Artemis 2: Humanity's Next Step to the Moon and Beyond

7 245 139
Artemis 2: Humanity's Next Step to the Moon and Beyond


On April 1, 2026, at 18:35 p.m. ET, a 98-meter-long rocket launched from Launch Complex 39B at the Kennedy Space Center in Florida. Rocket SLS (Space Launch System). At its top is the Orion spacecraft carrying four astronauts. The launch of the Artemis II mission marked humanity's return to deep space after the Apollo program ended in 1972.



This isn't just a repeat of past achievements. Artemis II is the first crewed mission in NASA's long-term program to establish a permanent human presence on the Moon and prepare for expeditions to Mars. The mission is designed to test all systems under real-world conditions before the next crew, Artemis III, lands on the lunar surface.

The commander is Reed Wiseman, a former military pilot and ISS veteran. The pilot is Victor Glover, the first African-American to travel to such a deep space. The mission specialists are Christina Koch, the record-holder for the longest single stay in space by a woman, and Jeremy Hansen, the first non-American beyond low-Earth orbit (representing the Canadian Space Agency).

After the successful launch into orbit, Hansen uttered words that have already become part of stories:
"Humanity has once again shown what we are capable of, and it is your hopes for the future that carry us on this journey around the Moon."



The launch proceeded as planned. On the first day, the crew conducted a 70-minute manual check of the control systems—a "ramp-up demonstration." On the second day, they performed a key maneuver—**TLI (Trans Lunar Injection)**, a 5-minute main engine burn that placed Orion on a free-return trajectory to the Moon.

"After TLI, we found ourselves in zero gravity, and it immediately became clear that we were no longer in near-Earth space. We were heading toward the Moon," Wiseman shared his impressions.

On the third day, the crew conducted communications testing via the Deep Space Network (DSN)—a global network of large antennas, each approximately 70 meters in diameter, located in the United States, Spain, and Australia. This system provides navigation and communications over distances where GPS no longer functions.


In addition to testing technical systems, scientific experiments are being conducted on board Orion. Among them is the AVATAR (A Virtual Astronaut Tissue Analog Response) project, which studies the effects of radiation and microgravity on the human body using an "organ-on-a-chip"—a microchip containing living tissue that mimics the function of real organs.

Data obtained during the flight will help assess health risks during long-term missions and develop protective measures for future expeditions to Mars.


On April 6, the crew is expected to break the distance-from-Earth record set by the Apollo 13 mission in 1970 (400,171 km). Orion will travel 405,000 km, exceeding the previous record by 5,400 kilometers.

However, the main danger awaits the astronauts at the end of the mission. Upon re-entry, the spacecraft's skin will heat up to 2,760°C. Orion's heat shield is known to have defects, discovered after the unmanned Artemis I flight in 2022. Therefore, the re-entry trajectory has been modified: instead of a "skip" maneuver, a smoother "lift" trajectory will be used to reduce thermal loads.

After orbiting the Moon and performing corrective maneuvers, Orion is scheduled to return to Earth and splash down in the Pacific Ocean. The data collected will form the basis for preparing Artemis III, the first human landing on the lunar surface since Apollo 17.

The Artemis program is more than just a technical project. It's a symbol of humanity's return to the stars, a demonstration that even half a century after the first lunar missions, we are capable of setting and achieving goals beyond our reach. As Victor Glover said before launch:
"We're not just going to the Moon. We're going there to stay."



Astronauts on the Artemis 2 mission have released a new image of Earth taken en route to the Moon.
139 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. -21
    April 4 2026 06: 42
    We had barely reached orbit when the toilet became clogged.
    Let's see what will happen next.
    1. + 20
      April 4 2026 07: 01
      But we have a lot of wonderful plans!

      2023 g

      About the lunar program
      Putin promised to continue supporting the lunar program despite the Luna-25 emergency.

      "It will be," the president said, answering a question from Denis Demin, an employee of the Lavochkin Research and Production Association, about whether the domestic lunar program would be supported.

      Experts already have an understanding of what led to the Luna-25 failure. "It's okay, it's negative, but it's experience that will be used in the future to avoid mistakes," the president noted.

      About salaries
      Putin promised to address the issue of salaries at the state corporation Roscosmos not being as competitive as those at commercial enterprises, and agreed with a participant in a meeting with young scientists that this issue had been overlooked. "Such issues can't be resolved overnight, but we absolutely must think about it, and we will definitely do so."

      Putin was "even surprised" that for certain areas of high-tech activity, there is a specific procedure according to which employees at scientific institutions are required to receive salaries "in line with the market" depending on the region. Specialist salaries are "regional averages." "But they should be higher."
      1. + 13
        April 4 2026 08: 24
        He had it even better:
        Moscow. March 15th. INTERFAX.RU - Russia will launch a mission to Mars after the implementation of the Lunar program, and as part of a new study of the moon, Russian specialists will try to land on the poles, President Vladimir Putin said.

        "We will now carry out unmanned launches there, and then manned launches - for deep space exploration, and the Lunar program, then exploration of Mars. The first is very soon - in 2019, then we are going to launch a mission towards Mars," Putin said. in the film by Andrei Kondrashov, which was published in the social networks of his colleague Dmitry Kiselev.
        1. + 11
          April 4 2026 10: 14
          Quote: tatra
          His was even cooler

          He also promised a thousand domestically produced civilian aircraft by 2030. It won't be long now!
      2. +3
        April 5 2026 09: 11
        A master of promises and smiles for the camera... He's a real grandmaster here. And so it is in everything.
    2. +3
      April 4 2026 12: 34
      Quote: Ravik
      We had barely reached orbit when the toilet became clogged.
      The problem was solved in a matter of minutes: it turned out that the water supply from the tank was not turned on.

      It's good that we don't have such problems! After all, Roscosmos currently has neither a lunar-flying spacecraft nor a launch vehicle. No spacecraft, no problem! laughing
      Quote: Ravik
      Let's see what will happen next.
      Orion successfully flies to the Moon.
      The spaceship is in flight, the envious people are in flight laughing
    3. +2
      April 4 2026 21: 15
      No, it's something else, another stupid flag-sticking exercise. The Chinese were the first to wheel a rover around the moon, the Americans want to plant a flag in the ice reserves, so that at least something will have some significance. But everyone understands perfectly well that with current technology, it's impossible to stay on the moon, but sticking flags in there is possible. For the future. The only thing is, there will be no future on the moon. And certainly no future for humanity among the stars. Earth is one and disposable for our species. The "spiders in a jar" have already started fighting over the remaining resources. That's basically all that will happen. Then comes global war and a slow decline into tribes.
  2. -3
    April 4 2026 06: 52
    I have mixed feelings... I'm kind of glad that humanity has taken a step into space... but I have some kind of animosity towards the Americans... they're crooks, after all... who knows what they'll cook up and cook up on this flight... I have no faith in them.
    1. -25
      April 4 2026 07: 09
      Judging by the picture of the ground, they've already concocted a complete cartoonish AI with enhancements and other crap...
      1. +9
        April 4 2026 07: 28
        What's improved there? Should it be square? Or without clouds?
        1. + 12
          April 4 2026 11: 06
          What's improved there? Should it be square? Or without clouds?

          No, come on! The Earth is flat, after all! But here it's spherical, what's wrong! wassat
          1. +6
            April 4 2026 11: 28
            Quote: Grandfather is an amateur
            What's improved there? Should it be square? Or without clouds?

            No, come on! The Earth is flat, after all! But here it's spherical, what's wrong! wassat

            It's obvious it's flat. The important thing is which side you look at it from. The photo shows a top-down view, but if you take a side shot, it's flat. Yes
        2. +3
          April 4 2026 19: 48
          Quote: ASSAD1
          What's improved there? Should it be square? Or without clouds?
          Without editing, this is what it should look like
    2. +7
      April 4 2026 08: 26
      Who's now the Hollywood director for the "studio shoot" of the lunar flight? Or is everything pre-shot on the ISS, and new faces are just being added using AI?
      Hey!!! Where are you, "anti-Moon cultists"? It's time to unpack your lies about how it was all filmed in Hollywood. And the latest "proof" is the Apollo astronauts' spacesuits in NASA museums, with smooth soles... And all the footprints in the photo of the Moon's surface are heavily ribbed! Hurray – a hoax and a fake!
      The "sectarians" are rejoicing and can't believe they took off the galoshes and left them on the Moon, collecting excess soil in their place. They also left bags of feces there for the same reason of saving on takeoff weight. In short, they've completely trashed the Moon, and now they're screwing with our brains, too.
      1. +7
        April 4 2026 10: 14
        What's so bad about leaving feces on the Moon? It's organic, after all. Maybe it could become the basis for the emergence of lunar life.
        1. +2
          April 4 2026 11: 32
          Quote: cat Crush
          What's so bad about leaving feces on the Moon? It's organic, after all. Maybe it could become the basis for the emergence of lunar life.

          Yeah. What if some "Gadzilla" grows up and, with American-style scale, defaces the entire lunar surface? No.
          1. +3
            April 4 2026 16: 59
            What if some "Gadzilla" grows up and, with American scope, pollutes the entire lunar surface?

