Lest I continue contributing to any thread derailing -- and to clear up any potential confusion I might've caused -- the
Reusable Nuclear Shuttle was the
best part of the IPP portion of the Integrated Program Plan which made monthly cargo runs between Earth and the Moon. It was not a nuclear-powered Space Shuttle, as at the time of the IPP, the Space Shuttle was usually referred to as the Orbiter. Except when it wasn't. Because NASA had a lot of ideas at the time and only so many names to go around, to say nothing of the IPP's ignominious self-immolation.
It will shock you
But NASA study several times the use to launch the space Shuttle to Moon orbit
Last study was in 1992, consider feasible could bring a reusable lunar lander in payload bay
but the issue it needed a full loaded Extrenal Tank in orbit to dock on to
means to launch around 700 ton of tank and propellant’s for that….
This reminds of the "assume a can opener" joke regarding economists. Though we'd probably all like it if we did have a can opener capable of multi-launching 700 tons of remass and tankage.
I've always thought the Shuttle launched EOR architecture could do with some love. You can do a lot with a Shuttle bay scaled payload as your building blocks and like Boldy Going explored with Enterprise what you need to "save" the STS is a busy enough manifest to a. amortise the fixed costs down to something reasonable and b. justify the investment you need to get STS the enhancements it requires to be safer and financially sustainable (liquid fly back boosters, super lightweight tank etc.)
The problem there, though, is that it's really easy to enter a feedback loop of needing to fly the STS enough to justify spending the money to make the STS safe, which was the problem OTL. As once you start flying the Shuttle in its OTL configuration, you're guaranteed to have a potential catastrophic accident, and once
that happens -- and most likely lost a crew in the process -- your flight rate will tank to the point nothing will be amortizable.
That said, cosmonauts on the Moon during the Bicentennial is the type of event that should shake loose enough money to, at the very least, guarantee that the Shuttle's not the accident-waiting-to-happen it was OTL. It might even shake loose enough money to put something like RS-IC back on the table, which is where the real potential for shenanigans begins.
Depends on the shuttle
:
<Snip!>
The nuclear powered
Pathfinder from 'For All mankind'.
The less we talk about that
thing, the better. Shun the abomination! SHUN I SAY!
...how telling is it that I am unsure whether it should be shunned for existing in general or specifically for its lack of a vertical stabilizer?
Stretching the ET and fitting the Orbiter with cryogenic propellant-transfer gear are also fun possibilities—the latter was planned IOTL, before STS-107 threw a wrench in everything.
That does, indeed, open up fun possibilities. Shuttle EOR concepts certainly don't lack for mission design potential.
