SpaceOps Conferences 10.2514/6.

2018-2489
28 May - 1 June 2018, Marseille, France
2018 SpaceOps Conference

Ariane 6 Launch System Operational Concept

Main Drivers

Pier Domenico Resta1, Julio A. Monreal2, Benoit Pouffary3, Sonia Lemercier4, Aline Decadi5
European Space Agency, Space Transportation Directorate, F-75012 Paris, France

Emilie Arnoud6
ArianeGroup, F-78130 Les Mureaux, France

The launchers of the European Ariane and Vega families are leaders on the launch
service commercial market, with a demonstrated high reliability after long series of
successful flights.
Downloaded by 109.48.106.114 on July 30, 2021 | http://arc.aiaa.org | DOI: 10.2514/6.2018-2489

Ariane 6 is the next heavy European launch system of the Ariane family. It is being
developed with the objectives to provide users with high mass performance, mission
versatility, operational flexibility, high launch rate and low launch service cost.
The European Space Agency (ESA), in its role of Launch System Architect (LSA), is in
charge of ensuring the coherence between the Launcher and the Launch Base and of
verifying the Launch System performance to reach those objectives. With this goal, the LSA
(ESA), the Launcher Prime (ArianeGroup) and the Launch Base Prime (CNES) work
together on building up an optimised launch operations plan.
The launch operations plan starts at the arrival to the Launch Range of the launcher
elements and the spacecraft to be launched together with its support ground equipment. It
ends with the post-flight analyses, the launch facilities revalidation and their reconfiguration
for the following launch.
In order to ensure that the above-mentioned challenging set of objectives is met, the
launch preparation and launch operations concept (here dubbed “operational concept” or
CONOPS) shall be designed taken the mission cost as main driver and pursuing the same
service quality and reliability than provided by Ariane 5 today. Therefore, with the view on
the customer needs, the CONOPS is constantly optimised to minimise wastes. The
optimisation of the CONOPS is done while copping with the safety requirements imposed by
the applicable law and regulations which eventually constitute a guarantee of system
operational robustness.
This paper presents the drivers established to build the Ariane 6 operational concept, the
related trade-offs performed and the rational for the selected choices.
Finally, some aspects of the preliminary operations plan resulting from the CONOPS
exercise are compared with former Ariane operations plans to show differences and
highlight improvements with respect to user’s expectations.

                                                            
1
Ariane 6 Launch System Architect Manager, Space Transportation Development Department.
2
Ariane 6 Launch System Architect Deputy Manager, Space Transportation Development Department, and AIAA Member.
3
Ariane 6 Launch System Architect Chief Engineer, Space Transportation Development Department.
4
Ariane 6 Launch System Architect Operations Project Engineer, Space Transportation Development Department.
5
Ariane 6 Launch System Architect RAMS Officer, Space Transportation Development Department.
6
Ariane 6 Launch System Architect Operations Engineer. 

1/16 
 
Copyright © 2018 by European Space Agency. Published by the American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Inc., with permission.
 I. Abbreviations
BAL = Launcher Assembly Building
CC = [Launcher] Central Core
ELA4 = Ariane Launch Complex number 4
ESR = Equipped Solid Rocket
LLPM = Lower Liquid Propulsion Module
LS = Launch System
L/V = Launcher Vehicle
MG = Mobile Gantry
PPF = Payload Preparation Facilities
RLOX = Liquid Oxygen Tank
ULPM = Upper Liquid Propulsion Module
Downloaded by 109.48.106.114 on July 30, 2021 | http://arc.aiaa.org | DOI: 10.2514/6.2018-2489

II. Introduction
The Ariane 6 Launch System development has been firstly decided at the time of the European Space Agency
(ESA) Council at Ministerial level held in 2012. At that time, ESA Member States decided to finance the
continuation of the Ariane 5 Mid-life Evolution Programme in parallel with the execution of the Phase A of the
development of a new Launch System dubbed Ariane 6. The definitions of the two launch systems were
constrained by the objective to maximize the common parts of the Cryogenic Upper Stage based on the Vinci
engine. Ariane 6 launch system development objectives were set to achieve a strong mission cost reduction and
were based on a “Poudre-Poudre-Hydrogen” (PPH) configuration of the launcher: the first two stages would
have been based on Solid Rocket Motor engines, the orbital stage on the Vinci Oxygen/Hydrogen cryogenic
engine.

