"

ftd Conl'r_ } 2d SOaion

COlOlIT'1'BE PBlN'1'

SOVIET SPACE PROGRAMS, 1971 A Supplement. to the. Corresponding Report Covering the Period 1966-70

STAFF REPORT

PREPARED roR THE USE OF THE

COMMITTEE ON AERONAUTICAL AND SPACE SCIENCES

UNITED STATES SENATE

BY THE

SClENCE POLICY. RESEARCH DIVISION OONGRESSIONAL RESEARCH SERVICE LIBRARY OF CONGRESS

APRIL 1972

Printed for the u.se of the COmmittee on Aeronau.tical and Space Sciences

U.S. GOVERNMENT PalNTING OFF1CE

""'187 0 WASHINGTON : 1912

LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL

LmRARY OF CONGRESS, CONGRESSIONAL RESEARCH SERVICE,

M arch. 16, 197~.

Hon. CLINTON P. ANDERSON, Chairman; Oommittee on Aeronautioai and Space Sciences, U.S.

Senate, TV ashington, D.O.

DEAR SENATOR ANDERSON: Pursuant to the request of the committee, the Congressional Research Service has prepared the accompanying study of the Soviet space program to update a corresponding major study which covered the years 1966-70. This supplement reflects certain data complete for the year 1971, together with some cumulative figures since 1957. It also includes some refined interpretations of earlier events and some more direct comparisons with the United States effort in space.

As in the past studies, it should be emphasized that the report is based upon unclassified, open sources, both Soviet announcements and independent checks on such data derived from U.S. observational equipment whose findings are published in this country and from corresponding British data.

Dr. Charles S. Sheldon II, Chief of the Science Policy Research Division, and Senior Specialist in Space and Transportation Technology, has been the prImary author of this new report, working in cooperation with Mrs. Barbara M. DeVoe, Analyst in Science and Technology in the same division.

The study has been reviewed by appropriate individuals in more than one institution of Government m the interest of accuracy and security, although the final responsibility rests with the authors and the Congressional Research Service.

Smcerely yours,

LESTER S. JAYSON, Director, Oonqressional Researoh. Service, Library of Oonqrese.

(III)

~~--.--------------------------------------~---------------

CONTENTS

SOVIET SPACE PROGRAMS 1971

Page

I. Introduction 1

II. Log of fiights__________________________________________________ 1

III. Program elements in summary 1

A. Gross statistics________________________________________ 1

Table 1-Worldwide record of known space launchlngs..., 3

B. Mission categories______________________________________ 2

Table 2-Summary of Soviet and United States space

payloads by mission categories______________________ 5

C. Relative mixes of civil and military flights________________ 2

Table 3-Approximate comparison of Soviet and United States successful space flights-primarily civil-oriented

versus· presumptively military-oriented______________ 6

D. Detailed summary of fiights______________________________ 2

Table 4-Detailed summary of Soviet space payloads by launch site, launch inclination, name or category,

launch vehicle and year_____________________________ 7

E. Payloads by name~ ~-------------------- 2

Table 5-Summary of Soviet space payloads by name;., 8

F. Flights by launch site___________________________________ 9

Table 6-Number of successful orbital and escape

launches by site ~________________ 9

G. Flights by launch vehicle________________________________ 9

Table 7-Number of successful launches to Earth orbit

and beyond by basic first stage______________________ 9

H. Co,mparative weights of payload ~----------- 9

Table 8-Summary of nominal payload weights sent to Earth orbit or beyond-normalized to a standard low orbit-Soviet Union and United States-in pounds

by year --------------- 11

IV. Program detatls=-unmanned __ c.__________________________________ 11

A. Small Kosmos (B-1) 11

1. Kaspustin Yal" scientific fiights_____________________ 11

2. Plesetsk military fiights____________________________ 12

B. Intermediate Kosmos (C-1) 12

1. Previous subsets for navigation and ferreting________ 12

2. New repetitive subsets --------------------------- 12

3. Multiple payloads --- ~ ~___________ 13

4. Scientific fiights ------------------~----- 14

5. Target fiights ..,________________________ 15

C. Military observation recoverable payloads (A-2) 15

1. More third generation fiights~______________________ 15

2. Observation programs since 1962 -'___________ 16

D. Lunokhod 1____________________________________________ 17

1. Brief <description oJ: roving vehicle .,.___________ 17

2. Review of operational life ----------------------- 18

Table 9----Summary record of the performance of

Lunokhod 1, delivered to the Moon by LUna 11-_ 18

3. Scientific findings_________________________________ 19

4. Relative merits of manned versus unmanned roving

lunar vehicles____________________________________ 20

(V)

VI

E. The 1971 ]dars attempts _

1. Launch failures __ , _

2. Launch of ]d'ars 2 and 3 and of Mariner 9

3. In1Ught progress ===========

4. ]dars 2 arrivaL _

5. ]dars 3 arrivaL _

6. The landers =

7. The orbital buses and their activity _

8. Tables, on planetary flighL _

Table l~Continuation of summary list of plan-

etary flights _

Table ll-Continuation of Soviet flights related

to the planets _

F. Luna 18, 19, and 20 _

1. Luna 18 _

2. Luna 19 _

3. Luna 20 _

4. Tables on lunar flighL , _

Table 12-Continuation of summary list of

lunar flights _

Table la-Continuation of Soviet flights related

to the Moon , __ --- _

V. Program details-manned _

A. Precursors _

B. Salyut and Soyuz 10 _

1. Launch of Salyut _

2. Launch of Soyuz 10 _

3. New equipment in docking -r _

4. Separation and recovery ----- _

5. Ground reception of crew _

6. Possible flight difficulties _

C. Soyuz 11 and SalyuL -------------

1. Launch of Soyuz 11 _

2. Details on SalyuL -----

3. Mission of SalyuL _

4. Summary of mission activity _

Table 14-Daily log of activities on Salyut dur-

ing the period Soyuz II was docked to iL _

5. Degree of success and possible problems ., _

6. Separation and recovery ------

7. Deaths of the cosmonauts _

8. Further work with SalyuL _

D. Zond manned precursors _

E. Manned flightstatistics _

Table 15-Continuation of log of manned space flights,

Soviet and ADlerican _

Table 16-Continuation of log of man-related Soviet

space flights -r ,.; _

Table 17-Cumulative comparisons of Soviet and U.S.

manned flights _

Table 18-Comparative time spent on space missions __

VI. Soviet civil applications _

A. Meteora _

B. Kosmos 389 and Kosmos 405 _

C. Communications satellites _

D. Earth resources satellites _

VII. Soviet military applications _

A. Military support flights _

B. FOBS - ------

C. Maneuverable satellites _

1. Interceptor satellites for inspectionjdestruction _

2. Other F-l-m maneuvering satellites _

3. Three subsets _

4. Difficulties of interception _

Page
20
21
21
21
22
22
23
23
25
25 l
25
26
26
26
27
28
29
29
29
29
30
30
31
31
32
32
32
34
34
34
35
35
36
39
39
40
41
41
42
43
43
44
45
45
45
46
46
47
49
49
49
49
49
50
51
53 --~~--~-----------------

vm:

Page

VIII. A chronology of Soviet statements on .future space plans__________ 53

1910 -_____________________________________________________ 53

1971 - __ ~__________________________________________________ 54

1972 - < ...:______ 58

IX. Other developments____________________________________________ 58

A. Soviet ground support__________________________________ 58

1. Moscow Space Institute, Soviet Academy of Sci-

ences 58

2. Overseas land-based tracking station_______________ 58

3. Soviet tracking ships______________________________ 58

Table 19-Characteristics of known Soviet space

and missile tracking and control ships________ 59

4. The K08moolJlVt Ywriy Gagarin_____________________ 60

B. Soviet space personalities________________________________ 60

C. Soviet international space cooperation____________________ 61

1. Lunar rock exchanges_____________________________ 61

2. Bilateral meetings with the United States__________ 61

3. Bilateral activities with France____________________ 62

4. Interkosmos program_____________________________ 62

5. Vertikal probes___________________________________ 62

6. Draft space treaties -"__________________________ 62

Jr. Summation ~______________________ 63

Appendixes 64

A. Table of Soviet space launches, 1971-72__________________________ 64

B. Illustratlons of Soviet spacecraft and space tracking ships________ 71

SOVIET SPACE PROGRAMS 1971

I. INTRODUCTION

During 1971, the Library of Congress _prepared for the Committee on Aeronautical and Space Sciences, U;S. Senate, a major review of the Soviet space program, with data as complete as possible thro. ugh calendar year 1970. The postscript to that study then updated some tables for the months January-April 1971, and the text to about May 14. The only other revision was to insert on June 30, 1971, a note reflecting the death of the three Soviet cosmonauts on that date.

It is the purpose of this relatively brief report to consolidate later information as much as possible to serve as a replacement for the original postscript, so that key tables will include information covering all of calendar 1971, and also consolidated totals over the span of the whole space program.

By the nature of things, there are never "final" data, as various refinements come along with the unfolding of new facts and as analysis of past events proceeds in the context of better perspectives. Accordingly, the report which follows, like all such studies, is interim in nature, but does carry beyond the fairly massive study of the main report in some respects.

Although this report will stand by itself, it is intended for use in conjunction with its longer predecessor. Consequently, the highly detailed qualifications, definitions, and source descriptions for tables where carried in the long report have not been repeated in this new study.

II. Loa OF FLIGHTS

The principal body of the report contained a computer printout log of all Soviet space :flights which was current to May 14, 1971. Over a period of time as :flights decay, there are always some adjustments underway in such a listing. In the interest of reflecting a reasonably current list held to manageable length, what is presented with this report is the same kind of tally covering all flights from the beginning of 1971 to March 4, 1972. See Appendix A, attached.

III. PROGRAM ELEMENTS IN SUMMARY

A. GROSS STATISTICS

Table 1 is revised to present the worldwide record of known spaceflight successes and estimated failures from 1957 through 1971.

(1)

2

B. MISSION OATEGORIES

Table 2 is a table comparing the categories of spaceflight missions flown by the Soviet Union and the United States with summary figures from 1957 through 1971, and for convenient reference, the corresponding annual figures for the two countries each of the last 5 years

O. RELATIVE MIXES OF OIVIL AND MILITARY FLIGHTS

Table 3 is a slightly different approach to division of effort between outright military missions, and those which either are civilian in nature or though used by military organizations could as well be civilian (such as communications and weather). By its very nature, it is somewhat arbitrary, and always subject to revision as later information becomes available.

D. DETAILED SUMMARY OF FLIGHTS

. Table ~ is .a fairly fine break~own of Soviet space flights by mission, inclination, and launch vehicle, as well as launch site, covermg the years 1969-71, together with cumulative figures for the period 1957-71 inclusive.

E. PAYLOADS BY NAME

Table 5 lists the specific numbers of Soviet flights by each name for the year 1971, and also gives cumulative numbers for the flights from 1957 through 1971 inclusive.

TABLE I.-WORLDWIDE RECORD OF KNOWN SPACE LAUNCHINGS SUCCESSES

Launches

Payloads to Earth orbit

Escape payloads to Moon, beyond

United United United

States U.S.S.R. France Italy Australia Japan China Kingdom States U.S.S.R. France

United United

Italy Australia Japan China Kingdom Siaies U.S.S.R.

1957 _

1958_____________ 5

1959~____________ 10

1960_____________ 16

1961..___________ 29

1962~____________ 52

1963_____________ 38

1964_____________ 57

1965_____________ 63

1966 ,_____ 73

1967_____________ 57

1968_____________ 45

1969_____________ 40

1970_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 29

1971_____________ 31

TolaL_____ 545

2 " " __ __ __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 2 _

1 5 1 _

3 - - - - - - - -- -- -- -- -- - ---- -- - -" - - - - - --- -- - - -- -- - - - - - - - - - 9 - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - CA:I

3 " -__ 16 3 ~___________________ 1 _

6 __ __ _ 35 6 __ __ __ __ __ _ __ _ 1

20 54 20 __ __ _ 4 1

17 60 17 __ __ __ __ __ __ _ 1

30 _ 69 36 __ __ __ __ __ __ 4 Z

48 1 c_______ 94 66 1 3 7

44 1 95 46 1 5 5

66 2 1 1 17 71 2 1 1 10 1

74 __ _ 61 82 __ __ __ __ __ 3 3

70 " ---------- c_ 58 73 ---- ,_ __ __ _ 8 4

81 2 1 1 36 96 3 1 1 3 5

83 1 1 2 1 1 45 103 1 1 Z 1 1 8 6

548 7 2 3 2 714 622 8 2 50 39

TABLE I.-WORLDWIDE RECORD OF KNOWN SPACE LAUNCHINGS FAILURES

Launches

United United

States U.s.S.R. Japan Eldo Kinlldom

Payloads to Earth orbit

Escape payloads to Moon. beyond

United

China France States U.s.s.R.

United

Jlpan Eldo Kinlldom

United

China France States U.s.S.R

1957._ _ _ 1 0 0 _

1958_ _ _ _ __ __ _ 12 c 0_ 0 0 _

1959____ __ _ _ 10 0 0 _

1960_ _ __ __ __ 13 2 0 0 _

1961. ~_____ 12 0 _

1962 0____ 7 0'_ 0 _

1963__ _ _ __ __ __ _ 8 0 • _

1964_ __ _ __ 7 0_0 _

1965_ __ __ _ __ 7 _

1966_________________ 4 2 _

1967_________________ 3 1 0 0 _

1968__ __ _ _ _ __ __ _ 3 __ _ __ 1 0 _

1969_________________ 1 1 1 -------- __ ------

1970_________________ 1 1 1 1 0 _

1971_________________ 3 0____ 1 1

--------~----------~----~--~--~--~----~------~--~--------~--~

TotaL_________ 92 931 5 4 1 116 1001 5 4 12 19+1

1 0 0 _

S 0____ _ __ __ _ _ __ _ _ __ __ __ __ _ __ __ __ __ __ 4 0 _

9 00 __ 0___ _ _ __ _ _ __ __ _ __ _ 2 _

12 2 0__________________________________ 2 2

12 0 0 __ __ __ _ 1

12 _ __ __ __ __ _ _ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ 1 5

11 _ __ __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ __ _ _ __ _ __ __ __ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ _ 2

8 _ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ _ _ _ __ __ _ _ _ __ _ _ _ __ _ __ _ __ 1

8 .; 2

12 2 1 1

4 1 1

15 _ __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 1 _

1 1 1 1 2

1 1 1 1 1

2 1 1 1 1

_'"

Soviet Union

TABLE 2-SUMMARY OF SOVIET AND UNITED STATES SPACE PAYLOADS BY MISSION CATEGORY

United States

1967

1957-1971

1971 total

Earth orbital science .; ,________________________ 5 10 3 9 7 59

t~':nc:r~~li:~:~~~~~~~~~:: :::::::::: :::::::::::::::::::::: :::::- -- -- - - -4-" -- -- -- -4-- -- -- -- -2 - - - - - - - - -5 - - -- - - -- -3 - - -- - - - -23-

WeatheL ,_________________________ 4 2 2 5 4 22

Naviaation/ferret , .; ,________________ 4 6 6 16 27 84

Geodesy , , ~ _

Military observation:

Low orbit recoverable______________________________________ 22 29 32 29 28 202 19 16 12 9 7 198

Low orbit nonrecover______________________________________ 8 10 12 12 12 67 7 7 11 4 6 77

Intermediate orbiL ~_ _ _ _ _ __ _ __ _ _ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ __ __ __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ __ _ 4 _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ _ _ _ _ __ __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ _ 10

~~€!~lillf~~~~;~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~-------r------r:::::::~:-------r------r-----"~r=:::::::::::::::::~::::::::+::::::::~:::::::::~:::::::::i~

~~:r~~~-~1:t~~~:~::::::::::::::::::::::::::.:::::::::::::::: ~ ~ ~ ~ ~_ 1: -------T------T::::::::::--------i--------T 1;

Lunar maaned., __ __ __ __ 2 8 2 4 16

~e~:;~_~~~~_~~~~~~~~~~~~~:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::-------T '. ~ ~ ~_ ~~ f ~_:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: 2~

Mars , __ ~ "_____________________________ 5 10 2 1 5

~~~[fJ~ar:s'~r:..-_~:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: ~ ~_:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: I~

1968

1969

1970

1957-1971

1971 total

1967

1969

1970

1968

12 6 19 6 3 1

16 14

1 5

11 6

4 3

1 _

1 1

137 50 83 49 25 17

4 11

1 10

6 6

5 4

1 _

1 _

SubtotaL ______________________________________________ 66 77 71 91 102
Orbital launch platforms ________________________________________ 6 8 6 10 7
TotaL _________________________________________________ 72 85 77 101 109 ~ ~ 84 66 ~ ~ m

59 . _

64

661

87

66

764

39

53

TABLE 3.-APPROlUMATE COMPARISON OF SOVIET AND UNITED STATES SUCCESSFUL SPACE FLIGHTS-PRIMARILY CIVIL-ORIENTED VERSUS PRESUMPTIVELY MILITARY-ORIENTED

Payloads

Launches

Soviet Union

United States

Soviet Union

United States

Tyazheliy

Civil Sputniks Subtotal Military Total NASA

DOD DOD

civil Subtotal military Total

DOD DOD civil Subtotal military

Years

Civil Military Total NASA

Total

1957 _

1958 _

1959 __ ~ _

1960 _

1961." _

1962_~ _

1963 _

1964_~ _

1965 _

1966 _

1967 _

1968 _

1969 _

197O__ _

1971 _

TotaL _

2 _

1 _

3 _

3 _

6 _

15 5

10 7

14 16

19 29

16 28

21 45

22 52

17 53

26 S5

21 62

2 _____________________________________________ 2 _________ 2 _________ 2 _____________________________________________
I _________ 5 S _________ 5 1 _________ 1 _________ 1 _________ 5 5 _________ 5
3 5 _________ 5 5 10 3 _________ 3 _________ 3 5 _________ 5 5 10 0)
3 5 1 6 10 16 3 _________ 3 _________ 3 5 2 7 10 17
6 10 _________ 10 19 29 6 1 7 _________ 7 10 6 16 19 35
20 18 1 19 33 52 15 1 16 5 21 18 7 25 33 58
17 10 2 12 26 38 10 1 11 7 18 11 16 27 33 60
30 22 2 24 33 57 16 3 19 19 38 23 10 33 40 73
48 23 7 30 33 63 19 9 28 45 73 29 31 60 37 97
44 30 9 39 34 73 16 7 23 28 51 30 26 56 44 100
66 25 6 31 26 57 21 6 27 45 72 26 29 55 32 87
74 19 4 23 22 45 25 8 33 52 85 21 16 37 27 64
70 21 3 24 16 40 18 6 24 53 77 26 15 41 25 66
81 12 1 13 16 29 29 10 39 62 101 17 3 20 19 39
83 14 4 18 13 31 26 7 33 76 109 20 16 36 17 53
548 214 45 259 286 545 210 59 269 392 661 241 182 423 341 764 352

196

7

TABLE 4.-DETAILED SUMMARY OF SOVIET SPACE PAYLOADS BY LAUNCH SITE, LAUNCH INCLINATION, NAME OR CATEGORY, LAUNCH VEHICLE AND YEAR

Payload

Inclination

Launch vehiCle

1957-1971

1971 total

KAPUSTIN YAR

K Weather _

Interkosmos _

K Science _

~ ~~I~rp7e-:: ~::::::::::::::::::::::

1969

1970

2 5 31 18 2

48 8-1 1 _

48 8-1 2 2 I

48-9 8-1 1 __

48-9 8-1 2 1 _

49 8-1 __

TotaL_______________________ _ 4 5

TYURATAM

n ~~~~~~_t~~:::::::::::::::::::::::

K F08S _

K Recov. Obs __

K Recov. Obs __

n ~Tc~~~a~~~~:: :::::::::: :::::::::

K Soyuz Pre __

K Manned Pre __

K Zond Pre.. __

K Manned Pre __

Zond _

proton _

~a¥:ai:sput:::::::::::::::::::::: :

U Tyaz. S~UL------------------~--

~:.a~~_~!~-_- .: ::~~~:::~ __ :~:::::::

~ =~rrrc~i~:::::::::::::::::::::::

Luna _

venera _

Mars _

MalS lander _

~o~:Ov:-iljOSiC:::::::::::::::::

~oe~!;~~~:-:-::-:-:-:===:::::::::::::

Elektron , _

~~~~~~-~~::::::::::::::::::::::: ~ ~~~Sa~~~~:::::::::::: :::::::: :::

~!~~r~~~~~~~ ~~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~~

Mars __

ZOnd . .. _

Tyaz. Sputnik _

Luna __

~utnik-- ; _

orabl Sputnlk ~ _

Vostok _

K Voskhod Pre _

Voskhod _

K No RockeL __

K Weather ~ __

K Recov. Obs __

K Recov. Obs.. _

n ~rJ~~ic~~~::::::::::::::::::::::

K Recov. Obs .... __

K Recov.Obs .. ..

~ ~Tcffa~~c~~~::::::::::::::::::::::

Luna __

50 50 50

51-2 51-2 51-2 51-2 51-2 51-2 51-2 51-2 51-2 51-2 51-2 51-2 51-2 51-2 51-2

52 52 52 52 52 52 52 52 56 56

58-9

61 62-5 63-4 64-5 64-5

65 65 65 65 65 65 65 65 65 65 65 65 65 65 65 65 65 65 65

69-71 69-71 69-71 69-71

74

F-l-m 1 __

F-l-r __

F-l-r 1 2 1

A-I _

A-2 4 3 _

A-2 2 1 5

A-2 I

A-2 ........

A-2-h ........ 1 2

D-l-e .. _

D-l-h 1 __

D-l-e I 1 __

D-l _

D-l 1

A-2-e 2 2 _

D-l-e 2 3 4

0-1-e 2 1

0-I-e 1 3 2

A-2-e 1 _

A-2-e _

A-2-e _

A-2-e 2 1 _

D-l-e 2

D-l-e 2

A-2 5 1 2

A-2 _

C-l __

C-l _

A-m __ .. -- -- __

A-I ------ -- ----- __

F-l-m 1 4 5

0-1 _

A-2-e 2 1 _

A-2-e --- _

A-2-e 2 1 _

A-2-e . . . _

A-2-e _

A-2-e .. __ .. __ ...... _

A-2-e .. _ ...... .. _

A-2-e -- _

A-2-e -- -- __ -- -- -- -- -

A-2-e -- _

A -- -- ---

A-I -- _

A-I -- -- -- -- __ -- -- -- ---

A-2 .. -- :------

A-2 _

A-l-m .. _

A-I -- __

A-I -- -- ----

A-2 7 2 ..

