Space Shuttle

On 1st of February, 2003, the space shuttle Columbia exploded when it re-entered the Earth’s atmosphere after finished a 16 days mission in space. All seven astronauts were dead because of this incident. The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) had stopped the space shuttle program for more than two years to investigate this tragedy. In the 16 days period, the astronauts did approximately 80 experiments on different categories, for example, life science and material science [1]. An

events surrounding the space shuttle Challenger, the product of flawed decisions. The evidence was inadvisable to launch the space shuttle at the earliest opportunity. NASA's perspective was that is was undesirable to delay the launch because of the impact it would have on political and public support for the program. Authorities dismissed potentially lethal hazards as only acceptable risks because of NASA's engineer's pressure to launch. The decision to launch the shuttle

There was a failure during the launch of the space shuttle challenger with one of the 0-rings on the solid-propellant boosters. It had become brittle by the cold weather and failed. This catastrophe led to an explosion shortly after liftoff. Engineers who had designed the 0-rings had apprehensions about launching under these extreme cold conditions. The engineers recommended that the launch be postponed, but they were overridden by their management. The management team did not believe that there

The Space Shuttle Columbia disaster happened on February 1st, 2003, and was the second and final lost Space Shuttle for NASA. Unlike the other case studies, I do not think that there was as much external disaster planning with the Columbia. In my research it seems that NASA as long been an advocate for the traditional approach to disaster management. Taking in to account the secret classification that surrounds much of what happens, and the inner workings of a government organization such as NASA

gave me a little more insight into what actually happened and how this tragedy could have possibly been avoided had NASA’s management team taken heed to the engineers and others who advised them to bring in someone to do a complete inspection of the shuttle. During this simulation, I viewed this tragedy through the eyes of one of the many engineers that were employed at NASA during this tragic time. I feel that this tragedy was the result of a combination of leadership and process failures. According

INTRODUCTION: This is Jenna Jackson reporting live from Kirksville, MO. Breaking news tragedy has struck Space Shuttle Challenger, killing all passengers, including a high school teacher. BODY: Sad news from Cape Canaveral, Florida, at 11:38 a.m. January 28, 1986, the Space Shuttle Challenger broke apart, disintegrating into the Atlantic Ocean, 73 seconds into its flight, leading to the deaths of its seven crew members. The crew included, five NASA astronauts and two Payload Specialists. NASA

The Space Shuttle Challenger was originally a test vehicle for the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA). In 1979, NASA ordered Challenger to be converted to a space-rated orbiter, which consisted of massive disassembly and restructuring of the orbiter. It was delivered back to NASA as the second orbiter in their fleet of Space Shuttles in July 1982, where it was launched on its first mission on 4 April 1983. Crew members conducted the first spacewalk of the Space Shuttle program

were to be cheap and reusable. Before these rocket boosters were modified again, the manufacturer had constructed these booster using two O rings to seal the hot gases inside the SRBs. What changed the construction for these boosters would be the Space Shuttle Challenger explosion back in January 18, 1986. The O rings in the booster “had become brittle in the cold temperature”(History) causing them to fail sealing the gases inside the booster. Now, this did cause a decline in human moral since the manufacturer

happened before, so I was in shock to see how the Space Shuttle Challenger exploded only 73 seconds liftoff, and killing all seven astronauts onboard. Going to researching about the tragedy, I found out the real cause was a massive, almost explosive, burning of the hydrogen that was streaming from the failed tank bottom, combined with liquid oxygen leaking from a part of the fuel tank known as the interbank. Under severe aerodynamic loads, the space shuttle Challenger broke apart over the Atlantic Ocean

The case study I chose to analyze was the Space Shuttle Challenger Explosion, by Ronald C. Kramer. Kramer, discussed the four main components that led to the catastrophic explosion. These components included the societal context, the final flaw, the persons behind the final decision to launch, and lastly the failure of social control mechanisms. Unlike popular belief, there was more than just one factor that led to the deadly failure of the launch. Kramer discusses these different concepts that point