This was likely an opportunity for the use & development of another indestructible, non combustible man-made fabric perhaps or is it one that already exists? 🤷🏼♂️
That is correct. They didn't show Artemis II re-entry live. But a cgi representation. They did show it land in the ocean. So make of that what you will.
I dream that one day, space flight around our planet will be a necessary step to be able to become the ruler of a country or CEO of a large corporation.
No, they're decelerating. They got up to 4G of being pushed into their seats. The final stage between going subsonic and before the parachutes opening may have felt like freefall though. This footage however, is of the uncrewed Artemis I mission.
The intense heat causes plasma and ionization to occur around the capsule. I looked up plasma. It's a state of matter in which the subatomic particles, e.g., electrons, separate from their nuclei and are no longer associated with any particular atoms. What? Far out!
I would like to have someone check my understanding. there were a number of parts where it looked like there was fire. I interpret this, in my very limited understanding, as skipping off the atmosphere a few times, slowing down then there's a final tip and they go nearly straight down.
This is a render not what really happened. Took them almost 10 minutes to fall to earth and it was not recorded. This video showed the 2 drogue parachutes that carried them down most the way as only being active for mere seconds not the majority of the way down like what really happened.
The title says this is the Artemis 1, so not the manned mission right? The timing of this post made me think this was the Artemis 2. Unless the title is incorrect?
The physics of re-entry are crazy. Your average descent in a commercial aircraft is longer and it is only slowing from 500+ish mph. Meanwhile this thing is going 22,000mph when it hits the upper atmosphere. Thats like 250gJ or enough energy to boil a small lake.
Stupid question but why does it appear as though they are going across the globe rather than straight down to it? Is it just so that they are positioned over their landing spot?
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/nasas-artemis-ii-free-return-trajectory-lets-gravity-do-the-driving/ This article explains the path they took to and from the moon and why. https://time.com/article/2026/04/10/artemis-ii-historic-splashdown/ This article explains the heat shield, trajectory, and complications of both Artemis II and past missions in landing. https://stories.uq.edu.au/contact-magazine/artemis-return/index.html This article explains the reentry of Artemis II and the methods used, and probably has most of the answers you are looking for. I have read all three of the articles to ensure they have relevant and factual information, and I hope you find them as interesting as I have! (Yes I am a human, yes I am autistic lol)
Thanks so much for the links. I can’t believe the temperatures reached were half that of the sun! Question from the Time article:
“NASA split the difference, not quite following the as-the-crow-flies route of Earth-orbiting craft, but taking a somewhat shallower path than Artemis I did.”
Is this the answer to my question? They didn’t go straight down towards earth, taking a shallower approach instead.
Spacecraft will basically never go straight down. They're returning from orbit, which is a big circle (or ellipse). When they reenter they're flattening out that circle just enough to touch the atmosphere, which then begins to slow them down so they fall further and further. This is both the easiest way in terms of not using a lot of fuel, and also best way to slow down safely. You want to travel through as much of the atmosphere as possible so you get the maximum braking effect from pushing through the air.
One of the things that kinda surprised me was how much speed they were gaining (before hitting the atmosphere) due to just the gravity of earth. It was like 1mph/sec before they started re-entry
NASA usually prioritizes safety and reliability, especially for human missions, so they stick with proven methods like parachute landings in the ocean. On the other hand, companies like ypu mentioned are focused on reusability and cutting costs, which is why they go for rocket landings on pads. That approach is more complex and a bit riskier, but it helps them launch more frequently.
The transition at 0:52 is surreal
ReplyDeleteI'd worry about burning the parachutes!
ReplyDeleteThis was likely an opportunity for the use & development of another indestructible, non combustible man-made fabric perhaps or is it one that already exists? 🤷🏼♂️
Delete😂😂😂🤣🤣😂🤣😂🤣😂🤣😂🤣😂🤣😂🤣😂😂😂🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣😂😂😂🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣😂🤣🤣🤣😂😂🤣🤣😂🤣🤣🤣😂😂🤣🤣🤣😂🤣🤣
ReplyDeleteLooks fake
ReplyDelete2d This says Artemis I, so it wasn't the crewed flight that just splashed down?
ReplyDeleteThat is correct. They didn't show Artemis II re-entry live. But a cgi representation. They did show it land in the ocean. So make of that what you will.
