Quietly, Japan has established itself as a power in the aerospace industry

https://arstechnica.com/science/2018/11/long-on-tradition-japan-grapples-with-a-rapidly-changing-rocket-industry/

by rbanffy • 8 years ago

178 125 8 years ago

ekianjo4• 8 years ago

(Editor's note: Mitsubishi Heavy Industries paid for the author of this story to travel to Japan and spend several days visiting company facilities there.)

OK, so it's pretty much a PR piece. That should have been mentioned right at the beginning of the article, not as a footnote on the last page.

astrange2• 8 years ago

It's mentioned in the third paragraph.

rbanffy2• 8 years ago

And it felt as a pretty honest and accurate depiction.

j269967• 8 years ago

Thanks for the precision.

jillesvangurp3• 8 years ago

It's not just Japan but also China, India, Russia, and the EU that each have ambitious space programs and have had them for quite some time. The US has historically been leading the pack as space programs have been very expensive. However, what we are seeing now is commoditization of technology and vast decreases in cost. SpaceX has quite effectively shown that you can out compete bigger players with a combination of modest availability of capital, talent and out of the box thinking. The level of their capital expenses is quite a lot more reasonable than what it took Nasa to get to the Moon or running the space shuttle program. It gets it down to the level where aspiring billionaires can get things done in reasonable time frames on reasonable budgets (Bezos, Musk, Branson, etc.). Likewise, any multinational or country with access to similar resources can hope to achieve similar results.

So, there is going to be a wave of countries, companies, and people trying to get to emulate SpaceX. Of course the military angle here is scary. Several of these countries are also nuclear powers and the nature of space rockets is that once you can get them to space, delivering payloads back anywhere on earth is relatively straightforward. That used to be the exclusive domain of the US and Russia. That's no longer true.

baybal22• 8 years ago

SpaceX has quite effectively shown that you can out compete bigger players with a combination of modest availability of capital, talent and out of the box thinking.

But did that employing hordes of ex NASA, Lougheed, Raytheon, MDA engineers, and best and brightest at that.

SpaceX is as far from a ordinary SV startup as it can be.

jillesvangurp3• 8 years ago

I agree, they achieved a lot and they stood on the shoulders of giants. The point is that they proved it is possible to achieve these things now. Other companies are emulating what they do and are also getting results. I'm not trivializing their achievements at all.

nine_k4• 8 years ago

NASA, Raytheon, etc did employ these same engineers, and had access to much thicker wads of cash. They did not produce a returnable, reusable rocket, though. They've produced the Space Shuttle.

Xixi3• 8 years ago

That used to be the exclusive domain of the US and Russia.

France detonated its first nuke in 1960, and put its first satellite (called Asterix) in space in 1965. So it has not been the exclusive domain of the US and Russia for more than half a century. Of course North Korea joining the club is a tad more scary...

doombolt4• 8 years ago

France has a long history of invading all kinds of countries, including European ones (think Napoleonic 1812). They're not hesitating to do that today when we consider Africa.

Neither South nor North Korea has either commitment or capacity or historical precedent.

North Korea is a "fake it till you make it" media scarecrow. They would not go to agressive war and they never actually claimed they want to.

If you try to do "five whys" on "Why you should fear North Korea more than France" the topic will evaporate around the third "why".

balthasar• 8 years ago

I am not particularly informed on European aerospace and I am not disputing your point. As a historical note France was very economically competitive mid-50s - 60s but had troubling competing after that.

readhn3• 8 years ago

Russia cant really compete on a mass scale. They can create maybe one-off things but nothing on a scale that can threaten other nations.

jillesvangurp3• 8 years ago

I agree that their economy is a mess. However, they do enjoy a monopoly on transport to the ISS currently and that is due to them having better and cheaper rockets than Nasa. This is being fixed of course but that is after a rather embarrassingly long decade of being dependent on the Russians and their Soviet era rockets still being quite awesome. My understanding is that their engines are still quite competitive, even when compared to SpaceX and Blue Origin. So, I wouldn't discount them outright.

