Shiny Delivery this Holiday Season for the “Time and Navigation” Exhibit

NTS-2

NTS-2 Satellite

Preparation of the upcoming Time and Navigation exhibition is in full swing, and objects are being installed in cases throughout the gallery.  In fact, the gallery became a little more shiny just in time for the holiday season thanks to a delivery from our friends at the Naval Research Laboratory. The object they contributed is a restored engineering model of the NTS-2 satellite. Now, you may be asking, “What is an NTS-2 satellite, besides a shiny box?”  Well, the NTS-2 satellite led a revolution in navigation technology, and can be considered the grandfather of all the satellites which currently help you find your way around town.

The NTS-2 satellite is the descendent of a naval research program known as TIMATION (TIMe/navigATION). The program began in the early 1960s, and tested the possibility of launching highly accurate clocks into space within satellites. The clocks on board the NTS-2 satellite worked by measuring the “tick” of cesium atoms. The cesium atoms vibrated more than nine billion times per second, acting like a super accurate clock. These clocks could then broadcast that time from space, and people on Earth could receive these signals to help them locate themselves on the planet. In 1973, the TIMATION program was combined with other military programs to form the NAVSTAR Global Positioning System (GPS). After successfully launching the NTS-1 satellite in the summer of 1974, NTS-2 was launched on June 23, 1977, forever changing how we navigate on Earth. The two satellites demonstrated the feasibility of using super accurate atomic clocks aboard satellites, and became the basis of the GPS network that your smartphone may use on a daily basis.

The restored engineering model looks very much like the one that went into space on that historic day in 1977. The Naval Research Laboratory did a great job restoring it and installing it in the gallery. We hope you will come and visit it when the exhibition opens in March of 2013!

Tom Paone is a museum specialist in the Aeronautics Division of the National Air and Space Museum.

Stanley Moves In

On October 24, Stanley, winner of a historic robot race, left its home at the National Museum of American History aboard a flatbed truck and arrived safely at its destination, just seven blocks away. For the foreseeable future, Stanley will be here at the National Air and Space Museum, a centerpiece in the exhibition Time and Navigation:  The Untold Story of Getting From Here to There.

The irony of the situation escaped no one.  Stanley, a driverless vehicle that had navigated 132 miles on its own to win the 2005 Defense Advanced Research Projects Grand Challenge, needed the help of scores of people AND a truck ride to get from there to here.

Stanley

Stanley hitches a ride to the National Air and Space Museum. Photo by Richard Strauss

Frankly, moving Stanley is nerve-racking for me. I collected Stanley for the American History Museum’s robot collection.  I feel responsible for Stanley’s safety and the safety of everyone involved with wrangling such a big, heavy car.  On moving day, it turned out, there really was no cause for worry. Everybody—American History’s experienced vehicle mover Shari Stout, the skilled riggers from Ely, and the welcoming Air and Space staffers—everybody knew exactly what to do to put Stanley in just the right spot for long-term display.

Now that Stanley is securely in place, though, there’s a moment to reflect.  It’s worth thinking more deeply about the car’s place in Time and Navigation and the reasons for collecting contemporary objects for the Smithsonian in the first place.

Some have already wondered:  what’s a car doing in the National Air and Space Museum?  In Time and Navigation, we link Stanley directly to satellite navigation, a subject clearly within the Museum’s scope.  The car’s ability to drive itself is a new application for satellite navigation, made possible when computers combine GPS (global positioning system) coordinates with other kinds of data to construct an image of the road ahead, complete with obstacles.  And there’s another connection:  Stanley operates on the ground in much the same way that UAVs, that’s Unmanned Aerial Vehicles, operate in the air.  Stanley moved into the Museum right under the UAV exhibition on the west end.

stanley

Stanley moves into the National Air and Space Museum. Photo by Mark Avino

When Stanley won the off-road DARPA race in 2005, the achievement was a giant technical step forward for autonomous vehicles, the vehicles like Stanley that drive themselves.   Now, seven short years later, numerous carmakers and Google are testing self-driving cars.  Three states—Nevada, Florida, and California—have passed legislation permitting them on state roads.  Advocates foresee a future where such cars will relieve congestion on highways, reduce traffic accidents, and provide transportation for those who otherwise cannot or do not want to drive.  No point going to the showroom to shop for your robot car just yet, but insiders predict the technology will be commercially available soon.

