> “The launch cost is almost 2x the cost of Falcon 9.”
This actually seems quite reasonable considering the Ariane 6 is a non-reusable, low-volume design.
This actually seems quite reasonable considering the Ariane 6 is a non-reusable, low-volume design.
It’s after subsidies [1]. Actual costs are 4 to 6x Falcon 9, and that’s comparing actual costs today for Falcon 9 to projected costs in the future for Ariane 6.
[1] https://www.space.com/europe-ariane-6-rocket-debut-launch
They’re both state supported. But Falcon 9 is cash-flow positive on commercial launches where the only operational subsidies are launch complex access.