2087: "Rocket Launch"

This forum is for the individual discussion thread that goes with each new comic.

Moderators: Moderators General, Prelates, Magistrates

User avatar
Soupspoon
You have done something you shouldn't. Or are about to.
Posts: 4060
Joined: Thu Jan 28, 2016 7:00 pm UTC
Location: 53-1

2087: "Rocket Launch"

Postby Soupspoon » Wed Dec 19, 2018 7:01 pm UTC

Image

Title text: NASA tries to coordinate launch timing with the Care Bears' cloud castle, but unfortunately sometimes collisions with stray Care Bears are unavoidable, so they just try to make the fairings sturdy and hope for a glancing impact.

That looks an awful lot like my typical KSP flightpath, especially the ill-timed release of boosters from my asparagus.

User avatar
Keyman
Posts: 340
Joined: Thu Jun 19, 2014 1:56 pm UTC

Re: 2087: "Rocket Launch"

Postby Keyman » Wed Dec 19, 2018 7:13 pm UTC

I don't often LOL at these, but silencing the GPS sure did this time.
Nothing could be more ill-judged than that intolerant spirit which has, at all times, characterized political parties. - A. Hamilton

User avatar
Reka
Posts: 264
Joined: Thu Sep 20, 2012 10:21 pm UTC

Re: 2087: "Rocket Launch"

Postby Reka » Wed Dec 19, 2018 7:58 pm UTC

explainxkcd.com is failing me: can anyone explain the Care Bears reference?

User avatar
cellocgw
Posts: 2068
Joined: Sat Jun 21, 2008 7:40 pm UTC

Re: 2087: "Rocket Launch"

Postby cellocgw » Wed Dec 19, 2018 8:10 pm UTC

He left out the phase where the rocket is at risk of being eaten by a ginormous shark
resume
Former OTTer
Vote cellocgw for President 2020. #ScienceintheWhiteHouse http://cellocgw.wordpress.com
"The Planck length is 3.81779e-33 picas." -- keithl
" Earth weighs almost exactly π milliJupiters" -- what-if #146, note 7

User avatar
Heimhenge
Posts: 384
Joined: Thu May 01, 2014 11:35 pm UTC
Location: Arizona desert

Re: 2087: "Rocket Launch"

Postby Heimhenge » Wed Dec 19, 2018 8:19 pm UTC

Tried to follow the dotted line trajectories and saw he had visually "merged" the two on the last loop of the dogfight. That way the ? ? ? winner is indeed indeterminate. Nice artistic touch.

User avatar
Moose Anus
Posts: 444
Joined: Fri Oct 14, 2011 10:12 pm UTC

Re: 2087: "Rocket Launch"

Postby Moose Anus » Wed Dec 19, 2018 8:39 pm UTC

Reka wrote:explainxkcd.com is failing me: can anyone explain the Care Bears reference?
The Care Bears live in Care-A-Lot, which is also where a lot of clouds form in the atmosphere. The clouds can obscure stray Care Bears and the rocket can "accidentally" hit some due to poor visibility. In extreme cases, this effect can be mitigated by the Care Bear Stare.
Lemonade? ...Aww, ok.

User avatar
Jorpho
Posts: 6291
Joined: Wed Dec 12, 2007 5:31 am UTC
Location: Canada

Re: 2087: "Rocket Launch"

Postby Jorpho » Wed Dec 19, 2018 9:02 pm UTC

Reka wrote:explainxkcd.com is failing me: can anyone explain the Care Bears reference?

For a second there I was astonished by the longevity of Care Bears in popular culture considering the vapidity of the original subject matter, but perhaps it is not so enduring after all.

The Robot Chicken take is amusing (though displaying typical Robot Chicken levels of irreverence).
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wycARJk-Z6E

kdb
Posts: 17
Joined: Thu Aug 16, 2018 8:40 am UTC

Re: 2087: "Rocket Launch"

Postby kdb » Wed Dec 19, 2018 10:02 pm UTC

Thanks to this comic I finally found out what "care bear" means. Turns out it's the English name of what German TV called "Glücksbärchi" (lit. "Happyness Bears" or, less fitting outside Las Vegas, "Lucky Bears"). Ah good times as a child...

There's actually even a webcomic based on subvertig the series! Beware of graphic plush violence.
“Computers: a way to take three hours to do a three minute job in three seconds.” – ucim, 2019

fluffysheap
Posts: 45
Joined: Sat Sep 28, 2013 7:53 am UTC

Re: 2087: "Rocket Launch"

Postby fluffysheap » Wed Dec 19, 2018 10:27 pm UTC

Maybe this is accurate for rockets launched from Florida. Rockets launching from California instead have to avoid hitting Pegasus ponies as they fly through the Cloudsdale zone.

rmsgrey
Posts: 3655
Joined: Wed Nov 16, 2011 6:35 pm UTC

Re: 2087: "Rocket Launch"

Postby rmsgrey » Wed Dec 19, 2018 11:16 pm UTC

Heimhenge wrote:Tried to follow the dotted line trajectories and saw he had visually "merged" the two on the last loop of the dogfight. That way the ? ? ? winner is indeed indeterminate. Nice artistic touch.


To my eyes, it looks like they cross 4 times then kiss and diverge, meaning it's the boosters that lose. On that fifth encounter, I can see one track crossing, but the other then isn't smooth and has one dash forced to be out of alignment with the rest. When looking at them kissing, both tracks remain smooth.

