My favorite Neil Armstrong story was the one my dad's friend Tom, who had a small airstrip near Solvang, CA told me. He got to take Neil up in one of his gliders. He offered him the controls, but he declined. He just wanted to be a regular tourist and spend some time enjoying the scenery. Can you imagine, get to fly an American hero around in an unpowered glider who just wanted a nice, quiet ride in the sky.

@Skank_and_Gutterboy

Жыл бұрын

One of my favorite Armstrong stories is when he ejected out of the lunar lander trainer (after it developed a thruster problem and crashed) and was in the office that afternoon working like nothing even happened. Even his boss was like, "Are you alright? You can take the afternoon off if you want." He was just like, "No, I'm good. We got work to do here." Just another day at the office.

@MorzakEV

Жыл бұрын

@@Skank_and_Gutterboy lol, yeah, and I think his wife found out from someone else as well

@VenturiLife

Жыл бұрын

@@Skank_and_Gutterboy He was a cool customer. Probably why he was selected for the first moon landing.

@Skank_and_Gutterboy

Жыл бұрын

@@VenturiLife Exactly, like when/how he dealt with a thruster malfunction on a Gemini flight that spun the capsule faster with every passing second and was literally life-threatening. I'll bet a million dollars that was a huge contributor on why he was selected.

@jessebott1879

Жыл бұрын

Did he seam kinda weird? Like something was off ? just wanna know because of own experience.

“Neil, you missed the runway” “10-4, im just gonna circle the globe one time”

@mokka1115

4 жыл бұрын

"Neil you idiot, the earth is flat. Everyone knows that!"

@anunayy

4 жыл бұрын

@@mokka1115 Don't worry he would have one under it and up back.

@zhongxina9420

3 жыл бұрын

@@mokka1115 your mom's flat

An aero engineering instructor at one point, Armstrong was asked what procedure existed, if any, for landing the X-15 should the lower horizontal stabilizer fail to jettison, necessary for deployment of the landing skids. "Well," said Armstrong, in his southern drawl, "what you have then is a situation in which you are about to be the driver of the world's fastest plow."

@michaelwoods9005

5 жыл бұрын

Southern drawl? He's from Cincinnati lol

@NeutronSplitter

5 жыл бұрын

@@michaelwoods9005 Ohioans have a drawl.

@JONNOG88

5 жыл бұрын

"Southern". He was from Ohio. I guess that's "Southern". Relative to Canada! 😉

@scriptohio1986

5 жыл бұрын

No, he is from Wapakoneta Ohio.

@blahblahbleh__9046

5 жыл бұрын

My god how people have changed over the decades. I remember reading a quote from Frank Whittle when he was asked about the Gloster E.28/39 going really fast with his jet engine it. He just turned around and said “well, that is what it was bloody well supposed to do” haha.

You mentioned that Adams’ X-15 broke up on its last flight, but failed to note that Michael Adams lost his life in that flight. This made him the first fatality in the American Space program. He was only 37.

@jmcdonne

Жыл бұрын

X-15 #3 was destroyed in November 1967, but the Apollo 1 fire was January 1967.

@Cydonia2020

Жыл бұрын

@@jmcdonne Yes, Grissom, Chaffee and White were the first fatalities in the American space program, but they never left the launch pad. Adams was the first American to die IN SPACE (according to the American definition of where space begins).

@robertoroberto9798

Жыл бұрын

@@Cydonia2020 You didn’t specify that they needed to die in space.

@codymoe4986

Күн бұрын

1.Astronauts Freeman, See, and Basset were all American astronauts in training, and died well before those that you had mentioned...and both Grisson and White had certainly "left the launchpad" before their fire on Apollo 1. 2. Adams perished during his aircraft's breakup during REENTRY, and not above the Karmann Line, aka IN SPACE... "During X-15 Flight 191, Adams' seventh flight, the plane had an electrical problem followed by control problems at the apogee of its flight. The pilot may also have become disoriented. During reentry from a 266,000 ft (50.4 mile, 81.1 km) apogee, the X-15 yawed and went into a spin at Mach 5. The pilot recovered, but went into a Mach 4.7 inverted dive. Excessive loading led to structural breakup at about 65,000 feet (19.8 km).[14] Adams was posthumously awarded astronaut wings, as his flight had passed an altitude of 50 miles (80.5 km)."

Knowing how much of an engineer that Neil Armstrong was, I have no doubt in my mind that the guy wasn't "winging it" when he overshot his holding pattern in the X-15, but just calmly and collectively started immediately calculating his descend rate, speed and altitude to figure out if he could make it. And he probably all did it in his head. To give you an idea, back in 2000 he said this about himself in a speech: _"I am, and forever will be, a white-socks, pocket-protector, nerdy engineer, born under the second law of thermodynamics, steeped in steam tables, in love with free-body diagrams, transformed by Laplace, and propelled by compressible flow . . . [Arthur C. Clarke’s] third law seems particularly apt today: Any sufficiently developed technology is indistinguishable from magic. Truly, it has been a magical century.”_ The man was a legend and it was a sad day for space exploration, engineers, and the aerospace industry when he passed on. The man should be the patron saint of engineers everywhere.

@Dr_Do-Little

5 жыл бұрын

One of the few who not only had the "theoric knowledge" but also the "empiric understanding" of it. Add to that his ability to be one with the machine. He wasn't selected to be the first Sapiens on the Moon by accident.

@RCAvhstape

5 жыл бұрын

@@Dr_Do-Little Actually, he kinda was selected by accident; the accident in question being the one that killed Gus Grissom and his crew. Had that not happened the flight schedule would've been different and someone else likely would've been the first, probably Gus himself.

