_GOTOBOTTOM
Armor/AFV: Vietnam
All things Vietnam
Hosted by Darren Baker
Most common truck in the 'Nam?
joegrafton
Visit this Community
United Kingdom
Joined: October 04, 2009
KitMaker: 1,209 posts
Armorama: 1,143 posts
Posted: Saturday, May 01, 2010 - 11:44 AM UTC
I'm sure I read in "Circle the Wagons" by Richard E Killblane that the semis were using QL-19 up & over the An Khe Pass & into Pleiku.
I may be wrong but I'm sure that is what I read.
Joe.
trickymissfit
Joined: October 03, 2007
KitMaker: 1,388 posts
Armorama: 1,357 posts
Posted: Saturday, May 01, 2010 - 02:37 PM UTC

Quoted Text

I'm sure I read in "Circle the Wagons" by Richard E Killblane that the semis were using QL-19 up & over the An Khe Pass & into Pleiku.
I may be wrong but I'm sure that is what I read.
Joe.

yes they probably did (not all that sure about Pleiku, but they probably got the road to it black topped after awhile)as the roads down there were good if not much like they were back home. Up north they roads were mostly gravel and dirt. There were some stretches of Highway One black topped up north, but once you got ten miles outta town it was dirt
gary
joegrafton
Visit this Community
United Kingdom
Joined: October 04, 2009
KitMaker: 1,209 posts
Armorama: 1,143 posts
Posted: Saturday, May 01, 2010 - 08:16 PM UTC
Yes, I have to agree with you there, Gary.
My book states that most roads in Vietnam were dirt roads & these were much earier to plant mines on. It must have been a real psychological blow to keep losing men & vehicles to mines & not have a stand up fight with the Cong or NVA.
Joe.
trickymissfit
Joined: October 03, 2007
KitMaker: 1,388 posts
Armorama: 1,357 posts
Posted: Sunday, May 02, 2010 - 08:53 AM UTC

Quoted Text

Yes, I have to agree with you there, Gary.
My book states that most roads in Vietnam were dirt roads & these were much earier to plant mines on. It must have been a real psychological blow to keep losing men & vehicles to mines & not have a stand up fight with the Cong or NVA.
Joe.


we lost a couple trucks to mines when we were operating along Highway One down near Duc Pho. Luckly they both were the delayed fuse type, and the guys in them were not hurt real bad. The road from Baldy to Ross was a complete nightmare! They didn't use mines much, but 155mm and 8" rounds that were command detenated. Sometimes they used 500lb. bombs, and a lot of 105 rounds in the sameway. The Tam Key Road was even worse, but you didn't travel on it a lot (Thank God). 155 round will CBL an M48 like it was nothing.

You didn't have to worry about driving over a mine out west as Charlie hadn't finished the road repairs. No ice houses or beer stands either!
gary
joegrafton
Visit this Community
United Kingdom
Joined: October 04, 2009
KitMaker: 1,209 posts
Armorama: 1,143 posts
Posted: Sunday, May 02, 2010 - 08:24 PM UTC
Gary,
Any idea what the mine strike rate was? I mean, was it at least one vehicle per convoy?
Joe.
trickymissfit
Joined: October 03, 2007
KitMaker: 1,388 posts
Armorama: 1,357 posts
Posted: Monday, May 03, 2010 - 06:25 AM UTC

Quoted Text

Gary,
Any idea what the mine strike rate was? I mean, was it at least one vehicle per convoy?
Joe.


