Military space activity in modern geopolitical conditions. Prevention of the militarization of outer space. School Encyclopedia

Issues considered:

Retrospective of military-space activities - from its inception to the present state.
Features of EVA in modern conditions and the militarization of space.
Possible ways to prevent the militarization of outer space.

The entire development of cosmonautics, domestic and foreign, is inextricably linked with the use of space facilities to solve military problems. And there were objective prerequisites for this. Launch vehicles for launching space objects were created by defense plants, as a rule, on the basis of combat missiles commissioned by the military department and, naturally, the military, first of all, thought about using satellites for military tasks. This is confirmed by the fact that almost two years before the launch of the first satellite, by a government decree of 01/30/1956, the task of studying the prospects for the military use of space was assigned to the specialized institute of the Ministry of Defense.

During this period, the USSR and the USA were in a state of "cold war" and intensively accelerated work on the creation of a reliable nuclear sword and shield, respectively, of their country on the basis of combat intercontinental missiles. And for the effective use of rocket technology, i.e. to accurately hit the missiles at the designated target at the appointed time, it was necessary to identify and control targets in the vast territories of potential enemies, know their coordinates exactly, as well as precisely "tie" their missiles, ensure reliable uninterrupted communication between the country's leadership and the armed forces, bring orders from the centralized combat control on the use of nuclear weapons to the appropriate command posts, as well as directly to their carriers.

Therefore, the primary tasks for the solution of which space means began to be used in the interests of defense were the tasks of photo and electronic intelligence, navigation and geodetic support, bringing signals of centralized combat control. But this was preceded by the stage of launching experimental spacecraft for testing rocket and space complexes and onboard service systems.

In 1962, a new stage of space exploration began, the first target spacecraft was launched to solve military problems - it was the Zenit-2 photographic surveillance spacecraft. Within two years, more than a dozen of these spacecraft were launched, after which, in 1964, the first space complex was put into service.

In the period 1961-1978. passed flight tests and were put into service with more advanced photo surveillance spacecraft of the Zenit series, new spacecraft of the Yantar type, space complexes for radio engineering (Tselina, US-P) and radar (US-A) reconnaissance, adjustment (“Rhombus”), geodetic support (“Sphere”), space communication systems (“Lightning”, “Arrow”), meteorological observations (“Meteor”), navigation (“Gulf”, “Sail”, “Cicada”, etc.).

At the same time, work was underway to create a space-based missile attack warning system.

In response to the US work on the creation of anti-space systems of the ASAT type and the development of methods for space inspection, the Soviet Union adopted the low-orbit interception complex "IS".

The creation and use of space facilities for military purposes abroad in the United States began in the same years and along similar lines. So the first experimental reconnaissance satellite "Discoverer-1" was launched on February 28, 1959. Spacecraft of this series were used to test the means and methods of conducting reconnaissance from space. In the 60s, the use of the Samos series spacecraft, the Ferret-D electronic intelligence spacecraft, communications (SDS, NATO, Telstar), meteorological support (Tiros), navigation "Transit".

Of particular importance was given to space-based missile attack warning systems (originally Midas, then Imews) and a system for detecting ground-based nuclear explosions based on Vela Hotel in high (110,000 km) circular orbits.

In the United States in the 1970s, more advanced reconnaissance spacecraft of the LASP series, and then the KX series, were created and put into service, providing the possibility of conducting survey and detailed observation, including frame-by-frame and area shooting modes. For the first time, a satellite with a large-sized Ryolit antenna is launched into geostationary orbit to conduct radio interception of communications from radio communication facilities in Europe, which caused a big stir among our special services due to the difficulty of identifying it using the available technical means.

Space systems of communication, navigation, meteorological support are being actively developed, and the missile attack warning system is being improved.

Despite the abundance of space complexes put into service, the total composition of the orbital constellation remained small due to the short duration of the active existence of the spacecraft in orbit.

In the future, during the transition to space systems and complexes of a new generation, significantly longer periods of active functioning, more advanced on-board equipment, with the creation of systems for delivering received data via radio channels, including protected ones, there was a qualitative leap in the use of space facilities in the interests of solving military problems and ensuring national security.

Permanently operating orbital groupings of space systems and complexes for various purposes were deployed in the interests of information support for the actions of the branches of the Armed Forces. The volume of tasks solved with the use of space means has significantly increased. Information space support has become a generally recognized fact and natural both in the planning of strategic actions and in the course of planning the actions of groupings of troops and naval forces at a lower level. The contribution of space assets to the solution of the tasks of the Armed Forces in various periods of the situation is very significant; in quantitative terms, estimates of the contribution to increase efficiency reach 80 percent or more.

The results of modeling the use of groupings of ground forces, naval and aviation forces, as well as evaluating the effectiveness of various weapons systems, carried out by specialized institutes for more than a decade, showed that the combat capabilities of groupings of troops and weapon systems due to information support from space increase by 1.5-2 times.

This is generally recognized by both our and foreign specialists and experts.

In the same period, simultaneously in the USSR and the USA, studies were carried out on the possibility and expediency of deploying combat weapons in space, primarily for striking ground and sea targets.

At the same time, the task of "depreciating" the Soviet nuclear potential by delivering a preventive nuclear strike from space was considered. In dialectical unity, ground-based anti-space weapons were also considered here for the destruction of similar Soviet strike weapons if they were created. However, the technological backlog available in the 50-70s, the production base and, of course, economic opportunities did not allow the United States and its allies to carry out the militarization of space. A deterrent was also the conclusion of a number of international treaties - the 1967 Treaty on the non-deployment of weapons of mass destruction in outer space and the 1972 ABM Treaty.

Nevertheless, the issues of further militarization of outer space have always remained the cornerstone of the policy of the leading states, primarily the United States. They were given special attention by the leadership of the powers, given the ever-increasing importance of outer space for achieving the goals of national interests and security. So US President A. Johnson said back in 1964: “The British dominated the sea and led the world. We rule the air and have been the leaders of the free world ever since we established that rule. Now this position will be occupied by the one who will dominate in space. This catchphrase, further paraphrased and therefore attributed to many US politicians, has become the leitmotif of the goals and objectives of the world's leading states in the field of national space policy.

Active development of various projects for the creation of combat space assets, simulation of combat operations in space and from space led to the fact that by the beginning of the 1990s. from the long-expressed thesis that space is a new sphere of armed struggle, they came to the need to solve practical problems in the operational equipment of near-Earth space as a possible theater of military operations (TVD).

Usually, the operational equipment of a ground-based theater of operations involves the construction of fortified areas, the development of railways and roads, the airfield network, the equipment of positions, bases, warehouses, the preparation of a communication system, control points, navigation, metrological, topographic and geodetic measures, etc.

What does it mean in relation to the space theater? First of all, the deployment in space of permanent space systems for reconnaissance of the space situation, navigation, communications and combat control, relaying, which ensure the combat use of strike space assets. Next is the creation on earth of the necessary elements of space infrastructure for launching spacecraft (combat and information), controlling them, receiving information from them, etc., that is, providing a full cycle of combat use and operation of space technology.

In domestic and foreign literature, there are various concepts and definitions regarding outer space as a sphere of armed struggle. In foreign countries, the term "space theater of war" is more often used, in ours - "space theater of military operations". In the 1990s, the concept of "strategic space zone" - SKZ was proposed and introduced. The division of the SKZ into operational zones is rather conditional and is characterized primarily by the types of spacecraft orbits used to solve various target tasks.

Thus, by the mid-1990s After space information equipment, there is a qualitative change in the use of space facilities in the interests of solving military problems and national security.

And if earlier the use of space assets in the course of local wars and armed conflicts was, as a rule, episodic (Vietnam, the Middle East, Afghanistan, the Falkland Islands, etc.) - if there is a satellite in orbit and it can be maneuvered for operational passage over the observation area, now the situation has changed radically.

