How "Crew Dragon" Stands Apart from the Russian "Soyuz"
Written on
Understanding Modern Spacecraft
Inquiries about the distinctions between the “Soyuz” and “Crew Dragon” spacecraft fill our inbox, prompting us to delve into the core differences between these two vessels.
When examining contemporary crewed spacecraft, they can be categorized into two main groups: low-orbit and deep-space vehicles. Current low-orbit craft include the American “Crew Dragon” and “Starliner,” the Russian “Soyuz MS,” the Chinese “Shenzhou,” and the Indian “Gaganyaan.” Meanwhile, upcoming deep-space missions are set to feature the American “Orion,” the Russian PTK NP “Oryol,” and various international projects.
However, today we will focus specifically on the low-orbit spacecraft: “Crew Dragon” and “Soyuz MS.”
The Genesis of Crew Dragon
In 2010, NASA initiated a competition to develop a low-orbit spacecraft for missions to the International Space Station (ISS). This initiative aimed to reduce reliance on Roscosmos's transport services and the Russian “Soyuz” spacecraft, which became necessary following the conclusion of the Space Shuttle program. SpaceX emerged as the victor with its “Crew Dragon.”
Despite sharing the low-orbit category, “Crew Dragon” and “Soyuz” exhibit considerable differences. For example, “Crew Dragon” is significantly heavier, with a launch mass of approximately 12 tons compared to the nearly 8 tons of “Soyuz.” This increased mass allows “Crew Dragon” to transport nearly nine times more cargo to the ISS and return roughly 3.5 tons from orbit. The higher payload capacity is attributed to the Falcon 9 rocket, which supports the larger mass of the “Crew Dragon.”
Advantages of Crew Dragon
Another advantage of “Crew Dragon” is its spacious interior, accommodating four crew members instead of the three in “Soyuz.” Additionally, in emergency situations at the station, it can transport three additional crew members instead of cargo, provided that extra suits and seats are preloaded onto the spacecraft.
On the downside, “Crew Dragon” lacks a dedicated habitation module that can double as an airlock for spacewalks. Life support systems are integrated within the main craft, unlike “Soyuz,” which has a separate compartment for such purposes. Furthermore, “Crew Dragon” does not utilize traditional fairings; it serves as its own fairing, implementing a different rescue system.
Design Features of the Two Spacecraft
The architecture of these spacecraft differs significantly: “Soyuz” has three distinct modules, whereas “Crew Dragon” consists of only two. “Crew Dragon” benefits from modern control systems, including touch interfaces, while “Soyuz” has not undergone such upgrades due to the extensive redesign and financial resources required. Currently, Roscosmos is channeling its efforts into the PTK NP “Oryol” project, which is deemed more future-oriented.
Moreover, unlike “Soyuz,” “Crew Dragon” is designed for reuse, with capsules like Endeavour and Resilience successfully completing multiple missions. After each flight, parts such as the heat shield and external cargo bay—which houses solar panels and radiators—are replaced.
Pricing and Insights from Astronauts
Interestingly, a seat on “Crew Dragon” averages around $55 million, which is almost equivalent to the $55.7 million NASA spent on transporting a single American astronaut via “Soyuz.”
NASA astronaut Shannon Walker, who has flown on both spacecraft, acknowledges the differences but considers them relatively minor.
If you’re interested in more space-related content, please clap and subscribe to our channel. Feel free to submit your questions for future articles!