The Post-ISS Era: Who Will Own Low Earth Orbit?

1. Introduction: The Fragmentation of Current Low Earth Orbit Historical Space Stations

For nearly a quarter of a century, the International Space Station (ISS) has stood as the singular, defining colossus of human endeavors in Low Earth Orbit (LEO). Since the arrival of its first long-duration crew in November 2000, the station has served not merely as a laboratory, but as a diplomatic extrusion of the post-Cold War geopolitical order—a "monolithic" model of cooperation where former adversaries, the United States and Russia, integrated their engineering and operational cultures into a unified whole. It is a structure of immense scale, spanning the area of an American football field and massing over 400 metric tons, representing a continuous human presence in the vacuum of space that has remained unbroken for over two decades.¹

However, the architecture of LEO is on the precipice of a radical phase transition. The ISS, battered by the thermal stresses of tens of thousands of orbital sunrises and sunsets, and structurally fatigued by the dynamic loads of visiting vehicles, is approaching its immutable end-of-life, currently scheduled for 2030.² The conclusion of the ISS program does not signal the end of space stations; rather, it signals the end of the singular space station. The unified, unipolar regime of the ISS is fracturing into a multipolar, heterogeneous ecosystem of successor platforms that are divergent in design, purpose, and ownership.

This transition is driven by two powerful, interlocking vectors: the commercialization of space and the resurgence of great power competition. On one vector, the United States is orchestrating a deliberate privatization of orbital infrastructure. NASA’s strategy has shifted from being the owner-operator of a national asset to becoming a customer in a marketplace, fostering a fleet of privately owned "Commercial LEO Destinations" (CLDs) to succeed the ISS.⁴ On the other vector, the geopolitical bifurcation of Earth is mirroring itself in the heavens. The People's Republic of China has already established its permanent Tiangong station, a sovereign asset that rivals the capabilities of the ISS, while Russia plans to retreat to a high-latitude "surveillance" orbit with its proposed Russian Orbital Service Station (ROSS).⁶ India, too, has entered the fray, announcing an aggressive roadmap for the Bharatiya Antariksh Station (BAS) to cement its status as a premier spacefaring nation.⁸

This report provides an exhaustive, expert-level analysis of this emerging landscape. It dissects the technical specifications of the next-generation habitats—from the inflatable softgoods of Orbital Reef to the monolithic steel hulls of Starlab—and explores the economic and legal frameworks attempting to keep pace with this expansion. It examines the risks of a "capability gap" where Western presence in LEO might falter before commercial successors are ready, leaving China as the sole operator of a permanent outpost.³ Furthermore, it analyzes the shift in orbital utility, from the pure science of the ISS to the mixed-use "business parks" of the future, where fiber optic manufacturing and space tourism coexist with government research.

2. The Twilight of the ISS: Decommissioning a Titan

The retirement of the International Space Station is not merely a matter of switching off the lights; it is a complex aerospace engineering challenge with profound logistical and safety implications. The station is too massive to be left to an uncontrolled orbital decay, which would pose unacceptable risks to populated areas on Earth. The strategy for its disposal, and the management of its final years, sets the boundary conditions for the rise of its successors.

2.1 Structural Fatigue and Life Extension Limitations

The primary driver for the 2030 decommissioning date is the structural health of the station's primary pressurized elements. The first components, such as the Russian-built Zarya Functional Cargo Block and the US Unity Node, launched in 1998, have far exceeded their original 15-year design lives.² These modules endure extreme thermal cycling as the station orbits the Earth every 90 minutes, passing from the searing heat of direct sunlight to the freezing darkness of Earth's shadow. This constant expansion and contraction induces fatigue in the metal structures, particularly at seals and docking ports.

NASA’s technical analysis indicates that while the station remains safe for current operations, the probability of significant failures—such as hull breaches or depressurization events—increases non-linearly beyond 2030.³ The agency has committed to operating the platform through the end of the decade to maximize the return on investment and ensure a seamless handover to commercial platforms, but the physics of material degradation imposes a hard stop.⁴

2.2 The United States Deorbit Vehicle (USDV)

The mechanics of deorbiting a 400-ton structure are non-trivial. Historically, the plan relied on the usage of multiple Russian Progress cargo spacecraft to perform a series of retrograde burns to lower the station's altitude. However, given the deteriorating geopolitical relationship with Russia and the need for a highly reliable, redundant system, NASA has pivoted to the development of a bespoke United States Deorbit Vehicle (USDV).³

