How NASA Learned To Fly The Space Shuttle Like A Glider

[@JaccovanSchaik]

"Enterprise had gone to places in the flight envelope that no Shuttle had gone before." Very smooth, Mr. Manley.

[@ascii892]

you might say it had boldly gone where no shuttle had gone before.

[@adamkerman475]

@@ascii892 aaaaand ya ruined it

[@CryptoTonight9393]

had me laughing for a good minute

[@mikecrownshaw1646]

Let history never forget the name Enterprise

[@brianarbenz7206]

And most logical, Mr. Manley .

[@Aengus42]

I once heard an air crash investigator say that "Oh shit!" was THE most frequent phrase heard on flight deck recorders just before impact. So those pilots DEFINITELY had their hands full with that shuttle at that point! And the guy with the "Let go of the stick Luke, use the Force!" advice needs a medal! Talk about calm under fire!

[@terryboyer1342]

Les Hemmings I heard the most frequent phrase was "Oh f*ck!" Not that it makes much difference.

[@warrenwhite9085]

The Shuttle launch & reentry were flown by computer because they required precision far beyond human capabilities.. NASA disallowed the much easier computer landing so there could be no unmanned shuttle flights, & so deliberately unnecessarily risked human lives to haul groceries up & waste back at 10 times the cost of commercial boosters. NASA’s shuttle was the most dangerous, unaffordable & unreliable space vehicle in history.

[@allanchurm]

rolled about laughing on the use the force Luke bit..

[@johnarnold893]

@@warrenwhite9085 I once read that an astronaut described the Shuttle as a "Butterfly riding a Bullet".

[@221b-l3t]

That's how I recover the Su25 in DCS lol. Just let go of the stick, the aircraft knows how to fly better than me haha.

[@giantnanomachine]

Test pilots are a different breed. Imagine joining a "digital fly by wire" NASA test program and being told "we're going to make your plane fly terrible in lots of different ways so we can figure out which ones are worst".

[@lordgarion514]

The size of their balls aside, I suspect people like them love figuring out complicated problems in general. And there was plenty of complicated to go around.

[@221b-l3t]

@@lordgarion514 Also certain personalities tend to end up as test pilots. Many famous test pilots from back in the day wouldn't pass a medical exam today.

[@AntonFetzer]

As a glider pilot, I felt physically sick when I saw the oscilatting fly by wire test flight scene in this video. That must be absolutely terrifying to fly, because your intuition leads you to make the oscillation worse. You need to focus and think about how to control the thing, but if stuff gets out of hand you don't have the time for that. When shit hits the fan any human pilot relies on his muscle memory first, then his experience and then logic.

[@lordgarion514]

@@221b-l3t Yeah, thrill seeking adrenaline junkies with above average intelligence probably shouldn't be flying planes.

[@jfan4reva]

@@AntonFetzer Indeed! Most videos I've seen where the aircraft did that ended in an orange fireball.

[@billhensley5922]

Interesting that Shuttle's automated landing system took several iterations to get right. Makes it more amazing that the one flight of Buran was unmanned and landed successfully. I wonder what their development program looked like.

[@scheve332]

Very simple: In Mother Russia you don't land Buran, Buran lands you.

[@benjaminchung991]

Buran had a whole test flight campaign for their automatic landing system, using the vehicle-integrated jet engines; while it only flew to space once, it flew (in the atmosphere) as part of its flight test campaign 24 times.

[@jeshkam]

Buran had half a little of vodka. Russian way to calm down the nerves.

[@briancorrigan5350]

Copy & Paste?

[@ValentineC137]

@@plane_guy6051 yea they did the entire automated orbital flight perfectly the first try, but the landing, oh no they probably lied about that

[@jasonatr0n]

It never fails to amaze me seeing the shuttle on top of a 747. It just looks like it shouldn't be possible. Brilliant engineering

[@sproctor1958]

One morning, going down our driveway to take my son to school, we saw the Shuttle on its 747 transport flying low (couple thousand feet) turning towards the Cape for a delivery from Edwards. We live about 90 miles away... and it was "cool" to see. We still talk about it sometimes.

[@teyton90]

@@sproctor1958 jesus, what an experience. you were chosen

[@sproctor1958]

@@teyton90 Yep. 25 or 30 seconds of it flying by low and slow. What a rush! Then it was gone. Never saw it again. But I still "believe" in it! It IS real!

[@googee3]

Is this technically a biplane?

[@Wigash]

@@googee3 🤣

[@SaucyAlfredo]

"Ah shit" Not what you wanna hear from your test pilot

[@tarmaque]

_Any_ pilot.

[@danieljensen2626]

I suspect it happens a fair amount though. I mean they're testing for a reason.

[@esepecesito]

@@tarmaque Specially if you are onboard...

[@aaronwells6608]

As Scott pointed out, he was forced to fight the computer for control in front of a crowd of VIPs. And it's not like a shuttle gets a second attempt. It'd get an aw shit out of me as well lol.

[@triton6490]

😭😭

[@mlnrtms]

Kind of smooth landing for a brick tbh...

[@Flevvers]

Ground effect is a helluva drug

[@SpartanNat]

For a brick, it flew pretty good.

[@mlnrtms]

@@SpartanNat A very gracious fall 😁 (for most of the way at least)

[@codefeenix]

The ship hung in the sky in much the same way that bricks don't.

[@gordonstewart5774]

After it's double sonic boom, it fell like a brick the time I was there. The most dangerous thing on the runway would be a stray alligator.

[@CuriousMarc]

You gotta love that AGC controlled F-8 with the DSKY hanging off to the side. I always have a chuckle with that.

