This Clip is from the Singapore Satellite Forum 2013. Richard Bowles, Director of Ariane Aerospace is highly skeptical that SpaceX is achieving their goals.
It is not obsolete. It is not needed apart from a few satellites launches per year. SpaceX is competing in an empty industry basically. Apart from a few wanna-be hype projects like spin launch, a few small companies like Virgin Galactic, underpaid NASA without large contacts and destroyed Russian space industries there's really nothing to compete with. And yet SpaceX is unsustainable, doesn't meet its own roadmaps and lives solely of taxpayers money
@indietonne not soon enough.. Ariane hasn't been the same since all the German scientists from Peenemunde retired. And Ariane is very proud of their german roots, they have portraits of all the former 'nazi' scientists on display along the Seine in Vernon where Arianespace is located.
Personally I think the telling point is "we would then have to follow". This was June 2013 SpaceX wouldn't land a booster or another 2 and a half years. So maybe you can reasonably take a view that it's too hard to be worth while. But what he's really saying is they would rather just keep doing what they are doing, they don't want the industry to advance and they don't want to put in the effort to lead that advance.
@@GordonWrigley You are 100% right. The industry does not want launch cost to go down, this is how a business man thinks. Not how a visionary thinks. I guarantee you, the Ariene guy will NOT have a statue of him anywhere, ever. Elon on the other hand is going to be in bronze one day and our kids' kids will learn about him in history class. Like we learned about Eli Whitney, Nicola Tesla, Wernher von Braun .. people that changed the world forever.
@@yevgeny79 that seems likely, it's a shame he's suck a dick. Maybe we can make statues of Gwynne instead. Thinking about it I actually don't know much about what she's like as a person cause she's too busy getting work done to run her mouth on social media.
@@yevgeny79couldnt agree more Elon is truely a philanthropist. All he thinks about, ever, is how long can the human race continue and how can HE make that time longer. Then throws all his money and a substantial amount of his time at making it happen
While he was obviously wrong about the reusability part, the question was mostly about how they would compete with SpaceX selling launches at $15M. Falcon 9 is still at about $60-65M per launch in 2024, and back in 2013 when this video was recorded, the launch price was around $50M. It was pretty accurate to say the $15M claim was a dream because it still costs 4 times that, even though it's generally the cheapest launch option.
@@agerrgerra1361spacex said they see launches in the future will cost 7 million dollars. So they are most likely not talking about falcon 9. They are most likely talking about starship.
@@agerrgerra1361 he was right about pretty much everything, including facts stated at the end of the video - that Ariane would react by developing similar technology WHEN it will become more than a dream, because SpaceX is amazing, but not supermen. I guess that young fans (I was one of them) want them to be superheroes. But then the reality kicks in. But just as Ariane director said - we need to dream!
This is why you need people to dream in your industry. The big fat mainstays won't iterate unless they HAVE to. They don't dream of anything but money, so you have to threaten their money to get larger scale progress.
And a decade later they've only admitted that partial reusability might actually be a Good Idea, not that they'll ever realize it for themselves until sometime in the 2030s. When Falcon 9 has retired and SpaceX is likely trialing a successor to Starship, ArianeSpace will be like "look at us, we're so innovative, we finally figured out partial reusability!"
Large companies have too much to loose if they take risks and so they don't. Small companies have nothing to gain _unless_ they take risks so they do. (And most small companies fail, but are small enough that not a lot is lost in the process.)
@@benjaminshropshire2900 right that is my point. You need people who big guys will call crazy and either they are or they are right and upend everything. All space faring companies have lost countless millions on SpaceX's successes
@@Acklon you're not wrong, but that's not my point; the reason big companies don't innovate isn't because they are stupid, incompetent or lack motivation or vision. Rather it's because most innovations are doomed to be failures from the start and the only companies that can bet their existence on something like that are the ones that are doomed if they _don't_ take extreme risks.
@@benjaminshropshire2900 I disagree. There are plenty of rich CEO who genuinely believe that it is a waste to spend money on something that doesnt DEFINITELY make them more money. Rarely/never do they make decisions because it will improve something and not directly increase their profit margin
SpaceX is selling a dream, and you're stuck in a nightmare. Don't forget that the head of Russian Space Agency laughed that NASA was trying to launch astronauts with a trampoline to space when it was announced that SpaceX was chosen to send astronauts to the ISS.
@@totetsu3752it was a trampoline. On April 2014, Dimitry Rogozin, who at the time was Russia's deputy prime minister, made the trampoline comment on Twitter.
It was about sanctions in 2014, not about spacex. "How are they gonna launch astronauts into space if they sanction the only one avaliable crewed launch provider, with trampoline?"
It's not how it happened. The russians were threatening to stop cooperating with the US when saying that. At that time, NASA was forced to use the Soyuz to send astronauts to the ISS since the space shuttle was retired and Crew Dragon was still not ready. Rogozyn wasn't even talking about Space X.
@@user-ew8dw5yy5x The broomstick comment was after the 2022 Russia-Ukraine war started. The Biden administration started directing NASA to reduce its co-operation with Roscosmos, and Rogozin said, if they don't fly on Soyuz what are they going to fly on, broomsticks?
7 years later they just start to "draw" a possible rocket who can compete with Falcon9, which may take 10 years more, when actually now they have to compete with Starship which they are 20 years behind. Europe is so out from the space career.
Europe might be far behind when it comes to rockets, but on space in general, they are a key player in nearly every other space project in terms of instruments, science or control.
I would even argue that, regarding rockets, Europe is on a good track with the two companies "Isar Aerospace" and "Rocket Factory Augsburg". For sure it's no comparison with SpaceX (like it is nowhere on earth), but they do quite a good job. Everyday Astronaut visited them and has a video on his channel.
I agree with the first part. But about the second part: SpaceX is capable of bringing stuff into orbit, but still decades away from bringing stuff to others planets, what NASA & ESA and Roscosmos already did decades ago. And the new Arianne as actually a damn good rocket, especially when it comes to mass to payload ratio. Also: Never underestimate the Europeans. They may have slept since the end of the cold war, but with Russia's latest actions and a possible anti-European Trump on the horizon, a lot of things already changed there and we will see a lot more changes in next 10 to 20 years.
@@galileo3431 Im also from Germany and I hope they will succeed but I think they are just not ambitious enough. With a startup nowadays you should at least aim for a partly reusable vehicle imho. Stoke Space tries to go full reuse with it's first rocket.
"First they ignore you. Then they laugh at you. Then they attack you. Then you win." Seems like every industry these days. I think SpaceX got to phase 4 already.
classic example of an older executive letting their experience imbue them with false confidence and dismiss what is actually possible, sometimes the biggest disruptions in an industry happen because the company doing the disrupting was never smothered in its crib by "No" men like this
Just like Sears after having the opportunity of being like Amazon or Yahoo refusing to buy google and TH-cam. Those were bad decisions taken by older executives with fake confidence
The world is full of small-thinkers. This reminds me of "There is no reason anyone would want a computer in their home." - CEO of Digital Equipment Corp.