The USDV is envisioned as a massive spacecraft with significant propellant capacity, designed to dock with the ISS in its final year. Its function is to execute a precise, high-delta-V burn that will drive the station's perigee deep into the atmosphere over a remote oceanic uninhabited area, likely the South Pacific Ocean Uninhabited Area (SPOUA), often referred to as "Point Nemo." This controlled reentry ensures that any surviving debris—dense components like titanium fuel tanks or stainless steel reaction wheels—falls harmlessly into the sea.² The development of the USDV is a critical critical path item; without it, the station cannot be safely disposed of, yet its cost and complexity add another layer of pressure to NASA’s transition budget.¹⁰

2.3 The "Gap" Risk and Transition Logic

A central anxiety in Western space policy is the prospect of a "LEO Gap"—a period between the deorbiting of the ISS and the operational readiness of commercial successors where the United States and its partners have no permanent human presence in orbit.³ Such a gap would have deleterious consequences:

• Scientific Discontinuity: Long-duration human research, particularly studies on bone loss, radiation effects, and ocular changes (SANS), requires continuous data accumulation. A break in presence would disrupt the baselines needed for planning Mars missions.⁹

• Geopolitical Cession: If the ISS is deorbited before Starlab or Axiom are ready, and China’s Tiangong continues to operate, Beijing would hold a monopoly on human space stations. This would likely drive international partners and emerging space nations to align their scientific programs with the China National Space Administration (CMSA) rather than NASA.⁶

To mitigate this, NASA’s transition plan explicitly aims for a two-year overlap period where commercial stations operate alongside the ISS. This allows for the cross-calibration of scientific instruments and the physical transfer of hardware and crew expertise.¹ However, as analyzed in later sections, the aggressive schedules of the commercial partners make this overlap precarious.

3. The Sovereign Challenger: China's Tiangong Space Station

While the West navigates a transition, the People's Republic of China has firmly established its own permanent foothold. The Tiangong ("Heavenly Palace") space station represents the culmination of "Project 921," China's three-decade strategic plan for human spaceflight. Unlike the ISS, which is a coalition of distinct national segments, Tiangong is a cohesive, state-owned national asset that rivals the ISS in capability if not in size.

3.1 Architecture and Modular Configuration

Operational since late 2022, Tiangong currently exists in a T-shaped configuration consisting of three primary modules, each weighing between 22 and 23 metric tons.¹¹ The architecture is reminiscent of the Soviet/Russian Mir station but utilizes modern technologies and larger module diameters.

• Tianhe ("Harmony of the Heavens") Core Module: Launched in April 2021, Tianhe is the central command post. It provides the living quarters for the crew of three (expandable to six during handovers), the guidance, navigation, and control (GNC) systems, and the primary life support infrastructure. Unlike the ISS, which splits guidance and life support duties between the US and Russian segments, Tianhe centralizes these critical functions, resulting in a more streamlined command architecture.⁶

• Wentian ("Quest for the Heavens") Laboratory: Docked to the starboard port in July 2022, Wentian is primarily a science laboratory focusing on life sciences and biotechnology. Crucially, it also acts as a redundant control center for the station. If Tianhe were to suffer a catastrophic failure, the station could be flown from Wentian. It also features a dedicated airlock for Extravehicular Activities (EVAs) and a small 5-meter robotic arm capable of dexterous operations or handing payloads to the larger arm on Tianhe.⁶

• Mengtian ("Dreaming of the Heavens") Laboratory: Docked to the port side in October 2022, Mengtian is dedicated to microgravity physics and material science. A key innovation in Mengtian is its cargo airlock. This system allows astronauts to deploy small satellites or external experiments directly from the station's interior without performing a risky and time-consuming spacewalk. The internal payloads are passed through the airlock and grabbed by the exterior robotic arm for positioning.⁶

3.2 Advanced Life Support and Autonomy

China has demonstrated rapid maturity in Environmental Control and Life Support Systems (ECLSS). Official reports indicate that Tiangong has achieved a 100 percent regeneration rate for oxygen and a high efficiency in water recycling, effectively closing the loop for air and water.¹³ This capability is vital for reducing the logistical mass required to support the crew, allowing the cargo capacity of the Tianzhou resupply spacecraft to be used for scientific equipment rather than consumables.

3.3 The Xuntian Telescope: Co-Orbital Synergy

A unique strategic element of the Tiangong program is the planned launch of the Xuntian Space Telescope (CSST), expected around 2026. Xuntian is a Hubble-class observatory with a field of view 300 times larger than its American counterpart.11 What makes Xuntian revolutionary is its "co-orbital" concept. It will orbit in close proximity to the Tiangong station. Unlike the Hubble Space Telescope, which required dedicated Space Shuttle missions for servicing, or the James Webb Space Telescope, which is unserviceable at the L2 Lagrange point, Xuntian is designed to dock periodically with Tiangong.11

