Challenger Space Shuttle Case Study Essay
Challenger Space Shuttle - Case Study
In the following case study, we’ll have a brief analysis of the disaster that took place with the “Challenger Space Shuttle” and the role played by the 3 most important players: Thiokol, NASA and the White House. At the end we will discuss the things that could have prevented not only this but all major disasters that take place in various organizations.
Reviewing the Case
When the Challenger blew up 73 seconds after launching the Challenger disaster happened on 28, this led to the departure of seven individuals and $3 million worth of gear was dropped. The tragedy happened because of an error using the O rings, as they failed to seal sufficiently, this induced fires in the Solid-Fuel Rocket Boosters (SRB) to burn up straight onto the outside container. The danger had been recognized by the technologist of Thiokol before Opposition had been released, but the …show more content…
technologist's view had not been carefully considered.
Slide #3
Contributing Circumstances:
The circumstances can be grouped in to two crucial factors and they are external and internal circumstances.
The Roger Commission, who was in-charge of the probe, found out the interior factors, which include mechanical problems and problems that are related to management. Overall there were a total of sixteen conclusions on the reason why the accident happened (Harwood, 2011).
The mechanical problem happened as the exhaust fires trickled due to faulty field joint in the SRB. Because of this failure of the sealing method there were four issues, which led to the Challenger explosion. These issues were that o rings were not sealing correctly and this disaster could have been avoided if the Challenger launch was delayed as metal billets were being designed to get a fresh construction of the area joint. Some of the other findings were payload contribution; no flight hardware at the launch site; out-of-round conditions existed causing one of the two joints to fail; ambient temperature concerns; non-functional aft joint; and as previously mentioned numerous issues with the o-ring (Science.ksc.nasa.gov, 1986). Overall the challenger accident was the result of a non-functioning pressure seal in the aft field joint of the right Solid Rocket Booster.
Slide # 4
The main difficulties were with the management of the project, these problems include: miss-communication and liability issues.
The miss-communication affected lack of communication involving the Thiokol engineers and the NASA technicians; since the Thiokol engineers did not pass the required piece of information to NASA’s appropriate persons (Raval, 2014). The single-chain of command in the management structure failed to maintain communication movement that was necessary, as the technologists can just speak to their very own managers and the info was not correctly delivered. The technologists of Thiokol were not able to convince the management board to understand the need for the O-ring issue. The engineers of Thiokol were not enabled to have conversation with NASA people so the significant information wasn't shared properly. Thiokol, under pressure gave approval to launch and unperceived to all the challenger was headed for disaster. Due to technical and management issues the program was ground until the proper changes were made to ensure a safe operation of
shuttle.
In the following case study, we’ll have a brief analysis of the disaster that took place with the “Challenger Space Shuttle” and the role played by the 3 most important players: Thiokol, NASA and the White House. At the end we will discuss the things that could have prevented not only this but all major disasters that take place in various organizations.
Reviewing the Case
When the Challenger blew up 73 seconds after launching the Challenger disaster happened on 28, this led to the departure of seven individuals and $3 million worth of gear was dropped. The tragedy happened because of an error using the O rings, as they failed to seal sufficiently, this induced fires in the Solid-Fuel Rocket Boosters (SRB) to burn up straight onto the outside container. The danger had been recognized by the technologist of Thiokol before Opposition had been released, but the …show more content…
technologist's view had not been carefully considered.
Slide #3
Contributing Circumstances:
The circumstances can be grouped in to two crucial factors and they are external and internal circumstances.
The Roger Commission, who was in-charge of the probe, found out the interior factors, which include mechanical problems and problems that are related to management. Overall there were a total of sixteen conclusions on the reason why the accident happened (Harwood, 2011).
The mechanical problem happened as the exhaust fires trickled due to faulty field joint in the SRB. Because of this failure of the sealing method there were four issues, which led to the Challenger explosion. These issues were that o rings were not sealing correctly and this disaster could have been avoided if the Challenger launch was delayed as metal billets were being designed to get a fresh construction of the area joint. Some of the other findings were payload contribution; no flight hardware at the launch site; out-of-round conditions existed causing one of the two joints to fail; ambient temperature concerns; non-functional aft joint; and as previously mentioned numerous issues with the o-ring (Science.ksc.nasa.gov, 1986). Overall the challenger accident was the result of a non-functioning pressure seal in the aft field joint of the right Solid Rocket Booster.
Slide # 4
The main difficulties were with the management of the project, these problems include: miss-communication and liability issues.
The miss-communication affected lack of communication involving the Thiokol engineers and the NASA technicians; since the Thiokol engineers did not pass the required piece of information to NASA’s appropriate persons (Raval, 2014). The single-chain of command in the management structure failed to maintain communication movement that was necessary, as the technologists can just speak to their very own managers and the info was not correctly delivered. The technologists of Thiokol were not able to convince the management board to understand the need for the O-ring issue. The engineers of Thiokol were not enabled to have conversation with NASA people so the significant information wasn't shared properly. Thiokol, under pressure gave approval to launch and unperceived to all the challenger was headed for disaster. Due to technical and management issues the program was ground until the proper changes were made to ensure a safe operation of
shuttle.