I think it was the head of IBM that said their market research told them that the worldwide demand for a desktop computer was only a few thousand per year 😂
And a decade later SpaceX is developing the Starship, a fully reusable rocket, which is also the largest rocket ever built, and Ariane has yet to develop a rocket to compete with Falcon-9.
by 2013 they should have known better.. Falcon 9 was amazingly successful from the beginning.. Arianne was the leader, but they were truly caught unprepared.. they may never recover from this guy's incompetence.
Ariane was always more a geostationary orbit launch system than anything else, Falcon9 is 67 mln$ per launch now, roscosmos Soyuz was around 35-48mln$ per launch.
Same thing legacy automakers said about Tesla just around a decade ago. Yet here we are with Tesla still proving them wrong. I’m sure all competitors of every one of Elon’s ventures will make the same mistaken claims.
Everyone here is focusing on the SpaceX vs Ariane aspect here. Very interesting, but the host actually made an even better prediction. If launch cost really goes down significantly, all these old requirements suddenly become obsolete. 5m fairing, larger satellites, dual launch capability, etc, etc. Even those whole focus on GEO. Not only did the cheaper launch cost outflank Ariane. It put the customers of Ariane, which were optimized for big expensive launchers, in big trouble as well. Who cares about big expensive communication satellites in GEO when you can have a large constellation of cheap and small satellites in LEO? The host didn't know the exact outcome, but he did correctly predict that the industry would have to rethink its approach. SpaceX really killed the business model of both the legacy launchers, and their legacy customers. Super interesting to see the different perspectives on the future right as we were on the cusp of the revolution.
Not to mention that with low cost/kg you no longer HAVE to shave every gram off your sat. THAT is the game changer Starship brings to this equation. Its not even close.
@@calhil Same thing killed Japan in the 1990s. They dominated computers in the 80s, but when the switch from analogue to digital kicked off, they were caught on the backstep and are still struggling for relevance.
Different people have different definitions for "a dream". For SpaceX it's a goal they'll work their asses off to achieve. For Ariane it's something impossible until someone else does it. Physics is the only true limit
Yeah, I've learned not to jump to conclusions and say it is impossible. Facial recognition, LiDAR on iPhones, and ChatGPT services are possible. Stealth aircraft and reusable rockets are possible. Maybe anti-gravity propulsion is around the corner since we study quantum mechanics, electromagnetism, nuclear mechanics, and string theory.
@@macdieter23558Ironically NASA already built the prototype for propulsively landed tickets 40 years prior. Kind of arrogant they think it's impossible
And as of 2024 Falcon 9 has had more successful consecutive launches and more landings than the entirety of the Arianne family of launchers has had launches in its history An streak of 334 successful consecutive launches in ~6.5 years and 329 landings (96,8% success rate) versus 260 launches in 45 years, of which 12 failed (4,6% failure rate/95,4% success rate) if anyone was wondering
Kinda skewed to compare total launches to total landings and judge success off that. Some missions intentionally expended the rocket because they needed the additional performance, so those missions should be entirely excluded from the denominator.
@@Wirmish That's not necessary true. Almost every other launches are non reusable except Falcon 9/heavy. The more reuse the more you know that it works. New rocket may have some hidden problems that will only show up in real launch.
@@Wirmish New isn't always better because old is proven and new is not. Would you get on a plane that has flown a hundred times or would you get on a plane that just got out of the factory and is about to fly for for its first time?
@@luigeribeiro Nah likely about 15 million, maybe less. SpaceX can just charge way more to customers as there is no competition. Why would they only charge 15 million when just as many people are willing to pay 67 million? Now with those profits they're building Starship, which will make basically every other rocket obsolete from an economic standpoint.
@@Astra2 The U$ 7 million price was never achieved, that is the dream the video talk about, but you are a fanboy and that's why you prefer to deflect from the fact mentioned.
The staggering ineptitude of these managerial dinosaurs with no vision is why space launch never advanced despite half a century of development. Some still don't get it, Thunderf00t for example mocks Space X even now despite a decade of evidence that we can contrast with this video from just 11 years ago.
The worst thing about Thunderf00t is that he makes some very interesting videos that explain concepts very well to the layman audience but if it is someone who triggers him...he looked miserable when the video feed cut back in and showed Starship performing the soft touchdown.
These are the extremely powerful, highly privileged people who use their positions in life to influence how everyone else thinks and gets to experience life. We have all known people like this in our own lives, the teacher, who crushes a child's dream, the boss who contributes nothing but stress, misery and fear! This person with his limited vision, his evasiveness, his near contempt and others like him, are the ones that hold us back! They probably spend as much energy on suppressing advancement as they do holding onto power. Had people like this had the foresight and power, then they would have tried to stop SpaceX from getting anywhere ... and of course, that is exactly what they did try to do when contracts were being awarded and why there is still contempt towards this incredible organisation to this day!
Blue Origin is hyped to give the industry a chance to hide from their shame. In reality the NG is way smaller, has less reusability and has not shown any successful flight.
Arianespace is good adviced to close their business NOW, cancel all contracts, pay all open bills and send a farewell package to all employees. Tomorrow the money is gone! They are selling typewriters in our modern world!
This reminds me of that epic quote from Steve Ballmer: "HOHOHO Five hundred dollars? Fully subsidized? With a plan? Hohohoho, And it doesn't appeal to business customers because it doesn't have a keyboard!"
To be fair, these comments were not silly AT THE TIME. They were absolutely typical of the industry. The miracle is that ANY company came along with a different mindset.
He said it himself, "We would have to follow". That's the difference between a company like Arianne and SpaceX. SpaceX is a leader. Arianne is a follower. What else do you need to know?
"Whatever they can do, we can do".... yeah, we just saw your 20 year old plan for Arianne 6 come to life, at this pace it will be 2125 before they have something that competes. The only thing ESA has going is their launch site.
ESA is our equivalent of ULA. A day late and a dollar short. I remember this forum, and how everyone else laughed at SpaceX for trying to recover and reuse their 1st stage. They kept failing, then almost managed it, then they managed to recover one and the world took notice. Now, it's routine; the only time these launches make the news is when they fail to recover the 1st stage. And SpaceX has had 70 launches so far this year... that is over 2 per week on average! Some launch cadence... I still remember the live broadcast of the inaugural Falcon Heavy launch. Seeing those two boosters land almost in perfect sync, that was something out of a bloody Science Fiction movie. The last time we could imagine seeing something like this was back in the 70s.
@@kaasmeester5903 I am still amazed nobody has tried to make a serious claim it was CGI. I'm sure some think that, FFS I believe in them and it looked liked CGI to me! EDIT: There was a comparison of a SpaceX barge landing synced with a 1950s or so Russian animation of an offshore rocket landing, Basically the same thing.
@@kaasmeester5903 - Yes but, it still takes SpaceX months to get the reused rocket ready to fly again and that has pushed up their costs to about the same as other less complicated rockets. You also have to 'oversize' the 1st stage to save enough fuel to fire up and control the landing and that pushes up the costs of launch as well. The intense heat and vibration causes stress and metal fatigue that needs to be carefully inspected and repaired as necessary to make it safe to relaunch. Not as simple as reusing an airplane.
Ariane launch cost: The current Ariane 5 costs 150-170 million euros to build and launch. Ariane 6’s cost goal is 90 million euros, or $100.3 million at current exchange rates. It would be sold for $120 million per launch, with two satellite customers per launch of the heavier Ariane 64 version Falcon 9 launch cost: The cost of launch for a Falcon 9 has been $62 million historically, but it can carry considerably larger payloads up to 50,000 pounds. Per pound launch costs have been as low as $1,200. SpaceX increased the cost of a launch to $67 million in 2022, citing rising material costs and inflation. How is that for reduced cost recuction? Does the price tell you anything? :) I'd be quite happy if my rocket compared to another rocket reduced about $100.000.000 per launch :) OK? Kej :)
@@dociekania SpaceX offer the cheapest rocket on the market. Why should they lower their price lower? They need $$$$$$$$ for the Super Heavy / Starship and for the Starlink constellation.
ESA and Ariane Space is technological at least 10 years behind SpaceX ... they still try to improve their horse saddles, while someone has introduced the automobile and soon nobody will use horses anymore
The first google result for "ariane space" in 2024: Arianespace is the world's leading satellite launch company, operating a full family of launchers: Ariane 5, Soyuz and Vega
To be fair, the iPhone was ok but not breaking barriers when it first came out. The app store was small and kept out many developers. Battery life was iffy. And the price was way higher as with all Apple products. Without the die hard Apple cultists buying it up, the phone may have failed even with its innovations. Blackberry was still beating them easily. It wasn't until the 4th version and social media taking off that it really took off. Fortunately, RIM didn't bother to innovate themselves and rested on their laurels. Meanwhile Android was destroying everyone and continues to do so today. Ariane is like RIM. They're playing catch up and not doing any innovating. They're relying on old ways and their connections within the industry to stay afloat. Like RIM, it will be hard to justify their higher costs and lower capabilities to dependable clients vs what SpaceX can offer.
@@randallsanchez3161 you sound like somebody that didn’t live at that time and did not experience “internet connected” phones at the time. I had to replace my htc 12 times over the 18 month contract due to screen failing, iphone came out and it was indestructible compared to (full size screen) competition. You could scroll stuff easily on iPhone, you could setup your email easily and had an app for it rather than criminal was of setting stuff on windows CE/Mobile. web pages looked like on desktop and you could operate them with a finger, not a stylus. And most importantly, the touch screen was the most killer feature of the time! Nobody had anything close to it’s smoothness and reliability for over 7 years ! (not to mentiontion something as stupid as tilt to the side to change to vertical orientation!)
@@randallsanchez3161 China (both public and private companies) gonna be the Android in this analogy, the only one that's capable of going head-to-head against SpaceX in the future
You know when you pee in a dream and then you eventually realise it wasn't a dream your bed is already wet? My boy will wake up in a wet and very warm bed 😂
This is what happens when you let a clueless sales guy run a tech company. They just keep polishing the same turd until one day they realize that the world has moved on and you're left with an obsolete product.
I have seen loads of engineers responding ”no it cannot be done” just because of attitide problems. So no, this is not a profession related issue but a general lack of the ”can do attitude” in many individuals at all levels.
Despite his political views Elon is a genius of the highest order. So many people, even within SpaceX did not believe in the concept of vertical launch and recovery. People keep saying Elon is successful because he is rich and hires good people. It it’s clearly more than that, he has the vision to smash the incumbents and the management ability to execute the vision.
@@sillysciben8092 because people don’t give him credit because they dislike his political views, ignoring his proven genius. It’s extremely relevant right now.
@oldschoolben438 fair enough. Those people who arent reading between the lines are foolish. A prime reason why discussing politics (especially someone elses political veiws) outside of ones own head is counter productive
I‘m so happy that Elon succeeded and showed what is possible when you work really hard and focussed towards your dream and stand up again after each failure.
At this point in time and still 5 months later SpaceX launched its first satelite in to geo orbit :) So "at this point in time" .... I wouldn't say meant that much actually. Often when you say something like that - you're talking about decades.. not 5 months... :) But yes, you're right.. he did say that... =) And that made it worse cause that REALLY told us that he had NO idea what SpaceX were capable of and what they were doing at the time :)
Reminds me of people laughing about the concept of mobile phones "I will never use one" "I don't see why one would want one" "it will never take off". Yeah..............
Cost is about $15M per launch currently, SpaceX was right. Price is a different matter obviously, but I think he mentioned cost, not price. He says: we would have to react to it. And it's also right, they are giving small steps towards reusability, but the question is: why do you need to wait, where is the ambition to be the best at the present time? There's a big risk to become obsolete.
People are hating on this guy, but their $7,000,000 estimate came in 10X lower than their actual cost per launch. He was probably a little too unserious with this take, but I still don't think he was too far off.
Ariane has done well, but the criticism often comes from their conceit and dismissive stances on next-generation reusable hardware. They have stated often that they don't believe in reusability. And why should they? No one else challenges them in the European market. There will always be a demand from the European governments to have a Europe-only launch platform. Both for security reasons and because they are stuck in a sunk-cost fallacy of investing into the ESA. By doing so they are investing in European markets that produce these vehicles. But these view are short sighted. Because with high-cadence low-cost vehicles comes market growth that unfortunately the EU will miss. Just as they've missed the information technology market growth of the last 40 years.
You have to distinguish between price and cost. Apparently, SpaceX's cost is between $15-$25 million per launch. Their price is $67-$70 million per launch. They are maximizing profits while they can.
Fair that you put in the end that they actually plan to design reusable rockets as well. It's funny how he didn't believe, but he will actually follow now that the dream has become reality
This is why outsiders push innovation much more than industry “experts”- they see a goal and try any way to get to it, as opposed to they learn every known boundary and never even attempt to go beyond it. 2 years after this interview SpaceX landed their first booster, today they have the Starship performing perfectly on the test, and Ariane is in the same place where they were 30 years ago. Pathetic.
You’re watching how a company sits back and doesn’t react to competition, it’s the “blockbuster” video ideology, or simplistic point of deer in headlights.
Those comments didn’t age well especially “whatever they can do we can do.” SpaceX is making all the other space launch service companies look like dinosaurs.
