×

Announcing: Slashdot Deals - Explore geek apps, games, gadgets and more. (what is this?)

Thank you!

We are sorry to see you leave - Beta is different and we value the time you took to try it out. Before you decide to go, please take a look at some value-adds for Beta and learn more about it. Thank you for reading Slashdot, and for making the site better!

Informative Shuttle Ascent Video

timothy posted more than 3 years ago | from the sights-to-behold dept.

NASA 69

minterbartolo points out this video, produced by Matt Melis at the Glenn Research Center, excerpting from its description: "Photographic documentation of a Space Shuttle launch plays a critical role in the engineering analysis and evaluation process that takes place during each and every mission. Motion and Still images enable Shuttle engineers to visually identify off-nominal events and conditions requiring corrective action to ensure mission safety and success. This imagery also provides highly inspirational and educational insight to those outside the NASA family. This compilation of film and video presents the best of the best ground-based Shuttle motion imagery from STS-114, STS-117, and STS-124 missions. Rendered in the highest definition possible, this production is a tribute to the dozens of men and women of the Shuttle imaging team and the 30yrs of achievement of the Space Shuttle Program."

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Nice (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34521246)

And obama canceled everything, and we don't have a plan. So much for "change." Sigh.

Re:Nice (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34521264)

Bush cancelled the Shuttle.

Re:Nice (4, Informative)

Low Ranked Craig (1327799) | more than 3 years ago | (#34521420)

yeah, and Obama / congress cancelled portions of it's overdue replacement, which I thing was the point. By all means cancel Orion, but make sure to pay the fuckers that precipitated the financial meltdown $800B.

Re:Nice (3, Insightful)

bgoffe (1501287) | more than 3 years ago | (#34521762)

They weren't paid, it was loaned, and all but some $30 billion came back. Also, we once let the financial system collapse and we didn't do a thing to stop it -- today it's widely known as the Great Depression. Back then 1/3 of banks in the U.S. shut their doors in the days before the FDIC. The details were different this time, but the impact could have been the same as bank capital went from $1.3 trillion to $.3 trillion in a few months. We complain that Washington doesn't "do the right thing," but in this case they did (Congress, Bush, and Obama), and now they catch hell for it. Finally, there's a reason that Bernanke was Time's Person of the Year.

Re:Nice (2)

TrisexualPuppy (976893) | more than 3 years ago | (#34521860)

These boom-bust cycles were CAUSED by the people running the national bank.

Re:Nice (1)

bgoffe (1501287) | more than 3 years ago | (#34523524)

We certainly had booms and busts well before we had a central bank (i.e. the Fed, which was established in 1913). As time has gone by, they've generally gotten better at central banking; the period from 1982 to 2007 is often called the "Great Moderation" for this quarter century of stable growth: two mild recessions and stable and low inflation; see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Great_Moderation [wikipedia.org] . Also, take a look at the real GDP data from http://measuringworth.com/usgdp/ [measuringworth.com] (put together by economic historians) and note the falling volatility over the last century (easiest seen in the log view). Finally check out http://www.nber.org/cycles/cyclesmain.html [nber.org] (from the people who officially date recessions) and note the increasing length of expansions and shorter recessions.

Re:Nice (1)

nedwidek (98930) | more than 3 years ago | (#34523598)

Ah, we have an Austrian Economic Theorist in the house. So the fact that these booms and busts happened before central or reserve banks and even banks in general is explained by? Or even that they happen in non-economic systems?

You can argue that they exacerbate them, but the evidence shows they don't cause them. In fact the evidence makes it very easy to argue that they actually make them less severe.

Re:Nice (1)

Charliemopps (1157495) | more than 3 years ago | (#34521492)

and Obama could change that with a snap of his fingers.

Re:Nice (0)

MrQuacker (1938262) | more than 3 years ago | (#34522156)

No he can't, you're doing it wrong.

