0
riggerrob

Did our Jim Hooper write 100 Feet Over Hell?

Recommended Posts

Yes, adrenaline can be addictive.
A psychiatrist recently diagnosed me with post traumatic stress related to a plane crash a year and a half ago.
But post traumatic stress can start with a lot of things. For many Americans my age it was the Vietnam War that started their problems.

With me it was far too much bullying when I was young. Now even a sarcastic comment sends my adrenal glands into over-drive!

That may also be the reason I skydive way more than my schoolmates. All that bullying taught me that "X" was a normal amount of adrenaline and anything less just feels weird. Even if the general public thinks that is an abnormally high level of adrenaline, it is my "normal."
Drunken driving never gave me the same thrill, so I quit drinking.

The challenge is to find a "socially acceptable," non-criminal way to get that adrenaline rush.
Many firefighters and ambulance attendants get their adrenaline "fix" at work.
Skydiving has given me that level of excitement for the last 32 years.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

All that bullying taught me that "X" was a normal amount of adrenaline and anything less just feels weird. Even if the general public thinks that is an abnormally high level of adrenaline, it is my "normal."
.
Many firefighters and ambulance attendants get their adrenaline "fix" at work.
Skydiving has given me that level of excitement for the last 32 years.


...................................................................
I think you are exactly right on that. For years I wondered why I was drawn to such sports as skydiving, riding broncs, and risking life and limb in other various ways. Then I read some research and opinion articles on that. People tend to gravitate toward what they are used to.

When I was a kid it was abuse, and craziness at home. It sent all my adrenal glands into overdrive. Later in life, I had a hard time turning that off....

When I started skydiving (in the 70's), I remember climbing to altitude, and wondering why am I doing this. I would look down at all the houses and think there sure are a lot of people down there who are different than I am. I couldn't figure out why I was drawn to danger....

I'm not saying this is the case with all skydivers, but it certainly was a big factor in why I took up the sport. It's a good feeling to finally figure out what makes you tick, and understanding who you really are. Now I work at keeping myself safe, and controlling the need for another adrenaline rush.....

I once heard a therapist say, "what are you thinking about when you are traveling through the air at 120 miles per hour?".....It sure isn't worry about the past or worry about the future. It's freedom and pure fun!....I think some of us jump to feel normal and alive. It's a natural high of the highest order....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hoop,

I finished the book. Wow, totally immersive. Never been shot at, but I think you brought the feeling of it as close as possible. These guys have to be the bravest souls out there; no armor, virtually no weapons, and flying within range of every weapon the enemy has. I was able to relate some of the stories my Brother told me of his two tours in Nam to those in the book which made it even better for me.

I really enjoyed the read and thank you very much for the (humbling) bookplate!

-----------------------
Roger "Ramjet" Clark
FB# 271, SCR 3245, SCS 1519

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I'm enjoying the book immensley and have nothing but respect for the men flying the catkillers.
I am wondering why they were not armed with more than rockets. It would seem a wing mounted fully auto machine gun would have added so much to their ability to squelch ground fire in some occasions. What is puzzling is that even the observers were cautioned against firing their M-16's at ground troops, supposedly to keep shell casings out of the aircraft's interior from fouling things up.
Was there a particular reason that these aircraft remained relatively unarmed? Observation aircraft non the less, it seems odd to have an unarmed aircraft in proximity to ground troops.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Tuna--
With full fuel, pilot and observer, radios and rockets tubes, a Bird Dog (basically a C-170) was already over gross. Hanging an M-60 under the wing would have added more weight and drag to the 85kt Cessna. It would also have encouraged very aggressive twentysomethings to actively look for targets to strafe. In an area known for mobile 12.7mm and 14.5mm heavy machineguns, this would have seen more of the Catkillers KIA. Calling in artillery or marking targets and running Marine, Air Force or Navy close air support (A-4s, F-4s, A-6s, A-7s) was a much more effective way of dealing with concentrations of enemy troops. They weren't supposed to fly lower than 1,500' AGL (3,000' when they went into North vietnam), but to get the job done, sometimes they were working just above the treetops.
Hoop

