interesting information regarding Lam Son 719....

Modeling Subjects Helicopters
1

this is some back and forth between my father and myself. He was A/4/77 ARA forward deployed to Khe Sahn during the incursion…

-----Original Message-----

From: Martens, Matthew D [mailto:matthew.d.martens@boeing.com]

Sent: Thursday, August 25, 2005 11:59 AM

To: Barry.Martens

Subject: Any of this look familiar?

This website is loaded with images and information…

http://www.174ahc.org/lolo-pix.htm

-----Original Message-----

From: Barry.Martens

Sent: Thursday, August 25, 2005 6:16 PM

To: Martens, Matthew D

Subject: RE: Any of this look familiar?

I’m not sure of the details… I do remember flying gun cover for Lolo

several times and I definitely remember 5 slicks buringin in the LZ. I

remember a total of 8 aircraft going down on one mission. If I added this

account up correctly there are 7 counting the Charlie models. Might have

been one or more that didn’t make it back to base.

An awful lot of confusion during these operations as soon as the shooting

started. Many times there was no shooting until one or more slicks were in

the LZ. The all hell would break lose. The bad guys figured they could

choke the LZ if they could cripple a couple of Hueys in the middle of the

LZ. Sure made it harder for the next Huey to get in there to start

extracting crews.

This happened many times in Laos.

DAD

-----Original Message-----

From: Martens, Matthew D [mailto:matthew.d.martens@boeing.com]

Sent: Friday, August 26, 2005 9:37 AM

To: Barry.Martens

Subject: RE: Any of this look familiar?

I’ve been reading quite a bit about it. It’s really amazing to me how

little history exist of that incursion. There is a good book however, "into

laos" by Keith Nolan. He also wrote one titled “ripcord” that was the year

before you got there I believe. Other than his stuff, only fragmentary

information exists…and almost nothing on the ARA other than

anecdotal references.

ARA does not get much ink anywhere. We just quietly entered the picture, shot our rockets, and went somewhere else. We were not a part of the aviation network of slicks and guns. We were artillery and attached and operated under the control of division artillery. We went opcon to other units for very short periods of time. For an LZ prep, if no guns were available, we were artillery for the first and second rocket run and then broke into gun cover with 50% armament remaining and we were opcon to the lift unit. We stayed opcon to the lift unit until the LZ was cold or we were expended. If there were guns with the slicks we fired the prep and held high and dry until the LZ was cold or we were called back in for artillery support. Stayed until the LZ was cold or we expended.

They were still talking about ripcord a little when I got there. The hottest subject when I got there was the rockpile [as in a little group of rocks called the rockpile and the razorback]. That battle happened just a few weeks before I got in country.

DAD

2

here’s some more…I found it fascinating…keep in mind these are the comments of an ARA pilot…I know I’ve seen a lot of cav birds with the 20mm cannon on the port stub, but the ARA guys didn’t seem to use that rig much…

-----Original Message-----

From: Martens, Matthew D [mailto:matthew.d.martens@boeing.com]

Sent: Tuesday, May 10, 2005 9:07 AM

To: Barry.Martens

Subject: RE: Phu bai

Well it seems to me the cobras were employed more like an aircraft than a

helicopter…in other words, diving attacks not much different than a spad

or a bird dog or OV-10, etc…except the achilles heel of the

helicopter is always in terms of what it can carry and how long it can stay

on station. And of course the helicopter has always and will always be very

susceptible to ground fire…it’s obvious the A-10 warthog was

designed with vietnam in mind…it’s too bad it came too late to be a part

of that war. I’ve always felt they should never scrap an A-10, ever.

