NASA Launches the World's Most Powerful Rocket | Artemis I Highlights
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 16 ноя 2022
- A selection of the best shots from the NSF team and NASA from the historic Artemis I launch.
Video from Thomas (@TGMetsFan98), Michael (@Nextspaceflight), Jack (@theJackBeyer), Space Coast Live, and NASA.
Edited by Patrick (@Patrick_Colqu).
All content copyright to NSF. Not to be used elsewhere without explicit permission from NSF.
Click "Join" for access to early fast turnaround clips, exclusive discord access with the NSF team, etc - to support the channel.
Rolling Updates and Discussion: forum.nasaspaceflight.com/ind...
Articles: www.nasaspaceflight.com
NSF Store: www.nasaspaceflight.com/shop/
(Join L2 and support NSF here: www.nasaspaceflight.com/l2/) 
Наука
2:10 the sheer joy! I replayed this five times already. Thank you for covering this. Truly a moment in history.
And then a few seconds later SLS sound arrived and completely drowned out all shouts.
I just don't know why NASA should choose Apollo style old technologies of space capsules and expendable heavy lift rockets to go back to the moon? A 21st century Apollo style moon landing which used old technologies of space capsules and expendable rockets is very meaningless.
To be honest, I found their tone slightly annoying! "oH My gOo0od!" But regardless of that, great launch and video!
@@JamesVideoCollection you're not one one to appreciate the joy in others, are you?
Same here!! Unbelievable!
I shed a tear when I heard all your shouts of joy. That's how much it means to us. It's not about rockets, really. It's about being together and witnessing the power of what we can achieve when we strive together.
What a night that was. Still unbelievably spectacular.
Your ENTHUSIASM had me smiling thru the entirety of this video!!! That slow mo lift off was INSANE !!! Hearing you all go crazy when it launched in this video was awesome!!! I have probably re watched the launch at least 20 times now and it just doesn't get old !!!! Thanks for being there on launch night and thanks for this video of launch night !!!!
The emotion at lift off was incredible to hear. Is Chris G still wiping tears of joy from his eyes?
Excellent coverage everyone. Thank you for being there to share with the world.
I love how, if you go frame by frame, at 1:12 you can see the hold down clamp release on the Solid Booster. And at 1:38 you can see the sound ripples coming back up from the engines distorting the tower on the left. And I love hearing the people's reactions.
Awesome work
I love the excitement and enthusiasm from the group, and Chris G takes it a level higher, thanks Chris, that’s awesome!
The best part was the NASA SpaceFlight's team commentary it was a masterpiece love you guys
Tears of joy 😂 hearing everyone just gushing over the launch really got me . The biggest bucket list item on my is to see a launch live . Just wow 🤯
That force power sound... it really brought me to tears. I can't imagine the emotions people had who were actually there. What a feat a international union so many people spent years creating all this. Congrats!
The overwhelming joy experienced from this launch was epic! I can only imagine what it must have been like to help get SLS to the pad and to see it ripping the air as it roared uphill.
To bad all we could see was an exhaust plume and a CGI animation.
The screams of joy sum up over a decade of delays and waiting. All for this absolute beast of a rocket!
Absolutely phenomenal you guys absolutely killed it with coverage!!! "Way to go NASA" is right!!!!
I just don't know why NASA should choose Apollo style old technologies of space capsules and expendable heavy lift rockets to go back to the moon? A 21st century Apollo style moon landing which used old technologies of space capsules and expendable rockets is very meaningless.
What a breathtaking launch...
This brought tears to my eyes.. TO THE MOON BABY!!
Was watching live. The moment when the engines gimballed my heart missed several beats!
CONGRATS TO THE NASA ENGINEERS AND FLIGHT CREWS. THIS IS A HISTORICAL MOMENT.
The absolute madness of elation at 2:12 - it takes a fraction of a second for everyone to process that the SRBs have ignited and that the stack is fully committed before the screaming commences. It’s my favorite 15 seconds on RUclips. Just absolutely incredible.
The Joy from Chris-G was really priceless to hear GO NASA GO SLS GO Artemis I
I just don't know why NASA should choose Apollo style old technologies of space capsules and expendable heavy lift rockets to go back to the moon? A 21st century Apollo style moon landing which used old technologies of space capsules and expendable rockets is very meaningless.
