Sea Ceptor - CAMM Sea Wolf replacement

[TomS]

I know, I kinda get that point. Though I really don't think they're in such a hurry to buy the VL MICA, even if they're gonna give it to Ukraine in a couple of years (because there is no way they'll choose the VL MICA as their main SHORAD system).

Possibly it's as simple as VL MICA having better delivery timelines/more availability. A system they can buy and get delivered now beats a better one they have to stand in line for behind several other customers.

 

[Big_Zukini]

Possibly it's as simple as VL MICA having better delivery timelines/more availability. A system they can buy and get delivered now beats a better one they have to stand in line for behind several other customers.

The Danish procurement smells a lot like it's timeline driven, and regards capability and cost less significant.

 

[zen]

Definitely.
Get something ASAP and sort out the mess when things be more secure.

 

[NMaude]

The Danish procurement smells a lot like it's timeline driven, and regards capability and cost less significant.

Definitely.
Get something ASAP and sort out the mess when things be more secure.

Wartime footing?

 

[Big_Zukini]

Wartime footing?

Even just regular footing will suffice against hybrid threats. Good for Denmark.

That or it's preparing to take Ireland.

 

[TomS]

So does this mean we are getting the long-claimed, never demonstrated quadpack CAMM in Sylver?

 

[MadRat]

If Aster 30 isn't antiship, maybe they should look at Mk56 and ESSM in a stanflex.

 

[Mallard]

If Aster 30 isn't antiship, maybe they should look at Mk56 and ESSM in a stanflex.

None of the proposed designs used Stanflex, it’s a dead end anyway

 

[Mallard]

So does this mean we are getting the long-claimed, never demonstrated quadpack CAMM in Sylver?

I’ve seen 2 different concepts from France recently, a dedicated 24 cell CAMm launcher, and triple packed CAMm, but quad won’t fit in sylver

 

[MadRat]

CAMM, Crotale, and MICA fit in Sylver 35. Aster 15 and CAMM-ER fits in Sylver 43. Its kind of tragic that Sylver 50, with its wider design for Aster 30, doesn't allow twin or triple packs. Seems like Sylver 70 allows quad CAMM or dual CAMM-ER from what is said on the net.

 

[Mallard]

CAMM, Crotale, and MICA fit in Sylver 35. Aster 15 and CAMM-ER fits in Sylver 43. Its kind of tragic that Sylver 50, with its wider design for Aster 30, doesn't allow twin or triple packs. Seems like Sylver 70 allows quad CAMM or dual CAMM-ER from what is said on the net.

I’d argue CAMm hasn’t been fitted into any slyver thus far, unlike Mk41. Depends on the delivery timeline but I don’t think we’ll be seeing that anytime soon

 

[zen]

A private sector offer to prove CAMM multiple packing into Sylver could swing even the UK at this point.
Though IP details may be the real issue lurking behind the lack of this upto this point.

 

[Mallard]

A private sector offer to prove CAMM multiple packing into Sylver could swing even the UK at this point.
Though IP details may be the real issue lurking behind the lack of this upto this point.

I doubt it, we’ve already ordered mk41 for T26 and plan it for future escorts.

Also contracting a study for Aster in Mk41

 

[TomS]

I’ve seen 2 different concepts from France recently, a dedicated 24 cell CAMm launcher, and triple packed CAMm, but quad won’t fit in sylver

Can you post pics somewhere?

A dedicated 24-cell CAMM launcher that fits in the footprint of a Sylver would make a ton of sense, though it would [not] have the flexibility of Mk 41.

 

[Mallard]

Can you post pics somewhere?

A dedicated 24-cell CAMM launcher that fits in the footprint of a Sylver would make a ton of sense, though it would have the flexibility of Mk 41.

I mean it’s be good for exports but would continue the issue of European naval missiles requiring a specific launcher ala A70 for MDCN only and so on.

2 different stories I’ve seen on it, I figure one or the other will come to fruition as both aren’t really nessecary.

