Canadian Surface Combatant RFQ

[SeaKingTacco]

I am pretty certain that CAMM is off the table because it is too hard to integrate with AEGIS- hence RAM, which already is.

 

[Rainbow1910]

Has it been confirmed that the launchers will in fact be the 2 X 21 cell unit? This guy seems to think the ExLS will be used for RAM Missiles. As he points out, why would Canada do this? I hope he is wrong.

“Canada's RIVER-class variant of the Type 26 is reportedly (as of latest official data as published) going to have RAM Block 2 instead of CAMM missiles (despite entering a contract with MBDA for CAMM earlier), but not from a traditional RAM above-deck launcher, but from ExLS cells.”

“How do you put RAM Bk 2, a hot-launch missile, into ExLS cells, however? Well, a LM ExLS presentation does give us an answer: you integrate an exhaust vent directly into the missile canister, since the launcher does not have it. You can see it although image quality is atrocious.”

“It's very hard to tell from this low quality pic but seems fair to say RAM Bk2 in ExLS will not give you 4 missiles per cell like CAMM. It looks more like 2 missiles, with rest of the space eaten up by vents...? I'm not sure Canada will really want to deal with this, honestly.”

https://twitter.com/x/status/1864402400611610676

There has been no confirmation officially but the scuttlebutt I've heard points to a pair of 21 cell launchers that will be fitted in the areas where the British and Australians have their Phalanx mounts, take a liberal dose of salt with that though.

It makes no sense to continue using ExLS without CAMM considering the entire point of ExLS is that it is a lightweight cell that can fire soft launch missiles like CAMM in a low footprint system. RAM Block II has seemingly never actually been tested in a vertically launched configuration and even if it is possible, it is incredibly sub-optimal and a very poor use of weight/space.

ExLS is almost certainly departing alongside CAMM, with RAM coming back into the design again.

 

[Cloud Cover]

There has been no confirmation officially but the scuttlebutt I've heard points to a pair of 21 cell launchers that will be fitted in the areas where the British and Australians have their Phalanx mounts, take a liberal dose of salt with that though.

It makes no sense to continue using ExLS without CAMM considering the entire point of ExLS is that it is a lightweight cell that can fire soft launch missiles like CAMM in a low footprint system. RAM Block II has seemingly never actually been tested in a vertically launched configuration and even if it is possible, it is incredibly sub-optimal and a very poor use of weight/space.

ExLS is almost certainly departing alongside CAMM, with RAM coming back into the design again.

I hope you are correct. This configuration above seems like a nightmare.

 

[Lumber]

I am pretty certain that CAMM is off the table because it is too hard to integrate with AEGIS- hence RAM, which already is.

This is what is so frustrating about the whole AEGIS thing: EVERYTHING is hard to integrate with AEGIS. You know what CAN integrate with EVERYTHING? CMS 330.

 

[Rainbow1910]

This is what is so frustrating about the whole AEGIS thing: EVERYTHING is hard to integrate with AEGIS. You know what CAN integrate with EVERYTHING? CMS 330.

CMS-330 is aboard CSC, it’s a further development designated as CTI (Canadian Tactical Interface) that works as an interface with AEGIS to handle other systems aboard like ASW.

One of the big pushes lately for equipment that is already integrated is to save on integration time, effort and cost. That is important given the urgent need for these ships and the fact they are entering full rate production next year.

 

[Lumber]

CMS-330 is aboard CSC, it’s a further development designated as CTI (Canadian Tactical Interface) that works as an interface with AEGIS to handle other systems aboard like ASW.

One of the big pushes lately for equipment that is already integrated is to save on integration time, effort and cost. That is important given the urgent need for these ships and the fact they are entering full rate production next year.

Yes well, you know what was already integrate with CAMM? CMS 330 (see Te Kaha and Te Mana).

 

[DBNSG]

One of the big pushes lately for equipment that is already integrated is to save on integration time, effort and cost. That is important given the urgent need for these ships and the fact they are entering full rate production next year.

Could the Canadian procurement system be morphing into a good enough vs career years construct?
Dear God, won't someone think of the pensions.

 

[Nvlgzr]

Has it been confirmed that the launchers will in fact be the 2 X 21 cell unit? This guy seems to think the ExLS will be used for RAM Missiles. As he points out, why would Canada do this? I hope he is wrong.