@@powerfulstrong5673 ok, we gotcha, how many times are you going to piss on this parade? We all follow these launches and are aeware of the history of this launch, but the fact that it did indeed launch safely, up to this point, is something to acknowledge, not admonish.
@@rogerthomas169 Do you know the Space Transportation System (STS) which NASA proposed in 1969 to replace the Apollo capsules and Saturn V and Saturn IB expendable rockets? The system's major components consisted of:
1. A modular space station in a 270-nautical-mile (500 km) low Earth orbit, and as well as a permanent lunar orbit station.
2. A chemically fueled Earth-to-station shuttle.
3. A chemically fueled space tug to move crew and equipment between Earth orbits as high as geosynchronous orbit, the space tug also could be adapted as a lunar Earth Moon transfer vehicle to ferry crew and cargo between low Earth orbit and the moon.
4. A nuclear-powered ferry using the NERVA engine, to move crew, spacecraft and supplies between low Earth orbit and lunar orbit, geosynchronous orbit, or to other planets in the solar system. As Apollo accomplished its objective of landing the first humans on the Moon, political support for further crewed space activities began to wane, which was reflected in unwillingness of the Congress to provide funding for most of these extended activities. Based on this, Nixon rejected all parts of the program except the Space Shuttle, which inherited the STS name. As funded, the Shuttle was greatly scaled back from its planned degree of reusability, and deferred in time. The Shuttle first flew in 1981, and was retired in 2011.
A second part of the system, Space Station Freedom, was approved in the early 1980s and announced in 1984 by president Ronald Reagan. However, this also became politically unviable by 1993, and was replaced with the International Space Station (ISS), with substantial contribution by Russia. The ISS was completed in 2011.
@@powerfulstrong5673 yes
@@rogerthomas169 NASA becomes to take a conservative approach in space flight since the 2003 Space Shuttle Columbia accident. It's a shame that the program of the Venture Star spaceplane was cancelled in 2001.
This marks a new era in space-travel!
@El Bearsidente Hey, sorry if my statement is a little vague but I was referring this being the first of the Artemis launches. Of course it’s a Frankenstein rocket and and im a huge starship/space x supporter but just saying you know…
@@hatchedcoast7495 I really try to get excited about SLS but just can't. It feels to me like we're getting all the huge budget requirements for a flight rate 1/10 of what Shuttle provided.
This was intended to be Shuttle's more streamlined, efficient replacement after a "short gap" between programs. There's no sustainable future for SLS except in a few very specialized missions spread at least a year apart. 2025 or 2026 before the next launch which will deliver no Artemis hardware. 2027 is likely the first operational flight.
This actually marks more of a return to the OLD, non-reusable era of space travel.
Falcon 9 and Falcon 9 Heavy mare the new era - as will Starship when SpaceX gets that working too.
Goodness the support struts bending and handling all the pressure 😳
That’s a great summary vid. Captured the awe and emotion of this amazing launch. Thanks NSF 👍
I just don't know why NASA should choose Apollo style old technologies of space capsules and expendable heavy lift rockets to go back to the moon? A 21st century Apollo style moon landing which used old technologies of space capsules and expendable rockets is very meaningless.
@@powerfulstrong5673 You said that already. Repeating it doesn't make it any more true :(
@@iamjadedhobo Do you know the Space Transportation System (STS) which NASA proposed in 1969 to replace the Apollo capsules and Saturn V and Saturn IB expendable rockets? The system's major components consisted of:
1. A modular space station in a 270-nautical-mile (500 km) low Earth orbit, and as well as a permanent lunar orbit station.
2. A chemically fueled Earth-to-station shuttle.
3. A chemically fueled space tug to move crew and equipment between Earth orbits as high as geosynchronous orbit, the space tug also could be adapted as a lunar Earth Moon transfer vehicle to ferry crew and cargo between low Earth orbit and the moon.
