Colonel Toon's (Tomb's) MiG17
//www.gstatic.com/images/branding/product/1x/groups_32dp.png
Wec58 wrote:

> I purchased a Hasagawa MiG 17 today and was informed it was Toon's aircraft.

> The kit says it was Nguyen Van Bay's aircraft.

Toon (Tomb) appears to be a fictional pilot...nobody seems to know how it got

started. The VPAF don't have an Ace by either name since neither is a Vietnamese

name.

> To further complicate things I

> went to a web site...and says it's Toon's.

It would appear that site is in error.

> The number on

> the aircraft is red 3020 and shows 7 kill markings. That would match Van Bay's

> number of kills but is below Toon's approximately 13 kills.

The VPAF does NOT list any pilot with 13 kills, Nguyen Van Coc is listed as their

highest scorer with 9 (which includes two Firebee Drones).

> To further

> complicate things the picture shows Driscoll and Cunningham's aircraft

> following this MiG and I found another source which claims that Driscoll and

> Cunningham battled with Toon (I'm not sure if they succeeded in downing him).

On 10 May 1972, Cunningham and Driscoll became the first US Aces, when they downed

numbers 3,4, and 5. Their last kill was against a very wiley MiG-17 driver. This

gave rise to the claim they had downed Col Tomb, but the VPAF did not have any

Colonels flying fighters, nor anybody named Toon (Tomb). Cunningham and Driscoll

were later damaged by an SA-2, lost all hydraulics (Phantom flight controls are

hydraulic) and Duke managed to get "feet wet" prior to them ejecting.

How's the kit, is it the old Hasegawa/Minicraft mold (silver)?

Robey

When you see the item on F-4Js 'strafing' pilots in chutes, the credibility of

the source is established.

The MiG-17 article is an extract of what is in the new VPAF history from

Squadron. Both are near verbatim translations of the "official" history of the

VPAF, and as such are somewhat circumspect.

The VPAF is still playing games with "who's who", although we now know a lot

more about who shot who on 10 May 1972. Cunningham and Driscoll's 5th Kill was

a pilot named Nguyen Van Tho, who is listed in one account as buying then and

there, and in another as bailing out. Tho was a 17 driver from the original

batch of 31, so that does match up.

I have since found out that Dose/McDevitt's kill was not the model for "Tomb"

-- Dang Ngoc Ngu -- but his wingman, an unfortunate soul named Ngai who did not

survive the crash. Ngu DID claim Dose's element leader as a kil though, but

anyone who read the classic Ethell/Price "One Day in a Long War" knows that one

"won't fly" (pun intended!)

Ngu bought it on 8 July 1972 when shot down by a (?Talos?) from one of the

cruisers, which I am pretty sure was the USS Chicago.

The whole "Tomb" business comes from idiots who did not read Vietnamese and saw

some of the classified reports using Vietnamese telegraphics at the time, and

screwed it up. Even Jack Anderson wrote him up in a 1971 column and tried to

correct the spelling to TOONS but could not get people to believe it.

Cookie Sewell

AMPS

PS a complete history of the Vietnamese Air War with a comparison of "who shot

John" reports and assessments is being written, but not by the fellow who

"wrote" the VPAF book for Squadron.

Geoff Murphy wrote:

> I confess I don't know what might thoughts go through mans mind while flying

> combat in a dogfight scenario.

I have no combat experience...

> However, common sense might not be one of those.

Hmmm, from my very limited peace-time experience...it's all training, logical

training.My AF predecessors in vietnam, did not have the benefit of ACM and

DACT. Their BFM skills were weaker than their bombing skills. The naval guys had

better air-to-air skills.

> It does seem the revenge factor could be very strong when you see a

> "buddy" going down in flames after a sneak attack from the rear as the

> Vietnamese pilots were famous for doing.

Sorry, I respectfully submit that is Bullsh*t! As a guy that spent 10 years in

that profession (1979-89) I've never even heard hints of that kind of behavior.

That would NOT be tolerated. Obviously Cookie Sewell might have heard something

else...but I sincerely doubt it. You're speculating about something I have a

pretty good handle on, IMO.

> The chance to put a few 20 mm rounds through the culprit might be too much to

> resist.

Nah...it's the machine you're after, NOT the pilot. Sure if I could put my 20mm

into the cockpit with him still there fine, but once a guy is hanging in his

chute he becomes "hors de combat" (or some similar sounding french phrase). You

go to Leavenworth for shooting at pilot/WSO in a parachute. No excuses!

> War can have a profound effect on the most civilized person.

