It has been a long time since America last launched its own astronauts to space. While 2011 doesn’t seem like that long ago, that was the year the Space Shuttles last flew after three decades of storied but troubled service. With mounting public pressure due to two launch failures and soaring launch costs, the U.S government and NASA ultimately decided to retire the spaceplane after its last mission in 2011. Ever since, U.S astronauts have relied on the Russian space agency, Roscosmos, and their Soyuz capsule to reach the International Space Station at an inflated price tag of around $80 million per seat. Faced with an increasingly expensive bill from the Russians that also posed potential risks to America’s access to the billion-dollar orbital laboratory, NASA had to decide between developing a brand new crew transport on their own or outsourcing the development to a commercial company. In the end, the American space agency took a gamble on the nascent U.S. commercial space industry by hiring SpaceX and Boeing to each independently develop their own crew vehicles.

The result of this gamble will be revealed in little under a week, on May 27th*, when SpaceX attempts its first crewed launch of its Crew Dragon vehicle to the International Space Station, carrying two NASA astronauts as well as the hopes and dreams of the entire commercial space industry. This has been a moment nine years in the making, stretching across three separate presidential administrations, and may bear immense implication on how space is going to be developed as an industry in the upcoming decade. Regardless of the outcome of this launch, I believe the progress made thus far by both SpaceX and Boeing (albeit the latter has had serious software issues that will likely delay its program by over a year) demonstrates the viability of commercial space companies and will usher in a new era of enterprising in space. It will likely open up new public-private partnership opportunities between NASA and the private sector as well as encourage more private companies to take the initiative to create demand for the space industry. Demo 2 will likely mark the beginning of the true commercialization of the final frontier.

The Great Debate Over the Shuttle Replacement

The Crew Dragon story actually begins about 15 years earlier. Back then, America’s primary tool of space transportation was the venerable Space Shuttle. But after two fatal disasters, three decades of service, and rapidly escalating costs, it became increasingly apparent in the mid-2000s that the Space Shuttle’s days were numbered. In 2005, the Bush administration officially signed off on the Constellation program that initiated the development of a new, Shuttle-derived launch vehicle named Aries as well as a new crew capsule named Orion to replace the shuttle. The goal of the Constellation program was to preserve American access to Low Earth Orbit (LEO) in addition to creating the capability of reaching farther destinations like the Moon and Mars, with both Aries and Orion designed for deep space exploration from the beginning. This was a major step up from the shuttle, which only operated close to Earth and could only stay in orbit for a maximum of two weeks. One of the major criticisms of the shuttle was that NASA seemed to have taken a step backwards from the Apollo program, having relegated itself to LEO with the shuttle and hadn’t ventured any farther than it had gone 50 years ago. This was why the Constellation program was very Apollo-esque, with the two main Aries rockets - Aries I and Aries V - paying homage to Saturn I and Saturn V, announcing to the world America’s recommitment to space exploration.

While the program was highly ambitious, it suffered from a series of severe schedule and technical setbacks as well as continuous budget overruns. A 2009 Government Accountability Office report declared the program to be facing “significant technical and design challenges,” and many issues had to be resolved before it was possible to gain schedule clarity. The same year, NASA, under the new Obama administration, convened the Augustine Committee to review the entire program and found it to be too “behind schedule, underfunded, and over budget” to be able to meet any of its goals of reaching the Moon and subsequently Mars. The choice then was to decide whether to continue funding the Constellation program - seen by Obama as “lacking in innovation” - or pivot toward the private industry to develop crew vehicles to reach the International Space Station, allowing NASA to instead focus on deep space exploration.

