These launch photos of Monday’s SpaceX flight are pretty amazing

See the booster from launch, into MaxQ, and through the first stage's return.

Read the whole story

 

[Colm]

Is there a particular reason this LC has a single lightning tower on top of the erector, but others have 4 arrayed in a square around the launcher?

 

[Psychedelic Mushroom]

Great work Mr Trevor Mahlmann!

 

[SymmetricChaos]

Is there a particular reason this LC has a single lightning tower on top of the erector, but others have 4 arrayed in a square around the launcher?

Courage.

 

[lazarus2405]

Given the preponderance of evidence, are there still people who earnestly believe these landings are faked?

Recognizing that some folks will never be convinced (moon landing hoaxers, flat earthers, etc), I wonder if any of the people who thought the landings were some sloppy Photoshop and VFX have changed their minds.

 

[Nomaran]

There wouldn't happen to be a 1920x1080 image would there? I'd like to set one as my desktop background.

 

[afedon]

There wouldn't happen to be a 1920x1080 image would there? I'd like to set one as my desktop background.

Not that resolution, but have you ever checked out the SpaceX flikr page (https://www.flickr.com/photos/spacex/)? I use these images as wallpapers all the time. I particularly like this one from yesterday's launch: https://www.flickr.com/photos/spacex/35762350653/.

 

[Nomaran]

There wouldn't happen to be a 1920x1080 image would there? I'd like to set one as my desktop background.

Not that resolution, but have you ever checked out the SpaceX flikr page (https://www.flickr.com/photos/spacex/)? I use these images as wallpapers all the time. I particularly like this one from yesterday's launch: https://www.flickr.com/photos/spacex/35762350653/.

I am now, thanks!

 

[Peevester]

I would love to get a high-res closeup of the falcon returning. I grabbed the one below from a screencap of a recent stream, but it's not sharp enough for a desktop photo.

 

[andygates]

Peevester[/url]":xykqif9t]I would love to get a high-res closeup of the falcon returning. I grabbed the one below from a screencap of a recent stream, but it's not sharp enough for a desktop photo.

Falcon 9 performing the Adama Maneuver. Just an insanely cool image.

 

[malcolm_]

lazarus2405[/url]":1yk40v90]Given the preponderance of evidence, are there still people who earnestly believe these landings are faked?

Recognizing that some folks will never be convinced (moon landing hoaxers, flat earthers, etc), I wonder if any of the people who thought the landings were some sloppy Photoshop and VFX have changed their minds.

That's not a conspiracy theory I've heard before! I'd like to say I'm surprised, but alas...

 

[beausoleil]

Given the preponderance of evidence, are there still people who earnestly believe these landings are faked?

Recognizing that some folks will never be convinced (moon landing hoaxers, flat earthers, etc), I wonder if any of the people who thought the landings were some sloppy Photoshop and VFX have changed their minds.

Jeez - I didn't realize that there were people who believe SpaceX has been faking the booster landings.

We live in a world where people believe in sky fairies, sasquatch, and ghosts - yet don't believe that 6 astronauts/cosmonauts are orbiting the Earth, which in turn is orbiting our Sun, or that mankind is capable of landing a liquid fueled 1st stage booster rocket.

Edit - ninja'd by malcom_!

 

[WonkoTheSaneUK]

lazarus2405[/url]":18n6mez2]Given the preponderance of evidence, are there still people who earnestly believe these landings are faked?

Recognizing that some folks will never be convinced (moon landing hoaxers, flat earthers, etc), I wonder if any of the people who thought the landings were some sloppy Photoshop and VFX have changed their minds.

I often find the simplest way to shut down moon landing hoaxers is to say that NASA hired Kubrick to fake them, but he insisted on filming on location.

Similarly, the flat earthers can be silenced by pointing out that if the Earth were flat, cats would have pushed everything off it by now.

 

[KGFish]

Is anyone getting tired of watching rockets land? Cuz I sure as hell am not. Makes my inner 6-year squeal every time.

 

[Hopefully Smarter]

Given the preponderance of evidence, are there still people who earnestly believe these landings are faked?

Recognizing that some folks will never be convinced (moon landing hoaxers, flat earthers, etc), I wonder if any of the people who thought the landings were some sloppy Photoshop and VFX have changed their minds.

Wait! The earth isn't flat? /s

 

[gmerrick]

This launch and landing by far has produce the best imagery to date for SpaceX. The video of the booster landing on the pad was simply phenomenal as was the imagery coming from the booster itself as it was descending to the pad.

 

[DoomHamster]

Those poor doves in that first pic have never encountered a Falcon of that ferocity before.

 

[chibiconsulting]

Is there a particular reason this LC has a single lightning tower on top of the erector, but others have 4 arrayed in a square around the launcher?

As I recall, Pad 39A was in heavy use for the Shuttle and did not get the lightning upgrades that Pad 39B and SLC 40 got towards the end of the Shuttle era... No clue why Pad 39 A has not had the upgrade subsequently other than cost.

