text:
George Henry Thomas

George Henry Thomas (July 31, 1816 – March 28, 1870) was an American general in the Union Army during the American Civil War and one of the principal commanders in the Western Theater.

Thomas served in the Mexican–American War, and despite being a Virginian whose home state would join the Confederate States of America during the Civil War, he was a Southern Unionist who chose to remain in the U.S. Army. Thomas won one of the first Union victories in the war, at Mill Springs in Kentucky, and served in important subordinate commands at Perryville and Stones River. His stout defense at the Battle of Chickamauga in 1863 saved the Union Army from being completely routed, earning him his most famous nickname, "the Rock of Chickamauga." He followed soon after with a dramatic breakthrough on Missionary Ridge in the Battle of Chattanooga. In the Franklin–Nashville Campaign of 1864, he achieved one of the most decisive victories of the war, destroying the army of Confederate General John Bell Hood, his former student at West Point, at the Battle of Nashville.

Thomas had a successful record in the Civil War, but he failed to achieve the historical acclaim of some of his contemporaries, such as Ulysses S. Grant and William T. Sherman. He developed a reputation as a slow, deliberate general. In an environment rife with jealousy and avarice for promotion and recognition, Thomas stood out as an oddball for occasionally refusing promotions to positions that he thought he was still not capable of; although on some occasions he regretted his refusals or found it injurious that he was passed over for promotion. After the war, he did not write memoirs to advance his legacy.

Early life and education
Thomas was born at Newsom's Depot, Southampton County, Virginia, five miles (8 km) from the North Carolina border. His father, John Thomas, of Welsh descent, and his mother, Elizabeth Rochelle Thomas, a descendant of French Huguenot immigrants, had six children. George had three sisters and two brothers. The family led an upper-class plantation lifestyle. By 1829, they owned 685 acre and 15 slaves. John died in a farm accident when George was 13, leaving the family in financial difficulties. George Thomas, his sisters, and his widowed mother were forced to flee from their home and hide in the nearby woods during Nat Turner's 1831 slave rebellion. Benson Bobrick has suggested that while some repressive acts were enforced following the crushing of the revolt, Thomas took the lesson another way, seeing that slavery was so vile an institution that it had forced the slaves to act in violence. This was a major event in the formation of his views on slavery; that the idea of the contented slave in the care of a benevolent overlord was a sentimental myth. Christopher Einolf, in contrast wrote "For George Thomas, the view that slavery was needed as a way of controlling blacks was supported by his personal experience of Nat Turner's Rebellion. ... Thomas left no written record of his opinion on slavery, but the fact that he owned slaves during much of his life indicates that he was not opposed to it." A traditional story is that Thomas taught as many as 15 of his family's slaves to read, violating a Virginia law that prohibited this, and despite the wishes of his father.

Thomas was appointed to the United States Military Academy at West Point, New York, in 1836 by Congressman John Y. Mason, who warned Thomas that no nominee from his district had ever graduated successfully. Entering at age 20, Thomas was known to his fellow cadets as "Old Tom," and he became instant friends with his roommates, William T. Sherman and Stewart Van Vliet. He made steady academic progress, was appointed a cadet officer in his second year, and graduated 12th in a class of 42 in 1840. He was appointed a second lieutenant in Company D, 3rd U.S. Artillery.

Antebellum military career
Thomas's first assignment with his artillery regiment began in late 1840 at the primitive outpost of Fort Lauderdale, Florida, in the Seminole Wars, where his troops performed infantry duty. He led them in successful patrols and was appointed a brevet first lieutenant on November 6, 1841. From 1842 until 1845, he served in posts at New Orleans, Fort Moultrie in Charleston Harbor, and Fort McHenry in Baltimore. With the Mexican–American War looming, his regiment was ordered to Texas in June 1845.

In Mexico, Thomas led a gun crew with distinction at the battles of Fort Brown, Resaca de la Palma, Monterrey, and Buena Vista, receiving two more brevet promotions. At Buena Vista, Gen. Zachary Taylor reported that "the services of the light artillery, always conspicuous, were more than unusually distinguished" during the battle. Brig. Gen. John E. Wool wrote about Thomas and another officer that "without our artillery we would not have maintained our position a single hour." Thomas's battery commander wrote that Thomas's "coolness and firmness contributed not a little to the success of the day. Lieutenant Thomas more than sustained the reputation he has long enjoyed in his regiment as an accurate and scientific artillerist." During the war, Thomas served closely with an artillery officer who would be a principal antagonist in the Civil War—Captain Braxton Bragg.

Thomas was reassigned to Florida in 1849–50. In 1851, he returned to West Point as a cavalry and artillery instructor, where he established a close professional and personal relationship with another Virginia officer, Lt. Col. Robert E. Lee, the Academy superintendent. His appointment there was based in part on a recommendation from Braxton Bragg. Concerned about the poor condition of the Academy's elderly horses, Thomas moderated the tendency of cadets to overwork them during cavalry drills and became known as "Slow Trot Thomas". Two of Thomas's students who received his recommendation for assignment to the cavalry, J.E.B. Stuart and Fitzhugh Lee, became prominent Confederate cavalry generals. Another Civil War connection was a cadet expelled for disciplinary reasons on Thomas's recommendation, John Schofield, who would excoriate Thomas in postbellum writings about his service as a corps commander under Thomas in the Franklin-Nashville Campaign. On November 17, 1852, Thomas married Frances Lucretia Kellogg, age 31, from Troy, New York. The couple remained at West Point until 1854. Thomas was promoted to captain on December 24, 1853.

In the spring of 1854, Thomas's artillery regiment was transferred to California and he led two companies to San Francisco via the Isthmus of Panama, and then on a grueling overland march to Fort Yuma. On May 12, 1855, Thomas was appointed a major of the 2nd U.S. Cavalry (later re-designated the 5th U.S. Cavalry) by Jefferson Davis, then Secretary of War. Once again, Braxton Bragg had provided a recommendation for Thomas's advancement. There was a suspicion as the Civil War drew closer that Davis had been assembling and training a combat unit of elite U.S. Army officers who harbored Southern sympathies, and Thomas's appointment to this regiment implied that his colleagues assumed he would support his native state of Virginia in a future conflict. Thomas resumed his close ties with the second-in-command of the regiment, Robert E. Lee, and the two officers traveled extensively together on detached service for court-martial duty. In October 1857, Major Thomas assumed acting command of the cavalry regiment, an assignment he would retain for 2½ years. On August 26, 1860, during a clash with a Comanche warrior, Thomas was wounded by an arrow passing through the flesh near his chin area and sticking into his chest at Clear Fork, Brazos River, Texas. Thomas pulled the arrow out and, after a surgeon dressed the wound, continued to lead the expedition. This was the only combat wound that Thomas suffered throughout his long military career.

In November 1860, Thomas requested a one-year leave of absence. His antebellum career had been distinguished and productive, and he was one of the rare officers with field experience in all three combat arms—infantry, cavalry, and artillery. On his way home to southern Virginia, he suffered a mishap in Lynchburg, Virginia, falling from a train platform and severely injuring his back. This accident led him to contemplate leaving military service and caused him pain for the rest of his life. Continuing to New York to visit with his wife's family, Thomas stopped in Washington, D.C., and conferred with general-in-chief Winfield Scott, advising Scott that Maj. Gen. David E. Twiggs, the commander of the Department of Texas, harbored secessionist sympathies and could not be trusted in his post. Twiggs did indeed surrender his entire command to Confederate authorities shortly after Texas seceded, and later served in the Confederate military.

Remaining with the Union
At the outbreak of the Civil War, 19 of the 36 officers in the 2nd U.S. Cavalry resigned, including three of Thomas's superiors—Albert Sidney Johnston, Robert E. Lee, and William J. Hardee. Many Southern-born officers were torn between loyalty to their states and loyalty to their country. Thomas struggled with the decision but opted to remain with the United States. His Northern-born wife probably helped influence his decision. In response, his family turned his picture against the wall, destroyed his letters, and never spoke to him again. During the economic hard times in the South after the war, Thomas sent some money to his sisters, who angrily refused to accept it, declaring they had no brother.