At the end of the project Phase A/B1, a new market assessment together with a re-evaluation of the feasibility of
the overarching goals of Ariane 6 lead ESA to present a completely new proposal to the Council at Ministerial
level held in Luxembourg in December 2014. The new proposal envisaged the development of the Ariane 6
based on a “Poudre-Hydrogen-Hydrogen“ (PHH) launcher configuration and new dedicated launcher
integration and launch pad facilities at CSG – Launch Complex 4 (ELA4) – together with the establishment of a
new governance. In application of guidelines set by Ministers, new Governance was designed for the future
control of European launchers sector. It assigns to ESA the double role of procurement entity of both the Ariane
6 Launcher System and Launch Base development activities together with the role of Launch System Architect
(LSA). ArianeGroup (AG) is the Prime Contractor and Design Authority of the Launcher System development,
CNES is the Prime Contractor and Design Definition Authority of the Launch Base. Finally, the role of future
Ariane 6 Launch Service Provider is appointed to Arianespace that underwent a radical change in its
shareholding: public shares owned CNES were transferred to ASL that becomes the major share-holder
controlling the Company. The European Commission finally approved the transaction in July 2016.

The Ariane 6 Operational Concept is the tool for the modernization of Ariane production and operations
targeted to a significant cost reduction accompanied by increased operational flexibility and versatility and
performances matching best forecasts for years’20 and ‘30s. Ariane 6 Launch System definition is indeed
optimized to serve both institutional and commercial market. This is fundamental to grant a balanced yearly
launch service cost in which Public sector plays the role of the launch service customer to which the Launch
Service Provider is bound to offer launch service price defined upfront and agreed by ESA Member States.

The present paper presents the implementation of the Ariane 6 Operational Concept optimization process that
has now entered the Critical Design Review phase.

2/16 
 
 III. Ariane 6 LS description

The Ariane 6 Launch System is part of the overall ESA Space Transportation Framework that is depicted in
Figure 1 below. The Ariane 6 Launch System is de-composed in:

 Ariane 6 Launcher System that is the compound of production facilities located either in Europe or in the
CSG perimeter in French Guiana, the launch vehicle elements that are finally assembled and checked, with
the payload integrated and software loaded, ready for filling operations and launch countdown,
 Ariane 6 Launch Complex including all facilities necessary to the final assembly of the launch vehicle on
its launch pad.

The CSG Launch Range facilities support the implementation of launch services providing, among the others,
Telemetry, Tracking and Safety means; Spacecraft (S/C) preparation facilities (“Ensemble de Preparation
Charges Utiles” – EPCU); auxiliary facilities and services for the launch preparation (e.g. storage areas,
weather forecast, etc.).
Downloaded by 109.48.106.114 on July 30, 2021 | http://arc.aiaa.org | DOI: 10.2514/6.2018-2489

Propellant production facilities are also within the CSG geographical perimeter and are the same already in use
of the exploitation of Ariane 5 and VEGA Launch Systems.

 
Figure 1 ‐ ESA Space Transportation Framework

The Launch System description that follows is indeed the result of the application of an optimization-to-cost of
operations and of concurrent engineering practices that in which the operational concept plays a central role
constraining Launcher System and Launch Complex performances through the definition of their interfaces.

The Ariane 6 launcher is made of the following elements Figure 2:

‐ a common Central Core (CC) composed by:

o a lower liquid propulsion module (LLPM) H150, equipped with the Vulcain 2.1 engine, diameter
5.4m, separated tanks, liquid oxygen tank (RLOX) at top position;

3/16 
 
 o an upper liquid propulsion module (ULPM) H30, equipped with the Vinci re-ignitable engine,
diameter 5.4m, separated tanks, with non-structural RLOX.