[@FlyNAA]

I knew about the AGC F-8, but had no idea about the DSKY in there!

[@nzoomed]

That would have to be the last time NASA ever operated an AGC?

[@CuriousMarc]

@@nzoomed I'd have to double check with Mike but I think this is correct.

[@nzoomed]

@@CuriousMarc would be interesting to find out. I didn't think any were used past the Skylab era!

[@foximacentauri7891]

Could you explain those abbreviations? Google won’t give me any useful answers.

[@sandrotanganelli5521]

Amazing that the Shuttle would come down at a 20° (compared to 3° of an airliner) and yet be able to flare and hover like that over the runway and even need a parachute to timely complete rotation to the ground. Great coverage!

[@allthingsbing1295]

And yet on tv it looks like the approach of a commercial airliner. The shuttle broke laws of physics

[@michaelbrownlee9497]

Ground effect.

[@Quicksilver_Cookie]

@@allthingsbing1295 No it didn't.

[@daniell1869]

@@Quicksilver_Cookie english not your first language huh bud

[@TheJustinJ]

Its poor lift/drag ratio is partly due to its low aspect ratio wing. When within approximately 1/2 or 1/4 wing-span of the ground, the surface limits downwash angle and therefore erases much of the lift-induced drag. In short: ground effect improves efficiency.

[@robertharvey6725]

Having done a bunch of glider landings, that looked pretty darn good, particularly given the landing speed

[@TheScoobysteve]

I was gonna say, I've bounced a Cessna 172 way higher than that.

[@allen_p]

A flying manhole cover. He did great.

[@59thfsaviation79]

@@TheScoobysteve Same. Multiple times!

[@DroneViral]

same!

[@ZWD2011]

Glider pilot here, too: plus the scary glide ratio, poor manouvrability, and a long final from space! Hats off and a deep bow.

[@ccchhhrrriiisss100]

I once spoke with a NASA astronaut. I asked him about the differences between piloting a military jet and the shuttle. He went over several differences. The most important difference, he explained, is that you only get ONE CHANCE to land the shuttle (even if something goes wrong). He said that this means that you're obviously making every effort to get it right -- but prepared for any number of possible issues.

[@ArathirCz]

There is an absolutely fantastic video describing how to land a Space shuttle - "How to Land the Space Shuttle... from Space" - on the "Space Scope" channel

[@MaxR.]

...as with every glider. Every glider pilot knows that there is just one landing

[@dylantowers9367]

No option to abort the landing and fly around for another go. No option to eject. One shot one landing.

[@onebronx]

@@MaxR. regular gliders can make couple of approaches and go-arounds (not last-second ones of course) due to their extremely high lift-to-drag ratio, especially with a ground effect (kzbin.info/www/bejne/roW4nKqGadOifbs )

[@hoghogwild]

@@dylantowers9367 They could eject during all the ALT with Enterprise and for teh first 4 test missions, STS-1 through STS-4.

[@glennpearson9348]

"Flying manhole cover." That was a side-splitter! Well done, Scott.

[@jfan4reva]

You know you're going to be flying a steep glide path vehicle when the trainer has to have thrust reversers engaged for practice landings.

[@seanys]

I'm crying! 🤣🤣😂🤣

[@PrinceAlhorian]

No nukes required.

[@dw300]

The flying manhole cover got to space though! Well, maybe..

[@NoewerrATall]

I'm sure Gulfstream was thrilled to find out about NASA's mods.

[@unwanted_zombie]

"For a brick, he flew pretty good" -sgt Johnson

[@thorvaldg.tveitereid8076]

Hype for Halo infinte

[@EclipseClemens]

Excellent reference

[@loturzelrestaurant]

@@EclipseClemens Random question: Mind if i recommend you, a random fellow Science-Fan, some Education-Channel and Science-Channel, just because the Learning never ends and for no other reason?

[@EclipseClemens]

@@loturzelrestaurant sure

[@loturzelrestaurant]

@@EclipseClemens Cool.

[@luxornv6685]

I love how calm he was with that "ah shit" on the bad landing. It was like he dropped a pen rather than messed up the landing that could have ended worse than it did.

[@fastfiddler1625]

I can only imagine what these early fly by wire systems felt like. After thousands of hours in traditional planes, my first A320 sim lesson was rough; I was constantly chasing the plane. My second flight was perfect after I really took home that "less is more" when flying those. In a normal plane, you're used to constantly working to keep the airplane where you want it, especially in slower flight; you learn to feel the plane and almost react before the plane even starts rolling left because of some turbulence. In FBW, and particularly the airbus, it's quite the opposite. You use the controls to tell the airplane where you want it to go. It's super easy to create PIO (pilot induced oscillation) if you're trying to fly it like a regular plane. This is partially because there's a bit of a lag between you and the flight controls. So what you perceive as the plane getting pushed in a left roll, the airplane already knows and is doing something and then it sees your input to roll right and it thinks, ok he wants to go right, so suddenly you're over to the right instead of level. Granted I am NOT a test pilot and I'm sure these guys knew quite well what to expect. But in a traditional plane that might have some aerodynamic quirk, you kind of learn the feel quickly and go, ok, that's what I'm dealing with. Where in FBW, you're left with the classic question: what is it doing now? Or why is it doing that?

[@0MoTheG]

That is why the suggestion was to let go of the stick. The control system does not have enough authority to meet any input. Humans tend to update twice per second in a "dead beat" fashion leading to a 1 Hz oscillation. An impatient human will try to generate a faster response by larger input.

[@JamesJoseph-u1y]

Flying a FBW flight control airplane is more like “flying” a spacecraft. Very different than a conventional jet as much of the aerodynamic feel and feedback you get from a conventional flight control system is absent.

