• Hi Guest! Forum rules have been updated. All users please read here.

Flyaway

ACCESS: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jan 21, 2015
Messages
4,935
Reaction score
2,755
I presume this will eventually become Ariane 7.
 

TomcatViP

Hellcat
Joined
Feb 12, 2017
Messages
2,999
Reaction score
1,637
It's a lot of mass and inertia to fight to get that vertical impulse (vernier like system). I wonder if they plan to use a solid booster for that to ease the dynamic loads on the system.
 

fredymac

ACCESS: Top Secret
Joined
Dec 14, 2009
Messages
2,158
Reaction score
691
Video on European space projects including Ariane 6. No mention of reusable rockets which probably reflects the relative funding share given to them (as well as the dubious attitude heard in the narration).


 

FighterJock

ACCESS: Top Secret
Joined
Oct 29, 2007
Messages
1,698
Reaction score
434
I do hope that Ariane 7 is going to be a heavy booster to lift a manned capsule to the Moon then Mars, Arianespace really need a competitor to the SLS and the next generation Chinese Long March heavy rocket.
 

Deltafan

ACCESS: Top Secret
Joined
May 8, 2006
Messages
1,091
Reaction score
464
I do hope that Ariane 7 is going to be a heavy booster to lift a manned capsule to the Moon then Mars, Arianespace really need a competitor to the SLS and the next generation Chinese Long March heavy rocket.
I hope too...
But…
Since the cancellation of the Hermes Space Shuttle by EU, some years ago, Europe's space ambitions seem to me as unpredictable as it is uncertain...
 

Hobbes

ACCESS: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
May 9, 2008
Messages
930
Reaction score
335
Ariane 7 is already being worked on (under the name Ariane Next). This will be a reusable replacement for Ariane 6, in the same payload class. There are no plans to develop a larger rocket at the moment.
 

FighterJock

ACCESS: Top Secret
Joined
Oct 29, 2007
Messages
1,698
Reaction score
434
Ariane 7 is already being worked on (under the name Ariane Next). This will be a reusable replacement for Ariane 6, in the same payload class. There are no plans to develop a larger rocket at the moment.

Europe dragging its heals over large rocket development as usual.
 

Hobbes

ACCESS: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
May 9, 2008
Messages
930
Reaction score
335
No, Europe is developing rockets according to its needs.
 

Moose

ACCESS: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jul 4, 2010
Messages
1,371
Reaction score
340
Europe is developing rockets according to its requirements.
 

fredymac

ACCESS: Top Secret
Joined
Dec 14, 2009
Messages
2,158
Reaction score
691
Europe is developing rockets according to its requirements.


Not my concern but don't "needs" drive "requirements"? The issue comes down to who defines them and why. In terms of SLS, the "needs" were pork and the "requirements" were whatever fits the bill. It will be interesting to see how Europe decides these things.
 

Grey Havoc

The path not taken.
Senior Member
Joined
Oct 9, 2009
Messages
12,936
Reaction score
2,957
I should note that Ariane 5 production has yet to conclude.
 

Grey Havoc

The path not taken.
Senior Member
Joined
Oct 9, 2009
Messages
12,936
Reaction score
2,957
Originally it was supposed to be around 2023 if I'm not mistaken, though there is circumstantial evidence some more examples may be added to the last ordered batch (PC Batch) of ten launch vehicles, which was originally ordered back in early 2018 (the first of which is scheduled to be launched this year). This meant as of January 2018 there were 23 Ariane 5s still in production or on order.
 

Flyaway

ACCESS: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jan 21, 2015
Messages
4,935
Reaction score
2,755

European Commissioner Thierry Breton:

SpaceX has redefined the standards for launchers, so Ariane 6 is a necessary step, but not the ultimate aim: we must start thinking now about Ariane 7
 

sferrin

ACCESS: USAP
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 3, 2011
Messages
13,677
Reaction score
1,723

Michel Van

ACCESS: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Aug 13, 2007
Messages
4,826
Reaction score
1,008
in 2030
the Starship Fleet is operational
also New Armstrong (while they build bigger rocket named after the guy who put his feet on Mars)
The Chinese and India will there reusable Rocket ships
Also Ethiopia...

Welcome to future ESA...
 

PMN1

ACCESS: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 4, 2006
Messages
767
Reaction score
124
in 2030
the Starship Fleet is operational
also New Armstrong (while they build bigger rocket named after the guy who put his feet on Mars)
The Chinese and India will there reusable Rocket ships
Also Ethiopia...

Welcome to future ESA...

Can't rush these things.........
 

Michel Van

ACCESS: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Aug 13, 2007
Messages
4,826
Reaction score
1,008
Can't rush these things.........
The SpaceX reusable launch system development program
Took around 5 years until first landing of Booster on 22 December 2015

ArianeSpace could have a reusable Ariane 7 in 2025
But you know Politic, the ministers Idiots who are ESA decision maker,
Think to protect the European Aerospace industry by building the disposable launcher Ariane 6.
There opinions is that reusability destroy jobs

odd, SpaceX use reusable rockets and has engagement of personnel
 

Zoo Tycoon

ACCESS: Secret
Senior Member
Joined
May 27, 2008
Messages
476
Reaction score
554
5 years ? It’s taken the Arianespace/ESA gravy train 7-8 years to do a simple rehash of yesterday’s technology ie Ariane 6. For something genuinely new, with the ingrained risk adversity it will take ten years plus. So when they fire the first ignitor for real, they’ll be 15 plus years behind SpaceX. I do wonder what Ariane 6 will be launching in the meantime? I can’t see any Sat builders being particularly keen to commission a flight...... unless the EU give em for free.

