17 ms·

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

330 points by gostsamo 2y ago

the_mitsuhiko 2y ago
I’m happy it exists but it’s incredibly disappointing how non competitive it is. There was a lot of hubris in the project in the beginning and now it’s clear that they are years behind. Which in turn makes future funding a challenge I’m sure. I really hope they don’t give up and manage become more ambitious.
- szundi 2y ago
  Funding hard to lose when the end result is needed and is a strategic objective. Not funding it would make the EU depend on others and knowledge would be lost. Interesting to think about a way how these perfectly connected people could be exchanged to some new, pragmatic generation.
  - trueismywork 2y ago
    Yeah, but govt could find multiple companies instead of a monopoly. Encourage domestic competition.
  - 627467 2y ago
    knowledge is preserved by having more people have it and build upon it. subsidizing decaying incumbents is not an effective way to preserve knowledge
nabla9 2y ago
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.
- Kuinox 2y ago
  By then, startship would have lowered cost even further.
  - threeseed 2y ago
    Starship has a payload 10x-15x larger than the smaller Ariane 6 variant. It seems like for the cost to be lower you would be wanting to fit as much as possible thus impacting how often it is being launched. So not sure if the two have the same requirements.
    - JumpCrisscross 2y ago
      > seems like for the cost to be lower you would be wanting to fit as much as possible thus impacting how often it is being launched Starlink alone will fill Starship’s most-ambitious deployment schedules for years. That gives plenty of piggyback capacity to swamp the market with.
    - dhedberg 2y ago
      I suspect that you don't really need to fill all the seats of a reusable 737 before it's cheaper to fly than a single-use Cessna.
- Y_Y 2y ago
  You're quite right, but for apples-to-apples you should compare to NASA rather than SpaceX. "Move fast and break things" is an attitide that only relatively new rocket builders can have.
  - JumpCrisscross 2y ago
    > for apples-to-apples you should compare to NASA rather than SpaceX ESA is analogous to NASA. ArianeSpace is Europe’s ULA. Europe doesn’t have a SpaceX; Ariane 6 is a Yugo in the modern launch market.
    - 2y ago
karaokeyoga 2y ago
| Nevertheless, it had several passengers on board. "passengers" → "payloads", I assume.
jari_mustonen 2y ago
Even though this is not impressive compared to SpaceX, it is still essential that we have multiple actors building rockets. The competition makes sure that SpaceX needs to push the boundaries. Our future as a multi-planetary species is not dependent on a single actor. I'm hoping for some space race. It would be great if the United States would transfer a part of MIC funding to space exploration.
- amelius 2y ago
  I don't think it is that impressive anymore. We've been building rockets for decades. Making them return to Earth is peanuts compared to building a self driving car. You can even make a simulation that is 99% accurate without much effort. Also, rocket science is just Newtonian physics. Of course, building a rocket requires a shit-ton of resources, so if anything is impressive then it's the management of those resources.
  - ur-whale 2y ago
    > Also, rocket science is just Newtonian physics. Disagree. The newtonian physics part of flying a rocket is indeed the boring part of rocket science in these days of Ghz computing. But all the engineering (an altogether different - if related - discipline) required is anything but simple. And engineering and all of its sub-disciplines (materials science, propellant research, iterative refinement, operational research, logistics, 3d printing, computing, simulation, structural engineering, etc...) is both where the complexity lives and where the greatest progress in rocket science has been made. The devil is in details, as usual.
    - amelius 2y ago
      I view the things you mention as incremental improvements on stuff that basically worked since the 60s.
      - itishappy 2y ago
        If we want to get real pedantic, the Chinese invented rocket powered flight around 1000AD. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Huo_Che https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Huo_Che
mrtksn 2y ago
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 https://x.com/AndrewParsonson/status/1810794808828641546
- dotnet00 2y ago
  *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.
  - mrtksn 2y ago
    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.
trueuropean 2y ago
[flagged]
lnxg33k1 2y ago
[flagged]
- aryonoco 2y ago
  [flagged]
  - pixelesque 2y ago
    I think they're referring to the Ariane 5 disaster in 1996 caused by a software bug...
    - sufficer 2y ago
      Maybe he's defensive because of his username is similar to Aryan too
  - adolph 2y ago
