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. 2 THE UNIVERSITYOF CHICAGOPRESS, CHICAGO8 LONDON The University of Toronto Press, Toronto 5, Canada Copyright 1948 by…
  • p. 48 …An Associated Press dispatch of 10 October gave a contemporary judgment of the importance of this…
  • p. 55 …Air Service (Corps) found it difficult to press vigorously for reorgani- zation and, by default, leadership…
  • p. 56 …In 1919the W a r Department was pressing for a drastic revision of the military establishment…
  • p. 61 …It held that there was no danger of an air attack on the United States and…
  • p. 64 …GHQ Air Forcq a trial than to press for more radical measures, and Howell’s group…
  • p. 75 …Powerful air attacks resolutely pressed home could never be completely stopped, but their effects could best…
  • p. 98 …based air operations in defense of the United States and its overseas posses~ions.’~T w…
  • p. 99 …General Westover’s report concluded that “all Air Force units could be concentrated on either coast…
  • p. 130 …the Admiralty began to press for control of naval air units, while the army attempted to…
  • p. 149 …basic and advanced Responsibility for crew and unit train- ing was vested in the GHQ Air…
  • p. 164 …A m y air units in the Territory existed primarily for the defense of this and…
  • p. 176 …no military alliances were made which would commit the United States to war; the plans only…
  • p. 278 …There were also grounds for hoping that heavy bomber units now based on Darwin might increase…
  • p. 285 …From 1938 the United States had invoked sanctions against Japan in the form of moral em…
  • p. 287 …Over-all Strategy and lmmediate Deployment On 2 2 December, the press announced dramatically the arrival…
  • p. 289 …ground units sent in that direction were not destined for immediate combat. No major invasion of…
  • p. 323 …Seizure of bases in Canada or Mexico for later attacks on the United States. Capture of…
  • p. 366 …United state^,^ and the British them- selves were forced to withdraw some pilots from combat units…
  • p. 380 …Upon the request of the Ferrying Command, the State Depart- ment again pressed for an answer…
  • p. 397 …the summer and fall, first as the United States Middle East Air Force and later as…
  • p. 430 …Attempts had been made to replace these obsolete craft by purchase from the United States, but…
  • p. 440 …But as the Japanese pressed forward the Americans were given no opportunity to get set. The…
  • p. 463 …personnel that would be reassigned to infantry units whose rosters already included many representatives of the…
  • p. 552 …pines and more recently of American air units operating in the Netherlands East Indies, he was…
  • p. 560 …Moreover, examination proved that most of the basic equipment of the units, including badly needed trucks…
  • p. 563 …Grady arrived from the United States for a comprehensive survey of Indian resources with reference to…
  • p. 564 …TO C H I N A graphic units, and unfavorable atmospheric conditions combined to make high…
  • p. 607 …Thus the AAF units engaged in the anti-U-boat war became almost a t once…
  • p. 628 …Army air bombardment units would operate offensively in collaboration with the Royal Air Force, primarily against…
  • p. 658 …was to operate in the United Kingdom.14' All air units initially based there were to…
  • p. 683 …of the units of the infant Eighth until their departure for the United Kingdom several months…
  • p. 691 …The RAF proposed that American fighter units be integrated with its own under a plan eventually…
  • p. 748 …533.) By 1928he was (Patrick, United States in the Air, pp. 190-91.) 38. Charges of…
  • p. 770 …y.W D Press Release, 2 1 June 1941. 9 1 . AR 95-5, 3a. 92…
  • p. 857 …Presque Isle, 344, 347-49, 641, 644-45 Press comment: B-17, 662-63; danger 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
power, but, shorn of details, the proposals for reorganization followed
one of four patterns. Most radical was the independent air force,
usually drawing heavily upon the RAF and its Air Ministry for prece-
dent. This scheme called for a new cabinet agency on a par with the
War and Navy departments. Since in most plans of this type the De-
partment of Aeronautics was to control all government aviation-cur-
rently divided between the Army, the Navy, and civilian agencies-
the terms “independent,” “separate,” and “united air force” were used
interchangeably. Various expedients were suggested to govern the
employment of aircraft by this department in operations over land
and sea, but none offered an acceptable solution to the problem of
unity of command. An alternative plan, which seemed compatible with
current ideas of command and potentially more economical, gained
popularity after 1923. This entailed creation of a single Department
of National Defense with co-ordinate subdepartments for Army,
Navy, and Air. When this plan was rejected, some Air Service officers,
cautious by nature or discouraged by constant rebuffs, were willing
to settle for a degree of autonomy within the War Department
equivalent to that enjoyed by the Marine Corps in the Navy. And,
when that was not forthcoming, as a last resort they accepted as a
poor compromise such tactical control as might be achieved by
assigning the bulk of offensive air units to General Headquarters.
The War Department resisted in turn every proposal to eliminate
or diminish its control over military aviation. The Secretary of War
was supported in this resistance, overtly or tacitly, by each Chief
Executive during the period under consideration, by the powerful
military and naval affairs committees in Congress, and by most general
officers. Similarly, the Navy Department, its General Board, and most
admirals objected strenuously to any organizational change which
would establish a different control for overwater aircraft or which
threatened to disturb the dominant role of the battleship. Service
academies and colleges followed service lines. In 1925 Secretary of the
Navy Curtis D. Wilbur could say: “I think there is not a man in either
service, outside of those connected with the aircraft-I do not know of
any in the service, with one or two exceptions in the Army possibly-
who would regard the Air Service as a principal service.”
Certainly that unanimity existed within the Army’s General Staff,
and it was in this agency that proponents of air reorganization found
their most potent antagonists. As late as 1926 an official poll taken for
2 0

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.