August 22nd, 2012
12:00 PM ET

Watch Curiosity land, in HD

The @MarsCuriosity team has released a beautiful, high-definition video of the Curiosity rover landing on the surface of Mars on August 6. This is no simulation: it's a rover's-eye-view of the Red Planet's surface zooming up to meet it.

Need to catch up on the details of the latest mission to Mars? Check out all our Curiosity coverage!


Filed under: Mars
soundoff (125 Responses)
  1. newsmoves

    there is some cool maps and photos of curiousity as it makes its way to mount sharp on here http://newsmoves.com/curiosity-continues-to-search-for-the-red-planets-secrets/

    August 4, 2013 at 2:18 pm |
  2. hdtv

    Great beat ! I would like to apprentice at the same time as you amend your site, how can i subscribe for a weblog website? The account aided me a acceptable deal. I have been tiny bit familiar of this your broadcast offered bright clear idea

    August 22, 2012 at 8:52 pm |
  3. interested_to_know

    Anyone wonder why we have not gone back to the moon.... hmmm (scratching chin here). Conspiracy or not, this is a great accomplishment for mankind. I do hope that these image(s)/video(s) are real and hope to see a human reach mars one day (I'm 30 now, lets see what happens in the next 20 years).

    August 22, 2012 at 5:39 pm |
    • WW_Dagger

      We've been to the moon 6 times. That's 6 more times than any other country. We haven't been back because the main reason we went (were able to go) the first six times was national pride and public support. It was a space race during the cold war back then and NASA only gets money when the public rallies to spend tax dollars on them. Besides, we've learned mostly everything we think we can learn from landing on the moon. Dollars spend going to Mars will be much more valuable.

      August 22, 2012 at 5:49 pm |
  4. cjbigcat

    Come on NASA, we want to see more pictures of dirt, rocks, and pieces of our tax paid wonder machine flying off into space.

    August 22, 2012 at 5:34 pm |
    • WW_Dagger

      So, I think you are talking about Obama's budget plan, not NASA right?

      August 22, 2012 at 5:40 pm |
    • WW_Dagger

      Besides, the AVERAGE american only paid about $8 total in taxes for this Mars mission. If we all resisted stuffing our fat faces by just one McDonnalds meal, we could send another!

      August 22, 2012 at 6:04 pm |
  5. Mars or bust

    Learning about the Curiosity project – and seeing video like this – fills me with awe and pride for the team of NASA engineers that developed this program. In comparison, it is shameful how uninspired, uninformed and intellectually lazy some of the commenters are here.

    August 22, 2012 at 5:16 pm |
  6. c

    I love it when pentecostal science/technology illiterates step on their di–s.

    August 22, 2012 at 4:47 pm |
  7. KJK

    Can someone explain to me how this video can be sent back to earth so quickly from a place that I believe is light years away and look almost flawless yet I can't even make a decent cell phone call?

    August 22, 2012 at 4:27 pm |
    • Randy

      Mars is not "light years away." At its minimum, Mars is about 35 million miles away (3 minutes for FM signal to reach us) and at its maximum, it is about 220 million miles (19 minutes).

      August 22, 2012 at 4:36 pm |
    • Rhinodaddy

      KJK – Your preception of distance is way off. If it were lightyears away, the rover would not have landed before your great-great-grandchildren were dead and buried.

      August 22, 2012 at 4:36 pm |
    • Damon

      I bet if you paid $235B for your phone bill, you'd get better reception.

      August 22, 2012 at 4:41 pm |
      • WW_Dagger

        Actually, it cost NASA 2.5 billion dollars... compare that to AT&T's 18 billion dollars they spent on cell towers alone last year.
        Now think about that... NASA can beam high def video from a remote controlled car that it landed on another planet for nearly a tenth of what AT&T uses to send crappy phone signals that I can't even get in my bathroom from a tower 9 miles away. Folks, this is why NASA should run everything.

        August 22, 2012 at 5:02 pm |
      • intothemoonbeam

        WW_Dagger for the win!

        August 22, 2012 at 5:08 pm |
      • intothemoonbeam

        And just to add on to WW_Dagger point on how great NASA is. NASA currently has a spacecraft on the way to Pluto called "New horizons" it will reach Pluto in 2015. At it's closest distance Pluto is 4.2 billion miles from Earth and when New horizons reaches Pluto it will also beam back photos. So yeah, NASA rocks!

        August 22, 2012 at 5:17 pm |
    • Davcenmt2

      Well mars is actually ~0.0000007605 light years away. (~4 min for light to travel from earth to mars)

      August 22, 2012 at 4:46 pm |
    • Dan

      It is not light years away for starters.

      August 22, 2012 at 4:51 pm |
    • T Ciccone

      They had a number of days to return this data–it wasn't transmitted all at once. Still, it's a spectacular accomplishment.

      August 22, 2012 at 5:02 pm |
  8. wizard2399

    Awesome. 235 milion miles from here.

    August 22, 2012 at 4:16 pm |
  9. NoTerrorHere

    We're just now seeing this due to the thousands of man hours going through footage frame by frame to make sure no anomalies were in the video. Can't have the general joe public seeing an alien or proof of prior civilizations.

    August 22, 2012 at 4:10 pm |
    • snowboarder

      isn't the reason the rover is there to look for life? wouldn't that be proof of a successful mission?

      conspiracy theory logic is no logic at all.

      August 22, 2012 at 4:21 pm |
    • kingkong

      Notice the props from the "mary poppins" movie in the 33rd frame? This was made on earth. Case Closed.

      August 22, 2012 at 5:03 pm |
  10. Dan

    Looks like El Paso.

    August 22, 2012 at 4:06 pm |
    • Conspiracy

      That's funny. The video footage looks almost authentic. Too bad it's all computer-aided animation created in a government-owned laboratory.

      August 22, 2012 at 4:19 pm |
    • Yadawsurendrakumar

      I've always thhugot of LR for rich snobs .until I owned one. My LR2 is unbelievable in a foot or more of snow and can get up to 25 mpg highway when you follow the speed limit (60-65mph). I am blue colar and got a great deal on a used 2008 model for $27,000 with only 12K miles .I feel so sorry for any idiot who pays $30K+ for a Ford Edge.

      September 13, 2012 at 1:34 am |
  11. james

    There ain't no Martians on Mars, no flying saucers either, you might as well go to Jupiter. Forget looking at rocks there's nothing there.

    August 22, 2012 at 4:05 pm |
    • Jim

      yeah....let's sit on our a$$es as we consume all the resources on this planet.....and let's be satisfied with not knowing and not going out there to find out more....because james says so....

      August 22, 2012 at 4:08 pm |
    • intothemoonbeam

      Imagine if the European explorers from 500 years ago went by the same logic as James.

      August 22, 2012 at 4:25 pm |
  12. Reemo

    Now that was awesome!

    This is something that should definitely excite the general population. Lately, the only thing we get from NASA is a grainy picture of the night sky with a caption saying, "This pixel here is an earth-like planet 20 lightyears away!! Actually, it's too close to it's star to be habitable, so it's really more of a 'Mercury-like' planet, It's also too far to reach in our lifetime so we'll probably never set foot on it...sorry for wasting your time." And other times we'll get artists' renditions of what a galaxy WON'T look like through the eyes of an average human (you know, the ones with solar flares and ambient lighting shooting all over the place).

    But THIS right here...this is awesome. Bravo people! Looking forward to seeing more of what's to come!

    August 22, 2012 at 3:49 pm |
  13. JA

    awesome video, i was hoping they would release more of the landing. just stunning!

    August 22, 2012 at 3:41 pm |
  14. Alaska

    What a lame video, can't believe I wasted my time watching it. Also no life on Mars, and never will be, big waste of time.

    August 22, 2012 at 3:37 pm |
    • JA

      coming from someone who lives in Alaska, figures

      August 22, 2012 at 3:40 pm |
    • snowboarder

      with your astounding knowledge of mars, i wonder why the scientists at nasa didn't consult with you.