            Oh well; the moon will turn dark brown, to the delight of BLM fans. smile
      2. -4
        April 4 2026 11: 12
        Hey!!! Where are you, "anti-moon cultists"? It's time to unpack your Hollywood-filmed lies.
        The thing is, there's no ironclad proof that Americans went to the Moon, nor that they didn't. No one can prove anything, you understand? And leave the belief in one thing or another without proof to the priests.
        They'll fly off now, circle the satellite, and return—and that'll be fine. The main thing is that the toilet doesn't break again...
        1. +4
          April 4 2026 11: 31
          The fact that you "non-Mongliks" do not know this evidence does not mean that it does not exist.
          1) There were cross-observations of manned and unmanned spacecraft flights by the US and the USSR. Just as their specialists intercepted and deciphered our telemetry, so too did we intercept and decipher theirs. If memory serves, NASA even coordinated the landing times of some Apollo missions with the USSR, because our spacecraft were scheduled to land in the same area on the same dates, and to avoid interfering with each other, they coordinated the dates.
          2) The USA and the USSR exchanged soil samples obtained during their missions
          3) The Apollo landing sites have been photographed from orbit. Moreover, they were photographed not only by American, but also by Chinese and Indian orbiters.
          4) Even before the first manned flights to the moon, the USSR and the USA had cross-commissions involving design engineers and cosmonauts. Their cosmonauts visited us, and ours visited them. And according to the memoirs of Feoktistov (the first civilian in space and one of the developers of our spacecraft), in 1967-1968 he already noted the Americans' high level of readiness for manned flights and noted that they were closer to the first manned missions than they were.
          1. -2
            April 5 2026 02: 58
            The fact that you "non-Mongliks" do not know this evidence does not mean that it does not exist.

            Yeah, and there's a gopher too, even though no one sees it.
            1) there were cross-observations of flights of manned and unmanned vehicles by the USA and the USSR.
            There were. But there's a theory that the US and USSR agreed to consider the American lunar mission a success. In that case, no observations can be considered genuine.
            Я not I know whether Armstrong and his comrades landed on the moon. not I claim that there was falsification and that everything was filmed on the Hollywood soundstages by Stanley Kubrick.
            I'm saying that we don't know the whole truth, and I think we never will.
            1. +3
              April 5 2026 09: 33
              What a flexible position. You know nothing and don't claim there were falsifications. But based on your knowledge, you confidently assert that the rest of us know nothing and will never find out...
              Let's try applying this logic to a different field: "I don't know the rules of football, and therefore I'm not saying that the Germans are the best at football. But I am saying that none of us know the rules of football and never will." So, is that logical?
              Or maybe it's worth recognizing that if someone doesn't have up-to-date knowledge, competence, and awareness in a particular area, then they shouldn't make statements like "I don't know, and therefore others don't know either"!?!?!?
              1. -1
                April 6 2026 06: 43
                Quote: Mustachioed Kok
                What a flexible position.
                Flexible, anyone? You're aware that there's a directive called the "US National Space Policy," which was created specifically to protect the secrets of all American lunar visits. After all, these lunar missions are designated, no less, as "critical information to American national interests."
                Only Russia (as the legal successor to the USSR) currently has the full right to inspect the lunar surface with any level of detail possible. This is possible now, and it was possible even under Brezhnev—to conduct an inspection flyby of the Moon. Even if it's automated, that's not happening. Everything is murky and ambiguous.
                The question is, what secrets is the US hiding? And how did the USSR, the "Evil Empire" "defeated" in space, end up showered with unprecedented concessions from the US, and Brezhnev personally with expensive gifts? How did fraternization with the enemy emerge, in this Apollo-Soyuz spaceflight with political dividends for "détente"?
                Otherwise, it can be said that neither then nor now does humanity have effective protection from cosmic radiation, especially since brave cowboys managed to fly during years of maximum solar activity, and their launches often coincided with magnetic storms.
                No one will quarrel with America, Russia is bound by treaties on the Moon, plus, with the henpecked "elite" of the West, and the rest, "trembling creatures", have no right to inspect the Moon, much less "lift their leg" on the hegemon of world capitalism.
                So, if we take a strictly scientific approach, it becomes abundantly clear that our knowledge of the Apollo manned flights to the Moon comes exclusively from NASA. To date, there has been no independent confirmation of these missions.
                There weren't even any attempts at inspections, although there are no fundamental technical obstacles to this.

                Therefore, the belief in the Apollo flights is entirely based today solely on the belief in the alleged honesty of NASA. But this approach is contrary to scientific principles and cannot be considered objective.
          2. 0
            April 6 2026 05: 58
            This was taken apart a long time ago. I haven't looked for anything new for a long time, although it's on YouTube.
        2. -2
          April 5 2026 05: 13
          There's proof. The event is repeatable. Did Gagarin fly? Well, it's been repeated many times. And could Gagarin have flown, given the scientific and technological progress he had? It turns out he could. That's not the case with the moon.
          1. +2
            April 5 2026 09: 53
            Besides Armstrong and Aldrin, five other missions later flew to the Moon. And in 1968 (or 1969, I can't remember the year) the USSR sent a spacecraft on a lunar flyby carrying various living organisms and a prototype spacesuit on a dummy. Following the flight, the spacecraft was deemed ready for flight. The only thing holding us back was the launch vehicle. There were only three test flights in total, all of them unsuccessful. According to engineers from those years, the main problems with the first stage (it was the one that failed all the tests) were identified, and work began to correct them. They believed that the fourth or at least the fifth flight would have been successful. But the program was canceled because, after Korolev's death, a leadership dispute arose within the leadership. Some projects were cancelled and others were promoted. Furthermore, the Proton launch vehicle had just appeared at that time, which, while seemingly useful, took away some of the resources from the N-1 during its development.
            Similarly, Soviet cosmonautics in the late 60s was guaranteed to support manned lunar flybys. But funding was already insufficient, as our cosmonautics, then as now, is merely an appendage of military cosmonautics and is tied to military decisions. Korolev was tasked with creating an ICBM, and he accomplished it—the R7. Everything that followed no longer interested the military, and Korolev, using his status and charisma, secured funding for development and peaceful projects. Without Korolev, there was no one left who could secure funding for peaceful programs.
            1. -2
              April 6 2026 07: 08
              Quote: Mustachioed Kok
              There were only three test flights in total, all of them unsuccessful.
              It's no surprise that the Saturn V ("rig-tested"), which appeared out of nowhere, was immediately loaded with crews and, without a hitch, flew like a charm, only to disappear into oblivion just as unexpectedly as it had appeared, along with the incredibly reliable F-1 engines. How did the Yankees "lose technology" so completely that they bought our RD-180s out of desperation? Do you know how pure oxygen affects blood, even at reduced pressure? Finally, how did the Apollo capsule reenter the Earth's atmosphere at 2 times the escape velocity without braking (we had a double-dive design, with atmospheric braking, but this reduces landing accuracy, and the crew breathed air, not oxygen). How did the cowboys' bones not break from the G-forces, and how did the oxygen capsule not explode during the heating process? Finally, how did they bounce along so briskly after splashdown, despite all this? It might also be worth noting that, unlike the United States, the Soviet Union had experience launching our rover from the lunar surface with real lunar soil, and had experience returning cargo to Earth. How could they, without any prior experience, just up and fly to the Moon, having already suffered a ton of problems, like the oxygen explosion on Apollo 1, where the entire crew burned alive, and the crashes of American rover craft on the Moon? Cool... They didn't even bother to build a lunar rover or collect data, lacking knowledge at the time about the dangers of Earth's radiation belts, which they supposedly flew through along the "Kondratyuk route" in the most dangerous equatorial region. Yes, the United States is a very developed country, but the truth is, they were hopelessly behind the USSR in manned spaceflight. The nonsense about diapers and their conversations "from space" is on the level of radio dramas from last century's science fiction stories for gullible ordinary people.
              1. +1
                April 7 2026 08: 52
                Our RD-180s were purchased out of desperation

                Not quite so... A tender was simply announced for anyone interested in filling this particular niche in the American rocket engine lineup. To save money and avoid the expense of developing their own. And then Russia successfully submitted its half-engine of the existing, more powerful RD-174 to the tender. Note that the Americans didn't need the RD-174; they were looking for a less powerful engine for unmanned launches, so they purchased a license for the RD-180, which meant full rights to manufacture and purchase it from Russia. This meant that no one else, not even Russia itself, had the right to use the RD-180 for their own purposes, with the modifications and refinements made by American engineers. And there were several such refinements, and they significantly improved the engine's performance. And when the entire contract for 112 units was fulfilled, we tried to find another buyer, replacing all the American refinements with domestic ones... No one needed the RD-180 anymore, not even ourselves – "the Moor had done his job..."
                Why the Americans chose our RD-180 is no secret. Our inexperienced managers offered such a low price that, after starting production on a US order, they found themselves in deep financial ruin within a couple of years, never mind profit. Then the Americans took pity and voluntarily raised the price a bit, just to save our plant from bankruptcy and collapse. So we struggled with their contract deliveries, teetering on the brink of profitability. How do you rate that as a feat or a success?
            2. 0
              April 7 2026 19: 28
              It's a bit different - ours stopped funding the lunar program after the first American flight to the Moon, since the priority was to be first, and here they were late...
        3. +1
          April 7 2026 08: 21
          The fact is that there is no ironclad proof that the Americans have been to the Moon, nor that they have not flown there.


          Do you have this approach only to the American flights to the Moon or to all our manned flights, including Gagarin's?
          By this principle, should only joint flights with Americans be recognized as valid? And all others, even those with "tourists" from socialist countries, should be left in doubt?
          1. -1
            April 7 2026 17: 39
            Do you have this approach only to the American flights to the Moon or to all our manned flights, including Gagarin's?
            Only to American flights to the Moon.
            A nation of pirates and bandits, stealing everything they can get their hands on from around the world, hasn't provided any definitive proof. And given their short history, the reliance on word of mouth and dubious newsreel footage, there simply can't be.
            The latest gem is the rescue of the F-15 co-pilot in Iraq. A perfect example of a lie.
            1. 0
              April 8 2026 10: 53
              did not provide unconditional evidence.