The first experience of large-scale practical use of space systems in the course of hostilities was the events in the Persian Gulf in 1991, when space assets were used by multinational forces in all phases of the operation.

The main tasks assigned to the control bodies of the space command in the conflict area were to provide reconnaissance, communications, assess the results of the destruction of enemy targets, navigational topographic, geodetic and meteorological support for the troops.

The most significant role was played by the means of space reconnaissance of the United States. The US space reconnaissance orbital constellation included more than two dozen spacecraft for surveillance (optical and radar) and radio and electronic reconnaissance.

The characteristics of reconnaissance means made it possible to confidently open almost all objects of the ground forces, the air force basing system, missile units and subunits, as well as objects of military and economic potential.

In the course of hostilities, the US Space Command practiced new tactics for using data from the space-based Imeus ballistic missile launch detection system to increase the effectiveness of the combat use of Patriot anti-aircraft missile systems. The fulfillment of these tasks was carried out in advance by a deployed constellation of spacecraft.

There was an intensive use by the command of the multinational forces of space communications up to the tactical level. The navigation field created by the Navstar space system was widely used by the multinational forces. With the help of its signals, the accuracy of aviation reaching targets at night was increased, and the flight trajectories of aviation cruise missiles were corrected.

Based on weather reports compiled on the basis of data received from space, planned tables of aviation flights were compiled and, if necessary, corrected.

In general, military space assets had such a strong influence on the actions of multinational forces in the conflict in the Persian Gulf that they even contributed to the development of new tactics for their combat use.

According to experts, the 1991 Gulf War is "the first war of the space age" or "the first space war of our era."

Further processing and development of the forms and methods of using space assets to support the combat operations of troops took place in Yugoslavia. Planning of missile and bomb strikes, control of the results of their implementation, topographic, geodetic and meteorological support of the operation at all its stages was carried out using data from space facilities. Particular importance was attached to the space navigation system, the information of which ensured the functioning of high-precision weapons at any time of the day and under any weather conditions. An analysis of the experience of using space assets in Yugoslavia and in previous conflicts made it possible to finally confirm the necessity and high efficiency of the use of the so-called space support groups created in various command and control levels. Thus, in the Yugoslav conflict, in order to coordinate the actions of heterogeneous reconnaissance assets, as well as to optimize the information received, a special division for the use of space assets was created under the NATO Commander-in-Chief in Europe.

There was such a unit in the Russian army. At the initiative of the leadership of the Russian Military Space Forces, a freelance unit was created - a space support group (GKP), which included representatives of the Aerospace Forces, the GRU, the department of the head of the communications troops and other representatives of military authorities interested in obtaining space information. In accordance with the directives, this group was involved in all operational training activities carried out in the troops - KSHU, KSHVI, KSHT.

The increase in the use of space forces and assets in military operations and conflicts continued. The war in Iraq in 2003 became another training ground for working out information support for troops and weapons from space.

The orbital constellation of the multinational forces involved in the course of the war included up to 60 military spacecraft for various purposes (reconnaissance, communications and relaying, meteorological support), a full-scale constellation of Navstar-GPS devices, and a large number of commercial satellites for communication and remote sensing of the Earth. With regard to commercial spacecraft, decisions were made by the governments of the United States and NATO countries on the priority use of their resource in the interests of the military. During the period of the operation, the orbital constellation was not increased, i.e., the orbital reserve was created in advance.

In the course of hostilities in Iraq, the Americans carried out practical development of the concept of creating integrated heterogeneous reconnaissance and strike systems (RSS) that implement the principle of jointly interconnected in space and time the use of a subsystem of destruction, which includes, either individually or in a complex, ground, sea, air, and space weapons and subsystems for information support and data output for target designations. The algorithm for the functioning of heterogeneous RSS is simple, but very effective. The means of the information support subsystem solve the problems of detecting targets in various areas of armed struggle. The received data for target designations are transmitted in real time to command and control points for troops and weapons or directly to the weapons of the subsystem of destruction. It is in this way that the ideal military concept of "saw and struck" is realized.

In the orbital grouping of coalition forces, the space contour of the information support subsystem was made up of KX-11 optical-electronic reconnaissance satellites, Lacrosse radar reconnaissance, Magnum and Forteks electronic reconnaissance, and DMSP meteorological satellites. In addition, information was widely used from civil Earth remote sensing satellites Iconos, Spot and others. and unmanned vehicles "Raptor", "Predator" and others.

A huge role in the war with Iraq was played by space navigation aids. First of all, we are talking about using information from Navstar-GPS to aim high-precision weapons.

As in the war of Yugoslavia, rockets and bombs were widely used, using signals from the Navstar space navigation system to target the target.

Military operations in Iraq once again confirmed the exceptional role of space communications in command and control of troops in the preparation of operations in the course of combat operations.

One of the main features of the analyzed war is the conduct of operations on a vast territory without a clear front line. Under these conditions, the scope and transience of the operations being carried out are very large, and the dispersion of forces and means is significant. And only space means of communication were able to provide operational command and control of troops. Only space means of reconnaissance could provide "vision" of enemy objects to the entire depth of his operational formation.

prospects

It should be noted that information support from space for the actions of the armed forces in the 21st century will remain one of the key tasks, the solution of which should be provided by military space assets.

The results of scientific research, the experience of using space assets to support combat operations, obtained, among other things, in various military conflicts, as well as during operational training activities, show that the development of space assets to solve the problem of information and space support should be carried out in two interrelated directions.

The first direction is the creation of space assets that meet the requirements of wartime in terms of operational and tactical characteristics, first of all, detail, productivity, frequency of data acquisition, efficiency in creating an orbital launch group, its combat stability and survivability, etc.

The second direction is bringing space information to the lowest tactical levels of command, and in the long term - to an individual soldier.

The realization of the need to bring space information to the lower levels of command and control, up to the fighter, occurred only at the end of the 20th century, when samples of “intellectual” highly informative small-sized equipment appeared and the very idea of the nature of modern combat changed (its transience, dynamism, scope.

According to new views, the equipment of each fighter must include means of control (communication), navigation and information display. And not separately, but combined into an individual small-mass-sized complex (set), its effectiveness will largely, and perhaps even to a decisive extent, depend on the degree of integration of information-computer and space technologies.

The results of working out in the 1990s the issues of the practical use of space forces and means in the troops confirmed that the creation of small-mass-sized transceiver equipment for space information should remain one of the most priority areas of development.

In conditions where a war or an armed conflict can be viewed as a confrontation between "intellectual" reconnaissance and strike systems, a soldier, regardless of the level he occupies in the army hierarchy, will be the main dominant unit. But in order to “correspond to the situation at its level of hierarchy, in addition to perfect weapons, it must be equipped with reliable, small-sized, high-performance means for receiving location data, for assessing the situation at the appropriate level and issuing (receiving) target designation data for its own and subordinate weapons forces.

An integral element in the equipment of such a warrior will include space communication equipment coupled with computer facilities with high throughput, noise immunity and security, space navigation equipment, devices for its interface with individual means of displaying information.

And these ten-year-old plans are being implemented successfully. . So, in the modern set of combat equipment "Warrior" there is already a communicator for determining the location of a fighter using the GLONASS and GPS systems, the communication system provides the commander and colleagues with information about the location of the fighter and is transmitted to the command post. The Sagittarius complex provides the ability to carry out target designation. The commander detects air targets and transmits target designation to the soldiers directly to the helmet-mounted mini-monitor via this target designation complex. Those do not need to search for targets on their own - quickly enough to get out of cover and fire a shot.

The predominant role of space in achieving the goals of armed struggle in the 21st century will be determined by the possibility of solving such a problem as active influence and combat support from space for the actions of armed forces. The solution to this problem involves the creation and deployment of space-based combat assets for conducting military operations in space and from space. This task covers the protection of own satellites, providing access to space and preventing the enemy from using space assets for their own purposes, destroying ground stations, facilities and links with satellites, disabling orbital assets, and it may also include the use of combat space assets, which involves the use of them from space to ground targets.

