Talk:Operation Ivory Coast

message: When I first read this article, I found that it was two merged pieces, and that one of them was lifted in its entirety from a web page. So I did a major re-write from memory, checked my source material, and editted corrections of my flaws in memory. Buckboard 05:33, 22 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: Rumor has it that notable screenwriter John Milius is writing script for a movie based on this operation. Does anyone know if those rumors are true? NiceDoggie 08:26, 15 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Feature Film, soon? 

message: According to "Green Berets at War" by S.L. Stanton and other reports, the "secondary school" was full of Russians and Chinese.  While Capt. Meadows was searching Son Tay for POWs, Col. Simons' 21 man team "mowed down"* the the Russian and Chinese troops.
*Stanton's words.
:It makes sense, because why would you assault a POW camp when the powers that be knew that there was no prisoners there, atleast a day earlier? In Benjamin Schemmer's book Colonel Simons initially denied that his team landed at the secondary school to Mr Schemmer, author of "The Raid", but "came clean" later on saying it was a mistake, albeit a fortuitous one. Who knows, really. Perhaps the POW rescue was a cover for the raid on the school. Maybe the Americans just wanted to make sure the Russians and Chinese know that their presence in North Vietnam is known, and might have wanted to use this as perhaps some sort of leverage, maybe for better treatment of POWs or something else? What would have happened if the US got some POWs out? What would have happened to the rest of the POWs still in captivity? WikiphyteMk1 05:27, 9 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It is indeed noteworthy, and significant, that the the POWs in the Hanoi Hilton were treated far better as a result of the raid.  Whether or not the enemy combatants killed were Soviet and/or Chinese, Cuban, or whomever, there were non-Vietnamese "foreign" combatants reported by the operators on the ground at the time of the operation. Dr. B. R. Lang (talk) 19:56, 25 June 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: One of the newest and by far the most comprehensive regarding the raid itself is Gargus's The Son Tay Raid. Gargus was radar navigator on Cherry 02 and a mission planner. He debunks that supposition forcefully, stating such was never practiced nor planned by the JCTG. Simons was a stickler for planning for every contingency and would not have gone along with an unplanned, untrained for, and last minute ad hoc mission-within-a-mission. The navigation error that caused the fight at the "school" was the fault of the first helo, Apple 03, compounded by Banana 01 not only making the same mistake, but compounding it by assaulting the school as rehearsed before realizing that they were in the wrong location. By the time they had lifted off again, Apple 01 had landed south of the school as rehearsed, based on what they saw Banana do. If you're going to "fake" a raid, you won't have 2/3 of your force spend 27 minutes shooting up and searching the decoy site while 1/3 spends only five minutes in the actual target.--Reedmalloy (talk) 04:46, 15 February 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Diversionary attack actually the real objective? 

message: Can anyone explain what exactly does a place called "SITE 32" have to do with this operation. If anyone has a copy of THE RAID maybe they can confirm to me the significance of that place. If I recall correctly the Mission planners and the CIA were talking about that place, but I can't recall why. Is this place one of those "Lima Sites" or something else entirely? WikiphyteMk1 15:36, 8 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: SITE 32 is the Village of Baum Long, Laos near the border with North Vietnam, and was a CIA outpost during the Vietnam War. It had an airstrip that was frequently used by Air America assets. My guess is that the rescue force was to have staged through this place but during the time period in preparation for the rescue mission it was under attack by Pathet Lao or North Vietnamese ground forces. It think it got overrun, which may explain why it wasn't used in the actual rescue attempt. 58.164.9.10 (talk) 12:33, 12 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: "Landing Site 32", aka "Lima Site-32" ("LS-32"), or more simply aka, "SITE 32", were indeed the nomenclature and the various acronyms used by covert American and Royal Laotian allied personnel operating against the communist military forces in the Laotian front of the Second Indochina War.  For example, Long Tieng was known as "Twenty Alternate" {LS-20A), and Sam Thong was "LS-20".  LS-32 was probably included in the operational plan as an alternate emergency extraction location after the assault.  Perhaps someone else has more information in this regard.  Dr. B. R. Lang (talk) 01:46, 2 June 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: To the original question, LS32 was to be the staging point for an UH-1H Huey as the backup assault craft in the event an HH-3E was not available or had mechanical problems. The Huey had first been considered for the mission instead of an HH-3, and trained in Florida for the contingency, but only had the carrying capacity for an 11-man Blueboy, and struggled in the airspeed (forced to use 5 degrees of nose down) to stay within the cruise stall speed of the Combat Talons, even when drafting off the left wingtip. They had to stage out of Laos because of fuel considerations, while the HH-3 had aerial refueling capability. The UH-1H and two crews were transported by C-141 to Thailand in case needed, but according to Schemmer, the NVA or Pathet Lao captured LS32 just before JCTG staged to Thailand.--Reedmalloy (talk) 04:52, 15 February 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Laotian Connection 

message: Various web pages (including that one) "estimates" NVA / Chinese / Russian casualties ranging from 50 up to 200. Nevertheless, a Trijicon page  says that Greenleaf team killed 16 ennemy. Steven Emerson Secret Warriors says 25 ennemy killed in the whole raid. I have read elsewhere (don't remember where) also 25 or 26. Has anyone a good source about thoses casualties ? Rob1bureau (talk) 21:46, 23 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  NVA / Chinese / Russian casualties 

message: Someone needs to correct the last section of the article. I'm afraid that more than one US serviceman was freed from communist captivity, along with hundreds of South Vietnamese troops and civilians, during operations conducted by the Joint Personnel Recovery Center (under the code name Bright Light). See Military Assistance Command, Vietnam Studies and Observations Group.RM Gillespie (talk) 13:28, 3 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Bright Light

message: From the article:  "Despite the absence of prisoners, the raid was executed with a high degree of success, incurring only two minor casualties and the unplanned loss of one aircraft."
I was always under the impression that the loss of the HH-3 was actually planned for.  Even the source article (footnote 5) claims "It was anticipated that damage would occur and the plan provided for the HH-3 to be considered a loss. By means of an explosive charge with a timing device, it was to be destroyed upon departure of our troops from the compound."  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.131.50.48 (talk) 14:02, 1 February 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: It was, therefore the use of "unplanned" to account for the loss of the F-105G that went down in Laos as result of a SAM hit. But since it was unclear, I tweaked the grammar.--Reedmalloy (talk) 08:59, 2 February 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Ah, I got ya.  Sorry about the misinterpretation on my part.  I will say, however, that I think the new way you have it laid out allows for less misinterpretation on the part of the reader.  Good job!  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.131.50.48 (talk) 16:31, 5 February 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Unplanned loss of an aircraft? 

message: 'Cherry 01 transmitted the execute command "Alpha, Alpha, Alpha" to all aircraft[67] as it overflew the prison and dropped four illumination flares, then performed a hard-turning descent to 500 feet (150 m) to drop two battle simulators[68][n 32] south and southeast of Sơn Tây.'
I think it needs to be explained what 'battle simulators' are. The average person is not going to have a clue what that is, I certainly don't. 86.46.56.178 (talk) 10:23, 15 May 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: It's in the article already (note 32). The notes are used to fill in such details without cluttering the article. Battle simulators, also known as "firefight simulators", are firecrackers mounted on pallets dropped into areas to mimic small arms fire.--Reedmalloy (talk) 23:41, 15 May 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  battle simulators? 

message: This article is part of an online encyclopedia, and therefore needs to be as unbiased as possible. It is NOT meant to be a tribute page, or a propaganda piece. Future editors need to keep this in mind when considering changes to the article. MainBattery (talk) 09:09, 13 April 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  The need for objectivity