The explosion that tore through Russia’s main crew launch pad at Baikonur did more than scar a slab of concrete. It abruptly removed one of the International Space Station’s core lifelines, grounding Soyuz flights and forcing partners to confront how fragile their access to orbit really is. The central question now is not just how badly the pad is damaged, but how long it will take before crews can safely ride a Russian rocket to the station again.
That timeline is wrapped up in engineering realities, political frictions and the simple fact that there is no quick backup for a system that has carried people into space since the early 1960s. As I trace what we know about the damage, the repair plans and the alternatives, a rough window emerges for when Russian crews might return to the ISS, and what it will cost the broader partnership to wait.
The blast that broke Baikonur’s routine
The crisis began when a Soyuz MS-28 rocket, launching from the Baikonur Cosmodrome, severely damaged its own pad during ascent to the International Space Station. The vehicle’s crew still reached orbit and docked safely, but the infrastructure that supports Russia’s human spaceflight program did not fare as well, leaving the country suddenly unable to send people into space for the first time since 1961. Reporting on the incident describes how the accident at the Baikonur Cosmodr instantly halted crewed launches and triggered emergency planning among ISS partners.
In the immediate aftermath, Russian officials stressed that repairs would be conducted shortly, but outside experts painted a more sobering picture of the damage. The Soyuz MS-28 mishap did not just scorch paint or wiring, it compromised key elements of the launch complex that handle propellant, structural loads and ground support, which are all essential for human-rated missions. As the scale of the destruction became clear, it was evident that the interruption to Russia’s crewed flights would not be measured in days or weeks.
Roscosmos promises versus outside skepticism
Roscosmos has publicly projected confidence, telling audiences that it aims to have Baikonur’s crew pad back in service by the end of March and signaling that the interruption to ISS traffic will be temporary. That target, framed as a way to calm what one report described as “Crisis headlines,” suggests a roughly four month turnaround from the accident to the next possible crewed launch. The agency has tried to reassure partners that its engineers can restore the pad and resume Soyuz missions to the station on a schedule that keeps long term planning intact at Baikonur.
Outside observers are not as sanguine as Roscosmos about that timeline. Analysts like Anatoly Zak, a longtime expert on Russian space activities, have warned that the scale of the destruction could require more extensive reconstruction than officials are admitting, especially if structural elements or underground systems were compromised. Coverage of the incident notes that some specialists doubt the pad can be fully restored for human-rated launches on the schedule the agency has floated, even though the crew that launched on Soyuz MS-28 reached the ISS safely.
What exactly was damaged on the pad
To understand how soon crews can fly again, I have to look at what was actually broken. Roscosmos acknowledged in a statement that there was “damage to a number of elements of the launchpad,” language that hints at multiple systems being affected rather than a single failed component. The agency posted that assessment on Telegram, but did not immediately spell out whether the flame trench, fueling lines, electrical systems or crew access structures were most heavily hit.
Subsequent analysis has emphasized that the pad is more than a concrete platform, it is a tightly integrated system of propellant plumbing, umbilicals, support towers and safety infrastructure that all must work perfectly for a crewed launch. If the blast damaged underground conduits or structural foundations, repairs could require excavation and rebuilding rather than simple patching. That is why some experts, looking at the available imagery and the history of similar accidents, caution that the path back to routine Soyuz flights may be longer and more complex than the early statements from Roscosmos suggest.
No backup pad and the Gagarin’s Start problem
The vulnerability exposed by the accident is not only the damage itself, but the lack of a ready alternative. Earlier this year, the historic Gagarin’s Start complex at Baikonur, the pad from which Yuri Gagarin began human spaceflight, was removed from Russian jurisdiction and formally transferred to Kazakhstan. That transfer, described in detail by independent reporting, left Russia without direct control of its original crew launch site and made it harder to pivot to another pad when the current one failed. The decision to hand over Gagarin’s Start to Kazakhstan in 2025 now looms large in the current crisis.
With Gagarin’s Start unavailable and other Baikonur facilities not configured for human-rated Soyuz launches, Russia effectively has no backup pad for crewed missions. Analysts have asked why Roscosmos did not invest earlier in a redundant launch complex at Baikonur or at its newer Vostochny Cosmodrome, given the age and importance of the existing site. The result is that the entire Russian human spaceflight program is now bottlenecked by the pace at which the damaged pad can be repaired, a strategic weakness that has become painfully clear for Russia and its partners.
How long can the ISS run without Soyuz seats?
For the ISS partnership, the key operational question is how long the station can function smoothly without Russian crew launches. In the interim, Russia’s human spaceflight program is grounded, a first such disruption since 1961, and that gap strains the long standing practice of having mixed crews from multiple agencies on board. One detailed assessment notes that the hiatus disrupts not only launch cadence but also the delicate balance of responsibilities on the ISS, where Russian modules and systems require trained cosmonauts on site to operate and maintain them In the short term.
