It's still really hard to land on the moon – can this Japanese company pull it off?
Later today, a Japanese company will be attempting a feat which few have achieved successfully: it will try to gently touch down its Resilience lander on the moon's surface as part of its Hakuto-R Mission 2. Given that humans landed on the moon over 50 years ago, you might assume that moon landings today are easy, but you'd be wrong — as plenty of recent history shows.
ispace's previous mission, Hakuto-R Mission 1, was launched in December 2022 but failed its lunar landing in April 2023. That spacecraft did slow to a speed of less than one meter per second and did get into a landing position, but it crashed into the moon's surface due to problems with the spacecraft's altitude measurement.
Recommended Videos
This time, the company will be hoping for a better result.
'Just over two years ago, on April 26, 2023, ispace, operating Hakuto-R Mission 1, became the first private company in the world to attempt a lunar landing. While the mission achieved significant results, we lost communication with the lander just before touchdown,' said Takeshi Hakamada, CEO of ispace. 'Since that time, we have drawn on the experience, using it as motivation to move forward with resolve. We are now at the dawn of our next attempt to make history.'
How landings have gone wrong before
The challenges of landing on the moon are many, and it takes just one thing to go wrong for a landing to fail. That's what happened to ispace with its previous landing attempt, which occurred due to the complex topography of the moon's surface.
The surface of the moon is covered in craters caused by impacts with meteors and other bodies, some of which are miles wide. While the Earth has experienced similar periodic impacts, on the moon these craters stay present for much longer because there is no atmosphere and no wind to erode them. That means sharp edges, jagged shapes, and steep cliffs.
It was one of these cliffs at the rim of the crater which cratered the previous landing. Passing over a cliff nearly two miles deep, the lander's altitude measurement showed a dramatic jump, and its software assumed that this data must be incorrect so it was ignored. The result of this was that the lander thought it was on the surface when it was still 3 miles above it, and so it cut its engines causing it to plummet straight down and crash.
This goes to show how tricky the moon can be due to its surface geography. But it isn't just cliffs which can be a problem there.
When Intuitive Machines landed its Odysseus lander on the moon in 2024 it made history as the first US spacecraft to land there since the Apollo missions, but it also had landing problems and ended up settling on the surface at a tilted angle. That limited its lifespan as it couldn't collect enough solar power via its panels to keep operations going. In that case, the problem happened when the landing didn't occur in exactly the landing zone which had been planned, but rather at a site around one mile away which had higher elevation. With the wrong elevation data, the leader skidded across the surface, damage its leg, and gently tipped over once it came to a standstill.
Intuitive Machines' second attempt at landing with another version of the spacecraft earlier this year was even less successful, as the lander ended up fully on its side and totally unable to collect solar power. Then, it seemed that the lander may have caught a leg on the edge of a crater or on a boulder, causing it to tip over. As well as all the craters on the moon, there are also many loose boulders, some of which are more than 10 meters across.
It's extremely hard to detect these kinds of topographical challenges from orbit, as landers have to begin their descent processes far above the moon's surface to give them enough time to slow down so they can set down gently on the surface. They can't detect relatively smaller obstacles like boulders or crater edges until they are closer to the surface, by which time they may not be able to maneuver to avoid them.
And finally, there's the fact that the landing procedure needs to be perform with second-time accuracy. The Israeli company SpaceIL had an issue with its Beresheet lander in 2019, when it lost contact with its spacecraft for just a few seconds during landing so a part could be rebooted. That few seconds without contact was enough for the engines to stop firing during the descent, meaning the craft couldn't slow itself quickly enough and smashed hard into the moon's surface.
A success story
With all these partial or total failures, it's notable that there has been one success when it comes to a private company landing on the moon. Firefly Aerospace's Blue Ghost mission touched down safely on the moon's surface earlier this year, marking a big check for the company's first landing attempt and allowing the lander to complete a successful two-week mission.
That lander made use of technology similar to that NASA uses for its Mars landings, called terrain relative navigation, in which cameras on the underside the spacecraft take images of the surface as it descends. An onboard computer then compares these images to onboard maps to select a safe landing spot, allowing the spacecraft to land itself autonomously.
