Japan Plans a Moonbase by 2030

Aglassis writes "The Japanese Aerospace Exploration Agency (JAXA) announced at a conference that they are planning to build a Moonbase by 2030. Since JAXA doesn't currently have a 100 ton-class heavy lift rocket or a human transportation system perhaps now is a good time for JAXA to join in with NASA on the Project Constellation rocket program."

This is awesome

[whitman's ghost]

Whooo! Way to go Japan, at least they are planning for the future. You don't see them plunging into war after war, deplete their resources and manpower. A moon base in my life time, very exicting.

US moon base

[the_crowing]

Didn't Bush reinstate plans to start putting Americans back on the moon shortly after he was elected? If so, maybe there will be a race to see who can build the first moon base just as there was with putting the first man on the moon.

Seems like the wrong choice for a permanent base.

[The Living Fractal]

Why not choose Mars instead?

Lots of ice on Mars.. More gravity is a good thing too. Sure, it's farther away, but once you're there it's probably more self-sustaining. Something tells me that if the Earth were to suffer a major catastrophe a moon base would be doomed as well. Not so for a Mars base, perhaps.

First, develop some kind of autonomous solar power development system. Let it work its magic for a couple decades. Maybe cover a thousand square miles with the cells. That should generate plenty of power for the first colonists.

Then send the first crew there with enough equipment to set up a base camp. You'll probably want to have the major stuff underground, just reduce the possibility of accidental depressurization.

Once they establish the initial systems, go into full colonization mode. Start doing geological surveys to look for usable natural resources such as Methane or petroleum.

Heck, in 50 years you could have something that might survive if the rest of the human population on Earth were to meet catastrophe. And this is with today's tech.

I mean, isn't that really the best reason to make an offworld base? To have some of our eggs diverge from the coordinates of our current basket?

TLF

The Earth is doomed.

[titanandrews]

The Earth will be underwater by 2030, so it looks like pretty good timing from the Japanese. I guess the few Japanese people inhabiting the Moon will be the only humans left.

Re:The Japanese prohibited from engaging in warfre

[MrNixon]

I'm thinking that China has learned that it can control and rule the world through means other than military might.

While America is strong, its true strength comes from it's economy and how much control it can exert over the world markets. (In fact, I'd argue that America is diluting it's might by constantly trying to express it militarily - an economic and social solution to their problems would be much more effective, imo.)

The Chinese are students of history and have learned from that example and are taking the long view. They'll dominate the world eventually, and we probably won't even notice until it's too late. I don't forsee China invading anyone with their military, but their economy and their culture will one day be the most pervasive in the world

In related news, in situ generation of oxygen?

[escay]

A Cambridge student working on methods to extract oxygen and metals from lunar soil was recently awarded the first prize [ibnlive.com] in a contest co-organized by the Heinlein trust and Russian aviation/education complex. Maybe his work (and/or derivatives) would have an impact on this promising moonbase?

Re:But are they sending any sailors there?

[WindBourne]

That has happened a lot over the years in a lot of technoolgy. In particular, the Beoing 747 is more dependant on the workers than all the other Boeing lines combined. Why? Because it was designed in the 60's, but the design was changed at the lines by the workers and engineers. Problem is, that the info never gets back into plans. As it is, the 757,767, and 777 are very similar and took advantage of each earlier design.

With this current work, we will no longer allow loss of knowledge.

Re:But are they sending any salors there?

[LWATCDR]

Okay let me first say that NASA needs a bigger budget. THAT IS A GIVEN.
I was questioning the use of the term technology. I do not believe much new technology needs to be developed. Just that we need to build the bloody stuff.

I wasn't suggesting that they use the actual heat shield from Stardust. Just that expertise to build it exists. I should also state that I also understand that creating a heat shield like that is a complex task involving hypersonic aerodynamics, thermal dynamics, and a big heaping scoop of material science.

The suit for long term use on the moon is going to take a lot of development. Let's not forget that there are health risks with the dust that I hope that someone is also looking at. Not only is in sharp and could cause lung damage but I wonder just how reactive it is. I am guessing that that there are going to a lot of chemically reactive metals that are free in that dust that we would only see in an oxide form on Earth. Not to mention that the top layer in under constant bombardment with radiation across the spectrum. My limited chemistry has me wondering just how many of the electrons will bet at a much higher energy level than we are used to dealing with. There is a lot of development to do here.

NASA flew a real reactor called SNAP-10a and the Soviets used them to power spysats. Again yes development is needed. I can see all sorts of issues with a moon based reactor. None having to do with the low gravity. I am also not a nuke but I have friends that are. Off the top of their head they think that a light water reactor is not the way to go. They suggest a liquid metal reactor with a long burn core. It seems that if you combine enough enriched uranium along with some burnable poisons you can get a core life of decades.
As I said I think the biggest problem is a lack of will. That lack of will isn't from the people at NASA but the people that write the checks.

I for one HATE the new vehicle. Or as I call it Apollo 2.0. I see it as a step backwards. I would love to see NASA take a two program path a lot like the Air Force did before WWII. Right before the war the USAAF tended to pick two different planes for each mission. One was radical and one was conservative. For fighters you had the P-40 Warhawk as the conservative and the P-39 Airacobra as the radical. For medium bombers you had the B-25 as the conservative and the B-26 as the radical. For Heavy Bombers you had the B-18 as the conservative and the B-17 as the radical. The result was that the at the start of the war they always had one that would at least do okay at the mission and sometimes two really good aircraft.
NASA should be running two programs in parallel programs one should be a tried and true vehicle and one should be a development vehicle. NASA should have kept Apollo/Skylab flying while developing the Shuttle. Once the Shuttle was in service a next development of the Shuttle should have been started followed then by a new big leap development. Of course this would cost a lot of money and people would have to learn that even when you fail, you learn.

I see NASA has having two missions. One is the space science missions but the other mission I feel has been ignored. That mission is vehicle development.
The big flaw with the Shuttle was that they had to sell it as going from the Wright Flyer to a 747 in one step. The truth is we still need to go through the Lockeed Vega, Boeing 247, and DC-3 steps of space travel.
But this is just my opinion.
I am no expert. My job is manly just fixing problems. I guess that it is in my nature to try and find solutions using what I do know, and that fails I learn more :)