I saw a tv special once, that outlined some of the weaknesses of the shuttle:
- Cost savings with the re-useable craft were dimished, because of the practically complete tear down and rebuild required.
- Turn around times never met original expectations
- Positioning the crew astride the rocket, and not on top, made it impossible to include a launch pad ejection system
- Using the entire vehicle as a re-entry device caused a huge need for heat shielding...since the very beginning, the heat tiles were a problem, always some were lost...which really was walking on a razor’s edge
- Positioning the craft astride and almost under the fuel tank made it very vulnerable to debris falling off the fuel tank.
The conclusion of the special was that we already have a ‘platform’ for doing experiments in space - the ISS. And, and new rocket should resemble the traditional rocket, with crew pod on top. It could still deliver a large payload - satellites are launched into space with traditional rockets, all the time.
For all of the technical and design issues what really killed both crews was not technical.
The first shuttle was lost because of management and politics that forced a launch outside of operational limitations.
The second shuttle was lost largely due to EPA regulations which resulted in an inferior application of the required insulation.
- Using the entire vehicle as a re-entry device caused a huge need for heat shielding...since the very beginning, the heat tiles were a problem, always some were lost...which really was walking on a razor’s edge
...
The Shuttle was designed for a military mission to launch from California, snag Soviet satellites and glide back to California in one orbit without being detected. It had to glide a long distance, so the wings were unnecessarily large. That increased weight and required more tiles. Of course, the Shuttle was never used for that purpose but we were stuck with the design.
To add to your list:
- Because the PR aspect of the shuttle needed to plant the idea of space travel as routine, the shuttle was designed to land like a conventional aircraft. This meant landing gear, wings, and systems to control an aircraft-like landing process.
Much weight, cost, and complexity could have been saved if the shuttle simply splashed down in the ocean like a typical space craft returning from orbit, but that didn’t fit NASA’s marketing plans.