H-Hour

Northern Fury #1

by Bart Gauvin, Joel Radunzel

August 1991. Soviet hardliner Pavel Medvedev knows that only bloodshed can save the USSR from complete collapse. With violence breaking out in the streets of Moscow, few realize that he is piloting the Soviet Union on a collision course with its deadliest enemy NATO. US Marine Colonel Robert Buckner, passed over for a coveted command, takes a post working for Vice Admiral Falkner on his way to retirement. As the world lurching towards World War III, he finds his way towards a panoramic view of the unfolding crisis with a pivotal role to play. War breaks out across the globe, but the pin falls in the far north, where soldiers and civilians alike must battle not just the enemy, but the unforgiving elements. With arsenals of high-tech weapons loosed in both directions, the ultimate reward may not be victory, but survival. H-Hour is the first book of the Northern Fury series, which tells the alternate history of World War III’s northern front through the eyes of those who lived it.

Genres: Military Fiction, War, Fiction, Alternate History

628 pages, Paperback

First published October 1, 2019

About the author

Bart Gauvin is a veteran of more than thirty-years of service as an artillery officer in the Canadian Army. In his free time, he builds exciting scenarios set in the Northern Fury universe for the war game Command: Modern Air/Naval Operations. He resides with his wife, Tammy, and two distracting pugs in Ontario, Canada.

Reviews

[D. E. · Rating 5 out of 5]

A BG./JR. Military Adventure Mystery Thriller/World War III

BG/JR have. penned a war time novel, which begins on Northern Europe then spreads across the world. The two writers, in their opinion, have spared no chances for misinterpretation with the different factions that face off with each other. The combat scenes and those descriptions are current with those inventories. This is an excellent read for the genre.....DEHS

[Mike · Rating 5 out of 5]

I was recently asked by Bart Gauvin and Joel Radunzel to review their first book, Northern Fury: H Hour. This was exciting because I am a huge fan of Bart’s scenario work since playing my first during the Harpoon era and culminating into what I think is his GOAT level work with his Northern Fury CMANO scenario set. This work helped grow the popularity of the games and created wonderful stories for players to fall into after a hard day in the mine. Now partnering with a talented writer like Joel to create a series of novels based on that work makes perfect sense as more people will get to experience a really great story. I am definitely a fan and hope my bias shows in this case.

Northern Fury: H Hour is the first in a series of novels covering a Third World War between the Soviet Union and NATO in the 1990s. This novel describes the historical and hypothetical events that lead into and past war start through the eyes of many participants from the leader of the Soviet Union down to the fighter pilots, mechanized infantry officers fighting in Norway and Coast Guard commanders and crews off the US East Coast. The other theaters of war are mentioned at a high level but are left for follow-on novels in the series to cover in detail. There are a number of really great maps and diagrams included to help tell the tale and readers who may not know too much about Norwegian geography. The book is written for adults who like modern military fiction and is appears professionally edited.

I like many things about this book. The plot and writing style really sucked me in. I love books that I know after reading a chapter that I’m going to enjoy the entire ride. The writing flows comfortably and the plot makes sense. I even liked the preface which sets the reader up to understand the writers’ perspectives. The characters are well crafted, warts and all. Pavel Medvedev loves his country and his kids and he worries about them. It drives hard decisions that lead to world war. You get it though, it’s relatable, Pavel’s trying to do his best as he sees it. David Strong is at the tip of the spear and wants all to know it. Who wasn’t that ambitious but insecure young person at some point? You have a much to prove and the tools to do it. Abby Savage, skilled helicopter pilot and lioness, you feel her frustration at not being able to fly combat missions. Get her into the fight! The character work is great as you know these people, they could be you. Finally, Joel and Bart’s military expertise is in the novel. The complex mechanics of warfighting are explained well and fed into action sequences that make enjoyable sense to any war nerd. Norwegian and US Coast Guard, National Guard and Police defenders suffer horribly to the realities and challenges of modern war. Sometimes you can’t see the enemy, talk to your friends or have favorable odds. Sometimes your perfect plans fail and you lose. It is gritty, real and works.