License Plate

Nevada license plate issued for testing autonomous vehicles on the state’s public roads. Photo by Wayne Wakefield.

Predicting the future, like moving Stanley, makes me nervous. My training and interests make me passionate about the past. I’m a historian and a curator, not a soothsayer. Making decisions about what to collect from the long-ago past, a curator stands on pretty solid ground. Often there’s a body of existing research and documentation that verifies the importance of an object from long ago. That’s collecting from inside a comfort zone.

But collecting contemporary objects like Stanley comes close to predicting the future.  It’s a risky business.  Curators have to make educated guesses that today’s technical innovation will be tomorrow’s historic milestone.  Curators who do contemporary collecting take the risk that an object making headlines today will remain representative of some important event or illustrative of how Americans absorbs new technologies.  Such an object might even carry material evidence that inspires our successors to dig deeper into research we haven’t even imagined yet.  Or maybe collecting such an object won’t have any of those useful outcomes.  Maybe it will simply lie fallow forever after in storage.  As I say, it’s a risky business.

An important indicator of an object’s historical worth is whether it yields rich  insights.  So far Stanley does not disappoint.  On display at the National Museum of American History, Stanley represented the latest in a long line of wheeled robots, a history that can be traced back to renaissance automatons.  At the Air and Space Museum, Stanley’s technologies let us see inside the “black box” of navigation and consider emerging technologies that are likely to change the ways we get from here to there.  Whether there will be more insights down the road, we’ll just have to wait and see.

Carlene Stephens is a curator at the National Museum of American History in Washington, DC. She is currently working with a team of curators, designers and restoration specialists at the National Air and Space Museum to develop the Time and Navigation exhibition.

For more about Stanley’s recent move, see the Smithsonian blog.

 

Are You Sure You Want to Donate This?

“Are you sure you want to donate this?” I asked the intern. “This” was a slightly-used Smartphone, in perfect working condition. The intern, Rebecca Bacheller, was, indeed, willing to donate it. She heard that the Time and Navigation team wanted to disassemble one and showcase the current state of geolocation devices, enabled by the Global Positioning System and other advanced electronics. Our plan was to label the phone’s circuits, and show how they correspond to classical methods of navigation that had been practiced for centuries. Becky was excited that she would be credited in the label; she also had another motive: namely a reason to trade up to the newest version of the popular phone. (This is a never-ending treadmill: once you get on, it is impossible to get off.)

I prepared myself for the transfer by going on-line and special-ordering tools to disassemble it: a “pentalobe” screwdriver, a plastic pry-bar, and a tiny Phillips-head screwdriver. I also downloaded instructions on how to disassemble the phone, and I borrowed a head-mounted magnifier. When the day arrived, fellow curator Andy Johnston and I got to work, surrounded by a few sidewalk superintendants from the Space History Division.

USS Alabama

The USS Alabama was launched in 1984, carried up to 24 Trident ballistic missiles armed with nuclear warheads, and is still in the fleet.

Before describing what we found, I want to mention an important part of the new gallery. One of the centerpieces of Time and Navigation is a “SINS” guidance system, removed from the nuclear-powered submarine USS Alabama. “SINS” stands for “Submarine Inertial Navigation System,” and it was responsible for telling the sub where it was without having to surface to take a fix on stars or otherwise reveal its location. Hence the “inertial” components: a set of gyroscopes and accelerometers that, as its developer Charles Stark Draper called it, was like practicing “astronomy in a closet.”  It was not perfect: the gyros had a tendency to drift, so periodically the sub would come near the surface to receive navigation signals from a Transit satellite orbiting overhead.  (An engineering backup of a Transit will also be on display in the gallery.)  A refrigerator-sized digital computer combined data from these inputs, corrected the gyros’ drift, and computed the sub’s position. The whole ensemble is rather bulky and heavy, and as Heidi Eitel mentioned in an earlier blog post, getting everything to fit in the gallery is quite a challenge.

