Doctorate of Philosophy

Eyes All Over the Sky: The Significance of Aerial Reconnaissance in the First World War by James Streckfuss December 6, 2011 M.A., University of Cincinnati, 2002 J.D., Woodrow Wilson College of Law, 1981 B.A., University of Cincinnati, 1973 A dissertation submitted to the Division of Research and Advanced Studies of the University of Cincinnati in partial fulfillment of the degree requirements for the degree of DOCTORATE OF PHILOSOPHY In the Department of History of the College of Arts and Sciences Committee Chair: Christopher Phillips 2 Abstract Historians have portrayed aviation in the First World War as a romantic alternative to the mass slaughter playing out on the ground and at sea. Young men volunteered for service in the air to escape the horrors of the trenches and their exploits made them into heroes a war-weary public could revere. As valuable as this diversion proved to civilian morale, it contributed little, if anything, to the military victory. Another global conflict broke out before aviation’s destructive power matured into a potential war winning force. This characterization has allowed historians to discuss World War I without any meaningful analysis of what role aviation played in the fighting. Connections between the air war and ground and naval operations are missing from most contemporary accounts of the war. This dissertation argues that airmen contributed greatly, shaping the manner in which armies and navies functioned in ways that influenced the outcome of battles and the length of the war. Reconnaissance, observation and photography made up the branch of World War I military and naval aeronautics that most significantly impacted the fighting. Observation balloons and airplanes regulated artillery fire, infantry liaison aircraft kept track of the advances made by attacking troops and the retreats of defenders, aerial photographers produced pictures that aided operational planners and provided the basis for perpetually updated maps, and naval airplanes, airships, and tethered balloons acted as aerial sentinels in a complex anti-submarine warfare organization that developed in the last half of the war. In the decade following the armistice, aviation leaders had to abandon the proven aerial reconnaissance model they developed during the war in favor of organizations that specialized in bombing and aerial combat. Achieving independence from the army and navy, as well as simple financial survival in an era of draconian military budget cuts, forced them to demonstrate that airmen possessed their own ability to destroy the enemy. Acting as auxiliaries to the other services would no longer suffice. Aviators had to substitute for soldiers and sailors, not merely service them. This atmosphere prompted air power advocates like William Mitchell, Hugh Trenchard, and Guilio Douhet to preach the future potential of bombing and to minimize the past accomplishments of reconnaissance. The record compiled by the Second World War’s bombing forces appeared to prove their arguments. This dissertation contends that in the aftermath of World War II historians examining aviation in the First World War joined their chorus. Instead of acknowledging the solid contributions made by aerial reconnaissance crews they have focused their analyses on the largely ineffectual record compiled by World War I bombing crews or the glamorous lives of the flying aces. Failing to uncover the type of massive damage produced by the U.S. Army Air Force, Britain’s Royal Air Force, or Germany’s Luftwaffe, they have dismissed the efforts of World War I aircrews as meaningless. This dissertation’s goal is to give the First World War’s aviators their rightful place in the war by documenting the achievements of reconnaissance airmen. In memory of Sharon Streckfuss, whose contributions to this project and to my life are beyond evaluation, and who left us all much too soon 3 Contents Acknowledgments iv Note on Sources viii Introduction 1 Chapter 1. Desire and Capacity Lock Horns 7 Chapter 2. The Fighter Pilot Mystique 30 Chapter 3. The Forgotten Air Service 65 Chapter 4. “Art. Obs.:” Spotting for the Army’s Big Guns 99 Chapter 5. Infantry Liaison: Keeping Track of the Attack 137 Chapter 6. “Two Men and a Darkroom under the Stairs:” Aerial Reconnaissance and Aerial Photography 162 Chapter 7. The Air War over the Sea 205 Chapter 8. Aerial Reconnaissance v. Air Power: Turning the Air Service into the Air Force 230 Conclusion. Historicism and World War I Aerial Reconnaissance 259 Bibliography 288 4 Acknowledgements One of the first lessons learned in writing history is that it is never a solo process. Everyone needs help along the way and I can testify to having had a great deal of valuable assistance from many people during the research and writing of this dissertation. Of course the History Department faculty of the University of Cincinnati stand out for their close involvement, particularly Christopher