Sputnik Declassified

[LabSpokane]

The great thing about Russia, is (at least during the space race) they built two of everything they sent to space.  So, it's possible to see a real Russian space probe, lunar lander, etc. in person.  About 25 years ago, these duplicate vehicles were exhibited at the Seattle Science Center. There were no glass enclosures, just ropes to keep one at arm's distance.

It was a huge treat to see them in person as one got to experience firsthand the philosophical difference between Russian and American engineering.  Flathead screws were the rule for fasteners.  Even for the door to the re-entry capsule.  (I'm assuming that the doors were blown off with explosive bolts). 

This doesn't mean the workmanship was crude.  The rocket engines were just absolutely incredible.  The welds were perfect - virtually smooth as glass. 

If you ever have the opportunity to see this equipment up close, do it. 

[daqq]

This doesn't mean the workmanship was crude.  The rocket engines were just absolutely incredible.  The welds were perfect - virtually smooth as glass.

If you ever have the opportunity to see this equipment up close, do it. 

If you're into that sort of stuff you should check out this:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/64683169@N00/

A lot of soviet (amongst others) military (and misc.) equip is there, you can see a lot of difference between this and western stuff. While this is not the space stuff, you can enjoy it.

[Richard Crowley]

No question that a "command economy" (remember their "5 year plans"?) and compulsory workforce are more "efficient".
But it didn't do much for employee retention (or even citizen loyalty). No wonder they had to build fences to keep them caged in.

[CatalinaWOW]

Soviet equipment was neither better, or worse - just different.  Different objectives, different valuations for how the objective was achieved and so on.  People who argue that one or the other design philosophy is better are kind of like those who argue operating systems.

[John_ITIC]

I've been watching similar documentaries about the race to the moon. One of the take-away's was that the 'Reds' made it to space first because they did everything in secrecy and could cover up the about 75% launch failures, including cosmonauts that didn't make it off the launch pad. Only after a semi-random success, was this trumpeted to the world.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lost_Cosmonauts

In the U.S., however, everything was done in the open and even televised. Therefore, technology had to be more mature before risking human life.

From an engineering standpoint, the latter approach is of course more sane. The 1st approach is political only.

[janoc]

Soviet equipment was neither better, or worse - just different.  Different objectives, different valuations for how the objective was achieved and so on.  People who argue that one or the other design philosophy is better are kind of like those who argue operating systems.

Also don't forget the bit that few of comparable western technology had to deal with the "infrastructure" issues Russians had (and still have) - e.g. how many western fighter planes are designed to operate from short, unpaved runways after standing outside in -40C and needing to be repairable with basic tools? Such conditions are common in large parts of Russia and several of their planes were designed explicitly for this. Americans were actually flying their MI-24 helicopters in Afghanistan, because they were more rugged and better adapted for the conditions than the western gear. Etc.

Then there is also the Russian "mentality" when it comes to following rules and handling stuff too so being simple and "idiot-proof" helps.  And sometimes it was simply a matter of resources - some advanced tech was not available, either because of the western embargoes or local material shortages, so human ingenuity had to make up for it.

[janoc]

I've been watching similar documentaries about the race to the moon. One of the take-away's was that the 'Reds' made it to space first because they did everything in secrecy and could cover up the about 75% launch failures, including cosmonauts that didn't make it off the launch pad. Only after a semi-random success, was this trumpeted to the world.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lost_Cosmonauts

Except that most of that stuff are urban legends and conspiracy theories, with very few credible sources to back them up.

You can keep only so much secret - if that stuff was true, don't you think someone out of the thousands of people who were involved with the space program, even the cosmonauts themselves, wouldn't have come forward already? They have nothing to lose - most of the people who were involved in those early years are long retired/dead and the stuff is declassified. Moreover, any major accidents would have leaked, the same as other things did - sometimes it took decades, but the truth always did surface sooner or later.

[miguelvp]

Also, the price of failure in the US was being fired or demoted, the price of failure in the USSR on high level project was being sent to Siberia (or reassigned to a new work place, as they were saying). And you could not really pick a place where to live in the USSR, after getting your degree, you were assigned to a certain factory, where you work for the rest of your life.

Someone's been drinking the kool-aid. I know people who actually lived in the USSR, it wasn't like that at all. If you look at the history of the Russian space programme you can see that there were failures, but it was understood that the task was difficult and things would go wrong. Obviously there was pressure from the military for military applications, the same as in the US.

Yeah, you tell the Russian guy how it was in Russia.

Man, I would love to be like you, knowing what everyone should think or be like and having answers for everything!

I hope your wife/gf is submissive enough to deal with you because of course she would never be right on anything and you'll take every chance to prove her wrong.

Mine is Texan and takes no Shit from me at all, but I wished she did (not really).

[smjcuk]

Also, the price of failure in the US was being fired or demoted, the price of failure in the USSR on high level project was being sent to Siberia (or reassigned to a new work place, as they were saying). And you could not really pick a place where to live in the USSR, after getting your degree, you were assigned to a certain factory, where you work for the rest of your life.