This docking capability allows the station's crew to refuel the telescope, replace failing gyroscopes, and upgrade scientific instruments. This symbiosis effectively grants Xuntian an indefinite operational lifespan and allows it to evolve with technology, a capability currently unmatched by any Western observatory.6

3.4 Future Expansion: The Six-Module Complex

While currently a three-module complex, the China Manned Space Agency (CMSA) has outlined plans to expand Tiangong into a six-module cross-shaped configuration. This would involve launching a second core module to dock at the forward port of Tianhe, which would then serve as a node for two additional laboratory modules.¹¹ This expansion would effectively double the station's habitable volume and mass, bringing it closer to the scale of the ISS and enabling a permanent crew of six. This growth potential underscores China’s intent for Tiangong to be a multi-decadal platform that could dominate LEO research throughout the 2030s and 2040s.

4. The Commercial LEO Destinations (CLD): Privatizing the Orbit

The United States’ response to the post-ISS era is fundamentally ideological. Rather than building a "NASA Station," the agency is seeding a marketplace. Through the Commercial LEO Destinations (CLD) program, NASA aims to transition from being a landlord to a tenant, purchasing services from private space stations just as it purchases launch services from SpaceX.¹⁶ This strategy is designed to reduce costs, stimulate the orbital economy, and free up capital for the Artemis lunar exploration program.

4.1 Axiom Station: The Evolutionary Hybrid

Axiom Space, led by former ISS program manager Michael Suffredini, is pursuing the most risk-averse and evolutionary path among the commercial contenders. Axiom’s station will not initially launch as a free-flyer but will be built attached to the ISS.

4.1.1 The "Mushroom" Growth Strategy

Axiom holds a contract to attach its modules to the forward port of the ISS Node 2 (Harmony).¹⁶ This allows the Axiom segment to utilize the existing power, cooling, and life support of the ISS during its early assembly phase, mitigating the immediate need for complex utility systems. Once the assembly is complete and the modules are self-sufficient, the Axiom segment will detach before the ISS is deorbited, becoming a free-flying station.¹⁷

4.1.2 Revised Assembly Sequence and the PPTM

In a significant strategic pivot designed to accelerate independence, Axiom recently revised its assembly sequence. Originally, the first module was to be a crew habitat (Hab-1). The new plan prioritizes the Payload Power Thermal Module (PPTM) as the initial launch.¹⁸ The PPTM is effectively a service module, providing the solar power generation and heat rejection radiators necessary for the station to survive on its own. By launching this infrastructure piece first, Axiom ensures that its segment can separate from the ISS as early as 2028 if necessary, providing a hedge against an early ISS failure or accelerated decommissioning.¹⁸

4.1.3 Industrial Construction

Axiom’s modules are being manufactured by Thales Alenia Space in Italy, the same contractor that built the pressurized shells for the ISS modules Columbus, Harmony, and Tranquility.¹⁷ This reliance on legacy industrial partners and proven welding techniques reduces the technical uncertainty of the project, positioning Axiom as the likely "first mover" in the commercial station race.

4.2 Starlab: The Monolithic Steel Giant

Starlab Space LLC—a transatlantic joint venture comprising Voyager Space, Airbus, Mitsubishi Corporation, and MDA Space—proposes a radically different architecture. Starlab rejects the modular "tinkertoy" assembly method of the ISS in favor of a single-launch, monolithic design.²⁰

4.2.1 The Single-Launch Concept

Starlab is designed around a massive stainless-steel pressure vessel, approximately 8 meters in diameter.²¹ This large diameter is made possible by the payload capacity of SpaceX’s Starship launch vehicle. By launching the station as a fully integrated unit—complete with life support, laboratories, and crew quarters pre-installed—Starlab eliminates the costly and risky process of on-orbit assembly. There are no spacewalks required to connect cables or fluid lines; the station is theoretically "turnkey" upon reaching orbit.²⁰

4.2.2 The "Airbus Loop" Interior

The internal volume of Starlab allows for a layout impossible on the ISS. The ISS is essentially a series of narrow corridors. Starlab, utilizing the "Airbus Loop" concept, features a three-deck vertical configuration.²¹ This layout includes a dedicated science deck, a habitation deck, and a logistics deck, all connected by a central tunnel. This zoning allows for the separation of vibration-sensitive experiments from crew exercise areas, a persistent problem on the ISS.

4.2.3 Strategic Consolidation

The commercial space station market is already consolidating. Northrop Grumman, which originally held a separate NASA agreement to build a station based on its Cygnus spacecraft, canceled its independent project in late 2023 to join the Starlab coalition.¹⁶ Northrop will now provide its Cygnus spacecraft for cargo logistics and potentially its autonomous docking technology, strengthening the Starlab bid by merging two major aerospace competencies.

