Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “Mission Control”

Search indexed NASA NTRS and DOE OSTI research on propulsion, heat transfer, battery materials and energy systems. Follow report and document links to the original sources.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 235 records · Page 13
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRS2015

Designing Interfaces for Astronaut Autonomy in Space

As we move towards human deep space missions, astronauts will no longer be able to say, Houston, we have a problem. The restricted contact with mission control because of the incredible distance from Earth will require astronauts to make autonomous decisions. How will astronauts take on the roles of mission control? This is an area of active research that has far reaching implications for the future of distant spaceflight. Come to this talk to hear how we are using design and user research to come up with innovative solutions for astronauts to effectively explore the Moon, Mars, and beyond.

design↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Exploring Self-Scheduling Strategies and Heuristics in Novice Schedulers

Missions beyond low Earth orbit will require crews to act with greater autonomy. Increasing communication delays will require crews to take on tasks currently supported by Mission Control, including the involved process of scheduling and rescheduling their own complex spaceflight timelines to fit a variety of restrictions and constraints. Unlike Mission Control, astronauts are not expert planners, and determining strategies and heuristics that enable crews to schedule successfully may increase the range of problems they can solve. In two human-in-the-loop scheduling experiments, we analyzed 1) common strategies among novice schedulers and 2) the development of self-scheduling heuristics. We find that, even when participants are instructed to follow a given strategy, they rapidly develop their own self-scheduling heuristics as they learn to successfully complete the scheduling task. While scheduling, participants naturally learn to arrange activities with the most constraints first, whereas while rescheduling, they display greater variability in their heuristics.

self-scheduling↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Exploring Self-Scheduling Strategies and Heuristics in Novice Schedulers

Missions beyond low Earth orbit will require crews to act with greater autonomy. Increasing communication delays will require crews to take on tasks currently supported by Mission Control, including the involved process of scheduling and rescheduling their own complex spaceflight timelines to fit a variety of restrictions and constraints. Astronauts, unlike Mission Control, are not expert planners, however, and determining simple strategies and heuristics that enable them to schedule successfully can increase the range of problems they can solve successfully. In two human-in-the-loop scheduling experiments, we analyzed 1) common strategies among novice schedules, and 2) the development of self-scheduling heuristics. We find that, even when participants are instructed to follow a given strategy, they rapidly develop their own self-scheduling heuristics as they learn to successfully complete the scheduling task. Participants conducting naturally learn to schedule activities with the most constraints first, while participants vary in heuristics in the rescheduling task.

self-scheduling↗
NASA NTRS1995

The Mission Operations Directorate's International Space Station Alpha Hardware Familiarization Role

The National Aeronautics and Space Administration's Mission Operation Directorate's (MOD) On-Orbit Maintenance Operations Mission Controllers are participating in space station hardware tests and demonstrations in multiple neutral buoyancy facilities. This is part of the controllers' hardware familiarization world in preparation to support the astronauts in the operation and maintenance of the hardware. This paper describes the larger context of Mission Controller hardware familiarization with specifics of participation in the Boeing neutral buoyancy tests. Also covered is what participation has occurred in the past and future plans.

Zingrebe, Kenneth W., II↗
NASA NTRS1986

Manned Mars mission environmental control and life support subsystem

A specific design is not presented, but the general philosophy regarding potential Environmental Control/Life Support System (ECLSS) requirements, concepts, issues, and technology needs are discussed. The focus is on a manned Mars mission occurring in the late 1990's. Discussions on the Trans-Mars Vehicle, the Mars Excursion Module (MEM), and a Martian base facility are covered. The functions, performance requirements, and design loads of a typical ECLSS are listed, and the issues and technology briefly discussed. Several ECLSS concepts and options are identified, and comparative weights and volumes are provided for these. Several aspects of the space station ECLSS are contrasted with the Mars element ECLSS.