NASA has acknowledged that with Russia’s Baikonur pad out of action, the only fully operational crew transport to the station is SpaceX’s Dragon spacecraft. That reality concentrates risk in a single commercial system and leaves little margin if Dragon experiences its own technical or schedule issues. In public comments, NASA officials have stressed that they are monitoring the situation closely and that Dragon can cover near term crew rotations, but they also recognize that relying on one vehicle indefinitely is not sustainable, especially while the Russian segment of the ISS still depends on regular cosmonaut presence at the outpost.
Commercial and international stopgaps
In the absence of Soyuz, the ISS program is leaning harder on commercial and international alternatives, but those options have limits. SpaceX’s Crew Dragon can carry four astronauts at a time and has already become the primary U.S. vehicle for reaching the station, yet its manifest was not designed to absorb all of Russia’s crewed traffic on short notice. NASA is also hoping to certify Boeing’s Starliner capsule as a second operational vehicle for missions to the ISS, a step that would add redundancy and flexibility if it comes in time. The agency’s goal is to have both Dragon and Starliner sharing crew duties so that no single failure can ground human access to the station.
At the same time, the political and technical arrangements that allowed Russian cosmonauts to ride on U.S. vehicles are under new scrutiny. A Russian cosmonaut, Oleg Artemyev, was recently removed from the upcoming SpaceX Crew-12 mission, a change that Roscosmos linked to the evolving situation at Baikonur and the need to reshuffle assignments. That decision underscores how the damaged pad is rippling through crew planning on both sides of the partnership, affecting not only who flies on Soyuz but also who gets a seat on Crew-12 and other commercial flights.
NASA’s response and the politics of dependence
NASA’s public response has walked a careful line between concern and pragmatism. Officials have confirmed that the Soyuz MS-28 crew safely arrived at the space station and emphasized that operations on orbit remain stable, even as they acknowledge that Russia’s Baikonur accident has removed a major pillar of ISS logistics. Behind the scenes, planners are recalculating crew rotations, contingency scenarios and how long Dragon alone can shoulder the load if Roscosmos misses its repair targets. The agency’s statements make clear that the loss of Soyuz access is not just a Russian problem, it is a shared vulnerability for everyone who relies on the ISS today.
Politically, the situation highlights how intertwined the partners remain, even after years of tension on the ground. The United States has invested heavily in commercial crew vehicles precisely to avoid overdependence on Soyuz, yet the station’s architecture still assumes that Russian and American systems will support each other. As long as the Russian segment is essential for propulsion and some life support functions, Washington cannot simply shrug off a prolonged grounding of Soyuz flights. The damaged pad at Baikonur has therefore become a test of whether the ISS partnership can absorb a shock to one side without unraveling the delicate balance that keeps the orbiting laboratory running safely.
Technical repair timelines versus ISS needs
From a purely technical standpoint, a four to six month repair window for a damaged launch pad is not impossible, especially if structural damage is limited and crews can work around the clock. Roscosmos’s stated goal of returning to crewed launches by the end of March reflects that kind of aggressive schedule, one that assumes rapid assessment, streamlined contracting and minimal redesign. If the damage is mostly to surface structures and replaceable hardware, the agency could plausibly restore basic functionality in time to support a late spring Soyuz mission to the ISS, aligning with its public assurances about Baikonur.
The ISS, however, operates on a longer planning horizon, and its needs may not wait patiently for the most optimistic repair scenario. Crew rotations, cargo deliveries and maintenance tasks are scheduled months or years in advance, and any slip in Soyuz availability can cascade through that calendar. If Roscosmos’s timeline slips by even a few months, NASA and its partners will have to decide whether to extend current crew stays, add extra Dragon flights or accept periods with fewer Russian specialists on board. That is why some analysts argue that the real constraint is not how fast engineers can pour concrete, but how much operational risk the ISS program is willing to tolerate while it waits for Roscosmos to deliver.
Strategic lessons for Russia’s space future
For Russia, the Baikonur accident is a stark reminder that a national space program built around a single human launch complex is inherently fragile. The loss of the pad has left the country unable to send people into space at all, a symbolic and practical blow for a nation that once defined human spaceflight. The fact that this is the first time since 1961 that Russia has found itself in this position underscores how deeply the Soyuz system and its infrastructure are woven into the country’s identity and its role in global spaceflight today.
Strategically, the crisis may accelerate long discussed but slow moving plans to diversify launch sites and modernize hardware. Investments in Vostochny, new crew vehicles and upgraded ground systems have all been on the table, yet the current predicament shows how incomplete those efforts remain. If Roscosmos uses this moment to push for genuine redundancy and modernization, the damaged pad could become a catalyst for a more resilient program. If not, the country risks repeating the same vulnerability the next time a launch goes wrong at Baikonur.
More from MorningOverview