>>13628898>>13628910>>13628924>>13628929>>13628947>>13629048most people here deride the shuttle for its many failing, and rightfully so, but the pre-challenger shuttle era was an amazing time to be a spaceflight enthusiasts, they were testing awesome new things such as the MMU and sending senators and non-government affiliated engineers into space, they were gradually ramping up the flight rate and space station freedom was on the horizon. a non-challenger timeline would have seen shuttle-centaur, the launch of Hubble, the first polar orbit launch and 12 flights in a year, and that's just in in 1986 alone.
but what if thing's had gone differently? what if the shuttle's 'golden age' went unhindered?
while poor engineering and management were contributing factors, the challenger disaster was ultimately caused by unusually cold weather, if the concerned engineers had their voices heard and the launch had been called off, or even if the flight miraculously went off without a hitch, things would have gone so, so differently. the shuttle's flight rate would increased and economy of scale benefits would kick in, bringing down launch costs, allowing real, useful work to be done, with spaceflight going untainted in the public eye and with costs decreasing, perhaps freedom may have gone uncancelled, maybe the shuttle-c would've been developed, with man returning to the moon by the year 2000, perhaps the shuttle would have seen upgrades over it's lifetime, liquid boosters, easier to reuse engines, a more durable heatshield, a less flaky external tank all may have been introduced, had the challenger disaster never occurred.
this shit keeps me up at night bros.
