flyingturtle wrote:

mxaxai wrote:

Extremely unfortunate. It was the 4th stage however, not the 2nd stage again. The 4th stage's Avum motor is a liquid engine, unlike the first 3 which are all solid fuel boosters.

I officially can't count past 2... Naah, I'm so used to Two-Stages-To-Orbit vehicles.

Francoflier wrote:

The good old crossed wires strike again...

OMG. Did the guy from Lufthansa Technik (the famous A320 sidestick incident) make it to Arianespace?

I thunk they were checking such critical cabling doubly or even triply.

This is going to result in a review by Arianespace or externally by the ESA of the established SOP's and if they need to be modified or enforced better.

Nomadd wrote:

texl1649 wrote:

I don’t disagree on any of that frankoflier45. I think it’s an order of magnitude more difficult to do what they want with re-using starship, but I also think they’ve documented/shown why/how the first stage, regardless, should be ‘more’ reusable with it vs. Falcon (from a component perspective.).

Plausibly, they could be about 5 years from their objectives though; it seems like the majors (not just talking about Arianespace, but in terms of ‘western’ major launch providers I think they’re comparatively high cost) would logically have some steps/programs in place at this point to logically react. Other than their own proprietary engines, not much about Starship/Falcon seem that difficult to technologically...copy. I have to think some of their engineers might get some quite interesting job offers in the future.

Even if Starship is a total bust, just the booster with disposable 2nd stages would still be a pretty huge change in things.
Other than the engines, there's nothing that hard to copy design wise. The corporate structure and philosophy is what is hard to copy. The reason RS-25 engines cost over 100 times as much to produce as a far superior Raptor isn't just design.

These guys will definitely get good offers. In case they need it. There are a lot of new space companies now. And this is an area in which they can be invited to completely different countries.
In general, disputes about who the competitor is to whom is not entirely appropriate here. It's still a business that is created where it is needed. So if there is such a rocket / engine / company, then they are needed for something.

Vega once again returns to flight with a successful launch. The primary payload was a commercial imaging satellite operated by Airbus DS. https://spacenews.com/vega-return-to-fl ... e-imagery/

Ariane 5 recent launch, this presumably is one of the last prior to the JWST mission;
https://www.theguardian.com/science/202 ... e-launches

GDB wrote:

Ariane 5 recent launch, this presumably is one of the last prior to the JWST mission;
https://www.theguardian.com/science/202 ... e-launches

Yes, there's one more commercial launch scheduled in September, then it's JWST in November, barring any further delays...
My heart rate will go up a bit watching that one, for sure.

Today's Ariane V launch went without a hitch, pushing 2 sats to GTO.

This in itself wouldn't be particularly noteworthy if it wasn't for the fact that this was the last Ariane launch before the JWST's turn in December.

ArianeSpace and ESA are finding themselves in a bit of a pickle with the war in Ukraine. https://spacenews.com/esa-weighs-option ... -launches/

• Soyuz is obviously out of the picture, at least for satellites.
• Vega C has (at least temporarily) lost the supplier of their upper stage engine, which is from Ukraine. Only engines for the first 3 launches have been delivered so far.
• Ariane 6 won't be ready before Q3 2022, and buying more Ariane 5 launches is uneconomical.
• ESA's first mars rover has lost its descent and landing module, which is developed and built in Russia. The mission faces further delays.

Vega C's RD-843 engine uses UDMH + NTO for a thrust of up to 2.45 kN. A successor is already planned for Vega E, using the 98kN methalox M10 engine to replace both the RD-843 and the preceding solid fuel booster. But that was scheduled to enter service no earlier than 2025. https://www.esa.int/Enabling_Support/Sp ... eyond_2025

It also means a significant delay for the Rosalind Franklin Mars Rover, however I have never been happy with the Russian elements of this mission, their record not just with Mars but reliability of launch vehicles not called Soyuz. Even more so with the landing and descent modules.

(Yes I know, 'Beagle 2', well orbital images some years after shows it did land but whatever reason could not properly deploy, rather than cratering. Had it not been for the planet wide dust storm in 1971, which delayed the orbiting Mariner 9 images until it cleared, the Soviets would have likely got the first images from the surface of another planet 5 years before Viking, it did land, started sending then...the dust storm most likely finished that, though in the case of Venus they still beat that by a year).