Indeed, but most aviators I know are pretty well grounded. An unobserved entry

by a bandit is something we were trained to anticipate, and not get pissed at

the MiG guy that was smart enough to get there.

Sorry for the soapbox mode, and nothing personal is intended. Obviously I have

pretty strong feelings about this topic.

Robey



USN SEA F-4's /could/ have guns and in the 'first war' (there were

actually two ya' know...) they often did. HiPEG Mk.4s on the centerline

I think. USAF 4C/D had the SUU-23 Vulcan and F-8's carried quad

Mk.12's All in spraying around 4-6K spm and every one in 20mm so you'd

definitely 'know you've been hit' (along about the time Peter is sizing

your halo on the brim machine)... Also far better sights and

powered-precise controls.

In _/Horrido!/_, there are mentioned 'several' accounts of -jet- pilots

being strafed after landing because they were such a menace. One was a

personal-by-survivor I could look up if you want.

In the end it comes down to this:

1. If he's over his territory think about it. For prior mentioned

reasons. Tactical opposition reduction to own-treatment

likelihood if shot down. Remember, they can kill you AFTER you

land too.

2. If you're in a multibandit/SAM environment with friends as well as

yourself potentially endangered by independent head-hunting -don't-,

ever.

3. If he's over YOUR territory, there is no excuse; it's murder.

4. One's after-mission Aggression should be modified by the likelihood

of war-loss in your nation's immediate future ('War Crimes' etc.)

and also the activities of your fellows. If they're all doing it

then you'll likely die if shot down anyway so you might as well add

to the attrition effect and hope to make it a shorter war.

IMO, 'cockpit kills' accounted for about 60-70% of the 'airframe kills'

anyway, be it via a shattered canopy and .50 ball/HEI bouncing around

the cockpit, or the last roller coaster ride as anonymous freegyros in

at 10-20G with a wing blown off, or the compressibles dig-for-China

approach.

I also believe 'luck' serves those who naturally have it and those who

try really hard to amass it and wouldn't want to be giving myself

negative Moja points blasting helpless-other guys knowing I could be in

their place some day. Totally illogical in the singular selective

instance (chances of my being seen during-murder or recognized as a

prior criminal) but never the less 'true' as a total-mimicked behaviour

represented throughout the Forces.

I /don't/ imagine either the German or Viet citizenry were terribly

thrilled at being bombed and THEY are the over-zealous-wannabe-heros who

are the really dangerous party. Many times the Germans did not treat

THEIR OWN GUYS terribly well 'recovering' them from the fields.

It takes a lot of sticking to die by rusty pitchfork and the

luck-honor-Geneva factor is minimal.

BTW: whoever said that POW's were 'propoganda tools' obviously never

read the statistic about the 'at least 55 of those who died' in Hanoi's

tender hands did so via their captors caring touch. Don't feel bad, the

Senators and Congressman who had previously threatened to turn NV into a

desert if they hurt a single one of our people apparently were suffering

from temp-deafness as well.

KP

In article <35B8AFD1...@mindspring.com> Art Murray <amu...@mindspring.com> writes:

>Michael Benolkin wrote:

>> I have been aware of the tales of Colonel Toon. He was made out to be the

>> von Richtofen of the VPAF. The trouble is that he has shown up in a variety

>> of articles and references over the years in a number of countries. On the

>> US side of the fence, Toon became a target to go hunting for,

>> someone/something to focus on. I suspect Toon is the fabrication of

>> someone's propaganda machine, but he has been run through virtually

>> everyone's machine since the 70s and it would be a challenge to find out who

>> 'fabricated' him first. It would be the same challenge trying to hunt down

>> the origins of that legendary plastics ace, Bruce Beamish.

>>

>Actually, you are closer to the truth than you think. After the war, Col. Toon

>fled VN when he was not promoted to General and not given the MacDonald's

>franchise that goes with promotion. Made his way to the Gulf coast of Texas

>where he became a shrimp fisherman. On a trip to Dallas to sell shrimp in Daley

>Plaza, he saw a hobby shop display. Thus was born the inspiration to go into

>the model industry. The rest is history.

>:-)

>Art

All of the Vietnamese who moved to the Gulf Coast to go into the shrimping

business of course changed their names to conform to Texas (Baja Oklahoma)

naming standards. Thus there are now such names as Billy-Bob Nguyen, "Big-D"

Toon, Jimmy Ngo, Ricky Lee Truong, etc.

Just thought I'd add my 2 cents in this cultural dialogue....

John Hairell (jhai...@pop200.gsfc.nasa.gov)