Why Aborting From Gemini May Have Likely Killed The Crew

Climbing on top of a rocket is still nutty when you think about it. I mean you’re literally riding on top of a controlled explosion, sitting upon a column of flames until the blue sky turns black.
And because of the risky nature, it’s generally considered a good idea to have a backup in case things go wrong. Welcome to launch abort systems. Most human rated vehicles have some system to get people away from a failing rocket in a hurry, typically by pulling the crew capsule off of the rocket with a special set of abort motors.
But did you know that the United States’ second crew capsule, the Gemini spacecraft had an interesting solution for getting crew away from impending doom, an ejection seat… Today we’re going to take a look at an engineering solution to a problem that in hindsight would’ve almost certainly led to death... oh, and there’s much more to it than just the ejection seat that could’ve killed you, that’s only part of the equation…
EDIT!!! UPDATE!!! UPDATING EDIT!!!
Read Gordon Cress' enlightening comment pinned below!!! Besides the wonderful comment he posted, he also emailed me some awesome fact sheets about the performance of the Gemini Ejection Seat:
everydayastronaut.com/wp-cont...
everydayastronaut.com/wp-cont...
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Check out Amy Shira Teitel's video on the regallo wing! - • Video
Show your support by becoming a Patreon - / everydayastronaut
This video had three "Moon Walkers" who helped make this possible - Blake Jacobs, Mac Malkawi and Matthew Nolan.
The best place for all your space merch needs!
everydayastronaut.com/shop/
All music is original! Check out my album "Maximum Aerodynamic Pressure" anywhere you listen to music (Spotify, iTunes, Google Play, Amazon, etc) or click here for easy links - everydayastronaut.com/music
And also check out "27 Merlins" a song composed to Falcon Heavy's sequence of events - • "Heliocentric" (Former...
I'm the cohost of an awesome podcast where we talk all about current technologies and how they shape our future! ourludicrousfuture.com or here on KZbin / @ourludicrousfuture

[@gordoncress1949]

Tim, almost hate to add to the many many comments already here, but since I was deeply involved in the Gemini program..... First the Gemini vehicle was a spacecraft, not a capsule. NASA went to great lengths to make that distinction; it could change orbits, maneuver in space, dock with other vehicles, etc. The Mercury was a capsule; it could not change orbits, etc. I was the project test engineer on Gemini for Weber Aircraft. We were tasked to design, test and qualify it for McDonnell Aircraft (MAC) and NASA. We, Weber Aircraft spent three years in providing an escape system that was the most sophisticated and complex system ever envisioned. It had to provide the astronaut occupants with safe egress and recovery from (1) a pad abort condition should the booster suffer a catastrophic failure. The system had to eject the occupants more than 500 feet away and bring them safely to earth via a personal parachute, (2) a high speed max Q condition during the boost phase, (3) a high speed Mach 4 ejection at 45,000 and (4) a high altitude ejection up to 70,000 feet. A whole lot more than those currently in service with the F-35, F-22, F-16, F-15, B-2, etc. Weber also provided the lightweight systems used in NASA lifting bodies M2-F2, HL-10 and X-24 in addition to those for the LLRV and LLTV ( have the filmed footage of Neil Armstrong, Joe Algranti and Stuart Present ejecting from it). Astronaut safety was the primary concern throughout the program and every conceivable failure mode and environment was considered. Secondly, you were correct in listing the reasons for ejection seats. Jim Chamberlain had always championed them and with good reason for the Gemini program. The weight of an escape rocket system would have been many times that of the seats and they'd have spent much fuel getting to a safe altitude where the vehicle parachutes could be relied on to affect safe recovery. Modern ejection seats have provided a 90% safe recovery rate for the past 50 years. And a good deal of the 10% failures are pilots delaying the decision to eject. There were some spinal compression fractures in early Martin Baker seats before we realized the importance of keeping onset rates below 150 gs/sec. Once that was solved there have been very few back problems due to ejections. More than 12,000 pilots have had their lives saved by ejection seats and I think they'd take exception to your comments regarding the safety and capabilities of ejection seats. John Young and Gus Grissom were not at the Randsburg Wash facility of China Lake when the hatch problem caused only one seat to be ejected. I was there and had Jim Lovell and Frank Borman with me. And the seat did not "blast through the hatch." The system works like this...when either occupant pulls his ejection control handle to fire an initiator, the hot high pressure gas is routed to both hatch actuators. The hatch actuator initiator fires to start the hatch opening sequence. As the hatch actuator piston moves up it releases the hatch latches and starts opening the hatch. When the piston reaches the top of the actuator and hatch is locked in the open position, hot gas is vented off to the rocket catapult (rocat). The catapult ignites and moves the seat up the rails. When the seat reaches the top of the rails, the catapult is stripped off and the seat rocket is ignited. In this instance, the o-ring on the piston failed and hot gas was vented off to the rocat before the hatch was fully open. The seat moved up the rails and struck the hatch structure. This jammed the seat on the rails. Both the hatch structure and the seat headrest structure sustained some damage. The test dummy's helmet was cracked. When we were looking at the post-test damage, Jim looked over at Frank and inquired if maybe Frank might interested in trading seats; Frank thanked him for his kind offer, but decided that he was fully satisfied with his seat. MAC installed double o-rings on the piston and no further problems of this kind were encountered. Since the seat is at the top of the rails when the rocket is ignited there is no flame inside the vehicle before that and no problem with oxygen environment. While our astronauts are extremely intelligent, super test pilots and true American heroes, none of them that I'm aware have any experience whatsoever in escape system design. Several of them, including Tom S., did make derogatory comments about the Gemini seat system and that was unfortunate. They are human just like the rest of us, but their comments should not be taken as gospel. Weber, MAC and NASA expended blood, sweat and tears for those three years (1962-1965) to provide our guys with the finest system available. It's very easy 50 years later to make derogatory comments regarding why certain decisions were made, but where were you when the decision had to be made? Thanks for letting me vent! If you'd like to follow my blog visit me at geminihistory.com/welcome-to-my-blog/

