Kavalali Mehmed Ali Pasha (c. 1770 – 1849); often dubbed "the founder of modern Egypt"; was one of the most important figures in the history of the Ottoman Empire. Born in what is now Greece; and seemingly headed for an everyday existence as a married tobacco trader; he joined the Ottoman army at the age of thirty; and went on to become the ruler of Egypt for nearly half a century. Conqueror of Sudan and Syria; despot; and eventually a threat to the Ottoman Empire itself; he established both mass industrialisation and the mass-farming of cotton; and secured hereditary rule for his descendents. In this insightful and well-constructed biography; Khaled Fahmy assesses the infamous leader’s life; and his contribution to Egyptian; and more broadly; Islamic history. Khaled Fahmy is Associate Professor of Middle Eastern Studies at New York University. He is the author of All the Pasha's Men: Mehmed Ali; His Army and the Making of Modern Egypt.
#582705 in Books 2011-09-20 2011-09-20Original language:EnglishPDF # 1 245.87 x .28 x 6.88l; .60 #File Name: 184908473480 pages
Review
3 of 3 people found the following review helpful. Some additional commentsBy SlavaInterestingly enough; both fighters were born by lack of the liquid-cooled engine availability. On the German side it was a fear of RLM's Technical Department that production and delivery schedules of the Bf-109's engine could be placed in jeopardy if it were also to be selected to power a second fighter from a back-up program. On the Soviet side if ill fated LaGG-3 would be phased out of production and replaced with Yak-7B in the Gor'kiy Plant No 21 it could not help with Klimov liquid-cooled engine shortage which was also used in Pe-2 bomber. Moreover; with such replacement Yakovlev would have monopolized all fighter production during WWII without any meaningful alternative! Arkadiy Shvetsov; Chif Designer of the Perm's engine plant No 19 producing the M-82 was concerned at the lack of demand for the engine. Hundreds were in storage and only small batch had been mounted on Sukhoi SU-2 short range bombers; which was about to phase out of production mostly due to the low battle survivability.Because of the fear that the removal of the LaGG-3 from production would occur before the combined team could design; build and test the new aircraft; the effort should be concentrated on installing the M-82 in the airframe of the production aircraft; which would also minimize overall fighters discrepancy production. Many thoughts that this idea was impractical because of the diameter of the M-82 engine was 460 mm (18 in) wider compared to the maximum cross section of the LaGG-3 fuselage. Moreover M-82 was 250 kg (551 lb) heavier than Klimov M-105P engine; which means that aircraft center of gravity would change... It should be pointed out that in the aircraft industry this modification in such a hassle is extremely risky. A true bravery (could not find a better word) of NII VVS test pilots Yakimov and Kubyshkin really helped new fighter to be born; which later modifications (La-5FN/La-7) became best fighter for Red Amy VVS during WWII. These tests also included a clear "from the list" spin tests! Interestingly enough these spin tests were done without letting Semen Lavochkin know ahead; since he was extremely careful aircraft designer and probably would never authorized such "exercises" from the scratch.One way or another somehow pure luck (or good fairy) helped and saved Lavochking fighter during the plant tests; NII VVS evaluation; and a state acceptance trials. On another hand; Nikolay Polikarpov's I-185 was already flying at that time bearing a striking resemblance to the La-5 which appeared in 1943. Unfortunately I-185 and its predecessor I-180 did not have as much luck during the tests as Lavochkin's LaGG-3 with M-82... At the order of NKAP; Polikarpov was obligated to pass the drawings for the dual 20mm ShVAK synchronized cannons to the design bureau of Semen Lavochkin to speed up development and production of La-5. It should be pointed out that technologically the I-185 was very sound design. Its structure was well design and as airplane feature it can be easily modified and produced at different plants for subsequent assembly at the final production plant. This capability was of great importance in the wartime because it enables a significant increase in production.I agree with most of the reviewers that German pilots training could be written much better and should not be doubled with another Osprey book "Focke-Wulf Fw 190 Aces of the Russian Front". For people who is really missed this portion I would suggested two Bergstrom books: "Black Cross/Red Star Volume I (Operation Barbarossa 1941)" and "Graf Grislawski A Pair of Aces".La-5 fighter was very "heavy" on the control and would require a lot of true Russian muscles to fly and especially fly good to win air battles. This is probably why Ivan Kozhedub's habit to exercise a lot with 32 kg in wight lifting came very handy. As it was mentioned in La-5/7 vs. Fw 190 book; Kozhedub was the best Allies fighter during WWII with 62 personal kills. One of the main reasons for such performance was his remarkable and unprecedented ability (true masterpiece) of the low attitude air battles.There is some confusing in the book (p. 53): actually; Kozhedub was almost shot down during his first air engagement with the enemy by Me-109 while trying to attack Me-110 over his own airfield. His La-5 with five fuel tanks was unofficially written off...I was surprise myself by reading this book how many real Fw-190 fighters were actually at the Eastern Front at one given time. Some elements of JG-51 were there before another conversion to Me-109 and JG-54 is in Courland. I guess