Industrial romance with America

8 024 123
Industrial romance with America
The industrialization movement officially began with the First Five-Year Plan and was carried out through a number of different stages and had a number of consequences, such as the focus on heavy industry, whereby the economy was drastically restructured to prioritize the development of coal, steel, electricity and machinery over consumer goods production.


These days, there's a debate about the role of foreign specialists in the development of Russia's modern economy. However, in the late 1920s and early 1930s, communists in the Soviet Union had no doubt about the necessity of such cooperation. During the industrialization era, two thousand American companies operated in the USSR, and the number of invited foreign engineers and skilled workers reached twenty thousand.



How did it all begin?


After the end of the Civil War, the economy of the young Soviet Republic found itself in dire straits: the country faced widespread devastation, and to overcome this collapse, the leadership was forced to resort to forced measures, effectively changing the vector of its previous economic policy—the New Economic Policy (NEP), which produced tangible results in a short period of time. However, while the NEP provided a temporary respite for the country's economy, allowing for economic recovery, it also presented the country with new challenges—the need for large-scale modernization.


After the civil war, the country's economy lay in ruins, and the Bolsheviks realized that the harsh "war communism" was no longer working. In 1921, they introduced the New Economic Policy (NEP), a new policy that allowed people to trade and own private property. It was a temporary compromise that helped the country "get back on its feet" and restore production.

By the late 1920s, the USSR found itself in a difficult situation: the development gap with Western countries was not narrowing, but rather widening, as the old industrial base inherited by the Bolsheviks from the Tsarist era urgently required renovation. Since the Soviet government could not count on foreign loans or investment, the country's domestic resources became its only source of financing.


The New Economic Policy (NEP) marked a radical turnaround in the country's economy. The harsh confiscation of food was replaced by a transparent tax in kind, giving farmers the right to sell the fruits of their labor. In the cities, private businesses were given the green light. State-owned factories began operating on a self-sustaining basis, and to accelerate economic development, the authorities began actively attracting private companies and foreign investors, leasing or granting concessions to enterprises.

Note. The course toward accelerated industrialization, adopted at the 14th Congress of the All-Union Communist Party (Bolsheviks) in 1925, provoked a heated debate about the vector of the country's economic development. The debate centered on two alternative strategies, provisionally known as "Bukharin's" and "Stalin's." Advocates of the "Bukharinist" approach, led by N.I. Bukharin, advocated maintaining continuity with the NEP and emphasized the need for market regulation, support for private enterprise, and the harmonious development of all sectors of industry without a bias toward the heavy sector.

The global economic crisis that began in 1929 became an unintended boost to Soviet industrialization, as construction of new factories equipped with modern equipment and machine tools began. However, the lack of qualified domestic personnel for construction and industrial operations still forced the Soviet leadership to actively recruit foreign engineers and workers.

Taking into account the situation that has developed abroad in connection with the worsening unemployment even among the technical intelligentsia, we consider it necessary to accelerate the recruitment of specialists and workers abroad for industry,
— this is what one Soviet official wrote in a report to the Central Committee of the All-Union Communist Party (Bolsheviks) at the beginning of September 1931.


The 1922–1924 reform halted hyperinflation and introduced the hard chervonets. The New Economic Policy (NEP) ensured rapid growth in industry and agriculture, but was abandoned by the end of the 1920s due to ideological differences and grain procurement crises.

So, at that time, the West was experiencing the Great Depression, while the Soviet Union was rapidly developing, and for many foreign specialists, this was a good opportunity for employment...

Meanwhile in the US…


While the Old World was licking the wounds inflicted on it by the First World War, and the young Soviet Russia was trying to recover from the global upheavals of the Revolution and the Civil War, the United States was experiencing a true “golden age” – a period known as the “Roaring Twenties.” (Roaring Twenties), which became a time of triumph for American industry.


The Roaring Twenties were a legendary time in America after World War I. The country literally exploded with economic growth: everyone started buying goods, listening to jazz, and going to secret parties due to Prohibition. But this celebration was short-lived—the stock market crashed in 1929, and all the fun came to an abrupt end.

The secret of American success lay in innovation, the widespread adoption of assembly lines and standard designs, which transformed production into a well-oiled machine. American factories were so simple and well-designed that they began to be assembled like a construction set. LEGO - easy and fast to start producing products immediately.


The introduction of the assembly line and mass production shaped the modern consumer economy and gave rise to the world's largest corporations. The company pioneered this process. Ford Motor Company. An innovative approach to assembly allowed Ford to achieve incredible figures for that time: by 1927, 15 million cars of the model had been produced. Model T

And buyers for this “constructor” were found very quickly...

Buyers


In 1924, the Amtorg company was founded to establish trade relations with the United States. Since Washington did not recognize the Soviet government at the time, Amtorg effectively assumed the role of diplomatic representation, which did not stop forty American companies from ignoring ideological differences with the Bolsheviks for the sake of profit. At the time, capitalists in the United States were firmly convinced that communism and the Soviet Union were evil... until they began paying them in gold and diamonds. Even more astonishing is how quickly Americans went from hating the Soviet Union to sympathizing with it...

Note. During this period, the USSR didn't feel much hostility toward the United States, as Stalin was more focused on Britain and France as existential threats to the state, and US foreign policy at the time was, in any case, primarily isolationist. American companies also did business with the Third Reich throughout much of the 30s for similar reasons.

At the same time, Amtorg was an "open secret": American authorities were well aware that some of the company's employees were agents of the Soviet secret services, as Amtorg had been exposed as early as 1924, when engineer Vladimir Kemerov betrayed all his intelligence colleagues in exchange for political asylum in the United States, demonstrating to American authorities the true scale of Soviet trade missions being used for espionage. However, a real breakthrough in relations came later, in 1929, when the Great Depression prompted Americans to cooperate with the USSR, which was just beginning large-scale industrialization.


The Great Depression is the largest and most protracted economic downturn in the world stories 20th century. Beginning with the stock market crash of October 24, 1929, the crisis entered its acute phase, lasting until 1933, and finally overcame its consequences only by 1939. This period was characterized by a systemic collapse of the banking sector, a critical decline in industrial production, and a catastrophic rise in unemployment.

Note. Initially, Soviet leadership's interactions with American business were rather sluggish. Following the adoption of the Decree on Concessions in 1920, the USSR became an attractive platform for foreign entrepreneurs, but the Americans were not the pioneers. Initially, the Germans developed the market, followed by British gold miners, and then Swedish electrical equipment manufacturers and Japanese oil producers on Sakhalin. During this period, the leading investors in the Soviet economy were Great Britain, the United States, and Sweden.

Thus, before the onset of industrialization in the USSR, American companies were not particularly eager to enter Soviet Russia, but in 1929, everything changed: the Great Depression hit the global economy, and economic policy in the Soviet Union changed.

Architect of great construction projects


One of the most famous Americans who built factories in the USSR was Albert Kahn, a figure who became a legend in American industrial architecture, primarily as the creator of Detroit's industrial image. His firm Albert Kahn Associates, Inc It became renowned for its incredible efficiency: a staff of 400 specialists developed design documentation in seven days, and the plant's construction itself took no more than five months. The company's portfolio included such auto giants as Ford, Chrysler и General MotorsHowever, the escalating economic crisis brought the thriving business to the brink of ruin, and the question of bankruptcy became pressing…


In the global history of 20th-century industrial production, the name Albert Kahn is not only widely known. It occupies a position unattainable by many architectural luminaries, as it is inextricably linked to a truly epochal invention of the industrial era: the method of high-speed, conveyor-belt production of architectural and construction design documentation. This method revolutionized architectural design, transforming design from "artistic creativity" into "industrial production."

Note. "The Man Who Built Detroit" is how architect Albert Kahn is most often described in the English-language press. Kahn not only launched factory construction but also introduced the high-speed, in-line production of design documentation, laying the foundations for typical industrial and civil construction.


Albert Kahn was known in America as "Ford's architect" because he designed virtually all of the Ford plants. He was a businessman who owned his own, fairly large design firm, which he transformed into a perfectly streamlined assembly line for producing designs. He also worked on commissions. General Motors, and designed master plans for American steel plants. He was interested in only one thing: how to complete a project faster, with higher quality, and at a lower cost.

At this critical moment, salvation came from the Soviet foreign trade organization Amtorg, which offered Kahn a $40 million contract (approximately $750 million in today's dollars) to design and build a large tractor plant in Stalingrad, now known as the Volgograd Tractor Plant (formerly the Stalingrad Tractor Plant). The uniqueness of this large-scale project lay in the fact that the plant was first assembled in America, then disassembled and transported across the ocean on hundreds of ships, after which it was reassembled in the USSR in just six months.


The Stalingrad Tractor Plant project, which was considered from the very beginning as tank, is being carried out Albert Kahn Associates, Inc in record time – building structures are manufactured in the USA, transported to the USSR and assembled within six months

Note. Most likely, this plant was designed as a military facility from the very first drawings, and the civilian component was “sewn” into it more as a disguise and a secondary factor...

The result exceeded expectations, and a large-scale three-year contract worth $2,5 billion was signed with A. Kahn, and a representative office of the company was opened in Moscow to ensure confidentiality and coordinate the work. Albert Kahn Associates, Inc., registered under the name "Gosproektstroy." Over two thousand Soviet engineers worked at the newly created Gosproektstroy, under the leadership of 25 American specialists, mastering advanced Western design and industrial construction technologies.


American specialists at one of the Soviet factories

Note. All Soviet ball bearing factories and all metallurgical plants were designed by Gosproektstroy.

Thus, Gosproektstroy became the very instrument that opened the country's path to industrialization and enabled the creation of a powerful industrial base in the USSR in the shortest possible time.

Note. Collaboration with American specialists during the industrialization period was not limited to Albert Kahn's firm. The USSR purchased foreign technologies en masse and commissioned turnkey plant designs from other companies. Specifically, a specialized institute, GIPROMEZ, was founded in Leningrad, where American engineers not only developed designs for future plants but also supervised construction work.


