An-148 – Retaining Industrial Capacity

Ukrainian company Antonov, formerly a powerhouse of Soviet aviation industry, has recently launched its new An-148 regional passenger jet model. The technical details of the jet should be better left to specialists, while the aspects of the industrial cluster management are of interest from a knowledge-management prospective.

During the planning, development and production of An-148 many problems emerged with the broken links in supply chain stemming from Soviet times. Many enterprises were not operational anymore, most have long been privatised, Russian companies are now abroad etc. Some of the lost ground was regained, and as a result a new model An-148 emerged. But just a quick look on the site of Antonov gives a fairly good idea that the production methods are quite old and there is not a single sight of any online platforms for suppliers unlike what Airbus provides at its site. It leads to certain observations:

1. Rebuilding and creating supply chains on new terms - ability to forge back together broken supply chains to build an odd couple of jets is commendable but it will bring better results if new innovative methods of managing suppliers will be introduced, with locally developed IT solutions.
2. Antonov could and should rally suppliers, individual specialists and those interested in aviation technologies around its web site. Developing communities of practice, knowledge databanks, conducting competitions and engaging in constant exchange of information, at least in Russian speaking Internet audience, could strengthen role of the company as an emerging pole of reference in aviation industry.
3. Using knowledge as a competitive advantage – Airbus and Boing, two giants of the worlds aviation industry, are making inroads in the former USSR aviation industry with the strategic alliances and subcontracting (Russia recently courting for EADS stake). Keeping focus on knowledge gained during exploitation of new An models in countries of former USSR could slowly strengthen position of Antonov as a company. Ukraine, as any CEE country outside Russia, is in desperate need of national champions. Only by utilizing exclusive knowledge smartly, Antonov stands a chance to transform itself to such a champion on the back of the strongest growth in the region in years.

Ingenuity within lack of sophistication

One of the main differences between the former USSR and its former rivals, mainly USA and Western Europe, was the consumer abundace in the later and total scarcity of anything that makes life more comforable in the later (so called defitsyty). The brainless experiments of bolsheviks on erasing culture from public life and disfigured appreciation of beauty have depressed the natural zeast of humans for beauty in the things surrounding them (what Western Europe have developed and preserved). The consumeristic society’s lavish abundance was a distant dream (what States have elevated to such a high level).

Under such conditions, the process of inventing things and creating knowledge differed significantly. I am not aware of any research on the subject (please suggest if you know). But identifying this process and defining how people were able to come up with great things in USSR is something worth puzzling about:

• Firstly, in the former Soviet Union there is something about the cult of suffering, – what many people in the West would consider as a suffering and torture, people in the East of Europe are actually find interesting pasture times. Take mushroom hunting or berry picking – favourite weekend activity of many people. These are quite physcially demanding activities, with a stint of extreme sports (eg being lost in the forest). But solitude brings great ideas forward, and one gets all the time of the day to talk to friends who went along to the forest. Can it be that physical hardship make you long for better and inevitably come up with great inventions?
• Secondly, the apprehension of inevitable lack of things push humans to invent things to fill in the void. For instance, if you know that you will not be able to get new car in the next 10 years, you will have to invent things to make the one you have last for next 10 years at least. No wonders half of cars in early 90-ties in former USSR looked like coming straight from the shelves of the DIY shop. For Westerns it is an object of jokes, for myself – an object of marvel for engineering skills of ordinary people.
• Thirdly, the unavoidable honor of being a part of the group – in Soviet time, one would get an assignment to work for a plant or a research institute and that would be pretty much your life path and life assignment. People had to learn how to create groups, to tresure them and how to hate-and-love your colleagues. Combinations of most unmatchable types often prove to bring best sparkles of ideas. And group was a confinement for grievances, expressing disagreements for small societal tresons of social order. There was pretty much no way to move on or to compete with someone openly in scientific excellence. The group defined options.

Could there be lessons learned? Could there possible be a Soviet-style innovation sessions – with 2-months pasture time, in groups of very different people working with LADA-like toolkit to create its hydrogen equivalent? It feels that with the onslaught of typical consumeristic society on post-USSR terrain, the initial romance of invention is disappearing. The specific combination of time, space, people and minimum resources, – could this be a Soviet innovation model? Or am I trying to coin an oxymoron?

Innovation from the military

It might be of interest to non-Slavic speaking readers to know about the slow but steady revival of the military complex innovation in post-Soviet countries. Why does it matter for knowledge economy, you may ask. For decades, the so called military complex was the vehicle behind the innovation in this part of the world. Often, under the disguise of the military equipment, the researchers were carrying their fundamental or applied research activities, not quite directly related to the needs of the army. The USSR collapsed and a lot of innovation processes and systems collapsed with it.

Just yesterday, the Ukrainian Ministry of Defense announced the upgrade and enlisting of the AN-26 based air-born command center. Anotonov-26 used to be a mainstream of the military aviation of the Socialist block. Now Antonov and Aviant have installed equipment able to support communication between different army units, fully integrated into the existing communication platform of all units and kinds and capable of resisting any kind of modern communication supression technologies. If this kind of technology could also be adapted to ensure communication during the natural and athropogenic disasters – this could be of help to all CEE countries – AN-26 are ubiquous and could be re-fitted for this purpose. Something for Science and Techonology Center to explore?

By any means new innovative products coming from the military are only welcome – it means people working for those enterprises are slowly start to acquire back lost lust for innovation.