[@LuLeBe]

Funny that you found it so difficult. Did you have a type rating on another aircraft before? When I was in a 320 sim, it felt as stable as it gets. I can’t follow your PIO observations at all. I do see what you mean by it feeling a bit sluggish, but then again you can yank it full nose-up (or rather max G) with very little force.

[@77leelg]

I met Fred Haise at Spacefest in 2016 and we talked for a long time. He was the nicest person you would ever want to meet. A perfect gentleman. He shared some great Apollo 13 memories.

[@phyzzx22]

I met him once too, at the "Apollo 11" movie. Very nice guy. He said the highlight of his career was doing the Shuttle test flights, because they proved that it could work.

[@jamesrobinson1214]

What a memory. I was 10 years old visiting my grandparents house. This was back when adults had complete control over the one television in the house, and they were not interested in space stuff. Fortunately, there was an eight in black & white set in the camper. I had the opportunity to watch the shuttle leave the back of the carrier aircraft, and do its landing. Very exciting, even on such a tiny screen.

[@devilsoffspring5519]

I'm never gonna understand that, but I know it happens a lot. What the heck else would you rather watch on TELEVISION, for crying out loud, instead of your country's pinnacle of achievement?

[@dangerpea108]

@@devilsoffspring5519 probably watching All in the family like everyone was back then 🤣😂

[@CJ_102]

So much respect for the unreal amount of math, engineering and good organisation to make all that work back then

[@jimlthor]

And the balls on those pilots. Those guys had to be living their dream

[@benbaselet2026]

Not to mention a fair chunk of luck :)

[@atoka2206]

And all that math was done by people

[@MICHAEL-vy3ch]

The "forgotten shuttle", Pathfinder, was used to measure clearances and mounting brackets so that Enterprise wouldn't be damaged. Made of steel, fiberglass, and plywood, it didn't actually have a name until it was rebuilt as a display vehicle. It is currently on display at the Huntsville Space and Rocket center.

[@darekmistrz4364]

Makes sense. I was wondering why they were using actual shuttle construction when basically a foam and plywood would give same results (except weight testing)

[@lordcroussette]

ah yes, OV-98, my favourite

[@louisloizides7488]

Given how fast that shuttle must be going when it touches down, I think it’s a great landing. I fly a C150 and if I’m even a tiny bit faster than my normal landing I’ll bounce too.

[@Tryinglittleleg]

Yep! Same in my grob G115

[@ad_akp1662]

Honest comment!

[@coffee8814]

they just have higher standards then, this is why theyre integral to history and youre just a pilot its absolutely awful for them

[@JeffreyBue_imtxsmoke]

This is a great example of why flight testing is so important to aircraft development. I'm always amazed at the amount of research you put in to these videos Scott. Great work as usual.

[@buckmaster3594]

Do your due diligence Jeff, this is antique technology. OPERATION PAPERCLIP initiated the process of anti-grav propulsion. Admiral Byrd was beaten bad by the German hold out in Antarctica. Operation High Jump.

[@cbspock1701]

I read in “Into the black” that the bounce actually gave the landing gear team info that they couldn’t capture from the previous landings

[@jfan4reva]

"Non-destructive testing."

[@DrWhom]

still it was not intentional I don't imagine

[@darrenbrashaw8409]

Great book, all of Mr White's are worth a read!

[@dandeprop]

Hi Scott--Very Well Done! I got into the program about 1 year after these tests were completed. I'd like to make a note here if I may-- With the tail cone on, glide time was 5 1/2 minutes, with the tail cone off it was 2 1/2 minutes. Quite a change!

[@pommiebears]

You read as important. You got into the program? My son has just joined the airforce, and he isn’t even flying. He’s an armament technician. I’m worried sick about him lol. I can’t imagine the things you have seen and experienced. Takes guts to do this, and I admire it immensely. Just a question, isn’t the cone supposed to facilitate, assist, in aerodynamics? Yet, it was 3 minutes quicker without the cone.

[@dandeprop]

@@pommiebears Hi Pommie: Please understand, I didn't fly the vehicle. Thank you for the kind words, but nothing I did took any real 'guts'. The worst that can happen to a Test Conductor or Flight Director is that he/she might fall out of their chair. Regarding the tail cone--in the beginning of this program there was great uncertainty as to what flow over the base area of the vehicle would do. The presence of the engine bells greatly complicated this situation. And in fact one of the biggest reasons for the tail cone was due to uncertainty as to the 'dynamic environment' that the Orbiter base flow would induce to the 747 carrier aircraft. Since the flow over the Orbiter base also tended to flow over the 747's tail, there was FUD (that's space talk for 'Fear, Uncertainty, and Doubt'...) as to how much this would influence the 747's yaw stability. After the 1st captive flight without the tail cone, the 747 crew was quoted as saying something to the effect of 'We don't want to do anything like that again!' I think there were structural modifications to the 747, as well as modifications to its flight control system after that. Wow: this stuff was a long time ago! Thank you very much.

[@314159265352]

Its enough that it lands.. coming from that high up! Don't judge it by its landing.

[@Roonasaur]

As long as everyone gets to walk away, it's a success to pretty much every one.

[@louskunt9798]

Exactly!

[@fork9001]

@@Roonasaur Not if the orbiter is damaged

[@kingfisher7960]

Nowadays that nothing....SpaceX lands rockets...

[@djbeezy]

I was fortunate enough to be related to an astronaut and got to witness his first launch live. I got to go to another but there was an issue with one of the main engines at T-9 seconds and they had to postpone the launch for like 2 weeks and we couldn't stay in Florida to wait so we had to go home. But he is retired now and in the astronaut hall of fame. I really miss the Space Shuttle!!

