1986 Space Shuttle Challenger Explosion

Eric Brennan, Caron Parker, Alex Macomber, Ethan Hancock

Company Overview/Background

• Founded in July, 29, 1958 by Dwight D. Eisenhower
• Annual Budget
• Is the world’s premier space exploration program
• Many inventions lead to consumer products
• Has had three space tragedies

Event Description and Presentation Intentions

• Space shuttle challenger exploded, killing all seven crew members
• Prior to the launch there was great anticipation over the first civilian going to space
• Five astronauts were aboard

​

• Engineering Technicals:
• Case of negligence

​

​

​

Top Five Stakeholders and Their Stakes

• Media: responsibility to disseminate information to the public
• NASA: funding, public faith and trust
• Government: responsibility to regulate and fund
• Humanity: the pace of scientific progress and space flight
• Future Astronauts: safety

Resolution Analysis: What They Did

• Rogers Commission Report: 1986
• Lapse in their Safety Program leading to the launch
• Over reliance on the judgement of their engineers
• Lack of statistical analysis

​

• April 3rd 1986 Post Incident: Arnold Aldrich’s public hearing

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

Our Alternative Resolution: What They Should Have Done

• Direct input from the Rogers Commission on implementing safety recommendations
• Ongoing independent oversight as described by Columbia Accident Investigation Board in 2003

The Effects This Resolution Would Have on the Top Five Stakeholders

​

Media: Citizens need to know true risks. NASA could use to sway public opinion.

Government: Would face increasing NASA’s budget or shelving the program.

NASA: Would face a massive restructuring, but perhaps leading to more innovation.

Humanity: Disasters slow down progress and shared innovation.

Future Astronauts: Their safety, and their willingness to participate.

Why is Our Resolution Better?

• Pros: Improved Safety
• Reduced bias from NASA
• Considering the societal context of the explosion (Cold War)
• Standardizing their procedure of operation

​

• Cons
• Costs: financial, time, personnel
• Complexity
• Stifling progress

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

Bibliography

The Challenger Disaster- A Case of Subjective Engineering https://spectrum.ieee.org/tech-history/heroic-failures/the-space-shuttle-a-case-of-subjective-engineering

​

The Space Shuttle Challenger Disaster- A failure in decision support system and human factors management http://dssresources.com/cases/spaceshuttlechallenger/index.html

​

​

Rogers Commission Report, Appendix f, https://science.ksc.nasa.gov/shuttle/missions/51-l/docs/rogers-commission/Appendix-F.txt