If through some uncharacteristic set of events manage to pull their heads out of their asses, they are still well positioned to do awesome stuff going forward. Of course, the current kleptocracy is hopelessly inept and unlikely to get much done on this front. That seems to be the tragedy of Russia.

scottlocklin• 8 years ago

Have you looked at the things they've fielded recently? Air launched hypersonic cruise missiles, possibly a working version of a nuclear powered hypersonic cruise missile, their ICBMs are the most advanced in the world...

hodgesrm• 8 years ago

Depending on how you mean "threaten other nations" your argument seems to be contradicted by basic facts. Here are three examples.

1. Within the realm of space flight, Russia has one of the most active launch programs in the world if not the most active. [1]

2. As far as overall military capacity Russia has by some accounts the largest nuclear arsenal in the world. [2]

3. With respect to current military strategy and tactics, Putin's campaign of disinformation using social media is a model of asymmetric warfare -- cheap to create and expensive to defend against.

Westerners discount Russia at their peril. They are worthy adversaries.

[1] https://spaceflightnow.com/launch-schedule/

[2] https://www.armscontrol.org/factsheets/Nuclearweaponswhohasw...

duxup• 8 years ago

Is Russia really competitive anymore? It seems like they've fallen behind and outside of putting humans on the space station, and riding out the life of their existing rocket system (granted a highly reliable one) they're potentially doomed to keep lagging under the current kleptocracy.

Hoefner• 8 years ago

As far as I know there are at least 3 private space companies in Russia with some ongoing projects. But state owned Roscomos definitely have some problems lately.

soperj2• 8 years ago

They're the only ones putting people on the space station. I'd say yes. Not to mention they supply the engines for a few different american rockets.

coldtea• 8 years ago

SpaceX has quite effectively shown that you can out compete bigger players with a combination of modest availability of capital, talent and out of the box thinking.

Well, it's not like NASA (or the USSR equivalent) couldn't "think out of the box".

In fact they had to, several times, to get to space/moon.

All those newer challengers (no pun intended) also benefit from a long list of technologies and problems they've already solved for them.

paulsutter• 8 years ago

Biggest problem at NASA, contractors are paid a percentage of cost

“We’ve got to change the way contracting is done,” Musk told the governors. “You can’t do these cost-plus, sole-source contracts because then the incentive structure is all messed up. As soon as you don’t have any competition, the sense of urgency goes away. And as soon as you make something a cost-plus contract, you’re incenting the contractor to maximize the cost of the program, because they get a percentage.”

From https://arstechnica.com/science/2017/07/elon-musk-knows-what...

umichguy12• 8 years ago

NASA et al were true pioneers in uncharted territories with no prior guiding principles. Without them, a lot of current gen tech wouldn't even exist. Plus, remember they operated in times where you mostly used slide rules and hand calculations!

azernik5• 8 years ago

Space launch and ICBM technology has actually drifted apart over time. The early ICBMs that were suitable for space launch were liquid-fueled, and this is actually a really bad choice for missiles; it can take hours to fuel a rocket and ready it for launch. Modern missiles are almost all solid-fueled, which lowers performance (bad for commercial launch) but lets you store the missiles fueled and ready for launch.

The only example I know of an operational launch vehicle with a lot of ICBM commonality is the Israeli Shavit, and that one is not commercially competitive; Israeli payloads (even military) are only launched on Shavit if they require a particular level of secrecy.

liftbigweights• 8 years ago

Japan has been a power ( relatively speaking ) in the aerospace industry for very a long time and it was never a secret and they certainly weren't quiet about it. What they have been quiet about is that their aerospace industry is also used to maintain a quasi military/icbm capability. Just like japan's is open about it's nuclear industry but quiet about the fact that their nuclear industry is used to maintain their latent/defacto nuclear power status. But then again, all aerospace industries and all nuclear industries are also linked to the military everywhere.

Japan has been the 2nd or 3rd largest economy in the world for 50 years. JAXA, after NASA and ESA, is probably the most technical advanced, well funded and respected space agencies in the world. A nation can't have such a large economy for this long without being a "power" ( relatively speaking ) in most sectors. Japan, despite its pacifist constitution, also has one of the best funded militaries as well.