‐ two or four solid rocket motors (P120C) used for the lateral equipped solid rocket booster (ESR) with 142 t
of solid propellant loading, a diameter of 3.4m, allowing the two Ariane 6 configurations: A62 and A64,
with 2 and 4 ESR respectively;

‐ dedicated adaptations, depending of the missions (e.g. dual launch system, deorbiting systems when
needed, additional kits, etc.).
Downloaded by 109.48.106.114 on July 30, 2021 | http://arc.aiaa.org | DOI: 10.2514/6.2018-2489

 
Figure 2 ‐ Ariane 6 launcher configurations

The Ariane 6 development programme encompasses the construction of Ariane 6 launch complex at the Guiana
Space Centre (CSG) in French Guiana, and the adaptation of the Launch Range for its exploitation at CSG.

The Launch Complex facilities are composed of:

 the BAL building (a French acronym for “Bâtiment d’Assemblage Lanceur”) for integrating the Central
Core of Ariane 6, composed of the LLPM and the ULPM;
 a launch control center located in the CDL3;
 support buildings for the provision of supplies;
 the launch pad itself, including a launch platform, a blast deflector, a mobile gantry and a lightning rod
system.

The adaptation of the Launch Range encompasses telemetry, remote control, trajectory tracking,
telecommunications (data, audio, and video), weather forecast station, optics & video disciplines, Range
Control Centre, payloads preparation facilities, chemical laboratories.

The Ariane 6 launcher Central Core assembly building (BAL) is located in the Preparation Zone. The BAL’s
main function is the integration and preparation of the Launcher Central Core (CC) in horizontal position before
transfer to the launch zone. The BAL’s final design is depicted in Figure 3.

4/16 
 
Downloaded by 109.48.106.114 on July 30, 2021 | http://arc.aiaa.org | DOI: 10.2514/6.2018-2489

Figure 3 ‐ Ariane 6 Launcher Assembly Building (BAL)

The BAL is divided in 3 main zones:

 On the south side, the Unpacking Hall (not air conditioned), which can receive only one container at a time
(containers shall be evacuated as campaign goes on),
 On the north side, the Assembly Hall (air conditioned) with one CC assembly line and one CC storage line,
 On the west side, technical rooms zone.

The Launch Zone enables the filling of the launcher, the last functional checks and the lift-off. Two symmetric
covered exhaust ducts are sized to evacuate four solid propellant boosters and one cryogenic engine combustion
gases, with a deflector and a water retention area. The launch pad integrates a fixed launch table and a fixed
umbilical mast equipped with 2 cryogenic arms and connection systems between Launch Base facility and the
launcher. The launching area depicted in Figure 4 is equipped with four lightning masts protecting the launcher,
a water tower (for deluge systems only) and a Mobile Gantry (a mobile metallic structure equipped with
platforms giving access to the appropriate levels of the launcher).

 
Figure 4 ‐ Ariane 6 Launch Pad 

5/16 
 
 The Mobile Gantry (Figure 5) can stand in two different positions: a front position during launcher preparation
and a rear position (120 m away from front position) at launcher’s lift-off. It will enable the sliding and the
assembly of the Equipped Solid Boosters to the Central Core and the hoisting of the Upper Composite and it
will provide access to the launcher as late as possible for final preparation and chronology.
Downloaded by 109.48.106.114 on July 30, 2021 | http://arc.aiaa.org | DOI: 10.2514/6.2018-2489