              But should they have? And what do you think this evidence would have looked like?
              Is our evidence of the flights any different from the American ones, or could it have been filmed on the Mosfilm soundstages just like them? After all, we could have also colluded with the Americans to lie about Gagarin's flight, or better yet, about the filming of Yulia Peresild. Or are we different?
              I am no less ready than you to "love the Motherland out loud," but I have a hard time imagining how one could agree on a global deception with hundreds of NASA specialists, members of the US Congress and Senate, and, most importantly, persuade the USSR and everyone else in the world to support this deception?
              Is there even one other example of a global deception that managed to survive for a year or two, if only two or three people knew about it... but here there are hundreds, if not thousands? Or did NASA kick all but the insiders out of Mission Control, and air a pre-recorded film on TV? And then repeat the same scam five more times, all without a single leak?
              Why do you need all this? Does such confidence make your love for your homeland grow louder?
              1. +1
                April 8 2026 17: 25
                Should have?
                Yes.
                And what do you think this evidence might look like?

                So that they are accepted by everyone. Unconditionally.
                Are our flight records any different from the American ones, or could they have been filmed in the Mosfilm studios just like them?
                And our flights are subject to such doubt?
                After all, we could have also come to an agreement with the Americans so that they would lie about Gagarin's flight, or better yet, about the filming of Yulia Peresild.
                Did we agree? Do you have any evidence, or are you just fantasizing? And I have no desire to even think about Peresild: the film turned out, to put it mildly, not very well.
                Why do you need all this?
                I'm not used to taking the word of those who lie too often. I need unconditional proof from such people. The Americans didn't provide it.
                And love for the Motherland is neither louder nor quieter. It has nothing to do with it. Hatred of enemies hasn't changed either. The USA is the enemy. And it will remain the enemy, even if some Yeltsinian politician blesses them.
                1. 0
                  Yesterday, 06: 30
                  And our flights are subject to such doubt?


                  And they don't stop for a minute! And it started long before Gagarin's flight. To this day, there are tons of articles from American jerks, foaming at the mouth and using "scientific" approaches to prove that Gagarin never flew anywhere, and that before him, there was a fatal attempt. They write such things about the supposed technical ineptitude of the USSR that all our articles from local jerks about the impossible Saturn V, insurmountable radiation, or the wrong color of the lunar soil are pathetic imitation of fairy tales concocted in the US about our flights. It's surprising that you don't know this and can't compare, or even see the mirror image.
                  I'm, of course, talking about the everyday mistrust of ordinary people, which doesn't apply to officials in the US. There, as in our country, officials don't question such flights, but they also don't discourage ordinary people's imaginations, throwing fuel on the fire from respected political scientists like Pushkov or Artamonov.
                  And folklore about the lunar hoax hasn't died down for over half a century, joining the ranks of searches for the Loch Ness monster, yeti, and aliens among us.
                  You should make friends with bayard here, he is from your "anti-moon sect" and he will fully support and complement your confidence in the lunar deception of all humanity.
                  1. 0
                    Yesterday, 17: 07
                    He's from your "anti-moon sect"

                    1. And where did I foam at the mouth and prove that there were no Americans on the Moon? Please cite it.
                    2. Learn to distinguish between realism, that is, the demand for evidence that no one has yet provided, and denial.
                    3. Once you understand the difference, please contact us.
                    1. 0
                      Today, 11: 16
                      These are your words:
                      I need absolute proof from people like that. The Americans haven't provided it.


                      They didn't provide any irrefutable evidence. And given their short history, the reliance on word of mouth and dubious newsreel footage, they simply can't be trusted.


                      Andrey, I only ever said "foaming at the mouth" about American jerks, by the way... But I'll be honest, I meet our own jerks here too, and they're no better than the American ones. For them, it's a revelation that there were six moon landings, not just one. Or that the astronauts rode on the moon in electric buggies, which remained standing. And the tire tracks were photographed by the Chinese, Japanese, and Indians from their lunar orbiters. My point is, people get into these kinds of arguments without even knowing the most basic things.
                      They're fixated on the deal with the USSR, without mentioning what they gave us in exchange for admitting this deception. Or the color of the moon in the astronauts' photographs. It doesn't match the tonality of our Lunokhod photographs, and for them, that's sufficient proof of fraud.
                      Or about the loss of NASA's entire archive of film and photographic documentation of the Moon landing...
                      The fact that all the originals were eventually found, and that millions of copies around the world were never lost, is an unproven fact for the "sect"... After all, NASA itself talked about the loss...
                      Remember that incident in Holland at the local technical museum? Someone noticed a supposedly gifted "moon rock" with a plaque and an inscription like, "To the Prime Minister of the Netherlands (last name) from the Apollo astronauts." The rock was the size of a matchbox, dark brown, and upon closer inspection, turned out to be petrified wood...
                      What happened here!!! The global "anti-moon sect" rejoiced and celebrated yet another piece of evidence of deception. Some are still rejoicing...
                      But in fact, it turned out that no one had ever given this Prime Minister a moonstone. Moreover, this Prime Minister had resigned several years before the lunar mission, so why would he have been given such a gift, especially a "cobblestone"? Elizabeth II herself was given a stone weighing no more than 5 grams.
                      It eventually turned out that one of the museum staff had simply played a joke and substituted a plaque from a previous exhibition with a piece of wood, spreading the rumor that it was a moonstone. The plaque itself made no mention of a moonstone, but the "sect" is still rejoicing.
                      I've said enough about the "demand for evidence"... To whom and for what purpose? And did we provide it to every average American, or, on the contrary, with our pathological secrecy back then, did we only fuel mistrust of our flights?
                      You remember how we were only informed about all the first launches after a successful landing. And they only dared broadcast live from the cosmodrome after the collapse of the USSR, I think. Do you understand how all this contributed to the mistrust of others? And how did we prove to the average foreigner that Gagarin flew and Leonov walked? Nothing!!! So what proof, and why on earth, do you demand from the Americans? They don't care about your mistrust, just like we don't care about theirs. Or are they obligated, and we don't have to, since we're not as liars as they are?
                      1. 0
                        Today, 15: 57
                        Александр, я задал конкретный вопрос. Вы на него не удосужились ответить.
                        1. And where did I foam at the mouth and prove that there were no Americans on the Moon? Please cite it.

                        Поскольку ответа нет, дальнейший диалог не имеет смысла.
      3. +1
        April 6 2026 12: 39
        Who's now the Hollywood director for the "studio shoot" of the lunar flight? Or is everything pre-shot on the ISS, and new faces are just being added using AI?
        Hey!!! Where are you, "anti-Moon cultists"? It's time to unpack your lies about how it was all filmed in Hollywood. And the latest "proof" is the Apollo astronauts' spacesuits in NASA museums, with smooth soles... And all the footprints in the photo of the Moon's surface are heavily ribbed! Hurray – a hoax and a fake!
        The "sectarians" are rejoicing and can't believe they took off the galoshes and left them on the Moon, collecting excess soil in their place. They also left bags of feces there for the same reason of saving on takeoff weight. In short, they've completely trashed the Moon, and now they're screwing with our brains, too.

        They think the same about us there.
        Their latest poll: 6% of Americans consider Gagarin to be the first cosmonaut. laughing
        1. +2
          April 7 2026 08: 15
          They think the same about us there.


          And by the way, they have no less right to this than our "anti-moon sectarians" who deny the American moon landings. And when they say we don't have 100% data to support such landings, they can immediately retort: ​​"How do we prove to the world that Gagarin flew or Leonov walked?" Our Mosfilm could have filmed all of this on a soundstage, too.
    3. -1
      April 4 2026 10: 06
      Quote: The same LYOKHA
      There is some kind of hostility towards the Americans...they are crooks after all...it is unknown what they will concoct and cook up on this flight...they are not to be trusted.

      One thing I'm sure of is that the Americans are doing it—it's for military purposes. So Russia can only expect trouble from this project.
    4. -1
      April 4 2026 23: 17
      I have mixed feelings...I'm kind of glad that humanity has taken a step into space...but I have some kind of animosity towards the Americans...they're crooks, after all.[/quote]
      I had mixed feelings before the SVO, but now I just have calm hatred.
  3. -5
    April 4 2026 07: 04
    Quote: The same Lech
    I have mixed feelings... I'm kind of glad that humanity has taken a step into space... but I have some kind of animosity towards the Americans... they're crooks, after all... who knows what they'll cook up and cook up on this flight... I have no faith in them.

    I agree completely. Their flights to the moon immediately come to mind.
    No one will deny the Americans' ability to make a SHOW out of everything.
    This is a SENSATION. But somehow they acted illogically.
    The astronauts' underwear could be put under glass in the Museum of Military Glory and displayed for bucks.
    And there's nothing here. It's all gone somewhere. As if it never existed??? You're right - there's no faith in them.
  4. -3
    April 4 2026 07: 05
    I don't believe it! It's fine with them inventing things and taking risks during the race with the USSR. Now, no one's pushing them. They should have made two or three unmanned launches with sensors and testing technology reliability, testing the entire program down to the last detail. Just like the USSR would have done. And not just for show, sending people on their first flight. America is in complete trouble right now – Trump is heading for impeachment, there's a mountain of debt, and Iran is kicking ass. So they need some kind of victory! So let's go back to the Moon. fellow And if in the 60s, without an engine, they "flew" to the Moon to play golf (I wonder how they practiced manual space docking, how they calculated the engine pulses for the Apollo orbital insertion with the modified lunar lander weight—after all, they were hauling hundreds of kilograms of soil?), then let's go now... and if anyone starts asking questions, we'll say the archives are lost. It worked before, and it will work again. It's a good thing the Russians invented the toilet for space, otherwise they'd all be using plastic bags.
    The United States is the most deceitful and hypocritical nation (at least its leaders). That's why I don't believe it. My personal opinion.
    1. +4
      April 4 2026 09: 17
      Quote: Rurikovich
      They were supposed to conduct two or three unmanned launches with sensors and testing of the equipment's reliability, testing the entire program down to the last detail. Just like the USSR would have done.