You have to find all the reasons that make gutting NASA good for Obama. Along the lines of:

> No more whities in space!
> We'll take money from NASA in order to come take your guns away. Only way we can afford it.
> By gutting NASA, we'll take all the high paying jobs in the south and eliminate them.
> Rockets? In Utah? As if!
> The Overlords told me to.

The crazier the better. Then you get the Teabaggers/Republinuts to demand more NASA funding. Because now giving NASA money would be bad for Obama.

Yes, I am serious.

Re:Nice (4, Insightful)

Jstlook (1193309) | more than 3 years ago | (#34521294)

With all due respect, the Shuttle is a program that needs to go. I agree that it is a travesty that there is no overarching goal after the end of the shuttle program.
Still though, when's the last time you saw government deliver a good, cheap, quality product on time? I get the feeling that in the next twenty years or so, commercial entities will be able to surpass our present status. The only hope I have on the government front is to maintain the space program legacy to encourage smart young kids to pursue something greater than themselves. Or, at least to maintain the program until it looks pathetic compared to the commercial entities in the same market.

Re:Nice (4, Insightful)

DerekLyons (302214) | more than 3 years ago | (#34521440)

I agree that it is a travesty that there is no overarching goal after the end of the shuttle program.

Why? It's exactly those overarching goals that keep effing NASA up. Pretty much every other government agency gets to do it's work in a straightforward and methodical fashion without a dramatic goal - but if NASA doesn't have one, it gets flamed. (Never mind that NASA only carries the policies set by the Administration and funded by Congress.) When NASA does get to do methodical development and to work out the basics, it gets flamed for 'going around in circles'.
 

Still though, when's the last time you saw government deliver a good, cheap, quality product on time?

About the same time I last saw a good cheap quality product delivered by anyone. I.E. never. 'Cheap' is pretty much antithetical to 'good quality' for a product of any significance. (Yeah, there are some down at the end of the bell curve, like Linux, but they're exceptions and you're fooling yourself if you believe otherwise.) Most government programs do get done more or less on time and in budget, but as always you never hear about the middle of the bell curve.
 

I get the feeling that in the next twenty years or so, commercial entities will be able to surpass our present status.

Not a chance. Commercial entities aren't going any further than LEO any time soon.
 

The only hope I have on the government front is to maintain the space program legacy to encourage smart young kids to pursue something greater than themselves.

In other words, you want the same mess we've always had - unsustainable, extremely expensive programs for entertainment. Why not? You get something to drool over (because it's SPACE!) and something to bitch about (because it's hard and expensive) all at once. What a bargain.

Re:Nice (2)

NalosLayor (958307) | more than 3 years ago | (#34521900)

About the same time I last saw a good cheap quality product delivered by anyone. I.E. never. 'Cheap' is pretty much antithetical to 'good quality' for a product of any significance. (Yeah, there are some down at the end of the bell curve, like Linux, but they're exceptions and you're fooling yourself if you believe otherwise.) Most government programs do get done more or less on time and in budget, but as always you never hear about the middle of the bell curve.

So very, very, VERY wrong. The only reason you say that is because standards keep ratcheting up. A cheap car today costs the same as one made fifty years ago (with inflation), but the quality is much, much, much better (despite what old fogies would have you believe). How about calculators? A cheap, high quality four function calculator costs a few pennies today. In 1950 they were expensive office appliances that needed frequent repair. The same goes for nearly every consumer good you can think of. Sure, botique shops make better quality higher priced versions of nearly everything, but the fact is, the quality of goods is on average, phenomenal, and the prices are fire-sale low.

Re:Nice (1)

welshmnt (787086) | more than 3 years ago | (#34522120)

True, but only with a hundred years worth of iteration, a truly MASSIVE user base to test with and (until recently) a large amount of competition. In the process they killed hundreds of thousands (millions?) and STILL manage to produce some real howlers even these days. Though it is true to say that they don`t explode in a ball of flame and kill the passengers very often now, a wheel felling off due to incorrect maintainance whilst joining a motorway (think re-entry) is still going to cause a problem.... All the things you mention are produced by the million at least, launch vehicles are not going to be in that range until we`ve come up with some seriously new physics. Which is a shame, `cause I`d love my corpse to be cremated in a SunDive (tm Douglas Adams).

