Press-conference at MCC February 28, 2001

 U. N. Koptev

 Let's get started. Since the topic of the conference is clear, let's proceed from the fact that everybody present today is familiar with the information covered in the press. I would like to touch upon 6 issues before I give the floor to all those willing to express their attitude to the subject matter in order to find the truth, which, I am quite confident, is impossible in principle, because a regular technical conference of technical specialists is substituted to a great extent by a political hysterics which fails to take into account real technical, legal or other arguments thus making any professional discussion next to impossible.

 A group of deputes is present today, since, at the last week's Plenary session an appeal to the President was issued which proposed a procedure on the "Mir" station different from the one adopted by the Government. That is why we are especially grateful to them: firstly, for taking joining the conference in order to have a better understanding of the state of affairs in the field of manned space operations in Russia, and, secondly, for agreeing to participate in this discussion.

  First of all I should stress the fact that all the publications and statements concerning the subject in question don't draw upon the legal and legislative basis on space operation In this connection I would like to remind that we have the law which regulates space activity and actually determines the subject matter of the space operations. I would dare to remind that space industry involve any type of space operation (research and exploration in space including Moon and other celestial objects). Space research, space communication including TV and radio communication with using satellite systems, Earth and ecological monitoring, the use of satellite, navigation and topogeodesic systems, manned missions, material production in space and lots of other operations could be related to space activity. To put it point blank, today's discussion lacks some integrated approach to the problem. As you know, the power of each state in space operation presupposes integration of all types of space activity without specifying any one particular aspect however important it might seem because it can't solve all the Government tasks.

 There is something more I would like to draw your attention to - this is Article 4, which states that any space activity in space should meet the requirements for safety and protection of the environment. Russian Federation international responsibility for space operations is recognized, it presupposes a rational, well-balanced combination of space engineering and space technology in the accomplishment of space operations in order to meet research, socioeconomic and defense purposes. If we consider the real state of affairs in our space operation we should take into account all the above stated.

  As to the legacy of taking decisions by the Government: I would like to remind of Article 5 of the Law which states that it is within RF Government competence to approve of normative acts, regulating the procedure of designing, manufacturing, testing and utilization of engineering facilities.

 Russian Federation is a member of a number of international agreements, in particular, Vienna Convention (of March 29,1972) on international liability for damage from space man-operated objects.

This liability prescribes absolute indisputable responsibility for every state in case of damage caused by any space operation. That's why the point stating that 'space activity' is a risky area, i.e. weather there is a possibility of uncontrolled descent for an orbiting facility doesn't make very much sense because it contradicts all the principles of a civilized society conducting space operations. In case of such a possibility, we ought to be extremely careful and bear all responsibly to prevent it from happening. The same documents which I have already mentioned - the law regulating space operations state that it is against the law to carry out operations which might cause damage, and more to it the same document determines the rate of liability. To avoid giving an unsupported evidence, I would dare to remind you of the following fact. In accordance with the current documents on February 28, 1978 the marine reconnaissance satellite "Cosmos 954" was lost as a result of onboard radio control system failure which ended in an uncontrolled descent on the territory of Canada causing us lots of trouble. It took the former Soviet Union a year to fix the problem and cost it 6,5 mln $ that's to cover the matter of international liability.