      This is exactly what was done in the Artemis 1 mission.
      And by the way, what did the USSR do? In that lunar program? Did you know that at least two of the four N-1 crashes could have been avoided if they'd had proper ground control? Like the Americans, who burned through the entire stage assembly on a test rig?
      1. -4
        April 4 2026 10: 31
        Quote: Intelligence
        And by the way, what did the USSR do?
        There are two Soviet lunar rovers on the Moon, but not a single American one yet. Apparently, it's not like driving around on Mars for years, defying the dust storms that rage there for months, and the difficulty of control due to a much longer signal lag than to the Moon. You brought up the N-1 here, but didn't compare it to the Saturn V, which, without even testing it in test launches, immediately carried Americans to the Moon with flying colors. It would be like putting a crew on the N-1 right away, and mission after mission being a show with cheerful astronauts. By the way, the Yankees used pure oxygen, in low pressure, so how they didn't explode like Apollo 1, nothing happened to their blood—it's a miracle. Radiation is a whole other topic. What kind of Yanks are so proud, defending themselves, essentially trashing Soviet achievements?
        1. +4
          April 4 2026 11: 40
          Hmm... Is it the Unified State Exam that's creating the demand for this level of knowledge? I'll have to give a little education here.
          1. Try to understand the difference between the Soviet automated remote-controlled robots and the American manned vehicles controlled by astronauts (Apollo 15/16/17 - 1971/1972/1972). The US had a goal to land people to the moon, not apparatus.
          2. Before writing nonsense about the Saturn V, at least familiarize yourself with the topic. It was precisely because the US had such excellent ground support that all Apollo flights went flawlessly (except one, but that wasn't the first stage's fault). Unlike the selective tests of the NK-15, the F-5 was mercilessly tested on rigs; it was repeatedly blown up, burned through, and then the entire stage was burned through, which contributed to its success.
          3. Are you able to understand the difference between "percentage" and "gas pressure"? Or are you simply repeating an old internet myth?
          The positive pressure of 115 kPa of pure oxygen on the ground and the negative pressure of 34 kPa in flight are two different things. In the latter case, the concentration of oxygen molecules in the volume is comparable to that of ordinary air.
          - What does blood have to do with it? A pressure of 34 kPa is much higher than the Armstrong limit (~6.3 kPa). 34 kPa of pure O2 is physiologically almost equal to air on Earth.
          4. Do you think knowing your history is "defaming" it? Is that what they teach in schools these days? And ignoring the real facts—is that what true patriotism is today? I worked in the space industry during the Soviet era. I have a lot to remember. And believe me, I'm much prouder of Soviet space achievements than you are. But despite all this, denying the failure of the Soviet N-1 lunar program is simply stupid.
          1. +1
            April 4 2026 11: 49
            Quote: Intelligence
            F-5

            F-1, of course, was confused by Saturn.
          2. -1
            April 4 2026 13: 44
            Quote: Intelligence
            Well... Is it the Unified State Exam that creates the need for this level of knowledge?

            I have an excellent Soviet education, stop this demagoguery. Tell housewives fairy tales about "excellent ground testing," but no ground testing can replace real testing. Moreover, no one in their right mind would put a crew on a crude rocket and risk the country's prestige in front of the whole world, unless it's a deliberate show. Tell me again about the Yankees' helicopter on Mars that flew in a thin atmosphere, breaking all Earth records for thinness at altitude, not only for helicopters but also for airplanes. I've heard NASA adherents say that its blades simply spun very quickly. Of course, it would fly like that in the completely airless environment of space. If you lie once, if not "Moon" in Hollywood, then "Mars" in Devon. The Americans don't even have the technology to build an orbital station themselves, and here they're flying cowboys to the Moon again. We're waiting for a new Kubrick, or a declassification of the reasons behind the US's incredible generosity to the "defeated" USSR in space, with the merger of the Soyuz-Apollo spacecraft (where the Americans surprised everyone with their strange knowledge of space medicine and, in general, real spaceflight). It would have been better if the Yankees had gone straight to Europa or Titan, instead of skimping on the Moon. There's less chance of embarrassment, and even computer graphics and AI can't help.
            And, yes, all we can do is be proud of our Soviet achievements; this is not about exporting raw materials and semi-finished products abroad and selling off the latest Soviet developments.
            1. +4
              April 4 2026 13: 51
              Yes, sir... I won't argue any further. I won't even try to understand how all this can actually fit into a person's head.
              1. -2
                April 6 2026 12: 27
                Quote: Intelligence
                I will not argue further.
                Of course, you're the one with the "spots" on the US conscience. This can't be true, because it could never be true. Classic. You take phrases out of context, ignore facts, and when you have nothing better to say, resort to personal attacks. What else can "moon witnesses" do? Demagoguery and rudeness. All the best.
            2. +4
              April 4 2026 19: 51
              Quote: Per se.
              I have an excellent Soviet education, stop this demagoguery.

              Faith isn't about facts, sir. If you have it in your head that the Americans can't or never could... that's undeniable. Just like Loza and the flat earth. hi
        2. +1
          April 4 2026 17: 13
          Quote: Per se.
          You brought up the N-1 here, but you didn't compare it to the Saturn 5, which, without even having worked through test launches, immediately carried Americans to the Moon with flying colors.

          Sergey, don't waste your nerves arguing with believers. request If those technologies convinced us we actually flew, then now you can draw whatever you want on a computer, and everyone will rejoice at the Yankees' victories in space (despite techies proving otherwise). You and I have been chewing over this topic for years, but what's the point? hi It's sad that people believe in fairy tales.
          1. -2
            April 4 2026 20: 45
            Quote: Rurikovich
            Sergey, don't waste your nerves arguing with believers.
            Yes, Andrei Nikolaevich, blessed are those who believe. True, one can understand the "experts" at NASA who tirelessly squirm, justifying their blunders; one can understand those who earn their keep online with their constant rudeness and demagoguery; but it's difficult to understand those who simply believed in the most honest and truthful country, even after a test tube of white powder and the show-off of the Twin Towers collapsing inward from an industrial explosion.
            The article's title is jarring. The United States is far from representing all of humanity, and certainly not its best and most truthful part. No one should have to prove anything for the United States; they should have provided irrefutable evidence. The problem is that when the Yankees were exposed, and our leadership decided to profit from it, for the sake of short-term gain, they squandered the unconditional victory of socialism in space, which ultimately gave rise to Brezhnev-era stagnation and the Western fetish. We were also anointed, having to cover for the "conquerors of the Moon" and stage a joint "Soyuz-Apollo" show with the Americans.astralo"nauts" who had only the vaguest idea about real flights. Even Comrade Leonov rallied for the Yankees, fulfilling his obligations.
            However, there is still no effective protection against cosmic radiation. What would happen without the Earth's protective magnetic field? No one can say how many sieverts the astronauts would receive even during a one-way flight.
            Having screwed up Iran, Trump needs another victory lap. But the Moon isn't Mars; it's much closer, and not everyone is sitting under America's thumb. Very soon, North Korea will be able to inspect the lunar surface at the highest resolution, and those guys don't keep their money in enemy banks. Our rovers are there, but whether we'll find a lunar rover there is a big question.
            You can't lie forever, this concerns not only the conquerors of the Moon, time will tell.
            1. -1
              April 4 2026 22: 10
              I absolutely agree with you! Word for word. drinks hi
            2. 0
              April 7 2026 09: 19
              There is still no effective protection against cosmic radiation, what will happen without the Earth's protective magnetic field, how many sieverts the astronauts will receive even during a one-way flight, no one can say.


              Wouldn't you like to ask the Chinese how they plan to fly to the Moon in the near future without fear of radiation? Does it not affect the Chinese, or are they the same kind of patriotic suicide bombers as our first cosmonauts selected for the Lunar Program, ready to fly one way...? And who in the Chinese or Soviet leadership would agree to such deadly flights exposed to radiation? Where did you read such horror stories about radiation? It certainly exists and is very dangerous to health, but it's not deadly enough to rule out deep space travel. You're wrong to cling to this horror story, presenting it as an insurmountable obstacle.
              They've flown before and are still flying through all these radiation belts. And we'll see if they show us how energized the irradiated crew members are when they emerge from the capsule after splashdown.
              1. +1
                April 7 2026 09: 26
                Quote: Saburov_Alexander53
                Wouldn't you like to ask the Chinese how they plan to fly to the Moon in the near future without fear of radiation?
                Let's wait. I'm more worried about our space program than about NASA's exploits in the last century or the Chinese's modern achievements. There's no harm in wanting, but what's harmful is not wanting. All the best.
                1. +1
                  April 7 2026 10: 08
                  I'm more worried about our cosmonautics,


                  Me too... And I just reread a ton of materials and articles written by smart experts about the dangers of radiation in space. Radiation affects even pilots and passengers on commercial aircraft, as it's higher than at the surface. It's even more damaging to astronauts in low orbits, where some have been flying for over a year. And during strong solar flares, they even take refuge in the safest compartments of the ISS. And yes, they write about the even greater danger of radiation outside the Earth's magnetic field, and that on flights to Mars, which would require up to a year in space, radiation levels without special protective equipment on the spacecraft could be fatal.
                  But for 7-10-day lunar missions, all radiation levels have long been calculated and are not considered life-threatening for a healthy person. But everyone is different, and for some, a couple of X-rays in a hospital could trigger cancer. But no one refuses an X-ray... request
        3. +2
          April 5 2026 08: 26
          There are two Soviet lunar rovers on the Moon, but not a single American one so far.

