ICBM silos

[Apurva Kawthalkar]

We would love to have some missile launch bases which are underground and have architecture similar to that of a missile silo with retracting silo doors n all 

[AlmostNASA]

Well, there is a mod that has a silo, here.

I think it does. I find it in my parts list.

 

[Wjolcz]

More launch sites would be nice to have, but ICBM silos? Not a fan.

[Dizzle]

49 minutes ago, Veeltch said:

More launch sites would be nice to have, but ICBM silos? Not a fan.

This. I'd love to see more launch sites, or at least runways, but I'd rather not have any hint of military or weapons in the stock game.

[razark]

1 hour ago, Dizzle said:

I'd rather not have any hint of military or weapons

The only difference between a missile and a rocket is where the guidance system sends it.

[Mikki]

2 hours ago, Apurva Kawthalkar said:

We would love to have some missile launch bases which are underground and have architecture similar to that of a missile silo with retracting silo doors n all 

.. Hi there, it`s not a silo but a ICBM fits nicely on it:
(Shameless plug)  http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/index.php?/topic/146294-kemaz-mobile-launcher-vals-dad-icbm-vehicle/

[Choctofliatrio2.0]

...Why? More launch sites would be cool, but I don't think a silo would be very useful. If only because of the space constraints.

[Nothalogh]

8 hours ago, Dizzle said:

I'd rather not have any hint of military or weapons in the stock game.

No worries, they're not ICBM silos, they're vandal resistant all weather rapid response launch sites

[Vanamonde]

This will not be a stock thing. Squad has said that weapons and fighting do not go with their concept of the game. 

[Apurva Kawthalkar]

17 hours ago, Choctofliatrio2.0 said:

...Why? More launch sites would be cool, but I don't think a silo would be very useful. If only because of the space constraints.

Yes buddy, of crouse we would have size constraints but that's the point. ICBMs are not as massive as launch vehicles so we need to make and launch missiles that are in those constraints    

Just now, Apurva Kawthalkar said:

Yes buddy, of crouse we would have size constraints but that's the point. ICBMs are not as massive as launch vehicles so we need to make and launch missiles that are in those constraints    

also I checked your youtube channel

[pandaman]

Silos? That's a big no from me.  I don't see what could be gained by having a buried launchpad rather than one on the surface.

Additional runways and landing areas in other locations would be ok, but I'm not convinced of the value of additional launch sites.

[Rath]

I do want more launch sites, but maybe not silos.  I want to launch out of them, but I dont like the possible implications.  

Silos and that runway that was build as just a very long corridor inside a mountain with a door so it could survive a nuke fit in the same category.  Sounds very fun to use, but makes no sense with SQUAD not adding weapons.  Gets a bit too close to that.

On 10/1/2016 at 5:53 AM, pandaman said:

Silos? That's a big no from me.  I don't see what could be gained by having a buried launchpad rather than one on the surface.

Additional runways and landing areas in other locations would be ok, but I'm not convinced of the value of additional launch sites.

What can be gained is only military.  Thats why they shouldn't be added.

[Codraroll]

1 hour ago, Rath said:

What can be gained is only military.  Thats why they shouldn't be added.

Well, I can see silos working for one other reason: They could be placed anywhere, with no changes to the terrain. They're meant to clip through terrain, so it doesn't matter if they do. All you need is a function to remove terrain scatter in the immediate radius around the silo. From a technical standpoint, they would be very easy to place wherever they are needed.

Also, for radiation shielding purposes, it's more feasible to build real-life off-planet cities underground than above the surface. That means that launch silos could be a relevant, yet peaceful element of planetary bases. With an underground (or in-silo) vehicle assembly apparatus, you could launch rockets directly from your Mun, Minus or wherever base. The inherent size constraint would just be a neat gameplay feature.

There's no reason to build missile silos on Kerbin, but they could be a very integral part of off-planet bases. Although, Kerbals don't need to worry about radiation, and the bases would look quite boring, so I'd rather have launchpads and buildings on the surface.

[klgraham1013]

On 9/30/2016 at 4:53 PM, pandaman said:

...but I'm not convinced of the value of additional launch sites.

The value is the same as the value in real life.  Launching into different inclinations can have advantages or disadvantages depending on what your trying to do.

