What Does Russia’s Failure to Launch a Crewed Mission Mean for the ISS?

The International Space Station (ISS) might be facing a significant shift towards reduced international collaboration. A critical launch site in Russia, the only one capable of sending humans into orbit, has been heavily damaged and could remain non-operational for up to two years. This situation presents a challenging dilemma for NASA: either shoulder increased expenses and duties or consider decommissioning the ISS.

The Soyuz spacecraft took off from the Baikonur Cosmodrome in Kazakhstan on November 27, transporting two cosmonauts alongside an American astronaut. While all three arrived at the ISS safely, subsequent evaluations of the launch pads revealed that a crucial multi-layered support structure, which is typically retracted during the initial launch phases, had collapsed into the flame trench, sustaining significant damage.

According to reports, repairs might take as long as two years. The Russian space agency, Roscosmos, stated that damage repairs will begin “soon.” The actual extent of the issues remains uncertain.

While the Baikonur Cosmodrome has several launch pads, the damaged one, Site 31, Launch Pad 6, has been operational since 1958 and is the only pad configured for manned missions. David Amato from Imperial College London notes that alternative Russian launch facilities face similar complications that eliminate their viability. The Plesetsk Cosmodrome, located 650 kilometers northeast of St. Petersburg, is positioned too far north for efficient ISS launches, while Vostochny Cosmodrome, near the Chinese border, lacks sufficient infrastructure.

“Many space missions hinge on critical vulnerabilities like this, particularly those that are winding down, such as the ISS,” Amato indicated.

Certainly, the ISS’s operational lifespan has exceeded expectations, having initially been planned for decommissioning in 2020, with several delays thereafter. Current intentions forecast a gradual descent to lower orbits beginning next year, potentially lasting until 2030, after which the crew will dismantle its functional and historic equipment before its final descent toward Earth, expected to fully disintegrate by 2031. Details regarding this process can be found here: “A 400-ton mass of flame is hurtling through the upper atmosphere at orbital velocity.”

Should Russia withdraw, NASA would likely need to further invest in resources and funds to maintain ISS operations—a daunting prospect, especially since the program is nearing its conclusion.

However, Amato casts doubt on whether the U.S. aims to fully terminate the ISS. Without it, both the U.S. and Europe would lack a venue for astronauts, leading to minimal incentives to launch personnel into orbit until longer-term projects like a commercial space station or lunar habitats are established. In contrast, China, America’s principal economic competitor, operates a flourishing space station.

“The optics are not favorable,” Amato noted, “and losing the ISS would be substantial since invaluable research facilitated by this platform would cease to exist.”

The ISS’s inception in the 1990s emerged from a different geopolitical context. Following the Soviet Union’s collapse, there was a mutual interest in launching a collaborative initiative between the former superpowers. The ISS was meticulously crafted to foster not only cooperation but to necessitate it. The Russian orbital segment (ROS), managed by Roscosmos, plays a critical role in trajectory control, while the US orbital segment (USOS), overseen by NASA and collaborated on with European, Japanese, and Canadian space agencies, is solar-powered. Cooperation is essential for both components to function effectively.

However, relationships have soured, and current tensions between the United States and Russia parallel geopolitical strains on Earth, a reality worsened by Russia’s annexation of Crimea in 2014 and the full-scale invasion of Ukraine in 2022.

Should Russia entirely pull out from the ISS partnership, NASA and its counterparts would face the daunting task of transporting not only astronauts but also crucial supplies like fuel and food—a responsibility previously managed by Russia. NASA would have to address these adjustments. There are more complex inquiries to address, notably regarding the formal management and operation of the Russian section of the ISS. Given recent budget reductions, NASA must scrutinize the feasibility of such an undertaking.

As of this writing, many of Roscosmos’ websites are down, and inquiries regarding the condition of Site 31 have gone unanswered. The European and Canadian space agencies have also not replied to media requests for commentary on the situation with Roscosmos. New Scientist reports.

Nadie Russell, a NASA Public Relations Officer, told New Scientist that the agency would “collaborate closely with our international partners, including Roscosmos, to ensure the safe operation of the ISS and its crew.” Nonetheless, Russell refrained from addressing specific queries about Russia’s ongoing involvement or whether contingency measures are in place should Russia choose to disengage.

Russia has time to evaluate these matters before its next crewed flight to the ISS, slated for July, although it must quickly formulate a strategy to rectify the issues at Baikonur.

Lia Nani Alconcel, a professor at the University of Birmingham in the UK, points out that there are alternatives for crewed travel to the ISS, such as SpaceX’s Dragon capsule, which has successfully transported American astronauts to orbit. Should U.S.-based SpaceX become the sole option for reaching the ISS, it would represent a stark reversal from the early 2000s, when the U.S. was dependent on Russia for crew transport after the retirement of the Space Shuttle.

“Contractual issues may arise regarding launch agreements, but those are legal matters, not engineering challenges,” Alconcel remarked.

This alternative approach could ease some burdens on NASA and alleviate the pressure of urgently needing to establish a new program to compensate for the loss of Russian expertise and capabilities.

“Roscosmos specifically trains astronauts for essential tasks related to the Russian orbital segment, making it a formidable challenge for NASA to independently operate the ISS,” Alconcel explained, highlighting that NASA is pursuing a similar approach on the American segment.