Vietnam aircraft losses
Discussion
This could almost have been in the 'things that shocked you' thread but I was surprised to see just how many aircraft the US and allies lost in the Vietnam war, both combat losses and accidents. Including some types that I thought barely featured in the war.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_aircraft_los...
775 Phantoms, 373 Skyhawks and 481 Skyraiders sounds a lot compared with recent losses but not too surprising.
But they also lost 14 Starfighters, 11 F111s, and 142 Chinooks. Also older types such as 22 A26 Invaders, 40 C47s and even a B50 Superfortress.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_aircraft_los...
775 Phantoms, 373 Skyhawks and 481 Skyraiders sounds a lot compared with recent losses but not too surprising.
But they also lost 14 Starfighters, 11 F111s, and 142 Chinooks. Also older types such as 22 A26 Invaders, 40 C47s and even a B50 Superfortress.
Geneve said:
Plus almost 60,000 US military fatalities - and all for what ?
The futility of war.
Only if you lose, and you don't know that when you start.The futility of war.
The Vietnam war was about pushing back what was then the successor to fascism - communism.
andyA700 said:
The US really is a s**t country.
I'd rather live in the US than in Vietnam.US did nothing about the regimes in Spain and Portugal - basically after WW2 fascist regimes were allowed to stay in place.
At least the Vietnamese intervention into Cambodia ended the holocaust there.
The Vietnam war was a civil war, and in general it is a bad idea to get involved in those.
At least the Vietnamese intervention into Cambodia ended the holocaust there.
The Vietnam war was a civil war, and in general it is a bad idea to get involved in those.
A dangerous thread, might need looking at lol!
War has several purposes, please be aware of this, Nixon was at war largely because of the stoked fear of communism, watch Oppenheimer for an insight into the farce that the CIA and FBI went to to stoke that. It serves to prolong careers, it serves to benefit certain companies that help political parties and it serves to bolster relationships with allies. These things should not be factors in sending people to potentially die but when you employ tens of thousands who are prepared to sign their life away, you train them and give them the best kit to win!!
The soldiers who fought for Vietnam exposed immense weakness in the arrogant West, one that has still not really been sorted as can be seen from the failures in Iraq and Afghanistan.
People who are fighting for their lives are more determined and more dedicated than over burdened gung ho idiots with the best kit who fight because they want to shoot stuff and be paid for it. Or in Vietnams case young kids who did not really believe they should be there/
Aircraft wise it taught the USA that dogfighting was still key which gave us the F16, to some extent the F18 and even more the long distance stuff like the F14 and 15.
It taught the Russians that they were on the right track, a track they left with the 23, but regained with the 29 eventually and the 27 it taught the Yanks that the B52 was a threat over and above many other more dangerous things!!
Loads of lessons were learned that put us as the West on the path we are on today
War has several purposes, please be aware of this, Nixon was at war largely because of the stoked fear of communism, watch Oppenheimer for an insight into the farce that the CIA and FBI went to to stoke that. It serves to prolong careers, it serves to benefit certain companies that help political parties and it serves to bolster relationships with allies. These things should not be factors in sending people to potentially die but when you employ tens of thousands who are prepared to sign their life away, you train them and give them the best kit to win!!
The soldiers who fought for Vietnam exposed immense weakness in the arrogant West, one that has still not really been sorted as can be seen from the failures in Iraq and Afghanistan.
People who are fighting for their lives are more determined and more dedicated than over burdened gung ho idiots with the best kit who fight because they want to shoot stuff and be paid for it. Or in Vietnams case young kids who did not really believe they should be there/
Aircraft wise it taught the USA that dogfighting was still key which gave us the F16, to some extent the F18 and even more the long distance stuff like the F14 and 15.
It taught the Russians that they were on the right track, a track they left with the 23, but regained with the 29 eventually and the 27 it taught the Yanks that the B52 was a threat over and above many other more dangerous things!!
Loads of lessons were learned that put us as the West on the path we are on today
Austin Prefect said:
US involvement in the Vietnam war started under Kennedy as a reaction to North Vietnam attacking South Vietnam, was ramped up under Johnson, then peaked under Nixon who later started the withdrawal.
When you say 'soldiers who fought for Vietnam' do you mean North, South, or both?
The french being bankrolled and assisted in other ways by Truman and then Eisenhower suggests otherwise. WW2 didn't end for the vietnamese until 1975. When you say 'soldiers who fought for Vietnam' do you mean North, South, or both?
Never get involved in a land war in Asia.
wisbech said:
US did nothing about the regimes in Spain and Portugal - basically after WW2 fascist regimes were allowed to stay in place.