 Now back to 'Mir'. I would like to bring back the time when we started designing the project, that was in 1976. At that time ours was a different country with different possibilities. The implementation of the project required 4,2 bln $. In the year 1986 the fist core block was launched, it cost 1,6 bln $. It was followed by the development of a few resupply modules "Kvant', 'Kvan-2','Kristal' which before 1990 made up the Station core. It cost another 1,1 bln $. I want to draw your attention to the fact, that in 1986 it was financed only from the Federal budget - 357 mln $, 1987 - 393 mln $, 1988 - 461 mln $, 1989 - 595 mln $, and after perestroika - 1990 - 24 mln.$, 1991 - 6.1 mln.$, 1992 - 8.7 mln.$, 1993 - 22 mln.$. As a result having been assembled only by half - (without the two biggest modules), since 1990 the Station being in financial difficulties has been with one foot in the grave. The Government, being concerned with other problems, didn't give the money. It is quite natural that under such conditions starting from 1990 the top management of RSCE and from 1992 with my assistance started looking for possibilities of extending the Orbit Facility's service life and its resupplying. It resulted in signing the first Agreement with the USA in 1992. Meanwhile some hysterical individuals who yelp about extreme insidiousness of the Americans whose only dream, as they put it, is to bring 'Mir' to its demise as soon as possible. I am here to confirm if we hadn't had an agreement with the Americans, we would have lost 'Mir' 8 years ago, because it occurred in 1993 that the first agreement was signed which changed the destiny of 'Mir' - thus starting the first stage of International Station . A special 5-year program was developed involving regular Shuttle missions with join crews. The program - the result of which was a 1 bln $ worth investment. Here the exact financial report: 1993- budgetary - 22mln $ and extra budgetary - 73, 1994 - budgetary - 81 and extra budgetary - 132, 1995 - budgetary - 96 and extra budgetary - 54, 1996 - budgetary - 151 and extra budgetary - 60. Some of those present today may remember how the budget was formed. We had to be very inventive: sometimes we had to do annual planning, which would be signed by the Russian Federation Government Chairman and the US Vice-President. Some of our international commitments helped us to receive the money necessary to build 'Spectr' and 'Priroda' but there is nothing that can last forever. This program ended in 1998. It should be stressed here that after the Program was launched, Europeans and some other countries also expressed their readiness to participate. Then the first Slovak astronaut was launched and this flight brought another 16 mln $. The result was - 1 bln $ injection into the Program. And only thanks to this money the Program could go ahead. Let's consider the situation today. The year - 1999, January - everybody is happy - everybody is looking forward to commercial operations on the Station. The Government passes a Resolution. All the resources are transferred to the RSCE with certain obligations to provide safety in conducting space operations. But, unfortunately, at this time the ISS is put in the first line on the priority list becoming a more significant event. We don't have any serious customers, ready to make contributions and we have to do only with the budget money. Starting from July 1, 1999 the budget money runs out and we are restricted only to extra budget investments. Starting from 1999 we managed to launch only one crew, one cargo ship and received a credit to launch another ship, which is far from what we had planned. That's the lot we could accomplish in reality. I believe it's not a good idea to discourse on the topic one doesn't know well enough it's far better go and ask those who are in the matter instead of relying on the evidence of the so-called 'experts'. 

 A few words about the budget. I want you to know that it was only in 1989 that the Soviet Union declared the amount of money it spent on Space activity - 6,9 bln rubles. I'd like to remind of the rate of the dollar at that time - 0,64. We won't have to make very complicated calculations to get the sum exceeding 9 bln $. If you consider the budget of the year 2000 - you will see that in comparative prices it is 19 times less on the whole on space activity And what about civil operations? In 1994 from the overall budget - 425 mln on manned missions was given - 54%, in 1995 - 41%. On average, we spent from 50% up to 55% of this scanty budget on two manned programs. And what is more important the biggest part of the money went to the 'Mir' program because till the end of 1998 we were mainly committed to the 'Mir' program. Due to a number of reasons we were 2 years behind the schedule with the ISS operations. When it comes to considering our partners' activity we can't help mentioning our claims: nothing has been returned from 'Mir', nothing supplied, nothing has been estimated. When it is being put this way it is technical realization that is to be considered first of all. Do you know the lifting capabilities of our cargo ship, do you have any idea of the maximum weight we can return in it - it is just a few tens of kilograms. In the course of out joint operations on 'Mir' together with the Americans and Europeans, we managed to return 22,9 tons of weight. I am sorry, it s the amount of cargo delivered to the Station. It is equal to 9 cargo ship 'Progress' missions. 7,8 tons of cargo was returned to Earth. Apart form research equipment and experiment results we had to deliver onboard and back docking facilities, onboard computers and other supplies which were necessary to service the station and go ahead with the program. Now it is not difficult to calculate that on average in terms of commercial rates the delivery onboard of one kg of cargo costs 10000$, and to return it to Earth is - 2,5 or 3 times more expensive. According to our estimation: delivery of the same cargo onboard requires 9 cargo ships, and return with the same capabilities we have at our disposal - 26 'Raduga' returnable capsules. Now you have a clear idea of our partners' contribution to the 'Mir' program.

