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
tween British and American comrnander~.~~On undertaking the
establishment of a headquarters at High Wycombe (PINETREE in
code) that would serve for the immediate direction of American
bomber operations, General Eaker followed as far as was possible
the organization of the near-by RAF Bomber Command, thus achiev-
ing a measure of organizational similarity designed to facilitate co-
operation. By 18 May he was able to notify Spaatz that the bomber
headquarters should be ready to “control and supervise in bombard-
ment operations by the 1st of June.” 4 3 The tardy arrival of the first
combat units obviated any test of that promise in June, but plans
for close co-ordination with the RAF proceeded along lines that
permitted the prompt adoption of formal agreements following the
arrival of General Spaatz. Early in July, the RAF invited the Eighth
Air Force to share membership on some of the more important RAF
operational committees-those dealing with targets, operational re-
search, interception, and bomber operation^.^^ Composed of senior
staff officers for the study of operations data as a guide to policy,
these committees thus took an important step toward their trans-
formation into combined committees representative of the two air
forces. Close personal agreement having theretofore marked the rela-
tions between General Eaker, who continued to command the VIII
Bomber Command, and Air Marshal Sir Arthur T. Harris, command-
ing the RAF Bomber Command, they further agreed on the eve of
the Eighth‘s entry into combat that Eaker, or his representative,
would attend the daily operations conference held by Harris and that
the two commands would co-ordinate action for the selection of
targets and the issuance of communiquCs or other press releases.45
The pattern of collaboration thus established for bomber operations
was promptly followed by the two fighter commands.
Not until November 1942 was a definitive understanding with the
British reached on the most fundamental question arising from the
purpose to base American fighter planes in the United Kingdom.
The RAF proposed that American fighter units be integrated with
its own under a plan eventually to assign entire defensive sectors of
the United Kingdom to AAF operational The suggestion
had obvious administrative advantages to recommend it, but it would
have involved the assumption of heavy responsibilities for defense of
the British Isles. The AAF preferred that all of its forces be con-
centrated in an offensive effort against Germany, with the defensive
6 22

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.