From NASA to the Pentagon, Commercial Space Takes Center Stage in “Rocket Dreams”

New Book Explores the Commercial Dynamics and Geopolitical Tensions of the Modern Day Space Race 

America was watching when NASA’s Artemis II crew splashed down in the Pacific Ocean after their record-setting mission around the moon. An estimated 27.17 million people across six of the nation’s largest television networks tuned in to follow Artemis II’s return to Earth, while another 650,000 followed along on NASA’s YouTube livestream. The Artemis II mission was a precursor to America’s actual return to landing on the moon, but it was aptly timed for Christian Davenport’s new book, Rocket Dreams: Musk, Bezos, and the Inside Story of the New, Trillion-Dollar Space Race, which chronicles the commercial dynamics and geopolitical tensions defining the modern day space race against China. 

“The central tension of the narrative is the lunar lander competition for NASA’s Artemis program,” Davenport said. “Initially, SpaceX won the lunar lander competition when they beat out Blue Origin. But because of concerns over delays with SpaceX’s Starship vehicle, NASA reopened [the competition]. Now, the next Artemis mission will test the docking mechanism of one or both of the lunar landers in low-Earth orbit in 2027, before an eventual lunar landing in 2028.”  

This evolving commercial space dynamic follows Davenport’s 2018 book The Space Barons, which recounts the emerging ambitions of America’s commercial space sector backed by billionaires like SpaceX’s Elon Musk and Jeff Bezos’ Blue Origin. 

“Space Barons posed the question on whether the public-private partnership between commercial space companies and NASA was actually viable,” Davenport said. “The answer in Rocket Dreams is clearly a ‘Yes.’ Astronauts are now being put on rockets and spacecraft that are owned and operated not by the U.S. government, but the private sector. That’s a big deal.” 

Bridenstine and NASA’s Artemis Program 

A key figure in Rocket Dreams is Jim Bridenstine, the NASA administrator from the first Trump administration, who was tasked with overseeing NASA’s Commercial Crew program just as SpaceX was preparing to fly astronauts from U.S. soil for the first time since the space shuttle was retired in 2011. 

“Bridenstine’s first memory of space was the Challenger explosion, so he goes out of his way to hold SpaceX accountable over their parachutes, abort systems, etc.,” Davenport said. “At the same time, SpaceX was developing its Dragon spacecraft to dock on the International Space Station. But the ISS’s docking mechanism had six mechanical arms, each with their own motor and software system that essentially created six potential points of failure. SpaceX rejected that legacy design in favor of their own that used springs from a motor bike, while having to overcome NASA’s skepticism in the process.” 

The Artemis program was originally designed to deliver NASA astronauts and their Orion spacecraft to the moon through the Space Launch System (SLS), which is an expendable, single-use rocket. But this intention was counter to the emerging re-usable rockets the commercial industry was developing, namely SpaceX’s Falcon 9 and Blue Origin’s New Glenn. 

These re-usable rockets created an opportunity for NASA to leverage commercial solutions in their ambitious return to the moon. 

“At one point, Bridenstine even tried to sideline the SLS until Senator Richard Shelby of Alabama [intervened],” Davenport said. “But now, there’s widespread recognition that we need to move fast and use the resources we have to beat China back to the moon. So while the near-term solution is to use both SLS and reusable rockets, [current NASA administrator] Jared Isaacman has said that when commercial alternatives are less expensive, reusable and more efficient, that NASA would go toward those and away from SLS.”  

Ensuring the Continuity of Artemis 

The success of the recent Artemis II mission was only possible, in part, by the actions Bridenstine took to insulate the NASA program from the political whims of changing presidential administrations.  

“George W. Bush said we’re going to the moon, only for Barack Obama to switch gears to focus on an asteroid or Mars,” Davenport said. “When Trump came in and returned focus to the moon, Bridenstine wanted to create a program that would survive [a change of administrations]. So he created the Artemis Accords and brought in international partners by casting this program as a key tenet in the space race between the United States and China.” 

Similarly, the United States Space Force has also received bipartisan support through recent administration changes since its inception during the first Trump administration.  

