I would guess not the space but cost may be next step would have been another 6 totaling 3x6 =18 Vls which were perhaps cost going up too much not sure but space does not seems to be a problem especially when chines/Russian Vls and missiles are usually far larger than western typesWhat I don't get is, why reduce VLS to 12 when 16 was already planned? Can't be a space issue, can it...if 16 were already planned earlier.....?? What other reason is there? Even cost doesn't seem logical reason.
Also would appreciate if someone can shed light on how CAMM-ER is superior to the Chinese alternative that was planned earlier.
As far as sam goes two way data link and active guidance vs passive meaning missile seaker pick up 10-15 km after launch not needing ship providing updates also leading to more simultaneous engagement of targets I think hq-16 can do 6 vs say camm twice as many or more but then there are total 12 missiles not sure if in case of camm there is auto loading and Can Cary another load of 12 down under the Vls in the front ??