Jump to content

Boosters: RT-10 beats BACC in every way?


Recommended Posts

Once you start using the S1 SRB-KD25k, the SRB from NASAmission, the BACC is even further overshadowed because the S1 SRB-KD25k actually does what an SRB does extremely well.

A classic example of the efficiency of that design. Three stage probe to Duna, and, not a direct intercept either;

06EC8hX.jpg

Pi8oegu.jpg

PXea4jq.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have a bigger problem with the NASA/ARM KD25k than I do with the BACC, just because the TWR and burn rate are very low, and thrust-limiting can't be used to increase these. But yeah, the RT-10 beats everything, hands-down, IMHO.

This is partly what prompted me to make SpaceY. I wanted SRBs with more kick, in larger sizes (and maintain stock-balanced ISP, cost, dry mass, etc).

(yeah, I know, shut up about the mods, it's off topic). :)

KSP%202014-12-17%2000-12-47-17.jpg

Left to right:

[table]

[tr][td]#[/td][td]Name[/td][td]Diameter[/td][td]Full Mass[/td][td]Thrust[/td][td]Pad-TWR[/td][td]Burn Time[/td][td]Tech Node[/td][/tr]

[tr][td]A[/td][td]RT-10[/td] [td]1.25m[/td][td]3.7475[/td][td]250[/td][td]66.71[/td][td]30s[/td][td]start[/td][/tr]

[tr][td]B[/td][td]BACC[/td] [td]1.25m[/td][td]7.875[/td][td]315[/td][td]40.00[/td][td]47s[/td][td]generalRocketry[/td][/tr]

[tr][td]C[/td][td]KD25k[/td] [td]1.25m[/td][td]21.75[/td][td]650[/td][td]29.89[/td][td]68s[/td][td]heavyRocketry[/td][/tr]

[tr][td]D[/td][td]S109[/td][td]1.875m[/td][td]29.3125[/td][td]2000[/td][td]68.23[/td][td]30s[/td][td]heavierRocketry[/td][/tr]

[tr][td]E[/td][td]S115[/td][td]1.875m[/td][td]48.9375[/td][td]2500[/td][td]51.09[/td][td]40s[/td][td]veryHeavyRocketry[/td][/tr]

[tr][td]F[/td][td]S211[/td] [td]2.5m[/td][td]58.625[/td][td]2800[/td][td]47.76[/td][td]42s[/td][td]experimentalRocketry (1000)[/td][/tr]

[tr][td]G[/td][td]S217[/td] [td]2.5m[/td][td]97.875[/td][td]3800[/td][td]38.83[/td][td]52s[/td][td]experimentalRocketry (1000)[/td][/tr]

[tr][td]H[/td][td]S223[/td] [td]2.5m[/td][td]137.125[/td][td]5000[/td][td]36.46[/td][td]56s[/td][td]experimentalRocketry (1000)[/td][/tr]

[/table]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Speaking of easy to slap on, I think from now on every rocket I send up will be riding on some variant of this:

http://i.imgur.com/oY1jola.png

Need more thrust? Stack more radially outward.

Need more burn time? Stack more radially outward and then tune their thrust limiter down.

I tend to get overheating issues if I pack 'em in that tight; space 'em out with girders.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Better late that never, but I need to take some time and apologize to LethalDose. I made a snarky remark at zerotwo's math, since he was adding the cost of a decoupler to every RT-10 and then concluding that the RT-10 was too expensive. Lethaldose read the remark and thought I was telling him his rocket design was 'doing it wrong'.

That was not my intention, and it just goes to show how shooting your mouth off can have unintended consequences. My bad.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This thread is quite old. Please consider starting a new thread rather than reviving this one.

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...