These companies could replace Russia


Russia plans to abandon the International Space Station in 2024.

It was the headline that shocked the space community last week, when Russia’s TASS news agency quoted Roscosmos’ new head Yuri Borisov as saying that Russia would “withdraw from this station after 2024” and try to build a new, all-Russian space station instead. But maybe investors should take this less as a surprise, and more as… an opportunity?

After all, when the International Space Station (ISS) started operating in 2001, it was expected to remain in service for about 15 years. It’s 2022 now, so obviously that original plan has been revised. Yet, as early as 2016 (initial expiration date of the ISS), Russia was already making noise for wanting abandon the projectdetach its modules and use them as a base for a new all-Russian station.

Ongoing negotiation between the United States, which wants to use the ISS to train private companies to build their own stationsand Russia, which until 2020 was doing good business selling “seats” on Russian rockets, extended the lease of the ISS – first until 2025, then 2028, and more recently until 2030. But former Roscosmos boss Dmitry Rogozin has complained that the ISS costs “a colossal sum” to maintain, and the Russian government has said for years that it would rather spend its money on a wholly-owned Russian station. , which will be called the Russian Orbital Service Station. (ROSS).

To sum up:Russia Leaving Space Station Could Trigger Program ‘Nightmare’

SpaceX News:SpaceX rocket in latest Starlink launch

Now, with the advent of Russia’s war against Ukraine and the arrival of a new “cold war” mentality in the United States and Russia, Russia may be ready to abandon the ISS. (Or not. Reuters story that followed the TASS report of just a few hours quoted other Russian officials say Russia could stay with the ISS until 2028.)

An opportunity in space

If Russia Is jumping ship is not necessarily the end of the mission Although this is a multinational effort including elements contributed by the United States, Russia, Japan, Europe and Canada ( roughly in that order), most of the ISS is US owned. In fact, only about 17% of the space station’s mass is “Russian”. But the most important part of that 17% is the station’s Zvezda (“Star”) service module, which is the station’s engine that allows it to maintain orbit and maneuver around space junk.

If and when Russia abandons the ISS – taking Zvezda with it – it is the part NASA needs to replace if it wants to keep the ISS in service until 2030. And that could be an opportunity for companies that can capitalize. If Russia leaves the ISS, NASA may be forced to rush to award an award to an American company to take over the role of Zvezda. Several names are coming forward as candidates for this role – and potential recipients of a NASA contract to build a replacement for Zvezda.

What NASA has to say:NASA ‘strongly rebukes’ display of pro-Russian separatist flag on International Space Station


SpaceX is probably the name that comes to mind first. Elon Musk’s pioneering space company has proven adept at solving all sorts of space problems, from reusable launch rockets to communications satellites to lunar landers. SpaceX is a private company, however, offering little chance for investors to profit even if it wins an ISS contract.

For kids:You can buy SpaceX toys and collectibles from Mattel starting next year

Fortunately, two other public companies space companies are more attractive.


Boeing (NYSE:BA), for example, was NASA’s prime contractor in building the ISS in the 1990s and 2000s and probably knows the ISS better than anyone. Boeing also now has a flight-proven and (nearly) human-rated spacecraft – the Starliner – that is capable of reaching the ISS and using its engines to course-correct the space station as as an ad hoc engine, while working on a more permanent solution.

Northrop Grumman

Another publicly traded space company that would have a good chance of winning a Zvezda replacement contract is Northrop Grumman (NYSE:NOC). Like Boeing’s Starliner, Northrop’s Cygnus supply ships can reach the ISS – and in fact, NASA plans to try using Cygnus’ engines to correct the ISS’ course on a future flight. , in order to test this option.

Northrop even won a contract to build a habitation module for NASA’s future lunar space station, the Lunar Gateway, basing its design on – what else? – a Cygnus tanker. And if NASA thinks Northrop is qualified to build modules for its New space station, it stands to reason that Northrop would also be first in line to win a contract to build new modules for NASA’s former space station.

Incoming:Uncontrolled debris from a Chinese space rocket could crash into Earth as early as Saturday

Right now, it’s hard to tell how serious Russia is about exiting the ISS sooner than expected. But if he leaves, given the ambitious plans that several space companies have announced in recent years to build their own space stations – but to first practice space station operations and procedures aboard the ISS – I thinks there’s a good chance NASA is looking for a stopgap solution to keep the ISS flying for a few more years.

If that turns out to be the case, Boeing and Northrop (and SpaceX) are all prime candidates for a new ISS contract.

Motley Fool’s Offer

10 stocks we like better than Boeing: When our award-winning team of analysts have stock advice, it can pay to listen. After all, the newsletter they’ve been putting out for over a decade, Motley Fool Equity Advisortripled the market.*

They have just revealed what they believe to be the 10 best stocks for investors to buy now…and Boeing was not one of them! That’s right – they think these 10 stocks are even better buys.

View all 10 stocks

Rich Smith has no position in the stocks mentioned. The Motley Fool has no position in the stocks mentioned. The Motley Fool has a disclosure policy.

The Motley Fool is a USA TODAY content partner offering financial news, analysis and commentary designed to help people take control of their financial lives. Its content is produced independently of USA TODAY.


Comments are closed.