French auditor says Ariane 6 rocket too conventional to compete with SpaceX

2 min read Original article ↗

If everything works, when the Ariane 6 debuts, it will offer comparable service to the Ariane 5 rocket at a 40 to 50 percent reduction of cost. It will not be reusable, of course, and it can never reach the theoretically super-low cost of a fully reusable Falcon 9. But having eight to 10 launches a year, from an economic standpoint, simply does not justify the expense of developing and flying a reusable rocket, European officials said.

What business model?

SpaceX has benefited from “huge financial support” from the US government, the report asserts, but it also praised the company’s “breakthrough model” of reusability. (This “huge financial support” argument is based on NASA funding for the development of the Falcon 9, which was limited, and a European belief that the US military artificially inflates the amount it pays SpaceX for satellite launches. In reality, SpaceX’s Falcon 9 rocket has driven down the price of military launches).

By contrast, France has shouldered half of the €4 billion ($4.5 billion) cost of developing the Ariane 6 launcher, with the remainder coming from other European countries. The new rocket gives greater responsibility to manufacturers, which should allow them to reduce costs. But the declining number of commercial customers, price competition from SpaceX as well as other market entrants including Blue Origin, and lack of technical innovation mean that Ariane 6 risks being competitive in the long term regardless.

The report makes half a dozen recommendations. For example, any new public funds committed to rocket development should be spent on “technical innovation,” rather than supporting existing contractors.

Overall, this is a critical report, but it seems unlikely to effect that much of a change. Previously, European leaders, including French President Emmanuel Macron, have stated that they want the continent to maintain its own independent access to space. So the Ariane 6 is likely to fly for a long time, whether it is commercially viable on its own or, as this report suggests may happen, requires subsidies to break even.

Listing image: ESA - D. Ducros