 

[ZaphodHarkonnen]

chibiconsulting[/url]":2utzn720]

Is there a particular reason this LC has a single lightning tower on top of the erector, but others have 4 arrayed in a square around the launcher?

As I recall, Pad 39A was in heavy use for the Shuttle and did not get the lightning upgrades that Pad 39B and SLC 40 got towards the end of the Shuttle era... No clue why Pad 39 A has not had the upgrade subsequently other than cost.

Could be that SpaceX have decided that the existing protection is enough for them.

 

[trimeta]

Is there a particular reason this LC has a single lightning tower on top of the erector, but others have 4 arrayed in a square around the launcher?

As I recall, Pad 39A was in heavy use for the Shuttle and did not get the lightning upgrades that Pad 39B and SLC 40 got towards the end of the Shuttle era... No clue why Pad 39 A has not had the upgrade subsequently other than cost.

Actually, the lightning tower pictured above is an upgrade, SpaceX made it higher and with four guide-wires to disperse electrical surges away from crucial equipment. I'm not sure why they made a better single tower rather than install four, however...maybe they figured that one which is tall enough is just as/more effective?

 

[RickRoyLeonPrisZhoraRachael]

Adama Manuever? You mean like BSG? Cool!

 

[miken32]

Nice pics. Anyone else start getting antsy at about T00:40 on these launches? Probably memories of Challenger, but every time they cut to that zoomed in from a distance view I start to worry. Glad everything went off without a hitch!

 

[JohnDeL]

Go, baby, go! And then come back to me!

 

[mikedelhoo]

Given the preponderance of evidence, are there still people who earnestly believe these landings are faked?

Recognizing that some folks will never be convinced (moon landing hoaxers, flat earthers, etc), I wonder if any of the people who thought the landings were some sloppy Photoshop and VFX have changed their minds.

Probably some have changed their minds, but when hard-core flat-earthers are shown convincing evidence that these launches actually take place, they just move on to the next conspiracy-preserving hypothesis: these rockets are just sending their payloads/upper stages out to be ditched somewhere in the Atlantic Ocean out of sight.

 

[Mandella]

lazarus2405[/url]":41q2ps4v]Given the preponderance of evidence, are there still people who earnestly believe these landings are faked?

Recognizing that some folks will never be convinced (moon landing hoaxers, flat earthers, etc), I wonder if any of the people who thought the landings were some sloppy Photoshop and VFX have changed their minds.

I often find the simplest way to shut down moon landing hoaxers is to say that NASA hired Kubrick to fake them, but he insisted on filming on location.

Similarly, the flat earthers can be silenced by pointing out that if the Earth were flat, cats would have pushed everything off it by now.

I'm totally stealing those.

I have my own go-to counter-conspiracy that I launch into when confronted by idiots (Canada is a hoax) but yours wins for brevity. And cats.

 

[jdhardy]

Given the preponderance of evidence, are there still people who earnestly believe these landings are faked?

Recognizing that some folks will never be convinced (moon landing hoaxers, flat earthers, etc), I wonder if any of the people who thought the landings were some sloppy Photoshop and VFX have changed their minds.

Probably some have changed their minds, but when hard-core flat-earthers are shown convincing evidence that these launches actually take place, they just move on to the next conspiracy-preserving hypothesis: these rockets are just sending their payloads/upper stages out to be ditched somewhere in the Atlantic Ocean out of sight.

When some people with deeply held beliefs are shown evidence that their beliefs are false, they actually become more convinced that they are correct. Sometimes the beliefs persist because they are wrong; some people just have to be deliberately contrarian, and others would rather believe the entire world (or even reality itself) is wrong before they admit that they are in error.

 

[brianthebloomfield]

Is there a particular reason this LC has a single lightning tower on top of the erector, but others have 4 arrayed in a square around the launcher?

Courage.

The iFalcon, coming to an Apple Store near you.

 

[TLStetler]

I would love to get a high-res closeup of the falcon returning. I grabbed the one below from a screencap of a recent stream, but it's not sharp enough for a desktop photo.

Better?

 

[MilleniX]

This launch and landing by far has produce the best imagery to date for SpaceX. The video of the booster landing on the pad was simply phenomenal as was the imagery coming from the booster itself as it was descending to the pad.

They get points for consistency of transmission on this flight, certainly. I think it'll be a long while before someone tops this shot of a landing, though.

 

[truthyboy15]

no picture of it sitting on the launchpad after the landing? color me disappointed

 

[vanzandtj]

There wouldn't happen to be a 1920x1080 image would there? I'd like to set one as my desktop background.

Not that resolution, but have you ever checked out the SpaceX flikr page (https://www.flickr.com/photos/spacex/)? I use these images as wallpapers all the time. I particularly like this one from yesterday's launch: https://www.flickr.com/photos/spacex/35762350653/.

Cool. Including one picture of a launch that was taken on August 15. It's hard to keep some secrets...