Figure 5 ‐ Ariane 6 Mobile Gantry Data 

IV. Ariane 6 LS High Level Requirements

The High Level Requirements constraining the Ariane 6 performances and operational concept choices are
listed below:
a. To operate from Europe’s Spaceport in in French Guiana (Guiana Space Centre);
b. To comply with applicable laws and regulations (incl. FSOA and ESA Space Debris ADMIN);
c. To withstand and be secured with respect to external environment (e.g. meteorology and aerology,
EMC/lightning, EMC induced by spacecraft);
d. To be compatible with other CSG launch systems in exploitation;
e. To ensure a high launch rate capability: Ariane 6 shall be capable of up to 12 launches per year. This
requirement is translated in a capability to launch every 15 working days allowing a high launch
cadence of 8 launches over 6 months;
f. To optimise Operational Costs: the recurrent launch preparation and launch cost has been optimized by
simplifying the operations and reducing so the operations time:
i. Simplify CC integration before assembly with the ESR: assembly in a dedicated building
(BAL) where only mechanical operations are performed (electrical checks are done in the
launch area, before UC integration;
ii. Short Upper Composite (UC) matting process from S/C accommodation up to UC matting on
top of the L/V within the mobile gantry (MG);
iii. Short launcher processing in the launch area after ESR assembly with the CC;
iv. Minimised activities and time to refurbishment of the ZL after each launch to ready it for the
next launch;
v. Modularity approach: e.g. CC exchange in case of engine exchange is needed;
g. To ensure at least same reliability and availability than Ariane 5;
h. Use Lessons Learned from past launch systems development and operation:

6/16 
 
 The Ariane 6 requirements encompass a large domain of missions represented in the Figure 6 below.

Launch Service

Mission: P/L Characteristics: Services to P/L:

‐ Launcher Configuration (A62 / A64) ‐ MCI
‐ on‐ground
‐ P/L Configuration (Single / Dual) ‐ P/L Conditions at separation
‐ in‐flight
‐ Category of orbit at separation ‐ Mechanical characteristics (frequencies)

Standard
Secondary
Main Missions
Missions (demonstration of
feasibility)
Qualified Option

Pre-designed Option
Downloaded by 109.48.106.114 on July 30, 2021 | http://arc.aiaa.org | DOI: 10.2514/6.2018-2489

Known P/L (past & future)

Core Domain (specified in Applicable HLR)

Analyzed domain (specified in Applicable HLR)

Extension of the Core Domain (with possible 

limitations)
Qualified Domain

 
 
Figure 6 ‐ Ariane 6 Mission Domains 

Thanks to the extent of the development phase, the Launch Service Provider will be able to respond to both
Institutional and Commercial market request and propose both single Payload (P/L) missions (Ariane 62
configuration) and multiple P/L missions for a large domain of applications including Telecommunications,
Earth Observation, Navigation, Science and Space Exploration. The emergency of a new market with
applications based on light satellites and constellations has been caught in the Ariane 6 development that
encompasses a variety of P/L support and accommodation structures and dispensers. Special attention is also
dedicated to the possibility to use spare capacity whenever available thanks to the initiative dubbed Low cost
Launch services for Light satellites (LLL) that is targeted to develop new operational concept’s variants
enabling the availability of the launcher mass-to-orbit capability to New Space players.

V. Lessons Learned from past LS development

Lessons learned from the past European launch systems are being considered during the development of the
Ariane 6 launch system, in particular:

i. Review of past launch systems anomalies to reduce their likelihood through an Ariane 6 launch system
“design-to-robustness” approach and allowing, by design, a quicker treatment in case of anomaly
occurrence;
j. Foresee a dynamic and reactive spare parts logistics to enable the minimum time to repair/exchange;
k. Ensure the appropriate resources availability in the launch zone to treat degraded cases without
needing to disassemble and to come back to the launcher assembly building (BAL);
l. Optimise the interaction with other launch systems on the range when using common means for
different launch systems, e.g. launch range means (weather forecast station, roads, logistics,
coordination and safety offices, etc.);

7/16 
 
 m. Optimise S/C processing from the operations in the S/C Preparation Facilities (EPCU) prior to launch,
through the combined operation with the launch vehicle and up to the launch;
n. Assembly of the ESR as late as possible to allow a not constrained access to the CC due to safety
constraints related with pyrotechnical environment (i.e. see chapter VIII conservative scenario);
o. Dedicated roads for transfer of launcher elements (CC, ESR, propellant tanks) and payload composite
within the launch range separated from the personnel roads.

