If I may put on my nerd hat for a moment and recommend a good read

[bunk22]

Even this cool, hard charging, heavy drinking, womanizing COD driver has a geek side. I love reading about aviation history, air warfare specifically and just read a fact book called "Iran-Iraq War in the Air" by Tom Cooper and Farzad Bishop. You can get it from Barnes and Noble. Good research on the many air-to-air, anti-ship, air-to-ground battles that took place during the 8 year war. Surprised how many kills were scored by the F-5E against all types of aircraft. The F-14 rained supreme with about 80 confirmed and up to 40 probable kills, losing very few in returned. A good book for those who think the Iranian F-14 fell apart over those 8 years.

 

[A4sForever]

Even this .....COD driver has a geek side. I love reading about aviation history, air warfare specifically ....

Yes, BUT:

Are you a "geek" because you are a COD driver??
-- or --
Are you a COD driver because you are a "geek"??

And I agree. History is a great teacher. That's how I became interested in the military. More people should read and study history --- if only to keep from repeating history's mistakes. And military history is what channels and determines so much of what has happened in this 'ol world's .... history.

 

[bunk22]

Yes, BUT:

Are you a "geek" because you are a COD driver??
-- or --
Are you a COD driver because you are a "geek"??

It might be a little of both Like "Pistol" (an F-15E and F-16CJ driver) once said to my det pilots, you COD guys are coolest non fighter guys I've ever met. He is the Singapore Peya Lebar Air Force liason. Then again, it was an Air Force driver saying it Usually the Navy fighter types simply say, ****ing COD guys with a little shake of the head

 

[kmac]

Speaking of reading material...
Bunk you left your book in the ready room on the ship.
...and your NATOPS jacket. You might want those.

How's that JPME reading coming along?

 

[bunk22]

Speaking of reading material...
Bunk you left your book in the ready room on the ship.
...and your NATOPS jacket. You might want those.

How's that JPME reading coming along?

I asked for my NATOPS jacket to be sent a month ago and heard it still hasn't. Ed is supposedly taking care of that for me. As for the book, give it to the ships library. There's a lot more reading for the JPME this time, more conventional though.

 

[mmx1]

Ack, I keep running into people excited over this book's rewriting of history and am skeptical of its claims of over 100 kills and kill-rates well over 50%. Did they even have a stock of 100 phoenix missiles?

What do you think of the first review on amazon (by a Mr. Forzyk)
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/1841767875/ref=pd_bxgy_text_b/103-5682531-5515843?_encoding=UTF8
that claims that most of the "confirmed" kills were from single sources only, and that the claimed number contradicts even what Iran officially listed as the official kill count?

 

[bunk22]

Ack, I keep running into people excited over this book's rewriting of history and am skeptical of its claims of over 100 kills and kill-rates well over 50%. Did they even have a stock of 100 phoenix missiles?

What do you think of the first review on amazon (by a Mr. Forzyk)
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/1841767875/ref=pd_bxgy_text_b/103-5682531-5515843?_encoding=UTF8
that claims that most of the "confirmed" kills were from single sources only, and that the claimed number contradicts even what Iran officially listed as the official kill count?

Well, number one, that's not the book I'm referring to and it doesn't attempt to rewrite any history. Thus, number two, might want to try and read it before commenting on it. The authors do a pretty thorough research into all aspects of the air war, not just F-14 kills. They put the kills for the Tomcat at about 80 vs 5-8 losses for the Tomcat. The info was gathered from Iraqi and Iran documents, Iraqi and Iran pilots, etc. Even has info on the Saudi/American F-15 engagement vs Iranian F-4's and the USN F-14 engagement in 87 I believe. So, try at least to come to the table with a little knowledge about the subject. Thanks and try again :icon_smil

 

[Flash]

Well, number one, that's not the book I'm referring to and it doesn't attempt to rewrite any history. Thus, number two, might want to try and read it before commenting on it. The authors do a pretty thorough research into all aspects of the air war, not just F-14 kills. They put the kills for the Tomcat at about 80 vs 5-8 losses for the Tomcat. The info was gathered from Iraqi and Iran documents, Iraqi and Iran pilots, etc. Even has info on the Saudi/American F-15 engagement vs Iranian F-4's and the USN F-14 engagement in 87 I believe. So, try at least to come to the table with a little knowledge about the subject. Thanks and try again :icon_smil

I have not read the book yet but after your review and the fact that I am a fellow 'geek' when it comes to aerial warfare history, I will probably be making a purchase here soon......

However, I am very skeptical of the claims made by both sides when it comes to 'confirmed' kills. No matter what the Iraninan and Iraqi source material says I would consider it almost all suspect. The Middle Eastern states have a very poor record of air combat against the Israeli's and an even poorer track record when it comes to claiming kills against them. I have read quite a few 'neutral' books on the aerial battles between the Israeli's and the Arab countries and many make the point that while Israel is pretty stingy about fessing up to their planes that were shot down, the Arab claims were usually fantastical and had very little basis in reality. The same goes for some of the Pakistani claims against India in the '65 and '71 wars.

