Ariane 62 is most likely ~7mT to 700km Polar, so ridiculously over powered for the Sentinel 1 sats.
Quote from: Rik ISS-fan on 06/23/2017 11:01 pmAriane 62 is most likely ~7mT to 700km Polar, so ridiculously over powered for the Sentinel 1 sats.Sentinel-1 is more the exception though. The Sentinel-4 (MTG-S) and Sentinel-5 (MetOP-SG) series are too heavy for Vega-C at around 2.8-4.0 tons to SSO, and in my opinion those four plus the four MTG-I from EUMETSAT are prime payloads for Ariane 62 in the first half of the 2020s.
Try and seriously sponsor more internal competition for new launch providers. PLD Space, Nammo appear to have relatively credible bids for getting to orbit with microlaunchers.Like, this sounded like a good plan: http://www.small-launcher.euHave they done anything at all ?
Funnily, with all this talk about "launcher autonomy", they have no qualms about using Soyuz from Guiana.
In short, Ariane tries to prevent governments of EU (their orbital payloads) to "desert" to SpaceX.
I havn't named one aspect of the buy european act. Currently the ESA member-states pay around 100mln annually to keep CSG oparational. With annually around 11 or 12 Ariane 6 and 3 or 4 Vega launches this isn't required anymore. (Nasa and USAF also pay the operational cost of the east and west coast ranges.)Currently Arianespace sells around six annual Ariane5 ECA launches. To come to the 11 number, five additional launches are required. Arianespace and ESA want a fixed minimal amount of 5 institutional Ariane 6 payloads to fill these additional launches. I think there is a huge difference between the situation in the US and what this buy Arianespace act involves. In the US, institutions are forced to buy American launches. From 1990-2010 three was only one provider; ULA. their cost spiraled out of control. Now with SpaceX, OATK and most likely in the future BO competition is coming back, an thus the price drop. BUT, SpaceX is selling their launcher at higher fares to US-institutions then what they say their commercial prices are. This buy guaranteed basic demand for Ariane 6 and Vega launches from EU institutions involve discounted launch cost. So EU institutions get lower prices by clustering their launch order and thus generate a guaranteed demand of launches from Arianespace. (Not unlike the USAF ULA block buy.)And no, the point that commercial launches are offered at lower prices then institutional launches, is not only to the US. China, India and Russia also do this. If I'm not mistaken the USA accuses India of selling PSLV (rideshare) launches at lower prices then their launch cost. The document form 2014 also shows that launch prices for institutional Soyuz launches went up very fast. That's why ESA/EU decided to make Ariane5ES suitable to orbit four Galileo satellites at ones. I think that the act will be part of the Launchers_LEAP program. EU/ESA institution buy a fixed annual amount of launchers at discounted launch costs. And the industry develops improvements to the Ariane/Vega launchers, with a part of the development cost carried by the industry. (Now ESA/the member-states pay the developments fully.)I think that the satellite development and launch procurement timelines are long enough to arrange the launcher that are part of the act during the ministerial conferences. If this is the case, than it's actually very much like the block buy that ULA got from the USAF. This would mean that every two years the details of the buy Arianespace act can be adjusted.I'm for the act if it is implemented with adjustment mechanism.
And no, the point that commercial launches are offered at lower prices then institutional launches, is not only to the US. China, India and Russia also do this. If I'm not mistaken the USA accuses India of selling PSLV (rideshare) launches at lower prices then their launch cost. The document form 2014 also shows that launch prices for institutional Soyuz launches went up very fast. That's why ESA/EU decided to make Ariane5ES suitable to orbit four Galileo satellites at ones.
For @ArianeGroup @Arianespace CEO S. Israel, 'if Ariane doesnt OK equivalent of Buy European Act, we wont make it through next decade.' @EU_Commission, @eumetsat, @DLR_de, @ASI_spazio et al to decide on bulk-launch guarantee (equivalent of 5 lge sats/yr) in 2018.#SpaceEurope
Wow:QuoteFor @ArianeGroup @Arianespace CEO S. Israel, 'if Ariane doesnt OK equivalent of Buy European Act, we wont make it through next decade.' @EU_Commission, @eumetsat, @DLR_de, @ASI_spazio et al to decide on bulk-launch guarantee (equivalent of 5 lge sats/yr) in 2018.#SpaceEuropehttps://twitter.com/pbdes/status/934134726574727168So is the Arianespace CEO really saying that Ariane 6 can’t compete and so needs legislation to have enough launches to survive?!
Quote from: FutureSpaceTourist on 11/24/2017 06:08 pmWow:QuoteFor @ArianeGroup @Arianespace CEO S. Israel, 'if Ariane doesnt OK equivalent of Buy European Act, we wont make it through next decade.' @EU_Commission, @eumetsat, @DLR_de, @ASI_spazio et al to decide on bulk-launch guarantee (equivalent of 5 lge sats/yr) in 2018.#SpaceEuropehttps://twitter.com/pbdes/status/934134726574727168So is the Arianespace CEO really saying that Ariane 6 can’t compete and so needs legislation to have enough launches to survive?!No, he is saying that Ariane 6 can compete if it has the same benefits as the other providers do, ie a steady supply of government launches. :)