An analysis of all programs aimed at the militarization of outer space, including SDI and missile defense of various bases, shows that their practical implementation, in spite of any proclaimed defense goals, leads to a violation of the existing military-strategic balance in the world. The question is often asked how the use of space assets can affect strategic stability and disrupt the military-strategic balance. First of all, they provide greater predictability of the actions of states by controlling military activities, as well as expanding the scale of Russia's economic and scientific integration into the international community.

No one doubts that the space industry has a significant impact on technical and technological progress in all areas of the economy and science. Orbital facilities make it possible not only to explore outer space itself, the air and sea spheres, the state of the earth's surface, but also to use the results of these studies in the economy. Communications and television, navigation, research of natural resources, meteorology, topogeodesy, environmental control are now mastered by almost all developed countries. Work is underway on the ISS. At the same time, they contribute to strengthening ties and mutual understanding between our countries. The experience of the world economy confirms that with close economic and scientific cooperation, there are fewer prerequisites for unleashing a war between states and outer space can contribute to such a development of events.

Finally, the security and defense capability of Russia directly depend on the capabilities and state of the means of strategic warning of preparations for aggression, the start of a nuclear missile attack, as well as the quality of the comprehensive provision of space forces and assets to the army and navy in peacetime and wartime.

The military-strategic balance in the world and the deterrence of large-scale conventional and nuclear wars today is guaranteed primarily by Russia's ability to deliver an effective retaliatory nuclear missile strike against an aggressor. So far, we have approximate parity in strategic nuclear forces with the United States and outnumber the nuclear forces of other states.

Of course, in order to deter conventional war, it is desirable to have the same balance of forces in conventional weapons, but the state of the economy does not allow this to be achieved. Therefore, today it is necessary to talk not about parity, but about maintaining the Russian Armed Forces at a level that prevents the enemy from achieving dominance in several areas of military operations at once - air and space, sea and land. With such a conquest, defeat in war becomes inevitable. A striking example of this is the war in Iraq. The air supremacy ensured a quick victory for the multinational forces. A significant role was played in this by American forces and means of reconnaissance, navigation and communications.

In modern conditions, space assets are included in a number of strategic components, the parity in which is critical for from maintaining the military-strategic balance. It is impossible to keep it if one of the parties creates a missile defense system with space-based elements capable of repelling a retaliatory (or EIA) RIA or deploys an effective anti-satellite system. Complete dominance in space will create the necessary prerequisites for achieving victory in any war or conflict. Reconnaissance decommissioning. space systems entails the impossibility in real time to control the situation on the theater and issue the control center of the RUK. And this, in turn, disrupts the timely fulfillment of tasks to destroy mobile carriers of nuclear weapons (strategic aircraft in flight, submarines in patrol areas, ground-based mobile missile systems of ICBMs and OTR). Therefore, now it is expedient to introduce the concept of "PARITY IN SPACE" as an element of military-strategic balance.

At present, with a close range of space weapons, we are lagging behind the Americans in terms of the quality of these weapons. They continue to support the funding of the military space programs, including work on missile defense and SSS. Operative reconnaissance means for monitoring the situation in the theater of operations and in outer space are being created there more intensively. Using a broad interpretation of the 1972 ABM Treaty. and other documents that did not prohibit the creation and testing of strike and PSS with conventional weapons. The United States has carried out and continues to work on the development of the space echelon of missile defense and PSS.

In the future, we must take into account the growing military and nuclear power of China and its intensive development of space assets.

The latter is very important since China is not bound by any treaty restrictions on space. To maintain military parity in space, Russia needs to take both military and diplomatic measures. It is necessary to seek the conclusion of treaties banning testing and deployment of any type of weapons in outer space. To continue work on the creation of effective satellites for solving the problems of securing the battlefield. And we are not talking about their full-scale deployment, but about creating a scientific and technical reserve in order to prevent military-technical surprise in the creation of a new generation of weapons. The results of forecasting and trends in the development of the military-political situation and scientific and technological progress in the world allow us to draw the following conclusion: the influence of space on deterring large-scale wars and even local conflicts is constantly growing.

The features of military space activity noted earlier in modern conditions create real prerequisites for the development and implementation by the United States of new initiatives for the militarization of outer space. The main ones are :

Trends in the spread of nuclear weapons in the world (the number of countries owning nuclear weapons and OTR increased by 8 and 6 times, respectively.

The decline in the volume of space activities in Russia in the 90s. During these years, the tasks of transferring the production of space technology to the territory of Russia were mainly solved, and attention was paid to the implementation of military programs on a residual basis.

There is a clear tendency to blur the boundaries between military and civilian space, and an increasing number of civilian space assets are used in the interests of solving military problems during periods of aggravation of the situation.

Technical commonality in the development and creation of missile defense and missile defense systems, which makes it possible to create information and combat assets capable of solving the tasks of both missile defense and missile defense systems.

A significant increase in the role of outer space in achieving the goals of armed struggle.

There is another important feature of modern EVA - this is its significant expansion . If earlier Russia and the USA and partly France and England were monopolists in the EVA, then in recent years the situation has changed. India, Japan, and Israel have joined the military space club. And the entire world community is concerned about the inclusion of China and North Korea on this list. China, in addition to launching military vehicles, tested anti-satellite weapons. This activity is of particular concern, since China is in no way bound by international obligations prohibiting the testing of weapons in space, and after the US withdrew from the 1972 ABM Treaty. his hands are completely untied. In general, more than 40 countries are currently engaged in space activities. And as has already been noted, including from the experience of using space assets in Iraq, the use of civilian spacecraft is very successful in solving military problems. And with the accumulation of experience in the use of space assets, quantity can easily turn into quality, when a country learns how to successfully use dual-use assets, primarily spacecraft remote sensing and communications, for military purposes. That is, there is a tendency to expand the EVA. This expansion of the EVA is indicative of the growing militarization of outer space. This is definitely supported by:

Adoption in May 2005 of a new US national security doctrine and its component part - military space strategy.
US withdrawal from the 1972 ABM Treaty.
US adoption of a program to create a national missile defense system.

And this is where the real threats to Russia's national security come from: US dominance, the US gaining superiority in the field of strategic offensive arms and the US gaining unilateral advantages in traditional areas of armed struggle.

Let's take a closer look at these prerequisites.

Adopted in 2005 by the Bush administration, the new national doctrine. security states that, according to American military strategists and planners, military space systems will have to play a huge, even decisive role in organizing and maintaining an active missile defense of the country, groupings of troops and the most important objects of the United States and its allies in the global space and at all levels from tactical to strategic.

President George Booj Jr. and his administration adopted this postulate of US military strategy as the basis of their national security and war policy. A new military space strategy (doctrine) of Washington has now been approved and is being consistently implemented. It is becoming the most important priority not only of the military, but of the entire state policy of the White House.

The new military space strategy (VKS) of the United States was adopted in May 2005 as an integral part of the new doctrine (strategy) of national security, the new strategy of "preemptive preemptive and devastating war." It is precisely as "preventive" (preemptive) that military analysts in Western Europe, China and other countries of the world evaluate and perceive the American military space strategy.

US military space doctrine is called upon legitimize militaryization by the United States of outer space - to create a legal framework and a basis for a policy of active weapons and active military use of outer space, provide American global military dominance in space and other areas, and to fix scientific and technological positions and economic advantages of the United States, won by them in space.

The adoption of the VKS, in essence and according to the recognition of the American leadership itself, defines the main long-term goal and task of official Washington's space policy and military space strategy. Its essence is briefly, but exhaustively, characterized by the motto: “ Control space for guarantees superiority».

