Arianespace launch thread

[SunlitZelkova]

ESA announces program to build European commercial resupply service.

https://x.com/esaspaceflight/status/1736766316118224948?s=46&t=Jd73T2beq0JLNtwTy1uR5A

https://www.esa.int/Science_Exploration/Human_and_Robotic_Exploration/Competition_developing_Europe_s_space_cargo_return_service
 

Cargo launch and return. First flight intended for 2028 to ISS. ESA wants the program to be able to “barter” for flights to commercial space stations instead of having to pay money. The capability is said to possibly present an opportunity to eventually build a crewed spacecraft, or return cargo from Gateway.

It says “this is part of ESA’s renewed journey to LEO and beyond to Moon and Mars”.

Timeline seems a little optimistic, to say the least. Although I guess Dragon 1 flew in what, 3 years from beginning of development?

What companies can realistically partake in this? And to what extent is this going to be “commercial”?

The meat of my questions are: how is this going to become profitable or sustainable and not end up like the ATV (cancelled after five flights), when these manufacturers participating don’t have alternative sources of income like SpaceX did?*

*I’m assuming Airbus’ airliner, defense, and space divisions are separate and can’t have cash swapped between them all willy nilly.

[Exoscientist]

 

 I once jokingly said that if they were asked how much the Ariane 6 SRB’s cost, ArianeSpace and ESA would respond, “We’re not going to tell you that!” Turns out that wasn’t far from the truth:  

Ariane's New Price Tag Is Bad News for Airbus, Great News for Boeing and Lockheed (and SpaceX).  
By Rich Smith – Dec 23, 2023 at 7:07AM  
Recall that Ariane originally targeted a 50% cost reduction between Ariane 5 and Ariane 6. Asked about the price at a press briefing earlier this year, though, Arianespace CEO Stéphane Israël first blamed inflation, complaining that Ariane has to work with a "real economy," then flat-out declined to say how much the rocket will cost, telling reporters to "speak...with our customers," as Ars Technica reported in September. Taking the hint, Ars dug up a June speech from ESA Space Transportation Director Toni-Tolker Nielsen, who confided that Ariane 6 is looking likely to cost about 40% less than Ariane 5 -- not 50%.
But now, even 40% looks over-optimistic.
https://www.fool.com/investing/2023/12/23/arianes-new-price-tag-is-bad-news-for-airbus/

 

  Bob Clark

Edited December 26, 2023 by Exoscientist

[Exoscientist]

Space wars: Europe’s master plan to counter Elon Musk’s Starlink
The Starlink satellite system is crucial for the Ukrainian military, but there are problems.
The European Union aims to sign contracts worth billions by the end of March to build and operate a new constellation of communication satellites | Mariana Suarez/AFP via Getty Images
JANUARY 25, 2024 5:09 PM CET
BY JOSHUA POSANER
https://www.politico.eu/article/space-wars-europe-masterplan-counter-elon-musk-starlink/

 This is great news. An argument against Europe producing a reusable launcher to compete with SpaceX is the lack of a European market for it. A European satellite system to compete with Starlink requiring thousands of satellites would provide a definite market for large numbers of launches that would be done most cheaply by reusable launchers.

 This article about the IRIS2 systems says it will only use hundreds of satellites. But both the Starlink and Project Kuiper systems will use thousands of satellites. And the Chinese systems intended to be competitive to the American systems will also use thousands of satellites. It is unlikely this system can be competitive to these systems without also using thousands of satellites.

  Robert Clark

 

[tater]

46 minutes ago, Exoscientist said:

This article about the IRIS2 systems says it will only use hundreds of satellites. But both the Starlink and Project Kuiper systems will use thousands of satellites. And the Chinese systems intended to be competitive to the American systems will also use thousands of satellites. It is unlikely this system can be competitive to these systems without also using thousands of satellites.

It can't possibly be for low latency internet.

So first Arianespace needs to have an operational, reusable vehicle on par with at least Falcon 9, and a launch cadence of at least what, 1 per week? They'll need a pad someplace better than their current facility, much of the year there has rain about 2/3 of the days per month (vs ~20% for most of the months in FL). They also need the cost to be comparable (internal launch costs). Do you think they can make a second stage every week, or whatever SpaceX is aiming for now (every 2-3 days)?

So they're gonna make their own Starlink in... a decade? Longer?

[Exoscientist]

 The need for such large number of launchers will spur the development of reusability in European space as well. In response to a question about how long to build a new Delta IV, ULA head Tory Bruno responded two years. A reusable launcher that can be launched again within a matter of weeks would have a major advantage.

