ESA Completes Important Step Toward Vega Launcher

Sven-Erik writes "ESA is reporting that 'An important step forward has just been made in the development of ESA's Vega launcher. After several months' work at the Guiana Propellant Plant at Europe's Spaceport the inert casting of the main Vega motor has been successfully carried out.' The 30-meter tall Vega launcher will be capable of placing a 1.5 ton payload into polar orbit, and it is scheduled for its first launch in 2006 from Europe's Spaceport in French Guiana, where the Ariane 1 launch facilities are being adapted for its use. It will be a perfect complement to ESA's large Ariane 5 and the medium-classed Soyuz."

Comments

Useless

[Anonymous Coward]

Vega is a LEO (Low Earth Orbit) launcher. There isn't a commercial market for low earth orbit satellites. Commercial satellites want GEO (geosynchronous orbit). The US military is not going to outsource to ESA (they aren't Indian). So I dont see the point of Vega. If I was doing research and needed a LEO for taking pictures or whatever, I would go with the cheaper reliable Chinese launcher.

ESO need to concentrate on improving Ariane 5 reliability and cost.

Or yeah, and ESO needs to build the OWL!! This earth based telescope should be able to image some planets better than space probes that visited them up and saw them up close.

http://www.eso.org/projects/owl/

Re:Useless

[Polkyb]

I give you two quotes from TFA

Costs are being kept to a minimum by using advanced low-cost technologies and by introducing an optimised synergy with existing production facilities used for Ariane launchers.

and

Unlike most small launchers, Vega will be able to place multiple payloads into orbit.

Seems to me like two damn good reasons to me. Another, being; If you were Europe, would you REALLY want the Chinese to launch your Top Secret military satelites...?

multiple payloads.

[lingqi]

Chinese can lauch multiple satellites too, you know. However, once a rocket bites the dust, several satellites go with it instead of one.

While indeed that no *small* chinese launchers can do this, there are really not such a big market for satellites small enough that several fit into a Vega.

Can't argue with the military aspects, though. I don't think EU trusts the US pushing military satelites into space either these days...

Re:multiple payloads.

[Polkyb]

All fair points, but, I suspect the major reason that the EU want their own "fleet" of vehicles is just plainly and simply that they don't want to have to rely on another countries space program

I can understand the mentality, in a way... If we screw up, then WE'VE screwed up.

What's the matter with you people?

[marsu_k]

It seems every time a story gets submitted here about ESA and new technologies they're trying to develop, most of the comments are negative. Let's take a look at the discussion so far: "Useless" by AC (+4, insightful), "Is it any good?" (+3, interesting), "Why not fuel free?" (+3, interesting), "A step backward" (+3, informative)... see a pattern here?

First of all, I really have a hard time believing that your random slashdotter would have sufficient knowledge to make any intelligent observations about the projects involved (posting as AC doesn't certainly help); furthermore, even if they would have (I've seen people claim working for NASA here), ESA press relases are (naturally) very thin on technical details. After all, you wouldn't want the whole world to know all of your research, right?

OK, so there have been failed ESA projects (NASA/Russians have also failed more than once if I'm not mistaken), Beagle 2 being the latest (however it is often forgotten here that Mars Express was the real purpose of the mission). So yeah, they might be wasting my tax Euros. I wish they'd waste more! IMHO more research put into space programs ultimately helps everybody, it certainly isn't "useless".

Re:Is it any good?

[mj_1903]

As all its stages are solid fuel (except the final stage), Vega doesn't need the hazards of complex machinery, fuelling, insulation and other things that can possibly make it fail or delay a launch.

What I find interesting is that it is such a small vehicle. I imagine its going to push some g's on launch because its thrust to weight ratio is quite high. I haven't seen any numbers to support this theory though.

Re:A step backward

[ttsalo]

here are a few launch prices: ... Falcon I ... Falcon V ...

Those Falcon launchers sound impressive, but are completely unproven and it remains to be seen how they perform in reality and what the real cost is. Saying that something is "a step backward" from stuff that doesn't exist doesn't make much sense.

On the other hand, vega is a decent ICBM with MIRV capability.

Conspiracy theory time! I wonder what the throw weight is, say, halfway around the globe?

--

Re:Polar orbit?

[Sven-Erik]

Scientific satellites very often use polar orbits since it allows them to cover the whole of the earth surface.

And if the US military hadn't been involved with NASA and space development throughout its history, I doubt there would be much, if any, NASA.