Remember Russians and Germans both used first angle projection, while
Americans used (still use) third angle projection. Russians did not have to
re-draw German technical drawings,  while Americans did.

On Thu, Jul 9, 2020, 6:52 AM Stanislav Jakuba <[email protected]> wrote:

> *Did Metric Help the Russians in the Space Race?*
>
>
>
> *by Stan Jakuba*
>
>
>
> History suggests that Russian use of the metric system helped their space
> program outpace the U.S. in the early days of the space race. The Russians,
> starting with Sputnik, collected all the space travel world records in
> those early years, and gave up on the moon landing more for political than
> technical reasons.
>
>
>
> The space program started in both nations after World War II, when both
> sides “imported” then current space technology from the Germans. The
> “import” consisted of the documentation and hardware for the V2 rockets
> that terrorized London and, after the allied invasion, Antwerp. With the
> hardware and documentation, each nation “retained” a group of German
> scientists, engineers and technicians that worked on that war project.
>
>
>
> It is usually not recognized that the Russians had their own "von Braun"
> and coworkers, just as the U.S. did. These “Russian” Germans, such as
> Helmut Grottrup, are so little known because they did not have the NASA PR
> machine behind them as von Braun did. The Russian government kept secret
> the names of their own engineers, let alone giving credit to the
> non-Russians.
>
>
>
> In any case, the “Russian” Germans must have been a formidable group of
> scientists and engineers, considering that they reaped all the space race
> records with the Russian backward technology and without the equivalent of
> the McMaster-Carr catalog we had in the U.S.; they made most of even
> standard hardware themselves, as needed.
>
>
>
> Coming back to the metric system, von Braun’s group used the MKS system
> (which later became MKSA and eventually SI in 1960 as we know). Relocated
> to the U.S. they continued working in that system, and U.S. engineers then
> converted the metric documentation, such as drawings and calculation
> results, to the U.S. conventions.
>
>
>
> The “Russian” group likewise continued working the same way they had in
> Germany. But here the German and USSR engineers spoke the same measurement
> language that was used by all engineers in the metric world throughout
> most of the 20th century. Thus the Russians did not need to employ staff
> to convert as we did, and did not experience delays and wasted money due to
> mistakes associated with working in two measuring systems. Their work
> progressed faster and cheaper simply because everybody was drawing,
> calculating, machining, assembling, etc. metrically.
>
>
>
> For example, when the German detail drawings hit the manufacturing floor
> in Russia, the lathe, milling, grinding, etc. operators could start cutting
> metal immediately, without even knowing the German language. They knew the
> language of engineering drafting, which by that time was very much the same
> throughout European nations. In fact, the Russians built about twenty V2s
> for testing right away.
>
>
>
> It might be interesting to put that situation into perspective with our
> war effort in building some English-designed hardware, such as the famous
> Rolls-Royce Merlin airplane engine. All the drawings, despite of using
> inches and the English language, had to be redrawn for American factories
> to make parts here. In technical literature, the spoken language is not as
> important as the drafting language, and the European (nowadays ISO)
> language spans those, and also unifies national standards with its drafting
> symbols and various standardized design features.
>
>
>
> The importance of a common engineering language can perhaps be best
> illustrated by the statement I heard at a fasteners conference, that “if
> threaded fastener standards were harmonized globally, World War II might
> have been over two years earlier.”
>
>
>
> Sadly, the obvious, long-term advantage of the metric system is still
> debated in the U.S. today. How many other races have we been losing without
> realizing it? To this day, the first stage of NASA rockets, including the
> Space Shuttle one, have been designed and built in Russia for us.
>
> Published in Metric Today a few decades ago.
>
> On Wed, Jul 8, 2020 at 8:48 PM John Nichols <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> According to my Russian supervisor they are good at listening at walls.
>>
>>
>>
>> But he is biased.  But you are correct.
>>
>>
>>
>> John
>>
>>
>>
>> *From:* USMA <[email protected]> *On Behalf Of *Peter
>> Goodyear
>> *Sent:* Wednesday, 8 July 2020 7:29 PM
>> *To:* USMA List Server <[email protected]>
>> *Subject:* [USMA 1474] Re: Metric to the Moon
>>
>>
>>
>> Hi, everyone,
>>
>>
>>
>> You could also respond that the Russians:
>>
>>    - Put the first satellite in orbit,
>>    - Put the first man in orbit,
>>    - The first woman in orbit,
>>    - Made the first spacewalk,
>>    - Operated the first extra-terrestrial rover,
>>    - Landed the only two probes on Venus,
>>    - Took the first pictures of the far side of the moon, and probably a
>>    few other firsts, too.
>>
>> And they used the metric system exclusively, to design, construct, and
>> operate their spacecraft.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Best wishes,
>>
>> Peter Goodyear,
>>
>> Melbourne, Australia
>> e-mail: [email protected] <[email protected]>
>>
>>
>>
>> = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
>>
>>
>>
>> On 9 Jul 2020, at 10:02, [email protected] wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> That's not a real argument though and more of a "poke in the eye with a
>> stick" sort of meme.  It means nothing.  The pyramids weren't built in the
>> metric system either.
>>
>>
>>
>> The Apollo missions were done in ifp because that's what they used at the
>> time.  That was also 50 years ago.  Let the snarky memes pass you by.  I
>> agree, it's sort of a funny statement, but it really means nothing to the
>> actual argument.
>>
>> -------- Original Message --------
>> Subject: [USMA 1472] Metric to the Moon
>> From: "[email protected]" <[email protected]>
>> Date: Wed, July 08, 2020 4:48 pm
>> To: USMA List Server <[email protected]>
>>
>> Don-- It seems that on some of the "social media" boards these days, a
>> big
>> argument against the metric system is the (mis)statement that the U.S.
>> got
>> to the moon not using the metric system. If I recall some of the
>> discussion here and in "Metric Today," the metric system was in fact
>> used,
>> at least in part.
>>
>> Moreover, all of the space activities since then (space station,
>> interplanetary probes, etc.) have been essentially all metric.
>>
>> I'm thinking that it would be useful to have information to debunk this
>> argument collected as one of the red bullet points on the USMA's home
>> page
>> (perhaps under "Why Use the Metric System"). I think I recall an article
>> in "Metric Today" on this topic. Perhaps it could be lifted for this
>> purpose and used as an easy response when someone raises the issue.
>> --Martin Morrison
>> _______________________________________________
>> USMA mailing list
>> [email protected]
>> https://lists.colostate.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/usma
>> <https://nam01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Furldefense.com%2Fv3%2F__https%3A%2Flists.colostate.edu%2Fcgi-bin%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Fusma__%3B!!KwNVnqRv!TpimtgEZvDBYlDv7y_q0pQzTITZb_iSPRLtgdPt5wfHAiSHa3tNVHXPU1AX8dxr9-xQ%24&amp;data=02%7C01%7Cusma%40lists.colostate.edu%7Cac84e2468a064c77f2a608d824017bdd%7Cafb58802ff7a4bb1ab21367ff2ecfc8b%7C0%7C0%7C637298936080177017&amp;sdata=XQKOBsoJnTNlu3ftIz%2FuGQGAC0aeucofv7rZAev3mAo%3D&amp;reserved=0>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> USMA mailing list
>> [email protected]
>> https://lists.colostate.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/usma
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> USMA mailing list
>> [email protected]
>> https://lists.colostate.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/usma
>>
> _______________________________________________
> USMA mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://lists.colostate.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/usma
>
_______________________________________________
USMA mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.colostate.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/usma

Reply via email to