So it can be done, and has been done. But with the moon's tricky surface making every landing a challenge, we'll have to wait and see whether ispace can replicate that success. You can tune into the livestream of the ispace landing in a few hours' time to see how it does.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
a day ago
NASA spacecraft around the moon photographs the crash site of a Japanese company's lunar lander
CAPE CANAVERAL, Fla. -- A NASA spacecraft around the moon has photographed the crash site of a Japanese company's lunar lander. NASA released the pictures Friday, two weeks after ispace's lander slammed into the moon. The images show a dark smudge where the lander, named Resilience, and its mini rover crashed into Mare Frigoris or Sea of Cold, a volcanic region in the moon's far north. A faint halo around the area was formed by the lunar dirt kicked up by the impact. NASA's Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter captured the scene last week. The crash was the second failure in two years for Tokyo-based ispace. Company officials plan to hold a news conference next week to explain what doomed the latest mission, launched from Cape Canaveral in January. ___ The Associated Press Health and Science Department receives support from the Howard Hughes Medical Institute's Department of Science Education and the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation. The AP is solely responsible for all content.
Tom's Guide
a day ago
- Tom's Guide
I tested Perplexity vs Google AI overview with 7 prompts — the results were shocking
Search is undergoing a profound change. For decades, Google has dominated the web search world, with some 90% of all searches funnelled through the massive Google machine. But suddenly, with the arrival of artificial intelligence, things are starting to change, and seriously so. Not only are people increasingly using AI products like ChatGPT as their default search tool, but companies like Perplexity are also building businesses around search services. The idea is to combine the power of AI analysis with the huge amount of conventional search data available at the end of a cursor. But Google is fighting back. The company has recently released an advanced search function called AI Overviews, which aims to bridge the two disciplines and deliver the kind of informed search results the market demands. It's a new kind of search on steroids. So how do the two approaches compare in everyday use? We take a look at Google's new AI Overviews and compare the results to Perplexity AI, to see which gives a better bang for the buck. Prompt: Summarize the key contributions of John McCarthy, Geoffrey Hinton and Noam Shazeer to the development of artificial intelligence. We thought we'd start with something close to home - a look at the architects of AI from the past. First impressions are that Google delivers a competent but fairly traditional results page from this request. Its answer of 238 words covers all the basic points and gives a good overview of the points as you'd expect. Perplexity delivers over 400 words, but it's more than just the quantity that's impressive. It's the fact that the results are laid out in a much more engaging manner, with the user being encouraged to explore additional information in a variety of different ways. They can explore related data, look directly at the sources and even regenerate the results to get a different perspective. Where Google seems to do the bare minimum, Perplexity really seems to add user value. Get instant access to breaking news, the hottest reviews, great deals and helpful tips. Google 4/10 Perplexity 7/10 Prompt: Create a 3-day itinerary for a first-time visitor to Tokyo on a modest budget. The user is interested in Japanese culture and food, but wants to avoid tourist traps. This is a real kicker, a stark example of the old versus the new. Google completely fails to deliver any meaningful response, but instead retreats to a standard Google search. The answer merely features a selection of third-party websites offering tour advice. This is obviously beneficial to Google as it will no doubt allow it to earn ad revenue. Perplexity, on the other hand, delivers a glorious 1000 words of real down-to-earth itinerary. This includes gorgeous photos, maps and itemized costings, which will be more than enough for the user to get a great idea of the proposed experience. Google 2/10 Perplexity 9/10 Prompt: What is the technology behind noise cancelling headphones? Once again we can see the difference between traditional search results and new style AI analysis, although in this case the difference is not so great. Google's results are very credible with 186 words of explanation, along with a useful YouTube video. Perplexity, however, takes it to a more advanced level. The explanation is roughly the same, but the prose is much more accessible to a layperson. Instead of using the word 'inverse', for example, the app chooses to use simpler English to explain how sound is cancelled. It's a subtle but important use of 500 words to achieve a more understandable answer. Google 6/10 Perplexity 8/10 Prompt: Explain the 'double-dig' method of garden bed preparation and contrast it to no-till farming This is quite an obscure test, involving little-known agricultural techniques. But for gardeners it's a very important topic. Google's response is very workmanlike and informative, and uses 260 words to deliver a good answer to the question. The use of Reddit and the Royal Horticultural Society (RHS) are also great sources, which add authority to the answer. Unfortunately for Google, Perplexity once again matches and exceeds in response quality. The RHS and Reddit are also mentioned, as is YouTube. But two things really make this answer stand out. First, the use of a great table to explain the differences at