Who will compete with SpaceX? The last two and next two years.

[Barrie]

Reminds me of Elon Musk saying there was no point patenting anything...

[Lar]

To a certain extent this is what Elon wanted, except maybe starting with the US...

[oldAtlas_Eguy]

But in order to stay ahead of the copy cats he has to keep innovating and producing even cheaper access to space LVs.

Correct, Elon has started a disruption in the normal way of business for the LV industry.

[matthewkantar]

It will be very interesting to see how the followers do with booster landings. New Shepard landings look fuel inefficient, but have the potential to be improved incrementally. Upstarts beginning from scratch have the benefit of knowing it can be done but not much more.

Matthew

[Jim]

Anyway, the potential slips from unanticipated events (Boeing damaging an antenna on TDRSS-M causing knock-on launch schedule slips, Irma delaying a west coast launch and potentialls other subsequent launches, etc.) will not improve their competitive position WRT SpaceX. 

Not at all.  Only a biased person would think so.

The smooth OTV-5 launch ahead of Irma's arrival might have some asking why the USAF is paying so much more for traditional rides..

Again, not at all.  No need to make such posts.

[Semmel]

[...]
Not at all.  Only a biased person would think so.
[...]
Again, not at all.  No need to make such posts.

Welcome back

On a more on topic note.. I agree with you on the rocket related statements. These are just little things that dont count much by it self. If they create a trend that may change. I dont think that would happen though. ULA will not become notoriously slippy and SpaceX will not conduct cowboy launches just before Hurricanes.. for the lack of Hurricanes.

[Jarnis]

This just crossed my Twitter feed.... Interesting design...

https://www.chinaspaceflight.com/satellite/Linkspace/Linkspace.html

Just a concept. That small company has no funds, no technology, no debut launch date...

Really? I mean they seem to have already bent metal and tested it.



Yes, it appears to be basically a testbed for the software and avionics, but that is not a bad place to start.

[SmallKing]

This just crossed my Twitter feed.... Interesting design...

https://www.chinaspaceflight.com/satellite/Linkspace/Linkspace.html

Just a concept. That small company has no funds, no technology, no debut launch date...

Really? I mean they seem to have already bent metal and tested it.



Yes, it appears to be basically a testbed for the software and avionics, but that is not a bad place to start.

In China there are some hopeful private rocket companies like EXPACE, OneSpace and LandSpace(EXPACE is the front company of CASIC, OneSpace and LandSpace are buying solid engines from the state-own rocket enterprise for now), LinkSpace is not.
The above video you posted shown LinkSpace had finished some VTVL prototype testings with a 3KN Ethanol-LOX press-feed engine. For them, the first step to achieve orbit is to develop a kerosene pump-feed engine(according to their advertisement). But to develop such a engine is really hard even to the Chinese state-own rocket firm CASC(They acquired Soviet technology for the first Chinese kerosene engine YF-100). Moreover, unlike the early SpaceX or RocketLab which can hire ex-employees from some mature aerospace corporations, Chinese state-own aerospace corporations control nearly all aerospace resource for now, it's really hard for LinkSpace to poach the top talent. That's just my view

The following is a article about CEO Hu Zhengyu and his LinkSpace(you can read with GOOGLE translation), FYI
http://www.acfun.cn/a/ac2278655

[AncientU]

New Ariane 62/64 capabilities/prices posted:

Ariane 62
LEO 11.3t
GTO 4.5-5t
$85M (More expensive than comparable Soyuz*)
Available circa 2021

Ariane 64
LEO 22.3t
GTO 11-11.5t
$130M (27% reduction over Ariane 5**)
Available circa 2022

* Soyuz ($80M per GAO) phased out by Arianespace 2021-2022
** Ariane 5 ($178M per GAO) phased out 2023

Pages 22-31
http://www.arianespace.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/09/Presentation_Ariane-6-Users-Club_Sept-2017.pdf

[Rebel44]

New Ariane 62/64 capabilities/prices posted:

Ariane 62
LEO 11.3t
GTO 4.5-5t
$85M (More expensive than comparable Soyuz*)
Available circa 2021

Ariane 64
LEO 22.3t
GTO 11-11.5t
$130M (37% reduction over Ariane 5**)
Available circa 2022

* Soyuz ($80M per GAO) phased out by Arianespace 2021-2022
** Ariane 5 ($178M per GAO) phased out 2023

Pages 22-31
http://www.arianespace.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/09/Presentation_Ariane-6-Users-Club_Sept-2017.pdf

And product/service being delivered at planned price isnt exactly guaranteed...

