[PDF] The Effectiveness Of Airpower In The 20th Century eBook
The Effectiveness Of Airpower In The 20th Century Book in PDF, ePub and Kindle version is available to download in english. Read online anytime anywhere directly from your device. Click on the download button below to get a free pdf file of The Effectiveness Of Airpower In The 20th Century book. This book definitely worth reading, it is an incredibly well-written.
"This volume ... takes a look at the military airpower functions that emerged during World War I, and then examines the development of airpower doctrine in seven nations that developed major military air arms during and after the first World War. They are: France, Germany, Great Britain, Italy, Japan, the Union of Soviet Socialist States (USSR), and the United States of America ... The text also reviews the use of military airpower in conflicts that took place between the two world wars"--Page xi.
"This volume ... looks at the air arms of seven nations engaged in [World War II]: France, Germany, Great Britain, Italy, Japan, the USSR and the United States. Selected campaigns are discussed in detail to illustrate how national pre-war airpower doctrine was applied, and what results were achieved."--Preface
The book reviews the actual effectiveness of military air power in accomplishing desired military and political goals in a number of conflicts following WWII. During the Korean War and the Vietnam War, U.S. air power attempted a re-run of WWII aerial activities. However, in both conflicts, political constraints prevented the United States from achieving its desired political results, although the 1972 B-52 strategic bombing campaign against Hanoi worked to bring the North Vietnamese back to the negotiating table. The Falklands/Malvinas War pitted the UK against Argentina in a remote corner of the South Atlantic. Air power allowed a U.K victory, barely. The USSR held air supremacy over Afghanistan but was unable to subdue tough Afghan guerrillas, and was finally forced to withdraw after Stinger missiles were introduced. The Gulf War demonstrated the increasing effectiveness of precision aerial weaponry. The conflict in Kosovo finally produced a result long sought by air power enthusiasts-an end to fighting brought about by air attack alone.
Did the impact of air power in the Gulf War mark a revolution in warfare? Is air power impotent in politically fractured scenarios such as Bosnia? Does air power need to break free from habits and concepts induced by 40 years of superpower confrontation? How does air power impinge upon new security structures in Europe and the Middle East? Can air power any longer have the same meaning in Washington, Moscow, Stockholm or Copenhagen? How can air power contribute, and with what implications, to international peacekeeping and peace enforcing? How can the complexities of air power be contained within arms control and confidence-building regimes? What support can air power offer to international diplomacy?
In the pantheon of air power spokesmen, Giulio Douhet holds center stage. His writings, more often cited than perhaps actually read, appear as excerpts and aphorisms in the writings of numerous other air power spokesmen, advocates-and critics. Though a highly controversial figure, the very controversy that surrounds him offers to us a testimonial of the value and depth of his work, and the need for airmen today to become familiar with his thought. The progressive development of air power to the point where, today, it is more correct to refer to aerospace power has not outdated the notions of Douhet in the slightest In fact, in many ways, the kinds of technological capabilities that we enjoy as a global air power provider attest to the breadth of his vision. Douhet, together with Hugh “Boom” Trenchard of Great Britain and William “Billy” Mitchell of the United States, is justly recognized as one of the three great spokesmen of the early air power era. This reprint is offered in the spirit of continuing the dialogue that Douhet himself so perceptively began with the first edition of this book, published in 1921. Readers may well find much that they disagree with in this book, but also much that is of enduring value. The vital necessity of Douhet’s central vision-that command of the air is all important in modern warfare-has been proven throughout the history of wars in this century, from the fighting over the Somme to the air war over Kuwait and Iraq.