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hey Hoop,
That makes sense....but I had to wonder how a small aircraft like those birddogs would be effective, lets say, with no observer, more horsepower (maybe use a Cessna 180) and a pair of wing mounted rattle guns and a bit of Kevlar on the belly....Kind of a light observation aircraft with a stinger....as it were.
I was at the point in the book where your brother was after that barge in the river and the difficulties he had getting a rocket to nail it.....he had some cojones to go that low but I have to admire his tenacity and using the weather to advantage....quite a man he was....quite a man...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

but to get the job done, sometimes they were working just above the treetops.



By flying in at tree top level their exposure time to ground fire was reduced. The lower they flew the lower the exposure time. Just a matter of survival. That and it allowed us to blow them kisses. :P

Sparky
My idea of a fair fight is clubbing baby seals

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

I'm enjoying the book immensley and have nothing but respect for the men flying the catkillers.
I am wondering why they were not armed with more than rockets.



As I remember there was another war going on between the Air Force and the Army about the arming of spotter planes. If im not mistaken most of the birddogs were Army.
Correct me if im wrong.



bozo
Pain is fleeting. Glory lasts forever. Chicks dig scars.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Tuna, Sparky and Bozo--

All three services in RVN flew the Bird Dog, though most of the Air Force tactical air support squadrons had phased out the O-1 for the O-2 (Cessna 337) by the time frame of my book. Shortly after that, the Marines replaced their Bird Dogs with the North American/Rockwell OV-10 Bronco.

The twin-engine O-2 had four hardpoints that could take rocket pods and minigun pods. The latter were seldom mounted for reasons stated in my previous post. Just to make sure I wasn't talking out my ass, I checked with former USAF pilot Walt Shiel, author of the definitive work Cessna Warbirds. Here's his response:

"Jim, I think there were a few reasons for never flying with four pods installed:

(1) The extra weight affected climb performance quite a bit, especially in the high density altitudes common in the higher altitudes in portions of Vietnam and Laos.

(2) The extra weight and doubled drag index of 4 vs 2 pods cut fuel consumption by an extra 7% or so (loiter time was very important to a FAC)

(3) Two pods provide 14 rockets total for target marking, and FACs generally needed only WP rockets to mark a target (rarely more than two and that usually only to bracket a target). So two pods were sufficient for almost all missions.

The O-2's minigun pods were only used initially in Vietnam before being quickly withdrawn, as too many gung-ho, wannabe-fighter-pilot FACs tried to use that little peashooter to engage troops and even crew-served AA weapons. And too many were taking serious damage or getting shot down. A FAC's job was not to engage the enemy on his own but to direct the fighters with serious firepower to do so.

I'm not positive when the last USAF O-1 was replaced by the O-2 or the OV-10. The Ravens in Laos (admittedly only semi-USAF) flew the Bird Dog right up until the end of US combat ops. And the Army, of course, operated Bird Dogs right up until 1973."

So, guys, I hope that answers your questions. Those of you who have read A Hundred Feet Over Hell will have noted that the only time the Catkillers used their M-16s was when there was an pressing tactical need to help troops in contact, and close air support was not immediately available.

Hoop
www.jimhooper.co.uk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Wow Hoop! What a great back story on that issue...One can easily figure that the armed services had good reasoning for doing things the way they did but sometimes to us whuffos, we don't have the full picture and therefore tend to question activities we aren't sure were or were not done for one reason or another.
Thanks so much for clarifying that issue, it's much easier to understand practices and policies when you know that back story.
Only makes me appreciate your research work even more.
I'm enjoying the book and can't wait to read further.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I just finished A Hundred Feet Over Hell last night. I was completely into it from beginning to end. During the Kinh Mon battle sequence I actually had to put the book down for a bit and walk around because it was so intense!
Thanks, Jim, for writing this book. Thanks also to the regular posters on this forum for your discussion of this book that made me go out and get it.
-Tim

