Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “Number of 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 NTRS2012

NASA AND ESA Partnership on the Multi-Purpose Crew Vehicle Service Module

In March 2011, NASA and ESA made a decision to partially offset the European obligations deriving from the extension of the ISS Program until the end of 2020 with different means than ATVs, following the ATV-5 mission foreseen in mid-2014. NASA and ESA considered a number of barter options, and concluded that the provision by ESA of the Service Module and Spacecraft Adaptor for the NASA Multi-Purpose Crew Vehicle (MPCV) was the barter element with the most interest. A joint ESA - NASA working group was established to assess the feasibility of Europe developing this Module based on ATV heritage. The working group was supported by European and US industry namely Astrium, TAS-I and Lockheed-Martin. This paper gives an overview of the results of the on-going study as well as its projected utilization for the global space exploration endeavour.

Free, James M.↗
NASA NTRS1986

Biological and Medical Experiments on the Space Shuttle, 1981 - 1985

This volume is the first in a planned series of reports intended to provide a comprehensive record of all the biological and medical experiments and samples flown on the Space Shuttle. Experiments described have been conducted over a five-year period, beginning with the first plant studies conducted on STS-2 in November 1981, and extending through STS 61-C, the last mission to fly before the tragic Challenger accident of January 1986. Experiments were sponsored within NASA not only by the Life Sciences Division of the Office of Space Science and Applications, but also by the Shuttle Student Involvement Program (SSIP) and the Get Away Special (GAS) Program. Independent medical studies were conducted as well on the Shuttle crew under the auspices of the Space Biomedical Research Institute at Johnson Space Center. In addition, cooperative agreements between NASA and foreign government agencies led to a number of independent experiments and also paved the way for the joint US/ESA Spacelab 1 mission and the German (DFVLR) Spacelab D-1. Experiments included: (1) medically oriented studies of the crew aimed at identifying, preventing, or treating health problems due to space travel; (2) projects to study morphological, physiological, or behavioral effects of microgravity on animals and plants; (3) studies of the effects of microgravity on cells and tissues; and (4) radiation experiments monitoring the spacecraft environment with chemical or biological dosimeters or testing radiation effects on simple organisms and seeds.

Halstead, Thora W.↗
NASA NTRS1997

Psychosocial value of space simulation for extended spaceflight

There have been over 60 studies of Earth-bound activities that can be viewed as simulations of manned spaceflight. These analogs have involved Antarctic and Arctic expeditions, submarines and submersible simulators, land-based simulators, and hypodynamia environments. None of these analogs has accounted for all the variables related to extended spaceflight (e.g., microgravity, long-duration, heterogeneous crews), and some of the stimulation conditions have been found to be more representative of space conditions than others. A number of psychosocial factors have emerged from the simulation literature that correspond to important issues that have been reported from space. Psychological factors include sleep disorders, alterations in time sense, transcendent experiences, demographic issues, career motivation, homesickness, and increased perceptual sensitivities. Psychiatric factors include anxiety, depression, psychosis, psychosomatic symptoms, emotional reactions related to mission stage, asthenia, and postflight personality, and marital problems. Finally, interpersonal factors include tension resulting from crew heterogeneity, decreased cohesion over time, need for privacy, and issues involving leadership roles and lines of authority. Since future space missions will usually involve heterogeneous crews working on complicated objectives over long periods of time, these features require further study. Socio-cultural factors affecting confined crews (e.g., language and dialect, cultural differences, gender biases) should be explored in order to minimize tension and sustain performance. Career motivation also needs to be examined for the purpose of improving crew cohesion and preventing subgrouping, scapegoating, and territorial behavior. Periods of monotony and reduced activity should be addressed in order to maintain morale, provide meaningful use of leisure time, and prevent negative consequences of low stimulation, such as asthenia and crew member withdrawal. Leadership roles and lines of authority need to be studied further to understand the factors leading to status leveling, leadership competition, and role confusion. Finally, the relationship between crews and ground personnel should be characterized in order to minimize the displacement of anger and tension to the outside, to counter the effects of inter-group miscommunications, and to develop support strategies that can help to counter in-group/out-group conflicts. Ground-based space simulations still have a role to play in terms of understanding the impact of these factors and ways of dealing with them. In particular, issues involving language, cultural differences, gender biases, career motivation, monotonous conditions, use of free time, leadership, lines of authority, and the relationship between crews and outside monitoring personnel need to be further characterized and examined under controlled conditions. Until such time as these factors can be studied directly in space, simulations provide an opportunity to learn more about these psychosocial issues and to plan ways of minimizing their negative consequences during actual space missions.