“Canada's RIVER-class variant of the Type 26 is reportedly (as of latest official data as published) going to have RAM Block 2 instead of CAMM missiles (despite entering a contract with MBDA for CAMM earlier), but not from a traditional RAM above-deck launcher, but from ExLS cells.”

“How do you put RAM Bk 2, a hot-launch missile, into ExLS cells, however? Well, a LM ExLS presentation does give us an answer: you integrate an exhaust vent directly into the missile canister, since the launcher does not have it. You can see it although image quality is atrocious.”

“It's very hard to tell from this low quality pic but seems fair to say RAM Bk2 in ExLS will not give you 4 missiles per cell like CAMM. It looks more like 2 missiles, with rest of the space eaten up by vents...? I'm not sure Canada will really want to deal with this, honestly.”

https://twitter.com/x/status/1864402400611610676

ExLS has only been tested with CAMM, never with RAM. There hasn’t been a customer for ExLS and my uneducated guess is that we are going with established equipment for the first 3 hulls.

 

[Underway]

Has it been confirmed that the launchers will in fact be the 2 X 21 cell unit? This guy seems to think the ExLS will be used for RAM Missiles. As he points out, why would Canada do this? I hope he is wrong.

“Canada's RIVER-class variant of the Type 26 is reportedly (as of latest official data as published) going to have RAM Block 2 instead of CAMM missiles (despite entering a contract with MBDA for CAMM earlier), but not from a traditional RAM above-deck launcher, but from ExLS cells.”

“How do you put RAM Bk 2, a hot-launch missile, into ExLS cells, however? Well, a LM ExLS presentation does give us an answer: you integrate an exhaust vent directly into the missile canister, since the launcher does not have it. You can see it although image quality is atrocious.”

“It's very hard to tell from this low quality pic but seems fair to say RAM Bk2 in ExLS will not give you 4 missiles per cell like CAMM. It looks more like 2 missiles, with rest of the space eaten up by vents...? I'm not sure Canada will really want to deal with this, honestly.”

https://twitter.com/x/status/1864402400611610676

I can confirm that in the current plans for CSC the ExLS space is empty. Or at least doesn't have ExLS in it. Besides, ExLS hasn't been tested for RAM yet, as @Nvlgzr stated.

CAMM is integrated with CMS. However in order for CMS to do missile defence it needs to work through AEGIS, and then back to CMS, leading to latency in the solution. That latency, even if fractions of a second can create a miss (particularly with hypersonic or supersonic weapons), and that just can't happen. Also CAMM basically overlapping with ESSM doesn't completely make sense, especially now as ESSM 2 has an active seaker head (ESSM didn't when the bid was selected and CAMM did).

 

[Cloud Cover]

I can confirm that in the current plans for CSC the ExLS space is empty. Or at least doesn't have ExLS in it. Besides, ExLS hasn't been tested for RAM yet, as @Nvlgzr stated.

CAMM is integrated with CMS. However in order for CMS to do missile defence it needs to work through AEGIS, and then back to CMS, leading to latency in the solution. That latency, even if fractions of a second can create a miss (particularly with hypersonic or supersonic weapons), and that just can't happen. Also CAMM basically overlapping with ESSM doesn't completely make sense, especially now as ESSM 2 has an active seaker head (ESSM didn't when the bid was selected and CAMM did).

Thank you!

 

[Underway]

I can confirm that in the current plans for CSC the ExLS space is empty. Or at least doesn't have ExLS in it. Besides, ExLS hasn't been tested for RAM yet, as @Nvlgzr stated.

CAMM is integrated with CMS. However in order for CMS to do missile defence it needs to work through AEGIS, and then back to CMS, leading to latency in the solution. That latency, even if fractions of a second can create a miss (particularly with hypersonic or supersonic weapons), and that just can't happen. Also CAMM basically overlapping with ESSM doesn't completely make sense, especially now as ESSM 2 has an active seaker head (ESSM didn't when the bid was selected and CAMM did).

Can't edit my post now but I should be clear. CMS on the RIVER CLASS needs to work through AEGIS. CMS can do its own missile defense of course.

