The soviets
always had comparable technology, but were limited by
inefficient manufacturing and logistics. Those only exposed to western
design philosophy tend to belittle soviet engineers because of the
seemingly crude appearance of their equipment, but they had to meet
vastly different product requirements. Their export market was the
underdeveloped third world, no infrastructure at all. When your target
market is some place like Mongolia, Eritrea or South Yemen you have an
entirely different set of design parameters. There is no Radio Shack
down the corner, no parts store in town, no UPS delivery service. Even
Why Radio Shack when you have BFI? I can just imagine a fried US
made cell phone flying into a third-world bonfire...that sure would
stink. Another reason why Russian products were build to last was,
very simply, because if you trash your phone, you'd have to get on
a two-month waiting list to get another one.
See? That's my biggest complaint about the Soviets. They gave communism a
bad name. The USSR, in my opinion, wasn't a true communism any more than
Rome was a democracy after they had "dictators for life." Nice try, but a
true communism would be the opposite. Everyone would have everything, if
humans worked on an equal basis. That's why communisms don't work with
people: They'res a few rotten apples in every barrell.
Also, look at Soviet technology and people as a whole. Even though
MiG's did use vaccum tubes, they were still considered a threat, when
equipped with Soviet pilots.
As for the technology, I'll say that it wasn't behind the US, but rather
on a path that we didn't follow, and so it looked like they were behind us.
BTW, I'm guessing that with a $20,000 A2 clone, the avreage Dmitri didn't
get one in the USSR.
Tim D. Hotze