Soviet Space Cooperation In Biosatellite Programs
Soviet Attitude Toward International Cooperation in Space *
* Prepared by Joseph G. Whelan, Senior Specialist in International Affairs, Senior Specialists Division, CRS.
SPACE COOPERATION: AN IMPERATIVE IN THE PRESENT
ERA
COMMITMENTS IN ACCORD
AN EXPANDING UNIVERSE FOR SPACE ACTIVITIES
U.S. PARTICIPATION IN SOVIET BlO-SATELLITE EXPERIMENTS
IMPORTANCE OF BlO-SATELLITE COOPERATION
Supporters of space cooperation have had cause for satisfaction in the series of U.S. biological experiments carried aboard Soviet biological satellites under a cooperative arrangement. For the United States, participation was especially important because it did not have a biosatellite program and therefore at a minimum cost could benefit from the Soviet life sciences program.
Life science experiments had been conducted aboard ASTP, but the Apollo program closed out the United States from any further biomedical experiments. (91) Not until the development of the Space-lab/Shuttle space systems would the United States have a full capability for independent life science experiments in space. (92) Thus Soviet cooperation provided the United States, as one space writer put it, with a "cut-rate way" to bolster its store of knowledge in light of a weak space biological program and a long hiatus between manned space missions. (93)
KOSMOS 782, 1975
Soviet invitation and experiments
At the fifth meeting of the Joint United States/U.S.S.R. Working Group on Space Biology and Medicine in Moscow during October 26-November 3, 1974, the Soviet Union invited the United States to fly biological experiments on their third biosatellite, Kosmos 782. (94) (Previous Soviet biosatellites were Kosmos 110 flown in 1966 and Kosmos 605 in 1973.) On November 25, 1975, Kosmos 782 was launched for a flight that lasted 19.5 days. The spacecraft carried several biological experiments: Those by the Soviet Union, their Interkosmos associates, France, and the United States. This flight marked the first time that the Soviet Union carried American experiments aboard one of its spacecraft. (95)
Briefly, the experiments centered around the addition of a centrifuge never before carried aboard a spacecraft. This device made it possible to conduct some experiments in the state of weightlessness while others were in simulated Earth gravity. Besides its own four experiments in self-contained packages, the United States was invited to particpate in several Soviet experiments. One such experiment, for example, dealt with a stress reaction of animals (in this case, white rats) during space flight. (96)
Judgments on cooperation
The judgments on Soviet-American cooperation in the Kosmos 782 mission were favorable. Perhaps, Frutkin best summed up NASA's official views when he stated upon completion of the mission and the return of the experimental materials, "We can say that that has been a most successful relationship." (97)
The experiments were "quite modest," as Dr. David L. Winter, NASA Director for Life Science, said; all were self-contained; no technology was transferred.98 The Soviets handled the experiments to the full satisfaction of the U.S. scientists. American scientists were not allowed at either the launch or recovery sites; but their presence, not being necessary, was not requested. (99)
Thirty-six hours after touchdown, the Russians returned the American experiments to the U.S. scientists waiting in Moscow. Mr. Larry P. Chambers, U.S. Program Director for Kosmos 782, was surprised at Soviet efficiency and presumably good faith in managing the U.S. experiments. "They bent over backwards to help us," he exclaimed. (1)
Though the experiments were limited, still the information derived from postflight analyses was, "extremely useful," as Kenneth A. Souza of NASA's Ames Research Center wrote in a commentary on the Kosmos 782 and 936 missions.2 The Soviets had promised a written report within a year from the mission's completion. None was forthcoming (though none was formally required), but they did present some results verbally. Many of the verbal presentations were "quite good," according to Winter.3
1. House International Relations Committee, Technology Transfer and Scientific Cooperation between United States and Soviet Union, p. 117.
2 Souza, Kenneth A. The Joint United States-U.S.S.R. Biological Satellite Program. Bio-Science, vol. 29, March 1979:166. This article is a highly technical commentary on the experiments. Still his conclusion suggests, even to the layman, the value of the missions: "We now know that spaceflight factors, principally weightlessness, have a measurable effect on the erythropoietic and musculo-skeletal systems and on the carbohydrate and lipidmetabolism of rats. We learned that artificial gravity produced by centrifugation has the potential for counteracting some of the detrimental effects of spaceflight. Observations of rat retinal tissue during both flights suggested that cosmic radiation may be a hazard to man during prolonged stays in space. We also learned that spaceflight had little (if any) effect on the growth and development of a variety of biological tissues, including the carrot * * *, the minnow * * *, and the fruit fly * * *, although additional studies of the activity and behavior of adult Drosophila [fruit fly] during spaceflight are needed."
