4 ms·
You presume wrong. Pens are not a space program. I meant the differences in design philosophy that permeate aerospace engineering on both sides. Russian, buil
by 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 agoSorry 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 agoYou 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.