[@johnboze]

Knowing someone in the Space Industry is soooo special. We saw the maiden voyage of Challenger from on base at KSC, just wow... and we saw Hurley pilot the last Shuttle Flight! We watched one of these drop test basically "live". My father was one of the techs at IBM Owego that physically built the circuit boards for the Flight Computers for all of the Space Shuttles including Enterprise. Dad worked for the father of NASA / SpaceX Astronaut Doug Hurley who lead the project for Columbia STS-1, to which Dad did contribute his craftsmanship. Dad was also a Core Memory Specialist which the Space Shuttle used for "NVRAM". Challenger's Core Memory was eventually returned to his lab in a tank of deionized water, for forensics. Years before Enterprise, Dad was the IBM DDAS Telemetry Network Controller in the Firing Room for Apollo 10, 11, 12, 16, 17, and Skylab 2, 3, and 4. Dad can actually be seen in the recent CNN film "Apollo 11" in # FiringRoom1 at his DDAS Console as the camera glides by: # ProjectApolloFilm

[@djbeezy]

@@johnboze Wow!! That is impressive. I would be curious to know more about the forensics that was done on the Challenger computer.

[@IstasPumaNevada]

I wish I could have seen a Shuttle launch, and it truly is an iconic marvel of engineering. On the other hand, I'm also glad for multiple reasons that it was retired.

[@djbeezy]

@@IstasPumaNevada It was an amazing experience to be honest. I couldn't believe how loud it was and how fast it disappeared.

[@allanchurm]

@@johnboze bless him

[@j.donaldson2758]

That digital fly-by-wire footage would be what I look like flying just about anything in KSP

[@enjibkk6850]

Reminds me learning to fly remote control aircraft all on my own

[@Oddman1980]

Many of my KSP spaceplanes tend to have a more definite and vertical descent.

[@TheAziz]

if you're playing with keyboard, it's that, either full on or off, so yeah

[@tarmaque]

That film of the F8 Crusader is _terrifying._

[@laprepper]

Yeah no kidding, that test pilot was probably not enjoying some of that craziness!

[@tarmaque]

@@laprepper My money says he had to land and spit out bits of underwear that got sucked all the way up in.

[@greenbeacon394]

“Any landing you walk away from is a good one, Any landing where you can use the craft again is a great one”

[@kwgm8578]

What a great presentation, Scott. I was an engineering student at SFSU back then and we visited Singer Link and saw the simulator. What a monster machine! I think the artists at George Lucas' Skywalker Ranch were inspired by that Singer Link simulator when they designed tanks walking on stilts for the opening battle scene. The audio from that bouncy landing sounded like my first solo landing in a Cessna. My youngest son, who is an airline pilot and my CPI, had a great laugh and then made me do it again.

[@j.o.9091]

I am just at awe how those brave man tested those things putting everything on the line, to advance our quest to be explorers. Thank you.

[@tymoteuszkazubski2755]

Flight deck was equipped with ejection seats during the test program. Those were removed when they started having people fly on the lower deck.

[@j.o.9091]

@@tymoteuszkazubski2755 Sure was, but still you can't always eject- you hear it good at the sound of the test pilot.

[@jasonboren9951]

That F-8 footage looked SKETCHY! Wow. These pilots were made of something else.

[@BGraves]

They were intentionally inducing oscillation probably

[@paulsengupta971]

I assume they had a "make everything normal again" button they could press.

[@raideurng2508]

They had to be only a few inches from a tailstrike.

[@ChristopherDoll]

I remember watching this landing live on TV, and we all held our breath after that first bounce. It was pretty exciting to see. Really enjoyed hearing what you dug up about this test and Enterprise itself.

[@Urroner]

Awesome stuff sir. I've worked for NASA since 1980 and love my job. These were exciting times at KSC. Scott, thanks for reminding me of those days. BTW, in the first launch, the External Tank (ET) was painted white, but it was the only one. The rest were the natural rusty orange color, which woodpeckers loved (As an aside, there was a guy on the launch tower whose job was, if he saw a woodpecker, to blast an air horn to scare the bird away.). Not painting the ET shaved between 600 to 800 lbs of useless weight. The extra weight wasn't that great in comparison to the total weight, but given that, to put 1 lbs. of payload in space, it took around 7 lbs. of fuel. That meant around 2.5 tons of fuel could be used for important things, and not transporting white paint into space.

[@iRunfastXC]

That’s amazing, thank you for sharing!

[@jamesrobert4106]

Did you ever chat to Mulloy about cold O rings?

[@Urroner]

@@jamesrobert4106 I'm not that important.

[@jamesrobert4106]

@@Urroner But you were likely more competent.

[@Urroner]

@@jamesrobert4106 Well, one of my strong points, probably the strongest, is my overwhelming abundance of palpable humility, and I take great pride in that. 😏

[@grahamduncan2843]

Fascinating history of Enterprise. Thank you.

[@AsteroidWrangler]

Great to hear some discussion of the orbiter and orbiter/carrier wind tunnel testing. For work I regularly go to one of the wind tunnels where a fair number of the small scale tests were done throughout the shuttle's lifetime, and a lot of the models are just sitting out in the basement there. Always a good time to just walk down there and take in the history.

[@Clyman974]

6:10, wait SOMEONE needs to make a full video on that 70s flight simulator, it sounds awesome! I wonder if they kept the whole map and camera system somewhere? I really want to see what does it look like inside the cockpit in high quality, there's barely any infos about it on the Internet

[@SeanBZA]

No, likely got scrapped, along with the rest of the Apollo era hardware, or taken apart and used for other projects.