They swept the roads every morning with a CAV unit or Mechanized Infantry outfit on the main roads that were well traveled. But roads like the one from Baldy to Ross were almost never swept. The Tam Key road was pretty much under control by the local land lords, and Charlie never bothered to sweep it as he didn't ever drive on it. From Baldy to Da Nang you often saw two or three tracks from Alpha 1st/1st CAV and maybe a squad of Marines with them (the tracks were almost always out of the Troop Motor Pool). It was also common to see a Marine sniper with them. For the Marines this was sought after duty, as the CAV guys always had a good supply of the latest brand of hooch, and they were treated very well.
As for hitting mines, I really didn't see as much as you'd think. In the bush they break a track and blow off a road wheel with an 82mm mortar round, and often fix it on the spot if the damage wasn't all that bad. Maybe a dozen hits was all that I saw. When we headed out on a road we'd watch the locals to see where they were walking or riding. If they were on the extreme side of the road, we started to look for mines. If they were in the middle of a road you watch the sides for a lookout. If you went down a new (to you) road and saw large craters in it everybody walked that could walk. Charlie liked to setup mines at blue crossings as they're very hard to detect. Cav units often stop and search out a new crossing rather than use the normal crossing point. When you came to a blue crossing, can rounds were the norm! That was the best place for Charlie to express his displeasure of your presence. But a can round from a Sheridan or a 48 usually gets his undivided attention.

Some places are just known for mines and booby traps, and others are not. The area south of Quang Nghai to Duc Pho was one of those places. If they were not shooting at you it was a good day, and mines were everywhere without the benifit of a road sweep. You never saw locals on the road down there. ROK's took care of a large piece of that AO, and they tend to have a bad attitude. Still that was the best place I saw to meet a mine.
gary
joegrafton
Visit this Community
United Kingdom
Joined: October 04, 2009
KitMaker: 1,209 posts
Armorama: 1,143 posts
Posted: Thursday, May 06, 2010 - 02:03 AM UTC
I've read about mine clearing operations first thing in the morning before convoys could run in a couple of books I have. What was this then? Was it a few guys walking along the road with a metal detector or something else?
Who protected these guys? A guntuck; a track or a tank, mabye?
Joe.
trickymissfit
Joined: October 03, 2007
KitMaker: 1,388 posts
Armorama: 1,357 posts
Posted: Thursday, May 06, 2010 - 05:33 AM UTC

Quoted Text

I've read about mine clearing operations first thing in the morning before convoys could run in a couple of books I have. What was this then? Was it a few guys walking along the road with a metal detector or something else?
Who protected these guys? A guntuck; a track or a tank, mabye?
Joe.


generally speaking the crews sweeping the roads would eat breakfast first and head out. Often there would be two squads starting at opposite ends of the stretch to be cleared. They used regular metal detectors and good quality eyeballs. Traffic would be backed up behind them, and if and when they did find a mine it had to be blown in place most of the time. There were stories about wood boxes made into mines, but we never saw anything like that. Always wondered if Charlie ever checked things out before going about his morning business? (actually he cleared mines by exploding them on himself)

Usually it was a couple M113's and maybe an M48 if there was one setting around. Never a Sheridan or a truck! That is if you wanted to stay alive
gary
joegrafton
Visit this Community
United Kingdom
Joined: October 04, 2009
KitMaker: 1,209 posts
Armorama: 1,143 posts
Posted: Thursday, May 06, 2010 - 09:02 AM UTC
I understand about the Sheridan as there are many stories that crews hated it because of its thin armour & caseless ammunition that would make it go up like July 4th but the M113? I didn't think they could take much mine damage what with the aluminium hull & thin armour too.
How did you rate the track, Gary?
Joe.
trickymissfit
Joined: October 03, 2007
KitMaker: 1,388 posts
Armorama: 1,357 posts
Posted: Thursday, May 06, 2010 - 04:28 PM UTC

Quoted Text

I understand about the Sheridan as there are many stories that crews hated it because of its thin armour & caseless ammunition that would make it go up like July 4th but the M113? I didn't think they could take much mine damage what with the aluminium hull & thin armour too.
How did you rate the track, Gary?
Joe.


