Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Shuttle Pic--SIDE VIEW!
WFAA | 02/01/03 | GRRRRR

Posted on 02/01/2003 12:18:50 PM PST by GRRRRR

This is the picture that Rintense and I have seen...from the WFAA video...you can see the shuttle from the REAR clearly, and it is traveling from FRAME RIGHT TO FRAME LEFT--look closely, you can certainly see the shuttle's main engines at the rear, also the PROFILE of the shuttle from underneath...and in the video, it's moving in the direction of the left wing...


TOPICS: Front Page News; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: columbia; columbiatragedy; feb12003; nasa; shuttle; spaceshuttle
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 121-140141-160161-180 ... 221-236 next last
To: FreedomCalls
that's clean for me. thanks.
141 posted on 02/01/2003 3:21:29 PM PST by PokeyJoe (Act with Courage, Support Promethius)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 126 | View Replies]

To: FreedomCalls; All
Thank you for #126. Competency has a name..."FreedomCalls".

Good job on a very bad day.
142 posted on 02/01/2003 3:21:30 PM PST by VaBthang4
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 126 | View Replies]

To: All
You guys'll have to forgive my language on a terribly bad day but a whole grip of posters in this thread turned out to be some real dumbasses.

Idiots.
143 posted on 02/01/2003 3:31:23 PM PST by VaBthang4
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 142 | View Replies]

To: not-an-ostrich
"No you are correct. The video was taken by a cameraman employeed by WFAA...John ???? I am in Dallas and have been watching WFAA since 8:35 a.m."

Thanks. If this is the case what are all these posts concerning a Sony camcorder? If these were indeed taken by someone in the employ of WFAA, I must reiterate, would a pro videographer be using a consumer camcorder to get these images? Optical experts notwithstanding, I don't think the question has been answered.
144 posted on 02/01/2003 3:42:59 PM PST by jaugust
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 140 | View Replies]

To: seamole
>>...I take it the bottom one is an engine (although scale would help)....<<

First thought was an OMS engine nozzle but judging from the pine needles I'd say it was a Reaction Control System (RCS) nozzle.

145 posted on 02/01/2003 3:43:06 PM PST by FReepaholic
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 59 | View Replies]

To: VaBthang4
The 'apeture' image explanation:

-assumes the camera is a Sony.

-Does not enclose the image, it only appears to do so after editing!

-Does not account for the image remaining proportional during zooming.

-Occurs alongside in-focus images of tumbling debris in the same frames through different zoom levels.

Ime narrow-minded people are the most easily placated during times of crisis as they are unaccustomed and unwilling to solve problems on their own.

146 posted on 02/01/2003 3:49:00 PM PST by Justa
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 143 | View Replies]

To: OldFriend
"Uh guys.....the shuttle does re enter upside down."

With all due respect the shuttle does not RE-ENTER upside down. It has an upside down attitude when the engines are fired to get it into position for re-entry and begin the slow down, after which it rolls over rightside up. The craft needs to be in a 40 deg nose up attitude to re-enter at the proper angle. And in this attitude it makes its series of "s" turns to help slow it down. These include a 70 deg bank angle left and right while doing the turns. Four turns if I remember correctly.
147 posted on 02/01/2003 3:52:00 PM PST by jaugust
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 130 | View Replies]

To: jaugust
An update from WFAA's evening news. Cameraman John Proct filmed the re-entry for WFAA and it was broadcast live. John Proct did not know the contents of the film until he returned to the studio. WFAA also has video filmed by an amateur astromoner from Mesquite, TX with real time communicatons. Last communications was just seconds prior to Columbia entering the video shot.
148 posted on 02/01/2003 4:05:42 PM PST by not-an-ostrich
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 144 | View Replies]

To: Justa
If it's an out of focus image then how can an object, presumably at the same range, be seen in-focus, tumbling away from the main object?

This is what I don't think the know-it-alls can explain. How come I can make out the shapes of some of the falling debris, yet it would be impossible to make out the shape of the orbiter when the camera is zoomed?

149 posted on 02/01/2003 4:16:47 PM PST by Moonman62
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 138 | View Replies]

To: Justa
Thank you for this analysis. When I saw this video it looked to me like it was taken with a professional camera with a very long lens.


150 posted on 02/01/2003 4:17:12 PM PST by BigBobber
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 146 | View Replies]

To: jaugust
The amateur astronomer is Tim Hamilton, also an employee of WFAA.
151 posted on 02/01/2003 4:19:16 PM PST by not-an-ostrich
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 144 | View Replies]

To: FreedomCalls
The reason I know you are correct, this is unfocused light, is because I saw this footage as part of a segment of video. During the segment the object was large in the frame, then the camera backed away making the object smaller, then the focus was adjusted revealing this to simply be the lead part, the most bright object on the front of the smoke trail we've seen all day long. You are most definately correct that this is an out of focus segment of video of the lead object on the smoke trail.
152 posted on 02/01/2003 4:24:44 PM PST by DoughtyOne
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 126 | View Replies]

To: not-an-ostrich
Thanks for your input. Very informative indeed! I will remain neutral until someone who is an expert actually interprets the image and tells us what we're seeing.
153 posted on 02/01/2003 4:31:06 PM PST by jaugust
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 151 | View Replies]

To: OldFriend
According to the press conference it had rolled over without any problem at all and was at the proper attitude when it began to break apart.

Respectfully, it was at the proper attitude when they lost contact.
154 posted on 02/01/2003 4:31:51 PM PST by wasp69 (The time has come.......)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 130 | View Replies]

After seeing that clip about 50 times today...its just the camera being totally out of focus. you can see it get blurry, then focusing in.

lets not go pierre salinger here people.
155 posted on 02/01/2003 4:32:54 PM PST by KneelBeforeZod (Deus Lo Volt!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: Alberta's Child
Thanks for the reply. :-)

156 posted on 02/01/2003 4:33:34 PM PST by Jael
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 133 | View Replies]

To: RossA
All I see is a bright blob.
157 posted on 02/01/2003 4:35:38 PM PST by Republic of Texas
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: hole_n_one
Props for the screen captures!
158 posted on 02/01/2003 4:36:07 PM PST by dennisw (http://www.littlegreenfootballs.com/weblog/weblog.php <AND> http://rantburg.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: jaugust
just watch the image on TV. its being played over and over. Just like any other camera, being totally out of focus makes the light blur into weird shapes.

you can plainly see that the camera is focused after that diamond image is shown.
159 posted on 02/01/2003 4:37:18 PM PST by KneelBeforeZod (Deus Lo Volt!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 153 | View Replies]


160 posted on 02/01/2003 4:46:47 PM PST by hole_n_one
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 158 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 121-140141-160161-180 ... 221-236 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson