• September 15, 2019, 18:59:39 PM

Login with username, password and session length

Author Topic: Da Nang  (Read 162165 times)

0 Members and 3 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline grampron

  • OOD
  • *****
  • Posts: 105
Re: Da Nang
« Reply #133 on: February 23, 2011, 19:31:30 PM »
When Ron got out he was never given a physical. When it says physical on his termination papers RID is used. I know he was to get 10% for knee problems, but it never came about, and they use the Barrington Rule and won't even investigate it.. Now when something like this is done isn't the VA suppose to go on the exit physical, but if there isn't physical then how do they judge and on what evidence? He also has earing lost and several other things that are at 10% each but refuse to use that at his 80% disability.

Offline Mark D

  • Administrator
  • OOD
  • *****
  • Posts: 100
Re: Da Nang
« Reply #132 on: February 21, 2011, 11:36:37 AM »
Mark
Is there a way to plot the position during these Naval gunfiring times?

19-Nov   190130   190233   TROOP CONC   HE   74   150
19-Nov   190753   190820   TROOP CONC   HE   62   170
19-Nov   190829   190840   SUPPLY AREA   HE   8   150
20-Nov   200116   200212   TROOP CONC   HE   28   170
21-Nov   211400   212200   ARTILLERY SITE   HE   40   150
21-Nov   211500   212100   AA SITE   HE   96   200
21-Nov   211515   211540   AA SITE   HE   72   160
22-Nov   220225   220742   VC/NVA POSIT   HE   215   210
11-Dec   111103   111107   ARTILLERY SITE   HEPD   20   160
11-Dec   111200   112115   VC/NVA POSIT   HEPD   108   160
12-Dec   112343   120007   TROOP CONC   HEPD   47   160
12-Dec   120015   120507   TROOP CONC   HEPD   128   180
12-Dec   120607   120658   BUNKER   HEPD   15   250
12-Dec   121200   122102   VC/NVA POSIT   HEPD   207   200
13-Dec   130140   130306   BUNKER   HEPD   30   250
13-Dec   130318   130437   VC/NVA POSIT   HECVT   79   160
13-Dec   131215   131652   TROOP CONC   HEPD   275   170


Interesting, but I don't believe those are Lat/Long numbers. I think those are Naval Gunfire Support grid reference numbers. Grid reference numbers would provide an X/Y point on a map so that the fire control solution could be provided in order to place shells on target.

Even if I had the reference map, I could only identify the target's position, not the ship's position.
FC1(SW), WF / CF Division, 1986 - 1990
USS King (DLG-10/DDG-41) Association Historian

Offline fredw

  • Mid Watch
  • **
  • Posts: 18
Re: Da Nang
« Reply #131 on: February 21, 2011, 10:46:55 AM »
Mark
Is there a way to plot the position during these Naval gunfiring times?

19-Nov   190130   190233   TROOP CONC   HE   74   150
19-Nov   190753   190820   TROOP CONC   HE   62   170
19-Nov   190829   190840   SUPPLY AREA   HE   8   150
20-Nov   200116   200212   TROOP CONC   HE   28   170
21-Nov   211400   212200   ARTILLERY SITE   HE   40   150
21-Nov   211500   212100   AA SITE   HE   96   200
21-Nov   211515   211540   AA SITE   HE   72   160
22-Nov   220225   220742   VC/NVA POSIT   HE   215   210
11-Dec   111103   111107   ARTILLERY SITE   HEPD   20   160
11-Dec   111200   112115   VC/NVA POSIT   HEPD   108   160
12-Dec   112343   120007   TROOP CONC   HEPD   47   160
12-Dec   120015   120507   TROOP CONC   HEPD   128   180
12-Dec   120607   120658   BUNKER   HEPD   15   250
12-Dec   121200   122102   VC/NVA POSIT   HEPD   207   200
13-Dec   130140   130306   BUNKER   HEPD   30   250
13-Dec   130318   130437   VC/NVA POSIT   HECVT   79   160
13-Dec   131215   131652   TROOP CONC   HEPD   275   170
Fred Wright

Offline grampron

  • OOD
  • *****
  • Posts: 105
Re: Da Nang
« Reply #130 on: February 20, 2011, 19:48:09 PM »
Dave Barker from AMVETS has a forum on Military. Com called Dave Barker-Sound Off. He is very helpful and kind. I have written him several times.