SINS Typewriter

This modified IBM Selectric typewriter, connected to a special computer system, output data about the operation of two SINS (Submarine Inertial Navigation System) units aboard the nuclear-powered submarine USS Alabama. It could also provide input to the computer in emergencies.

So what does this have to do with the cell phone? As we disassembled it, Andy and I realized that almost every component of the SINS was present, even if you need a high-power magnifier to see it. A three-axis accelerometer? Check.  Gyroscopes? Yes. A radio to receive satellite navigation signals? Yes, although the phone receives signals from GPS, not Transit satellites. A computer? Of course—the phone uses an “A4” processor supplied by the company ARM. It has more processing power than the CRAY-1 that used to be on display in the Beyond the Limits gallery. A keyboard and display to give and receive commands? Yes–the phone’s touch screen even replicates the old-fashioned “QWERTY” keyboard of the electric typewriter used on the submarine. A radio to communicate with the rest of the world?  The phone has several, covering the major cellular frequencies in the UHF region. (The sub communicated by trailing a long wire behind it and receiving “Very-Low-Frequency” (VLF) radio signals—far below the standard AM broadcast band– chosen because they could penetrate water.)  The Smartphone even has a magnetic compass.

Smartphone

This disassembled smartphone showcases the current state of geolocation devices (as of 2012), enabled by the Global Positioning System and other advanced electronics. The phone’s circuits correspond to classical methods of navigation that have been practiced for centuries.

The difference in size between the two systems is breathtaking, but there is another difference that may be even more significant. The SINS was designed to allow the submarine to navigate without anyone, other than the crew, knowing where it was. By contrast, a Smartphone has all kinds of circuits and software on board to let the world know where its owner is, and what he or she is doing. Submariners might be uncomfortable carrying one of these around.

It is going to be a challenge to show this disassembled object to our visitors and convey the magnitude of what they are looking at. Many visitors carry these devices with them and hardly give them a second thought. The gallery opens next spring, and we’ll see how this exhibit works.

Paul Ceruzzi is chair of the Space History Division at the National Air and Space Museum.

Telstar and the world of 1962

Telstar

After Telstar’s launch, models of the satellite circulated around the United States to museums and local community centers. This photo is of a model displayed at the Parade of Progress, a show in Cleveland, Ohio. Photo Credit: NASA.

Last week, the Museum recognized the 50th anniversary of Telstar, the first “active” satellite (one that can receive a radio signal from a ground station and then immediately re-transmit it to another) and the first technology of any kind that enabled transatlantic television transmissions.  In 1962, both accomplishments generated intense interest, excitement, and commentary.  Telstar was, at once, a technical, political, and cultural happening, providing impetus to the world of globalized information we take for granted today.  Our anniversary program featured a satellite simulcast between the Museum and the French city of Pleumeur-Bodou (an echo of the first United States-Europe television exchanges in July 1962), then a symposium exploring the history of Telstar and the significance of its legacy.

My contribution today is to offer some broad reflections on the perspectives and tensions that Telstar brought to the fore in U.S. life in late summer and early fall of 1962 (and correct some confusions in Telstar’s early chronology that appeared in many news briefs on the anniversary last week).  In November 1962, the satellite suffered electrical problems and went out of service for several weeks, then expired altogether in February 1963.  But in its blaze across these months of 1962, it overlapped with and helped shape perceptions of a variety of concurrent events—U.S. and USSR human space flight missions, a string of nuclear weapons test, the Cuban missile crisis, and iconic cultural moments such as Marilyn Monroe’s death.

Telstar embodied a host of technical accomplishments.  As was true for many Space Age achievements, it was a testament to large-scale systems engineering and the coordinated work of teams of experts.  In addition to the satellite, the system included massive and complex ground stations:  In Pleumeur-Bodou, at Goonhilly Downs, England, and, on the U.S. side, a primary ground station in Andover, Maine.  (For more on Pleumeur-Bodou, please see the blog-post of my colleague Paul Ceruzzi.)  These ground stations, with Telstar in orbit, collectively provided the means for transatlantic satellite communications, connecting the two continents in a way that had not previously been possible.

telstar

This graphic shows the tracks of Telstar’s early orbits (5 through 9) on July10. Note the limited time of “mutual visibility” to the satellite for ground stations on each side of the Atlantic. Telstar’s orbit was elliptical, tilted about 45 degrees with respect to the equator. Photo Credit: AT&T.

