Cat peeking out of the bag?

On 11/9/04 8:29 AM, in article ,
"Pechs1" wrote:

I know Mr Cooper will blast me for this, but oh well, he has before.

Have any of the aviators that were in the 'fleet'(USN or USAF or even USMC)
during or after the Iran-Irag conflict heard of any of the results that Mr.
Cooper talks about in his book?


Nope. I've never heard of them.

I find that even tho I have an SI clearance, and was flying the F-14, even in
a
test squadron(VX-4), I never heard of these F-14 results..


I never had the IrAF Tomcat painted as a formidable machine. Sounds a bit
overblown to me.

--Woody

"Tom Cooper" wrote in message ...
Very nice, sharp one. I've already noticed your attack on amazon.com.

My 'attack' was a critique...which they removed, along with the other
'attacks'
that posted legitimate critisism of that volume. The reviewers'
postings (we are not coordinating our critiques, a lot of readers
simply hate your book) have been removed, but your book retains its
3/5 star rating. There were several lenghty critiques 'attacking' that
book before someone cried to amazon.com and had all those reviews
pulled.


Now that you're here and so willing to "inform" the people about me, I
hope you'll be kind to answer me the following questions:

I've been a silent lurker for years, wholly content on being informed,
but your condescending, yet at the same time undistinguished, postings
bring me out of the woodwork. Yes, you motivate me, because you remind
me of a heckler at a baseball game. You know batting averages, but you
don't know baseball. You attack pro players, you anger them. You said
so yourself. That Iraqi Air Force general you supposedly lectured, and
had in fits, for instance.
His was one of the most heavily funded and professional air forces on
earth. He was a pro, no matter who's team he's on. Those guys, before
the sanctions were pretty good ****s. And you 'lecture' him about the
Iranian F-14 threat? It was they who fought those F-14s, you think
they'd have an idea on their adversaries' capabilities? Not to mention
the posters here who are or were aviators or otherwise in the
business. Your often condescending attitude, when coupled with your
shallow knowledge (usually lorded over the aviators), deserve a
rebuttal of mightier ferocity. Maybe if you had some good ****, you
can dance around, but when you scatter ramblings of your quality, you
get on a lot of peoples' nerves.



- Would you be so kind to mention all these sources which we plagiarized
so much - regardles in which of Farzad's and my publications?

Not one of your volumes are to be found in my library. I am carefull
where I throw my scarce dollars, and will peruse a book thoroughly
before I get it. So I can say I cannot do a word for word relation of
your sins, from recall alone, my boy. But in your Iran-Iraq war book
80-88, you deal with the Iranian purchase of the F-14 system. From the
top of my head, (I don't have your bunk in my shelves), you simply
lifted the portion that Gillchrist describes in "Tomcat!", chapter 7,
page 48, in which a distinguised fighter pilot Capt. John Mitchell,
travells to Iran to sell that system to the Iranian Air staff. Your
version of that story in your book is a near word for word lifting.
But during the looting, it fell in your pages in the broken grammar
and low-minded prose that characterize that whole volume.

Let me in on something; I know Schiffer likes to be quick in putting
out books in the market. Most of their stuff is excellent (like
"Tomcat!"), but some others, like their flight helmet collector books,
are very inconsistent throughout and have an unmistakable tinge of
amatureness...but how did they let such a bloken engrish manuscript
like that Iran 80-88 book pass the editor and into press? I had high
hopes for that volume when I saw it, but since I was familiar with
your bunk on the net, the surprise for me was how Schiffer would allow
a work of such low standard printed under their trademark? To other
readers, go find this book somewhere, and read it. My money is on,
that you won't be walking out with it.


- Which of published sources used for "Iran-Iraq War in the Air,
1980-1988" was not mentioned in footnotes?

Since it's irrefutable where you purloined the John Mitchell visit on
your Iran book (from Gillchrist; it's almost word for word), I never
found it cited anywhere in the book. There are others I cannot recall,
and I don't have your book to wade through. On the next edition, if
there is one, try enclosing the following:

Gillchrist, Paul T. "Tomcat!", Schiffer Publishing Ltd., Altgen, PA.
1994


- Where am I known as a plagiarizer?