@phil4826

5 жыл бұрын

Matchesburn. Oh, Neil is without question one of my patron saints. Those guys inspired me into an aerospace engineering career. How I wish I could have met him.

@SpydersByte

5 жыл бұрын

that's a beautiful quote from an amazing man.

@HappyBeezerStudios

5 жыл бұрын

Just check out on his last minute corrections on Apollo 11

Scott, having been in flight test for the government (attached to the Air Force Systems Command (AFSC), I wish to congratulate you on your excellent synopsis of the magnificent X-15 and the equally magnificent expertise of Neil Armstrong. Mr. Armstrong was a consummate test pilot (and member of the Society of Experimental Test Pilots (SETP)). Folks think that test pilots are a wild bunch of 'Smil'n Jacks - they are not (Not even Chuck Yeager) they are skilled and disciplined professionals, who follow an exact flight test plan, for a particular mission/flight. Armstrong did what any good test pilot (or any pilot regardless of what you are flying) - must do - trust your instruments. The downlink telemetry data can be skewed and particularly back in those days it was still pretty much Frequency Modulated (FM) telemetry, before pulse coded modulation (PCM) evolved. Everyone who flew the X-15, including Scott Crossfield said it was a handful to fly and totally unforgiving. In my career I have seen test pilots make incredible saves - but NEVER outside the test plan envelope or the aircraft's capabilities. Yes, I have seen death in flight test, it is part of the game, but never never because of "hot dogging" or some such silliness. Its unfortunate but it happens. Keep up the excellent work on this channel, inform the public and continue to de-mystify what they are seeing, you are doing great work. Thank you.

5 жыл бұрын

Respect!

@midship_nc

5 жыл бұрын

Back in the Gemini and Mercury days.....those pilots were made of hardened steel. Doing what no one before them had done, in vehicles never built before, in an environment humans had never experienced. Badass level over 9000

@travcollier

5 жыл бұрын

As Scott says, Armstrong was one of the "*primary engineers* and test pilots" for the avionics system. Yeah, the bravery of test pilots gets a lot of mention, but the job is *testing* the technical systems, which means the big difference between a pilot and test pilot is that a test pilot has to at the very least fully understand the inner workings of (and often has a hand in devising, designing, and building) bleeding-edge systems.

@RCAvhstape

5 жыл бұрын

Never forget that the first Space Shuttle flight was also a super risky test flight. An untested, never flown rocket powered spaceplane, and you stick two guys in it, launch it to orbit, and then fly them home at mach 25 to an unpowered landing. Young and Crippen were an amazing crew.

@cynthiaklenk6313

5 жыл бұрын

@G.Gorrell I believe its Tail Number 3, - I was stationed at WPAFB, and went over to the museum quite a bit (that was a great assignment by the way!) If you get to the museum there are two aircraft their that I thought I would never see again after leaving a previous duty assignment - F-117 tail number 780 (it was the first of our test birds) and the other is the ugliest aircraft ever to take wing, (Northrop Tacit Blue). Apologies to the Northrop guys and gals ;-)

The X-15 actually came with *three* sets of controls. The main stick was for aerodynamic control in normal flight regimes. The left side stick was for the reaction thrusters. The right side stick was for aerodynamic control but in the more marginal parts of the envelope. It basically had higher resistance to prevent pilots getting into pilot induced oscillations. It became a macho badge of honour to not use the centre stick, and at leats one pilot admitted to not touching the centre stick even though he really, really wanted to.

@devingraves8044

Жыл бұрын

Doing research on the X-15, could you send me a source for this by any chance?

"LA center, X-ray 1 5, got a ground speed readout for me?" "X-ray 1 5, we're showing you at 3,989 knots across the ground." "Center, I'm showing a little closer to 4 thousand." (credit to Maj Brian Shul and Walter, LA Speed Check.)

@f.9485

4 жыл бұрын

I had to laugh so hard reading this 😂

@KSparks80

3 жыл бұрын

lol When he heard Walter open his mic to say that was pretty funny. "Walter and I became a crew at that moment". ".....and the Navy had been slain". Good stuff.

@Absaalookemensch

3 жыл бұрын

@@KSparks80 Walter, what a poet.

@HyperSpify

3 жыл бұрын

Had he overshot a bit more: "LA center, X-ray 1 5, mayday mayday mayday, inbound for emergency landing at Los Angeles"

@blackopscw7913

2 жыл бұрын

This is incorrect, it was an SR-71 that did this not a X-15

Made me literally burst out laughing with your shuttle cough! 😂

@ljfinger

5 жыл бұрын

Dream Chaser and the other lifting bodies have a glide ratio worse than Shuttle.

@VolcanicSpacePizza

5 жыл бұрын

@@ljfinger A glide ration WORSE then the shuttle? Why that's preposterous!

@WillProwse

5 жыл бұрын

same here hahaha

@Sugar_K

5 жыл бұрын

@@VolcanicSpacePizza both are still better than a wing suit.. the only thing wth a worse glide ratio than a wing suit is a brick

@mrkeogh

5 жыл бұрын

@@ljfinger "Lifting" bodies 😉

Michael J. Adams died when the x-15 broke up in mid air for those wondering.

@GLRAIRSOFT

4 жыл бұрын

Thank you. He did just glide over that part

@garychandler4296

4 жыл бұрын

I was.

@cyc25ruffneck

4 жыл бұрын

I was.

@MadScientist512

4 жыл бұрын

Thanks for the clarification as I just assumed the pilot survived because he he didn't mention it, that was a rather disregarding oversight.

@tristandoran601

4 жыл бұрын

It was glanced over but to be fair to Scott it has to be assumed the conditions in which the aircraft broke up that survival would be minimum at best. R.I.P Mr Adams.

