2 LLeetttteerr ffrroomm tthhee EEddiittoorr

OOrraall HHiissttoorryy4 AAnn OOrrddiinnaarryy JJooee LLiivveess HHiiss DDrreeaamm WWhheenn HHee LLeeaasstt

EExxppeecctteedd IIttBy Joe Lennox

7 AAnn IInntteerrvviieeww wwiitthh JJoosseepphh GG.. GGaavviinn JJrr..EEnnggiinneeeerriinngg aa VVeehhiiccllee ffoorr AAnnootthheerr WWoorrlldd

Interview conducted by Rebecca Wright

42 AAnn IInntteerrvviieeww wwiitthh BBrruuccee HHaallll:: RReeppoorrttiinngg TTrriiuummpphh aanndd TTrraaggeeddyy iinn tthhee SSppaaccee SShhuuttttllee PPrrooggrraamm

Interview conducted by Herman Howard

FFeeaattuurreess27 TThhee IInntteelllliiggeennccee AAggeenncciieess HHeellpp FFiinndd WWhhaalleess::

CCiivviilliiaann UUssee ooff CCllaassssiiffiieedd OOvveerrhheeaadd PPhhoottooggrraapphhyy uunnddeerr PPrroojjeecctt AArrggoo

By James David

37 TThhee EElluussiivvee HHuummaann MMaaxxiimmuumm AAllttiittuuddee RReeccoorrddBy Daniel R. Adamo

48 KKoossmmiicc KKoonnssppiirraaccyy::HHooww II LLeeaarrnneedd ttoo QQuueessttiioonn tthhee EEvviiddeennccee

By Joe Felice

ContentsVolume 16 • Number 4

2009

Q U E S T 16:4 20091

CCoovveerr IImmaaggee CCrreeddiittss

FFrroonntt CCoovveerr"Tracy's Rock" (Split Rock, Turning Point Rock), part of station 6 panorama byApollo 17 commander Eugene A. Cernan on 13 December 1972 during thethird EVA at the Taurus-Littrow landing site. Scientist-astronaut Harrison H.Schmitt is moving behind the boulder. Photomontage of AS17-140-21493 andAS17-140-21497 from the NASA Human Space Flight Gallery by Eric Hartwell.

BBaacckk CCoovveerrApollo 8 on Pad 39A with the Mobile Service Structure (MSS) preparing thestack for flight. NASA image S69-15528

RRiigghhttAl Worden (Apollo 15) holds a copy of Quest at the November 2009Astronaut Scholarship Foundation astronaut autograph fundraising event.

BBooookk RReevviieewwss

55, 56, 57, 61, 64 OOnn tthhee BBooookksshheellff

57 AA DDiiccttiioonnaarryy ooff tthhee SSppaaccee AAggeeBook by Paul DicksonReview by Roger D. Launius

58 TThhee SSppaaccee SShhuuttttllee PPrrooggrraamm:: HHooww NNAASSAA LLoosstt iittss WWaayyBook by R. Michael GordonReview by Roger D. Launius

60 MMiissssiilleess ffoorr tthhee FFaatthheerrllaanndd:: PPeeeenneemmüünnddee,, NNaattiioonnaall SSoocciiaalliissmm,, aanndd tthhee VV--22 MMiissssiilleeBook by Michael B. PetersenReview by Monique Laney

62 TThhee AAddaappttiivvee OOppttiiccss RReevvoolluuttiioonnBook by Robert W. DuffnerReview by Christopher Stone

63 TThhee SSaattuurrnn VV,, FF--11 EEnnggiinnee::PPoowweerriinngg AAppoolllloo iinnttoo HHiissttoorryyBook by Anthony YoungReview by Thomas Lassman

Q U E S T 16:4 200948

By Joe Felice

In November 2007, I received news that the Dean’s

Office had approved my research proposal. As the recipient of

the West Chester University of Pennsylvania (WCUPA)

College of Arts and Sciences Undergraduate Research Grant

Award, I could finally expand on a lifelong interest: the history

of the space race between the Soviet Union and the United

States. Nearly two years into my studies at WCUPA, I now had

the opportunity to explore a region of the cosmos with which

my father, a cold war engineer, had been unable to acquaint

me—the kosmos, or Soviet space activities in the late 1950s and

early 1960s.

Impressed by how Clint Eastwood’s film Letters fromIwo Jima abandoned the “orthodox” U.S. perspective on that

famous World War II battle and instead adopted a Japanese per-

spective, I decided to attempt a similar approach to understand-

ing early Soviet space history. To begin I decided to broaden my

understanding of the space race by using my research grant to

investigate the kosmos in Washington, DC. That trip led me

down a path that involved developing research skills and tech-

niques that were essential to unraveling a mystery I call the kos-

mic konspiracy. It centers on questions surrounding who really

was the first man into space, as presented in at least one article

and two documentary films. Through the process of uncovering

these questions and raising my own questions about what I was

reading and seeing, I learned a powerful lesson: always ques-

tion the evidence and how it’s presented. I learned that seeing

shouldn’t lead blindly to believing.

During my research trip to Washington in July 2008, I had

the pleasure of meeting Dr. Cathleen S. Lewis, curator of

International Space Programs and Spacesuits in the Division of

Space History at the National Air and Space Museum (NASM),

who later would play a role in the story. After my appointment

with her, I went to the National Aeronautics and Space

Administration (NASA) History Division, and that is where I

first encountered the kosmic konspiracy.

After hours of sifting through archival folders, I came

across an article written by Gordon Feller in Final Frontiermagazine, titled “The Nightmare Mission.”1 In that article, the

author claimed Lt. Col. Vladimir Iliushin, son of the famed

Soviet aircraft designer Sergei Iliushin, was the first man into

space.2 Engaged in intense photocopying and passionate note

taking of other materials, I decided to add Feller’s article to my

stack of photocopied material and pursue the matter further on

my return home. Unfortunately my instincts and skills as a his-

torical researcher were still in their infancy. I initially accepted

as fact, therefore, the unsubstantiated theory of a pre-Gagarin

orbit.

On 15 September 2008, I was fortunate enough to engage

Dr. Sergei Khrushchev in a telephone conversation. Dr.

Khrushchev, son of former Soviet Premier Nikita Khrushchev

and now a professor at Brown University’s Watson Institute for

International Studies, was once himself an engineer in the

Soviet space program. By this time I had read Dr. Khrushchev’s

book, Nikita Khrushchev and the Creation of a Superpower,

and I was curious about why he did not mention Iliushin as

being a member of the cosmonaut corps. When I asked about

this and whether Iliushin might have been first in space, Dr.

Khrushchev responded that the Iliushin theorists are on par with

those who believe America never landed on the Moon.3

Because I respected and trusted Dr. Khrushchev’s opin-

ion, I became more curious about why there were those who

believed Lt. Col. Vladimir Iliushin was the first man into space.

After surfing the Web, I came across Dr. Elliott Haimoff of

Global Sciences Productions, Inc. It appeared he had produced

a documentary proving that Iliushin was the first man into

space. In November 2008, after I had contacted him, Dr.

Haimoff was kind enough to send me two documentary DVDs

he had produced on this subject. The first was The CosmonautCover-Up, which aired on American Public Television (APT) in

I N T E R N AT I O N A L

Kosmic Konspiracy: How I Learned to Question the Evidence

Conspiracy fanatics maintain that Lt. Col. Vladimir Iliushin was the

first person to fly into space. Because he does not appear in this photo,

it gives the illusion of the “missing” twelfth cosmonaut. From left to

right: Gagarin, Titov, Nikolayev, Popovich, Bykovsky, Tereshkova,

Feoktistov, Komarov, Yegorov, Belyayev, and Leonov.

Q U E S T 16:4 200949

1999. The second was a pre-release copy of Fallen Idol: TheYuri Gagarin Conspiracy, which Dr. Haimoff said would be

released to theaters in late summer/early fall 2009.4 Both

DVDs asserted that Iliushin, not Gagarin, was the first man into

space. The second pre-release documentary goes more deeply

into Gagarin’s death, suggesting it was the result of a KGB con-

spiracy, not a MiG jet crash.5 Both of Haimoff’s DVDs support

the contention in Feller’s article that Iliushin orbited Earth on 7

April 1961, five days prior to Gagarin’s flight. As a result of

crash landing in mainland China after three orbits and severely

injuring Iliushin, the failed mission was swept under the carpet.

Consequently, according to Haimoff, Gagarin was sent up as the

second “first” man into space.6

Convinced by the fluidity of Haimoff’s presentation, I

decided to incorporate the Iliushin story as truthful into my

research report. In December 2008, shortly before my under-

graduate commencement, I completed the first draft of my

paper. Then, in January 2009, I decided to return to WCUPA to

continue my research under a master’s program.

My research was well received when it was presented at

the WCUPA Graduate Historical Conference in April 2009. At

that time, I believed the Iliushin controversy to be a “case

closed” issue. On hearing my presentation, however, a profes-

sor of Russian history encouraged me to further investigate the

matter. Following through on her advice, I discovered several

interesting perspectives on both sides of the question whether

Iliushin orbited Earth prior to Gagarin.

I again contacted Dr. Haimoff to gain insight into his aca-

demic credentials. He informed me that he received a doctoral

degree in biology from Cambridge University. Eighteen years

ago, he left academia to pursue his passion of producing docu-

mentary films. Ranging across a variety of topics, Haimoff’s

documentaries include several on the topic of spaceflight. He

said Indican Pictures, Inc., could confirm release of Fallen Idolfor screening in West Coast theaters.7

On 9 April 2009, I received an e-mail reply from Jamie E.

Haines, director of communications for American Public

Television (APT). She said APT supported the validity of the

content in Haimoff’s earlier documentary, The CosmonautCover-Up, insofar as it met the “format requirements” set by the

organization.8 Haines went on to describe the format require-

ment that must be met before a program being permitted air

time.

First the documentary must be reviewed by experts in

whatever field it concerns. Then, based on evaluation by in-

house experts, APT decides whether the documentary can air as

is or, considering its controversial content, it warrants further

scrutiny and an “outside expert’s opinion.”9 She implied earli-

er that such an approach ensured a “balanced perspective” in

documentary content.10 Haines said that in the case of The

Cosmonaut Cover-Up the review committee decided no such

extra measure was needed because of “questions posed in the

course of the program.”11

Shortly thereafter, Dr. Lewis at NASM replied to one of

my e-mails and commented on the matter. In regard to Dr.

Haimoff and the supposed pre-Gagarin Iliushin orbit, she stat-

ed: “I would recommend that you stay far clear of him.”12 She

further encouraged that I avoid anyone whose work advertises

some unique understanding which “no one else shares.”13

Dr. Lewis supported her reservations about Haimoff’s

claim regarding Iliushin. In terms of theory, she raised a couple

of logical points. One was that well before Gagarin was

launched into space the United States had been predicting a

Soviet human spaceflight. Hence Dr. Haimoff’s references in

Fallen Idol to U.S. monitoring activities at Tern Island. Tern

Island served as a tracking station for U.S. satellites and Soviet

spaceships during the early days of the space race. Dr. Haimoff

features the personal account of an anonymous Tern Island

engineer who claimed to have been at his post witnessing

instrumentation readouts that supporting the occurrence of a

Soviet human space mission on 7 April 1961.14

Although Dr. Lewis did not mention Tern Island in her e-

mail to me, she referred to other reputable observers, such as

England’s Sheffield School, NASA, and the National Security

Agency (NSA).15 None of these observers supported the claim

that Iliushin ever orbited. Also none of them had anything to

gain by keeping a Soviet space failure secret. Lewis also point-

ed out the improbability of the numerous people involved in this

case remaining silent for nearly 50 years. This includes every-

one from members of the Soviet military to civilian family

members, in addition to those working for Western spy agencies

and tracking stations.16

In terms of hard evidence, Dr. Lewis recalled that during

1960–1961 the Soviet Union was openly sharing with the pub-

lic information pertinent to Vostok test flights.17 Soviet Premier

Nikita Khrushchev was on the Black Sea during Gagarin’s

flight. Thus chances are he was unable to learn of Gagarin’s

success before U.S. President John F. Kennedy did. Though just

speculation, Lewis said that “recently declassified CIA intelli-

gence briefings point to the likelihood” of this being the case.18

Obviously if Kennedy learned of Gagarin’s flight before

Khrushchev, chances are the Soviet Union would not have suc-

ceeded in covering up a failed mission launched before 12 April

1961. In closing Lewis mentioned that the release of materials

from Soviet archives, subsequent to the collapse of commu-

nism, makes no mention of Iliushin being involved with the

Q U E S T 16:4 200950

Soviet space program.19 Her expertise

and informed opinion clearly out-

weighed Ms. Haines in this case, but I

still wanted further analysis before

drawing my own conclusion.

On 13 April 2009 I contacted the

History Division at NASA headquarters,

where I had first come across Feller’s

article about an Iliushin orbital flight. On

14 April, Liz Suckow, a contract

archivist at the History Division

responded to my inquiry. She confirmed

the Iliushin flight was debunked as myth

based on release of the Soviet archives.

Ms. Suckow also informed me that the

Iliushin story is on occasion referred to

as the “lost cosmonaut.”20

On 17 April Dr. David Robarge,

chief historian of the Central

Intelligence Agency (CIA), responded to

my inquiry about the possibility of an

Iliushin orbit. He was unable to find in

CIA archives any declassified documen-

tation that would confirm Iliushin orbit-

ing before Gagarin. Specifically he stat-

ed, “To the contrary, the Agency and the

other relevant intelligence Community

departments are on record at the time as

describing Gagarin as the first man in

space.” 21

Dr. Robarge went on to mention a

couple declassified briefings that can be

accessed on the CIA’s public Website

under the Freedom of Information Act

(FOIA) Reading Room. These briefings

are “The Soviet Bioastronautics

Research Program,” Office of Scientific

Intelligence Report OSI-SR/62-3, dated

22 February 1962 and “The Soviet

Space Program,” from National

Intelligence Estimate 11-1-62, dated 5

December 1962.22 These documents

identify Gagarin as being the first man

into space.

Robarge’s statements contradict

those of supposed former CIA analyst

Racheal Seymour, who appears 20 min-

utes into Fallen Idol. She claims that

documents she obtained “conclusively

indicate that not only was Vladimir

Iliushin launched on 7 April 1961, but

that he seemed to have some severe

problems during flight.”23 Although

this sounds rather convincing given her

former title position, the document dis-

played by the camera lens to accompany

her words hardly supports her case.

While it is difficult to quote the

document verbatim because of how the

camera zoomed in on it, I was able to

make out certain details that refute

Seymour’s statements. There is no doubt

this piece of paper was a Department of

State document, dated 5 May 1961, that

was sent from the U.S. embassy in

Moscow to the Secretary of State. The

title of the document, which the camera

almost cuts off, is “Soviet Denial of

Ilyushin Space Flight Report.”24

Perhaps it is important to note here that

another accepted spelling for Iliushin’s

name does have the letter “y” follow the

“l.”

When the camera zooms in below

the title, the document becomes

extremely difficult to read. Still I feel

confident in my assessment of the words

that the camera lens conveniently cuts

off. One very important line reads:

“Vladimir Ilyushin, said to be in China

for severe leg injuries received in a”

after which the sentence finishes moving

on the next line with “le accident near

Moscow.”25 Presumably, the “le” is the

last two letters of the word automobile,

given that the official Soviet claim was

that Iliushin had suffered severe injuries

sustained in an automobile accident.26

The document goes on to say, “The cor-

respondent quotes Edouard Bobrovsky’s

story that he had been injured,” then

moves to the next line, the beginning of

which is once again cut off “garin’s is

nonsensical.”27

Mr. Bobrovsky was a French

broadcaster who informed the public

that Sergei Iliushin had orbited and, as a

result of a crash landing, was nearly

fatally injured.28 Chances are that

because Vladimir’s name was actually

Sergei Vladimir Iliushin Jr., Mr.

