Today is Vietnam Veterans' Day

[Mike Henderson]

Today (3/29) is Vietnam Veterans' Day. I almost missed it but saw something in the paper about it.

Mike

[Maurice Mcmurry]

Thanks for the reminder. I am slowly reading a history book by a highly honored Vietnam Veteran. It is very heavy and is effecting my views in a major way. No Google doodle, that is a shame. I had leaned a tiny bit toward the Jane Fonda camp. I am often wrong.

[Ken Fitzgerald]

Thank you to all those of my generation who served in Vietnam!

While I served from '68-'76, I managed to miss that duty station!

[Maurice Mcmurry]

Thank you for your service Ken! One of my bosses was a Conchie and spent some of those same years cleaning bed pans and changing wound dressings. Thank you both!

[Ron Citerone]

I was a little too young to really understand what was happening. Thanks to all that served.

[Lee Schierer]

I also served on active duty from June 71 to July 76 and wasn't asked to go there.

[Rick Potter]

Thanks,

I never heard of this being a special Vietnam Memorial Day, but I am going to call my little brother. He still has some pieces of a Chinese hand grenade in his leg.


PS: I called him last night, and had a long talk. He was not aware of the special day either.

He carries a lot of guilt from there. He went through the Tet offensive, stationed at a forward fire artillery base ( that translates as a hummock in the middle of a rice paddy). When not on artillery duty, he also did patrol duty in the area, and survived several enemy attempts to over run the base. Not long after he went home, the base was over run, and every one was killed.

[Maurice Mcmurry]

I was a little too young to really understand what was happening. Thanks to all that served.

Me Too. From the First two chapters of Col. Dunn's book I see that very few understood or understand what was going on. Thanks to Lee and Ricks brother too.

[Joe Bradshaw]

That day missed me completely. I spent a year and a half in country. Thanks to all my fellow Vet vets.
Joe

[Peter Mich]

Maurice,

Can you share the name of the author and title of the book? Sounds like something I would like to read. Thank you.

Peter


Thanks for the reminder. I am slowly reading a history book by a highly honored Vietnam Veteran. It is very heavy and is effecting my views in a major way. No Google doodle, that is a shame. I had leaned a tiny bit toward the Jane Fonda camp. I am often wrong.

[Dave Anderson NH]

I never noticed it until this thread. Spent 12 months and 22 days there 68-69. It wasn't a lot of fun as my 2 purple hearts will attest. Being a Marine grunt, I consider myself lucky that I came home with no permanent damage. I give back by volunteering at my local VA Medical Center a day a week to help my fellow vets.

[mike calabrese]

Tothe Sons and Daughters of America
Whileyou are far away those of us you have left behind stand with you inspirit and great pride.Wesee the images and hear the stories, we fly the flags and dry oureyes and we think of the job you are doing every day for our freedomour America. We are with you in spirit and proud of you in ways thatwords simply don’t allow. If we could look you in the eye, shakeyour hand or have a moment to stand beside you maybe then we couldbegin to show you how we feel.Americais proud of her sons and daughters.
Asin every war past, present and future you may hear or meet those whowill detract from the job you do for us. They will call you names andmay even welcome you home with terrible acts of disrespect.
Don’tbe discouraged, be proud and stand tall because they are proof thatfreedom, your mission is alive and at work in America.Youare the protectors of their free speech and the very breath they mayuse to protest you.
Alwaysremember this is your America, a place, because of you and yourservice that allows such actions in the form of freedom. Alwaysremember because of you tanks will never roll them over to renderthem silent, Alwaysremember because of you they will never run naked in the streetsfrom an approaching army. Alwaysremember because of you they will never be forced to their knees andexperience the point blank execution of their dissidence.
Mostof all always remember it is because of you, thousands before you andthousands who will follow in your tracks that makes this possibleonly in our America.
Youare the sons and daughters of freedom and there is no greater honorany American can ever wish to have than to be the heart & soul ofthe very best of who we are. The freedom you are fighting for isalive and strong in America and awaiting your proud return.
Comehome soon, come home proud and come home to an America that is betterbecause you are in her service. Withdeepest respect for every one of you THANK YOU for our America and WelcomeHome
mikecalabrese

[Jack Frederick]

If you go to “The Wall’s” website there is an area where you can comment, give a remembrance, of those you knew who did not come back.

