And some jobs are unbelievably boring."
Despite the high level of automation, human oversight remains a fundamental component of the operational protocol.
Ferdinand Peters, the software integration lead, points out that artificial intelligence systems can still hallucinate or produce false results.
"You need to let the system work for you, but not think for you," he says.
"We need to think carefully about where we use it and where we do not."
Feenstra confirms that weapon deployment decisions will not be delegated to autonomous algorithms.
"A person is always part of the decision-making chain," says Feenstra.
The ethical debate surrounding military automation is not entirely new to the Netherlands, which has utilized the autonomous Goalkeeper air defense system for over forty years.
"What we know from the past is that even when people make the plan or collect the information, something can go wrong," says Feenstra.
"The question is where the culpability will lie if you automate everything."
Naval analysts view the Dutch efforts as a vital model for maritime security collaboration in the North and Baltic seas.
Naval analyst Lee Willett notes that the Netherlands is successfully advancing its capabilities despite possessing a relatively small navy.
"The Dutch punch above their weight," Willett says.
"They are also advancing what they have because they recognise that they are a relatively small navy in an incredibly important part of the world."
Sidharth Kaushal, a senior research fellow at the Royal United Services Institute, suggests that these systems also offer practical benefits for personnel retention.
"Uncrewed systems don’t completely remove the requirement for manpower – you tend to need more engineers – but they provide a different balance in terms of family life," he says.
"This is the direction of travel."