The most famous Black worker in the USSR was Robert Robinson, who arrived in 1930 as a skilled laborer from the United States under contract. He became an outstanding specialist, received a higher education, and worked in Soviet factories for 44 years. After completing his contract, he moved to Moscow, where he worked at the First State Bearing Plant (GPZ-1). In 1974, disillusioned with the Soviet system, after much effort, he was able to leave the USSR. In 1988, he published his autobiography, "Black on the Reds." (Black on Red), where he described his Soviet experience

The Chief's Cunning Strategy


Observing the progress of industrialization, American engineers working in the Soviet Union in the 1930s encountered a curious phenomenon. Their Soviet colleagues, assigned to them to learn from their experience, changed with remarkable regularity: every six months or a year, their former colleagues would disappear without a trace, and new people would appear in their place. At first, this caused confusion, but later the true purpose of Stalin's plan became clear.


In the late 1920s and 1930s, hundreds of American engineers and technicians worked in Soviet factories, teaching young Soviet specialists to work according to new technical standards.

The Soviet leadership sought to utilize the expertise of foreign engineers as effectively as possible, "training" as many Soviet specialists as possible. As soon as a group of engineers mastered Western technologies, they were immediately deployed across the country to build new factories. This approach proved extremely effective, allowing for the rapid training of a substantial corps of qualified technical personnel for the entire Soviet industry during its period of accelerated development. Stalin's cunning strategy worked remarkably well—over the years of industrialization, the USSR produced tens of thousands of highly qualified personnel!


The Americans explained how to arrange workshops so that the flows of raw materials and finished products did not overlap unnecessarily, and how to organize warehouse space. A culture of technical documentation and Ford-style assembly line work were introduced. For example, a team of engineers at Albert Kahn's firm taught 4000 Soviet draftsmen to work according to this principle—plants were designed in weeks, not months.

What was built from scratch?


There were quite a few enterprises designed and built in the USSR with the participation of Americans or Europeans. According to some estimates, approximately 1500 industrial enterprises were built in the USSR with the assistance of foreign companies, and over 3000 Soviet specialists were trained in management, a significant number of whom were designed and built by Americans.


Soviet postage stamps from the industrialization era

I will highlight the largest and most interesting projects:

Stalingrad Tractor PlantThis massive plant, designed by Albert Kahn, had another American, John Calder, as its chief construction engineer. More than four hundred Americans resided permanently in Stalingrad, completing the construction of a plant twice the size of a similar plant. International harvester in Milwaukee, Wisconsin. The steel structures for the plant were manufactured by McClintic-Marshall, and the first tractors that rolled off the assembly line in June 1930 were developed by the company McCormick Deering.


The Stalingrad Tractor Plant began operations on June 17, 1930, with the production of the legendary STZ-1 wheeled tractor, which ran on kerosene and had a power output of 30 hp (later 31 hp). These machines formed the backbone of the country's tractor fleet.

Note. The plant copied a popular American tractor called the International Harvester Farmall. The Soviet version was called the STZ-1..

A similar plant was built in Chelyabinsk, in the Urals, occupying over a thousand hectares of land, with five kilometers of underground tunnels, and all made from imported American steel. Upon completion, the Chelyabinsk plant produced 55,000 tractors per year.


In the 1930s, the Stalingrad Tractor Plant (STZ) produced primarily wheeled tractors, and by the end of the decade, it had also mastered the production of tracked tractors – the SHTZ-NATI, which were the result of domestic developments.

The overall result for tractors was astounding! In 1924, there were 1000 tractors in the entire USSR, and ten years later, thanks to companies Ford, International Harvester and other American manufacturers, there were already more than 200 thousand of them in the Soviet Union!


The Chelyabinsk Tractor Plant (ChTZ), which became one of the main symbols of Soviet industrialization, was built during the First Five-Year Plan. The decision to build it was made in 1930, and the official opening took place on June 1, 1933. The plant was built with the help of American specialists, and its equipment was manufactured under license from the company. Caterpillar

Gorky Automobile PlantThe project to build an automobile plant in the Nizhny Novgorod province began in the first months of 1929, and a site near the village of Monastyrka, near Nizhny Novgorod, was allocated for construction. This decision was motivated by excellent transport accessibility: a nearby railway junction and proximity to waterways—the Oka and Volga rivers—allowed for easy delivery of raw materials and efficient production links with other regions of the country.


How GAZ was built...

To solve the problem of lack of experience in the automobile industry, in the late spring of 1929, an agreement was reached between the Soviet government and the corporation Ford Motor Company After difficult negotiations, a historic agreement on technological cooperation was signed. According to the agreement, the American side transferred design documentation for passenger car models to the USSR. Ford Model-A and cargo Ford Model AA and helped implement advanced flow assembly methods. The program included a large-scale personnel exchange: American experts oversaw the installation of production lines in the Soviet Union, while over a hundred Soviet engineers completed internships at Henry Ford facilities in the United States. The plant was conceived as a full-cycle enterprise.

Note. In 1927, the level of development of automobile transport in the USSR was extremely low compared to Western countries. In the United States, there were over 22 million cars and buses, in Great Britain, over 1 million, and in post-war Germany, approximately 300. Meanwhile, in the entire vast Soviet territory, there were only 20 such vehicles..


Pictured left: Ford Model A — a legendary car produced from 1927 to 1931. An outstanding successor to the famous Model T, which sold over 4 million units. It was the first Ford car with a familiar modern pedal layout. Pictured on the right: Ford Model AA — a medium-duty truck produced from 1927 to 1932 as a commercial version of the famous passenger car Ford Model-AIt had a carrying capacity of 1,5 tons and was equipped with a 3,3-liter in-line 4-cylinder engine producing 40 hp. The design of the truck Model AA was in many ways similar to the passenger car model A, and they even had the same engine

In one of the interviews with the newspaper The New York Times On June 23, 1929, Henry Ford said:

Transportation is at the very heart of education. The Russian people are endowed with enterprise and ambition, and as they develop, they should have as many cars as Americans.

The contract was worth $30 million, a significant boost for the American company amid the looming Great Depression. Immediately after the agreement was signed, construction began on an automobile plant in Nizhny Novgorod, destined to become the largest in the industry.


The NAZ-AA was the first Soviet mass-produced truck, the well-known "polut'orka" (one and a half ton truck), produced from January to December 1932 at the Nizhny Novgorod plant. Only 7357 of these vehicles were produced, after which the city was renamed, and the model became known as the GAZ-AA. The truck had a payload capacity of 1,5 tons (hence its popular name) and was equipped with a 3,3-liter gasoline engine producing 40 hp. The vehicle's top speed was approximately 70 km/h.

Between May 1930 and November 1931, spanning a period of eighteen months, construction of 52 production buildings was completed at the site. The scale of the work was impressive: 230 cubic meters of concrete were poured, 25 tons of steel structures were used, 38 kilometers of railway tracks and 22 kilometers of roads were laid. More than 6 pieces of industrial equipment and 8 electric motors were installed inside the production facilities.


The NAZ-A (after Nizhny Novgorod was renamed Gorky in 1932, it became known as the GAZ-A) was the first mass-produced Soviet passenger car, produced from 1932 to 1936. It was a licensed copy of the American Ford Model-A, was produced at the Nizhny Novgorod Automobile Plant (NAZ) and assembled from Soviet components

Along with the construction of production facilities, the first housing for workers was also being built—thus the birth of the Auto Workers' Social City. An American company was responsible for developing the architectural and construction plans for the plant. Austin & K, whose office was located in Cleveland.


The first NAZ-A vehicles leave the factory floors

The history of the Nizhny Novgorod Automobile Plant, originally named after V. M. Molotov, began on January 1, 1932, and a few weeks later, the first-born of the enterprise, the one-and-a-half-ton NAZ-AA truck (based on Ford Model AA), later renamed GAZ-AA due to the city's name change. The legendary "one and a half ton" firmly secured its status as the most mass-produced vehicle in the USSR in the first half of the 20th century. That same year, in December, the first Soviet passenger cars were assembled—the NAZ-A (based on Ford Model-A).


NAZ-A is the first passenger car produced in the USSR by the Nizhny Novgorod Automobile Plant in 1932. It was a licensed copy of the American Ford Model-AOnly a couple dozen examples were produced before the city was renamed Gorky, and the car was renamed the legendary GAZ-A.

“It was the beginning of a new era for Russia,” said Frank Bennett, a company engineer. Ford Motor Company and an advisor to the Soviet plant manager, commenting on the opening of the plant in Nizhny Novgorod.

And in a short time, the Gorky Automobile Plant gradually switched from screwdriver-based assembly of cars from foreign components to domestic components.


The first Soviet passenger car GAZ-A

Note. The scale of production is impressive: by June 1941, the Red Army had over 151 vehicles of this series at its disposal, and over the entire life of the model, the Gorky plant produced almost 830 units.


The GAZ-AA became a true "workhorse" of the Great Patriotic War. This 1,5-ton truck delivered ammunition to the front lines, transported infantry, and towed artillery, and also served as an ambulance and a base for anti-aircraft guns. Under the harsh conditions of wartime, the vehicle's design was simplified as much as possible to expedite production at evacuated factories—special simplified versions were produced for front-line needs.

With the outbreak of the Great Patriotic War, wartime demanded a complete reorientation of the plant's operations. The enterprise rapidly converted its entire production capacity to meet the needs of the Red Army. Its product lineup included SU-76 self-propelled guns, T-70 light tanks, BA-64 armored vehicles, and other Soviet weaponry.


GAZ-A during the war years...

Magnitogorsk Iron and Steel Works. As is known, steel is needed for the production of tractors and other equipment, and in 1930, an American engineering company Arthur G. McKee & Company A company from Cleveland, Ohio, began construction of a steel mill in Magnitogorsk, which was to become the largest in the world. The Soviet steel mill was modeled after the plant. U.S. Steel in Gary, Indiana. The plant was commissioned in February 1932, with the first blast furnace of the project Arthur G. McKee & Co Cast iron was produced for the first time.


The Magnitogorsk Iron and Steel Works (MMK) is one of the world's leading ferrous metallurgy plants. Construction began in 1929, with the first pig iron produced in 1932. During the Great Patriotic War, the plant became the "armored shield of the Motherland," mastering the production of tank armor, and the post-war period was marked by the construction of gigantic blast furnaces.

The first blast furnace was followed by a second that same year, and a third was commissioned in 1933, along with the first open-hearth furnace and rolling mill. Thus, iron and steel became the watchwords of the era.

We are becoming a country of metal, and this metal had to be forged in Magnitogorsk,
— declared I.V. Stalin.


The plant's design near Magnitnaya Mountain was created with an eye toward becoming a leader in the Soviet metallurgical industry, a position it still holds today. The large-scale construction began on March 10, 1929, with the arrival of the first specialists. The pace of work increased rapidly: in just two months, the construction staff grew to three hundred people.