VI. Ariane 6 LS Operational Concept Targets

The Ariane 6 launch system operational concept covers the whole launch preparation to launch data analyses
cycle. Starting with the launch request from a customer, the mission analyses and up to the launch, the launch
base post-launch revalidation and launch data analysis as a feedback for following launches.
The following areas have been specially considered for the Ariane 6 launch system operations optimisation in
particular vis-a-vis customer requirements:
Downloaded by 109.48.106.114 on July 30, 2021 | http://arc.aiaa.org | DOI: 10.2514/6.2018-2489

a. Launch mission flexibility and versatility:

i. Quick launch mission analyses allowing rapid feedback to ensure launch compliance with
P/L requirements;
ii. Reactive L/V specific adaptations to meet new launch mission requirements;
b. Optimized P/L-L/V combined processing: here a joint ESA/Arianespace/ArianeGroup/CNES working
group has streamlined the operations flux enabling a COP duration of 5 days as illustrated below;
c. Optimised Launch Complex and Launch Range operations
d. Easy interfaces with the spacecraft
e. Optimised cycle for launcher processing (integration and check-out policy)
f. Simplified launch pad refurbishment
g. Quick post-flight analyses
h. Simplified maintenance in operational conditions of all ground facilities.
i. The launch cycle is designed to reduce operations time and cost => “design to operations”.

8/16 
 
 A. Methodology
Concurrent engineering tasks have been extensively used to tackle the end to-end system optimisation,
integrating from the beginning the lessons learnt from former launch systems development and operations
(Ariane & Vega mainly). The overall methodology is illustrated in Figure 7 below:
Downloaded by 109.48.106.114 on July 30, 2021 | http://arc.aiaa.org | DOI: 10.2514/6.2018-2489

 
 
Figure 7 ‐ Ariane 6 Launch System Development Methodology

To illustrate such activity, an insight is provided on the trade-off performed between a full horizontal, mixed
horizontal/vertical and full vertical operational concept. The three scenario investigated were full Horizontal,
Horizontal/Vertical and Full Vertical. The Full Vertical is an Ariane 5 like scenario while the Full Horizontal
scenario relied on the hypothesis that both launchers and P/L would be integrated in horizontal position. The
Horizontal/Vertical scenario is a smart mix of both scenarios, meaning that most of operations are performed
horizontally but the P/L will be integrated vertically and assembled at a later stage on top of the launcher on the
launch pad.

For the trade-off, the following elements were studied concurrently, involving experts from operations,
mechanical, avionics and fluidics experts as well as cost engineers:

‐ Launcher Integration, P/L Integration, CC verticalisation concept, Launcher connections

‐ Check-out policy
‐ BAL concept

For each element, the following criteria were used for quotation:

‐ Recurring Cost (end-to-end)

‐ Time to market (Maiden flight 2020, Full Operational Capability in 2023) and fit to the NRC
‐ P/L Customer’s satisfaction criteria
‐ Flexibility to meet launch manifest dynamics
‐ Robustness to contingencies
‐ Adaptability

Even if no showstopper was identified for the horizontal integration logic, it was found not be optimal in terms
of service to the customers, leading to the choice of the horizontal/vertical scenario.

9/16 
 
 B. Current “design-to-operations” under study
Reaching ambitious operations duration targets goes by driving the design of Launcher and Launch Base
elements towards operation efficiency. In this frame, the following workshops have been identified:

a. Cryogenic connection systems junction: quick connection devices are currently under analysis to
drastically reduce the operations duration observed with classical bolt flanges connection devices;
b. Optimisation of Central Core vs ESR mechanical dimension chains to avoid any ESR ripping
operations for ESR-CC integration;
c. Parallelism of mechanical & electrical integration operations for the Central Core integration and the
ESR assembly;
d. L/V final integration test in less than 2 hours;
e. Avoid need of sensors recalibration once in the launch area.

C. Challenges
The duration of each operation defined in the BAL has been fixed to fulfil the target of “BAL in 3 days”. The
Downloaded by 109.48.106.114 on July 30, 2021 | http://arc.aiaa.org | DOI: 10.2514/6.2018-2489

final feasibility of carrying out the operations in the allocated time is still to be verified.
The launch vehicle and launch complex means design, as well as the operational process itself, have to be
challenged with respect to current launch systems to achieve the timeline target.
At the end of design loops, the duration of BAL operations will have to be reviewed in order to validate the
final duration of each operation and the resources needed for each operation.