SiempreViernes• 8 years ago

Are you saying that Japan has a covert nuclear weapons program?

detaro2• 8 years ago

Japan is considered a de-facto nuclear power because they do not need a covert nuclear weapons program right now. They're advanced enough and have the materials and infrastructure that if they ever decide to abandon current policy of "we do not want nukes being made or stationed in Japan" they can become an actual nuclear power within a year or so.

hindsightbias• 8 years ago

Japan has had all the pieces for a very long time - as an obvious capability to rapidly counter any threat from China if they had to go it alone. We (and France I believe) shipped them reprocessed plutonium in the 80's for "breeder research."

One of the Fukushima reactors held a lot of that store.

https://www.japantimes.co.jp/opinion/2018/07/07/editorials/r...

"Today, the plutonium stockpile has reached 47 tons, including 37 tons stored in Britain and France, which have been commissioned to reprocess spent fuel from Japan’s nuclear power plants."

philipkglass• 8 years ago

Japan may be considered a "virtual" nuclear weapons state because it already has delivery systems, separated plutonium, and the industrial/technical capabilities to quickly weaponize that plutonium should it need to.

Japan's plutonium is reprocessed from commercial reactors and is not "weapons grade." This is a bit of a misnomer, however: weapons grade plutonium is really good for making weapons because it has a low concentration of the isotope plutonium 240. Pu-240 undergoes spontaneous fission frequently enough that it makes a pre-detonation "fizzle" (bomb blows itself too quickly to achieve useful yield) likely in a simple bomb design like that used during World War II. "Supergrade" plutonium, especially pure Pu-239, is also desirable for submarine-launched weapons because it reduces crew exposure to radiation from the stored warheads.

It is however technically feasible to make effective weapons from "reactor grade" plutonium containing more Pu-240 if the weapons designer invests in more sophisticated features like deuterium-tritium boosting of the fission device.

To quote Carey Sublette's excellent Nuclear Weapons FAQ,

"The fusion reaction rate typically becomes significant at 20-30 million degrees K. This temperature is reached at very low efficiencies, when less than 1% of the fissile material has fissioned (corresponding to a yield in the range of hundreds of tons). Since implosion weapons can be designed that will achieve yields in this range even if neutrons are present a the moment of criticality, fusion boosting allows the manufacture of efficient weapons that are immune to predetonation. Elimination of this hazard is a very important advantage in using boosting. It appears that every weapon now in the U.S. arsenal is a boosted design."

(My emphasis.)

https://nuclearweaponarchive.org/Nwfaq/Nfaq4-3.html

Japan could produce its own tritium by irradiation of natural lithium targets in commercial power reactors. It takes maybe 3 grams of tritium to make an efficient boosted weapon. Japan has enough plutonium for perhaps a thousand boosted-fission weapons in the 100 kiloton yield range, comparable in yield (if not efficiency) to France's latest submarine-launched warheads. I don't think it can produce tritium fast enough to supply a large number of weapons, given tritium's short half life and Japan's small number of operating reactors, but many reactors idled post-Fukushima are still in working condition and could be started up again in an emergency. Further, an opponent that does not consider dozens of nuclear weapons a rational deterrent is unlikely to be deterred by hundreds either, so Japan may not need many weapons to demonstrate a credible deterrent.

tyu1000• 8 years ago

There's also for a long time been a tacit protectionist agreement with Boeing that as long as Japanese airliners buy a lot of jets Boeing will produce a lot of components in Japan.

rangibaby• 8 years ago

It extends to military too. The Mitsubishi F-2 was the F-35 of it’s day, which was great for everyone (except the taxpayer)

kubakan• 8 years ago

Why do these people always spend the first 20% of the article talking about themselves. Its like they wanted to be a gonzo journalist but could only land a tech blog gig.

readhn3• 8 years ago

I think Japan can really make it a reliable streamlined technology. After reading about the setup of some of their production systems its not longer a surprise to me why they make some of the most reliable tech out there (automotive industry for example).

