Red Storm Rising.

[Rabs]

which US in reality hadn't in 80-ies

I don't think it is that fanciful to slap a sidewinder onto an F-117, very much possible.

 

[A Can of Man]

Rabs it is. The AIM9 sidewinders don't need radar lock to acquire and shoot down air targets, especially something as non maneuverable as a Mainstay. You point and launch and the seeker will find the Mainstay's engines and home in. You can in fact arm your Cessna with a sidewinder.

As for the order of battle there is a flaw:
"957 Airforce + 13 USMC Reserve F-15"
USMC does not have F-15s. It's a pretty glaring mistake actually.
Also there is no doubt that Russia was superior in number. Everyone knows that. Quality however, is different. I can't remember from Red Storm Rising but in Red Army, the quantity of Russian equipment over quality was explained. The Russian equipment is designed for short term shock attacks where it is expected to be destroyed in large numbers. NATO equipment is expected to survive longer. In the longer run, the NATO equipment gains the edge as Russian losses bring their numerical advantage down.
This has never been in debate.
Quality has. Quality of hardware and pilot training, which again, the West invested FAR more capital into than its Russian counterparts (I believe Alexander Zuyev's book FULCRUM covered some of that).

I'm also not saying that book is a godly creation, some kind of non fiction Oracle-esque masterpiece of what would have happened if war broke out. A different outcome is completely possible.
But my point was, some things pointed out in the novel has turned out to be true: the vulnerability of attack helicopters and the effectiveness of the A-10 in ground support.

 

[Rabs]

no 13th we are agreeing. When i said its not that fanciful, i mean its not that unreasonable.

 

[Supostat]

In the book air superiority, or something very close to that was won with "operation Dreamland".
Clancy never reveals the exact enemy planes lost during that action.

Such an operation is very feasible.

Problem was, that this operation was completed with imaginary stealth fighters, which USAF hadn't in middle 80-ies. F=117 is not fighter, but ground-attack aircraft (Clancy wrote about supersonic stealth fighter, F-117 definitely is not such. I'm not sure, can it carry a long or medium range air-to-air guided missiles, but fulfill such mission with short range Sidewinders I guess, will be quite risky. Besides, F-117 is not invisible, but less visible than common aircraft, and one F-117 was shot down in 1999 in Yugoslavia, which had mostly aged air defense systems. The reason was that F-117 was designed for modern radar frequencies, while use older radars with different (lower?) frequencies removes a invisibility from F-117...

Second, tank crews (again in the book) were ordered to specifically target AA systems on the battlefield as the ground attack planes had taken heavy casualties.

Also a very feasible statement.

I consider that AA systems will not expose in battlefield to be easily hit by enemy.

It is a fictional book, not a documentary.

Agree, but as I understood, Clancy pretended to model a modern symmetric war between to big armies. And in THIS he failed somewhere, with inaccuracies.

In my opinion it´s a worthwhile read.

No doubts. Book is quite interesting.

The AIM9 sidewinders don't need radar lock to acquire and shoot down air targets, especially something as non maneuverable as a Mainstay. You point and launch and the seeker will find the Mainstay's engines and home in. You can in fact arm your Cessna with a sidewinder.

If incoming Sidewinder is detected, Mainstay always can use thermal boobytraps (false thermal targets, I do not know exact English terminology, sorry for that).

As for the order of battle there is a flaw:
"957 Airforce + 13 USMC Reserve F-15"
USMC does not have F-15s. It's a pretty glaring mistake actually.

Quite possible. I am not expert in organization of USAF, I just shared data I found on net.

Also there is no doubt that Russia was superior in number.

For nowadays, Russia isn't. In fighters and Navy aircraft USA has overwhelming superiority. For mid 80-ies - who knows, but taking into consideration European NATO aircraft and Warszaw treaty aircraft I still think NATO will numeric superiority in aircraft.

The Russian equipment is designed for short term shock attacks where it is expected to be destroyed in large numbers. NATO equipment is expected to survive longer. In the longer run, the NATO equipment gains the edge as Russian losses bring their numerical advantage down.
This has never been in debate.

Not survivability. This difference always has been little different: Soviet/Russian weapons always have been more simple and foreseen for mass conscripted armies, while Western doctrines relayed on highly-trained, well-equipped (with complicated weapons, what are superior over simple conscript weapon systems) professional soldiers. For one side, quality can beat quantity, for other side - with use of `simple weapon system` USSR won the WW2 (and Germans, relaying on `quality over quantity` concept, failed the `Barbarossa`). So, this concept has its own strengths, which should be taken in consideration.

But my point was, some things pointed out in the novel has turned out to be true: the vulnerability of attack helicopters and the effectiveness of the A-10 in ground support.

...in circumstances of poor/suppressed AA defense system of enemy.

 

[A Can of Man]

Rabs I was confirming you, not challenging your claim.

Also I think what our friend means by thermal decoys is commonly known as "flares" in English. Don't get me wrong I'm not holding this against you as it's not possible for people who learn English as a foreign language to know technical words. In fact, your level of English is very commendable. However, these decoys aren't fool proof, or else we won't have a single air craft shot down to IR guided missiles... or radar guided for that matter due to chaff (electronic decoy foils). An F-117 attack on a Mainstay of course would be tricky but it's not impossible. You're right, it's not super sonic but that's not even an important part of the equasion. Regular fighters like F-15s could in fact launch a feint attack on the Mainstay formation, drawing the attention of the escorts before the F-117s went in for the kill where they could be possibly detected too late for the escorts to react.
Also comparing numbers with quality - USSR vs Nazi Germany - is not really fair to the situation because the lopsidedness was just insane. USSR vs NATO wouldn't enjoy that sort of advantage. Also, NATO wouldn't be commanded by Adolf Hitler - the single most destructive known to the German fighting machine.
As for your accusations of bad/poor AAA... Iraq's air defense network was actually feared as one of the toughest at least during the first Gulf War. That didn't make a difference.

 

[Supostat]

However, these decoys aren't fool proof, or else we won't have a single air craft shot down to IR guided missiles... or radar guided for that matter due to chaff (electronic decoy foils). An F-117 attack on a Mainstay of course would be tricky but it's not impossible.

Only difference, that Clancy did not describe F-117 but another jets

You're right, it's not super sonic but that's not even an important part of the equasion. Regular fighters like F-15s could in fact launch a feint attack on the Mainstay formation, drawing the attention of the escorts before the F-117s went in for the kill where they could be possibly detected too late for the escorts to react.

That's right. Any measure has countermeasure, and any countermeasure has its own countermeasure. Again we come to creativeness and quickness of side commanders and their talent.

Also comparing numbers with quality - USSR vs Nazi Germany - is not really fair to the situation because the lopsidedness was just insane. USSR vs NATO wouldn't enjoy that sort of advantage. Also, NATO wouldn't be commanded by Adolf Hitler - the single most destructive known to the German fighting machine.

I don't want go too much offtopic, but Western `quality over quantity` concept failed BEFORE Hitler went insane. Although it does not mean, that `quantity over quality` rulez and will always guarantee the victory.

As for your accusations of bad/poor AAA... Iraq's air defense network was actually feared as one of the toughest at least during the first Gulf War. That didn't make a difference.

Iraqi during First Gulf War (i.e. 1991) was banally outnumbered, since US lead coalition was able to concentrate a lot or aircraft and cruise missiles over limited area (actually, territory of Kuwait).

* * *
My point is, that despite of interesting story and undeniable pretty well knowledge of military branch as such and Soviet military inside too (in comparison with Soviet Army, portreyed in `Rambo 3`, for example :lol: ), `RSR` still gives considerable basis for critics, especially if Clancy with his work pretend to `model a modern symmetric warfare`. Critics what I am trying to mark out, in accordance with my humble knowledge.