Nevertheless, Thomas stayed in the Union Army with some degree of suspicion surrounding him, despite his action concerning Twiggs. On January 18, 1861, a few months before Fort Sumter, he had applied for a job as the commandant of cadets at the Virginia Military Institute. Any real tendency to the secessionist cause, however, could be refuted when he turned down Virginia Governor John Letcher's offer to become chief of ordnance for the Virginia Provisional Army. On June 18, his former student and fellow Virginian, Confederate Col. J.E.B. Stuart, wrote to his wife, "Old George H. Thomas is in command of the cavalry of the enemy. I would like to hang, hang him as a traitor to his native state." Nevertheless, as the Civil War carried on, he won the affection of Union soldiers serving under him as a "soldier's soldier", who took to affectionately referring to Thomas as "Pap Thomas".

Kentucky
Thomas was promoted in rapid succession to be lieutenant colonel (on April 25, 1861, replacing Robert E. Lee) and colonel (May 3, replacing Albert Sidney Johnston) in the regular army, and brigadier general of volunteers (August 17). In the First Bull Run Campaign, he commanded a brigade under Maj. Gen. Robert Patterson in the Shenandoah Valley, but all of his subsequent assignments were in the Western Theater. Reporting to Maj. Gen. Robert Anderson in Kentucky, Thomas was assigned to training recruits and to command an independent force in the eastern half of the state. On January 18, 1862, he defeated Confederate Brig. Gens. George B. Crittenden and Felix Zollicoffer at Mill Springs, gaining the first important Union victory in the war, breaking Confederate strength in eastern Kentucky, and lifting Union morale.

Shiloh and Corinth
On December 2, 1861, Brig. Gen. Thomas was assigned to command the 1st Division of Maj. Gen. Don Carlos Buell's Army of the Ohio. He missed the Battle of Shiloh (April 7, 1862), arriving after the fighting had ceased. The victor at Shiloh, Maj. Gen. Ulysses S. Grant, came under severe criticism for the bloody battle due to the surprise and lack of preparations and his superior, Maj. Gen. Henry W. Halleck, reorganized his Department of the Mississippi to ease Grant out of direct field command. The three armies in the department were divided and recombined into three "wings". Thomas, promoted to major general effective April 25, 1862, was given command of the Right Wing, consisting of four divisions from Grant's former Army of the Tennessee and one from the Army of the Ohio. Thomas successfully led this force in the siege of Corinth. On June 10, Grant returned to command of the original Army of the Tennessee.

Perryville, Stones River, Chickamauga, and Chattanooga
Thomas resumed service under Don Carlos Buell. During Confederate General Braxton Bragg's invasion of Kentucky in the fall of 1862, the Union high command became nervous about Buell's cautious tendencies and offered command of the Army of the Ohio to Thomas, who refused, as Buell's plans were too far advanced. Thomas served as Buell's second-in-command at the Battle of Perryville, but his wing of the army did not hear the fighting engaged in by the other flank. Although tactically inconclusive, the battle halted Bragg's invasion of Kentucky as he voluntarily withdrew to Tennessee. Again frustrated with Buell's ineffective pursuit of Bragg, the government replaced him with Maj. Gen. William Rosecrans. Thomas wrote on October 30, 1862, a letter of protest to Secretary Stanton, because Rosecrans had been junior to him, but Stanton wrote back on November 15, telling him that this was not the case (Rosecrans had in fact been his junior, but his commission as major general had been backdated to make him senior to Thomas) and reminding him of his earlier refusal to accept command; Thomas demurred and withdrew his protest.

Fighting under Rosecrans, commanding the "Center" wing of the newly renamed Army of the Cumberland, Thomas gave an impressive performance at the Battle of Stones River, holding the center of the retreating Union line and once again preventing a victory by Bragg. He was in charge of the most important part of the maneuvering from Decherd to Chattanooga during the Tullahoma Campaign (June 22 – July 3, 1863) and the crossing of the Tennessee River. At the Battle of Chickamauga on September 19, 1863, now commanding the XIV Corps, he once again held a desperate position against Bragg's onslaught while the Union line on his right collapsed. Thomas rallied broken and scattered units together on Horseshoe Ridge to prevent a significant Union defeat from becoming a hopeless rout. Future president James Garfield, a field officer for the Army of the Cumberland, visited Thomas during the battle, carrying orders from Rosecrans to retreat; when Thomas said he would have to stay behind to ensure the Army's safety, Garfield told Rosecrans that Thomas was "standing like a rock." After the battle he became widely known by the nickname "The Rock of Chickamauga", representing his determination to hold a vital position against strong odds.

Thomas succeeded Rosecrans in command of the Army of the Cumberland shortly before the Battles for Chattanooga (November 23–25, 1863), a stunning Union victory that was highlighted by Thomas's troops taking Lookout Mountain on the right and then storming the Confederate line on Missionary Ridge, the next day. When the Army of the Cumberland advanced further than ordered, General Grant, on Orchard Knob asked Thomas, "Who ordered the advance?" Thomas replied, "I don't know. I did not."

Atlanta and Franklin/Nashville
During Maj. Gen. William Tecumseh Sherman's advance towards Georgia with three armies in the spring of 1864, the Army of the Cumberland numbered over 60,000 men, and Thomas's staff did the logistics and engineering for Sherman's entire army group, including developing a novel series of Cumberland pontoons. At the chaotic Battle of Peachtree Creek (July 20, 1864), Thomas's troops defended against an attack by Lt. Gen. John B. Hood's army in its first attempt to break the siege of Atlanta.

When Hood broke away from Atlanta in the autumn of 1864, he menaced Sherman's long line of communications, and endeavored to force Sherman to follow him, Sherman abandoned his communications and embarked on an offensive through Georgia. Thomas was ordered to defend Tennessee from confederate offensive operations, culminating in the Franklin-Nashville Campaign. As Hood's army of Tennessee entered the state, Thomas hurriedly attempted to concentrate his forces. He had a numerical advantage, but he still wished for his entire force to be concentrated. He ordered the Army of the Ohio under command of his subordinate general Schofield to delay the confederates as much as possible. Schofield's small, single-corps army attempted to harangue the confederate crossing of the Tennessee, but Hood's army executed a skillful manoeuvre and emplaced themselves behind Schofield's corps, on a hill named Spring Hill. In the ensuing fighting, Schofield's army came near destruction, but due to a series of miscommunications Hood's army was frozen for a day as the Army of the Ohio beat a hurried retreat in front of it, and defeated confederate cavalry led by Gen. Forrest in a rearguard action. This army made a forced march to Franklin where it entrenched itself strongly.

At the Battle of Franklin on November 30, 1864, the smallest part of Thomas's force, under command of Maj. Gen. John M. Schofield, resisted an attack by Hood's army and held him in check for a day as pontoons were built over the Harpeth river (bridges had been destroyed), Schofield's army retreated the same night and made a desperate forced march for Nashville, where all union forces in Tennessee were being concentrated. Thomas had to organize his forces, which had been drawn from all parts of the West and which included many raw troops and even quartermaster employees. Hood's army subsequently arrived, found the vastly larger union army heavily entrenched, and began entrenching in preparation for a siege of Nashville. Grant (General in Chief of all union armies) ordered Thomas to attack, and Thomas replied that he needed a few days to have everything in order for an attack. Grant had grown greatly exasperated and nervous at the prospect of a confederate invasion through Tennessee and Kentucky, which could turn the tide of the war, him and Halleck both bombarded Thomas daily with frequent communiques ordering him to attack the confederate army. As Thomas' preparations ended, a snow storm immobilized both armies entirely for four days, as snow melted Thomas sent a message to Grant and the war department that as snow melted, he would attack the next day. Grant had grown completely impatient with Thomas during this period and drafted an order relieving him from command. Halleck had wired Thomas that Grant was deeply unhappy with Thomas' performance, and Thomas replied that if he wished to relieve him from command he would 'submit without a murmur'. General Grant grew impatient at the continued delay, and finally sent Maj. Gen. John A. Logan with an order to replace Thomas as commander, and soon afterwards Grant started a journey west from City Point, Virginia to take command in person. As the weather finally warmed and rain washed away the snow on December 14,Thomas drafted the orders and distributed them to his corps commanders on the day to attack on the confederates on the next day, and the Battle of Nashville effectively destroyed Hood's army in two days of fighting. Thomas sent his wife, Frances Lucretia Kellogg Thomas, the following telegram, the only communication surviving of the Thomases' correspondence: "We have whipped the enemy, taken many prisoners and considerable artillery."

