The Airmobile Division

Describes the history, organization, and capabilities of the U.S. Army's 1st Air Cavalry Division.

This is the exciting story of the development of U.S. airmobile power from theory to practice, involving air transport, fixed wing aircraft, and attack helicopters culminating in Vietnam War operations. It includes analysis of airmobile combat operations; doctrinal and interservice disputes; equipment descriptions; and the organization of combat and support units. It also includes data about airmobility in South Vietnam's army and it features personal reflections of the author, who was at the center of airmobility development and who commanded large airmobile units. John J. Tolson in June 1939 participated in the first tactical air movement of ground forces by the U.S. Army. He was in all combat jumps of the 503d Parachute Infantry Regiment during World War II, became an Army aviator in 1957, and served as Director of Army Aviation and Commandant of the Army Aviation School. From April 1967 to July 1968 he commanded the 1st Cavalry Division (Airmobile), Vietnam. (Includes many maps and photographs)

On 1 July 1965 the 1st Cavalry Division (Airmobile) was officially activated and was ordered to Vietnam beginning 28 July 1965. In a matter of three and half weeks the newly formed division, with 16,000 men and 434 helicopters--Chinooks (CH-47s), Flying Cranes (CH-54s), Mohawks (OV-1s), UH-1s and OH-13s--was prepared to enter combat. Within 90 days of becoming the Army's first airmobile division, the 'First Team' was in combat as the first fully committed division of the Vietnam War. On 10 October 1965, in Operation 'Shiny Bayonet', the First Team initiated its first brigade-size airmobile action against the enemy. The division would go on to take part in many more air assaults and play a leading role in defence against the Tet offensive, driving out the NVA and Viet Cong invaders from Hue and, in Operation 'Pegasus', relieving the 3,500 U.S. Marines and 2,100 ARVN soldiers besieged by nearly 20,000 enemy at Khe Sanh. On 1 May 1970, the 'First Team' was 'First into Cambodia' hitting what was previously a Communist sanctuary but the campaign had severe political repercussions for the Nixon Administration. Pressure was mounting to withdraw US forces from the war. Although there would be further assault operations, the war was beginning to wind down and 26 March 1971 officially marked the end of duties in Vietnam for the 1st Cavalry Division, although it was only on 5 May 1971 that the colours moved from Vietnam to Fort Hood, Texas.

This monograph will answer the question: Can the U.S. Army apply to the current "prototype brigade" the lessons that were learned during the development and experimentation of the 11th Air Assault Division (Test)? Having established that the criteria of DTLOMS is a valuable tool for evaluating change in military systems, the next step is to apply those criteria to evaluate the changes that occurred in the formation of the 11th Air Assault Division (Test) from 1963 to 1965. In order to accomplish this, a study of the separate elements of DTLOMS will be conducted in order to determine how the 11th Air Assault Division reorganized itself and conducted operations during that period. The benchmark for studying the elements of DTLOMS will be the use of air mobility during the Ia Drang campaign of November 1965. Specifically, this monograph will attempt to answer the following six questions: 1. How did the division develop doctrine to support the transition to airmobile warfare? 2. How did the division determine the proper organization to facilitate warfighting with the airmobile division? 3. How did the division train leaders to support the new doctrine and organization? 4. How did the division conduct field training to certify its soldiers and units in the new tactics? 5. Did building a new force require any specific soldier skills; and if so, how were those skills cultivated? 6. How did the division adopt and recommend changes to material and equipment to support the new methods of fighting? Each of these questions addresses one aspect of the DTLOMS and will be used to measure change in the 11th Air Assault (Test) Division from the beginning in 1963 to the redesignation to the 1st Cavalry Division in 1965. Finally, this study will synthesize these changes and determine which lessons learned can be applied to ongoing experimentation in the U.S. Army of the 21st century.

[Includes 2 charts, 12 maps, and 41 illustrations] Although troops had been dropped by parachute since the early years of the Second World War, the use of helicopters to move large number of troops only came to the fore in the years before the Vietnam War. During the Vietnam War they would prove their value in allowing the American troops tactical flexibility, surprise and most of all mobility that the dense terrain and difficult communications of Vietnam complicated. “The author of this monograph, Lieutenant General John J. Tolson, has been involved with the airmobile concept since June 1939, when he participated in the first tactical air movement of ground forces by the U.S. Army. Participating in all the combat jumps of the 503d Parachute Infantry Regiment during World War II, he became an Army aviator in 1957, and later served as Director of Army Aviation and Commandant of the U.S. Army Aviation School. From April 1967 to July 1968 he served as Commanding General, 1st Cavalry Division (Airmobile), Vietnam.” As the author himself says in his preface; “Although Vietnam was the first large combat test of airmobility, air assault operations in Southeast Asia would not have been possible without certain key decisions a decade earlier. This study attempts to trace the most important milestones which led to the eventual Formation of airmobile divisions. “It would be impossible in a single volume to adequately describe every airmobile operation in Vietnam during the years 1961-1971. Therefore, only selected operations have been chosen as examples of different airmobile tactics. Many of these were selected because of the author’s personal knowledge. Another author might have selected different operations. “I believe I’d be remiss in this account if I were not candid with the reader on some of the pros and cons of airmobility. Thus, throughout the text, I have inserted comments that are intended to broaden the reader’s view of this issue.”