NASA Discipline Number 00-00↗
NASA NTRS1984

Influence of spaceflight on erythrokinetics in man

It has been found in connection with American and Soviet manned space missions that a reduction in the circulating red blood cell mass (RCM) is a result of the effect of space flight on the human hematological system. An experiment conducted during the 10-day Spacelab 1 mission in November 1983 was designed to measure factors involved in the control of erythrokinetics which might be altered after exposure to microgravity. In this experiment a decrement in RCM approximately equal to that observed in crewmen returning from Apollo flights of similar duration (7) was measured. Erythropoietin decreased in flight in all crew members. The lack of significant change in erythropoietin with a significant decrease in reticulocyte number and a decrease of about 1 percent per day in mean RCM suggests that inhibition of erythropoiesis ms not the primary or only cause of the inflight RCM reduction.

Leach, C. S.↗
NASA NTRS1986

Aircrew coordination and decisionmaking: Peer ratings of video tapes made during a full mission simulation

Six professionally active, retired captains rated the coordination and decisionmaking performances of sixteen aircrews while viewing videotapes of a simulated commercial air transport operation. The scenario featured a required diversion and a probable minimum fuel situation. Seven point Likert-type scales were used in rating variables on the basis of a model of crew coordination and decisionmaking. The variables were based on concepts of, for example, decision difficulty, efficiency, and outcome quality; and leader-subordin ate concepts such as person and task-oriented leader behavior, and competency motivation of subordinate crewmembers. Five-front-end variables of the model were in turn dependent variables for a hierarchical regression procedure. The variance in safety performance was explained 46%, by decision efficiency, command reversal, and decision quality. The variance of decision quality, an alternative substantive dependent variable to safety performance, was explained 60% by decision efficiency and the captain's quality of within-crew communications. The variance of decision efficiency, crew coordination, and command reversal were in turn explained 78%, 80%, and 60% by small numbers of preceding independent variables. A principle component, varimax factor analysis supported the model structure suggested by regression analyses.

Murphy, M. R.↗
NASA NTRS2016

Orion GN&C Fault Management System Verification: Scope And Methodology

In order to ensure long-term ability to meet mission goals and to provide for the safety of the public, ground personnel, and any crew members, nearly all spacecraft include a fault management (FM) system. For a manned vehicle such as Orion, the safety of the crew is of paramount importance. The goal of the Orion Guidance, Navigation and Control (GN&C) fault management system is to detect, isolate, and respond to faults before they can result in harm to the human crew or loss of the spacecraft. Verification of fault management/fault protection capability is challenging due to the large number of possible faults in a complex spacecraft, the inherent unpredictability of faults, the complexity of interactions among the various spacecraft components, and the inability to easily quantify human reactions to failure scenarios. The Orion GN&C Fault Detection, Isolation, and Recovery (FDIR) team has developed a methodology for bounding the scope of FM system verification while ensuring sufficient coverage of the failure space and providing high confidence that the fault management system meets all safety requirements. The methodology utilizes a swarm search algorithm to identify failure cases that can result in catastrophic loss of the crew or the vehicle and rare event sequential Monte Carlo to verify safety and FDIR performance requirements.

