A low cost, all European, manned launcher.

[Notebook]

European maybe, but we British don't give up easily, sometimes:

http://www.sptv.demon.co.uk/britishspace/

N.

 

[Urwumpe]

The big point I took from the article is that the writer seems to be lamenting the demise of the dream of a European manned launch capability.

Bob Clark

Not really lamenting. It is rather a "Finally they removed the corpse from the room".

Germany is favorable for manned spaceflight, but also aware that we have not come forward for the past 40 years in it, because most of the other European countries in the ESA are against it. Germany already has the EAC and ESOC, that is already bad enough for ESA politics.

 

[MattBaker]

Germany is favorable for manned spaceflight

I would rather say we're as favorable for manned spaceflight as we are for renewable energy. Cool, as long as I don't have to pay for it...

 

[RGClark]

The European Union has been the greatest economic power in the world or a close second to the U.S. over the last few years. Russia and China have their own manned spaceflight program as will the U.S. once again soon. Even India and Japan are planning their own manned spaceflight program.
European space advocates should regard it as unacceptable that Europe has no plans to develop a manned spaceflight capability.

Here I discuss how the Ariane 6 could serve as a manned spaceflight vehicle:

On the lasting importance of the SpaceX accomplishment, Page 4: how the Ariane 6 can beat both SpaceX and the Russians.
http://exoscientist.blogspot.com/2013/06/on-lasting-importance-of-spacex.html

Bob Clark

 

[Urwumpe]

Here I discuss present how the Ariane 6 could serve as a manned spaceflight vehicle if you ignore physics and engineering:

Fixed it for you.

The Ariane 6 is exactly the opposite of a manned launcher. It is designed to be unmanned without compromises. The Ariane 5 on the other hand is a manned launcher, that was downgraded to an unmanned career.

For turning it into a manned launcher, you need to change it from bottom up. From the earliest architecture decisions on, you have to redesign things. The acoustic environment has to be more tolerable for humans. The guidance needs more tolerance for failures.

That all increases costs. Also, you have to include that the Ariane 5 is already pretty much a lightweight for a useful manned capsule. Even SpaceX does not expect to do more with the Falcon 9, than what the Soyuz with its 7 tons of payload can already do. If you want to have anything more than a space station taxi more among many, the Ariane 6 will not have enough performance.

 

[RGClark]

Fixed it for you.
The Ariane 6 is exactly the opposite of a manned launcher. It is designed to be unmanned without compromises. The Ariane 5 on the other hand is a manned launcher, that was downgraded to an unmanned career.

You didn't read the blog post.

Bob Clark

 

[Urwumpe]

You didn't read the blog post.

Bob Clark

I did. :lol: Made me wish I hadn't.

 

[RGClark]

I did. :lol: Made me wish I hadn't.

Then you are satisfied with the fact that the European Union has greater economic might than all these other countries that have manned spaceflight or will have manned spaceflight while it makes no attempt to develop a manned space program of its own?


Bob Clark

 

[Urwumpe]

Then you are satisfied with the fact that the European Union has greater economic might than all these other countries that have manned spaceflight or will have manned spaceflight while it makes no attempt to develop a manned space program of its own?


Bob Clark

No, but contrary to you, I live in the EU and know very well, that it is not with any greater might. It could have it. But currently we are just friends in Europe. We stick together in good times and become egoists when things get tough. And for manned spaceflight, we have to stick together even when things get tough, because they will get tough.

We should have our homework done before we do manned spaceflight. It is maybe annoying and requires patience, but that is the only way that it could ever be done. Europe is no tyranny, we can't order things from top to bottom.

 

[RGClark]

No, but contrary to you, I live in the EU and know very well, that it is not with any greater might. It could have it. But currently we are just friends in Europe. We stick together in good times and become egoists when things get tough. And for manned spaceflight, we have to stick together even when things get tough, because they will get tough.
...

Meanwhile there is this:

China Launches New Crew to Tiangong 1 Space Station.

Bob Clark

 

[Urwumpe]

Meanwhile there is this:

China Launches New Crew to Tiangong 1 Space Station.

Bob Clark

Yes. And for this, I could recite Shelley or Uhland. Like that:

I met a traveller from an antique land
Who said: Two vast and trunkless legs of stone
Stand in the desart. Near them, on the sand,
Half sunk, a shattered visage lies, whose frown,
And wrinkled lip, and sneer of cold command,
Tell that its sculptor well those passions read
Which yet survive, stamped on these lifeless things,
The hand that mocked them and the heart that fed:
And on the pedestal these words appear:
"My name is Ozymandias, king of kings:
Look on my works, ye Mighty, and despair!"
Nothing beside remains. Round the decay
Of that colossal wreck, boundless and bare
The lone and level sands stretch far away.