See my example above. And there were critiques at Amazon.com sharper
and less vile in tone than mine, yet equally truthfull. The reviews
for your book @ Amazon were near unanimous: it's bunk. And after
several months up there, everyone's postings were removed! Not to
worry, I could write them to remedy this. The consumers have rights,
you know.



- Better yet: "Iran-Iraq War in the Air, 1980-1988" was written by two
authors. How do you know that it's me who should be a plagiarizer of us
two?

Where do we draw the line on who was responsible for the bunk? In your
numerous postings punting about this piece (which I sat through
quietly, knowing the very low and amaturish quality of your work from
your website), you perpetually slink away from mentioning your
partner. Now when the dogs are uncaged, you want to climb on his
shoulders?



- Then, I'd like you to be so kind and explain me the following:

Can you cite the source of such stories like this (excerpt from "Iranian
F-4 Phantom Units in Combat"):

Have not read it. I will find it, and read it. If its good and I like
it, I'll search between the sofa cushions for some coin. I have read
most of the Osprey aviation catalogue, dating from the early 80s. But
this new series looks like a rush job, with Osprey just flooding the
market with shallow works that do not share the earlier volumes'
thoroughness. Compare Mersky's F-8 in Combat to those latest releases
on Davies' F-15 and F-18 Units in OIF Combat. As a sidenote, I've come
across Davies' other works on the F-15 and they are very amaturish
too...aren't both of you from that depthless website ACIG.org which is
mostly dripping with tables of shootdowns (un-cited, do we see a
pattern here?) and articles, again mostly uncited, which are on the
whole unaccomplished. Visit acig.org, people, and see for yourselves.

These books you mention have just been released, and I have not had
the opportunity to see them. Tom, despite my foul, vile tone, I really
don't hate you on a personal level. Seems like a contradiction, but
that's USENET for ya.
These are just opinions of mine, and I'm open to change. I will look
at your other work, and maybe I'll have some for myself.

Good luck.

Tom Cooper
Freelance aviation journalist
Author:

(You mean co-author? Oh right, you only have a co-author when people
start to unravell your...)

- Iranian F-14 Tomcat Units in Combat
http://www.ospreypublishing.com/title detail.php/title=S7875

- Arab MiG-19 and MiG-21 Units in Combat
http://www.ospreypublishing.com/title detail.php/title=S6550

- Iranian F-4 Phantom II Units in Combat
http://www.ospreypublishing.com/title detail.php/title=S6585

- African MiGs
http://www.acig.org/afmig/

- Iran-Iraq War in the Air, 1980-1988
http://www.acig.org/pg1/content.php
************************************************** ***********************

Woody,

re. references:

-- Mike Spick: in article "Odd Couple", published in AirForces Monthly
magazine, volume April 2004 (p.94 thru 98) stated (citate from p.98,
paragraph 3):

"Never Clashed
The two (meaning MiG-21 and F-5E; my note) never clashed in close
combat...."

During the Iran-Iraq War there were several dozens of air combats between
IrAF MiG-21MF/bis and IRIAF F-5Es. All were fought at close ranges because
neither aircraft was equipped with BVRAAMs. To keep the long story short,
there is an Iraqi MiG-21MF-pilot with four confirmed kills against Iranian
F-5Es scored during the first month of the war (all kills are known to the
last detail, including date, time, place, names of involved crews and their
fate, weapon used etc.). Another example: there is also an IRIAF F-5E-pilot
who claimed four IrAF MiG-21s shot down during a single engagement; three of
these are confirmed (again: full data available).


-- Yefim Gordon: in one of his newest books, "Sukhoi Su-7/-17/-20/-22;
Soviet Fighter and Fighter-Bomber Family", (ISBN 1 85780 108 3) published by
Aerofax earlier this year, spends exactly two sentences to describe the
deployment of Iraqi Su-20/22s in the war against Iran. As follows:

1.) Page 127:
"Iraq used the Su-20 and Su-22 fairly successfully in the war against Iran
in 1980-88.

2.) Page 150:
"Together with their fixed-geometry stablemates (the Su-7BMKs) they were
actively used in the Iran-Iraq war of 1980-1988; amont other things, they
staged chemical attacks against Iranian troops, using bombs filled with
nerve agents."

