As has become apparent the values and integrity of both private and state-backed space companies, that existed in the era of Aeropatiale, Matra, Dassaut, Safran, Thompson… have been swept aside, leaving free reign to financial shareholder interests (and eventual corruption) who now rely on misleading media coverage to cover their tracks. ESA and its member states have been obliged to bow to these new groups. As you say, we just have to swallow the pill, and forget our ideals. A great proportion of the « space fathers » must be heartily sick.
Is there an ESA road map, participate in various US meetings, new one is Cosmic Consortium in Nov. Currently at Lunar Surface Innovation Consortium, expect standards to be locked in by end 2024 for Lunar Economy. Cosmic will focus on space mobility and ISAM. US Northstar Vision can be seen here - https://isruinfo.com/public/index.php?page=srr_23#SRR_23_1 yes JAXA, no ESA! Following can be accessed, big picture: Peter Garretson, Senior Fellow, Defense Studies, American Foreign Policy Council
The Scramble for the Skies: Why Nations Care About Space Resources
So...no penalty clauses were triggered by them being 4 years behind schedule on their contract?
But seriously, isn't it /Arianespace/ that is doing the actual operations? You did a whole article how ArianeGroup is one doing the building of the rockets.
The European launch contracts are with ArianeSpace.
As it was ArianeSpace that decided that it was a good idea to outsource its production to a separate holding, let them solve this negotiation, and let price hikes come from their profits.
ArianeSpace is on the hook for 18 Amazon launches before 2026. And I'm guessing that *that* countract *does* have penalty clauses. :-D Europe paying extra to subsidize the Bezos Billionaire rocket is insane.
No one in the European space community is willing to ask or answer the question, “How much to add a second Vulcain to the Ariane 5/6 core?”
Then can someone, anyone in European space ask the question, “Does a single P120 solid rocket as used for the Ariane 6 SRB’s and the Vega-C first stage really cost €20 million?”
“So that the two SRB’s on the Ariane 62 cost €40 million, and the four on the Ariane 64 cost €80 million?”
The solution is obvious. The only thing ESA has to acknowledge is the cost of large solid side boosters is prohibitive. Eliminating them entirely and using instead multiple Vulcains on the Ariane 6 core would result in launchers *cheaper* than the Falcon 9, able to be made reusable like the Falcon 9, and capable of manned spaceflight like the Falcon 9:
Monday, October 9, 2023
Towards return of Europe to dominance of the launch market.
"What we can do, however, is make sure that ArianeGroup is not involved in the future of European launch."
Hear, hear!
As has become apparent the values and integrity of both private and state-backed space companies, that existed in the era of Aeropatiale, Matra, Dassaut, Safran, Thompson… have been swept aside, leaving free reign to financial shareholder interests (and eventual corruption) who now rely on misleading media coverage to cover their tracks. ESA and its member states have been obliged to bow to these new groups. As you say, we just have to swallow the pill, and forget our ideals. A great proportion of the « space fathers » must be heartily sick.
Is there an ESA road map, participate in various US meetings, new one is Cosmic Consortium in Nov. Currently at Lunar Surface Innovation Consortium, expect standards to be locked in by end 2024 for Lunar Economy. Cosmic will focus on space mobility and ISAM. US Northstar Vision can be seen here - https://isruinfo.com/public/index.php?page=srr_23#SRR_23_1 yes JAXA, no ESA! Following can be accessed, big picture: Peter Garretson, Senior Fellow, Defense Studies, American Foreign Policy Council
The Scramble for the Skies: Why Nations Care About Space Resources
So...no penalty clauses were triggered by them being 4 years behind schedule on their contract?
But seriously, isn't it /Arianespace/ that is doing the actual operations? You did a whole article how ArianeGroup is one doing the building of the rockets.
The European launch contracts are with ArianeSpace.
As it was ArianeSpace that decided that it was a good idea to outsource its production to a separate holding, let them solve this negotiation, and let price hikes come from their profits.
ArianeSpace is on the hook for 18 Amazon launches before 2026. And I'm guessing that *that* countract *does* have penalty clauses. :-D Europe paying extra to subsidize the Bezos Billionaire rocket is insane.
No one in the European space community is willing to ask or answer the question, “How much to add a second Vulcain to the Ariane 5/6 core?”
Then can someone, anyone in European space ask the question, “Does a single P120 solid rocket as used for the Ariane 6 SRB’s and the Vega-C first stage really cost €20 million?”
“So that the two SRB’s on the Ariane 62 cost €40 million, and the four on the Ariane 64 cost €80 million?”
Robert Clark
The solution is obvious. The only thing ESA has to acknowledge is the cost of large solid side boosters is prohibitive. Eliminating them entirely and using instead multiple Vulcains on the Ariane 6 core would result in launchers *cheaper* than the Falcon 9, able to be made reusable like the Falcon 9, and capable of manned spaceflight like the Falcon 9:
Monday, October 9, 2023
Towards return of Europe to dominance of the launch market.
http://exoscientist.blogspot.com/2023/10/towards-return-of-europe-to-dominance.html
Robert Clark