The world witnessed the preamble to a changing of the guard in space as four astronauts climbed aboard the Orion spacecraft built by Lockheed Martin Corp and awaited the countdown. They were launched on April 1 into space on a 10-day journey around the moon by the Space Launch System rocket — a NASA initiative led by Boeing Co, with help from Northrop Grumman Corp and Aerojet Rocketdyne.
Any space junkie would tell you, those companies are legendary players in the history of US space exploration. They were key contractors on the Apollo missions that landed astronauts on the moon beginning in 1969, allowing the US to win the space race against Russia and cementing the country’s status as the dominant superpower. After some 50 years, their time driving NASA’s space exploration appears to be ending.
However, although the legacy space companies all returned to play key roles in this mission, they would not be spearheading NASA’s ambitious seven-year, US$20 billion plan to build a permanent moon base. For that to happen, Boeing, Lockheed, and the others would have to figure out how to remain relevant in a new space market increasingly dominated by commercial interests instead of NASA’s budget. The drive to turn a profit means that the delays, the billions of dollars of budget overruns, and the structurally high per-launch costs that have plagued space programs in the past would no longer be tolerated.
The reconfigured Artemis program would require a steady cadence of launches from rockets and spacecraft that have much lower operational costs and can carry more payload. That future belongs to the producers of reusable rockets — led by Elon Musk’s SpaceX and with Jeff Bezos’ Blue Origin scrambling to catch up. Other startups — Rocket Lab Corp and Stoke Space Technologies — are building reusable rockets, a technology that has lowered launch costs dramatically and which legacy space companies lack.
SpaceX, with its workhorse reusable Falcon 9 rocket, unlocked the secret to making money in space by launching more than 10,000 low-Earth-orbit satellites providing fast Internet for rural residences and any moving vehicle, whether ship, aircraft, or recreational vehicle. Blue Origin’s partially reusable rocket made its first commercial flight in November.
With profit margins in focus, there is an incentive for SpaceX and Blue Origin to be as efficient as possible — an essential ingredient to commercial space that has been lacking since NASA was created in 1958. The timing could not be better. The US racing with China to create a permanent base from which the moon’s resources of water and minerals can be claimed and tapped.
NASA Administrator Jared Isaacman has laid out a streamlined plan to return to the moon that contemplates a transition from the legacy companies to the commercial-space newcomers. NASA is scrapping Gateway — an expensive space station orbiting the moon that would have acted as a transition toward building a moon base. Instead, it is planning to land equipment and material to erect a base and search for moon ice and minerals. That would require a twice-a-year launch cadence.
The hardware is legacy as well. The Space Launch System, or SLS, is powered by the same engine design used on the Space Shuttle program, which was retired in 2011. The SLS rocket was supposed to end the US’ embarrassing dependency on Russia’s Soyuz rocket to send astronauts and cargo to the International Space Station. That nearly nine-year reliance on Russia was finally broken when SpaceX’s Falcon 9 rocket and Dragon spacecraft carried its first crew to the ISS in 2020.
Lockheed’s Orion spacecraft has its roots in the Constellation program — a return-to-the-moon plan announced in 2004 under former US president George W. Bush and eliminated during the administration of former US president Barack Obama administration in 2010. Orion can orbit the moon but is not capable of landing there. A single moon launch of Orion on the SLS rocket is estimated to cost more than US$4 billion.
“The space ecosystem has been dramatically upturned by reusability,” said Jud Ready, the executive director of the Space Research Institute at Georgia Tech. The legacy space companies “are going to have to modify their operations.”
The SLS and Orion require a human landing system to take astronauts from Orion to the lunar surface. NASA has contracted with both SpaceX and Blue Origin to build these landers. This complex system would likely be streamlined in the future with a spacecraft that can reach the moon and land directly with astronauts aboard. A fuel depot in low-Earth orbit would be necessary to provide the energy needed for the long journey to the moon. These commercial space companies would have to prove their safety case for ferrying humans to and from the moon.