In any case ESA did Venus Express, Mars Express orbiters, with this rover though ESA had to go to Russia as the original tie up with NASA was axed, by NASA due to cost cutting, this wasn't Europe cuddling up to Russia, NASA forced it.
Methinks ESA should give Musk a call, could Falcon Heavy do it, what about the Russian landing and descent modules of the however?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rosalind_Franklin_(rover)

Amazon buys 18 Ariane 6 launches for their 'Kuiper' broadband constellation, in addition to 38 Vulcan launches from ULA and 12 (+15 options) New Glenn launches from Blue Origin.
https://spacenews.com/amazon-signs-mult ... contracts/

Major win for Arianespace, presumably driven by Amazon / Bezos not wanting to buy from SpaceX.

Some updates on ArianeGroup:

Vega C launched successfully in July 2022

Once the 115-foot-tall (35 meters) medium-lift Vega C cleared the launch pad, everything continued without a hitch, including four burns of the Avum+ upper stage, an upgraded version of the one used on the original Vega rocket.

The next Vega launch is scheduled for November.
https://www.space.com/arianespace-vega- ... ch-success

The problems with supply of the Ukraine-made upper stage engine seem to be medium-term only, with stocks already being sufficient for 2-3 years of planned launches.

LA TRIBUNE- Today, the AVUM upper stage of Vega and Vega C is powered by a Ukrainian engine. Do you have a sufficient stock of engines to ensure the continuity of service of the Italian launchers?
DANIEL NEUENSCHWANDER - Absolutely. I confirm that we have in the short term (two to three years) the stocks necessary for the exploitation of the last two Vega, then of Vega C. This is very good news for the European institutional missions, which must absolutely take advantage of these flight opportunities.

https://www.latribune.fr/entreprises-fi ... 28551.html [French]

The Avio M10 engine expected to power the Vega E version has been test-fired in May 2022, first flight scheduled for 2026. The M10 could potentially replace the AVUM stage.
https://payloadspace.com/avio-vega-e-m1 ... -sardinia/

Ariane 5 completed its 5th- and 4th-to-last launch

The new Eutelsat spacecraft weighed more than 7 tons (about 6.4 metric tons) at launch, and will provide Ka-band connectivity for European markets, including fixed broadband customers — such as homes and businesses — and in-flight WiFi users flying across Europe on airliners. The satellite’s main body stands about 29 feet (8.8 meters) tall, as high as a three-story building.

With the successful launch of Eutelsat Konnect VHTS Wednesday, there are just three Ariane 5 rockets remaining in Arianespace’s inventory. The next Ariane 5 launch is scheduled for December, followed by two more in 2023 to close out the program.

https://spaceflightnow.com/2022/09/07/e ... -5-rocket/

Reusable reentry vehicle SUSIE presented

Susie is extremely flexible and is designed to be able to conduct numerous types of missions in space. Its large-volume internal bay (40 m3) will make it highly adaptable for cargo or payload transport and for crewed flight.

This vehicle would be comparable to the X-37B but significantly larger, approximately the diameter of a Falcon 9 or Ariane 6. The design is similar to a shuttlecock, somewhat reminiscent of the ESA IXV experimental reentry vehicle.
https://press.ariane.group/arianegroup- ... /?lang=eng


Not directly ArianeGroup, but German DLR is also developing a winged reentry vehicle, ReFEx, which will be tested on a suborbital launch in 2024. https://www.dlr.de/irs/en/desktopdefaul ... lery/34117

SUSIE is a really intriguing development, will be interesting to follow progress.

The first Ariane 6 launch has slipped to late 2023, from the previously targeted early 2023. Testing of major components is still ongoing, a recent upper stage hot fire test was considered "extremely successful"
https://spacenews.com/ariane-6-first-la ... late-2023/

Long term improvements for Ariane 6 are already in the work:

ARIANEGROUP TO DEVELOP PHOEBUS FOR ESA, AS A DEMONSTRATOR FOR ARIANE 6 FUTURE CARBON UPPER STAGE

PHOEBUS (Prototype for a Highly OptimizEd Black Upper Stage) is a key programme on the path to a further optimized upper stage called ICARUS (Innovative Carbon ARiane Upper Stage). PHOEBUS is built of carbon composites rather than metal, leading to lower cost and lower weight. It will increase payload capacity and thus contribute to a more sustainable use of resources.

The final test – including filling and refueling cycles, pressurization, and drainage – will take place at DLR’s test center in Lampoldshausen (Germany) around the end of 2025. It will be the world’s first demonstration of cryogenic carbon fiber tanks of such a size.