[@EverydayAstronaut]

You sir get top remarks and a pinned comment so others can learn too (hopefully putting this into proper light). I try not to sensationalize information, as I aim to be educational. I’m very happy to stand corrected on the rigors of testing and that the engineers would know more than the test pilots. This has been noted and future “facepalm” videos in this series will aim to take a more balanced approach to make sure those included have positive light shown on their decision making process. Thank you for providing valuable information. It may be worth someone who does Wikipedia articles to update some of the notes and sources based on your info. Also note to all of us. THIS is how to leave a comment. Gordon could’ve been upset, emotional, name calling, or anything else due to his involvement, but look at how poised, polite, FACTUAL and INFORMATIVE he was. Wow. This is what makes the internet a better place. So thank you Gordon 🙏🙏🙏 (EDIT) Gordon was kind enough to email me some awesome data sheets which I threw up on my website here: everydayastronaut.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/02/Gemini-Escape-System-Data-Sheet.jpg everydayastronaut.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/02/Gemini-Performance.jpg

[@ChuckBeefOG]

Very interesting read, you must be in your late 80’s by now and still going strong. Thanks for sharing.

[@gordoncress1949]

@@ChuckBeefOG I am 85 now, but I'm not sure about the "going strong" part. I do play senior softball, do meals on wheels deliveries, ride my motorcycle, active in Kiwanis, etc. Got to keep moving! Thanks for the comment.

[@monstrok]

And OUTSTANDING response and amount of insight. Thank you Gordon.

[@c.a.g.3130]

@@gordoncress1949 Bless you and thank you for your contribution to the program. My son is now down in Daytona at Embry-Riddle (graduating in Dec.) and looking forward to being involved in these kind of issues and solutions.Engineers are a fascinating breed. God bless you all.

[@cheesegrease8247]

*nasa scientist:* i mean the kerbals would probably survive *astronaut:* what *nasa scientist:* what

[@geeky973]

i know i like that

[@EtzEchad]

I once had all my parachute packs burn off in Kerbal Space Program mission so I had Jedidiah Kerman crawl out and landed him on his suit jets. (I knew he'd die if he was still in the capsule when it impacted.) Jeb is truly badass. (BadS = true.)

[@navalca9686]

Everyone else: what

[@ad6442]

@@EtzEchad ive seen that if you go eva but hang on to the ladders of your capsule ur kerbal should be able to survive its impact if it isnt going too fast also last time i checked im pretty sure eva packs dont work on kerbin (unless u were landing on another planet where they do work)

[@rooka4]

@@ad6442 parachutes

[@JeffreyBue_imtxsmoke]

Interesting bit of Space history - The Soviet Vostok ejection seats: Back in 1961, the Soviets claimed that Gagarin - the first man to orbit the earth - landed in his capsule. They did this because in order to get official recognition by international flight record groups for the Vostok-1 flight, pilots had to land in their own craft. Rather than get disqualified, Moscow ordered Gagarin to lie about ejecting. It wasn't until years later that the truth came out.

[@EverydayAstronaut]

Now that I didn't know! Thank you for the fun fact!!!

[@Verpal]

Hmm..... very interesting, do you a little bit of leads for me to read up on this? It seems like an interesting mix between politicking and exotic plumbing.

[@jj182bass]

Quite well known. To be honest it doesn’t make a difference, he was the first man in space.

[@MlTGLIED]

Strange rules. But who cares, he was the first in space.

[@brantwedel]

@@MlTGLIED international flight record groups in 1961 cared ;-)

[@SimplySpace]

There's a John Young moment that I really like, it was at a press conference before the first Shuttle flight. Reporter: "It is still not clear to me whether you can eject during the burn of the Solids (Solid Rocket Boosters)" John Young: *blank face* "You just pull the little handle"

[@thecapacitor1395]

Legend

[@hectorkeezy1499]

Simply Space John Young is the MAN. I remember when He got out,after the flight,and caressed the orbitter. Really Happy with the ship, while the groundcrew was franticly trying to pull him away. What a Great Guy.