[@Clyman974]

@@SeanBZA Yeah but the one shown in the was a plane simulator for training airliner pilots, not a Space Shuttle simulator, so there might be a chance it wasn't scrapped yet

[@dotancohen]

Yes, the map still exists! It is on display at KSP, on the wall. You would need someone to point it as it is easy to miss. I saw it in 2018.

[@chrisglen-smith7662]

@@dotancohen LOL, first thing I thought was that you were joking and meant the Kerbal Space Center ! 😅😅 before I remembered the Kennedy Space Center initials 😆

[@NGCAnderopolis]

They have the map in a video with Tom Scott on the Objectivity youtube channel.

[@danelfernandez6571]

I didn't realize how big the shuttle was until I saw it on top of a 747

[@thomasvaverka5168]

wow this footage is outstanding to see the space shuttle lift right off the plane like that just f****** awesome

[@raydunakin]

It's a shame they never got to launch the shuttle from Vandenberg. There was no chance I'd ever get to make a trip to Florida to see it launched, but I might have been able to see a west coast launch.

[@LoanwordEggcorn]

Hopefully you got to see some landings at Edwards.

[@jimlthor]

I was so upset that I didn't get to hear the final sonic boom when it flew over on the last shuttle mission. I was inside a power plant and couldn't hear anything but machinery

[@longshot7601]

@@LoanwordEggcorn I was on the lakebed when Young and Crippen landed. I can not tell you the worries for the heat shield tiles during the comm blackout. I still have one of the Pepsi commemorative soda cans from that day.

[@yourhandlehere1]

I got to see a couple of day launches close up-ish (7-8 miles) when I lived in Orlando for a while. Deafening, feel it in your bones roar. One night launch I watched from a bridge in Orlando. 50 miles away and it still lit up like daytime before it hit clouds. I'd love to go see the full stack Big Fu...um...Starship...launch.

[@almostfm]

@@LoanwordEggcorn I never got to see the landings but I'm close enough (about 130 miles as the crow flies) that we got to hear the sonic boom when it came in to Edwards from the north

[@IstasPumaNevada]

PIO in an experimental aircraft is frightening enough, but to have the flight computer adding to the chaos is slightly terrifying.

[@DChrls]

I remember the shuttle on back of that 747 flying over where I lived when I was a kid. Very cool seeing it fly over.

[@bobbreit5244]

I have never seen the footage of Enterprise attached to test rockets. That was the like a piece of space candy for me!

[@carlman257]

Those pitch oscillations at 11:46 are absolutely 100% Kerbal

[@oliverlamb8892]

Of all the Scott Manley videos, I think that this is the most Kerbal.

[@alexlandherr]

Nice software/hardware development story. Shows the importance of knowing your hardware’s interaction with the outside world.

[@memamu0]

Some years ago I visited the Enterprise in New York. It was my first. And the most tear jerking... Had watery eyes the whole time. Saw the others later and loved it every time. They all have their special features.

[@johnshields9110]

The Shuttle program held a big personal interest for me as a young teen, and throughout its life. My BIL worked on improvements to the C-130 tail, which lead to the design team for the main booster guide fins on the Saturn V. I had a brother in Air Force flight flight training, and I later attend college as an AFROTC Pilot rated cadet. Historically, I followed all the designs on WWII and Korean War aircraft, as I was an advanced math student from early age (college degree was in Mathematics), so I followed the Shuttle designs with interest. Few people recall that the NASA engineers used the earliest 'lift body' data from the wingless M2F2 aircraft, which had been propelled by being hauled down a runway by big V8 hotrodded Chrysler! I think the Century series Fighters provided gross examples of problems using ailerons vs rudders on how to turn an aircraft for final approach (the Shuttle wouldn't survive an episode of the deadly "saber dance"). When the Vietnam War ended, I signed out of the flight program; I had gotten too tall for fighters cockpits, but lived on through flight with the mathematics.

[@allen_p]

Growing up in the 70's and 80's we followed Apollo and the Space Shuttle programs, and visited Johnson Space Center often. Thanks for the details

[@MichaelBennett1]

One of the best videos you’ve made. That was enthralling.

[@quaidbergo]

Very cool tidbit about the longer attachment pylons for the test flights to achieve the required AOA. I never knew that.

[@hoghogwild]

Yup, the ferry flights used the shorter front attach struts to save fuel as it holds the Orbiter Vehicle at 3º AOA, while flight/glide test used longer from struts to maintain a 6ºAOA. Even so, the 5,500 N mile no payload range still decreases down to 1000 nautical miles with an orbiter on the SCAs back..

[@awuma]

I noticed it immediately in the video. The "Enterprise" really did poke up higher. Never noticed it before, though.

[@hoghogwild]

@@awuma Yes, but only during the Approach and Landing Tests(ALT), OV-101-Enterprise was indeed placed at the lower 3ºAOA for the SCA/Orbiter Vehicle ferry flights. Enterprise had the honour of being the only Orbiter Vehicle to be carried in both the ferry(3º) and the ALT mission(6º). SCA/Enterprise flew from USA/CAN to Europe in the lower "ferry position".

[@timothybrummer8476]

I did a lot of work on Enterprise, from simulator design to rollout, and Vandenberg fit checks.

[@utoothheartyeight]

...and?

[@timothybrummer8476]

@@utoothheartyeight The entire Shuttle program was cutting edge technology for the time, with thousands of engineers working on it. An amazing technical achievement. Unfortunately some in the government thought it was an airliner, and pushed for too high a flight rate while ignoring engineering safety concerns.

