ESA Ariane 6

NMaude said:
I wonder if there ever will an Ariane 7?
Click to expand...
yes it will be once the reusable Europan rocket is ready
Ariane 6 is dead,
and since NESTS not pronounceable, they will called it Ariane 7...
 
It’s interesting to hear that they literally chose keeping certain countries onboard over efficiency of production, shows you that Ariane is still as much a political project as an engineering one, and why it will never truly compete on price. Also the fact that the upper stage of Ariane 5 could not restart its upper stage in orbit added a year’s journey time to Juice.
 
Flyaway said:
It’s interesting to hear that they literally chose keeping certain countries onboard over efficiency of production, shows you that Ariane is still as much a political project as an engineering one, and why it will never truly compete on price. Also the fact that the upper stage of Ariane 5 could not restart its upper stage in orbit added a year’s journey time to Juice.
Click to expand...
Well it could compete on price only a mere decade ago (given some subsidies).
It just cannot compete against a uninational, vertically integrated, ideologically-motivated company that's still on its first generation of managers with the overwhelming support of the world's largest army, space agency and wealthiest person. Structurally speaking it just can't.

tbf... JUICE was always built for ECA even when ME was still planned. Reliability>Time
 
Last edited:
Flyaway said:
Also the fact that the upper stage of Ariane 5 could not restart its upper stage in orbit added a year’s journey time to Juice.
Click to expand...

I was very surprised to learn that the second-stage couldn't be restarted, that was an extremely shortsighted design decision.
 
NMaude said:
I was very surprised to learn that the second-stage couldn't be restarted, that was an extremely shortsighted design decision.
Click to expand...
Because it never was supposed to be a long term solution, ESC-A was initially only a stopgap for the Vinci-powered ESC-B, which is why it reused the engine and oxygen tank of Ariane 4’s upper stage, and why it doesn’t have restart capabilities, and a worse mass fraction than even the Chinese and Indian cryogenic stages

But of course ESC-B was cancelled after 517, Vinci was downscaled to a technology program, then ESC-B/ME iwas revived, then re-cancelled
 
NMaude said:
I was very surprised to learn that the second-stage couldn't be restarted, that was an extremely shortsighted design decision.
Click to expand...
I asked on NSF & apparently the plan was for ESC-A to be an interim solution only, pending the development of ESC-B using the restartable Vinci engine. That was cancelled, IIRC after the failure of the first ECA launch.
 
Maybe swap Vincis for some Raptors or Merlins?

SpaceX was open to the special needs of Euclid.

Europe gets a boost and Elon can learn precision.
 
So does this mean that the Ariane 6 will fly before the end of the year?
 
Here’s the updated development schedule for Ariane 6.

Here below please find the updated schedule for #Ariane6 development. With this, @ESA, @ArianeGroup, @Arianespace and @CNES confirm that the inaugural launch is now targeted for 2024.
Click to expand...
After successful tests including completion of a launch chronology of the core stage up to the ignition of the Vulcain thrust chamber on 18 July in Kourou, we will run a short hot-firing test on 29 August.
Click to expand...
The following milestone will be the third hot-firing test of the upper stage in Lampoldshausen on 1 September.
Click to expand...
A long hot-firing test of the core stage – scheduled for 26 September @EuropeSpacePort – will be open for journalists to attend.
Click to expand...
Furthermore, we will organize a detailed briefing after the long hot-firing test of 26 September, when we will also be able to provide a more precise launch period for 2024. Our next regularly scheduled Task Force report to the public is planned for 4 September.
Click to expand...

https://twitter.com/x/status/1688823142741880834
View: https://twitter.com/arianespaceceo/status/1688823142741880834


https://twitter.com/x/status/1688823145891766273
View: https://twitter.com/arianespaceceo/status/1688823145891766273


https://twitter.com/x/status/1688823148618153986
View: https://twitter.com/arianespaceceo/status/1688823148618153986
 
Oh good 2024 for the first launch of the Ariane 6 rocket, though no firm date yet. I suspect that will follow after the long hot firing test.
 
https://twitter.com/x/status/1704875460000129370
View: https://twitter.com/aschbacherjosef/status/1704875460000129370


Ariane 6 task force update: great data and results from the hot-fire September tests for #Ariane6 both in French Guiana and Germany. However, an anomaly was detected in the thrust control vector hydraulics when preparing for the next test and the long-duration hot firing test will no longer take place on 3 October as teams investigate the causes. We will come back to you with more updates when available.
Click to expand...