 Now the next issue - the real state of affairs.

 Yes, I should admit that 'Mir' Station became failure prone long time ago but by no means I want to underestimate the importance of 'Mir'. "Mir" - is one of the greatest scientific achievements in terms of engineering and technical progress. 15 years in orbit -more than 100 missions and dockings - an enormous amount of diverse experiments carried onboard - such is the contribution, which will never be forgotten. Now it is all over. We are all engineers and we are all aware of the fact that nothing can last forever. Starting form 1997 the time which was normally require to maintain the Station operational had to be increased 2,5 times thus correspondingly reducing the time allocated to research, that's what we have today. We have been facing the problem since the middle of the last year. We received the first warning in October when Khrunichev Center which is responsible for safety operation of the Orbit Facility didn't issue the Resolution allowing exploitation of the Station on the grounds that the real technical condition of the Orbit Facility aggravated by corrosion and other flight effects prevent it from issuing such a Resolution without the necessary ground experiments. Today I think it is illegal to continue the program. We have turned to a number of institutes including the Head Institute. A number of resolutions have been issued. They all agree that the current technical condition of the Station doesn't allow to continue the program, because it doesn't meet the safety requirements either in terms of its exploitation or safety of the crew in general. I will read some of the conclusions issued by the Head Institute together with the Designer.

 "At present to the most critical onboard systems, malfunction of which can influence the successful execution of final stage controlled descent should be referred: motion control system, the crew thermal control system , power system, onboard measuring system, structures and units designed by Design Bureau "Salute".

 Technical condition report:

 - motion control system - the core block "Kvant" - "Kvant2" reveal resource shortage as well as shortage of computing facilities, the gyrodines service life is over, the warranty term for 'Kursk 100' has expired;

 - thermal control system - fails to maintain the required thermal mode; the crew involvement is required to restore the efficiency of loops;

 -power system - the service life of a number of storage batteries blocks (8 out of 12) and items of automatic equipment has expired, current stabilizer ÑÒ 25-11 failed, 'Kvant' resupply module solar array is powered down; 

 - onboard measuring system - two ÁÐ9ÑÓ 5 units failed, "Mir" Station ÁÈÊ 3 system units reveal shortage of resources

  ÁÈÊ 2-3 system and "Symbol D" system telemetry data are used to control the Station;

 Structure and units:

 - low efficiency thermal control loop of "Kvant" thermal control loop of "Êristal" module;

 -unfavorable impact of moisture and microflora on structure elements inside pressurized compartments;

 Khrunichev Center doesn't issue the Resolution to continue 'Mir' Station operation until February 28.

 Conclusion - the failure report and their aftereffects show that service life of a number of critical onboard systems has expired which proves the necessity to carry out final operations on controlled descent during the estimated time interval.

 I could go on with the final report in order to demonstrate kind of general opinion - this letter was sent to all. It's a pity that our mass media is very choosy when it comes to a rowdy scene or a political go all the front pages are covered with the news. At our last press conference we had over 100 journalists. And what was the result - just a few tiny paragraphs on the last page. I am here to let you know that the open letter signed by the Head of Rosaviacosmos and the Top Management of the major enterprises involved in the Program was sent to all whom it might concern. The letter in question outlines clearly the situation we found ourselves in.