The use of airpower in wartime calls to mind the massive bombings of World War II, but airplanes have long been instrumental in small wars as well. Ever since its use by the French to put down rebellious Moroccan tribes in 1913, airpower has been employed to fight in limited but often lengthy small conflicts around the globe. This is the first comprehensive history of airpower in small wars-conflicts pitting states against non-state groups such as insurgents, bandits, factions, and terrorists-tracing it from the early years of the twentieth century to the present day. It examines dozens of conflicts with strikingly different scenarios: the Greek Civil War, the Philippine Anti-Huk campaign, French and British colonial wars, the war in South Vietnam before the American escalation, counterinsurgency in southern Africa, Latin American counterguerrilla operations, and counterinsurgency and counterterrorist campaigns in the Middle East over the last four decades. For each war, the authors describe the strategies employed on both sides of the conflict, the air forces engaged, and the specific airpower tactics employed. They discuss the ground campaigns and provide the political background necessary to understand the air campaigns, and in each case they judge the utility of airpower in its broadest sense. In their historic sweep, they show how forms of airpower evolved from planes to police helicopters, aircraft of the civilian air reserve, and today's unmanned aircraft. They also disclose how small wars after World War II required new strategies, operational solutions, and tactics. By taking this broad view of small-war airpower, the authors are able to make assessments about the most effective and least effective means of employing airpower. They offer specific conclusions ranging from the importance of comprehensive strategy to the need for the United States and its allies to expand small-wars training programs. Airpower in Small Wars will be invaluable for educating military professionals and policy makers in the subject as well as for providing a useful framework for developing more effective doctrine for employing airpower in the conflicts we are most likely to see in the twenty-first century.
Since the unprecedentedly effective performance of the allied air campaign against Iraq during Operation Desert Storm, the role of American air power in future wars has become a topic of often heated public debate. In this balanced appraisal of air power's newly realized strengths in joint warfare, Benjamin Lambeth, a defense analyst and civilian pilot who has flown in most of the equipment described in this book, explores the extent to which the United States can now rely on air-delivered precision weapons in lieu of ground forces to achieve strategic objectives and minimize American casualties.Beginning with the U.S. experience in Southeast Asia and detailing how failures there set the stage for a sweeping refurbishment of the nation's air warfare capability, Lambeth reviews the recent history of American air power, including its role in the Gulf War and in later conflicts in Bosnia, Kosovo, and Serbia. He examines improvements in areas ranging from hardware development to aircrew skills and organizational adaptability.Lambeth acknowledges that the question of whether air power should operate independently or continue to support land operations is likely to remain contentious. He concludes, however, that air power, its strategic effectiveness proven, can now set the conditions for victory even from the outset of combat if applied to its fullest potential.
This collection of essays reflects the proceedings of a 1991 conference on "The United States Air Force: Aerospace Challenges and Missions in the 1990s," sponsored by the USAF and Tufts University. The 20 contributors comment on the pivotal role of airpower in the war with Iraq and address issues and choices facing the USAF, such as the factors that are reshaping strategies and missions, the future role and structure of airpower as an element of US power projection, and the aerospace industry's views on what the Air Force of the future will set as its acquisition priorities and strategies. The authors agree that aerospace forces will be an essential and formidable tool in US security policies into the next century. The contributors include academics, high-level military leaders, government officials, journalists, and top executives from aerospace and defense contractors.
The book reviews the actual effectiveness of military air power in accomplishing desired military and political goals in a number of conflicts following WWII. During the Korean War and the Vietnam War, U.S. air power attempted a re-run of WWII aerial activities. However, in both conflicts, political constraints prevented the United States from achieving its desired political results, although the 1972 B-52 strategic bombing campaign against Hanoi worked to bring the North Vietnamese back to the negotiating table. The Falklands/Malvinas War pitted the UK against Argentina in a remote corner of the South Atlantic. Air power allowed a U.K victory, barely. The USSR held air supremacy over Afghanistan but was unable to subdue tough Afghan guerrillas, and was finally forced to withdraw after Stinger missiles were introduced. The Gulf War demonstrated the increasing effectiveness of precision aerial weaponry. The conflict in Kosovo finally produced a result long sought by air power enthusiasts-an end to fighting brought about by air attack alone.
The U.S. has long suffered from a serious strategy deficit. In short, there is a general crisis of strategic comprehension, a lack of agreement on the most effective organizing ideas. Airpower is by no means lonely in suffering from strategic theoretical uncertainty. The study argues that the United States needs a theory of war and warfare. It claims that future warfare will be diverse and that the tactical, operational, and strategic value of airpower must always be situational. A coherent theory of employment for all of airpower's capabilities, not only the kinetic, is needed. Airpower's potential utility lies within a spectrum of possibilities and is dependent on context. The study advises frank recognition of airpower's situational limitations. (Dr. Colin S. Gray is Professor of International Politics and Strategic Studies at the University of Reading in England. Originally published by the Airpower Research Institute)