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 Commanding General, AAF, in order to relieve it from the
control of any local, regional command. It would confine its opera-
tions to the American coastal waters, but would be free to send
detachments or task forces to other parts of the world. It would
work in conjunction with naval forces and under their operational
control “wherever this may be desirable,” leaving the convoying of
ships clearly a Navy responsibility. In short, he proposed to create a
unified force of land-based aircraft, built solidly around the radar-
equipped B-24, capable of waging offensive war against an elusive and
mobile enemy.*’
Formal action on the long-discussed command began in Sep-
tember. The final settlement was, however, less radical than that
favored by Dr. Bowles. It retained only those reforms suggested by
Army planners that did not specifically reduce the over-all authority
of the Navy. On 14 September, General Marshall wrote to Admiral
King: “Experience with the First Bomber Command in antisubmarine
operations since March indicates that the effective employment of air
forces against the submarine demands rapid communications, mo-
bility, and freedom from the restrictions inherent in command sys-
tems based upon area responsibility.” Accordingly, he proposed to
create the “First Antisubmarine Army Air Command,’’ which would
absorb those portions of the I Bomber Command engaged in anti-
submarine work. Control of the new unit would be centralized in the
War Department in order that it might be promptly dispatched to
zones of submarine activity wherever they might develop. It would
begin operation in Atlantic coastal waters, the Gulf, and the Carib-
bean; its expansion to other areas would depend upon the planes
available. Operations “naturally will be under the operational control
of the sea frontier concerned.” The closest co-operation with the
Navy, especially in the transmission of intelligence which could only
be compiled through naval sources, would be essential to the proper
functioning of this command. Provision would therefore have to be
made for liaison between “our immediate headquarters.” 83
On 2 2 September, General McNarney instructed General Arnold
to organize the new command, using I Bomber Command as cadre.
It was activated on 15 October 1942, under the designation, Army
Air Forces Antisubmarine Command. SubseqGent orders clarified its
mission and- command status. It was to attack hostile submarines
“wherever they may be operating,” which gave it considerable lati-
5 5 2

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.