Brown, Denise↗
NASA NTRS2000

Social and cultural issues during Shuttle/Mir space missions

A number of interpersonal issues relevant to manned space missions have been identified from the literature. These include crew tension, cohesion, leadership, language and cultural factors, and displacement. Ground-based studies by others and us have clarified some of the parameters of these issues and have indicated ways in which they could be studied during actual space missions. In this paper, we summarize some of our findings related to social and cultural issues from a NASA-funded study conducted during several Shuttle/Mir space missions. We used standardized mood and group climate measures that were completed on a weekly basis by American and Russian crew and mission control subjects who participated in these missions. Our results indicated that American subjects reported more dissatisfaction with their interpersonal environment than their Russian counterparts, especially American astronauts. Mission control personnel were more dysphoric than crewmembers, but both groups were significantly less dysphoric than other work groups on Earth. Countermeasures based on our findings are discussed which can be applied to future multicultural space missions. Published by Elsevier Science Ltd.

NASA Discipline Space Human Factors↗
NASA NTRS2006

NASA Crew Launch Vehicle Overview

The US. Vision for Space Exploration, announced January 2004, outlines the National Aeronautics and Space Administration s (NASA) strategic goals and objectives. These include: 1) Flying the Shuttle as safely as possible until its retirement, not later than 2010. 2) Bringing a new Crew Exploration Vehicle (CEV) into service as soon as possible after Shuttle retirement. 3) Developing a balanced overall program of science, exploration, and aeronautics at NASA, consistent with the redirection of the human spaceflight program to focus on exploration. 4) Completing the International Space Station (ISS) in a manner consistent with international partner commitments and the needs of human exploration. 5) Encouraging the pursuit of appropriate partnerships with the emerging commercial space sector. 6) Establishing a lunar return program having the maximum possible utility for later missions to Mars and other destinations. Following the confirmation of the new NASA Administrator in April 2005, the Agency commissioned a team of aerospace subject matter experts from government and industry to perform the Exploration Systems Architecture Study (ESAS), which provided in-depth information for selecting the follow-on launch vehicle designs to enable these goals, The ESAS team analyzed a number of potential launch systems, with a focus on: (1) a human-rated launch vehicle for crew transport and (2) a heavy lift launch vehicle (HLLV) to carry cargo. After several months of intense study utilizing technical performance, budget, and schedule objectives, the results showed that the optimum architecture to meet the challenge of safe, reliable crew transport is a two-stage variant of the Space Shuttle propulsion system - utilizing the reusable Solid Rocket Booster (SRB) as the first stage, along with a new upper stage that uses a derivative of the RS-25 Space Shuttle Main Engine to deliver 25 metric tons to low-Earth orbit. The CEV that this new Crew Launch Vehicle (CLV) lofts into space early next decade will initially ferry astronauts to the Space Station and be capable of carrying crews back to lunar orbit and of supporting missions to Mars orbit. The HLLV system will utilize the Shuttle External Tank combined with SRBs. The focus of this paper is on the CLV system, giving an overview of plans and progress to date.

