Hacker News Reader

Comment by woliveirajr | Hacker News Reader

After SpaceX, I always expect to see live cams. Of course, that would just add weight and complexity without relevant benefits except the entertainement... but being entertained is fun :-)

View on HN

Getting more publicity and public support and get the science much further in the mid to long term. Its a legitimate consideration to make imo. Were not bound by rocket capacity as much as we are by public support & funding.

Certainly helps with their next set of grant proposals.

I think that proper science communication and marketing is crucial, at the same time, it is very difficult to explain with numbers and graphs, while it is so much easier with multispectral imaging (see the success of Hubble and the Mars images).

It makes absolute sense. Our perception system is a giant Filter. Providing more information to it by emtion-provoking images rather than abstract, low info graphs seems logical to achieve higher retainaince and presence in people

Entertainment = Money. People will support things that give them a good time. Just look at the Hollywood.

Certainly a peculiar relationship. Your post made me wonder when the first dogecoin private key will reach escape velocity. Any bets? I think we can agree that the "if" and "who" is already settled...

Assuming signals move through fiber optic cables at 69% of c, it has already been done.

A similar argument could be made for a key being transmitted via radio signal that has slipped out to space.

Live cam data can be useful in analysis of failures.

What can a camera tell you that more sensors couldn't?

I’m not remotely an expert, but cameras have a much larger coverage area than any sensor could.

And I assume a sensor can tell you “this piece stopped talking” but a camera in right place could tell you “because it fell off when a screw fell out”, so presumably they’re complementary.

Video of the SRB leak just prior to the Challenger disaster was quite useful after the fact.

Also, the video of the foam chunk hitting the Columbia's wing.

An early Falcon 1 launch failed because the first stage recontacted the second after staging. You'll note one of the F9 cameras is looking up at the second stage from inside the first stage's interstage section.

The Columbia case is a better example than the Challenger case, because they actually caught that right after launch and analyzed it, though incorrectly.

Well, the analysis at the engineering level was correct. Problem is, the engineers weren't allowed to confirm it. That was a management decision, made on the grounds that, "There's nothing we can do".

A camera is a sensor.

A camera is a tool for rendering light on a medium. That medium could be a sensor. Rendered light can tell you a lot about what the medium is facing, but you can pack a lot more sensors than cameras on to a spacecraft. Especially on the parts that aren't illuminated. Besides, you need a big sensor on a camera to capture anything in low light without a lot of expensive processing, and that means you need shielding and cooling because they get hot and don't do well in all that radiation.

So sure. You could put huge chips in hot boxes with delicate glass all over the craft. Or could you wire in a bundle of little sensors that tell you stuff you'd never get from light.

Probably doesn't matter much for this one as it is the last Ariane 5 launch (afaik). Maybe they can get cameras on the 6.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com