 Now about the actions taken. All the necessary procedures defined by the Law, Regulations of Rosaviacosmos, defined by our international obligations are fully complete. The Government has detailed information on the matter, personally U.P. Semenov and I have done part of the reports. The decision taken by the Government was the final one and approved of the planned operations. There are people who still think they are being deceived. I am very surprised to see some cosmonaut speak in favor of keeping the Station in orbit. Among them there are those who worked on the station and who keep saying that only one of the modules is old enough but the rest of them are still operational. They suggest disintegration of the Station so that it could be assembled again with the addition of a new Service module. I want you to understand: the Service module service life has expired, the resupply module wasn't fitted with a propulsion system so it can't function autonomously. Besides, it is only one year younger than the Station itself. The modules "Êristal" è "Kvant-2": has up to 80 kg of working medium each in their propulsion systems. They are not fitted with radio control system. They are not provided with docking units. There are not any functional docking assemblies, because we had to return them to be able to go ahead with the program. And what is more they can't be connected to new interfaces. Being manufactured 15 years ago they can't be produced today because of the poor condition of our industry. We could carry on with this list. In fact, the module "Spectr" is out of order and useless. The only module "Priroda" still has a supply of 800 kg. of propellant, but at the same time it doesn't have solar arrays and a power system, i.e. lithium batteries - can provide an autonomous flight only during 6 days, and it is possible if we undock. But even after undocking we will not be able to control the module, since its onboard radio system is out of order and we can't be replaced since they stopped to produce such systems 8 years ago.

Now I would like to say a few words about the new block - yes, it can be operational. The time required is - 4-5 years. If we consider the time required to manufacture the previous modules - the terms were much longer at that time. It will cost 200-300 mln $. Since we are discussing this matter, then a question may arise: why should we do it. If we are so rich, if our potential is limitless than why not build a new Station. Or wouldn't it be better to fulfil our obligations in terms of the ISS at least where we are lagging behind the schedule.

 And there is more to it.Let's use this cargo ship to reboost the orbit, - and we'll have another two months to take a decision. But the question is what decision? We've been considering the matter since 1997. I am here to let you understand: taking into consideration the unsatisfactory technical condition of the Station, to be able to prevent it from causing damage we should perform the next launch in April. I believe many are familiar with ballistic calculations - today even a big cargo ship can reboost the orbit by 50 km. Before we steer to safe waiting orbit - we are supposed to have a new core block ready (to tell the truth I can't understand what for) - just to let 'Priroda' survive 6 days more after docking, but to make it operational we will need at least 5-6 cargo ships. I want to remind that the cost of each cargo ship launch today is 300 mln. rubles.

To do justice, I would like to remind, that the Board of Chief Designers considered all the possible approaches on October 3. Among the discussed issues were the following: is there a possibility to continue the Program, how to perform de-orbiting with all the necessary regulations. And of course a whole amount of procedures was mentioned necessary to be carried out. The decision should be taken at the Government level, a special resolution should be issued, the necessary funds raised and so on and so forth. By the way at the same time "Duma' planned to inject another 1.5 bln. rubles into the 'Mir' program at the end of 1999, but you refused. I want you to know that 'Duma' intended to spend 1.5 mln in accordance with the debit item which expected revenues from the turnover of intellectual property of military and dual purpose. To replenish the budget 9 bln rubles were allotted, one part of the budget - for general military technologies, and the remaining part was planned for the 'Mir' program. As a result only 90 mln rubles was raised during the year for the debit item in question. 

 And the last issue - participation in the ISS program. I don't intend to raise a discussion but I want to say that it is a well-balanced decision. It has been taken after a thorough study, which started in 1990. All the steps were taken in accordance with the state legislation, the Government was involved in taking decisions and issuing resolutions. The activity on the ISS agreement was started in 1995 and was carried out under the guidance of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs.

 During the 4 year period we together with our colleagues has gone though the necessary formalities, before in January 1998 the RF Ambassador on behalf of the Russian Government signed this Agreement together with 15 participant countries inWashington. Thus taking into account the above mentioned facts I should say that any doubts on the ISS Agreement don't seem to have any grounds. Those who want to clear up the matter should take the trouble to read the related documents. 

 The matter of ownership within the ISS program. The matter of ownership is being regulated by a special article of the Agreement which clearly defines the right to material and intellectual property, i.e. a country which joins the project with some particular property preserves all the rights to this property within the ISS program.

