Tactical Air Power Controversies in Normandy: a Question of Doctrine

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

Tactical Air Power Controversies in Normandy: a Question of Doctrine Canadian Military History Volume 9 Issue 2 Article 5 2000 Tactical Air Power Controversies in Normandy: A Question of Doctrine Paul Johnston [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://scholars.wlu.ca/cmh Recommended Citation Johnston, Paul "Tactical Air Power Controversies in Normandy: A Question of Doctrine." Canadian Military History 9, 2 (2000) This Article is brought to you for free and open access by Scholars Commons @ Laurier. It has been accepted for inclusion in Canadian Military History by an authorized editor of Scholars Commons @ Laurier. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Johnston: Tactical Air Power Controversies in Normandy Paul Johnston he history of tactical air power in the battle in the campaign, in particular by the famous Tof Normandy has been fraught with both Field-Marshal Erwin Rommel. A much quoted misunderstanding and contradiction. Largely 12 June 1944 message from Rommel to Berlin ignored by the army-centric historians who have reads: written the histories of the campaign, it has been asserted on the one hand that Allied air power Our own operations are rendered extraordinarily was overwhelming and on the other that the difficult and in part impossible to carry out system for controlling it was cumbersome and [owing to] the exceptionally strong and, in some respects overwhelming, superiority of the enemy ineffective. On the face of it, at least, there would air force.2 appear to be some tension between those two schools of thought. Which is more accurate? In order to examine that question, it is important ...And Some Army Accusations to begin with an understanding of the doctrine for tactical air power - the contemporary doctrine t is perhaps somewhat paradoxical, therefore, of the time - and disputes about both that Ithat there is another theme running through doctrine and the role of air power in the commentary on the Battle of Normandy, and that campaign. What emerges is that there is enough is criticism of air support. Many critics have blame to go around for all parties - and enough complained - some vociferously if not viciously credit. In truth, the doctrine of the time was - that the RAF3 was intransigent, uncooperative under-developed, and this simply reflected some and sometimes downright stinting in its provision of the larger doctrinal weaknesses of the Western of air support to the land campaign. Allies' militaries. Only a year after the war, Major-General C.C. Mann, who as a brigadier had been the Chief of One Traditional View... Staff at First Canadian Army headquarters throughout the Northwest Europe campaign, ne of the more famous paintings of the made a striking and surprisingly blunt OSecond World War is Rocket Firing accusation. He described the basis of the British Typhoons over the Falaise Gap, Normandy 1944 and Commonwealth doctrine for air support as by Frank Wootton. It captures a traditional image "unsound."4 of Allied air power over the Normandy battlefield - crushing air supremacy that doomed the Mann strongly believed that RAF air support Germans. Chester Wilmot made this point early had been stinting and unresponsive during the in his classic history of the war, The Struggle/or campaign in Northwest Europe. And this was not Europe: "The value of this air supremacy can just his opinion upon reflection after the fact. In hardly be overrated."1 He is seconded in this the midst of some of the worst fighting of the opinion by virtually all of the Germans who fought Normandy campaign, he had felt strongly enough © Canadian Military History, Volume 9, Number 2, Spring 2000, pp.59-71. 59 Published by Scholars Commons @ Laurier, 2000 1 Canadian Military History, Vol. 9 [2000], Iss. 2, Art. 5 about this to have taken the time to pen a long over 2,000 in 2nd Tactical Air Force, specifically memorandum to Lieutenant-General H.D.G. dedicated to OVERLORD. Now, having amassed Crerar, the commander of First Canadian Army. such a vast armada, what should be done with it? Bomb German defensive positions right along The situation as it stands at present makes it the front? Attack supply depots further in the quite impossible to expect that there can be any rear? Try and shoot up columns on the move? heavy or effective air attacks within a matter of All of the above? Which is more profitable? Which several hours, to say the least, which require resources beyond those within the capacity of is more effective? Where should the emphasis the Tactical Group supporting the Army go? This is the nub of the doctrinal question, and concerned.5 as one might expect, there was not unanimity. But first of all, this whole discussion poses an Mann was especially disturbed by a obvious question: just how fast was the response particular air support request which he outlined to army requests for air support? Significantly, in great detail. In the end, the RAF had declined after making the above sweeping accusation, to fill it. Mann considered this unacceptable. Gooderson does not answer this question. In order to answer it, we need a quick overview of In my opinion, the action of the ground forces is the air support doctrine of the time. sabotaged, rather than supported, by the present practice of the Tactical Group with whom we have been cooperating.6 The Background: This issue of timeliness, or perhaps more Inter-Service Rivalry accurately responsiveness - getting close support y 1944, British air support doctrine had gone air attacks