I have a couple of gripes with the book. First, is I’d like to see a little more detail on what is going on in NATO and US leadership. You do get some bits and pieces on Norwegian thinking but the big picture stuff is murky. I want to see what the NATO leadership thinks and what they’ll be doing. My guess is I will get this next novel but it’s something I’m thinking about. My second gripe is probably me being a square but I’m not a fan of authors giving accents or sprinkling foreign words in. The word Tovarishch is used a lot and I’m not sure it is in colloquial Russian. There are also several instances where Brooklyn or Boston accents are used but are not consistent. It gets a little weird if you’re from any of these places but it is also a personal preference that may not be an issue to anybody else.

I am suggesting this book to anybody that loves military fiction. It surpasses most fiction in the genre because it is well written, has deep characters and the military action is smart. I view it as the spiritual successor of all those great novels of the eighties and nineties but with the far better insight into what was going on and superior writers. I look forward to the next chapters and its definitely on the short list of books I’ll be going back to again and again.

[Bobbie Bridges · Rating 4 out of 5]

Well thought out

As a former air assault battalion commander and an airborne company commander in Alaska, as well as an instructor in the operational level of war, I found this to be a well thought out operational plan for the invasion of Norway.

[Michael Rogero · Rating 5 out of 5]

The authors channeled Tom Clancy as the military-techno thriller writing is that good. The authors do a very good job building up from when the Cold War historically ended to this alternate history where the Soviet Union didn't go quietly at the end to why the started a war with the West. They did a good job of weaving historical events into their fiction and is very believable. This first novel in a series only covers the first two days but does a great job of telling the story in the air, land, and sea both in Northern Europe and other places. I can't wait for the next in the series to pick up after the chaotic start of WWIII.

[PETER ODUKWE · Rating 5 out of 5]

This is a very very good book. Red Storm Rising by the late Tom Clancy is my favourite book and all books for me in this genre are for me measured against this. Most fall well short, this does not. As this is not the complete story, I can only hope the wait for the next book is not too long. There is a great level of detail here, I wish I had found the book earlier. It's a long one but captivating in its scope. I keenly await what comes next. Brilliant so far

[Curt Bradley · Rating 5 out of 5]

Entertaining to say the least.

Very well done! I am looking forward to the other books as they come out. As this book ends, the good guys are back on their heels, without a lot of hope for the future. Somehow we expect them to turn it around. I guess we will see.

[Mike64 · Rating 5 out of 5]

What a great book. The storyline is incredible as are the characters. I can’t wait for the next book. This was a wonderful story that kept me on the edge of my seat throughout.

Well done!

[Whatismoo · Rating 1 out of 5]

Spoilers for this and other books (mainly Ralph Peters' Red Army, and Clancy's Red Storm Rising) throughout so, y'know, be warned.

***

This book is 619 pages. The war starts on page 313. You'll note that this is just over half way through. The first half of the book is spent setting up the war, which involves a great deal of the "pronoun game" and characters saying "now let me tell you the plan..." and then the authors neglect to tell the reader the plan while the rest of the characters in the scene marvel at the brilliance of the idea. This is bad writing. It also involves a great deal of alternate history. Medvedev (Not Dmitri Anatolyevich) heads the hard liner coup against Gorby in 1991, and succeeds, then represses his way to victory against the secession movements, and magics the economy to be fixed. I'm not a political scientist or economist, so I can't tell you if that is realistic, but it certainly strains my disbelief. Personally, I think the "why" of Cold War Gone Hot novels is almost universally the weakest part. Peters' Red Army succeeds in part because it doesn't focus on why the war starts, but how the characters experience it as it happens.

There are some fundamental failures of understanding regarding the Soviet view of nuclear weapons. A high level politburo member states that "all our traditional war plans call for the use of these [atomic] weapons on the battlefield." This had not been true, per-se, since the mid-1980s at latest. The Soviet General Staff, per Hines' "Soviet Intentions 1968-1985", believed that a war could be fought and won against NATO in Europe with purely conventional weapons as early as 1981. This was not a body typified by flights of wild fancy. In 1993 this statement is close to 15 years out of date. The Soviets were far more loath to initiate nuclear weapons use than NATO, in large part due to nuclear weapons' ability to even the Soviet conventional superiority over NATO.

