NASA's Abandoned Plan To Carry Soviet Spacecraft In The Space Shuttle

[@theophrastusbombastus8019]

3:20 I initially interpreted "95% of astronauts could fit" like they could fit most of the three astronauts but one had to stick his arm out the window.

[@bat2293]

They don't even allow that at Disneyland. How many times have you heard, "keep your hands and arms inside the vehicle until the ride comes to a complete stop"?

[@colinfield981]

I’m sure it’s just a bell shaped curve expression

[@theophrastusbombastus8019]

@@colinfield981 that or the bell shaped curve is Bill's stomach after eating too much ISS lasagna and now we have to force him inside the Soyuz with a plunger.

[@tomgidden]

Well, at least they weren’t trying to fit 95% of all astronauts into one Soyuz, like an orbital clown car.

[@colinfield981]

Theophrastus Bombastus errrr thanks for that image!

[@praveenneevarp4822]

1991: "hey, let's use a Soyuz as an emergency return ship" 2011 onwards: Soyuz is the only ship available to send humans to space itself.

[@Skunkwurx]

Ya have to give the Soyuz props, its the little space craft that could.

[@balticpagan1495]

@@Skunkwurx its pretty huge

[@gdwnet]

@@Skunkwurx could and still does. Soyuz MS-10 was quite impressive even though it was a rare Soyuz failure

[@gavinmartin3762]

well not the only, you do have the Chinese shenzou although the odds of anyone outside of china flying one of them is near impossible

[@maxk4324]

@@gdwnet You and I might see that as an example of the Soyuz booster failing, but the astronauts who made it back unscathed might argue it was an example of the Soyuz abort system working flawlessly. Also it was the first time that specific abort mode was actually put to use, so now we have more reliability data on its performance.

[@AsbestosMuffins]

"And canada would provide a robotic arm." and what a fine robotic arm its been

[@Xatzimi]

Thanks Canada!

[@Jameson1776]

Nothing like extending an arm for a friendly hand shake. Ehh?

[@manofsan]

it's aboot specialization

[@mr.boomguy]

@@Jameson1776 You could say, they have a helping 'hand'

[@TheZoltan-42]

Canada: "Hi! Can I help?" USA: "Sure! Gimme a hand!"

[@the_puzzle3412]

I love the logic behind "Titan 3C would be very expensive so let's use the shuttle."

[@nardgames]

The_Puzzle per launch titan 3c was a good bit more expensive.

[@the_puzzle3412]

@@nardgames by my calculation Titan's cost per launch would be $159 million in 2020s USD while the shuttle's cpl would be $514 million.

[@RubenKelevra]

@@the_puzzle3412 yes, but the titan could not carry two plus a full crew in the cockpit with supplies.

[@parkershaw8529]

@@RubenKelevra The last time I checked, 160*3 still smaller than 514.

[@RubenKelevra]

@@parkershaw8529 IIRC the Titan IIIC wasn't human rated, there would have been some changes beeing made before they could launch humans in the capsules. Additionally this calculations also doesn't take into account that the capsules need to be serviced on the ground. How you're supposed to bring them back for service? 🤔

[@wallyhall]

Auto-subtitles: hallo, it’s skull manly here...

[@TheAziz]

"using osoyoos"

[@Nowhereman10]

Or it's correct and Scott died and became an undead lich.

[@DreamsCatcher101]

Got mistaken because of his shiny head

[@francoisleveille409]

Kumon Skot. Yew shud pey atenshun fur handeykapped peepl. Wee haftohaf ledjibl sobtitlz!

[@Ladco77]

It couldn't handle "Scott" but it did correctly show "Mikhail Gorbachev". LOL

[@mattdumbrill8324]

The space shuttle was basically like one of my projects. I starts out being really cool and kinda affordable, but when you start looking into it, there is wayyyy more to it than you think, then you eventually give up once you have spent too much money.

[@TheZoltan-42]

Project Matryoshka: Put somebody in a Soyuz, in a Shuttle and wrap it with the ISS.

[@Ugly_German_Truths]

Sounds more like Operation Turducken?