on target as quickly as possible after through an extensive evolution. The war Army request - has dominated consideration of B began in 1939 with some considerable enmity the tactical air support issue from the very start. between the Army and the RAF, even by the It was the issue that drove the first British efforts normal standards of inter-service rivalry. Indeed, to reform their air support system after the the Army (and the RN) had at various times tried debacle at Dunkirk and it was the issue that was to have the RAF dissolved and its assets divided central to complaints from the Army about air between the two older services.9 For its part, the support throughout the Overlord campaign, the RAF had preached the new doctrine of strategic most vociferous example being (then) Brigadier bombing, which the RAF's founders and early Mann's accusations. Indeed, the timeliness issue leaders believed would render the older services has dominated the historiography of the issue themselves obsolescent, if not entirely obsolete.10 down to the present day. Many commentators "The bomber will always get through," as the have discussed it, in tones generally disapproving 7 saying went. In this environment, not only did of the RAF. Most recently Ian Gooderson, in his the RAF not allocate any significant amount of analysis of Allied tactical air power, stated: resources towards air support to armies in the field, but they did not think very much about that 11 The British system proved very successful In particular issue either. The result of all of this processing pre-planned air support strikes, but was a system of air support in France in 1940 the more difficult test was how quickly air that was cumbersome, slow and ineffective - one support could be provided in response to of the contributing factors to the debacle at impromptu requests from forward troops, Dunkirk. where speed was vitally important. In this respect, both in Italy and in the early stages of the campaign in North-West Europe, the process While still convinced that strategic bombers was simply not fast enough.8 would win the war, even the RAF's hierarchy realized that air support would have to be Are such accusations fair or accurate? In improved, and shortly after Dunkirk Air Marshal large part this question comes down to doctrine. A.S. Barratt, who had been the commander of After all, just what is the best way to apply air the RAF forces in France in 1940, was made power against an enemy army in the field? Think commander of new command within the RAF - of it this way - in June 1944 the Western Allies Army Cooperation Command. And within this had over 9,000 aircraft in their various tactical new command two officers, both also veterans air forces, the British and Commonwealth with of the recent disaster in France - Brigadier J.D. 60 https://scholars.wlu.ca/cmh/vol9/iss2/5 2 Johnston: Tactical Air Power Controversies in Normandy A Spitfire of 2nd Tactical Air Force is loaded with a 500-pound bomb in preparation for a dive-bombing attack on the invasion coast. Woodall of the Army and Group Captain A. Wann This the RAF stoutly resisted, and even while the of the RAF - were sent to the quiet backwater of new tactical air force idea was coming together Northern Ireland to jointly study the problem of in North Africa the bureaucratic turf war over air support to armies and propose solutions.12 command and control escalated all the way up This they did, producing what came to be known to Churchill himself.14 He produced a as the "Wann/Woodall Report." The key feature compromise slightly favourable to the RAF. of the Wann/Woodall recommendations was the Contrary to the Air Staffs original wishes, a creation of an elaborate system of radio links, to considerable portion of the RAF's resources allow the rapid passage of air support requests would be devoted specifically to army support in via a special communications network, outside the tactical air forces. But against the Army's of the normal chain of command.
Recommended publications
  • Downloadable Content the Supermarine
    AIRFRAME & MINIATURE No.12 The Supermarine Spitfire Part 1 (Merlin-powered) including the Seafire Downloadable Content v1.0 August 2018 II Airframe & Miniature No.12 Spitfire – Foreign Service Foreign Service Depot, where it was scrapped around 1968. One other Spitfire went to Argentina, that being PR Mk XI PL972, which was sold back to Vickers Argentina in March 1947, fitted with three F.24 cameras with The only official interest in the Spitfire from the 8in focal length lens, a 170Imp. Gal ventral tank Argentine Air Force (Fuerca Aerea Argentina) was and two wing tanks. In this form it was bought by an attempt to buy two-seat T Mk 9s in the 1950s, James and Jack Storey Aerial Photography Com- PR Mk XI, LV-NMZ with but in the end they went ahead and bought Fiat pany and taken by James Storey (an ex-RAF Flt Lt) a 170Imp. Gal. slipper G.55Bs instead. F Mk IXc BS116 was allocated to on the 15th April 1947. After being issued with tank installed, it also had the Fuerca Aerea Argentina, but this allocation was the CofA it was flown to Argentina via London, additional fuel in the cancelled and the airframe scrapped by the RAF Gibraltar, Dakar, Brazil, Rio de Janeiro, Montevi- wings and fuselage before it was ever sent. deo and finally Buenos Aires, arriving at Morón airport on the 7th May 1947 (the exhausts had burnt out en route and were replaced with those taken from JF275). Storey hoped to gain an aerial mapping contract from the Argentine Government but on arrival was told that his ‘contract’ was not recognised and that his services were not required.
