Wings were the real problem.

They stuck out where they could be struck by stuff. They precluded the capsule eject system. They cost Shuttle tons of fuel. For a system used in only one part it's flight regime.

Why _why_ did Shuttle have wings? The Air Force insisted. So they could launch Shuttle into polar orbit from Vandenberg. Shuttle would need the wings to come _back_ to Vandenberg.

Then the Air Force withdrew from the program. Too late to get rid of the terrible wings, however.

It's a legitimate question to ask if the wings were worth the trouble. However, the real problem from a safety standpoint was that Shuttle was riding on the side of the stack rather than on top.

Because it had wings. You can't put wings up top without even bigger wings down low to make the thing stable.

Even if that's the case, those lower wings aren't as vulnerable to minor damage since you don't need them for re-entry. That said, I am firmly in the "wings aren't worth it" camp anyway. Just put a capsule on top.

Curious, how would it land anywhere without wings? Apart from splashing down.

Lifting Bodies

http://www.nasa.gov/centers/dryden/news/FactSheets/FS-011-DF...

You don't need huge delta wings to land, a lifting body design with maybe little wing stubs (like HL-20/Dream Chaser/BOR-4 works just fine).

Here's an M2-F3 landing video, as an example: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iaz6Bmitawo

Elon musk explained many times how Dragon will land with helicopter precision. Currently it lands with precision of a few kilometers( because of the wind, they use parachutes ).

They can do that because even on a symetrical capsule you can have lift vector control.

I can't find the video, but you can look it up with google. It is very easy to find.

What InclinedPlane said.

The huge-giant wings were needed so Shuttle could fly cross-range back to Vandenberg after going over the pole.