4.3 Orbital Reef: The "Mixed-Use Business Park"

Orbital Reef, led by Blue Origin and Sierra Space, is marketed with the broadest commercial vision: a "mixed-use business park" in space.²² The project emphasizes scalability and a diverse customer base, from sovereign nations without their own space programs to media companies filming movies in zero gravity.

4.3.1 The LIFE Habitat: Inflatable Innovation

The technological cornerstone of Orbital Reef is Sierra Space’s Large Integrated Flexible Environment (LIFE) habitat. Unlike traditional rigid aluminum modules, LIFE is an inflatable structure constructed from high-strength "softgoods," primarily Vectran.²³

• Launch Mechanics: The primary constraint of rigid modules is the diameter of the rocket fairing. The LIFE habitat launches in a folded, compact configuration and inflates once in orbit to a diameter of roughly 9 meters, creating a massive habitable volume (approx. 300 cubic meters) from a single launch.²⁴

• Structural Validation: Concerns about the durability of inflatable structures have been addressed through rigorous "burst pressure" testing. In recent full-scale tests at NASA’s Marshall Space Flight Center, the LIFE prototype withstood internal pressures exceeding 77 psi—well above the NASA safety requirement of 60.8 psi and far beyond the operational pressure of 14.7 psi.²⁵ This proves that the softgoods weave is structurally superior to many rigid equivalents, capable of handling the stress of pressurization while offering excellent protection against micrometeoroids due to its multi-layer energy-absorbing construction.

4.3.2 Partnership Dynamics

Despite the technical progress, the Orbital Reef partnership has faced internal turbulence. Reports in late 2023 suggested friction between Blue Origin and Sierra Space, with rumors of the partnership potentially dissolving or restructuring as both companies prioritize their own launch vehicles (New Glenn and Dream Chaser).¹⁶ However, the consortium continues to pass NASA milestones, such as the System Definition Review, and remains a funded participant in the CLD program.²⁸

4.4 Vast and Gravitics: The Agile Disruptors

Beyond the NASA-funded majors, new entrants are attempting to disrupt the market with speed and specialized capabilities.

4.4.1 Vast: The Pursuit of Artificial Gravity

Vast Space is unique in its explicit focus on Artificial Gravity (AG). Its initial station, Haven-1, is a single-module station scheduled for launch on a Falcon 9 as early as 2026—potentially beating the NASA-funded competitors to orbit.³⁰

• The AG Roadmap: While Haven-1 will operate primarily in microgravity, it serves as a pathfinder for Haven-2, 3, and 4. Vast’s long-term vision involves connecting multiple modules and spinning them end-over-end to generate centripetal force. This artificial gravity (ranging from Lunar 0.16g to Mars 0.38g) addresses the physiological degradation of long-duration spaceflight, such as muscle atrophy and fluid redistribution.³² This capability would position Vast as the premier facility for researching human adaptation to the environments of the Moon and Mars.

4.4.2 Gravitics: The Supplier Model

Gravitics is positioning itself not as a station operator, but as a prime manufacturer—the "Boeing" of space station modules. Their StarMax module is designed specifically to maximize the throw-weight and volume of Starship. A single StarMax module offers 400 cubic meters of volume—nearly half the pressurized volume of the entire ISS.³³ Gravitics aims to sell these massive hulls to other operators, effectively commoditizing the pressurized volume of LEO.

5. The New Nationalists: Russia and India

Not every nation is looking to the commercial sector. For Russia and India, space stations remain instruments of national sovereignty and strategic prestige.

5.1 Russia’s Orbital Service Station (ROSS): The Polar Sentinel

Russia’s commitment to the ISS is set to expire by 2028, aligning with its plans to deploy the Russian Orbital Service Station (ROSS).⁷ ROSS represents a strategic departure from the ISS not just in ownership, but in orbital mechanics.

• The Polar Orbit Strategy: ROSS is planned for a high-latitude, sun-synchronous orbit of approximately 97-98 degrees inclination.³⁵ This is a drastic shift from the 51.6-degree inclination of the ISS. The polar orbit allows ROSS to fly over the entirety of the Earth's surface, and most importantly, provides comprehensive coverage of the Arctic region.

• Strategic Rationale: The Arctic is a zone of vital economic and military interest to Russia (the Northern Sea Route). A station in this orbit acts as a permanent surveillance platform, monitoring shipping lanes and resource extraction. This dual-use potential suggests ROSS will be less of a pure science laboratory and more of a national security asset.⁷

• Operational Concept: Due to the higher radiation environment in polar orbits (passing frequently through the auroral ovals), ROSS is not envisioned to be permanently crewed. Instead, it will operate autonomously for long periods, with cosmonauts visiting for short-duration "servicing missions" to maintain equipment and retrieve data.³⁶

5.2 India’s Bharatiya Antariksh Station (BAS)

India, fresh from the success of its Chandrayaan-3 lunar landing, has accelerated its human spaceflight timeline. The Bharatiya Antariksh Station (BAS) is the centerpiece of this ambition.

