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

321–330 of 403 posts

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

#321

Post by JumpCrisscross »

ddalex wrote: post #316
JumpCrisscross wrote: post #118

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I would also say that the new product is obsolete and we need to work on a replacement ASAP Sure. See the rest of the article. Everyone else has been saying the same for a decade. Note that the reusable heavy launcher he’s pitching is still aiming to deliver in a decade what SpaceX can do today. It’s not a strategic option, it’s a jobs programme.

It is a strategic option because should SpaceX suddenly say no to launches, you have a backup. An expensive backup, but it's there. If ESA has 100 payloads, it can just book 90 of them on SpaceX and the mandated 10 of ArianeSpace (to keep the political pork happy), and lose only 10% efficiency (considering Ariane flight is twice as expensive as SpaceX). The problem is that ESA has no scalable payload economy, nobody…

> should SpaceX suddenly say no to launches, you have a backup. An expensive backup, but it's there

It's not a functional back-up. Not for any commercial use case relevant outside the military.

If all you want is a back-up for military launches, the Ariane 5ME was a better, cheaper option that could have bridged the gap to a competitive reusable [1]. The billions of dollars wasted on Ariane 6 would have put Europe into the running for a competitive launch vehicle in the 2030s. Instead, we have Arianespace's CEO pitching another boondoggle to ensure Europe has a Falcon Heavy by the 2030s.

So yes, having 10% launch capability is better than zero. But that 10% could have been bought for much cheaper. And saying 90% of your space industry is subject to foreign control versus 100% is a bit milquetoast, particularly when the alternative would have been R&D to bring that down to e.g. 50%.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ariane_5#Ariane_5_ME

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

#322

Post by dotnet00 »

mort96 wrote: post #317
dotnet00 wrote: post #286

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

When the question is "should we trust this guy?", judging the character of the guy based on past behavior and statements is not a fallacy.

What exactly has Musk actually done that goes so far beyond the pale of typical corporate shenanigans that it would register as not being trustworthy to governments? At most he has had overly optimistic timelines, overly optimistic social media statements about future capabilities, a bunch of business ideas that didn't pan out and some QA issues in a car manufacturer. This is pretty par for the course for every business.

The whining about him being untrustworthy stems almost entirely from him having different political views (and not being afraid to voice them), and the stream of mostly unsubstantiated hit pieces and awful reporting regarding Starlink in Ukraine.

With the way you guys talk about it though, he might as well have personally caused the crash of more than two full passenger jets.

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

#323

Post by jacobr1 »

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.

Also there is real competition downmarket for regional jets

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

#324

Post by nordsieck »

rbanffy wrote: post #225
fallingknife wrote: post #201

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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?

A rocket that's thrown away was cheaper per flight than the shuttles, which were only partly discarded. It all depends on how much does it cost to build vs refurbish. Falcon 9 was designed to be easily refurbished and Ariane 6 was designed to be cheap to build. Also, launch campaign costs are not neglectable - moving the parts around, fueling, testing, and so on, are expensive. Their next-gen ones should be reusable,…

> A rocket that's thrown away was cheaper per flight than the shuttles, which were only partly discarded. It all depends on how much does it cost to build vs refurbish. Falcon 9 was designed to be easily refurbished and Ariane 6 was designed to be cheap to build.

It's not just that the Shuttle was expensive to refurbish. It was also very expensive to build.

Whereas Falcon 9 is much less expensive to build new than Ariane 6.

Ariane 6 was designed to be cheaper to build (cheaper than Ariane 5, that is).

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

#325

Post by mrtksn »

dotnet00 wrote: post #315
mrtksn wrote: post #10

Unfortunately the mission didn't perform smoothly as intended at the end, there was an issue with the auxiliary power unit and it wasn't able to de-orbit once deployed the cubesats: https://x.com/AndrewParsonson/status/1810794808828641546

*auxiliary propulsion unit :) It isn't the same thing as the APU in a plane (where I think most people are getting the 'auxiliary power unit'). The APU here is a secondary thruster which ensures proper pressure (and likely ullage) for the main engine to start.

Haha right, I paused for a second as I couldn't remember the exact word and went with power. Thanks for the correction and the explanation.

