7 Myths About The Challenger Shuttle Disaster

NBC via MSNBC ^ | January 27, 2006 | James Oberg

[John W]

HOUSTON - Twenty years ago, millions of television viewers were horrified to witness the live broadcast of the space shuttle Challenger exploding 73 seconds into flight, ending the lives of the seven astronauts on board. And they were equally horrified to learn in the aftermath of the disaster that the faulty design had been chosen by NASA to satisfy powerful politicians who had demanded the mission be launched, even under unsafe conditions. Meanwhile, a major factor in the disaster was that NASA had been ordered to use a weaker sealant for environmental reasons. Finally, NASA consoled itself and the nation with the realization that all frontiers are dangerous and to a certain extent, such a disaster should be accepted as inevitable.

At least, that seems to be how many people remember it, in whole or in part. That’s how the story of the Challenger is often retold, in oral tradition and broadcast news, in public speeches and in private conversations and all around the Internet. But spaceflight historians believe that each element of the opening paragraph is factually untrue or at best extremely dubious. They are myths, undeserving of popular belief and unworthy of being repeated at every anniversary of the disaster.

[DesertSapper]

Watching this sad event is one that is forever burned in my memory.

I was late for a college class already so I stopped to watch the launch in the dorm lobby with a few other students. Though I didn't want to believe what I saw, I had no doubt what had happened within a second of the explosion.

I was stunned as I walked out of the building where everyone sat in total silence. My professor made some snide remark about me being late again but didn't pursue the matter when he saw my face. I explained to the class what had happened, and though I tended to be a class "cut-up", everyone knew it was true though it was the first they had heard of it.

My professor ended the class 5 minutes later. I didn't even attempt to go to another class that day.

Since then I have had the same feeling only twice: once when a good buddy and others were killed in an explosion in Kuwait in 1991 just minutes after I had spoken to him (we were in different vehicles) and then again on the morning of September 11th, 2001.

Some events just leave an indelible mark - my wife's face at our wedding and my sons' births are some of only a few. Unfortunately these marks also include some I wish were not there - like the fateful days these astronauts, friends, and WTC workers "touched the face of God".

[sandbar]

We were out on a snow day and I saw this in middle of the Price is Right. I was ticked at first because they overrode my favorite game show! I was in the 7th grade.

[stainlessbanner]

Oberg is full of baloney. McCauliffe was on board as the "first teacher in space" - thousands of students and teachers anxiously watched the launch.

Oberg's piece appears to try to clear his consicious of guilt or involvement. He could have written an honarble article about the men and women of mission STS 51-L.

There's nothing really new here.

[Old Professer]

The only thing I see here is a hack writer hanging another hat on a stationary peg.

[Babsig]

I had a roommate in college from Oscola FL who said she saw it live that day along with thousands of other school children in FL were watching it live outside their schools

[MamaB]

We in Huntsville, did too. It was very bad for this family because hubby had worked with all of them. He was out of town when it happened. Our daughter and I went to the Memorial Service here in town.

[Roccus]

Not so. The show blamed the O rings in the booster for the disaster. (as had always been my understanding.) Burning gases exited the booster at a joint, burned through the insulation on the external fuel tank and then the tank itself igniting the fuel therein resulting in the explosion.
The re-enactment of the conference call between NASA and Morton Thiekold was also as I remembered the reports at the time.
The author states that the equipment operated properly when used within certain environmental parameters. I believe this to be true. Conditions that morning, however, were not within those parameters.

[Dunstan McShane]

Few people saw the tragedy unfold? Bullocks. There were classrooms full of children watching because there was a teacher on board.

On a break between classes, I went to a local cafe and read an article in the paper about some NASA folk being worried about launching the shuttle in such cold weather. Thought, "If anything goes wrrong with the launch, the fecal matter will really hit the fan." Got up later, paid check and passed through the room with the TV just long enough, with the rest of the patrons, to watch the Challenger blow up.

Staggered to class, told my students in a quaking voice, "The Challenger space shuttle just exploded." Students burst out laughing. "It's not a damn joke!" I said. "The space shuttle's gone! The astronauts are dead!" It got very quiet after that.

I think we discussed the poetry of William Blake, but no one's heart was in it much.

[jaydubya2]

These arn't very good myths. I never heard any of these before.

[poobear]

You sound like a could of would of should have quarter back. Many engineers had issues with the seal. It probably would have gone eventually, the temperature that day didn't help. I was here as well as many NASA engineers. This tragedy didn't have to happen. Glad, however, you still have the passion to care.

This tragedy will never be exonerated with real facts.

[Roccus]

I've always felt that the disaster was a perfect example of what happens when managers make technical decisions.

[tanknetter]

We were out on a snow day and I saw this in middle of the Price is Right. I was ticked at first because they overrode my favorite game show! I was in the 7th grade.

I was living in Fairfield CT, a high school sophomore. We were out on a snow day as well. I can't remember what I was watching at the time, but it was on ABC because I remember Peter Jennings breaking in to what ever it was (it wasn't the launch itself) saying that something had gone horribly wrong with the shuttle.

I also remember initial reports that people had seen parachutes in the area and at least some of the astronauts may have survived. IIRC this turned out to be SAR parajumpers ...

[mysterio]

You were 11? So was I. I still remember eating my chili in the lunch room, and some kid came running in to tell us what had happened.

[Dan(9698)]

The author states that the equipment operated properly when used within certain environmental parameters. I believe this to be true. Conditions that morning, however, were not within those parameters.

You misread my post. This is exactly what I was saying. The good "Doctor of Education" ordered the launch even after he had been advised of the temperature problem.

However, he had a Doctorate, and was the final authority so his arrogance led him to order the launch.

The insulation problem I am talking about is the reason of the last crash, and the reason they aren't launching another.

That is the insulation on the top of the external fuel tank.

It used to be made with using Freon. Since they "cannot" use Freon, they are stymied.

[Calvin Locke]

I was at work. My boss was in my office, and a colleague popped in to tell us. I turned on the radio and started scanning
for the reports.

[Dan(9698)]

This tragedy didn't have to happen.

That is my point exactly.

Whenever you give someone authority over something they are not competent about, and they won't listen to those who are competent, bad things happens.

That is the exact reason that a pilot is given final authority concerning an airplane he is flying.

Only someone who understands the implications of their decisions should have final authority.

Did they advise the Shuttle pilot that the craft was operating outside its operating temperature and get his OK?

I doubt it, but they should have, and given him the final say.

[Ditto]

The media back then was relentless against the shuttle, every launch attempt aborted (even for weather!), the scumbag MSM would use it against NASA. That may have caused pressure.

And within minutes of the disaster the MSM, with absolutly no evidence, were spewing the line that NASA only launched that morning because of pressure from the Reagan White House since the State of the Union address was scheduled for that evening.

[UnbelievingScumOnTheOtherSide]

I worked 2nd shift at the time and was at home taping the launch on my brand new first VCR when I saw it live. I have 6 hours of the live launch and immediate aftermath.

[Always Right]

I heard about it while eating lunch in my college cafeteria. Many people saw the replay immediately after, but most would agree that they didn't really see it live.

I was studying for a test and the TV was on. Don't recall if I actually saw it live or just saw a replay. Whether it was live or within a few minutes does not matter.