Just in case you were under any illusions in regards to the age of the International Space Station, Monday marked the twenty fifth anniversary of the launch of the Zarya module. This Russian-built power and propulsion module formed the cornerstone of the space station, and the primary residents arrived two years later.
In other words, some hardware on the space station has now been in the cruel environment of outer space for 1 / 4 of a century. Questions on how long it might probably last are, increasingly, greater than theoretical.
NASA has been grappling with the best way to move on from the International Space Station for a while. There may be a general sense that, on condition that we have had humans living in low-Earth orbit for greater than twenty years, it could be good to maintain that streak going.
The plan that NASA has settled on is constant to fly the International Space Station—if it is feasible given the aging nature of the hardware and at-times tenuous relationship with Russia—through 2030. After that NASA would really like to see a number of private firms begin operating facilities in low-Earth orbit. The agency would then lease time on those commercially operated stations, sharing them with astronauts from other nations, in addition to space tourists.
The issue is that it now appears entirely possible that no private facilities will yet be flying in orbit by 2030, resulting in the dreaded “g” word—in NASA parlance, a in capabilities.
To gap or to not gap
After the ultimate Apollo crewed flight in 1975, the US space agency had no capability to fly astronauts into space until the appearance of the Space Shuttle in 1981. This six-year gap in human spaceflight was painful for the space agency. It repeated the method in 2011, when the Space Shuttle retired and NASA had to attend nearly nine years for a alternative, in the shape of SpaceX’s Crew Dragon.
Each of those gaps were brought on by a mixture of poor planning, inadequate funding, and over-optimistic schedules. Fortunately, it’s difficult to assume NASA facing a niche in human spaceflight capability any time soon. Not only does the agency have the Dragon spacecraft, but in addition, Boeing’s Starliner vehicle should soon start flying. NASA also has its own Orion deep space vehicle. Looking further down the road, SpaceX has the larger Starship spacecraft coming, Sierra Space intends to eventually add crew to Dream Chaser, and Blue Origin can also be planning a crewed spacecraft. As El Guapo says in , NASA will soon have a of crew vehicles.
The larger problem now could be where they are going to go.
NASA has been planning for a transition to “industrial LEO destinations,” often called CLDs, for about half a decade. It has development contracts with Axiom Space, Blue Origin, and Voyager Space for 3 different concepts and is working with other firms, including SpaceX and Vast Space, on different plans. The agency expects to award large “services” contracts to 1 or more firms in 2026 to support the event of personal stations.
The actual query is whether or not these options will likely be ready 4 years later. Space stations are hard. It took NASA and half a dozen other space agencies world wide a decade to plan, construct, and launch the primary elements of the International Space Station. These firms are expected to do that faster and with far less money.
Possibly a niche is OK
On Monday, during a gathering of the NASA Advisory Council’s Human Exploration and Operations Committee, a NASA official said he doesn’t wish to see a niche in low-Earth orbit. But Phil McAlister, director of the Industrial Spaceflight Division at NASA Headquarters that oversees the CLD program, said he could accept one if the result’s a long-term solution.
“That might be bad, and I don’t desire a niche,” McAlister said. “But when the CLDs are usually not ready, we may need one. Personally, I do not think that may be the tip of the world. It might not be unrecoverable, especially if it’s relatively short-term. It would impact some research somewhat, but we could leverage Crew Dragon and Starliner to minimize the impact of a niche.”
McAlister said the 2 spacecraft might be provisioned to permit a two-person crew to stay in space for as much as 10 days to finish crucial research.
One reason a niche could also be inevitable is funding. McAlister noted the likelihood of federal budget cuts in coming cycles because the US government reins in spending. “With all of the budget challenges now we have ahead, you recognize, something has got to offer,” he said.
The US Congress was already somewhat reluctant to completely fund industrial space stations, and it seems not unreasonable that less funding for industrial space stations will slow their development.
Although McAlister didn’t address it Monday, some industrial space station firms have also raised concerns in regards to the specter of an extension for the International Space Station. If NASA or Congress were to push for an extension of the aging facility beyond 2030, that may likely impair their ability to boost private capital for industrial replacements.