I nominate Kilo Feet Per Second KFPS for the most indecisive unit. SI, Metric, Imperial? Yes...

I'd like to point out, Scott, that _Challenger_ in fact WASN'T the slowest shuttle. _Enterprise_ was, as she only reached whatever velocity the 747 carrying her reached. Sure, she never went to space, but she _was_ a Space shuttle, and she _did_ fly, so...☺

“As long as it stops on the centerline, nobody will know…” Scott, your pilot is showing :P

11:21 "Unfortunately, Challenger could not be with us to accept the award tonight..." - big orbital OOOOF...

"You seem to have touched down left of centerline" "Affirmative. And my first officer to the right of it"

I have an eye witness story to tell about the STS-36 DOD mission of Space Shuttle Atlantis on February 28, 1990 that launched into that one-off 62 degree orbit inclination. I live in Machias, Maine (eastern Maine). That 62 degree orbit inclination launch sent the Shuttle and its expended External Tank directly over New Brunswick, Canada. I have a NASA “Space Shuttle News Reference” book that I’ve had since the early ‘80s. It’s loaded with information on anything and everything you’ve ever wanted to know about the STS system. From that reference book, I had access to information that allowed me to deduce that I should see an OMS rocket burn on board the Space Shuttle Atlantis at approximately 10 minutes and 40 seconds after the launch, facing N-NE from my location in Machias, Maine, looking at a 45 degree angle off the horizon, or halfway up the sky. That launch happened at 2:50:22 EST. I watched the launch on CNN. I started my stopwatch from the launch on CNN. At a minute before 3 AM, I stepped outside into my snow covered backyard, wearing a bathrobe and moccasin slippers on my feet. It was a star-studded moonless night in Machias, Maine. I faced New Brunswick, Canada (faced N-NE) and I watched the time progress on my stopwatch. On my stopwatch, at 10 minutes and 30 seconds, I looked halfway up the sky and took in a wide field of view, working my peripheral vision. At 10 minutes and 40 seconds, I had an OMS rocket burn of the Space Shuttle Atlantis appearing smack dab in the center of my field of vision. The size of this OMS rocket plume was about a peppercorn or a BB shot pellet held out at arms length. You could see the shafts of rocket exhaust shimmering in this OMS plume. This peppercorn sized OMS plume was moving across the sky at the speed of a satellite moving across the sky. I watched this OMS plume move across the sky for about 45 seconds, heading N-NE, heading away from me, until it disappeared from my view behind the trees on my horizon. I remember thinking how I could have watched it for a much longer time were it not for the trees on my horizon blocking my view. Post edit: OMS is the Orbital Maneuvering System rocket engines and its fuels tanks that were housed in those two big ungainly-looking bulges on the back end, upper side of the shuttle orbiter, on either side of the rudder. Those two big ungainly-looking bulges were called “OMS Pods”. After posting this eye witness story, I found a most interesting NASA document on the web titled “Space Shuttle Missions Summary” published in September 2011. In this document, on page “2-38” for mission STS-36, it shows that no “OMS-1” engine burn occurred at the ten and a half minute mark into the launch. And, that the first OMS burn in that launch didn’t occur until 32 minutes into the flight (the first OMS burn is designated “OMS-2” in this NASA document). I beg to differ with this information shown on mission STS-36 in this NASA document, because my eyes saw a rocket burn appear and move across the sky over New Brunswick, Canada at ten and a half minutes into the launch of mission STS-36, the shuttle Atlantis, on the morning of February 28, 1990. SPACE SHUTTLE MISSIONS SUMMARY - September 2011 ntrs.nasa.gov/api/citations/20110001406/downloads/20110001406.pdf Post edit #2: I’m just now realizing that the NASA doc I found and posted a link to here is the same NASA doc that Scott Manley is featuring and drawing data from in this video.

Scott, this was 13 of the most riveting minutes of my life about information I never knew I wanted or needed 😂This was some proper space nerdery, and that's why you're still one of the best space educators out there!

