Remember the helicopter that made a precautionary landing a few days ago???

Remember this news release by ISAF?

2011-11-S-041
ISAF Joint Command - Afghanistan
For Immediate Release
KABUL, Afghanistan (Nov.  24, 2011) – An International Security Assistance Force helicopter made a precautionary landing in eastern Afghanistan Thursday.
ISAF is still in the process of assessing the circumstances to determine more facts; however, initial reporting indicates that there was no enemy activity in the area. All crew members have recovered with no reported injuries. When the assessment is completed, details will be released as appropriate.

Well your intrepid blogger wasn't too happy with the information provided so I shot an e-mail to the boys over there and got this response.

Classification: UNCLASSIFIED
Caveats: FOUO

Sanfu,

ISAF policy restricts the release of operational information; however,
we can say that the helicopter that made a precautionary landing was a
CH47 and was recovered by slingloading to a nearby ISAF base.  We have
no additional information to add.

IJC Press Desk.

Long story short. I'm not too happy, but I'll refrain from throwing rocks at ISAF.  Let me rephrase that and be specific.  I'd never throw stones at anyone below the rank of Colonel at ISAF.  Anything equal to and above that rank is fair game.

Lets play detective with the info provided.

*  The precautionary landing was made by a CH-47 in Eastern Afghanistan.
*  The 10th Combat Aviation Brigade (Task Force Falcon) is providing aviation assets in that area.
*  We can assume that they operated the helicopter that made the precautionary landing.
*  A number of US units are operating in the area...10th Mountain, 25th ID, 1st ID and several allied units including the French.
*  They stated in the press release that the CH-47 was slingloaded back to base so we can assume that a TRAP mission or whatever the Army calls it was performed.  That would seem to indicate some type of security force was on site while the helicopter was stripped.
*  Speaking of stripping the helicopter.  Unless they got CH-53E to do the slingloading then rotors, engines and any other heavy gear would have to be removed before making the flight.  Even with a CH-53E they might to have to a severe tear down job depending on terrain.

So....no information but we can make some pretty good guesses as to what occurred and since we have so little info coming out we have to make guesses.

Interesting though.  For such a non-incident they're playing their cards extremely close to the vest.  I wonder if we might not hear later on that this was indeed enemy action?

Wow! BlackFive went where I dared not go!

Those guys over at BlackFive have balls the size of bowling balls.

They went where I wouldn't go in polite conversations.  Sure, me and my buddies have talked about it in private but never in public.  Check out this post by them...

Posted By Grim • [November 25, 2011]
Instapundit links to a round of stories about the Euro crisis, and includes this comment:

“To predict the failure of the Euro was easy peasy: all that was needed was a slight familiarity with economics and the human race. To predict what comes next is much, much harder.” Yes.

I think I can make one prediction with relative safety.  The social-democracy policies that have ruined many European economies, and which currently threaten the stability of the whole European project, weren't paid for with deficiets alone.  They were also paid for by gutting European military budgets, relying on the umbrella of US protection.
You can't stand up a competent brigade overnight:  it takes a long time, as the examples of the ISF and ANSF demonstrate.  Non-Anglosphere NATO forces participated in these wars, so there is some small core of experience they can draw upon:  but by the same token, it should be clear to anyone who participated in either war that the non-Anglosphere NATO forces could not have performed other than in a support role.  Some of this is due to power-projection concerns such as heavy airlift capacity, but some of it is simply due to the weakness of these forces.
So, the prediction:  The already-common riots will evolve into insurgencies as the pinch becomes tighter, and the military forces of continental Europe are inadequate to stop them.  What comes after that?  An attempt at rapid re-militarization in Europe, with all the attendant chaos and violence that implies; pleas for a major US involvement to fill the gap while they try to stand up those forces.  What comes after that?  War, or nightfall.

I mean seriously!

Like I said, we've talked about it in whispers but this occupy wallstreet is the precursor to something nasty...and its global.

They're talking about riots turning nasty.  As in threatening democracy nasty.

IF and its a big if...food prices jump, we have periods of extremely---as in unbearably high oil prices---then you could see widespread unrest.  Not only in Europe but here in the US.

That my friends is why I have more than the FEMA recommended amount of food stored.  That my friends is why a person in New York would consider my collection of firearms an arsenal.

Are you ready in case of the worst and if not then I suggest you redo your Christmas shopping list to something a bit more practical than the latest consumer electronics.