4. A nuclear-powered ferry using the NERVA engine, to move crew, spacecraft and supplies between low Earth orbit and lunar orbit, geosynchronous orbit, or to other planets in the solar system. As Apollo accomplished its objective of landing the first humans on the Moon, political support for further crewed space activities began to wane, which was reflected in unwillingness of the Congress to provide funding for most of these extended activities. Based on this, Nixon rejected all parts of the program except the Space Shuttle, which inherited the STS name. As funded, the Shuttle was greatly scaled back from its planned degree of reusability, and deferred in time. The Shuttle first flew in 1981, and was retired in 2011.
A second part of the system, Space Station Freedom, was approved in the early 1980s and announced in 1984 by president Ronald Reagan. However, this also became politically unviable by 1993, and was replaced with the International Space Station (ISS), with substantial contribution by Russia. The ISS was completed in 2011.
@@iamjadedhobo I think reusable space tugs, in-orbit assembly, space refueling depots, nuclear propulsioned ferry tugs, and reusable delta-winged spaceplanes are very good ideas and are much better than Apollo style hardwares of space capsules and disposable heavy-lift rockets.
It was wonderful to watch it live. Wish we was able to see it in real.
Great work to everyone who worked on this, to launch the most powerful rocket atm (until Starship starts). Hopeing this launch will help, for the future progress
Thats so awesome. Look at this massive shokwave when the boosters lit @1:24 , thats so crazy.
One day I want to experience that rumble in person, it must be incredible.
Beautiful :) I can't get enough of watching these recaps, but yours is really top quality!
It still gives me chills watching this, so amazing! 🤩
Fantastic compilation, guys! It was awesome to see and hear SLS lift off via your lenses and microphones. Thanks so much for being there, for sharing the experience and for letting us hear your feelings and emotions coming through the commentary.
Great compilation and amazing live coverage as well, huge thanks for sharing
Awesome! What a compilation of awesome clips. I have tears of joy in my eyes, again!
Great Job caught some Great Footage Thank You NSF Team
Awesome! Hearing your excitement guys, made me smile 😊
Love it or hate it, you can't complain about the extreme power behind the rocket
Except the "most powerful rocket" part being a lie. Never mind starship, it's weaker than the Saturn 5, the rocket it's meant to replace.
Heck, it's weaker than the Energia too.
@@carljohan9265 the lion's share of the power comes from those two SRBs. About 6.5 million lbf of thrust just from the two SRBs. With 1.6 to 2 million lbf of thrust from the four RS-25s. So no, Energia, and in fact Saturn V as well, are actually weaker than SLS.
6.5m lbf from the Zenit boosters and 1.3m lbf from it's core stage.
@@setesh1294 It IS weaker, because it can carry less payload.
Thrust means fuckall when you got such a shit specific impulse as an SRB, and sea level hydrolox engines has never been a good idea but everyone got hung up on them anyway.
@@carljohan9265 like, 11,000 pounds less. That's just on the Block 1. Block 1B and eventually Block 2 will far surpass Energia in payload to LEO. To TLI it's closer to 20,000lbs. But again, Block 1B and Block 2 will surpass that. And Energia never went to TLI to begin with so this argument is kinda moot.
As for Saturn V, SLS far surpasses it to LEO and gets really fuckin close with block 1B to TLI, and surpasses it with the Block 2.
@@setesh1294 Really? Because the SLS can do around 95 tonnes and the saturn could do 140.
I got goosebumps reminiscing of launch day last November. So glad I got to be there for this historic launch!
I just remember seeing Neil Armstrong walk on the moon for the very first time. I was not quite 9 and in bed when my parents got me up to watch it. I now know it was about 3am but I was too excited to care. I was absolutely gutted when it was all stopped at Apollo 17, but I remember Apollo 13 very well. (Almost better than 11). I turned 60 earlier this year so with this successful launch I can now hope that I'll see a proper (semi?) permanent base on the moon in my lifetime.
I just don't know why NASA should choose Apollo style old technologies of space capsules and expendable heavy lift rockets to go back to the moon? A 21st century Apollo style moon landing which used old technologies of space capsules and expendable rockets is very meaningless.
@@powerfulstrong5673 Because they were ordered to by the US government.
@@_starfiend Do you know the Space Transportation System (STS) which NASA proposed in 1969 to replace the Apollo capsules and Saturn V and Saturn IB expendable rockets? The system's major components consisted of:
1. A modular space station in a 270-nautical-mile (500 km) low Earth orbit, and as well as a permanent lunar orbit station.
