Japan Successfully Launches Solid Fuel Rocket (oann.com)
randomErr writes: Japan successfully launched a solid fuel rocket named Epsilon-2. The 26-meter-long rocket launched from the Uchinoura Space Center at about 8 p.m. local time. Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency (JAXA) said this is the latest in Tokyo's effort to stay competitive in an industry that has robust growth potential and strong security implications. Also, this is to curb costs for rocket launches. The Epsilon-2 three-stage rocket [is part of a new generation of solid propellant rockets that aim] to put communication and weather satellites in space.
https://www.nasaspaceflight.co...
Oh no, they say he's got to go go go Godzilla
Oh no, there goes Tokyo go go Godzilla
Let's make like a bird... and get the flock outta here.
Did the suddenly-trustworthy CIA confirm it?
Did the suddenly-evil Russians try to blow it up?
Why on Earth anyone would make a rocket out of solid fuel is beyond me. It seems unnecessarily hazardous and I don't understand the benefits. Are they gonna sell it to the Russians for giggles?
Actually it's not perfect for satellites (and much worse for manned missions, remember Challenger). The lack of throttle control (and an off switch) probably makes it more difficult to precisely place it into orbit.
As a military weapon of course it's just about perfect. Relatively robust to physical shock, storable (on its side!) for long periods of time without expensive cooling systems, instant launch capability (no loading of cryogenic propellants, no pressurization of fuel tanks) its only disadvantage is the specific impulse may be lower than liquid fuels (less payload). Presumably the warhead has its own guidance system so a little imprecision in the boost phase is acceptable.
Why would Japan want such a thing after having avowed a no nuclear policy after being subjected to the only nuclear attack in history? Because Trump has declared S. Korea and Japan to no longer be protected by the American nuclear umbrella. So with a rogue N. Korea using its pitifully scarce resources to build as many nuclear capable delivery systems as it can, what choice does Japan and S. Korea have?
So now the Chinese have another reason to regret their support of the Kim dynasty. It will be much more difficult for them to cow the Koreans or Japanese once they develop an effective nuclear arsenal (and considering the technological and industrial capabilities of these nations it may happen in months not years). N.E. Asia will become a more dangerous place because there will be a temptation to use nukes in the various unresolved territorial issues (Senkaku islands for example). They may consider a "small" tactical nuke necessary should there be a naval showdown that would cause them to lose face. Of course there is no such thing as a small nuke and if one is used, even in the ocean, there will be a huge temptation to take out the remaining ones in a first strike. This would lead to fears of "use it or lose it" etc. (With distances so short between the three countries, a launch on warning policy would mean making a nation-ending decision in a few minutes, not the leisurely half hour the Americans usually have). In general unlike the U.S. and say Canada; it's not a good thing when historically antagonistic neighbors acquire nukes (India and Pakistan).
That's one reason why nuclear nonproliferation is a good thing. While most of the actors in N.E. Asia are extremely level headed (excepting Kim and maybe the current S. Korean president who's got a Shaman giving her advice), that can't be said for the rest of the world. That's why Trump's other statements of letting the Saudi's develop (or buy from Pakistan) nukes to counter Iran is a bad idea; as the 19 out of 20 hijackers on 9/11 showed us, even our allies can't always be trusted. Unfortunately it looks like the nuclear club may soon be getting bigger
When you launch it, it will shit bricks
Why are people blaming everything on Trump?
Several reasons. 1) He's an asshole and an easy target. 2) Every president gets both too much credit and too much blame. Trump will be no exception. 3) Trump has said some terrifying and ignorant and irresponsible shit in regards to nuclear weapons which is relevant to this discussion.
He wasn't even elected or running when they started the development on this project.
No but he's the guy who got elected and so his actions and opinions now matter.
Solid fuel: Low cost, low storage requirements, quick preparation
Disadvatanges:
Low power, can't be stopped
While solid fuel is not normally considered a good propellant for commercial launch operations, it is very good in case you ever have to field your own ICBM's. With The Donald talking about shaking things up with our allies (saying Japan and South Korea should have their own nukes), this is good expertise to have experience with.
Thank you. That "article" is one of the worst things I have ever read, the only saving grace being that besides being completely contentless it was also short. And why are we driving eyeballs to this unknown newsrag anyhow?
