Europe's new heavy-lift rocket, Ariane 6, made its inaugural flight • Hacker News Board

Re: Europe's new heavy-lift rocket, Ariane 6, made its inaugural flight

#11

Post by sligor » Wed, Jul 10, 2024, 9:37 AM UTC

nabla9 wrote: post #2

Ariane 6 exists so that European countries can get independent access to space between now and 2030s. The launch cost is almost 2x the cost of Falcon 9. Both platforms can lift 22t to LEO. 6-10 years from now Ariane Next/SALTO will aims replicate Falcon 9 efficiency and the design will be very similar: reusable, RP-1/LOX, Prometheus engine is similar reusable open cycle engine as Merlin with lots of 3D printed parts.

Is the cost difference mostly due by design or also due to much higher production volume and launches for Falcon 9 ?

Re: Europe's new heavy-lift rocket, Ariane 6, made its inaugural flight

#12

Post by crest » Wed, Jul 10, 2024, 9:38 AM UTC

nabla9 wrote: post #2

Ariane 6 exists so that European countries can get independent access to space between now and 2030s. The launch cost is almost 2x the cost of Falcon 9. Both platforms can lift 22t to LEO. 6-10 years from now Ariane Next/SALTO will aims replicate Falcon 9 efficiency and the design will be very similar: reusable, RP-1/LOX, Prometheus engine is similar reusable open cycle engine as Merlin with lots of 3D printed parts.

So because an incumbent exists ESA should give up, let their production and development pipeline rot away and "enjoy" the monopoly until it's too late to change something?

Re: Europe's new heavy-lift rocket, Ariane 6, made its inaugural flight

#13

Post by JumpCrisscross » Wed, Jul 10, 2024, 9:38 AM UTC

Y_Y wrote: post #7

nabla9 wrote: post #2

Ariane 6 exists so that European countries can get independent access to space between now and 2030s. The launch cost is almost 2x the cost of Falcon 9. Both platforms can lift 22t to LEO. 6-10 years from now Ariane Next/SALTO will aims replicate Falcon 9 efficiency and the design will be very similar: reusable, RP-1/LOX, Prometheus engine is similar reusable open cycle engine as Merlin with lots of 3D printed parts.

You're quite right, but for apples-to-apples you should compare to NASA rather than SpaceX. "Move fast and break things" is an attitide that only relatively new rocket builders can have.

> for apples-to-apples you should compare to NASA rather than SpaceX

ESA is analogous to NASA. ArianeSpace is Europe’s ULA. Europe doesn’t have a SpaceX; Ariane 6 is a Yugo in the modern launch market.

Re: Europe's new heavy-lift rocket, Ariane 6, made its inaugural flight

#14

Post by JumpCrisscross » Wed, Jul 10, 2024, 9:38 AM UTC

nabla9 wrote: post #2

Ariane 6 exists so that European countries can get independent access to space between now and 2030s. The launch cost is almost 2x the cost of Falcon 9. Both platforms can lift 22t to LEO. 6-10 years from now Ariane Next/SALTO will aims replicate Falcon 9 efficiency and the design will be very similar: reusable, RP-1/LOX, Prometheus engine is similar reusable open cycle engine as Merlin with lots of 3D printed parts.

> 6-10 years from now Ariane Next/SALTO will aims replicate Falcon 9 efficiency and the design will be very similar

…at which point it will be competing with Starship.

Re: Europe's new heavy-lift rocket, Ariane 6, made its inaugural flight

#15

Post by ur-whale » Wed, Jul 10, 2024, 9:39 AM UTC

nabla9 wrote: post #2

Ariane 6 exists so that European countries can get independent access to space between now and 2030s. The launch cost is almost 2x the cost of Falcon 9. Both platforms can lift 22t to LEO. 6-10 years from now Ariane Next/SALTO will aims replicate Falcon 9 efficiency and the design will be very similar: reusable, RP-1/LOX, Prometheus engine is similar reusable open cycle engine as Merlin with lots of 3D printed parts.

> 6-10 years from now Ariane Next/SALTO will aims replicate Falcon 9 efficiency and the design will be very similar:

And by then, SpaceX will be 10 years ahead of them with a next-gen platform.

Not a great sounding story.

Re: Europe's new heavy-lift rocket, Ariane 6, made its inaugural flight

#16

Post by amelius » Wed, Jul 10, 2024, 9:39 AM UTC

jari_mustonen wrote: post #9

Even though this is not impressive compared to SpaceX, it is still essential that we have multiple actors building rockets. The competition makes sure that SpaceX needs to push the boundaries. Our future as a multi-planetary species is not dependent on a single actor. I'm hoping for some space race. It would be great if the United States would transfer a part of MIC funding to space exploration.