    Ariane is a series of European civilian expendable launch vehicles for space launch use. The name comes from the French spelling of the mythological character Ariadne. France first proposed the Ariane project and it was officially agreed upon at the end of 1973 after discussions between France, Germany and the UK. [0] In Greek mythology, Ariadne (/ˌæriˈædni/; Greek: Ἀριάδνη; Latin: Ariadne) was a Cretan princess, the daughter of King Minos of Crete. . . .Linguist Robert S. P. Beekes has also supported Ariadne having a pre-Greek origin; specifically being Minoan from Crete because her name includes the sequence dn (δν), rare in Indo-European languages and an indication that it is a Minoan loanword. [1] 0. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ariane_(rocket_family) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ariane_(rocket_family) 1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ariadne https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ariadne
- Mashimo 2y ago
  How so? What are you referring to?
r721 2y ago
Related discussion: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=40918284 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=40918284 (57 comments)
snowpid 2y ago
In Germany there are 3 companies, I heard in France 2 companies, I don't any in other parts of Europe but there are definitely but I suppose the European rocket start up pipeline is filled. P. S. HN please tell me about your (European) nation's future rocket builder.
- Maken 2y ago
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Miura_5 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Miura_5
- T-A 2y ago
  I still don't know how seriously to take it, but this one really stands out from the crowd: https://www.sidereus.space/ https://www.sidereus.space/ https://europeanspaceflight.com/sidereus-space-dynamics-complete-integrated-static-fire-test/ https://europeanspaceflight.com/sidereus-space-dynamics-comp...
  - snowpid 2y ago
    Now I found this one as well from Poland https://europeanspaceflight.com/ilr-33-amber-2k-makes-history-as-polands-first-rocket-to-reach-space/ https://europeanspaceflight.com/ilr-33-amber-2k-makes-histor...
    - T-A 2y ago
      That's just a sounding rocket though, not all that different from the 1940s https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aerobee https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aerobee Sidereus' EOS is a miniature, reusable orbital launcher. Load it in a tuck, drive to a field outside town, launch it with your cubesat, then go pick it up at the local airport as it glides back down from space on its parafoil. https://www.sidereus.space/eos/ https://www.sidereus.space/eos/ SciFi stuff if it works.
- snowpid 2y ago
  Also here is a non rocket space device from Germany https://www.polaris-raumflugzeuge.de/ https://www.polaris-raumflugzeuge.de/ (I cant judge their seriousness, but they got funding by military)
scosman 2y ago
[flagged]
- m2fkxy 2y ago
  not sure why you are getting downvoted, that was a funny reference to Ariane 501/V88.
witx 2y ago
I guess something is better than nothing. But it's a shame to be launching something that seems obsolete from the start
- Cthulhu_ 2y ago
  It's not obsolete if it works and there's people paying for it. Most space rockets are decades old tech, calling it obsolete seems pointless.
  - witx 2y ago
    Obsolete as in it can be competitive or not ...
- cooper_ganglia 2y ago
  This is Europe's slogan.
sociorealist 2y ago
"but muuuh SpaceX ftw!" The inspection costs needed for reusability are undervalued by the SpaceX fantroopers.
cabirum 2y ago
No mention of an engine failure and the last payload could not be delivered. It is now floating helplessly in orbit, effectively turned into space debris, endangering other projects.
- mauriciolange 2y ago
  There were no last payload to be delivered. The remaining payload was intended to deorbit along with the second stage.
  - cabirum 2y ago
    "but the mission ended with the launcher coasting in orbit without releasing its final batch of payloads.", Reuters[1]. [1]: https://www.reuters.com/technology/space/europes-ariane-6-rocket-set-maiden-flight-after-data-glitch-2024-07-09/ https://www.reuters.com/technology/space/europes-ariane-6-ro...
  - adolph 2y ago
    The plan was for the last payloads to separate from second stage and deorbit along with it. That was the delivery. 35:13 end of this the upper stage will flip in space and restart the Vinci engine to break and set itself on a collision 35:19 course with Earth burning up in our atmosphere and limiting space debris but before it touches atmosphere two 35:26 capsules are set to detach and had on their own mission to survive the extreme temperatures of the re-entry and all 35:32 three elements will then splash down in the Pacific Ocean far away from civilization this will end our mission [0] [...] 4:42:58 according to this new situation which means that the Vinci engine decided not 4:43:04 to restart because there was no ipu uh operating so he was not in a good condition to restart and so there was a 4:43:12 passivation of the upper stage which was triggered in order to make it an object 4:43:18 which does not create um dangers of debris and the passivation works 4:43:25 perfectly according to plan uh and also it was the the launcher system decided 4:43:32 automatically not to to release the two capsules the two passengers because it 4:43:39 would have created additional debr and so uh we have an event which is not 4:43:44 understood yet which is why did the Apu stop but all the rest of the mission was [1] 0. https://youtu.be/B0oFpOJaIYc?t=2113 https://youtu.be/B0oFpOJaIYc?t=2113 1. https://youtu.be/B0oFpOJaIYc?t=16978 https://youtu.be/B0oFpOJaIYc?t=16978
