Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “Flight crew”

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 253 records · Page 14
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRS2013

Development and Execution of Autonomous Procedures Onboard the International Space Station to Support the Next Phase of Human Space Exploration

Now that major assembly of the International Space Station (ISS) is complete, NASA's focus has turned to using this high fidelity in-space research testbed to not only advance fundamental science research, but also demonstrate and mature technologies and develop operational concepts that will enable future human exploration missions beyond low Earth orbit. The ISS as a Testbed for Analog Research (ISTAR) project was established to reduce risks for manned missions to exploration destinations by utilizing ISS as a high fidelity micro-g laboratory to demonstrate technologies, operations concepts, and techniques associated with crew autonomous operations. One of these focus areas is the development and execution of ISS Testbed for Analog Research (ISTAR) autonomous flight crew procedures intended to increase crew autonomy that will be required for long duration human exploration missions. Due to increasing communications delays and reduced logistics resupply, autonomous procedures are expected to help reduce crew reliance on the ground flight control team, increase crew performance, and enable the crew to become more subject-matter experts on both the exploration space vehicle systems and the scientific investigation operations that will be conducted on a long duration human space exploration mission. These tests make use of previous or ongoing projects tested in ground analogs such as Research and Technology Studies (RATS) and NASA Extreme Environment Mission Operations (NEEMO). Since the latter half of 2012, selected non-critical ISS systems crew procedures have been used to develop techniques for building ISTAR autonomous procedures, and ISS flight crews have successfully executed them without flight controller involvement. Although the main focus has been preparing for exploration, the ISS has been a beneficiary of this synergistic effort and is considering modifying additional standard ISS procedures that may increase crew efficiency, reduce operational costs, and raise the amount of crew time available for scientific research. The next phase of autonomous procedure development is expected to include payload science and human research investigations. Additionally, ISS International Partners have expressed interest in participating in this effort. The recently approved one-year crew expedition starting in 2015, consisting of one Russian and one U.S. Operating Segment (USOS) crewmember, will be used not only for long duration human research investigations but also for the testing of exploration operations concepts, including crew autonomy.

beyond low earth orbit (BLEO)↗
NASA NTRS2012

Traffic Aware Strategic Aircrew Requests (TASAR)

Under Instrument Flight Rules, pilots are not permitted to make changes to their approved trajectory without first receiving permission from Air Traffic Control (ATC). Referred to as "user requests," trajectory change requests from aircrews are often denied or deferred by controllers because they have awareness of traffic and airspace constraints not currently available to flight crews. With the introduction of Automatic Dependent Surveillance-Broadcast (ADS-B) and other information services, a rich traffic, weather, and airspace information environment is becoming available on the flight deck. Automation developed by NASA uses this information to aid flight crews in the identification and formulation of optimal conflict-free trajectory requests. The concept of Traffic Aware Strategic Aircrew Requests (TASAR) combines ADS-B and airborne automation to enable user-optimal in-flight trajectory replanning and to increase the likelihood of ATC approval for the resulting trajectory change request. TASAR may improve flight efficiency or other user-desired attributes of the flight while not impacting and potentially benefiting the air traffic controller. This paper describes the TASAR concept of operations, its enabling automation technology which is currently under development, and NASA s plans for concept assessment and maturation.

Ballin, Mark G.↗
NASA NTRS2000

Free Flight Simulation: An Initial Examination of Air-Ground Integration Issues

The concept of "free flight" is intended to emphasize more flexibility for operators in the National Airspace System (RTCA, 1995). This may include the potential for aircraft self-separation. The purpose of this simulation was to begin examining some of the communication and procedural issues associated with self-separation in an integrated air-ground environment. Participants were 10 commercial U.S. flight crews who flew the B747-400 simulator and 10 Denver ARTCC controllers who monitored traffic in an ATC simulation. A prototypic airborne alerting logic and flight deck display features were designed to allow for increased traffic and maneuvering information. Eight different scenarios representing different conflict types were developed. The effects of traffic density (high and low) and different traffic convergence angles (obtuse, acute, and right) were assessed. Conflict detection times were found to be lower for the flight crews in low density compared to high density scenarios. For the controllers, an interaction between density and convergence angle was revealed. Analyses on the controller detection times found longer detection times in the obtuse high density compared to obtuse low density, as well as the shortest detection times in the high density acute angle condition. Maneuvering and communication events are summarized, and a discussion of future research issues is provided.

