HD Launch of STS-127 on 07.15.09 from T-2 to MECO

[Ondelendo]

I am very happy to see the vidoe Space Shuttle Endeavour lifts off for the International Space Station from you, hopefully the others also are happy for You

[willamricard]

Nice Video Space Shuttle Endeavour lifts off for the International Space Station That You Share , So Very Nice Thanks You

[imegatrone]

I Really Like The Video Space Shuttle Endeavour lifts off for the International Space Station From Your

[bundawartini]

Your Video Space Shuttle Endeavour lifts off for the International Space Station Is Very Useful Sharing

[SloikWspomnien]

2:13 - oh my God, oh my God, oh my God, no, I'm going back, now! :D

[Zacsta]

Dear NASA, PLEASE make a forward-facing video like this for an approach to Mars.

[navalaviator017]

Why do shuttles always fly a little upside down and at an angle? why not just straight up

[Omhra]

@navalaviator017

They rolled on their back to get better radio with the ground.

They point up and to the east because most orbiting objects are orbiting in some east-bound trajectory.

The reason they are east-moving is because the Earth rotates east at around 1,200 miles an hour which is a direct savings in the required fuel to accelerate to the needed 17,500 to get into a stable circular orbit.

The direction of take-off is either 42 or 132 degrees from north to match ISS orbital path

[sober1t]

Sound barrier @ 2:40...

[cash212money172]

At 10.50 you can see UFO flying to earth in backround

[zeberdee24]

Space shuttle is cool, and i love to watch it beacuse it`s beautyful spacecraft. But it`s opposite to it`s idea - space shuttle was designed to be less expensive and more safe than previous generation of spacecrafts. And the truth is that it`s not safe, and it`s really expensive. And good old Soyuz will be for now the future of space flights.

[supermegapixel]

4.5 million lbs moving at 4000 mph!

[ChaosDynamics]

02:14 - I wonder what's going through that bird's mind.

[flchange]

@ChaosDynamics she`s probably wondering why that bigger bird a few miles away is farting that much....

[jamestargetedindiv]

Closely listen to an Inception dvd made before the January 8th Tucson shooting, especially during the dialogue, "Do It."

[emenentia]

My birthday was on the maiden flight of Columbia. I'm a space shuttle kid... I'm ashamed at myself for never going to Florida to watch one of these launches.

[Nexxus79]

@emenentia you've still got time, June 28th is the last scheduled launch

[fireflames57]

awesome <3

[suzukirizla11]

2.43 broke sound barrier without boom? I can't understand that phenomenon... I need an answer

[ChaosDynamics]

@suzukirizla11

Sound has to travel through a medium - nearing the upper atmosphere the amount of molecules in the atmosphere decreases, therefore the sound doesn't travel as well as it would near the surface of the earth. You can experimentally prove this very easily. Get an alarm clock (or anything that makes a sound) and put it into an air-tight chamber. Set the alarm off and slowly pump the air out using a pump - the sound will get quieter and quieter as the air is pumped out.

[gaspower70]

12,700mph is the biggest astonishment to me.

[99FAILURES]

i live in oklahoma, but i was in florida in daytona driving to cocoa beach when i saw this thing launch. it was amazing

[luckycharmz336]

Would this vehicle pass emissions? I can't get my car to past emissions and I am positive it doesn't put off these amounts of carbon

[spacevidcast]

@luckycharmz336 The majority of the byproducts released from a launch are steam and water vapor (especially at liftoff). You'll notice after the SRB's separate at about 4 minutes into the video, there's no real visible exhaust. The main engines (the ones without the smoke) run on hydrogen and oxygen. Their byproduct is nothing more than water vapor. The SRB's main byproduct is sulfuric acid, but it carries about 2.2 million lbs of prop per flight, so less than that becomes the acidic exhaust.

[matt90679]

@spacevidcast if it was co2 we would be screwed



[emenentia]

@luckycharmz336 The shuttle itself? Hell yeah... its just water steam coming out...

[NANOFORGE]

@luckycharmz336 According to NASA a Shuttle launch produces 28 tons of CO2 but as the poster of this video said, the majority of the waste is basicly H20. The oribter (The Shuttle) itself burns liquid Hydrogen and Oxygen fuel which produces only H20 as waste. The Solid Rocket Boosters (SBR's) burn Aluminium power and Iron Oxide.

[Yonkage]

LMAO the bird at 2:14, he's like:

"Oh, fuck no! Not going over there!!"