Speaking of writing, the authors don't do that very well. There is an absolute ton of telling, rather than showing. Characters are cardboard cutouts, and don't really have arcs. They exist as automatons to propel the plot forwards, and there's so many they never really get fleshed out. The ones who do get some characterization aren't amazingly likable. Medvedev, our Soviet Premier du jour, is violent, power hungry, opportunistic, and honestly seems like a caricature. The woman US Navy helicopter pilot, Abby Savage, is also a caricature. The authors made her quite unlikable, despite the innate righteousness of her complaints. She wants to fly an anti-submarine helicopter, but The Man (TM) won't let her. So far, the resolution for this narrative tension is that every chapter, if not every page, from her viewpoint takes the time to constantly remind the reader how degrading her job is. This whole facet of her characterization as of now only serves to remind the reader of the mediocre prose, and poor pacing/plotting.

I presume that the VDV officers, Romanov and his Political Officer (a poorly understood role I will address later in this review) Sviashenik, are supposed to be a humanizing core, but their main virtues in this role seem to be that the ham-fistedly named Romanov is devoutly Russian Orthodox, Sviashenik is a secular Jew, and neither particularly likes communism. Frankly, the relationship between Gordunov (VDShV Battalion Commander) and Levin (his Deputy Commander for Political Affairs) in Red Army is far more compelling. It was fascinating to see Gordunov's view of Levin evolve from barely contained contempt to a begrudging respect, while Levin experiences the horror and trauma of war, the senselessness and violence. It breaks him, just as it broke Gordunov. It's gut-wrenching to read. Romanov and Sviashenik are just kind of there. Khitrov, the mind behind the Soviet plan, is an incompetent psycopathic madman more akin to Joachim Peiper, Otto Skorzeny, or Lev Mekhlis than an educated Colonel from Spetsgruppa-Alfa. So let's take this opportunity to discuss that plan.

Khitrov's plan is foolish. He begins with a large and orchestrated series of car and truck bombings against civilian targets in the Continental United States and Canada. Simultaneous to this are several cruise missile attacks against American ports, taking advantage of OSCAR-I, OSCAR-II, CHARLIE-I, and CHARLIE-II anti-shipping cruise missile submarines. This would normally be enough of a challenge, moving significant submarine forces up next to the US Seaboard in time of crisis, but the plan goes further, as the Soviets manage to sneak a number of pilots, bomber/navigators, and electronics (the radar out of a fighter jet) and the communications equipment from a "Bear" bomber, and stuff it all into a Piper Cherokee. How they power all this is beyond me. Now, a sane person might imagine that if you're lobbing big expensive cruise missiles at a harbor, you might want to shoot at the enemy's Navy, but no, Khitrov's plan is to sink a gaggle of merchant and passenger vessels. I guess he didn't remember the Lusitania. Also, the Soviets drop sea-mines in New York Harbor.

What does this achieve? Well, the Soviets understood that the most decisive period of a war was the initial period. What happens right at the start of a war can have outsize effects. This aligns with the Prussian maxim that wars are best kept "Kurtz und vives" (short and lively). Examples would be German campaigns 1939-40, the Soviet intervention in Czechoslovakia and Hungary, the 1991 Gulf War, etc. Therefore, it is important, in the Soviet view, to make appropriate use of the resources available to maximize their effects. This is especially true in light of several other Soviet views. The USSR understood that the US, and the West as a whole, had a far greater economic potential and population than the USSR. They understood that they would lose a long war of attrition, as that would allow the USA to economically mobilize and grind the USSR into paste with the arsenal of democracy, much as we did the Germans. They wanted to fight a short and decisive war making most efficient use of their more limited resources. Wasting these resources on indiscriminate attacks against civilian targets is questionable. Attacking civilian targets on the wrong side of the Atlantic, with limited to no effect on the American capacity to reinforce forces in Europe is counter productive. In just the New York attacks, at least a company of Special Forces, 24 heavy anti-ship missiles, and 8 medium anti-ship missiles are wasted on civilian targets. Anyone with a brain between their ears would understand that this would do nothing but provoke the American public to support a ceaseless crusade against the attacker until their leadership, people, and nation have been destroyed. We did it in Afghanistan, Germany, Japan, and Iraq. This failure to understand the United States is the reason strategic command in the Soviet Union was centralized in the General Staff, and not passed off to random disgruntled Spetsnaz Colonels with personality disorders.

***

That said, there are some parts of the plan which fit within the Soviet way of war. The decapitation of the Norwegian gov't was an excellent choice, though it should likely have been supplemented by attacks on AF North Headquarters at the Kolsas Bunker Complex. The actions of Soviet SOF to delay Norwegian reinforcements is also reasonable, though their insertion method (as Olympic athletes) is questionable. There is no mention of the various Northern and Baltic fleet Spetsnaz units, especially the Detached Reconnaissance teams, who were tasked with strikes against Norwegian/NATO SOSUS and Radar infrastructure in Finnmark and Troms.