The debate was a ferocious one. The administration leaned toward pivoting to the private sector, especially given the development of the Commercial Resupply Service that saw private companies like SpaceX and Orbital ATK deliver cargo to the International Space Station starting in 2012. However, the proposed plan, named the Commercial Crew Program, was met with great backlash in Congress, especially from congressmen that represent states with significant employment tied to both Shuttle and Constellation programs. Richard Shelby, an Alabama congressman and staunch supporter of both the Constellation and its eventual successor the Space Launch System, said “Congress cannot and will not sit back and watch the reckless abandonment of sound principles, a proven track record, a steady path to success, and the destruction of our human spaceflight program.” After decades of state-led development, there was great inertia to move away from ineffective but politically beneficial space programs, much like how defense contractors leverage employment for program fundings.

In the end, Obama compromised - access to the ISS in low Earth orbit will be serviced by commercial companies under the new Commercial Crew Program, but the Orion crew capsule will continue to be developed for deep space exploration, alongside a new heavy-lift vehicle named the Space Launch System. It was a compromise that saw Shuttle-derived hardware (and thus employment) preserved, as the new SLS, like Constellation, is heavily derived from the Space Shuttle, but innovation will be given to private companies to develop new vehicles for low Earth orbit access.

While this was a win for commercial space enterprises, it was just the beginning of their challenge. Skeptics within and outside of NASA piled doubts on the viability of the plan, arguing such outsourcing of manned spaceflight is at best reckless and at worst disastrous. Apollo astronauts Neil Armstrong and Eugene Cernan - the first and last astronauts to walk on the Moon, respectively - came out in opposition of Obama’s plan during a congressional hearing in 2010. “I do not think this would be in our best interest,” Armstrong remarked. Both contended that an increased reliance on commercial partners would reduce America’s dominance in space.

Congress was also decidedly against the Commercial Crew Program, especially from states that had the most to lose from a decreased NASA involvement in human spaceflight. For the first five years of the program, from 2011 to 2015, the program was consistently underfunded, at times by as much as 50%. In the 2016 budget proposal, for example, NASA’s request for $1.2 billion was undercut by Congress by 25%, or around $300 million. Shelby, congressman for Alabama, justified the cuts as to “preserve a ‘balanced space program,’” with extra funding going to the Space Launch System and the Orion crew capsule, both of which were NASA-funded projects built in his state. Such politicking, paired with old-school conservatism, dogged the Commercial Crew Program from the beginning. This, however, did not stop the program from moving forward. The constant pressure and underfunding did not prevent one company in particular - SpaceX - from developing a crewed space vehicle.

SpaceX’s Underdog Story

The Commercial Crew Program was structured to be a competition, gradually narrowing the number of companies that eventually got funded to develop a full vehicle through multiple rounds. Initially, SpaceX was not even included in the competition. The first round of development funding - CCDev 1 - was awarded to five companies, including Boeing, Blue Origin, and Sierra Nevada. The company was included in the second round - CCDev 2 - however, with $75 million awarded to continue development of its Crew Dragon vehicle. SpaceX has already been developing a separate vehicle - Dragon 1 - to send cargo to the ISS, and it plans to base its crewed version off of Dragon 1 to reduce development time and cost. The field was gradually narrowed through the next couple of rounds to eventually just Boeing’s Starliner and SpaceX’s Crew Dragon vehicles, receiving $4.2 billion and $2.6 billion, respectively, in 2014. The fixed-cost contracts - CCtCap - entailed an end to end launch, docking, and recovery capabilities from the two companies and covered an uncrewed test launch, a crewed test launch, and six operational missions to the ISS. It was a huge milestone for the company that wasn’t even in contention during the first round. With the competition out of the way, however, SpaceX still had a difficult road ahead: building and flying the Crew Dragon.

It may seem easy for SpaceX to build the Crew Dragon. After all, it was based off of Dragon 1, the cargo vehicle that had been regularly visiting the ISS since 2012. That proved to be easier said than done, however, as SpaceX worked four long years to build out the new vehicle’s navigation, vehicle control, life support, docking, and emergency abort systems, among a myriad other systems and modifications. The experience gained from building and flying Dragon 1 was immensely helpful, however. Garret Reisman, a former NASA astronaut that served as a consultant to SpaceX until 2018, said “if we had to do Dragon 2 from a blank sheet of paper, it would have been a lot harder.” It allowed SpaceX to learn valuable lessons on navigating in space and maintaining a pressure vessel, both essential ingredients to a crewed vehicle.