 

[Colm]

This launch and landing by far has produce the best imagery to date for SpaceX. The video of the booster landing on the pad was simply phenomenal as was the imagery coming from the booster itself as it was descending to the pad.

They get points for consistency of transmission on this flight, certainly. I think it'll be a long while before someone tops this shot of a landing, though.

That's my current desktop background.

 

[Thereitis]

no picture of it sitting on the launchpad after the landing? color me disappointed

Actually, it was sitting on the landing pad after the landing. I think Elon's waiting for some upgrades before trying to land on the launchpad.

Edit: Hope I don't need a /s for the second sentence.

 

[DSL987 [DSLR]]

lazarus2405[/url]":1bgczul0]Given the preponderance of evidence, are there still people who earnestly believe these landings are faked?

Recognizing that some folks will never be convinced (moon landing hoaxers, flat earthers, etc), I wonder if any of the people who thought the landings were some sloppy Photoshop and VFX have changed their minds.

I often find the simplest way to shut down moon landing hoaxers is to say that NASA hired Kubrick to fake them, but he insisted on filming on location.

Similarly, the flat earthers can be silenced by pointing out that if the Earth were flat, cats would have pushed everything off it by now.

We also wouldn't need NASA or SpaceX to launch stuff into space, we could just get cats to push the satellites off the edge and into orbit.

 

[equine_physics]

I would love to get a high-res closeup of the falcon returning. I grabbed the one below from a screencap of a recent stream, but it's not sharp enough for a desktop photo.

Better?

Now that right there could be evidence of an alien space craft. Strange markings on the side, different colors and those engines....Are you sure that is the falcon 9 or maybe it's a spaceship that is trying to escape detection.

;-)

 

[Peevester]

I would love to get a high-res closeup of the falcon returning. I grabbed the one below from a screencap of a recent stream, but it's not sharp enough for a desktop photo.

Better?

Not even a little. Using shitty photoshop filters and messing with color balance does not improve an image.

 

[Tempus --)-------]

lazarus2405[/url]":15vkogkh]Given the preponderance of evidence, are there still people who earnestly believe these landings are faked?

Recognizing that some folks will never be convinced (moon landing hoaxers, flat earthers, etc), I wonder if any of the people who thought the landings were some sloppy Photoshop and VFX have changed their minds.

I often find the simplest way to shut down moon landing hoaxers is to say that NASA hired Kubrick to fake them, but he insisted on filming on location.

Similarly, the flat earthers can be silenced by pointing out that if the Earth were flat, cats would have pushed everything off it by now.

We also wouldn't need NASA or SpaceX to launch stuff into space, we could just get cats to push the satellites off the edge and into orbit.

I've always wondered how flat earthers explain things like GPS, or Satellite TV.

OK GPS can be done with terrestrial antennas (and in fact there are systems like that used for things like Tractor and Combine harvester navigation and autopiloting that have sub inch accuracy) so maybe change that to Navigation via Sextant, Chronograph, Star Sites and Nautical almanac.

But you can quite literally go out to a small dish antenna like DISH and DirecTV use and see how the signal comes and goes as you re position the dish ever so slightly, and how it only works when pointed at that particular point in the sky, which is different (angle and inclination) depending on where you are on earth.

How do they reconcile these things with their flat earth beliefs?

 

[ev9_tarantula]

lazarus2405[/url]":26twha55]Given the preponderance of evidence, are there still people who earnestly believe these landings are faked?

Recognizing that some folks will never be convinced (moon landing hoaxers, flat earthers, etc), I wonder if any of the people who thought the landings were some sloppy Photoshop and VFX have changed their minds.

I often find the simplest way to shut down moon landing hoaxers is to say that NASA hired Kubrick to fake them, but he insisted on filming on location.

Similarly, the flat earthers can be silenced by pointing out that if the Earth were flat, cats would have pushed everything off it by now.

Mitchell and Webb explain it all.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sE-tpiAiiHo

 

[gozur88]

Given the preponderance of evidence, are there still people who earnestly believe these landings are faked?

I always figured most of that is tongue in cheek. I went to one of those sites and it sure seemed like the authors were just trying to be clever.

 

[jbode]

Given the preponderance of evidence, are there still people who earnestly believe these landings are faked?

Searching for "spacex fake" on YouTube brings up a lot of hits (I mean, a lot), but none from the last couple of days.

Recognizing that some folks will never be convinced (moon landing hoaxers, flat earthers, etc), I wonder if any of the people who thought the landings were some sloppy Photoshop and VFX have changed their minds.

Not bloody damned likely.

The last one I saw claimed that the signal lag from the on-board cameras vs. ground cameras was proof of the fakery.

Yeah.

These people are not the sharpest bags of hair.

Oh, bee tee dubs - immediately after staging (around 16:16 on the webcast), you can see the first stage light up and scoot away from the perspective of the S2 camera - it's cool as shit.