Is Ariane 6 the last European launcher?

Or will New Space come to the rescue?

Issue 79. Subscribers 3,749.

I would first like to sincerely apologize for the extended absence. I took the time away to think about the future of the newsletter. While there is still some uncertainty, I’m excited about what I have planned for 2024.

---

In January 2023, at the 15th European Space Conference, Airbus Space executive vice president Jean-Marc Nasr suggested that Europe needed to "avoid fragmentation." "We need to make sure we create champions,” Nasr explained. "A champion is someone that is financed to be better." He went on to explain that Europe is currently experiencing the growth of nationalism in the space sector with countries eager to build out sovereign capabilities and that this trend could affect European cooperation in the development of future heavy launch vehicles.

At the time Nasr spoke, I got the overwhelming feeling that he was advocating for monopolies. And how convenient for him that the most likely recipient of the assignment of launcher “champion” in Europe would be ArianeGroup, of which Airbus is, along with Safran, a major stakeholder. However, the last 12 months have seen his words become almost prophetic. It’s proof that the messenger can often be just as important as the message. I am still not sure that monopoly by any name is the right choice, but fragmentation and the end of European cooperation in the launcher sector appear to be here.

If that reality was ever in doubt, the summit in Seville in November and the discussions around it put those doubts to rest. The summit saw the exit of Avio’s Vega rockets from the ranks of Arianespace-managed vehicles. The Italian rocket maker celebrated its emancipation, which will allow the company to market and manage Vega missions itself. This was the small visible crack. According to French president Emmanual Macron, the true fractures were, however, much larger than what became visible to the world in Seville. 

During a recent review of the progress of the country’s France 2030 plan, Macron spoke about France taking on the challenge of developing sovereign launch capabilities. “We fought for months and months to say that European sovereignty is unity,” said Macron. “Unfortunately, some of our historical partners have said they prefer to be competitors. Therefore, we are going to fight,” he explained. “We will fight, we will be the best, and we will reconsolidate around us.”

The Director General of the European Space Agency, Josef Aschbacher, has spoken about a European launch industry in crisis. Despite this, when asked by European Spaceflight, the DG outlined an optimistic outlook for continued European cooperation in the development of a successor to Ariane 6.

“President Macron has been a very strong supporter and promoter of independent access to space for Europe. His speech called on France – and Europe – to engage in space because there is so much at stake. I can only fully share that sentiment,” Aschbacher explained. “On ESA’s side, the Seville decisions have been instrumental for two reasons. First, ESA Member States decided to support the exploitation of Ariane 6 and Vega C until at least the end of this decade, therefore ensuring guaranteed access to space for Europe medium to long term. Of course, ESA’s short-term priority is the Ariane 6 inaugural flight in mid-2024. Second, ESA has been tasked to prepare a launcher challenge where ESA will be an anchor customer. The challenge will first be proposed at the 2025 ESA Ministerial, after which other challenges might follow. This could lead to a new heavy launcher for Europe in the next decade after Ariane 6.” 

While I appreciate the DG’s optimism, I struggle to reconcile what he says with the reality of the situation. While member states may have agreed to support the exploitation of Ariane 6 and Vega C in Seville, the agreement, which included additional subsidies for the two vehicles, was only concluded when France, Germany, and Italy agreed to provide the bulk of the funding to pay for it. The reason for this? Out of ESA’s 22 member states, these three countries have the most to lose if Ariane 6 and Vega C fail and the most to gain if the two vehicles become commercially successful. So, the question then becomes, will Europe be able to maintain this stalemate between its three major space powers?

All three countries are working on sovereign launch capabilities. Yes, the sovereign launch capabilities currently being developed are mostly limited to small and micro launchers. However, both Italy and France are pursuing programmes to develop propulsion systems that could power future medium and heavy-lift launch vehicles. In Italy, the government has furnished Avio with over €300 million to develop a reusable launcher demonstrator. A key element of this project is the methane-fueled M60 first stage engine. Although few specific details about the engine are known, a SpaceNews article from March 2023 stated that it would offer “six times the thrust of the M10,” which is capable of producing around 98 kN. That puts the M60’s performance in the range of the SpaceX Merlin 1C. As for France, in addition to having access to Prometheus through ArianeGroup, the country has also recently thrown support behind The Exploration Company to develop an engine capable of doubling the performance of Prometheus. These engines will allow both Italy and France to develop vehicles that will likely offer enough performance to fulfill the vast majority of their respective needs. Why, then, would they need to contribute to an Ariane 6 successor? 

