NASA changes the rules of the game for commercial space stations
- Reference: 1754585140
- News link: https://www.theregister.co.uk/2025/08/07/nasa_changes_the_rules_of/
- Source link:
The new [1]directive [PDF] reflects an unfolding reality at NASA. The US space agency's budget is unlikely to be as big as it was when NASA kicked off the [2]Commercial Low Earth Orbit Destinations Program , the ISS has only a few years left before it is to be [3]de-orbited by a SpaceX vehicle , and priorities within the agency are changing.
NASA bosses have long known that time was running out for the ISS, and agreements have been signed with companies such as Axiom Space for crewed modules that could be attached and then detached from the ISS prior to ditching it. Axiom recently [4]shuffled its assembly sequence to remove dependence on the ISS.
[5]
Those arrangements were all part of phase 1 of the Commercial LEO Development Program's (CLDP) acquisition strategy, during which it was planning the design and development of commercial space stations. Phase 1 also included a pair of funded Space Act Agreements (SAAs) with Blue Origin and Starlab Space to develop commercial free-flying destinations.
[6]
[7]
However, according to the memo, there is a $4 billion budget shortfall in the strategy for [8]phase 2 , during which NASA was supposed to certify one or more of the proposed plans. The bequest for FY2026 includes $272.3 million for the fiscal year and $2.1 billion over the next five years for developing and deploying new commercial space stations.
So, what to do? The directive calls for things to move quickly in light of the impending demise of the ISS to avoid a gap in crew-capable space operations. It also dials down the requirements through "a modification to the current approach for LEO platforms."
[9]
That modification includes a shift away from a firm fixed-price contract (deemed "high risk" due to projected budget shortfalls) in favor of funded SAAs, which, according to the memo, "better aligns with enabling development of US industry platforms." The change will also "provide more flexibility to deal with possible variations in funding levels without the need of potentially protracted and inefficient contract renegotiations."
[10]More NASA spacecraft give controllers the silent treatment
[11]Mistakenly sold NASA command trailer could be yours – for $199K
[12]Lunar Trailblazer trails off as NASA loses probe to the void
[13]Australia's attempt to join the space race lasts just 14 seconds
And then there's the crew. Rather than a permanent presence in orbit, the directive now calls for a minimum capability for four crew for one-month increments, which suggests that a future commercial station would only need occasional crewed visits as far as NASA is concerned. The "increments" part is a significant downgrade from the "Full Operating Capability" that was [14]originally required by December 2031 and included "two NASA crew continuously in LEO for 6-month missions."
The change is quite dramatic and could mean an end to the continuous presence of humans in orbit. However, it is also a little more realistic considering the agency's funding levels and reflects what can actually be done in the time remaining and with the money available.
A NASA spokesperson told The Register , "To reduce the potential for a gap of a crew capable platform in low Earth Orbit, NASA is moving quickly to revise its current acquisition strategy for Commercial Low Earth Orbit Destinations Phase 2. This includes shifting from firm-fixed price contracts to continuing to support U.S. industry's designs and demonstrations through Space Act Agreements." ®
Get our [15]Tech Resources
[1] https://regmedia.co.uk/2025/08/07/nasa_cld_directive_aug_4.pdf
[2] https://www.nasa.gov/humans-in-space/commercial-space/low-earth-orbit-economy/commercial-destinations-in-low-earth-orbit/
[3] https://www.theregister.com/2024/06/27/spacex_wins_iss_deorbit_contract/
[4] https://www.theregister.com/2024/12/19/axiom_space_shuffles_station_assembly/
[5] https://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/jump?co=1&iu=/6978/reg_offbeat/science&sz=300x50%7C300x100%7C300x250%7C300x251%7C300x252%7C300x600%7C300x601&tile=2&c=2aJUh8wjFu5hWFzbG10kFxAAAAAc&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D2%26raptor%3Dcondor%26pos%3Dtop%26test%3D0
[6] https://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/jump?co=1&iu=/6978/reg_offbeat/science&sz=300x50%7C300x100%7C300x250%7C300x251%7C300x252%7C300x600%7C300x601&tile=4&c=44aJUh8wjFu5hWFzbG10kFxAAAAAc&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D4%26raptor%3Dfalcon%26pos%3Dmid%26test%3D0
[7] https://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/jump?co=1&iu=/6978/reg_offbeat/science&sz=300x50%7C300x100%7C300x250%7C300x251%7C300x252%7C300x600%7C300x601&tile=3&c=33aJUh8wjFu5hWFzbG10kFxAAAAAc&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D3%26raptor%3Deagle%26pos%3Dmid%26test%3D0
[8] https://www.nasa.gov/humans-in-space/commercial-space/commercial-space-stations/#Phase-2
[9] https://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/jump?co=1&iu=/6978/reg_offbeat/science&sz=300x50%7C300x100%7C300x250%7C300x251%7C300x252%7C300x600%7C300x601&tile=4&c=44aJUh8wjFu5hWFzbG10kFxAAAAAc&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D4%26raptor%3Dfalcon%26pos%3Dmid%26test%3D0
[10] https://www.theregister.com/2025/08/06/more_nasa_spacecraft_give_controllers/
[11] https://www.theregister.com/2025/08/06/nasa_airstream_trailer/
[12] https://www.theregister.com/2025/08/05/lunar_trailblazer_dead/
[13] https://www.theregister.com/2025/07/30/gilmour_space_australia_test_flight/
[14] https://sam.gov/api/prod/opps/v3/opportunities/resources/files/2997eee17d894e5995517d312991037c/
[15] https://whitepapers.theregister.com/
Of course.
The world has changed, so the purpose and scope of NASA needs to change with it. Our current leadership excels at this: the Trump Administration identifies waste and obsolete practices and either ends them or changes them to something useful. From a pragmatic point of view we have to admire that.
Re: Of course.
Notwithstanding that, I have to admit that I'm somewhat concerned that the "waste and obsolete practices" identified seem to include arguably useful things such as reliable evidence, and science, and also various legal and democratic processes. :-/
Re: Of course.
CLARIFICATION:
"... changes them to something useful"
means
"... changes them to something useful ... to Herr Trump himself !!!"
Hope that helps !!!
:)
permanent occupation of the ISS will be a thing of the past
First off, then what the fuck is the point?
Second off, a lot of that "permanent occupation" is spent doing maintenance, cleaning, and repair. I'm hesitant to think I'd want to go aboard a station that's been falling apart/leaking/growing mold for the last two months it's been unoccupied.
Re: permanent occupation of the ISS will be a thing of the past
My fridge is almost as old as the ISS and is in a similar state. Falling apart, leaks and growing mould. I avoid spending any more time looking in there than I absolutely have to.
Re: permanent occupation of the ISS will be a thing of the past
If it's anticipated that a new station would be vacant for as long as two months, that makes me think it isn't viable. I can see there being a week between one team leaving and the next arriving so there isn't the need to support both teams at the same time. Maybe in that interval it would be useful to disinfect the station in some manner. I first thought of packing up the atmosphere, but that's fraught with issues. It might make sense to make the air Oxygen poor to kill off some nasties. Run some UV lights, etc.
We used to do incredible things, pursue difficult goals, set great examples, achieve what was thought impossible. Now we seek to do as little as possible while enriching the already rich.
We've gone from pursuing exploration to investing in exploitation.
How the mighty have fallen.
Not the only space station
China have had continuous crew presence on Tiangong for a while now and don't appear to be changing that.