Cold Clone War

buran vs shuttle large1 410x500 Cold Clone War

Buran VS Shuttle

Accord­ing to the Soviet pro­pa­ganda, every­thing which wasn’t invented by the ancient Chi­nese, was invented by the Soviet engi­neers in the USSR. Ah, they were said to invent the best weaponry, the best tanks and the best cars.

In real­ity, of course, the path of inven­tions had a very mod­er­ate devel­op­ment but in order to keep the morale up, Soviet gov­ern­ment had the engi­neers copy­ing things off their Amer­i­can, Cana­dian or Japan­ese coun­ter­parts. Cer­tainly, noth­ing is wrong with it  per se– such strate­gies usu­ally allow to save time and money by buy­ing and recre­at­ing a licensed ver­sion. How­ever, the root of all evils is the men­tioned Soviet brain­wash on the topic of Soviet  supe­ri­or­ity in all fields of engi­neer­ing research and  development.

Let’s have a closer look at who really invented what.

One of the most con­tro­ver­sial inven­tions was the gun­fire rifle AK-47 invented by a Soviet engi­neer Mikhail Kalash­nikov in, well, 1947. The holy war over this rifle and its true ori­gins has been going on for more than half a cen­tury. The story goes that after the sec­ond World War, Ger­many was not allowed to pro­duce weapons, which the USSR author­i­ties used to their advan­tage: the promi­nent weapon­maker Hugo Schmeisser was invited to visit the arms plants in the Ural moun­tains, where later on the Sovi­ets allegedly stole some of his ideas. As per usual, the truth is hard to find, how­ever, we won’t be surpised if his fam­ily would file a law­suit over the intel­lec­tual prop­erty of this par­tic­ual invention.

akm Cold Clone War

AK 47 vs Sttur­mgewehr 44 by Hugo Schmeisser

Another piece of weaponry story: it is hard to tell whether it was copied off the Finnish or the Sovi­ets just hap­pened to invent a similar-looking rifle just a year later. The resem­blance is strik­ing, and yet again, no men­tion of the rights reseved.

avtomat shpagina Cold Clone War

Shpa­gin Rifle, 1941 vs Suomi Rifle (Fin­land), 1931

Next, the pop­u­lar Makarov pis­tol of 1951– another acclaimed exam­ple of Soviet weaponry, this pis­tol had been copied by many as a pop­u­lar mil­i­tary side arm.The ques­tion is still raised whether it is a scaled up ver­sion of a Ger­man pis­tol (minus dec­o­ra­tive ele­ments), but the resem­blance is quite uncanny.

pistolet makarova Cold Clone War

Makarov 9mm Pis­tol, 1951 vs Ger­man Walther 9 mm Ultra, 1935

Next, heavy mil­i­tary machin­ery. Every kid knows that tanks were the USSR’s frst and fore­most object of pride, yet there is an opin­ion that the famous T-34 and its later ver­sions were just copy­cats of the Amer­i­can Christie line.

t 34 Cold Clone War

T-34, 1940 vs Tank Christie, USA, circa 1930

The next one is prob­a­bly one of the fewer hon­est exam­ples of Soviet coop­er­a­tion. Dur­ing the WWII, sev­enty of Amer­i­can elec­tric loco­mo­tives were shipped to the USSR as part of the Allied Forces war effort. The USSR authories kept them after the war, adopt­ing the design to form the basis of their own line of diesel locomotives.

teplovoz Cold Clone War

Diesel-Electric Loco (DA), of 1946 vs Amer­i­can ALCO RSD-1, of 1941

As for the planes, here even the wikipedia sup­ports the story of the Tupolev plane Tu-4 being shame­lessly copied off the Amer­i­can Boe­ing B-29 Superfortress.In 1945 the Tupolev avia con­struc­tion com­pany had metic­u­lously reengi­neered the Amer­i­can plane to the point of ash­tray loca­tions! Cer­tainly the whole con­cept of reverse engi­neer­ing (ie, dis­cov­erig the tech­no­log­i­cal prin­ci­ples of some­thing through analysing its work­ings in detail) is praiseworthy.

tu 4 Cold Clone War

The Tupolev TU-4 (1947) vs Boe­ing B-29 of 1942

Even the rock­ets — the end­less well of Soviet pride — are rumoured to be the copies of the Ger­man devel­op­ment. Need­less to say, it is still a remark­able act of engi­neer­ing. Aca­d­e­mic Sergey Korolev — the same sci­en­tist who sent the first human Gagarin in the outer space — was in charge of this project, so it just as successful.

fau 2 Cold Clone War

The rocket R1, 1948 vs the Ger­man V-2, 1942

The fol­low­ing projects do not look iden­ti­cal, how­ever, both the hydro elec­tri­cal power sta­tion on the river Dnipro and the Amer­i­can Hoover Dam, NV have some­thing in com­mon: their chief engi­neer, C J Thomp­son, who over­saw the devel­op­ment of both projects.

