Retrieving Vanguard 1

[Blackstar]

https://aerospaceamerica.aiaa.org/bringing-home-a-piece-of-space-history/

Bringing home a piece of space history
By Cat Hofacker|January 10, 2025
Authors of a technical paper describe how Vanguard 1, the second U.S. satellite, could be retrieved, analyzed and displayed at one of the Smithsonian museums

AIAA SCITECH FORUM, ORLANDO Fla. — The Vanguard 1 spacecraft narrowly missed out on the distinction of being the first U.S. satellite, an honor that of course goes to Explorer 1, which was launched two months earlier in January 1958. It is, however, the first satellite to convert sunlight to electricity.

Now, the volleyball-sized aluminum sphere with spike-like antennas could gain another distinction. Engineers and a research associate from Virginia-based consulting firm Booz Allen Hamilton have suggested that Vanguard 1’s original owners, the Naval Research Laboratory and later NASA, could capture it in orbit and return it to Earth. They outlined how this might be done in the paper, “Retrieving History: Options for Returning Vanguard 1 to Earth,” presented at the conference here.

Recovering satellites isn’t an entirely new concept, but if the mission is undertaken and succeeds, Vanguard 1 would be the oldest satellite ever recovered.

[LittleBird]

https://aerospaceamerica.aiaa.org/bringing-home-a-piece-of-space-history/

Bringing home a piece of space history
By Cat Hofacker|January 10, 2025
Authors of a technical paper describe how Vanguard 1, the second U.S. satellite, could be retrieved, analyzed and displayed at one of the Smithsonian museums

AIAA SCITECH FORUM, ORLANDO Fla. — The Vanguard 1 spacecraft narrowly missed out on the distinction of being the first U.S. satellite, an honor that of course goes to Explorer 1, which was launched two months earlier in January 1958. It is, however, the first satellite to convert sunlight to electricity.

Now, the volleyball-sized aluminum sphere with spike-like antennas could gain another distinction. Engineers and a research associate from Virginia-based consulting firm Booz Allen Hamilton have suggested that Vanguard 1’s original owners, the Naval Research Laboratory and later NASA, could capture it in orbit and return it to Earth. They outlined how this might be done in the paper, “Retrieving History: Options for Returning Vanguard 1 to Earth,” presented at the conference here.

Recovering satellites isn’t an entirely new concept, but if the mission is undertaken and succeeds, Vanguard 1 would be the oldest satellite ever recovered.

Fascinating. As well as the "how could we" paper linked to from that article I see there's a "should we" paper by same team at the conference https://arc.aiaa.org/doi/10.2514/6.2025-0748

[laszlo]

The first paper mentions the NRL and NASA ownership roles and the required permission to retrieve the satellite. I was a bit puzzled by this since neither organization has tried anything of the sort for 67 years. It seemed to me that Vanguard 1 was well and truly abandoned. However, there's an excellent article in The Space Review from 2017 which does a nice job of explaining why you can't just interpret the maritime Law of Finds to allow anyone to grab objects from space and why contract salvage is the way to go. Just in case anyone else was wondering, too.

[edkyle99]

Not sure how to keep those six 30 cm spring actuated antennas (not shown in those pre-launch images) from being damaged during a recovery try.  Why not just photograph the satellite?  Would be interesting to see how many holes exist.

 - Ed Kyle

[Blackstar]

I went to several of the presentations about this and I know the person who led the initial proposal. Think of this as them asking "What are the issues involved with retrieving a satellite that has historical value?"

There are actually a lot of issues, and the what they are doing is outlining them. There are legal issues like who currently owns it. There are also policy issues within the US government, such as would a US government organization like NRL allow a private company to make the retrieval? (And what are the liabilities involved in that?) And then there are other issues like historical and archeological preservation questions. For example, in some cases, archeologists determine that it is best to leave an object in place than to remove it, because removing it might damage it, or because removing it will lose its connection to the things around it.

There are also some sticky policy issues. If the US government does this, then it indicates that the US now has the ability to retrieve objects from space. How will other countries react? Will they be concerned that the US may go after their spacecraft? Maybe the US government does not want to raise those policy issues by doing something provocative.

And then there are the technical issues. Can you actually get there and capture it and bring it back to Earth? And would you damage it if you did so? Vanguard 1 has been in space for over 60 years. What has happened to the aluminum body? What about the batteries? It could be brittle, it could have split apart. It has a small amount of mercury on board, which is toxic. It's possible that a spacecraft could grab it and it breaks into pieces. And finally there is the issue of cost.