Someone's been drinking the kool-aid. I know people who actually lived in the USSR, it wasn't like that at all. If you look at the history of the Russian space programme you can see that there were failures, but it was understood that the task was difficult and things would go wrong. Obviously there was pressure from the military for military applications, the same as in the US.

Yes same here. I know someone from the Ukraine that lives here in the UK now through his son (who both incidentally just bailed thanks to the war over there). He was actually involved in the old USSR space programme between about 1965-1985 as a mechanical engineer working on support equipment. Three things he told me...

1. There was lots of pressure but no one was punished for failure unless it was due to complete negligence or incompetence and that usually just ended up as demotion to positions such as chef and cleaner. Failure was expected as a whole and those who manned the craft were aware they'd probably end up toast. It was a great honor to either end up toast or survive and their families would be rewarded either way. Plus it was rather cool. There was definitely a cool factor. Plus they were mostly Orthodox Christians which meant they thought they were going to heaven anyway...

2. The tech was pretty advanced at the time. They had access to everything that anyone else had. They had pretty good clones of western equipment. They'd just started buying in things like VAX minicomputer clones from VEB state run companies in East Germany when they wall came down (which was when he left) to run simulations on. They had Fortran and all sorts available to them. Most of the equipment they used was cloned American tools.

3. This one is my favourite... they were very social and everyone knew everyone and everyone drank together from officers to engineers to cleaners. Outside of the day job, everyone was equal.

Now I've worked with a lot of people from Russian and former Russian states and they're all pretty good people as a whole. Don't ever challenge them to a drinking competition though; that stereotype has left me unconscious under numerous tables before. Also poker. They're shit hot at poker. Well shit hotter than me.

Not the Russia I suspect you see elsewhere.

[zapta]

Someone's been drinking the kool-aid.

Look who's talking.

Communism got debunked but some still have hard time to let go.

[ataradov]

I know people who actually lived in the USSR, it wasn't like that at all.

I was born in the USSR in 1983. Granted, it was the last days of it by the time I was old enough to understand what is going on, but still, the "pressure" was quite real.

Seriously, just read the story of Sergei Korolev's life. It is very representative of what was going on. Wikipedia article:

Arrested for alleged mismanagement of funds (he spent the money on unsuccessful experiments with rocket devices), he was imprisoned in 1938 for almost six years, including some months in a Kolyma labour camp. Following his release, he became a recognized rocket designer and a key figure in the development of the Soviet ICBM program.

Arrests like that were a mean to make people more willing to do what soviet authorities wanted them to do.

[ataradov]

1. There was lots of pressure but no one was punished for failure unless it was due to complete negligence or incompetence and that usually just ended up as demotion to positions such as chef and cleaner.

The pressure was on the people, who you would not have access to for a free conversation.

2. The tech was pretty advanced at the time.

That's true. They spared no expense for reverse engineering and re-implementing computers and processors.

3. This one is my favourite... they were very social and everyone knew everyone and everyone drank together from officers to engineers to cleaners. Outside of the day job, everyone was equal.

People did assemble in the kitchens from time to time, but that was a rebellion, since there was no freedom of assembly and those kitchen conversations were political a lot of times and not favorable for the government. I remember being told to not talk publicly about what was going on there.

[Richard Crowley]

I wish I still had a copy of that infamous photograph published in Pravda.
It showed 2~3 USSR engineers showing off their latest technology, an 8K PROM.
They had a nice big die-plot of it framed on the wall behind them.

The plot was line-for-line stolen from Intel's "tape-out" data.
Including the "easter-egg" fish symbol and other private jokes inserted by the layout guys.
The only thing they removed was the Intel logo and name.

That was just one of many examples of "Communist technology" clearly cloned or simply stolen from the west.

[ataradov]

Yeah, they did it a lot. There were a lot of "embarrassing" stories like that. I've heard one, where they have cloned some calculator chip and showed it off at some trade show, where original inventors were also present. And those original inventors recognized their design and entered some secret key combination that made the calculator print company name, original of, course.

I don't think it is necessarily bad, they did just rip off the layout to boost the production, but they always went back and created an equivalent. I would say it is better than just ripping off, especially if you re an isolated communistic country.

[Fraser]

Back to the subject of the modulation used in Sputnik.... I recall that a BFO was needed to receive it. This strongly suggests an on/off keyed CW transmitter. Such is logical as CW has the best penetration and power conservation. Modulation would be both wasteful of energy and as the receivers had BFO's it was totally unnecessary for the experiment.

I take my hat off to the Russians for achieving success with SPUTNIK. On the other hand I do not agree with the animal piloted missions that were intentionally a one way trip. Leika being a sad example. Hero dog of the Soviet Union she may have been, but an unpleasant death all the same.

http://time.com/3546215/laika-1957/

She was not the only one to be sacrificed either.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soviet_space_dogs

All I can say about that is Cruel  heartless B*stards    To die slowly in total terror is indeed a very cruel death for any creature.

Aurora