It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Curiosity Has Landed!!

page: 24
100
<< 21  22  23    25  26  27 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 7 2012 @ 09:15 AM
link   

Originally posted by Sorgmodig
Americans are lying again, they never landed on the moon, why would we belive this?

Scaniae could colonize mars any time they wanted!


You can see our flags on the moon that we left there.


- Sea of Tranquility -

All you need is a telescope.




posted on Aug, 7 2012 @ 10:44 AM
link   


That's the entire point to the mission . They want to start low and work there way up the sedimentary levels of the ridge .
reply to post by Max_TO
 


Thanks for the reply. I wasn't aware of the reason why they chose that site.



posted on Aug, 7 2012 @ 10:55 AM
link   

Originally posted by Ihnen
reply to post by AmatuerSkyWatcher
 




I told you CATS everywhere!!



Awesome


Do they fly saucer type craft?? I'll have to send some of my fresh catnip to Mars... jsut in case of course..



posted on Aug, 7 2012 @ 11:01 AM
link   
reply to post by Terminal1
 


Well, Maybe we should wait for then to remove the dust cover thing. It's very difficult to tell from this picture. But it looks like there're some "hardcore" peaks up there that makes the front mountain looks like a small hill. But again it may be simply an ilusion.


edit on 7-8-2012 by LordAdef because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 7 2012 @ 11:21 AM
link   
reply to post by LordAdef
 


It does1 so hard to have patience with this but I know it will be worth it. Now off to look at a map of the landing area and get some kind of orientation.



posted on Aug, 7 2012 @ 11:31 AM
link   

Originally posted by starchaser
reply to post by Kryties
 


Forget hazard cams. I was searching for info about the 3 internal cameras (MARDI, MAHLI, MASTCAM) and I put a link 2 posts before. All three internal cameras seem to have a 2Mpx sensor KAI-2020. My question is, though the sensor is a CCD with very high iso and dr performance, why only 2Mpx? Is the resolving power not so important?


www.msss.com...

One Mastcam camera head has a 100 mm focal length, f/10 lens. This provides the capability to obtain images with a scale of 7.4 centimeters per pixel at 1 km distance, and about 150 microns per pixel at 2 meters distance. The camera’s square field of view covers 5.1° over 1200 by 1200 pixels on the instrument’s 1600 by 1200 CCD.

The other Mastcam camera head has a 34 mm focal length, f/8 lens. The camera’s 15° square field of view covers 1200 by 1200 pixels on a 1600 by 1200 CCD detector. The camera can obtain 450 microns per pixel images at 2 meters distance and 22 centimeters per pixel at 1 kilometer distance.


And I will quote a post from Phage back near the beginning of the thread:

post by Phage

Originally posted by Phage
reply to post by Druid42
 

The resolution will be fine. Can your camera do this? Do you really understand what that "8 mp" means?

This provides the capability to obtain images with a scale of 7.4 centimeters per pixel at 1 km distance, and about 150 microns per pixel at 2 meters distance.

www.msss.com...

There is more to the MSL than pretty pictures for you.


So no, resolution does not matter so much.



posted on Aug, 7 2012 @ 11:31 AM
link   
I can't wait to see MARDI's hi-rez video of Curiosity's descent!

They're coming people. As another poster posted, we're only getting images from the Hazcams. The High-rez cameras still need to be unpacked.

Be patient! It's all coming! And it will be spectacular!



posted on Aug, 7 2012 @ 11:32 AM
link   

Originally posted by Kryties
OH MY GOD.....

Are there STILL people whinging about the quality of the images recieved thus far? FFS people GO TO THE NASA WEBSITE AND READ THE FREAKIN THING.

The images we have now are only HAZARD CAMERA images, that camera is primarily designed to make sure the bloody rover doesn't smack into something while it's driving around. The reason they used that camera first was because the others, which have MUCH MUCH MUCH MUCH better resolution are still packed away in their flight positions and need to be unpacked - which will happen over the next few days and weeks.

I am seriously losing hope in the human race seeing the continued attempt to # all over the years of hard work by thousands of people around the world to get this bloody rover to Mars.

HAVE PATIENCE PEOPLE. MORE, AND BETTER, WILL COME.



Can we lay this to rest now? PLEASE?????


Sadly I don't think this problem will be going away anytime soon. You Phage and a couple others must have the patience of a saint because one of you guys is explaining this every couple of pages if not more often. I went from reading every post in this thread to just skimming because of it.



posted on Aug, 7 2012 @ 11:43 AM
link   

Originally posted by TheCaucasianAmerican
I repeat Curiosity has landed. On MARS!