This article, from your link describes the first Epsilon launch in 2013 and generally the development projects which led up to it. Quoting the overview:
I'm not particularly sure why this is news, but especially puzzled at the choice of headline. This is apparently the second Epsilon launch, but not exactly JAXA's first time on the ranch. It's their fourth launch this year, and the next one is in mid-January. It must be a slow news day. Anyhow, for anyone else's further purview, the Wikipedia article on the satellite it's launching is here, and it could perhaps be considered a replacement for this one which was deactivated in 2015.
Those who advocate genocide deserve every protection afforded by law, and none afforded by common human decency.
From my limited KSP playing experience, the biggest drawback for solid fuel propulsion is the inability to throttle back (or shut down) the rocket.
I have seen a growing number of non-booster stages that use solid rocket fuel systems. Has this problem been solved?
There is a political aspect to it. Solid fuel rockets are ideal for ballistic missiles because they can be kept on standby with little to no maintenance. This is a dual-use technology that means Japan could produce intercontinental ballistic missiles if it wanted to. This is the exact thing North Korea was forbidden to do by the UN.
Of course more whining from North Korea is not likely to be noticed, but it won't help relations with China either.
Tom Clancy - Debt of Honor
Drop mic..
I have a hard time agreeing with that. I'm not a rocket scientist, but I think there are a number of things which detract from that argument. The principles of solid fuel rockets are pretty solidly nailed down, especially in terms of chemistry, and while solid fuel does have certain conveniences, ballistic missiles can run just fine on alcohol, jet fuel, kerosene, or whatever is lying around. Almost anyone could produce ballistic missiles, it's a lot easier than putting something in orbit. JAXA building one solid fuel rocket every two or three years is not actually equivalent to having the ability to manufacture ballistic missiles en masse. Turns out, you build missiles differently from rockets, which might explain why they have different names. Playing around with KSP will probably give you the most insight into the kind of structural differences you would need to adapt this technology, but rockets tend to be fairly precisely designed around mission requirements, so if you change those drastically you would still need to re-engineer your rocket significantly. Also, it's extremely unlikely that they were manufacturing this with mass production in mind (i.e. hundreds at once) so that capability would also need to be developed. Also, one of the fun features of solid fuel rockets is that shutting them off once you turn them on can be a challenge, so anything that's going to supply you with the velocity to reach orbit is going to be complete overkill if you happen to not want to do that, so you can't just slap a warhead on top of this rocket and call it a day.
This could be considered a starting point for a ballistic missile program, but so could a copy of John Clark's Ignition!. The problems of ballistic missiles and of orbiting satellites are not as similar as they might appear, and in no sense could these rockets be considered "dual use". And remember that thing where the US did the reverse, trying to turn Redstone ballistic missiles into orbit-capable launch vehicles? Here's a list of Redstone launches. Note that the word "failure" occurs 80 times in that list, and Redstone was considered a reliable rocket. So essentially rocketry is difficult, and this should not be considered a strategic move. It might be useful for some political purpose to pretend that it is a strategic move, but I tend to doubt that as well -- as you say, if it's just NK that gets upset no one will care.
Those who advocate genocide deserve every protection afforded by law, and none afforded by common human decency.
Why, from the main SD page if I go to the bottom and click on Wednesday (yesterday), does it got to:
https://science.slashdot.org/?...
instead of
https://slashdot.org/?issue=20...
Science today, some other random category on other days.
Is slashdot falling apart at the scripting seams?
... That Japan has stopped assembling checklists of things to do to build a rocket (then firing them off and finding that things seldom go to plan) and actually started testing every step of the way as well as taking input from the rank-and-file workers (This was one of the prime causes of past failures. Lowly workers would notify that XYZ was incorrect but be overruled by managers who knew better because they were highly paid managers, not lowly workers who actually put the things together(*))
(*) This culture was one of the prime contributors to Fukushima occuring. GE consultants told Tepco management NOT to put the generators down by the plants during the construction of the site because of the risk of flooding if there was a major tsunami. Tepco management smiled and nodded - and put the generators there anyway, because they knew better than the (non-management) consultants.