3. House International Relations Committee, Technology Transfer and Scientific Cooperation between United States and Soviet Union, p. 117.
In April and October 1976, American and Soviet scientists met to review the findings of Kosmos 782. Perhaps the best evidence of satisfaction on both sides was the conclusion of a tentative agreement to fly five U.S. experiments as candidates for a mission planned in 1977. (4)
Kosmos 782 was thus a success, both scientifically and politically. For the purpose of demonstrating the Soviet attitude toward space cooperation the mission was especially meaningful because the Soviets were playing the role of grantor, the possessor of all negotiating leverage, and the United States, the role of recipient or supplicant, the weakest position in any negotiations. Yet despite their advantage the Soviets appear to have played it straight, and fair. (5)
KOSMOS 936, 1977
Planning, flight, and experiments
The momentum, gathering in the Kosmos 782 project, was carried into the Kosmos 936 mission, apparently producing generally the same satisfactory results. (6) In September 1976, the Joint United States/U.S.S.R. Working Group on Space Biology and Medicine met in Yerevan, U.S.S.R. and agreed upon and began detailed planning for five U.S. biological experiments (actually seven were flown) to be flown on Kosmos 936 biosatellite scheduled for launching in late 1977. (7)
On August 3, 1977, Kosmos 936 was launched, carrying biological samples and scientific instrumentation belonging to the Soviet Union, Czechoslovakia, France, and the United States. Specialists from Interkosmos, France, and the United States were scheduled to take part in the research and processing of the experimental biological materials. (8) After a flight of 18.5 days, Kosmos 936 was recovered on August 22.
According to Dr. Hinners, the U.S. experiments included the use of laboratory rats to investigate the effects of weightlessness and 1-G centrifugation on red blood cell life span, liver enzyme activity, bone growth and muscle changes. Also included were high energy particle dosimetry and electron microscopic examination of zero-gravity effects on the genetics and aging of fruit flies. After recovery of Kosmos 936, the biological samples and dosimeters were returned to the United States in September for study by American investigators during the following year. Plans were set for an initial exchange of results in March 1978, to be followed by a Soviet symposium on Kosmos 936 in the fall. (9)
Appraisals, meetings, and value of U.S. participation
Kosmos 936 proved to be another success for space cooperation. "We continue to enjoy substantial international cooperation in the space life sciences, reported Dr. Hinners to the Congress in September 1976.10 And in a further report in February 1978, he stated:
We continue to have successful cooperation with the Soviets in the biological sciences, flying experiments on their unmanned Kosmos series of biological satellites. We anticipate flying experiments on subsequent flights, in 1981 and 1982, with the Soviets.