Because there will always be some third world conflict in which it would be

the perfect weapon to support troops in

contact. What this country has always needed, and people are so hard

headed about (in the pentagon and in the design world) is an A-10 type

aircraft that can take off and land in less than 1000ft of rough strip. Sure

you loose the ability to land on a dime like a helicopter, but if you think

about it, if we could design something that can land and take off on any

semi flat, prepared surface within’ 1/4 to 1/2 a mile length…and we lose

the verticle requirement (which is what always makes the design have to

sacrifice range and payload)…in any conflict that you could ever

imagine, we’d most likely be able to base or forward deploy units of this

kinds of aircraft close enuff to the front to really support the CAS

role…the technology exists to do this, but the zoomie guys hate the

A-10 because it’s low and slow…how much do you think they’d hate

something that sacrifices

speed even more than an A-10. So you still today end up with F-16’s

and F-18’s that can’t carry much, and can’t carry it far, and can’t stay on

station…but they sure do look good in airshows.

-----Original Message-----

From: Barry.Martens

Sent: Monday, May 09, 2005 6:14 PM

To: Martens, Matthew D

Subject: RE: Phu bai

A1-E Skyraiders!! Spads they called them. One of the best close air

support tools we had. Most belonged to the ARVN’s so you never would know

what they were going to do for sure. They could get in pretty close, carry

a million pounds of ordinance, all kinds of stuff and they could stay on

station long enough to do some good.

The Zoomies would fly in from who knows where and have about 5 minutes on

station, drop and then get the hell out of the AO. The only time they had

any time on station was when they were covering for one of their downed

crews. Just like magic, they all of a sudden could stay for 30 or 40

minutes if needed.

The whole idea behind the 20mm was to get the standoff range for the 12.7mm.

The only problem, the bad guys would set-up in gulley’s or ravines and the

only way you could get to them was in a dive. Then you were head to head

again and it was the ultimate game of chicken. The 20mm has a max effective

range of way less that 2000 meters. Tracer burn out is just over a 1000

meters so it was hard to shoot in the jungle. Once the tracers burn out the

only way to adjust your fire was to watch for the round burst on impact. In

triple canopy jungle that was next to impossible. Not many of the 20mm

ships were deployed because they just didn’t work that well. Plus it was

very heavy. They finally took off 3 barrels and lightened it up a lot for

the turret. Big heavy gun, bad recoil, devastating muzzle blast, relatively

small amount of ammo and limited range. Not the best combination.

The combat sight setting a 50 cal, or 12.7mm, was 2500 meters. It was good

to 3000 with the right gunner. That’s 10,000 feet of air you needed to be

completely out of range. Not enough air for a helicopter, and a slow target

to boot.

The TOW was for armor and pretty much useless in the jungle. Same scenario,

the only way to get the angle on the pit was in a dive and with the TOW you

have to hang it out there for the full missile time of flight. Good rocket

shooting was the best in these situation. You could let them loose anywhere

inside of 4000 meters hit the target if you were good. The guys in the pit

still required a dive and you could easily lay in 10-15 pair on a dive with

your wingman following up with just as many. If you had a few pair of nails

on board so much the better. When the red powder started popping overhead

everybody that saw it go down in their holes. They covered such a large

area with devastating effects. You could get home early if you have a few

pair of nails on board.

When we were not going out for troops in contact we normally carried 3 pair

of nails in the first 3 holes of the outboard pods. We could control what

we shot by starting with the outboard nails if needed or go with inboard

10lb warheads and wait to see what happened. Sometimes we could not use the

nails and we would have to move off target and bury them in the jungle.

Usually they guys on the ground would have a target for you when they found

out you had nails onboard. If the friendlies weren’t to close we would

always find a home for the nails.

DAD

3

I had a chapter about an ARA unit in my book Snake Driver: Cobras in Vietnam, and another about Lam Son 719. It read a lot like your dad’s accounts. And when they first introduced that 20 mm, the muzzle blast would damage the side of the aircraft, so they added some shielding there.

4

little more…(other than the red, blue, or yellow (???) arrows for A/B/C batteries 4/77th)

We could not put anything on aircraft in the 101st airborne division. The little unit marks on the tail were the only thing allowed. We weren’t even supposed to paint pilot or crewcheif names. Some units did do that and nobody seemd to mind. Some guys would get hold of some chalk every now and then and scribble something appropriate on the bottom of the aircraft.

First rain would take care of the artwork.

