In article 6be6c300-9524-4255-ab83-b19121ccff27
@h15g2000yqe.googlegroups.com, says...

on a associated note I think some florida silos should be used to keep
emergency rockets to ISS available at all tmes. occasionally one could
be used tom launch a regular supply module to keep the vehicles fresh.

This is dumb. What silos in Florida are still active? Why do this when
ISS has the following resupply options:

1. Progress on Soyuz launcher (Russian)
2. ATV on Ariane 5 (Europe)
3. HTV on H-IIB (Japan)
4. Dragon on Falcon 9 (US, from Launch Complex 40 at Cape Canaveral Air
Force Station)
5. Cygnus on Antares, renamed from Taurus II (US, from Wallops Flight
Facility, in Virginia)

That's five *completely different* resupply options. None of these
share spacecraft, launch vehicles, or even launch location. Why in the
world would NASA pay to keep "missiles" in a launch silo in Florida?

some day ISS is going to desperately need some key cargo on short
noitice. having a few boosters ready to go could help prevent a
disaster

There will always be a resupply mission "in the pipeline" that could
launch on relatively short notice. Besides, anything that crops up
that's too dangerous and the crew can abandon ISS. Remember that there
are always enough Soyuz spacecraft docked to ISS to evacuate it
completely.

Your "missiles in silos" suggestion makes no sense in today's world.

Jeff
--
"the perennial claim that hypersonic airbreathing propulsion would
magically make space launch cheaper is nonsense -- LOX is much cheaper
than advanced airbreathing engines, and so are the tanks to put it in
and the extra thrust to carry it." - Henry Spencer