The maiden flight of the new heavy-lift Ariane 6 rocket is scheduled for July 9, four years later than originally planned. This will finally put an end to the recurring development delays and industrial setbacks. With no launch vehicles of its own, Europe will have to rely on US competitor SpaceX to launch its science and Galileo satellites. Toni Tolker-Nielsen, ESA’s Director of Space Transport, explains the challenges ESA faces in the early commissioning of Ariane 6 and the strategy for the European space transport system, which is planned to run until the 2030s.
Is the Ariane 6 ready for its maiden flight on July 9? In 1996, the first Ariane 5 exploded after 40 seconds. How do you reduce the risk of failure for flight model 1 or FM1?
Tolker-Nielsen: We have done everything we can on the ground to make sure this maiden flight is a success. I am pretty excited and 98% confident! Things are looking good right now. The launch vehicle is fully qualified on the ground. We are pretty confident that we can launch on July 9th as we are solving minor issues on a daily basis. On this demonstration flight we have thousands of sensors on the rocket to measure performance and validate our models. Then we need five months until the second flight to analyze all the flight data.
Will the next challenge be to increase industrial capacity to launch nine Ariane 6 rockets per year?
This is a big challenge considering that we have already signed 30 contracts, 18 of which are dedicated to Amazon’s Kuiper constellation. It is quite unique to have such a backlog for a new rocket. We are already working on a rapid ramp-up after the maiden flight. After fixing the possible anomalies, the first commercial flight is planned for the end of the year. Then we will have six flights in 2025 and eight flights in 2026. In 2027 it will be 10 flights because numerous payloads are waiting for us. Otherwise, we are aiming for a steady state of nine flights per year in 2028 and 2029.
The challenges of ramping up production are already underway in Kourou and throughout the production chain of the 13 European countries building Ariane 6. Manufacturing of the first batch of 15 launchers is well underway. We are currently negotiating contracts for Ariane 6 flights 16 to 42. This is the ambitious production plan to which everyone is committed.
Despite the current business plan, which includes four institutional European launches and five commercial launches, does Ariane 6 still require annual subsidies of €340 million ($365 million) until 2031?
The 13 ESA countries involved in Ariane 6 have already agreed on funding for a first test flight and 14 operational missions. We are now discussing the operational revenues for three years with nine launches per year. We are analysing the business plan for the FM16 to 42 launcher batches, looking at all the contracts and launch services costs. We will need between €290 and €340 million per year. The final figure will be determined after examining the industrial and supplier costs and the revenues from the contracts signed by Arianespace. In any case, we will not need more than €340 million to reach the operational balance of the new launcher.
Is this the price for European sovereignty, access to space?
Exactly, Ariane 6 is a sovereign launcher for European access to space. Today we are in a delicate situation. That is why last November, at the European ministerial meeting in Seville, we found a good solution to ensure the financing of this European space programme. Twenty years ago, Ariane 5 was supported by the EGAS programme (European Guaranteed Access to Space with support of 120 to 240 million US dollars per year) to provide Europe with a robust launch service.
Is the Ariane 6 still in the race to achieve a 40% cost reduction compared to the Ariane 5?
We are working to reach the 40% target set in 2014 and we will do it. In 2022 and 2023, Europe suffered from high inflation, but that is now easing. We have asked the commercial operator Arianespace, the aerospace company ArianeGroup and suppliers to further reduce costs. This is underway, but we also do not want European industry to lose money.
Is it an illusion to believe that the Ariane 6 could still generate commercial profits like its predecessors Ariane 4 and 5?
Ariane 4 operated from 1988 to 2003 and was an incredibly profitable launch vehicle as it was the only one on the commercial market. The US Space Shuttle was no commercial competitor. Even when Ariane 5 was able to launch two large satellites, it still required some financial support. Independent access to space always represents a significant cost factor.
If Starship is successful, will it be a game-changer and lead to falling prices per kilo in orbit?
