Department of Defense Legacy Resource Management Program PROJECT 95-10092 FORGING THE SWORD Defense Production in the Cold War Dr. Philip Shiman July 1997 This document is unclassified and may be released to the public. FORGING THE SWORD: DEFENSE PRODUCTION DURING THE COLD WAR DR. PHILIP SHIMAN USACERL Special Report 97/77 July 1997 A Study Jointly Sponsored by: United States Air Force Department of Defense Legacy Air Combat Command Program, Cold War Project FOREWORD The Department of Defense (DOD) Legacy Resource Management Program was estab- lished in 1991 to “determine how to better integrate the conservation of irreplaceable bio- logical, cultural, and geophysical resources with the dynamic requirements of military missions.” One of Legacy’s nine task areas is the Cold War Project, which seeks to “inven- tory, protect, and conserve [DOD’S] physical and literary property and relics” associated with the Cold War. In early 1993, Dr. Rebecca Hancock Cameron, the Cold War Project Manager, assisted by a team of DOD cultural resource managers, formulated a plan for identifying and documenting the military’s Cold War era resources. They adopted a two-pronged approach. The first phase was to conduct a series of studies documenting some of the nation’s most significant Cold War era sites. The second step had a much broader focus. Recognizing the need to provide cultural resource managers and historians with a national framework for future Cold War studies, the Cold War Project recommended con- ducting a series of theme and context studies that would examine the impact of promi- nent military weapon systems and missions on the American landscape. The Cold War Project’s first studies documented the nation’s missile systems. Dr. Cameron directed a team from the U.S. Army Construction Engineering Research Labo- ratories (USACERL), headed by Virge Jenkins Temme, which produced To Defend and Deter, a report on the Army and Air Force facilities and systems; and contracted with R. Christopher Goodwin and Associates for the Navy Cold War Guide Missile Context. In the spring and fall of 1995, Ms. Temme met with Dr. Paul Green of the Air Force Air Combat Command (ACC) to discuss ACC involvement and scope of funding for follow-on Cold War studies. With ACC to provide the majority of the funding, Dr. Green, Dr. Cameron, and Ms. Temme authorized Dr. John Lonnquest, the lead historian on CERL’s Cold War mis- sile study, to determine which mission areas warranted further study. Dr. Lonnquest recommended a three-part study containing separate volumes on the areas of defense research, development, test, and evaluation; defense production; and military training. Each of the studies was written by a different historian. In addition to serving as the series coordinator, Dr. Lonnquest also wrote the first volume, Developing the Weapons of War: Military Research and Development, Test and Evaluation (RDT&E) During the Cold War. The study explores the changes in RDT&E wrought by the rapid evolution of science and technology during the period. The second volume in the series, Forging the Sword: Defense Production During the Cold War, was written by Dr. Philip Shiman. Drawing on a wealth of diverse source material, Dr. Shiman has written an engaging and informative account of the challenges the military and industry faced to produce the myriad of weapons and products DOD needed during the Cold War. The last . 111 Forging the Sword: Defense Production During the Cold War volume in the Cold War series is an overview of military training and education written by David Winkler. A PhD candidate at the American University, Mr. Winkler has written extensively on the Cold War. In his current study, lFaining to Fight: lYaining and Educa- tion During the Cold War, Mr. Winkler addressed the challenges of military training and education in an era of rapid technological advances, geopolitical instability, and social change. Julie L. Webster USACERL Principal Investigator iv PREFACE This was a particularly difficult project because there were few precedents or models to go by, and little of a historical nature has ever been published on the subject of produc- tion during the Cold War. However, many people provided the advice and support that ultimately made this study possible. Dr. Paul Green of the U.S. Air Force Air Combat Command at Langley AFB, VA, co-sponsor with the Legacy Cold War Project, provided helpful comments on the manuscript draft. Dr. John Lonnquest patiently guided this study and played a key role in shaping the final product. David Winkler introduced me to the various history repositories in the Washington, DC, area. Virge Jenkins Temme, the first principal investigator of the project at the U.S. Army Construction Engineering Lab- oratories in