There are certainly rumblings about the future of astronaut access to low Earth orbit. This often comes up in the context of commercial space stations, where having access to LEO is obviously imperative, but affordable access is really the distinction. In that respect, it doesn't matter how many certified crew vehicles you have, Dragon, Starliner, or otherwise, if the architecture inherently creates a cost barrier that limits demand. Take a look at where we are at today.. - There are five outstanding and proven SpaceX Crew Dragon spacecraft still under contract for missions over the next few years. - There are several Boeing Starliner crewed spacecraft that will be modified to address the design issues identified in the PIT report and ultimately certified to launch on ULA's Vulcan. We hope to launch the next uncrewed mission in the months ahead. - Lockheed's Orion, of which I saw the crew and service modules for Artemis III, IV, and V under development this past Friday at KSC. That visit in itself deserves a long-form post about how hard the NASA teams, our contractors, and partners are working to meet this moment for the nation. That amazing fact aside, we have Orion. It is a crew-certified spacecraft and will fly in LEO next year. Certainly not a vehicle optimized for LEO or affordability, but the capability is there. There is no doubt a long future ahead for Orion on a variety of launch vehicles and paired w/ transfer stages. - Both SpaceX and Blue Origin are developing landers to return astronauts to the lunar surface, not to mention affordably delivering mass to the Moon in support of the Moon Base. These programs also have a path to support future crewed LEO needs, be that inherent in their existing plans or paired with other spacecraft. - Other companies, including Blue Origin, have made public comments about internally funding the development of additional crew vehicles. If there is really considerable demand for even more astronaut access to LEO and beyond, then private companies should be able to build the business case and raise the capital. NASA will always be willing to provide subject matter expertise and test facility support for these types of company-funded efforts. And if the capability is there at a lower cost, it is hard to imagine we wouldn't become a customer. In short, there has never been a time when the United States had so many crew-certified spacecraft options available, with others in development, and so much investment moving in the direction of lower costs to make missions to Earth orbit, the Moon, and beyond more routine. I would just caution folks against jumping right to NASA funding the business case for every good idea--like why not one more crewed spacecraft. The more NASA gets spread out trying to make everyone happy, the fewer exciting moments we will have like Artemis II and Roman, the fewer X-planes we will put in the sky, and the fewer astronauts we can afford to fly frequently to Earth orbit. The longer programs, like America's long overdue return to the Moon, take to achieve. We need to stay focused on delivering on the national space policy as quickly, safely and affordably as possible.

We’re getting America underway on nuclear power in space and ushering in the era of a Nuclear NASA. With the signing of an MOU with @ENERGY, we’re taking the next giant leap toward exploring the outer solar system and sending American astronauts to Mars. Fission power will help us travel farther, operate longer, and power more capable scientific instruments.