Counting on newcomers for NASA’s moon strategy comes with risk. SpaceX’s new Starship spacecraft would have to refuel in space to reach the moon and land — a capability that has yet to be tested. For the human landing system, SpaceX is building a version of the Starship spacecraft that is stripped of heat shields and navigational fins. It would still require in-space refueling to reach the moon. A lot can go wrong, and Musk has a reputation for setting overly optimistic technology timelines. NASA’s Isaacman said the agency would embed experts across the supply chain to head off delays and budget overruns.
The big advantage of Starship is that both the rocket booster and the spacecraft are recovered either on the launchpad or an ocean-faring drone ship and can be refurbished quickly and launched again. SpaceX has proven it can do this with the Falcon 9 — a rocket system that has been reused partially more than 430 times and has set a record of one rocket booster being flown more than 30 times.
Unlike the SLS and Orion, Starship does not depend solely on NASA to fund its development. SpaceX is cash-flow positive, with sales from its Starlink internet service.
Musk has a grand plan of using Starship to launch tens of thousands of data-center satellites that would be powered by tapping near-round-the-clock sun, which is more intense in space. Investors are excited about Starlink’s lead on satellite Internet and this data-centers-in-space opportunity, which is driving demand for an initial public offering of SpaceX even after it recently bought Musk’s xAI startup. This sale of shares could raise US$75 billion and value the company at US$1.75 trillion.
This 10-day trip around the moon is key to sustaining the Artemis program’s momentum, which hopes to land humans on the moon by 2028. The program would successful until NASA lets go of outdated hardware and adopts the recycling tactics of commercial-space newcomers.
Thomas Black is a Bloomberg Opinion columnist writing about the industrial and transportation sectors. He was previously a Bloomberg News reporter covering logistics, manufacturing and private aviation.This column reflects the personal views of the author and does not necessarily reflect the opinion of the editorial board or Bloomberg LP and its owners.
KMT Chairwoman Cheng Li-wun’s (鄭麗文) recent visit to Beijing and her upcoming visit to Washington will serve as a high-level test of her diplomatic mettle. In Beijing, Cheng was received with symbolic gestures, a warm reception, and high-level access. In Washington, she will receive far less pomp and far sharper questions about the KMT’s vision for the future of Taiwan. Her challenge will be to persuade Washington that the KMT’s engagement with China can coexist with strong deterrence. Cheng’s April 7-12 visit to mainland China coincided with an intense period of conflict in Iran. Despite the strategic significance of Cheng’s trip,
The closure of the Strait of Hormuz has sent the vast Asian chemicals industry into a tailspin. Deprived of the likes of Qatari natural gas and Saudi Arabian oil, the region’s fertilizer and plastics plants are slowing production or even shutting down. Everywhere except China, that is. In petrochemicals, China is unique. As well as a traditional industry that uses oil and gas as feedstock, it has parallel output that relies on its abundant domestic coal. Unsurprisingly, India and other regional powers want to copy and paste the Chinese method. This would not be easy — or climate friendly. The
US President Donald Trump recently repeated his claim that “Taiwan stole America’s chip industry,” reigniting public debate on the issue. As a former Taiwanese minister of economic affairs and an entrepreneur deeply involved in semiconductor supply chain development, I feel a responsibility to clarify this misunderstanding. From the perspective of global industrial evolution and the economic principle of comparative advantage, such a statement appears overly simplistic and risks obscuring the essence of the issue. The rise of Taiwan’s semiconductor industry was not built on “replacing America,” but rather emerged as a result of countries pursuing different development paths within the
Indonesian President Prabowo Subianto says he knows how to fix the problems facing Indonesia. Yet his economic mismanagement and authoritarian tendencies are steering the nation toward a familiar mix of currency instability and political chaos. The world’s fourth-most populous nation risks reversing the hard-won democratic and business reforms that came after the Asian Financial Crisis in 1997. At that time, the rupiah collapsed and the political upheaval that followed forced former president Haji Mohamed Suharto from power. Prabowo’s administration is ignoring similar warning signs. That disconnect was apparent in a national address on Wednesday, when Prabowo projected the swagger that has
RSS