Champaign, IL, gave support and encouragement. Her successor, Julie Web- ster, took on the onerous task of providing the encouragement, support, prodding, and cajoling necessary to shepherd this project to completion. No history can be performed without the assistance of librarians and archivists, and this one is no exception. Those deserving special thanks include Yvonne Kinkaid and Rian Arthur of the Air Force History Office Library at Bolling AFB, Washington, DC; Catherine Turner and the staff at the National Defense University Library at Fort Leslie J. McNair, Washington, DC; Geraldine Harcarik and the staff of the Historical Resources Branch, U.S. Army Center of Military History, Washington, DC; the staff of the Naval Historical Center in Washington, DC; Louis Arnold-Friend and the staff at the Historical Reference Branch of the U.S. Army Military History Institute, Carlisle Barracks, PA; Richard Sommers and the staff of the Special Collections Branch, U.S. Army Military History Institute, Carlisle Barracks, PA; the staff at the National Archives, College Park, MD; and Dotti Sappington and the staff at the U.S. Naval Institute, Annapolis, MD. I also received invaluable assistance from public historians and civil servants throughout the country, who gave freely of their time. Dr. Rebecca Cameron of the Air Force History Office, the Director of the Legacy Cold War Project, helped focus my research. Appreciation is due to Lynn Engelman, Cultural Resource Manager for Head- quarters Air Force Materiel Command (HQ AFMC), Wright-Patterson AFB, OH. Ms. Engelman provided Air Force points of contact and a critical review of the study. John D. Weber and Bill Suit of the HQ AFMC History Office also offered helpful information on the Air Force plants. Dr. Richard Hayes of the Naval Facilities Engineering Command, Alexandria, VA, spent hours showing me the files at the Legacy/Harp Program Office, Code 150. Dr. Robert Darius and Mike Bellafaire of the Army Materiel Command, Alexandria, VA, also provided time and assistance. E. Lowell Martin of the Naval Facili- ties Engineering Command and Chris Haskette of the Naval Command, Control, and Ocean Surveillance Center, both in San Diego, provided documentation and information concerning Air Force Plant 19 in San Diego; Sanda Trousdale and Michael E. Baker of Forging the Sword: Defense Production During the Cold War the U.S. Army Missile Command provided information regarding that organization’s facilities; and Steve Diamond of the Sacramento Air Logistics Center, McClellan AFB, CA, provided suggestions and information regarding the Air Force’s Air Logistics Cen- ters. Richard Altieri of the Industrial College of the Armed Forces, National Defense Uni- versity, also gave suggestions as to sources and points of contact. Gary Weir of the Naval Historical Center supplied me with a copy of his book. Joseph Murphey of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Fort Worth District, Fort Worth, TX, provided information as well as copies of the historical studies he has been directing on the Army’s ammunition plants during World War II. Frank Tokarsky, Fred Beck, and Bill Suit all read the manuscript and provided helpful comments. Linda Wheatley of USACERL carefully and patiently edited the manuscript and caught many errors that I had missed. Special thanks go to Timothy Tuttle of Scranton Army Ammunition Plant; Mike Mills of Holston Army Ammunition Plant; Elaine Robinson of the Mississippi Army Ammuni- tion Plant; Wayne Gouget of Mason Technologies, Inc.; and Deborah Franz-Anderson of Puget Sound Naval Shipyard, all of whom provided documents and photographs. Ann M. Bos of the History Office, U.S. Army Tank-automotive and Armaments Command (TACOM), Warren, MI, receives my sincerest gratitude for her generous donation of time, photographs, histories, and documents relating to the Detroit Army Tank Plant, and Art Volpe of the Public Affairs Office at TACOM spent hours providing information by tele- phone. Above all, my love and gratitude goes to my wife, Vicki Arnold, who accompanied me on the research outings; patiently performed searches, took notes, and attended meet- ings; uncomplainingly endured the trauma of the writing of the study; and read the man- uscript with a critical eye. Whenever I say “I” in this preface, I mean “we.” She deserves far more credit for the result than I can ever give her here. Philip Shiman ’ Springfield, VA April 1997 vi CONTENTS . Foreword 111 Preface V Chapter 1: Introduction 1 Chapter 2: The Legacy of Total War 3 The Arsenal System 3 Mobilization for Total War 5 The Expansion of the Aircraft Industry 8 The Production Record 10 I,, Chapter 3: The Production Base in 1945 15 The Industrial Base 15 Aircraft Plants 15 Ammunition Plants 16 Gun Plants 25 Tank Plants