Pic of the day and modest proposal. Ban black gear.

U.S. Army Soldiers with the Kandahar Provincial Reconstruction Team security force climb down from their positions during a site assessment of the Dowry Rud check dam in Spin Boldak district, Kandahar, Afghanistan, on Nov. 19, 2011. DoD photo by Senior Airman Sean Martin, U.S. Air Force. (Released)

Look at these Soldiers doing real work in Afghanistan.  Out on patrol and not at a major combat base but out and about doing Soldiers work...no civilian comparison here.  But notice one thing.  They're all wearing multicam which is doing its job quite well and whats busting it up?  Black rifles, black admin pouches, black nvg mounts etc....

Its past time that the US Army and US Marine Corps fix the black rifle problem.

Surely Duracoat or another manufacturer can come up with a fix that's durable enough to meet military standards.

Fix real problems!

Enough of the foolishness!

WTF is going on in the US Senate?

Read sections 1031 and 1032 of the Defense Authorization Bill.

Let me put it like this.  Both Right winger and Left wingers are up in arms and alarmed by the language.  I've said it before and I'll say it again.  McCain's use by date has expired (Levin's too).

Time to put that guy out to pasture!

The Senate is going to vote on whether Congress will give this president—and every future president — the power to order the military to pick up and imprison without charge or trial civilians anywhere in the world. Even Rep. Ron Paul (R-Texas) raised his concerns about the NDAA detention provisions during last night’s Republican debate. The power is so broad that even U.S. citizens could be swept up by the military and the military could be used far from any battlefield, even within the United States itself.
The worldwide indefinite detention without charge or trial provision is in S. 1867, the National Defense Authorization Act bill, which will be on the Senate floor on Monday. The bill was drafted in secret by Sens. Carl Levin (D-Mich.) and John McCain (R-Ariz.) and passed in a closed-door committee meeting, without even a single hearing.

Full disclosure.

I'm in the preparedness community.  FEMA says have 7 days of food and water.  I have a bit more.  You believe in the Constitution.  I'm in love with the 2nd Amendment.  You say republican, I say Conservative.

Just sayin.

Is the Marine Corps becoming reactionary/risk averse?

Lt. Commander Timothy Ringo (left), aeromedical safety officer, and Marines with the 11th Marine Expeditionary Unit receive instruction for proper underwater breathing during egress training Nov. 7. Approximately 200 Marines and sailors with Company L, 11th Marine Expeditionary Unit, made the Corps’ first egresses from a simulated amphibious assault vehicle, which was dunked in a Pendleton pool Nov. 7-11. The Marines embarked USS Makin Island, USS New Orleans and USS Pearl Harbor in San Diego Nov. 14 beginning a seven-month deployment to the western Pacific and Middle East regions.  Photo by Cpl. Chad Pulliam

Marines with the 11th Marine Expeditionary Unit practice evacuating a sinking amphibious assault vehicle Nov. 7. Approximately 200 Marines and sailors with Company L, 11th Marine Expeditionary Unit, made the Corps’ first egresses from a simulated amphibious assault vehicle, which was dunked in a Pendleton pool Nov. 7-11. The Marines embarked USS Makin Island, USS New Orleans and USS Pearl Harbor in San Diego Nov. 14 beginning a seven-month deployment to the western Pacific and Middle East regions.  Photo by Cpl. Chad Pulliam

Sgt W. J. Rice was killed when his AAV sank at Camp Pendleton.  Lt. Commander Ringo then decided to dabble in the ground side of things and develop another egress training evolution.

Problem is this.  We've had this training for ever and a day.  The only difference is that it hasn't been done with a "designed" training aid.

My question is this.  Has the Marine Corps become risk averse?  Was there some type of finding that an experienced AAV crewman didn't know how to properly egress from his vehicle?  

I find that hard to believe.

I don't know what caused the tragedy that took Sgt Rice's life but something tells me that he didn't die because he didn't know how to properly escape from a sinking AAV.

And since this isn't the first time that a crewman has died in a vehicle incident then why have we decided that this type of training is necessary?

Why is an aeromedical safety officer dabbling in ground vehicle safety?  Doesn't he have enough work to do on the wing side?

Is this type of training even realistic?  Does it help?

I've been extremely impressed from the outside looking in at what the 11th MEU has been doing.  This smacks of political correctness so bad that it reeks.