[AncientU]

New Ariane 62/64 capabilities/prices posted:

Ariane 62
LEO 11.3t
GTO 4.5-5t
$85M (More expensive than comparable Soyuz*)
Available circa 2021

Ariane 64
LEO 22.3t
GTO 11-11.5t
$130M (37% reduction over Ariane 5**)
Available circa 2022

* Soyuz ($80M per GAO) phased out by Arianespace 2021-2022
** Ariane 5 ($178M per GAO) phased out 2023

Pages 22-31
http://www.arianespace.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/09/Presentation_Ariane-6-Users-Club_Sept-2017.pdf

And product/service being delivered at planned price isnt exactly guaranteed...

True. 
Ariane 6 was originally advertised as 50% reduction over Ariane 5, now 27% reduction (Note edited number in original posting).

Don't see anything here to worry about competition-wise.  A62 about RTLS F9 Block 5, and A64 around expendable Block 5 or RTLS FH... and not available for five years.  Dual launch on A64 still a great deal.

[yokem55]

New Ariane 62/64 capabilities/prices posted:

Ariane 62
LEO 11.3t
GTO 4.5-5t
$85M (More expensive than comparable Soyuz*)
Available circa 2021

Ariane 64
LEO 22.3t
GTO 11-11.5t
$130M (37% reduction over Ariane 5**)
Available circa 2022

* Soyuz ($80M per GAO) phased out by Arianespace 2021-2022
** Ariane 5 ($178M per GAO) phased out 2023

Pages 22-31
http://www.arianespace.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/09/Presentation_Ariane-6-Users-Club_Sept-2017.pdf

And product/service being delivered at planned price isnt exactly guaranteed...

True. 
Ariane 6 was originally advertised as 50% reduction over Ariane 5, now 27% reduction (Note edited number in original posting).

Don't see anything here to worry about competition-wise.  A62 about RTLS F9 Block 5, and A64 around expendable Block 5 or RTLS FH... and not available for five years.  Dual launch on A64 still a great deal.

Will they get a fairing and payload adapter to accommodate 2 bigish SATs though? A 6 MT + a 5MT or 2 5.5MT SATs would make for an easier sale for the dual launch capability.

That said, I would bet F9 would be down to the 45-50 million price by the time that the 64 flies, especially if they get fairing reuse figured out.

[envy887]

New Ariane 62/64 capabilities/prices posted:

Ariane 62
LEO 11.3t
GTO 4.5-5t
$85M (More expensive than comparable Soyuz*)
Available circa 2021

Ariane 64
LEO 22.3t
GTO 11-11.5t
$130M (37% reduction over Ariane 5**)
Available circa 2022

* Soyuz ($80M per GAO) phased out by Arianespace 2021-2022
** Ariane 5 ($178M per GAO) phased out 2023

Pages 22-31
http://www.arianespace.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/09/Presentation_Ariane-6-Users-Club_Sept-2017.pdf

And product/service being delivered at planned price isnt exactly guaranteed...

True. 
Ariane 6 was originally advertised as 50% reduction over Ariane 5, now 27% reduction (Note edited number in original posting).

Don't see anything here to worry about competition-wise.  A62 about RTLS F9 Block 5, and A64 around expendable Block 5 or RTLS FH... and not available for five years.  Dual launch on A64 still a great deal.

Will they get a fairing and payload adapter to accommodate 2 bigish SATs though? A 6 MT + a 5MT or 2 5.5MT SATs would make for an easier sale for the dual launch capability.

That said, I would bet F9 would be down to the 45-50 million price by the time that the 64 flies, especially if they get fairing reuse figured out.

They show several fairing lengths and 3 payload adapter lengths in the powerpoint linked above.

[AncientU]

...

That said, I would bet F9 would be down to the 45-50 million price by the time that the 64 flies, especially if they get fairing reuse figured out.

Short turn-around (anywhere near a few times 24 hr or less) of first stages, by itself, should allow Falcon prices to drop to half of the fiducial $62.5M.  After the company has had a year or two to recoup development costs, they will have pricing flexibility to keep below half of Ariane 5/6 prices.  If so, this $5B Ariane 6 development effort will bring Arianespace no closer to price competitive.