Tripack

https://meta-defense.fr/en/2025/12/15/Silver-A50-FDI-Camm-Tripack-Power/

Dedicated launcher

Reddit - The heart of the internet

www.reddit.com

 

[zen]

I doubt it, we’ve already ordered mk41 for T26 and plan it for future escorts.

Also contracting a study for Aster in Mk41

Funding MBDA to "put up or shut up" on Aster compatibility with Mk41 is a sign there is scope for NG to turn this situation around.
As surely as it could also end up with only Type 45 using Aster and FADS moving over to alternative effectors.

Upto recently, compatibility with the USN and expectation of no major political interference on such systems was a given. That's changed.

NG proves CAMM integration to Sylver and if French politicians keep out of the deal then they can potentially win the RN back.

 

[Mallard]

Funding MBDA to "put up or shut up" on Aster compatibility with Mk41 is a sign there is scope for NG to turn this situation around.
As surely as it could also end up with only Type 45 using Aster and FADS moving over to alternative effectors.

Upto recently, compatibility with the USN and expectation of no major political interference on such systems was a given. That's changed.

NG proves CAMM integration to Sylver and if French politicians keep out of the deal then they can potentially win the RN back.

Aster in Mk41 is intended for the T83 program.

NG proves nothing as it doesn’t exist and won’t for many years, how can we base a design off of that.

Also as it stands Sylver is the minority system and there is little sign of that changing, a major partner wants to leave and everyone else is either making their own or getting Mk41.

Hell as it stands none of the Stratus variants will even be intergrated with Sylver whether because its customers don’t want to or it is physically impossible.

 

[zen]

NG Naval Group.
Owns the IP on Sylver silo system.

 

[Mallard]

NG Naval Group.
Owns the IP on Sylver silo system.

Understood. Though A70NG is relevant to the discussion as with Mk41 we can put an Aster, CAMm or strike missile in any cell, while with Sylver we currently have to install a completely different cell for those capabilities, besides the excessive amount of space it takes up

 

[MadRat]

Crotale VT1 is supposed to fit a four pack in the Sylver 50, but did not find confirmation.

 

[Titus K]

So does this mean we are getting the long-claimed, never demonstrated quadpack CAMM in Sylver?

No you will not ...
Naval Group is developping a dedicated "CL" launcher for 24 CAMM or CAMM-ER missiles, with the same footprint as a 8 cell Sylver launcher. An FDI could feature :

• 24 Aster B1NT + 24 CAMM-ER + 8 AShM
• 16 Aster B1NT + 24 CAMM-ER + 24 CAMM + 8 AShM

If Aster 30 isn't antiship, maybe they should look at Mk56 and ESSM in a stanflex.

The FDI has 8 anti-ship missiles, Exocet for France and Greece, NSM was offered for Norway, RBS-15 is offered for Sweden.
Stratus RS (and maybe LO) will also be available in the future.

I’ve seen 2 different concepts from France recently, a dedicated 24 cell CAMm launcher, and triple packed CAMm, but quad won’t fit in sylver

Never heard of a "triple pack CAMM".

Seems like Sylver 70 allows quad CAMM or dual CAMM-ER from what is said on the net.

For now Sylver A70 only allows MdCN. We've heard rumours about a project "A70NG" but nothing concrete.

I doubt it, we’ve already ordered mk41 for T26 and plan it for future escorts.

Also contracting a study for Aster in Mk41

As far as I recall, the Mk41 VLS on the Type 26 are intended to carry only the Stratus missiles, not CAMM.
For CAMM, the available options are ExLS or the “mushroom farm”, and these are not particularly versatile launchers either.

A dedicated 24-cell CAMM launcher that fits in the footprint of a Sylver would make a ton of sense, though it would have the flexibility of Mk 41.

Yes, it’s great news.
I don’t really see the lack of flexibility as a deal-breaker ... sure, it would be nice to have, but navies rarely overhaul their loadouts entirely. How often have europeans navies with Mk41 changed their loadouts for example ?

And if needed, you can always swap out the launcher during a mid-life upgrade. Sure it's more expensive but at least the footprint is the same.