A-2 7 8

A-2 I I

A-I -- -- .... -- .. -- ---

A-2 .. __

A-2 1 .. .. __

A-2 .. ---

A-I .. _

58

I 2 IS 5

25 9 2 7 3 2 1 5 1 1

15 12 3 6 4 1 7 6 2 2 11

1 24 3 2 4 17

3 25

3 13 6 3 1 1 3 1 4 3 5 6 2 2 2 5 29

30 17 3

1

2 1 3

TotaL .. ; __ ;;_;, __ =--=-;;--;,--=-=--=--=--=-=--=--===3~6===3~6===3=7====373

8

TABLE 4.-DETAILED SUMMARY OF SOVIET SPACE PAYLOADS BY LAUNCH SITE, LAUNCH INCLINATION, NAME OR CATEGORY, LAUNCH VEHICLE AND YEAR-Continued

Payload

1957-1971 total

Inclination

Launch vehiole

1969

1970

1971

PLESETSK

K Recov. Obs _

K Recov. Obs __

K Imp rOV. Obs .. _

U pickaback .. __

Molniva L .. _

Molniya 2 ,, __

U Tyaz. Sput, __

K Target.. " .. _

K Science __ .. " .. __

K Science " __ " _

K Military " __

K Recoy. Obs __

K Recoy. Obs __

K lrnprov. Obs __

U Pickaback .. _

K Low Military .. __

K I ntermed Nay __

K High Nayig _

K Multiple _

K Science . _

o reol ,, __

K Weather _

Meteora __ .. _ .. _

K Military .. _

K Recoy. Obs __

K Recov, Obs _

K lmprov, Obs _

U Pickaback .. _

K Science . __

K Military __

65-1) 65-6 65-6 65-6 65-6 65-6 65-6 65-6

69 71 71

72-3 72-3 72-3 72-3

74 74 74 74 74 74 81 81 81 81 81 81 81 82 82

A-I .. .. 5

A-2 12 5 36

A-2 3 4 8 15

A-2 I I 2

A-2-e 4 2 6

A-2-e I I

A-2-e 4 3 7

C-I 3 3

C-I I I

B-1 2 3

B-1 9 8 10 36

A-I I

A-2 2 I II

A-2 3 5 8

A-2 I I

C-I 2 3 5 13

C-I 2 3 2 10

C-I 2 I 4 9

C-I 8 16 24

C-I .. 2 I 3

C-I I I

A-I 5

A-I 2 10

A-I .______ I I 2

A-I .. ._ ._ _

A-2 I I 4

A-2 2 2 4

~=i :::::::::::: -- - -- -- - -- -- -- -- -- -- - -- - -- -- - -- - -- j B-1 I 8

PLESETSK total. .. _ ,,_ ,, __ ,,_ .... __ .. " _

KAPUSTIN YAR total. __

TYURATAM total, ,, ._ __ .. __

37 4 36

60 5 36

Grand total. .. _ .. " ........ ._ _

77

101

71 I 37

230 58 373

109

661

TABLE 5.-SUMMARY OF SOVIET SPACE PAYLOADS BY NAME

Name

1971

Sputnik " _

Luna, _ _ _ _ __ _ _ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ __ _ _ _ __ __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ __ __ _ _ _ __ __ _ _ 2

Korabl Sputnik _

Tyazheliy Sputnik _

Venera .. ' _

Vostok .. _

Kosmos.; _ _ _ _ _ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ _ __ _ _ _ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ _ _ _ 81

Unannounced and Pickabacks .. __ __ __ __ _ __ __ 5

Mars_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ __ _ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ __ _ _ __ __ __ _ _ __ _ _ _ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 2

Polet _

Elektron _

Zond _

Voskhod _

Molniya L___ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ _ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ _ 2

Proton _

Soyuz .... _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ __ __ __ __ _ _ __ __ __ __ _ _ __ __ __ __ __ __ _ _ _ _ __ __ __ __ __ _ _ __ _ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 2

Meteora __ .. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ __ _ _ __ __ __ __ __ _ 4

I nterkosmos .. " ~_ _ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ _ _ _ I

SalyuL _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ _ _ _ _ __ _ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ __ _ _ __ __ _ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ I

Molniya 2 " _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ __ __ __ _ _ _ _ __ __ __ __ _ _ __ __ __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ I

Oreol , _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ _ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ __ __ __ _ _ _ 1

----------------

Subtotal. ,_ _ __ __ __ _ _ __ __ _ _ __ _ _ __ __ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ __ _ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ _ _ _ 102

Implicit Tyazheliy Sputnik__ _ __ _ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ _ __ _ __ __ _ __ 7

Total. -------1-09--------

1957-1971
total
3
19
5
I
7
6
470
20
3
2
4
8 ~
2
19
4
II
10
5
1
1
1
602
59
661 -------------------------~

9

I'. FLIGHTS BY LAUNOH SITE

Table 6 provides a worldwide record of launches by site for the year 1971, together with cumulative figures for the period 1957-71 inclusive.

G. FLIGHTS BY LAUNOH VEHICLE

Table 7 lists the number of successful flights by each type of first stage launch vehicle, worldwide, for 1971 and cumulatively for the period 1957-71 inclusive.

TABLE 6.-NUMBER OF SUCCESSFUL ORBITAL AND ESCAPE LAUNCHES BY SITE

1971

1957-71 total

~r:i~~~:£:~~~~:::::::::::::::: :::::::::::: :::::::::::::: ::::::::::::::::: ~!

1!~;~Ill::::::::::::l

Total. • _. •.• _. __ • "' • . 120

329 291 200 199 57

15 4 4 3 3 2 2

1,109

TABLE 7.-NUMBER OF SUCCESSFUL LAUNCHES TO EARTH ORBIT AND BEYOND BY BASIC 1ST STAGE

1971

1957-71 tolal

Total. " _

120

H. OOMPARATIVE WEIGHTS OF PAYWAD

333 277 126 105 65 52 50 35 23 10 9 4 4 4 3 3 2 2 1 1

1,109

There is no certain way of finding out the exact weights of payload carried to orbit by each nation as only selectively is such information released by the governments concerned. Further, the actual weights of payload, announced or estimated, suffer from two statistical problems.

10

There is no universal definition of what constitutes payload, and the significance of a given payload weight is modified by the velocity im-

parted to it. '

A payload may be defined by some reports as the total weight sent to orbit, and by other reports as the weight above the accompanying rocket casing. Still others narrow the definition down to the specific weight of instrumentation carried in a space vehicle. Illustrative is the range of numbers associated with an Apollo Moon flight. The typical kinds of numbers are 300,000 pounds in Earth orbit, 100,000 pounds to the vicinity of the Moon, 12,000 returned to Earth, for a crew, some rocks, and film with an approximate weight of perhaps 900 pounds.

The amount of weight carried by a given rocket is subject to division between fuel to attain a given velocity to reach certain altitudes, and the useful instrumentation. Also, the weight which can be carried by a given launch vehicle depends upon the latitude of launch site and the launch azimuth. Equatorial launches due east at the equator can carry the greatest weight of payload because the spin of the Earth provides an assist to Earth orbital velocity, and a change either away from the equator or in a direction other than east carries a penalty in reduced payload.

Presumably a useful clue to levels of hardware application to space can be obtained, providing some reasonably common standard is applied to all launchings. It is with some reluctance that Table 8 is presented, but it may at least indicate something of trends and comparative efforts being mounted. One drawback is that only approximations are available for the lifting capacity at the optimum of some launch vehicles. A second factor is that examined in detail, one would find that there are constant variations and improvements being introduced into vehicles. However, because of the approximate nature of these estimates, it probably suffices to take a series of average configurations for each basic launch vehicle combination. One step of a more complete comparison has not been made in this table, to estimate a standard equatorial eastward launch. Instead, it assumes as the optimum for the United States eastward launch from Cape Kennedy, and for the Soviet Union eastward launch from Tyuratam. The U.S. site is at about 28.5 degrees north latitude, and the Soviet site is at about 45.6 degrees north latitude.

It should be understood that the table is not a measure of any actual weight of payload, whatever that definition. It represents the normalized maximum carrying capacity of rockets to place spacecraft in a circular orbit of about 115 miles (185 kilometers) above the Earth, firing eastward from the named sites.

The table divides by column this nominal weight to orbit between those payloads carried by small and medium launch vehicles and those by large lift capacity launch vehicles.

11

TABLE 8.-SUMMARY OF NOMINAL PAYLOAO WEIGHTS SENT TO EARTH ORBIT OR BEYONO, NORMALIZEO TO A STANDARD LOW ORBIT, SOVIET UNION AND UNITED STATES

(In pounds by years]

Soviet Union

Small and medium vehicles

G-l-e vehicles

United States

Small and

Total medium

weight vehicles

Saturn V vehicles

Total wei&ht

Year:

1957 _

1958.. _

1959 _

1960 " _

196L _

1962.. __ " _

1963.. _

1964.. • _

1965.. . _

1966.. _

1967 _

·l~~L::::::::::::

1970 > _ ,. _

197L _

TotaL __

2,240 _

3,000 __

31,200 _

31,200 _

73,000 " _

170,500 _

149,100 _

271,2S0 --

S16,300 __

S04, SOO _

719,100 • _

877,800 _-----.--------

864,600 _ .. -- _

892,900 , " _

955,Z50 _

6,.061,940 _, _

2,240 _ ...... .. _ .. _

3,000 3,200 3,200

21,200 11,400 11,400

31,200 25,850 ______________25,850

73,000 71,550 71,550

170,500 13;3,750 133,150

149,100 95,200 95,200

271,250 229,750 229,750

516,300 326,050 _ _ __ __ _ __ _ __ _ _ 326,050

504,500 391,200 391,200

719,100 270,050 285,000 555,050

877, 800 278, 850 570, 000 848, 850

864,600 177,100 1,140,000 1,317,100

892,900 138,350 285,000 423,350

9SS,25O 171,400 570,000 741,400

6, 061, 940 2, 323, 700 2, 850, 000

5,173,100

Note: Corresponding total weights for other nations are: France, 1,080; China, 1,000; Itaiy, 600; Japan, 390; Australia, 150; and United Kingdom, 150. This brings to world total to about 11,239,010.

IV. PROGRAM DETAILS-UNMANNED

A. SMALL KOSMOS (B-1)

Of the small Kosmos pay loads launched during 1971, none has been announced as: having a specific scientific mission, and it is still too early to expect any published scientific findings. There has been one very similar Interkosmos launch, number 5, which is the only space launch of the year from Kapustin . Yar. All the rest .have come from Plesetsk.

1. KarJustin Yair Scientific Flight

Interkosmos 5 was launched on December 2, 1971 as a follow-on to Interkosmos 3, with an apogee of 1,200 kilometers and a perigee of 205~ilometers at an inclination of 48.4 degrees. The payload was jointly assembled by Soviet and Czech specialists, and was regularly tracked by stations in those two countries and in the German Demo-

cratic Republic. .

The payload included instruments for investigating the composition and temporary variations in charged particle fluxes, and registration and analysis of the spectrum of low frequency electromagnetic waves between 20 and 70 kilohertz.

1J. Plesetsk Military Flights

In the absence of any evidence that the B-1 flights from Plesetsk served anyscientific purpose, and because they conformed closely to the patterns of previous years which were assessed as military, all of these 1971 flights are grouped into corresponding categories.

12

II n kilometers)

Apope Peripe

FaJrly low Ipol") intermediate peripe, 71· (overall prolram rani': 828-360 _pope,

Illii!li~!!i~!i~:!i!!!i!!!!i!ii~!!l~::ii~~iiiil~;;i;;;i~;;;i:i

Hipeat -PGl", low peri, .. , 82° (overall program ran,.: 2.100-1,192 lPOpe, Zao;.203 peril"):

KOsmos 408 ••••••••••••••••••• • • _. • __ •• __ • _

828 512 492 511 505 814 522 516 523 502

277 213 283 282 212 282 281 282 211 279

1,542

211

There are no obvious indicators of any new development in this particular ~roup of programs. Based upon U.S. parallels, their unspecified mission might include electronic ferreting, radar calibration, and small component testing. A number of similar flights have been identified by the Russians as subjects of air drag measurements, but this would surely represent a secondary mission. Because of their small size and typically spin-stabilization, it seems unlikely that they are picture takers, either by television or by film.

B. INTERMEDIATE KOSHOS (0-1)

1. Previous Subeete lor Navigation and Ferreting

In 19'70 and 19'71, use of the flexible 0-1, Skean-based vehicle grew noticeably. The main body of the long report which this supplements noted that there had been a series of multiple flights out of Tyuratam which fell into several categories of orbit characteristics, some sug~ting navigation satellites, and some perhaps serving as electronic ferrets because their orbital elements were not as carefully defined. These multiples were then followed by some single flights. generally not closely defined as to orbital elements, and also a little low for greatest convenience if intended for navigation purposes, These flights were followed by a larger number flown from Plesetsk which seemed to fall into three very distinct classes: a lower circular orbit group with elements drawn with only averaze precision, which seemed less likely to be na vi~ation than ferret flights; an intermediate, circular orbit group initiated by a flight with very precisely drawn orbital elements, and thereafter reported with only averaze precision. which probably were navigation satellites: and finallv a higher circular orbit rrroup. mostly with very precisely defined orbits which seemed very likely to be navigation satellites.

~. New Repetitive Sub8et8

But as 1970 approached its end. new variations appeared in fli~ht natterns and it seemed evident that new missions and new apnlications were being found for the C-1 class launch vehicle. The trend continued throuzh 1971, and still more time will be required before more positive inferences can be drawn about theprobable missions of these flights. The brief listings which follow examine these variations as WAll as the continuation of old patterns to establish as clearly as possible the subsets which exist in the announced orbits, leaving open the final significance of each subset.

13

(In kilometers; precise elements)

Apogee Perigee

lower circular orbit, possibly ferret flights, and less likely to be navigational flights, from

Plesetsk at 74°:

Kosmos 395 _

Kosmos 425 _

Kosmos 436 _

Kosmos 437 _

Kosmos 460 _

I ntermediate circular orbit, probably navigation, but changing, from Plesetsk at 74°:

~:~ :== =::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: ::::::::::: :::::::::

570 556 550 558 553

844 830

534 511 514 523 520

799 788

The change, referenced above, is that the series used to have apogees generally in the range of 786-760 kilometers, and perigees 775~747 kilometers. But the last 1970 flight of the series, Kosmos 372 was 828 by 786 kilometers. Because there seems to be little that is haphazard in Soviet flights, it seemed likely that some alteration in operations or purpose had occurred despite the reasonable match with the earlier series. Now with the 1971 flights given above, it is clear that they follow the Kosmos 372 pattern, and not the earlier pattern, and in effect may be a new subset of undetermined purpose.

(In kilometers, precise elements)

Apogee Perigee

Higher circular orbit, probably navigation, but also changing, from Plesetsk at 74°:

Kosmos 409 , __ .; _

Kosmo$ 422 • _

Kosmus 457 ----

Kosmos 465 __ ~ _

1,222 1,020 1,229 1,023

1,~

1,192 984

During earlier years, flights in this series had apogees in the range 1,234-1,187 kilometers, and perigees of 1,200-1,145 kilometers, usually with very precise elements listed. But late in 1970, KOSffiOS 381 was announced as 1,023 apogee and 985 perigee, serving as a topside ionospheric sounder, a scientific mission. Then Kosmos 385 was not given special announcement as a scientific payload, but flew at 1,005 apogee and 982 perigee, a close match. The main report speculated that the flights could be alike, perhaps both serving as navigation satellites even though the first was announced as a scientific flight with a specific mission. The question had to be left open. As one examines the flights of 1971 listed above, it is evident that there are now two subsets. Kosmos 422 and 465 are like 385. Kosmos 409 and 457 are a closer match in orbital elements to the earlier series of higher orbit flights. Again, we must recognize that some new complexity has been introduced into the 0-1 program although we cannot now define it.

3. Multiple Payloads

These new octuple flights began in 1970 with Kosmos 336-343, and probably their elements as announced at 1,500 and 1,400 kilometers should have been judged as imprecise. Within the limited scope of the analysis used here, this weakened the case for their being navigation satellites. as usually the initial launch of each new series judged as intended for that mission seemed to be accompanied by precisely defined orbital elements. On the other hand, the generally high placement

14

of these satellites is not a bad match for the earlier multiple flights out of Tyuratam which were judged most likely to serve a navigation purpose.

OCTUPLETS

(In kilometers. precise elements)

Apogee Peripe

Higher circular orbit, possibly navigation. but open to question. from Plesetsk at 74°:

Kosmos 411-41~-'413-414-145-416-417-418 _

Kosmos 444-445-446-447-448-449-45G--451 _

1.530 1.550

1.408 1.415

4. Scientific Flight8

Still other new uses for the C-1launch vehicle have appeared, perhaps suggesting that its larger lifting capacity and restartability of upper stage make it a growing substitute for the smaller, less versatile B-1 vehicles which used to handle most modest scientific missions.

The main report listed Kosmos 378 with an orbit ranging from an apogee of 1,763 to a perigee of 241 kilometers. While this eccentric orbit could have represented an attempt to put up a navigation satellite which failed to circularize its orbit as intended, it was suggested that it was more likely the beginning of another new mission series. That suggestion has been confirmed by a Soviet COSP AR report on its ionospheric studies, and it has been followed by two more flights, one acknowledged at launch as scientific.

(I n kilometers)

Apollee Peripe

Eccentric orbit flights. possibly related. and scientific, from Plesetsk at 74°:

Kosmos 426 1 ~ _

Oreol , __ ~ _

2.012 2.500

394 410

1 Precise elements.

, Imprecise elements.

Oreol was the French payload which was clearly scientific, and seems to be an approximate match in orbital elements to its Soviet predecessors, Kosmos 372 and 426.

(I n kilometers. precise elements)

ApOlLee

Lower circular orbit. mission unstated. from Plesetsk at 69.2°:

Kosmos 461. • ~ " • • _

524

490

What is striking about this flight is that it represents the use of a new inclination from Plesetsk, and also is still lower than the original larger set of lower circular orbits at 74°, and hence must be judged a

15

new mission. If it remains the only flight like this, it would probably be safe to classify it as possibly scientific, but we may have to wait a few years to see whether any findings are published.

5. Target Flight8

This is one series about which we can be fairly positive. In the military interceptor series of inspection/destruction satellites, the flights used to use 88-9 based (F-1-m) vehicles both for the targets and for the hunters. The American press is divided as to whether the targets were destroying the inspectors or whether the inspectors carried selfdestruct mechanisms. This writer leaned toward the latter choice, based upon British data of how and where the explosions in the interceptors took place, some distance from the targets and leaving the targets intact.

The 1971· flights which shifted to use of C-1 targets even more seemed to settle this question that same way. While a target ranging up to 10,000 pounds might be thought capable of carrying sophisticated homing rocket weapons to go after the mspectors, it is less likely that C-1 payloads closer to 1,200 pounds would serve this purpose. Other aspects of these missions will be discussed in greater detail in a later section of this report.

[In kilometers, precise elements)

Apogee Perigee

Various orbits, fairly circular, for target purposes, from Plesetsk at 65.8 or 65.9°:

Kosmos 394 _

Kosmos 400 _

Kosmos 459 _

574 995 226

C. MILITARY OBSERVATION RECOVERABLE SATEI,LITES (A-2)

1. More Third Generation Flight8

All of the flights in this series during 1971 were of the third generation extended life type, divided between higher resolution and lower resolution categories, and flying from both Tyuratam and Plesetsk at several inclinations. The tables which follow group these as continuations of similar tables contained in the main report.

!lrtL generaUon-A.-2 vehicZe8 with elDtenJtetL 8tOll! time 1st subgroup extended (possibly lower resolution)

TYUBATAY SERIES 52° inclination

Kosmos 428-12 days, pickaback Kosmos 431-12 days

65° inclination

Kosmos 392-12days

Kosmos 410-12 days, pickaback

PLESETSK SERIES 65° inclination

Kosmos 439--11 days

Kosmos 443-12 days, pickaback 81 ° inclination

Kosmos 403-12 days

16

2nd subgroup extended (possibly higher resolution)

TYUlI.ATAM SERlES 52° inclination

Kosmos 420-11 days, maneuvered Kosmos 429-13 days, maneuvered Kosmos 432-13 days, maneuvered

65· inclination

Kosmos 390-13 days, maneuvered Kosmos 399--14 days, maneuvered Kosmos 441-:1.2 days, maneuvered Kosmos 452-13 days, maneuvered Kosmos 463-5 days, maneuvered Kosmos 466-11 days, maneuvered

PLESETSK SEBIEB 65· inclination

Kosmos 396-13 days, maneuvered Kosmos 424-13 days, maneuvered Kosmos 430-13 days, maneuvered Kosmos 438-;13 days, maneuvered Kosmos 454-14 days, maneuvered Kosmos 470-10 dayS, maneuvered

72° inclination

Kosmos 401-13 days, maneuvered Kosmos 427~12 days, maneuvered Kosmos 442-13 days, maneuvered Kosmos 45~13 days, maneuvered Kosmos ~ days, maneuvered

81· inclination

Kosmos ~10 days, maneuvered

Mr. Geoffrey E. Perry of the Kettering Grammar School has established that Kosmos 4631 and 464 were maneuvered to stabilize their ground tracks over East Pakistan during the fighting there. It will be noted they were both recovered early as if a high priority was assigned to current order of battle information.

:2. Obseroation Proqrams Since 196:2

This in turn permits us to update a table in the main report summarizing all such flights as follows:

(I n degrees)
Tyuratam Plesetsk
52 65 69-72 65 72 81 Total
lst generation ________________________ 5 29 1 5 1 0 41
2d generation,low resolution ___________ 9 3 0 15 4 2 33
2d generation, high resolution __________ 16 25 0 21 7 2 71
3d generation, low resolution ___________ 5 9 1 5 1 2 23
3d generation, high resolution __________ 4 10 1 10 7 2 34 'J
Total __________________________ 39 76 3 56 20 8 202 17

':By years, the trends show up as follows:

2d leneratlon

3d "neratlon

1st low· high low high

"neretion resolution resolution resolution resolution Total

V .. r:

11!!!........ •••• •••••••••••••••.•• 5 ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••.•.•••.•••••••••••••••••••••

""" 6 .•.••••.•.•... 1 ••.•....••..•.••.•••..•.•...

1964_ •••••••••• _._. 9 ••••••.••••••• 3 ••••••••••.•.•••••..•••• " .••

1965 ••••.••• _...... 7 •.••...•.•••.. 10 •• _ ••••..••....•.•••.•••..•.

196&............... 9 2 10 ••.••••••••....••.••.••.•..•

1967............... 5 8 9 _.

1968 •••••••••..•••.•.•.•..•••..• _ 12 13 3 1

1~9::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: g 1~ ; ~

1971............. 7 21

Totel •••.•••.

33

71

23

5 7 12 17 21 22 29 32 29 28

202

41

34

This shows that Tyuratam has launched 118 and Plesetsk 84 of these satellites, and by 1971, only the third generation satellites were in use.

D. LUNOKHOD 1

1. Bmf De8or-iption 0/ Roving Vehicle

The main body of the report described the launch of Luna 17 to the Moon on November 10, 1970, entering lunar orbit on November 15, and then landing on November 17 at 38° 17' N. and 35° W. in the Sea of RQ,ins. The Lunokhod 1 remotely controlled roving vehicle, weighing 1,667 pounds, drove off a ramp of the lander platform to begin its independent existence on the Moon. This 8-wheeled vehicle with independent electric motors for each wheel could go forward, backward, turn in its tracks, and travel at different speeds. A four-man crew on Earth sent the necessary commands, but automatic sensors on the vehicle also protected It from moving onto slopes which would threaten it WIth tipping over. Its four television cameras permitted observation in all directions, stereo views, close up pictures or more sweeping panoramas. The cameras were each under 3 pounds, using 2.5 watts and transmitting pictures of 6,000 lines, 500 elements each. Pictures could be returned either in near real-time or in slower facsimile. It had various radio systems, computer elements, and thermal regulating devices. It also carried extendable devices to impact the lunar soil for density and mechanical properties tests, and an X-ray spectrometer both for chemical soil analysis purposes and for astronomical studies by telescope, Other detectors permitted analysis of the intensity and energy levels and directional sources of protons, electrons, and alpha particles. Power was' collected and converted by a large array of solar cells on the lower side of a lid over the top of the vehicle which in daylight was hinged to fold out and pivot to face the Sun. Buffer chemical batteries were used, and in the lunar night when the lid was closed to protect the sola, cells and vehicle, radio isotope sources maintained a sufficient level of internal heat to minimize the stresses of the intense cold on all systems.

18

92. Review of Operational Life

Lunokhod was intended to operate through three lunar days. The fact that it lasted for parts of 11 or 12 makes an impressive record by any standard. Rather than repeat in narrative form the highlights of ull the activities announced by Soviet sources, much of this information has been summarized in a single table, and supplementary comments will be added to supply other details and interpretations.

The table in some ways tells its own story, and is a little more explicit than the Soviet accounts. The first operating day was short because it was about half over when the landing was made. Fairly detailed reports and counts were filed for the three days .of planned operations. After that, fewer detailed statistics were provided except for radio contacts during the night, and the distance traveled each day. References were made to television pictures, associated with directing travel, and to panoramas for more general navigation, topographic studies, and astronomical studies. Soil chemical analyses were reported, as these took- enough power to suspend travel in order to accumulate electricity. These ceased after the 9th day. Astronomy tests for X-ray measurements and mapping of radio sources were referred to, but with no Quantitative counts either after the first three days or in summation. Soil mechanical tests were quantified after three days and in total, but not mentioned after the 9th day. A few discrepancies between lunar day totals and cumulative totals for travel show up in the announcements. The figure for the 11th day became a vague "almost 100 meters", which by subtraction can be established as 88. Finally the experiment officially ceased on October 4, 1971, the anniversary of Sputnik 1. The reason given was that the radio isotope supply used to keep the instrumentation functional despite the rigors of the lunar night had been too reduced in heat output. If so, the complete absence of any official announcement that the vehicle had been contacted during the 11th lunar night, and the absence of any announcement of its reactivation about September 30, and no reference to any work during the 12th lunar day strongly suggest that to all intents and purposes, the final performance of Lunokhod 1 came with its shutdown on September 15. It may be that October 4 was the day the team of operators abandoned any further attempt to revive the payload. This minor evasrveness about late performance should not detract from the outstanding accomplishments of the first automated roving vehicle on the Moon.

