The "Tanner" and "Maury" names refer to two generations of paired U.S. Navy oceanographic and hydrographic survey sister ships, named after pioneering oceanographers Zera Luther Tanner and Matthew Fontaine Maury.1. First Generation: World War II Conversions (1946–1969)
Originally built as Artemis-class attack cargo ships during World War II, these vessels were converted into dedicated hydrographic survey units in 1946:
- USS Tanner (AGS-15): Originally commissioned as the USS Pamina (AKA-34).
- USS Maury (AGS-16): Originally commissioned as the USS Renate (AKA-36).
Both ships spent over two decades performing critical, global mapping and charting operations—including extensive data gathering in the Persian Gulf and the Arctic—before being decommissioned together in 1969.2. Second Generation: Purpose-Built Survey Vessels (1989–1994)In the late 1980s, the Navy built a new pair of advanced, fast oceanographic research sister ships at the Bethlehem Steel Sparrows Point shipyard in Maryland:
- USNS Maury (T-AGS-39): Entered service in 1989. It was the largest and fastest deep-ocean mapping vessel of its time.
- USNS Tanner (T-AGS-40): Entered service in 1990.
Post-Military Second LivesAfter brief naval careers cut short by the end of the Cold War and mechanical problems, both second-generation vessels were transferred to state maritime academies in 1996 for use as training platforms:
- USNS Maury (T-AGS-39) became the TS Golden Bear, serving as the primary training vessel for the California Maritime Academy.
- USNS Tanner (T-AGS-40) became the TS State of Maine, serving the Maine Maritime Academy.
(Note: The Navy later commissioned another standalone Pathfinder-class survey ship named USNS Maury (T-AGS-66) in 2016. Due to Matthew Fontaine Maury's historical ties to the Confederacy, that vessel was officially renamed the USNS Marie Tharp in 2023).
from Google AI:
The T-AGS oceanographic survey ships USNS Maury (T-AGS 39) and USNS Tanner (T-AGS 40) collected geomagnetic data used to create high-accuracy magnetic maps.
Operating as deep-ocean survey platforms, both vessels were outfitted with highly complex, integrated survey systems. Their primary mission was to gather critical geophysical parameters—including bathymetric, gravity, and geomagnetics data—specifically designed to produce precise seafloor charts.
Key Details of Their Mission:
Strategic Purpose: The precise magnetic and gravity charts produced from their data directly supported the Trident Fleet Ballistic Missile Submarine Program to assist with covert underwater navigation.
Acoustic Engineering: To ensure that the sensitive instruments recording these magnetic and bathymetric readings were not compromised by noise, the ships' engines were mounted on specialized rubber-cushioned rafts to isolate vibrations from the hull.
Sister Ships: This specific deep-ocean charting system was also operational on two other survey vessels of that era: the USNS H.H. Hess (T-AGS 38) and the USNS Wyman (T-AGS 34).
(Note: If you are looking into the newer Pathfinder-class survey ship formerly named USNS Maury (T-AGS 66), it was officially renamed the USNS Marie Tharp in March 2023. Tharp was the pioneering oceanographic cartographer who created the very first scientific maps of the Atlantic Ocean floor.)
What Caused the Collision mentioned in the video?
from Google AI:
The navigation error that caused the USS San Francisco (SSN-711) to collide head-on with an undersea mountain on January 8, 2005, was driven by a failure to cross-reference multiple available charts, combined with operating at maximum speed in poorly mapped waters.
While the primary tactical chart used by the crew did not display the seamount, an official U.S. Navy investigation revealed an "accumulation of errors" by the commanding officer and the navigation team:
- Inadequate Voyage Planning: The navigation team relied entirely on a single chart that omitted the hazard. They failed to review alternative, larger-scale charts in their possession that explicitly noted "discolored water"—a critical warning indicator for shallow underwater features or volcanic activity.
- Overconfidence and Lack of Skepticism: The crew did not exercise standard precautionary measures when transiting a region known to be dotted with underwater volcanoes. They omitted safety checks and failed to take more frequent depth soundings that could have alerted them to rapid seafloor elevation changes.
