Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “flight deck”

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

STS-107 Crew Choice Television Highlights

The STS-107 flight day highlights begin with a shot inside the flight deck of the Space Shuttle Columbia where Commander Rick Husband, Pilot William McCool, and Mission Specialists David Brown and Kalpana Chawla are seated. The actual liftoff of the Space Shuttle Columbia is shown with Mission Specialists Michael Anderson and Laurel Clark, and Payload Specialist Ilan Ramon seated on the middeck of the spacecraft. Mission Specialist David Brown exits his seat to take pictures of the external tank while Michael Anderson also prepares to take photographs. A beautiful shot of the orbiter flying over Egypt is presented. A view of the Spacehab Research Double Module is shown where crystals are growing in microgravity. Laurel Clark is also shown working on the Bioreactor experiment. Michael Anderson is shown performing various breathing experiments in space. This video shows the last flight of STS-107 during ascent as the crew is seated in the flight deck and middeck of the Space Shuttle Columbia.

Source record↗

Flying Schedule-Matching Descents to Explore Flight Crews' Perceptions of Their Load and Task Feasibility

Multiple studies have investigated the development and use of ground-based (controller) tools to manage and schedule traffic in future terminal airspace. No studies have investigated the impacts that such tools (and concepts) could have on the flight-deck. To begin to redress the balance, an exploratory study investigated the procedures and actions of ten Boeing-747-400 crews as they flew eight continuous descent approaches in the Los Angeles terminal airspace, with the descents being controlled using speed alone. Although the study was exploratory in nature, four variables were manipulated: speed changes, route constraints, clearance phraseology, and winds. Despite flying the same scenarios with the same events and timing, there was at least a 50 second difference in the time it took crews to fly the approaches. This variation is the product of a number of factors but highlights potential difficulties for scheduling tools that would have to accommodate this amount of natural variation in descent times. The primary focus of this paper is the potential impact of ground scheduling tools on the flight crews performance and procedures. Crews reported "moderate to low" workload, on average; however, short periods of intense and high workload were observed. The non-flying pilot often reported a higher level of workload than the flying-pilot, which may be due to their increased interaction with the Flight Management Computer, when using the aircraft automation to assist with managing the descent clearances. It is concluded that ground-side tools and automation may have a larger impact on the current-day flight-deck than was assumed and that studies investigating this impact should continue in parallel with controller support tool development.

Martin, Lynne Hazel↗

Learning from Automation Surprises and "Going Sour" Accidents: Progress on Human-Centered Automation

Advances in technology and new levels of automation on commercial jet transports has had many effects. There have been positive effects from both an economic and a safety point of view. The technology changes on the flight deck also have had reverberating effects on many other aspects of the aviation system and different aspects of human performance. Operational experience, research investigations, incidents, and occasionally accidents have shown that new and sometimes surprising problems have arisen as well. What are these problems with cockpit automation, and what should we learn from them? Do they represent over-automation or human error? Or instead perhaps there is a third possibility - they represent coordination breakdowns between operators and the automation? Are the problems just a series of small independent glitches revealed by specific accidents or near misses? Do these glitches represent a few small areas where there are cracks to be patched in what is otherwise a record of outstanding designs and systems? Or do these problems provide us with evidence about deeper factors that we need to address if we are to maintain and improve aviation safety in a changing world? How do the reverberations of technology change on the flight deck provide insight into generic issues about developing human-centered technologies and systems (Winograd and Woods, 1997)? Based on a series of investigations of pilot interaction with cockpit automation (Sarter and Woods, 1992; 1994; 1995; 1997a, 1997 b), supplemented by surveys, operational experience and incident data from other studies (e.g., Degani et al., 1995; Eldredge et al., 1991; Tenney et al., 1995; Wiener, 1989), we too have found that the problems that surround crew interaction with automation are more than a series of individual glitches. These difficulties are symptoms that indicate deeper patterns and phenomena concerning human-machine cooperation and paths towards disaster. In addition, we find the same kinds of patterns behind results from studies of physician interaction with computer-based systems in critical care medicine (e.g., Moll van Charante et al., 1993; Obradovich and Woods, 1996; Cook and Woods, 1996). Many of the results and implications of this kind of research are synthesized and discussed in two comprehensive volumes, Billings (1996) and Woods et al. (1994). This paper summarizes the pattern that has emerged from our research, related research, incident reports, and accident investigations. It uses this new understanding of why problems arise to point to new investment strategies that can help us deal with the perceived "human error" problem, make automation more of a team player, and maintain and improve safety.

