Do you have adblock enabled?
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Discover)   Had enough crappy news this week? Then how about a picture of a rover sent to another planet *as it descends via parachute to the surface of Mars?*   (blogs.discovermagazine.com ) divider line
    More: Cool, Mars Reconnaissance Orbiter, HiRISE, Martian surface, polarizations, Phoenix Lander  
•       •       •

7267 clicks; posted to Geek » on 06 Aug 2012 at 4:02 PM (4 years ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



94 Comments     (+0 »)
 
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | » | Newest | Show all

 
2012-08-06 01:10:28 PM  
Think how much money NASA could have made by placing a Taco Bell or Bing logo on that chute.
 
2012-08-06 01:21:07 PM  
...awesome.
 
2012-08-06 01:21:22 PM  
Looks fake.

Seriously though, why not in color?
 
2012-08-06 01:23:31 PM  

RoyBatty: Think how much money NASA could have made by placing a Taco Bell or Bing logo on that chute.


What? And expose space aliens to our capitalistic advertisements, commercials, and corporate logos? Who wants some advanced civilization to have to interpret what Ronald McDonald actually means?

/Cool pic though.
 
2012-08-06 01:24:42 PM  
img229.imageshack.us

It'sronly a model.
 
2012-08-06 01:25:16 PM  
I watched the landing on live stream from the NASA JPL website. I love some NASA TV :D
 
2012-08-06 01:25:34 PM  

AdolfOliverPanties: Looks fake.

Seriously though, why not in color?


Geez, AdolfOliverPanties. Even if it was in color, you'd probably complain it wasn't in 3D with quadraphonic sound effects. :-)
 
2012-08-06 01:26:52 PM  
That's right. Nasa perpendicular parked a car. However, they have to move it because the red zone is for loading and unloading only.
 
2012-08-06 01:32:06 PM  
WOW
 
2012-08-06 01:39:55 PM  
Damn and I can barely take a picture of my dog that isn't out of focus.
 
2012-08-06 01:43:34 PM  

AdolfOliverPanties: Looks fake.

Seriously though, why not in color?


The camera that took it (HiRISE on MRO) takes grayscale images using different filters (as most telescopes do). After the fact those different images can be combined to make a color image, but in this case there wasn't time to change filters (and if they had, it would've been hard to combine them because this is a moving and changing object). I don't know how many pictures they were able to obtain, but it was far more important to simply get them at all rather than get some in color.
 
2012-08-06 01:46:13 PM  
That's farking awesome.
 
2012-08-06 01:50:27 PM  
The timing that got all three of those craft in range of each other at the same time was phenomenal in itself

/cool picture!
 
2012-08-06 02:07:34 PM  
holy sh*t

HOLY SH*T
 
2012-08-06 02:09:42 PM  

AdolfOliverPanties: Looks fake.

Seriously though, why not in color?


What color is the sky in your world?
 
2012-08-06 02:14:17 PM  

Makh: the red zone is for loading and unloading only.


No, the White Zone is loading and unloading only, there is no parking in the Red Zone.
 
2012-08-06 02:18:23 PM  

Ennuipoet: No, the White Zone is loading and unloading only, there is no parking in the Red Zone.


Oh, and what color is the sky in your world?
 
2012-08-06 02:19:49 PM  
AdolfOliverPanties, Ennuipoet Because, I think I might be lost.
 
2012-08-06 02:23:00 PM  
Yep, I'm on the wrong planet. Damn it.
 
2012-08-06 02:32:24 PM  
How this landing wasn't the first thing I saw on the news this morning is beyond me. Got some Olympic coverage though........
 
2012-08-06 02:53:59 PM  

Makh: Ennuipoet: No, the White Zone is loading and unloading only, there is no parking in the Red Zone.

Oh, and what color is the sky in your world?


Listen Betty, don't start up with your white zone shiat again.
 
2012-08-06 03:04:39 PM  

Angry Drunk Bureaucrat: Listen Betty, don't start up with your white zone shiat again.


Oh really, Vernon? Why pretend? We both know perfectly well what this is about. You want me to have an abortion.
 
2012-08-06 03:14:32 PM  

imgs.xkcd.com

 
2012-08-06 03:33:11 PM  

gilgigamesh: [imgs.xkcd.com image 300x300]


Pimp Science: Get back to work, biatches.
 
2012-08-06 03:54:32 PM  
I farking LOVE stuff like this.

Love it.
 
2012-08-06 04:05:52 PM  
Where is it with regards to the Viking landers? Far too lazy to find out myself.
 
