National Society Of Professional Engineers Code Of Ethics

The National Society of Professional Engineers Code of Ethics lays out guidelines and standards to which all engineers should abide when making professional decisions and communicating with their peers and the public. Ethics and communications played a large role in the cause of the event and the end result of the mission. The following section will discuss the ethics of the events that transpired prior to the launch, the communication of the crews and the NASA public relations office, and the ethics of the actions taken by the engineers after the incident.

As stated in previously, oxygen tank 2 was damaged during a removal procedure, but was deemed safe for use after initial inspection. When the system was modified to accept the 5 volt source

All of the Apollo crews and mission control teams were well trained to operate under high-stress situations. All three crew members were previously test pilots, so they were all experienced in dealing with high-risk situations with no room for error. They were able to effectively communicate the problems they were experiencing back to the crew members in mission control. Both parties were able to communicate calmly and clearly, with little to no change in tone as the accident transpired. The ground crew members related all information to the flight crew, not withholding any information that they deemed pertinent to the

The public affairs sector of NASA had learned from the Apollo 1 tragedy that withholding information from the public greatly affected the public’s image of the program. Not properly informing the public on current issues also goes against the National Society of Professional Engineers (NSPE) Code of Ethics third canon, ‘Issue public statements only in an objective and truthful manner” (National Society of Professional Engineers [NSPE], n.d., para. 2). The first statement in the rules of practice, section 2, states that all information should be disclosed to the public (NSPE, n.d.). During the Apollo 13 mission, NASA informed the public of the incident promptly and honestly. This is in direct agreement with the National Society of Professional Engineers Code of Ethics third canon. Effective communication and action after a crisis has a tremendous impact on the entity involved. One example is how Johnson and Johnson handled the Tylenol poisoning case in 1982. Because of their efforts, the public’s image of the company greatly improved (Kauffman, 2001). NASA was not only bound ethically to be completely transparent with the public, but they were also bound legally since they were a public entity and received funding from the