Jump to content

included theater discussion


remi
 Share

Recommended Posts

Part of the reason that older sims did those things better is because they could put a larger percentage of coding labor into them since there were other areas like flight model, avionics and fancy graphics, where they did not need to spend as much time.

Yeah, but some "ancient" features sure don't seam like all that coding intensive. I.E. limited ordnance stores, airframe flight worthiness/condition, limited airframe/squadron availability...... even relatively "soft" sims used to have that.

Current modules:

FC3, Mirage 2000C, Harrier AV-8B NA, F-5, AJS-37 Viggen, F-14B, F-14A, Combined Arms, F/A-18C, F-16C, MiG-19P, F-86, FW-190A, Spitfire Mk IX, UH-1 Huey, Su-25, P-51PD, Caucasus map, Nevada map, Persian Gulf map, Marianas map, Syria Map......ah yes, forgot the Super Carrier! Shows you how often i fly these days....

Modules in waiting: MiG-23, A-6, F-4U, F-8, Falklands Map

Wish list: South East Asia map, F-4J/N, F-15A/C, Su-27, Sea Harrier FRS.1, Mirage III, MiG-17.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 272
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Well, I'd certainly agree. I wish DCS World could rework their UI and campaign support to allow for squadron management, various campaign options like limited ordnance (actually, they do have those warehouses, but those seem more for MP), better support for various images to go with the mission briefings, video files, music, etc.

 

One thing I'm curious of is if DCS can work the "virtual airfield" (or virtual carrier) concept into the game. One of the things about DCS that sent me into a delirious frenzy was when I ejected, landed, and found that the pilot could walk around on foot! If the DCS world is capable of simulating a living, breathing world from both earth and sky, could they not implement a virtual/carrier airfield? That would be the immersive feature to end all immersive features?

 

Definitely, but the major point there for me is the campaign. DCS would have to add some of those options (the squadron management, weapon selection as part of the briefing, after action report) to retire the FD completely. I'm sure we'll get there, just hope it would be sooner rather than later ;)

 

Fleet Defender is definitely unique in its own right. Hopefully, we'll definitely get there!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

One thing I'm curious of is if DCS can work the "virtual airfield" (or virtual carrier) concept into the game. One of the things about DCS that sent me into a delirious frenzy was when I ejected, landed, and found that the pilot could walk around on foot! If the DCS world is capable of simulating a living, breathing world from both earth and sky, could they not implement a virtual/carrier airfield? That would be the immersive feature to end all immersive features?

 

I was also taken aback by the ability to walk around the world and explore my wrecked fighter (not too often :music_whistling:). I would love the ability to preflight and walk around the aircraft as part of normal operations.

 

The idea of a virtual carrier sounds remarkable, walking the Hangar deck by a dozen Tomcats and Hornets. The 3D models are so detailed, it seems feasible if the carrier model is also detailed enough.

 

I think that having to detail with maintenance issues, especially with the difficult to maintain F-14, would add a lot to the total experience. Modern american fighter operations are so different than WWI or WWII. Operations tend to be short and promotion is not part of the immediate process (air medals and such certainly happen), but a rapid increase in responsibility seems unlikely in the modern campaign. Also, American units are so well equipped and supplied, that some of the classic WWII (imaging the Cactus Air force on Guadalcanal) hardships are not part of the equation. Running out of ammo or fuel is really unlikely and units are likely to be reinforced or rotated out far before they run out of airframes.

 

That said, Tomcat squadrons were known to run a bit short on operational airframes if they weren't diligent about maintenance. The book "Black Aces High" mentions that VF-41 had to borrow airframes from VF-14 during their 1995 cruise to meet their squadron operational obligations. That would be a more compelling scenario for the player to deal with than losing half of his aircraft to combat losses (though that could happen under extreme circumstances).

 

-Nick

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Running out of ammo or fuel is really unlikely and units are likely to be reinforced or rotated out far before they run out of airframes.

 

That said, Tomcat squadrons were known to run a bit short on operational airframes if they weren't diligent about maintenance. The book "Black Aces High" mentions that VF-41 had to borrow airframes from VF-14 during their 1995 cruise to meet their squadron operational obligations. That would be a more compelling scenario for the player to deal with than losing half of his aircraft to combat losses (though that could happen under extreme circumstances).