Theodores• 8 years ago

The title isn't fair to the established international role Japan plays in the aerospace industry or space.

The Boeing 'Dreamliner' is one-third made in Japan. Re-supply missions to the International Space Station have been completed without incident by Japanese craft. Even the largest module on the ISS is Japanese. Japan has been busy.

Before WW2 Japan was in possession of a remarkably large fleet of aircraft carriers with the planes to go with them. In the post WW2 years the electronic components for those planes bombing Korea had to come from somewhere and Japanese people were doing all the hard work making and packaging those avionic nuts and bolts, even if for Western customers in the defence sector. So it is a long history tied into global projects and multi-national companies, not some 'secret effort to get started now'. It is a tale of evolution, not some nationalist effort with no long term goals.

When the USA decided to put a man on the moon there were 400,000+ people working for NASA, directly or with a contractor. The trip to the moon was chosen just because it hadn't been done and it was unlikely that the Soviets were going to do it any time soon. There was no plan for a next step, once the goal had been achieved. Hence we ended up with low-earth-orbit projects and no effort to put a man on Mars or establish a lunar base for further exploration.

Japan has 'quietly' got on with the real projects that are needed when it comes to aerospace and space, there has been no grand-standing or opting out.

baud1472584• 8 years ago

The Japanese Aerospace Exploration Agency (JAXA) has also launched the Hayabusa 1 & 2 missions to study asteroids.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hayabusa https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hayabusa2

hinkley• 8 years ago

More importantly, the wings are manufactured by Mitsubishi Heavy. Historically Boeing kept the wings in house because they were considered the most important part.

Mitsubishi Heavy Industries also has a commuter jet, and I still think it's just a matter of time until they build something bigger. At least by the time the Dreamliner is up for a replacement.

nimbius• 8 years ago

As someone intimately familiar with japanese manufacturing (I work as an engine mechanic at an auto repair chain in the midwest) this comes as no surprise to me.

remember when you first bought a new car? the manual said an oil change was required after 400-500 miles? thats due to a japanese invention called the self clearancing piston. a certain amount of piston wall is designed to wear off to develop the final piston clearance in the engine block. this cut manufacuring times drastically for some of the most critical components in the engine.

Japanese metallurgy is also miles ahead of what US steel is in my opinion. They are more willing to put exotic metal blends in their cars than their american counterparts. For example, a regular sedan from the US might contain a hardened borg warner gearset for all models. The japanese will adjust the transmissions for nearly every model based on what the car or truck is. turbocharged all wheel drive vehicles get 15% more nickel in their gears than their front wheel drive counterparts. This leads to a car with unreal longevity and durability.

They do this with motor assemblies too. Its not uncommon to see working sets of motors in japanese cars that are 30 years old where window motors and such would easily have failed in american sedans. potted, brushed high quality motors were a fixture on practically every japanese sedan in the 90s for even boring stuff like mirror adjustment.

jgust2• 8 years ago

I don't know how to word this without sounding condescending, but how did you end up on hacker news given your profession? I get the impression that the majority demographic here is involved with software in some fashion, so seeing someone with a "blue collar" job stuck out to me. I tend to spend my free time tinkering with engines, so my thought is that you may spend your free time tinkering with software? Anyways, glad to see non-software people here to make discussions a bit less homogenous.

yourapostasy2• 8 years ago

That perspective was really valuable to me. It confirmed what I had long suspected: lots of Japanese manufacturing somehow still embodies a craftsmanship ethos. This seems lost in the large American brands (some smaller "Made in USA" brands like Norseman for drill bits still seem to embrace this ethos).

This ethos is increasingly rare in software as well, and I'm wondering if this is setting up those who have discarded the ethos for a long losing game with technical debt, or if they will be eventually vindicated as having correctly optimized for price over complexity management and quality.

BJBBB• 8 years ago

Sorry, but does sound a bit elitist. Coding has become a somewhat skill set among some blue-collar workers, and have seen some good stuff come from electricians, plumbers, and mechanics.