As news of the victory streamed north, Logan returned to Grant and returned his orders to relieve Thomas. Thomas was appointed a major general in the regular army, with date of rank of his Nashville victory, and received the Thanks of Congress:

"... to Major-General George H. Thomas and the officers and soldiers under his command for their skill and dauntless courage, by which the rebel army under General Hood was signally defeated and driven from the state of Tennessee."

Thomas may have resented his delayed promotion to major general (which made him junior by date of rank to Sheridan); upon receiving the telegram announcing it, he remarked to Surgeon George Cooper: "I suppose it is better late than never, but it is too late to be appreciated. I earned this at Chickamauga.".

Thomas also received another nickname from his victory: "The Sledge of Nashville".

Later life and death
After the end of the Civil War, Thomas commanded the Department of the Cumberland in Kentucky and Tennessee, and at times also West Virginia and parts of Georgia, Mississippi and Alabama, through 1869. During the Reconstruction period, Thomas acted to protect freedmen from white abuses. He set up military commissions to enforce labor contracts since the local courts had either ceased to operate or were biased against blacks. Thomas also used troops to protect places threatened by violence from the Ku Klux Klan. In a November 1868 report, Thomas noted efforts made by former Confederates to paint the Confederacy in a positive light, stating:

President Andrew Johnson offered Thomas the rank of lieutenant general—with the intent to eventually replace Grant, a Republican and future president, with Thomas as general in chief—but the ever-loyal Thomas asked the Senate to withdraw his name for that nomination because he did not want to be party to politics. In 1869 he requested assignment to command the Military Division of the Pacific with headquarters at the Presidio of San Francisco. He died there of a stroke on March 28, 1870, while writing an answer to an article criticizing his military career by his wartime rival John Schofield. Sherman, by then general-in-chief, personally conveyed the news to President Grant at the White House. None of Thomas's blood relatives attended his funeral as they had never forgiven him for his loyalty to the Union. He was buried in Oakwood Cemetery, in Troy, New York. His gravestone was sculpted by Robert E. Launitz and comprises a white marble sarcophagus topped by a bald eagle.

Legacy
The veterans' organization for the Army of the Cumberland, throughout its existence, fought to see that he was honored for all he had done. In 1879, they commissioned the equestrian statue of Thomas at Thomas Circle, Washington, D.C.

Thomas was in chief command of only two battles in the Civil War, the Battle of Mill Springs at the beginning and the Battle of Nashville near the end. Both were decisive victories. However, his contributions at the battles of Stones River, Chickamauga, Chattanooga, and Peachtree Creek were decisive. His main legacies lay in his development of modern battlefield doctrine and in his mastery of logistics.

Thomas has generally been held in high esteem by Civil War historians; Bruce Catton and Carl Sandburg wrote glowingly of him, and many consider Thomas one of the top three Union generals of the war, after Grant and William Tecumseh Sherman. But Thomas never entered the popular consciousness like those men. The general destroyed his private papers, saying he did not want "his life hawked in print for the eyes of the curious." Beginning in the 1870s, many Civil War generals published memoirs, justifying their decisions or re-fighting old battles, but Thomas, who died in 1870, did not publish his own memoirs. In addition, most of his campaigns were in the Western theater of the war, which received less attention both in the press of the day and in contemporary historical accounts.

Grant and Thomas also had a cool relationship, for reasons that are not entirely clear, but are well-attested by contemporaries. It apparently started when Halleck placed Thomas in command of most of Grant's divisions after the Battle of Shiloh. When a rain-soaked Grant arrived at Thomas's headquarters before the Chattanooga Campaign, Thomas, caught up in other activity, did not provide dry clothes for several minutes until Grant's staffer intervened. Thomas's perceived slowness at Nashville—although necessitated by the weather—drove Grant into a fit of impatience, and Grant nearly replaced Thomas. In his Personal Memoirs, Grant minimized Thomas's contributions, particularly during the Franklin-Nashville Campaign, saying his movements were "always so deliberate and so slow, though effective in defence."

Grant did, however, acknowledge that Thomas's eventual success at Nashville obviated all criticism. Sherman, who had been close to Thomas throughout the war, also repeated the accusation after the war that Thomas was "slow", and this damning with faint praise tended to affect perceptions of the Rock of Chickamauga up to the present day. Both Sherman and Grant attended Thomas's funeral, and were reported by third parties to have been visibly moved by his passing. Thomas's legendary bay horse, Billy, bore his friend Sherman's name.

Thomas was always on good terms with his commanding officer in the Army of the Cumberland, William Rosecrans. Even after Rosecrans was relieved of command by Grant and replaced by Thomas, he had nothing but praise for him. Upon hearing of Thomas' death, Rosecrans sent a letter to the National Tribune, stating Thomas' passing was a "National Calamity... Few knew him better than I did, none valued him more."

In 1887, Sherman published an article praising Grant and Thomas, and contrasting them to Robert E. Lee. After noting that Thomas, unlike his fellow Virginian Lee, stood by the Union, Sherman wrote:"During the whole war his services were transcendent, winning the first substantial victory at Mill Springs in Kentucky, January 20th, 1862, participating in all the campaigns of the West in 1862-3-4, and finally, December 16th, 1864 annihilating the army of Hood, which in mid winter had advanced to Nashville to besiege him." Sherman concluded that Grant and Thomas were "heroes" deserving "monuments like those of Nelson and Wellington in London, well worthy to stand side by side with the one which now graces our capitol [sic] city of 'George Washington.'"

In memoriam
A fort south of Newport, Kentucky was named in his honor, and the city of Fort Thomas now stands there and carries his name as well. A memorial honoring Thomas, Major General George Henry Thomas, can be found in the eponymous Thomas Circle in Washington, D.C.

A distinctive engraved portrait of Thomas appeared on U.S. paper money in 1890 and 1891. The bills are called "treasury notes" or "coin notes" and are widely collected today because of their fine, detailed engraving. The $5 Thomas "fancyback" note of 1890, with an estimated 450–600 in existence relative to the 7.2 million printed, ranks as number 90 in the "100 Greatest American Currency Notes" compiled by Bowers and Sundman (2006).

Thomas County, Kansas, established in 1888, is named in his honor. The townships of Thomas County are named after fallen soldiers in the Battle of Chickamauga. Thomas County, Nebraska, is also named after him.

In 1999 a statue of Thomas by sculptor Rudy Ayoroa was unveiled in Lebanon, Kentucky.

A bust of Thomas is located in Grant's Tomb in Manhattan, New York.

Thomas's torn loyalties during the Civil War are briefly discussed in Chapter XIX of MacKinlay Kantor's Pulitzer Prize-winning novel "Andersonville" (1955).

A three-quarter length portrait of him, executed by U.S. general Samuel Woodson Price (1828–1918) in 1869 and gifted by the heirs of General Price, hangs in the stairwell to Special Collections at Transylvania University, Lexington, Kentucky.

A Sons of Union Veterans Camp, Camp No. 19 in Lancaster, Pennsylvania, is named in his honor.

He was honored as the namesake of the George Henry Thomas Post Number 5 of the Grand Army of the Republic. A 10-mile road in Southampton County, Virginia, his birthplace, is named General Thomas Highway.

General references

 * Bobrick, Benson. Master of War: The Life of General George H. Thomas. New York: Simon & Schuster, 2009. ISBN 978-0-7432-9025-8.
 * Broadwater, Robert. General George H. Thomas. Jefferson: McFarland & Company, 2009. ISBN 978-0-7864-3856-3.
 * Bowers, Q.D., and D.M. Sundman, 100 Greatest American Currency Notes, Atlanta: Whitman Publishing, 2006.
 * Cleaves, Freeman. Rock of Chickamauga: The Life of General George H. Thomas. Norman: University of Oklahoma Press, 1948. ISBN 0-8061-1978-0.
 * Coppée, Henry. General Thomas, The Great Commanders Series. New York: D. Appleton and Co., 1893..
 * Eicher, John H., and David J. Eicher. Civil War High Commands. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press, 2001. ISBN 0-8047-3641-3.
 * Einolf, Christopher J. George Thomas: Virginian for the Union. Norman: University of Oklahoma Press, 2007. ISBN 978-0-8061-3867-1.
 * Furgurson, Ernest B. "Catching up with Old Slow Trot". Smithsonian, March 2007.
 * Grant, Ulysses S. Personal Memoirs of U. S. Grant. 2 vols. Charles L. Webster & Company, 1885–86. ISBN 0-914427-67-9.
 * O'Connor, Richard. Thomas, Rock of Chickamauga. New York: Prentice-Hall, 1948..
 * Van Horne, Thomas Budd. The Life of Major-General George H. Thomas. New York: Charles Scribner's Sons, 1882..
 * Warner, Ezra J. Generals in Blue: Lives of the Union Commanders. Baton Rouge: Louisiana State University Press, 1964. ISBN 0-8071-0822-7.
 * Warner, Ezra J. Generals in Blue: Lives of the Union Commanders. Baton Rouge: Louisiana State University Press, 1964. ISBN 0-8071-0822-7.

title: George Henry Thomas


text:
Karl Hase

Karl August von Hase (25 August 1800 – 3 January 1890) was a German Protestant theologian and church historian.

