The Space Shuttle Challenger Disaster

NB: We do not resell your papers. Upon ordering, we do an original paper exclusively for you.

NB: All your data is kept safe from the public.

Facts in the case with respect to each of the following

Engineering design

The space shuttle is known to be one of the most ambitious projects of the modern age. The idea to create a space ship that would be able to fly into the outer space and return back seemed fantastic and even ridiculous. That is why its embodiment was a very complicated process that had its own peculiarities connected with the technicality of this project. With this in mind, it was obvious that every launch was risky, and in case of failure, a great number of specialists analyzed aspects of the accident.

First of all, it should be said that the space shuttle was made as a reusable launch vehicle (Fleddermann 7), and that is why it was a complicated mechanism. In order to launch this spaceship, solid rocket boosters are used. They can guarantee a great augmentation of power.

However, they are very dangerous as it is impossible to stop them once the fuel is lit. Accidents with space shuttles showed how dangerous this type of engine could be. Some problems were found in the work of solid rocket booster and field-joint design before the launch of the Challenger. They did not work in a proper way. Unfortunately, a good solution to this problem was not found before the Challenger launch.

However, the engineering design of this shuttle had a great impact on society. It was a source of pride for the community as a complicated ship with a unique design was created in their country. That is why this project was a real affair of honor for the whole nation.

Atmospheric (weather) conditions from the night before launch until the time of the disaster

Problems revealed while analyzing the project made specialists sure that in order to mitigate risks, it was better to assure of ideal weather conditions on the date of launch. This fact became obvious after investigations, which showed that cold weather influenced the work of the whole system greatly and increased the possibility of failure.

That is why the first launch was postponed because of a cold front, which was said to come. The decision to wait for another day was accepted. However, the night before the launch, the weather did not become better. The overnight temperature was even colder than it was expected. There was a significant accumulation of ice on launchpad from safety showers and fire hoses (Fleddermann 11). However, this time, the launch was not postponed.

Professional responsibilities neglected

Crash of the space shuttle was a very stressing accident, which of cause attracted much attention. That is why a great number of different specialists tried to analyze the aftermath of the launch to determine the main reasons which led to these results in order to avoid them in the future. It was rather an easy thing to do as every launch of the shuttle was filmed by hundreds of cameras, and all showings had been recorded.

Having analyzed all data and evidence which were at their disposal, specialists came to the conclusion that neglection of professional responsibilities might have been a reason for this disaster. The first obvious reason was the disdain of the officials towards weather conditions. Richard Feynmann, one of the members of the special commission, managed to prove the idea that on cold temperatures, the space shuttle becomes more vulnerable, and the probability of disaster rises significantly (Fleddermann 12).

Under these conditions, it becomes obvious that people responsible for the launch should have postponed it in order to wait for better conditions and guarantee its success. One of the fundamental canons of NSPE code for engineering, which states that deceptive acts should be avoided (NSPE Code of Ethics for Engineers para. 7), was ignored. Moreover, another accident with the space shuttle showed a threatening tendency that a great number of safety measures were ignored while preparing the ship for its launch.

Having analyzed reasons for the crash of the space shuttle Colombia, the special commission came to the conclusion that it happened because of the detachment of the foam. Specialists who were responsible for this launch knew about this problem; however, they did not pay much attention to it.

That is why the report made after analyzing the data was called broken safety culture. Taking into consideration these facts, it is possible to come to the conclusion that it was possible to avoid this tragedy if all people responsible for certain aspects of this project were attentive and acted according to instruction.

Engineers assuming administrative/managerial positions during their careers

There is a tendency that many engineers assume administrative positions during their careers. It is possible to say that this fact has a pernicious influence on the whole sphere of engineering in the world. Accomplishing a managerial job, an engineer loses his practical skills, which are of great significance in the work of any good specialist.

That is why it is even possible to say that this tendency can be one of the factors which led to disastrous results. Being not skilled, engineers can forget about some tiny detail, which is very important in this complicated sphere. That is why it is important to combine managerial work with good practice in order to be in good shape.

Works Cited

Fleddermann, Charles. Engineering Ethics. New Jersey: Prentice Hall. 2011. Print.

NSPE Code of Ethics for Engineers. Web.

Click Here To Order Now!

The Space Shuttle Challenger Disaster

Do you need this or any other assignment done for you from scratch?

We have qualified writers to help you.

We assure you a quality paper that is 100% free from plagiarism and AI.

You can choose either format of your choice ( Apa, Mla, Havard, Chicago, or any other)