ShareThis Page
Westmoreland

60 years later, Ligonier Township man's signature is still orbiting the earth

Stephen Huba
| Friday, March 16, 2018, 9:40 p.m.
Alex Simkovich poses with a picture of the Vanguard 1 rocket and the 1957 issue of Life magazine that featured the Vanguard Project on the cover. Simkovich, 84, of Ligonier Township, was an engineer on the historic project.
Stephen Huba | Tribune-Review
Alex Simkovich poses with a picture of the Vanguard 1 rocket and the 1957 issue of Life magazine that featured the Vanguard Project on the cover. Simkovich, 84, of Ligonier Township, was an engineer on the historic project.

Somewhere up in space, a 60-year-old satellite is orbiting the earth with Alex Simkovich's name on it.

“I hope to be around when it comes down,” Simkovich said with a twinkle in his eye.

The 84-year-old Ligonier Township man is spending Saturday celebrating the 60th anniversary of the launch of Vanguard 1 — the oldest man-made object in space.

Simkovich had a pivotal role in the satellite's development as a young Navy ensign at a time when the space race between the United States and the Soviet Union was just heating up.

The “grapefruit-sized” satellite was successfully launched from Cape Canaveral, Fla., on St. Patrick's Day 1958.

“Everything went perfectly,” Simkovich recalled about that day.

Although not the first man-made object put into space, it was the first solar-powered satellite. It followed the Army's launch of Explorer 1 earlier that year and, more importantly, the launches of Sputnik 1 and 2 by the Soviet Union in late 1957.

Three days after the launch of Sputnik 1, Simkovich returned to his alma mater, Penn State, to give a talk to the university's chapter of the American Society for Metals.

The college students eagerly listened as the recent graduate — he earned his master's in metallurgy in 1956 — explained the makeup, design and purpose of the Navy satellite. He brought with him a scale model of the satellite and the rocket that would eventually launch it into orbit.

“It embarrassed the United States” to be beat by the Russians into space, Simkovich said.

Americans were already familiar with the Vanguard Project from coverage it had received in Life magazine in June 1957.

“The man-made moon takes shape for first step in space conquest,” said the magazine's headline. On the cover was a picture of Simkovich's colleagues Jim McFarland and Graham Moore reflected in the satellite's mirrorlike surface.

Inside, a striking full-page photo showed Simkovich shining a flashlight on the spinning orb as he tested its balance from the U.S. Naval Research Laboratory in Washington.

“Even now,” the article read, “nobody can guarantee Vanguard will succeed. But if the rocket does launch its moon in space, it will mark man's first step in breaking the bonds that chain him to his native planet.”

It was heady stuff for a 23-year-old man from rural Westmoreland County.

Simkovich grew up in Jacobs Creek near Smithton, the son of a Czechoslovakian immigrant and the youngest of five children. He took physics and chemistry at South Huntingdon High School, where he graduated in 1951.

But it wasn't until college that his scientific mettle was truly tested, as a Navy ROTC scholarship recipient at Penn State. After graduate school, with several summer Navy tours under his belt, he interviewed with Adm. Hyman G. Rickover, the “father” of the nuclear submarine.

Simkovich recalled the brief interview as a terrifying experience, but something good came out of it — a bidding war that landed him a job as an engineer with the Project Vanguard Satellite Structures Group.

During Simkovich's three years with the project, his team oversaw the selection of various metals used on the satellite, including zinc, copper, silver and gold. They conducted extensive tests related to the performance of the satellite, which was only 6 inches in diameter and contained six solar cells and six antennae.

“This was in the days of the dinosaurs ... the embryonic beginning of the space program,” Simkovich said. “It was a totally new effort.”

Vanguard's main purpose was to test the stresses of space on man-made objects and to test the reliability of ground-based radio tracking systems, he explained.

“There was enough data developed after that to establish the life of various items in space. ... This helped to lay the groundwork for that,” he said.

Simkovich attributes the satellite's longevity to its small size, which creates less drag as it hurtles through space. For posterity's sake, Simkovich made sure he engraved his name onto one of the interior pieces of metal before the satellite was loaded in the three-stage rocket.

Long after the Sputnik satellites burned up, Vanguard 1 continues to provide data as it orbits the earth. Although radio contact was lost in 1964, its projected lifespan is 240 years, according to Wikipedia.

Simkovich went on to get a doctorate at Carnegie Institute of Technology (now Carnegie Mellon University) and to work in the steel industry, including 15 years at Latrobe Steel.

But he looks back on his days in the nascent U.S. space program with nostalgia and pride — and a bit of whimsy.

“It does give you a very good feeling,” he said, noting that if the satellite ever falls back to earth, officials might wonder why someone with a Russian-sounding name was working on an American satellite.

Stephen Huba is a Tribune-Review staff writer. Reach him at 724-850-1280, shuba@tribweb.com or via Twitter @shuba_trib.

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.

click me