TheNASA Challenger Disaster of 1986 in The Space shuttle challenger disaster casestudy: Pleaseread The Challenger Disaster The Space shuttle challenger disaster casestudy Case Studies text...

1 answer below »

TheNASA Challenger Disaster of 1986 in The Space shuttle challenger disaster casestudy:

Pleaseread The Challenger Disaster The Space shuttle challenger disaster casestudy Case Studies text (Attached file). Consider parallels between thisproject and how to control or minimize Risk Management in the context of:

- Sensitive factors relatedto acceptable and unacceptable risks

- The risk in making hastydecisions due to customer and management pressures

- Potential lowering ofstandards by management in the interest of time and budget

- The reluctance of projectpersonnel to (escalate/whistle blow) a problem

- Potential negative pressfrom internal sources or outside media "interpretation"

((please write 2 pages))

Document Preview:

The Space Shuttle Challenger I Disaster On January 28,1986, the space shuttle Challenger lifted off the launch pad at 1 1:38 A.M., beginning the flight of mission 51-L.' Approximately seventy-four seconds into the flight, the Challenger was engulfed in an explosive burn and all comrnuni- cation and telemetry ceased. Seven brave crewmembers lost their lives. On board the Challenger were Francis R. (Dick) Scobee (commander), Michael John Smith (pilot), Ellison S. Onizuka (mission specialist one), Judith Arlene Resnik (mission specialist two), Ronald Erwin McNair (mission specialist three), S. Christa McAuliffe (payload specialist one), and Gregory Bruce Jarvis (payload specialist two). A faulty seal, or O-ring, on one of the two solid rocket boosters caused the accident. Following the accident, significant energy was expended trying to ascertain whether the accident had been predictable. Controversy arose from the desire to assign, or to avoid, blame. Some publications called it a management failure, specifically in risk management, while others called it a technical failure. Whenever accidents had occurred in the past at the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA), an internal investigation team had been formed. 'The first digit indicates the fiscal year of the launch (i.e., "5" means XXXXXXXXXXThe second number in- dicates the launch site (i.e., "1" is the Kennedy Space Center in Florida, "2" is Vandenberg Air Force Base in California). The letter represents the mission number (i.e., "C" would be the third mission scheduled). This designation system was implemented after Space Shuttle flights one through nine, which were designated STS-X. STS is the Space Transportation System and X would indicate the flight number.404 THE SPACE SHUTTLE CHALLENGER DISASTER But in this case, perhaps because of the visibility, the White House took the ini- tiative in appointing an independent commission. There did exist significant jus- tification...

Answered Same DayDec 20, 2021

Solution

David answered on Dec 20 2021
3 Votes
The Space shuttle Challenger disaster
The first space shuttle flight occu
ed on Fe
uary 18, 1977, with the launch of Enterprise. It was
a proud day for NASA, and the beginning of a new age in space exploration. Less than 9 years
later, on January 28, 1986, the nation was stunned when the space
shuttle Challenger disintegrated 73 seconds after launch. All seven crew members perished. The
technical explanation for this disaster was the “O-ring” problem—a crucial shuttle component
was compromised by the cold weather on that launch day. Subsequently, it became clear that
there were voices speaking against the launch because of wo
ies about the O-ring problem.
However, there were pressures to launch and a belief in the infallibility of the decision-making
process. Thus, the voices speaking against launch were silenced. The classic Challenger space
shuttle disaster illustrate, engineers and managers at the National Aeronautics and Space
Administration (NASA) and the cooperating company, Thiokol, had different priorities,
perceptions, and technical judgments regarding the “go, no-go” decision of that space launch.
Lack of individual responsibility and critical judgment contributed to the miscommunication and
esulting disaster. In some crises,...
SOLUTION.PDF

Answer To This Question Is Available To Download

Related Questions & Answers

More Questions »

Submit New Assignment

Copy and Paste Your Assignment Here