“Europeans are self-flagellate” – L’Express

Europeans are self flagellate – LExpress

Europeans have their eyes fixed on Kourou this Tuesday, July 9. It is from the Guiana space base that Ariane 6 is due to begin its inaugural flight at 8 p.m. A subject that puts “everyone on edge,” admits General Philippe Steininger, associate researcher at the Institute of International and Strategic Relations (Iris) and military advisor to the president of the National Center for Space Studies (Cnes). Because for a year now and the last flight of Ariane 5, Europe has no longer had any heavy launchers in operation. Author of Space revolutions In the Archipel publishing house, Philippe Steininger explains to L’Express why Europe needs this autonomy. And the new balance of power that is being created from a few hundred to a few tens of thousands of kilometers above our heads.

L’Express: Why is it so important that the first launch of Ariane 6 works?

Philippe Steininger: Not having a launcher puts everyone on edge. Failure would be bad news. But it should not be seen as an irremediable catastrophe. Heavy launchers and their launch pads are very complex machines. Statistics show that on average only one in two first flights succeeds. The first flight of Ariane 5 was a failure, but that did not prevent this launcher from proving to be formidably reliable and competitive. Competitors, from the H3 heavy launcher to the Falcon 9, have also suffered start-up failures. This would not be the end of the story for Ariane 6 at all.

However, Europe has not had any launchers for a year, which means that it no longer has freedom of access to space. However, space is now a key sphere in the functioning of our societies and in the military domain. If we have to go through other countries to access space, we put ourselves in a situation of dependence on these countries. This has multiple effects. First, a financial impact, since we often have to pay a lot for this access. So much money that does not go into our industry. In addition, you lose control of your schedule. You are forced to adapt to the availability of your service provider to launch your satellites. This also poses problems of protecting secrecy, when you want to launch sensitive satellites. Finally, moving dual satellites, for civil and military use, requires going through fairly lengthy administrative processes.

READ ALSO: SpaceX, Ariane… When risk culture conditions innovation

Recent news gives us a concrete example of what happens when you go through a foreign company. Eumetsat [NDLR : l’entité européenne qui supervise l’exploitation des satellites] recently decided not to launch its next satellite with Ariane 6 as originally planned, but with SpaceX’s Falcon 9. This satellite paid for by European taxpayers will therefore bring income to an American billionaire, while at the same time these same taxpayers pay for the development of a European launcher. It’s a bit shocking.

When did Europe realise the importance of having sovereign access to space?

The need for free access to space was measured in the sixties by Europe when it wanted to launch its first communications satellites, Symphonie. At the time, only the Soviet and American players had rockets powerful enough to take such heavy satellites so high. But the Soviets demanded to have control over the integration of the satellite, which we refused in order to protect our manufacturing secrets. We were in the middle of the Cold War. The Americans accepted but imposed that our satellites could not be exploited commercially in order to protect their national champions. This triggered an awareness in Europe and the launch of the Ariane program.

If Ariane 6’s flight is a success, are Europe’s space problems solved?

Europe’s space sector is not limited to launchers. Launchers are an essential building block, but only a building block. If the inaugural flight of the two-booster version of Ariane 6 goes well, then there will be that of the four-booster version. Then an industrial rate to be reached in order to manufacture ten to eleven launchers per year. All these steps pose their own challenges.

How will Ariane 6 compare to its competitors?

It comes in a context of very strong competition, especially American but not only. Chinese competition is increasingly strong. India is also emerging. And in the United States, competition is going to multiply. For the moment, there is only SpaceX but Blue Origin will arrive with New Glenn as well as the launchers of the ULA group. There is room for several launchers, because the world is launching more and more satellites. Ariane 6 has almost 30 flights ordered even before its first flight. This shows that there is demand, and that Ariane 6 is attractive.

“Armies that do not have satellite constellations will be downgraded”

This launcher is not devoid of quality. Its production costs are reduced by around 40% compared to those of Ariane 5. It can be manufactured and launched at a higher frequency than its predecessor. Its much greater versatility will make it possible to launch both commercial or institutional geostationary satellites (military, weather, Galileo, etc.) as well as constellations in low orbit. A significant portion of the contracts won by Ariane 6 come from Amazon for its Kuiper constellation.

Doesn’t the fact that Ariane 6 is not reusable, like the rockets of rival SpaceX, make it obsolete?

It is true that SpaceX rockets are impressive. And the fact that they are reusable is a major asset. But Elon Musk’s galaxy is a separate model, very verticalized. He does not only manufacture rockets, he wants to create connectivity and decided that it was necessary to go through space for that. His companies are therefore present at all levels of the sector: from the manufacture of satellites, to that of launchers, including that of ground stations, and the marketing of the Starlink service. Until now, all these levels were attacked by separate players. Musk, who has already launched some 6,000 Starlink satellites, plans to launch 36,000 more. This requires a sustained pace. SpaceX is very busy with its own projects. Which leaves room on the market for other launchers.

Why was the production of Ariane 6 so delayed?

I think the Europeans are beating themselves up. Such complex industrial projects often suffer delays. And the initial six-year schedule for Ariane 6 was a bit too ambitious, not to say unrealistic. The ten years it ultimately took are consistent with the development times of other launchers of this type, notably its predecessor Ariane 5.

Are there any frictions within this spatial Europe, in particular between Germany, Italy and France?

Ariane was launched in the 1970s on a model of European cooperation dominated by France. This model is being questioned today, because some countries want to renationalize the development of launchers. Italy has already had a light launcher called Vega for a few years. And Germany has several mini-launcher projects. From a spirit of cooperation, we are moving towards a logic of competition. Let us specify that Europe in space has mainly been embodied by the ESA until now. The European Union in this field was a relatively invisible entity. But the EU is gaining strength, particularly under the leadership of Thierry Breton. If this trend continues, it could add coherence to a landscape that is fragmenting.

What are the major challenges that European space must prepare for?

The major transition is connectivity. How to enable all humans to access high-speed internet anywhere on Earth at an affordable price, in order to communicate or obtain information. Geostationary satellites are located so far from Earth, 36,000 km away, that their beam covers large areas of the globe. But some areas are poorly covered. What’s more, their remote location increases latency. The time it takes for information to go up and down again is about half a second.

READ ALSO: Antoine Bordes (Helsing): “Autonomous weapons are not the solution”

In some areas, this is not a problem. For others, such as trading or online gaming, it is much more so. And of course, in military communications, this latency makes a huge difference. Constellations such as Starlink allow the use of tactical data, transported very quickly. When you are trying to intercept a hypersonic missile or follow the trail of an adversary, too much latency disqualifies you. The armies of tomorrow will be divided into two categories: those that have constellations of this type and those that do not. The latter will be downgraded. Or they will subscribe to the services of other countries but will therefore not have control over their military data. There is a major sovereignty issue. This is why the EU launched the Iris² constellation project.

Will Ariane 6 be well suited to launching these clusters of satellites into low orbit?

It will be perfectly suited. But it will be just as suitable for launching essential institutional satellites. For example, Galileo, a positioning system more precise than GPS. It is little known, but today 3.5 billion people around the world use it.

.

lep-general-02