gkedzierski 2y ago
This is great! Now we're waiting for Themis to become a reality.
cdydsaigon 2y ago
thank you
kranke155 2y ago
[flagged]
numpad0 2y ago
Previous livestream submission, just 16 hours earlier than this: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=40918284 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=40918284 Top comment from above submission: mrtksn 18 hours ago IIUC 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.
nanna 2y ago
> Beyond the great emotion I am feeling right now, my first thoughts are for all the teams in Kourou, Paris, Vernon, Les Mureaux, Toulouse, Bremen, Lampoldshausen, Liège, Barcelona, Colleferro, Zürich and everywhere else in Europe who made this success possible. Would the UK have been a part of this pre-Brexit?
- alibarber 2y ago
  The UK is still part of ESA. They do not have a direct involvement in the Ariane project however.
- mglz 2y ago
  The UK is part of ESA, which should be independant from EU membership. I am not sure where Ariane 6 parts are built though.
ThinkBeat 2y ago
Too bad they are not equipped to rescue the 2 astro nauts Boeing has been left stranded on the ISS for over a month. There they are munching up unbudgeted food and oxygen. Which will not be a problem, since ISS should have a reserve supply for 3 months, but it should impact the the next supply run. Will Boeing bring them back? I would think NASA has reached out to SpaceX, and possibly the Russians (? in today political climate?) and asked what their rescue capabilities might be. SpaceX seems likely to be able to prepare rescue rocket fairly quickly?
- dotnet00 2y ago
  If they were actually stranded, the Crew Dragon being prepared for a private flight in August would probably be in the process of being prepared for heading to the ISS instead. They are not stranded. They are staying because this Starliner is rated for 45 days at the station and since the service module (the location of the helium leak) is disposed of before reentry. Better to delay and attempt to gather as much information about the leak as possible while they can still run tests than have to try to figure out what might've been wrong after the fact.
delta_p_delta_x 2y ago
The bearishness, pessimism, and criticism in this thread—especially by just a handful of prolific commenters—is off-the-charts. We have people comparing strategic assets and state-owned enterprises to private commercial enterprises. Well done.
- Gud 2y ago
  Sorry, but the pessimism, criticism and bearishness is warranted. By now, making a new rocket today that is non-reusable is like inventing the penny farthing and trying to compete in modern day tour the France. Europe deserves to be led by bold industrialists, not ran by frightened bureaucrats.
deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
GMoromisato 2y ago
This reminds me of reading about the launch of the HMS Dreadnought in 1906. The Dreadnought was a revolutionary battleship: a turbine engine made it faster than any other battleship, and it had all 12-inch guns (instead of a wasteful mix of small and large guns). It was so clearly superior to all other battleships that the name "dreadnought" become a generic name for a modern battleship. But here's the thing: navies around the world resisted building their own dreadnoughts. If you've spent your military treasure on pre-dreadnought battleships, how do you explain to citizens that they're all obsolete and you need to start from scratch? And so it is with reusable rockets. In 2018, Alain Charmeau, an ArianeSpace exec, said that re-usable rockets make no sense because, "Let us say we had ten guaranteed launches per year in Europe and we had a rocket which we can use ten times—we would build exactly one rocket per year!" And that would be bad because what do you do with the employees? [1] This is classic sunk-cost fallacy. [1] https://arstechnica.com/science/2018/05/ariane-chief-seems-frustrated-with-spacex-for-driving-down-launch-costs/ https://arstechnica.com/science/2018/05/ariane-chief-seems-f...
- GMoromisato 2y ago
  At the risk of beating a dead horse: In 2018, Starship was not even fully designed (later that year they switched to stainless steel instead of carbon-composite). Yet Starship managed to fly into orbit and re-enter successfully before Ariane 6 flew even once.
  - TMWNN 2y ago
    >later that year they switched to stainless steel instead of carbon-composite A decision which, according to Isaacson's Elon Musk, Musk insisted on against considerable opposition from his engineers. One more point against the frequent claim that Musk isn't a "real" engineer/doesn't really do anything at SpaceX.