- High-Speed Travel: Despite relying on incomplete mapping data, the submarine was traveling at a depth of 525 feet and rushing at maximum flank speed (over 30 knots). At this velocity, passive sonar is heavily degraded by water flow noise, and the crew had no advanced warning before hitting the seamount.
170 comments:
What is principle of wotk of GPS?
It is *network*.
And as that -- not means of spreading signal or ways information about position recieveing.
But inner protocols. That, how much "smart" it is as a whole.
Because. If ir smart enough - it can integrate informatiin of different kinds. And be versatike.
As Internet are.
O.K. let my show you how it can be done with contemporary techs
and how it can be made even more viable with my new ones ;-)
simplest bruteforce solution -- beacons. lots of em.
that would be floating on the surface -- recieving GPS signals, and then re-transmit it (with long radiowaves, ultrasound, lasers or etc(for example,as variant -- chemical signals))
Well, such path, though possible -- would strain our modern industrial capabilities greatly.
we can mass-produce some cheap electronics
and we can produce, also relatively cheap bodies
but... to have practical use -- millions and millions if such need to be produced -- and while individual beacon would be cheap -- masses if em woukd cist a lot of $.
And that without mentioning emerging problems, like
such (stupid tech, I will call em from now) beacons will be blown by winds and currents, would polute environment, would have problems with robustness and longetivity of use...
and et cetera, etsetera, et cetera.
or, as I said -- dumb tech ;-p
and how it should be looking with my smart techs ;-)
first -- mass-production.
"robots making other robots"... "from local resources" to boot
>> that eliminate problems with mass-production bottlenake
use smart materials and local resources -- problem with pollution and robustness
>> you use something that already there, and you akways can make more -- in substitute to malfunctioned/gone
versatile and working as a system, means that you can do/try different designs, accustomed to environment and tasks elements
>>like, beacons that bir only flow on the surface, but under water too, statiined on the floor, robots that tug beacons, robots that salvage malfuctiined beacins, robots that explore sea bed... and et cetera, et cetera, et cetera.
There's already a network in place. Biologics. The "sounds" of life. Passive sonar detectors normally filter out "biologics". looking for man-made mechanical noises (submarines, etc.). Snapping shrimp could certainly tell you where the seafloor is, and the nature of the terrain.
In underwater acoustics, biologics refer to ambient noise and acoustic signals generated by marine life—such as whale vocalizations, dolphin clicks, fish choruses, and snapping shrimp—which passive sonar systems pick up and operators must classify to avoid masking tactical or scientific targets.
Role and Impact of Biologics in Passive Sonar
Signal Masking: Biological sounds can match the frequency bands of interest (low and mid-frequencies), occasionally growing louder than shipping or environmental noise and masking true targets of interest.
Signature Libraries: Sonar operators and automated processing systems maintain extensive acoustic reference databases to distinguish biological transients from mechanical signatures like rotating machinery or pumps.
Bio-Acoustic Modeling: Advanced military and research frameworks incorporate biological noise models to predict passive sensor performance in geographic regions where animal choruses dominate the underwater soundscape.
//Snapping shrimp could certainly tell you where the seafloor is, and the nature of the terrain.
Is it... binaural? ;-p
Didn't heard 'bout it. :-)
Ambient Noise Interferometry: In a cutting-edge technique, scientists record the seemingly random background noise of the ocean—such as waves, wind, rain, and distant ship engines. By using advanced algorithms to compare how these ambient sound waves collide and overlap across multiple hydrophones, they can map deep ocean structures without emitting a single sound ping
Multi-aural... like in the string of hydrophones (many, not just 2) on a passive towed array.
It's called "beamforming". i also worked on a beamformer for the AN'SLR-24 towed array.
link.
Well. Naturally.
//This blog is one of my workshops. Nothing you see here is a "finished product". I'm always chiseling...
Alone.
Yawn.
Welcome to Zarathustra's mountaintop cave, sunshine.
