EG2401 Group 3

Analysis of the Challenger disaster

using the Ethics Line Diagram

Kenneth Goh
Timothy Tsang
Tan Yen Kheng
 Factual Issues
F1. Blow-by of the O-rings had occurred in an
earlier flight where the temperature was 53
F2. The overnight temperature before the
shuttles flight was 8, even colder than the
originally predicted low 20s
F3. Both NASA and Thiokol had known of the
issues of the O-ring at low temperatures
F3. NASA were informed of the low predicted
temperatures on the launch date which were
even lower than the lowest 53 launch previously
 Conceptual Issues (Party 1 Morton
Thiokol)

C1a. When the plan was first conceived, does the

power to make decisions lie with the engineers
judgment or solely the management?
C1b. When the plan was first conceived, does
Thiokol has the authority to override NASA and
postpone the launch?
C1C. Were there clear considerations for the
safety of the astronauts when the green light to
launch was given?
 Conceptual Issues (Party 2 NASA)

C1a. When the plan was first conceived, is the

purpose for mankinds advancement in
technology or political move to support a party?
C2b. Were there clear considerations for the
safety of the astronauts when the green light to
launch was given?
C2c. Was the problem of a potential danger that
involved lives seriously considered although the
data obtained were inconclusive?
 Ethics Issues (Party 1 Morton
Thiokol)
E1a. Thiokol had known of the inherent
problems of the O-rings at low temperature
E1b. Thiokol engineers had reiterated to their
management that the original decision not to
launch was the correct one
E1c. VP of Thiokol, Lund, reversed his previous
decision and recommended the launch to
proceed
 Ethics Issues (Party 2 NASA)

E2a. NASA and Thiokol had a meeting the evening

before the launch to discuss the possible effects
of the cold temperatures on the rocket boosters
E2b. NASA employee Mulloy disagreed with
Thiokol engineers view and pointed out that the
data was inconclusive
E2c. NASA didnt want to postpone the launch as
they didnt want to antagonize Bush, who was an
ardent NASA supporter
 Ethics Line Drawing: Case 1

Morton Thiokol recommending the launch of

Challenger to proceed, noting Lund (of Thiokol)
reversed his previous decision and recommended
that the launch proceed.

Thiokol were already aware of problems with the

O-rings
 Ethics Line Drawing: Party #1 Morton
Thiokol
NP PP

P2 SC1 P1
Pt Party #1 Morgan Thiokol Location from Left
NP Recommending the launch to proceed, ignoring the Left Point
inherent problems of the cold weather with the blow-by
of the O-rings; and not informing NASA of the O-ring
problems at low temperatures.
PP Reverse the decision of allowing the launch to proceed, Right Point
at the same time working together with NASA to rectify
the O-ring problems, and issuing a new
recommendation of postponing the flight until the
weather turns better or until the problem has been
rectified.
 Ethics Line Drawing: Party #1 Morton
Thiokol
NP PP

P2 SC1 P1
Pt Party #1 Morgan Thiokol Location from Left
P1 Thiokol and NASA held discussions on the O-ring the 9.5
evening before the launch and Thiokol recommended
that the launch should be delayed until the O-ring
temperature could be at least 53
P2 Lund of Thiokol reversed his previous decision of 0.5
delaying the launch and instead recommended the
launch to proceed despite knowing the problems with
the O-ring
 Ethics Line Drawing: Party #1 Morton
Thiokol
NP PP

P2 SC1 P1
Pt Party #1 Morgan Thiokol Location from Left
SC1 Thiokol to recommend that the launch should be 7
delayed until the O-ring temperature could be at least
31, where the original design had specified that was
the lowest temperature in which the booster is able to
operate properly
 Ethics Line Drawing: Party #2 NASA
NP SC1 PP

P2 P3 P1
Pt Party #2 NASA Location from Left
NP Allowing the launch to proceed despite knowing that Left Point
the temperatures on the day of launch were the lowest
ever and had resulted in severe erosion of the O-rings
previously
PP Delaying the launch until the inclement weather had Right Point
died down and ensuring that Thiokol conduct
investigative tests to find out whether there was
correlation between the temperature and the erosion of
the O-rings
 Ethics Line Drawing: Party # 2 NASA
NP SC1 PP

P2 P3 P1
Pt Party #2 NASA Location from Left
P1 NASA, who had expected low temperatures on the day 9
of launch, checked with all shuttle contractors to
determine if they foresaw any problems with launching
the shuttle at low temperatures
P2 NASA employee, Larry Mulloy, pointed out that the data 4
that Thiokol had presented was inconclusive and
disagreed with them, even though he may have known
that there had in fact been severe erosion of the O-rings
at 53 on a previous launch.
 Ethics Line Drawing: Party # 2 NASA
NP SC1 PP

P2 P3 P1
Pt Party #2 NASA Location from Left
P3 When the launch was recommended, and McDonald, 4.5
who was the director of the Solid Rocket Booster project
at Thiokol, found out and attempted to convince NASA
to delay the launch, NASA did not take his views into
consideration
SC1 NASA to question Thiokol on the reasons behind their 8.5
decision to reverse the decision of delaying the launch
until better weather, when they had already knew of
the inherent problems with the O-rings
 Ethics Line Drawing: Case 2
NASA did not want to postpone the launch,
noting NASA didnt want to antagonize [Vice-
President] Bush, a strong NASA supporter, by
postponing the launch due to inclement weather
after he had arrived.

NASA was already informed that the predicted

temperatures (in the low 20s degF) was lower
than the lowest 53 degF of previous launches
where there was already blow-by problems of
the O-rings.
 Ethics Line Drawing: Party #1 Morton
Thiokol
NP PP

P2 SC1 P1
Pt Party #1 Morgan Thiokol Location from Left
NP Recommending the launch to proceed, ignoring the Left Point
predicted colder weather with the blow-by of the O-
rings; and not caring whether how the outcome would
affect Bush.
PP Reverse the decision of allowing the launch to proceed, Right Point
at the same time working together with NASA to rectify
the O-ring problems, and issuing a new
recommendation of postponing the flight until the
weather turns better or until the problem has been
rectified; and mindful that a negative outcome would
adversely affect Bush.
 Ethics Line Drawing: Party #2 NASA
NP SC1 PP

P2 P3 P1
Pt Party #2 NASA Location from Left
NP Allowing the launch to proceed despite knowing that Left Point
the temperatures on the day of launch were the lowest
ever and had resulted in severe erosion of the O-rings
previously; and not caring whether how the outcome
would affect Bush.
PP Delaying the launch until the inclement weather had Right Point
died down and ensuring that Thiokol conduct
investigative tests to find out whether there was
correlation between the temperature and the erosion of
the O-rings, ensuring a positive outcome which would
be beneficial for Bushs political agenda.