Today most Australians commemorate the Battle of Nui Dat. I for one disagree with the Prime Minister. I believe that those mercenary scum working for Uncle Sam deserved the treatment they got after they returned.
But enough of that. Let us imagine a what-if. First I should remind our American readers of the Battle of Nui Dat.
As part of 1 Australian Task Force 6RAR was stationed in Viet Nam, in Phouc Tuy province at Nui Dat. Revolutionary forces were committed to testing 6RAR and hopefully rendering them ineffective. As part of this effort 5 Division committed itself to battle. The formation drew up 275 Regiment and some elements of D455 Battalion. After artillery probing on 16 August, 6RAR send B Company on limited patrol. At the end of the 17th, B Co. was relieved by D Co. in the field. D Co. deployed in wide formation to maximise the chance of contact to the front.
At 15:30 on the 18th D company encountered a D455 platoon on its right flank in a lightly hilled rubber plantation near Long Tan. While the local forces platoon went to ground quickly. D6RAR halted and deployed facing right in an inconvenient position. About this time accurate mortar rounds pinned D Co., and D Co. was overrun in echelon attacks from its new rear. Later analysis indicates that the early deaths of attached NZ artillery observers may have been relevant in the inability of D Co. to withstand attack. However, during the courts marshal process emphasis was placed upon the inadequate intelligence and the willingness to deploy single companies on patrol. In the aftermath of the battle of Nui Dat no survivors were located from D Co. [Narrative recreated from radio transcripts at War Memorial].
Shocked by the radio silence of D Co. 6RAR began wild artillery firing into the area around Long Tan. This was hindered by the lack of observers in strong monsoonal rain. Additionally fire missions tasked to US allies were ineffective due to the lack of spotting. B Co. still in field was ordered to the site of D Co. A Co. was embarked in M113s at Nui Dat.
Those who have read of the battle know the sequel. B Co. was flanked in the field. A Co. was mostly destroyed in an opposed river crossing. C Co. and Nui Dat were finally overrun on the morning of the 19th with most artillery assets lost. Contemporary Australian Army wargaming has focused on decision of incensed B Co troops to storm revolutionary force positions protected by reverse slopes. Among the dead were Little Patty.
Australia withdrew from Viet Nam in ignominy shortly after the battle of Nui Dat.
* * *
Let us imagine that, if for some reason, D Co. had been able to withstand attack in the field for perhaps a couple of hours before its destruction? Perhaps the NZ observers could have survived slightly longer and provided effective artillery fire? Would this be enough to allow B and A company to form a reasonable front? Would A Co.'s M113 transports have had difficulty crossing swollen rivers regardless of an opposed crossing?
Even if A and B companies linked up in the field, would this be sufficient defence to protect Nui Dat?
Would Australia have withdrawn from Viet Nam is only D6RAR was eliminated, rather than 6RAR itself?
yours, Sam R.
But enough of that. Let us imagine a what-if. First I should remind our American readers of the Battle of Nui Dat.
As part of 1 Australian Task Force 6RAR was stationed in Viet Nam, in Phouc Tuy province at Nui Dat. Revolutionary forces were committed to testing 6RAR and hopefully rendering them ineffective. As part of this effort 5 Division committed itself to battle. The formation drew up 275 Regiment and some elements of D455 Battalion. After artillery probing on 16 August, 6RAR send B Company on limited patrol. At the end of the 17th, B Co. was relieved by D Co. in the field. D Co. deployed in wide formation to maximise the chance of contact to the front.
At 15:30 on the 18th D company encountered a D455 platoon on its right flank in a lightly hilled rubber plantation near Long Tan. While the local forces platoon went to ground quickly. D6RAR halted and deployed facing right in an inconvenient position. About this time accurate mortar rounds pinned D Co., and D Co. was overrun in echelon attacks from its new rear. Later analysis indicates that the early deaths of attached NZ artillery observers may have been relevant in the inability of D Co. to withstand attack. However, during the courts marshal process emphasis was placed upon the inadequate intelligence and the willingness to deploy single companies on patrol. In the aftermath of the battle of Nui Dat no survivors were located from D Co. [Narrative recreated from radio transcripts at War Memorial].
Shocked by the radio silence of D Co. 6RAR began wild artillery firing into the area around Long Tan. This was hindered by the lack of observers in strong monsoonal rain. Additionally fire missions tasked to US allies were ineffective due to the lack of spotting. B Co. still in field was ordered to the site of D Co. A Co. was embarked in M113s at Nui Dat.
Those who have read of the battle know the sequel. B Co. was flanked in the field. A Co. was mostly destroyed in an opposed river crossing. C Co. and Nui Dat were finally overrun on the morning of the 19th with most artillery assets lost. Contemporary Australian Army wargaming has focused on decision of incensed B Co troops to storm revolutionary force positions protected by reverse slopes. Among the dead were Little Patty.
Australia withdrew from Viet Nam in ignominy shortly after the battle of Nui Dat.
* * *
Let us imagine that, if for some reason, D Co. had been able to withstand attack in the field for perhaps a couple of hours before its destruction? Perhaps the NZ observers could have survived slightly longer and provided effective artillery fire? Would this be enough to allow B and A company to form a reasonable front? Would A Co.'s M113 transports have had difficulty crossing swollen rivers regardless of an opposed crossing?
Even if A and B companies linked up in the field, would this be sufficient defence to protect Nui Dat?
Would Australia have withdrawn from Viet Nam is only D6RAR was eliminated, rather than 6RAR itself?
yours, Sam R.