Slashdot Mirror


Bob Ebeling, Challenger Engineer Who Forewarned of Shuttle Disaster, Dead At 89 (huffingtonpost.com)

An anonymous reader quotes a report from HuffingtonPost: For three decades, retired NASA engineer Bob Ebeling blamed himself for being unable to stop the 1986 launch of space shuttle Challenger. He had warned that the shuttle might explode, and it did shortly after liftoff, killing seven crew members. Ebeling was one of five engineers at a NASA contractor then called Morton Thiokol who warned the space agency that cold temperatures predicated at the time of the launch could prove disastrous. The warning was ignored. The night before the launch, Ebeling reportedly told his wife, Darlene, "It's going to blow up." He told another daughter, Kathy Ebeling, that he had toyed with the idea of bringing his hunting rifle to work to threaten NASA not to launch, according to an article last month in The Washington Post. In the final weeks of his life, however, thanks to an outpouring of support following a National Public Radio story in January on the 30th anniversary of the disaster, Ebeling, 89, finally found peace. Ebeling died Monday in his home in Brigham City, Utah, after a prolonged illness with prostate cancer, NPR reported.

16 of 132 comments (clear)

  1. Sad. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    RIP Mr. Ebeling.

    A tragedy that did not have to happen because "sales and marketing" ignored the engineer with the technical knowhow.

    1. Re:Sad. by Lisandro · · Score: 5, Insightful

      NASA had to launch in order to keep to their promised schedule (which was already stretched several times before the incident) in order not to lose funding. Someone made the call to consider the freezing an acceptable risk and launch even with several warnings not to do so.

      There was a a "product" and a "sale".

    2. Re:Sad. by gstoddart · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Well, then it's the next batch of cluprits ... PR and management. Which I gather in this case is exactly what happened.

      The night before the launch, Ebeling and four other engineers at NASA contractor Morton Thiokol had tried to stop the launch. Their managers and NASA overruled them.

      That night, he told his wife, Darlene, "It's going to blow up."

      When Challenger exploded 73 seconds after liftoff, Ebeling and his colleagues sat stunned in a conference room at Thiokol's headquarters outside Brigham City, Utah. They watched the spacecraft explode on a giant television screen and they knew exactly what had happened.

      Three weeks later, Ebeling and another engineer separately and anonymously detailed to NPR the first account of that contentious pre-launch meeting. Both were despondent and in tears as they described hours of data review and arguments. The data showed that the rubber seals on the shuttle's booster rockets wouldn't seal properly in cold temperatures and this would be the coldest launch ever.

      What's really sad is this poor bastard did everything he could to avert it, and got told to STFU.

      It's sad that he carried guilt for something he properly identified and did everything he could to prevent it.

      "I think that was one of the mistakes that God made," Ebeling says softly. "He shouldn't have picked me for the job. But next time I talk to him, I'm gonna ask him, 'Why me. You picked a loser.' "

      No sir, that's not how the rest of us interpret that.

      --
      Lost at C:>. Found at C.
    3. Re:Sad. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Insightful

      ...should have GONE to jail.

      You should go to jail for butchering the English language like that.

    4. Re:Sad. by Solandri · · Score: 5, Insightful

      How NASA came up with the 1 loss per 100,000 figure is a great lesson in misapplied statistics. Most of that risk was due to O-ring failure. Mating the segments of the SRBs was a difficult task, and inspection of the SRBs after test firings showed that something like 1 in 50 O-rings sealing the joint was failing (burning through). This was correctly deemed unacceptable. NASA's "solution" was to put in 3 O-rings at each joint. That triple redundancy meant that the chance of a complete burn-through (failure of all three O-rings) was 1 in 50*50*50 = 1 in 125,000. Presto! You've taken a system with unacceptably high risk, and through the clever use of statistics turned it into something reliable.

      Unfortunately, that math only works when the failures are independent events. When a common event compromises all three O-rings - like cold weather - they all fail together and your redundancy offers no additional protection.

