Personally, there are so many layers to writing this post. Unlike the Mercury and Apollo astronauts, we belong to the generations of space scientists and engineers who have spent every day of their lives dreaming and preparing for exploration. Sometimes it’s been deceivingly within reach, sometimes it feels at astronomical distances. All the same, the challenges that Apollo teams faced seem super-human.
Apollo 13 dealt with high uncertainly, high probability of failure, high probability for misunderstanding (due to time constraints and work across interdisciplinary virtual teams), and low predictability. With survival of the mission at risk, the teams moved very rapidly through Diagnose-Design-Act-Reflect cycle at the top of the Execution-as-Learning Pyramid. Soon after the O2-tank accident happened, Gene Kranz made it a point not to improvise. Indeed procedures were being developed on the flight and simultaneously, but a lot of care was placed on the “act-reflect” components before fully implementing these items. On this re-watch, this is a the revelation of the movie – even (well, specially!) when your life depends on your wise use of every second, improvisation might be too risky to make it out of the drawing room without some tests happening… Some of the same principles about having a dress rehearsal (even if you are not sure if you will playing Thomas Jefferson or the Sugar Plum Fairy) apply while dealing with a very precious sample or while having a conversation with a Dean…
There are so many lessons to learn from history… This story brings to mind:
Do not dismiss ideas because they appear too impractical or underdeveloped: I think this was almost comically demonstrated by the makeshift CO2 filter, which actually worked… But in general, most emergency procedures were still very much untested. Apollo 11 and Apollo 12 were the only real precedents for Apollo 13.
If you want others to listen to you, you should listen to them: Despite Gene Kranz’s high levels of stress and direct (i.e., abrupt) communication style, he demonstrated a high willingness to modified plans based on the different inputs from his teams.
Get outside information: This was an area in which the teams really shined. From the get-go, Gene Kranz sought collaboration from everybody who would have any insights into each level of missions operations.
Show personal regard: Although there was a tendency to blame Jack Swigert for the O2 tank mishap, the astronauts quickly regrouped and supported each other through the rest of decisions. Lovell holding Haise while he was very cold and sick toward the end of the mission showed this was a team that deeply cared for each other.
Combine ideas: This was another area in which all teams excelled. Clearly the mission required a high degree of interdependence, in which optimizing one system at the expense of other had the potential to be fatal. However, in the heat of the moment, such an evident concern could have been easily disregarded. The teams, however, performed their work while keeping in mind what impact they could have on others and what impacts other teams could have on them. They combined ideas to achieve the common goal.
Recent Comments