4 ms·

Does it mean that? Europe has had a space agency for a while now. So this story isn't "Europeans finally started to launch for space" but a private European co

Does it mean that? Europe has had a space agency for a while now. So this story isn't "Europeans finally started to launch for space" but a private European company chose to launch from a continental location. It's funny how we can't be celebrate a European achievement without trying to interpret it into relationship to the US.

postingawayonhn 28d ago
Yes, they've had a space agency, but the only launchers are expensive legacy vehicles. This launch is a move towards lower cost and more frequent launches, that in the US are provided by SpaceX.
- nine_k 28d ago
  It's not even the US in general, it's SpaceX specifically. Only the US and China have demonstrated reusable rockets, and only SpaceX demonstrated the actual reuse, the cadence and the economy of scale that it brings.
  - toomuchtodo 28d ago
    It means the laws of physics allow it, and anyone willing to invest the time and fiat to accomplish it can. This means the world will no longer need to rely on SpaceX for inexpensive lift to orbit through reusable first stages, which is objectively good. No different then China working towards obviating the need for ASML for EUV semiconductor manufacturing.
    - panick21_ 28d ago
      Just because you invest in it doesn't mean you end up with hugely cheap and scalable launch. Europe has already invested far more in rocket then SpaceX did and isn't close. If your capital efficiency is far lower, it might not be inexpensive. If you can get the scale because you don't have payloads, its going to be more expensive. There is a incredibly long road between 'rocket can land' and 'cheap and scalable launch'. A long road most people don't see because its not as flashy as landing.
      - rbanffy 28d ago
        SpaceX was founded on making launches cheap. Arianespace only recently decided to develop reusable launch systems. Up to SpaceX demonstrating it was possible, the dominant approach to cheap launches was in making the expendable rocket cheap to manufacture. Nobody needs to be reminded the shuttle promised cheap access to space and failed at that.
        NetMageSCW 27d ago
        But SpaceX built a cheaper launcher to manufacture as well as gaining reuse. There was no one making an expendable cheaper rocket before SpaceX either.
    - somenameforme 28d ago
      There are a lot more barriers to things in the real world. China has been dedicating immense effort and brainpower to cloning SpaceX, and they're still not especially close. I think a lot of us (certainly including myself) have no intuition for why this is, because we live in the software world where if you see something that is done then cloning it is generally just a matter of time and effort. But there's certainly some 'secret sauce' at SpaceX that does not seem easy to replicate. That said I think this is awesome and hope the EU is able to make further advances. I have a very positive view of Musk, but the more competitors there are in space, the more likely we able to accelerate advances and efficiency in that domain. And I think everybody wins in that scenario.
      - rbanffy 28d ago
        > because we live in the software world where if you see something that is done then cloning it is generally just a matter of time and effort. But there's certainly some 'secret sauce' at SpaceX that does not seem easy to replicate In software, thanks mostly to the open-source movement, we all have access to the same materials and manufacturing processes. In manufacturing, there are huge differences in materials and processes that we need to account for. On the flip side, this can allow one to leapfrog the other rather than replicating them - it’s likely the next reusable Falcon 9-class vehicle will use a methalox engine that’ll be easier to maintain compared to Flacon 9’s kerolox ones. China has demonstrated a novel approach to vehicle recovery as well (in addition to landing legs). Future competitors will have access to materials current incumbents didn’t have and can’t easily adopt with their current supply chain. People also forget SpaceX subverted a lot of the expectations for reusable rockets - they didn’t use parachutes, but opted to carry extra propellant for landing; they didn’t eject the engines, opting instead to reuse the whole stage; and they built landing barges because their rockets would launch towards the ocean, saving fuel for a boost back to the launch site. They also tested capsule landing using the launch abort rockets, but opted for parachutes and splashdowns instead. Still they keep all the RCS motors in the capsule, making their expendable service module very inexpensive in comparison to Boeing’s. All these decisions point to proven mission architectures so that followers don’t need to explore architectures that were explored and dropped.
  - torginus 28d ago
