5 ms·

His compliment of Ariane 5 tingles my French pride. So annoyed when watching the launch live to see all the ameritards in youtube chat saying "what why is it no

His compliment of Ariane 5 tingles my French pride. So annoyed when watching the launch live to see all the ameritards in youtube chat saying "what why is it not spacex" grrr. And we did it for free to boot. Elon "Electric Jesus" Musk only does it as a business model. He'll never do important national stuff that go beyond budget efficiency.

callamdelaney 5y ago
Ironically spacex is most likely to provide a budget friendly route to space on an industrial scale - and is already cutting costs by a significant amount. Only reason they used the Ariene 5 was because of its width. edit: its payload width*
- olex 5y ago
  Not even that - the Falcon 9/Heavy fairing is the same width on the inside as Ariane 5, only the exterior is narrower (but the walls are thinner). The rocket simply didn't exist at the time when JWST was designed, and changing the launcher for a project of this complexity years after the design and build started wasn't even considered, understandably. But it will be very different for future projects.
  - callamdelaney 5y ago
    Yes, as I understand the Ariane 5 was the widest reliable launch vehicle available at the time. Obviously trying to fold the telescope into a smaller space would have introduced even more complexity so they chose it - changing later would have added delays and additional complexity!
    - panick21_ 5y ago
      It has nothing to do with reliability or space. Its political. ESA put in the budget for the launch and they got a significant part of the science in return. And ESA of course put it on Ariane 5. There was no competition or comparison or any of that. Since then the price of the rocket has gone from like 20%+ to like 2% or less of the cost. But they will still get the science. So all in all, might be the best investment anybody has ever made in terms of a science project. The Delta 4, Delta 4H and Atlas 5 would all have been fully qualified to fly the JW and likely could all have launched it. Maybe the Atlas 5 is to small but there were certainty rocket in the US that had the required certification from NASA.
murderfs 5y ago
? Arianespace was the first commercial launch provider.
Azrael3000 5y ago
Musks goal is to Marke humanity multiplanetary. If he just wanted to milk the space cow Starship would not be necessary.
ChickeNES 5y ago
> He'll never do important national stuff So sending astronauts to the ISS and launching spy satellites isn't "important national stuff"?
panick21_ 5y ago
I'm sorry, you getting down-voted because you are just completely wrong on all accounts. Not to mention using terms like 'ameritars' and 'Electric Jesus' are just embracing things to use in any discussion. 1. This was not a competitively bid launch. Europe provided the budget for launch so they selected their own launch vehicle. 2. Nothing the Ariane 5 did was very special no matter they hype about 'so exact'. Everybody know that was almost certainty happening. It was typical under-promise over deliver. Other certified rockets would have done the same thing. 3. Both SpaceX and ULA could have launched this mission. Both are full certified for first rate, lowest-risk launches by NASA. Please actually go and look at the list of launches and you will see: SpaceX: > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Falcon_9_and_Falcon_Heavy_launches https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Falcon_9_and_Falcon_He... ULA: > https://www.ulalaunch.com/missions https://www.ulalaunch.com/missions 4. Both ULA and SpaceX are launching both NASA and Dod payloads. Both required separate very detailed qualification. 5. SpaceX also has launched German Defense sats because it was cheaper then Ariane. Italy has just booked a SpaceX flight as well. 6. The SpaceX Falcon 9 is certified and has launched humans. I would consider that 'important national stuff'. 7. Falcon 9 based on most statistical models is now considered safer then Ariane 5. Falcon 9 has also already launched more often then Ariane 5. Insurance cost of payload on Falcon 9 is also the lowest in the industry. 8. Ariane 5 was just grounded for 6 month because of issues with the fairing and required government intervention. This actually did cause significant concern for James Webb lukeyl they had one launch before to test the new configuration. In typical Arianespace fashion they hid this error for as long as they could and didn't tell anybody why they are grounded. Great security culture they got, always trying to brush their failure under the carpet and not talk about it. Fine to have pride but don't try to bring others down to lift yourself up. It makes you look silly.
- Karto 5y ago
  French guy here, thanking panick21_ for answering an irritating post with a cool head :D