 I wrote the following blog post in regards to advancing European manned spaceflight. However, in regards to a financial motive, a greater reason for developing the launchers I discuss is advancing reusability in European spaceflight:

Towards Every European Country's Own Crewed Spaceflight, Page 2: saved costs and time using already developed, operational engines.
https://exoscientist.blogspot.com/2024/01/towards-every-european-countrys-own.html

Key, and most controversial, points:

1.)Any European country can field their own, independent, manned flight capable launcher in under 2 years, IF they design it around already developed and operational engines.

2.)By eliminating the two SRB’s on the Ariane 6, and instead adding 1 or 2 additional Vulcain engines on the core stage, ArianeSpace can field such a launcher in less than a year.

3.)In any case, such a manned flight capable launcher by following the commercial space approach spear-headed by SpaceX could be developed for less than $200 million, assuming they didn’t have to pay engine development costs by using already operational engines.

  Robert Clark

[tater]

Last year, the CEO of Arianespace said that Ariane 6 would fly for a decade before being replaced (by a reusable).

So 2033?

First F9 reuse was 2017. 6 years later they were at nearly 100 launched per year.

2018 they tested 2 Starlinks—wrong design, Musk fired the guy in charge (now running Kuiper).

2019 they launched 120, 2020 they launched 833.

Assuming they fly reusable in '33, and the next year they fire for effect, and slowly learn how to reuse rockets, they might have something like a constellation going by 2040?

Or maybe they fire literally everyone at Arianespace, and build a new culture that has a sense of urgency about... anything at all?

3 minutes ago, Exoscientist said:

3.)In any case, such a manned flight capable launcher by following the commercial space approach spear-headed by SpaceX could be developed for less than $200 million, assuming they didn’t have to pay engine development costs by using already operational engines.

See my last question above.

Look at Blue Origin. They hired old space management, and had a "slow is steady, and steady is fast" mandate from Bezos, they therefore got an old space culture... and they've been around longer than SpaceX—funded by the previously richest man on Earth as a project that represents his fondest wish—and have sent zero spacecraft into orbit so far.

"Culture" matters. I can't imagine it is even possible for Arianespace to ever compete.

Edited January 29 by tater

[SunlitZelkova]

5 hours ago, tater said:

"Culture" matters. I can't imagine it is even possible for Arianespace to ever compete.

Culture can change though. China had abysmal engineering and manufacturing practices as late as the 1980s. By the 1990s it was booming, and of course it became the second largest economy in the world in 2010.

I don't know whether that can work with individual companies though. China had the advantage of being guided by the state to a great extent.

[Exoscientist]

 

A Moore’s Law for space

Edward Lu January 29, 2024

Something fundamental has changed in space. After decades of slow growth, the number of spacecraft launched annually has doubled every two years since 2015. And the trend shows no sign of slowing, with tens of thousands of planned spacecraft to be launched over the next few years. This exponential growth is reminiscent of Moore’s Law, the decades-long observation that the number of transistors on integrated circuits doubles every two years. The consequences of the continuation of Moore’s law and the ever-increasing computing power for lower costs over the past six decades has changed the course of our society, our economy, and our way of life. Could we be witnessing a similar revolution in space?

https://spacenews.com/moores-law-space/

  This is great news for advancing reusability in space launchers. With reusability and large numbers of launches prices will drop

  Robert Clark

[tater]

Arianespace feels like a sort of ULA where the parents are multiple contractors in multiple countries. I think it's way, way more political (both "actually" political, meaning governments, and business political, meaning competing interests of companies).

Number of objects increasing since 2019 is largely Starlink driven I think.

[Kermann Nolandung]

ESA is the intergovernmental space agency that coordinates the european space programmes. Eventually the budget, programmes and member participations are voted by the member states.
In ESA there are mandatory programmes where each member state contributes an amount proportional to their gross national product and optional programmes. 
The launchers are optional programmes, the members are free to participate or not.
It should be noted that ESA is not a sub-organization of the European Union but a different one.
Alongside ESA, some members have their own national space agency (CNES, DLR, ASI…).

Arianespace is the company in charge of providing launch service from Kourou spaceport. Its offer includes launch with Ariane, Vega and formerly Soyuz from Kourou.

ArianeGroup is a joint venture of aerospace companies (with activities mainly in France and Germany) that was recently formed to develop and build Ariane 6 launcher.
The share of the work of the prime and sub-contractors is then divided between the members in proportion to their participation.

