What do you think?
Rate this book
Holding the Line: The Naval Air Campaign In Korea
Naval and air power was crucial to the United Nations' success in the Korean War, as it sought to negate the overwhelming Chinese advantage in manpower. In what became known as the 'long hard slog', naval aviators sought to slow and cut off communist forces and support troops on the ground. USS Leyte (CV-32) operated off Korea in the Sea of Japan for a record 93 continuous days to support the Marines in their epic retreat out of North Korea, and was crucial in the battles of the spring and summer of 1951 in which the UN forces again battled to the 38th Parallel. All of this was accomplished with a force that was in the midst of change, as jet aircraft altered the entire nature of naval aviation. Holding the Line chronicles the carrier war in Korea from the first day of the war to the last, focusing on front-line combat, while also describing the technical development of aircraft and shipboard operations, and how these all affected the broader strategic situation on the Korean Peninsula.
320 pages, Hardcover
First published March 19, 2019
43 people are currently reading
97 people want to read
About the author
Thomas McKelvey Cleaver
25 books36 followersMost of my non-fiction writing is in the field of aviation, primarily the history of people, units and events, though I am also interested in technological developments and their influence on events.
I first ran across "serious" aviation writing when I was 10 and found William Green's "All The World's Aircraft, 1954" - the first book I read that seriously dealt with aircraft development beyond picture books. Over the years I read many books by Bill (as I came eventually to know him), and 25 years later he was the first editor to professionally publish an article by me about an aviation topic (a feature about people in California who restored, owned and operated antique airplanes). Not only did he publish the article, he used my photograph for the cover of that issue of Air Enthusiast Quarterly! In the years that followed, Bill became a friend through the mail, a source of valuable insight about writing, and an enthusiastic supporter of my efforts. I've had a lot of success that way with fellow authors.
My interest in the field of aviation must be genetic. My mother's favorite tale about me was that my first word, spoken around age 1, was "o-pane!" when we were in a park in Denver, and I pointed up at a P-38 as it flew overhead.
My father was involved in aviation in the 1930s, and knew most of the Major Names of the era, like Jimmy Doolittle, Roscoe Turner, and even Ernst Udet. (As an aside, I met General Doolittle myself in 1976. Upon hearing my name, he looked me up and down, then shook his head and said "Nope, too young and too tall." Taken aback for a moment, I realized he was thinking of my father, also a Tom Cleaver. Once I identified myself, he told me a story about my father I had never heard before. I later discovered he had near-perfect recall of names and events.) I grew up looking at my father's photo albums of the old airplanes he had been around, which is probably why I most enjoy airplanes from those years.
In addition to writing about airplanes, I take pictures of them in flight. As a result of both activities, I have flown in everything from a Curtiss Jenny to an Air Force F-4E Phantom (definitely the best rollercoaster ride ever), and have additionally been up in World War II airplanes - the P-51 Mustang, P-40 Warhawk, SBD Dauntless, B-25 Mitchell, and many many many times in a T-6. As a pilot myself, I have about 200 hours in a Stearman biplane trainer as a member of a club back in the 1970s. I am certain my personal knowledge of flying as a pilot has helped me put a reader "in the cockpit" in my writing.
While I have advanced college and university degrees, I consider myself an autodidact, and I see the involvement with airplanes as my key to the world of self-education, as I would ask myself "what was that airplane used for?" which led to such questions as "how did that war happen?" I was also fortunate to grow up in a home with lots of books and a father who enjoyed history; between that and forays to the Denver Public Library (a Saturday spent in the stacks at the Main Library was a day in heaven), my education was very eclectic in subject matter.
My "film school" education came on Saturday afternoons spent at the old Park Theater on South Gaylord Street in Denver, where I went every Saturday from age 7 to age 15 when the theater closed, and watched everything that played on-screen. Somewhere along there, I learned the meaning of "good movie."
I first ran across "serious" aviation writing when I was 10 and found William Green's "All The World's Aircraft, 1954" - the first book I read that seriously dealt with aircraft development beyond picture books. Over the years I read many books by Bill (as I came eventually to know him), and 25 years later he was the first editor to professionally publish an article by me about an aviation topic (a feature about people in California who restored, owned and operated antique airplanes). Not only did he publish the article, he used my photograph for the cover of that issue of Air Enthusiast Quarterly! In the years that followed, Bill became a friend through the mail, a source of valuable insight about writing, and an enthusiastic supporter of my efforts. I've had a lot of success that way with fellow authors.