According to the US military space leadership, which is shared and supported by the country's political and military (including the military-industrial complex) elite, overwhelming technological and military superiority in space should become a reliable guarantee of the overall superiority and dominant position of the United States in the world for the foreseeable future.

In fact, now the “brain” of the Pentagon is the US Strategic Command, combined with the Space Command and transformed into a functional expanded and actually the main military command structure of the American armed forces, endowed with the rights to plan and manage military space operations in the interests of supporting the operations of nuclear forces and general purpose forces.

Back in 2005, it presented to the president and the congressional divisions involved in the legislative support of the military construction of the country's military activities a fundamental conclusion on the role of military space in the national security strategy: a condition for achieving success on the battlefield in future wars, just as superiority on land, dominance at sea and in airspace were and remain the most important elements and conditions of modern military strategy (doctrine).

The practical implementation of the Aerospace Forces means the transition of the United States from the passive military use of outer space to the course of the actual deployment of offensive and defensive weapon systems in outer space.

The main objectives of the military space strategy

They are summarized as follows.

Continuous control of outer space and control of the global situation by US space facilities.
Actively ensuring free access of the United States to outer space for conducting military and other activities there (in space, from space and through space). This task organically includes the intersection of any attempts by potential adversaries to prevent US access to outer space.
Protection and defense of US space facilities and systems from any impact from enemy space and other facilities.
Strategic missile defense and other types of defense of the United States by space defense means.
Deployment and combat use in space and from space of conventional (non-nuclear) offensive and defensive space assets (non-space-based nuclear weapons are used through space); deployment and use of space assets and systems of military and government control in peacetime and wartime, ensuring the effective practical implementation of the innovative concept of "network-centric control" of the country's military organization and operations of the combined armed forces in wars of a new look.
Preventing military access to open space by potential adversaries, their deployment in space of offensive military means and the use of such means in and from space against the United States.

In general, the US military space strategy in the country's national security strategy is designed to more effectively support and ensure the implementation of the policy (principles) of both nuclear and non-nuclear deterrence of possible military aggression at all levels - global, regional and local.

Doctrinal foundations of combat use(modern and in the short and medium term) space forces, the backbone of which is the 14th Air Force of the Air Force, are set out in a special document of the Ministry of the Air Force AFDD 2-2 "Space Operations", issued in August 1998. In it, the achievement of unconditional military superiority in space is proclaimed the primary task of any military company. This is understood as such a situation in which the US space forces will have complete freedom of action, including inflicting damage on the enemy, and the enemy space forces, on the contrary, will not have any opportunity to inflict damage on the US or its allies. The concept of military space superiority also extends to preventing the enemy from using space communications, accurate navigation signals, reconnaissance, meteorological and other data obtained using own or foreign (international) space facilities.

The conquest of military space superiority is proposed to be carried out through the implementation of complexes of special active measures - anti-space operations, which can be defensive and offensive.

The purpose of offensive anti-space operations is defined as the destruction or neutralization of space systems (SS) or enemy assets, as well as the termination of access to information provided by them or through them. The achievement of this goal is planned to be carried out in various ways, the main of which are the introduction of deliberate distortions in the information flows circulating through the enemy's space systems, temporary disruption of functioning, reduction in the effectiveness of combat use or destruction of components of space systems belonging to him, as well as depriving him of the possibility of access to these systems.

According to US Air Force leadership estimates, the most frequently used form of offensive anti-space operation will be air, missile and artillery strikes against ground elements of the enemy's space infrastructure. However, it also provides for the possibility of conducting anti-space operations according to the "earth-to-space", "space-to-space" and "space-to-earth" schemes. In this regard, the document "Space Operations" specifically emphasizes that the creation and deployment of weapons intended for use according to the indicated schemes are the most important factors that ensure national interests.

Defensive anti-space operations in the document under consideration include active and passive measures aimed at protecting the USC from enemy strikes or his attempts to disrupt the order of their functioning. In the course of active anti-space operations, it is planned to carry out actions to detect, track, identify and destroy or neutralize enemy attacking weapons. It also does not exclude the possibility of maneuvering spacecraft in order to divert them from possible impact, the use of electronic warfare, as well as communication terminals, the vulnerability parameters of which are much higher than those of stationary ones.

Passive anti-space operations will be carried out to reduce the vulnerability of US space systems and assets. In the course of such operations, independently or in various combinations, measures such as encryption, the use of pseudo-random hopping of carrier frequencies, increasing the strength of structures, masking, introducing redundancy, dispersal, and others can be taken.

When considering the possibilities for providing offensive and defensive anti-space operations, it is noted that high results can be obtained only if there are developed and effective systems for controlling aerospace, monitoring its parameters (radiation background, magnetic field characteristics, intensity of solar wind flows, etc.) , as well as missile attack warnings.

With the gain of military superiority in space, the US space forces will be able to carry out practically unhindered not only anti-space, but also other operations - to use force in and from space, to support operations (including combat) in space, to support combat operations in other environments.

Space strikes (operations of force) are seen as a real form of space warfare, despite the fact that the United States does not currently have the appropriate weapons systems. At the same time, it is argued that everything possible will be done to create such systems, and (taking into account the intensity and real results of R&D in this direction) already in the foreseeable future (2015-2020). The strike space system, which is the most likely "candidate" for deployment within the specified time frame, is a space-based laser weapon complex.

US adoption of a national missile defense program. This program should be considered together with plans for NATO expansion to the East. The missile defense program provides for the improvement of existing and the creation of new information means - ground and space. So the radar stations on about. Shemiya, at Beale Air Force Base, Tula, England. On about. Shemiya is being tested by the X-band locator. It is planned to manufacture a sea-based SBX X-band radar, which can be based in the ports of the states of California, Washington, Alaska, and Hawaii. According to the plans, the low-resolution radars will be used to detect missiles, which will then be accompanied by X-band radars. After the US withdraws from the ABM Treaty, such radars designed to track missiles in flight can be deployed by the US anywhere in the world. For the detection of missiles and spacecraft in flight, work is underway to create space facilities under the programs SBIRS_HIGH, SSTS, SBR .

Plans for NATO expansion to the East. In the Baltic States, as part of the Baltnet project, a unified airspace control system, in 2004 several radar stations were deployed near the borders of Russia. These stations allow you to track targets at distances up to 450 km and at altitudes up to 30 km. In addition, it is planned to introduce a new radar in Latvia (AN / FPS-117), which makes it possible to track Russian aviation flights and missile launches in the north-west of our country. Lithuania reaffirms the decision to locate a NATO base near Siauliai, where there was the largest airfield designed to land Buran-class aircraft. In combination with NATO plans to deploy anti-missiles in Poland, radars in the Czech Republic and possibly in Bulgaria, all this creates real threats to Russia's security.

Almost the entire territory of Russia will be under constant control of the US and NATO missile defense .

Naturally, under these conditions, Russia must take a set of measures to protect its national interests. What are these measures? They can be divided into two complementary directions . The first is international legal and political and diplomatic measures, which are undoubtedly a priority.

But history teaches us not to forget about measures of a military-technical nature, including maintaining the combat potential of strategic nuclear forces, developing strategic defense and warning systems, developing Russia's space potential - ensuring Russia's guaranteed access to space, reliable provision of troops with space information up to the tactical level, inclusive, etc. .d. One of the areas of international legal measures are measures to improve the international legal regulation of space activities.

conclusions:

1. The military use of space has been one of the primary motives for space exploration. With the accumulation of experience in the use of space assets for solving military problems and understanding of its strategic importance, the militarization of space began to take on a threatening character and could reach an uncontrollable level. Therefore, on the initiative of the countries that play the main role in the military use of outer space, and with the understanding of the leading world powers of their responsibility for maintaining peace on the planet, a number of fundamental agreements were concluded that limit the militarization of outer space and, first of all, the launching of offensive weapons there.