Yeah the dream which never let SpaceX engineers and workers sleep is a dream but at the same time a dream which ensured that time a good night's sleep for Ariane engineers is also a dream
Not taking SpaceX seriously in 2013 is still forgivable. But the fact that they didn't change their strategy after 50 successful Falcon 9 landings was an embarrassing failure. Ariane Space is now showing up to a Formula 1 race on a bicycle.
Aged like the finest milk. But he says an important part. When they do better he would need to follow. And there are we right now. They start to follow.
They have 99% of the market selling RTL launches at around 70m, this does not mean they can not go lower, it ony means that's the sweet spot in the market right now.
Dream: "reusability is a dream" Reality: 22 missions and landings by a single booster Dream: "100% success rate is a dream" Reality: 361 out of 364 success rate ( not 100% but 99.2% success rate) So far the "dream" is doing rather well.
Surely the time has now come for Ariane Space and the ESA to stop making rockets and focus entirely on satellites and other payloads. They've lost the battle with the US companies regarding vehicles. Don't get me wrong, I'm no expert. Perhaps the Ariane 6 has some capabilities that the Falcon 9 or Atlas V don't.
@@macdieter23558 == The one thing that Ariane can offer Europe is local EU control of a launch. I mean, they are building only 1 rocket per year, but apparently ESA can make a national security argument off of that 1 launch per year that no one in the USA, China, or Russia could say "No" to. Yup. Europe has total control of that one launch while SpaceX will be doing 200+ launches in 2025 and China 100+. RocketLabs will make more Electron launches than Ariane 6. Basically, Europe is in distant 7th (or worse) place behind SpaceX, ULA, Boeing, Rocket Labs, China, and Russia (possibly also behind India and Japan).
@@macdieter23558 And I second that. The whole purpose with Ariane 6's launch a weeks ago was to showcase their "restart of engines" in space, which they didn't succeed.. and that rocket took years to develop. And still they told media that it was a successful launch (they lied) it might have been a successful launch but they did not reach their specific goal with the rocket.
It's the reason why space industry in Toulouse is fucked up : unemployment rate is going up for this industry, no more recruiting, these dinosaurs led the industry in a deadlock with their "it's only a dream"
He's not a very good study of history when he says, "Every operator would change their game plan completely." No operator that receives large sums of money from the US government would change their game plan. They don't want to spend less than what their fiscal budget allows, because what they spend determines what they will get for future fiscal years. So they GAME THE SYSTEM in order to maintain flexibility to do what they need and if they have extra left over, it gets wasted on needless expenditures. This is part of what makes the US government ineffeicient.
Well, the “SpaceX dream” has turned into a downright nightmare for legacy launch contractors, hasn’t it? A little over 10 years later, and no one is laughing. Arianespace have 260 launches since 1979. This year to date, SpaceX has performed 70 launches, targeting 144. And as for the dream of reuseability: current record is 22 flights for an individual booster, and counting.
They made a whole ass company obsolete
Company? Industry!
It is not obsolete. It is not needed apart from a few satellites launches per year. SpaceX is competing in an empty industry basically. Apart from a few wanna-be hype projects like spin launch, a few small companies like Virgin Galactic, underpaid NASA without large contacts and destroyed Russian space industries there's really nothing to compete with. And yet SpaceX is unsustainable, doesn't meet its own roadmaps and lives solely of taxpayers money
The whole industry is obsolete. ULA, Boeing, Mitsubishi, Energia etc… are in the same boat
When the 7mln$ price come to fruition?
@@dociekaniawhen competition dictates it to come down ... for now spacex will just bring in the extra profits, while still being the cheapest
Good morning Ariane space...this is your 4th snooze alarm..
hahahahha
But you said whatever they do we have to. When is a reusable Ariane coming?😂
👏🏻🥃🇿🇦
He is not wrong, Space X has not delivered, reusability does not save cost.
@indietonne not soon enough.. Ariane hasn't been the same since all the German scientists from Peenemunde retired. And Ariane is very proud of their german roots, they have portraits of all the former 'nazi' scientists on display along the Seine in Vernon where Arianespace is located.
"Personally I think recoverability is a dream" -- yep. That's the difference.
Personally I think the telling point is "we would then have to follow".
This was June 2013 SpaceX wouldn't land a booster or another 2 and a half years. So maybe you can reasonably take a view that it's too hard to be worth while.
But what he's really saying is they would rather just keep doing what they are doing, they don't want the industry to advance and they don't want to put in the effort to lead that advance.
@@GordonWrigley You are 100% right. The industry does not want launch cost to go down, this is how a business man thinks. Not how a visionary thinks. I guarantee you, the Ariene guy will NOT have a statue of him anywhere, ever. Elon on the other hand is going to be in bronze one day and our kids' kids will learn about him in history class. Like we learned about Eli Whitney, Nicola Tesla, Wernher von Braun .. people that changed the world forever.
@@yevgeny79 that seems likely, it's a shame he's suck a dick. Maybe we can make statues of Gwynne instead. Thinking about it I actually don't know much about what she's like as a person cause she's too busy getting work done to run her mouth on social media.
@@yevgeny79couldnt agree more Elon is truely a philanthropist. All he thinks about, ever, is how long can the human race continue and how can HE make that time longer. Then throws all his money and a substantial amount of his time at making it happen
It's been 5 years since SpaceX demonstrated "recoverability", where is his "follow action" ?
aged like milk
Nah, you can make milk age better than this.
he's still right, SpaceX still can't launch $7m rockets
While he was obviously wrong about the reusability part, the question was mostly about how they would compete with SpaceX selling launches at $15M. Falcon 9 is still at about $60-65M per launch in 2024, and back in 2013 when this video was recorded, the launch price was around $50M. It was pretty accurate to say the $15M claim was a dream because it still costs 4 times that, even though it's generally the cheapest launch option.
@@agerrgerra1361spacex said they see launches in the future will cost 7 million dollars. So they are most likely not talking about falcon 9. They are most likely talking about starship.
@@agerrgerra1361 he was right about pretty much everything, including facts stated at the end of the video - that Ariane would react by developing similar technology WHEN it will become more than a dream, because SpaceX is amazing, but not supermen.
I guess that young fans (I was one of them) want them to be superheroes. But then the reality kicks in. But just as Ariane director said - we need to dream!
This is why you need people to dream in your industry. The big fat mainstays won't iterate unless they HAVE to. They don't dream of anything but money, so you have to threaten their money to get larger scale progress.
And a decade later they've only admitted that partial reusability might actually be a Good Idea, not that they'll ever realize it for themselves until sometime in the 2030s. When Falcon 9 has retired and SpaceX is likely trialing a successor to Starship, ArianeSpace will be like "look at us, we're so innovative, we finally figured out partial reusability!"
Large companies have too much to loose if they take risks and so they don't. Small companies have nothing to gain _unless_ they take risks so they do. (And most small companies fail, but are small enough that not a lot is lost in the process.)
