4 ms·

So I wanted to take a look at the actual craft they built, but all I can find are a bunch of nice CGI animations. Usually there are photos of the fully assembl

So I wanted to take a look at the actual craft they built, but all I can find are a bunch of nice CGI animations. Usually there are photos of the fully assembled satellite sitting in a test lab somewhere prior to launch. Anyone have a link to actual pictures of the probe? Also -- what's happening to science when more and more articles seem to have CGI artists renditions instead of pictures of the real thing. I get that those with ADHD need some stimulation to keep them interested in science funding -- but as a skeptic I find the boring "real" photos far more interesting. It's getting harder to tell real programs from fictional programs with clickbait titles and pretty graphics i.e. "NASA has designs for a working warp drive" /rant edit: OK so I finally found an image of the final assembled satellite prior to launch here [0] [0] https://pbs.twimg.com/media/GL2pPKZW4AAXK1P?format=jpg&name=large https://pbs.twimg.com/media/GL2pPKZW4AAXK1P?format=jpg&name=...

cbsks 2y ago
I found a few pictures: https://www.nasa.gov/mission/acs3/ https://www.nasa.gov/mission/acs3/ https://www.nasa.gov/smallspacecraft/what-is-acs3/ https://www.nasa.gov/smallspacecraft/what-is-acs3/
- lordfrito 2y ago
  Thanks for this, no photo of the completed satellite but it's something. It's a shame you have to dig deeper into the NASA website to find the images-- should be on the main mission page.
  - Out_of_Characte 2y ago
    >no photo of the completed sattelite That's the completed sattelite in the second link. The 'solid' booms are very similar to how a tape measure rolls out and remains rigid. Solar spacecraft are half sail by mass and half sattelite.
d4mi3n 2y ago
I realize you said it in jest, but as someone with ADHD generalizations like this hurt. Many of us love science and we have enough day to day difficulties to contend with. That said, I can think of a few reasons for not releasing a photo: 1. Solar sails are flimsily and fragile. The photo would likely not be representative of the craft in action. 2. The labs building these things may not have a professional photographer available. 3. A prototype craft might just look like junk. Wouldn’t be surprised if they want to iterate on the design a bit before they solidify the public’s vision of what a solar sailing craft looks like.
- lordfrito 2y ago
  > as someone with ADHD generalizations like this hurt Apologies -- I was mainly referring to the "overstimulated generation" of kids and their effect on media becoming more clickbaity with fancy/fake images. It was a poor choice of mine to summarize this idea using the word ADHD.
digging 2y ago
> It's getting harder to tell real programs from fictional programs ...Is this a real concern of yours? I've never experienced such ambiguity
mrguyorama 2y ago
>Also -- what's happening to science when more and more articles seem to have CGI artists renditions instead of pictures of the real thing I'm sorry for joining the pile-on but why do you believe this is "new"? Artists interpretations and renderings have been the norm for space media since before NASA. It makes sense, since it's so hard to get the film crew out to Jupiter, and the craft all folded up on it's launch platform is usually less interesting to normal people than seeing the instrument as it will be in space >but as a skeptic... It's getting harder to tell real programs... working warp drive Skeptic? I promise you that everything put onto a rocket is real. Keep in mind that every single project anyone has ever had to get funding for will inevitably have a CGI rendering or artists interpretation because you need something to put on the first powerpoint slide when you pitch it to the funding board. This is not limited to NASA
dylan604 2y ago
>Also -- what's happening to science when more and more articles seem to have CGI artists renditions In case you weren't aware, pretty much everything in advertising in a render as well. If the car is not moving in a commercial shot from a camera car/drone, it's more than likely 3D rendered. Those close up interior shots or the camera zooming from outside to the interior, yup, those are 3D rendered. A large portion of product shots (like furniture) online are 3D rendered as well. This has been happening for a long time too

cbsks 2y ago

I found a few pictures: https://www.nasa.gov/mission/acs3/ https://www.nasa.gov/mission/acs3/ https://www.nasa.gov/smallspacecraft/what-is-acs3/ https://www.nasa.gov/smallspacecraft/what-is-acs3/

lordfrito 2y ago
Thanks for this, no photo of the completed satellite but it's something. It's a shame you have to dig deeper into the NASA website to find the images-- should be on the main mission page.
- Out_of_Characte 2y ago
  >no photo of the completed sattelite That's the completed sattelite in the second link. The 'solid' booms are very similar to how a tape measure rolls out and remains rigid. Solar spacecraft are half sail by mass and half sattelite.

d4mi3n 2y ago

I realize you said it in jest, but as someone with ADHD generalizations like this hurt. Many of us love science and we have enough day to day difficulties to contend with. That said, I can think of a few reasons for not releasing a photo: 1. Solar sails are flimsily and fragile. The photo would likely not be representative of the craft in action. 2. The labs building these things may not have a professional photographer available. 3. A prototype craft might just look like junk. Wouldn’t be surprised if they want to iterate on the design a bit before they solidify the public’s vision of what a solar sailing craft looks like.

lordfrito 2y ago
> as someone with ADHD generalizations like this hurt Apologies -- I was mainly referring to the "overstimulated generation" of kids and their effect on media becoming more clickbaity with fancy/fake images. It was a poor choice of mine to summarize this idea using the word ADHD.

digging 2y ago

> It's getting harder to tell real programs from fictional programs ...Is this a real concern of yours? I've never experienced such ambiguity

mrguyorama 2y ago

>Also -- what's happening to science when more and more articles seem to have CGI artists renditions instead of pictures of the real thing I'm sorry for joining the pile-on but why do you believe this is "new"? Artists interpretations and renderings have been the norm for space media since before NASA. It makes sense, since it's so hard to get the film crew out to Jupiter, and the craft all folded up on it's launch platform is usually less interesting to normal people than seeing the instrument as it will be in space >but as a skeptic... It's getting harder to tell real programs... working warp drive Skeptic? I promise you that everything put onto a rocket is real. Keep in mind that every single project anyone has ever had to get funding for will inevitably have a CGI rendering or artists interpretation because you need something to put on the first powerpoint slide when you pitch it to the funding board. This is not limited to NASA

dylan604 2y ago

>Also -- what's happening to science when more and more articles seem to have CGI artists renditions In case you weren't aware, pretty much everything in advertising in a render as well. If the car is not moving in a commercial shot from a camera car/drone, it's more than likely 3D rendered. Those close up interior shots or the camera zooming from outside to the interior, yup, those are 3D rendered. A large portion of product shots (like furniture) online are 3D rendered as well. This has been happening for a long time too