DeleteHopefully they have video and can release it from Artemis II!
DeleteI will die on this planet. No thank you outer space and no thank you deep water
ReplyDeleteI dream that one day, space flight around our planet will be a necessary step to be able to become the ruler of a country or CEO of a large corporation.
ReplyDeleteIt's so weird how it goes from looking like they're still outside the atmosphere to instantly parachutes are deployed. Insane.
ReplyDeleteThis really visualised the 'skip' reentry method for me!
ReplyDeleteHang up the phone grandma!
ReplyDeleteThat’s so kool!!
ReplyDeleteIs there any risk of barotrauma coming back from space like there is for divers coming back to the surface?
ReplyDeleteYes there is a risk of HIV from space as they after doing 4some there ins pace you get HIV
DeleteComment has been removed
DeleteIs there any thermal fatigue going from the hot atmosphere to the freezing cold
ReplyDeleteMURICA
ReplyDeleteEven at 25x speed that looked way faster than 25 min descent
ReplyDeleteSend this to the flat earthers, still wont change a thing.
ReplyDeleteWhere do I find the unabridged clip? YouTube only has the crappy live stream ones
ReplyDeleteCgi nice
ReplyDeleteThat is absolutely nuts! Going that fast to landing safely in the ocean..
ReplyDeletescaaaaaaary!
ReplyDeleteOk. Where's the epstein files.
ReplyDeleteShow this to the flat earthers
ReplyDeleteAI has gotten so good
ReplyDeletethis is fake. everyone knows the world is flat.
ReplyDeleteI hope you're joking.
DeleteGenuine question, where are all the rocks and stuff flying about in space, and how does it avoid hitting them?
ReplyDeleteFake
ReplyDeleteSorry you don’t have the intelligence to comprehend the science, I pity you.
Deleteindeed
DeleteI want to be an astronaut long time ago..but then my friends laugh at me, now my job is dental technician 🥸
ReplyDeleteThey see me rollin', they hatin'
ReplyDeleteAnd they say the earth is not flat 🤦♂️
ReplyDeleteThis will never not totally captivate me
ReplyDeleteWhere’s the ice wall? 😂
ReplyDeleteWatching those chutes open has to be one of the best feelings imaginable.
ReplyDeleteIt's actually just as insane at 1x speed if you're not impatient.
ReplyDeleteJust saying...
Did it feel like a roller coaster drop / free fall to the astronauts?
ReplyDeleteNo, they're decelerating. They got up to 4G of being pushed into their seats. The final stage between going subsonic and before the parachutes opening may have felt like freefall though. This footage however, is of the uncrewed Artemis I mission.
Deleteso no video of them during launch or landing.
ReplyDeleteI'll never understand heating up on re-entry. Is it because the earth is rotating & we are moving relatively slower than the atmosphere?
ReplyDeleteThe re entry is so fast that it’s compressing air so much that the air heats up.
DeleteWeeeeeeeeeee
ReplyDeleteLooks fake to me!!! FlatEarth#
ReplyDeleteflat af bro
ReplyDeleteWhat's up with all of the aquarium noises?
ReplyDeleteI thought the start of the video was a UNIVERSAL studios movie.
ReplyDeleteThey almost ran into the letters on the way down though 😉
DeleteI wonder why a pod wasn't sent from the space station or from the shuttle. It would have been easy once you're in orbit.
ReplyDeleteSome genius actually calculates that descent to land in specific spot in the Pacific Ocean near California, WOW
ReplyDeleteIncredible
ReplyDeleteWhy don't they just fly straight down are they stupid
ReplyDeleteHilarious this is someone’s dream come true because it’s my person nightmare 🤪
ReplyDeleteFlat Earthers be like: "no fucking way"
ReplyDeleteWhat the source? Is there any way to see this in regular speed?
ReplyDeleteThe intense heat causes plasma and ionization to occur around the capsule. I looked up plasma. It's a state of matter in which the subatomic particles, e.g., electrons, separate from their nuclei and are no longer associated with any particular atoms. What? Far out!
ReplyDeleteField goal! It's good!
ReplyDeleteAll thanks to Tunnock Teacakes
ReplyDeleteI would like to have someone check my understanding. there were a number of parts where it looked like there was fire. I interpret this, in my very limited understanding, as skipping off the atmosphere a few times, slowing down then there's a final tip and they go nearly straight down.