I know many civil, mechanical, chemical, and electrical engineers that write good code to solve important problems. I know few programmers that know anything about circuit design, plumbing, carpentry, etc. But do believe that the programmers that frequent HN are probably more apt to be multi-skilled and a more renaissance-type of person.

forapurpose• 8 years ago

How is an engine mechanic more 'blue collar' than a sysadmin or a website 'mechanic'? And a lot of coding could be (and has been) compared to assembly-line work.

I think the only difference, in this respect, is that one technology has been around longer and the other is still the cool new thing. Someday, in a forum about whatever the new thing of that moment is, someone will ask the same thing about people who work in IT.

Baeocystin• 8 years ago

Not the person you asked, but I was a welder in a shipyard for years, and am a skilled mechanic. I currently work in tech.

No one would ever know unless I mention it, because I don't fit the ugly stereotype of tradework being the domain of the crude and uneducated. I used to talk about it more, but I got tired of the condescension. Tech in general is incredibly insular, and nowhere near as open-minded as the field thinks it is, so I just keep quiet unless something like this thread pops up.

There are a lot of us like this out there, and we tend to stay silent on the subject for similar reasons. I am happy to talk about engines or APIs. What I really don't like is the assumption that because I know about engines, anything more cerebral must be a hobby, because it would otherwise be beyond me as a profession.

TheSpiceIsLife• 8 years ago

Another blue collar reporting in. I did an apprenticeship in metal fabrication / welding after high school. I worked in IT briefly more recently but am back in my trade now doing fairly technical job of operating a laser cutter.

RobLach• 8 years ago

Programmer is the factory job of our time.

nihonde• 8 years ago

Interesting perspective! A good friend of mine is a supplier to Mitsubishi on the MRJ and other projects. I’m not comfortable sharing details but I can say that the excellence in engineering skill in the Nagoya area, with both Mitsubishi and Toyota and others having built on a long tradition of craftsmanship from that area, is very exciting to learn about. Did you know that it basically began with innovations in loom technologies around the turn of the last century?

stochastician• 8 years ago

On that note, the Toyota museum in Nagoya was the most amazing science/technology museum my wife and I have ever been to. We made a specific stop in Nagoya on our honeymoon to see it, and were not disappointed. The first half is an incredible tour of the history of textiles, with hundreds (literally) of working looms at all phases of development, and incredibly knowledgable staff. And that's all before you get to the equally-amazing car part! http://www.tcmit.org/english/

umichguy12• 8 years ago

"They do this with motor assemblies too. Its not uncommon to see working sets of motors in japanese cars that are 30 years old where window motors and such would easily have failed in american sedans. potted, brushed high quality motors were a fixture on practically every japanese sedan in the 90s for even boring stuff like mirror adjustment."

I think a lot of that "over-engineering" gradually went away towards the 90s and beyond, as cost concerns and other aspects started to bite in. Plus, they also understood that people started to change cars more often than before, so why engineer something for such a long duration? A lot of that initial over-engineering was also because of the pressure on Japanese brands to try and establish themselves in markets like the U.S. and Europe, where there was a general feeling that these "puny" Japanese cars might not last long. In terms of over-engineering (I know, keep using this term), the true pinnacle for me was the first gen Lexus LS400 designed to compete with the Mercedes S-class. Now, that was something else.

Funnily enough, they have started lagging U.S. and European companies after the mid-2000s in terms of vehicle technologies like advanced transmissions, wider adoption of turbocharged engines, infotainment etc.

/just a few personal thoughts from my years working in the auto industry

stcredzero3• 8 years ago

Funnily enough, they have started lagging U.S. and European companies after the mid-2000s in terms of vehicle technologies like advanced transmissions

Scotty Kilmer is an almost half-century veteran of the car repair business. (He's become the new Car Talk of 20-teens YouTube.) His position on the automatic transmissions made by most car companies, in the current fleet of used cars, is that they're a bit crappy. As in, you're a bit lucky to get 100k out of most of them trouble free, and you're very lucky to get 200k trouble free. One of the few makers of automatic transmissions that gets it right is Aisin, which is the supplier to Toyota.