Also I love looking back at those ESA seniors claiming Space X would never make it and the future would be expendable’s.... Tomorrow’s EU taxes paying for yesterday’s technology.
 

sferrin

ACCESS: USAP
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 3, 2011
Messages
13,677
Reaction score
1,723
5 years ? It’s taken the Arianespace/ESA gravy train 7-8 years to do a simple rehash of yesterday’s technology ie Ariane 6. For something genuinely new, with the ingrained risk adversity it will take ten years plus. So when they fire the first ignitor for real, they’ll be 15 plus years behind SpaceX. I do wonder what Ariane 6 will be launching in the meantime? I can’t see any Sat builders being particularly keen to commission a flight...... unless the EU give em for free.

Also I love looking back at those ESA seniors claiming Space X would never make it and the future would be expendable’s.... Tomorrow’s EU taxes paying for yesterday’s technology.
The first time they try to land one and it crashes they'll retire it. "Too risky."
 

Flyaway

ACCESS: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jan 21, 2015
Messages
4,935
Reaction score
2,755
Rather than start a separate thread for this it seems more logical to put it here as this will partly be in service of supporting Ariane 6 launches as well as Vega-C.

 

Flyaway

ACCESS: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jan 21, 2015
Messages
4,935
Reaction score
2,755
news Arianespace and ESA sign contract for Themis program

Goal for Reusable Ariane in year 2030.

ehh 2030 ?
View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4EoAHdwGBvU

They sure are aiming low. Starship will be fully reusable and flying regularly by 2030. Probably New Armstrong as well.
Both of these are irrelevant as the goal of Ariane has always been partly to maintain independent access to space. So what the US does or doesn’t do it will never be given certain European payloads as these will be for European launchers alone even if that means paying more. Ariane is greatly driven by France who have no desire to become reliant on the US in this area I suspect.
 

martinbayer

ACCESS: Top Secret
Joined
Jan 6, 2009
Messages
720
Reaction score
190
Both of these are irrelevant as the goal of Ariane has always been partly to maintain independent access to space. So what the US does or doesn’t do it will never be given certain European payloads as these will be for European launchers alone even if that means paying more. Ariane is greatly driven by France who have no desire to become reliant on the US in this area I suspect.
Rightly so - the US bait and switch promise of "free" Scout launches for the UK, which at least in part led to the cancellation of the Black Arrow, see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_Arrow, comes to mind.
 

sferrin

ACCESS: USAP
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 3, 2011
Messages
13,677
Reaction score
1,723
news Arianespace and ESA sign contract for Themis program

Goal for Reusable Ariane in year 2030.

ehh 2030 ?
View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4EoAHdwGBvU

They sure are aiming low. Starship will be fully reusable and flying regularly by 2030. Probably New Armstrong as well.
Both of these are irrelevant as the goal of Ariane has always been partly to maintain independent access to space. So what the US does or doesn’t do it will never be given certain European payloads as these will be for European launchers alone even if that means paying more. Ariane is greatly driven by France who have no desire to become reliant on the US in this area I suspect.
I would have thought they'd have been hoping to use commercial payloads to help defray the costs.
 

Michel Van

ACCESS: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Aug 13, 2007
Messages
4,826
Reaction score
1,008
Just little Infographic
What SpaceX has manage over years
1525879838_SpaceX_market_share.png
 

blackstar

ACCESS: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Sep 26, 2008
Messages
1,802
Reaction score
219
Just little Infographic
What SpaceX has manage over years
1525879838_SpaceX_market_share.png

You have to be careful with graphics like that, because they require context. For instance, often these charts include NASA launches as "commercial" because of the way the contracts are written. That means that a US government payload on a US launch vehicle (SpaceX) is counted as "commercial," whereas a European government payload on a European launch vehicle, or a Russian government payload on a Russian launch vehicle is not counted as commercial.
 

Hobbes

ACCESS: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
May 9, 2008
Messages
930
Reaction score
335
it also hides how many launches there were, so doesn't say anything about total revenue.
 

Hobbes

ACCESS: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
May 9, 2008
Messages
930
Reaction score
335
That's not what I meant. When you hide the number of launches, you can't see if the market has grown or shrunk.
 

marauder2048

"I should really just relax"
Joined
Nov 19, 2013
Messages
3,159
Reaction score
471
That's not what I meant. When you hide the number of launches, you can't see if the market has grown or shrunk.
But revenue could have declined for the commercial market as a whole due to competition
but be offset by the institutional launches whose definition is, per blackstar's point, squishy.
 

blackstar

ACCESS: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Sep 26, 2008
Messages
1,802
Reaction score
219
That's not what I meant. When you hide the number of launches, you can't see if the market has grown or shrunk.

Yeah, this is only showing percentages, not number of launches, and 100% of 60 is not the same as 100% of 80.

To really understand this subject, you need a bunch of different statistics. In general, there really was no US commercial launch market until about 5+ years ago. That's when SpaceX started taking away customers from Russia and Arianespace. A lot of SpaceX's growth has been at the detriment of those other non-US launch vehicles. So it would be useful to have percentages of the commercial launch market by country and show that over time (the above table shows some of that, but not exactly).

Personally, I would subtract-out the NASA and DoD launches that are book-kept as "commercial" from any comparison, because there is no way that those payloads are going to a non-US launch vehicle (NASA is not going to buy a launch on a Russian or European rocket); they're either going to ULA or SpaceX. But again, to really discuss this, you would need more charts and explanation.

Finally, I'd add that launch vehicles are really not the most important part of the "commercial" space sector. That's just a fraction. You'd also want to look at payloads (satellites) and services too. But it's common on the internet to focus on the rockets because rockets make noise and look cool.
 

Flyaway

ACCESS: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jan 21, 2015
Messages
4,935
Reaction score
2,755
Top