[carnivoreplant]

I can't belive why would 4 people dislike this Video! Thumbs up if you think there idiots! The space shuttle was the best and most advance Spacecraft that NASA has ever made!

[SaGruenwdt]

somehow I am thinking there must be an more efficient way to reach the space. just to see the waste and danger of so much power just to take off, makes me think about a different system. we live in the 21st century and still launch rocketsystems, why havent we invented smarter things that have been thought off for a long time. Like t/o like an aircraft and iginite later in air to the space? I think todays we have too less new visions, and always to less money - sad. greetings from germany!

[spacevidcast]

@SaGruenwdt Aircraft are only able to fly to about 40,000-50,000 feet (12000 to 15000 meters) in altitude. The official altitude of the border space is 100km or 65 miles. It takes a LOT of energy to accelerate 250,000 lbs (114,000 kg's) to 17,500 mph (28,000 km/h). That's the speed you need to go to get into low earth orbit.

[SaGruenwdt]

@spacevidcast I know that it takes 28000km/h but... The point is we could save a lot of energy taking off like a normal Aircraft and ignite later with lighter Rockets into the orbit! That is the point. It is in my eyes nonsense to take off old fashioned - strait up. You could start and reach 3000Km/h in a normal way without any rocket - then ignite! This would be even quite saver ;o)

[spacevidcast]

@SaGruenwdt It doesn't work that way unfortunately. Aircraft can only fly at about Mach .90 at cruise altitude. This is about 600 mph or 1000 km/h. You still have 27,000 km/h to overcome. In the big picture, that's barely and roughly 4% of the total speed and energy needed. The plane built to carry the orbiter and all of the propellant needed to accelerate it the rest of the 96% to orbital velocity would be more expensive than the orbiter itself.

[Trex1094]

@spacevidcast nooo. i think hes right... the point is they dont have to fly straight up...they can fly like a blackbird reaching over Mach 2. and after it has climbed to to its maximum altitude then ignite rocks to continue the climb

[spacevidcast]

@Trex1094 You still need a lot of energy to get a shuttle orbiter to that speed. The Blackbird is basically titanium and fuel. It doesn't carry its own oxygen for the engines, it doesn't support 7 people for 14 days, and it doesn't carry 20 tons of payload.

[nikiebc]

@spacevidcast thats why NASA is retiring the Space Shuttle Program, and developing more safe and energy efficient ways of space transportation

[spacevidcast]

@nikiebc NASA's ending the shuttle program because its mission is now done. It was planned in 2003 (after Columbia was lost) to be retired after construction of the International Space Station (ISS) was complete, and is developing a Shuttle Derived Heavy-Lift Launch Vehicle (SDHLV). The space shuttle main engine (SSME) is the most fuel efficient rocket engine ever developed, and will be used on the next design.

[Neptuneaus]

@SaGruenwdt With the weight of the payload that the shuttle carries, straight up is the only way to go currently. Requires the massive thrust (or 'boost') provided by the solid rocket boosters to get the orbiter/payload out of Earth's atmosphere.

[puncheex]

@SaGruenwdt: well, let's see what the options are. You can use wings to lift yourself to space through the atmosphere. That works well, but it's hard to develop the speed you need to reach orbital velocity, and the streamlining that helps mitigates against carrying a good payload. You can build an elevator; Arthur C Clarke investigated this in his book The Fountains of Paradise. This is the best method, but the initial investment is huge and depends on materials just outside our reach today.

[intertr0ns]

Fantastic machine

[9DragonMaster]

what happens to the srbs?

[spacevidcast]

@9DragonMaster They fall into the Atlantic ocean abiyt 150 miles off the coast using parachutes, then are picked up by recovery ships, taken back to KSC disassembled, cleaned (salt water and steel don't mix), then sent back to the manufacturer (ATK) to be processed and reused on a later flight.

[NSRacerMods]

i heard about kibo yesterday on discovery channel...it's a very new and advanced laboratory from what i remember...i forgot what kibo means though, something with "hope"??

[Houston4444]

@St8Solja grow up please

[TachieBillano]

Oooo, look at that singularity cloud as it breaks the sound barrier!

[MetalMonkeyStudios]

grrrrrr we drive from orlando to there 2 times and it scrubs and the day the forcast said it has low % to launch they launch it i got so pist!!!

[rakuten231]

きぼうの本体を乗せて発射です。

繰り返し見ては、感動してます。

[HNDNV07]

At 10:00 minutes what is that "light" coming from around the Orbiter and ET? Looks like fire, but obviously not....

