DEPLETE%TUCC.BITNET@ncsuvm.ncsu.edu (12/06/89)
From: DEPLETE%TUCC.BITNET@ncsuvm.ncsu.edu During my tour in RVN it was rumored that one of the methods use by us to track NVA was by flying a helo over the triple canopy and wafting air over a bed of bedbugs. The phermones in the aiir were detected by the bugs who became vewry excited. Excitment noted and ploted and done agin again until a concentration of troops was identified. Arty and aircover did the rest. WSA Was ;this ever evaluated or di d it ever exist? B-52 stikes were vectored using a much diferent methodology , another posting.
frank@uunet.UU.NET (Corradino) (12/09/89)
From: adiron!frank@uunet.UU.NET (Corradino)
DEPLETE%TUCC.BITNET@ncsuvm.ncsu.edu writes about a rumor regarding the use of
bedbugs for target acquisition in Vietnam. I cannot verify the accuracy of
the rumor but the method sounds very similar to "People Sniffer" missions.
In 1969-1970, I was assigned to the 503rd Chemical Detachment, 199th
Light Infantry Brigade, III Corps, RVN. We used a device developed by GE
originally intended for use in measuring air pollution. Air was brought
into the device through a 4" flexible duct taped to the landing skid of a
UH-1 chopper. Air samples were first super-humidified and then passed into
a chamber. Instruments in the chamber detected the amount of deflection of
a light beam. The theory is that if dust particles (condensation nuclei)
were present, water droplets would form, causing deflection of the beam.
The amount of deflection was proportional to the quantity of dust and was
registered on a simple meter. The theory is that people moving about on
the ground (or cooking, or doing other people things) would stir up
condensation nuclei that could be detected above the triple canopy jungle.
That's how the device worked. Tactically, as mentioned above, the device
was mounted in a UH-1 that was used as the "low-bird" in a hunter/killer
team. The "high-bird" for most of the missions in which I participated,
was a Cobra. The low-bird would fly back and forth across a designated
search area, at tree-top level, perpendicular to the wind. After each pass
we would make a 180 degree turn, into the wind, and make another pass across
the area. This pattern prevented the device from picking up our own exhaust.
Meanwhile, the Cobra, observing and guiding our ship from approximately
2000 feet, would track our progress. When the meter indicated activity,
I would inform the co-pilot in the gunship who would mark the reading on
his map. Inspection of the pattern of marks on the map often revealed
trails. As we gained more experience, we could sometimes deviate from the
assigned pattern and actually follow an invisible trail by pointing the
chopper in the direction that sustained a high reading. Suspected trails
were investigated by the infantry for possible ambush opportunities. Often,
areas with high concentrations of readings (assumed to be camps) were used
as harassing artillery targets.
Several points to consider:
1. The device could not tell the difference between VC, NVA, or friendly
troops, or even a herd of monkeys moving through the trees. Experience
and intelligence about the location of friendlies allowed us to
make good judgements.
2. When flying at tree-top level, one must remember that all trees
are not at the same level. Dramamine was most helpful. I recall there
were many times we had to clear leaves and branches from the air duct
after a mission. One mission came to an exciting and abrupt conclusion
when our pilot experimented with using the UH-1 as a tree trimmer.
3. The "People Sniffer" technique was very effective in locating strong
concentrations of heavily armed VC. That's because they usually tried
to blow us out of the sky. I was pleased with the short time it took a
Cobra to dive and deliver ordinance ("bring smoke") from 2000 feet.
4. I cannot vouch for its effectiveness in finding small groups of guerrillas
hiding in the jungle. Certainly, we brought back many suspected locations
but I never heard much about whether or not they were verified.
So, we didn't use bedbugs but I suspect we drove some VC buggy trying to
figure out how the artillery knew enough about their location to keep them
up all night.
Frank Corradino email: uunet!adiron!frank
PAR Technology Corp. phone: (315) 738-0600 Ext 338
New Hartford, NY 13413 disclaimer: you bet!howard@cos.com (Howard C. Berkowitz) (12/13/89)
From: howard@cos.com (Howard C. Berkowitz) In article <12014@cbnews.ATT.COM>, DEPLETE%TUCC.BITNET@ncsuvm.ncsu.edu writes: > > > From: DEPLETE%TUCC.BITNET@ncsuvm.ncsu.edu > During my tour in RVN it was rumored that one of the methods > use by us to track NVA was by flying a helo over the triple > canopy and wafting air over a bed of bedbugs. The phermones in the > aiir were detected by the bugs who became vewry excited. Excitment > noted and ploted and done agin again until a concentration of troops > was identified. Arty and aircover did the rest. WSA Was ;this ever > evaluated or di d it ever exist? B-52 stikes were vectored > using a much diferent methodology , another posting. There were at least two "people-sniffer" devices. The airborne sensor detected ammonia concentrations, as typically was generated by any large mammal(s). Took out lots of water buffaloes, although the NVA did seem to have some awareness of the technique; there were reports of troops finding beer bottles of urine hung high in trees (as a spoofing technique, we hope). Bedbugs were a different method, used in perimeter defenses and some trailside sensors. Developed, as I remember, by the Army Limited Warfare Laboratory, they were fairly selective for humans, but had a limited life in the field. I have mercifully forgotten the contents of the Bedbug Depot Maintenance Manual (if any). I worked on people sniffer basic research for the Navy, which, as far as I know, never deployed any. We did do some research in discriminating among various population groups based on dietary components, cosmetics, and other "smell-based" approaches; most were not practical. I had a group of social scientists research any traditions relating to smells; I remember their sober description of a particular Montagnard tribe which "bathed but once a year, and then in the blood of a sacrificed water buffalo. They have been scrupulously avoided by both sides." [by memory from "Cultural and Biological Effluents of Southeast Asia," Center for Research in Social Systems (CRESS), then an Army Contract Research Center at American University.] -- howard@cos.com OR {uunet, decuac, sun!sundc, hadron, hqda-ai}!cos!howard (703) 883-2812 [W] (703) 998-5017 [H] DISCLAIMER: Opinions expressed are not necessarily those of the Corporation for Open Systems, its members, or any standards body.