1983: STS-8 Challenger : Giants in Space?

a reply to: Shamrock6

I am airing my own opinion nothing more, be it wrong or right, who knows, all i know it the video i posted is interesting at the least.

Upon close viewing, there's a small black area near the tail (perhaps part of a main thruster?) that blocks the man's face. I have to admit that my initial impression is that the man is standing behind a scale model, and accidentally strayed into the shot for a couple of seconds. I tried to look for any evidence that the satellite was suspended on a wire, but I didn't see any.

originally posted by: TheDon

originally posted by: Box of Rain

originally posted by: TheDon

...and if it is a reflection, how come we don't see the reflection over the the shuttle?

As mentioned above, you can see the person's nose over top of a blue part of the shuttle. Otherwise, I think the white parts are so white that they would overpower and obscure a reflection that might be over top of them.

I thought that to, but, then after looking at the clip many times, it could also be a pixel glitch due to the poor quality.

If it was a refection, should one not see it all over the shuttle, especially due to the the size of the guy seen in the film?

As I said in my response, the white parts are so white that overpowering ("washing out" as someone else put it) any reflection.

Like I said, you can see his nose against a blue part of the shuttle bay at the 3:32 mark. That blue color is not so bright, so it doesn't wash out the reflection like the white does.

a reply to: TheDon

Part of the reason for the full Apollo suit and helmet is that they were breathing pure oxygen to purge their bloodstream of nitrogen. The space craft itself had aO2/N2 mix at laucn that was replaced with 5psi oxygen later.

Apollo and the shuttle are two different craft for two different jobs, the operating procedures were different.

originally posted by: AndyFromMichigan
Upon close viewing, there's a small black area near the tail (perhaps part of a main thruster?) that blocks the man's face. I have to admit that my initial impression is that the man is standing behind a scale model, and accidentally strayed into the shot for a couple of seconds. I tried to look for any evidence that the satellite was suspended on a wire, but I didn't see any.

I saw that too. However, I think that blacked-out area of his face could be due to something casting a shadows on his face.

That is to say, we can see the parts of his face lit up by something, and those lit-up parts are more likely to be visible in a window reflection, while any part of his face that may have been in shadow are less likely to be visible in a window reflection.

Let's get back to basics. We have a video filmed through a window and a face appears. The first conclusion someone could jump to is that it is a giant space ghost? Seriously?

originally posted by: Shamrock6
a reply to: TheDon

Maybe you should research before concocting hair brained conspiracy theories chief.

Apollo isn't a shuttle, it's a capsule.

STS 8 flew in Challenger, which is a shuttle. You can go research yourself when they adopted the pumpkin suits and what they flew in before that.

The four test flights, between April 1981 and July 1982, went without incident, and the pressure suits performed without any problems. With the termination of the test flight program, all flights from STS-5 to STS-51-L (the Challenger disaster) saw the crew wearing one-piece light blue flight suits, escape harnesses, and helmets similar to the pressure suit helmets, but fitted around the head with a clamshell-like closure. After Challenger, NASA, in need of an escape system, also required the reintroduction of the wearing of pressure suits during the launch and landing portions of the flight. The initial eight suits were navy blue,[3] similar in color to the previous flight suits, the rest of the suits were bright orange to contrast against the dark blue ocean water they'd most likely be used in. The blue suits were never used on an actual mission.

Don't attack my research when you clearly haven't even done any to begin with.

Yup!

originally posted by: TheDon
Well straight to the point, either we are looking at giants in space,(3:28) or a refection's though a window or glass, and if it is a reflection, how come we don't see the reflection over the the shuttle?

Because the reflection is happening entirely inside the multi-pane Shuttle window?

That aside, going into space, there wearing what looks like motorcycle helmet, plus no gloves or pressurised suit, even though claiming to be experiencing over 5G on take off?! that alone should have people thinking.

Why would you need a pressurised suit or gloves when experiencing 5g? I thought a pressurised suit was needed in case of depressurisation.

IMO looks fake as hell and if anyone remembers thunderbirds, they did a better job.

Interested to see how people will explain this away.

Peace.

Your gut feeling of "this looks CGI" versus tons of evidence and documentation describing how it was actually done... I think I'll stick with the evidence.

a reply to: TheDon
Well, to be fair, your interest lies in how people will "explain this away," not in if our opinion differs from yours, which is that it appears to be "fake as hell." And to be even more fair, you seem to argue with everyone who has a differing opinion, so if that is the route you are going to take with this thread, yes, a bit more proof other than speculation would be a great place to start.