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

#326

Post by JumpCrisscross »

ddalex wrote: post #313
JumpCrisscross wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> what happens when your peer denies your launches on their platform Strongly agree—Europe needs an indigenous launch option. Ariane 6 is not it, and I’m sceptical ArianeSpace can ever deliver it.

What do you mean, can deliver it? This article is specifically about the maiden flight of Ariane 6, which was successful. It's already delivered.

> can deliver it? This article is specifically about the maiden flight of Ariane 6, which was successful. It's already delivered.

It's not commercially viable. That means it has no room to organically drive economies of scale and thus learning curves, which has downstream effects on evertyhing from recruiting to supplier negotiations. Europe has a launch vehicile. It does not have a platform. Virtually everything in Ariane 6 will have to be thrown out to be relevant in a modern, reusable design.

Put another way, SLS didn't prepare Boeing and Lockheed Martin one iota for the modern launch industry. If anything, it drove ambitious people away from them.

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

#327

Post by mort96 »

dotnet00 wrote: post #322
mort96 wrote: post #317

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When the question is "should we trust this guy?", judging the character of the guy based on past behavior and statements is not a fallacy.

What exactly has Musk actually done that goes so far beyond the pale of typical corporate shenanigans that it would register as not being trustworthy to governments? At most he has had overly optimistic timelines, overly optimistic social media statements about future capabilities, a bunch of business ideas that didn't pan out and some QA issues in a car manufacturer. This is pretty par for the course for every busin…

I wouldn't downplay the Starlink Ukraine thing the way you're doing. But if you're still a Musk apologist after all these years, there's nothing I can say to convince you.

For many of us, the whole diver pedophilia accusation was enough, and that pales in comparison to everything that came after.

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

#328

Post by JumpCrisscross »

TheLoafOfBread wrote: post #259
JumpCrisscross wrote: post #189

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Arianne 6 is not about competition, but about strategic independence at the first place That’s what the Starliner folks said. The fault in their argument was ignoring scale effects. Ariane 6 buys Europe zero practical launch independence, other than maintaining the workforce (and accompanying skill set). If SpaceX blocks Europe, it’s game over for any constellation operator and, in all likelihood, the European comm…

It is completely irrelevant how much Falcon 9 cost if political leadership of USA is unreliable and unstable. Flacon 9 could be flying for free, but if you could lose access to it any time, it is like it does not exist.

> Flacon 9 could be flying for free, but if you could lose access to it any time, it is like it does not exist

The point is Ariane 6 enables nothing new. If SpaceX blocks Europe for some reason, with or without Ariane 6, Europe isn't going to have a LEO constellation. Keeping Ariane 5 (5ME [1]) and developing a reusable platform would have been a smarter use of resources. (It aso wasn't particularly daring, either, over the last decade.) Instead, the ESA gets stuck with SLS but for Brussels.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ariane_5#Ariane_5_ME

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

#329

Post by JumpCrisscross »

imtringued wrote: post #254
JumpCrisscross wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> will still be building that knowledge inside Europe Ariane 6 cannibalises Europe’s chance at being more than an also-ran in space: “An Arianespace manager pushing his company as the only solution to Europe’s launch challenges isn’t that noteworthy. However, the fact [Arianespace’s CEO] urges the need for a ‘reusable heavy launcher’ is notable, considering his previous noncommittal remarks about rocket reusability.…

You're under the misconception that it makes sense for Europe to have a launch vehicle at all. The launches happen in French Guiana. The only reason why you would build it on the European mainland is as a jobs program for Europeans. No commercial entity would come up with the idea of building a launch vehicle in Europe. Making a rocket reusable means that it would not leave French Guiana far behind. There would be le…

> under the misconception that it makes sense for Europe to have a launch vehicle at all. The launches happen in French Guiana

Launch controlled by Europe. French Guiana is Europe, geopolitically speaking. SpaceX building rockets in Europe wouldn't give Brussels the strategic autonomy of an Ariane launched from below the equator.

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

#330

Post by JumpCrisscross »

mytailorisrich wrote: post #124
JumpCrisscross wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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.

> it is crucial for Europe to maintain and develop its knowledge and industrial base

SpaceX built heavily on NASA's heritage. But very few people came from old space to SpaceX. The cultures and skills simply aren't very transferable.

Post reply on HN