The argument for Naval Strike Missile starts with availability: Norway had developed a new missile that buyers could fit, while several other Western successors remained development projects. Those prospective weapons are discussed as possible options for the 2030s, leaving navies needing an armament they can obtain in the meantime. A newer baseline also offers scope to adapt to changing threats. Exocet remains a credible alternative in this assessment because repeated modernisation and its proven record retain value. British and French procurement illustrates the willingness to fit an established missile while successors are still in development. Other missiles retain their own advantages despite NSM's availability and newer starting design.
Notable Point · 26:02-28:23
Why Naval Strike Missile keeps appearing in new frigates
Norwegian development gives NSM an availability advantage over prospective new Western weapons, while Exocet retains strengths from repeated modernisation.