330 points by gostsamo 2y ago

I’m happy it exists but it’s incredibly disappointing how non competitive it is. There was a lot of hubris in the project in the beginning and now it’s clear that they are years behind. Which in turn makes future funding a challenge I’m sure. I really hope they don’t give up and manage become more ambitious.

szundi 2y ago
Funding hard to lose when the end result is needed and is a strategic objective. Not funding it would make the EU depend on others and knowledge would be lost. Interesting to think about a way how these perfectly connected people could be exchanged to some new, pragmatic generation.
- trueismywork 2y ago
  Yeah, but govt could find multiple companies instead of a monopoly. Encourage domestic competition.
- 627467 2y ago
  knowledge is preserved by having more people have it and build upon it. subsidizing decaying incumbents is not an effective way to preserve knowledge

nabla9 2y ago

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.

Kuinox 2y ago
By then, startship would have lowered cost even further.
- threeseed 2y ago
  Starship has a payload 10x-15x larger than the smaller Ariane 6 variant. It seems like for the cost to be lower you would be wanting to fit as much as possible thus impacting how often it is being launched. So not sure if the two have the same requirements.
  - JumpCrisscross 2y ago
    > seems like for the cost to be lower you would be wanting to fit as much as possible thus impacting how often it is being launched Starlink alone will fill Starship’s most-ambitious deployment schedules for years. That gives plenty of piggyback capacity to swamp the market with.
  - dhedberg 2y ago
    I suspect that you don't really need to fill all the seats of a reusable 737 before it's cheaper to fly than a single-use Cessna.
Y_Y 2y ago
You're quite right, but for apples-to-apples you should compare to NASA rather than SpaceX. "Move fast and break things" is an attitide that only relatively new rocket builders can have.
- JumpCrisscross 2y ago
  > for apples-to-apples you should compare to NASA rather than SpaceX ESA is analogous to NASA. ArianeSpace is Europe’s ULA. Europe doesn’t have a SpaceX; Ariane 6 is a Yugo in the modern launch market.
  - 2y ago

karaokeyoga 2y ago

| Nevertheless, it had several passengers on board. "passengers" → "payloads", I assume.

jari_mustonen 2y ago

Even though this is not impressive compared to SpaceX, it is still essential that we have multiple actors building rockets. The competition makes sure that SpaceX needs to push the boundaries. Our future as a multi-planetary species is not dependent on a single actor. I'm hoping for some space race. It would be great if the United States would transfer a part of MIC funding to space exploration.

amelius 2y ago
I don't think it is that impressive anymore. We've been building rockets for decades. Making them return to Earth is peanuts compared to building a self driving car. You can even make a simulation that is 99% accurate without much effort. Also, rocket science is just Newtonian physics. Of course, building a rocket requires a shit-ton of resources, so if anything is impressive then it's the management of those resources.
- ur-whale 2y ago
  > Also, rocket science is just Newtonian physics. Disagree. The newtonian physics part of flying a rocket is indeed the boring part of rocket science in these days of Ghz computing. But all the engineering (an altogether different - if related - discipline) required is anything but simple. And engineering and all of its sub-disciplines (materials science, propellant research, iterative refinement, operational research, logistics, 3d printing, computing, simulation, structural engineering, etc...) is both where the complexity lives and where the greatest progress in rocket science has been made. The devil is in details, as usual.
  - amelius 2y ago
    I view the things you mention as incremental improvements on stuff that basically worked since the 60s.
    - itishappy 2y ago
      If we want to get real pedantic, the Chinese invented rocket powered flight around 1000AD. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Huo_Che https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Huo_Che

mrtksn 2y ago

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 https://x.com/AndrewParsonson/status/1810794808828641546

dotnet00 2y ago
*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.
- mrtksn 2y ago
  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.

trueuropean 2y ago

[flagged]

lnxg33k1 2y ago

[flagged]

aryonoco 2y ago
[flagged]
- pixelesque 2y ago
  I think they're referring to the Ariane 5 disaster in 1996 caused by a software bug...
  - sufficer 2y ago
    Maybe he's defensive because of his username is similar to Aryan too
- adolph 2y ago
  Ariane is a series of European civilian expendable launch vehicles for space launch use. The name comes from the French spelling of the mythological character Ariadne. France first proposed the Ariane project and it was officially agreed upon at the end of 1973 after discussions between France, Germany and the UK. [0] In Greek mythology, Ariadne (/ˌæriˈædni/; Greek: Ἀριάδνη; Latin: Ariadne) was a Cretan princess, the daughter of King Minos of Crete. . . .Linguist Robert S. P. Beekes has also supported Ariadne having a pre-Greek origin; specifically being Minoan from Crete because her name includes the sequence dn (δν), rare in Indo-European languages and an indication that it is a Minoan loanword. [1] 0. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ariane_(rocket_family) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ariane_(rocket_family) 1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ariadne https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ariadne
Mashimo 2y ago
How so? What are you referring to?

