While I've covered several Japanese launches, they've all centered on the relatively established H2 or H3 families of launch vehicles. This Tuesday (in Japan) we were treated to the launch of a new rocket from a company that has never built a launch vehicle: Honda. That's right, the storied and enormously successful Honda Motors has joined the space industry, launching a test vehicle reminiscent of the old "Star Hopper" or "Hoppy" from Starbase before the first Starships were ever tested.
The video is short and honestly more entertaining than I would have guessed. I see a lot of familiar aspects in this short little mission.
The vehicle is small and the flight was short. I'm reading that as "proof of concept."
[M]easuring less than 21 feet (6.3 meters) tall and about 2.8 feet (85 centimeters) in diameter. Fully fueled, the rocket weighed about 2,892 pounds (1,312 kilograms). Honda has been reticent about the rocket's engines, but the company's video of the test flight suggests the liquid-fueled engines consume cryogenic propellants, possibly a mixture of methane and liquid oxygen.
Stepping into new territory is only a strange thing to those who don't know the company. Honda started out building motorcycles in 1946, dove into the automobile industry in 1963, and started building small jets in 1986.
"We are pleased that Honda has made another step forward in our research on reusable rockets with this successful completion of a launch and landing test. We believe that rocket research is a meaningful endeavor that leverages Honda’s technological strengths," Toshihiro Mibe, global CEO of Honda, said in a press release.
"Honda will continue to take on new challenges—not only to offer our customers various services and value through our products, while addressing environmental and safety issues, but also to continue creating new value, which will make people's time and place more enjoyable," Mibe said.
I was somewhat surprised to read that Honda is working with the Japanese Space Agency (JAXA) and Toyota motors on a pressurized, crewed, Moon rover. Honda has agreed to supply the rover with a renewable energy system for continuous production of oxygen, hydrogen, and electricity from sunlight and water.
Honda isn't putting out specifics of how much they intend to focus on rockets. There's talk about "still in the fundamental research phase," with the interest in possibly being being able to launch their own satellites to network their cars or other business cases like those that seem rather small.
But Tuesday's test catapulted Honda into an exclusive club of companies that have flown reusable rocket hoppers with an eye toward orbital flight, including SpaceX, Blue Origin, and a handful of Chinese startups. Meanwhile, European and Japanese space agencies have funded a pair of reusable rocket hoppers named Themis and Callisto. Neither rocket has ever flown, after delays of several years.
Japan's biggest rocket producer is Mitsubishi Heavy Industries, currently producing H2 and H3 boosters. MHI has never launched more than six missions in one year. The H3 debuted in 2023 but didn't launch successfully for another year. It is fully expendable.
It might help perspective to remember that car companies aren't accustomed to making vehicles that can only be used once. Much like aircraft companies.
Honda's experimental rocket lifts off from a test site in Taiki, a community in northern Japan.
Excellent. Honda has a culture of attention to detail that will aid them in success.
ReplyDeleteBoeing used to have that culture, killed on the twin altars of modern management and trade unions.
Looking forward to seeing who else joins the reusable rocket market. South Korea maybe?
"Looking forward to seeing who else joins the reusable rocket market. South Korea maybe?"
DeleteWho's next? Good question. Everyone says they're moving that way, but how many are flying? Safe bet is it's not the ESA. They're the folks who said if they made the rockets reusable, they couldn't be a jobs program anymore.
FWIW, I know that Rocket Lab has made some attempts and they've reflown parts but not a complete Electron booster with all "experienced" engines. China has done some tests like Honda's, but they seem to be pushing it onto low budget startups so if it fails they can say it wasn't the gubmint (CCP) that screwed up. My interpretation, of course.
My guess is Rocket Lab's Neutron will be the next one that matters.
Given the similarities, I wonder if reverse engineering is involved. Or, how open is Space X with their designs. The more, the merrier?
ReplyDeleteI'm gonna reach out to my friend at Mitsubishi Heavy to borrow some of his time. He's an actual rocket scientist now back in Japan. He's mostly been involved with engines for a decade+ now.
Any suggestions for questions?
It absolutely doesn't require copying SpaceX's designs. Everybody knows what a Falcon 9 looks like. They fly just about every other day. Just watching a mission on the SpaceX feed shows lots of details of what they're doing. The right people could watch the SpaceX video, then model everything until their model seems to be predicting properly.
DeleteWatch the video and notice that they don't deploy their grid fins until the rocket starts falling backwards. Then they do a couple of small movements, and I bet it's to compare what the movement actually does to their simulations and predictions. They said it landed within 15 inches of the intended spot.
The Merlin engine has been in development and use for a decade. Some of it has to be documented. Lacking that, maybe hiring some experienced engineers out of SpaceX and giving them a nice offer to move to Japan gets the important stuff.
Specific questions are harder to come up with. Also dependent on your friend and details of what he knows. Along with what he can comfortably talk about.
Mitsubishi Board of Directors and the Japanese government should ask why Mitsubishi and JASA have not been able to create a reusable launch vehicle. SpaceX and Blue Origin did it ten years ago, Delta Clipper 30 years ago and the Apollo landers had some applicability , 50 years ago.
DeleteSiG, I was playing 'what if', just wondering. Certainly not to disparage Honda or anyone else.
DeleteYes, limitations of what friend can say, how much time available he has and so on. Still, I am to talk with him and with emphasis on current news on JAXA, Mitsubishi Heavy and what else.
Regarding 'proprietary' SpaceX products, Elon and SpaceX have been relatively open about how, why and what they do, subject only really to ITAR restrictions.
DeleteSpaceX also seems not to enforce non-competition clauses on their employees. As seen in many successful or intriguingly not-so-successful neuveaux aerospace companies.
SpaceX follows the "Silicon Valley model" pretty much entirely. Nobody bothers with patents because you make your money before the rest of the world catches up with you.
DeleteSay you're going to keep a secret and punish anyone who finds out about it. Oh-Kayyy... If I'm remembering correctly (not even three sips into morning coffee) Company A comes up with a new thing, or new idea, sells it for as much as "early adopters" will pay. Company B buys one, "reverse engineers" it, and as soon as it's ready to sell, A cuts their price by around 25%. This can be repeated for a few cycles before the Chinese just start flooding the market with it. The key is "be the firstest with the mostest" and KEEP INNOVATING.
Leg design looks like Blue Origin vs SpaceX. Wonder which is better? If SpaceX design is found to be inferior, would they drop it? Cannot remember SpaceX / Musk ever dropping a line of development.
ReplyDeleteAs for the small size of the Honda rocket, it might have been intentionally desgined to fit in an American garage.
SpaceX has dropped lines of development. Like Starship, which was originally conceived as a massive carbon-fiber composite construction. SpaceX even went so far as to buy some really huge winders and kilns and started winding and casting preliminary sections. Which, after some basic testing and some basic skull sweat, showed that carbon-fiber in a vehicle as large as Starship wasn't a great idea.
DeleteThen there's thrust-return landing of Dragon capsule using the Draco and Super Draco thrusters. Still possible, and SpaceX has tested it, but parachutes are oh-so-much-more reliable. So thrust-return and thrust-landing of Dragon is still potentially possible if the parachutes fail, possible-maybe, but SpaceX isn't banking on it.
It's Honda.
ReplyDeleteJust like everything else they touch, if a part breaks it'll cost $30B to replace, and it'll be on 60-day backorder when you need it.
Nah, this one is a two-stroke.
Delete