Hueter, Uwe↗
NASA NTRS2025

Private Astronaut Post-Mission Debrief Interviews Study

BACKGROUND The commercialization of space will increasingly include individuals that are not rigorously-selected, highly-trained professional astronauts. Private astronaut missions (PAMs), such as Axiom-1 in 2022, will continue to travel to the International Space Station in the coming years, but the risk of integrating private astronauts with NASA astronauts has not been clearly quantified nor mitigated. An earlier internal NASA operations assessment, which consisted of a comprehensive literature review and interviews of current NASA experts, found that PAMs are likely to increase the risk to NASA astronauts during integrated missions (Landon, Whiting, Russell, Schorn, Passmore, & Roma, 2022). There are ongoing efforts at NASA to mitigate concerns from a medical, psychological, and technical perspective. NASA experts are working closely with PAM providers to offer recommendations and best practices beyond the limits of requirements to ensure crew health and safety. However, efforts are siloed between groups to some extent, and with the rate of PAMs likely to increase, a more comprehensive and integrated process is needed to reduce the burden on NASA resources. AIMS The purpose of this project is to understand private astronauts’ motivations for journeying to space, their pre-mission preparation period, and their experiences in space. Data will be collected via private astronaut post-mission debrief interviews. This data will inform training needs and in-mission support needed for missions that include private astronauts; the preparation NASA astronauts and mission support personnel will need to work with these integrated crews; and gaps in knowledge to guide research and countermeasure development. Our study aims to (1) Characterize risks posed by commercialization and private astronaut crew integration in spaceflight operations, as it relates to Team, Human Systems Integration Architecture (HSIA), and Behavioral Medicine (BMed) Risks, (2) Recommend potential countermeasures and identify gaps in current research. Countermeasures may be related to crew selection and composition, training, crew support systems (e.g., medical/psychological support, support from Mission Control, on-board resources), and habitability and human factors design. METHOD The BHP Lab will conduct 30-minute interviews with up to eight (8) private astronaut mission (PAM) astronauts (e.g., Axiom) and spaceflight participants (e.g., SFPs or “free flyers” on Polaris Dawn) per year from 2024-2030 to discuss knowledge gaps and needs related to selection and assessment, crew composition, training, crew support systems (e.g., medical/psychological support, support from Mission Control, onboard resources), and habitability and human factors design, which may influence the risk to NASA astronauts. Interviews will then be coded using thematic analysis and interpreted with the assistance of lexical analysis software (e.g., LIWC). As of the end of 2024, we have collected data from one PAM crew. At the conclusion of data collection in 2030, a final report will be prepared integrating all data collected by 2031. SUMMARY Post-return interviews of private astronauts are being conducted to understand their experiences and inform training and countermeasures to ensure the safety of all who journey to the ISS.

Private Astronaut Missions↗
NASA NTRS2005

STS-114 Flight Day 12 Highlights

Flight Day 12 features a night undocking of Space Shuttle Discovery (Commander Eileen Collins, Pilot James Kelly, Mission Specialists Soichi Noguchi, Stephen Robinson, Andrew Thomas, Wendy Lawrence, and Charles Camarda) from the International Space Station (ISS). The STS-114 crew and the Expedition 11 crew of the ISS (Commander Sergei Krikalev and NASA ISS Science Officer and Flight Engineer John Phillips) bid each other farewell. Prior to the undocking, Discovery and Mission Control are heard discussing troubleshooting of an oxygen flow sensor. Crew preparations for undocking are also heard. After the spacecraft are shown separating, Collins discusses with Mission Control possible debris seen on a monitor. The video includes several scenes of the ISS from the shuttle orbiter, one with Kazakhstan and another with the Himalayas in the background, and another shot with a hand-held camera by Noguchi. Other Earth views include the Sinai Peninsula and Nile Delta in Egypt, a storm at sea, and a black and white view of the Southern Lights over Australia.