2. In modern geopolitical conditions, the characteristic features of military space activities are :

but) full-scale use of space assets to support combat operations of groupings of troops and forces of the fleet, ensuring that space information is brought to the tactical level, and for special tasks to the fighter inclusive;

b) the fact generally recognized by domestic and foreign experts that the increase in the combat capabilities of the armed forces due to the information component is 1.5-2 times;

in) recognition of outer space as a new sphere of armed struggle and carrying out work on its operational equipment,

G) the increased capabilities and experience gained in operational retargeting when using dual-purpose spacecraft ensures their effective inclusion and use in the control loops of troops and weapons. The experience of using dual-purpose spacecraft in the war with Iraq has certainly proved this.

e) space assets have ample opportunities to ensure strategic stability, and at present it is expedient to introduce the concept of "parity in space".

e ) a significant increase in space as a sphere of confrontation in achieving the goals of armed struggle, which enshrined in the US administration's military space strategy.

3. The US withdrawal from the ABM treaty opens up new opportunities for the militarization of outer space. The adoption of a program to create a national missile defense system is also a way to militarize space, because without the deployment of weapons systems in space, the missile defense task cannot be effectively solved in a full-scale strike. The increase in the number of states engaged in military-space activities in the absence of treaty restrictions on the placement and testing of weapons in space also contributes to the militarization of space. An example of this is the activity of China and its work on the creation of anti-space weapons and their testing in space.

4. All this makes it necessary to take a set of measures to protect the state interests of Russia - international legal and political-diplomatic, as well as military-technical in nature.

International legal ones are a priority and involve the improvement of the existing mechanism of international legal regulation of space activities in a number of areas considered.

Literature:

1. US News and World Report, August 17, 1964, p. 41-42.

2. Space: as seen from Washington. Ed. G. Khozina. M:, Progress, 1985 .

3. Space weapons: the security dilemma. Ed. E. Velikhova. M: Mir, 1986.

4. E. P. Velikhov. Scientific, technical, economic and strategic aspects of creating a promising US missile defense system. Report at the international seminar. Italy 1983.

5. A. I. Kiselev, A. A. Medvedev, and V. A. Men’shikov, Cosmonautics at the Turn of the Millennium. Results and prospects. M:, mechanical engineering. 2001.

6. Golovanev I. N., Pavlov S. V. For strategic stability. Army collection, October 1997, pp. 21-23.

7. Golovanev I. N., Bukharin A. V. Mutant from SOI. Army Digest, December 1996, pp. 88-89.

8. Golovanev I.N., Menshikov V.A., Pavlov S.V. Soldier of the future. Army collection., February 1997. p. 62-65.

Details Category: Military-space activities Published on 12/17/2012 14:20 Views: 3684

Military space activities implies the use of astronautics in military affairs, as well as, if necessary, the use of outer space or its individual areas as a theater of military operations.

Various countries are currently using spacecraft for satellite reconnaissance, early warning of ballistic missiles, communications, and navigation. Military space activities are led by Russia and the United States.

satellite intelligence

For these purposes, use reconnaissance satellite(informally called spy satellite) is an earth observation satellite or communications satellite used for reconnaissance.

The functions of reconnaissance satellites include:

specific reconnaissance(photography with high definition);
electronic intelligence(listening to communication systems and determining the location of radio facilities);
tracking for the implementation of the ban on nuclear testing;
missile warning system(detection of missile launches).

First generation satellites (American corona and Soviet "Zenith") took photographs, and then released containers with the captured film, which descended to the ground. Later spacecraft were equipped with photo-television systems and transmitted images using encrypted radio signals.

Vision reconnaissance satellites : photographic(have Russia, USA, China), optoelectronic(have Israel, Russia, USA, China), radar(have Russia, USA, Germany, China).

Radio engineering(electronic) reconnaissance - the collection of intelligence information based on the reception and analysis of electromagnetic radiation (EMR). Electronic reconnaissance uses both intercepted signals from communication channels between people and technical means, and signals from various devices. According to its features, electronic intelligence refers to the technical types of intelligence.

Monitoring the implementation of the ban on nuclear tests is associated with the implementation the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty, which was adopted by the 50th session of the UN General Assembly on September 10, 1996 and opened for signature on September 24, 1996.

In accordance with Article I of the Treaty:

each State Party undertakes not to carry out any nuclear weapon test explosion and any other nuclear explosion, and to prohibit and prevent any such nuclear explosion in any place under its jurisdiction or control;
Each State Party undertakes to further refrain from from inciting, encouraging or otherwise participating in the conduct of any nuclear weapon test explosion or any other nuclear explosion.

Missile attack warning system designed to detect a missile attack before the missiles reach their targets. It consists of two echelons - ground-based radars and an orbital constellation of early warning satellites.

Anti-satellite weapon systems

Anti-satellite weapons- types of weapons designed to destroy spacecraft used for navigation and reconnaissance purposes. D

This weapon is divided into two main types:

1. Satellites - interceptors.

2. Ballistic missiles launched from ground installations, ships or aircraft.

interceptor satellites

In the USSR, the concept of an interceptor satellite was chosen as an anti-satellite weapon. The apparatus in orbit performed an orbital rendezvous maneuver with the target satellite and hit it with a detonation of a warhead with shrapnel submunitions. In 1979, this anti-space defense system was put on alert.

Currently, the United States is armed with the Aegis ship-based missile defense system. The RIM-161 (SM-3) missile, which is part of it, has the ability to hit satellites, which was demonstrated in practice on February 21, 2008, when the SM-3 missile successfully hit the US military satellite USA-193, which entered an undesignated low orbit.

Anti-satellite ballistic missiles

The United States began such developments in the late 1950s. From May 1958 to October 1959, 12 test launches were carried out, which showed the inefficiency of the system. Another similar project involved launching a rocket from a B-58 Hustler bomber. The program was closed after a failed launch. The next generation of anti-satellite ballistic missiles was based on the use of high-yield nuclear warheads. Since 1982, when it became known that the USSR had effective anti-satellite weapons (IS interceptor satellites), the USA launched a program to develop a new generation of highly mobile anti-satellite missile ASM-135 ASAT. This two-stage solid rocket was launched from an F-15 fighter; guidance method - inertial; detachable warhead weighing 13.6 kg, having an infrared guidance head was not equipped with an explosive and hit the target with a direct hit.

In the 1980s, the USSR also carried out a program to develop an anti-satellite missile launched from a MiG-31 aircraft.

Currently, the United States is armed with the Aegis ship-based missile defense system. The missile can hit satellites, which was demonstrated in practice on February 21, 2008, when an SM-3 missile successfully hit the US military satellite USA-193, which entered an undesignated low orbit.

Russian Space Forces

Aerospace Defense Troops(VVKO) - a separate branch of the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation, created by decision of President Dmitry Medvedev (previously they were called space troops). The first duty shift of the command post aerospace defense troops took up combat duty on December 1, 2011.

Creation Aerospace Defense Troops it was necessary to combine the forces and means responsible for ensuring the security of Russia in space and from space with military formations solving the tasks of air defense (air defense) of the Russian Federation. This was due to the objective need to integrate under a single leadership all the forces and means capable of fighting in the air and space spheres.

Objects aerospace defense troops located throughout Russia - from Kaliningrad to Kamchatka, as well as beyond its borders. In the countries of the near abroad - Azerbaijan, Belarus, Kazakhstan and Tajikistan, objects of missile attack warning systems and space control systems are deployed.

The perceptions of states about military threats related to space activities are expressed in two aspects: threats using space systems and threats against space systems. International discussions about this intensified in the 2000s in connection with the American program for the creation of strategic missile defense systems and in connection with the Chinese and American experiments to destroy their satellites in 2007 and 2008, respectively. However, the real economic, technical and political possibilities of the military use of outer space differ from the commonly used rhetorical figures.

Military space activities traditionally include space access, reconnaissance, communications, navigation and movement control on land, at sea, in the air and in space, including missile attack warning systems.

