| This study of the development of the Tactical Air Command in the decade following the end of World War II focuses on four central questions. First, how did USAF's dedication to strategic bombing effect its attention to its other missions--specifically tactical air operations--and its ability to incorporate the non-strategic lessons of combat operations? Second, how did TAC, in the face of what it perceived as USAF indifference, first survive and later thrive under the shadow of the Strategic Air Command? Third, to what extent was TAC's growth, particularly after the Korean War, guided by the military and civilian political environments rather than by its own assessments of likely military threats on the horizon? Fourth, what role did external agents (the Army, congress, presidential administrations, for example) play in the shaping of TAC during the period?;In answering these questions, the study treats a number of themes. One of the central issues is development of doctrine for tactical aviation, especially the struggle to develop meaningful joint doctrine. Another important, and related issue, is interservice relations after reorganization. TAC was, in a sense, the bridge between the independent Air Force and its roots as the Army Air Forces, a role that both enhanced and frustrated it development is thus of central importance, during the period under study, TAC enjoyed a series of strong commanders, each of whom left his mark on TAC. Thus, this work looks at how each influenced the character and development of TAC. Several key events, policies, and strategies of the Cold War period proved pivotal in determining the future of TAC. Understanding which policies and events were most decisive and why is vital in understanding the relationship between national policies and the evolution of military institutions and capabilities. Finally, this study looks at the learning process within the United States Air Force in an effort to determine to what extent operational experience is incorporated into institutional memory and plays a role in designing future USAF doctrines and capabilities. |
