Japan's next-generation rocket failed after liftoff. Photo: AFP
national

Japan's H3 rocket ordered to self-destruct after liftoff

48 Comments

The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.

© AFP 2023.

©2024 GPlusMedia Inc.

48 Comments
Login to comment

rocket failure with spying tools and satellite aboard?

just wondering how much this "glitch" costs japanese taxpayers?

-1 ( +19 / -20 )

neighbours could help?

-8 ( +10 / -18 )

Japan has a bad day.

4 ( +15 / -11 )

Bummer. It's not easy. Get back up, dust off your hands and get back to work. JAXA and Mitsubishi can make this work.

14 ( +22 / -8 )

Another costly loss.

12 ( +17 / -5 )

With brief experience in military contracts, anything that will be used by any of the top agencies around the world will usually mean an order for not just one, but close to 3-5pcs for 1 that is planned to be launched. Everything is built to have spare parts on hand, and fully working dummies of all but the most expensive planes are already built. Then you just need to make adjustments to what failed the first time. Guaranteed, if Japan wanted to, they could relaunch within a month. However, the reason for failure will be closely evaluated, studied, and be sure to not happen again.

4 ( +10 / -6 )

Without the ALOS3 spy satellite is a great lost and put the nation in dire danger.

-12 ( +3 / -15 )

That satellite was very expensive and will take a very long time to build one.

6 ( +13 / -7 )

Can’t they just simply make all people a bit more happy and financially more independent before, and only then, and if there still should be something left for any lucky reason, continue with their costly, idiotic useless phantasy hobby? Astronomy and space research might be interesting or mysterious fir many, yes, but it isn’t something to follow by overdoing or putting more money into than a few bucks for a book or a good telescope. Look, there aren’t nearby UFOs, extraterrestrials or other life forms, if any they are unreachable far away. Also any nice pictures or signals, whatever, it’s all light years away and therefore not real but only reflecting long bygone eras. Most of it what you see there isn’t even there now anymore or at a completely different location. And finally, we can’t live outside our common environment we are born into. That’s biologically impossible. We can’t even exist a longer time on all places here, under water or on top of the highest mountains, so how can you ever come to the conclusion you could make it sufficiently long outside of our planet?

-4 ( +9 / -13 )

Uncle Elon can help

5 ( +13 / -8 )

Country based approaches destined for the dustbin, that's why it's called global technology. And didn't Mitsubishi just 'crash' out of the commercial airline market....calling the market incompatible with their company 'culture'.

Last time I checked, it's about underlying technology's merits, whether high in the atmosphere or in space, as company culture ain't going to help much at altitude!

3 ( +6 / -3 )

Japan just can't get it up in the air?

Hard to do sometimes.

-4 ( +6 / -10 )

JAXA and Mitsubishi can make this work.

youd hope so, since Mitsubishi has all but given up on the Mitsubishi SpaceJet, officially canceled last month

5 ( +7 / -2 )

It is easy to make fun of our neighbor NK, but they have shown more competency launching rockets. Japan needs to get this right, so keep up the work....

-8 ( +6 / -14 )

The US space program provides so many spinoff technologies that it makes perfect sense for fully developed nations to have a space program so they can have some spin-off tech too. Japan needs a functioning, commercial, space program for many reasons.

It isn't only about national pride or the 15K directly related jobs, but the 250K indirectly related jobs ... and that's not counting the spin-off industries.

Commercial space flight and discovery is an innovation maker for everyone involved.

There will be far too many meetings about this all around MIT and JAXA. They definitely need to do the root cause analysis to understand which things failed. Could be 1 part that failed, but it could be 20 independent failures that broke the redundancy chain.

Folks seem to forget that SpaceX blew up a bunch of rockets. There are 2 ways to get to a viable launch system. 1 has lots of failures and quick innovation. The other has lots of meetings and engineering where guesses and assumptions are made with millions of moving parts, hoping that the lowest bidder didn't fail to supply what was purchased. I worked in the 2nd type and was really jealous seeing action and failures in the development of SpaceX rockets.

10 ( +13 / -3 )

Japan will learn the news of North Korean has launched a ballistic missile after it hit somewhere nearby their country.

-5 ( +6 / -11 )

The new first stage LE9 was successful, that's what matters. The upper stage LE5 is a mature design and never failed before, so it not a big deal

-7 ( +0 / -7 )

H2A rockets have been 40 times successful 97%. The new H3 rocket has just started. This failure would be a great success sooner or later.

-3 ( +3 / -6 )

"Destruct command has been transmitted to H3 because there was no possibility of achieving the mission."

Was that the actual English message or just a translation?

1 ( +2 / -1 )

I can guess what happened:

Project manager (the one from previous conference) proposed a fix but higher-ups Oyaji's rejected and forced the launch to push through.

0 ( +6 / -6 )

Just give up.

Elon Musk's SpaceX service will put your satellite in orbit for very cheap.

Stop wasting time and money.