“Two of President Trump’s policies that President Biden continued were the Artemis program and the Space Force, because he recognized their importance,” Davenport said. “China also has ambitions for cislunar space, the lunar South Pole and Mars, all of which have national security implications. They have already demonstrated docking maneuvers and even potentially refueling in geostationary orbit, years after they already grappled a defunct Biedou satellite and moved it to a graveyard orbit. ” 

The Space Force and Commercial Engagement 

Likewise, the emerging Chinese threat in space and the opportunity to leverage innovative solutions from the commercial space industry has captured the attention of the Space Force. 

“In order to achieve space superiority, the Space Force needs to rely on the commercial space sector for the kinds of technologies that we need: reusable rockets, maneuverable satellites, on-orbit refueling,” Davenport said. “Space Force officials are now openly talking about weapons in space, [ranging from] anti-satellite tests to more subtle attacks like jamming and spoofing. All of those capabilities are necessary for space superiority and a lot of companies are currently working on that.” 

That’s why the Space Force has been engaging its commercial partners publicly, particularly through published documents like the 2024 Commercial Space Strategy. 

“From the beginning, the Space Force has aimed to be more nimble, efficient and avoid the government procurement debacles that Senator McCain used to turn into theater in the Senate Armed Services Committee,” Davenport said. “The motivation to incorporate commercial partners is there. One significant action they’ve taken is bringing [industry] into war-gaming scenarios, like the one focused on Russia’s development of a space-based nuclear weapon, so they can better understand the challenges and threats.” 

Despite the emerging relevance of potential solutions and capabilities provided by commercial space companies, questions still remain. 

“SpaceX is launching the Falcon Nine once every two or three days, showing that reusability is real,” Davenport said. “But they’re also going to have to show that [Starship] can be launched and refueled in orbit, which will require a fleet of tankers. Meanwhile, Blue Origin is also set to land their uncrewed Mark 1 lunar lander on the moon later this year. But while Blue Origin has had some success with its New Glenn rocket, can they resolve its recent second stage engine anomaly and get their launch cadence up?” 

The success of U.S. ambitions in space, for both NASA and the Space Force, will be contingent in part on their commercial partners. But the implications for national security space will be a narrative that Davenport intends to pursue in his next project. 

 “The American public doesn’t fully understand the Space Force and its importance in facing the rising threats from China, Russia and others,” Davenport said. “But the national security space problem isn’t new, either. It didn’t suddenly appear when President Trump created the Space Force in 2019, there’s a long history that goes back decades and that’s only going to accelerate in the years ahead.” 

Translating Public Interest into Financial Backing 

So while space captivated the American public’s attention for the ten-days of Artemis II, the responsibility now falls on the leaders of NASA and the Space Force alike to translate that public interest into sustainable financial backing for their mission-critical space programs.  

“We saw the American public’s attention fade away after the Apollo 11 moon landing,” Davenport said. “After the Artemis II mission, NASA has momentum behind a return to the moon for the first time since those Apollo missions. So NASA Administrator Jared Isaacman is going to have to keep not only the American public engaged, but also Congress engaged to fund the new space race against China.” 

The dual-use potential of commercial space systems seems to have captured the attention of the investor community. SpaceX is seeking a $1.75 trillion valuation for its initial public offering (IPO) later this year, one that some estimates suggest could raise $75 billion. 

“SpaceX is one of the biggest stories of American entrepreneurship of the last 100 years, moving from building rockets to [operating] a constellation of 10,000 internet satellites,” Davenport said. “Now they’re looking ahead to orbital data centers and artificial intelligence. But the Pentagon also has a real desire for alternatives in the space launch market – they need New Glenn to work, Neutron from Rocket Lab, Stoke Space to stand up, all of these companies and their capabilities need to come to fruition. The need is proliferating, so the potential for greater investments is a rising tide that can lift all boats.” 

However, it remains to be seen if the growing public interest will likewise be met with financial backing from the U.S. government. While the Space Force has put forward a record-setting budget proposal of $71.1 billion for FY2027, how much will be appropriated from Congress remains to be seen. 

NASA, on the other hand, is looking at an $18.8 billion budget — a 23% reduction from the prior year despite a renewed emphasis on human exploration through programs like Artemis. 

“The United States is always going to defend its values and assets in any new frontier,” Davenport said. “But even with a huge increase in the Space Force budget, threats in space will only accelerate with the proliferation of spacecraft and our reliance on them. If the United States doesn’t have a presence in low-Earth orbit, cislunar space or the moon, we would cede all of that to China.  

Elara Nova is the trusted global security partner delivering decisive advantage. Learn more at elaranova.com