<p>Att utnyttja flygstridskrafter har sedan tidernas begynnelse varit en effektiv metod att påtvinga motparten sin egen vilja. Sättet man använt flygstridskrafterna på har debatterats under historiens gång. Inom ämnet luftmakt finns det en rad kända och inflytelserika luftmaktsteoretiker som alla har sin idé om hur man bäst utnyttjar flygstridskrafter. Hur ser vår svenska doktrin ut gällande teorier kring luftmakt? Vilka luftmaktsteorier genomsyrar grundtanken bakom hur vi idag vägleder våra luftoperationer? Syftet med uppsatsen är att undersöka vilka generella och centrala luftmaktsteorier som återfinns i den svenska doktrinen. För att kunna svara på mina valda frågeställningar och tillgodose syftet med uppsatsen har jag valt att dela in uppsatsen i två delar. Den första delen är en beskrivande del där jag helt enkelt redogör för vad luftmakt är, presenterar centrala luftmaktsteoretiker och deras teorier samt redogör för vad vår doktrin säger angående luftmakt. Därefter kommer en komparation mellan centrala tankar och teorier kring luftmakt och svensk doktrin för luftoperationer. Resultatet i uppsatsen visar tydliga exempel på att doktrinen återspeglar det bästa hos flera av de centrala luftmaktsteoretikerna. Det centrala i doktrinen är effekttänkandet och utnyttjandet av indirekt metod. Avslutningsvis ser jag en begränsning gällande svensk doktrin och luftmaktsteorier kring strategiska mål och medel nu när Försvarsmakten gått från invasions- till insatsförsvar och därmed minskat på personal och resurser. Frågan är om vi har möjlighet att effektivt verka strategiskt som enskilt land eller om vi är beroende av andra nationer?</p> / <p>To use air power has always been an effective way to affect your opponent. The way you use air power has been debated throughout history. There are a number of famous and influential air power theorists who all have their idea of how to best use air power. How does the Swedish air doctrine describe air power? Which airpower theories work as guidelines for our air operations today? The purpose of this paper is to examine general and central air power theories which can be found in the Swedish doctrine. To be able to answer my questions and to achieve the objective of this paper, I have chosen to divide the paper into two parts. The first part is a descriptive part where I simply describe what air power is, present well known air-power theorists and their theories and outline what our doctrine says about air power. The second part is a comparison between the central ideas and theories about air power and the Swedish airdoctrine. The result of this paper shows that the Swedish air doctrine has been influenced by several air-power theorists. Central in the doctrine are effects-based operations and the use of indirect methods. Finally, I see a limitation in the Swedish air doctrine and strategic air power theories now that the Armed Forces have reorganized, which means less personnel and resources. The question is whether we can effectively operate on a strategic level as a single country or if we are dependent on other nations?</p>

Att utnyttja flygstridskrafter har sedan tidernas begynnelse varit en effektiv metod att påtvinga motparten sin egen vilja. Sättet man använt flygstridskrafterna på har debatterats under historiens gång. Inom ämnet luftmakt finns det en rad kända och inflytelserika luftmaktsteoretiker som alla har sin idé om hur man bäst utnyttjar flygstridskrafter. Hur ser vår svenska doktrin ut gällande teorier kring luftmakt? Vilka luftmaktsteorier genomsyrar grundtanken bakom hur vi idag vägleder våra luftoperationer? Syftet med uppsatsen är att undersöka vilka generella och centrala luftmaktsteorier som återfinns i den svenska doktrinen. För att kunna svara på mina valda frågeställningar och tillgodose syftet med uppsatsen har jag valt att dela in uppsatsen i två delar. Den första delen är en beskrivande del där jag helt enkelt redogör för vad luftmakt är, presenterar centrala luftmaktsteoretiker och deras teorier samt redogör för vad vår doktrin säger angående luftmakt. Därefter kommer en komparation mellan centrala tankar och teorier kring luftmakt och svensk doktrin för luftoperationer. Resultatet i uppsatsen visar tydliga exempel på att doktrinen återspeglar det bästa hos flera av de centrala luftmaktsteoretikerna. Det centrala i doktrinen är effekttänkandet och utnyttjandet av indirekt metod. Avslutningsvis ser jag en begränsning gällande svensk doktrin och luftmaktsteorier kring strategiska mål och medel nu när Försvarsmakten gått från invasions- till insatsförsvar och därmed minskat på personal och resurser. Frågan är om vi har möjlighet att effektivt verka strategiskt som enskilt land eller om vi är beroende av andra nationer? / To use air power has always been an effective way to affect your opponent. The way you use air power has been debated throughout history. There are a number of famous and influential air power theorists who all have their idea of how to best use air power. How does the Swedish air doctrine describe air power? Which airpower theories work as guidelines for our air operations today? The purpose of this paper is to examine general and central air power theories which can be found in the Swedish doctrine. To be able to answer my questions and to achieve the objective of this paper, I have chosen to divide the paper into two parts. The first part is a descriptive part where I simply describe what air power is, present well known air-power theorists and their theories and outline what our doctrine says about air power. The second part is a comparison between the central ideas and theories about air power and the Swedish airdoctrine. The result of this paper shows that the Swedish air doctrine has been influenced by several air-power theorists. Central in the doctrine are effects-based operations and the use of indirect methods. Finally, I see a limitation in the Swedish air doctrine and strategic air power theories now that the Armed Forces have reorganized, which means less personnel and resources. The question is whether we can effectively operate on a strategic level as a single country or if we are dependent on other nations?