TABLE 9.-SUMMARY RECORD OF THE PERFORMANCE OF LUNOKHOD I, DELIVERED TO THE MOON BY LUNA 17

\

'\

Vehicle Vehicle

Lunar actio shut Lunar night

day vated down contacts

Travel TV

distance pane-

(meters) TV pictures ramas

Soil tests Astron·

omy

Meehan. Chem. tests

1 Nov. 17 Nov. 22 2 radio, 1 laser.... 197 14 •••••.•.••• 12~ ••.••• Some •••.

2 Dec. 10 Dec. 22 3 radio........... 1,522 Some ••.••••. 2L •••.••.• do •..••

3 Jan. 8 Jan. 20 2 radio........... 1,936 ••• do .••..••.. 20 •.••..• Some,

2001.

4 Feb. 8 Feb. 19 2 radio........... 1,573 •.••• do ••...•• Over 10 •. Some. ... 3 Some.

5 Mar. 9 Mar. 20 2 radio ••.•. _..... 2,004 ••..• do ••.•.•• Some ••••••• do..... 2 Do.

6 Apr. 8 Apr. 20 1 radio, laser •••.. 1,029 ••••• do ••.•.•.••• do ••...••• do..... 1 Do.

i r~a~ i ~~ l~ I ~:~lg=========== I, ~i~ =====~~==========~~========~~==:== f Do.

U ~~i.~! ~f.i. ~i :::~:;~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~.~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~:~~~~~~::::::::::

Total (7) •••••••... -.- .... ._._ ... _~ Over20,OOO •.• Over 200. Over 500. Over 25.. (7)

1 Some. 3 33.1 10 30.

1 CumUlative.

19

."1. Scientific Finding8

By its very nature, the Lunokhod has received more continuing coverage in Soviet reports than any other space activity. A considerable number of findings were made, only some of which have reached publishable form. The data are said to be yielding very detailed topological maps and. information on soil structure and composition of the area explored. Features not visible in orbital photographs were found. Instead of the expected basalt plain, the area turned out to be one of complex lava flows with considerable terrace stratification. Also, there are folded ridges, with the soil much stronger on top of the ridges.

The instrument named the Rifma was used both for measuring the chemical constituents of lunar soil and for interpreting the signals received through the telescope. By searching sectors of the sky with this telescope III conjunction with television panoramas of the sky, it was possible to pinpoint X-ray star sources. Measurements were made at levels between 2,000 and 10,000 electron volts in the 1 to 6 Angstrom wave length range. Although normally the Lunokhod cover was closed during lunar mghts, there were some special experiments conducted. On February 10 during the lunar day, an eclipse put the vehicle into darkness, and the temperature of the environs dropped from plus 138 degrees centigrade to minus 100 degrees centigrade. This three-hour test of rate of heat loss showed it came through undamaged. In another test, the television system was turned on March 7th during darkness and kept operational to witness the arrival of sunrise.

Several methods of navigation were used during its travels. Laser ranging from the Crimea and also the Pic du Midi in France permitted some very precise measurements. A second approach was the use of dead reckonmg, keeping a plot on where the vehicle had been. A third approach was to look for landmarks, and to estimate from changes in angles to these points to establish the location of the vehicle. A fourth approach was to take pictures of star fields and to measure the position of the Sun with a sextant in order to establish the vehicle's location.

The Russians reported the telemetry coming from Lunokhod was so extensive that just the engineering data on the behavior of the wheels produced a greater data flow than was obtained from all spacecraft combined for the years 1957-1960. The vehicle experienced many vicissitudes as it climbed into and out of craters and occasionally met boulders. Sometimes the list was 30 degrees. But by changes of course, and backing when necessary, it managed very well. Some areas of dust were found with depths up to 20 centimeters. Then the fifth wheel, a distance measuring device, would not always turn, and other data were required to establish the actual distance covered.

Another interesting phenomenon was measurement of a lOOO-fold increase in the level of low energy protons between April 7 and 10, after a solar flare had been observed from Earth on April 6.

As the table shows, during the 7th lunar day, little travel was accomplished, and it was feared that deterioration of systems would require restriction of experiments to static ones. But in fact, it came back to good performance on the 8th day, with a rapid deterioration thereafter. When the last of its travels were over, it was positioned so that the passive laser reflector supplied by the French could continue to be used for many years to come.

20

4. Relative Merit8 of Manned Ver8u8 Unmanned Roving Lunar Vehiole8

The success of Lunokhod inevitably brings back the recurring questions of the relative merits of manned versus automated flights to the Moon. The main report discussed this issue in connection with sample return, No clear cut answer was possible in that instance, but it was hard to escape the conclusion that Apollo flights at roughly $400 million each out-of-pocket bringing back 200 pounds of documented samples selected with care over some miles of terrain should have far greater scientific merit for analysis than a Luna 16 flight at roughly $100 million bringing back a sample of 3.5 ounces selected at random.

The closest parallel between the Luna 17 with Lunokhod mission would be the flight of Apollo 15 with the manned roving vehicle:

loaded Total Useful
wei~ht distance life
Name (poun s) (miles) (days) Power source Control
Lunokhod l , ___________________ 1,667 6.S 298 Solar cells __________ From Earth.
Apollo RoveL __________________ 1,540 40.0 3 Chemical batteries Astronauts. It will be observed this is something of 'an apples and oranges comparison. Time is of the essence with a manned flight, and the greatest mobility and practical speed are important. But if there is time for an unmanned vehicle to recharge its batteries, and for scientists on Earth to study each minute advance and discovery, then the extended life of the automated vehicle even with low speed gives a useful result.

Both roving vehicles were undoubtedly expensive to develop, although the automated Lunokhod system should cost many times more, including its Earth control units. The mission costs probably are on the order of $450 million for a manned rover and $100 million for the one-way trip of Lunokhod. The contrast is that men can bring observational powers, deploy certain experiments, and collect the most interesting rocks for return to Earth on a scale not yet possible under the Soviet plan. But the Soviet system permitted improvements in performance and interpretation of experiments which could be repeated as the ground crews and scientists worked month after month. Up to this time, the closest equivalent Soviet act.ivity to an Apollo round trip at $450 million with men and a roving vehicle would be to spend the equivalent of about. $200 million to send a Lunokhod to the Moon, and some months later make a surface rendezvous with a sample returner to bring back a few ounces of soil. Because no absolute determination can be made of the relative tradeoffs, it seems reasonable to suggest that the Lunokhod and Apollo approaches are complementary rather than competitive, and in fact even the Russians acknowledge this officially even though they have stressed the comparative cheapness of their automated system.

E. THE 1971 MARS ATI'EMPTS

As expected in the main body of the report, when the Mars window for launch opened in May 1971, the United States was joined by the Soviet Union in a series of launch attempts to that planet. Accom-

21

panying tables provided later summarize the flights of the two nations, and give further details on the Soviet flights.

1. Launch F ailure«

The United States was unsuccessful on May 8 in sending Mariner 8 on its way to Mars. The Centaur stage went out of control and the payload fell in the Atlantic near Puerto Rico.

Less publicized was the Soviet launch of its first Mars attempt of the 1971 window on May 10. It attained Earth orbit, but did not fire its escape stage so that after two days it decayed from orbit. The Russian press release came a day late, named the flight Kosmos 419, gave the orbital parameters, but did not make the usual statement that routine receipt of data was underway. They did publicize on their own launch day the Mariner 8 failure. By hmdsight, we can be reasonably sure the Soviet payload was put up by the D-1-e vehicle and was SImilar to the two later successes.

2. Launch. of Mar'S 2 and 3, and of Ma1'iner9

Moscow announced the launch of Mars 2 on May 19 as soon as it was clear that the payload had left Earth orbit at the requisite velocity to reach Mars. It was revealed as weighing 10,251 pounds, not including the weight. of the accompanying rocket stage. Telemetry was being received on 928.4 MHz.

The announcement on the successful launch of Mars 3 was equally prompt on May 28, describing a craft of identical weight and similar operating pattern, except that the latter payload also carried the French Stereo experiment designed to supply readings of the solar radio emissions and cosmic rays in the planetary medium as part of synoptic measurements to be made in France and the Soviet Union.

Mariner 9 was successfully launched on May 30, preceded by the usual U.S. detailed explanation of its intended purposes and instrumentation, which also as usual were lacking in the Soviet accounts of their own craft.

3.1nflight Proqress

The Soviet releases presently were expanded at least to report that both flights would be measuring data from the interplanetary medium, although only Mars 3 carried the French experiment. The Russians said that directional antennas on Mars 2 and 3 would greatly increase the flow of data over that of earlier experiments.

On June 8, a course correction was made by Mars 3 to bring it more nearly to its intended trajectory. A similar successful course correction was carried out by Mars 2 on June 17.

Nothing more was said about the performance of the two craft until July 27 when both were reported as operating normally. There had been 43 communications sessions with Mars 2 and 38 with Mars 3. Continuing measurements were being made of solar corpuscular radiation and of galactic cosmic rays.

The next announcement came on August 21, and dealt just with the continuing studies of the solar wind. Each craft carried 8 separate spectrometers to determine the speed, temperature, and composition of the basic components of the solar wind over time, in the range of energies from 30 to 10,000 electron volts. This was the last known reference to the flights for many months, and some Western observers began to suggest that the flights had failed.

22

As had been done with Venera 4 and thereafter, an analog of the Mars craft was operated on Earth in a vacuum chamber to receive the precise commands to be sent to the real devices. This enabled the operators to see how it responded. This was necessary in a situation where a command to fire a brief burst of a steering rocket took longer to reach the spaceship and the result to be communicated to Earth than the firing itself.

4. Mar8 ~ Arrival

The Russians waited until November 30 to announce that on November 27, 1971, Mars 2 had entered an orbit around Mars, with an apoapsis of 25,000 kilometers, a periapsis of 1,380 kilometers, the orbit inclined at 48054' to the equator with a period of 18 hours. As the payload first approached the planet, a capsule separated from the main bus and delivered to the surface of the planet at 440 S., 3130 W. a pennant bearing the coat-of-arms of the Soviet Union. The main bus was to study the planet from orbit. It had arrived at the planet after course corrections on June 17, November 20, and November 27.

5. Mar'S 3 Arrival

Not until December 7 did the Russians announce that Mars 3 had reached the planet in similar fashion, on December 2. This time the lander was referred to as a descent craft which parachuted to land at about 45° S. and 1580 W., after which it transmitted signals to Earth. Both Mars 2 and 3 were described as opening the way to conduct a search for life, but not themselves equipped for this purpose. The Mars 3 lander also carried Soviet insignia to the surface. The Mars 3 bus was put into a more eccentric orbit, with a low point 1,500 kilometers above the surface, and an ll-day period of orbit. Presumably the inclination was about as with Mars 2, and the high point should be at about 190,700 kilometers. Signals from the surface were transmitted by a weak omnidirectional system to the orbiting bus where they were recorded and later played at a slower data rate via the high gain antenna pointed toward Earth. Braking of the lander was accomplished by aerodynamic ballistic entry. and after a marked slowing of the craft, a drogue chute was released, followed by the main parachute. A rocket braking system supplied the final reduction in velocity to permit a survivable landing. This was activated by a radio altimeter 20-30 meters above the surface. It was stated that the signals from the surface had been brief, and were replayed to Earth from Mars 3 over the period December 2t05.

The landing site of the Mars 3 vehicle was in a relatively featureless rounded hollow about 1,500 kilometers across. Orbital television cameras with a resolution of 0.3 kilometers can detect no craters, even though beyond a surrounding area of ridges and cliffs, there are numerous craters.

On December 18 it was revealed when the lander reached the surface, and was stabilized, that after a lapse of 90 seconds, the several instruments and television system were activated. The TV began taking a panoramic view, but after 20 seconds of transmission, all signals from the lander ceased. The small portion of picture, when retransmitted to Earth, revealed no noticeable contrast of details.

23

We can now conclude with reasonable assurance that although the landing devices reached Mars, and in one case survived the landing, no small achievement, the overall results were disappointing in proportion to the capabilities provided. Undoubtedly Mars 2 and 3 carried similar landers, and the Mars 2 device failed early enough that it made a non-survivable landing. The Mars 3 lander failed for reasons unknown in less than two minutes after touchdown, when it might have been expected to send reports for a period of hours or days before its batteries ran down. It is not known what caused signals to cease.

A viation Week on March 6, 1972 reported that the real problem was in the relay antenna on the Mars 3 orbital bus which malfunctioned, while the lander probably continued to transmit data and television pictures from the surface, which could not be relayed to Earth. This may be a useful hypothesis, but cannot be confirmed from public evidence.

6. The Landere

The December 18 Soviet description of the Mars 3 lander can be presumed to apply to both Mars 2 and 3. They said it carried atmospheric temperature and pressure sensors, a mass spectrometer to determine atmospheric components, a wind velocity meter, devices to measure the chemical and mechanical properties of the soil, and a television system to supply panoramic views of the surroundings.

The best analyses which have appeared to date are those of the Jet Propulsion Laboratory in Pasadena, working from all the available, though limited, public data. (See Charles W. Cole: 201-72-1, Considerations of the Soviet Planetary Program in Light of the Mars 2 and 3 missions, February 22, 1972.) The lander capsule was an outgrowth of the self-righting petal design used for Luna 9 and the Venera landers. JPL used as a working hypothesis that the landed weight was on the order of 2,000 pounds.

7. The Orbital BU8e8 and Their Activity

The JPL study referred to included further calculations in an appendix prepared by P. H. Roberts. He showed by computer analysis that if the Mars 2 assemblage had included a 250-pound nominal lander, then 3,500 pounds of fuel were used in bus maneuvers and about 6,500 pounds was the weight of the bus injected into orbit. If the Mars 2 lander was 2,000 pounds, then the maneuvering and braking fuel used was 2,860 pounds, and the orbital bus injected weight was 5,390 pounds. For Mars 3, a lander of 2,000 pounds would mean a fuel weight expended of 2,330 pounds, and an orbital bus weight of 5,920 pounds inserted into Mars orbit. These data show the problems of trying to make precise estimates when Soviet data are so scanty. Although residual fuel weights may differ, the total logic of the missions would be for the basic structures and weights for both landers and both orbiters to be virtually identical between the two flights.

The Russians announced on December 15 that both Mars 2 and 3 had taken photographs of the planet at different distances and the pictures had been transmitted to Earth by facsimile after development in an automatic on-board laboratory. On December 18, further details supplied described the camera system as including both a wide

24

angle lens and a 40 narrow angle lens, and there are different light filters as well which could be shifted over the lenses on command. The continuing dust storm on Mars which hampered the much more ambitious picture-taking by Mariner 9 plagued the Russians as well.

Another Soviet announcement said that the French Stereo experiment carried by Mars 3 used a data compression system reducing by 100-fold the burden of transmitting significant results to Earth. Future systems were expected to provide similar economies in picture transmission, but such systems were not yet available.

Pravda carried a more complete account of instrumentation on December 19. The bus instruments on both Mars 2 and 3 consisted of:

An infrared radiometer to construct a Mars surface temperature distribution chart (8-40 microns range) .

An instrument to determine water vapor 'concentrations by spectral analysis by absorption in the 1.38 micron line.

An instrument to study surface relief by measuring the amount of carbon dioxide along a sighting line, according to the intensity of the 2.06 micron absorption band (an infrared photometer).

An instrument to study the reflectivity of the surface and atmosphere in the visible spectrum of 0.3 to 0.6 microns-a visible range photometer.

An instrument to determine the radio-brightness temperature in the 3.4 centimeter range, and for determining the dielectric permeability of the surface and temperature to a depth of 35-50 centimeters.

An instrument to determine the density of the upper atmosphere and the concentration of atomic oxygen, hydrogen, and argon-an ultraviolet photometer.

Two television cameras on the same axis, one wide angle, and the other narrow angle.

In general, the orbital buses seem to have done their job as planned.

On December 27, they announced the discovery of atomic hydrogen and oxygen in an analysis of the upper atmosphere of Mars.

By January 9, 1972, TASS reported that work from the stations was proceeding in an orderly fashion with no sensational disclosures. It was encouraging that the dust storm seemed to be subsiding. Pictures taken with the red filter were showing the dark areas of "seas" again, while ultraviolet pictures again showed bright clouds.

Moscow Radio ventured the opinion On January 26 that the conditions measured on Mars by the two orbital vehicles were compatible with life in the form of microorganisms and of some kinds of plants.

TASS reported that data collection by both orbital vehicles continued on January 29.

TASS further reported on March 1, 1972 that the dust storm on Mars was over. Soil temperature at a depth of several tens of centimeters was found to be largely independent of the time of day. The ionosphere was defined as beginning at a height of about 80-110 kilometers, with electron concentrations sharply increasing, then gradually diminishing with height. The orbital buses were said to be exploring the structure and surface of Mars, taking pictures of the planet, and measuring the temperature, pressure, density, and chemical composition of its atmosphere. A second bulletin that day stated

25

that by the first of March, Mars 2 had made 127 orbits of the planet and Mars 3 had made 7 orbits around Mars. The report ended: "The program for the work of stations Mars 2 and Mars 3 which are orbitmg Mars as its artificial satellites is nearing completion." (TASS, March 1, 1972, 1446 GMT.)

8. Tables on Pl(1.lMtary Flights

Table 10 is a continuation of the log carried in the main report summarizing all known Soviet and U.S. planetary flight attempts.

Table 11 also continues a corresponding table in the main report for the year 1971, with further details on the Soviet portion of the planetary flight effort.

TABLE 10.-CONTlNUATlON OF SUMMARY LIST OF PLANETARY FLIGHTS

Launch date

Spacecraft name

Cumulative national

Weight weight

(pounds) (pounds) Mission Results

1911:

May 8 ••••• Mariner 8 •••••••• May 10._ •• Kosmos 419 ••••.•• May 19_ •• _ Mars 2 ••••• _._ •••

2,270 10,251(1) 10,251

May 28_ ••• Mars 3 •• _._ •••.••

10,251

6,549 Mars •••.• Failed to aChieve orbit. 59,150 ... do ••••. Failed to leave Earth orbit.

69,400 ••• do ••••• Gathering data in Mars orbit; lander delivered coat of arms to surface on Nov. 27, 1971 in hard landing.

79,650 ••• do ••••• Gathering data in Mars orbit; lander survived touchdown, but TV transmission surface ended after 20 seconds, on Dec. 2, 1971.

8,819 •.• do •.••• Entered Mars orbit on Nov. 13, 1971 from which it is returning TV pictures and other data on the planet and its 2 moons.

May 30_. __ Mariner 9. ••••

2,270

TABLE II.-CONTlNUATlON OF SOVIET FLIGHTS RELATED TO THE PLANETS

Launch date and spaceCraft name

Time and place of flight termination

Weight

(kg) Mission

Results

May 10,1971, Kosmos May 12 (Earth)._ ••.• 4,650(1) Mars orbit and soft

419. landing.

May 19, 1971 :

Mars L •• _ •••••• In Mars orbil....... 4,650

Failed to leave Earth orbit.

Mars orbiL •••••... Arrived Mars Nov. 27, 1971, placed in

orbit at inclination of 48.9 degrees, apoapsis of 25,000 km., peri apsis 01 1,380 km., and period of 1,078 min. Returning pictures by facsimile and various radiation measurements.

Lander_ ••• _ •••• _. Nov. 27 (Mars) •••••••••••••. _. Mars soft landing •••• Made direct entry, ballistic, parachute, and rocket braking approach, but failed to make a survivable landing for instruments.

May 28, 1971:

Mars 3 •• _ ••••••• _ In Mars orblt, ••.... 4,650 Mars orbiL •••.. _. _ Arrived Mars Dec. 2,1971, placed in

orbit at inclination of 48.9(1) degrees, apoapsis of 190,700 km., periapsis of 1,500 km., and period of 15,840 min. Returning pictures by facsimile and various radiation measurements,

plus solar data for French Stereo experiment.

tander. ••.••••••• Dec. 2 (Mars) •••. --_ ..••••• _ .• Mars soft landing •••• Made direct entry, ballistic, parachute, and rocket braking approaCh, and touched down safely. Instruments turned on, and 20 seconds of TV

r,anorama returned when sudden ailure ended all further data. Location: 45 degrees S. 158 degrees W.

26

F. LUNA 18, 19 AND 20

The present series of large unmanned lunar flights began in 1969 with Luna 15, which crashed on the Moon during the Apollo 11 mission without a specific Soviet announcement of its intended purpose. In 1970, there were two similar lunar attempts which were stranded in Earth orbit as Kosmos 300 and 305.

Mr. Geoffrey E. Perry in a letter accepted for publication in Mathematics Teaching has applied set theory in a Venn diagram of all the known Soviet lunar landers of this series as a possible clue to their missions. Although this approach still leaves uncertainties, it strengthens the tentative conclusion about the possible purposes of the three flights referenced above. He shows that those flights which were intended to scoop a sample for return to Earth all flew at a time when declination of the Moon was close to maximum positive value, as well as flying a posigrade orbit around the Moon. Luna 16, 18, and 20, fit both conditions, and Kosmos 300 and 305 were launched at the right time of month for this same scooper mission. Luna 15 meets neither condition, but conforms with Luna 17, the Lunokhod carrier.

During 1970, as already described, the big Soviet lunar events were the successful flights of Luna 16 and 17. The Luna 17 operation continued through much of 1971 because of the work of Lunokhod 1. The Luna 16 mission itself was quickly over, once the small sample of lunar soil had been returned to Earth. During 1971, the task was one of continuing analysis of this sample, most of it unheralded in the press. Occasional mentions came up. On April 7, a small sample was supplied to the French; on April 30 a similar sample went to the Czechs; and on June 10, the United States and Soviet Union exchanged samples.

1. Luna 18

Luna 18 represented a continuation of the same program. It was launched on September 2, 1971 using a D-l-e vehicle, which first placed it in an Earth parking orbit. As the probe rocket carried it toward the Moon, it was found by Soviet astronomical observatories at a distance of 100,000 kilometers from Earth. Orbital corrections were made on September 4 and 6, and then on the 7th, it entered lunar orbit at an inclination of 35 degrees, about 100 kilometers circular, with a period of 119 minutes. A total of 85 communications sessions were held with the ship. Several maneuvers were made during the 54 revolutions around the Moon. On September 11, the braking rockets were fired and it reached the surface at 3° 34' N. and 56° 30' E. The landing area was rugged mountainous terrain, and the point of touchdown in this rough terrain was "unlucky" so that signals ceased at that moment. By hindsight. we can infer the' purpose of the flight was to brinz home a sample, probably using hardware duplicating that of Luna 16.

2. Luna 19

On September 28. 1971, Luna 19 was launched in similar fashion, usinrr a D-1-e vehicle to an intermediate Earth parking orbit. The wording of the press release differed from similar announcements of the same series of I .. una flights, implying it would stay in lunar orbit, not land, although that was not quite so explicit. During flight to the

27

Moon, the payload was observed by the Shternberg Observatory near Alma Ata, at an estimated distance of 120,000 kilometers. The Crimean observatory also obtained fixes on both the payload and the probe rocket at 60 positions. After 26 radio sessions en route, Luna 19 was placed in lunar orbit on October 3, at an inclination of 40° 35', at about 140 kilometers circular, with a period of 121 minutes, 45 seconds. This orbit was adjusted October 6 to 135 by 127 kilometers, and the period was cut to 121 minutes even.

Izvestiya on October 19 reported that Luna 19 was extending the systematic study of gravitational fields of the Moon, locating mascons, It was also studing the radiation environment near the Moon and the gamma-active lunar surface. Photographic coverage and television pictures of the Moon were extending geological knowledge of the lunar structure, and paving the way for future studies.

TASS said on December 2 that the orbit of I .. una 19 had become 40° 41', with an aposelene of 385 and a periselene of 77 kilometers, and an orbital period of 131 minutes. It had completed 722 orbits by that time. On December 31, Luna 19 was still active and performing its mission. This was reported again on .January 29 when it had completed 1,358 revolutions. Additionally, reference was made to its maznetic field studies, and the synoptic data it was gathering on solar wind to match that reported by Mars 2 and 3.