The resulting vehicle utilizes a rather unorthodox design. The most obvious is its shape: the spacecraft’s tall form contrasts with the shorter, cone-shaped design that characterized the Apollo reentry capsule as well as the more recent Orion and Boeing’s Starliner capsules. This was necessary as SpaceX incorporated eight SuperDraco thrusters into the spacecraft’s body, in four pods of two, which formed the basis of its launch escape system. This was a first in spaceflight - most launch escape systems are not a part of the spacecraft itself but rather ditched after every launch. SpaceX incorporated it into Crew Dragon to improve reusability as well as one day utilize them for vertical landing - much like how it lands its Falcon 9 rockets. The spacecraft also utilizes a modern, minimalistic interior design, completed with touchscreen controls for the pilot that minimized buttons, contrasting with traditional capsules that were littered with buttons; the Space Shuttle cockpit famously had more than 1,000 buttons. This design also differ from Boeing’s more traditional design, which was made possible by the flexibly of the Commercial Crew Program - each contractor could choose how it plans to meet NASA’s high level requirements. The result was two distinctive spacecrafts that had unique strengths and weaknesses.

Building the spacecraft was only half the work, however, as SpaceX also had to navigate the NASA bureaucracy to validate and certify its vehicle. The Commercial Crew Program is a public-private partnership, meaning NASA works closely with SpaceX to ensure its high level requirements are met. This required close cooperation between the two organizations that could not be more different. Reisman characterized the contrast as “this Silicon Valley-type company with that kind of an ethos” and “a government bureaucracy.” It was an unlikely marriage with strained relationships at times. In 2018, Elon Musk famously smoked weed on Joe Rogan’s podcast, prompting NASA to initiate a company-wide culture review to determine whether there is an issue with SpaceX’s safety culture. NASA Administrator Jim Bridenstine also publicly called out Musk last year for working on an alternate launch system, Starship, rather than focus solely on the Commercial Crew Program, saying he “expects to see the same level of enthusiasm focused on the investments of the American taxpayer.” Overall, the partnership has held steady, and SpaceX was able to work through numerous accidents with the space agency, including two rocket explosions (CRS-7 and Amos-6) as well as a Crew Dragon capsule explosion during an abort engine test. During a press conference on May 1st, Bridenstine called NASA’s investment in SpaceX to be “very beneficial, not just for human space exploration, but beneficial for the economy." The unlikely relationship has lasted and the end product is in sight.

It is worth pointing out that despite receiving $1.7 billion less than Boeing, even with mishaps from both companies, SpaceX is still on track to launch astronauts to the space station earlier than the aerospace behemoth. During the final selection process of the Commercial Crew Program, Boeing pushed hard for NASA to award just one contractor to fly to the ISS. One government source told publication Ars Technica that “We were fighting to keep two providers as many in Congress, lobbyists, and some in NASA were fighting to down-select to only Boeing.” The perception that SpaceX was an inexperienced, publicity-obsessed company ran deep within the establishment and played into Boeing’s attempt to maximize profits for itself. It is a stunning turn of events today with SpaceX far ahead of Boeing in terms of launch readiness.

In less than a week’s time, on May 27th, SpaceX will attempt to launch NASA astronauts Bob Behnken and Doug Hurley, both Shuttle veterans, to the International Space Station aboard its Crew Dragon vehicle and Falcon 9 rocket. It will be the first launch of U.S. astronauts from U.S. soil since 2011, and will also be the first launch of a two-man crew from the U.S. since 1982. The mission is expected to last between one to four months, after which the capsule will bring the pair back to Earth for a soft landing via parachute in the Atlantic Ocean. This is a culmination of 10 years of work, and if the launch is successful, it will also be the first commercial orbital-class launch in history and just the fourth entity - after the Soviet Union/Russia, U.S., and China - to launch humans to space.

After Demo-2

What does a successful Demo-2 mission mean? In the short term, SpaceX will have completed the development and testing obligations for its Crew Dragon capsule under the Commercial Crew Program and will thus be cleared to begin operational missions to the space station for NASA. The company will also be able to begin flying private commercial customers to the ISS under an arrangement that allowed private access to the laboratory. In March, SpaceX signed an agreement with Axiom Space, a Houston-based startup that hopes to sell three seats to the space station using the Crew Dragon as transport. Just a month prior, the company inked a deal with Space Adventures, a company with a history of organizing trips to the ISS for wealthy individuals, to send four space tourists for a trip around Earth on a Crew Dragon, though this trip will not involve visiting the ISS. The certification of Crew Dragon will go beyond just the contract with NASA, allowing SpaceX to utilize the capsule for space access in general.

It will also open the doors to further cooperation between the public and private sectors, allowing private companies to play a much bigger role in the space industry. Commercial companies like SpaceX have been long criticized to be unscrupulous and reckless, and the successful launch of Behnken and Hurley will be able to silence critics and prove that commercial enterprising can be much more effective than government programming. A 2011 congressional report found that the Falcon 9 rocket used by SpaceX to launch the Crew Dragon costed the company $390 million to develop, but it would have costed $4 billion if the same rocket was developed by NASA instead. The agency’s traditional “cost-plus” contracting model, which promised to shoulder any and all development costs for a program, often allows contractors to not be penalized financially for cost overruns and schedule delays. The fixed-cost contracts that Commercial Crew was based on obliged contractors to shoulder cost overruns, encouraging cost reductions and increasing efficiencies. Commercial enterprising, combined with competitive bidding and a sound contracting model, can be much more cost-effective and efficient than traditional government programing. The success of Commercial Crew has spawned numerous other public-private partnerships, most notably for the Artemis program that aims to bring NASA astronauts back to the Moon by 2024. Such partnership has the potential to reshape the space industry landscape forever.

Apart from NASA initiatives, the success of SpaceX will mark the beginning of the true commercialization of space, with industries ranging from space tourism to communications to manufacturing ripe for disruption. Axiom Space, mentioned previously for their space tourism deal with SpaceX, is aiming to launch their own module to the ISS, which can one day detach from the station to become its own full fledged space station. Other companies, such as Jeff Bezos’ Blue Origin, have been vocal about investing in new industries that will see millions of people work in space one day. Demo-2 is thus heavily symbolic - signaling that the end of government monopoly of the final frontier is rapidly approaching.

Conclusion

It is decidedly an exciting time to be alive. I remember my love of space was first inspired by the launch of the Chinese astronaut Yang Liwei in 2003, when I was just a child attending kindergarten. I watched with awe as the Shenzhou 5 marched into the sky atop a streak of orange flame and white trail, making China just the third country to send a human into space. The upcoming launch of Crew Dragon really feels like a déjà vu back to that moment 17 years ago, marked by the same fear, anticipation, excitement, and hope.

But beyond pure emotions, the launch will be a watershed moment for the whole commercial space industry. It will be the final chapter of the underdog story, of how an inexperienced startup, armed with nothing but the Silicon Valley-style ethos of trial and error, defeated aerospace giants and entire nations to usher in a new era of enterprising in an entirely new space. I hope other companies will follow SpaceX’s lead and take their first steps toward creating something completely new. This is not unlike the year 1869, when the first intercontinental railway was just about to be completed. The rails have been built, the trains have been constructed, and all there is left to do is to head on out west and start building.

*As of May 27th, Demo 2 has been delayed to May 30th due to inclement weather at the launch site.