Re:Nice (4, Insightful)

FuckingNickName (1362625) | more than 3 years ago | (#34522330)

Crap yesterday is crap today, but mid-range equipment from 30 years ago - especially electronic - was built to last and built to be repaired.

When I was born we had one main TV, and that same TV was repaired two or three times by a knowledgeable, cheap, well-known, local repair guy until its death over two decades later. None since has lasted more than 5 years without developing some niggle or dying completely.

Even at your desk, LCD longevity is a fucking joke compared to CRTs, and printers are sold disposable with ink DRM. An HP 48 has buttons as fresh today as in 1990, but an HP 49G will make you give up after a couple of hours and a 50G - after several iterations of fail - is only just about usable.

Items 30 years ago were engineered to work - that's all we knew how to do. But now we know how to do something more profitable: items today are engineered as cheaply as possible to last for the length of the warranty. It'd be uncapitalistic not to, right?

The market delivers what the market demands (1)

DragonHawk (21256) | more than 3 years ago | (#34524476)

Items 30 years ago were engineered to work - that's all we knew how to do. But now we know how to do something more profitable: items today are engineered as cheaply as possible to last for the length of the warranty. It'd be uncapitalistic not to, right?

Of course, given the choice between expensive quality and cheap crap, the vast majority of consumers buy the cheap crap every time. If you try and build stuff designed to last for decades, nobody buys it and you go out of business. Sucks for the tiny minority which is actually willing to fund quality, of course.

To give a concrete example: Modern photocopiers are basically just big printers. They're the only printers left which have reasonable cost per page and are designed to last for millions of pages. But they cost several thousand dollars. The thing is, when you look at cost per page, they're actually *well worth it*, even at that price. You get break-even after a few years; after that they're making you money. But most people still buy a $300 printer instead.

Re:Nice (2)

mspohr (589790) | more than 3 years ago | (#34524694)

Sounds like you've had a string of bad luck... or you enjoy

My experience has been the opposite. When I was born we had tube TVs which broke down regularly when tubes burned out. The picture tubes CRT got dimmer over time and also burned spots on the screen if you weren't careful. Since moving to solid state, I've never had a TV (even CRT tube TVs) die on me. I had two TVs (solid state + CRT) from 1982 that were still working fine until I gave them away last year. The LCD screens that I've had (on laptops, TVs, desktop monitors) are all working just fine. I've never had one fail in any way. They are all bright and clear as when new.

Re:Nice (1)

FuckingNickName (1362625) | more than 3 years ago | (#34524842)

Yeah, TVs from the '80s were way better than those of the '60s and early '70s - but cheaper processes (hello, China!) through the late '80s and '90s fixed that, and since moving to LCD things have got very shit again. I do not believe that the backlights in your LCDs have not dimmed, unless you barely use them or you only moved to LCD very recently. Backlights are simply not built to stay bright for as many hours as recent CRTs will chug along.

But it's not just the main components which die sooner: "advances" in PSU design often mean not installing over-specced components (must..save..last..$0.01). More recently, regulations on filtering have become enforced (in the EU, certainly) as if no more than friendly advice, with self-certification being the way backward.

Re:Nice (1)

Ihmhi (1206036) | more than 3 years ago | (#34526768)

I think you and I may be from a dying generation.

I got my first computer in 1999, and with it came a 19" Gateway CRT monitor. When I got it it had already been used daily for a year.

That monitor lasted for 8 years with very few problems. The last year, the screen picture would bend inwards like an hourglass, but if you smacked the side of it that fixed things nicely. One day, about 10 years after it was purchased originally, the hardest of technical taps would not restore the screen. I junked it and replaced it with a backup 15" monitor.

