Internet The Faking Hoaxer

[cljohnston]

I found this cool clip...

...and it really made me appreciate all the things that went right with the Shuttle program!

The guy's got a lot of other space-related clips on his channel, too.

 

[jinglesassy]

Yeah the shuttle never had anything incredibly bad like these that are shown here only 2 breakups and both could of been avoidable if nasa just decided to listen to the engineers and not of launched challenger and had they looked at the heatshield in more depth on columbia

 

[cljohnston]

^Sorry, I didn't mean to imply that I'd forgotten about Challenger and Columbia.

 

[Izack]

That was spookily well-done.
"Faking Hoaxer" on the wing was a bit of a giveaway, though.

 

[jinglesassy]

^Sorry, I didn't mean to imply that I'd forgotten about Challenger and Columbia.

Wasn't stating you did its just a shame because it was nasas fault that they happened

 

[Andy44]

I'm not watching any such video until the last orbiter is safely in its museum parking spot, thank you.

 

[ikrase]

Most of those are hypervelocity impacts. I think they can see the larger objects and they they are not THAT common.

Also: Cockpit fire? WTF it's not that likely.

Not sure how the nose would break off.

Best, spookiest one is the shuttle crashland. Spooky because it looks survivable. That's what you get for no powered descent.

 

[MeDiCS]

That was spookily well-done.

Emphasis in spooky.

EDIT: Lol, I almost thought the bird in the last scene was a missile .

 

[DarkEnergy]

Also: Cockpit fire? WTF it's not that likely.

Apollo 1 had a cockpit fire that killed everyone in it. There are a lot of electrical circuits in the cockpit especially that could easily overheat or cause a spark.

[ame="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apollo_1"]Apollo 1 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia[/ame]

 

[David413]

Wasn't stating you did its just a shame because it was nasas fault that they happened

[RANT]
I have many friends at NASA. You are painting with a very broad brush with the statement "...it was nasas [sic] fault". Many within NASA challenged the Challenger launch decision; many within NASA were calling for imagery of Columbia. Your statement is too broad. Managers were to blame. Better yet, name names. L. Ham was at fault, L. Malloy was at fault. It has become all too fashionable to just blame NASA. There are literally thousands of employees at all the NASA centers that had nothing to do with either accident. Who are the "engineers" that you say should have been listened to? Can you specify? Please, be specific when making such statements. If you don't know names, then I would respectfully suggest that you study the accidents. Know who made the decisions, know who challenged the decisionmakers. Know why the decisions made were made. This is how we learn lessons from history. But please, don't just blanket blame NASA. You condemn many who never had a chance to challenge the decisions, you condemn many who did. NASA is an organization. No organization ever made a decision. People make decisions, flawed and otherwise; to suggest otherwise is at best misplaced, at worst it suggests a prejudice against people based upon their employment.
[/RANT]

 

[Izack]

David413, that was excellently put. Mind if I quote you?

 

[jinglesassy]

[RANT]
I have many friends at NASA. You are painting with a very broad brush with the statement "...it was nasas [sic] fault". Many within NASA challenged the Challenger launch decision; many within NASA were calling for imagery of Columbia. Your statement is too broad. Managers were to blame. Better yet, name names. L. Ham was at fault, L. Malloy was at fault. It has become all too fashionable to just blame NASA. There are literally thousands of employees at all the NASA centers that had nothing to do with either accident. Who are the "engineers" that you say should have been listened to? Can you specify? Please, be specific when making such statements. If you don't know names, then I would respectfully suggest that you study the accidents. Know who made the decisions, know who challenged the decisionmakers. Know why the decisions made were made. This is how we learn lessons from history. But please, don't just blanket blame NASA. You condemn many who never had a chance to challenge the decisions, you condemn many who did. NASA is an organization. No organization ever made a decision. People make decisions, flawed and otherwise; to suggest otherwise is at best misplaced, at worst it suggests a prejudice against people based upon their employment.
[/RANT]

Yeah i was trying to say it was the higher up people i really should get into more detail with that kind of stuff in the future

 

[supersonic]