[antoinesaloumi]

@HNDNV07 it's the flames coming out of the space shuttle boosters

[HNDNV07]

@antoinesaloumi But the SRB have already been jettisoned...

[usnsquirrel]

@antoinesaloumi The boosters separate at about 2 minutes into the flight.

[mach25man]

@HNDNV07 It is fire. In a vacuum the engine exhaust spreads out.

[usnsquirrel]

@HNDNV07 Plasma.

[Zoomer30]

You can see some foam come off on the shuttle came as the SRBs drift away.

[INFORISISY]

heh.. 20,001 viewer

[sebastian12f]

at 10:30 try to look at the left cornor, there is somekind of UFO and a lot of them !!

[f22cool]

those are just the srb and externel tanks fall to earth

[EndeavourLaunch]

That's the pigs flying out of your ass son.

[raykiller545]

what kind of fuel does that rocket use?

[laserfloyd]

Main engines use Liquid Oxygen and Liquid Hydrogen. And from a website I found this for the SRBs: Ammonium Perchlorate (Oxidizer, 69.6% by weight), Aluminum (Fuel, 16%), iron oxide (Catalyst, .04%), a polymer (Binder for substances, 12.04%), and an epoxy to cure the compounds (1.96%).

[TechnikaSound]

rocket fuel

[Madrobos]

I was at Space Park in Titusvill & watched the launch live. The best thig I have ever done & seen. Great video & good reminder of the day.

[errrick]

sounds like playing starcraft with terrans

[GuiltySpark347]

Nice quality

[mach25man]

Lockheed builds it in Michoud La.

[JephN]

My mistake, you're both correct.

[frankyola2009]

los yumas son los mejores del mundo

[OtAcOwN23]

Mission accomplie!

[elbigjim]

I love this stuff!

[Arvak777]

i saw this from my house in south florida (couple hundred miles away) i didnt exactly see a rocket, but i saw an extremly bright orange dot(almost made me feel like sweating), flying upward(a bit slanted too) from north. first time i seen it, looked amazing

[ROFLMAOROFLCOPTER]

anyone know why that external fuel tank stays on so long, and doesnt go down with the solid rocket boosters?

[Neptuneaus]

The external tank contains the fuel supplying the 3 main engines. The vehicle still has another 6 and a half minutes to go to reach orbit after the boosters are jettisoned.

[BlueLamp614]

This is because at 2:20 the SRB's (white things) are out of fuel, hence they drop off. However, there is not enough velocity to reach orbit, so the 3 main engines (black and on shuttle) continue to burn, using fuel for the ET until the proper orbit is achieved. The ET is not re-used.

[ROFLMAOROFLCOPTER]

i thought the ET gets reused, along with the solid rocket boosters. so lockheed martin has to make a new external tank each launch?

[mach25man]

This is true....

[ROFLMAOROFLCOPTER]

whats true

[mach25man]

New tank made for each flight. Boosters are re-used after refurb.

[JephN]

Lock-mart doesn't build the ET. Michoud does. And yes, each mission gets a new tank. They fall back into the atmosphere and mostly burn up. The few bits that survive fall into the Pacific ocean, almost 1/2 way around the planet, never to be seen again.

[ROFLMAOROFLCOPTER]

i was at lockheed martin . com and they under the list of the things they manufacture was the space shuttle external fuel tank

[puncheex]

@JephN: Michoud is the name of a wholly owned plant of Martin Lockheed, used probably 90% exclusively for building external tanks. They are then barged to KSC.

[Chisuz]

hey people. i have watched the video some days ago. I MAINTAIN IT HAS BEEN CUT AT 3:58 + when you see the debris coming off. the scene was longer before, and you could see even more debris and BIG debris comin off, now its cut right in the second when the large particles appear... WHY???

censored XXX

FUXK

[spacevidcast]

This was recorded live from the satellite and uploaded by spacevidcast which is not associated with NASA in any way. The video was not cut in any form this is exactly as it aired live.

[Chisuz]

SO WHERE IS THAT SCENE???

[mach25man]

4min in this video booster leave and tank is still attached but is hard to see in this video.

[RrisStar3]

Nice...footage at 1:38 Thanks!

[ddtonfire]

3:20 is a really awesome shot.

[jvstin19]

"This is mission controle Huston"

WAUW, That woman got a voice!!

[jesses14]

i saw this in person at spaceview park in titusville florida. it was awesome. nasa has a live feed there so everything u hear in this video u could hear in person at the park. it was the coolest thing i have ever seen so far.

