Reprints     Printer-Friendly    Email this Article    RSS        Font Size     What's This?

[Web Exclusive]

Engineering Sputnik



Kristina Fiore  |   ED Online ID #17184  |   October 3, 2007

Article Rating:

While Sputnik’s steady stream of radio-signal beeps broadcast the Soviet’s early prowess in space exploration, the creation of the first man-made satellite had long remained a state secret.

On the 50th anniversary of Sputnik's launch, the world knows much more about the satellite's engineering — from the development of ballistic missiles and the construction of the 180-pound antennaed orb to the ego of state scientists and politicians.

“We learn [the engineering details] much later,” says Anthony Curtis, professor of mass communication at the University of North Carolina at Pembroke and author of several books on Space. “That’s why [the Soviets] accomplished a number of firsts — because they were so secretive, because they were pushing ahead even before [the official] Space Race.”

Sputnik 1 was launched Oct. 4, 1957 atop an intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM), evidence that the Space Race was actually born of the weapons race. The satellite was 23 inches in diameter and circled the earth every 98 minutes, relaying a 20MHz to 40MHz radio wave signal via a one-watt transmitter.

Its “chief designer” was Sergei Korolev, head of the Soviet spaceflight program — though some researchers say a different scientist was the quiet brain of the operation.

“The unacknowledged saint is Mikhail Tikhonravov, who really devised Sputnik,” says William E. Burrows, professor of journalism at New York University and also an author of several books on the Space Age.

“Korolev gets all the credit because he designed the first intercontinental ballistic missile,” that launched Sputnik into orbit, Curtis says. “[Tikhonravov] is obscured because Korolev became the renowned figure in the engineering world.”

There’s no doubt Korolev’s ICBMs were vital to getting Sputnik off the ground. The Soviets had been hard at work on versions of German V-2 ballistic missiles, and began engineering the R-7 in 1954. A liquid-fuel engine powered the 111-foot, 300-ton rocket.

At the time, Tikhonravov was hard at work on a study regarding the feasibility of spaceflight — the evidence Korolev needed to have his dreams of spaceflight actualized. Opportunity came when Soviet leader Nikita Khrushchev figured out that launching the first satellite could flex the U.S.S.R.’s political muscles.

Khrushchev gave the space program the ok in January 1956, promising to launch a satellite during the newly-instated “international geophysical year,” a worldwide scientific collaboration to study earth from 1957 to 1958.

Korolev and Tikhonravov went to work on “Object D,” a large satellite that was ultimately replaced since they feared they couldn’t complete it quickly enough. Tikhonravov suggested creating a satellite that was “a little lighter and a little simpler,” and Sputnik was born.

Its main task would be to identify the density of high atmospheric layers and provide data on radio-signal distribution in the ionosphere.

With the first successful launch of the R-7 ballistic missile on Aug. 21, 1957, the Soviets prepared for a Sept. 17 launch to honor the 100th anniversary of the birth of Konstantin Tsiolkovsky, the father of Russian spaceflight. Tsiolkovsky, a schoolteacher, devised theories that laid the groundwork for the Soviet space program.

The launch didn’t go off that day, but on Oct. 4, 1957, Sputnik lifted off at 10:28 pm Moscow time. Within an hour-and-a-half, the beep-beep-beep of Sputnik’s radio transmitter could be picked up by anyone from government agencies to amateur ham operators.

“Americans were horrified,” Curtis says. “It really squashed our ego.”

Yet it stroked the egos of the Soviet scientists, however quietly: their identity would remain secret, even when organizations as prestigious as the Nobel Prize Committee inquired. Khrushchev refused to identify such valuable members of his regime.

“[The Soviets] were desperately afraid that the CIA would kill [Korolev],” Burrows says. “And you have to remember, [the engineers involved] were every bit as egotistical as Hollywood stars today.”