The whole area of Soviet cooperation is getting increased attention now, both on account of their long-duration manned activity in space, which is in progress, and because we are looking at the potential for increased cooperation with the Soviets. (11)
Kenneth A. Souza of NASA's Ames Research Center and manager of the U.S. experiments said that the Soviets were "extremely cooperative in all dealings" and answered all questions "as best they could." He said further that the quality of engineering displayed in the mission hardware was excellent and that the Soviet technicians processing the U.S. experiments were "top notch." (12)
The Soviets were no less approving in their commentary. Tass correspondent Nikolay Zheleznov exclaimed that the biosatellites of the Kosmos series "reach the orbits of international cooperation" and that Kosmos 936 was "a striking illustration of this." With an eye on space politics Zheleznov concluded that the "new orbit blazed in world science" by Kosmos 936 was the "best illustration" of how the process of detente was "really filled with new vivid facts of widening cooperation between scientists of various countries in major branches of science and technology." Nonetheless, his account contained many details in layman's language on the scientific and technical aspects of the mission. (12A)
The rhetoric on both sides seemed to be matched by performance in the exchange of information at subsequent meetings. During November 1977, the eighth meeting of the Joint United States/U.S.S.R. Working Group on Space Biology and Medicine took place at Wallops Island, Va. and Bethesda, Md. The conferees discussed the preliminary results of the Kosmos 936 experiment as well as proposals for future biosatellite missions along with the medical results of manned space flight. The Soviets invited the United States to participate in their biosatellite flights in 1980 and 1981. (13)
For NASA's Life Sciences Division the series of joint meetings conducted over the past 7 years with their Soviet counterparts were, in Dr. Hinners' words, "very productive." In a report to Congress in September 1978, he stated that the final report on the U.S.experiments flown abroad Kosmos 936 were completed and forwarded to Moscow. This report was to be presented in Moscow during the Kosmos 936 International Symposium scheduled for October 19-21, 1978. Hinners also noted that 14 U.S. proposals for scientific experiments were submitted to the Soviets in June 1978 to be flown aboard Kosmos 1980. The Soviets were expected to acknowledge selection of some or all of these experiments during the 9th meeting of the joint work group in Leningrad on October 10-18, 1978. At that time detailed negotiations would determine the extent of U.S. participation in Kosmos 1980. (14)
Judging from commentaries by NASA officials there seems little doubt that U.S. participation in the Kosmos project through 936 was important and useful. When asked to respond to the question, "How important are these flight opportunities in our Life Sciencies Program?" NASA replied simply:
The Soviet biological flights are important in two ways: First, they provide an opportunity to do research that could not otherwise be done until the Life Sciences Spacelab missions fly in the future; and second, they give us the opportunity to become familiar with the special problems associated with animal maintenance in flight. (15)
KOSMOS 1129, 1979; AND THE FUTURE
Continuing interest in Kosmos biosatellite
U.S. participation in the Kosmos biosatellite project continued into 1979 with the flight of Kosmos 1129 and into the future with at least proposals for specific cooperative programs for 1980 and 1981. In addition, cooperation in the life sciences took place in ground-based studies relating to weightlessness in long-duration manned flights. (16) But the events in Afghanistan brought about the suspension of what seemed to be a durable regime of cooperation in the life sciences as indeed in planetary exploration. In September 1979, the United States placed 14 experiments, along with those from the Soviet Union, Czechoslovakia, and France, aboard the Soviet biosatellite Kosmos 1129 for a flight lasting 19 days. All experiments were designed to test the effects of weightlessness on physiological processes. U.S. participation included experiments with biological specimens (rats, quail eggs), space radiation, dosimetry, and post flight specimen preparation in Moscow. At the end of 1979, U.S. scientists were still analyzing the flight material with the expectation of presenting their results at a joint meeting in 1980. (17)
And the future
Continuing Soviet and American satisfaction with cooperation in the Kosmos biosatellite project was evident with the Soviet invitation to the United States in October 1978 to propose experiments to be carried aboard their next generation biosatellite scheduled for launching in 1982. This mission would be using primates. In 1979, NASA undertook advance planning for the project. (18 0 NASA eventually submitted six proposals, two of which were accepted in principle by the Soviets in October 1979; the others remained under consideration. (19) .
In 1977, the United States, in reciprocation for Soviet largesse in allowing U.S. participation in their biosatellite project, invited Soviet proposals for experiments to be flown on a life science Space-lab mission aboard the Space Shuttle sometime in 1984-85. As of October 19, 1979, the Soviets had submitted no formal proposals, though discussions on potential Soviet proposals were held between NASA and Soviet life sciences specialists. (20)
What the future holds for Soviet-American cooperation in the life science area can only be a matter of conjecture, given the downturn in political relations. Having succeeded in launching the Shuttle, the United States will be able to accumulate greater knowledge in the life sciences on its own. As Dr. Lovelace said in 1980:
It is clear that we have not been accumulating data on manned space flights since the Apollo/Skylab and ASTP space projects. . . . Once the space shuttle becomes operational, it will allow us to come back up on the learning curve of the manned aspects of space life sciences. (21)
Yet, the United States remains committed, at least formally, to participating in the Soviet biosatellite project, notably the 1981 flight. As NASA responded to a congressional inquiry on this point:
We believe that this joint activity is of specific scientific interest to the United States and consistent with current U.S. policy. U.S. preparations leading up to the 1981 Cosmos flight will, of course, be subject to U.S. Government review. (22)
Meanwhile, cooperation in the life sciences is, apparently, at a standstill, or rather in a state of suspension. As Dr. Frosch explained on February 6, 1980, with respect to meetings of the joint United States/U.S.S.R. scientific working groups, "we are simply at a stage where we were in between activities." (23)
Yet, it is significant as an indication of the Soviet attitude toward space cooperation that in April 1980, a time of great stress in Soviet-American relations, a leading Soviet scientist could look back over a decade of Soviet-American cooperation with an approving glance. Writing in the Soviet foreign affairs weekly New Times, Dr. Nikolai Gurovsky, head of the Department of Space Biology and Medicine in the Soviet Ministry of Public Health, recalled:
A fairly wide programme of joint research has been carried out over the past ten years with American scientists. It is co-ordinated by a Soviet-American working group on space biology and medicine. At first co-operation was confined to an exchange of information on the results of land and space experiments. Later on American experts took part in experiments on the Soviet biological Sputniks Cosmos 782, 936, 1129. Many land-based experiments follow identical programmes.
Gurovsky reminded his readers of the successful work done in space biology and medicine during the ASTP mission; noted that NASA officials have "on many occasions commented on the success and value of joint work" under the Interkosmos program; and then concluded with a statement of approval of space cooperation as "an important factor in international relations." (24)
References:
A. SOVIET SPACE PROGRAMS: 1976-80, SUPPORTING VEHICLES AND LAUNCH VEHICLES, POLITICAL GOALS AND PURPOSES, INTERNATIONAL COOPERATION IN SPACE, ADMINISTRATION, RE-SOURCE BURDEN, FUTURE OUTLOOK PREPARED AT THE REQUEST OF HON. BOB PACKWOOD, Chairman, COMMITTEE ON COMMERCE, SCIENCE, AND TRANSPORTATION, UNITED STATES SENATE, Part 1, Dec. 1982.
91. For a discussion of ASTP life sciences experiments, see, testimony of Yardley, Senate Aeronautical and Space Sciences Committee, hearings, NASA Authorization for Fiscal Year 1976 and the Transitional Period, 1975, pt. 1, pp. 199-200.
92. Statement of Hinners, House Science and Technology Committee, Hearings, 1980 NASA Authorization, 1979, vol. 1, pt. 3, p. 1398.
93. O' Lone, Richard G. U.S., Soviets to Discuss More Biosat Missions. Aviation Week & Space Technology, vol. 107, Sept. 26, 1977:95. In commenting about the Kosmos 782 and 936 missions, O'Lone wrote that the Russians "did not charge the U.S. a nickel for the Cosmos missions, and total U.S. costs for the effort will amount to about $450,000. This is a tiny fraction of what it would have cost the United States to mount such a mission from scratch." O'Lone's source was Harold P. Klein, Director of Life Sciences at NASA's Ames Research Center in Mt. View, Calif.
94. Testimony of Yardley, Senate Aeronautical and Space Sciences Committee, Hearings, NASA Authorization for Fiscal Year 1976 and the Transitional Period, 1975, pt. 1, p. 200.
95. House International Relations Committee, Technology Transfer and Scientific Cooperation between United States and Soviet Union, pp. 116-117.
96. Ibid. For a commentary on the experiments, see, statement of Dr. Joseph Sharp, House Science and Technology Committee, Hearings, 1976 NASA Authorization, 1975, vol. 2, pt. 1, pp. 616-617. See also, statement of Hinners, Senate Commerce, Science, and Transportation Committee, Hearings, NASA Authorization for Fiscal Year 1978, 1977, pt. 2, pp. 1227-1228.
97. House Science and Technology Committee, Hearings, 1977 NASA Authorization, 1976, vol. 1, pt. 2, pp. 646-647. Frutkin continued: "Since we do not have biological programs in being, or in early prospect, this represents an opportunity for us that we would not otherwise have." For further comments on the technical aspects of the Kosmos 782 mission, see p. 662.
98. Testimony of Winter, House Science and Technology Committee, Hearings, 1977 NASA Authorization, 1975,vol. 1, pt. 1, pp.670-671.
