Phil Mcalister, who directed the NASA space department in 2005–2024, which included this commercial space station program, said that the changes give NASA and companies a chance to success, given that the agency’s budget would be less than expected.
“How did the previous NASA strategy intended to act for commercial stations when they lost nearly a third of their budget?” Mcalister said Ars. “They had no chance. It gives them a chance.”
It is not clear how this document was widespread before Duffy signed it on Monday. It looks like it was hurriedly written. For example, Northrop Grumman is written in two different ways. One source was informed by ARS that older leaders from the NASA space operation department were not informed about the changes before the distribution of the directive.
Winners and losers
About five years ago, NASA awarded the initial agreements for the development of a space station to four different companies: Northrop Grumman, Blue Origin, Axiom Space and Voyager Space. Since then, Northrop has abandoned his effort and joined the Voyager team. Other companies, especially huge interest, in particular huge, which cooperates with SpaceX to develop the initial space station.
Probably the most striking thing in the up-to-date directive is that it seems that he is favorable to the original NASA contractors. In particular, the Wast Haven-1 module is intended for four astronauts who spent two weeks in orbit, and the company has a simpler path to build a station that would meet the minimum requirements of NASA.
Other companies planned larger stations that would have greater durability in orbit, which suited the original NASA desires for the successor of the international space station. The up-to-date directive favors a company that builds possibilities through momentary steps, including stations with a constrained period of life in orbit.
“All current players will have to perform some revolving, at least visit their current configuration again,” said Mcalister. “Some players will have to make a more difficult turn.”
One of the industry officials, to put it anonymously, takes him more directly: “Only Haven-1 can be successful in this environment. This is our reading.”
CEO of Waster, Max Hoot, said ARS that the company assumes that starting with a minimal profitable product was the best business strategy and fully financed this approach without government money.
“It seems that NASA is now based on the approach to the future of the CLD, which is conducted by what in industry can achieve technically and build a reliable business model,” said Haot Ars. “Seeing that information from contractors before committing to shopping can help increase long -term risk reduction. This seems similar to the successful approaches of NASA for loads and crews.”
Huge worked closely with SpaceX in the development of its station, to the extent that Haven-1 will largely rely on a space ship of the dragon to support life and some other functions. Future stations such as Haven-2 will have more independent possibilities.
This story originally appeared Ars Technica.