There is not a word about Iraqi Su-22M-2/-3Ks equipped with Kh-28s, Kh-29s
and SPS-141 ECM-pods supplied from East Germany being used against Iran or
about their performance, or any other "special" weapons tested on this type
during that war. Not a word about the fact that Su-20/22s were IrAF
warhorses of that conflict, that they flew over 20.000 combat sorties,
suffered quite some losses (over 30 of these are registered down to the last
detail - including extensive pictorial evidence of wreckage) etc...


-- Maj. Ronald Bergquist (USAF) published "The Role of Airpower in the
Iran-Iraq War", while working as research associate on the Airpower Research
Institute, at Maxwell AFB. The first print was in 1982; I've got a copy from
the second print run, published by Air University Press, in 1988.

This was probably the best book to this topic published until 2003.


2. Aside from SPEAR, I've never heard of many of your sources.

OK, here the full data of the last batch of stuff I've got:

- NAVOPINTCEN SUITLAND MD message 250021Z Jul 87
- NAVOPINTCEN SUITLAND MD message 102038Z Apr 88
- NAVOPINTCEN SUITLAND MD message 152005Z Jun 88
- SPEARTIP 014-90, IRAQ FIGHTER-INTERCEPTOR CAPABILITIES
- NAVOPINTCEN memo of 6 Jul 88 (the last would be highly interesting for
anybody researching about the downing of IranAir Airbus by USS Vinncennes).


3. You tend to attempt to baffle with size.

Well, sorry; I do not attempt anything else but to explain. And this can
often not be done within a single sentence.

--
************************************************** ***********************
Tom Cooper
Freelance aviation journalist

Author:
- Iranian F-14 Tomcat Units in Combat
http://www.ospreypublishing.com/titl...hp/title=S7875

- Arab MiG-19 and MiG-21 Units in Combat
http://www.ospreypublishing.com/titl...hp/title=S6550

- Iranian F-4 Phantom II Units in Combat
http://www.ospreypublishing.com/titl...hp/title=S6585

- African MiGs
http://www.acig.org/afmig/

- Iran-Iraq War in the Air, 1980-1988
http://www.acig.org/pg1/content.php
************************************************** ***********************

Rob- To give Tom the benefit of the doubt, are there any reasonable
scenarios that would account for a limited dissemination of the
information? Couldn't we just blame compartmentalization? BRBR

Doubt it. We knew quite a lot about the F-14s capability after Iran fell. We
knew who helped to maintain them and how they received spare parts.

We knew a lot about other airforces and their engagments, but never a word
about the 'success' of Iran against the airforces of Iraq, using the Turkey.
think if it existed, it would be all over the USN...since we flew the aircraft.
P. C. Chisholm
CDR, USN(ret.)
Old Phart Phormer Phantom, Turkey, Viper, Scooter and Combat Buckeye Phlyer

Well, under "critique" I understand something constructive. What you're
doing is nothing but an attack, you like it or not.

As second: your attack from amazon.com was NOT removed. Neither me nor
anybody else complained, and therefore it was not removed - as can be seen
by everybody who opens the page he
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg...78422?v=glance

So, here I must conclude that you're lying.

You're also lying regarding any other "lenghty critiques" being removed from
the all the critiques are still there where they were posted. Not only on
amazon.com but also on amazon.co.uk.

As next, it is well-known to us that there are several readers who do not
hate that book but me - and who repeatedly attack my person by prentending
of attacking the book. The silly thing about this is that all four of them
are well-known to me: two because they plagiarized me, and two because they
attacked the book although they never read it.

I've been a silent lurker for years, wholly content on being informed,
but your condescending, yet at the same time undistinguished, postings
bring me out of the woodwork. Yes, you motivate me, because you remind
me of a heckler at a baseball game.

I asked some very specific questions above. For example if you can show the
evidence for any of my or the works I co-authored being plagiarisations.

You have not shown anything of this kind. This paragraph above can therefore
not be taken seriously.

You know batting averages, but you don't know baseball.

That's right: I can't play baseball.

