Documents / Document

The Army Air Forces in World War II, Vol. 1 (archived PDF)

Air Force Historical Studies Office · 863 pages · text from the file's own layer

This is Volume One of The Army Air Forces in World War II, titled Plans and Early Operations, January 1939 to August 1942, edited by Wesley Frank Craven and James Lea Cate. The University of Chicago Press first published it in 1948, and the Office of Air Force History reprinted it in 1983. The front matter explains how the AAF historical program was set up during the war. The index covers Pacific, Atlantic and European operations, and nothing in the text concerns unidentified aerial phenomena.

  • p. 303 …of Naval Opera- tions; Adm. Ernest J. King, Commander in Chief, U.S. Fleet; Gen. George…
  • p. 316 …So far as the Navy is concerned, Admiral King, as you know, is not only Chief…
  • p. 493 …Admiral King believed that the mines offered a tempting bait to the Japanese who were currently…
  • p. 526 …Hence Admiral King placed a bid for suffi- 461
  • p. 527 …t this stage of the war Admiral King had accepted the belief that his carrier planes…
  • p. 538 …plan by 2 9 June, when Admiral King submitted to the Joint Chiefs a proposal that…
  • p. 607 …type * O n 5 March 1942, Admiral King wrote to General Arnold as follows: “The experience…
  • p. 608 …s.’l A formal request by Admiral King to the Chief of the Army Air Forces…
  • p. 609 …In a letter of 9 March 1942 to Admiral King, he proposed “the estab- lishment of…
  • p. 614 …In June, Admiral King expressed the official Navy position on this point with the utmost clarity…
  • p. 615 …In a memorandum to Admiral King, General McNarney, Deputy Chief of Staff, on 26 May outlined…
  • p. 616 …viewed as a temporary deta~hment.?~ Admiral King’s reaction to these cautious proposals was expressed…
  • p. 618 …the same words as used by Admiral King a month earlier: the answer to the antisubmarine…
  • p. 621 …On 14 September, General Marshall wrote to Admiral King: “Experience with the First Bomber Command in…
  • p. 622 …T o General Marshall’s proposal of 14 September, Admiral King had replied that, although he…
  • p. 641 …54 A week later General Marshall, Admiral King, Harry Hopkins, and a small staff flew to…
  • p. 645 …that scheduled to operate from the United King- dom. Dry topic or no, organization must figure…
  • p. 684 …the principal air task in the United King- dom had long been conceived as strategic bombardment…
  • p. 707 …establishment of base depots in the United King- dom became the basis of action in January…
  • p. 724 …Implicit in all of the arrangements being made in the United King- dom was the belief…
  • p. 788 …Force, Pt. I ; Fleet Adm. Ernest J. King, First Official Report to the Secretary of the…
  • p. 793 …Memo for Adm, King from C/S, 17 Mar. 1 % ~ . 34. JPS 2I/j/D, 7…
  • p. 795 …4 Aug. 1942. 108. Zbid. 109. Adm. King’s Report on Battle of Midway, incl. in…
  • p. 797 …306, 29 June 1942; memos for Adm. King from Mar- shall, 26 June 1942, and for…
  • p. 802 …1942; CM-IN-0629, Chung- king to AGWAR, # # z , 3 Apr. 1942; memo for Gen. Arnold…
  • p. 805 …Ltr., Arnold to King, 2 5 Feb. 1942. certain evidence from all Allied and enemy sources…
  • p. 806 …Memo for King from McNarney, 26 May 1942. 7 1 . Ltr., King to Marshall, 10 June…
  • p. 807 …Ltr., Marshall to King, 14 Sept. 1942, TAB XIVA, in Bowles report; memo for C G…
  • p. 808 …to notes from Mar- shall and Adm. King). 3 2 . A I c m o for…
  • p. 814 …Forces to the United King- dom, App. A, 19 Aug. 1942. 50. Ltr., Col. H.L…
  • p. 851 …C.E., 48-50 Killin, Pfc, 219 Kilner Board, 1 2 0 Kimbolton, 63 I King…
  • p. 854 …in Chief, 515, 5 2 2 , 544. (see also King); controversy over air power vs. battleship…
T H E A R M Y A I R F O R C E S I N W O R L D W A R I 1
gains, both in planes manufactured and in the rate of acceleration,
came in the latter half of the year, when the fall of France and the
Battle of Britain lent a grim incentive to American efforts. By the end
of September 1940, contracts were outstanding for 16,649 Army air-
craft, of which 9,122 were ta~tica1.l~In the second half of that year,
3,770 military aircraft were accepted by all users; in 1941,the total
accepted was 19,428. Nor do these figures reveal the whole story;
there was, because of a trend toward heavy bomber types, a marked
increase in the average weight per plane as well as a numerical gain.20
Of the aircraft delivered the Air Corps received far too few to equip
its authorized fifty-four groups. Prospects for the future were, how-
ever, encouraging. The appropriations of 1939 and 1940were dwarfed
by those of the following year. In the first eight months of 1941,some
$6,500,000,000was appropriated, the major part of which was allo-
cated to the procurement of about I 5,000 aircraft and the enlargement
of productive capacity. All told, the Air Corps was authorized, in
the three years before Pearl Harbor, to expend about eight billion
dollars and to procure about 37,500 planes.’l It had not known such
generosity since I 9 I 7,
One policy of the Air Corps ran counter to the insistence on mass
production of existing models of aircraft. This was the continued stress
on research and development. Efforts to develop new types of air-
craft diverted talent from tasks of current utility to projects which,
if successful, might pay dividends in the future. The policy was costly,
but in view of the time lag between original design and quantity pro-
duction, it was essential if we were to keep abreast of German devel-
opments. The results of the research and development program were
not always spectacular. Many new airplane models were stillborn, or
died in the experimental stage. But the same program which spawned
such forgotten airplanes as the XP-44 or the XB-21 gave birth also
to the B-29, designed in 1940. Mass production was hampered even
more by the large number of modifications for current models which
this policy encouraged. Changes in design and equipment made
standardization difficult; “freezing” a model at a certain stage in its
development would have made for more rapid production. But to
keep abreast of foreign air forces, it was necessary to incorporate h-
provements which were constantly suggested by combat experience.
The earliest and most obvious lesson which came from the air war
in Europe was the need for heavier armor, greater defensive firepower,
I 08

About this file

Document, cited by the archive. The PDF is mirrored here; the original link is under it. 863 pages are in the text index: search them above, or from the library's search.