FLUG REVUE December 2002: International Space Station expansion woes

US AND RUSSIANS FEUD OVER ISS CONTROL

By Gerhard Kowalski

In actual fact the agreed pecking order in the International Space Station (ISS) is quite clear. Contractual provisions specify precisely which of the 16 partners is required to do or allow others to do what, when, where and why in this outpost of the Earth in space. The ISS Agreements dated 29 January 1998 are based on three pillars: a code of conduct for the spacemen, several bilateral memoranda covering technical issues and an Intergovernmental Agreement, which provides the legal basis under international law for implementing ISS co-operation.

ISS

Nevertheless, disputes over who is responsible for what occur at regular intervals, especially between the Americans and Russians. Most of them take place behind-the-scenes with neither side exactly beset by any qualms about them. If the bickering is not (yet) conducted entirely in public, then in the view of the Russians this is only because concerns about the best possible joint management of such a complicated system are simply forcing the partners to avoid confrontation in favour of co-operation.

When in 1993 – some two decades after the historic Soyuz Apollo test project (SATP) – the USA and Russia agreed to dare a second and this time long-term attempt at a joint manned space programme, everyone was aware that a common language needed to be found for this, in both the literal and figurative senses of the word. Apart from the language barrier, it was important to overcome differences in approach on the creation of the on-board systems and on flight control. Moreover, everything had to be protected by law, since the ISS is the only Russian-American programme on which co-operation in high technology has been allowed to extend to the use of American military technology in Moscow's on-board computers.

Some of the differences were cleared up by having American astronauts prepare for the ISS adventure on the Mir space station and Russian cosmonauts on Shuttle missions. Despite this, mutual understanding has remained a problem between the two partners to this day. This becomes especially apparent when irregularities occur on the International Space Station such as recently, when a Russian Progress cargo ship was unable to dock onto the ISS at the first attempt, as the remains of a seal from the previous Progress cargo supply craft was still stuck to the docking mechanism.

As far as the Russians were concerned, the blame for this fell squarely on the shoulders of the Americans, who dispose of water condensation, urine and preserving agents by releasing them outside from their Destiny module. According to the mission control centre in Korolev near Moscow, in-depth analysis showed that, along with unburned nitric acid residue from the fuel, this had contaminated the "atmosphere” around the ISS. This in turn had altered the characteristics of the seals and thus caused the problem.

Such a thing, the Russians complained, had not occurred one single time in some 250 dockings with their own space stations. They warned the American astronauts in no uncertain terms against continuing this practice, as contamination of this kind could cause damage to portholes, solar battery photodiodes, the radiators in the heat regulation system and scientific equipment on the ISS's outer panels.

Ongoing contentious issues include the disposal of condensation in the modules, the oxygen supply system and co-ordination of the crew's daily schedules. In both the Russian and American segments, the condensation water is collected from the cabin air in special tanks. But whereas the Russians obtain drinking water from the condensation, the Americans release it into the cosmos. Paradoxically, the Russian system is actually designed so that it could also process the condensation water in the American segment. However, the Americans will not allow this, so that the two systems each deal with the water in their own way. This in turn means that water stocks are lower than planned on the Russian side so that they have to have water brought to the ISS from the earth at great expense, while the Americans gaily tip it out of the window.

The fact that American astronauts not infrequently interfere directly in management of the Russian segment is viewed as a particularly serious violation of the ISS Agreements. Although each country possesses territorial sovereignty over its own part of the ISS, Mission Control in Houston on one occasion went so far as to autonomously order its astronauts to cut back or increase oxygen production in the Zarya module. This was met with protests by the Russians.

The regular ISS reboosts and avoiding manoeuvres aimed at getting out of the way of dangerous obstacles that loom up on the ISS's path are the subject of a separate chapter in the chronicle of strife. It is actually clearly specified that the station should be "lifted” to a higher orbit with unused fuel from the Progress cargo ships. During the avoiding manoeuvres, either the engines of the supply craft or those of the Zarya module are supposed to be fired. But often the American simply use their shuttles for this purpose, solely in order to make the headlines, as the Russians complain. The result is that the Zarya fuel is not used as planned and, having only a finite usable life, goes "off” through being kept too long. Also, apparently, fewer Progress cargo carriers, the only means of transporting fuel to the station, are required. But this is a threat to the regular supply of the ISS generally, as the cargo ships also bring water, food, consumables, scientific equipment and spare parts.

The Russians are only too aware that they are very much the junior partners of the Americans over the ISS, on the grounds that he who pays also chooses the music. But naturally they do not like having the butter snatched from their bread. Their most important bargaining-counter in the bickering over the ISS is the fact that they alone have over 30 years' experience in building and operating space stations. And even the Americans cannot do without that, as Moscow is well aware.

Fom page 56 of FLUG REVUE 12/2002

Last updated 4 November 2002

FLUG REVUE, Ubierstr. 83, 53173 Bonn, Germany