I'm inclined to agree that it never would have happened, but I'm thinking that more for political rather than technical reasons.I'm skeptical of the cost figures on several grounds. First of all, probably one reason that Titan looked cheaper was that its fixed costs were could be borne in large part by the Titan ICBM. But in 1970s, that advantage would vanish as ICBM run was completed.To top it all off, the III-C's capability to LEO was only about 70% that of the IB. Apparently that was adequate in 1970, but over then next two decades the Air Force spent billions upgrading the Titan (the 34D, the 4A and 4B) so that by the 90s it had about the same capability that the IB had demonstrated in 1966.I think you and I are looking at flight rates for different reasons. I was trying to estimate the demand for heavy launches, for which purpose the III-B is not relevant. If I understand your point correctly, you're referring to the fact that the III-B's relatively frequent launches lowered costs. That's a relevant point. In my scenario, I suppose I would transfer the III-B's payloads to the Atlas-Centaur. That wouldn't help Saturn's economics, but it would help Atlas's.But then it does mean building a West Coast launch capability not only for the IB, but for the Atlas-Centaur as well. I would have thought that wouldn't have been too big a deal, since VAFB was already capable of handling Atlas Agenas. And if SLC-6 could be adapted for the Shuttle, then I would think it could be more easily adapted for the IB, which was more conventional in form than the Shuttle and lighter than either the Shuttle or the III-C.
IIIC wasn't a LEO vehicle, It was a GSO vehicle.
IB would have required a Centaur for GSO missions. Both the Centaur addition and the high manpower costs of MSFC made the IB expensive
Atlas-Centaur wouldn't have worked on the west coast for those missions. Agena was an integral part of the mission
1. True, but drop the Transtage and you get the IIID, an LEO vehicle.2. To perform the missions demanded of it in the 70s and beyond, the Centaur had to be adapted to the T-III anyway. 3. Hmmm, hadn't thought of that. I suppose the stategy would be to accelerate the transition to a post-Agena platform.
I believe the Titan IIIC was considered as a replacement for the Saturn IB. And, as it turned out, with the halting of the Saturn IB/V lines, the Titan IIIC became the heavy lifter anyway
Another rejected Saturn 1 option was to employ an Agena stage to replace Atlas-Centaur (proposed about 1962............)
Why was Saturn so much more expensive than Titan?