Eine „Katastrophe, die darauf wartet, einzutreten“? Branchenvertreter machen sich Sorgen um die Verfügbarkeit von Crew Dragon | „Es ist ganz klar, dass in den Vereinigten Staaten ein großer Bedarf an einem zusätzlichen Mannschaftsfahrzeug besteht.“

>NASA breathed a deep sigh of relief six years ago when SpaceX launched two astronauts, Doug Hurley and Bob Behnken, on a successful mission to the International Space Station. With the safe landing of Crew Dragon, the US space agency broke a nearly decade-long gap in its ability to put humans into orbit.

>Through its Commercial Crew program and multibillion-dollar contracts awarded in 2014, NASA had hoped to foster two providers of low-Earth orbit transportation, SpaceX and Boeing. However Boeing has yet to complete a successful crewed test flight—a perilous 2024 test flight by Boeing’s Starliner was later declared a Type A mishap—and probably won’t fly another crewed mission before 2028.

>With the International Space Station slated for retirement in the early 2030s, NASA is partnering with several US companies to develop private space stations. As part of that effort, the private companies will have to work with NASA to determine how they will transport astronauts to and from their space stations, some of which could launch as soon as 2030.

>And it turns out this is more difficult than it sounds.

>**Crew Dragon the default, but…**

>The key players in the effort to build private space stations are Axiom Space, Vast Space, Voyager, Blue Origin, and possibly SpaceX. Of these companies, Axiom Space has previously worked with SpaceX to fly private astronauts on Crew Dragon to the space station, and Vast Space will use Dragon to support its early space stations. SpaceX is likely planning to use its Starship vehicle as a potential space station, if it decides to enter the NASA competition.

>Crew Dragon would seem to be the obvious answer for commercial space stations in the 2030s, but there are some questions. The first of these is availability. SpaceX President Gwynne Shotwell has said the company will fly Crew Dragon and the Falcon 9 rocket for a finite number of years, possibly for less than a decade as the company transitions its launches to Starship. Could humans launch on Starship? Eventually, but this seems unlikely before the mid-2030s, and docking the large Starships to smaller space stations would be challenging.

>NASA, obviously, will want Crew Dragon to fly longer, and this will have some influence. But gradually pretty much all of SpaceX’s launch activity, beginning with Starlink satellites but eventually other commercial satellites, will migrate to Starship. This would leave SpaceX in the position of keeping a Falcon 9 production line open just to support Crew Dragon, which would certainly increase the price. Although Crew Dragon pricing is a closely held secret, multiple sources say costs have already risen in recent years for the crewed launch vehicle.

>After speaking to officials at several private space station companies, it is clear these concerns are front of mind. The bulk of expenses in operating a space station will come not from the facility itself, but safely transporting crew and cargo to the facilities. The providers do not have certainty that Crew Dragon will be available for the long haul, and they also have pricing concerns due to Falcon 9 availability, as well as lack of competition.

>“It’s a disaster waiting to happen,” one industry source told Ars about Crew Dragon availability in the 2030s.

The cargo version of dream chaser is set to launch later this year. If it performs well then a crew version is possible.

And somehow the title make it sound like Spacex’s fault.

I have always been a proponent of the commercial cargo and commercial crew strategy, but the current situation demonstrates that if fully depending on it it can put NASA at the mercy of companies that may have changing priorities over time. 

Maybe NASA needs to include itself in the dissimilar redundancy mix, kind of like SLS, yes it’s expensive and clunky but at least it’s operational while waiting for private companies to get their
heavy lifters online. Maybe NASA using cost plus could build an LEO transport capsule in a ten-year timeframe. Although I realize there is currently no budget for it. 

I saw Blue Origin mentioned later in the article as a potential candidate for crewed launch, which does make sense. I was also wondering whether this is an area that Rocket Lab would ever be interested in, or if they are focused solely on cargo operations for the foreseeable future?

With Neutron, it would seem like they are developing a vehicle that could also launch crewed missions, but there’s obviously a lot of technologies that come with humans flying that Rocket Lab has never engaged with.

That’s what they get for rejecting the Dream Chaser mini shuttle and giving the second contract to Boeing.

The thing I don’t understand is what has changed since last month? Ever since Boeing failed with the starliner there is only been one US low Earth orbit option. Eventually that option will need to be replaced much as all previous options have. What’s the sudden urgency?

SpaceX is no more likely to rush ending dragon service now than they were a month ago.

In the end if you want s service, you have to pay the person who can provide it enough to make it worth their time to keep providing it, or you have to pay someone else to develop the capability. The first option is probably cheaper. But eventually you’re going to have to do the second option again. It seems like it’s easy to plan for unless you’re sticking your head in the sand.