Vega is a launcher developed and manufactured by Italian agency and companies. The manufacturer is Avio.
Last year, Italy and Avio negotiated that future Vega launches would no longer have to be marketed through Arianespace. That means it becomes a new competitor.

With Ariane 6, unlike the previous generations, ESA has entrusted ArianeGroup, a private company, with the development of the rocket.
This company is supposed to develop the launcher within a fixed budget and assume the risks. 

We can see where they are today.
The company is calling for a budget increase and members complain about the extra costs.
ArianeGroup seems easily to blame, but I guess nobody (ESA, members, ArianeGroup, contractors) is clean.
One issue is that it has to follow the principle of geographical return.
For example, ArianeGroup’s CEO has revealed that while he engaged cost reduction in his company, he faced dramatic increase in costs from subcontractors (some of whom, understandly, come from countries that complain about the cost of the programme).

Who to blame ? If I were one of the CEO of one of the subcontractors, it would be my duty to make the most of it from a kind of a monopol situation.
I don’t know the contractual details, but I can imagine a lot of reasons for the delays, extra costs and tense discussions.

[DDE]

On 1/29/2024 at 11:30 PM, Exoscientist said:

This is great news. An argument against Europe producing a reusable launcher to compete with SpaceX is the lack of a European market for it. A European satellite system to compete with Starlink requiring thousands of satellites would provide a definite market for large numbers of launches that would be done most cheaply by reusable launchers.

That's assuming the EU has the political capacity to properly follow through with such a project.

Instead of, for example, writing off a hypothetical reusable Ariane halfway through the project and sending the whole thing up on Falcons. Or creating a constellation, then not using administrative leverage to forcibly create demand for their alternative (which, since it's playing catch-up with SpaceX, would be inferior), and acting all surprised when the thing goes bankrupt or becomes permanently subsidized.

[tater]

https://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2024/02/ariane-6-prepares-ship-kourou/

ArianeGroup prepares to ship Ariane 6 maiden flight rocket to Kourou

[AckSed]

It's about time. Good to see flight hardware.

[Exoscientist]

 Key question is how much will they charge for commercial customers? The subsidies will have to be used to reduce the prices charged for commercial customers.

  Robert Clark

[tater]

9 minutes ago, Exoscientist said:

 Key question is how much will they charge for commercial customers? The subsidies will have to be used to reduce the prices charged for commercial customers.

The only place where it might have a niche to compete at all is GTO/GEO assuming it is cheaper than FH.

https://arstechnica.com/space/2023/10/oops-it-looks-like-the-ariane-6-rocket-may-not-offer-europe-any-launch-savings/

Berger says that amortized over 100 flights, the European subsidies alone (annual costs for facilities, etc, plus dev) are ~€75M per launch. Given Kuiper bought flights, Amazon is getting paid by Europe to launch sats, lol.

[tater]

 

[tater]

 

[darthgently]

1 hour ago, tater said:

 

This is sooner than I expected.  Hope they are able to stay with this schedule

[tater]

 

[tater]

This aged like fine milk.

 

 

Edited March 22 by tater

[Spaceception]

2024 is the year of 2020 debuts. Vulcan, Ariane 6, and New Glenn. 1/3 so far!

[darthgently]

2 hours ago, tater said:

This aged like fine milk.

Arianne's statements there have transmuted into a strange cheese covered with a thick velvet carpet of multi-hued mold at this point.  The "25 satellites a year" thing is just frosting on the "SpaceX is just a dream" thing.  It never ceases to amaze me how we, myself included at times, strongly think/feel we know how the future will roll out.  But most of us have the sense to check our process a bit with some humble self-doubt, especially in a public setting like that.  The internet never forgets

[JoeSchmuckatelli]

55 minutes ago, darthgently said:

The internet never forgets

I for one have never posted some whiskey-fueled nonsense that I regret.

Nope.

Never.

Weird thing is that as I try to convince my students just how amazing it is that SX is propulsively landing spacecraft... they just shrug.  Because for as long as they've paid attention - SX has been doing just that.  I remember thinking the first PC I built was super powerful - and I'm pretty sure my phone has more power than it did.

It's almost like we can't predict the future - and then once some amazing future is at hand - we take it for granted.

[tater]

What makes Ariane 6 really tick (hint: it's the same special sauce as SLS/Orion):

[darthgently]

1 hour ago, tater said:

What makes Ariane 6 really tick (hint: it's the same special sauce as SLS/Orion):

You could be referring to the SRBs, the porkolox fuel, or both