a Sheridan that worked right was a bad mother! But also very lightly armored. You knew that going into it. They did come out with a fied kit to add addition armor to the front and belly. The other nagging problem was the gun launcher. The ammo was OK if taken proper care of (it's nothing but a 6" recoiless rifle), but the recoil system and loader were a problem. Funny thing was that Allison never knew anything about these problems till April 1974 when I told them! They then inquired and liked to died! They imediately redesigned the hydraulic system (that was where the problems started out), and were turned down by TACOM. But trust me when I tell you there's nothing like the impression a 152mm can round makes on the other end. It made the 90mm can round like a B B gun. I read Mr. Z's book on that tank, and he's right about as much as he's wrong. The same for the other one as well. The hull was built to spec, and actually came in slightly on the heavy side! So there's not much that can be said about the design as the specs were the problem. It should have been a 23 ton tank from the start with 550 hp. The hydraulic system needed the addition of several accumlators in it to makeup for the needed boost in volume, as well as a better (more GPM) pump.

As for being unable to take a mine, let me put it this way; I once saw a pile of M48's that were all opened up like a can opener in the front end. The mine that would destroy a Sheridan would probably CBL a 48 as well (even though it was largely cast steel). An M113 was actually a pretty tough cookie! It would handle an 82mm round fairly well with repairable damage. A 105 round might CBL it and might not depending on the damage. The advantage the 48 and M113 had was the likelyhood of the crew surviving the blast. A Sheridan was less likely, but most mines were survived. Keep in mind the Sheridan was a light tank at best; where as a 48 was a medium tank that was on the heavy side of medium. The Sheridan was debugged in combat, while the others were not. Had the Sheridan been given three years in the states most of the design flaws would have been gone.
gary

P.S. I never saw a Sheridan burn. But I have seen a couple M113's and M48's burn
joegrafton
Visit this Community
United Kingdom
Joined: October 04, 2009
KitMaker: 1,209 posts
Armorama: 1,143 posts
Posted: Thursday, May 06, 2010 - 10:02 PM UTC
So, would you say that a "guntruck" would never be used for protecting the mine clearing detail?
Guntrucks never really came into being until late '67 & it wasn't until 1969 that they really got going. You served your tour earlier than that, didn't you Gary? So could they have possibly been used after you rotated out? Have you ever heard any stories of this being so?
Joe.
trickymissfit
Joined: October 03, 2007
KitMaker: 1,388 posts
Armorama: 1,357 posts
Posted: Friday, May 07, 2010 - 06:23 AM UTC

Quoted Text

So, would you say that a "guntruck" would never be used for protecting the mine clearing detail?
Guntrucks never really came into being until late '67 & it wasn't until 1969 that they really got going. You served your tour earlier than that, didn't you Gary? So could they have possibly been used after you rotated out? Have you ever heard any stories of this being so?
Joe.


I was there from early December 1967 till the end of Febuary 1969. There were gun trucks in I-Corps at the time, but were only used where there were roads. Charlie was behind on his road building out west, and had all his crews dedicated to the Ho Chi Mein Trail. I would be considered a grad from the "class of 68."

You could use a gun truck on a mine sweeping detail, but most every one I saw used tracks and boots on the ground. CAV units and Infantry units rarely if ever used gun trucks. Yet a gun truck would be a good match for convoy duty just like an M113 would. Now I could see them using an Ontos even though it was as lightly armored as a Sheridan. But never ran accross a Marine group doing a mine sweep (I'm sure they did). When doing a sweep you really never worried much about an ambush as much as the mines buried in the road. Still you'd get a pot shot taken at you every now and then. Some areas were well known for sniper fire, and some were not. The road from Tam Key to Da Nang was well known for sniper fire, and that's why they often had a Marine sniper placed ontop an M113. Yet the road from Chu Lai to Bein Son rarely if ever had a round of sniper fire. But that stretch of road usually had three or four mines every week (local VC don't shoot as well as the NVA). The trick was to wait till they cleared the road, and ran a few local busses down there. If the busses didn't run you just waited a little longer.
gary
joegrafton
Visit this Community
United Kingdom
Joined: October 04, 2009
KitMaker: 1,209 posts
Armorama: 1,143 posts
Posted: Friday, May 07, 2010 - 08:20 AM UTC
Thanks Gary,
You know, it never ceases to amaze me how it seemed that every civilian knew where the mines were but always seemed to look at you with that "shit eating grin".
How did you get on with the civilian population.
Joe.
trickymissfit
Joined: October 03, 2007
KitMaker: 1,388 posts
Armorama: 1,357 posts
Posted: Friday, May 07, 2010 - 08:39 AM UTC

