The STS-48 UFOs incident revisited - discussion with Credulity Kills

page: 1
55
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
+7 more 
posted on May, 4 2008 @ 05:28 AM
link   
Let me introduce Credulity Kills:
He worked for NASA for 9 years as a mission control specialist for the ISS (his specialty was the ISS guidance, navigation & control system).
His experience could be very helpful in order to understand the dynamic of one of the most controversial
NASA ufo footages ever.


The STS-48 UFOs incident revisited
STS-48



STS-48 (43)
DISCOVERY (13)
Pad 39-A (42)
43rd Shuttle mission
13th Flight OV-103
5th Night landing

Crew:
John O. Creighton (3), Commander
Kenneth S. Reightler, Jr. (1), Pilot
James F. Buchli (4), Mission Specialist 1
Charles D. Gemar (2), Mission Specialist 2
Mark N. Brown (2), Mission Specialist 3

Launch:
September 12, 1991, 7:11:04 p.m. EDT. Launch delayed 14 minutes by a faulty communication link between KSC and

Mission Control in Houston. Launch Weight: 240,062 lbs.

Mission Highlights:
Primary payload, the Upper Atmosphere Research Satellite (UARS), deployed on the third day of the mission. During its planned 18-month mission, the l4,500-pound observatory will make the most extensive study ever conducted of the Earth's troposphere, the upper level of the planet's envelope of life- sustaining gases which also include the protective ozone layer. UARS has ten sensing and measuring devices: Cryogenic Limb Array Etalon Spectrometer

(CLAES); Improved Stratospheric and Mesospheric Sounder (ISAMS); Microwave Limb Sounder (MLS); Halogen Occultation

Experiment (HALOE); High Resolution Doppler Imager (HRDI); Wind Imaging Interferometer (WlNDII); Solar Ultraviolet

Spectral Irradiance Monitor (SUSIM); Solar/Stellar Irra- diance Comparison Experiment (SOLSTICE); Particle Environ-

ment Monitor (PEM) and Active Cavity Radiometer Irradiance Monitor (ACRIM II).

Secondary payloads were: Ascent Particle Monitor (APM); Middeck 0-Gravity Dynamics Experiment (MODE); Shuttle

Activation Monitor (SAM); Cosmic Ray Effects and Activation Monitor (CREAM); Physiological and Anatomical Rodent

Experiment (PARE); Protein Crystal Growth II-2 (PCG II-2); Investigations into Polymer Membrane Processing (IPMP);

and the Air Force Maui Optical Site (AMOS) experiment.



Description of Events


On September 15, 1991, between 20:30 and 20:45 Greenwich Mean Time, the TV camera located at the back of Space Shuttle Discovery's cargo bay was trained on the Earth's horizon while the astronauts were occupied with other tasks. A glowing object suddenly appeared just below the horizon and "slowly" moved from right to left and slightly upward in the picture. Several other glowing objects had been visible before this, and had been moving in various directions. Then a flash of light occurred at what seemed to be the lower left of the screen; and the main object,
along with the others, changed direction and accelerated away sharply, as if in response to the flash. Shortly thereafter a streak of light moved through the region vacated by the main object, and then another streak moved through the right of the screen, where two of the other objects had been. Roughly 65 seconds after the main flash, the TV camera rotated down, showing a fuzzy picture of the side of the cargo bay. It then refocused, turned toward the front of the cargo bay, and stopped broadcasting.

/3p8mac

NASA STS-48 U.F.O


Subsequently, analysis of the video shows that:


  • The distance from the Discovery to the Earth's horizon is 2,757 kilometres

  • The UFO's speed before accelerating into space is 87,000 kph (Mach 73)

  • Three seconds after the light flash, the UFO changes direction sharply and accelarates off into space at 340,000 kph (Mach 285) within 2.2 seconds

  • Such an acceleration would produce 14,000 g of force (1g is normal Earth gravity)



Links:

Space Shuttle Discovery Mission STS-48 - TinWiki entry

A New Look at the Evidence Supporting a Prosaic Explanation of the STS-48 "UFO" Video

Chronology of Anomalous Events during STS-48 Shuttle Mission

Commentary on the STS-48 Video: A Closer Look, and Second Thoughts

Digital Video Analysis of Anomalous Space Objects - The STS-48 Video (PDF)

Examination of Object Trajectories in the STS-48 "UFO" Video

Losing the Signal - Proof That Time Stamps on the STS-48 Video Released by NASA Are Phony

Proof of the Prosaic Nature of the STS-48 Zig-Zag Video (Skeptical)

Response to NASA's James Oberg's Analysis of STS-48 Video

Star Wars Over Australia?


On ATS:
NASA STS-48 UFO Video

NASA Space Shuttle - STS footage & Strange Objects

USA shots laser at UFO video

Aurora video?

Firing at UFO's

STS-48 Mission on video.

UFO?s Prominent in Space

Looking for Some Footage

UFO Articles on AboveTopSecret.com

Space Shuttle Discovery Mission STS-48 Captures Potential UFOs on Film




posted on May, 4 2008 @ 05:40 AM
link   
i looked at the video.... which one is suppose to be the ufo????
sorry... it looks just like all the other nasa footage of debri.. and ice particles that float around the shuttle???



posted on May, 4 2008 @ 05:47 AM
link   
reply to post by philjwolf
 




Then a flash of light occurred at what seemed to be the lower left of the screen; and the main object,
along with the others, changed direction and accelerated away sharply, as if in response to the flash.


I've hilighted the object



posted on May, 4 2008 @ 05:56 AM
link   
i tried to count all the objects that curved or shifted there paths.... are you saying that all of them are ufo???? allmost thousands????


+1 more 
posted on May, 4 2008 @ 06:00 AM
link   
Thanks internos.

I posted this in the other thread but I'll do it again here:

The flash that you see is a shuttle thruster firing - mostly likely an automatic one. Thrusters are used by the shuttle to maintain attitude or to move to different attitudes when required. There's typically a deadband of a few degrees that the shuttle's computers will control within - if it hits a attitude error of ~5 degrees (typical but that's modifiable) in any axis, thrusters will fire to correct the orientation.

As mentioned above, the shuttle sheds quite a bit of ice from different places. It's required to regularly dump water overboard (a byproduct of the fuel cells), uses a FES (Flash Evaporator System) to reject heat before the radiators are deployed, and even expels human waste. All of this stuff freezes almost immediately upon hitting vacuum.

The object that you see trending right to left (object 1) is likely frozen crap (figuratively or even literally) that came off the shuttle. The flash is definitely from the contact of the hypergolic fuel and oxidizer from some nearby thrusters. While the flash is initially visible, the bulk of the thrust comes in the moments after as the gaseous byproducts of the combustion expand. That expansion of gasses is what caused the change in direction of object 1 and made it accelerate. Object 2 (AKA the first streaks) which appears to shoot past object 1 could be more ice or the clumped up residue that collects in the thruster manifolds (unburned fuel that freezes).

The second streak is something I hadn't seen before looking at the video again just now. The thruster firing pushes debris in its path outwards - more or less radially form the thruster itself. I say "more or less" as the thrusters are, of course, directional. Debris directly in front of the thruster will be pushed quickly away from the jet in the direction that the jet faces. Debris which is nearby will get a glancing blow of gas that has already dispersed (and thus decelerated) therefor it will tend to move more slowly and not directly outwards.

Streak 1 is due to debris very close to the thruster (or even in the thruster manifold) whereas streak two is due to more distant debris that got a glancing blow.

The analysis of the video in the above post makes the assumption that the objects are very far away, yet we've got no reason to assume that.

As for the camera moving away 65 seconds later, I really don't think that tells us anything. The INCO officer in Houston will move the camera regularly and will usually point it at the cargo bay. Besides, if there were real concerns about exposing the existence of secret craft in orbit, NASA would just they delay the public video feeds or just stop them all together.

As for the video drop-out, this is hardly unusual. Video from the shuttle or ISS requires Ku-Band communication with the TDRS satellites. Ku-Band is high bandwidth and thus in high demand from other non-NASA users. On the ISS right now, Ku-Band is only available about 30-35% of the time. The lower bandwidth S-Band is available about 80% of the time but is unable to transmit smooth, high FPS video like you see in this video.

