How come the Soviet Union was so much more technologically advanced than America despite the much smaller economy?
>>18549559In what regard?
>>18549585Big bomba, jet fighters, space travel, submarines, rockets, medicine.
>>18549559They didn't need to.
>>18549587>Big bombaPresumably because the Americans didn't see a point in developing a 50 megaton bomb when bombs with much lower yields still do the job.>jet fightersMy understanding is that American and Soviet planes were designed differently with different strategies in mind, each being superior to the other in their respective field.>space travelThey lost the space race though?>submarinesLike what?>rocketsLike what?>medicineHow?
why do i subject myself to reading the utter trash posted on /his/ every day?
>>18549597You convince yourself that one day you'll stumble across a post by someone that isn't completely fucking retarded or is posting in good faith
>>18549597I think that it may improve our self-esteem when we see all those idiots around. The idiots can still think that they are "winning" any "debates" though so everybody's happy.
I always see this clown mushroom cloud used in pictures where it seems completely out of place and I can never tell if it's intentional or not.
>>18549559Tsar Bomba was nothing but a cold war project to scare the Americans.
>>18549559Unstoppable scientific prowess of Slavic bolshevism
>>18549587>Big BombaLost the cold war anyway>Jet fightersInvented by the Nazis>Space travelCaptured nazi scientists>Submarinesexisted for centuries before the soviets. Both Americans/soviets had advanced nuclear submarines.>RocketsNazis again>MedicineWhat?
>>18549559That’s propaganda, not scientific development. H-bombs can be built as big as one wishes, but above 100 megatons much of their energy is lost in space.Nowadays 200-300 kilotons are the usual yield
>>18549595>They lost the space race though?They did the Venus landings which is still one of the most technically impressive feats of space travel humanity has ever pulled. Mogs the Moon landing.
>>18549885Do you think the US wouldn't have been able to also do a landing if they had devoted the resources to it, or how is that a mog in terms of technological achievement?
>>18549896It's just objectively the most difficult space mission that has ever been attempted.>Do you think the US wouldn't have been able to also do a landing if they had devoted the resources to itIf my grandmother had wheels she'd be a bicycle.
>>18549906>It's just objectively the most difficult space mission that has ever been attempted.By what metrics?
>>18549587US is better at all of those.
>>18549885why did all Soviet Mars missions end in utter failure though?
>>18549559They had a bigger military budget. Unfortunately for them, that left the door open for the USA to completely Goomba stomp them in the cultural and civilian sphere which cost them the cold war.
>>18549587>Big bombaThe Tsar Bomba was so big it has no practical use and merely testing it nearly killed the crew that dropped it. I think you will find that "Russians build something to show off, Americans build things that work" is a recurring theme with everything you listed.>jet fightersAmericans have the most elite war fighters ever created, and to my knowledge no Russian fighter has a winning record against any American counterpart. >space travelRussians were the first to put a satellite in orbit (for a short duration) but that is pretty much their only triumph over America. They never put a man on the moon, most of their early satellites only lasted a few weeks in orbit, where American satellites lasted decades. I believe there's still a few American satellites from the 60s chugging along. Private American companies have more successful launches in a year now than Russia has managed in decades.>submarinesYet to see any sign that Russian submarines are superior in any way to American ones. They're basically equivalent. It's also telling that submarines are the only thing you listed here for navy, because even a russian dicksucker like you knows the Russian navy is overall pathetic. >rocketsSee space travel. Russian rocketry stagnated decades ago, pretty much as soon as they lost their captured Nazi scientists to old age. Which is why all they have now is posturing over "hypersonic" missiles, a meme tech the US played around with decades ago and discarded as impractical.>medicineLOL
>>18549559Because it was focused on producing things of value not BS line go up economic crap.Also, after Stalin purges, jew power was heavily curtailed.
>>18549913Do you know literally anything about the planet Venus?
>>18549595>Presumably because the Americans didn't see a point in developing a 50 megaton bomb when bombs with much lower yields still do the jobBigger yields are much better at the job.> They lost the space race thoughThey didn't.
>>18549885>Mogs the Moon landing.Assuming it actually happened.
>>18549932>and to my knowledge no Russian fighter has a winning record against any American counterpartSoviet fighters were used by the North Vietnamese against burgers and more than held their own.
>>18549941>assuming that the sky is indeed blue, which is just what Big NASA wants you to think!
>>18549587>space travel
>>18549945The vast, vast majority of US aircraft losses in Vietnam were due to AA artillery and SAMs, which is what actually kept Americans from strafing the north with impunity. The USAF maintained a solid 2:1 K:D ratio against North Vietnam's Migs in the dogfights they did have, and won the overwhelming majority of aerial combats. I suppose scoring 2:1 in dogfights against Americans looks good only if you compare it to the previous time communists went up against the USAF in Korea, where it was 10:1 in favor of America.
>>18549966Sputnik 1 was also just a simple radio transmitter, Explorer 1 was an actual scientific satellite that discovered the Van Allen Belts.