You know my eagle and serpent?
There is time to come into cave...
and there is time to come out.
That is probably the only "wisdom" from zaratustra I was able ti grok.
That's epithome of modern techs.
First... you need some sensor (Physics!)
then, either built-in or separate device to transform analog into digital
And then, funneling that da%a into micro-chip/computer, that processing it in accordance to your need... with program. That can be updated/imoroved/ changed at whim.
And that is that only way our contemporary techs can be called "smart" -- easiness to change program.
...and what did he have to do first? Overcome his pity.
Leave the camel behind.
Learn some techs? ;-p
Became smarter? ;-)
You know -- people need to eat. They cannot be fed with preaching alone.
Even Jesus (and his father gawd... manna, manna, mannao) did know that. ;-p
While in Evolution. And in my tech.
Material itself becomes smart. ;-)
So let them learn some techs and become smarter. I'm not in the manna production business.
That's the whole problem with the technical singularity. It's supposed to produce manna from heaven. I don't want any manna.
I'll plant and then walk my own beans.
Like Thoreau in Walden.
No Roundup for my beans!
My labour theory of value...
//I'll plant and then walk my own beans.
More like Little Prince... and his Rose. ;-p
"Fuck its' Division!"
Do you mean for me -- to start oppising you? %^)))
Or if it can be divided, let Prosumers make the divisions!
And you have tech on your mind -- how for em to accomplish that?
Your tech already exists. It's called "humanity".
You know what was problem with communism?
There was no algorithm. No blueprints. No idea. HOW it should look like.
and the network's in place. We're using it.
//Your tech already exists. It's called "humanity".
???
It should look like Toffler's 3rd wave.
Earliest form: Project CyberSyn
I am programmer.(and network/system administrator)
Means. I DO KNOW how networks built. And how they work.
And I can say it basing it on my expertise -- that they DO NOT WORK BY ITSELF -- they need lots and lots of effort of soecially trauned and experienced people.
Means. There is no Singularity. There's just us.
We are the robots.
//Earliest form: Project CyberSyn
There was such projects in ussr too.
Know what happened with em?
"Those who know better" kiled em.
Just after seeing em as a rivalling firce to iwn uncontrollable power.
Yawn.
Whatever.
Robots need a program.
Remember Appletalk Networks? I do. Simple.
Complexity may be the goals of some. I prefer simplicity.
We each have one. And many are incommensurable.
Simplicity is good only for destroying...
Instincts... it's not a program.
Yawn.
The factories were too big. That made them efficient, but "fragile". They needed to be anti-fragile. Every kulak his own factory owner.
Every kulak owning his own "means of production".
Power federated and distributed. Not centralized.
Heh... like China under Mao steel production??? ))))
But... you do not have that many people in USA to try his such methods. %^P
Stomachs are a part of their program.
//Power federated and distributed. Not centralized.
That's not simple.
But VERY complex system. ;-o
You never read Plato's Republic. You want a "luxurious" Republic, not Socrate's ideal Republic.
Simplest possible systems -- is systems with strict hierarchy.
That's why we have brains, with specialised for every task parts in it.
Because Evolution -- is just like you. Likes simple solutions. ;-p
You want Star Trek's Luxury Space Communism.
We can do it in a "make everybody smarter" way, or in a "make everybody dumber" way. Fuck AI!
I am technologist
I do not care about politics.
Yawn.
//You want Star Trek's Luxury Space Communism.
What a bs.
Who am I to you? Your fellow DEMN commie???
Bu-ga-ga-ah
//The factories were too big. That made them efficient, but "fragile"
You.., know nothing.
There was no problem with "too big" factories in ussr.
They worked fine. And exist till today. And RFia economy based on em.
But that, that 90% of all other factories was small, with outdated equipment and producing never needed by anyone outdated goods (or weapon).
But system of decision-makind (Politburo) was such -- that it was *not* possible to restructure it.
Because ussr system was *not* oriented on recieving profit.
Not capitalist's which you dislike so much.
And that mean -- there was *NO* sources of investments.
As capitalists -- when they have profit -- they immediately re-invest it into more production. For natural goal -- to have even more.
But that was ideologically impossible in ussr (except for... in weapon for war with burgeous... weapon to reduce USA to radioactive dust)
That's why. When Gorbachev and your Ray Gun signed peace treaty.
Whole reason for ussr to exist -- was lost.
Dead link above.
Since you don't, your technology is irrelevant.
Yeah, we've got robots. @@
Only in the people at the end of each network connection/ node.
In scheduling, you can have an ADM network or a PDM network. The difference lies in where you place the "complexity". You're ADM arrow-diagramming method. I'm PDM point diagramming method.
Brains are an organ for directing movement. Plants don't need them.
So what?
Who will do that scheduling? Who will allow em to do that?
Naaah.
China do. Producing and using robots on industrial scales.
Capitalism is a technology for commodifying money, land, labour, and information. You can partially or fully commoditize all 4. The USSR simply left out the $ part and pretended that it wasn't commoditizing the rest. They were anti-dominion. Soviet labour WASN'T alienated? It was even More alienated. Why? The peasants weren't allowed to "profit".
I'm a plant.
The plant's organs are specialized, and their inputs and outputs flow naturally.
...cause not exist... yet.
You named Mao.
You DON'T was Star Trek luxury communism?
They didn't trust the peasants to arrive at their stated end-state: STATELESSNESS.
Lenin modified Marx's communism. He called the modification (totalitarian state) Socialism.
g00gle ai not agree with you
""No, capitalism is not a technology.It is an economic and social system based on private ownership of property, free markets, and making a profit.While a technology is a tool or machine made to solve a practical problem, capitalism is the set of rules people use to trade goods, hire workers, and run businesses
Differences Between Capitalism and Technology
Capitalism is a system of human rules, laws, and habits for business and money.
Technology is a physical or digital tool, like a computer, engine, or plow.Capitalism can help build new technology fast because people want to make money.Technology can change how capitalism works, such as the shift from steam power to the internet.If you want to know more, I can tell you:How capitalism helps create new toolsHow technology changes the economy
He added a "tier" to Marxism.
And it do not fit Lem's definition -- nobody ever stated a task -- we need to build capitalism.
It just naturally emerged from practice.
Evolution... not Abrupt Transformation
It emerged due to the Portuguese. From making an abrupt transformation due to the discovered presence of virgin land and raw materials ripe for exploitation with slave labourers.
//Lenin modified Marx's communism. He called the modification (totalitarian state) Socialism.
The French philosopher and social reformer Pierre Leroux is widely credited with inventing and first using the word socialisme (socialism) in February 1832 in the French periodical Le Globe.Origin and Early UseCoined in France: Pierre Leroux used the term to define a cooperative social doctrine that contrasted with extreme individualism
All it required to connect it into a whole system was "capital".
//Evolution... not Abrupt Transformation
In modern theory evolution IS abrupt transfirmation exactly.
Like evolution of mammals after dinos extinction (asteroid, asteroid)
And evolutiin of us humans -- because of ice age
Lenin merely added extreme State control (aka Stalin). He centralized rather than distributed "information".
To make an omelette, ya gotta break eggs.
???
You keep forgetting.
That I was living under Actual History Communism
And it was nothing lije ST.
In Russia, the eggs were the kulaks.
(Spok's eyebrow up)
Not Mao. Xi. ;-p
..and the information all came FROM the central planners.
Stalin added himself.
Yawn.
Lenin's "brain" for directing "movement".
While Lenin was alive and kicking -- Stalin was nobody.
A brain with a for sh*t feedback loop that took years to receive a signal (failure)
//..and the information all came FROM the central planners.
not infirmation
who care about such shit???
funds (shiffered codename instead of banned "capital")
Lenin was the single point failure in a serial vertical (hierarchical) structure. Not a Deleuzian rhizome horizontal one.
//A brain with a for sh*t feedback loop that took years to receive a signal (failure)
They knew the signal very well.
