The HabForum

Am I right in believing that I was told that it was more or less Reagans fault that the Challenger was destroyed? I'm thinking that he rushed the launching of it... am I imagining things, or am I right? Because I distinctly remember that he wanted it launched then, but I can't remember why. Y'all are fellow USSRC'ers, and I know a bunch of y'all are councilers... I need to know, because if I'm right, this will be a GREAT part of my paper on Anti-NASA people and why they're wrong. I'll post it when it's done, and y'all can tell me what you think.

Well i can't tell you what a counselor might have said and believe me i've heard some stuff that a counselor in the early 90s said about the accident that wasn't true but it didn't have anything to do with the reason you listed. What i can tell you is based on the research i've done in recent years on Challenger as well as Apollo 1 and Columbia. I've read the three accident investigation reports. The launch of Challenger actually had several things putting pressure on it. Granted The reagan administration was part of it because they had declared the space shuttle to be an operational vehicle that was safe for anyone to fly and should beable to make routine flights. To prove it their confidence they had flown two members of the US congress the second of which flew on STS-61C the mission before challenger. The Teacher in space was supose to be the first of many every day citizens to fly in space she was to be followed in mid 86 by a reporter. So there was pressure to get the mission into space for that reason but there were several others. One of the biggest was due to the way NASA had sold the shuttle to congress in the early 70s. They told congress the shuttle would beable to pay for itself by launching comercial and DOD missions for paying customers at only 100 dollars a pound. On top of that they promised the shuttle could fly up to 50 times a year. By 1984 they had long since given up on the 50 mission a year idea and the cost was considerably higher per pound but it was still hoped it could pay for itself. They set a new goal to fly 24 missions a year by 1991. They had 14 missions planned for 1985 then another 14 for 1986. 9 flights flew in 85 including 2 originaly scheduled for 86 5 were canceled due to problems with the IUS and other paytload delays. But they still wanted to make 14 in 1986. STS-61C made the first flight of the year. It returned 10 days before the challenger launch. Challenger had originaly been planned for mid 1985 as indicated by the 51 designation but had its mission and crew changed several times and was pushed back to 86. The 5 flight cancelations as well as a slower than hoped launchinmg pace was creating a backlog of comercial customers and the Ariane rockets of the ESA were becoming widely used since they were cheaper. So the backlog and the pressure to meet unrealistic launch schedule was probably the biggest pressure on the launch. 61C and 51L had had delays so NASA was already getting behind for 86. I know this was a long answer to your question but atleast from the research i've done and most stuff i've read agree that the launch schedule was the primary reason for the pressure to launch despite the weather. If you need more you can send me a rivate message or email me.

That helps to a point.