          Who saw them there? Gagarin landed by parachute again. Straight from space? Not a sure thing... laughing

          Just kidding, by the way.

          I spoke with those in the know. We had a dedicated unit created to monitor and verify that the Americans had actually flown. The specialists were digging around, trying to find any discrepancies.

          But they didn't find it. request
          1. -2
            April 6 2026 12: 12
            Quote: Arzt
            But they didn't find it.
            They found it both while our reconnaissance ships were on duty at Cape Canaveral, monitoring launch telemetry and visual inspection, and by recovering the empty Apollo 13 capsule from the Bay of Biscay. There are a ton of other inconsistencies, and the "lunar soil" thing is something else entirely... Essentially, the Yankees returned our own grams to us during the exchange, since their "three hundred kilograms" turned out to be a scandalous topic, after which everything mysteriously disappeared from NASA, along with the original lunar films and photos. Whether you want to believe the most honest gentlemen, that's a personal matter.
            1. +2
              April 6 2026 12: 25
              They found it both while our reconnaissance ships were on duty at Cape Canaveral, monitoring launch telemetry and visual inspection, and by recovering the empty Apollo 13 capsule from the Bay of Biscay. There are a ton of other inconsistencies, and the "lunar soil" thing is something else entirely... Essentially, the Yankees returned our own grams to us during the exchange, since their "three hundred kilograms" turned out to be a scandalous topic, after which everything mysteriously disappeared from NASA, along with the original lunar films and photos. Whether you want to believe the most honest gentlemen, that's a personal matter.

              No, I was just finishing my service in the Aerospace Forces and treating Lunokhod drivers. Everyone was terribly vigilant there. The Americans also considered challenging Gagarin's telemetry.
              But then they changed their minds. wink
              1. -2
                April 6 2026 12: 31
                Quote: Arzt
                But then they changed their minds.
                Because it's undeniable, and others followed Gagarin's lead. Furthermore, it wasn't us who "lost technology" and bought rocket engines from the "conquerors of the Moon," and couldn't have built the ISS without them. They, however, bought RD-180s from us and wouldn't have built an orbital station on their own without Soviet advances.
                1. +1
                  April 6 2026 12: 43
                  Because it's undeniable, and others followed Gagarin's lead. Furthermore, it wasn't us who "lost technology" and bought rocket engines from the "conquerors of the Moon," and couldn't have built the ISS without them. They, however, bought RD-180s from us and wouldn't have built an orbital station on their own without Soviet advances.


                  It's the same story with the Moon. OUR receivers were receiving an intercepted signal.
                  And them too. What's there to argue about when you're receiving this TV signal from SOMEONE ELSE'S device on YOUR receiver:
                  1. 0
                    April 7 2026 09: 37
                    Quote: Arzt
                    What's there to argue about when you receive this TV signal from SOMEONE ELSE'S device on YOUR receiver:

                    Moreover, it's difficult to draw conclusions based on such quality. Nevertheless, the Americans allegedly took lunar images directly on the Moon, but the quality was deliberately degraded after publication. Why? Communications from the Moon... A repeater, a pre-prepared recording sent automatically (those reached the Moon, after all), could be used (they were the ones that reached the Moon). Even a satellite's high geostationary orbit can simulate a signal. Incidentally, the corner reflectors of our lunar rover give a clear signal, while the reflectors allegedly abandoned by the Americans are blurry. NASA attributed this to "dust," although it's more likely that they were using the natural slopes of lunar craters, passing them off as installed reflectors. Whether or not to believe the Yankees is everyone's business. I repeat, I would believe them if the US hadn't perpetrated a ton of lies and meanness around the world, and if there were real, irrefutable proof of the cowboys landing on the Moon, especially without the strange loss of technology that would allow for repeating these achievements. That's not the case.
                    1. +1
                      April 7 2026 10: 39
                      Moreover, it's difficult to draw conclusions based on such quality. Nevertheless, the Americans allegedly took lunar images directly on the Moon, but the quality was deliberately degraded after publication. Why? Communications from the Moon... A repeater, a pre-prepared recording sent automatically (those reached the Moon, after all), could be used (they were the ones that reached the Moon). Even a satellite's high geostationary orbit can simulate a signal. Incidentally, the corner reflectors of our lunar rover give a clear signal, while the reflectors allegedly abandoned by the Americans are blurry. NASA attributed this to "dust," although it's more likely that they were using the natural slopes of lunar craters, passing them off as installed reflectors. Whether or not to believe the Yankees is everyone's business. I repeat, I would believe them if the US hadn't perpetrated a ton of lies and meanness around the world, and if there were real, irrefutable proof of the cowboys landing on the Moon, especially without the strange loss of technology that would allow for repeating these achievements. That's not the case.

                      And what if our guys weren't lying? When the question of setting Gagarin's record arose, Ustinov, Keldysh, and Co. signed off without blinking an eye, claiming he landed in a capsule, not separately by parachute, because according to the rules, the pilot must be in the aircraft from takeoff to landing. Otherwise, it's just a high-altitude jump. wink

                      For the sake of goddamn secrecy, a wooden replica of Gagarin's launch pad was built in a different location, which also fueled conspiracy theories about his flight, but the Americans deduced the true launch site from the trajectory. And a whole bunch of other stuff, including newsreels.
                      Do you think all this "Let's go!" and the launch of the "Vostok" are real footage? It's as late as the Hollywood Moon. laughing
                      1. 0
                        April 7 2026 12: 04
                        Quote: Arzt
                        The same late imitation as Hollywood Moon.
                        Can you imagine the USSR staging a lunar hoax at Mosfilm, showing a spectacular launch to the moon, planting a flag, and then jettisoning the landing module from a high-altitude transport? We have some interesting people who support the United States, probably not for profit or because they're under orders.
                      2. +2
                        April 7 2026 15: 02
                        Can you imagine the USSR staging a lunar hoax at Mosfilm, showing a spectacular launch to the moon, planting a flag, and then jettisoning the landing module from a high-altitude transport? We have some interesting people who support the United States, probably not for profit or because they're under orders.

                        I'm not rooting for the United States; it's obvious they're our rival and enemy. At the same time, going to extremes in denying the obvious isn't cool either. wink
                        So America itself can be condemned, but what if no one in our village went there? laughing

                        Remember Chekhov's "Letter to a Learned Neighbor":

                        “... I can't remain silent and I can't stand it when scientists think incorrectly in their minds, and I can't help but contradict you. Father Gerasim informed me that you have an incorrect understanding of the moon, that is, the crescent moon, which replaces the sun for us during hours of darkness and gloom, when people sleep, while you conduct electricity from place to place and fantasize. Don't laugh at an old man for writing such stupidly. You write that people and tribes live and inhabit the moon, that is, the crescent moon. This can never be true, because if people lived on the moon, they would block out its magical and magical light for us with their houses and lush pastures. People cannot live without rain, and rain falls down to the earth, not up to the moon. People living on the moon would fall down to the earth, but this doesn't happen. Sewage and slop would rain down on our continent from an inhabited moon. Can people live on the moon if it only exists at night and disappears during the day? And governments can't allow life on the moon, because its great distance and inaccessibility make it very easy to hide from duty. You're slightly mistaken...

                        And the devil is right, there are no people on the Moon! laughing
                      3. -1
                        April 8 2026 09: 32
                        Quote: Arzt
                        And the devil is right, there are no people on the Moon!
                        Maybe he's right, if you change it a bit - "there are no footprints of Neil Armstrong on the Moon"...
                        There is another extreme, let's also take Chekhov's work.
                        that it seems as if there are black spots on the greatest luminary, the sun. This can't happen because it can never happen.»

                        The idea that the US could lie, falsify, and even reach an agreement with Brezhnev after being exposed, forcing the USSR to play along, is something that would be typical of the most developed capitalist country. They are so developed and honest that deception is impossible, because it could never happen. Too much was at stake, too much money was spent.
                      4. +1
                        April 8 2026 10: 07
                        The idea that the US could lie, falsify, and even reach an agreement with Brezhnev after being exposed, forcing the USSR to play along, is something that would be typical of the most developed capitalist country. They are so developed and honest that deception is impossible, because it could never happen. Too much was at stake, too much money was spent.

                        To agree with Brezhnev... about supposedly flying to the Moon... what
                        Think about this thought. wink

                        This cannot be because it can never be."
                        hi
                      5. 0
                        April 8 2026 14: 51
                        Yes, the thought is profound. All the best.
  5. +9
    April 4 2026 07: 08
    How it contorts the commentators. It's a bad feeling.
    1. -5
      April 4 2026 10: 37
      Quote: Gankutsu_
      Depends on the bad feeling.
      Why be envious that the most developed capitalist power in its time stooped to falsification and made a deal with Brezhnev? That they now imagine themselves masters of the planet, convinced that no one will expose them? Who knows, if the lunar show turns out to be a fake, the United States will face double national disgrace, with all the ensuing consequences.
      1. +2
        April 4 2026 19: 52
        Quote: Per se.
        What's there to envy? That the most developed capitalist power in its time sank to falsification and made a deal with Brezhnev? That they now imagine themselves masters of the planet?

