ATK Advanced Booster For SRB-X

miraglia

miraglia

ACCESS: Restricted
Joined
13 May 2009
Messages
33
Reaction score
16
Website
www.minifoguete.com.br
What would be the gain in payload SRB-X if it used the new SRB carbon fiber?
 

Attachments

  • srbx-ps1[1].jpg
    srbx-ps1[1].jpg
    49.2 KB · Views: 501
  • 18348.jpg
    18348.jpg
    74.5 KB · Views: 486
  • atk1.jpg
    atk1.jpg
    197.4 KB · Views: 481
  • atk2.jpg
    atk2.jpg
    65.7 KB · Views: 448
What is this? Is this a design currently being looked at or some old thing with an inch of dust on it?
 
sferrin said:
What is this? Is this a design currently being looked at or some old thing with an inch of dust on it?
Click to expand...

The top images are for the "SRB-X" which was a proposal for linking three SRBs together.

The bottom images are for the proposed "advanced booster" for the SLS. That would have more powerful propellant and some other changes. That is intended for the SLS Block 2 in the 2020s.
 
index.php




SRB-X was idea of low cost partial reusable Launch rocket
it use 2 full size Shuttle SRB as first stage and 3 segment SRB as second stage
as Third stage the second stage of Titan III and shuttle Centaur as fourth stage for GEO mission
 
Already posted here:

http://www.secretprojects.co.uk/forum/index.php/topic,1928.msg151959.html#msg151959
 
blackstar said:
sferrin said:
What is this? Is this a design currently being looked at or some old thing with an inch of dust on it?
Click to expand...

The top images are for the "SRB-X" which was a proposal for linking three SRBs together.

The bottom images are for the proposed "advanced booster" for the SLS. That would have more powerful propellant and some other changes. That is intended for the SLS Block 2 in the 2020s.
Click to expand...
Nice 4.5 million pounds thrust ? So 18% more than the five segment SRB? Reading Astronautix indicates the Thiokol 260" booster produced 5.87 million lbs interesting. Hope these programs get funded and/or developed.
 
bobbymike said:
blackstar said:
sferrin said:
What is this? Is this a design currently being looked at or some old thing with an inch of dust on it?
Click to expand...

The top images are for the "SRB-X" which was a proposal for linking three SRBs together.

The bottom images are for the proposed "advanced booster" for the SLS. That would have more powerful propellant and some other changes. That is intended for the SLS Block 2 in the 2020s.
Click to expand...
Nice 4.5 million pounds thrust ? So 18% more than the five segment SRB? Reading Astronautix indicates the Thiokol 260" booster produced 5.87 million lbs interesting. Hope these programs get funded and/or developed.
Click to expand...

Not needed
 
miraglia said:
What would be the gain in payload SRB-X if it used the new SRB carbon fiber?
Click to expand...

The answer is meaningless since there is no Titan second stage for the concept and a FWC SRM was available in 1986.
The idea was a kludge in the first place. Just NASA scrambling not to lose work to what became the Titan IV.
 
bobbymike said:
blackstar said:
sferrin said:
What is this? Is this a design currently being looked at or some old thing with an inch of dust on it?
Click to expand...

The top images are for the "SRB-X" which was a proposal for linking three SRBs together.

The bottom images are for the proposed "advanced booster" for the SLS. That would have more powerful propellant and some other changes. That is intended for the SLS Block 2 in the 2020s.
Click to expand...
Nice 4.5 million pounds thrust ? So 18% more than the five segment SRB? Reading Astronautix indicates the Thiokol 260" booster produced 5.87 million lbs interesting. Hope these programs get funded and/or developed.
Click to expand...

I'd MUCH rather see the F-1 revived rather than another expensive and infrastructure maxing-out SRB proposal... F-1 gets you flexibility... heavy SRB's, not so much...