3. Luna eo

Luna 20 was launched on February 14, 1972 at 03 :28 GMT, using a D-1-e vehicle, and placing a platform in Earth parking orbit from which the probe to the Moon was sent on its way. Launch is said to have occurred within 1/2000 of a second of the intended time chosen as the optimum to minimize the burden of gravity, still bringing arrival near the Moon while providing good visibility to the deep space tracking station in the Crimea.

Various observatories made optical sightings despite cloudy weather with the help of electronic enhancers. The Crimean observatory saw Luna 20 at 130,000 kilometers. The Caucasus observatory did the same at 250,000 kilometers.

A midcourse correction was executed on February 15, and (In February 18 braking rockets slowed the payload to place it in lunar orbit about 100 kilometers circular at 65° inclination, and a period of 118 minutes. On February 19, the orbit was adjusted to a periselene of 21 kilometers, leaving the aposelene at 100 kilometers. It made a total of 41 revolutions. The braking rockets were fired on February 21 at 19 :13 GMT for a period of 267 seconds. This permitted a free fall to begin at an altitude of 760 meters, and then the main engine was fired again, followed by steering and some braking by small thrusters; and the main engine fired a last time at an altitude of 20 meters to complete a soft landing with engine cut-off at 2 meters. The landing occurred at 19 :19 GMT about 120 kilometers from the site of the Luna 16 landing,close to the place where Luna 18 had failed. The purpose was to correlate the sample from a mare brought back by Luna 16 with a different sample from the same general region of the Moon but in nearby mountainous terrain (lurain), in the hope of collecting older material,

28

After the landing, systems were checked out, and then a panoramic television system was turned on which surveyed the surroundings. On the basis of these views, a drilling site was selected. In contrast to the night operation of Luna 16, this experiment took place in sunlight. Apparently there was some improvement made in the drill system over that used for Luna 16, as It was described as designed for the first time to work simultaneously in hard and loose rock samples. A special lubricating system of "oil vapor" was used, a substance that would vaporize in a vacuum. Additionally a layer of lubricant was applied to some friction surfaces of the drill. As the drill was operated, the density of the soil grew and the drill was run more slowly; a halt was called, probably to permit cooling and to interpret returning data on drill operations. Then drilling continued. The hollow core of the drill was filled with lunar material and with contents in place it was swung to be placed inside the capsule atop the ascent stage and this capsule was hermetically sealed.

Launch back to Earth had to be timed to insure return to the Soviet Union, so the ascent stage waited until February 22, 22 :58 GMT before firing, using the descent stage as the launch platform. Telemetry monitored from Earth gave control over the return path. In the final approach to Earth, the return capsule separated from the ascent rocket, and aerodynamic braking in the atmosphere began. The chosen landing area measured 80 by 100 kilometers, with aircraft and helicopters standing by to effect recovery. Visibility was poor because of clouds and a raging blizzard. The reentry angle was 30 degrees in contrast to the 60 degrees of Luna 16. This cut the G load, but added to the heat load because of a greater time exposure to heat. Radar chaff was released to aid tracking, and with the opening of the parachute, a new radio antenna was extended. Six aircraft did the main searching, and then a helicopter served to guide a cross-country vehicle toward the actual landing site. The landmg occurred on a small island in a river. Three more cross-country vehicles were sent out, but the ice proved too thin to carry their weight. As the gale subsided a helicopter made the pickup. Then a plane carried the precious sample on the afternoon of February 26 to the lunar receiving laboratory near the plant which manufactured the Luna 20 equipment. It was another 14 hours of preliminary processing before the 'hollow drill was opened, and the lunar soil contents were poured out into a long steel tray inside a vacuum chamber. The material looked lighter in color and different from that returned by Luna 16. The weight returned has not been announced yet, but maybe slightly more than the 3% ounces of the earlier flight.

4. Tables on Lunar Flight

Table 12 continues the combined Soviet and U.S. log of all flights intended to reach the vicinity of the Moon, with data for 1911 added.

Table 13 is a similar continuation of the log contained in the main report with added data on all Soviet flights related to the lunar programs.

29

TABLE 12.-CONTINUATION OF SUMMARY LIST OF LUNAR FLIGHTS

Launch date and spacecraft name

Cumulative national

Weight weight

(pounds) (pounds) Mission

Results

662,902 Soft land Succeed-man lunar landing and return.

Recovered.

779,216 do. Succeed-man lunar landing and return.

• Used manned roving vehicle on Moon.

Recovered.

197,225 do Fail-signals ceased attouchdown.

211,725 OrbiL Succeed-still active, returning data.

226,225 Soft land Succeed-Made automated return to

Earth with sample. Recovered.

Jan. 31, 1971, Apollo 14__________ 102,177

July 26, 1971, Apollo 15 116,314

Sept. 2, 1971, Luna 18 _

Sept. 28, 1971, Luna 19 _

Feb. 14, 1972, Luna 2O__ " _

14,500(1? 14, SCO(1 14,500(1

TABLE 13.-CONTINUATION OF SOVIET FLIGHTS RELATED TO THE MOON

Launch date and spacecraft name

Weight

(kg) Mission

Time and place of flight termination

Results

Entered lunar orbit Sept. 6, maneuvered, made 54 orbits, then landed on Sept. 11, but signals ceased at touchdown because of rough terrain.

Entered lunar orbit Oct. 2 and after adjustment this orbit was: inclination of 40.6 degrees aposelene 135 km., periselene 127 km., period 121 minutes. Returning pictures, data on mascons, and a variety of radiation measurements. Still active.

Entered lunar orbit Feb. 18, maneuvered, made 41 orbits, then landed on Feb. 21. It drilled a core sample, then launched on Feb. 22. Direct ballistic return to U.S.S.R. and recovered.

Sept. 2,1971, Luna 18_ Sept. 11 (Moon) 6,575(1) Automatic sample

return.

Sept.28,1971,Luna 19_ In orbit (Moon) 6,575(1) LunarorbiL _

Feb. 14, 1972, Luna 20_ Feb. 25 (Earth)______ 6,575(1) Automatic sample return.

v. PROGRAM DETAILS-MANNED

A. PRECURSORS

A new series of precursor flights began in late 1970 and more occurred in 1971. These were as follows (altitudes in kilometers) :

Date

Name

Perigee Inclination

Apogee

1970:

Nov. 24 Kosmos 379 Original announcement _

Nov. 25 do After maneuver _

Nov. 30 do do • _

Dec. 2 s: __ Kosmos 382 Original announcemenL _

Dec. 7 do After maneuveL _

Dec. 8 do do _

1971:

Feb. 26 Kosmos 398 Original announcement _

Feb. 27 do -_ After maneuveL _

Feb. 28 do do _

Aug. 12 Kosmos 434 Original announcemenL _

~~:: ~~::::::::::::: J~:::::::::::::_ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~:::::::::::::

253

1,210 14,035 5,040 5,072 5,082

276 1,188 10,903 285 1,328 11,804

198 190 175 320

1,615 2,577

196 186 203 197 189 186

51.6 51.6 51.7 51.6 51.6 55.9

51.6 51.6 51.6 51.6 51.6 51. 6

30

It will be noticed that three of the flights fit one pattern, and the remaining one (Kosmos 382) is unique. Yet there are certain similarities. All four used an orbital platform, but with variations. The three similar ones abandoned their rocket stage at the low initial orbit, and abandoned the platform stage at the intermediate orbit, with the payload providing its own propulsion to attain the highest orbit. The unique flight used a double burn for the launch vehicle rocket stage, for it is listed in the Royal Aircraft Establishment register as first appearing separately at the low initial orbit, and then shifting to the intermediate orbit, quite similar to the intermediate orbit at which the orbital platform was abandoned. Was this a misinterpretation of events, or did the rocket stage actually make a separate maneuver equal to that of the launch platform? This seems a contradiction, so the object located close to the initial orbit of the payload must not have been the same rocket casing listed at the intermediate orbit also occupied by the orbital launch platform.

The nature of the initial orbits of three of the flights was very similar to a Soyuz orbit, and the signal formats and frequencies also resembled Soyuz. Hence it is assumed that they were launched by the A -2 vehicle. But a Soyuz class of ship has been repeatedly listed by the Russians as having a maximum altitude capability of 1,300 kilometers. Hence the use of an orbital launch platform like a lunar or interplanetary flight, and the further climb with on-board propulsion to 10,000 kilometers and more is clearly beyond the Soyuz capability. Mr. G. E. Perry of the Kettering Grammer School in England calculated the delta V's involved in Kosmos 379, and found a very close match to what might be expected for lunar orbit insertion and for trans-Earth ejection, as used for Apollo. Therefore he suggests that all four flights probably involve some testing of a Soviet equivalent of the Apollo SPS engine system as used for the CSM of Apollo on lunar flights.

If the A-2 rocket has been used for three flights, either there has been a drastic reduction in the weight of the precursor craft, or at last a high energy fuel system has finally reached spaceflight status, or both. It might.be useful to designate the launch vehicle for these three flights as the A-2-h on a tentative basis.

Kosmos 382 is different from the others not only in the fact that the perigee was raised instead of the apogee, but also a very substantial plane change was accomplished in the final maneuver. If this payload was similar to that of the other three flights, then only a D. class vehicle could have been used to make maneuvers of such magnitude, On an interim basis, this launch vehicle will be called the D-1-h.

More time will have to pass before missions can be assessed with any certainty. Mr. Perry may very well be right that all four are related to a future manned program to place Soviet cosmonauts in orbit around the Moon. But one might also imagine that there was some relation to variants of future Earth orbital stations. Because of the generallimitations of the A-2 vehicle, it will be arbitrarily assumed for now that the three flights are Earth-orbit related, even if later helpful to the Moon program; and the fourth flight will be assigned to the Moon

precursor category. -

B. SALYUT AND SOYUZ 10

1. Launch of 8al;1/ut

Very early on April 19, 1~71, at Tyuratam, the unl!1anned space st~tion Salyut was launched usmg a D-1-e class of vehicle to a low orbit

31

of 222 by 200 kilometers at an inclination of 51.6 degrees. This came after Moscow had been filled with rumors for some days of a major impending space flight event. The initial announcements, true to form, were very noncommittal. The purpose was announced as a test of elements of the systems of the space station, and to conduct scientific research and experiments on board the craft. Accompanying accounts were cast in general terms about the future roles of stations. This particular station was described as multipurpose and complex, for carrying out diverse plans.

2. Launoh. of SOyWJ 10

Just short of four days were to pass before the first specific use of the station was signaled by the launch of the man-carrying Soyuz 10. This launch occurred before dawn local time at 2._~:54 GMT April 22. The crew of three consisted of Col. Shatalov, pilot, who was a veteran of the Soyuz 4 docking, and the Soyuz 8 attempted docking; civilian Yeliseyev, flight engineer, who had transferred in space from Soyuz 5 to Soyuz 4, and had been in Soyuz 8; and a newcomer, civilian Rukavishnikov, described as responsible for operation of systems in the Salyut station.

Soyuz 10, launched on a A-2 vehicle, was put into the same orbital plane as Salyut, with an apogee of 246 kilometers, a perigee of 208 kilometers, and an inclination of 51.6 degrees. Colonel Shatalov indicated this was a little higher an orbit than had been sought, but a correction would not be difficult. Even so, instead of making a fairly direct ascent to rendezvous with the Salyut, almost 24 hours were to elapse before this was accomplished. The Salyut was maneuvered by remote control four times, Soyuz 10 made three principal maneuvers. One of these came 13 hours and 35 minutes into the flight : Soyuz 10 made a major adjustment of orbit on the basis of instructions radioed from the new large tracking ship Akademik Sergey Koroleo in the Atlantic. Automatic devices did the actual work of rendezvous until the two spacecraft were only 180 meters apart. The crew of Soyuz 10 said they were not able to see the station until the ships were within about 15 kilometers of each other, and then they used an "optical device" to see it. Later as they approached, they could then see lighted beacons on the station as an aid to docking. They described the station as very impressive, painted in more brilliant colors than they had noticed while it was still on Earth, and they observed its many exterior instruments and antennas. Shatalov took over manual control at 180 meters to accomplish the actual docking, later saying the difference in size between the two craft made the Soyuz seem like a train entering a railway terminal. Apparently the docking experience was very nervewracking for the crew. It was executed with great care and at a very low approach speed. All the commentary said that the problems of docking with a large mass, unmanned, then nonmaneuvering station, were quite different from the joining of two Soyuz, each able to adjust its position. While Shatalov did the steering, his colleagues monitored the various instruments on status of systems. Even with the tension, the actual docking was said to have gone smoothly.

3. New Equipment in Dooking

Soviet accounts emphasized that many new systems were involved in the tests. These were said to be greatly improved over previous equipments, despite the strains involved both for the crew in space and

32

the ground controllers. New systems of telemetry were used .. The rendezvous system was different. 'rhe docking equipment ~as e~tIrely new. The Salyut itself was described as the first of Its kind WIth no precursors having been flown earlier.

4. Separation and Recovery

The two ships remained docked for about 5.5 hours. Television cameras external on both ships had watched the procedures of approach, docking, and separation. After the un docking, Soyuz 10 flew all around the station to take a variety of pictures. After that preparations were made for return to Earth. Retrorockets were fired at the earliest opportunity after un docking which would permit return to Earth in the normal recovery area. The work cabin and service module were then separated, and the command module returned to Earth in the normal Soyuz manner. The flight had lasted just short of two days, and the before dawn landing near Karaganda was another first in the Soviet program.

The Russians said that although the flight had been short, it had been scheduled to a very tight degree for the research and testing tasks which were successfully accomplished. There is some confusion about crew condition. Rukavishnikov is said to have been quite uncomfortable at first on experiencing weightlessness, but was aided by his companions on how to minimize the discomfort. In another press conference, perhaps to offset rumors that this medical problem had contributed to early termination of the flight, the crew said Rukavishnikov adjusted so well, he was eating ravenously of the food supplies on board.

5. Ground Reception of Crew

The launch of Soyuz 10 to join Salyut was not a surprise in relation to expectations. The early return of Soyuz 10 to Earth, and the failure of the crew to transfer mto the Salyut station was a surprise. Typica~ly, Soviet accounts said that mission objectives had been accomplished successfully.

After the flight, some Western observers read significance into the report that the crew on arriving at Moscow was met by a smaller delegation of officials than had been experienced by earlier returning cosmonauts. The Chief Designer was said to have been present, but not the top political leaders. However, the traditional welcome was accorded the three cosmonauts in the formal reception in the hall of the Great Kremlin Palace. The Soviet account said the powerful sounds of the choir and symphony orchestra rendering Glinka's chorus "Glory" blended with the stormy applause of the many important leaders who formed a living corridor up which the three men strode to be greeted by Brezhnev, Kosygin, and Podgorniy. All three men were decorated, and Shatalov was promoted to the rank of Major General, matching Beregovoy and Nikolayev.

6. Possible Flight Difficulties

Considerable speculation has surrounded this pair of flights, with questions raised as to whether the full objectives were met. It seems reasonable to accept the Soviet statement that the missions achieved their primary objectives of exercising the new telemetry, docking and

33

control systems, and to recover the men safely, with further unmanned experiments continuing with the Salyut.

But it also seems likely that the total mission fell short of its en~neering capabilities and Soviet hopes. An inferential case can be built to support this conclusion, and some rumors are consistent with this logic. One of the most complete analyses was that supplied by the Agence France Presse which often has good sources in Moscow. AFP reported that Salyut originally was to have been launched on March 27, but was delayed by problems in checkout. Once the launch came, further difficulties delayed the launch of Soyuz 10. The French predicted that in the second half of May a manned Soyuz 11 might be launched to conduct a second docking with Salyut. There were other details as to the volume of the Salyut and the number of docking ports it had, which in fact have not stood up well in the light of later information.

The possible signs of trouble in the mission were as follows:

(1) The four-day delay in launching Soyuz 10 might be accounted for by the complexity of checking out the Salyut, or may have signaled that either ship had problems which for a time threatened the mission.

(2) The twenty-four hours required to accomplish rendezvous and docking seem to extend beyond the time to be expected even for a lowfuel-cost rendezvous, compared with the greater demands of direct ascent. This also suggests the possibility of continuing systems problems.

(3) The failure of the crew to transfer into the station after a successful mechanical lock of the two ships seems surprising, especially because Rukavishnikov was a specialist in the systems of the station. Either the hatches and air locks were not functioning properly, or there was some threat of trouble which might require a quick disconnect and return to Earth.

( 4) The early return to Earth at the first opportunity suggested either trouble in Soyuz 10, or such dependence upon equipment, consumables, and systems of the Salyut that when these were found to be unavailable, there was no point in prolonging the mission.

(5) When all previous Soyuz flights are plotted on a graph to compare hour of launch with number of days of flight until recovery, a very regular relationship is revealed. On this basis of estimation, the before dawn launch of Soyuz 10 seemed to signal a 30-day flight, and yet the flight was terminated after 32 orbits (2 days), with a before dawn landing.

The implication suggested by references to an entirely new docking system was that crew transfer would come through an internal tunnel and set of locks, rather than externally by EVA as used in Soyuz 4 and 5. Because no EVA was mentioned, and the crew was pictured as being launched in coveralls, it seems likely no EVA suits were carried on Soyuz.

After Soyuz 10 returned to Earth, the ground controllers continued with their regular work of managing and testing the Salyut station, to verify the systems under actual flight conditions. Because of the low orbit assigned to Salyut during the period it was to serve as a rendezvous target for Soyuz 10, the station would have decayed from orbit

34

around May 3 through atmospheric drag, Accordingly, after Soyuz .10 returned to Earth, the on-board propulsion of Salyut was fired to raise its orbit by about 50 kilometers, which would have extended its orbital life by about 45 days.

C. SOYUZ 11 AND SALYUT

At least twice during May 1971, the Salyut space station was moved to slightly higher orbits to offset the orbital decay which had threatened to bring its reentry in the first half of June.

1. Launch of Soyuz 11

On June 6 at 04:55 GMT, Soyuz 11 was launched from Tyuratam using the callsign Yantar (Amber). It carried the following crew:

Command Pilot, Lt. Col. Georgiy Timofeyevich Dobrovolskiy, Red Air Force, age 43; Flight Engineer, civilian Valislav Nikolayevich Volkov, veteran of the Soyuz 7 flight, age 35; and Salyut Test Engineer, civilian Viktor Ivanovich Patsayev, age 37, who turned 38 in orbit.

The first day of flight went routinely with appropriate maneuvers by the pilot to effect a rendezvous until Soyuz 11 was 6-7 kilometers from Salyut, about 04 :26 GMT on June 7. Then automatic devices took over and during the course of the next 24 minutes closed the gap between the two ships to 9 meters, with a relative speed difference of 0.2 meters per second. Actually the automatic control passed to manual control at 100 meters. The process of docking was fairly complicated and took until 07 :45 GMT to complete. The process, after initial engagement, consisted of making the connection mechanically rigid, engaging various electrical and hydraulic links, and a thorough process of establishing air-tight seals before locks could be opened. Then pressure had to be equalized between the ships, the locks were opened, and Patsayev traveled through into the space station, presently followed by Volkov. They were busy preparing the station for its functions as a habitated craft, switching on the recycling systems, and switching the command functions of the combined craft to the central control panel in the Salyut. Only after this did Dobrovolskiy join his two companions.

93. Detaiis on Salyut

For the first time, details were supplied about the Salyut. It was described as 20 meters long and 4 meters in diameter at the maximum. The combined weight of Salyut and Soyuz 11 was given as in excess of 25 metric tons. There is some confusion in the Soviet account about the length, as if the figure quoted included the Soyuz 11. But since the Soyuz 11 without its docking probe is about 9.5 meters (31 feet) long, it seems likely from a released drawing and a photograph that the 20 meters (65 feet) length refers to Salyut alone, giving a combined length of 29.5 meters (96 feet). Because the Soyuz 11 should have weighed about 6,575 kilograms (14,500 pounds), and the combined weight of the two is over 25 metric tons (55,125 pounds, Salyut alone should weigh in excess of 18,425 kilograms (40,625 pounds). This weight is down from an earlier figure, not revealed, before several maneuvers began, and hence is compatible with the 44,000 pounds estimated in some portions of the main report.

35

I

The Salyut station is described as consisting of several compartments. Of these, three were pressurized, and two could be entered by the crew. The first was the transfer compartment which was connected directly with Soyuz 11. It had a docking cone, with a front end diameter of 2 meters, growing to 3 meters at its after end. The main habitable compartment was about 4 meters in diameter. Television interior views showed a considerable amount of space with big chairs, and several control panels. Still later it was revealed there were eight chairs, seven at work consoles. All told there were 20 portholes, some unobstructed by instruments to give good visibility of the Earth or space. The third pressurized compartment contained the control and communications equipment, the power supply, the life support system, and other auxilIary equipment. The fourth and final compartment was not pressurized, and was about 2 meters in diameter. It contained the engine installations and associated control equipment.

Externally, there were two double sets of solar cell panels, placed at opposite ends, extending like wings from the smaller diameter compartments, in much the same manner as the panels on the Soyuz craft. Also externally were the heat regulation system's radiators, the orientation and control devices. Some of the scientific instrumentation was internal, some was external on the ship.

Internally, there were about 100 cubic meters of space in the pressurized compartments. The station had buffer chemical batteries, reserve supplies of oxygen and water, and regeneration systems.

The approximate 3,500 cubic feet of interior space in Salyut compares with approximately 210 in Apollo and 315 in Soyuz. When the U.S. Skylab flies, it will weigh over four times as much as Salyut, and have 12,763 cubic feet.

3. Mission of Salyut

After the crew transferred into the station, the Russians announced its mission as :

(1) To check and test the design, units, onboard systems and equipment of the orbital piloted station.

(2) To tryout the methods and autonomous means of the station's orientation and navigation as well as the systems of controlling the space complex while maneuvering in orbit.

(3) To study geological-geographical objects on the Earth's surface, atmospheric forma;tions, the sno,,: and ice cover. of the Earth with the aim of developmg methods usmg these data III the solution

of economic tasks. .

( 4) To study physical characteristics, processes and phenomena in the atmosphere and outer space in various ranges of the spectrum of

electromagnetic radiation.... ... . .

(5) To conduct medico-biological studies to determine the P?sSIbIhties of performing various jobs by the cosmonauts m the station .and to study the influence of space flight factors on the human organism.

1,. Summary of Mission Aotivity

The mission set an all-time manned flight duration record~ and a considerable number of experiments were conducted. The SImplest way to summarize the detailed Soviet accounts is to present a t.able of activities by days, which follows, and then to comment on special features which are revealed. (See Table 14.)

TABLE 14.-DAILY LOG OF ACTIVITIES ON SALYUT DURING THE PERIOD SOYUZ 11 WAS DOCKED TO IT

Date

Earth Observations

Biology Operations

Ship Systems

Astronomical Observations

June 7 1971 .____ _ _ Test on board life support systems Dock and seal hatch connections. Hook up

, ------------- - ------ - communications. Activate systems. Functioning normally.

June 8, 197L Check research equipment and activate it, Test on board life support systems in differ- Make orbital correction, then spin stabilize

ent regimss. Do exercises. TV broadcast to Earth. Functioning normally.

Make second orbit correction. Stress conservation of ship systems. Check gas atmosphere. TV broadcast to Earth. Functioning normally.

TV broadcast to Earth. Functioning normally.

June 9, 197L Make further adjustments to equipment. Test wide angle sights for precise orienta- Try out tension suits to simulate gravity

Measure radiation levels, micrometeor- tion on Sun and planets. force on muscular·skeletal system. Do

ites. other medical and biological experiments.

June 10, 197L Using various lenses and filters, make More physical exercises. Take blood sam-

reports on weather, clouds, snow, ice. pies. Check cardiovascular systems.

Check bone calcium density, Check water balance. Check experiments with fruit flies, chlorella, seeds.

More biological monitoring of cosmonauts, including vestibular reactions and arterial pressure.

June 11, 197L Spectrographic measures of atmosphere,

land and water surface. Measure micrometeorites.

Use gamma ray telescope to study intensity, angular distribution, energy spectrum of primary cosmic gamma radiation. Check Influence of space environment on

optical samples for developing extraatmospheric telescopes.