[@gevmage]

Which shows Young's take on the first shuttle mission into sharp relief and makes it even stronger. Legend is that NASA was considering making the first shuttle mission deliberately a return-to-lauch abort, to test the abort modes. Young, commander of the first shuttle, pretty much said "No, we're not going to do that." and really pushed NASA to take it off the table as the plan.

[@mikee368]

is there any change you have a source of footage from that moment? i would love to not only know it but also see it. that is just so epic and so John Young xD

[@SimplySpace]

mikee368 yea, it's in an IMAX film called Hail Columbia. I watched it here on KZbin.

[@carsonmcmasters]

Everyday Astronaut has inspired me to take the leap and start toward becoming an astronaut in the engineering field. I have also been sitting here binge-watching all his videos lol

[@carsonmcmasters]

I love playing kerbal space program with his videos playing in the background.

[@thesauciestboss4039]

ChiefCarlos same. Ksp is great

[@theuncalledfor]

Just make sure not to block any hatches with ladders that are inconveniently placed on top of them.

[@KaceyGreen]

I love this sort of space history, good video Tim

[@thespaceguy-tg8lj]

Me to

[@Finkletonian]

Very skeptical of impact a pure O2 environment would have on the survivability of ejection from Gemini. The ejection rockets don't ignite until the seat is at the end of its rails and the seat is essentially *outside* the capsule. The seat is propelled to this point by the catapult assembly which is powered by high pressure gas. You can observe this in the slowmo video at 5:12. Aside from that, the high velocity airstream (assuming a non-static launch) would immediately reduce the concentration of O2 within the capsule during hatch opening. Nonetheless, great video with lots of awesome historical space content.

[@DavidStrchld]

I was wondering this too. The Apollo 1 fire didn't seem to have everyone just be engulfed in flames, but took some time as the crew was last seen struggling to get out :( It would appear that a quick exodus via ejection seat could be done in a total oxygen environment, perhaps a visit to a hospital burn unit, but survivable. Running through the blast exhaust of a exploding fuel tank, that's another issue.

[@mikeparker5008]

@@DavidStrchld People aren't getting it...the MOMENT the hatch is cracked, atmosphere enters and that "pure O2" is gone. 1 second, maybe? Rockets fire after, a long 1.5 second after hatch ejection. People really ARE idjits, I'd say. Apollo 1: the crew was never seen, period. No video, no witnesses...just the audio. It was over in

[@jennydavis4198]

Pure oxygen is only a fire hazzard when under pressure, when those hatches came off it would have been no more dangerous than the air we breathe. The pure Oxygen atmosphere of Apollo was not itself the cause of the intensity of the fire but that it was under pressure

[@archstanton1628]

Also worth noting that their concern about being physically "saturated" with oxygen is irrelevant too, let's leave the spontaneous human combustion to the Flat-Earthers 😁

[@josephg3231]

The spacecraft atmosphere may be gone but the astronauts suits had been soaked in 100% pure oxyben for 2 hours. @@mikeparker5008

[@Macakiux]

2:31 omg you have the exact same glasses

[@jdos2]

Shurons were, and are, very popular!

[@miskuziomberski3540]

LOL yeah

[@mrbalz5404]

LOL yeah

[@chestynetarol7406]

LOL yeah

[@criogenic1839]

Que diablos haces aqui Fred! PD: LOL yeah

[@donhayward9825]

Probably why Chamberlin liked ejection seats: "Chamberlin began his engineering career with the British aircraft company (and later ejection seat manufacturers) Martin-Baker before returning to Canada"

[@TaiViinikka]

Angry Canadian voice: What the hell is a talented Canadian doing at NASA building Gemini when we... Disappointed Canadian voice: Oh yeah, we got bullied into canceling that... Canadians know what I'm talking about. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jim_Chamberlin

[@richardvernon317]

@@TaiViinikka Avro Arrow would have most likely been a Dog in the end. Airframe worked OK, Engines most likely would have worked OK with a bit of work. Avionics would have been very unreliable and the Missile system selected (Active Homing Sparrow II) would have never worked no matter how much money was thrown at it.

[@richardvernon317]

Martin Baker didn't start work on Ejection Seats until a few years after Chamberlain left the company to go back to Canada.

[@lukasmakessomething7322]

About to hit 250k! Congrats Tim. I remember when you were at 20k

[@DroneMee]

Great work as always Tim! Lots of very interesting bits of info in this video about our spaceflight history.

[@profarrington]

Prior to the first shuttle launch, during a crew interview with the press, John Young was asked about the ejection seats. The reporter asked how they could eject during the boost phase of the launch. In his own understated style, Captain Young leaned into the microphone and said, "You just pull the little handle." Gotta love John Young!

[@BjornCanute]

"Luckily the space shuttle ejections seats were never used...." Yeah..... good thing.

[@SofieBrink]

I absolutely love the Video and the especially the intro!!! I loved it!!

[@mattc3696]

Thank you for this. I watched every Gemini launch when I was a kid and NEVER remember hearing of this ejector seat business. It is fun to learn!

