Hope not.

Also,would there be a Columbia Disaster?

How did they plan on recovering the LFBBs? One shuttle runway, three vehicles (the orbiter might need to RTLS as well). Were they going to bring them all down at SLF, and if so, were they going to land in formation or was one going to be in a holding pattern until the other one was towed off the runway? Were there going to be more runways?

Edit: I looked up on NTRS and found a report on a LFBB done in 1996. The boosters take an hour to fly back, and one of them does go into a holding pattern for 15min while the other lands and clears the runway. Any RTLS would arrive first. If they couldn't get the shuttle off the runway, they would probably sacrifice the boosters.

From what I've read, the letters get sorted by topic, and asking for a vote for or against. So I figure if not many people write in against (and I don't see why they would), the small pile of JWST letters will be primarily for. That's gotta count for something, if they seriously weigh letters when it comes time to vote. But I do agree, it's a shame what they are doing to it after so much work and innovation from countless people.

Yes, yes! Vandenberg deserves a few launches too, hope you include it in the future-past-alternate history.
This is a nice look at what could have been.

Hooray for democracy!

But seriously, although these letter likely won't mean much (although not much is still infinitely greater than nothing), I want to see that thing in space. I can't believe what they're currently doing to the program.

That was a slick launchpad that they built for the shuttle.

Indeed. Looking forward on the next parts, and hope Vandenberg gets used.

No Challenger Disaster,nice.

Well, I always fantasized about Enterprise making it into space... And besides in this alternate history, I want to play around with the idea of an expanded orbiter fleet, with maybe as much as 12 orbiters around. Besides, regarding conversion cost, it would have been infeasible for STS-1 to launch in 1979, but that's the beauty of "reboots" Still wanted to keep early STS chronology close to what it really was. I'll probably use the "new" STS flight numbering for the remainder of the alternate chronology, since Challenger doesn't blow up in it it impacts all flights from STS-26 onward...

Very interesting. I can't see Enterprise being used in any timeline though as it was just too costly to convert to flight standards.

Awesome thanks for this!I wonder if construction of the international space station would have occured had skylab been saved........

Thanks we will definitely try to improve-always! We always love to hear it when someone likes our VSA.

Thanks!

Absolutely excellent , this VSA has excelled against all other open VSA's. Keep up the good work!

I'm glad you like it! Remember to check in often.

You can put IronRain on the list

Thanks.

Thanks! Yeah, it's going well. BTW, the DG powered flight tests have been going for a while, everything OK so far.

Thanks,I will send it tomorrow.