NASA looks at reducing the ISS operating expenses

With the release of NASA's first 2026 "skinny budget" last week, one of the glaringly obvious things was that, like every agency of the Federal Government, they were going to face a budget cut rather than staying the same or even still growing but growing slower.  The relevant "money quote" from there was this:

The tradeoff of more money for the moon and Mars is less money for the ISS, but the budget still commits to flying it until 2030. "The Budget reduces the space station’s crew size and onboard research," the document states. "Crew and cargo flights to the station would be significantly reduced. The station’s reduced research capacity would be focused on efforts critical to the Moon and Mars exploration programs."  

More details on what, when, and all those details made headlines today in an Ars Technica overview titled, "NASA scrambles to cut ISS activity due to budget issues."    

• Reducing the size of the crew complement of Crew Dragon missions from four to three, starting with Crew-12 in February 2026
• Extending the duration of space station missions from six to eight months

These sound like minor adjustments.  A reduction in crew assigned to a mission on the ISS of 25% in itself probably doesn't save 25% of NASA's operating expenses, because those astronauts will remain at NASA - unless they're not telling us there will be a RIF (Reduction In Force) in the astronaut corps.  

Extending crew missions from six to eight months will save some money in launch costs, but while I don't believe that's a big cost contributor, going from half year missions to two thirds of a year means going from four crewed launches to three launches in two years, which is absolutely going to cut the number of launches before the ISS gets de-orbited.  In the big picture sense, yes, it seems that less work will be accomplished on the ISS.

"The Budget reduces the space station’s crew size and onboard research, preparing for a safe decommissioning of the station by 2030 and replacement by commercial space stations," stated the budget request for fiscal year 2026. "Crew and cargo flights to the station would be significantly reduced. The station’s reduced research capacity would be focused on efforts critical to the Moon and Mars exploration programs."

The president's budget proposal document linked in that paragraph estimates this would save $508 million from a budget of about $3 billion annually to support the ISS - roughly a 17% cut.  

Coincidentally (hah!) this matches plans Roscosmos has for its Soyuz launches to the ISS.  Beginning with the Soyuz MS-27 mission launched last month, Russia has extended the duration of flights to eight months.

It needs to be said that this is probably less final than such budget ideas usually are this early in the process.  Add to the usual uncertainties that NASA doesn't have an administrator yet, so this is all preliminary and may unfold differently.  

The decision to fly fewer than a full complement of astronauts is not consistent, for example, with the goals of the Trump White House nominee to lead NASA, Jared Isaacman.

He spoke in favor of "maximizing" science on the space station during his confirmation hearing last month. In subsequent answers to written questions, Isaacman reaffirmed this position.

"My priority would be to maximize the remaining value of the ISS before it is decommissioned," Isaacman wrote. "We must prioritize the highest-potential science and research that can be conducted on the station—and do everything possible to 'crack the code' on an on orbit economy."

NASA Astronauts (from left) Nichole Ayers and Anne McClain work together at the International Space Station’s Port-4 truss structure to install a modification kit readying the orbital outpost for a future rollout solar array.  Photo taken May 1, 2025.   Image credit: NASA