      The same thing happened at Fukushima. They knew the nuclear plant would need diesel generators for backup power in an emergency. Diesel generators can be finicky to start, especially if they haven't been usd much for years. So they added redundancy by installing multiple generators - 2 per reactor, plus a switching station which would allow them to shunt power from any generator to any reactor. 12 diesel generators in all for the plant.

      Again, that assumes the diesel generator failures are independent events. A common event (flooding from a tsunami) wiped out all but 2 of the generators, and those 2 (in another reactor further up the hill that had been shut down for maintenance) were useless because the flooding also wiped out the switching station.

      When you took Intro to Statistics the book said to get the overall probability, you multiply probabilities for independent events. That little bit at the end there is really important.

    5. Re:Sad. by Grishnakh · · Score: 5, Insightful

      The thing that really bothers me is that these whistleblower engineers have Wikipedia pages about them, they're listed by name in discussions or articles (including Wikipedia) about the disaster, etc.

      But where is the list of names of the managers who were *directly responsible for the deaths of the Challenger crew*? These people are guilty of **murder**. Yet we never see their names anywhere, they're just referred to as anonymous "managers".

      Why is this? These murderers should be publicly listed and shamed for the scum that they are.

    6. Re:Sad. by Grishnakh · · Score: 3, Insightful

      What I want to know is, why is it the whistleblower heroes are listed by name, but we never see the names printed of any of these managers (at Thiokol or NASA) who *murdered* the Challenger crew. All we ever hear about these people is the names "bureaucrat" or "manager". Somehow these people have completely escaped all culpability, including having their names aired in public for their misdeeds.

  2. May he RIP by Lisandro · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The worst part is reading about how the incident scarred him for life, as he felt directly responsible for the disaster. The guy spoke up and no one wanted to listen.

  3. I remember this as a child by holophrastic · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I was 6 years old, and interested in space tech. I became very aware of what had happened, and it shaped my life. I learned a valuable lesson from Bob.

    The lesson I learned wasn't to listen to warnings, or to double-check things. The lesson I learned was to stand my ground through escalation.

    Bob did his job. And had he been a psychopath, he could have been happy with what he did. But that's not me -- because of these events.

    In my case, yes I'd have grabbed my hunting rifle. But I wouldn't have walked into NASA offices with it. You don't believe me that it's going to blow up from the cold, fine. Bang. Now it's going to blow up from that hole that I just shot into it.

    I've followed this lesson quite a few times in my career, and in my life. Being willing to sabotage my own interests (clients, projects, money, property, relationships) in order to do what I strongly believed was the right thing has ensured that I sleep really damned well, each and every night.

    Thank you Bob, for giving me the lesson that would shape much of my life.

    1. Re:I remember this as a child by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Sucks that in today's world we are forced to choose between sleeping well and living well.

    2. Re:I remember this as a child by countach44 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Let's say he brought the rifle and maybe even shot the actual shuttle. The news report would be "shuttle engineer goes crazy, shoots at shuttle, launch delayed" And, for the sake of this story let's say that NASA never attempts a launch in kind of cold again. He would just always be a crazy guy that shot at a shuttle.

      As a lot of us know firsthand, this is the kind of job where if everything is going well no one knows that you exist... how many times do we warn management of risks and then things turn out okay anyway? Even with a 99.9% probability of failure, that 0.1% chance of success is still a possible outcome.

      Either way, he seems like a great guy who tried to do the right thing. It's a shame that he was ignored and even had to consider taking drastic actions. Despite his doing exactly the best he could, I know if I were in his shoes I would be second-guessing everything I could've done - not an easy burden to bear.

  4. That's why some engineers are Professionals by ErichTheRed · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Fortunately, most people won't have the weight of something like this when faced with the decision to keep pushing your position or keep your mouth shut. I've had a number of times where I've suggested something isn't going to work the way people think it will, or that a course of action isn't the right one. Sometimes I've been listened to, and others I've been told I'm "too negative" or "overly cautious" or similar. It happens a lot in IT -- most of us don't work on safety-sensitive systems and don't design things that may fall down and/or kill people. Because of this, lots of projects fail and billions of dollars are just flushed down the toilet. Look at any ERP implementation in a large company; almost none are completely successful and yet those same consulting firms keep raking in money year after year.