 

It depends on the scenario, operational and sortie levels (which drop significantly on prolonged operations) and the opposing force I guess. E.g. in aforementioned Fleet Defender, you had multiple Tomcat flights on each mission and they could suffer losses to SAM's and other planes, especially if the campaign involved MiG-29's and Su-27's. You could see on the after action report what they shot down and how they were shot down and the game would track those. Of course, this would also be up to the AI flying those Tomcat's, but the AI in DCS is not that great to keep itself out of harm. Regarding the fuel and missiles, I've read that these had to be replenished every three days during Desert Storm. I wonder what was the usual load of Phoenix missiles while on a regular patrol deployment and how many missiles were built in total? It couldn't have been a huge number.

 

In any case, it was suggested that these would be somewhat "gamey" options to enhance the campaign immersion (with the emphasis on being optional).


Edited by Dudikoff

i386DX40@42 MHz w/i387 CP, 4 MB RAM (8*512 kB), Trident 8900C 1 MB w/16-bit RAMDAC ISA, Quantum 340 MB UDMA33, SB 16, DOS 6.22 w/QEMM + Win3.11CE, Quickshot 1btn 2axis, Numpad as hat. 2 FPH on a good day, 1 FPH avg.

 

DISCLAIMER: My posts are still absolutely useless. Just finding excuses not to learn the F-14 (HB's Swansong?).

 

Annoyed by my posts? Please consider donating. Once the target sum is reached, I'll be off to somewhere nice I promise not to post from. I'd buy that for a dollar!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's only true in the most lopsided of wars Blacklion. If you're doing a USA vs Iraq 2003 campaign, then yeah, the only thing you might be worried about is running out of bombs before the next resupply ship comes. But that kind of campaign is a little boring imho since if made realistic, you'd never encounter an enemy plane. If you're looking at Iran vs Iraq in the 1980's, then you have 79 F-14's and maybe a few thousand missiles. Once they are gone, they are gone. There is no resupply. If you do a hypothetical NATO vs USSR campaign, then the situation would be similar.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In view of the latest development, that the next jet from LNS might well be the AJ37 Viggen*, what does that mean for the map? We know that LNS has two maps and 3 aircraft in development. I strongly assume that one map is for the WWII type, so there is either a common map for the Tomcat and the Viggen or a map tailored for one of the two.

 

The Viggen would require a map which inlcludes Sweden, since the type was not supposed to be operated anywhere else. A common map with the Tomcat would be North Cape, as we have seen it includeds a chunk of Sweden. But we also saw that it is a big map that does not comply with LNS's statement that their first maps would be small. A possibility would be Gotland, a Swedish island in the Baltic. The Baltic on the other hand is not a common operating area for the Tomcat (too small and dangerous for carriers). It would actually be possible, since the Tomcat will require carrier operations for any meaningful (USN) operarations, and since timely inclusion of carrier ops by ED is unknown, that LNS's first map is NOT tailored for the Tomcat.

 

 

*For the sake of the argument, I am assuming here that this is true. At this point it sounds very likely.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Could it also be the AJS37 or it raises the complexity with some systems? I'm not that familiar with Viggen variants, but the AJS introduced Sidewinders if I understand correctly from the wiki page.

 

Regarding the theater was thinking the same today (I guess not too many options for a Viggen) - North Cape or Baltic, but the latter wouldn't have US Carrier groups. Although, I could see them fit into any Scandinavian map if we stretch the scenario a bit.


Edited by Dudikoff

i386DX40@42 MHz w/i387 CP, 4 MB RAM (8*512 kB), Trident 8900C 1 MB w/16-bit RAMDAC ISA, Quantum 340 MB UDMA33, SB 16, DOS 6.22 w/QEMM + Win3.11CE, Quickshot 1btn 2axis, Numpad as hat. 2 FPH on a good day, 1 FPH avg.

 

DISCLAIMER: My posts are still absolutely useless. Just finding excuses not to learn the F-14 (HB's Swansong?).

 

Annoyed by my posts? Please consider donating. Once the target sum is reached, I'll be off to somewhere nice I promise not to post from. I'd buy that for a dollar!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Could it also be the AJS37 or it raises the complexity with some systems? I'm not that familiar with Viggen variants, but the AJS introduced Sidewinders if I understand correctly from the wiki page.

