Fears of a
catastrophic shuttle accident were raised last summer with the White House
by a former Nasa engineer who pleaded for a presidential order to halt all
further shuttle flights until safety issues had been addressed.
In a letter to the White House, Don Nelson, who served with Nasa for 36
years until he retired in 1999, wrote to President George W. Bush warning
that his 'intervention' was necessary to 'prevent another catastrophic
space shuttle accident'.
During his last 11 years at Nasa, Nelson served as a mission operations
evaluator for proposed advanced space transportation projects. He was on
the initial design team for the space shuttle. He participated in every
shuttle upgrade until his retirement.
Listing a series of mishaps with shuttle missions since 1999, Nelson
warned in his letter that Nasa management and the Aerospace Safety
Advisory Panel have failed to respond to the growing warning signs of
another shuttle accident. Since 1999 the vehicle had experienced a number
of potentially disastrous problems:
· 1999 - Columbia's launch was delayed by a hydrogen leak and
Discovery was grounded with damaged wiring, contaminated engine and dented
fuel line;
· January 2000 - Endeavor was delayed because of wiring and
computer failures;
· August 2000 - inspection of Columbia revealed 3,500 defects in
wiring;
· October 2000 - the 100th flight of the shuttle was delayed
because of a misplaced safety pin and concerns with the external tank;
· April 2002 - a hydrogen leak forced the cancellation of the
Atlantis flight;
· July 2002 - the inspector general reported that the shuttle
safety programme was not properly managed;
· August 2002 - the shuttle launch system was grounded after
fuel line cracks were discovered.
White House officials rejected Nelson's plea for a moratorium. He tried
to talk again to Nasa's administration about his worries in October but
was again rebuffed.
Yesterday Nelson told The Observer that he feared the Columbia disaster
was the culmination of 'disastrous mismanagement' by Nasa's most senior
officials and would inevitably lead to the moratorium he was calling for.
'I became concerned about safety issues in Nasa after Challenger. I
think what happened is that very slowly over the years Nasa's culture of
safety became eroded.
'But when I tried to raise my concerns with Nasa's new administrator, I
received two reprimands for not going through the proper channels, which
discouraged other people from coming forward with their concerns. When it
came to an argument between a middle-ranking engineer and the astronauts
and administration, guess who won.
'One of my biggest complaints has been that we should have been looking
for ways to develop crew escape modules, which Nasa has constantly
rejected.'
His claims emerged against a background of growing concern over the
management of safety issues by Nasa.
They followed similar warnings last April by the former chairman of the
Aerospace Safety Advisory panel, Richard Bloomberg, who said: 'In all of
the years of my involvement, I have never been as concerned for space
shuttle safety as now.'
Bloomberg blamed the deferral or elimination of planned safety
upgrades, a diminished workforce as a result of hiring freezes, and an
ageing infrastructure for the advisory panel's findings.
His warning echoed earlier concern about key shuttle safety issues. In
September 2001 at a Senate hearing into shuttle safety, senators and
independent experts warned that budget and management problems were
putting astronauts lives at risk. At the centre of concern were claims
that a budget overspend of almost $5 billion (£3bn) had led to a culture
in Nasa whereby senior managers treated shuttle safety upgrades as
optional.
Among those who spoke out were Democratic Senator Bill Nelson of
Florida, who warned: 'I fear that if we don't provide the space shuttle
programme with the resources it needs for safety upgrades, our country is
going to pay a price we can't bear.
'We're starving Nasa's shuttle budget and thus greatly increasing the
chance of a catastrophic loss.'
Although Nasa officials said that improvements were being made they
admitted that more needed to be done.
A year earlier, a General Accounting Office report had warned that the
loss of experienced engineers and technicians in the space shuttle
programme was threatening the safety of future missions just as Nasa was
preparing to increase its annual number of launches to build the
International Space Station.
The GAO cited internal Nasa documents showing 'workforce reductions are
jeopardising Nasa's ability to safely support the shuttle's planned flight
rate'.
Space agency officials discovered in late 1999 that many employees
didn't have the necessary skills to properly manage avionics, mechanical
engineering and computer systems, according to the GAO report.
The GAO assembled a composite portrait of the shuttle programme's
workforce that showed twice as many workers over 60 years of age than
under 30. It assessed that the number of workers then nearing retirement
could jeopardise the programme's ability to transfer leadership roles to
the next generation to support the higher flight rate necessary to build
the space station.