There are several questionable features to the air campaign against the RNoAF.

* At one point (p.322) the authors state that radio waves move at the speed of sound.

* Missile avoidance in the book is more related to Ace Combat than any real life tactic. Missiles, which don't need to keep a pilot from blacking out, can turn far harder then jets.

* Bandit (hostile radar contact) and Bogey (unknown radar contact) are used interchangeably.

* The patter from the AWACS operators is not formatted correctly.

* Alta Airport, with a 7300 foot runway, is ignored as a potential dispersal field.

* Despite the authors' claims, the F-16A lacks thrust reversers. The Norwegian F-16s have drag parachutes.

* The Soviets do not re-pain vehicles for winter camouflage, which is not in line with their practices in real life.

* Stavka doesn't mean "General Staff", it means High Command.

* VVS was retiring the Mig-23 in the late 80s, why they're in service in the 90s is beyond me. They also behave like early export models, limited to 4g with poor missiles, instead of the 8.5g capable, agile, and well armed MiG-23MLD.

* The Soviets seem to forget that Anti-Radar Missiles exist, and they had quite a few of them.

* The SCUD-D is used, instead of the SS-23 SPIDER/OTR-23 Oka for reasons unknown. Furthermore, a small number (6) are used against 6 targets, with the result that one misses. This target then survives 18h. This is a patently stupid way to use these missiles. It is common practice to target enough missiles on each target to ensure destruction even if one or more malfunctions. Beyond that, the use of only 6 missiles (one Battalion), when the 6th Combined Arms Army has the 6th Missile Brigade with three Battalions, in Murmansk Oblast. Why there was not an immediate reload-refire on the target, which should take no more than an hour or two with the SS-1e SCUD-D, or about a half hour with the SS-23 Spider, is beyond me.

* VVS is Frontal Aviation, one of three (ish) Soviet Air Arms, along side PVO (air defence) and A-VMF (Naval Aviation). Mitroshenko is stated to be VVS flying a Su-27 out of Kilp Yavr Airbase. There was a Su-27 unit at Kilp-Yavr, but it was PVO, the 941st Fighter Aviation Regiment, PVO.

* The Flanker is called an "interceptor" but it is an Air Superiority Fighter, in Soviet parlance a Frontline Fighter. A Soviet interceptor would be the MiG-25, Su-15, MiG-31, and similar.

* Su-24 Fencers or Tu-22M2/M3 Backfires should probably make an appearance in the tactical support role, rather than the MiG-23 and MiG-27s that are used in the book.

* The Soviets are using the Beriev A-50 "Mainstay" radar aircraft. Mitroshenko is said to be VVS, but the A-50 was used by PVO. VVS was in the process of procuring the An-71 "Madcap" radar aircraft when the USSR fell. The Soviet Navy was also procuring the Yak-44 radar aircraft for their carriers.

The Soviet Su-27s have missiles that outrange those carried by the Norwegian jets by several dozen miles. The Norwegian jets somehow get into the perfect position to attack the Soviets without being noticed, despite the Soviets having their own airborne radar aircraft, the initiative in launching the action, and a numerical advantage. The Soviets are also opting to sneak in at low level, despite the mentioned technological advantage. The authors also appear not to be aware of the quite superior performance of the AA-11 Archer/R-73 missile, compared to the AIM-9L Sidewinder. It can lock on to targets up to 45 degrees off the boresight of the missile, cued off the radar or the pilot's helmet mounted sight. The AIM-9L on the RNoAF F-16 looks straight forwards. The Norwegians have to point their plane at the Soviets a lot harder than the Soviets have to point at the Norwegians. Furthermore, the R-73 has thrust vectoring while the AIM-9L doesn't. The R-73 is far more maneuverable, and far more likely to get a hit/kill than the AIM-9L in identical engagements.

