Military Innovation in the Interwar Period: Adopting the aircraft carrier: The British, American, and Japanese case studies
Military Innovation in the Interwar Period: Adopting the aircraft carrier: The British, American, and Japanese case studies
复制标题
两次世界大战期间的军事创新：采用航空母舰：英国、美国和日本的案例研究
DOI：
--
复制
发表时间：
1996
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
G. Till
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
G. Till
在第二次世界大战中，航空对海军对抗轴心国的战役结果有着决定性的影响。航母和陆基海上飞机大大扩展了海上侦察，提供了保护商船和军用船只免受空中和潜艇攻击的最有效手段，并被证明是攻击敌方战舰和海上商业的有力手段。海基飞机对于进行两栖作战是必不可少的，因为它们是攻击防御飞机和确保制空权的主要手段。舰载机保护两栖运输和岸上部队，并提供侦察和火力支援设施，往往是决定性的。然而，在两次战争之间的几年里，英国、美国和日本海军未能充分认识到空中力量对海上战争的贡献。三国海军的决策者都低估了海军空中力量在多大程度上代表着它们将采取的行动方式的重大偏离。尽管如此，下面的分析将表明，到第二次世界大战爆发时，三国海军的不同之处仅在于对海上空中力量战略意义的低估程度。英国人最不敏感，日本人最敏感。但是，它们之间的差异，以及它们与其他没有被列入这次审查的主要海军之间的差异，是程度问题，而不是绝对的问题。
In World War II, aviation had a decisive effect on the outcome of the naval campaigns against the Axis powers. Carrier and land-based maritime aircraft vastly extended reconnaissance at sea, offered the most effective means of protecting shipping – merchant as well as military – against air and submarine attack, and proved to be a potent means of attack on enemy warships and maritime commerce. Sea-based aircraft were essential for the conduct of amphibious operations because they were the principal means of attacking defensive aircraft and of securing command of the air. Carrier aircraft protected amphibious shipping and troops ashore and provided reconnaissance and fire-support facilities that were often decisive. However, in the years between the wars, the British, American, and Japanese navies failed to realize fully the contribution that airpower could make to the conduct of war at sea. Policy makers, in all three navies, underestimated the extent to which naval airpower represented a significant departure in the way they would conduct their business. Nonetheless, the following analysis will show that by the outbreak of World War II, the three navies differed only in the degree of their underestimation of the strategic significance of maritime air power. The British were the least perceptive, the Japanese, the most. But the differences among them, and indeed between them and other major navies not included in this review, were matters of degree, not a question of absolutes.