The U.S. Congress has just approved a budget of $24.44 billion for NASA for fiscal year 2026. This figure is the same as the previous year but $5.63 billion higher than the White House's initial request—indicating that Congress still places significant importance on space projects.
How will the money be spent? Of that, $7.78 billion is allocated to the Artemis lunar landing program, and $7.25 billion is dedicated to restoring scientific projects. These are the key focuses.
The Artemis schedule has already been laid out. Phase One was completed in 2024. Phase Two is planned to launch before April, with astronauts aboard the SLS rocket and Orion spacecraft for a lunar flyby, but not landing for now. The real big move is Phase Three—aiming for a crewed lunar landing in 2028, which is a hard milestone.
Phase Four plans to establish a long-term base on the Moon and also aims to harvest helium-3 resources. However, the government once proposed to cut the SLS rocket and Orion spacecraft projects after Phase Three and switch to a new plan. If that happens, the prospects for Phase Four become uncertain.
But based on current attitudes, the lunar landing schedule for 2028 is essentially set in stone. This is not just a scientific mission but also a matter of national strategy. Space competition is becoming increasingly fierce—whoever gains control of lunar resources first will hold the chips for the future. From technological validation to commercial applications, every step is advancing humanity’s space dreams.
View Original
This page may contain third-party content, which is provided for information purposes only (not representations/warranties) and should not be considered as an endorsement of its views by Gate, nor as financial or professional advice. See Disclaimer for details.
22 Likes
Reward
22
7
Repost
Share
Comment
0/400
MevHunter
· 01-09 18:00
# Translation
$24.4 billion for lunar landing, this is what major powers should be doing
2028 crewed lunar landing is set in stone? Worried it'll change again in between, I've seen this American playbook before
$7.78 billion for Artemis, frankly it's just the ticket to grab lunar resources, helium-3 is the real target right?
That SLS rocket burns through money like crazy, might as well just use SpaceX's plan directly
Space militarization is really here, all countries are rushing to the moon, this competition is just getting started
View OriginalReply0
AlgoAlchemist
· 01-06 21:29
Will 2028 really be achievable? NASA's previous schedules have also often missed deadlines.
View OriginalReply0
FadCatcher
· 01-06 18:48
Wow, 24.4 billion and you want to go to the moon? That's way too cheap, it feels like SpaceX can't even spend that much money.
Landing on the moon in 2028? I bet five bucks it will be delayed. The US's big projects have never been on time.
Don't even think about helium-3, let's fix Earth's problems first...
77 billion for lunar landing, the rest is just repairs and patch-ups. Basically, it's just burning money.
Looking at this process, I have more confidence in private companies' lunar plans. National-level projects are always so sluggish.
Not to mention, at least it proves the US is still serious about space exploration. China's competitive pressure is intense.
I've heard the stories about lunar bases and helium-3 for over ten years. Every time they say they'll do it, and in the end?
View OriginalReply0
QuietlyStaking
· 01-06 18:45
24.4 billion still proving Elon Musk wrong, pouring real money into moon landing.
View OriginalReply0
MindsetExpander
· 01-06 18:43
Landing on the Moon in 2028, investing $24.4 billion—this is what true great power competition looks like.
View OriginalReply0
ColdWalletAnxiety
· 01-06 18:26
Landing on the Moon in 2028, huh? That's a huge bet, but then again, the US's approach is always like this—political correctness is what matters.
Stop dreaming about science for a moment; honestly, it's all about locking down others' lunar resources.
Spending 7.78 billion on Artemis, no matter how you look at it, it's a good deal. Space military-industrial stocks will be celebrating again.
The Silicon Valley folks have already been planning how to get a piece of the pie—helium-3 resources? Ha, let's see who gets it first.
But if we really want to land steadily in 2028, the rockets and spacecraft need to be reliable. Don't come with the old routine of "technical difficulties causing delays."
View OriginalReply0
SchrodingerPrivateKey
· 01-06 18:25
Will we really be able to land on the Moon in 2028? I remain skeptical, after all, NASA's schedule has always been like that.
The U.S. Congress has just approved a budget of $24.44 billion for NASA for fiscal year 2026. This figure is the same as the previous year but $5.63 billion higher than the White House's initial request—indicating that Congress still places significant importance on space projects.
How will the money be spent? Of that, $7.78 billion is allocated to the Artemis lunar landing program, and $7.25 billion is dedicated to restoring scientific projects. These are the key focuses.
The Artemis schedule has already been laid out. Phase One was completed in 2024. Phase Two is planned to launch before April, with astronauts aboard the SLS rocket and Orion spacecraft for a lunar flyby, but not landing for now. The real big move is Phase Three—aiming for a crewed lunar landing in 2028, which is a hard milestone.
Phase Four plans to establish a long-term base on the Moon and also aims to harvest helium-3 resources. However, the government once proposed to cut the SLS rocket and Orion spacecraft projects after Phase Three and switch to a new plan. If that happens, the prospects for Phase Four become uncertain.
But based on current attitudes, the lunar landing schedule for 2028 is essentially set in stone. This is not just a scientific mission but also a matter of national strategy. Space competition is becoming increasingly fierce—whoever gains control of lunar resources first will hold the chips for the future. From technological validation to commercial applications, every step is advancing humanity’s space dreams.