There's a lot of great technology from the Shuttle, such as the avionics and the engines, that could be worth reusing. A lot of research work was done on Shuttle derivatives in the 1980's, but nobody was interested in making the investment to retrofit the VAB and the launchpad.
That, of course, is one of the great challenges of making improved launch vehicles. You ~might~ be able to lower the operations cost by investing in research and a new design, but the cost of the research is guaranteed to be high.
Falling foam is the threat to the tiles that everyone is thinking of (because it's happened), but it's not the only thing that can damage them. The tiles also have the big problem that they're expensive to maintain.
There are many alternative concepts for heat protection for re-entry, but there's no interest in making expensive research investments in something that could fail. Manned spaceflight is going back to 60's era ablators because we know they work.
To be sincere, the idea of sending a 737-sized reusable spacecraft to LEO when it usually lands empty is not practical.
You could send the the payload up on non-reusable vehicles and, after a couple trips, send a reentry vehicle to bring down anything that still can be reused.
That, of course, is one of the great challenges of making improved launch vehicles. You ~might~ be able to lower the operations cost by investing in research and a new design, but the cost of the research is guaranteed to be high.
Falling foam is the threat to the tiles that everyone is thinking of (because it's happened), but it's not the only thing that can damage them. The tiles also have the big problem that they're expensive to maintain.
There are many alternative concepts for heat protection for re-entry, but there's no interest in making expensive research investments in something that could fail. Manned spaceflight is going back to 60's era ablators because we know they work.