The Challenger - BBC Two now
Discussion
Really enjoyed it Eric. I agree with what you say about Mr Hurt's portrayal as I just caught a bit of the documentary about Feynman which followed The Challenger. Feynman seemed a bit different in real life.
I knew there were issues with the o rings that caused Challenger's demise, but didn't know anything about how the story came to light and who found it out.
I knew there were issues with the o rings that caused Challenger's demise, but didn't know anything about how the story came to light and who found it out.
funkyrobot said:
Yes. Until I watched the prog I didn't realise how political the outcome of the disaster became. Quite bad really.
What is worse is that they didn't learn their lesson, and the Columbia was lost with very similar procedural failures - management thinking they know better than the engineers.funkyrobot said:
Really enjoyed it Eric. I agree with what you say about Mr Hurt's portrayal as I just caught a bit of the documentary about Feynman which followed The Challenger. Feynman seemed a bit different in real life.
I knew there were issues with the o rings that caused Challenger's demise, but didn't know anything about how the story came to light and who found it out.
Feynman didn't discover the O ring problem. In fact, engineers at Thiokol had been pleading with their own management and the NASA Marshall Space Flight Center to do something about it for over two years.I knew there were issues with the o rings that caused Challenger's demise, but didn't know anything about how the story came to light and who found it out.
What Feynman did was use the public forum of the Commission to make sure that everybody in the decision making process at Morton Thiokol and NASA were properly embarrassed.
Eric Mc said:
funkyrobot said:
Really enjoyed it Eric. I agree with what you say about Mr Hurt's portrayal as I just caught a bit of the documentary about Feynman which followed The Challenger. Feynman seemed a bit different in real life.
I knew there were issues with the o rings that caused Challenger's demise, but didn't know anything about how the story came to light and who found it out.
Feynman didn't discover the O ring problem. In fact, engineers at Thiokol had been pleading with their own management and the NASA Marshall Space Flight Center to do something about it for over two years.I knew there were issues with the o rings that caused Challenger's demise, but didn't know anything about how the story came to light and who found it out.
What Feynman did was use the public forum of the Commission to make sure that everybody in the decision making process at Morton Thiokol and NASA were properly embarrassed.
). I'll see what else I have missed.That bit isn't so obvious. The film does more or less give credit to Feynman for finding the O ring problem - which isn't actually true. What he did do was highlight it in such a way that no one could avoid it.
By putting too much emphasis on Feynman, it actually lessens the tragedy. The real tragedy is that NASA and Thiokol KNEW there was a potential problem all the time and STILL insisted on launching.
When the Challenger failed 73 seconds after launch, some people knew instantly what had happened. Some people were even EXPECTING it to happen.
By putting too much emphasis on Feynman, it actually lessens the tragedy. The real tragedy is that NASA and Thiokol KNEW there was a potential problem all the time and STILL insisted on launching.
When the Challenger failed 73 seconds after launch, some people knew instantly what had happened. Some people were even EXPECTING it to happen.
It was a tragedy indeed. There was a bit in the film where a chap (from Thiokol) stood up and mentioned the truth at one point, but he was ushered away. He then seemed quite relieved that the truth finally came out at the end of the prog.
As mentioned above, I was surprised by the whole thing. As you say, people knew there were potential disasters waiting to happen, but NASA carried on regardless. One key moment of the prog for me was when the general told Feynman about how NASA was funded. Very interesting.
I guess everything regarding the disaster did eventually come out. What happened to the people involved though (I.E. the people who knew what could happen and took the risk)?
As mentioned above, I was surprised by the whole thing. As you say, people knew there were potential disasters waiting to happen, but NASA carried on regardless. One key moment of the prog for me was when the general told Feynman about how NASA was funded. Very interesting.
I guess everything regarding the disaster did eventually come out. What happened to the people involved though (I.E. the people who knew what could happen and took the risk)?
Dear All,
caught this this time.
Excellent docudrama (or is that dramadoc?). Hurt was excellent as Feynman I thought.
I don't know how much of the programme was doc and how much drama but highly watch-able.
If true I hadn't realised just how hard an attempt was made to delay/hide the cause.
I imagine the committee bits should have been fairly accurate as recordings/transcripts were available?
regards,
Jet
caught this this time.
Excellent docudrama (or is that dramadoc?). Hurt was excellent as Feynman I thought.
I don't know how much of the programme was doc and how much drama but highly watch-able.
If true I hadn't realised just how hard an attempt was made to delay/hide the cause.
I imagine the committee bits should have been fairly accurate as recordings/transcripts were available?
regards,
Jet
I thought he was very poor as Feynman. He came across as bumbling and inarticulate (Hurt belongs to the "mumbles" school of acting).
In reality Feynman had a sharp incisive mind and a very clear way of talking and a lucid way of describing things.
I thought Hurt's interpretation was almost the polar opposite of how Feynman should have been portrayed.
The story was interesting with one or two extra bits of information coming out.
In reality Feynman had a sharp incisive mind and a very clear way of talking and a lucid way of describing things.
I thought Hurt's interpretation was almost the polar opposite of how Feynman should have been portrayed.
The story was interesting with one or two extra bits of information coming out.
I thought it was quite well done really. yeah, Hurt's performance probably didn't capture his "mischievous" side terribly well, but it did i think represent how authoritive and dominating of an audience he could be.
There were of course a few funny "tv" dramatics errors, like being able to stand about 20feet from an SSME running at full power, or the "flight deck" of the shuttle looking remarkably like that of a KC-135 (i think??)....... ;-)
There were of course a few funny "tv" dramatics errors, like being able to stand about 20feet from an SSME running at full power, or the "flight deck" of the shuttle looking remarkably like that of a KC-135 (i think??)....... ;-)
Did they show the actual footage of Feynman in the Commission? Here is some footage of him talking about it: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UCLgRyKvfp0
Gassing Station | Science! | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff