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. 258 …order to achieve this end we should cooperate with Japan fully un- quote.” Then: “ I 3…
  • p. 345 …seater aircraft operated by inexperienced personnel in cooperation with antiaircraft search- lights.” la‘ Many important objectives…
  • p. 425 …with brilliant judgment who must rely on cooperation,” * the ARCADIA conference of the British and American…
  • p. 566 …joined at Dinjan by Col. Merian C. Cooper. The task confronting them, to say the le…
  • p. 596 …There had even been talk of “mutual cooperation” rather than “unity of command.” Some firm decision…
  • p. 629 …the British Isles, to “operate independently in cooperation with the British Bomber Command.” l o Detailed…
  • p. 679 …the fullest agreement with the methods of cooperation which you propose and supremely confident that, at…
  • p. 793 …1942. 36. Ibid. 37. Col. Merian C. Cooper, Briefing 7'8 Officer, First Special Aviation Project…
  • p. 802 …Mar. 1943; talk by Col. M.C. Cooper in Gen. Johnson's Staff Meeting, 2 3…
  • p. 846 …5 5 2 Coolidge, President, 25, 28 Cooper, Col. M.C., 499 Coral Sea. Battle of…
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
production, some were acquired from the Air Service Command, but
others became available as the result of a presidential order of 6 May
directing the Secretary of War to commandeer all transports of the
DC-3 type operated by the domestic air carriers in excess of zoo and to
refit them “for such transport services as will most effectively serve
the war purposes of the United nation^.''^^^ The transfer of the air-
craft from the airlines to the War Department made it possible for the
former also to release additional crews for employment in military
operations.
A long-range air supply system, conducted on the basis of pre-
determined and established schedules and operating into or through
a number of theaters and independent commands exercising military
jurisdiction along overseas air routes, had to be reasonably free from
control by local commanders. A transport or ferried airplane flying
from the West Coast to Australia in 1942 passed through the territory
of four principal commands before reaching its destination; and over
the North Atlantic a plane flying from the United States to Great Brit-
ain might traverse the jurisdictional area of as many as five separate
theater or base commands. In the early months of the war, the theater
commanders, whose powers, traditionally, were almost without limits
within the established boundaries of their own commands, frequently
diverted scheduled transport aircraft and crews operating under the
control of the Ferrying Command to their own immediate tactical
needs. In other instances, ferrying crews, upon completion of deliv-
eries to a theater, were held for a time by local authorities instead of
being returned promptly to the United States. While such practices
might have been justified in emergencies, if carried too far they would
have led inevitably to a complete breakdown of the developing system
of strategic air supply. The theater commanders were, in short, adopt-
ing a policy contrary to their own long-range
The jurisdictional difficulty began in the Middle East early in 1942
when Brig. Gen. Elmer E. Adler, then the ranking Air Corps officer
in that area, attempted to pre-empt control of Ferrying Command
operations and personnel in Africa. The misunderstanding, however,
was promptly removed by strongly worded messages from General
Arnold and General Olds.zooMore serious and prolonged interference
came from the commanding generals of the Southwest Pacific Area,
the China-Burma-India theater, and the Alaska Defense Command.’’’
The necessity for protecting Ferrying Command operations was the
364

About this file

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