Dumbacher, Daniel L.↗
NASA NTRS2015

Orion Launch Abort System Performance on Exploration Flight Test 1

This paper will present an overview of the flight test objectives and performance of the Orion Launch Abort System during Exploration Flight Test-1. Exploration Flight Test-1, the first flight test of the Orion spacecraft, was managed and led by the Orion prime contractor, Lockheed Martin, and launched atop a United Launch Alliance Delta IV Heavy rocket. This flight test was a two-orbit, high-apogee, high-energy entry, low-inclination test mission used to validate and test systems critical to crew safety. This test included the first flight test of the Launch Abort System preforming Orion nominal flight mission critical objectives. NASA is currently designing and testing the Orion Multi-Purpose Crew Vehicle (MPCV). Orion will serve as NASA's new exploration vehicle to carry astronauts to deep space destinations and safely return them to earth. The Orion spacecraft is composed of four main elements: the Launch Abort System, the Crew Module, the Service Module, and the Spacecraft Adapter (Fig. 1). The Launch Abort System (LAS) provides two functions; during nominal launches, the LAS provides protection for the Crew Module from atmospheric loads and heating during first stage flight and during emergencies provides a reliable abort capability for aborts that occur within the atmosphere. The Orion Launch Abort System (LAS) consists of an Abort Motor to provide the abort separation from the Launch Vehicle, an Attitude Control Motor to provide attitude and rate control, and a Jettison Motor for crew module to LAS separation (Fig. 2). The jettison motor is used during a nominal launch to separate the LAS from the Launch Vehicle (LV) early in the flight of the second stage when it is no longer needed for aborts and at the end of an LAS abort sequence to enable deployment of the crew module's Landing Recovery System. The LAS also provides a Boost Protective Cover fairing that shields the crew module from debris and the aero-thermal environment during ascent. Although the Orion Program has tested a number of the critical systems of the Orion spacecraft on the ground, the launch environment cannot be replicated completely on Earth. A number of flight tests have been conducted and are planned to demonstrate the performance and enable certification of the Orion Spacecraft. Exploration Flight Test 1, the first flight test of the Orion spacecraft, was successfully flown on December 5, 2014 from Cape Canaveral Air Force Station's Space Launch Complex 37. Orion's first flight was a two-orbit, high-apogee, high-energy entry, low-inclination test mission used to validate and test systems critical to crew safety, such as heat shield performance, separation events, avionics and software performance, attitude control and guidance, parachute deployment and recovery operations. One of the key separation events tested during this flight was the nominal jettison of the LAS. Data from this flight will be used to verify the function of the jettison motor to separate the Launch Abort System from the crew module so it can continue on with the mission. The LAS nominal jettison event on Exploration Flight Test 1 occurred at six minutes and twenty seconds after liftoff (See Fig. 3). The abort motor and attitude control motors were inert for Exploration Flight Test 1, since the mission did not require abort capabilities. A suite of developmental flight instrumentation was included on the flight test to provide data on spacecraft subsystems and separation events. This paper will focus on the flight test objectives and performance of the LAS during ascent and nominal jettison. Selected LAS subsystem flight test data will be presented and discussed in the paper. Exploration Flight Test -1 will provide critical data that will enable engineering to improve Orion's design and reduce risk for the astronauts it will protect as NASA continues to move forward on its human journey to Mars. The lessons learned from Exploration Flight Test 1 and the other Flight Test Vehicles will certainly contribute to the vehicle architecture of a human-rated space launch vehicle.

McCauley, R.↗
NASA NTRS1989

Transonic aerodynamic characteristics of a proposed Assured Crew Return Capability (ACRC) lifting-body configuration

The investigation was conducted in the Calspan 8-Ft Transonic wind tunnel at Mach numbers from 0.6 to 1.2. The 0.07-scale model had a low aspect ratio body with a flat undersurface. A center fin and two tip fins were mounted on the aft upper body. The tip fins were rolled outboard 40 deg from the vertical. Elevon surfaces made up the trailing edges of the outboard fins and body flaps were located on the upper and lower aft fuselage. Results of the investigation indicated that the model was longitudinally and laterally stable about a center-of-gravity position of 0.54 body length. The maximum trimmed lift-drag ratio was about 3.1 at M = 0.6. The small center fin contributed only a small positive increment to lateral stability but was effective as a yaw control device. Protuberances on the forebody had little effect on the aerodynamic characteristics of the configuration. The model with pitch controls undeflected had desirable longitudinal trim characteristics.

Ware, George M.↗
NASA NTRS1992

An on-orbit viewpoint of life sciences research

As a Payload Specialist and a life science researcher, I want to present several issues that impact life science research in space. During early space station operations, life science and other experiments will be conducted in a time-critical manner and there will be the added duties of both space shuttle and space station systems operation (and the concomittent training overhead). Life sciences research is different from other science research done in space because the crew is involved both as an operator and as a subject. There is a need for pre- and post-flight data collection as well as in flight data collection. It is imperative that the life science researcher incorporate the crew members into their team early enough in the training cycle to fully explain the science and to make the crew aware of the importance and sensitivities of the experiment. During the pre-flight phase, the crew is incredibly busy with a myriad of duties. Therefore, it is difficult to get 'pristine' subjects for the baseline data collection. There are also circadian shifts, travel, and late nights to confound the data. During this time it is imperative that the researcher develop, along with the crew, a realistic estimate of crew-time required for their experiment. In flight issues that affect the researcher are the additional activities of the crew, the stresses inherent in space flight, and the difficulty of getting early in-flight data. During SSF activities, the first day or two will be taken up with rendezvous and docking. Other issues are the small number of subjects on any given flight, the importance of complete and concise procedures, and the vagaries of on-board data collection. Post flight, the crew is tired and experiences a 'relaxation.' This along with circadian shifts and rapid re-adaptation to 1-g make immediate post-flight data collection difficult. Finally, the blending of operational medicine and research can result in either competition for resources (crew time, etc.) or influence on the physiological state of the crew. However, the unique opportunity to conduct research in an environment that cannot be duplicated on Earth outweighs the 'challenges' that exist for space life researchers.

Lichtenberg, Byron K.↗
NASA NTRS2019

Electrochemical Solutions for Advanced Life Support

The Oxygen Generating Assembly (OGA) on-board the International Space Station (ISS) employs a polymer electrolyte membrane (PEM) water electrolysis cell stack to electrochemically dissociate water into its two components – oxygen and hydrogen. Oxygen is provided to the cabin atmosphere for crew respiration while the hydrogen is delivered to a carbon dioxide reduction system to recover oxygen as water. The design of the OGA evolved over a number of years to arrive at the system solution that is currently operational on ISS. Future manned missions to space will require advanced technologies that eliminate the need for resupply from earth and feature in-situ resource utilization to sustain crew life and to provide useful materials to the crew. The architects planning such missions should consider all potential solutions at their disposal to arrive at an optimal vehicle solution that minimizes crew maintenance time, launch weight, installed volume and energy consumption demands. Skyre is developing new technologies through funding from NASA, the Department of Energy, and internal investment based on PEM technology that could become an integral part of these new vehicle solutions. At varying stages of Technology Readiness Level (TRL) are: an oxygen concentrator and compressor that can separate oxygen from an air stream and provide an enriched oxygen resource for crew medical use and space suit recharge without any moving parts in the pure oxygen stream; a regenerative carbon dioxide removal system featuring a PEM-based sorbent regenerator; a carbon dioxide reduction system that electrochemically produces organic compounds that could serve as fuels or as a useful intermediary to more beneficial compounds; and an electrochemical hydrogen separator and compressor for hydrogen recycle. The technical maturity of these projects is presented along with pertinent performance test data that could be beneficial in future study efforts.

Roy, Robert J.↗
NASA NTRS1992

Orbital debris risk analysis and survivability enhancement for Freedom Station manned modules

This paper briefly reviews how 'probability of penetration' analyses are currently performed at NASA, and discusses extension of this procedure to a 'probability of loss' analysis through identifying penetration hazards and failure modes. It goes on to discuss alternatives for increasing crew safety through redesign and/or augmentation of interior manned module systems, and describes an elementary analysis maximizing crew safety considering one identified penetration-induced failure mode (depressurization) and one interior design factor (number of hatches open).

