One of the defining symbols of the endgame of the Vietnam War.
The Vietnam War was over. April 30, 1975, marks the end of a conflict that had begun some 30 years earlier with the conclusion of World War II. It had been a long, bloody drawn-out affair that ended with victory for the North Vietnamese Army (NVA). The conflict that had started out as a guerrilla war in jungles and forests, rice paddies and tiny villages, had escalated and come to a close with the thunder of tank cannons and the roar of their engines in the streets of Saigon.
South Vietnam fell to a combined arms force of tanks, infantry, artillery and antiaircraft weapons that tore its way through the defenses of the Army of the Republic of Vietnam (ARVN). The iconic symbol of the NVA’s victory was a T-54 tank, bearing the number 843 on the side of its turret. It crashed through the gate of the Presidential Palace in Saigon and parked its bulk on the grounds, its long barreled 100mm gun set to pour fire into anyone who dared resist. On that April day, the T-54, not the guerrilla, was the harbinger of defeat for the South.
The T-54 was the ubiquitous Soviet tank of the Cold War. It rolled into nearly every conflict involving nations in the Soviet sphere of influence. Somewhat out of date by Western standards in the mid-1970s, it nevertheless was the frontline battle tank of the NVA, just as the ARVN fought with its own share of second-hand weapons. Nonetheless, the T-54 did its job.
The T-54 originated in the Soviet tank development programs of late World War II. The Soviets were engaged in a continuous effort to build better armor in order to go head to head with the vaunted German Tiger and Panther tanks. Development continued after the Nazi surrender and as the Cold War heated up. By the late 1940s the T-54 went into production. The design suffered a number of component problems common to new weapon systems, so production was halted while further refinements were made. Once the problems were resolved, the improved models were back in production by 1949. In the following decades, a series of upgrades were made and other countries began producing the tank, including China, which built it under license as the Type 59. This led to some varriations in the design. The T-54 is often referred to as the T-54/55. Since the product-improved T-55 version was so similar, they generally are grouped together.
The T-54 weighed about 36 tons, lighter than most of its Western counterparts. It was 29.5 feet long, just under 11 feet wide and 7 feet 10 inches high. Armor was up to 203mm thick, and a 580-horsepower V-12 diesel engine propelled the T-54 up to 30 mph. The main armament was a 100mm cannon that, depending on ammunition, could penetrate up to 390mm of armor at 1,000 meters. The crew of four included a commander, driver, gunner and loader. As the tank was improved, it gained such features as a main gun stabilizer, enabling it to shoot more accurately on the move. An infrared sighting system for night fighting was also installed. Overall the T-54 was a good balance of the three requirements of tank design: firepower, mobility and armor protection.
By the late 1960s, T-54s had served in a number of conflicts and it wasn’t long before the Soviets started supplying the tanks to their North Vietnamese clients. Additional Type 59s came from the Chinese. Much of both nations’ T-54 production was for the export market, since those tanks were cheaper and simpler to operate—though less durable—than Western tanks. They also were simple to produce. By the time production ceased, some 50,000 had rolled off the assembly lines. The T-54 can still be found in service around the globe today and, most likely, will be for decades to come.
During the Vietnam War the T-54 was first committed to action in 1971 during Operation Lam Son 719, the ARVN invasion of Laos designed to disrupt the flow of supplies down the Ho Chi Minh Trail. NVA intelligence had learned of the impending attack and the commanders planned accordingly, committing its new T-54s to the battle against the ARVN, whose main forces moved along Route 9. The ground attack was supported by air assaults to seize firebases and landing zones, mostly along the flanks of the ARVN advance.
The ARVN forces attacked on February 8, and two days later their initial objective was in their hands: the town of Aloui along Route 9. At Landing Zone 31, T-54s and PT-76 amphibious light tanks spearheaded the NVA counterattacks against the ARVN positions. During a poorly coordinated response, ARVN M-41 Walker Bulldog light tanks rushed to the area in a desperate attempt to hold on. The better training of the South Vietnamese tankers paid off and six T-54s were knocked out along with 16 of the smaller, thinly armored PT-76s. ARVN Sergeant Nguyen Xuan Mai destroyed the first NVA T-54 of the war. Oddly, the South Vietnamese identification books failed to include T-54s, so the destroyed enemy tank was at first misidentified as an older T-34.
NVA forces kept up the pressure and six days later pushed the South Vietnamese off the landing zone and back toward Aloui. The NVA relentlessly continued the assault, but the ARVN conducted a determined fighting withdrawal that bagged another 30 NVA tanks. After other setbacks, the ARVN leaders aborted the operation and fell back down Route 9 into Vietnam, harried all the way by NVA attacks. ARVN losses were heavy, with many armored vehicles abandoned intact by fleeing crews. Many T-54s were lost as well. Although it was not a stellar combat debut for the tank, final victory did belong to the North, who, if nothing else, had shattered the confidence of the South’s tankers.
The war quieted somewhat for a time after Lam Son 719, but the NVA was preparing for its next move. It established a number of new regular armored units, including three tank regiments. Supporting units of artillery and anti-aircraft weapons grew alongside the tank formations. The NVA was slowly learning how to fight a conventional war.
Less than a year after the fighting in Laos, the NVA launched a new offensive on March 29, 1972. T-54s helped spearhead the attack, supported by artillery and infantry. Initial ARVN resistance crumbled and the NVA advance continued toward Quang Tri, Dong Ha and Cam Lo. The T-54s encountered the ARVN’s 20th Tank Regiment at Dong Ha and intense tank-to-tank engagements ensued, in which the inexperienced NVA crews again suffered horribly at the hands of their better-trained Southern opponents. The 20th Tank Regiment was effectively destroyed, but not before disabling 90 NVA tanks.
T-54s also took part in the battles of An Loc and Kontum, scoring some successes against the ARVN M-41s while sustaining losses, including some to the new U.S.-supplied TOW missiles. In one notable instance a T-54 unit without infantry support tried to enter An Loc after a heavy artillery preparation. The T-54s were ambushed by South Vietnamese troops armed with M-72 Light Antitank Weapons (LAWs), who knocked out the foremost and rearmost tanks in the confined city street and then proceeded to destroy the whole column.
Although frequently defeated head on by ARVN tankers, the T-54 units did achieve some significant victories. Against infantry and support troops, the sudden appearance of T-54s could instill terror and cause an otherwise viable defensive position to collapse. That happened at Tan Canh, when at dawn on April 24, 1975, NVA tanks panicked support troops, who broke and ran. The resulting confusion spread to the combat troops and they also fled. A few kilometers west, a similar tank-infantry assault penetrated the perimeter of the Dak To II base in several places and captured it within a few hours.
Beaten back by a combination of armor and air support, including helicopters firing the TOW, the NVA’s 1972 invasion failed and cost the North some 400 tanks. The T-54 units had suffered heavily, largely because of poor coordination between armor, infantry and artillery. Tanks operating alone are simply too vulnerable. The North Vietnamese, however, did not forget their hardwon battlefield lessons. Replacement tanks flowed in from China, enough to expand their armored force. By the time of the 1975 offensive, the NVA had nine tank regiments in service.
This time, exploiting the lack of American air support, the NVA’s T-54s burst upon the city of Ban Me Thout, defeating the local ARVN counterattack. When the South Vietnamese leadership decided to withdraw to the south, the NVA advance turned it into a headlong flight. As the tanks pursued, fleeing ARVN soldiers abandoned their own vehicles, which were quickly taken over by the advancing NVA. It was not uncommon, therefore, to see American-made M-48s operating alongside Soviet and Chinese T-54s, all crewed by North Vietnamese tankers.
The armored offensive continued, rivaling in size all but the very largest tank attacks of World War II. T-54s blasted their way into Quang Tri, forcing back the defending South Vietnamese marines. Hue and Da Nang were next, both surrounded by tanks before falling in confused battles. Racing down the coastal road, this time with their supporting infantry and artillery, plus antiaircraft units clearing the skies overhead, the columns of T-54s encountered their last real resistance at Xuan Loc. After a few days of intense combat, the ARVN was overwhelmed, leaving Saigon exposed. As a display of power, the NVA parked T-54s in various spots then paraded their captured prisoners by them. Afterward the prisoners were set free and sent into Saigon to tell of the might of the North Vietnamese Army. The way was now clear for T-54 number 843 to crash its way into history.
The T-54 was one of the defining symbols of the endgame of the Vietnam War. Its arrival on the Southeast Asian battlefield signaled the maturing ability of the North Vietnamese military to operate conventional forces against the South with increasing success. The NVA did lose many T-54 tanks, often in lopsided battles, through lack of coordination, comparatively poorer training and simple inexperience. Nevertheless, the crews of those tanks and their NVA leaders learned from their mistakes, improved, and used the T-54 persistently if not always skillfully.
Originally published in the December 2007 issue of Vietnam Magazine. To subscribe, click here.