Background
He was born at Steinbach (near Penig) in Saxony. He studied at Leipzig and Erlangen, and in 1829 was called to Jena as professor of theology. He retired in 1883 and was made a baron. He was the great-grandfather of Dietrich Bonhoeffer.

Hase's aim was to reconcile modern culture with historical Christianity in a scientific way. But though a liberal theologian, he was no dry rationalist. Indeed, he vigorously attacked rationalism, as distinguished from the rational principle, charging it with being unscientific inasmuch as it ignored the historical significance of Christianity, shut its eyes to individuality and failed to give religious feeling its due.

Works
His views are presented scientifically in his Evangelisch-protestantische Dogmatik (1826; 6th edition, 1870), the value of which "lies partly in the full and judiciously chosen historical materials prefixed to each dogma, and partly in the skill, caution and tact with which the permanent religious significance of various dogmas is discussed" (Otto Pfleiderer). More popular in style is his Gnosis: Oder evangelische Glaubenslehre, für die gebildeten in der Gemeinde, (volume 1, 1827; volume 2, 1828; volume 3, 1829; second edition in two volumes, 1869 & 1870). But his reputation rests chiefly on his treatment of church history in his Kirchengeschichte, Lehrbuch zunächst für akademische Vorlesungen (1834, 12th edition, 1900; English translation, 1870).

His biographical studies, Franz von Assisi (1856; second edition, 1892), Caterina von Siena (1864; second edition, 1892), Neue Propheten (Die Jungfrau von Orleans, Savonarola, Thomas Münzer) are judicious and sympathetic. Other works are:
 * Hutterus Redivivus, or, doctrine of the Evangelical Lutheran Church (1827; 12th edition, 1883), a work in which he sought to present the teaching of the Protestant church in such a way as Leonhard Hutter would have reconstructed it, had he still been alive.
 * Das Leben Jesu (1829; 5th edition, 1865; English translation, 1860); in an enlarged form, Geschichte Jesu (second edition, 1891).
 * Handbuch der protestantischen Polemik gegen die Römisch-katholische Kirche (1862; 7th edition, 1900; English translation, volume 1, volume 2, 1906).

For his life, see his Ideale und Irrtümer (1872; 5th edition, 1894) and Annalen meines Lebens (1891); and for comparison — Otto Pfleiderer, "The development of theology in Germany since Kant" (1890) and Frédéric Lichtenberger, "History of German theology in the nineteenth century" (1889).

license: Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/

title: Karl Hase


text:
Talk:Urethral sphincter

Untitled
Isn't it the case that most males can't stop peeing once they start? Any info on reasons / proportions etc? -- Tarquin 15:21 Feb 2, 2003 (UTC) _____

Not at all true. All men can do it at a young age. Muscle atrophy may set in if the muscles are not used frequently. Exersice the muscles to prevent urinary incontinece. The process is not disimmilar to kegel exercises for women. http://www.kegel-exercises.com. Of course this is common knowledge in the Sodom and Gomorrah known as Toronto,Canada. And those people are not preventing urinary incontinence: they are training for recreation. ;-}  This is an encyclopedia for the whole family, I hope my meaning is not too obscure. User:Two16

---

Data point #1: I am male, and have no problem starting and stopping urination at will. -- Anon.

 * neither do I. but a late night straw poll in my student days showed I was a minority (sorry if that's too much information). See also popular culture, such as the scene in Dumb and Dumber -- Tarquin 18:38 Feb 2, 2003 (UTC)

It seems clear that some can, some can't. Seems reasonable to think that Kegel's may help. But what does "in real life" mean?

Content
Considerable confusion exists regarding the presence of (or rather absence)internal urethral sphincter in females. Some referrence would be helpful. Najbhusan (talk) 14:41, 18 November 2009 (UTC)

This article is really very poor, both in structure and accuracy. Is there any template for improving it?

I have been looking over several related articles on Wikipedia. There is the article on the urethral sphincter, one on the internal urethral sphincter and two on the external urethral sphincter (one for the male and one for the female). There is also an article on micturition and another on ejaculation. The one on micturition seems particularly well written, but has a distinct focus. There is also an article on the deep perineal pouch, which contains the external urethral sphincter. Thinking about what would be useful in the context of an encyclopedia-type article, I think the best approach would be to have the "Urethral sphincter" page be a disambiguation page between the external and internal urethral sphincters. The external urethral sphincter link would then go to the page for the deep perineal pouch, which would need to be improved. The link for the internal urethral sphincter could go to the existing one on the urinary bladder, which may need to be augmented to include the relevant material.

I'm a newbie at this editing stuff, and I have no idea how the organizational changes could be handled. I agree this article is poor and contains misinformation, but the term "urethral sphincter" without specifying whether the external or internal sphincter is intended is not in current usage. rbatra55, 03:49, 28 September 2011 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rbatra55 (talk • contribs)

Significant content error: Article states that male bladder does not share space with reproductive organs. In reality, the prostate is directly beneath the bladder. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.209.240.208 (talk) 05:28, 15 November 2011 (UTC)

Strength of the muscle in men vs. women
I have heard that men have a sufficiently strong urethral sphincter that they can die from a burst bladder if they try to keep it in too long, whereas women will instead leak if they hold it too long. I have no idea if this is true, but if anyone knows a source that could verify/deny this, it would be worth putting into the article properly. -- Whitepaw (talk) 19:49, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

I made some changes as stated in my comment below. Didn't have much time, but it's a start :) Dr.Kane (talk) 01:28, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

Revamped the article
I just modified the article making many revisions. I corrected some mistakes, added more information, clarifications, and removal of the wrong information that was added regarding male/female bladder capacity from someone saying:

"Human males have much stronger sphincter muscles than females, meaning that they can retain a large amount of urine for twice as long, as much as 800mL, i.e. "hold it"." ..... The style is too informal to sound like an encyclopedia, not counting the misinformation and unneutral statement.

I also removed the disputed neutrality as I believe it is no longer necessary in my revision. Let me know if someone disagrees. Dr.Kane (talk) 01:28, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

... I'd like to note that sex differences in bladder capacity is a discussion that should not be under urethral sphincters.

The comparison of "strength" of urethral sphincters in the different sexes personally seems pointless to me considering variation on the individual level. However, if you do want to make a claim, even one in which "there is no difference in strength", remember that claims need CITATIONS. Considering that the female external urethral sphincter blends into the sphincter urethovaginalis, trying to make comparisons in strength seem like a hapless task. My personal opinion is, considering the anatomy of the external urethral sphincter, the speculation/assumption that the male external urethral sphincter would generally be stronger than the female external urethral sphincter has more credence to it than the speculation/assumption that they are equal. But again, "strength" and how it's measured isn't defined, and the individual variations is too great that I feel like any such claims are pointless and probably inflammatory. For example, a nulliparous female likely have a stronger external urethral sphincter than a male suffering from atrophied muscles from pudendal nerve damage. A healthy male will likely have a stronger urethral sphincter than a multiparous female. Etc etc etc.

Whoever wrote this initial discussion may be trying to explain the more frequent observed phenomena of urinary incontinence in females as opposed to males. This discussion does not seem appropriate here; this difference is more likely attributable to the shorter urethra in females, as well as the weakening of muscles and nerves in the urogenital region after parturition. Evilbob0 (talk) 02:15, 6 October 2015 (UTC)

Organization
The Gender Differences section lacks any sort of organization, has confusing adverbs, and at times seems contradictory. 75.118.170.35 (talk) 20:44, 4 July 2009 (UTC)

title: Talk:Urethral sphincter


text:
Soyuz (rocket family)

Soyuz (Союз, meaning "union", GRAU index 11A511) is a family of expendable Russian and Soviet carrier rockets developed by OKB-1 and manufactured by Progress Rocket Space Centre in Samara, Russia. The Soyuz is the rocket with the most launches in the history of spaceflight.

