Philip Major - Trial by fire : forging American close air support doctrine, World War I through September 1944

During World War II, the Allied Powers found themselves embroiled in a fight for survival on the European continent and lands beyond. Suspected, but unknown at the time was the significant role airpower would play in the struggle to defeat the Axis powers. This thesis focuses on the mission of close air support (CAS), employing airpower against tactical targets, those with the most immediate and transient effects during battle, in direct support of friendly forces. The definition of CAS has fluctuated with time; however, on the cusp of American combat in Europe, it was the immediate support of ground forces where contact with the enemy is imminent or has already been established.

Although numerous factors impacted CAS success in World War II, the focus here will be on three, analyzing each considering development and application in doctrine and execution. These factors are: (1) organization, command, and control, specifically as they relate to the use of air support, (2) the role of airpower as planned and integrated to support ground forces, and (3) the personnel, equipment and procedures for requesting and controlling CAS, which, for the purposes of this thesis will be referred to as the tactical air control system (TACS). It is important to note that the concept of liaison is inextricable from the discussion, at both the operational and tactical levels. In this discussion, a liaison is someone assigned or attached to another branch or service for the purpose of advising, planning, coordinating, cooperating or executing a mission involving both services.

Keeping these factors in mind, this thesis explores the doctrinal development of tactical airpower during the evolutionary period beginning in World War I, through the interwar period, ultimately focusing on lessons learned in North Africa, Italy, and northwestern Europe in World War II. Tremendous leadership, innovation, critical mission analysis, and technological advancement changed the Allied forces organization, command, and control methods, application of close support, and employment of tactical air control despite being heavily engaged in two theaters, ultimately delivering combat effects to support the ground forces.

The implications of airpowers combat potential were just beginning to be realized by the close of World War I. Advantages in speed and range over surface forces on the battlefield offered dramatic possibilities for missions, both tactical and strategic in nature. Initially used for observation, artillery spotting, and reconnaissance, it did not take long to realize the potential of air delivered weapons. Attacking targets beyond the battle might hasten conflict termination, while air-to-air combat meant freedom from observation and air attack. However, what many ground units wanted to know was: How will aircraft affect the localized battle by attack of front line enemy troops and equipment? While World War I provided American airmen the chance to execute these missions, the war ended with American airpower in relative infancy, with just a few tastes of close support to analyze. Following the November 1918 Armistice, tactical airpower was relegated to the background as strategic bombing theory and its advocates stepped into the limelight of doctrine development.