Japan has a space exploration plan

[sketerpot]

I'm sure you can think of lots of things to criticise about this plan.

TOKYO - Japan's space agency mapped out a new, ambitious plan for manned flights to the moon by 2025 as a first step to explore the solar system's far-flung planets, but said decisions about whether it would go it alone or collaborate with other nations won't be made for another decade.

The proposal unveiled Wednesday by Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency, or JAXA, marks the agency's first attempt in years to rethink its missions and rejuvenate a space program that has been hobbled by recent launchpad and space probe failures.

JAXA sent the plan to a government space panel for review, asking for a budget increase to roughly $2.6 billion a year, from $2 billion. By comparison, NASA's annual budget $16.2 billion.

"Until now, the question has been, 'Can Japan develop its own manned spaceship?' We will know the answer in another 10 years" when the agency will review its options, JAXA Chairman Keiji Tachikawa said. "It won't require a big budget rise," he said, adding that it's "too soon to know how it will cost because things might change in coming years."

Japan's long-term vision resembles those of President Bush and European space officials, who hope to land astronauts and robots on the moon as a first step to sending space shuttle missions to Mars.

Robotic surveys of moon

Over the next decade, JAXA's plan calls for scientists to develop robots and nanotechnology for surveys of the moon, and design a rocket and space vessel capable of carrying cargo and passengers. By 2015, JAXA will review whether it's ready to pour resources into manned space travel and possibly building a base on the moon. A decision to possibly to try for Mars and other planets would be made after 2025.

The plan emerges two months after JAXA sent a communications satellite into space aboard the country's workhorse H-2A rocket — its first successful launch since November 2003, when a rocket carrying two spy satellites malfunctioned after liftoff and was destroyed in midflight. That accident had forced officials to put the entire space program temporarily on hold.

It also marks a major policy shift that was set in motion last year when a Japanese government panel recommended that the agency focus on manned space flight instead of unmanned scientific probes.

Catching up

Despite being Asia's most advanced space-exploring nation, Japan has been playing catch-up to Europe in commercial satellite launches. Tokyo also has struggled to outdo China, which put its first astronaut into orbit in October 2003 and later announced plans for a trip to the moon.

Tachikawa said JAXA's plan wasn't a reaction to the recent string of failures that led to a 15-month grounding of the domestically made H-2A rocket.

JAXA will scrap several planned missions but hasn't publicly said which ones, the agency's executive director, Kiyoshi Higuchi, said. Missions will be reorganized so they aren't so cut off from other projects, as they have been until now, he added.

JAXA already has a moon survey mission planned. Its Selene probe — originally scheduled for launch in 2005 but since delayed — is designed to orbit the moon, releasing two small satellites that will measure the moon's magnetic and gravitational field and conduct other tests for clues about the moon's origin.

Lunar mining

JAXA officials said their hope is establish a base on the moon that could mine resources found on and under the lunar surface. An illustrated handout showed an astronaut directing an array of robots constructing the base, which would draw solar power from photovoltaic panels and explore the moon's poles for traces of water to convert to hydrogen fuel.

Eventually, JAXA hopes to expand missions to search for evidence about the origins of the universe and life beyond our planet, JAXA officials said.

Other aerospace projects include a passenger airliner that will travel at Mach 2 — or twice the speed of sound — for five-hour Tokyo-Los Angeles flights and an unmanned, hydrogen-fueled plane that can travel at Mach 5.

[sketerpot]

Japan's long-term vision resembles those of President Bush and European space officials, who hope to land astronauts and robots on the moon as a first step to sending space shuttle missions to Mars.

Space shuttle missions to Mars? The fucking space shuttle?

Over the next decade, JAXA's plan calls for scientists to develop robots and nanotechnology for surveys of the moon, and design a rocket and space vessel capable of carrying cargo and passengers.

"Hey, let's put the word 'nanotechnology' into our plan! That'll make us sound cool!"

That said, on their budget they had better go unmanned if they want to explore the moon. And it is worth spending some effort to explore and understand. I can't fault them for including robots in there.

Despite being Asia's most advanced space-exploring nation, Japan has been playing catch-up to Europe in commercial satellite launches. Tokyo also has struggled to outdo China, which put its first astronaut into orbit in October 2003 and later announced plans for a trip to the moon.

Well, it's easy to catch up with China in the area of claiming that you're going to go to the moon: just claim that you're going to go to the moon.