You attack pro players, you anger them. You said
so yourself. That Iraqi Air Force general you supposedly lectured, and
had in fits, for instance.
His was one of the most heavily funded and professional air forces on
earth. He was a pro, no matter who's team he's on. Those guys, before
the sanctions were pretty good ****s. And you 'lecture' him about the
Iranian F-14 threat? It was they who fought those F-14s, you think
they'd have an idea on their adversaries' capabilities?

Well, from exchange with him I'm sure that he is still convinced that
Iranian F-14s were not armed with AIM-7s. Would you like to join him in that
opinion?

Not to mention
the posters here who are or were aviators or otherwise in the
business. Your often condescending attitude, when coupled with your
shallow knowledge (usually lorded over the aviators), deserve a
rebuttal of mightier ferocity.

How about some evidence or examples - instead of empty ranting and offense?

- Would you be so kind to mention all these sources which we plagiarized
so much - regardles in which of Farzad's and my publications?

Not one of your volumes are to be found in my library. I am carefull
where I throw my scarce dollars, and will peruse a book thoroughly
before I get it. So I can say I cannot do a word for word relation of
your sins, from recall alone, my boy.

With other words, you haven't read the book either... But you comment about
it?

But in your Iran-Iraq war book
80-88, you deal with the Iranian purchase of the F-14 system. From the
top of my head, (I don't have your bunk in my shelves), you simply
lifted the portion that Gillchrist describes in "Tomcat!", chapter 7,
page 48, in which a distinguised fighter pilot Capt. John Mitchell,
travells to Iran to sell that system to the Iranian Air staff. Your
version of that story in your book is a near word for word lifting.
But during the looting, it fell in your pages in the broken grammar
and low-minded prose that characterize that whole volume.

Just a second: in the post above you stated (citate), "His Iran-Iraq 80-88
book draws massive portions from Paul Gillchrist's "Tomcat!"...almost word
for word plagerism...he absolutely did not cite Adm. Gillchrist."

Now you changed your opinion and say that only a "portion" of Gillcrist's
book - i.e. Chapter 7, page 48 - was "lifted". (BTW, you spell Mr.
Gillcrist's name wrongly).

But OK. That's at least specific enough. On the page 33 of "Iran-Iraq War in
the Air, 1980-1988", there is one sentence taken from that book. On the end
of it is sign for footnote 39.... and the footnote 39 (p.54) says: "TOMCAT!
The Grumman F-14 Story, by R.Adm (USN. Ret.) Paul T. Gillcrist."

Surprise, surprise, isn't it, (un)sharp one?

For your information, the same book is mentioned at least five times
elsewhere in footnotes of our book. So, you're lying here too.

Eventually, you ough to admit appearing pretty silly regarding this, then in
your eagerness to attack me you failed to notice that both books were
published by Schiffer Military Publishing, Atglen. Do you seriously consider
them so stupid to accept a manuscript that is plagiarising one of their
earlier books?

Let me in on something; I know Schiffer likes to be quick in putting
out books in the market. Most of their stuff is excellent (like
"Tomcat!"), but some others, like their flight helmet collector books,
are very inconsistent throughout and have an unmistakable tinge of
amatureness...but how did they let such a bloken engrish manuscript
like that Iran 80-88 book pass the editor and into press?

Well, perhaps you could contact Mr. Ian Robertson (editor) and ask him. I
never got any answer regarding this.

- Which of published sources used for "Iran-Iraq War in the Air,
1980-1988" was not mentioned in footnotes?

Since it's irrefutable where you purloined the John Mitchell visit on
your Iran book (from Gillchrist; it's almost word for word), I never
found it cited anywhere in the book.

When one refuses to see something with his own eyes...

There are others I cannot recall,
and I don't have your book to wade through. On the next edition, if
there is one, try enclosing the following:

Gillchrist, Paul T. "Tomcat!", Schiffer Publishing Ltd., Altgen, PA.
1994

It is the in footnote 39 and footnote 43 of that chapter, just for
example. You're only so much involved in attempt to attack me, that you
oversaw this completely.

Should you want to continue in the same style, I'll obviously have to post
here also something like 30 other footnotes from that book...

What makes me wonder here, how would you then describe such books like "Red
Wings over Yalu", which consist of footnotes and references to almost 40%?

- Where am I known as a plagiarizer?

See my example above.