Right now this group has just started to raise the issues, bringing together different experts--historians, archeologists, museum curators, engineers, policy people, etc. I don't really expect this to happen, maybe not for decades, but there's no harm in thinking about the issues.

[Thorny]

There are also some sticky policy issues. If the US government does this, then it indicates that the US now has the ability to retrieve objects from space.

Didn't we have this for thirty years with the Space Shuttle?

[Blackstar]

There are also some sticky policy issues. If the US government does this, then it indicates that the US now has the ability to retrieve objects from space.

Didn't we have this for thirty years with the Space Shuttle?

Retired 13 years ago and never used for this purpose. Things change over time.

[AmigaClone]

There are also some sticky policy issues. If the US government does this, then it indicates that the US now has the ability to retrieve objects from space.

Didn't we have this for thirty years with the Space Shuttle?

The US had that capability during the entire shuttle program although it was only done a few times. Vangard 1 and the upper stage that placed it in orbit were beyond the range of the Shuttle.

[Blackstar]

This is the abstract to one of the presentations:

Retrieving History: Options for Returning Vanguard 1 to Earth

Matt A Bille*1, Michael Ferguson1, Christopher Vanwy1, William Austin1, Catherine Russell1, Dakota Welch1
1Booz Allen Hamilton Inc, McLean, Virginia, United States
ABSTRACT. In 1958, the Naval Research Laboratory (NRL) Vanguard 1 microsatellite reached orbit. Almost 70 years later, it is still there, the oldest satellite of any nation, and one of the most precious objects in existence from the early Space Age. Vanguard 1, a 15-centimeter aluminum sphere with a 91-centimeter antenna span, occupies an elliptical orbit of 654 x 3969 kilometers at an inclination of 34.25 degrees. This paper explores the options for missions and payloads using technology that could safely inspect, and, if desirable, retrieve the satellite for study and display. One approach is a U.S. Space Force (USSF) mission in partnership with NASA/NRL or industry. The USSF could use a prototype or pathfinder spacecraft to demonstrate maneuvering, inspection, and other capabilities on a peaceful mission. Alternatively, NASA, which took over the Vanguard program, or private industry could lead the mission with military support if needed. NRL, still the owner of the spacecraft, is currently investigating options for such a mission as well. A rendezvousing spacecraft would require precision maneuver capabilities and onboard intelligence to provide high-resolution images while avoiding collision and plume impingement. Vanguard 1’s current characteristics, most notably spin rate, will dictate the practicality of and approach to a capture. Mission stages include Part 1 (rendezvous, close imaging, and evaluation) and Part 2 (if practical, capture and return to Earth). These could be done by a robotic imager, followed by either a retrieval vehicle (which might be the same as the imager) or a crewed vehicle. The satellite could be returned directly to Earth, moved to a lower orbit for retrieval, or taken to the International Space Station (ISS) to be repackaged for its journey to Earth and then the Smithsonian National Air & Space Museum. These options vary in cost, required delta-v, and other factors, among them the extant hardware used and the capabilities any mission sponsor might wish to demonstrate or mature. Future missions (space debris removal, materials capture for on-orbit manufacturing, and even deep space exploration) could build on techniques demonstrated in the retrieval of Vanguard 1. It is outside this paper’s scope to predict, should such a mission be created, which agencies will be involved, but the possibilities are attractive for potential partners. For the USSF, the appeal would be the ability to demonstrate chosen capabilities while working with a scientific objective of great public interest. For NRL and NASA, it would be a major scientific and public engagement success. For private firms like Boeing, Sierra Space Corporation, SpaceX, or firms developing space repositioning services, it would be a demonstration of their capabilities. For materials engineers and space historians, it would be a learning opportunity like no other. Retrieving Vanguard 1 would be a challenge, but an achievable and invaluable step forward for the entire U.S. space community. Disclaimer: This abstract and paper present the thoughts of the authors. It is not a business proposal or offering and does not represent the views, policies, or plans of Booz Allen Hamilton or any government or private organization.

[Blackstar]

Another one:

Bringing Space to Earth: Should We Retrieve Historic Space Objects?