[NullPoint84]

i was there too! quite a unique experience. :)

[MrJarama]

What's that at 1:38 and at 4:10? Have you seen it?

[2giveup]

i know the shuttle has to be luanched at certian times to get were it needs to go in space..if the earth stood still twice in our history ..would this affect the trjectory and would this info be needed to get into the correct postion in space? i have been told this is factored into the equation..

[stl1967]

Everything affecting the flight before its launch is calculated into the trajectory. Everything happening after the launch does either not affect the flight or will be dealt with upon occurrence i.e. by Ground Control or the team on the flight.

[spacevidcast]

Irrelevant. If the Earth suddenly stood still all life on the planet would pretty much instantly be wiped out, so we wouldn't have a shuttle program anymore let alone a human species.

[TheShrinkRap]

Seat belts save lives. Lrts see here 1000mph to 0 in 1sec. Crap, nevermind.

[TheShrinkRap]

Do you have the one with the mouse and the Harley? The good Doctor recommends smoking a big fatty before sleep, I may not stop the dreams but it sure as hell will change them. Variety is the spice of life.

[laserfloyd]

A body in motion tends to stay in motion. There isn't anything short of collision with another Earth size body that would make Earth stand "still". Even if that happened the two bodies would obliterate one another as well as every living thing on them.

[puncheex]

@2giveup: Had it happened in the past (and I am sure that it did not) it would not have affected today's ephemeris calculations, presuming that it's supernatural source played it self out and thereafter no longer acted on Earth.

[2giveup]

was just watching the shuttle on nasa tv making its roll to look at heat shield damage..the worst cut and paste job i have ever seen. youthink nasa would do better with the cgi..

[k1dicarus]

What is the difference between altitude and downrange? First she says 2:28

1 mile altitude and 7 miles downrange

and a minute later 3:30

17 miles altitude and 16 miles downrange.

Were does this extra mile come from? :) I might miss the point here but it shouldnt be able to be higher than its downrange, can it?

[dynamic717]

Altitude is distance up. Downrange is distance east.

[k1dicarus]

A i get it! Downrange is the horizontal distance. Makes sense now.

So at first it flies a curve were it gets

7 miles away horizontal from the launch-pad and just 1 mile up and just 1 min later it already gained 16 miles altitude but just 9 miles downrange(horizontal away)

[RJY4356]

You would think that from her figures but she's wrong there is no way possible- even if it was a super-fast intercontinental ballistic missile- for it to go 7 miles out in the first 33 seconds. She should have said 0/.7 miles because the first 15 seconds it just goes straight up from the pad before it even goes past the beach line and heads out over the water at 25-30 seconds.

[JephN]

"Downrange" is distance from pad. "Altitude" is height above surface.

[globaltrotterjew]

UFO @ 7:24...right side between shuttle and earth...LOL...prolly a sat.

[MrJarama]

Much better at 1:38.

[lecaab]

I' wrong ;(. The acceleration is about 2G, but the astronaut feel (of course) 1 more G.

[JephN]

The whole craft and everything in it experiences 3 G's. They throttle back near MECO as well, to keep within limits. There's no possible way for the craft to experience 2 G's and the crew 1 G, unless the crew was decelerating.

[puncheex]

@JephN: Actually, I believe their profile calls for something like 3G until the SRBs are dropped, then the weight of the vehicle exceeds the thrust of the SSMEs and the vehicle actually dives a little, trading altitude for speed until it burns off some of its fuel, before it starts climbing again. The G force climbs from 1G to 3G a minute or two before MECO, where they're throttled back to maintain the 3Gs. Gs that I'm speaking of ignore the Gs due to weight.

[usnsquirrel]

@puncheex The craft and everything in it experience the same level of acceleration. Ergo 3 G's is 3 G's for crew and craft. Same principles apply to cars, planes, or any other moving object. The difference is the direction they experience the G's. You'll have some "eyeballs in" and "eyeballs up" acceleration once the shuttle is on its back after rollover. The three G's they feel are primarily "eyeballs in" though. ("eyeballs [direction]" is a reference to how the acceleration is felt)

[puncheex]

@usnsquirrel: Great. You might also note that acceleration is inversely proportional to mass ( a = F/m), and as they burn off their fuel the acceleration increases while the force remains constant (104% rated SSME power). So, the acceleration is rising as they near orbit.  And, yes, obviously they, the SSME's, the unburned fuel, the shuttle and the ET are all part of that same declining mass and are accelerated the same.