7:55 - My favorite factoid about the Space Shuttle is that to train pilots to land it, they put them in a business jet modified to have the same cockpit layout as the Space Shuttle. Then dove toward the ground. With all the flaps/speed brakes deployed for maximum drag. Then turned on the thrust reversers.

@touristguy87

5 жыл бұрын

...when you're in orbit at Mach 25, the ground is a long way away.

@sillyone52062

5 жыл бұрын

Jet that you are talking about was the Sabreliner, which not having a parachute for braking, would have to use reversers to slow down.

@victorperson2408

5 жыл бұрын

Anonymous Freak __

@jag1720

5 жыл бұрын

I flew an approach a couple of years ago into SLC during a severe TS. It was the first time in decades of flying I ever saw it raining up! We were in a Fokker F100 full of folks in the back. By the time we had established a somewhat stable approach, about two miles off the end of the runway, we were in full landing mode. Approach angle correct, Gear down, Flaps 45, Engines to flight idle and we were climbing like a bat out of hell! Needless to say we aborted and get the hell out of Dodge. News reports later that evening told of a rare tornado touchdown in the Bountiful area. Closest I ever want to be to the edge. Neal was one of a kind and a national treasure.

@jshepard152

5 жыл бұрын

But unlike the real shuttle, the training aircraft didn't break apart and throw its crew onto the ground. Twice.

My father worked on the X-15 project and was friends with Neil Armstrong the smoke that you were referring to in the cockpit is not from paint but from actually wood that was place behind the leading edges of the plane acting as an insulation and many times caught on fire

“Experimental aircraft explodes. Pilot wets pants” Good to see some things never change.

@masskilla469

5 жыл бұрын

Could you imagine the shit he got because of that? LOL

@sirraident

5 жыл бұрын

I was thinking the same thing.

@masskilla469

5 жыл бұрын

@@sirraident Great minds think alike LOL

@godofawesum223

5 жыл бұрын

#fakenews 😝😆

@DamianReloaded

5 жыл бұрын

Nah today it would be: *Experimental aircraft explodes. You won't believe what happened next* (don't click on it btw, it's not a link)

Nasty cough you got at 7:55, you better get that checked out or it could snowball into a big expensive problem.

@Mr2winners

5 жыл бұрын

Might even explode once or twice

@ricomotions5416

5 жыл бұрын

lmao

@nilsp9426

5 жыл бұрын

"Snot is supersonic" *static mic noise*

@N75911_

5 жыл бұрын

Roll Program.

@Mosern1977

5 жыл бұрын

Might even be fatal

In that last part I feel you should have mentioned that Adams did not survive, making him the first US "Space" mission fatality.

@codymoe4986

Күн бұрын

He died when his aircraft broke up, at 65,000 feet...AKA, not in space.

Scott Crossfield was the pilot in the aircraft when the motor exploded. He is a cool customer. He just sat there and watched as he was covered by a fireball for a few minutes. He said that the craft was rated for higher temperatures for longer times, he was not worried. until the fire crew got the cockpit clear of flame and he popped the canopy and felt the great heat. Then he said he made a fast exit. (an understatement)

@RyanPerrella

Жыл бұрын

Cool bit of info here ❤

One of the best opening scenes of any movie. Fantastic!

@axelord1942

5 жыл бұрын

You da man, Jesus 👉😎👉

@zwolfrants7107

5 жыл бұрын

Why are you everywhere?

@FPV-wi8fw

5 жыл бұрын

@@zwolfrants7107 because he is jesus

@TeslaNick2

5 жыл бұрын

Neil Armstrong's balls must have been MASSIVE.

@KrustyKlown

5 жыл бұрын

Lordy, Lordy ... Jesus Christ, that was a Damn good movie!

I’m happy thinking about the fact that the number of humans who have flown a missile not remotely is larger than 1

@theaveragepro1749

5 жыл бұрын

Japanese kamikaze pilots were basically human missiles

@PiePieTheSpartan

5 жыл бұрын

The Earth isn't actually spherical, it's wider at the equator and flatter at the poles.

@argh1989

5 жыл бұрын

@@PiePieTheSpartan It's not perfectly spherical, but spherical nonetheless.

@PiePieTheSpartan

5 жыл бұрын

@@argh1989 Sort of...

@lordgarion514

5 жыл бұрын

@@PiePieTheSpartan On a 23 inch LED monitor the Earth is 1 pixel wider than it is tall. And spheres are perfectly round, but something doesn't need to be perfectly round to be spherical. The Earth is NOT spherical "more or less". The Earth is spherical...... Period. Learn your definitions.

Neil Armstrong was best of the best clutch pilots to ever have to lived. All the near catastrophic events he pulled are amazing. Never phased at all.

@alexandertheissl5517

5 жыл бұрын

One of the best Stick and rudder man ever lived 👍.Absolut Agree with you.

@MalcolmCooks

5 жыл бұрын

fazed

@JeremiahDouglas

4 жыл бұрын

can you imagine, dude never cracked under pressure i guess no reason to panic and die=)

whether the film was entirely accurate or not, the x-15 scene depicted just how intense and challenging these test flights were. Neil's pulse rate when landing the eagle was around 150 or so, yet he managed to keep his concentration and land. The original film clips cannot capture what he was experiencing in a physical and emotional sense. We just assumed by his voice he was cool,calm and collected. His heart rate begs to differ. What a guy!