Today, the United States, Russia, China have the most developed military space programs.: 147, 84 and 58 out of 352 military vehicles in orbit, respectively. This is due to foreign policy interests that go far beyond their borders. The European members of NATO together have a little over 30 military satellites, the rest belong to other states.

At the same time, there are more than 1420 vehicles in orbit. And commercial communications and earth remote sensing devices can also be used by the military of those states in whose jurisdiction the owner companies are located.

Orbital maneuver

One of the most promising areas is the creation of satellites capable of maneuvering in near-Earth orbit. It is important to understand that with the development of ion engines, more and more advanced microsatellites receive this option. Between 2005 and 2010, the United States launched several experimental vehicles with this capability. In 2014, Russia also launched a small satellite that traveled independently in Earth orbit. Orbital maneuvering will make it possible to create flexible satellite systems: to concentrate them over a conflict zone, to modernize their components without replacing entire satellites, and so on.

At the same time, international public opinion is entrenched in the idea that maneuvering satellites in conflict situations can be used to destroy enemy satellites. There are no fundamental technical restrictions for such a step, but this idea seems to be completely meaningless for developed countries - the resources expended with a hypothetical result and its political consequences are not justified in any way.

In conditions when there are hundreds of devices around the Earth, and the enemy uses dozens of them, including commercial satellites that do not belong to him, the destruction of several satellites cannot affect the situation in any way. Moreover, regardless of the political situation and at a sufficient level of accuracy, global navigation systems can be used to solve military problems. GPS(USA), GLONASS(Russia) and the system created by the Europeans Galileo.

Consequently, a much more effective way to deprive the enemy of access to space systems will not be their destruction, but the suppression of communication channels between satellites and its receiving devices in the conflict zone. And often it is much more convenient to do this with the help of ground-based systems, and not through the deployment of special satellites.

We emphasize once again that the described argumentation works for countries that are responsible participants in the system of international relations, are involved in world trade and have modern armed forces. But this argument does not work in relation to political regimes like North Korea, whose driving motives boil down to holding power by the ruling group and breaking the existing international rules of the game.

Such regimes themselves have little dependence on space systems, and therefore the destruction of satellites of other states can be a good opportunity for them to use foreign policy blackmail. Considering the cheapening of platforms for the creation of small satellites and access to space, such a threat from outsiders international relations should be kept in mind. And here, active measures to protect space systems, including maneuvering in space, may be required.

Near-Earth Space Control

In recent years, space systems for monitoring near-Earth space have acquired high importance, allowing to get a complete picture of the space activities of different states, as well as convert this into increased security and foreign policy capital. The championship here also belongs to the American side.

The United States, in addition to a developed terrestrial infrastructure located in different parts of the world and allowing it to control the near-Earth orbit, has three satellite systems. Among them: the orbital system of space observation ( Space based Surveillance System, SBSS), space tracking and surveillance system ( Space tracking and Surveillance System, STSS) and geosynchronous satellites of the system for detecting space objects ( Geosynchronous Space situational Awareness program, GSSAP). At the same time, by 2020, the US Air Force plans to replace the only existing satellite SBSS, located in a sun-synchronous orbit, with three new small-sized geosynchronous vehicles.

System STSS consists of three satellites, two of which serve as technology demonstrators and are integrated with the maritime component of the American missile defense. Accordingly, the main objects for her are ballistic missiles and warheads, which she can track in all parts of the flight.

System GSSAP today is the newest - in July 2014, both of its satellites were launched. Their peculiarity lies in the possibility of orbital maneuvering, which allows them to study from a relatively close distance the spacecraft of interest, which are launched by other countries into geosynchronous orbits. Of course, in this case we are talking about situations where these same countries have not announced the appointment of new space objects.

With the development of technology and industry, the emergence of similar systems is likely in other major participants in space exploration, moreover, this does not require the deployment of large satellite constellations. However, such systems become necessary when the economic and political activities of a country and its key partners are critically dependent on that country's satellite systems. Today, this is relevant only for the United States and the European countries dependent on them in the field of security.

Thus, there is no need for Russia yet to spend limited resources on creating its own satellite system for global control of outer space. It is enough to maintain control of the orbit over its territory with the help of ground-based systems.

The idea of a military "shuttle"

An experimental vector for the development of military activities in space since 2010 has been demonstrated by the American reusable unmanned spacecraft X-37 B . This device is capable of staying in near-Earth space for many months, changing its orbit due to the engines, landing at an airfield and, after the necessary maintenance, again going into space.

Another merit X-37 B- the presence of a compartment where equipment is installed depending on the tasks performed by the ship. Thus, the spaceplane can play the role of a heavy reconnaissance and communications satellite, can act as a carrier of microsatellites and, hypothetically, an automatic repair ship.

However, at present X-37 B serves as a scientific laboratory for the US Air Force, a technology demonstrator, and it is premature to talk about its routine use in the coming years. Also, the talk that the spaceplane can become a carrier of high-precision weapons and / or a means of destroying satellites seems unfounded. The arguments here are the same as for maneuvering satellites - the discrepancy between the resources expended and the likely result.

Do you need "hypersound"?

Attempts to create hypersonic aircraft have become another experimental area of military space activities. Such devices move in the upper layers of the airspace and along a suborbital trajectory and are controlled using space systems. In this case, the launch can be carried out using a light-class launch vehicle.

It is hypersonic motion that opens the way to the practical implementation of the concept of a fast global non-nuclear strike ( Prompt Global Strike), formulated in the 2000s in the United States. In 2010-2011, the Americans tested vehicles over the Pacific Ocean twice HTV-2 , the purpose of which was to collect telemetry and other data on flights in the atmosphere at speeds up to 20M. After the experiments, research work in this direction has returned to the laboratory for the time being. In the field of hypersonic aircraft, which virtually erase the boundary between the atmosphere and space, research programs today have Russia and China.

It also poses the problem that any current and future missile defense systems must counter all suborbital targets. And as far as one can judge, hypersonic technologies are interesting for modern Russia, first of all, in the context of increasing the capabilities of its strategic forces to overcome anti-missile systems.

As for China, this country conducted three flight experiments with hypersonic vehicles in 2014. wu-14 , whose speed reached 10M. In the context of the creation of the Chinese global navigation system and the gradual build-up of the national constellation of satellites by Beijing, this may mean a desire to acquire the capabilities of a global non-nuclear strike in the coming decades. Probably, Chinese technology will be inferior to American, but will be sufficient to solve military problems outside the PRC.

In this regard, it must be taken into account that the concept of a rapid global strike in the American, Chinese or any other version may not be realized. But the accumulated new knowledge and technologies will definitely be used in the creation of new generations of aerospace equipment for military and commercial purposes. This means that Russia needs to continue precisely fundamental research in this area and, possibly, without being tied to the creation of specific systems.

Again, missile defense

The American missile defense program is associated with military space activities. Strategic missile defense systems can be classified as space activities, since they involve the interception of warheads flying along a suborbital or low-orbital trajectory. In addition, it performs its tasks, relying on satellites and ground-based means of controlling outer space.

At the same time, despite the experiment conducted in 2008 to destroy a satellite descending from orbit using an anti-missile system “ Aegis" (Aegis), it is wrong to consider missile defense as a means of destroying satellites. A huge part of the satellites are beyond the reach of any anti-missile systems, and the Chinese experiment demonstrated the negative consequences of destroying a satellite directly in orbit in 2007. Then, as a result of a hit by a specially launched ballistic missile, the satellite turned into a large cloud of space debris, which for several years posed a danger to other devices. And for the international reputation, not to mention long-term foreign policy goals, such actions are only fraught with damage.

At the same time, as mentioned above, for states, the destruction of individual enemy satellites does not affect security in any way and does not create any military superiority in the event of a conflict. And given the fact that only economically and politically developed countries can afford anti-missile systems, the risk of combat, rather than experimental, use of these systems as anti-satellite weapons can be considered close to zero.