    Reuse might turn out not to be the future - and its SpaceX has embraced this internally. At least not full reuse, or not the way most people think of a reusable spacecraft as a reusable aircraft. A reusable rocket engine might only have 2-3 flights in it, if that, with some routine inspection and maintenance between them. 3D printing has been a game changer that basically allows you to crank out rocket engines from raw materials, which means that building new ones is cheap and easy. If you look at the Raptor 3 (3D printed), it looks super clean, thanks to the fact that they integrated most of the piping into the 3d printed body, but that means you can't really fix or inspect it. Which is fine tbh. SpaceX (and Tesla) has been shown to be pragmatic not dogmatic when it comes to new technology. 'Elon time' might be a meme, but Musk both pushes his employees very hard, but probably not harder than possible - and he's willing to take flak for delaying projects, changing scope or outright cancellation.
    - nine_k 27d ago
      2-3 flights is still quite a bit of cost-cutting, and some SpaceX Falcon 9 boosters have flown more than 30 times; the median number is about 12, often very soon after the previous flight. We are not talking about forever spacecraft, and even Falcon 9's reusabilility is partial (the second stage is lost), but even what Falcon 9 has achieved allows for very rapid progress, due to the short feedback loop, including progress in reliability.
    - NetMageSCW 27d ago
      There’s absolutely no reason to believe rocket engines can only do two or three flights. SpaceX has demonstrated ten times that with F9 and with Raptor testing.
  - NetMageSCW 27d ago
    Didn’t Blue Origin already reuse a booster?
- thrance 28d ago
  Ariane 5 was the cheapest option available for a long time, now they're a bit behind. But the ESA is now working on reusable rockets too, it seems, with their Themis program.
  - NetMageSCW 27d ago
    No, Soyuz was the cheapest option, but they took themselves out of the running.
petcat 28d ago
[flagged]
- ulfw 28d ago
  Hackernews is slowly turning into the same primitive social networking shit as X, Threads, insta, Linkedin. Time to get off of it I suppose
  - rbanffy 28d ago
    It is still the opinion of a very selected group. Even the rants are worth listening to. In particular, I’m loving the obviously British comments (I deeply admire their ability to give the classiest insults).
- noir_lord 28d ago
  Yeah, in the same way that as a home owner I’d be “obsessed” with my neighbour if he was showing a predilection towards arson. I’d love to be able to go a day without having to see whatever the latest stupidity we’ll have to deal with the fallout from is, I really would.
  - petcat 28d ago
    This obsession started decades ago. Long before any recent politics. It's only gotten deeper and more intense recently.
    - noir_lord 28d ago
      You folks over the pond really do think we think about you that much don’t you, prior to Trump I didn’t give much of a shit what the US did (except when you were destabilising the Middle East but I guess everyone needs a hobby), was literally none of my business and I didn’t have to live there (fortunately). Now we have to pay attention because what you always where in part is in full control and it’s essentially impossible to ignore. I long for the days when we can go back to the happy place of ignoring your government day to day until it’s time for another Middle East intervention. Til then and for the avoidance of any doubt, I loathe Trump, I don’t like the people in his government, I don’t like the people who voted for him and the ones who didn’t vote and could have, the only people in America I have any sympathy for is the ones who voted for anyone but him/this shit show, the rest of you got what you deserved and will continue to do so. So with that as your president if you still believe in American Exceptionalism you can shove it. Hope that was clear enough.
anonymars 28d ago
Have there been other rocket launches from continental Europe?
- AshleyGrant 28d ago
  Orbital? Maybe not. Sub-orbital and ballistic? Absolutely.
  - anonymars 28d ago
    Oh yes, I think everyone remembers Germany's ballistic rockets "Don't say that he's hypocritical, Say rather that he's apolitical. 'Once the rockets are up, who cares where they come down? That's not my department,' says Wernher von Braun." https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TjDEsGZLbio https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TjDEsGZLbio
    - globalnode 28d ago
      hehe, yes but if it wasnt for german rocket scientists the americans and russians would not have had space agencies (at least not that early)
      - m4rtink 28d ago
        Well, there was Goddard, Korolev & quite a few others. But it could indeed have taken longer if the military implications were not clearly demonstrated by Von Braun. Still, an interesting possibility of a fully civilian space program from the start & how it would look like & how it would be different. Kinda like in Wings of Honneamise.
        dotancohen 28d ago