The "(cough) space shuttle" part got me. Right when Manley did that I thought it was an accident and something caught his throat but then I realized a split second after t was intentional and I cracked up

This was one if the first tests that I had heard about and later saw as a kid that got me hooked into watching and following the amazing "Space Race" as it was called back then. I was 5 years old. Throughout grammar school in every school year there were things we would learn about and see on the black and white Television that the school had on a cart to be shared among the classrooms and different grades. It was an amazing time to be alive and watch almost weekly reports of what was going on in the Space program. From Mercury to Gemini to the docking procedure practiced with Gemini, the first American space walk, on up thru Apollo it was certainly a magical time to see the advancements as they would show clips in the classroom, and sometimes watch the action live for a launch or a reentry while holding your breath waiting to see the parachutes open as they would descend into the Pacific Ocean and wait for the helicopter pick up. It was fascinating as a kid to follow this, seeing the incremental developments, and the disappointments when the Russians would beat us being first in a lot of things until Appollo. People who claim it was all a hoax and we never went to space are just sore losers that they weren't part of a glorious time of National Pride and determination of making it the Moon before the Russians did so we could honor JFK'S gauntlet he had laid down before his untimely death. We went to the moon, space does exist, and the Earth is a globe and isn't flat. Can I get an Amen?👍🏼👍🏼

Oh hey. It's that video you told me was coming outside Twitch Con last week. Great to meet you out there. Love the videos.

Fantastic explanation of Neil Armstrong's difficult X-15 flight. It should be obvious from his actions that Armstrong was the most choice to pilot the Lunar Module down to the surface of the moon. The man was a total professional with ice water in his veins. Thanks so much Scott!

You gotta build the X20 in KSP now. No excuses.

@EricHallahan

5 жыл бұрын

He already did.

@RCAvhstape

5 жыл бұрын

It's in Orbiter, has been for at least 10 years.

@davidkirby6928

5 жыл бұрын

Kentucky space program?

@derekortiz3663

5 жыл бұрын

@@davidkirby6928 I think it's kenya space program

@LFSPharaoh

4 жыл бұрын

Derek Ortiz Kanye, stop please

Ain't gonna lie even if First Man does have a few inaccuracies, it's way more accurate than most Hollywood space movies.

@scottmanley

5 жыл бұрын

I'm doing my best to fix that twitter.com/MysteryGuitarM/status/1057331046457339904

@kg4boj

5 жыл бұрын

@@scottmanley Someone has to make sure they get the zero-G boobs correct.

@Strike_Raid

5 жыл бұрын

The sets were great and very realistic (except Pad 19) and I was surprised how accurate the story was but all the shaking and crazy noises were pointless and just silly. I mean, when Gemini 8 launched, you get all this banging around and insane noises, *then* you can actually hear the Titan’s turbo cart start charge go off (which would be at ignition mind you). My guess is that someone actually put the scene together correctly then the director insisted on all that other junk be added to make it ‘more dramatic’. What a mistake.

@ZanHecht

5 жыл бұрын

@@Strike_Raid I still don't know why they made all the brand new spacecraft filthy with grime-coated switches, peeling paint, and chipped knobs.

@JanKowalski-fy1xn

5 жыл бұрын

@@scottmanley DJ?

Scott, thank you for the breakdown. I knew of Neil Armstrong's test flight of an X-15 but was unaware of the details. Your video brought this into nail-biting focus.

The X-15 program was badass...just seeing the rockets kick in to Mach plus defines "going like a bat outta hell." Respect.

What do you mean the space shuttle is a bad glider *just enable infinite fuel*

@daskampffredchen9242

5 жыл бұрын

Just hack gravity

@adamp.3739

5 жыл бұрын

Good one mate!

@RealityIsTheNow

5 жыл бұрын

It's a spaceplane. Glides exactly as designed. Strapping an actual glider to a rocket would be a bad idea.

@reformCopyright

5 жыл бұрын

What do you expect of a flying brick?

@argh1989

5 жыл бұрын

@@RealityIsTheNow ^This! I don't get the edgy remarks including Scott's cough. It was designed to bleed off speed, a controlable heatshield if you want.

Still throwing shade on the Space Shuttle, I dig it.

@jonathangrey2183

5 жыл бұрын

The space shuttle was a camel

@hologrampizza5432

5 жыл бұрын

If only the military didn’t get involved. Without those giant wings, the space shuttle would be far safer and more practical.

@jshepard152

5 жыл бұрын

Robert Lutece No, the Air Force had cool Air Force fantasies of zooming off into the wild blue yonder in the shuttle to screw around with other people's satellites. There's plenty of shuttle blame to go around and they can accept their fair share.

@patmyers7750

5 жыл бұрын

That's a crock. I was around back then and saw the whole thing unfold. What happened was that NASA was trying to do something that had never been done before; build a reusable spacecraft. They found out that this task was a lot more complex and expensive than they had hoped and they (NASA) ran out of money. (The original shuttle design was a LOT different than what they ended up with.) Nor would Congress allocate any more money to finish the job. So NASA approached the DoD. The DoD/Air Force said OK, but we will need this vehicle to meet our mission requirements, which needless to say were a lot different than NASA's, mainly in terms of payload. The Air Force needed to put their big, bus-sized satellites into orbit, which the NASA design could not do. So there was a major redesign and the result was the shuttle that we got, a heavy lifter, not the one that NASA had originally envisioned (fully reusable, for carrying passengers and only a moderate cargo payload into orbit). And they end up with a design compromise that satisfied no one. Even so, overall it flew successfully (and no, you don't have to remind me that they lost two of them; I know that better than you.) for 30 years. At least you can bet they know a hell of a lot more about how to build something like this than they did in the early 1970s when the shuttle program started. Whether they will try again remains to be seen.