    [Show full text]
  • United States Air Force and Its Antecedents Published and Printed Unit Histories
    UNITED STATES AIR FORCE AND ITS ANTECEDENTS PUBLISHED AND PRINTED UNIT HISTORIES A BIBLIOGRAPHY EXPANDED & REVISED EDITION compiled by James T. Controvich January 2001 TABLE OF CONTENTS CHAPTERS User's Guide................................................................................................................................1 I. Named Commands .......................................................................................................................4 II. Numbered Air Forces ................................................................................................................ 20 III. Numbered Commands .............................................................................................................. 41 IV. Air Divisions ............................................................................................................................. 45 V. Wings ........................................................................................................................................ 49 VI. Groups ..................................................................................................................................... 69 VII. Squadrons..............................................................................................................................122 VIII. Aviation Engineers................................................................................................................ 179 IX. Womens Army Corps............................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • The German Military and Hitler
    RESOURCES ON THE GERMAN MILITARY AND THE HOLOCAUST The German Military and Hitler Adolf Hitler addresses a rally of the Nazi paramilitary formation, the SA (Sturmabteilung), in 1933. By 1934, the SA had grown to nearly four million members, significantly outnumbering the 100,000 man professional army. US Holocaust Memorial Museum, courtesy of William O. McWorkman The military played an important role in Germany. It was closely identified with the essence of the nation and operated largely independent of civilian control or politics. With the 1919 Treaty of Versailles after World War I, the victorious powers attempted to undercut the basis for German militarism by imposing restrictions on the German armed forces, including limiting the army to 100,000 men, curtailing the navy, eliminating the air force, and abolishing the military training academies and the General Staff (the elite German military planning institution). On February 3, 1933, four days after being appointed chancellor, Adolf Hitler met with top military leaders to talk candidly about his plans to establish a dictatorship, rebuild the military, reclaim lost territories, and wage war. Although they shared many policy goals (including the cancellation of the Treaty of Versailles, the continued >> RESOURCES ON THE GERMAN MILITARY AND THE HOLOCAUST German Military Leadership and Hitler (continued) expansion of the German armed forces, and the destruction of the perceived communist threat both at home and abroad), many among the military leadership did not fully trust Hitler because of his radicalism and populism. In the following years, however, Hitler gradually established full authority over the military. For example, the 1934 purge of the Nazi Party paramilitary formation, the SA (Sturmabteilung), helped solidify the military’s position in the Third Reich and win the support of its leaders.
    [Show full text]
  • Antwerp Text
    SECOND WORLD WAR TH 60ANNIVERSARY The Advance from the Seine to Antwerp 25 August – 30 September 1944 ‘The days of rapid advance across North West Europe’ No.6 The Advance from the Seine to Antwerp ANTWERP, BELGIUM NETHERLANDS London• NORTH SEA Berlin• BELGIUM GERMANY Paris• FRANCE NETHERLANDS London KEY FACTS • Ostend • • Antwerp Antwerp is: Calais • • Brussels • The second largest city in Belgium BELGIUM Le Havre • The second largest harbour in Europe • FRANCE • Located at the inner point of the Scheldt estuary • Paris • 69 km (43 miles) from the North Sea Cover image: British infantry advance past a destroyed 88 mm anti-aircraft gun IWM B 9982 THE ADVANCE FROM THE SEINE TO ANTWERP | 1 Foreword by the Under Secretary of State for Defence and Minister for Veterans, Ivor Caplin MP This series of commemorative booklets is dedicated to those who fought for our freedom in World War Two. The booklets provide a detailed account of key actions of the war for those familiar with the period, as well as serving as an educational tool for younger people less familiar with the heroic actions of Allied Service personnel. In this, the sixth booklet in the series, we commemorate the way the Royal Navy and the RAF combined so effectively with the 21st Army Group and made such a rapid leap forward from the Seine to Antwerp. August 1944 presented the Allies with a unique opportunity to lunge like a rapier through German-held Belgium and the Netherlands and end the war in weeks rather than months. To enable such a rapid advance, the well-fortified channel ports had to be cleared of German forces and opened up to Allied ships carrying the hundreds of tons of fuel and ammunition needed to sustain the effectiveness of the rapidly advancing Armour and Infantry.