My interest in the field of aviation must be genetic. My mother's favorite tale about me was that my first word, spoken around age 1, was "o-pane!" when we were in a park in Denver, and I pointed up at a P-38 as it flew overhead.
My father was involved in aviation in the 1930s, and knew most of the Major Names of the era, like Jimmy Doolittle, Roscoe Turner, and even Ernst Udet. (As an aside, I met General Doolittle myself in 1976. Upon hearing my name, he looked me up and down, then shook his head and said "Nope, too young and too tall." Taken aback for a moment, I realized he was thinking of my father, also a Tom Cleaver. Once I identified myself, he told me a story about my father I had never heard before. I later discovered he had near-perfect recall of names and events.) I grew up looking at my father's photo albums of the old airplanes he had been around, which is probably why I most enjoy airplanes from those years.
In addition to writing about airplanes, I take pictures of them in flight. As a result of both activities, I have flown in everything from a Curtiss Jenny to an Air Force F-4E Phantom (definitely the best rollercoaster ride ever), and have additionally been up in World War II airplanes - the P-51 Mustang, P-40 Warhawk, SBD Dauntless, B-25 Mitchell, and many many many times in a T-6. As a pilot myself, I have about 200 hours in a Stearman biplane trainer as a member of a club back in the 1970s. I am certain my personal knowledge of flying as a pilot has helped me put a reader "in the cockpit" in my writing.
While I have advanced college and university degrees, I consider myself an autodidact, and I see the involvement with airplanes as my key to the world of self-education, as I would ask myself "what was that airplane used for?" which led to such questions as "how did that war happen?" I was also fortunate to grow up in a home with lots of books and a father who enjoyed history; between that and forays to the Denver Public Library (a Saturday spent in the stacks at the Main Library was a day in heaven), my education was very eclectic in subject matter.
My "film school" education came on Saturday afternoons spent at the old Park Theater on South Gaylord Street in Denver, where I went every Saturday from age 7 to age 15 when the theater closed, and watched everything that played on-screen. Somewhere along there, I learned the meaning of "good movie."
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 15 of 15 reviews
June 16, 2022
If you're looking for a contemporary accounting of U.S. naval activities in the Korean War, you could do a lot worse than this synthesis. Cleaver tells a good narrative story and, though he bleeds Navy blue and gold, he's quite forthright about his loyalties. What he probably does best is capture how hard it was for the U.S. and British carriers to function in the winter environment of Korea, while dealing with a near-crash transition to jet aircraft. Also good is that Cleaver is appropriately skeptical of many US strategic choices in the war, and is aware of the pattern of bad thinking that carried into Vietnam and, arguably, beyond.
Less good is that Cleaver can be a little weak on the U.S. Army, as witnessed by the meme that won't die; the invocation of George S. Patton's "pearl-handled" guns. This leads us to suggest two books for further reading: "Combat Ready?" (Texas A&M, 2010) by Thomas E. Hanson and "Forgotten Warriors" (Kansas, 2010) by T.X. Hammes. These are excellent monographs that examine what the U.S. Army and Marines were respectively doing to prepare for the next war on the eve of Korea.
Less good is that Cleaver can be a little weak on the U.S. Army, as witnessed by the meme that won't die; the invocation of George S. Patton's "pearl-handled" guns. This leads us to suggest two books for further reading: "Combat Ready?" (Texas A&M, 2010) by Thomas E. Hanson and "Forgotten Warriors" (Kansas, 2010) by T.X. Hammes. These are excellent monographs that examine what the U.S. Army and Marines were respectively doing to prepare for the next war on the eve of Korea.
July 30, 2023
An interesting, and incisive, account of the Korean War with a focus on the Navy and Marine air campaign. Cleaver drives home how totally unprepared the US was for a conventional war involving land forces, logistics, shipborne supply and tactical air support. At the time the war broke out, the US was pursuit a policy of atomic deterrence, assuming that no national interests could arise that could not be influenced by the specter of a nuclear response. The Army and the Navy were drastically reduced across the board through the efforts of SECDEF Louis Johnson - easily the worst SECDEF ever, but one who was encouraged and supported by the Truman Administration, until he wasn't. There was a movement to do away with the Navy - certainly to absorb naval aviation into the newly independent Air Force. The Army was a mere shadow of its post-WWII strength and readiness. Cleaver provides an excellent account of the "Revolt of the Admirals" that saved naval aviation and the carriers.