    I heard this guy's story on NPR a couple months ago, and it really is a sad end; he was tortured for the rest of his life by the fact that he felt there was something more that he could do. It's similar to a development project getting taken over by the salesweasels and marketing people -- the actual engineers who know what's really possible are just ignored and an unrealistic date is promised, a vaporware feature that can't be built is sold, etc.

    Before I retire, I would like to see IT including software development start acting more like professional engineers (real PEs) and less like a bunch of cowboys with no guidance or standards. Things that work should be standardized to some extent so they're easily repeatable. Civil engineers, for example, don't go back to first principles designing a run of the mill highway interchange. They use reference designs and only get inventive/creative when the situation warrants it. Contrast that with IT, where Web Framework Of the Month changes every month and there's no standard anything.

  5. And yet on the flip side... by DumbSwede · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The world is full of people that are sure in their minds they are right and will do whatever it takes to stand up for their beliefs.
    The suicide bomber in Brussels I'm sure was convinced he had rightful justification for his actions.

    Escalate, yes,
    Fight the system, yes.
    Commit dangerous, illegal, criminal acts in defence of your beliefs, NO.

    Not everyone can be IN CHARGE. While there are many bad outcomes from following the chain of command, on average it is probably better than the anarchy that would reign without it.

    Perhaps you are engaging in hyperbole with your rifle example, but do you really want every halfwit in our country destroying things to back up their beliefs, because they "KNOW" they are right?

  6. A Burden Misplaced - by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Sometimes I think the reason that we blame ourselves for bad things happening, even when we have no power to foresee or stop them, even we've done everything that was good and right to keep those things from happening, even when we had nothing to do with the cause of those events... is because it's easier to believe that we could have done something and didn't, than to accept that we couldn't do anything.

    Mr. Ebeling clearly believed that there was something that he could have or should have done, and that his inaction resulted in catastrophe. Not only was he innocent, and not only did he do everything within his power to make certain that the launch did not proceed, but the forces which pushed the launch forward rested entirely outside of his control. Maybe his hunting rifle plot would have made a difference - we'll never know. What's important to note, though, is that threatening his friends and colleagues with deadly force to delay the launch is a plan that probably appealed much more in the clarity of hindsight.

    Sometimes we entertain power fantasies for unselfish reasons. We envision ourselves being able to use power that we oftentimes lack in order to correct some grave wrong in our lives, or to prevent tragedies both foreseen and unforeseen. Sometimes these lines of thinking are helpful in preparing us to take useful action later in our lives, so we can prevent the same thing from happening again. Other times... well, just look at Mr. Ebeling. This kind of thinking can eat you up inside, and suffering this way is no form of redemption, if redemption is even called for at all.

    When any sober assessment of one's actions shows that a negative event which they've experienced truly was not their fault, why is it that some people continue to imagine that they could have done something about it, believing against all reason that they're to blame? It is because acknowledging that they were powerless to stop it, and accepting that powerlessness, hurts at least as much as the event itself. Blaming oneself numbs the pain that comes with acceptance, and to many it is treated as the lesser of two evils whether they're aware of it or not. It isn't, and persistently avoiding the pain of acceptance creates even greater suffering in the end.

    Rest in peace, Mr. Ebeling. You've taught us many difficult lessons - lessons which will hopefully save (and have already saved) lives. The final lesson you gave us, however, is a lesson in guilt and the importance of acceptance. Perhaps that lesson will save lives as well.

  7. Re:Rest in Peace by 110010001000 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Yes. He suddenly died at 89 because he was going to reveal a secret he just remembered about.

  8. Re:Sad/Enough by Grishnakh · · Score: 3, Insightful

    You think murderers should just go free and just have to live with their consciences? Great, let's just let everyone out of prison now!