Note. In 1929, the Soviet government chose Mount Magnitnaya, home to some of the world's richest iron ore deposits, as the site for the plant. The city of Magnitogorsk was built from scratch on the banks of the Ural River. The plant was built on the Asian side of the river, and the city on the European side.

Magnitogorsk wasn't just a profit-making enterprise; it was an instrument for transforming the country—its geography, its industry, and, above all, its people. Magnitogorsk was the October Revolution itself, the socialist revolution, the Stalinist revolution.
— writes historian Stephen Kotkin in his book Magnetic Mountain.

They were soon followed by other metallurgical plants across the country, including one in Kuznetsk, designed and built by an American company. Freyn Engineering.


Before the Great Patriotic War, the plant focused exclusively on civilian needs, not smelting armor alloys. But June 22, 1941, marked a turning point in the plant's history: on that day, an order was issued to convert its production facilities to military needs. The plant's management was tasked with mastering the production of metal for shells and preparing the foundation for the manufacture of tank armor.

During the Great Patriotic War, this plant was a key defense facility, which, thanks to its location deep in the Ural Mountains, was protected from air raids. aviation The plant quickly switched to producing armor steel, which was used to build every second Soviet tank and every third artillery shell.


Magnitogorsk Iron and Steel Works

DneproGESIndustrial enterprises, in turn, consumed electricity in much greater quantities than Soviet Russia could produce at the time, and Professor Ivan Gavrilovich Aleksandrov began work on a 560 MW hydroelectric power plant project. However, a Politburo decision, adopted in January 1927, stipulated that construction should be carried out "using domestic resources, subject to the involvement of competent foreign assistance." I. G. Aleksandrov, who headed the project, traveled to the United States to exchange experience with American colleagues in the field of hydraulic engineering. American experts spoke highly of the Dnieper Hydroelectric Power Station concept, and during this visit, Aleksandrov not only secured their professional approval but also negotiated the direct involvement of the American side in the project's implementation.


Construction of the Dnieper Dam

And already on March 15, 1927, a red flag with the inscription "Dneprostroy has begun!" was erected on the banks of the Dnieper, and American engineer Hugh Cooper, known for his large hydroelectric power station projects in the USA and Canada, was personally invited by I.V. Stalin to the position of chief consulting engineer.


In the photo on the leftAcademician I. G. Aleksandrov (1875–1936). He participated in the drafting of the GOELRO plan, and in 1920 began developing a project for the construction of a hydroelectric power station on the Dnieper, proposing the construction of a single large dam with a hydroelectric power station of 560 MW, extremely large for the time, instead of several low-power stations on the Dnieper rapids. In the photo in the centerHugh Cooper (1865). American hydraulic engineer. He was invited by I. V. Stalin to serve as chief consulting engineer for the construction of the Dnieper Dam. Pictured rightHugh Cooper at the Dnieper Hydroelectric Power Station construction site

When the construction of the power plant was nearing completion in 1930, the American company General Electric sold the USSR five generators for the needs of the Dnieper Hydroelectric Power Station, and the company Newport News Shipbuilding and Drydock supplied nine turbines to the Dnieper Hydroelectric Station. And on October 10, 1932, the grand opening of one of the largest hydroelectric power plants in the Soviet Union—the five power units of the Dnieper Hydroelectric Station—took place.


The Dnieper Hydroelectric Power Station (DneproGES) became a key achievement of the first five-year plan, bringing the ideas of the GOELRO plan to life. The dam's construction not only solved the shipping problem by flooding the famous rapids but also provided energy to the region's entire industrial sector. In the photo on the left: Hugh Cooper with the dam in the background

The commissioning of the Dnieper Hydroelectric Power Station (DneproGES) became the occasion for a grand celebration, which took place not only at official venues but also in informal settings.

For two days, banquets were held in restaurants on both the right and left banks. A wide selection of dishes and wines from the Massandra cellars graced the tables. Democracy was complete: an ordinary collective farmer sat next to the celebrated brigade commander, and an assembly worker clinked glasses with an academician. In the department offices, tables were stocked with vodka, meat, and bread. Anyone could drink and snack to their heart's content!
— this is how eyewitnesses of the events recalled the completion of construction.


On October 10, 1932, the grand opening of one of the largest hydroelectric power plants in the Soviet Union, the Dnieper Hydroelectric Power Station, took place.

After the launch of the Dnieper Hydroelectric Power Station, the plant achieved record efficiency—the cost of generating one kilowatt-hour became the lowest on a global scale. While the design calculations predicted a unit price of 0,6 kopecks, by the end of 1934, this figure was 0,44 kopecks.

Note. Following the construction, engineer Hugh Cooper and his six assistant consultants were awarded the Order of the Red Banner of Labor, and the small city of Zaporizhzhia was transformed into a powerful industrial center in the entire Soviet Union.

Thus, the history of the construction of the Dnieper Hydroelectric Power Station is directly linked to the plan for the electrification of the entire country (GOELRO), proposed by V.I. Lenin almost immediately after the cessation of large-scale battles of the Civil War.

What is the benefit for the US?


The primary and most obvious reason was the need to overcome the consequences of the Great Depression. Large-scale contracts for industrial construction in the Soviet Union became a lifeline for many American firms, preventing their complete collapse. Among the companies that avoided collapse thanks to Soviet contracts was Albert Kahn's corporation. Albert Kahn AssociatesThe Soviet Union, with its vast reserves of gold and raw materials to finance American technology, offered lucrative contracts precisely during the Great Depression, when the American economy collapsed. The USSR became an important and profitable market for American heavy machinery, agricultural equipment, and engineering developments.


The unfolding global crisis gave the USSR a wide window of opportunity for a technological breakthrough

The Great Depression had devastated the US labor market, so by 1930, the Soviet trade mission in New York (remember Amtorg?) was receiving tens of thousands of applications from desperate, skilled American engineers, contractors, and laborers seeking work in the growing Soviet industrial centers.

And one more factor! By the 1930s, the United States began to reconsider its policy toward the Soviet Union. The American administration believed that a strengthened USSR would serve as a deterrent against Japan's growing expansionist policies in Asia, which seriously threatened American interests in the Pacific. Furthermore, the Bolshevik Party's ability to retain power for over a decade demonstrated that the regime was here to stay, a fact that American policymakers needed to take into account. All of this coincided with a more conciliatory approach toward the West by the Soviet leadership by the late 1920s.

Note. Faced with Japan's conquest of Manchuria along the Soviet border, the Soviet Union also viewed the United States as a potential ally that could help counter further Japanese expansion. Mikhail Litvinov, who advocated improved relations with the West, became Foreign Minister in 1930 and used his post to promote improved US-Soviet relations.

You might laugh, but there is another interesting factor: the position of Great Britain, which was satisfied with the beginning of industrialization in the USSR and which, albeit on a small scale, nevertheless participated in some economic projects.

The point is that, back in the so-called "Victorian era," the British authorities developed a strategic approach that would become the foundation of their foreign policy for many years to come: to prevent any continental European country from becoming so powerful that it would threaten the interests and security of the British Isles. And our country was likely assigned the role of counterweight in this construct...

Final look. What's the outcome?


For the Soviet leadership, the Great Depression proved a godsend and a unique "window of opportunity." While Western markets were collapsing, major firms, primarily American ones, were willing to fulfill turnkey construction contracts for entire enterprises in the Soviet Union, just to make a profit. As a result, the USSR was able to industrialize using Western technology, while also enjoying significant cost advantages. Of course, all these services weren't free, but they were obviously offered at a very attractive discount.

The accelerated industrialization of the Stalin era undoubtedly bore fruit and was a key factor in enabling a country that half a century earlier was considered hopelessly agrarian to not only survive but also win the Great Patriotic War. This industrial leap in the USSR enabled a radical transformation of the entire economic structure, moving from an agrarian to an industrial model. By the end of the 1930s, Soviet industrial potential had become the second-largest in the world and the first in Europe, marking the country's emergence as a leading global power.

Note. After the end of the Great Patriotic War, L. P. Beria stated that during the years of Soviet rule, the country had increased its industrial production by 39 times. However, the USSR did not have the same base as European countries and the United States, which enjoyed high aggregate production levels in the 1920s and 1930s. By comparison, the United States increased production by only 2,6 times during the same period.

During the period of accelerated industrialization in the Soviet Union, the foundations of a number of strategic industries were laid, including aviation, automobiles, tractors, machine tools, and chemicals. At the same time, rapid growth was observed in the energy sector, metallurgy, and coal mining, a logical development of the ideas of Lenin's GOELRO plan. The country's industrial map was enriched with new industrial giants, such as Magnitogorsk, Zaporozhye, Norilsk, Novokuznetsk, and Komsomolsk-on-Amur. These transformations resulted in technological independence: the USSR transitioned from purchasing foreign technology to independently producing complex industrial equipment.

In summary, it's safe to say that the industrial potential built in the 1930s became the foundation for defense, which played a key role during the Great Patriotic War. Factories evacuated from the country's European territory to the Urals and Siberia mass-produced military equipment...

And finally ...


The lessons of American capitalism's crucial role in building Soviet socialism remain relevant today. When the full history of Communist China's economic "miracle" in the 1980s and 1990s is written, it will become clear that American companies, engineers, and technology, and even the US government itself, just as they did for the USSR, did everything possible to help Communist China become the world's second-largest economy.
123 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. + 11
    1 August 2026 04: 56
    For the Soviet leadership, the Great Depression turned out to be a gift of fate and a unique “window of opportunity.”
    The main thing is to skillfully use the moment to your advantage!
    1. +9
      1 August 2026 06: 51
      It sounds ambiguous. I remember when oil prices in the country went up one time, they also used the momentum to their advantage.
      The goals are just opposite.
      1. + 15
        1 August 2026 07: 07
        Quote: Gardamir
        When oil prices in the country rose one day, he also used the moment to his advantage.
        Are you referring to the $300 billion worth of American and European securities purchased from oil revenues, which ultimately ended up there? And the interest on them is used to finance Ukraine! We made good use of the moment...))
        1. +4
          3 August 2026 07: 29
          You modestly kept silent about the work of the Germans - their contribution to the industrialization of the USSR is estimated at around 40% of what was built.
          But it has become indecent to remember the contribution of the Germans.

          Everything is based on factories (especially tank factories) feel ) - and the Americans/Germans built a network of irrigation canals in Central Asia that made it possible to grow cotton where it had never been before.
          Cotton is one of 10 strategic goods whose import into Russia has never been subject to duties – that’s how important these goods are.
          Because - gunpowder.....
          1. +6
            3 August 2026 11: 23
            Quote: your1970
            You modestly kept silent about the work of the Germans - their contribution to the industrialization of the USSR is estimated at around 40% of the total built
            The article is about American participation in the industrialization of the USSR. But as for the Germans, close cooperation with them began as early as 1922, immediately after Rapallo, when an aircraft factory was built in Moscow. Junkers, and in Saratov, a chemical plant. And the Germans' participation in our industrialization lasted until Hitler's rise to power, while the Americans' only lasted for one five-year plan. But if we dig deeper, contacts with Germany were established as early as 1920, but it was all done in secret. We can also mention the participation of the British, Czechs, Italians, and French in industrialization. and various other different SwedesBut these are all minor details...
      2. +2
        1 August 2026 09: 13
        Quote: Gardamir
        The goals are just opposite.

        And there is no one to ask...300 billion and it's gone...
  2. +7
    1 August 2026 05: 41
    His firm, Albert Kahn Associates, Inc., became famous for its incredible efficiency: a staff of 400 specialists developed design documentation in seven days, and the construction of the plant itself took no more than five months.

    Not plant design, but plant alignment—one might say, plant layout on the site and external utility design. And the plant and workshop designs were standard.
  3. +6
    1 August 2026 06: 20
    Our bakers will regret it...
    The entire Hermitage was sold off for factories... ugh... And now it turns out that the genuine masterpieces of Raphael, Rembrandt, Botticelli, and others are still in our possession. And Mikoyan foisted off works by students of the great painters' schools on his American Armenians. This was the custom when an artist became famous: he'd only sign the paintings, maybe add a few touches, and his students would do the rest... This was recently revealed, but they're keeping it under wraps for now.
    1. +7
      1 August 2026 07: 23
      Quote: Konnick
      Our bakers will regret it...
      The entire Hermitage was sold off for factories...uuu...And now it turns out that the genuine masterpieces of Raphael, Rembrandt, Botticelli and others remain with us...
      At that time, there was a shortage of absolutely everything. People in general, specialists, both workers and engineers. Everything was in short supply. Building materials, metals, transportation... Somehow, we had to survive. We survived. We saved the country. Greater Russia, called the USSR.
    2. +7
      1 August 2026 07: 29
      Quote: Konnick
      The entire Hermitage was sold to factories.

      It seems there was material on the website that the money received from the sale of works of art and jewelry amounted to only a few percent of what was spent on industrialization.
  4. +8
    1 August 2026 07: 03
    Quote: Konnick
    The entire Hermitage was sold off to factories...uuu...
    Stalin's industrialization was also financed by the free labor of peasants herded into collective farms and the free labor force of the Gulag. And by other things, invented liberals, universal human beings и human rights activists in the 1990s...
    1. + 13
      1 August 2026 07: 31
      free labor of peasants... free labor force

      And thanks to all this free stuff, not only did the country's population begin to grow, but life expectancy also increased. According to the 1898 census, it was 29-30 years.
      In addition to this free education, free literacy and learning were promoted. There was also free healthcare for everyone, rest homes, sanatoriums, and sports activities...
      Free clubs and sections hi
      1. +2
        3 August 2026 08: 04
        Quote: Reptiloid
        but life expectancy also increased. According to the 1898 census, it was 29-30 years.

        I am tormented by vague doubts - that you are taking your young age due to infant mortality for normal the average age was 42-46.
        The number of children in families suggests that in your case they had to start making and giving birth to children at the age of 5-7 feel so what?
        And record-breakers like our Luka - who had 5 wives in succession and 72 children (as of 1903) from them - apparently stamped out 5 heads in a litter at a time lol lol

        Look at the question carefully.
        1. -1
          3 August 2026 09: 20
          If it's written in the census, then that's how it is. And why? That's your opinion. It's known that even then there were people over 80 years old. And they were mostly wealthy. For example, the Tsar's mother. There are also portraits of elderly people. That, precisely with such an average age, suggests that many children died immediately after birth. Mothers often died after giving birth, too.
          1. +1
            3 August 2026 09: 57
            Quote: Reptiloid
            If it's written in the census, then that's how it is. But why? That's your opinion.

            Once again - slowly.
            They took children of recently deceased men and 50-year-old men of recently deceased men - the average life expectancy was 25 years.
            To confirm this, go to any surviving early Soviet building. RURAL cemetery. And you'll see there 50- and 70-year-olds who died in the 1920s and 1930s.

            Quote: Reptiloid
            В 1926-27 years the duration increased to 42-46 years.
            Newborn deaths have decreased slightly, and statistics have changed. In fact, everything remains as it was under the Tsar; medicine hasn't yet played any significant role.
            And medicine at that time could not play any particular role physically - it practically did not exist in the villages yet.
            Quote: Reptiloid
            Maternity leave for women
            in the village it was a fiction at least until massive Collective/state farms - where you could go on maternity leave. And where can individual farmers go and who will feed them?
            Grandfather's mother gave birth to him in the hayfield in 1921 - while great-grandfather was galloping to the village for grandmother, she washed the child, tied the umbilical cord, fed him, ran and began to aim again to collect the mown grain.
            And you - "maternity leave" - ​​in the village, yeah-yeah...
            1. 0
              3 August 2026 11: 36
              You know very well that rural life is little known to me, although my great-grandmothers and great-grandfathers lived in villages.
              There was intensive construction, and workers were needed. Of course, there was a stream of able-bodied young men and women from rural areas, just as before the Revolution. But industrialization, as discussed in the article, required more... Who was on maternity leave for? Working women, of course, primarily. After all, under the Tsar, they, too, sometimes gave birth at their workplaces. Although, of course, they were mostly fired early. First-aid stations immediately appeared at Soviet factories. There were also first-aid stations in the workers' dormitories, many of which were built before the war. Of course, there weren't doctors, paramedics, or orderlies. But before the Revolution, none of that existed. And there were no institutions for children either.
        2. 0
          3 August 2026 09: 33
          In 1926-27, life expectancy increased to 42-46 years. This was, of course, due to medical care. Immediately after the Revolution, maternity leave was introduced for women. A little later, crèches and kindergartens were established for children, including 24-hour ones. Industrialization required a lot of work, and the state tried to help those working in everyday life.
      2. -2
        3 August 2026 08: 17
        In addition to this free education, free literacy and learning were promoted. There was also free healthcare for everyone, rest homes, sanatoriums, and sports activities...
        Free clubs and sections

        Nothing is free; adults should understand this basic thing.
        1. +1
          3 August 2026 09: 37
          The question is who's paying for it. If the state paid for it, then it's free for the public.
          1. -1
            3 August 2026 10: 00
            Quote: Reptiloid
            The question is who's paying for it. If the state paid for it, then it's free for the public.

            Margaret Thatcher: "There is no 'government money', there is only taxpayer money."(WITH).
            1. 0
              3 August 2026 11: 19
              Why don't you remember the Soviet proverb?
              Everything around is collective farm, everything around is mine!
              1. -2
                3 August 2026 11: 42
                Quote: Reptiloid
                Why don't you remember the Soviet proverb?
                Everything around is collective farm, everything around is mine!

                Because it was everything NOBODY'S - and you could drown tractors in the river on Easter when you're drunk. Regularly...
                And as for the iron abandoned in the fields...
                For 30 years, our metalworkers have been collecting iron in the fields and it hasn't run out yet - that is, something like "Azovstal" could have stopped working altogether - instead of wasting resources and money.
                And yes, the formula sounded a little different back then.
                Quote: Reptiloid
                everything around is collective farm/folk, everything around is nobody's!
              2. 0
                Yesterday, 20: 12
                Take every nail from work, you are the master here, not a guest.
                1. 0
                  Yesterday, 20: 16
                  That's probably always the case. Under any system. Petty officials bring home pens and paper. Nurses bring bandages and other things. request
          2. 0
            4 August 2026 02: 59
            Quote: Reptiloid
            The question is who's paying for it. If the state paid for it, then it's free for the public.

            There's no such thing as state money; it's all taken, one way or another, from the people who earned it. It's astonishing that such basic things need to be explained to grown-ups.
            In the USSR, everything "free" was actually paid for: if a child supposedly went to school for free, then the money for this education was taken from his parents in the form of underpayment of wages; if the child was an orphan, then the money for his maintenance was taken from the parents of other children (or those who did not yet have children).
            It's high time to stop writing nonsense about things supposedly being free in the USSR or other countries; working people always pay for everything.
    2. + 14
      1 August 2026 07: 52
      And who else was it supposed to be carried out by? 90% of the peasants. The 20s showed only one thing. The average peasant, no matter what you give him, is only interested in his own well-being. When he has money, he prefers to exploit his neighbors. He doesn't need to buy machinery, learn agronomy, and so on. Providing the country with grain and so on is not something the peasant needs at all. He needs to support his family and get rich. We didn't have the time to wait for all this to lead to the normal development of agriculture and the transition of those tired of it to industry. The English Revolution took a long time. 150 years. And the methods they used were simply monstrous. We had neither the time nor such outrageous brutality. Events confirmed the correctness of this approach. Or collective farms and machine-tractor stations, and then industry by the hands of yesterday's peasants. Or German slavery 10 years later.
      Pleasant pictures of villages and peasant labor will not protect the country.
      1. + 13
        1 August 2026 07: 59
        Quote: MCmaximus
        Or collective farms and machine-tractor stations, and then industry at the hands of yesterday's peasants. Or German slavery 10 years later.
        Or, as Comrade Stalin said, Otherwise, in ten years we will be crushed...
      2. +4
        1 August 2026 09: 21
        Yeah, we're reading Ilf and Petrov's "The Twelve Chairs." Pictures from life. But you can't build Tankograd out of a hundred candle factories. Not even out of a thousand.
      3. +3
        1 August 2026 11: 19
        "The peasant doesn't need to provide the country with grain or anything like that. He needs to support his family and get rich" are mutually exclusive propositions. A peasant can only get rich by selling his own produce within the country.
        1. +2
          1 August 2026 17: 13
          The peasant will never be able to produce as much grain as he needs. The New Economic Policy (NEP) demonstrated this perfectly.
        2. +1
          4 August 2026 11: 07
          Quote: Sergey Valov
          "The peasant doesn't need to provide the country with grain or anything like that. He needs to support his family and get rich." These are mutually exclusive theses.

