Aborted STS Discovery Launch (NASA Raw Simulation Feed)

[eXcommunicate1979]

What the hell did I just watch? Looks like a normal launch to me.

[johanlaurasia]

Don't see the big deal actually, just a simulation. The actual video of the launch was flawless, the SRBs separated at the right time and I saw 3 main engines the whole time, big deal an abort simulation.  One of the reasons NASA has such a good record.

[RoPWU]

was that upside down when it had to go back around?

also if they did do an abort, what would they do if they had to land in water? will the shuttle stay floating when it lands? or sink like a rock?

[Andrewmcmelonse]

Imagine being the astronaut.

[TheCrayonMan529]

jesus that was loud

[shakenama]

I can't see a RTLS happening, The maneuver to do that must be tremendous and the stress on the orbiter itself also.

[AtlantisB737]

it was a drill...there haven´t been any RTLS events so far in the STS program. There was one ATO once. One of the engine lost 2 sensors and shutdown, a few minutes later one of the other engines lost one sensor and an engineer on the ground quickly inhibited the 2nd to prevent a shutdown of a second engine.

[EricSala97]

but nothing was really aborted on sts-93. why is that?

[Zoomer30]

This was a simulator exercise they ran before STS 26 (the first flight after challenger). They carried it live on CBS the video was just a tape of a previous launch. They where training fir an RTLS abort. There had never been an RTLS abort in a real mission. The only after liftoff abort that has ever happened is 51B I think, when challenger lost an engine about a min after SRB sep, they had to do an abort to orbit.

[av8n4life]

The ATO abort was Challenger 51-F. This was an engine-out RTLS abort simulation that turned into a contingency abort when they lost an additional engine. Kind of haunting to hear Flight ask FDO "Any chance of getting this one back?" "negative" "Do we have an IP (impact point)?" Basically, this RTLS simulation didn't end with a landing on the runway...

[TPM75108]

If I had a red bullshit stamp I'd use it on this.

[MrApolloTom]

It says in the title it's a simulation.

[RJY4356]

The audio is from a June 1988 simulation prior to the STS-26 launch in September 1988. The video itself is the STS-51-J Atlantis launch in October 1985.

[incargeek]

Nice one, thanks for posting it. Good to hear an RTLS abort simulation. Pretty rare.

[El135o]

Baloney. There's never been an RTLS launch. Also, CAPCOM wouod never say "right ENGINE down." Jeez, it's an SSME!

Anyway, you've simply cobbled together footage, or taped some bad made-for-TV disaster flick. Either way, nobody's been fooled, sport.

[blablubb12345]

This is real communication between mission control and the shuttle crew during an simulated RTLS abort.

[RJY4356]

In fact they do say center engine down and center engine failed. as they did on 51-F in 1985. It is made quite clear this is audio from a simulation practice synched to an old launch video, no one is trying to fool anyone.

[wuzzlevideos]

Apart from the fact that you're completely wrong about pretty much everything, I've heard internal loops and they do indeed say engines.

[flyxwire]

FYI - For all those that seem compelled to flame this videotape.

This was taped off Spacenet9 as a raw NASA feed. It is simply provided for your viewing. It was common in the 80's for NASA to broadcast simulations on C-Band, this was an inverted feed (change in polarity).

This has not been modified in any form other than removing the some of the video with non-communication to shrink size of clip.

This is 100% NASA raw feed, a simulation for sure by NASA - whether you believe it or not.

[deepsinK]

you could've just inserted all of the above in your rather lackluster description.

[rollprogramhouston]

@flyxwire My parents had a C-Band satellite system installed literally just prior to 1986. I can remember some of these sims or wildfeeds as I refer to them. This particular sim is what I believe to be a sim for the STS-26 return to flight mission in September 1988. So to the naysayers, this was a 100% raw feed. In addition, I've always believed that an RTLS would more than likely never really be fully successful due to many reasons leading to a loss of vehicle and possibly the crew.

[mduncan36]

It's wrong to present this as fact. It's a total fabrication using a simulation. You should have noted that. Bad move man, very bad.

[Paragon0fVirtue]

This is a very interesting simulation to watch. I wonder. I seen the SRB seperation but what would be the case as far as the external fuel tank? Would the tank be ejected into the ocean or would they wait until they were in a lower orbit so the tank would burn up in the atmosphere?

[thenekom]

An RTLS (return to launch site) abort would involve dumping the external tank for sure. They can't do ANYTHING to shut the SRB's off, they would have to burn out on their own, but they would absolutely have to discard the external fuel tank before attempting a landing at Kennedy.

[andrewwski]

RTLS calls for the ET to be dropped after the SSME's have burned to give the orbiter the velocity needed to reach the runway. The fuel from the ET would be necessary, but yes, obviously the orbiter couldn't land with it attached.

[ElAviator72]

The video is a fake...there has never been an actual RTLS abort. The audio is from a launch simulation.

