Month wants to expand the Virgin Lands campaign rather than intensify
Month is also interested in improving soil quality.
Good topsoil health is key to water management (as dying topsoil loses water faster than healthy topsoil), yield and crop quality. And increasing the amount of topsoil, as Month wants to do, is pretty much the only method of carbon burial that works.
Plus, thicker, healthier topsoil makes the country more resistant to drought, which is still something that could clobber our agricultural sector.
That said, expanding the Virgin Lands scheme isn't good, and I am not sure what the balance between Month's "better topsoil" and "chop down that forest and plow it baby" sides is.
Because for as much as destroying Siberian wetlands might be an issue, so is the Aral disappearing, as it happened OTL and will happen TTL (much earlier as well, since uh, we made some dams that are very good for electricity and agriculture, but not so good for the Aral lets say). Also, its cool and it effectively gives us two free infra dice.
The Siberian wetlands are a far larger and more important ecoregion than the Aral, which has dried up several times in the recent past and which we are working hard to turn into a toxic lake through pesticide, herbicide and fertilizer over-use draining into it (where it then has nowhere to go).
Also, the way to save the Aral is to
change what's being grown. Diverting Siberia's rivers into Central Asia will just encourage our ministry to widen the war against nature with these additional resources, and grow even more cotton, care even less about fixing leaks and evaporation losses, and so on.
The core problem of the OTL Soviet Union, which we do occasionally manage to escape in this quest, is of trying to solve problems by throwing ever more resources at the problem. Eventually it won't matter if we are efficiently moving all of Siberia's water to places where we can manage "further intensification" - if we don't solve the core problem, we'll just have an even bigger problem after we've wasted a whole bunch of resources.
I like this idea! The Volga is our smallest River Reversal project and the one place where doing it patches a slowly bleeding sore (lowering water levels in a very important shipping route) rather than trying to build a whole new water system we could life without. Doing this least harmful option to show SupSov we're not cowards, and then pointing to the damage it does in Russia to show them that doing it elsewhere is totally not worth it, sounds like it's worth a shot at least!
Well, in OTL the river reversal projects were what sparked Soviet environmentalism. However, in OTL it was a rather nationalist environmentalism. Great Russian nationalism might be something we don't want to poke.
And that is assuming that it mobilizes an environmentalist movement.
I say this as someone who is tentatively in favour of the Volga re-plumbing because I am an optimist, so I am sharing the ways I second-guess myself.
Development work directly derived from the R16 missile system has proceeded at a good pace as the storable mass-produced hypergolics have been preferred for the program. Despite some raising concerns over fuel toxicity and the issues of production a cheap missile that is already in production is significantly better than more complex systems. The army for its part has steadily ramped up production of next-generation missile systems leaving a surplus of hardware and older systems that can be refitted for satellite launches. The largest question of the development program is one of refitting the missile systems for conventional use as several modifications in guidance and payload systems are needed to bring a production R16 or R16U to the standards of a light booster.
Recycling military surplus as light launch vehicles isn't too shabby.
Working closely with enterprises both domestically and abroad has immediately yielded an increase in orders and importantly a recovery of the prestige of the program. Several dozen want to launch some form of payload or other for media coverage or even novel scientific purposes. CMEA-based payload engineering has steadily increased in scale with several socialist allies working towards increasing the accessibility of space. Further launches are only just expected to saturate the number of RLA cores produced but that alone represents a major improvement in domestic industry and further savings from mass production.
That we're actually about to max out on RLA utilization is really good news for the economics of our launch industry.
Also sounds like the commercial launch going well saved us from worse political fallout from the Intercosmos critfail.
The first coordinated manned launch of a crew to a month-long flight in a VA-PKA has gone poorly with the booster experiencing a failure almost immediately off the pad. The operation of the abort system has saved the crew but the political outcome of the rocket directly exploding in front of several international observers has been negative. Criticism has immediately fallen on the program with a Supreme Soviet-launched investigation started almost a day later. The effective cause of the accident was the wear-down of a single part in the engine, effectively a routine error but it still has caused several expensive and challenging inspections.