JAXA already has a moon survey mission planned. Its Selene probe — originally scheduled for launch in 2005 but since delayed — is designed to orbit the moon, releasing two small satellites that will measure the moon's magnetic and gravitational field and conduct other tests for clues about the moon's origin.

Go Japan! This looks like pretty solid stuff.

JAXA officials said their hope is establish a base on the moon that could mine resources found on and under the lunar surface. An illustrated handout showed an astronaut directing an array of robots constructing the base, which would draw solar power from photovoltaic panels and explore the moon's poles for traces of water to convert to hydrogen fuel.

Honestly, when are we going to end the massive wanking over hydrogen fuel? Once they get hydrogen fuel, what will they do with it? Ship it back to Earth? Use it to power rovers and robots? Take pictures of the nanobots posing next to it and put them on glossy propaganda brochures?

And what's the purpose of mining lunar resources? Surely not to send them back to Earth, and hopefully not as an end in itself.

Other aerospace projects include a passenger airliner that will travel at Mach 2 — or twice the speed of sound — for five-hour Tokyo-Los Angeles flights and an unmanned, hydrogen-fueled plane that can travel at Mach 5.

Supersonic travel will rise again!---I hope. It's nice to see that somebody is trying to replace the Concorde. It'll be interesting to see how the Mach 5 hydrogen plane works out; will the advantages of hydrogen as an airplane fuel offset the disadvantages, like larger fuel tanks?

I want ride on these! And although I've been very critical of what I've seen in this article, it is nice to see that Japan is going to be spending lots of money on aerospace stuff, much of which is pretty interesting. Even where political wankery overrides good science and engineering, quite a bit of good can be salvaged.

[Sea Skimmer]

Supersonic travel will rise again!---I hope. It's nice to see that somebody is trying to replace the Concorde. It'll be interesting to see how the Mach 5 hydrogen plane works out; will the advantages of hydrogen as an airplane fuel offset the disadvantages, like larger fuel tanks?

With a mach 5 engine your probuably going to be flying at over 100,000 feet, you need to in ordered to keep down skin heating to acceptable levels. At such high levels I'd image you could get away with a lot of volume behind your front heat shielding. The thing is mach 5 means a ramjet, which means it can't take off under the power of that engine. I would expect they intend it to be an air launched test craft only. I wish they'd go for a hydrogen scramjet myself.

[Chris OFarrell]

Japan's long-term vision resembles those of President Bush and European space officials, who hope to land astronauts and robots on the moon as a first step to sending space shuttle missions to Mars.

Space shuttle missions to Mars? The fucking space shuttle?

Well it is a little insane. I could belive a Space Shuttle mission to the moon, if you get the infastructure for refuling the shuttle into orbit. Mars though.....

[Lord Zentei]

Space shuttle missions to Mars? The fucking space shuttle?

Bad wording. The "Interplanetary Shuttle" is a time honoured buzzphrase referring to a craft capable of repeated transits.

"Hey, let's put the word 'nanotechnology' into our plan! That'll make us sound cool!"

That said, on their budget they had better go unmanned if they want to explore the moon. And it is worth spending some effort to explore and understand. I can't fault them for including robots in there.

And nanotech is not all wankery. It is already being used. Nanotech replacing traditional manufacturing technologies and "gray goo", however, is wankery.

Well, it's easy to catch up with China in the area of claiming that you're going to go to the moon: just claim that you're going to go to the moon.

China does not have the wherewithall to send a man to the moon. Neither does Japan.

BTW: I'm going to the moon too.

Go Japan! This looks like pretty solid stuff.

Robotic probes, on the other hand, are another matter entirely, and are potentially within China and Japan's capabilities within the 20-year timeframe given.

Honestly, when are we going to end the massive wanking over hydrogen fuel? Once they get hydrogen fuel, what will they do with it? Ship it back to Earth? Use it to power rovers and robots? Take pictures of the nanobots posing next to it and put them on glossy propaganda brochures?

And what's the purpose of mining lunar resources? Surely not to send them back to Earth, and hopefully not as an end in itself.

Its for use on the lunar base itself, silly. That way the base will be less dependant on constant resupply missions from the Earth for the absolute basics we most often take for granted. Again, no wankery.

Other aerospace projects include a passenger airliner that will travel at Mach 2 — or twice the speed of sound — for five-hour Tokyo-Los Angeles flights and an unmanned, hydrogen-fueled plane that can travel at Mach 5.

Supersonic travel will rise again!---I hope. It's nice to see that somebody is trying to replace the Concorde. It'll be interesting to see how the Mach 5 hydrogen plane works out; will the advantages of hydrogen as an airplane fuel offset the disadvantages, like larger fuel tanks?