Bobrovsky was indeed referring correct-

ly to the younger Iliushin, not the elder

aircraft designer.29 Also chances are

that the cut-off sentence showing only a

few words is assessing as “nonsensical”

Mr. Bobrovsky’s story about an Iliushin

flight occurring before “Gagarin’s.”30

When Dr. Haimoff’s work is

placed under a “detective’s lens” it

becomes glaringly obvious that he pro-

vides no hard evidence to substantiate

his claim of an Iliushin flight. Therefore

in an effort to obtain the hard evidence

that Ms. Seymour claims to have uncov-

ered, I conducted a free “person” search

on the Internet to see if I could locate

her. Fortunately I found an address for

her and was able to send a letter asking

if she would share any documentation

she might have substantiating an Iliushin

orbit. Still awaiting her response on this

matter, I cannot help but continue to

speculate on why both Ms. Seymour and

Dr. Haimoff share the same street

address in Beverly Hills.

On 18 May 2009, I telephoned Dr.

Rick W. Sturdevant, deputy director of

history at Air Force Space Command

headquarters (HQ AFSPC), Peterson Air

Force Base, Colorado. He appears

briefly in Fallen Idol to discuss Tern

Island. Haimoff and a recording crew

had come to Peterson Air Force Base on

30 July 2007 to interview Sturdevant

and a couple other individuals who

would be featured in the documentary

Bob Truax: The U.S. Navy’s RocketMan.31 An hour or two before

Sturdevant’s session on camera,

Haimoff told him about another docu-

mentary he was producing on Yuri

Gagarin’s flight. He asked if Sturdevant

might be able to comment briefly on the

role of Tern Island in detecting that

flight.

To prepare hurriedly for this unex-

pected request regarding Tern Island, Dr.

Sturdevant searched the World Wide

Web. On Google Books, he found a per-

tinent narrative segment on page 49 of

Hamish Linday’s Tracking Apollo to theMoon (2001). Dr. Sturdevant also relied

on Sven Grahn’s “TV from Vostok”

Website about the role of Tern Island in

the detection of Gagarin’s flight. Neither

Lindsay nor Grahn mention the name

Iliushin, and both clearly acknowledge

Gagarin as the first human to orbit Earth.

Finally Sturdevant expressed concern

that he only signed a release for the

Truax documentary, not one permitting

inclusion of his remarks about Tern

Island in the Gagarin documentary.

When I learned this, I decided to send

the DVDs to Sturdevant in Colorado and

asked him to evaluate the use of his

commentary in the Fallen Idol docu-

Q U E S T 16:4 200951

mentary. I wanted to hear his opinion

concerning both the use of his interview

in Fallen Idol and the Iliushin theory.

Dr. Sturdevant found Dr.

Haimoff’s use of his Tern Island

remarks disconcerting. Since Dr.

Sturdevant clearly referred only to

Gagarin in his on-camera interview, it is

clear he never intended to imply that

someone other than Gagarin completed

the first human orbital flight. He also

commented specifically on the anony-

mous statement of a former Tern Island

tracking station engineer featured in

Fallen Idol. This statement, which sup-

posedly provides details in support of an

Iliushin flight on 7 April 1961, is read

by host Elliott Gould, star of the 1978

conspiracy-based movie CapricornOne. In that film, Gould portrayed a

journalist who unearthed details of a

faked NASA space mission to Mars.32

Similar to how he was able to arouse

unwarranted suspicions 30 years ago

among the sandlot of conspiracy theo-

rists, Gould returns in Fallen Idol with

apparently the same motivation. In this

new documentary, Gould reads verba-

tim from what is billed as irrefutable

proof of a pre-Gagarin orbit. Dr.

Sturdevant thought it was unusual that

the actual document was not held up to

the camera. He acknowledged this

would be a perfectly ethical practice

provided that the name of the engineer

was blacked out in respect for his

anonymity.33

Mr. Gould informs viewers, sub-

sequent to reading this anonymous

statement, that the NSA threatened the

engineer with an “indefinite” jail sen-

tence should he ever reveal himself on

camera.34 Strangely, however, Dr.

Lewis at NASM confirmed the NSA

never supported the claim of an Iliushin

flight.35

Dr. Sturdevant, confident that Yuri

Gagarin was the first man into space,

had one more important comment con-

cerning the content of documentaries in

general. Cautioning me about the highly

subjective nature of documentary films,

he urged that a healthy degree of skepti-

cism be exercised when viewing any

content that is being advertised as estab-

lished fact. He remarked that based on

what the director and producer decide to

include and exclude, in concurrence

with the accompanying narration, the

audience could be easily misled into

believing a false conclusion. It is obvi-

ous that even though Dr. Haimoff pro-

vides seemingly convincing dialogue in

Fallen Idol, he produces no hard evi-

dence on camera to support the claim of

an Iliushin orbit.

Although I had received the opin-

ions of many well-respected scholars, I

still felt a need to gather more before I

drew my own conclusion. While surfing

the Web in an effort to acquire contact

information for the remaining Fallen

Idol interviewees, I discovered on

Google Video the original television

broadcast of The Cosmonaut Cover-Up.Aired in 1999, this version of the docu-

mentary, titled Stolen Glory: The Cover-up of Cosmonaut Vladimir Ilyushin, was

part of the Phenomenon Archives televi-

sion series hosted by Quantum Leap star

Dean Stockwell.36 This version of the

documentary has three noteworthy dif-

ferences compared to the DVD I

received from Dr. Haimoff.

First, in the original television

broadcast, interviews featuring Dennis

Ogden, a correspondent for the British

newspaper, Daily Worker, are absent.37

Second, toward the end of the television

version there seem to be major reserva-

tions concerning the scenario of Iliushin

crash landing in China. Given strained

Sino–Soviet relations at the time, there

is little logic to this version of events.