 

[A Can of Man]

That's fine it's just that I'm pointing out what parts of your arguments are not right.
Now let's take a look.
The F-117 was not mentioned because that jet was classified at the time. But the role of the F-19 as per mentioned in the novel is not TOO far off from what we expect of the F-117. It is not supersonic and is not used for launching sidewinder missiles but it could. Not supersonic... that's just about the only inconsistency.
As for the first Gulf War, the target area was not just around Kuwait. Air strikes were made deep into Iraqi territory including Baghdad and air fields all around the country. SAM did take down some birds but not enough to prevent a completely lopsided air superiority for the coalition. So this part of your argument is actually absolutely incorrect. Please check your facts before you make such a statement.
Also, provide proof that the quality didn't work against quantity before Hitler went insane. Hitler's forces with superior weapons were in fact defeated more by the cold winter than the Red Army itself. The Red Army took full advantage of this and were victorious after the Germans could never recover from their losses. Weapon quality and quantity was not a factor in this engagement. German troops without winter coats and winter foot gear with an overstretched supply line was.
Heck, even Hitler managed to botch Overlord by preventing the superior German tanks from entering the battle because 1) he believed that the real landing would be in Calais and 2) because he was asleep and was not to be disturbed.
Quality vs Quantity deserves another thread but what I'm saying is that your quality vs quantity argument here applied to Red Storm Rising is flawed.
If you are not sure about certain things, please say you are not sure. Your background information on the 1991 Gulf War was completely off the mark.

Let's not even go into the Rambo movies... dear Lord... hehehe

 

[Supostat]

The F-117 was not mentioned because that jet was classified at the time. But the role of the F-19 as per mentioned in the novel is not TOO far off from what we expect of the F-117. It is not supersonic and is not used for launching sidewinder missiles but it could. Not supersonic... that's just about the only inconsistency.

F-117 could, but mission will be quite risky since it is not primarily designed for fighter role. And, strategically, could give `casus belli` to Soviet side, since Americans actually commenced first attack. Soviets just answered...
On other side, Clancy could not be sure, that Soviet side also do not have a secret superweapon. As fictional writer, he could allow himself such joy. But he didn't.

As for the first Gulf War, the target area was not just around Kuwait. Air strikes were made deep into Iraqi territory including Baghdad and air fields all around the country. SAM did take down some birds but not enough to prevent a completely lopsided air superiority for the coalition. So this part of your argument is actually absolutely incorrect. Please check your facts before you make such a statement.

Ok, but agree, that territory of Iraq is not very large. Besides US lead coalition was able to use airfields in Turkey and Saudi Arabia, which means, that one plane could make a few combat flights in day. Again, if we return to `RSR`, the front line over Germany, Denmark and UK/Norway is much longer, with large number of Soviet aircraft, considerable greater than Air Force of Iraq in 1991. And, if Soviets manage to capture Iceland, USAF wouldn't be able to attack with such intensity like in Iraq@1991. Just because of distance (and if Soviets were chosen Iceland for strategically important base to control Atlantic Ocean, they also would take all the possible measures, to protect it from any possible attack. Here Clancy gives a lot credits to American side).

Anyway, Iraq had no any chances to fight back US lead aircraft superiority in 1991, while Soviets had some chances for it (and we again do not know ALL factors - for example, not all the USAF aircraft would be dislocated in West Germany/Denmark/UK/Norway at the beginning of conflict, and it means, that NATO air superiority wouldn't be permanent, especially, in beginning of conflict), despite of lack of quality and quantity of aircraft.

Also, provide proof that the quality didn't work against quantity before Hitler went insane. Hitler's forces with superior weapons were in fact defeated more by the cold winter than the Red Army itself. The Red Army took full advantage of this and were victorious after the Germans could never recover from their losses. Weapon quality and quantity was not a factor in this engagement. German troops without winter coats and winter foot gear with an overstretched supply line was.

