Author Topic: Partial Success : Ariane 62 VA262 maiden flight - 9 July 2024 (19:00 UTC)  (Read 104633 times)

Offline FutureSpaceTourist

  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 57753
  • UK
    • Plan 28
  • Liked: 94821
  • Likes Given: 44764
https://twitter.com/exolaunch/status/1810820664418513347

Quote
ARIANE 6: 🎉 MISSION ACCOMPLISHED 🎉

We’re proud to announce that Exolaunch has successfully deployed 4 satellites into their target orbits for @esa , @NASA, @spacemanictech, @istecnico, @tuke_sk, and @la_UPC, aboard the historic #Ariane6 launch!

Quote
Today’s launch marks a monumental moment as Europe returns to space, showcasing the incredible skill and collaboration within the European space community.

https://twitter.com/exolaunch/status/1810820669304885371

Quote
Big thanks to @esa , @Arianespace, and @CNES for a smooth ride to orbit! We’re proud to be part of this mission and celebrate such a historic milestone together.

📸 : @esa

Offline rpapo

Well, if they had tried to recover the fairings, they might have saved a few euros . . . I'm sure those things don't cost much under $10m for the pair.

I got the idea when I saw that one fairing of theirs float down. It seemed to be clapping hands.

Hey, now there's a business idea!  Offer to recover all the expendable's fairings!  Better still, build their fairings for them, so they can be recovered.

Hang on, I need to call my VC pimp.
Nice idea, but you would need the cooperation of ArianeSpace and the government.  Fairings don't easily survive without some help.  That help takes the form of additional equipment which costs money and eats into the payload capability.  ArianeSpace still subscribes to the Formula-1 school of aerospace design: performance at all costs.  It takes a major shift in mentality to build the rockets with too much capability and then sacrifice some of that capability to pay for those things which give reusability.

In other words, you can't just recover the fairings if they weren't designed to be recovered.  They will come out of the water much more beat-up, if they come out of the water at all.
Following the space program since before Apollo 8.

Offline ZachF

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1854
  • Immensely complex & high risk
  • NH, USA, Earth
  • Liked: 3063
  • Likes Given: 627
Surely naming the thread "Partial failure: ..." would be the clearest option?
It was clearly a successful inaugural launch.  The failure was during the on-orbit upper stage "Demo Phase", preventing a deorbit burn.  Similar to, for example, a few early successful Falcon 9 launches that saw failed Stage 2 disposal burns, etc.  Relabel this one and you'll have to relabel those as well.

I wouldn't have a problem with post-launch "Anomaly", but all caps "ANOMALY" bugs me.

 - Ed Kyle

It’s a 90%+ success in terms of test flight, for sure and congrats on that.

However I don’t think calling it partial failure on payload deploy is out of bounds considering about half of the payload mass failed to reach it’s intended destination, and if the payload had been CSO it’s likely it would have been a total failure in payload deploy.


It’s a first flight so these things happen. It went pretty smoothly all considered.
artist, so take opinions expressed above with a well-rendered grain of salt...
https://www.instagram.com/artzf/

Offline ZachF

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1854
  • Immensely complex & high risk
  • NH, USA, Earth
  • Liked: 3063
  • Likes Given: 627
Well, if they had tried to recover the fairings, they might have saved a few euros . . . I'm sure those things don't cost much under $10m for the pair.

I got the idea when I saw that one fairing of theirs float down. It seemed to be clapping hands.

Hey, now there's a business idea!  Offer to recover all the expendable's fairings!  Better still, build their fairings for them, so they can be recovered.

Hang on, I need to call my VC pimp.
Nice idea, but you would need the cooperation of ArianeSpace and the government.  Fairings don't easily survive without some help.  That help takes the form of additional equipment which costs money and eats into the payload capability.  ArianeSpace still subscribes to the Formula-1 school of aerospace design: performance at all costs.  It takes a major shift in mentality to build the rockets with too much capability and then sacrifice some of that capability to pay for those things which give reusability.

In other words, you can't just recover the fairings if they weren't designed to be recovered.  They will come out of the water much more beat-up, if they come out of the water at all.

