Slashdot Mirror
Airbus Attacked By French Lawmaker For Talking To SpaceX
schwit1 (797399) writes A French lawmaker lashed out at Airbus for daring to consider SpaceX as a possible launch option for a European communications satellite. "The senator, Alain Gournac, who is a veteran member of the French Parliamentary Space Group, said he had written French Economy and Industry Minister Emmanuel Macron to protest Airbus' negotiations with Hawthorne, California-based Space Exploration Technologies Corp. for a late 2016 launch instead of contracting for a launch on a European Ariane 5 rocket. "The negotiations are all the more unacceptable given that, at the insistence of France, Europe has decided to adopt a policy of 'European preference' for its government launches," Gournac said. "This is called playing against your team, and it smacks of a provocation. It's an incredible situation that might lead customers to think we no longer have faith in Ariane 5 — and tomorrow, Ariane 6."
French Lawmakers have bigger balls than american lawmakers who encourage companies to off shore jobs
i thought once I was found, but it was only a dream.
We already know that whenever there is a headline that contains "French Lawmaker" it is going to be an idiotic remark that is inconsequential to anything. We might as well just ignore whatever French Lawmakers say.
while(1) attack(People.Sandy);
Maybe we can follow this up with another nice story about H1Bs that will draw 250 responses, 90 plus percent on the protectionist side.
Airbus is a big company that has to play out in the big world. Perhaps it's not that they have lost faith in Ariane, but that the SpaceX cost is lower by a substantial margin.
If they had to run a company they'd run it into the ground instead of towards success. That's why they're politicians. Airbus, not the most efficient of global corporations, can remain a profitable concern only by making rational commercial decisions. If that means negotiating with a non-European supplier then the good French senator Alain Gournac ought to find out why Ariane 5 (or 6) were deficient and figure out how to make them competitive. But that would require the Monsieur Gournac to pull his thumb outta his ass and do some real work. Non, pas acceptable!
The summary neglects to mention that Airbus is also the prime contractor on the sameself Ariane 5 they're snubbing.
If the one in your driveway wont run you'll have to. Or stay home.
surrenders
Has to be said twice.
All governments prop up their launch industries. Yes, this includes the US government supporting SpaceX: they wouldn't have made it through their early difficulties without NASA support. Elon Musk readily acknowledges this, its more his libertarian fanboys wanting to hold up as some paragon of the all-conquering private sector.
That said, Ariane 5 is now looking a bit subsidy heavy, despite it being a very commercially successful launcher for years. This is why they are trying to make Ariane 6 much cheaper. If this doesn't work, or rather can't be made to work without an unacceptable subsidy, ESA really needs to look towards Skylon.
... he probably also hopes that other countries around the world will consider buying and using products and services that originate in the EU. Just so long as people in the EU can't shop around. Like he hopes others will do, and wind up spending money in France. I'm trying to think of a better word than "hypocrisy." How do you say "Greenpeace" in French?
Don't disappoint your bird dog. Go to the range.
Did it seriously only take 4 posts to get to Godwin's law?
"Gonna play the sue me, sue you... blues!"
It's strange that the US pretends that space expeditions are a private enterprise and they expect everyone else to do the same. It's a French national/European project as is the Arianne programme. Of course they're going to use their own programme to pay their own people with money that came from their own tax-payers. That's what democratically elected governments are supposed to do, not implement stuff like NAFTA, TPP, etc. to impoverish your own people for personal financial gain and funding for party political campaigns.
apparently it is okay now to just exclude france from any contract openly.
Thanks france.
I've decided to stop wasting my time responding to AC trolls/sockpuppets... so if you want a response from me... login.
It can't be any more humiliating than your quick surrender to Germany.
I love Americans. So quick to call out the French for surrendering when they've never faced the prospect of enemy soldiers on their home soil. You know, the US might actually benefit from an invasion or two; perhaps they'd be less quick to start wars in other countries if the citizenry had lived through one themselves within living memory.
they've never faced the prospect of enemy soldiers on their home soil.
Americans have had enemy soldiers on their home soil twice. The first time, they overthrew their king. The second time, the north conquered the south.
-jcr
The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."