[@robercar1482]

Dear Tim! The first thing that passed through my mind when noting you were getting in the history field was 'wow and careful'. Still I enjoy the video very much since it seems to me that the Gemini Program doesn´t have the recognition it deserves! Not to mention that such field is so well developed in the KZbin channel and in writing by the great Amy Shira Teitel... (So jealous you know her in person! haha!) Allways enjoying your high quality work! Best wishes from Willy Klein in Patagonia!

[@spacecadet35]

As a physicist/engineer, I cannot see the problem with firing the rockets into a pure oxygen atmosphere At that point the hatch covers will be gone, so the cabin is at atmospheric pressure. And the flame front of the combustion will be slower than the exit speed of the astronauts. Even then the oxygen would need something to burn. And the exhaust gases of the rockets on the ejection seats do not usually burn very well as they have already been burnt. The astronauts in their suits would be fine for the few milliseconds that they are exposed to this problem. Compared to the flame that is already in the cabin due to the firing rockets, the pure oxygen combustion will have minimal, if any, effect. I am sure, that in testing the system, they would have noticed if their dummies kept catching on fire. And when they land, even if there is toxic gases in the region, they are in space suits. They should still have a few minutes of air in their suits before they have to open the visors and start breathing.

[@wolf310ii]

In the tests they used nitrogen, not oxygen.

[@bradyj2182]

He addressed this in the video. Nitrogen was used on the dummy tests. Although your theory may hold some water it was never tested in a pure oxygen environment. Poor testing standards if you ask me

[@hrissan]

Brady J pure oxygen sounds creepy dangerous, how it is possible it was allowed in the first place...

[@spacecadet35]

@@hrissan - Basically what they did is that air is about 21%oxygen. The rest is Nitrogen, Argon and traces. So what they did is took the everything except the oxygen out. This allowed the spacecraft to have a much lower pressure. In a standard atmosphere the pressure is 101.3 kPa (14.7 pounds per square inch.) With pure oxygen they only had to pressurise the spacecraft to 34.5 kPa (5 psi). This meant that they could build the spacecraft lighter . It also meant that the space suits were much easier to use when in vacuum. Later on in the Space Shuttle the crew would have an oxygen nitrogen mix at 101 kPa, but would use pure oxygen at 35 kPa for space walks.

[@ethitlan]

Love the vid. Btw, you should work with the Curious Elephant.

[@UDMH]

I was so bored then you came out with a new video and I am now entertained. I just love how educational and entertaining your videos are.

[@Rostgnom]

Extremely smooth and exciting intro Tim, good work :)

[@MarcusGoodwyn]

Titan I (shown blowing up while discussing hypergolic propellants) was keralox

[@levelharpy]

When is canceled part 3 coming? I'd love to see the conestoga and Sthil'' rocket

[@jeffpleimling3489]

The Gemini was always my favorite of the original 3 US capsules, but didn't realize all the problems with the abort system. Thanks for the great knowledgeable video.

[@alangao4693]

Thanks for this break from Math and science, really like this, love your channel, and, thank you for inspiring me to reach for the stars!

[@bisowned13]

Over 500 likes before your first dislike! That’s a ratio you can live with! Nice job buddy! Another great production!

[@mtbaddict1354]

Finaly waiting for that for half a year lol nice vid

[@monkeypants6764]

i love your videos tim! you really inspire me to learn more about space

[@aidanwansbrough7495]

Really interesting to see spaceflight is so complicated, there are so many little details, that there are things even NASA could miss! Love your videos, they're so enjoyable to watch!

[@erickrcisneros]

Hey Tim Dodd ! Love what you do!

[@rknight3259]

Hey everyday astronaut it seems like KZbin changed your category from education to music? Also this was really interesting when I think of Gemini I never would have thought that they could have overlooked something so big

[@williamshakespeare2482]

Mix quality content, historical info and a dash of humor and you bring space down to earth for everyday people. Thank you Tim! #EverydayAstronaut

[@faceplants2]

New intro is awesome, Tim! It's always interesting to be reminded how they did a lot of things by the seat of their pants during the space race. Never knew how close they came to ejecting from the pad during a failed launch.

[@gordoncress1949]

I don't think the comprehensive development and qualification test program on the Gemini would qualify as "seat of the pants" approach.

[@Helios-Rex]

Glad these systems have improved, any new on if star ship will have an abort system, and if so, How? Could they just light the 2nd stage engines b/c they are now sea level optimized version?

[@Kanglar]

Probably not, it would take too long too ignite those engines. Escape rockets are typically solid rocket motors and/or a monopropellant style thruster that can ignite and get up to full power in a fraction of a second.

[@donjones4719]

The Starship stage just has too much mass - inconceivable to me that it could accelerate quickly enough to escape an exploding booster, even with huge SRBs. People speculate about an escape module like the F-111 bomber had, but that would only work for early flights with a small crew.

[@marxistilluminati9529]

BFR is an interplanetary system, so there is no. He will not have a system of salvation.