        Will there be evidence? It's bitter... and it's bitter to me that this is how it is... the Americans are flying around the Moon, and the USSR is no more... but look the facts in the face...
        1. -3
          April 6 2026 12: 21
          Quote: Level 2 Advisor
          evidence will be?
          If I were to show you just a pair of damp swimming trunks, would that prove a man swam across the ocean? Hardly. And here, it's not me who has to prove anything, but the Americans. Who prevented us from conducting an expeditionary flyby of the Moon under international supervision, photographing the landing sites in high detail, and submitting everything for expert analysis? The US doesn't want to prove anything; moreover, they've classified everything. They don't want to build lunar rovers either (or can't); it's not like driving around Mars for years.
          1. +2
            April 6 2026 13: 21
            Quote: Per se.
            Who prevented the expeditionary flyby of the Moon under international control and the capture of landing sites in high detail?

            The Indians and Chinese have already filmed it in high detail... everything has been confirmed... or will you only believe it when you take the photo yourself?
            Quote: Per se.
            They don't want to make moon rovers (or can't)

            Is it really more difficult to deliver a Lunokhod to the Moon than a Mars rover to Mars? Or do you think no one drives on Mars either?
            1. 0
              April 7 2026 09: 18
              Quote: Level 2 Advisor
              The Indians and Chinese have already filmed it in high detail... everything has been confirmed.
              Confirmed? The "Chinese" images with "evidence" were widely available earlier, not even on the scientific data portal of the Chinese lunar exploration program. When requesting the Chinese images themselves, where "American traces" are present, we receive the following response (correspondence with the Chinese at moondatacenter@nao.cas.cn): "The global lunar image captured by CE2 has a resolution of 7 m per pixel, so it is not clear enough to identify a NASA lunar landing;
              The lunar image captured by CE3 is limited to the local area of ​​the CE3 landing site, a location different from NASA's lunar landing site, so it is also inapplicable." Furthermore, during the live broadcast of the Chang'e-6 mission—China's lunar exploration station—the project's chief designer mentioned that they had not found any traces of the Apollo landing. Furthermore, the Chinese had a different lunar surface color, and there were also differences in the dust.
              I can say I appreciate your optimism, but I don't understand why you're so drawn to trusting your enemies. If it was possible to reach an agreement with Brezhnev, surely it's impossible to reach an agreement with the Indians or the Chinese, especially since there have been no official statements on the global stage.
              1. 0
                April 7 2026 09: 30
                Quote: Per se.
                I can say I appreciate your optimism, but I don't understand why you're so drawn to trusting your enemies. If it was possible to reach an agreement with Brezhnev, surely it's impossible to reach an agreement with the Indians or the Chinese, especially since there have been no official statements on the global stage.

                It's just that in space, we're all Earthlings, not enemies... Maybe I should throw away my phone and computer—they're the enemy, after all? And maybe even my watch and jeans. laughing
                I don't have any hatred towards the Americans, yes, they have an unfriendly policy - that's normal - we would do the same in their place, but in 1st stage, the fact that we ended up where we are is our own fault "inside", not theirs... I'm not used to looking for someone to blame somewhere, for my "mistakes".
                1. 0
                  April 7 2026 10: 01
                  Quote: Level 2 Advisor
                  It's just that in space, we are all Earthlings, not enemies... maybe we should throw away our phones and computers - they are enemies, aren't they?
                  No need for such pathos. The Moon was a matter of life and death for US prestige, for capitalism itself. We squandered our victory. Khrushchev, by slandering Stalin, essentially slandered socialism itself. Nevertheless, he refused to cooperate with the US on the Moon (John F. Kennedy twice made such an offer). The Jamini's suborbital hops in an oxygen environment were all the US had achieved at the time. In manned spaceflight, the United States was hopelessly lagging behind, and had only a vague understanding of space medicine, toilet technology, and the possibility of breathing air rather than risking oxygen. Brezhnev, in exchange for American freebies, essentially slandered the Soviet space program, giving rise to a fetish for capitalism and stagnation, which in no small part led to the demise of the USSR. Gorbachev and Yeltsin were already consequences of exchanging our space "gold" for "glass beads and mirrors" from the Americans.
                  Having picked up capitalism, we have what we have: not ours, but essentially their "elite," the squandering of the Soviet reserve of strength and the little rats who would sell their own mothers for money.
          2. 0
            April 7 2026 09: 43
            photograph the landing sites in high detail and submit everything for examination


            A couple of years ago, I watched a lecture on YouTube by Artamonov, our respected intelligence officer and now political scientist. He told the story of how the US begged China not to approach the nearest landing site of the US astronauts with its Cha'E (Moon Hare) lunar rover after the lunar landing. They even promised to release the arrested "Huawei princess" if only the Chinese wouldn't expose their lunar scam.
            I respect Artamonov and enjoy listening to his knowledgeable commentary on any topic. The lecture was held in front of about fifty people, and there wasn't a single doubter among them... Even though China initially stated that the lunar rover would land (and had landed by the time of the lecture) on the far side of the Moon... I wonder if Artamonov doesn't know that all six US lunar expeditions were on the visible side, not the far side? And no lunar rover is capable of traveling thousands of kilometers to the nearest point visited by the Americans? And the people are buying it...
            A couple of days later, the entire internet was in raptures over a cleverly planted fake about Americans asking the Chinese for help. And our esteemed Artamonov so foolishly fell for this prank and didn't hesitate to spout this nonsense in front of an audience.
  6. + 15
    April 4 2026 07: 25
    It's really funny to read how the locals ooze bile and envy in the comments.
    1. -1
      April 4 2026 07: 31
      Quote: Serjy
      It's really funny to read how the locals ooze bile and envy in the comments.

      Hmm...to rejoice at the success of a country that supplies missiles to our enemies and fires at our cities...our civilians are dying.
      Have you mixed anything up, my dear?
      Personally, I don’t like the successes of the United States for this very reason...why should I praise them?
      1. + 12
        April 4 2026 07: 57
        We imposed sanctions (the last ones, I think, were in 2018). We sold weapons to South Korea. By your logic, the Koreans (North Korea) should have hated us, not helped us. People rejoice not at the enemy's achievements, but at scientific advances. Just like normal Americans rejoiced at Gagarin's flight. Of course, like everyone else, I'd like to see our people fly to the moon. But as we know, if you don't do it, others do. We can only rejoice for them and start doing something meaningful in our space program.
        1. +2
          April 4 2026 08: 06
          Everything the US does in space, they do for themselves, not for humanity...this must be clearly understood.
          They don't share space technologies with us...even on the ISS, everyone is on their own...they didn't let our cosmonauts use their own toilets when they needed to, but they did climb into ours...when they had to.
          So there is no point in having any illusions about American space exploration.
          1. +4
            April 4 2026 08: 31
            Copies have grown in space more than any other spacecraft; an American spacecraft delivered our last cosmonaut to the ISS. Of course, we need to strive for more, but that's a question for politicians, not scientists. And competition hasn't been abolished; we remember how everyone laughed at Starlink, saying that if we turned on the RB, all Starlinks would stop working. But then, with the advent of the '90s, everything changed, and now we're making a Starlink analogue. The same goes for Artemis; it could push our leadership to send the Russians to the Moon, simply to show the world that we're a great space power.
        2. -7
          April 4 2026 10: 11
          Quote: Epifantsev Sergey
          All we can do is be happy for them and start doing something meaningful in our space program.

          So I see that you are happy for the Americans, but when their rockets fly from space and the Moon to your country, you will cry.
          1. +8
            April 4 2026 12: 19
            Of course they want to put rockets on the moon; there's nowhere else. Dear Sir, stop using illegal substances.
            1. -5
              April 4 2026 13: 17
              Quote: Epifantsev Sergey
              Of course they want to place rockets on the Moon, there is nowhere else.

              Time will tell.
              1. +2
                April 4 2026 17: 31
                Quote: carpenter
                Time will tell.
                Time has passed, and it has already shown many things. For example, some people aren't particularly guided by reality and reason when they need to label any actions of those they consider an enemy as strictly villainous.
      2. +5
        April 4 2026 09: 20
        Quote: The same LYOKHA
        rejoice at the success of the country that supplies missiles to our enemies

        It all depends a lot on your point of view.
        You see only the Americans in this event, and automatically transfer your negativity towards them - for the entire flight mission
        For me, this is, first and foremost, a success for science and humanity. And, ultimately, a continuation of Korolev's ideas and Gagarin's flight. And the opportunity for humanity to rediscover such long-distance flights is difficult to overestimate.
      3. -7
        April 4 2026 10: 09
        Quote: The same LYOKHA
        Have you mixed anything up, my dear?

        There are many of them on the site who look Americans in the eye.
      4. +3
        April 4 2026 11: 40
        No, I haven't got it all mixed up. Don't bother trying to figure out what I'm happy about and what I'm not.
        Any scientific achievement is important to me, regardless of regional boundaries. Especially in space.
      5. 0
        April 4 2026 14: 07
        Quote: The same LYOKHA
        Hmm...to rejoice at the success of a country that supplies missiles to our enemies and fires at our cities...our civilians are dying.