Ariane 6 joint update report, 21 September 2023

The Ariane 6 Launcher Task Force consists of top management at ESA, the overall Ariane 6 procuring entity and launch system architect, launch base prime contractor and French space agency CNES, launcher system prime contractor ArianeGroup and launch service provider Arianespace. This group...
www.esa.int
 
As a German/European citizen, I have absolutely no doubt whatsoever that Ariane 6 will eventually be *made* successful in meeting its basic mission requirements, but I am also completely convinced that it will never be really economically competitive in the global market, because this travesty is still based on overriding European industry economic distribution constraints [cough Italian SRBs cough] rather than developing a thoroughly cost optimized clean sheet design of a truly competitive 21st century launch system with at least *some* level of reusability. I'm just glad that as a US resident alien/expat/guest worker I don't have to pay any taxes for that sickening nonsense anymore. But I'm not bitter...
 
Last edited:
It's a not a single test, it's now at every stage of the process that ESA makes some discoveries that force them to have improvised procedures.
It should not be like that if they were still mastering the discpline.
 
Two pieces of news from Latribune

https://www.latribune.fr/entreprise...nt-public-pour-exploiter-ariane-6-979126.html
Space: Airbus and Safran want more public money to operate Ariane 6


According to corroborating sources, ArianeGroup, owned by Airbus and Safran, is negotiating with the member states of the European Space Agency a very clear reassessment of support for the operation of Ariane 6 due to the consequences of inflation. The manufacturer is asking for €350 million per year, corresponding to an increase of ... 150%.
Click to expand...

https://www.latribune.fr/entreprise...-un-premier-vol-en-avril-mai-2024-977533.html




Ariane 6: first flight in April-May 2024?
Ariane 6 could take off for the first time in the second quarter of 2024. The new European heavy launcher is expected to ramp up rapidly, with ten launches scheduled from 2027.
Click to expand...

Recent Ariane 6 anomaly that resulted in the long test fire delay (now schedule for late november) doesn't seem to have impacted ESA's internal schedule for the A62 maiden launch.
 
A first launch for Ariane 6 second quarter next year? I always thought that would happen, given what has happened so far with the repeated delays and engine issues.
 
If Ariane 6 launches in the middle of next year as this article says ESA still hopes so, and if it succeeds, then frankly its development wouldn’t have been particularly slow compared to H3 and Vulcan...
 
Personally I think that Arianespace shouldn't have ended production of the Ariane 5 until the Ariane 6 had had at least one successful flight.
 
martinbayer said:
Ariane 6 should at least have included a modicum of reusability, but once again, I'm not bitter...
Click to expand...

To be fully honest
Europe rocket business ugliest side (French & Italy solid fuel, ATK - like ugly business) combined with SpaceX Falcon 9 meteoritic rise toward reusability: into a perfect shitstorm.
Falcon 9 flew in May 2010, reusability was announced in 2012, first atempted circa 2013-2014... and achieved in 2015.
Arianespace might be "excused" until, say, 2013-2014: but not much beyond that point.
 
Let Face it, ArianeSpace had their moments of Glory, there are over.
It started already with Ariane 5 replacing the cheaper Ariane 4 but who cares it's the EU subsidies the launches.
But then came December 21, 2015. Were Falcon 9 return to launch site and landed !
From here thing change fast and ESA and ArianeSpace were overrun by SpaceX and Rocket Lab.
Dropping launch cost deeper as Ariane 5 or Vega rocket.
Here comes Rocket Lab with Electron, offering cheaper launch as Vega and they work on making Electron reusable.

Now ArianeSpace whines and whines about Bad SpaceX and market is too small...
but Elon Musk point on Elephant in Room: the EU subsidies to ArianeSpace
while ESA goes for very Conservative program to make the Ariane reusable in 2030s...

in 2030 ?
They You have Rocket Lab reusable Electron and Neutron rockets
next Firefly Aerospace, Stork Space, Relativity Space, ULA reuse also.
i guess Blue Origin manage to launch New Glenn few times
And there Starship/Superheavy operational and replace Falcon 9

Good luck ArianeSpace, you need it...
because here the Business Mantra is:

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K6RpnMFlqP8
 
Michel Van said:
It started already with Ariane 5 replacing the cheaper Ariane 4 but who cares it's the EU subsidies the launches.
Click to expand...

The reason why the Ariane 4 was replaced is that the satellites it was launching kept getting bigger and bigger, it was no longer up to the task.
 
NMaude said:
The reason why the Ariane 4 was replaced is that the satellites it was launching kept getting bigger and bigger, it was no longer up to the task.
Click to expand...
the Ariane 5R and Ariane 5C could fly those mission too (yes Ariane 5R was on Limit for payload.)
But it would be cheaper as the Ariane 5 we build for Hermes but Hermes never flew...
 
