ROSS and Russia’s Orbital Future: A Public Look at Space Strategy
On July 26, Yuri Borisov, head of Roscosmos, announced Russia’s withdrawal from the ISS project from 2024 and presented President Putin with a plan for a future Russian orbital station called ROSS. The vision is clear: the station will be visited rather than permanently inhabited. The big question remains, what tasks will it undertake?
First and foremost, ROSS is framed as a tool to address national security challenges in space. There are many such missions emerging every day, and operating them from the ISS is increasingly impractical. In contrast, the United States has already established a pivot point for these technologies in the form of the X-37B Orbital Test Vehicle, a project of the Pentagon. Its initial flight occurred in 2010, and the shuttle remains in space for years, returning with the results of experiments. The public is seldom aware of the specifics aboard. The orbiting station model Borisov proposed seems to offer even broader opportunities to tackle sensitive tasks in space, potentially surpassing the X-37B in certain respects.
Why not develop a Russian analogue of the X-37B? The answer lies in one crucial fact: each country has its own specialization when it comes to orbital platforms. Cost-effectiveness and strategic focus vary, and direct comparisons with the X-37B are difficult because not all details are public. The second point to consider is that personnel approaching aircraft after landing at an air base wear protective gear. Why is this protection necessary? Some speculate it relates to experiments on radiation effects and the potential for long term storage of nuclear payloads in space. For now, such ideas are speculative and part of a broader discussion about future capabilities.
Vladimir Solovyov, who served as General Designer of RSC Energia, previously stated that the construction of a new Russian orbital service station could begin in 2028. The initial phase of ROSS would feature a node and gateway modules, followed by basic, scientific, and energy modules. What are these modules designed to achieve?
Knot refers to the central connector in a modular system. It is intended to allow all other modules to dock, with cargo and crewed ships joining at the airlock. The concept presents a constructor approach that enables module replacement as technology ages. This represents the next logical step in the evolution of space systems. A recent description accompanying the station diagram noted that only two to four people could be aboard simultaneously. Is that sufficient for the tasks at hand? The rationale is straightforward: a smaller crew reduces interference to experiments. Many onboard systems must operate in concert, and the presence of astronauts can introduce microgravity effects and other disturbances. ROSS is envisioned to be simple and efficient for its mission set, rather than a replica of the ISS with larger crew contingents.
External work areas are identified in the same diagram, with forty-eight designated spots for mounting specialized equipment on the station frame. The goal is to maximize such mount points. The pressurized volume is 667 cubic meters, which raises questions about capacity, yet the intention is not to create a larger analog of the ISS but to deliver targeted capabilities. A production module and a service platform are included in the design. The idea is to enable in-space manufacturing, such as ultrapure crystal production or bioprinting, while the service platform could host a nuclear tugboat and allow satellites to be refueled, repaired, upgraded, or disposed of near the station. This is the kind of flexible, service-oriented architecture that could redefine what a space station does in practice.
One of the central technological ambitions tied to ROSS is the development of a nuclear tugboat codenamed Zeus. This marks a bold step in propulsion and orbital logistics with implications for Russia’s defense posture as well as deeper space exploration, including Moon and Mars initiatives. Testing of Zeus-related technologies could take place on ROSS, offering a platform for validating what would be required for long-range robotic and crewed missions beyond low Earth orbit. The political dimension is equally important. Russia’s participation in groups like BRICS, the Shanghai Cooperation Organization, and the EAEU points to a belief that space projects are most effective when pursued as multinational, collaborative efforts. In this view, universal missions that span borders are essential, and national-only projects may struggle to scale in scope and impact.
There is a broader argument that as global resources come under pressure, humanity must pursue new destinations and capabilities. Some observers point to artificial intelligence assisting space programs while reducing human labor needs on the ground. The idea of space-based industrial activity aligns with proposals from industry leaders who see a future where space serves as a hub for research, manufacturing, and even the handling of debris or hazardous materials. The Moon and Mars programs receive attention globally, but the perspective here emphasizes universal missions over parochial, national ambitions. This is a strategic stance backed by a belief that space exploration will eventually require joint action beyond any single nation.
The discussion around whether ROSS is a national station or a platform for broader international cooperation continues. The line taken by Roscosmos suggests a pivot toward a universal program of collaboration alongside BRICS and related formats. The aim is to situate Russia as a leading contributor to a shared, globally beneficial space agenda. In this view, leadership in space comes not from insisting on a single nation’s primacy but from driving common solutions that leverage the strengths of many countries. If successful, ROSS could become a model for future space infrastructure that supports both scientific discovery and strategic resilience in a rapidly evolving cosmic landscape [Cite: Roscosmos announcements and official briefings].