Public and private strategies for fueling in orbit—and why it matters who gets it right first
The Same Goal, Two Very Different Paths
NASA builds ecosystems. SpaceX builds everything.
In-space refueling is the critical unlock for missions to the Moon, Mars, and beyond. But how we get there—and who builds the infrastructure—is still up for debate.
At the center of this emerging split are two dominant players with fundamentally different strategies:
- NASA, leveraging public-private partnerships to build an open fuel network.
- SpaceX, creating a vertically integrated system with Starship at its core.
This divide isn’t just technical—it’s philosophical. And the outcome could define who moves freely in space, and who waits for access.
NASA: The Partnership Model
Build the standards. Fund the ecosystem.
NASA’s approach is shaped by decades of deep-space operations and a new mandate to foster commercial markets. The agency isn’t trying to build its own fuel depots—instead, it’s enabling others to do it by:
- Funding early-stage technologies through programs like Tipping Point and SBIR.
- Supporting cryogenic fluid management demos, thermal shielding, and autonomous refueling tech.
- Requiring open interface standards for docking and transfer systems.
- Working with a range of companies, from Lockheed Martin to startups like Orbit Fab.
The idea: seed a competitive, interoperable refueling architecture that serves all missions—government, commercial, and scientific.
This model is slow by design. But if successful, it could support a robust fuel marketplace, where different players operate depots, tankers, and service platforms.
SpaceX: The Full Stack Strategy
Own the vehicle, the tanker, and the refuel
SpaceX’s approach is radically different: don’t wait for infrastructure—build it yourself.
Starship, their fully reusable launch system, is designed from the start for in-orbit refueling. The model looks like this:
- One Starship launches dry.
- Multiple tanker Starships launch after it, transferring fuel in low Earth orbit.
- The now-fueled Starship heads to the Moon, Mars, or beyond.
SpaceX is developing its own cryogenic transfer systems, docking ports, and mission sequencing—all internally.
There’s no external depot. There’s no third-party provider. It’s vertical integration at orbital scale.
This model moves faster. But it depends on one company’s technology—and creates a closed ecosystem others may not access.
The Pros and Risks of Each Approach
Speed vs resilience. Control vs openness.
| Feature | NASA Model | SpaceX Model |
|---|---|---|
| Speed to first use | Slower, multi-partner | Fast, if Starship works |
| Flexibility | High—serves many vehicle types | Low—designed for Starship |
| Market development | Open ecosystem | Closed loop |
| Redundancy and resilience | Stronger with more vendors | Weaker if reliant on one system |
| Cost efficiency | Competitive through bidding | Economies of scale via integration |
In short, NASA bets on an open market. SpaceX bets on owning the market.
What This Means for the Future of Exploration
Whoever controls the fuel controls the flow of missions
In the next decade, we’ll see:
- Private tankers and public depots emerging from NASA-funded partnerships.
- Starship test flights performing orbital refueling as proof of concept.
- Standardization pressure as multiple refueling systems come online.
- A mixed model, where some missions use NASA-compliant depots, and others use SpaceX-exclusive refueling.
Ultimately, refueling will shape who gets to move, how fast they move, and how affordably they move in space.
Conclusion: Two Paths to the Same Goal—But Not the Same Future
NASA and SpaceX are racing to the same capability, but with very different world-building assumptions.
One aims for shared infrastructure. The other builds a private pipeline. Both could succeed—but the implications for global space access, private enterprise, and mission diversity are significant.
For educators, parents, and students dreaming beyond Earth: pay attention to the plumbing. Whoever solves orbital refueling first won’t just make history—they’ll write the blueprint for how space works.