Where was it meant to land 8)



posted on Aug, 7 2012 @ 11:48 AM
link   

Originally posted by impaired
I can't wait to see MARDI's hi-rez video of Curiosity's descent!

They're coming people. As another poster posted, we're only getting images from the Hazcams. The High-rez cameras still need to be unpacked.

Be patient! It's all coming! And it will be spectacular!


I see no solar panels on the top of the Curiosity Rover.

Now, i know why. It's nuclear powered ! - Plutonium 238 -

The Plutonium gives off heat and then a thermoelectric generator transforms the

heat into electricity.


- Curiosity Rover - Nuclear Powered



posted on Aug, 7 2012 @ 12:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by Eurisko2012

Originally posted by impaired
I can't wait to see MARDI's hi-rez video of Curiosity's descent!

They're coming people. As another poster posted, we're only getting images from the Hazcams. The High-rez cameras still need to be unpacked.

Be patient! It's all coming! And it will be spectacular!


I see no solar panels on the top of the Curiosity Rover.

Now, i know why. It's nuclear powered ! - Plutonium 238 -

The Plutonium gives off heat and then a thermoelectric generator transforms the

heat into electricity.


- Curiosity Rover - Nuclear Powered


Yep. One of the engineers said that he would not be surprised to see Curiosity last twice the 2 years alotted since there are no consumable fuels. He also went on to say that most of the heat generated is used to heat a fluid to circulate throughout the rover to keep it warm. The rover goes into sleep mode to trickle charge the battery since all functions use that battery. It runs totally off the battery until the battery gets low then it goes into sleep mode.

I bet when it fires that laser it uses a lot of juice...

I've become addicted to the NASA channel press conferences lol. Learn stuff every time they hold one.



posted on Aug, 7 2012 @ 12:46 PM
link   
...My faith in humanity had been slightly restored through this exciting news - only to be tossed back into the trash bin upon reading this thread. It is beyond mind boggling how the majority of posts can be so.... obtuse!

And so is the result of an entitled, instant gratification society. The valuable nuggets are buried under a big steaming pile o denseness. Advice of the day: Don't Be a Simpleton (Fathead, Ignoramus, Twit, etc.)! That's fine if you want to hurt yourself, but please don't foist your buffoonery on the rest of us.

Now, back to the matter at hand..... woooo hoooo! I think we've desperately needed something to take us out of our compartments here on earth, so that we may consider ourselves as collective humanity rather than this country or that, this person or that, and to focus on something other than the superfluous distractions that assault our senses daily. I am waiting patiently for some Rover Smackdown Episodes, and perhaps some footage of Curiosity burning some wicked donuts into the landscape.

If anyone is interested, there's a great NPR interview with Neil deGrasse Tyson, and he discusses the need for space exploration; why it's so important, and other pertinent topics. Worth the listen! Badass Neil Tells It Like It Is



posted on Aug, 7 2012 @ 12:54 PM
link   
Stop it already with that stupid "2MB pixel resolution is bad" comments.
This is the same idiocy as with the hype from makers of digital cameras, making you believe that the more MB a cam has, the "better" it is.

MB has nothing to do with image quality, every smart person buying a digital cam should already know this.

2MB is 1600x1200 resolution - which is plenty to start with - if they need "mega images" like panoramas etc. they can compose giant images of several images. (Look up the AMAZING "McMurdo Panorama", by the way. it was taken in 2008 or so, one of the most stunning Mars images to date! This image is 22k x 5k resolution, by the way, and Mars Pancam who took it over several months has only 1024x1024 pixel resolution).

There are other problems with giant resolution like 8MB - for starters, it would significantly increase transmission times to Earth - a big waste of time for a very insignificant benefit of "better" resolution.



posted on Aug, 7 2012 @ 12:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by flexy123
Stop it already with that stupid "2MB pixel resolution is bad" comments.
This is the same idiocy as with the hype from makers of digital cameras, making you believe that the more MB a cam has, the "better" it is.

MB has nothing to do with image quality, every smart person buying a digital cam should already know this.

2MB is 1600x1200 resolution - which is plenty to start with - if they need "mega images" like panoramas etc. they can compose giant images of several images. (Look up the AMAZING "McMurdo Panorama", by the way. it was taken in 2008 or so, one of the most stunning Mars images to date! This image is 22k x 5k resolution, by the way, and Mars Pancam who took it over several months has only 1024x1024 pixel resolution).