Lozito, Sandra↗
NASA NTRS2011

Flight Deck-Based Delegated Separation: Evaluation of an On-Board Interval Management System with Synthetic and Enhanced Vision Technology

An emerging Next Generation Air Transportation System concept - Equivalent Visual Operations (EVO) - can be achieved using an electronic means to provide sufficient visibility of the external world and other required flight references on flight deck displays that enable the safety, operational tempos, and visual flight rules (VFR)-like procedures for all weather conditions. Synthetic and enhanced flight vision system technologies are critical enabling technologies to EVO. Current research evaluated concepts for flight deck-based interval management (FIM) operations, integrated with Synthetic Vision and Enhanced Vision flight-deck displays and technologies. One concept involves delegated flight deck-based separation, in which the flight crews were paired with another aircraft and responsible for spacing and maintaining separation from the paired aircraft, termed, "equivalent visual separation." The operation required the flight crews to acquire and maintain an "equivalent visual contact" as well as to conduct manual landings in low-visibility conditions. The paper describes results that evaluated the concept of EVO delegated separation, including an off-nominal scenario in which the lead aircraft was not able to conform to the assigned spacing resulting in a loss of separation.

Prinzel, Lawrence J., III↗
NASA NTRS2018

Participant Training for a Flight Test Evaluation of Interval Management

Interval Management is a concept designed to be used by air traffic controllers and flight crews to more efficiently and precisely manage inter-aircraft spacing. NASA, in cooperation with Boeing, Honeywell, and United Airlines, tested an avionics prototype onboard flight test aircraft. A critical need was identified to train the pilots participating in the flight test prior to the first flight. This paper documents the flight training regimen that successfully trained the pilots on the Interval Management concepts and flight crew procedures and suggests potential improvements to future training regimens for industry use.

Roper, Roy↗
NASA NTRS2001

Avionics for a Small Satellite

This paper discusses a small. seven and a half (7.5) inch diameter. satellite that NASA-JSC is developing as a technology demonstrator for an astronaut assistant free flyer. The Free Flyer is designed to off load flight crew work load by performing inspections of the exterior of Space Shuttle or International Space Station. The Free Flyer is designed to be operated by the flight crew thereby reducing the number of Extra Vehicle Activities (EVA) or by an astronaut on the ground further reducing crew work load. The paper focuses on the design constraint of a small satellite and the technology approach used to achieve the set of high performance requirements specified for the Free Flyer. Particular attention is paid to the processor card as it is the heart and system integration point of the Free Flyer.

Abbott, Larry↗
NASA NTRS1988

Radiation safety in commercial air traffic

A recalculation of radiation dose rates in the stratosphere indicates that near 45,000 ft. the level is 1 to 1.6 m-rem/hour depending on solar activity. Consequently, flight crews operating at that height should be considered radiation workers with respect to safety level calculations. Uncertainties are introduced by the difficulty in ascertaining how many hours flight crews actually spend at that altitude and by the unresolved effects of galactic heavy ion collisions on the atmospheric neutron spectrum.

Wilson, John W.↗
NASA NTRS2006

STS-121: Crew Activities

STS-121/Discovery Flight Crew; Steve Lindsey(Commander), Mark Kelley(pilot), Mike Fossum, Lisa Nowak, Stephanie Nowak, Pierce Sellers, and Thomas Ryder performed the following activities: 1) Crew equipment interface test at SSPF; 2) Crew equipment interface test at Kennedy Space Center; and Payload Crew equipment interface test in SSPF.

