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 1 1
ron prepared at all times for reconnaissance and bombing missions,
while the 24th Pursuit Group was to keep a three-plane flight from
each squadron on the alert from daybreak until dark. These orders
were in effect by 10
Five days later, all pursuit aircraft were placed on constant alert,
fully armed, and with pilots on thirty-minute call. Except for the 34th
Squadron, at Del Carmen Field, all pursuit squadrons were completely
equipped with P-40’s by the end of November. The 17th and 2 1 s
Squadrons at Nichols Field and the 3d at Iba had P-~oE’s,but the 20th
at Clark Field still had obsolescent P-4oB’s. In addition to the Ameri-
can units, the 6th Squadron of the Philippine army was equipped with
outmoded P-26’s and was based at Batangas. T w o other fields, Nielson
and Rosales, were available for pursuit operations, while O’Donnell,
San Fernando, and Ternate fields were under construction. All the
airfields were located on Luzon, radiating out from the focal points of
Manila and the island fortress of Corregidor a t the entrance to Manila
Bay.@5
Despite the modern equipment of most of the pursuit squadrons and
their apparent readiness for action, the total system of air defense in
the Philippines had not reached a satisfactory stage. Both the aircraft
warning service and the antiaircraft defenses were sadly inadequate,
although new items of equipment were en route from the United
States. Without sufficient warning of a hostile air attack, the pursuit
forces would be unable to take to the air in time to intercept the
enemy; yet the status of the aircraft warning system pointed to just
such an eventuality. In the absence of radar equipment, General Mac-
Arthur had established a rudimentary system which depended mainly
upon native air watchers posted a t strategic points. The watchers were
instructed to transmit their observations by telephone or telegraph to
headquarters of the V Interceptor Command at Nielson Field; from
this point the information would be relayed by teletype to a plotting
board a t Clark Field. Although seven radar sets had reached the Philip-
pines by the first week in December, only two-one a t Iba and an-
other outside Manila-were in operation a t the time of the Japanese
attack. Officials in the Philippines as well as at AAF Headquarters
were greatly concerned over the absence of trained aircraft warning
units and the lack of highly developed radar equipment which would
reveal the altitude and course of approaching aircraft. Remedial action
was begun in November with organization of an aircraft warning
I 86

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.