• Forum
• SITREP
• Military
• WMD
• Intelligence
• Homeland Security

• Space

• Introduction
• Systems
• Facilities
• Agencies
• Countries
• Hot Documents
• News
• Reports
• Policy
• Budget
• Congress
• Links

• Public Eye

In July 1969, Russian Lunar Lander was Indeed On Board

Another L-3 related topic that has had largely blanket acceptance by many space observers and researchers world-wide--is that the July 1969 N-1 5L mission had only one piece of manned lunar-related equipment on board, a version of the Zond spacecraft called the 7K-L1S.  As recently as 2004, I have run into impassioned opposition and intense debate (via an Internet discussion group list service, and its subsequent spill-over in e-mails) to the notion that present information about the 5L manifest was incomplete, and that there was other data that pointed to further equipment.  But I think the time has now come to show what the actual payload encompassed.

Soon after the dissolution of the USSR, German TV journalist and documentarian Karl Heinz-Eyermann was permitted to view at length and take copious notes from the Tyuratam launch logs of the Strategic Rocket Forces. This singular opportunity allowed him to directly review uncensored materials about Soviet rocketry preparation and launch events.  Heinz-Eyermann eventually published a two-part article in 1993 and 1994 in the German publication Flug Revue that discussed some of the revelations he had found in the logs.[6] 

The payload for the 5L mission was as follows: 

"A.lunar landing system LK [lunnaia kabina, or "lunar cabin"] (11F94), not yet fully ground-tested and constructed throughout in detail, designed only for one cosmonaut, was modified by [Vasiliy] Mishin's designers with the lunar orbiter 7K-L1S (11F92), which was designed for other missions, into a combination which could not be utilized as a unified system.  Various photographic equipment of the 7K-L1S-including a nine-eyed multi-spectrum camera-was to scout possible landing sites on the Earth's satellite for the LK which was taken along only as a functionary model.. The combination could not be used for a manned lunar [landing] mission."[7]

And there are additional examples of Western publications mentioning the lunar lander. A book that appeared at about the same time as Heinz-Eyermann's article serial-The Soviet Reach for the Moon by Nicholas L. Johnson-also mentioned that 5L contained an LK lunar lander as part of the payload.[8]

But upon the examination of Soviet books, things become more complex.  In juxtaposition, the vast majority of Russian-centric publications published since the mid-1990s do not list a lunar lander for the July 1969 N-1 launching.  In actuality, they are silent.  One example is the recent encyclopedia volume Mirovaya Pilotiryemaya Kosmonavtika:  Istoriya. Teknika. Liudi. ("World Piloted Cosmonautics: History. Technics. People.") This very current compendium lists only that there was a "7K-L1A" as the payload.[9] 

Additionally, in the RKK Energia corporate reference Raketno-kosmicheskaia korporatasiia Energia imeni SP Koroleva. 1946-1996  ("RKK Energia: The aerospace corporation named after SP Korolev.  1946-1996"), it is quite notable that in the discussion about the N-1 launch failure series, payloads are not discussed (excepting one prefacing comment-"Manufacturer's flight trials of the N-1 rocket with a substitute payload system block (with the unpiloted 7K-L1S spacecraft in place of the LOK [lunnaya orbitalniye korabl, or "lunar orbiting spacecraft"] and LK) began in February 1969").  Furthermore, the LK is not mentioned in the text as part of the equipment on board 5L.[10]

If readers set aside this data conflict, and concentrate on Heinz-Eyermann's surprise information, it is obvious that the 5L mission has now been significantly enhanced with the addition of the now-revealed LK (whatever its construction threshold was).  What was the true and complete mission of 5L?  No longer can it be accepted that the Soviets were intending solely a circumlunar mission of a single spacecraft with the aim of surface photography. 

But a myriad of questions come to the forefront as a result of this odd description of the LK lander in Heinz-Eyermann's reportage.  What was "functionary" about the LK on this mission, and what was not?  What is meant by that Mishin's colleagues "modified" the LK-from what point in its assembly, to what further point of its assembly? Where are the photographs of the 5L payload in the assembly/grooming stage?  What photographic documentation is there about the interiors of both spacecraft for the 5L mission?  Were there operational life-support systems extant?  Was this LK man-rated?  Was this specific 7K-L1S man-rated? Was there any direct cosmonaut involvement in the preparation of these two space vehicles for the 5L mission of early July 1969? 

Again, our Russia-based colleagues should be able to use their contacts in RKK Energia, as well as their abilities to interview surviving members of Mishin's TsKBEM (Tsentralnoye Konstruktorskoye Byuro Eksperimental'nogo Mashinostroeniya or "Central Design Bureau of Experimental Machine Building") engineering teams (like Vyacheslav F. Filin) and put these questions to them, to obtain much-needed answers.