>>13858509>>13858567ET tank production was capped at 24 per year and the lowest possible orbiter turnaround times (54 days, round that up to two months) meant that that many flights could be supported annually with a four orbiter fleet.
The SRBs on the other hand were problematic - they took weeks to stack and the process interfered with most other VAB operations, so liquid boosters are necessary to reach flight rates that high.
Annual shuttle program costs would be amortized over more launches, lowering individual flight costs significantly, and the use of LRBs would likely help with that. with liquid boosters, a solution to the foam strike menace is all that would be needed to ensure safety.
Don't get me wrong, the shuttle would still be grossly expensive, but on NASA's budget, and with actual safety, it'd genuinely be worth the cost.
