Eyes All Over the Sky: The Significance of Aerial Reconnaissance in the First World War

321 Pages·2011·1.54 MB·English

Eyes All Over the Sky:
The Significance of Aerial Reconnaissance in the First World War

by

James Streckfuss

December 6, 2011

M.A., University of Cincinnati, 2002
J.D., Woodrow Wilson College of Law, 1981
B.A., University of Cincinnati, 1973

A dissertation submitted to the
Division of Research and Advanced Studies of the University of Cincinnati
in partial fulfillment of the degree requirements for the degree of

DOCTORATE OF PHILOSOPHY

In the Department of History of the College of Arts and Sciences

Committee Chair: Christopher Phillips
2
Abstract Historians have portrayed aviation in the First World War as a romantic alternative to the mass slaughter
playing out on the ground and at sea. Young men volunteered for service in the air to escape the horrors of the
trenches and their exploits made them into heroes a war-weary public could revere. As valuable as this diversion
proved to civilian morale, it contributed little, if anything, to the military victory. Another global conflict broke out before
aviation’s destructive power matured into a potential war winning force. This characterization has allowed historians
to discuss World War I without any meaningful analysis of what role aviation played in the fighting. Connections
between the air war and ground and naval operations are missing from most contemporary accounts of the war. This
dissertation argues that airmen contributed greatly, shaping the manner in which armies and navies functioned in
ways that influenced the outcome of battles and the length of the war. Reconnaissance, observation and photography
made up the branch of World War I military and naval aeronautics that most significantly impacted the fighting.
Observation balloons and airplanes regulated artillery fire, infantry liaison aircraft kept track of the advances made by
attacking troops and the retreats of defenders, aerial photographers produced pictures that aided operational
planners and provided the basis for perpetually updated maps, and naval airplanes, airships, and tethered balloons
acted as aerial sentinels in a complex anti-submarine warfare organization that developed in the last half of the war.
In the decade following the armistice, aviation leaders had to abandon the proven aerial reconnaissance model they
developed during the war in favor of organizations that specialized in bombing and aerial combat. Achieving
independence from the army and navy, as well as simple financial survival in an era of draconian military budget cuts,
forced them to demonstrate that airmen possessed their own ability to destroy the enemy. Acting as auxiliaries to the
other services would no longer suffice. Aviators had to substitute for soldiers and sailors, not merely service them.
This atmosphere prompted air power advocates like William Mitchell, Hugh Trenchard, and Guilio Douhet to preach
the future potential of bombing and to minimize the past accomplishments of reconnaissance. The record compiled
by the Second World War’s bombing forces appeared to prove their arguments. This dissertation contends that in the
aftermath of World War II historians examining aviation in the First World War joined their chorus. Instead of
acknowledging the solid contributions made by aerial reconnaissance crews they have focused their analyses on the
largely ineffectual record compiled by World War I bombing crews or the glamorous lives of the flying aces. Failing to
uncover the type of massive damage produced by the U.S. Army Air Force, Britain’s Royal Air Force, or Germany’s
Luftwaffe, they have dismissed the efforts of World War I aircrews as meaningless. This dissertation’s goal is to give
the First World War’s aviators their rightful place in the war by documenting the achievements of reconnaissance
airmen.

In memory of Sharon Streckfuss, whose contributions to this project and to my
life are beyond evaluation, and who left us all much too soon
3
Contents

Acknowledgments iv

Note on Sources viii

Introduction 1

Chapter 1. Desire and Capacity Lock Horns 7

Chapter 2. The Fighter Pilot Mystique 30

Chapter 3. The Forgotten Air Service 65

Chapter 4. “Art. Obs.:” Spotting for the Army’s Big Guns 99

Chapter 5. Infantry Liaison: Keeping Track of the Attack 137

Chapter 6. “Two Men and a Darkroom under the Stairs:”
Aerial Reconnaissance and Aerial Photography 162

Chapter 7. The Air War over the Sea 205

Chapter 8. Aerial Reconnaissance v. Air Power:
Turning the Air Service into the Air Force 230