[usnsquirrel]

@puncheex I'm a big fan of Newton's laws, particularly F=ma and its variants. I apologize if it seemed like i was being condescending. It appeared there was some bad comms about the crew's acceleration vs. the shuttle stack's. The G's are limited through Max Q, then increase to SRB tailoff, then reduce some st SRB SEP before increasing again uo to MECO. As a matter of fact, Spacevidcast's coverage for STS-131 shows the acceleration at the link.... Pretty cool; watch?v=_NeCvBCZbC8

[puncheex]

@usnsquirrel: Yes, I saw that, and in fact the meters made it pretty plain what was happening in the shuttle vis-a-vis acceleration. I don't know actually whether SpaceVidCast's meters are set from telemetry or from a realtime flight profile model. It's kinda too bad the PAL doesn't have those meters to read instead of whatever she is doing.

[usnsquirrel]

@puncheex Brandi Dean (the PAO at JSC) has a very bad habit of confusing numbers. I've submitted emails requesting her to be removed, and even replace her with myself. Sadly, they don't do things that way. Anyway, those numbers are from Bill Harwood, who gets the numbers from NASA's telemetry. They're fairly accurate, as they are numbers from previous mission to the ISS with similar payload mass. I'd say accurate within 1%. The -23 ft is a reference to the geometric center of the planet.

[puncheex]

@usnsquirrel: Thanks for the information. OK, then, they are numbers culled from the telemetry of a similar mission in the past and played back. I have no argument with the accuracy; I agree they're probably right in there.

[usnsquirrel]

@puncheex They do trade altitude for airspeed for a bit after SRB SEP though.

[lecaab]

An acceleration of 3G (29.4m/s*s) is 823m/s after 28 seconds or 2964km/h (roughly 1850 miles/h).

[QAFtuvok101]

Most of you aren't aware that this will be the first time 2 Canadians will be in space at the same time.

There's a Canadian already on the ISS (he'll be there 6 months), and Julie Payette will be joining him.

And in October, Cirque du Soleil owner Guy Laliberté will be taking a tourist flight with the Russians.

[goalirobi]

I was so glad the weather cooperated. great video, and an even better launch. god speed, endeavour

[RJY4356]

I don't know where this JSC PAO gets her figures. There is NO WAY on EARTH they are 7 miles downrange at T+ 33 seconds. Her thrust figures are way too low, the SRBs generate more like 5.9-6 million lbs. of thrust- launch thrust is more like 7.4 million lbs. She made the same errors on STS-120 in 2007. Time to update the script!

[Neptuneaus]

I agree. On several flights a commentator states that the shuttle's speed is 1,000 mph some 25 seconds after liftoff. Absolute nonsense. Do they just make up numbers that they think sound good? Ridiculous.

[RJY4356]

I know the guy you're talking about but can't think of his nam,e..it's not Rob Navias or Kyle Herring or Jim Hartsfield. He did STS-116 and another recent one where he said " speed a thousand mph" only 25 or 28 seconds in which is absurd. Intercontinental ballistic missles don't go that fast, or downrange 7 miles in 30 seconds!!! It doesn't even clear the beach around the launch pad until 20-25 seconds into launch.

[RJY4356]

@Neptuneaus Kelly Humphries is his name.

[gonzo13fox]

Too much math for me, she fooled me, lol. However if I actually sat down and write the stuff down, then yeah, I would be able to follow along with the figures. You sound like you know what your talking about, I will take your word for it.

[RJY4356]

Watched almost every shuttle launch since 1981. Math isn't that complicated just height, speed, and distance.

[gonzo13fox]

Did you know 4/3 people have trouble with fractions!

[bigdrevideo]

LOL

[usnsquirrel]

@RJY4356 the NASA PAO lady is Brandi Dean. She's been heard saying the ISS was over the surface of the Pacific Ocean at 214 feet altitude, and the space shuttle was once 140,000 miles above Earth during it's approach to KSC. For her to say 7 miles downrange at 33 seconds into the flight is par for her course.

[RJY4356]

@usnsquirrel Haha thanks. I was sure it was Kylie Clem. Whoever she is I wish she wouldn't make up her own facts. There's also Kelly Humphries (a guy) who always randomly says " Speed 1,000 miles an hour" about 25 seconds into flight. Very annoying.