Telstar, though, differed in one crucial respect from every other period Space Age project:  Its funding came predominantly from a private corporation, AT&T, the largest firm in the world at the time.   NASA and the governments of Great Britain and France were partners, providing key resources, but the effort was seen as exemplar of private initiative, working hand-in-hand with the public sector.  In the context of the Cold War, this collaboration was a boon and a source of tension.  As the fruit of an American corporation, Telstar stood for the defining place of private enterprise in American life and as an alternative to Soviet-style communism.  The importance of satellite communications as technology and symbol in the Cold War already had been highlighted (though now not often remembered) in President Kennedy’s  well-known May 1961 “Moon” speech.

But in 1962, as the United States and USSR sought to persuade peoples around the world to align with their respective political values, the question arose who should control this powerful tool of communicating internationally via television.  Should this capability be primarily in private hands, or be considered an instrument of government policy?  Through the summer of 1962, as Telstar demonstrated its prowess for television broadcasting, Congress debated this very issue, eventually approving a “split the baby” solution (creating what would soon become Comsat and Intelsat, the organizations that, in 1969, would bring the Apollo moon landing to hundreds of millions of viewers around the world).

Though Washington policy battles can be dry stuff, the debates reflected a new reality.  Television had become a critical part of American culture.  In 1950, about six million televisions were in use in the United States; after 1960, the number was well north of 60 million.  Sending images directly into homes, television was regarded as a uniquely potent medium—either to promote awareness and critical thinking, or to undermine such communal virtues through escapist entertainment.  In 1961, Newton Minow, head of the Federal Communications Commission, leaned toward the latter assessment and famously remarked that television programming was a “vast wasteland.”  Telstar added another dimension to this “promise and peril” perception of the role of television, expanding its reach from primarily national to international markets and bringing events from around the world “live” into everyday experience.

Marshall McLuhan already had coined the term “global village” to characterize this emerging change in human affairs.  As Telstar began its broadcasts famed television anchor Walter Cronkite noted the satellite makes the “White House and the Kremlin no farther apart than the speed of light”—a sentiment that helps us understand part of the reason for the satellite’s broad impact on the imagination of Americans in 1962.  U.S. and USSR long-range missiles just were entering service, making mutual nuclear warfare and destruction possible within 20-30 minutes.  For the optimistic, satellite communications technology, and its promise of instantaneous connection, seemed like an antidote, promoting understanding across cultures and intercontinental distances and defusing misunderstandings.

Telstar entered into this context—infusing it with excitement and a tinge of the utopian, a strong sense of world-changing progress, as well as highlighting the tensions and realities of the Cold War and of television as a cultural phenomenon.  And one of its technical characteristics only seemed to intensify this sense of a changing present and an impending future:  During each orbit of more than two and a half hours, only 20-30 minutes could be used for transatlantic communications.  Television could only be done in bursts, heightening scrutiny of the implications of the new capability.

Soon after Telstar’s launch early on the morning of July 10, engineers began to test the satellite.  In anticipation of success, a large audience of dignitaries, including Vice President Johnson gathered in Washington D.C., to commemorate the first phone and television transmissions via satellite.  The U.S. television networks carried the events.  Initial expectations were that these historic transmissions would be between Andover, Maine and Washington D.C.—a strictly U.S. occasion.  But Pleumeur-Bodou, too, picked up the satellite signals: a panning shot of the American flag waving in front of the Andover ground station as “America the Beautiful” played in the background, thereby inaugurating transatlantic television.