dneproges Cold Clone War

Dne­proGes (1927−1939) vs Hoover Dam (1922−1933)

Another finest exam­ple of dubi­ous engi­neer­ing suc­cess — when Khrushchev started his build­ing binge, his archi­tect team did not invent the hideous look­ing apart­ment blocks — they just bor­rowed the idea of the Ger­man civil engi­neers. Pity both par­ties, in this case.

khruschevki Cold Clone War

Soviet vs Ger­man Plat­ten­bau Apart­ment Blocks

The auto­mo­bile indus­try was the one with the most copied items. In some cases, even parts are said to be compatible!

moskvich 400 Cold Clone War

Moskvich-400 (1947) vs Ger­man Opel Cadette of 1936.

gaz aa Cold Clone War

Gaz Mini Truck, 1932 vs Ford AA, 1929

falcon Cold Clone War

Volga of 1970 vs Ford Fal­con, 1966

volga Cold Clone War

Volga of 1970 vs Ford Main­line of 1954.

Also, remem­ber our post about Vyatka mopeds, the exact and true copies of Vespa? That one is just classic.

The bot­tom line here is about hon­esty, really. Nobody is expected to invent things from scratch — you can bor­row other people’s ideas as long as they are prop­erly copy­righted. It is also more effi­cient  to mod­ify the orig­i­nal ver­sion to suit the domes­tic real­i­ties bet­ter. How­ever, it is good man­ners to acknowl­edge the work of oth­ers. And it is cer­tainly shame­ful to claim the intel­lec­tual rights to things which never belonged to you. And this is where the USSR had failed dramatically.

Based on: www.worldaffairsboard.com and muacre.livejournal.com

Related posts:

  1. The Great Patri­otic War: the Vil­lain­ous Hitler’s Plan or the Provoсation?
  2. The Vic­tory After­math. Rus­sia in Sec­ond World War.
  3. Soviet Cars: His­tory of the Copy-and-Paste Indus­try  —  Part 2 of 3
  4. Best of Fall 2009
  5. The Fash­ions of the War Times

  • http://germanytoday.co.cc/?p=8568 Cold Clone War | Real USSR | Ger­many today

    […] The rest is here: Cold Clone War | Real USSR […]

  • http://www.sarov.info/ Bad­Block

    “AK 47 vs Sttur­mgewehr 44″ shows only that its exte­rior vaguely resem­bles that of Ger­man rifle. Every­body who knows AK-47 mechan­i­cals will say that AK-47 is a com­pletely dif­fer­ent weapon designed on dif­fer­ent principles.

    Space shut­tle and Energia-Buran are also com­pletely dif­fer­ent by design. Shut­tle is a ship on top of dumb solid-rocket boost­ers con­trolled by a space­ship and the whole sys­tem can­not carry any­thing but a shut­tle, mean­while Ener­gia is not a booster, it is an inde­pen­dend car­rier rocket and can carry everything.

    I agree about Tu-4 being a copy of B-29, that is true.

    You’d bet­ter try to go and find any­thing like Vos­tok, the first manned space­ship in the world. USA newest rocket Atlas-5 is now using soviet designed and man­u­fac­tured engines, how do you like it?

  • dobroghe­la­tel

    Just an another brain­wash. From west­ern side.

  • reed­cat

    Not all issues from this arti­cle are real clones.
    1. “Buran” plane is more or less copyed, at least out­side, but soviet rocket “Ener­gia” is absolutely dif­fer­ent.
    2. AK-47 and StG44 just look­ing a lit­tle same, but have absolutely dif­fer­ent prin­ci­ple of action and inter­nal con­struc­tion
    3. PPSh-41 and Suomi mashine guns: all MGs (US M3 or Britain Sten too) have almost same action prin­ci­ple (blow­back), dif­fer­ence as a rule just in tech­nol­ogy. Russ­ian MG is ori­ented on mass pro­duc­tion and most parts are made with press­ing and weld­ing, the Suomi with milling cut. As a result — 3 to 4 times dif­fer­ence in price.
    4. “Makarov” and “Walther PPK”. There are not very much pis­tole prin­ci­ples at all. The Sovi­ets steal con­cept of all-purpose pis­tole (same for army and police) and some ideas. But the Walther was very sen­si­tive to dirt and round qual­ity, the Makarov not.
    5. T-34 and Cristie Tank. More cor­rect com­pare with Cristie ear­li­est soviet BT tanks. the T-34 saves just con­cept, but in con­struc­tion there is noth­ing the same.
    6. “Plat­ten­bau” houses began to pro­duce in appr. 1925 – 1930 in Nether­lands and Ger­many on US tech­nol­ogy.
    7.V-2 Rocket. Yes, Soviet space rock­ets are devel­open on Ger­man V-2. But US rock­ets too…
    8. GAZ-AA and Ford AA. The USSR has bought a license for pro­duc­tion this trucks (BTW, it helps Ford to sur­vive dur­ing Great Depres­sion). Yes, this is a clone, but 100% legal!