This is SO much better than I feared. A rocket blowing up with no casualties is embarrassing, but just embarrassing.
With the increases in labor costs the necessity of building new mostly automated lines has become inherent to the drive for more domestic appliances. Firm competition from Japanese exports has already made the market challenging with local enterprises focusing on reliability and part commonality to overcome the continued pressure. As long as sufficiently cheap labor can be supplied along with cheap energy and inputs the process itself is expected to stay considerably profitable as production increases. At this point between state expansion and incentive funds, most of the domestic demand for appliances has been met with only a mildly negative overall external trade balance.
This implies alot more trade with Japan than there was in OTL, which is interesting.
____________
As far as the personnel we need to pick, let's look at the options here:
[]Alexander Gavrilovich Kogutenko: Senior systems designer for unmanned payloads and the effective engineer behind the program for Lunar landings. The man himself is a dependable veteran who despite working under Glushko for so long has refused his excesses. He has little experience in working directly on lower propulsion phases but the more centralized structure along with the consolidation of the OKBs into a more unified program should more than compensate for direct deficiencies. Upper payloads are the new technical frontier and that is unlikely to change in the next decade.
[]Boris Alekseevich Rodionov: Practically a direct inheritor of Korelev's after the man's retirement Rodionov is an effective continuation and one of the more innovative minds of the program. He lacks Glushko's unchecked ambition preferring to work with near-earth manned systems and continue the development of orbit instead of chasing after unattainable goals. His movement would effectively merge Energia into the space program rather than the inverse, allowing a new bureaucracy to form and minimizing unnecessary influence on general spending.
[]Alexey Andreevich Borisenko: Tightly coupled with Glushko and the rising personage in Energia and a core director of engine production for the RLA. His biases and good work history are at least a known factor and he can easily function as a less connected and less problematic head compared to Glushko himself. One of the few candidates with theoretical designs to pursue he has been one of the outspoken advocates for nuclear and exotic propulsion, his ascension might cause political problems but further technical improvements are going to be necessary to put crew onto the moon or possibly even around Venus and Mars.
In rocketry we have a probe man, a manned program guy and a nuclear rocket guy.
The probe man and nuclear rocket man are from Glushko's organization, and would lead to Glushko's organization effectively absorbing the others. Especially nuclear rocket man, who seems to be Glushko's heir apparent.
Manned program guy is the freshest broom of the bunch.
So what are our goals?
If we choose probe guy, that fits well with our current goal to push forward electronics with space program money. He may keep nuclear engines as an option for the outer planets, but that may be hoping for too much. The low amount of experience and focus on making good payloads probably bodes ill for any hopes for reuseability also.
If we go with Mr. manned program, we get an innovative mind, a more meaningful re-organization of the program, but at least in relative terms, a pivot away from our very successful unmanned efforts towards a space station. Almost certainly, we'd loose any option to develop nuclear drives, since they're low utility for activity close to Earth. We'll need to ramp up our manned efforts eventually though. I wonder if that innovative mind might give us a shot at reuseable first stages?
If we go for nuclear engine guy, we keep the nuclear engines as an option for sure, may have more proposals to develop ion drives, which would help with satellite longevity (but which may come up under probe guy as well). Borisenko's experience with the RLA's main engine might make him a good bet for pushing forwards towards reuseability.
There's reasons to go for all of these fellows, Kogutenko (probe guy) is probably the most conservative pick relative to the policies that we the players have favoured. I am unenthused, but he'd probably be fine.
I am curious about what might be in the mystery box of Rodionov. Last time we picked a program chief, we went with a boring option in Glushko and steered clear of the more innovative Korolev and Chelomei. I am not a big fan of focusing our efforts on low Earth orbit however. I favour spreading our efforts on many smaller programs to build experience and capability on a broad front.
