8 ms·
Ariane 6 first flight (Official broadcast)[video]
- alecco 2y agoThe CEO of Arianespace since 2013 is a lawyer. [...] Edit: Seems I mixed up the companies, so I'm taking back the ramble against the CEO.
- api 2y ago... and their job is probably dealing with a lot of space policy, policy organizations, regulations, contractors, etc. not designing rockets. Who is their head of engineering / CTO?
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]
- itishappy 2y agoArianespace is just the launch provider. They don't even build their own rockets. "French space policy" is essentially their product.
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]
- api 2y agoFYI this is the predecessor to a reusable rocket patterned after Falcon 9: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ariane_Next https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ariane_Next Would love to see at least one other provider get into reusability.
- amelius 2y agoI would love them to develop reusable (sustainable) fuel too.
- glzone1 2y agoActually, Arianespace famously chided spacex for trying to do reusability. So A6 was not intended to be a predecessor at all. Almost no real new major tech. China is doing a much more aggressive fast follow of SpaceX and ESA just recommitted to this Ariane 6 as the future backbone of EU space launch (they have a lot of vested interests on this rocket so chance of going hard on something else were pretty limited to begin with). This rocket will probably need at least a billion in subsidies every 2-3 years in addition to forcing EU sats to go on it (for 2x the price of alternatives).
- grecy 2y ago> Would love to see at least one other provider get into reusability China have basically a clone of the Falcon 9 in testing now. Nine engines, landing legs, etc. etc. It's famous for accidentally taking off during an engine test recently - https://arstechnica.com/space/2024/07/chinese-space-firm-unintentionally-launches-its-new-rocket/ https://arstechnica.com/space/2024/07/chinese-space-firm-uni...
- fransje26 2y ago> FYI this is the predecessor to a reusable rocket Not much of a predecessor, no. When they started designing it, there was no interest in producing a reusable rocket, as it was not clear if it could be done in a cost-efficient manner, and the development uncertainty was too high. Hindsight is 20/20. Of course, they might iterate and re-use some technology from Ariane 6 for a re-usable future launcher, as they leveraged technology from Ariane 5 and Vega for this launcher.
- signatoremo 2y agoRocket Lab, Firefly, Relativity, Stoke are all working on reusable rockets. Blue Origin’s New Glenn is supposed to have the first flight end of September, carrying some low risk NASA’s satellites. They also plan to land on the first try. We shall see if they can achieve that
- dotnet00 2y agoI think a launch this year for New Glenn is pretty much entirely off the table now (or might just barely make it in by the end of the year), they haven't even gotten to static firing the rocket yet, let alone all the work after that needed to be able to fly. They'd have to move as fast as SpaceX without running into any trouble on their very first time lighting up the fully integrated rocket and have launch licensing paperwork already being worked through to just barely make it to a September launch. Similarly, I bet that the next Starship test won't happen before mid-September/early-October if they stick to the plan of attempting a catch.
- fvdessen 2y agoAt least they chose a fun codename; 'SALTO' meaning 'backflip' in French :)
- BrandoElFollito 2y agoBackflip or frontflip - we have the choice:) Not sure if the world frontflip exists in English
- mrtksn 2y agoIIUC this is one of those projects that the governments fund when the free market solution doesn't exist. Sure, Falcon 9 or Soyuz exists but those are foreign entities that might become unavailable due to politics, therefore a local solution must be developed even if its not the most cost effective. It also must help train and retain local talent and distribute funds to participating parties. So, it may be a bit expensive but in the end you get a rocket, a workforce who knows how to design and build rockets and they happen to spend the money they receive locally. IMHO they should invest in video production and art too, no one ever comes close to Space X in that department. edit: Wow, so much negativity for a successful launch.
- bandyaboot 2y agoI think they should invest in state of the art rocket technology foremost.
- mrtksn 2y agoFunding art can greatly help with justifying funding science and technology. Musk is very good at that, others should take a note.
- grecy 2y agoI agree that it makes sense for the EU to have it's own rocket and rocket talent, but the crazy part is the Ariane 6 was obsolete before it hit the design table. Clearly SpaceX have upturned the industry, but to still be so blind to the fact reuse is the future is wilful ignorance. I'm happy the government funds projects to keep expertise and local know-how, but it would be better if they weren't spending billions to be a decade (or two) obsolete.
- mrtksn 2y agoI don't know how obsolete it was since it appears to have decent performance numbers even if its not lading the boosters for re-use, but its a common theme when the government is involved. They like to play it safe(at least in perception) and comes with added rigidity since public funds are involved. Even the USA has these problems, when it comes to government contracts Musk and Bezos fight over it, the Boeing swoops in etc. Can you imagine how hard it is when it involves not only multiple businesses but also multiple countries? It works well when it has a market dominant customer base, like with Airbus, but when its the governments pushing things into existence its is usually optimised for other needs like contracts being given in such a way that stakeholders are happy.
- Diederich 2y agoFor all of the various challenges, structural and political, that Ariane 6 has dealt with, I truly hope this is a flawless launch. Any kind of additional competition is worthwhile.