Now I have a LCD that I got used. I already loathe the fact that it seems far more difficult to clean without damaging it (I received it with some dust and dirt stains on it just from being stored on the floor in a room somewhere). I don't imagine that it would last half as long as my Gateway 2000 CRT.

Re:Nice (1)

BraksDad (963908) | more than 3 years ago | (#34527280)

DerekLyons please go find a different pot to piss in. NASA is better money than most government programs!

Re:Nice (1)

BraksDad (963908) | more than 3 years ago | (#34527268)

...when's the last time you saw government deliver a good, cheap, quality product on time?...

Hoover Dam? Maybe we should call it the Dam Government.

Re:Nice (1)

Jstlook (1193309) | more than 3 years ago | (#34538970)

That was back when immigrant labor clearly wasn't a problem. That or a huge number of deaths.

Re:Nice (1)

BraksDad (963908) | more than 3 years ago | (#34539150)

yep! I was just mentioning the last time the Govt was ahead of schedule and under budget. Well, the last time I can recall anyway. I am glad we do not exploit people and lives this way now, at least not blatently.

Re:Nice (1)

Coren22 (1625475) | more than 3 years ago | (#34534180)

I was talking to my 10 year old about this subject recently. I told him that in his lifetime, I can see him taking a trip to the moon. I kind of think that this stagnation has been what caused us to not have the space station from the beginning of 2001. If the private sector was doing it, it would already be done. Build in space, like the old Star Trek (why they changed that in the new one I cannot fathom.)

The funny thing was my son just not getting what I was saying, he said "but I don't want to be an astronaut." I had to explain what commercial space flight means. Some day I have to put him through watching 2001 and 2010, it might open his eyes to what will happen in the next 50 years.

Go Bigelow, go SpaceX, go Virgin; bring to us what NASA couldn't. I look forward to space travel becoming reality, I just doubt it will happen while I am young enough to go.

Re:Nice (3, Informative)

ravenspear (756059) | more than 3 years ago | (#34521336)

Obama didn't cancel the shuttle, Bush did, and yes we do have a plan. It is the SLS.

http://www.universetoday.com/75522/president-signs-nasa-2010-authorization-act/ [universetoday.com]

Obama touched my junk. Bush never did that. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34525618)

Obama touched my junk.

Bush never did that.

Obama seized GM gleefully.

Bush never did that.

Obama marches troops away from the enemy.

Bush never did that.

Obama seizes banks gleefully.

Bush never did that.

Obama spreads socialist misery.

Bush never did that.

Re:Obama touched my junk. Bush never did that. (1)

MrQuacker (1938262) | more than 3 years ago | (#34527360)

Bush lied, people died.

480p? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34521302)

It's a "high definition" video that's only available in 480p. Sigh.

Re:480p? (1)

Hynee (774168) | more than 3 years ago | (#34521348)

Uh yeah, what's the deal? Youtube can go up to 4000 horizontal lines, and this is supposed to be sourced from "high definition" and film, so it should be available at least in 720p. It was posted 3 days ago, so that should be plenty of time for youtube to encode hidef.

Re:480p? (2)

Hynee (774168) | more than 3 years ago | (#34521386)

From the uploaders comments in youtube:

I am going to see if Matt can get me the original files in higher resolution to upload.

Re:480p? (4, Insightful)

ColdWetDog (752185) | more than 3 years ago | (#34521450)

I don't care.

Total. Nerd. Porn.

Re:480p? (0)

Ostsol (960323) | more than 3 years ago | (#34521626)

Odd that you cared enough to troll.

Re:480p? (1)

ColdWetDog (752185) | more than 3 years ago | (#34524040)

Troll?

If that were a troll, your nose would have fallen off.

Simply an expression of delight and awe that we've put that thing together.

Back into the basement, son. Come on out when you're feeling better.