DG Aschbacher concluded his statement to European Spaceflight, stating the launcher challenge the agency announced in Seville “could lead to a new heavy launcher for Europe.” Remember that Ariane 6 has cost around €4 billion to develop. The launcher challenge, as it stands, seeks to award €150 million to winning bids. Even if these companies are able to bring in double or triple the amount in private funding to support the development of these vehicles, it’s unlikely to be enough to pay for the development of a heavy-lift launch vehicle. That’s not to say it couldn’t eventually result in a new European heavy launcher. That really depends on how much the agency commits to being “an anchor customer.” If it allows a company to operate for several years comfortably, it may have the security and resources to pursue the development of a larger vehicle. How many flights a year will ESA commit to launching aboard these vehicles, though? With its guaranteed minimum launch commitments to Ariane 6 and Vega C, will it even have any capacity to offer?

The Exploration Company

While the failures of the old guard have divided Europe, new players are emerging with an eye on rebuilding those bridges. And ESA appears to be warming to the possibility of embracing them. In an interview with the Financial Times that was published recently, DG Aschbacher explained that there is "no guarantee" that ArianeGroup will continue to be Europe's rocket launch company of choice. He also explained that the next generation of launchers would be done "in a very different way." This could potentially open up the role to a startup like The Exploration Company to deliver on what ArianeGroup has thus far struggled to do. 

The Exploration Company has, as I hinted at earlier, recently been awarded a CNES-backed development initiative to create a reusable methane-powered staged combustion rocket engine that will be capable of producing approximately 200 tonnes of thrust. It should be noted that CNES is not taking this project on as a way to reforge bonds between historic partners, despite Macron’s instance that the country is doing everything it can to foster unity. In fact, the agency has, according to reporting, stipulated that all funding given to The Exploration Company for the project must be spent on the company's French operations. Despite this, the project may still be the catalyst for future cooperation. 

When The Exploration Company was founded, it set up shop in both France and Germany. With this new engine development initiative, which the company is calling Typhoon, it is seeking to add another European space power to its list. The company has announced plans to open a new office in Turin, Italy, which it will use to perform some of the new engine’s development.

One shouldn't confuse The Exploration Company's actions for altruism, though. By setting up its operations in France, Germany, and Italy, the three countries that contribute the largest portions of ESA's launcher budget, the company is positioning itself to utilize the agency's often criticized geo-return policy to its advantage. With the company already positioned to be a front runner to develop a spacecraft for ESA's LEO cargo services initiative, it would be only natural that it would be involved in the next generation of European launch vehicles that would take over from Ariane 6 in the 2030s. 

I’m not sure trading ArianeGroup for The Exploration Company would necessarily be the utopian option I wish it were. However, I do appreciate that the company is looking to disrupt the European space industry and deliver on its promises as quickly and as cost-effectively as possible. In contrast to this, ArianeGroup’s founding was the old guard anointing itself as a new European monarchy, a monarchy that so famously dropped the ball that abdication should really be its only option.

Conclusion

During the discussions in Seville, DG Aschbacher challenged member states, stating, "Europe can watch or act. Europe can follow or lead. Europe can stagnate or inspire. We chose to act, lead, and inspire." I LOVE that! "We chose to act, lead and inspire!" What a fucking amazing call to action. The issue is that I'm not entirely sure if I believe it. 

I don't particularly feel inspired by a launcher challenge that we will need to wait another two years to receive funding to pursue. Or, in fact, by member states agreeing to supply ArianeGroup with several times what they will award to launcher challenge winners in subsidies every year just to ensure that the company can secure a few commercial customers to supplement the huge number of annual guaranteed institutional flights it has been gifted. We're also nowhere close to leading the launch sector, and we won't be for at least another decade, if not more if we do not truly act. And we really aren't acting. We're sitting on our hands, waiting for CM25. I know that's not entirely true. I know that ESA is already working on the launcher challenge with the director of space transportation, Toni Tolker-Nielsen, recently sharing that the agency is in discussions with member states to allow the winners of the competition to be proposed at the ministerial meeting in late 2025. But the fact remains that without funding, no real progress can be made until then. How has ESA still not proposed a mechanism that would allow it to call on member states to make ministerial-level decisions outside the three-year cycle in extraordinary circumstances?

I am still not convinced ESA really has any idea how it intends to handle the development of a successor to Ariane 6. With the introduction of the launcher challenge, it appears that the agency wants to shift the bulk of the responsibility onto commercial actors, much like the US has done. However, Europe just doesn’t offer the same huge NASA and defence contracts that sustained a company like SpaceX in its early days. I’m not sure Europe really offers an environment for a similar development path. Also, what does this direction mean for programmes like Prometheus and Themis? Are the results of these programmes left to ArianeGroup to do as with as they please? Is it a better approach to maybe go in the opposite direction and take a greater role in the development of an Ariane successor? I’ll be honest: I am hesitant to ask these questions of ESA because I worry that the most likely answer is that we’ll have to wait and see what happens at CM25—another two years of inaction.