Would wider Sea Eagle use displace Exocet and Harpoon?

Would wider Sea Eagle use lead to ship- or submarine-launched versions replacing Exocet and Harpoon?

Probably not, because Exocet and Harpoon were already available, avoided new integration costs, and carried alliance-political value.

Even a larger air-launched Sea Eagle fleet would not necessarily produce ship- or submarine-launched versions. The counterfactual governments are still expected to choose available weapons to limit cost. Missile purchases also express diplomatic relationships: buying French equipment supports ties with France, while American purchases reinforce the US relationship. A larger carrier program therefore does not automatically overturn established missile choices.