 

According to vectorsite, Rb24 (AIM-9B and AIM-9J) were integrated on 2 pylons since the beginning with the AJ 37. Rb74/AIM-9L intergration then followed in the late 1980s even before the AJS upgrade in 1992, as was the Rb75/AGM-65A.


Edited by MBot
Link to comment
Share on other sites

According to vectorsite, Rb24 (AIM-9B and AIM-9J) were integrated on 2 pylons since the beginning with the AJ 37. Rb74/AIM-9L intergration then followed in the late 1980s even before the AJS upgrade in 1992, as was the Rb75/AGM-65A.

 

I see now that I actually misread the wiki article. They were referring to the outboard wing pylon being used only for AIM-4 Falcon missiles on the AJ37. Since AJS37 came out after the Cold War, I would kindly revise my previous erroneous statement and ask for the AJ37 :)

i386DX40@42 MHz w/i387 CP, 4 MB RAM (8*512 kB), Trident 8900C 1 MB w/16-bit RAMDAC ISA, Quantum 340 MB UDMA33, SB 16, DOS 6.22 w/QEMM + Win3.11CE, Quickshot 1btn 2axis, Numpad as hat. 2 FPH on a good day, 1 FPH avg.

 

DISCLAIMER: My posts are still absolutely useless. Just finding excuses not to learn the F-14 (HB's Swansong?).

 

Annoyed by my posts? Please consider donating. Once the target sum is reached, I'll be off to somewhere nice I promise not to post from. I'd buy that for a dollar!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My favorite sim was the F-14 Fleet Defender. Besides the Tomcat itself, I loved the branching campaigns which were evaluated based on the successful mission percentage and how you had an overview of the two Tomcat squadrons and pilots. Losses were tracked, so sometimes you'd reach the final missions with not enough planes left so that could be rather challenging.

 

The cool thing is we can do that NOW with DCS World! I am in no way an expert using the mission editor and haven't even thought about using LUA scripting options available. But from what I "know' right now a person could "build" a conflict lasting as long as they choose.

 

For example:

 

Lets say I set up a mission with 4 F-15's vs. 4 Su-27s that starts at 0800 on Monday. There will be a follow on Mission at 1300.

 

During the morning mission the F-15s do well and 2 of the Su-27s don't make it home.

 

When the afternoon mission rolls around, All 4 of the original F-15s are available for use but the RED flight is now 2 Su-27s from Base A and 2 Mig-29s from Base B to replace the Su-27s lost earllier. And since experience makes one smarter, the Su-27s can be changed from "Average" pilots to "Excellent" pilots for the second battle possibly effecting the outcome

 

And we can continue the process as long as we want.

 

With as many apps and programs already available for DCS, I am willing to bet it is only a matter of time until someone develops a "War Planner" of some sort to just just what I described and more.

 

("War Planner" name copyright 2015 Sierra99 enterprises. All rights reserved unless I get a copy of the program free then all's good. )

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

Primary Computer

ASUS Z390-P, i7-9700K CPU @ 5.0Ghz, 32GB Patriot Viper Steel DDR4 @ 3200Mhz, ZOTAC GeForce 1070 Ti AMP Extreme, Samsung 970 EVO M.2 NVMe drives (1Tb & 500 Gb), Windows 10 Professional, Thrustmaster Warthog HOTAS, Thrustmaster Warthog Stick, Thrustmaster Cougar Throttle, Cougar MFDs x3, Saitek Combat Rudder Pedals and TrackIR 5.

 

-={TAC}=-DCS Server

Gigabyte GA-Z68XP-UD3, i7-3770K CPU @ 3.90GHz, 32GB G.SKILL Ripjaws DDR3 @ 1600Mhz, ZOTAC GeForce® GTX 970.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The cool thing is we can do that NOW with DCS World! I am in no way an expert using the mission editor and haven't even thought about using LUA scripting options available. But from what I "know' right now a person could "build" a conflict lasting as long as they choose.

 

For example:

 

Lets say I set up a mission with 4 F-15's vs. 4 Su-27s that starts at 0800 on Monday. There will be a follow on Mission at 1300.

 

During the morning mission the F-15s do well and 2 of the Su-27s don't make it home.