[@stainlesssteelfox1]

No, you put the Space Shuttle in an extended payload fairing on top of a Sea Dragon (the diameter of the Sea Dragon was 23 m, the same as the Shuttle wingspan, though the top 6 m of the tail-fin would poke out of the side fairing). The fairing would also accomodate the Shuttle External tank, though the Sea Dragon had a payload to LEO of only 550 tons, so the ET could only be half full). Then you mount the Sea Dragon on a huge Project Orion Nuclear Pulse Vehicle (the Sea Dragon weighed 18 kT, but an Orion pusher-plate design could theoretically be built big enough to lift one). To push the absurdity further, have the paylod section be a giant water tank, so the Sea Dragon has the correct launch environment.

[@user-mp3eq6ir5b]

Zoltán Pósfai ☆ Kind of the Mission for the Soviet "Buran" to rescue the MIR then possibly "steal" certain CIA Satellites. Same plan as the USA had. We're Not that Different, really.

[@Nowhereman10]

Major oversight on your part, Scott. NASA had been looking at extending the Shuttle's ability to stay on-orbit while docked to Freedom during that time period with vehicles like ARCV and HL-20 to supplement it. The two long poles in the tent were how far down the fuel cells could be throttled to without shutting them down completely to conserve reactants and how long the nitrogen-filled tires could remain properly inflated for. The studies indicated a Shuttle could last about three months on-orbit while docked to ISS and later in 1991, Endeavour was delivered with the equipment needed to for Extended Duration Orbiter (EDO) capability of up to one full month (sadly never used) and the heavier, older Columbia was modified in 1992 to be capable of 18 day EDO missions. The other, but somewhat easier to deal with issue was automating the orbiters so that they could land completely on their own (fire the drogue chute, lower landing gear) since pilots might be too debilitated after spending 90 days in freefall to land it safely.

[@JeffreyBue_imtxsmoke]

I always thought the shuttles could stay in orbit up to thirty days.

[@Veptis]

I thought this was about how the airforce used a Shuttle to bring some Soviet satellites to US Soil and investigate it

[@icollectstories5702]

Didn't happen for reasons that are obvious. But yeah, I thought that was the topic.

[@ryccoh]

Idk there were a lot of black missions for the shuttle. More likely is they brought the Satellites into the bay and had the astronauts inspect it and then release it.

[@larryscott3982]

Oh that happened. But, if they admitted it, then they’d have to kill you.

[@larryscott3982]

They brought one down and put it back. Yeah. It’s true.

[@impguardwarhamer]

@@larryscott3982 the USAF totally would have done it if they could, but franctly sending a space shuttle to rendezvous with a soviet satelite and then steal it would be imediately obvious to even amature astronomers

[@IanMcCloghrie]

I remember the comment at the time being that Space Station Freedom had become "Space Station Fred", because with the budget cuts there wasn't enough room on the hull to paint the whole name any more. :)

[@voip001]

that reminds me of a joke; the gist of it ... A girl gets angry when she sees a tattoo on boyfriends penis read ANA, guy says take off your clothes and read it again, she does and presto ANACONDA :))

[@Don_Rodrigo44]

imagine having Scott as your dad the bed time stories must have been incredible. Dad tell us the one about soviet spacecraft inside the space shuttle again

[@Krommandant]

Scott, I cannot stress enough how great and how essential a role you play in space journalism. You are doing an awesome job, keep at it! From Canada with love!

[@darkguardian1314]

I remember some this in OMNI magazine... “By the Year 2000...” I hoped. I believed. I’ll be lucky to make a Vomit Comet trip. 🙁

[@chmeee9562]

Ahh OMNI magazine. One of the best magazines out there in the day. Great for science, speculation and fiction

[@svenblackwell4550]

Hang in there Dark , better days are commin ;)

[@JeffreyBue_imtxsmoke]

If I remember correctly, Omni was owned/published by the same folks who published Penthouse :)

[@svenblackwell4550]

@@JeffreyBue_imtxsmoke you remember correctly

[@breastmilkgaming]

Congrats on 1 million subs!

[@thomasfholland]

talkpls 👍 Yeah Scott definitely deserves a congrats for this.

[@DallinBackstrom]

The crazy thing is, it would have worked... I mean, without considering actually packing the craft in there, the shuttle bay had about 300 cubic meters of internal volume, compared to the ~42m^3 external volume of a soyuz TMA-- that's like 7 soyuz. Space shuttle was BEEG

[@gate7clamp]

An American Soyuz wow you learn something new everyday thanks Scott

[@asdfjoe123]

7:15 -- Not sure if Soyuz or Jellyfish.