        Not only the military aspect. His staff literally were absorbed into the Russian sand US space programs. Von Braun himself famously designed the Saturn V.
kibwen 28d ago
> Does it mean that? When the US government funded SpaceX, it was motivated in no small degree by a desire to not be permanently reliant on a geopolitical wildcard (Russia) for getting astronauts into orbit. Now that the US itself has become a geopolitical wildcard, savvy countries know that they need to seek out alternatives to SpaceX under more stable regimes.
- aaron695 28d ago
  [dead]
- drysine 28d ago
  >geopolitical wildcard How is Russia a wildcard? What unexpected thing do you think Russia has done?
  - deleted 28d ago
    [deleted]
  - qwytw 28d ago
    Authoritarian dictatorships will always behave in seemingly irrational ways (from the perspective of sane politicians). Dictators will always put their personal ambition and "career" first before their country's interests. If Russia behaved rationally they would have made a deal with Ukraine (decades ago) that protected the rights of the Russian minorities in Ukraine and continued massively profiting from gas and oil exports into Europe.
    - drysine 28d ago
      > they would have made a deal with Ukraine (decades ago) that protected the rights of the Russian minorities in Ukraine and continued massively profiting from gas and oil exports into Europe. Russia did, many times, last time in 2010.[0] But the US and the EU didn't like it, so the coup in 2014 happened with American help[1] which overthrew democratically elected president of Ukraine who introduced the law protecting Russian speaking Ukrainian citizens.[2] The law was repelled right after the coup and Crimeans supported the reunion with Russia. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russia%E2%80%93Ukraine_gas_disputes#Agreement https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russia%E2%80%93Ukraine_gas_dis... [1] https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-26079957 https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-26079957 [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Language_policy_in_Ukraine#2012_Law_%22On_the_Principles_of_State_Language_Policy%22 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Language_policy_in_Ukraine#201...
lostlogin 28d ago
> It's funny how we can't be celebrate a European achievement without trying to interpret it into relationship to the US. It really isn’t funny. The US shat the bed and for now the repercussions are mainly being felt outside the US. When the US realises what it’s lost it’s going to be too late.
- zzzeek 28d ago
  Oh we (the non idiots here) know full well what we lost. If Europe has a larger and more substantial science / technology community, that will just mean more trips/job offers in EU for me, so go Europe !
  - mag7269 28d ago
    As an American, I welcome a multi-polar world where Europe pulls its weight when it comes to science, technology and engineering! More so in geopolitical matters. It’s always been very draining for one empire or nation to maintain world peace. The 19th century was Pax Britannica, the 20th, after WW2, was Pax Americana, we can now hope that Pax AmEuropana can offer a counter to the crazy rapid growth of Asia and also find common ground with those nations.
    - anonymars 28d ago
      What rewards do you think the US is going to gain from this path it has begun to travel? Do you think it was all some noble charity case? The UK is likely to be an illustrative example, so it's apt you mentioned it
      - ryeats 28d ago
        You're arguing US imperialism is the best interest for the whole world. It was definitely after WW2 considering the alternative but the only way to keep the US honest is a little friendly competition.
        28d ago
NicoJuicy 28d ago
Belgian here. I think Trump definitely pushes allies away much faster than ever anticipated, that's probably the only achievement from the current administration. The alliance still stands, but it's hard to trust the US when the current president is constantly praising violent dictators and doesn't seem to grasp the concept of laws/rules + tries to blame everyone else + threatens to invade EU countries + the requirement to bribe him with funds/crypto to have "alliance". You can know a guy by the friends he keeps :) Fyi. I used to always use US tech, the last year I've done my best to adhere to the "European Souvereign Cloud". My current stack on US providers is down from 300 € / month to 35€ / m. And many are following suite ( it's slowly becoming a requirement for tenders for the governement + cities)
- drstewart 28d ago
  Germany is the country where AfD is about to win big. Good friends you're choosing there. China has it's own launchers which shows it's decoupling from Europe now. It's over for Europe as countries race to be independent from them.
  - NicoJuicy 27d ago
    The far right in Europe isn't comparable even to the right in the US fyi.
  - cromka 27d ago
    If AfD about to win BIG? Or are you just skimming the headlines?