@jshepard152

5 жыл бұрын

@@patmyers7750 That's all true but it glosses over so many unpleasant facts. Such as, NASA had a much better heavy lift capability sitting on the shelf in 1972 than it does today. There was absolutely no need to spend billions developing a new system, except NASA promised the shuttle would be super cheap to fly, if we could only develop it. Story Musgrave said it best. "We said it would fly for $10 million per launch and it cost $1.2 billion per launch, so we were only off by 1200 times over". Your comment has a thin veneer of "the shuttle was a good idea at the time", when of course it was never a good idea. The development costs and operational costs and lives lost all destroy this romantic notion. People who worked on or near the shuttle program often have an affinity for it that isn't really justified. That's because they worked hard on it or because shuttle dollars clothed them and sent their kids to college all those years. Fortunately for the taxpayers and for the astronauts who must actually ride the machine, those romantic shuttle notions have mostly faded in the harsh light of reality. The shuttle was the result of a series of mistakes. It doesn't matter whether it was well intentioned or not. We must take care to acknowledge this reality so the mistakes won't be repeated. If NASA wanted a complex, expensive, dangerous "horse built by committee" vehicle, they'd build one. They don't, and neither does anyone else. They're going back to the 1972 way, at least to the extent that congress will allow it. (You're welcome, Northrop Grumman). Personally, I'm looking forward to returning to a launch vehicle with reasonable expectations that doesn't throw its crew into the Atlantic, nor scatter them all over east Texas. It's going to be a breath of fresh air.

Cough"Shuttle"cough Google:"Do you mean Flying Brick?"

@joso5554

5 жыл бұрын

or maybe a truck ?

@MaciejBogdanStepien

5 жыл бұрын

Cough, cogh. XD ( 7:54 ).

@LeCharles07

5 жыл бұрын

@ *bowl of petunias or a sperm whale.

@jorgensenmj

5 жыл бұрын

@@LeCharles07 42 is the answer.

@rohanpotdar908

5 жыл бұрын

@@LeCharles07 what an iconic reference.

My uncle an cousin worked in S. California on the X-15. They drilled all the canopy an vent rivet holes, every hole had to be almost perfect, so only one special drill bit per hole. Bits not being used again, they brought a hand full of bits for me, I still use them, Cool! I have drill bits that constructed the X-15! Tim

Fun fact, to simulate the gliding conditions in the shuttle, the test plane dove down with its engines in full reverse. It was that horrible at gliding.

@RealityIsTheNow

5 жыл бұрын

It glided exactly as it was designed to, and had a thirty year record of perfect landings. Spaceplanes are not gliders. That it glided as well as it did is kind of amazing, considering how gigantic it was, and the sorts of stresses it had to endure.

@cynthiaklenk6313

5 жыл бұрын

Unfortunately the STS system was never as intended. The program was unable to find "customers" - however the USAF needed a vehicle to hoist surveillance satellites into orbit (that's the good news). It was intended to be a vehicle much more like the X-20 lifting body and placed atop the booster where it could be removed from harms way in a launch abort situation. Instead it was required to lift huge surveillance sats into orbit, (the bad news) requiring a much larger payload bay, - solid rocket boosters and a gigantic tank filled with liquid hydrogen. In engineering terms, it became what is known as a "kluge". And because of its immense size (roughly the size of a Boeing 737 aircraft), a contiguous heat shield could not be used, so they turned to a puzzle of fragile ceramic tiles, and reinforced carbon carbon panels. Turn around times could never be met and the schedule went sideways, and pressure to launch increased,against the advice of the engineers. The huge vehicle now had to dissipate immense energy upon atmospheric entry, due to its increased mass. In its original configuration, the Challenger catastrophe would never have happened, the human piloted vehicle would not be strapped to the side of a gigantic tank of hydrogen (lessons learned from the Hindenberg in 1937 - hydrogen goes boom very easily) and SRB's reliant on o rings to keep the gasses bottled up in the SRB stack. A kluge is always going to be a kluge, and it was becoming an increasingly dangerous kluge, that never met all (or many) of its mission objectives. However it did do some amazing things, leading to the success of the ISS, and the repair of the Hubble telescope. But it was an increasingly and unnecessarily dangerous kluge, thus its eventual grounding and program termination. The next gen low earth returnable vehicle is pretty much back to the original concept. Scott's videos are excellent.

@waynesimpson2074

5 жыл бұрын

Fun Fact 2:- KSC has a plastic slide chute set to replicate exactly the same glide angle as the Shuttles' approach. If you remove your shoes you can slide down it to experience the glide rate...it's very swift and steep.

@Markle2k

5 жыл бұрын

@@cynthiaklenk6313 Without the Shuttle and its large payload bay, you've got no long-term space observatories like Hubble and Compton. Spitzer had to be downsized when the cryogenic upper stage was banned from the Shuttle. The ISS could never have been built up to a 6 crew configuration in a short enough period of time to satisfy politicians' short attention spans and the crew would still be spending over half their duty time on maintenance instead of science, or the only off-planet National Laboratory would be visiting Mir at Point Nemo before the first decade of the 21st century was finished. In that second case, China would be the only country with an operating space station.

@Dahoon

5 жыл бұрын

@@RealityIsTheNow I'm pretty sure some of those landings wasn't the way they planned. Wasn't it supposed to be landing in one piece? Hard to land perfectly when you can't even take off without blowing up.

Imagine Neil sliding down 7L at LAX at around 200 KIAS with sparks off the skids flying 500' in the air, screaming The Wild Blue Yonder on terminal...

@ErrorAcquired

5 жыл бұрын

I imagined the exact same scenario

@Tiisiphone

5 жыл бұрын

That would have been quite a sight!

@BadIdeas101

4 жыл бұрын

Lost again, sonifoabitch

The Space Shuttle owed lot to the X-15 program, including similar glide characteristics. It was the X-15 where they proved the concept and developed that ability to manage energy for a high speed glide that was eventually used to bring the Shuttle to its landing sites. Even though they look nothing alike there are remarkable similarities in their glide characteristics.