r721 2y ago

Related discussion: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=40918284 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=40918284 (57 comments)

snowpid 2y ago

In Germany there are 3 companies, I heard in France 2 companies, I don't any in other parts of Europe but there are definitely but I suppose the European rocket start up pipeline is filled. P. S. HN please tell me about your (European) nation's future rocket builder.

Maken 2y ago
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Miura_5 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Miura_5
T-A 2y ago
I still don't know how seriously to take it, but this one really stands out from the crowd: https://www.sidereus.space/ https://www.sidereus.space/ https://europeanspaceflight.com/sidereus-space-dynamics-complete-integrated-static-fire-test/ https://europeanspaceflight.com/sidereus-space-dynamics-comp...
- snowpid 2y ago
  Now I found this one as well from Poland https://europeanspaceflight.com/ilr-33-amber-2k-makes-history-as-polands-first-rocket-to-reach-space/ https://europeanspaceflight.com/ilr-33-amber-2k-makes-histor...
  - T-A 2y ago
    That's just a sounding rocket though, not all that different from the 1940s https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aerobee https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aerobee Sidereus' EOS is a miniature, reusable orbital launcher. Load it in a tuck, drive to a field outside town, launch it with your cubesat, then go pick it up at the local airport as it glides back down from space on its parafoil. https://www.sidereus.space/eos/ https://www.sidereus.space/eos/ SciFi stuff if it works.
snowpid 2y ago
Also here is a non rocket space device from Germany https://www.polaris-raumflugzeuge.de/ https://www.polaris-raumflugzeuge.de/ (I cant judge their seriousness, but they got funding by military)

scosman 2y ago

[flagged]

m2fkxy 2y ago
not sure why you are getting downvoted, that was a funny reference to Ariane 501/V88.

witx 2y ago

I guess something is better than nothing. But it's a shame to be launching something that seems obsolete from the start

Cthulhu_ 2y ago
It's not obsolete if it works and there's people paying for it. Most space rockets are decades old tech, calling it obsolete seems pointless.
- witx 2y ago
  Obsolete as in it can be competitive or not ...
cooper_ganglia 2y ago
This is Europe's slogan.

sociorealist 2y ago

"but muuuh SpaceX ftw!" The inspection costs needed for reusability are undervalued by the SpaceX fantroopers.

cabirum 2y ago

No mention of an engine failure and the last payload could not be delivered. It is now floating helplessly in orbit, effectively turned into space debris, endangering other projects.

mauriciolange 2y ago
There were no last payload to be delivered. The remaining payload was intended to deorbit along with the second stage.
- cabirum 2y ago
  "but the mission ended with the launcher coasting in orbit without releasing its final batch of payloads.", Reuters[1]. [1]: https://www.reuters.com/technology/space/europes-ariane-6-rocket-set-maiden-flight-after-data-glitch-2024-07-09/ https://www.reuters.com/technology/space/europes-ariane-6-ro...
- adolph 2y ago
  The plan was for the last payloads to separate from second stage and deorbit along with it. That was the delivery. 35:13 end of this the upper stage will flip in space and restart the Vinci engine to break and set itself on a collision 35:19 course with Earth burning up in our atmosphere and limiting space debris but before it touches atmosphere two 35:26 capsules are set to detach and had on their own mission to survive the extreme temperatures of the re-entry and all 35:32 three elements will then splash down in the Pacific Ocean far away from civilization this will end our mission [0] [...] 4:42:58 according to this new situation which means that the Vinci engine decided not 4:43:04 to restart because there was no ipu uh operating so he was not in a good condition to restart and so there was a 4:43:12 passivation of the upper stage which was triggered in order to make it an object 4:43:18 which does not create um dangers of debris and the passivation works 4:43:25 perfectly according to plan uh and also it was the the launcher system decided 4:43:32 automatically not to to release the two capsules the two passengers because it 4:43:39 would have created additional debr and so uh we have an event which is not 4:43:44 understood yet which is why did the Apu stop but all the rest of the mission was [1] 0. https://youtu.be/B0oFpOJaIYc?t=2113 https://youtu.be/B0oFpOJaIYc?t=2113 1. https://youtu.be/B0oFpOJaIYc?t=16978 https://youtu.be/B0oFpOJaIYc?t=16978

gkedzierski 2y ago

This is great! Now we're waiting for Themis to become a reality.

