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 region around Huntingdon, which he had chosen in consultation
with the British. As to the proposed air force structure, he thought
that it might be suitable for a “virgin American theater” (i.e., the
Caribbean) but “most undesirable” for the United Kingdom, and on
the 30th definitely rejected it.lo5 T o reinforce his position, he re-
quested GHQ to approve his own views for planning purposes, and
on 3 February GHQ concurred.lo6 Hence the plan accepted by the
Combined Chiefs of Staff on 1 6 February for establishing the initial
AAF contingent in England provided only for a bomber command
subject to Chancy’s control through such channels as he should desig-
nate; there was no mention of an air force headquarters or of other
air commands.107
In spite of this rebuff, Arnold was proceeding within the AAF on
the assumption that his scheme would be adopted. On 31 January
Brig. Gen. Ira C. Ealter had been designated bomber commander for
USAFBI,’” and Arnold on 6 February cabled Chaney that he was
holding up action until Eaker had presented the AAF’s views in Lon-
Eaker’s orders stipulated that he should help prepare for the
reception of his own command and of the air force which was to be
“an intermediate headquarters between Bomber Command and the
Theater Commander.” His own informal notes suggest also that his
verbal instructions called for similar preparations for an air base and
an interceptor command.’” T o reinforce the case for the last-named
organization, Arnold opened on a new tack while Eaker was en route.
Throughout, Chaney had argued against such a headquarters from
the purely defensive role assigned to interceptor units in RAINBOW
No. 5. Now, however, the Joint Chiefs were inclined to accept
Arnold’s suggestion that pursuit units be included as a part of the
striking force,”’ and the latter was quick to take advantage of that
change. O n I Z February he listed for Chaney the combat units to be
made available in 1 9 4 2 . ~ ”These included three pursuit groups to be
used in conjunction with bomber operations and not for defense
of England: Chaney must provide for their operational control with-
out recourse to the RAF. Chaney’s immediate reply was a request that
he be allowed to settle in London all details concerning USAFBI air
forces and their tactical use.’ l 3 The issues involved were not “details”;
what Chaney in London seemed not to realize was that the AAF’s
struggle for control of its force in USAFBI merely paralleled the
5 84

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.