        Can we simply rejoice in humanity's achievements? It's not the astronauts, engineers, or other scientists who participated in the program who are to blame for what's happening now in Ukraine.
      6. +1
        April 6 2026 12: 30
        Quote: The same LYOKHA
        Hmm...to rejoice at the success of a country that supplies missiles to our enemies and fires at our cities...our civilians are dying.
        Have you mixed anything up, my dear?
        Personally, I don’t like the successes of the United States for this very reason...why should I praise them?

        You won't believe it, but contacts between our scientists and Americans in the field of nuclear energy have been maintained and continue, just like in space exploration. Scientists are thinking about the future of the planet... Politicians are temporary positions, but scientists are for life.
    2. + 12
      April 4 2026 08: 28
      Quote: Serjy
      It's really funny to read,

      What else... First, "how bad everything is with the German auto industry," then "how bad everything is with the American space industry," and then, apparently, we'll wait until we see "how bad everything is with Chinese science"... It's a shame that the highly respected authors don't write about "how wonderful everything is with the domestic auto industry, space, and science"...
      1. +5
        April 4 2026 10: 24
        Quote: Doccor18
        It's a shame that the highly respected authors don't write about "how wonderful everything is with the domestic auto industry, space, and science"...

        Wait. These are exactly the topics of future articles!!
  7. -6
    April 4 2026 07: 29
    Well, nothing's written, and where's the radiation protection? It's all the same as usual, a fake and a flight in Earth orbit, and then a satellite will fly around the moon. As always, there won't be a video or photo report, either the resolution is wrong, or the camera is broken, the AI ​​will draw the Apollo landing sites, without landing with evidence, all this doesn't interest me, and the Pindos were already used to shitting in diapers. drinks
    I don't believe it am
    1. +7
      April 4 2026 07: 44
      China's Chainye 2 spacecraft photographed platforms from the launch modules left over from the American lunar mission.
      1. +1
        April 4 2026 08: 03
        These are official statements...

        During the Apollo space program, 24 people flew to the Moon, three of them twice. Six successful landings were made, and 12 people walked on the moon's surface. They returned 382 kg of lunar soil to Earth. During these flights, the astronauts traveled 400,000 kilometers from Earth. This is currently the record for manned spaceflights.

        It's strange that everything is going so well and smoothly. what
        1. +3
          April 5 2026 01: 13
          It's strange that everything is going so well and smoothly.

          The Apollo 13 crew disagrees with you.
      2. +7
        April 4 2026 08: 03
        And not just the Chinese, but the Indian "Chandrayans" too. But I'm afraid they'll tell us here, too, that this is all a conspiracy by bloody reptilians. They don't show us the truth: that the earth is flat and rests on elephants. And when they're bitten by fleas, they kick and earthquakes occur.
        1. +5
          April 4 2026 15: 16
          What do you expect if these people live by the principle "whatever the leadership says on TV is true?" Back in our day, Rogozin declared on a federal channel that "whether they actually flew or not is a separate question that needs to be proven." So they believe it. If tomorrow Vladimir Vladimirovich says live on air that "the Americans on the Moon aren't just details; I've been provided with sufficient evidence in my office," they'll believe it for the rest of their lives, because "Well, he said they didn't fly."
      3. -6
        April 4 2026 10: 17
        China has something to lose if they don't admit that the Americans were on the moon, that they built us a KamAZ plant, and that they allowed us to sell gas to Europe. laughing
  8. +2
    April 4 2026 07: 39
    We're flying to the Moon to stay - that sounded a bit ambiguous...
    1. +3
      April 4 2026 07: 49
      Google Translate can cook up even worse.
  9. +4
    April 4 2026 07: 40
    Reading some of the comments, I get the feeling you're reading not a serious website, but some forum for believers in world government, flat earth, and other reptilian ideas. I'd advise you to read more scientific literature and watch educational programs. You could also re-read your school curriculum; maybe it'll help.
    1. +2
      April 4 2026 09: 35
      When reading "scientific literature," you need to make allowances for the authors. For example, Americans are guilty of heavy advertising and often inflate minor achievements into world-class discoveries, inflating the results to achieve this (cold thermonuclear fusion, for example). Meanwhile, the Chinese often simply lie about their achievements, uttering a few words and then falling silent, as if they hadn't said anything.
      This is the reason why our public has such mistrust of what they are broadcasting - we are not fools, as you think, we see all of this.
      1. +1
        April 4 2026 15: 24
        When reading "scientific literature," you need to clarify that there is "literature" and there are "research articles." For example, the website Arxiv.org publishes research articles from various fields of science, but primarily from physics and astrophysics. These are simply articles with calculations, descriptions of experiments, and modeling. If you read "scientific literature" somewhere that contains advertising, it could be a consequence of the field of science (for example, formaculology, where competition between pharmaceutical companies and institutes is present in one way or another), or it could be a consequence of reading ordinary popular science, which has little to do with rigorous science.
        1. +2
          April 4 2026 16: 07
          You're a real comedian, though. ))) Any scientific article is just "calculations, descriptions of experiments, and modeling." The trick is how reliable it all is, i.e., how much tweaking is done to achieve the desired result—and Americans are guilty of precisely this. Take, for example, a scientific study proving the benefits of high doses of fluoride for tooth enamel. As it turned out later, when side effects started to appear, the study was commissioned by a chemical company that found it expensive to dispose of the fluoride compounds. And that's just the way things are with them. Hence the attitude toward their "breakthroughs."
  10. +1
    April 4 2026 07: 44
    Quote: Epifantsev Sergey
    I would advise you to read more scientific literature and watch educational programs.

    I read and watch... I really love technology and science... but I still don't like the USA and I don't share your thesis... perhaps you don't like that kind of forum member... smile bear with it.
    Each has its own disadvantages.
    1. +4
      April 4 2026 08: 10
      Whether or not to love someone is a personal matter. I'm just saying that science isn't politics, and we need to understand that. Or do you think we should reject all advances in medicine, electronics, and so on if they weren't invented by Russians?
      1. +3
        April 4 2026 08: 19
        Or do you think that we should reject all advances in medicine, electronics, etc. if they were not invented by Russians?

        I don't know about you... I'm a supporter of the Chinese model... taking knowledge from everywhere and not asking anyone's permission.
        I am a supporter of the effective development of science and technology in Russia... putting everything most necessary and useful into action immediately... and not waiting for favors from the USA, Europe, and China.
      2. -1
        April 4 2026 08: 26
        How does the scientific literature relate to whether Americans were on the Moon or not? Where is the evidence?
  11. +3
    April 4 2026 07: 48
    Quote: Gankutsu_
    How it contorts the commentators. It's a bad feeling.

    The comments reveal the human stupidity of those who don't believe Americans were on the Moon. All these commentators can do is envy the Americans, because Russia is incapable of replicating their successes in space.
    1. +5
      April 4 2026 08: 28
      The comments show the human stupidity of those people who don't believe that Americans were on the Moon.

      Or the stupidity of those who believe...
  12. The comment was deleted.
  13. +4
    April 4 2026 07: 52
    Quote: Alexander Elizarov
    The comments reveal human stupidity.

    Hmm ... smile It's a double-edged sword. Instead of convincing people they're wrong, resorting to insulting them...that's also not cool, sorry. request
    There are no other arguments...then there is a lack of convincing evidence.
    This means that the opponents are right in their doubts.
    1. +1
      April 4 2026 08: 09
      Will you waste time explaining to Ukrainians that Russia came to liberate them and only wants to help a brotherly nation?
      It's the same here.
      1. +1
        April 4 2026 08: 24
        Quote: Gankutsu_
        Will you waste time explaining to Ukrainians that Russia came to liberate them and only wants to help a brotherly nation?
        It's the same here.

        I will definitely try to convince you...where possible...that there are normal people among Ukrainians through whom you can reach out to others.
        The Americans managed to reformat the brains of the conscious... we must learn to do this too... the technology is there.
  14. +3
    April 4 2026 08: 17
    Quote: Epifantsev Sergey
    I'm just saying that science is not politics and this needs to be understood.

    Are you kidding me?
    Why then did they kick out our scientists from Zurich?
    1. +4
      April 4 2026 08: 41
      And what I'm telling you is that it's the politicians who interfere where they're not wanted. And they hinder the development of science.
      1. +3
        April 4 2026 09: 02
        Quote: Epifantsev Sergey
        And what I'm telling you is that it's the politicians who interfere where they're not wanted. And they hinder the development of science.

        It is impossible at the moment to separate science from politics...whoever pays for it, dances it.
        It's a pity of course...I don't like politicians either. hi
    2. +2
      April 4 2026 08: 53
      "You don't understand! This is DIFFERENT!" (c)
      In general, the most interesting aspect of the discussion is about patent law. The Chinese "communists" don't comply because they're... "Chinese"! That's how they see themselves. And why did we get involved again? Out of servility, or did we think we could win them over to our side? And then we "forgot" what we wanted :), the kids are screaming... and so on. So, "non-essentiality" without memory or reason won't lead to anything good :)) We need to decide here.
  15. +5
    April 4 2026 08: 52
    And Rogozin said that the Americans would launch satellites from trampolines. He was probably a bit mistaken.
  16. +3
    April 4 2026 09: 00
    Data obtained during the flight will help assess health risks during long-term missions and develop protective measures for future expeditions to Mars.


