It is somewhat hard to fill in the table without knowing the exact details beside what I can gather up from wiki that the incident was mainly attributed to

damage to lift wing of shuttle going undetected during lift-off and even before point of re-entry. The reason for being so is due to change in design specifications of thermal protection system which didn't cater up for uncommon occurrence of impact damage to it during flight i.e damage during launch sequence.

The ones in red I believe are some of the area which were missed or inadequately addressed.

Why the Zachman framework? This is the kind of framework that would be used to see where NASA is successful as an institution in putting a man on the moon. But failing to add a check on sensors as basic as one which would alert when significant damage is done to its critical structure, i.e. the left wing?

  • $\begingroup$ Zackman is an architecture framework, it's used to define how an enterprise is structured, I cannot see how it would be relevant. $\endgroup$
    – GdD
    Sep 8 '15 at 9:08
  • $\begingroup$ I don't understand why this question has had so many negative votes - some other NASA Mishap Investigation Board reports have analysed management or team structure in the past, just not using the described method... surely the flawed decision making processes are of interest? $\endgroup$
    – Andy
    Sep 8 '15 at 13:05
  • $\begingroup$ @GdD thanks , Zachman framework basis is absorbed in breaking away from "built and run" concept to more ontological method / analysis of interaction among different artifacts. Relevant is because using it we can probe or tap into "interrogative mindset of organization" when a deviation from design specs were made. Zachman can be used to capture "moment in time" thinking /structure of organization which perhaps was poorly constructed to let such decision to take place. $\endgroup$
    – asadz
    Sep 9 '15 at 11:57
  • $\begingroup$ @GdD I will add a graphic which help to understand bit more. For e.g using the engineering function row of framework critical gaps can be viewed as the engineering process inability to seek unknowns where measurements to thermal protection system should include factors that are less obvious and known then got from re-entry flight data. How was lift-of preparation risks to structure of thermal protection system can be missed? $\endgroup$
    – asadz
    Sep 9 '15 at 12:03

From a cursory read of the Wikipedia article, it seems to me that the Zachman framework is intended to be a top-level overview of a project. I suspect the errors that led to the loss of Columbia would not even show up at this level.
The primary source for data on the Columbia accident is the Accident Investigation Report.


Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.