 

[NearingZenith]

I am pretty certain that CAMM is off the table because it is too hard to integrate with AEGIS- hence RAM, which already is.

CAMM is integrated with CMS. However in order for CMS to do missile defence it needs to work through AEGIS, and then back to CMS, leading to latency in the solution. That latency, even if fractions of a second can create a miss (particularly with hypersonic or supersonic weapons), and that just can't happen. Also CAMM basically overlapping with ESSM doesn't completely make sense, especially now as ESSM 2 has an active seaker head (ESSM didn't when the bid was selected and CAMM did).

Although I agree that since we already use ESSM going with RAM is a better choice than CAMM (more missiles, reloadable, RF and IR homing to provide an alternative to active radar ESSM and SM-2, ability to draw on USN stock in an emergency), I’m surprised it turns out to be so difficult to integrate CAMM directly into our Aegis implementation rather than having to go through the CTI/CMS-330. Saudi Arabia is already paying to have CAMM integrated with the COMBATSS-21 CMS which uses the Aegis Common Source Library as part of their Multi-Mission Surface Combatant. You’d think “Aegis Common Source” means it shouldn’t be much work to port that code to other Aegis combat systems in other ships. Figure 3 in the Maritime Engineering Journal article on the CSC’s Aegis even shows the Saudi FFG feeding into the Common Source Library to be shared with all other Aegis users.

 

[calculus]

Not exactly related to this thread, but interesting to see the specifications of the new German navy Type 127 "frigate". Pretty formidable. The only weakness I can see in the relatively short range (4000 nm), but that's probably adequate for the German Navy's mission. Of particular interest is the reference to CMS 330 - this is not the first time I have seen CMS 330 mentioned as relates to this class of ship. If the German Navy adopts SPY7, and also CMS 330 for the "non-Aegis" systems, that would create a larger installed base for both, which would be good news for long term support.

Germany formally approves Type F127 air-defense frigate program - Naval News

The German Bundestag has given its green light for the start of the Type F127 program. These 10,000 tons "frigates" are meant to...

www.navalnews.com

 

[Underway]

Not exactly related to this thread, but interesting to see the specifications of the new German navy Type 127 "frigate". Pretty formidable. The only weakness I can see in the relatively short range (4000 nm), but that's probably adequate for the German Navy's mission. Of particular interest is the reference to CMS 330 - this is not the first time I have seen CMS 330 mentioned as relates to this class of ship. If the German Navy adopts SPY7, and also CMS 330 for the "non-Aegis" systems, that would create a larger installed base for both, which would be good news for long term support.

Germany formally approves Type F127 air-defense frigate program - Naval News

The German Bundestag has given its green light for the start of the Type F127 program. These 10,000 tons "frigates" are meant to...

www.navalnews.com

They were talking about having an entirely separate radar system for the CMS 330 installed above the SPY to interface with CMS and non-Aegis integrated systems. I don't think they actually know what they are going to do yet. Given that though perhaps they are thinking of pushing the CMS / Aegis interface further than we are.

This is a weird and very German design. 10,000 tonnes, short range, very damage control heavy, independent zones that can fight separately, two different combat management systems, short range, tumblehome design bow, and those odd platforms everywhere.

 

[Lumber]

. That latency, even if fractions of a second can create a miss (particularly with hypersonic or supersonic weapons), and that just can't happen. Also CAMM basically overlapping with ESSM doesn't completely make sense, especially now as ESSM 2 has an active seaker head (ESSM didn't when the bid was selected and CAMM did).

Disagree that the latency would be an issue. We already deal with this same type of arrangement. The fire control radars first send their data to the CEROS console, who then sends their data to CMS, who then does threat evaluation and engagement planning, then sends a fire signal back to CEROS. AEGIS would just take the place of CEROS in this scenario.

 

[Underway]

Disagree that the latency would be an issue. We already deal with this same type of arrangement. The fire control radars first send their data to the CEROS console, who then sends their data to CMS, who then does threat evaluation and engagement planning, then sends a fire signal back to CEROS. AEGIS would just take the place of CEROS in this scenario.

I don't know the details, nor could I talk about it if I did. That's what I was told. Perhaps its risk and cost associated with trying to get CMS working with Aegis.