- ur-whale 2y ago> Any kind of additional competition is worthwhile. Agree with the sentiment, but is Ariane actually competitive with SpaceX And if so, how ? Pricing for payload maybe ?
- Diederich 2y ago> but is Ariane actually competitive with SpaceX I think you're correct, Ariane isn't "competitive" with SpaceX, but it is "competition", which is a minor but important point. I've been following SpaceX since the beginning, and I'm a huge fan of what they're doing. At the same time, I really want Ariane and others to be not just "competition" but also "competitive".
- KingOfCoders 2y agoI'm more amazed by all the space startups in Germany, like RFA, Isar Aerospace, and HyImpulse - especially as they all have very different rocket designs (cheap/steel vs. highly engineered/carbon vs. hybrid rocket engines).
- stuff4ben 2y agoSuccessful launch, booster and stage separation! Good job ESA and Arianespace!!!
- panick21_ 2y agoAriane 6 is a disaster of a design and just terrible space policy. It was literally an emergency program because Arianespace was in a panic as by 2014 they were already losing commercial launches to SpaceX. Europe viewed their ability for Arianespace to dominate commercial launches as vital to their continued ability to be a first class space power. Instead of taking a long term view and really thinking about future rocket strategy, they basically went into emergency 'we need to compete with Falcon 9 (2014 version)' as soon as possible. The then proposed a rocket design that was only minimally different from the Ariane 5. In fact, at the time, there was a discussion about just continuing with the Ariane 5 and moving on the the Ariane 5 ME. This would have cost 100s of million, not billions. Upgrading the upper stage but otherwise continuing all the existing supply lines and most launch infrastructure. This would have worked for independent access but France wanted commercial success. And France was willing to buy of Italy, by forcing an Ariane 6 design that relied on Italians solids. Together France and Italy managed to push the current Ariane 6. Even competing with Falcon 9 of 2014 would have been difficult for Ariane 6, but they didn't take into account Falcon 9 improving a lot faster then they imagined. And that's before re-usability. SpaceX improvement of engines and other system was just very rapidly, far, far faster then Arianespace. SpaceX was playing a new game, one of iteratively improving, rather then decades of the same design. And Ariane 6 cost targets were missed as well. The upgraded from Ariane 5 to Ariane 6 in terms of Main engine are not as significant as those that SpaceX made in the same timeframe. So despite SpaceX not launching a new design, they were innovating faster on their existing design, constantly rolling in new systems and improvements in every subsystem. These addressed performance and operational efficiency. For example the novel concept of deep cryo fuel. So as the Ariane 6 was starting out, the target they aimed for Falcon 9 was already moving away faster then Ariane 6 catch up. And then Falcon 9 started to make re-usability operational and even the most patriotic French bureaucrat engineer had to understand that competing against SpaceX commercially in their traditional market was just not happening. Once this was clear, the narrative out of ESA/Arianespace moved very much into 'its all about independent access to space'. Of course, they already had that, but that doesn't stop everybody from constantly repeating that line. Of course it mostly contradicts the rational that Ariane 6 was pushed threw politically, but hey, who is counting a few billion $. And the promise and importance of continuing their domination of the commercial launch has transformed in three ways. Increase prices since traditional commercial launch isn't happening anyway (to be fair inflation also impacted SpaceX). Try to simply force anything European on the rocket via political pressure. And 3rd just outright subsidize commercial rocket buyers. While SpaceX dominance was not expected, some things fell really well for Ariane 6. Russia and Europe splitting, made Soyuz go away. That means the major advantage of Ariane 6, namely launching with only 2 small solid boosters was way more useful. And second, that there is a major global shortage of heavy launch vehicles given the explosion of demand. So in their eagerness to compete with SpaceX they are now subsidizing Amazon to launch on European rockets. Amazing strategy. And that works not because even with that subsidy Ariane 6 is competitive, it works because Amazon literally needs every single heavy lifter in the world to try to compete with Starlink. Amazon simply paying SpaceX to do it would be like literally just handing billions of $ to their direct competitor. Of course Amazon Kupiter only exists because of SpaceX revolution of the industry in the first place. So what could a smart space policy have been. Quite simply, continue Ariane 5 (maybe do ME). Then simply build a reusable design, inspired by SpaceX Falcon 9 as much as soon as you can. The 5 billion $ not spend on Ariane 6 could have gone into Ariane Eagle (or whatever you want to name it). A few years ago French basically came out with an Ariane Next design that was basically such a Falcon 9 type design. Initially they claimed 2028 but this was clearly just marketing, nobody actually believed that. Such a rocket now is more likely to launch much closer to 2040, then 2028. So in the end, we went from only independent access with Ariane 5 to space only to independent access but we paid 5-6 billion $ and no political will to develop a vehicle of the future. Why is this a problem. Because if you are a first rate space power, you need to launch constellations. If you don't have large amount of launch capacity, you simply aren't a relevant player in the future of space. And without re-usability you simply wont get there. So this is how Europe went from being actually first in rockets, to being essentially second rate more comparable to Japan then the US or China.
- dotnet00 2y agoSeems like the second stage is having some APU trouble that has caused it to not reach the right orbit...