The CEV Versus The Soyuz

Some have proposed that the Soyuz-TM be converted to serve as a lunar vehicle. The question is raised: How would NASA's CEV stack up against the Soyuz?

It would appear that the Soyuz is far too small to be part of a sustained lunar or Mars mission of the kind of which the CEV is capable. Unlike the Soyuz, CEV is not only a taxi vehicle, but, in its advanced configurations, a lunar-bound and interplanetary vehicle. The CEV would be part of dual-vehicle design.

To start with, the Soyuz is about half the size of the CEV and lacks any transorbital capability. By contrast, the much larger CEV is itself part of a system that will allow it to attain lunar insertion and, in its interplanetary configuration, break free of Earth's gravitational field altogether.

The CEV will be capable of supporting six astronauts. The Soyuz is capable of supporting only three cosmonauts.

The CEV is twice as large as the Apollo capsule, while weighing only slightly more. The Soyuz was never intended to be capable of any independent extended operations lasting many weeks or months and would need to be completely reconfigured or expanded for any such purpose. It would need to be a completely new ship.

It's important not to confuse the Soyuz with the Mir Space Station, or the Mir's predecessor, the Salyut design. Both the Mir and the Salyut were eminently capable of sustained operations. Mir is no more, having been intentionally destroyed through a de-orbit burn that plunged it into the Earth's atmosphere. Neither does the Salyut exist.

The CEV consists, notionally, of two separate internal sections: The crew capsule, and a large service module. The Soyuz does not have an equivalent service module. The CEV is also designed to link with transorbital upper stages for lunar flight. The Soyuz program has no such compatible stages.

The CEV is designed to be capable of sustained lunar operations. The Soyuz is not. It would be a mistake to characterize the CEV as merely a shuttle per se, since a shuttle would not need to be capable of independent operations 200,000 miles from Earth, or far more distantly in interplanetary operations. But it could be said, that the Soyuz, by contrast, is a taxi.

In terms of size, the maximum diameter of Soyuz craft is 2.7 meters, versus 5.5 meters for the CEV.

One would do well to consult with the following resource concerning the capability of the Soyuz, which is definitely not a lunar ship (e.g., see pp. 15 ff.): Link. Note the multiple launch failures of even unmanned attempts as well as the abortive attempt to expand the Soyuz concept. Further, even under the original 1962-1963 lunar concept (which was never realized), the expanded Soyuz would have required half a dozen launches for a lunar mission.

The CEV will be capable of reaching Mars. Will others, flying the Soyuz or an equivalent, have such technology in a decade?

Lockheed Martin's take on the CEV is available at

http://www.lockheedmartin.com/data/assets/5565.pdf

In competitive terms, it's Northrop/Boeing versus Lockheed Martin. The Boeing design has been popularized through NASA's recent release of graphics showing a "super-Apollo"-style CEV.

By contrast, in the following view of Lockheed's proposed design, note the winged configuration. http://www.popularmechanics.com/science/space/1534782.html

Northrop Grumman and Boeing have just taken steps toward making our CEV a reality. See, e.g.: http://www.spaceref.com/news/viewpr.html?pid=18022

In a competition between the CEV and the Soyuz, there is thus no doubt in my mind which is the more advanced vehicle.