For nearly a decade, between the final flight of the Space Shuttle program in 2011 and the 2020 first crewed mission of SpaceX's Falcon 9 rocket, Soyuz rockets were the only launch vehicles able and approved for transporting astronauts to the International Space Station.

The Soyuz vehicles are used as the launcher for the crewed Soyuz spacecraft as part of the Soyuz programme, as well as to launch uncrewed Progress supply spacecraft to the International Space Station and for commercial launches marketed and operated by Starsem and Arianespace. All Soyuz rockets use RP-1 and liquid oxygen (LOX) propellant, with the exception of the Soyuz-U2, which used Syntin, a variant of RP-1, with LOX. The Soyuz family is a subset of the R-7 family.

Development
The Soyuz launcher was introduced in 1966, deriving from the Vostok launcher, which in turn was based on the 8K74 or R-7a intercontinental ballistic missile. It was initially a three-stage rocket with a Block I upper stage. The first four test launches were all failures, but eventually it worked. Later a Molniya variant was produced by adding a fourth stage, allowing it to reach the highly elliptical Molniya orbit. A later variant was the Soyuz-U. While the exact model and variant designations were kept secret from the west, the Soyuz launcher was referred to by either the United States Department of Defense designation of SL-4, or the Sheldon designation of A-2 (developed by Charles S. Sheldon, an analyst with the Library of Congress). Both systems for naming Soviet rockets stopped being used as more accurate information became available.

The production of Soyuz launchers reached a peak of 60 per year in the early 1980s. It has become the world's most used space launcher, flying over 1700 times, far more than any other rocket. Despite its age and perhaps thanks to its simplicity, this rocket family has been notable for its low cost and high reliability.

Soyuz / Fregat

In the early 1990s plans were made for a redesigned Soyuz with a Fregat upper stage. The Fregat engine was developed by NPO Lavochkin from the propulsion module of its Phobos interplanetary probes. Although endorsed by the Roscosmos and the Russian Ministry of Defence in 1993 and designated "Rus" as a Russification and modernisation of Soyuz, and later renamed Soyuz-2, a funding shortage prevented implementation of the plan. The creation of Starsem in July 1996 provided new funding for the creation of a less ambitious variant, the Soyuz-Fregat or Soyuz-U/Fregat. This consisted of a slightly modified Soyuz-U combined with the Fregat upper stage, with a capacity of up to 1350 kg to geostationary transfer orbit. In April 1997, Starsem obtained a contract from the European Space Agency (ESA) to launch two pairs of Cluster II plasma science satellites using the Soyuz-Fregat. Before the introduction of this new model, Starsem launched 24 satellites of the Globalstar constellation in 6 launches with a restartable Ikar upper stage, between 22 September 1999 and 22 November 1999. After successful test flights of Soyuz-Fregat on 9 February 2000 and 20 March 2000, the Cluster II satellites were launched on 16 July 2000 and 9 August 2000. Another Soyuz-Fregat launched the ESA's Mars Express probe from Baikonur in June 2003. Now the Soyuz-Fregat launcher is used by Starsem for commercial payloads.

ISS crew transport
Between 1 February 2003 and 26 July 2005 with the grounding of the United States Space Shuttle fleet, Soyuz was the only means of transportation to and from the International Space Station. This included the transfer of supplies, via Progress spacecraft, and crew changeovers. After the retirement of the Space Shuttle fleet in 2011, the United States space program was without any means to take astronauts into orbit, and NASA was dependent on the Soyuz to send crew into space until 2020. NASA resumed crewed flights from the United States in 2020 through the Commercial Crew Development program.

Recent incidents
A long string of successful Soyuz launches was broken on 15 October 2002 when the uncrewed Soyuz-U launch of the Photon-M satellite from Plesetsk fell back near the launch pad and exploded 29 seconds after lift-off. One person from the ground crew was killed and eight were injured.

Another failure occurred on 21 June 2005, during a Molniya military communications satellite launch from the Plesetsk launch site, which used a four-stage version of the rocket called Molniya-M. The flight ended six minutes after the launch because of a failure of the third stage engine or an unfulfilled order to separate the second and third stages. The rocket's second and third stages, which are identical to the Soyuz, and its payload (a Molniya-3K satellite) crashed in the Uvatsky region of Tyumen (Siberia).

On 24 August 2011, an uncrewed Soyuz-U carrying cargo to the International Space Station crashed, failing to reach orbit. On December 23, 2011, a Soyuz-2.1b launching a Meridian 5 military communications satellite failed in the 7th minute of launch because of an anomaly in the third stage.

On 11 October 2018, the Soyuz MS-10 mission to the International Space Station failed to reach orbit after an issue with the main booster. The launch escape system was used to pull the Soyuz spacecraft away from the malfunctioning rocket. The two crew, Aleksey Ovchinin and Nick Hague, followed a ballistic trajectory and landed safely over 400 km downrange from the Baikonur Cosmodrome.

Soyuz-2 and Guiana spaceport

The venerable Soyuz launcher was gradually replaced by a new version, named Soyuz-2 or Soyuz/ST, which has a new digital guidance system and a highly modified third stage with a new engine. The first development version of Soyuz-2 called Soyuz-2-1a, which is equipped with the digital guidance system, but is still propelled by an old third stage engine, started on 4 November 2004 from Plesetsk on a suborbital test flight, followed by an orbital flight on 23 October 2006 from Baikonur. The fully modified launcher (version Soyuz-2-1b) flew first on 27 December 2006 with the CoRoT satellite from the Baikonur Cosmodrome.

On 19 January 2005, the European Space Agency (ESA) and the Roscosmos agreed to launch Soyuz/ST rockets from the Guiana Space Centre. The equatorial launch site allows the Soyuz to deliver 2.7 to 4.9 tonnes into Sun-synchronous orbit, depending on the third-stage engine used. Construction of a new pad started in 2005 and was completed in April 2011. The pad used vertical loading common at French Guiana, unlike the horizontal loading used at the Baikonur Cosmodrome. A simulated launch was conducted in early May 2011. The first operational launch happened on 21 October 2011, bearing the first two satellites in Galileo global positioning system.

The Soyuz-U and Soyuz-FG rockets were gradually replaced by Soyuz-2 from 2014 until 2019. Soyuz-U was retired in 2017, while Soyuz-FG carried astronaut crews to the ISS until September 2019 (final flight, Soyuz MS-15, on 25 September 2019).

Variants

 * Soyuz 11A511 (1966–1975)
 * Soyuz-L 11A511L (1970–1971)
 * Soyuz-M 11A511M (1971–1976)
 * Soyuz-U 11A511U (1973–2017)
 * Soyuz-U2 11A511U2 or 11A511K (1982–1995)
 * Soyuz-FG 11A511U-FG (2001–2019)
 * Soyuz-2 14A14 (2006–present)

The Molniya-M (1964–2010) was also derived from the Soyuz family.

Assembly

The rocket is assembled horizontally in the Assembly and Testing Building. The assembled rocket is transported to the launch site in its horizontal state and then raised. This is different from the vertical assembly of, for example, the Saturn V, and is one of the features that makes Soyuz cheaper to prepare for launch. Assembling a horizontally positioned rocket is relatively simple as all modules are easily accessible. Assembling the rocket in vertical position would require a windproof high-rise hangar, which was not considered financially feasible at the time the rocket was designed, due to the failing economy of the Soviet Union.

Prelaunch

The entire rocket is suspended in the launch system by the load-bearing mechanisms on the strap-on boosters where they are attached to the central core. The latter rests on the nose sections of the strap-on boosters. This scheme resembles flight conditions when the strap-on boosters push the central core forward. The concept of suspending the rocket was one of the novelties introduced with the R-7/Soyuz.

Since the launch pad has been eliminated, the bottom portion of the rocket is lowered. The launch system trusses bear the wind loads. Resistance to high wind is an important feature of the launch system, as the Kazakhstan steppes, where the Baikonur launch site is located, are known for windstorms.