[envy887]

...

That said, I would bet F9 would be down to the 45-50 million price by the time that the 64 flies, especially if they get fairing reuse figured out.

Short turn-around (anywhere near a few times 24 hr or less) of first stages, by itself, should allow Falcon prices to drop to half of the fiducial $62.5M.  After the company has had a year or two to recoup development costs, they will have pricing flexibility to keep below half of Ariane 5/6 prices.  If so, this $5B Ariane 6 development effort will bring Arianespace no closer to price competitive.

Better than keeping Ariane 5 flying though.

[AncientU]

Not sure about that... using that $5B and 5-10 years working toward ArianeNext makes more sense to me. 

Ariane 5 is a great launcher with a great track record; it has a significant captive user base and has been doing well in the competitive marketplace.  Spending (wasting?) the next 5-10 years on an expensive intermediate solution doesn't get them any closer to a long-term competitive offering.

[groundbound]

...

That said, I would bet F9 would be down to the 45-50 million price by the time that the 64 flies, especially if they get fairing reuse figured out.

Short turn-around (anywhere near a few times 24 hr or less) of first stages, by itself, should allow Falcon prices to drop to half of the fiducial $62.5M.  After the company has had a year or two to recoup development costs, they will have pricing flexibility to keep below half of Ariane 5/6 prices.  If so, this $5B Ariane 6 development effort will bring Arianespace no closer to price competitive.

SpaceX would be smart to not drop their price until the point they need a lower price to keep their manifest full. It is not like they are short of investment ideas that could absorb some excess operating profit for a year or three. 

The corollary to that is that the time when SpaceX' competition really starts to sweat is very likely when launch rate catches up to demand. There is good speculation that they could probably start to shave prices down now (or soon) if it were really necessary. But while there is a big backlog, why bother? They are just giving away money.

[woods170]

...

That said, I would bet F9 would be down to the 45-50 million price by the time that the 64 flies, especially if they get fairing reuse figured out.

Short turn-around (anywhere near a few times 24 hr or less) of first stages, by itself, should allow Falcon prices to drop to half of the fiducial $62.5M.  After the company has had a year or two to recoup development costs, they will have pricing flexibility to keep below half of Ariane 5/6 prices.  If so, this $5B Ariane 6 development effort will bring Arianespace no closer to price competitive.

Ah, I see you overlooked something with regards to A6 development: a quaranteed minimum anual number of institutional launches on A6. ESA committed to this. But really this is just a replacement of the "subsidy" the currently keeps A5 flying competitively.
Given the number of guaranteed institutional launches Arianespace can afford to lose part of the market to SpaceX and other competitors.

[AncientU]

...

That said, I would bet F9 would be down to the 45-50 million price by the time that the 64 flies, especially if they get fairing reuse figured out.

Short turn-around (anywhere near a few times 24 hr or less) of first stages, by itself, should allow Falcon prices to drop to half of the fiducial $62.5M.  After the company has had a year or two to recoup development costs, they will have pricing flexibility to keep below half of Ariane 5/6 prices.  If so, this $5B Ariane 6 development effort will bring Arianespace no closer to price competitive.

Ah, I see you overlooked something with regards to A6 development: a quaranteed minimum anual number of institutional launches on A6. ESA committed to this. But really this is just a replacement of the "subsidy" the currently keeps A5 flying competitively.
Given the number of guaranteed institutional launches Arianespace can afford to lose part of the market to SpaceX and other competitors.

Yes, the captive customer base should help constrain launch price increases and allow Arianespace to remain viable at least as a niche player.  10-12 A6 launches per year is planned capacity, a third?/half? of which is internal ESA exploitation.  Their manifest as presented in above reference shows 6-8 launches per year in 2022-2023.

Doesn't seem that they are positioning themselves to compete with SpaceX as queried in the OP.

[oldAtlas_Eguy]

From the standpoint of SpaceX pricing on F9. At 15 used flights per year where they recover $300M/yr of the invested $1B to develop the reusability by only dropping the price by $12.5M to a price / launch of $50M. Meaning that after 2020 or the beginning of 2021 expect another price drop of $10 to $15M to a price of $40M or as low as $35M per launch for a used F9.

If a used FH is at $90M now, also expect that price to drop by $30 to $45M to $60M or as low as $45M per launch.

This is what is expected as prices for any competitors will have to compete against in 2021/2022.