Can Private Space Companies Replace the ISS Before 2030? (cnn.com) 31
China's orbital outpost Tiangong was completed in 2022 and is hosting up to three astronauts at a time, reports CNN.
But meanwhile U.S. lawmakers are now signaling there's not time to develop and launch a replacement for the International Space Station — considered the signal most expensive object ever built — before its deorbiting in 2030. A recent Senate bill calls for the U.S. to continue funding it as late as 2032, but that bill still awaits approval from the U.S. Senate and the House.
But some private space companies are already building their alternatives: Private companies that are in the early design and mockup phase of developing these space stations are still waiting on NASA for guidance — and money... [NASA's "Requests for Proposals"] were delayed, in part because it took all of 2025 to cinch a confirmation for Trump's on-again-off-again pick for NASA administrator, Jared Isaacman [confirmed in December]... Similarly, 2025 saw a 45-day government shutdown, the longest in history — adding another hiccup in the space agency's plans to begin formally soliciting proposals from the private sector. Companies now expect that NASA will issue its Request for Proposals in late March or early April, one CEO told CNN...
Several commercial outfits have recently announced big funding influxes aimed at speeding up the development and launch of new orbiting outposts. Houston-based Axiom Space announced a $350 million funding round last month. Its California-based competitor Vast then notched a $500 million raise in early March. Vast is determined to launch a bare-bones station to orbit as soon as possible, with or without federal input, according to the company. "Our approach is to actually not wait for (NASA) and get going and build a minimum viable product, single-module space station called Haven-1, which we're launching into orbit next year," Vast CEO Max Haot told CNN in a phone interview earlier this month. Similarly, Axiom Space is working toward a 2028 launch date for a module that it plans to initially attach to the ISS before breaking off to orbit on its own. A spokesperson told CNN that it the company is "committed" to winning the NASA contract money and may continue pursing such goals even without contract awards.
Still, there's lingering doubt that any of the companies pursuing space stations will be able to stay afloat without securing a coveted NASA contract or at least cinching significant business from the public sector.
The article includes "Another complicating fact: Russia, the United States' primary partner on the ISS, has not pledged to keep operating its half of the space station past 2028." NASA will eventually evaluate proposals for an ISS alternative from Vast, Axiom Space, Jeff Bezos' Blue Origin, Max Space and several competitors including Voyager Technologies, CNN notes, ultimately handing out an estimated $1.5 billion in contracts between 2026 and 2031.
And while those companies may wait decades before a return on their investment, the article includes this quotes from the cofounder/general partner of Balerion Space Ventures, which led the fundraising for Vast. " What's obvious to us is you're going to have multiple vehicles with myriad companies go into space. You're going to have vehicles leaving from celestial bodies, like the moon. And we need a habitat."
But meanwhile U.S. lawmakers are now signaling there's not time to develop and launch a replacement for the International Space Station — considered the signal most expensive object ever built — before its deorbiting in 2030. A recent Senate bill calls for the U.S. to continue funding it as late as 2032, but that bill still awaits approval from the U.S. Senate and the House.
But some private space companies are already building their alternatives: Private companies that are in the early design and mockup phase of developing these space stations are still waiting on NASA for guidance — and money... [NASA's "Requests for Proposals"] were delayed, in part because it took all of 2025 to cinch a confirmation for Trump's on-again-off-again pick for NASA administrator, Jared Isaacman [confirmed in December]... Similarly, 2025 saw a 45-day government shutdown, the longest in history — adding another hiccup in the space agency's plans to begin formally soliciting proposals from the private sector. Companies now expect that NASA will issue its Request for Proposals in late March or early April, one CEO told CNN...
Several commercial outfits have recently announced big funding influxes aimed at speeding up the development and launch of new orbiting outposts. Houston-based Axiom Space announced a $350 million funding round last month. Its California-based competitor Vast then notched a $500 million raise in early March. Vast is determined to launch a bare-bones station to orbit as soon as possible, with or without federal input, according to the company. "Our approach is to actually not wait for (NASA) and get going and build a minimum viable product, single-module space station called Haven-1, which we're launching into orbit next year," Vast CEO Max Haot told CNN in a phone interview earlier this month. Similarly, Axiom Space is working toward a 2028 launch date for a module that it plans to initially attach to the ISS before breaking off to orbit on its own. A spokesperson told CNN that it the company is "committed" to winning the NASA contract money and may continue pursing such goals even without contract awards.
Still, there's lingering doubt that any of the companies pursuing space stations will be able to stay afloat without securing a coveted NASA contract or at least cinching significant business from the public sector.
The article includes "Another complicating fact: Russia, the United States' primary partner on the ISS, has not pledged to keep operating its half of the space station past 2028." NASA will eventually evaluate proposals for an ISS alternative from Vast, Axiom Space, Jeff Bezos' Blue Origin, Max Space and several competitors including Voyager Technologies, CNN notes, ultimately handing out an estimated $1.5 billion in contracts between 2026 and 2031.
And while those companies may wait decades before a return on their investment, the article includes this quotes from the cofounder/general partner of Balerion Space Ventures, which led the fundraising for Vast. " What's obvious to us is you're going to have multiple vehicles with myriad companies go into space. You're going to have vehicles leaving from celestial bodies, like the moon. And we need a habitat."
Can? Yes... (Score:2)
Will? No.