Quoted Text

Thanks Gary,
You know, it never ceases to amaze me how it seemed that every civilian knew where the mines were but always seemed to look at you with that "shit eating grin".
How did you get on with the civilian population.
Joe.


The civilian population was different everywhere we went. Down on Gator they were OK, but still there was a local VC element, but not in the local village. We knew where they were. Dottie was a bad place for locals. Better than half were local VC with not much NVA presence. Dragon & Liz didn't have a lot of civilians (just one small village down there), but most were local VC. North of Chu Lai it was a fifty fifty affair. There were not a lot of civilians west of Highway one once you got about fifteen klicks west. Thien Phouc had a village close by, and it was probably 50/50. There was another village a little further north east that was full of VC/NVA. They used to do prisoner snatches over there, but know little about it. West of there it was open country, and you just shot him unless he was a Montgnard. Then he probably got the guy before you saw him.

There these huge free fire zones up north, and most all the civilian population had been relocated earlier. In those areas you saw it and shot at it. All the A.O.'s were treated differently. If you were in an AO that had no infantry working in there, you could expect to see mechanicals and booby traps. Infantry tended to stay ahead of the game here. But when you got out in a SF AO you had to watch out for them from both sides.
gary
joegrafton
Visit this Community
United Kingdom
Joined: October 04, 2009
KitMaker: 1,209 posts
Armorama: 1,143 posts
Posted: Friday, May 07, 2010 - 11:00 AM UTC
Yeah, I've read quite a lot about booby traps used in Vietnam & the simple yet deadly ways one can kill or maim. You have to admire Charlie for his ingeniousness at improvisation & adaption of so called useless items left over like dud bombs, gunpowder from discarded rounds & even empty C rat cans!
I've also read that SOG used to booby trap the 7.62mm AK-47 ammo & leave it in a place where the VC/NVA would find it. Deadly, eh?
Joe.
trickymissfit
Joined: October 03, 2007
KitMaker: 1,388 posts
Armorama: 1,357 posts
Posted: Friday, May 07, 2010 - 04:09 PM UTC

Quoted Text

Yeah, I've read quite a lot about booby traps used in Vietnam & the simple yet deadly ways one can kill or maim. You have to admire Charlie for his ingeniousness at improvisation & adaption of so called useless items left over like dud bombs, gunpowder from discarded rounds & even empty C rat cans!
I've also read that SOG used to booby trap the 7.62mm AK-47 ammo & leave it in a place where the VC/NVA would find it. Deadly, eh?
Joe.