That's not the answer to question I asked. So, here again: WHERE am I "known
as plagiarizer"?

And there were critiques at Amazon.com sharper
and less vile in tone than mine, yet equally truthfull. The reviews
for your book @ Amazon were near unanimous: it's bunk.

All the "critiques" are still there. Why don't you go there and see them for
yourself?

And after
several months up there, everyone's postings were removed!

This is a lie, and you know that. Nothing was removed.

Besides, what is with the following review:
http://www.journal.forces.gc.ca/engr...o3/book7_e.asp


Not to worry, I could write them to remedy this. The consumers have
rights, you know.

So also those who are wrongly blamed for plagiarisation...


- Better yet: "Iran-Iraq War in the Air, 1980-1988" was written by two
authors. How do you know that it's me who should be a plagiarizer of us
two?

Where do we draw the line on who was responsible for the bunk? In your
numerous postings punting about this piece (which I sat through
quietly, knowing the very low and amaturish quality of your work from
your website), you perpetually slink away from mentioning your
partner. Now when the dogs are uncaged, you want to climb on his
shoulders?

As you can see, I'm here, with my full name.

Oh, and who are you and what are your qualifications?

- Then, I'd like you to be so kind and explain me the following:

Can you cite the source of such stories like this (excerpt from "Iranian
F-4 Phantom Units in Combat"):

Have not read it. I will find it, and read it. If its good and I like
it, I'll search between the sofa cushions for some coin. I have read
most of the Osprey aviation catalogue, dating from the early 80s. But
this new series looks like a rush job, with Osprey just flooding the
market with shallow works that do not share the earlier volumes'
thoroughness. Compare Mersky's F-8 in Combat to those latest releases
on Davies' F-15 and F-18 Units in OIF Combat. As a sidenote, I've come
across Davies' other works on the F-15 and they are very amaturish
too...aren't both of you from that depthless website ACIG.org which is
mostly dripping with tables of shootdowns (un-cited, do we see a
pattern here?) and articles, again mostly uncited, which are on the
whole unaccomplished. Visit acig.org, people, and see for yourselves.

Thanks for your PR for acig.org. In that sence, here few of usual reactions
re. our website:

- "This has to be one of the best places for information & INTELLIGENT
discussion on aircraft. Keep up the good work guys!"

- "Just want to say that I've been printing out articles from ACIG Journal
and from the topic threads like it's going out of style. :-) Tons of good
info here enough for several books. Just want to send you my bill for
printer paper and print cartridges! ;-)"

- Great information, great forum, great people, great articles and great
artwork.

- "Hey guys, just wanted to say thanks for having a place like this. I'm a
xxxxxxx (job-description deleted), so it's great to be able to sift through
all the data available and apply it (like BVR tactics). Just wanted to say
thanks to all who put this on and keep it gonig; this is really a fantastic
resource. Awesome!"

- Thats just QUALITY!! Thanks for that!


Regarding your attacks about that website plagiarising anybody: how about
showing us at least 1 example?

Re. Steve Davies: Steve is meanwhile acknowledged as THE expert when it
comes to USAF F-15s, with excellent contacts within the USAF F-15C/E
circles, a number of related books, articles and even TV-shows. If he's what
you describe as "amateur", I'm gladly joining him in that status.

On the other side, the book "USN F/A-18 Hornet Units in Operation Iraqi
Freedom" was written by Mr. Tony Holmes, editor of "Combat Aircraft" series
at Osprey. Given your mistake in this case, and also all the nonsence you
wrote above, I'd say that you are not only mixing quite a lot of stuffs, but
also gladly producing "facts" you prefer.

These books you mention have just been released, and I have not had
the opportunity to see them. Tom, despite my foul, vile tone, I really
don't hate you on a personal level. Seems like a contradiction, but
that's USENET for ya.

Well, of course not: you don't hate me. You are just engaged in a campaign
of spreading lies about me.

These are just opinions of mine, and I'm open to change. I will look at
your other work, and maybe I'll have some for myself.

To be sincere and direct - as I always am: I don't care the least about your
opinion, nor am I trying to change it.

I'm just putting your lies straight.