          Thus, a peasant can become rich not only due to volume, but also due to rising prices when there is a shortage of goods.
          Only in November of the eighteenth year, when the cannons began to hum near the City, did smart people, including Vasilisa, realize that the peasants hated this very gentleman hetman like a mad dog - and peasant thoughts that no such gentlemanly bastard reform was needed, but that eternal, long-awaited peasant reform is needed:
          - All the land to the peasants.
          - Each one hundred dessiatines.
          - That there were no landowners and no spirit.
          - And so that for every one hundred dessiatines, faithful stamped paper with a seal - into an eternal, hereditary possession, from grandfather to father, from father to son, to grandson, and so on.
          - So that no punks from the City come to demand bread. Peasant bread, we will not give it to anyone, that we ourselves will not eat it, we will bury it in the ground.
          - To bring kerosene from the City.
          © Bulgakov
          1. 0
            4 August 2026 12: 47
            "A peasant can grow rich not only through volume but also through rising prices during commodity shortages"—but only for a short time; shortages are quickly alleviated. Moreover, shortages in the countryside are usually the result of crop failure, mass livestock deaths, and the like, which peasants dread like fire.
            As for the quote from Bulgakov, such nonsense is characteristic of the lumpen of all times and peoples, and the last demand is especially delightful.
    3. -6
      1 August 2026 09: 00
      True. Stalin refined the concept of primitive socialist accumulation proposed by the economist Preobrazhensky. He decided that since the West had been able to industrialize through the ruthless exploitation of its external colonies, the USSR could exploit its "internal colonies." The peasantry was precisely the target. Bukharin and Rykov were categorically opposed to such inhumane methods, for which they were executed.
      1. +4
        1 August 2026 10: 00
        Did you come up with this yourself or did someone suggest it?
        1. +1
          1 August 2026 10: 09
          Is there anything to say or reasonably object to?
          1. +2
            1 August 2026 10: 16
            In essence, of course.
            It was pulled out of a finger either by you personally or by the perestroika people before you, to denigrate and justify.
            Without such a breakthrough, there would be no free Russian people. The very essence of socialist revolution and the dictatorship of the proletariat is that individual farmers were forced into the collective fold. The effect exceeded all expectations: we broke the back of Nazism and became a superpower.
            1. -3
              1 August 2026 10: 40
              You're contradicting yourself. How can one be free in a stable? No one knows how history would have unfolded if the USSR had followed Bukharin's path. China, by the way, studied his works very carefully.
              1. +2
                1 August 2026 11: 54
                What is China an example of? One of the most stable societies on the planet. It has nothing in common with true socialism. And besides, no one promised freedom to the individual farmer. Only within the collective, together with everyone else. So, no contradictions. Collective freedom. Freedom from private property, which generates the freedom of a few and the enslavement of many. And in general, it's easier to solve any problem collectively. Incidentally, the Russian peasantry lived communally for centuries. Individualism is something alien. It's foreign.
              2. +8
                1 August 2026 13: 14
                Quote: Glock-17
                Nobody knows how history would have turned out if the USSR had followed the path proposed by Bukharin.

                It's not a given that it's better than the real thing. We might have been late with industrialization by WWII. Actually, we jumped on the last train anyway.
                On the other hand, there really were too many victims...
            2. +1
              3 August 2026 08: 21
              Quote: Essex62
              free people

              Quote: Essex62
              stall

              - You don't even need anti-Sovietists here - you yourself manage to vulgarize everything lol
      2. The comment was deleted.
        1. +1
          1 August 2026 20: 19
          Your comment is complete crap, completely meaningless and contains elements of personal attacks.
  5. +1
    1 August 2026 07: 27
    The result exceeded expectations, and a large three-year contract was signed with A. Kahn for the amount of 2,5 billion dollars

    ?
    Turnkey plant for 30 lard, and documentation for 2.5 lard?
    1. + 11
      1 August 2026 07: 44
      So the contact isn't limited to just one plant. But to everyone.
      And in general. For normal leaders, money is a means. For abnormal ones, it's an end. Compare the two approaches: in the 30s and today. Compare our modern approach and the modern Chinese one.
      1. 0
        1 August 2026 10: 08
        How does the Chinese differ from our modern-day counterpart? Only in that they used their advantage of unlimited, cheap labor to build a global factory, while ours, lacking such a large supply of slaves, trade in resources, of which there are still plenty.
        Both of them are bourgeois parasites. Working people are gloriously riding into their bright futures on the backs of their hands there, while they empty the earth's resources here. And by the way, both of them are turncoats, too, like communists or those same ones from the past.
        1. +2
          1 August 2026 17: 12
          Go to China. Look at the people. The old people. What's been built.
          1. -1
            1 August 2026 17: 20
            And what will I see there? Ploughing away most of the day, for the same bourgeois, for paltry wages. Cruel exploitation and the dictatorship of the inverted overseers.
            1. +2
              1 August 2026 18: 45
              Name another. Where and when was it different? Maybe under socialism? Where people are a labor force. Well, the last 20 years have been wasted, but we've also gotten tired. If we'd worked more, maybe we wouldn't have thought about all this gibberish.
              Personally, my ancestors weren't lazy. They worked harder than I could ever imagine. No way.
              1. +1
                2 August 2026 10: 17
                Of course, things were different in the USSR. Everything was regulated by a wage scale or salaries. There were no speculators or freeloading bourgeois. Everyone worked, no one was a slacker. At least dragging your ass to the office, where you sit for eight hours, was work of some kind. lol Otherwise, it turns out to be a complete disgrace: one guy works hard for 12-13 hours a day, while the other one warms his belly on a foreign beach and skims the cream.
                1. +1
                  2 August 2026 10: 27
                  You've nailed it on the head about the foolishness. If it weren't for the imbalance in the military-industrial complex, if the metal that was used to make tanks was used to make Zhiguli cars, and if the building materials were used to build a farmstead, and a sausage factory next to every herd of cows, the marked man wouldn't have succeeded. Those Kremlin grandpas have screwed the country over.
                2. 0
                  4 August 2026 11: 18
                  Quote: Essex62
                  Of course, things were different in the USSR. Everything was regulated by a wage scale or salaries. There were no speculators or freeloading bourgeois.

                  Yeah... if you look from the front.
                  But if you look behind the facade, you'll see speculation, a black market, and the Soviet trade that cowers like a bull over a sheep, whose illustrious representatives were already having tens of kilograms of gold confiscated in the 60s. And alongside this trade are corrupt party officials, right up to the heads of republican ministries and Communist Parties (the investigation was not allowed to go any higher). Look, in Khrushchev's final years, they poked at Leningrad trade—and such a flood of it poured out that the investigation had to be shut down at the city executive committee level. And when, under Marked, prosecutors were allowed to touch the cotton cycle in the USSR... wink
                  A parallel world of parasites living in the body of the Soviet state and even ruling it.
                  1. -1
                    4 August 2026 12: 31
                    Well, the only difference is that they confiscated it. Speculation was forbidden. The penalty for that was jail. And it was forbidden to indulge in grandeur with the stolen goods. But now it's allowed.
                    Let's leave the perestroika fairy tales about thieving party bosses to the clueless children of the Unified State Exam. Why the hell would they need that if it were implemented?
                    Can't we? They had everything going on just fine within the bounds of what was permitted. And some were still ideologically committed. If we'd all gone rogue at once, we'd have had the restoration much sooner. The CPSU and its top brass had an invincible administrative resource, as they demonstrated under the marked agent.
                    1. +3
                      6 August 2026 11: 52
                      Quote: Essex62
                      But let's leave the perestroika fairy tales about thieving party bigwigs to the clueless children of the Unified State Exam.

                      What does perestroika have to do with this? The "fairy tales," as you put it, began under Brezhnev. The "fishing case" and the "Sochi-Krasnodar affair" were all carbon copies of each other: they began with restoring order to Soviet trade, and after a while, the number of defendants included deputy ministers, executive committee chairmen, and city committee chairmen, with the threads stretching higher—to the secretaries of regional committees.
                      Quote: Essex62
                      Why the hell did they need it if it couldn't be implemented? Everything was fine within their permitted limits.

                      Human greed is immeasurable.
                      Quote: Essex62
                      The administrative resource of the CPSU and its top brass was indestructible, which was demonstrated under the marked agent.

                      The most paradoxical thing is that those who possessed administrative resources and lived off them did everything possible to lose them. The USSR was dismantled under the wise leadership of the bureaucratic fraternity—and few of them settled into their new lives any better than before. Parasites, in a fit of greed, devoured the body.
      2. +2
        3 August 2026 08: 20
        Quote: MCmaximus
        Compare two approaches: in the 30s and today.

        Then 500 factories were sold.
        Now they haven't even sold Opel ("every car will eventually become an Opel" (c) Germans)
    2. + 10
      1 August 2026 07: 55
      Quote: Senior Sailor
      Turnkey plant for 30 lard, and documentation for 2.5 lard?
      Albert Kahn's firm designed over 500 industrial facilities in the USSR, including such giants as tractor factories in Stalingrad, Kharkov, and Chelyabinsk, automobile factories in Moscow and Gorky, and machine tool factories in Kaluga and Novosibirsk. In addition, the firm developed all ball bearing factories and metallurgical plantsBesides the projects, the company also led all stages of construction. technical supervisionIsn't that worth $2,5 billion?
      1. +1
        1 August 2026 09: 01
        Quote: Luminman
        Isn't that worth $2,5 billion?

        I don't know and I want to understand.
        Quote: Luminman
        Albert Kahn's firm designed more than 500 industrial facilities in the USSR.

        500 factories at 30 million each = 15 billion (obviously, less, as not all factories are equal to GAZ, but whatever). In other words, the cost of the projects is over 16%. Quite a bit...
        1. +6
          1 August 2026 09: 50
          Don't forget about training domestic specialists. This was likely included as a separate clause in the contract.
        2. +9
          1 August 2026 11: 36
          Quote: Senior Sailor
          In other words, the cost of projects is more than 16%. Not a small amount...
          Projects are built by people with university degrees and university brains, and their labor is always and everywhere more expensive than that of those who work with shovels. That said, I don't mean to offend those who work with shovels in any way...
          1. +4
            1 August 2026 13: 18
            Quote: Luminman
            and the cost of their labor is always and everywhere more expensive than that of those who work with shovels.