I want ride on these! And although I've been very critical of what I've seen in this article, it is nice to see that Japan is going to be spending lots of money on aerospace stuff, much of which is pretty interesting. Even where political wankery overrides good science and engineering, quite a bit of good can be salvaged.

A bit overly critical though with the 2 billion dollar budget, I can't say I disagree with your assessment of their chances of success. As for the supersonic flight thing, it would certainly be nice to see the concorde replaced, although it did face some major economic/engineering problems of it's own.

[Lord Zentei]

Japan's long-term vision resembles those of President Bush and European space officials, who hope to land astronauts and robots on the moon as a first step to sending space shuttle missions to Mars.

Space shuttle missions to Mars? The fucking space shuttle?

Well it is a little insane. I could belive a Space Shuttle mission to the moon, if you get the infastructure for refuling the shuttle into orbit. Mars though.....

No. Even with a refueling mission in orbit this would not be possible for the shuttle.

[Vympel]

Just wait till the Australian space program gets going. We anticipate a manned mission to Uranus via an old Kingswood.

[dragon]

Space shuttle missions to Mars? The fucking space shuttle?

Well it is a little insane. I could belive a Space Shuttle mission to the moon, if you get the infastructure for refuling the shuttle into orbit. Mars though.....

No. Even with a refueling mission in orbit this would not be possible for the shuttle.

Actually it wouldn't if you refueled the shuttle in orbit it would easily reach the moon. After all the energy neccessary to escape earth orbit and go to the moon is already more than half meet when ther shuttle gets to a LEO orbit. Now a direct ascent requires a lot of power but we have sent probes there lifted by rocket that have less thrust than the shuttle. Or if you want to save fuel you can use a Hohmann transfer orbit but that will add several days toi the trip.

Now as to the comment about nanotech. They are talking about using such processes as spray on solar cells and spary on space suits as well as mems (Micro-electrical-mechanical-systems)

As for the comment about getting the hydrogen. It would be used for lifesupport systems and for return fuel. However the millions of tons of Deutrim in the soil is the main reason we want to go there. 1 ton would produce enough power to last the US 1 year.

Getting the fuel back to earth is really simpile. A standard mass driver can impart enough momentum to get the stuff back to earth.

[Lord Zentei]

No. Even with a refueling mission in orbit this would not be possible for the shuttle.

Actually it wouldn't if you refueled the shuttle in orbit it would easily reach the moon. After all the energy neccessary to escape earth orbit and go to the moon is already more than half meet when ther shuttle gets to a LEO orbit. Now a direct ascent requires a lot of power but we have sent probes there lifted by rocket that have less thrust than the shuttle. Or if you want to save fuel you can use a Hohmann transfer orbit but that will add several days toi the trip.

No, you are oversimplifying the situation. The shuttle has already shed it's external fuel tank and boosters. Attaching these is a nontrivial task. Furthermore, its engines are optimized for takeoff, not lunar insertion.

[dragon]

No. Even with a refueling mission in orbit this would not be possible for the shuttle.

Actually it wouldn't if you refueled the shuttle in orbit it would easily reach the moon. After all the energy neccessary to escape earth orbit and go to the moon is already more than half meet when ther shuttle gets to a LEO orbit. Now a direct ascent requires a lot of power but we have sent probes there lifted by rocket that have less thrust than the shuttle. Or if you want to save fuel you can use a Hohmann transfer orbit but that will add several days toi the trip.

No, you are oversimplifying the situation. The shuttle has already shed it's external fuel tank and boosters. Attaching these is a nontrivial task. Furthermore, its engines are optimized for takeoff, not lunar insertion.

Ok the main shuttle engines produce 375000 lbs of thrust with a dry weight mass of 250,000 lbs while the saturn third stage had only 230000 lbs of thrust. So the shuttle has enough thrust without the boosters. The problem are several fold.
1. The shuttle is not designed to be refueled while in orbit a structure would need to be built.
2. If the shuttle wanted to come to earth the heat shield are designed to take 25,000 ft/sec while coming from the moon it is 36,000. Its doubtful it could take the extra heat.
3.The Orbiter is designed for 3 g's max operational load. Assuming we didn't use rockets to decelerate while coming home from the moon, we'd hit up to 6 g's

Now several possible solutions this is a quote taken from my space craft system design and operation text book

OK, so this isn't a viable first-mission scenario. However, add some more ingredients and stir well, and you have a scenario very similar to the argument for a translunar SSTO: one vehicle all the way to the moon.