Williamsen, Joel E.↗
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 NTRSDate not supplied

Manual Crew Override of Vehicle Landings Following G-Transitions

BACKGROUND Manual control during exploration spaceflight consists of both planned automated supervisory control and unplanned crew override. This crew override capability is critical to enable overall mission success during landing contingencies. However, the introduction of manual override capabilities must be implemented to enable crews to mitigate risks introduced by human error. Adaptive changes in the sensorimotor system can manifest during g-transitions as spatial disorientation. While training and landing aids enable successful landing through disorientation, these adaptive changes may increase cognitive demand that needs to be accounted for in the manual control strategy. It is important to characterize these effects as soon as possible following the G-transition to develop appropriate countermeasures. METHODS In this study, we will examine operational piloting tasks following International Space Station (ISS) missions in a simulated lunar landing using a six-degree-of-freedom (6DOF) motion base. The motion-based simulation will be implemented in our laboratory at the Johnson Space Center (JSC) and will be available within hours following the return from commercial crew landings. The primary goals of this study are (1) to understand the impact of spaceflight on crew ability to perform manual crew override tasks, (2) to examine how adaptive changes in vestibular and cognitive function relate to changes in manual crew override proficiency, and (3) compare performance during late “just-in-time” on-board training with early post-flight crew performance. The impact of spaceflight on piloting capability will be assessed from pre- versus post-flight changes in crewmembers assigned to either short duration (< 30 day) or long duration (~6- month) missions to the International Space Station (ISS). Individual differences in post-flight vestibular and cognitive changes include motion sickness reports, measures of tilt motion perception accuracy and precision, and dual-task tracking. During the 6DOF lunar simulation, the crew will manually takeover attitude and rate-of-descent to the nominal or re-designated landing aim point during the approach phase. The outcome measures for the lunar crew override tasks will be the percent time maintaining actual vehicle states, e.g., attitude and rate-of-descent, within recommended guidance during the landing approach, number and maximum deviation outside limits, and root mean square error (RMSE). Given that “just-in-time” (JIT) training is an operational expectation for the Human Landing System (HLS) program, all participants will perform late inflight JIT training for each manual crew override task in which they will participate. Crew proficiency will be captured inflight during JIT training that will be implemented on a laptop with hand controllers to allow the crewmember to practice the landing task procedures like the approach implemented for JIT training with Shuttle landing and ISS telerobotic tasks. COUNTERMEASURE UPDATES The lunar lander simulation has been implemented onto a two-laptop display system where subjects select from alternative landing points, based upon avoiding hazards that the on-board system identifies during the landing. The subject makes inputs using a rotational hand controller (i.e., joystick) and a translational hand controller, which are processed by simulated vehicle dynamics to update the vehicle attitude and rate of descent. Subjects will utilize a combination of flight, situation, and status displays to monitor the state of the simulated vehicle. The simulation exports tilt and translation movements to a 6DOF motion base synced to visual movements and provides representative vestibular cues to the subject while performing the task inside an enclosed cabin featuring a simulated lunar out-the-window view and a heads-down lander cockpit view. RELEVANCE This project will deliver an operational demonstration of crew override capability following spaceflight and identify potential deficits that may require remediation. Comparison of individual vestibular and cognitive changes with crew override performance will help better characterize the manual control risks associated with sensorimotor alterations. The inclusion of “just-in-time” on-board training will ensure we are characterizing changes in override proficiency with this expected countermeasure in place. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS: The authors acknowledge contributions from Draper, HLS Joint Test Panel, Crew HLS Interfaces for Piloting Working Group, and Dynamic Skills Trainer (DST) Lab toward the development of the lunar landing simulation. This project is funded by the Human Health Countermeasures Element.

Austin M Bollinger↗
NASA NTRS1974

Results of tests (OA64 and IA35) of an 0.015-scale model (36-OTS) of the space shuttle configuration 140A/B in the NASA/LaRC unitary plan wind tunnel

Supersonic aerodynamic tests were conducted in the NASA/LaRC Unitary Plan Wind Tunnel on a 0.015-scale model of the Space Shuttle Vehicle 4 configuration. Surface pressure data were obtained for both the launch (test IA35) and entry (test OA64) configurations at Mach numbers from 2.5 to 4.5. The surface pressure was measured in the vicinity of the cargo bay door hinge and parting lines and on the side of the fuselage at the crew compartment and below the OMS pods at the aft compartment. Data were obtained for angles of attack and sideslip consistent with the expected excursions about the nominal trajectory values at the test Mach numbers. These tests were a part of a test series supporting the orbiter venting analysis over a Mach number range from 0.6 to 10.4