Did not knew what to do with it
Cause neither Marx nor Lenin -- did not privide recepie.
Yawn.
A program.
Parallel flows, not serial flows!
//Lenin was the single point failure in a serial vertical (hierarchical) structure.
If so? Why ussr not break up with his death (like did napolein and macedonski empires)?:?
He provided a program, just not a very good one. 5 year plans. Same one Chinese use today, with better feedback loops.
Stalin took Lenin's place.
The system's serial verticality remained.
//Stalin took Lenin's place.
Absolutely not.
Neither structure nor post was the same.
The first five-year plan in the Soviet Union was introduced and politicalized by Joseph Stalin, who launched it on October 1, 1928
Every Republic was a hostage to the system's verticality. Every industry required inputs and outputs that were all state directed.
The central brain directed all the flows. And Stalin directed the brain.
Lenin
well befote Roosvelt
invented New Economical Politics
Which was dismantled by Stalin
Yawn
PS You just kniw nothing about the thung. @@
Have you seen Musk's new robot factory?
As well as his "new" Starships? ;-p
At least he commit 100%...
I did that scheduling. ADM was developed for mainframes. PDM for pc's With the first, you drew it on paper before keypunching the data.. You needed the long lines to write on (text on arrow), the you added start (I) and finish (J) "nodes" (numbered) on the arrows. With pc's, you started by entering the text data, and then you connected the text boxes (points) with arrows. It required a graphical Apple or Windows based interface.
So it was pretty much determined by the computer interface.
//I did that scheduling
Of your own will? ;-)
The information is stove-piped.
The opposite of "stovepiped" information—which refers to isolated data silos, vertical-only communication, or unshared channels—is integrated, shared, cross-functional, or collaborative information flow. In system design and organizational behavior, the opposite breaks down into key concepts.
Organizational Opposites
Cross-functional / Cross-departmental: Teams actively share data horizontally across different groups rather than staying locked in separate functional towers.
Decentralized / Networked: Information flows freely in multiple directions rather than strictly up and down a rigid vertical chain of command.
Transparent / Open-access: Data is visible and accessible to all relevant stakeholders rather than restricted or hoarded by a single unit.
Technical and Data Opposites
Interoperable: Software systems and databases are designed to communicate, exchange data, and function together seamlessly.
Unified / Centralized repository: A single, shared source of truth replaces multiple disconnected legacy systems.
Holistic integration: Point-to-point or enterprise-wide connectivity that eliminates data islands.
For $
How do you plan without a work flow?
It lacked "luxury".
It rationed scarcity.
I'm just a kulak.
Hardly your USA peers would grok such new identity.
And to... it says nothing.
"Kulaks" was just that whose personal health and family circumstances (big family, grown up, on productivity peak, with connections) allowed em to "succeed".
Are you one with big family? You can "walk the bean" together? With achieving in such a way productivity boost over neighbours?
Is that what you mean?
???
First... you need to define -- what exactly you are doing, isn't it?
Or... you mean your "work" here is like in Physics -- just an amount if energy spent??b
//Software systems and databases are designed to communicate, exchange data, and function together seamlessly
Aha. ))) "Seamlessly" )))
Word from marketing material of every SW firm.
But. You keep forgetting that you talking with programmer.
Even worse -- sysadmin and DevOps.
Very that position that gotta be non-existant... if that "seamleasky" gonna be true.
Position akin to your workflows facilitating. ;-)
But with computers. Not people
And cimputers. They *NOT* that forgiving. And cooperative.
What a bs.
It was ALL about luxury.
As there was no bank accounts to measure wealth
It was measured by amount of material goods stashed. And privilages.
L*ke in feodal times.
Because not solved the politics...
The Former... than add "how long it should take".
That's why they have all those "stovepipes". ;)
Technofeudal times...
So why didn't every comrade have a dacha? Scarcity, No matter-antimatter replicators? Tea, Earl Grey, hot!
No. A kulak buys a tractor instead of a horse. He buys a bull instead of a milk cow. He sells the eggs i or hatches them instead of eating them. He makes productive investments instead of hiring servants.