Matt A Bille*1, Michael Ferguson1, Aubrey Farrell1, Courtney Williams1, Rachel Tillman2
1Booz Allen Hamilton Inc, McLean, Virginia, United States; 2Viking Mars Missions Education & Preservation Project, Portland, Oregon, United States
SPACE TO EARTH: SHOULD WE RETRIEVE HISTORIC SPACE OBJECTS? Matt Bille, Aubrey Farrell, Michael Ferguson, Courtney Williams, (Booz Allen Hamilton) Rachel Tillman (Viking Mars Missions Education & Preservation Project) ABSTRACT. In 1958, the Naval Research Laboratory’s first successful satellite, Vanguard 1, reached orbit. The 15-cm sphere is still there, the oldest satellite of any nation, and one of the most precious objects in existence from the early Space Age. This paper explores the question of whether artifacts like Vanguard 1 should be retrieved, when possible, for museum display or whether their location in orbits or on other bodies is an intrinsic part of their historic value. There is little debate on sites like the Apollo moon landing locations. It is safe to assume these will always be protected, but what about artifacts? Should items in open space or protected sites be brought back to preserve or display them? This topic will be of increasing urgency as humanity spreads further into the solar system. This paper considers Vanguard 1, currently in low Earth orbit (LEO), as the test case. Vanguard 1’s retrieval is technically possible and already under consideration, thus requiring a policy decision. That decision and its results will affect such artifacts as the first Martian helicopter, probes now resting on asteroids, and many other examples. Some items can be examined, studied, or displayed in place, visited by imaging robots or eventually by astronauts and the cameras or other instruments they emplace to provide virtual access. Some are in conditions, such as decaying orbits, which threaten deterioration and eventual destruction. While a considerable body of research and opinion exists, more widespread and affordable access to space means it is time for the space and history/archaeology communities to begin developing standard considerations to serve as a framework for case-by-case decisions. Retrieving Vanguard 1, while difficult, could be done in this decade if funding is available. For materials engineers as well as space historians, retrieving it would be a learning opportunity like no other, and public interest will be enormous. For all these reasons, it makes the perfect test case to discuss and hopefully resolve the scientific and philosophical question of whether to let space artifacts lie or return them to Earth. Disclaimer: This abstract and paper present the thoughts of the authors. While four authors are employed by Booz Allen, this does not represent the views, policies, or plans of Booz Allen Hamilton or any government or private organization.

[AmigaClone]

I admit that I find the concept of a mission to retrieve Vanguard 1 to be interesting. I would add the upper stage that placed that satellite in orbit might be another interesting object to retrieve.

This is the abstract to one of the presentations:

Retrieving History: Options for Returning Vanguard 1 to Earth

Matt A Bille*1, Michael Ferguson1, Christopher Vanwy1, William Austin1, Catherine Russell1, Dakota Welch1
1Booz Allen Hamilton Inc, McLean, Virginia, United States
ABSTRACT. In 1958, the Naval Research Laboratory (NRL) Vanguard 1 microsatellite reached orbit.

<snip>

Vanguard 1’s current characteristics, most notably spin rate, will dictate the practicality of and approach to a capture. Mission stages include Part 1 (rendezvous, close imaging, and evaluation) and Part 2 (if practical, capture and return to Earth). These could be done by a robotic imager, followed by either a retrieval vehicle (which might be the same as the imager) or a crewed vehicle. The satellite could be returned directly to Earth, moved to a lower orbit for retrieval, or taken to the International Space Station (ISS) to be repackaged for its journey to Earth and then the Smithsonian National Air & Space Museum.

<snip>

Returning Vanguard 1 directly to Earth or moving it into a lower orbit is very feasible. Sending it to the ISS would take a lot of delta-V, possibly more than it would take to take Vanguard 1 to a lunar orbit.

[Jorge]

There are also some sticky policy issues. If the US government does this, then it indicates that the US now has the ability to retrieve objects from space.

Didn't we have this for thirty years with the Space Shuttle?

The US had that capability during the entire shuttle program although it was only done a few times.

The capability was used more than is generally given credit, although admittedly mostly on spacecraft that were originally placed in orbit by a shuttle in the first place (several SPAS, several SPARTAN, PDP, LDEF, EURECA, SFU, and others I can't recall at the moment).

Vangard 1 and the upper stage that placed it in orbit were beyond the range of the Shuttle.

At 3823x649 km HAxHP, it's beyond the range of Falcon 9/Dragon as well. You'd need a Falcon Heavy just to launch a Dragon into that orbit. A stock Dragon could probably just barely deorbit from that high (assuming the FH did all work getting it up there, leaving the Dragon tanks almost full), but entry speeds would be high (no opportunity to lower apogee as was done on Polaris Dawn to bring the orbit within Dragon's ISS certification) and splashdown sites would be limited to the vicinity of wherever over Earth Vanguard's perigee is, not guaranteed to be anywhere near the US (or even over ocean).

[goretexguy]

Well, if we leave Vanguard 1 up there, it'll come down at some point and be gone forever.
I'd rather have it in a museum someplace, even if it's considered ancient history by those who retrieve it.

At some point, we're going to want to start clearing LEO of junk. Might as well learn to do that first for objects historical value. Pioneer 4 comes to mind, though that's a different challenge altogether.