Love stories like this, I grew up in Palmdale and worked on those lakebed runways during my high school summers at Edwards AFB. So much cool history in an otherwise drab place at the time.

The shuttle cough was not only funny absolutely appropriate your shows are greatly appreciated thank you

NASA: "we built this thing. Don't know if it works. Any volunteers to fly it?" All hands go up. We'll likely never see the likes of these guys again. NASA thought about grounding Armstrong, because the fuel cost of lifting his balls was just too high.

@aaronlarsen8412

4 жыл бұрын

Dude...😂👍

@sethmorton8539

4 жыл бұрын

That’s funny

@phmwu7368

4 жыл бұрын

Armstrong was only planned for 11 X+15 flights while John McKay was planned to fly 50 test flights !

@bsc4344

4 жыл бұрын

HopelessNerd nope we sure wont. Instead we have a young gen of morons needing safe spaces becuz of facts challenging their dement-iologies, and whose highlights are mostly making vids of their indestructibility in the face of a semi serious v|rus, by licking toilet seats and posting for the world to see...such bravery, such heroic risk taking.

@ryanrising2237

3 жыл бұрын

In all seriousness, there will always be those people who want to push the boundaries of what’s possible with little regard for their own personal safety. It’ll take a lot more than a few societal changes to make explorers obsolete.

Great rundown thanks Scott.

Scott, great content and presentation. It really conveyed, for me, what a great pilot Mr. Armstrong was to be able to bring his ship back to the lake bed. Well done!

Good video as always. Would like to see more videos discussing aspects of that movie and what they got right and wrong. Enjoyed the movie.

@slikrx

5 жыл бұрын

Amy Shira Teitel did a movie review of it as well, where she discusses a few points.

100 feet..... "either side" so he was below treetop level and flew between them 😲😨

Thank you Scott, very well done.Take care and continue to produce good vids.

I'm so glad you made this, Scott, I just watched the film. Hello from Glasgow!

Moral of the story Neil Armstrong’s name should be called “Ballstrong” Serious brass!

Shuttle and X-15 had about the same glide ratio as an autorotating helicopter. I still haven't decided if that makes helicopters look good or spaceplanes look bad. For comparison, airliners are around 15:1, fighter jets are a bid behind airliners (there are exceptions in both directions, but big wings for maneuvering in dogfights/retaining control at 60kft and plaid speed are generally also good for gliding), and sailplanes (the things built for gliding) get up to 70:1.

@RealityIsTheNow

5 жыл бұрын

It glided exactly as it was designed to, and had a thirty year record of perfect landings. Spaceplanes are not gliders. That it glided as well as it did is kind of amazing, considering how gigantic it was, and the sorts of stresses it had to endure.

@mytech6779

5 жыл бұрын

Glide ratio is one measure, steady state sink rate is also important, and I think you will find the sink rate of an autorotating chopper is well below the X15 and shuttle.

@HappyBeezerStudios

5 жыл бұрын

but then fighter jets usually have a TTW slightly below 1, somewhere on the 0.8 to 0.98 range. Some few are above it.

@billroberts9182

5 жыл бұрын

My supercub has a 5.5 glide ratio at 50 mph indicated airspeed. The tradeoff is it flies really well at slow speed and can carry a relatively large load off of a short strip.

@MiG82au

5 жыл бұрын

You should try it. The first harnessing of a thermal will amaze you.

Just wanna say how much I appreciate the new props you got set up nicely in the background, looks nice.

Cheers for the video Scott x

I had the fortune to speak with Gary Lockwood at a convention, and he stated that the portrayal of the Discovery astronauts in 2001 was heavily based on Lockwood's impressions after meeting Armstrong at an event. Which may be why Bowman and Poole were some of the very few fictional astronauts you could imagine being entrusted with a multi-billion dollar mission.

After watching the movie, one of my first questions was what happened when he "bounced" off of the atmosphere? I wanted to know more. Thank you for providing the answers!

I just want to say, I absolutely love the way you describe and tell the stories.

I watched " first man," 2 times in a row after u informed me of the movie. Thanks scott.

2:10 That's some awesome AGI "Animated Generated Effects" I love that old school.

Hi Scott, This video just popped years after you uploaded it. Hey, a couple of cool things...I brought my grandsons to the movie at an Imax Theater, it was awesome! One of my grandsons was so inspired by the movie he said that he wants to be an aerospace engineer! The other cool thing is...my family lived in that part of California when this flight happened. I was three years old and heard sonic booms on a regular basis.

OMG, Scott When you were talking about the glide ratio of the X15 and coughed the words "Space Shuttle " I about pissed myself laughing 🤣😂🤣😂

You're doing well there Scott! I enjoy your very informative blogs. Greetings from Holland and keep up the good work. ;-)

I met Neil when he taxied his Cessna 310 onto our ramp in 1993 and I was the guy with the wands and chocks. Before he departed I got him to sign my logbook. Nice, quiet man.

@Aengus42

5 жыл бұрын

You find that a lot with test pilots. Nothing gets their heartrate up! Laconic I think is the word. You hear it when Scott Crossfield talks too.

A Hollywood movie not entirely accurate? Shocking...

So interesting Scott! Great description! Amazing that it was in the 60's

Wonderful video. Thank you very much for the information.

When I was little the X 15 was my favorite. I never knew they could do what they did. Just learned only 3 were built!

I enjoyed the film, thanks for the extra details, Armstrong definitely had the "Right stuff".55 years later and Branson is struggling with a watered down version, however the X prize definitely spurred development in sub orbital flights. Keep up the good work, it is much appreciated.

