Faked moon launch?

[Beagle]

This time by Europeans! That photo by Reuters looks like a little toy rocket going up in the air. Anyone could do that. With all the video technology they have today…

The shadows look funny somehow…

[Q.E.D]

Sure looks like a real rocket launch to me. Model rocket motors don’t burn anywhere near hot enough to put out that much bright, white light.

[Mr.Blue_Sky]

Paging the Bad Astronomer…

Bad Astronomer, white courtesy phone…

[Ale]

Nah… they just build really neat and clean rockets.

[Pigs_in_Space]

boy, I hope I’m not getting whooshed here

This is launching a probe to the moon, with no actual people on it. Ariane-5 is a real, huge-ass rocket. I’d still hate to be on anything that took 15 months to get to the moon.

[Alereon]

Oh come on, Q.E.D., that is SOOO obviously water vapor with two flashlights shining through it. The oversaturated whites and too-intense blacks are a dead giveaway that the image contrast has been jacked up. They didn’t even bother to put the detail stickers on the middle part of the rocket! See the red “Remove before launch” tag on the right tower, just hanging there? There’s a price tag on the side of the launch complex, too. $23.99, I think. $23 is clearly visible with a little sharpening, and the .99 is probably hidden by the plastic piece behind the rocket. The lack of detail on the flags is clearly an artifact of poor resolution on the logo stickers.

[El_Cid_Viscoso]

It’s kind of pathetic – they expect us to believe anything. They type it up on the AP News and we’re supposed to swallow it hook line and sinker.

…the probe will travel 120 million “kilometres” on only 60 “litres” of fuel…

and

…SMART 1 weighs only 387 “kilogrammes”…

and this pretty one

The total bill has come to just 110 million “euro”, and that also takes account of launch fees.

They’re not even translating it right or something. Next they’ll tell us it’s propelled by ion drive or some sech shiznit. It’s a good thing we saved their asses in WWII because even though this launch is just a big scam, it’s even more entertaining than that Chunnel yarn. 2LMAO

[umop_ap_sdn]

Hmmm… what am I missing? It looks real enough to me.

For the flames shooting out the bottom to be that white, they’d have to be very very hot and hence very very bright. Let me tell you from experience that trying to photograph a high contrast scene (such as a rocket launch or in my case, a sunset) is very very difficult.

LOL - good one about the flashlights! Because of course flashlight filaments don’t run hot enough to look that white.

And anyway the cloud of smoke issuing from the underside would scatter the light roughly the same way it appears in the photograph.

Or maybe the ESA saw our little Moon hoax and decided to stage one of their own.

[AncientHumanoid]

15 months to get to the moon?

What feaky ass kind of orbit would that need?

'Cause, you can’t just point it at the moon and let it crawl out there. Right? Apollo got to the Moon by achieving escape velocity.

[umop_ap_sdn]

My best guess is that the 15 month mission has to do with expending a minimal amount of fuel. It’d be nice if they put orbital elements in the news stories so us intellectual types would have a better understanding of the matter!

[Necromancer]

Those Europeans will eventually be caught out for faking it, just like NASA was.

[jjimm]

Escape velocity is puzzling me - the papers are saying the thrust is equivalent to the weight of a postcard on earth… Doesn’t it have to travel at ~25,000 mph to get out of Earth’s gravity.

BTW I’m not a doubter - the OP is clearly a joke, people - just wondering how it works.

[Brutus]

I always wondered what is meant by ‘escape velocity is ~25,000 mph’. Couldn’t you escape gravity by going at a plodding 1 mph, assuming fuel and all that were not a factor?

Anyways, it is well know that Europe lacks the technology to have launched a ‘rocket-ship’ on their own. I would guess alien involvement is what made this launch possible.

[Liberal]

I think it’s a fake. If you look closely at a blow-up of the picture, there’s something not quite right about it.

[Brutus]

Heh.

[jjimm]

Arf!

[Liberal]

Brutus

I always wondered what is meant by ‘escape velocity is ~25,000 mph’. Couldn’t you escape gravity by going at a plodding 1 mph, assuming fuel and all that were not a factor?

It’s not just a matter of the speed, it’s also the energy. See this.

[Desmostylus]

The most pertinent part of your cite, Lib, is this:

In a stable orbit, with orbital velocity, gravity no longer threatens to bring down the vehicle, it just determines its orbit. From that point on, one can apply thrust at any rate. There is a story of a communication satellite (I think of NASA’s TDRSS system) which made Earth orbit safely, but the engine which was to take it to its final orbit at 42000 kilometers (6.6 Earth radii) failed. However the spacecraft had plenty of on-board fuel, and a small motor meant to adjust its orientation, which was able to tap that fuel supply. So over the months that followed, guided by NASA controllers (the motor had to be switched on and off to prevent overheating), it slowly limped to its final station, reaching it safely.

That is probably as close as we have come to your “one mph” motion.

And, because this is the Pit:

Brutus may be correct on this, but even a stopped clock is occasionally correct.

[Brutus]

*Originally posted by Desmostylus *
**The most pertinent part of your cite, Lib, is this:And, because this is the Pit:

Brutus may be correct on this, but even a stopped clock is occasionally correct. **

A) Excellent. I know have all of the information I need to build my own ‘space dirigible’. Most excellent…

B) Being correct twice a day isn’t too bad Desmo.

[Brutus]

P.S. Excellent cite/site, Libertarian. There used to be a ‘Ask Dr. Somethingerother’ at NASA, that was similiar, but is long gone methinks.