There are other problems with giant resolution like 8MB - for starters, it would significantly increase transmission times to Earth - a big waste of time for a very insignificant benefit of "better" resolution.


They should have super glued an iPhone 4s on top. It has an 8 MP camera.


It doesn't weigh that much. A 3G signal could be sent to the orbiting satellites.



posted on Aug, 7 2012 @ 12:59 PM
link   
reply to post by TheCaucasianAmerican
 


Thanks for posting this, for the most part it's been a great read and love the first pics, well done to NASA and all others involved, can't wait to see some of the steroscopic images when Curiosity is fully up and running.



It seems that some people can't read the first page of the thread before bashing NASA and the first B&W hazard camera pics. Come on ATS members, deny ignorance and read some of the posts and links about the cameras before posting.



posted on Aug, 7 2012 @ 01:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by Terminal1

Going to look at other sites I guess ot get my mind more wrapped around the scale of the crater itself.



Crater is about 100 mls in diameter, and in the middle is Mt. Sharp, rising up 5.5km which is HUGE. From hat i read, the site is so interesting since the mountain displays various (sediment) layers belonging to different geological periods of mars. Short: By going to Mt. Sharp they can literally dig into Mars' history and read it like a book, studying the geology of various times and periods back. So, from a scientific point of view this is a very, vey interesting site to land and find more about mars.
edit on 7-8-2012 by flexy123 because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 7 2012 @ 01:11 PM
link   
I liked what Stephen Colbert said, taht if the solar system was a line of donuts, we just licked the icing off of Mars. lol



posted on Aug, 7 2012 @ 02:27 PM
link   
Exciting times!


It's a great feat that we could land anything on another planet even without considering the complexities that come with the whole Curiosity project. Here's to hoping we find new evidence of alien life soon, although I think I might've stumbled upon the reason why we haven't found anything concrete yet:



With Curiosity's lazer abilities, I'm sure we won't fall for that one again



posted on Aug, 7 2012 @ 02:32 PM
link   
So nobody else really wants to discuss the photo I posted? I mean its got some artifacts in it. But yet, nobody is really willing to go into detail about it. Another guy posted a photo that was released by nasa and it was edited. Well, I got the raw photo.



posted on Aug, 7 2012 @ 03:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by flexy123

Originally posted by Soulece

Originally posted by TheCaucasianAmerican
reply to post by Soulece
 


Im on my phone so the photo gets snipped off about halfway...

Sorry bud maybe tomorrow when im on the PC.


Finally somebody paying attention. Look at it closely when you can. I know the cutoff is bad but it's on the far right.



Two white dots appear on the far right. Look closely. It was just something that stood out when I first saw it. Im glad there's a photo so people cant say I'm making it up.

For those that do not know I was watching the live feed when the FIRST photos were being shown. It was maybe 3 am. And I saw this after a guy telling people around him what he found. Then the room got estatic. Then is showed on the screen. Then somebody from another thread heard what I was trying to say went back and snagged a photo of it. It was the last photo before the feed went off. All you all only see if what NASA wants to show you. Thats why I tuned in. They cant edit photos as they are being seen for the first time. They will not reveal this photo. I have it, however. So hah NASA!
edit on 7-8-2012 by Soulece because: (no reason given)

edit on 7-8-2012 by Soulece because: (no reason given)


To be honest, you are WAAAYYY too excited by two boring white dots on images where we already know there are dust particles and stuff everywhere.

But, to give you credit, i *think* i remember this particular picture, it was shown at that news conference, there was a lady explaining this is a view of the crater's rim or something. Later on, some press guy asked her again about the direction the rover is facing and she confirmed the camera is facing the mountain. (So i remember). And i *think* it was that picture shown on the screen.

YOU ARE CORRECT in so far that this particular image is not (yet?) in the collection of mars images from the rover, why, i don't know.

But you could make this entire thing easier if your screen shot would have displayed the file name of this particular image - but it cuts off on that screen so the filename cannot be read.
edit on 7-8-2012 by flexy123 because: (no reason given)


To be honest, I'd be more excited about 2 white artifacts in a picture than a picture of a dang shadow and some rocks. Not to mention NASA put up the photo on their site but its ALL BLACK but a little sun glimpse. I have the raw photo. Its in this thread even. Yeah it's something I think we should discuss. I mean NASA blatantly covered it up. And the raw photo is for us to see

edit on 7-8-2012 by Soulece because: (no reason given)







 
100
<< 21  22  23    25  26  27 >>

log in

join