4
$\begingroup$

It's easy to say in retrospect that the USSR's Sputnik 1 was just a dumb radio transmitter that didn't actually do anything useful.

However, it also stands to reason that putting that same "dumb radio transmitter" into Earth orbit and keeping it there for a while demonstrated a number of technological feats that had not been done previously.

What scientific and technological advances occured as a direct result of the work that culminated in the launch and operation of Sputnik 1? How did specifically Sputnik 1 contribute to each of those?

Improve this question
$\endgroup$
3
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @called2voyage No need to apologize for suggesting improvements! I'm basically trying to capture some of the things mentioned in comments over on space.stackexchange.com/q/5278/415 and answers. I edited the question to broaden it slightly. (The "direct result of" is intended to limit the question in scope so we don't get "well, we went to the Moon and shoved New Horizons in the direction of Pluto because of it" as an answer...) $\endgroup$
    – user
    Apr 7, 2016 at 20:42
  • $\begingroup$ It was the beginning of the end of one technology, the nuclear powered airplane. But it triggered bomb shelter development... $\endgroup$
    – LocalFluff
    Apr 8, 2016 at 11:24
  • $\begingroup$ Originally, the first Sputnik was planned to be a 1000—1400 kg spacecraft with 200—300 kg of scientific equipment. But its development faced delays and simple payload (as we know it) was sent instead in order to be the first. Quote from Korolev's letter to Soviet government: "There are reports that in relation to the International Geophysical Year, the United States intend to launch a satellite in 1958. We risk losing priority. I propose instead of a complex laboratory (object "D") to launch a simple satellite into space." $\endgroup$
    – Sergiy Lenzion
    Jan 2, 2020 at 11:38

1 Answer 1

Reset to default
4
$\begingroup$

First off, Sputnik 1 was when space travel went from being "just a theory" to being an actual thing. The difference is huge, do you not see a lot of theories about future technologies here and there? Can all of them be true? No matter people where sceptical to the concept of space travel.

Secondly, the successful launch saved Korolev's ass. The head designer og the Soviet Rocket program had great visions for space. However, the military wanted missiles, and nothing but that. (even ICBMs where questioned for their actual usefulness as weapons). One can truly say that he went quite far, launching the last attempt to get Sputnik into orbit after he got an order from Moscow to "stop it". When the satellite was successful, everything was of course forgiven. Finally getting the space program a budget in the Soviet Union, can indeed be said to have been the start of the amazing technological progression that was the spacerace.

Nothing is guaranteed to work until you test it!
A for-real test of an orbital rocket is an experience that can not be replaced. If that is not what you are interested in, and strictly mean the probe itself, it was indeed a simple design, featuring very limited instrumentation. Apart from "the components used did not break", the role of the Sputnik 1 was merely to pave the way for the following series of much more sophisticated Sputnik satellites.

Improve this answer
$\endgroup$

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service and acknowledge that you have read and understand our privacy policy and code of conduct.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.