You mean Sea Ceptor?
My apologies @shadow99 . You are indeed correct. The new fact sheet clearly refers to RAM, which is a big change, IMHO. It does appear that maybe the structure holding the VLS cells is larger, leading to the conclusion there could be as many as 12 ExLS cells now, which would suggest 48 quad-packed missiles, either RAM or Sea Ceptor.
It would appear that the Block 2 version of RAM can indeed be fired vertically:
I've been following a similar discussion on a Canadian forum, and the general feeling is this is a late breaking decision influenced heavily by the Houthi drone attacks in the Red Sea and Golf of Yemen. RAM rounds are apparently cheaper than Sea Ceptor, and can be reloaded at sea. By substituting two MK 49 GMLS launchers for the six ExLS cells, you increase your missile count from 24 to 42, and could carry extra rounds onboard thus negating the requirement to return to port to reload. All supposition of course, but I also wondered why Canada chose Sea Ceptor for the CIADS role, when Sea Ceptor was more akin to ESSM. In any case, the good news is this program is now officially moving.
Apparently, in a townhall meeting, Admiral Topshee stated he had challenged the design teams to find a way to incorporate 48 Mk 41 cells, without sacrificing hangar or mission bay space. The challenge, supposedly, is weight. The SPY 7 is heavy, and high up, so ways to save weight are being looked at to try and accommodate the Admiral's wishes. There is that one rendering showing a hollowed out mast (attached) that might be influenced by that request. This will probably only show up in the Flight 2 designs, which are likely many years away, but good to hear that there is a recognition that more VLS are needed.
Thanks, hadn’t seen that, and given the missile’s aerodynamic approach it must have been an interesting challenge to make it work. So far as I can ascertain none have actually been fitted as yet. Possibly because it would give away one of RAM’s great advantages - as noted above that it can be reloaded at sea. Something which despite various attempts, nobody has succeeded in doing in a sustainable way with VLS systems. And magazine depth is certainly a consideration!
Its not # of VLS we are talking about here. We're using it as a short form for how deep is the magazine for the tasks you want to do. If you want pure VLS numbers then the T26 wins with 48 CAMM VLS plus the 12 extra Strike Length Mk41's. But each of those CAMM launchers are single missiles.
The Mk41 configuration will be 24 cells. There will also be ExLS launchers for CAMM. Ship class names have never been aggressive. Current frigates are named after Canadian cities, hence “city class”. The previous 4 destroyers were named after native Canadian tribes, hence “tribal class”. The River class will be named after major Canadian rivers (way more than 15 of them) in case we need more ships in this class. The RCN is now calling the CSC destroyer.
Probably no different than calling the Tribal's Destroyers, the new ships probably have more in common with them than the Halifax's, especially in their original configuration.