Launch

The engines are ignited by electrically initiated pyrotechnic flares, mounted on birch poles, which are ignited at approximately T-20 seconds, a few seconds before fuel components are introduced into the combustion chamber. This sequence rarely fails due to its simplicity. During launch, the support booms track the movement of the rocket. After the support boom heads emerge from the special support recess in the nose sections of the strapons, the support booms and trusses disconnect from the rocket airframe, swiveling on the support axes and freeing the way for the rocket to lift off. During launch, the rocket and the launch facility form a single dynamic system.

When the strap-on booster engines stop, the boosters fall away, providing nonimpact separation. If the skies are clear, ground observers can see a Korolev cross formed by the falling boosters.

Fairings used for uncrewed missions
The Soyuz launch vehicle is used for various Russian uncrewed missions and is also marketed by Starsem for commercial satellite launches. Presently the following fairing types are used:

Progress is the cargo spacecraft for uncrewed missions to the ISS and previously to Mir. The spacecraft uses a dedicated platform and fairing and can be launched with either Soyuz-U, Soyuz-FG or Soyuz-2.

A-type fairing is used for commercial launches.

S-type fairing is used for commercial launches by Starsem. The fairing has external diameter of 3.7 m and a length of 7.7 m. The Fregat upper stage is encapsulated in the fairing with the payload and a payload adapter/dispenser. S-type fairing along with Fregat upper stage were used to launch the following spacecraft: Galaxy 14, GIOVE A, Mars Express, AMOS-2, Venus Express, Cluster.

SL-type fairing is used for commercial launches by Starsem. The fairing has external diameter of 3.7 m and a length of 8.45 m. The Fregat upper stage is encapsulated in the fairing with the payload and a payload adapter/dispenser. SL-type fairing along with Fregat upper stage were used to launch the following spacecraft: CoRoT.

ST-type fairing is used for commercial launches by Starsem. Its external diameter is 4.1 m and its length is 11.4 m. It can be used with the Soyuz-2 only, because older analog control system cannot cope with aerodynamic instability introduced by a fairing this large. This carbon-plastic fairing is based on the proven configuration used for Arianespace's Ariane 4 vehicles, with its length increased by approximately one additional meter. The fairing has been developed and is being manufactured by TsSKB-Progress in accordance with the requirements of a customer (Starsem). This is the only fairing type offered by Starsem/Arianespace for launches from Kourou. Progress M-UM is the only Progress Spacecraft that was launched while being enclosed in a ST fairing.

First stage

The first stage of Soyuz rockets consists of four identical conical liquid booster rockets, strapped to the second stage core. Each booster has a single rocket motor with four combustion chambers, two vernier combustion chambers, and one set of turbopumps.

Statistics (each of 4 boosters)
 * Gross mass: 44.5 tonne (98,100 lb)
 * Propellant: 39.2 tonne (86,400 lb)
 * Dry mass: 3784 kg
 * Diameter: 2.68 m
 * Length: 19.6 m
 * Burn time: 118 seconds
 * Engines:
 * Soyuz and Soyuz-U models
 * RD-107
 * Thrust 813 kN (183 klbf) at liftoff
 * Thrust 991 kN (223 klbf) in vacuum
 * Specific impulse 245 isp at liftoff
 * Specific impulse 310 isp in vacuum
 * Chamber pressure 5.85 MPa (848 psi)
 * Soyuz-ST models
 * RD-107A (14D22)
 * Thrust 838 kN (188 klbf) at liftoff
 * Thrust 1021 kN (230 klbf) in vacuum
 * Specific impulse 245 isp at liftoff (estimed)
 * Specific impulse 310 isp in vacuum (estimed)
 * Chamber pressure 5.85 MPa (848 psi)
 * Soyuz-FG
 * RD-107A (14D22)
 * Thrust 775 kN (174 klbf) at liftoff
 * Specific impulse 320.2 isp in vacuum

Second stage

The second stage of the Soyuz booster is a single, generally cylindrical stage with one motor at the base and is activated with the first stage. Like each of the first-stage rockets, it also has four combustion chambers and one set of turbopumps, but four (instead of two) vernier combustion chambers. The second stage tapers toward the bottom to allow the four first-stage rockets to fit more closely together.

 * Gross mass: 105.4 tonne (232,400 lb)
 * Propellant: 95.4 tonne (210,000 lb)
 * Propellant (Soyuz-U2 with Syntin propellant): 96.4 tonne (212,000 lb)
 * Dry mass: 6875 kg
 * Length: 28 m
 * Diameter: 2.95 m
 * Burn time: 290 seconds
 * Engines:
 * Soyuz and Soyuz-U models
 * RD-108
 * Thrust 779 kN (175 klbf) at liftoff
 * Thrust 997 kN (224 klbf) in vacuum
 * Specific impulse 264 isp at liftoff
 * Specific impulse 311 isp in vacuum
 * Chamber pressure 5.1 MPa (740 psi)
 * Soyuz-U2 model with Syntin fuel
 * RD-108
 * Thrust 811 kN (182 klbf) at liftoff
 * Thrust 1009 kN (227 klbf) in vacuum
 * Specific impulse 264 isp at liftoff
 * Specific impulse 311 isp in vacuum
 * Chamber pressure 5.1 MPa (740 psi)
 * Soyuz-ST models
 * RD-118 (11D512)
 * Thrust 792 kN (178 klbf) at liftoff
 * Thrust 990 kN (222 klbf) in vacuum
 * Specific impulse 264 isp at liftoff (est)
 * Specific impulse 311 isp in vacuum (est)
 * Chamber pressure 5.85 MPa (848 psi)

Third stage

There are two variant upper stages in use, the Block I and Improved Block-I (used in Soyuz-2-1b).
 * Gross mass: 25.2 tonne (55,600 lb)
 * Propellant: 21.4-22.9 tonne (47,200 – 50,500 lb)
 * Dry mass: 2355 kg
 * Length:6.7 m
 * Diameter: 2.66 m
 * Burn time: 240 seconds
 * Engine:
 * Block I
 * RD-0110
 * Thrust 298 kN (67.0 klbf)
 * Specific impulse 330 isp
 * Chamber pressure 6.8 MPa (986 psi)
 * Improved Block I
 * RD-0124 (11D451)
 * Thrust 294 kN (66 klbf)
 * Specific impulse 359 isp
 * Chamber pressure 16.2 MPa (2350 psi)

title: Soyuz (rocket family)


text:
Soyuz (spacecraft)

Soyuz (Союз) is a series of spacecraft which has been in service since the 1960s, having made more than 140 flights. It was designed for the Soviet space program by the Korolev Design Bureau (now Energia). The Soyuz succeeded the Voskhod spacecraft and was originally built as part of the Soviet crewed lunar programs. It is launched on a Soyuz rocket from the Baikonur Cosmodrome in Kazakhstan. Between the 2011 retirement of the Space Shuttle and the 2020 demo flight of SpaceX Crew Dragon, the Soyuz served as the only means to ferry crew to or from the International Space Station, for which it remains heavily used. Although China did launch crewed Shenzhou flights during this time, none of them docked with the ISS.

History
The first Soyuz flight was uncrewed and started on 28 November 1966. The first crewed Soyuz mission, Soyuz 1, launched on 23 April 1967 but ended with a crash due to a parachute failure, killing cosmonaut Vladimir Komarov. The following flight was uncrewed. Soyuz 3, launched on 26 October 1968, became the program's first successful crewed mission. The only other flight to suffer a fatal accident, Soyuz 11, killed its crew of three when the cabin depressurized just before reentry. These are the only humans to date who are known to have died above the Kármán line. Despite these early incidents, Soyuz is widely considered the world's safest and for a long time most cost-effective human spaceflight vehicle, established by its unparalleled length of operational history. Soyuz spacecraft were used to carry cosmonauts to and from Salyut and later Mir Soviet space stations, and are now used for transport to and from the International Space Station (ISS). At least one Soyuz spacecraft is docked to ISS at all times for use as an escape craft in the event of an emergency. The spacecraft is intended to be replaced by the six-person Orel spacecraft.

Design

A Soyuz spacecraft consists of three parts (from front to back):
 * A spheroid orbital module, which provides accommodation for the crew during their mission.
 * A small aerodynamic reentry module, which returns the crew to Earth.
 * A cylindrical service module with solar panels attached, which contains the instruments and engines.