A kulak doesn't wait for Stalin to give him a tractor.
And from where will emerge that tractor??? %^O
From realities of Russian Empire -- only nobility have had such a freedom -- to buy tractors... from West.
As there was no tractors produced and available for buying. For mere peasants to boot.
//Technofeudal times...
Will you cut this crap???
:-O
You have no idea what feidalism was.
And cannot point where it still is (hint: nowhere)
//So why didn't every comrade have a dacha? Scarcity,
And why all Americans do not fly in helicopters? ;-p
Because Deep State decided to keep em impoverished? To have pool of ready to be slaves/servants? ;-p
dunno how it relates in your mind...
Yeah.
That what "answering technological question" is.
In a narrow sence.
Like building map of technological process... with all circumstances given.
I have engineering education, you remember?
It maybe lacking. And differ from your.
But, I know what blueprints is, technological processes, knowing material properties and etc.
And by myself I studied what post-soviet engineering education was predictably lacking -- economy, business processes, marketing...
...into the ground? %^P
Because... have no leverage. And no interest in having it.
Cause politics is realy simple thing. Primitive even.
That is just a network of "those who know better".
Yawn.
//He makes productive investments instead of hiring servants.
Exactly that reason.
Of outrage of ordinary peasants against "kulaks".
There was NO space for "productive investments" -- no capitalism... developed enough to buy "means of production".
Only workforce was available -- that same peasants, but more poor than "kulak".
And while that peasants served to nobles, habitually.
Even not paid for their work.
And not revolted.
Because "those who kniw better"(like preists)have explained to em -- that that is O.K.
Working. While paid. But in same mere peasants.
Made em feeling -- that that is (somehow) "unfair".
So... after nobility was banished
To keep steam of revolutional outrage -- that "dekulakisation" was invented.
SAME as "purge of jews" by nazis.
Or... "cultural revolution" in Chuna.
All the same -- to keep grip on power.
That's why liliPut CANNOT stop his silly war against Ukrainians... and whole West.
Because that outrage he directed outside -- will return home. Back to him.
New tech isn't leverage? For every elite "who knows better" there is an anti-elite who opposes him. You need a coalition of anti-elites who are willing to politically oppose the elites "who know better". The struggle is eternal.
Go big or stay home.
We had quite a few Russian engineers and scientists at Goddard. They didn't seem to have any trouble with any of those. Marketing was based upon the scientific and engineering merits, although inexpensive did carry some weight. Contracts weren't based upon lowest bid, but it helped.
Analog, not digital. It took decades to convert all our NASA ground systems to digital. Analog = stovepiped data. Digital made information exchange easier.
per google AI:
did any kulaks own tractors prior to dekulakization in ussr?
AI Overview
Yes, a small number of wealthier peasants classified as kulaks owned or co-owned tractors prior to dekulakization, primarily during the New Economic Policy (NEP) era of the 1920s when private agricultural leasing and machinery purchases were temporarily permitted. However, motorized farm machinery was exceedingly rare in the Soviet countryside, and owning any motorized equipment was explicitly used by Soviet authorities in 1929 as a formal legal criterion to identify and classify a household as a kulak.
Tractor Ownership and the Kulak Definition
Legal Criteria: Under Soviet decrees issued in May 1929, owning a motorized farm machine—such as a tractor, a small mill, or a cream separator—automatically helped categorize a peasant farm as a "kulak" farm, marking them for expropriation.
Scarcity of Machinery: Total tractor numbers in the USSR during the 1920s were extremely low. Most individual peasant households relied entirely on hand tools, wooden plows, and draft animals like horses or oxen.
Cooperative Ownership: When wealthier peasants did possess mechanical equipment, it was sometimes shared or cooperatively bought within an extended family or tight-knit community group rather than single ownership, though authorities still targeted these assets.
Open borders = low wages. What do you think is going on with European and US immigration?
Yawn.
Artifically generated BS. THAT IS.