• Timeline and Architecture: The Indian Space Research Organisation (ISRO) targets the launch of the first module, BAS-1, by 2028, utilizing the LVM3 heavy-lift rocket. The full station, comprising five distinct modules including a core, science labs, and a docking hub, is expected to be fully operational by 2035.⁸

• Mass and Capability: The completed station will have a mass of approximately 52 metric tons.³⁸ While smaller than Tiangong or Mir, it provides India with an independent platform for microgravity research and a crucial training ground for its astronaut corps (Gaganyaan program) before attempting crewed lunar landings in the 2040s.³⁷

6. The Deep Space Infrastructure: Lunar Gateway

While LEO stations focus on commercialization and Earth observation, the Lunar Gateway represents the next frontier: a deep-space staging ground. Gateway differs fundamentally from the LEO stations in its purpose; it is not a destination for long-term habitation but a node in the Artemis architecture for lunar surface access and Mars mission simulation.³⁹

6.1 Orbital Mechanics: The NRHO

Gateway will inhabit a Near-Rectilinear Halo Orbit (NRHO) around the Moon. This specific seven-day orbit is a gravitational "sweet spot" balanced between the Earth and Moon. It is highly stable, requiring minimal propellant for station-keeping, and offers continuous line-of-sight communication with Earth. Crucially, it provides low-energy access to the lunar South Pole, the target site for Artemis surface missions.⁴⁰

6.2 The Power and Propulsion Element (PPE)

A key technological innovation of Gateway is the Power and Propulsion Element (PPE), built by Maxar Technologies. The PPE is a high-power solar electric propulsion spacecraft. It generates 60 kilowatts of electrical power, far more than standard satellites, to drive a cluster of Hall-effect thrusters.⁴¹

• Solar Electric Propulsion (SEP): Unlike chemical rockets that burn fuel quickly for high thrust, SEP uses electricity to ionize and accelerate xenon gas. This produces low thrust but with extreme efficiency (high specific impulse). The PPE allows Gateway to maneuver across cislunar space, adjusting its orbit to support different mission profiles, a capability the ISS lacks.⁴³

6.3 International Continuity

Gateway preserves the international coalition of the ISS. The European Space Agency (ESA) is contributing the I-Hab module and the ESPRIT refueling module; JAXA (Japan) is providing life support components; and the Canadian Space Agency (CSA) is supplying the Canadarm3 robotic system.³⁹ This continued partnership ensures that Western space exploration remains a multilateral endeavor, distinct from the nascent Chinese-Russian lunar axis.

7. The Economics of Orbit: Searching for the "Killer App"

The viability of the US commercial stations (Starlab, Orbital Reef, Axiom) rests on a precarious premise: that a robust private market for LEO services will emerge to replace the government monopoly. Without a "killer app"—a commercially lucrative activity that generates revenue independent of NASA—these stations risk becoming merely government contractors by another name.

7.1 In-Space Manufacturing (ISM): The Fiber Optic Hope

The most promising revenue stream is In-Space Manufacturing (ISM). The microgravity environment eliminates physical phenomena such as convection, sedimentation, and buoyancy, allowing for the creation of materials impossible to produce on Earth.

• ZBLAN Optical Fiber: The poster child for ISM is ZBLAN (Zirconium Barium Lanthanum Aluminum Sodium Fluoride) glass. On Earth, gravity causes micro-crystals to form during the cooling process, clouding the glass. In microgravity, ZBLAN can be drawn with near-perfect clarity. Such fiber has theoretical signal attenuation rates 10 to 100 times lower than traditional silica fiber.⁴⁴

• Market Economics: If produced at scale, space-made ZBLAN could sell for upwards of $200 per meter, targeting the high-frequency trading networks and medical laser markets where signal speed and purity are priceless.⁴⁵ Companies like Flawless Photonics are already conducting pilot manufacturing runs on the ISS to validate the technology before scaling up on commercial stations.⁴⁶

7.2 The Anchor Tenant Dilemma

Despite the promise of manufacturing and tourism, current market analyses suggest that the US government will remain the "anchor tenant" for the foreseeable future.⁴⁷ NASA's strategy relies on being just one of many customers, but if the tourism market remains niche and manufacturing scales slowly, NASA may be forced to subsidize these stations more heavily than anticipated to prevent their bankruptcy. The "business park" model works only if there are tenants other than the landlord.

8. Regulatory and Geopolitical Implications

The transition to privatized and sovereign stations introduces complex legal and diplomatic challenges.

