ERIC BERGER: Europe’s Ariane 6 rocket is turning into a space policy disaster.

Member nations of Europe make financial allocations to the European Space Agency and expect roughly that amount of money in return in terms of space projects. So the development and production of Ariane 6 was spread across a number of nations under management of a large conglomerate, France-based ArianeGroup.

This approach combined the worst of the parochial politics that guide NASA funding in the United States with the sluggish activity of a traditional aerospace company accustomed to guaranteed contracts. Naturally, therefore, development of the project has lagged and gone over budget. As of this writing, the public date for the debut launch of Ariane 6 remains “late 2023,” but the rocket’s first flight will certainly slip into 2024. And its development budget has nearly doubled, to $4.4 billion.

That is a lot of time—nearly a decade—and money for Europe to develop what is essentially a poorer version of SpaceX’s Falcon 9 rocket. In the nine years since Europe began development of the Ariane 6 to compete with SpaceX, the Falcon 9 rocket has nearly doubled its payload capacity and become partially reusable, so it is now more capable and costs far less. It has also launched more than 215 times, which is nearly as many rockets as the Ariane program has launched since 1979. Because of this, the Falcon 9 is now extremely reliable and capable of launching on schedule.

So why is Europe developing a rocket that costs more than a Falcon 9 and is a decade late to the party?

Everybody — ULA, Boeing, Ariane, Roscosmos, I mean everybody — should have thrown out all their existing plans once SpaceX proved that reusable rockets were both reliable and profitable.