Hacker News Reader

Comment by JumpCrisscross | Hacker News Reader

> 6-10 years from now Ariane Next/SALTO will aims replicate Falcon 9 efficiency and the design will be very similar

…at which point it will be competing with Starship.

It will still be building that knowledge inside Europe. Rocketry in general is deemed to be strategic so it's OK for any country to invest money in that, keep scientists and engineers on the subject, keep the industries alive, etc. It's not only about access to space, it's also about defense.

Yes, and the industrial base that we are discussing is the one that builds the M51.3 which is fundamental for Europe. Existence is worth a lot.

> will still be building that knowledge inside Europe

Ariane 6 cannibalises Europe’s chance at being more than an also-ran in space:

“An Arianespace manager pushing his company as the only solution to Europe’s launch challenges isn’t that noteworthy. However, the fact [Arianespace’s CEO] urges the need for a ‘reusable heavy launcher’ is notable, considering his previous noncommittal remarks about rocket reusability. The certainty of his statement leaves no ambiguity–Ariane 6 just won’t be able to compete in the global market. It will take a (single and expensive) reusable heavy launcher (manufactured by Arianespace) and (funded by) a unified Europe to compete (with SpaceX).

While [Arianespace’s CEO’s] admission of reusability’s future in Europe is surprising, his constancy in his attempts to keep European space activities hostage to Arianespace is not. To be clear, he wants European taxpayers to fund reusability development and manufacturing only through Arianespace. He believes Europe can’t afford more than one reusable heavy launcher and that if Europe were to pay for a reusable rocket, then Arianespace must manufacture it.”

https://www.illdefined.space/arianespace-the-only-fish-in-th...

While that attitude makes sense for ArianeSpace , I doubt they will be successful.

You're under the misconception that it makes sense for Europe to have a launch vehicle at all. The launches happen in French Guiana. The only reason why you would build it on the European mainland is as a jobs program for Europeans.

No commercial entity would come up with the idea of building a launch vehicle in Europe. Making a rocket reusable means that it would not leave French Guiana far behind. There would be less need for rockets from the European mainland.

> under the misconception that it makes sense for Europe to have a launch vehicle at all. The launches happen in French Guiana

Launch controlled by Europe. French Guiana is Europe, geopolitically speaking. SpaceX building rockets in Europe wouldn't give Brussels the strategic autonomy of an Ariane launched from below the equator.

will it? or will engineering talent just move elsewhere after realizing their talents are wasted in bureaucratland?

Is nationalism really so far in the past already

nationalism is dying with the older generations and importing new labour from abroad is not really the short term solution for that

What's strategic about it?

We give all of our data to US companies and that's ok (?), but for some reason we need to be able to launch our own rockets?

Unless Europe wants to build a moon base or new ISS, won't a Starship competitor be a bit overkill for most payloads?

> won't a Starship competitor be a bit overkill for most payloads?

No, for the same reason trucks aren’t overkill for horses in logistics. Unit costs, lead time, orbital flexibility: there isn’t a market for Ariane 6 left.

Even ArianeSpace’s CEO admits Ariane 6 is obsolete and that Europe needs “a reusable heavy launcher” [1].

[1] https://www.illdefined.space/arianespace-the-only-fish-in-th...

...well the Ariane 6 is already in the category of "heavy lift vehicle" at up to 22 tons payload. I'm wondering how much of a market there is in the end for a super-heavy lifter like Starship. But I guess we'll see soon.

> I'm wondering how much of a market there is in the end for a super-heavy lifter like Starship. But I guess we'll see soon.

The biggest market is probably internally for Starlink. But itself, that'll be quite a lot of launches. Especially if SpaceX ends up pursuing an enlarged constellation size.

For the same reason, it's almost certain that ArianeSpace won't get any launches in the 2nd Kuiper tranche - New Glenn should be more efficient and capable than either Ariane 6 or Vulcan. Even if it isn't up to the task operationally, Vulcan will probably receive the balance of launches.

You don't know that. Starship does not exist.

a thing which can get into orbit and deploy objects exists

A thing which can nearly get into orbit. It never quite reached it (probably intentionally). But more importantly, the recent Starship tests ran with no payload whatsoever, and they definitely didn't deploy anything into orbit.

It reached orbital velocity, just in a suborbital direction. Had they pointed it a different way it would have been in orbit.

I don't know what you mean by deploy objects, but even according to Musk himself, the current Starship version will not carry any payloads any time soon.

It’s already deployed objects - tiles, paint etc.

The doors opened on IFT3. If it was life or death starship could put something into orbit right now. Obviously it’s not the best solution for that currently (compared to say an FH) - they want to get the reuse working, but that doesn’t negate the fact that starship has been to orbital height and speed (albeit on a suborbital trajectory)

Reply on news.ycombinator.com