Tractors were barely produced in the late Russian Empire. Industrial mass production of agricultural tractors did not exist yet, and the entire country relied on a tiny number of imported machines or experimental prototypes.
Early Pioneers and PrototypesFyodor Blinov: Built the world's first model of a crawler track vehicle in 1888 and received a patent for a continuous-track wagon, laying conceptual groundwork for crawler tractors.
Yakov Mamin: Invented a self-ignition oil engine and built the "Dwarf" (Karlik) tractor prototype in 1910, which was later referred to as the "Russian tractor", though it saw very limited local creation rather than factory mass production.
Scale of the MarketExtremely low numbers: By 1917, right as the empire collapsed, only about 165 total tractors existed across all of Russia.
Foreign reliance: Large-scale manufacturing of tractors only began later in the 1930s under the Soviet regime using foreign templates like Ford and International Harvester
In the 1920s, domestic tractor production in the USSR was very low and only began in earnest when the Red Putilovite Plant in Leningrad started manufacturing the Fordson-Putilovets replica in 1924.
The Soviet Union relied heavily on large-scale imports from the United States (primarily Ford), holding roughly 33,000 total tractors in the country by late 1928, most of which were foreign-made.
Domestic Production and ContextEarly domestic output: Small-scale and experimental builds occurred just after the Russian Civil War, but mass assembly of the licensed Fordson design at Leningrad only produced a few thousand units annually through the mid-1920s due to metallurgical and tooling challenges.
Reliance on imports: Between 1921 and 1927, Ford alone exported roughly 25,000 tractors to the Soviet market, accounting for an estimated 85% of all tractors and trucks in the USSR
25000
For a millions and millions of "kulaks" families purged. ;-p
And? What about fuel??? And spare parts?
Surely! There was gas station. On every corner. In early ussr.
You just mixing it with realities of your USA
Pre-1915: Only about 10,300 tractors were built in total during the earliest decades of steam and experimental gas engines.1916: 29,670 tractors produced in that single year.1917: 62,742 tractors produced.1918: 132,697 tractors produced as manufacturers scaled up.1919: 164,590 total cumulative benchmark reached right before the 1920s.1920: Cumulative total reached roughly 203,207 tractors.
By 1941, the USSR had built a massive domestic tractor industry under Stalin's Five-Year Plans, producing hundreds of thousands of tractors (with over 50,000 units made in peak single years like 1932 alone) to reach an active pre-war farm inventory of over 500,000 tractors
See the difference?
And that... I doubt truthfulness of that numbers. Cause I much more closely encountered "russian statistics".
Yawn.
500.000 gross number (not thieved for broken and etc) in 1941
and 200.000 in 1920 ALONE
with industry sufferung from OVERproduction.
So what?
Yawn.
Again
You saying that to prigrammer and sysadmin.
Yawn.
//Digital made information exchange easier.
Ough-yeaah, baby! Ough-yeah. )))
Well... specifics of the place...
Motto of China's fleets commanders? ;-p
They'd better when chasing CVNs. Fortune favours the brave.
What, you don't speak mitochondria? You don't speak chemistry?
Fluids, the 'digital' spaces of chemistry. Where analog information gets dissolved and transmitted to specialized analog receivers
Wait until after the war. Who do you think will be manning all the reconstruction jobs, native Ukrainians?
How did kulaks get them?
In the 1920s, kulaks (the more prosperous, relatively well-off peasants) acquired Fordson tractors through legal market channels created by the Soviet state itself during the New Economic Policy (NEP).
The way they obtained them—and the way those same tractors were later weaponized against them—followed a specific sequence of events:
1. The NEP Market Loophole (1921–1928)
Following the economic ruin of the Russian Civil War, Vladimir Lenin paused strict communist policies and introduced the New Economic Policy (NEP). The NEP reintroduced a limited form of capitalism in the countryside to jumpstart food production.
State Incentives: The Soviet government actively encouraged peasants to "enrich themselves" and grow more food.
Agricultural Cooperatives: The Soviet buying agents (like Amtorg) imported Fordson tractors and sold them to rural agricultural co-operatives or directly to rural credit societies.