Later! OL JR :)
 
Byeman said:
miraglia said:
What would be the gain in payload SRB-X if it used the new SRB carbon fiber?
Click to expand...

The answer is meaningless since there is no Titan second stage for the concept and a FWC SRM was available in 1986.
The idea was a kludge in the first place. Just NASA scrambling not to lose work to what became the Titan IV.
Click to expand...

True... plus, SRB-X never addressed the problem that even Ares V was running up against-- it's simply TOO DARN HEAVY to work well with the existing infrastructure at KSC-- the Ares V was getting SO heavy, that combined with the mass of the MLP, it was coming up against the limits of the VAB foundations and the Pad foundations. Ares V was going to require and all-new six-truck crawler to transport it to the pads, and serious rework of the crawlerways to keep it from sinking into the swamps at SLC-39. That was just with ten booster segments...

SRB-X would have run into the same problems... two 4-segment SRB's plus the relatively lightweight ET and orbiter (by comparison anyway) were all the existing crawlers and MLP's could handle... and they could BARELY handle them... Remember Saturn V, being a liquid rocket, was moved EMPTY (well, full of air) and thus was much lighter than the two Shuttle SRB's, which, being solid propellant, must be moved FULLY FUELLED. I've seen design proposals for vehicles with up to four SRB's, but there is NO WAY that the infrastructure at KSC could support them, not without being COMPLETELY reworked and beefed up! That would run into the billions and make any such vehicles non-starters.

Liquid rockets keep the weight down, so you can build a MUCH bigger rocket (capable of carrying MUCH larger payloads) than a solid-boosted rocket without overloading the crawlers, crawlerways, and other infrastructure at KSC. In fact, the biggest limitation to the size of the liquid rocket is the blast and acoustic limits at the pads at KSC (11 million pounds IIRC). As it is, SRB's max everything out, and so you can't make an SRB-equipped rocket much bigger than present designs without hitting the limits of what KSC can handle.

Saturn V was going to get around this with its solid-booster equipped variants by moving the rocket from the VAB to pad, THEN stacking the SRB's and attaching them to the Saturn V ON THE PAD... hence the crawlers and crawlerways never had to carry the combined weight of the Saturn V vehicle, the LUT/MLP, AND the heavy fully-fuelled SRB's at the same time... the segments would be brought to the pad by crawler and lifted and mated on the pad by a special booster assembly facility which itself would be carried to the pad via crawler.

If you want a BIG, POWERFUL rocket, revive the F-1 or build an equivalent high-thrust kerosene, propane, or even methane powered first stage/booster engine. Ditch the expensive SRB's and leave them for where they work best-- in missile silos and small solid boosters on EELV's...

Later! OL JR :)
 
miraglia said:
What would be the gain in payload SRB-X if it used the new SRB carbon fiber?
Click to expand...

Do you have a link to this presentation?? I WOULD like to read up on their proposals as compared to the revived F-1 and other liquid advanced booster proposals...

Later! OL JR :)
 
luke strawwalker said:
miraglia said:
What would be the gain in payload SRB-X if it used the new SRB carbon fiber?
Click to expand...

Do you have a link to this presentation?? I WOULD like to read up on their proposals as compared to the revived F-1 and other liquid advanced booster proposals...

Later! OL JR :)
Click to expand...

Don't ever say that I don't bring you nice presents...
 

Attachments

  • ATK Advanced Booster Paper.pdf
    500.7 KB · Views: 45
blackstar said:
luke strawwalker said:
miraglia said:
What would be the gain in payload SRB-X if it used the new SRB carbon fiber?
Click to expand...

Do you have a link to this presentation?? I WOULD like to read up on their proposals as compared to the revived F-1 and other liquid advanced booster proposals...

Later! OL JR :)
Click to expand...

Don't ever say that I don't bring you nice presents...
Click to expand...

THANK YOU! Very interesting...

Later! OL JR :)
 

Similar threads

Back
Top Bottom