            This is certainly true, but in Kahn
            a staff of 400 specialists
            and there are tens of thousands of people with shovels. Not to mention that their salaries aren't the biggest expense item.
            Quote: Luminman
            At the same time, I in no way want to offend people working with a shovel...

            I think Anton is right; the benefit of teaching people who only know how to work with a shovel new skills is no less than in the factories themselves.
        3. +5
          2 August 2026 09: 59
          Greetings, Ivan!
          From my twenty years of experience I can say the following:
          - a modern project in the Kahn style for a large power plant, with a cost of 8% of the estimate, entails unforeseen expenses of 30%;
          - the same with high-quality development and a project cost of 12% reduces unforeseen expenses to 15%;
          Total: 27% versus 38%, but our grabbers are unteachable. They need to make the stage for which they are personally responsible as cheap as possible, and shift the costs to implementation.
          1. +1
            2 August 2026 11: 30
            Here you just need to understand: do it quickly or cheaply. If it's fast, then prepare 30%. And rightly so... A good project is being developed. And then: either the Central Bank changes the rate, or oil prices go up. Or some other crap. The entire budget goes down the drain.
            The result is usually predictable.
            A disastrous project is underway. 20-30% of the money was stolen, but the facility is ready and operational.
            Otherwise, there's nothing at all. Because the correct estimates are 50% off, and there's no money. There's nothing to build, nothing to steal.
    3. 0
      3 August 2026 08: 14
      Quote: Senior Sailor
      The result exceeded expectations, and a large three-year contract was signed with A. Kahn for the amount of 2,5 billion dollars

      ?
      Turnkey plant for 30 lard, and documentation for 2.5 lard?

      There is documentation for ALL factories + approvals + signatures + kickbacks (in the USA, capitalism was indeed).
  6. + 10
    1 August 2026 07: 33
    This is what it means to have good leaders and managers at the helm of the country.
    Not like the current ones....
    1. +1
      3 August 2026 08: 26
      Quote: Million
      This is what it means to have good leaders and managers at the helm of the country.
      Not like the current ones....

      Quote: Luminman
      An explanation of why innovations are not being implemented in the modern Russian economy.

      Almost everyone involved in purchasing everything from abroad between 1925 and 1935 was shot.
      And many of the accusations included "purchased a product 3-5 times higher than the average price for a similar one."
      This surprised even the Germans and Americans, who knew what kickbacks were. scope overpayments.
  7. + 23
    1 August 2026 08: 05
    Quote: Million
    Not like the current ones....
    I think I read V. Katasonov's explanation of why innovations are not being implemented in the modern Russian economy.
    Imagine approaching two car thieves who are removing the tires from someone else's car and telling them you've invented a gasoline additive that will save fuel, extend engine life, and is also environmentally friendly. What do you think they'll think of you?
    In the same way, the current generation doesn’t need any innovations at all - they are busy removing wheels from someone else's car plundering the country...
    1. -5
      1 August 2026 11: 46
      "Why aren't innovations being implemented in the modern Russian economy?" Of course they are, but journalists aren't interested in such information. Read about Rosatom's development, about construction projects in the Far East and the Far North...
      1. +9
        1 August 2026 11: 51
        Quote: Sergey Valov
        Read about Rosatom's development, construction projects in the Far East and the Far North...
        And you should also read about the "development" of semiconductors, biotechnology, machine tool and engine building in our country...))
        1. -3
          1 August 2026 12: 39
          Where and when did I write that everything is fine here? No country in the world has anything like that. But the fact that modern Russia lacks industrial development is a slander against our country.
          "You should also read about 'development'" - the "you yourself..." principle is unproductive.
        2. ANB
          +2
          2 August 2026 22: 36
          And you should also read about "development"

          And the development of system software (OS, DBMS), which required import substitution.
        3. 0
          3 August 2026 08: 30
          Quote: Luminman
          engine building

          Have we ever had any of our own? Especially passenger cars and diesels? And this is taking into account the machine-tool industry?
          1. +3
            3 August 2026 11: 17
            Have we ever had our own?
            It happened, it happened... and it wasn't bad!
            1. 0
              3 August 2026 11: 33
              Quote: Luminman
              Have we ever had our own?
              It happened, it happened... and it wasn't bad!

              Is the engine in the passenger cars different from the BA2101 or the German ones?
              Diesel on 469 - where did he ask to be born?
              The engine in a passenger car has a power of 120-150 horsepower?
              Aircraft engines for light aircraft - NOT tracing their lineage back to the pre-war 1930s?
      2. +1
        9 August 2026 03: 17
        Rosatom is not a benchmark. Innovations in its operations do exist. But these are typical of large state corporations, while three-quarters of Russian enterprises do not implement innovations. Innovations are distributed unevenly across the country's economy. Furthermore, if innovations were implemented en masse, this phenomenon would have a measurable economic impact. This is not the case yet. Innovations in our economy are not systemic. Indeed, the same is true for development in general.
  8. +2
    1 August 2026 09: 18
    Under the harshest wartime conditions, the vehicle's design was simplified as much as possible to speed up production at evacuated factories; special simplified modifications were produced for front-line needs.

    This is a caption, and the photos are again illustrative! The photos show "lorries" of normal design, at least pre-war production. They have two headlights and decorative front fenders.
    To simplify the design during the war, a single headlight was retained, and the fenders were made straight. Other simplifications were made as well.
  9. +7
    1 August 2026 09: 53
    There's one thing I can't understand: where did they find so many translators, and even techies?
    Thank you, Nikolay!
    1. +5
      1 August 2026 11: 25
      Quote: 3x3zsave
      There's one thing I can't understand: where did they find so many translators, and even techies?
      I've thought about that too. In our country, besides villages, there were also university centers; that's probably where they recruited. Although I read that some former count served as a translator during the construction of Magnitka...
      1. +5
        1 August 2026 11: 33
        But besides personal communication, there are also tons of technical documentation!
        1. +4
          1 August 2026 11: 42
          Quote: 3x3zsave
          But besides personal communication, there are also tons of technical documentation!
          I agree! Technical English isn't English for communication. I can only assume that the translators were émigrés... P.S. During the war, every division had a translator. They must have recruited them somewhere, right? Although I understand that English was a more exotic language back then than German or French...
          1. +4
            1 August 2026 11: 47
            Technical English is not English for communication.
            And as an anti-bonus - other measurement systems!
            1. +2
              1 August 2026 12: 51
              A different measurement system isn't a problem at all; you get used to it in a day or two. If you want, you can create your own conversion table in 20-30 minutes. It's much more difficult for designers and metallurgists. With metallurgists, it's easier—if the decision is made to replicate it exactly, then you'll only have to set up rolling to the new dimensions. But if not, then the designers will have to sweat converting imported rolled products to domestic ones, and imported alloys, with their characteristics, to domestic ones.
            2. +3
              1 August 2026 13: 20
              Quote: 3x3zsave
              other measurement systems!

              Well, it's hard to say. We ourselves were "inch-sized" until 1917. request
              1. +6
                1 August 2026 13: 41
                The Metric Convention was signed by Russia in 1875. Well, yes, we still measure "black" plumbing fixtures in inches.
            3. +4
              2 August 2026 10: 06
              For a competent engineer, the transition from one unit system to another is quite quick. If you work in this system every day, you'll be flying in it within a month!
              As for language, the cultural revolution carried out by the Bolsheviks is no empty phrase! And mastering a technical language for an engineer with a minimal linguistic background is the same adaptation process.
              1. +3
                2 August 2026 10: 20
                In the late 40s, my father talked to Cobra pilots, and they only used feet and miles in conversation. They got used to it.
              2. +2
                2 August 2026 20: 06
                For a competent engineer, the transition from one system of units to another occurs quite quickly.
                I remember my father translating DIN standards into GOST standards. What a load of crap!
          2. +4
            1 August 2026 12: 43
            I've had to translate technical articles; it's easier than translating colloquial language. You just grab a specialized dictionary and go, without any nuances of meaning, it's practically translating a charter.
            1. man
              +7
              1 August 2026 22: 16
              Quote: Sergey Valov
              I have had to translate technical articles, it is easier than translating spoken language.

              That's right... when I took the minimum English test, translating a technical text, with and without a dictionary, I got A's, but I got a F for "communication." laughing But since the grades for the translation of equipment were a priority, the overall grade was given a four. smile
              1. +6
                2 August 2026 05: 17
                Quote: mann
                I got A's in translating technical texts, with and without a dictionary, but I got a F for "communication"
                Usually it's the other way around... wink
                1. man
                  +3
                  2 August 2026 06: 33
                  Quote: Luminman
                  Quote: mann
                  I got A's in translating technical texts, with and without a dictionary, but I got a F for "communication"
                  Usually it's the other way around... wink

                  For the early USSR, you're probably right, but I was referring to the early 80s. Obviously, I knew much more about underwater technology than the examiners, but as for communication... request smile
              2. ANB
                +2
                2 August 2026 22: 38
                . then the total number of results was four.

                I managed to get an A. I retook the test three times. Although I'm a zero in communication, since I studied German in school.
                1. man
                  +2
                  3 August 2026 03: 05
                  Quote: ANB
                  . then the total number of results was four.

                  I managed to get an A. I retook the test three times. Although I'm a zero in communication, since I studied German in school.

                  I didn't care about the grade, as long as it wasn't a C. I wasn't taking an entrance exam, after all. candidate minimumIf I had gotten a B in my specialty, it would have been a disgrace.
                  You're a great guy... persistent... I can imagine how difficult it was.hi
            2. +2
              2 August 2026 10: 10
              That's if you have a relevant education. Incidentally, we had to retrain specialist translators from German to English for a long time. After a year, it was impossible to distinguish the work of a retrained translator from that of a basic specialist.
            3. +2
              2 August 2026 11: 34
              The technical literature of those times is a separate topic. This level of excellence has been lost.
          3. 0
            3 August 2026 08: 35
            Quote: Luminman
            During the war, every division had a translator. Where did they recruit them from?