[@stridermt2k]

We were fortunate enough to see what was probably a boilerplate X-38 being build at JSC during a tour in 97. I was instantly a fan and was disappointed to see it canceled. It was really cool

[@FandersonUfo]

Absolutely fascinating as always sir. Thank you.

[@perpetualscifi7734]

Scott you videos are so interesting I have to skip the ads, cause I dont want to wait. Afterwards, I refresh and let the ads run. Thanks for the great content.

[@philipkudrna5643]

As always, a very interesting video with surprising background information! Please keep doing the stuff you do!

[@Avida-l7s]

1 M subs !!!!! Let’s do a big party on the mun !

[@gravitationalassist379]

During my first few stock Space Shuttle i wondered if Soyuz can fit in a Space Shuttle... Now there is a video about it!

[@teddy.d174]

Awesome video Scott! I really enjoy hearing more little known stories like this one. 🚀

[@Blade4952]

For all it's problems (which were numerous) I still love the S0ace Shuttle. Such an iconic part of space history.

[@manofsan]

"Carry Soviet spacecraft in the Space Shuttle" - wasn't this part of the plot of Salyut-7?

[@richwaight]

Super interesting bit of space history there! :) thanks

[@user-mr1um1cg5v]

Loved that “50mm longer seat improvement” on Soyuz. A bit less torture for those fortunate enough to be small enough to fit in that original 2-seater. Thanks, Scot.

[@cyn3rgy759]

Is anyone else getting bombarded by Neil Degras Tyson's Masterclass ad anytime you watch a space video?

[@Power_DC_Official]

Ad block to the rescue!

[@newsgetsold]

If he practiced what he preaches in that ad, he should very carefully consider whether he is wrong and whether young-earth creationism, Jesus and Christianity are right.

[@brianking81]

Can't stand him

[@alphaadhito]

I'm glad I'm getting Chris Hadfield's ad and I'm actually enjoying it through the end :)

[@brianking81]

@HO LAM YIU I enjoy Chris Hadfield's too.

[@mmyesrice2522]

scott, i have been having a bit of a bad time lately, but your voice always makes me feel better. thank u

[@scottmanley]

Hope everything works out

[@mmyesrice2522]

Scott Manley :)

[@vikkimcdonough6153]

6:06 - Actually, the shuttle orbiter would have been able to glide to a landing site even well outside those boundaries, due to its ridiculously-high crossrange capability. (Otherwise - to give an example - it wouldn't have been able to land at Edwards AFB [latitude 34.91°] from a 28-29°-inclination orbit, and yet the orbiters did just that, _twenty-six_ separate times; the first mission to do this was STS-4 in July 1982, and the last was STS-125 in May 2009.)

[@nowhereman1046]

Before the ISS-era, missions returning from 28.5 degree inclinations or even 39 degree ones often overflew the lower continental U.S. on the way back to landings at Kennedy Space Center.

[@camtron0]

Thank you Scott for sharing this fascinating bit of history! Cheers

[@dazuk1969]

I think the overriding message here is that space does not have borders like countries, and it does not discriminate between people. Space should be a place a unites people. When that happens, wonderful things happen...likes the ISS....Peace.

[@tonykriss1594]

Ironically in a way you could say there is a border on the ISS.

[@dazuk1969]

@@tonykriss1594 Hey T, yeah, i know mate...i came over all hippy in that post...the battle for Space superiority is a very real one unfortunately....now if you will excuse me i am gonna listen to louis Armstrong it's a wonderful world 😉..Peace brother.

[@stardolphin2]

I've sometimes wondered if it could, I never knew it had been seriously considered...

[@NoNameAtAll2]

9:34 g in "ener *G* ia" is same as in word " *G* ravity"

[@t65bx25]

I always said it like Scott. Thanks for the correction!

[@NoNameAtAll2]

@Prowler Cam jraphical image format

[@phoen-gr7914]

those Greek words... are everywhere. And its not Homer its OOmeeros.

[@Name-nw9uj]

That sounds wrong and weird. "EnerGEEia"

[@Pintuuuxo]

The Soyuz spacecraft has been a wonderful vessel but fortunately soon it will no longer be the only one. Dragon 2 and Starliner will join the Soyuz and I hope that Dream Chaser joins them too. Thank you Scott for talking about the Space Shuttle. We miss it.

