people too...)
@@Websurfer1111 no chão ja tem curvatura, ou é a camera que ja deixa assim? Ate onde sei, o pai da ciência moderna afirmou que a 40km não tem curvatura, o foguete ai, chegou a 36 km ne! Tem video de 100km sem curvatura.
@@ONE-sn2bl I used google translate, because I don't understand Portuguese:
"there is already curvature on the floor, or is it the camera that already leaves it like that?
As far as I know, the father of modern science said that at 40km there is no curvature, the rocket there, reached 36 km ne! It has 100km video without curvature."
Well. I made a video about this here: ruclips.net/video/g93o5lmiDuM/видео.html
In it I took the footage of the camera and choose a picture towards the ocean.
I made sure the picture is not showing distorted footage.
Then I scanned it for significant landmarks and compared it with google earth, so that I know where I am.
From google earth I received a good guess for how far away the horizon in the picture from the camera is:
*Google maps: 424.03 miles*
Then I calculated with c = square-root(a² + b²) and the available data, which is based on a ball, how far away the horizon from the camera is:
*My calculation: c = 426.10 miles*
I think the result talks for itself.
16:04 it looks like it'll land on Jupiter
So the earth is not flat?
this camera have FISH EYE look on launch
+Which One Is Better there are two cameras. One has fish eye and the other does not. The one who doesn't shows curvature. Is used until minute five. Go check it with a good monitor and a string youll see. Earth is not flat. Sorry
I just knew a few of you would have shown up down here. The *GoPro* has a fish-eye lens and you can *tell* it's got a fish-eye because the apparent curvature *changes* as it moves up and down on the screen. The *FlipHD* shows consistent curvature no matter where the line is on the screen and *no distortion* while standing still on the ground, so we can tell that the *FlipHD* camera does *not* have a fish-eye lens and the *curvature visible in its footage from 120,000 feet up is real curvature.* You have been shown it.
the fact that the freakin gopro housing melted from the intense friction with the air is just AMAZING !! 1000 THUMBS UP definately :)
I want to build one so bad. You just inspired me. I'm a ME at Iowa State and want to get my masters in Aerospace. You did a great job!
Just thought I should let you know...
That's not the curvature of the earth, it's your lens.
It's called spherical abberation. If it was the curve, it wouldn't change based on angle.
I don't know the first camera footage looks pretty normal to me....no fish eye lense.
I took a snippet of this video from 3:58 (within the FlipHD camera section) of the video and drew a STRAIGHT line across the horizon in Paint, well guess what? Its FLAT!!! Damn!
So, I'd really like to know at what point in this video do you think "the curvature of the earth is clearly visible"? ... Seriously. I am trying to debunk the flat earth on Facebook and would really like to see some curvature!!! Please help, FE trolls are busting my *balls*////
+Cole Haley That was the first i thought. The flip HD Cam shows clearly a flat horizon. Footage from a Gopro, like everybody knows who is familiar with their cameras, using fish eye lenses. I mean you can see it right at lift off.
So why he put this line in the description? Most viewers would not even think about if it is not mentioned. I have never talked to someone who launched a rocket like this. But you can`t do that without a official permission from the FAA. However the footage disqualify his statement. The question is....why he mentioned it?
the clouds, atmospheric effects and the sheer size of the earth are all responsible for the earth "appearing" flat. Not to metion all of the massive land forms that curve and bend away from the camera
ok what ever you say !
Here I will provide a few links to various Wikipedia articles to help explain some basic phenomenon of visual perspective:
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perspective_%28graphical%29
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vanishing_point
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Depth_perception
Conflicting info on some of these pages:
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Horizon
The horizon seemed slightly curved to me. Regardless, it doesn't really matter. The horizon shouldn't look very curved from that height anyway. It did seem as if the horizon dropped though
Fish-eye lense? the curvature in the film turns to flat and then concave for a moment showing that the camera can't be trusted to give us a accurate view of the horizon of the earth.
+PS massage Very valid point, but if you knew cameras like some of us do, you can judge by what you're seeing.
I've seen the curve myself, not saying it's a globe, obviously because I've yet to be on the ISS, but it's not FLAT. At best it's either globed, or the land is domed itself, which would lend to a better explanation of the sun and moon cycles.
They were trying for altitude. No one had the slightest interest in providing the idiots with proof of the shape of the Earth. You want to do that? Then build your own rocket with your own cameras.