Uh, give another go at history. The British army was the homeland army in the US and the actual resident armed force. Yours was a secession war that effectively created your national identity (or officialized it, depends on the point of view). The only real foreign attack you had on your soil was Pearl Harbor, and that wasn't an invasion.
Hmm.... Ariane has 77 successful launches vs 0 for Falcon.
Even this rah rah go American American is not convinced.
I am very small, utmostly microscopic.
Yea 'Merica!
Why is Snark Required?
Europe was surprised when the Air Force tanker contract went to Airbus. When the US flip-flopped, neither the EU nor Airbus bothered complaining.
Uh, give another go at history. The British army was the homeland army in the US and the actual resident armed force. Yours was a secession war that effectively created your national identity (or officialized it, depends on the point of view). The only real foreign attack you had on your soil was Pearl Harbor, and that wasn't an invasion.
There was this war in 1812 when the British and a bunch of natives from Canada burned down the White house. During the war the US did have enemy soldiers on US soil. But that war ended in a stalemate. One of the things that did happen, though, is that the US was discouraged from further attacks on Canada and it paved the way for Canada to become an independent nation while keeping British ties.
Except that Airbus is not government owned and it's no more subsidized than any other aerospace firm.
It would be more accurate to say that a French politician is complaining that the French subsidiary of a Dutch multinational corporation is choosing an American launch vehicle instead of one offered by the German subsidiary of that very same Dutch multinational corporation.
Some of what I say is fact, some is conjecture, the rest I'm just blowing out my ass...you guess.
There's always the War of 1812 and the Burning of Washington..
-R C
"'Tis great confidence in a friend to tell him your faults, greater to tell him his." --Poor Richard's Almanac
When did America ever overthrow a King? And which nations King?
Seems so many Americans think they had a successful revolt where they marched on London, burned Parliament and hung the King when in reality they seceded from the British Empire (or whatever it was officially called) with lots of French help and even then they couldn't even beat the local French, who also helped burn down the White House a few decades longer.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inverted_totalitarianism
Many of us Americans were disappointed we couldn't arrange for the British to help us commemorate the 200 year anniversary by burning Washington D.C. - this time with the politicians and bureaucrats still inside!
Next year, if spacex continues their launch increase, they will be the leaders. And considering that spacex will be able to cut their prices in half while doubling number of launches, it appears that nobody will catch up for some time.
I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
Uh, I might not recall well,but didn't the US declare that war?
That is because the Boeing deal was better within the definition of the contract.
I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
This has nothing to do with the Falcon Heavy. Airbus wants to be the primary payload on the smaller, cheaper Falcon 9, rather than a secondary payload on an Ariane 5 ECA. Launching as the secondary on an A5 would be cheaper, as the primary would carry the bulk of the launch costs, but there are advantages of being the primary payload.
Ariane 5 has 73 successful out of 77. F9 is 13 out of 13. By end of next year, spacex is expected to be over 30 launches.
I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
On the other hand, all the people involved in both the revolutionary war and the war of 1812 are long dead, and Americans have a well deserved reputation for short historical memories. For over 200 years the American population has pretty much taken for granted that war is something fought elsewhere and have lived with no serious threat, much less visible scars of, local attacks. Look how freaked out the US got over 9/11. Three buildings, ~4000 people, the US population went crazy. Go to France, Germany, England, pretty much anywhere in Europe and you will find echos of much larger devastation.
Why does this matter? The people in the US have a well deserved reputation for being rather loud mouthed about how tough they would be if they were in other people`s shoes. The horrors of actual local war are just too abstract, too fictional, too "other". Chances are in a real situation like what France faced, overwhelming force completely crushing your military, leveling your cities, and then having to choose between slaughter and fighting something they can not win,... while the idea of fighting to the end might seem romantic, it gets a lot less so when you are actually living with the consequences AND it is happening to your own town.
So, where the Vichy government dropped trou, we rude Americans kicked the invaders in the nuts and sent them packing.
...which would not have been possible if the Red Army had not first exahausted Germany military force on the east front. The real defeater of Nazi Germany was USSR.
Well I don't know about the short historical memory. We are all aware of Europeans cutting each others throats for the past millennium.
Three times actually
Japan invaded the Aleutian islands in WWII.
Four if you count the problem with Pancho Villa.
Yeah, got to just love the spell checkers on android.
That IS pretty damn funny.