    A flight to Mars, even with optimal planetary alignment, would take about a year. A mission to the Moon would take much less time.
    Even experience from missions to the ISS and other orbiting planets shows that exposure to weightlessness for several months negatively impacts a person's physical condition. After such exposure, astronauts require lengthy rehabilitation. But this is unlikely to be possible on Mars. Real flights to other planets require completely different technologies that would increase flight speeds, shorten their duration, and eliminate weightlessness during flights (at least have low gravity). So, this won't happen anytime soon.
    Flying to Mars with modern rockets is like trying to cross the Atlantic in a dinghy. It's possible, but only as a record-breaking achievement. Something more serious and technologically advanced is needed.
    1. +5
      April 4 2026 14: 49
      Quote: Illanatol
      Flying to Mars on modern rockets is like trying to cross the Atlantic in a rowboat.

      Columbus tried and succeeded, although the chances were slim.
      1. 0
        April 5 2026 09: 05
        Columbus still used a squadron of three caravels, and not a rowboat.
        And the New World, unlike other planets, maintained a constant distance from Europe; subsequent voyages to the new continent lasted even shorter than Columbus's. And colonies in the New World were quite capable of being self-sufficient.

        What about space travel? A year to Mars—if the planets are at their closest approach. And when is their closest approach? When Mars and Earth are on opposite sides of the Sun? Is such an "oversun" five years or even ten? Is such a flight even theoretically possible?
        Moreover, a colony on Mars, with the current level of technology, cannot exist autonomously. This has been proven experimentally, by failed attempts to create a model of a closed biosphere capable of supporting colonists. And regularly supplying the colony with everything it needs at current flight speeds and durations is simply impossible. "No, son, that's science fiction!" And not very scientific, either...

        The worst case scenario is to fly there and have a flag-waving riot. Although after such a flight, the astronauts will have to crawl out of the landing module due to muscle atrophy from prolonged weightlessness. The presence of Martian medics with stretchers awaiting guests from Earth is highly unlikely. laughing
        We won't be able to seriously consider exploration and colonization until the flight to a neighboring planet is measured in a few weeks or a few months, at most. Nuclear-plasma-powered planet-ships are probably still at least a century away.
  17. -5
    April 4 2026 10: 11
    We're not just going to the moon. We're going there to stay.

    Why didn't you stay last time? Was that an unfortunate slip of the tongue, or have Americans never been to the Moon?
  18. +9
    April 4 2026 10: 15
    I'll just insert a quote from blogger Fatherbomber, because I can't say it better:
    We have another holiday in our country. The toilet in the spaceship of the damned sheep is clogged. There are attempts to call this day a holiday and declare it a day off.

    We all know that the clogged toilet is the crew's protest against the war in Iran.

    This is what the crew of the aircraft carrier Lincoln did, this is what the crew of Artemis 2 did.
    No other way.

    You Laotians, I report to you.
    We caught up in a few years, and in some places we have already greatly surpassed them in terms of stubbornness. Ukrainians.
    It took them about 10 years to do this, but three was enough for us.
    1. -3
      April 4 2026 18: 05
      This bomber doesn't follow the news at all. He doesn't know how people live. What three years? Public festivities over a broken toilet on the American segment of the ISS—and not the first at that point—were in 2019. Public festivities over a toilet leak in the Crew Dragon manned reusable spacecraft—in 2021.
  19. +3
    April 4 2026 13: 42
    Comrades, let's separate the wheat from the chaff. We are all human, and flight people Getting to the Moon is, in any case, a great achievement and a great joy. Yes, personally, I would be 100 times happier if it were our rocket and our people, and even more so if it were the Chinese, but we have what we have.
    Let's separate the Apollo program from the current one. Yes, there are serious questions about their highly successful flights in the 60s, and the extremely difficult and slow development of the Artemis program (with its extremely cumbersome and low-tech landing system compared to the 60s) only exacerbates these questions. But the Apollo program is a separate issue. For now, we can simply forget about it.
    Of course, trust but verify. But so far, there are no questions about Artemis. At least they're actually heading to the Moon. There's no talk of a landing yet; it won't happen in 2026 or 2027. But in any case, it's already a major achievement.
    1. +6
      April 4 2026 14: 52
      Quote: Belisarius
      It would be nicer if it were the Chinese

      They'll fly too, but later. They don't have the rocket for that. But the fact is that the US and China will share the Moon.
  20. +7
    April 4 2026 15: 15
    Space confrontation is a matter for developed nations. The US is rushing to confirm its leadership, but in any case, it will have to share the Moon with China. And it doesn't matter who lands there first; what matters is who can establish a base there first and begin colonizing the Moon. This requires a rocket capable of carrying tons of cargo, and robots capable of operating in low gravity and lunar dust. The US's existing SLS rocket is unsuitable for this, but they have Starship and New Glen in the pipeline. China is testing the CZ-10, which is also unsuitable for lunar exploration, but it will be suitable for flag-waving if the tests are successful. They've started developing a replacement, but nothing concrete is in sight because they lack a powerful rocket engine. As for robots, China seems to be ahead, but then again, they still have to get to the Moon. So, we're left to munch on sunflower seeds and argue until we're hoarse about whether the Americans ever went to the Moon... Which, unfortunately, is exactly what we're doing here.
  21. +3
    April 4 2026 15: 41
    I waited a couple of days for news about the crew's mission to the Moon to appear on the website. But all I saw were articles about "their toilet broke, hooray!" Only after almost three days did the author write a full-fledged article, while everyone else either remained silent or limited themselves to making up new jokes about filming in Hollywood.
    It's clear that the very topic of our site doesn't represent the entire population, but only a certain category of people. And from the comments, it's clear that many of our regular visitors are completely ignorant of space exploration, yet sincerely and fervently believe, "The Americans couldn't have flown to the moon, I'm a pretty good engineer and know for sure it's impossible." But in fact, they have no idea about the state of American and Russian space exploration in the 60s and 70s. They've only heard some journalistic facts or myths, and with these meager facts they "expose" the Americans.
    Why don't these authors expose the American nuclear program? Surely there's a case to be made there, too, "How could they have created a nuclear bomb if they had nothing in 1942? Hiroshima and Nagasaki were actually destroyed by conventional carpet bombers, and the rest was a Hollywood fantasy." But no one says that because forum users know next to nothing about fundamental nuclear physics, and so they don't bother. And also because we were all objectively targeted by the US during the Cold War, when they repeatedly tested nuclear weapons and threatened us with them.
    Why is no one "exposing" the US achievements in the chemical industry?
    Maybe because they haven't learned chemistry at all since school. And they know nothing about the state of the American chemical industry, even though they don't know the state of the DOMESTIC chemical industry.
    Or let them say that the Wright brothers never flew, but everything was shot on film.
    1. +2
      April 5 2026 01: 02
      But no one says that because forum users know almost nothing about fundamental nuclear physics, and therefore don’t bother.

      I think you underestimate some of the forum members :((
  22. +2
    April 4 2026 15: 45
    How relevant for our sick society are K.I. Chukovsky's thoughts on the American flight to the Moon
    July 25, 1969
    I'm completely absorbed by the Americans' flight to the moon. Our internationalists, who have spoken so much about the global scale of spaceflight, are filled with envy and hatred for the great American heroes—and have instilled the same feelings in the people. While my "chest aches with tenderness"—tenderness for these people—Lida's housekeeper, Marusya, said, "Oh, if only they'd die on the way." Schoolchildren are taught that the Americans sent men to the moon out of callousness and inhumanity; we, they say, send apparatus and machinery, while the vile Americans send living people!

    In short, the poor sectarians don't even want to feel part of humanity. They've forgotten that they themselves boasted of being the first people on the moon. "Only under communism is human spaceflight possible"—that was the placard of our propaganda.

    Thanks to the Russian people's ability to forget their yesterday's past, today's propaganda can freely lie that "only under soulless capitalism can they send living people to the moon."
  23. -3
    April 4 2026 20: 55
    This is all well and good. But...
    No one has abolished radiation, no matter how much some people might wish it. And reliable protection against it has yet to be developed. Read the serious research, not the journalistic chatter.
  24. -4
    April 4 2026 21: 17
    It's worth remembering that even according to NASA experts, Artemis is a stillborn child of corrupt space agency officials, and Boeing, despite assurances of their low cost, has squandered a ton of budget money on old, "proven" solutions. Currently, the strangely designed system is only capable of launching four people in a capsule on a flyby trajectory, with space for each astronaut equivalent to a phone booth. Orion's energy output is significantly lower than Apollo's, so this version of the spacecraft is incapable of entering lunar orbit and then launching back to Earth. Essentially, everyone is watching an American show again, but this time for $4 billion per episode. Hollywood is taking a break.
  25. +1
    April 5 2026 09: 45
    I'd like to pose a question to proponents of manned interplanetary spaceflight. How could a two-armed, flight-weary human, who still has to return, be useful to science on the surface of Mars? What unique things can they do with their arms and legs that technology capable of organizing a flight to that planet can't?
  26. +3
    April 5 2026 15: 49
    Quote: Boris Sergeev
    Putin promised to continue supporting the lunar program despite the Luna-25 emergency.

    From the media:
    The failed launch of Luna-25 cost the country 12 billion rubles,

    Roskomnadzor (RKN) may spend almost 60 billion rubles to update the system for blocking internet resources in RuNet – technical means for countering threats (TMT).

    What are the authorities more interested in?
  27. +2
    April 5 2026 17: 33
    And we are still making plans... request
  28. 0
    April 7 2026 14: 18
    As a first step toward manned flights to the Moon, this can be welcomed. However, manned flights to the Moon and other planets are highly controversial and futile, and more like a propaganda circus act.
    But if this is a repetition of what happened half a century ago, then it is nothing but propaganda.
  29. 0
    April 7 2026 18: 43
    A new PUK from the Americans. And nothing more.