            Jews, half-cleansed Germans, Russians - who lived in the Volga German Republic (like Kuznetsov, who had a Bavarian belay accent) and their own translators from universities
            1. +4
              3 August 2026 11: 20
              Quote: your1970
              Jews, half-cleansed Germans, Russians living in the Volga German Republic (like Kuznetsov, who had a Bavarian belay accent) and their translators from universities
              At that time, German was taught in all schools and knowledge of it was obligatory (for educated people), just as knowledge of English is today...
              1. 0
                3 August 2026 11: 52
                Quote: Luminman
                Quote: your1970
                Jews, half-cleansed Germans, Russians living in the Volga German Republic (like Kuznetsov, who had a Bavarian belay accent) and their translators from universities
                At that time, German was taught in all schools and knowledge of it was obligatory (for educated people), just as knowledge of English is today...

                Let me remind you that in 1940, 67% of the junior command staff had initial school education and courses for command personnel (six months at best).
                And a person with 10 grades was accepted to a leadership position - only because he had 10 grades.
                But even in this case - without a native speaker for communication and study - it is nonsense.

                So everything I have listed above is the most massive translators' sources.
  10. +6
    1 August 2026 10: 14
    It all came together in a truly amazing way:
    1. The decision was made to end the NEP and begin industrialization. 1929.
    2. The beginning of the Great Depression. 1929.
    3. The state accumulated the initial capital. 1929.
    Simply cosmic! What followed was a ten-year leap that completely transformed the country and gave it a chance to resist yet another crusade.
    Hitler and his arrogant cronies missed this and planned a blitzkrieg. Even though they were receiving intelligence that the USSR had changed dramatically.
    But how did they find the money to finance all this? Of course, the NEP couldn't have happened without it. Everything we do comes from there. Aviation, metallurgy, oil refining, machine tool manufacturing, and so on. A brilliant decade.
    1. +7
      1 August 2026 11: 21
      Quote: Glagol1
      Although they received intelligence information that the USSR had changed greatly
      If you've read V. Schellenberg's memoirs, there's a curious scene where he describes an argument with Abwehr chief V. Canaris just before the invasion of the USSR. One of them said that the railway line in one of the industrial regions of the Urals had a single track, while the other claimed there were two. That's all the intelligence they had. And they knew nothing about the T-34 tank either.
      Quote: Glagol1
      But how did they find the money to finance all this?
      Where the money for industrialization came from remains a matter of debate. Some say it was plundered from the Church and the peasantry, others say it was thanks to Comrade Stalin's wise economic policies. Still others claim the USSR mined large quantities of gold, which is how it paid foreign specialists. One thing is certain: during the Great Depression, the cost of machine tools and industrial equipment fell almost in half.
      1. +6
        1 August 2026 12: 07
        You're right—it's still unclear where the funding came from. Because there's a secret file, which, according to the documents, remains sealed. It's clear there were several sources:
        1. The NEP generated revenue in the form of increased taxes. There were several dozen of them, and they were well collected.
        2. Gold mining. But not only that. There was also gold buying from the population.
        3. Sale of works of art created before 1917.
        4. Sale of royal property.
        5. Income from foreign trade. Timber, oil, furs and grain.
        You can lament (and quite honestly) the sales of Fabergé eggs and royal diamonds as much as you like, but the bottom line is that reality is merciless and unequivocal. Without that leap, when the country reached fifty in ten years, we simply wouldn't exist.
        1. +3
          1 August 2026 23: 49
          An important source of financing was guaranteed repurchase loans. The planned economy allowed for the creation of an inter-industry balance and the allocation of loans to those sectors that provided the fastest and highest return on investment. For example, a tractor used in the MTS dramatically increased the output of marketable products on the consumer market. Loans to the tractor industry failed to increase the amount of cash available on the consumer market before the product itself was available. This is a very simplified explanation.
      2. +3
        2 August 2026 11: 36
        They looked for money everywhere. They spent every penny where it was needed.
      3. 0
        4 August 2026 11: 35
        Quote: Luminman
        Well, they didn't know anything about the T-34 tank either.

        The Abwehr knew about both the T-34 and the KV as early as the spring of 1941. But this information didn't reach those who were supposed to encounter these tanks directly.
    2. 0
      3 August 2026 08: 46
      Quote: Glagol1
      But how did they find the money to finance all this?

      Quote: Luminman
      Where the money for industrialization came from remains a controversial issue to this day.

      Read Littlepage - Deputy Head of the Golden Trust, the only American awarded the Order of the Red Banner of Labor
      Quote: Luminman
      If you read the memoirs of V. Schellenberg, there is an interesting story where he describes a dispute with the head of the Abwehr
      belay lol lol lol
      Schellenberg's memoirs were written by an unknown person in an unknown year. They are fantasy, not memoirs....
      The Wehrmacht had maps all the required scale throughout the entire territory of the USSR up to the "A-A line".
      In this case, our military memoirists claimed that the German maps were fresher and more accurate than ours.
      Therefore, the idea that the German General Staff didn't know the necessary details of the area is nonsense (hungover) most likely from the British - to belittle the level of our victory ("Oh, so what, the USSR defeated those village idiots")
  11. +2
    1 August 2026 10: 30
    A formal point: in the section of the text about the Magnitogorsk Combine, there are duplicate photos.
  12. +9
    1 August 2026 10: 33
    The main conclusion is that it is more useful to invite 20 thousand qualified Americans than a million unskilled laborers - migrant workers.
    1. +9
      1 August 2026 11: 29
      Quote: balabol
      The main conclusion is that it is more useful to invite 20 thousand qualified Americans

      Unlike the young USSR, we still have a decent scientific and engineering base. We just need to give it the right direction and, of course, funding. We could also invite another hundred capable engineers to the ailing semiconductor industry...
      1. +6
        1 August 2026 14: 09
        It is clear that the situation has changed over the past hundred years, and as the ancients said: “Everything flows, everything changes,” “You cannot step into the same river twice.”
        We need a clear development strategy, with requirements for key industries and the economy as a whole, and, as a result, specific plans for finances, resources, technology, and people.
        Only then can you understand where and how many people to invite.
      2. man
        +5
        1 August 2026 22: 40
        Quote: Luminman
        a hundred smart engineers in the semiconductor industry, which is lying on its side...

        Hmm... we were way behind in electronics even in the early 80s... There were two translated journals, "Electronics" and "Proceedings of Engineers...." I read them and died of envy... sad Our developers did their best to cope...
      3. +2
        3 August 2026 15: 51
        I really enjoyed your article, dear Author. I read it, listened to it several times, and learned something new. This is a huge topic, and I really hope you continue it.
        Deepen and expand wink hi
        1. +3
          4 August 2026 15: 10
          Quote: Reptiloid
          I really liked your article
          Thank...
  13. +6
    1 August 2026 10: 40
    So, in the 20s and 30s, the Soviet leadership was smart enough to realize that autarky was impossible. And that was even back in the technological era! And many hamsters today still dream of it. And everyone's waiting for the launch of modern domestic chip production using lower-tech processes.
  14. +6
    1 August 2026 12: 02
    "I know the city will be!
    I know the garden will bloom!
    When are such people
    "There is one in the Soviet Union!"
    On the buildings of Privokzalnaya Square are inscribed words from V.V. Mayakovsky's poem about my city, which we learned by heart at school.
    Engineers from the USA and Germany also participated in the construction of the KMK.
    Even the place where they lived was called "Americanka".
  15. +5
    1 August 2026 12: 47
    When the full history of communist China's economic "miracle" in the 1980s and 1990s is written, it will be revealed that American companies, engineers, and technology, and even the US government itself, just as they did for the USSR, did everything possible to help communist China become the world's second-largest economy.

    But this is the work of the USSR, without which China would still remain an agrarian wild country.
  16. +3
    1 August 2026 15: 15
    Quote: Konnick
    Our bakers will regret it...
    The entire Hermitage was sold off for factories... ugh... And now it turns out that the genuine masterpieces of Raphael, Rembrandt, Botticelli, and others are still in our possession. And Mikoyan foisted off works by students of the great painters' schools on his American Armenians. This was the custom when an artist became famous: he'd only sign the paintings, maybe add a few touches, and his students would do the rest... This was recently revealed, but they're keeping it under wraps for now.

    It is not true.
    Mellon was sold Venus with a Mirror by Titian, Raphael, Hals, Rembrandt, Van Dyck, 25 paintings in total.
    Gulbenkian bought almost everything for immediate resale, meaning very cheaply. He kept mostly jewelry and other decorative objects for himself, rather than paintings.
    By the way, such a sale in itself is not bad, the money went to the cause.
    But they tried to bribe Mellon (the then Minister of Finance) in this way, but nothing came of it.
    The sale itself was poorly organized; the market was quickly oversaturated, prices plummeted, and the unsold goods (mostly precious metals) that had been consigned and unsold had to be reclaimed with a penalty. Plus, there was an extremely negative international response.
    Now, of course, expert analysis has advanced, and all the museums were afraid—but they sold them confident they were genuine, with no intention of deceiving the buyer. For some items, they simply couldn't agree on a price, and the buyers became downright brazen.
    Mellon, it must be admitted, bought it for a reasonable price, i.e., at that time - expensive.
  17. +8
    1 August 2026 16: 54
    I'll add a few words about Magnitogorsk. I worked at Magnitogorsk Iron and Steel Works for several years, and as strange as it may sound in a Russian-American company, my American boss told me that three plants were built in the US using the same design as Magnitogorsk Iron and Steel Works, and none of them have survived to this day. They all closed, all destroyed by trade unions, with whom it was impossible to negotiate anything about modernization or reconstruction, or anything at all.
    Magnitogorsk Iron and Steel Works once had three open-hearth shops. Only one remains today, renamed the Electric Steelmaking Shop (ESP). In fact, it was an open-hearth shop with an operating 32-furnace DSA (two-bath steelmaking unit) furnace, to which they added two electric arc furnaces, each with a capacity of 180 tons. The open-hearth shop was approximately 1600 meters long and was once a record-breaking facility.
    There are quite a few places and workshops on the Magnitogorsk Iron and Steel Works site where the atmosphere of the 30s and 40s still reigns. It doesn't give the impression of a modern enterprise at all. There are monuments to that era on the plant's grounds, for example, preserved cast-iron ladles from 1932 on a pedestal.
    Magnitogorsk itself is a dead-end city in terms of transport accessibility, located off the main transport routes. Getting there and leaving by train is very problematic; this aspect was somehow not improved in the 30s. The city itself, especially the historical part, is quite pleasant, and it has the third-longest tram network in Russia.
    Magnitogorsk on the right bank is cleaner and has a much better developed infrastructure than the city on the left bank.
  18. +3
    1 August 2026 20: 33
    And at this critical moment, salvation came from the Soviet foreign trade organization Amtorg, which offered Kahn a contract worth $40 million (approximately $750 million in today's dollars) to design and build a large tractor plant in Stalingrad, which is now known as the Volgograd Tractor Plant (formerly the Stalingrad Tractor Plant).