Source record↗
NASA NTRS2011

The Traverse Planning Process for the Drats 2010 Analog Field Simulations

Traverse planning concentrates on optimizing the science return within the overall objectives of planetary surface missions or their analog field simulations. Such simulations were conducted in the San Francisco Volcanic Field, northern Arizona, from Aug. 26 to Sept 17, 2010 and involved some 200 individuals in the field, with some 40 geoscientists composing the science team. The purpose of these Desert Research and Technology Studies (DRATS) is to exercise and evaluate developmental hardware, software and operational concepts in a mission-like, fully-integrated, setting under the direction of an onsite Mobile Mission Control Center(MMCC). DRATS 2010 focused on the simultaneous operation of 2 rovers, a historic first. Each vehicle was manned by an astronaut-commander and an experienced field geologist. Having 2 rovers and crews in the field mandated substantially more complex science and mission control operations compared to the single rover DRATS tests of 2008 and 2009, or the Apollo lunar missions. For instance, the science support function was distributed over 2 "back rooms", one for each rover, with both "tactical" teams operating independently and simultaneously during the actual traverses. Synthesis and integration of the daily findings and forward planning for the next day(s) was accomplished overnight by yet another "strategic" science team.

Horz, Friedrich↗
NASA NTRS2011

Development of the ISS EMU Dashboard Software

The EMU (Extra-Vehicular Mobility Unit) Dashboard was developed at NASA s Johnson Space Center to aid in real-time mission support for the ISS (International Space Station) and Shuttle EMU space suit by time synchronizing down-linked video, space suit data and audio from the mission control audio loops. Once the input streams are synchronized and recorded, the data can be replayed almost instantly and has proven invaluable in understanding in-flight hardware anomalies and playing back information conveyed by the crew to missions control and the back room support. This paper will walk through the development from an engineer s idea brought to life by an intern to real time mission support and how this tool is evolving today and its challenges to support EVAs (Extra-Vehicular Activities) and human exploration in the 21st century.

Bernard, Craig↗
NASA NTRS1974

MSFC engineering support to Skylab operations

Major engineering support provided during the Skylab mission from the Marshall Space Flight Center and its contractors to the Mission Control Center at Houston was essential to Skylab success. The need for this type of support was anticipated during premission preparations due to the complexity and first-flight nature of the Skylab, but the requirements were greatly magnified by the problems encountered early in the mission. The MFSC engineering support organization and its interface to the Mission Control Center is described. The importance of close cooperation between the operating and engineering organizations in this type of mission is discussed. Illustrations are given from more than 1800 systems analysis actions worked out during the nine-month Skylab mission by more than 600 support engineers.

Kurtz, H. F., Jr.↗
NASA NTRS1978

Design concepts of the Shuttle mission simulator

The Shuttle mission simulator is designed to simulate all phases of the Space Shuttle mission from the last 30 minutes of countdown to launch, ascent, operations in orbit, deorbit, reentry, and landing with full participation by astronaut trainees and the mission control center. This paper reviews the design concepts of the simulator with attention given to the simulation hardware, crew stations, instructor/operator stations, digital computers, flight computer simulation interface device, mission control center interface, visual systems, aural cue system, mathematical modeling, digital computer complex, motion system, and the payload accommodation system.

Bird, J. D.↗
NASA NTRS2003

STS-107 Mission Highlights Resource, Part 4 of 4

This video, Part 4 of 4, shows the activities of the STS-107 crew during flight days 13 through 15 of the Columbia orbiter's final flight. The crew consists of Commander Rick Husband, Pilot William McCool, Payload Commander Michael Anderson, Mission Specialists David Brown, Kalpana Chawla, and Laurel Clark, and Payload Specialist Ilan Ramon. The highlight of flight day 13 is Kalpana Chawla conversing with Mission Control Center in Houston during troubleshooting of the Combustion Module in a recovery procedure to get the MIST fire suppression experiment back online. Chawla is shown replacing an atomizer head. At Mission Control Center a vase of flowers commemorating the astronauts who died on board Space Shuttle Challenger's final flight is shown and explained. The footage of flight day 14 consists of a tour of Columbia's flight deck, middeck, and Spacehab research module. Rick Husband narrates the tour, which features Kalpana Chawla, Laurel Clark, and himself. The astronauts demonstrate hygene, a dining tray, the orbiter's toilet, and a space iron, which is a rack for strapping down shirts. The Earth limb is shown with the Spacehab module in the foreground. Clark exercises on a bicycle for a respiration experiment, and demonstrates how a compact disk player gyrates in microgravity. On flight day 15, the combustion module is running again, and footage is shown of the Water Mist Fire-Suppression Experiment (Mist) in operation. Laurel Clark narrates a segment of the video in which Ilan Ramon exercises on a bicycle, Rick Husband, Kalpana Chawla, and Ramon demonstrate spinning and push-ups in the Spacehab module, and Clark demonstrates eating from a couple of food packets. The video ends with a shot of the Earth limb reflected on the radiator on the inside of Columbia's open payload bay door with the Earth in the background.