Being in the military is inherently dangerous.  Developing training routines like this don't lessen the danger.

Besides, the more I look at this the more it looks like the dunk chamber that pilots go through for their water survival training.

The Marine Corps seems to be losing its way in small ways...

Polls being taken of the troops to decide on a uniform issue and then ignoring the polls (rolled sleeves vs. sleeves down).  Unique weapons buys (IAR).  Buying gear items year after year and not getting it right (boots, ruck sacks, holster).  Ditching useful uniform items and instead buying boutique, one use specific items instead (new PT uniform).

And now this.

I'm not impressed.

Blast from the past. Harrier intercepts TU-16...

via Flight Global

I still marvel at the capability holiday the UK forced upon itself by retiring these aircraft early.  Sweetman might gush over the Libyan air war and truly believe that no ground forces were providing targeting data (Fat chance of that!  Either allied special ops or Libyan fighters were talking to fighter bombers overhead) but either way, naval air in the form of a strike fighter is essential in any power projection scheme outside of area.

A great maritime nation acting like some of its land locked cousins still astounds.

Happy Thanksgiving all!

And this is why ISAF press releases are useless...

I'm done with ISAF.

They issue nothing but fluff pieces and have been doing so for so long that I've gotten in the habit of ignoring most of their stuff out of hand.

This press release just pushed me over the edge and now I'm done.

Helicopter makes precautionary landing in eastern Afghanistan

2011-11-S-041 ISAF Joint Command - Afghanistan For Immediate Release KABUL, Afghanistan (Nov.  24, 2011) – An International Security Assistance Force helicopter made a precautionary landing in eastern Afghanistan Thursday. ISAF is still in the process of assessing the circumstances to determine more facts; however, initial reporting indicates that there was no enemy activity in the area. All crew members have recovered with no reported injuries. When the assessment is completed, details will be released as appropriate.

I'm sorry and most of you probably disagree but the deal here to me is this.

1.  No one was injured.
2.  They stated that it was a precautionary landing.
3.  Initial reports are stating that no enemy activity in the area.
4.  All personnel have been recovered.

Then why not tell us the unit and helicopter type!

This war has gone from being reported to having the news managed.  Most images (I'd say at least 90%) are simply fluff pieces telling us how great the ANA is. 

They've been telling us that shit for at least 8 years now.

ISAF Public Affairs Office can kiss my ass.

Is the main battle tank tactically dead?

Is the MBT tactically irrelevant?  I ask because of all the weapon systems designed to kill it...just in US service check out the following...

Maverick Missile

A-10's Gun

DAGR 2.75 rocket noteworthy because it could revolutionize attack helicopters.  Instead of a heavy load of 16 antitank missiles you could carry a 'light' load of perhaps 32 DAGR's...don't laugh, an RPG-29 penetrated an M1 in Iraq.  These should be several times more powerful...just need the right warhead.

Brimstone (not US) but supposedly we have our own version under development...noteworthy because so many rounds can be carried by one airplane.

Hellfire (love this guys artwork)

All this and we haven't even started to look at GPS guided weapons that can be retrofitted for the precision work necessary to take out tanks...we haven't even talked about area denial weapons and bomblets designed to channel and destroy tanks...I haven't even talked about precision artillery shells.

I have been critical of our allies that appear to be destroying there heavy armor forces but perhaps in this area a 'holiday' can be taken.

History has shown that although artillery is still the biggest killer on the modern battlefield, most attention has been paid to destroying tanks.

Perhaps the threat to tanks has finally pushed it into the obsolete category...useful, but on a modern battlefield too heavily hunted to be able to hunt.

If the F-35 is getting the axe someone better tell MCAS Yuma!

via the Yumasun.com

The hangar, which costs $36 million and would normally take about 18 months to build, is expected to be completed in 10 months, and in use by March. McBee said that the air station is on a tight timeline to coincide with the first arrival of the first F-35s in Yuma.

As the future home of the first F-35 Joint Strike Fighters in the country, MCAS Yuma will get five squadrons each with 16 aircraft, and one operational test and evaluation squadron of eight aircraft. The 88 aircraft will replace Yuma's four existing squadrons of 56 AV-8B Harriers.

Great news.

With infrastructure being built on both coasts to house the F-35 I just don't see how they can practically afford to cancel the program.

