Artemis 2 launch - humans return to the Moon after 54 years

[PeterDonis]

You sure the sun is behind the Earth in this pic?

Yes.

Remarkable colour photography of night-side

That's because that version of the photo was put through an enhancement algorithm to brighten the night side. Here's what it looked like before that was done:

https://www.nasa.gov/image-detail/amf-art002e000193/

More usually we would be seeing city lights.

You can see them in the image I linked to above.

 

[Ken Fabian]

@PeterDonis - Colour me surprised; I was thinking it might be a composite image - the thin crescent and some glow further out indicating light from behind. I didn't realise night time pictures could be enhanced like that.

 

[PeterDonis]

I didn't realise night time pictures could be enhanced like that.

I suspect the enhancement algorithm made use of outside knowledge about what Earth looks like from space--for example, what clouds look like, what Africa looks like, etc--to help in making the enhanced image look realistic, even if not all of that information was in the original image.

 

[PeroK]

I suspect the enhancement algorithm made use of outside knowledge about what Earth looks like from space--for example, what clouds look like, what Africa looks like, etc--to help in making the enhanced image look realistic, even if not all of that information was in the original image.

Plenty of grist for the conspiracy mill!

 

[jurica_c]

Have humans ever landed on the Moon?

 

[Ken Fabian]

So... like a composite image but not?

 

[PeroK]

So... like a composite image but not?

It's a spectacular image, but it's essentially fake. It's not what the crew saw. This raises the question of what is allowable as enhancement or alteration before you have to declare something as "synthetic".

 

[Klystron]

Have humans ever landed on the Moon?

Well I met Buzz Aldrin a few times when I worked at NASA Ames. He definitely appeared human. Not as sure about Neil Armstrong <joke>. He might be super-human.

 

[Jonathan Scott]

It's a spectacular image, but it's essentially fake. It's not what the crew saw. This raises the question of what is allowable as enhancement or alteration before you have to declare something as "synthetic".

The human eye adapts well to darkness, although it doesn't see colour well at low light intensity. The earth was lit by full moonlight. If I just save the darker image and "auto-adjust" colour I get quite a similar result, although the available copy of the darker image is lower resolution, so I don't get all the detail.

 

[russ_watters]

It's a spectacular image, but it's essentially fake. It's not what the crew saw. This raises the question of what is allowable as enhancement or alteration before you have to declare something as "synthetic".

Nah, if that were true it would mean basically all astrophotos are "fake". They are brightened to the limit of available data. They might have 65,000 levels of brightness (16bit) and only use the bottom few hundred for most. Plus the dynamic range is huge. Solar eclipse photos might be half a dozen different exposures in a composite.

Though if you were led to believe "this is what they saw" that would be misleading.

 

[berkeman]

Plenty of grist for the conspiracy mill!

Have humans ever landed on the Moon?

Just a friendly reminder that PF is a science forum and conspiracy theory nonsense does not belong here. Enough said (hopefully).

 

[sbrothy]

The name Orion had me confused for a second until I looked it up. I was 97% sure we weren't talking about the old type of Orion but in these days it's hard to know anything for sure. Exciting. A lot of stuff is going on right now...

EDIT: Also, looking at the funding as according to Wiki, it doesn't even look that expensive. Relatively I better qualify it with. I'm guessing the dream is to bring boosting material into orbit cheaper.

 

[Filip Larsen]

Artemis II is going so well that we’re left to talk about frozen urine

Along those lines of humor and considering Artemis 2 is officially not landing on the Moon, NASA probably should prepare to handle questions from conspiracy theorists about "which secret base on Moon they actually landed on" or similar lunacy.

 

[sbrothy]

Artemis II is going so well that we’re left to talk about frozen urine

Along those lines of humor and considering Artemis 2 is officially not landing on the Moon, NASA probably should prepare to handle questions from conspiracy theorists about "which secret base on Moon they actually landed on" or similar lunacy.

Heh, "lunacy".

 

[bob012345]

Heh, "lunacy".

I call it a Moondoggle.

 

[Astronuc]

Still unclear to me. I get the moon base, but what specifically is this mission's goal? Simply a starting point to prove we can fly around it again?

Artemis I was an unmanned test flight to test various systems and regain experience. Artemis II is the first manned flight in 54 years. It tests the same systems, but now also crew/life support systems. The idea would be to test all the systems to root out any issues/problems and fix before committing to a lunar landing.

It's a similar process with nuclear reactors and plants in which testing (i.e., pre-startup testing, e.g., hydrostatic testing, control systems testing) is performed well before initial criticality. One performs 'cold' and 'hot' testing. After criticality is achieved, power ascension is performed in steps (with holds) to ensure the system behaves as expected (based on sophisticated simulations; power (flux) distribution mapping is performed; control systems are tested). It can takes days/weeks of testing before full power is achieved.

One can also consider testing of new aircraft or marine systems.

Searching Google with "shakedown cruise", Google AI returns:

A shakedown cruise is a final, intensive testing phase for a new or recently repaired ship, submarine, or spacecraft before it enters regular service. It serves as a stress test to evaluate systems, allow the crew to familiarize themselves with the vessel, and fix issues at minimal cost.

NBC News interview with the Artemis II crew
https://www.nbcnews.com/science/spa...interview-space-moon-far-side-nasa-rcna266564

Noticeable is the delay in the conversation between the crew and terrestrial interviewer.

 

[DennisN]

Some more media:

FULL LAUNCH: Artemis II is first mission to the moon in 53 years (Fox 13 Seattle)

NASA’s Artemis II mission lifted off at 6:35 p.m. EDT from Kennedy Space Center’s Launch Complex 39B, sending four astronauts aboard the Space Launch System rocket and Orion spacecraft on a journey around the Moon, officials said.

Artemis 2 crew goes live with Earth on their way to the Moon (VideoFromSpace)

Artemis 2 commander Reid Wiseman, pilot Victor Glover and mission specialists Christina Koch and Jeremy Hansen talk to ABC and Fox news shortly after their Trans-Lunar Injection burn that set them on a course for the moon.

 

[neilparker62]

Similar to the goal of Apollo 8, as compared to Apollo 11.

(And to date myself, I watched Apollo 11 on TV as a preschooler--a small black and white TV. I still remember seeing how the astronauts hopped around on the Moon.)

ditto from Nairobi, Kenya!

 

[DennisN]

Wow, what a photo!

Quote: "Christina Koch peers out of one of the Orion spacecraft’s cabin windows at Earth, as the crew travels towards the moon. Photograph: AP"

Source: Artemis II astronauts expected to reach far side of moon on Monday
(The Guardian)

 

[DennisN]

A bunch of nice photos here:

Nasa’s Orion spaceship four days into Artemis II mission: in pictures (The Guardian)
https://www.theguardian.com/artandd...rion-spaceship-artemis-ii-mission-in-pictures

Examples:

"The exterior of the spacecraft
Photograph: AP"

"Commander Reid Wiseman looks at the Earth from a window onboard.
Photograph: AP"

"A view of Earth taken by Wiseman from one of the spacecraft’s four windows, after completing the translunar injection burn
Photograph: AP"