Wealthier Buyers: Because kulaks were the only peasants with disposable cash, excess grain to barter, or the ability to secure credit lines from village banks, they easily dominated these local co-operatives. In many cases, a wealthy peasant bought a Fordson tractor outright from a state depot or leased it via a local agricultural collective that they practically controlled.
2. The Definition of a Kulak
It is important to note that owning advanced machinery like a Ford tractor was exactly what caused a peasant to be labeled a "kulak" by the state.
The official Soviet definition of a kulak in 1929 depended heavily on technology and labor:
If a peasant household owned a mechanized tractor, they had more farming power than their neighbors.
To maximize the tractor, they often hired seasonal laborers or rented the tractor out to poorer neighbors in exchange for a portion of their harvest.
Under Marxist-Leninist ideology, hiring labor or renting out machinery was classified as "capitalist exploitation," instantly rendering that peasant a class enemy.
3. The Reversal: Dekulakization (1929–1933)
By late 1929, Joseph Stalin launched the campaign for rapid collectivization and the "liquidation of the kulaks as a class". The very tractors the kulaks had legally purchased during the NEP became the targets of state seizure.
Forced Confiscation: Under the dekulakization orders, local party activists and the secret police (OGPU) raided kulak households.
Seizure of Machinery: The state seized all private agricultural means of production—specifically land, livestock, and modern machinery like Fordson tractors.
Redistribution: These confiscated Ford tractors were stripped from their owners and transferred into the hands of the newly formed state Machine-Tractor Stations (MTS) or collective farms (kolkhozes) to be used as propaganda tools to show the "triumph of socialist farming". The original owners were either executed, sent to forced labor camps (Gulags), or exiled to Siberia.
25.000 tractors in country with 25.000.000 peasant families?
there are different kinds of "small number"
is 10% small? for sure
is 1% small? absolutely
and here we have 1 promile ;-p
On USA territory? Yawn.
Freed from previous inhabitants by China-Russia allied efforts.
Who knows...
Nothing have ended... yet.
You, USA... have not killed that bear... to calculate what you'd do with its furr (Russian proverb)
(Spok's eyebrow)
It eventually reduced to 30-40% of the pre-tractor formerly 80% agricullture portion of the total Soviet economy population to do industrial labour in the USSR..
To compare...In the USA the 25-30% formerly (pre-tractor) in agriculture is now 1.5%
what percent of russian peasants farmed before tractors, and what percent after?
Before the widespread use of tractors (around 1928), roughly 75% to 85% of the Russian population worked in agriculture. After forced collectivization and mechanization by the late 1930s and 1940s, the rural farm population changed fundamentally, but about 40% to 50% of the Soviet population still lived and worked in rural agricultural areas.
Before Tractors (Late Russian Empire / Early USSR)
80%–85% of the population: Lived off the land as peasants or agrarian workers prior to the 1917 revolution and through the 1920s.
Hand and animal labor: Farming relied heavily on manual tools, wooden plows, and draft animals (horses and oxen) rather than combustion engines.
Virtually zero mechanization: In 1928, the entire Soviet Union possessed only about 27,000 tractors for millions of small peasant holdings.
After Tractors (Soviet Collectivization)
Creation of collective farms (kolkhozes): Through Stalin’s forced collectivization starting in 1929–1930, over 90% of peasant households were forced off individual farming and onto state-controlled collective farms.
State machinery monopolies: Tractors were centralized in state-run Machine Tractor Stations (MTS) rather than owned outright by individual farmers initially.
40%–50% rural workforce: By 1940 and into the post-WWII era, industrialization pulled millions to cities, dropping the active agricultural share of the population closer to 40%–50%, even though output per mechanized area rose significantly
Then we'll never find out. Ukraine will suffer the same fate as Sparta and its' helots.
Not tractors alone...
Yawn.
And from where such analogies???
The Thebans conquered Sparta when Sparta ran out of men.
Xenophon, "Hellenika"
Post a Comment