There's an even more fundamental problem with this plan. The RNoAF only flies F-16A jets. These go about Mach 1.5 and can fly up to 50,000 feet. The Soviet Air Defense Force has MiG-31 interceptors with long ranged AA-9 Amos/R-33 missiles. The MiG-31 flies up to >80,000 feet, and Mach 2.83. The Soviets have no need to fool around with flying jets in low to sneak up and kill the NATO radar aircraft, when they can fly over the Norwegian air force with impunity. Beyond that, the air to air combat feels more related to Ace Combat than reality. The authors are not pilots and it shows. The most valuable assets to a fighter pilot are speed and altitude. Flying low is only useful against radars which are not pulse doppler (look down-shoot down) types. The NATO AWACS is one of those types, so the Soviets, as they often do in this story, are stupidly handicapping themselves for no reason.

***

When the reader finally slogs their way to ground combat, it is sterile, emotionless, and worst of all, boring. The reader understands what's happening. It is neat, and orderly. I personally have not been attacked by a Soviet combined arms task force, but I would imagine it is a great deal more chaotic. Peters' certainly manages to capture this feeling in Red Army. The confusion of battle, how overwhelming it is. The randomness, chaos, and at times futility. I would point to the passages in Red Army with Gordunov and Levin, as well as Bezarin's portions, as excellent examples of what I mean.

The authors say a few things in the preface. They ask "Why does history seem to rhyme? Why do John Hackett’s and Tom Clancy’s and nearly every other work of Cold War-goes-hot fiction seem to fall into the same familiar patterns?" and then state that:

>"...Northern Fury is the story of the people, on both sides, who would have had to fight the war that we here imagine. We have been careful to remain true to the constraints of reality and the details of the military organizations that existed at the end of the Cold War (when ships sink, they will not reappear; when squadrons and regiments are decimated they must be reorganized; one cannot conjure divisions out of thin air), and we think that those “grognards” who care about such things will be pleased with the depth of our research and attention to technical, geographical, and historical accuracy. But the drama of the story comes from the characters, the people, and from their struggles against each other, against geography, and against themselves. And in this respect, we think we have an exciting story to tell."

Working backwards, I take issue with several points made in the second passage quoted above. Northern Fury is not the story of the people involved in this war. The focus of the book, the engine that drives the reader to keep turning the page, is the war. It is not, as it would be in a character driven work, to follow the characters as they change in relation to the events of the plot they experience. The efforts made to be true to the Tables of Organization and Equipment are of middling quality. Much liberty has been taken to augment force structures ahistorically, and the Soviet force structures in the 1988-1991 period were, more than usual, in a state of flux as Gorbachev radically reoriented military policy. Their commitment to detail appears more to be based on what has name recognition (SCUD), modern marketing materials (passive homing R-27), and Hollywood/video game depictions of war than anything else. I am distinctly displeased with the treatment of air combat. The geographical, historical, and technical accuracy is lacking in key areas, and this detail was not sacrificed in the name of storytelling. It appears to be a result of limited and surface level research. Certainly no interaction was made with, even translated, Russian language sources such as Reznichenko's Taktika. The authors website cites the 1984 versions of FM 100-2-1 and FM 100-2-2, which are of limited quality compared to the 1990/1991 updates to these manuals. No use is made of the excellent British Army Field Manual Volume 2, Parts 1, 2, and 3 (1991), or Red Banner: The Soviet Military System in Peace and War.

To address the first quote, history seems to rhyme because Hackett, Clancy, and the other 'big' Cold-War-Gone-Hot fiction writers, such as Zaloga and Coyle, all subscribed to the same school of thought. It was one which fundamentally misunderstood the Soviet Army and how they approached war, and did so in ways which benefited NATO's odds. Franz Nauta, in Logistics Implications of Maneuver Warfare, Vol. 5, p. 16, outlines in detail why the underlying principals of Hackett's scenario are deeply flawed. Lt. Col. LeRoy Outlaw's "Red Storm Rising: A Primer for Conventional War in Europe" notes that, given the unrealistic behaviors and handicaps imposed on the Soviets, "one must question how it would have been possible for NATO to fail." History, in this case, rhymes because of stereotype and wishful thinking.

The authors set out to write a Cold War Gone Hot Novel. Typically these works balance mediocre prose with a slavish, almost pornographic attention to detail and technical accuracy. Hackett's Third World War is dry and goes on forever, Clancy includes a bizzare fetishistic Iceland romantic sub-plot with a borderline self-insert character getting together with a pregnant Icelandic woman who he saved from the rapist barbarian Soviet paratroopers, a racialized power fantasy that reads like it came from Die Sturmer or Gobbels', rather than the Naval Institute Press. The genre's saving grace has always been the technological fetishism, where authors and readers alike can salivate over the latest whiz-bang gadgetry as it blows someone or other to pieces.

This contrasts with Ralph Peters' Red Army, a work which names so few specific designations that you can count them on one hand. It is a character driven novel that truly understands and shows the human element of war. If you are familiar enough with the technology of the period, you can tell what systems Peters is talking about, but to obsess over them misses the point. War is a human endeavor, and as much surface level fun as the shooty-bang-bang technobabble is, it is not a compelling story. Something has gone wrong when a novel about war leaves the reader grasping for reasons to care in the middle of a battle.

Northern Fury: H-Hour claims to be a detail-oriented, compelling novel of a Cold War Gone Hot. I read it expecting the book to live up to these claims. Between sloppy research, mediocre prose, poor characterization, terrible plotting and pacing, and a fundamental failure to understand the core of both the Soviet Way of War and what makes a good novel, I was left disappointed.

If you want a well written, technically accurate, character driven novel about the human element in a hypothetical Cold War Gone Hot, get Red Army.

[Bruce Bonaney · Rating 5 out of 5]

Northern Fury's attention to technical detail combined with personal stories makes for a compelling read on what could have been an all too possible reality in our not too distant past. Read it and enjoy.

[David Mcgowan · Rating 5 out of 5]

A believable alternative history

A great story, well constructed characters and the level of detail in the tech is excellent. Well worth the read and looking forward to the next installment.

[Diego · Rating 5 out of 5]

Superb

I didn’t enjoy so much since Red Storm Rising. If you like modern war novels I recommend it at 100%

[Brian Smith · Rating 5 out of 5]

Solid Counterfactual WWIII Scenario

Got turned on to this as a CMNAO player and fan of the genre. Well thought out, well paced, and well strategized scenarios. Enough tactical surprises to make it fresh and intriguing. The plot, pacing, and characterizations are easily as good as the stuff published by the ‘big name’ authors in the genre. The book is also clearly professionally edited- a huge plus in this era of publishing. Highly recommended and looking forward to seeing more of the story unfold.

[Don Rouse · Rating 4 out of 5]

Good twist on history.

The book is a little slow developing, it dowes build nicely. Can not wait for book 2 of this series.

[Allyn Nichols · Rating 5 out of 5]

An excellent take on the cold war going hot.

Excellent operational detail and planning. Well written despite a few personal gripes with some of the writing style. For a debut however it is well worth reading. Especially if you have an interest in operational command and modern naval / air warfare.

[German Onofrio · Rating 5 out of 5]

Northern Fury: H-Hour by Bart Gauvin and Joel Radunzel is a novel about a hypothetical war between a strengthened Soviet Union and NATO in 1994. The war takes place across central Europe but the novel focuses on the Norwegian front, as well as Soviet sabotage operations on the US east coast.

The book is seen through many different points of views. From news reporters, Norwegian government officials, to US coast guard officers, Soviet paratroopers and pilots. The book is one of the more recent additions to the ‘NATO-USSR WWIII’ genre, and it's one of the better additions. It's very entertaining, keeping the reader on the edge of their seat for a lot of the scenes that play out. It is also well researched, as you can tell the authors went to great lengths to keep the military and technological aspects as close to real life as possible. Yet, the authors also take some artistic liberties when it comes to doctrines, tactics, and procedures, making the book a little more enjoyable. It is a fictional war novel, not a manual, afterall.

Some of the plot points in this novel are new and refreshing. Very interesting to follow as well.

There are, however, some things I did not like about the book. First, the pacing. Just so you get an idea, the first half of the book takes place over the course of three years. The second half of the book, apart from some of the last chapters (there’s 95 I think), takes place over the course of four hours. Here is my biggest problem with the book. The authors spend so much time setting up for the war, yet only show the initial day. And on that day (second half of the book), they tell you everything and I mean everything that goes down. It then ends abruptly on a cliffhanger. I feel as though there are some characters and events that I didn’t really need to know about. At the same time, I didn’t get to read about some events that are mentioned or alluded to. This is the first in a series of books, which explains why it ends so abruptly.

The book also has characteristics people often criticize Tom Clancy’s novels for having. There are a multitude of characters, and it is hard to keep track of them. This isn’t something I have a problem with, but some people might. The only issue I have is the fact that some characters have no purpose at all, other than being introduced for their actual roles in the next books to come.