Woods, David D.↗

Performance Comparison Between a Head-Worn Display System and a Head-Up Display for Low Visibility Commercial Operations

Research, development, test, and evaluation of flight deck interface technologies is being conducted by NASA to proactively identify, develop, and mature tools, methods, and technologies for improving overall aircraft safety of new and legacy vehicles operating in Next Generation Air Transportation System (NextGen). Under the Vehicle Systems Safety Technologies (VSST) project in the Aviation Safety Program, one specific area of research is the use of small Head-Worn Displays (HWDs) as an equivalent display to a Head-Up Display (HUD). Title 14 of the US Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) 91.175 describes a possible operational credit which can be obtained with airplane equipage of a HUD or an "equivalent" display combined with Enhanced Vision (EV). If successful, a HWD may provide the same safety and operational benefits as current HUD-equipped aircraft but for significantly more aircraft in which HUD installation is neither practical nor possible. A simulation experiment was conducted to evaluate if the HWD, coupled with a head-tracker, can provide an equivalent display to a HUD. Comparative testing was performed in the Research Flight Deck (RFD) Cockpit Motion Facility (CMF) full mission, motion-based simulator at NASA Langley. Twelve airline crews conducted approach and landing, taxi, and departure operations during low visibility operations (1000' Runway Visual Range (RVR), 300' RVR) at Memphis International Airport (Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) identifier: KMEM). The results showed that there were no statistical differences in the crews performance in terms of touchdown and takeoff. Further, there were no statistical differences between the HUD and HWD in pilots' responses to questionnaires.

Arthur, Jarvis J., III↗

Pilot-Configurable Information on a Display Unit

A small thin display unit that can be installed in the flight deck for displaying only flight crew-selected tactical information needed for the task at hand. The flight crew can select the tactical information to be displayed by means of any conventional user interface. Whenever the flight crew selects tactical information for processes the request, including periodically retrieving measured current values or computing current values for the requested tactical parameters and returning those current tactical parameter values to the display unit for display.

Shafaat, Syed Tahir↗

The role of communications, socio-psychological, and personality factors in the maintenance of crew coordination

The influence of group dynamics on the capability of aircraft crew members to make full use of the resources available on the flight deck in order to maintain flight safety is discussed. Instances of crewmembers withholding altimeter or heading information from the captain are cited as examples of domineering attitudes from command pilots and overconscientiousness on the parts of copilots, who may refuse to relay information forcefully enough or to take control of the aircraft in the case of pilot incapacitation. NASA studies of crew performance in controlled, simulator settings, concentrating on communication, decision making, crew interaction, and integration showed that efficient communication reduced errors. Acknowledgements served to encourage correct communication. The best crew performance is suggested to occur with personnel who are capable of both goal and group orientation. Finally, one bad effect of computer controlled flight is cited to be the tendency of the flight crew to think that someone else is taking care of difficulties in threatening situations.

Foushee, H. C.↗

Design Considerations for Attitude State Awareness and Prevention of Entry into Unusual Attitudes

Loss of control - inflight (LOC-I) has historically represented the largest category of commercial aviation fatal accidents. A review of the worldwide transport airplane accidents (2001-2010) evinced that loss of attitude or energy state awareness was responsible for a large majority of the LOC-I events. A Commercial Aviation Safety Team (CAST) study of 18 worldwide loss-of-control accidents and incidents determined that flight crew loss of attitude awareness or energy state awareness due to lack of external visual reference cues was a significant causal factor in 17 of the 18 reviewed flights. CAST recommended that "Virtual Day-Visual Meteorological Condition" (Virtual Day-VMC) displays be developed to provide the visual cues necessary to prevent loss-of-control resulting from flight crew spatial disorientation and loss of energy state awareness. Synthetic vision or equivalent systems (SVS) were identified for a design "safety enhancement" (SE-200). Part of this SE involves the conduct of research for developing minimum aviation system performance standards (MASPS) for these flight deck display technologies to aid flight crew attitude and energy state awareness similar to that of a virtual day-VMC-like environment. This paper will describe a novel experimental approach to evaluating a flight crew's ability to maintain attitude awareness and to prevent entry into unusual attitudes across several SVS optical flow design considerations. Flight crews were subjected to compound-event scenarios designed to elicit channelized attention and startle/surprise within the crew. These high-fidelity scenarios, designed from real-world events, enable evaluation of the efficacy of SVS at improving flight crew attitude awareness to reduce the occurrence of LOC-I incidents in commercial flight operations.

