NASA safety culture?

[ORAC]

Next shuttle launch on Saturday. I wish them good luck and a safe trip.

Los Angeles Times: Email ends astronaut's mission

A SENIOR NASA engineer and astronaut has been removed from his position after writing a congratulatory email to engineers who voiced concerns over the safety of the next shuttle launch. Charles Camarda, who flew on last year's mission to the international space station and was the director of engineering at the Johnson Space Centre in Houston, has been reassigned.

Mr Camarda said on Tuesday that the dispute involved a "management style" issue between himself and the space centre's director, Michael Coats, also a former astronaut, rather than a concern over whether the shuttle was safe to launch. Mr Camarda had said in an earlier email to colleagues that he had been removed from the mission management team, which oversees shuttle missions. But on Tuesday, he said he had been assured he would be on the team and looked forward to "working toward the successful completion" of the 12-day STS-121 shuttle mission, scheduled for launch on Saturday.

The conflict with Mr Coats apparently came to a head after Mr Camarda offered congratulations to engineers who spoke out at a flight readiness conference 11 days ago. In that meeting, the agency's top safety official and the chief engineer said they did not believe the shuttle should launch until more work had been done on the foam insulation covering the external fuel tank. A NASA administrator, Michael Griffin, decided to proceed with the launch. Despite concerns that the foam problem had not been fixed, the two engineers said they had no objections.

In the email, copies of which were supplied to the media, Mr Camarda did not say whether he was congratulating the engineers for having the courage to speak up, or voting not to launch. NASA officials said the dispute had nothing to do with safety. They pointed out that Mr Griffin has repeatedly said he welcomed open debate. Mr Griffin expected people to raise issues, the agency's spokesman, Dean Acosta, said.

Mr Camarda, 54, was reassigned to the NASA Engineering and Safety Centre, based in Virginia.

[arcniz]

Next shuttle launch on Saturday. I wish them good luck and a safe trip. Not
ORAC: I'm having difficulty interpreting your post. SURELY you are not wishing misfortune to the shuttle crew?!!
The timing of the launch - over a 4-day patriotic holiday with lots of available viewing audience, is about as political as it gets. One can be certain the Public Relations aspects of the launch timing are in no manner accidental. Whether NASA management has bowed to internal or external pressure to 'fit the slot' is not much in question.
This is the time of year when NASA-derived press releases about pending galactic catastrophes and killer asteroids normally fill the news, along with marvelously colorful photos of space objects, real and imagined - because July-August is the fertile period for final negotiations over NASA's budget allocation for the next fiscal year, beginning in October. The public appeal of space projects has dimmed some with bad press and other distractions, even as infighting over dollar amounts increases in intensity. So NASA needs to look like it is doing 16.5 billion $$ worth of something.
The administrator's comment about safety is informative:
Defending the decision (to launch), NASA's administrator, Michael D. Griffin, said that falling foam might pose a danger to the shuttle but not to the crew, because the astronauts could find a haven, if necessary, on the orbiting space station; another shuttle could then be sent to retrieve them. (Mr. Griffin did add, however, that another serious accident could end the shuttle program.)
The shuttle fleet is scheduled to fly 16 more missions to complete work on the half-finished space station and possibly to service the Hubble Space Telescope. The three remaining shuttles — Discovery, Atlantis and Endeavour — are scheduled to be retired in 2010.
"If we're going to fly, we need to accept some programmatic risks — not crew risks — and get on with it," Dr. Griffin said.
Bottom line is - space flight always has been and long will be a dangerous undertaking. Even though I view NASA as a bloated fish, swimming mostly in pork juice, I heartily wish the crew the best of good fortune on their flight, and a safe return.

[Kalium Chloride]

I heard someone say once that space exploration was never "safe" - it was only "acceptably dangerous".

But that's no excuse for ignoring safety advisors. That's what happened in 1986. It won't be tolerated again.

[ORAC]

Sorry, the "not" was accidently left in when I deleted a second sentence in an edit.

[RevMan2]

Might I suggest this (http://www.fotuva.org/feynman/challenger-appendix.html) - Richard Feynman's Appendix to the Challenger report - as required reading for this thread?
NASA's "safety culture" - an oxymoron if there ever was one, it sadly appears - doesn't seem to have changed one bit.......

[ICAO]

Before and after the February 1, 2003, Columbia Shuttle (STS-107) disaster, NASA Administrator Sean O’Keefe (an accountant) dumped a lot of money on DuPont for its consulting services to build a “safety culture” at NASA.

O’Keefe was rewarded for his (NASA? DuPont?) “service” by nomination to DuPont’s Board of Directors.

Thread 'trimmed' by BOAC 11/7