The Chinese had little reason to assist

the Soviet Union in covering up a major

space failure. In the DVD version,

Haimoff acknowledges strained

Sino–Soviet relations but emphasizes

the unlikely being likely, namely that

Iliushin did indeed crash land in China

and the Chinese cooperated in a cover-

up.38

Third, and most important, is the

presence of host Dean Stockwell in the

original television broadcast. His

appearance and dialogue offer startling

insight into producer Haimoff’s mind

and prompted me to seriously doubt his

claim of a pre-Gagarin orbit. At the start

of the broadcast, toward the end of his

initial discourse, Stockwell informed the

Q U E S T 16:4 200952

audience that General Vladimir Iliushin

was the “unsung hero of the first

manned Soviet space mission.”39

Further dialogue by narrator Bill

Rogers affirmed Stockwell’s initial

statement that Yuri Gagarin was not the

first man into space. Stockwell then

returned to the screen with additional

commentary and questions. The nature

of these statements and inquires would

alarm any sound-minded scholar intent

on handling the possibility of a pre-

Gagarin launch with an open and objec-

tive mind. A little more than three min-

utes into the broadcast, Stockwell stated,

“Indeed a rocket is launched on April 16,

1961.”40 Then, he asked viewers, just

before transitioning back into actual

documentary, “Gagarin is filmed board-

ing the capsule, but when the propagan-

da cameras stop rolling does Gagarin

stay onboard as the Russians claim, or

does something entirely different

occur?”41

First, the detail concerning

Gagarin’s launch date is incorrect.

Gagarin was launched on 12 April 1961.

Any scholar with expertise in this area of

history would notice that mistake like a

jeweler would notice a missing diamond

in a ring. More important, any possibili-

ty that a serious scholar pursuing

research in this field would consider the

Iliushin story as fact is immediately

removed by this all too suggestively

conspiratorial line of thought and ques-

tioning. Not at any point during this

whole documentary, even when the

question again is asked toward the end,

is the notion of the Gagarin orbit never

occurring openly entertained, but the

narrator suggestively planted that

thought in uncritical viewers’ minds.

After Stockwell initially raised

this question, narrator Bill Rogers turned

to a discussion of Sputnik. Then, Dr.

Roald Sagdeev, director of Moscow’s

Institute for Space Research from

1973–1988, commented specifically on

the Soviet government’s shock about the

worldwide reaction to the launch of

Sputnik.42 Sagdeev also admitted the

Soviet government’s intention to exploit

the success of Sputnik to sell the social-

ist system to the world.43

Further commentary by Sagdeev

was sandwiched between interviews

with the aforementioned Mr. Feller and

Dr. Thomas Maggard, a U.S. Navy his-

torian specializing in Soviet space activ-

ities. Although never questioned directly

about the possibility of Iliushin orbiting,

that segment of Sagdeev’s interview was

featured in a potentially misleading way;

viewers easily could have misconstrued

what Sagdeev really meant. A little more

than 20 minutes into the film, Sagdeev

said, “All failures were only known to a

narrow circle.”44

That comment came immediately

after a brief clip featuring Feller explain-

ing the logic of the communist regime.

According to Feller, the

Marxist–Leninist paradigm demanded

secular perfection. Thus the Soviet gov-

ernment was forced to keep secret Lt.

Col. Iliushin’s humiliating crash landing

and, consequently, his entire mission.

Sagdeev’s words during this portion of

the program end with, “I think the way

governments tried to hide failures was

really detrimental for the problem.”45

Following Sagdeev’s interview in

this portion of the program, Maggard

commented on how the Soviet govern-

ment had to keep Iliushin’s flight a

secret because he was in no condition to

appear publicly. There the filmmakers,

whether intentionally or otherwise,

rather deceptively made it appear that

Sagdeev supported the possibility of a

pre-Gagarin human spaceflight. This

sparked my desire to approach Dr.

Sagdeev directly on the issue. On 28

July, I contacted him via e-mail and

asked for his candid opinion. Now a pro-

fessor of physics at the University of

Maryland, Sagdeev replied two days

later, “I have not heard anything from

people I do trust about anyone being

flown before Gagarin.”46

Now I was convinced the whole

Iliushin matter truly was just a “kosmic

konspiracy.” One noteworthy similarity

in both versions of The CosmonautCover-Up concerns supposedly recent

declassification of Kremlin archival

materials that provides hard evidence for

an Iliushin orbit. The only consistent ref-

erence to this alleged information comes

from narrator Rogers. Despite his con-

stant, superficial reassurance, Rogers

halfway through the documentary con-

tradicts several of his own previous

claims about the existence of Kremlin

documentation concerning an Iliushin

space mission. After describing how

Gagarin became an international super-

star, Rogers claims, “The Iliushin flight

becomes a non-event. The Kremlin

apparently destroys all evidence of his

mission, including films and photos.”47

If this was the case, how come Mr.

Feller, the only other interviewee claim-

ing legitimate insight on the actual

nature of these documents, was able to

access them at the Kremlin archives?