Ellis, Kyle K. E.↗

Aviation Simulators for the Desktop: Panel and Demonstrations

Panel Members are: Christine M. Mitchell (Georgia Tech), Michael T. Palmer (NASA Langley), Greg Pisani (NASA Ames), and Amy R. Pritchett (MIT). The Panel members are affiliated with aviation human factors groups from NASA Ames, NASA Langley, MITCHELL Department of Aerospace and Aeronautical Engineering, and Georgia Technics Center for Human-Machine Systems Research. Panelists will describe the simulator(s) used in their respective institutions including a description of the FMS aircraft models, software, hardware, and displays. Panelists will summarize previous, on-going, and planned empirical studies conducted with the simulators. Greg Pisanich will describe two NASA Ames simulation systems: the Stone Soup Simulator (SSS), and the Airspace Operations Human Factors Simulation Laboratory. The the Stone Soup Simulator is a desktop-based, research flight simulator that includes mode control, flight management, and datalink functionality. It has been developed as a non-proprietary simulator that can be easily distributed to academic and industry researchers who are collaborating on NASA research projects. It will be used and extended by research groups represented by at least two panelists (Mitchell and Palmer). The Airspace Operations Simulator supports the study of air traffic control in conjunction with the flight deck. This simulator will be used provide an environment in which many AATT and free flight concepts can be demonstrated and evaluated. Mike Palmer will describe two NASA Langley efforts: The Langley Simulator and MD-11 extensions to the NASA Amesbury simulator. The first simulator is publicly available and combines a B-737 model with a high fidelity flight management system. The second simulator enhances the S3 simulator with MD-11 electronic flight displays together with modifications to the flight and FMS models to emulate MD-11 dynamics and operations. Chris Mitchell will describe GT-EFIRT (Georgia Tech-Electronic Flight Instrument Research Tool) and B-757 enhancements to the NASA Ames S3. GT-EFIRT is a medium fidelity simulator used to conduct preliminary studies of the CATS (crew activity tracking system). Like the Langley efforts with S3, the Georgia Tech enhancements will allow it to emulate the dynamics and operations of a widely used glass cockpit. Amy Pritchett will describe the MIT simulator(s) that have been used in a range of research investigating cockpit displays, warning devices, and flight deck-ATC interaction.

Pisanich, Greg↗

Traffic Aware Strategic Aircrew Requests

This presentation summarizes the accomplishments of TASAR and introduces the guest speakers for the ATD-3 flight deck portion of the ATD TIM in September 2021.

TASAR, ATD-3, flight deck↗

STS-78 Flight Day 1

On this first day of the STS-78 mission, the flight crew, Cmdr. Terence T. Henricks, Pilot Kevin R. Kregel, Payload Cmdr. Susan J. Helms, Mission Specialists Richard M. Linnehan, Charles E. Brady, Jr., and Payload Specialists Jean-Jacques Favier, Ph.D. and Robert B. Thirsk, M.D., can be seen preforming pre-launch activities such as eating the traditional breakfast, crew suit-up, and the ride out to the launch pad. Also included are various panoramic views of the shuttle on the pad. The crew can be seen being readied in the white room for their mission. After the closing of the hatch and arm retraction, launch activities are shown including countdown, engine ignition, launch, and the separation of the Solid Rocket Boosters. Henricks shares a unique view of Columbia's climb to orbit with flight controllers from a small camera that was mounted on the flight deck. The video follows Columbia's flight from just before main engine start through main engine cutoff, showing the force of main engine and solid booster ignition as experienced by the astronauts.

