Canopus

They will scale it down again until what was once called „Mars Colonial Transport“ will turn into a bigger falcon with reusable second stage. Something that can actually be accomplished.

Well EUS hasn‘t been cancelled either. Last i read about it they where changing it quite a bit trying to improve its capacity, necessitating the two extra block 1 flights.

The gateway won‘t use frozen orbits rather a so called near rectilinear halo orbit. https://engineering.purdue.edu/people/kathleen.howell.1/Publications/Conferences/2017_IAA_ZimHowDav.pdf https://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/20150019648.pdf Additionaly the first component will have Hall effect thrusters.

@DDE Where did u get the impression that ACES development is being stopped?

You also have to distuingish between Shuttle C and the Shuttle derived heavy lift launch vehicle. Shuttle C is a much earlier concept and is basically an unmanned Orbiter without the capacity to return to earth, allowing for some extra cargo. This would have allowed to build the ISS unmanned since it still is able to maneuver on orbit. SDHLLV Is basically just a mounting point for the SSME‘s and a large fairing which would make it even more capable when it comes to putting mass into orbit. For both to be working right now they would have to have started serious development in the 80s. If they only started in the late 2000s they would have come just as far as SLS.

Well there is the Exomars rover and the Mars 2020 rover but after that i think Mars surface exploration will slow down in light of renewed interest in the Moon. Unless the Mars sample return rover and lander receive funding.

Who would put a fuel depot in low lunar orbit?

Future lunar landing vehicles that support a hypothetical ice extraction enterprise won‘t begin their journey from LLO anyway. Might aswell build one now that is up to the task and can be adapted for future uses.

There is no arguing that, The Shuttle made little sense as a reusable launch vehicle and certainly wasn‘t cheaper than any other disposable launch vehicle they could have build during that time.

You were talking about reusing a launch vehicle and that the Shuttle did, more than the Falcon 9. So nothing impossible about it.

https://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2018/11/northrop-grumman-synergy-omega-sls-solid-boosters/ So we might after all see something of a Block 2 using a more advanced solid rocket motor.

No i‘m just sick of the meme that SpaceX has proven airplane like reusability in Launch vehicles. Because they have not. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space_Shuttle So no, SpaceX has not ”done the impossible“ when they land part of a rocket and reuse it two or three times.

Oh please. Reusing boosters wasn‘t impossible it just wasn‘t economical and it still hasn‘t been proven to be. There are even myths of an ancient launch vehicle that reused every part of the launcher, even the part that reached Orbit, loosing only the main tank.

Why would NASA funding for manned missions go to a hypothetical Space Force that supposedly combines already existing entities, each with their own funding?

Other way around, it seems the russian airlock isn‘t going to fly. Personally i am excited that we will have human activity beyond LEO again and for the gateway too even if it would only be a destination for private companys to supply.