One of the greatest tragedies in history occurred on January 8, 1986. Shortly after it was launched, the space shuttle Challenger exploded, killing seven astronauts, including Christa McAuliffe, a New Hampshire schoolteacher chosen to be the first teacher in space (“Challenger Disaster, n.d.). The explosion was caused by a failure of the O-rings of the solid rocket boosters. The O-rings were unable to seat properly, causing the leaking of hot combustion gases, which burnt through the external fuel tank. The malfunction was not any one person’s or organization’s fault; it was caused by many factors including the decision to launch despite the cold weather, the poor communication between management levels of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration, and the readiness of NASA management to launch the shuttlecraft (“Engineering Ethics,” n.d.).
Alan McDonald, an employee of Morton-Thiokol and director of the project to build the solid rocket boosters, urged NASA management not to launch Challenger at the planned time after the company management wrote a recommendation to launch. In spite of his pleas, NASA made the decision to continue with the scheduled date, even though the predicted temperature was not within operational requirement (“Engineering Ethics,” n.d.). This decision, according to the National Society of Professional Engineers Code I.1, engineers shall “hold paramount the safety, health, and welfare of the public” (“Code of Ethics,” n.d.). By electing to perform the launch under subpar conditions, they directly endangered the lives of the seven astronauts who were to be aboard the Challenger. Results of this decision played out in the worst possible scenario: all seven disastrously lost their lives.
Additionall...
... middle of paper ...
...not worth human life.
Works Cited
Challenger Disaster. (n.d.). Encyclopedia Britannica Online. Retrieved January 17, 2014, from http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/1494445/Challenger-disaster#ref1096611
Code of Ethics. (n.d.). National Society of Professional Engineers. Retrieved January 16, 2014, from http://www.nspe.org/resources/ethics/code-ethics
Engineering Ethics. (n.d.). Texas A&M University. Retrieved January 17, 2014, from http://ethics.tamu.edu/Portals/3/Case%20Studies/Shuttle.pdf
Neuner, K., & Rider, J. (n.d.). The Challenger Disaster. Northern Kentucky University. Retrieved January 17, 2014, from http://studenthome.nku.edu/~riderj/challenger%20report.pdf
The Space Shuttle Challenger Disaster. (n.d.). Seton Hall University. Retrieved January 18, 2014, from http://pirate.shu.edu/~mckenndo/pdfs/The%20Space%20Shuttle%20Challenger%20Disaster.pdf
Soon after launch on January 28th, 1986, the space shuttle Challenger broke apart and shattered the nation. The tragedy was on the hearts and minds of the nation and President Ronald Reagan. President Reagan addressed the county, commemorating the men and woman whose lives were lost and offering hope to Americans and future exploration. Reagan begins his speech by getting on the same level as the audience by showing empathy and attempting to remind us that this was the job of the crew. He proceeds with using his credibility to promise future space travel. Ultimately, his attempt to appeal to the audience’s emotions made his argument much stronger. Reagan effectively addresses the public about the tragedy while comforting, acknowledging, honoring and motivating his audience all in an effort to move the mood from grief to hope for future exploration.
On January 29th, 1986, live national press coverage let even the most rural communities join in and feel like part of the event. Somehow NASA and Christa McAuliffe had created something so wonderful that it felt as if all of the American people joined together as if there was an invisible flow of holding hands nationwide. As NASA looks to the future, finding ways to go higher, faster, and farther, the tragedy of mission 51-L will never be forgotten. The crew of the ill-fated Challenger have staked their claim in the history books and due to the extensive media coverage. It's truly too bad that such a collaborating, heart-felt event had a tragic end that crushed America's social invincibility forever.
NAEYC. (2005, April). Code of Ethical Conduct and Statement of Commitment. Retrieved May 13, 2010, from NAEYC.org: http://www.naeyc.org/files/naeyc/file/positions/PSETH05.pdf
Martin, M.W. and Schinzinger, R. (2005) Ethics in Engineering. 4th ed. New York: McGraw Hill.
This speech was made by our 40th President Ronald Reagan on January twenty-eighth, nineteen hundred eighty-six . Originally slated to be the State of the Union Address, President Reagan instead addressed the tragedy of the Challenger Space Shuttle that exploded mid-flight earlier that day. The seven-member crew perished in the explosion including Christa McAuliffe, who would have been the first teacher in space. In the twenty-five years of the United States space program’s history, this was the second time a space shuttle’s crew had been killed. The previous incident being nineteen years earlier, involving a cockpit fire in the Apollo I Shuttle cockpit killing all three the of the crew members aboard.