@scottmanley

5 жыл бұрын

Thanks, although, to be fair Bransons version has to carry a bunch of paying passengers into space.

This was an EXCEPTIONAL story, exceptionally told. Thanks a lot!

Great video ThanX for making it !

My dad designed the tail section of the X-15 and attended college with Neil.

@MrThenry1988

5 жыл бұрын

Awesome

First Man was a big disappointment for me, I enjoyed this video much more than the movie! I was frustrated by the lack of exterior shots in the movie, most of the movie seemed to be just close ups of things shaking. I think they really cheaped out on the special effects. The movie somehow made one of the most exciting events in human history look dull (and very shaky). There was an excellent opportunity to show exterior shots of the moon landing, instead it became a re run from 1969. I'm a huge Apollo fan, but I left the theater wishing I hadn't seen this movie.

@castor4357

5 жыл бұрын

Well said, I kind of thought the same. The X-15 flight looked like a soapbox on a gravel track. I doubt that this was accurate.

@castor4357

5 жыл бұрын

@Long Range Rifle you are probably a fake

@ignacydrozdowicz8107

5 жыл бұрын

I think this was their idea to show history from Neil's perspective, as it is film about him, not Apollo program. Also the scenes from exterior would be much more boring than from interior

@ignacydrozdowicz8107

5 жыл бұрын

@Long Range Rifle Because after Apollo 13 failure Congress decided to cancel Apollo 18-20

@ignacydrozdowicz8107

5 жыл бұрын

@Long Range Rifle exactly

In 1954 my family moved to a little village in northern New Jersey called Lake Telemark. In Rockaway Township.. I was 5 years old. Just over the hill was a place called Picatinny Arsenal. It was the original test site for all of the rocket engines developed for the X planes. We had one little store where we lived where we would stand and watch trucks with huge tubes of liquid oxygen passing by. The roar of the engines cracked concrete sidewalks and broke windows. While playing touch football we had to stop while the test was blasting away. We would sneak up there as kids would do and check it all out. We loved every day of it. We lived with it for my entire childhood. History being made everyday.

What a great short/mini documentary and very well explained. I appreciate people like yourself giving correct and accurate information on our past and history. So thanks for the video! :)

*another great video; by the way, what do you think about the Boeing x-37?*

@scottmanley

5 жыл бұрын

It's pretty cool, would love to know what it's up to.

Weird cough you got there.

@SolarWebsite

5 жыл бұрын

You might want to watch that, it might blow up. Twice.

@florianmessner2789

5 жыл бұрын

* cough * flying brick * cough *

@oremooremo5075

5 жыл бұрын

He's got shuttle fever caused by too many cooks cooking the broth

@christianlabanca5377

5 жыл бұрын

Weird flex but ok

@mcahill135

5 жыл бұрын

Florian Messner Cough-cough * F-104 * cough-cough

Fantastic review of this amazing moment in history. Thank you.

Thanks Scott! Great info in this video. Cheers!

If Neil Armstrong was first man on the moon, then who took the pictures of him climbing down the ladder?

@derrinpickett9948

4 жыл бұрын

@Tru Quality I just think history should remember the mystery photographer who risk his life and made his own giant great leap for mankind to record that historical moment.

“He’s bouncing off the atmosphere, and he’s seconds away from falling out of gravity and into space.” -The Wrap You serious???????

@nathangallup6411

5 жыл бұрын

I read that too lol

@HUEEY

5 жыл бұрын

Now that’s funny!

@jorgensenmj

5 жыл бұрын

Considering escape velocity from earth is about Mach 33 and the X-15 did about Mach 6....not really a chance of "falling out of gravity into space"

@HUEEY

5 жыл бұрын

jorgensenmj it’s a quote from an article in the wrap magazine. I’m quoting it here because it’s funny.

@lindaandyspringer8753

4 жыл бұрын

At 3500 you would have to nose down constantly.. or bounce off the atmosphere into outer place ?

Great vid. Thanks for not dumbing it down.

This was a most informative and pleasant post. Way to go Scott Manley

Yeah that first sequence of the movie was really cool, but lacking on context. Luckily we have Scott to explain it to us! Thx!

@MikeB3542

5 жыл бұрын

I like how they worked Yeager in

@ErrorAcquired

5 жыл бұрын

Totally agree with you. This is top notch content

The report should have been, "Experimental aircraft explodes. Fireman wets pants.” Or better still: "Experimental aircraft explodes. Fireman wets Pilot's pants”

@Studio44B

5 жыл бұрын

"Fireman Wets Pilot's Pants. Experimental Aircraft Explodes."? Or "Fireman Wets Pilot's Pants. Pilot Never Achieves 100% Thrust." (I'm sorry--it's late and I'm punchy ;-) )

@touristguy87

5 жыл бұрын

You should get a life. A real life. Preferably under the guidance of a social professional.

@mfree80286

5 жыл бұрын

"Experimental aircraft explodes, pilot's demeanor dampened"

Nicely presented, as usual, thanks.

This stuff is fascinating to me and as usual you did a great job explaining a little piece of historical aviation (high speed and altitude) flight research.

With planets it's correct to photograph/video them center in the view, unlike normal photography where you put the subject off-center. This is also why it's correct that Scott Manley's head is at the center as his brain is as big as a planet.

@dextrodemon

5 жыл бұрын

saints and religious icons are also usually centered. not sure what i'm implying...

@francisgeorge7639

5 жыл бұрын

@@dextrodemon LOl!!

@joergmaass

5 жыл бұрын

And his answer to the big question is: 42.

@personzorz

5 жыл бұрын

@@dextrodemon rocket jesus

@garymingy8671

4 жыл бұрын

Bolus of madcow ,run amuck !

