/sci/ - Science & Math

>>15674178
>>15674170

Yes I agree the economic conditions would be important, the early 90s crisis, the gulf war, the peace dividends were probably not very conductive to a large space project... but at the same time, if it happens a bit before the 1992 election, an ambitious development program of the shuttle could be approved by Bush sr to help his reelection odds in key states (CA, TX, FL...) in said time of aerospace sector crisis.

American military downsizing was happening as early as 1988, the USAF answer to Energia (ASL, Barbarian) was not particularly urgent, I think NASA would look more at cooperation than competition with USSR in 1989+

If the failure happens after the NASA access to space study, I imagine that the Mini-shuttle would be more favoured.
A problem is that NASA lacked a heavy launcher at the time, EELV was still some years in the future, and projects like NLS were still only in the concept phase. Shuttle C was overkill for crewed spacecraft, and Titan IV was both expensive and USAF's dedicated launcher.
I wonder if a mini-shuttle could have been designed as launcher agnostic, with options as backup notably on Ariane 5, potentially Energia M or proton (lol) .

>their own Hermes+Columbus plans independent of each other.
That'd be sad, although I don't think NASA stopping or downgrading the shuttle would save Hermes itself, this progrma was too much of a mess, it may be more sensibly downgraded however.

>>15674180
It probably would be quicker than the IRL retirement, without the need to complete ISS, If it happens in the 80s there's still several years of DOD and the odd Comsat launch/repair, if it happens shortly after 93 I guess Shuttle-MIR program would be completed, between the two... I think the retirement could be very quick.

Shuttle-derived may be less popular, but NASA still had that obsession with LH2 boosters (see all the STME proposals at the time), and of course, there was the need to keep the centers and thiokol busy...