A completed checklist of parts and function should have been confirmed and reconfirmed by the experts to get a 101% assurance of perfection before set off. There should be ‘no rock left unturned’. Otherwise, there should be no room or space for ambiguity because everything can be calculated closest to precision considering previous projects of similar nature and the perspectives gained by the organizational manpower. In reality, the tragedy should not have happened. Gross negligence is a real management problem and not simple ambiguity. This is because this is a scientific undertaking which follows protocol scientific pattern of doing things. An extensive laboratory test is usually conducted on all materials prior to its employment. Thus, ambiguity cannot be taken as a justification for the tragedy. Though some experts may suppose probable defects on human ability to recognize some extents of risk (Roberto et al, 2006), scientific undertakings like materials for spacecraft capability to withstand the forces of nature are common engineering prowess. Otherwise, the crew must have been aware of the risk knowing that their mechanics were not perfect and that materials were not perfected accordingly.Conclusion The Columbia space shuttle mishap was the result of gross negligence on scientific pattern protocols. Ambiguities should not have been tolerated considering the extent of a laboratory test on materials before its use, and management should have been firm and through considering the scientific nature of the project.