It is reported that the landing site of Artemis Project has become the theme of two independent activities recently held by the leaders of the organization. The first was a digital conference attended by NASA director Jim bridenstein, organized by NASA’s letter exploration analysis group. < p > < p > the NASA director said at the meeting that he would not be surprised if his agency abandoned the Artemis 3 Antarctic goal. He said he did not mean that the South Pole had been or had not arrived, but that the Apollo site might have a greater chance of winning. < / P > < p > one of the main reasons for choosing the lunar south pole as the landing site was that the ice there could be converted into drinking water, air and rocket fuel. Water ice is hidden in the dark crater, and sunlight cannot reach it. The challenge, however, is that reaching the moon’s poles is more challenging than reaching the equator. < / P > < p > If NASA has problems with the polar landing site, they may change the landing site to maintain the 2024 deadline. If Nasa decided to land on the equator, the six original landing sites used by Apollo between 1969 and 1972 would be attractive. If NASA had to land in the equatorial region of the moon, they could do their research by returning to the places where they used to lay down their national equipment, bridenstein said. < / P > < p > as for another event, the Washington Space Business Roundtable, Kathy Lueders, deputy director of the human exploration and Action Council, stressed that the Antarctic landing site may change. She pointed out at the event that they were considering different options for making a decision. Apple extends AppleCare + purchase period: users can decide within 60 days