ReplyDeleteis that about right?
This is a render not what really happened. Took them almost 10 minutes to fall to earth and it was not recorded. This video showed the 2 drogue parachutes that carried them down most the way as only being active for mere seconds not the majority of the way down like what really happened.
ReplyDeleteThis is Artemis 1
DeleteIt appears sir you are correct and I cant read.
DeleteCrazy how it goes from black sky looking into space to suddenly blue.
ReplyDeleteFlat Earthers be like, Fake News!
ReplyDeleteNah, looks flat to me
ReplyDeleteVery cool!!
ReplyDeleteSounds like its under water, wonder why they can't do a couple more orbits of earth upper atmosphere to bleed off some extra speed?
ReplyDeleteCrazy they were brewing coffee at a time like this.
ReplyDeleteWhat a rush !
ReplyDeleteNow thats a ride
The plasma streaks remind me of that one scene from Project Hail Mary, so cool
ReplyDeleteWhy the two phases with fire? Cut down on heat damage?
ReplyDeleteYes — it's called a skip trajectory. https://www.lockheedmartin.com/en-us/news/features/2022/orion-skip-maneuver.html
DeleteThe parachutes kind of look like the logo for the umbrella corporation. Strange.
ReplyDeleteflat earthers have 24 hours to respond
ReplyDeleteSpace porn, ended with a huge shot:)
ReplyDeleteNice to see a rocket being used for the betterment of mankind for a change.
ReplyDeleteIsn't there a shit ton of satellites and space garbage in orbit? I'd be worried about smashing into something
ReplyDeleteSpace is big. Even low earth orbit.
DeleteDoesn't look fun.
ReplyDeleteAnyone know where to find the non-timelapse version?
ReplyDeleteAnyone know the link to who/what was doing the actual filming? Or, did I miss this part of the convo?
ReplyDeleteFlat earthers are gonna say this is AI
ReplyDeleteneeds some pink floyd
ReplyDeleteThe title says this is the Artemis 1, so not the manned mission right? The timing of this post made me think this was the Artemis 2. Unless the title is incorrect?
ReplyDeleteYou are correct. Everyone is posting this for internet points. Half the comments are asking about the astronauts.
DeleteDo they have to go through customs when they come back?
ReplyDeleteFrom sticks and stones to this In the Blink of an Eye ...crazy
ReplyDeleteIt looks like they go around the earth like 5 times during this video. I’m sure they don’t, but The perspective is hard to judge. Anyone know more?
ReplyDeleteThey're just relatively close to the earth, so you're seeing a far smaller chunk of it than you would if they were further away.
DeleteSo crazy
DeleteThe physics of re-entry are crazy. Your average descent in a commercial aircraft is longer and it is only slowing from 500+ish mph. Meanwhile this thing is going 22,000mph when it hits the upper atmosphere. Thats like 250gJ or enough energy to boil a small lake.
ReplyDeleteInteresting to see reentry from a clear perspective. All of the historical stuff is just flashes of flame against a dark background.
ReplyDeleteIf you stick this video into AI, it detects this video as being AI generated. 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣
ReplyDeleteWhich would make sense! They have been trained on real videos and this would be pretty new to ai!
DeleteStupid question but why does it appear as though they are going across the globe rather than straight down to it? Is it just so that they are positioned over their landing spot?
ReplyDeletehttps://www.scientificamerican.com/article/nasas-artemis-ii-free-return-trajectory-lets-gravity-do-the-driving/ This article explains the path they took to and from the moon and why. https://time.com/article/2026/04/10/artemis-ii-historic-splashdown/ This article explains the heat shield, trajectory, and complications of both Artemis II and past missions in landing. https://stories.uq.edu.au/contact-magazine/artemis-return/index.html This article explains the reentry of Artemis II and the methods used, and probably has most of the answers you are looking for. I have read all three of the articles to ensure they have relevant and factual information, and I hope you find them as interesting as I have! (Yes I am a human, yes I am autistic lol)
DeleteThanks so much for the links. I can’t believe the temperatures reached were half that of the sun! Question from the Time article:
Delete“NASA split the difference, not quite following the as-the-crow-flies route of Earth-orbiting craft, but taking a somewhat shallower path than Artemis I did.”
Is this the answer to my question? They didn’t go straight down towards earth, taking a shallower approach instead.
