Documents / Document
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.
“King”32 pages
T H E A R M Y A I R A R M B E T W E E N T W O W A R S been only England or France. And, whereas Mitchell had placed great importance upon the moral effects of bombing, these disciples of his stressed rather the material effects of the air weapon. In any event, the newly formulated doctrine involved three prac- tical measures. One was the acquisition of more advanced bases. That was a political matter, wholly foreign to the Air Corps, which was to be effected in 1940-41 by actions of other government agencies. A second was the study of profitable targets within the national structure of potential enemy countries. This was begun, on a modest scale and not without opposition from the General Staff, in the tiny economic analysis branch of the intelligence section, established in the OCAC in 1939.’~’But the one measure which was of most immediate concern to the Air Corps was purely technological-increasing the range of its bombardment planes. This was not in 1935 a new issue. In the 1926 edition of TR 440-15 it had been stated that “it is necessary, therefore, to determine, from a purely tactical standpoint, what purposes air- planes are to serve in war, and to build different types with appropriate characteristics.” 1 4 9 Once the Air Corps had chosen as its chief func- tion the destruction of an enemy’s “national structure,” this involved the development of a bomber of long range and great bomb capacity. These same characteristics were equally important if the air arm was to be considered merely as a weapon for national defense. By 1935 the successful flight of the Boeing B-17 had indicated what could be ac- complished by American industry working in harmony with the OCAC. But the Air Corps was not content. The student officer whose study served as an introduction to this section showed his appreciation of the true situation when he remarked that the Air Corps building program (in 1938) “indicates that the primary role is long range stra- tegical operations.” 150 The building program, like the doctrine it was meant to implement and the organization which was deemed necessary for a successful air war, had not always enjoyed the desired support of the War and Navy departments. Only two months after the major submitted his report (29 June 1938) the Joint Board arrived at the following conclusion: “Based on the present situation it is not considered probable that the Army Air Corps will be called upon in war to perform any missions that require the use of reconnaissance and heavy bombardment planes of greater practical ferrying range, greater tactical radius, and greater carrying capacity than those of the B-17.” 15’ A brief account of 53
Document, cited by the archive. The PDF is mirrored here; the original link is under it. 863 pages are in the text index: search them above, or from the library's search.