Last edited:
I can remember seeing the Ariane 5 with the Hermes shuttle on the top back in the 1980s, but was gutted that it never was launched as I thought that Hermes was the future after the Challenger disaster.
 
Amazing to think Shuttle produced Hermes, and in turn Hermes impacted Ariane 5 away from 5C and toward 5P - breaking the Ariane 4 to Ariane 6 continuity... that would have been the all-cryo Ariane 5C. Or - worst case - the 5R, of Ariane 44L legacy.
 
Can't help thinking that Ariane 5C on the right is the missing link between Ariane 44L and Ariane 6.


1982%20concept%2005.jpg
 
Can't say I'm a big fan of the vulcain, $3 Billion 2023USD of investment* for a middle-of-the-road Hydrolox sustainer , one that struggles to serve as booster without SRBs, one that is poorly reusable, very hardly relightable and throttleable, and not particularly cheap ($15 million back in the 90s, $25 million today, half that claimed on Ariane 6; compare ~1.7-2 Million 1999USD for one viking engine). A 3 stages Ariane 5 powered exclusively by vulcain seems like an expensive machine, a worse european Delta IV, without the institutional launches.

Can't help but think the most logical road for Ariane would have been the Titan/LVM3 way, Put larger SRBs , increase the mass of the upper stages (seriously Ariane 1-4 were one of the rare liquid fueled rockets whose upper stage has a higher TWR than the S1), maybe hot stage the center core if it's possible....

Of course there were reasons for developping Vulcain, it was a technologically interesting (and maybe trendy at the time) project, it was needed for heavy launcher with reduced staging for Hermes, it meant 1/4 of the A5 budget automatically going to a SEP/SNECMA led project in france, getting rid of Hydrazine..

Thanksfully ESA now has Prometheus, more european, but still assembled in France, it'll hopefully do its first flight next year on Themis' tiny hop in sweden... AG seems to be willing to sell them to other companies beside Maiaspace, which considering the lack of test infrastructures in europe beside AG's, is promising.
In china, space pioneer proved that a launch startup can reach orbit VERY quickly if they use pre-existing liquid engines,



*$1.3 billion /9 billion francs in 1990 terms, only for V1 up to the maiden launch, Vulcain 2, 2.1, with the cost of post-517 modifications, probably was quite a bit higher
 
Last edited:
https://twitter.com/x/status/1715009136205680825
View: https://twitter.com/aschbacherjosef/status/1715009136205680825


Ariane 6 update
In order to optimise the #Ariane6 testing schedule, the test sequence has been inverted. This allows us to anticipate the launch rehearsal test, followed by the long-duration firing test of the main stage Vulcain 2.1 engine, and ultimately reduces any impact on the overall schedule.

*Next milestones*
October: Combined test, launch rehearsal with ignition of the main stage, Kourou, French Guiana

November: Combined test, long-duration firing of the main stage with Vulcain 2.1 engine, Kourou, French Guiana

December: Upper stage firing test, Lampoldshausen, Germany

Read the full update here:
Click to expand...

Ariane 6 joint update report, 19 October 2023

The Ariane 6 Launcher Task Force consists of top management of ESA, as the overall Ariane 6 procuring entity and launch system architect, of the French space agency CNES, as the launch base prime contractor, of ArianeGroup as the launcher system prime contractor and of Arianespace as the launch...
www.esa.int
 
Oh sure. Whatever the naysayers and the SpaceX fanboys says, it will fly and it will provide stellar service. The ESA side of the business is safe and sound. Now the satelite business, comsats and others... not so much. ALTHOUGH Kuiper may provide ammunitions against SpaceX and Starlink onslaught. I was surprised (and pleased) to see Bezos buying loads of Vulcan and Ariane 6 launches for Kuiper. In your face, Starlink and SpaceX.

Although to be honest - satellites constellations through classic ELV may be... expensive. But Bezos has very deep pockets.

Yeah, I really want to see that: Musk & SpaceX and Starlink vs Bezos & Kuiper and old school ELVs. This gonna be a very interesting experiment in RLVs vs ELVs costs.
(grabs popcorn)
 
Last edited:
The headline kind of says it all to be honest, there’s an argument to be made for why NASA and ESA don’t buy their launchers from private companies like a commodity.

Ariane 6 cost and delays bring European launch industry to a breaking point

arstechnica.com

Ariane 6 cost and delays bring European launch industry to a breaking point

"I certainly expect a paradigm shift on the launcher sector."
arstechnica.com arstechnica.com
 
Oops, that is not good news Flyaway, Ariane 6 bringing the European launch industry to breaking point?
 

Similar threads

Back
Top Bottom