The ingredients to add are lunar oxygen to refuel the Shuttle, and a servicing facility launched from the moon. The key to those is an electromagnetic launcher on the moon to keep the launch costs down. The fuel tank could be designed to interface directly with the Shuttle's attachments for the ET.

While we're fantasizing, add in a situation where NASA approves the original SPACEHAB scenario. SPACEHAB was orginally designed to be a passenger compartment for commercial Shuttle flights. Put a couple of SPACEHAB modules full of happy passengers in the payload bay, and we're running tourist flights to lunar orbit!

It would be very difficult to modify the Shuttle Orbiter system so that we could actually land it on the moon. The landing gear is in the wrong place, with a big fuel tank in the way. So we'd need another vehicle, perhaps a carrier for those SPACEHAB passenger compartments, to get between lunar orbit and the lobby of the Luna City Hotel.

Since the Shuttle's design is so specific to its original mission, my guess is that we'd be way ahead with a new design; but this is certainly a mind-expanding scenario. It's certainly an interesting mental image of a space shuttle in orbit around the moon!

[Patrick Degan]

Hey, once they get a fleet of these up:



there'll be no stopping the Japanese space programme.

[Firefox]

I'm a little annoyed by claims that the STS could be used to travel to the Moon (unless it's carrying a probe to be deployed with an upper-stage booster, anyway). How the hell do you get the replacement ET into orbit and attach it to the orbiter, let alone its fuel and the SRBs? Even if you can, hypothetically, launch a Shuttle with 5-segment SRBs or something to allow it to bring the ET with it to orbit, you'd still have to haul up the cryogenic propellants to refuel. And unless they're not needed, again, the SRBs would be a bitch to bring up.

[dragon]

I'm a little annoyed by claims that the STS could be used to travel to the Moon (unless it's carrying a probe to be deployed with an upper-stage booster, anyway). How the hell do you get the replacement ET into orbit and attach it to the orbiter, let alone its fuel and the SRBs? Even if you can, hypothetically, launch a Shuttle with 5-segment SRBs or something to allow it to bring the ET with it to orbit, you'd still have to haul up the cryogenic propellants to refuel. And unless they're not needed, again, the SRBs would be a bitch to bring up.

You don't need the SRB's to get to the moon. The main engines or OMS provides enough thrust see post above.

[Firefox]

That's why I said "unless they're not needed".

[dragon]

That's why I said "unless they're not needed".

Sorry I really hate these 24 hour shifts to tired and missed that.

[Lord Zentei]

No. Even with a refueling mission in orbit this would not be possible for the shuttle.

<snip>

Bah. You can just as easily claim that it is possible to send a rowing boat across the Atlantic. "If we do A, B, C, D, E, and F we might manage it. Except it is not designed to be compatible with A, B, C, D, E or F". No shit, but then you are not talking about the rowing boat anymore, eh?

[Mayabird]

Japan is planning on building its own shuttles. If they're sensible, the shuttles will be better than ours.

Also, remember that we are talking about a country that's obsessed with mega-engineering projects and high technology. I wish them good luck.

[sketerpot]

"Hey, let's put the word 'nanotechnology' into our plan! That'll make us sound cool!"

And nanotech is not all wankery. It is already being used. Nanotech replacing traditional manufacturing technologies and "gray goo", however, is wankery.

I worry that the word "nanotechnology" is defined too broadly. Later in the thread dragon said "They are talking about using such processes as spray on solar cells and spary on space suits as well as mems (Micro-electrical-mechanical-systems)". Well, the spray-on solar cells don't look very nanotechnological (unless you're willing to say that all fancy polymers are nanotech), the spray-on spacesuits use some fancy technology for working with small things (which I guess could be called nanotech), and the MEMS are clearly nanotech.

When most people hear "nanotech", they're not thinking of the practical applications. They're thinking of the gray goo and people writing their names on specks of dust. This broad definition of nanotech is probably a good thing; people cough up the money thinking they'll get the Manufacturing System of the Future, and they get assorted small things, some of which are useful.

Well, it's easy to catch up with China in the area of claiming that you're going to go to the moon: just claim that you're going to go to the moon.

China does not have the wherewithall to send a man to the moon. Neither does Japan.

BTW: I'm going to the moon too.