1) `Barbarossa` was planed in influence of the victorious Poland@1939 and France @1940 campaigns. On both these conflicts German army managed to defeat the enemy before it fulfilled mobilization. And there is no Hitler fault, that German army was not ready for winter combat. Due to previous campaigns experience, war was supposed to end before winter.
2) Despite of defeat of masses of Red Army, the huge territory of USSR and though resistance of remains of Red Army slowed down German army enough to fulfill the mobilization both of retreated remains of defeated divisions and soldiers conscripted after beginning of war. And enough to make Germans to be in late for time line of `Barbarossa`, already in August 1941.So the Red Army was not defeated like French or Polish army - it made to receive reinforcements. And when German general stuff supposed, that Red Army should be already completely defeated, they found a new, fresh divisions entering the battlefield. They were relatively poor trained and equipped (particularly in artillery), but they were. Where Germans supposed them not to be.
3) All the main German offensives (assault on Leningrad and Moscow) generally were stopped UNTIL beginning of winter and great colds, although I can not deny influence of beginning of winter on German combat capabilities, but is was not a main factor. On 5 of December, 1941, Red Army already started a relatively successful counterattack, which last till beginning of February 1942.
4) Soviet counterattack ended because of such factors as a) they also overstretched their supply lines and were not able to follow the advancing forces with supplies they needed (and supplying of attacking troops was done mainly by horse transport, since most of Soviet motorized transport were lost in almost half-year long retreat campaign; also attacking troops were generally infantry, reinforced with some more mobile cavalry divisions and few tank brigades - again quantity and the very fact of existence, not modern and qualitative armament); b) beginning of February 1942 - it is the time, when first German reinforcements arrived in Eastern front, equipped for winter combat.
5) After winter 1941/1942 Germans were not defeated, there was still fight for initiative. On spring 1942, Soviets launched massive attack in South, objected to free Kiev. Attack was stopped and Germans answered with operation `Blau` - advance to Stalingrad, which repeated history of summer 1941 - Red Army AGAIN retreated and stopped Germans only in Stalingrad. Initiative completely went on Soviet side only after unsuccessful German operation `Citadel`, i.e. battle of Kursk.

Quality vs Quantity deserves another thread but what I'm saying is that your quality vs quantity argument here applied to Red Storm Rising is flawed.

Yes, for `RSR` scenario as it is it could not be applied, since Clancy ended war before it went in phase of atrition(? not sure again on terminology, found this in dictionary. I mean situation, when professional armies has suffered considerable casualties and are being reinforced with mobilized conscripts. In this situation simplicity of weapon systems gives considerable advantages, since conscripted soldiers learn to use them faster than complicated, highly advanced systems and can enter the fight faster).

I agree, `Quality vs. Quantity` needs its own thread, because its quite important. `AK vs. M-16` also is part of it.

 

[A Can of Man]

Explain why on paper the Iraqis would have had no chance to have air superiority. They had a very good SAM network, dense as hell anyway, and certainly had their fair share of fighter jets. Okay, so maybe they didn't have enough combat aircraft but the truth is, their combat aircraft were a non factor in the entire conflict. And I don't recall any being shot down by coalition SAM. Iraq is a pretty big country. Take a look at it on a map. Not as big as the continent of Europe, but still big enough.
As for the F-117 mission being risky, war is risky. If it's for a mission crucial as taking out Mainstay AWACs aircraft to gain air superiority, this sort of mission most likely would be authorized.
The winter's effect on the German troops was the main factor. The Russians have traditionally used the winter as their single most greatest weapon. Picking a fight with the USSR was disaster for the Germans because at this point they had already fought most of continental Europe, they were thinly spread and of course, had the Americans to answer to as well (this would come later on but still it kept many assets tied down in the west). And who decided to attack the USSR at this point? Adolf Hitler. Your point that the Germans were losing before Hitler lost his mind is false because Hitler was already out of his mind by invading the USSR at such a time.
Strategically, once the Germans lost the initiative in the east, it was over. They had already lost too much and their momentum took a permanent vacation. This happened primarily in Stalingrad where the German 6th Army was destroyed. I think that was 1942. In 1941, Adolf Hitler assumed direct command of all operations in the eastern front. So there you have it, I just disproved your point once again. Hitler was in fact the commanding officer.
So like I said, your comparison for the Red Storm Rising scenario and Germany in the Eastern front is in fact grossly inaccurate. Not to mention in Red Storm Rising, you don't have Americans coming in to hit the Germans from behind, you have American reinforcements coming in to reinforce NATO (that includes Germany).
As for your challenge on America's wonder weapon the F-19 in the novel, there was indeed a true equivalent. Different, not Supersonic, not a TRUE fighter but still something that could have done what the book described. This is the F-117 we talked about. If he made a wonder weapon for the USSR, well, as it turns out, there is no real life equivalent so it would have been more unrealistic.