I also love how they're managing to plus up the B's, kill the F/A-18D's and keep the US Navy happy while maintaining the C's...

Soon the only aircraft that will be big carrier capable will be the F/A-18C's and I wonder how much good the Hornet will do with carriers filled with Super Hornets...a mix of similar looking aircraft but much different capabilities.

The inter-service politics could get really interesting.  The Hornet is faster than the Super...but has shorter legs....I wonder if it might be relegated to CAP and carrier defense?

Is this the beginning of Marine Air basically taking itself out of the big carrier business?

I mean seriously, the Commandant signed for the C model but the talk on the street is that the B model will come first. 

Yeah, this will get good on the manufacturing side...the procurement fight is all but won.

Pic of the day. 24 Nov 2011.

SAN DIEGO — A Marine assigned to the Marine Corps Training Division at Expeditionary Warfare Training Group Pacific jumps from a CH-46 Sea Knight helicopter, assigned to the “Knightriders” of Marine Medium Helicopter Training Squadron (HMMT) 164 during a training exercise. The exercise was the conclusion of the Infantry Company Small Boat Raid Course. (U.S. Navy photo by Mass Communication Specialist Seaman Tim Godbee)

Australia's Amphibious Re-birth.

The Australian Navy is going through a bit of an Amphibious renaissance.  You take a force that once operated elderly and decrepit Newport Class LST's to a capability that begins to rival that of the strongest navies in the region is nothing less than impressive.

Taking it by the numbers (at least as I understand them and AD has passed along to me...)...

1.  The decision to acquire the Canberra Class LHD.  While I would have personally preferred that the Aussies acquire a Makin Class LHD to maintain compatibility with the USMC, the Canberra Class appears to be quite formidable.

In the European fashion its built to mercantile standards rather than the combat standards that US amphibs are built to but it should be a quite servicable design.

2.  Next up would have to be the landing craft that the Aussie's are acquiring.  The LCM-1E is not your fathers landing craft.  Although it bears the classic lines, it can blaze through the water at 22 knots.  More than good enough to maintain a supply chain to the beach and yet has the capability to carry an M1 Tank.  The Australian's will be getting 12 of these.

3.  And then last but not least.  The British fire sale of the Bay Class LPD.  Barely used.  New car sent still in the ships.  And the Aussie's got them for a song.  As much as I can't understand the sale at least they sold them to good allies.  The Brits loss is the Aussie's and the Pacific's gain.  And the US' gain by extension too.

4.  We haven't even talked helo's, both cargo and attack...we haven't talked about the formation of a dedicated section to provide the Naval Infantry....we haven't even talked about the Australian Navy following the lead of other navies and having an amphib as the capital ship of the fleet!

Smart moves, great planning and a nice force in the making.  The Aussies could in a short time have an extremely robust force projection/response force second to no other nation of its size and population.

First International F-35 Rolls Out of the Factory

British fantasy vs. British reality.

The British military.

First from Think Defense on how some wish it to be...

Thank you everyone who commented, requested clarification and helped, I’m resubmitting with explanations, detail and the pound of flesh Jed demanded J
So here goes
I’d start, with the “war fleet”, of which we would have two, each one “active” for 6 months of the year, or 8 months, or 4 months, or whatever else makes everyone happy.
Active would be “ready to at short notice go and beat some unfortunate foreigners to a bloody pulp”.
Inactive would be everything else, overhaul, training, diplomacy, exercises ect.

	First Fleet	Purchase Cost	Operating Cost
Carrier	QE Class	3,700,000,000	400,000,000
24 Fast Air	Rafale	1,680,000,000	288,000,000
6 Infantry landing ships	Juan Carlos	2,940,000,000	600,000,000
24 Heavy Lift	Chinook	720,000,000	192,000,000
6 Armour Landing Ship	Bay Class	1,368,000,000	600,000,000
6 AAW Destroyers	T 45 Daring Class	3,900,000,000	420,000,000
6 Light Helicopter	Lynx	180,000,000	24,000,000
6 ASW Frigates	T46	4,500,000,000	420,000,000
6 ASW Helicopter	Merlin	180,000,000	48,000,000
3 Guided Missile Cruiser	T47	3,000,000,000	210,000,000
5 SSGN / Deterrent	Astute+	15,000,000,000	900,000,000

