can you make an autoloader but for missile so we can have some variation from the boring VLScels?
>>65215308Those autoloaders already handle missiles. The reason no one does what you suggest for naval missiles is because that would be retarded and needlessly complicated for less than no gain.
>>65215308That's basically how the arm launchers of yore worked.It is very cool to look at but it's easy to see why VLS supplanted it
>>65215308VLS are more space efficient because you just launch them from the carousel instead of needing to dick around with getting them into place.
>>65215313>that would be retarded and needlessly complicated for less than no gain.Because why?
>>65215332there's no good reason to move the missiles with heavy and complex machinery when you can just have them staticit's also a lower rate of fire which means you'll fucking die
>>65215332Its literally what we already had and it sucked. Look up why we moved from autoloaders to VSL.
>>65215332Ye olde missile arm launchers launched missiles from a trainable rail, where it had ot be placed by heavy machinery that picked it out of a magazine.VLS cells basically ARE the magazine, and you do away with all of the moving bits apart for some moving flaps that cover the cells.It saves space, maintenance, and gives you a better rate of fire.
>>65215308
>>65215332because missiles dont need a barrel