The bigger problem with fairing reuse would be throwing a monkey wrench in Arianespace’s Byzantine work/contract sharing allocations among the member states.
artist, so take opinions expressed above with a well-rendered grain of salt...
https://www.instagram.com/artzf/

Online LouScheffer

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3661
  • Liked: 6781
  • Likes Given: 979
The bigger problem with fairing reuse would be throwing a monkey wrench in Arianespace’s Byzantine work/contract sharing allocations among the member states.
If I recall, the fairings are made by RUAG in Switzerland.  Maybe contract with the Swiss Navy to recover them?

Offline ulm_atms

  • Rocket Junky
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 985
  • To boldly go where no government has gone before.
  • Liked: 1680
  • Likes Given: 1082
Well, if they had tried to recover the fairings, they might have saved a few euros . . . I'm sure those things don't cost much under $10m for the pair.

I got the idea when I saw that one fairing of theirs float down. It seemed to be clapping hands.

Hey, now there's a business idea!  Offer to recover all the expendable's fairings!  Better still, build their fairings for them, so they can be recovered.

Hang on, I need to call my VC pimp.
Nice idea, but you would need the cooperation of ArianeSpace and the government.  Fairings don't easily survive without some help.  That help takes the form of additional equipment which costs money and eats into the payload capability.  ArianeSpace still subscribes to the Formula-1 school of aerospace design: performance at all costs.  It takes a major shift in mentality to build the rockets with too much capability and then sacrifice some of that capability to pay for those things which give reusability.

In other words, you can't just recover the fairings if they weren't designed to be recovered.  They will come out of the water much more beat-up, if they come out of the water at all.

The bigger problem with fairing reuse would be throwing a monkey wrench in Arianespace’s Byzantine work/contract sharing allocations among the member states.
That's the problem with Europe's space flight capabilities in general.  At least half of their costs are bureaucratically self imposed.  Modifying/changing anything is a PAIN.

Offline mn

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1318
  • United States
  • Liked: 1245
  • Likes Given: 449
I'm confused as to how fairing reuse is relevant to this mission thread?

Offline grfredy

  • Member
  • Posts: 37
  • Liked: 78
  • Likes Given: 32
From facebook post - a photo by AUTH telescopes showing the deployed payloads of Ariane 6:

Link to web address

[zubenelgenubi: Attach files; do not embed them.]
« Last Edit: 07/11/2024 04:11 pm by zubenelgenubi »

Offline TheKutKu

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 756
  • France
  • Liked: 864
  • Likes Given: 846
Don't remember hearing it during the live stream, but Guiana's local TV network that was reporting at the CSG said that there was a second, failed, attempt at re-starting the APU after it had shut itself down shortly after restarting a second time.
« Last Edit: 07/10/2024 11:03 pm by TheKutKu »

Offline Steven Pietrobon

  • Member
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 40158
  • Adelaide, Australia
    • Steven Pietrobon's Space Archive
  • Liked: 34073
  • Likes Given: 11565
As far as I know and I can find publicly there will be only one CURIE cubesat, deployed by EXOPOD (ExoLaunch) deployer.

CURIE deploys as a single 6U cubesat, but will later split into two 3U cubesats as described below.

https://techport.nasa.gov/view/92216

"CURIE will launch as a 6U Cubesat and then separate into two 3U Cubesats once in orbit."
Akin's Laws of Spacecraft Design #1:  Engineering is done with numbers.  Analysis without numbers is only an opinion.

Offline Steven Pietrobon

  • Member
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 40158
  • Adelaide, Australia
    • Steven Pietrobon's Space Archive
  • Liked: 34073
  • Likes Given: 11565
At the press conference, Stefan Israel gave the following dates for the next three launches. Six Ariane 6 launches are planned for 2025.

Vega - Early September for Copernicus.
Vega C - End November.
Ariane 6 - December.
Akin's Laws of Spacecraft Design #1:  Engineering is done with numbers.  Analysis without numbers is only an opinion.