[@canadianragin]

To this day, Australia remains reserved for landing space stations

[@JeffreyBue_imtxsmoke]

I remember the days of Space Station Freedom very well. Then came the Challenger disaster and the STS not living up to the hype of bringing down launch costs. Still.. it was exciting times.

[@jackalovski1]

Soyuz TMA: Too Many Astronauts

[@dylanwebster2656]

Congrats on 1 mil!!!!

[@jimmycen7498]

The Russian actually proposed a special Soyuz "lifeboat" for the space station Freedom. Which enlarge the return capsule to accommodate 7 crews, use cold gas for RCS and replace the whole service modules with small solid rocket pack for deorbiting. This will be launch by the space shuttle and in theory it can stay on orbit indefinitely.

[@347Jimmy]

What you're describing sounds nothing like a Soyuz, and everything like a TKS Quite a different return vehicle Tested by the Soviets but never actively used

[@HalNordmann]

​@@347Jimmy It might, but it was an entirely separate project.

[@347Jimmy]

@@HalNordmann true. There were definitely proposals at one point for a bunch of Soyuz by NASA, I wouldn't be shocked if there was a separate proposal involving TKS modules (given the number of different proposals for both US stations and potential ways to use leftover TKSs, it seems likely)

[@pentagramprime1585]

5:18 Scott measures everything relative to Kerbals.

[@user-mp3eq6ir5b]

pentagramprime ☆ General Soleimani's Funeral was held on Kerman. Just saying.

[@agenericaccount3935]

Enjoying the Soyuz parachute going wukawukawukawuka

[@steve1978ger]

1:52 - very space. so capsule. wow.

[@conall9415]

6:58, Look at that parachute wobble! I don't know why it does that but it looks cool!

[@erlichbachman3330]

Thank you for making this great content!

[@purpleloco1]

Damn Scott. That was a really spectacular run down.

[@problemat1que]

1:23 - "Ima spread over here so I look bigger - wait, my arm is suddenly super heavy" XD

[@muzzamemes3657]

such a shame this never happened, would've been the coolest thing ever, and would have been plausible to launch two soyuzes in one shuttle as each spacecraft only weighs about 7 tonnes, with the maximum payload size being 29 tonnes, also meaning that the shuttle would be able to carry them back down to earth in order to be reused, as the landing payload mass of the shuttle was somewhere around 18 tonnes think.

[@jamestrexler6329]

Hah! AERSP 401 at Penn State? Well, that beat my project for the class, our group did a feasibility study for a lunar orbital refueling platform and mining base. Our results weren't great for the mining base at the time... Fun to see what they had been doing in the class 23 years prior...

[@grayks364]

Had all of these station plans fallen through, would space exploration have stalled, or would we have returned to the moon sooner?

[@rohanpotdar908]

Commercial trips like SpaceX? Sooner. But plans for a long-term habitat like LOPG would never have been possible without all the biological and systems data from the ISS across the past twenty years.

[@MrJob91]

Moon? U mean mars?

[@andrewreynolds9371]

Would we have returned to the Moon sooner? No, there wouldn't be a space program, and without NASA coughing up the big bucks, there wouldn't be any 'private' spaceflight development either.

[@st4rlightr4v3n4]

@@KuK137 I mean, the bankers and oil barons are wrapped up in that too. War is business for them, and they wouldn't undercut themselves. The money comes out of social programs, the sciences, and the poor.

[@mikedicenso2778]

@@rohanpotdar908 SpaceX might never have existed or just plain gone bankrupt without the ISS CRS contract it got in 2007 following three consecutive failures of its Falcon 1 rockets. Elon Musk and Shotwell as well as other SpaceX alumni have admitted this many times. So while not perfect, the cause and effect that got us SpaceX and Blue Origin today paving a new trail in commercial spaceflight might never have happened but for the way that it did.

[@AirCommandRockets]

Congratulations on the 1 Million Subs! :)

[@h.cedric8157]

Effectively the plot in the Russian Film Salyut 7.

