Arianespace launch thread

[tater]

2 hours ago, darthgently said:

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

"Made in all the districts" was the thought.

[darthgently]

11 hours ago, tater said:

"Made in all the districts" was the thought.

porkolox fueled.  Not all a bad thing, but we've all seen the dark side

[JoeSchmuckatelli]

15 hours ago, tater said:

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

Participation trophy mindset. 

Probably because the politicians are so stupid that handing them a lollipop entitlement to their district is about as far as they think. 

This is why market driven scenarios work better (well, actually, war driven scenarios also work) to drive innovation and efficiency. 

[tater]

4 minutes ago, JoeSchmuckatelli said:

Participation trophy mindset. 

Probably because the politicians are so stupid that handing them a lollipop entitlement to their district is about as far as they think. 

This is why market driven scenarios work better (well, actually, war driven scenarios also work) to drive innovation and efficiency. 

To be fair, this is the model that the US used from the early days of the Apollo program, and pretty much all other space programs have been top-down affairs. If everyone plays the same game it's slow, but it works.

[JoeSchmuckatelli]

1 hour ago, tater said:

To be fair, this is the model that the US used from the early days of the Apollo program, and pretty much all other space programs have been top-down affairs. If everyone plays the same game it's slow, but it works.

Kinda my point.  Space Race was part of the Cold War... And then once the prestige goals had been met, and there wasn't any immediately obvious profit motive - everything slowed dramatically.  

Sure we kept putting up spy sats and some science - but it took a commercial reason for 'Space' to be viable.  Internet, phones, television and navigation and other communication technologies became (and still are) the primary drivers.   Until recently - those firms were too small to be able to do anything but ask for rides from the government(s).

The Bezos / Musk / other private launch competition is changing things - we are seeing the market in action and possibly the most innovative time in 'Space' since the 60s. 

I just hope people not only keep making money from 'Space' but that we keep inventing new ways to make even more money and the process snowballs 

[darthgently]

2 hours ago, tater said:

To be fair, this is the model that the US used from the early days of the Apollo program, and pretty much all other space programs have been top-down affairs. If everyone plays the same game it's slow, but it works.

I admit, I was harsh.  But I find it hard to say their committee space system is working well and that makes it hard to be gentle.  They were in a position to move to compete with F9 but the web of existing contracts held them fast to the past.  Very familiar story. 

It is chaffing a bit that the CCP may land a booster before a big player like ESA.   They are as pridefully afraid of appearing to be "copying" as the Chinese are shamelessly willing to unabashedly do so.  There really is a middle ground called "creative competition in the real world".   

So glad other private firms in the West are taking the new normal seriously

[tater]

6 minutes ago, darthgently said:

I admit, I was harsh.  But I find it hard to say their committee space system is working well and that makes it hard to be gentle.  They were in a position to move to compete with F9 but the web of existing contracts held them fast to the past.  Very familiar story. 

I agree with you completely. I was merely saying that their method was the norm pre-SpaceX. No government(s) are going to be as agile as required I think.