greg@Veritas.COM (Greg Sudderth) (04/10/91)
From: greg@Veritas.COM (Greg Sudderth) I tried to combine complete information (given my two sources) with brevity. I would have been here for a week if I typed in all the tables. Look at the second book, it has the losses indexed by type/year/type of loss etc. Also, I waited a couple of days to see what other people might say. >From: smpod@venus.lerc.nasa.gov >>... During the "Rolling Thunder" air >>campiagn in Vietnam in 1972, the United States lost more than 900 aircraft >>to North Vietnam defences. "Rolling Thunder" went from Feb. '65, to Nov. '68. I assume you meant "Linebacker I" and Linebacker II". I have found two references to total losses by year, that would at least disprove the losses in that scale. The ability to determine losses related to the two Linebacker operations is outside the scope of the data. From "Air war in Vietnam" by Phil Chinnery (ISBN 0-671-08927-7): USAF USN USMC USA Total Fixed 2175 830 276 439 3720 Rotary 76 48 424 4320 4868 Total 2251 878 700 4760 = 8588, or, 6907 Million $ Note: Ship based Marine UH-34/CH-46 are under "USN". Note: There is no scale for the dollar figure. From "Vietnam, The War in the Air" by Rene J Francillon (ISBN 0-517-62976-3) (mucho data, listed by service, loss type, area of loss, and ALL aircraft types, from '62 to '73): Loss percentages (fixed wing): USAF USN USMC USA All services To Migs 2.8 1.8 0.4 0.2 2.1 To SAM 5.2 9.8 1.4 0 5.3 To AAA 64.7 52.3 64.1 27.6 57.5 At bases 4.5 0 4.4 7.8 3.9 Sub-total 77.2 63.9 70.3 35.6 68.8 Operational 22.8 36.1 29.7 64.4 31.2 Total 100.0.... Loss percentages (rotary wing): USAF USN USMC USA All services To Migs 1.3 0 0 0.1 0.1 To SAM 0 0 0.2 0.2 0.2 To AAA 69.7 27.1 56.2 47.9 48.7 At bases 5.3 0 7.3 3.8 4.2 Sub-total 76.3 27.1 63.7 52.0 53.2 Operational 23.7 72.9 36.3 48.0 46.8 Total 100... Losses over Geographical Area (fixed wing): USAF USN USMC USA All services N. Vietnam 36.9 83.6 17.0 0 42.8 Laos 23.9 10.7 8.8 1.3 18.6 S. Vietnam 37.1 4.9 74.2 96.8 36.9 Cambodia etc. 2.1 0.8 0 1.9 1.7 Losses over Geographical Area (rotary wing): USAF USN USMC USA All services N. Vietnam 10.3 38.5 0.4 0 0.5 Laos 37.9 0 3.7 4.2 4.9 S. Vietnam 48.3 61.5 95.9 92.7 38.9 Cambodia etc. 3.5 0 0 3.1 2.7 Notes specifically pertaining to Linebacker 1 and 2 (Oct and Dec '72 respectively (types are those I recognize as having a direct combat role in the operations, based on the descriptions in these two books, and elsewhere): Losses by type to SAM (subset) for '72 (USAF): 3xA-1, 16xB-52, 1xEB-66, 3xAC-130, 16xF-4, 3xRF-4, 4xF-105 Losses by type to SAM (subset) for '72 (USN): 1xA-4, 1xRA-5C, 1xA-6/E-6/KA-6, 14xA-7, 5xF-4 Losses by type to MIGS (same set) for '72 (USAF): 17xF-4, 2xF-105 Losses by type to MIGS (same set) for '72 (USN): 1xA-4, 1xF-4 Losses by type to AAA/Small arms (same set) for '72 (USAF): 3xA-1, 2xA-2, 3xA-37, 1xAC-119, 38xF-4, 3xRF-4, 1xF-105, 6xF-111 Losses by type to AAA/Small arms (same set) for '72 (USN): 4xA-4, 2xRA-5, 8xA-6etc, 20xA-7, 5xF-4, 2xF-8, 2xRF-8 Op losses 2xB-52, 1 for most other types, except 10xA-7 (USN) and 5xF-4 (USN), 11xF-4 (USAF), 3xF-105 (USAF) USMC did real well, with 1 Mig (F-4), no SAM, AAA: 3xA-4, 4xA-6, 6xF-4, and some combat losses of 3xA-4, 4xA-6, 7xF-4. General Notes: - We op-lost more B-52s in the Gulf than Vietnam - It was unhealthy to be: - Around AAA - In an Army aircraft in general (op-losses=64.4/48.0) - In a Navy rotary-wing, doe to high op losses (72.9) - To be in a Navy fixed wing over N. Vietnam - To be in a Marine or Army Rotary in S. Vietnam - To be a F-105 pilot in '66 (total all-time record) (Combat losses: 111 aircraft, Op. losses: 15) - It seems mildly safe to be in a B-52 (comparing the real high sortie rates to losses) - I had no idea as to the scale of the loses over Laos - Its a bad idea to fly attack missions for the Marines - Its a fairly bad idea to fly recon (high loss vs low sorties) - Its a REAL bad idea to be sitting in a F-4. - A-7s get hit by SAMS - F-111s never get hit by SAM, but get hit by AAA/small arms (all years of deployment, across all variants) - A-1s got hit less and less by AAA/Small arms (30 in '68 to 3 in '72) but were ALWAYS second to the F-4, and the F-4 was second to the F-105. - If you really meant Rolling Thunder, let's recap the biggest losses, during the biggest year of losses ('68) for the biggest category (AAA/Small arms): 30xA-1, 4xA-37, 5xB-57, 1xAC-130, 50xF-4, 19xRF-4 (REALLY unusual!), 48xF-100, 28xF-105, 1xRF-101, 2xF111. There were 1xF-4 and 2xF-105 lost to SAM. 9 total to MiGs, and about 1 doz 105/100 lost due to op-losses. - Losses for 0-1 and 0-2 were really really high, considering their smaller numbers (over a dozen most all years, and as high as 33xO-1 in '67!) and the OV-10 eventually got pretty close. This one statistic leads me to believe the Army should get the A-10 as the OA-10, because only the OA-10 could survive loitering around A-10ish targets! - Total USAF aircraft losses (all types, all causes, all operations) in '72 were 163, with the USN at 91. Add the USMC at 21, and the USA at 172 (all but 3 are rotary), and you are still short of 900. The books are pretty good, from what other people tell me, and that they have the statistics is unusual, given that they are picture-books overall. There are more scholarly books to be had, but not as easily, and with lots of good pics :). I'll be happy to look up any stat if you e-mail me. -Greg -- Greg Sudderth - VERITAS Software greg@veritas.com apple!veritas!greg CLAIMER: I don't speak for you, or anyone else, so don't DIS me.