Spacecraft will basically never go straight down. They're returning from orbit, which is a big circle (or ellipse). When they reenter they're flattening out that circle just enough to touch the atmosphere, which then begins to slow them down so they fall further and further. This is both the easiest way in terms of not using a lot of fuel, and also best way to slow down safely. You want to travel through as much of the atmosphere as possible so you get the maximum braking effect from pushing through the air.
DeleteLook how thin and pathetic is the Earth's atmosphere. Wouldn't it be nice if we stop polluting it?
ReplyDeleteI mean, technically polluting it would just make it thicker.
Deletesure would.
DeleteWhy does the camera make earth look lumpy?
ReplyDeleteLens distortion
DeleteWhy did it start to burn two times?
ReplyDeletehttps://www.lockheedmartin.com/en-us/news/features/2022/orion-skip-maneuver.html
Deletewonder what the flat earther's are saying about this video.
ReplyDeleteOne of the things that kinda surprised me was how much speed they were gaining (before hitting the atmosphere) due to just the gravity of earth. It was like 1mph/sec before they started re-entry
ReplyDeleteThe sped up audio is wild too. It sounds like me trying to get every last drop using a straw or my leaky toilet.
ReplyDeleteWhat-a-production 👏🏿 👏🏿👏🏿
ReplyDeletejumbo kinder egg
ReplyDeleteUS Navy Corpsmen lead the way!
ReplyDeleteAll this awesomeness, and some flatbrain on YouTube dares to call this fake.
ReplyDeleteThe smell must be something else when they opened it
ReplyDeleteMoreso for the astronauts. They breath filtered air so when they return Earth smells funny.
DeleteSame for submariners
It's nice to have really hopeful and positive moments for humanity like this. I really hope we get more.
ReplyDeleteThats what a hatch opening looks like Katy Perry
ReplyDeleteomg the way they're floating in the water like that is so surreal.. space travel is actually wild when you think about it.
ReplyDeleteI don't get why NASA are still using the same reovery methods as they always have, while Musk and Bezos' craft can land on the pad.
ReplyDeleteLanding the rocket on the pad is still extremely dangerous, all those videos you see of rocket landing, there never was a human on board (yet)
DeleteThis specific one was due to low budget. If you look it up they repurposed several parts.
DeleteNASA usually prioritizes safety and reliability, especially for human missions, so they stick with proven methods like parachute landings in the ocean. On the other hand, companies like ypu mentioned are focused on reusability and cutting costs, which is why they go for rocket landings on pads. That approach is more complex and a bit riskier, but it helps them launch more frequently.
DeleteNice handpan
ReplyDeleteImagine if the guy had forgotten to bring the key.
ReplyDeleteComment removed by moderator
ReplyDeleteThe video is from the bodycam of one of the guys going in id bet the capsule has a much better camera and they will likely drop that vid later on
DeleteWhere are we, what is this planet called?? What year?? 🤣❤️
ReplyDeleteWhy are there apes everywhere??
DeleteHave they kissed the ground?
ReplyDeleteI would have farted in the hatch and sealed it back up. Welcome back!
ReplyDeleteThis is the type of stuff we like to see from the US. As opposed to all the verbal vomit lately
ReplyDeleteAbsolutely!
DeleteCouldn’t have said it better myself!
DeleteFor some reason I assumed they would still be strapped in in case it tipped over or something. This looks much more comfortable.
ReplyDeleteWho sealed them in?
ReplyDeleteAliens clearly
Deletehttps://www.reddit.com/media?url=https%3A%2F%2Fexternal-preview.redd.it%2FUrxShGwi_V0I7-1Am72sEq2BG0aXLxkrh1zoJF8pUzQ.gif%3Fauto%3Dwebp%26s%3D1ab8c84eb9c7d0f029122c71ead64055584a8814
ReplyDeleteDoes anyone know why they are going in id expect the astronauts to leave the pod ?!
ReplyDeleteThey need to secure the black box and all of the backside of the moon videos :p
DeleteProbably to unstrap them
DeleteThey usually have a crew strap them in on top of the rocket. Makes sense that Plan A is to have a crew unstrap them too.
They're also probably weak as shit from 10 days of traveling at 0G
https://culleninsuranceagency.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/10/think-about-it.gif
DeleteWho straps the crew that straps them?
Delete