[LittleBird]

There are also some sticky policy issues. If the US government does this, then it indicates that the US now has the ability to retrieve objects from space.

Didn't we have this for thirty years with the Space Shuttle?

The US had that capability during the entire shuttle program although it was only done a few times.

The capability was used more than is generally given credit, although admittedly mostly on spacecraft that were originally placed in orbit by a shuttle in the first place (several SPAS, several SPARTAN, PDP, LDEF, EURECA, SFU, and others I can't recall at the moment).

Can't help asking about the X-37B ? Do we think it has any such capability-esp now that it has recently done an HEO mission ?

I must admit I'd love to see Vanguard 1 come home-and see jcm log that event in his Space Report, and see Blackstar report for the Space Review on the NASM exhibition party  that results  ;-);-)

[Jorge]

Well, if we leave Vanguard 1 up there, it'll come down at some point and be gone forever.

Vanguard 1's expected orbital lifetime is about 240 years. By that time I expect the retrieval could be a grad-school project.

[Jorge]

There are also some sticky policy issues. If the US government does this, then it indicates that the US now has the ability to retrieve objects from space.

Didn't we have this for thirty years with the Space Shuttle?

The US had that capability during the entire shuttle program although it was only done a few times.

The capability was used more than is generally given credit, although admittedly mostly on spacecraft that were originally placed in orbit by a shuttle in the first place (several SPAS, several SPARTAN, PDP, LDEF, EURECA, SFU, and others I can't recall at the moment).

Can't help asking about the X-37B ? Do we think it has any such capability-esp now that it has recently done an HEO mission ?

"I have no idea what you're talking about."

[LittleBird]

There are also some sticky policy issues. If the US government does this, then it indicates that the US now has the ability to retrieve objects from space.

Didn't we have this for thirty years with the Space Shuttle?

The US had that capability during the entire shuttle program although it was only done a few times.

The capability was used more than is generally given credit, although admittedly mostly on spacecraft that were originally placed in orbit by a shuttle in the first place (several SPAS, several SPARTAN, PDP, LDEF, EURECA, SFU, and others I can't recall at the moment).

Some kind souls listed them for me in the KH-11 thread:

Did the shuttle in the end  ever return any other free flying satellites apart from LDEF ?

STS-41-C (launch) / STS-32R (retrieve): LDEF
STS-41-B (launch) / STS-51-A (retrieve): Palapa B-2 and Westar 6
STS-46 (launch) / STS-57 (retrieve): EURECA
H-II Test Vehicle 3 (launch) / STS-72 (retrieve): Space Flyer Unit

https://space.stackexchange.com/questions/15094/what-satellites-did-the-shuttle-retrieve-from-orbit

 - Ed Kyle

It retrieved others but did not return them
HST
Intetsat VI
Syncom IV
Solar Max

Also, deployed, retrieved and returned
Several SPARTANs and SPAS

Plus the MPLMs, which were launched and retrieved 11 times, but maybe don't count because they weren't free-flyers.  (They were always attached to either the shuttle, the station or both.)

[laszlo]

The closest we've ever gotten to that was retrieving Surveyor 3's camera and that was only in the vacuum of space 2-1/2 years. ...

LDEF - 5 years, 9 months in LEO.

ISS - decades, and they can just duck outside and detach a piece for return and study.

[Jim]

The closest we've ever gotten to that was retrieving Surveyor 3's camera and that was only in the vacuum of space 2-1/2 years.

Inaddtition to LDEF, SFU, Palapa/Westar and EURECA.

Since 2001,  the Materials International Space Station Experiment (MISSE) series has tested some 4,000 material samples and specimens — from lubricants and paints to fabrics, container seals and solar cell technologies — to demonstrate their durability in the punishing space environment.

A Russian solar array panel removed in November 1997 from the non-articulating photovoltaic array on the Mir core module was returned to Earth on STS-89 in January 1998. The panel had been exposed to low Earth orbit (LEO) for 10 years prior to retrieval.

Optical Properties Monitor (OPM) experiment and the data gathered during its 9-mo exposure on the Mir space station

Hardware was remove from Solar Max and returned during the repair.  Same with HST servicing missions.

[Jim]

LDEF - 5 years, 9 months in LEO.

ISS - decades, and they can just duck outside and detach a piece for return and study.

Ah, I forgot about those. None of the examples proferred here are close to more than six decades in space, admittedly, but still we do have instances of recovering objects up there for a reasonably lengthy period.

We have one-half, one and two decades worth.

Plus Vanguard's acreage is really doesn't provide much to research.  In addition, its construction has little in common with current systems.