a glance and, most importantly, a conclusion, which gives a clear indication as to why no-dig is increasingly considered the better solution. Google 7/10 Perplexity 8/10 Prompt: What are the primary compliance challenges for a US-based tech startup under the EU's AI Act? This request pushes search to the limits of topicality and obtuse legal documents. Surprisingly, Google's results are very lackluster. The search engine offers up a 57 word March 2025 'featured snippet' from an obscure third-party publication, and that's it. It shows no interest in digging deeper into the topic for the user. Yet again Perplexity tries harder. We're talking 600 words set in a beautiful bullet point format, running through the main challenges and issues surrounding compliance. Along with 9 easily accessible sources and a handful of related subject matter links. Masterful. Google 2/10 Perplexity 8/10 Prompt: What does the history and potential future of blockchain and cryptocurrency look like? This prompt clearly demonstrates why Google's AI Overview is unfortunately not really ready for prime time. The original prompt was something like 'explain cryptocurrency to a fifth grader', but when tested Google couldn't handle it and served up a lame Quora snippet. It's only when we changed the prompt to this one that AI Overview kicked into action, and delivered a reasonable result. It's obvious there's not that much AI involved in AI Overview yet. Interestingly though, this was probably Google's best result. We got 400 words of densely packed information covering the topic clearly and succinctly. Perplexity was also good, providing 600 words and a nice table. Not much to choose between the two then. Google 8/10 Perplexity 8/10 Prompt: What kind of cat is this? For the final prompt we thought we'd go with something a little more exotic. Both search platforms support image upload, so what better than to upload a friendly looking cat to get some more information? Google takes the uploaded image as a prompt to display a page full of similar images, which aligns with its original image matching search. But a re-prompt of 'what kind of cat is this' then delivered a very short four line answer which, although correct, was not super helpful. Perplexity's response was 246 words, with bullets points, covering coat pattern, fur, and the breed. Even a fun fact (calico cats are almost always female). Engaging and informative. Google 3/10 Perplexity 7/10 The king is dead, long live the king? Based on this showing, the rumors could indeed be true. The mighty Google may in fact be on the way to losing its grip on the world's search traffic. Is this the end of an era? Time will tell. However if there's one thing we've learned over the years, it's never to discount the ability of the Google empire to strike back. Uniquely in the world, the company has the compute power, the data and the legendary AI pedigree to surprise us all. Test Notes. It should be noted that we did not use any of the advanced Perplexity functions, but kept to the basic default service. Which make the results even more impressive. It's also important to recognize the fact that AI can get things wrong. Both services feature disclaimers which stress that users should not assume AI search responses are factually correct. This is an early technology finding its feet, users should take care.
Yahoo
a day ago
- Yahoo
NASA moon orbiter spies grave of crashed Japanese lunar lander (image)
When you buy through links on our articles, Future and its syndication partners may earn a commission. NASA's Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter (LRO) has imaged the crash site of Resilience, a moon lander built and operated by the Tokyo-based company ispace. Resilience tried to touch down on June 5 in the center of Mare Frigoris (Sea of Cold), a volcanic region interspersed with large-scale faults known as wrinkle ridges. Mare Frigoris formed over 3.5 billion years ago as massive basalt eruptions flooded low-lying terrain, according to Mark Robinson, a lunar scientist for the company Intuitive Machines who is based in Phoenix, Arizona. Later, the wrinkle ridges formed as the crust buckled under the weight of the heavy basalt deposits. Shortly after Resilience's landing sequence, the ispace Mission Control Center was unable to establish communications with the spacecraft. The team determined that Resilience had likely been lost, a conclusion that was firmed up a few hours later. Also lost on landing was the Tenacious microrover, a small wheeled vehicle developed in Luxembourg by ispace's European subsidiary. Tenacious carried a piece of artwork on its front bumper — Mikael Genberg's "Moonhouse," a small replica of the red-and-white homes famous in Sweden. Related stories: — Private Japanese spacecraft crashes into moon in 'hard landing,' ispace says — Japan's Resilience moon lander aces lunar flyby ahead of historic touchdown try (photo) — Japan's Resilience moon lander arrives in lunar orbit ahead of June 5 touchdown Resilience left some telltale marks when it slammed into the moon on June 5, and LRO noticed them. "The dark smudge formed as the vehicle excavated and redistributed shallow regolith (soil); the faint bright halo resulted from low-angle regolith particles scouring the delicate surface," Robinson, the principal investigator for the Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter Camera, told Inside Outer Space. The crash spot is roughly 1.5 miles (2.4 kilometers) from the landing site that ispace mapped out, to one decimal place, on its webpage. One decimal place in lunar latitude and longitude equals 19 miles (30 km), Robinson said. Resilience was ispace's second moon lander. The company's first such probe also crashed during its touchdown try, in April 2023. Scott Manley has more details on the Resilience crash; check out his video here.