Neil was the best pilot we had, He not only broke speed records in almost every new plane being tested but YES Did fly to the moon.

@brucelamberton8819

5 жыл бұрын

The astronaut's astronaut.

@memyselfandlewii8781

4 жыл бұрын

Ah no he didn't

Great video. Thanks!

Really grateful for your channel keeping my brain interested during covid lock down times!! Thank you

Neil Armstrong, what a life full of perfect skilled decisions at key moments!

I think the world would be a bit different if "Rocket space plane makes unplanned visit to LAX" was a thing.

As a youngster I found news of the X-15 fascinating. As a retiree I find it an even more remarkable aircraft for what it accomplished pioneering spaceflight. Thanks for the video.

Excellent vid Scott.

1:20 and it just suddenly explodes that was sudden

@LeCharles07

5 жыл бұрын

"Engine test notes: Forgot to check staging"

@richardvernon317

5 жыл бұрын

Fun Fact, the team at North American that developed the X-15 was led by Harrison Storms, the same man who was in charge of the Apollo CSM program at NAA until the Apollo 1 fire. 2nd Fun Fact, the reason that Scott Crossfield survived that explosion was because the X-15 cockpit was pressurized with pure nitrogen during flight and ground runs. The pilot's pressure suit was also pressurized with pure nitrogen with a neck dam separating the helmet (which was pressurized with pure oxygen) from the rest of the suit. Had the X-15 been pressurized with pure oxygen, it would have been very likely that Crossfield would have been incinerated and killed.

@Rob_Moilanen

5 жыл бұрын

@@richardvernon317 Unlikely to happen, the two accidents don't correlate to each other in any regard other than the fire itself, unlike the Appollo 1 capsule, Crossfield could manually release and open the canopy and get out, not to mention he was protected from the explosion by the rear cockpit bulkhead. Unlike the Mercury and Gemini capsules which had outward opening hatches, the Appollo capsule had an inward opening plug door design, that even if all 3 men were pulling on it, they couldn't have gotten it open because of the capsule being pressurized, Frank Borman testified to that fact at the congressional inquiry of the Appollo 1 accident. Also, NASA chose to over-pressurize the capsule with 100% Oxygen, that wasn't a decision made by North American or Stormy, in fact, he had protested NASA's practice of doing the plugs out test that way. So I have no idea why you're trying to equate the deaths of the Appollo 1 crew with the potential for Crossfield's death in the X-15 explosion, much less blame it on Stormy.

@Anvilshock

5 жыл бұрын

Explosions rather tend to be sudden events.

"it's still in theatres, you should check it out" Because it seems nobody else has...

@brucelamberton8819

5 жыл бұрын

Can't blame them.

You mentioned the Dynasoar program. My father worked on that back in the early 1960s when he worked for Boeing. This is the only time I have heard reference to it. Good.

Don’t know why I didn’t check this video out sooner, but I gotta say it was just great. As they all are! Thank you Scott Manley and please keep up the good work. BW

Why - so the answer is Neil was looking at a g meter and pulled up too much? ....i.e. pilot error ?

@laprepper

3 жыл бұрын

Although pilots undergo a monumental amount of training I would say in general most pilots are not used to how much altitude you will gain during a 4G climb at Mach 3.

1:13>Scott Crossfield was head of development for North American Aviation. Soon after the explosion he called my Dad. I was just a kid at the time. Anyway...Dad left JPL and relocated to his new job cooling the X15 rocket engine during ground test. He managed to get the base commander to allow me to become the ‘Test Kid’. Many incredible memories....

@paulmaggs3212

5 жыл бұрын

Any chance you could share a few? There are many people out there that would love to hear the human interest side of these space programs.

Great research. Great presentation.

Thanks, Scott! To think, I once had the crazy idea you were eventually gonna run out of great material.

So are you saying he didn't bounce off the atmosphere?

@archiefibbon7325

4 жыл бұрын

Yea right..?? Thats the only reason I watched this... the bounce.. wth??

@MichaelBreen.

3 жыл бұрын

6:03

Saw the movie yesterday. 9/10. Just wish the dramatic in-flight scenes were not so exaggeratedly shakey such as the launches. I found that annoying. Except for the stuck RCS in Gemini 8. That really would have been awfully dramatic.

@Zack_Taylor

5 жыл бұрын

IIRC the smakeyness was the part that real astronaughts (buzz aldrin, I think) like the most. Most space movies do not do justice to the reality of how jarring and overwhelming the noise of space travel is. Imagine trying to do what they have to do in THOSE conditions. Insane

@robguyatt9602

5 жыл бұрын

@@Zack_Taylor Perhaps that's where I get my impression from. Hollywood :) But the thing that suggests to me the visual shaking we saw in the movie is excessive is because the Astronauts would not have been able to read instruments or select switch settings during accent if it really was as bad as the movie suggested.

@Zack_Taylor

5 жыл бұрын

@@robguyatt9602 Maybe that just shows how incredible they are. Even without the shaking the movie can't make you experience the G forces they had to endure. They are amazingly capable human beings. I have yet to see the movie so will leave it there.

@robguyatt9602

5 жыл бұрын

@@Zack_Taylor Get your arse into a cinema PRONTO. :) Regardless of suspicions of exaggerated vibration, it's a minor concern. The movie is great.

@mohanicus

5 жыл бұрын

so your saying sitting in gemini rocket or a fuckin saturn v rocket at lift off isn't gonna be shakey....think mate.... armstrong aldrin and collins and any of the other guys in the apollo programme said at lift off those rockets would shake extremely violently with that amount of thrust... the launches in the film were totally accurate.

The Cough at 7:55 wins the internet for Oct 30th, 2018 Hilariously well done!!

Thank you for the video! I enjoyed it.