[RANT]
I have many friends at NASA. You are painting with a very broad brush with the statement "...it was NASAs [sic] fault". Many within NASA challenged the Challenger launch decision; many within NASA were calling for imagery of Columbia. Your statement is too broad. Managers were to blame. Better yet, name names. L. Ham was at fault, L. Malloy was at fault. It has become all too fashionable to just blame NASA. There are literally thousands of employees at all the NASA centers that had nothing to do with either accident. Who are the "engineers" that you say should have been listened to? Can you specify? Please, be specific when making such statements. If you don't know names, then I would respectfully suggest that you study the accidents. Know who made the decisions, know who challenged the decision makers. Know why the decisions made were made. This is how we learn lessons from history. But please, don't just blanket blame NASA. You condemn many who never had a chance to challenge the decisions, you condemn many who did. NASA is an organization. No organization ever made a decision. People make decisions, flawed and otherwise; to suggest otherwise is at best misplaced, at worst it suggests a prejudice against people based upon their employment.
[/RANT]

So true, David413

That was spookily well-done.

Yes, it really was spooky.
I'm afraid of what might happen now that I have watched it.....:shifty:

 

[Izack]

Yes, it really was spooky.
I'm afraid of what might happen now that I have watched it.....:shifty:

Well, hopefully you jinxed it into not happening.

Either that or you'll be having nightmares about meteor strikes and explosive decompression. :hide:

 

[David413]

David413, that was excellently put. Mind if I quote you?

Thanks. I guess I have a passion for defending my many friends and the good work they do. I'm not sure where you would find it useful to quote me, but feel free to do so as long as it is properly in context. I remember the many Emails I traded with folks after the loss of Columbia. I was honored to actually attend the first anniversary memorial at JSC in February, 2004. I stood shoulder to shoulder with literally hundreds of NASA and contractor employees in the courtyard outside building 1. It was one of the best moments of my life. This picture shows the many folks that day:

http://www.jsc.nasa.gov/jscfeatures/photos/ColumbiaMemorial/jsc2004e01457-ColMem.jpg

This is the NASA I know...

 

[Izack]

There are a few dorks I know.
I've vehemently defended NASA on a few occasions. I can't say I know any NASA employees, though I have a few friends in aerospace engineering and astrophysics programmes at college (and hope to join their ranks in a year or so ).

 

[Orbinaut Pete]

That video really is quite eerie to watch. It's good, but I would have waited until after the program is safely over to release it!

...and it really made me appreciate all the things that went right with the Shuttle program!

Hang on - the program aint over yet!


It might interest people to know that The Faking Hoaxer is actually a member of our forum! :thumbup:

 

[Urwumpe]

Apollo 1 had a cockpit fire that killed everyone in it. There are a lot of electrical circuits in the cockpit especially that could easily overheat or cause a spark.

Apollo 1 fire was caused by pure oxygen atmosphere at 1.2 atmospheres pressure in the capsule. Under such conditions even aluminum burns.

The Shuttle has always 20% oxygen and 79% nitrogen. That is worlds apart from Apollo, even at 1.2 atmospheres, the mixture is not as reactive as pure oxygen.

There are many fire hazards in the real Shuttle, but you also have a pretty robust fire extinguisher system and smoke detector system in the shuttle, both things that Apollo didn't have.

The art in the videos is undisputed I would say, but what they show is pretty disturbing...luckily, TFH does his fakes so exaggerated, that the horror is not too strong, if he would be a bit more careful with the damage, it would be harder to keep some emotional distance.

Just imagine he would do a SSME HPOTP fire correctly... It is one of those real failures that nobody wants to see during a real mission, which also has a bit of Edgar Wallace horror.

 

[T.Neo]

The art in the videos is undisputed I would say, but what they show is pretty disturbing...luckily, TFH does his fakes so exaggerated, that the horror is not too strong, if he would be a bit more careful with the damage, it would be harder to keep some emotional distance.

Indeed.

I've never been a fan of gore, even if it's shuttle gore.

But hey, I crash objects into the Cape in Orbiter at 0.92 c, so whatever someone finds fun...

 

[astrosammy]

Not that much horror. Most of them look like a reason to fly a LON mission. I don't know how much of the shuttle is pressurized, but scenario 7 could be a problem for the crew. In scenario 2 I'd say there's enough time to get into ISS. But 3 and 12 are somehow disturbing.