Space starts on earth

Military space activities also include the improvement and sustainability of terrestrial space infrastructure. It is the ground infrastructure that ensures the operation of satellites, and the satellites themselves are used in the interests of consumers located on land, at sea and in the air, and are connected to them through satellite navigation chips, phones, etc.

The most urgent threats here are the creation of radio-electronic interference for such devices, for the communication channels of the satellite with the Earth and the destruction of ground stations, which has already been mentioned in passing above. By and large, today and in the foreseeable future, the most effective and widespread methods of combating space systems will be those that are in no way connected with the concepts of "space weapons" or "anti-satellite weapons."

In this context, the example of the American system is very indicative. Raiders, designed to recognize extraneous effects on communication channels with satellites. In the spring of 2013, the deployment of this system, consisting of five mobile antennas, was completed in different parts of the world, including the launch site at Cape Canaveral, Hawaii, Japan, Germany (the location of another antenna was not indicated).

This system is designed to protect communications through commercial satellites, as well as communications channels for US troops abroad, which are also often used by commercial space systems. And it is clear that the interception of information passing through satellites, the suppression of communication channels or strikes on ground-based space infrastructure are available to a much larger number of states and non-state players than the creation and use of their own satellites.

Moreover, the United States, as the country most dependent on space systems, is forced to spend the most resources to protect its advantages. At the same time, all other players (with the exception of the American allies), depending on the likelihood of an armed conflict with the United States, are or may be interested in reducing these advantages.

From this it becomes clear that the most likely are "space battles" that take place exclusively on the earth's surface. The ratio of resources expended, military and political costs and the predicted result here seems to be optimal.

In the context of all of the above, we can conclude that the current stage in the development of military space activities has several main vectors. Firstly, it is an increase in the stability and flexibility of satellite systems - due to orbital maneuvering technologies, automatic reusable vehicles, etc. Secondly, it is the development of space control systems. Thirdly, this is the development of electronic warfare systems and counteraction to such systems. Fourth, these are studies of hypersonic motion and the improvement of anti-missile technologies, which will make it possible in the future to deal with vehicles moving at hypersonic speeds.

As you can see, there is still no talk of some kind of "Star Wars". However, there may be exceptional situations where the destruction of a spacecraft or large pieces of space debris may be deemed necessary because of their threat to other satellites, the orbital station, manned spacecraft or people on Earth. But it is precisely the exclusivity of such a development of events that emphasizes the fact that the special creation of space weapons today is not a rational step. For such circumstances, equipment created or created for other purposes will be used.

In the light of the foregoing, the following approach seems optimal for Russia to its own military space program:

Focus on improving the reliability of our own satellite systems;
To create conditions for the development of commercial space systems, which, if necessary, can be used by the military. This will reduce the cost of providing the armed forces with space systems;
Make fundamental scientific research in the space sector a priority, which will improve Russian military security in the future.

The value of military space parity in itself leads to unjustified costs. Russia needs to proceed from the idea that the size of the military satellite constellation is directly proportional to the level of the country's economic development and the role of space systems in its economic activity.

r Specialists working in the field of rocket and space technology and other people interested in Russian cosmonautics are well aware of Maxim Tarasenko's book "Military Aspects of Soviet Cosmonautics", published in 1992. Until now, this book has been a unique, independent domestic research in the field of military astronautics. For the first time, many political, organizational, and technical aspects that influenced the formation and development of domestic military cosmonautics were covered in it. The book caused a huge response. The issues raised in it were discussed for many years by Western analysts on the pages of various publications, which for the most part were not available in our country.

In 1992, no one in Russia could yet dare to finance the publication of Military Aspects of Soviet Cosmonautics. The circulation of the book, eventually published at the expense of the author, turned out to be clearly insufficient, and today it has become simply a bibliographic rarity. Many experts have raised the issue of reprinting Military Aspects of Soviet Cosmonautics in a larger edition.

r Over time, the political situation in the country has changed, in the open press, many materials have appeared that were previously inaccessible. Large volumes of new serious analytical materials on various aspects of the long history of Russian cosmonautics were collected and analyzed. The new study in the field of military space in its depth, detail, accuracy of presentation of facts and correct analysis of events differed significantly from the first work. In this regard, in 1995, Maxim Tarasenko refused to publish the 2nd edition of the Military Aspects of Soviet Cosmonautics, considering it inappropriate.

One of the results of the author's many years of work was the manuscript of a new book - "Russian Military Space Activities" - almost completed in early 1999. This work is a systematic description of the evolution of domestic space complexes and systems for military and dual purposes.

r The main attention is paid to the space segment of the complexes, i.e. constellations of spacecraft operating in near-Earth orbits. A classification of space systems according to their functions is given, space infrastructure and satellite systems for military and dual purposes are described. The general logic of the development of military space programs and the organization of space activities in the USSR, the CIS and Russia are considered.

The first part of the book is devoted to general issues of military activity in space.

Information is given on the organization and management of space activities, as well as its evolution from the beginning of the USSR state rocket program in 1946 to 1999.
The main tasks of a military nature that can be solved with the help of space means are considered; basic requirements for devices for solving certain target tasks; provides information on the norms and documents of international law governing space activities for military purposes.
Possibilities of independent definition of tasks of spacecrafts on the basis of objective third-party observation data are investigated.
An overview is given of the ground-based space infrastructure that provides for the preparation and implementation of space launches and control of spacecraft in orbit.
In addition, the evolution and performance and operational characteristics of domestic launch vehicles are considered.

The second part is devoted to specific space complexes. Each of its thematic sections describes space systems of one or another purpose: communications, navigation, combat space systems, missile attack warning systems, and others. In addition to describing the complexes and systems themselves, the chronology and statistics of their use are given.

MILITARY SPACE ACTIVITIES

MILITARY SPACE ACTIVITIES, operations carried out in near-Earth space in support of military operations on land, in the air, on the seas and under water.

UNITED STATES

History reference. From the very beginning, the US military was interested in the opportunities that opened up with the advent of communications satellites, navigation and meteorological satellites, and in particular intelligence and early warning systems for ballistic missiles. After the end of World War II, the Army, Navy, and Air Force began to develop ballistic missiles, meaning not only to destroy targets, but also to launch satellites into low Earth orbits, from where they could support military operations.

See also ROCKET WEAPONS; ROCKET; SPACE FLIGHTS MANNED.

In the late 1950s, the Air Force became the main US military space service. Their plan for launching satellites, developed in 1956, provided for the performance of both reconnaissance functions (observation from space of objects of a possible enemy) and early detection of ballistic missiles. Satellites equipped with photographic equipment and IR sensors were supposed to be launched into polar orbits in order to provide continuous global surveillance.

The shaping of the US military space program during the Cold War was essential to intelligence gathering on the Soviet Union. The leading role in the collection of this kind of intelligence was played, of course, by the CIA, which from 1956 conducted flights of U-2 reconnaissance aircraft over the territory of the USSR. In August 1960, President D. Eisenhower created the Directorate of Missile and Satellite Systems, which was later renamed the National Intelligence Agency - NRU. He was assigned the respective tasks of the CIA, Air Force and Navy. By early 1961, it was given responsibility for national programs for both operational and strategic intelligence, and the Air Force was given responsibility for "semi-open" programs in the military field, which included communications, meteorology, navigation, and early warning.

Operational Intelligence. The return of the film to Earth. Flights of reconnaissance aircraft over the territory of the Soviet Union came to a discouraging final on May 1, 1960, when a U-2 piloted by F. Powers was shot down. This attracted interest in satellite systems. The program for the return of exposed film from satellites to Earth (codenamed CORONA) was carried out under the "roof" of the Discoverer program in conditions of the highest secrecy. The first successful return of a filmed film to Earth was from the Discoverer 14 satellite, launched into orbit on August 18, 1960. After the return capsule was released from the satellite on its 17th orbit, a C-130 transport aircraft caught it in the air from the third run using a special trawl.

