NASA targets Artemis II crewed moon mission for April 1 launch | Hacker News Reader

NASA targets Artemis II crewed moon mission for April 1 launch

npr.org

63 pointsBrajeshwar36 comments

Then we just have to see if SpaceX can pull off orbital refueling at scale.

Starship 3 first launch will be in April as well https://www.caller.com/story/news/local/2026/03/11/spacex-st...

It's not really a Moon mission if it doesn't land on the Moon, is it?

But imagine mankind would finally put man on the Moon...

I was just thinking yesterday - wouldn't be nice if first man in the space was Russian, first man on the Moon (supposedly) American and first man on different planet/Mars was Chinese. They sure can pull it off.

>It's not really a Moon mission if it doesn't land on the Moon, is it?

What was Apollo 10 in your view?

Why?

----

I know there are readily-observible NASA debris scattered across the moon. Heck, it's even likely that we've already sent a few Americans up there before (perhaps not as early as '69, but eventually... yeah.sure.fine.).

But why go, even if "again?" Why even have gone in the first place (outside of USSA Space Race posturing)?

What is the point? Even if we discovered the goldliest of oils, deep within moonmantle, it would be absolutely cost-prohibitive to transport commercially between our masses. Perhaps the only use I can think is nuclear waste/bombs (for disposal/testing).

----

equally stupid == Mars gaiabomb

----

So again I'll ask: WHY?

Imagine riding in a vehicle that has been tested zero times. I would be terrified. Best of luck to the team.

Have the vehicles not been tested? It seems a strange premise to make.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Artemis_I

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Exploration_Flight_Test-1

It’s kind of wild that I never heard about this. Space exploration really has dropped off the map news/media wise.

I watched a news piece about this and alot of people are calling for more testing before sending a crew up. Every mission has risks but there seems to be real concern about the vehicle's re-entry into Earth's atmosphere. Blessings and good luck to the whole team.

Lunar surface?

Fly-by

April 1 is an in interesting choice for a big event that will be news if it goes well and bigger news if it goes badly

They don't really have a choice. The launch window is small and they either make it or they don't.

There is a window on the 2nd. But you don't aim for the second half of the launch period and hope you make it, you aim for the start to allow time to resolve issues without waiting for the next window (which is the end of the month).

Well at least there’s a 50% probability of success

What factors are there for the lunar launch window?

It can't be weather, here, right? That's too far ahead.

Is it perigee?

If this window is missed, when is the next one?

The position of the moon relative to the earth and the sun. The windows are about a month apart.

"April fools, your space shuttle just disintegrated!"

Can't they just schedule it for March 32nd?

They are snip hunting that day.

Surely they are joking?

The whole program is a joke.

Operation: Sike! is a go! ;)

“As early as April 1” is a weird way to describe something that is two months behind schedule

That's probably a "layman's terms" translation of a more technical term NET April 1, which would be "Not Earlier Than" and is widely used in the industry.

Messaging is everything!

Being a few months behind schedule is forgivable for human space flight.

If a SpaceX Falcon blows up on the pad, that's one thing. It's expensive but they accept that risk to move faster. At least they gain knowledge of what failed, to do better next time.

You can't apply that mentality once a human is piloting it however. That's how you get Columbia, Challenger, or Apollo 1.

> If a SpaceX Falcon blows up on the pad, that's one thing. It's expensive but they accept that risk to move faster. At least they gain knowledge of what failed, to do better next time.

Assuming it's not carrying a SpaceX Crew Dragon with crew onboard ;)

Also, it's a bit of a dated metaphor. Falcon 9 is by most accounts, now the most reliable rocket in history and is pretty design-locked. The modern metaphor is SpaceX Starship :)

Theres a lot of ways to describe the artemis program, forgivable isnt one of them.

Six day launch window April 1-6.

As it's currently March, April seems very close to me. I didn't know there was a moon flight planned so this is a great headline to me.

Seeing how the last test at the beginning of Feb found hydrogen leaks, it does sound very early to me

Why? They fixed it.

In a month is why. It seems if it was fixed that fast it was easy to find. If it was so easy to find, why was it not found. These are the types of questions that seem to make NASA push things further than just a month. So again, it seems fast to me

It feels fast to you because you don't know what happened, and you are asking questions that have been answered by NASA already in public.

It was easy to find because they knew what valve was leaking.

It was not found beforehand because they don't have the ability to do the tanking test without rolling it to the launch pad and its very hard to know how a system responds to liquid hydrogen.

I didn't even know we were within years of putting people around the moon, so I was surprised!

Scott Manley does a roundup video every two or so weeks called 'deep space updates' that I suggest watching.

The start is all rocket launches, which gives a good idea of how much is happening.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com