Lockheed Extensible Launching System

[A51dude]

I tried searching, but wasn't able to find out if this was discussed before. And if this topic is in the wrong forum, could it be moved to the correct one, please?

Anyway, I'm curious about Lockheed's Extensible Launching System for the Mk.41 VLS.
Extensible Launching System
What caught my eye is that a pic shows that NULKA decoys as well as RAM (Rolling Airframe Missiles) could be quad packed in a VLS cell for launch.
Has the US Navy fitted this system on any of it's ships currently or not?
Does the US Navy plan to launch NULKA and RAM this way or do they still prefer the old style swivel/rotating launcher for the RAM and the tall angled launcher for NULKA decoys?

 

[kqcke for you]

Anyway, I'm curious about Lockheed's Extensible Launching System for the Mk.41 VLS.
Extensible Launching System
What caught my eye is that a pic shows that NULKA decoys as well as RAM (Rolling Airframe Missiles) could be quad packed in a VLS cell for launch.

Yes it could be tought except for CAMM nothing else was tested (atleast with they never said anything about it)

Has the US Navy fitted this system on any of it's ships currently or not?

Not that we know of. As far as we can tell nobody has this system installed and even canadia has chosen to switch from CAMM to RAM and too the Mk.49 Launcher.

Does the US Navy plan to launch NULKA and RAM this way or

Not that we know off.

do they still prefer the old style swivel/rotating launcher for the RAM and the tall angled launcher for NULKA decoys?

Yes. The reason is actualy quite simple.
Both system can be mounted with ease on any ship that needs them. They also don't Take any large internal space away and also would have some more performance with RAM as we don't have to make the turn from vertical to the direction the enemy missile (or else) comes from.

 

[TomS]

We've talked about it a bunch under the shorthand ExLS. But not in a dedicated thread.

I'll note that there are two versions of ExLS -- "host" ExLS that fits a quad launcher inside a Mk41 cell or "3-cell" ExLS that fits three of the host type quad packs inside a dedicated launcher. As far as I know, host ExLS has not generated much interest, but there may be some international customers for 3-cell ExLS, probably around the CAMM/Sea Ceptor missile rather than RAM or Nulka.

For now, the USN seems uninterested in either version of ExLS and appears content to keep RAM on trainable launchers and Nulka in angled launchers piggybacking off SRBOC.

 

[TomS]

Yes it could be tought except for CAMM nothing else was tested (atleast with they never said anything about it)

Nulka was tested out of the host ExLS configuration nearly 15 years ago.

Lockheed Martin Successfully Demos Extensible Launching System (ExLS) for Nulka Offboard Countermeasure

 

[kqcke for you]

Nulka was tested out of the host ExLS configuration nearly 15 years ago.

Lockheed Martin Successfully Demos Extensible Launching System (ExLS) for Nulka Offboard Countermeasure

Okay tought there still missing RAM.

 

[kqcke for you]

Yes it could be tought except for CAMM nothing else was tested (atleast with they never said anything about it)

Thanks to TomS for correcting me so both CAMM and Nulka we're tested.

Not that we know of. As far as we can tell nobody has this system installed and even canadia has chosen to switch from CAMM to RAM and too the Mk.49 Launcher.

There also Sweden who wants to use it with CAMM. Tought its seams like Saudi also uses it on the MMSC.

 

[TomS]

Thanks to TomS for correcting me so both CAMM and Nulka we're tested.

There also Sweden who wants to use it with CAMM. Tought its seams like Saudi also uses it on the MMSC.

Poland seems to be getting the host version to put CAMM in the Mk 41 on its new frigates.

 

[olek_z17]

I wonder, does the CAMM-ER fit into the ExLS? LM seems to be using its render in their brochures, but labels it as just "CAMM", and from the actual photos I've seen, the regular CAMM is just about as long as the Standalone ExLS cell. I suspect that if it doesn't fit, then making the VLS module longer shouldn't be difficult at all, but I'm curious if there is any official confirmation that using the CAMM-ER with the ExLS is possible.

 

[Titus K]

Does anyone know where to find the dimensions and mass of an empty 3-CELL ExLS ?

 

[olek_z17]

Does anyone know where to find the dimensions and mass of an empty 3-CELL ExLS ?

I don't think this info is available anywhere, though since the Standalone ExLS is essentially an extra short 3 cell Mk41 module without the exhaust management system, the "horizontal" dimenstions are probably around 2.6 by 1.25-1.3 meters (more less what you get by multiplying Mk41's length by 3/4 and width by 1/2). As for depth, from my post above you can see that the CAMM launch canister is above as high as the Standalone ExLS itself, so I'd say the depth is not more than 3.5 meters (CAMM is 3.2 meters long, so its launch canister should be 3.4 as that's the difference between the length of the CAMM-ER and its launch canister, both of which are known).

 

[Titus K]

I wonder, does the CAMM-ER fit into the ExLS?

I don't know how i missed your message right above mine, but this is litteraly what i was wondering aswell haha.

i just found this mbda brochure on CAMM from 2021 that seems to indicate that CAMM-ER will only be compatible with Mk41 and not ExLS.

https://www.mbda-systems.com/sites/mbda/files/2024-07/CAMM%20family%20brochure%20-%20WEB.pdf

LAUNCHERS

MBDA recognises that allocating space and weight for launchers is a significant challenge for ship design, and CAMM was developed with that in mind. Each missile is self-contained within its launch canister and can be quad-packed into an area of less than 1m2 of deck space. MBDA has partnered with Lockheed Martin RMS to integrate CAMM into the Mk41 family of launchers. As part of this development, a new compact launcher called the Extensible Launcher System (ExLS) standalone has been produced and now, for the first time, enables smaller ships such as Fast Attack or Patrol Craft to host a highly credible air defence capability. The ExLS launcher can host up to 12 CAMM munitions, and provides all the benefits of the Mk41 VLS launcher in a more compact package. New-build and ship upgrade programmes which already have Mk41 VLS launchers specified can integrate CAMM now and CAMM-ER in the immediate future.

Btw, CAMM-ER is even longer then i thought at 4.2m in length, so definitely not compatible with ExLS ... or is 4.2 the canister length ? They seem to say it's the missile.

 

[olek_z17]

i just found this mbda brochure on CAMM from 2021 that seems to indicate that CAMM-ER will only be compatible with Mk41 and not ExLS.

Yeah, this unfortunately seems to indicate it. Wonder how hard would it be to "stretch" the Standalone ExLS so that it can accommodate the CAMM-ER. Because without it it's a bit useless IMO, especially for newly built ships.