Europe blasts back into the heavy launch biz with first Ariane 6 flight
- Reference: 1720591089
- News link: https://www.theregister.co.uk/2024/07/10/ariane_6_launch_success_esa/
- Source link:
The Agency (ESA) celebrated the launch with a [1]post that offered little detail other than "At 17:06, a little over an hour after liftoff, the first set of satellites on board Ariane 6 were released from the upper stage and placed into an orbit 600km above Earth. Satellites and experiments from various space agencies, companies, research institutes, universities and young professionals were included on this inaugural flight."
But not all was well. The mission plan also called for Ariane 6's upper stage to perform a demonstration in which its Vinci engine was restarted – to test the craft's ability to move into different orbits so it can conduct missions that require cargos to be dropped in several spots under conditions of microgravity.
[2]
Ariane 6 can theoretically do that, thanks to its inclusion of what the ESA describes as a "novel auxiliary propulsion unit" (APU).
[3]
[4]
The ESA hoped to demonstrate the APU by releasing a pair of "re-entry capsules" that would burn up in Earth's atmosphere.
Sadly, something went less than perfectly.
[5]Ariane 6 ready to rocket, bringing heavy-lift capability back to Europe
[6]NASA and ESA take a close look at Europe's International Habitation Module
[7]BepiColombo power struggle could leave probe short of Mercury's orbit
[8]NASA's Mars Sample Return Program struggles to get off the drawing board
In a [9]post-flight Q&Asession , Martin Sion, CEO of ArianeGroup – the private biz responsible for building and operating Ariane 6 – said the APU fired once, allowing the upper stage to release a second set of satellites, but then failed after a second ignition.
"We don't know why it stopped," he admitted, going on to explain that ArianeGroup doesn't yet have the data it needs to analyze the situation.
[10]
Whatever happened, Sion revealed that the Vinci engine did not start, so the demo mission was not possible. The upper stage was placed in an orbit that ESA officials assured does not represent more of a hazard than comparable pieces of hardware, and the capsules stayed aboard.
"But all the rest of the mission was according to plan," Sion noted, pointing out that the demos were just that – efforts to understand how the rocket behaves in microgravity, because that's not possible on Earth.
Despite the problems with the demo phase, ESA officials declared the launch a triumph – because it matched the performance of the agency's old Ariane 5 launcher. Officials also pointed out that it's not every decade a new heavy launcher takes to the skies – and that this one went so well a second Ariane 6 launch is a near-certainty this year. Six are planned for 2025.
[11]
Ariane 6 ascends for the first time – Click to enlarge
Officials pointed out that future launches can take place without the APU being fixed, because not every mission will involve a phase in microgravity.
That's welcome news, given the ESA funded the rocket in 2016 under a plan that called for it to fly in 2020 – a year in which the agency still operated Ariane 5.
[12]
That launcher last flew in July 2023, and Europe has been without a heavy launcher ever since.
Now it has one that can carry over 20 tons into low Earth orbit when Ariane 6 is equipped with four external boosters, or 10.3 tons in a smaller configuration with two boosters. ®
Get our [13]Tech Resources
[1] https://www.esa.int/Newsroom/Press_Releases/Europe_s_new_Ariane_6_rocket_powers_into_space
[2] https://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/jump?co=1&iu=/6978/reg_offbeat/science&sz=300x50%7C300x100%7C300x250%7C300x251%7C300x252%7C300x600%7C300x601&tile=2&c=2Zo5bx1hFYeZaASr2AOASHwAAAEc&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D2%26raptor%3Dcondor%26pos%3Dtop%26test%3D0
[3] https://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/jump?co=1&iu=/6978/reg_offbeat/science&sz=300x50%7C300x100%7C300x250%7C300x251%7C300x252%7C300x600%7C300x601&tile=4&c=44Zo5bx1hFYeZaASr2AOASHwAAAEc&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D4%26raptor%3Dfalcon%26pos%3Dmid%26test%3D0
[4] https://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/jump?co=1&iu=/6978/reg_offbeat/science&sz=300x50%7C300x100%7C300x250%7C300x251%7C300x252%7C300x600%7C300x601&tile=3&c=33Zo5bx1hFYeZaASr2AOASHwAAAEc&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D3%26raptor%3Deagle%26pos%3Dmid%26test%3D0
[5] https://www.theregister.com/2024/06/06/july_9_ariane_6_launch/
[6] https://www.theregister.com/2024/05/31/nasa_and_esa_astros_habitat_module/
[7] https://www.theregister.com/2024/05/16/bepicolombo_thruster_problems/
[8] https://www.theregister.com/2024/03/04/mars_sample_return_audit_warnings/
[9] https://www.esa.int/ESA_Multimedia/Videos/2024/07/Ariane_6_inaugural_flight_press_conference
[10] https://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/jump?co=1&iu=/6978/reg_offbeat/science&sz=300x50%7C300x100%7C300x250%7C300x251%7C300x252%7C300x600%7C300x601&tile=4&c=44Zo5bx1hFYeZaASr2AOASHwAAAEc&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D4%26raptor%3Dfalcon%26pos%3Dmid%26test%3D0
[11] https://regmedia.co.uk/2024/07/10/supplied_esa_ariane_6_first_launch.jpg
[12] https://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/jump?co=1&iu=/6978/reg_offbeat/science&sz=300x50%7C300x100%7C300x250%7C300x251%7C300x252%7C300x600%7C300x601&tile=3&c=33Zo5bx1hFYeZaASr2AOASHwAAAEc&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D3%26raptor%3Deagle%26pos%3Dmid%26test%3D0
[13] https://whitepapers.theregister.com/
Re: Congratulations
The original planned launch date was 2020...