That's my $0.02.

[edit on 4-5-2008 by Credulity Kills]



posted on May, 4 2008 @ 06:14 AM
link   
thanks... you wont convince anyone that those ice particles are not flying saucers being piloted by aliens . after all.. they are taking over the world, and abducting millions of us every year.... god.. I love this stufff.



posted on May, 4 2008 @ 06:22 AM
link   

Originally posted by philjwolf
i tried to count all the objects that curved or shifted there paths.... are you saying that all of them are ufo???? allmost thousands????

No: YOU are saying that.

The object i'm referring to, is the hilighted one, which makes an acute (less than 90 degrees) turn after the flash.
"Explainable" doesn't mean "ordinary":
i don't think that people like Michael Bara and James Oberg would waste their time on a video which shows ordinary debris:
in fact, as you can also see in Credulity Kills post, there's a perfectly logical explanation but in the meantime what we see is neither ordinary nor obvious.



posted on May, 4 2008 @ 06:23 AM
link   
What an enjoyable thread! Thanks, Internos, for pulling everything together and for responding so succintly with a requote and highlighted (!) video.

Credulity Kills: You sound like you know what you talk about but I obviously haven't heard of or seen your credentials beyond your claimed experience at NASA. I enjoyed your thourough and reasoned response. OT: but got any space memorablila you want to get rid of?
I got the bug.

philjwolf: Scientific inquiry demands that nothing is written in stone.



posted on May, 4 2008 @ 06:36 AM
link   
Awesome thread, it is nice to have the whole lot drawn together so that Credulity Kills explanation can be referenced along side all the relevant material and links to this incident. Well done Internos, you tooCR. Thanks again.



posted on May, 4 2008 @ 06:37 AM
link   
reply to post by internos
 


you only highlighted that one.. because it stands out the best. But you obviously did not look around and see all the other ones taking sharp turns also.. if you look close.. you cant even count them all.. open your eyes to more than just whats in front of you... things will seem clearer..



posted on May, 4 2008 @ 06:39 AM
link   

Originally posted by philjwolf

you only highlighted that one.. because it stands out the best. But you obviously did not look around and see all the other ones taking sharp turns also.. if you look close.. you cant even count them all.. open your eyes to more than just whats in front of you... things will seem clearer..

Mate i don't need someone who tells me what i have to see and by the way, chill out.



posted on May, 4 2008 @ 06:45 AM
link   

Originally posted by stikkinikki
What an enjoyable thread! Thanks, Internos, for pulling everything together and for responding so succintly with a requote and highlighted (!) video.

Credulity Kills: You sound like you know what you talk about but I obviously haven't heard of or seen your credentials beyond your claimed experience at NASA. I enjoyed your thourough and reasoned response. OT: but got any space memorablila you want to get rid of?
I got the bug.

philjwolf: Scientific inquiry demands that nothing is written in stone.

Many thanks! As I mentioned in my intro thread, I'm hoping that sharing my experience will be evidence enough to back up my claimed credentials. I'd rather not post my name/face/info on here (I've been cyber-stalked by a wacky conspiracy theorist before - creepy).

As for space memorabilia, I used to have tons of stuff but I've given most of it away! I guess I assumed I'd be doing the space thing forever and thought little of giving away flown mission patches, bits of replaced shuttle tile, etc. I've since left NASA to go back for another degree and kinda regret giving away most of that stuff.



posted on May, 4 2008 @ 06:46 AM
link   
What also could clear alot up about this vid is a few techinical things, as in, where the camera was mounted on the shuttle, which thrusters where fired, firing length of the thruster.

For a few simple reasons, it would solve this, if we knew these three things and that they are consistent with their placement on the shuttle, it would probably be ice.

Now if it would not be consistent in that way, the video is probably showing something entirely else than ice.

What i mean with this is, that the shuttle itself is quite big, it has RCS thrusters placed here and there, for the thruster to affect something that debris have to be directly under the thruster (or rather quite close to the muzzle) to be affected in the way it is showing, also that means that the ice/debris showing on the camera, places the camera in close proximity to the thruster, or the firing of the thruster and the particle will be in the shuttles shadow.