 

When the afternoon mission rolls around, All 4 of the original F-15s are available for use but the RED flight is now 2 Su-27s from Base A and 2 Mig-29s from Base B to replace the Su-27s lost earllier. And since experience makes one smarter, the Su-27s can be changed from "Average" pilots to "Excellent" pilots for the second battle possibly effecting the outcome

 

And we can continue the process as long as we want.

 

With as many apps and programs already available for DCS, I am willing to bet it is only a matter of time until someone develops a "War Planner" of some sort to just just what I described and more.

 

("War Planner" name copyright 2015 Sierra99 enterprises. All rights reserved unless I get a copy of the program free then all's good. )

 

It is feasible not with the Mission Editor, but by basically creating your own mission generator through LUA scripting. Some of the elements that were discussed here I tried to include in my Guardians of the Caucasus dynamic campaign for the MiG-21bis. I hope to do similar things and more for the Tomcat or the Viggen. That is why I have such a strong interest in the scenario and "complete package" (aircraft, map, AI units) that LNS intends to provide.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's only true in the most lopsided of wars Blacklion. If you're doing a USA vs Iraq 2003 campaign, then yeah, the only thing you might be worried about is running out of bombs before the next resupply ship comes. But that kind of campaign is a little boring imho since if made realistic, you'd never encounter an enemy plane. If you're looking at Iran vs Iraq in the 1980's, then you have 79 F-14's and maybe a few thousand missiles. Once they are gone, they are gone. There is no resupply. If you do a hypothetical NATO vs USSR campaign, then the situation would be similar.

 

I was specifically referring to USN operations for the Tomcat during the 1980s and 1990s. The USN's operations during that time were pretty lopsided. One of the difficulties of creating a historically accurate/realistic USN F-14 campaign is that most operations would be short (maybe a few week to a few months) and heavily favor the USN. The exception being all out war with the USSR (for which there are different opinions about how lopsided that would be). Making an interesting/challenging campaign for the USN F-14s that doesn't require a crazy war would depend on the player managing issues and learning skills beyond the usual maneuver and kill that we think of with combat flight sims.

 

With the Iran-Iraq war, things were very different. Airframe attrition and missile supplies were a huge issue. Not only because aircraft were shot down, but keeping an aircraft like the F-14 running with limited parts was hugely challenging. It's amazing that ~30-40 IRIAF Tomcats are still operational. It may have been as low as 10 airframes at the end of the war.

Iran received about 250 phoenixes prior to the war (with a lot of AIM-7E-2s and AIM-9Ls for their other fighters as well). By late in the war, there were fewer than 50 phoenixes remaining. It was a hard fought war for those aircrew.

 

-Nick

Link to comment
Share on other sites

With as many apps and programs already available for DCS, I am willing to bet it is only a matter of time until someone develops a "War Planner" of some sort to just just what I described and more.

 

("War Planner" name copyright 2015 Sierra99 enterprises. All rights reserved unless I get a copy of the program free then all's good. )

 

I know it's doable for years (since the A-10C release) via LUA scripting (or even better by creating your own application), but it's a lot of work and I see no such 3rd party engines/products yet while the main developers are busy with other things. Love the copyright joke ;)

i386DX40@42 MHz w/i387 CP, 4 MB RAM (8*512 kB), Trident 8900C 1 MB w/16-bit RAMDAC ISA, Quantum 340 MB UDMA33, SB 16, DOS 6.22 w/QEMM + Win3.11CE, Quickshot 1btn 2axis, Numpad as hat. 2 FPH on a good day, 1 FPH avg.

 

DISCLAIMER: My posts are still absolutely useless. Just finding excuses not to learn the F-14 (HB's Swansong?).

 

Annoyed by my posts? Please consider donating. Once the target sum is reached, I'll be off to somewhere nice I promise not to post from. I'd buy that for a dollar!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I was specifically referring to USN operations for the Tomcat during the 1980s and 1990s. The USN's operations during that time were pretty lopsided. One of the difficulties of creating a historically accurate/realistic USN F-14 campaign is that most operations would be short (maybe a few week to a few months) and heavily favor the USN. The exception being all out war with the USSR (for which there are different opinions about how lopsided that would be). Making an interesting/challenging campaign for the USN F-14s that doesn't require a crazy war would depend on the player managing issues and learning skills beyond the usual maneuver and kill that we think of with combat flight sims.

