Quote from: volker2020 on 10/17/2022 06:06 amThe really bad thing here, if ESA starts to copy F9 now (and that would include minor improvements), they would again end up with a system that is outdated, when reaching the market.Better to be 10 years out of date (after starting on a Falcon 9 clone), then waiting another 10 years (and doing nothing) and be 20 years out of date!
The really bad thing here, if ESA starts to copy F9 now (and that would include minor improvements), they would again end up with a system that is outdated, when reaching the market.
Quote from: Steven Pietrobon on 10/18/2022 05:40 amQuote from: volker2020 on 10/17/2022 06:06 amThe really bad thing here, if ESA starts to copy F9 now (and that would include minor improvements), they would again end up with a system that is outdated, when reaching the market.Better to be 10 years out of date (after starting on a Falcon 9 clone), then waiting another 10 years (and doing nothing) and be 20 years out of date!Interestingly, there is private money (RocketLab with Neutron) chasing the idea of Falcon 9 with improvements. Many suspect they will need to raise more money to complete this project. If so, for a fraction of what they would spend on their own competitor, perhaps ESA could help fund Neutron development, in return for IP rights, the right to manufacture in Europe, and a pad in Guiana.This would solve the problem of assured European access to space, if they can build and launch their own vehicle, from their own spaceport, at a reasonable (even if not StarShip level) cost. It could also preserve some manufacturing capabilities, though not the large solids some EDA factions would prefer. This project alone would not preserve the ability to design and qualify new vehicles, but that might be covered by project working on next generation (fully reusable) concepts.However, spending significant money outside the ESA for a core function (design and qualification) seems implausible, no matter what the practical benefits might be.
I checked the IAC program. Susie was presented by the same people who gave us Adeline. Do I need to elaborate ?
The ESA budget for space transportation has risen to €2.8 billion. ESA will further strengthen its Ariane 6 and Vega-C launchers, complete the development of the reusable Space Rider that can stay in low Earth orbit for more than two months before returning to Earth for refurbishment, and develop a green hydrogen system to fuel Ariane launchers at Europe’s Spaceport in French Guiana, with the goal of eliminating carbon in hydrogen production by 2030. It will continue to mature critical technologies that underpin European capabilities while responding to environmental sustainability and cost-efficiency requirements, along with preparatory activities for the advent of human space transportation capabilities. ESA will also increase the efforts of its Boost! programme to help space entrepreneurs turn their space transportation projects into commercial reality.
Fundings ArianeGroup’s Susie concept would be a mistakeAndrew Parsonson[…]As a fan of exciting developments in spaceflight and specifically European spaceflight, I was excited about the concept when it was first announced. However, the more I thought about it the more I realized how cynical the proposal had been and how little about it made sense.
https://europeanspaceflight.substack.com/p/funding-arianegroups-susie-conceptQuoteFundings ArianeGroup’s Susie concept would be a mistakeAndrew Parsonson[…]As a fan of exciting developments in spaceflight and specifically European spaceflight, I was excited about the concept when it was first announced. However, the more I thought about it the more I realized how cynical the proposal had been and how little about it made sense.
