Vietnam Helicopters - Slicks vs. Gunship Platoons

[River Patrol]

This question came up at SOS, and I wanted to get more information and opinions from those that have been on these types of aircraft, or know more about helicopter histories than me: Slicks vs. Gunship helicopters -- who had the more difficult role to perform?

 

I always imagined it was the Slicks because they had fewer guns and were closer and more vulnerable to the enemy. The aircraft had to slow down and land to unload or load, and then take off again, while the gunships were always in motion above the action on the ground, providing the covering fire where needed. Would gunships ever land during an extraction? Was it dependent on how active/hot the LZ was deemed? any info would be helpful.

Thanks,

Steve

[Cobrahistorian]

I don't think it is possible to say who had the "tougher" job. Each role has specific roles during an combat air assault which are incredibly difficult. Gunships would provide cover while the slicks inserted. They would not touch down. That'd eliminate any advantage they had and would also severely limit their fields of fire.

 

Gunships attract fire. Every gun on the battlefield gets trained on a gunship because it is the highest threat. Slicks can be taken care of once the guns are dealt with.

 

Jon

[hawkdriver]

Being utility, I can tell you that no one has it any harder or easier than the other. This is something that is all governed by opinions and will never be substantially answered. With that said, lift is harder!

[Cobrahistorian]

Being utility, I can tell you that no one has it any harder or easier than the other. This is something that is all governed by opinions and will never be substantially answered. With that said, lift is harder!

 

I don't think you'd ever get an argument on that from a gun driver either, and if you do, it is all ego talking.

 

I will say, that the initial post talked about birds touching down in an LZ. That was a procedure that was done away with early on in Vietnam. Hueys would come to a low (3-5 foot) hover, keeping power on, the troops would "unass" the aircraft and the pilot would just have to dip the nose to start gaining forward airspeed. A lot safer, (especially when taking fire) than touching down and taking power out.

[River Patrol]

OK. Maybe take it from a maintenance point of view....which aircraft suffered more damage by enemy fire? That would answer my question. I'm not sure if anyone knows those statistics or where I could find them for indiviual aviation companies in Vietnam.

[Jim McCauley]

In my humble opinion, it depends on the situation. Not necessarily the mission type aircraft being flown.

 

That said, I've never flown an attack aircraft in combat.

 

Regards.

 

Jim

[River Patrol]

And for the gunships...I mean non-Cobra gunship platoons.

[Cobrahistorian]

And for the gunships...I mean non-Cobra gunship platoons.

 

 

I'd probably say that the Huey gunships took a lot more damage than the slicks did. Simple reason is, once the Slicks dropped off their loads, they were a lot lighter, had a much better power margin and were able to get out of the LZ fairly quickly. Guns, the only way they'd get lighter is by expending all of their ammo. They were still heavy, less maneuverable and had a much smaller power margin.

 

You can compare it to the B-17/YB-40 experiment in WWII. The YB-40 was a great idea, an escort bomber with tons of guns on it that could fly in formation with the bomber stream. However, once the bombers dropped their loads, they picked up a lot of speed and frequently left their "escorts" behind. YB-40s were often laden with as many as 12,000rds of .50 cal ammunition, additional armor, two extra turrets and five extra guns. But I digress...

[Mercenary25]

I read in book "Chickenhawk", according to author who was a slick pilot, gunship Huey is much more dangerous then slicks. The gunships got shot down more often than slicks because of the weight it carried with all those rockets and machine guns, so it was more difficult to maneuver. It usually go in hot zones to provide air supports while slicks swoop down to drop off then get the hell out. I recommend you to read this book. Very informative about Huey helicopters in Vietnam.

[Spathologist]

With that said, lift is harder!

 

Aieeya!

[Brandon]

I don't think you'd ever get an argument on that from a gun driver either, and if you do, it is all ego talking.

 

I will say, that the initial post talked about birds touching down in an LZ. That was a procedure that was done away with early on in Vietnam. Hueys would come to a low (3-5 foot) hover, keeping power on, the troops would "unass" the aircraft and the pilot would just have to dip the nose to start gaining forward airspeed. A lot safer, (especially when taking fire) than touching down and taking power out.

 

I agree, looking at the 3-5 foot hover unload, I figure the power margine was more acceptable especially for a single engine ACFT where power managment is key. Because not dealing with initial takeoff you could come out of ground effect faster and get the hell out of there. Also the T53 lycoming was a very powerful engine but once introduced to the jungle humid enviroment it lossed significant SHP. This was later corrected with upgraded models and Lycoming engine updates. Dealing with a fully loaded ACFT and little power also contributed to hover assault landing as stated above. Id like to point out this is from a crewchief perspective and not from a pilot. So my flight concepts could be slightly scewed, sorry Cobra and Hawkdriver,

 

From what research I have done on Vietnam its all summed up by the mission!! The gunships provide the cover and draw the fire while the assault guys insert to the OBJ. Once the slicks are clear they return for the next load while the gunships remain for close air support of ground forces. I do know from experience that slicks take a beating but the gunships are usually onsite longer and sustain more damage. Check out the book CHOPPER great account of aircrews WW2-OIF/OEF. :thumbsup: I do know the gun guys are more comfortable on missions with their AC, lol

 

Brandon

[Cobrahistorian]

I do know the gun guys are more comfortable on missions with their AC, lol

 

Don't hate me because I have full temperature control from 50-90 degrees fahrenheit....

 

Hmmm... 65 is too hot today. Let's try 63...

 

Dammit, hurry up and crank the P so we can get the AC going!!!

[CaptCav]

Reading this thread, the aeroscouts chuckled to themselves, dragging their 12 inch b*lls behind them.