@@benjaminshropshire2900 right that is my point. You need people who big guys will call crazy and either they are or they are right and upend everything. All space faring companies have lost countless millions on SpaceX's successes
@@Acklon you're not wrong, but that's not my point; the reason big companies don't innovate isn't because they are stupid, incompetent or lack motivation or vision. Rather it's because most innovations are doomed to be failures from the start and the only companies that can bet their existence on something like that are the ones that are doomed if they _don't_ take extreme risks.
@@benjaminshropshire2900 I disagree. There are plenty of rich CEO who genuinely believe that it is a waste to spend money on something that doesnt DEFINITELY make them more money. Rarely/never do they make decisions because it will improve something and not directly increase their profit margin
SpaceX is selling a dream, and you're stuck in a nightmare.
Don't forget that the head of Russian Space Agency laughed that NASA was trying to launch astronauts with a trampoline to space when it was announced that SpaceX was chosen to send astronauts to the ISS.
It was a broom not a trampoline xD
@@totetsu3752it was a trampoline. On April 2014, Dimitry Rogozin, who at the time was Russia's deputy prime minister, made the trampoline comment on Twitter.
It was about sanctions in 2014, not about spacex. "How are they gonna launch astronauts into space if they sanction the only one avaliable crewed launch provider, with trampoline?"
It's not how it happened. The russians were threatening to stop cooperating with the US when saying that. At that time, NASA was forced to use the Soyuz to send astronauts to the ISS since the space shuttle was retired and Crew Dragon was still not ready. Rogozyn wasn't even talking about Space X.
@@user-ew8dw5yy5x The broomstick comment was after the 2022 Russia-Ukraine war started. The Biden administration started directing NASA to reduce its co-operation with Roscosmos, and Rogozin said, if they don't fly on Soyuz what are they going to fly on, broomsticks?
"Yesterday.... all my troubles seemed so far away. Now they seem as though they're here to stay. Oh, I believe in yesterday." ~ Ariane Space
Ah, ah, ah, well done. Ray Charles have sung this one.
@@Eric_MalbosThe Beatles.
7 years later they just start to "draw" a possible rocket who can compete with Falcon9, which may take 10 years more, when actually now they have to compete with Starship which they are 20 years behind.
Europe is so out from the space career.
Europe might be far behind when it comes to rockets, but on space in general, they are a key player in nearly every other space project in terms of instruments, science or control.
I would even argue that, regarding rockets, Europe is on a good track with the two companies "Isar Aerospace" and "Rocket Factory Augsburg". For sure it's no comparison with SpaceX (like it is nowhere on earth), but they do quite a good job. Everyday Astronaut visited them and has a video on his channel.
I agree with the first part. But about the second part: SpaceX is capable of bringing stuff into orbit, but still decades away from bringing stuff to others planets,
what NASA & ESA and Roscosmos already did decades ago. And the new Arianne as actually a damn good rocket, especially when it comes to mass to payload ratio.
Also: Never underestimate the Europeans. They may have slept since the end of the cold war, but with Russia's latest actions and a possible anti-European Trump on the horizon,
a lot of things already changed there and we will see a lot more changes in next 10 to 20 years.
@@galileo3431 Im also from Germany and I hope they will succeed but I think they are just not ambitious enough. With a startup nowadays you should at least aim for a partly reusable vehicle imho. Stoke Space tries to go full reuse with it's first rocket.
space X is just a taxi
"First they ignore you. Then they laugh at you. Then they attack you. Then you win."
Seems like every industry these days. I think SpaceX got to phase 4 already.
Said Elizabeth Holmes
Now you need to find a place for "then they copy you"
@@pigslefats yes but you should add the line "then we deliver" something she never did he didn't fake it till he made it. He made it without faking it
classic example of an older executive letting their experience imbue them with false confidence and dismiss what is actually possible, sometimes the biggest disruptions in an industry happen because the company doing the disrupting was never smothered in its crib by "No" men like this
Just like Sears after having the opportunity of being like Amazon or Yahoo refusing to buy google and TH-cam. Those were bad decisions taken by older executives with fake confidence
The older executive, false confidence thing....is what is sinking Boeing without one bubble hitting the surface.
The world is full of small-thinkers. This reminds me of "There is no reason anyone would want a computer in their home." - CEO of Digital Equipment Corp.
I think it was the head of IBM that said their market research told them that the worldwide demand for a desktop computer was only a few thousand per year 😂
And a decade later SpaceX is developing the Starship, a fully reusable rocket, which is also the largest rocket ever built, and Ariane has yet to develop a rocket to compete with Falcon-9.
The host is on point. I love how smug this guy was, and granted at the time SpaceX was still an underdog. Just love how badly this aged though XD
by 2013 they should have known better.. Falcon 9 was amazingly successful from the beginning..
Arianne was the leader, but they were truly caught unprepared.. they may never recover from this guy's incompetence.
Ariane was always more a geostationary orbit launch system than anything else, Falcon9 is 67 mln$ per launch now, roscosmos Soyuz was around 35-48mln$ per launch.
The more people underestimate you, the more free hand you have to be successful without them noticing.
"Whatever they can do, we can do" and 11 years later Europe still can't.
Same thing legacy automakers said about Tesla just around a decade ago. Yet here we are with Tesla still proving them wrong. I’m sure all competitors of every one of Elon’s ventures will make the same mistaken claims.
Tesla is a failing company lol
@@kipkipper-lg9vl What is your definition of "failing"? lol
Everyone here is focusing on the SpaceX vs Ariane aspect here. Very interesting, but the host actually made an even better prediction. If launch cost really goes down significantly, all these old requirements suddenly become obsolete. 5m fairing, larger satellites, dual launch capability, etc, etc. Even those whole focus on GEO. Not only did the cheaper launch cost outflank Ariane. It put the customers of Ariane, which were optimized for big expensive launchers, in big trouble as well. Who cares about big expensive communication satellites in GEO when you can have a large constellation of cheap and small satellites in LEO?
The host didn't know the exact outcome, but he did correctly predict that the industry would have to rethink its approach. SpaceX really killed the business model of both the legacy launchers, and their legacy customers. Super interesting to see the different perspectives on the future right as we were on the cusp of the revolution.
thanks for posting - exactly my thinking. 💯
Not to mention that with low cost/kg you no longer HAVE to shave every gram off your sat. THAT is the game changer Starship brings to this equation. Its not even close.
How is this a debate between Europe and America... you know Elon Musk is everything but ameircan, right?
@@abelnicolaebaritone because it's an American company. Why do you think he chose America?
@@chrismoule7242exactly. America is the only place with the expertise and the attitude that can execute musk's ideas
Arianespace had a 50% market share of commercial launches in 2013. They're now 19%. SpaceX as of 2023 had 65%+
Similar situation happened in the semiconductor industry. Geriatric Europe just cant respond to changing environment fast enough
@@calhil Same thing killed Japan in the 1990s. They dominated computers in the 80s, but when the switch from analogue to digital kicked off, they were caught on the backstep and are still struggling for relevance.
