On April 19 2023 02:44 {CC}StealthBlue wrote: Looks like SpaceX will be needed in order to launch the EU's Galileo satellites as the Ariane 6 is over budget, and behind schedule. Keep in mind Europe decided on the Ariane 6 in order to compete with the Falcon 9.... in 2014.
No idea what happens if the US tells SpaceX/ULA or whoever else they are not allowed.
The European Commission wants to cut deals with private American space companies like Elon Musk's SpaceX to launch cutting-edge European navigation satellites due to continued delays to Europe's next generation Ariane rocket system.
In a draft request to EU countries seen by POLITICO, the Commission is planning to ask for a green light to negotiate "an ad-hoc security agreement" with the U.S. for its rocket companies to "exceptionally launch Galileo satellites.”
The Commission reckons only SpaceX's Falcon 9 heavy launcher and United Launch Alliance's Vulcan system are up to the job of sending the EU's new geo-navigation Galileo satellites — which weigh around 700 kilograms each — into orbit.
Seeking U.S. help to keep its flagship space program running puts a dent in the EU’s idea of strategic autonomy. Galileo is a point of pride for the EU, as it seeks to become less dependent on other regions for critical infrastructure, services and technology — a quest strongly backed by Paris.
The EU is having to seek assistance to launch new versions of its navigation satellites because the Ariane 5 rocket, developed by France-based ArianeGroup and launched from France's South American spaceport in French Guiana, is to be retired in the next months.
The deployment of its replacement, Ariane 6, has been delayed; the new system is currently expected to carry out a maiden launch at the end of this year, with full commercial deployment starting next year.
The alternative to the Ariane series would have been launching Galileo satellites with Russian-built Soyuz rockets, a version of which are also used at the French Guiana site. However, since Russia's invasion of Ukraine, two Galileo launches using Soyuz rockets have been cancelled, prompting the search for alternatives.
Galileo satellites beam highly accurate navigation and precise time data back to earth — and also provide a top secret encrypted service for use by government agencies. That means launches typically can only be carried out from EU territory under tight security rules.
"In view of the security sensitive information … included in Galileo satellites, an ad-hoc legally binding security agreement with [the] U.S. is necessary, in order to protect the integrity of the satellites and the Galileo constellation," said part of a draft proposal from the Commission seen by POLITICO.
It will be up to EU countries to approve negotiations for an agreement, which would come under the umbrella of standing deals on the exchange of classified information, the proposal states.
Capacity to launch satellites and humans into space independently of other powers has been a key part of French efforts to develop the concept of strategic autonomy for Europe.
But the need to contract out launches of critical space infrastructure to private companies operating in the U.S. undermines the argument that Europe is able to manage its own alternative to the U.S. GPS, Russia's Glonass and China's BeiDou constellations.
"Analyses are ... ongoing to ascertain whether or not launching with an alternative launch service provider would be feasible," said Commission spokesperson Sonya Gospodinova, adding that no decision has yet been taken. Assessments are being made on technical compatibility, launch site security and cost, she said.
While SpaceX's Falcon rocket is already operational, ULA only plans its first Vulcan mission in May.
The Paris-based European Space Agency, which isn't an EU institution but helps manage Galileo and runs the French Guiana spaceport, had already been looking at alternative launch options for satellites.
They're aspiring to have 1/5'th of the launch rate and 3x the cost of SpaceX's last-gen rocket - while launching later than their next-gen one. I don't see any outcome which leaves A6 relevant for anything more than heavily subsidized national security launches of reduced capability.
I think we're going to see about 5 great private companies that excel in this that take care of every kind of launch while having national companies still doing one off jobs. I just don't see a viable path for legacy companies to keep up. The government, especially NASA, has shown that by backing the right kind of startup, you reap dividends left and right. SpX is going to be the top and then till he Rocketlab and maybe BO.
Wonder how high it got. Almost seemed like SpaceX knew, when it started to spin, to see how much data could be gathered. It is known that it did not separate.
edit:
edit#2: Wow all the cameras that the press, and streamers setup closest to the pad have all been knocked over. Some were being held down by cinder blocks, still knocked over lol
Watched it with a coworker as it launched. Was awesome. The spinning told me it wasn't going to make it to orbit but that explosion was even better than I had hoped. Interesting to see what the issue was that didn't allow for separation.
I say once data is understood and they get another clear, they'll be doing another test in 2 months. Just seeing it lift off was amazing.
Well I watched the launch and the hold-down was pretty long, makes sense why there's so much damage down there. A flame trench is definitely required to minimize damage and funnel it to a sacrificial direction. I wouldn't be surprised if there's a lot of ground systems damage, there was a lot of flying concrete around it. Hopefully it wasn't the debris that damaged the engines on the first stage.
The water deluge system and maybe a pool of standing water is probably required to mitigate damage to the engines during takeoff.
Large chunks of debris (capable of e.g. destroying large equipment or totalling a vehicle) flew hundreds of meters for sure, some flew higher than the mechazilla arms which are 70m high. Tank farm and hoppy took debris damage, maybe more. The finer material (sand, dust, dirt) flew up to 10km and coated everything.
Tim Dodd @ 8km away:
Looks like the rocket itself lost 6 engines and then thrust vector control halfway through first stage burn. Debris strikes a big cause? Maybe other stuff too, but with that much of an event at ignition they're lucky it got well clear of the pad.
Peter Beck, CEO of Rocket Lab, was at the Space symposium Finance and Business Strategy with other space companies.... at the 20 minute mark he nearly had a Freudian slip and almost revealed who had signed a contract with them for parts. Plain as day who it is, almost certainly. Exact same company has a space branch of their which is about a decade behind schedule of course.