I don't think it is that impressive anymore. We've been building rockets for decades. Making them return to Earth is peanuts compared to building a self driving car. You can even make a simulation that is 99% accurate without much effort. Also, rocket science is just Newtonian physics.

Of course, building a rocket requires a shit-ton of resources, so if anything is impressive then it's the management of those resources.

Re: Europe's new heavy-lift rocket, Ariane 6, made its inaugural flight

#17

Post by ur-whale » Wed, Jul 10, 2024, 9:42 AM UTC

crest wrote: post #12

nabla9 wrote: post #2

Ariane 6 exists so that European countries can get independent access to space between now and 2030s. The launch cost is almost 2x the cost of Falcon 9. Both platforms can lift 22t to LEO. 6-10 years from now Ariane Next/SALTO will aims replicate Falcon 9 efficiency and the design will be very similar: reusable, RP-1/LOX, Prometheus engine is similar reusable open cycle engine as Merlin with lots of 3D printed parts.

So because an incumbent exists ESA should give up, let their production and development pipeline rot away and "enjoy" the monopoly until it's too late to change something?

> So because an incumbent exists ESA should give up

No. But they should learn their lesson and try to run instead of plodding along at a glacial pace.

Oh but wait, they're govt funded with no success incentives other than some sort of vague sense of pride for a job well done.

My money is on they're not going to come out ahead in the race.

Re: Europe's new heavy-lift rocket, Ariane 6, made its inaugural flight

#18

Post by threeseed » Wed, Jul 10, 2024, 9:42 AM UTC

Kuinox wrote: post #5

nabla9 wrote: post #2

Ariane 6 exists so that European countries can get independent access to space between now and 2030s. The launch cost is almost 2x the cost of Falcon 9. Both platforms can lift 22t to LEO. 6-10 years from now Ariane Next/SALTO will aims replicate Falcon 9 efficiency and the design will be very similar: reusable, RP-1/LOX, Prometheus engine is similar reusable open cycle engine as Merlin with lots of 3D printed parts.

By then, startship would have lowered cost even further.

Starship has a payload 10x-15x larger than the smaller Ariane 6 variant.

It seems like for the cost to be lower you would be wanting to fit as much as possible thus impacting how often it is being launched. So not sure if the two have the same requirements.

Re: Europe's new heavy-lift rocket, Ariane 6, made its inaugural flight

#19

Post by JumpCrisscross » Wed, Jul 10, 2024, 9:43 AM UTC

jari_mustonen wrote: post #9

Even though this is not impressive compared to SpaceX, it is still essential that we have multiple actors building rockets. The competition makes sure that SpaceX needs to push the boundaries. Our future as a multi-planetary species is not dependent on a single actor. I'm hoping for some space race. It would be great if the United States would transfer a part of MIC funding to space exploration.

> it is still essential that we have multiple actors building rockets. The competition

Twice the cost and at a small fraction of the frequency is competition in the way a rubber duck competes with a battle ship.

Ariana 6 isn’t meaningful competition. ArianeSpace’s sole value is in its potential of becoming competition if one day sensibly managed.

Re: Europe's new heavy-lift rocket, Ariane 6, made its inaugural flight

#20

Post by ur-whale » Wed, Jul 10, 2024, 9:46 AM UTC

amelius wrote: post #16

jari_mustonen wrote: post #9

Even though this is not impressive compared to SpaceX, it is still essential that we have multiple actors building rockets. The competition makes sure that SpaceX needs to push the boundaries. Our future as a multi-planetary species is not dependent on a single actor. I'm hoping for some space race. It would be great if the United States would transfer a part of MIC funding to space exploration.

I don't think it is that impressive anymore. We've been building rockets for decades. Making them return to Earth is peanuts compared to building a self driving car. You can even make a simulation that is 99% accurate without much effort. Also, rocket science is just Newtonian physics. Of course, building a rocket requires a shit-ton of resources, so if anything is impressive then it's the management of those resourc…

> Also, rocket science is just Newtonian physics.

Disagree.

The newtonian physics part of flying a rocket is indeed the boring part of rocket science in these days of Ghz computing.

But all the engineering (an altogether different - if related - discipline) required is anything but simple.

And engineering and all of its sub-disciplines (materials science, propellant research, iterative refinement, operational research, logistics, 3d printing, computing, simulation, structural engineering, etc...) is both where the complexity lives and where the greatest progress in rocket science has been made.

The devil is in details, as usual.