I‘m pretty sure it is hard to come up with a more unimportant question, but you also complicated it so much it basically got hilarious. No seriously you are unter the best KZfaqrs out there, just by being so friendly, funny but also over precise . I hope my englisch is good enough to let that sound like a compliment.

Space Shuttle Enterprise is the best one, because it was the first, and few know of it's existence. I got to explore Enterprise at KSC when I went to Space Camp as a kid, it will always be my favorite!

We could also define it as the fastest human piloted winged vehicle. In that case the title would go to Space Shuttle Columbia which was manually flown all the way from orbit to landing by Joe Engle on STS-2.

Faster, Faster, until the thrill of speed overcomes the fear of death.

As a kid I launched an SR71 rocket model. It flew up about 10 feet and leveled off. That would have been cool except that it was headed towards the picture window of the neighbor across the road. Luckily the motor ran out of fuel before it got to the window. That rocket-plane had the highest pucker factor ever.

"unfortunately Challenger couldn't be with us to accept the award tonight" Too soon, Scott, too soon...

I love the excitement you can hear in Scott's voice because he gets to nerd out about space shuttles and win an internet argument at the same time. I love all the different details you actually have to take into account to determine the fastest aircraft!

Normal people seeing a tweet: Meh... Scott Manley seeing a tweet: i'm gonna make a spreadsheet and a video!

An episode filled with spreadsheets and charts....Adrian Beil from NSF would absolutely LOVE this !!! Edit: Fixed a critical spelling error....!

Now that you've loaded your spreadsheet, Scott, I would like to know which mission resulted in the most energy dissipated upon reentry. Just multiply the relative velocity by the gross vehicle mass (including returning payload).

Would be interested to see a video documenting differences between all of the shuttles and what/why things were changed throughout the life of a program

Gemini 11 went up to 739 nmi, so if they had kept the rogallo wing that might have held the record for the fastest winged vehicle (even though it wouldn't be winged when it reached its highest speeds)

You beat me to it Scott ... I WAS going to ask about Buran but you shortstopped me. Well done sir!

This video has sort of CGP Grey vibe to it - digging so much and correcting yourself so many times, dealing with a lack of documentation, love it

"Challenger couldn't be with us to accept the award" Oof

Scott! You left yourself open to pedantry! Technically the shuttle did use parachutes to land! Great video as always though man!

1:30 Those shockwaves are absolutely incredible! 😮

I imagine the speeds get much smaller if you take "like a plane" to mean glide ratio >> 1... or even just > 1. First part of re-entry is definitely more brick-like than plane like even with wings.

This is the high quality research that I watch this channel for!

Excellent & In depth as always.

Scott gives us a free video to justify his "Well actually...." Awesome

"So I created a spreadsheet..." Total geek-out central! 😎

Imagine being so wrong on the internet that Scott Manley makes a video about it! 😂 awesome video Scott, great to see the breakdown and a winner!

Ingenuity, the tiny helicopter on Mars, checks all your boxes for aircraft and had much higher relative velocities when leaving Earth or entering Mars. I recognize this is a ridiculous, pedantic exception, but i couldn't resist. :)

Dang Scott. That's a LOT of work and math to prove someone wrong not for the sake of 'beating' them but rather to prevent the spread of misinformation. I salute you, sir.

In the slow entry category, we should not ignore the Burt Rutan planes: SpaceShip 1 and 2. They too went to space and landed as airplanes. Note that I'm aware thar an SS2 was lost in atmospheric trials and the new one got a new individual vessel name.

I've seen lots of Space Shuttle Videos, but the video of the Cloud Silhouette Shock Cones was pretty damn awesome!

Only _Enterprise_ would've surprised me. 😆 (But then, I didn't spend hours slaving over a hot spreadsheet, forming and testing hypotheses. Good job researching!)

Another hilarious video by our idol Scot, who seems to have too much time for embarking on all these investigations and research and even bedsheets of excel calculations just to find out the fastest Space-Shuttle. And shout out for even able to make a compelling and exciting video about this with changing favorites and a worthy winner! One of the best videos lately!