[@piyh3962]

I thought that film was complete trash that left so much potential on the table, but turns out that Cosmonauts saluting Astronauts from their separate spacecraft wasn't out of the question. Surviving a blazing inferno on a space station on the other hand.....

[@mytube001]

Scott Manley, do you think it would be possible to "overload" a Soyuz return capsule in an emergency, to bring one extra person back? Obviously, that person wouldn't be strapped in, and it would at the very least be uncomfortable, but is it even physically possible? And are there life support limits that would make it unlikely or impossible?

[@LordGryllwotth]

It's a interesting question. The seats collapse during the touchdown. Maybe the person can be back there without a suit and climb up and lay across all 3 before it lands?

[@DemosIoannou]

the seats in Soyuz , they have absorbers and they move to accommodate the impact . Plus the seats are literally custom made for every astronaut . Also they take balance into account . You can see the bellow video in 17:45 . (see all the full video , also there are 3 parts , this is the 3rd) kzbin.info/www/bejne/Y52afoBvrtSrf6s Life Support you mean like oxygen water and food ? (Normally they return in 6 hours now, so even in extreme cases , they have enough supplies , even if they land in the middle of Siberia) So i believe they are not a problem . Now , in the video , if you remove the load , and strap or tie someone ... i dont know , as the astronaut said , is an impact , a small car his a truck and you are in the small car . So a bad restrained guy is bad thing. Lets say , only if the other options are really really terrible !

[@FalconWing1813]

Sure do miss seeing the Space Shuttle docking with the space station. Overall yes its retiring has help spur private space development. But going from a space plane, back to capsules is going back wards. That would be like retiring all the planes in the air and traveling only by train. Being the year 2020 we should be taking the millennium falcon to the ISS. But thats another conversation. Thank fully Space X now has fully re-usable rockets that can land them selves and is clearly trying to make advancements in the way we do things. If I had all the money in the world , I would like to see Space X make the Space Shuttle with today's technology.

[@peteranderson037]

I don't know what it is about those opening shots of the Space Station Freedom model, but the first thing that popped into my head when I saw them was "In the not too distant future. Next Sunday, A.D...."

[@cl4ster17]

5:00 Kerbal for size comparison

[@BillySugger1965]

Hi Scott, I note that the preposition used with the word orbit has changed recently, I’m curious. Until recently, in astrophysics, a body was described as being “in an orbit” about another, (or more precisely in joint orbits around a common barycentre. In recent months however, I have heard the term “on orbit” increasingly used, particularly with respect to commercial assets orbiting Earth. And in this video in particular, you’ve made extensive use of the phrase. What is the reason for the change? Why have you started using it? Is there a particular distinction between “in orbit” and “on orbit”, or now the prospect of commercial utilisation to space has become a reality, has this become the latest ghastly incarnation of trendy management speak? Pray do tell!

[@dsdy1205]

Maybe engineers are more concerned with solving actual problems in spaceflight than quibbling over grammar.

[@jeremiahdauphinais7186]

Congrats on the 1 MILLION SCOTT MANLEY!

[@compelledpluto]

Lol I clicked on the video thinking that they were gonna use the shuttle to kidnap a soviet craft from space to study it

[@janbormans3913]

One of your best videos so far!

[@Patchuchan]

Axing the X-38 was dumb as they probably could have evolved it into a crew transfer vehicle.

[@cyphi474]

2:01 The were even thinking where can cosmonauts store hats! Save the Hats!

[@joostdriesens3984]

It's cold in space, so when you leave the station, it's good to wear a hat.

[@user-mp3eq6ir5b]

Cyphi ☆ Russians being respectful to Future Texan Astronauts!

[@yashizuko]

NPO Energia, that reminds me of the Buran, that was a beautiful machine , probably ahead of its time!

[@randomnickify]

It was as useless as the shuttle, in the end you are wasting carload of fuel to put up 100 ton orbiter with measly 30 tons of cargo overpaying 3 times. At least shuttle was able to reuse its engines, Buran was throwing out entire expensive energia rocket.

[@randomnickify]

@NaN true, but why waste that capability to launch useless 100 ton orbiter instead ...well.. I don know... 100 tons of actual cargo?!

[@alex_inside]

@@randomnickify the Energija Was relatively cheap the only fancy thing being the RD 170, which is the most powerful to ket engine ever created. There where plans to reuse the booster by adding wings to it and landing it. You got a Cheaper shuttle with more pyaloade capability and a 100t launch vehicle in one.