June 12, 197L Photograph various atmospheric formations ••• •• _ •• • ._._. __ ••••••• Check radiation safety by effective dosi-

metric system-values and build-up of doses by different components. Test respiration, gas exchange, energy expenditure. Test blood circulation, EKG, seismocardiogram, pulse, other cardiovascular measures:

June 13, 1971. .. _'" ~ In joint tests with Meteora satellites, Measure characteristics of cosmic radiation __ Do physical exercises. Use hydroponic farm

observe and photograph cloud cover. to raise Chin6se cabbage, flax, and onions.

June 14, 1971 ......... Joint exp6riments with aircraft carrying .. ... _ ....... • __ ... _ ..... _. .. _ Continue 2 hours daily exercise. Continue

same Instruments to check spectra of automatic monitoring of medical condi-

reflectivity, soil characteristics. Also tion by speech, cabin parameters, pulse,

check cloud cover. respiration, EKG, seismocardiogram at least twice daily.

June 15, 1971. ..... __ • Jointteston cloud cover with Meteora.Joint .......... _. __ .... _._. ...... __ ...... _ Measure surface and deep radiation to de-

tests with aircraft on spectral charac- termine relative biological effect of cos-

teristics of surface formations for agricul- mic radiation, sorting out protons,

Functioning normally in full conformance with plans.

TV broadcast to Earth. Stable eemmunications. Functioning normally, all according to plan.

Test autonomous navigation system. Functioning normally.

Adjust autonomous navigation system using on-board computer. TV broadcast to Earth. Functioning normally, all according to plan.

TV broadcast to Earth. Crew feeling well.

.! .'

ture, land improvement, geodesy,

cartography.

June 16, 1971 __ •• Radio frequency mass spectrometer used

to investigate composition of upper atmosphere. Photometry of light effects. Distribution of charged particles-ions, electrons, in orbit. Study of high frequency electron resonance on antenna

performance.

,June 17, 1971 Day of rest, performing physical exercises,

mutual medical exams.

neutrons, and gamma radiation. More cardiovascular tests.

Craw equipped with flight suits, exercise suits, "Penguin" suits to put stress on skeleton and muscles like Earth gravity, and one other kind of stress suit.

Good results in testing manual and automatic ship control, using optic sighters, plotters, astronomical reference points, new ion orientation. Functioning well, crew feels well.

The crew continues to fulfill the program. (Soviet press: We hear report of minor correction work. Answer: Ship carries tools to open instrument panels, spare parts, safety devices.(

June 18, 1971 Experiments begin with Orion astrophysi- Attention to farm of kale, flax. crepis. Use TV broadcast to Earth. Functioning nor-

cal observatory on board, with checkout of exercise machines and load suits for mally. (Kettering Grammar School detects

of equipment. To study spectral char- 27'2 hours. Soyuz 11 frequency telemetry for some

acter of stars in short wavelengths not hours as if equipment switched from

visible from Earth. dormant to powered up state for recovery.)

June 19,1971. Optical studies of Earth day and twilight Investigation of cardiovascular system Use solar orientation instrument to check

horizons. with spectrograph. Study dis- using functional loads. Study visual func- accuracy of ship gyros for extended

tribution of aerosol particles. tions of spatial perception and color period. TV broadeast to Earth. Functioning

sensitivity. Measure bone calcium den- normally.

sity.

June 20, 1971. Sent weather feports Day of rest, TV broadcast to Earth. Functioning normally.

June 21, 1971. Investigation of polarization of solar light Orion experiments to obtain spectrograms of Routine medical examinations Reoriented ship position. Functioning ae-

reflected from Earth. UV radiation from Alpha Lirae and Alpha cording to plan.

Zeta of Ophiuchus. using both the ex· ternal telescope and another inside the ship looking out a porthole. Further measures of primary cosmic gamma rays.

June 22, 1971. Manual spectrograph measures of physical Routine medical experiments. More work TV broadcast to Earth. Functioning normally.

properties of the atmosphere. especially with Casis-1 hydroponic farm.

of twilight horizon. Cloud cover and cy·

clone observations.

June 23, 1971. Study of brightness and contrast of Earth, _

photographing with wide angle system.

More Earth resources experiments.

June 24, 1971. Synchronized picture taking of Earth and. _

stars for precision location to suppCfrt

geology. geodesy, and cartography, both

with three-axis stabilization and while

spinning on various axes.

Further studies of functions of organisms under conditions of long duration space flight.

More biological monitoring. on 12 channels of EKG and 30 blood circulation parameters. Brain blood circulation measured. Some data stored on magnetic tape.

Study of optical coatings port holes. Orienta· tion system tested. Functioning normally.

Manual and automatic orientation of ship tested in connection with picture taking. Functioning normally. crew feeling well.

Date

Earth Observations

Astronomical Observations

Biology Operations

Ship Systems

TABLE 14.-DAILY LOG OF ACTIVITIES ON SALYUT DURING THE PERIOD SOYUZ 11 WAS DOCKED TO IT-C:ontinued

TV broadcast to Earth. FUnctioning normally crew feeli ng well.

Check on board systems. Functioning normally, crew feeling well. IKetterinf Grammar School again detects Soyuz 1 frequency telemetry as if equipment switched from dormant to powered up state for recovery.)

June 29,1911. . Mutual medical tests Filled out ship logs. Checked ship systems.

functioning normally, crew feeling line, Data, specimens and films moved to Soyuz 11. Hatches sealed and cre"! undocked.

June 25, 1911. Era equipment, multifunctional, to measure Functioning normally.

parameters of ionosphere, and electron

resonance, charged particles.

June 26, 1911 Record intensity of charged particles and Measure micrometeortie conditions More measures of radiation tissue doses. FUnctioning normally, crew feeling well.

charge spectrum of nuclei of cosmic Medical checkups and physical exerciese.

particles.

June 21, 1911 Medical experiments, physical exercises.

Crew resting in turn.

June 28, 1911 . Continued checks on cardiovascular systems

with and without exercise.

39

t

The main load of communication with Earth was carried during passes over Soviet territory, but added coverage was carried by signals sent via the large new tracking ship Alcademilc Berg_ey K oroleo in the Atlantic, which in turn used a Molniya 1 satellite relay to home base.

The summary table of activities reveals that health monitoring and exercises for the crew were continued throughout the mission. Some monitoring was close to continuous, some was periodic, and some was supplemented with more detailed self-administered tests. Other biological specimens and a hydroponic farm to grow plants were carried, and used in experiments. Work related to Earth resources and weather was extensive. Detailed astronomical work began about midway in the mission, although various radiation studies had been conducted earlier. Ship systems and instrumentation got considerable testing.

5. Degree of Suooess and Possible Problems

How successful was the mission ~ Overall, it seems to have lived up to reasonable expectations. There were many rumors in the Western press that the men were at various points uncomfortable, tired, and reduced in the ability to perform. Most days the Russians summarized the condition of the flight, saying that it was functioning normally. When there were variations in the language or omissions, one is not sure whether that was happenstance, or an indirect way of indicating that things were not always normal. In this regard, there is an intriguing irregularity in the reports at one stage of the mission. On June 17, no reports of scientific work were released, and no television show to Earth was mentioned. The Soviet press stated that there were reports of "minor correction work" that day. They were told by Soviet authorities that the ship was equipped WIth the means to get at instrumentation and wiring behind panels, to effect repairs, and that spare parts were carried, and also safety devices. They did not elaborate. On June 18, when more scientific experiments were announced, there was a TV broadcast. But of some interest, Mr. G. E. Perry of the Kettering Grammar School in England detected that telemetry was being transmitted on the long dormant Soyuz 11 frequency. Did this mean that troubles alluded to on the 17th brought the possibility of an early return from orbit on the 18th ~ In any case the mission continued. June 26th was the last day of substantial experimentation. After that the accounts spoke of medical checkups, physical conditioning, checking the on-board systems. They were getting ready to vacate the station, and to leave it in condition for possible later visits, according to Soviet accounts.

8. Separation and Recovery

On June 29, scientific specimens, films, tapes, and other gear had been "loaded into Soyuz 11. The crew returned to that ship, having transferred the main manual control back to their ferry craft. At 18 :28

40

GMT with hatches sealed, the Soyuz 11 undocked. It flew a coorbit for a time, then retrofired at 22 :35 GMT. The normal follow-on routines of casting off the work compartment and service module were carried out prior to entering the dense atmosphere. Under its automatic systems, the ship oriented itself and steered to the intended recovery area. Radio communication with the crew came to an abrupt end at the moment of separating the work compartment probably at 22 :47 GMT even before the normal ionospheric blackout. The drogue and main parachute systems functioned, and a normal landing was made, at an estimated time of B3 :17 GMT. This gave a total flight duration for the men of 070 :22 hours, and 383 orbits, including 18 prior to docking, 362 in docked condition, and 3 after undocking.

7. Deaths of the Uosmonauts

The rescue helicopter crew on reaching the landing site and opening the hatch was horified to discover all three men dead in their seats. The official results of the investigation showed that the men died suddenly of pulmonary embolisms when the imperfect seal of the hatch between their command module and their work compartment permitted the air supply to evacuate in the seconds after the two separated. There was no time to cry out, and precisely what happened could only be deduced, although with a fair certainty. There has been no detailed report made public corresponding to that which followed the Apollo 204 fire.

In this absence of confirmed information, there have been many theories offered as to why this happened, but the leak in the hatch is circumstantially logical and obvious. The bodies were on public display in Moscow, but aside from rumors of bruises, there was no further evidence from this inspection. Autopsies were performed, and the bodies were cremated very soon. One popular story, denied by the Soviet account, was that some time barrier to extended manned flight had been crossed, and the men after almost 24 days in orbit were no longer competent to protect themselves by making routine checks that all safety measures were complete. It is conceivable that they were exhausted to the point where more alert men might have at least cried out by radio even if they could not overcome the air leak. But this is guessing. Another story was that despite all the physical monitoring and exercising, the men on return to gravity had suffered terminal cardiac arrest. Had this been so, the story ran, perhaps man was doomed never to spend more than a few days in weightlessness. This theory almost on its face seemed unlikely because there was no evidence of deterioration in extreme measure before the men returned, and it seems unlikely that all three men would die simultaneously after a very few minutes exposure to about 2-4 G's of gravity, while cushioned in contour couches. By the very nature of this unexpected accident, there will probably always be speculative stories, made even

,

....

41

harder to dispose of so long as the Russians remain secretive about their findings beyond the barebones announcement. Probably the flights in Skylab will dispose of the time barrier rumors.

The 1966 death of Chief Designer Korolev was felt by people in the program both because of the high esteem given him and his genuine leadership. The 1967 death of Cosmonaut Komarov had been a big shock to the Russians who could hardly accept even philosophically as applying to their space program that all means of transportation can eventually have accidents. The deaths of the three cosmonauts in 1971 was a major setback to the Soviet space program, which entered an eclipse even in its unmanned practical applications for many months. Only late in the year did the pace of flights pick up again to bring the annual total to the highest level yet achieved by any nation.

8. Further Work with Salyut

As early as July 4,1971, Boris Petrov predicted in Pravda that more stations would be sent to orbit to continue manned space flight. Western observatories were to note that Salyut was moved to higher orbits in July and Au~ust to insure that it would not end through early decay. This provided both an opportunity to test the longevity of its automatic systems, and to keep open the option of sending up a Soyuz 12 if it was deemed suitable.

On October 11, the Salyut engines were fired for a last time, now to lower its orbit to insure prompt decay over the Pacific Ocean. Hence after'175 days in space, the first real space station came to an end.

No complete account and very few of the actual findings have been presented by the Russians. Pravda reported on October 26, 1971, that the Salyut tasks were solved in 75 percent of cases by optical means, in 20 percent by radio-technical means, and the small balance by magnetometrical, gravitational, and other studies. Often synoptic readings were taken in both the visible and invisible parts of the electromagnetic spectrum.

D. ZOND MANNED PRECURSORS

The main body of the report traced Soviet hopes to send men around the Moon by the fall of 1967, and how that program fell behind its intended schedule. By 1970, Zond precursor flights had tested a variety of flight paths and recovery methods on Earth with a ship design frankly described as capable of carrying a human crew. Only in early 1971 was a drawing released of the ship which showed it virtually identical in external appearance to Soyuz, but without the forward work compartment.

No more Zond flights were announced in 1971. Detailed biological findings on seeds carried by Zond 5 in 1968 were revealed early in 1971, after comparisons of growth and analysis of the chromosomes of result-

42

ing plants with control seeds and plants maintained on Earth. In general, there were no differences, except that barley and pine seeds showed some changes as expected because of their known sensitivity to radioactivity.

In the spring of 1971, a detailed account of lunar photogrammetry work by Zond 6 of 1968 was reported. The ship carried a standard aerial camera with a focal length of 400 mm, and frame size of 13 x 18 cm, with a resolution of 50 lines per mm. Also that spring the Russians summarized the biological findings of Zond 5, 6, and 7, listing all the principal experimental materials carried and the analytical methods used to process the results. In general they concluded that during quiet Sun periods, manned flights would not be dangerous.

In the summer of 1971, the Russians gave details of the proton analyzing instruments carried by Zond 4 and 5 in a fairly thorough review article. Finally on August 19, 1971, TASS summarized all these same findings and said the Zond data had now been fully processed and analyzed. Nothing further was said about plans. This writer gets the feeling that the Soviet Government was indirectly indicating the program had been closed out. It could very well mean that the passage of time with long delays has obsoleted this particular approach to manned lunar flight. Also, after almost seven years of tests, the D~l~ vehicle has yet to be used for any manned launch, although Salyut was joined by men after launch. Considering the variety of flight patterns pursued during the development period, one would expect at least one more unmanned flight if it should turn out the Russians have not abandoned their intention to fly men in this craft. Such a precursor would fly the route selected for the manned follow-on.

This report had assumed the weight of a Zond was 6,575 kilograms or 14,500 pounds. In recent months, the British Royal Aircraft Establishment has estimated the weight as 4,820 kilograms, or 10,626 lbs., its length as 5.3 meters (17.2 feet) and diameter as 2.3 meters (7.5 feet), which is not unreasonable.

E. MANNED FLIGHT STATISTICS

Table 15 continues the table carried in the main report to present the log of Soviet and U.S. manned flights occurring in 1971. Table 16 continues a similar table with greater detail on all Soviet flights related to manned programs,including precursors.

Table 17 replaces a similar table in the main report to summarize the whole array of Soviet and U.S. manned flights, giving their durations, man-hours, and number of men carried, with data complete through the end of 1971. Table 18 is a matching replacement for a listing. in the main report of the space time of each cosmonaut or astronaut, complete through the end of 1971.

National Highest

Flight time cumulative altitude

(hours, minutes) (hours, minutes) (miles)

TABLE 15.-CONTINUATION OF LOG OF MANNEO SPACE FLIGHTS, SOVIET AND AMERICAN

Name of spacecraft

Launch date Crew

Highlights

Payload weight

(pounds) Revolutions

Apollo·Saturn 509 Apollo 14 (CM-110) Jan. 31,1971 Shepard (2) Mitchell

(LM-8) Kittyhawk and Antares. Roosa.

Salyul.. •.....................•.......... Apr.19,1971 Soyuz 11 crew .••. ~ .....

Soyuz 10 Granit (Granite) .••............•.. Apr.22,1971 Shatalov (3) Yeliseyev (3) Rukavishnikov.

Soyuz 11 Yantar (Amber) •.•...•........... Jun. 6,1971 Dobrovolskiy Volkov (2) Patsayev.

Apollo·Saturn 510 Apollo 15 (CM-112) Jul. 26,1971 Scott (3) Irwin Worden ... (LM-10) Endeavor and Falcon.

102,177 41,0007

14,5007 14,5007

116,314

2 (Earth) 34 216:02 •........ 6,910:55 240,000 .....•.. 3d lunar landing and

(Moon). return safely.

340 docked with 538:43 docked .............••• 175 occupied Occupied almost 24 days;

Soyuz 11. with Soyuz 11. 197 empty. operated 175 days to decay.

30 .•........... 47:46 2,693:04 •...... 153 ..•.....•.•• Docked with Salyut, but

no crew transfer.

361. •.•....•... 570:22 4,404:10 .•...... 175 .........•.• Crew operated Salyut,

but died on way back to Earth.

2 (Earth) 74 295:12 .•....... 7,796:31.. 240,000 ..•...•• 4th lunar landing and

(Moon). return safely.

TABLE 16.-CONTINUATION OF LOG OF MAN·RELATED SOVIET SPACE FLIGHTS

Launch

date Spacecraft name and callsign

Weight Apogee Perigee

(kilograms) (kilometers) (kilometers)

Orbits Revolutions Remarks

Inclination

Period (minutes)

1971

Feb. 26 .•... Kosmos 398 .

Apr. 19 ...•• SalyuL •.....................

6,5757 20,0007

276 10,903 317

Apr. 22.. ... Soyuz 10 ..•..................

Granit (Granite)

6,5757

246

June 6 .•... Soyuz 11 •••.................• Yantar (Amber)

6,5757

282

Aug. 12 •••• Kosmos434 .............•.....

285 11,804

6,5757

196 203 284

51.6 51.6 51.5

208

51.6

259

51.6

197 186

51.6 51.6

88.9 _ .. _ .. After attaining a low orbit, was shifted to

216. 1 higher orbits.

90.5 2,8007 2,6251 Unmanned station was later jOined by Soyuz

10, and then by Soyuz 11 with occupancy. Maneuvered to decay over the Pacific, Oct. 11, 1971.

89.0 32 30 Rendezvoused and docked with Salyut 5.5

hours. Col. Vladimir Aleksandrovich Shatalov Red Air Force, 43; Aleksey Stanislavovich Yeliseyev, 36; and Nikolay Nikolayevich Rukavishnikov, 39. Recovered.

89.7 383 359 Rendezvoused and docked with Salyut 538:43

hours. Occ:upied station. Lt. Col. Georgiy Timofeyevich Dobrovolskiy, Red Air Force, 43; Vladislav Nikolayevich Volkov 35; Viktor Ivanovich Patsayev, 38. Crew died from hatch leak during return to Earth.

89.0 _ _ _ __ .. After attaining a low orbit, was shifted to

228. 2 higher orbits.

44

TABLE l'.-CUMULATIVE COMPARISONS OF SOVIET AND iI.S. MANNED FLIGHTS I

Soviet Union United States
Flights Crew F1i~ht Crew F1iJht
size duration Man-hours Flights size duration Man-hours
Vostok: MercAAlr 3~~~~t~.n.e.: ..
L ............ 1:48 1:48 0:15 0:15
2 ••........•.. 25:18 25:18 MR4 .......... :16 :16
3 •............ 94:22 94:22
4 ...•.•....•.. 10:51 10:51 2 .••••.....• 2 :31 :31 •
5 •••..•....•.. 119:06 119:06
6 •........•.•.. 10:50 10:50 MercAA~ :.~~~: •..•.
4:55 4:55
6 •.•...•....•• 6 382:21 382:21 MA 1 ...•...... 4:56 4:56
MA 8 •••....... 9:13 9:13
Voskhod: 72:51 MA 9 ..•...•.•. 34:20 34:20
L ............ 3 24:11
2 .............. 2 26:02 52:04 4 .•...••...• 4 53:24 53:24
2 .••....•....• 50:19 125:55 Gemini Titan:
GT 3 .•........ 2 4:53 9:46
Soyuz: GT 4.. ........ 2 91:56 195:52
L ............ 1 26:31 26:31 GT 5 •••.•..... 2 190:55 381:50
3 ............. 1 94:51 94:51 GT 1. ......... 2 330:35 661:10
4 .•.•......... 1 11:23 11:23 GT6 .......... 2 25:51 51:42
2 (47:49) 95:38 GT8 ••.. " ..... 2 10:41 21:22
5 .••.......... 1 72:56 12:56 GT9 •.•..•.•.. 2 72:21 144:42
6 .•........... 2 118:42 237:24 GT 10 ..•...•.. 2 70:41 141:34
7 ..•.•••...•.. 3 118:41 356:03 GT 11 .••.•...• 2 11:17 142:34
8 ...........•. 2 118:50 237:40 GT 12 ....•...• 2 94:35 189:10
9 .....••..•••. 2 424:59 849:58
10 ..•.....•... 3 41:46 143:18 10 •••.••..•• 20 969:51 1,939:42
11._." .••.•••• 3 510:22 1,711:06
10 •••..•...•.. 21 1,665:08 Apollo Saturn I:
3,896:54 1. ............ 3 260:09 180:27
Salyut: I [538:43[ (1,61&:09) Apollo Saturn V: 147:01
L ~ - - - ~ - - - - -- 3 8 •••......•... 3 441:03
9 ••..••.....•• 3 241 :01 123:03
Soviet total: 3 10 ••...•....•. 3 192:03 576:09
18 ..•...•....• 32 2,097:48 4,404:10 11 ••••••...... 3 195:19 585:57
12_ ••......... 3 244:36 133:48
World total : 13_ .••........ 3 142:55 428:45
43 ..••.......• 85 4,160:38 12,200:41 14 ..•....•...• 3 216:02, 648:06
15_ .•..•....•. 3 295:12 885:36
8 •••..•....... 24 1,318:55 5,022:21
U.S. total:'
25._ ••......•• 53 2,662:50 7,796:31 I As of l1ec. 31, 1911.

'Data. on Salyut are the period Soyuz 11 was docked; precise time in stauenjs not known. a Breakilown for Soviet Union:

2 men (3 times) ••••.••••.•.••.....•..•.....•......•...•..•.... _._ .•.••..•.•••... _................. 6

3 men (2 timas) ••••••.•..•......••.•.•...•.•.••••••••••..........•••.••........ :............. .•••• 6

20 man (1 time).... ........••..•.... •... ..•• ••••.. ......•...•.•.....•.........•......•••••••••••. 20

Total,25 men •.••••.•.•.....•.•...........••....•••••..•.•..•....•.••••.....•.•...•.•. ,..... 32

'Breakdown for United States:

1 man (4 times) •••••. _ ...•..........•....••.••....•.......... _.. ....•••...•...•........•........•• 4 5 men (3 times) ••.••.•••••.........•••...•..........•.•..•..••..•.•...........•..•••..•••..•.•. _. 15

~~ ::~ a ~i::~~~·:==:::::: :::: :~::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: ~~

Total, 30 men ••.•.•••..•.•.••..........•.•.••••. _.... ..•......• •..•.••.•••• ...•.•. 53

45

TABLE 18.-COMPARATIVE TIME SPENT ON SPACE MISSIONS

Astronaut Nationality Flights Total hours, Total hours,
minutes Astronaut Nationality Flights minutes
LovelL _________ United states, 4 715:04 Anders _______________ do _______ 1 147:01
Volkov __________ Soviet ________ 2 689:03 Haise _________________ do _______ 1 142:55
Dobrovolskiy __________ do _______ 1 570:22 Swigert _______________ do _______ 1 142:55
Patsayev ______________ do _______ 1 570:22 B~kOVskiY _______ SovieL ______ 1 119:06
Scott ____________ United states, 3 546:54 S onin _______________ do _______ 1 118:42
NikolaJev ________ Soviet ________ 2 519:22 Kubasov ______________ do _______ 1 11::42
Conra __________ United_States_ 3 506:48 FiIi~chenko __________ o,do _______ 1 11 :41
Borman ______________ do _______ 2 477:36 Gor atko _____________ do _______ 1 118:41
Sevastyanov ______ Soviet ________ 1 424:59 White ___________ United States_ 1 97:56
McDivitt _________ United States_ 2 338:57 Beregovoy _______ Soviet ________ 1 94:51
Gordon _______________ do _______ 2 315:53 Volynov ______________ do _______ 1 72:56
Schirrl _______________ do _______ 3 295:13 Popovich _____________ do _______ 1 70:57
Irwin _________________ do _______ 1 295:12 Tereshkova ___________ do _______ 1 70:50
Worden _______________ do _______ 1 295:12 Komarov _____________ do _______ 2 50:54
Stafford ______________ do _______ 3 290:15 Khrunov ______________ do _______ 1 47:49
Aldrin ________________ do _______ 2 289:54 Rukavishnikov _________ do _______ 1 47:46
~tlr:s:::::::::::::: :~~: .: ::: 3 267:43 Belyayev _____________ do _______ 1 26:02
2 266:06 Leo nov _______________ do _______ 1 26:02
Cernan _______________ do _______ 2 264:24 Titov _________________ do _______ 1 25:18
Eisele ________________ do _______ 1 260:09 Yegorov ______________ do _______ 1 24:17
Cunningham __________ do _______ 1 260:09 Feoktistov ____________ do _______ 1 24:17
Bean _________________ do _______ 1 244:36 Grissom _________ United states, 2 5:09
Schweickart ___________ do _______ 1 241:01 Carpenter _____________ do _______ 1 4:56
Shatalov _________ Soviet ________ 3 237:59 Glenn ________________ do _______ 1 4:55
Cooper. _________ United_States_ 2 225:15 Gagarin __________ SovieL ______ 1 1:48
Shepard ______________ do _______ 2 216:17
Mitchell. _____________ do _______ 1 216:02 U.S. total. _________________________ 7,796:31
Roosa ________________ do _______ 1 216:02 Soviet total. _______________________ 4,404:10
Yeliseyev ________ Soviet ________ 3 214:25
Armstrong _______ United States_ 2 206:00 World total.. _______________________ 12,200:41 VI. SOVIET CIVIL ApPLICATIONS

A. METEORA

The Soviet weather satellite program showed no significant changes ° during 1971. The following launches occurred:

(Altitudes in kilometers!