The chinese space program serves the same purpose as the old statue there, pleasing the mighty. And especially in the unmanned segment, you can see that the Chinese spaceprogram has not yet lifted off. It is unbalanced, only doing propaganda efforts. And pretty strong militarized as well.

Why should we do the errors of the Chinese? Because you like it?

 

[RGClark]

The chinese space program serves the same purpose as the old statue there, pleasing the mighty. And especially in the unmanned segment, you can see that the Chinese spaceprogram has not yet lifted off. It is unbalanced, only doing propaganda efforts. And pretty strong militarized as well.
Why should we do the errors of the Chinese? Because you like it?

Someone made the point on another forum that the ESA has been superseded by the Chinese space program.
I think the ESA has been superseded now by the Chinese now that the Chinese have manned spaceflight and the ESA does not, even though ESA has the leading satellite launch system, and has had some impressive planetary science successes. And if India and Japan succeed in manned space flights by 2020 as they plan, ESA will be superseded by them as well.
So the thesis here is manned spaceflight trumps your successes in unmanned spaceflight in evaluating the “prestige” of your space flight program. But why then do I not feel the same way about the U.S. space program? Probably because the U.S. did develop an extensive manned spaceflight program and it it is only a temporary interruption now in when it is reinstituted.

Bob Clark

 

[Urwumpe]

I see no objective, rational reason for such an opinion. Not that the ESA program is exactly great - it is mostly many great ideas killed by non-spaceflight politics. But what survives the red tape is still pretty epic, as you can see with the 10 years of Mars Express. And that the ATV will make the CEV fly is also a pretty epic result and well-deserved for the engineers who made the ATV despite the constant political interference.

But: Worse than the Chinese?

If ESA would have such a big lag between propaganda and reality, ESA would be doing firework rockets and cubesats by now, and a few ESA managers would be promoted to distant EU advisory boards, where they can't cause harm anymore. And we would be back at national space programs faster than you could say "Stop". China does not even have a Earth monitoring center like ESA operates, despite it being a pretty cheap thing - when a garbage can in Athen catches fire, the local emergency board could get satellite pictures of the scene by a French or German satellites already while the fire fighters are still driving (You can also see that in the current flooding here, the emergency staffs even received ground moisture measurements from space without any delay)

The difference is just: ESA does focus on maximal science per Euro. It is not nice and pretty boring sometimes, but effective. A bit more passion would be nice, but is hard to do when you have to please the passions of multiple different cultures (and not only a few hundred thousand staunchly communist Han chinese). Also you have to include that the ESA is not all European Spaceflight or all European rocketry - especially Germany, France and Italy also have bigger national programs aside of ESA. And it does not look like we will have a reason to stop national programs and let ESA do all that.

Could we do manned spaceflight? Sure, when ever we want.
Could we do it now? Well... rome wasn't build on a day. And...OH LOOK THERE, A SQUIRREL!

PS: I have no idea how Japan will have any space program after the predicted hyperinflation and national bankruptcy for the next 20 years.

 

[Loru]

A SQUIRREL!???

Loru runs after it with fork yelling "dinner"!!

On the serious note:
Many people outside EU think it's United States of Europe with one "federal" government body and states with minor authority while reality is much more complex. Same thinking extends to ESA. While NASA or other national space agency can be ordered to perform certain programs by governing body, ESA must take into consideration interests of all members which is much more difficult but IMHO produces more efficent results. Every expediture is spent more carefully within ESA.

Yes - we can have manned launcher (Ariane-5 derived) and manned spacecraft (ATV derived) but current situation doesn't reqire us do pursue it. Do it for the sake of having it?? Or as PR stunt? Why not buying seats on Soyuz or (in future) Dragon if they're cheaper and let the Soviets Russians and Americans do the hard work. When seats are not available anymore or when there is other reason we'll surelly make manned launcher.

 

[Urwumpe]

And why not let EADS develop a manned launcher and spacecraft for us on their own risk and money, if there is really a market for manned spaceflight in Europe....

