What Happened to Capt. John T. McDonnell? P3 – POW camps in MRTTH and Central Laos

According to the former pilots who flew alongside Captain McDonnell, they periodically searched the area where he crashed, flying over for any signs of him for months to come. All of this was to no avail.

Ground teams located no remains.

The unanimous conclusion of the ground search-and-rescue teams, as well as Major Robert Graham, was that Captain McDonnell was captured shortly after crashing, and taken quickly from the area.

To begin to understand the situation,  let’s take a look at the region where Captain McDonnell was shot down on March 6, 1969.

Phu Loc, Thua Thien, I Corps

Captain McDonnell was shot down 10 KM southeast of Phu Loc, Thua Thien province, South Vietnam.  During the war, this was part of what was known as ‘I Corps‘ in the United States tactical zones during the war. See Fig. 1

To the north of Thua Thien province was Quang Tri province, and to the west, Central Laos.

Fig. 1 – I Corps

Historical Background of MRTTH

Fig. 2 –  Historical map of Viet Minh Inter-Regions –  Thua Thien fell within Zone IV, historically and tactically part of communist North Vietnam

Zone IV, ‘BAC BO’

Historically, Vietnam was divided into three regions, North Vietnam, Central Vietnam and South Vietnam, or Bac Bo, Trung Bo, and Nam Bo respectively. ⁽¹⁾

The area where Captain McDonnell was shot down was part of what communist Vietnam considered North Vietnam, not the South. The 17th parallel (aka the DMZ), created during the Geneva accords was not recognized as the border by the communists.  Thua Thien fell within Zone IV (see Fig. 2), part of Bac Bo (North Vietnam).

Fig. 3 – Map showing three Military Regions and VC provinces in northern South Vietnam following the reorganization of the old MR 5 — Tri-Thien-Central Laos is shown as the northern most province, south of the DMZ.

1965 and Central Laos Control

As the years progressed, the Viet Minh, and then, eventually the NLF (National Liberation Front)  reshuffled these regions. In 1965,  Military Region 5 was reorganized (see Fig. 3) and this area, previously a sub-region, was given full region status and designated the name ‘Tri-Thien-Hue Region’, otherwise known as MRTTH. The name was derived from the two regions, and the ancient autonomous capital city of Hue.  A regional Party Committee was formed, which was directly subordinate to the NVA High Command, and answered directly to Hanoi, not via the Central Office of South Vietnam (COSVN). *

* COSVN – The American designated term for the North Vietnamese military/political headquarters inside South Vietnam. 

Most interesting and significant to our investigation is the following: the region controlled not only operations inside Quang Tri and Thua Thien provinces, but also within the central part of the Laotian panhandle and it was occasionally referred to as the Tri-Thien-Central Laos Military Region. ⁽²⁾ This is an important point in the investigation, and will be discussed later in regards to live sighting reports.

Fig. 4 – Map showing the four subregions of VC Tri-Thien-Hue Central Laos MR at the time of the TET 1968 Offensive.

The TET Offensive in 1968

The Lao Dong Party began directing preparations for what became the 1968 TET Offensive in July 1967. Even prior to this directive, the Tri-Thien-Hue Central Laos MR experienced a basic change in structure. In May 1967, this involved a replacement of regional Party Committees with that of four inter-district or subregion committees, each administering several districts (see Fig. 4). These were not autonomous, but corresponded in other respects to VC province echelons. Captured documents indicated that the purpose was to maintain closer contact with the districts, villages and hamlets of the area.⁽³⁾

Looking at Fig. 4, the area of the crash site of Captain McDonnell was located in what was known as SR-4. The city of Hue was located in SR-3. To the west, bordering Laos, was an area named ‘Vung C’. This area was probably sub-ordinate to SR-4. In the document where I retrieved the map, it wasn’t clear as to its place in the chain of command.

Before we move onto the next section, it’s important to show how the Thua Thien region was divided during, and after the war. After the war, like much of South Vietnam, many of the regions, districts and villages were renamed making it difficult to ascertain at times where things occurred.

• 

• 

Fig. 5 shows the regions during the war, and Fig. 6 is a touristic map showing the region’s divisions following the war.

---

POW camps in MRTTH and Central Laos

This section will cover where POW camps were located in the vicinity Captain McDonnell’s shoot down, and where he could  have been potentially processed.  It will also cover how American POW’s in this region were historically manoeuvred during the war. 

Fig. 7 Proximity of three known POW camps in the vicinity of the crash site of McDonnell.

There are three camps that investigators cited as being possible holding points for Captain McDonnell following his capture (see Fig. 7).  Following the war, investigators looking into the McDonnell case attempted to retrieve more information from these camps, and their corresponding cadre and commanders.⁽⁴⁾

We will look at each camp, from nearest to furthest from the crash site.