The aim of this thesis is to examine the relationship between the Royal Australian Air Force (RAAF) and the Royal Australian Navy (RAN) regarding the operation of aircraft from ships of the RAN and from RAAF shore bases. The effects of the separate intellectual development of maritime doctrine in the RAAF and RAN, and the efforts of the two Australian services to transfer theory into practice will be considered in the pre- (and post) World War II period, with due consideration of the experience of the services in both wars. The thesis will also discuss the problems that were faced by the RAAF and RAN to develop mutually acceptable operational procedures to enable the efficient use of aircraft in a maritime setting. The influence and effect on RAAF and RAN doctrine and equipment procurement, as a result of the special relationships that developed between the Air Force and Navy of Australia and Britain will be critically examined. A similar approach to the post war US/Australian relationship, and its effect on the Australian services, will also be critically examined. The thesis being propounded is that the development of a unique Australian maritime policy was retarded due to a combination of the relationship with Britain and the United States, lack of suitable equipment, lack of clear operational concepts in both the RAAF and RAN and the parochial attitude of the most senior commanders of both Services. The study has been based on Department of Navy, Department of Air and Department of Defence documents held in the National Archives of Australia in Canberra and Melbourne. In addition, relevant documents from the Admiralty and Air Ministry related to the development of naval aviation on RAN vessels during World War I, the attitude of the RAF toward the deployment of RAAF units to Singapore, and the negotiations that resulted in the procurement of HMA Ships Sydney and Melbourne, have been perused. Wartime operational records of the RAAF have been examined to obtain data to enable a critical study to be made of the RAAF anti-submarine campaign, torpedo bomber operations and the maritime campaign undertaken from bases in North Western Area during World War II. The influence of the commander of the United States 5th Air Force has also been incorporated in the discussion. The research uncovered procedural and operational variations between the two Services, the diversion of key elements from Australian command and the priority given to the American line of advance that resulted in Australian operations being given a secondary, supportive, status. A conclusion reached as a result of this research has been that the development of a unique Australian maritime aerial capability was restricted by the requirement of Britain to deploy flying units to Singapore in 1940. Similarly, the pressure exerted on the RAN by the Admiralty to purchase the Light Fleet Carriers in the late 1940s was more in the interests of the RN and British foreign policy than that of the RAN. Overall, the relationship with the Britain and the United States masked the real weakness in Australia???s maritime operations and retarded its development.

The aim of this thesis is to examine the relationship between the Royal Australian Air Force (RAAF) and the Royal Australian Navy (RAN) regarding the operation of aircraft from ships of the RAN and from RAAF shore bases. The effects of the separate intellectual development of maritime doctrine in the RAAF and RAN, and the efforts of the two Australian services to transfer theory into practice will be considered in the pre- (and post) World War II period, with due consideration of the experience of the services in both wars. The thesis will also discuss the problems that were faced by the RAAF and RAN to develop mutually acceptable operational procedures to enable the efficient use of aircraft in a maritime setting. The influence and effect on RAAF and RAN doctrine and equipment procurement, as a result of the special relationships that developed between the Air Force and Navy of Australia and Britain will be critically examined. A similar approach to the post war US/Australian relationship, and its effect on the Australian services, will also be critically examined. The thesis being propounded is that the development of a unique Australian maritime policy was retarded due to a combination of the relationship with Britain and the United States, lack of suitable equipment, lack of clear operational concepts in both the RAAF and RAN and the parochial attitude of the most senior commanders of both Services. The study has been based on Department of Navy, Department of Air and Department of Defence documents held in the National Archives of Australia in Canberra and Melbourne. In addition, relevant documents from the Admiralty and Air Ministry related to the development of naval aviation on RAN vessels during World War I, the attitude of the RAF toward the deployment of RAAF units to Singapore, and the negotiations that resulted in the procurement of HMA Ships Sydney and Melbourne, have been perused. Wartime operational records of the RAAF have been examined to obtain data to enable a critical study to be made of the RAAF anti-submarine campaign, torpedo bomber operations and the maritime campaign undertaken from bases in North Western Area during World War II. The influence of the commander of the United States 5th Air Force has also been incorporated in the discussion. The research uncovered procedural and operational variations between the two Services, the diversion of key elements from Australian command and the priority given to the American line of advance that resulted in Australian operations being given a secondary, supportive, status. A conclusion reached as a result of this research has been that the development of a unique Australian maritime aerial capability was restricted by the requirement of Britain to deploy flying units to Singapore in 1940. Similarly, the pressure exerted on the RAN by the Admiralty to purchase the Light Fleet Carriers in the late 1940s was more in the interests of the RN and British foreign policy than that of the RAN. Overall, the relationship with the Britain and the United States masked the real weakness in Australia???s maritime operations and retarded its development.