Re:480p? (1)

Ostsol (960323) | more than 3 years ago | (#34524084)

Hmm. . . It appears I misunderstood the tone of your post. Sorry.

Re:480p? (1)

ColdWetDog (752185) | more than 3 years ago | (#34524228)

Not a problem. We need a smiley tag or something. Maybe blinkies.

First. (0, Offtopic)

lul_wat (1623489) | more than 3 years ago | (#34521346)

...man on the moon

What's the point? (2)

DerekLyons (302214) | more than 3 years ago | (#34521358)

What's the point of bragging about how the program is rendered in 'the highest definition available' - and then putting it on You Tube in crappy low definition?

Re:What's the point? (3)

kestasjk (933987) | more than 3 years ago | (#34521502)

I'm not sure, but I'd love to buy a copy in a high-def format.. I think they're teasing us.

It really is stunning how NASA can have the most exciting, awe-inspiring projects and footage of any government project that has ever existed, and yet it falls to an engineer to salvage this incredible footage, edit and narrate it (with his engineer friends). I've watched countless series of documentaries about NASA's various space programs and have never come across such excellent footage, so well explained.

Re:What's the point? (1)

bill_mcgonigle (4333) | more than 3 years ago | (#34527496)

and yet it falls to an engineer to salvage this incredible footage, edit and narrate it (with his engineer friends). I've watched countless series of documentaries about NASA's various space programs and have never come across such excellent footage, so well explained.

Ever talk to a newspaper reporter and then read his story? Primary sources are ideal.

Re:What's the point? (1)

shacky003 (1595307) | more than 3 years ago | (#34521730)

It's going to be released as a dvd with extras, etc, in full def..

Re:What's the point? (1, Insightful)

adolf (21054) | more than 3 years ago | (#34521994)

It's going to be released as a dvd with extras, etc, in full def..

[citation needed]

Re:What's the point? (3, Funny)

creativeHavoc (1052138) | more than 3 years ago | (#34522208)

It's going to be released as a dvd with extras, etc, in full def..

[citation needed]

[watch the video]

Re:What's the point? (1)

ColdWetDog (752185) | more than 3 years ago | (#34524046)

Been there, done that. I heard them talk about it, but I don't see a place on the screen where I can call with my VISA card. One of those places where OPERATORS ARE STANDING BY.

Re:What's the point? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34522486)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W2VygftZSCs#t=33m15s [youtube.com]

My bad for feeding the trolls, but for anyone Else that is interested, 33:15 or so is the first of two times he mentions deleted scenes, extras, and releasing a disc.

As to Adolf: if you have no interest in watching the youtube copy, how much interest could you really have in the high-def version of the same thing, thus the need to ask for a citation?

Re:What's the point? (1)

adolf (21054) | more than 3 years ago | (#34524454)

Troll? Hardly.

I did watch the video. It was great.

But before I could watch (Youtube was having buffering issues on the 480p stream), I went in search of this elusive "high definition" version, and was instead finding comments from the original poster like this: [youtube.com]

I am not sure if there is any plans to release a DVD/Blu Ray for the public, but I will see what I can find out.

I don't know about anyone else, but I don't see how "I am not sure" and "it's coming to DVD!!@!" are in any way synonymous.

More recently, there is this other comment [youtube.com] , in response to a question about possibly making a 1080p torrent available:

working on getting a higher resolution version. only had the dvd that I got from a friend. Matt is busy with shuttle ET tanking test, but going to see what he can put together. He is just happy folks are able to finally see the video finally.

Nonetheless, thank you for the citation, AC.

Re:What's the point? (2)

T-Bone-T (1048702) | more than 3 years ago | (#34523816)

How is that any different? DVD is only 720x480.

Re:What's the point? (5, Informative)

minterbartolo (1956690) | more than 3 years ago | (#34523380)

I only had the DVD version that I got from a friend and put that up, but I am trying to get the high def originals from Matt. He is busy right now working the shuttle ET tanking test for STS-133. We are just happy folks are able to see the video since Matt has been trying for a while now to get it out in the public. The outpouring of support will hopefully prompt the folks to find a way to get a high res version available for the public to purchase or at the very least download.