2. A chemically fueled Earth-to-station shuttle.
3. A chemically fueled space tug to move crew and equipment between Earth orbits as high as geosynchronous orbit, the space tug also could be adapted as a lunar Earth Moon transfer vehicle to ferry crew and cargo between low Earth orbit and the moon.
4. A nuclear-powered ferry using the NERVA engine, to move crew, spacecraft and supplies between low Earth orbit and lunar orbit, geosynchronous orbit, or to other planets in the solar system. As Apollo accomplished its objective of landing the first humans on the Moon, political support for further crewed space activities began to wane, which was reflected in unwillingness of the Congress to provide funding for most of these extended activities. Based on this, Nixon rejected all parts of the program except the Space Shuttle, which inherited the STS name. As funded, the Shuttle was greatly scaled back from its planned degree of reusability, and deferred in time. The Shuttle first flew in 1981, and was retired in 2011.
A second part of the system, Space Station Freedom, was approved in the early 1980s and announced in 1984 by president Ronald Reagan. However, this also became politically unviable by 1993, and was replaced with the International Space Station (ISS), with substantial contribution by Russia. The ISS was completed in 2011.
@@javaman4584 EDT => BST
@@javaman4584 I think reusable space tugs, in-orbit assembly, space refueling depots, nuclear propulsioned ferry tugs, and reusable delta-winged spaceplanes are very good ideas and are much better than Apollo style hardwares of space capsules and disposable heavy-lift rockets.
This was absolutely magnificent! I'm not gonna lie, I had tears in my eyes! Seeing Artemis slowly ascend as "NASA" rolls by in front of the camera is amazing! I watched the launch live and screamed with excitement!
It was a very emotional moment, I've followed SLS progress since it was announced back in 2011... hell, I was still 19, just got into university back then.
My parents watched Man walk on the Moon for the first time... I wanna see Man back on the Moon and Man on Mars in my lifetime! We're gonna be a spacefaring race baby!!!
Science fiction becomes science fact - there ain't nothing better!
Great job to the whole NSF team! Fantastic shots and commentary.
Some of the best video of this awesome launch. NASA workers tend to get a little excited over such an event.
You know I cried when this rocket lit the solids because it brought back a ton of memories from watching a lot of the Gemini launches can the Saturn launches and now I'm witnessing going back to the moon for the second time I hope I'm going to be alive when we finally land on Mars
I just don't know why NASA should choose Apollo style old technologies of space capsules and expendable heavy lift rockets to go back to the moon? A 21st century Apollo style moon landing which used old technologies of space capsules and expendable rockets is very meaningless.
Amazing footage, TY.
Great compilation. Some really awesome close shots too.
Incredible! Loved the slow-mo footage and the live audio from the launch. Wish I could have there to experience it in person. Go Artemis!
I just don't know why NASA should choose Apollo style old technologies of space capsules and expendable heavy lift rockets to go back to the moon? A 21st century Apollo style moon landing which used old technologies of space capsules and expendable rockets is very meaningless.
Than you JAck and NSF team and NASA. what an iconic launch. there can beonly one First ARtemis . what a spectacle .
I just don't know why NASA should choose Apollo style old technologies of space capsules and expendable heavy lift rockets to go back to the moon? A 21st century Apollo style moon landing which used old technologies of space capsules and expendable rockets is very meaningless.
