The Major Causes Of The Columbia Disaster

1014 Words3 Pages
bulb-icon

Recommended: Case study challenger and columbia disasters

Columbia disaster
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.

Technical issue of Columbia disaster
The Space Shuttle Columbia disaster occurred when the orbiter disintegrated following the foam shedding, caused by the technical issue which included inadequate understanding of foam properties as well as faulty design of the orbiter inadequate understanding of foam properties the properties of foam have not been fully understanding since its
Management issue in the space shuttle Columbia disaster
Management issue is one of the major causes of the space shuttle Columbia disaster in 2003. Inadequate risk assessment and pressure account for implementation of the launch despite there are potential risks, resulting the disinfection of obiter.
Inadequate risk assessment the inadequate risk assessment which include normalisation of deviance is one of the management issue causing the Columbia disaster. In the case of Columbia disaster, foam shedding had observed for many time in the previous flight, but it did not consider as a safety issue because orbiter came back safely ( ). It was a potential risk of orbiter that foam shedding occurred during the launch even though it was a common phenomenon. But the engineers in NASA did not pay high attention to the potential risk. Also, extra assessment to test and analyse the property of foam did not apply. Then, engineers did not have inefficient evidences and concluded that foam shedding is acceptable based on strong belief and previous
This pressure was further exacerbated in the case of Columbia by the actions of NASA administrator. As shown in figure 1 this selection of data appears to show a dramatic budget decline is evident in the early 1960s. the challenger disaster happened in 1986 and the Columbia disaster happened in 2003. The NASA budget continuous decline before the two disaster and the rate of budget decline in the case of Columbia is bigger than Challenger. Budget decline exited for a long time. Engineers were under budget pressure to execute command, especially the engineers who worked in Columbia project face more severe budget

Show More
Related

  • Analysis of the Smoking Gun Memos

    1223 Words  | 3 Pages

    R. M. Boisjoly had over a quarter-century’s experience in the aerospace industry in 1985 when he became involved in an improvement effort on the O-ring which connect segments of Morton Thiokol’s Solid Rocket Booster. This was used to bring the Space Shuttle into orbit (OEC, 2006). Morton Thiokol is an aerospace company that manufactures the solid propellant rocket motors used to launch the Challenger (Skubik). Boisjoly authored a memo to R.L. Lund, Vice President of Engineering and four others, in regards to his concerns about the flawed O-ring erosion problem. His warnings were ignored leading to the deaths of six astronauts and one social studies teacher.

    Read More

  • Challenger Disaster

    1061 Words  | 3 Pages

    It was on January 28, 1986 at 11:38 A.M. that the shuttle Challenger, NASA flight 51-L, the twenty-fifth shuttle flight, took off. It was the "Teacher in Space" mission. At lift-off, the temperature at ground level was 36° Fahrenheit, which was 15° Fahrenheit cooler than any previous launch by NASA. It was the Challenger's tenth flight. Take-off had been delayed several times. Finally the shuttle had taken off. The shuttle had climbed high in the sky thirty-five seconds after take-off, and it was getting hit by strong winds. The on board computers were making continuous adjustments so the shuttle would stay on course. About eight miles in the air, about seventy-two seconds after take-off, people watched in fear and horror as the shuttle was engulfed by a huge fire ball. All the crew members were killed instantly.

    Read More

  • Eastern Flight 401

    2748 Words  | 6 Pages

    This tragic accident was preventable by not only the flight crew, but maintenance and air traffic control personnel as well. On December 29, 1972, ninety-nine of the one hundred and seventy-six people onboard lost their lives needlessly. As is the case with most accidents, this one was certainly preventable. This accident is unique because of the different people that could have prevented it from happening. The NTSB determined that “the probable cause of this accident was the failure of the flightcrew.” This is true; the flight crew did fail, however, others share the responsibility for this accident. Equally responsible where maintenance personnel, an Air Traffic Controllers, the system, and a twenty cent light bulb. What continues is a discussion on, what happened, why it happened, what to do about it and what was done about it.

    Read More

  • The Space Shuttle Tragedy Of The Columbia And Challenger

    975 Words  | 2 Pages

    NASA has faced many tragedies during their time; but one can question if two of the tragedies were preventable by changing some critical decisions made by the organization. The investigation board looking at the decisions made for the space shuttle tragedies of the Columbia and Challenger noted that the “loss resulted as much from organizational as from technical failures” (Bolman & Deal, 2008, p. 191). The two space shuttle tragedies were about twenty years apart, they both had technical failures but politics also played a factor in to these two tragedies.

    Read More

  • Challenger Disaster Case Study

    1167 Words  | 3 Pages

    Lack of proper risk management process: NASA was using a simple risk classification system and the methods used were only qualitative. There was a lack of proper technical and quantitative risk management methods that could have helped them identify the risks and eliminate them.

    Read More

  • The Space Shuttle Challenger Disaster

    3177 Words  | 7 Pages

    In the mid-1980’s, the shuttle space program was the focus of the political media since it had failed to deliver on its exp...