[@yashizuko]

Alex_Inside yeah I remember the booster wings too, the whole thing combined with the unmanned landing (if I remember correctly) and the beauty of the energia with its boosters, it has a special place in my mind!

[@thomasackerman5399]

@NaN Shuttle-C or other similar Shuttle-derived vehicles could do the same.

[@cormacmccarthy2978]

"8 seconds ago" okay *click*

[@skyebrennan2299]

The video: 29min old. This comment: 30min old.

[@jamesdriscoll9405]

1M subscribers : Congratulations!

[@YossiRafelson]

I had this idea when they were doing the last service mission to Hubble. Fly the shuttle there with a Soyuz and then leave the shuttle up there in hibernation mode and fly home in the Soyuz. Then years down the road when it comes time to service or retire Hubble, fly back up there and turn the shuttle back on.

[@randomnickify]

At that point thermal stress would tear the shuttle apart, hardware that stays in space have to be designed to stay in space.

[@gate7clamp]

What ever happen to the X-38 prototype where’s it at now if anyone knows tell me

[@Mario_N64]

Cancelled due to budget cuts in 2002 by the Bush administration.

[@fractalelf7760]

Always interesting to me that the shuttle never had a cargo bay option that allowed it to stay up longer with a crew for say 3 months- all that space seems like a easy way to use it as a 3-6 month space station effectively...

[@HalNordmann]

There was no need for it - plus, that would reduce the flight rate even further

[@stephenirwin2761]

Once again Scott nailed it!

[@jeffpkamp]

Not gonna lie, riding in one of those soyuze capsules for more than 30 minutes (like the time it takes to get up to the space station) is one of my top nightmare scenarios. Like being fired out of a cannon in a coffin with two other people for multiple days straight. Or maybe just a road trip from hell.

[@teflonpan115]

This was an interesting project plan. Of all the things I've read over the years about space exploration, I must have missed this one. With all the money that the US had, it still didn't have enough funds for a space station NASA required. How is mars landing ever supposed to happen...

[@johncnorris]

Nice bit of Space History!

[@jull1234]

Soyuz, Land Safe!

[@steveshoemaker6347]

Thanks again...Scott..!

[@deusexaethera]

Why is it that the robotic arms are always provided by Canada? Why is that their niche?

[@thundercactus]

It was 1981 and robots were new. We had designed a robot arm to load and unload fuel rods from our CANDU nuclear reactors, which apparently attracted NASA's attention as a manipulator arm was on the table as a core component of the space shuttle program. Apparently we did such a bang-up job on the first one, they had us build the Canadarm2 for the ISS and we're going to build the Canadarm3 for Gateway. Plus it's probably one of the least expensive components we can contribute lol

[@Mical2001]

I imagined this as the US just taking all of the Soviet's spacecrafts back to Earth. Just like "you can't win the space race if we don't let you stay in space" lol

[@caonabo2]

I saw this in the Russian Salyut 6 movie. The rescue of that Space station was incredible and amazing!

[@juliap.5375]

Actually directories of movie are freaks and by unknown reason added a lot of bullshit. By that reasons cosmonauts even deny to use they real names in this move. But in general something like that. Poor based on true story.

[@caonabo2]

@@juliap.5375 I respectfully disagree. I was 17 years old in 1985 when this ordeal happened, and the movie sticks mostly to the truth. By that time, Russians called their cosmonauts by numbers, because it was easier than by name. The repair crew members were Vladimir Dzhanibekov (mission commander) and Victor Savinikh (Flight engineer). I don't know where do you get they did not want their names to be mentined when they were heroes and as badass as badass could be. The maneuvering required to manually dock with a 3 axis rotating moving non responsive and nonenergizrd object in spsce its really complicated, plus all the other risks they had to take and situations to overcome, place the repair of Salyut 7 on the top of the list of space heroism. There have been many other space heroes, like Scotty Musgrave, who is one of my favourite astronauts, for the repairs he made to the hubble telescope. Also is Neil Armstrong, for the docking of the Gemini and Agena that almost killed them. The astronauts Charles Conrad, Paul Weitz and Joseph Kerwin, that fixed and saved the Skylab space station, were badasses too, and so were Gene Cernan and Aleksei Leonóv with their amazing EVA. But my most admired space hero is Valentina Tereshkova. Look up her flight story, and you will see what it means to be a badass!