--
************************************************** ***********************
Tom Cooper
Freelance aviation journalist

Author:
- Iranian F-14 Tomcat Units in Combat
http://www.ospreypublishing.com/titl...hp/title=S7875

- Arab MiG-19 and MiG-21 Units in Combat
http://www.ospreypublishing.com/titl...hp/title=S6550

- Iranian F-4 Phantom II Units in Combat
http://www.ospreypublishing.com/titl...hp/title=S6585

- African MiGs
http://www.acig.org/afmig/

- Iran-Iraq War in the Air, 1980-1988
http://www.acig.org/pg1/content.php
************************************************** ***********************

Pechs,
could it be there is a difference in the way the USN saw some things and the
USAF did it?

What I noticed is a considerable difference in style of descriptions in USN
and USAF documents.

For example, paragraph 5 of NAVOPINTCEN SUITLAND MD message 102038Z Apr 88
(related by ONI under FOIA) states:

THE IRANIAN AIR FORCE WENT FOR OVER A YEAR FROM OCT 86 TO NOV 87 WITH OUT A
DETECTED AIR-AIR MISSILE FIRING. SUDDENLY IN NOVEMBER 87 F-4'S FROM BUSHEHR
ENGAGED IRAQI AIRCRAFT NORTH OF BANDAR KHOMEYNI WITH MULTIPLE AAM'S. IN
EARLY FEB 88 AN IRIAF F-14 APPARENTLY DOWNED AN F-1 SE OF FARSI ISLAND AND
ANOTHER F-14 FIRED AT TWO TARGETS 3 HOURS LATER. SINCE THEN BOTH F-4 AND
F-14 AIRCRAFT HAVE SHOWN AN INCREASED AGGRESSIVENESS AND WILLINGNESS TO
EMPLY AAMS. MOST RECENTLY IN MID-MARCH AN F-14 DOWNED AN F-1 DURING AN
ATTACK ON KHARG ISLAND IN AND AN F-14 MAY HAVE ATTEMPTED TO ENGAGE A C-601
LAUCNHED FROM A H-6D. A BANDAR ABBAS F-4 POSSIBLY LAUNCHED AN AAM AGAINST
TWO F-1's RTB AFTER A RAID ON LAVAN ISLAND IN EARLY APRIL.

As you can read here, there are lots of guesses here about results of
missiles fired from Iranian fighters.

USAF documents, on the contrary, are usually very clear, stating exactly how
many missiles were fired and what was shot down.

Also, I never found any kind of such a ridiculous statement in any USAF
document, explaining that Iranians fired not a single AAM between October
1986 and November 1987.

I purposedly say "ridiculous" here, because - and this is just a SINGLE
example that comes to my mind right now - on 1 September 1987 the USN picked
up an Iraqi Mirage F.1 pilot from the waters of the lower Persian Gulf.
There are documents about this case and there are even photos of the Iraqi
pilot in the National Archives. The Iraqi spent two days in his dinghy -
after being shot down (by an AAM) in an air combat with F-14 flown by the
top IRIAF ace of the whole war, late Lt.Gen. Jalal Zandi. And that in full
view of several USN warships from a convoy to Kuwait that was passing by.

How comes the SUITLAND MD message I cited above states that not a single AAM
was fired by IRIAF in air combats with Iraqis between October 1986 and
November 1987?

Finally, the document above is not mentioning by a single word an air battle
that occurred over Khark on 18 March 1988 - in full view of no less but five
USN warships. In course of this engagement - according to rumorus I've heard
from USAF and IRIAF sources - IRIAF F-14s fired five AIM-54s, downing at
least a Tu-22 and a MiG-25R. When I asked ONI for release of related
documents, they said I should go and ask State Department. State Department
said they can't release them.

Why?

What to hell can be so secret in these documents - and since when is State
Department responsible for USN documents describing air battles between Iran
and Iraq?