I just knew a few of you would have shown up down here. The *GoPro* has a fish-eye lens and you can *tell* it's got a fish-eye because the apparent curvature *changes* as it moves up and down on the screen. The *FlipHD* shows consistent curvature no matter where the line is on the screen and no distortion while standing still on the ground, so we can *tell* that the FlipHD camera does *not* have a fish-eye lens and the curvature visible in its footage from 120,000 feet up is *real curvature.* You have been shown it.
this is one of the coolest videos i've ever seen in my life. thank you
This is One of the best Videos I have ever seen!!
Looked very flat
Put a straight edge across the screen.
Lol!😜
Lol fly flat earthers up to this altitude so they can no longer claim it's "fish eye" lenses causing the Earth to curve. They will never doubt that the Earth 🌏 is round AGAIN.
They will never accept that.
Personally I could not care less if the earth is flat,round,concave or even square for that matter, but it did sound and act as if it hit something at one point. Cool none the less. I would like to see another one with the camera's facing up just for giggles! :)
+shazizz they the balloon burst lol
+shazizz The only thing it hit was lower air pressure and density, and the end of its fuel.
It didn't hit anything. It simply ran out of fuel. SMH.
+shazizz I totally agree, it is irrelevant if the earth is flat or round or anything in between, ;but it seems there is an invisible barrier, a ceiling or a force shield or whatever you want to call it, that stops objects from going 'outside' whatever that is hehe, and that barrier in itself is the real mystery, who and why put it there, could be 'the guy upstairs' watching over us or is that by 'design', and who's design is this..etc etc
+shazizz Are you referring to the noise? That was the cone ejecting. Are you referring to the sudden change in orientation of the camera, as if it bounced off something? That was the cone/weight tugging the body back towards the surface after being ejected and pulling taught the connecting line.
Truly an amazing feat and I was moved by the first onboard camera my heart actually skipped a beat, just really awesome.
Yes but I read that the shuttle's solid boosters had a mixture of oxidiser . To avoid the balloons is why I thought have 3 with a thin plastic tube to separate them.The rocket blasts off in the middle.
I'm so amazed at what you have accomplished.
For all you "Flat Earthers", let me help out a bit. . .
See that image at about 6:15 with the "Fish Eye Lens" that you fellas use for your RIDICULOUS claim of being the cause of the curve? ok. See that very large mass of land down there? Yeah, the one taking up 90% of the realestate down there... yeah, that's ONE continent. There's not even enough room for all of your continents on your topographic map. IT STILL DIPS OFF! ... but you'll never accept that, would you?
There's no debating with closed minded people (which funny enough, FE's claim to be open minded) who have already made up your minds. There's never enough evidence when you think you already know it all.
+Allen Howe After rethinking that, I may have to rub your noses in the point for you to get it... see, with your Flat Earth idea, the landmass would be so great, and so vast that it wouldn't even end in the camera, but since it does you have to look at the fact that not all of the map is there... but you can see the edge....
So I beg you, please, PLEASE respond with 'how come that is'.... I'd love to hear that one.
+Allen Howe Oh and one more thing, in the later scenes where you can see the chute's rope whipping around, if your "Fish Eye Lens" truly was the excuse for the curvature, the rope would've distorted in view... but it doesn't... the curvature remains without curving the rope as well.
Yes, it does curve, but not THAT much... damn people...
+Allen Howe I#m not a flat Earther, and the thought of it just sounds, extremely, INSANELY stupid, but I'm saved and studying to show myself approved. It wasn't 'til the bottom view camera, right at the beginning, that I noticed ANYTHING curved! And, it's quite obvious that lens was definately fish eye. Iwatched the video in entirety, no pauses, speed adjustments, just watched and observed. Only bottom view camera was a fish eye, at least that's the only fish-eye view I witnessed. As for the first views, everything seemed to support those flat-earther's, and now, I'd be stupid to not further investigate this, situation? Just because ur taught something don't make it true, just makes u accept it as reality, til further notice. Think of breaking a horse from the wild, vs breaking a horse from a ranch.. Wild horse is like, "I'm coo'." Horse from the ranch already is in acceptance cuz it's raised that way, just waitin' it's trun for a rider...
+Allen Howe And the camera at 4:08 isn't a fish eye lens. That's were you see the curvature of earth. We are only 37km high when the earth has a radius of 6371 km. We are still not in space.
