Internet The Faking Hoaxer

[T.Neo]

I agree, perhaps because they reminded me a bit of both the Challenger and Columbia incidents. None of the fragments after Columbia were really large enough to be recognised on that scale. It's chilling.

Indeed, most of the others seem fixable (in terms of saving the crew, of course) by flying a LON mission. The window puncture in the second scenario seems small enough that even if it were relatively rapid, the crew could escape in time. It may even be possible to improvise a patch (out of a random object, perhaps) to slow the leak if anything. Scenario 1 does not seem too bad, although spilt propellant certainly would not be healthy. Isn't really a pretty sight, either.

I doubt the probability of some scenarios shown, but rewatching them is starting to make me a bit nauseous.

Also- all the shuttles have no names, and The Faking Hoaxer can be seen on the wing of the shuttle at certain times. :lol:

 

[supersonic]

Well, hopefully you jinxed it into not happening.

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

If anything bad happens, I can almost grantee that it will land on top of me.
But really, good luck to the last two shuttle missions and may nothing bad happen.

 

[Ark]

Is it bad that I laughed at the belly landing?

 

[DarkEnergy]

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

Thanks for clarifying that. I completely overlooked the different atmospheric conditions between the two when I had posted. It was just the first thing to come to mind when I read cockpit fire.

The video is extremely well done. The camera shaking and focusing does make it look all the more believable.