Offline grampron

  • OOD
  • *****
  • Posts: 105
Re: Da Nang
« Reply #129 on: February 20, 2011, 19:25:05 PM »

By Martha Ann Overland / Danang
Saturday, Dec. 19, 2009
Agent Orange Poisons New Generations in Vietnam


This lonely section of the abandoned Danang air base was once crawling with U.S. airmen and machines. It was here where giant orange drums were stored and the herbicides they contained were mixed and loaded onto waiting planes. Whatever sloshed out soaked into the soil and eventually seeped into the water supply. Thirty years later, the rare visitor to the former U.S. air base is provided with rubber boots and protective clothing. Residue from Agent Orange, which was sprayed to deny enemy troops jungle cover, remains so toxic that this patch of land is considered one of the most contaminated pieces of real estate in the country. A recent study indicates that even three decades after the war ended, the cancer-causing dioxins are at levels 300 to 400 times higher than what is deemed to be safe.
After years of meetings, signings and photo ops, the U.S. held another ceremony in Vietnam on Dec. 16 to sign yet another memorandum of understanding as part of the continuing effort to manage Agent Orange's dark legacy. Yet there are grumblings that little ? if anything ? has been done to clean up the most contaminated sites. Since 2007, Congress has allocated a total of $6 million to help address Agent Orange issues in Vietnam. Not only does the amount not begin to scratch the surface of the problem or get rid of the tons of toxic soil around the nation, but there are questions about how the money is being spent. And several parties have noted with growing frustration that the money is primarily going to study the issue and hire consultants rather than implementing measures to prevent new generations from being exposed. (See the ongoing effects of an industrial disaster in India.)
"There is still risk to people living in those areas," says Thomas Boivin, president of the Vancouver-based Hatfield Consultants, an environmental firm that has been identifying and measuring Agent Orange contamination in Vietnam since 1994. The good news is that Hatfield's studies indicate that even though 10% of southern Vietnam was sprayed with dioxins, only a handful of hot spots ? all former U.S. military installations where the herbicide was mixed and stored ? pose a danger to humans. The bad news? "If those were in Canada or in the U.S., they would require immediate cleanup," Boivin says.
Responding to complaints that America is dragging its feet, U.S. ambassador to Vietnam Michael Michalak said the $1.7 million most recently allocated to conduct an environmental assessment of the Danang air base is being done to comply with both U.S. and Vietnamese law and is a necessary step toward cleanup. "We're investigating many promising techniques," Michalak said following the signing ceremony in Hanoi. Careful study is required if the job is to be done right, he added. "We know there is dioxin in the soil," he said. "But what method do we use to remove it? Where do we tell the diggers to dig? It's just another step on the road." (See 90 years of battlefield portraits.)
But critics believe the U.S. is playing a grim waiting game: waiting for people to die in order to avoid potentially costly lawsuits. For a country currently engaged in two wars, accepting comprehensive responsibility for wartime damages could set an expensive precedent. "They know what the problem is and where it is," says Chuck Searcy, country representative of the Vietnam Veterans Memorial Fund. "Why do they now need an environmental impact assessment? They are studying this to death."
Scientists have been raising the alarm about dioxins since the 1960s. After TCDD, the dioxin in Agent Orange, was found to cause cancer and birth defects, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) slapped an emergency ban on the herbicide in 1979. Dow and Monsanto, the chemical's largest manufacturers, eventually shelled out millions in damages to U.S. troops who were exposed to it while it was being used as a wartime defoliant from 1961 to 1971. The U.S. government still spends billions every year on disability payments to those who served in Vietnam ? including their children, many of whom are suffering from dioxin-associated cancers and birth defects. In October, the Department of Veterans Affairs added leukemia, Parkinson's and a rare heart disease to the list of health problems associated with Agent Orange. Yet U.S. official policy maintains that there is no conclusive evidence that the defoliant caused any health problems among the millions of exposed Vietnamese or their children.


