The maiden flight of the new Ariane 6 heavy launcher is expected on July 9, four years behind the initial schedule and finally putting an end to recurring development delays and industrial setbacks. Meanwhile, due to a lack of available national launchers, Europe had to call on its American competitor SpaceX to launch its scientific and Galileo satellites. Toni Tolker-Nielsen, Director of Space Transportation at ESA, explains the challenges ESA faces for the early operation of Ariane 6 and the strategy in place for the European Space Transportation System planned until the 1990s 2030.
Is Ariane 6 ready for its maiden flight on July 9? In 1996, the first Ariane 5 exploded after 40 seconds. How to reduce the risk of Flight Model 1 or FM1 failure?
Interpreter-Nielsen: We did everything that could be done on the ground to make this inaugural flight a success. I am very excited and 98% confident! Things look good at this point. The thrower is fully qualified on the ground. We are reasonably confident about launching on July 9 as we are fixing minor issues daily. On this demonstration flight, we have thousands of sensors on the rocket to measure performance and validate our models. Then we will need five months before the second flight to analyze all the data from the flight.
Will the next challenge be the increase in industrial power to launch nine Ariane 6 rockets per year?
This is a major challenge since we have already signed 30 contracts, including 18 dedicated to Amazon’s Kuiper constellation. It’s quite unique to have such a large order book for a new rocket. We are already working on a rapid ramp-up after the maiden flight. After resolving any anomalies, the first commercial flight is planned by the end of the year. Then we will have six flights in 2025 and eight flights in 2026. In 2027 there will be 10 flights because we have many payloads waiting. Otherwise, we are aiming for a steady state of nine flights per year in 2028 and 2029.
The challenge of ramping up is already underway in Kourou and throughout the industrial chain in the 13 European countries building Ariane 6. The manufacture of the first batch of 15 launchers is well advanced. We are currently negotiating contracts for Ariane 6 flights 16 to 42. This is the ambitious production plan to which everyone is committed.
With the current business plan of four institutional European launches and five commercial launches, will Ariane 6 still need subsidies of 340 million euros per year until 2031?
The 13 ESA states involved in Ariane 6 have already agreed on funds for an inaugural test flight and 14 operational missions. We are now talking about the operating profit over three years with nine launches per year. We analyze the business plan for batches of FM16 to 42 launchers, reviewing all launch service contracts and costs. We will need between 290 and 340 million euros per year. The final figure will be determined after audit of industrial and supplier costs and revenue from contracts signed by Arianespace. In any case, we will not need more than 340 million euros to achieve the operating balance of the new launcher.
Is this the price to pay for European sovereignty to access space?
Precisely, Ariane 6 is a sovereign launcher for European access to space. Today we are in a delicate situation. This is why, last November, during the European ministerial meeting in Seville, we found a good solution to guarantee the financing of this European space program. Twenty years ago, Ariane 5 was supported by the EGAS program (European Guaranteed Access to Space with $120 to $240 million per year) to provide Europe with a robust launch service.
Is Ariane 6 still on track to achieve a 40% cost reduction compared to Ariane 5?
We are working to achieve the 40% target set in 2014 and we will achieve it. In 2022 and 2023, Europe suffered from high inflation, but this is now slowing. We have asked commercial operator Arianespace, aeronautical company ArianeGroup and suppliers for further cost reductions. It’s in progress, but we also don’t want European industry to lose money.
Is it an illusion to believe that Ariane 6 could still achieve some commercial profits like the previous Ariane 4 and 5?
Ariane 4 was in service from 1988 to 2003 and was an incredibly profitable launch vehicle on the commercial market. The American Space Shuttle was not a commercial competitor. Even when Ariane 5 was able to launch two large satellites, it required some financial support. Independent access to space always represents a significant cost.
If Starship succeeds, will it be a game changer with lower prices per kilo in orbit?
Honestly, I don’t think Starship is going to be a game changer or a real competitor. This enormous launch vehicle is designed to transport humans to the Moon and Mars. Ariane 6 is perfect for this task if you need to launch a four or five ton satellite. Starship will not eradicate Ariane 6 at all. In the distant future, such as in 2040, the situation will be different. We will likely have a space transportation logistics system with recurrent, reusable launchers flying to a hub. In this hub there will be platforms, satellites and spacecraft to other destinations, refueling and servicing capabilities, on-orbit manufacturing, etc. Starship will likely play an important role in transporting heavy cargo to this space logistics hub, such as a container. ship arriving at a terminal. Europe is already working on this vision with the development of space cargo, in-orbit refueling, space docking systems and traffic to the Moon using Ariane 6.
