Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
Without Commonwealth Forces the RAF would be a very hard pressed service, maybe on par with the Italians .
The number tossed around here is 25% of RAF squadrons were Canadian I would not feel bad about knocking this down to 20+% , I would assume the numbers for other Commonwealth countries would not be far off proportionally giving the Commonwealth between 40-45% of RAF aircrew.I admit , as I did to DG, that I wouild not know how to separate colonial manpower from British manpower for the RAF, so in these respects, if you have information to claify, I would be most grateful.
QUOTE]
DG
I accept your superior knowledge in this area of debate, but I do have some knowledge concerning mobilization rates and deployments, and really am trying to avoid "argument" for arguments sake. Really what I am trying to do is pool knowledge to arrive at a better understanding.
With regard to the US naval air forces, I will explain in a minute why I did not consider them, but for clarity I have not included them in the RAF totals. If they were you need to add another 1194 to that land based total. The FAA at that time had 84 front line squadrons on establishment
That all said, I would simply draw your attention to an issue that will draw this rapid expansion of the USAAC into focus. It was a similar expansion to that which was occurring for the US army field formations at the time. The US army upon mobilization was expanded from about 12 divs to about 70 divs in less than a year, but this did not mean that at the end of 1942 the Americans had 70 Divs combat ready. Far from it. In fact by the end of 1942, they were able to field about 1 corps of troops for front line combat, so in reality, depite all the expansion that was going on, the abilities of the US forces was still quite limited. The US was hard pressed to put into the field the forces they did at Torch, and this was essentially a Corps level operation. By the time they got to Sicily, they were able to field an army level operation. by the time they got to Normandy, the Americans were fielding the equivalent of an army group, and by the time of the Ardennes this had expanded to two army groups, plus of course a single army in Italy.
My opinion is that the expansion of the AAC mirrored this expansion. In 1942, despite all the mnassive expansions in personnel and equipment, the US forces in the ETO were extremely limited in their ability to put frontline forces into the field. The first bombiong operations were at Squadron strength, and IIRC were in July 1942. Fighter operations over the continent were not implemented until the end of the year, in miniscule proportions. Fast forward to six months later and the situation had changed considerably, but compared to RAF/CW ops was still extremely modest. The massive expansions that you are referring to are correct....but in June 1943 they were still not having any effect on the battle per se, because most of these formations were simply not ready. Within 6 months that situation had changed dramatically, I will grant you that.
The problem for the US was in the relatively small size of its starting force, and the need to continually break up formations to act as cadres for the next crop of new formations. This was as true for the AAC as it was for the ground formations.
So even though the AAC was as big as the RAF, if not bigger, in June 1943 it was still a force that needed to time to build up its experience and consolidate its expansion. I was aware that the AAC reached its peak strength oin July 1943, but this raw figure is somewhat misleading IMO, because it fails to take stock of the massive expansion the AAC had undergone so recently. You cannot do that and expect your forces to be immedialtey ready for heavy duty combat.
With regard to the Naval aviation issue, I am not ignoring it, but the the initial brief given for this thread was that we were to exclude Naval Air Arms in our discussions. For this reason we cannot consider the IJN air force, neither can we consider the FAA or the USN air coprs or, I guess, the USMC air formations. If that were the case, I thik the equation would change as you say. We are simply restricted to assessing the land based air forces
With the US Naval air arms in the equation, I would agree with you, the qualitative edge shifts in favour of the Us somewhat earlier. I would still argue that it was after July, but then perhaps thats being a little too precious about the issue...
It is clearly debatable (re:July 1943) but to me that is the start of the debate period - not 1944 or mid 1944. So I agree with the caveats re: RAF dominant ETO position at that time
Mind you, with the IJN also thrown into the equation, the world leader in the 41-42 bracket also chnages IMO. My vote under those conditions would change to the Japanese, with the Brits in a close second and the US in third position
Parsifal - all your points are well reasoned.
First I would like to say that this poll started out comparing 'Air Force' vs airforce and I pointed out, correctly in my opinion, that the question was not 'land based airforce' but 'airpower' and the ability to project strategic and tactical footprint globally... and if I recall coreectly Chris came to the same conclusion and expanded the discussion
I'd have to disagree with that. We can look at the frontline strengths and capabilities of the italians at any period, and they will always be inferior to the RAF excluding the effects of the dominions and the exiles at any period.
I wouldn't be so sure about this. We should check confronting datas. And we should agree on which datas using.
agree 95% except IMHO (not that my opinion means squat) I give the US parity with RAF beginning 44.
I still tend to rank RAF, LW as one and two, with US reaching parity to Japan in mid to late 1942 and start to go offensive during Guadalcanal, into the Solomons and New Guinea. The LW question is a difficult one for me for 1942. They were stretched but still remained a very powerful force but had no ability to weaken either Russia or even Britain strategically so I rank RAF/FAA the strongest in 1942 through mid to late 1943.
agree 95% except IMHO (not that my opinion means squat) I give the US parity with RAF beginning 44
about 16000 Brits were flight trained in US and 45000 in CanadaAn interesting point is that quite a few Allied pilots other than Americans were trained in the US during the war. Number Five British Flying Training School opened for business in September of 1941 in Clewiston, Florida. I don't know how many Brits were trained there but it was still open in February of 1945. 5924 American and French pilots were trained during 1941-45, at Hawthorne School of Aeronautics, Orangeburg, South Carolina.