Name

Launched

Apogee

Perigee

Inclination

Period

Meteora 7 Jan.20 _

Meteora 8 Apr. 17 _

Meteora 9 July 16 _

Meteora 10 Dec. 30 _

679 646 650 905

630 620 618 880

81.2 81.2 81.2 81.2

97.6 97.2 97.3 102. 7

It will be observed that most were in a 97 minute orbit,but the last flight was higher. In this respect, it was a close match for Meteora 5 which also had a period of 102 minutes.

British observers have found that Meteora 10 sends APT on the Essa 8 frequency (13,7.62 MHz) on command when within range of the U.S.S.R. The scan rate is one-half the Essa rate and appears to be

46

from right to left instead of from left to right. The Russians announced that Meteora 10 has slightly modified equipment with a vision bandwidth 50 percent greater than the lower flights of the year.

B. KOSMOS 389 AND KOSMOS 405

As the main report was written last year, Kosmos 389 was so close a fit to the Meteora series that it was judged a possible weather satellite failure, when it was launched on December 18, 1970, followed just about a month later by Meteors 7. But the appearance of Kosmos 405 on April 7, 1971 just 10 days ahead of Meteors 8, also with similar orbital characteristics, raised doubt about the tentative assignment of the Kosmos 389 flight to the weather series. All 10 Meteora satellites have been announced as flying at 81.20 inclination. Here are the orbits of these two Kosmos flights:

[Altitudes in kilometers]

Name

Launched

Apogee

Perigee Inclination

Period

I(osmos 389 Dec. 18, 1970 _

Kosmos 405 Apr. 7, 1971. - _

699 706

655 676

81.0 81. 3

98.1 98.3

Each flight not only differs from the standard inclination, but has a period over 98 minutes. Unless scientific findings are announced later, It seems more likely that these flights serve a repetitive military purpose such as electronic ferreting of data, or some other classified purpose.

C. COMMUNICATIONS SATELLITES

There were only a few communications satellite launches during 1971, a sign that those already in orbit are enjoying longer operational lives than some of the earlier models. The three launched are as follows:

[Altitudes in kilometers]

Name

Launched

Apogee

Perigee Incunatlon

Period

Molniya l-l8__ July 2L _

Molniya 2-L Nov.24 _

Molniya 1-19 Dec. 20 _

39,300 39,350 39,200

470 460 490

65.4 65.4 65.5

705 706 703

The significant development, although it received little fanfare, was the successful orbiting of the first of the Molniya 2 satellites. These are ones which shift from the frequencies used by the Molniva 1 series to higher frequencies more closely matching those used for the Intelsat flights of the Western countries. But even this first flight was shortly followed by a further Molniya 1. Apparently the Orbita ground stations for the most part are still set to receive the Molniya 1 frequencies, and a normal replacement was required. Later, there may be a shift of all flights and all Orbita stations to the Molniya 2 frequencies.

It may be recalled that the main report said the Russians had announced Molniya 2 would be followed by the Statsionar 1 series operat-

47

ing at the higher Molniya 2 frequencies, but the Statsionar payloads would be placed in 24-hour synchronous orbits at a fixed position over the Equator, instead of in the inclined 12-hour orbits of the Molniya series. The first flight was to have occurred before the end of December 1970. This did not take place either in 1970 or in 1971. If the tests of the hardware in the guise of Molniya 2 go well, we may expect Statsionar sometime in 1972 or 1973. It has not been preceded by any Soviet flight to 24-hour synchronous Earth orbit.

During the year 1971, there was a scattering of announcements of more Orbita stations opening or being improved. These included new stations at Bilibino, Anadyr, Yuzhno-Kurilsk, Aleksandrovsk, Poronaysk, Nikolayevsk na Amur, and Naryan Mar. Two stations adding color television capabilities were those at Dzhezkazgan, and Bratsk.

Intersputnik, the Soviet bloc equivalent of Intelsat, which has developed very slowly since it was first created was able to announce in late November 1971 that Cuba had joined the organization, and the long awaited ground station in Cuba will finally become operational in 1973.

Also, the Molniya 1 class of satellite was disclosed in June 1971 as the carrier for a French satellite pickaback payload of 15 kilograms, with an intended launch date of sometime in 1971. The purpose of the flight was to test the durability of solar cells. If indeed this flight did take place on Molniya 1-19, it has not been announced by either France or the Soviet Union.

D. EARTH RESOURCEs SATELLITES

Although 1971 did not bring the launch of any applications satellite specifically tagged as doing operational Earth resources work, the theme of developing such capabilities continued to get repeated coverage in the SOVIet press. Examples follow.

The work of geological surveying over continental reaches with stereo photographs from Zond was described. This was particularly useful for study of North Africa, the Middle East, and Central Asia. Many new crustal features were discovered.'

Satellite study of fisheries data is expected to increase yields by a factor of 1.5. The article listed the kinds of data useful in this regard readily obtainable from satellite data-data on water temperatures, currents, zoo- and phyto-plankton, ice fields, weather fronts, sea state, and the location of other ships,"

Present data from space are used only to 40 percent efficiency. Further, cloud cover shrouds % of Earth. Day resolution from Meteora is only 1-3 kilometers, while night IR pictures are only 15 kilometers. Hence more work will be needed before satellites can do their potential job of aiding agronomists. But even today scientists determine the time of blossoming and maturing of crops from weather satellite pictures."

Numerous articles continued to extol the virtues of the earlier experiments with Kosmos 243, which has already been discussed in the main report.

1 Aviatsiya 1 Kosmonavtlka, Moscow, No. 11i 1970, pp. 34-36.

• Aviatslya I Kosmonavtlka, MOScoWi No. 12, 970, pp. 34-35.

• Zemyla 1 Vselennaya, Moscow, No. ,1971, pp. 76-77.

48

An article discussed the wide range of geographic problems which could be solved through satellite observation. The list is almost too long to repeat. It included a detailed mapping of stable natural objects, a study of natural processes, a study of agricultural lands and forests, a study of the problems of pollution. The paper seemed to suggest a plea for greater support because of the high payoff.'

Boris Petrov made a major case for the study of Earth resources from manned stations, presenting a fairly detailed catalogue of the kinds of data and their many uses,"

K. Ya. Kondratyev made a strong case for the importance of the study of aerosols in the atmosphere as measured from manned stations, if the problems of pollution are to be overcome. Automatic devices, he contended, can not be sufficiently discriminating and selective of the times to make observations of greatest usefulness."

A. A. Blagonravov discussed in detail how 'space stations with human crews could locate minerals, oil and gas, and determine much about the usefulness of deposits. He also showed the range of hydrological problems which could be managed on the basis of space data. He discussed how fisheries could be supported from space."

Meteorological satellites were announced to be carrying an improved IR system which was affording the same accuracy of the temperature profile of Earth from the surface to 35 kilometers as is afforded by radiosondes,"

T A~S reported on the absolu~ely vital importance to oceanography of having current data worldwide on the oceans from space stations. Color pictures received particular stress, and data relayed from surface floating buoys to stations was also played Up.9

I. P. Gerasimov discussed the threat to the biosphere from all forms of pollution, saying the interactions of industry and nature were worldwide. Before the problems can be tackled, reliable information will be needed, and much of it will have to come from space. Although the technical task is difficult, it is within reach of present capabilities."

G. Katys stated that already pictures taken in space have been put to practical use in geology, hydrography, oceanography, agriculture, and forestry, but especially in hydrology and oceanography.v

M. Ravich said space observation would not take the place of ground prospecting, but the preliminary surveys from space would cut this cost many times over. He suggested that space studies of continental drift would enable the location in Antarctica of the continuation of the diamond fields of South Africa. Space studies already permit the "X-raying" of the Antarctic to a depth of several dozen meters,"

G. Khozin predicted that crop yields from the same amount of land will rise by 25-50 percent if space data of interest to agriculture is gathered and properly processed. The same article had a much longer list of direct and spin-off benefits of space activity."

• Izvestlya Akademiy Nauk SSSR, Moscow, No.3, 1971, pp. 29-46.

• Avlatslya I Kosmonavttka, Moscow, No.4, 1971, pp. 32-33.

• Komsomolskaya Pravda, Moscow, Apr. 25, 1971, p. 1. 1 Pravda, Moscow, Apr. 26, 1971, p. 2.

8 Izvestlya, Moscow, May 13, 1971, p. 4. • TASS, June 9, 1971, 1159 GMT.

10 Trud, Moscow, June 20, 1971, p. ·2. 11 TASS, June 24, 1971, 1238 GMT.

1lI Sotslallstlcheskaya Industriya, Moscow, Aug. 10, 1971, p. 3. ra Znanlye·Slla, Moscow, No. 10, 1971, pp, 17-18.

49

As these several citations reveal, the Soviet authorities have given continuing coverage to the advantages of space research in support of Earth resources management.

VII. SOVIET MILITARY ApPLICATIONS

A. MILITARY SUPPORT FLIGHTS

Continued activity in 1971 in the B-1, 0-1, and A-2 categories has already been reviewed in this supplemental report. These include various kinds of ferret and data gathering satellites, calibration and component testing satellites, navigation satellites, and photographic recoverable payloads.

B. FOBS

Only one fractional orbit bombardment system satellite (FOBS) was flown during 1971. The most obvious conclusion is that operational status has been achieved, so that flights will occur only occasionally for troop training purposes :

PROGRAM I-FOBS FLIGHT OF F-1-r !Apoee and perigee In kilometers!

Name

Launched

Apogee

Perigee

Inclination

Kosmos 433 Aug. 8 • __

259

159

49.5

C. MANEUVERABLE SATELLITES

1. I nteroeptor S atellite8 for I 'fUJpeotiort/ De8truotion

Reference has been made earlier in this supplemental report to the launching of 0-1 class vehicles carrying targets from Plesetsk to inclinations between 65 and 66 degrees. (Kosmos 394, Kosmos 400, and Kosmos 459.)

Following the launch of Kosmos 394 on February 9, a further launch was made from Tyuratam on February 25 of Kosmos 397, using the F -1-m (SS-9 derived) launch vehicle. This represented a change from the earlier pattern of using the F-1-m both for targets and inspectors and both from Tyuratam. Also it was a change from using two inceptors to each target as had been done with Kosmos 248-249- 252 and with Kosmos 373--374-375.

The orbital elements of the 1971 series of flights were as follows:

PROGRAM 2.-INTERCEPTOR FLIGHTS OF F-1-m !Apogee and perigee in kilometersl

Launch Inclln·
Name date Apogee Perigee ation Period
Kosmos 394 (target payload). ___________ . __ .. ________ Feb. 9 619 574 65.9 96.5
Kosmos397 ~interceptor payload) _____ • __________ Feb. 25 2,317 593 65.8 114.7
Kosmos 397 interceptor rocket) _________________ • ________ 613 144 65.1 92.1
Kosmos 400 (target payload) ______ • ____ • _____________ Mar. 19 1,016 995 65.8 105.0
Kosmos 404 ~interceptor payload) ________________ Apr. 4 1,009 811 65.9 103.0
Kosmos 404 interceptor rocket) __________________________ 632 148 65.1 92.3
Kosmos 459 (,arget payload) ___ ~ _____________________ Nov. 29 277 226 65.8 89.4
Kosmos 462 (interceptor payload) ____ -. __________ Dec. 2 1,804 237 65.8 105.7
Kosmos 462 (interceptor rocket) ________ -. _____ • __________ 1,561 143 62.3 102.0 50

It will be observed from the three sets of tests run in 1971 that intercepts were made at three different altitudes, approximately 600 kilometers, 1,000 kilometers, and 250 kilometers. The interceptors were maneuvered a number of times, first abandoning their carrier rockets in eccentric orbits. Kosmos 397 followed much the same pattern as its predecessors of the year before. Its eccentric orbit permitted it to match its perigee with the perigee of its target, and after making a fast pass, then moved away and was exploded into a cloud of debris. Kosmos 404 instead circularized its orbit to coorbit with its target, providing much more linger time than had been true of any test previously when the interceptor was moving much faster than the target. Also, when the interception had been accomplished, instead of exploding the interceptor, the interceptor was maneuvered to an orbit of 799 apogee and 169 perigee from which it promptly decayed, presumably mostly burning, but with any surviving debris falling in the ocean where recovery of parts. would be unlikely. This seems neater than cluttering space with debris. The final test occurred at the lowest orbit yet, more nearly that of a photographic mission, and the interceptor returned to the pattern of making a swooping pass at high speed by matching its perigee with that of the target, after which at a safe distance the interceptor was broken into many fragments.

All seven of the interceptor tests operated by the Russians have also been unique in that the original announcement of the launch of the target has included the statement that it had fulfilled its mission, rather than implying as they do even for many mission failures in other programs that measurements and functions are continuing.

!Y. Other F -1-m maneuvering satellites

No scientific papers have been published on any payload put up with the military SS-9 class missiles, which with various multiple burn stages and platforms have been used to create the F-1-r earrier rocket used for FOBS and the F-1-m carrier rocket used for interceptor satellites and other maneuvering satellites of more obscure purpose. With the number of years these rockets have been in use for space purposes since 1966, it seems safe to conclude their purpose is exclusively military, and that this use in every case extends in some fashion beyond the support missions of picture taking observation, electronic ferreting, navigation, military communications, and so forth which make up the bulk of the Soviet military space program.

Somehow the SS-9 has always seemed very sinister in American eyes, raraded as the largest Soviet ICBM and advertised to have a globa reach. The two space missions which can be defined with confidence are the FOBS and the interceptors, both extending beyond mere support into weapons use. Neither one technically is certain to represent a violation of the space treaty limiting the placement of weapons of mass destruction III orbit. The FOBS probably has not flown with a nuclear warhead, and is called down short of one orbit. The interceptors could as easily as not use a non-nuclear kill mechanism, and in any case have yet to destroy any satellite target, whether Soviet or American.

But then what of the remaining flights of the F-1-m launched category ~ It seems best to sort them out into several distinct groups

51

-

as their technical differences are quite clear, even if their missions are unknown, although presumed to be weapons related in some fashion.

The writer has decided upon further review to reclassify the two unannounced flights of 1966 which he and most other analysts have previously identified as FOBS flights which failed. They were classified as FOBS because they flew at the 49.5 degree inclination used by FOBS, and their early breakup and lack of announcement made a plausible case that their payloads, whatever they were, were intended to stay up less than one orbit even though debris lasted in some cases

for a considerable period. .

3. Three Subsets

The first step in analysis is to group these flights into three separate categories, and then to examine their behavior. The tables which follow summarize these flights. One should be aware that no single source has been available to supply all the data. The Soviet announcements routinely given for payloads only almost always differ by a nominal amount from U.S. and British measurements, but are substantially correct. Also, many objects in orbit are so placed that they are subject to rapid decay, and if the pieces vary in shape and density, then these decay rates show considerable differences. Further, U.S. and British data may represent measurements taken at different periods of time so that further differences occasioned by decay or sometimes maneuvers will appear. In this table an attempt has been made to assemble as complete a picture as possible of the major elements of payloads, carrier rockets, and orbital platforms as can be deduced. In the interests of identification of sources, the letter symbols S-Soviet, R-Royal Aircraft Establishment, and G-Goddard Space Center have been appended to orbital elements.

A total of five separate military space projects associated with the F class (S8-9. Scarp) have been identified. Because the FOBS and the maneuverable inspector/destructor categories are well established, all which was necessary in this brief report was to update the previously published tables. Incidentally, the existence of FOBS was formally announced by Secretary McNamara in November 1967, and the inspector/destructors was formally acknowledged by Dr. Foster in February 1972. But the three remaining classes, with no obvious missions apparent, are sufficiently complex that it seems more practical to summarize our complete list of such flights to give a better feel for the scope of these projects.

PROGRAM 3-ECCENTRIC ORBIT FLIGHTS OF F-l-m
Apogee Perigee Inclination Period
Date and Name Dimensions (meters) (km) (km) (degrees) (minutes) Source
Sept. 17, 1966: 49.6 96.1 R
No name (88A) _________ 6 x 1.5 diameter _" 1,046 163
Rocket (88B) ___________ 8 x 2.5 diameter ____ 529 259 49.6 92.4 R
Highest object (88AY) _______________________ 1,353 259 50.7 101. 2 G
Nov. 2, 1966: 140 49.6 94.5 R
No name (10IA) ________ 6 x 1.5 diameter, ___ 855
Rocket (lOIB) ______________________________ 507 134 49.4 91.5 G
Highest object (lOIM) _______________________ 1,728 202 49.1 104.4 G
Capsule (IOIG) ________ - .8 diameter, 1,000kg_ 830 144 49.6 94.3 R
Dec. 23, 1969: 154 49.5 102.7 S
Kosmos 316 (10BA) ______ 4 x 1.5 diameter, ___ 1,650
Rocket (1088) __________ 6 x 2 dlameter., ____ 920 130 49.5 95. I G
Platform (l08C) _____________________________ 1,513 146 49.4 iei, 5 G 52

An examination of this table will show why ft Was deemed useful to regroup the two unannounced flights of 1966 with KOSIllos316, instead of considering them as FOBS ffights which merely misbehaved. The FOBS flights also use both a carrier rocket and an orbital launch platform for placement of the payload, but all three are SO nearly in the same low orbit (typically 210 kilometers apogee, 145 kilometers perigee) that it compares in no simple way with the three flights of this series, whose rocket and platform or other debris fly in distinctive orbits quite separate from each other. There seems little doubt that the first two flights were destroyed by explosions, but with the advantage of hindsight it begins to seem as if this might have been deliberate rather than because of a propulsion failure. The dimensions stated for several of the objects are British estimates published by the RAE, and it should be understood they are not exact.

PROGRAM 4.-LESS ECCENTRIC AND LOWER ORBIT FLIGHTS OF F,.l-m

Dale and name

Dlmensions(meters)

Apogee (km.)

Perigee Inclination Period

(km.) (degrees) (minules)

Source

Oct. 27,1967:

Kosmos 185 (104A) __ • 1.5 diarneter •

~~t!hI04B5::::::::::-6-i2-diiiiiieiir--:=::::

Apr. 24,1968:

Kosmos 217 (none) • _

Rockel (36A) 10 x 2 diameter _

Aug.6, 1969:

Kosmos 291 (66A) • _

Rockel (66B) • _

546 888 874

520 262

574 481

396 144

153 143

62.2 62.2

62.3 62.2

93.4 88. 5

91.5 90.7

estimale S R

S R

S R

370 .. __

522 64. 1 98. 7

510 64.1 98.6

There is no published fi.~re on the initial orbit of Kosmos 185, but from shifts in early ground traces, it can be deduced it was fairly low, and then maneuvered to the higher orbit as announced, abandoning the carrier rocket at that point. Kosmos 217 was announced in the higher orbit shown, but it is doubtful that it separated from the carrier rocket, if the British estimates of the length of the carrier rocket are correct. Soviet and Western data on Kosmos 291 are in reasonable agreement.

PROGRAM 5-HIGH, CIRCULAR ORBIT FLIGHTS OF F-1-m
AWl" Peril" Inclinalion Period
Date and name Oimensions (meters) (km.) (km.) (degrees) (minUleS) Source
Dec. 27, 1967:
Kosmos 198 (127A) ______ 6 x 2 diameter ______ 281 265 65.1 89.8 S
W~:'hiii~::: = = .; = = = =: = =::::::: =:::::::: 952 894 65.1 103.4 R
273 241 65.1 89.6 R
Platform (12 C} _____________________________ 246 223 65.1 89.0 R
Mar. 22, 1968:
Kosmos 209 (23A) _______ 6 x 2 diameter ______ 282 250 65.1 89.6 s
~!t~r(i38j::::::=::~:-6-x2-diimeti;:::::: 944 871 65.3 103.1 R
236 210 65.1 89.0 R
Platform (23C) ______________________________ 267 227 65.1 89.5 R
Oct. 3, 1970: . eslimate ~
Kosmos 367 (79A) ______ • 6 x 2 diameter ______ 264 246 65.1 89.b
~:~-(i9Bj::::::=::::-6-x2-diim.ti;:::::: 1,030 932 65.3 104.5 S
246 226 65.2 89.2 R
Platform (79C) ______________________________ 264 246 65.1 89.6 R
Apr. I, 1971: 261 89.7 S
Kosmos 402 (25A) _______ 6 x 2 diameter ______ 279 65.0
~5A)--- ___________________________________ 1,036 948 65.0 104.9 R
258 239 65.0 ~.6 R
pfa~:~~2~f?B5.::=:·::::::-~-~~-~~~~~~~:::::: 263 247 65.0 89.6 R
Dec. 25. 1971: 89.7 S
Kosmos 469 (117A) __________________________ 276 259 65.0
W!1k~hYfi sic: = =:= = =::: = = .: = = = .: .: = = = .: =::: 1,016 947 64.4 104.7 G
230 222 64.9 89.0 G
Platform (11 C) _____________________________ 233 223 64.0 64.0 Q 53

The pattern is unmistakable that these payloads abandon both the carrier rocket and the orbital platform before further on-board propulsion carries them to a higher circular orbit. In most cases the Russians announce the initial orbit, but in one case announced the final orbit. Kosmos 469 was striking in that the maneuver did not come very early after launch but occurred on January 4, 1972, about 11 days after initial orbit.

4. Difficulties of Interpretation

The original report discussed all the F-1-m flights together, not separating them into the inspector/destructor program and three additional programs shown here. Reference to that report will give some further narrative account of individual flights. The text also suggested the possibility but not the probability of a link of some part of these flights with weapons of mass destruction. The question could not be answered, but at least a cautionary note was sounded.

Unfortunately not enough new evidence has developed in the many months since that writing to throw much light on the meaning of the programs, even though it may be a useful analytical step to have been able to group these F-1-m flights into distinct categories, so that instead of an irrational jumble of inconsistencies, We see there is an orderly pattern even if we do not know its purpose. This writer will stick with the assumption that all three sub-programs (3-5) shown in the brief tables are military in nature. Further, because of the association of the SS-9 with a variety of missile programs and with both the FOBS and inspector/destructors, it seems likely that this military mission may go beyond the "traditional" military support, passive roles, of other military flights. That is, there is a weapons implication with all S~9 based (F-1-r and F-1-m) flights until evidence to the contrary can be developed.

It would seem prudent to subject all of these flights and any more like them to the closest scrutiny until their real mission can be pinpointed with some assurance. That does not seem possible now. It was Kosmos 316, as mentioned in the main report, which first brought tangible clues to buttress the suspicion of the flight of a weapon of mass destruction in early prototype form. No one has seriously suggested actual nuclear weapons material has been placed in any satellite including the FOBS.

VIII. A CHRONOLOGY OF SOVIET STATEMENTS ON FUTURE SPACE PUNS

The main body of the report provided a reasonably complete, documented chronology of actual Soviet quotations and abstracted reviews of Soviet expressions related to their future plans. It ran from December 31, 1964 to December 29, 1970.

In this supplement, the same account is continued with entries from late December 1970 to March 1, 1972. The qualifications and observations expressed in the main report continue to apply to these additional news items.

CHRONOLOGY 1970-72 (Partial) 1970

The space museum in Moscow has put on public display an exhibit of a closed cycle life support system of the type intended for future manned voyages to the planets. (Aviatsiya i Kosmonavtika, Moscow, No. 12, 1970, pp. 33-34.)