>>18549936Yes, it's considerably more hostile than the Moon or Mars. It's also a completely different kind of mission compared to the Apollo Program or Rosetta. They're all challenging in their own ways and all impressive feats of engineering. >>18549939>Bigger yields are much better at the job.There comes a point where the yield is big enough to do its job and any increase in yield is just increasing the yield for the sake of increasing the yield. >They didn't.The US beat them to the moon, declared victory and the world accepts that to this day. You're in the minority if you don't agree.
>>18549969Cause the Russians were doing it for prestige, to say they were first, not to actually do anything useful. Sputnik didn't even stay in orbit very long before it crashed since the Soviets only cared about being able to crow over doing it first, not getting the math right for geostationary orbit.
>>18549559am i crazy or is there a laughing face in the smoke
>>18549559Wish they'd used these honestlyWe should be in the post-WW3 ruins, not this shit.
NASA didn't bother with Venus landers because it was seen as not worth it to get a few pictures before the probe was destroyed by extreme heat and pressure. Instead they decided to radar map the planet from space, which was something the Soviets didn't have the technical ability to do.
>>18549973>There comes a point where the yield is big enough to do its job and any increase in yield is just increasing the yield for the sake of increasing the yield.Theoritcally, yes.But 15 Megatons is no where near that point.As the US and the USSR are MASSIVE and it would require far more than a 15 MT yield to bring them down.The US just didn't have the Slavic ingenuity needed to improve upon the design.
>>18549973>The US beat them to the moon, and claimed victory. I mean if we completely ignore LITERALLY everything the USSR did, I guess, yeah the US won.Pic related.And this is assuming that the moon landing wasn't faked.
>>18550101> W-W-WE JUST DIDN'T THINK IT WAS WORTH ITThe cope is absolutely REAL
>muh space raceconsidering I see no moon bases, orbitals, mars landing, does it really matter, both let their future down miserably
>>18550113>As the US and the USSR are MASSIVE and it would require far more than a 15 MT yield to bring them down.Do you think that nuclear warfare revolves around the idea of sending one, single gigantic warhead that eliminates the entire country as opposed to sending multiple warheads at various strategic targets?>>18550117>I mean if we completely ignore LITERALLY everything the USSR did, I guess, yeah the US won.Yes, if you ask most people then the space race culminated with the moon landing and the US were the victors.
>>18550119didn't Soviets claim they don't put guy on the Moon because it wasn't worth it?
>>18550117and that ignores all the more mundane weather, comsat, military etc payloads which the US did first
>>18549921shut up
>>18549559The soviets got humiliated in the computer race, though. All they could produce in the 1970s was substandard or outdated copies of IBM models with pirated western software.
>The first unmanned test of the Vostok spacecraft took place May 15, 1960 when Korabl-Sputnik 1 launched from Baikonur Cosmodrome. The prototype capsule lacked life support systems or a heat shield and was not designed to survive reentry. After completing three orbits, the retrorocket was fired to initiate reentry. However, a malfunction in the orientation system caused it to point in the wrong direction, instead driving the descent module into a high orbit where it remained until decaying in 1965. A 20 pound piece of debris impacted in Manitowoc, Wisconsin.>The second flight carried a pair of dogs, Chaika and Mushka. It lifted July 28. One of the R-7 booster's strap-ons experienced a fire and engine explosion, causing it to break away from the stack at 19 seconds. The booster continued to climb but the unbalanced thrust finally caused it to pitch over at 28 seconds and break apart, the core and strap-ons all flying off in separate directions and impacting on the steppe. The spacecraft with the dogs inside broke away from the stack and fell to Earth--due to the low altitude, the parachutes did not deploy. Recovery crews found the hull cracked and a hissing sound coming from inside. After opening it, they found that the dogs had died from impact forces. The cause of the failure was combustion instability in the failed strap-on. This problem had already been corrected on R-7 vehicles, but the booster used was an older model so no changes had to be made.
>On August 28, the third attempt was made when Korabl-Sputnik 2 carried two dogs for a three orbit mission. They were de-orbited and recovered successfully, the first recovery of living creatures from space. The United States had a few weeks earlier achieved the first recovery of a manmade object from space with Discoverer 13, a prototype reconnaissance satellite, but it was overshadowed by the bigger feat of recovering living creatures. Analysis of flight data found that one dog had experienced convulsions during the second orbot, so it was decided that the first manned mission would be limited to one orbit.
>The next mission happened when Korabl-Sputnik 3 launched on December 1 with two more dogs. The flight went well, but a malfunction of the orientation system meant that the descent module would probably land outside Soviet territory, most likely in China, and the onboard destruct system was activated and blew the capsule apart, killing the dogs.>Another dog mission was launched December 22. The R-7 third stage experienced thrust decay due to a gas generator malfunction and the mission was aborted. The descent module was ejected and landed in eastern Siberia. Recovery crews were in a hurry to locate it and disable the destruct system before it was too late. They found the capsule and waded through snow and -20F temperatures. The wiring to the destruct charges was cut and the dogs were found alive, but shivering from the extreme cold. Other biological specimens aboard had perished in the frigid conditions.