Different people have different definitions for "a dream". For SpaceX it's a goal they'll work their asses off to achieve. For Ariane it's something impossible until someone else does it. Physics is the only true limit
"Everybody said it is impossible to do. Then there came a man who didn´t know, and he did it!"
Yeah, I've learned not to jump to conclusions and say it is impossible. Facial recognition, LiDAR on iPhones, and ChatGPT services are possible. Stealth aircraft and reusable rockets are possible. Maybe anti-gravity propulsion is around the corner since we study quantum mechanics, electromagnetism, nuclear mechanics, and string theory.
@@macdieter23558Ironically NASA already built the prototype for propulsively landed tickets 40 years prior.
Kind of arrogant they think it's impossible
well, Ariane probably had a lot of internal engineers stuck in old thinking telling them it is impossible
@@Mallchad == Right. NASA used rockets to land the Eagle on the Moon back in 1969.
Ariane: "Obviously that's impossible!"
And as of 2024 Falcon 9 has had more successful consecutive launches and more landings than the entirety of the Arianne family of launchers has had launches in its history
An streak of 334 successful consecutive launches in ~6.5 years and 329 landings (96,8% success rate) versus 260 launches in 45 years, of which 12 failed (4,6% failure rate/95,4% success rate) if anyone was wondering
Kinda skewed to compare total launches to total landings and judge success off that. Some missions intentionally expended the rocket because they needed the additional performance, so those missions should be entirely excluded from the denominator.
@@qwerty112311 If I remember correctly is total landing *attempts*, not boosters that landed/didn't land in general
The more you reuse the same rocket, the more chance something goes wrong.
Ariane Rockets were always NEW. They should have better stats than SpaceX.
@@Wirmish That's not necessary true. Almost every other launches are non reusable except Falcon 9/heavy. The more reuse the more you know that it works. New rocket may have some hidden problems that will only show up in real launch.
@@Wirmish New isn't always better because old is proven and new is not. Would you get on a plane that has flown a hundred times or would you get on a plane that just got out of the factory and is about to fly for for its first time?
“Whatever they can do, we can do”….
Ahh …. the ultimate expression of hubris is to believe no one could ever be better than you….
The same with EVs and legacy car makers... "no problem, we can do it quickly, we let them fail and see".
And now they are behind...
I wonder if anyone emailed him the link to this video.
I bet you 100 bucks he got 1000 mails or more 😂
Many have on twitter so I'm sure he's aware. I (unironically) find it amusing seeing it in the replies of every post related to Ariane
It became a reality… and 10 years later, still not competing 🙈
actually it didn't, launch prices are at least U$ 67 million (not U$ 7 million), so it is still a dream.
@@luigeribeiro Nah likely about 15 million, maybe less. SpaceX can just charge way more to customers as there is no competition. Why would they only charge 15 million when just as many people are willing to pay 67 million? Now with those profits they're building Starship, which will make basically every other rocket obsolete from an economic standpoint.
@@Astra2 The U$ 7 million price was never achieved, that is the dream the video talk about, but you are a fanboy and that's why you prefer to deflect from the fact mentioned.
@@Astra2 "which will make basically every other rocket obsolete from an economic standpoint"
LOL
SpaceX's fanboys are so naive
@@luigeribeiro Care to elaborate?
Elon Musk has effectively changed the game. Everyone else are decades behind SpaceX.
Humility always wins.
Now let's wait for Ariane wakes up from their nightmare.
Sometime in the 2030s.
Careful, as he stated you can't wake someone up from a dream. They must do it in their own. Lol
This is what lack of vision is about...
people who cant do something like to tell others they cant do it either
Bruh i am european and looking at starship make me feel to laugh about Ariane Space now
same
Looking at it exploding? That's citizen taxes there bursting into the flames right there. Read old SpaceX roadmaps and you'll see how wrong you are
And China LANDSPACE company is already following SPACEX in developing reusable rocket booster while ARIANE SPACE is still sleeping
So, they woke up from their ‘dream’ and found SpaceX had done everything in THEIR dream. Ariane said they would have to respond in kind. They haven’t.
"Whatever SpaceX can do, we can do."
You are dreaming, and I've been told (by a very wise man) to never wake up the dreamer.
The staggering ineptitude of these managerial dinosaurs with no vision is why space launch never advanced despite half a century of development. Some still don't get it, Thunderf00t for example mocks Space X even now despite a decade of evidence that we can contrast with this video from just 11 years ago.
The worst thing about Thunderf00t is that he makes some very interesting videos that explain concepts very well to the layman audience but if it is someone who triggers him...he looked miserable when the video feed cut back in and showed Starship performing the soft touchdown.
These are the extremely powerful, highly privileged people who use their positions in life to influence how everyone else thinks and gets to experience life. We have all known people like this in our own lives, the teacher, who crushes a child's dream, the boss who contributes nothing but stress, misery and fear!
This person with his limited vision, his evasiveness, his near contempt and others like him, are the ones that hold us back! They probably spend as much energy on suppressing advancement as they do holding onto power. Had people like this had the foresight and power, then they would have tried to stop SpaceX from getting anywhere ... and of course, that is exactly what they did try to do when contracts were being awarded and why there is still contempt towards this incredible organisation to this day!
Aged beautifully with Eumetsat’s recent decision to stick with The Dream.
Space X single-handedly made ARIANE inconsequential. Might as well shut down Kourou and bring the lads home.
If he was talking about Blue Origin, he would be right
Blue Origin is hyped to give the industry a chance to hide from their shame. In reality the NG is way smaller, has less reusability and has not shown any successful flight.
The dream turned out to be their nightmare.
I work with these guys. Believe me, with some exceptions, the reality is far far worse than you think.
Arianespace is good adviced to close their business NOW, cancel all contracts, pay all open bills and send a farewell package to all employees. Tomorrow the money is gone! They are selling typewriters in our modern world!
This reminds me of that epic quote from Steve Ballmer: "HOHOHO Five hundred dollars? Fully subsidized? With a plan? Hohohoho, And it doesn't appeal to business customers because it doesn't have a keyboard!"
To be fair, these comments were not silly AT THE TIME. They were absolutely typical of the industry.
The miracle is that ANY company came along with a different mindset.
He said it himself, "We would have to follow". That's the difference between a company like Arianne and SpaceX. SpaceX is a leader. Arianne is a follower. What else do you need to know?
Anyone remember the Far Side cartoon where the dinosaurs are laughing at a furry rat and then the dinosaur sees snow?
He summed it up - Arianne were only capable of reacting, not innovating the ‘dream’ themselves.
SpaceX put 80% of all tonnage into space last year. Equally important: CHEAPER, MUCH, MUCH CHEAPER !!!