 

[Supostat]

Explain why on paper the Iraqis would have had no chance to have air superiority. They had a very good SAM network, dense as hell anyway, and certainly had their fair share of fighter jets. Okay, so maybe they didn't have enough combat aircraft but the truth is, their combat aircraft were a non factor in the entire conflict. And I don't recall any being shot down by coalition SAM. Iraq is a pretty big country. Take a look at it on a map. Not as big as the continent of Europe, but still big enough.

1) number of aircraft. We already compared Russian and US aircraft and saw that US has a almost twice superiority in number of fighters. And it IS a serious reason to consider that US has greater chances to gain control of air space over battledield. Problem is in way Clancy describes it.
2) Iraqi has no AWACs aircraft. So, they only can fight back American air strikes (i.e. try to decrease efficiency of American air strikes), not answer with air strikes on American army bases, ships or other targets. They answered only with SCUD rocket launch, but it is not air war.

As for the F-117 mission being risky, war is risky. If it's for a mission crucial as taking out Mainstay AWACs aircraft to gain air superiority, this sort of mission most likely would be authorized.

1) Can Sidewinders be launched from the inside of aircraft? F-117 carry only 2 two bombs/missiles in its `stomach` and nothing under its wings (I guess - missiles under its wings will decrease its stealth effect?). Anyway - it seems that F-117 could not carry more than 2 missiles.
2) I re-read chapter of F-19 `Frisbee` mission. Clancy writes that F-19 enters the Soviet (East German) air space in height of ~30 meters. Could F-117 handle such sustain trimmer flight from aerodynamics point of view?
3) Clancy writes that `Frisbees` shot down ALL 5 Soviet `Mainstay` AWACS. So, what is chance that ALL Soviet AWACS will be simultaneously in air? Besides, `Mainstay` is not only Soviet AWACS type aircraft, there was also AN-71 and older model - Tu-126 (build 9 since 1965). Also MiG-31 has more complicated radar than MiG-25 interceptor and was able to find enemy aircraft as well as AWACS - crew of MiG-31 consisted from pilot and radar operator.
4) About risk... and what in only half of `Frisbees` (or F-117) managed to sneak successfully in Soviet air space and attack their targets? So, if 5 F-117 attack 5 `Mainstays` and in result of it 2 F-117 are shot down in their approach to target, 3 F-117 attacks 3 `Mainstays` and shot down 2 of them, and 1 F-117 is shot down on its way back home - could such operation (lost 3 F-117, shot down 2 `mainstays`) be considered as `successful`?
5) About invisibility of `Stealth`... www.airwar.ru claims, that average RCS of F-117 is 0,01-0,1m², but from certain angles it can arise till 1m². Further, the radar complex of SAM of types S-75, S-125, S-200, SA-4 and SA-6 can aim only targets with RCS greater than 1m², so F-117 has almost no danger of these. But radar complex of SAM type S-300V already be able to aim with RCS = 0,02m². S-300V entered the service in 1983. (www.pvo.guns.ru)

So, it altogether do not convince that F-117 attacking an air targets in area with dense AA defense can manage an efficiency higher than 50%. Not talking about that such joyride will guarantee a total control in air space over battlefield.

