Using SRB for Redirect Mission

[Bryan Hayward]

In a discussion about the speculative "Starkicker" concept from SpaceX, the idea of planetary defense authorities funding such an idea came up. Someone posited the idea that maybe SpX would want to build it if someone else paid for "I need to get a lot of mass to a particular orbit, now."  I took that to mean perhaps redirecting an extinction level event sized asteroid or comet ("X"). 

But I had a different take. Solid rocket boosters (SRB's) are short-lived once ignited, but they have a ridiculous amount of energy stored in the solid fuel. Perhaps you want to send unfired SRB's (a lot of them) up and sprinkle them along the path to "X" to either boost the mission ship and/or the refueling depots. Liquid-fueled engines would be only for docking with SRB's or depots, and terminal guidance. 

I don't know if this is "advanced" enough for this forum, but I was trying to come up with something that would be possible today with a few tweaks that was better than typical liquid fueled solutions.

[Robotbeat]

For the same mass, worse energy than liquid rockets.

[Jim]

In a discussion about the speculative "Starkicker" concept from SpaceX, the idea of planetary defense authorities funding such an idea came up. Someone posited the idea that maybe SpX would want to build it if someone else paid for "I need to get a lot of mass to a particular orbit, now."  I took that to mean perhaps redirecting an extinction level event sized asteroid or comet ("X"). 

But I had a different take. Solid rocket boosters (SRB's) are short-lived once ignited, but they have a ridiculous amount of energy stored in the solid fuel. Perhaps you want to send unfired SRB's (a lot of them) up and sprinkle them along the path to "X" to either boost the mission ship and/or the refueling depots. Liquid-fueled engines would be only for docking with SRB's or depots, and terminal guidance. 

I don't know if this is "advanced" enough for this forum, but I was trying to come up with something that would be possible today with a few tweaks that was better than typical liquid fueled solutions.

Not possible today and not better than typical liquid solutions.  Too heavy and too much thrust.  1,600,000 lb weight

[Bryan Hayward]

For the same mass, worse energy than liquid rockets.

OK thanks for the answer.

[mrhuggy]

I think ideally you want the thrust to push the object over time. However using a solid rocket brings the picture of the shuttle SRB blowing a mountain apart and wondering instead of using the motor to push use a solid rocket motor to disrupt the asteroid.

Thinking a bit further if you have 2 motors on each side and have them pointing down at a shallow angle then light them up so no only the rocket thrust but also the mass materials, thrust plus mass reduction. Saying that it would be impractical and cause a veritable cloud of debris to deal with as well, yep a hollywood solution.

[litton4]

From the recent asteroid sampling missions, asteroids may be more fragile and prone to disruption than previously thought.