KABOOM! Europe's heavy-lift rocket explodes on debut

[MKSheppard]

They are not superior,they are enough good to compete.

Fly by Wire my ass.....computer overriding the pilot's decisions, NO.

[Admiral Piett]

Fly by Wire my ass.....computer overriding the pilot's decisions, NO.

The F 16 is fly by wire.
It seems to work quite well...

[Oberleutnant]

"Unlike Airbus, Boeing lets aviator override fly-by-wire technology"
http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/business/boe202.shtml

[Vympel]

The F 16 is fly by wire.
It seems to work quite well...

Yes, that's because the F-16 is inherently unstable and requires computer assistance to keep it from falling out of the sky- but it cannot override a pilot's decisions.

[BenRG]

I think that it is only fair to mention that the Arianne 5 is the latest in a series of rockets (although not much related in technology) used by the ESA as satellite and space probe launchers. The previous four, most notably the sadly-now-retired Arianne 4, were highly reliable and successful. Damning the ESA for the problems with Arianne 5 (and they are serious. Three failures in 14 launches? ) is about as logical as saying the STS series are a failure because of the destruction of the Challenger.

NASA has had its' shares of SNAFUs, as has Rossyacosmos (the Russian space agency). The US space probe Pioneer 1, for instance, went swimming because someone neglected to put a 'minus' sign in one line of the launch vehicle's Inertial Naviagation Unit's programme. And no-one is forgetting the Mars Climate Orbiter's imperial-no-metric units mix-up. The Atlas and Titan I rockets had lengthy gestations while they were considered basically bombs waiting to go off during launch. The Russian G-1 heavy booster's only achievement was to be the first launch-pad failure to be picked up by seismographs the world over. New technology is always jumpy. Economic and political considerations often mean that it is put into service before it is truely ready.

The Arianne 5 was originally designed as the launch vehicle for the ESA's now-cancelled Hermes-class light space shuttle. Because of the investment spent, they still put the thing into service (it is probably the only heavy-lift rocket available other than the Russian Proton; the Delta is much too light and the Titan-V/Centaur has been retired). However, it is clear that it still needs a lot of work.

[Oberleutnant]

Well said BenRG.

I find it surprising that ESA gets so little publicity in Europe. Many Europeans don't even probably know that their country is participating exploration of space. Seeing the flag of my country on a spacesuit is somewhat a weird moment.

ESA website
http://www.esa.int/

[Setzer]

Proof that Europe can't even wipe their own ass without help from America.

And then the NASA is a bunch of incompetent idiots.Proof? The Challenger
Ahh, I love american logic

It was Jingoism. When did I mention Logic?

[phongn]

The F 16 is fly by wire.
It seems to work quite well...

Yes, that's because the F-16 is inherently unstable and requires computer assistance to keep it from falling out of the sky- but it cannot override a pilot's decisions.

AFAIK the Airbuses have some degree of instability in them, though not as much as a fighter aircraft.

[phongn]

I think that it is only fair to mention that the Arianne 5 is the latest in a series of rockets (although not much related in technology) used by the ESA as satellite and space probe launchers. The previous four, most notably the sadly-now-retired Arianne 4, were highly reliable and successful. Damning the ESA for the problems with Arianne 5 (and they are serious. Three failures in 14 launches? ) is about as logical as saying the STS series are a failure because of the destruction of the Challenger.

Indeed. It is somewhat odd that Ariane has been plagued with this problems so early in its life, however. Based on the performance of the earlier series I expected a much higher reliability rate.

The Arianne 5 was originally designed as the launch vehicle for the ESA's now-cancelled Hermes-class light space shuttle. Because of the investment spent, they still put the thing into service (it is probably the only heavy-lift rocket available other than the Russian Proton; the Delta is much too light and the Titan-V/Centaur has been retired). However, it is clear that it still needs a lot of work.

Ben, Delta 4 is now competing squarely in Arianne 5's territory, as with Atlas 5. They have some major competition now. And IIRC, there are still a few Titan 4Bs laying around?