Despite Feller’s claim that no xeroxing,

photographing, or note-taking were per-

mitted in these particular archives, it

seems rather implausible that no other

scholars familiar with those archives

appeared in either documentary to cor-

roborate Feller’s or the narrator’s expla-

nations concerning the existence of

materials about an Iliushin flight.48

Rogers’ narrative inconsistency and

Feller’s singular testimony about having

seen the Iliushin documents ought to

cast immediate suspicion on their truth-

fulness. Furthermore Dr. Asif A. Siddiqi,

one of the premier historians on early

Soviet space activities and author of

Challenge to Apollo (2001), confirmed

in an e-mail to me that the case regard-

ing Iliushin “has been thoroughly

debunked.”49

Still feeling the need to tie up any

loose ends regarding The CosmonautCover-Up, I decided to contact Dr.

Thomas Maggard, one of the intervie-

wees. At first I had extreme difficulty

finding contact information for him, but

producer Haimoff was kind enough to

share Maggard’s address from 10 years

prior. That information enabled me to

find a recent phone listing for Maggard.

On 4 August 2009, I called the person

whom I believed to be the correct

Thomas Maggard. After explaining who

I was, I learned I had indeed contacted

the correct Thomas Maggard. He was

not, however, Dr. Maggard, as Haimoff

had said in his documentaries; he was

Mr. Maggard.50 Maggard informed that

he graduated in 1970 with a bachelor’s

degree from the University of

Washington’s College of Engineering.51

Q U E S T 16:4 200953

Thereafter he pursued a master’s degree

in engineering while working as a mem-

ber of the U.S. Navy’s nuclear program.

After this clarification about his

credentials, Maggard and I discussed his

involvement with The CosmonautCover-Up. I told him Dr. Haimoff had

generously sent me a DVD of this origi-

nal work along with a pre-release copy

of his most recent documentary on the

subject. In the original 1999 documen-

tary, Maggard was featured discussing

the extremely clandestine nature of the

Soviet space program, especially when it

came to failures. For example, Maggard

himself cited in this documentary the

notorious case of the famous airbrushed

photograph. A cosmonaut in training,

who evidently failed, was removed from

the picture and his presence in the cos-

monaut corps simply denied, thereby

preserving the illusion of infallibility

among these “kosmic” superheroes.53

Then I began discussing with

Maggard the differences between The

Cosmonaut Cover-Up DVD and the

original television broadcast version I

had discovered on Google Video. I

reminded him of Dean Stockwell’s role

as the show’s host and his line of initial

questioning about the validity of

Gagarin’s launch. Having jogged

Maggard’s memory with this detail, I

learned from him quite a bit about the

dynamic between him and Haimoff dur-

ing the time they spent working on the

television project.

Maggard informed me that

Haimoff does not believe Lt. Yuri

Gagarin’s flight actually occurred on 12

April 1961. He said Haimoff really

believed Gagarin was filmed entering

his spacecraft as a fill-in for the failed

Iliushin flight. Maggard said that he

could not disagree more with this ver-

sion of events. Although Maggard does

believe adamantly that Iliushin orbited

before Gagarin, he also believes Gagarin

orbited.

Mr. Maggard recalled how recent-

ly released archival documents showed

the intensely dangerous situation

Gagarin faced while in orbit. Experts

now acknowledge that he nearly lost his

life when the Vostok capsule failed to

separate from its braking rocket before

reentry.54 Even though crowds gathered

in Moscow to cheer on a smiling

Gagarin after his having achieved one of

humankind’s greatest feats, he was any-

thing but smiling deep inside. Instead,

Maggard claims, Gagarin wrote

Khrushchev a letter informing the Soviet

premier of his close encounter with

death. Rarely did a good communist

report bad news to his leader, and

Gagarin was not only a committed mem-

ber of the communist party, he was also

a committed member of the cosmonaut

corps.

Eventually the cosmonaut corps

developed deep respect and admiration

for Gagarin. Maggard concluded that

this respect had its roots in both the brav-

ery Gagarin exemplified when confront-

ed by the dangers of his mission but also

in Gagarin’s courage to confront

Khrushchev about the risks posed by

spaceflight.55 These factors provide

Maggard with a basis for believing

Gagarin’s launch did occur. Had Gagarin

not flown, Maggard thinks no such

mutual admiration among the cosmo-

naut corps toward Gagarin would have

manifested itself.

I have had several telephone con-

versations with Maggard since that ini-

tial contact, but I have promised for the

time being to keep my account of his

involvement in this matter as general as

possible. I am at liberty to say that

Maggard, despite his appearance in TheCosmonaut Cover-Up, disagrees with

Haimoff’s conclusion that Iliushin

crashed in China.56 Even when I first

fell victim to the “kosmic konspiracy”

surrounding Iliushin, I could not recon-

cile in my mind why China would assist

the Soviet Union in sweeping an inci-

dent of this nature under the rug, espe-

cially considering the strained

Sino–Soviet political relations.

Maggard provided some logic to

the Iliushin story by claiming he had

news articles stating that Iliushin had

crashed in Russia. While generously dis-

cussing with me the specific content of

his personal library, Maggard only has a

collection of journalistic clippings that

claim Iliushin was a member of the cos-

monaut corps. Unfortunately old news-

paper articles and magazine clippings

are not the irrefutable proof needed to

conclude Iliushin was indeed the first

man into space.

Although I do not question

Maggard’s sincerity, I cannot help but

suspect his credibility. He apparently

lacks the scholarly credentials necessary

to be an acknowledged expert on Soviet

space history, as Haimoff suggests in

The Cosmonaut Cover-Up. Indeed even

when it comes to the credentials of peo-

ple he places in front of his camera lens.