postingawayonhn 28d ago

Yes, they've had a space agency, but the only launchers are expensive legacy vehicles. This launch is a move towards lower cost and more frequent launches, that in the US are provided by SpaceX.

nine_k 28d ago
It's not even the US in general, it's SpaceX specifically. Only the US and China have demonstrated reusable rockets, and only SpaceX demonstrated the actual reuse, the cadence and the economy of scale that it brings.
- toomuchtodo 28d ago
  It means the laws of physics allow it, and anyone willing to invest the time and fiat to accomplish it can. This means the world will no longer need to rely on SpaceX for inexpensive lift to orbit through reusable first stages, which is objectively good. No different then China working towards obviating the need for ASML for EUV semiconductor manufacturing.
  - panick21_ 28d ago
    Just because you invest in it doesn't mean you end up with hugely cheap and scalable launch. Europe has already invested far more in rocket then SpaceX did and isn't close. If your capital efficiency is far lower, it might not be inexpensive. If you can get the scale because you don't have payloads, its going to be more expensive. There is a incredibly long road between 'rocket can land' and 'cheap and scalable launch'. A long road most people don't see because its not as flashy as landing.
    - rbanffy 28d ago
      SpaceX was founded on making launches cheap. Arianespace only recently decided to develop reusable launch systems. Up to SpaceX demonstrating it was possible, the dominant approach to cheap launches was in making the expendable rocket cheap to manufacture. Nobody needs to be reminded the shuttle promised cheap access to space and failed at that.
      - NetMageSCW 27d ago
        But SpaceX built a cheaper launcher to manufacture as well as gaining reuse. There was no one making an expendable cheaper rocket before SpaceX either.
  - somenameforme 28d ago
    There are a lot more barriers to things in the real world. China has been dedicating immense effort and brainpower to cloning SpaceX, and they're still not especially close. I think a lot of us (certainly including myself) have no intuition for why this is, because we live in the software world where if you see something that is done then cloning it is generally just a matter of time and effort. But there's certainly some 'secret sauce' at SpaceX that does not seem easy to replicate. That said I think this is awesome and hope the EU is able to make further advances. I have a very positive view of Musk, but the more competitors there are in space, the more likely we able to accelerate advances and efficiency in that domain. And I think everybody wins in that scenario.
    - rbanffy 28d ago
      > because we live in the software world where if you see something that is done then cloning it is generally just a matter of time and effort. But there's certainly some 'secret sauce' at SpaceX that does not seem easy to replicate In software, thanks mostly to the open-source movement, we all have access to the same materials and manufacturing processes. In manufacturing, there are huge differences in materials and processes that we need to account for. On the flip side, this can allow one to leapfrog the other rather than replicating them - it’s likely the next reusable Falcon 9-class vehicle will use a methalox engine that’ll be easier to maintain compared to Flacon 9’s kerolox ones. China has demonstrated a novel approach to vehicle recovery as well (in addition to landing legs). Future competitors will have access to materials current incumbents didn’t have and can’t easily adopt with their current supply chain. People also forget SpaceX subverted a lot of the expectations for reusable rockets - they didn’t use parachutes, but opted to carry extra propellant for landing; they didn’t eject the engines, opting instead to reuse the whole stage; and they built landing barges because their rockets would launch towards the ocean, saving fuel for a boost back to the launch site. They also tested capsule landing using the launch abort rockets, but opted for parachutes and splashdowns instead. Still they keep all the RCS motors in the capsule, making their expendable service module very inexpensive in comparison to Boeing’s. All these decisions point to proven mission architectures so that followers don’t need to explore architectures that were explored and dropped.
- torginus 28d ago
  Reuse might turn out not to be the future - and its SpaceX has embraced this internally. At least not full reuse, or not the way most people think of a reusable spacecraft as a reusable aircraft. A reusable rocket engine might only have 2-3 flights in it, if that, with some routine inspection and maintenance between them. 3D printing has been a game changer that basically allows you to crank out rocket engines from raw materials, which means that building new ones is cheap and easy. If you look at the Raptor 3 (3D printed), it looks super clean, thanks to the fact that they integrated most of the piping into the 3d printed body, but that means you can't really fix or inspect it. Which is fine tbh. SpaceX (and Tesla) has been shown to be pragmatic not dogmatic when it comes to new technology. 'Elon time' might be a meme, but Musk both pushes his employees very hard, but probably not harder than possible - and he's willing to take flak for delaying projects, changing scope or outright cancellation.
  - nine_k 27d ago
    2-3 flights is still quite a bit of cost-cutting, and some SpaceX Falcon 9 boosters have flown more than 30 times; the median number is about 12, often very soon after the previous flight. We are not talking about forever spacecraft, and even Falcon 9's reusabilility is partial (the second stage is lost), but even what Falcon 9 has achieved allows for very rapid progress, due to the short feedback loop, including progress in reliability.
  - NetMageSCW 27d ago
    There’s absolutely no reason to believe rocket engines can only do two or three flights. SpaceX has demonstrated ten times that with F9 and with Raptor testing.
- NetMageSCW 27d ago
  Didn’t Blue Origin already reuse a booster?
thrance 28d ago
Ariane 5 was the cheapest option available for a long time, now they're a bit behind. But the ESA is now working on reusable rockets too, it seems, with their Themis program.
- NetMageSCW 27d ago
  No, Soyuz was the cheapest option, but they took themselves out of the running.