Recently, Elon Musk said that only reusable launchers make sense. With only nine or ten launches per year for Ariane 6, does the ability to be reusable make sense in Europe?
We made the choice not to be reusable with Ariane 6 precisely because of this argument. Our launch requirements are so low that it would not make economic sense. So we don’t really need it at this point. But when we release products frequently in the future, we will need reuse for economic reasons. The second reason in favor of reusability for a European launcher is durability. We must have a circular economy in 10 or 20 years; we must be sustainable. And for this, we are already developing Themis, which is a European demonstrator with a reusable main stage and other reusable technologies such as the Prometheus engine. But already this decade we will have Maia, a launcher developed privately and supported by France, small but reusable. Maia will use the Prometheus liquid propellant rocket engine and build on technology from the Themis reusable stage demonstrator.
What is the importance of mini and micro launchers for Europe?
Compared to 10 years ago, I am extremely surprised to see all these mini and micro launchers exploding all over Europe. They are developed in Spain, France, Norway, Sweden and the United Kingdom. For the first time, new spaceports are being built in Europe. It’s incredible. We want to change the paradigm of the launcher sector in Europe by introducing competition, which is well underway in many start-ups. The European Launcher Challenge, announced last year in Seville, will play an important role in the future of Europe’s access to space by increasing the competitiveness of European launch services. The idea is to upgrade these launchers developed by private companies to heavy launchers. They all have the ambition to do it.
How can we reconcile competition between private launchers in Europe and the “georeturn” policy which has constituted the ESA’s industrial policy for 40 years?
For micro-launchers, it’s not a question of “geofeedback”, we simply choose the best proposals, and we hope that the ESA Member State that matches that offer will fund it. Note that in some cases these start-ups have a wide industrial geographic distribution beyond their national borders. For example, the French private micro-launcher Maia chose 40% of its suppliers outside France. And these suppliers are often the same as those of Ariane 6.
Can Ariane 6 maximize the performance of ESA’s future lunar lander, Argonaut, to contribute to the Artemis program?
We are already working on a more powerful version of Ariane 6, called Block Two. With more powerful boosters, better efficiency of the upper stage thanks to an increase in engine thrust to 200 kN, the gain is two tonnes at LEO. It will enable the deployment of the Kuiper constellation. We will not make a decision on Block Three, a more powerful version called the black upper stage, until the European ministerial meeting in November 2025. As an alternative to increase the performance of Ariane 6, we are studying in-orbit refueling, working on an Argonaut concept with refueling in orbit to increase its performance. So, with two Ariane 6s, we launch a full tank and an Argonaut with its payload and little fuel. Then we will dock at the reservoir to refuel. This scenario gives a big increase in performance for getting cargo to the surface of the Moon. Argonaut is a European lunar lander that will provide Europe with autonomous access to the Moon, allowing us to play a major role on the surface of our natural satellite. In the 2030s, Argonaut, launched on Ariane 6, will deliver up to 2,100 kg of cargo to the surface of the Moon.
If ESA decides to launch crewed European spaceflights, will Ariane 6 be up to the task?
Ariane 6 is also a human-oriented launcher with some modifications. But we can also invest in a safety system for the capsule to make it safe for the crew in the event of a launch failure. We have a contract to find the best compromise between these two options next year. Any decision on whether to pursue these options rests with ESA Member States and, in this case only, ESA would not favor any particular launcher; it would ask industry to submit proposals.
Should the ESA already be thinking about a reusable Ariane 7 for the next decade?
I do not think, at least for the moment, that the ESA plans to choose its own developed launcher. For Ariane 6, we own almost everything, such as the vehicle launch system, manufacturing facilities, launcher definition, launch pad, etc. In the future it will be totally different; the launcher will be developed privately. We’ll just buy services, like the Commercial Orbital Transportation Services program in the United States, NASA does both. We will not develop a European SLS.
For the moment, Ariane 6 is a modular launcher. It is a perfect system because Ariane 62 (530 tonnes with two boosters) replaces the Russian Soyuz, and Ariane 64 (850 tonnes with four boosters) replaces Ariane 5. It therefore covers all our needs. Ariane 6 could be the European workhorse of the next 15 to 30 years.