Challenges, which have already been identified, are:

 Design of the floors/accesses to Liquid Propulsion Modules: the duration of the floors installation / removal
as well as the duration of internal inspection before removal is specified to be very short compared to what
is known on Ariane 5 today.
 Design of Dollies / Rolling bases and associated interfaces in order to minimize the durations of stage
unpacking, containers repackaging, ULPM & LLPM relative positioning, etc.
 Means of measurement for ULPM & LLPM relative positioning.

VII. Current Definition of the Ariane 6 LS operational concept

Two main distinctions may be done on the different activities constituting the Ariane 6 LS operational concept:

a. Activities in Mainland Europe;

b. Activities at the CSG:

i. The operational cycle at the launch rate starts with the launcher vehicle integration which is
performed in four main steps:
 The launch vehicle central composite (CC) integration in a dedicated building
 The transfer of the CC to the mobile gantry (MG) at the launch area (ZL)
 The transfer of the strap-on solid boosters (ESR) to the MG
 Assembly of the CC with the ESR in the MG at the ZL
ii. The launch cycle continues with the matting of the upper composite (UC) where the payloads
are accommodated
iii. Then the launch countdown and the launch, which are followed by the ZL refurbishment after
the launch and the reconfiguration of the launch complex and launch, range to prepare the
next launch.

10/16 
 
 As a matter of facts today it is confirmed that the horizontal integration of the launch vehicle central core has
introduced synergies in the end-to-end production chain: adopting the same manufacturing and integration
processes for stage (Europe) and launch vehicle (French Guiana) has enabled to reduce significantly time-to-
market of Ariane 6, to reduce and consolidate operational skills necessary to exploit the system and to mutualize
them between the Europe production chain and the Guiana production chain.

The strict application of “Deming cycle” (PDCA) applied to Launch System fluidic functions together with
careful exploitation of the knowledge gained through Ariane 5 ECA exploitation have achieved important
savings for cryogenic and conventional fluids compared to Ariane 5. In this way launch rate can be satisfied
with very limited upgrade of propellant’s production facilities.

Another achievement of the Ariane 6 development methodology is the simplification of flight hardware allowed
by the different choice of launcher to ground cryogenic connections system whose main functions and
constraints can be synthesized as follows:

 Fulfill cryogenic (but not only) Ariane 6 fluid interface functions


Downloaded by 109.48.106.114 on July 30, 2021 | http://arc.aiaa.org | DOI: 10.2514/6.2018-2489

Disconnect in positive time just after ESR ignition

 Fulfill RAMS requirements.

Cryogenic Connection System design (Figure 8) is common for the Lower and the Upper Liquid Propulsion
Modules allowing cost reduction by maximization of hardware commonality.

Ariane 6 launch system methodology gives priority to a design-to-operations to minimize launch campaign
duration through improved Flight segment to ground segment interfaces and to a review and optimisation of the
launcher checkout logic to minimize complexity and degraded modes treatment at the Launch Base.

Figure 8 Cryogenic Connection System Architecture

Finally, logistic constraints have been challenged and a critical item has been identified in the definition of CSG
road system that requires limited refurbishment to enable free movement of people and non-dangerous means
during dangerous transfers. The subject is illustrated in Figure 9 in which two separate main roads are shown
corresponding to the ESR transfer road and the CSG main road.

11/16 
 
Downloaded by 109.48.106.114 on July 30, 2021 | http://arc.aiaa.org | DOI: 10.2514/6.2018-2489

Figure 9 CSG Roads System

Ariane 6 Launch System is ready to become compatible with new generation of the CSG Launch Range (e.g.
telemetry transmission by satellite, localization by GNSS receivers).