--
************************************************** ***********************
Tom Cooper
Freelance aviation journalist

Author:
- Iranian F-14 Tomcat Units in Combat
http://www.ospreypublishing.com/titl...hp/title=S7875

- Arab MiG-19 and MiG-21 Units in Combat
http://www.ospreypublishing.com/titl...hp/title=S6550

- Iranian F-4 Phantom II Units in Combat
http://www.ospreypublishing.com/titl...hp/title=S6585

- African MiGs
http://www.acig.org/afmig/

- Iran-Iraq War in the Air, 1980-1988
http://www.acig.org/pg1/content.php
************************************************** ***********************
"Pechs1" wrote in message
...
Rob- To give Tom the benefit of the doubt, are there any reasonable
scenarios that would account for a limited dissemination of the
information? Couldn't we just blame compartmentalization? BRBR

Doubt it. We knew quite a lot about the F-14s capability after Iran fell.
We
knew who helped to maintain them and how they received spare parts.

We knew a lot about other airforces and their engagments, but never a word
about the 'success' of Iran against the airforces of Iraq, using the
Turkey.
think if it existed, it would be all over the USN...since we flew the
aircraft.
P. C. Chisholm
CDR, USN(ret.)
Old Phart Phormer Phantom, Turkey, Viper, Scooter and Combat Buckeye
Phlyer

On 11/10/04 7:52, in article , "Tom
Cooper" wrote:

Woody,

SNIP

Sorry, Tom. I should have been more clear--or perhaps I misunderstood the
scope of your posts. I don't have a lot of dispute with either F-5's
fighting MiG-21's or the use of Su-xx's by either side.

I do disagree with the Tomcat stuff.


-- Maj. Ronald Bergquist (USAF) published "The Role of Airpower in the
Iran-Iraq War", while working as research associate on the Airpower Research
Institute, at Maxwell AFB. The first print was in 1982; I've got a copy from
the second print run, published by Air University Press, in 1988.

This was probably the best book to this topic published until 2003.

2. Aside from SPEAR, I've never heard of many of your sources.

OK, here the full data of the last batch of stuff I've got:

- NAVOPINTCEN SUITLAND MD message 250021Z Jul 87
- NAVOPINTCEN SUITLAND MD message 102038Z Apr 88
- NAVOPINTCEN SUITLAND MD message 152005Z Jun 88
- SPEARTIP 014-90, IRAQ FIGHTER-INTERCEPTOR CAPABILITIES
- NAVOPINTCEN memo of 6 Jul 88 (the last would be highly interesting for
anybody researching about the downing of IranAir Airbus by USS Vinncennes).


Subject lines? What are these messages about? I tend to agree with Pechs.
Had the Tomcat been as successful as you claim, I think we would have heard
about it.

As I said before. Claims on all sides during a war tend to be exaggerated.
The way the USN keeps it under control is by tape review in the debrief.
It's amazing what the tapes bring out with regard to veracity.

3. You tend to attempt to baffle with size.

Well, sorry; I do not attempt anything else but to explain. And this can
often not be done within a single sentence.

As soon as I posted, I knew that would be your response. Fair enough.

--Woody

Woody,
topics are as follows:

- NAVOPINTCEN SUITLAND MD message 250021Z Jul 87: Request for Persian Gulf
Related Info
- NAVOPINTCEN SUITLAND MD message 102038Z Apr 88: Speartip 009-88 Persian
Gulf Fighter Developments
- NAVOPINTCEN SUITLAND MD message 152005Z Jun 88: IRIAF F-14 reaction to
CVBG F-14 Ops (this document was almost completely blotted out)
- SPEARTIP 014-90, IRAQ FIGHTER-INTERCEPTOR CAPABILITIES
- NAVOPINTCEN memo of 6 Jul 88: Iranian F-14 Air-to-Ground Bombing and ASM
Capability

For an excerpt from SUTITLAND MD message from April 1988 about air combats
involving F-14s please check my answer to Pechs' post two sub-threads
bellow.

--
************************************************** ***********************
Tom Cooper
Freelance aviation journalist

Author:
- Iranian F-14 Tomcat Units in Combat
http://www.ospreypublishing.com/titl...hp/title=S7875

- Arab MiG-19 and MiG-21 Units in Combat
http://www.ospreypublishing.com/titl...hp/title=S6550

- Iranian F-4 Phantom II Units in Combat
http://www.ospreypublishing.com/titl...hp/title=S6585

- African MiGs
http://www.acig.org/afmig/

- Iran-Iraq War in the Air, 1980-1988
http://www.acig.org/pg1/content.php
************************************************** ***********************
"Woody Beal" wrote in message
...
On 11/10/04 7:52, in article , "Tom
Cooper" wrote:

Woody,

SNIP

Sorry, Tom. I should have been more clear--or perhaps I misunderstood the
scope of your posts. I don't have a lot of dispute with either F-5's
fighting MiG-21's or the use of Su-xx's by either side.