-4 ( +7 / -11 )

Wandered into that base back in '97 carrying my bodyboard bag,no questions asked

Nice little point,watched a rocket launch and enjoyed an impromptu chuhai.

It's a great island to visit.

2 ( +4 / -2 )

The live feed was then briefly halted, with a message reading "We are currently checking the status. Please wait."

This self censorship is not needed. Hopefully, they at least let us see the explosion.

2 ( +4 / -2 )

And this is how our taxes are spent…

-2 ( +7 / -9 )

2nd stage on 2nd attempt. Get to the 3rd stage next time!

-1 ( +3 / -4 )

If it was 300 km above earth in theory the satellite could be launched.

2 ( +3 / -1 )

So, where's the photo of the execs bowing and apologizing?

1 ( +3 / -2 )

No Problem, back to the drawing boards, figure out what went wrong, Fix It, and try Again till you WIN. Good Luck.

2 ( +3 / -1 )

"It's not rocket science," except when it is. There is a lot that can go wrong with a rocket launch. I saw a few explosions during my time at Vandenberg AFB, America's West Coast space launch facility. What I found amazing was that there were not more failures than what there were. As one astronaut put it, when you have thousands of parts, all made by the lowest bidder, is it really a surprise when something goes wrong?

4 ( +5 / -1 )

Space is hard and anyone who thinks otherwise is either ignorant of the facts or deliberately obtuse.

SpaceX at one period during the learning stage provided some of the best fireworks you could ask for, now they are a lot more reliable. One problem with disposable rockets is you don’t know if anything is wrong until you light the blue touch paper. With reusability you get to study what works, like aircraft.

How successfully the failure is dealt with depends on how few committees are involved.

2 ( +3 / -1 )

Look how the Toyota engineers teared down a Tesla car amused at the technology.

SpaceX is another level.

They will launch to outer-space and come back to be launched again.

Sometimes in life you must step back and let the pros do what they do best.

-2 ( +2 / -4 )

Makoto Shimizu

Today 06:46 pm JST

If it was 300 km above earth in theory the satellite could be launched

We'll take the k off km and call it a succesful launch if it hits 300 metres.

0 ( +2 / -2 )

They seem to have gotten the self destruct button to work.

3 ( +3 / -0 )

There is a reason why JAXA called this rocked "実験機1号" (Experiment No 1).

In developing a brand new machine, no matter how you prepare things, you really do not know if it works until you test it in real situations. That's why you repeat a cycle of testing and fixing until you gain confidence. It is a costly process, but there is no other way.

1 ( +2 / -1 )

In developing a brand new machine, no matter how you prepare things, you really do not know if it works until you test it in real situations.

Proof Of Concept.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

Launches can fail, what's the complaint?

There is no launch system with a 100% success rate. All launch systems fail.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

Dont worry about the rocket....Taxpayers will buy you a new one.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

Everyone knows Govt. 'paycheck' employees cannot manage complex technological efforts anywhere near the private sector, why you ask?

1) No 'ownership' or risk, just taxpayer money

2) No serious motivation, paychecks the same

Anyone can do a search of the former US Astronaut who's now a US Senator in AZ. He's gone public, how US Govt. Space Program has ZERO innovation, total reliance on private sector now. It's the same IT, healthcare, any science or technology actually, Governments are just BIG DUMB BUYERS that can print and tax money

-2 ( +0 / -2 )

What's scary is Japan's BOJ is conducting a Government led 'take-over', funding everything, you name it, most cases now the largest shareholder of EVERY major public company. But nobody can come up with any recent technological success stemming from ANY Government ANYWHERE, certainly not this century.

Any real surprise this was an epic failure?!

Reality's the global space industry is purely being led by the private sector and more so with every day, as no 'space tech' talent wants to work for idiot Govt. bureaucrats anywhere, the kiss of professional death!

-2 ( +0 / -2 )

No doubt that SpaceX is extremely worried about the new competition !

SpaceX is too busy innovating to look at what other space companies are doing. That's why they are the current world leader in space launch.

SpaceX isn't afraid to fail and since they aren't forced by the govt to spread jobs all over the country, like with the SLS project under the US Congress's funding thumb, SpaceX can do what is commercially viable, not just welfare for every congressional district.

Whenever there are too many people in the decision chain, it becomes easy for people to assume someone else is responsible for a key part, which results in nobody being responsible. Too many cooks in the kitchen is probably the issue in Japan, just like it is with the SLS. If the SLS has a failure, Congress will provide 50% less money than needed to fix the problems. Congress likes having control over things they don't really have the expertise to control. Unfortunately. Why would a lawyer or political science graduate be good at rocket science? Answer: they aren't.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Login to leave a comment

Facebook users

Use your Facebook account to login or register with JapanToday. By doing so, you will also receive an email inviting you to receive our news alerts.

Facebook Connect

Login with your JapanToday account

User registration

Articles, Offers & Useful Resources

A mix of what's trending on our other sites