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

241–250 of 403 posts

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

#241

Post by boricj »

protomolecule wrote: post #223
boricj wrote: post #125

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 no…

>we are not vassals of the USA Aren't you? In 2003 Russia, Germany and France were strongly against illegal American invasion of Iraq. The US invaded anyway, ruining the country. What have France and Germany done about that?

France among many nations called bullshit on the WMD claims, we threatened to veto the UN Security Council resolution authorizing a military intervention and we refused to get involved in that mess.

The fact that the US government decided to unilaterally invade Iraq anyway is not our responsibility to bear. What could France have done more, try and enact economic sanctions or wage war against the USA over this?

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

#242

Post by inglor_cz »

sidewndr46 wrote: post #190
InTheArena wrote: post #188

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Having followed the launch industry for 30 years, I can safely tell you that this is the exact line that every competitor (save RocketLabs and the startups fueled by the SpaceX diaspora of engineers) says whenever they are trying to justify their legacy wasteful rockets. Even Rocketlab's CEO had to "eat his hat" when he finally realized that the cost difference was real, that reusability was here to stay, and they ha…

Given that ULA historically purchased engines from Russia, are you suggesting that it was a direct mechanism for transferring tax revenue to Russia companies?

Interestingly, Ukraine has a lot of space industry and relevant experience. The EU could make use of that, one day. Or the Western world in general.

Of course that means not leaving them over to the bear.

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

#243

Post by ThinkBeat »

Too bad they are not equipped to rescue the 2 astro nauts Boeing has been left stranded on the ISS for over a month.

There they are munching up unbudgeted food and oxygen.

Which will not be a problem, since ISS should have a reserve supply for 3 months, but it should impact the the next supply run.

Will Boeing bring them back?

I would think NASA has reached out to SpaceX, and possibly the Russians (? in today political climate?) and asked what their rescue capabilities might be. SpaceX seems likely to be able to prepare rescue rocket fairly quickly?

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

#244

Post by baq »

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #208
basementcat wrote: post #200

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Several of the investment rounds included participation from In-Q-Tel, the CIA's venture capital arm.

> Several of the investment rounds included participation from In-Q-Tel, the CIA's venture capital arm Not a significant source of capital. NASA COTS was Hawthorne’s public-money shot in the arm.

Yes and it saved/will have saved them literally billions over the following 20 years.

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

#245

Post by imtringued »

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.

>"Doing something" isn't a goal in itself.

Almost all space activity, with the exception of satellite launches, is useless. Let's say we build a Mars and Moon colony, then what? You do it, because you want it as a goal in itself. If you don't grasp that, you don't understand anything about space.

The same fundamental problem also applies to the idea of an economy that is 100% productive and that consumption is evil. If you get rid of consumers, you can also get rid of the producers. You can get rid of the economy. No human existence can be justified under the guise of "productivity" unless that productivity leads up to some consumptive activity.

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

#246

Post by realityking »

bryanlarsen wrote: post #240
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…

> massive taxpayer support When the Forest Service buys a truck from Ford do you also call that "taxpayer support"? The government buys stuff from SpaceX, it hasn't directly subsidized SpaceX for years. The government buys from the lowest bidder, which is almost always SpaceX. For example, NASA estimated that it would have to pay $1.5B to deorbit the ISS. After tender, SpaceX bid and won with an $843M bid. Who is sub…

> The government buys from the lowest bidder

To my knowledge, in the case of NASA’s launch contracts, only US companies are allowed to bid on these. It’s quite understandable that Europe would like to keep domestic capabilities the same way NASA aims to maintain the US’ domestic capabilities.

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

#247

Post by nordsieck »

threeseed wrote: post #152
nordsieck wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If EU pays 10x or 100x more to launch satellites the world isn't going to change all that much. That may be true for a few military satellites. But ESA is talking about putting up a Europoean mega-constellation. In that context, launch costs do really matter.

> In that context, launch costs do really matter. Not really. Strategically important projects rarely live or die based on costs. Especially when they are a fraction of the total spend on the project.

> There was a lot of hubris in the project in the beginning and now it’s clear that they are years behind.

That may be true of other projects, but LEO communications satellite constellations have a history of going bankrupt. Cost is very relevant in this case.

> Especially when they are a fraction of the total spend on the project.

I guess 40-50% is technically a fraction.

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

#248

Post by imtringued »

kranke155 wrote: post #203
cubefox wrote: post #153

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is little doubt that it will do so in a few months. The main engines have already been tested successfully on Vulcan, a few months ago.

You’re not really reading what I wrote but ok.

What wisdom do you expect people to drive from something not having a property until it has that property?

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

#249

Post by inglor_cz »

imtringued wrote: post #245
inglor_cz wrote: post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

>"Doing something" isn't a goal in itself. Almost all space activity, with the exception of satellite launches, is useless. Let's say we build a Mars and Moon colony, then what? You do it, because you want it as a goal in itself. If you don't grasp that, you don't understand anything about space. The same fundamental problem also applies to the idea of an economy that is 100% productive and that consumption is evil.…

"If you don't grasp that, you don't understand anything about space."

That's quite a self-confident, if not arrogant, take, which also misinterpretes my words.

Ariane 6 is a launcher, not a Moon base. Launchers should strive to be economical, because there is a real orbital economy, as you admit, and because the entities which launch them may be cash-strapped.

You yourself wouldn't buy a car or a bicycle that would have to be discarded after the first trip.

Or if your point is that Ariane 6 is basically a white elephant project, well, that would be pretty damning.

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

#250

Post by mort96 »

nordsieck wrote: post #50
kuschku wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

> Ariane is one generation behind SpaceX, but that still puts them on second place. The first doesn't imply the second. Ariane 6 is behind: * ULA's Vulcan * SpaceX's F9/FH * SpaceX's Starship (who knows when it'll start launching payloads) * Blue Origin's New Glenn (supposed to be launched in September) in terms of raw performance as well as $/kg. There are also a number of other rockets like RocketLab's Neutron and…

Relying on a company which is headed by a famously unreliable narcissist seems like a bad choice though, I wouldn't really count those SpaceX options as proper alternatives

EDIT: I would like downvotes to explain their reasoning.

Post reply on HN