How long should NASA and Roscosmos keep the ISS running?

[bobskythecanadianguy]

I know that it eats up a relatively large chunk of NASA's budget each year, and that it would need to go out in a controlled deorbit (due to the potential of collisions), but what do you guys think? The Zvezda, the first module, expires in 2028 (as per the manufacturer's 30-year expiration date), and from what I understand that's considered the maximum possible lifespan.

[Kibble]

Zvezda was the third module.

But International Space Station is a triumphantly amazing spacecraft, I hope it flies for as long as the hardware holds up. And with any luck the space-faring countries of the world will come together to create its successor!

[Rickenbacker]

For as long as they possibly can, or until they build a better one. Whichever comes first.

[Reddragon]

As of now, the plan is to upkeep it until 2024. Further use of it depends on many factors.

[musicpenguin]

Another 10-20 years is my guess.

[Nibb31]

The solar arrays will be seriously degraded by 2029. They are supposed to last for approximately 20 years, but it is likely that they won't produce enough power for the ISS to function as a lab before that. The first one went up in 2006 and the last one in 2009.

[jwenting]

They should have stopped sinking money into it years ago after starting design and construction on something more capable as a permanent settlement in space that is suitable as a basis for things like asteroid mining, maintenance and construction of on orbit solar power stations, a base for on-orbit spacecraft for satellite maintenance, etc. etc.

As is, it's purely a money sink so NASA can claim they've not given up manned spaceflight when everyone know they have. And for the Russians the contract to transport people to it is a nice source of hard currency which for them is the only reason to keep it running.

[Streetwind]

There's already an international agreement between NASA and Roscosmos to operate the station until 2024 and then discontinue the project (possibly in favor of something else - especially the Russians want a new station of their own).

ESA still has to formally agree but is expected to (Germany for instance is in favor and they represent already a full third of ESA's budget). JAXA and CSA also still need to make decisions on it, but they're the smallest partners and losing one of them could be compensated. CSA is likely to coordinate with ESA, as the two have a cooperation agreement.

If the 2024 extension for some reason does not go through (if all three minor partners say no), then the station will be decomissioned in 2020.

However, with the new US commercial crew vehicles allowing the extension of the permanent crew to 7 people from 2017(ish) onwards, there's an added incentive to go those extra four years. Currently the six crewmembers spend most of their time on station upkeep and do science only on the side, but the seventh member could focus on science full time, greatly increasing the amount and scope of experiments that could be run.