OK I can get it started1. Development and deployment of Propellant depots.2. Space telescopes in various orbits or locations.3. Moon orbital manned station.4. Moon surface manned program.5. Robotic mining , Propellant, and other manufacturing Moon.6. Large robotic Mars, Venus, Europa, and Titan class sample return missions7. Large fuel/oxygen manufacturing plant on Mars.8. NEO manned missions.9. Mars orbital stations.10. Mars surface missions.11. Mars moon missions.12. Neptune multi year orbital mission.13. Uranus multi year orbital mission.14. Earth orbital manned station 2.Why ?Because man must explore his new home.
...Unfortunately, I don't know where the money is supposed to come from for all that and the SLS...
Now there's a good place to get some international partners involved...JAXA, ESA, CSA, Roscosmos, and maybe even emerging economic powers like China, India, Brazil. The national prestige of having an astronaut from "insert_nation_here" on a NEO or lunar mission in exchange for providing the hab, or the propellant, or some other key component.
And the Koreans and Russians have shown us how easy it is to LEGO together two stages from different countries.
Unfortunately, I don't know where the money is supposed to come from for all that and the SLS...
[T]here are too many people working at NASA.
Yes, and this works even for robotic precursor missions, like a mission where a single lunar hopper delivers separate rovers to scout several different surface locations. Even if the lander could only hop once after the first descent, that approach might work for a joint NASA/ESA mission. One NASA rover; one ESA rover. NASA J-130 first stage; ESA Ariane-derived lander stage. Commercial Delta IV middle stage.
Why would you want to fly two rovers to the same locations? Surely two rovers to two different locations [...] makes more sense.
I was envisioning a (single) lander would deliver the first rover to the first location, then hop using whatever "hover" propellant remained available and deliver the second rover to a second location.
Also, while Robert Lightfoot notably said "We don't need to study it anymore" he also said that it hasn't been decided what this new heavy lift rocket would actually do, once built.Okay, what do we think NASA should do with this heavy lift capability, once deployed?
This would be the beginning of the 'Flexible Path' scenario and would be probably be affordable even if the NASA budget remained level during the 2014 to 2022 period of initial SLS operation.