Sfdwhf

To string or not to string

How old can references or sources in a thesis be?

Method of fabrication patents, Is it okay to import from abroad?

Show that if two triangles built on parallel lines, with equal bases have the same perimeter only if they are congruent.

What is the offset in a seaplane's hull?

What's the output of a record cartridge playing an out-of-speed record

Accidentally leaked the solution to an assignment, what to do now? (I'm the prof)

TGV timetables / schedules?

Can an x86 CPU running in real mode be considered to be basically an 8086 CPU?

Can divisibility rules for digits be generalized to sum of digits

Why are electrically insulating heatsinks so rare? Is it just cost?

Arthur Somervell: 1000 Exercises - Meaning of this notation

In Japanese, what’s the difference between “Tonari ni” (となりに) and “Tsugi” (つぎ)? When would you use one over the other?

Can a Warlock become Neutral Good?

Why don't electron-positron collisions release infinite energy?

Approximately how much travel time was saved by the opening of the Suez Canal in 1869?

The Clique vs. Independent Set Problem

How can bays and straits be determined in a procedurally generated map?

Why is 150k or 200k jobs considered good when there's 300k+ births a month?

Languages that we cannot (dis)prove to be Context-Free

How to find program name(s) of an installed package?

What defenses are there against being summoned by the Gate spell?

Writing rule stating superpower from different root cause is bad writing

Dragon forelimb placement

How did the USSR manage to innovate in an environment characterized by government censorship and high bureaucracy?

What was the Mantineian form of government and what praise did it receive?In what way and to what extent did the USSR exert influence on Mongolia?What is the difference between NKVD and OGPU (USSR)Why did the USSR preserve the national republics?Why did people in the USSR participate in elections?When and how did the West lose its dependency on the USSR for Titanium?Why and when did countries develop long names that include the form of government?Why did the USSR annex Tannu Tuva?How and when did the border regime change when the USSR broke up?How did the Apollo-Soyuz test project affect the relationship between the USSR and USA during the cold war?

4

Despite the high bureaucracy in the Soviet Union, some design bureaus still achieved spectacular feats in science and engineering (mostly in defense and aerospace) e.g. Mir space station, Soyuz rockets, Mil V-12, Caspian Sea Monster, Antonov 225 Mriya etc.

Free flow of ideas and criticism are important for innovative ideas to be realized. How did the scientists in these bureaus manage to innovate despite Soviet censorship and bureaucracy. Take for example a scientist disagreeing with the head of a design bureau on a certain design prototype. How was such criticism handled? Or was the best design prototype chosen from a scientist who had more political connections.

soviet-union government

share|improve this question

asked 2 hours ago

Kevin MuhuriKevin Muhuri

211

New contributor

Kevin Muhuri is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.

• 
  
  
  

  
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  
  Science was not free from political interference, with terrible examples like Lysenkoism. More examples here. Also it is important between science and engineering...
  
  – SJuan76
  1 hour ago
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  
  @SJuan76 Those are some very good examples you've given. I guess fundamental sciences were more prone to political ideologies than applied sciences which are closely related to fields of engineering. All my examples are in fact engineering feats.
  
  – Kevin Muhuri
  26 mins ago
  

  
  
  
  

add a comment | 

4

Despite the high bureaucracy in the Soviet Union, some design bureaus still achieved spectacular feats in science and engineering (mostly in defense and aerospace) e.g. Mir space station, Soyuz rockets, Mil V-12, Caspian Sea Monster, Antonov 225 Mriya etc.

Free flow of ideas and criticism are important for innovative ideas to be realized. How did the scientists in these bureaus manage to innovate despite Soviet censorship and bureaucracy. Take for example a scientist disagreeing with the head of a design bureau on a certain design prototype. How was such criticism handled? Or was the best design prototype chosen from a scientist who had more political connections.

soviet-union government

share|improve this question

asked 2 hours ago

Kevin MuhuriKevin Muhuri

211

New contributor

Kevin Muhuri is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.

• 
  
  
  

  
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  
  Science was not free from political interference, with terrible examples like Lysenkoism. More examples here. Also it is important between science and engineering...
  
  – SJuan76
  1 hour ago
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  
  @SJuan76 Those are some very good examples you've given. I guess fundamental sciences were more prone to political ideologies than applied sciences which are closely related to fields of engineering. All my examples are in fact engineering feats.
  