54

1971

Engineer R. Borlsov suggested that a future lunar mission might combine the efforts of two separate launches, one carrying a Lunokhod rover, and the other a sample returner, which landing in the same area could combine the kind of tasks performed by Luna 16 and 17. (Trud, Moscow, January 22, 1971, p. 4.)

The Chief Designer of Luna 17 forecast that advanced Lunokhods will far exceed the capacities of the first roving vehicle, being able to travel at night, travel at higher speed, and carry many more instruments. (TASS, February 6, 1971, 0542 GMT.)

The Chief Designer of Soviet Spaceships believed that it is very expedient to build in the near future in space near the Earth an orbital station that would operate a long time. Soyuz ferry craft are produced on a batch basis at the factory. (TASS, March 14,1971,0811 GMT.)

The Chief Designer of Soyuz spacecraft: "Of course, the time will come when people will certainly be setting out on journeys, say, to Mars. But first, they will accustom themselves fully and properly to circum terrestrial space and the Moon." (Socialist Industry, Moscow, March 14, 1971, p. 4.)

Academician G. Petrov and others stated that hundreds of thousands are involved in supporting the Soviet space effort. In the future, navigation and geodesy satellite systems will go into regular service, and other satellites will support the study of natural resources in ftsherles, agriculture, water services, timbering, and geology. For these same purposes, use will be made of long term orbital manned stations. (Pravda, Moscow, March 30,1971, p. 4.)

Corresponding Member T. M. Eneyev described in detail the energy requirements and advantages of flights which swing by the major planets as an economical way of reaching the outer planets. He also suggested that within 10 to 15 years, there will be nuclear powered rockets using hydrogen as a propellant, greatly aiding grand tours. (Yestnik Akademii Nauk SSR, Moscow, April 1971, pp. 13-21.)

Cosmonaut Shatalov: "The creation of orbital stations with replaceable crews is man's principal path into space. They can serve as space launching platforms for flights to other planets." (As well as serving practical Earth purposes.) (Aviatsiya i Kosmonavtika, Moscow, No.4, 1971, pp.1-2.)

Cosmonaut Yegorov discussed the relative places of men and automatic devices in space flight. "[Man] can, according to his own judgment, change the program and carry out more complex tasks, greater tasks than planned if he realizes they are feasible. Therefore we have not given up manned space flights, but I want to emphasize that where danger lurks for man or where he cannot safely pilot a spacecraft in view of the present level of technical development, there the work must be done by robots. You know that we are exploring the Moon, Yenus, and Mars with automatic laboratories and we will explore other planets in the future by the same means." (Budapest Radio, April 6, 1971. 1645 GMT.)

Academician Boris Petrov: "The purposes of the Soviet space program are determined by the requirements of science and the national economy ... The main trends as we visualize them today will probably be as follows: further investigations of near-Earth space, studying the Earth from space for purposes of space meteorology, geology, agriculture, oceanography, and marine and air navigation ... Automatic devices are now being assigned the leading role in the exploration of space, the Moon, and other celestial bodies ... In the present stage of the Soviet space program near-Earth space remains the main arena of manned flights . . . Over a relatively short period of time [Luna 16 and 17 proved it is possible] to obtain information on various parts of the lunar surface by launching automatic craft which are much cheaper than piloted spaceships." (TASS, April 8, 1971, 1830 GMT,)

Academician Boris Petrov predicted that small orbital platforms with several specialists may appear in the near future. They will exist from one month to one year. They will be replaced by large laboratories assembled in orbit, to operate for years, both in low orbit and at very great distances from Earth. (Radio Moscow, April 9, 1971, 1130 GMT.)

Academician Boris Petrov predicted that future Lunokhods will roam on the far side of the Moon with their data transmitted to lunar satellites intermediate to returning these data to Earth. He also predicted dual missions like Luna 16 and

55

17, with one flight delivering a Lunokhod to the Moon to roam and gather samples, and the second flight homing on the same landing site to remove a sample from the Lunokhod to return this sample to Earth. (TASS, April 12, 1971, 0627 GMT.)

Academician Boris Petrov predicted the next ten years would bring direct broadcast of television to home receivers, accurate short rangs and long range weather forecasts, fast warning of disasters, aerospace and space transports to fly speedily between continents, further. automatic exploration of the planets, laser communications, and more international cooperation in space. (Pravda, Moscow, April 12, 1971, p. 3.)

Cosmonaut Beregovoy predicted that within the next decade the problem. of long stay time in stations will be solved, and a wholly reliable reusable space shuttle will be in operation. Cosmonaut Nikolayev predicted continuing orderly progress toward long term manned space stations, in which Cosmonaut Shatalov concurred. Cosmonaut Filipchenko predicted the creation of artificial gravity aboard spaceships. Cosmonaut Volynov saw more automatic exploratory ships to be followed by manned ships. Cosmonaut Sevastyanov saw the program changing from one of net outlay to strong economic gains in net balances. Additionally Filipchenko predicted a 1971 launch of a space station to be visited by successive crews. In summary, three of the six cosmonauts (Beregovoy, Nikolayev, and Shatalov ) predicted a reusable manned shuttle in operational use within the next decade. (CTK report from Moscow, carried by Rude Pravo, Prague, April 13, 1971, p. 5.)

Academician Blagonravov again stressed the importance of manned flight.

For example, he said that when several solar flares occur simultaneously, with odd and ill-defined forms, the data received by automatic instruments may not catch all of these within their field of vision, and only averaged data are provided. Men can exercise initiative .and skill to develop a much more complete picture of what is happening. (Nedelya, Moscow, April 19-25, 1971, pp. 6-7.)

Cosmonaut Beregovoy predicted that in time there will be an international manned space station of enormous size which will fly in an extended orbit embracing the Earth and the Moon. Cosmonaut Shatalov predicted a joint international manned expedition to Mars. Cosmonaut Popovich expected the development of a rocket powered passenger craft to fly from Moscow to New York in half an hour. All three cosmonauts saw the next ten years bringing large permanently used space stations with rotating crews sent up in ferry craft doing Earth resources work, scientific observing, and space manufacturing. (Trud, Moscow, April 21, 1971, p. 3.)

Academician K. Ya. Kondratyev suggested that manned space stations will play a key role in attacking the problems of pollution by the measurement of particulate matter and gases, that men can do some of these tasks with a correctness of timing, calibration, and understanding which automatic devices cannot yet achieve. (Komsomolskaya Pravda, Moscow, April 25, 1971, p. 1.)

Academician Blagonravov saw space stations as ideal for practical applications in .the search for Earth minerals, moisture studies, oceanography studies (temperature, sea state, water color, currents), fish concentrations, magnetic surveys, and also work in radio astronomy. (TASS, April 26, 1971, 0546 GMT.)

Scientist Kirill Kondratyev said major results have already been obtained from space flights in meteorology, communications, geodesy, and navigation. He stressed the importance of manned observation as well as use of automatic devices for many further practical applications, both for resource management and for rapid reporting of threatening phenomena. (TASS, April 26, 1971, 1222 GMT.)

Academician Feodor Chukhrov detailed the future of space geology as a way of locating mineral resources, studying the structure of continents, measuring movements of the Earth's crust, mapping all changes on the surface of the Earth for constantly updated coverage, establishing a tightly controlled geodetic grid, and measuring the total thermal, radiational, and gravitational spectrum of the globe. (TASS, April 26, 1971, 1923 GMT.)

Academician Blagonravov saw manned stations as making a major contribution to studies of space physics, astronomy, astrophysics, and biological sciences. Stations will be the place in which new devices are tested, ultimately to permit the fitting out of manned expeditions to distant planets. He also stressed practical Earth applications. As an illustration, he said that photographs taken of

56

Africa by the Zond 5 Moon flight built up a geobotanlcal map of that continent on the distribution of vegetation more accurate than data from hundreds of land expeditions over dozens of years. (Pravda, Moscow, April 26, 1971, p. 2.)

Academician Oleg Gazenko stated that orbital stations afford the best means of solving medical-biological problems connected with long stays in space, related to problems of readaptation to gravity after weightlessness, problems in the cardio-vascular system, and vestibulary problems. Also, he noted the psychological problems which may appear with extended flight, and the weakened protective reactions to microorganisms. (TASS, April 27, 1971, 0746 GMT.)

Cosmonaut Nikolayev stressed the application of coming manned stations to atmospheric and ocean .observation, pinpointing forest fires, tracing the movement of cyclones, prospecting for minerals, noting the ripening of crops, forecasting crop yields, and charting polar ice. He also saw a trend toward faster, larger capacity computers and reduced weights for instruments and other devices. (TASS, April 28, 1971, 0650 GMT.)

Cosmonaut Nikolayev reminded his readers that Leonid Brezhnev after the return of Soyuz 6, 7, and 8 said "Our science has approached the creation of long period orbital stations and laboratories and these are the decisive means for the broad conquest of space. Soviet science regards the creation of orbital stations with replaceable crews as man's main path into space. They can become cosmodromes in space and jumping off points for fiights to other planets. Major scientific laboratories for the research into space technology and biology, medicine and geophysics, astronomy and astrophysics will come into being." (Red Star, Moscow, April 28, 1971, p. 3.)

Cosmonaut Feoktistov said the primary emphasis of space development is becoming economic-crop control, oceanography, and geology, and also space manufacturing of super-pure crystals and metals. One of the most pressing problems is the reduction of costs of orbital flights by developing a reusable shuttle vehicle. Later will come manned interplanetary ships. (TASS, April 29, 1971, 0606 GMT.)

Academician M. V. Keldysh spoke of the possibilities of using space stations in the future as large scale power stations to transform solar energy to transmit it to Earth for use. K. Davydov reviewed the usual array of broad applications to be expected from future manned space stations. He further described as essential elements in orbital complexes (1) long term space stations, (2) transport shuttle systems, and (3) specialized modules and equipment to pursue research and to assemble and launch interplanetary ships. He suggested that large stations will incorporate a nearby rotating facility to supply crews with recurrent exposure to the equivalent of gravity rather than rotating the main station which has disadvantages for some observations and also brings awkward coriolis effects. (Izvestiya, Moscow , June 9, 1971, p. 2. )

Academician A. Blagonravov reviewed the spreading importance of space flight to more and more nations, with over 1,000 successful launches, including about 500 by the U.S.S.R. He said in the last two years the Soviet Union had orbited about 1,600 metric tons of payload. He repeated the key role of manned stations for scientific research, for practical Earth applications, and for future use as launching pads for flights to other planets. (Red Star, Moscow, June 9, 1971, p.2.)

Professor K. Davydov summarized the practical uses of manned stations for Earth resources work and for space manufacturing; also for developing solar energy for use on Earth, and as a launch platform for assembling interplanetary ships. (Izvestiya, Moscow, June 9, 1971, p. 2.)

Red Star promoted the idea that it would be cheaper to send a repair spaceship to a malfunctioning payload in orbit than to launch a replacement payload. It suggested that many of these repair missions could be launched from a manned station rather than direct from the surface of the Earth. Even with the best of systems, some missions both in Earth orbit and into deeper space will involve emergencies beyond the repair capaCity of the crew, in which case there must be a capability to make a quick emergency launch of a powerful rocket carrier with a highly maneuverable rescue craft, supported by a wide network of ground tracking stations and command complexes. Red Star forecast that by 1990 there should be about 1 million man-made objects in orbit with a cumulative weight of 100,000 metric tons. This may require future sweeper spacecraft to collect and dispose of space debris. (TASS, June 19, 1971, 0809 GMT.)

c-'

57

SCience correspondent Vladimir Denisov suggested that the Soyuz craft is the predecessor for future new space transports of greater versatility. Winged craft are probably coming which will land horizontally for recovery and reuse. They may take ofi' either vertically or horizontally. Future rescue craft may be launched either from Earth or from space stations to do repair work. Their crews will have spacesuits and special portable devices for repair work either outside or inside other spacecraft. It is the feature of repeated use which will make these ships economical in promoting the conquest of outer space. (TASS, June 22, 1971, 1820 GMT.)

Academician Boris Petrov said that we can predict with confidence that the 1970's will be the epoch of development and broad use of manned orbital stations with changing crews, moving from occasional experiments in space to It regular vigil by scientists and experts in space stations. First will come more stations of the Salyut type, and then will come large and more complex multipurpose and specialized manned space stations. (TASS, July 4, 1971, 0703 GMT.)

Academician Boris Petrov predicted that another Salyut and Soyuz would be launched, and that the Soviet Union has not given up the plan to send men to the Moon in the future. He said it was technically possible for U.S. and Soviet spacecraft to dock together in the 1970's. Despite the death of the three cosmonauts in SOyuz 11, he saw spacesuits as needed only for EVA work. The assembly of a large space station in orbit, a step beyond the docking of SOyuz and Salyut, is at the desk-discussion stage. (Paraphrased from a Moscow interview on July 30,1971 witb a Japanese correspondent.)

Engineer S. Zhitomirskiy suggested that in the future, Venus may be more open to human exploratIon than Mars. He suggested that manned dirigibles in the atmosphere of Venus might operate in a temperature and pressure regime completely compatible with human survival w1tbout the pressure suit problems of the Moon or Mars, and that oxygen could be broken out of the carbon dioxide atmosphere. (Tekhnika-Molodezhi, Moscow, No.9, 1971, p. 55.)

Cosmonaut Feoktistov predicted that future manned space stations will be more fully automated so that the crew can devote more time to scientific and economic applications of space than to spaceship housekeeping. Also, future stations will carry an even larger array of sensors and instruments than did the SaIyut. (Izvestiya, Moscow, October 22, 1971, p. 3.)

Professor B. Bodlonov stressed that manned space stations can be usefully employed both to relay urgent real-time data on current events in weather, agriculture, and fisheries, for example, and for long term data gathering such as geological studfes, where it will sutlice to bring back photographs on film. He also stressed the importance of synoptic measurements from many kinds of instrumentation. (TASS, October 26, 1971, 0922 GMT, quoting Pravda of that date.)

Engineer A. VasUyev said scientists are now speculating on the possibility of spacefiights to Mercury. The first fiight will probably be of a small payload in a fiy-by mode to report on the atmosphere and to return photographs by facsimile. Design suggestions were ofi'ered. (Krylya Rodiny, Moscow, November 1971, pp. 28--29.)

Academician A. Blagonravov stated that Mars increasingly will be a main subject of research on the planets, including the search for life. The techniques coming into use are bringing an explosion in the amount of knowledge we can gain about Venus and Mars, contributing to an understanding of the origins of the Earth. In the future men will go to Mars, perhaps about 10 men with logistics support in excess of 70 metric tons. But before men go, the way will be blazed by automatic ships, and much work will have to be done on improved rocket engines and on the operation of maintenance of crew well-being in a small space for an extended period of time. (Socialist Industry, Moscow, December 11, 1971, p. 4.)

Academician Boris Petrov praised the new hardware used for Mars 2 and 3, and said that later equivalents of Luna 16 and 17 would provide hardware capable of roving over the surface of Mars and of returning actual samples of Mars soil to Earth. Despite the rapid progress in manned 1Ught, he did not expect men to go to Mars during the course of the next ten years when only automatic devices will be used. (TASS, December 16, 1971, 1740 GMT.)

58

Academician A. A. Blagonravov commented on the signifiance and future of Mars probes. Higher capacity carrier rockets are going to be needed for planetary exploration. Manned expeditions to the planets such as Mars will best be assembled in Earth orbit, both because 'of the logistic support such flights will require, and the fuel needed for a round trip. In the near future, vehicles similar to Lunokhod will be sent to Mars to travel over the surface of Mars. Many difficulties lie ahead, but they will be overcome. (Pravda, Moscow, December 23, 1971, p. 3.)

1972

Academician Boris Petrov reviewed progress of 1971 in space flight. For the near future, he said emphasis would be placed in meeting the needs of science and the national economy. These include study of the properties of near-Earth space, and the physical origins and properties of. the Moon, planets, and. Sun. He listed. again the applications of space technology to communications, meteorology, na viga tion, geodesy, agriculture, and mineral prospecting. (Selskaya Zhizn, Moscow, January 4, 1972.)

Radio Moscow predicted that;,the present Molniya type communications satellites will be superseded by future models which give up. solar cells for nuclear power sources. Powerful atomic reactors will raise power levels to the point that direct broadcast of television can be achieved to individual receivers, instead of following the present practice of routing programs to an Orbita station prior to local distribution. (Moscow Radio, February 7, 1972, 0930 GMT.)

Academician Aleksandr Mikhaylov predicted that an automatic observatory on the Moon to conduct a wide range of experiments is quite conceivable in the not distant future. He said the same applied to Venus and Mars, and that the risks and costs of sending human crews to the planets exceed the value of such expeditions for many years to come. (TASS, February 29,1972,0655 GMT.)

IX. OTliER DEVELOPMENTS

A. SOVIET GROUND SUPPORT

1. Moscow Space Research Institute, Soviet Academy of Sciences

A reasonably detailed description of the Space Research Institute in Moscow was provided during the year. It consists of administrative buildings, parking lots and landscaping in front, laboratories back of these, and finally experimental areas and, storage' in the rear. The administration building has three stories, underground parking, a library, conference and reception rooms, and an auditorium seating 1,200 persons. The laboratories are in a 13-story building with 2"story annexes. There are air-conditioning units in special towers nearby. All told there are 41,000 square meters of floor space, including 33,000 square meters in laboratories; and the building volume is, 599,870 cubic meters, including 534,700 cubic meters in laboratories.'

~. Overseas Land-based Tracking Station

The Russians announced the opening of a new tracking station on February 8, 1972, at Fort Lamy, Chad, saying this would lead to furfurther scientific cooperation between the Soviet Union and Chad."

3. Soviet Tracking Ships

During 1971, the fleet of space tracking ships operated by the 'Soviet Academy of Sciences grew to 10, including 3 modern, comprehensively equipped vessels, two of which have been previously described in the main report. The table which follows summarizes data on these ten ships, plus one which left the Academy fleet, and the six operated by the Soviet Strategic Rocket Forces.

1 Strolte1stvo i Arkhitektura Moskvy. Moscow, No.1, 1971, pp. 26-29. • TASS, Moscow, February 8, 1972, 1719 GMT.

Name

Displacement

TABLE 19.'-CHARACTERISTICS OF KNOWN SOVIET SPACE AND MISSILE TRACKING AND CONTROL SHIPS

Crew

Size Class and builder

Control

Gross tonnage

S~eed (kts)

Remarks

Length (ft.)

Width (ft.)

AkademikSergey Koro~ev ... ._ CiviL_______ 21,465 17.5

~~~rtSa~~=:::::::::::::::::=::=:~~~:J~~~~~~~~~ ::~~~~:::~~ 1~: ~~ It ~

g~~~~~~i: _-_-_._~::::: :::: ::: ::::::: - Miii~~i:~:::: - - - - --5:000 - ~: ~~~ _ - - - - - - -18:0-

Chukotka •• .do_______ 5,000 18.0

Chumikan do_______ 5,000 18.0

Dolinsk •••• • Civil. 5,500

Kegostrov • .dc.. __ __ __ _ _ __ __ _ _ __ _ 5,277

Kosmonavt Valdimir Komarov __ • do • 17,500 11,089 16.0

Kosmonavt Yuriy Gargarin_. .ee.. 45,000 - 18.0

Morzhovets • .do_______ 5,277 _

NeveL do________________ 5.277 c _

Ristna_._. do ~-------- __ _ 3,730 14.0

Sakhalin._ •• Military______ 5,000 18.0

SibiL __ • .dc.. 5,000 18.0

Sutchan .do_______ 5,000 18.0

592 81 300 Nikolayev • _

349 49 Tanker, Rauma, Fin Now retired.

510 68 68 Nikolayev _

400 55 Vostok timber carrier, Leningrad •• _

358 _. • __ • __ •• • c _

358 - ---------- _

358 _

457 58 Abo, Fin._ ••• _

400 55 Vostok timber carrier, Leningrad._ •• • _

510 68 Nikolayev, rebuilt Leningrad _

753 101 Leningrad _

400 55 Vostok timber carrier, Leningrad • __

400 55 Vostok timber carrier, Leningrad • _

347 48 Neptun timber carrier, Rostok, GDR •• _

358 .; _

~~~ ::::::::::::::::::::::::_ ~~~~J~~_~~I:_-_-_~ ~::::: ::::: =: :::::::::::::::::

60

4. The K oemonaut Yuriy Gagarin

The main report included an account of the particulars of the new tracking ship Akademik Sergey Koroleu which was completed late in 1970. But even this versatile ship is now surpassed by the world's largest tracking ship which was first described in mid-1971. The Kosmonaot Y uriy Gagarin late in the year reached operational status.

The ship looks as if it might have been adapted from a super-tanker hull. The first account spoke of its having over 120 laboratories. Its scientific instrumentation comes direct from scientific institutes rather than from industrial enterprises, and units can be easily installed and removed so that the ShIP should keep pace with changing technology. It is intended to be away from home base for as long as six months. It has a 19,000 hosepower turbine power plant. The library has 10,000 books. A theater has 300 seats. There are nine elevators. There are three swimming pools, and a sports hall big enough for a football match. There is an automatic telephone exchange,"

It was further described as having a displacement of 45,000 tons, a speed of 18 knots, with a length of 231 meters and a width of 31 meters.'

The ship was described as having over 100 antennas, and via Molniya satellites can reach almost any telephone in the Soviet Union around the clock. It can both receive high data rates from satellites and amplify weak signals at planetary distances. There are over 1,250 compartments in the ship,"

Late in December, 1971, this new ship of 45,000 tons displacement was anchored in Odessa getting ready for its first operations, near the 17,500 ton Kosmonaot Vladimir Komaro» with its two 20-meter radomes, and the almost 22,000-ton Akademik Sergey Koroleo, The new ship has 11 decks. The article compared this enormous capability with the limited work done at sea in 1957 by the llionevsk and the K rasnodar, long since retired. The antenna closest to the bridge is a regular Orbita ground station to create the tie to Molniya. The second big dish performs trajectory and orbital data-gather measurements. The two largest dishes are intended for deep space work. These must calculate automatically the precise location of the ship, the movement of the star field, and compensate for the angles of list and yaw in relation to the ship's course, and even distortions in the ship's hull caused by heavy seas. The ship is air conditioned throughout. This account gives sliglitly different statistics-8 elevators and 260 seats in the theater."

Another report counts 130 antennas, not including the four big dishes, 19,500 horsepower. The ship is equipped with roll dampers and two ship maneuvermg rudders in the bow, and a third in the stern.'

,

B. SOVIET SPACE PERSONALITIES

The Russians have continued their previous policy of withholding information on many key figures in their space program until after their death. During the year at least three important men died, and their obituaries told something of their past work.

• Lenlngradskaya Pravda, Leningrad. July 17, 1971, P. 1.

• Izvestiya, Moscow, July 18" 1971, p. 3. S TASS, December 13. 1971. :<:216 GMT.

• Izvestlya, Moscow, December 15, 1971, p. 4.

7 Trud, Moscow, December 14, 1971, P. 2, and Krasnaya Zvezda, Moscow, December 15, 1971, p. 4.

61

Aleksey Isayev died on June 25, 19'71. He was described as an outstanding designer of rocket engines, and a chief designer of equipment used in Vostok, Voskhod, Soyuz, and various Automatic Interplanetary Stations (AIS).

Mikhail Yangel died on October 25, 1971, with a less specific identification of his responsibilities. He was described as very prominent in rocket-space engineering, the manager of a big designing office.

Marshal Nikolay I. Krylov died on February 9, 1972. He was the supreme commander of the Strategic Rocket Troops for the years 1963-72.

C. SOVIET INTERNATIONAL SPACE COOPERATION

It is not the purpose of this report to treat the subject of Soviet international space cooperation in the same detail as has been done with their domestic programs. But a brief survey of 1971 events may help to round out the overview of the total space effort.

1. Lunar' Rock Eicchamqee

On January 21, 1971, the United States and the Soviet Union agreed to exchange lunar rock samples. The amounts in question were very small, considering the total Soviet supply was only 3.5 ounces, although the United States had hundreds of pounds. Earlier this supplemental report mentioned that in the spring, Soviet lunar samples were supplied to Bloc countries and to France; and in June, the exchange with the United States took place.

92. Bilateral ]1;1 eetinqs with the United States

Back in October, 1970, the United States and Soviet Governments had agreed to work toward a compatibility of docking and linkup systems for manned spaceships and stations. This led to a further series of meetings to explore details both in Moscow and in Houston, with technical experts of both countries participating.