5

little more…stop me if this in “un-interesting or not related to modelling”…and I apologize to any potheads out there…hehehe

-----Original Message-----

From: Martens, Matthew D [mailto:matthew.d.martens@boeing.com]

Sent: Monday, September 12, 2005 12:08 PM

To: Barry.Martens

Subject: Ever studied this?

I found your name in one of these reports. It didn’t sound like the

unit had a good day that day…

http://www.bluemax-ara-assoc.com/A477ARA.htm

-----Original Message-----

From: Barry.Martens

Sent: Monday, September 12, 2005 1:25 PM

To: Martens, Matthew D

Subject: RE: Ever studied this?

These records are interesting but, incomplete to say the least. I recognize

several tail numbers and the incidents. A couple are mine. I know the oil

cooler landing was one I made. They aircraft was in good shape but, mortar

and small arms sent it back to the states.

There was another aircraft that we set down in Laos that made it all the way

back to Phu Bai and Chinook dropped it on shor final, oscillating load they

said. I think the flight engineer kicked the cargo hook release to soon. It

landed on the PSP they were aiming for, just a little bit to soon.

The other was a midair collision that I just happen to witness. We lost 2

ships that night and all on board were killed. Weather closed in before we

could get to the crash sites and it was 7 days before we could get back in

the mountains to get the bodies out.

DAD

-----Original Message-----

From: Martens, Matthew D [mailto:matthew.d.martens@boeing.com]

Sent: Monday, September 12, 2005 2:30 PM

To: Barry.Martens

Subject: RE: Ever studied this?

What’s the tail number for the oil cooler incident you talk of? I didn’t

come across it yet…

What’s the tail number for the one with a shot up tail rotor drive shaft

(I’ve seen in your photo album)

-----Original Message-----

From: Barry.Martens

Sent: Monday, September 12, 2005 2:57 PM

To: Martens, Matthew D

Subject: RE: Ever studied this?

This is one instance of battle damage that was not listed. 67-15760 is one

of the aircraft that was lost in the midair collision and I think that is

correct.

The oil cooler was 68-15153 and the day after that there was 68-15018 with a

hole in the transmission. We made it back to the border with the

transmission problem, primarily because of the day before and going down

about 25 miles inside Laos. We decided that we would get back as close to

the border as we could and kept going until there was no oil pressure at

all.

The oil cooler will bypass after you lose a few pints of oil and when it

does the oil temperature goes through the roof. It only takes a few minutes

to cook and engine and then you have a bigger problem than a bad LZ. That

would be no choice in which bad LZ you pick and no engine. No transmission

is pretty bad too but, there is time to work things out, point it towards

home and get on the deck so you can land quickly.

I think they have 68-17025 listed as a hit in the tail rotor and that is the

wrong aircraft.

Lets just say that the record keeping is not very good.

DAD

-----Original Message-----

From: Martens, Matthew D [mailto:matthew.d.martens@boeing.com]

Sent: Monday, September 12, 2005 3:03 PM

To: Barry.Martens

Subject: RE: Ever studied this?

Which instance was it that you had to land backwards?

-----Original Message-----

From: Barry.Martens

Sent: Monday, September 12, 2005 2:57 PM

To: Martens, Matthew D

Subject: RE: Ever studied this?

It was 67-15760 with the #5 driveshaft and tail rotor control shot out.

That is not even mentioned in the aircraft history and the picture certainly tells a different story.

I think most of the operations specialists that would submit the damage reports to division were potheads. That might explain some of the incorrect tail numbers.

DAD

6

this was in response to a question I asked about the A/4/77th badge ever being painted on the doghouse…during Lam Son 719 one of the batteries from the blue max was sent to re-inforce the 4/77th…I don’t know if they just received replacement aircraft or also crews…I found it interesting that he recalls they lost all of the blue max ships…

I really don’t remember if we had any aircraft with a dragon patch painted up there. We did get a few birds from down south and they had a blue max Maltese cross on them. We lost all of those birds in Laos and it is possible that they rearmed a few times at the dragon pad.