What did the Challenger explosion teach us about engineering ethics and the ethical decisions we should make?

The Challenger explosion in 1986 was a wake-up call to the importance of engineering ethics. In addition to technical problems, unethical decisions by management led to the accident, emphasizing the need for engineering ethics education. There is a need for systematic education and awareness to practice ethical decisions.

 

On January 28, 1986, NASA’s Space Shuttle Challenger launched ambitiously, carrying the future of the entire human race. With the world watching, and the hopes and expectations of many, it was about to make space history. But just 73 seconds after liftoff, tragedy struck in a way no one could have predicted. The Challenger exploded in mid-air, killing the entire crew on board. The explosion was broadcast live over the airwaves to the world, and everyone was shocked and horrified by the horrific moment that played out on their TV screens. Smoke filled the sky and debris scattered like meteors, falling into the Atlantic Ocean, with astronauts, teachers, engineers, scientists, and representatives from all walks of life on board. This was more than just the failure of a launch vehicle; it was a deeply scarring event that shattered trust in science and technology and human progress.
The accident was interpreted as the result of a systemic failure, not just a technical glitch. The U.S. government immediately formed a Presidential Accident Investigation Board to determine the cause of the Challenger disaster and launched an extensive, months-long investigation. The conclusion reached in a statement released at the end of the lengthy investigation was that two joint rubber O-rings used in the rocket’s auxiliary propulsion system had failed to function properly in the low temperatures at launch: the temperature was too low, causing the rubber to shrink, resulting in an imperfect seal and a gas leak. What’s more, the investigation’s findings went beyond technical issues to reveal problems with management and political decision-making. Despite the fact that Thiokol’s engineers had opposed the launch the day before, citing temperature concerns, Thiokol’s management, under pressure from its NASA contract, pushed ahead with the launch. This brought the topic of engineering ethics to the forefront of the debate.
Let’s go back to 1986. The launch of Challenger had already been delayed several times. Originally scheduled to launch on January 22, it was delayed by six days due to weather and technical problems. At this point, NASA couldn’t afford any more delays, and the pressure was on to keep the launch on schedule. On January 27, Thiokol executives, who had to notify NASA of the final launch clearance, decided to go ahead with the final clearance over the objections of the engineers. The engineers had already raised the issue that the rubber O-rings might not work properly at low temperatures, but management had ignored them. The reason was simple economics. With the company’s economic survival hinging on its NASA contract, another launch delay would have resulted in a loss of confidence in Thiokol and risked canceling the contract in the future. The company’s leadership was torn between the technical concerns of a possible explosion and the responsibility of protecting the company and the livelihoods of its employees. In the end, they chose the livelihoods of their employees, which ultimately led to the tragedy of the deaths of everyone on board.
This case highlights how ethical dilemmas can play out in modern engineering and management. What if Thiokol’s management had applied the ethics of duty, guided by the principle of respect for persons? Instead of prioritizing their employer’s need to minimize costs and meet the launch schedule, they might have prioritized the safety concerns raised by the engineers. For example, choosing to postpone the launch and waiting for the temperature to rise appropriately before launching Challenger might have saved the lives of those on board. From an economic perspective, however, this decision may not have secured the future of the company. The schedule delays in the Space Shuttle program and the possible loss of the NASA contract would have weighed heavily on Thiokol’s management.
This case also shows that engineering ethics is not just a matter of technical ethics, but a complex issue with social and economic implications. It has been suggested that engineering ethics problems like the Space Shuttle Challenger disaster can be solved with a Creative Middle Ground Approach. This is a way of finding a compromise between the best and the next best option, such as delaying the launch until temperatures were right on launch day. However, these solutions are not always realistically feasible. NASA’s schedule was strict, and under pressure, Thiokol executives may not have had the luxury of finding a “creative middle ground. As a result, Challenger was eventually launched on schedule, with tragic consequences.
After the Challenger explosion, Roger Boisjoly, one of the Thiokol engineers who blew the whistle on the incident, went on to give a series of lectures on engineering ethics to raise awareness of the issue. He provided internal company documents to prove that he had tried to prevent the accident, but the psychological toll it took on him was significant. Ultimately, the incident left him deeply depressed, and he spent the rest of his life teaching engineering ethics to warn others against repeating the same tragedy.
This year marks the 38th anniversary of the Challenger explosion, and while much time has passed since then, the issue of engineering ethics remains an important topic in our society. Universities and companies are increasingly emphasizing engineering ethics training, but critics say it remains too perfunctory. Given the constant stream of incidents in the news, one has to wonder if engineering ethics education is doing its job. It’s worth taking a second look at how much we as a society recognize the importance of engineering ethics and whether we are actually practicing its values.
Engineering ethics is more than just preventing technical errors; it is an important moral standard for protecting human life, safety, and the trust of society as a whole. The Challenger explosion should serve as a reminder of the importance of ethical decision-making, and it is essential to provide a systematic educational environment for companies and researchers to deepen their ethical awareness and practice. Moreover, it is necessary to go beyond formal education and develop practical engineering ethics practices.