Author Topic: Ariane 6 Discussion Thread: Place Your Ariane 6 Discussions Here.  (Read 584629 times)

Offline floss

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 404
  • Liked: 19
  • Likes Given: 119
Every company goes through this in the private sector only difference is that retirements happen in bunches not a steady rate.
« Last Edit: 11/21/2018 06:57 pm by floss »

Offline jpo234

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1384
  • Liked: 1315
  • Likes Given: 348
Moved to discussion thread.

Europe’s Ariane 6 Rocket Is Doomed Even Before First Flight, Auditor Finds

So, is the article saying that Ariane 6 will be cancelled before its maiden voyage, or will they fly a certain number of them before calling it quits?

I know the title gives away the answer, but I would like to make sure that what the article said is actually true.

The article is a writeup on the report linked here: https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=31484.msg1908674#msg1908674

I think it accurately reflects the content of the report. There is nothing about cancelling Ariane 6.
You want to be inspired by things. You want to wake up in the morning and think the future is going to be great. That's what being a spacefaring civilization is all about. It's about believing in the future and believing the future will be better than the past. And I can't think of anything more exciting than being out there among the stars.

Offline floss

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 404
  • Liked: 19
  • Likes Given: 119
Funny sounds like the Shuttle arguments and Venture star again the market size cannot support 14 to 20 billion launchers without a large government investment either in R+D or opening new markets .

Basically  how many Ariane 5 can you launch for 14 billion as opposed your first reusable Shuttle .

Offline envy887

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5181
  • Liked: 3075
  • Likes Given: 1549
So if LEO constellations are the big market in the next decade or two (not a sure thing but what if) - How suitable and competitive is Ariane 6 for LEO work?

If they meet their goal of 90 million euros per launch for A64, which is 102 million dollars, they should do just fine. Wikipedia lists 14,900 kg to SSO, which would be about 100 147 kg One Web satellites fairing space permitting (and not counting the payload carrier). On the other hand, SpaceX lists $62 million for a first stage recoverable Falcon 9 launch with a LEO capacity of ~16,000 kg. SSO would be well south of that. Assuming it is something like 10,000 kg, you are looking at two thirds of the capacity in terms of mass for approximately two thirds of the cost. The fairing size ratio also comes out similarly. See attachment.

OneWeb is going to a polar orbit, not SSO. F9 FT can do 11585 kg to 550 km polar orbit per NASA LSP. That does not include Block 5 upgrades, and it does include LSP margins, so it is rather conservative.

Also, that $102M price is dependent on selling enough A62 to institutional customers, and it was released at a time when the Euro was slightly stronger against the dollar. If they don't get those institutional launches, they will need either subsidy, or will have to charge nearly double SpaceX's price for 30% more fairing volume and perhaps 20% more mass to orbit.

At this point, SpaceX's $50M per launch with reuse is probably a lot more solid than Ariane's 90M euro for an A64 (that is, SpaceX has actually sold launches for that price while Ariane has not).

Tags: