Canada, the United States and the Command and Control of Air Forces for Continental Air Defence from Ogdensburg to NORAD, 1940-1957
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
This dissertation examines the evolution of the bilateral Canadian-American continental air defence operational-level command and control relationship from the 1940 Ogdensburg Agreement to the establishment of the North American Air Defence Command (NORAD) in 1957.It takes a functional approach, focusing on the efforts of Canadian air force officers in conjunction with their American counterparts to develop efficient command and control arrangements to ensure effective air defence of North America while at the same time safeguarding Canadian sovereignty.It explores the evolution of certain command and control principles such as cooperation, unity of command, operational command, and operational control, and argues that because Canada was able to avoid having its air defence forces come under American command, Canadian sovereignty was assured.It also demonstrates that the Canada-U.S. bilateral continental air defence command and control relationship had its origins in Canadian, American, and British joint command and control culture and practice.Canadian steadfastness, along with compromise and accommodation between the two North American nations, operational and doctrinal factors, and also cordial professional working relationships and personalities, all played important roles in the evolution of this command and control relationship from the "cooperation-unity of command" paradigm of the Second World War towards "operational control" in an air defence context throughout the early Cold War.This paradigm shift culminated in 1957 with the integration and centralization of combined air defences under an overall NORAD commander exercising operational control.The thesis also demonstrates that by taking How much space do I have?This dissertation would not have been possible without the assistance of several people and I will now do my best to thank as many of them as possible.First and foremost, I would like to thank my advisor, Allan English, for all of his help and advice, for sharing his impressive knowledge of command and control in the Canadian Forces, and for his example of perseverance and professionalism during my time as one of his graduate students.I would also like to thank my co-advisor, Rich Gimblett, for his help and advice, and especially his positive encouragement and reassurance to me during some difficult times.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,002 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».