8.1 Liability and the Outer Space Treaty

The 1967 Outer Space Treaty (OST) creates a liability regime that is ill-suited for the commercial station era. Article VI of the OST states that nations bear international responsibility for the activities of their non-governmental entities. Article VII makes the launching state liable for damage.

This means that if a commercial module on Starlab—launched by SpaceX from Florida—were to suffer a catastrophic failure and create debris that destroys a Chinese satellite, the United States government (not just the company) would be diplomatically and financially liable.49 This creates a massive regulatory burden for the FAA and NASA to certify the safety of these private stations, as the taxpayer effectively insures the geopolitical risk.

8.2 The Bifurcation of Governance: Artemis vs. ILRS

The breakdown of the ISS partnership is driving a divergence in space governance.

• The Artemis Accords: Led by the US, the Artemis Accords establish a framework for civil space exploration based on transparency, interoperability, and the peaceful use of space. It has attracted over 29 signatories, including traditional allies and new space powers like India.⁵¹

• The International Lunar Research Station (ILRS): Countering this, China and Russia are promoting the ILRS. This initiative seeks to build a parallel coalition, attracting partners like Venezuela, Pakistan, and South Africa.53This bifurcation suggests that future orbital infrastructure will not just be competing commercially, but will serve as nodes in rival geopolitical blocs. A nation's decision to send an astronaut to Tiangong versus Starlab will be a significant diplomatic signal, reinforcing soft power alignments on Earth.55

9. Conclusion

The 2030s will witness the end of the orbital monolith and the rise of the orbital archipelago. The deorbiting of the ISS will close a chapter of singular international cooperation, giving way to a diverse, competitive, and specialized ecosystem.

• China's Tiangong will stand as a mature, state-run powerhouse for international science, attracting nations outside the US sphere of influence.

• Russia's ROSS will mark a retreat from global cooperation to national security surveillance in the Arctic.

• India's BAS will signal the arrival of a new space superpower.

• The US Commercial Fleet will attempt to prove that capitalism can thrive in a vacuum, turning LEO into an industrial domain of factories and hotels.

• The Lunar Gateway will push the human frontier outward, establishing the first permanent foothold in deep space.

This transition is fraught with risks—technical, economic, and diplomatic. The potential for a "presence gap," the uncertainty of the ZBLAN market, and the fragmentation of space law are significant hurdles. However, this diversification also creates resilience. The failure of a single station will no longer mean the end of humans in space. The future of orbit is not a single outpost, but a bustling, chaotic, and vibrant frontier.

Appendix: Comparative Data

Table 1: Successor Station Specifications

Station	Operator	Type	Launch/Ops	Orbit	Key Feature
Tiangong	China (CMSA)	National	Active / Exp. 2026	41° LEO	Co-orbital Telescope (Xuntian); 100% ECLSS regen
Axiom	Axiom Space	Commercial	~2026 (Attached)	51.6° LEO	Evolutionary design; transitions from ISS attached to free-flyer
Starlab	Starlab Space	Commercial	2028	45-51° LEO	Single-launch stainless steel hull; Starship launch
Orbital Reef	Blue Origin/Sierra	Commercial	~2027	51.6° LEO	Inflatable LIFE habitat; "Mixed-use business park"
ROSS	Russia (Roscosmos)	National	~2028	97° Polar	High-latitude surveillance; autonomous operations
BAS	India (ISRO)	National	2028 (1st mod)	51.5° LEO	Supports Gaganyaan crew; Lunar staging
Gateway	NASA/ESA/JAXA	International	~2027	NRHO (Moon)	Solar Electric Propulsion (60kW); Deep space staging

Table 2: NASA Commercial LEO Development (CLD) Funding

Partner	Funding Mechanism	Award Amount	Status
Axiom Space	NextSTEP-2 App I	~$140M	Active; Construction at Thales Alenia Space
Blue Origin / Sierra	CLD SAA	$172M	Active; Passed System Definition Review
Starlab (Nanoracks)	CLD SAA	$217M	Active; Merged with Northrop Grumman
Northrop Grumman	CLD SAA	$125.6M	Withdrawn; Joined Starlab consortium

Works cited

1. International Space Station Transition Report - January 2022 - NASA, accessed January 10, 2026, https://www.nasa.gov/wp-content/uploads/2015/01/2022_iss_transition_report-final_tagged.pdf

2. FAQs : The International Space Station Transition Plan - NASA, accessed January 10, 2026, https://www.nasa.gov/faqs-the-international-space-station-transition-plan/

3. International Space Station Deorbit Analysis Summary - NASA, accessed January 10, 2026, https://www.nasa.gov/wp-content/uploads/2024/06/iss-deorbit-analysis-summary.pdf

