Why were our boy's flying WW2 vintage aircraft in Vietnam War?

Question

Not talking about the Jets.

Answer 1

There are times when A1 Skyraiders have taken out Mig17s.
And they were great for dropping bombs on ground targets.

Answer 2

1. T-28 Trojan. Used as an interdiction aircraft by "other" forces. I saw many of them land at Nakhon Phanom Air Base. It didn't carry an especially large bomb load but it could maneuver in spaces where jets dared not venture.

2. A-26 Invader. Used as an interdiction platform along the Ho Chi Minh trail in Laos. It was notorious as a "truck buster". At the time, no other aircraft in the inventory could mount eight .50 Cal machine guns in the nose, fire them all at once and have the airplane stay in one piece. There were numerous Invaders at Nakhon Phanom Air Base.

3. The A-1 Skyraider. One clattering, banging, howling ***** of an aircraft!!!! Could haul a HUGE bomb load (more than a WW2 B-17 bomber). It had a incredible loiter-over-target time. The Skyraider was an unqualified success because it was so tough, I heard one pilot say "you could shoot it so fulla holes that you were flying more "hole" than aircraft and it would still get you back to base." It could absorb battle damage well beyond what any jet used in Viet Nam could hope to sustain. They had a sizeable contingent of them at Nakhon Phanom Air Base.

There are some roles which jets just can't fulfill.

If they are so tough why aren't they still in service today? First, all of those aircraft used 115/145 Octane av-gas. Environmental constraints no longer allow the use of fuel with such a high lead content. Second, the USAF is now all turbine; it reduces the variety of fuels needed to be held in inventory.

Answer 3

Simple, because it was the best for the job at the time.

The A-1 Skyraider was introduced in 1945, but did not go into full manufacture until 1949, and last was made in 1957. With a huge radial engine and very large wing, it has 8000 lbs of payloard spread over UP TO FIFTEEN hardpoints for mounting a large variety of ordnance over a very respectable distance, able to "loiter" over the battlefield for a long time, and be able to deliver just enough firepower onto a specific spot. Jets may be faster, but they are much thirstier for fuel, and doesn't carry as much (4 to 5 hardpoints at most).

It wasn't till several years later, when the war spurred developement of the jet, that A-4, A-7, and other better jet bombers replaced it. Then it's pressed into "Sandy" roles.

Answer 4

Some aircraft from the 1940s were still more than suitable for their old roles later on, even fast forward more than twenty years.

For instance, a low flying forward observer aircraft only needs to fly low and slow to spot enemy positions for artillery. The benefits of Vietnam War-era jet engines would be counter productive for an aircraft that needs to be able to accurately call in artillery in a relatively small area of operations.

The A-1 Skyraider, which just missed out on WW2 only needs to fly and slow too. However, it has the added benefit of being able to carry a massive bomb load. Flying slowly allows it more time to attack enemy positions in bombing and strafing runs, and advanced targeting wasn't necessary - all they needed was a series of big explosions.

Answer 5

They didnt the prop jobs used in vietnam were used as close ground support like the A-10 jets of today and were pretty modern for the time. I cant remember what they were called but none of the aircraft used in the vietnam war were from WWII.

Answer 6

There is a group of aircraft that tour the country. Usually a B-17, B-24, B-25, P-51, and a T-6. The P-51 they have is the B model, the only one left flying if i understand correctly, and they will let you get some stick time on it. Its a 2 seat tandem. However be prepared to shell out some dough. An hour at the controls is about $2300 bucks.

Answer 7

Because the A1 Skyraider, which is what I will guess you are talking about, could fly much more slowly than jets, and was a far more accurate ground attack platform. Back then they didn't have laser guided munitions, or as sophisticated computers to drop bombs as accurately. Planes like the Skyraider were invaluable.

Answer 8

They were an integral part of our support, like the A-1, as they flew slow and were good for missions that jets were not suited for. They were the backbone our rescue operations of getting our downed aircraft pilots out as the flew slow and laid down a massive amount of gunfire at low altitudes!

They were also suited in hitting trails, and were flown by several countries supporting us. They were not as difficult to train those in props vs jets!

We loved them as they were great for ground support at low altitudes

Answer 9

In some cases the slower prop planes could provide better close air support then fast movers.

That is part of the idea behind the A-10 today.

Answer 10

Several prop jobs were used in Nam for ground support as noted above and for observation. They had a low ground speed and a long loiter time. Ideal for eyes in the sky. Now mostly replaced by drones.

Answer 11

Mainly for ground support. The planes were slower than jets. Pilots could get a better look at what they were shooting at. They were still good plane and accomplished the mission.