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…
P E A R L H A R B O R A N D C L A R K F I E L D
for the first time General Brereton publicly stated the facts as he
recalled them, General MacArthur announced that he had received
no such recommendation and that prior to that publication he knew
“nothing of such a recommendation having been made.” ’This state-
ment lent special weight to the testimony of General Sutherland, who
during the preceding year had stated in an interview that the responsi-
bility for holding the bombers on the ground that morning was
entirely Breret0n’s.t It was Sutherland’s recollection that the air
commander agreed that there would be no point in attempting a
bomber mission without advance reconnaissance. T h e interview did
not indicate whether the question of an immediate reconnaissance mis-
sion was considered, but General Brereton, in reply to a request for
information on that point, has indicated that no authorization for
reconnaissance was received until later. “At the first conference,” he
wrote, “General Sutherland approved my plans for an attack imme-
diately after daylight, instructed me to go ahead with preparations and
that in the meantime, he would obtain General MacArthur’s authority
for the daylight attack.” 3 1
* T h e Brereton Diaries (New York, 1946); MacArthur’s statement of 2 7 Sept. 1946,
in N e w York Times, 28 Sept. 1946. In response to a request for information, General
Brereton several months earlier had given the Historical Office a statement of develo
ments on the first day of war that was substantially the same as that subsequentri
published. (1st ind., Brereton to Paul [ltr., Chief, AAF Historical Office to C G Third
Air Force, sub.: Air Defense of the Philippine Islands in December 1941,30 Jan. 19461.)
t The record of an interview by Walter D. Edmonds with Lt. Gen. Richard K.
Sutherland in Manila on 4 June 194s (copy supplied the author through the courtesy
of Mr. Edmonds) reads on the question of “Why was Formosa not bombed?” as
follows:
Gen. Sutherland began by saying that all the B-17s had been ordered to Del Monte
some days before. On a check it was found that only half had been sent. GHQ
wanted the planes in Del Monte because they would there have been safe from
initial Jap attacks-they could not have been reached at all-and they could them-
selves have staged out of Clark Field to bomb Formosa. This direct order had not
been obeyed. And it must be remembered that GHQ gave out general orders and
that the AFHq were supposed to execute them. As Sutherland recalls, there was
some plan to bomb Formosa, but Brereton said that he had to have Photos first.
That there was no sense in going up there to bomb without knowing what they
were going after. There were some 25 fields on Formosa. On December 9th and
roth, photo missions were dispatched-Carpenter going on the first and returning
with generator trouble; Connally going on the second but being turned back by
fighters. Holding the bombers at Clark Field that first day was entirely due t o
Brereton. (Italics mine, WDE.)
General Sutherland’s statement that all B-17’s had been ordered to Del Monte (sub-
sequently confirmed in MacArthur’s statement of September 1946) and General
Brereton’s account of the move have been discussed above in Chap. 5 , pp. 188-89.
On the immediate question of the employment of the planes at Clark Field on 8
December, the question of a prior order for their transfer is a side issue.
2 0 5

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.