6 ms·

Why was Ariane 5 retired? Did ESA replace it with something else?

m2fkxy 3y ago
Ariane 6, which suffers from some delays. Vega and Vega-C are also supposed to fill the lower segment gap, but they are grounded after a series of mishaps. Tough spot for ESA launchers, but we'll get through this!
- semi-extrinsic 3y ago
  AFAIU only Vega-C is grounded, Vega is still in operations with SSMS 16 scheduled for September? But yeah, Vega-C has been very unlucky with the nozzle throat insert on the second stage eroding away and failing, plus the general trouble with certain parts being made in Ukraine now during the war.
  - m2fkxy 3y ago
    True! Vega did experience quite some trouble in the past too.
cubefox 3y ago
They wanted to replace Ariane 5 in time with Ariane 6, but it got delayed a lot. Ariane 6 will be ready next year at the earliest.
- pfdietz 3y ago
  And Ariane 6 isn't competitive against SpaceX either. They've really screwed up.
  - robin_reala 3y ago
    Only in the sense that everyone isn’t competitive against SpaceX. They absolutely could have done better, but the role isn’t to produce the most price competitive launch, the role was securing Europe’s launch capability. If both could be done at the same time then that’s a win but it’s not the primary goal.
    - pfdietz 3y ago
      You're just explaining the process by which they screwed up.
      - wongarsu 3y ago
        But it's a screw up most space launch providers are sharing, and it's one most of them will survive in the medium term for the same reason: their respective governments see more value in them than revenue and will prop them up. The more interesting question is what will happen after Ariane 6. SpaceX's lead continues to grow, and catching up would require changes to the development process not everyone seems comfortable with.
        robin_reala 3y ago
        Ariane Next’s design goals seem to be mostly “be Falcon 9”: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ariane_Next https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ariane_Next No-one’s trying to build a Starship at this point apart from SpaceX (leaving aside a couple of less credible Chinese attempts).
        martin8412 3y ago
        No, the others gave up on that can of worms in the 60s.
        wongarsu 3y ago
        Which would be quite foolish. Controlling a large number of engines was made a lot easier by about 60 years of improvements in microcontroller and sensor technology.
        pfdietz 3y ago
        I remember a NASA-connected SF author explaining at a Worldcon in Chicago that Falcon 9 wasn't going to be reliable because it had too many first stage engines. Oops.
        3y ago
PedroBatista 3y ago
Because it was becoming old tech and primarily it costs too much. It's fine for a few big ticket once-in-a-decade launch missions but things are evolving.
pfdietz 3y ago
It could not compete with newer launchers, particularly those from SpaceX.
- hef19898 3y ago
  So, the alternative is what? Start lobbying to force Euorpean, an other, governments to exclusively use SpaceX because they are so cool? And I don't know, maybe we should wait until Ariane 6 had its first launches, while also cutting them the same slack for failed early launches SpaceX gets?
  - pfdietz 3y ago
    Actually, the coercion would have to be forcing the European governments to use the expensive European launcher, when they could save a great deal of money just launching on SpaceX. SpaceX has definitively shown that there's a disconnect between delivering a great product and acting as a distribution mechanism for aerospace entitlement.
    - pyrale 3y ago
      > SpaceX has definitively shown that there's a disconnect between delivering a great product and acting as a distribution mechanism for aerospace entitlement. Did spaceX not receive significant "aerospace entitlement" funding through public contracts?
      - signatoremo 3y ago
        > Did spaceX not receive significant "aerospace entitlement" funding through public contracts? They did not. All SpaceX contracts with NASA are fixed price, not cost plus, paid when they can deliver. What is entitlement about them? Did you know that Boeing lost a substantial amount of money for Starliner with a similar contract? Despite being paid much more?
        pyrale 3y ago

Ariane 6, which suffers from some delays. Vega and Vega-C are also supposed to fill the lower segment gap, but they are grounded after a series of mishaps. Tough spot for ESA launchers, but we'll get through this!

semi-extrinsic 3y ago
AFAIU only Vega-C is grounded, Vega is still in operations with SSMS 16 scheduled for September? But yeah, Vega-C has been very unlucky with the nozzle throat insert on the second stage eroding away and failing, plus the general trouble with certain parts being made in Ukraine now during the war.
- m2fkxy 3y ago
  True! Vega did experience quite some trouble in the past too.

cubefox 3y ago

They wanted to replace Ariane 5 in time with Ariane 6, but it got delayed a lot. Ariane 6 will be ready next year at the earliest.

pfdietz 3y ago
And Ariane 6 isn't competitive against SpaceX either. They've really screwed up.
- robin_reala 3y ago
  Only in the sense that everyone isn’t competitive against SpaceX. They absolutely could have done better, but the role isn’t to produce the most price competitive launch, the role was securing Europe’s launch capability. If both could be done at the same time then that’s a win but it’s not the primary goal.
  - pfdietz 3y ago
    You're just explaining the process by which they screwed up.
    - wongarsu 3y ago
      But it's a screw up most space launch providers are sharing, and it's one most of them will survive in the medium term for the same reason: their respective governments see more value in them than revenue and will prop them up. The more interesting question is what will happen after Ariane 6. SpaceX's lead continues to grow, and catching up would require changes to the development process not everyone seems comfortable with.
      - robin_reala 3y ago
        Ariane Next’s design goals seem to be mostly “be Falcon 9”: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ariane_Next https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ariane_Next No-one’s trying to build a Starship at this point apart from SpaceX (leaving aside a couple of less credible Chinese attempts).
        martin8412 3y ago
        No, the others gave up on that can of worms in the 60s.
        wongarsu 3y ago
        Which would be quite foolish. Controlling a large number of engines was made a lot easier by about 60 years of improvements in microcontroller and sensor technology.
        pfdietz 3y ago
        I remember a NASA-connected SF author explaining at a Worldcon in Chicago that Falcon 9 wasn't going to be reliable because it had too many first stage engines. Oops.
        3y ago

PedroBatista 3y ago

Because it was becoming old tech and primarily it costs too much. It's fine for a few big ticket once-in-a-decade launch missions but things are evolving.

pfdietz 3y ago

It could not compete with newer launchers, particularly those from SpaceX.

hef19898 3y ago
So, the alternative is what? Start lobbying to force Euorpean, an other, governments to exclusively use SpaceX because they are so cool? And I don't know, maybe we should wait until Ariane 6 had its first launches, while also cutting them the same slack for failed early launches SpaceX gets?
- pfdietz 3y ago
  Actually, the coercion would have to be forcing the European governments to use the expensive European launcher, when they could save a great deal of money just launching on SpaceX. SpaceX has definitively shown that there's a disconnect between delivering a great product and acting as a distribution mechanism for aerospace entitlement.
  - pyrale 3y ago
    > SpaceX has definitively shown that there's a disconnect between delivering a great product and acting as a distribution mechanism for aerospace entitlement. Did spaceX not receive significant "aerospace entitlement" funding through public contracts?
    - signatoremo 3y ago
      > Did spaceX not receive significant "aerospace entitlement" funding through public contracts? They did not. All SpaceX contracts with NASA are fixed price, not cost plus, paid when they can deliver. What is entitlement about them? Did you know that Boeing lost a substantial amount of money for Starliner with a similar contract? Despite being paid much more?
      - pyrale 3y ago