Research Paper, Essay on Medicine, Challenger

Free study resources: Free term papers and essays on Medicine

We are offering free complimentary access to thousands of free essays and term papers on almost every subject imaginable. The free Medicine essays do not interfere with our services: We know how much people like free resources and just want to keep the visitors on our site and illustrate the advantages of our services by exposing the drawbacks of using free resources. Please note that the free papers hosted on this site have been donated by college students. Those are not our writers' products and are not indicative of the quality of our services. To examine the real quality of our services please visit the Work Samples page.

Free essays and term papers take a lot of time to find and tweak

There are thousands of free essays on-line, however, browsing through categories takes forever to finally locate the right piece. Moreover, free Medicine papers are rather outdated and most likely will feature neither current research nor correct citations. The structure of the papers will make you spend hours to tweak in order to finally match your professor's instructions.

Errors, typos, incorrect grammar and word choice

If you want to do your project all by yourself, we can respect that. You are free to use our free papers and tell your friends about our site. You will need to spend hours because the papers are presented on as-is basis and we do not guarantee them to be any good. They may contain errors, types, incorrect grammar, incorrect sources, poor research, to name just a few.

Use our services to save time and grade

If you are not willing to spend hours browsing through our essay collection and need services of a qualified writer, you can order custom term papers or custom essays on absolutely any subject. You won't have to rewrite the paper because our writer will write a brand new paper in accordance with your instructions. Buy Custom Term Paper...

Essay/Term paper: Challenger

Essay, term paper, research paper:  Medicine

On January 26, 1986, one of the greatest disasters of our time occurred. When Challenger was destroyed many questions were asked about the safety of space missions. Many questions were asked about the credibility of the engineers who designed the air craft. It is now know that crucial information about the faulty O-rings was know to many if not all of the engineers. These engineers had many moral decisions they had to face when the problem was first noticed, which was as early as November 1981. When a shuttle is launched their are two booster rockets attached to the side of it that disconnect when the shuttle gets into orbit. The rockets that were on the Challenger were manufactured by Morton-Thiokol, an engineering company. This company then sends the rockets to the launch site where they are assembled. Where the different pieces of the rocket fit together, there is a set of O-rings that make a seal around the booster. Around the O-rings their is a putty substance that holds the O-rings in place. In November of 1981, after the flight of the second shuttle mission, the joints where examined, and the O-rings were eroded. The joints were still sealing effectively but the O-ring material was decaying because of hot gasses that went through the putty. At this point Roger Boisjoly an engineer for Morton-Thiokol started researching different types of putty to reduce the corrosion on the O-rings. After testing the O-rings in the laboratory it was found that they did not return to their original size after being compressed at low temperatures. Thiokol designed a set of billets that would hold the joint more firmly in place. These billets were not ready on the day of the Challenger disaster because they took too long to manufacture, and NASA did not want to delay the project. The next tests took place in June of 1985 at Morton-Thiokol in Utah. The primary seal on flight 51B which flew on April 29, 1985, was eroded; "eroded in 3 places over a 1.3 inch length up to a maximum depth of.171 inches. It was postulated that this primary seal had never sealed during the full two minute flight."i It's at this point that Boisjoly knew he had to go to his superiors about the problem. In August of 1985 Morton-Thiokol formed a task force of engineers to solve the problem of the O-rings. This task force only consisted of 5 engineers who could not solve the problem. NASA wanted Thiokol to down play the problem because they were under a lot of pressure due to competition. The night before the scheduled launch of Challenger, a teleconference was held between engineers and management from the Kennedy Space Center, Marshal Space Flight Center in Alabama and Morton-Thiokol in Utah.ii Boisjoly, and Ernie Thompson another engineer from Thiokol knew this was their last chance to stop the flight from taking off. Robert Lund, Thiokol's Engineering Vice President showed that 53 degrees "was the only low temperature data Thiokol had for the effects of cold on the operational boosters."iiiBut they had no data that did prove that it was unsafe to launch at lower temperatures. Boisjoly and Thompson were unsuccessful in "blowing the whistle." The next day the Challenger took of from the Kennedy space Center; "a rush of cotton-candy like smoke washed over the cockpit windows, possibly accompanied by a brief burst of brilliant orange flames. Almost simultaneously, the astronauts were crushed down in their seats by a force at least 12 times greater than gravity."iv After the disaster Boisjoly went to his office, where he stayed and thought. Some of his colleagues came in to see how he was doing but he could not even speak, he was so over come with emotion. Their were many factors that effected neglecting the O-rings. For one NASA had a billion dollar contract with Thiokol before the disaster and Thiokol felt that causing any problems by expressing Boisjolys concern could jeopardize the contract. Boisjoly was an engineer and according to a code of ethics I believe he should have followed, he should have gone public with the information when NASA told them to down play the problem. Along with his loyalty to Thiokol he also had a moral obligation to the crew of the Challenger. A question he should have asked at the time was "Would I let my wife or children ride in there?" I believe that Boisjoly did not do a good enough job in light of the model code of ethics. I do not know if any one would have been able to stop the flight because NASA had their set of plans that they wanted to stick to and Thiokol was looking at the problem from a management point of view. Gerry Mason the President of Thiokol said to Robert Lund; "take off your engineering hat and put on your management hat." v I do believe that the code is good in theory but I also believe that it is very hard to follow. This is so because the engineer must look at the problem from all points of view. Boisjoly was put in a very tough position he either goes to the media and loss his job, or down play the serious problem and risks and eventually destroys the lives of the crew. I personally believe that I would opt to loss my job because it was the right thing to do, and because I would not be able to handle the lives of five people on my conscience. The code of ethics is necessary in any employment situation. But it needs to be stressed more in the education of an engineer. Engineers must realize that their are many situations that people put their live in the hands of the engineer. Every time we step into a car we are relying on the design of an engineer, and if any part of it fails the passenger could get hurt if not killed. In today's society their are many institutions that protect the public from technology; buildings must meet certain regulations, and cars have to meet certain safety standards. But their are not as many organizations that protect the rights of the engineers. When can we say that it is no longer the engineer's fault, and say that it is the fault of the operator? Engineers must be careful when it comes to ethical standards, they should not have to be in the same position that Boisjoly was in. By evaluating the situation and acting according to what is best for society and themselves they should find a perfect median between morals and management. i Http://www.mit.edu:8001/activities/ethics ii Http://www.mit.edu:8011/ethics iii http://www.mit.edu:8001/activities/ethics/boisjoly/RB-intro.html ivhttp://www.mit.edu:8001/activities/ethics/boisjoly/RB-intro.html v Gerry Mason, January 27 1986