Slashdot Mirror
First Weather Satellite Launched 50 Years Ago
stinkbomb writes "Fifty years ago today, the world's first weather satellite lifted off from Cape Canaveral, Fla., and opened a new and exciting dimension in weather forecasting. Top leaders from NOAA and NASA hailed the milestone as an example of their agencies' strong partnership and commitment to flying the best satellites today and beyond."
New parachute-like devices are being proposed that create more drag for spent rockets and satellites so that they come down sooner:
http://dvice.com/archives/2010/03/cubesail-parach.php
It won't work for lost parts and collision debris, but it's a start.
Table-ized A.I.
Its harder to get good photographs of weather at high latitudes because you either have to do it from high altitude and an oblique angle, or from low altitude in a high inclination orbit. Doing it that way you get two passes at the most per day.
Also, maybe they did have weather satellites but the data wasn't released to civilians because high altitude photography was considered secret.
http://michaelsmith.id.au
They were a bit ahead early on, but not by that much. Here's an incomplete timeline of some firsts:
October 1957: Sputnik 1, first satellite [USSR]
November 1957: Sputnik 2, first space capsule capable of sustaining life (contained a dog) [USSR]
January 1958: Explorer 1, first U.S. satellite, first to carry scientific instruments [USA]
March 1958: Vanguard 1, first solar-powered satellite [USA]
May 1958: Sputnik 3, first Soviet satellite to carry scientific instruments (but tape recorder failed, so collected no data) [USSR]
December 1958: Project SCORE, first communications satellite [USA]
February 1959: Vanguard 2, first weather satellite (though didn't collect much useful data) [USA]
April 1960: TIROS-1, first successful weather satellite [USA]
August 1960: Sputnik 5, first roundtrip of living animals (40 mice) in a capsule [USSR]
April 1961: Vostok 1, first human in space [USSR]
May 1961: Freedom 7, first American in space [USA]
10 PRINT CHR$(205.5+RND(1)); : GOTO 10
"I'm surprised the Soviets were not the first with a weather sat."
You don't know how close the space race really was.
A weather sat with a better camera is a spy sat. We were heavily into that as soon as possible, earlier than the Soviets (1959 with Corona and the USSR with Zenit in 1962). A launch of a weather or science satellite also looks the same as a spy satellite. And indeed, the first launches of spy satellites were announced as "Discoverer" science missions.
Interestingly, Yuri Gagarin's capsule was actually the first spy satellite hull. The Soviets sacrificed the first hull to get Yuri in the air, and the second one became the first Zenit spy sat. They were able to accomplish this because in the Soviet system, the whole thing went up and came back, camera and all, for reloading for film. Sending up a delicate (and heavy) camera and bringing it back in one piece is pretty similar to getting a human up and back. The tests with dogs like Laika and the rest were to ensure that they could get the cameras back in one piece just as well as getting a human back.
The US Corona system didn't lend itself to dual use like the Zenit system did - it only ejected film packs to be returned by parachute and retrieved in mid air. There was no need to bring the whole apparatus back.
Eisenhower was excoriated in the press for Sputnik, but declassified docs showed that he was already on the ball by the time the Soviets launched. Since he couldn't say anything about actual spy satellites, he couldn't fend off the press.
Eisenhower also benefited from Sputnik dispelling the notion of "airspace" beyond the Earth's atmosphere - that national borders didn't extend to infinity.
It's all interesting stuff.
Weather sats were a side benefit to the whole cold-war spy business.
--
BMO
..... that the average Joe Blow with a basic receiver and antenna and suitable software on his/her computer can pick up the weather pix for themselves. Go on you lazy bastards google it yourselves - "weather satellite receiver kit", "turnstile antenna", "weather satellite receiving antenna" - and get the gen from our favourite data company.
TIROS 1 was one of those major milestones that we take for granted today. With today's coverage via the GOES and POES (Polar Orbiting Environment Satellite, along with the older ESSA and NIMBUS satellite systems from the mid 1960's and 1970's) weather forecasting took a giant step forward from the late 1950's to today. Just as an example, take hurricane forecasting. Back in the 1950's and early 1960's, discovery of a hurricane forming would have been from a ship report in the Gulf of Mexico, reports from the Leeward Islands, or a Hurricane Hunter randomly coming across the storm during routine patrols. Once satellites were added into the mix, the discovery of the storm became easier with increased advance notice for populated areas. What used to be 12 hours warning for an area (New Orleans, Hurricane Betsy 1965) became 35 hours warning (New Orleans/Biloxi, Hurricane Katrina, 2005). This made a significant difference not only in being able forecast the movement of the storms, but also to get the warnings out to evacuate people and save lives.
The weather satellite is perhaps the best example of how our technology has improved our lifestyle overall.
That's what urban legend, the professionally panics, and those whose livelihoods depends on getting eyeballs on column ink (electrons?) would have you believe. As usual, the reality is far different. Launchers and spacecraft today are required to minimize debris production. Separation hardware is now retained rather than being jettisoned. Spent stages vent rather than being allowed to explode. Etc. Etc..
Is the problem solved? No. Is progress being made? Yes, quite a bit. Statements like the one quoted above are just ill informed alarmism.
PS to the guy who suggested aerogel: Unless you match velocities with the debris, all you'll have is aerogel with a hole in it. Once you've matched velocities, you could capture the debris in a brown paper bag and you won't need aerogel, which is only any good for capturing debris a small fraction of the size that causes the most worries. I wish the comment about aerogel would stop getting moderated up - it's like suggesting containing a nuclear explosion by wrapping the bomb in chewing gum wrappers.
You missed options three and four. You can also use a high inclination Molnyia orbit. (Which the Russians have used at various times.) You can also use a polar orbit (which most US birds use), which can get photos every couple of hours.
So high latitude weather photography is really only difficult if you choose to make it so.