"A few years ago I was over [visiting Arianespace in France and they] weren't worried about [United Launch Alliance but asked] could I get rid of SpaceX, because they were going to drive them out of business?" -- Rep. Loretta Sanchez (D-Calif.)
In 2015, sitting in on a House Armed Services Committee hearing on the cost of spaceflight, then-Congresswoman Loretta Sanchez got a few laughs with this quip -- but four years later, nobody's laughing in Europe. France's independent state auditor, the Cour des comptes (CDC), just reported that Elon Musk's use of reusable rockets to lower the cost of space launch poses a very real risk of driving Ariane out of the space business.
Pretty ballsy to ask an American politician to hamstring an American company to aide a foreign firm. I think it's important to note they thought it was ok to ask this of a Democrat.
Anyway, beat this, Euros:
American innovation and boldness wins again:
For years, France's Arianespace space launch company, a subsidiary of Airbus(NASDAQOTH:EADSY), has struggled to compete with SpaceX in the market for commercial rocket launches. Here's the problem: Your average Ariane launch costs some $200 million, whereas SpaceX famously advertises Falcon 9 rocket rides for as little as $62 million.
Obviously, it's hard for Ariane to compete with prices that low. So to improve its competitive positioning, Ariane has spent the last few years developing a new family of rockets, dubbed "Ariane 6". Its goal: to bring Ariane's average launch cost down to about $77 million (for a payload capacity similar to Falcon 9's) or $126 million (for something closer to what a SpaceX Falcon Heavy will haul).
That sounds like a good idea. But as France's CDC opines, Ariane 6 may be too little, too late.
Slow and steady loses the race
In a 31-page "tome" incorporated in its rapport public annuel 2019, CDC notes that Ariane "lost global leadership in the commercial market to the American company SpaceX" way back in 2017. CDC directly links this loss to SpaceX's "breakthrough model of reusable rockets," and to Ariane's "failure to believe in" the concept of reusable rockets -- and build them.
Ariane's "cautious" approach, says CDC, may turn out to be "not ... competitive over the long term." Rather, CDC believes that Ariane will ultimately need to "evolve Ariane 6 toward reusability" -- at the cost of "additional financing." All Ariane has accomplished with its first effort, therefore, was wasting time.
And given that even an expendable Ariane 6 isn't expected to go into service before 2020, time is not something Ariane has to waste. By the time Ariane 6 starts flying, SpaceX may have further refined its reusable rocket designs, tailored its business model to reap the full benefits of reusability, and lowered its prices even more, rendering any cost reduction in Ariane 6 moot.
I was thinking about Representative Sanchez's remark about the French & SpaceX...
ReplyDeleteMy view of the Republicans & Democrats is that they are the two sides of the same coin, the hand that hold the coin is the important one. The big bucks keep flowing & people spend their time on bathrooms arguments.
Eisenhower warned us in 1960.
Past that I cannot say how impressive that twin landing was! THAT was science fiction come to life!
So Sanchez was over in Fwance talking to a non-innovative Fwench company that competes against American companies and the Fwench ask her to torpedo an innovative American company and years later she tells the story anecdotally like it's no big deal that the Fwench just assumed she was for sale and in no way does she indicate any outrage then or now. From that we can assume the Fwench didn't offer enough and to her all that is normal and just business as usual. Sweet.
ReplyDeleteBingo! your on target there! got it in one.
Deleteno one at NASA at that time thought the direct return to pad launch vehicle was viable with existing tech. had to wait a few years. instead of doing the R&D and making the tech which is what we paid them to do, we end up with STS. yeah, it was big and had wings. it was also a waste of time and money. We would probably have lost just as many lives with any other launch system, but the whole idea was to reduce the cost per kilogram; not safety. Safety is inherent in the simplest possible systems. the shuttle was not a simple system. combining a cargo lift system with a manned system added to the problem of KISS.
ReplyDeleteSo where are we at now? Moving to where we should have been in the first place.
I wonder how cheap Rep. Harris (D)CA has been bought for in the past?
I've read before about the problems that the space launch industry is seeing - and one thing almost never mentioned is that overall, space launches are way down in recent years.
ReplyDeleteSpaceX may be taking a chunk of the pie, but the whole pie is way smaller than it was 10 to 20 years ago. Part of that is reduced demand and part is that with smaller satellites, more can fit on each launch.
If the whole industry keeps going that way, even SpaceX will run into trouble...