[Bernie Kopfer]

Fortunately after the debacle of the Vietnam war the powers that be opted for a all volunteer armed services.That way their rich children did not have to be put in harms way. Such a pity that the poor foot soldiers took the beating in Vietnam. A war that had nothing to do with freedom of speech or dissent as some claim our soldiers have preserved for us. Our leadership in DC and their Pentagon buddies should have been tried for treason and gross stupidity. Sadly since then we have had Iraq, Afghanistan. Wars that again have nothing to do with th freedoms Americans enjoy.

[Maurice Mcmurry]

Maurice,

Can you share the name of the author and title of the book? Sounds like something I would like to read. Thank you.

Peter

The First Vietnam War by Peter M. Dunn
Col. Dunn USAF served 3 tours in Vietnam at very great cost to himself.
Our public Library brought the book in for me through the Inter Library Loan service.

Thanks to Dave Anderson and Joe Bradshaw as well.

476796 476797

[mike calabrese]

to ALL AMERICAN HEROES who wore and currently wear the uniform of this great country I always have one thing to say.....THANK YOU, I get to be here in American freedom and pride because YOU WERE THERE

[Malcolm McLeod]

Thanks for the reminder. I am slowly reading a history book by a highly honored Vietnam Veteran. It is very heavy and is effecting my views in a major way. No Google doodle, that is a shame. I had leaned a tiny bit toward the Jane Fonda camp. I am often wrong.

I highly recommend the book "When Thunder Rolled: An F-105* Pilot Over North Vietnam" - Ed Rasimus. Told from the perspective of a low ranking officer / pilot, not a decision maker.

My father was a fighter pilot, as were many of the men who sat with their families around our dinner table. YMMV, but I'd pick a different camping companion.

*- Proof that with enough horsepower, a brick WILL fly. Two thirds of the production run rest in the jungles of SE Asia, some still with the men who flew them.

[Mike Henderson]

Two thirds of the production run rest in the jungles of SE Asia, some still with the men who flew them.

According to Wikipedia (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Republic_F-105_Thunderchief), 395 were lost, including 61 non-operational losses, out of 833 produced. That's 47% losses, including non-operational losses, and about 40% combat losses (excluding non-operational losses).

Actually, there are two sets of figures for losses in the Wikipedia article. The introduction says 382 lost, including 62 non-combat, while the summary says 395 lost, including 61 non-combat. I used the higher loss numbers for the percentages.

Mike

[Perhaps 2/3 of those who saw action in Vietnam were lost, but I couldn't find any statistics on that.]

[Just an added statistic - I served 14 months in Vietnam, but in a rear area. I was not involved in combat. About 80% of a military force is involved in support of the soldiers in combat. It's often said that wars are won with logistics and crew served weapons. Some sources (https://www.thesoldiersproject.org/what-percentage-of-the-military-sees-combat/)say only 10% are involved in combat. Logistics - the ability to produce war materiel and to get it to front (in time) - was a major factor in the Allied success in WWII.

It's often said that amateurs study tactics while professionals study logistics.]

[Malcolm McLeod]

According to Wikipedia (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Republic_F-105_Thunderchief), 395 were lost, including 61 non-operational losses, out of 833 produced. That's 47% losses, including non-operational losses, and about 40% combat losses (excluding non-operational losses).

Actually, there are two sets of figures for losses in the Wikipedia article. The introduction says 382 lost, including 62 non-combat, while the summary says 395 lost, including 61 non-combat. I used the higher loss numbers for the percentages.

Mike

[Perhaps 2/3 of those who saw action in Vietnam were lost, but I couldn't find any statistics on that.]

I have not researched, just relaying comments from a couple of real-life 'lead-sled' drivers. (And fighter pilots would NEVER exaggerate. Like fishermen.)

[Mike Henderson]

Exaggerating experiences from war goes back a long way. Here's a quote from Henry V (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/St_Crispin's_Day_Speech)

This day is call'd the feast of Crispian (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saint_Crispin%27s_Day).
He that outlives this day, and comes safe home,
Will stand a tip-toe when this day is nam'd,
And rouse him at the name of Crispian.
He that shall live this day, and see old age,
Will yearly on the vigil feast his neighbours,
And say "To-morrow is Saint Crispian."
Then will he strip his sleeve and show his scars,
And say "These wounds I had on Crispin's day."
Old men forget; yet all shall be forgot,
But he'll remember, with advantages,
What feats he did that day. Then shall our names,
Familiar in his mouth as household words—
Harry the King, Bedford (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John,_Duke_of_Bedford) and Exeter (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Beaufort,_Duke_of_Exeter),
Warwick (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Beauchamp,_13th_Earl_of_Warwick) and Talbot (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Talbot,_1st_Earl_of_Shrewsbury), Salisbury (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Montagu,_4th_Earl_of_Salisbury) and Gloucester (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Humphrey,_Duke_of_Gloucester)—
Be in their flowing cups freshly rememb'red.

Mike

[I'll add the rest of Henry's speech just FYI. It's somewhat famous.]

This story shall the good man teach his son;
And Crispin Crispian shall ne'er go by,
From this day to the ending of the world,
But we in it shall be rememberèd—
We few, we happy few, we band of brothers;
For he to-day that sheds his blood with me
Shall be my brother; be he ne'er so vile,
This day shall gentle his condition;
And gentlemen in England now a-bed
Shall think themselves accurs'd they were not here,
And hold their manhoods cheap whiles any speaks
That fought with us upon Saint Crispin's day.

[Malcolm McLeod]

... It's often said that wars are won with logistics and crew served weapons. ...

Slow to get back to this, but I've read 3-4 different sources that point to the proximity fuse for larger caliber (crew served) weapons as the single-most important* advantage the US and Allies had in WWII. From AA artillery to air-burst anti-infantry shells it was devastating. And US logistics produced millions upon millions of these fuses by wars end.

I found it interesting that initial use of the fuses was confined to naval AA guns (falling un-recoverably into the the sea), out of fear the Axis powers would reverse engineer a dud falling on land. It would seem that leadership recognized the potential early in the development cycle...?

*-This from the various authors; I'm sure opinions vary widely.

*****
I'm more of a Bobby Burns fan: Scots wa' hae

[Mike Henderson]

Another artillery development in WWII was "time on target". The ability to fire multiple guns, with different trajectories, and have them all arrive on target at the same time. Research had shown that most casualties from artillery occurred in the first few seconds of a barrage, when troops were not taking shelter or prone. Time on target greatly increased casualties.

Time on target was developed in 1941. The proximity fuse was first used in combat at the Battle of the Bulge in 1944. The proximity fuse was used in anti-aircraft shells before 1944, mostly against German bombers over England.

Mike

[When enemy troops were in a wooded area, the fuse of choice was not the proximity fuse, but one called "super quick". This caused the shell to explode in the trees, above ground, and shower shrapnel down on the enemy. Well entrenched troops always put overhead shelter on their fighting positions.]

[Malcolm McLeod]

Another artillery development in WWII was "time on target". The ability to fire multiple guns, with different trajectories, and have them all arrive on target at the same time. Research had shown that most casualties from artillery occurred in the first few seconds of a barrage, when troops were not taking shelter or prone. Time on target greatly increased casualties.

Time on target was developed in 1941. The proximity fuse was first used in combat at the Battle of the Bulge in 1944.

Mike

[When enemy troops were in a wooded area, the fuse of choice was not the proximity fuse, but one called "super quick". This caused the shell to explode in the trees, above ground, and shower shrapnel down on the enemy. Well entrenched troops always put overhead shelter on their fighting positions.]