Nikita Khrushchev’s son Sergei Khrushchev said his father kept the identity secret to soothe some of the ego. If the scientists thought Korolev was getting all the credit, they might refuse to work with him, which would be detrimental to the space program, Sergei Khrushchev wrote in an editorial.

“A well-organized team would collapse like a house of cards, and the hopes for future space research and missile design would be dashed,” he wrote.

As Korolev, Tikhonravov, and a team of other state scientists went unsung, Sputnik continued beeping for about three weeks after its launch, until its silver-zinc batteries ran out. The little silver ball burned up while reentering the atmosphere on Jan. 4, 1958, but its beeps rang in the ears of U.S. citizens for much longer.

Its call set off the Space Race, raising national awareness of science and thrusting scores of people into successful engineering careers. Those engineers would go on to send humans to the moon, set up an International Space Station, and forge other accomplishments initially made possible by some of the U.S.S.R.’s best-kept secrets.




Reprints     Printer-Friendly    Email this Article    RSS        Font Size     What's This?


  • In EDA, A Year Of Mergers, Failed And Otherwise
  • 2008 BEST Electronic Design Winners
  • Engineers Rely On Internet For Product Info
  • Rochester Electronics Establishes New Design and Technology Group
  • November 17, 2008
  • Custom Sources Light Way To 22-nm IC Lithography
  • Software Turns Scopes Into Vector RF Signal Analyzers
  • Couple’s $15 Million Gift Advances Rice Engineering Education
    1) Behind The Bright Lights, LED Drivers Evolve To Meet New Requirements
    (820 views today)
    2) Build A Smart Battery Charger Using A Single-Transistor Circuit
    (296 views today)
    3) Ten Top Design Skills For Tough Times
    (256 views today)
    4) Easily Convert Decimal Numbers To Their Binary And BCD Formats
    (170 views today)
    5) Consumer Electronics Series: AMD Live! Home Cinema Platform
    (148 views today)
    ALL TOP 20







    Reader Comments

    I read your article with interest because, a number of years ago, we had a guest lecture in our Department by Prof. Konstantin I. Gringauz who was part of the Sputnik I design team. I believe his next stop was at Goddard Spaceflight Center.

    As I recall, one of his anecdotes was that they were unsure what transmitting frequency to use. Their concern was that just as the Ionosphere bounces radio waves around the world, it might hinder transmissions from above penetrating downward. They finally decided to proceed in spite of that concern. The next consideration was what would be the best frequency from the point of view of getting the satellite's signal heard by receivers all around the world. Their decision was to pick a frequency that was tunable by generally-available amateur radio receivers. The political objective of having the signal heard widely was primary. The scientific objective of "studying radio propagation" was a cover story.

    Walter Pinkus -December 05, 2007

    What? No mention of the massive efforts by the US State department and military to prevent Von Braun from launching a satellite 18-24 months earlier?

    And whatever the official story, the primary function of Spunik was a propaganda victory--which the US government WANTED the USSR to have in order to ensure that space would become international territory--had we orbited a satellite first the Soviets would have bitterly and loudly complained about us violating "their" air space as they complained about surveillance overflights by the US program (many of which were on the edge of where the invisible line demarcating "space" exists, and many of which did not actually paas over Soviet territory.

    By permitting the Soviets to orbit a satellite over many other countries without dispute, the international character of space was secured--permitting us to orbit surveillance satellites over the entire planet. And our electronics capabilities were far advanced over the Soviets, especially in power consumption and mass--the 2 most important factors in satellite design.

    The propaganda "victory" also enabled the US to greatly increase funding for the space program because being "beaten" caused the average American peasant to be willing to spend more tax money to try and "beat the Russians" at the next stage.

    If von Braun had been permitted to launch when he wanted to, space should have become yet another territorial bone in the international fight over resources, the military would have had more difficulty getting funding for their space projects and there would have been no "civilian" space program.

    Without a major investment in space engineering, many of the advances in micro-electronics would have been delayed considerably due to lack of any crying need for them.

    We might also been involved in a "hot" war with the Soviets in the early 60's instead of a "cold" war.