petcat 28d ago

[flagged]

ulfw 28d ago
Hackernews is slowly turning into the same primitive social networking shit as X, Threads, insta, Linkedin. Time to get off of it I suppose
- rbanffy 28d ago
  It is still the opinion of a very selected group. Even the rants are worth listening to. In particular, I’m loving the obviously British comments (I deeply admire their ability to give the classiest insults).
noir_lord 28d ago
Yeah, in the same way that as a home owner I’d be “obsessed” with my neighbour if he was showing a predilection towards arson. I’d love to be able to go a day without having to see whatever the latest stupidity we’ll have to deal with the fallout from is, I really would.
- petcat 28d ago
  This obsession started decades ago. Long before any recent politics. It's only gotten deeper and more intense recently.
  - noir_lord 28d ago
    You folks over the pond really do think we think about you that much don’t you, prior to Trump I didn’t give much of a shit what the US did (except when you were destabilising the Middle East but I guess everyone needs a hobby), was literally none of my business and I didn’t have to live there (fortunately). Now we have to pay attention because what you always where in part is in full control and it’s essentially impossible to ignore. I long for the days when we can go back to the happy place of ignoring your government day to day until it’s time for another Middle East intervention. Til then and for the avoidance of any doubt, I loathe Trump, I don’t like the people in his government, I don’t like the people who voted for him and the ones who didn’t vote and could have, the only people in America I have any sympathy for is the ones who voted for anyone but him/this shit show, the rest of you got what you deserved and will continue to do so. So with that as your president if you still believe in American Exceptionalism you can shove it. Hope that was clear enough.

anonymars 28d ago

Have there been other rocket launches from continental Europe?

AshleyGrant 28d ago
Orbital? Maybe not. Sub-orbital and ballistic? Absolutely.
- anonymars 28d ago
  Oh yes, I think everyone remembers Germany's ballistic rockets "Don't say that he's hypocritical, Say rather that he's apolitical. 'Once the rockets are up, who cares where they come down? That's not my department,' says Wernher von Braun." https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TjDEsGZLbio https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TjDEsGZLbio
  - globalnode 28d ago
    hehe, yes but if it wasnt for german rocket scientists the americans and russians would not have had space agencies (at least not that early)
    - m4rtink 28d ago
      Well, there was Goddard, Korolev & quite a few others. But it could indeed have taken longer if the military implications were not clearly demonstrated by Von Braun. Still, an interesting possibility of a fully civilian space program from the start & how it would look like & how it would be different. Kinda like in Wings of Honneamise.
      - dotancohen 28d ago
        Not only the military aspect. His staff literally were absorbed into the Russian sand US space programs. Von Braun himself famously designed the Saturn V.