cdydsaigon 2y ago

thank you

kranke155 2y ago

[flagged]

numpad0 2y ago

Previous livestream submission, just 16 hours earlier than this: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=40918284 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=40918284 Top comment from above submission: mrtksn 18 hours ago IIUC 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.

nanna 2y ago

> Beyond the great emotion I am feeling right now, my first thoughts are for all the teams in Kourou, Paris, Vernon, Les Mureaux, Toulouse, Bremen, Lampoldshausen, Liège, Barcelona, Colleferro, Zürich and everywhere else in Europe who made this success possible. Would the UK have been a part of this pre-Brexit?

alibarber 2y ago
The UK is still part of ESA. They do not have a direct involvement in the Ariane project however.
mglz 2y ago
The UK is part of ESA, which should be independant from EU membership. I am not sure where Ariane 6 parts are built though.

ThinkBeat 2y ago

Too bad they are not equipped to rescue the 2 astro nauts Boeing has been left stranded on the ISS for over a month. There they are munching up unbudgeted food and oxygen. Which will not be a problem, since ISS should have a reserve supply for 3 months, but it should impact the the next supply run. Will Boeing bring them back? I would think NASA has reached out to SpaceX, and possibly the Russians (? in today political climate?) and asked what their rescue capabilities might be. SpaceX seems likely to be able to prepare rescue rocket fairly quickly?

dotnet00 2y ago
If they were actually stranded, the Crew Dragon being prepared for a private flight in August would probably be in the process of being prepared for heading to the ISS instead. They are not stranded. They are staying because this Starliner is rated for 45 days at the station and since the service module (the location of the helium leak) is disposed of before reentry. Better to delay and attempt to gather as much information about the leak as possible while they can still run tests than have to try to figure out what might've been wrong after the fact.

delta_p_delta_x 2y ago

The bearishness, pessimism, and criticism in this thread—especially by just a handful of prolific commenters—is off-the-charts. We have people comparing strategic assets and state-owned enterprises to private commercial enterprises. Well done.

Gud 2y ago
Sorry, but the pessimism, criticism and bearishness is warranted. By now, making a new rocket today that is non-reusable is like inventing the penny farthing and trying to compete in modern day tour the France. Europe deserves to be led by bold industrialists, not ran by frightened bureaucrats.

deleted 2y ago

[deleted]

GMoromisato 2y ago

This reminds me of reading about the launch of the HMS Dreadnought in 1906. The Dreadnought was a revolutionary battleship: a turbine engine made it faster than any other battleship, and it had all 12-inch guns (instead of a wasteful mix of small and large guns). It was so clearly superior to all other battleships that the name "dreadnought" become a generic name for a modern battleship. But here's the thing: navies around the world resisted building their own dreadnoughts. If you've spent your military treasure on pre-dreadnought battleships, how do you explain to citizens that they're all obsolete and you need to start from scratch? And so it is with reusable rockets. In 2018, Alain Charmeau, an ArianeSpace exec, said that re-usable rockets make no sense because, "Let us say we had ten guaranteed launches per year in Europe and we had a rocket which we can use ten times—we would build exactly one rocket per year!" And that would be bad because what do you do with the employees? [1] This is classic sunk-cost fallacy. [1] https://arstechnica.com/science/2018/05/ariane-chief-seems-frustrated-with-spacex-for-driving-down-launch-costs/ https://arstechnica.com/science/2018/05/ariane-chief-seems-f...

GMoromisato 2y ago
At the risk of beating a dead horse: In 2018, Starship was not even fully designed (later that year they switched to stainless steel instead of carbon-composite). Yet Starship managed to fly into orbit and re-enter successfully before Ariane 6 flew even once.
- TMWNN 2y ago
  >later that year they switched to stainless steel instead of carbon-composite A decision which, according to Isaacson's Elon Musk, Musk insisted on against considerable opposition from his engineers. One more point against the frequent claim that Musk isn't a "real" engineer/doesn't really do anything at SpaceX.