[gaetanomarano]

Originally Posted by Jasoncw

...why is it safer to have the escape stairs on the outside...

first of all the escape towers are good not only for a small number of skyscrapers but for every building
second, more security always is better than less
that's why to-day's cars have a dozen of airbags everywhere and other life saving devices
a $30,000 car could cost 3000+ dollars less without these devices, so, they may seem a waste of money
also, not all cars will action these devices in real accidents, but just a very little fraction of them (maybe 0.1% or less)
however,to-day, these (costly) rarely used (then "paranoic") devices are STANDARD on every good car
about costs, just think the (useless but very high) additional price of the structures to give to some buildings (like the Dubai's "sail") the original shape the architects have designed for them...
spend lots of million$ for the "shape" and save a few million$ for a further security structure, is like spend $5000 to pay an artist that paints your car, then drive it without the airbags, etc.
the number of mid-big buildings grows every day, so, it's not a bad idea to design them SAFER
of course, it's clearly better if they already have a good standard emergency structure

If the fire started near the entrance to the external shaft, it would be useless.

if problems are so simple as you write, we would never had/will have just ONE death in (both) the past and future accidents ...unfortunately, things are not so simple....

...it would be expensive...

costs doesn't matter since safety comes first

...skyscrapers are very safe as they are now...

that's only a STATISTICAL ILLUSION due to the fact that big skyscrapers are a minuscule fraction of all buildings (a 0.00000000something of the total) but, in future, when the mid-big skyscrapers and 20+ floors buildings will become MILLIONS the risk of an accident will be similar to to-day's airline jets... not daily, but not s rare (and with hundreds dead everytime will happens)

...about Earthquakes, your external shaft is more prone to them...

maybe, or maybe not... a simpler structure could be more "flexible" and may remains intact (however, that needs study and tests to know)

Even if the airplanes don't hit the shafts, the shock would damage the shafts.

this is only the pessimistic view of a problem, also, there is no need of an attack to have an airplane that hit a building (just think at the recent airline accident in Brazil with the plane that's gone to an highway and a building)

The people at NASA are probably visiting your site and making fun of it.

several thousands times? if you are right, then, they have nothing better to do...

You want to make the Orion less massive by cutting the top off it, because you think that they don't need it.

as discussed in deep in some space forums and blog, I've not deleted the parachutes... ...and the cutted capsule CAN work since its Center of Gravity remains pretty close to the past full-cone shape, also, there are meny existing capsules (like the Soyuz) and many alternative CEV designs proposed by big aerospace companies (see them on astronautix.com) that use CEV shapes very different than a cone

NASA spends massive amounts of time and money optimizing every aspect of everything they do.

NASA seem copy the Apollo project (since they have fear to fail with new designs) and last year/this year news say NASA is recalling many retired Apollo engineers to have some help...

And you want to make the Space Shuttle safer by basically giving it an ejector seat.

the ejection seats was standard in the early Shuttle launches but can't save the crew at high altitudes

...do you think that the ejector pod would be able to blast off fast enough to escape the explosion...

military airplanes and the Shuttle with ejection seats have pressure/fire sensors that start the ejection BEFORE the explosion... that's also the way the tower-LAS (Launch Abort System) works

...adds more weight and complexity...

not for the complexity (there is a little jet fighter, F111 IIRC, that has it) nor need too much weight (a few tons from the 24 tons max cargo of the Shuttle)

...see if it's actually practical...

my ideas ARE practical and CAN work
.