[@Helios-Rex]

Would it be better if starships were launched uncrewed.( At least until proven very reliable over years) and just launch dragons to bring up crew. It would take londer and be more expensive but mabey worth it for safety at least for beggining years

[@rossh2386]

Would an ejection seat get enough height/distance from a pad abort/explosion? Edit: They definitely dodged a bullet never needing to use the seats

[@stevepirie8130]

Ross h23 I’d doubt it. I saw a ground ejection (accidental and fatal) of a modern seat. In the rocket it looked like a slight downward ejection and it was an old tech seat in a Gemini. Likely there was a min alt to pop out as well as a max speed/alt.

[@filanfyretracker]

from the explosion unknown, but ejection seats today can do a zero altitude eject.

[@TheMonkeytrumpetz]

David Kearns they couldn’t at the time

[@KuK137]

Soviet one would have, they had seats rated for 0/0 launches (safe from any speed/attitude starting from zero). US one would most like break pilot's neck even without the oxygen issue...

[@stan.rarick8556]

@@filanfyretracker The Gemini seats are rotated about 90 degrees from the seats in aircraft, eject (mostly) horizontal, not vertically...

[@senaesul3128]

I really think you're doing a great job building your brand/show. Keep it up.

[@elopeous3285]

Keep it up Tim. Very well done

[@neil7250]

Hey Tim, Vostok is pronounced with an "s", not "sh"

[@donjones4719]

Yup. He may be thinking of Vokshod, its successor.

[@StuSaville]

Depends on how much vodka you've drunk...

[@WG-tt6hk]

BFD Tim does a pretty good job of explaining what is going on with a launch and answers the questions with accuracy. Cut him some slack.

[@neil7250]

@@WG-tt6hk I'm not criticizing him. I'm giving a piece of knowledge on how to pronounce a foreign word, because I know he likes to pronounce them correctly.

[@lukasfiala1019]

He is talking about "Voschod", pronounced Vos-khod.

[@TheDsasadsad]

That music at the end gave me goosebumps. Because I know where it's from. Yes the name of that video started with "27". Mmm

[@NGinuity]

7:48 Hah, Ford Pinto in the foreground and Space Shuttle in the background. Quite the duality there.

[@robbytheremin2443]

I saw that Ford Pinto pulling up to the space shuttle. Two machines that explode at random. 😳

[@milosdewit7562]

14 years old, everyday astronaut patron... Best decision of the year 😁

[@lawrencedoliveiro9104]

0:10 No, there’s a difference between “explosion” and "combustion”. An “explosion” is a runaway reaction which produces a shockwave which triggers further reactions.

[@RadFX1]

Lol

[@forestsoceansmusic]

Really well-made and well-spoken video Tim. Looks like Gordon Cress has answered (nicely) all the objections though (except the one about clearing a hypergolic-fuel fireball, that I could see). Thanks to both of you for very interesting stuff.

[@gordoncress1949]

The fireball from an off pad explosion would have been less that 500 feet and the ejection seat would have resulted in the occupants landing some 700 feet away.

[@citizenblue]

Tim you are one of my absolute favorite KZbinrs! Love your channel and miss your space suit!

[@tinldw]

Buran was also designed to use ejection seats during the manned test flights.

[@JP-kk7re]

Wait what.

[@iplaygames8090]

@@JP-kk7re buran the better russian space shuttle which flew only once and which was destroyed by decayung hangar after the fall of ussr

[@wpatrickw2012]

On the positive side, if the parachutes failed after re-entry the ejection seats might have made it survivable.

[@edfou5]

That, Patrick, is a great GREAT point and I'm slapping myself for not having thought of it over the past 50 years! Gold star on YOUR forehead!

[@vivid996]

Awesome, as always! Great new series. Can't wait to see more face palm moments

[@Aussie_Aaron]

I love you vids dude there inspiring, space is amazing keep it up.

[@user-mr1um1cg5v]

Wouldn’t the oxygen starting to burn inside the cabin engulf the astronauts only for a fraction of a second and not burn their spacesuits? Sort of like swinging your hand through an open fire would not burn your hand. So I’m not quite sure pure oxygen environment orthe glitch with blowing the hatches during a test are enough reasons to dismiss the Gemini ejection seats design as being unable to save lives.

[@dpsamu2000]

I've done the pure oxygen soak on some cotton denim rags in a pringles can for days. Didn't cause any more suceptability to fire than not soaking them. Fed oxygen to the lit rags and they burn like a blow torch. But the burn returns to normal when the oxygen is cut. In the capsule there could be some oxy supply from ambient capsule oxy to the burn for a short time. The Apollo 1 capsule was over pressurized with oxy so that could be a factor. I personally doubt the ambient overpressure alone was responsible. I know there are some things not publicsized about that fire. That burn caused extreme overpressure enough to rupture the capsule. The cause of death is oft cited as suffocation not smoke or burn. I think NASA doesn't want to explicitly say, or release the film that brutaly shows that extreme overpressure from the oxygen fed fire crushed the lungs causing suffocation. The ambient overpreassure fed initial fire probably damaged the oxygen feed system, and hoses, and caused uncontrolled oxygen feed resulting in a very intense fire, and the extreme overpressure that ruptured the capsule and crushed the astronauts. In the case of ejection seats the Ejection rockets probably would have damaged the oxy feed and caused an uncontrolled feed of oxy, even a rupture of the tank, before the seats cleared the capsule. Add to that the injuries, and deaths, that have been caused by ejection seats, everything from pieces of burning solid rocket fuel penetrating the flight suit, and in one case I heard of into the helmet, to amputation of the legs severed by hitting the dash, the ejection seats were a bad idea.

