In article ,
(WaltBJ) writes:
Q: How does a solid rocket fuel compare to liquid fuel as far as
specific thrust versus density of loading?

I depends on the fuel. Specific Impulse is usually higher for a
liquid, but, especially with a small system, a chunk of that gets
eaten up by hte weight and volume of the tanks, pumps, and
plumbing. (For values of chunk ranging from "A fair bit" to "all").
Fuel density become imortant. Hydrogen can provide an amazing amoutn
of energy, but yyou get about 6 times the kW/l with Kerosene.
One of the early Sparrow III (AIM-7) models used a storable liquid
rocket motor. for that scale of system, it basicall provided the same
performance, in the same volume and weight, as the solids that
replaced it.

I can see why the two exotic torp oxidizers/monopropellants I am
familiar with, propylene glycol dinitrate and hi-test hydrogen
peroxide, are not 'sub-friendly' but I don't know how either would
compare to say ammonium perchlorate/aluminum/hydrocarbon solid fuel.
Looks like powered duration on Skval is about 90 seconds max.
Launching it will surely give a very noisy sound signature and a fix
if there's more than one searcher close by - on its origin.
If it is used against a formation it looks like there would be a trade
- one sub for one target.

Since it's supposedly a nuke, it would be generally considered to have
a Pk of 2.0 - the target, and the shooter.


--
Pete Stickney

Without data, all you have are opinions