Today is Vietnam Veterans' Day

[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, 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 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, 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

This day is call'd the feast of Crispian.
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 and Exeter,
Warwick and Talbot, Salisbury and 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, head of the U.S. Office of Scientific Research and Development (OSRD) during the war, credited the proximity fuze with three significant effects.^[53]

• It was important in defense from Japanese Kamikaze attacks in the Pacific. Bush estimated a sevenfold increase in the effectiveness of 5-inch anti-aircraft artillery with this innovation.^[54]
• It was an important part of the radar-controlled anti-aircraft batteries that finally neutralized the German V-1 attacks on England.^[54]
• It was used in Europe starting in the 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's 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]
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.^[56] After General Dwight D. Eisenhower demanded he be allowed to use the fuzes, 200,000 shells with VT fuzes (code named "POZIT"^[57]) were used in the 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] 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 credited the introduction of proximity fuzes with saving Liège and stated that their use required a revision of the tactics of land warfare.^[59]

Bombs and rockets fitted with radio proximity fuzes were in limited service with both the USAAF and USN at the end of WW2. The main targets for these proximity fuze detonated bombs and rockets were anti-aircraft emplacements and airfields.^[60]

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. GMLRS and original cluster warhead are block-wide-ugly, but the unitary warhead is a very specifically nasty little beast!