[@user-mr1um1cg5v]

dpsamu2000 I think oxygen in APOLLO 1 acted simply as fuel - not as the cause of deaths itself - it fueled and made everything inside the spacecraft even more combustible than it already was. Obviously not the same as the situation with ejecting from Gemini capsule at all.

[@dpsamu2000]

@@user-mr1um1cg5v Oxidizer isn't fuel. Almost everything else in the cabin is fuel and the vigor of a burn is based on how much oxidizer is fed to a fire. Normal pressure is 14 psi. In pure oxygen at that pressure things burn pretty well. Those capsules were overpressurized to 18 PSI. At that pressure copper wire, plastic, insulation, thin steel and many other things burn very vigorously. I don't think vigorously enough to do the damage of Apollo 1. Under those circumstances there was only a few ounces of oxy in the cabin, and so only a few ounces of fuel could have burned. If the primary reducer valve on a tank of oxy breaks an open tank pressurized to 1000 psi can feed so much oxidizer to the fire most of the easy combustibles burn explosively. In my earlier post I mentioned feeding cotton denim with pure oxy from a hose. That cotton was at 14 psi. The hose fed from a reducer at 100 psi. It burns like a blowtorch. The source tank was cryogenic oxy. Can only imagine what kind of burn that might have caused. In tests of the ejection seats on the Gemini there may have damage to the oxy feed in some tests that caused explosions before the seat cleared so the ejecton seats were discontinued. The argument that they were discontinued due to weight doesn't hold water. A rocket that pulls the seat clear weighs less than a rocket that pulls the seats, and the whole capsule clear.

[@user-mr1um1cg5v]

dpsamu2000 Oxygen fuels the fire.

[@Lecxlez]

I'm addicted to your videos...

[@rocketman48]

Hi Tim another great video and good of you to mention Amy.Keep it goinBill frm Ireland.

[@EvangelineNoelle]

Yay i have been whating for this video for a while. Nice video!

[@JeffSyam]

2:26 Jim Chamberlin? The same person designed Canadian historical Avro Arrow?

[@makimcleary393]

Tim has the same glasses as Jim Chamberlin

[@dapeach06]

Every time you pronounce it Gemin-eye, imagine Amy Shira Teitel crossing her arms and shaking her head as she looks upon disapprovingly (even though she's probably way too nice to actually do this)

[@albclean]

Or Von "Brown" Von Braun!!!

[@josephcope7637]

You're wrong about the von Brawn pronunciation. I recall a college German language instructor saying on TV that in Wernher von Braun's province his name is pronounced "Verner fonn Brown". Also see www.oxfordlearnersdictionaries.com/us/pronunciation/english/wernher-von-braun.

[@thebonesaw..4634]

Yeah, I wasn't going to say anything, but as she would say, it's pronounced "Jiminy"... as in the cricket from Pinocchio. Also, since we're already splitting hairs here... It's _Vah-stok,_ not _Voh-stok..._ kzbin.info/www/bejne/gqazqoZto9GAZ7M

[@oliverbooth2872]

and every time anyone says gemin-ee the ancient Greeks rotate in their graves

[@dapeach06]

@@oliverbooth2872 haha, pretty sure there are worse ways we've mangled their culture (Disney's Hercules, 300, etc)

[@WaterburnerActual]

Outstanding! A most enjoyable video. At the end, when you were doing the wrap, it brought up a question in my mind. The question is, would you consider the same analysis of todays space vehicles? Has production today, included in the mission, an escape system that will do as expected, and keep the Galactic Travelers alive? Thanks! Take Care Stay SAFE

[@WaterburnerActual]

Can a body feel any more embarrassed? I made the above reply and just a bit later, I found the answer in your, (Tim's) video, Why Starship Won't Have.. . Yeah, one just has to open their eyes! Tks.

[@travisshea9809]

Id love a video discussing the idea of Shuttle II, it would have had a n evolved orbiter design that allowed for the drew cabin to act as a launch abort vehicle. The topic is extremely interesting

[@gevmage]

:-O I never thought about the pure oxygen atmosphere in terms of ejection. Wow. Yeah, I bet they would have died even if everything else had gone right. Another not-great thing about the Gemini capsule: I believe it has the smallest amount of cabin space per crew member of any spacecraft ever launched. I suspect that a Soyuz capsule without the orbital module would be smaller, but that's not a configuratoin that's ever intended to be used except for the final couple of hours of a mission (though a crew had to spend at least a day in one once by accident; yuck).

[@maedu3299]

Will the Starship / Superheavy have a launch abort system?

[@sreastronaut9765]

Matija Frey I don’t think so.

[@sreastronaut9765]

Most likely. Its too big for an escape tower.

[@Patchuchan]

I think think the first ones would launch uncrewed and they would transfer to it with Dragon.