STS 36 launched a Misty - AFP-731 in this case - as well as a few other little goodies Although there is some debate over if it actually failed a while later or not due to debris spotted in the orbit

Worked on the STS and Ares Programs for 22 years at KSC and I seem to remember the Long Duration Exposure Facility when it was retrieved as being a “Bear” to wrestle down safely with more then the usual number of tires blowing up on the Landing Strip. How was the greater mass affecting speeds and control?

My eyes crossed, and I got dizzy when you mentioned spherical trigonometry, but I think I’ll be all right in a bit. Thanks for all the info.

I love the silly, mathematical, mechanical videos that you make. It also made my day that I have the Lego Discovery on my shelf!

I just googled it, but the Stardust return capsule at 28,000 mph is the fastest return vehicle ever. That's pretty crazy.

another reason to love the shuttle that won this one (i had to change it not to spoil)…

2:52 Thats so cool. Just look how much thrust there is to flex everything.

I do recall when the the shuttle program was just starting up a friend was a competitive glider pilot. These folks would try for highest altitude / flight duration / distance etc and he remarked well the shuttle wins them all now.

For anyone wondering as I was: The chutes that are deployed behind the Shuttle when it lands on the tarmac, those are not parachutes. That is a drogue parachute, also called a drag chute, drag parachute, drogue chute, or braking parachute.

Hello Scott, first of all thanks for the videos you are doing and your efort to translate speeds from imperial to international. But could you also edit them on the screen to be read? Also you are missing some convertions at the end. Cheers :D

“…Unfortunately Challenger couldn’t be with us to accept the award tonight…”? Ouch. Too soon.

This is the level of research and dedication that everyone should dedicate to the things they post as fact

For slowest, wasn’t there an ATO (abort to orbit) that ran a slower re-entry?

Disagree with your initial premise as it's a definition problem: The original tweet does not say aircraft, it says "plane'. I contend that to qualify as a 'plane' it must be a powered aircraft, as we call unpowered aircraft gliders. During the time it is going fast AF, while acting as a plane, in atmosphere, it's not ever powered, and I don't think it can reasonably meet the definition of plane. I think the X-15 is a much better candidate for a manned craft, and of course my heart *really* lies in *air-breathing* manned craft, so when (if) we ever get those SABRE engines flying I'd probably favor those the most

It’s actually emotional seeing how much older the Columbia and Challenger photos are at 0:21

This is the most Scott Manley video ever, love it!!

Does a manhole cover have wings? Just asking

It's not entirely accurate to say that 28.5 deg is "the lowest inclination you can get from Florida". If you have a _lot_ of excess delta-V you can execute an plane change burn at the orbital node. The only time I can recall that being done was for IXPE, and it basically reduced the 15t LEO payload capacity of F9 to 330 kg.

Videos like this are why I love your channel so much.

This is the best "SOMEBODY IS WRONG ON THE INTERNET!" Video i have seen in a long time.

Kilo Feet per second is just a terrible unit of measurement

12:28 so if parachutes are not allowed for landing, how is the Space Shuttle the winner?

Great, now I need to know this information for all kinds of other categories of vehicle. Scott, you need to do a video series on the fastest/slowest of... -lifting-body space capsules -non-lifting-body space capsules -first stages -second stages -sub-orbital capsules -sub-orbital flights -completely non-space, all-atmosphee flights I frankly don't care if we can just google the information, I want this Scott Manley style overanalysis.

Tons of research there Scott, well done lad, well done.

The definition of plane is powered flight. Therefore the space shuttle is a glider, not a plane, however by the same definition the sr-71 is not the fastest and it would instead be the x-15 as it was powered flight. Therefore everyone was wrong, and the fastest plane is the x-15 (Details matter).

Only the bravest souls will willingly go into a spaceship and risk their lives for space exploration

The fourth column of the old shuttle data sheets has VI on it under the heading "Launch..., Landing..." with numbers like 25k fps

this is the biggest "umm akshualy" ive ever seen and i love it. although personally i think "fastest plane" should be something that gains its speed exclusively IN atmosphere.

Me: that’s a trivial question to answer. Me 13 mins later: ahh that’s why it’s called rocket science

Wow Scott, that was a magnificent effort you put in for this! Congratulations to Discovery--my second favorite shuttle! (runs away laughing!)