[@TinkersWithMotherboards]

I thought I'd share the story of the day I spent landing the orbiter over and over again. In the late 90's I was working as a jr. systems administrator in a research lab at JSC that had built an out-the-windows simulator that had been used to help develop the recent glass cockpit upgrades for the shuttle. They were running some tests on the simulator and needed someone to pilot the thing to make sure it was working and fine-tune the displays, so I got tapped. I had never seen the simulator run before, and no one told me how to operate it. It included a full-sized cockpit mock-up and several projectors that ran out-the-window visuals on an at-the-time state of the art SGI supercomputer. So I sat in an accurate-to-scale cockpit flying the orbiter with a joystick and a bunch of glass-cockpit controls. The simulation started somewhere high over Florida, which I figured out by pointing the nose down until I could see the coastline. But the simulation kept restarting before I could get anywhere near the ground. Since I couldn't figure out how to land it, I started trying Immelman's, barrel rolls, etc., out of frustration. (Shout out to the original 'Ace-of-Aces' game books) It turns out the orbiter was not highly maneuverable. Finally, someone came over and said 'what are you doing', to which I replied something like 'I don't know', and they said 'here, keep the dot in the cross-hairs'. Ah Ha! A Head-Up Display! So after several more tries, I managed to start landing it, or getting close, although it helped when I was shown a few other controls, like the one to lower the landing gear. But I eventually managed to even get the landing flare down. When that got old, I got bored and tried a few other things, like doing a belly landing without deploying the landing gear, and actually managed to find a flaw in the simulator, because if I glided in smoothly enough, I could get the runway going over my head before the sim stopped. Apparently, it hadn't occurred to anyone that someone would be crazy enough to land without deploying the gear first, so the simulator didn't count touchdown as happening until the virtual wheels, which were still tucked into the body of the virtual orbiter, met the surface of the runway. So they had to go back and update the simulator to fix that. As a result of all of this, I could honestly claim in my list of useless life skills that, in an emergency, I could probably actually land the orbiter if I had to...

[@deantomac3348]

Funny how 98 percent of the critics would be dead if they were in control. Well done to this pilot. Perfect landing.

[@georgehill8285]

The display on the Intrepid is amazing, you get to walk under the shuttle, they have an itty bitty Soyuz capsule underneath, and you really get a sense of just how amazing the shuttle was, payload wise.

[@arronbryan5314]

Great video Scott! It might have been a flawed machine, but there’s something about a space shuttle orbiter that stirs the soul. Phenomenal piece of kit whose influence on a young space fan is the reason I’m probably watching this video today.

[@MervynPartin]

It certainly did stir the soul. My wife was in tears with emotion after watching Atlantis launch. Absolutely breath-taking.

[@jtveg]

That real cockpit audio was absolutely brilliant. Thanks so much for sharing.

[@aureaphilos]

I have 2 memories of Enterprise. The first was standing on a chair in a packed room at college to watch the maiden flight of a Space Shuttle, in August 1977 (thanks for clarifying the date). My second memory was of being at the Paris Air Show in 1983, and seeing Enterprise and the SCA take off from Le Bourget airport. The two craft were touring Europe, and they were leaving for Rome.

[@thedeloachsdoyoutube8377]

Another beautiful video thank you Scott.

[@kentonhurst252]

Great video! The development and early years of the shuttle program are very interesting to me. The fact that they got this working 40 years ago continues to impress me! What an accomplishment.

[@CPT_Nelson]

I remember in 83 when the 747 flew over Montreal, I just happened to glance at the sky during a street hockey match and there it was in all its glory!

[@rpsmith]

I use to work at J.S.C. on the Space Shuttle Simulators in the early 80s and we often tried to land the Shuttle but never once came close! It was a brick with wings and you had to anticipate your control movements way before your natural instincts. As you might expect, the Astronauts made it look easy. :o)

[@tgmccoy1556]

"Aw sh** "nothing like an audience to bring out the landing gremlins😁..

[@runcows]

A few years ago I got to see Shuttle Enterprise at the Intrepid Air and Space Museum and its the only shuttle ive seen in person and it was amazing to see. I'd always wondered what it had been used for. I didn't expect to find out today, but its amazing to be able to look at the video and say "hey ive seen that in person" Thanks so much for the video

[@bobjohn2000]

What’s always striking is to see the enterprise, and then see any of the other shuttles. The real ones look like they’ve been to hell and back, while enterprise looks completely clean.

[@muzzaball]

Another excellent production Scott - thank you. I am glad that the Shuttle hasn't been totally lost to history. Cheers.

[@grxengine]

12:45. OMG! I know Charlie Bolden!! What a wonderful guy. Lived here in Houston and was active in our neighborhood community for years in 3rd Ward. He became head of NASA later.

[@M5guitar1]

I met Joe Engle while working on the National Aerospace Plane in the late 80's. He was one of the astronaut consultants along with Neil Armstrong and Scott Crossfield who I saw as well. My short conversation was while we were both standing at the urinal (no joke). Joe had a picture of himself flying a WW II P-40 in his office and I commented that I liked that photo while we were standing there. He turned his head and said "She was a sweet bird!" He was dressed in jeans and cowboy boots and had a very friendly demeanor. I only regret not getting an autograph.

[@trapjohnson]

"A Flying Manhole Cover" I'm gonna be laughing because of that for a good long while.

[@mscottveach]

My father was a shuttle astronaut and I had never heard 90% of this -- what a great video!

[@BradiKal61]

I got used to seeing the shuttle on top of the 747 but when you think really think about it, its INSANE!

[@phyzzx22]

I got to talk to Fred Haise at an IMAX theater, after seeing the Apollo 11 movie back in 2019. He was very nice - what a thrill for me. We asked him what the highlight of his career was, and he said it was these shuttle landing tests, as they assured that the program could continue. I expected him to say "Getting back alive from the Moon!"

