CSC Weapon Systems

[Ex-Dragoon]

I know I should take whatever CASR says with a grain of salt however there is an article regarding using the Absalon class as our new AAD variant. While I do believe the Absalon has been discussed as a contender here before, something in the article made me take notice. The author of the article states

[5] In the artwork at the top of the page, Mk 41 VLS of the type now used on Iroquois class destroyers is shown. This would allow SM-2 missiles to be fired. However, the RCN states a preference to standardize on the ESSMs. In that case, the Mk 48 VLS from the Ivar Huitfeldt class. As it happens, that is the same vertical launch system used on Halifax class frigates

.

So does this mean the RCN is getting rid of the Standard and variants? So far this is the first I have heard of us completely going to ESSM to meet all of our AD needs.

Article link below.
http://www.casr.ca/mp-dorschner-rcn-absalon-ddh.htm

 

[AlexanderM]

I believe the Ivar has 32 cell mk 41 vls, plus 48 ESSM in the mk 48 vls, going by memory.  I think I read somewhere that the SM2 is being discontinued in favor of the SM6 and then there is the SM3 for balistic missle defence.  If we go with the Ivar, which would be a great choice, we will have a mix of vls launchers.

Nope, its the mk 41 and mk 56 launchers.

 

[Cdn Blackshirt]

CSC seems like a very expensive platform to not have a longer-ranged missile system than ESSM.  ???

 

[Oldgateboatdriver]

Actually, the Ivar Huitfled have the SM's in Mk 41 and the ESSM's in Mk 56.

The best for flex is the Mk 41, or the more advanced Mk 57 developed for the Zumwalt. Either one of these systems lets you load either SM's in single cell or ESSM's in quad packs per cell.

My understanding was that the Mk 41 was the preferred choice for CSC. Don't know where CASR got the info that the Navy prefers the Mk 48. However, there is a lot of speculation and day dreaming in the various pages of CASR (especially in their infamous "a modest proposal" formats.

 

[Ex-Dragoon]

CSC seems like a very expensive platform to not have a longer-ranged missile system than ESSM.  ???

Agree completely Matthew.