4. NASA Provides Updated International Space Station Transition Plan, accessed January 10, 2026, https://www.nasa.gov/humans-in-space/nasa-provides-updated-international-space-station-transition-plan/

5. Low Earth Orbit Economy - NASA, accessed January 10, 2026, https://www.nasa.gov/humans-in-space/commercial-space/low-earth-orbit-economy/

6. Tiangong, China's space station | The Planetary Society, accessed January 10, 2026, https://www.planetary.org/space-missions/chinese-space-station

7. Russian Orbital Service Station (ROSS) Plans - Journal of Space Operations & Communicator, accessed January 10, 2026, https://www.opsjournal.org/DocumentLibrary/Uploads/Russian%20Orbital%20Service%20Station%20Plans_final.pdf

8. Bharatiya Antariksh Station by 2035, Chandrayaan-4 and human landing on Moon by 2040: ISRO Chief unveils India's space roadmap - The Statesman, accessed January 10, 2026, https://www.thestatesman.com/india/bharatiya-antriksh-station-by-2035-chandrayaan-4-and-human-landing-on-moon-by-2040-isro-chief-unveils-indias-space-roadmap-1503475694.html

9. nasa-cld-directive-aug-4-2025.pdf, accessed January 10, 2026, https://www.nasa.gov/wp-content/uploads/2025/08/nasa-cld-directive-aug-4-2025.pdf?emrc=35eca8

10. IG-24-020 - NASA's Management of Risks to Sustaining ISS Operations through 2030, accessed January 10, 2026, https://oig.nasa.gov/wp-content/uploads/2024/09/ig-24-020.pdf

11. Tiangong space station - Wikipedia, accessed January 10, 2026, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tiangong_space_station

12. Design and application prospect of China's Tiangong Space Station - EurekAlert!, accessed January 10, 2026, https://www.eurekalert.org/news-releases/1051342

13. China's space station achieves 100% regeneration of oxygen resources | english.scio.gov.cn, accessed January 10, 2026, http://english.scio.gov.cn/chinavoices/2023-04/14/content_85229262.htm

14. Tiangong science program delivers data surge, accessed January 10, 2026, https://www.spacedaily.com/reports/Tiangong_science_program_delivers_data_surge_999.html

15. China's space station, Tiangong: A complete guide, accessed January 10, 2026, https://www.space.com/tiangong-space-station

16. Commercial LEO Destinations program - Wikipedia, accessed January 10, 2026, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Commercial_LEO_Destinations_program

17. Axiom Station - Wikipedia, accessed January 10, 2026, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Axiom_Station

18. Axiom Space Accelerates Axiom Station Assembly, accessed January 10, 2026, https://www.axiomspace.com/release/axiom-space-accelerates-axiom-station-assembly

19. NASA, Axiom Space Change Assembly Order of Commercial Space Station, accessed January 10, 2026, https://www.nasa.gov/humans-in-space/commercial-space/leo-economy/nasa-axiom-space-change-assembly-order-of-commercial-space-station/

20. Starlab (space station) - Wikipedia, accessed January 10, 2026, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Starlab_(space_station)

21. Starlab | Next generation space station - Airbus, accessed January 10, 2026, https://www.airbus.com/en/products-services/space/space-exploration/starlab

22. Orbital Reef - Wikipedia, accessed January 10, 2026, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orbital_Reef

23. Giant Leap in Microgravity Research: Sierra Space's Successful Habitat Test - Futuramic, accessed January 10, 2026, https://futuramic.com/giant-leap-in-microgravity-research-sierra-spaces-successful-habitat-test/

24. LIFE® | Inflatable Space Station - Sierra Space, accessed January 10, 2026, https://www.sierraspace.com/commercial-space-stations/life-space-habitat/

25. NASA Supports Burst Test for Orbital Reef Commercial Space Station, accessed January 10, 2026, https://www.nasa.gov/humans-in-space/commercial-space/leo-economy/nasa-supports-burst-test-for-orbital-reef-commercial-space-station/

26. Sierra Space Continues to Lead the Industry in the Development of the First Business-Ready Commercial Space Station, accessed January 10, 2026, https://www.sierraspace.com/press-releases/sierra-space-leads-in-the-development-of-the-first-business-ready-commercial-space-station/

27. Blue Origin, Sierra Space weigh future of Orbital Reef space station as partnership turns rocky : r/SpaceXLounge - Reddit, accessed January 10, 2026, https://www.reddit.com/r/SpaceXLounge/comments/16uv0s4/blue_origin_sierra_space_weigh_future_of_orbital/

28. Orbital Reef Space Station Advances to Design Phase After NASA Review - Blue Origin, accessed January 10, 2026, https://www.blueorigin.com/news/sdr-milestone

