On Tue, 01 Jun 2010 22:06:17 -0500, Mitchell Holman wrote:


Of course Sputnik was primitive. But it got into
orbit, something it took the US over a year to imitate.


The story is complex and perhaps best discussed in alt.history
or something.

But, to be brief, the massive Soviet push to develop and
showcase a rocket that had orbital capabilities was a direct
response to their own nuclear bomber inferiority (an inferiority
which persisted until the very end of the cold war).

Furthermore, the US military had plans for orbital satellites
well before Sputnik but were concerned about the political
ramifications of sending space objects over foreign territory.
Ironically, the Soviet Sputnik launch only dissolved those
concerns.


The plus side was it kick-started US educational
standards and ushered in the priority of math and science education that
served NASA well in the following decades.


If public hysteria has value, that was it, I suppose.

Consider the following quote (LA Times, 1957):

One proud exception to the general knicker-twisting? The editorial
board of the Los Angeles Times, whose primary response to the news
of Sputnik's launch was a Pattonesque slap at all the blubbering
ninnies. From our Oct. 8, 1957 editorial "Moonshine About the New
Moon"...

This week-end's outpourings over the Russian satellite show most
of the American spokesmen at their juvenile worst. They act like
the alumni who want to fire the coach every time the team loses
a game. That is exact: they view the satellite launching as a race
which the United States has lost.


"Blubbering juvenile ninnies" is a good characterization of
the public hysteria that surrounded Sputnik.