But, bluntly, it doesn't matter, as I see that other people are voicing similar thoughts to mine, and it's not a big enough issue in my life to debate it any further.

Best regards.

Its another veiled and subtle NASA is fake thread, no moon landing and the whole Space Program didn't happen type of thread. Its just a way to get it on the front page without it going into the LOL or Hoax bin. When you take a picture through glass you often wind up with reflections and it looks to me as if it has already been explained.

a reply to: TheDon
If you are driving your car (assuming you are old enough to drive yet), and you see a reflection in one of your car's windows, how come you don't see it on the rest of your car in such detail, if at all? Because it's not as reflective, for one thing, and for another, that reflection in the video is most likely coming from within the Orbiter. Ergo, it will only reflect from those surfaces which provide the conditions to reflect inwards into the Orbiter's inner space, which most of its external surfaces don't.

But no, you state it's either giants in space -- as your first choice! -- or a reflection.

There is a good reason why this "giants in space" subject has not been a major point of discussion or controversy in the more than 56 years of manned space flight (since Gagarin on April 12 1961). It's because only a very small number of people would even consider such a patent absurdity as their first choice to explain a rather unremarkable visual event.

originally posted by: JustMike
a reply to: TheDon
If you are driving your car (assuming you are old enough to drive yet), and you see a reflection in one of your car's windows, how come you don't see it on the rest of your car in such detail, if at all? Because it's not as reflective, for one thing, and for another, that reflection in the video is most likely coming from within the Orbiter. Ergo, it will only reflect from those surfaces which provide the conditions to reflect inwards into the Orbiter's inner space, which most of its external surfaces don't.

I think the OP's point was that if it was a reflection on the glass, then why did we only see it in the glass when that glass was in from of black space rather, and NOT see the reflection on the glass that was in front of parts of the shuttle. So in both cases, the reflection would have been on the glass window.

However, the likely answer is that the white of the shuttle was so bright that it washed out any chance of being able to see the reflection in the glass. In that scenario, the reflection would still be there in the glass, but the whiteness was too bright for it to be visible to us.

a reply to: Box of Rain
Fair comment (and starred on that basis). However capturing a reflection can come down to just a few degrees. It could well be that what was reflected from one window would be shown via the camera's lens, whereas another reflection (which also existed) was not.

Even allowing for the above generalization, I agree with you that most likely, wash-out was a significant factor as well. I'll put it this way: it's some magnitudes more likely than the OP's first-stated choice of "giants in space" as an explanation.

5Gs...Pressure Suits...Small Models...

What?

5Gs is nothing at all, you experience more Gs swinging your car around a corner at a moderate to fast speed.

A pressure suit is required when performing extreme maneuvers in a jet fighter banking and twisting at incredible speed and angels such as like in a dog fight to prevent your entire blood load shifting to your lower or upper body, not in the launch of a Shuttle or Capsule.

Some early launches required them just in case something went terribly wrong with there brand new bomb with a engine attached to it that had a habit of blowing up in the history of there rocket brothers and cousins (earlier rockets).

You don't need a pressure suit but they can be used occasionally.

If they were used the death of 3 cosmonauts would not of happened when the capsule depressurized during reentry...if they had a pressure suit maybe they could of survived.

a reply to: TheDon


Why does the reflection not appear all over the answer is CONTRAST the simple fact the the image of the face looks translucent should be enough for most adults that have had there eyes open a some point when growing up to have seen similar effects looking out of car,bus,train or aircraft windows.

Some people seem to grow up and gain no experience from the world around them.

Watch the video slowed down to 0.25 speed.

It's the reflection of the astronaut inside, moving to photograph (or film) the deployed satellite with his camera.

/case closed

Ascent max G's was 3 [eyeballs in], and entry, 1.5 [eyeballs down].

At 5:20 you get a good view of CDR Dan [foreground] and MS2 Dale [background], at the aft crew station looking to the left out the windows into the payload bay. Note the two overhead windows above their heads. Bright sunlight streaming into the cabin, lights up their faces when they move to the left [closer to the aft windows], then they back into the shadow of the edge of the window and their faces darken. So the reflection off the aft window would come and go as Dale moved back and forth with the sun over his head.

originally posted by: TheDon
Well straight to the point, either we are looking at giants in space, or a refection's though a window or glass,

Reflection

and if it is a reflection, how come we don't see the reflection over the the shuttle?

Angles of reflection, light levels etc. The usual stuff that plagues anyone who has done photography even semi seriously (ie NOT a phone!!!)

All that being said, astronauts (and cosmonauts) are indeed "giants in space". They are the real-life superheroes who get to float in zero-g and do invaluable service to humankind while they're up there.