The orbital and service modules are single-use. The orbital module detaches and is destroyed upon reentry in the atmosphere. Though this might seem wasteful, it reduces the amount of heat shielding required for reentry, saving mass compared to designs containing all of the living space and life support in a single capsule. This allows smaller rockets to launch the spacecraft or can be used to increase the habitable space available to the crew (6.2 m3 in Apollo CM vs 7.5 m3 in Soyuz) in the mass budget. The orbital and reentry portions are habitable living space, with the service module containing the fuel, main engines and instrumentation. The Soyuz is not reusable; it is expendable. A new Soyuz spacecraft must be made for every mission.

Soyuz can carry up to three crew members and provide life support for about 30 person-days. The life-support system provides a nitrogen/oxygen atmosphere at sea-level partial pressures. The atmosphere is regenerated through potassium superoxide (KO2) cylinders, which absorb most of the carbon dioxide (CO2) and water produced by the crew and regenerates the oxygen, and lithium hydroxide (LiOH) cylinders, which absorb leftover CO2.

The vehicle is protected during launch by a payload fairing, which is jettisoned along with the SAS at $2 1/2$ minutes into launch. It has an automatic docking system. The ship can be operated automatically or by a pilot independently of ground control.

Launch escape system
The Vostok spacecraft used an ejector seat to bail out the cosmonaut in the event of a low-altitude launch failure, as well as during reentry; however, it would probably have been ineffective in the first 20 seconds after liftoff, when the altitude would be too low for the parachute to deploy. Inspired by the Mercury LES, Soviet designers began work on a similar system in 1962. This included developing a complex sensing system to monitor various launch-vehicle parameters and trigger an abort if a booster malfunction occurred. Based on data from R-7 launches over the years, engineers developed a list of the most likely failure modes for the vehicle and could narrow down abort conditions to premature separation of a strap-on booster, low engine thrust, loss of combustion-chamber pressure, or loss of booster guidance. The spacecraft abort system (SAS; Система Аварийного Спасения) could also be manually activated from the ground, but unlike American spacecraft, there was no way for the cosmonauts to trigger it themselves.

Since it turned out to be almost impossible to separate the entire payload shroud from the Soyuz service module cleanly, the decision was made to have the shroud split between the service module and descent module during an abort. Four folding stabilizers were added to improve aerodynamic stability during ascent. Two test runs of the SAS were carried out in 1966–1967.

The basic design of the SAS has remained almost unchanged in 50 years of use, and all Soyuz launches carry it. The only modification was in 1972, when the aerodynamic fairing over the SAS motor nozzles was removed for weight-saving reasons, as the redesigned Soyuz 7K-T spacecraft carried extra life-support equipment. The uncrewed Progress resupply ferry has a dummy escape tower and removes the stabilizer fins from the payload shroud. There have been three failed launches of a crewed Soyuz vehicle: Soyuz 18a in 1975, Soyuz T-10a in 1983 and Soyuz MS-10 in October 2018. The 1975 failure was aborted after escape-tower jettison. In 1983, Soyuz T-10a's SAS successfully rescued the cosmonauts from an on-pad fire and explosion of the launch vehicle. Most recently, in 2018, the SAS sub-system in the payload shroud of Soyuz MS-10 successfully rescued the cosmonauts from a rocket failure 2 minutes and 45 seconds after liftoff, after the escape tower had already been jettisoned.

Orbital module

The forepart of the spacecraft is the orbital module (бытовой отсек), also known as habitation section. It houses all the equipment that will not be needed for reentry, such as experiments, cameras or cargo. The module also contains a toilet, docking avionics and communications gear. Internal volume is 6 m3, living space is 5 m3. On the latest Soyuz versions (since Soyuz TM), a small window was introduced, providing the crew with a forward view.

A hatch between it and the descent module can be closed so as to isolate it to act as an airlock if needed so that crew members could also exit through its side port (near the descent module). On the launch pad, the crew enter the spacecraft through this port. This separation also lets the orbital module be customized to the mission with less risk to the life-critical descent module. The convention of orientation in a micro-g environment differs from that of the descent module, as crew members stand or sit with their heads to the docking port. Also the rescue of the crew whilst on the launch pad or with the SAS system is complicated because of the orbital module.

Separation of the orbital module is critical for a safe landing; without separation of the orbital module, it is not possible for the crew to survive landing in the descent module. This is because the orbital module would interfere with proper deployment of the descent module's parachutes, and the extra mass exceeds the capability of the main parachute and braking engines to provide a safe soft-landing speed. In view of this, the orbital module was separated before the ignition of the return engine until the late 1980s. This guaranteed that the descent module and orbital module would be separated before the descent module was placed in a reentry trajectory. However, after the problematic landing of Soyuz TM-5 in September 1988 this procedure was changed, and the orbital module is now separated after the return maneuver. This change was made as the TM-5 crew could not deorbit for 24 hours after they jettisoned their orbital module, which contained their sanitation facilities and the docking collar needed to attach to Mir. The risk of not being able to separate the orbital module is effectively judged to be less than the risk of needing the facilities in it, including the toilet, following a failed deorbit.

Descent module

The descent module (Спуска́емый Аппара́т), also known as a reentry capsule, is used for launch and the journey back to Earth. Half of the descent module is covered by a heat-resistant covering to protect it during reentry; this half faces forward during reentry. It is slowed initially by the atmosphere, then by a braking parachute, followed by the main parachute, which slows the craft for landing. At one meter above the ground, solid-fuel braking engines mounted behind the heat shield are fired to give a soft landing. One of the design requirements for the descent module was for it to have the highest possible volumetric efficiency (internal volume divided by hull area). The best shape for this is a sphere – as the pioneering Vostok spacecraft's descent module used – but such a shape can provide no lift, resulting in a purely ballistic reentry. Ballistic reentries are hard on the occupants due to high deceleration and cannot be steered beyond their initial deorbit burn. Thus it was decided to go with the "headlight" shape that the Soyuz uses – a hemispherical upper area joined by a barely angled (seven degrees) conical section to a classic spherical section heat shield. This shape allows a small amount of lift to be generated due to the unequal weight distribution. The nickname was thought up at a time when nearly every headlight was circular. The small dimensions of the descent module led to it having only two-man crews after the death of the Soyuz 11 crew. The later Soyuz-T spacecraft solved this issue. Internal volume of Soyuz SA is 4 m3; 2.5 m3 is usable for crew (living space).

The thermal protection system on the slightly conical side walls is stood off from the structure to also provide micrometeoroid protection in orbit. The slightly curved heat shield on the bottom consists of "21mm to 28mm thick ablator (glass-phenolic composite) which is held by brackets approximately 15mm from the 3.5mm thick aluminum AMg-6 substrate. VIM low-density silica fibrous insulation (8mm thick) is contained in the gap between the heat shield ablator and aluminum substrate."

Service module
At the back of the vehicle is the service module (прибо́рно-агрега́тный отсе́к). It has a pressurized container shaped like a bulging can (instrumentation compartment, priborniy otsek) that contains systems for temperature control, electric power supply, long-range radio communications, radio telemetry, and instruments for orientation and control. A non-pressurized part of the service module (propulsion compartment, agregatniy otsek) contains the main engine and a liquid-fuelled propulsion system, using N2O4 and UDMH, for maneuvering in orbit and initiating the descent back to Earth. The ship also has a system of low-thrust engines for orientation, attached to the intermediate compartment (perekhodnoi otsek). Outside the service module are the sensors for the orientation system and the solar array, which is oriented towards the Sun by rotating the ship. An incomplete separation between the service and reentry modules led to emergency situations during Soyuz 5, Soyuz TMA-10 and Soyuz TMA-11, which led to an incorrect reentry orientation (crew ingress hatch first). The failure of several explosive bolts did not cut the connection between the service and reentry modules on the latter two flights.

Reentry procedure
The Soyuz uses a method similar to the 1970s-era United States Apollo command and service module to deorbit itself. The spacecraft is turned engine-forward, and the main engine is fired for deorbiting on the far side of Earth ahead of its planned landing site. This requires the least propellant for reentry; the spacecraft travels on an elliptical Hohmann transfer orbit to the entry interface point, where atmospheric drag slows it enough to fall out of orbit.

Early Soyuz spacecraft would then have the service and orbital modules detach simultaneously from the descent module. As they are connected by tubing and electrical cables to the descent module, this would aid in their separation and avoid having the descent module alter its orientation. Later Soyuz spacecraft detached the orbital module before firing the main engine, which saved propellant. Since the Soyuz TM-5 landing issue, the orbital module is once again detached only after the reentry firing, which led to (but did not cause) emergency situations of Soyuz TMA-10 and TMA-11. The orbital module cannot remain in orbit as an addition to a space station, as the airlock hatch between the orbital and reentry modules is a part of the reentry module, and the orbital module therefore depressurizes after separation.