Borisenko appeals to me the most. Accessing space in 1970 is still largely a problem of rocket engineering, and better rockets will enable interesting payloads. I'd like to get the RLA upgraded incrementally over the next decade or so to make it a real Falcon 9 come early. Borisenko seems like the man for the job. I am also keen to get a small nuclear engine deployed. The nuclear drives remain the one area where we may be behind the Americans and would revolutionize our probe programs and open up the moon to low-cost missions.
That his entry speaks of manned missions to Mars or Venus shouldn't put us off. Borisenko will be long retired by the time we're ready to consider a Mars mission (which if we doubled our funding, we could do after about 20 years of feaverishly building up our experience of doing manned things in space for long time periods). The long journey times of a Mars mission and the needs for a mission to be able to deal with emergencies a year out from help from Earth mean we'd need a long space station program to build experience. Nuclear engines don't change that. A flyby of Venus is more doable - it's a couple months travel time and basically Apollo levels of cost and difficulty. However, with our unmanned probes doing as well as they are, actually flying men around Venus would be clear showboating and thus I don't see it as being likely that we'll recieve any political pressure to do such a thing. The Supreme Soviet has to pretend they're doing things for the good of the ordinary worker.
Also, considering Glushko's cult of personality, removing the man and reorganizing the program around the closest thing he has to an heir should be minimally disruptive.
______________
On to agriculture, first let's look at the current deputy:
Deputy: Igor Alexandrovich Skachkov(1961): A advocate for the massive intensification of agriculture through updated practices and increasing chemicalization, Skachkov is conventional and typical of much of the agronomy sector. Improved cultivars with a wider range of fertilizer response, improved herbicides, advanced pesticides, and an increase in fertilizer use are expected to solve every issue of land and water efficiency. Massive production increases are expected to be necessary to keep the gain going with both the extraction of conventional fractions and an increase in nitrogen fixation belived to be necessary. Far more a conventional agronomist then Smolin, the two are expected to significantly compliment each other.
Oh yeah, the guy is nuts for fertilizers and poisons.
Such was the Green Revolution built on, but we are likely getting close to the point of declining returns, with work on new pesticides and herbicides mostly being a case of replacing old poisons with better poisons (for human purposes).
I'm not keen to make this fellow minister on his own merits, and considering some of the options for deputy we have, I am doubly unkeen on promoting him.
[]Advance Skachkov: Skachkov may be a Voznesensky appointment and technically politically unreliable but he is the most qualified for the post. He is mostly uninvolved in the previous problems with corruption and while strongly disagreeing with Smolin has not done anything excessively petty about it. Moving him up would almost certainly ingratiate the man and ensure that the ministry can keep to meritocratic rather than political promotions.
[]Pyotr Andreevich Paskar: Experienced with managing technical agricultural development in Moldova to the point of taking charge of general agriculture. His plans for revolutionizing local agriculture and intensifying mechanization are mostly centered around heavier and more capable mechanisms, improving the output of state farms. He is partially a political candidate but has enough experience in agriculture with a graduate degree in agronomy. His current proposals call for an expanded drive towards improving the available lands, minimizing water use through intensification, and a strong increase in chemical production.
[]Valentin Karpovich Month: One of the core Moscow-based agronomists that initially raised yields with local crops before being re-assigned to areas of agricultural breakthrough. The driver of the largest campaign under the old Virgin Lands scheme for developments in Altai and the Northern Kazakh SSR. He has demonstrated improvements in agriculture on poor soils and is one of the leading political figures driving a further campaign toward finding and making new high-grade soils through the taming of nature.
[]Ringaudas Bronislovas Songaila: The current minister of Lithuanian agriculture and one of the men responsible for increasing production well over previous standards. Effectively entirely conventional in approach and senior enough for the post he'd be an effective continuation of current policies if with a tendency to prefer chemicalization over mechanization. Songalia has published several works on the necessity of water control for the development of agriculture and is expected to take work in a similar direction. Close work with the chemical industry will be essential for further modernization, allowing Balakirev to at least gain some experience on combined projects.
