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

281–290 of 403 posts

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

#281

Post by m4rtink »

unethical_ban wrote: post #228
nordsieck wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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…

Two operational, and a bunch of dreams. Right now, Europe has a functioning rocket program under their own control. I think it's understandable for an engineering community to talk about the tech, but people seem to be forgetting the geopolitics.

Europe again has one functioning rocket - after it had 3: - Soyuz from Kourou, which understandably is no longer politically viable now. - Ariane 5 - Vega/Vega C (which keeps crashing in its latest iteration) Not I good track record I'm afraid.

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

#282

Post by nordsieck »

m4rtink wrote: post #279
nordsieck wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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…

Not to mention the quite cheap flight-proven Indian rockets & a whole bunch of traditional + private Chinese companies, some actively trying to clone Falcon 9 or even Starship.

> Not to mention the quite cheap flight-proven Indian rockets & a whole bunch of traditional + private Chinese companies, some actively trying to clone Falcon 9 or even Starship.

It seems like most of the world has decided not to fly on Chinese rockets, so those aren't really competition.

But I totally agree with regard to India: PSLV and GSLV are both good, competitive rockets. It'd kind of a shame that they don't launch more often. It makes me wonder if there's some sort of organizational dysfunction going on. It does sound like they're going to be launching OneWeb going forward, though, which is nice.

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

#283

Post by tekla »

Angostura wrote: post #136
Cipater wrote: post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>True, but the EU has tight rules about government subsidies (TFEU art. 107-109) which don't have equivalent in the US. ESA member states contributed €2.815 billion for the development of Ariane 6. Industry contributed €400 million. Additionally, the member states have agreed to subsidize the Ariane 6 to the tune of €340 million annually.

Where does SpaceX get its development funding from?

They sell commercial services to private industry and Government.

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

#284

Post by nordsieck »

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?

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

I mean, for many years the US bought seats on Soyuz launches, so that was an even more direct mechanism.

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

#285

Post by dotnet00 »

MrSkelter wrote: post #47
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.

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…

It's sad seeing this delusional take despite all the evidence to the contrary.

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

#286

Post by dotnet00 »

mort96 wrote: post #250
nordsieck wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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.

It's a tired ad hominem, all the evidence shows that SpaceX is by far the most reliable operator in the space industry right now.

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

#287

Post by dotnet00 »

Epa095 wrote: post #271
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.

You could probably have said the same about Airbus at some point. But now we are pretty happy we don't have to rely on Boeing.

Airbus hasn't been making excuses about how they don't need to compete with Boeing for a decade. They've been focusing on being actually competitive.

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

#288

Post by m4rtink »

threeseed wrote: post #163
ddalex wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

it's about maintaining political options - what happens when your peer denies your launches on their platform; what prevents ESA from launching 90% of their payloads on SpaceX for reduced cost, while maintaining alive a credible option ?

> what prevents ESA from launching 90% of their payloads on SpaceX for reduced cost You only have to look at what happened with Starlink and Ukraine. Last thing EU wants is to put their vital strategic interests in the hands of Elon Musk and his erratic whims. Especially given they are planning to fine X 6% of their revenue which may end up bankrupting the company given its perilous financial state.

Well, that seems to have been a one-off episode. Since then modern versions of at least maritime drones & possible bigger aerial drones in Ukraine are almost certainly Starlink guided, possibly via the military version of it called Starshield.

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

#289

Post by verzali »

fallingknife wrote: post #201
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…

You don't actually believe that a rocket that is thrown away every launch could possibly be cost competitive with one that can be reused 20 times, do you?

It depends what you do with the rocket. Reuse isn't free, it has costs. Notably you need to carry more fuel with you in order to land, and that negatively affects overall performance. You also need to fly frequently to get the cost advantages. That's one reason SpaceX has turned to Starlink, since the demand from the market isn't enough to really get the benefits from reusable rockets.

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

#290

Post by dotnet00 »

espadrine wrote: post #194
627467 wrote: post #135

Earlier quoted context omitted.

at this stage I question the resolve of any European leader in actually wanting to achieve anything of note in a consequential manner. it's cheaper but not cost-free to sustain a narrative of "independence" and "alternative to incumbent" when the actual result is just wasting tax payers money for vanity projects with no clear path to actually build a sustainable alternative to the incumbent. ESA has no resources to d…

> it's cheaper but not cost-free to sustain a narrative of "independence" and "alternative to incumbent" The narrative is independent of the price. SpaceX has showed that they may refuse service in various situations, such as drone access to Starlink Internet in a battle during Ukraine war. Thus a government being dependent on them for their space fleet, gambles the possibility of being suddenly unable to guarantee c…

Next time SpaceX should simply refuse to provide aid until countries requesting aid get everything approved through the US government first. Otherwise people like you will continue to act like it was unreasonable that SpaceX wouldn't allow Ukraine to do things with Starlink that were potentially in conflict with officially stated US policy.

No good deed goes unpunished.

Post reply on HN