 

A few weeks to a few months is actually a long time when it comes to war. Even a war with the USSR wouldn't last very long. If it wasn't nukes, then both sides would run out of ammo quickly.

 

Given the indecisive nature of many of modern warfare, I think a fairly intense campaign lasting at most a few weeks would be optimal.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A few weeks to a few months is actually a long time when it comes to war. Even a war with the USSR wouldn't last very long. If it wasn't nukes, then both sides would run out of ammo quickly.

 

Given the indecisive nature of many of modern warfare, I think a fairly intense campaign lasting at most a few weeks would be optimal.

 

Probably wouldn't last long, but the same was said of both WWI and WWII - "home by Christmas - better enlist before it ends!".

 

And Vietnam, OEF, and OIF. Hard to say till it happens.

 

A carrier usually stays on station for 4-8 months, even during combat operations, so that is the max that one would expect from such a campaign. All rules would be off with a US vs USSR campaign given the scope, but carriers can't maintain a reasonable ops tempo for more than a couple weeks without steady resupply. If there is steady resupply, then you can expect the carriers to frequently rotate off station for crew rest and thorough replenishment. So one year on station with rapidly dwindling stocks of equipment is not too likely - but possible. Doesn't account for a mainland US attack that could cripple manufacturing and prevent resupply by compromising the source. Hard to imagine anything like that now.

 

-Nick

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Probably wouldn't last long, but the same was said of both WWI and WWII - "home by Christmas - better enlist before it ends!".

 

And Vietnam, OEF, and OIF. Hard to say till it happens.

 

A carrier usually stays on station for 4-8 months, even during combat operations, so that is the max that one would expect from such a campaign. All rules would be off with a US vs USSR campaign given the scope, but carriers can't maintain a reasonable ops tempo for more than a couple weeks without steady resupply. If there is steady resupply, then you can expect the carriers to frequently rotate off station for crew rest and thorough replenishment. So one year on station with rapidly dwindling stocks of equipment is not too likely - but possible. Doesn't account for a mainland US attack that could cripple manufacturing and prevent resupply by compromising the source. Hard to imagine anything like that now.

 

-Nick

 

One persistent feature of warfare in the post-modern age is that it is more like an ongoing feud as opposed to a competition/dispute-turned-deadly. OEF and OIF were just extreme instances of an ongoing feud (U.S. vs. Islamic extremists) going to the next level. Its also consistent with the indecisive nature of today's wars.

 

I think an optimal campaign involving the F-14 would be something like this:

 

On June 25, 1996, terrorists detonate a truck bomb at the Khobar Towers, killing 19 American servicemembers. American intelligence is able to establish a solid link between the terrorists who carried out the attack and Iran, who sponsored it. Having grown tired of Iran's behavior during the past 17 years, including recent provocative actions in the Strait of Hormuz, President Bill Clinton orders the USS Carl Vinson (CVN-70) and its air wing and battle group to strike all Iranian military facilities and forces in the southern Persian Gulf.

 

This scenario not only takes place during the Tomcat's heyday, but its also a short-duration campaign that will probably last a few days (there are a lot of targets to attack). That's enough time for plenty of varied missions (CAP, escort, strike, CSAR), while also reflecting that even when these targets are burning piles of rubble, the feud is not over.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

One persistent feature of warfare in the post-modern age is that it is more like an ongoing feud as opposed to a competition/dispute-turned-deadly. OEF and OIF were just extreme instances of an ongoing feud (U.S. vs. Islamic extremists) going to the next level. Its also consistent with the indecisive nature of today's wars.

 

I think an optimal campaign involving the F-14 would be something like this:

 

On June 25, 1996, terrorists detonate a truck bomb at the Khobar Towers, killing 19 American servicemembers. American intelligence is able to establish a solid link between the terrorists who carried out the attack and Iran, who sponsored it. Having grown tired of Iran's behavior during the past 17 years, including recent provocative actions in the Strait of Hormuz, President Bill Clinton orders the USS Carl Vinson (CVN-70) and its air wing and battle group to strike all Iranian military facilities and forces in the southern Persian Gulf.

 

This scenario not only takes place during the Tomcat's heyday, but its also a short-duration campaign that will probably last a few days (there are a lot of targets to attack). That's enough time for plenty of varied missions (CAP, escort, strike, CSAR), while also reflecting that even when these targets are burning piles of rubble, the feud is not over.