When North Korean forces poured across the broider into South Korea, the US response was totally inadequate. Air Force fighters bombers could not operate from Korean dirt fields and had to sortie from Japan, giving them a ten-fifteen minute loiter time over the battlefield. The very few carriers still operational provided air support for the overwhelmed UN forces, ultimately saving them from being expelled entirely off the peninsula since the carriers were stationed 50-100 miles off the coast and could keep air cover over the battlefield and on call.
Cleaver highlights the limitations of the air campaign over Korea. Strategic bombing had limited effect, at best - there was little of strategic value to bomb. The last year or so of the war, strategic bombing did little more than bounce the rubble around. Close air support was critical to stem the vast Chinese incursions and attacks, but it was diminished by bureaucratic issues. For example, the Marine doctrine of on-call air support to meet battlefield exigencies as they occurred was subsumed into an Air Force doctrine of planned support missions that centralized battlefield requests and promulgated scheduled close air support schedules 24-hours in advance, regardless of the real time needs of units in contact. The mixture of WWII era aircraft with the emerging jet technologies is another interesting aspect of the air war over Korea.
Cleaver is adept at explaining the political and bureaucratic factors that affected the course of the war in Korea, and the international maneuverings and missed opportunities. As he points out, many of these same failings reappeared in the Vietnam War and with the same deleterious effects.
If anything, there is an overwhelming amount of detail interspersed throughout the book - bomb loads, sortie compositions, squadrons designations and damage claims - trucks, trains, bridges.... it becomes somewhat tedious to wade through. Nevertheless, the insights and analyses provided of the war, the experience of those engaged in the air campaigns, and the contextual issues that governed strategy, tactics and operations - indeed the very nature and progress of the war - make this an extremely worthwhile study of the Korean War and the Navy/Marine air campaign so vital to the UN war effort.
When North Korean forces poured across the broider into South Korea, the US response was totally inadequate. Air Force fighters bombers could not operate from Korean dirt fields and had to sortie from Japan, giving them a ten-fifteen minute loiter time over the battlefield. The very few carriers still operational provided air support for the overwhelmed UN forces, ultimately saving them from being expelled entirely off the peninsula since the carriers were stationed 50-100 miles off the coast and could keep air cover over the battlefield and on call.
Cleaver highlights the limitations of the air campaign over Korea. Strategic bombing had limited effect, at best - there was little of strategic value to bomb. The last year or so of the war, strategic bombing did little more than bounce the rubble around. Close air support was critical to stem the vast Chinese incursions and attacks, but it was diminished by bureaucratic issues. For example, the Marine doctrine of on-call air support to meet battlefield exigencies as they occurred was subsumed into an Air Force doctrine of planned support missions that centralized battlefield requests and promulgated scheduled close air support schedules 24-hours in advance, regardless of the real time needs of units in contact. The mixture of WWII era aircraft with the emerging jet technologies is another interesting aspect of the air war over Korea.
Cleaver is adept at explaining the political and bureaucratic factors that affected the course of the war in Korea, and the international maneuverings and missed opportunities. As he points out, many of these same failings reappeared in the Vietnam War and with the same deleterious effects.
If anything, there is an overwhelming amount of detail interspersed throughout the book - bomb loads, sortie compositions, squadrons designations and damage claims - trucks, trains, bridges.... it becomes somewhat tedious to wade through. Nevertheless, the insights and analyses provided of the war, the experience of those engaged in the air campaigns, and the contextual issues that governed strategy, tactics and operations - indeed the very nature and progress of the war - make this an extremely worthwhile study of the Korean War and the Navy/Marine air campaign so vital to the UN war effort.
February 1, 2019
This book is filled with historical detail about the US Navy in Korea. As a child, my grandfather told me about his time in Korea but those were just stories in a kids head until I read this book. The book provided context and a deeper understand of the history behind all the stories my grandfather told me about. This is a fantastic book for any history buff!