kibwen 28d ago

> Does it mean that? When the US government funded SpaceX, it was motivated in no small degree by a desire to not be permanently reliant on a geopolitical wildcard (Russia) for getting astronauts into orbit. Now that the US itself has become a geopolitical wildcard, savvy countries know that they need to seek out alternatives to SpaceX under more stable regimes.

aaron695 28d ago
[dead]
drysine 28d ago
>geopolitical wildcard How is Russia a wildcard? What unexpected thing do you think Russia has done?
- deleted 28d ago
  [deleted]
- qwytw 28d ago
  Authoritarian dictatorships will always behave in seemingly irrational ways (from the perspective of sane politicians). Dictators will always put their personal ambition and "career" first before their country's interests. If Russia behaved rationally they would have made a deal with Ukraine (decades ago) that protected the rights of the Russian minorities in Ukraine and continued massively profiting from gas and oil exports into Europe.
  - drysine 28d ago
    > they would have made a deal with Ukraine (decades ago) that protected the rights of the Russian minorities in Ukraine and continued massively profiting from gas and oil exports into Europe. Russia did, many times, last time in 2010.[0] But the US and the EU didn't like it, so the coup in 2014 happened with American help[1] which overthrew democratically elected president of Ukraine who introduced the law protecting Russian speaking Ukrainian citizens.[2] The law was repelled right after the coup and Crimeans supported the reunion with Russia. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russia%E2%80%93Ukraine_gas_disputes#Agreement https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russia%E2%80%93Ukraine_gas_dis... [1] https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-26079957 https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-26079957 [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Language_policy_in_Ukraine#2012_Law_%22On_the_Principles_of_State_Language_Policy%22 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Language_policy_in_Ukraine#201...

lostlogin 28d ago

> It's funny how we can't be celebrate a European achievement without trying to interpret it into relationship to the US. It really isn’t funny. The US shat the bed and for now the repercussions are mainly being felt outside the US. When the US realises what it’s lost it’s going to be too late.

zzzeek 28d ago
Oh we (the non idiots here) know full well what we lost. If Europe has a larger and more substantial science / technology community, that will just mean more trips/job offers in EU for me, so go Europe !
- mag7269 28d ago
  As an American, I welcome a multi-polar world where Europe pulls its weight when it comes to science, technology and engineering! More so in geopolitical matters. It’s always been very draining for one empire or nation to maintain world peace. The 19th century was Pax Britannica, the 20th, after WW2, was Pax Americana, we can now hope that Pax AmEuropana can offer a counter to the crazy rapid growth of Asia and also find common ground with those nations.
  - anonymars 28d ago
    What rewards do you think the US is going to gain from this path it has begun to travel? Do you think it was all some noble charity case? The UK is likely to be an illustrative example, so it's apt you mentioned it
    - ryeats 28d ago
      You're arguing US imperialism is the best interest for the whole world. It was definitely after WW2 considering the alternative but the only way to keep the US honest is a little friendly competition.
      - 28d ago

NicoJuicy 28d ago

Belgian here. I think Trump definitely pushes allies away much faster than ever anticipated, that's probably the only achievement from the current administration. The alliance still stands, but it's hard to trust the US when the current president is constantly praising violent dictators and doesn't seem to grasp the concept of laws/rules + tries to blame everyone else + threatens to invade EU countries + the requirement to bribe him with funds/crypto to have "alliance". You can know a guy by the friends he keeps :) Fyi. I used to always use US tech, the last year I've done my best to adhere to the "European Souvereign Cloud". My current stack on US providers is down from 300 € / month to 35€ / m. And many are following suite ( it's slowly becoming a requirement for tenders for the governement + cities)

drstewart 28d ago
Germany is the country where AfD is about to win big. Good friends you're choosing there. China has it's own launchers which shows it's decoupling from Europe now. It's over for Europe as countries race to be independent from them.
- NicoJuicy 27d ago
  The far right in Europe isn't comparable even to the right in the US fyi.
- cromka 27d ago
  If AfD about to win BIG? Or are you just skimming the headlines?