Source record↗
NASA NTRS2020

Identification of Scenarios for System Interface Design Evaluation: CAST SE-210 Output 2 Report 5 of 6

This report is one in a series of reports describing research to develop enhanced approaches to design and evaluation of flight deck interaction. The research was conducted to support the Commercial Aviation Safety Team (CAST) response to incidents and accidents caused by failure of the flight crew to maintain aircraft attitude or energy state awareness. This report partially responds to Safety Enhancement (SE) 210.2 (CAST, 2014) by describing development of operational scenarios for evaluation of flight crew interaction. Evaluations of human performance with an interface rely on asking humans to perform operational tasks in an appropriate operational context. The report includes the major sources of material for developing operational scenarios—which include system state, operational tasks, operational context, and safety events—and a method for developing an appropriate set of operational scenarios for interface evaluation.

commercial aviation↗
NASA NTRS1962

SIMULATION EQUIPMENT USED IN THE TRAINING OF ASTRONAUTS AND FLIGHT CONTROL CREWS IN PROJECT MERCURY

At the beginning of the Mercury Program it was realized that the entire preparation of the man for piloting the spacecraft would have to be done by use of simulation techniques. It was also realized that no single all-inclusive flight simulator could provide the astronaut with practice in all phases of the mission in a sufficiently realistic environment. To determine the simulation needs, the Mercury-Atlas flight was broken down into areas of astronaut mission responsibility and into areas of physiological and psychological factors affecting the astronaut. A study was made of existing and proposed devices to determine requirements, suitability, feasibility, and availability of these devices. The simulators and devices finally selected are listed in Figure 1. Omitted from this list are several devices that are not actually simulators, such as mockups and visual devices} disorientation devices such as the one at Pensacola, and airplane 0 g familiarization flights. The listings in Figure 1 are not by order of importance or time availability but rather in groupings of fixed-based and dynamic or moving-based simulators.

Training equipment↗
NASA NTRS1996

Ice Detector and Deicing Fluid Effectiveness Monitoring System

An ice detector and deicing fluid effectiveness monitoring system for an aircraft is disclosed. The ice detection portion is particularly suited for use in flight to notify the flight crew of an accumulation of ice on an aircraft lifting and control surfaces, or helicopter rotors, whereas the deicing fluid effectiveness monitoring portion is particularly suited for use on the ground to notify the flight crew of the possible loss of the effectiveness of the deicing fluid. The ice detection portion comprises a temperature sensor and a parallel arrangement of electrodes whose coefficient of coupling is indicative of the formation of the ice, as well as the thickness of the formed ice. The fluid effectiveness monitoring portion comprises a temperature sensor and an ionic-conduction cell array that measures the conductivity of the deicing fluid which is indicative of its concentration and, thus, its freezing point. By measuring the temperature and having knowledge of the freezing point of the deicing fluid, the fluid effectiveness monitoring portion predicts when the deicing fluid may lose its effectiveness because its freezing point may correspond to the temperature of the ambient.

Seegmiller, H. Lee B.↗
NASA NTRS2019

Increasing Pilot’s Understanding of Future Automation State – an Evaluation of an Automation State and Trajectory Prediction System

A pilot in the loop flight simulation study was conducted at NASA Langley Research Center to evaluate a trajectory prediction system. The trajectory prediction system computes a five-minute prediction of the lateral and vertical path of the aircraft given the current and intent state of the automation. The prediction is shown as a graphical representation so the pilots can form an accurate mental model of the future state. Otherwise, many automation changes and triggers are hidden from the flight crew or need to be consolidated to understand if a change will occur and the exact timing of the change. Varying dynamic conditions like deceleration can obscure the future trajectory and the ability to meet constraints, especially in the vertical dimension. Current flight deck indications of flight path assume constant conditions and do not adequately support the flight crew to make correct judgments regarding constraints. The study was conducted using ten commercial airline crews from multiple airlines, paired by airline to minimize procedural effects. Scenarios spanned a range of conditions that provided evaluation in a realistic environment with complex traffic and weather conditions. In particular, scenarios probed automation state and loss of state awareness. The technology was evaluated and contrasted with current state-of-the-art flight deck capabilities modeled from the Boeing 787. Objective and subjective data were collected from aircraft parameters, questionnaires, audio/video recordings, head/eye tracking data, and observations. This paper details findings about the trajectory prediction system including recommendations about further study.