@@powerfulstrong5673 who tf cares, is not NASA's fault, is USA goverment fault, they don't bring the attention this program needs to be succesful, also, is everything but Apollo style landing, is not a go and back program like the Apollo, there is going to be a literal moon station with continuous human presence if everything goes right, that will made companies design new tech to provide a safer and cheaper flight to make it sustainable, SLS is the pathfinder that opened the window to that future, it isn't going to be launching a lot to be a considerable amount of money wasted ( The budget of the SLS is literally the same amount of money that the US has sent to Ukraine ), also is neccesary as it is a safer and most technology proven alternative to start with, Starship will not be magically human rated as most fanboys think, it is a new concept that has a lot of risk that will need loads of testing and technology development, the same goes with every existing vehicle, there is no replacement or better alternative than the SLS right now, the SLS is a solid way of delivering crew to the moon and back, is literally the start of the program, they can't risk to fail with new technology with the absurdly little amount of budget they recieve to fund the program, they need to start safe and assure the maturity of the program to start using new tech, also, they will already implement little improvements and use of new tech, with the Gateway lunar station and the Starship as moon landing vehicle, aswell with more vehicles that companies are designing to contribute to the project
@@danko8983 Do you know the Space Transportation System (STS) which NASA proposed in 1969 to replace the Apollo capsules and Saturn V and Saturn IB expendable rockets? The system's major components consisted of:
1. A modular space station in a 270-nautical-mile (500 km) low Earth orbit, and as well as a permanent lunar orbit station.
2. A chemically fueled Earth-to-station shuttle.
3. A chemically fueled space tug to move crew and equipment between Earth orbits as high as geosynchronous orbit, the space tug also could be adapted as a lunar Earth Moon transfer vehicle to ferry crew and cargo between low Earth orbit and the moon.
4. A nuclear-powered ferry using the NERVA engine, to move crew, spacecraft and supplies between low Earth orbit and lunar orbit, geosynchronous orbit, or to other planets in the solar system. As Apollo accomplished its objective of landing the first humans on the Moon, political support for further crewed space activities began to wane, which was reflected in unwillingness of the Congress to provide funding for most of these extended activities. Based on this, Nixon rejected all parts of the program except the Space Shuttle, which inherited the STS name. As funded, the Shuttle was greatly scaled back from its planned degree of reusability, and deferred in time. The Shuttle first flew in 1981, and was retired in 2011.
A second part of the system, Space Station Freedom, was approved in the early 1980s and announced in 1984 by president Ronald Reagan. However, this also became politically unviable by 1993, and was replaced with the International Space Station (ISS), with substantial contribution by Russia. The ISS was completed in 2011.
@@powerfulstrong5673 that program is irrelevant, as i said, NASA's budget is so small because the goverment doesn't give the attention Artemis needs to implement new tech, what you're saying is so out of reality, it was concieved on the 60s, just as many proposals that only stayed on paper because of budget cuts due to Vietnam war and literally you said that, how in the world do you expect to do that with the budget they have bruh, the budget they get today is less than 1% of federal budget, and the highest it has ever been was during 1966, in that year the budget was over 4% of the federal budget. In order to make the Space Transportation System happen NASA would need like 5 times the budget of the Apollo era, which is as you can already guess, it's impossible, so why tf are you complaining about NASA doing what they do ( that is literally the best they can with their budget, so be thankful that at least another lunar program is being worked on ) instead of complaining about the US goverment not giving the funding needed to raise the tech development to use in new programs.
@@danko8983 I think reusable space tugs, in-orbit assembly, space refueling depots, nuclear propulsioned ferry tugs, and reusable delta-winged spaceplanes are very good ideas and are much better than Apollo style hardwares of space capsules and disposable heavy-lift rockets.
What a SPECTACULAR launch! This new rocket is just incredible. What a machine!
Can’t imagine how bright that would be in person
When I saw Falcon heavy at night it was as bright as a sunrise
I’ve seen Atlas, Falcon 9 & Heavy but SLS was so much brighter and just overall more intense! The sound was something I’ve never heard before. It was almost like windows were bending as if they were plastic…crazy!! (11 miles away)
@@KCJbomberFTW yes. It so bright
@@thomasttrr Great description-al feedback. Bet a few non space people thought it was their last day on earth 😵💫
Or how loud.
Amazing to watch this in my lifetime.
Thank you so very much for the coverage, and congratulations to the NASA TEAM🙏👍🇺🇸
I just don't know why NASA should choose Apollo style old technologies of space capsules and expendable heavy lift rockets to go back to the moon? A 21st century Apollo style moon landing which used old technologies of space capsules and expendable rockets is very meaningless.
@@powerfulstrong5673 they are not SpaceX = they are bad and old. Ok
Absolutely beautiful. Watching live is one thing, multiple camera coverage is another. Loved it.
Very well done on the editing and multiple angles.
Hope next Nasa stream they'll have a smoother coverage and people on board.