NAM DONG CAMP

The nearest of these camps was named the Nam Dong camp. It is the closest to the McDonnell crash site, being about 33 kilometres to the southwest. During the war, this camp was purportedly located on the southern border of the Nam Hoa district (see Fig. 5).

Fig. 8 Location of Nam Dong POW Camp

According to a 1966 report, a communist defector reported four U.S. and several ARVNs as being held in this camp, and it was located at YC 880830 (Indian), about a kilometre southeast from Nam Dong hamlet. ⁽⁵⁾

The report describes the camp layout as follows:

‘There were three wood and thatched huts that made up the camp. Each was widely separated from the other my approximately one hours walk. All three huts were near a stream which runs east. The western most hut was on a hill overlooking the middle house, and housed 5 Vietnamese VC and 15 Montagnard VC. The middle hut was on a slope of a hill, and on the bank of a stream, and housed the 4 Americans plus 20 ARVN captives, and 3 VC, including (blank) who were being punished for one reason or another. The hut was under a thick canopy of jungle. All 27 persons slept in this hut, in double decked hammocks; the hut was approximately 10 feet wide by 20 feet long. The third hut was unoccupied except when they returned from work late, and could not make it back to the middle house before nightfall. The third hut was at the junction of two streams.’

The report then continues, describing the fact that this was a working camp, and the POW’s were expected to work in rice fields, which were hidden under the canopy of the surrounding jungle.

The camp was guarded by two machine gun emplacements should any of the prisoners have any thought of escape.

The report concludes that the source of this information was dubious, and that there were obvious discrepancies in his reporting (e.g. he had stated there were Black Americans in the camp, and pointed at Caucasians when he was asked to mark out who they were).

Furthermore, a camp in the Nam Dong area is mentioned as a possibility in the case files of 1035 Solomon H. Godwin and returned CIA operative Eugene A Weaver.

Godwin/Weaver were initially held with others in Thua Thien province captured in Hue during the TET offensive of ’68, until it was discovered they were intelligence operatives, whereupon they were separated to a highly secluded camp. This camp may have been the Nam Dong camp (see Fig. 9).

Considering the time period and area is similar to that of the McDonnell case, it is worthy of taking a close look at the patterns, and holding places of Godwin/Weaver. Weaver was returned during Operation Homecoming in 1973, while Godwin was last seen by Weaver on the march northwards to Hanoi. Godwin was never acknowledged as being captured by the Vietnamese. According to Weaver, he was forced to sign a paper by the North Vietnamese as having witnessed his (Godwin’s) death. ⁽⁶⁾ Although it is likely that Godwin perished during an intense interrogation session, his body remains unrecovered.⁽⁷⁾

Weaver, on the other hand, was released in ’73. He was interrogated by Soviets, who wanted to recruit him. Why did they release Weaver considering this? According to George Veith’s book Bright Light (p. 279) the US wanted to do a trade for him in return for one captured senior NVA colonel. The Vietnamese knew he was an important asset, and, therefore, was most likely part of the eventual peace talk agreements. 

Fig. 9 POW Camp #2, possibly Nam Dong camp

AN LO CAMP

An Lo camp, so called because of the nearby ‘An Lo’ river, was located approximately 44 km southwest to the McDonnell crash site. It was about 14 km north west from the Nam Dong camp at UTM grid coordinates YC 745875 (Indian).

Fig. 10 Location of An Lo POW Camp

A report made on the 26 March 1969 describes the camp as follows:

‘The camp was located in a valley which opens to the west. On the northern and southern sides of the valley were mountains so high that the peaks were covered by clouds. There were many tall trees and much jungle canopy in the area. A stream ran out of the valley flowing westward toward the Huu Trach River. Approximately 200m west of the camp is a ford across the steam. The camp was located so that there were good escape routes from the valley floor in all directions. There was a trail running from the Huu Trach River area vic YC 7088 VS to the Kho Lo Moi area vic 7788 VS. The trail follows the streams flowing to the west out of the valley.

The camp was located on the valley floor close to the eastern end of the valley. The camp was divided into two sections: a prisoner section to the west and a guard section to the east. The distance between the two sections was approximately 150m. Approximately half way between the two sections was a cooking area consisting of one hole in the ground. The prisoner section of the camp consisted of three huts partially underground and roofed with palm leaves. Dimensions of the huts, construction of the huts, other than stated, and locations of doors and windows were unknown. The three huts were located very close together and on a line across the valley. There was a fence around the huts constructed of wicker, bamboo, and saplings stripped of their bark. The only exit/entrance through the fence was on the eastern side of the fence. The opening was very small and there was a guard post at this location. The guard section of the camp consisted of three huts partially underground and covered with leaves. The huts were arranged in a triangular order with one hut to the east and two to the west. Dimensions of the huts, locations of doors and windows, and distance between huts was unknown.’

