#Challenger shuttle free#

On the night before the Challenger was set to launch, a group of NASA engineers and managers met with the shuttle contracting firm Morton Thiokol to discuss the safety of launching the shuttle given the low temperatures that were forecasted for the day of the launch. One that can help us avoid future ethical disasters. While the most commonly referenced explanation for what went wrong focuses on the technological failures associated with the O-rings, an examination of the decision process that led to the launch through a modern day “behavioral ethics” lens illuminates a much more complicated, and troubling, picture. Had the astronauts survived the explosion, it is unlikely they would have survived without oxygen or the impact of hitting the water.Ī review of the accident resulted in major changes to the space shuttle program including a reduction in launches, easing of its workload and a redesign of the SRB O-ring system.Shuttle liftoff from Cape Kennedy, FL (Photodisc)įor anyone who was around on Tuesday, January 28, 1986, it’s difficult to watch a shuttle launch without remembering the Challenger disaster, when the space shuttle disintegrated 73 seconds after launch, killing all seven crew members. The orbiter broke into many sections and plummeted to the ocean, 16 kilometres below. The force of the explosion blew away the SRBs, which continued to travel on an uncontrolled path. In an instant, the nose of the SRB punctured the external tank causing liquid hydrogen and liquid oxygen to burst out of their pressurised tanks and immediately ignite in a ball of flame.

#Challenger shuttle free#

The gap in the casing opened further, eventually causing the bottom of the booster to break free from the external tank. But as the shuttle passed through max-Q (maximum aerodynamic pressure), the 'material' was shaken out and flame licked out the side of the SRB. The join held, possibly due to burnt material blocking the exit of exhaust through the side. One set of O-rings on the right hand SRB immediately burnt away, releasing a puff of black smoke immediately after lift-off. Because the rings were frozen, during this launch they took a fraction of a second longer to expand. The night before, the decision was made to go aheadĪs the SRBs ignited, the hot gases inside immediately caused the O-rings to expand in the casing joints to prevent flame leaking out sideways. However management needed to get the mission underway,Īs soon as possible. Space Center and what effect it would have on the space shuttle, particularly Several engineers raised concerns over the low temperature at Kennedy Had already flown its mission, after numerous delays and now Challenger The schedule for 1986 originally listed 12 flights. Of being a space taxi - one of the goals NASA promised when it was firstĭesigned.

The pressure was on NASA to make the space shuttle fulfil its promise Were dressed in heavy coats and scarves - an unusual sight for tropical Iciclesįormed on the space shuttle launch pad, and people waiting for the launch The morning of 27 January 1986 was particularly cold in the USA. The Space Shuttle Files: The Challenger Disaster - ABC Science Online