      August 22, 2012 at 3:41 pm |
    • intothemoonbeam

      Sarah Palin is that you?

      August 22, 2012 at 3:46 pm |
    • Robert

      Such astounding scientific conclusions from Alaska. How about on the next journey to Mars they take along Sarah Palin.You know, she can see Mars from her front porch! You Betcha!

      August 22, 2012 at 3:53 pm |
    • Sagan

      What's it like being so stupid, Alaska?

      August 22, 2012 at 4:02 pm |
    • sbp

      The question was never if there ever WOULD be life on Mars (and yes, if we land a person there, there will be). It was if there ever WAS. How did that concept escape you?

      August 22, 2012 at 4:28 pm |
    • Dan

      There is a good possibility that there was life there, there might be life now, and there definitely will be life there in about 20 years.

      August 22, 2012 at 4:56 pm |
  15. dave

    I made this look pretty real didn't i? suckers

    August 22, 2012 at 3:17 pm |
  16. ThatSummersGuy

    Reblogged this on thatsummersguy and commented:
    Very, very cool vid of Curiosity landing on the surface of Mars.

    August 22, 2012 at 3:13 pm |
  17. cptpooppants

    That was awesome. Can't wait until we send people there. Too bad people can't appreciate just how difficult this is to do.

    August 22, 2012 at 3:12 pm |
  18. Franco

    I just had an orgasm.....

    August 22, 2012 at 2:55 pm |
  19. JacktheKling-on

    We've finally done it!!! We have managed to take billion dollar pictures of dirt and rocks. Landing on the moon was a novelty, spending billions to land on Mars is a travesty.

    August 22, 2012 at 2:46 pm |
    • intothemoonbeam

      You know that NASA is only 0.5% of the entire National Budget? If you are complain about how funds are spent then take it out on the Military who spends over 700 billion a year on pointless wars. Or how about the bank bailouts which cost more than the entire 50+ year running budget of NASA.

      August 22, 2012 at 2:49 pm |
      • KikaiderX

        Right On! Jack is an ill-informed buffoon.

        August 22, 2012 at 2:56 pm |
      • wow

        It's not about what programs cost more. Defending one by saying another is MORE pointless is a stupid argument. No, we shouldn't spend that much on wars but we also shouldn't spend it on a bunch of photos and video of a planet that, according to the majority of scientists, will not help us or our future by way of sustainability nor usable minerals. So, all in all, you are saying it is OK to waste $2.5 billion on this because we are already wasting $700 billion on wars?

        August 22, 2012 at 5:44 pm |
    • alex

      please crawl back in your hole and leave us alone.

      August 22, 2012 at 2:53 pm |
    • JacktheKling-on

      Land on the sun and I'll be impressed. I volunteer you three.

      August 22, 2012 at 3:10 pm |
      • chris

        I'll join them Jack, only if you are standing under the rocket when it launches.

        August 22, 2012 at 3:16 pm |
      • Zeibodique

        You've been shot out of a circus cannon one too many times without a safety net.

        August 22, 2012 at 3:17 pm |
      • intothemoonbeam

        Actually NASA currently has spacecraft in orbit around the Sun, they also have spacecraft around Saturn, Vesta, Mars, Mercury, one on the way to Pluto, then there is Voyager who is currently on the edge of the solar system. NASA does all of this on 0.5% of the national budget, while the pointless war in Iraq cost us 720 Million dollars a day.

        August 22, 2012 at 3:29 pm |
    • Dan

      I'm glad that Jack is not in charge of our future.

      August 22, 2012 at 4:57 pm |
  20. Rob

    I don't get it. Is the camera on the bottom of the rover? What is the disk falling to the surface at the beginning of the shot? Is that the heat shield falling off?

    August 22, 2012 at 2:44 pm |
    • intothemoonbeam

      Yes, that is heat shield that falls off

      August 22, 2012 at 2:46 pm |
    • donkey

      Yes. because it totally makes sense that this heat shield would fall to the ground 10 times faster than the rover which weighs 400 times the shields weight lolol

      August 22, 2012 at 3:19 pm |
      • azbearhuntr

        Do some research, at that point the rover portion has deployed a parachute and the heat sheild is free falling.

