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. 47 …s Independent Force, the whole of the French Air Division (strategic reserve), and Italian and Portuguese…
  • p. 113 …Japanese Air Power The Japanese air forces, divided into separate army and navy air arms, had…
  • p. 119 …naval air service, and a colonial air force.” For their air doctrines, the Italians depended almost…
  • p. 120 …In its first “combat” test during the thirties the Italian Air Force faced no real opposition…
  • p. 121 …The hope was not fulfilled, for numerous weaknesses in the Italian Air Force rapidly came to…
  • p. 122 …The fundamental weakness of the Italian Air Force was not in its theory of air power…
  • p. 197 …naval forces, and within prescribed boundaries to destroy any German and Italian naval, air, and ground…
  • p. 386 …More threatening were Rommel’s forces in North Africa, for the very existence of the air…
  • p. 554 …Chennault, who since 1937 had been serving as special adviser to the Chinese Air Force. Known…
  • p. 705 …Brett, Chief of the Air Corps, to England for study of the problem. Specifically, he was…
  • p. 752 …USSBS, Japanese Air Power. 9. Notes on the Italian Air Force, in special file of Brig…
  • p. 805 …History, First Air Force. 44. History, Caribbean Air Force, 8 May 1941-6 Mar. 1942, p…
  • p. 851 …E S Italian Air Force: 82-85; development, Italian East Africa, 84 Italy, Air Ministry, 82…
  • p. 857 …See Italian Air Force. Reinforcements. See theaters. Renault works, 593 Replacement Control Depot, ~ z t h…
T H E A R M Y A I R A R M B E T W E E N T W O W A R S
each side that ;he other side had been unreasonable.” T h e contro-
versy was characterized by much poor rhetoric, by extraneous political
issues, by Fabian tactics on the part of those in power, and at times by
a disconcerting lack of decorum and of candor. T o the public it be-
came a battle royal of “Billy Mitchell versus the Brass Hats,” with
the climax in his court-martial, a cause ce‘libre unique in American
military history. But, from a purely administrative viewpoint, the
struggle may be conceived as running through four phases, punctu-
ated by the Army Reorganization Act of 1920, the Air Corps Act of
1926, and the formation of the GHQ Air Force in 1935.
Legislative efforts to establish aviation as a combatant branch of the
Army and as a separate service had begun, respectively, in 1913 and
1916.Attracting little support, those efforts had failed, and, when the
United States entered World War I, its Army air arm consisted of
the Aviation Section, Signal Corps, as provided in an act of 1 8 July
1 9 1 4 . ’ ~It was the failure of that organization and its allied offices to
adjust to the demands of large-scale war which led to the establishment
in 19 I 8 of the Air Service as a quasi-autonomous body within the W a r
Department. More successful than its predecessor, the Air Service was
far from perfect as an administrative agency, and it existed only as an
emergency measure set up by executive order. After the Armistice, in
spite of further temporary expedients adopted by President Wilson,
the loss of key personnel through resignations threatened to leave
military aviation without leadership in the crucial period of demobili-
zation of the air force and collapse of the war-born aircraft industry.“
T h e demand for new policies to guide a peacetime program was not
peculiar to the Air Service. In 1919the W a r Department was pressing
for a drastic revision of the military establishment as prescribed in the
National Defense Act of 3 June 1916.Returning Air Service officers
were eager that any reorganization should provide for a separate air
force. Congressional support was stronger than in the prewar period,
but, of the eight bills introduced in 1919-20to provide for a Depart-
ment of Aeronautics, only one was favorably reported.” Expert
studies of the problems involved served merely to confirm opinions
previously held. Pershing’s Dickman Board at Chaumont and the W a r
Department’s Menoher Board at Washington opposed any change in
the control of aviation, the latter concluding that “the military air
force must remain under the complete control of the Army and form
an integral part thereof.” Yet the Crowell mission, appointed by
2 3

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.