This collection of essays presents a clear, authoritative study of airpower, combining historical narrative, thematic analysis, and expert perspective to show how military operations and national security have been shaped by airpower over the past 120 years. American Airpower offers a clear, balanced examination of how airpower has been developed, applied, and what it can—and cannot—achieve in war. Edited by Sterling Michael Pavelec, this collection brings together leading scholars and practitioners to trace the evolution of airpower from its early technological and intellectual foundations to its role in contemporary and emerging domains. Organized as a collection of thematic essays, the book integrates theory with practice. It traces how airpower concepts emerged alongside new technologies, were tested in major conflicts, and how they adapted—sometimes imperfectly—to political constraints, joint warfare, and irregular conflict. Contributors examine key missions such as strategic bombing, air mobility, naval aviation, intelligence and reconnaissance, and precision strike, while also addressing the growing intersections of airpower with space and cyber operations. Rather than advancing a single doctrinal argument, the volume highlights enduring debates: Can airpower alone achieve decisive political outcomes? What are its limits when separated from ground and maritime forces? How do technological advances shape expectations—and misperceptions—about what airpower can deliver? Case studies from World War II through post–Cold War operations illustrate both notable successes and persistent shortcomings.American Airpower highlights critical thinking over advocacy. It challenges readers to understand airpower not as a universal solution, but as a powerful tool whose effectiveness depends on context, strategy, and sound judgment. For students, officers, policymakers, and scholars seeking a clear foundation in airpower history and theory, this book offers a disciplined guide to understanding what airpower has achieved, what it has failed to do, and why those distinctions matter.
