Attached units

Members may post in this forum, but anyone may read posts.

Moderators: Jim Sheppard, RJ_Smith

Attached units

Postby namvet6567 » Mon Nov 12, 2012 10:55 am

An acquantance served w/1/50th (C Co., 1/50th, 1969, wounded at An Khe pass) while they were attached to the 173rd Abn and claims he is authorized to wear the 173rd patch on his right shoulder, as he was "assigned" to the 173rd. I disagree. Can someone clarify for me?? I seem to remember attached units being authorized to wear the major units patch while serving w/them but not after leaving. He also claims airborne status while in the 1/50th. Was the 1/50th an airborne unit during 1969, in the An Khe, RVN area?? Thanks!
namvet6567
New poster
 
Posts: 2
Joined: Mon Nov 12, 2012 10:46 am

Re: Attached units

Postby Jim Sheppard » Mon Nov 12, 2012 1:22 pm

You are authorized to wear the patch of any unit you served with in Combat...either assigned or attached. The 1st Battalion (M), 50th Infantry was NOT an airborne unit...HOWEVER, the 173rd Airborne was NOT restricted to airborne qualified replacements during their time in Vietnam...as often units throughout Vietnam were operating under strength.

No person can become airborne qualified and wear the airborne jump wings unless they attended and completed Airborne training. YOU COULD, however, wear the shoulder patch and Airborne Tab if you served in combat with the 173rd...as the patch includes the airborne tab. In the case of the 173rd...the Airborne Tab does NOT signify "Airborne Qualified"...but simply that, at inception, the 173rd included the tab as an incorporated part of their shoulder patch.

I am not a fan of the 173rd. They "snubbed" all men who were not assigned to one of their contiguous battalions for their memorial. We had dozens of men KIA who wore their patch...and they are NOT on the 173rd Memorial. It's all pompous BS. Sorry...you pushed my button.
User avatar
Jim Sheppard
Moderator
 
Posts: 624
Joined: Tue May 26, 2009 5:24 am

Re: Attached units

Postby harley hawkins » Mon Nov 12, 2012 8:45 pm

Sounds right to me what you said Jim. What was told to me as I was being discharged is you could wear any patch on the right you was in combat with attached or assigned. On the left you could wear any unit you was in combat with or assigned to other wise like the armor unit in Fort Hood . I wore 1st cav on the right 173 on the left because the 173 is the unit I was with when discharged could have wore 2nd armor anyway you are right you can not blouse your boots wearing dress green or wear wings we were not airborne only attached to an airborne unit. I think the parch came in two patchs with the airborne on top a person could have wore the 173 bottom and not the airborne on top I guess if I had it to do again I would have wore hell on wheels patch on the left and 1st cav on the right, but I was going home and I would have wore a sack on my head if I had to.


Good Talk

Mick Hawkins
harley hawkins
Ruby poster
 
Posts: 194
Joined: Fri Jul 24, 2009 11:06 pm

Re: Attached units

Postby namvet6567 » Fri Nov 16, 2012 8:12 am

Thank you both for your replies. My next course of action will be to secure a copy of his DD214, or 215 if issued. My sense is that he wasn't Airborne qualified. It's just a personal sore spot w/me. Again, thank you for your responses and I certainly didn't intend to press anyone's buttons, as I know what it's like to be discounted in the end. We all know the 173rd combat jump wasn't a real combat jump anymore than some generals medals are really earned. jmo

namvet6567
namvet6567
New poster
 
Posts: 2
Joined: Mon Nov 12, 2012 10:46 am

Re: Attached units

Postby Bob Bihari » Fri Nov 16, 2012 9:33 am

I was with the 1/50 when we transitioned from the 1st Cav to the 173 Airborne (I came in from the 1/12 Cav as a replacement after Tet '68), and I agree with Jim that our situation with the 173d is a definite sore spot. With the Cav we were treated (and lead) extremely well .. .we did Combat Assaults (Helicopter insertions), Mechanized Ops, as well a pure Grunt stuff (too-many klicks humping up & down the 505 & 506 Valleys and other places in our AO). They were always there to support us in the field, and they never put us in a situation where we weren't backed-up 110% .

The 173d treated us like bastard children - and besides the derision of being "Just Leg Infantry", the upper-level Officers really didn't have a clue about how to effectively use a Mechanized unit. There were some real Cluster-Fucks as a result. An Bao was a perfect example....a total screw-up from "on high"....and we paid the price.....big-time.

So yeah...it hits my buttons as well.... I NEVER wore the 173d patch - only the horse blanket. When I was wounded, they gave me a lighter in the hospital with an inscription that said "To a Wounded Trooper" & a 173d patch.
I threw it away.
A Company '68. WIA An Bao

Image
User avatar
Bob Bihari
Bronze poster
 
Posts: 49
Joined: Tue May 26, 2009 7:27 am
Location: Central Florida


Return to Public Forum

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 321 guests

cron