Offline Jim

  • Night Gator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 38472
  • Cape Canaveral Spaceport
  • Liked: 23230
  • Likes Given: 434
Sorry,  but this thread renaming is not acceptable.  The primary mission was a success.  By this measure, there should be a thread called: ANOMALY Boeing Starliner (CST-100) CFT mission discussion thread : May-July 2024

I am not holding my breath. 
I would consider this a much bigger anomaly that the niggling issues with Starliner: Ariane 6 leaving 7700 kg of hardware in a 580 km orbit by mistake.
Clearly opinions on this sort of anomaly vary widely.  On Wikipedia I tried to change the three Atlas missions where the Centaur later fragmented (creating considerable space debris) to "Partial success".  I got shouted down by folks who said that the payload was delivered as planned, so it was a "success" despite the extra (and not understood, to my knowledge) creation of debris.

They are right and it is not related to this. 
« Last Edit: 07/11/2024 06:46 pm by Jim »

Offline FutureSpaceTourist

  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 57753
  • UK
    • Plan 28
  • Liked: 94821
  • Likes Given: 44764
https://twitter.com/esa/status/1811376976919232828

Quote
🎥 Europe’s new #Ariane6 rocket powered into space on 9 July 2024 from its launch pad in French Guiana. Check out our launch highlights video! 👀
🔗 https://www.esa.int/ESA_Multimedia/Videos/2024/07/Ariane_6_first_flight_highlights

Quote
I so wish that Ariane 6 could share information about the deorbit burn

https://twitter.com/esa/status/1811378512642670833

Quote
More info will follow as soon as the teams have collected and analysed their data.
« Last Edit: 07/11/2024 03:14 pm by FutureSpaceTourist »

Offline FutureSpaceTourist

  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 57753
  • UK
    • Plan 28
  • Liked: 94821
  • Likes Given: 44764

Offline AstroWare

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 301
  • Arizona
  • Liked: 234
  • Likes Given: 0
Anyone else think this would be a cool opportunity for Arianespace to show the commitment to zero orbital debris generation, and also an opportunity for a startup space debris removal company to deorbit this stage?

« Last Edit: 07/11/2024 09:42 pm by zubenelgenubi »

Offline matthewkantar

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2462
  • Liked: 3039
  • Likes Given: 2519
Anyone else think this would be a cool opportunity for Arianespace to show the commitment to zero orbital debris generation, and also an opportunity for a startup space debris removal company to deorbit this stage?

Seems like an extraordinarily tough target for a first go. Uncooperative, massive, no grapple fixture, etc.

Offline woods170

  • IRAS fan
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12609
  • IRAS fan
  • Currently not in The Netherlands
  • Liked: 20838
  • Likes Given: 14296
Anyone else think this would be a cool opportunity for Arianespace to show the commitment to zero orbital debris generation, and also an opportunity for a startup space debris removal company to deorbit this stage?

Seems like an extraordinarily tough target for a first go. Uncooperative, massive, no grapple fixture, etc.

Not worth the effort IMO. At its current altitude its coming down well within ESA's current deorbit norm of 25 years. If anyone is interested in bringing down a significant target of opportunity, they'd better focus on Envisat IMO.
« Last Edit: 07/12/2024 03:30 pm by woods170 »

Offline GWR64

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2007
  • Germany
  • Liked: 1998
  • Likes Given: 1252
9 objects, ROBUSTA 3A and 8 unknown

https://celestrak.org/NORAD/elements/table.php?INTDES=2024-128

I have a question about the Ariane 6 ULPM.
If I understood the launch broadcast correctly, the APU was only ignited after the Vinci during the first burn phase.
How was the stage pre-accelerated and the attitude controlled before the first ignition of the Vinci?
« Last Edit: 07/13/2024 05:49 pm by GWR64 »

Offline GWR64

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2007
  • Germany
  • Liked: 1998
  • Likes Given: 1252
...

I have a question about the Ariane 6 ULPM.
If I understood the launch broadcast correctly, the APU was only ignited after the Vinci during the first burn phase.
How was the stage pre-accelerated and the attitude controlled before the first ignition of the Vinci?

With GH2?

interesting: https://www.eucass.eu/doi/EUCASS2023-873.pdf

Offline FutureSpaceTourist

  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 57753
  • UK
    • Plan 28
  • Liked: 94821
  • Likes Given: 44764

Tags:
 

Advertisement NovaTech
Advertisement
Advertisement Margaritaville Beach Resort South Padre Island
Advertisement Brady Kenniston
Advertisement NextSpaceflight
Advertisement Nathan Barker Photography
1