Haimoff interprets the facts to support

his own preconceived notions about the

truth. Also it seems odd that in both doc-

umentaries Haimoff hired as narrators

Hollywood actors whose most notable

roles involved science-fiction or con-

spiratorial plots. Haimoff would have

been better served by consulting legiti-

mate, well-known scholars who could

substantiate his claim and, simultane-

ously, act as narrator. To conclude

whether Haimoff manipulated any facts

beyond those already mentioned I decid-

ed to initiate one final step in my inves-

tigation.

On 10 August 2009, I mailed from

my local post office several Freedom of

Information Act (FOIA) Requests to var-

ious different agencies. These agencies

include HQ AFSPC and NSA. Dr.

Haimoff claims his October 2000 FOIA

request to the NSA for strip chart record-

ings, audiotape recordings, and memos

produced on 7 April 1961 at Tern Island

tracking station was denied.57

According to Haimoff, the NSA

responded, “The document is classified

because its disclosure could reasonably

be expected to cause exceptionally grave

damage to the national security, and is

exempt from automatic declassifica-

tion.”58

By applying a scientific method to

Haimoff’s claims, I should be able to

produce identical results, or in this case

responses. If this experiment proves suc-

cessful, then according to narrator Elliott

Gould in Fallen Idol, not only should I

receive something quite similar to what

Haimoff received from the NSA, but any

subsequent appeal concerning this mat-

ter should be denied also.59 I also sent a

FOIA request to the CIA, citing both

Robarge’s e-mail response to me and

Q U E S T 16:4 200954

Seymour’s Fallen Idol claim that

Iliushin was the first man into space. I

asked for any documentation that might

clarify the situation. For now I will just

have to wait.

The date of 12 April 2011 will

mark the 50th anniversary of the first

man into space, Yuri Gagarin. After

much investigation, I have no doubt that

Elliot Haimoff’s documentaries cast

unnecessary doubt among uninformed

viewers about whether Gagarin really

was first into space. Initially my

untrained eyes and ears missed the high-

ly subjective and unsubstantiated nature

of the claims being made in both of

Haimoff’s DVDs. Iliushin, now referred

to as a “lost cosmonaut,” soon will be

rediscovered by a new generation, but

instead of reading Ogden’s article in the

Daily Worker, this generation will hear

about the “kosmic konspiracy” in West

Coast theaters or on television when

Fallen Idol is released.60 Unless the

audience comes prepared with the nec-

essary skills to critically assess what is

being said and shown on the screen,

skills I lacked when I first viewed these

documentaries, it will fall victim to

unproven conspiracy theories. As for

me, I wholeheartedly endorse Lt. Yuri

Gagarin as the first human in space

based on the evidence. Furthermore I

shall never again watch a historical doc-

umentary with unquestioning accept-

ance of its content.

About the Author

Joseph Felice is a resident of West

Chester, Pennsylvania. A fledging space

historian, one year ago, he graduated

with a bachelor’s degree in

world/regional history from West

Chester University of Pennsylvania

(WCUPA). Currently, Joseph is attend-

ing WCUPA to pursue a master’s degree

in European history while engaging in

research for his thesis on the subject of

Soviet spaceflight.

Notes1 Gordon Feller, “The Nightmare Mission,”Final Frontier magazine (May/June 1996):32–34.

2 Feller, “Nightmare,” 1996, 34.

3 Telephone interview with Sergei

Khrushchev, PhD, Senior Fellow, BrownUniversity’s Watson Institute forInternational Studies, 15 September 2008.

4 Telephone interview with Elliott H.Haimoff, PhD. Founder of Global ScienceProductions, Inc., April 2009.

5 Fallen Idol: The Yuri Gagarin Conspiracy,DVD, directed by Elliott H. Haimoff andDiane Tishkoff, 2009. Although TheCosmonaut Cover-Up, also directed by Dr.Haimoff, addresses the supposed strangecircumstances surrounding Gagarin’sdeath, this documentary goes further indepth regarding the details of his untimelydemise.

6 Fallen Idol, Cosmonaut Cover-Up.

7 Telephone interview with Haimoff, April2009.

8 Jamie Haines, APR, e-mail, AmericanPublic Television (APT), director,Communications, 9 April 2009.

9 Haines e-mail.

10 Haines e-mail.

11 Haines e-mail.

12 Cathleen S. Lewis, PhD, e-mail,Smithsonian’s National Air and SpaceMuseum (NASM), Division of Space History,Curator of International Space Programsand Spacesuits, 9 April 2009.

13 Lewis e-mail.

14 Fallen Idol.

15 Lewis e-mail.

16 Lewis e-mail.

17 Lewis e-mail.

18 Lewis e-mail.

19 Lewis e-mail.

20 Elizabeth Suckow, contract archivist, e-mail, National Aeronautics and SpaceAdministration (NASA) Headquarters, NASAHistory Division, 14 April 2009.

21 David Robarge, PhD, e-mail, CentralIntelligence Agency (CIA), chief historian,17 April 2009.

22 Robarge e-mail.

23 Fallen Idol.

24 Fallen Idol.

25 Fallen Idol.

26 Fallen Idol. This is my own personalanalysis regarding the likelihood that theletters “le” were part of the word automo-bile.

27 Fallen Idol.

28 AbsoluteAstronomy.com: Exploring theUniverse of Knowledge. “Vladimir Ilyushin.”13 August 2009. http://www.absoluteas-tronomy.com/topics/Vladimir_Ilyushin.

29 Paul Tsarinsky, Explorer Hero: SergeiVladimir Ilyushin, Jr. (20 March 2007). 13August 2009. http://myhero.com/myhero/hero.asp?hero=Ilyushin. Although Iliushin’sname also appears as Vladimir SergeiIlliushin, this Website presented his namein a fashion that made sense as to why Mr.Bobrovsky would have acknowledged thealleged cosmonaut as Sergei Iliushin.