"Whatever they can do, we can do".... yeah, we just saw your 20 year old plan for Arianne 6 come to life, at this pace it will be 2125 before they have something that competes. The only thing ESA has going is their launch site.
ESA is our equivalent of ULA. A day late and a dollar short. I remember this forum, and how everyone else laughed at SpaceX for trying to recover and reuse their 1st stage. They kept failing, then almost managed it, then they managed to recover one and the world took notice. Now, it's routine; the only time these launches make the news is when they fail to recover the 1st stage. And SpaceX has had 70 launches so far this year... that is over 2 per week on average! Some launch cadence...
I still remember the live broadcast of the inaugural Falcon Heavy launch. Seeing those two boosters land almost in perfect sync, that was something out of a bloody Science Fiction movie. The last time we could imagine seeing something like this was back in the 70s.
@@kaasmeester5903 I am still amazed nobody has tried to make a serious claim it was CGI. I'm sure some think that, FFS I believe in them and it looked liked CGI to me!
EDIT: There was a comparison of a SpaceX barge landing synced with a 1950s or so Russian animation of an offshore rocket landing, Basically the same thing.
@@kaasmeester5903 - Yes but, it still takes SpaceX months to get the reused rocket ready to fly again and that has pushed up their costs to about the same as other less complicated rockets. You also have to 'oversize' the 1st stage to save enough fuel to fire up and control the landing and that pushes up the costs of launch as well. The intense heat and vibration causes stress and metal fatigue that needs to be carefully inspected and repaired as necessary to make it safe to relaunch. Not as simple as reusing an airplane.
“Reusability is a dream” - what are we on, 20+ launches per booster?
Reusability for reusability only is nothing, where is the promised cost reducition?
@@dociekania Internal launch cost of F9 is less than $25M.
@@dociekaniaStarship is cheaper than the SLS, even without reuse. Let that sink in.
Ariane launch cost:
The current Ariane 5 costs 150-170 million euros to build and launch. Ariane 6’s cost goal is 90 million euros, or $100.3 million at current exchange rates. It would be sold for $120 million per launch, with two satellite customers per launch of the heavier Ariane 64 version
Falcon 9 launch cost:
The cost of launch for a Falcon 9 has been $62 million historically, but it can carry considerably larger payloads up to 50,000 pounds. Per pound launch costs have been as low as $1,200. SpaceX increased the cost of a launch to $67 million in 2022, citing rising material costs and inflation.
How is that for reduced cost recuction? Does the price tell you anything? :)
I'd be quite happy if my rocket compared to another rocket reduced about $100.000.000 per launch :)
OK? Kej :)
@@dociekania SpaceX offer the cheapest rocket on the market. Why should they lower their price lower? They need $$$$$$$$ for the Super Heavy / Starship and for the Starlink constellation.
ESA and Ariane Space is technological at least 10 years behind SpaceX ... they still try to improve their horse saddles, while someone has introduced the automobile and soon nobody will use horses anymore
whatever they can do we can do...
... with enough time and money, they will. Someday.
The first google result for "ariane space" in 2024:
Arianespace is the world's leading satellite launch company, operating a full family of launchers: Ariane 5, Soyuz and Vega
Lmao 😂
Its because its from their own website
@@Little908 which they didnt update in 3 years YES
Lol, well they are still flying Vega at least. And they almost have Arianne 6….
"Whatever they can do, we can do"
10 years later - SpaceX biggest by far in the indusutry while Ariane who??+ :P
That interview reminds me of M$ interview during the iphone and ipad introduction ... "it's never going to sell"
To be fair, the iPhone was ok but not breaking barriers when it first came out. The app store was small and kept out many developers. Battery life was iffy. And the price was way higher as with all Apple products. Without the die hard Apple cultists buying it up, the phone may have failed even with its innovations. Blackberry was still beating them easily. It wasn't until the 4th version and social media taking off that it really took off. Fortunately, RIM didn't bother to innovate themselves and rested on their laurels. Meanwhile Android was destroying everyone and continues to do so today.
Ariane is like RIM. They're playing catch up and not doing any innovating. They're relying on old ways and their connections within the industry to stay afloat. Like RIM, it will be hard to justify their higher costs and lower capabilities to dependable clients vs what SpaceX can offer.
@@randallsanchez3161 you sound like somebody that didn’t live at that time and did not experience “internet connected” phones at the time. I had to replace my htc 12 times over the 18 month contract due to screen failing, iphone came out and it was indestructible compared to (full size screen) competition. You could scroll stuff easily on iPhone, you could setup your email easily and had an app for it rather than criminal was of setting stuff on windows CE/Mobile. web pages looked like on desktop and you could operate them with a finger, not a stylus.
And most importantly, the touch screen was the most killer feature of the time! Nobody had anything close to it’s smoothness and reliability for over 7 years ! (not to mentiontion something as stupid as tilt to the side to change to vertical orientation!)
@@randallsanchez3161 China (both public and private companies) gonna be the Android in this analogy, the only one that's capable of going head-to-head against SpaceX in the future
You know when you pee in a dream and then you eventually realise it wasn't a dream your bed is already wet? My boy will wake up in a wet and very warm bed 😂
It has long since cooled, yet the dreamer still hasn't awoken. One wonders if they ever will.
This is what happens when you let a clueless sales guy run a tech company. They just keep polishing the same turd until one day they realize that the world has moved on and you're left with an obsolete product.
Lots of clueless managers with big smiles vs hard working engineers with great ideas
I have seen loads of engineers responding ”no it cannot be done” just because of attitide problems. So no, this is not a profession related issue but a general lack of the ”can do attitude” in many individuals at all levels.
You just fire those love
Despite his political views Elon is a genius of the highest order. So many people, even within SpaceX did not believe in the concept of vertical launch and recovery. People keep saying Elon is successful because he is rich and hires good people. It it’s clearly more than that, he has the vision to smash the incumbents and the management ability to execute the vision.
Why you even mentioning his political veiws? What relevance does it add? Honestly 😩
@@sillysciben8092 because people don’t give him credit because they dislike his political views, ignoring his proven genius. It’s extremely relevant right now.
@oldschoolben438 fair enough. Those people who arent reading between the lines are foolish. A prime reason why discussing politics (especially someone elses political veiws) outside of ones own head is counter productive
The only dream happening in this moment was Richard Bowles level of expertise.
Steve Balmer moment!
I‘m so happy that Elon succeeded and showed what is possible when you work really hard and focussed towards your dream and stand up again after each failure.
At least he said "at this point in time"
At this point in time and still 5 months later SpaceX launched its first satelite in to geo orbit :)
So "at this point in time" .... I wouldn't say meant that much actually. Often when you say something like that - you're talking about decades.. not 5 months... :) But yes, you're right.. he did say that... =) And that made it worse cause that REALLY told us that he had NO idea what SpaceX were capable of and what they were doing at the time :)
Let us be honest, his answer was polite and respectful.