Welcome to ATS Credulity Kills

Hope your stay will be pleasant


[edit on 4-5-2008 by Balez]



posted on May, 4 2008 @ 07:08 AM
link   

Originally posted by Balez
What also could clear alot up about this vid is a few techinical things, as in, where the camera was mounted on the shuttle, which thrusters where fired, firing length of the thruster.

I'm pretty sure it's the aft-facing camera at the front of the cargo bay (which is used on all missions - some special mission-specific cameras have been flown as well). I can't seem to find the (alleged) longer version which purports to show it pointing into the bay - that'd confirm it. If my assumption is right, it's most likely one of the port-aft RCS ( Reaction Control System) jets that you see firing.


Originally posted by Balez
places the camera in close proximity to the thruster, or the firing of the thruster and the particle will be in the shuttles shadow.

This would place the camera ~30m or so form the RCS in question. As for the ice particles, it's hard to say. The plume created by the RCS jets is rather massive - during dockings with the ISS the ISS' solar array wings are feathered to prevent damage from shuttle thruster firings. Those arrays are 30m-40m from the jets.


Originally posted by Balez
Welcome to ATS Credulity Kills

Hope your stay will be pleasant


Thanks!



posted on May, 4 2008 @ 08:52 AM
link   
If the flash, and subsequent 'ice particle' activity, is to be attributed to the shuttle using one of it's thrusters, why then, does the shuttle not move?

I would have thought the image would have shifted when the thruster activated. The image does not shift at all. Not a fraction.

Maybe someone could explain why the shuttle has thrusters that do not appear to do anything but generate flashes and shift 'ice particles' around in space.

[edit on 4/5/2008 by skibtz]



posted on May, 4 2008 @ 09:42 AM
link   
Excellent thread as usual Internos.


Welcome Credulity Kills, my wife was a flights controller for the ISS at JSC back in the late 1990's. We lived in Taylor Lake Village right down NASA Road One, you might have met her if you were there back then.

I would add that whoever named that mud puddle "Clear" Lake needed glasses.


I have always believed this video was exactly what you describe it as myself but can certainly see how it could be misunderstood, it does resemble a grand space battle in many ways. That's the magic of video, perspective and size though.


Springer...



posted on May, 4 2008 @ 09:45 AM
link   
Internos, thanks for this post, though I have to say it is a real bummer when a piece of footage that maintained a level of mystery for so long is comprehensively explained!

Credulity Kills, boy oh boy are you going to be useful on these forums (and possibly branded a disinfo agent
!) Welcome aboard!

Of course, there will be a backlash against this thread. As I stated above, it's not easy being informed that a piece of the jigsaw doesn't fit any longer. But we must look on the bright side. As Sherlock Holmes said:


Eliminate all other factors, and the one which remains must be the truth.


With every piece of UFO "evidence" that is succesfully disposed of, we are left with the evidence that is real. And it's then that the real fun begins.

Edit to add: have a S&F on me


[edit on 4-5-2008 by Beamish]



posted on May, 4 2008 @ 09:49 AM
link   
reply to post by internos
 


Sparky or highly UV radiating low orbit craft.

I'm sure it was possible in the 1950s.

Another Illuminati exercise they can't tell us about.



posted on May, 4 2008 @ 10:02 AM
link   

Originally posted by Beamish
..boy oh boy are you going to be useful on these forums..


Perhaps when he's done here we can get him to explain away STS-80 and the Tether Incident of STS-75 as well.


Anyway welcome to ATS Credulity and thanks for the very techy low down on the the thrusters.

Agree with you on that one.



posted on May, 4 2008 @ 10:07 AM
link   
reply to post by Credulity Kills
 



if there were real concerns about exposing the existence of secret craft in orbit, NASA would just they delay the public video feeds or just stop them all together.


I was under the impression that this is already the case (delayed feeds)? So then shuttle footage is indeed always a live feed?

I've watched the footage in question a good dozen times and the explanation makes sense. Thanks for posting this here.

A bit off-topic, but hope you'll also open a thread on the well-known STS ring/wheel formation as well.





new topics
top topics
 
55
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join