30 Fallen Idol. This is my personal assess-ment as to the possible entire meaning ofthe cut-off phrase “garin’s is nonsensical.”Chances are that given the nature of thisparticular document, it is suggesting thatIliushin did not orbit before Gagarin.

31 Telephone interview with Rick W.Sturdevant, PhD, senior historian, UntiedStates Air Force Space CommandHeadquarters (HQ AFSPC), 18 May 2009.

32 IMDb: The Internet Movie Database,Capricorn One, 17 August 2009,http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0077294/.

33 Sturdevant phone interview.

34 Fallen Idol.

35 Lewis e-mail.

36 Google Video, “Phenomenon: The LostArchives—Stolen Glory: The Cover-up ofCosmonaut Vladimir Ilyushin.” 28 July2009, http://video.google.com/video-play? docid= 9095762107244106606.

37 The Cosmonaut Cover-Up, DVD, direct-ed by Elliott H. Haimoff, 1999. In the DVDversion of this documentary Mr. DennisOgden, the Daily Worker’s communist cor-respondent is featured on several occa-sions providing his personal insight intowhat led him to write his article namingIliushin as the first man into space. Theseinterviews of Mr. Ogden do not appear inthe original 1999 television broadcast ofthis documentary.

38 The Cosmonaut Cover-Up. Despiteadhering to the logic of contemporary rela-tions between the former Soviet Union andChina being strained, Dr. Haimoff seemsconvinced in this DVD version of his 1999documentary on the Iliushin story that thealleged cosmonaut did indeed crash landin China. Subsequently Dr. Haimoff claimsthat Illiushin was treated for injuries sus-tained in his capsule crash for a period of

Q U E S T 16:4 200955

one year before being returned to theSoviet Union.

39 “Phenomenon: The Lost Archives.”

40 “Phenomenon: The Lost Archives.”

41 “Phenomenon: The Lost Archives.”

42 American Physical Society: Physics,“2001 James Clerk Maxwell Prize forPlasma Physics Recipient: Roald Sagdeev:University of Maryland,” 31 July 2009.http://www.aps.org/programs/honors/prizes/prizerecipient.cfm?name=Roald%20Sagdeev&year=2001. Although Dr. Haimoffdid list Dr. Sagdeev’s former position inboth versions of The Cosmonaut Cover-Up,a more precise title for Dr. Sagdeev’s for-mer position was listed at this Website.

43 “Phenomenon: The Lost Archives.”

44 “Phenomenon: The Lost Archives.”

45 “Phenomenon: The Lost Archives.”

46 Roald Sagdeev, PhD, e-mail,. Universityof Maryland Physics Department, 30 July2009.

47 “Phenomenon: The Lost Archives.”

48 Feller, “Nightmare,” 1996, 32–43.Though Mr. Feller does appear in both TheCosmonaut Cover-Up and Fallen Idol dis-cussing the highly secretive nature of theKremlin archives, an exact description ofthe limitations and boundaries scholars areforced to work within in these archives isprovided in the content of this article.

49 Asif A. Siddiqi, PhD, e-mail, FordhamUniversity. At the time of e-mail communi-cation, Dr. Siddiqi was a visiting scholar atthe Massachusetts Institute of Technology,16 April 2009.

50 Telephone interview with Mr. ThomasMaggard, M.S. engineering, 4 August 2009

51 Maggard phone interview.

52 Maggard phone interview.

53 Cosmonaut Cover-Up. In both the DVDversion cited here and the original televi-sion version posted on YouTube, Mr.Maggard is falsely labeled and being Dr.Maggard.

54 Telephone interview with Mr. Maggard,10 August 2009.

55 Maggard phone interview.

56 Maggard phone interview.

57 Fallen Idol.

58 Fallen Idol.

59 Fallen Idol.

60 Indican Pictures, (2007), 11 August2009. http://www.indicanpictures.com/.Under the “In Theaters This Summer” sec-tion of the Indican Pictures website, a briefdescription appears for the Yuri Gagarin:Fallen Idol film, hosted by Elliott Gould.

O N T H E B O O K S H E L F

Organizational Learning at NASA:

The Challenger and ColumbiaAccidents

by Julianne Mahler with Maureen Hogan

Casamayou

Georgetown University Press, 2009

ISBN: 978-1589-0126-60

Pages: 256, trade paper

Price: $29.95

Just after 9:00 a.m. on 1 February 2003, the Space Shuttle

Columbia broke apart and was lost over Texas. This tragic

event led, as the Challenger accident had 17 years earlier, to an

intensive government investigation of the technological and

organizational causes of the accident. Despite the frequent with

which organizations are encouraged to adopt learning practices,

organizational learning—especially in public organizations—is

not well understood and deserves to be studied in more detail.

This book fills that gap with a thorough examination of NASA’s

loss of the two Shuttles.

La Naissance d’Ariane

[The Birth of Ariane]

by Jean-Pierre Morin

Editions Edite, 2009

ISBN: 978-2846-0824-88

Pages: 236

Price: 20 €

In the early 1970s, western European countries

could launch their payloads one of two ways, with the

United States or not at all. By the 1980s, Europe had

developed its own independent launch vehicle, the Ariane,

and rose from the United States’ junior partner to its com-

petitor in launch services. La Naissance d’Ariane chroni-

cles the technological and political challenges of this

achievement.