Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!cs.utexas.edu!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!att!cbnews!military
From: christ@sci.ccny.cuny.edu (Chris Thompson)
Newsgroups: sci.military
Subject: Re: Tom Clancy
Summary: Tom Clancy
Message-ID: <12209@cbnews.ATT.COM>
Date: 12 Dec 89 04:53:04 GMT
References: <12153@cbnews.ATT.COM>
Sender: military@cbnews.ATT.COM
Organization: City College of New York
Lines: 56
Approved: military@att.att.com



From: christ@sci.ccny.cuny.edu (Chris Thompson)

> In article <12095@cbnews.ATT.COM>, willner@cfa203.harvard.edu (Steve Willner) writes...
> : 
> :Having just finished _Red Storm Rising_ (1986), I'll append a capsule
> :review.  The novel's strength is the number of interesting and
> :surprising strategems it contains, but I considered the plot badly
> :flawed by a major hole.  There were other, minor errors in the plot
> :logic and in the technology of infrared imaging, though as far as I
> :could tell most of the other technology was accurate.  (But infrared
> :imaging is something I get paid to do; my knowledge of the other
> :technologies is limited.)  The characters were stereotypical.  And Mr.
> :Shuger's criticism is valid; weapons - especially US weapons - almost
> :always work as intended, and intelligence (on the US side, anyway) is
> :far too accurate to be convincing.  I guess what I'm saying is that I
> :had a lot of trouble "suspending my disbelief."
> 					

I've read _RSR_ a couple of times, and I also found a couple of minor
mistakes...I'm a little confused about the IR, though.  The main area where
IR comes into play are the tank-battle sequences.  Clancy (correctly, I
thought) refers to the M1's sights as thermal imaging, not IR.  Now I know
that there is a large IR signature associated with heat, but I think you
can have thermal imaging which is not dependant on IR.  I've only worked
with available light image-intensifiers, so I'm not positive about this,
but surely it is related to the same technology which measures body
temperatures?  I'm referring to the medical uses, which scan for cancers
by locating patches of high-temperature cells.

My main beef with _RSR_ had to do with the land-combat sequences in
general.  Clancy is obviously at least conversant with Navy strategy
and technology, but it is obvious that he didn't do nearly as much
research on the land end of things (probably because HE wasn't as 
interested in it-no problem there, it's his choice).  An example,
though: in the entire book, Apache attack helicopters are mentioned
only ONCE.  I just have a hard time believing that the Apache wouldn't
play more of a role in any conflict (wishful thinking?  they're SO
expensive! :) )

	[mod.note:  One thing I did like was the Soviet troops nicknaming
	the A-10 "The Devil's Cross."  That has a good Russian feel to
	it, they're quite attached to invoking the Devil for such things.
	To quote von Mellenthin (_Panzer Battles_), "Whenever the Devil
	and his near relations are mentioned in Russian signals one can
	assume that a crack-up is at hand."  - Bill ]

In the same vein, I just finished _Red Phoenix_, by Larry Bond, co-author
of _Hunt for Red October_ and creator of the game _Harpoon_.  I enjoyed
it.  His grasp of land warfare does seem better than Clancy's, but then
a Korean conflict wouldn't depend as much on Naval affairs as a
European war.  Any thoughts on this?

Chris Thompson
--