>>18549559>>18549587It's not really productive to uncritically glaze the USSR like this. The US and the USSR were engaged in a nuclear arms race, ad a bunch of what you bring up are just one side one-upping the other. This has has happened in every arms race in history and really shouldn't be surprising. The USSR had the capability of more directly allocating resources to these problems so it did have a slight advantage, but once they scared the pants off of the US (e.g. sputnik) this advantage disappeared in the face of the much larger economy of the US.Medicine was more advanced in the USSR for different political reasons- it was a need, not something to be profited off of. You could say the same for housing.The US was consistently more developed in other things though. Consider computers, a dominance which remained unchallenged until very recently with China.
US jets, submarines and missiles mogged the fuck out if the USSR.
>>18550353>Medicine was more advanced in the USSR for different political reasons- it was a need, not something to be profited off of. You could say the same for housingLmao
>>18550346>The state news agency TASS admitted to the loss of Korabl-Sputnik 3. After the 12/22 launch attempt, Korolev wondered why that could not also be acknowledged since after all the dogs had been recovered successfully. Khrushchev refused, saying the Soviet state could not admit to two failed missions in a row. It was not acknowledged until the glasnost era in the 1980s.[3]
>>18550337That second attempt was apparently rushed to test out the life support systems and the capsule had no heat shield, hence the dogs were never coming home even if it made it to orbit.
>>18549939>Bigger yields are much better at the job.Delivery and interception, retard. Very hard to deliver big ass bomb. Very easy to intercept big ass bomb.
this is completely untrue. The soviets lost big on the technological front once computers happened, prior to that they resorted to stealing things much like how the chinese today do. That was pretty much the entirety of the cold war.Russia today had a few leads in things like peptides and racetams. Probably because it's under wraps due to the american regulatory system for medical related injuries. Otherwise They had a few nazi scientists and that was it. They were hardly even a peer competitor at all during the cold war
>>18550117Cope
they were also very behind in making large RP-1/LOX engines, LH2 engines, and large solid motors
>>18550560The Cold War lasted a long time. In the early period, the American elites were aware that they were lagging behind the Soviets in terms of R&D and education and developed policies to remain competitive. >NDEA was among many science initiatives implemented by President Dwight D. Eisenhower in 1958 to increase the technological sophistication and power of the United States alongside, for instance, DARPA and NASA. It followed a growing national sense that U.S. scientists were falling behind scientists in the Soviet Union. The early Soviet success in the Space Race catalyzed a national sense of unease with Soviet technological advances, especially after the Soviet Union launched the first-ever satellite, Sputnik, the previous year.>The year 1957 also coincided with an acute shortage of mathematicians in the United States. The electronic computer created a demand for mathematicians as programmers and it also shortened the lead time between the development of a new mathematical theory and its practical application, thereby making their work more valuable. The United States could no longer rely on European refugees for all of its mathematicians, though they remained an important source, so it had to drastically increase the domestic supply. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Defense_Education_ActMultiple Soviets won Nobel prizes and Fields medals. They were especially strong in physics and mathematics and there are cases of Soviet discoveries preceding Western ones by years. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DGLAP_evolution_equationsThe US definitely pulled ahead later on but in no small part due to the widespread integration of the entire Western (and much of the Eastern) world into American R&D. Half the American Nobels last year were given to foreign researchers now working in the US. Half of Fortune 500 companies are owned by immigrants or their children. The richest man in the world is an immigrant to the US. Etc.
>>18549595>Presumably because the Americans didn't see a point in developing a 50 megaton bomb when bombs with much lower yields still do the job.The actual reason is that America had fancy multi-warhead missiles that could spread out the destruction for maximum effectiveness. The Soviets by that point had entered their period of stagnation and couldn't really replicate that, so they had to make up the difference by making the single warhead on their missiles so massive it could just flatten everything by itself.
>>18550540lol no
>>18550635no they weren't. they never were. If the soviet model was actually as successful as you say they wouldn't have had to steal the formula for the atom bomb, virtually all their armored vehicles and most small arms, jet fighters etc, and presumably a great deal of other things. The soviet miracle never happened, but that didn't stop a great deal of think tanks from using them as a boogeyman to continue funding themselves
the Soviet space program was never ahead of the US one except in lift capacity where they were in the lead until the mid-60s
>>18550119well i mean they couldn't build equivalent of Pioneer Venus probes to radar map the planet as their tech wasn't up to it
>>18550092There’s a laughing face in the smoke. It’s a clown head, and a minor meme. You might be crazy, but not about that.
>>18550092>>18551001kinda spooked me a bit ngl
>>18550718Other than the Su27 Flanker can you name a single Russian jet with a positive K/D ratio?