2012-08-06 04:06:14 PM  

MaudlinMutantMollusk: The timing that got all three of those craft in range of each other at the same time was phenomenal in itself


Yes, EXACTLY!

images.wikia.com
 
2012-08-06 04:11:46 PM  
"The news these days is filled with polarization, with hate, with fear, with ignorance. But while these feelings are a part of us, and always will be, they neither dominate nor define us. Not if we don't let them. When we reach, when we explore, when we're curious - that's when we're at our best. We can learn about the world around us, the Universe around us. It doesn't divide us, or separate us, or create artificial and wholly made-up barriers between us. As we saw on Twitter, at New York Times Square where hundreds of people watched the landing live, and all over the world: science and exploration bind us together. Science makes the world a better place, and it makes us better people."
 
2012-08-06 04:13:34 PM  
Oh, it's practically on the other side of the planet...

Viking 1

Curiosity
 
2012-08-06 04:14:42 PM  

BafflerMeal: Science makes the world a better place, and it makes us better people."


What an interesting thing to say on the 64th anniversary of the Hiroshima bombing. Not that I disagree with the sentiment, it's just an interesting juxtaposition.
 
2012-08-06 04:18:59 PM  

dittybopper: What an interesting thing to say on the 64th anniversary of the Hiroshima bombing. Not that I disagree with the sentiment, it's just an interesting juxtaposition.


I'm sure there are people in Japan who didn't catch polio and spend their childhoods in iron lungs who are okay with that.
 
2012-08-06 04:19:08 PM  
That's fake.
Parachutes don't work on Mars.
 
2012-08-06 04:28:17 PM  
Okay, you know how some people say that something is, like, the coolest thing ever?

Now you can actually say that. Literally. Without hyperbole.
 
2012-08-06 04:29:20 PM  

The Bad Astronomer: AdolfOliverPanties: Looks fake.

Seriously though, why not in color?

The camera that took it (HiRISE on MRO) takes grayscale images using different filters (as most telescopes do). After the fact those different images can be combined to make a color image, but in this case there wasn't time to change filters (and if they had, it would've been hard to combine them because this is a moving and changing object). I don't know how many pictures they were able to obtain, but it was far more important to simply get them at all rather than get some in color.


With the resolution they're showing off here, I'm surprised they didn't go for a shot of the sky-crane in action. Was Curiosity much higher at this stage, allowing for the higher res?
 
2012-08-06 04:29:38 PM  

MaudlinMutantMollusk: The timing that got all three of those craft in range of each other at the same time was phenomenal in itself

/cool picture!


I would actually like to find a paper or discussion of just what it took to get that to happen in terms of launch windows, or various orbital adjustments. Was that a relatively easy thing, or an incredible act of precision?
 
2012-08-06 04:32:37 PM  

AdolfOliverPanties: Looks fake.


The reason it looks fake is because Curiosity is still high up in the planetary atmosphere, so the light reflecting off of it is going to look very different from the light that has to travel all the way down to the atmosphere, and then all the way back up to the observer.

It also doesn't help that the rover is white/sliver while the entire rest of the planet is red/black.
 
2012-08-06 04:37:02 PM  
I guess we can't declare it a streetlight.
 
2012-08-06 04:38:57 PM  

RoyBatty: MaudlinMutantMollusk: The timing that got all three of those craft in range of each other at the same time was phenomenal in itself

/cool picture!

I would actually like to find a paper or discussion of just what it took to get that to happen in terms of launch windows, or various orbital adjustments. Was that a relatively easy thing, or an incredible act of precision?


They talked about it during the news conference earlier today. They had to send commands to the observer 72 hours in advance to change it's trajectory, get it in position, and then it had a window of 110 seconds to catch the parachute in action. If the trajectory was slightly off, if either the observer or the rover was just a little bit too early or too late they wouldn't have gotten the shot.

Even so, they gave themselves an 80% chance of getting the shot, which is more than the 60% chance they gave themselves of getting the Phoenix picture.
 
2012-08-06 04:45:16 PM  

Fish in a Barrel: With the resolution they're showing off here, I'm surprised they didn't go for a shot of the sky-crane in action. Was Curiosity much higher at this stage, allowing for the higher res?


The skycrane portion of the flight lasted for 70 seconds, and the skycrane/rover portion would be even smaller than the backshield you see in the picture, so it'd be significantly more difficult to get a good picture. The interesting part of the skycrane flight, lowering the rover from the crane to the surface, only takes 16 seconds.
 
2012-08-06 04:49:59 PM  
It was all faked on a movie set!!!
 
