Talk:Vanguard 1

message: JohnASantos (talk) 22:08, 8 March 2023 (UTC)

message: This satellite is NOT space "junk."  Because it is still in a relatively stable orbit, it can be tracked and the measurements continue to provide valuable information on atmospheric density and the geodesy of the Earth.Vanguard50th (talk) 15:24, 25 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Previous discussions missing headers

message: This thing is around 5 feet across but only weighs about 3 pounds?  I realize that aluminum is light, but is this correct?  -Grammaticus Repairo 06:20, 17 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Are you sure about that Grammaticus? The article states the sphere is 152mm in diameter - that's six inches. --Bradg 07:31, 17 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Bradg is correct.  It's about the size of a grapefruit.  --William Ackerman 15:27, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

text:  I have corrected the dimensions to describe the sphere as 152 mm / 6 inches diameter with antenna spanning 3 feet. 2601:185:8280:2240:31A8:261D:61A:340E (talk) 20:07, 12 March 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Mass 

message: Can this grapefruit-sized object really be tracked optically from earth, even with a powerful telescope?  -Grammaticus Repairo 02:43, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes. The U.S. built a network of Baker-Nunn cameras for this purpose. Here's a ref.  --agr 03:15, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Optical Tracking?

message: Is the 108 MHz figure for the transmitter frequency correct?  This seems unlikely, since that puts it inside the aviation navigation (VOR/ILS) band.  -- RoySmith (talk) 02:46, 17 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't know the exact frequency, but oral history in my family says that the crystals for the radio on the Vanguard satellites were ground by hand by James R. Eager (10 Dec 1909 - 8 Dec 1962).  Further oral history states he was the last man alive to be able to grind such crystals to frequency by hand, without reference to the masters in washington, DC. Mycroft (talk) 17:02, 13 July 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  108 MHz? 

message: I have set up this article to have its orbital elements automatically updated by User:AstRoBot, an approved bot for this purpose.  The old orbital elements in the article had not been updated in a long time and were quite out of date.  Other editors are welcome to observe the results of this change as you'll see the bot begin to update these six parms every couple of weeks, and flag anything that does not look right.  Cheers. N2e (talk) 18:24, 21 September 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't knwo if it's the bot or the referenced data page, but how can the satellite have increased both its apogee and its perigee (and semimajor axis, too) over the past year without an on-board power source? Its orbit is supposed to decay, not increase...--Roentgenium111 (talk) 20:12, 29 September 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: To add another issue, the values are inconsistent. The 132 minute orbit is plausible, and this time did not change significantly over the last 57 years - but then we should be at more than 200,000 orbits now. --mfb (talk) 03:15, 24 January 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Auto updates of orbital elements 

message: The source link is  but there perigee is listed as 28,070 km and all the other values are different as well. This looks like an error in the source, as the orbit is not that high. --mfb (talk) 11:01, 30 January 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Orbit data inconsistent 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Vanguard 1. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080919152144/http://code8200.nrl.navy.mil/vanguard.html to http://code8200.nrl.navy.mil/vanguard.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080312072756/http://www.amsat.org/amsat/features/sounds/firstsat.html to http://www.amsat.org/amsat/features/sounds/firstsat.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 10:00, 11 November 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Vanguard 1. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20131006073413/https://usspaceobjectsregistry.state.gov/Pages/Search.aspx to https://usspaceobjectsregistry.state.gov/Pages/Search.aspx
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 16:45, 22 January 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified (January 2018) 

message: I bumped into this article while running some things with AWB. I realize this article is very scientific, and written seriously,  but as a follower of professional wrestling, it should be noted that there is a re-occurring (Character, point of interest), a drone/remote controlled plane also by the name of Vanguard 1 used by Matt Hardy in a surreal/satirical gimmick. I was wondering if anyone would be interested in a small section for either popular culture or "other media", as there must be other references in the media towards this satellite? Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 14:38, 9 April 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Popular Culture 

message: The article states . It's unclear to me how it is described as having antennae spanning three feet, when, antenna-sphere-antenna can only be 12"-6"-12", or 30 inches. What am I missing?  cheers. anastrophe, an editor he is. 22:32, 12 February 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Object size ambiguous 

message: The article says that the COSPAR designation is 1958-005B, but the footnote cited there says it is 1958-002B.  The footnote is most likely correct, since it was the 2nd successful orbital launch in 1958.  I was unaware until reading International Designator that COSPAR designations had been assigned retroactively to objects launched before 1963.  Perhaps the "005" was a confusion with Satellite Catalog Number, which is 000000005.  (Usually, the leading zeros are dropped.)--JohnASantos (talk) 22:08, 8 March 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Designations 

message: Canadian researchers are very excited to receive information about Vanguard 1 199.43.175.33 (talk) 14:09, 7 June 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Canadian researchers-Vanguard 1