May 7, 2021
A good book, providing an overview of Naval Aviation during the Korean War. The author, noted aviation historian Thomas Cleaver, has written a very in-depth history of both the specific naval air campaigns in the Korean conflict and, more broadly, the first major war involving jet and helicopter aircraft. The book starts with the development of naval aviation after WWII. The slow transition to jet aircraft, the budget struggles during the post-war drawdown, and the debates on the future of airpower delivery between the Navy and Air Force are covered in detail. As the book progresses the Navy’s contribution to the early campaigns in Korea are described. The author gives each Carrier’s detailed story and provides great descriptions of the conditions and environment faced by the aviators. In the latter part of the book the author describes how naval aviation played a major role in the interdiction and strategic bombing campaigns over North Korea. He speaks to the frustration felt by many aviators as they continued to “bounce rubble” or drop bridges in support of the negotiating efforts. Chapters on Marine Corps aviation’s contribution to close air support and the development of combat search and rescue with helicopters ensure a broader story than just the carrier strikes. By referencing the Soviet records made available in the 1990s and various other sources, Cleaver provides great insights into the dynamically revised history of the Korean War’s air campaigns. The failure of American aviation to realize their un-met objectives and under-performance of combat units had, Cleaver points out, a negative effect on the use of air power in the next major conflict in Vietnam. A great book for anyone wishing to understand the benefits and limitations of carrier based aviation. Highly recommended for anyone wanting to learn more about the Korean War.
May 19, 2024
A look into use of US naval airpower in Korean war. Written in typical Osprey fashion it combines strategic overview with personal insights, first hand accounts and some background. It's not a typical Osprey book in that it's longer than their main series.
And while book does provide a good overview of the campaign author tends too focus too much o the way carriers operated. Which carries was where, how long were they there, how many sorties they launched, how many mishaps aircraft suffered and the like. At times the effect of this on war in Korea seems to be more of an afterthought with missions and effects described in general terms. Major campaigns as covered but again, in a way that focuses more on operations of the carriers and their air wings rather than what they achieved on the ground and how that affected the war. The overall impression is that author did a lot of research in this area and then simply didn't want to see all that work go to waste, so he included it.
Author also makes a bold claim that carrier launched strike on Pyongyang on the 4. July, mere days after North Korea launched the attack, persuaded Stalin not to send Soviet aircraft to Korea openly and Mao to delay direct intervention until end of the year under vastly different circumstances. Topped by the claim that this was one of the things that led to eventual Soviet-Sino split. No evidence is ofered, merely "later investigations showed that....".
Overall it's a nice book that offers good overview of the campaign from a specific angle and as such nice read to somebody with a casual interest in this war. Even if it's a bit tedious at parts where author focuses on minor and not that relevant details.
And while book does provide a good overview of the campaign author tends too focus too much o the way carriers operated. Which carries was where, how long were they there, how many sorties they launched, how many mishaps aircraft suffered and the like. At times the effect of this on war in Korea seems to be more of an afterthought with missions and effects described in general terms. Major campaigns as covered but again, in a way that focuses more on operations of the carriers and their air wings rather than what they achieved on the ground and how that affected the war. The overall impression is that author did a lot of research in this area and then simply didn't want to see all that work go to waste, so he included it.
Author also makes a bold claim that carrier launched strike on Pyongyang on the 4. July, mere days after North Korea launched the attack, persuaded Stalin not to send Soviet aircraft to Korea openly and Mao to delay direct intervention until end of the year under vastly different circumstances. Topped by the claim that this was one of the things that led to eventual Soviet-Sino split. No evidence is ofered, merely "later investigations showed that....".
Overall it's a nice book that offers good overview of the campaign from a specific angle and as such nice read to somebody with a casual interest in this war. Even if it's a bit tedious at parts where author focuses on minor and not that relevant details.
August 3, 2020
This very good military history of the naval air campaign during the Korean Conflict is an excellent companion to Cleaver's Mig Alley, which covers the USAF role.
Cleaver covers the air campaigns and battles of the US Navy and Marine Corps in Korea, but also provides analysis and insight into a number of areas. He discusses the aircraft used, the evolution of carrier operations in the jet age, the different view of role that Marines and the Navy felt (a greater willingness to perform battlefield support and willingness to operate closer to friendly lines), operations of the British in support of the naval air campaign and adjustments in tactics and priorities.
Cleaver also looks at the developing role of helicopters in providing search and rescue and transport.
Very well done book.
Cleaver covers the air campaigns and battles of the US Navy and Marine Corps in Korea, but also provides analysis and insight into a number of areas. He discusses the aircraft used, the evolution of carrier operations in the jet age, the different view of role that Marines and the Navy felt (a greater willingness to perform battlefield support and willingness to operate closer to friendly lines), operations of the British in support of the naval air campaign and adjustments in tactics and priorities.