The US (and the West in general) has no problems with despotic regimes as long as they do what we want. if they don't do what we want then we start going on about regime change etc.Eric Mc said:
On the subject of aircraft losses (which is what the thread was originally supposed to be about) I think the type that suffered the largest amount of losses as the Bell UH-1 "Huey" helicopter.
The Iroquois - which reminds me, must read Robert Mason’s Chickenhawk again - dubbed ‘the best book to come out of Vietnam’Vietnam came off the back of Korea, which itself came off the back of WWII.
The public were accustomed to losses in war. Something we have lost the appetite for given our recent history of very asymmetric, and casualty-light conflicts.
A scrap in the SCS would see a return of large scale losses of aircraft and ships. After GWOT it will be a huge shock for many when it comes.
The public were accustomed to losses in war. Something we have lost the appetite for given our recent history of very asymmetric, and casualty-light conflicts.
A scrap in the SCS would see a return of large scale losses of aircraft and ships. After GWOT it will be a huge shock for many when it comes.
hidetheelephants said:
WW2 didn't end for the vietnamese until 1975.
Never get involved in a land war in Asia.
1981.Never get involved in a land war in Asia.
Because once the US left Vietnam, Vietnam then invaded Cambodia & made every mistake that the US made in the Vietnam war themselves.
Essentially the 20th century was SE Asia’s equivalent of Europe’s 100 years war.
williamp said:
Lets face it: the war had a huge effect on mine and many other childhoods.
I have family members who served with the US Military in Vietnam.In fact just the other day, whilst putting Christmas decorations away in the loft I came across a box, looking inside to see if it was worth keeping found my Uncle’s M-65 field jacket he gave me.
andyA700 said:
That kind of pales into insignificance when you factor in the 2 million Vietnamese civilian deaths.
The US really is a s**t country.
I think the situation was vastly more complex than this. There are many in southern Vietnam who consider their country was invaded 1975. Many see it as a conquest, not a liberation. The US really is a s**t country.
The US did many wrong things in Vietnam, their depravity was exceeded only by the actions PAVN and Liberation Front.
Simpo Two said:
I'd rather live in the US than in Vietnam.
Not sure I would, as someone with a UK passport, who can leave and is largely unaffected by the communist corruption, it is about the best county on earth to live in.Countdown said:
wisbech said:
US did nothing about the regimes in Spain and Portugal - basically after WW2 fascist regimes were allowed to stay in place.
The US (and the West in general) has no problems with despotic regimes as long as they do what we want. if they don't do what we want then we start going on about regime change etc.Eric Mc said:
On the subject of aircraft losses (which is what the thread was originally supposed to be about) I think the type that suffered the largest amount of losses as the Bell UH-1 "Huey" helicopter.
I couldn't even imagine the current generation of Western Populations accepting the kind of vehicle and manpower loses that people generally just kind of accepted back the 60's-70's - so much seemingly just thrown away (lives and money) compared to 20+ years of GWOT since 9/11.In fairness the unit costs are a lot lower.
A Bell UH-1D was a cost per unit of $350k in 1968 which is about $3.5m today.
An F-4C Phantom was $1.9m in 1965, about $20m today.
For comparison a Blackhawk is $5.9m and an F-15E is over $70m with an F-35 being over $100m depending on variant.
The most eye watering costs of the air war over Vietnam is fuel.
Just a quick look at where tankers were based, and the flight hours & logistics of in flight refuelling operations alone makes your head spin, (especially running a tanker fleet from Okinawa!), that’s before you look at ELINT, aircraft used as airborne comms relay stations, transport & replenishment.
The ‘combat’ Aircraft are not the only part of the USAF in SEA.
https://www.nationalmuseum.af.mil/Visit/Museum-Exh...
A Bell UH-1D was a cost per unit of $350k in 1968 which is about $3.5m today.
An F-4C Phantom was $1.9m in 1965, about $20m today.
For comparison a Blackhawk is $5.9m and an F-15E is over $70m with an F-35 being over $100m depending on variant.
The most eye watering costs of the air war over Vietnam is fuel.
Just a quick look at where tankers were based, and the flight hours & logistics of in flight refuelling operations alone makes your head spin, (especially running a tanker fleet from Okinawa!), that’s before you look at ELINT, aircraft used as airborne comms relay stations, transport & replenishment.
The ‘combat’ Aircraft are not the only part of the USAF in SEA.
https://www.nationalmuseum.af.mil/Visit/Museum-Exh...
Austin Prefect said:
This could almost have been in the 'things that shocked you' thread but I was surprised to see just how many aircraft the US and allies lost in the Vietnam war, both combat losses and accidents. Including some types that I thought barely featured in the war.
I think that the Vietnamese has more aces than any other country. What's shocking is the amount of hardware that was left behind. Gassing Station | Boats, Planes & Trains | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff