From: snidely.too@gmail.com   
      
   JF Mezei formulated the question :   
   > On 2022-11-15 05:25, Snidely wrote:   
   >   
   >> The changes you describe would require about as much redesign work as   
   >> SLS; you'd essentially have a whole new shuttle except for the RS25s   
   >> and the fragile tiles, and the shuttle would still be exposed to ice   
   >> debris.   
   >   
   >   
   > both Boeing and Airbus make iterative improvements to their aircraft   
   > (called derivatives). (the MAX fiasco was due to regulatory issues that   
   > pushed Boeing to keep the new 737 cockpit behaving as the original 1967   
   > one to keep commonality and hence not add new warnings, buttons  etc).   
   >   
   > NASA aklready had the plans to go with electric APU instead of hydrazine   
   > APUs. Had already converted cockpit to glass cockpit. And early on made   
   > major modifications to heat shield system by using blakets for top   
   > portion.  The Shuttle wasn't as static as it seemed.   
   >   
   >   
   > So a modified Shuttle woudln't need a total redesign as happened with   
   > SLS for 12st stage, 2nd stage and service module and Orion.   
      
   Those changes were peanuts compared to what you've suggested be done to   
   reach lunar orbit.   
      
   /dps   
      
   --   
   Yes, I have had a cucumber soda.  Why do you ask?   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)