Here I favor Paskar (his focus on minimizing water use is good, making better use of lands currently under the plow rather than expanding the farmed area is also good) followed by Skachkov for pure political reasons. Showing the ministry to be meritocratic isn't the worst thing. I have hopes for Month, who might be more interested in improving soil than he is in clearing more virgin lands. But I am not sure that voting for a candidate based on hope is a great idea.
[]Keep Skachkov: Avoiding promoting the Voznesensky appointment and simply outlasting him is a viable option as he is going to be retiring by the start of the next plan. Skachkov may be politically disagreeable but he's far from the worst and at least willing to go along with higher priorities. Avoiding promoting him can give some cause for agitation but even that is expected to be mild. (No Change to Dice)
[]Ivan Afanasyevich Bondarenko: Chief agrologist of the Rostov area and one of the leading figures of the luxury agricultural program. He has tirelessly advocated for a strong increase in meat and luxury fruit production in place of imports and for improving domestic supplies through stronger feedback mechanisms. He has further pushed for a general increase in agricultural initiative on all levels, effectively separating the operation of both enterprises and farms from anything outside market mechanisms, favoring control at the purchasing point. (Option to move two Ag Dice Away)
[]Nikolai Fedorovich Vasiliev: One of the core drivers of radical projects towards fixing severe water issues that are present and providing a degree of protection against super floods. He posits that the largest question and problem facing Soviet agriculture is not one of chemicalization or mechanization but of consistency of water access and the construction of more reservoirs. Advocating for a line of general intensification through the construction of several cascades he effectively wishes to finally address water scarcity in the Southern Union. (Dams use 2 Ag Dice First)
Vasiliev will be a disaster. He's right about the importance of water access and combatting drought of course, but I have no confidence he will use reasonable methods to attain his aim. And even less confidence in his fans on the threadviet. If we decided to promote Skachkov, Bondarenko seems like he'd at least be... Alright. More initiative of course will let the state farms get up to more shennanigans, but also less engineers from Moscow telling ordinary farmers what to do.
______________
With regards to heavy industry:
[]Vladimir Vladimirovich Grabin: One of the rapidly promoted managerial staff that managed to rapidly recover and turn towards immense profitability in the aftermath of the Gorky crisis. Grabin turned a dedicated enterprise for the production of heavy machinery towards profitability while achieving a massive increase in yield, leaving him as one of the strongest proponents of intensive modernization. With a graduate degree in process engineering though few publications in favor of administrative work he is both qualified and capable of managing the broader industry.
[]Grigor Sergeevich Karapetyan: One of the technical pioneers of the Sevastopol plant's integrated process with further experience in the electronics industry a further focus on modernization is almost certain to involve increased computerization. An electrical engineer rather than a directly applicable profession, a wealth of experience working with early NC machinery along with more refined systems with Elbrus units predisposes him well to a focus on general modernization. He also remains one of the few advocates for the transition of factory labor towards more automated forms, increasing efficiency and freeing labor for intellectual pursuits.
[]Yuri Ivanovich Lomakin: A process engineer who rose rapidly through managerial positions after exemplary mid-level work at the Barrikady plant and further efforts towards the production of petrochemical equipment. Lomakin advocates for a sharp increase in energy production along with the program of the electrification of industries to improve efficiency and throughput. The struggle for energy security and energy in general is only accelerating and having a minister directly experienced with equipment production can help. Already Lomakin has proposed a strong plan to more than double grid increases through new power sources to decisively overtake the Americans.
Lomakin, as I've mentioned before, sounds like someone too focused on overtaking the US just for the sake of having a bigger number. Super not a fan.
Grabin sounds fine, but I favour Karapetyan. Pressing forward with modernization is just part of the Red Queen's race.
So my vote for now is:
[X]Alexey Andreevich Borisenko
[X]Pyotr Andreevich Paskar
[X]Keep Skachkov
[X]Grigor Sergeevich Karapetyan
Regards,
fasquardon
.