[usnsquirrel]

@RJY4356 1,000 mph in 25 seconds is indeed fast, but not entirely absurdly ridiculous either...however, the shuttle's not capable of that rate of acceleration. To break it down, The shuttle gos 0-100 mph in 4 seconds (100mph when it clears the tower, about the same time the comms switch to Houston), mach 1 at ~40 seconds (MaxQ), ~2500 mph 2:30 seconds into the flight (shortly after SRB separation, ~5000 mph in about 3:30 into the flight, 17,500 mph 8:30 into the flight (MECO-Main Engine Cut Off)

[2utoday]

Beautiful launch!! Way to go NASA!!!

[youlikeme31]

My father works for NASA over safety and i live just 25 minutes from launch pad 39-A. and i was closer than the press viewing site for this launch. this was a weight off of everyone's shoulders When they finally got Endeavour up. and i finally get to see my father in the morning! because he had to go in at 3:00 A.M every day until they finally got it launched. If you ever Get a chance in the next year to visit kennedy space center during a launch IT is a blast. GOOD LUCK Endeavour!

[blkbishop112]

Your so right, I was on Kennedy when STS-124 launch, that was my first launch. I wish I was closer than I was, I was on the main road across the banana river. I put that launch on my channel. Had a blast down there.

[lee3764]

Godspeed the crew of STS-127!Only 7 more launches of the Space Shuttle to go before retirement.

I got my 5 year old son Robert out from bed at 11:00pm British Summer Time to watch this so he can remember these last few occasions of watching a live shuttle launch on Sky News.He's the only child at his infant school who got up and watched it live.I was a child in the Apollo age and still fondly remember watching coverage of the launches, Moon footage & splashdown back on Earth of the missions!

[Kharawonder]

Did anyone notice debris flying between the shuttle and external fuel tank?

Check 4:08-4:12.

I'm guessing this is NASA's concern you see on the news...

[lakatosv]

Awsome launch. Good luck to the crew!

[XGoombafiedX]

That was a beautiful launch, and when it was in the air I was thinking "finally..."

[verstwo2]

so ....do the boosters become space junk?  or do they fall back to earth?

[simav8r]

The boosters fall back into the Atlantic. From there they are retrieved, refurbished, and reused.

[verstwo2]

good to know.  Thanks.

[thesmart358]

They fall to earth and they get recovered and reused.

[TheShrinkRap]

They reclaim them and make fart cannon mufflers for Hondas.

[lildonut206]

ROTFLMAO!!!!

[Chrisjr2007]

They fall back to Earth.

The E.T.(External Tank) desinigrates and fall into the ocean.Maybe just small pieces that survived the re-entry.

[hawkmoth11]

they are so high up that the tanks will either go up or down

[loploro]

Thnaks for the HD live stream. Really appreciate it. Could you please upload also the SRB vodeo too.

Thanks

[Vitaminnn07]

it actually was HD live stream ? damn. where exactly did you watch it?

i watched it live on shitty nasa tv quality.

[loploro]

Spacevidcast is streaming via ustream all major events.

[spacevidcast]

On the spacevidcast . com site we stream shuttle launches in HD (and as many things as we can get in HD too). Also have live weekly shows every Friday at 02:00 UTC.

[NovemberKat]

This launch was so much fun to watch live. :D Thanks Spacevidcast!!!

[Buttmunch5000]

why do nasa use imperial measurements, when spacex the other day, spoke of KM and KG and KMH, we get lbs and MPH from nasa?

[TheShrinkRap]

We do that just to piss people off.

[NIK4EVA]

Good stuff. Thanks for the post. will watch the HD tommorow :)

[digitalimpulse]

Only about 8 more left right?

[JustAnAdjunct]

Wikipedia lists only 7 - STS-128, STS-129, STS-130, STS-131, STS-132, STS-133 and STS-134 which is the last.

[Chrisjr2007]

yes.

[AL3J4NdR001]

no.

[thesmart358]

Finally. It FINALLY launched. I think everyone at SVC was relieved when it launched. Great job, Ben.

[spacevidcast]

LOL, I would love to take credit but all I did was get people excited about the work that everyone at NASA does. I just had to stay awake for it. Again and again and again and again...

[simav8r]

Great launch (granted that any successful NASA launces are awesome).

Hmmm... another 24hr hold and it would've launched on the Apollo 11 anniversary. Imagine what the PAO would've done with that.

[swires]

Defiantly worth the wait.

[spacevidcast]

Just wait... YouTube is still compressing the HD version, quality will bump even more as soon as it is done!

[swires]

sorry i didn't clarify myself i was talking about the wait for the shuttle to go up after all the scrubs

[spacevidcast]

Ha, well that works too, and I agree (although I'm all over a dusk launch too)