Additionally, both countries were run by authoritarian regimes and the Air Forces had little to lose and a lot to gain by making inflated claims. Without a doubt some pretty interesting air combat took place during the war but I have little faith in 'source' documentation from those two countries or the eyewitness accounts of the pilots.

But yes Bunk, I plan on reading the book and seeing first hand what you are talking about.

 

[bunk22]

Hey Flash,

It's definitely a book that has to be taken with a grain of salt. however, it does mention often that many kills claimed by both sides could not be verified. There are some pics and often mentioning of wreckages of aircraft. More often than not, Iraqi aircraft. Again, the book deals with all aspects of the air war, not just F-14 combat. The Iranians did train in the US and I would presume their skill level was a notch above that of the Iraqi pilots. There are some interviews with Iraqi and Russian pilots who flew against the Iranians as well.

There's a well known story of from the Iraq side of some Generals who decided to take a tour of the forward battle area via some MI-8's I belive. They had an escort of 4 Mig-21's and 4 Mig-23's. Two F-14's on tanker escort got the call with one of them responding. I think they were carrying the standard load of two AIM-54's, two AIM-7's and two AIM-9's. They tracked the oncoming MIG's and picked off three of them, presumably two with one missle. The Iraqi helo pilots basically saw two Migs plumet into the ground on fire, the first sign they new they were under attack. The MIG's and helo's turned and ran, with another MIG falling to the Tomcat. This combat was apparently verified by both sides.

 

[Catmando]

The Iranians did train in the US and I would presume their skill level was a notch above that of the Iraqi pilots. . . .

Not only did the Iranians train in the US, but it should not be forgotten that we maintained a large, permanent detachment of experienced F-14 pilots and RO's as instructors, flying and training Iranians in Isfahan, right up until the Shah was overthrown. They were part of the Pentagon’s Technical Assistance Field Teams know as "TAFT Iran."

Now those guys had some stories!

 

[mo7stanley]

Bunk 22 your Avatar is freeking me out please change it.

 

[bunk22]

Bunk 22 your Avatar is freeking me out please change it.

Yeah, me too

 

[Flash]

Hey Flash,

It's definitely a book that has to be taken with a grain of salt. however, it does mention often that many kills claimed by both sides could not be verified. There are some pics and often mentioning of wreckages of aircraft. More often than not, Iraqi aircraft. Again, the book deals with all aspects of the air war, not just F-14 combat. The Iranians did train in the US and I would presume their skill level was a notch above that of the Iraqi pilots. There are some interviews with Iraqi and Russian pilots who flew against the Iranians as well.

There's a well known story of from the Iraq side of some Generals who decided to take a tour of the forward battle area via some MI-8's I belive. They had an escort of 4 Mig-21's and 4 Mig-23's. Two F-14's on tanker escort got the call with one of them responding. I think they were carrying the standard load of two AIM-54's, two AIM-7's and two AIM-9's. They tracked the oncoming MIG's and picked off three of them, presumably two with one missle. The Iraqi helo pilots basically saw two Migs plumet into the ground on fire, the first sign they new they were under attack. The MIG's and helo's turned and ran, with another MIG falling to the Tomcat. This combat was apparently verified by both sides.

I looked at reviews for the two books the two authors wrote on Amazon and was a little put off by what I read. I give credit to the authors for trying to shed some light on a little studied conflict. However, I am a bit unsettled by the fact that they rely on surreptitious contacts with the veterans of the Iranian Air Foce and don't seem to rely as much on info from the Iraqis. That and the authors apparently admit to the paucity of accurate records pokes a hole into how accurate the kill claims really are.

Showing some pictures of wreckage and having one story confirmed by the Iraqis does not make the whole book accurate. Having read a lot about how kill claims are inaccurate even with meticulous record keeping (many US claims in WW II have often not stood up to historical scrutiny) makes me really doubt the accuradcy of the book. And while the Iranians were trained by us and may have been better than average than the average Iraqi, it doesn't make them really good pilots or capable of as many kills as they claim. And I do know a little more about that subject than the man off the street or most of the people on this board......... This kind of info makes me wonder a littel bit about the accuracy of the book "standard load of two AIM-54's, two AIM-7's and two AIM-9's".....

 

[bunk22]

Well Flash, you've got to do what you've got to do. There are interviews with Iraqi pilots as well. I've read quality work, such as those written by John B. Lundstrom, and though it may not stand up to his credentials, there isn't much else out there on this subject (meaning particular war). You may borrow my book if would you like. I'm done with it.

 

[TurnandBurn55]

\This kind of info makes me wonder a littel bit about the accuracy of the book "standard load of two AIM-54's, two AIM-7's and two AIM-9's".....

Why's that?