Tonight is a lunar eclipse - if someone want's to see the circular shadow of the earth on the moon.
TakeoFR
Yeah man. I was try'n to peep that out, but here in Austria, it was cloudy, etremely! But u know, I agree with the curve, it's evident there's a curve and anybody refuting against it is a sensless do-do-brain, u feel? However, that doesn't mean the Earth is a globe. Seem's to me, if anything, from my researching, a half, round earth, sorta like the flat-earthers believe, instead, their flat portion being, a rounded half so to speak, is supported. Still too many questions and answers awaiting to decide, but I'll always be a global earth believer, and in the universe as well until it's PROVEN otherwise..
nd the curvature of the earth is clearly visible.... hahahaha with go pro
Yes, a GoPro camera was used, but it seems you're ignorant of the fact that the standard wide-angle lens was swapped out with a rectilinear lens (link below), which totally eliminates any distortion.
If a standard wide-angle lens was used, the curvature would be evident in the footage right from the start, as it's sitting on the launch pad - it's not and is a completely straight line, as you'd expect.
community.gopro.com/t5/Cameras/Rectilinear-lens-option-ability-to-convert-to-360/td-p/171921
That is frigging Awesome work!
Congrats to you all,
A job well done!
Flat Earther's beware!
The Earth isn't FLAT, its CONCAVE!
Your cameras proved that, finally!
This is quite possibly the coolest thing ever uploaded to YT.
Clearly a curved lense you can see from take off..let me guess they didnt allow you to use the regular lenses and air it right?
+GrimnastyTV rewind it to 2:52, unedited with no fish eye. everything looks pretty straight to me??
ALL lenses are curved (if it wasn't curved it would be a window)
as brian says ...at 2:52 looks like a regular wide angle lens to me (and i should know... I've been a photographer for over 25 years)
clearly you have no clue what you are talking about
Well old son, this was an altitude attempt. Nothing more. Not one of these people had the slightest interest in proving to you what they already knew. No one bothers to try and teach you anything because you are no one. You run no agencies, you control no budgets, you don't have jobs with anyone important, you don't teach at any real universities. You are the village idiot who, when shown proof in the past, just dismisses it without any evidence as being fake. So we don't even try any more. You are a lost cause. Why don't you build your own rocket and then you can pick what camera and lens go onto it? Of course, living in your mothers basement with a dollar a week allowance might make it a little difficult.
GrimnastyTV....riddle me this dumbass. Takeoff from a base on the US east coast on 26L and maintain basically the same westerly heading and after a non-stop flight and the 5th inflight refueling op heading west over Europe then land on the same strip 26L at the same base....explain that one!
Ask your doctor if Clozapine is right for you.
next time dont use fish eye lenses
+Don Szymon lmao
+Don Szymon I know made it very Nasa-ish
Don Szymon You can use those buzzwords, but facts are facts. The first clip is not using a fisheye lens, nothing is distorted.
Earth aint round fools
+A Parker whahaha! you realy are stupid
WHY THIS IS FUCKING FISH EYE???!!!
That. was. AWESOME! Well done.
Definately one of the coolest things on RUclips.. Just amazing...
Bugs Bunny threw a baseball one way and it came back the other. That proves the earth is round!
At 6:55 and again at 9:39 Earth becomes Convex to Flat to Concave wow, exposing the fish eye/ eagle eye lense used to fake Ball Earth.
Indeed
Right on, obviously fish eye!
Yessir
SpirituallyAwakened The world is flat. All those who don't think it is haven't done any research on the topic what so ever.
Jeremy Schoonover Right !
Dam the world looks flat wtf?
shanebh007 it seems so
Yup. It seems so...
It's because it's only about 23 miles up. In order to see the curvature of Earth, you have to be way higher up like in the ISS 250 mi off the ground
+tecnockicken57 Not True! According to NASA, only like 71 miles up and you're in space. This thing was only ~22 miles up and I could see the curvature of the earth in this video! I think you're way off with your numbers.
tecnockicken57
the world is actually flat. Round planets shit is brainwash by TV and school
Wow!!! Check out that curviture. Amazing!! How earth bends at 3km radius
Are you a flat earth believer?