99. Ibid. Winter explained that "we will not have anyone at the launch site, nor at the recovery site." "Quite frankly, we did not even request to go. This particular endeavor came about at their invitation," he noted. Winters also made it clear that this experiment, other than instrumentation, was at no cost to the United States. "We are getting a free ride, quite frankly," he said, "and the cost is very modest."
1. House International Relations Committee, Technology Transfer and Scientific Cooperation between United States and Soviet Union, p. 117.
2 Souza, Kenneth A. The Joint United States-U.S.S.R. Biological Satellite Program. Bio-Science, vol. 29, March 1979:166. This article is a highly technical commentary on the experiments. Still his conclusion suggests, even to the layman, the value of the missions: "We now know that spaceflight factors, principally weightlessness, have a measurable effect on the erythropoietic and musculo-skeletal systems and on the carbohydrate and lipidmetabolism of rats. We learned that artificial gravity produced by centrifugation has the potential for counteracting some of the detrimental effects of spaceflight. Observations of rat retinal tissue during both flights suggested that cosmic radiation may be a hazard to man during prolonged stays in space. We also learned that spaceflight had little (if any) effect on the growth and development of a variety of biological tissues, including the carrot * * *, the minnow * * *, and the fruit fly * * *, although additional studies of the activity and behavior of adult Drosophila [fruit fly] during spaceflight are needed."
3. House International Relations Committee, Technology Transfer and Scientific Cooperation between United States and Soviet Union, p. 117.
4. Ibid, and statement of Hinners, House Science and Technology Committee Hearings, 1978 NASA Authorization, 1976, vol. 1, pt. 1, p. 10.
5. The extent to which the Soviets had determined to cooperate in the life sciences was evident in the testimony of Dr. Joseph Sharp taken at the Ames Research Center in February 1975. Sharp explained the Kosmos project, noting the nature of the planned experiments, purposes, and cost Sharp was asked: "Are we learning anything from them or are they just picking our brains?" To which Sharp replied: "Well, we received from them, at the meeting in October, about a 450-page document in Russian that described in the greatest detail that we have ever seen of any of their experiments, the Cosmos 605 via satellite experiments. They went through every one of the experiments they had described. What their problems were; what their findings were." Sharp continued, "Well, first of all, this was an unmanned satellite so we were dealing strictly with animal or plant material. There were indeed some surprises in that data. Asked it the Soviets were indeed sharing, Sharp replied, "I think, in fact, they are.' And he explained further: "Now, in addition, at that meeting they exchanged * * *. There was an honest exchange, I believe, on the medical findings of the cosmonauts and astronauts post flight, the follow-up studies and the physicals. Both theirs and ours. And an agreement was made about how the physicals would be conducted. How the tests would be done even to the point of how you would determine the amount of electrolytes in urine or blood so both countries were using the same measurements. So we had a good idea what their numbers meant. Sharp concluded: In fact we had suggested to them that they run the identical tests in their laboratories that we will run here. Admittedly, this is tentative. A very tentative step into this corroborative role. We don't know how it will come out. It seems to take forever right now." (House Science and Technology Committee, Hearings, 1976 NASA Authorization, 1975, vol. 2, pt. 1, pp. 617-618.)
6. For an explanation of the procedures for setting up these joint experiments, see response to questions for the record in Senate Commerce, Science, and Transportation Committee, Hearings, NASA Authorization for Fiscal Year 1979, pt. 1, p. 474.
7. Statement of Hinners, Senate Commerce, Science, and Transportation Committee, Hearings, NASA Authorization for Fiscal Year 1978, pt. 2, p. 1228
8. Moscow Tass in English, 1904, Aug. 3, 1977, in FBIS Daily Report: Soviet Union, vol. 3, Aug. 4, 1977: U1.
9. Statement of Hinners, House Science and Technology Committee, Hearings, 1979 NASA Authorization, 1977, vol. 1, pt. 1, p. 99.
10. House Science and Technology Committee, Hearings, 1978 NASA Authorization, 1976, vol. 1, pt 1, p. 10.
11. Senate Commerce, Science, and Transportation Committee, Hearings, NASA Authorization for Fiscal Year 1979, pt. 1, pp. 288-289.
