Gravity (Movie)

[Holo]

That would make a good drinking game for Armageddon

Yeah, but then you'd die of alcohol poisoning.

I chekced, and armageddon was the movie they used for NASA training.

[Nibb31]

I wonder what the Shuttle is doing conducting an EVA in proximity of the ISS without being docked, while a Russian is also doing an EVA at the same time.

Edited May 11, 2013 by Nibb31

[Agent30632]

This sounds like a good movie, might go watch it.

Even if there are many scientific errors, like, 1 quick explosion equaling the whole station re-entering. And other stuff

[SunJumper]

This sounds like a good movie, might go watch it.

Even if there are many scientific errors, like, 1 quick explosion equaling the whole station re-entering. And other stuff

I think, that if an enemy nation sent up a perfectly timed object on a sub-orbital trajectory, they could have the object give most bits of the station enough delta-v to re-enter.

[tygoo7]

When the shuttle first gets hit and it shows her WHY IS THERE A RAT/MOUSE IN THE HELMET???

[TheCanadianVendingMachine]

How long before the first KSP spoof of this trailer?

I thought this WAS a spoof of KSP.

[mushroomman]

Yeah I'll probably watch this. But I can tell that for whatever the reason, I'm not going to like it. There might be some other reasons, but I mostly just don't like watching astronauts suffer.

[Emilio]

Wait, wouldn't that guy die after touching a solar array? They pack quite a lot of volts...

It looks interesting anways, now to wait until it airs in my country

[Nikolai]

Wait, wouldn't that guy die after touching a solar array? They pack quite a lot of volts...

No, for much the same reason that birds don't die from perching on high-tension power lines. What's relevant is not the amount of volts at a particular point, but the difference in voltage across a bridge that can conduct electricity. If that difference is small across that bridge, there will be negligible current flow.

[RedDwarfIV]

TOPO wasn't doing his job that day, it seems.

There's a box the size of a football field [not sure is british or American football] around the ISS which, if objects are going to enter it, means the ISS will be moved to avoid said object. I'm not sure how NASA's tracking facility could have missed a whole shower of objects.

[Kerbface]

TOPO wasn't doing his job that day, it seems.

There's a box the size of a football field [not sure is british or American football] around the ISS which, if objects are going to enter it, means the ISS will be moved to avoid said object. I'm not sure how NASA's tracking facility could have missed a whole shower of objects.

The size of a football field? Isn't that what the ISS itself is supposed to be the size of? It's not very big, something going many times faster than a bullet, as you do with orbital velocity, would pass through such an area long before the ISS could move.

[stupid_chris]

The size of a football field? Isn't that what the ISS itself is supposed to be the size of? It's not very big, something going many times faster than a bullet, as you do with orbital velocity, would pass through such an area long before the ISS could move.

Indeed, it's larger. IIRC, the box is 5km downwind and upwind, and 1km above and below.

[RedDwarfIV]

The size of a football field? Isn't that what the ISS itself is supposed to be the size of? It's not very big, something going many times faster than a bullet, as you do with orbital velocity, would pass through such an area long before the ISS could move.

Oh yeah.

The box was more like 25 football fields.

[Tex_NL]

Funny that nobody spotted an 'in your face' error.

It is of course a cinematic liberty to keep the astronauts faces visible but a true astronaut would never look towards the sun with a clear visor. It would burn out their retina's in mere seconds.

[RedDwarfIV]

Funny that nobody spotted an 'in your face' error.

It is of course a cinematic liberty to keep the astronauts faces visible but a true astronaut would never look towards the sun with a clear visor. It would burn out their retina's in mere seconds.

From http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/InSpaceEveryoneCanSeeYourFace

In media depicting characters in environments requiring protective helmets, such as space or underwater, those helmets will be equipped with lights that illuminate the wearer's face. If you did this in real life, the wearer would most likely find that all they can see is their face reflected in the glass.

A variation, seen in the few science-fiction media that make some attempt at scientific accuracy, is to avoid the lights, but also omit the highly reflective metallic coating applied to the visors of real spacesuits. (It should be noted, though, that the reflective visors on real spacesuits are often retracted when not looking the direction of the Sun; case in pointâ—Š.) Such scenes would often require contrived lighting. Then again, "contrived lighting" has been a staple of filmmaking for ages.

