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 I 1
the rate of about three tons of cargo a week. Since this force repre-
sented the only ground unit, aside from guerrillas, actually engaged
in fighting the enemy, it was decided to supplement its supplies and
to provide reinforcements by air transport with a view toward launch-
ing an attack against Lae and Salamaua. This project was somewhat
delayed by bad weather and inability to provide fighter cover, but
on 2 2 May a flight by the 2 1st Troop Carrier Squadron inaugurated
a movement of about 300 troops and supplies. For more than a year
thereafter, the rough and sloping 3,300-foot runway at Wau served
as the most advanced terminal of Southwest Pacific transport opera-
tions. At the close of June, the small force at Wau even undertook
raids on the Japanese positions a t Lae and Salamaua.16
Efforts to make Lae and Salamaua as untenable for enemy bombers
as was Port Moresby for Allied bombers had been inaugurated by
the A-24’s of the 8th Squadron a t the opening of April. But prior
to their withdrawal at the end of May to Charters Towers, the A-24’s
flew only four combat missions, totaling twenty-nine sorties, from
Port Moresby. Though only two were lost in combat as against
claims of six enemy planes destroyed on the ground and two shot
down, operational losses were high. On 4 April, of the forty-two
dive bombers assigned to the Allied Air Forces, only twenty-two were
in commission; two months later, only twelve out of twenty-six.17
Designed originally as a carrier-borne plane and seemingly unequal
to the rough wear of imperfect fields, of relatively short range and
slow speed, and highly vulnerable except when provided with better
escort than was possible at Port Moresby, the A-24 was written off
by AAF personnel as unsuited to the type of operations required in
New Guinea, perhaps mistakenly in view of its subsequent record in
Navy hands.
Not unnaturally, the AAF came to place greater confidence in the
more rugged B-25. The early “C” model of the Mitchell Army
bomber had approximately three times the range of an A-24, could
carry more than twice its bomb load, had two more .50-cal. machine
guns, and was faster. Ever popular with Army flyers and locally
dubbed a “luxury liner,” it proved well suited to the hazardous
flights across the Owen Stanley Mountains. The only trouble was
that there were not enough B-25’s. Only fourteen originally had
been available under the Dutch contract, and by August there were
still only seventeen on hand.I8
478

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.