Risk management is making and executing managerial decisions to reduce the likelihood of an adverse outcome and minimize possible losses caused by its implementation. Any project should conduct a risk analysis to determine how risks can be eliminated, anticipated, or managed in case they materialize. The Challenger Tragedy is no exception, and post-disaster analysis of the entire project demonstrates that the risks were not taken into account. The tragedy could have been avoided if a risk assessment had been conducted before the launch in accordance with all regulations, with a clear explanation of the consequences to those who made the decision.
It was later discovered that a design error was the root of the malfunction. The O-rings, which serve to seal the connections between the segments of the lateral solid fuel boosters, were the weak points. However, there was proof that since 1981, issues have occurred on every shuttle flight equipped with O-rings (Dixon, 2021). The rubber gaskets were typically found to be severely corroded, which allowed hot gases to leak through the cracks. As a result, it was essential to research and evaluate the risk associated with this technical design before launching the Challenger.
Additionally, the sealing rings’ protective qualities were lost at low temperatures because the rubber hardened and ceased to provide adequate tightness. This is another significant risk that was overlooked and led to the tragedy. On January 28, 1986, the shuttle’s launch pad was covered in ice, and the takeoff temperature was just above freezing (The New York Times, 2014). Since such intense frosts were expected, it was necessary to postpone the launch to reduce risks. A strong wind gust also destroyed a life-saving plug during takeoff, which could have prevented the tragedy.
During the shuttle’s launch, sealing rings were destroyed near the junction with an external fuel tank. Liquid hydrogen and liquid oxygen were present in the external fuel tank, and when it collapsed, a mixture of the two substances resulted in the explosion. Hence, the third severe risk was the structure of the Challenger, which theoretically could lead to an explosion, which in practice happened.
It is obvious that the issues with rocket booster O-rings that were currently present should have been given higher priority. The following two risks resulted from the first and indicated the likelihood that a problem might occur. The weather conditions served as the triggers, only to exacerbate already existing issues and create new ones. The fact that there was more than one previous experience when there were problems with the sealing rings meant that this risk had a higher probability of occurring.
In conclusion, the Challenger story is a significant tragedy in the history of not just the United States but also of all of humanity, and lessons must be learned from it. The tragedy might have been prevented if a risk assessment had been done. Engineers would search for a potential solution in the structure’s design in response to a risk assessment that would reveal how likely the tragedy is. Had weather conditions been considered, the launch could have been rescheduled or initially planned for a more favorable season.
References
Dixon, R. (2021). The Challenger space shuttle disaster: A case study in the analysis of binary data using Scatter diagrams and logit regression. Australian Economic Review, 54(2), 294–305.
The New York Times. (2014). Space shuttle challenger disaster: Major malfunction | Retro report | The New York Times [Video]. YouTube. Web.