On July 12 (but still July 11 in the United States), the French ran a test from their side.  But rather than broadcast bland panoramas or discussions among dignitaries, they ran a tape of singer Yves Montand and sights of Paris.  A little later in the day, the British finally joined the fun and did a live broadcast featuring the engineers and technicians of Goonhilly.  Both east-to west transmissions, each just several minutes in duration, were carried by U.S. networks and into U.S. homes.  As a national marketing event, the French choice seemed more astute.  In a U.S. celebrity name recognition survey taken in the weeks after, Mr. Montand rose to number three, trailing movie stars Janet Leigh and Kim Novak, but ranking above Elizabeth Taylor and Richard Burton.  As reported in one magazine, a New York City woman exclaimed, “Just imagine! I was so thrilled! Yves Montand!  Live! Straight from Paris!”—indicating television’s propensity to confuse recorded and live events.  CBS, referring to its coverage of the Goonhilly broadcast, proclaimed “we are proud to have been the first to bring the biggest eight-minute show in television history to the United States.” Telstar had arrived, its coverage on TV and in newspapers, resembling, according to one observer, a “space fever chart.”

With these transmissions as preview, U.S. and European television networks moved from opportunistic presentations to a coordinated, planned transatlantic extravaganza, set for July 23.  Several hundred million on both sides of the Atlantic, in 16 nations (including communist Yugoslavia), watched the telecast, which began with a split screen image of the Eiffel Tower and the Statue of Liberty, then an excited exhortation of  “Go, America, Go” as the U.S. portion of the program started.  It was a combination of seriousness—presenting a portion of President Kennedy’s press conference, as he talked about monetary policy and nuclear testing—and travelogue superficiality, showing scenes of iconic American locales, such as Mount Rushmore, accompanied by singers belting out the “Battle Hymn of the Republic.”   The presentation was a genre already well-established in television programming known as “Wide Wide World.”  The European portion of the show, occurring a couple of hours later, on a subsequent orbit of the satellite, was much the same, completing what was widely reported as “a historic achievement, a notable victory for the West in its space and communications race with the Soviet Union.”

Telstar Postal Cover

A postal cover issued on July 10, Telstar’s launch date. Interestingly, the time code (11 am) is earlier than the actual time of television broadcast highlighted by the graphic and text in the lower left corner. The Project Mercury stamp suggests the linkage in 1962 between human space flight and communications achievements. Photo Credit: National Postal Museum.

This series of July broadcasts, from July 10 to 23, encapsulated the uncertainties of 1962 and the possible role of transcontinental television in recalibrating the Cold War and day-to-day life.  Perhaps not too surprisingly Telstar anniversary coverage last week often conflated these separate events and missed some of the context that gave the satellite achievement its meaning in 1962.  Should television via satellite, with its broad geographic reach, emphasize high-minded news coverage of political import?  The projection of idealized concepts of the nation—whether of the United States, France, Britain, or others?   Or reflect television’s preeminent role in conveying popular entertainment (which some regarded as “vast wasteland”)?   All of which invoked the key question:  Who would decide?

In the months to follow, as Telstar undertook additional broadcasts, all of these perspectives and contentions were aired, jostling against each other.  The Pope told pilgrims gathered in Rome that Telstar had “helped strengthen brotherhood among peoples,” and “marked a new stage of peaceful progress.”  In turn, when in fall 1962 Vice President Johnson visited the Pope he presented His Holiness with a model of the satellite as a gift.   Others weighed in as to whether Telstar’s scarce airtime should be used for news or the actual fare of U.S. popular entertainment—period shows such as “Gunsmoke,” “The Lone Ranger,” and “Yogi Bear.”  This sentiment could turn dark.  Political philosopher Ayn Rand saw in Telstar an avenue to totalitarian suppression of free speech rights, asking “which one of us will obtain equal time on that global medium? And if we do not, how will we make ourselves heard?”  Optimistic assessments, though, were more common.  Historian Arnold Toynbee penned for the New York Times a long essay called “A  Message for Mankind from Telstar,” arguing that the technical progress represented by the satellite paled in comparison to its “new hope for the survival of the human race.”