callamdelaney 5y ago

Ironically spacex is most likely to provide a budget friendly route to space on an industrial scale - and is already cutting costs by a significant amount. Only reason they used the Ariene 5 was because of its width. edit: its payload width*

olex 5y ago
Not even that - the Falcon 9/Heavy fairing is the same width on the inside as Ariane 5, only the exterior is narrower (but the walls are thinner). The rocket simply didn't exist at the time when JWST was designed, and changing the launcher for a project of this complexity years after the design and build started wasn't even considered, understandably. But it will be very different for future projects.
- callamdelaney 5y ago
  Yes, as I understand the Ariane 5 was the widest reliable launch vehicle available at the time. Obviously trying to fold the telescope into a smaller space would have introduced even more complexity so they chose it - changing later would have added delays and additional complexity!
  - panick21_ 5y ago
    It has nothing to do with reliability or space. Its political. ESA put in the budget for the launch and they got a significant part of the science in return. And ESA of course put it on Ariane 5. There was no competition or comparison or any of that. Since then the price of the rocket has gone from like 20%+ to like 2% or less of the cost. But they will still get the science. So all in all, might be the best investment anybody has ever made in terms of a science project. The Delta 4, Delta 4H and Atlas 5 would all have been fully qualified to fly the JW and likely could all have launched it. Maybe the Atlas 5 is to small but there were certainty rocket in the US that had the required certification from NASA.

murderfs 5y ago

? Arianespace was the first commercial launch provider.

Azrael3000 5y ago

Musks goal is to Marke humanity multiplanetary. If he just wanted to milk the space cow Starship would not be necessary.

ChickeNES 5y ago

> He'll never do important national stuff So sending astronauts to the ISS and launching spy satellites isn't "important national stuff"?

panick21_ 5y ago

I'm sorry, you getting down-voted because you are just completely wrong on all accounts. Not to mention using terms like 'ameritars' and 'Electric Jesus' are just embracing things to use in any discussion. 1. This was not a competitively bid launch. Europe provided the budget for launch so they selected their own launch vehicle. 2. Nothing the Ariane 5 did was very special no matter they hype about 'so exact'. Everybody know that was almost certainty happening. It was typical under-promise over deliver. Other certified rockets would have done the same thing. 3. Both SpaceX and ULA could have launched this mission. Both are full certified for first rate, lowest-risk launches by NASA. Please actually go and look at the list of launches and you will see: SpaceX: > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Falcon_9_and_Falcon_Heavy_launches https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Falcon_9_and_Falcon_He... ULA: > https://www.ulalaunch.com/missions https://www.ulalaunch.com/missions 4. Both ULA and SpaceX are launching both NASA and Dod payloads. Both required separate very detailed qualification. 5. SpaceX also has launched German Defense sats because it was cheaper then Ariane. Italy has just booked a SpaceX flight as well. 6. The SpaceX Falcon 9 is certified and has launched humans. I would consider that 'important national stuff'. 7. Falcon 9 based on most statistical models is now considered safer then Ariane 5. Falcon 9 has also already launched more often then Ariane 5. Insurance cost of payload on Falcon 9 is also the lowest in the industry. 8. Ariane 5 was just grounded for 6 month because of issues with the fairing and required government intervention. This actually did cause significant concern for James Webb lukeyl they had one launch before to test the new configuration. In typical Arianespace fashion they hid this error for as long as they could and didn't tell anybody why they are grounded. Great security culture they got, always trying to brush their failure under the carpet and not talk about it. Fine to have pride but don't try to bring others down to lift yourself up. It makes you look silly.

Karto 5y ago
French guy here, thanking panick21_ for answering an irritating post with a cool head :D