Reentry firing is usually done on the "dawn" side of the Earth, so that the spacecraft can be seen by recovery helicopters as it descends in the evening twilight, illuminated by the Sun when it is above the shadow of the Earth. The Soyuz craft is designed to come down on land, usually somewhere in the deserts of Kazakhstan in Central Asia. This is in contrast to the early United States crewed spacecraft and the current SpaceX Crew Dragon, which splash down in the ocean.

Spacecraft systems

 * Thermal control system – sistema obespecheniya teplovogo rezhima, SOTR
 * Life support system – kompleks sistem obespecheniya zhiznedeyatelnosti, KSOZh
 * Power supply system – sistema elektropitaniya, SEP
 * Communication and tracking systems – Rassvet (Dawn) radio communications system, onboard measurement system (SBI), Kvant-V spacecraft control, Klyost-M television system, orbit radio tracking (RKO)
 * Onboard complex control system – sistema upravleniya bortovym kompleksom, SUBK
 * Combined propulsion system – kompleksnaya dvigatelnaya ustanovka, KDU
 * Chaika-3 motion control system (SUD)
 * Optical/visual devices (OVP) – VSK-4 (vizir spetsialniy kosmicheskiy-4), night vision device (VNUK-K, visir nochnogo upravleniya po kursu), docking light, pilot's sight (VP-1, vizir pilota-1), laser rangefinder (LPR-1, lazerniy dalnomer-1)
 * Kurs rendezvous system
 * Docking system – sistema stykovki i vnutrennego perekhoda, SSVP
 * Teleoperator control mode – teleoperatorniy rezhim upravleniya, TORU
 * Entry actuators system – sistema ispolnitelnikh organov spuska, SIO-S
 * Landing aids kit – kompleks sredstv prizemleniya, KSP
 * Portable survival kit – nosimiy avariyniy zapas, NAZ, containing a TP-82 Cosmonaut survival pistol or Makarov pistol
 * Soyuz launch escape system – sistema avariynogo spaseniya, SAS

 * Orbital module (A)
 * 1 docking mechanism
 * 2, 4 Kurs rendezvous radar antenna
 * 3 television transmission antenna
 * 5 camera
 * 6 hatch

 * Descent module (B):
 * 7 parachute compartment
 * 8 periscope
 * 9 porthole
 * 11 heat shield

 * Service module (C):
 * 10, 18 attitude control engines
 * 12 Earth sensors
 * 13 Sun sensor
 * 14 solar panel attachment point
 * 15 thermal sensor
 * 16 Kurs antenna
 * 17 main propulsion
 * 19 communication antenna
 * 20 fuel tanks
 * 21 oxygen tank

Variants

The Soyuz spacecraft has been the subject of continuous evolution since the early 1960s. Thus several different versions, proposals and projects exist.

Soyuz 7K (part of the 7K-9K-11K circumlunar complex) (1963)

Sergei Korolev initially promoted the Soyuz A-B-V circumlunar complex (7K-9K-11K) concept (also known as L1) in which a two-man craft Soyuz 7K would rendezvous with other components (9K and 11K) in Earth orbit to assemble a lunar excursion vehicle, the components being delivered by the proven R-7 rocket.

First generation

The crewed Soyuz spacecraft can be classified into design generations. Soyuz 1 through Soyuz 11 (1967–1971) were first-generation vehicles, carrying a crew of up to three without spacesuits and distinguished from those following by their bent solar panels and their use of the Igla automatic docking navigation system, which required special radar antennas. This first generation encompassed the original Soyuz 7K-OK and the Soyuz 7K-OKS for docking with the Salyut 1 space station. The probe and drogue docking system permitted internal transfer of cosmonauts from the Soyuz to the station.

The Soyuz 7K-L1 was designed to launch a crew from the Earth to circle the Moon, and was the primary hope for a Soviet circumlunar flight. It had several test flights in the Zond program from 1967–1970 (Zond 4 to Zond 8), which produced multiple failures in the 7K-L1's reentry systems. The remaining 7K-L1s were scrapped. The Soyuz 7K-L3 was designed and developed in parallel to the Soyuz 7K-L1, but was also scrapped. Soyuz 1 was plagued with technical issues, and cosmonaut Vladimir Komarov was killed when the spacecraft crashed during its return to Earth. This was the first in-flight fatality in the history of spaceflight.

The next crewed version of the Soyuz was the Soyuz 7K-OKS. It was designed for space station flights and had a docking port that allowed internal transfer between spacecraft. The Soyuz 7K-OKS had two crewed flights, both in 1971. Soyuz 11, the second flight, depressurized upon reentry, killing its three-man crew.

Second generation

The second generation, called Soyuz Ferry or Soyuz 7K-T, comprised Soyuz 12 through Soyuz 40 (1973–1981). It did not have solar arrays. Two long, skinny antennas were put in the solar panels's place. It was developed out of the military Soyuz concepts studied in previous years and was capable of carrying 2 cosmonauts with Sokol space suits (after the Soyuz 11 accident). Several models were planned, but none actually flew in space. These versions were named Soyuz P, Soyuz PPK, Soyuz R, Soyuz 7K-VI, and Soyuz OIS (Orbital Research Station).

The Soyuz 7K-T/A9 version was used for the flights to the military Almaz space station.

Soyuz 7K-TM was the spacecraft used in the Apollo-Soyuz Test Project in 1975, which saw the first and only docking of a Soyuz spacecraft with an Apollo command and service module. It was also flown in 1976 for the Earth-science mission, Soyuz 22. Soyuz 7K-TM served as a technological bridge to the third generation.

Third generation

The third generation Soyuz-T (T: транспортный) spacecraft (1976–1986) featured solar panels again, allowing longer missions, a revised Igla rendezvous system and new translation/attitude thruster system on the Service module. It could carry a crew of three, now wearing spacesuits.

Soyuz-TM (1986–2002)

The Soyuz-TM crew transports (M: модифицированный) were fourth generation Soyuz spacecraft, and were used from 1986 to 2002 for ferry flights to Mir and the International Space Station (ISS).

Soyuz-TMA (2003–2012)

Soyuz TMA (A: антропометрический) features several changes to accommodate requirements requested by NASA in order to service the International Space Station (ISS), including more latitude in the height and weight of the crew and improved parachute systems. It is also the first expendable vehicle to feature a digital control technology. Soyuz-TMA looks identical to a Soyuz-TM spacecraft on the outside, but interior differences allow it to accommodate taller occupants with new adjustable crew couches.

Soyuz TMA-M (2010–2016)
The Soyuz TMA-M was an upgrade of the baseline Soyuz-TMA, using a new computer, digital interior displays, updated docking equipment, and the vehicle's total mass was reduced by 70 kilograms. The new version debuted on 7 October 2010 with the launch of Soyuz TMA-01M, carrying the ISS Expedition 25 crew.

The Soyuz TMA-08M mission set a new record for the fastest crewed docking with a space station. The mission used a new six-hour rendezvous, faster than the previous Soyuz launches, which had, since 1986, taken two days.

Soyuz MS (since 2016)

Soyuz MS is the final planned upgrade of the Soyuz spacecraft. Its maiden flight was in July 2016 with mission Soyuz MS-01.

Major changes include:
 * more efficient solar panels
 * modified docking and attitude control engine positions for redundancy during docking and de-orbit burns
 * new Kurs NA approach and docking system which weighs half as much and consumes a third of the power of previous system
 * new TsVM-101 computer, about one eighth the weight (8.3 kg versus 70 kg) and much smaller than the previous Argon-16 computer
 * unified digital command/telemetry system (MBITS) to relay telemetry via satellite, and control spacecraft when out of sight of ground stations; also provides the crew with position data when out of ground tracking range
 * GLONASS/GPS and Cospas-Sarsat satellite systems for more accurate location during search/rescue operations after landing

Related craft
The uncrewed Progress spacecraft are derived from Soyuz and are used for servicing space stations.

While not being direct derivatives of Soyuz, the Chinese Shenzhou spacecraft uses Soyuz TM technology sold in 1984 and the Indian Orbital Vehicle follows the same general layout as that pioneered by Soyuz.

title: Soyuz (spacecraft)