@Truthful_ast Sure whatever. You’re a visual creator so I see why you’d insist on this concept, the Shuttle on the Moon looks cool, but outside of KSP it’s a stupid idea so it never happened.
You’re hand-waving away all the problems with this idea. You seem to think it’s only a propulsion issue, if that was the case then the real Shuttle should have gone to the Moon, simply launch a smaller external tank, attach it to the orbiter and go.
The internal tanks are a minor detail, they would be designed for ascent, not meant for long-duration cryogenic storage and zero-g propellant management. The rest of the orbiter would also need to be designed around deep-space power/comms/navigation/radiation, even carrying all that for normal LEO missions.
At that point you have built a deep space vehicle capable of doing Apollo’s job while also dragging an airplane to lunar orbit. If you already have depots and a lander, leave the orbiter in LEO and use a dedicated cislunar tug.
Even then, it’s wasteful because a spaceplane needs far more propellant than a dedicated tug because of dead mass needlessly carried there and back. That means more tanker launches, less depot throughput and lower mission cadence.
Taking a step back, a NASA that can’t get funding for a dedicated lunar spacecraft is also not doing all the other things required for this, they simply wouldn’t go to the Moon, period.
@Truthful_ast NASA’s plans always paired the Shuttle with dedicated cislunar tugs and landers. Carrying the orbiter to the Moon was possible, but very inefficient compared to dedicated tugs, it would only consume more propellant and require an over-engineered vehicle for everything.
@CgCharlygarma@gonziver@EsDeMamador “Romper el bloqueo” no tiene sentido en este caso porque se trata de un sistema de rastreo “romper la fijación” sería lo más cercano. De cualquier manera todos usan “lock-on” para referirse a esto y solo tú te quejas de pesado.