The Carrier and fast air is I hope fairly self explanatory, shoot down enemy aircraft, possibly bomb enemy targets, provide close air support and reconnaissance.
It’s the QE class, because that’s what we have, and the Rafale, because I believe thatFranceandGermanyare about to have a massive falling out, and we’ll buy it hoping to influence French opinion in our favour.
I assume some sort of ISTAR platform will also arrive, hopefully not that silly Sea King, but have no real idea whether we will end up with the Hawkeye, something funky based on the V22 or something else entirely.
This will also function as the flag ship, to what extent that means anything anymore
The Amphibs, the reasoning behind numbers simply being so that the entire force could be landed in a single group.  Well, obviously not quite, a single group, each ships group of four Chinook would need to make 5 trips to offload the ship “battalion” and even with 4 LCUs it would take 13 trips to deposit the 50 warriors of an armoured infantry battalion.  But we’re talking 11 hours rather than the 11 days Sutton took, or so I hope.  To my none military mind, that sounds like a smashing capability.  I’m wedded to neither Bay nor Carlos, feel free to suggest better ships, or just assume they are better.  I’d much prefer something with a much greater cargo handling capacity, but am open to a third heavy landing ship specifically to vomit ISO boxes onto a beach.
Why Chinook?  Again, its that realism (lol) bit, I’d prefer a bigger lift, I’m sure that there is something bigger than the CH53-k planned in the long term, but we have Chinooks.

Read the rest and especially the comments.  Its quite entertaining.

Now the British military as it really is from CDR. Salamander...

In any event - the Brits are walking a rather thin line methinks ....

Royal Navy officers said HMS Westminster was “dangerously under-defended” when it was called on to patrol close to the Libyan port city of Benghazi in March.
The warship can carry 32 Seawolf and eight Harpoon missiles but it is understood that military cutbacks left the Westminster and its crew of 190 with only a fraction of that capability.

As Seawolf missiles — which are used to intercept incoming missiles — are fired in pairs, sources said the Westminster had just two rounds to defend against missile attacks from Col Muammar Gaddafi’s forces.

A hollow Navy defined. Nice E-Ticket part of the 1,000-ship Navy we have there.

The 1,000 ship Navy that CDR. Salamander is talking about is the plan that the Western Navy's of the world could combine (in times of intense crisis) to form a 1,000 ship fleet.

Reality is far different from the wishful thinking that is posted on TD's website.  From my view of things the Royal Navy will be lucky to equal our Coast Guard in size and firepower in a couple of years.

UPDATE & CLARIFICATION:

I need to make a couple of things clear.

1.  Think Defense has guest writers on his blog and the views expressed in that article are from one of them.
2.  The US is clearly on the same trajectory as Europe and the failed bipartisan committee illustrates the trouble that we are in.

CBO's analysis of Amphibious Warfare Ships...

11-18-AmphibiousShips


Major hat tip to Defense Talk.  Long story short.  Combatant Commanders want Marines and amphibs at a higher rate than the US Navy can provide.

Its a short read and well worth it.

Of particular interest is the "Demand for Amphibious Warfare Ships...." and "The Operating Cycle of Amphibious Warfare Ships".

We need more ships!

F-35 Commitment...

During a press conference in Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada, on 18 November 2011, US Defense Secretary Leon E. Panetta (right) and Canadian Defence Minister Peter G. MacKay both called the F-35 crucial to the defense of North America. "The United States is committed to the development of the F-35 and to a cooperative relationship with the F-35 with our Canadian friends," Panetta said. "The F-35 is going to be an essential fighter … in helping us with security challenges we face." MacKay said, "There is no fifth generation aircraft other than the F-35 available to Canada and the United States, so all the hypothetical discussions—and quite negative discussions, quite frankly—about this program are really just clatter and noise.”

Wow.

The leaders of both the US and Canadian Defense establishments just called the F-35 critics, journalist and those that are in their camps -- generators of 'clatter and noise'.

Luv it!

Tactical Air Power 1968 Vintage Air Force Film

Cooking with the Troops.

Hey all.

Consider this a strategically placed stab at your pocket books.

Instead of spending money on trinkets from China that you don't need and won't last how about you support "Cooking with the Troops" with a little of that hard earned money.

I don't do this often so consider it a sign that this is indeed a worthy cause...but if you have your doubts then go here and listen to what a BlackFive writer has to say about it!