The report continued with its description of the camp, adding that it was staffed by 35 Communist personnel, and commanded by a man known as Bui-Chich, who was a native of An Lo, Thua Thien province.

The prisoners themselves were Vietnamese Nationals, approximately 60 of them were male, and 20 female. They had been at the camp for approximately two months. No American prisoners were known to be at the camp at that time. ⁽⁸⁾

Fig. 11 Sketch of the An Lo POW Camp

LANG TA/RANG TA CAMP

The furthest away POW camp that investigators flagged as a possible holding site was the Lang Ta camp. Lang Ta was approximately 100 km due west from the crash within the territory borders of Laos,  Saravan province, at YC 2092 (Indian). The map shows a well concealed position in densely forested mountainous terrain. 

Fig. 12 Location of Lang Ta POW Camp

A 1970 CIA Intelligence Information Report (IIR)⁽⁹⁾ described the camp. The information was obtained from the captured Deputy Chief of American Subsection of the Military Proselyting Section of the VC Military Region Thua Thien Hue. That in itself makes the report worthy of note.

The report details that the captured Deputy Chief claimed to have seen within the camp seven surviving crew members of two helicopter crashes that occurred in January 1970 in the Ashau-Aluoi area in western Thua Thien. He claimed that those captured in this area were interrogated for about two weeks at the camp,  before being sent north to Hanoi. The camp was on the western slope of a mountain known as ‘Kou Boi Mountain‘, about 15-20 km west of Ashau Valley, and 3-hours walking distance north of the Xe Sap River. The source claimed that to his knowledge, this was the only detention camp used in MRTTH for U.S. POW’s prior to their being sent to Hanoi, and that they were usually detained no longer than 10 days.

The camp was described as follows:

‘…the camp consisted of several small houses in a jungle clearing, the jungle growth providing a protective perimeter around the camp site. Usually, interrogation of the U.S. POW’s began as soon as they arrived at the camp. The American Subsection of the MRTTH Military Proselyting Section was responsible for interrogating the prisoners. The prisoners were asked to provide order of battle information and were subjected to some political indoctrination, but no coercion was used. MRTTH treated the prisoners in accordance with instructions which originated in Hanoi in 1967 which directed MRTTH to take U.S. prisoners, keep them in good condition, and send them to Hanoi for use by the North Vietnamese in negotiations with the Americans.‘

The report then followed on with descriptions of the seven prisoners-of-war.

Despite this detailed report, and the knowledgeable source, a field comment stated that the Joint Prisoner Recovery Center (JCRC) had no record of seven people missing in action from two downed helicopters in the stated area. It’s entirely possible the source was withholding vital information concerning this camp.

At least one returned POW was known to have been processed through this camp, the longest officially held POW from the Vietnam War conflict, Captain Floyd James Thompson. He was observed by a certain Colonel Chu in the early 1960’s, prior to the CIA IIR stating the sighting of seven POWs. ⁽⁸⁾ Chu stated this was probably during 1963, but this cannot be so, since Captain Thompson was captured in 1964, but the description of the pilot otherwise matches that of Thompson.

Colonel Chu is an important figure in this investigation, and will be mentioned in detail later on.

What Next?

Regardless of whether Captain McDonnell was held at any of the aforementioned camps, it’s worthy to note that camps in general in the South were subject to frequent change, depending on the climate and war activity. They were made of makeshift material that could be assembled and rapidly dissembled, without much of a trace, and were often covered under dense jungle canopy to avoid aerial detection. Unlike the camps in the North that were permanent holding sites, these camps were designed to keep POW’s out of sight and ready to move at a moments notice.

Because Captain McDonnell, at the time, was never officially recognized as surviving into the prison system, is it possible that he, along others, were kept hidden? And, to what end would this serve? And why would that be so? These are questions that will be looked at in-depth later on.

Now we have a detailed background of the area where Captain McDonnell was shot down, and where he could have potentially have been taken following capture, we will move onto the next stages of the investigation. This will cover the two trails that have been followed by analysts over the years, that of hearsay accounts which results in Captain McDonnell’s death shortly after capture vs. live sighting reports pertaining to Captain McDonnell as a POW potentially left behind following the end of the war.

Stay tuned for future posts, and subscribe for post reminders.

---

Sources for this post:

⁽¹⁾  Viet-Nam Documents and Research Notes, United States Mission in Vietnam, Document Number 23 – Viet Cong Political Geography, 1071319013. Vietnam Center and Sam Johnson Vietnam Archive. March 1968, Box 13, Folder 19, Glenn Helm Collection, Vietnam Center and Sam Johnson Vietnam Archive, Texas Tech University, https://www.vietnam.ttu.edu/virtualarchive/items.php?item=1071319013 – p. 3

⁽²⁾ Report – Viet Cong Political Geography of South Vietnam – Vietnam Documents and Research Notes Series, F031300030768. Vietnam Center and Sam Johnson Vietnam Archive. March 1971, Box 0003, Folder 0768, Sam Johnson Vietnam Archive Collection, Vietnam Center and Sam Johnson Vietnam Archive, Texas Tech University, https://www.vietnam.ttu.edu/virtualarchive/items.php?item=F031300030768,  –  p. 11-13

⁽³⁾ ibid  –  p. 19

⁽⁴⁾ post-1975 Vietnam: Detailed report of investigation of case 1402 – https://memory.loc.gov/frd/pwmia/206/65670.pdf

⁽⁵⁾ South Vietnam, pre-1975: Alleged sighting of US detainees https://memory.loc.gov/frd/pwmia/6/2739.pdf

⁽⁶⁾ (1968) VIETNAMESE ISSUE DEATH CERTIFICATE FOR SUBJECT. [Manuscript/Mixed Material] Retrieved from the Library of Congress, https://www.loc.gov/item/powmia/pwmaster_58489

⁽⁷⁾ Testimony From Garnett E. Bell before House Committee on International Relations – re: POW/MIAs in Southeast Asia 11272213017. Vietnam Center and Sam Johnson Vietnam Archive. 12 July 1995, Box 22, Folder 13, Garnett Bell Collection, Vietnam Center and Sam Johnson Vietnam Archive, Texas Tech University, https://www.vietnam.ttu.edu/virtualarchive/items.php?item=11272213017 – p. 3

⁽⁸⁾ South Vietnam, pre-1975: POW Camp https://memory.loc.gov/frd/pwmia/7/3910.pdf

⁽⁹⁾ (1970) IN-700 PW VIET CONG/ U.S. PRISONERS OF WAR AT VIET CONG MILITARY REGION TRI-THIEN-HUE DETENTION CAMP IN LAOS NEAR BORDER OF THUA THIEN PROVINCE, SOUTH VIETNAM. [Manuscript/Mixed Material] Retrieved from the Library of Congress, https://www.loc.gov/item/powmia/pwmaster_87839/

Figures

Fig. 1 – I Corps – Photocopied Map of All Corps Tactical Zones in Vietnam, 13770101003. Vietnam Center and Sam Johnson Vietnam Archive. No Date, Box 01, Folder 01, Maury William Hearne Collection, Vietnam Center and Sam Johnson Vietnam Archive, Texas Tech University, https://www.vietnam.ttu.edu/virtualarchive/items.php?item=13770101003, Accessed 21 Jul 2021.

Fig. 2 –  Historical map of Viet Minh Inter-Regions –  Thua Thien fell within zone IV, historically and tactically part of communist North Vietnam –https://www.vietnam.ttu.edu/virtualarchive/items.php?item=F031300030768

Fig. 3 – Map showing three Military Regions and VC provinces in northern South Vietnam following the reorganization of the old MR 5 — Tri-Thien-Central Laos is shown as the northern most province, south of the DMZ – ibid

Fig. 4 – Map showing the four subregions of VC Tri-Thien-Hue Central Laos MR at the time of the TET 1968 Offensive. – ibid

Fig. 5 – Map showing the division of Thua Thien province districts during the war – 1967 –  U.S. Military – South Vietnam Provincial Maps, Edgar R. McCoin https://www.vietnam.ttu.edu/virtualarchive/items.php?item=22290110001

Fig. 6 – Touristic map showing the division of Thua Thien province districts after the war — Source u/k, please contact me if you know.

Fig. 7 – Google Map of POW camp sites belonging to author

Fig. 8 – Location of Nam Dong POW Camp — Full map available at https://legacy.lib.utexas.edu/maps/topo/vietnam/txu-pclmaps-oclc-21713238-6541-3.jpg

Fig. 9 – Fig. 9 POW Camp #2, possibly Nam Dong camp – https://www.loc.gov/item/powmia/pwmaster_102024/

Fig. 10 Location of An Lo POW Camp — (see Fig. 8)

Fig. 11 Sketch of the An Lo POW Camp — memory.loc.gov/frd/pwmia/7/3910.pdf

Fig. 12 Location of Lang Ta POW Camp — Full map available at https://legacy.lib.utexas.edu/maps/topo/vietnam/ban_ko-6441-3.pdf