Source record↗
NASA NTRS2006

NASA flight controllers - Meeting cultural and leadership challenges on the critical path to mission success

As part of its preparation for missions to the Moon and Mars, NASA has identified high priority critical path roadmap (CPR) questions, two of which focus on the performance of mission control personnel. NASA flight controllers have always worked in an incredibly demanding setting, but the International Space Station poses even more challenges than prior missions. We surveyed 14 senior ISS flight controllers and a contrasting sample of 12 more junior controllers about the management and cultural challenges they face and the most effective strategies for addressing them. There was substantial consensus among participants on some issues, such as the importance of building a personal relationship with Russian colleagues. Responses from junior and senior controllers differed in some areas, such as training. We frame the results in terms of two CPR questions. We aim to use our results to improve flight controller training.

Clement, James L., Jr.↗
NASA NTRS1974

MSFC Skylab Apollo Telescope Mount thermal control system mission evaluation

The Skylab Saturn Workshop Assembly was designed to expand the knowledge of manned earth orbital operations and accomplish a multitude of scientific experiments. The Apollo Telescope Mount (ATM), a module of the Skylab Saturn Workshop Assembly, was the first manned solar observatory to successfully observe, monitor, and record the structure and behavior of the sun outside the earth's atmosphere. The ATM contained eight solar telescopes that recorded solar phenomena in X-ray, ultraviolet, white light, and hydrogen alpha regions of the electromagnetic spectrum. In addition, the ATM contained the Saturn Workshop Assembly's pointing and attitude control system, a data and communication system, and a solar array/rechargeable battery power system. This document presents the overall ATM thermal design philosophy, premission and mission support activity, and the mission thermal evaluation. Emphasis is placed on premission planning and orbital performance with particular attention on problems encountered during the mission. ATM thermal performance was satisfactory throughout the mission. Although several anomalies occurred, no failure was directly attributable to a deficiency in the thermal design.

Hueter, U.↗
NASA NTRS1997

STS-82 Mission Highlight Presentation

The STS-82 is the second in a series of planned service missions to the Hubble Space Telescope (HST). The flight crew of STS-82, Cmdr. Kenneth D. Bowersox, Pilot Scott J. Horowitz, Mission specialists, Mark C. Lee, Steven A. Hawley, Gregory J. Harbaugh, Steven L. Smith, and Joseph R. Tanner can be seen performing pre-launch activities preparing for the night launch. The crew meets the press for pre-launch photos before being transported to the launch pad. Several views can be seen of the final inspection team on the O level and the crew being readied in the 'white room'. Launch activities such as the oxygen vent hood retraction, liftoff, SRB separation, and personnel activities in the Houston Integrated Mission Control room are viewed. Subsequent footage is provided of the crew's activities during the HST rendezvous and docking, Extravehicular Activities (EVA's) preparation and EVA numbers 1, 3 and 5. During the first EVA the earth can be seen clearly in a reflection off of HST's offshroud during its 60th orbit crossing the equator. The HST deployment and views of the Hale-Bopp comet are clearly seen before Discovery's reentry and landing. After reentry a beautiful view of Discovery moving at 10,400 mph can be seen looking east from Mission Control. The ususal twin sonic boom precedes Discovery's touchdown on runway 15 at Kennedy Space Center. This second HST service mission orbited Earth 150 times and traveled 1.4 million miles.