Etherington, Timothy J.↗
NASA NTRS2019

Supporting Crew Autonomy in Deep Space Exploration: Preliminary Onboard Capability Requirements and Proposed Research Questions. Technical Report of the Autonomous Crew Operations Technical Interchange Meeting

Communication delays are a critical challenge posed by long duration deep space exploration. Space missions historically have relied on an ever-present Mission Control Center (MCC) to direct operations in near real-time. As unanticipated anomalies that defeat fault detection and resolution systems do arise, the lack of real-time communication will significantly weaken what the MCC support represents: a reliable safety net for the flight crew through its deep and diverse areas of expertise and investigative resources. As a consequence, future space vehicles and habitats need to be equipped with capabilities to support the flight crew to operate with little or no ground support. Considerations must be given to vehicle and mission designs that will fortify the traditionally ground-centered safety net and forge new support systems, when communication delays exist. In August 2018, NASA’s Human Research Program, through its Human Factors and Behavioral Performance Element, convened a Technical Interchange Meeting (TIM) on Autonomous Crew Operations at NASA Ames Research Center. The goal of the meeting was to gather input from NASA centers, industry, academia, and branches of the Department of Defense (DoD) to address how intelligent technologies can be applied to augment onboard capabilities to support crew anomaly response. The TIM featured 24 presentations by 29 speakers and hosted a total of 59 attendees, including 43 from 5 NASA centers (Ames, Johnson, Langley, Marshall, and Jet Propulsion Lab) and 4 from the DoD (3 from Army Research Lab and 1 from Naval Postgraduate School), with remaining attendees from academia (e.g., UC Davis, CMU) and industry (e.g., IBM, Siemens). Discussions were centered around three themes: standards and guidelines, lessons learned in analog environments, and technologies. To help provide a framework for discussion, a concept matrix describing anomaly response processes was created prior to the TIM (Figure 1, page 6). The matrix captures the steps involved (monitoring and detection, diagnosis, solution development and evaluation, solution implementation and verification, resolution documentation) as well as the resources and capabilities required to support these steps (data, knowledge, analysis, synthesis, resource management). A wallpaper size printout of the matrix was utilized at the TIM to solicit attendee inputs along the three themes; the activity garnered 108 submissions of ideas. Overall, what emerged from TIM discussions was a picture of mismatch between crew anomaly response needs and support that can be provided by existing intelligent technologies. The needs are broad, spanning multiple steps and processes/resources, with many of which lacking support from existing technologies, such as knowledge management throughout the steps of problem solving (especially in resolution documentation) and manpower management. The solutions provided by existing intelligent technologies are specific to the steps/processes that they are designed to support and constrained to solving only problems similar to those that have occurred before. What is lacking from technologies is typically made up by humans, specifically their complex critical thinking, creative problem solving, and domain expertise. In the end, the TIM highlighted the pressing need to support responses to onboard anomalies during autonomous crew operations, particularly those that have eluded the system tests, inspection, and other assurance processes. Such anomalies can potentially threaten crew and vehicle safety, as well as significantly impact overall operations with additional workload. These fairly rare events are difficult to anticipate and prepare for, given the state-of-the-art in intelligent technologies. This is true even for anomalies that stem from “unknown knowns”—cases in which there is sufficient external information to characterize the problem but the overall pattern fails to be recognized by the problem solver, or in which the internal knowledge needed to solve a problem is held tacitly and potentially accessible by the problem solver but not articulated. It follows that the ability to tackle anomalies lies not only with the availability of relevant information and knowledge but also their accessibility in times of need. To that end, we propose research questions along the following three broad themes: • How intelligent technologies can help make relevant knowledge and information available? • How intelligent technologies can help make relevant knowledge and information accessible? • How intelligent technologies can help support the crew operating as a team in anomaly response processes?