User avatar
Soupspoon
You have done something you shouldn't. Or are about to.
Posts: 4060
Joined: Thu Jan 28, 2016 7:00 pm UTC
Location: 53-1

Re: 2087: "Rocket Launch"

Postby Soupspoon » Thu Dec 20, 2018 12:48 am UTC

The (deliberate, I'm sure) extra-wide confluence of the jinking paths could be where the lower path (four-time crossing boosters) merely scrape against the upper (final stage) and depart to their destructive end or the fifth and final victorious crossing of the ultimately jubilant boosters as they rise past the soon to be destroyed (half-)piloted craft. It's very much in the eye of the beholder, and can be either if willed to be so, at that resolution (even zoomed in).

User avatar
moody7277
Posts: 627
Joined: Thu Aug 14, 2008 7:06 pm UTC
Location: Extreme south Texas

Re: 2087: "Rocket Launch"

Postby moody7277 » Thu Dec 20, 2018 12:59 am UTC

Heimhenge wrote:Tried to follow the dotted line trajectories and saw he had visually "merged" the two on the last loop of the dogfight. That way the ? ? ? winner is indeed indeterminate. Nice artistic touch.


If you lose the dogfight, you will not go to space today.
The story of my life in xkcdmafia:

Tigerlion wrote:Well, I imagine as the game progresses, various people will be getting moody.


BoomFrog wrote:I still have no idea what town moody really looks like.

rmsgrey
Posts: 3655
Joined: Wed Nov 16, 2011 6:35 pm UTC

Re: 2087: "Rocket Launch"

Postby rmsgrey » Thu Dec 20, 2018 1:40 am UTC

Soupspoon wrote:The (deliberate, I'm sure) extra-wide confluence of the jinking paths could be where the lower path (four-time crossing boosters) merely scrape against the upper (final stage) and depart to their destructive end or the fifth and final victorious crossing of the ultimately jubilant boosters as they rise past the soon to be destroyed (half-)piloted craft. It's very much in the eye of the beholder, and can be either if willed to be so, at that resolution (even zoomed in).


I cannot get the downward crossing path to resolve as a path. I always see it as:

Code: Select all

----
    ----

needing a sharp dogleg to connect the two branches.

To be fair, the 4th crossing has the boosters' path do a similar dogleg, so it wouldn't be unprecedented. Still, particularly when zoomed in, I can only see the tracks kissing and not crossing.

User avatar
keithl
Posts: 662
Joined: Mon Aug 01, 2011 3:46 pm UTC

Re: 2087: "Rocket Launch"

Postby keithl » Thu Dec 20, 2018 4:00 am UTC

The seeming explosion is actually the spontaneous creation of an anti-booster travelling backwards in time. This is only a partial Feynman diagram of a complete launch, because it does not include quantum entanglement between KSC and LHC.

User avatar
Soupspoon
You have done something you shouldn't. Or are about to.
Posts: 4060
Joined: Thu Jan 28, 2016 7:00 pm UTC
Location: 53-1

Re: 2087: "Rocket Launch"

Postby Soupspoon » Thu Dec 20, 2018 2:48 pm UTC

Image
The leftmost crossing (the second in total) of this zoom-and-crop slice is the anomaly (anti-aliased border notably whites-out the other dash it crosses, unless the two ends were redrawn in afterwards, notably a pixel or two off-line to the ones leading in/away from them). The third cross, just after the label-arrow has signs of layering, in making the upper-pre-cross (piloted-track) slightly trapezoidal in a way not strictly matching the profile of the other (booster-track) dash. The fourth crossing doesn't have a whitening border between the dashes at all. This seems to bear the hallmarks of the white being selectively penned back in for deliberate clarity on the crosses.

The first cross (not shown, above) might even have been penned with truncated high-to-low, or swiped with dash-thickness pen of white alongside the low-to-high to make such large gaps. The second could have been done with a thinner 'nib' because otherwise it'd make the cross-path miss an entire dash. The third looks to have been poked (if layers were used, maybe even a square-brush sent in to the high-to-low path layer alone) from the bottom-left but not all the way through to top-right.

Pass four may not have been retouched, or even was retouched totally (erasing the crossing entirely, redrew the two crossing dashes individually, rather than as smooth motion of the dash-lining hand), see the hump on the upper cross-dash. But then also see the signs of pressure-bounce on the lower pre-crossing dash (in fact the three dashes leading up to crossing four from below, and some of the others, seem to verge towards being double-impacts of the pen, just close enough that their edge gradients merge). I might even hypothesise that this was originally meant to be the point of confusion.

But while there could still be a cross/non-cross confusion, it takes extra effort to map non-cross, as the tracks barely separate.

Meeting-point five has a large splodge. Looks a 'burn' mark over a 'burn' mark, which extends the significant drop-off of the AA edge (no sign of white-bordering, which would give the game away entirely whether it does a ÷ or = effect, skewed or otherwise). It might even represent a glancing blow. Though maybe we'd be forced to count dashes on each path to suggest whether one might be in front of the other (not done that yet - might not be accurately depicted that way anyway) to rule out an actual collision (leading to either element spinning out and exploding due to damage after a small delay). But if they do strike, smoothness of either path on whichever set of path-options could be complicated by inflection at the contact-point, with spall/shrapnell/whatever from the contact being included in the splodge as well.

But I still think it was deliberately obfuscated, even after whatever initial freehand tracks may have been laid down to the 'true' end results, with possible erasure and definite over-inking to touch it up just subtly enough. ;)

Spoiler:
Photo - 02018-54-20-01-54-37.jpg


Return to “Individual XKCD Comic Threads”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Mikeski and 90 guests