The winter's effect on the German troops was the main factor.

Nop. Operation `Barbarossa` failed its deadlines BEFORE winter. Winter helped the Russians, of course. But it was not that factor due to which Germans lost the war.

Your point that the Germans were losing before Hitler lost his mind is false because Hitler was already out of his mind by invading the USSR at such a time.

In 1941 Hitler already has no chance. If he did not invade USSR, the USSR, earlier or later would hit him in the back while he was in war with UK. UK in 1941 was not such threat as USSR, therefore Hitler turned to East. I in his place in situation of 1940/1941 will act similarly. Operation planning mistakes was not just responsibility of Hitler - his General Stuff was also responsible since they were war professionals. Hitler wasn't. And Hitler did not plan the details of operations - his generals did. He just approved plans, provided by generals, of course, choosing the best variant.

All German general Stuff was responsible for underestimate the Red Army in the planning period of `Barbarossa`. Not Hitler alone.

Strategically, once the Germans lost the initiative in the east, it was over. They had already lost too much and their momentum took a permanent vacation. This happened primarily in Stalingrad where the German 6th Army was destroyed. I think that was 1942. In 1941, Adolf Hitler assumed direct command of all operations in the eastern front. So there you have it, I just disproved your point once again. Hitler was in fact the commanding officer.

In fact only after battle of Kursk Soviets regained initiative.
`Barbarossa` has bad planning. And its responsibility of stuff officers.

So like I said, your comparison for the Red Storm Rising scenario and Germany in the Eastern front is in fact grossly inaccurate. Not to mention in Red Storm Rising, you don't have Americans coming in to hit the Germans from behind, you have American reinforcements coming in to reinforce NATO (that includes Germany).

I did not compare WW2 with `RSR`. I mentioned Germans and WW2 as argument for `simplicity vs. high trained proffesionality`. In fact, it is old good `quality vs. quantity` argue.

 

[A Can of Man]

We're really going nowhere with the historical debate but most people do attribute Germany's demise to Hitler's micromanagement. Whether you agree with it or not.

The F-19s in the novel did not have a joy ride. They did take losses and in the book actually, their stealth is not considered perfect and they say so, which is the reason why they flew so low. Can F-117s fly so low to the ground? At a lower airspeed it's perfectly possible. After all, it IS an airplane. And yes, if the F-117s were able to take out the on station Mainstays and create a window in which NATO aircraft could destroy key bridges, AA assets and Soviet fighters, even with those losses it would have been considered a successful mission. I don't even see how this is up for debate.
Basically in the story, the Americans found a way to negate the superior numbers of the Soviet Air Force by throwing them into a temporary confused state that NATO was counting on. Like the Soviets said before, "surprise is everything." Works the other way around too. And heck, the Soviets were able to pull off a surprise of their own and took out the US base in Iceland.
Can the sidewinder be used internally? You could in fact, point, fire and have the missile seeker head target in flight. For this of course you'd have to close the range a bit and have a good view of the target's engine to ensure success. The sidewinder does this anyway, this is why it actually does fall for flares now and then.

 

[rock45]

Larry Bond

Larry Bond help write Red Storm Rising with Tom Clancy and well as create the Harpoon naval game. His early books are better then his later books overall.

 

[Supostat]

And yes, if the F-117s were able to take out the on station Mainstays and create a window in which NATO aircraft could destroy key bridges, AA assets and Soviet fighters, even with those losses it would have been considered a successful mission. I don't even see how this is up for debate.

For that they need:

• All Mainstays in the air;
• Poor protection of Mainstays. There was mentioned that Sentries were always escorted with interceptors. Don't see why Soviets should leave Mainstays unprotected;
• At least one Sidewinder fired at each Mainstay hit successfully its target.