autonomous crew operations↗
NASA NTRS1995

STS-74 Flight Day 5

On this fifth day of the STS-74 mission, the flight crew, Cmdr. Kenneth Cameron, Pilot James Halsell, and Mission Specialists William McArthur, Jerry Ross, and Chris Hadfield, were awakened to the theme from the movie '2001: A Space Odyssey.' The Mir 20 cosmonauts, Cmdr. Yuri Gidzenko, Flight Engineer Sergei Avdeyev, and Cosmonaut-Researcher (ESA) Thomas Reiter, and shuttle astronauts are shown giving each other plaques and presents to commemorate their historic docking event and the start towards the development of the International Space Station. There is a press conference from Moscow by a one of the officers of the Russian Space Agency with both flight crews and an additional separate press interview of the crews by Canadian reporters. There is video footage of the two docked spacecraft taken from various angles.

Source record↗
NASA NTRS1996

Crew Selection and Training

This research addressed a number of issues relevant to the performance of teams in demanding environments. Initial work, conducted in the aviation analog environment, focused on developing new measures of performance related attitudes and behaviors. The attitude measures were used to assess acceptance of concepts related to effective teamwork and personal capabilities under stress. The behavioral measures were used to evaluate the effectiveness of flight crews operating in commercial aviation. Assessment of team issues in aviation led further to the evaluation and development of training to enhance team performance. Much of the work addressed evaluation of the effectiveness of such training, which has become known as Crew Resource Management (CRM). A second line of investigation was into personality characteristics that predict performance in challenging environments such as aviation and space. A third line of investigation of team performance grew out of the study of flight crews in different organizations. This led to the development of a theoretical model of crew performance that included not only individual attributes such as personality and ability, but also organizational and national culture. A final line of investigation involved beginning to assess whether the methodologies and measures developed for the aviation analog could be applied to another domain -- the performance of medical teams working in the operating room.

Helmreich, Robert L.↗
NASA NTRS1996

STS-75 Flight Day 13

On this thirteenth day of the STS-75 mission, the flight crew, Cmdr. Andrew Allen, Pilot Scott Horowitz, Payload Cmdr. Franklin Chang-Diaz, Payload Specialist Umberto Guidoni (Italy), and Mission Specialists Jeffrey Hoffman, Maurizio Cheli (ESA) and Claude Nicollier (ESA), are shown conducting combustion and burn experiments. The flight crew is interviewed by news reporters from United States and Europe via a satellite hookup. Earth views include clouds and storm systems. A view of the lost, free-flying tethered satellite is shown.

Source record↗
NASA NTRS2017

Synthetic Vision System Commercial Aircraft Flight Deck Display Technologies for Unusual Attitude Recovery

A Commercial Aviation Safety Team (CAST) study of 18 worldwide loss-of-control accidents and incidents determined that the lack of external visual references was associated with a flight crew's loss of attitude awareness or energy state awareness in 17 of these events. Therefore, CAST recommended development and implementation of virtual day-Visual Meteorological Condition (VMC) display systems, such as synthetic vision systems, which can promote flight crew attitude awareness similar to a day-VMC environment. This paper describes the results of a high-fidelity, large transport aircraft simulation experiment that evaluated virtual day-VMC displays and a "background attitude indicator" concept as an aid to pilots in recovery from unusual attitudes. Twelve commercial airline pilots performed multiple unusual attitude recoveries and both quantitative and qualitative dependent measures were collected. Experimental results and future research directions under this CAST initiative and the NASA "Technologies for Airplane State Awareness" research project are described.

Prinzel, Lawrence J., III↗