Death by PowerPoint: the slide that killed seven people (2019)

Fascinating, I'm familiar with the incident but never heard this aspect of it.

Another NASA screw-up that they're trying to pin on the vendor engineers, just like Challenger.

The title is not reassuring. Conservatism in engineering is essentially about creating safety margins through conservative estimation. The title is saying we need to be careful because a tile was likely penetrated. Hell, if I remember correctly they were reporting that there was known tile damage on the news before reentry, but that they didn't know the extent.

"NASA felt the engineers didn’t know what would happen but that all data pointed to there not being enough damage to put the lives of the crew in danger."

If you thought they didn't know, then ask them what they do know! It's right on the slide that flight conditions are outside of test parameters and that the mass of the projectile was much higher. How the F do you work at NASA and not understand the basic principles of mass, velocity, and energy well enough for that to stand out enough to ask questions or run your own calculations...

The reason the slide is laid out the way it is, is because it's describing the thought process and creates a deductive argument for how they got to their concern. This is a presentation for a briefing for other engineers, not a conference or sales pitch. It's supposed to be formal and contain the synopsis of technical points. Using projectors for technical briefings predates the use of PowerPoint. I see nothing wrong with the layout in that context.

Edit: why downvote without a reply? NASA has a history of blaming vendors when they screw up. This looks like another example to me. The presentation format does not have any issues given the setting and target audience.

I've seen presentations with Powerpoint that suck the life out of you and also ones that inspire and excite. It's not the tool, it's the presenter and how they wield the tool.

Reading word for word off a text-heavy deck in a monotone with no images or diagrams is a recipe for disaster. I tend to have my decks (back when I was doing presentations) be relatively text-lite and involve images/diagrams that back up my talking points. And I've seen image-heavy decks that really don't convey anything either.

I just realized that more time has passed since the Columbia Shuttle disaster (19 years), then passed between the Columbia and Challenger disasters (17 years). That seems impossible to me.

I remember reading each of the astronaut's bios after the Columbia disaster, and the same thought kept echoing in my head: what a tragedy, what a waste. Seven remarkably talented people. I had no idea until I read this article how easily their deaths could have been avoided.

PowerPoint decks for the upper tiers of an organization can take on a whole different character. I shit you not that it's common to pass them around in email as if they were a document format, even for information that is never intended or expected to be presented. As if they were PDFs or something. It's crazy.

[EDIT] There's also a kind of horrendous, illegible house style some places, that's expected to be how these documents look. The US military and any big businesses that work heavily with them are infamous for this. They routinely produce some comically terrible decks and graphics. I wouldn't be surprised if that weird, seemingly-intentionally-hard-to-read style is also present in at least some parts of NASA, especially up at the administration level.