Wow... around the 5 min mark it gets all NOT GOOD NOT GOOD NOT GOOD!! AAAAAAAAHHHH!

Man, I wish so much that wasn't recorded with a fisheye lense. Kinda spoiled it for me tbh.

So all the lens flare in Abram's Star Trek was actually realistic! The more you know.

Actually, this is what falling from space looks like...
Joseph Kittinger did it on August 16, 1960 from the Excelsior III at 102,800 feet. True, the shuttle boosters jettison ~150K ft, but still, this is a person doing it =)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YVanXFKS8DM

-- Dave

Would this be before or after I was turned inside out in of the vacuum of space?

I've seen this before, just not sure if it was here or not.

>> ^Jinx:

Man, I wish so much that wasn't recorded with a fisheye lense. Kinda spoiled it for me tbh.


Are you for real? You live in an age where you get to see that and you're fucking complaining?

Feel free to correct it. Off the top of my head, split it out into frames (easy, something like FFMPEG will do it nicely), correct (Panotools) and reassemble (ffmpeg). We look forward to your newer, better version.


>> ^Jinx:

Man, I wish so much that wasn't recorded with a fisheye lense. Kinda spoiled it for me tbh.

What's with all this sound in space then? Was Star Trek right about that as well?!!?!

>> ^Gallowflak:

>> ^Jinx:
Man, I wish so much that wasn't recorded with a fisheye lense. Kinda spoiled it for me tbh.

Are you for real? You live in an age where you get to see that and you're fucking complaining?

Yeah, yeah I am. Next time your computer crashes mid essay remember not to complain ok honey.

Oh, and its the fact its such an amazing sight that makes the distortion all the more frustrating.

I know it had parachutes, but that really was a gently kiss of a landing wasn't it???

By the time it gets to about the 3:50 area you can hear the whole thing groaning just from the stress. Also, at 4:40 (you can see it before) is the smoke plume in the far back the launch origin? Might be the other booster, but that plume looked like it was screwed up by atmospherics.

/edit- Definitely not the other booster.

At 5:00 the sound changes because it starts to encounter friction from the Ionosphere or mesosphere not sure which there's no altitude indication.

The Astronaut who skydived from space talked about it. Free falling in complete silence, and then boom hitting the atmosphere.

Haha, this sounds like the music I play live.

Not knowing the g forces involved with splashdown, who thinks NASA could sell tickets after strapping seats on those things?

I have a bunch of power points and the only things I can *promote are my own. Go go number 1!

Self promoting this video back to the front page; last published Tuesday, August 31st, 2010 12:05pm PDT - promote requested by original submitter Zyrxil.

*promote ?

Invocations (promote) cannot be called by joel_eb because joel_eb is not privileged - sorry.

Wow.

Great sift.

I was hoping the splashdown would have enough force for the camera to go underwater. Maybe deep enough to see a seamonster or something.

That would be cool.

It's amazing how dark or small the sun is in space. It's as if there isn't really anything you can do with it unless you are on Earth. It's like that old saying if you want to hide something put it in plain sight.

>> ^Deano:
What's with all this sound in space then? Was Star Trek right about that as well?!!?!
Sound is vibration. For us, sound is usually propagated primarily in air, but this camera is bolted to the booster, so it "hears" those vibrations.



This makes me wonder about the feasibility of a possible plot element in a space movie\story. Two folks in spacesuits lose radio contact with each other (accident, disaster, nefarious villian) and can't communicate (soundlessly yelling, unintelligible gesturing) until one of them pulls the other one close enough for the faceshields to touch, restoring some semblance of verbal communication (tinny? bassy? muffled?).

...so...dizzy...

>> ^ReverendTed:

>> ^Deano:
What's with all this sound in space then? Was Star Trek right about that as well?!!?!
Sound is vibration. For us, sound is usually propagated primarily in air, but this camera is bolted to the booster, so it "hears" those vibrations.

This makes me wonder about the feasibility of a possible plot element in a space movie\story. Two folks in spacesuits lose radio contact with each other (accident, disaster, nefarious villian) and can't communicate (soundlessly yelling, unintelligible gesturing) until one of them pulls the other one close enough for the faceshields to touch, restoring some semblance of verbal communication (tinny? bassy? muffled?).





I've seen that done before in fiction. Or do you mean whether that would actually work?

It's been done hundreds of times in fiction and it would actually work in the same way that two tin cans with a string between them can conduct sound>> ^Zyrxil:

>> ^ReverendTed:
>> ^Deano:
What's with all this sound in space then? Was Star Trek right about that as well?!!?!
Sound is vibration. For us, sound is usually propagated primarily in air, but this camera is bolted to the booster, so it "hears" those vibrations.

This makes me wonder about the feasibility of a possible plot element in a space movie\story. Two folks in spacesuits lose radio contact with each other (accident, disaster, nefarious villian) and can't communicate (soundlessly yelling, unintelligible gesturing) until one of them pulls the other one close enough for the faceshields to touch, restoring some semblance of verbal communication (tinny? bassy? muffled?).



I've seen that done before in fiction. Or do you mean whether that would actually work?

the 2:05-2:15 seperation is pretty awesome.

I wish those faithless scientists would stop making fake videos trying to prove the earth is not flat. First, it's evolution in biology class, and now this!!????

There is a very similar video on here, but this is not a dupe as it is from a separate mission: http://videosift.com/video/shuttle-rocket-boosters-blown-clear-freefall-to-earth