Thornton, D. E.↗
NASA NTRS1996

Cross-Cultural Barriers to Effective Communication in Aviation

Communication is essential to safe flight, as evidenced by several accidents in which crew communicates was found to have contributed to the accidents. This chapter documents the essential role of explicit efficient communication to flight safety with a global context. It addresses communication between flight crews and air traffic controllers in regions a the world where pilots and controllers speak different native languages, as well as cases in which crew members within the flight deck represent different native languages and cultures. It also addresses problems associated with "exporting" crew resource management training programs to parts of the world which values and norms differ from those of the United States, where these programs were initially developed. This chapter is organized around several central questions: (1) What are various kinds of communication failures and what are their consequences; (2) What are the causes of communication failure; (3) What are features of effective crew communication; (4) What can be done to enhance communication success? To explore a wider range of communication failures than available from accident reports, we examined a set of incident reports from the Aviation Safety Reporting System. These could be classified into three major categories: those in which language actually interfered with transmission of a message; those in which transmission was adequate but the context was not expressed unambiguously and thus the message received was not the same as the message intended; and those in which the message was received as intended, but was not adequately understood or acted upon, mainly because of cultural factors. The consequences of failed communication can be flight errors (such as when a clearance is not received correctly), loss of situation awareness, or failure of crew members (or ATC and pilots) to build a shared understanding of a situation. Causes of misunderstanding can be traced to a number of sources, often grounded in faulty assumptions held by one or both parties to a conversation. Speakers and listeners often experience "illusionary understanding" in which they think they understand each other, but in fact do not. While this problem can exist within a single culture, it is much more serious across cultures. Training in effective explicit communication is a component of Crew Resource Management training programs developed in the U.S. These programs are being adopted by airlines around the world, with varying degrees of success. The level of success in part depends on how similar the conversational and social styles of those cultures are to those of the U.S. A factor that influences conversational style is a culture's relative positioned on two major dimensions that distinguish national cultural groups: individualism vs. collectivism and degree of power distance. The chapter concludes with a discussion of techniques for overcoming the various classes of communication failures and for effectively adapting training programs to fit the values and norms of cultures around the globe.

Fischer, U.↗
NASA NTRS2011

Benefits of Power and Propulsion Technology for a Piloted Electric Vehicle to an Asteroid

NASA's goal for human spaceflight is to expand permanent human presence beyond low Earth orbit (LEO). NASA is identifying potential missions and technologies needed to achieve this goal. Mission options include crewed destinations to LEO and the International Space Station; high Earth orbit and geosynchronous orbit; cis-lunar space, lunar orbit, and the surface of the Moon; near-Earth objects; and the moons of Mars, Mars orbit, and the surface of Mars. NASA generated a series of design reference missions to drive out required functions and capabilities for these destinations, focusing first on a piloted mission to a near-Earth asteroid. One conclusion from this exercise was that a solar electric propulsion stage could reduce mission cost by reducing the required number of heavy lift launches and could increase mission reliability by providing a robust architecture for the long-duration crewed mission. Similarly, solar electric vehicles were identified as critical for missions to Mars, including orbiting Mars, landing on its surface, and visiting its moons. This paper describes the parameterized assessment of power and propulsion technologies for a piloted solar electric vehicle to a near-Earth asteroid. The objective of the assessment was to determine technology drivers to advance the state of the art of electric propulsion systems for human exploration. Sensitivity analyses on the performance characteristics of the propulsion and power systems were done to determine potential system-level impacts of improved technology. Starting with a "reasonable vehicle configuration" bounded by an assumed launch date, we introduced technology improvements to determine the system-level benefits (if any) that those technologies might provide. The results of this assessment are discussed and recommendations for future work are described.

Mercer, Carolyn R.↗