Conclusion. Historicism and World War I Aerial Reconnaissance 259

Bibliography 288
4
Acknowledgements

One of the first lessons learned in writing history is that it is never a solo
process. Everyone needs help along the way and I can testify to having had a
great deal of valuable assistance from many people during the research and
writing of this dissertation. Of course the History Department faculty of the
University of Cincinnati stand out for their close involvement, particularly
Christopher Phillips, Willard Sunderland, and Martin Francis, who made up the
local members of the dissertation committee. John Morrow, of the University of
Georgia, who served as the outside reader, had been a valued friend and
colleague for several years prior to the start of this project, and his work in this
field continues to inspire countless researchers and writers. Several other UC
historians, though not directly involved in the final product, nevertheless
contributed through the examples they provided in demonstrating how this kind of
work should be done. Daniel Beaver, with whom I was privileged to study during
his last year at UC, Thomas Sakmyster, John K. Alexander, David Stradling, and
Ross Dickinson, all made me a better student of history.
Outside the University of Cincinnati community many friends, most of
whom I came to know through the old Cross and Cockade Society, or the current
League of World War I Aviation Historians and Cross and Cockade International,
loaned research material or provided other help along the way. Funding for my
research junket to London to mine the vast holdings of the British National
Archives’ Public Record Office and the Moore-Brabazon and Laws Collections at
iv
the Royal Air Force Museum came from Bruce and Ralph Hooper of the
Elizabeth S. Hooper Foundation. This family foundation, named in honor of their
mother, has a long and impressive record of supporting organizations that honor
the service of men and women who have worn the uniform of this country and I
am myself honored that they chose to support my efforts as well. Staff members
of the National Archives Public Records Office perform their jobs in a highly
professional manner, juggling the demands of several hundred curious
researchers every day. Amidst the chaos they never failed to lend whatever
assistance I needed. The same can be said of the staff at the Royal Air Force
Museum, especially Peter Elliott, who arranged for a waiver of the rules so that I
could bring a digital camera into the facility at a time before cameras were
regularly allowed. During my stay in London, Michael and Shibohan Herne were
extremely gracious hosts who made me feel more like family than a temporary
border.
Col. Terry Finnegan and Dr. Birger Stichelbaut both served as valuable
sounding boards and people with similar views on the role and importance of
aerial reconnaissance. Dr. Stichelbaut’s efforts in organizing the 2006 Images of
Conflict: Military Aerial Photography and Archaeology conference in Ypres,
Belgium, where we all had the chance to share ideas, were especially
appreciated. The University of Ghent’s Department of Ancient History and
Archaeology and the In Flanders Fields Museum also deserve thanks for their
sponsorship of the conference. Steve Suddaby and Col. Steve Ruffin provided
many good suggestions and advice. Noel Shirley, who served for more than a
v
decade as Assistant Managing Editor of Over the Front, shared much primary
source material without which there would have been little said here about naval
aviation. The-late Peter Grosz and the-late Neal O’Connor, both of whom still
stand as giants in the field of WWI aviation research, taught the world most of
what is known about German aerial operations in the Great War. What little they
did not cover, my friend Peter Kilduff has done, and he was also generous with
his help here.
Several years before beginning graduate school, I had the opportunity to
spend a few days rummaging through the records at the U.S. Air Force Historical
Research Agency and the library at the Air War College during a visit to Maxwell
Air Force Base funded by a grant provided by the USAF HRA. The documents
copied during that visit were essential to the chapter on balloon operations. I
have not had a formal opportunity to thank Agency officials for that generosity
until now and would like particularly to mention Dr. Robert Johnson, of the
Archives Division. Annie Pinder, of the UK Parliamentary Archives, also proved
helpful answering an email query in a timely manner.
The largest measure of gratitude goes to my family. My mother, Ruby
Streckfuss, and sister, Virginia Gutzwiller, learned long ago that the question
“what would you like for Christmas” often led to very odd answers. In this case,
several holiday seasons spent shopping at the U.S. National Archives collecting
a complete set of the Gorrell Report on microfilm; an acquisition that ultimately
saved immeasurably in both travel time and expense. Finally, my wife, Sharon,
and our son, Erich, both endured many disruptions in their lives over several
vi
years in support of this research. In addition, both regularly lent their technical
expertise when called upon, helping solve more than a few hardware and
software problems. Erich also allowed me to conscript him for a couple days
service as research assistant photographing records at the National Archives’
College Park, Maryland, facility, saving me another road trip. To everyone I
express my thanks.
vii