Shallow water, divided attention
Hunting submarines in the Baltic is no miniature version of the open-ocean mission. In Swedish navy chief Johan Norlén’s description, the bottom is always part of the problem. Temperature differences caused by cold river water, confined space and shallow depths complicate the search. That makes the location chosen for Dynamic Merlin on November 9–13 consequential. Allied ships accustomed to the deep Atlantic are working in conditions familiar to local navies. Cooperation here requires a common working language before it can mean anything in formation.[1]
This year the ships’ attention is also being pulled upwards. Task group commander Nicolas Molitor says live drone scenarios are to be introduced without warning. A surface ship searching for a submarine must also manage its own protection. My military judgement centres on that simultaneity: tasks performed well in isolation can compete for attention and decision time when the same formation faces them together. The hard question for the exercise is how the search mission holds up under that combined demand.[1]
Five hulls, different jobs
The group’s composition fits that question. Den Helder is both flagship and combat support ship; Berlin is another support ship. Ville de Québec, Esbern Snare and Hamina provide other surface elements of different sizes. Counting five ships as five interchangeable units obscures how the formation works. Support and command functions belong to the arrangement that enables the submarine hunters to operate. Norlén’s emphasis on combining defensive layers across different ships explains that composition: different vessels contribute complementary protection against the threats.[1]
That cooperation also creates dependence. A ship relying on another vessel’s protection depends on communications and division of labour working across the group. This is my assessment, not a reported exercise result. The strongest counterargument is that a planned drill can successfully repeat familiar procedures while approaching only part of the uncertainty created by a hostile force. Unannounced drone targets offer a meaningful test of that objection. Even then, their timing and intensity remain within an exercise framework. What crews can sustain simultaneously matters more than the scale of the display.[1]
The mission being protected
Commanders identify protection of Baltic sea lines of communication and allied security as the purpose. Rehearsing submarine hunting alongside a ship’s own defence directly serves that mission. The searching vessel has to remain able to operate for the search to continue. The exercise has a strong explanation as announced training and reassurance for allies; its composition does not require a reading of attack preparation. Combining submarine and drone scenarios does not, by itself, establish an opponent’s intentions.[1]
Craddock describes rapid allied assembly as part of deterrence. That is the commander’s objective. The announced ships and scenarios show which practical tasks are being used to test it. My narrow judgement is that Dynamic Merlin offers a meaningful readiness test insofar as it puts protection of the formation inside the search mission. A single target engagement is too small a measure of success. Continuing to hunt a submarine while ships protect one another is a stronger measure of the combined force’s usefulness. Results showing how the exercise handled that burden have not yet been released.[1]