Wider stock SRBs? - Poll

[KSPACE]

Should Larger SRBs exist in stock KSP?

(I know it's early)

If you somehow did not know, the following is helpful info for you to indulge yourself in. 

*Ahem*    Stock SRBs are all small radial size and combining them with struts and other crap works, but it's just so messy (for me at least). 

[Aeroboi]

@KSPACE RT-5 should stay. Excellent first stage booster and good for early career craft. It's also good as a constructional piece when empty and it's good for super large sepatron on very heavy lower stages.

I think we should have both 1.875m or 2.5m SRB's.

However I  think a form factor of both sizes is to much in the SRB department because I'm under the impression 2.5m can be overkill. Then again we have 5m liquid fuel and oxidiser tanks and 2.5m srb's wouldn't look that off, although still bulky imho.

1.875m should be a good middle road that fills in a desired for gap. Remember that multiple size version will be introduced so a 1.875m and 2.5m alltogether may to be much. I did choose that option because I don't care about the part list personally. I do know polls and discussions turn out to be very picky due to such reasoning so don't hold your breath.

[Fraston]

DLC should add 1.875 and 5, all other sizes should be stock.

5 meter SRB... sounds volatile!

[Chel]

The Flea is quite useful as a small little booster. It's also the first engine you get when you start a career or science game, and if you were given a more powerful engine it might be overkill. Every part has it's uses, and the Flea is no exception

[Fraston]

3 hours ago, The_Cat_In_Space said:

Every part has it's uses

Except for the Thud. But this is a thread for SRBs not LFEs.

[Ol’ Musky Boi]

The small SRB is a simple solution when the small sepratron sucks at separating spent stages from your shuttles.

[Ultimate Steve]

While we're at it, can we get 0.625m SRBs as well?

[Ol’ Musky Boi]

On 3/8/2019 at 6:32 PM, Ultimate Steve said:

While we're at it, can we get 0.625m SRBs as well?

That'd be great for sounding rockets!

[basic.syntax]

A larger SRB is needed, to visually match up with the scaling of the 3.5m Shuttle parts. While I think 1.875 might be good, it would be a shame to tell stock part owners they need to buy DLC to complete a stock Shuttle launch package. So it might have to be a 2.5m part, unless Squad doesn't mind adding some DLC sizes to the stock parts collection.

 

[ZooNamedGames]

RT-5 should stay largely for compatibility reasons at this point. Besides if they start to decide what parts are or are not important, everything else in the parts list can fall victim to this sudden trimming.

Other sized SRBs is just obvious. With solid rocket motors ranging from the 1 meter diameter GEM-40 rocket motor generating 500kN, the 3 meter UA1207 solid rocket boosters that lifted the Titan IV generating 14.2MN, and the space shuttle solid rocket motors at 3.71m (just call it 3.75m for KSP’s purposes) and generating 12,000kN of force. (I’m ignoring the AJ-260 as that wasn’t a realistic solid rocket motor and just an excuse for a giant boomstick).

So needless to say, a set of 1 meter SRBs and a single radial SRB motor isn’t sufficient to fit the full range of functionalities and uses that they could be used for in today’s world. Simply extending SRBs by adding a larger rocket. 

I have a solution.

Trim all SRBs down to 4-5 options. Effectively 1 motor for each diameter sizes (0.875, 1.25, 1.875, 2.5, 3.75, 5m). With a slider/option for each motor that will allow for SRBs to be lengthened, either in segments, or with a slider that allows players to precisely select what TWR they want out of the booster. The higher the TWR, the shorter the booster. Besides it’s easier to keep a single set of parts under the aesthetic shift as opposed to a dozen. 

Just my thoughts.

[Tweeker]

On ‎3‎/‎9‎/‎2019 at 2:04 PM, basic.syntax said:

A larger SRB is needed, to visually match up with the scaling of the 3.5m Shuttle parts. While I think 1.875 might be good, it would be a shame to tell stock part owners they need to buy DLC to complete a stock Shuttle launch package. So it might have to be a 2.5m part, unless Squad doesn't mind adding some DLC sizes to the stock parts collection. 

 

SRBs have been screwed up for a long time, noticeably at least since .25.

The Vector is about 1.5 to 2X overpowered,   so as a result the Kickback ends up being about 3-4X underpowered.

If you build a KSP version of the SLS you will only get about 25% of your thrust from the SRBs (1350 for the 2 kickbacks vs 4000 for the mammoth)

IRL the SLS will develop 75% of it's thrust from the SRBs, (5,600,000 for 2 SRBs, VS ~1,800,000 for 4 RS-25s

 

 

[herbal space program]

On 3/9/2019 at 4:58 PM, ZooNamedGames said:

I have a solution.

Trim all SRBs down to 4-5 options. Effectively 1 motor for each diameter sizes (0.875, 1.25, 1.875, 2.5, 3.75, 5m). With a slider/option for each motor that will allow for SRBs to be lengthened, either in segments, or with a slider that allows players to precisely select what TWR they want out of the booster. The higher the TWR, the shorter the booster. Besides it’s easier to keep a single set of parts under the aesthetic shift as opposed to a dozen. 

Just my thoughts.

I think that's a great idea. I don't know about a slider, but SRB segments that are different diameters and a handful of different SF motors with a balanced range of available TWR vs. ISP would be awesome. I would use SRBs a lot more if I could build them that way.