2012-08-06 04:53:12 PM  

Fubini: They talked about it during the news conference earlier today. They had to send commands to the observer 72 hours in advance to change it's trajectory, get it in position, and then it had a window of 110 seconds to catch the parachute in action. If the trajectory was slightly off, if either the observer or the rover was just a little bit too early or too late they wouldn't have gotten the shot.


I didn't even consider that aspect. Just taking the photo is an astonishing achievement of orbital mechanics, timing and automation.
 
2012-08-06 04:54:37 PM  

Obscene_CNN: It was all faked on a movie set!!!


Well, yeah, but the movie set was actually on Mars.
 
2012-08-06 05:00:55 PM  
why only a 2 year lifespan?
for something so expensive and difficult to pull off, you'd think that there would be more emphasis on having a lab on mars for as long as possible. I wonder how much more 'fuel' would it need to extend its life for each additional year and why didn't they beef up that end of things? K so it would be slightly heavier, so what? I mean they went through all this trouble anyway, what's a few more dollars spent on earth liftoff, and landing requirements for that extra fuel that seems to be a vital bottleneck.
 
2012-08-06 05:01:13 PM  
Thats one of the coolest pictures I have ever seen
 
2012-08-06 05:07:59 PM  
To an observer on Mars, that's a UFO.
 
2012-08-06 05:10:24 PM  

tsakali: why only a 2 year lifespan?
for something so expensive and difficult to pull off, you'd think that there would be more emphasis on having a lab on mars for as long as possible. I wonder how much more 'fuel' would it need to extend its life for each additional year and why didn't they beef up that end of things? K so it would be slightly heavier, so what? I mean they went through all this trouble anyway, what's a few more dollars spent on earth liftoff, and landing requirements for that extra fuel that seems to be a vital bottleneck.


The rover's nuclear power source will last for 14 years. So, my hope of course is that all its other parts will still be working after 2 years, and thus the mission will be extended. See Opportunity .
 
2012-08-06 05:14:07 PM  

Perturbance: tsakali: why only a 2 year lifespan?
for something so expensive and difficult to pull off, you'd think that there would be more emphasis on having a lab on mars for as long as possible. I wonder how much more 'fuel' would it need to extend its life for each additional year and why didn't they beef up that end of things? K so it would be slightly heavier, so what? I mean they went through all this trouble anyway, what's a few more dollars spent on earth liftoff, and landing requirements for that extra fuel that seems to be a vital bottleneck.

The rover's nuclear power source will last for 14 years. So, my hope of course is that all its other parts will still be working after 2 years, and thus the hopefully there will be funding for the mission to be extended. See Opportunity.
 
2012-08-06 05:14:20 PM  
That is THE most inspiring photo I've seen of this so far. I can't wait until the rover gets rolling.
 
2012-08-06 05:14:44 PM  

Fubini: RoyBatty: MaudlinMutantMollusk: The timing that got all three of those craft in range of each other at the same time was phenomenal in itself

/cool picture!

I would actually like to find a paper or discussion of just what it took to get that to happen in terms of launch windows, or various orbital adjustments. Was that a relatively easy thing, or an incredible act of precision?

They talked about it during the news conference earlier today. They had to send commands to the observer 72 hours in advance to change it's trajectory, get it in position, and then it had a window of 110 seconds to catch the parachute in action. If the trajectory was slightly off, if either the observer or the rover was just a little bit too early or too late they wouldn't have gotten the shot.

Even so, they gave themselves an 80% chance of getting the shot, which is more than the 60% chance they gave themselves of getting the Phoenix picture.


If people had only listened to me, Mars would have a TDRS and GPS systems in orbit around it, and at least 200 Spirits and Opportunities driving around and maybe a great big, earth observable Red Bull logo to pay for it all.
 
2012-08-06 05:20:10 PM  

Perturbance: Perturbance: tsakali: why only a 2 year lifespan?
for something so expensive and difficult to pull off, you'd think that there would be more emphasis on having a lab on mars for as long as possible. I wonder how much more 'fuel' would it need to extend its life for each additional year and why didn't they beef up that end of things? K so it would be slightly heavier, so what? I mean they went through all this trouble anyway, what's a few more dollars spent on earth liftoff, and landing requirements for that extra fuel that seems to be a vital bottleneck.

The rover's nuclear power source will last for 14 years. So, my hope of course is that all its other parts will still be working after 2 years, and thus the hopefully there will be funding for the mission to be extended. See Opportunity.


oh wow where did I get such a wrong number? I could have sworn one of those blue shirts last night said 2 years.


Either way 14 years sounds more like it!
 
Displayed 50 of 94 comments


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | » | Newest | Show all


View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter








In Other Media
  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report