Talk:EADS Phoenix

message: From what I understand about current policy, you are quite wrong. The EU Commission decided it is important for the EU to retain native launch capability, see the Green Paper, and Soyuz would not allow that.
This sums up what I know about future ESA launchers (from several public papers):
Ariane 5 will not last forever. By the 2010s the design will be around 20 years old, so it will need a replacement.
Ariane 5 also had the problem of having a bad size. Too big for a single regular satellite, too small for having two regular satellites. The Ariane 4 launch category was much missed. Soyuz will fill the void Ariane 4 left. Ariane 5 will get bigger to cope (Ariane 5 ECA, etc).
The Germans pushed a program called FESTIP in the 90s to investigate which new launcher architecture was most suitable for replacing Ariane 5. The results claimed that to obtain substancial launch cost reductions would require the use of advanced RLVs. Things like SSTO VTVL were dismissed allegedly because EU engine technology wasn't good enough, SSTO VTHL was dismissed because it was considered too risky to be possible, Shuttle like designs were dismissed because the non-reusable bits added to the cost and complexity of the vehicle to be economic. Two vehicle types were pushed as favourites: TSTO VTHL (like the early Shuttle proposals) and something which was basically Hopper. Basically a quasi SSTO HTHL vehicle which uses rail launch boost and a special kick stage to put the satellite into orbit.
Now the French will have none of that without having their own funded study first (they and the Germans will be putting most of the money into it I bet). They think it will be impossible to have a new RLV launcher without new engines, so the focus will be on the new engines first, as was done for Ariane 5. Two RLV engines are being planned for an Ariane 4 payload class reusable launch vehicle: LOX/Methane Volga and LOX/LH2 Veda. The engines are being jointly designed with the Russians since they have more experience with high performance reusable hydrocarbon burning staged combustion designs of the type desired (experience they got from designing the Energia engines). These new engines may be used for a TSTO VTHL (both engines), a reusable first stage vehicle with expendable second stage (Volga), or basically Hopper (Veda).
To better decide on which of the RLV designs are viable, testbeds for reentry, GNC, etc will be made. DLR pushed their Phoenix (which is shaped like a scaled down Hopper) as a demonstrator for automated horizontal landing GNC.
The dark horse in the race is a new expendable based on Ariane 5 and some new, cheaper to manufacture, Vulcain 3 engine.
What I think will likely happen:
The TSTO will be dismissed as too expensive or risky. Something else will win. I doubt it will be Hopper. I all depends on how the engine development goes on. Volga is probably the riskier engine, but it also has the highest possible payoff, so I think they will try to push that engine through thick and thin. By 2020 we should know.
Google this presentation for more info (it should be someplace in the EADS site):
Future Propulsion Systems – The Key to Reach the Stars
Technologies for Next Generation Launcher Propulsion Systems
by Dieter Preclik - link to PDF.
Quasarstrider 01:29, 31 May 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for the nice info ;-) --Bricktop 12:55, 31 May 2005 (UTC)
replies: text:  What I get from the recent European Ministerial conference in early December is that there will be no effort in the next four years on future reusable launchers for the successor of Ariane and that the successor of Ariane, if any, should be expendable. So could we remove all this nonsense about Hopper and stuff ? 83.157.224.36 20:40, 13 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text:  I am somewhat out of touch with the latest developments, but last I heard some small funding was being made for basic R&D on advanced reusable engines, reentry and GNC. Namely, the Volga and Veda engines, EXPERT and PRE-X for reentry, EADS Phoenix for GNC. AFAIK there is no concrete plan for a reusable vehicle. Just a bunch of inexpensive paper studies and small technology demonstrators. A decade from now these will mature and *maybe* then a reusable design will be pushed and possibly funded. This old BBC article elaborates on it a bit, as does this ESA page. From what I understand this research is being done for the long term (i.e. decades, not next 4 years) and may not pan out. If anything, the latest developments point to a scaling down in investment due to the lackluster launch market, leading to an expendable replacement/upgrade for Ariane 5. Quasarstrider 17:18, 12 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Future ESA launchers 

message: Howdy, Could someone add some pics from this craft? For example from here:
  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.140.250.192 (talk) 09:23, 17 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Pictures missing from article?