    Sputnik enabled the Soviets to show that they not only had nuclear weapons (having exploded their first hydrogen bomb only a three years earlier.

    The combination made it possible for the US government (Eisenhower's Military-Industrial-Legislative Complex) to present the USSR as a plausible threat--something that the MILC required to enable them to keep siphoning millions to billions of dollars into their pockets from the taxpayers. If the USSR were not a plausible threat, there could be no real reason to maintain a huge standing army or continue massive weapons development programs.

    Like all heavily pushed technological projects, the primary driver behind Sputnik and the space race was to maintain the power of those in control, other results were (and are) secondary.

    Nearly all such projects have a degree of "blackness" to them which not only enables the details to be kept secret from possible enemies, but permits the details to be kept secret from those paying the bills. (Of course, over the summer many terabytes of classified technical data found its way to the Chinese--probably our most viable threat.) The smart thing to do at this point would be to release that data to all of our allies and remove much of the advantage that China receives by having the data. This will not happen.

    And part of maintaining power is to control money. (Remember that GE licensed their process to manufacture silicon carbide for tooling to German industrial companies before and during WWII--and made a profit for themselves of nearly $300 per pound on their sales to the military and industrial war plants of this strategic material. (Their cost of manufacture was in the neighborhood of $6/pound.) The same was and is true of most large industrial companies today.

    Note that 16 months ago MIT announced that a researcher had discovered a way to reduce the cost of refining titanium by 90%, as a result, titanium prices DOUBLED over the past year and DOW just announced that they were RAISING prices on titanium oxide "in order to help control rising prices of raw materials."

    Titanium is, of course, a strategic material, who's main cost factor has been the refining cost--cutting 90% of the refining cost ought to drop the price considerably--titanium is 8 times more abundant than copper. Will prices fall as the new refining technology is adopted? I'll give 5 to one odds that it won't, that they will actually RAISE prices as the cost of production drops.

    Note that while skanky, none of these activities is actually illegal.

    Technology is a good thing, it is probably the ability to create new technology which has repeatedly saved our species from major problems over the centuries. But technology is not developed in a vacuum. Technology is developed at the behest of those in control, and limited where they don't want it to be developed (see Japan's restrictions on firearms, or China's withdrawal from becoming a major intercontinental empire.)

    As scientists, engineers and technologists, we need to remain aware of the political and economic implications of our work. Technology is the ability to make tools, and those tools are neutral and can be used for either good or ill purposes. The same electronics used for remote control toys are restricted from shipment to the middle east because they can also be used to create weapons systems which cannot be easily jammed or overridden.

    Since the US military has begun using armed robotic aircraft (with remote operators,) it will only be a very short time before we start giving such devices the ability to make kill decisions without the operator. Such will first be implemented in creating "no man's lands" areas where the machines will be permitted to destroy anything that is man-sized or larger and moves within it's GPS coordinate range.

    I expect that this is already being done on a test basis in Iraq, and will be admitted to by the military within the next 36 months.

    Once we start allowing our machines to kill us on their own decision, where will we go?

    Charles M. Barnard -November 05, 2007

    Rating Only

    Rating Only -October 03, 2007   (Article Rating: )

    POST YOUR COMMENTS HERE

    Name:

    Email:
    Rate this article:

     less useful more useful 
    1
    2
    3
    4
    5
    Your Comments:

    Enter the text from the image below




    Please refresh the page if you have trouble reading this text.
     
     

    PartFinder

    Find real-time pricing, stock status, same-day/next-day shipping options and more. Brought to you by Digi-Key. Go to PartFinder.    
    GlobalSpec

    PART SEARCH :
    Powered by: GlobalSpec - The Engineering Search Engine
    Sponsored Links

    Electronic Design Europe Electronic Design China EEPN Power Electronics Auto Electronics Microwaves & RF
    Mobile Dev & Design Schematics Find Power Products Military Electronics EE Events Related Resources