Read more: http://www.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,1948084,00.html#ixzz1EYkRuJCY


Offline Mark D

  • Administrator
  • OOD
  • *****
  • Posts: 100
Re: Da Nang
« Reply #128 on: February 20, 2011, 18:37:45 PM »
Haiphong is about 350 miles due north of Danang and about 60 miles southeast of Hanoi. I don't know if AO was deployed there, but the King would not have gone anywhere near Haiphong harbor and would have launched the rescue helo several hundred miles out.

Haiphong was well defended and patrolled by high speed motor torpedo boats which could have easily sunk a ship like the King given the opportunity.
FC1(SW), WF / CF Division, 1986 - 1990
USS King (DLG-10/DDG-41) Association Historian

Offline grampron

  • OOD
  • *****
  • Posts: 105
Re: Da Nang
« Reply #127 on: February 20, 2011, 18:25:34 PM »
Can anyone tell me how Haiphong Harbor fits in with Agent Orange? I know they recused a down pilot with the help USS Towers. Haiphong Harbor is that like Tonkin Bay? I know I should do more research but I like to hear other points of view.

Offline grampron

  • OOD
  • *****
  • Posts: 105
Re: Da Nang
« Reply #126 on: February 19, 2011, 11:47:52 AM »
I went back and typed in Tom Philpott name and there's alot of information under his name.

Offline grampron

  • OOD
  • *****
  • Posts: 105
Re: Da Nang
« Reply #125 on: February 19, 2011, 11:44:10 AM »
Sorry I should have used the hole address bluewaternavy.org/Sailors Philpott.pdf

Offline grampron

  • OOD
  • *****
  • Posts: 105
Re: Da Nang
« Reply #124 on: February 19, 2011, 11:38:27 AM »
Sailors Victory Reversed in Agent Orange Related Case.

Offline kayo1952

  • Mid Watch
  • **
  • Posts: 17
Re: Da Nang
« Reply #123 on: February 19, 2011, 10:43:43 AM »
where did you read that about Tom Philpott and the blue water navy

Offline grampron

  • OOD
  • *****
  • Posts: 105
Re: Da Nang
« Reply #122 on: February 19, 2011, 10:20:22 AM »
Does anyone know wherein the appeal process I just read Tom Philpott and he stated blue water navy was granted an appeal and then to the Supreme Court?

Offline grampron

  • OOD
  • *****
  • Posts: 105
Re: Da Nang
« Reply #121 on: February 19, 2011, 09:57:31 AM »
I would appreciate you sending me copies of those documents as at least to me it establishes a history of sorts.

Offline Mark D

  • Administrator
  • OOD
  • *****
  • Posts: 100
Re: Da Nang
« Reply #120 on: February 19, 2011, 08:00:04 AM »
I see - you're referring to the ships timeline.

Those entries came from the official Command Histories, submitted annually by the Commanding Officer.

I have copies of those if you need them.
FC1(SW), WF / CF Division, 1986 - 1990
USS King (DLG-10/DDG-41) Association Historian

Offline grampron

  • OOD
  • *****
  • Posts: 105
Re: Da Nang
« Reply #119 on: February 18, 2011, 21:08:50 PM »
Now if this is true of the USS King was in Da Nang Harbor 6/27/66, 10/21/67, 8/8/70 and with my proof of 11/21/1972 does this constitutes history? It was Judge Marjorie A. Auer who declared Da Nang Harbor as a inland waterway.