Source record↗

Concept to Reality: Contributions of the Langley Research Center to US Civil Aircraft of the 1990s

This document is intended to be a companion to NASA SP-2000-4519, 'Partners in Freedom: Contributions of the Langley Research Center to U.S. Military Aircraft of the 1990s'. Material included in the combined set of volumes provides informative and significant examples of the impact of Langley's research on U.S. civil and military aircraft of the 1990s. This volume, 'Concept to Reality: Contributions of the NASA Langley Research Center to U.S. Civil Aircraft of the 1990s', highlights significant Langley contributions to safety, cruise performance, takeoff and landing capabilities, structural integrity, crashworthiness, flight deck technologies, pilot-vehicle interfaces, flight characteristics, stall and spin behavior, computational design methods, and other challenging technical areas for civil aviation. The contents of this volume include descriptions of some of the more important applications of Langley research to current civil fixed-wing aircraft (rotary-wing aircraft are not included), including commercial airliners, business aircraft, and small personal-owner aircraft. In addition to discussions of specific aircraft applications, the document also covers contributions of Langley research to the operation of civil aircraft, which includes operating problems. This document is organized according to disciplinary technologies, for example, aerodynamics, structures, materials, and flight systems. Within each discussion, examples are cited where industry applied Langley technologies to specific aircraft that were in operational service during the 1990s and the early years of the new millennium. This document is intended to serve as a key reference for national policy makers, internal NASA policy makers, Congressional committees, the media, and the general public. Therefore, it has been written for a broad general audience and does not presume any significant technical expertise. An extensive bibliography is provided for technical specialists and others who desire a more indepth discussion of the contributions.

Chambers, Joseph R.↗

NASA's ATM Technology Demonstration-1: Integrated Concept of Arrival Operations

This paper describes operations and procedures envisioned for NASA s Air Traffic Management (ATM) Technology Demonstration #1 (ATD-1). The ATD-1 Concept of Operations (ConOps) demonstration will integrate three NASA technologies to achieve high throughput, fuel-efficient arrival operations into busy terminal airspace. They are Traffic Management Advisor with Terminal Metering (TMA-TM) for precise time-based schedules to the runway and points within the terminal area, Controller-Managed Spacing (CMS) decision support tools for terminal controllers to better manage aircraft delay using speed control, and Flight deck Interval Management (FIM) avionics and flight crew procedures to conduct airborne spacing operations. The ATD-1 concept provides de-conflicted and efficient operations of multiple arrival streams of aircraft, passing through multiple merge points, from top-of-descent (TOD) to touchdown. It also enables aircraft to conduct Optimized Profile Descents (OPDs) from en route altitude to the runway, using primarily speed control to maintain separation and schedule. The ATD-1 project is currently addressing the challenges of integrating the three technologies, and implantation into an operational environment. Goals of the ATD-1 demonstration include increasing the throughput of high-density airports, reducing controller workload, increasing efficiency of arrival operations and the frequency of trajectory-based operations, and promoting aircraft ADS-B equipage.

Baxley, Brian T.↗

Air Traffic Management Technology Demonstration-1 Concept of Operations (ATD-1 ConOps), Version 2.0

This document is an update to the operations and procedures envisioned for NASA s Air Traffic Management (ATM) Technology Demonstration #1 (ATD-1). The ATD-1 Concept of Operations (ConOps) integrates three NASA technologies to achieve high throughput, fuel-efficient arrival operations into busy terminal airspace. They are Traffic Management Advisor with Terminal Metering (TMA-TM) for precise time-based schedules to the runway and points within the terminal area, Controller-Managed Spacing (CMS) decision support tools for terminal controllers to better manage aircraft delay using speed control, and Flight deck Interval Management (FIM) avionics and flight crew procedures to conduct airborne spacing operations. The ATD-1 concept provides de-conflicted and efficient operations of multiple arrival streams of aircraft, passing through multiple merge points, from top-of-descent (TOD) to the Final Approach Fix. These arrival streams are Optimized Profile Descents (OPDs) from en route altitude to the runway, using primarily speed control to maintain separation and schedule. The ATD-1 project is currently addressing the challenges of integrating the three technologies, and their implantation into an operational environment. The ATD-1 goals include increasing the throughput of high-density airports, reducing controller workload, increasing efficiency of arrival operations and the frequency of trajectory-based operations, and promoting aircraft ADS-B equipage.

Baxley, Brian T.↗

Emerging Technologies for Airplane State Awareness and Prediction

Loss of control in flight (LOC-I) is consistently the leading cause of fatal aircraft accidents. A study of LOC accidents and incidents, commissioned by the Commercial Aviation Safety Team (CAST) identified a growing trend in loss of Airplane State Awareness (ASA) by the flight crew. This has led to recommended safety enhancements that include flight deck technologies with the potential of enhancing flight crew awareness of airplane energy state. The goal of this research is to develop and evaluate technologies that predict and assess the future aircraft energy state and auto-flight configuration, and provide appropriate alerting to anticipated problematic auto-flight inputs, with the aim of enhancing pilots situational awareness.