A day before Toynbee’s essay appeared, Telstar’s scarce time was used to broadcast to France a 20-minute program on Marilyn Monroe’s death, that included “pictures of Miss Monroe’s secluded home and an outside view of the bedroom where here nude body was discovered.”   Period culture watchers mused that Telstar might be introducing the “Age of Ephemera—the one day sensation, wowing ‘em simultaneously in Paris, Peoria, Pretoria, and Peru,” a trend Andy Warhol reduced to 15 minutes a few years later.  In the yin and yang of Telstar, a mirror of the state of television, popular frivolity and serious politics shared transatlantic airtime, providing opportunities to see and be seen in new ways.  As African American leaders, in the midst of the U.S. Civil Right Movement, poignantly stated the satellite could be used to share their struggle on an international stage and gain new voices of support: “The whole world knows what’s happening here.  The whole world is watching…”

Though that last phrase was not quite true, and carried different meanings for different people, it captured the essence of what Telstar brought into the world of 1962 — and of what would follow in the years after as global communications, via satellite and undersea fiber optic cable, gradually became part of the fabric of everyday life.

 

Martin Collins is a curator in the Space History Division of the National Air and Space Museum.

Telstar and the “Global Village”

Since October 1997, the Space History Division has been celebrating a number of fiftieth anniversaries: Sputnik, Vanguard, Yuri Gagarin’s flight, Alan Shepard’s Mercury Flight. Next July we hope to celebrate another. On July 10th, 1962 at 11:47 GMT, the world’s first transmission of a television image by satellite took place, using the Telstar satellite. Prior to Telstar’s launch that summer, NASA experimented with a passive reflector—“Echo” to transmit signals over the horizon, but engineers soon realized that the most practical way to transmit television, with its high bandwidth requirements, was by an “active satellite”: one that would receive a signal and then retransmit it to a ground station on another continent.  (Most people know the name “Telstar,” if not for the satellite, then for the hit instrumental song by the Tornados, with its “space age” synthesizer sound.)

 

Telstar

An engineering back-up of the Telstar satellite, in the collections of the National Air and Space Museum.

dome

The antenna was located in a remote area of Brittany, the westernmost part of France. It was protected by a flexible Dacron dome, which was transparent to microwave radio frequencies. Photo: Musée des Télécoms, Pleumeur-Bodou, France.

Last week I had the great fortune to visit the French village of Pleumeur-Bodou, on the Brittany coast, where that first transmission was received. The microwave antenna in the US, at Andover, Maine, was dismantled years ago, but the one in Brittany has been preserved and is in excellent condition (although it is no longer used). Because Telstar flew in a low-Earth orbit, it was only visible to the ground stations for a few minutes at a time, unlike today’s geostationary satellites, whose 24-hour orbits position them in the same place in the sky at all times. So the antenna had to track the satellite carefully as it passed overhead. Unlike modern dish-shaped antennas, this one was shaped like a giant horn, based on the design of microwave repeaters built by AT&T for long-distance telephone in the U.S.  Entering the 64-meter (210 foot) diameter protective Dacron dome, and climbing onto the giant horn was an experience I will never forget.

Telstar Antenna

The antenna was not a dish but a horn, mounted on bearings to track the satellite as it passed overhead. The design was adopted by AT&T, which built it, based on existing microwave telephone relay antennas. Photo: Musée des Télécoms, Pleumeur-Bodou, France

It worked. The initial test on July 10 was followed by images of the U.S. flag waving, Mt. Rushmore, and a “live” portion of a press conference held by President Kennedy. The French, in turn, transmitted a tape of Yves Montand singing “La Chansonnette.” After a string of Soviet firsts in space, this was one the U.S. could claim as a first, finally. A modest beginning, but look at what Telstar has brought us. We take it for granted that whenever there is a major event happening anywhere in the world: a Royal wedding, a benefit rock concert, an earthquake—anything—we expect to see it “live.” Marshall McLuhan prophesized that the “cool” medium of television would make us all inhabitants of a “global village.” That did not happen right away, which led people to dismiss his predictions as mere fancy. But with the combination of satellite telecommunications, the Internet, and Facebook (the last two appearing after McLuhan’s death), who would say that he was wrong? And it all began with Telstar.

Paul Ceruzzi is Chair of the Space History Division of the National Air and Space Museum.