 

Thats exactly what I'm thinking too.

 

I also would like to see something as a take off from Operation Praying Mantis in 1988, except escalation instead of diffusion.

 

Still, hard for the F-14 to be anything less than a 500 lb gorilla in these scenarios (between the airplane and very well-trained aircrew), but it still could be very challenging if done right. Plus, maybe some gorilla vs gorilla combat...in the Strait of Hormuz that is ;).

 

-Nick

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thats exactly what I'm thinking too.

 

I also would like to see something as a take off from Operation Praying Mantis in 1988, except escalation instead of diffusion.

 

Still, hard for the F-14 to be anything less than a 500 lb gorilla in these scenarios (between the airplane and very well-trained aircrew), but it still could be very challenging if done right. Plus, maybe some gorilla vs gorilla combat...in the Strait of Hormuz that is ;).

 

-Nick

 

If you read a lot of the literature that tells the inside story of U.S. involvement in the Persian Gulf 1977 - onward, you'll see a lot of details on the various contingency plans they had in place for attacking Iran. These plans were nothing short of large. Even the original Praying Mantis plan put forth by CENTCOM was far more extensive than what was ultimately approved. Even the supremely hawkish Reagan administration had its limits when it came to the use of military force.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Cold and ocean? I like the idea of Norway, Sweeden, or Finland for a theater but when compared with the size of our current map size it seems a bit large of an area to be likely. I still think the Korean peninsula is a possibility. You could do a large section of it (not as large as F4.0) in a similar size as the Georgia map, and it is cold with a lot of ocean.

 

Another possibility and a real world area of increased operations between east and west is the Arctic. With the melting ice sheet, there is more and more interest in the extreme north and not a lot of cities and other features to bog down play. The distances though are extreme except for the narrow straight between Alaska and Eastern Russia. Bering-Strait-Map.mediumthumb.gif

Toten

 

Tiger-Spit-Viggen-Fishbed-Sabre-Dora-Kurfurst-Mustang-Huey-Warthog-Hip-Black Shark Driver (Not necessarily in that order)

 

MSI 970A-G40 MoBo, AMD FX-8350 8 Core, Patriot Viper 24 GB DDR3, Nvidia Ge Force 1060 3 GB GPU

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I fully endorse the North Pacific as a theater of play. I've said this many times before and I'll say it again; the North Pacific was as crucial in Cold War planning as the North Atlantic was. Plus, I prefer the West Coast Tomcat squadrons over that of the East Coast.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I fully endorse the North Pacific as a theater of play. I've said this many times before and I'll say it again; the North Pacific was as crucial in Cold War planning as the North Atlantic was. Plus, I prefer the West Coast Tomcat squadrons over that of the East Coast.

 

+1

 

BTW, where did you find the Centcom reports on the original plans for Praying Mantis?

 

Thanks!

 

-Nick

Link to comment
Share on other sites

+1

 

BTW, where did you find the Centcom reports on the original plans for Praying Mantis?

 

Thanks!

 

-Nick

 

There is an epic, magnum opus of a non-fiction book written by Dr. David Crist, a historian for the federal government and a Marine Corps reserve officer. Titled The Twilight War, it chronicles U.S.-Iranian relations from the late-'70s to the present. It relies on a ridiculous amount of details and facts from hundreds of interviews and primary-source documents that are now declassified. I won't say much more than that, because it is an incredible piece of work that you need to read yesterday. I can't remember reading a book and saying "Oh my God" so many times than in this book. Anybody who wants to express an opinion on U.S.-Iran relations and expects to be taken seriously needs to read this book first.

 

I also began reading America's First Clash with Iran: The Tanker War, 1987-88 by Lee Allen Zatarain. So far, so good.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Great, thank you! I just ordered the Zatarain book and I'm going to look for the Crist book later today.

 

-Nick

 

My suggestion is to read The Twilight War first, because it is a very comprehensive, "big-picture" account of the totality of U.S.-Iran relations from the early days of the Carter administration to now. It also goes into the events of 1987 - 88 in detail. It'll give you a solid background into the subject. It may even change your views on many of the presidents that we've had in office.

 

I also suggest Inside the Danger Zone by Harold Lee Wise. Its very similar to Zatarain's book, except its written primarily from the perspective of the United States Navy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...