  • vio­let­dino

    кто сечет в англицком? там кто у кого в итоге все своровал?

  • vio­let­dino

    кто в англицком сечет, в итоге кто у кого украл? или там по очереди?

  • kulesh

    Dear Bad­Block,

    As with any­thing which had to do with the USSR, the truth about the AK47 is hard to find: not only all mate­ri­als on the mat­ter were clas­si­fied, the author­i­ties would do any­thing and every­thing to bend the truth into what suited them most.

    The point is, where there’s smoke, there’s fire. We are not say­ing that Mikhael Kalash­nikov is gulity as charged in steal­ing the Ger­mans’ ideas; we are say­ing that there is a con­tro­versy over the ori­gins of this gun­fire. Most likely he just used the S­ 44 as a base for his inven­tion, how­ever, if he had acknowl­edged it, it would have been more honest.

    http://www.worldaffairsboard.com/small-arms-per…

    Go fig­ure now, 60 years later.

  • kulesh

    I’m sorry, have you read the post?

  • kulesh
  • Dmitry

    I would agree about shut­tle, it’s plain amer­i­can tech­nol­ogy. Boe­ing, Plat­ten­bau, Makarov — may be bor­rowed too.

    But where do you see the equal­ity of the showed tanks? The tanks look com­pletely dif­fer­ent and have com­pletely dif­fer­ent weapons. Mid­dle tank T-34, like ger­man heavy tank Tiger, was top-modern tanks of 40ies, prooved class on the fields of war and became leg­ends, while the pic­tured amer­i­can light tank from 30ies wasn’t just some­thing like that.

    The both showed loco­mo­tives — I can give you hun­dreds of pics with locos like that. Around the world the most diesel loco­mo­tives look like that.

    And, by the way, all tanks, plains, cars are disigned in a com­mon way. If some vehi­cles of same era are of nearly same look, it means not only “stolen” or “copied”. Yes, the ingenieur’s ideas may be inspired by oth­ers, we live in a global world. But often the design­ers come to same solu­tions independently.

  • Dmitry

    I would agree about shut­tle, it’s plain amer­i­can tech­nol­ogy. Boe­ing, Plat­ten­bau, Makarov — may be bor­rowed too.

    But where do you see the equal­ity of the showed tanks? The tanks look com­pletely dif­fer­ent and have com­pletely dif­fer­ent weapons. Mid­dle tank T-34, like ger­man heavy tank Tiger, was top-modern tanks of 40ies, prooved class on the fields of war and became leg­ends, while the pic­tured amer­i­can light tank from 30ies wasn’t just some­thing like that.

    The both showed loco­mo­tives — I can give you hun­dreds of pics with locos like that. Around the world the most diesel loco­mo­tives look like that.

    And, by the way, all tanks, plains, cars are disigned in a com­mon way. If some vehi­cles of same era are of nearly same look, it means not only “stolen” or “copied”. Yes, the ingenieur’s ideas may be inspired by oth­ers, we live in a global world. But often the design­ers come to same solu­tions independently.

  • Damian

    The most ridicu­lous of those “com­par­isons” is that for hydro-electric sta­tion (power plant) Dne­proges. Same way you could com­pare wheels of Sovi­ets and Amer­i­cans — they both round and cer­tainly where cloned and stolen. Ha, ha! That is total mad­ness and com­plete stu­pid­ity. But that still it works for une­d­u­cated stu­pid amer­i­can sixpack-beers-kind-of-men, right? Amer­i­can pro­pa­ganda machine still works for those stu­pid who take that shit as truth.

    By the way, there is no such river as “Dnipro”, it is called Dnepr. “Dnipro” is what it is called among coun­try­side cheap labor illit­er­ate people.

  • http://www.sarov.info/ Bad­Block

    I don’t care about con­tro­versy, just dis­as­sem­ble it and see if it is a copy or not. If you can’t tell, ask weapon spe­cial­ists. Look­ing at pho­tos is not the best way to resolve the issue.

    If some­one con­sid­ers some­thing to be “more likely”, it has noth­ing to do with honesty.

  • Den

    Do not pre­tend that you do not under­stand what you have been told. You under­stand it very well (and we know it).

    This so-called arti­cle writ­ten by you is exactly another brain­wash, this time from west­ern side, period.

  • Den

    Dear kulesh,

    I am not say­ing that you are hired by US pro­pa­ganda, but the truth is that it is hard to find it out: not only evi­dence of this is obvi­ously clas­si­fied, but of course you’ll never tell us the truth about it, and will do any­thing any­thing and every­thing to bend the truth into what suited you most (that is exactly how your arti­cle is written).

    The point is, where there’s smoke, there’s fire. We are not say­ing that you, kulesh, as well as other authors on this site work for US pro­pa­ganda; we are say­ing that there is a con­tro­versy over the ori­gins of these sur­pris­ingly sim­i­lar FUD arti­cles that you post here. Most likely you and other authors here just used some help from US Min­istry of Truth, how­ever, if you had acknowl­edged it, it would have been more honest.