On January 28, 1986 the Space Shuttle Challenger destined for space came to a crashing halt after just 73 seconds into liftoff. What would the first thought of any normal person be? Why? What went wrong? All seven crew members aboard The Challenger perished. While the physical cause of the Challenger is now known as the failure of mechanics, the Report of the Presidential Commission on the Space Shuttle Challenger Accident revealed that the primary cause of the disaster was “flaws in the decision making process” (Hughes, 66).
The Columbia Disaster was one of the most tragic events in space shuttle history. In 2003, space shuttle Columbia broke up as it returned to Earth, killing the seven astronauts. This essay will explain the major causes of the Columbia disaster which include technical issue and management issues, and illustrate how pressure impacts engineers work at NASA.
Almost everybody as a child had at one time or another been fascinated by space exploration, the great mystery and excitement of the last frontier. Science Fiction led us on to what may be out there. There was a base for reality in space, though, Astronauts. Astronauts were amazing, intelligent people that were bigger than life. They were in the cutting edge of technology, pushing the limits of human knowledge. They did what no one else could. They traveled to places no one else could reach. The fascination with astronauts is what makes space ship accidents so tragic. On January 28th, 1986, Space Shuttle Challenger exploded after liftoff. On February 1st, 2003, Space Shuttle Colombia crashed over Texas when returning back to Earth from a mission. Both of these tragedies were felt all over the world. The destruction of both space shuttles share many similarities.
The Explosion of the Challenger Space Shuttle was a national tragedy as it was the first time we had astronauts die during flight on a shuttle. The type of Speech that former President Ronald Reagan gave was an informative speech on the Challenger explosion that occurred January 28, 1986. During this time, the United States were still pioneering the way for space travel, even though we had already gone to the moon. As Reagan Stated, “We’ve grown used to the idea of space, and, perhaps we forget that we’ve only just begun” (Regan), meaning that the reason this tragedy struck a chord with the nation was because we did not expect trivial outcome. Ronald Reagan effectively comforts the nation through the use of rhetoric while also addressing the
Gordon, Mike. "Engineering Ethics: An Insider’s Account of the Columbia Disaster." Introduction to Aerospace. Skurla 110, Melbourne. 8 November 2013. Lecture.
National Society of Professional Engineers. "NSPE Code of Ethics for Engineers." NSPE Code of Ethics for Engineers. National Society of Professional Engineers, July 2007. Web. 20 Nov. 2013.
The Columbia Disaster is one of the most tragic events in space shuttle history. In 2003, space shuttle Columbia broke up as it returned to Earth, killing the seven astronauts. This essay will explain the major causes of Columbia disaster which include technical issue and management issue, and illustrate how pressure impacts engineers work in NASA.
January 28, 1986, at 11:38am, one minute until the Challenger space shuttle lifted off, the weather was bad, but still have lot people drove to and watch the launch at that freezing day, people don’t know the bad weather are leading to a disaster, actually the engineer already warn that the launch are extremely dangerous at such a cold day, at 11:39am, the Challenger space shuttle took off, few second later abnormal black smoke comes out from the roll booster, around 45 second after took off observed triple time flash from the right side of roll booster, from 58 second the right side of the propeller start having fracture, tremble, large fuel spills, and ignite the main fuel tank, 73 second later after the challenger launched, the explosion
NASA’s Space Shuttle Program has impacted the United State in many different way throughout history. When the first American shuttle was launched into space in the 1960’s, there was an explosion of ideas for NASA and for other countries throughout the world. When the Challenger and Columbia exploded, it showed NASA that there were things they had to change about their shuttles, and the design of them.
The National Aeronautics and Space Administration commonly known by the abbreviated term of NASA is the pioneer when it comes to Science and technological developments and researches with regard to all areas of space flight and space science. The scientific researches they undertake are extremely risky due to its highly technical fields as well as human involvement in those pilot projects. The tragic failures of Challenger Space Shuttle in 1986 and Columbia space shuttle in 2003 highlights the risk involvement in these projects and cost of failures is very high because of the human lives lost. It is argued that these mission failures are mainly due to the fact of Poor organizational structure