Challenger space shutte risk assessment

These are external links and will open in a new window Close share panel Image copyright Reuters In the past week, the 30th anniversary of the Challenger shuttle disaster has been marked with tributes for the sacrifice of the crew. In the investigation that came after the tragedy, the brilliant physicist Richard Feynman identified a culture at Nasa where risk was not understood, writes mathematician Dr John Moriarty. The Challenger was lost because one small part - an O-ring seal - failed during a launch in cold weather.

Challenger space shutte risk assessment

These are external links and will open in a new window Close share panel Image copyright Reuters In the past week, the 30th anniversary of the Challenger shuttle disaster has been marked with tributes for the sacrifice of the crew.

In the investigation that came after the tragedy, the brilliant physicist Richard Feynman identified a culture at Nasa where risk was not understood, writes mathematician Dr John Moriarty. The Challenger was lost because one small part - an O-ring seal - failed during a launch in cold weather.

The possibility of this part failing had been predicted long before, but Nasa managers chose to ignore the concerns. The issue of "safety factors" was at the heart of the problem.

Suppose I tell you that a bridge you are about to drive over has a "safety factor of 2". Would you be reassured and put your foot down? Perhaps you might hit the brake instead, and ask: If the bridge was built twice as strong as is necessary for normal traffic, this sounds fine.

But if this "factor of 2" means something else - that only half of the essential structural components of the bridge will break under normal traffic conditions, you might opt for an alternative crossing. Before Challenger's final mission - listed as L - it was known that the O-ring seals on a previous flight - C - had eroded to a depth of one-third of their radius.

Instead of regarding this little-understood problem as an unacceptable risk, it was interpreted as a "a safety factor of three. Media playback is unsupported on your device Media captionOn 28 Januarythe Space Shuttle Challenger exploded 73 seconds after taking off, killing all seven of its crew.

Pessimists, typically, are not popular people. The rest of us don't want to hear about bad things when they might not even happen. Risk is about things that haven't actually happened.

Risk Management and the Space Shuttle Challenger disaster | Kelley G Rickard - rutadeltambor.com

We can study the past of course, but - as the financial services industry constantly reminds us - past performance is not necessarily a guide to the future. The thing is, the pessimists are actually right. To prove this we just need a monkey and a typewriter.

Given enough time and paper, it's technically possible for a monkey to type out the complete works of Shakespeare.

Challenger space shutte risk assessment

They simply need to press the keys in the right order. The probability of this is very small of course, but it is not zero.

Accessibility links

It is possible to prove mathematically that if something - anything - is possible, and if it is tried repeatedly and independently, it is guaranteed to happen eventually.

Not that it is possible, nor even likely - it is guaranteed. Richard Feynman, the great American physicist, wrote a detailed report on risk following the Space Shuttle Challenger disaster, entitled Personal Observations on the Reliability of the Shuttle.The Space Shuttle explosion is a case study in engineering safety and workplace ethics.

5 steps of risk management Organizational culture and decision-making processes Taking amazing risks Safety culture and risk-management failure 10 lessons of catastrophe.

Media caption On 28 January , the Space Shuttle Challenger exploded 73 seconds after taking off, killing all seven of its crew.

Pessimists, typically, are not popular people. Post-Challenger Evaluation of Space Shuttle Risk Assessment and Management is the compilation of the conclusions and recommendations of the Committee on Shuttle Criticality Review and Hazard Analysis Audit.

It is intended to assist NASA in taking the prudent additional steps which will provide a reasonable and responsible level of flight safety for the Space Shuttle, but has broader applications for other . The Space Shuttle explosion is a case study in engineering safety and workplace ethics.

IN ADDITION TO READING ONLINE, THIS TITLE IS AVAILABLE IN THESE FORMATS:

5 steps of risk management Organizational culture and decision-making processes Taking amazing risks Safety culture and risk-management failure 10 lessons of catastrophe.

Post-Challenger Evaluation of Space Shuttle Risk Assessment and Management is the compilation of the conclusions and recommendations of the Committee on Shuttle Criticality Review and Hazard . Challenger Space Shuttle Risk Assessment (Extra Credit) The multiple failures that led the disastrous events on the 28th of January, were inexcusable.

The reason the Challenger Space Shuttle blew up 73 seconds after launch was the result of a faulty sealing system which allowed exhaust flames from the Solid-Fuel Rocket Boosters (SRB) to.

Risk Management and the Space Shuttle Challenger disaster | Kelley G Rickard - rutadeltambor.com