Just thought I'd put this here to add to your statement.

[iDan122]

If you peope are wondering why the ISS reentered it is not because of the meteorite attacks. I did some research and it said that it is because(true story) the ISS is to be decommissioned in 2020 and their mission was to deorbiting it and get the hell out( get in the Soyuz'es/shuttle , undock and prepaid for reentry).

[deadshot462]

iDan - thanks for the info, it looked like that. The new clips below show the ISS in a deteriorating/abandoned state, which goes along with the de-orbit plot.

The CGI is incredible, it looks quite realistic. So much for that Hubble. Apparently the movie will be like this, without sound in space, the marketing guys added sounds to the original trailer.

I hope that one day Kerbals can "grapple" onto other kerbals in case one runs out of RCS fuel. That would be cool way to rescue them.

Edited July 26, 2013 by deadshot462

[MinerEdgar]

I HAVE to see this movie!

[Nikolai]

I wonder if that "Detached" trailer (thatk you, deadshot462) gives an answer to NovaSilisko's question about why Sandra was ordered to detach, even though it would seem to fling her further away. Here's the order of relevant events as it appears to me in one, continuous take:

1. Sandra complains that her clip is stuck after being ordered to get inside.

2. Debris separates the RMS from the Explorer. For the first few seconds after separation, it seems like Sandra is the most massive part of the new rotating system -- the center of rotation is close to her. Then the camera moves to emphasize her motion and show her disorientation.

3. George orders her to detach, telling her that "the arm will take you too far". He may have seen that the center of mass of the system was moving away too fast, and was hoping that Sandra would time her unclipping to fling herself back towards him so that she would have a shot at rescue.

4. Between Sandra's disorientation, panic, and stuck clip, she releases at the wrong time instead, flinging herself further away -- at least, based on the camera angle, it seems that way.

Is that a rationalization too far? Anyone?

[Agent30632]

I'm hearing audio clips from the movie at the official movie website: http://gravitymovie.warnerbros.com/

And I'm guessing the "DEBRIS IMPACT" timer is when we get another trailer?

[Jones-250]

I'm guessing they may be implying that the explosion is what is de-orbiting it.

That's a lot of Delta-V in one quick burst, but I'm willing to accept it in a movie plot.

But that's only a 90 second clip of a larger story, so well see.

Stealing my toughts, eh? I´ll fix a quick end to that sort of behaviour.

How long before the first KSP spoof of this trailer?

A long time ago (5.07.2013), well before you were able to ask that question.

[Mr Shifty]

Wait, so in the Detached clip, they're at Hubble. And in the I've Got You clip, they're at the ISS. Their current orbits have a relative inclination difference of about 23 degrees and Hubble is about 100 miles higher than ISS. There's no way you could transit between the two with the spacesuit SAFER's ~3 m/s, or even the discontinued MMU's ~25 m/s.

EDIT: It would take about 42 m/s just to lower your periapsis to ISS's altitude from Hubble's orbit. Then, if you managed to set your Pe right at ISS's AN or DN and were able to time it to the microsecond to reach that point exactly when the ISS did, your relative velocity would be around 3 km/s just due to the difference in inclination, which means you'd smash into the ISS at ~6,700 mph.

Edited July 26, 2013 by Mr Shifty

[Guest Aaack]

I've saw the first trailer last week when I saw Pacific Rim, I've saw it in 3d, not IMAX. However it was like:

Awwww nostalgia, the shuttle <3

Then

WOW, very realistic and beautiful!

Then

WTF! massive debris shower!!

then

AAAAAHHH THE CHAOS!

and then

I NEED TO SEE THIS MOVIE NOWWWWW

yep, I'm the perfect target audience for this kind of movie, I may start to wonder things the second time but the first it was a senses overload so intense I forgot to breath!

[Nikolai]

Wait, so in the Detached clip, they're at Hubble. And in the I've Got You clip, they're at the ISS.

I'm thinking this is supposed to happen in some alternate universe where there was a shuttle named Explorer.

[Awaras]

Here's the extended trailer as well:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uuMU2q00w3I