Slashdot Mirror
Entire NASA Safety Board Resigns
identity0 writes "All nine members and two consultants of NASA's Aerospace Safety Advisory Panel have resigned today, reports CNN. The Panel was responsible for advising NASA on the safety of its spacecraft and facilities, and was set up in 1967 following the Apollo 1 fire. Recently, it had been criticized by the Congressional investigation into the Columbia accident. Here is the NASA press release, and the official home page of the ASAP."
I dont like it when people cock up and then resign....i always feel that they should stay and fix the mess they created....
well, kinda hard with the shuttle and all, but you get my drift...
all you are, is all you are, i'm so sorry for you.
A resignation letter that says "we have a lot of hard work in front of us"? Perhaps they aren't resigning from their jobs but merely from the board. Perhaps when the reorganization takes place they will return to doing exactly what they were doing before? This article seems to be saying something that you've got to read between the lines.
Shortly after the Challenger disaster on January 28, 1986, a sick "joke" started circulating. NASA was reported to mean, "Need Another Seven Astronauts."
Unfortunately, as news reports come in about disregard for safety for Shuttle Columbia, it appears that such "joke" has a major element of truth. NASA bureaucrats (and probably politicians up to and including at the White House, as well) disregarded Morton Thiokol engineers in 1986, and we're now hearing that engineers warned NASA officials and the President prior to Columbia's launch that the Shuttle system itself was prone to such a disaster as witnessed yesterday. We know that Columbia was hit with "something" ("foam" or more likely, ice) during its launch on January 16th, and apparently, officials didn't take it seriously enough (Cain slew Abel; did Leroy Cain slay Columbia?). The excuse that "Columbia's crew was doomed from the start because they couldn't make repairs" is both silly and illustrates the current "can't do" attitude of today's NASA, which is far different than the NASA which both put humans on the Moon AND safely returned a crew to Earth after Apollo 13 had a "major malfunction" way up there.
For NASA's bureaucrats (and some politicians), it appears that risking astronauts' lives, NOT for the "unknown variables," but for glamour, expediency, and selfishness, is "acceptable." Perhaps this is to be expected in today's America where "style" and "appearance" are far more valued than substance and tangibility.
The "joke" way back in 1986, "N.A.S.A. = Need Another Seven Astronauts," has tragically turned out to be 2003's reality.
Reading between the lines, it looks like NASA Chief Administrator Sean O'Keefe fired the safety board because it was ineffective at stopping him and his management team from crushing attempts by engineers to put safety first, amd now he's making the safety board the fall guys in the Columbia Tragedy.
This from the guy who, barely hours after the accident, with astronauts' bodies still smoldering in half a dozen states, announced that he was forming an "independent" review board, under his terms, subject to his time frame, and under his budget control.
When Congress talks about the "NASA Culture", the finger is clearly pointing in his direction. O'Keefe should have resigned ages ago.
Safety officers in general are expected to make hard decisions and take hard and unpopular stands, theyre not supposed to coast through their tenure hoping nothing bad happens. That said you have to ask will this do any good.
The report on the shuttle disaster cited cultural problems at NASA. I don't see how changing 9 faces at the top will change the culture. What NASA could probably use isn't just a few sacrificial lambs at the top but someone to go through the agency and decimate its ranks. This is a life and death matter for the people that ride pillars of fire into the sky, it should be for those on the ground as well.
The Morton Thiokol presentations regarding the O-rings were utter crap. Edward Tufte has an excellent deconstruction of their major slides, and shows how little information they contiained. He redrew the graphs, and showed that it was almost certain that the rings would fail at the Challenger's launch temperature.
... a good chart could have saved lives.
The link I gave is just a summary & leaves out some parts - the original graph was organized by serial number, not launch temperature, and is filled with cutesy pictures of rockets (chartjunk in Tufte terminology). The new graph shows temperature vs. problems-found-on-recovered-orings. The Challengetr's launch temperature, 40 degrees F, is highlighted at the left of the graph, showing how different this one was versus all others.
The book has a much better presentation, and it's an excellent excellent book. This example is something that I think back to when I make any presentation
HIV Crosses Species Barrier... into Muppets
They did the only honorable thing.
"Eve of Destruction", it's not just for old hippies anymore...
NASA = Need Another Nine Advisors?
Q.
Insert Signature Here
Do you see the word "paraphrase"? Do you understand the old joke I am referring too? Do not assume others are as stupid as yourself...
For people who get my comedic reference (including the intentional mis-spelling) - I hope they are mildly amused.
You I couldn't care less about, 'tard. Oh and only nine were permanents, the other two were consultants - "Do you see the mis-match here?"
Q. the TrollDoll
Insert Signature Here
NASA have been playing pass the parcel with the blame for a while, referring accident reports and probability assessments of things going wrong from one committee, to a sub-committee to the next committee and to independant researchers in order to try to prove that their incompetance was not the cause of any wrongdoings. So far, their attempts to blame the government of the USA for causing safety problems by underfunding the project and pressing for results too soon, just so that they could have something to their name (much like the first man on the moon thing) have failed. The US Government will never accept that they were the cause of any safety issues, directly or indirectly, and I can say with complete certainty that the citizens of that huge country won't see how underfunding and budget cuts can lead to problems with safety.
"Safety First, as it seems," applies only when it's affordable to do so.
They need to make sure that word gets around that a certain believable group of people to take the blame, and of course, having exhausted all other options and O'Keefe wanting to keep his nice highly paid job, there was but one option... Go back and admit that it was their Safety Advisory Council's incompetance which caused the problems in safety. The Council would obviously be reluctant to admit that it was their fault and as such never have, but I belive O'Keefe has used this opportunity to bolster the group into resignation, hinting at the possiblity of them having been the cause. This is further indicated by the fact that strong review is going into the old council's contract and practices.
Of course, the press release only says that they are resigning, not what from. They mya still be employees of NASA but be resigning from their post on the Council in order that after review, perhaps another be set up that is mroe to O'Keefe's liking. Motives, I am unsure of, but it seems that the council did have problems in putting safety before cost consideration of the dafety procedure implementation. Perhaps a new council who are more willing to conisder the issue of safety as of the utmost importance could help, but only after stringent review of the practices, methods and objectives of the old Council.
Particularly scathing is the following: "'Rather than committing to an adequate budget for the space shuttle, NASA and its congressional allies found it easier to get rid of those raising the alarm,' the former panel members said in a statement provided to The Washington Post."
Given the disclosures to date about NASA management, it is not surprising at all that they decided to squelch the messengers; just like they did the engineers who wanted on-orbit imagery during the mission. Mere resignations or re-assignments seem inadequate.
Bush Lies On the Record.