These issues don’t take away from how good the novel is, at least not to me. I would still rate it five stars. It’s a great read that I’d recommend to anyone who is interested in cold war military history, or in the WWIII genre.

[Mark Sileikis · Rating 4 out of 5]

A good read and a different perspective

Refreshing to read a WW III story where only Americans are the hero's. Norway, Canada and the UK take the lead in many aspects on Day 1. The fog of war is shown very well and technical aspects are good. One telling oversight and is explained by the authors being Army, Navy and Marines do not salute without wearing covers (hats). And we don't wear covers indoors, unless we are under arms. The staff would not stand at attention and salute at the end of a meeting guys. Also no one in NYC in early February is going to have their window open to hear a tv or radio through. I look forward to the next book in this series. I did 2 Reforger exercises in the late 80's. We took our carrier across the Atlantic and fought from inside the Vest fjord. The high mountains protecting us from missile attacks and 14 A-6E bombers and 20 A-7s within striking distance of Russia. I also did a P-3c deployment to Iceland in 83.

[John McNair · Rating 5 out of 5]

in short, I found this an absolutely brilliant book. The writing, the story line, the detail all came together wonderfully. I will re-read it, soon, seeing as I raced through some parts dealing with action and combat, eager to see what the outcome was. Because the outcome wasn't always as one would think, and that in itself made the story so appealing. If there is any wee drawback to this book, it is that so many story lines are left hanging, unresolved. Of course, Gauvin and Radunzel planned it that way, hoping to create a cadre of followers that will continue to buy the next in the series. Well, I am one of those who will, and happily, since it will be money well spent. And the authors should be rewarded for their exceptional work. Although Red Storm Rising, Red Phoenix and Sword Point, to name a few (all based on somewhat comparable plots), are self-contained novels they do not approach Northern Fury H-Hour in terms of realism and attention-grabbing detail. If you're reading this review then you must already have an interest in this alternate-history-military-fiction genre. If so, read this book and I'll bet you will love it.

[P · Rating 5 out of 5]

Really pulled me in to the story. Can't wait to finish the series.

Those who like action should read this book. Great detail on the military capabilities of the nineties and a great integration into the story.

[Kent Phyfe · Rating 5 out of 5]

New take on old history!

I love when an author rewrites history with a different slant and makes it work. So often we find ourselves lost in reality that it’s nice to take a walk down memory lane and say this could have happened but.... well written book great read.

[Rory · Rating 5 out of 5]

The best addition to the techno-thriller Genre since Clancy's Red Storm Rising. I read it cover-to-cover in a single--12 hour--sitting!

[Rick Thomas · Rating 5 out of 5]

Great read and so close to what reality could be.

[Arne · Rating 5 out of 5]

A lot better than I thought - where is #2?

My pet peeve: People in Europe don't pay signing a check, that's an American thing. At least I never saw anybody in Sweden do it.

[Gary Young · Rating 5 out of 5]

I cannot recommend this book more .

The best , fastest moving book for a very long time . I had to fight to put it down , the grasp of U.S. and Russian weaponry and tactics is inspiring . Roll on the next book

[Merv Whitcombe · Rating 5 out of 5]

A cracking good read, a bit slow to begin with but once it gets going it a real page turner

[MATT · Rating 5 out of 5]

An exciting read

The book moves at breakneck speed and is difficult to put dowm, I can t wait for the next episode

[Robin Cowlyn · Rating 5 out of 5]

Brilliant book

Simply the best example of this genre!
I am now researching his previous works and eagerly await his new ones!

[MARTIN WITHERS · Rating 5 out of 5]

Superb blockbuster.

A modern classic, long but fascinating read, tremendous detail and action also thorough political details to set scene. Very exciting and interesting book.

[Michael Levy · Rating 3 out of 5]

Very clever strategy,I hope the Russians never read it.

I enjoyed the story,the Russian characters were given a lot of space which is unusual.how the Americans missed the build up of troops,.in Chekoslovakia seems odd.but well thought out.

[craig hurdle · Rating 4 out of 5]

Great read

I gave it a four star rating
Was an interesting read
About a war with the European union
And Russia against the United States
A third world war story

[David · Rating 5 out of 5]

This is the best military fiction I've read since Tom Clancy's "Red Storm Rising."