[@ModernClassic]

I'm old enough to remember watching the first flight of the Enterprise live on TV, when I was 5 years old. All the major stations broadcast it at the time, and this was in an era when live reporting was not common, but then NASA did also bring us live TV from the moon less than a decade before (unfortunately I am not old enough to remember that). I do remember even at 5 years old thinking "wow, we're living in the future!" I also couldn't wait to see the first real launch. The space shuttle is still a really unique vehicle (yes, I know about the Buran), and it's kind of a shame that we've gone back to conventional rockets now. I finally saw my first space shuttle up close just a little while ago - the Atlantis at the Kennedy Space Center - and it is really impressive in person. Bigger than it looks like in pictures.

[@sseeplane6950]

The shipyard I worked for at the time had previously built several structures for the Apollo program. When the first drop test of the Enterprise was performed they allowed members of the engineering staff to go to the training facility to watch the flight live on tv. It was fascinating and surreal at the same time.

[@warped-sliderule]

Brings back memories. Worked mission coverage for Enterprise ATL flights at Edwards. Our photo tracking mount shot one of the landing views that Scott showed. The cameras spooled through hundreds of feet of 35mm film on that mission. We had some excellent movies to review before handing over to NASA. What an exciting time, full of promise for a new era in space travel.

[@mapesdhs597]

Just curious, did NASA keep you guys informed of what happened to all the film?

[@warped-sliderule]

@@mapesdhs597 hi, we didn't have the capability to duplicate film. thus, when we turned the film over to contractors/NASA that was the last we saw of it. for video tapes, we were able to make duplicates. some of us got our own personal screening of historic/famous/original flight videos (on youtube). used in Six Million Dollar Man intro, the M2-F2 tumbling sequence was shot by our guys during actual crash. also less famous F4 flat spin with ejection. we played a very small part in some big flight programs. it was an honor to have a part...

[@mapesdhs597]

@@warped-sliderule I'm glad you were able to be a part of it. I wonder though if NASA kept all the film; probably not, often at the time its potential future appeal might be hard to imagine, bit like the way original tapes of old TV shows were often thrown away.

[@S.E.C-R]

This was very interesting… for the life of me until a few years ago I never knew that the shuttle started back in the 70’s. I was also little then too, being 10 in 1978 it’s not something I was ever really exposed to back then.

[@harrisjames2047]

I was there for the MERCURY-7. Your teachers and your parents FAILED YOU.

[@printsignalsoma1248]

what a legacy for a ship that paved the way for its sisters

[@Wayne_Robinson]

Very interesting to hear about the refinement of the fly-by-wire system. That was an aspect previously unknown to me.

[@StuReedy]

I'm just glad you didn't choose to boldly split infinitives that no man has split before. Thanks for another informative video!

[@MegaJMireles]

All I have to say is wow, Scott, you continue to amaze me with your subject matter. Great SpaceX coverage, but then you throw in this amazing content. Please keep it up.

[@awakening7251]

That was an excellent landing. Only had a little excess speed, not a bad idea for a gliding brick.

[@bsbrum]

"...because Enterprise had gone to places in the flight envelope that no shuttle had gone before." -- Scott Manley. Classic closer, Scott! :)

[@jetseekers]

Tho that said. Interestingly enough, Enterprise could be considered a Constitution class space plane

[@221b-l3t]

No since it never had the name. They are Columbia class LEO shuttles. The first operational one names the class. Titanic was an Olympic class ocean liner, USS Missouri is an Iowa class battlecruiser/battleship etc...

[@vertiform_city]

@@221b-l3t In Star Trek, Enterprise was Constitution class. The USS Constitution was also the first operational vessel in the class.

[@221b-l3t]

@@vertiform_city Which makes no sense. But I thought there was a Constitution... guess I have to rewatch TOS again.

[@stallfighter]

@@221b-l3t exept when it isnt. Admiral class with HMS Hood, lead and only ship. County and Town classes, Battle class destroyers and my personal favorite, Weapon class DD.

[@RFSA180]

I do wonder if Elon will call the first Mars Starship, Enterprise? 🤔

[@danapeck5382]

Young's subsequent landing was perfect, right on the marks

[@codymoe4986]

He was also flying the escort fighter during this flight if I remember correctly...

[@RideAcrossTheRiver]

STS-1 heart rates at liftoff PLT Crippen: 138 BPM CDR Young: 80 BPM

[@danapeck5382]

@@RideAcrossTheRiver Young was really impressive

[@entangledmindcells9359]

let me get this straight.. I am going to fly a glider with a terrible glide ratio, no engine, no ejection seat and one shot at landing.. sign me up.

[@vbscript2]

They actually did have ejection seats. Enterprise and the first few orbital missions of Columbia had ejection seats installed and active. Later missions deactivated and then removed them, though. They were only available for 2 of the crew members, though, which, as I recall, played a roll in why they were eventually deactivated and removed once the missions continued past the test phase where more than 2 crew were onboard.

[@thelolzbelgium1017]

always been interested in space.kinda wish this was a long show with mutliple parts,super intresting.off to check the rest of the channel.youtube did good with this suggestion

[@melbournewolf]

Hey Scott, Star Trek debuted the year I was born, 1966, nigh on 10 yrs to the day later Shuttle Enterprise was rolled out, 1976, thx for the memory recall!

