Designing the future in Russia

S. Hughes

Last weekend I was in Irkutsk watching the preparations for Victory Day. There was a musical brass band rehearsing their tunes. They were from a local music college in the city. They were very good too. The Great Patriotic War was of course a cataclysmic event in the recent history of Russia and the Soviet Union. It affected everybody, and families were required to experience loss and tragedy as young men went off to fight the war. Many never came back. I was with my friend and colleague Vera walking around Irkutsk. I asked her about her grandparents. Like many people of my generation in Russia, she never knew her grandfathers. One was lost on the outskirts of Leningrad in 1941, the other just disappeared and has no known grave. What has all this got to do with design? Well actually quite a lot. The great patriotic war accelerated he development of advanced technologies, initially for weapons of war, but were further developed into the machines, artifacts and services we use today. The jet engine, rocket and satellite technology and the first computers were developed during the 1941–45 war, the concept of the internet was first concieved, nuclear technology and countless others. Weapons and war winning technologies had to be developed very quickly and under great pressure. The very best scientists in the USSR, Germany, USA and the UK were closeted together for months and years during the war and immediately afterwards during what became the Cold War to develop special projects. Satellite technology was developed in Russia, rocket and jet propulsion principally in Germany. nuclear technology in the USA and early computers in the UK.

Going back to my experience in Irkutsk last week, it occurred to me that one of the reasons for the Soviet Union’s eventual victory against the German army in 1945 was that they had better designed weapons of war. In making that statement I mean that they had weapons which were «fit for purpose» and better designed for the conditions in which they were required to be used. The musical band I watched rehearsing in Irkutsk were playing in front of a T34 tank. It looked quite new and shiny as it had been painted ready for the Victory Day celebrations. It was also covered with balloons and flags. However, terrible, powerful killing machine as it was, this T34 looked as if it could go into battle today. Its lines were clean, it looked simple and economical, like all outstanding design. It was undoubtedly the most effective tank of the war. Perhaps not the most advanced technologically. The German Tiger IV and the Panther were faster and more powerful. But the T34 worked beautifully and could be produced in huge numbers in converted factories in Chelyabinsk and Irkutsk. It was diesel powered, and while this had the disadvantage of producing a lot of smoke (making it visible) and making it very noisy [1], the engineering was simple and it needed very few moving parts. It was very fast (35 mph) and importantly it did not break down in freezing temperatures like the more complex German models. Also being a simple machine, spare parts were readily available and interchangeable. It was designed «fit for purpose».

On a different scale the iconic PPSH-41 machine gun designed by Georgi Shpagin was another example of superb, simple design leading to war winning technology. Originally developed during the Russo-Finnish war in 1941, the PPSH-41 was very effective in close quarter fighting in forests and urban areas where accuracy was a secondary concern when set against rate of fire, reliability (it didn’t jam in freezing temperatures) and availability [2]. Importantly it could use a wide range of ammunition including German «parabel-lum» stock. In fact captured PPSH-41’s were extensively used by German forces fighting in Russia who preferred it to their own Schmeisers and Mausers, which were again more complex but less effective in the conditions. It was made out of pressed steel and only had 87 components which meant it was very simple to put together. 6,000,000 PPSH-41’s were produced and later models were used by Chinese forces in the Korean War as well as by the Vietcong in Vietnam in the late 1960’s and 70’s, proving highly effective.

Military priorities during the cold war period (1947–1989) drove improvements in rocket technology and space applications. Principally for the USSR the advanced launch capability of the multi stage rockets designed and developed by Sergei Korolev and his team were far in advance of the launch technologies then being developed in the USA by Werner Von Braun (Vanguard), which were little more than adapted versions of German V2 rockets launched on London. The USSR military was in this aspect driven by cost. It was cheaper and quicker to deploy a nuclear warhead with intercontinental range by putting it on a missile, than to develop an advanced jet powered bomber which could carry these weapons but be vulnerable also to USA/NATO air defences [3]. Satellite technology was also a very effective way of monitoring military developments through

Designing the Future in Russia

S. Hughes

photography from space. Incidentally it was only through recent research that I really began to appreciate the importance of Korolev as one of the great 20th century scientists. I stood in awe recently in front of the impressive memorial statue outside the entrance of Bauman University in Moscow considering his enormous achievements.

In the first half of this paper I have explored some examples of how cataclysmic events drive the pace of design and technological change. However as we approach the middle part of the 21st century we are faced with different challenges which have the potential to be no less catastrophic and will require fast dramatic solutions to huge world problems. Advanced design, science and technology is central to this as we strive to manage global issues such as climate change, population growth, the shortage of clean water, energy consumption and the forthcoming «end of oil».

Oil, natural gas, metals and timber make up 80 % of Russia’s exports [4]. Despite having reserves equalling less than 10 % of the Middle East’s total, Russia is the world’s largest oil producer and second largest exporter [5]. But it will run out, particularly at current rates of consumption. In Beijing 1000 more new cars hit the road each day. In Shanghai it is 700 cars. This is unsustainable. However 150 years ago the world also faced an energy crisis. In the mid 19th century the hunting and processing of whales principally for whale oil, was one of America’s largest industries. For more than 100 years oil extracted from whale blubber was the principal source of fuel for lighting. Without it the West would have fallen into darkness. But whales were running out. 8,000 Humpback whales died in 1853 alone [6]. However the crisis was averted. Six years later petroleum was discovered in a strike at Titusville in Pennsylvania USA. Kerosene replaced whale oil in the world’s lamps [6]. We need to keep our faith in human ingenuity.

The key to successful creative economies in the mid 21st century will be the ability to innovate, adapt quickly, reduce product development time and get leading edge products to market quicker than anyone else. From the «survival of the fittest», in business it has become the «survival of the fastest». The development of world class «fit for purpose» universities and other educational establishments are key to this, producing an adaptive, research focused workforce amongst which T shaped graduates, postgraduates and researchers feature prominently. The ability to have an in depth understanding of a subject, a product, a process or a service but to be able to think laterally about its adaptation, use and fitness for purpose. In another age and for different purposes the design and development of the T34 tank and the PPSH-41 were superb examples.