I still think Europe should invest in space stations, not transport. It will ensure that there a destination (customers) for those companies that are willing to invest their own money in transport. And it is a sector where Europe has enough head start to position itself well if it starts now, but is too large and risky for the private sector.
<blockquote> While I am suspicious about the timing of this announcement so close to the Space Summit meetings</blockquote>
Considering the last time Ariane made such announcements were the Adeline and Prometheus projects (To be introduced in 2025, but never heard of again)around the time of the Ariane 6 contract signing, I think you are right to be suspicious. Fool me once and all that.
I was one of the 3 journalists at Les Mureaux that day, and I can confirm to you that this scaled model was created to test both parachutes and propulsive landings, for both the intermediate sized (parachute landing) and full scaled SUSIE versions.
It was confirmed to me that there is no interest in a propulsive landing system for the small SUSIE... as long as it's used for cargo transportation.
If Moon Susie ever came to life (very unlikely in my opinion), it will be based on the small Susie model, and could be fitted with propulsive vertical landing system.
This article was a qualitative one as usual and I think you rock so well regarding your mission to promote European space activities, which would surely deserve much more consideration.
However, I don't think I agree on your opinion about SUSIE and though it is based on the trauma Hermes has generated and also the feeling of inappetence on Europe's space sector's part, I believe the project should further been looked upon from a different perspective, especially since it has begun to show some preliminary signs of progress. @MBBTHEBEST isn't wrong also saying the development of a transport mean is a big, even a huge deal for private companies, and Europe indeed has a far greater advantage when it comes to space stations, but SUSIE is still imo an innovative proposition that would, should it become tangible as a real engineering thing and not simply remain at a blueprint state, greatly change our capabilities and sovereignty.
This is anyway and definitely something to keep a close eye on, similarly to what's being worked out by RFA and The Exploration Company
EU Space Week will begin next week, which every European space journalist will be reporting on if not attending in person. Will any European space journalist ask of the ESA:
“Does a single solid rocket on the Ariane 6 and Vega-C really cost €20 million?” “So that the two on the Ariane 62 cost €40 million, and the four on the Ariane 64 cost €80 million?” “So that €80 million of the recommended €115 million price of the Ariane 64 is due just to the SRB’s alone?”
If the answer to those questions is yes, then it becomes obvious why the Ariane 6 is so expensive and it becomes obvious how to produce instead a cheaper launcher to be competitive with the SpaceX Falcon 9.
I’m getting an error message about untrusted certificate at your other web site, europeanspaceflight.com.
Robert Clark
I still think Europe should invest in space stations, not transport. It will ensure that there a destination (customers) for those companies that are willing to invest their own money in transport. And it is a sector where Europe has enough head start to position itself well if it starts now, but is too large and risky for the private sector.
<blockquote> While I am suspicious about the timing of this announcement so close to the Space Summit meetings</blockquote>
Considering the last time Ariane made such announcements were the Adeline and Prometheus projects (To be introduced in 2025, but never heard of again)around the time of the Ariane 6 contract signing, I think you are right to be suspicious. Fool me once and all that.
There is an initiative for a European space station called Space Villages.
I was one of the 3 journalists at Les Mureaux that day, and I can confirm to you that this scaled model was created to test both parachutes and propulsive landings, for both the intermediate sized (parachute landing) and full scaled SUSIE versions.
It was confirmed to me that there is no interest in a propulsive landing system for the small SUSIE... as long as it's used for cargo transportation.
If Moon Susie ever came to life (very unlikely in my opinion), it will be based on the small Susie model, and could be fitted with propulsive vertical landing system.
This article was a qualitative one as usual and I think you rock so well regarding your mission to promote European space activities, which would surely deserve much more consideration.
However, I don't think I agree on your opinion about SUSIE and though it is based on the trauma Hermes has generated and also the feeling of inappetence on Europe's space sector's part, I believe the project should further been looked upon from a different perspective, especially since it has begun to show some preliminary signs of progress. @MBBTHEBEST isn't wrong also saying the development of a transport mean is a big, even a huge deal for private companies, and Europe indeed has a far greater advantage when it comes to space stations, but SUSIE is still imo an innovative proposition that would, should it become tangible as a real engineering thing and not simply remain at a blueprint state, greatly change our capabilities and sovereignty.
This is anyway and definitely something to keep a close eye on, similarly to what's being worked out by RFA and The Exploration Company
EU Space Week will begin next week, which every European space journalist will be reporting on if not attending in person. Will any European space journalist ask of the ESA:
“Does a single solid rocket on the Ariane 6 and Vega-C really cost €20 million?” “So that the two on the Ariane 62 cost €40 million, and the four on the Ariane 64 cost €80 million?” “So that €80 million of the recommended €115 million price of the Ariane 64 is due just to the SRB’s alone?”
If the answer to those questions is yes, then it becomes obvious why the Ariane 6 is so expensive and it becomes obvious how to produce instead a cheaper launcher to be competitive with the SpaceX Falcon 9.
Robert Clark
Very interesting article and topic!