I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
Even more if you consider the Indians, Mexicans, Spanish and British to be invaders of the land that God gave to the Americans (manifest destiny and such). There's also the little wars like the pig war where strictly speaking the British partially occupied an American Island and the Union Jack still flies alongside the Stars and Stripes.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inverted_totalitarianism
And where did Lafayette come from, and on who's side did he fight?
I fail to see Gilbert du Motier listed as a member of the Vichy Regime government.
Chas - The one, the only.
THANK GOD!!!
Doesn't much matter.
Only an idiot is going to try to land an occupying force in something as large as the United States, where any given citizen can be more heavily armed than an entire company of Infantry.
Chas - The one, the only.
THANK GOD!!!
Did not US surrenders in Vietnam? Or retreat that is the same...
He can also punish the company with lose of subsidies, contracts, etc.
And Boeing has recommended Ariane at times.
I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
You are confusing Airbus with Airbus Defence and Space. Airbus is not involved at all in SpaceX decision.
You are correct, my mistake.
Airbus Group is not a Dutch multinational. It is simply registered in Netherlands for corporate tax-benefits.
Sorry, but regardless of the reason for being registered in the Netherlands it still makes it a Dutch multinational corporation. But I'll compromise and call it a Dutch registered, French headquartered multinational corporation.
Airbus Defence and Space is not a German subsidiary. It consists of independent companies from France, Germany, UK and other EU mignon-states. These companies like to pretend on paper they are unified. France has the largest share of ADS, then Germany, then UK.
Yeah, no. According to ADS's own website those companies were consolidated into ADS as a German based division (i.e. subsidiary) of AG.
And regardless of who owns the shares, government or otherwise, AG is still a publicly traded company that owns ADS.
So I will amend my original post to say that a French politician is complaining that the German division [wikipedia.org] of a Dutch registered, French headquartered multinational corporation [wikipedia.org] is choosing an American launch vehicle instead of one offered by the very same German division of that very same Dutch registered, French headquartered multinational corporation.
Feel better.
Some of what I say is fact, some is conjecture, the rest I'm just blowing out my ass...you guess.
I did it as Germany in Hearts of Iron 3. It wasn't as bad as it sounds.
"Lack of speed can be overcome. In the worst case by patience." --Znork
That's some nice revisionism you have going on there. The real defeater of Nazi Germany was Nazi Germany herself. There are many significant strategic and tactical blunders that were made by Germany which enabled the Soviets and others to capitalize. Not the least of which is the numerous never retreat or surrender orders that resulted in armies ending up encircled and lost order which were typically opposed by most of the German command structure. Writing off what amounts to basically 16-20 divisions of men (160,000-200,000) is nothing to sneeze at. Even more damning is that slightly better supply or just a 4th German division to compliment the Afrikacorps would have turned likely turned N.Africa into an Axis victory which is not something to be triffled with. That would have permitted a reallocation of supply, material, and manpower to other fronts being able to fortify the coast of France as well as reinforce the eastern front and Morocco to repel Torch.
"Lack of speed can be overcome. In the worst case by patience." --Znork
That's some nice revisionism you have going on there.
Revisionism? That would probably sound like an insult to russian people. USSR had by far the highest number of deaths during WWII. 20 millions people died in USSR during the war.
And your point is what, precisely? Stalingrad was responsible for over a million soldier deaths between the Axis and Soviets and yet that battle ended up being nothing more than a dick waving contest between Stalin and Hitler. The real strategic importance of that city was no where close to the material and manpower Germany ended up dedicating to trying to take it. Look all across Germany's eastern front and you'll find similar strategic blunders which in almost every case was due to some order from Hitler. many of these blunders were directly responsible for significant losses of German forces. Would the Soviets have beaten the Germans without those blunders? Maybe or maybe not but the allies would have been able to easily reach Berlin before the Soviets were even close to it.
Also, that 20,000,000 people dying in the USSR was only 13 million soldiers at best and 9 million soldiers at worst. The remainder of the figure was civilian deaths or deaths that could be attributable to war crimes.
"Lack of speed can be overcome. In the worst case by patience." --Znork
You keep talking about the work. I'm talking about the politics and the accounting. We're both right.
Some of what I say is fact, some is conjecture, the rest I'm just blowing out my ass...you guess.