Source record↗
NASA NTRS1991

Apollo 13: Houston, We've Got a Problem

This video contains historical footage of the flight of Apollo-13, the fifth Lunar Mission and the third spacecraft that was to land on the Moon. Apollo-13's launch date was April 11, 1970. On the 13th of April, after docking with the Lunar Module, the astronauts, Jim Lovell, Fred Haise, and Jack Swiggert, discovered that their oxygen tanks had ruptured and ended up entering and returning to Earth in the Lunar Module instead of the Command Module. There is footage of inside module and Mission Control shots, personal commentary by the astronauts concerning the problems as they developed, national news footage and commentary, and a post-flight Presidential Address by President Richard Nixon. Film footage of the approach to the Moon and departing from Earth, and air-to-ground communication with Mission Control is included.

Source record↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

What is the Role of Usability and Trust in Autonomy?

Usability encompasses learnability, efficiency, memorability, effectiveness, and satisfaction. NASA’s standards for usability acceptance criteria focus on interfaces that help operators achieve their tasks efficiently, effectively, and with satisfaction. However, discussions on usability, especially regarding future highly automated and autonomous systems, rarely include trust. As NASA plans for long-duration exploration missions, it envisions astronauts operating more independently from Mission Control on Earth. This independence will drive the development of these highly automated and autonomous systems that astronauts will use daily. To prepare for this future, our team has developed a scheduling and execution software tool that facilitates self-scheduling, allowing astronauts to independently manage their own schedule without Mission Control’s involvement. Over many years, we have developed, matured, and evaluated our software tool in extreme environments, prioritizing user-centered design and high usability. These evaluations have included multiple campaigns in NASA analogs, including NEEMO, BASALT, and HERA, as well as technology demonstrations onboard the International Space Station. Our recent research on software interfaces for future astronaut autonomy revealed a strong correlation between usability and trust measures. In a controlled lab experiment, we asked novice users to perform a complex scheduling task, during which the software immediately validated the schedule’s constraints and checked for violations. We collected usability (User Experience Questionnaire, UEQ) and trust (Trust in Automated Systems scale, TAS) measures; significant, strong, and moderate correlations emerged between several of the UEQ metrics and TAS. These results support the argument for investing in usability early to enable and sustain trust in highly automated and autonomous systems.

usability↗
NASA NTRS1994

Simplifying operations with an uplink/downlink integration toolkit

The Operations Engineering Lab (OEL) at JPL has developed a simple, generic toolkit to integrate the uplink/downlink processes, (often called closing the loop), in JPL's Multimission Ground Data System. This toolkit provides capabilities for integrating telemetry verification points with predicted spacecraft commands and ground events in the Mission Sequence Of Events (SOE) document. In the JPL ground data system, the uplink processing functions and the downlink processing functions are separate subsystems that are not well integrated because of the nature of planetary missions with large one-way light times for spacecraft-to-ground communication. Our new closed-loop monitoring tool allows an analyst or mission controller to view and save uplink commands and ground events with their corresponding downlinked telemetry values regardless of the delay in downlink telemetry and without requiring real-time intervention by the user. An SOE document is a time-ordered list of all the planned ground and spacecraft events, including all commands, sequence loads, ground events, significant mission activities, spacecraft status, and resource allocations. The SOE document is generated by expansion and integration of spacecraft sequence files, ground station allocations, navigation files, and other ground event files. This SOE generation process has been automated within the OEL and includes a graphical, object-oriented SOE editor and real-time viewing tool running under X/Motif. The SOE toolkit was used as the framework for the integrated implementation. The SOE is used by flight engineers to coordinate their operations tasks, serving as a predict data set in ground operations and mission control. The closed-loop SOE toolkit allows simple, automated integration of predicted uplink events with correlated telemetry points in a single SOE document for on-screen viewing and archiving. It automatically interfaces with existing real-time or non real-time sources of information, to display actual values from the telemetry data stream. This toolkit was designed to greatly simplify the user's ability to access and view telemetry data, and also provide a means to view this data in the context of the commands and ground events that are used to interpret it. A closed-loop system can prove especially useful in small missions with limited resources requiring automated monitoring tools. This paper will discuss the toolkit implementation, including design trade-offs and future plans for enhancing the automated capabilities.

Murphy, Susan C.↗