        August 22, 2012 at 3:23 pm |
      • Jim

        The rover had a parachute you silly monkey! Of course the Shield falls faster! ;-)

        August 22, 2012 at 3:24 pm |
      • Herpbeforeyouderp

        The heat shield is falling away more quickly because the rover has a parachute already expanded and slowing it down. The heat shield just got cut off from the parachute. An animation of the entire landing process is available all over the internet – watch it! It's pretty impressive!

        August 22, 2012 at 3:28 pm |
      • intothemoonbeam

        Thanks for proving you are a donkey, the rover had deployed it's parachute which is why the heat shield is falling much faster.

        August 22, 2012 at 3:31 pm |
      • Jim

        @intothemoonbeam
        LOL

        August 22, 2012 at 3:43 pm |
      • jer

        just to add to the chorus, it weight of the object doesnt even matter when it comes to how fast an object falls, gravity acts the same on everything. Thats why if you drop a bowling pall, or a small ball bearing, they will both hit the ground at the same time, barring air resistance and the objects terminal velocity.

        August 22, 2012 at 4:38 pm |
      • Dan

        One has a parachute and one does not but what does weight have to do with anything?

        August 22, 2012 at 4:59 pm |
      • SixDegrees

        Not only was the rover on a parachute: a difference in weight does NOT affect the speed at which things fall. Without the parachute, both the rover and the heat shield would have fallen at the same rate.

        Just to be clear – with the parachute, the rover falls SLOWER than the heat shield.

        August 22, 2012 at 5:22 pm |
    • Rick Shultz

      Rob I was not impressed with moonbeam's answer and I think you deserve a better one. There is indeed a camera on the bottom of the Rover known as the Descent Imaging camera. The rover is at the point in its descent where the heat shield is no longer necessary and in fact would interfere with landing if it was not released from the rover. It is released to uncover the landing radar as well the descent imager. The radar tells the rover how high it is and how fast it is falling and helps the computer that is landing the rover do it's job. The Descent Imager provides a video of the landing and tells NASA how well everything worked.

      August 22, 2012 at 4:09 pm |
  21. Frank

    Amazing!

    August 22, 2012 at 2:38 pm |
  22. Lila

    Gorgeous it's like we were there. Interesting to see the dirt blow up and the texture of it.

    August 22, 2012 at 2:35 pm |
    • Hot Carl

      Lila, I'll bet you spend a lot of time with your face in the dirt. Or the pillow.

      August 22, 2012 at 3:31 pm |
  23. luke

    The original video source is http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gZX5GRPnd4U

    August 22, 2012 at 2:31 pm |
    • donkey

      You clearly don't understand the term original source.

      August 22, 2012 at 3:20 pm |
  24. Rightster

    What an overuse and misuse of a word in the headline = "terror".

    August 22, 2012 at 2:30 pm |
    • Mike

      Not a misuse of the word 'terror' in the headline, since NASA formed the phrase 'seven minutes of terror' to specifically describe the danger and complexity of the landing process.

      August 22, 2012 at 2:56 pm |
    • Dave

      Calm down, something amazing just happened. Didn't you notice?

      August 22, 2012 at 3:01 pm |
    • brokenpinata

      Don't worry, Fox News still holds that crown.

      August 22, 2012 at 3:29 pm |
    • Rightster

      OK – so NASA misused the word!

      August 22, 2012 at 5:09 pm |
  25. Clarence

    Nice cartoon.

    August 22, 2012 at 2:27 pm |
    • marvin McNutt

      And you sir are a ret@rd

      August 22, 2012 at 2:43 pm |
    • KikaiderX

      Please put your your tinfoil hat back on, and crawl back into your 2012 bunker.

      August 22, 2012 at 2:58 pm |
  26. intothemoonbeam

    This should be the top news story right now instead of some nutty politician in Missouri.

