Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

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

esa.int

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 403 posts

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

#121

Post by londons_explore »

Xixi wrote: post #66
MrSkelter wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Falcon’s costs are a fiction. SpaceX benefits from massive taxpayer support and uses facilities built by the military and NASA. It’s not a like for like comparison especially give SpaceX keeping its books private and giving no clear public indication of how reusable its rockets really are or their refurb cost. Given Musks history of creative accounting quoting their PR numbers, the ones they pitch congress, as facts…

Ariane 6 is quite heavily subsidized, with ArianeGroup getting €340M per year to operate it [1]. With an expected 10 launches per year, that's about €34M/launch. But in the grand scheme of things it doesn't matter: Europe needs to be able to put its own military satellites (or anything else critical) up there. Military satellites sold to third party countries also won't launch themselves... [1] https://europeanspacef…

> But in the grand scheme of things it doesn't matter: Europe needs to be able to put its own military satellites (or anything else critical) up there. Military satellites sold to third party countries also won't launch themselves...

I'm very surprised the EU and the USA and SpaceX didn't work out a deal to buy a certain number of F9's to be launched and operated from the EU. The EU would pay a (vey high) price to buy outright the rockets, and would agree not to develop a competing rocket design in the next 20 yrs.

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

#122

Post by JumpCrisscross »

nordsieck wrote: post #56
JumpCrisscross wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And that’s before we start counting in China and, soon, possibly, India. Ariana 6 might be the stupidest civil aerospace project in the world after Boeing’s Starliner.

> And that’s before we start counting in China China is... weird. Most of the rockets they launch are small hypergolic rockets (Long March 2-4) with clear ICBM heritage. Which are multiple generations "behind" Ariane 6. They do have some more modern cryogenic rockets, but they can't seem to scale those operationally. Presumably it'll happen eventually. But who knows when that'll be.

> Most of the rockets they launch are small hypergolic rockets

They’re decently far along on their reusable booster [1], with a methalox engine being developed by a private company [2].

Of course, everything looks cute until it flies. But that programme is arguably ahead of anything ArianeSpace is working on.

[1] https://spacenews.com/china-to-debut-large-reusable-rockets-...

[2] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Longyun_(rocket_engine)

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

#123

Post by snowpid »

cubefox wrote: post #71
JumpCrisscross wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> more cost effective for ESA to contract two or three private European rocket start-ups, like RFA, to build such reusable launch vehicles That would trigger politically-impossible lay-offs in France.

Yeah, it seems impossible for ESA to act rationally in this regard when bound e.g. by French veto. The only opportunity would be for individual countries (like Germany) to fund such rockets alone, but that seems unlikely due to cost (and the fact that they already pay for ESA). Without substantial investment, companies like RFA don't have the means to create a larger rocket, due to heavy international competition. No…

The only opportunity would be for individual countries (like Germany) to fund such rockets alone, but that seems unlikely due to cost (and the fact that they already pay for ESA).

Germany does it in its national program. https://www.dlr.de/de/ar/themen-missionen/raumfahrttechnolog...

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

#124

Post by mytailorisrich »

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #19
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.

SpaceX came to be because of all of the knowledge, skills, industry, and people produced by NASA and the US taxpayers.

So it is crucial for Europe to maintain and develop its knowledge and industrial base, but indeed they should also adapt to compete because that's the only way to survive in the long term.

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

#125

Post by boricj »

contrarian1234 wrote: post #33
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.

Are the Europeans wworried that "between now and 2030s" the US will cut off their access to space? I understand things can go wrong and it's good to have a backup plan in the long term... But that's not that many years out. You can go without access for a few years .. It seems like a tiny risk

The French mantra is strategic autonomy. We are allies with the USA, we are not vassals of the USA and we do not want to depend on anybody else to defend our own interests or our own agenda. This is why the French army has independent expeditionary and nuclear deterrent capabilities and why nearly all of our military kit is designed and produced either locally or in partnership with nearby European countries.

It's not that we don't trust the Americans per se (although opinions may differ on that topic), but we don't want to have to.

ArianeGroup also manufactures the M51 missile that goes inside our SSBNs and unlike the Brits we do not accept depending on Americans supplying us with the missiles for our nuclear deterrent.

