Some Sth Vietnam snippets from documents.

[Diana Alan]

Maybe I need a re-education camp.
I call them Acco.
So do more than a few other lost souls. eg.

This ridiculous dispute has been going on since God created the earth . Use what ever terminology you want Carzee . We all know what an ACCO 4x4 or 6x6, Jeep, Blitz, Landy, etc etc are .

Next time I come around I'll give you a ride in my Range Rover SIIa FFR jeep, neither the International MK3 nor the International AB 160 have ever been International ACCO, otherwise we can all start calling our GS cargo LRPVs

[Phoenix]

Actually Stuart, Diana has a point.

If we continue to use the wrong terminology for a vehicle, then it will continue to be cllled the wrong thing by newcommers, new generations etc.

On REMLR I have always tried to be as acurate as possible as many people look at REMLR like an online reference book, expecially the ARN database. As such, if I didn't have definitive proof such as paperwork of some kind, or a whotograph showing indisputeably the information, then I put it in, if there was some doubt, it was either filed for later collaboration, or included with a note that there was doubt in some form or another.  As such in recent years I have been far more careful about referencing the source of photos an information in a similar fashion that the author of a book would have to do.  Not quite to the same level, but I am continuing to improve.  Many thanks for that go to Mike Cecil for pointing out my lack of referencing, which in any research field is unprofessional at best, or negligent at worst.

So if we keep calling them ACCO's, that misnomer will continue to pervail.  Hence why I try and refer to them by their proper titles. 

Census codes are another example, few census codes refer to just one vehicle, they refer to a vehicle type, for example, 6028, the 3/4 Ton GS, refers to Landcruisers, as much as it does series 2, 2a and 3 land rovers.

In the case of the line that started this debate, "TRUCK 2 1/2 TON INCL DUMP"  I would have thought that meant that it was 2 1/2 Ton Trucks INCLUDING Dump, so it would refer equaly to the AB-160 as it would the Mk.3.

[Diana Alan]

Thanks Richard

Perhaps I pressed my point too hard without being precise about my actual problem. 

Yes while I get annoyed by the Mk3 being called the civvi term AACO and the MK4 F1/F2/F5 being called their similar civvy ACCO what I was trying to suggest that the Truck, Dump, 2-1/2 Ton GS 4x4 W/Winch AB-160 were never included in the nickname Acco.



Glad you clarified the issue for us.

Diana

BTW: I just noticed a gunbuggy under repair at the end of the row.  Have we ever identified which one?

[zulu delta 534]

Notice the Tac signs, -519 - 87 Tpt Pl. Now guess which one it was.   Hint......we only had ONE.
1 Platoon had the other one!
Regards
Glen

[Phoenix]

I really must remember to record which unit had which gunbuggy on their regords.  Glenn, can you give me a precise phrase as to which GB was with which unit for the database please? 

[zulu delta 534]

In 1966-67 111 578 was on 87 Tpt Pl's books.......519 Tac sign
                   110 807 was on 1 Tpt Pl's books.........31 Tac Sign in later days.
Both of these units RTA'd to Australia in 1967 so the vehicles would more than likely have passed on to 85 and 2 Platoons respectively.
Somewhere out there, for 111 578, (the one I class as "ours"), there are probably photographs in someone's collection showing the same vehicle when it would have originally worn either 55 (1 RAR) numbers, or even 60 (6 RAR), then 519 RAASC when it was signed over to us, then eventually the 5 Coy turtle, depending on the year the shot was taken. I only lay claim when I know where the photograph originated from.

My gunbuggy (Onslow)shows up wearing 60 Tac signs (6 RAR) at the horseshoe in one photograph and then shows up later in Nui Dat wearing 63 (9RAR) signs in another shot so lining the buggies up with a particular unit will be a difficult task as they would have changed "owners" on each Battalion rotation. (Three Bns in country at once x 4 RCLs each = 12 buggies, plus RAASC x 2 = 14, plus those that were sent over for replacements when older ones were BER'ed. They were a pretty limited animal (21 in total over 7 odd years according to M & D) and each wore a lot of different colours over their times in country.)