  • kulesh

    I am not sure I am fol­low­ing you. How­ever I believe you can read through the source and decide for your­self was its author brain­washed or not. http://muacre.livejournal.com/54630.html (in Russian)

    The Real USSR would gladly accept your apolo­gies for being unnec­es­sary rude here.

  • kulesh

    Thank you. Thank you very much for your concern.

    The point is, it is very hard to see the point in your expres­sive feedback.

  • yuriy108

    Damian,
    “coun­try­side cheap labor illit­er­ate peo­ple” you can see any­time you want. In every mirror.

    Dnipro is orig­i­nal Ukrain­ian name for the river.

    The rest try to find in Wikipedia.

  • Den

    You do not prac­tice what you preach. You preach: “it is good man­ners to acknowl­edge the work of oth­ers”, but your­self have not attrib­uted this arti­cle to orig­i­nal source, as if you are the author.

    Oth­er­wise, if you are the author, why you now hide behind some­one else: “read through the source and decide for your­self was its author brain­washed or not. http://muacre.livejournal.com/54630.html”?

    It is hard to tell was author (you) brain­washed or not — he (you) may or may not. It is irrel­e­vant. The ques­tion is whether this arti­cle itself is a brain­wash. It cer­tainly is.

    All cases and lan­guage of this arti­cle are delib­er­ately selected and manip­u­lated to sup­port the “brain­wash on the topic of West supe­ri­or­ity in all fields of engi­neer­ing research and devel­op­ment” (using your exact words from this arti­cle); as if “the path of inven­tions had a very mod­er­ate devel­op­ment but… Soviet gov­ern­ment had the engi­neers copy­ing things off their Amer­i­can, Cana­dian or Japan­ese counterparts”.

    But even these care­fully selected cases almost all suck — the above com­ments clearly show this — your post may only fool unin­formed, for whom see­ing is believing.

    Sure, this manip­u­la­tive arti­cle is under­stand­ably silent about evi­dence to the contrary.

    And then from this adversely selected spec­u­la­tive cases the entirely mis­lead­ing false con­clu­sions were made. Plus, end­ing up preach­ing of “hon­esty” by some­one who is dis­hon­est. This bad old US-propaganda-style brainwash.

    Sure, you still “do not see” the point. But hav­ing writ­ten and posted such an obvi­ous brain­wash you are not expected to see the point.

  • kulesh

    Dear Den,

    Here at Real USSR we do not believe in the exis­tence of “US pro­pa­ganda” or “brain­wash”- we believe it has ceased to exist along with the USSR itself, if not ear­lier. What’s left is the legacy of some sort, which we are tak­ing a look at. For our posts we use a vari­ety of sources, in both lan­guages, and we feel some­what blessed with the oppor­tu­nity to express our point of view in our blog — which would not have been pos­si­ble back then.

    It is up to you to decide whether to take it to heart or not. See­ing is not nec­es­sar­ily believ­ing, it is more about allow­ing new per­spec­tives on old things. We cer­tainly doubt the rel­e­vance of this arti­cle  — who, in 2009, would care whether AK was invented by Mr Kalash­nikov sin­gle hand­edly or with some Ger­man help? We just pro­vide some food for though, if you like.

  • erani

    Ну конечно же идиоты-русские всё спёрли, иное услышать уже и не ожидается. Это же страна третьего мира, медведи на улицах, сами не на что не способны.

  • http://realussr.com stas-kulesh

    Гугл всё же получше переводит.

  • unkn0wn

    AK-47 has com­pletely dif­fer­ent approach in design. Tank Christie was not accepted by US army but USSR spe­cial­ists have found it a advan­tage in that design and had improved it. It’s not a copy, it’s a legit­i­mate purchase.

  • http://realussr.com stas-kulesh
  • unkn0wn

    Hujnya vse ehto. Ty real’no razberi AK i pos­motri. Tam prin­cyp sovsem dru­goj. To chto vizual’no on tak vyglyat ehto ne o chem ne gov­orit. Kalash­nikov mnogih izuchal. Ya lichno smotrel inter­view s kalash­nikovym gde ego sprosili pro Hugo i on normal’no i vny­atno ob’yasnil v chem raznica. Ty pomen’she nujni vsyakoj chi­taj. Real’no voz’mi i stavni detali i prin­cyp. sde­laj svoj research prezhde chem huetu takuyu postit’.

  • Max­im­Belov

    Dear Stat, yo-maye!
    1. The cas­sis (Fer­gus­son may be) of T-34 as far as I know is not much like chas­sis of BT-5, which looks like the amer­i­can tank’ phot you’ve placed.
    Fergusson’s chas­sis design used in BT-5 was offi­cially pur­chased in US in the begin­ning of 30.
    2. The same for GAZ-AA and Ford’s truck (in other words — com­mon enter­prise).
    3. Pobeda — is not amer­i­can design, it has more roots in Ger­man des­gin. It is tropehy of the Sec­ond World War. By the way — exter­nal design of cars that period of time have lots of com­mon char­ac­ters that period. Do not mix up.
    4. Sovit ‘taxi’ Volga is self-standing machine with it’s own– do not start mix­ing with Ford.