VIII. Safety Aspects

Safety is a must in Launch Vehicles operations. Ariane 6 processing cycle has to be compliant with Safety
Rules and provide as much as possible a demonstration of its feasibility and robustness in the early steps of the
development. In this objective, a collaborative way of work has been implemented by ESA with all the
stakeholders of the Ariane 6 project namely ArianeGroup (resp. CNES) as Launcher System (resp. Launch
Base) Design Authority and CNES/CSG as Safety Authority. A Safety roadmap has then been implemented to
secure the preparation of main development milestones:
 
‐ Identifying as soon as possible all the hazard scenarii impacting the safety of people and property, on the
ground and in flight,
‐ Defining, validating and implementing consistent mitigation actions to ensure the compliancy with law and
regulations.

The Safety roadmap is split in 6 months cycles, as illustrated in Figure 10 below.

12/16 
 
Downloaded by 109.48.106.114 on July 30, 2021 | http://arc.aiaa.org | DOI: 10.2514/6.2018-2489

 
Figure 10 Safety Cycle

This new safety management approach has revealed to be very efficient to reach a common understanding on
the way forwards for the usual safety issues like operations in presence of pyrotechnical products, qualification
rules of neutralization chains and close range. As a matter of example, the arrival sequence of the CC and the
ESRs at the launch area will be carried out in a conservative scenario (i.e. CC first) during the first launches and
its optimisation assessed towards a target scenario (i.e. ESR first) with the aim to optimize the overall launcher
integration operations schedule.

IX. Degraded Cases

Based on the lessons learnt from Operational Launch Systems, it has been observed that the operational concept
elaboration shall take into account from the very beginning the management of degraded cases as a major
contributor to the achievement of Dependability objectives. In this objective, the capacity to manage such cases
has been clearly identified and integrated in the robustness quotation of the operational concept options trade-
offs. As a consequence, it could be concluded that the minor degraded cases/contingencies occurring in a
Launch Campaign could be covered by the flexibility requirements applicable to the Launch System design:

‐ All minor degraded cases can be treated under Mobile Gantry, except nozzle and engine exchange that
would require to send back the Central Core to BAL
‐ Launcher System check-out logic principles established and evaluated in coherence with Operational
Concept elaboration
‐ All operations specified to be reversible (including CC assembly on ESRs)
‐ No Electrical Ground Support Equipment to be installed in BAL
‐ BAL integration areas limited to 1 assembly line and 1 CC storage line
‐ No fairing disassembly means required under Mobile Gantry as it has been ensured that minor
contingencies would be treated via local fairing doors and accesses, while in case of major anomaly on
a P/L, the P/L composite will be sent back to Encapsulation Hall.

To further secure the achievement of Dependability objectives, a Launch System risk analysis roadmap has
been established by ESA with both Launcher System and Launch Base Design Authorities to evaluate, as soon
as operational sequences and preliminary design are available, the risk mitigation actions to be implemented by
the other segment in case it would lead to major impacts on the segment that generated the failure mode. The
Figure 11 shows the methodology that has been implemented at Launch System level.

13/16 
 
Downloaded by 109.48.106.114 on July 30, 2021 | http://arc.aiaa.org | DOI: 10.2514/6.2018-2489

Figure 11 Launch System Hazard Analyses

This approach is of utmost importance to secure the robustness of the Ariane 6 Launch System:
‐ facing external environments (lightning, winds) in particular during transfer and Countdown phases;
‐ during cryogenic operations to optimise the safety barriers/operational procedures with respect to usual
feared events like geyser, water hammer, flash vaporisation effects;
‐ for Cryogenic Connection Systems disconnection and retraction. There, Ariane 6 Launch System will
benefit from a positive time disconnection system suppressing the need of purging devices on the
Launcher in flight while securing the draining operations in case of last instants Launch abort.
However, a stringent Launch System failure mode analysis is to be performed to suppress any design
issue before the Combined Test.

X. Right-first-time: Launch System Verification and Validation Logic

Defining an operational concept optimized to operational cost and launch rate constraints of High Level
Requirements is a need accompanied with another very important constraint: time-to-market, meaning, for the
case of Ariane 6, having the Maiden Flight within 2020 and the first exploitation flight beginning 2021. This is
a programmatic need of very high added value that has lead the project to abandon the prototypal development
approach and to enforce the right first time paradigm at all levels of the development chain.