    August 22, 2012 at 2:20 pm |
  27. Sean

    Wow ... I'm truly amazed and absolutely proud of my countryman who really came thru. After the space shuttle program shutdown, there was some shame but this totally restores our pre-eminence as space explorers. Go USA!

    August 22, 2012 at 2:15 pm |
  28. Al

    Watching this film took me back to the excitement I felt as a child watching the moon missions etc! I stand in awe of your scientists and your program!

    August 22, 2012 at 2:15 pm |
  29. tacostand

    Unbelievable!

    August 22, 2012 at 1:57 pm |
  30. davetharave

    I want to go to Mars.

    August 22, 2012 at 1:51 pm |
  31. Jt_flyer

    This is really cool stuff. Up Untill now this view only existed in movies. You make us proud NASA. Thank you.

    August 22, 2012 at 1:46 pm |
    • nostrildamus

      I was just thinking to myself "I bet we get a bunch of movies with reentry showing heat shields blowing off over the next 5-10 years".

      August 22, 2012 at 2:18 pm |
      • RP

        nostrildamus-face it, you're a low IQ mouthbreathing moron

        August 22, 2012 at 3:51 pm |
  32. Jim

    Cool!!!

    August 22, 2012 at 1:36 pm |
  33. Pat

    It's Obama's fault...

    August 22, 2012 at 1:34 pm |
  34. nobody

    I'll say one thing, that is one beautiful soft landing, pretty amazing considering

    August 22, 2012 at 1:07 pm |
  35. Phil

    Would have been better in 3D!

    August 22, 2012 at 1:03 pm |
  36. Cedar Rapids

    awesome video. maybe that will keep those shouting for pictures quiet for a while.

    August 22, 2012 at 12:53 pm |
    • Rick Shultz

      Don't count on that Cedar Rapids. There is no known effective treatment for instant gratification syndrome...LOL

      August 22, 2012 at 3:55 pm |
  37. Bill

    Beautiful. Truly honored to be alive right now.

    August 22, 2012 at 12:51 pm |
  38. RoadRunner, Albuquerque, NM

    Awesome!!!!! It is a proud moment for NASA, and for the U.S. Let's enjoy it.

    August 22, 2012 at 12:51 pm |
  39. paul

    THE SPACE RESEARCH / PROJECTS CREATE / PROVIDE MILLION OF JOBS, certainly is interesting to see if it will yield any space colony,s on moon / mars / planets / or moons, they have had interest in bringing mars back to a habital planet for over thirty years, the proposed process was to take 200 YEARS TO MAKE IT HABITABLE LIKE THE EARTH,
    To control a landing craft and send pictures back that far away certainly takes technology

    August 22, 2012 at 12:49 pm |
    • Quid Malmborg in Plano TX

      Mars' chances of being made habitable are as tenuous as its magnetosphere. Mars has essentially no magnetosphere, which is what shields life on Earth from solar and cosmic radiation.

      Mars habitability = ZERO

      August 22, 2012 at 1:27 pm |
    • snowboarder

      we can't convince people on earth that the hundreds of millions of tons of pollution we generate every day can affect this planet and you want to try convince people we can create a habitable atmosphere on another planet from scratch?

      August 22, 2012 at 1:39 pm |
  40. Andrew

    Makes you think. Why would our government Photoshop this image?

    August 22, 2012 at 12:47 pm |
    • KikaiderX

      Yeah, its a conspiracy.
      Here's your tinfoil hat.
      And your sign.

      August 22, 2012 at 3:01 pm |
  41. rockshow

    Why does it look like an animation.
    Weird, but it looks fake.

    August 22, 2012 at 12:43 pm |
    • WDS

      It is not really a movie but a series of stills spliced together. OK, that is what a movie really is too but in this case the stills were taken much farther apart than for a "real" movie.

      August 22, 2012 at 12:52 pm |
      • rockshow

        Ahh..that explains it. It certainly doesn't look like a video.
        But if it was put together from a bunch of images, that's different.