Re: Congratulations
The delays were not related to engineering problems.
For a massive multi-national cost-plus programme
This is pretty good for a first launch. All primary and secondary payloads dropped as required.
Vinci BTW is a LH2/LO2 engine so restarting one is something that's never been done in Europe.
Congratulations to all involved and hopefully their next launch will meet restart goals for Vinci.
Re: For a massive multi-national cost-plus programme
The thrust at take-off was very impressive. We'll need to wait for analysis of the problems with the APU but the mission was a great success!
A relief
Well, it’s a relief that at least Ariane can start shifting some of its backlog. First flights are about 50/50; so 1 for 1 is good.
I would say that “at least the world is no longer single-sourced on Falcon 9”; but as of a couple months ago even that isn’t true. Japanese H3 launch went fine; and is a good option.
The new stuff doesn’t work (multiple release in different orbits), so basically it’s a rebuild of Ariana 5, for very little cost improvement, in return for an investment of €4bn over 10 years. Plus an additional subsidy of €340M annually that Ariane 5 didn’t need, which is why I say there’s no cost improvement.
Anyone with a commercial payload is just going to pick Falcon9: both cheaper *and* a permanent advantage on reliability record (Ariane can launch successfully, but it can’t *catch up* to somebody else launching every 3 days). Those that don’t will go H3. And that’s in today’s environment. By 2027 the competitive landscape will have hugely moved on again.
Ariane 5 was a commercial workhorse because it was competitive. 6 is just going to launch EU institutional payloads, so that they can say they’ve got a launcher.
Re: A relief
You contradict yourself: you say new launches only work 50% of the time, that his one worked, but the new stuff didn't. But there was one shutdown and reignition in space. Getting all that done in the first launch is amazing. And, given the problems with the launch of Ariane 5, the overriding priority for this launch was to get into space without a problem.
The market has, indeed, changed significantly since the Ariane 6 project was agreed. Much of the delay was related to the inevitable politics of ESA. But commercial projects will welcome the prospect of increased competition. Whether it's from Ariane, JAXA, India or Rocketlab. To remain competitive, providers will need to compete not only on cost but on the service provided.
As for the finances: it's difficult to compare something like ESA with Space X which, on top of guaranteed NASA contracts, had access to capital markets during a time of unprecedented cheap money; without this the series of rapid prototypes wouldn't have been possible. A better comparison would, perhaps, be the Starliner project, which I personally think has been a far greater clusterfuck.
Having your own independent launch capacity is something worth having. Remember that it was only a few years ago that the US was dependent upon both Russia and Ariane for certain missions, including to the ISS. Should Europe risk being beholden to temperental manbabies?
There are lessons to be learned in production and deployment. But I'd be looking for more information on that after 10 launches.
Glad to see ESA continuing to mark the initial Ariane missions with a homophone ... after Ariane 5 sank, Ariane 6 ceased!
....
*spins up foreign language brain parts*
*iterates languages*
...
ouch.
Have one --->
I ought to credit for the original *Ariane cinq took off, exploded and sank .... thus living up to its name" joke to Angus Deayton on "Have I got news for you" at the time (which also indicates how long it's been between Ariane 5 and 6!)
"... homophone......"
Does that mean that Ariane 7 will be set to work ?
ESA officials need a little more practice counting
Officials also pointed out that it's not every decade a new heavy launcher takes to the skies.
OK for all the decades up to 1960, then there were two that decade and two in the '80s so averaging out to one a decade until 2000. Since then it has been three per decade (2 so far this decade with several more planned).
Money for nothing
> ESA officials declared the launch a triumph – because it matched the performance of the agency's old Ariane 5 launcher.
Sounds like a pretty low expectation. For a development cost said to be €3.6 billion, it's as good as the rocket it replaced.
Lift-off
I insist that Nasa start saying "décollage".
It just sounds way cooler.
Congratulations
It's nice to see Arianespace back in the race. And, contrary to some, no multiple delays and rescheduling, just engineers doing their job in the background then, flight.
Makes you dream, eh Boeing ?