The Challenger Disaster - Failure of Engineering Managers - Essay Example

? The Challenger Disaster The Challenger Disaster It was a chilly afternoon off the coast of Florida when around throughout the United States of America, children and adults alike were excitedly had their eyes glued on the television screens to witness the first shuttle launch with an elementary school teacher on-board. The teacher, Sharon Christa McAuliffe, was chosen to be on the shuttle as a result of President Ronald Reagan’s ‘Teacher in Space Project’, a project to attract people to the space programs in the United States of America, which would result in the first citizen to go into space. The shuttle was launched around 11:38 on the January the 28th, 1986 with seven people on-board and after 73 seconds of its take off; it exploded and fell into the Atlantic Ocean, witnessed by the millions of people watching it live on television and observers on the field. A commission was founded by President Reagan to investigate what went wrong. The commission was called the ‘Rogers Commission’. The Rogers Commission observed and analyzed the accident by using coverage in the form of pictures and videos and remains left from the explosion of the shuttle. The Rogers Commission arrived to the conclusion that the Challenger exploded because the O-rings (was used to seal different parts of the rocket booster together) of the right solid rocket booster had become brittle due to being used a couple of times and more importantly because of the extreme cold weather that on the morning of 28th January. Autopsies show that every member of the crew did not die because of the explosion, since the emergency air packs had been set up. However the shuttle hit the water after falling through 50,000 feet at a speed of 200 miles an hour, the impact of which, was impossible to survive. January 28th, 1986 was a highly anticipated day by the people of the United States of America. A space shuttle was going to be launched and among the crew was an American schoolteacher, Sharon Christa McAuliffe, who would be the first private citizen of the U. S. to travel into space.  Children around the country were excited about learning from a teacher about space, and their parents were amazed. It had caught everyone’s attention. Taking a school teacher to space was the way to accomplish the U. S. government’s mission.  The mission would give rise to unlimited possibilities that were not there before. It was a breakthrough in the history of space travel, and in the field of science. The mission of the space shuttle Challenger STS-51L was to symbolize safety. An average American schoolteacher being allowed to go into space was supposed to be a symbol that average citizens can also travel to space and it would be perfectly safe. Christa McAuliffe was not a trained astronaut. She was not someone with space experience. She was just an average American school teacher who was chosen from 11,000 participants who had volunteered themselves to travel into space as a part of President Ronald Reagan’s ‘Teacher in Space Project’. The mission was also going to show that the American dream was coming true. That the Americans were moving forward in all fields- political, social, scientific and economic. NASA was also using the Challenger to portray that it would bring America a lot of glory. It was going mark the starting of a new age in space travel, was going to be a source of hope of success in space travel. However, that mission of safety and hope soon became a message of sorrow and catastrophe as the shuttle exploded 73 seconds into the flight, ultimately resulting in the death of the seven members of the crew (Neuner et al 2012). Soon after the accident, President Reagan in February of the same year set up an investigation committee about the Challenger disaster which was headed by William Rogers, a former secretary of State. After him the committee was named the ‘Rogers Commission’ which carried out an extensive investigation regarding the accident. The Rogers Committee used pictures and video footage available to get to the bottom of the accident and to find out why the shuttle exploded. The remains of the accident were recovered from the surface of the ocean as well as from the shores thousands of miles away. This debris from the explosion also helped the Committee in determination of faults in the shuttle. The committee with the help of these elements was able to conclude the result of their investigation and stated that the Challenger STS-51-L had brittle O-rings in the right solid rocket booster (SRB) (Rosenberg 2012). The Challenger was not fit for flight especially in that weather and had a few technical problems that caused it to explode. They were: eroded O-rings and their response to the extreme weather, rotation of joints and formation of blow holes. The working of the rocket booster is highly dependent on the state of the primary seal. To make sure that the seal was intact, engineers carry out a leak test. While carrying out the leak tests of the seal of the Challenger, engineers increased the amount of pressure to see if the seal can withstand it and it pressurized the putty more than it could handle. This test was carried out to check if the O-ring required putty to cover the gap. The function of the putty is protection of the O-rings from the shuttle’s exhaust.  