Re:What's the point? (1)

CaptainChuck (856429) | more than 3 years ago | (#34528794)

Why not show it on NASA's hi def channel? It would be more relevant than showing *nauts playing pool and planting trees, which has been rebroadcast many times.

OMG (1)

cstec (521534) | more than 3 years ago | (#34521446)

That rocked! I can't believe I'm the first to say that.

Re:OMG (4, Interesting)

DarrylM (170047) | more than 3 years ago | (#34521506)

That rocked! I can't believe I'm the first to say that.

I have to agree. I know I took a while to reply... about 45 minutes, actually... after I had watched the video, spellbound by what I was seeing.

Wow.

Even as a Youtube video, the views and detail was amazing. If the people who put this video together happen to read this thread, thank you for creating this. If you could upload it as a high quality version and/or make a DVD available, that would be even better! But as it is, I'm simply amazed at what I saw and loved the explanations along the way.

Re:OMG (1)

lemur3 (997863) | more than 3 years ago | (#34521570)

i predict that there will be a lot of 'me 2' type replies on this one....

i agree, even as a youtube video the stuff was very compelling.... as was mentioned much of it was stuff i would have likely never seen before.. and hadnt.

i thought i knew what a launch looked like.

Re:OMG (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34521976)

i predict that there will be a lot of 'me 2' type replies on this one....

me 2

Re:OMG (2)

echucker (570962) | more than 3 years ago | (#34522028)

I just watched the whole thing, too. The number of views went from 3434 to 3460 in the 45 minutes it took to watch it. It definitely sounds like a DVD is coming, because they mentioned a disc and deleted scenes at least twice during the video.

FUCKING AWESOME! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34521532)

noting more to say

licking toilets (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34521584)

toilet lick

Should humans try to expand from Earth? (1)

bdabautcb (1040566) | more than 3 years ago | (#34521648)

What does the shuttle 'imaging' team have to show us? As a nerd-loving public, other than good imagery, this shows me nothing of the previous failures and bad launch images that have plagued the shuttle history. Show me something like a new vehicle, even a new concept design. "We had bad launches in the past, so we videotaped our next launches" doesn't cut it for me. Something like, "We have an experimental launch vehicle to access other planets and explore the boundaries of human exploration, similar to what the Apollo Astronauts did, and the heroes died... That would cut it. But, "we are so afraid to continue launching people into space because the bureaucracy of our space program is so bad that we have not made any improvements in fifty years and have actually continued a program in which two vehicles of the same design disintegrated upon launch and re-entry. We can no longer afford to put humans into space because our bureaucracy has made it prohibitively expensive, therefore, that is a useless endeavor. I call bullshit, and I call bullshit on the people who spend money on war instead of money on human exploration. There are many soldiers who would be willing to risk their lives going back to the moon, and beyond that, going to Mars. If JFK had the balls to make that call, and the governers of this country respect him, why have we not been back there? Don't tell me it is funding, because the current military expenditure annualy in the US could easily fund at least some research on the project. Compound that billions of dollars of funding since the Iran Contra, and we could have a man, woman, and family on the Moon, not to mention an exploratory team going to mars. People like Jim Lovell, who were willing to say, this has never been done before, but maybe it can. If it can, I will risk my life to make it happen. The age of communication has destroyed the idea of centralized regimes like the Germans in 1939. That horror physically and informationally cannot happen again. So lets get past it, change our goals, and realize the limitations and possibilities of life on our planet. It needs to be preserved, and expanded. Expansion is not possible while people are still fighting over things as trivial as religion, philosophy, and wealth. All three are fairly relative when you consider survival, are they not?