I do disagree with the Tomcat stuff.


-- Maj. Ronald Bergquist (USAF) published "The Role of Airpower in the
Iran-Iraq War", while working as research associate on the Airpower
Research
Institute, at Maxwell AFB. The first print was in 1982; I've got a copy
from
the second print run, published by Air University Press, in 1988.

This was probably the best book to this topic published until 2003.

2. Aside from SPEAR, I've never heard of many of your sources.

OK, here the full data of the last batch of stuff I've got:

- NAVOPINTCEN SUITLAND MD message 250021Z Jul 87
- NAVOPINTCEN SUITLAND MD message 102038Z Apr 88
- NAVOPINTCEN SUITLAND MD message 152005Z Jun 88
- SPEARTIP 014-90, IRAQ FIGHTER-INTERCEPTOR CAPABILITIES
- NAVOPINTCEN memo of 6 Jul 88 (the last would be highly interesting for
anybody researching about the downing of IranAir Airbus by USS
Vinncennes).


Subject lines? What are these messages about? I tend to agree with
Pechs.
Had the Tomcat been as successful as you claim, I think we would have
heard
about it.

As I said before. Claims on all sides during a war tend to be
exaggerated.
The way the USN keeps it under control is by tape review in the debrief.
It's amazing what the tapes bring out with regard to veracity.

3. You tend to attempt to baffle with size.

Well, sorry; I do not attempt anything else but to explain. And this can
often not be done within a single sentence.

As soon as I posted, I knew that would be your response. Fair enough.

--Woody

On 11/10/04 3:25 PM, in article , "Tom
Cooper" wrote:

Woody,
topics are as follows:

- NAVOPINTCEN SUITLAND MD message 250021Z Jul 87: Request for Persian Gulf
Related Info
- NAVOPINTCEN SUITLAND MD message 102038Z Apr 88: Speartip 009-88 Persian
Gulf Fighter Developments
- NAVOPINTCEN SUITLAND MD message 152005Z Jun 88: IRIAF F-14 reaction to
CVBG F-14 Ops (this document was almost completely blotted out)
- SPEARTIP 014-90, IRAQ FIGHTER-INTERCEPTOR CAPABILITIES
- NAVOPINTCEN memo of 6 Jul 88: Iranian F-14 Air-to-Ground Bombing and ASM
Capability

For an excerpt from SUTITLAND MD message from April 1988 about air combats
involving F-14s please check my answer to Pechs' post two sub-threads
bellow.

I read it.

From 102038Z Apr 88, I gather that (a), the Intel bubba's don't want to
compromise sources and (b), they're goal is to characterize the
aggressiveness of the combatants--not report news.

As to the "ridiculous" statement, the key word that you quoted from the
message was: "DETECTED." The SPEAR document apparently contains very
little interpretation and analysis.

You state that the Iraqi pilot and the Iranian ace had a fight that occurred
"in full view" of Navy surface ships. What does that mean? Were USN crews
witnesses to the fight? If so, why did the Iraqi pilot spend so many days
in his raft?

On the 18 March 1988 battle, you again use the phrase "in full view" again.
Why would you think that they would see 5 AIM-54's? Why would you believe
"rumors" over the SPEAR message? Why do you suggest some sort of
conspiracy?

--Woody

From: (Pechs1)
Newsgroups:

It was, I saw briefs on the Tomcat 21 when I was in VX-4...late 80s but the
USN
didn't buy it.
P. C. Chisholm
CDR, USN(ret.)
Old Phart Phormer Phantom, Turkey, Viper, Scooter and Combat Buckeye Phlyer


Do I know you?

I was on the COMFITAEWWING Staff from 1978-1982. Visited VX-4 twice and every
other squadron at least 4 times.

VFP-63 which I was in in 72 and 73 we visited only once.

VF-124 which had Crusaders when I was there switched to Tomcats so i only
visited them to check records.

I was just a lowly enlisted puke.