    Is the author sure it costs $40,000,000? This information is cited in an article from 2010:
    In May 1929, an agreement was signed between the Soviet foreign trade organization Amtorg and the firm Albert Kahn Incorporated for the design and consulting of the construction of a tractor plant in Stalingrad.

    Amtorg's official name, Amtorg Trading Corporation, was the Soviet trade mission authorized to represent in the United States the interests of the Supreme Council of the National Economy and other Soviet bodies with economic interests in America. Established on May 1, 1924, it began operating extensively in early 1925, purchasing equipment and machinery related to the defense industry and supplying the Red Army, as well as attracting necessary specialists.

    For the drawings of the main workshop buildings: mechanical assembly, forging and foundry - this architectural and construction firm was supposed to receive 130 thousand dollars, while at that time each "International" tractor imported from the USA cost 2500 foreign currency rubles.
    1. +6
      2 August 2026 05: 22
      Quote: Vasily_Ostrovsky
      Is the author sure that it costs $40,000,000?
      The author simply relays data from American sources about the construction of a tractor plant. Why American? Because they contain the most dry information, without all this Give it! и Fulfill and exceed! etc. Below are scans from the newspaper The New York Times From 1928, it was reported that thirteen Soviet engineers had arrived to purchase machinery and equipment for a tractor plant under construction, at a cost of $17.5 million. Add the design and construction costs to the cost of the purchased equipment, and you get the approximate cost of the entire plant...

      And one more thing. A. Kahn's firm wasn't just involved in the design; it also supervised all stages of construction and coordinated the work of several dozen contractors.

      A good example. When you build a house, you negotiate only with the company (or the freelancers) that is building it, and you are only interested in the end result - when it will be built and how much it will cost, and you are not at all interested in who digs the foundation, puts on the roof, does the glazing, or installs the water, gas, and electrical systems.The company (moonlighters) with whom you signed a contract is responsible for all of this...

      Just swap the construction of a private home for the construction of a factory. Albert Kahn's firm handled these projects, from the initial design to the factory's completion. Turnkey...
      1. +7
        2 August 2026 19: 59
        I didn’t really want to develop a discussion on this topic, which is not my area of ​​expertise.
        I will try to focus on the first contract with A. Kahn for the design of the Stalingrad Tractor Plant....

        I apologize for the length, but it's worth it.

        I thought the magazine was called "Military Review" and not "American Truth."
        The author provides a detailed, beautiful, three-dimensional picture of the source of Soviet industrialization, in the form of the participation of the American planner A. Kahn, without whom, he (the author) believes, industrialization would not have occurred. However, in my opinion, Kahn's role is portrayed too one-sidedly.

        A. Kahn, of course, made a truly enormous contribution to the development of Soviet industry, and not only Soviet industry—his flow-line design method allowed for the creation of enterprise designs in a few months, or even just one (like the aircraft factory project). This is not a matter of debate. But in describing his role, one must still be objective and honest, and objectivity requires not adhering to the classic Soviet or, similarly, American narrative—both the USSR and the US advanced their ideological lines with equal rigor, albeit with varying degrees of "creativity."

        Today, it is possible to give a completely objective picture of the events and the roles of all participants in that process; many documents and studies on this topic have been published from both sides.
        And the American version lies even more inspiredly than the Soviet one... "Poor Soviets, 1500 draftsmen who never held a pencil in their hands" and other ridiculous myths of that era... This is exactly what the American magazine to which the author of the article refers is about.

        The VO article simply switched from the Soviet version of industrialization to the American version, which did not add credibility to the material.

        Of course, $2 million today is a paltry sum, so to heighten the drama, it needs to be raised to $40 million, and then even $2 billion. This makes an impression on the average person, but the Americans themselves had never heard of such sums at the time... Let me remind you that in that period (the late 1920s), a million dollars was a huge sum...

        What do the facts presented in the documents reveal? Without delving into the history of Soviet industrialization as a whole, I will limit myself to a few considerations regarding the place of A. Kahn's firm as the most prominent and significant in the preparation and implementation of the immediate industrialization plan.

        And we will talk only about the Stalingrad Tractor Plant, the first decision to build which was made in 1925.
        Let's look at what has been said about Albert Kahn's firm from the perspective of documents and historical architectural science.

        This is what researcher Mark Meerovich writes in his article “Albert Kahn in the History of Soviet Industrialization” (Completed with the financial support of a short-term grant in the field of humanities of the American Council of Learned Societies (2008-2009) on the topic: “Albert Kahn in Soviet Industrialization”), in the specialized journal “Arkhitekton” back in 2009, as well as in the article “Albert Kahn and Ernst May: America and Germany in the Struggle for Soviet Industrialization. Parts I and II”,

        and, of course, the article by S.M. Melnikova-Reich (USA) “The Role of an American Architect and Soviet Trade Representative in the Industrialization of the USSR,” published in the “American Yearbook 2014” of the Institute of General History of the Russian Academy of Sciences.

        Of course, the American magazine Architectural Forum (August 1938) was not overlooked; it was entirely dedicated to the work of Albert Kahn and published with Kahn’s personal autograph.

        And of course, there are several publications on electronic resources, including VK, Kommersant Publishing House from June 08.06, 2019, “Tractor, tank, shopping center - How the first Soviet tractor plant was born, lived and died,” and a publication by A.G. Tokarev (publication details - DOI: 10.31675/1607-1859-2019-21-1-85-100 National Research Moscow State University of Civil Engineering) entitled “Stalingrad Tractor Plant - a space of industrialization and constructivism.”

        So, the design contract is listed at $130, while the plant's construction cost is $2 million. I'd like to draw your attention to the quote from Kommersant: "The total contract value, including equipment, was $30 million, of which $4 million was the cost of the factory buildings. In today's dollars, this would amount to approximately $450 million and $60 million, respectively." (That is, a 1:15 ratio.) And in addition, there was a further construction program worth another $2 million. And this was in 1929. Kahn's first visit to the Amtorg office was documented on May 8, 1929, and the contract with Kahn's firm was signed on that date.

        According to Tokarev: "It involved developing a master plan for the plant, the layout of individual buildings, the design of access roads, the power supply, heating, and other interconnected components of a vast industrial complex, arguably the most powerful in the world at the time. In addition to producing the drawings, A. Kahn's firm coordinated the activities of more than 100 American firms, which provided the manufacture and supply of building structures, machine tools, and equipment."

        Kahn's office was responsible for organizing the author's supervision, but Kahn's office was not involved in construction, and it never had the capabilities to do so.

        Again, a quote from Tokarev: "According to Soviet historical data, the main design work for the STZ, both in the early stages (by the team at the Stalingrad branch of Gipromez) and in the final stages, was carried out by domestic specialists. They drafted the design brief, created the preliminary design, and most of the technological design. Only the construction design for the three main workshops was carried out by Albert Kahn Incorporated."
        Ibid.: “The main workshops of the plant were built in the shortest possible time – construction work began in the spring of 1929, was mostly completed by May 1, 1930, and after the installation of equipment, on June 17, 1930, the Stalingrad Tractor Plant named after F.E. Dzerzhinsky was officially put into operation.”

        And another important quote, this time from an article by S.M. Melnikova-Reich (USA), "The Role of the American Architect and Soviet Trade Representative in the Industrialization of the USSR": "On May 8, 1929, Saul Bron and Albert Kahn signed a contract for the construction of a tractor plant in Stalingrad with a design capacity of 20 tractors per year (later increased to 50). Kahn's firm was to prepare preliminary and working drawings, assist in the procurement of materials and equipment, and provide construction with technical personnel, including a chief engineer, foremen, and specialists in utility networks and installation work. The $130 project was intended only for the construction of this plant and remained the property of the company."[i] [/ i].

        Those interested can refer to the publications I mentioned and form a more detailed impression for themselves.
        Once again, I don't intend to provide a detailed analysis; I'm merely drawing the author's attention to the need to provide an objective picture of the role of the American firm and Soviet institutions, while avoiding ideological bias in any direction...
        By the way, why only American ones? We could write about Ernest May, and about the Soviet architectural "general" V.A. Vesnin, and about Anatoly Stepanovich Fisenko, the chief architect of Gosproektstroy, and many others...
        But that's another story...
        1. +3
          3 August 2026 08: 20
          I apologize for the length, but it's worth it.
          Very often, without "long windings" it is impossible to understand the essence, unless of course the goal is objectivity and not hype.
  19. +5
    1 August 2026 20: 47
    I once listened to an American economist, I think. He said that if the Soviet Union had held out through the 1990s, for five or six years, the West would have been hit by a crisis worse than the 1930s. And the Soviet Union could have profited handsomely from it. Modernization, for example. But the young communists, led by Gorbachev, destroyed the Soviet Union, and the West survived the crisis, acquiring mineral wealth for next to nothing and eliminating its economic and political opponent. The cycle of capitalist history, it seemed, offered a chance, but what happened, happened. The chance didn't become an advance...
    1. +1
      3 August 2026 11: 43
      Yes, there were such words. They were even around before the 90s. There were even articles about it here... I forgot the last name... But who listened back then? They wanted to make a profit quickly.
  20. +4
    2 August 2026 06: 31

    For the Soviet leadership, the Great Depression turned out to be a gift of fate and a unique “window of opportunity.”
    ...which it utilized more than fully. It's scary to think what would have happened to us if today's (in)effective managers had been at the helm of the state back then...
  21. Fat
    +7
    2 August 2026 19: 59
    Note: Gosproektstroy designed all Soviet ball bearing factories and all metallurgical plants.

    Except for GPZ-2.
    The production was established as the Swedish bearing company "Ball Bearing SKF", the buildings were built in Moscow in 1916, the founders were E. L. Nobel and A. F. Cherberg.
  22. 0
    9 August 2026 23: 00
    Quote: your1970
    Quote: Reptiloid
    The question is who's paying for it. If the state paid for it, then it's free for the public.

    Margaret Thatcher: "There is no 'government money', there is only taxpayer money."(WITH).

    This maxim cannot in any way describe the situation in the USSR, where the people were the owners of everything, managing the assets of the state apparatus, and where the owner, the workforce, and the state administration were inextricably linked, one and the same.