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…
P L A N S , P O L I C I E S , A N D O R G A N I Z A T I O N
warrant it, but if by 1 5 September an operation in the following
spring should appear impracticable, a decision should be made to
launch a combined attack against North and Northwest Africa at
the earliest possible date before I December. This recommendation
was accepted by the Combined Chiefs of Staff on the ~ 4 t h . ~ ‘Ap-
parently Roosevelt gave his tentative approval in a telephone conver-
sation on the following day.58 The provision to hold off until 1 5
September for a firm decision to mount TORCH, as the revived and
revised GYMNAST plan was called, was wisely scrapped. It is diffi-
cult to say just when the two governments made a formal commit-
ment. On 3 0 July, Admiral Leahy told the Combined Chiefs of Staff,
then back in Washington, that Roosevelt and Churchill “believed”
that T O R C H was on; and so it was.59 Intensive planning began
immediately in London. With an eye on French sensibilities, the CCS
had preferred an American commander for the operation, and on 7
August, Lt. Gen. Dwight D. Eisenhower, who as commanding gen-
eral of the European Theater of Operations had participated in the
London conference, was informed of his appointment.“
Neither the new code name nor the choice of an American leader
could obscure the fact that the strategy which had long guided JCS
thought had been sharply wrenched if not broken. Planning for
ROUNDUP-and even for an emergency SLEDGEHAMMER-was
supposed to continue. But the Joint Chiefs in their memorandum of
24 July had realistically accepted the fact that T O R C H in 1942meant
no ROUNDUP in 1943.~‘For the Army Air Forces this might mean
a return to the time schedule suggested in AWPD/r, with its spring
1944 invasion, but the circumstances were to be importantly modified
by TORCH.
General Arnold had from March gone along with the War Depart-
ment General Staff in its preference for SLEDGEHAMMER, though
ROUNDUP would have fitted more aptly into AWPD’s concept of
the war. Arnold was not in London in late July, but with other mem-
bers of the JCS he had been opposed to TORCH. In July as in April
the British had proposed, in partial substitution for the second front,
an intensification of their bomber offensive over Germany, where
recent thousand-plane attacks on Cologne and Essen had already
given earnest of what was to come.62But T O R C H ruled out for the
time being any effective participation in this campaign by the AAF,
much as it was to their liking. Sir Charles Portal had raised the issue
573

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.