The northern approaches to the Atlantic are more secure after a two-week NATO anti-submarine exercise off the west coast of Norway that drew in hundreds of Royal Navy and RAF personnel and was bolstered by the aircraft carrier HMS Prince of Wales and her group, the Royal Navy has said.

Three ships and aircraft from four squadrons made up the United Kingdom’s contribution to Dynamic Mongoose 2026, the largest individual national input to the exercise, which has now completed. Shared between hosts Iceland and Norway, with Norway leading this year, the exercise drew in six NATO nations committing both personnel and hardware for the game of cat-and-mouse that submarines and surface forces have contested for over a century.

Beneath the waves were a German U-boat and submarines from Portugal and the Netherlands, while above them operated six warships and an auxiliary of NATO’s Standing NATO Maritime Group 1, reinforced by the Prince of Wales carrier group. The standing group, currently commanded by the Royal Navy under Commodore Maryla Ingham aboard the German frigate FGS Sachsen, led the hunt, assisted by Merlin helicopters flying from the carrier’s flight deck and by RAF P-8 Poseidon maritime patrol aircraft from CXX Squadron sweeping suspected submarine routes with sonobuoys.

The involvement of the destroyer HMS Duncan and the carrier brought extra air power into the mix this year, the Royal Navy said, with not only Merlin Mk2s for submarine hunting but Wildcats from 815 Naval Air Squadron providing force protection with their Martlet and Sea Venom missiles. Exercise directors also committed drones and autonomous systems to the effort, with the results of the various serials to be studied by NATO experts and the lessons folded into the alliance’s new Arctic Sentry mission, introduced in February to step up vigilance in the High North, the Norwegian Sea and the North Atlantic in view of Russia’s increased activity in the region.

Commodore Ingham said the exercise had been a real success for all involved, both individually and collectively. “We proved the successful integration of advanced capabilities and technologies,” she said, as well as refining tactics during an increasingly complex series of exercises against live submarines. Dynamic Mongoose, she said, had provided “first-class training” for the crews of maritime patrol aircraft, anti-submarine helicopters, ships and the submarines themselves, and the integration of nine different nations across the force had shown an ability to work together “seamlessly.” The area in which the exercise took place, she added, “is of strategic importance for the Alliance and training here helps us understand the environment.”

The carrier’s commander, Commodore Rich Hewitt, said Dynamic Mongoose had been “a great opportunity to fully immerse the Carrier Strike Group with our tailored air wing into NATO’s premier anti-submarine warfighting exercise.” The group was constantly developing its warfighting readiness alongside NATO allies, he said, and anti-submarine warfare was “a critical part of defending NATO’s Northern Flank.”

Dynamic Mongoose is one of two NATO exercises focused on anti-submarine warfare, testing forces in very different waters, with the Dynamic Manta series held in the Mediterranean, where depth, salinity and temperature all play differently for hunter and hunted. The exercise comes as the High North draws ever greater allied attention, with Russian submarine activity in the Norwegian Sea and the wider North Atlantic having climbed in recent years and NATO standing up Arctic Sentry under the leadership of the United Kingdom.

22 COMMENTS

    • I think we still have the premier anti submarine capability on the planet, between that and special forces and SIGNIT are our three main top of the pile capabilities.

      Both the Chinese in 2021 in the South China Sea and the Russians in their latest escapade into the North Sea seem to have been caught off guard about how good the Astute, 2087, Merlin and P8 combined capabilities are for hunting submarines. Both were left red faced after having their submarines detected.

      • Agreed to all. Another reason why I don’t want DSF reduced mate! ( in our last conversation ) or Cyber, or EW, which is all linked.

        • Agreed Daniele, I don’t want to see reductions in SF and certainly not SIGNIT, the details coming out about 18 (UKSF) Signal Regiment and the SAS mission in the run up to the Ukraine war are astounding and show UK forces at their best.

          But I don’t think we can continue to have capability gaps in GBAD and ABM. SF has grown very fat over the last two decades, especially with newer forces like SF Support Group and Rangers. These forces are vital for colonial policing missions in Asian and fighting insurgents but not so useful in fighting a mechanised war in Europe.

          It’s pretty clear there is no bank cheques coming from the treasury so we need to make do.

          • Hmmm, well see!!
            Rangers are not DSF by the way, but I get your meaning. One day we might end up fighting elsewhere, that is why these lighter expeditionary capabilities and enablers persist. You have the Labour Europe only mentality, I see the Grey Zone and British interests all over the world, we mutilate ourselves losing them.
            I don’t see us buying any ABM, not seen any indication?? On GBAD, that is supposedly expanding, we await still the details. CAVS as base vehicle for Stormer seems pretty solid, hopefully it is for over 100 as one of our posters connected to the Regiment quoted, would be a big increase on Stormer.
            What do you see us buying? I don’t see us buying a thing beyond the ordered Sky Sabre and more CAVS for Stormer. More Rapid Sentry would be good too.

      • That’s my point we can not be good every where but what we are good aat we are the best in the world. That’s why we can never have the massive armed forces some want not our role in Nato to be a ack of all trades other can be good at other things as it should be in an aalliance.where they are nit so good we are and vise vers.
        That’s why will will never have a big army again we do not need one

        • The irony of your comment being 2-fold. We cannot have good special forces without a large army to sustain them and NATO want us to provide significant land forces. That’s where they see our value.

          • True you need a good pool of people for SF, bigger army better the pick. But NATO can do one we can nit afford what they wabtcwe bring nuts and carriers when others do nit , we can not afford a large army no matter how many want it.
            Some need to wake up to that they want every thing abd think cutting welfare will pay for it except bo government will go down that path. Our days of a big Army are over for good

      • Handy for knocking away any long range Russian patrols. 8 X F35’s is probably the ideal amount for these North Atlantic NATO patrols that are more submarine and littoral strike group missions than CSG.

        As long as we can rapidly deploy additional F35 in the event of a war then not much point in having them bashed around in the rough North Atlantic on training missions.

      • What if the thing LM have been doing all this time is integrating sonobuoy pods and Stingray for internal carriage on F35B? They might have played a blinder.
        The CSG needs MQ9B if we want it to be a genuinely transformational ASW asset.

      • Oh, good stuff. Thing is, if they were not there before, they can be quickly where she is. So it is no biggy.

  1. This article is fake news, I have read in the daily mail and the independent that HMS Prince of Wales is broken down 😀

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here