A scale model of Russia's next-generation spacecraft was demonstrated at the Paris Air and Space Show in June. Credit: Anatoly Zak

With the U.S. manned space program grounded following the last mission of the space shuttle, the Russian Soyuz spacecraft is the only avenue into space for NASA astronauts. And, in an unprecedented arrangement for NASA, U.S. taxpayers will now provide the Russian government with the extra cash it needs to build a new-generation manned vehicle to replace the 40-year-old Soyuz.

Just as in 1993, when the Russian space agency suddenly found itself in the driver's seat of the stalled U.S.-led space station program by providing crucial elements of the outpost from their own stillborn Mir-2 project, Moscow space officials can again hardly believe their luck. The retirement of the U.S. space shuttle before its replacement is ready means a lucrative deal for Russia to transport all crews to the International Space Station in the next several years.

However, as the Russian space agency's officials are celebrating this windfall, the leaders of the Russian space industry are far from resting on their laurels—they are pushing ahead with plans for a new spacecraft and launcher. However, behind the scenes, RKK Energia, the nation's chief manned spaceflight contractor, has embarked on a collision course with its parent agency—Roskosmos—over the future strategy.

"We've got an unfortunate situation with our next-generation spacecraft," says Aleksandr Derechin, deputy designer general at RKK Energia. "Roskosmos wants a large 23-ton spacecraft [to replace Soyuz], which would also need a new powerful rocket and the new launch site on the far-eastern fringes of the country." But for more than four years, this ambitious plan has become a heavy burden for the Russian space program, Derechin argues.

While the official schedule calls for the first launch of the brand-new Rus-M rocket from the yet-to-be built Vostochny Cosmodrome in 2015, and the first manned mission from this site in 2018, many industry experts consider this timeline wildly unrealistic. In a run-up to the 2014 Winter Olympics, the country may have to choose between multibillion-dollar investments in Sochi Olympic facilities or in the new space center. These experts believe that the current Russian strategy could push back the birth date of the Soyuz replacement by years, if not a decade. Critics point to the ongoing development of the Angara family of rockets, which was initiated at the beginning of the 1990s and has perpetually remained several years away from its maiden mission.

In the meantime, RKK Energia has watched nervously as several modestly priced commercial ventures for carrying astronauts into space have been fostered by NASA. Seeing the emergence of these "private" spacecraft as competition, RKK Energia has come up with its own fast-track strategy, one that would bypass the Russian space agency's grand space plan. The company has proposed to fly a streamlined 12-ton version of the new-generation manned spacecraft onboard an off-the-shelf Zenit rocket, from an existing launchpad in Baikonur, Kazakhstan.

Roskosmos has so far rejected this cheaper, faster approach, preferring to stick to the original plan insisted upon by the government. Despite this setback, RKK Energia's alternative launch vehicle based on the Zenit reappeared last month at the Paris Air and Space Show.

The Zenit, first introduced in 1985, is a two-stage rocket that uses liquid oxygen and kerosene and is capable of delivering up to 13 tons of payload into low-Earth orbit. The Zenit still remains a critical part of the Russian space fleet, and RKK Energia based many of its manned spacecraft designs on the capabilities of the Zenit-based rockets.

Anatoly Zak is a freelance writer and illustrator specializing in space exploration. He is the publisher of RussianSpaceWeb.com, ­ a resource on the history of and the latest developments in the former USSR space program.

Atlantis blasts off on the final shuttle mission. Credit: NASA.

Space Shuttle Atlantis lifted off today on its final voyage, bringing NASA's 30-year-old space shuttle program to an end. With the retirement of the shuttles, and no U.S. rocket capable of taking astronauts into space, experts are buzzing with one question: what's next for NASA? Here are a few important issues surrounding the agency and its plans going forward.

Relying on the Russians to send U.S. astronauts to space is the first piece of NASA's future plan. For many at the agency, this is a bitter pill to swallow. According to SpaceflightNow.com,

In the near term, "we're going to have a reverse brain drain," [Michael Griffin, former NASA administrator and architect of the Bush administrations moon program], told CBS News. "It used to be that people came from other places and other industries to work in the space program because of what it meant and what it was. And as it goes away, we're going to lose those people because talented folks go where there are tough problems. And that's not going to be good for the country."

Griffin's concerns are echoed by many critics of the Obama administrations' plan to retire the shuttles. The administration has also canceled the Constellation program (the moon program devised by the Bush administration), tasked the commercial space industry with developing new low Earth orbit transportation systems, and asked NASA to build a heavy-lift rocket for trips to an asteroid, the moon, and eventually Mars.

