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…
D E P L O Y M E N T O N T H E E V E O F H O S T I L I T I E S
air forces, depended upon a complicated chain of command. In order
to communicate with officials in Washington it was necessary for the
air force to direct its correspondence through the Alaska Defense
Command, which forwarded the material to headquarters of the
Western Defense Command at San Francisco; only from this point
could the correspondence be sent directly to the W a r Department.
The close attention given to Alaskan air needs by both the Alaska
and the Western Defense Commands, however, tended to compensate
for any delays encountered in the routing of requests.
T h e decision to station military air units in Alaska had not been
made until after the outbreak of war in Europe, although the Air
Corps for some years had advocated such a move. Once the threat to
American security became clear, there was general agreement as to
the necessity for systematic air defense of Alaska. But determination
of the position which military aviation would occupy in the total
system of Alaskan defense required a considerable amount of discus-
sion among the services, and several basic issues were not settled until
the eve of hostilities. Brig. Gen. Simon B. Buckner, Jr., heading the
Alaska Defense Command, sought approval of a program of strategi-
cally located airfields and adequate garrisons for the bases. It was
estimated that any enemy assault on the territory would be primarily
an air attack, which could be opposed only by air forces previously
stationed in the area. In joint plans of the Army and Navy, however,
Alaskan defense was essentially a function of the Navy, supported
by air and ground forces at those points where coastal installations
required protection from air raids. Little attention was originally
given to the potentialities of long-range striking forces in opposing
an enemy assault, although the Air Corps was convinced of the im-
portance of all phases of military aviation in Alaskan defense. Because
of the nature of the terrain and the lack of transportation facilities,
ground forces were virtually tied to their stations, and local Army
commanders felt that only strong air forces and a system of well-
developed airfields could assure the mobility needed to repulse a co.
ordinated enemy T h e practicability of air operations in
Alaska had been demonstrated by both military and commercial air-
craft, and a new AAF cold-weather experimental station at Ladd
Field, Fairbanks, was preparing to conduct tests which would reveal
better methods of equipping aircraft for arctic operations.
T h e plan for air defense, as worked out by the Alaska Defense
167

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.