Skip to main content
  • 100 Accesses

Abstract

While the fundamental decisions about nuclear antiaircraft arms were made during President Eisenhower’s term, his immediate successor agreed with the need for the weapons and accepted the ideas upon which they were predicated. Indeed, it was not until John F. Kennedy’s administration that atomic anti-bomber armament reached its peak deployment in the United States. Shortly afterward, however, the nation’s defense preparations underwent substantial change. After the advent of Soviet intercontinental ballistic missiles, which were more difficult to counter and which could almost assuredly inflict enormous destruction, policy makers believed it was impractical and illogical to maintain extensive preparations to defend against an aircraft raid that might take place before or after an ICBM barrage. Partly for this reason, and also because atomic air-defense weapons were costly to retain, and because BOMARC never performed as intended, they began to be removed from service. Although a substantial number were dismantled by the end of the 1960s, others remained in the inventory longer.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Notes

  1. Chuck Hansen, U.S. Nuclear Weapons: The Secret History (Arlington, TX: Aerofax, 1988), p. 177; Air Force Association information on “AIR-2 Genie” in author’s possession.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Mary T. Cagle, History of the Nike Hercules Weapon System (U.S. Army Missile Command: Redstone Arsenal, Alabama), 1973, pp. 242–243.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Raymond L. Garthoff, Reflections on the Cuban Missile Crisis (Washington: Brookings Institution, 1987), Garthoff, p. 66, note 101; Aleksandr Fursenko and Timothy Naftali, “One Hell of a Gamble”: Khrushchev, Castro, and Kennedy, 1958–1964 (New York: W.W. Norton and Company, 1997), p. 210. Anatoli I. Gribkov and William Y. Smith, Operation ANADYR; U.S. and Soviet Generals Recount the Cuban Missile Crisis (Chicago: Edition Q, Inc., 1994), pp. 4, 27.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Scott D. Sagan, The Limits of Safety: Organizations, Accidents, and Nuclear Weapons (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1993), pp. 95–98, 135.

    Google Scholar 

  5. John C. Lonnquest, To Defend and Deter: The Legacy of the United States Cold War Missile Program (Rock Island, Illinois: Defense Publishing Service, 1996), pp. 329–330; War Room Journal, October 24, 1962, CMC document no. CC01120, items 13 and handwritten 33. Rail transit is noted in “Status of ADA units being deployed to SE US” attachment to War Room Journal, October 31, 1962, CMC document no. CC01773; and in Brugioni, p. 371. The date is shown as October 23 in Memorandum for General Parker et al., p. 38. The Air Defense Command History reports the date as October 27. (See “The Air Defense Command in the Cuban Crisis,” p. 282.)

    Google Scholar 

  6. Laurence Martin, Arms and Strategy: An International Survey of Modern Defence (London: Weidenfeld and Nicolson, 1973), p. 132.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Lloyd Mallan, Peace is a Three-Edged Sword (Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, 1964), pp. 68–69.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Mark L. Morgan and Mark A. Berhow, Rings of Supersonic Steel: Air Defenses of the United States Army, 1950–1979: An Introductory History and Site Guide (San Pedro, California: Fort MacArthur Press, 2002). South Dakota’s Ellsworth Air Force Base also had a Nike-Hercules battery between 1958 and 1961, at which time the equipment was moved to Hartford, Connecticut. This is probably because by this point the base became the headquarters of an ICBM unit. Since in the event of war, the associated missiles would presumably have been launched by the time the field could have come under attack by planes, it did not require anti-bomber defenses. See Morgan and Berhow, pp. 82–83. In addition, the conventional Nike-Ajax was considered outmoded almost immediately after the introduction of its successor missile. All Ajax sites were shut down between 1961 and 1964. See Morgan and Berhow.

    Google Scholar 

  9. Michael Getler, “Big Cut Set in U.S. Air Defense Force,” Washington Post, October 7, 1973, p. A2.

    Google Scholar 

  10. Bill Keller, “A Venerable Line of Defense Is about to Get a Facelift,” New York Times, January 27, 1985, p. E3.

    Google Scholar 

  11. John W. Finney, “U.S. May Tighten Atomic Control,” New York Times, March 19, 1976, p. 69.

    Google Scholar 

  12. Walter Pincus, “Nuclear Missile Has Navy in a Quandary,” Washington Post, January 14, 1984, p. A10.

    Google Scholar 

  13. Thomas B. Cochran, William M. Arkin, and Milton M. Hoenig, Nuclear Weapons Databook, vol. 1, “U.S. Nuclear Forces and Capabilities” (Cambridge: Ballinger, 1984), p. 41.

    Google Scholar 

  14. Lloyd Mallan, Peace is a Three-Edged Sword (Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, 1964), p. 50.

    Google Scholar 

  15. Steven J. Zaloga, Target America: The Soviet Union and the Strategic Arms Race, 1945–1964 (Novato, CA: Presidio Press, 1993), pp. 63–88; David Holloway, Stalin and the Bomb (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1994), pp. 242–245, 322–324.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Authors

Copyright information

© 2010 Christopher J. Bright

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Bright, C.J. (2010). Conclusion. In: Continental Defense in the Eisenhower Era. Palgrave Studies in the History of Science and Technology. Palgrave Macmillan, New York. https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230112926_8

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230112926_8

  • Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, New York

  • Print ISBN: 978-1-349-38469-3

  • Online ISBN: 978-0-230-11292-6

  • eBook Packages: Palgrave History CollectionHistory (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics