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
mations but immediately began an investigation of means to increase
the firepower of U.S. bombers. After making a detailed comparison
of the British Stirling and Manchester with the Fortress One, AWPD
recommended that the B-17 and B-24 be equipped with ten machine
guns, mounted in turrets where possible. This followed RAF practice
as to number, but the guns were to be heavier, of .50 caliber rather
than . 3 0 3 . Better equipment for oxygen and heating should be de-
veloped, and a board of officers should be named to draw up charac-
teristics for a long-range escort plane.z11
The recommendation for increased armament was followed imme-
diately, and the B-I~E-the first model to be used in combat by the
Eighth Air Force-was the most heavily armed bomber in the theater.
The design for the escort plane was slower in its evolution. The fail-
ure to have developed such a plane was the most serious flaw in the
AAF’s program, and it is difficult to account for. Again, the fact that
national defense rather than strategic bombardment against European
powers had been the prevailing influence in the twenties and early
thirties must have been important.212The effect of Douhet’s writings
a t the Air Corps Tactical School has been referred to above,” and
Douhet taught that heavily armed bombers in mass formations could
operate by day against fighter Whatever the reason, the
AAF was approaching a major war without a long-range escort for its
bomberst The type of plane recommended in AWPD/I to remedy
this lack was more akin to a modified bomber than to any existing
pursuit Eaker, on a mission to England in September 1941,
secured information which seemed to corroborate this
and eventually such an expedient was followed. Almost a year later,
in August 1942, a board headed by Brig. Gen. A.J. Lyon submitted
a plan for modifying the B-17 and B-24 into “destroyer escort
planes.” 216 That suggestion was followed, and the resulting YB-40
and YB-41 were to have a brief and unhappy trial in the ETO. But
when war came it was apparent that our early bombardment opera-
tions would be run without benefit of escorts over the target, a fact
which accentuated the need of improved techniques.
Research toward that end had paralleled those dealing with equip-
ment. A board had been established in July 1941 to evaluate bombing
accuracy in the AAF, and in response to Chaney’s recommendations,
* See above, p. 51.
+For one possible explanation, see above, pp. 64-65.
604

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.