Phillips, Willard Sunderland, and Martin Francis, who made up the local members of the dissertation committee. John Morrow, of the University of Georgia, who served as the outside reader, had been a valued friend and colleague for several years prior to the start of this project, and his work in this field continues to inspire countless researchers and writers. Several other UC historians, though not directly involved in the final product, nevertheless contributed through the examples they provided in demonstrating how this kind of work should be done. Daniel Beaver, with whom I was privileged to study during his last year at UC, Thomas Sakmyster, John K. Alexander, David Stradling, and Ross Dickinson, all made me a better student of history. Outside the University of Cincinnati community many friends, most of whom I came to know through the old Cross and Cockade Society, or the current League of World War I Aviation Historians and Cross and Cockade International, loaned research material or provided other help along the way. Funding for my research junket to London to mine the vast holdings of the British National Archives’ Public Record Office and the Moore-Brabazon and Laws Collections at iv the Royal Air Force Museum came from Bruce and Ralph Hooper of the Elizabeth S. Hooper Foundation. This family foundation, named in honor of their mother, has a long and impressive record of supporting organizations that honor the service of men and women who have worn the uniform of this country and I am myself honored that they chose to support my efforts as well. Staff members of the National Archives Public Records Office perform their jobs in a highly professional manner, juggling the demands of several hundred curious researchers every day. Amidst the chaos they never failed to lend whatever assistance I needed. The same can be said of the staff at the Royal Air Force Museum, especially Peter Elliott, who arranged for a waiver of the rules so that I could bring a digital camera into the facility at a time before cameras were regularly allowed. During my stay in London, Michael and Shibohan Herne were extremely gracious hosts who made me feel more like family than a temporary border. Col. Terry Finnegan and Dr. Birger Stichelbaut both served as valuable sounding boards and people with similar views on the role and importance of aerial reconnaissance. Dr. Stichelbaut’s efforts in organizing the 2006 Images of Conflict: Military Aerial Photography and Archaeology conference in Ypres, Belgium, where we all had the chance to share ideas, were especially appreciated. The University of Ghent’s Department of Ancient History and Archaeology and the In Flanders Fields Museum also deserve thanks for their sponsorship of the conference. Steve Suddaby and Col. Steve Ruffin provided many good suggestions and advice. Noel Shirley, who served for more than a v decade as Assistant Managing Editor of Over the Front, shared much primary source material without which there would have been little said here about naval aviation. The-late Peter Grosz and the-late Neal O’Connor, both of whom still stand as giants in the field of WWI aviation research, taught the world most of what is known about German aerial operations in the Great War. What little they did not cover, my friend Peter Kilduff has done, and he was also generous with his help here. Several years before beginning graduate school, I had the opportunity to spend a few days rummaging through the records at the U.S. Air Force Historical Research Agency and the library at the Air War College during a visit to Maxwell Air Force Base funded by a grant provided by the USAF HRA. The documents copied during that visit were essential to the chapter on balloon operations. I have not had a formal opportunity to thank Agency officials for that generosity until now and would like particularly to mention Dr. Robert Johnson, of the Archives Division. Annie Pinder, of the UK Parliamentary Archives, also proved helpful answering an email query in a timely manner. The largest measure of gratitude goes to my family. My mother, Ruby Streckfuss, and sister, Virginia Gutzwiller, learned long ago that the question “what would you like for Christmas” often led to very odd answers. In this case, several holiday seasons spent shopping at the U.S. National Archives collecting a complete set of the Gorrell Report on microfilm; an acquisition that ultimately saved immeasurably in both travel time and expense. Finally, my wife, Sharon, and our son, Erich, both endured many disruptions in their lives over several vi years in support of this research. In addition, both regularly lent their technical expertise when called upon, helping solve more than a few hardware and software problems. Erich also allowed me to conscript him for a couple days service as research assistant photographing records at the National Archives’ College Park, Maryland, facility, saving me another road trip.

Load more