Former astronauts, Neil Armstrong, John Glenn, and Jim Lovell, believe NASA should keep flying the shuttles—an agency without a backup system for getting into space and bringing astronauts home is a violation of one of NASA's critical design criteria, these astronauts told the Associated Press. Armstrong and Lovell wrote a letter to the Obama administration saying an end to the shuttle program was a mistake,

Glenn said he doesn't disagree with Obama's plans, although he said he believes private spaceflight will take years longer than [NASA administrator Charles] Bolden predicts. What Glenn objects to is the gap between the shuttle and a future spacecraft. While the Soyuz is reliable, Glenn said NASA should always want an alternative in case of a "hiccup" in the Soyuz plans.

[...]

"Throughout the history of the manned spaceflight program we've always had another program to transition into [...] we had that and it got canceled and we don't have anything," launch manager Leinbach told his fellow workers at Kennedy Space Center. "Frankly as a senior NASA manager I would like to apologize that we don't have that."

The future is not all bleak, though, according to NASA administrator Bolden. During a press conference at Kennedy Space Center held on July 7, according to Space.com,

Private spaceflight firms will pick up NASA's slack before too long, ferrying humans to low-Earth orbit and back relatively cheaply and efficiently, [said Bolden].

And handing off that taxi service to commercial companies, Bolden added, will free the space agency up to do what it was meant to do: explore further afield in our solar system. So the nation is not abandoning human spaceflight, despite a pervasive public perception to the contrary, he said.

NASA is pouring money into the commercial industry while still hammering out a design for a heavy-lift rocket. David Mindell, professor of aeronautics and astronautics at MIT, told me in an interview last week that there is a lot of anxiety about the ending of the shuttle program and part of the problem is that NASA's leadership is not doing a good job at articulating clearly to congress and the public what they are trying to do.

Mindell believes that it is time for the shuttles to retire because "we can't afford two space programs." He adds that the shuttle became an unambitious program, while a lot of other exciting things are happening in commercial spaceflight. "SpaceX is doing things NASA tried to do at one-third the cost; private space will deliver something," he said.

A detailed plan for NASA's future will become clearer when Congress releases the agency's 2012 budget. According to Mindell, there is still one fundamental question that NASA needs to clearly answer, "why send people at all?"

NASA has released the first edition of its new bi-monthy newsletter that focuses on "happenings" in the agency's commercial spaceflight development program. The first newsletter is devoted to the progress made in the commercial crew development program, which recently awarded four companies money to develop spacecraft that can carry astronauts to space. The progress made by these companies--SpaceX, Boeing, Blue Origin, and Sierra Nevada Corporation--is small. But with the space shuttle's final mission scheduled for July 8, the pressure is on for these companies to work quickly and efficiently to meet their goals.

"The space shuttle's retirement gives commercial companies more incentive to push the development of their systems," says Craig Steidle, the president of the Commercial Spaceflight Federation. "They are excited about what's coming up, but the pressure is getting financial support, to make sure we have the money to allow them to do spaceflight demonstrations."

Steidle is optimistic that the commercial companies working on human spaceflight will meet their goals, and we will see the first astronaut launch to space on a commercial spacecraft in 2017.

Here's a round up of what these companies are up to:

Boeing is developing the CST-100 spacecraft, and perhaps achieved the greatest milestone for its spacecraft thus far by completing its delta Systems Definition Review--an analysis of the design and requirements of the spacecraft and its subsystems, including structures, thermal, electrical, propulsion, life support, software and avionics. According to the company's press release,

The Delta SDR enables a common understanding of the design baseline as the team progresses toward a system-level Preliminary Design Review (PDR), which will further mature the system design and ensure it meets all requirements. Under the second round of NASA's Commercial Crew Development Space Act Agreement, Boeing expects to complete its System PDR no later than early spring 2012.

Boeing is preparing to gather performance data on the spacecraft's launch abort system and service module fuel tank; evaluate vehicle ascent performance in wind tunnel testing; and build on earlier landing air bag and parachute demonstrations with more in-depth investigations.

In June Boeing will present a plan for identifying and mitigating potential spaceflight safety hazards for the spacecraft.

SpaceX meanwhile is developing the Falcon 9 rocket and the Dragon spacecraft, which are both test flight proven. With the new funding the company is focusing on the development of a launch abort system and improving the design of the crew systems. SpaceX completed its initial milestone, a kickoff meeting with NASA officials to review requirements and present design status updates. In July, the company will have to present data, documentation, and risk assessments to show that the launch abort system concept is technically sound.

Sierra Nevada Corporation is building the Dream Chaser, a reusable piloted spacecraft that will be launched on an Atlas V rocket. It also had initial kickoff meeting and Systems Requirement Review and will present test results on the aerodynamic and thermal performance of the airfoil for the Dream Chaser's tip fins.

Blue Origin's crew transportation system will be a reusable biconic space vehicle that has been launched on an Atlas V rocket and then on the company's own reusable booster system. After initial meetings the company improved the overall space vehicle design. The next step will be ground and flight tests of its pusher escape system for astronauts, and accelerating the engine design for the reusable booster system.