29. NASA Adjusts Agreements to Benefit Commercial Station Development, accessed January 10, 2026, https://www.nasa.gov/humans-in-space/commercial-space/leo-economy/nasa-adjusts-agreements-to-benefit-commercial-station-development/

30. Haven-1 - Wikipedia, accessed January 10, 2026, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haven-1

31. Haven-2 - Vast Space, accessed January 10, 2026, https://www.vastspace.com/haven-2

32. Roadmap - Vast Space, accessed January 10, 2026, https://www.vastspace.com/roadmap

33. Gravitics - Factories in Space, accessed January 10, 2026, https://www.factoriesinspace.com/gravitics

34. Building Bigger: 54 Humans in One 8-meter Gravitics Module, accessed January 10, 2026, https://www.gravitics.com/news/54-humans-in-gravitics-modules

35. Russia unveils timeline for building its new space station, starting in 2027, accessed January 10, 2026, https://www.space.com/russia-space-station-timeline-2027

36. Russia's Plans for a Space Station Includes "Recycling" its ISS Modules - Universe Today, accessed January 10, 2026, https://www.universetoday.com/articles/russias-plans-for-a-space-station-includes-recycling-its-iss-modules

37. parliament question: indian indigenous space station - PIB, accessed January 10, 2026, https://www.pib.gov.in/PressReleasePage.aspx?PRID=2198267®=3&lang=2

38. Bharatiya Antariksh Station - Wikipedia, accessed January 10, 2026, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bharatiya_Antariksh_Station

39. ESA - Gateway - European Space Agency, accessed January 10, 2026, https://www.esa.int/Science_Exploration/Human_and_Robotic_Exploration/Exploration/Gateway

40. Gateway Space Station - NASA, accessed January 10, 2026, https://www.nasa.gov/reference/gateway-about/

41. Lunar Gateway - Wikipedia, accessed January 10, 2026, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lunar_Gateway

42. Power and Propulsion Element - Wikipedia, accessed January 10, 2026, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Power_and_Propulsion_Element

43. An Electric Solar-Powered Future: Maxar Space Systems' PPE to Propel NASA's Artemis Gateway, accessed January 10, 2026, https://payloadspace.com/an-electric-solar-powered-future-maxar-space-systems-ppe-to-propel-nasas-artemis-gateway/

44. Competing for space - SPIE, accessed January 10, 2026, https://spie.org/news/photonics-focus/janfeb-2021/competing-for-space

45. Sparking the space economy - Aerospace America, accessed January 10, 2026, https://aerospaceamerica.aiaa.org/features/sparking-the-space-economy/

46. Optical Fiber Production - NASA, accessed January 10, 2026, https://www.nasa.gov/missions/station/iss-research/optical-fiber-production/

47. NASA Plan for Commercial LEO Development, accessed January 10, 2026, https://www.nasa.gov/wp-content/uploads/2019/05/commleodevt_plan_6-7-19_final1.pdf

48. Commercial Space TPS Needs: NASA Assessment, accessed January 10, 2026, https://ntrs.nasa.gov/api/citations/20220004354/downloads/AMTPS_Commercial_space_Ver%202.3.pdf

49. Policy Challenges Of Commercial Space Stations - Beyond Earth Institute, accessed January 10, 2026, https://beyondearth.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/01/Commercial-Space-Station-Paper.pdf

50. International Liability for Commercial Space Activities and Related Issues of Debris, accessed January 10, 2026, https://oxfordre.com/planetaryscience/display/10.1093/acrefore/9780190647926.001.0001/acrefore-9780190647926-e-63?d=%2F10.1093%2Facrefore%2F9780190647926.001.0001%2Facrefore-9780190647926-e-63&p=emailAs664XFGzABAg

51. Space Exploration and the Artemis Accords - United States Department of State, accessed January 10, 2026, https://2017-2021.state.gov/dipnote-u-s-department-of-state-official-blog/space-exploration-and-the-artemis-accords/

52. Artemis Accords: What are they & which countries are involved? - Space, accessed January 10, 2026, https://www.space.com/artemis-accords-explained

53. Insight - Global Space Governance: Pathways to Agreement - Secure World Foundation, accessed January 10, 2026, https://www.swfound.org/publications-and-reports/insight-global-space-governance-pathways-to-agreement

54. How Private Companies and NASA's Artemis Accords Will Shape the Future of Space Law, accessed January 10, 2026, https://www.internationalaffairs.org.au/australianoutlook/how-private-companies-and-nasas-artemis-accords-will-shape-the-future-of-space-law/

55. Full article: Space in the international relations of Asia: a guide to technology, security, and diplomacy in a strategic domain - Taylor & Francis Online, accessed January 10, 2026, https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/14799855.2025.2483170