"For here am I sitting in a tin can / Far above the world / Planet Earth is blue / And there's nothing I can do".
Re: (Score:1)
Will? No.
Well, they might, if there is money to be made, or NASA cuts them a big check (probably the NASA check).
The more important question might be do we need humans in a space station full time to accomplish the goals we wish to achieve?
Re: (Score:2)
Face it ... (Score:5, Interesting)
And while those companies may wait decades before a return on their investment,
... the ISS isn't about ROI. It's job is primarily R&D. That produces little, if any financial reward. If a new zero-g manufacturing process is perfected, it will get its own purpose-built station/platform. The ISS isn't set up like a business park. Where one can lease a module and start knocking out product. And that process will most likely be robotic. The payback isn't likely going to cover a human manufacturing staff if the job is to run a gravity-free punch press or something. There will be no space and life support budgeted for meat-sack visitors.
And that R&D belongs to the public. Because it was funded by the public. With the understanding that there probably would never be a financial payback on pure science.
Re:Face it ... (Score:5, Insightful)
ROI for a private space station would be charging governments for access to do the research and such.
Re: (Score:2)
https://www.spaceforge.com/news/the-forge-awakens-space-forge-successfully-launches-forgestar-1-the-uks-first-in-space-manufacturing-satellite [spaceforge.com]
What's the mission statement? (Score:2)
In general, for these decades long government funded projects:
- What's the mission?
- What's the benefit to average US citizens?
- What is the 10 year cost to build and run it?
- What is the cost overrun percent by year 5 that the mission is automatically ended?
- List the achievements and benefits to average US citizens for the existing ISS over its 20+ year history. This is things in use today for a large number of average US citizens today and not breakthroughs that are forever 5-10 years away.
The space pro
Inflatable modules (Score:3)
I always thought the quickest way, and also one of the more robust options, to achieve a space station was to use inflatable modules. Bigalow tested a couple of modules out and I thought it went rather well. They had plans to attach a module to the ISS at one time. But even still it was expensive work, and the pandemic killed them, unfortunately. But I understand the technology demonstration missions were quite successful.
The cynic in me feels like now that we've past the ten thousandth satellite in just the StarLink constellation with thousands more planned to launch in the next couple of years, that Kessler syndrome will start well before 2030.
Re: (Score:2)
I always thought the quickest way, and also one of the more robust options, to achieve a space station was to use inflatable modules. Bigalow tested a couple of modules out and I thought it went rather well. They had plans to attach a module to the ISS at one time. But even still it was expensive work, and the pandemic killed them, unfortunately. But I understand the technology demonstration missions were quite successful.
INARS (I Am Not A Rocket Scientist) and obviously it got into testing, but I'd want a long, long test period before I'd entrust anything important to those. Metal modules are an understood quantity, and when they leak, the failure modes are also understood and repairs are usually easy enough if you can find them. A metal module will retain shape and rigidity even if it's unpressured and even if it has a golfball-sized hole in it. I don't know how you repair a depressurized, flopping and clingy waterbed b
Re: (Score:2)
The cynic in me feels like now that we've past the ten thousandth satellite in just the StarLink constellation with thousands more planned to launch in the next couple of years, that Kessler syndrome will start well before 2030.
You can tell the cynic in you to calm down because that's no longer a concern. At least, not for Starlink.
https://x.com/skorusARK/status... [x.com]
As of this year, Starlink began migrating to just within the region marked as "kept clean by drag" in that chart, or roughly 480km, vs the current 550km that the chart shows. SpaceX wants to go even lower than the ISS, for a lot of reasons, but hasn't been able to get approval to do so, except for the occasional short-duration trial.
https://universemagazine.com/e... [universemagazine.com]
At a
Re: (Score:2)
It sounds great, but the primary benefit is quickly providing open space. However, work done in space isn't done in open space, but with equipment. So now instead of having the bulk of the equipment mounted inside a module on the ground (where it's usually much easier to handle, with lots of lifting equipment and people and tools), you've got to do it in zero-G.
You still have to launch the entire mass (possibly more if there's extra tools and packing) and much of the volume, you've just significantly expand
The structure or the incentive structure? (Score:2)
It's not that the ISS is totally useless; but it currently justifies an awful lot of launches, including manned, more or less by bei
once again it's (Score:3)
Betteridge's Law of Headlines
Anything is possible (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I wondered if anyone else spotted that
Re: (Score:1)
I don't miss a signal typo.
Absolutely not (Score:2)
It's already known that they won't (Score:3)
Re: (Score:1)
ISS has been extended to at least 2032, and there's a caveat that for any commercial station "taking over", there must be a 6-month overlap (so it could extend further). NASA will have crews on both during those 6 months, I think.
The U.S. Congress committed to doing so. Russia has not. Is the U.S. going to seize and operate the Russian modules? What if the Russians remove key components, delete the software or otherwise render their modules non functional?
If they bring Mars rocks back (Score:2)
...they better test their safety in a space station rather than Earth. There's a slim but non-zero chance they have microbes we have no immunity for.
Re: (Score:1)
Such meteorites tend to be sterilized via thousands of years drifting in space and re-entry heat. We don't know really know if such is comparable to a direct surface sample.
Re: (Score:2)
signal most expensive object (Score:2)
Sig null.
Does CNN bother to employ proofreaders? (Score:2)