International Network of Engineers and Scientists Against Proliferation

Conversion of Intercontinental Ballistic Missiles

Galina Iofina

Russia is currently downsizing its strategic offensive arsenal in accordance with its obligations under the START I Treaty. This process involves elimination of land-based and sea-based missiles, which is usually done by dismantling them and then disposing of the components. There is also an alternative way – ballistic missiles can be used as space launch vehicles (SLV). Conversion of ballistic missiles into space-launch vehicles does not violate any international obligations (and restrictions will not interfere with launches), so it can proceed as long as these projects are commercially viable.

A number of projects that aim to convert missiles into space-launch vehicles began in the early 1990s. Table 1 provides a summary of the project that has been in development since then. Start, Rockot, Dnepr, and Strela are based on land-based intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBM); Zyb, Shtil, Volna, Priboy, and Visota would be launched from submarines (SLBM). The Riff-MA system would be an air-launched space launcher.

The work on conversion of combat missiles into launchers during the 1990s benefited from a number of space programs that were in development at that time. Some of these programs (for example, the Iridium communication system) called for deployment of large constellations of satellites into low Earth orbits. Converted missiles were a very attractive option, since they provided access to relatively inexpensive launch capacity.[1]

However, the hopes that these programs would support a massive missile conversion effort proved unfounded. Most of them have been scaled down or cancelled, so launches of converted missiles have been rather rare. In particular, Rockot and Start launchers are used to only 17% and 4% of their potential capacity, respectively. This article attempts to consider the factors that contributed to the slow development of a market for converted missiles.

Potential Space Launch Market

All converted missiles are light SLVs. They can carry small space vehicles weighing less than 3.5-4 t to orbits below 2,000 km.

Commercial low orbit satellite systems can be subdivided into three main segments: satellite communication, earth remote sensing, and scientific research.

Analysis of published information on foreign small space vehicles and market research conducted by Russian organizations showed that more than 90 low-orbit space systems are currently under development and will be used until 2015.

In particular, such space systems include Aries, Ellipso, Globalstar, Starnet, Orbcomm, LEO One Worldwide, Taos, and Vitasat. Many of these projects are focused on space vehicles weighing from 0.2 to 0.5 t. On the demand side, when the numbers of space vehicles for each space system is taken into account, one may conclude that the main duty will be on space vehicles with a mass of ca. 0.2-1.3 t, mostly owing to such systems as Aries, LEO One Worldwide, and Teledesic.[2]

On the supply side, there is a considerable potential availability of converted missiles for these missions. According to the Khrunichev Space Center’s estimates of 2000, it is possible to perform more than 40-45 Rockot missile launches over the next five years.[3] Space Forces Major General Aleksandr Vinidiktov, a member of the State Duma, claimed that the current Svobodny launch site capability allows for up to 12 Start launches annually, and even more if additional measures are taken.[4]

Launcher Competition

Currently, there are six major missile conversion programs in Russia: Rockot, Strela, Dnepr, Start-1, Volna, and Shtil-1. Some characteristics of the launchers are shown in Table 2.

Russian commercial launchers of similar specifications that may be considered as main competitors of converted missiles include Cosmos-3M, Tsyklon-2, and Tsyklon-3 (see Table 3). In addition, there is internal competition between missile conversion projects.

An analysis of the data shown in Tables 2 and 3 leads to the conclusion that, first, the launch cost of a converted missile is lower than that of a civilian launcher. The throw-weight of Rockot or Strela is comparable to the throw-weight of Cosmos-3M, and the throw-weight of Tsyklon-3 is comparable to that of Dnepr. That is why Rockot is comparable in cost with Cosmos-3M. Strela is cheaper than Rockot or Cosmos-3M. Tsyklon-3 is cheaper than Dnepr. However, production of Tsyklons in Dnepropetrovsk, Ukraine, the only place where the missile is produced, has been discontinued.[13] As a result, Tsyklon-3 launchers are no longer used. Launches of Tsyklon-2 that are sometimes carried out use old missiles from storage.[14]

Second, we can see that the reliability of the Rockot and Cosmos launchers is very high and are roughly comparable. However, Cosmos was launched about 750 times,[8] while statistics for Rockot are based on the SS-19 ICBM that was test-launched about 160 times.15 (Rockot itself was launched only eight times, as shown in Table 6). Overall, Cosmos seems to be a more reliable missile.

Reliability is a very important factor for the Start launcher. However, its standing was seriously affected by a Start launch failure in 1995. Although all major systems worked normally, the malfunction of a minor system lead to the failure of the mission.

