This sounds weird. Is there a crisis in terms of launching satellites into space? A crisis in getting people to and from ISS? One should think there are plenty of rockets available. But that is not so! I found a great article here. It really puts these things into perspective. Let us start with the basic concepts. A satellite going into space will require a launcher being available. There are only a few companies with a proven track record of providing reliable and cost effective launchers. In essence, we have SpaceX with the Falcon 9, Ariane 5 and now 6, Chinese Long march and the Russian launchers (Soyus and Proton). All of these have a success rate that is required. Nobody wants to take a chance with a satellite costing millions and see it blow up because the launcher is not really there yet. Soyus and Proton had some 90+ launches from 2020 to 2024. That is a lot of tonnage going into space – and then – Ukraine war removed the Russian rockets off the board.
Long March had some 230 launches from 2020 to 2024. And Falcon 9 had some 77 launches in the first six months of 2026. So where is the crisis? First of all, the Russian rockets are off the board. And now the big thing: SpaceX will retire Falcon 9! Nowe se can look at the picture and see the impact. Elon’s remaining Falcons might be used for StarLink and not offered as commercial vehicles for getting satellites into space. On top of, the cost is bound to go up, not down. Falcon 9 launch is more or less the same as 10 years ago. So the myth about lowering costs is a myth. The next big thing will be the SpaceX mega-rocket Starship. But it sort of blows up from time to time. Yes, the last launch went fine, but … Starship has not got a track record yet. And that can make people nervous. It points to one major crisis: there are not enough rockets to offer the service that is required when we look into the future: space-based data centers and flights to Mars.
Are manned flights on the go? That is another good question. The Dragon capsule will also get retired and that leaves the Boeing capsule as the alternative for getting people up and down to ISS. The Russian Soyus being off the board just complicates it all as that after all was a safe bet. Boeing is not a safe bet right now. Maybe the Chinese capsules can be an alternative but I do not see that as politically possible right now. It gets even more tricky. Starship is massive and designed to fly to Mars. Not just a few hundred miles up in space to deliver things in low-earth orbit. Finding new and un-proven launchers can be an option, but if these new launchers will still require several years of testing and development, the cost (and time delay) will surely impact the entire industry. ISS is set to retire in the 2030s. US has claimed that it is of ‘national interest’ to have a space station (otherwise the only one zipping around up there is the Chinese one).
Building a new space station will take a lot of launches of all the things that has to go into orbit. That reduces the commercial market even further. But that is not all! NASA wants to go to the moon in the next few years. Establishing a permanent moon base will take another good portion of available lanchers. One might ask one good question of the most successful launcher: why retire Falcon 9 in its prime? The answer is simple (and not so simple if we think about it). I quote SpaceX president Gwynne Shotwell: “If we don’t obsolete our own products and services, someone’s going to find a way to obsolete them for us.” What she is really saying is that Falcon is getting older and the technology needs a revamp. That is Starship so SpaceX is betting everything on the new rocket. The very good question is if SpaceX can deliver. If not there will be ample of space for Ariane, Long March etc etc to at least get a cut of the market. So, if you have a reliable rocket, start advertising! Maybe the SA-Rocket?