The "Challenger" Launch Decision
The "Challenger" Launch Decision
This paper evaluates, by reviewing individual journal articles, the correctness of Joe Kilminster's decision to launch the "Challenger" space ship on its mission, which ended in disaster.
2,745 words (
approx. 11 pages) |
6 sources |
APA | 2004
Paper Summary:
This paper explains that NASA managers were informed, adequately and promptly, about the unsuitability of the approved design of shuttle rocket boosters when used under temperatures below 40 F per the contract signed with Morton-Thiokol; but NASA authorities were subject to severe economic and political pressures and schedule backlogs. The author states that, instead of upholding his superior's decision, his fellow professionals' technical findings and recommendations, and observing his profession's code of ethics, Joe Kilminster subjected himself to the pressure of NASA and recommended the launch, despite the negative input of his engineers. The paper concludes that Kilminster is morally accountable and culpable for the disaster, directly risking the lives of seven persons by ignoring his own knowledge as an expert engineer and the strong recommendations of his subordinate professionals
Table of Contents
Introduction
Review of Literature
M. M. Jennings, "Summary of the Challenger Episode"
Gordon Stubley, "Engineer and Integrity"
Diane Vaughan, "The Challenger Launch Decision"
National Society of Professional Engineers, "Code of Ethics for Engineers"
Texas A & M University, Departments of Philosophy and of Mechanical Engineering, "The Space Shuttle Challenger Disaster"
Findings, Conclusions, and Recommendations
From the Paper:
"Joe Kilminster, an engineer, and the Vice President or Space Booster Programs at Thiokol, was one of four management signatories who approved the launch and the author of the written recommendation that it was all right for the shuttle to fly. Thiokol's contract with the NASA provided that shuttles with boosters, like the Challenger, would function properly only within the range of 40 to 90 F. Its engineers also formalized their objection to such launch the day before the disaster."
The "Challenger" Launch Decision (2012, January 15). Retrieved February 13, 2012, from http://www.academon.com/Analytical-Essay-The-Challenger-Launch-Decision/57074
"The "Challenger" Launch Decision" 15 January 2012. Web. 13 Feb. 2012. <http://www.academon.com/Analytical-Essay-The-Challenger-Launch-Decision/57074>