Between August 1960 and May 1972, 145 satellites were successfully launched and operated under the CORONA program, which collected many photographic images of interest to strategic intelligence and cartography. The first KH-1 satellites provided terrestrial object resolution of approx. 12 m (KH - short for the code name KEYHOLE - keyhole). Then several more advanced versions of the KH series satellites appeared, the last of which gave a resolution of 1.5 m. The KH-5 mapping system (seven satellites) and the KH-6 enhanced resolution system (one satellite) were also included in the CORONA program.

All of these satellites belonged to the category of platforms for wide coverage panoramic photography, since the resolution of their cameras made it possible to obtain an image of a territory measuring 20 × 190 km in each image. Such photographs turned out to be extremely important for determining the state of strategic weapons in the USSR.

OTHER COUNTRIES

Europe. By the early 1990s, some countries other than the US and the USSR had developed their own relatively small military space programs. France advanced the furthest. The beginning was laid in the 1980s with the creation of a combined military-commercial satellite communication system "Syracuse". On July 7, 1995, France launched its first reconnaissance satellite, Elios IA, developed with the participation of Italy and Spain, into orbit. In the mid-1990s, French space engineers also developed the Osiris radar surveillance satellite, similar to the American Lacrosse satellite, designed the Ekut satellite for electronic intelligence and explored the possibility of creating an early warning satellite Alert.

The UK in the 1990s used its own specialized military communications satellite operating in the microwave frequency band (SHF) to communicate with the fleet. Italy also had the Sircal satellite microwave military communications system, which, like Syracuse, was implemented as an additional payload of another satellite. NATO used space communications through its satellite NATO-4, which operated in the microwave band and was very similar to the American satellite "Skynet-4".

Other programs. The PRC has occasionally launched operational photo-reconnaissance satellites with footage returned to Earth, and had several other systems used for both military and civilian purposes. Despite Israel's access to American space imaging sources, the country launched its own experimental reconnaissance satellite in 1995.

LITERATURE Handbook of Satellite Communications and Broadcasting. M., 1983
Arbatov A.G. and etc. Space Weapons: The Security Dilemma. M., 1986

353 rub

A two-volume large encyclopedic dictionary is a universal reference publication covering all areas of modern knowledge. The dictionary contains about 85,000 entries, including about 20,000 biographies. A significant place is given to materials related to history, philosophy, economics, sociology, ethnography, religion, law, literature, art, and linguistics. The dictionary includes a series of articles about political and public figures of our country and other countries, about economists, lawyers, military leaders, intelligence officers, teachers, scientists, cultural figures, church leaders, about many people and entire nations.

422 rub

The Great Soviet Encyclopedia (BSE) is one of the largest and most authoritative universal encyclopedias in the world.

Edition 1970-1978 - third edition.
A total of 30 volumes were published (the 24th volume in two books, the second is entirely devoted to the USSR). The third edition, in comparison with the previous ones, is the most free from ideological accretions. The authors and editors of the encyclopedia managed to concentrate in it truly all the wealth of knowledge accumulated by mankind over the millennia.

183 rub

The New Russian Encyclopedia (NRE) is a fundamental universal reference and information publication that presents readers with a picture of the world that reflects the current state of scientific knowledge.
The alphabetical part of the encyclopedia is opened by the second volume. In total, over 60 thousand articles will be published in the encyclopedia, incl. about 30 thousand biographies, more than 10 thousand illustrations, maps, diagrams, diagrams and tables.

The new Russian encyclopedia is aimed at a wide range of readers: from schoolchildren and students to specialists in various fields of knowledge, cultural figures, politicians, and entrepreneurs. In 1889, the owner of one of the St. Petersburg printing houses, I.A. Efron, concluded an agreement with the German publishing house "F.A. Brockhaus" for the translation into Russian of a large encyclopedic dictionary of this publishing house. However, from the very beginning of the work, the editor-in-chief of the encyclopedia, the well-known St. Petersburg professor I.E. Andreevsky, began to include in the publication, in addition to the translated material, original Russian articles.
Starting from the ninth half-volume (the encyclopedia came out in two versions: "expensive" (41 volumes) and "cheap" (82 half-volumes), the management of the preparation of the publication passed to another St. Petersburg professor, K.K. Arsenyev. From that moment, the approach to compiling an encyclopedia: the translated material fades into the background, there is much more factual and statistical material. Particular attention is paid to geographical articles, the editorial states: "Russian cities fit absolutely everything, with the addition of more towns, villages and villages with more than 3 thousand inhabitants or for some reason worthy of attention. The editorial structure of the sections of the encyclopedia is also changing, leading Russian scientists are involved in the work.
Of course, some articles in the Encyclopedic Dictionary of Brockhaus and Efron have now lost their value, science has gone far ahead in a hundred years, but the historical value of most articles has only increased over the past hundred years. It is hardly possible to name another publication that so fully captures the idea of the world and oneself, characteristic of that era, for example, the article "Russia" occupies ... two half-volumes.
And one more feature distinguishes this encyclopedia from all, without exception, modern publications of this kind: you can simply read it, and this reading will be fascinating and useful for everyone who is interested in the history of science and technology, the history of culture and arts, the history of countries and peoples.

328900 rub

Yearbook 1972 - the sixteenth issue in the series of Yearbooks of the Great Soviet Encyclopedia. Like the previous editions, the new Yearbook is an independent universal reference publication.

In the TSB Yearbook of 1972, all the sections that have become permanent in this encyclopedia of the year are preserved - about the Soviet Union, the union and autonomous Soviet republics, about foreign states, non-self-governing territories and colonies; about international organizations and conferences; economic reviews of socialist, capitalist and developing countries; a section on the development of ties between communist and workers' parties; sections on science and technology; sports; biographical reference articles, etc. The Yearbook opens with articles that shed light on the historical significance of the formation of the USSR and describe the path traversed by the world's first socialist state.

The information reported in the 1972 Yearbook is limited, as a rule, to the chronological framework of 1971. Some figures published in previous editions have been changed as they have been refined. The data for 1971 are in some cases preliminary. The economic indicators for the USSR and the union republics are based on the materials of the Central Statistical Offices under the Council of Ministers of the USSR and the Councils of Ministers of the union republics, for foreign countries - official national statistical and other reference publications, as well as UN publications. Information about public health, public education, the press and transport in the Union Soviet republics is concentrated in the corresponding sections of the article "USSR".

As before, thanks to the assistance of organizations from a number of socialist countries, the Austria-USSR Society, the English Society for Cultural Relations with the USSR, the Belgium-USSR, Italy-USSR, Netherlands-USSR Societies, the Society for the Promotion of Relations between Germany and the USSR", "Finland - USSR", "France - USSR", "Sweden - USSR", the Institute of Cultural Relations "Brazil - USSR", the Japanese Association for Cultural Relations with Foreign Countries, as well as individual organizations and individuals from Argentina, India, the editions of the Encyclopedia Britannica in the Yearbook contain articles introducing the cultural life of the respective countries.

295 rub

Encyclopedia of symbols

For the first time translated into Russian, the book absorbed the richest material on the history of the cultures of many peoples of the world. In the original language, it has the title "Lexicon of Symbols" and has gone through 14 editions in Germany. The authors give their interpretation of the most ancient Indian, Greek, Indian and Christian symbols. The reader will find entertaining reflections on the symbolism of folk tales, symbols from legends about wise women - "witches", astrological and alchemical symbolism, try to understand the interpretation of the mysterious Tarot cards, see that our time also gives birth to its own symbols, and, finally, get acquainted with biographies outstanding figures of world culture who have become a kind of symbolic personalities (starting from Tire and Zarathustra and ending with Freud, Jung and Einstein - a total of 39 biographies).

202900 rub