One way this might change, is the use of computers to operate what's essentially a manual transmission on behalf of the driver. However, even that might fall by the wayside, outside of particular niches, with electric vehicles.

vkou• 8 years ago

Plus, they also understood that people started to change cars more often than before, so why engineer something for such a long duration?

People 'change cars more often then before', but they don't do it by hauling their three year old SUV to the junkyard.

The car gets re-sold to someone else. Most cars end their life by being driven into the ground.

rasz2• 8 years ago

In terms of over-engineering (I know, keep using this term), the true pinnacle for me was the first gen Lexus LS400

1UZ-FE, 1JZ, 2JZ are legendary engines. You can still buy overbuild cars today, but you will pay serious premium for it (Land Cruiser)

giardini• 8 years ago

nimbius says>" ... japanese invention called the self clearancing piston."

Never heard of it! What you're describing is commonly known as "break-in" and has been part of auto care from day two until now:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Break-in_%28mechanical_run-in%...

I agree that Japanese auto manufacturers use excellent steel and were quicker to put, say, higher-nickel steel into parts.

nimbius says> " Its not uncommon to see working sets of motors in japanese cars that are 30 years old where window motors and such would easily have failed in american sedans."

Too far: it's uncommon to see a 30-year old Japanese car (built in 1988 or before) that runs at all, much less that has working power windows!

rasz2• 8 years ago

Too far: it's uncommon to see a 30-year old Japanese car (built in 1988 or before) that runs at all, much less that has working power windows!

Camry V30s are pretty bulletproof

e12e• 8 years ago

Hm. Always thought Toyota made pretty durable pickups :

"Killing a Toyota Part 1 | Top Gear | BBC" : https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=xnWKz7Cthkk

jorblumesea2• 8 years ago

Is it fair to compare US car manufacturing standards to overall US manufacturing standards? The US car industry is notorious for poor engineering standards and quality, largely driven by profit incentives. Yet, we have our own sophisticated manufacturing base. It just doesn't care about cars.

umichguy12• 8 years ago

"The US car industry is notorious for poor engineering standards and quality,"

Engineering standards are * very broadly* similar, worldwide, as auto companies do have to design and sell a vehicle for multiple markets. What was lacking in the U.S. is the actual execution of the build quality. You can engineer something to be really good, but if you don't build it well, there's no point.

A very good example of this is the year 2000 Ford Focus. It was winning car of the year/ best quality awards in Europe, while it was noted for having the most amount of recalls in the U.S for a Ford. Broadly the same product with some localized differences, built separately in EU and the U.S. - completely different execution/ build quality.

adventured2• 8 years ago

The US car industry is notorious for poor engineering standards and quality, largely driven by profit incentives.

That certainly used to be the case, 20+ years ago. US auto makers have dramatically improved since the mid 1990s.

On reliability today Buick outranks BMW, Infiniti, Toyota and Mercedes. Chevrolet outranks Toyota, Audi, Honda, Hyundai and BMW. Ford & GMC are better than Subaru and Acura, comparable to Mercedes, and slightly better than Volkswagen. Lincoln is better than Honda, Nissan and Audi.

https://www.jdpower.com/business/press-releases/jd-power-201...

nradov3• 8 years ago

Most manufacturers no longer recommend an oil change at 500 miles for their new cars.

Japanese brands have also had their share of problems. For example Honda automatic transmissions were notoriously unreliable for several years leading to multiple recalls and class action lawsuits.

Nokinside• 8 years ago

Having aerospace industry is not just economic policy issue.

Japan, US, China, India, Russia, EU, maintain aerospace industry for strategic purposes. Civilian and military aerospace are tightly linked.

Apocryphon• 8 years ago

Perhaps one day SpaceX will likewise have grander desires.

axus• 8 years ago

Another Mitsubishi company, Mitsubishi Electric, builds the satellites that Mitsubishi Heavy Industries launches. They are independent companies; just yesterday, a Mitsubishi Electric-built satellite was launched on a Space-X rocket from Cape Canaveral: https://spaceflightnow.com/2018/11/15/spacex-launches-qatars...