The PHOEBUS project is part of the Future Launchers Preparatory Programme of ESA’s Directorate of Space Transportation.

https://press.ariane.group/arianegroup-developpe-phoebus-pour-lesa-un-demonstrateur-du-futur-etage-superieur-dariane-6-en-materiaux-composites-6071/?lang=eng

Surprised this has not been noted.
The Vega-C launch this week ended in failure when the second stage did not perform as intended.
https://www.space.com/arianespace-vega- ... ember-2022

I am sure the Arianespace team is working hard to find out what happened. Not a very good way to spend the holidays.

Tugg

Tugger wrote:

Surprised this has not been noted.
The Vega-C launch this week ended in failure when the second stage did not perform as intended.
https://www.space.com/arianespace-vega- ... ember-2022

I am sure the Arianespace team is working hard to find out what happened. Not a very good way to spend the holidays.

Tugg

The Vega-C is using a solid upper stage with new thrust vectoring & modulation technology. It has a spotty record thus far, so will be interesting to see what the investigation conclusions are.

Right now, all they know is that the stage suffered an under-pressure event, 7 seconds after ignition. In a solid rocket, that probably implies a failure of the nozzle end, which is where the new technology is.

Vega is really proving to be a problem child for Arianespace... Which is somewhat ironic since it was designed to be a relatively simple and cheap launcher.
I guess it is just one more proof that 'simple' and 'cheap' just don't belong in space.

Add that to the Ariane 6 delays and ESA is looking at a pretty spotty access to orbit in the next few years.

Francoflier wrote:

Vega is really proving to be a problem child for Arianespace... Which is somewhat ironic since it was designed to be a relatively simple and cheap launcher.
I guess it is just one more proof that 'simple' and 'cheap' just don't belong in space.

Add that to the Ariane 6 delays and ESA is looking at a pretty spotty access to orbit in the next few years.

There are many schemes for making solid rockets more similar to the characteristics of liquid rockets. It's an attractive solution because it requires far less infrastructure. But from a controls standpoint, is a far more difficult problem.

I suspect those efforts will continue until someone gets it right. Similar to booster flyback & vertical landing, which was also mostly a controls problem.

Avatar2go wrote:

Francoflier wrote:

Vega is really proving to be a problem child for Arianespace... Which is somewhat ironic since it was designed to be a relatively simple and cheap launcher.
I guess it is just one more proof that 'simple' and 'cheap' just don't belong in space.

Add that to the Ariane 6 delays and ESA is looking at a pretty spotty access to orbit in the next few years.

There are many schemes for making solid rockets more similar to the characteristics of liquid rockets. It's an attractive solution because it requires far less infrastructure. But from a controls standpoint, is a far more difficult problem.

I suspect those efforts will continue until someone gets it right. Similar to booster flyback & vertical landing, which was also mostly a controls problem.

Controls, and to some extent materials. It does you no good if you manage to fly the booster back, but lots of expensive components need to be replaced or deep serviced after the fact. You need rocket motors that are durable enough to fly for many flights, but not so expensive as to be almost unaffordable. You need sturdy enough materials on the rest of the rocket to put up with the repeated stresses of launch, boost-back and landing without excessive metal fatigue, while also being light enough to be usable. We've known how to control a rocket enough for a boost-back and landing (on paper at least) for decades. What we didn't have the tech for was the flow of information about the rocket's attitude, targeting, and sufficiently durable and accurate engine controls to make what we have on paper work in the real world.

I hope Arianespace that get this right one day. There needs to be more competition in the heavier side of the market.

ArianeSpace has released the report on the December failure of the Vega C second stage. It was caused by excessive porosity in the carbon-carbon nozzle throat insert. This caused rapid erosion, such that the engine stopped producing useful levels of thrust after about 2 minutes.

The part was manufactured in Ukraine, and the porosity issues were not previously known. The inserts had been used in two test firings and one flight. ArianeSpace will now manufacture the insert internally. They had outsourced the part due to schedule concerns.

https://spacenews.com/nozzle-erosion-bl ... h-failure/

ESA's JUICE (JUpiter ICy moons Explorer) was successfully launched on an Ariane 5 from Kourou today, after being scrubbed due to weather yesterday.

A great start to this ambitious mission, another very significant payload in Ariane 5's long career;
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s4hUkKs5fzE

Mission objectives, from last month;
https://www.theguardian.com/science/202 ... pport-life