What comes to key bridges, for that military engineers exist with their own folding bridges. So destruction of key bridges will be just inconvenience, not catastrophe.

Basically in the story, the Americans found a way to negate the superior numbers of the Soviet Air Force by throwing them into a temporary confused state that NATO was counting on. Like the Soviets said before, "surprise is everything."

Of course, I agree that ANY countermeasure could confuse Soviet plans and slow them down. My point was that Clancy overdid the effect of countermeasures.

Also, I did not notice any use of long-range MRLS in beginning of Soviet assault. As I discussed this in other forums the views were that MRLS as well as tactical missiles have been used widely in first hours of operation.

Works the other way around too. And heck, the Soviets were able to pull off a surprise of their own and took out the US base in Iceland.

This episode is terrible risky, too. It was kind a miracle in book as it finally went successful. War relaying on such risky key operations like this is not war but adventure/affair...

However, it is also not clear why airborne division did job of naval infantry in this episode

* * *
Just couple of other things:

• If USAF has its Wunferwaffe (F-19 `Frisbee`), than Soviets also could answer with their Wunderwaffe - supersonic bomber Tu-160, which was built in 4 exemplars till August 1986 (already 10 planes were in use at the end of 1987). If `Backfires` carried up to 3 Kh-22 cruise missiles, the Tu-160 could carry up to 12 cruise missiles Kh-55 and 24 air-to-surface Kh-15 missiles. This could make a little bit different outcome of air attacks on US Navy Group in Atlantic.
• Clancy did mention only AK-47 rifles as small arms of Soviet Army. However, we can see Soviet soldiers with actual AKS-74 rifles in quite similar scenario movie `Red Dawn`, which was released in August 1984...

 

[A Can of Man]

I think the Mainstays were intercepted. I can't remember too well but I think F-15s drew the Mainstay escorts off before the F-19s went in for the kill.
Even if you do not knock out all, knocking out enough would form gaps in coverage which could be expoited.
As for bridging equipment... if some bad guys blew up a bridge I was supposed to cross that would...
- Cause delays. Sometimes serious. Remember "A Bridge Too Far."
- No guarantee that the bridging equipment would survive. If NATO forces arrived in time the bridging equipment won't be able to deploy.
- Bridging equipment also means slower crossing of rivers than over a major bridge.
- During the delay time the enemy could prepare neccessary positions more effectively (which is what happened in the book). The Russians were not stopped cold on every stretch of river I think.

There actually is a way to minimize the effect of bridge blowing but I don't think I should post it here.

I also didn't get why paratroopers were assigned to take Iceland amphibiously. Seemed like an odd choice.

The AK-47 mistake was inaccurate but it wouldn't have turned the course of the war that dramatically.

 

[Supostat]

I think the Mainstays were intercepted. I can't remember too well but I think F-15s drew the Mainstay escorts off before the F-19s went in for the kill.

I re-read that chapter. There was no escort and in the beginning F-19s acted alone.

The AK-47 mistake was inaccurate but it wouldn't have turned the course of the war that dramatically.

I agree. It's small inaccuracy with no global influence on outcome of war.

 

[A Can of Man]

Hmmm that's something the guy needs to answer isn't it?

 

[KJ]

I re-read that chapter. There was no escort and in the beginning F-19s acted alone.

I agree. It's small inaccuracy with no global influence on outcome of war.

There were escorts.
But they failed to pick up the F19,s among the ground echoes during their attack run.

However this is all of academical interest as it IS a novel, not a documentary.

KJ.

 

[Supostat]

There were escorts.

Then they are missing in Russian translation which I read, or there are mistakes in translation.

 

[A Can of Man]

I'm pretty sure there were escorts that were drawn off.
I think your translation missed it.
But like KJ said, just a novel.

 

[Supostat]

However this is all of academical interest as it IS a novel, not a documentary

But like KJ said, just a novel.

That does not forbid us to analyze it, right?