 In accordance with the signed Agreement the Russian side can't be expelled or deprived of any kind of intellectual or material property it has the right to. All disputes are to be settled in the course of negotiations until consent is reached.

 On December 15 'Duma' considered the ratification of the ISS Agreement. It took 2 hours to discuss the matter. Your obedient servant together with the deputy Minister for Foreign Affairs specified all the details of the Agreement. As you understand the future of the 'Mir' program couldn't be ignored. During the discussion I drew upon the same facts. To do justice, we should state here that there are consistent individuals, such as deputy Mitrofanov, for example. I can understand it when a person has his own clear position on some problem. It is good when it is based not only on emotions and political arguments but also on proper understanding of engineering and economic aspects. Voting took place just after my report with the following results: 381 - supported the ratification, 2 - against, 4 - abstained from voting. I was interested in the results of the voting, especially I wanted to know whether our main opponents - the Communist Fraction supported us or was against?

Mr.Volkov - supported the ratification, but a day later he expressed quite an opposite attitude towards ratification on TV. Mr-s Zjuganov, Ligachev, Lukjanov, Sevastjanov, Seleznev supported the ratification. Mrs. Savitskaja - abstained from voting. I understand there are laws of political struggle. I believe the Russian Space program managed to survive during 10 years only because it was engaged in solving its primary tasks and was deprived of political approach.

 Under such conditions when the state financial support was reduced by 20 times, the industry together with the leading enterprises found ways of attracting additional (extra) means. For example, annual budget in India twice exceeds the Russian budget today. Though India can afford only 1 or 2 launches a year while Russia has to support a fleet of 110 space units. However, such publications and statements can mislead our public and taxpayers. It's not a good idea to make a laughing stock of ourselves in the whole world. We should not forget what we did yesterday, what we supported the day before. At this point I should remind that I am an official and I consider ratification a law I am committed to fulfil. If some fractions vote against it there could be some procedures to repeal it. But in case the law is adopted everybody is committed to observe the law they have approved of. In order to end our conversation optimistically I would like to say that it is not too bad when one particular subject is given so much attention to, but I would prefer to come down to Earth and look around to see what is going on in the world. Complete computerization and automatization and information are likely to become the main characteristic features of today's world. The situation in the Middle East, the war in the Bay involved more than 60 satellites to support integrated operation of the international military formation in the area. Combat action in Kosho involved - 119 space units to provide precise performance of up modern weapons, integration of forces etc. What is our level today? Where is our navigation system? The world forecast for the year 2007 is as follows: according to specialists by the year 2007 the market of navigation equipment and navigation service will exceed 100 bln $ per year.- Not long ago we supported a fleet of 24 navigation satellites not worse than the American. Today we have only 13 operational units without any finance to service them. We had optimistic hopes thanks to a number of fractions, who supported the investment of extra budget 600 mln. rubles into the development of the navigation system. And now we are being told that due to amendments to the budget we must say good-bye to 600 mln. on the navigation system and to 500 mln on manned space operations. Today 13 of our space craft have one foot in the grave. We are in danger of losing this system for good. I wonder what will our Army have at its disposal? The precise signal of the American system? But it can turn off any minute. Or let's consider the matter of communication system. It is 3 years since we are not allowed to use the budget money to develop communication systems. I don't consider the situation to be correct. Today 50% of our facilities has exceeded their service life 2 or 3 times .We don't know what it in store for us? I want to inform you that within our communication zone over the Russian territory we have 62 foreign communication satellites. Today we have quite a number of companies ready to purchase recourses from American companies-owners of the satellites (and they are right doing so). If we lost our satellites, their place would immediately be taken by others. Do you think there should be somebody who should be concerned with these problems. The President is concerned about the matter so is the Government and so is the Security Council. Recently a special meeting was held where all these problems were considered in a great detail. So I think the best thing is to stick to the Law. The Law states that space activity should be many-sided and all -embracing. I don't think it is right to focus on one particular project, which once used to be very profitable and now should be decommissioned in a civilized way. We should do our best to prevent it from causing any damage and stop this nightmare for the whole of mankind.

Thank you for your kind attention.