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

#126

Post by londons_explore »

panick21_ wrote: post #90
MrSkelter wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Falcon’s costs are a fiction. SpaceX benefits from massive taxpayer support and uses facilities built by the military and NASA. It’s not a like for like comparison especially give SpaceX keeping its books private and giving no clear public indication of how reusable its rockets really are or their refurb cost. Given Musks history of creative accounting quoting their PR numbers, the ones they pitch congress, as facts…

Lol, how delusional. ArianeGroup literally just got 5 billion $ plus use of lots of tax payer subsidized infrastructure. That is 4 billion $ more then SpaceX ever got for development of Falcon 9. Falcon 9 got an old shitty broken down launch sites they had rebuild, ArianeGroup got a whole new built launch site for free. But feel free to live in fantasy land. > It’s not a like for like comparison especially give Space…

> Problem is we know how much money SpaceX raised

If they wanted to raise money without it becoming public, they could do so easily - for example using directors loans.

A better way to guess their expenses is to look at how many employees they have. Lets call it 15,000. Lets put average pay at $150k/year after overheads and taxes. 96 launches in 2023. That puts the salary cost per launch at $23M/launch.

It's a very rough figure because obviously some rocket parts are purchased, there are other overheads, and there are other revenues and costs from starlink etc.

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

#127

Post by pantalaimon »

kuschku wrote: post #26
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.

Ariane is one generation behind SpaceX, but that still puts them on second place. All while being independent from the whims of one single individual, ensuring independent launch capabilities for national security reasons.

Are you deliberately ignoring China?

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

#128

Post by CrLf »

londons_explore wrote: post #121
Xixi wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ariane 6 is quite heavily subsidized, with ArianeGroup getting €340M per year to operate it [1]. With an expected 10 launches per year, that's about €34M/launch. But in the grand scheme of things it doesn't matter: Europe needs to be able to put its own military satellites (or anything else critical) up there. Military satellites sold to third party countries also won't launch themselves... [1] https://europeanspacef…

> But in the grand scheme of things it doesn't matter: Europe needs to be able to put its own military satellites (or anything else critical) up there. Military satellites sold to third party countries also won't launch themselves... I'm very surprised the EU and the USA and SpaceX didn't work out a deal to buy a certain number of F9's to be launched and operated from the EU. The EU would pay a (vey high) price to bu…

I think you fail to understand the concept of sovereignty.

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

#129

Post by 627467 »

ddalex wrote: post #70
JumpCrisscross wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> SpaceX benefits from massive taxpayer support and uses facilities built by the military and NASA So does ArianeSpace [1]. (It’s majority owned by the French state. EDIT: It’s not.) > no clear public indication of how reusable its rockets really are or their refurb cost Refurb rates and turnaround times for Falcon 9 first stages are publicly documented [2]. Refurb costs are more opaque, but they’d have to be multipl…

If I would be begging for new development money from the parent org after just launching a new product, I would also say that the new product is obsolete and we need to work on a replacement ASAP... especially in a pork-barrel org

that's a marginal improvement in attitude than previous Arianespace leaders:

> "Let us say we had ten guaranteed launches per year in Europe and we had a rocket which we can use ten times—we would build exactly one rocket per year. That makes no sense. I cannot tell my teams: 'Goodbye, see you next year!'"

https://arstechnica.com/science/2018/05/ariane-chief-seems-f...

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

#130

Post by ncruces »

inglor_cz wrote: post #103
lm28469 wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

HN is amazing: Europe does something > Aha it's bad why did they even try Europe doesn't do anything > Aha Europe always late, never innovate, Europe bad

As an European, this project is quite typical for Europe. Technically behind the times, serves French strategic interests, non-competitive on the private launch market. "Doing something" isn't a goal in itself. Ariane 6 in context of the 2020s is similar to programming a new MySpace app for Symbian OS right now. Hard work, costly, needs a lot of qualified workforce, and the product has very limited audience.

So the entire world should rather be dependent on SpaceX, and be done with it?

Arianespace had the lead and lost it, because it kept the old way of doing things. Or are you arguing Ariane 5 was technically behind and wasn't competitive in the '00s?

Ariane 6 is not that far behind the other "old space" companies, which the US is struggling to keep around as alternatives to SpaceX. It's not like Boeing and ULA are doing much better.

We should be critical of Arianespace, and find ways to get it to improve, but just throwing everything at SpaceX will do nothing to keep them honest.

Post reply on HN