Message boards : The Lounge : Will Dragon lift off today?
Message board moderation
Author | Message |
---|---|
Send message Joined: 29 Aug 05 Posts: 15567 |
Keep one eye glued to https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bIZsnKGV8TE to see if Dragon Crew gets launched today. |
Send message Joined: 8 Nov 19 Posts: 718 |
I'm hosting a Facebook Watch Party to see it. Youtube, and Facebook are hosting the streaming operations. (perhaps some more). |
Send message Joined: 29 Aug 05 Posts: 15567 |
|
Send message Joined: 29 Aug 05 Posts: 15567 |
Go! |
Send message Joined: 8 Nov 19 Posts: 718 |
Successful! I heard the faint rumble down here, where I live, but couldn't see the rocket. |
Send message Joined: 29 Aug 05 Posts: 15567 |
First stage landed again safely. |
Send message Joined: 8 Nov 19 Posts: 718 |
It's amazing how well it went, considering SpaceX is much cheaper than NASA (thanks to the advances in technology). Everyone with masks on, desks 6ft apart! :) |
Send message Joined: 8 Nov 19 Posts: 718 |
Very strange that the live feed cut out just at the time of the stage 1 landing. Either the landing was fake, or they suppressed the landing from being broadcast live, after the failure of the landings before. |
Send message Joined: 25 May 09 Posts: 1301 |
They've had that issue before, basically the camera gets knocked off air due to noise and vibration levels and they have to remote onto another camera (after searching through the other camera feeds until they find one that works) |
Send message Joined: 8 Nov 19 Posts: 718 |
They've had that issue before, basically the camera gets knocked off air due to noise and vibration levels and they have to remote onto another camera (after searching through the other camera feeds until they find one that works) If that was the case, they would have shared the feed with major news stations. But even in the review, there's the non-edited version with no active landing going on. |
Send message Joined: 23 Feb 08 Posts: 2494 |
They've had that issue before, basically the camera gets knocked off air due to noise and vibration levels and they have to remote onto another camera (after searching through the other camera feeds until they find one that works) Not the camera that has the vibration issue, the uplink antenna loses lock on the broadcast satellite. After landing no vibration and lock restored. Alternate angle https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TT9U45ZKFWE |
Send message Joined: 25 May 09 Posts: 1301 |
Thanks Gary - I knew they had a vibration/shock issue and assumed it was the camera as this has happened previously. |
Send message Joined: 8 Nov 19 Posts: 718 |
They've had that issue before, basically the camera gets knocked off air due to noise and vibration levels and they have to remote onto another camera (after searching through the other camera feeds until they find one that works) That video footage is of the loss of signal. its uploaded on May 30, but I suspect filmed on another day, as it wasn't raining on that day... It also doesn't show any landing. If it was an uplink issue, the locally recorded data should have been reuploaded. I'm still with as much doubt as before that the landing went smoothly. Possible near-tipover, or just cut the feed, to prevent failure being broadcast, are much closer to a possible reason to me.... |
Send message Joined: 8 Nov 19 Posts: 718 |
Edit: Here is the supposedly real footage... It looks almost too perfect to be true. The weather conditions seem right though: https://youtu.be/Dm__ZSLc6Is |
Send message Joined: 29 Aug 05 Posts: 15567 |
~4 years old, August 2016 (see comments). But it does show the booster will land in the 10 second window that the feed went offline. And the clouds in the background fit both sides of the cutoff. |
Send message Joined: 8 Nov 19 Posts: 718 |
Indeed, conspiracy theories are going wild! By trying to hide it, it became a real issue! |
Send message Joined: 29 Aug 05 Posts: 15567 |
No it didn't, you are making it a conspiracy by claiming they tried to hide it. Digital cameras just cut their signal going from an image one second to nothing the next. So then you see the test signal, showing there's a problem with the feed, that is automated to cut in there. You posted the link to the four year old footage claiming to be present footage. Footage someone else posted, not SpaceX. So you are feeding the conspiracy where there is none. |
Send message Joined: 12 Jun 09 Posts: 2105 |
In the 2nd decade of the 21st century, there are still many out there who say the Moon Landings are fake, just as there are some out there that think the earth is flat. You gotta love the Internet. :-) |
Send message Joined: 8 Nov 19 Posts: 718 |
No it didn't, you are making it a conspiracy by claiming they tried to hide it. Digital cameras just cut their signal going from an image one second to nothing the next. So then you see the test signal, showing there's a problem with the feed, that is automated to cut in there. The footage was uploaded just a few days ago. There are claims in the comments that it's 4 year old footage, which may be true, but I didn't know that. It was released on YouTube on the same day as the launch. I would say a cutting feed is Bs! Even with the landing disaster, the cam feed didn't break up! There's no reason why it would now. And I have only here mentioned about them cutting the feed. YouTube and other social platforms are full of comments about it. Heck, they're sending a rocket into orbit, but they can't get a lock on a camera feed??? |
Send message Joined: 8 Nov 19 Posts: 718 |
In the 2nd decade of the 21st century, there are still many out there who say the Moon Landings are fake, just as there are some out there that think the earth is flat. I'll tell you what, Internet is fake! How do I know? Because I'm the only real person in this simulation called life. My colleagues are not real, my family isn't real, you're not real.. I'm talking straight into the matrix right now! |
Copyright © 2024 University of California.
Permission is granted to copy, distribute and/or modify this document
under the terms of the GNU Free Documentation License,
Version 1.2 or any later version published by the Free Software Foundation.