    Read More

  • The Challenger Disaster Explained

    1083 Words  | 3 Pages

    The Challenger disaster of 1986 was a shock felt around the country. During liftoff, the shuttle exploded, creating a fireball in the sky. The seven astronauts on board were killed and the shuttle was obliterated. Immediately after the catastrophe, blame was spread to various people who were in charge of creating the shuttle and the parts of the shuttle itself. The Presidential Commission was decisive in blaming the disaster on a faulty O-ring, used to connect the pieces of the craft. On the other hand, Harry Collins and Trevor Pinch, in The Golem at Large, believe that blame cannot be isolated to any person or reason of failure. The authors prove that there are too many factors to decide concretely as to why the Challenger exploded. Collins and Pinch do believe that it was the organizational culture of NASA and Morton Thiokol that allowed the disaster. While NASA and Thiokol were deciding whether to launch, there was not a concrete reason to postpone the mission.

    Read More

  • Engineering disasters

    694 Words  | 2 Pages

    It’s very hard to say what steps, if any, could have been taken to prevent the Space Shuttle Columbia disaster from occurring. When mankind continues to “push the envelope” in the interest of bettering humanity, there will always be risks. In the manned spaceflight business, we have always had to live with trade-offs. All programs do not carry equal risk nor do they offer the same benefits. The acceptable risk for a given program or operation should be worth the potential benefits to be gained. The goal should be a management system that puts safety first, but not safety at any price. As of Sept 7th, 2003, NASA has ordered extensive factory inspections of wing panels between flights that could add as much as three months to the time it takes to prepare a space shuttle orbiter for launch. NASA does all it can to safely bring its astronauts back to earth, but as stated earlier, risks are expected.

    Read More

  • Analysis Of The Movie Armageddon

    1391 Words  | 3 Pages

    Pete, an astronaut on the shuttle Atlantis, is speaking via satellite radio to NASA’s executive director, Dan Truman. Pete is completing maintenance on a satellite when it is struck by several small meteorites. Atlantis, Pete, and the Satellite are all destroyed by the meteorites. As Truman gives

    Read More

  • Human Factors On Aloha 243

    2368 Words  | 5 Pages

    After the accident, a full-scale investigation was launched by the United States National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB). It concluded that the accident was caused by metal fatigue exacerbated by crevice corrosion, the corrosion is exacerbated by the salt water and the age of the aircraft was already 19 years old as the plane operated in a salt water environment.

    Read More

  • Ethics in Aerospace

    2166 Words  | 5 Pages

    Safety in the ethics and industry of aerospace technology is of prime importance for preventing tragic malfunctions and crashes. Opposed to automobiles for example, if an airplane breaks down while in mid-flight, it has nowhere to go but down. And sadly it will often go down “hard” and with a high probability of killing people. The Engineering Code of Ethics states first and foremost that, “Engineers shall hold paramount the safety, health and welfare of the public.” In the aerospace industry, this as well holds very true, both in manufacturing and in air safety itself. Airline safety has recently become a much-debated topic, although arguments over air safety and travel have been going ...

    Read More

  • Analysis of Columbia’s Final Mission

    975 Words  | 2 Pages

    Rodney Rocha is a NASA engineer and co-chair of Debris Assessment Team (DTS). When possibility of wing damage appeared he requested an additional imagery to obtain more information in order to evaluate the damage. This demonstrates that he actually tried to resolve the issue. However, due to absence of clear organizational responsibilities in NASA those images were never received. Since foam issue was there for years and risk for the flights was estimated as low management decided not to proceed with this request. After learning of management decision Rocha wrote an e-mail there he stated that foam damage could carry grave hazard and have to be addressed. At the same time this e-mail was not send to the management team. Organizational culture at NASA could be described as highly bureaucratic with operations under standard procedures only. Low-end employees like Rocha are afraid to bring any safety-related issues to the management due to delay of the mission. They can be punished for bringing “bad news”. This type of relationship makes it impossible for two-way communication between engineers and managers, which are crucial for decision-making in complex env...

    Read More

  • Causes and Factors Involving Aircraft Accidents

    1448 Words  | 3 Pages

    This term paper reviews the three most common catagories of aviation accident causes and factors. The causes and factors that will be discussed are human performance, environmental, and the aircraft itself. Although flying is one of the safest means of transportation, accidents do happen. It is the investigators job to determine why the accident happened, and who or what was at fault. In the event of an accident, either one or all of these factors will be determined as the cause of the accident. Also discussed will be one of the most tradgic plane crashes in aviation history and the human factors involved.

    Read More

  • The Purpose of a Team

    704 Words  | 2 Pages

    ...fault with NASA’s top-down design and testing methods, “was designed and put together all at once with relatively little detailed preliminary study of the material and components. Then when troubles are found…, it is more expensive and difficult to discover the causes and make changes.…[A] simple fix…may be impossible to implement without a redesign of the entire engine.” The outcome of this simple issue as we all are aware could have saved billions on the project if time for safety was taken. Instead of the top down approach wouldn’t the outcome been a significantly less expense if we used a bottom-up approach. When we think of safety is there a reason to worry about price with the thoughts of the Challenger incident in mind. Safety has always been a part of the working community not only in aviation but throughout all industry. Aviation being the background of

    Read More

  • Common Causes of Plane Crashes

    620 Words  | 2 Pages

    The primary cause is of airplane accidents does at some stage contain an element of a person being unable to discharge his duties correctly and in an accurate manner. More than 53% accidents are the result of ignorance or faults by the pilot during flight. Other staff is responsible for about 8% accidents. The most obvious errors by pilot are made during the take off or landing on the runway. Additionally errors can occur during the maintenance of the airplane outside the plane, whereby a lack of thorough inspection and oversight can lead to complication during mid-flight. Fueling and loading of the plane also sometimes create problems (Shapiro, 2001).

    Read More

More about The Major Causes Of The Columbia Disaster

Open Document