The SF guys at the base we used took regular old hand grenades and swapped the fuses with smoke grenade fuses. Then would drop a couple on the trail while they were out. The smoke grenade has a half second fuse! They also would take an AK 47 mag, and load it up with about twenty rounds of ammo, and put it with a dead body. About every third round had the gun powder removed and replaced with C4. They also were rather good at setting up Claymores in a daisy chained circle. VC did a lot of things that got everybody messed up. I've seen them go so far as to load candles with Syntex and a blasting cap. Take hand grenades, and tape the handles down with the pins pulled. Then have a little kid drop them down a gas tank. They were big on flame throwers used on civilians. It's simply amazing as to what one man can do to another man
gary
trickymissfit
Joined: October 03, 2007
KitMaker: 1,388 posts
Armorama: 1,357 posts
Posted: Friday, May 07, 2010 - 04:36 PM UTC
almost forgot to tell you that I got my Ontos today. The lower hull is not right! But how much not right is another story. It's been raining the last couple days, but when it drys out I have to make some serious measurements. I also see that they are using the bell mouthed barrels in the kit. Might try to scratch build a new lower hull.
gary
joegrafton
Visit this Community
United Kingdom
Joined: October 04, 2009
KitMaker: 1,209 posts
Armorama: 1,143 posts
Posted: Friday, May 07, 2010 - 08:08 PM UTC
It is the duality of man to be so creative & yet so destructive.
The thing is we all have a vivid imagination & use that imagination to invent things to kill each other.
Good luck with that scratchbuild project, by the way. Rather you than me.
Joe.
trickymissfit
Joined: October 03, 2007
KitMaker: 1,388 posts
Armorama: 1,357 posts
Posted: Saturday, May 08, 2010 - 06:26 AM UTC

Quoted Text

It is the duality of man to be so creative & yet so destructive.
The thing is we all have a vivid imagination & use that imagination to invent things to kill each other.
Good luck with that scratchbuild project, by the way. Rather you than me.
Joe.


actually I don't think the hull will be that hard to do once I get the CAD program fired up. The worst part is having to crawl under the real one to confirm what I suspect. I won't be building it for several months as I am not getting much done on the Sheridan assembly line these days. Also the tracks are completely wrong in everyway!! Lets hope Model Kasten helps us out. One thing I already see that I'm going to earn todo is to cast resin parts!
gary
joegrafton
Visit this Community
United Kingdom
Joined: October 04, 2009
KitMaker: 1,209 posts
Armorama: 1,143 posts
Posted: Saturday, May 08, 2010 - 07:37 AM UTC
Well Gary,
If you're going to cast resin parts from the Vietnam era & you're going to earn from it you can count me as one of your first customers!
Good luck with crawling under that Ontos aswell!
Is it the kit tracks that are wrong? I dont have an Ontos yet so I'm not really up to date with the kit.
Joe.
trickymissfit
Joined: October 03, 2007
KitMaker: 1,388 posts
Armorama: 1,357 posts
Posted: Saturday, May 08, 2010 - 12:53 PM UTC

Quoted Text

Well Gary,
If you're going to cast resin parts from the Vietnam era & you're going to earn from it you can count me as one of your first customers!
Good luck with crawling under that Ontos aswell!
Is it the kit tracks that are wrong? I dont have an Ontos yet so I'm not really up to date with the kit.
Joe.


I think Academy got the tracks completely wrong! The don't match well with the one down at Knox, and are completely different then the one near me. Right now I'm sorta studying my options, and how to go about it. The hatches and covers are not right, but at least they don't look like they'll be hard to fix. And there's something about the truss that holds all six barrels that looks wrong. Yet the barrels look correct. The suspension mounts are not correct in the mounting to the hull, and I think that's where you have to start when trying to get the hull to set right with the ground level. Also the hatches and cover plates all look way too thick (I need to get a better measurements here as well)

I don't think one can just jump into assembling the kit without figuring out what is wrong with the hull. And it looks like there's at least two major problems compounding the situation. Lastly I can see that all of us need to goout and buy some stock in Grandt Line nuts and bolts. Looks like your gonna need a bunch of them!
gary
joegrafton
Visit this Community
United Kingdom
Joined: October 04, 2009
KitMaker: 1,209 posts
Armorama: 1,143 posts
Posted: Saturday, May 08, 2010 - 07:24 PM UTC
Sounds like major problems, then!
Good luck.
Joe.
trickymissfit
Joined: October 03, 2007
KitMaker: 1,388 posts
Armorama: 1,357 posts
Posted: Saturday, May 15, 2010 - 05:38 AM UTC

Quoted Text

Sounds like major problems, then!
Good luck.
Joe.