Re:Should humans try to expand from Earth? (1)

rossdee (243626) | more than 3 years ago | (#34521962)

In the long run survival of the human species is not possible if we limit ourselves to this planet. Even if we don't screw up the planet ourselves (climate change) sooner or later a large rock will come along with our name on it.

Re:Should humans try to expand from Earth? (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34522090)

Shut up Braden.

You and your liberal arts major simply don't comprehend how fucked up the political system is.

Re:Should humans try to expand from Earth? (2)

PNutts (199112) | more than 3 years ago | (#34523340)

What does the shuttle 'imaging' team have to show us?

Images of the shuttle.

If JFK had the balls to make that call, and the governers of this country respect him, why have we not been back there?

If only someone whould have written the reasons down. We could call it history [imdb.com] and stored those historical documents historical documents [imdb.com] into places we could call libraries [imdb.com] perhaps located in a complex called a university [imdb.com] and people could come to look at them and learn [imdb.com] why decisions were made.

It needs to be preserved, and expanded. Expansion is not possible while people are still fighting over things as trivial as religion, philosophy, and wealth. All three are fairly relative when you consider survival, are they not?

Sorry, I'd love to answer but after college I try to not get high before 8 AM.

Where's the HD version please? (1)

Amiralul (1164423) | more than 3 years ago | (#34521776)

Rendered in the highest definition possible, but uploaded as a 480p YouTube clip...

Re:Where's the HD version please? (4, Informative)

minterbartolo (1956690) | more than 3 years ago | (#34523402)

I am working on getting the high def original, but all I had was the dvd version to upload. I just wanted to get it out there for folks to see since PAO has not really helped out.

Re:Where's the HD version please? (1)

Amiralul (1164423) | more than 3 years ago | (#34523592)

Thanks for uploading it anyway, it's a piece of YouTube jewelry!

Director's Cut (4, Informative)

Amiralul (1164423) | more than 3 years ago | (#34521828)

And here are some extra clips: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jsvVU24uDIc [youtube.com]

Re:Director's Cut (1)

ColdWetDog (752185) | more than 3 years ago | (#34524134)

Whoever is playing around with our minds, I would really appreciate if you would stop. Nearly 96 hours after it hits YouTube and not more than a couple of tweets about a DVD / high def torrent / whathaveyou.

It isn't polite to do that. It's not nice. Have you no shame?

Similar Apollo 11 Footage (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34524700)

Some guy did something similar (though not quite as extensive) for the footage of the Apollo 11 lift-off.

http://vimeo.com/4366695 [vimeo.com]

Where's the blu-ray? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34524974)

NASA has never been good at public relations. This is a case in point. What they have here is some first class engineering pr0n. There are engineers all over the world that would love to see this on their 50" plasmas. Yet... it's not available. Why don't they realize what a public relations boost this could be? Not only does it make NASA look good, it illustrates what they do, how hard it is, and in the end how beautiful it is.

I'd buy a bunch of blu-rays of this. If I could. Ya listening NASA?

Anyone similarly interested, you can get the email address of Edward Schilling, the NASA public affairs contact for video imaging, here:

http://science.nasa.gov/about-us/public-affairs-points-of-contact/

Can't hurt to drop him an email. Might not help, but if we don't tell him what we want, there's no chance we'll get it.

P2P (1)

Tokolosh (1256448) | more than 3 years ago | (#34526226)

If ever there was a justification for bittorrent, this is it. Why stick this on Youtube with crappy resolution, when you could post a torrent file and seed for a while.

The video could be public domain, high-def, and inspiring to young geeks, instead of being lame.

Re:P2P (1)

minterbartolo (1956690) | more than 3 years ago | (#34527372)

I only had the DVD so I took the VOB files merged them and put the mpg up on youtube. I am trying to work with Matt to get a higher resolution version up there and available for download.

Re:P2P (1)

TheKidWho (705796) | more than 3 years ago | (#34530254)

I would gladly pay for this, would be nice if NASA could fund itself in ways other than just congress.

Check for New Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?