4 ms·

People used to make similar comparisons between the Russian and American space programs.

by inopinatus 10y ago

jedberg 10y ago
Oh yeah? Which was which in that comparison? I'm not familiar with that.
- WorldMaker 10y ago
  Presumably a reference to the classic "Pencil myth": Americans when faced with a need to write things down spent millions of dollars inventing a low gravity ballpoint pen and Russians just used a pencil. As cutesy of a sentiment as it is, it's also full of misconceptions. The pens were invented by an American corporation that wanted better pens to sell in general (a smoother flow in a pen, regardless of gravity/orientation, is a better pen), and they saw a good opportunity to market the pen to NASA for use in space. Both NASA and the Russians used pencils in space, but the problems with pencils is the flakes can pollute an environment pretty quickly in low gravity and the pens turned out to be a much better solution. (So far as I've heard, every space agency these days buys similar pens.)
  - inopinatus 10y ago
    You presume wrong. Pens are not a space program. I meant the differences in design philosophy that permeate aerospace engineering on both sides. Russian, built ugly but for strength and longevity. American, built for high capability with finesse and finer tolerances. The emergent properties of these different principles explain why Soyuz is still a preferred launch vehicle, but it was the Americans who got to the moon and operated the STS. Amazon is more like the Russians: built in the knowledge that things fail, but less magical as a result. Google is more like the Americans: remarkable technology, you just need a herd of geniuses to run it.
    - WorldMaker 10y ago
      Sorry if you think I made the wrong presumption, but I've seen the "pencil myth" trotted out many times as a "definitive" example of precisely the dichotomy that you have spelled out. (A low gravity ballpoint pen is high capability that requires finesse and fine tolerances; a pencil is ugly but strong and typically exhibits longevity... and so forth.) It is an interesting analogy this dichotomy you see in the design philosophies (both between the space programs and the mega-corporations), but perhaps my point, if I were attempting a point, is to beware of false dichotomies.
      - inopinatus 10y ago
        You can see the same in comparing the military aircraft design. Both schools are ingenious, but it is applied in different ways. There are some excellent comparisons connecting principles to outcomes on Quora.

People used to make similar comparisons between the Russian and American space programs.

jedberg 10y ago

Oh yeah? Which was which in that comparison? I'm not familiar with that.

WorldMaker 10y ago
Presumably a reference to the classic "Pencil myth": Americans when faced with a need to write things down spent millions of dollars inventing a low gravity ballpoint pen and Russians just used a pencil. As cutesy of a sentiment as it is, it's also full of misconceptions. The pens were invented by an American corporation that wanted better pens to sell in general (a smoother flow in a pen, regardless of gravity/orientation, is a better pen), and they saw a good opportunity to market the pen to NASA for use in space. Both NASA and the Russians used pencils in space, but the problems with pencils is the flakes can pollute an environment pretty quickly in low gravity and the pens turned out to be a much better solution. (So far as I've heard, every space agency these days buys similar pens.)
- inopinatus 10y ago
  You presume wrong. Pens are not a space program. I meant the differences in design philosophy that permeate aerospace engineering on both sides. Russian, built ugly but for strength and longevity. American, built for high capability with finesse and finer tolerances. The emergent properties of these different principles explain why Soyuz is still a preferred launch vehicle, but it was the Americans who got to the moon and operated the STS. Amazon is more like the Russians: built in the knowledge that things fail, but less magical as a result. Google is more like the Americans: remarkable technology, you just need a herd of geniuses to run it.
  - WorldMaker 10y ago
    Sorry if you think I made the wrong presumption, but I've seen the "pencil myth" trotted out many times as a "definitive" example of precisely the dichotomy that you have spelled out. (A low gravity ballpoint pen is high capability that requires finesse and fine tolerances; a pencil is ugly but strong and typically exhibits longevity... and so forth.) It is an interesting analogy this dichotomy you see in the design philosophies (both between the space programs and the mega-corporations), but perhaps my point, if I were attempting a point, is to beware of false dichotomies.
    - inopinatus 10y ago
      You can see the same in comparing the military aircraft design. Both schools are ingenious, but it is applied in different ways. There are some excellent comparisons connecting principles to outcomes on Quora.