Artemis III is the first manned flight.
@@rjswas Artemis II will carry crew on the same flight path as Artemis I but Artemis III will be the first to actually put them on the surface
@Taurus Space Ah my bad, I thought they said on here that 3 would be the first crewed flight, i guess I miss understood, thanks for the correction.
@@rjswas Artemis II is like Apollo 8
@@orionSpacecraft Cool, i don't know much about the old shuttle launches and how they did it, just bits and pieces.
amazing footage from your team.
So proud of everyone of you guys that made it possible. Way to go NASA, making history again
Got the chills all over again. Still in wow mode.
The tram I was on while watching the launch Live looked quite confused when a few isolated people all started cheering at the same time.
Great video, nicely edited!
Beatiful, truly amazing. Thanks for the coverage NSF.
Those are some good vibes. Thanks, .
Best coverage!
Unbelievably awesome footage, particularly the part with the emotional reaction to the liftoff. Much better than the original live video.
Amazing 👏👏
Serious Saturn V vibes from this launch, especially with the views of umbilical arms pulling away.
Such a beautiful moment 🥹🙌🏽💛
A 50 year wait, and then three ( or more ) come at once ! Yeh !!!
I just don't know why NASA should choose Apollo style old technologies of space capsules and expendable heavy lift rockets to go back to the moon? A 21st century Apollo style moon landing which used old technologies of space capsules and expendable rockets is very meaningless.
Wish I was there for this, however when Astronauts are on board the next launch I'll be there definitely.
Back to the Moon after 50yrs away from it. Awesome job NASA and a Massive Congratulations getting this Bird off the pad 👏👏👏
I just don't know why NASA should choose Apollo style old technologies of space capsules and expendable heavy lift rockets to go back to the moon? A 21st century Apollo style moon landing which used old technologies of space capsules and expendable rockets is very meaningless.
Watching this rocket launch provides a comforting feeling to me.
Well NSF, y’all did it again! Well done. Loved hearing you guys hoot and holler at launch. I was doing the same and woke my wife up (I’m in the PNW), even she was happy. Excellent footage. Guess you’ll have to redo the intro video for all the daily updates and live streams now? Personally, I think you should thrown in the part where either Thomas or Chris was saying “Look at it goooo!!” 😂
I'm so glad I was able to be here for this launch
Absolutely amazing beyond words out of this world awesome
That crackle is awesome!!! 🔥🔥
Absolutely incredible.
imagine in this day and age still have a designs built around fully disposable rockets
This is the summary video of the Artemis 1 launch I've been waiting for. Thank you so much for this amazing coverage to everyone at NASA Spaceflight. It's a keepsake of a key moment in spaceflight history that I'll treasure for a long time.
I just don't know why NASA should choose Apollo style old technologies of space capsules and expendable heavy lift rockets to go back to the moon? A 21st century Apollo style moon landing which used old technologies of space capsules and expendable rockets is very meaningless.
Best films yet, by far!
Spectacular launch!
Finally got That Big Orange Rocket up. Man, that thing is loud, and the exhaust is so bright.
N-1 was louder - even when it did't blow up (the second launch)....
@@bricefleckenstein9666 well boss n1 doesnt fly, so...
I just don't know why NASA should choose Apollo style old technologies of space capsules and expendable heavy lift rockets to go back to the moon? A 21st century Apollo style moon landing which used old technologies of space capsules and expendable rockets is very meaningless.
@@ASAVSP N-1 got off the pad 4 times.
It just didn't fly very far 3 of the 4 times and didn't get close to orbit before it failed the 4'th time.
Pure sound is amazing
amazing
This was so epic!
Awesome!
It was a great launch! Was 9 years old when Apollo 8 launched for the 1968 Christmas flight around the moon. and then seeing the last Apollo 17 flight in 1972 all on TV. Took awhile to but hope to see an Artemis and Starship launch now that I am 64.
we all waited but knew it'll launch
like watching Apollo launch1969 but color and close up cheers for the post Beautifully captured my heart fluttered
We all get frustrated on a No launch but would we travel in a car on xmas holidays with faulty brakes tyres leaking oil etc Nope!
Least taking safety cautions on leaks better than the disaster rushing a launch last time Columbia with the O/rings sad that Ego trip they where told but ignored the warning .
I just don't know why NASA should choose Apollo style old technologies of space capsules and expendable heavy lift rockets to go back to the moon? A 21st century Apollo style moon landing which used old technologies of space capsules and expendable rockets is very meaningless.
Man, those solid rocket boosters are bonkers. When you need to go somewhere fasst! 🔥🚀
It takes a creative team to make a successful program and a creative editor to pull everything together for an audience to appreciate. 👏👏🎬🎬
Awesome
Fantastic launch, commentary and compilation video. I think the most moving shot is the last one ....... the empty pad. The pad is in a moment of quiet reflection !! Rocket delivered, gone, job done !!.
Awesome. Just fkn awrsome
The most powerful rocket to ever reach orbit!
Thanks
I missed the launch because I took my meds an eventually passed out. Great work nasal an all the teams.
Great recap and amazing photography.. only wish I had someway to watch it in 2k (or 4k)..
Great job putting this together! As no single video, because of the darkness, is able to capture the power and grandeur of the launch 🚀 this is the first video I’ve seen that gives some sense of that. Thanks for the time and effort you put in to making this 👍🏻😀
It's about time, NASA!
I just don't know why NASA should choose Apollo style old technologies of space capsules and expendable heavy lift rockets to go back to the moon? A 21st century Apollo style moon landing which used old technologies of space capsules and expendable rockets is very meaningless.
@@powerfulstrong5673
That's where commercial aerospace companies, like SpaceX come in, I guess...
@@direbearcoat7551 Do you know the Space Transportation System (STS) which NASA proposed in 1969 to replace the Apollo capsules and Saturn V and Saturn IB expendable rockets? The system's major components consisted of:
1. A modular space station in a 270-nautical-mile (500 km) low Earth orbit, and as well as a permanent lunar orbit station.
2. A chemically fueled Earth-to-station shuttle.
3. A chemically fueled space tug to move crew and equipment between Earth orbits as high as geosynchronous orbit, the space tug also could be adapted as a lunar Earth Moon transfer vehicle to ferry crew and cargo between low Earth orbit and the moon.
4. A nuclear-powered ferry using the NERVA engine, to move crew, spacecraft and supplies between low Earth orbit and lunar orbit, geosynchronous orbit, or to other planets in the solar system. As Apollo accomplished its objective of landing the first humans on the Moon, political support for further crewed space activities began to wane, which was reflected in unwillingness of the Congress to provide funding for most of these extended activities. Based on this, Nixon rejected all parts of the program except the Space Shuttle, which inherited the STS name. As funded, the Shuttle was greatly scaled back from its planned degree of reusability, and deferred in time. The Shuttle first flew in 1981, and was retired in 2011.
A second part of the system, Space Station Freedom, was approved in the early 1980s and announced in 1984 by president Ronald Reagan. However, this also became politically unviable by 1993, and was replaced with the International Space Station (ISS), with substantial contribution by Russia. The ISS was completed in 2011.
@@direbearcoat7551 I think reusable space tugs, in-orbit assembly, space refueling depots, nuclear propulsioned ferry tugs, and reusable delta-winged spaceplanes are very good ideas and are much better than Apollo style hardwares of space capsules and disposable heavy-lift rockets.
@@powerfulstrong5673
I agree. But it's commercial aerospace that will get us there, not a government agency.
I'm glad that NASA turned towards encouraging private industry to do the quick, cost effective innovations for the future of space exploration and the space economy.
I believe the SLS will be NASA's last government built rockets. Who knows? Maybe NASA may turn to private industry to design and build their space probes and autonomous mobile landers? It'll get done for much less than half the price and completed much faster.
Wow. This footage is nothing short of epic. I salute you, NSF.
Will they release the SRB or core stage cameras?
Epic.
If the SRBs had an explosive charge at the end of the fuel cell, they would be the coolest and biggest fireworks ever
Also a massive threat to ears, wildlife and local flora
@@chickensoldier9790 true, but if Nasa are still stuck in the non-reusable era they may aswell go out with a bang 🤣
@@AldenDoble they are stuck because dumbass US politics.
Awesome as always!
Great launch.
Dope