Space is a premium on ships, I don't really see much downside in packing missiles in spaces already designed to pack missiles. I mean, what's the difference between leaving the space empty, assuming mixed quad-pack is feasible, than just leaving a few UVLS canisters empty? Would you call filling all 64 canisters greedy and instead opt to leave say 4 of them empty?
So, there's two reasons I call it greedy.
First, is the goal for more weapons. What I mean is that dual packing HHQ-9C would already be a step up compared to existing single pack weapons that we know exists (except for the much rumoured 3-5 missile which is quad packable), and entertaining the idea of a cell canister where they could accommodate multiple diameter weapons in a single cell is one which has never been done before in the world AFAIK. Sure, it might be technically viable, but that leads us to the second and more important issue below...
Second, is the discussion about this to begin with -- it's not confirmed that HHQ-9C can dual pack in the UVLS, but based on its geometry we at least have a basis to guesstimate it may be viable. However speculating another leap on top of that is a bit is too ambitious for us, and at minimum we should at least:
A) confirm that HHQ-9C is able to be dual packed in the UVLS
B) know how much space could be left in a dual packed HHQ-9C UVLS cell to begin with
If the above two criteria are fulfilled, then I think some sort of productive discussion on the matter could be held.
But otherwise, the conversation about the idea of a 2+2 pack system basically just ends at "yeah it might be viable, but we have no credible rumours to suggest this is something they are pursuing and we don't even know if HHQ-9C dual packed would leave any room left over for another two dual packed smaller SAMs... so what now?"
When that level of speculation is dependent upon confirmation and details of a prior level of speculation, it becomes a bit of a mess IMO.
Though gotta say the idea of 2(+2) is indeed interesting.
I mean, it's interesting, but considering dual pack is not even confirmed yet (only viable/suspected), I don't think entertaining the idea of adding another two smaller SAMs in the same cell (which afaik, multipacking different diameter missiles in the same cell has never been done before) would be a bit too speculative for my taste.
If we had some sort of indicator from credible sources, sure.
But talking about our own ideas without a basis to work off first, is just directionless speculation.