in 1943 there was simply not enough Fw-190 to go around. This airplane was in a high demand in Luftwaffe due his high versatility: can be used in a dog fight; home defense against American's heavies; and in ground attack role! It's kind of interesting to see how this airplane turn table around in his favor compared to Me-109.I would have to agree with authors that winner of this duel would really come to the quality of the pilot training and tactics chosen during the engagements rather than the technical superiority of their respective machines. Overall; I found book very well written and organized; perhaps looking forward for another duel book: "Yak-1/7/9/3 vs. Me-109E/F/G/K".0 of 0 people found the following review helpful. Excellent review of the relative flight characteristics of the FW ...By CustomerExcellent review of the relative flight characteristics of the FW vs. La5. Not for those who want every mechanical detail; but a good review of design and deployment of each aircraft. Also good overview of the field conditions under which the aircraft operated. I am a fan of the Osprey publications because if you only have limited time to read it beats any monthly magazine. I am especially fond of the Kindle versions which I get on my tablet.18 of 20 people found the following review helpful. Battles in the Eastern SkiesBy WryGuy2"La-5/7 vs Fw 190: Eastern Front 1942-45 (Duel)"; by Dmitriy Khazanov and Aleksandr Medved; is a book in the Osprey Duel format that compares the Lavochkin La-5 and it's derivative; the La-7; against the Folke Wolf Fw 190A and its various sub-models over the Eastern Front during WW II. The duel format is typically 80 pages long; and presents an analysis of the factors ... human; mechanical; and tactical ... of the two weapons systems being compared; describes how the weapons were developed and utilized; and includes drawings; photographs; and illustrations.One of the reasons I bought this book is because while coverage of the Fw 190 is fairly common; there aren't many books in English that go into much detail about Soviet fighters such as the La 5/7; and I wanted to learn more. The authors do an excellent job of setting the stage and covering the development of Soviet fighter from it's initial prototype; the I-301; through the LaGG 1 and LaGG 3 fighters; to the more refined and deadly La-5 and La-7. Coverage of the development of the Fw 190 is also good. The authors effectively summarize the different sub-models of both fighters; giving good basic information of the differences between them.They also provide worthwhile information on the strategic situation and on pilot training. The section on combat; which provides useful comparisons and contrasts between the La-5/7 and the Fw 190; is more written from the Soviet point of view; although there are good anecdotes from both sides. The book closes with some statistical analysis and an aftermath; along with a list of books for further reading and an index. The pictures; illustrations; and diagrams were top notch.Although I enjoyed the book and learned much about the La fighters; I do have some nits to pick. First; under the combatant section; there is a good section covering Soviet pilot training from enlistment to employment. However for the German side; the authors note that the training system employed by the Luftwaffe has been described in several other books in the Osprey duel series; so they only provided information on how the Germans transitioned Bf 109 pilots to the Fw 190. While the information in this section was good; I don't happen to own any other duel books on German fighters; and I think it a bit presumptious for the authors to skip initial German pilot training in this book. (I probably own 20 Osprey books at this point in time; but they're more focused on land and sea; and on battles/campaigns; and this is my first "air duel" book.)Second; either the authors are using Soviet figures for German losses or they need to clearly define what constitutes a lost aircraft. For example; they state that at the beginning of the Battle of Kursk; the Germans had concentrated around 2100 aircraft to support the battle. They then state over the next 50 days of fighting that the Luftwaffe lost 2;419 aircraft. I suspect that an aircraft that suffered battle damage but could be repaired and returned to service are counted here as lost; as well as aircraft shot down or otherwise written-off. But it would help if the authors had defined what constituted "lost" in their analysis; as I don't believe the Germans had 115 percent of their starting aircraft totally destroyed (either shot down or lost on non-combat operations) in less than two months over the Kursk area. Similarly the authors state that the Germans lost some 4;500 aircraft during the Battle for Berlin. It's possible; I suppose; again depending on how you define "lost".And third; while the authors provide a lot of great information on the strengths and weaknesses of both sets of fighters; they never really choose a winner; and explain why they chose as they do; as the other books in the duel series do. In general; it seems that the Fw 190A was probably more than a match for the La-5; and the La-7 had the upper hand over the Fw 190A; but was probably evenly matched by the Fw 190D (although only around 700 were built by war's end and very few fought on the East Front.)Overall; though; this book provides succinct; pertinent information on the La family of fighters in World War II; and gives excellent comparisons as to the strengths and weakness of La's and Fw's; both in general and relative to combat with the other. The writing is clear and concise; and the pictures/illustrations/diagrams/etc are outstanding. Four stars.