Oh and how about after you make your donation, you get your sorry ass to the gym...working out during the holidays will keep you from struggling during the next CFT/PFT.

Thompson nails it. F-35 completes this years test goals....

Thompson nails the critics once again....

Aviation Week & Space Technology reports today that the nation's biggest weapons development program has surpassed its testing goals for calendar year 2011, and is on track to do the same in 2012. The goal for 2011 was 872 flight tests, and as of last Thursday, 875 had been completed. This is very good news, since three U.S. military services and a dozen allies need various versions of the plane to replace aging Cold War fighters. Without it, they can't preserve U.S. air superiority through mid-century.

So where are all the news stories highlighting the importance of this achievement and praising American ingenuity? Over the last several years, news services and the general media have reported every setback the F-35 program has faced, real or imagined. You know, like the trillion-dollar number to operate the plane through 2065 that it now turns out none of the military users believes (they're getting ready to challenge the methods and assumptions supporting the calculation).
I checked news.google.com for F-35 stories this morning, and it came up mostly with headlines like "Lockheed's F-35 Not in Budget 'Cross Hairs', Dempsey Says," and "McCain Raises Concerns About F-35 Cost Overruns." Something tells me if I wait a few days for the Fourth Estate to digest the good news from the F-35 program, I'm still going to find mostly negative reports about how it's faring. I predict all the major news outlets will decide it isn't worth reporting that the Pentagon's most expensive and complicated weapons program is making steady progress. Aviation Week and the rest of the trade press will notice, but the New York Times? Not a chance.
This tells you some important things about the way news is reported in the general media. First, it underscores the preference of reporters and editors for stories involving conflict of some sort. If it's good news, it usually isn't considered news at all. Second, it reflects the ideological biases of some outlets, which will report any kind of lurid nonsense about big weapons programs with minimal checking, but just can't be bothered to tell you the other side of the story. And third, it suggests why people who are exposed to a great deal of daily news tend to be pessimistic about America's future -- because all the technological breakthroughs and economic achievements get short shrift, while bad news hogs the front page.
Oh, and it also tells you one more thing about the prevailing approach to gathering the news. It tells you why consumers are walking away in droves, preferring social media and internet aggregators to the daily downer they get each day from traditional outlets. People just don't believe (or don't care about) the version of reality they are getting from newspapers and television news, so they are voting with their feet to get information from other sources. If you look at the way the F-35 story has been reported over the last several years, that reaction is easy to understand. It's an essential program that is making steady progress, but you'd never know that from reading stories about it in the general media.
Loren B. Thompson, Ph.D.

Absolutely spot on.

I also note with a bit of sadness that there appears to be a distinct rift between Aviation Week and its blog Ares.

Note that I said appears.

This would bear watching, but I've always assumed that what was in one was in the other and vice versa.  That wouldn't seem to be the case.

Like I said ... interesting.

Shooting Positions by MagPul Dynamics...

My questions are...

1.  Is this useful in CQB?  Seems like muzzle strike are out the window when using this shooting method.

2.  When you're shooting, moving and communicating is this method as fast as the 'old' holds?  Transitioning from a sprint to the MagPul grip would seem to cost time.

3.  Its definitely not as stable on long distance shots so is this a one trick pony?  For use only on a range when engaging multiple targets?  Is it something that can be used tactically?

11th Marine Expeditionary Unit's maritime raid force participate in a live fire exercise

All photos by Cpl. Chad Pulliam

Cpl. Nathan M. Sleeman, a squad leader with the 11th Marine Expeditionary Unit's maritime raid force, fires at targets while participating in a live fire exercise here Nov. 19. After additional training, the force will embark the amphibious transport dock New Orleans for a seven-month deployment to the Western Pacific and Middle East regions.

Lance Cpl. Armando F. Leal, left, provides security while Petty Officer 3rd Class Brian J. Klindt, right, moves through brush during a live fire exercise here Nov. 19. Klindt and Leal serve with the 11th Marine Expeditionary Unit's maritime raid force. After additional training, the force will embark the amphibious transport dock New Orleans for a seven-month deployment to the Western Pacific and Middle East regions.

Marines with the 11th Marine Expeditionary Unit's maritime raid force participate in a live fire exercise here Nov. 19. After additional training, the force will embark the amphibious transport dock New Orleans for a seven-month deployment to the Western Pacific and Middle East regions.