Aircraft Safety↗

Simulation and Flight Test Environments for the TASAR Traffic Aware Planner

The Traffic Aware Planner (TAP) software is a flight deck decision support tool that enhances the flight crew’s ability to make flight-optimizing route change requests while airborne. The software provides conflict-free, optimized trajectory suggestions during en route flight to produce time- and fuel-savings compared to the current trajectory. The TAP software requires evaluation in an operational environment with real pilot users to validate projected benefits. To this end, a set of developmental test environments have been developed to mature the software and mitigate technical risk prior to entering operational evaluation. The unique attributes of each test environment were leveraged to provide a range of purpose- and case-dependent TAP software tests. This paper describes the elements of a testing environment, discusses several environments of varying fidelity used to test the TAP software, and provides a review of two case studies highlighting the vital role testing played in the TAP software development process.

Barney, Terique L.↗

A Validated Set of MIDAS V5 Task Network Model Scenarios to Evaluate Nextgen Closely Spaced Parallel Operations Concepts

The Closely Spaced Parallel Operations (CSPO) scenario is a complex, human performance model scenario that tested alternate operator roles and responsibilities to a series of off-nominal operations on approach and landing (see Gore, Hooey, Mahlstedt, Foyle, 2013). The model links together the procedures, equipment, crewstation, and external environment to produce predictions of operator performance in response to Next Generation system designs, like those expected in the National Airspaces NextGen concepts. The task analysis that is contained in the present report comes from the task analysis window in the MIDAS software. These tasks link definitions and states for equipment components, environmental features as well as operational contexts. The current task analysis culminated in 3300 tasks that included over 1000 Subject Matter Expert (SME)-vetted, re-usable procedural sets for three critical phases of flight; the Descent, Approach, and Land procedural sets (see Gore et al., 2011 for a description of the development of the tasks included in the model; Gore, Hooey, Mahlstedt, Foyle, 2013 for a description of the model, and its results; Hooey, Gore, Mahlstedt, Foyle, 2013 for a description of the guidelines that were generated from the models results; Gore, Hooey, Foyle, 2012 for a description of the models implementation and its settings). The rollout, after landing checks, taxi to gate and arrive at gate illustrated in Figure 1 were not used in the approach and divert scenarios exercised. The other networks in Figure 1 set up appropriate context settings for the flight deck.The current report presents the models task decomposition from the tophighest level and decomposes it to finer-grained levels. The first task that is completed by the model is to set all of the initial settings for the scenario runs included in the model (network 75 in Figure 1). This initialization process also resets the CAD graphic files contained with MIDAS, as well as the embedded operator models that comprise MIDAS. Following the initial settings, the model progresses to begin the first tasks required of the two flight deck operators, the Captain (CA) and the First Officer (FO). The task sets will initialize operator specific settings prior to loading all of the alerts, probes, and other events that occur in the scenario. As a note, the CA and FO were terms used in developing this model but the CA can also be thought of as the Pilot Flying (PF), while the FO can be considered the Pilot-Not-Flying (PNF)or Pilot Monitoring (PM). As such, the document refers to the operators as PFCA and PNFFO respectively.

task network model↗

Single Throttle Design for the Subsonic Single Aft Engine (SUSAN) Transport Aircraft

NASA is conducting trade studies for a new hybrid-electric aircraft concept called the SUbsonic Single Aft eNgine (SUSAN) Electrofan. The SUSAN airplane is being designed as a 180-passenger commercial airplane and is expected to fly in the 2040 time frame. The flight deck of the SUSAN airplane is envisioned to resemble a typical two person flightcrew transport. Pilot control research issues include interfaces and display state elements needed for the 17 engine hybrid-electric propulsion system. A pilot study was conducted where one, two, and three throttle handles were the independent variable in a simulation experiment. The results from the study showed that the three throttle concepts were equivalent in terms of workload, situation awareness, and thrust control. However, the pilots rated the usability of the single throttle test case to be “good” compared to the rating of “excellent” for the two- and three-throttle cases. From these results, a follow-on pilot study is described to explore a redesigned single throttle concept with associated engine display concepts.

flight deck displays↗

Flight manager and check-airman training

An analysis of industry incidents, accidents, and related human factors research is given. The need to develop more effective resource management training for the flight deck crewmembers is discussed with specific emphasis on flight manager and check-airman training.

Carroll, J. E.↗