well after the fourth (or is it fifth trip) trip down to the Ontos again, I have came to the conclusion that Mr. Zaloga wasn't even in the ballpark with his comments on the way the "thing" sets! First of all the front of the hull is shaped wrong and actually has one large bend in the front plate left out! The bottom of the hull is just as wrong! The flanges for the suspension is right in one place and out in left field in the others! The engine access covers (not the grates) need to be recessed to the point that they are almost flush mounted. Now the actual suspension arms maybe the easiest part to fix, and why Steve didn't just do that I don't know. But alas I kinda worried now about the attitude of the outter track bar verses the ground it sorta parallels. It should have almost 125mm of slant in it compaired to ground level. But then you compound this with the attitude of the hull itself to the ground level. The hull is not parallel to the track bar (about 100mm difference). This maybe end up being one of those deals where you literally have to tape the pieces together to find out just how bad things are, and then figure out a plan. Right now I'm not sure just what's wrong with the way the basic hull and the fenders (if there is any problem. It may all be in the suspension setup. This leads us into the newest problem, which I may just ignor. The engine grates are a two layer affair! And the lower grate does show thru the outter one a little bit. I think a trip up the road to the model railroad shop maybe some help here. I did take a precision protractor down with me the last time, and and found that the hull design was typical G.M.; as I should have already known!
gary
joegrafton
Visit this Community
United Kingdom
Joined: October 04, 2009
KitMaker: 1,209 posts
Armorama: 1,143 posts
Posted: Saturday, May 15, 2010 - 08:00 AM UTC
Hi Gary,
Oh wow! That sounds like a lot of work you've got there!
So, are you talking about the new Ontos release that's just come out on the market? Is this new model that wrong?
Joe.
trickymissfit
Joined: October 03, 2007
KitMaker: 1,388 posts
Armorama: 1,357 posts
Posted: Saturday, May 15, 2010 - 04:02 PM UTC

Quoted Text

Hi Gary,
Oh wow! That sounds like a lot of work you've got there!
So, are you talking about the new Ontos release that's just come out on the market? Is this new model that wrong?
Joe.


I'm refering to the one from Academy. I actually think the lower hull is closer on the old Renwal! Right now I'm having fits with my CAD program, and it appears I'll have to draw it on my notebook. I've pretty much got the hull and suspension layout figured out right now, and the next step is to find out what it's going to take to get the upper hull to be aligned correctly with the hull bottom. Then after that I can attack the suspension (the easy part). Then to add insult to injury I've at least found three different hull configurations, and possibly a fourth. I've also found an error in the resin kit of the Ontos just by looking at pictures of it (the fenders are wrong). But that kit has the right barrel shapes and maybe both styles used together (keep in mind the photos were not all that great). Anyway I got lots of time, as I don't plan on starting the kit to the dead of next winter.

Right now I'd hunting for some AEF Sheridan parts as well as another Jaguar track set for one (really want two).
And I almost forgot! After looking thru fifty or so M107 photos, I've finally found the one to build that is not quite generic looking! Still wanting to lay my fingers on an M110 as well.

So as it sets right now, my working plans are:
* three Sheridans (one is a Gulf War version from the 82nd Airborne)

* the Ontos (may get another kit as well)

* the on again off again M48 project! Now that the pieces are all here (Joe, take a look in the 3/4 CAV book, and you'll know where I'm headed)

* a couple M113's

* the M107

* and if there's time I have three M106 kits for a diorama

* I also need to scrounge up two more M102 howitzers for another diorama and a chance to get back to stacking sandbags (who is it that sells the resin 105mm ammo crates? I think I might need as much as a hundred of them)

Lastly, let me run this one by all of you aces! I need to make sheet metal culverts like they use for bridges. I need several sizes, so I need some ideas from all of the masses.

it's raining outside, all of you best be awake all night cause Charlie don't mind the rain
gary
 _GOTOTOP