        August 22, 2012 at 12:56 pm |
    • Anthony DIVIzio

      Because it was put together from a huge number of still shots to make a running video.

      August 22, 2012 at 12:54 pm |
  42. Jim

    @Phil from MD
    Yes, "WE" the scientists can do this....and more!
    it's those concerned with religions and imaginary gods that prefer to occupy their time and energy with unimportant matter, like your example.
    It's time for such ignorance to be rocketed off into the abyss and the darkness of space, where it truely belongs.

    August 22, 2012 at 12:39 pm |
    • Franco

      You are such an idiot.

      August 22, 2012 at 3:01 pm |
      • Jim

        How so Franco? :-)

        August 22, 2012 at 3:27 pm |
  43. Ira

    Looks like a flying saucer. I wonder what the Martians are saying.

    August 22, 2012 at 12:27 pm |
    • n2video

      That "flying saucer" is the jetisoned heat shield that protected the Curiosity rover from the intense heat of atmosphere entry.

      August 22, 2012 at 2:12 pm |
    • Honeylyn

      own an LR2. It is based on the EUCD platform which it shaers with most Volvos, but not the Escape. The LR2 transmission is also from Volvo and the AWD system is from Haldex, not Dana as in the Escap). In fact, the LR2 shaers zero components with the Escape. Aside from being about the same size, they are 2 totally different vehicles. Also, Jaguars and Land Rovers were always designed and manufactured in their own facility and were never based on a previous Ford product.

      September 12, 2012 at 11:50 pm |
  44. Shane

    It's obvious this was Photoshopped.

    August 22, 2012 at 12:23 pm |
    • zmanx21

      It's obvious this was sped up. Pretty simple conclusion considering it's a 7 minute descent +/- a few seconds. You watched it in its entirety in about 30 seconds.

      August 22, 2012 at 12:53 pm |
      • Zeek

        The video doesn't start recording until it's already 2/3 the way thru it's decent since the camera isn't exposed until the heat shied separates at that point. Plus it appears the video is shorted after the 24second mark until it apporaches the sky crane phase. So the video isn't speed up, it's only the last 1/3 of the decent and part of the middle of that portion seems to be cut out.

        August 22, 2012 at 1:49 pm |
    • n2video

      I believe that the frame rate was about 10 frames per second, whereas "normal" video that you watch on your TV is shot at 30 frames per second. It does give a "photoshopped" effect, but the movie is very, VERY real of Curiosity's landing.

      August 22, 2012 at 2:15 pm |
      • traveler-CH

        The MARDI imaging rate for the descent was just under 4 frames per second.

        August 22, 2012 at 2:28 pm |
    • KikaiderX

      It's obvious that you know less than you think you do.

      August 22, 2012 at 3:02 pm |
    • LiliC

      An obvious post, but obvious troll is obvious.

      August 22, 2012 at 5:31 pm |
  45. Phil from MD

    It's amazing we can do this and argue over who can marry whom at the same time.

    August 22, 2012 at 12:22 pm |
    • Jim

      Yes, "WE" the scientists can do this....and more!
      it's those concerned with religions and imaginary gods that prefer to occupy their time and energy with unimportant matter, like your example.
      It's time for such ignorance to be rocketed off into the abyss and the darkness of space, where it truely belongs.

      August 22, 2012 at 12:53 pm |
      • Ceri

        Maybe we could send your intolerance and bigotry along with it, Jim.

        August 22, 2012 at 1:38 pm |
      • Davethecanuck

        @Ceri
        I think you need to re-read Jim's post again... slowly this time.

        August 22, 2012 at 2:09 pm |
      • Franco

        Maybe we people of faith that paid for these rockets should stick all the narrow minded scientists and shoot them off into space.

        August 22, 2012 at 3:03 pm |
      • ottomanwolf

        I"m pretty sure that Ceri read Jim's email exactly as he intended

        August 22, 2012 at 3:14 pm |

Contributors

  • Elizabeth LandauElizabeth Landau
    Writer/Producer
  • Sophia DengoSophia Dengo
    Senior Designer