Standing NATO Maritime Group One have concluded their participation in the annual Norwegian-led anti-submarine exercise Dynamic Mongoose.

SNMG1 is composed of the US flagship, the destroyer USS Gravely, British frigate HMS Westminster, and Turkish frigate TCG Gokova.

According to the Alliance, the exercise was designed to enhance Anti-Submarine Warfare of the participating Allied nations in a challenging environment due to the unpredictable sea state and weather conditions in this region.

“The ASW capabilities of these units were put to the test in this challenging environment which provided beneficial experience and knowledge while simultaneously contributing to increased interoperability among NATO Allies and demonstrating NATO’s capabilities, capacities and determination to defend Allies.”

“The exercise planners and the team at Submarines NATO did an excellent job designing the exercise for us to operate in multiple different environments, requiring us to constantly assess and evaluate our operating area, highlighting the diversity of NATO Maritime capabilities and interoperability,” said Rear Admiral Cashman, Commander of Standing NATO Maritime Group One.

“They designed the exercise in such a way that challenges us as the task group staff, and the units from the stand point of needing to understand the various environmental conditions in the ocean as well as needing to understand the adversary and how the submarines are going to use that environment to their advantage.”

0 0 vote
Article Rating
Subscribe
Notify of
guest
29 Comments
oldest
newest
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
geoff

Also and on another subject-much has been made of the Iranians hoisting their flag on the top mast of the Stena Impero. Without in any way condoning their actions this is the spot where the courtesy ensign would have been flown anyway!

Gavin Gordon

Kids and sand castles.

Herodotus

Does anyone else find these exercises rather odd. Here we are practising for a potential conflict, when we have a very real security issue in the Gulf! Or am I taking it too seriously?

Daniele Mandelli

I guess that NATO is so big, life goes on elsewhere regardless.

I’ve not seen any reporting of other NATO members rushing assets to the Gulf region, so their assets are not required.

Ours might be, and elements should have been there already. ( RM and boats, which can be flown out quickly)

Herodotus

Is anyone aware of increased C17 activity?

Daniele Mandelli

No idea. I’d also read that post elsewhere suggesting C17s could fly out RM. There is a vibrant spotter community in this country. Any increases in activity at places like Brize would be noted and commented on the various online forums.

I don’t frequent those though as I don’t give a monkeys what number a plane has.

Herodotus

Actually, I think it was Rob. But he used so many acronyms…the only one I understood was C17!

Daniele Mandelli

Lol. Dont believe that for a moment as your ex RN.

He said FF DD for Frigate or Destroyer, MCM for Mine Counter Measures, and SOH which I presume was Straights of Hormuz! He was also keen on ORCS…..!

andy reeves

i thought awkes were sea birds oops.

andy reeves

enough with acronyms on this site, every time i come on here i need a dictionary!!!!!

TopBoy

Only because of the presence at RAF Fairford for the Royal International Air tattoo….

Trevor

Apart from the USA and UK, and we have had pretty much the same level of activity for decades, no one else has any thing significant in the area. And its unlikely they will add many more. Only hysterics are going mad with the idea of sending transport planes full of paratroopers. The whole theatre is well over the size of western Europe so 1 or 2 frigates is not going to make a dent in our operations.

Herodotus

Yep….after 12 years of hydrographic surveying in the Gulf, and having worked out of every Gulf State, including Iran….prior to, and during the onset of the revolution, I have a vague idea how big the area is (Bander Abbas, gateway to hell). One would assume that if we operated a convoy system, a small number of escorts would go a long way. As for C17s, I believe it was mooted that small detachments of marines could be placed on tankers in lieu of an escort for every vessel. I’m not inclined to hysterics, though potentially another visit to Bander Abbas… Read more »

Trevor

Convoys are complex and who agrees to them and organises them and for what purpose if some independent carriers get in the way and then gets nabbed. Industry is not going to wait all that time. Apart from the USA and us, there are no permanent non land based assets. To what end is anyone else interested? We have to sit it out until Iran have over reached themselves. Iran have a lot of cards to play, they can lay off 20 tankers and then drop on the 21st. How many thousands of marines would be proposed to tie up… Read more »

Herodotus

Well, we shall see!

Trevor

Yes. And keep our fingers crossed.

James

The Marine idea was dropped apparently due to concerns of being outgunned by Iranian boats and potentially taking them hostage.
That would be a tad more embarrassing than what’s already happened

Pete

Absolutely the last thing you would want on a tanker… Particularly half full tankers (vapours) or tankers with LNG or Condensate onboard, would be high velocity rounds bouncing around.

Strategy would have to be keeping threats at arms length.

Not sure if its a solution but could forward posted typhoon with brimstone on QRA help… Its a huge area to cover and you would need multiple t23 and OPV to cover what is @1000km of shipping lane.

http://www.defense-aerospace.com/articles-view/release/3/204595/eurofighter-touts-combat-debut-of-brimstone-2-missile.html

Herodotus

I agree….I wasn’t advocating it. I do note, however, that armed guards have been part of anti-piracy operations in the Indian Ocean.

andy reeves

i never understood the number of archers the service has, designed to carry a 20mm cannon, i think thes,drilled in squadrons may go some way to negating the irani patrol boat threats maybe even use the 2omm mount for a few martlets i’ve always believed a squadron of archers would well augment the gibraltar squadron, and finally allow poor old sabre and scimitar to enjoy a well earned retirement. if we don’t use the archers, why have them?

Gunbuster

No one has anything else in the area? I beg to differ…
CTF 152 https://combinedmaritimeforces.com/ctf-152-gulf-security-cooperation/
CTF 150 https://combinedmaritimeforces.com/2011/03/06/ctf-150-%e2%80%93-seeing-the-bigger-picture/
CTF 151 https://combinedmaritimeforces.com/2016/10/27/ctf-151-handover-piracy-maritimesecurityoperations/

Every man an his dog has units in and around the area. What is lacking to the will to use them.

andy reeves

the iraqis sowed mines during its war with iran, which is why we often see mcm work and R.N ships operating in the region if the threat exist and a big oiler hits one the political environmental fall out could be huge so parading warships in the gulf addresses only a part of the overall issue.

Rob

So was the Turkish frigate there to practice hunting Russian subs? Their participation in exercises, intelligence gathering, plus indeed their place in NATO, must be being considered. It would be a brave decision to expel mind.

Herodotus

Hmmm….Turkey joining a Russian/Syrian axis…with Iran as well. Not the best option for Nato.

Rob

Doesn’t that already exist to an extent? NATO will be very uneasy about Turkey that’s for sure.

andy reeves

given the size and potential politics allowing, the turkish armed forces are a valuable asset in that part of the globe

maurice10

All very interesting, now turn south towards the Gulf and secure the rights of passage for Western shipping.

andy reeves

but how did it go were the tactics and technology up to the job?

andy reeves

did we find any subs? we’ll never know i suppose