HN Explorer

13 comments

[ 1.8 ms ] story [ 32.4 ms ] thread
abeppu
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
edgyquant
“As early as April 1” is a weird way to describe something that is two months behind schedule
mikkupikku
Can't they just schedule it for March 32nd?
la3lma
Surely they are joking?
proee
Imagine riding in a vehicle that has been tested zero times. I would be terrified. Best of luck to the team.
raiph_ai
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.
ProllyInfamous
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?

Markoff
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.

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

What was Apollo 10 in your view?