Does the name mean MaxQ is at 8K feet? My Dad used to work for Lockheed Missiles & Space and I remember as a kid laying on our front lawn looking up at the stars and him explaining how difficult it was to find a material for the nose cone of the Polaris missile. It had to be strong enough to withstand the differences in pressure from below the surface of the ocean, to Max Q, as well as temperature differences...and there was a weight limitation. His solution was laminated wood. It worked.
GoPro cameras are crap, they show nothing of value.
+Dog Serious sour grapes because you can't afford one?
Prometheus Engineer
You fucking clowns just dribble utter fucking nonsense.
***** sour grapes why don't you invent a camera which is better instead of talking shit
Prometheus Engineer
Why? we already have normal digital, HDMI cameras you fucking idiot.
***** learn something about cameras you degenerate. A $50 camera will not produce the same quality video as a gopro. I bet you are another loser who cannot afford one
Flat earth
checking for flat earth theory-seems to be true that Terra is flat :)))
This documentary is as good as anyone could hope for, and I assume you have all GPS data ready for review... Surely you have all the prerequisites to claim the prize (I sincerely wish you will get it).
The raw onboard video at times looks like it had been tastefully choreographed (I am not questioning its authenticity!). Its just so thrilling to watch, and the sound is almost orgazmic, especially near the apogee. Best video I've seen in ages.
This video never gets old. Great work.
they had a fish eyed lens
No. See 2:56 to f5:15 - FlipHD camera. No fisheye lens. The GoPro showing Fisheye was the second camera. The first camera had no fisheye and showed distinct curvature of the horizon
So?
fish eye lens all day long....no curve of the earth
Isaiah Prevo No, there's no fish-eye lens. This structure is 100% straight wich means NO fish-eye lens: drive.google.com/file/d/1DUjTa7PnCNuA8IhtTazbC-peo9cDO_8S/view?usp=sharing You can see the original one at 2:55
Now look at the horizon on 4:02 Curvature detected: drive.google.com/file/d/18pN-I0SEq47qIqFZ-RMYxo3RhXc_Ttl6/view?usp=sharing (I just corrected the brightness and the contrast so that way the curvature will be even more clear)
I just knew a few of you would have shown up down here. The GoPro has a fish-eye lens and you can tell it's got a fish-eye because the apparent curvature changes as it moves up and down on the screen. The FlipHD shows consistent curvature no matter where the line is on the screen and no distortion while standing still on the ground, so we can tell that the FlipHD camera does not have a fish-eye lens and the curvature visible in its footage from 120,000 feet up is real curvature. You have been shown it.
Flat Earthers lol
+Jason Cook I just troll-block them, to improve the future signal-to-noise ratio.
Fish eye lense!! Sorry, but the earth is flat!!
If the earth is flat why do some places get shorter light periods on earth in different seasons?
+Jan Magne Solheim I'm too tired and jaded to even debate you. Just run very fast into my fist instead.
4:08 ;)
If a fish eye lens was used, then the view when Q8K was on the ground would be distorted as well. It isn't, the world is round and if you don't believe it is, you're a crank.
+ootie extreme If the earth is round then how come people don't fall off the bottom?
That is incredible...I mean you could see space...the curve of the world....Bravo...I'm both amazed and jealous....FANTASTIC
that was amazing to watch! I ddn't think it would go up into the atmosphere so high!
Thanks so much for posting this, you guy's did an amazing job!!!!!!!!! Congratulations!!!!
this is the coolest thing I've seen in a while. great job!
Without a doubt, the kewlest video on youtube period. Now build a bigger one!!
Very, very smooth rocket. No osculation zone affects. Amazing accomplishment.
AWESOME!!!!! Thanks for sharing. My kids loved watching it, and asked me why they couldn't see the planets... Maybe you could work on that for your next mission. Very cool!!!
it is the nose cone. the nose cone separates and parachute opens but at the point you see the parts are all sorta flailing about.
So very cool guys. That was outstanding, and probably 1/100th of what it would cost NASA to do. Incredible camera work. I thought it was spectacular.
I'm amazed you got it back in the same area it was launched from. Spending that much time going that high, I would think it would be almost impossible not to have it miles away afterward.
It is great!!! Thank you so much that you show my space! I would be glad to see you in Dominican Republic for show you a beauty of underwater space like you show me a beauty of sky and space!
I find the sounds during the airborne flight the most amazing thing. The loud whistling at max height was surprising!
That's the air coming out of the rocket/equipment under pressure