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hey Hoop,
Finally finished the book and the ending was nothing short of spectacular.
The description of your Brother's incident of being shot was spot on and unbelievably realistic and spellbinding to read, by the time I finished, I was turning blue from holding my breath hoping he made it home safely.
A terrific read and one I will remember for a long time to come, and the insight into combat operations in Nam is spellbinding and quite revealing in a first person sense, these guys were there, and know with certainty what happens in war, and are the true heroes of the war there for their valiant sacrifices in battle to save those around them.
Excellent job Hoop, kudos to you as an author and now I'm waiting for your next one!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
What a read!! Flying down in the dirt like they did in support of our troops, unbelievable. You bring these men to life. And who would believe that I have drank more than one beer with the author. Can't wait for your next book. Whats next for you?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
riggerrob

Did our Jim Hooper write "Black Vortex?"



Rob--

A few rogues, rascals and ne'er-do-wells (or as Sparky so eloquently described them: "skydivers from the 60's/70’s, the worst variant of the species") from my dissolute past suggested I have a look at this forum, from which I've been AWOL for some time. To answer your question, yes, guilty as charged. Hope it's not court martial time. How did you come across it?

Had never contemplated a coffee table work until my publisher dropped in one day and spotted ten feet of shelves packed with boxes and binders of negatives and transparencies - most of which I hadn't looked at in years. "Hmmm, okay," I said. Converting a couple of thousand to high-res files over the next few weeks left my poor ol' scanner coughing, shuddering and riven with neuroses - the electronic equivalent of PTSD.

Black Vortex came out last December and is starting to gain traction, much to the publisher's delight. The 180 or so snaps are a retrospective look at four of the African wars I covered, starting with Namibia, where I was embedded with an elite counter-insurgency unit, and which led to my very first book four years after selling Z'hills. Koevoet! became a classic of the bush warfare genre, with second-hand copies going for as much as $1,000 (not a penny of which I got). As a result, a much-expanded and rewritten edition - which now includes my journey from DZO to war correspondent - was launched at the Imperial War Museum in London in 2012. It has been well received by those with a personal, professional or academic interest in COIN operations. I attach a list of comments and reviews for your amusement.

In the meantime, sales of A Hundred Feet Over Hell in both hardback and digital editions continue to exceed the orignal expectations of its publisher, Zenith Press. Between Amazon, aviation magazines, military journals, newspapers and book blogs in the US, UK and Europe, it has received close to 150 mostly five-star reviews. Who'da thunk it when I set off from the 'Hills all those years ago.

But as Lorelei so wisely observed, "Fate just keeps on happening."

Blue skies and safe landings to all,
Hoop
www.jimhooper.co.uk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Boogers

*** Koevoet! became a classic of the bush warfare genre, with second-hand copies going for as much as $1,000 (not a penny of which I got).



Used copies as cheap as $10, of which I hope you DO get a few pennies:
http://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_sb_noss?url=search-alias%3Dstripbooks&field-keywords=Koevoet+hooper

With the publication of the new edition, prices for 1988 first editions in Very Fine Condition (collectible) have plummeted to $200-$300. Makes no difference to me, as I get nothing anyway. It's like a car - GM doesn't get a percentage from used car lots when they sell a second-hand Caddy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Jim_Hooper

***Did our Jim Hooper write "Black Vortex?"



... yes, guilty as charged. ... How did you come across it? ...

.................................................................................

Your latest book (Black Vortex) was reviewed in a British military magazine.

One of the joys of living in a major port city is that I can buy: American, German, French, British, Korean, Chinese, Taiwanese, etc. magazines and read a variety of different versions of the truth.
For example, one of the reasons that I read "Soldier of Fortune" magazine is to hear a soldier's perspective of all the silly wars in Africa, etc. SOF's hard right wing politics may grate on my nerves, but they tell me far more than I will ever read in the mainstream media.

Just last night, a Belarus-born co-worker told me that the primary reason that Russia recently (2014) annexed a couple of Ukrainian provinces was out of fear that NATO would base troops (in the Ukraine) too close to the Russian border. Mainstream media have not mentioned this angle.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

0