  – Kevin Muhuri
  26 mins ago
  

  
  
  
  

add a comment | 

Despite the high bureaucracy in the Soviet Union, some design bureaus still achieved spectacular feats in science and engineering (mostly in defense and aerospace) e.g. Mir space station, Soyuz rockets, Mil V-12, Caspian Sea Monster, Antonov 225 Mriya etc.

Free flow of ideas and criticism are important for innovative ideas to be realized. How did the scientists in these bureaus manage to innovate despite Soviet censorship and bureaucracy. Take for example a scientist disagreeing with the head of a design bureau on a certain design prototype. How was such criticism handled? Or was the best design prototype chosen from a scientist who had more political connections.

soviet-union government

share|improve this question

asked 2 hours ago

Kevin MuhuriKevin Muhuri

211

New contributor

Kevin Muhuri is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.

share|improve this question

asked 2 hours ago

Kevin MuhuriKevin Muhuri

211

New contributor

Kevin Muhuri is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.

share|improve this question

asked 2 hours ago

Kevin MuhuriKevin Muhuri

211

New contributor

Kevin Muhuri is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.

asked 2 hours ago

Kevin MuhuriKevin Muhuri

211

New contributor

Kevin Muhuri is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.

asked 2 hours ago

Kevin MuhuriKevin Muhuri

211

2 Answers
2

active

oldest

votes

4

The USSR didn't tend to go in for economic competition, but it made good use of intellectual competition and competition for prestige. It was also relatively good at creating organisations that did a specific thing, and kept on doing that.

The competition between the MiG and Sukhoi fighter design offices, for example, was quite significant, driven by rivalry and prestige. They designed pretty good aircraft for far less money than the Western aircraft companies, and kept on doing it until the fall of the USSR meant that the money supply dried up.

In the same way, the OKB-1, OKB-52 and OKB-586 design offices competed fiercely, with different ideas of how the space and missile programmes should be organised. Political influence was important in these rivalries, but it wasn't measured on a single scale, and the virtues of designs were also significant.

The system had some definite flaws. One of them came when one ministry's organisation needed something that the relevant ministry did not produce.

For example, one of the problems with the unsuccessful N-1 moon rocket was the excessive weight of the first stage. That was because the USSR did not make aircraft-grade aluminium in thicknesses greater than 13mm. That wasn't thick enough to make a first stage whose outer skin was also the wall of the propellant tanks. So the tanks had to be spherical to make them stronger, and the rocket needed a separate outer skin for streamlining. That weight disadvantage meant that all kinds of other things had to be pared to the bone, the rocket needed extra stages, and things got harder and harder from there.

share|improve this answer

answered 1 hour ago

John DallmanJohn Dallman

17.3k35783

• 
  
  
  

  
  2
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  
  This is a great answer, though it's probably worth noting that command innovation tends to do the predictable well, but is pretty bad at the genuinely new. The one scientific area where the USSR really excelled and genuinely innovated was in mathematics and mathematical physics -- otherwise, their greatest strength (and it was great) was in engineering.
  
  – Mark Olson
  1 hour ago
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  
  Thanks for the additional info on the N1 rocket. I already knew certain technical difficulties prevented them from building large cylindrical tanks but I did not know what it was specifically. But overall, a trip to the moon in the 1960s required so many technological developments that they would literally have to start from scratch just like the US. In the US, the Moon project received a lot of political support and funding but in the USSR it didn't receive enough of either.
  
  – Kevin Muhuri
  12 mins ago
  

  
  
  
  

add a comment | 

-2

Central plans are just loans. The USSR was a normal market economy and there is no difference between "communism" and "capitalism" besides rhetorical differences.

Example

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gosbank

] The Soviet state used Gosbank, primarily, as a tool to impose centralized control upon industry in general, using bank balances and transaction histories to monitor the activity of individual concerns and their compliance with Five-Year Plans and directives

share|improve this answer

answered 2 hours ago

user37367user37367

1

New contributor

user37367 is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.

Some of the information contained in this post requires additional references. Please edit to add citations to reliable sources that support the assertions made here. Unsourced material may be disputed or deleted.