  • Max­im­Belov

    Buran and Shut­tle — Buran was invented PRIOR to Shut­tle.
    Dne­proges and Hoover Dam — are you sure you are real spe­cial­ist in archi­tec­ture and engi­neer­ing? From the exter­nal view — they look the same..

    AK-47 is dif­fer­ent from Stur­mGe­wher just because it’s mech­a­nism is absolutely dif­fer­ent. E.g.: Kalashnikov’s mech­a­nism is man­u­fac­tured by sim­ple, cheap and easy stamping/punching tech„ Ger­man gun — with cast­ing and milling. You can not pro­duce same parts work­ing with improper technology…

    Soviet and Ger­man blocks — yes, in DDR they’ve built the same way as in USSR.

    Etc. Etc…

    Stas, any other ques­tions or com­ments? May be you’ve to write some new ver­sion of the arti­cle to ‘keep it fair’? I’m sure you have to…

  • http://realussr.com stas-kulesh

    Sorry I can’t see any of your sources.

  • Max­im­Belov

    Just about Dne­proges and Hoover Dam — I was in rush typ­ing. They LOOK COMPLETELY DIFFERENT FROM OUTSIDE. I can no judge are they the same in construciton…

  • Max­im­Belov

    Stas, it will take time to find in which book what I’ve red about. I am at work now and can not find some spare minute right now. May be today evening at home if I had some free hours..

    By the way, where are your sources? You do build your line just on exter­nal sim­il­iar­ity of things, it is bet­ter that you also pro­vide your work with sources too.. I do base my posi­tions on things I know from books, mag­a­zines, ALSO on words of peo­ple WHO SEEN it THEMSELVES.

    Stas, it is up to you, not to me, to prove your posi­tion first. You’ve ‘offended’ first:)

    As for the Dam — I believe — no com­ments:))
    As for AK-47 — go and open it:)))

  • http://realussr.com stas-kulesh
  • Max­im­Belov

    1. As for me (I am not judg­ing for every­body), I do not trust 100% Iner­net, espe­cially blogs etc. Why? — Becuase they write on their own. I do write on my own. Do you trust things I write? Then why should I trust inter­net links you pro­vide? Guys there write on their own too…

    2. Are you sure that deep mod­i­fi­ca­tions and re-designing is some­thing to belong to ‘evil’ side? :) )))

    3. Do you mean that legal pur­chases and tro­pheys are some­thing bad?

    4. Are you so con­fi­dent in your knowl­edge and skills to judge so eas­ily on really com­plex mix­ture of things like ‘technology+science+commerce+history’?

    I really do not under­stand why are you doing things you do here. They seem very unpleas­ant, not becuase of things you write (already wrote why), but becuase of the way they tell about your personality.

  • http://realussr.com stas-kulesh

    I am answer­ing the same ques­tions. http://www.realussr.com/ussr/cold-clone-war/#co…

  • Max­im­Belov

    It is quite easy, Stas.
    Things you write are not 100% actual (in other and sim­ple words — these are not facts), and I belive you shouild know it. Hence, things you say (and you say them so firmly, as you have done it by your­self) so cat­e­gor­i­cally dis­tort the truth. And this means they can not be left the way as they are now. Yes, it still mat­ters who has invented AK-47 and is T-34 patent-clear or not.
    Free­dom doesn’t mean you can do any­thing you like, free­dom means full reli­a­bil­ity for things you do. You lack free­dom, you lack ethics. Sorry, I can do noth­ing about you. Be so kind, do not fool peo­ple who read your words. Thank you.

  • Gizmo

    Hehe. Para­noidal shit mostly. Like stu­pid journalwhores.

  • Den

    So, I see you finally added the attri­bu­tion of this arti­cle to orig­i­nal pub­li­ca­tions, since ini­tially you have not.

    But in addi­tion to not attribut­ing orig­i­nal sources of pub­li­ca­tions here, it would be dis­hon­est for you to keep the name of this site. Arti­cles here in no way reflect the real USSR, rather project a dis­torted and mis­lead­ing view of con­tin­ued US pro­pa­ganda under fraud­u­lent claim of “Real USSR”.

  • MK

    Wikipedia: “The BT-2 tank of 1932 — Wal­ter Christie’s tank design built under licence in the Soviet Union, with indigenously-designed turret”

  • Ihti

    Stas !!! prior wright­ing some­thing — study tech­nol­ogy , yours opin­ion regard­ing
    “Buran”, “AK-47″, “Makarov” and power sta­tion is not true. But V-2 , B-29 and cars
    were cop­pied.

    If some­thing looks as another one — it can be ques­tion of aero­dy­nam­ics (Buran-Energia — com­pletely dif­fer­ent sys­tem ) , engi­neer­ing (AK and Makarov) and nature (power sta­tion) restrictions.

  • Tyuhansen

    That’s funny to see, that you guys think, that every­thing wich is close to be in com­mon in veiw is the same inside. As to design of exter­rior — I agree, but only in this part. If you claim some­one, it should be on a rea­son­able basis. So, for exam­ple, what is the same in Schmeiser and AK exept their like-looking view? Show any sim­i­lar­i­ties in mechan­i­cal parts, too, please.
    Oth­er­wise, it’s like as some­one said: “we don’t steal someone’s melodies, the mat­ter is that there are just 7 tones exist in nature, but there are thou­sands of musi­cians and there is noth­ing strange in that some of har­monic dic­ta­tions sound sim­i­lar” :)

  • Man

    Dne proGes vs Hoover Dam
    Same because they are hydro­elec­tric power plan.
    Soviet vs Ger man Plat ten bau Apart ment Blocks same becuase 5 floor. Cool!
    You for­get about same pencils =)))

  • peniso­fanan­gry­god

    a strik­ingly retarded analysis

  • http://www.iphonland.ru/ iPhone

    I think the pro­mo­tion is valid every­where .. stolen or not stolen.
    мне кажется, пропаганда действует везде.. украли или не украли.
    Лучше не отвечать на этот пост тем, кто эмоционально относится к этому вопросу, как буд то Америка не крала и не использовала идеи и научные труды + наши МОЗГИ!.

    Предлагаю сделать аналогичный сайт под доменом RU и собрать такой же компромат

  • sovok

    Hey, T-35??? May be T-34? It would be cor­rect. Also mod­els Volga of 1970 mixed up with 1956…

  • sovok

    Я гляжу тут латышки закопошились под обсирательской темой в адрес русских? Поэтому считаю себя в праве писать на русском, ибо они поймут — не надо сладострастно пускать слюни, все равно нет в предоставленном материале правоты — это чистая провокация

  • http://realussr.com stas-kulesh

    Thanks. Fixed.

  • http://www.twitter.com/tigermunky Tiger­Munky

    I bet that if you look under­neath or within all the items/components, there will be a label “Made in China”, haha or some­thing sim­i­lar… has any­one tried to find a con­trast of an asian decent?

  • http://www.realussr.com/ussr/best-of-summer-2009/ Best of Sum­mer 2009 | Real USSR

    […] you might want to sub­scribe to the RSS feed for updates on this topic.Pow­ered by WP Greet Box­Cold Clone War Shpa­gin Rifle VS Suomi Rifle […]

  • plas­ma­hawk

    Aye Come on!
    Now, the T34 a copy, if that was the case, I am sur­prised why the T34 is known and regarded world wide, as the best tank. Has noth­ing of sim­i­lar­ity to the Christie Tank, although rus­sia did receive some Christie tanks and did make their own light Tan­kettes based on it, the T34 and Christie are far apart.

    pro­duced under license my friend all copy­right retained in the Christie tank:
    “The BT-2 tank of 1932 — Wal­ter Christie’s tank design built under licence in the Soviet Union, with indigenously-designed turret ”

    Christie Tank is about 10 tons
    T34 is about 46 tons…

    Any­way, the Tu-4 is a copy of the B29, as for the Ak47, dif­fer­ent guts inside. Keep post­ing pic­tures, but also get some his­tory books or wikipedia

  • http://yahoo.com/ Kandy­BLock

    Stas Kulesh — this is the stu­pid­est text i ever read, so the stu­pid you are

  • pmaitra

    Poorly writ­ten and largely malafide article.

    Of course, when we build some­thing we take inspi­ra­tion from our pre­de­ces­sors. For exam­ple, the author com­pares the Ger­man V2 rocket with a Soviet rocket. Does it imply the Sovi­ets copied from the Ger­mans? Well then the Ger­mans also copied from the Indi­ans since the first mil­i­tary rocket was used by Indi­ans against the British.

    More­over, send­ing the first man into space was a Soviet achieve­ment. Build­ing a rock­ets to carry a man into space isn’t as dif­fi­cult as build­ing a life sup­port sys­tem for the man to sur­vive in space.

    Oh, since the author is obsessed with accus­ing the Sovi­ets of copy­ing, he/she should write an arti­cle on how the West copied Soviet helmet-mounted sights and how mod­ern west­ern SUVs are copied from the LADA NIVA.

    Oh, that GAZ Volga may have been a copy of Ford Main­line, but the Ford Main­line itself looks like a copy of the Hin­dus­tan Ambas­sador (man­u­fac­tured under licensed from Oxford Morris).

    Com­par­ing dams with dams, pis­tols with pis­tols and the weird­est, AK-47 with a Stur­mgewehr — get a life author. The AK-47 was a com­pletely new device with new mech­a­nism in that era and both the dams look like dams, and are largely dif­fer­ent — now c’mon, what are they sup­posed to look like? A bowl of tomato soup?

  • http://debrayuela.blogspot.com/ Fer­ran

    This issue is really dif­fi­cult to dis­cuss. Not even the rock­ets were wholly Amer­i­cans, since they hired Ger­man sci­en­tists to do the research.
    It may also be true that Sovi­ets bor­rowed from the west, this sound like a West­ern claim thought, but just look­ing at the pic­tures doesn’t estab­lish they did.
    For exam­ple in Mex­ico, my coun­try, the apart­ment blocks look just like the Ger­man and Soviet ones, for real, and I don’t think my beloved politi­cians flew to the USSR, or bor­rowed the design from pic­tures.
    Any­way I have had a good time read­ing this arti­cle, be it Amer­i­can propanga, like it seems to be, or real infor­ma­tion from the Soviet block. Cheers.

  • http://debrayuela.blogspot.com/ Fer­ran

    Ah, and it’s truth what Bad­Block says, actu­ally the Inter­na­tional Space Sta­tion uses Soviet tech­nol­ogy since Amer­i­can space sta­tion tech­nol­ogy have proven to be quite bad.

  • AK

    Are you crazy peo­ple? Exter­nal resem­blance in your mind means copy­ing?! Silly pro­pa­ganda :)

  • Ip

    “Volga of 1970″ it is not true. In fact it is “Volga of 1957″. First exam­ples were made in 1954.

  • http://meneame.net/story/los-clones-de-la-guerra-fria Los clones de la Guerra Fría

    […] Los clones de la Guerra Fría […]

  • Jon­nyMF

    Один хрен мы впереди планеты всей :)

  • Yev­geniy

    I com­pletely agree with what you said, but Dniepr is the Russ­ian name, Dnipro is the Ukrain­ian name. Please keep that in mind

  • Yev­geniy

    buddy, I’ve seen both the AK and Stur­mgewehr. Their mech­a­nisms have NOTHING in com­mon. Stg wa a rev­o­lu­tion­ary weapon and all mod­ern assault rifles, be it Czech, Pol­ish, Bel­gian, Amer­i­can, etc. bor­row some­thing from that design and none of them acknowl­edge that it is based on the Stur­mgewehr. They don’t need to. What you’re say­ing to Bad­Block and oth­ers is as silly as say­ing that Stur­mgewehr is just a copy of bow and arrow, because they both belong to the pro­jec­tile weapon cat­e­gory. We’re all just try­ing to help you, so you don’t look stu­pid in your sub­se­quent endeav­ors just because you don’t have enough of a brain to do research and base your opin­ion on that research instead of what­ever feel­ings you have against the Sovi­ets. And the AK is indeed a great design and its mech­a­nism is well engi­neered and has NOTHING in com­mon with the Stur­mgewehr mech­a­nism, besides the fact that the pis­ton is pushed back by gases pro­duced when the round is fired, and on the way back the bolt cham­bers the next round, thus allow­ing for full auto­matic fire. Also, take a GOOD look at the T-34 and do some research on the armor, angle of the glacis plate, etc. and it will be clear even to you that the tanks are not the same.

    Regards. Good luck in your future work.
    Please feel free to send me your replies

  • Ksu_1

    The most unfair of all unfair arti­cles on this site! If the law suit should be com­ing to any­one that would be you due to fault accusations.

    I think USSR engi­neers deserve apol­ogy here!

  • toall­haters

    lol dont fool your­self. If items look sim­i­lar that doesn’t mean they are copied.

    Don’t HATE! losers

  • Kacz­marek

    United States did the same thing as it get all the nazi tech­nol­ogy in the end of the world war II. Apollo Moon land­ing? Thanks, nazi engineers…

  • Mizukami

    The West ignored Soviet patents com­pletely aswell.

  • http://profiles.google.com/nikolay.mihaylov Niko­lay Mihaylov

    ye, the com­par­i­son is unfair.
    you can not com­pare AK47 to any other “automat”.
    you can not com­pare T34 to any other tank.

    from the other hand, every­one knows Moskvitch is Opel (and later is BMW)

    Old Volga is not Ford, but Packard with “part” of Cadil­lac .
    “New” Volga is all Russian.

  • vlad

    “durp derp it look the same so it copied lolarticle”

    Author, please, If you know that you lack knowl­edge in a cer­tain topic, don’t write about it.
    Michail Kalash­nikov said he was inspired by the STG44’s design, but if you had any expe­ri­ence with weapons you’d know the mech­a­nisms can­not be called sim­i­lar in any way.

  • Anony­mous

    If you were think­ing your eye­glasses do not affect your per­son­al­ity and over­all appear­ance, think again. The trade­mark eye­glasses of John Lennon, Woody Allen or even Johnny Depp and Julia Roberts have made a remark­able impact on their per­son­al­i­ties. cheap gucci bags If you too wish to have a charm­ing, glam­orous per­son­al­ity this year, you can take a look at the eye­glasses trends 2011 and fol­low them. Let us take a look at it in detail.