[@sebastianweise4790]

Im a simple man, i see a video of scott and i hit the like button before even watching it. Watching it now tho. ^^

[@WeBeGood06]

As a side note, decades later, those "inside" the Belt Way were still laughing at the Trekkies because they had named the only Orbiter never flown in space, "Enterprise". I learned this years later when I went with group of space enthusiast, not in costume like the Trekkies, to get a "Space Tourist" bill passed. It passed. Being a Trekkie myself, I didn't appreciate their joke, and still don't.

[@AdmiralBob]

I don't know if it is any comfort or not that those inside the Belt Way are themselves a joke...

[@Jetfixerlady]

The last laugh is on them. Several real-life astronauts have appeared on different Star Trek series.

[@vaska00762]

In the opening title sequence for Star Trek: Enterprise, the Space Shuttle Enterprise appears as one of the many vehicles in "humanity's steps to the stars" alongside stuff like the Spirit of St Louis, the Bell X-1, Saturn V, Sojourner and of course, Star Trek First Contact's Phoenix warp ship. There's a drawing in Captain Archer's ready room of the Space Shuttle Enterprise in orbit, alongside drawings of the USS Enterprise aircraft carrier (the nuclear wessel), HMS Enterprize and the show's titular NX-01 Enterprise. In a novel (Star Trek beta canon), the Space Shuttle Enterprise is retrofitted with Impulse Drive in place of the SSMEs in order to join a "parade of Enterprises" alongside the NX-01, XCV-330, Enterprise-A and Enterprise-B. I do wonder how Star Trek has avoided breaking the fourth wall with incorporating a shuttle into its own lore which in real life was named because of Star Trek.

[@MarkXHolland]

Kind of apt though, because the original Star Trek 'Enterprise' was never flown in space either.

[@samsignorelli]

on the other hand, at least enterprise still exists...it could've been the one to take the foam damage instead of columbia.

[@eragonawesome]

She may never have explored space, but she was certainly boldly going where no one had gone before!

[@razredge68]

I'm pretty sure I've said much worst while installing software patches than that test pilot. It's impressive at how calm the pilots were while operating in such dangerous conditions.

[@Vi_Renders]

"For a brick, he flew pretty good" - Sgt Avery Johnson

[@SpartanNat]

Looking for this one lol.

[@AldorEricsson]

In much the same way that bricks don't.

[@Vi_Renders]

@@SpartanNat Noble Six. You're looking surprisingly alive since the reach incident.

[@SirMike02]

"For a brick, he flew pretty good."

[@davidboyle1902]

All these decades after the fact and I’m still learning about the Shuttle. Am still gritting my teeth every time I think about the Star Trek dopes who forced NASA to name the prototype Enterprise knowing it would never make it to orbit. Great work, Scott. Thanks for this.

[@DanielMcCool95]

Enterprise is and always will be my favorite Shuttle, She just got the raw deal when it came to the actual flight program. Her name is unfortunately cursed in spaceflight it seems as we saw with VSS Enterprise, Maybe someday an Enterprise will sail the black.

[@JBM425]

It didn’t get a raw deal. It turned out that after the changes that went into the production models, it just wasn’t cost-effective to refit Enterprise. Some major structural components would have had to be replaced. It wasn’t just Enterprise, either. As it was, there were changes to Challenger to make it (and subsequent shuttles) lighter that could not be retrofitted to Columbia. That’s why Columbia was relegated to Spacelab and non-ISS missions: it was just too heavy to reach the ISS.

[@kirkc9643]

If Elon Musk doesn't call the first operational Starship "Enterprise" I'm going to throw myself off a bridge. Maybe.

[@MagicAl5F4781]

@@JBM425 Columbia was planned to fly STS-118/ISS-13A.1 because or else they were looking at assembly falling behind during Discovery's OMDP. Columbia could reach ISS with a few tons less cargo and maybe one less crew member. The mission proceeded with Endeavour after return to flight.

[@andrewfolkes3256]

So the Enterprise completed its five flight mission to seek out new flights and meet new handling equipment

[@hoghogwild]

Enterprise flew atop the SCA 13 times total, she was released from the SCA for 5 of those flights.

[@Anon282828]

a great illustration of what proper engineering development looks like - some people will call this slow and meticulous approach "old school", but one does not simply fly to the moon straight from the drawing boards

[@grumpyvlogger]

I actually traveled along side the Enterprise while it was being moved by truck from Edwards. I was in the USAF at the time and a Star Trek fan so that made a check mark on my bucket list lol.

[@kylecramer8489]

Flying Manhole Cover sounds like a decent Prog-Rock band

[@dmacpher]

Atomic powered flying manhole cover

[@blueconcretezebra]

Ned's Atomic Dustbin

[@jordanmiller42]

I was under the impression that flying manhole covers were very fast...

[@SLCCWebmaster]

When my dad was in the Air Force in WWII (the Army Air Force, at the time) they always said any landing you walk away from is a good landing. Of course, they sometimes returned from their B24 missions with half a tail rudder blasted off, and engine on fire and loss of control surfaces on one wing. :D

[@eamonahern7495]

I like how an Apollo astronaut also flew the space shuttle. But it also took one of the Gemini astronauts into space when John Glenn became the oldest astronaut in space. I think of Apollo and space shuttle as two completely separate eras because all the manned moon landings were done before I was born and the space shuttle was the big space story when I was growing up. But it's nice to have all the important developments of early American space exploration connected to shuttle in that way.

[@kyleburnett4795]

Apollo astronauts John Young and Ken Mattingly also commanded space shuttle missions.

[@mcarp555]

I've seen Enterprise at KSC while the Shuttle program was still active. Lovely ship. It's a shame it never got the chance to really fly.

[@wlouisharris]

I remember buying a toy around 1976. It was a space shuttle that sat on back of a 747. I called the Space shuttle the Space Shovel.