Someone smarter than me can probably explain it better.

Edited October 2, 2016 by klgraham1013

[pandaman]

57 minutes ago, klgraham1013 said:

The value is the same as the value in real life.  Launching into different inclinations can have advantages or disadvantages depending on what your trying to do.

That  makes sense, I forgot about that, thanks. 

4 hours ago, Codraroll said:

Well, I can see silos working for one other reason: They could be placed anywhere, with no changes to the terrain. They're meant to clip through terrain, so it doesn't matter if they do. All you need is a function to remove terrain scatter in the immediate radius around the silo. From a technical standpoint, they would be very easy to place wherever they are needed.

True, but a normal launchpad like at KSC could be used just as easily without the obvious military implications.

[322997am]

I think that for a launch site, we really need a ditch left of the runway if taking off from sph. I could always bring up this:

http://i.imgur.com/sJ6leil.jpg

http://i.imgur.com/sJ6leil.jpg 

If a plane needs to land in water, it can do so.

Edited October 2, 2016 by 322997am

[SpannerMonkey(smce)]

5 hours ago, Codraroll said:

Well, I can see silos working for one other reason: They could be placed anywhere, with no changes to the terrain. They're meant to clip through terrain, so it doesn't matter if they do. All you need is a function to remove terrain scatter in the immediate radius around the silo. From a technical standpoint, they would be very easy to place wherever they are needed.

As we've now established many  times over that silo's will never be a stock thing, here's the reality of mods and silos

They can't  clip through terrain in anyway apart from decoratively  and are very difficult to place, If it was clipped through the terrain the ship would also be clipped through the terrain and as such is just an explosion yet to be triggered. 

Placing them is a matter of finding terrain of exactly the right shape to fit the model, which at this time in the game has no option other than to be a KerbalKonstructs run static, not to say it's static because it's not, The terrain basically need to be a bowl with a depression that is deep enough to accommodate the actual tube part of the silo while having enough elevation in the sides of the bowl for the model to blend in seamlessly, or as close as can be managed or more likely can be deemed acceptable. then there's the size issue, the bigger you make the silo the harder it is to place , making it less and less useful.   That said there once was a mod for this and here it is alive once more in 1.2

Spoiler

 

[Jonfliesgoats]

I generally like the idea of more customization regarding launch, research and other infrastructure.

[Tortoise]

Why not just do what I did?

 

[RandyRawgust]

I agree that I do NOT want anything militaristic added into stock. Although, I really wish someone could get something like this going again. 

 

[Nothalogh]

On 9/29/2016 at 11:42 PM, Vanamonde said:

This will not be a stock thing. Squad has said that weapons and fighting do not go with their concept of the game. 

This is asinine logic, the first ICBMs were launched from pads

[Red Iron Crown]

On 11/11/2016 at 8:10 PM, Nothalogh said:

This is asinine logic, the first ICBMs were launched from pads

Logic sounds legit to me. How many non-weaponized rockets were launched from silos?

[Firemetal]

On 9/29/2016 at 11:42 PM, Vanamonde said:

This will not be a stock thing. Squad has said that weapons and fighting do not go with their concept of the game. 

I agree 100%. It is Kerbal space program, not Kerbal War program.

Fire

[razark]

22 hours ago, Red Iron Crown said:

How many non-weaponized rockets were launched from silos?

How many things can be/are done in KSP that were never done in real life, though?

I agree about the lack of usefulness of doing it in reality, but KSP has rarely been about copying the real, and more about asking "Can we do this?" rather than "Should we do this?".

 

Edit:
Please, tell me with a straight face that this isn't "Kerbal":

 

Edited November 15, 2016 by razark

[kerbiloid]

23 hours ago, Red Iron Crown said:

How many non-weaponized rockets were launched from silos?

29 Jul 2009, Baikonur. SS-18 utilization, payload: DubaiSat-1, Daemos-1, UK-DMS-2, NanoSat-1B», UpriseSat-3,  UpriseSat-4.

Spoiler

 

 

Converted SS-18 as LV "Dnepr"

Spoiler

 

P.S.
As it's hard to driull into Kerbin, there could be not just SILOs, but rocket hills. Like Kerbal Konstructs artificial hill with a launch hole inside.