Talk:Ariane 5

Upcoming flights

It isn't difficult to find sources like this press release which at least begin to support some of the assertions made in the Ariane 5#Upcoming flights section. Does anyone have a citable source for the particular flight and vehicle serial numbers presented in the table? We might have to delete those columns if the assertions made there can't be verified. (sdsds - talk) 02:30, 28 July 2008 (UTC)

Shape of booster nose cones

The shape of Ariane 5 booster nose cones is quite distinctive. Is it correct to describe them as "canted ogives"? Or are they "canted conics"? Or something else entirely? The Apogee Rockets "Peak of Flight" model-building newsletter calls them "oblique nose cones" and asserts Proton and H2 use them as well. Is there another source that would confirm these assertions? (sdsds - talk) 05:50, 15 January 2009 (UTC)

I'm not sure wether the terms you refer to have specific meanings within the rocket industry, but as basic geometric/architectural terms the 'canted ogive' is the most correct for the shape used on the main fuselage of the rocket - it resembles the shape in profile of a gothic arch, a canted ogive.

A canted conic could be the term for the booster sections, conic meaning 'cone', and canted meaning 'leaning', ie a leaning cone.

As for oblique, an oblique conic would be a very short, wide cone, which the Ariane does not have. 86.8.186.89 (talk) 11:46, 18 November 2009 (UTC)

a new ariane 5?

i found this article on spaceflight now.com that talks about the upper Vinci engine that is slated to replace the current HM7B upper stage engine on ariane 5 if this information is true then could this be talk about ariane 5 replacement rocket, Ariane 5 ECB? [1] --Nrpf22pr (talk) 02:32, 22 December 2009 (UTC)

It is not a replacement, it is just a new variant, and it is already mentioned in the article: Ariane_5#Future_developments. -MBK₀₀₄ 02:49, 22 December 2009 (UTC)

Europe, a country?

In the infobox it says the country of origin of Ariane 5 is Europe, a continent. Can this be changed to "place of origin" or is there one country that would be accurate? MiraiWarren (talk) 23:17, 28 December 2009 (UTC)

Clarify Variants

Could the section explaining the differences between the variants be made clearer? I would also like to know if the Ariane 5 G used a Vulcain 1B engine (the Vulcain page is not helpful). The ESA website suggests that the next variant (with the Vinci engine) will be called Ariane 5 ME and could enter service in 2016; however, a new successor could be chosen instead. Should the article also mention the Liberty (rocket) proposal?86.41.46.28 (talk) 23:37, 14 September 2011 (UTC)

Ariane 5 G used a Vulcain 1, Ariane 5 GS used a Vulcain 1B (which frankly is such a small modification it might as well be the same engine). The current article already states this.

The Ariane 5 ME (Mid-life Evolution) is effectively the latest version of the Ariane 5 ECB, designed to replace the ECA and ES using a single architecture. The NGL or "Ariane 6", the supposed successor (there are still arguments over what exactly it will replace and when, which is to be decided at ESA's Council of Ministers next year), is running so late it's looking highly likely that the ME will be required anyway.

The Liberty isn't that integral to the subject, perhaps a brief mention in the EPC section is appropriate. ChiZeroOne (talk) 00:29, 15 September 2011 (UTC)

The article does not contain "Vulcain 1" and only mentions "1B" once; in fact the subsequent sentence implies that the Vulcain 1B is the original engine. I don't want to change it because I can't find a suitable reference. Anyway, I also wonder about the Cryogenic Main Stage section-- if two types of first stage are mentioned, shouldn't the thrust data for both be provided? Also the empty mass seems heavier than is listed on ESA's website "This part of" should be deleted as it doesn't make sense.86.44.205.108 (talk) 21:35, 15 September 2011 (UTC)