Mstislav Keldysh, president of the Soviet Academy of Sciences and Dr. George Low, acting administrator of NASA met in Moscow from January 18 to 21, 1971. This meeting including a discussion of broadening joint activities and exchanges, including meteorological data, biological data, and environmental data.

A further meeting of the joint space biology editorial review board was held in Washington in February, 1971. The previous April, one had been held in Moscow.

From June 21 to 25 a meeting on docking was held in Houston, with respective delegations headed by Dr. Robert Gilruth, director of the Manned Spacecraft Center and Academician Boris Petrov. Technical requirements for compatibility of rendezvous and docking systems were considered. Actual joint test operations were also explored as possibilities.

Further technical talks were held in Moscow in early August, covering the range of topics put on the agenda in the January meeting.

Dr. Gilruth headed the U.S. team to another major round of docking talks in Moscow held from November 29 to December 6. Although there is no final commitment, there is interest in the possibility of sending

62

an Apollo manned craft to dock with a future Salyut. There could be a similar docking of a Soyuz with a Sky lab, particularly if a second Skylab is authorized.

3. Bilateral activities with France

On October 17, 1971, the annual joint Soviet French space talks ended at Nice. They reviewed the results of using the French laser reflector on Lunokhod 1 and the Stereo solar radio emission equipment on Mars 3. The report noted that Molniya 1 had been used again in October 1971 to carry pictures of the visit of Brezhnev to Paris back to the Soviet Union. OtherJ· oint projects underway are auroral electron and proton fluxes (Arca e), low energy particles of the outer magnetosphere (Calypso), neutrons and gamma rays of solar origin (Sneg). Meteora weather data are being supplied to France, while the French Colombe sounding balloons are sending weather data to the U.S.S.R. A variety of sounding rockets and study of conjugate point phenomena in Kerguelen and the Soviet Arctic are also mentioned in the communique,

Mention has already been made of the Soviet launch in December 1971 of Oreol (Aureole) for France as part of their auroral studies under project Arcade.

~. I nterkoemos

Descriptions were given in the main re_port of the Soviet Bloc Interkosmos organization and the satellite flights it has conducted. This supplement has already discussed Interkosmos 5 launched December 2, 1971.

5. Vertikal Probe8

In addition to the joint Bloc satellite flights, the Russians have fired some probes from Kasputin Yar, now disclosed as the "Volgograd" cosmodrome.

Vertikal 1 had been launched in November 1970. It was described in 1971 as being a one-stage rocket 23 meters long, 1.66 meters in diameter, and carrymg a 1,300 kilogramfRyload. It made a study of a wide range of geophysical data, in behal of scientists of Bulgaria, the German Democratic Republic, Poland, the U.S.S.R. and Czechoslovakia.

Vertikal 2 was launched on August 20, 1971, at the same site for Hungary, the U.S.S.R. Czechoslovakia, the German Democratic Republic and Poland. It was the same weight as its predecessor, and reached an altitude of 463 kilometers. In addition to returning a wide variety of telemetered geophysical data, it returned Polish films.

6. Draft Space Treatie8

The main body of the report described the Soviet draft treaty on use of the Moon which was offered at the United Nations in early June 1971.

TASS spoke approvingly in late June of United Nations work on the draft convention on responsibility for damage by space objects.

I

63

X. SUMMATION

The findings of the main report continue to be valid for this supplementary report of a year later. The Soviet space program is still a strong and growing enterprise. The calendar year 1971 was the peak year in overall level of activity, running a little ahead of 1970 which had been the previous best year. Flight successes for 1971 were 83 for the Russians, 31 for the United States. The year before they had been 81 for the Russians and 29 for the United States.

The year 1971 was one of strong contrasts for the Russians. One the positive side, they had the remarkable performance of the roving lunar vehicle, Lunokhod 1, the versatile manned space station Salyut in which a manned world duration record was set, the arrival in Mars orbit of two very heavy payloads, Mars 2 and 3, and the placing in lunar orbit of the heavy automated laboratory, Luna 19. On the negative side, they had the continued inability to bring into operation the large G-l-e vehicle, the deaths of the three Soyuz 11 cosmonauts when their hatch did not seal properly, the crash of Luna 18 on the Moon, the failure of the first Mars probe, and the failures of the Mars 2 and 3 landers to do what was intended on the surface of Mars.

But beyond these spectacular events, good and bad, the steady work of applying space technology to national economic and military needs continued across a broad front of little publicized activity. This included work in communications, weather reporting, navigation, Earth resources research, data relaying, various kinds of military surveillance, practice with interceptor satellites, a FOBS flight, and other more obscure activities.

The Soviet Union demonstrated its continued commitment to more advanced missions by its flying of manned-precursor craft with greater maneuverability than the present ones, quite possibly testing the advanced propulsion needed for manned lunar flight. Soviet spokesmen also continued to stress the commitment to manned space stations, practical applications of satellites, and unmanned planetary exploration throughout the solar system. Ultimate flight by men to the Moon and the planets continued to get mention as a later goal.

No evidence of actual hardware for a reusable shuttle appeared, but the talk by Soviet space officials and by cosmonauts that a shuttle is neeessary and is coming continued throughout the year.

As this report is closed in early March 1972, they are rapidly approaching a Venus launch opportunity which may produce more spectacular activity. Also, before the spring is out It is very likely that another Salyut will be placed in orbit to be visited by a Soyuz 12 and 13 for long stay time tests.

One cannot say that nothing will happen in the future to divert the Russians from a continued expansion of their space effort. But so far, they both have given the program continued verbal support and have demonstrated a commitment of hardware which has been rising for the 15 years flights have been undertaken.

64

ApPENDIX A

TABLE OF SOVIET SPACE LAUNCHES, 1971-2 (MADCH 4) (In continuation of the 1957-71 too of the main report)

(By Charles S. Sheldon II, Barbara M. DeVoe, and Carol B. Garrett)

The computer printout which follows gives data under the following headings,

reading left to right:

Name of payload International designator Date of launch

Hour of launch in GMT

Launch site (TT-Tyuratam, PL--Plesetsk, KY-KapustinYar) Vehicle used for launch

Weight of payload in kilograms

Apogee in kilometers, or alternatively in astonomical units Perigee in kilometers, or alternatively in astonomlcal units

Inclination to equator in degrees, or alternatively to plane of the ecliptic Period in minutes, or alternatively in days

Date of payload decay' or recovery, with orbital life in days Date of carrier rocket decay, with orbital life in days Mission and remarks

Sources and definitions are further discussed in the main report.

.!ill .!ill
K081BOS 390 1A Jan 12 0936 'IT A-2 296 208 65 89.3 Jan 25 (13) Jan 17 (5) Observation.
Probably. recovered.
Separated a module.
Kosmos 391 2A Jan 14 1200 PL B-1 822 277 71 95.4 Feb 21 (403) Aug 21 (219) Military.
Neteora 7 3A Jan 20 1131 PL A-1 679 630 81.2 97.6 Weather satelli ee ,
Kosmos 392 4A Jan 21 0838 'IT A-2 JOO 207 65 89.4 Feb 2 (12) Jan 26 (5) Observation.
Probably recovered.
KoSIBOS 393 7A Jan 26 1243 PL B-1 512 283 71 92.2 lun 16 (141) Mar 31 (64) Military.
Kosmos 394 lOA Feb 9 1858 PL c-i 619 574 65.9 96.5 Target for intercept.
Kosmos 395 13A Feb 18 2107 PL <;-1 570 534 74 95.4 Possible ferret or
navigation satellite.
KG81IlOS 396 14A Feb 18 1410 PL A-2 310 211 65.4 89.4 >lar 3 (13) Feb 25 (7) Observation.
Probably recovered.
Separated a module.
Kosmos 391 15A Feb 25 1117 IT r-i-e first 613 144 65.1 92.1 Mar 4 (7) Maneuverable interceptor.
later 2,317 593 65.8 114.7 Near pass on 394. J::xploded.
Kosmos 398 16A Feb 26 0517 IT A-2-h 276 196 51.6 88.9 Mar 1 (3) Possible manned
precursor.
~
Kosmos 399 17A Mar 3 0936 IT A-2 310 209 65 89.5 Mar 17 (14) >lar 8 (5) Observation. ~
Probably recovered.
Separated a module.
Kosmos 400 20A Jolar 19 2150 PL c-r 1,016 995 65.8 105 Target for intercept.
Kosmos 401 23A liar 27 1102 PL A-2 322 216 72.9 89.6 Apr 9 (13) Apr 2 (6) Observation.
Probably recovered.
Separated a module.
KostD.os 402 25A Apr 1 1131 TT F-l-m first 279 261 65 89.7 May 6 (3~) xaneuveeeb Ie ,
later 1,035 948 64.9 104.9
xceeoe 403 26A Apr 2 0824 PL A-2 251 216 81.4 89 Apr 14 (12) Apr 5 (3) Observation.
Probably recovered.
Kosmos 404 27A Apr 4 1424 !T F-1-m first 632 148 65.1 92.3 Apr 4 (0) Apr 12 (8) Maneuverable interceptor.
second 1,009 811 65.9 103 Near pass on 4UO.
later 740 136 65.1 93.3 Steered to decay over ocean.
KoSIDOS 405 28A Apr 7 0712 PL A-1 706 676 81.3 98.3 Possible ferret.
Kosmos 406 29A Apr 14 0810 PL A-2 264 223 81.3 89.2 Apr 24 (10) Apr 17 (3) Observation.
Probably reccveeed,
Separated a module.
Meteora 8 31A Apr 17 1146 PL A-1 646 620 81.2 97.2 Weather satellite.
Salyut 32A Apr 19 0140 IT D-l-e 18,600? first 222 200 51.6 88.5 Oct 11 (175) Apr 20 (1) Launched as unmanued
later J18 284 51.5 90.6 station. Soyuz 10 34A Apr 22 2354 IT A-2 6.565? 246 208 51.6 89 Apr 24 (2) Apr 25 (3) sheeefcv, Ye1iseyev.
Rukavisnnikov.
Recovered.
Koamos 407 35A Apr 23 1131 PL C-1 844 799 74 101 Possible ferret or
navigation satellite.
Kosmos 408 37A Apr 24 1117 PL B-1 1,542 211 82 102.1 Dec 29 (249) Sep 29 (158) Hilitary.
Komos 409 38A Apr 28 1438 PL C-1 1,222 1.185 74 109.4 Possible navigation satellite.
Kosmos 410 40A May 6 0629 TT A-2 300 207 65 89.4 May 18 (12) May 11 (5) Observation.
ProLably recovered.
Separated a capsule.
Kosmoa 411 41A May 7 1424 PL C-1 1.530 1,408 74.5 115 Octup1e launch.
Koamos 412 418 1.530 1.408 74.5 115 Possible navigation or
Kosmos 413 41C 1.530 1,408 74.5 115 communications satellites.
Kosmos 414 41D 1.530 1,408 74.5 115
xceeoe 415 41E 1,530 1,408 74.5 115
Kosmos 416 41F 1,530 1,408 74.5 115
Kosmos 417 41G 1,530 1,408 74.5 115
Kosmos 418 4ll! 1,530 1,408 74.5 115
Roamos 4'19 42A Hay 10 1702 TT ~1-e 4,650 174 159 51.4 87.7 Hay 12 (2) attached Mars failure.
Eartil orbit only.
Koamos 420 43A Hay 18 0810 TT A-2 242 200 51.8 88.8 May 29 (11) May 21 (3) Observation. Probably reccv-
ered , Separated a module. ~
~
Kosmos 421 44A May 19 1019 PL 8-1 492 283 71 92 Nov d (173) Aug 23 (96) Hilitary.
Tyazheliy 45C May 19 1619 IT D-l-e 325 206 51.5 87.5 Hay 21 (2) May 21 (2) Launched liars 2.
Sputnik
Mars 2 45A 4,650 25,000 1,380 48.9 1,080.0 Nars orbit solar orbit
Lander 45D Nov 27 (189) Struck Mars.
Kosmos 422 46A May 22 0043 PL C-1 1~O20 994 74 105.1 PossiLle navigation satellite.
xcaecs 423 47A Ilay 27 1200 PL 8-1 511 282 71 92.2 Uov 26 (183) Aug 29 (94) }.lilitary.
Kosmos 424 48A Hay 28 1034 PL A-2 309 214 65.4 89.4 Jun 10 (13) Jun 3 (6) Observation. Probably
recovered.
Separated a module.
Tyazheliy 49C May 28 1522 IT ~l-e 238 138 51.7 37.6 May 31 (3) May 31 (3) Launched ttar s J.
Sputnik
Mars 3 49A 4,650 190.700 1,500 '+8.9? 15~840 Nars orbit solar orbit
Lander 49F Dec 2 (ISS) Soft Landed on nar s ,
Koamos 425 50A Hay 29 0350 PL C-l 556 511 74 95.3 Possible ferret or
navigation satellite.
KosllOS 426 52A Jun 4 1814 PL C-1 2,012 394 74 109.3 PrubaLle scientific satellite. Soyuz 11

Kosmos 427 55A

Kosmos 428 57A

Heteora 9

Kosmos 429 61A

Kosmos 430 62A

Tyazheliy Sputnik

Holniya 1-18 64A

Kosmos 431 65A

Kosmos 432 66A

Kosmos 433 68A

Kosmos 434 69A

Kosmos 435 72A

Tyazheliy Sputnik

Luna 18

Kosmos 436 74A

Kosmos 437 75A

Kosmos 438 77A<

Kosmos 439 78A

Kosmos 440 79A

Kosmos 441 8lA

53A

Jun 6 0455 II A-2

JW1 11 1005 PL A-2

Jun 24 0810 IT A-2

59A

Jul 16 0126 PL A-I

Ju1 20 1005 IT A-2

Jul 23 1102 PL A-2

64B

Ju1 28 0336 PL A-2-e

Ju! 30 0838 TT A-2

Aug 5 1005 IT A-2

Aug 8 2346 TT r-i-e

Aug 12 0535 IT A-2-h

Aug 27 1102 PL B-1

73C

Sep 2 1341 TT D-l-e

73A

Sep 7 0126 PL c-r

Sep 10 0350 PL c-i

Sep 14 1258 PL A-2

Sep 21 1200 PL A-2

Sep 24 1034 PL B-1

Sep 28 0741 TT A-2

6,565?

39,300

first 285 later 11,790

1,880?

217

337

271

650

260

322

458

262

262

259

505

2.36

100

550

558

321

308

814 228

185

211

208

618

204

206

217

470

202

209

159

197 187

282

196

100

514

523

212

219

282 209

51.6

72.9

51.8

81.2

51.8

65.4

65.4

65.4 705

51.8

51.8

49.5

51.6 89

51.5 288.2

71

51.4

35

74

74

65.4

65.4

71 65

88.3

Jon 29 (23) Jun 7 (1)

89.7

Jun 23 (12) Jun 20 (9)

09.1

Jul 6 (13) Jun 28 (4)

97.3

89

Aug 2 (13) Jul 23 (3)

89.6

Aug 5 (13) Jul 29 (6)

Aug 29 (32) Aug 24 (2.7) Launched Holniya 1-18.

Comaunacat Lons satellite.

91.2

89

Aug 11 (12) Aug 4 (5)

89

Aug 18 (13) Aug 9 (4)

88.5

Aug 9 (1)

Aug 10 (2)

Dobrovolskiy t vc lkcv , Patseyev. Died during Earth return.

observc cton, probably recovered. Sepaxa ted a module.

Observation. probably recovered. Separated a capsu le ,

Weather satellite.

Observation. Probably recovered. Separated a module.

Observation. Probably recovered. Separated a module.

Observation. probably recovered.

Observation. Probably recovered. Separated a module.

FOBS.

Manned precursor.

87.9

Sep 7 (5)

Sep 7 (5)

Jan 28 (154) Nov 20 (35) Military.

Launched Luna 18.

92.1

119

Sep 11 (9) Solar orbit

95.2

95.3

89.5

Sep 27 (13) Sep 22 (3)

89.4

Oct 2 (ll) Sep 27 (6)

95.3

89.2

Oct 10 (12) Oct 3 (5)

Lunar orbit September

7. 19710 Signals ceased at touchdown on Moon.

Possible ferret or navigation satellite.

Possible ferret or navigation satellite.

Observation. Pz-ob ab Ly recovered. Separated a module.

Observation. Probably recovered.

Hilitary.

Observation. Probably

recovered. Separated a lIOdula.
Tyzaheliy 82B Sep 28 1000 TT D-l-e 222 191 51.5 88.6 Oct 1 (3) Oct 1 (3) Launched Luna 19.
Sputnik
Luna 19 8U 4,8201 firstl40 140 40.6 121.8 lunar orbit unknown
latar385 71 40.7 131 lunar orbit
K08lllOS 442 84A Sep 29- 1131 PL A-2 321 211 72.9 89.5 Oct 12 (13) Oct 6 (7) Observation. Probably
Recovered. .Separateci a aodu1e.
KoROS 443 85A Oct 7 1229 PL A-2 325 211 65.4 89.6 Oct 19 (12) Oct 13 (6) Observation. Probably
recovered. Separated a capaule.
Kosaos 444 B6A Oct 13 1341 PL c-i 1,550 1.415 74 115 Octuple launch.
KoSDlOS 445 86B 1,550 1,415 74 115 Possible navigation or
KOS18OS 446 86e 1,550 1,415 74 115 cOllDWlications a_telli tea.
Kosaos 447 a6D 1,550 1,415 74 115
KoS1D08 448 86E 1,550 1,415 74 115
Kosm08 449 86F 1,550 1,415 74 115
Kosaos 450 86G 1,550 1,415 74 115
Konos 451 8611 1,550 1,415 74 115
KOSlDOS 452 8aA Oct 14 0907 TT 1.-2 270 201 65 89.1 Oct 27 (13) Oct 18 (4) Observation. Probably
recovered. Separated a
aoc.iu1e.
Komos 453 90A Oct 19 1243 PL 8-1 522 281 71 92.2 Jan 1 (74) IUlitary.
KoS11l.os 454 94A Nov 2 1424 PL A-2 284 210 66.4 89.2 Nov 16 (14) nov 6 (4) Observation. Probably ~
recovered. Separated a
module.
KOS1II08 455 97A Nov 17 1117 PL '-1 516 282 71 92.2 Feb 8 (83) Military.
xcecce 456 98A Nov 19 1200 PL A-2 328 218 72.9 89.7 Dec 2 (13) Nov 25 (6) Observation. Probably
recovered. Separated. a
module.
KOSID08 457 99A Nov 20 1800 PL c-i 1,229 1,192 74 109.5 Possible navigation satellite.
Tyazheliy iooc Nov 24 0936 PL A-2-e 412 214 65.0 90.8 lJec 30 (36) lJec 19 (25) Launched Molniya 2-1-
Sputnik
tfolniy. 2-1 100A 39,350 460 65.4 706 .• 0 Communications- aatelite.
Kosmos 458 lOlA Nov 29 1019 PL 8-1 523 281 71 92.3 Feb 14 (71) Hilitary.
KosD.oa 459 102A Nov 29- 1731 PL c-r 277 226 65.8 89.4 Dec 27 (28) Dec 11 (12) Target for intercept.
Kos.os 460 lO3A 'l.fov 30 1648 PL C-1 553 520 74 95.2 Possible ferret or
navigation satellite.
Interkosaaos 104A Dec 2 0824 KY B-1 1,200 205 48.4 98.5 Science for Soviet bloc.
5
KOS1DOS 461 lO5A Dec 2 1731 PL c-r 524 490 69.2 94.6 Possible scientific s.te1li te,
Kosmoa 462 lO6A Dee 3 1312 TT F-l-. first 1,561 143 62.3 102.0 Maneuverable interceptor.
later 1,840 237 65.8 105.7 Near pass on K08aOS 459.
E.xplexied •
.... xceace 463 107A Dec 6 0950 TT A-2 307 215 65.0 89.4 Dec 11 (5) Dec 11 (5) Observation. Probably
recovered. Separated a
modull!.
Kceece 464 108A Dec 10 1102 P1 A-2 405 206 72.9 90.3 Dec.16 (6) Dec 24 (14) Observation. Probably
recovered. Separated a
module.
Kosmos 465 lllA Dec 15 0434 P1 c-i 1,023 984 74 105 Possible navigation satellite.
Kosmos 466 112A Dec 16 0950 TT A-2 302 207 65 89.4 Dec 27 (11) Dec 21 (5) Observation. Probably
recovered. Separated a
module.
Kosmos 467 113A Dec 17 1048 P1 B-1 502 279 71 91 Feb 17 (62) Military.
Kosmos 468 114A Dec 17 1258 P1 c-i 830 788 74 100.8 Possible ferret or
navigation satellite.
Tyazhel1y U5D Dec 20 2302 P1 A-2-e 455 219 65.3 91.2 Jan 27 (38) Jan 26 (37) Lanucbed Molniya 1-19.
Sputnik
Molniya 1-19 USA 39,200 490 65.5 703 Co1Umunications satellite.
Kosmos 469 117A Dec 25 1131 TT F-I-m first 276 259 65 89.7 Feb 9 (46) Haneuverable.
later 1,016 947 64.4 104.7
Kosmos 470 llSA Dec 27 1410 PL A-2 272 195 65.4 89.1 Jan 6 (10) Dec 30 (3) Observation. Probably 0)
recovered. Separated a (CJ
module.
Oreol 119A Dec 27 1858 P1 c-i 2,500 410 74 114.6 Sciencific satellite for
French auroral studies.
Meteora 10 l20A Dec 30 1048 PL A-l 905 8BO 81.2 102.7 Weatner satellite.
1972 1972
Kosmo8 471 lA JanT2 1005 TT A-2 323 202 65 89.5 Jan 25 (13) Jan 20 (8) Observation. Probably
recovered. Separated a
module.
Kosmos 472 4A Jan 25 1117 P1 B-1 1,568 207 82 102.4 Uilitary.
Kosmos 473 6A Feb 3 TT A-2 333 209 65 89.7 Feb 15 (12) Feb 11 (&) Observation. Probably
recovered.
TyazheUy 7C Feb 14 0328 TT D-1-e Feb 17 (3) Feb 17 (3) Launched Luna 20.
Sputnik
Luna 20 7A 1,8&0? Feb l5 (11) unknown Lauded on Moon r-eL :':'1.
Liftoff Feb n. Recovered
on Earth.
Kosmos 474 8A Feb 16 TT A-2 347 207 65 89.8 reb 29 (13) Observation. Probably
recovered. xcence 475 9A Feb 25 TT c-i 1,013 977 74 105 Possible navigation
satellite.
xceace 476 llA ~far 1 PL A-I 651 618 81.2 97.2 Possible ferret.
Kosmos 477 13A Mar' PL A-2 328 212 72.9 89.6 Observation. Probably
recovered. 71

APPENDIX B

ILLUSTRATIONS OF SOVIET SPACECRAFT AND SPACE TRACKING SHIPS

(By Charles S. Sheldon II)

FIGURE 1.-The 10,251 pound Mars 2 or Mars 3 payload, including the orbital bus, htgh-gain antenna, solar panels, heat radiator panels, and lander unit on top, shielded by its aerodynamic braking cone.

FIGURE 2.-The 55,125 pound or heavier Salyut station and SOyuz 11 ferry locked together in Earth orbit.

72

FIGURE S.-The military mi.ssile tracking ship Ohuhotka, very similar to the Sutchan, Sibir, and SakhaZin.

,

i

FIGURE 4.-The military missile tracking ship Ohumikan, very similar to the Ohazma.

I'IGURE 5.-The civilian space support ships Ak8all, Ri8tna, and Bezhit8a.

73

FIGURE 6.-The civilian space support ship NeveZ, very similar to the MorZMvetll, Boro'Vichi, and Kegolltrov.

FIGURE 7.-Tbe modern civilian space support ship, Koamonavt VlatUtmr Komar01J.

FIGURE 8.-~ even larger civilian space support ship, AkafJemik Bergey KoroZ61J.

74

FIGURE 9.-The super civilian space support ship, Koamonavt Yurill Gagarin.

_. --,,--,-._-- ----

FIGURE 10.-Luna 20 rocketing off the Moon launch platform to return to Earth;

and the lunar sample capsule as found sitting -in);_h e snow of Kazakhstan.

. . . . . -

* u. S. GOVERNMENT PRlNTlNG OFFICE: 1972 0 - 477-101

o

Sign up to vote on this title
UsefulNot useful