My favorite will always be Endeavor. The youngest and the one built from all the spare parts left over from the OG program.

I saw Columbia first and third landing. 3rd I Used my 8” telescope. That’s was odd but I managed it. We waited til the crew left and they hauled it away. Leaving on the road out my buddy and noticed we could see the landed shuttle close (ish). Right through the chain link. One chance! So I pulled over and quickly set up the scope. 8” scope is a hell of a monocular. We took turns. I saw people in the cabin flipping switches. Cool. Then I heard my friend go, “Ahem.” I look behind and see a no-small line of hopeful shuttle watchers. They’d seen us and pulled over. Hell Yah! So we let people watch the shuttle up close as much as they wanted. So Columbia was my favorite.

Starship and SLS might be more powerful but Space Shuttle still has the most exciting launch sequence.

Such a Scott Manley classic :)

That WB-57 footage was great!

**no one, absolutely no one** Scott: so I plugged all this information into my spreadsheet

I love when you do videos about the shuttle!!

As always I like the research and sheer enthusiasm behind Scott's videos.

I love that this is basically a video about being nerd sniped by someone on the internet.

Now reading through the summary of shuttle missions, found this puzzling comment: -Second time a bat attempted to fly into space on Space Shuttle ET [external tank]; coincidentally Koichi Wakata was on both flights. There is no prior mention of any similar incident. Wikipedia has saved the day. The first bat left when it became apparent that something dangerous occurred, NASA assumed the second bat would do the same, but it probably had a broken wing, and is presumed to have been shaken off and killed in the exhaust plumes.

The 47% of Challenger's recovered remains accepts the slowest entry award from Its resting place in a silo at LC31 at Canaveral Space Force Station.

Never pick a fight with a man who’s good with spreadsheets.

Why do I love Scott Manley, he does math that he doesn't need to do just to win an internet argument. That's why

Thanks. Glad to see you getting back to explanatory physics videos!

40 seconds in, I see the answer in the bottom right. Might as well stop it there. Jokes aside, I love when lighthearted pedantics turn into learning something new!

Yo... that video from return to flight really is awesome footage! @1:10

I cannot understand how a literal rocket scientist could tolerate using so horrid a unit as "kilofeet per second."

Scott Manley: the man for which all space nerds say "this guy's a space nerd!" I humbly bow before your Excel nerdiness...

Another fantastically Nerdy vid Scott!! Loved it. My only question is…Dreamchaser?

Excellent video as always! Thank you👍🏻

8:52 That is one intimidating spreadsheet, and I've played *EVE.* Barely even any styling. Just stone cold vectors. Sir, you are a madman, and I salute you. Also, DISCO wins. ❤

This was an amazing 13 minutes of my life following along with your nerdy research journey. Especially loved the concluding sentences!

This video needs to be included as an example in the definition of "Nerding out".

So the faster aircraft ever is a glider .... This is why I love the Shuttle .... ....I also love the Buran ... that it's one flight, completely automated (something the Shuttle couldn't do) ... nearly beat the Shuttle's record is just icing on the cake ...

2:37 You can see the heat from re-entry distorting the air. The Space Shuttle has no engines for use inside the atmosphere on descent, so that is just pure heat resonating from it. Awesome footage.

"But still, had to sure" 9:30 My kind of dude right there.

Very cool that Scott has found that shuttle document. It's my favourite

You got me excited there for a second there

intensely good content mr manley

The record for fastest winged mammal goes to Space-Bat (STS-119) of course.

Yay! Discovery! I don't know why, but I'm happy with the result :D

I'm glad, Discovery is my favourite. Only rocket launch I ever saw was STS 103 to service Hubble, Scott Kelly's first flight.

"without deploying parachutes".. wildly gestures at the chutes at the tail of the space shuttles

Before watching it, my guess is that it's whichever shuttle serviced Hubble. I expect that's the highest orbit (although I could be wrong) and so it'd be the fastest when deorbiting. Edit: Dang, I didn't consider inclination!