This project asks the question of how different aerial strategies can affect the characteristics of aerial campaigns in conflict. It begins by developing a new categorization of aerial strategies that distinguishes aerial strategies by how targeted thy are. Data is collected on the type of strategies that were used in aerial campaigns from 1914 to 2003. A preliminary analysis of aerial strategy choice is conducted, studying the effect of military doctrines on strategy choice. The project also takes into consideration the role that ground forces, both those of the state carrying out the aerial attack and of its opponent, will play in determining the effect of aerial strategies on campaign duration and outcome.

Thesis--School of Advanced Airpower Studies, AY 1997-1998. / "March 2004." Includes bibliographical references. Full text document available on public STINET.

Thesis (M.S.)--School of Advanced Airpower Studies, Air University, 2000. / Includes bibliographical references. Also available via the Internet.

Thesis--School of Advanced Airpower Studies, Maxwell Air Force Base, Ala., 1994-95. / Title from title screen (viewed Oct. 10, 2003). "April 1996." Includes bibliographical references.

Thesis--School of Advanced Airpower Studies, Maxwell Air Force Base, Ala., 1995-96. / Title from title screen (viewed Nov. 7, 2003). "June 1996." Includes bibliographical references.

This thesis examines how air power has affected navies using the case of the United Kingdom between 1945 and 1957. Air power has given rise to numerous theories about its effect on the use of force, in which its impact on navies has been a particular theme. Many thinkers have interpreted air power as a strategic, operational and tactical challenge to navies, which would render them redundant and obsolete. Such ideas originated between the two World Wars but have continually reappeared since 1945 and were often influential in the British debate. During the period under consideration, the Royal Navy was challenged in a series of defence reviews. Although these serious and repeated attacks were generally motivated by financial considerations, they were justified primarily by claims relating to air power. It was argued that nuclear-armed air power would be sufficient to win wars, while any nuclear war would leave little role for navies. Later, this argument shifted to an emphasis on deterrence of war and it was suggested that naval forces were not vital to this deterrent. Although the Admiralty continued to justify a capability to defend sea communications as both a deterrent to war and vital in it, this case did not find favour with the government. During the mid-1950s, however, an alternative focus for the Navy emerged in the form of policing and limited wars, east of Suez. Conflicts in Korea and the Suez demonstrated that such conflicts could occur and that mobile naval forces, particularly carrier aviation, were well suited to intervention in them. It was also argued that land-based aircraft could take over some of the roles traditionally performed by naval forces, notably that of strike (against warships and shore targets) but also that of protecting shipping. These arguments were successfully defeated by the Admiralty. Land-based aircraft proved a useful complement to warships and naval aviation in protecting shipping but could only replace them in very limited areas. The Royal Navy differed from the US Navy in its conception of power projection against the land. Its capability for this task was thrown increasingly into doubt by growing Soviet submarine and air power and came to be justified by east of Suez commitments.

Thesis (M.A. in National Security Affairs)--Naval Postgraduate School, December 2007. / AD-A475 772. Thesis Advisor(s): Russell, James A. ; Khan, Feroz. "December 2007." Description based on title screen as viewed on January 25, 2008. Includes bibliographical references (p. 99-107). Also available via the World Wide Web.

Thesis (M.A.A.S.) -- Air University, 2004. / Title from PDF title page (viewed on April 23, 2009). "June 2004." Includes abstract. Includes bibliographical references (leaves 123-127).

Thesis (M.A.A.S.) -- Air University, 2004. / Title from PDF title page (viewed on April 24, 2009). "June 2004." Includes abstract. Includes bibliographical references (leaves 75-82).

Thesis (M.S.)--School of Advanced Air and Space Studies, 2008. / "June 2008." Vita. Includes bibliographical references (p. 200-203). Also available via the Internet.