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 E I G H T H A I R F O R C E
mission, which of course included protection of our own bases in
Britain, continuing in the experienced hands of the RAF Fighter
Command. General Spaatz defined the primary function of the AAF
fighter planes as that of supporting “our bombers in an effort to secure
air Supremacy and not for the defense of England,’’ but he agreed
that they should be so trained as to permit their assumption of
defensive obligations in the event of an emergency.47 O n this basis
the decision was finally made.48 T h e R A F would be responsible for
aerial defense of the sectors in which American airdromes were lo-
cated, and AAF fighter forces would be committed principally to the
escort of bomber strikes against the continent. It had been agreed
between General Arnold and Air Chief Marshal Sir Charles Portal,
Chief of Air Staff, RAF, in May that the Americans, in line with an
earlier decision dividing production responsibilities between the air-
craft industries of the two countries, would assume a primary re-
sponsibility for the provision of air transport, even for the training
of British airborne division^.^' Thus in the great airborne operations
that followed, American troop carrier units would provide most of
the lift.
T h e defensive responsibilities assumed by the British included anti-
aircraft and other ground defense of American airdromes. T h e AAF
had assumed in the earliest planning for a bomber command that such
an arrangement could be effe~ted,~’but as the number of our projected
installations increased, it became apparent that British forces would
be unequal to the task. Steps had been taken as early as August to
set up an air defense organization within the Eighth Air Force,‘l but
American antiaircraft and infantry units could not be made available
even in the number required to supplement those provided by the
British, much less in sufficient quantity to replace them.52 Our allies
consequently continued to carry the main responsibility into the early
part of 1943, a t which time the Eighth Air Force took over the job
with forces hardly more adequate than those the British had been able
to At no time during the war, fortunately, did the Germans
undertake large-scale attacks on American installations in the United
Kingdom.
T h e heaviest indebtedness of the Eighth to its British allies fell,
perhaps, in the field of intelligence. When war began, the AAF prob-
ably was more deficient in its provision for intelligence than in any
other phase of its activities-a deficiency brought home with increas-
6 2 3

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.