Head to head

Long March 3B/E vs Soyuz 2.1a

Two vehicles in the same payload class. Every figure below comes from the same two sources for both rockets, and a row appears only when both publish the input.

Payload to low Earth orbit

Relative

Long March 3B/E: 12,000 kg

Soyuz 2.1a: 7,020 kg

Side by side

11 comparable figures

The highlighted value wins the row. Rows where neither direction is better, like length or stage count, highlight nothing.

Metric	Long March 3B/E	Soyuz 2.1a
Flights flown	78	58
Success rate	97.4%	98.3%
Payload to LEO (kg)	12,000	7,020
Payload to GTO (kg)	5,500	2,810
Launch cost	$70M	$80M
Cost per kg to LEO	$5,833	$11,396
Liftoff thrust (kN)	5,924	4,149
Length (m)	56.3	46.3
Diameter (m)	3.35	2.95
Launch mass (t)	456	312
Stages	3	3

Long March 3B/E

Flight record

97.4% success rate76 of 78 flown · 2 failed

2007peak 2025 · 13 flights2026

Maiden flight 2007-05-13. Still flying.

Soyuz 2.1a

Flight record

98.3% success rate57 of 58 flown · 1 failed

2004peak 2023 · 7 flights2026

Maiden flight 2004-11-04. Still flying.

Long March 3B/E is built by China Aerospace Science and Technology Corporation of China.Soyuz 2.1a is built by Progress Rocket Space Center of Russia.

Full specifications and the complete launch history for each: Long March 3B/E · Soyuz 2.1a.

Specifications from Launch Library 2 by The Space Devs, launch records from Space Index. Derived figures are computed here; see sources and method.