[@Patchuchan]

@@FastSloth87 The first missions with Starship will only carry a dozen or so people maybe two dozen at the most as most of the payload will be cargo.

[@ohtheblah]

was watching xploration outer space this past Saturday and a few minutes in I realized I was watching you on TV and not KZbin lol. interesting to see behind the scenes and not just the part of your room from the podcasting camera point of view. after watching that, my question is how do you clean the space suits? I hope they aren't dry clean only... p.s. you have a lovely home but your wife should give you more than just one room for your space stuff...

[@user-im5gi4yr5q]

Another possible reason was described in "Boiled pilot" - the story by Andrey Lomachinsky about pilot whose cockpit cover was ripped off at Mach 4.

[@spheralflunky59BR]

Hello Tim Dodd, you're the best! Signed: Everyday People from 🇧🇷

[@dongurudebro4579]

I am so glad that they never had to use it! I just dont get how you could make such a stupid decision!

[@canadianstudentspaceinitia8812]

Very interesting and experimental part of space exploration. Thanks for covering it!

[@spikethelizard2770]

Great video my dude!

[@jimroger90]

Dude! I don't know if you have noticed but you have 2 different eye colours!

[@vladimirlenin4080]

The Gemini escape system should go to r/crappydesign

[@kamronmartinez487]

Nick DeFigio sammmme

[@MrRandomcommentguy]

At least Gemini actually had an escape system unlike say, the Space Shuttle...

[@RWBHere]

Guys, read the pinned comment. Everyday Astronaut had a few serious factual errors in this video. The abort system would have worked as planned, from the pad, up to about 70,000 feet (20 km). That was an awesome, and thoroughly proven, design.

[@susananavarro3452]

True Very True

[@kennethcoskey335]

Awesome videos, Thanks Tim

[@carlatteniese2]

Tim, I wish I could afford to be a Patreon supporter; you do fantastic work - you and Amy and Scott. Based on the information that you provided here, and from what I know being a spaceflight enthusiast myself, I think that as you suggested as an option for a conclusion to this information, NASA dodged a bullet. They should’ve put an escape tower on the Gemini. Shira definitely saved himself in Stafford, as Armstrong saved himself and and Scott - along with Aldrin who made up for what happened Cernan on the spacewalk from hell; all four of these men saved the program before we reached Apollo.

[@benitollan]

2:28 Jim Chamberlin, Jim Chamberlin Jim Jim cher-ee Aborting from Gemini unlucky it is

[@KSparks80]

I'm guessing Amy face-palmed every time you said Gemini! lol

[@depressed_neutron]

Knock knock knock amy

[@dirtfreak661]

Nice video, but when mentioning the space shuttle ejection seats, don't forget buran had some as well!

[@jcjuxojn]

Definitely dodged a bullet. I wonder what effect the sound waves of the rocket engines would have had on an ejecting astronaut? I can imagine someone pulling the D-ring, having a "lucky" safe ejection, only to die because of either the sound waves of the rocket exhaust or the shockwave of a RUD event. Either way it's a bad day. Special shout-out to the muppets that designed the Space shuttle as a faulty ejection system is still way better than having no ejection system at all. Tim, you're awesome as per usual. Keep up the good work! Shout out from Canada, birthplace of Jim Chamberlain (thanks for stealing him from Avro, we haven't been able to build a decent aircraft since).

[@C4...]

Speaking of Amy, where has she been?

[@FPV-wi8fw]

She said she would be back posting videos this month. Hopefully we will get something really soon

[@C4...]

@@FPV-wi8fw hopefully. Thank you.

[@RogerGarrett]

She's writing a book and has a serious deadline.

[@AleksandrMotsjonov]

Just one small /nit. You pronouncing Vostok as Voshtok. Just keep a simple s there as in "stop".

[@sergegordeev9426]

Same in Voschod. Who even needs an c there? There isn't one in the actual russian spelling.

[@JoeKersey]

Thank you so much for all of this information. I was quite the space junky as a kid (still am) and read all the stuff I could get my hands on (National Geographic, Life Magazine, etc) and never heard any of this.

[@sajkysj9513]

Hey Tim nice video, You are awesome! 😁

[@ThatSlowTypingGuy]

"You're literally riding a controlled explosions." If you think that's crazy you should see my car.

[@Fred_the_1996]

Your profile pic perfectly sums it up

[@joeylotrecchiano6322]

Has Everyday Astronaut ever made a bad video? I didn't think so.

[@a-1b-2c-37]

You're right!

[@vitormonteiro7313]

I agree that his videos are alot of fun and entertaining, but he should be a bit more skeptical about Elon Musk. Please take a look at Thunderfoot's video about Tesla's car powered by some kind of jet engine. It's very well explained with detailed scientific facts.

[@a-1b-2c-37]

@@vitormonteiro7313 ?hmmm ok?

[@nicewhenearnedrudemostlyel489]

i don't know that any are bad, mostly due to decent quality equipment and editting though. he's highly opinionated, and has on multiple occasions spread bad info in lieue of facts.

[@vitormonteiro7313]

@@nicewhenearnedrudemostlyel489 That's exactly what I meant. We should always question, specially our fellow science lovers. No one is above criticism, when it's justified.

