Troops rotation in Vietnam War

[vhp]

Hi,

In Iraq, American troops spend about a year on the theatre, with their division, and are relieved by an other division (like 4th ID by 1st ID). But how did it work in Vietnam ? Did divisions also made rotations, or were they fixed installed in 'Nam, rotations happening at inferior level (such as brigade, bataillon, company, individuals) ?

vhp
Ps : sorry for my english, I'm not an english speaker

[Midav]

Believe it was a one year tour in Vietnam. That was for individual soldiers.

[kutter]

Midav is correct. Troop rotation was only on an individual basis. The entire division would stay in Vietnam and new guys would rotate in to replace outgoing soldiers. For example, the 1st Cavalry Divison arrived in Vietnam in 1965 and its last brigade didn't leave until 1972.

[vhp]

thank you.

So why this system hasn't been used for Iraq ? Right now, rotations are very expensive because each division has to bring all it's material with it.

[Secret Squirrel]

thank you.

So why this system hasn't been used for Iraq ? Right now, rotations are very expensive because each division has to bring all it's material with it.

I would assume unit cohesion is the answer. ;)


The secrets of the Army’s tactical prowess so far can be summed up in four words: training, cohesion and unit rotations. Given an adequate structure, there is time to guarantee individual soldier competency and time to train units to a level that spawns the cohesion that guarantees high morale and esprit de corps. Unit rotation assures that soldiers who train together will fight together, and there is no substitute for soldiers fighting for each other as a guarantee for battlefield effectiveness.

The failure to have trained units ready to replace battle-worn formations in the field will require a reliance on the individual replacement system to maintain the strength of the committed force. Ultimately, that means committing those just completing their initial training to the replacement stream and to levying soldiers from the unready continental U.S.-based organizations to meet the needs in the combat zone. For every individual replacement, the stress level is high, the loyalty to the new unit and to new acquaintances is undeveloped and the impact on the new unit is always, at least temporarily, a lowering of unit effectiveness. Relying on that system, failing to build an adequate sustaining structure, will be repeating the mistakes of the Vietnam War and almost guaranteeing the deterioration of the total force. Individuals will be committed only partially trained. Unit training will be ineffective because of personnel turbulence. The noncommissioned officer corps will be attrited and irreplaceable.

[Trigger]

Believe it was a one year tour in Vietnam. That was for individual soldiers.
Yes, I think it was one year for most, but 13 months for Marines.
Why? I have no idea.

[digrar]

12 months for Australians and they rotated as a complete Battalion with only the mid tour reo's staying on to complete their tour.