Frankly, I don’t think Starship will change the game or represent real competition. This huge launch vehicle is designed to fly humans to the Moon and Mars. Ariane 6 is perfect for this task when you need to launch a four or five ton satellite. Starship will by no means replace Ariane 6. In the distant future, around 2040, the situation will be different. We will probably have a space transportation logistics system with recurrent and reusable launch vehicles flying to a hub. In this hub there will be platforms, satellites and spacecraft flying to other destinations, refueling and maintenance capabilities, in-orbit manufacturing, etc. Starship will probably play a big role in transporting heavy cargo to this space logistics hub, just like a container ship gets to a terminal. Europe is already working on this vision, developing space cargo, in-orbit refueling, in-space docking systems and transport to the Moon with Ariane 6.
Elon Musk has been repeatedly claiming recently that only reusable launch vehicles make sense. Given that Ariane 6 only carries out nine to ten launches per year, the question arises whether the ability to reuse makes sense in Europe.
This is precisely why we decided not to rely on reusability for Ariane 6. Our launch needs are so small that it wouldn’t make economic sense. So we don’t really need it right now. But if we launch frequently in the future, we will need reusability for economic reasons. The second reason for reusability of a European launcher is sustainability. We need to have a circular economy in 10 or 20 years; we need to be sustainable. And for that we are already developing Themis, a European demonstrator with a reusable main stage and other reusable technologies like the Prometheus engine. But already in this decade we will have Maia, a launcher privately developed and supported by France that is small but reusable. Maia will use the Prometheus liquid-propellant rocket engine and will be based on the technology of the Themis reusable stage demonstrator.
What significance do mini and micro launch vehicles have for Europe?
Compared to ten years ago, I am extremely surprised to see so many mini and micro launchers booming across Europe. They are being developed in Spain, France, Norway, Sweden and the UK. For the first time, new spaceports are being built in Europe. This is incredible. We want to change the paradigm in the launcher sector in Europe by introducing a competition that is already well underway in numerous start-ups. The European Launcher Challenge, announced last year in Seville, will play an important role in shaping the future of European access to space by increasing the competitiveness of European launch services. The idea is to let these privately developed launchers grow into heavy launchers. They all have the ambition to achieve this.
How can competition between private launchers in Europe be reconciled with the ‘Georeturn’ policy that has been ESA’s industrial policy for 40 years?
With micro-launchers, it’s not about “georeturn”, we simply select the best proposals and hope that the corresponding ESA member state will fund them. Note that in some cases these start-ups have a large geographical industrial spread beyond their national borders. For example, the Maia micro-launcher, privately developed in France, 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 Argonaut lunar module 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 and better upper stage performance by increasing engine thrust to 200 kN, the gain is two tonnes for LEO. This will enable the deployment of the Kuiper constellation. On Block Three, a more powerful version called the black upper stage, we will not take a decision until the European ministerial meeting in November 2025. As an alternative to increasing Ariane 6’s performance, we are studying in-orbit refuelling and are working on an Argonaut concept with in-orbit refuelling to increase performance. So with two Ariane 6s, we will launch a full tank and an Argonaut with its payload and little fuel. Then we will dock with the tank for refuelling. This scenario offers a big increase in performance to put cargo on the lunar surface. Argonaut is a European lunar lander that will give Europe autonomous access to the Moon and allow us to play an important role on the surface of our natural satellite. Launched on board an Ariane 6 in the 2030s, Argonaut is expected to bring up to 2,100 kg of cargo to the lunar surface.
If ESA decides to launch European manned space flights, is Ariane 6 up to the task?
Ariane 6 can be used as a launch vehicle for manned missions 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. The decision whether to pursue these options will then be up to ESA Member States and in this case ESA would not favour a particular launch vehicle; it would invite industry to submit proposals.
Should ESA already be thinking about a reusable Ariane 7 for the next decade?
I don’t think, at least for now, that ESA plans to opt for a self-developed launcher. With Ariane 6, we own almost everything, like the launcher system, the manufacturing facilities, the launcher definition, the launch pad, etc. In the future, it will be very different; the launcher will be developed privately. We will only buy services, like the Commercial Orbital Transportation Services program in the US, which NASA offers both. We will not develop a European SLS.
Currently, 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 covers all our needs. Ariane 6 could be the European workhorse for the next 15 to 30 years.