Shipbucket

You could mount two quad launchers in front of the bridge like it was done on the Peder Skram Class.
The launchers are light enough that the soft patch wont have any trouble supporting them, and compared to the size of a nuclear refueling, removing them in order to do it is nothing.
You may have to move the liferafts a bit aft though, just to be on the safe side.

Thiel wrote:You could mount two quad launchers in front of the bridge like it was done on the Peder Skram Class.
The launchers are light enough that the soft patch wont have any trouble supporting them, and compared to the size of a nuclear refueling, removing them in order to do it is nothing.
You may have to move the liferafts a bit aft though, just to be on the safe side.

I don't see why anyone thinks this thing wouldn't have enough VLS for VL Harpoon. It's got 231 VL tubes, that's nearly TWICE the loadout of a Ticonderoga class cruiser!
I mean, normal Harpoon load for a ship was eight missiles. If you double that, you would still have 215 tubes left for other missiles. Seriously, this ship is a BEAST.

MihoshiK wrote:

Thiel wrote:You could mount two quad launchers in front of the bridge like it was done on the Peder Skram Class.
The launchers are light enough that the soft patch wont have any trouble supporting them, and compared to the size of a nuclear refueling, removing them in order to do it is nothing.
You may have to move the liferafts a bit aft though, just to be on the safe side.

I don't see why anyone thinks this thing wouldn't have enough VLS for VL Harpoon. It's got 231 VL tubes, that's nearly TWICE the loadout of a Ticonderoga class cruiser!
I mean, normal Harpoon load for a ship was eight missiles. If you double that, you would still have 215 tubes left for other missiles. Seriously, this ship is a BEAST.

True, but it's not unlikely that it would replace two or three Tico's in a CVBG.
And it has the advantage that you won't have to introduce a new launch system.

was the VLS launched version of the harpoon even build?

acelanceloet wrote:was the VLS launched version of the harpoon even build?

Yes. I've actually got pictures of a trial firing somewhere on my PC.

Edit:

Interesting; I didn't know such was ever tested. I'll need to revise mine!

Exclusion of Harpoon canisters was a conscious AU-ish decision on my part. There are lots of places you could put them, but the idea never really excited me. Lord knows she'd sail with empty cells already (as is apparently quite common in the USN). And with so many weapons systems already, I wanted to avoid a more Soviet flavor...

I thought the VLS Harpoon launch was simply something that would be done if someone paid for the work to be done, not something that had actually been tested. I think the ship does look cleaner without the Harpoons, and really, no OTH Harpoon shot has ever been done, in which case you're better off with launching Standards in SSM mode.

It does beg the question as to why wasn't Harpoon deployed operationally from Mk 41, especially given how many tubes apparently sit empty. At the very least, it would've meant decks clean of Mk 141 launchers earlier than as happened (as Harpoon is actually getting supplanted with SM-3 as it turns out, and Harpoon's eventual replacement will be the ArcLight multi-role hypersonic cruise missile).

I'm guessing cost. Sure, you could get rid of the Mk 141, but you'd have to buy brand new boosters or conversion kits for all your missiles and train your personnel in their use. Quite a lot of hazzle when you already have a perfectly workable solution.

Because, honestly, who cares about ship-launched Harpoon? If you had more money (and open VLS cells) than sense, sure, but there are better things to do.