Not moving up the timeline? NASA announced that the SLS heavy-lift rocket has completed multiple upgrades and will launch in April next year, carrying four astronauts on the Artemis II manned lunar mission.

In the second half of this year, there were rumors that the launch could take place as early as February.

Now, NASA has officially confirmed that the April launch date is unlikely to change much. So, the issues surrounding the return to the Moon II mission are essentially settled. What upgrades have been made this time? What changes have been made? Is the return to the Moon for the third mission also stable? Let's take a closer look.

NASA confirms the timeline for the return to the Moon II mission, and the rocket has undergone multiple upgrades.

The SLS heavy-lift rocket is key to the US's return to the Moon mission. It's not the same Apollo-era lunar landing rocket; it's a completely new one.

So, during the development process, you've seen some bumps and bruises, but fortunately, as long as it works, it's fine. And during Mission 1, the entire launch process was completed, so there shouldn't be any major issues.

During Mission 2, the US has again implemented several upgrades, which is truly impressive. What are the main features?

What upgrades were made?

1. The spacecraft has been partially modified, with an optical device installed in the transitional cryogenic propulsion stage to provide visual guidance for the astronauts, allowing for precise manual control and stable control. Of course, it's important to note that the US Orion spacecraft previously experienced issues with its thermal insulation material. This time, the changes are primarily related to the re-entry plan, which presents a challenge for the astronauts. Whether these issues recur will also affect subsequent missions. The current changes to the manual control system may also take this into consideration.
2. The rocket has undergone significant upgrades, including adjustments to the solid booster separation angle. The depleted solid boosters are scheduled to be jettisoned several seconds earlier than on the Artemis 1 mission. This is expected to increase low-Earth orbit capacity by approximately 700 kg, achieving even greater transport capabilities.
3. Safety system upgrades, such as the emergency system and a change to the self-destruct system delay, have been implemented. These improvements are intended to significantly increase safety, further extending the escape window for astronauts aboard.

In addition, there are upgrades to the ground system's communications and electronics systems, among other things. While this is a significant undertaking, the primary focus has been on the SLS heavy-lift rocket.

Which, whether it is truly reliable or not, will only be determined through verification. However, as mentioned above, the second mission is still scheduled for April.

So, there's no need to bring it forward. The February date is unlikely to materialize. However, the US's statements are also half-baked, and there's a chance they'll change later. So, let's wait and see. The current timeframe is currently the same.

However, what then? The next mission, the Artemis-3 manned lunar landing, remains highly uncertain. It's scheduled for 2027, but whether it can be stable remains uncertain.

Will the US return to the moon be stable?

Indeed, as you've seen, Missions 1 and 2 didn't involve lunar landings. Mission 2 will orbit the moon and return to Earth, but data collection will certainly be necessary. This presents the biggest uncertainty for Mission 3. Another key element of Mission 3 is the lunar lander, and its deployment depends on the US's "super-large rocket."

Thus, the super-large rocket is crucial for Mission 3. Failure to deliver on this promise would be a major problem. The super-large Starship rocket is notoriously unstable, having failed three of its four flights this year.

While this may be hurtful to many "fans," who might think others have developed this way, it's undeniable that they're strong, but if you lose your rationality, you really can't understand it. Just like someone previously claimed that Starship deliberately damaged the insulation, I was truly shocked. People who didn't know would think the US was truly so generous as to play around with rockets in space.

I can only say, don't take it so extreme. If the Starship test failed, do you think they were willing to do it? I can only say, "Haha." So, there's nothing wrong with acknowledging others' strengths, but we can't be blind.

If they succeed, I'm sure you'll be very impressed. I think that's fine too, and they can serve as a role model, right? But if they fail and you still blame others for their predictions, I'm speechless.

As for the success or failure of Starship, it's indeed tied to the US Mission 3. As long as Starship fails, its lunar lander research will be delayed, and the execution of Mission 3 will definitely be delayed. Don't even think about completing a manned lunar landing in 2027. This is an unchanging rule. Although another US company is developing a lunar lander, it's slower than Starship. This is why NASA keeps saying Starship might impact the mission, because it's carrying Mission 3, which has already been set.

So, let's see how Starship performs in the future. Their success or failure has nothing to do with us anyway. The technology isn't yours, the success isn't yours, nothing is yours. At most, they're putting pressure on us, and we just need to catch up. But my country doesn't care about competition. The US keeps saying this, and it's become "boring." We just need to steadily advance according to plan.

The Moon is a Key Focus for the Future

Indeed, the Moon is incredibly important in the future, and there's no doubt about that. The Moon is incredibly rich in resources. If any country can access them first, they could potentially control the flow of those resources.

So, other countries are also frantically pursuing their lunar programs. This is the most important point, but what's the problem?

Let's be frank. Only by going up there can we truly achieve more. Building lunar habitats, establishing a lunar base, and conducting resource collection activities are all possible. Otherwise, humans can't even get up there. Doing all this requires machines, which is certainly difficult.

So, landing humans on the moon is truly crucial. Once lunar missions become routine, stability will undoubtedly prevail, making it easier to accomplish more.

So, whether or not we can rapidly complete a manned lunar landing before 2030 will be a significant game-changer for future lunar missions. It's something to look forward to, but stability is paramount.