Cleaver also looks at the developing role of helicopters in providing search and rescue and transport.
Very well done book.
April 8, 2021
This is an excellent overview of the US Navy's Korean War air campaign. It reveals all the capabilities, and failures, of carrier aviation in the 1950s. Without a jet fighter capable of matching the very advanced MiG-15, the Navy was still able to make a huge impact in the skies over South and North Korea, even when flying large numbers of piston-engined attack planes. I recommend this volume to all armchair historians and aviation buffs.
February 12, 2020
Naval Air Holds the Line in the Korean War
Fact filled account of flying & Fighting in the Korean War by naval airplanes operating last of propellers & first jets to fly off carriers in the Korean conflict. Retells fate of many a pilot, & cameo appearances of Neil Armstrong & Ted Williams.
Fact filled account of flying & Fighting in the Korean War by naval airplanes operating last of propellers & first jets to fly off carriers in the Korean conflict. Retells fate of many a pilot, & cameo appearances of Neil Armstrong & Ted Williams.
May 21, 2019
Detailed accounting of Naval (and Marine) Aviation in Korea
Once again McKelvey has produced a comprehensive treatment of air operations during a national campaign, in this case the Korean War.
Once again McKelvey has produced a comprehensive treatment of air operations during a national campaign, in this case the Korean War.
December 6, 2019
Good overview of naval aviation combat during the war. Lots of mig encounters described. Also enjoyed the descriptions of the different airplanes used. One of the photos has a Corsair misidentified as a skyraider. Enjoyed the stories about Ted Williams and Neil Armstrong.
December 9, 2019
Very technical but an interesting, seldom examined chapter in the Korean War nonetheless.
March 27, 2021
As always
As usual from this author a well written ,lucid and balanced book,the photos reproduced very clear.y . Eagerly awaiting his new publications.
As usual from this author a well written ,lucid and balanced book,the photos reproduced very clear.y . Eagerly awaiting his new publications.
June 1, 2021
Really a history of the Naval air arm from the end of WWII to the end of Korea. Including the post-WWII political and technological developments that led to the situation the Navy found themselves in at the start of the war.
The bulk of the coverage is, of course, the various air operations and engagements of the Korean War that the Navy participated in, including Marines and even some discussion of the British naval air power contribution.
Along the way, some attention is paid to the differences between Air Force and Navy doctrine, with some criticism aimed at the centralized control the Air Force insisted upon, to the detriment of effective close support of ground forces.
The author's biases are pretty clearly stated in the book. Aside from his disagreement with Air Force policy, and somewhat related to it, he seems to believe that the decrease in military spending after WWII went too far, and that what spending was made was often spent on the wrong priorities. Also, that as a country we have too short a memory, and as a result do not understand why other countries behave the way they do.
The book attempts to show that we weren't ready to fight in Korea because of poor decisions made regarding the military budget, and to teach about what happened in the Korean War, as we have forgotten, while the North Koreans have not.
The biggest problem with the book is the lack of footnotes. I really don't understand writing a book like this and then not footnoting your work. A bibliography is not enough, especially when you are entering into revisionist territory, which this author does.
The bulk of the coverage is, of course, the various air operations and engagements of the Korean War that the Navy participated in, including Marines and even some discussion of the British naval air power contribution.
Along the way, some attention is paid to the differences between Air Force and Navy doctrine, with some criticism aimed at the centralized control the Air Force insisted upon, to the detriment of effective close support of ground forces.
The author's biases are pretty clearly stated in the book. Aside from his disagreement with Air Force policy, and somewhat related to it, he seems to believe that the decrease in military spending after WWII went too far, and that what spending was made was often spent on the wrong priorities. Also, that as a country we have too short a memory, and as a result do not understand why other countries behave the way they do.
The book attempts to show that we weren't ready to fight in Korea because of poor decisions made regarding the military budget, and to teach about what happened in the Korean War, as we have forgotten, while the North Koreans have not.
The biggest problem with the book is the lack of footnotes. I really don't understand writing a book like this and then not footnoting your work. A bibliography is not enough, especially when you are entering into revisionist territory, which this author does.
November 19, 2021
Very detailed account of naval aviation in Korea. China is a dark horse
July 18, 2022
3 1/2 Stars.
Displaying 1 - 15 of 15 reviews