The putty of the rocket booster insulation had tiny holes called blow holes present in it which was the result of a high pressure test (the leak check port). The results of the pressure test were not very promising and they engineers were apprehensive. These holes allowed the exhaust to pass to the primary seal. The engineers were aware of the danger the holes promised, yet they chose to ignore it. They assumed that the holes were not as dangerous as any fault in the O-rings could be. The holes caused the primary O-ring to erode and the exhaust coming in contact with the O-ring caused it to break. The O-ring was not eroding only because of the exceeding pressure, but also because of the hot exhaust and the erosion reached up to eighty eight percent at times. The managers decided to go ahead with the pressure tests in spite of all that. Upon ignition of the shuttle, the walls bulge out due to a pressure of more than 1000 pounds per square inch. Due to this expansion, tang and clevis lose their alignment and cause the joints to rotate. The gap caused by the rotation must be sealed by the O-rings, which they were not able to do and the gaps were not completely sealed. The elasticity of the O-rings is called its resilience. Cold temperature causes the O-rings to stiffen up. Due to their stiffness, the O-rings could not seal the gap formed by rotation of the joints. The cold weather was the major factor which contributed to the malfunctioning of the O-ring (Neuner et al 2012). These mechanical problems combined caused the Challenger to explode. The hot exhaust which was able to reach the primary seal through blow holes caused it to erode.  The gap formed due to rotation of the joints was too large to be sealed by the eroded O-ring. The exhaust gases penetrated the whole joint and caused it to explode. There were also a number of environmental factors attached to the accident such as lack of communication, mismanagement and taking bad decisions under pressure from the government and media. Some of the environmental factors are discussed below. The economic as well as political support for the space shuttle was not very strong because it had no well defined goals. It was advertised differently to different audiences according to what would attract them. To military it was sold saying that it would be a great help to strengthen security. It was introduced in the markets as an opportunity to make money, and internationally it was advertised as a means of increasing brotherhood among the countries as members of the crew would belong to different countries. Congress expected NASA to fund its own expenses as they had spent billions for travels to the moon. This created a stressed environment in which human errors were bound to take place. Thiokol - the organization in charge of the manufacturing of O-rings- and NASA could have easily stopped the disaster in their Group Decision Support System which took place before the Launch of the Challenger but some factors caused them to make the unreasonable decision of going ahead with the plan. The O-ring problem was ignored as not an important one to keep up with the schedule. Thiokol insisted that the O-rings were nothing to worry about. The Shuttle also did not want to delay the launch any further and rejected any idea that suggested delay. Along with all that, the parties did not want to announce another delay in the launch as it would be the seventh one of that year and they did not want to face the negative feedback from the public. And lastly, the information provided at the Group Decision Support System was full of errors and did not state the facts correctly. Members who disagreed with the general opinion were made unwelcome. Because of that no one wanted to oppose NASA’s decisions (Forest 2012). One of the memos that no one took heed of (Neuner et al 2012). The Challenger met a drastic end. Measures should be taken to avoid such mistakes in the future.NASA should communicate in a better and improved manner and should set up better ways for employees to communicate among themselves. Communication workshops should be arranged which should be compulsory for every employee to attend. The policy regarding the paperwork should be strict. Every bit of misinformation can cause disastrous results. If NASA had taken care of these details, the space shuttle Challenger would have succeeded (Neuner et al 2012 Rider). Names of the crew members who lost their lives in the Challenger disaster: Commander Francis Scobee (Age: 46), Pilot Mike Smith (Age: 40), Judy Resnik - mission specialist (Age: 36), Ellison Onizuka - mission specialist (Age: 40), Ron McNair - mission specialist (Age: 35), Greg Jarvis- Payload specialist (Age: 41), Christa McAuliffe - educator astronaut of NASA’s Teacher in Space Project (Age: 37) (Chow 2012). References CHOW, DENISE. “FAQ: A Look Back at the Challenger Tragedy | Space Shuttle Challenger Accident, NASA Astronauts & Space Exploration | Space.com." Space and NASA News – Universe and Deep Space Information | Space.com. N.p., n.d. Web. 20 Dec. 2012. . FORREST, JEFF.  "Space Shuttle Challenger Disaster 1986." Decision Support Systems Resources -- DSSResources.COM. N.p., n.d. Web. 20 Dec. 2012.  NEUNER, KATHY, and JEREMY RIDER. "Student Home." Northern Kentucky University. N.p., n.d. Web. 21 Dec. 2012. ROSENBERG, JENNIFER. "Challenger - The Awful Explosion of the Space Shuttle Challenger." 20th Century History. N.p., n.d. Web. 20 Dec. 2012. Read More