12. O'Lone, U.S., Soviets to Discuss More Biosat Misssions, p. 95.
12A. Moscow Tass in English, 2020 GMT, Aug. 3, 1977, pp. U1-U2, in FBIS Daily Report: Soviet Union, vol. 3, Aug. 4, 1977, pp. U1-U2.
13. NASA News. Release No. 78-10. Summaries of Two U.S.-Soviet Meetings Issued in. Senate Commerce, Science, and Transportation Committee, Hearings, NASA Authorization for Fiscal Year 1979, pt. 1, pp. 118-128. For a technical explanation of achievements at these meetings, see the statement of Dr. Hinners in these hearings on pp. 406-407.
14. House Science and Technology Committee, Hearings, 1980 NASA Authorization, 1978, vol. 1, pt. 1, p. 326.
15. NASA response to questions, Senate Commerce, Science, and Transportation Committee, Hearings, NASA Authorization for Fiscal Year 1979, pt. 1, p. 474. To this general point could be added the specific values cited by Souza quoted above and also explained in O'Lone's commentary on the biosatellite missions in Aviation Week & Space Technology, also cited above.
The following statement by Dr. Hinners on Kosmos 936 suggests even to the uninstructed layman the value of such experiments for future U.S. manned spaceflights:
“The Soviet Union continues to cooperate with us in the life science area. We had a successful joint mission with the Soviets, flying on their Kosmos satellite last year, and found out some very interesting and strange new things.
"We have been aware of the calcium loss in the astronauts' bones. In the near-term it has not been a problem; in the long-term it might be, and that is why we are studying this area.
"What came out of the Kosmos biological experiments is that the amount of calcium, per se, may not be the only indicator of a change in activity; indications are that you may not have to lose a lot of calcium before bone strength changes. What was found is that the bone strength degrades very rapidly. Bones become very fragile with a small amount of calcium loss. There is a lot to be gained in studying this changing physiology.
"I am a little chagrined at the attitude I find in the life sciences area within and outside of NASA as to whether we do or don't know what is going on with man in space."
Hinners proceeded to explain the linkage between the Kosmos biological experiments to long-term U.S. manned spaceflights and the physiological problems involved therein. (Statement of Hinners, House Science and Technology Committee, Hearings, 1979 NASA Authorization, 1978, vol. 1, pt. 2, p. 1560.)
16. The first joint United States/U.S.S.R. ground-based study to investigate physiological changes in humans resulting from simulated weightlessness was conducted during 1979, In May two NASA scientists participated as obserers in an experiment at the Institute of Biomedical Problems in Moscow. In the second phase of the study, two Soviet scientists, both M.D,’s observed NASA's experiments at Ames Research Center. (Highlights of 1979 Activities, NASA News Dec 27 1979, in Senate Commerce, Science, and Transportation Committee, Hearings, NASA Authorization for Fiscal Year 1981, 1980, pt 2, p. 818.)
Frutkin gave the following appraisal of cooperation in this area: If I may say, there has been a rather extraordinary openness of exchange in this particular area the physiological results of spaceflight" This judgment was preceded by the insertion of a NASA statement recording specific instances of Soviet cooperation, for example, the Soviet report on the biomedical results from the 96-day space mission aboard Salyut 6. (Senate Commerce, Science, and Transportation Committee Hearings, NASA Authorization for Fiscal Year 1981, 1980, pt. .i, p. 3, p. 1650.)
17. Highlights of 1979 Activities, NASA News, Dec. 27, 1979 in Senate Commerce Science, and Transportation Committee, Hearings, NASA Authorization for Fiscal Year 1981 1980, pt. 2, p. 818. Further details on the results of Kosmos 1129 will be discussed in volume II of this report.
18. Response to question. Senate Commerce, Science, and Transportation
Committee, Hearings, NASA Authorization for Fiscal Year 1980, 1979, pt. 2., p. 934.
19. Response to question. Senate Commerce, Science, and Transportation Committee, Hearings, NASA Authorization for Fiscal Year 1981, pt. 2, p. 1236
20. "Statement of Dr. Thomas A. Mutch, Associate Administrator for Space Science, NASA, House Science and Technology Committee, Hearings, 1981 NASA Authorization, 1979, vol. 1, p. 240. See also, response to question, ibid., p. 342.
|
NEWSLETTER
|
| Join the GlobalSecurity.org mailing list |
|
|
|
