Not really a "myth" Moonwalker - rather a quite recent fact:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/24243569/ns/technology_and_science-space/
and a post TMA incident:
http://www.space.com/missionlaunches/exp6_soyuz_030526.html
While in NASA's case the STS program desasters were a direct result of management and decision-making chain almost criminal failures, in the Soyuz case, it's the method and equipment which is still an issue, with all the traditional Russian robustness, simplicity and over-specification built in their platforms.
That Soyuz generally is a hard landing vehicle remains is a rumor basically beefed-up by some news articels. Soyuz touches down with only 1,4 m/s under normal circumstances, which is quite smooth for a landing on solid ground.
Space flight always was and always will be a risky business. Soyuz isn't sparsely trustworthy because of incidents that are not uncommon to happen in manned space flight, less than ever within 39 years of operation. The causes are known and fixable. Soyuz fulfills all NASA requirements to accomplish ISS missions and to carry US astronauts.
And yes, I still have gripes with uncontrolled and uncontrollable re-entry and landing on hard surfaces regardless of whether it's NASA, ESA, JAXA or the Bear... but maybe that's a personal thing.
Yes, it's a personal thing I guess, but also for astronauts who feel different I think
If you take my personal opinion: I would be a fool not to take a ride on Soyuz only because of a few incidents within decades of operation. Same for the Shuttle by the way
Well, crews ride on Soyuz for 39 years, without any loss and without major injuries. It is indeed the most successful manned program for now. Especially German astronauts Thomas Reiter and Ulf Merbold loved to ride on it (and not to mention Sigmund Jähn, the first German guy in space in 1978 who also flew with Soyuz). They all still talk about it amazed in interviews like lots of others who took a ride and are willing to do again whenever they would get another chance. It's just that a few people still think that because Soyuz is a Russian thing it must be bad or rudimentary, which is not the case at all.
If you're scared about those incidents, then you have good reasons to also not take a ride with the Shuttle, just like with any other system as well (especially Mercury and Gemini which was really risky business). If you only look at the STS-1 anomalies, it already scares the hell out of you not less than those Soyuz incidents. STS-1 easily could have become a rather close one, just like many other STS missions. But that's again something you shouldn't worry about if you want progress and go into space
Soyuz is a reliable system that wrote history within the last 4 decades not less than the Shuttle, and is going to continue to do so for decades to come.
At least the water will get out of the way, land not so much...
An impact on water with 35 km/h and up to 40 G's is something that doesn't make the crew feel the water getting out of the way. Just think about the Apollo 15 landing with one failed main parachute. Comfort wasn't what you were looking for those days
Orion was only hoped to be reusable, but only ISS bound capsules. The returning lunar flights were never going to be reused.
The initial concept included Orion to be reusable up to 10 times, while it is still uncertain how much and which parts of the lunar version could be reusable. Of course the lunar version won't be entirely reusable, but also not non-reusable on the whole. Just think about the interior, i.e. the expensive electronics and instrumentation. I think that the final solution for both, the low earth orbit and lunar version, will be reusability of certain parts only.
The Apollo Command Module had a mass of "only" ~6 tons and required an impact attenuation system and a crushable structure, although it landed on water that gets
out of the way (also remember the Ares 1-X first stage impact...). Orion is going to have as twice as much mass. The Soyuz descent module has only half the mass of the Apollo Command Module and only 1/4 the mass of Orion. With a rate of descent of only 1,4 m/s, you cann guess which landing of those three systems will be the smoothest one.
With a 6-crew member Orion and Ares 1, NASA really has created a monster-challenge. Weight is the major issue for both, Ares 1 and Orion. The weight capabilities of the Ares 1 are almost exhausted already, resulting in a smaller version of Orion, shrinking crew size for lunar missions etc. Meanwhile I'm really curious how the program will continue. But I'm still a proponent and fan rather than an opponent. Because the program has come far and still is amazing. If they scrub it now and again change the direction, the manned part of NASA will be in serious trouble for years...