Crotale VT1 is supposed to fit a four pack in the Sylver 50, but did not find confirmation.

The Crotale VT1 production line closed 10 years ago ...

 

[Mallard]

No you will not ...
Naval Group is developping a dedicated "CL" launcher for 24 CAMM or CAMM-ER missiles, with the same footprint as a 8 cell Sylver launcher. An FDI could feature :

• 24 Aster B1NT + 24 CAMM-ER + 8 AShM
• 16 Aster B1NT + 24 CAMM-ER + 24 CAMM + 8 AShM

The FDI has 8 anti-ship missiles, Exocet for France and Greece, NSM was offered for Norway, RBS-15 is offered for Sweden.
Stratus RS (and maybe LO) will also be available in the future.


Never heard of a "triple pack CAMM".


For now Sylver A70 only allows MdCN. We've heard rumours about a project "A70NG" but nothing concrete.


As far as I recall, the Mk41 VLS on the Type 26 are intended to carry only the Stratus missiles, not CAMM.
For CAMM, the available options are ExLS or the “mushroom farm”, and these are not particularly versatile launchers either.


Yes it's great news.


The Crotale VT1 production line closed 10 years ago ...

CAMm can fit in Mk41 though so they could put more CAMm on T26 but most likely will be for strike weapons.

Also article on tri pack Sylver

https://meta-defense.fr/en/2025/12/15/Silver-A50-FDI-Camm-Tripack-Power/

 

[Titus K]

CAMm can fit in Mk41 though so they could put more CAMm on T26 but most likely will be for strike weapons.

Why does the Type 26 use dedicated CAMM launchers (ExLS or the “mushroom farm,” I don’t recall which), if Mk 41 can theoretically do everything?
Maybe it’s not that simple, "can fit in" and integrating aren’t the same thing, and CAMM still isn’t integrated into Mk 41.

Also article on tri pack Sylver

meta-defense is not a serious website. Never heard of a tri-pack sylver.

 

[Mallard]

Why does the Type 26 use dedicated CAMM launchers (ExLS or the “mushroom farm,” I don’t recall which), if Mk 41 can theoretically do everything?
Maybe it’s not that simple, "can fit in" and integrating aren’t the same thing, and CAMM still isn’t integrated into Mk 41.

meta-defense is not a serious website. Never heard of a tri-pack sylver.

Because there isn’t any more room for Mk41 cells and we need those cells for doing strike anyway.

We’re not going to keep using mushroom farm on future designs.

A tri pack Sylver is a far better idea than a dedicated CAMm cell block, would actually make it a multi purpose system rather than just launching aster

 

[Titus K]

Because there isn’t any more room for Mk41 cells and we need those cells for doing strike anyway.

Couldn't fit 1 more Mk41 launcher, for 32 cells total, on a 150m/8000t frigate ? Come on.

We’re not going to keep using mushroom farm on future designs.

I think babcock is offering Sweden a mix of ExLS for CAMM and Sylver for Aster in there AH120 proposal ...


Anyway we're off topic, i'll stop here. Or let's open a VLS Thread.
Personally, I think the NG proposal to Sweden is very attractive.

 

[Mallard]

Couldn't fit 1 more Mk41 launcher, for 32 cells total, on a 150m/8000t frigate ? Come on.


I think babcock is offering sweden a mix of ExLS for CAMM and Sylver for Aster in there AH120 proposal ...

Yes? Mk41 is a far better system them Sylver, and with the mushroom farms the T26 has the equivalent of 36 large VLS.

Because Sweden is already using Exls and they want Aster which is currently just in Sylver

 

[timmymagic]

Can you post pics somewhere?

A dedicated 24-cell CAMM launcher that fits in the footprint of a Sylver would make a ton of sense, though it would have the flexibility of Mk 41.

Don't understand everyones desire to fill perfectly good, very expensive, hot launch cells with a missile that is Soft, Cold vertically launched from its canister....either for Sylver or Mk.41....makes sense for ESSM in Mk.41 as its hot launched...and the US has an abundance of strike length.