Regards
Glen

[Mike C]

Ha! The earlier 'altercation' over nomenclature reminds me of several instances. I was taken to task for calling the 6x6 GS Inter an 'F1' by a book reviewer of M&D, rather than a 'Mk.5'. Hmmm.... so much for the quality of THAT review!

Or the day that I was in a meeting about the new South Vietnam Gallery and an historian kept on referring to having the 'back door open on the M113' in the display. Besides the fact it is an M113A1, I queried just how much the public would see if only the 'back door' was open, given that the view of the interior would be so restricted through such a narrow swing door. She (an expert on the war in South Vietnam) looked puzzled: she meant that she wanted the rear ramp lowered into the open position. The gallery designers then scratched out 'back door open' and inserted 'ramp down' on their documents. Makes a big difference to the footprint on the gallery floor, so using the correct nomenclature/description becomes imperative in such situations.

Nomenclature is a funny thing: I try and use the correct or abbreviated form wherever possible, but it is sometimes difficult when the full nomenclature is so long winded, like 'Tank, Combat, Full Tracked, Medium Gun, Centurion Mk.5/1, fitted with Wireless Sets C42 & B47'. Writing that several times in an article is not good writing, so we all resort to the abbreviated forms for clarity.

It's made no easier when Army use terms like 'wireless' and 'radio' or 'antenna' and 'aerial' almost interchangeably during the 1960s/70s!

Which reminds me: on the REMLR page under the M113 (sic) listing is a list of 'M115A1's' - what are they?

Mike C

[Phoenix]

Oh, I wonder how I did that!!!  I'll rectify as soon as I can (Hopefully later this morning)

I could see somebody getting very upset when the arrive to the newly setup display to find the back door open on a Bucket when they wanted the whole ramp down, but no space being left to fit the ramp down.  Actually I hope to have my first visit to the AWM for about 2 decades in Juy, really looking forward to it, a lot has changed.

[Carzee]

Found the old payrate tables, from June 1970 in the 17 Construction Sqn Orders.
There are so many groups.
The lowest group-rate for rank of Private is $5.24 per day whereas the highest-group rate for rank of Private is $9.73 per day (highest = SASR?)

[zulu delta 534]

Found the old payrate tables, from June 1970 in the 17 Construction Sqn Orders.
There are so many groups.
The lowest group-rate for rank of Private is $5.24 per day whereas the highest-group rate for rank of Private is $9.73 per day (highest = SASR?)

Highest grouping was probably someone like a Sig/cipher, or perhaps an intelligence translator or the likes of such.
The groupings went up as did the qualifications, some Corps by their own technical requirements, had higher groupings than others.
Don't forget that back in those days, well before Fringe Benefit taxes killed off all the perks, Bed and Keep was all found, clothing and medical dental requirements all found, and for the marriedies, housing was also found (minimum housing rent). I used to "hitch hike" by RAAF Hercules courier flights all round Australia on leave as well.
Whilst in Vietnam we were also on "tropical" zone allowance tax relief, all food, smokes, drinks, cameras etc were purchased through either US PX (Post Exchange) or our Canteen Service (ASCO) and was duty free, plus we drew "Danger allowance".
The pay was simply to be squandered on ones' self.
Not many civvy jobs came anywhere near that at the time.
I only drew half my pay each fortnight, the other half I had allotted straight to the bank, sort of compulsory savings.
When I came home I bought a brand new Falcon car and even had some left over. Today's soldiers serving O/S come back with roughly the same value proportionally.
Gp1 was basically a raw recruit doing Kapooka, and after those initial couple of months things changed drastically once Corps and specialist training had been completed.
Regards
Glen

[Carzee]

Back in 70 I  was at school. The head teach had a BRG Cooper S and a pie was 40c, sausage roll 20c. Then there was some inflation etc.
I mentioned SASR because when they came around re cruiting the starting salary for a Private was $75000 which was a tad more than some reg officers.

[Carzee]

Here is a snip from 17Constr Sqn orders July 1970 -  either the $5 a day is not enough or the phones are too expensive:

[THE BOOGER]

With all allowances they were probably on about $13/$14 per day so a days wage to phone home whats a days wage today?

[Minikeg]

..just realised those pay tables are per day not per hour as I presumed...

 

[THE BOOGER]

Yes but the pubs closed at 6 oclock remember and out of hours and sundays you had to be a bonafide traveller