At Launch System level, this has meant that ESA has established a very thorough integrated verification plan
encompassing the verification of technical and operational performances at the same time. For each Launch
System function contributing to operational performances (including dependability), the end-to-end verification
and validation logic is being established is collaboration with the Launcher System and Launch Base Design
Authorities with the aim to guarantee that:

 Requirements are fully verified and validated at lowest possible level in the product breakdown
structure,
 Requirements are satisfactorily verified and validated at least ones in the integrated logic,
 Test is the preferred verification method, including scale testing when necessary.

The Verification and Validation logic does not only encompass H/W and S/W products, but operational
products themselves. They are a compound of operation’s plans, operation’s requirements expressed by design

14/16 
 
 authorities, operation’s procedures defined by operation’s authorities, control software and databases. Each
operational product is to be tested as soon as possible in the integrated verification and validation plan.

Launch System validation encompasses four main steps:

 Product level testing (Category 1 tests);

 Early Combined Tests defined by introducing Launch System test requirements into the Launcher
System, respectively Launch Base, qualification tests;
 Launch System Combined Tests performed at Launch Complex when that has completed its
development activities;
 Maiden Flight Campaign.

Implementation of right first time approach requires using the operational organization and products designed
for exploitation at least since Launch System Combined Tests and this is implemented in ESA test plans.

XI. Comparison with former Ariane operations plans

Downloaded by 109.48.106.114 on July 30, 2021 | http://arc.aiaa.org | DOI: 10.2514/6.2018-2489

Ariane 6 is developed with the objectives to provide users with high mass performance, mission versatility,
operational flexibility, high launch rate and low launch service cost. The following improvements with respect
to former Ariane operations plans contribute to the final objective of better fulfilling user’s expectations during
the preparation, launch and post-launch operations:

‐ A Launcher System concept based on:

o a design for manufacturing and operations => design-to-cost;
o an industrial organisation based on the “Extended Enterprise” concept;
o a “production pulls” strategy.
‐ A Launch Complex concept based on:
o a design allowing a time optimised launcher integration, launcher checkout and countdown;
o a configuration of the launch pad taken into account lessons learned from Ariane 5, in
particular for what concerns the design of the gas exhaust ducts which in addition allow future
evolution of Ariane 6 launcher towards more powerful versions;
o a launcher control and command room accommodating commercial off-the-self operational
computing equipment together with a high reliable and redundant main computing core.
‐ A Launch Range adaptation based on:
o a customer oriented payload processing services including specific high speed links between
the spacecraft and its control bench;
o a multi launch missions re-configuration capability to be compliant with a high launch rate.
‐ A Launch System operational concept resulting in:
o a time optimised operations plan for launcher integration, payload upper composite assembly,
checkouts and launch readiness;
o a time optimised launch countdown including, for instance, a shorter liquid propellants
launcher filling process;
o a quicker delivery to customer (i.e. within 30 minutes after separation) of flight results
synthesis at separation (orbital characteristics, attitude data);
o a quicker post-flight analysis (i.e. within 2 weeks after launch) allowing a high launch rate
and ensuring early identification of flight non-conformances so they can be treated as soon as
possible.

15/16 
 
 XII. Conclusions
The results achieved so far demonstrate the well-funded of the Ariane 6 development methodology, notably the
concurrent design of products and operations with recurring cost check against targets performed at each step of
the development cycle. This is the basis for getting an upfront confirmation of the compliance to cost
requirements that are part of Ariane 6 HLR. The overall operations plan resulting from the CONOPS exercise
has been presented and has been compared, for some challenging points, with former European launch systems
operations plans showing the differences and highlight improvements with respect to user’s expectations.

Acknowledgments
ESA authors thanks ArianeGroup and CNES for their cooperative work allowing reaching the Ariane 6 targets
in time and in cost.
Downloaded by 109.48.106.114 on July 30, 2021 | http://arc.aiaa.org | DOI: 10.2514/6.2018-2489

16/16