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. 386 …More threatening were Rommel’s forces in North Africa, for the very existence of the air…
  • p. 387 …the route over which the Far East Air Force had received its thirty-five heavy bombers…
  • p. 551 …Formerly commander of the Far East Air Force in the Philip- * See above, pp. 396-97…
  • p. 561 …of an air force, depended upon a line of communications extending across the Indian and At…
  • p. 570 …the American air force would be used in the Bay of Bengal and Indian Ocean area…
  • p. 571 …Accordingly, on 24 May the order committing the Tenth Air Force to operations under RAF supervision…
  • p. 577 …involved in estab- lishing and operating an air force in Asia. The report of the Grady…
  • p. 630 …Policy for Disposition of US and British Air Forces.” l6 This memorandum greatly extended the scope…
  • p. 797 …MacArthur argued that now was a pro- pitious moment to rush forces from the Indian and…
  • p. 819 …5 8 - 6 7 Eighth Air Force, I, 326ff.; Achtung Indianer, a history of VIII FC…
  • p. 850 …See also CBI; Air Forces, Tenth AF. 336407 3537 356, 3803 395-96, q857 496 India…
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
struggle in Washington which was to result in the reorganization of
the War Department on 9 March.*
Eaker arrived in London on 20 February and on the next day met
with Chaney and his staff. That groLp of thirty-five included only
four air officers; of the ground officers, Eaker found some who were
“fair minded,” others “definitely antagonistic to air forces and Air
effort.” ‘14 One carried this hostility to the point of sending back to
an Air Corps officer “all his staff work which mentions Army Air
Forces, requiring them to be rewritten to eliminate the word
‘Air.7” ‘15 In such an atmosphere, Eaker could hope for little success.
Reporting on the conference he wrote apropos of air organization:
I found a complete inflexibility of mind on that subject in the Chaney staff.
They had made up their minds and no argument would change them in the
slightest. I presented the arguments as strongly as I could but without the
slightest effect. They are unalterably opposed to an Army Air Forces in
Britain. They say that they are perfectly able to handle this in addition to
their other duties and such an organization would make them merely rubber
stamps. They consider that function their primary mission here and are not
willing to surrender it.1le
The last consideration was perhaps the deciding one. Under RAIN-
BOW No. 5 the bomber command had been conceived as the most
important element in USAFBI-indeed as the only one with an of-
fensive mission-and it seems plausible to suppose that Chaney, an
airman who had seen more of World War I1 bombardment than any
of his colleagues, may have been unwilling to relinquish control of
operations. That, a t any rate, appears to have been Eaker’s interpre-
tation when he wrote:
I could not believe any man did not wish to be pushed up to a higher job,
but I found one. They [USAFBI] are the Air Force Headquarters as they see
it and they are reconciled and even believe in being subordinate to the British.
I could not make them see that General Chaney should sit in a t the Chiefs
of Staffs’ conferences and be coordinate with the highest military echelon,
the Air Force Commander being at the R.A.F. leve1.*17
Whatever the motivation, USAFBI firmly rejected Eaker’s sugges-
tions; when he asked for a headquarters for Spaatz, Eaker “was told
quite definitely and pointedly, that he [Spaatz] was not coming and
that there was not to be an Air Force Hq.” ‘18 The official reply to
Washington, if less pointed, was equally firm. In a cable addressed
See above, pp. 257-64.
5 8 5

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.