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
General Arnold. H e proposed that: ( I ) the AAF set up mobile repair
depots manned by civilians to service American aircraft operated by
the R A F in the United Kingdom; ( 2 ) the AAF ultimately take over
the management of existing British facilities for repair of American-
built equipment and provide for their expansion as required, using
initially civilian personnel; ( 3 ) specifically, and as quickly as possible,
Langford Lodge be established as a depot for third echelon main-
tenance; * and (4) if American air units should operate from bases
in the United Kingdom, the United States assume responsibility for
third echelon repair facilities for all U.S.-built planes operated by the
RAF and AAF, and for the supply of spare parts.'03
Because of the current shortage of U.S. personnel and equipment,
General Arnold refused to assume responsibility for the maintenance
of all RAF-operated American planes, but he approved, as a useful
step toward the development of an American service organization in
the United Kingdom, negotiations for the establishment of a depot
at Langford Lodge. It was anticipated that, after the President's
approval had been obtained, at least six months would be required to
provide necessary equipment and trained personnel, for it would be
unwise to rob newly expanding depot facilities in the United States
and, in addition, prior commitments to the Philippines and other
points would have to be fulfilled first. Meanwhile, General Arnold
desired that as far as possible American civilian personnel already in
the United Kingdom be used to man the
Plans for development of a depot at Langford Lodge proceeded on
the assumption that it could best be operated under contract with an
American aircraft company. T h e Lockheed Corporation for some
time had operated an assembly plant for the British near Liverpool,
and it was evidently felt that this company because of its experience
would be especially well equipped to undertake the pro ject.lo5 And
so, shortly after our entry into war the W a r Department requested
Lockheed to provide a maintenance depot for the AAF at Langford
Lodge. T h e actual contract with the Lockheed Overseas Corporation,
* In AAF usage, maintenance falls into four classifications, as follows: first echelon
maintenance covers repair and service that can be provided by the crew of the plane;
second echelon maintenance describes that provided by the ground crew forming
an integral part of the unit using the equipment; third echelon maintenance covers
work beyond the capacities of the using unit and is normally provided by more or
less mobile maintenance organizations; fourth echelon maintenance provides general
overhaul and reclamation involving the use of heavy tools and machinery in more
or less fixed installations.
63 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.