    Men’s Eye­glasses Trends 2011

    The retro eye­glasses will sim­ply never be out of fash­ion. Although termed retro, they have always been in fash­ion and worn by men of all age groups. You can choose from the clas­sic style square, rec­tan­gu­lar, per­fect round eye­glasses that suits your face type. The per­fectly round John Lennon eye­glasses were pop­u­lar 25 years back and are still one of the fash­ion­able eye­glass trends for men all around the world. How­ever, gucci out­let loca­tions for a more classy and sophis­ti­cated look, you can go for the square or rec­tan­gu­lar glasses in thin del­i­cate frames. At the same time, cheap coach bags artis­tic frames with abstract designs at the tem­ple arms are also pop­u­lar eye­glass fash­ion trends 2011 for men. These frames can be made in any color; but the black is still the most fash­ion­able color for eyeglasses.

    Sun­glasses for men 2011 are also mostly black or brown with a big rec­tan­gu­lar or square frame. Sun­glass frames with dual col­ors are also pop­u­lar this year and you can try out eye­glass frames with black and brown, light gold and black, etc. Gucci Can­vas Bags You can shop for men’s eye­glasses at online sites like lenscrafters, Just eye­wear or even visit the exclu­sive stores like Dolce and Gab­bana, Gucci or Chanel for expen­sive stuff.

    Women’s Eye­glass Trends 2011

    The clas­sic frames are the most fash­ion­able 2011 eye­glass trends. Sim­i­lar to that of men, eye­glasses in square or rec­tan­gu­lar shape with light frames are more in vogue. Frame less light rec­tan­gu­lar eye­glasses like those of Sarah Palin are the hottest choice for women in the years 2010 and 2011. Although the col­ors black, light or dark brown are never out of style for eye­glasses, women can also exper­i­ment with other col­ors like pink, yel­low, pur­ple, etc. These col­ors will also be the top col­ors in the spring col­lec­tion of eye­glasses trends 2011. Among all these col­ors, pur­ple tops the list in eye­glass trends for women as it suits every skin tone and color.

    At the same time, accord­ing to sun­glass reviews, large sun­glasses cov­er­ing nearly all your eyes and even top of cheeks like those of Jacque­line Kennedy are also pop­u­lar even today. The shape oft he sun­glasses can dif­fer accord­ing to your face struc­ture and type and will def­i­nitely look fash­ion­able. Sun­glasses with dec­o­ra­tive frames like stud­ded or crusted edges and tem­ple arms are also pop­u­lar in this year. Col­or­ful frames are also very fem­i­nine and you can def­i­nitely go for it accord­ing to your choice of col­ors. You can shop accord­ing to the lat­est eye­glasses trends 2011 in stores like Prada, Dolce and Gab­bana, Gucci, Chanel, etc. Or even shop online on sites like Just eye wear or frames direct, etc.
    gucci wal­lets
    Although you will be tempted to buy that gor­geous pain of eye­glasses which looks so awe­some in the shop­ping win­dow or counter, it is advis­able to not to make hasty deci­sions while buy­ing eye wear. You should wear the eye­glass and check whether you are com­fort­able wear­ing them; do they com­ple­ment your fea­tures and face type or not, etc. Buz­zle arti­cle on eye­glass frames for face shapes will be help­ful to you.

    This was brief infor­ma­tion on eye­glasses trends 2011. So, what are you wait­ing for, check out the stores nearby or research on the Inter­net to get the best deals. Buy a trendy eye­glass and flaunt it with con­fi­dence. Good luck!

  • Anony­mous
  • justAguy

    I had read that the story that for­mer Nazi engi­neers built the Soviet space pro­gram was actu­ally a myth.

    Cer­tainly the Soviet Union had an excel­lent aero­space pro­gram, the Yakovlev,
    Ilyushin and MIG design bureaus pro­duced excel­lent stuff. For instance, a lot of peo­ple say that the Ильюшин Ил-2 was one of the best air­craft of the Sec­ond World War.

    My impres­sion is that the Soviet Union was very good at heavy indus­trial pro­duc­tion, but failed to pro­duce enough light goods, and lacked the effec­tive dis­tri­b­u­tion sys­tem pro­vided by open markets.

  • Aritroso­laiman

    i am very glad to watch this similarity.

  • Aritrosloaiman

    I am very glad to see  this. I was in curiosi­ties about this.
     
    san anto­nio
    den­tists
     

  • Kaminich

    Awe­some pics…I love guns. I do have 4 guns at home.scrab­ble cheat

  • Atik

    This is such a great knowl­edge. Thanks for this valu­able
    infor­ma­tion. You have a lot of good ideas and con­cepts and lots of great
    infor­ma­tion and inspi­ra­tions. Keep on posting.   


    penny stock bro­kers

        

  • Tom_56

    Great pics …These are the sym­bols of a super­power coun­try.sims 3 cheats