[snake36bravo]

Brandon, you pretty much hit every point I was going to make as well. My father often mentions ground effect and density air in the Central Highlands. The whole thing was coming out of ground effect by bunny hopping down the flight line and then staying out of it. They never went skids down on insertion as you'd have to defeat both again. From all the footage I have seen though this seems to be dependent on terrain, time and unit.

 

Good question that I don't think has been academically answered. Sounds like something for the war college to research. There are plenty of aircraft serial numbers from the Gold Book online. It is just a matter of statistically comparing damage reports. I know the C model we are working on, which is just one gunship, took hits twice with 1 WIA and crashed once at Ben Het from 68 to 71.

 

:think:

 

CaptCav, very good response as Aeroscouts were all about drawing fire.

[Cobrahistorian]

Just a technical comment. Lloyd, they wanted to get through Effective Translational Lift, or ETL, not Ground Effect. Ground Effect helps them in this case, since it basically helps build a cushion of air under the helicopter. ETL is usually about 16-24 knots and once through that, the rotor system becomes more efficient and enables the helicopter to utilize less power to stay airborne.

 

Jon

[Cobrahistorian]

Just a technical comment. Lloyd, they wanted to get through Effective Translational Lift, or ETL, not Ground Effect. Ground Effect helps them in this case, since it basically helps build a cushion of air under the helicopter. ETL is usually about 16-24 knots and once through that, the rotor system becomes more efficient and enables the helicopter to utilize less power to stay airborne.

 

Jon

[Brandon]

Just a technical comment. Lloyd, they wanted to get through Effective Translational Lift, or ETL, not Ground Effect. Ground Effect helps them in this case, since it basically helps build a cushion of air under the helicopter. ETL is usually about 16-24 knots and once through that, the rotor system becomes more efficient and enables the helicopter to utilize less power to stay airborne.

 

Jon

 

ETL, I knew I was forgetting something. Thats why I memtioned from the crewdawg point of view!! :thumbsup: Jeese, my last flight was 22NOV08 I guess I have been slacking, lol I dont know if an Apache does what a Hawk does on landing but RIDE THE SHUTTER!!!!

 

Brandon

[Cobrahistorian]

-64s shudder like an unbalanced washing machine.

[Fly USMC]

shudder... also known as the Sikorski Shuffle. What a good place to be! I have a vortex ring state story. If I see any of you in person I will tell it over a beer.

 

great academic discussion on which is worse.

 

I came back from IOF I without one bullet hole in my bird. Many of the Skid Kids (Huey and Cobra) that were there had a few.

 

I think we could come up with a statistical analysis that will tell us on the average which is worse, but there are a bunch of guys with their names on a wall in DC. I bet you would have a hard time convincing their family that one or the other is worse.

 

Semper Fly

John

[Cobrahistorian]

shudder... also known as the Sikorski Shuffle. What a good place to be! I have a vortex ring state story. If I see any of you in person I will tell it over a beer.

 

VRS in something bigger than a -58? I thought that was a relative rarity...

 

I think we could come up with a statistical analysis that will tell us on the average which is worse, but there are a bunch of guys with their names on a wall in DC. I bet you would have a hard time convincing their family that one or the other is worse.

 

Amen to that.

[cjohns]

What about the flying semi boys(hooks)???Pretty darn big targets!!!

[snake36bravo]

What about the flying semi boys(hooks)???Pretty darn big targets!!!

 

Good point on the Hookers. My dad had another name for them. Surely US Army did a study on losses by aircraft type.

[Brandon]

Good point on the Hookers. My dad had another name for them. Surely US Army did a study on losses by aircraft type.

 

When I was in the desert not to long ago, hookers were not authorized to fly during the day because of just what you said!! I also was fortunate to spend alot of time with a US Army test pilot while over there. Man sure could make the best brightest crewchief get a headache, :think:

 

Brandon

[Rotorwash]

Not sure which you'd classify them as but I'd have to say the Smoke Ships would be the most vulnerable to fire during an insertion. They had to fly low and slow or the smoke wouldn't disperse properly. Low and slow in VC country doesn't sound fun to me at all!

I guess it's getting away from the spirit of the initial question, but I'd say the other two most dangerous flying jobs were aeroscouts and medivac. One where your job was to get shot at and one where your job was to extract wounded basically without armament (well unless you were 1st Cav).

Ray

[ripeold f*rt]

I served both in slicks and guns with the 174th AHC and by far the most dangerous mission was scout, next came medevac then guns and slicks simply because scouts and guns were looking for trouble, medevacs were going where there was already trouble and we tried to keep the slicks safe. Having said that, the first time I got shot down was in a slick, but I got shot up (there is a difference) more in guns. Slicks were more subject to ambush and I think more losses occurred in those situations then even combat assault.

 

Whether or not the skids touched down was more up to pilot preference then anything else, but we usually tried to touch down. When the troops start to exit a hovering aircraft, it may pendulum wildly and become difficult to control. If you injured someone on the ground you just had to come back and pick them up so do it right the first time. Sometimes it was just a relief to get it on the ground, you could yank a whole lot of collective on an empty aircraft.

 

I was on one CA where all we could carry was a dog and two handlers. The LZ was an opening on a hillside blown out with bombs. We had to hover above the tree stumps and the dog did not want to get out. Our cushion of air was sliding down hill and we could not hold power getting ever closer to the stumps. Finally, the dog went and we were saved from being a ka-bob.

 

The unit that took the most casualties was the 1/9th Cav, an air cav squadron. They were also the battalion that had the most enemy KIA's in the entire war.

 

Regards,

 

ROF