New submarine-launched SM40 Exocet missile

[@phil_nebula676]

Perfect weapon for the Export-oriented Scorpene-class submarine and the French Navy Suffren (Baracuda)-class submarines.

[@topgreen3950]

The target model is type 55 destroyers of china's pla navy ship😊this is perfect for ph navy naval group submarine for ph navy

[@joso5554]

Excellent upgrade !! The Exocet family keeps up with its legend.

[@dutch6390]

The French Power !!! MBDA !!! 💪 🇫🇷 👍 😘

[@kindnuguz]

Thank you MBDA for your continued support

[@Naylamp21]

Excellent news !!!

[@legend_of_the_south_PH_24]

👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍

[@ioanbota9397]

So powerful I like it

[@dykatran]

That target ship looks like a Type 055 destroyer.

[@avb4805]

Excellent 😊

[@WalterBurton]

👍👍👍

[@zinoudz1275]

You had to ask about the coast

[@Licanray-q7u]

Pienso que un misil con un alcance de 120 kms no es una arma de auto defensa del submarino. Porque enviar a un helo a esa distancia para destruir un submarino es mejor evadir el contacto.

[@Nainara32]

Stephan asserts that the missile is designed for the next 30 years, but I wonder if the detection part of ASW will increasingly become the domain of semi-attritable drones saturating the ocean hotspots in the next couple of decades.

[@joso5554]

Increased range brings part of the answer to this. Countering drone ASW will require other answers too.

[@Erik-rp1hi]

Well don't sell them to Argentina.

[@jeanvaljean9293]

Since we can’t sell those to Australia… do we have a choice ? 😂😂😂

[@Schurkie505]

a range of 120 km, is way to short, at least 2 times the distance is needed to attack a wel defended target, The Netherlands has bought 4 french subs, but we want a US long range anti ship missile, but the US doesn't want to share the technical details of the cruise missle with France, so we are fucked....

[@gorkarullan]

Spain should buy some dicents of this... ythis look better then teh harrpon

[@hourbee5535]

Are there any American made components in that thing?

[@wewillworld522]

U need some chipset plan ?!? 😂❤

[@ZaphodHarkonnen]

Probably not. Precisely to avoid US ITAR complications.

[@edsutherland8266]

No, the French sensibly avoid using American components wherever possible.

[@avb4805]

No itar free... french modo

[@jeanvaljean9293]

Careful, itar free doesn’t mean us component free. If the us put more spares into the itar list they become a problem so france avoid any us parts but that’s not always the case. France hade issues selling the scalp/storm shadow to Egypt due to a simple component just integrated into itar. Nothing special about it just cheaper since france has managed to deal with the us. The truth is that france can do itar free but us free is complicated as stated by the dga.

[@GarWhittaker]

No country with a decent navy would fire one of these from a submarine and give their position away.

[@n1k2-ja46]

I wonder why France doesn't equip their SSNs with vertical launchers? They seem more versatile than torpedo tubes, don't they? フランスは垂直発射装置をSSNに搭載して搭載しないのね、何故だろう？汎用性は魚雷発射管よりあると思えるのだが？？？

[@DomWood]

because they are attack subs, which mostly designed around hunting other subs and ships in a direct role, meaning their torpedo capabilities are the priority. it makes more sense to use weapons adapted for the vessel than to adapt the vessel for the weapons.

[@dan7564]

​@@DomWoodbut the statutes and Virginia's are attack subs too and they have both.

[@DomWood]

@@dan7564 yeah, but this kinda.. the b-league stuff? kinda? astute and virginia are as top-end, operational capability > cost as you can get, whereas this is largely a conversion program for the export and ally market designed to make the weapon readily available to cans already afloat or laid down - as other commenters have mentioned I think, a big focus here is making armament improvements rapidly available in specific theatres such as the pacific because of china's huge investment into naval force projection. fitting that config into smaller diesel powered and predominantly torp focused cans is probably doable, but it has cost prohibitions and complexities which aren't desirable when your acquisition is made on the basis of a 50 year operational lifetime and the sub itself is designed as a largely drop-in solution for small navies with specific needs. so it's just much cheaper and reliably deliverable to modify weapons to fit into a standard platform rather than modifying the standard platform to fit new weapons - this missile being a perfect case-in-point I guess. ah and you WILL find a dual config on the suffren class, which is france's nuclear sub and the equivalent to the classes you mention - but comparing diesel and nuke subs is honestly apples and oranges stuff, different tools, different roles, different operational needs.

[@ZaphodHarkonnen]

The benefits just aren’t worth the costs in their view. VLS tend to take up volume and France decides that the volume is better used elsewhere. Yes, the US Virginias have the VPM but that makes them larger. If your port infrastructure can’t support the larger boats then the cost for VLS is suddenly a lot larger due to new port infrastructure required. There’s no simple yes/no answer for these sorts of decisions. You’re always playing off various costs and benefits.

[@louismechler4338]

Volume, a VLS takes space and we doctrinaly prefer smaller subs

[@tylerdurden4006]

Ridiculous you think a missile from the 70's and 80's is "new" 😂😂😂 sure is a lot of cgi as usual from "murican military power" memes. 😂😂

[@DomWood]

i uh what

[@tylerdurden4006]

@DomWood why do muricans always have to ask "what" now matter what is said?

[@tylerdurden4006]

@DomWood do you really not know the exocet is really really old? Roflmfao okay cool story bro 👍

[@gustavoneves2278]

And the tomhawk are also from the 70's!!! And its one of the most advanced of the world, there are many versions!!!

[@tylerdurden4006]

@gustavoneves2278 roflmfao, it is not one of the most advanced. Do you not know Russia's come with radar jamming and even flare counter measures now? No? Okay cool story bro 👍