[@olliewoods1946]

Love your vids well done

[@brianw612]

As a side note, many of the Soviet accomplishments never truly happened. International rules of space accomplishments required the astronauts to LAND in the vehicle they departed in. The use of ejection seats should have disqualified success, based on this rule.

[@olv675]

Facepalm...more like SPACEpalm

[@EverydayAstronaut]

I KNOW!!! I thought about adding that, but fired we have about a dozen to throw that in there haha

[@barrybend7189]

Can you ask Elon Musk if he could engineer a real working thunderbird 1. I'm asking because it lands like the BFS.

[@river1403]

I have to say, I love your new intro

[@wrightmf]

In general at the time ejection seats made good sense. Though you discussed the reasons and illustrated the three year study, there may have been other issues. You also pointed out hindsight is everything, hey, look at many other systems/decisions made at the time as you pointed out about pure oxygen cabins of Gemini "I think you know where this is going" as nobody really understood how dangerous that was prior to Apollo 1. Enjoyed the video, kind of bored so thought I'd see what you have. And yes I watched Amy's video of that rogallo wing for Gemini another one of those "what were they thinking" moments of history. Like you, she is able to bring color to history of space moments that happen decades before both of you were born.

[@fcgHenden]

7:20 3-day reset for a manned orbiter? Man, these guys were crazy!

[@Talatharas]

3 day probably to give the rocket a full 1 over... followed by waiting for it to get a good line up again.

[@zerg9523]

Try selling that to the crew... it almost took off, it didnt blow up, so go home, take a shower and we’ll see you bright and early monday for another go.

[@fcgHenden]

@@zerg9523 😂

[@richardvernon317]

The more amazing thing was that they turned that Pad around from an actual successful launch in less than 8 days!!! Gemini 7's Titan II lifted off the very same pad 7 1/2 days before the Gemini 6 abort. The stacking and prep of Gemini 6 starting the following day after the Gemini 7 Launch. Fastest Pad turn around goes to the Russians though with Vostok 3 and 4 being launched from the same launch pad within 23 3/4 hours.

[@mattcolver1]

Good series. iIm looking forward to more in this series.

[@morgant1568]

I love the new intro!

[@jappperon7012]

great video. ejection seats/pods could be viable but the weight and mass likely will offset any positives. off topic but what are your thoughts on the oft overlooked/forgotten rocket engine they named the "nuclear lightbulb"?

[@bertblankenstein3738]

Really good stuff. Thank you.

[@philippsesar5276]

Wow. Never thought about that so intense. Very interesting topic in my opinion!

[@mettwurstopa4311]

Great Video! I am not sure but I think the Buran also had ejection seats (in planing) exept it never flew with crew.

[@sonnyburnett8725]

Tim, I can’t believe you didn’t tell that part of the story of Gemini 6 during their pad abort when Wally Schirra famously said to the Cape Capcom “we’re just sitting here, breathing”. Of course it wasn’t funny at the time but later it seemed so appropriate. Great information on your site, thanks for sharing.

[@donmoore7785]

It would be great to interview a few astronauts about this subject, and get their opinions. *edit* I see an engineer weighed in and provided extensive information.

[@arnoldsherrill6305]

A new post on KZbin from everyday astronaut it's like getting a Christmas present that you didn't expect but always remember

[@quiron139]

Great vid!

[@Artem.Kak.Art.]

Thanks for video. But didn't Buran-Energia have ejection seats too? Also for all 7 crew members?

[@EverydayAstronaut]

It did, however, no one got to fly on it unfortunately.

[@hparad51]

Liked the video, have 2 suggestions for future: 1. Why the space race? Curious Droid just did story about Van Allen Belt and nuclear weapons "fireworks". Space race stopped that! 2. Why the Shuttle was so BIG? Hint, the STS-44 payload (and ridiculous science experiments), the DSP program helped pay the NASA bill. Twice the size of Hubble, the USAF helped pay for the shuttle to carry this, but 13 years passed before they trusted "the life" of this critical satellite to the Shuttle.

[@thomasneal4775]

Thanks to Gordon Cress for your detailed response! And thanks for confirming something I had always wondered about: Given that the ejection seat rocket motor firing took place *outside* the pressurized crew space, followed by the *immediate* high-g acceleration of the seat/astronaut away from the O2 source, the crew would be safe from the Roman-Candle effect. Also, good to know that the Gemini Familiarization manual got the ejection sequence right, so I could figure this out myself. Question for Gordon: Didn't Weber do the actual installation of the landing gear into the two TTV (Tow Test Vehicles) as a sub contractor? I'm a big Gemini Paraglider fan and am still looking for an adequate drawing/description of the main gear/skid/deployment mechanism. Also, Grissom and Young were watching a *film* of an ejection seat test. As you state they weren't actually present.

[@mattdyer9544]

Love to see the glasses coordination between you and Jim

[@robertrudolph3549]

Face-planting great title... My Grandfather worked for NASA during Gemini and Apollo and would have loved your KZbin. He was very, Very critical. He said common sense was the one thing that was uncommon.