I think he is awake now😂
in the mean time, spaceX has sucesfully launch, in the past 3 years, more rocket than Ariane in its 45 years of existence.
Reminds me of Steve Balmer, then CEO of Microsoft, publicly dismissing the newly introduced Apple iPhone in favor of Windows Phone.
Reminds me of people laughing about the concept of mobile phones "I will never use one" "I don't see why one would want one" "it will never take off".
Yeah..............
Cost is about $15M per launch currently, SpaceX was right. Price is a different matter obviously, but I think he mentioned cost, not price. He says: we would have to react to it. And it's also right, they are giving small steps towards reusability, but the question is: why do you need to wait, where is the ambition to be the best at the present time? There's a big risk to become obsolete.
Richard Fenyman said : " Science is the belief in the ignorance of experts"
10 years later, Ariane lacks a dream. Poor Ariane.
People are hating on this guy, but their $7,000,000 estimate came in 10X lower than their actual cost per launch. He was probably a little too unserious with this take, but I still don't think he was too far off.
Ariane has done well, but the criticism often comes from their conceit and dismissive stances on next-generation reusable hardware. They have stated often that they don't believe in reusability. And why should they? No one else challenges them in the European market. There will always be a demand from the European governments to have a Europe-only launch platform. Both for security reasons and because they are stuck in a sunk-cost fallacy of investing into the ESA. By doing so they are investing in European markets that produce these vehicles.
But these view are short sighted. Because with high-cadence low-cost vehicles comes market growth that unfortunately the EU will miss. Just as they've missed the information technology market growth of the last 40 years.
You have to distinguish between price and cost. Apparently, SpaceX's cost is between $15-$25 million per launch. Their price is $67-$70 million per launch. They are maximizing profits while they can.
it all starts with one man's dream ✨️
His answer is both honest and reasonable given what the current status is in launch capability.
who laughs last laughs best
SpaceX - living the dream.
Fair that you put in the end that they actually plan to design reusable rockets as well. It's funny how he didn't believe, but he will actually follow now that the dream has become reality
At a snail's pace.
This is why outsiders push innovation much more than industry “experts”- they see a goal and try any way to get to it, as opposed to they learn every known boundary and never even attempt to go beyond it. 2 years after this interview SpaceX landed their first booster, today they have the Starship performing perfectly on the test, and Ariane is in the same place where they were 30 years ago. Pathetic.
This is exactly the reason why humans are not yet living on the moon or Mars. Or why we are not mining asteroids. Small minded executives.
Didn’t Elon laugh when asked if BYD was a serious competitor to Tesla?
"We will have to follow...." Yes you do
Ariane Space left the group ----->
You’re watching how a company sits back and doesn’t react to competition, it’s the “blockbuster” video ideology, or simplistic point of deer in headlights.
Yep. Where are you now?
Those comments didn’t age well especially “whatever they can do we can do.” SpaceX is making all the other space launch service companies look like dinosaurs.
Yeah the dream which never let SpaceX engineers and workers sleep is a dream but at the same time a dream which ensured that time a good night's sleep for Ariane engineers is also a dream
Not taking SpaceX seriously in 2013 is still forgivable. But the fact that they didn't change their strategy after 50 successful Falcon 9 landings was an embarrassing failure.
Ariane Space is now showing up to a Formula 1 race on a bicycle.
Who laughs now? You said just dreams? Now became reality, and now, how about you?
Still dreaming
Jeeez I completely forgot about existence of Ariane. Algorithm brought me here. This company still in business?
Aged like the finest milk. But he says an important part. When they do better he would need to follow. And there are we right now. They start to follow.
Only to remain at the starting line posing for photographs.
This is why engineers, rather than marketing types should run tech companies. They simply have no idea about what is possible.
They have 99% of the market selling RTL launches at around 70m, this does not mean they can not go lower, it ony means that's the sweet spot in the market right now.
They are not sustainable still. They cannot go lower because there's not enough taxes poured into SpaceX to completely disregard any losses
Some people talk of dreams and some people make dreams come true.
Dream: "reusability is a dream"
Reality: 22 missions and landings by a single booster
Dream: "100% success rate is a dream"
Reality: 361 out of 364 success rate ( not 100% but 99.2% success rate)
So far the "dream" is doing rather well.
I wonder if he still has the same job?
Lesson learned the hard way never underestimate your competitors.. the moment you do your in big trouble..
Apparently, you were the ones that needed a wake up
“Whatever they can do we can do…”. And yet no one has been able to match them or even tried.
Surely the time has now come for Ariane Space and the ESA to stop making rockets and focus entirely on satellites and other payloads. They've lost the battle with the US companies regarding vehicles. Don't get me wrong, I'm no expert. Perhaps the Ariane 6 has some capabilities that the Falcon 9 or Atlas V don't.
As an european, let me tell you: Ariane 6 has not!
@@macdieter23558 == The one thing that Ariane can offer Europe is local EU control of a launch. I mean, they are building only 1 rocket per year, but apparently ESA can make a national security argument off of that 1 launch per year that no one in the USA, China, or Russia could say "No" to. Yup. Europe has total control of that one launch while SpaceX will be doing 200+ launches in 2025 and China 100+. RocketLabs will make more Electron launches than Ariane 6.
Basically, Europe is in distant 7th (or worse) place behind SpaceX, ULA, Boeing, Rocket Labs, China, and Russia (possibly also behind India and Japan).
@@macdieter23558 And I second that. The whole purpose with Ariane 6's launch a weeks ago was to showcase their "restart of engines" in space, which they didn't succeed.. and that rocket took years to develop. And still they told media that it was a successful launch (they lied) it might have been a successful launch but they did not reach their specific goal with the rocket.
The hubris of slimy executives like this is why Europe has lost all relevance in the global launch market.
It's the reason why space industry in Toulouse is fucked up : unemployment rate is going up for this industry, no more recruiting, these dinosaurs led the industry in a deadlock with their "it's only a dream"
Ariane 5: 117 launches, 5 failures. SpaceX 345 launches, 3 failures. They can laugh!
He's not a very good study of history when he says, "Every operator would change their game plan completely." No operator that receives large sums of money from the US government would change their game plan. They don't want to spend less than what their fiscal budget allows, because what they spend determines what they will get for future fiscal years. So they GAME THE SYSTEM in order to maintain flexibility to do what they need and if they have extra left over, it gets wasted on needless expenditures. This is part of what makes the US government ineffeicient.
Well, the “SpaceX dream” has turned into a downright nightmare for legacy launch contractors, hasn’t it? A little over 10 years later, and no one is laughing. Arianespace have 260 launches since 1979. This year to date, SpaceX has performed 70 launches, targeting 144.
And as for the dream of reuseability: current record is 22 flights for an individual booster, and counting.
What a great video. The updates are hilarious.