[FPSPACE] "Lifting the Veil" - a cursory first reading

[Sven Grahn]

Peter Pesavento's article "Lifting the Veil" in the JBIS Space Chronicle (Vol. 60, Supplement 2) arrived the day before yesterday. I spent last night perusing the whole article before going to sleep. It is a long text and I tried to focus on possible new information that Peter has unearthed. The main thrust of the article seems to be to make it probable that U.S. intelligence agencies had human sources inside or near the Soviet space establishment. After a first reading the most convincing case in this respect are the reports about the delay and eventual cancellation of Voskhod 3. It is hard to fathom technical means that could track the course of this never-realised spaceflight in this detail.

Otherwise, let me just mention a few passages that drew my attention at the first reading.
  a.. The graphs summarizing Soviet lunar and deep space missions published by the CIA in October 1967 contain a few things that raised my eye-brows.
    a.. The E-3 launches in April 1960 were launched 15 and 16 April. This agrees well with the now available launch times. The launch on 15 April put a payload into elliptical orbit which the CIA correctly indicated.
    b.. The graph shows that the Luna launch on 4 January 1963 left earth orbit "4 th stage ejection". Is this really true? Later accounts based on Soviet sources do not agree with the CIA analysis. The 3 February 1963 launch is indicated to have reached orbit, which in hindsight seems to be incorrect. The Cosmos 60 flight is also indicated by the CIA to have come to the same point as the 4 Jan launch: "4 th stage ejection". As far as I can tell from recent Russian sources it never left earth orbit.
    c.. The Cosmos 21 launch is indicated to have resulted in "communications en route". As I understand things, this space probe never left earth orbit.
  So, this graph contains both correct data and probable errors. It illustrates how difficult it was to monitor these missons by technical means. If human sources were used to compile this table their reliability was less than 100%. 
  a.. There is a table in the article that was generated by the CIA listing data for all Soviet manned flights up to and including Voskhod 2. This table, in my opinion could have been put together by anyone using open data. For example, I have in my possession a clipping from Flight international dated 28 January 1965 giving the details of the Soviet filing to the FAI for obtaining a world record for Voskhod 1. There the spacecraft mass is given by the Soviet Union as 5320 kg and the flight duration as 24 hr 17 min and 3 sec, i.e to the nearest second. The CIA table (from mid-1966) gives the flight time as 24 h 17 min and the mass as 11750 lb= 5329.7 kg. So, the CIA seems not to have cared for accuracy in this particular case. I think all Vostok and Voskhod flight data were submitted to the FAI. That is why we know the Vostok/Voskhod spacecraft masses to the nearest kilogramme. In my opinion this CIA table has nothing to do with technical collection means or sources inside the Soviet space establishment. It was just a matter of reading Soviet official data, including orbital data that were reported with considerable precson by Soviet media. For example, the orbital period of Vostok-3 was given with three decimal places by TASS during the flight!

  b.. There is a most fascinating story about the Polish astronomer Zonn being invited to write an article praising a Soviet manned circumlunar flight in December 1968. This is the kind of account that I like. There were plans for launching a manned Zond around the Moon soon after Zond-6. Exactly when the plans were scrubbed is hard to know. Pure inertia could have resulted in the request to the Polish professor coming close to the origially planned launch date. However, the account from professor Zonn is a gem. Well done, Peter!

  c.. Peter Pesavento often refers to the GRAB/POPPY ELINT satellite series as a technical collection means for obtaining data on space events. Let me express some doubt. I think these satellite were aimed at Soviet long-range air defence radars which put out powerful pulsed signals that could easily be picked up by itty-bitty satellites like GRAB. I think the ELINT and radar facilities in Turkey and later Iran and elsewhere were much more capable of gleaning important data.

  d.. "The identity of Doll" is a key part of the article. Doll is a hypothetical human intelligence source within OKB-1. The author outlines strategies for identifying this person.  When reading this section of the article I feel overwhelmed by the difficulty of identifying this hypothetical person. It seems that it would be necessary to have the entire organization chart of the top level of OKB-1 and also to understand what access various positions in that chart had to information about plans and programs. Then this knowledge would need to be collated with what can be gleaned from CIA documents. In effect an unofficial "mole hunt". One could also wonder about the ethics of doing this now. The person (if he/she ever existed) or his/her immediate family, could still be alive and sufffer unpleasantness as a result of any such revelation or even statement of suspicion. I think that this matter is raised too early. Even if the subject is highly fascinating I think we should "let sleeping dogs lie" another 20+ years. Then it may be impossible to fathom the truth without a complete declassification of CIA documents. So be it!

  e.. The description of the declassification process is fascinating and very informative. One is somewhat taken aback by the effort that needs to be put into this task. And the "institutional memory" of intelligence agencies must be excellent to be able to know what is still secret and what could safely be released. The depth of knowledge needed to do this job must be considerable. Most persons involved in putting together the original documents must be either dead or demented. A few are obviously still around, even including "consumers" and Peter has done a good job of locating and talking to such persons. They provide very interesting comments
I need to read this article a second and third time...

I think Peter is right in trying to get documents declassfied. There are fantastic stories there. The space-related stories in the CIA "Studies in intelligence" for example are very readable. I think there are more goodies that have not been declassified. For example, I feel convinced there is a follow-on to James Burke's article about the U.S. deep-space tracking of Soviet planetary probes. That would be wonderful to read.

Best Wishes

Sven