When Sputnik-1 first beeped across the sky in 1957, the world held its breath. A shiny sphere no bigger than a beach ball had become humanity’s first artificial satellite, orbiting the Earth and transmitting simple radio signals. It was heavy, expensive, and had just one function, but it changed history. What followed in the decades after Sputnik wasn’t just a story of faster rockets and better electronics—it was the unfolding of a pattern of technological evolution.
That pattern was something Genrich Altshuller, a Soviet engineer, spent his life studying. Altshuller analyzed thousands of patents and discovered that technological progress follows predictable laws. He called his method TRIZ, the Theory of Inventive Problem Solving. Through TRIZ, he showed that innovation is not random—it develops along clear directions that engineers can anticipate.
When we trace the history of satellites, these laws are visible at every stage.
From Heavy Giants to Miniaturized Marvels
The early satellites, like Telstar-1 in 1962, were large, costly, and purpose-built. Telstar was a communications satellite that could relay live TV signals across the Atlantic—something astonishing at the time—but it was a one-trick machine.
Fast-forward to today: CubeSats the size of shoeboxes can photograph Earth, relay communications, and carry out experiments that once required satellites weighing tons. Even smaller, ChipSats, tiny spacecraft no larger than a credit card, are being tested for swarms of low-cost missions. This evolution reflects a central TRIZ idea: systems tend to deliver more benefits while becoming smaller, cheaper, and more efficient.
Solving Contradictions in Space
Progress in satellites has often come from resolving contradictions between subsystems. For example, payloads like high-resolution cameras demanded more power than traditional systems could provide. Engineers answered with deployable solar arrays that unfold like giant wings in orbit, high-capacity lithium-ion batteries, and even experimental nuclear power sources for deep space probes.
A clear example is the Hubble Space Telescope. Initially launched with a flawed mirror, it demonstrated how satellites are vulnerable to design contradictions—precision optics versus manufacturing limitations. The solution came through in-orbit servicing, with astronauts upgrading and repairing the telescope multiple times. This introduced a new stage in satellite evolution: spacecraft that are not static but can be maintained, adapted, and improved.
Satellites as Networks, Not Lone Machines
Satellites also evolve by becoming part of larger networks. A single navigation satellite provides some information, but the Global Positioning System (GPS) became possible only when dozens of satellites worked together in a constellation. The same applies to Galileo in Europe or BeiDou in China.
Today, Starlink and OneWeb push this idea further. Thousands of small satellites orbit in coordination, creating global internet coverage. Starlink’s satellites even communicate with each other through laser links, forming a mesh network in space. TRIZ predicts this kind of integration: mature systems grow by connecting into “super-systems,” expanding their impact and efficiency.
From Rigid Designs to Adaptable Machines
Traditional satellites were rigid—designed for one function, with no flexibility once launched. But newer designs embody TRIZ’s “law of dynamization.”
For example, SES’s O3b mPOWER satellites and Intelsat’s software-defined satellites (we will talk about such realm in a future post) can be reprogrammed in orbit. Instead of being locked to a fixed set of frequencies or coverage areas, they can shift their capabilities to meet demand, redirect bandwidth, or change service regions. This flexibility allows operators to adapt to changing needs without launching new hardware.
Even more futuristic are concepts like DARPA’s Blackjack program, which envisions agile, resilient constellations of small satellites that can be reconfigured like Lego blocks to survive disruptions.
Looking Ahead: TRIZ and the Future of Satellites
If TRIZ is right, satellites will continue along predictable paths. We may see:
- Autonomous fleets of satellites that manage themselves, much like driverless cars in space.
- Self-repairing spacecraft, able to fix damaged components or even 3D-print replacements in orbit.
- Space-based solar power satellites, capturing sunlight and beaming clean energy to Earth.
- In-orbit factories, where satellites are manufactured and assembled directly in space instead of launched fully built from Earth.
Each of these possibilities follows TRIZ’s principles: greater efficiency, integration into larger systems, adaptability, and the resolution of contradictions.