Not near my 'library' at the moment, so can't cite my previous reading, but this from Wiki:

Vannevar Bush (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vannevar_Bush), head of the U.S. Office of Scientific Research and Development (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Office_of_Scientific_Research_and_Development) (OSRD) during the war, credited the proximity fuze with three significant effects.[53] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proximity_fuze#cite_note-54)



It was important in defense from Japanese Kamikaze (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kamikaze) attacks in the Pacific. Bush estimated a sevenfold increase in the effectiveness of 5-inch anti-aircraft artillery (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/5-inch_gun) with this innovation.[54] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proximity_fuze#cite_note-Bush_p109-55)


It was an important part of the radar-controlled anti-aircraft batteries that finally neutralized the German V-1 (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/V-1_flying_bomb) attacks on England.[54] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proximity_fuze#cite_note-Bush_p109-55)


It was used in Europe starting in the Battle of the Bulge (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_the_Bulge) where it was very effective in artillery shells fired against German infantry formations, and changed the tactics of land warfare.


At first the fuzes were only used in situations where they could not be captured by the Germans. They were used in land-based artillery in the South Pacific in 1944. Also in 1944, fuzes were allocated to the British Army (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_Army)'s Anti-Aircraft Command (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-Aircraft_Command), that was engaged in defending Britain against the V-1 flying bomb. As most of the British heavy anti-aircraft guns were deployed in a long, thin coastal strip, dud shells fell into the sea, safely out of reach of capture. Over the course of the German V-1 campaign, the proportion of flying bombs flying through the coastal gun belt that were destroyed rose from 17% to 74%, reaching 82% during one day. A minor problem encountered by the British was that the fuze was sensitive enough to detonate the shell if it passed too close to a seabird and a number of seabird "kills" were recorded.[55] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proximity_fuze#cite_note-Dobinson2001-56)
The Pentagon refused to allow the Allied field artillery use of the fuzes in 1944, although the United States Navy fired proximity-fuzed anti-aircraft shells during the July 1943 invasion of Sicily (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Gela_(1943)).[56] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proximity_fuze#cite_note-57) After General Dwight D. Eisenhower (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dwight_D._Eisenhower) demanded he be allowed to use the fuzes, 200,000 shells with VT fuzes (code named "POZIT"[57] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proximity_fuze#cite_note-58)) were used in the Battle of the Bulge (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_the_Bulge) in December 1944. They made the Allied heavy artillery far more devastating, as all the shells now exploded just before hitting the ground.[58] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proximity_fuze#cite_note-59) German divisions were caught out in open as they had felt safe from timed fire because it was thought that the bad weather would prevent accurate observation. U.S. General George S. Patton (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_S._Patton) credited the introduction of proximity fuzes with saving Liège and stated that their use required a revision of the tactics of land warfare.[59] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proximity_fuze#cite_note-60)

Bombs and rockets fitted with radio proximity fuzes were in limited service with both the USAAF (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Army_Air_Forces) and USN (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Navy) at the end of WW2. The main targets for these proximity fuze detonated bombs and rockets were anti-aircraft (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-aircraft) emplacements and airfields (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aerodrome).[60] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proximity_fuze#cite_note-:94-61)


Some references here to AAA use, and 'Europe starting' use, but no detailed dates....? Don't see it here (wiki), but I would swear I've read fuse's first 'official kill' was USN 5" AAA on a Japanese Kate in the Pacific.

RE: Time-on-target, there was a (History channel??) video about US' artillery - - a single auto-loaded (Paladin?) can fire 5 or 6 rounds - all with near simultaneous impact. Ouch! And self-propelled shoot-and-scoot to avoid counter-battery fire.

I worked on automation for the production of the GMLRS system for Lockheed-Martin - Missiles & Fire Control Div.; always tried to make extra sure they weren't mad at me. :eek: GMLRS and original cluster warhead are block-wide-ugly, but the unitary warhead is a very specifically nasty little beast!