[zathras9now]

The only abort of a shuttle mission was in July of 1985, but was an "Abort to Orbit" when one of the main engines failed. The mission was unaffected as the failure happened at a high altitude and the other main engines did a great job of taking over. This is definitely a "what if".

[andrewwski]

There were also five RSLS (Redundant Set Launch Sequencer) aborts, although I guess you're technically right as the mission had not begun yet. An RSLS abort involves the SSME's automatically shutting down before the SRB's are ignited.

[deepsinK]

actually STS-93 was aborted at T:07 as well.

[zathras9now]

Oh yes, I seem to recall that. But the worst manned launch pad abort in the US was Gemini 6 (I think) at T +1! That could have gone way wrong!

[wuzzlevideos]

Er? Nothing was aborted on STS-93 at all.

[deepsinK]

Do your homework. It was aborted at T-7 because of hydrogen detected in the aft.

[wuzzlevideos]

Oh! I thought you meant DURING the launch. I didn't read at all that you were talking about pad aborts. Apologies :)

[Alphaleo2020]

from the altitude they were at a turn around would have been possible. and if not they have an alternate in Spain so idk why we are talking about landing in water. the shuttle also has the abilaty to eject the orbitor cockpit. The callengers orbitor ejection shutes burned up causing rapid desel. trauma killing all onboard

[deloodsmedia]

Don't fantasize here. Shuttles could NOT separate the cockpit from the airframe. It was the solid construction that kept Challenger's cabin together.

At the height of the explosion they still were in the atmoshere and chutes would not have burnt, just ripped. But there weren't any. and rapid deceleration? what the hell are you ranting about? The cockpit impacting with the ocean was the main cause of death.

Check your facts, don't make things up.

[Alphaleo2020]

My Bad, the cabin Ejection system was not installed due to the extra payload. The crew cabin hit the ocean surface at roughly 208 mph, causing an instantaneous deceleration of over 200 G's, far beyond crew survivability levels. Rapid Deceleration trauma is the shuttle hitting the water! 208 mph to ZERO suddenly. For You non math people for a 150Lbs. person the Presure involved at 200 G's is 30,000 LBS. That is the force your organs would have to sustain inorder to live.

[Alphaleo2020]

Modified SR-71 Blackbird ejection seats and full pressure suits were used on the first four shuttle orbital missions, which were considered test flights, but they were removed for the operational missions that followed. Providing a launch escape system for larger crews was considered undesirable due to "limited utility, technical complexity and excessive cost in dollars, weight or schedule delays.

[FORZION]

That means Challenger never had ejection seats also way to quote wikipedia.

[deepsinK]

I would've thought cabin depressurization would be the initial cause of death regardless considering the altitude.

[KFodor]

Actually, no astronaut I've ever met wants to even attempt an RTLS abort in real life. Turning the shuttle around means, at some point, your forward speed drops to zero. Yes, an RTLS has been simulated, but it's never been done in real life, and it's reserved for the grimmest of emergencies.

[LMichaelL65]

This is a simulated abort, but gives a sense of what would happen. If a Shuttle lost all engines at that point, it would not necessarily end up in the water. It would be directed to return to the launch site. I believe the term "Bail-out" point is referring to separating from the External Tank. This has never had to be done.

[rdfox76]

@LMichaelL65 Actually, the bailout point is referring to, well, bailing out of the gliding Orbiter that won't make it back to land, using the escape pole mounted in the main hatch. If you watch the Mission Control tape from STS-107, you'll hear them discussing having to have the crew bail out over the Gulf of Mexico rather than continuing to landing, about a minute before the breakup. (Moot, since it can only be used below 30,000 feet.)

[thenekom]

As has been said, this is obviously audio from a simulation, but that being said, it's interesting to listen to.

[philkarn]

Yes, this is definitely a sim. No return to launch site (RTLS) abort has ever actually occurred.

[jupitorman]

yep bullshit

[jackbuster]

If this were really true, and Discovery lost two or all engines, it would be in the water: Loss of Crew and Vehicle. In fact this video mentions impact point, unsurvivable for the shuttle and the astronauts. Since we've only lost astronauts on Challenger and Columbia, this doesn't make sense. And I just saw Discovery launch last Fall, and it was in perfect condition. This is bullshit.

[RJY4356]

The audio is from one of the STS-26 launch simulation practices in 1988. You can hear the voice of CDR Rick Hauck and CAPCOM John Creighton.

[Connecticut2009]

Why Aborted STS Discovery Launch?

[Connecticut2009]

STS-51J LAUNCH

[EndeavourLaunch]

This is STS-51J launch video combined with An RTLS Simulation from a Traning Mission. This is Still very cool, makes you get the idea of what it would be like if there was an RTLS abort.

[shuttleluis]

that tape is from STS-51J

[anyhandleleft]

this is bullshit video, only abort to orbit or any orbit after lighting of SRM was challanger back in 85. There has never been another abort. Russians must have posted this bullshit video!

[shuttlemasterbkg]

This has to be a transmission of a practice training abort. You can clearly see all the main engines are operating...