Similarly, reliability is also an issue for the Volna launcher. Three of five launches of this missile were unsuccessful. Moreover, two of the failures happened because of the missile malfunctioning. In both cases, the missile was attempting to deliver the Cosmos-1 solar sail spacecraft. In the first attempt, the spacecraft failed to separate from the launcher.[16] The next failure was caused by an abnormal engine cut-off – the rocket finished the flight early and the spacecraft failed to reach the correct orbit.[17]

Third, almost all converted missiles use UDMH as their fuel, which is highly toxic and considered harmful to the environment. The only exception is the Start-1 rocket, which uses a solid propellant and therefore usually does not meet serious opposition from environmental groups.[18]

ICBMs also have significant limitations for launches of commercial satellites that were not designed to withstand strong vibrations and loads. This issue is the most serious for launchers derived from the SS-19 ICBM – its silos are not suitable for conducting commercial launches. To overcome this problem, Russia is building a dedicated launch site for Rockot at the Plesetsk range.[19]

Environmental Problems

It has been mentioned above that all considered missiles except Start-1 use UDMH as fuel. UDMH is hazardous for the environment and for people. Let us consider the influence of this environmental factor on the progress of missile conversion programs.

Converted missiles are launched from three launch sites: Baikonur (Kazakhstan), Svobodnyy (Russia, Amursk region), and Plesetsk (Russia, Arhangelsk region). At all three sites, launch programs have been criticized by environmental groups and local officials concerned about the impact of launches on the health of local residents.

Only four launches of Start rockets have taken place from the Svobodnyy launch site since it became operational. After the failed Start lauch in February 2001, soil, snow, and plants around the accident area were examined and the laboratory results showed that none of the controlled substances exceed normal background levels.[20]

In March 2003, the Main Administration of Natural Resources in the Arhangelsk region conditionally banned the Rockot from the Plesetsk launch site, with the ban becoming effective on June 1, 2003. For this reason, Rockot launches were delayed several times. The main requirement of the local administration for resuming the launches was implementation of a set of measures for the environmental protection of the site.[22] The ban imposed by the administration interfered with Russia’s obligations under a number of contracts with foreign customers. Eventually, actions were taken and the Chief State Inspector for Environmental Protection in the region gave his permission for Rockot launches to be resumed again.[23]

Prospective Launchers

Currently, there are no light space launchers that use environmentally ‘clean’ fuel. However, many projects are aimed at the creation of such a launcher. For example, the Khrunichev Space Center is developing a new environmentally clean family of Angara rockets. Angara-1.1 and Angara-1.2 are supposed to be future carriers of the light class.2 The costs of the Angara project are estimated at US$ 500 million. According to one source, only half the costs will be covered by the federal budget, the rest is supposed to be paid by commercial investors.[24] RSC (Rocket and Space Corporation) Energia constructs the new light oxygen-kerosene rockets Kvant and Kvant-1. The project costs are estimated at US$ 146.5 million.[2] The Riksha project, carried out by the Kompomash corporation, is estimated to cost US$ 135 million.[25] The aerospace system Vozdushniy Start is being jointly developed by Kompomash and the aircraft company Polet on a commercial base. The team plans to spend US$ 150-170 million.[2]

One may notice from the comparison of the cost and payload capabilities that the prospective launchers will represent a better alternative to all existing missiles. The environmental factor may also offer the future launchers a decisive advantage.

New Tasks for Converted Missiles

Anticipating the future competition, developers of converted missiles are studying new market niches. Launches of remote sensing and research satellites to low orbits bring a fairly small income. The only field of space activity that offers prospects for a high and relatively stable income are launches to the geostationary earth orbit (GEO; 36,000 km above earth), which is commonly used for communication satellites.

Russian designers hope to gain their share of the geostationary market by offering a non-standard solution – a ‘spiral way’ to GEO. Several Russian companies are developing their own satellites in order to implement this method. It includes three steps. First, a light rocket (Strela or Rockot) puts the satellite into an appropriate low orbit. Then, the upper stage puts it on a highly-elliptical orbit. Finally, the satellite uses its own electrojet engine to get to GEO.[1]

It is also possible to use Dnepr for a maneuver like this. The company Kosmotras develops one-stage (ST-3) and two-stage (ST-1) upper stages that could carry out this maneuver.[26]

An estimate of the costs (including for the launch) shows that putting a small satellite into GEO would not exceed US$ 18-25 million. The launch costs of a small satellite with a weight of 500-520 kg is shown in Table 5.[26]

As can be seen from Table 5, launches with converted missiles will be cheaper than those using civilian launchers. However, the time required to put a satellite into GEO by converted rockets would be significantly longer.

One of the limitations is the short remaining service life of the missiles. In particular, the SS-19 (Rockot) ICBM can only be used until 2007, the SS-19 (Strela) until 2010, the SS-18 Mod 4 (Dnepr) until 2009, and the SS-25 (Start-1) until 2012.[27]

Abbreviations

(UNAM)SAT

(University of Mexico) Satellite

AAU

Aalborg University

AICAS

Astronomy Institute of Czech Academy of Science

ATSB

Astronautic Technology Sdn Bhd

CSA

Canadian Space Agency

DLR

Deutsches Zentrum für Luft- und ­Raumfahrt

DTU

Danmarks Tekniske Universitet

ERS

Earth Remote Sensing

ESA

European Space Agency

ham

amateur radio

IRDT

Inflatable Re-Entry and Descent ­Technology

KACST

King Abdulaziz City of Science and ­Technology

Khrunichev SC

Khrunichev Space Center

LTS

Latin Trade Satellite S.A.