Given that no-one has so far bought ExLS as an insert to Mk.41.....or bothered to try and fit multiples of CAMM in Sylver I suspect Navies agree with me....

 

[TomS]

Don't understand everyones desire to fill perfectly good, very expensive, hot launch cells with a missile that is Soft, Cold vertically launched from its canister....either for Sylver or Mk.41....makes sense for ESSM in Mk.41 as its hot launched...and the US has an abundance of strike length.

Given that no-one has so far bought ExLS as an insert to Mk.41.....or bothered to try and fit multiples of CAMM in Sylver I suspect Navies agree with me....

Poland seems to have bit on ExLS but we won't know for sure until their new frigates actually get built.

 

[olek_z17]

2 different stories I’ve seen on it, I figure one or the other will come to fruition as both aren’t really nessecary.

Tripack
https://meta-defense.fr/en/2025/12/15/Silver-A50-FDI-Camm-Tripack-Power/
Dedicated launcher

Reddit - The heart of the internet

www.reddit.com

That Meta Defence article is haunting me, I've seen it on three separate occasions today…
I don't know who came up with that "three pack" concept, but I'd recommend that they read a Wikipedia article about square packing.
There is no space inside of the Sylver A43 or A50 cell for a CAMM or CAMM-ER quadpack, it's just physically impossible. Both CAMM and CAMM-ER launch containers are 275 × 275 mm, so stacking that into a square gives us 550 × 550 mm. Both Sylver A43 and A50 are 560 × 560 mm if I recall, so there is practically no space for a quadpack adapter.
So that leaves us with two options if we wanna fit into a Sylver footprint with 24 CAMMs/-ERs - either go for 6 larger cells with quadpacks, which would honestly make no sense as this would be a proprietary CAMM launcher anyway, so why bother with multipacking, or go for individual launch containers fitter tightly together, probably in 4 rows of 6.

 

[Titus K]

That Meta Defence article is haunting me

Why ? He's a rando who makes shit up. Just ignore.

I don't know who came up with that "three pack" concept

He came up up with it, it's as simple as that.
the worst thing is that he publishes in every possible language

So that leaves us with two options if we wanna fit into a Sylver footprint with 24 CAMMs/-ERs - either go for 6 larger cells with quadpacks, which would honestly make no sense as this would be a proprietary CAMM launcher anyway, so why bother with multipacking, or go for individual launch containers fitter tightly together, probably in 4 rows of 6.

My bet is on 24 individual cells of CAMM-ER length. I agree, why bother with multipacking.
The only thing we know for now is that the 24 cell "CL" launcher has the exact same footprint as an 8 cell Sylver launcher.

 

[olek_z17]

He came up up with it, it's as simple as that.
the worst thing is that he publishes in every possible language

That's exactly why, I absolutely despise lazy journalism like that, having to correct such obvious mistakes over and over again is just annoying.
But back to the point, I wonder why it's going to be just 24 missiles. I get trying to fulfill the Swedish requirements, but why not go above that? The dimensions allow them to go for at least 40 missiles per launcher, so why just 24?

 

[Scott Kenny]

That's exactly why, I absolutely despise lazy journalism like that, having to correct such obvious mistakes over and over again is just annoying.
But back to the point, I wonder why it's going to be just 24 missiles. I get trying to fulfill the Swedish requirements, but why not go above that? The dimensions allow them to go for at least 40 missiles per launcher, so why just 24?

Possibly internal armoring, or thicker structure between cells at the very least.

 

[olek_z17]

Possibly internal armoring, or thicker structure between cells at the very least.

Could be, though I accounted for that, and my result was that you could pack as many as 48 CAMMs into the space just slightly bigger than that occupied by the 8 Sylver A50 cells (just the cells and what's between them, I accounted for the module's external structure as well) while using structural supports that are dimensionally similar to those used for the Mk41 quadpack. I've tried to match these sketches below as well as I could to the dimensions of the Sylver module, the Mk41 cell and the CAMM launch canister, and 24 is definitely not the maximum possible number here.