 

[Cosmic Penguin]

Remember that the Chinese decided to make their own manned spacecraft because neither the US or Russia would like to have full co-operation in their manned spaceflight programs. Currently only one country seems to be determined to fly their own manned spacecraft, and I have my doubts that it will actually reach the pad (India - money seems to be lacking and there isn't even a cohesive plan on what to do with it other than flying around the Earth).

 

[RGClark]

On the serious note:
Many people outside EU think it's United States of Europe with one "federal" government body and states with minor authority while reality is much more complex. Same thinking extends to ESA. While NASA or other national space agency can be ordered to perform certain programs by governing body, ESA must take into consideration interests of all members which is much more difficult but IMHO produces more efficent results. Every expediture is spent more carefully within ESA.

Yes - we can have manned launcher (Ariane-5 derived) and manned spacecraft (ATV derived) but current situation doesn't reqire us do pursue it. Do it for the sake of having it?? Or as PR stunt? Why not buying seats on Soyuz or (in future) Dragon if they're cheaper and let the Soviets Russians and Americans do the hard work. When seats are not available anymore or when there is other reason we'll surelly make manned launcher.

Suppose we have this scenario by 2020: all of Russia, China, the U.S., India, and Japan, all have manned spaceflight programs while the European Union does not. Even though the European Union has greater economic, industrial, and technological might than all those countries or is a close second to the U.S., it still has to ask politely, "hat in hand"(*) of those countries to use their launchers if it wants to send a European to orbit.
You would be satisfied with that?


Bob Clark

(*)hat in hand (adverb)
Synonyms
abjectly, deferentially, lowly, humbly, meanly, meekly, modestly, sheepishly, submissively

---------- Post added at 02:07 PM ---------- Previous post was at 02:00 PM ----------

And why not let EADS develop a manned launcher and spacecraft for us on their own risk and money, if there is really a market for manned spaceflight in Europe....

I think they could if they wanted to and if it were done by the commercial space approach. If there were no European "market" for it, then the ESA would not be paying the Russians to do it for them - at twice to three times more than what the Europeans could do it for themselves.

Bob Clark

 

[Loru]

Even though the European Union has greater economic, industrial, and technological might than all those countries or is a close second to the U.S., it still has to ask politely "hat in hand"(*) of those countries to use their launchers if it wants to send a European to orbit.
You would be satisfied with that? ...

...If there were no European "market" for it, then the ESA would not be paying the Russians to do it for them - at twice to three times more than what the Europeans could it for themselves.

Actually if we need 4 - 5 astronauts per year in orbit then in 10 year span it's still less than developing manned working spacecraft and upgrade Ariane 5 to match man-rating standards, building said vehicles, creating infrastructure, building advanced training centers, developing procedures (cost! cost! cost!).

We have market for human spaceflight but not big market. When it expands we'll surelly switch for our own business. For now it's just too small to be economically justified.

I'm perfectly satisfied with outsourcing certain parts of industry to experts even if they're abroad UE. I'm sure parts of computer you're writing from aren't made in US (even if it's US brand) and you don't pursue all "made in USA" products. Just scale is different and in progressing globalisation this trend will only expand.

Local example: While I could learn c++ I stick to meshing and colaborate with Woo482 who codes add-ons )

 

[Urwumpe]

I think they could if they wanted to and if it were done by the commercial space approach. If there were no European "market" for it, then the ESA would not be paying the Russians to do it for them - at twice to three times more than what the Europeans could it for themselves.

We we could do it REALLY for 1/3rd of the price that the Russians take, we would be doing it. But reality is no Kerbal Space Program.

I bet, you couldn't even properly calculate the prices for selling your own self-grown potatoes in your local supermarket. Despite it being a far simpler calculation than spaceflight economics.

 

[PhantomCruiser]

A SQUIRREL!???

Loru runs after it with fork yelling "dinner"!!

The 'cruiser fires up the grill.

Suppose we have this scenario by 2020: all of Russia, China, the U.S., India, and Japan, all have manned spaceflight programs while the European Union does not.

If multiple countries/organizations (SpaxeX, Orbital, et al) have man-rated launchers, where is the value added in developing another man-rated launcher other than pride? You wound't exactly be flying "space-available", but you'd have multiple contractors available to choose from to get your astronauts to space (more launchers=more competition and everybody wants your money).

All the monies set aside to upgrade/up rate the Ariane V would be better spent in continuing (and upgrading) the already awesome Earth monitoring programs.

Sure, launchers are sexy and make lots of smoke and noise; but it's the mundane that really makes the money.