MIMOSA

Micromeasurements of Satellite ­Acceleration

MOST

Microvariability and Oscillations of Stars

NASA

National Aeronautics and Space Agency

NPO

mashinostroenie

NPO (scientific production association) of engineering

OHB

OHB-System AG

SERVIS

Space Environment Reliability ­Verification Integrated System

SIMSAT

Simulator Satellite

SSC

Swedish Space Corporation

SSTL

Surrey Satellite Technologies Ltd.

TIT

Tokio Institute of Technology

TOI

TransOrbital Inc.

Tokio U

Tokio University

TPS

The Planetary Society

UOS

University of Surrey

USEF

Unmanned Space Experiments Free Flyer

Appendix

For the appendix, see next page

---

1.   Ruban O., Conversion of military missiles as seen by an attached journalist, Expert, No 22 (329), 2002.
2.   Birkin I., Kuzin A., and Lozin S., Analysis of commercial potential of native light- and medium-class launch vehicles on the international space market, Dvoinie Technologii, No. 4, 1998.
3.   Technical report on the first part of the SR <Dialog Project>; Exhibit collection on TEO project, Exhibit 2: Main design work and cooperation decicions in building small connection satellites by D.Paison (executive manager), A. Boreiko, A. Gurko, O. Zhdanovich, M. Shepelev, and others, ACEU <Aerocosmos>, Khrunichev Space Center, 2001, 70 p.
4.   I went to politics to help Russian space, Kommersant Daily, 26.02.2002, interview of the week with Space Forces Major General Aleksandr Vinidiktov.
5.   Birkin I. et.al., op.cit.
6.   Tihiy I., Russian and Ukrainian launch vehicles, 1999; http://tihiy.fromru.com/ Rn/RN_tsh4book1.html.
7.   Data is taken from official company sites.
8.   Federal state unitary enterprise “Polyot”, Launch rocket “Cosmos-3Ì”; www.polyot. su/­­main.php?­­id=94.
9.   Rocket-carriers experimental design office “Yuzhnoe”; http://a402-bgtu.narod.ru/ ­RN_yuznoye.htm.
10.  Kopic A., Ukraine space at exhibition in Moscow, Novosti kosmonavtiki, No. 8, 2002.
11.  Afanasiev I., Crash of “Cyclone-3”, Novosti kosmonavtiki, No. 8, 2002.
12.  Insurance company “Megarus”, Space Carrier “Cyclone-3”; www.cosmoworld.ru/ spacehistory/projects/­tsiklon.html.
13.  Kirillov V., Russian carriers on the launch market “Export vooruzheniy, No.2, March-April 1999.
14.  Afanasiev I., First launch of “Strela”, Novosti kosmonavtiki, No. 2, 2004.
15.  Data provided by E. Miasnikov.
16.  Afanasiev I., Fault of “Cosmos-1”, Novosti kosmonavtiki, No. 10, 2001.
17.  The “Volna” crashed due to energy loss of stage engine, Novosti kosmonavtiki, News compilation No. 842; www.novosti-kosmonavtiki.ru/content/z26.06.05.shtml.
18.  S. Ivanenko, D. Ovsyannikov, and A. Yarmola, Main effects of solid fuel rockets on the environment at launch and in flight, Dvoinii technologii, No. 3, 2001.
19.  Golotuk Yu, “Stillet” turned into “Rockot”, Vremya novostey, No. 46, 18 March 2002.
20.  Shoikin A., “Strela” must be safe, NIA Priroda, 2000.
21.  Cozlov S., Providing environmental safety of space rocket-complex «Strela» when using small space vehicles, Thesis of reports and presentations.
22.  Main management of nature resources in Arhangelskaya region will have trial cosmodrome Plesetsk, Information Agency “Regnum”, 15.03.2004; www.regnum.ru/ news/231857.
23.  Larionov S., Main state inspector permitted exploitation of “Rockot” complex of cosmodrome Plesetsk, IRAM, 22.05.2003.
24.  Project of building rocket complex “Angara” in Plesetsk is estimated at $500 million, 10.11.2003; www.aerotechnics.ru/­news.aspx­­?id=7659.
25.  Afanasiev I. and Shamsutdinov S., Russian space-carriers. Perspectives, Vestnoc vozdushnogo flota, No. 3-4, 1996.
26.  Cluster launch of space vehicle under “Dnepr” program, 2004, 44 p.; composed by LTD “Publishing office” (with the help of press-service FKA), 2004.
27.  Project names are used here. Information provided by E. Miasnikov.
28.  Table is composed mainly from data from Novosti kosmonavtiki, Gunter’s space page http://skyrocket.de/space/index_frame.htm, NASA’s Spacewarn Bulletin http://nssdc. gsfc.nasa.gov/spacewarn/, and www.astronautix.com/chrono/index.htm.

I would like to thank Eugene Miasnikov, Pavel Podvig, and Timur Kadyshev for their help with this article.