Slightly related, during that launch it was funny how the video from the fairing rocket cut out while it's still in space, and a minute later video from the landing boat shows the rocket on the launch pad like nothing happened.

Symmetry• 8 years ago

In addition to boosters, Japan is the only nation to have launched a practical solar sail spacecraft[1]. They've also got another spacecraft[2] orbiting an asteroid with the intent of returning a sample from it.

[1]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IKAROS

[2]http://www.hayabusa2.jaxa.jp/en/

esaym• 8 years ago

Funny since they were banned from making anything aerospace related after WWII.

azernik5• 8 years ago

"...MHI's chief executive, Shunichi Miyanaga, or Miyanaga-san as he is known throughout this building and beyond."

That's how everyone in Japan is addressed: $FAMILYNAME-san.

lovemenot• 8 years ago

Right. And later we get incorrectly:

> If Japan has an internationally known rocket personality, it is Ogasawara

He is introduced without honorific, no doubt because company insiders did so. But the reporter as an outsider is not entitled to do that.

azernik5• 8 years ago

Referring to someone by family name is standard Western journalistic practice; the specification of form of address for Miyanaga is only amusing to me because it's specifically called out.

Ogasawara has the added (and rather shocking, from a Japanese perspective) twist of insisting on being addressed by first name, which the journalist does after mentioning this.

nkoren2• 8 years ago

Good article. The most hopeful thing in it is their response to the development of reusable rockets "We feel a strong sense of crisis."

Good. They should. It's an innovation that is changing the industry with extreme rapidity. Almost universally, the established players in the sector -- both domestically and internationally -- have been in a state of extreme denial about this, making increasingly tortured arguments for why reusability isn't worthwhile or even possible to do. The longer they remain in this state, the more they undermine their future. Nice to see that Japan is confronting this head-on (even if there is still a bit of denial evident).

The end of the article, talking about women's participation in the workforce, isn't just political correctness. Japan has a big problem here, and it will impair their ability to innovate.

This isn't just about having women in senior leadership positions (although that's not unimportant). Watch the SpaceX webcast and you'll see that their crowds of (often very young) engineers are thronging with women, minorities, people who've dialed their queerness up to 11, etc. What's going on here? I don't think that SpaceX's hiring practices involve much affirmative action; from everything I've heard, intelligence, passion, and commitment are the qualities they hire for. But, critically: they give zero points for fitting into the culture of old grey company men. This differentiates SpaceX from the establishment and gives them an abundance of bright young things that are clearly fuel innovation.

The culture of old grey company men is something that Japan has bad. They do have some traditions which act to counteract this -- a practically spiritual commitment to quality of service & craftsmanship has driven Japanese innovation for centuries -- but that's not going to be enough to compete.

tlear2• 8 years ago

You realize that webcasts extras are not random sample of SpaceX engineering force?

Japan biggest challenge is collapsing population.

Honestly Space or NK for that matter are tiny problems for Japan. Debt and birth rate is what they need to face. That is real crisis.

nkoren2• 8 years ago

I've known some folks who've worked for SpaceX, and more who'v interviewed. My sense is that the webcasts are fairly representative of the youthfulness and diversity of the company.

(Context: I started getting involved in space activism as a teenager in the early 1990s. The first conference I went to was a bunch of mostly-veteran Apollo and Shuttle engineers. I remember looking around the room and noting that I was the youngest person in the room by 2 or 3 decades, and also that there wasn't a single woman or non-white face present. Nothing against these guys at all -- they were great! -- but demographics like that will lead any movement to extinction. So I find it enormously satisfying to see how those demographics have changed.)

You're absolutely right that Japan's biggest challenge is its collapsing population. However, excluding half your population from meaningful participation in the workforce -- at the same time as your population is collapsing -- makes a bad problem significantly worse. In fact both problems have pretty much the same solution, starting with changing the culture such that it doesn't force Japanese women to choose between between being a mother and having a career.

User23• 8 years ago

Japanese quality is fantastic. But few know how it happened. Homer Sarasohn's influence is almost impossible to overstate: https://honoringhomer.net/

Quietly, Japan has established itself as a power in the aerospace industry

Related Stories