That's a big part of what always bothers me about these grand plans: they announce some goal that they can't possibly reach on their budget and a long enough span of time that people take it semi-seriously. And then after a few years maybe the political winds shift and the funding priorities change, and we can only hope that they managed to get some good work done while it lasted, in spite of the unrealistic goals.

Robotic probes, on the other hand, are another matter entirely, and are potentially within China and Japan's capabilities within the 20-year timeframe given.

Yes, this is one of the real bright spots of the announcement. The other bright spot is that money spent on R&D generally gets something done, even if it isn't what you set out to do, and Japan is going to be spending lots of money.

Honestly, when are we going to end the massive wanking over hydrogen fuel? Once they get hydrogen fuel, what will they do with it? Ship it back to Earth? Use it to power rovers and robots? Take pictures of the nanobots posing next to it and put them on glossy propaganda brochures?

And what's the purpose of mining lunar resources? Surely not to send them back to Earth, and hopefully not as an end in itself.

Its for use on the lunar base itself, silly. That way the base will be less dependant on constant resupply missions from the Earth for the absolute basics we most often take for granted. Again, no wankery.

If they build a long-term lunar base, then I'll be cheering for every aspect of it, including the mining. But I have to wonder about the hydrogen fuel. If they have solar panels, then the reason for converting it to hydrogen would be as energy storage (and possibly for the oxygen byproduct). How does hydrogen stack up against batteries? How do the storage losses compare, especially in the moon's unusual environment? Lead-acid cells are about 85%-95% efficient, and that's going to be hard to beat, especially since commercial electrolysis is currently only about 75% efficient.

Now, hydrogen fuel cells may have some real advantages that make them superior for this use. I'm not going to rule out that possibility. But I have a dark suspicion that a major influence on their inclusion of hydrogen in the plan was that hydrogen is sexier than batteries or RTGs.

I may have overreacted. But DAMN am I sick of people spreading silly misinformed hype about hydrogen! Damn people wouldn't know a law of thermodynamics if it came up and attacked them with a sharpened spoon.

A bit overly critical though with the 2 billion dollar budget, I can't say I disagree with your assessment of their chances of success. As for the supersonic flight thing, it would certainly be nice to see the concorde replaced, although it did face some major economic/engineering problems of it's own.

Hopefully we can learn from the Concorde and avoid some of those economic and engineering problems. Although if Sea Skimmer is right and they intend the Mach 5 jet to be an air-launched test only, the economic problems for that one will be killer.

[Lord Zentei]

<snip>When most people hear "nanotech", they're not thinking of the practical applications. They're thinking of the gray goo and people writing their names on specks of dust. This broad definition of nanotech is probably a good thing; people cough up the money thinking they'll get the Manufacturing System of the Future, and they get assorted small things, some of which are useful.

No arguments there, I guess the field has earned much of the vitriol heaped on it by skeptics due to the grandoise claims of some of their more far out proponents.

That's a big part of what always bothers me about these grand plans: they announce some goal that they can't possibly reach on their budget and a long enough span of time that people take it semi-seriously. And then after a few years maybe the political winds shift and the funding priorities change, and we can only hope that they managed to get some good work done while it lasted, in spite of the unrealistic goals.

Blame democracy. We need an Evil Empire to drive the space race. GO RED CHINA! This announcement has been brought to you by Lord Zentei's Tounge-In-Cheek department.

<snip>Now, hydrogen fuel cells may have some real advantages that make them superior for this use. I'm not going to rule out that possibility. But I have a dark suspicion that a major influence on their inclusion of hydrogen in the plan was that hydrogen is sexier than batteries or RTGs.

This may be so. When I spoke of hydrogen being used on the base earlier I had in mind stuff requiring thrust. This is particularly the case if the lunar base is to be used as a launch base. I guess I should have been more specific (sue me).

I may have overreacted. But DAMN am I sick of people spreading silly misinformed hype about hydrogen! Damn people wouldn't know a law of thermodynamics if it came up and attacked them with a sharpened spoon.

Agreed.

Hopefully we can learn from the Concorde and avoid some of those economic and engineering problems. Although if Sea Skimmer is right and they intend the Mach 5 jet to be an air-launched test only, the economic problems for that one will be killer.

Alas, agreed.

[sketerpot]

This may be so. When I spoke of hydrogen being used on the base earlier I had in mind stuff requiring thrust. This is particularly the case if the lunar base is to be used as a launch base. I guess I should have been more specific (sue me).

Ah, okay. You really can't beat hydrogen as a propellant in nuclear-thermal rockets, which would be very cool to see. And if you get some oxygen in the process, everybody's happy.