    [Show full text]
  • HELP from ABOVE Air Force Close Air
    HELP FROM ABOVE Air Force Close Air Support of the Army 1946–1973 John Schlight AIR FORCE HISTORY AND MUSEUMS PROGRAM Washington, D. C. 2003 i Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Schlight, John. Help from above : Air Force close air support of the Army 1946-1973 / John Schlight. p. cm. Includes bibliographical references and index. 1. Close air support--History--20th century. 2. United States. Air Force--History--20th century. 3. United States. Army--Aviation--History--20th century. I. Title. UG703.S35 2003 358.4'142--dc22 2003020365 ii Foreword The issue of close air support by the United States Air Force in sup- port of, primarily, the United States Army has been fractious for years. Air commanders have clashed continually with ground leaders over the proper use of aircraft in the support of ground operations. This is perhaps not surprising given the very different outlooks of the two services on what constitutes prop- er air support. Often this has turned into a competition between the two serv- ices for resources to execute and control close air support operations. Although such differences extend well back to the initial use of the airplane as a military weapon, in this book the author looks at the period 1946- 1973, a period in which technological advances in the form of jet aircraft, weapons, communications, and other electronic equipment played significant roles. Doctrine, too, evolved and this very important subject is discussed in detail. Close air support remains a critical mission today and the lessons of yesterday should not be ignored. This book makes a notable contribution in seeing that it is not ignored.
    [Show full text]
  • 2Nd TAF and the Normandy Campaign: Controversy and Under-Developed Doctrine
    2nd TAF and the Normandy Campaign: Controversy and Under-developed Doctrine by Paul Johnston Subrnitted to the Department of History in partial fulfilment of the requirements for Master of Arts The Royal Military College of Canada Kingston, Ontario Q Paul Johnston National Libraty Bibliothbgue nationale du Cana a Acquisitions and Acquisitions et Bibliographie SeMces seMces bibliographiques 305 Wdingtori Street 395, nwr Wellington OrtawaON K1A ON4 mwaON K1AW Canada can&a The author has granted a non- L'auteur a accordé une licence non exclusive licence allowing the exclusive permettant à la National Library of Canada to Bibliothèque nationale du Canada de reproduce, loan, distribute or seli reproduire, prêter, distribuer ou copies of this thesis in microform, vendre des copies de cette thèse sous paper or electronic formats. la forme de microfiche/film, de reproduction sur papier ou sur format électronique. The author retains ownership of the L'auteur conserve la propriété du copyright in this thesis. Neither the droit d'auteur qui protège cette thèse. thesis nor substantial extracts fiom it Ni la thèse ni des extraits substantiels may be printed or otherwise de celle-ci ne doivent être imprimés reproduced without the author' s ou autrement reproduits sans son permission. autorisation. Dedication: This work proposes conclusions about the British and Commonwealth air forces and armies engaged in the battle of Normandy. Such conclusions, it is often somewhat disapprovingly pointed out, can only be reached fiom the cornfort of a peacetirne study, and with the benefit of hindsight. That is absolutely tme. However, it is precisely because we now have the lwniry of such hindsight that we can return to questions first raised in the heat of battle.
    [Show full text]
  • Ranking Us Army Generals of the Twentieth Century
    ABSTRACT Title of thesis: RANKING U.S. ARMY GENERALS OF THE TWENTIETH CENTURY USING THE GROUP ANALYTIC HIERARCHY PROCESS. Todd Philip Retchless, Master of Science 2005 Directed By: Professor Bruce Golden Department of Decision and Informatio n Technologies The group analytic hierarchy process (GAHP) is a mathematically based decision making tool that allows groups of individuals to participate in the decision making process. In this thesis, we use the GAHP and the expert opinions of 10 pro fessional and amateur military historians to rank seven U.S. Army generals of the 20th Century. We use two methods to determine the priority vectors: the traditional eigenvector method and the recently introduced interval linear programming method. We co nsider the effects of removing outlier data and compare the rankings obtained by each method. RANKING U.S. ARMY GENERALS OF THE TWENTIETH CENTURY USING THE GROUP ANALYTIC HIERARCHY PROCESS. By Todd Philip Retchless Thesis submitted to the Faculty of the Graduate School of the University of Maryland, College Park, in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Science 2005 Advisory Committee: Professor Bruce Golden, Chair Professor Edward Wasil Pr ofessor Charles D. Levermore © Copyright by Todd Philip Retchless 2005 Table of Contents List of Tables ............................................................................................................... iv List of Figures ..............................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Major Commands of the Air Force Mission and Directly Subordinate to Hq
    USAFAlmanac A major command is a subdivision of the Air Force assigned a major part ■ Major Commands of the Air Force mission and directly subordinate to Hq. USAF. In general, there are two types of major commands: operational and support. Air Combat Command Headquarters Langley AFB, Va. Established June 1, 1992 Commander Gen. Richard E. Hawley ACCMissions Resolve (USACOM), New Horizons PErsonnEl operate USAF bombers (active (USSOCOM) (as of Sept. 30, 1998) and ANG and AFRC gained); USAF’s Active duty 91,002 CONUS–based (active and gained) Major CONUS JCS exercises fighter and attack, reconnaissance, Cooperative Zenith, JTFEX, Roving Officers 12,254 rescue, battle management, and Sands, Fuertas Defense (USACOM); Enlisted 78,748 command-and-control aircraft Global Guardian (USSTRATCOM); Reserve components 61,501 organize, train, equip, and Baltops, TFW (USEUCOM) ANG 52,300 maintain combat-ready forces for Major training exercises AFRC 9,201 rapid deployment and employment Air Warrior, Green Flag, Red Flag Civilian 11,312 to meet the challenges of peacetime (Nellis AFB, Nev.); Air Warrior II Total 163,815 air sovereignty, wartime defense, (Barksdale AFB, La.); Blue Flag operations other than war, and major (Hurlburt Field, Fla.); Maple Flag theater wars (CFB Cold Lake, Canada) Provide air combat forces to Amer- ica’s warfighting commands; nuclear- capable forces for USSTRATCOM; air defense forces to NORAD supply aircraft and support forces to the five geographic unified com- mands: Atlantic, European, Pacific, Southern, and Central Commands Corollary Missions Monitor and intercept illegal drug traffic Test new combat equipment USAF photo by SrA. Greg L. Davis Force StructurE Four numbered air forces: 1st (ANG), Tyndall AFB, Fla.; 8th, Barksdale AFB, La.; 9th, Shaw AFB, S.C.; 12th, Davis–Monthan AFB, Ariz.
    [Show full text]
  • The Fighting Five-Tenth: One Fighter-Bomber Squadron's
    The Fighting Five-Tenth: One Fighter-Bomber Squadron’s Experience during the Development of World War II Tactical Air Power by Adrianne Lee Hodgin Bruce A dissertation submitted to the Graduate Faculty of Auburn University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy Auburn, Alabama December 14, 2013 Keywords: World War II, fighter squadrons, tactical air power, P-47 Thunderbolt, European Theater of Operations Copyright 2013 by Adrianne Lee Hodgin Bruce Approved by William Trimble, Chair, Alumni Professor of History Alan Meyer, Assistant Professor of History Mark Sheftall, Associate Professor of History Abstract During the years between World War I and World War II, many within the Army Air Corps (AAC) aggressively sought an independent air arm and believed that strategic bombardment represented an opportunity to inflict severe and dramatic damages on the enemy while operating autonomously. In contrast, working in cooperation with ground forces, as tactical forces later did, was viewed as a subordinate role to the army‘s infantry and therefore upheld notions that the AAC was little more than an alternate means of delivering artillery. When President Franklin Delano Roosevelt called for a significantly expanded air arsenal and war plan in 1939, AAC strategists saw an opportunity to make an impression. Eager to exert their sovereignty, and sold on the efficacy of heavy bombers, AAC leaders answered the president‘s call with a strategic air doctrine and war plans built around the use of heavy bombers. The AAC, renamed the Army Air Forces (AAF) in 1941, eventually put the tactical squadrons into play in Europe, and thus tactical leaders spent 1943 and the beginning of 1944 preparing tactical air units for three missions: achieving and maintaining air superiority, isolating the battlefield, and providing air support for ground forces.
    [Show full text]
  • Omar Bradley's View of Airpower A
    The commander of the 12th Army Group didn’t need wild declarations about how airpower helped win the war in Europe. The results spoke for themselves. was none other than Army Gen. Omar N. Bradley, four-star commander of 12th Army Group. Today it’s uncommon for senior ground commanders to spend time and resources analyzing airpower’s role at the opera- tional level of war. This was not the case in 1945. Writing up airpower’s scorecard was deemed a vital task—so much so, it had to be completed before forces rotated back to the United States. As American airpower starts its third decade in action in US Central Com- mand, it is instructive to look back at how air superiority, interdiction, recon- naissance, and lift affected the war in Omar Bradley’s View of Airpower t the end of World War II, By Rebecca Grant the US Army brass in Eu- rope sang the praises of airpower. For the first time, Aairpower influenced the design for major campaigns—and made a difference in the tactical outcomes of battles from Normandy to Remagen, Germany. Lost in dense volumes of after-action analyses was one of the most unusual and compelling reports ever written on airpower. The report, titled “Effect of Air Power on Military Operations: Western Europe,” was authored by Army ground officers. The Air Effects Committee of 12th Army Group consisted of Army infantry officers drawn from the air branches of G-3 (operations) and G-2 (intelligence) of 12th Army Group. The man who signed off on the report on July 15, 1945, in Wiesbaden, Germany, 78 AIR FORCE Magazine / October 2010 Europe—and why the Army valued idea was to evaluate airpower at the David N.
    [Show full text]
  • Order of Battle 21 Army Group 01.06.44 ]
    6 June 2020 [ORDER OF BATTLE 21 ARMY GROUP 01.06.44 ] Home Forces British Troops Scottish Northern South Eastern Northern Ireland Command Command Command 55th (West Lancashire) 52nd (Lowland) 9th 61st 45th Infantry Division Infantry Division Armoured Division Infantry Division Infantry Division * 48th (South Midland) Infantry Division * Hampshire & Dorset 77th NOTES: Western Command, Eastern District Holding Division $ Command and Southern Command did 76th not have any formations under Infantry Division * th command. 38 (Welsh) * = Reserve formations Infantry Division $ = The 77th Holding Division was under 80th War Office Control Infantry Division * 35th Tank Brigade * ©www.BritishMilitaryHistory.co.uk Page 1 6 June 2020 [ORDER OF BATTLE 21 ARMY GROUP 01.06.44 ] Order of Battle st 21 Army Group 21st Army 1 June 1944 Group Invasion of France (D-Day) 2nd Army 1st Canadian Army See Next Page II Canadian I Airborne Corps Corps 4th Canadian 79th Armoured 1st Special Service 1st Airborne Armoured Division Division * Brigade $ Division 2nd Canadian Infantry 4th Special Service 6th Airborne Division Brigade $ Division # * = Assault Formations on D-Day st 1 Polish Armoured # = Assault formation on D -1. Came under Division command of I Corps on landing $ = Assault formations on D-Day, came under command of I Corps. ©www.BritishMilitaryHistory.co.uk Page 2 6 June 2020 [ORDER OF BATTLE 21 ARMY GROUP 01.06.44 ] 2nd Army I Corps VIII Corps XII Corps XXX Corps rd 3 Guards Armoured 43rd (Wessex) 7th Armoured Infantry Division * Division Infantry Division
    [Show full text]
  • Airpower and Ground Armies : Essays on the Evolution of Anglo-American Air Doctrine
    Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Airpower and ground armies : essays on the evolution of Anglo-American air doctrine. 1940- 1943/ editor, Daniel R Mortensen. p. cm. Includes bibliographical references and index. Air power-Great Britain-History. 2. Air power-United States-History. 3. World War, 1939-1945- Aerial operations, British, 4. World War, 1939-1945-Aerial operations, American. 5. World War, 1939-1945-Campaigns-Africa, North. 6. Operation Torch. I. Mortensen, Daniel R. UG635.G7A89 1998 358.4’03-dc21 97-46744 CIP Digitize December 2002 from 1998 Printing NOTE: Pagination changed Disclaimer Opinions, conclusions, and recommendations expressed or implied within are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent the views of Air University, the United States Air Force, the Department of Defense, or any other US government agency. Cleared for public release: distribution unlimited. Table of Contents Page DISCLAIMER ..................................................................................................................... i FORWARD........................................................................................................................ iii ABOUT THE EDITOR .......................................................................................................v INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................. vi GETTING TOGETHER ......................................................................................................1
    [Show full text]