5
$\begingroup$

Right now, the cost of a Delta or Atlas is significantly higher than anything else on the market. I could see them being higher than the Soyuz or Long March, as they are made in countries with cheap labor.

But the Ariane is made using the same first world wages. How could it be so much cheaper?

Improve this question
$\endgroup$
3
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ Can you add a link to the pages where you found the launch prices? $\endgroup$
    – Hobbes
    Commented Sep 16, 2015 at 20:01
  • 7
    $\begingroup$ Cost is not the same thing as price. $\endgroup$
    – Russell Borogove
    Commented Sep 16, 2015 at 20:09
  • $\begingroup$ I recommend reading this article, in particular the blue box titled "ULA is a D*ck". $\endgroup$
    – Roman Reiner
    Commented Sep 21, 2015 at 14:50

1 Answer 1

Reset to default
12
$\begingroup$

ULA had a captive market: they were the only supplier for US Dept of Defence launches. There was basically no pressure on them to lower prices, and the DOD market was large enough that they never bothered going after the commercial launch market.
The recent entry into the launcher market by SpaceX is shaking up this situation: ULA is no longer the sole supplier, and they're restructuring their business in an effort to lower cost to a point where they can compete.
Arianespace is subsidised by ESA to ensure independent access to space for Europe. In 2011, Arianespace had about \$1B in revenue, including \$150M in subsidies. They had 5 Ariane 5 launches in that year, 4 commercial and 1 for ESA.

Improve this answer
$\endgroup$
1
  • $\begingroup$ $$ 150 million / 5 launches is $30 million subsidy per launch. I thought the price difference was much higher than that. $\endgroup$
    – esa
    Commented Sep 17, 2015 at 21:09

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service and acknowledge you have read our privacy policy.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.