[@aaroncawsey7892]

Weird thought. I found two conjoined Cadbury Mini Eggs and the first thing I thought of was Scott and 486958 Arrokoth (Ultimate Thule)

[@pyroslavx7922]

Why could Space Shuttle not be modified to be able to stay in orbit for loger time??? Like include more insulated tanks for cryogenic fuels and heatpumps/refrigeration, and perhaps photovoltaic panels in payload bay?

[@user-mp3eq6ir5b]

aaannnddd, Russia just happened to have an extra "Zvezda" module sitting around, which forms the Central Module of the ISS

[@kargaroc386]

Built in the USSR in the 80's as part of the Mir 2 station Really it was probably the backup module for the Mir core block just in case that one exploded

[@thundercactus]

They also had a warehouse full of millions of dollars worth of old NK33 rocket engines that happened to be some of the most advanced engines in the world

[@Idk-du1tt]

1.000.000 subs congratulations :)

[@peesweezy4553]

Congratulations! 1 Mil subs

[@darkguardian1314]

I did this as a kid with models but used Apollo capsule in the cargo bay. 🙂

[@CyberSamurai4Life]

Thank you Scott!

[@AubriGryphon]

FWIW, anything that passes by 1 vote means there were plenty of reps who wanted to pass it, but doing so was unpopular so they decided who would pass it and who would be able to tell their constituents, "Well, ~I~ voted against it!"

[@Vidz0022]

Everybody: Wonder what's going on with space right now. Scott: Let's talk about 1992...

[@SUPERHEAVYBOOSTER]

Congrats on 1M!

[@guardrailbiter]

Soviet Rocket Scientists: "Ugh! Is easier to only send midgets to space than redesign ship."

[@craigmcdonald4988]

I love every Scott Manley video

[@moosemaimer]

1:49 if you look closely you can see Bill & Bob screaming

[@michaelsdenney]

Seriously, a life boat. This seems to put the nail in the coffin that Space Shuttle program was flawed.

[@FragGile]

Great video thanks!

[@LeonRamkumar]

What a machine the Soyuz is.

[@edwinrobert7192]

No-one: Jellyfish in spongebob: 7:08

[@preiter20]

Why could the space shuttle on stay in orbit for 30 days? Radiation shielding/issues?

[@lowereducation6631]

I'm guessing fuel cell endurance

[@EDEPole]

Consumables for the astronauts (CO2 scrubbers, oxygen and stuff like that)

[@preiter20]

Thanks for the replies!!

[@nowhereman1046]

NASA did study having the Shuttle orbiters stay on-orbit for missions of up to three months in order to have a spacecraft always on standby. There were even tests done on Shuttle missions where the fuel cells were throttled down to conserve power and reactants while docked to Freedom. Later, the use of the Extended Duration Orbiter kits and power transfer from station to orbiter would supplement that. The big issues were as follows: 1. Tire staying properly inflated. Three months was thought to be about the limit for the nitrogen-filled tires and work was being done to see if they could stay at a safe pressure for longer periods. 2. Automated landings. While the Shuttle had an autoland system, it could not fire the drogue chute or lower landing gear. That required special modifications, but was doable and necessary since pilots might be too debilitated by being in zero G for so long. The EDO kits were made part of the Shuttle fleet, but only on Columbia and Endeavour. Endeavour had the capability to stay for up to 30 days in space with a Spacelab or Spacehab, but that was never made use of since some in NASA thought that it would be seen as too competitive the space station. Automated landings were going to be tested and STS-53 was earmarked for it in 1992, but the test was cancelled, allegedly because the astronaut didn't like the possibility that this would lead to totally automated Shuttles with no crew.

[@spaceactivistarchive4180]

Did NASA ever go back and look at the concept of inflatable life boats that were being designed for the MOL program in the 1960s?

[@redstone51]

Bring back the Shuttle Orbiter! It would have been a great lunar or Mars vehicle. I pity the astronauts being cooped up for 6 months in the present designed vehicle.

[@Reactordrone]

1:49 It's a hitchhiker module with a heat shield.

[@jamest.5001]

What type batteries did they use? What type is used now in space?