>>13088370They revive the Saturn program as a stopgap, which requires enough American manufacturing from the usual suspects (auto companies, computer companies, etc.) that the offshoring craze of the 80s never happens. By using modern electronics they reduce the mass/volume of computers needed by 90%, which allows an "Apollo XL" capsule called Artemis: four astronauts instead of three, and the LEM optionally replaced with a small orbital laboratory equipped with a robotic grabber arm. This allows the Saturn VI to replace the entire slate of missions the Shuttle actually did right off the bat, and with significantly more flexibility in orbits. NASA does recognize that expendable 3STO is not the right way to reach orbit forever, and so in 1989 (or whenever it happens in this timeline), Martin Marietta's work on the Blackstar aerial refueling spaceplane is given full funding to develop a low cost, SAFE, reusable orbital shuttle for crew transfer, Skylab 3 reboosts, and small/medium payload deployments. This keeps Fairchild Republic, Rockwell, and Martin alive through the inevitable defense spending cuts following the collapse of the USSR, meaning the lumbering behemoth of post-Cold War oldspace never forms and brand new A-10s are rolling off the factory line right up through 9/11, when they get brought back up to mass production for CAS/COIN flights.
On the downside there's no reason in this timeline for SpaceX to exist since NASA will have been yeeting massive payloads at Mars since the 80s.
>>13088387Challenger and Columbia weren't "whoops lol accidents happen :^)", they were due to massive negligence and design flaws, like that 70s car that exploded when it got rear ended due to a flawed gas tank. With Challenger in particular they knew the O-rings were out of spec from the temperature and launched anyway.