• 
  
  
  

  
  6
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  
  Incredible claims require evidence. Violates everything I know about both economies
  
  – Mark C. Wallace♦
  1 hour ago
  

  
  
  
  

add a comment | 

Your Answer

StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "324"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});

function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: false,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: null,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});


}
});

Kevin Muhuri is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.

draft saved

draft discarded

Sign up or log in

StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});

Sign up using Google

Sign up using Facebook

Sign up using Email and Password

Post as a guest

Name

Email

Required, but never shown

StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fhistory.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f51978%2fhow-did-the-ussr-manage-to-innovate-in-an-environment-characterized-by-governmen%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);

Post as a guest

Name

Email

Required, but never shown

4

The USSR didn't tend to go in for economic competition, but it made good use of intellectual competition and competition for prestige. It was also relatively good at creating organisations that did a specific thing, and kept on doing that.

The competition between the MiG and Sukhoi fighter design offices, for example, was quite significant, driven by rivalry and prestige. They designed pretty good aircraft for far less money than the Western aircraft companies, and kept on doing it until the fall of the USSR meant that the money supply dried up.

In the same way, the OKB-1, OKB-52 and OKB-586 design offices competed fiercely, with different ideas of how the space and missile programmes should be organised. Political influence was important in these rivalries, but it wasn't measured on a single scale, and the virtues of designs were also significant.

The system had some definite flaws. One of them came when one ministry's organisation needed something that the relevant ministry did not produce.

For example, one of the problems with the unsuccessful N-1 moon rocket was the excessive weight of the first stage. That was because the USSR did not make aircraft-grade aluminium in thicknesses greater than 13mm. That wasn't thick enough to make a first stage whose outer skin was also the wall of the propellant tanks. So the tanks had to be spherical to make them stronger, and the rocket needed a separate outer skin for streamlining. That weight disadvantage meant that all kinds of other things had to be pared to the bone, the rocket needed extra stages, and things got harder and harder from there.

share|improve this answer

answered 1 hour ago

John DallmanJohn Dallman

17.3k35783

• 
  
  
  

  
  2
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  
  This is a great answer, though it's probably worth noting that command innovation tends to do the predictable well, but is pretty bad at the genuinely new. The one scientific area where the USSR really excelled and genuinely innovated was in mathematics and mathematical physics -- otherwise, their greatest strength (and it was great) was in engineering.
  
  – Mark Olson
  1 hour ago
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  
  Thanks for the additional info on the N1 rocket. I already knew certain technical difficulties prevented them from building large cylindrical tanks but I did not know what it was specifically. But overall, a trip to the moon in the 1960s required so many technological developments that they would literally have to start from scratch just like the US. In the US, the Moon project received a lot of political support and funding but in the USSR it didn't receive enough of either.
  
  – Kevin Muhuri
  12 mins ago
  

  
  
  
  

add a comment | 

4

The USSR didn't tend to go in for economic competition, but it made good use of intellectual competition and competition for prestige. It was also relatively good at creating organisations that did a specific thing, and kept on doing that.

The competition between the MiG and Sukhoi fighter design offices, for example, was quite significant, driven by rivalry and prestige. They designed pretty good aircraft for far less money than the Western aircraft companies, and kept on doing it until the fall of the USSR meant that the money supply dried up.

In the same way, the OKB-1, OKB-52 and OKB-586 design offices competed fiercely, with different ideas of how the space and missile programmes should be organised. Political influence was important in these rivalries, but it wasn't measured on a single scale, and the virtues of designs were also significant.

The system had some definite flaws. One of them came when one ministry's organisation needed something that the relevant ministry did not produce.

For example, one of the problems with the unsuccessful N-1 moon rocket was the excessive weight of the first stage. That was because the USSR did not make aircraft-grade aluminium in thicknesses greater than 13mm. That wasn't thick enough to make a first stage whose outer skin was also the wall of the propellant tanks. So the tanks had to be spherical to make them stronger, and the rocket needed a separate outer skin for streamlining. That weight disadvantage meant that all kinds of other things had to be pared to the bone, the rocket needed extra stages, and things got harder and harder from there.

share|improve this answer

answered 1 hour ago

John DallmanJohn Dallman

17.3k35783

• 
  
  
  

  
  2
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  
  This is a great answer, though it's probably worth noting that command innovation tends to do the predictable well, but is pretty bad at the genuinely new. The one scientific area where the USSR really excelled and genuinely innovated was in mathematics and mathematical physics -- otherwise, their greatest strength (and it was great) was in engineering.
  
  – Mark Olson
  1 hour ago
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  
  Thanks for the additional info on the N1 rocket. I already knew certain technical difficulties prevented them from building large cylindrical tanks but I did not know what it was specifically. But overall, a trip to the moon in the 1960s required so many technological developments that they would literally have to start from scratch just like the US. In the US, the Moon project received a lot of political support and funding but in the USSR it didn't receive enough of either.
  
  – Kevin Muhuri
  12 mins ago
  

  
  
  
  

add a comment | 

The USSR didn't tend to go in for economic competition, but it made good use of intellectual competition and competition for prestige. It was also relatively good at creating organisations that did a specific thing, and kept on doing that.

The competition between the MiG and Sukhoi fighter design offices, for example, was quite significant, driven by rivalry and prestige. They designed pretty good aircraft for far less money than the Western aircraft companies, and kept on doing it until the fall of the USSR meant that the money supply dried up.

In the same way, the OKB-1, OKB-52 and OKB-586 design offices competed fiercely, with different ideas of how the space and missile programmes should be organised. Political influence was important in these rivalries, but it wasn't measured on a single scale, and the virtues of designs were also significant.

The system had some definite flaws. One of them came when one ministry's organisation needed something that the relevant ministry did not produce.

For example, one of the problems with the unsuccessful N-1 moon rocket was the excessive weight of the first stage. That was because the USSR did not make aircraft-grade aluminium in thicknesses greater than 13mm. That wasn't thick enough to make a first stage whose outer skin was also the wall of the propellant tanks. So the tanks had to be spherical to make them stronger, and the rocket needed a separate outer skin for streamlining. That weight disadvantage meant that all kinds of other things had to be pared to the bone, the rocket needed extra stages, and things got harder and harder from there.

share|improve this answer

answered 1 hour ago

John DallmanJohn Dallman

17.3k35783

share|improve this answer

answered 1 hour ago

John DallmanJohn Dallman

17.3k35783

answered 1 hour ago

John DallmanJohn Dallman

17.3k35783

answered 1 hour ago

John DallmanJohn Dallman

17.3k35783

-2

Central plans are just loans. The USSR was a normal market economy and there is no difference between "communism" and "capitalism" besides rhetorical differences.

Example

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gosbank

] The Soviet state used Gosbank, primarily, as a tool to impose centralized control upon industry in general, using bank balances and transaction histories to monitor the activity of individual concerns and their compliance with Five-Year Plans and directives

share|improve this answer

answered 2 hours ago

user37367user37367

1

New contributor

user37367 is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.

Some of the information contained in this post requires additional references. Please edit to add citations to reliable sources that support the assertions made here. Unsourced material may be disputed or deleted.

• 
  
  
  

  
  6
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  
  Incredible claims require evidence. Violates everything I know about both economies
  
  – Mark C. Wallace♦
  1 hour ago
  

  
  
  
  

add a comment | 

-2

Central plans are just loans. The USSR was a normal market economy and there is no difference between "communism" and "capitalism" besides rhetorical differences.

Example

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gosbank

] The Soviet state used Gosbank, primarily, as a tool to impose centralized control upon industry in general, using bank balances and transaction histories to monitor the activity of individual concerns and their compliance with Five-Year Plans and directives

share|improve this answer

answered 2 hours ago

user37367user37367

1

New contributor

user37367 is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.

Some of the information contained in this post requires additional references. Please edit to add citations to reliable sources that support the assertions made here. Unsourced material may be disputed or deleted.

• 
  
  
  

  
  6
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  
  Incredible claims require evidence. Violates everything I know about both economies
  
  – Mark C. Wallace♦
  1 hour ago
  

  
  
  
  

add a comment | 

Central plans are just loans. The USSR was a normal market economy and there is no difference between "communism" and "capitalism" besides rhetorical differences.

Example

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gosbank

] The Soviet state used Gosbank, primarily, as a tool to impose centralized control upon industry in general, using bank balances and transaction histories to monitor the activity of individual concerns and their compliance with Five-Year Plans and directives

share|improve this answer

answered 2 hours ago

user37367user37367

1

New contributor

user37367 is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.

share|improve this answer

answered 2 hours ago

user37367user37367

1

New contributor

user37367 is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.

answered 2 hours ago

user37367user37367

1

New contributor

user37367 is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.

answered 2 hours ago

user37367user37367

1