Europe's new rocket, Vega, launches in a few minutes; live stream
esa.int
esa.int
http://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2011/10/arianespace-soyuz-st-...
http://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2011/12/soyuz-st-launch-six-s...
Arianespace now have a fairly nice family of launchers - Ariane 5, Soyuz and now Vega.
http://www.thenews.pl/1/10/Artykul/86192,Polands-first-ever-...
hint: these are not really Romanian, Polish or Hungarian satellites...
ALMASat - http://www.amsat.org/amsat-new/satellites/satInfo.php?satID=... PW-Sat - http://www.amsat.org/amsat-new/satellites/satInfo.php?satID=... Xatcobeo - http://www.amsat.org/amsat-new/satellites/satInfo.php?satID=... Robusta - http://www.amsat.org/amsat-new/satellites/satInfo.php?satID=... e-st@r - http://www.amsat.org/amsat-new/satellites/satInfo.php?satID=... Goliat - http://www.amsat.org/amsat-new/satellites/satInfo.php?satID=... Masat-1 - http://www.amsat.org/amsat-new/satellites/satInfo.php?satID=...
DIY some more:
"So a Romanian satellite, a Polish satellite, and a Hungarian satellite go into space..."
14 years to develop a 300-2000 kg rocket at an established player (Arianespace) sounds slow to me.
Arianespace operates expendable launch systems, but doesn't manufacture them (anymore). So though Vega and Ariane 5 are both operated by Arianespace, they are actually designed and built by different companies.
- Ariane 5 is manufactured by EADS Astrium (French, German, British and Spanish).
- Vega is manufactured by Avio (Italian).
You can't really look at Astrium, and wonder why Avio took such a long time to develop the launcher. On the other hand there was definitely some cooperation going on, as for instance the first stage of Vega is derived from Ariane 5, and the improvements will most certainly make it back to Ariane...
Are you saying you think it should have been rushed?
- They may be doing higher-quality work or proceeding more cautiously than other projects with similar goals.
- The rocket may have unique traits or capabilities that justify the development time despite the payload capacity being nothing eyebrow-raising.
- The definition of "start of development" used by the author of the Wikipedia statement may not match my expectation, i.e. there may have been a long market analysis and conception stage before engineers actually got to work.
- The project may not have enjoyed a steady level of activity for all of those 14 years.
- Funding may have been lower than for comparable projects.
- There could have been political, legal or financial problems ailing the project.
- I may simply be wrong and 14 years is not a long time at all for this kind of project.
And so on.
Basically, I'm hoping for someone who knows the actual answer to share their insight.
Good luck to all involved. It's nice to see a proper engineering project being tested, hopefully not to destruction!