Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “flight rules.”

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 37 records · Page 2
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRS1983

Control/display trade-off study for single-pilot instrument flight rule operations

The objectives were to determine minimum autopilot functions and displays required to keep pilot workload at an acceptable level; to determine what constitutes an acceptable level of workload; to identify critical tasks; and to suggest specific experiments required to refine conclusions. It was determined that workload relief is derived from basic stability augmentation; that complex autopilots can lead to serious blunders; and that displays need to enhance positional awareness and minimize the likelihood of false hypothesis.

Hoh, R.↗
NASA NTRS1984

Ground-simulation investigation of VTOL instrument flight rules airworthiness criteria

A two-part ground-simulation investigation of VTOL terminal-area operations, conducted as part of a joint NASA/FAA program to develop airworthiness criteria for this class of vehicle, is described. The baseline vehicle selected for the simulations was a generalized version of the XV-15 tilt-rotor mathematical model, which was modified to permit generic variations in forces or moments or both with power or configuration changes. Additionally, changes to wing area and rotor-blade chord were considered as a means of modifying the allowable thrust-angle versus speed relationships (the conversion corridor). The Vertical Motion Simulator at Ames Research Center was used in the experiment. Four engineering test pilots conducted over 200 piloted evaluations examining the influence of the experimental variables on their ability to perform terminal-area operations.

Lebacqz, J. V.↗
NASA NTRS2010

Constraint and Flight Rule Management for Space Mission Operations

The exploration of space is one of the most fascinating domains to study from a human factors perspective. Like other complex work domains such as aviation (Pritchett and Kim, 2008), air traffic management (Durso and Manning, 2008), health care (Morrow, North, and Wickens, 2006), homeland security (Cooke and Winner, 2008), and vehicle control (Lee, 2006), space exploration is a large-scale sociotechnical work domain characterized by complexity, dynamism, uncertainty, and risk in real-time operational contexts (Perrow, 1999; Woods et al, 1994). Nearly the entire gamut of human factors issues - for example, human-automation interaction (Sheridan and Parasuraman, 2006), telerobotics, display and control design (Smith, Bennett, and Stone, 2006), usability, anthropometry (Chaffin, 2008), biomechanics (Marras and Radwin, 2006), safety engineering, emergency operations, maintenance human factors, situation awareness (Tenney and Pew, 2006), crew resource management (Salas et al., 2006), methods for cognitive work analysis (Bisantz and Roth, 2008) and the like -- are applicable to astronauts, mission control, operational medicine, Space Shuttle manufacturing and assembly operations, and space suit designers as they are in other work domains (e.g., Bloomberg, 2003; Bos et al, 2006; Brooks and Ince, 1992; Casler and Cook, 1999; Jones, 1994; McCurdy et al, 2006; Neerincx et aI., 2006; Olofinboba and Dorneich, 2005; Patterson, Watts-Perotti and Woods, 1999; Patterson and Woods, 2001; Seagull et ai, 2007; Sierhuis, Clancey and Sims, 2002). The human exploration of space also has unique challenges of particular interest to human factors research and practice. This chapter provides an overview of those issues and reports on some of the latest research results as well as the latest challenges still facing the field.

Barreiro, J.↗
NASA NTRS1984

An evaluation and force gradient determination of mechanically linked reversible sidestick controllers for General Aviation aircraft

In connection with the increase in air traffic, IFR (Instrument Flight Rules) flight in the air traffic control system has become very demanding. It has, therefore, become imperative to optimize the pilot's skills in his management of the various aircraft systems. The present investigation is concerned with the human factors aspects of the use of sidesticks in direct mechanical linkage (reversible) control systems in a production General Aviation (G.A.) aircraft. A total of 140 fifteen to twenty minute flight tasks were flown on the NASA Langley G.A. motion base simulator. The study involved a comparison of three locations of the sidestick, left side, center, and right side, and the standard yoke. It was found that the sidestick is preferable to the standard yoke. However, some of the design and installation features of the sidestick are critical for pilot acceptance.

Bergeron, H. P.↗
NASA NTRS2005

Small Aircraft Transportation System, Higher Volume Operations Concept: Off-Nominal Operations

This document expands the Small Aircraft Transportation System, (SATS) Higher Volume Operations (HVO) concept to include off-nominal conditions. The general philosophy underlying the HVO concept is the establishment of a newly defined area of flight operations called a Self-Controlled Area (SCA). During periods of poor weather, a block of airspace would be established around designated non-towered, non-radar airports. Aircraft flying enroute to a SATS airport would be on a standard instrument flight rules flight clearance with Air Traffic Control providing separation services. Within the SCA, pilots would take responsibility for separation assurance between their aircraft and other similarly equipped aircraft. Previous work developed the procedures for normal HVO operations. This document provides details for off-nominal and emergency procedures for situations that could be expected to occur in a future SCA.

Abbott, Terence S.↗
NASA NTRS2011

Space Shuttle Missions Summary

This document has been produced and updated over a 21-year period. It is intended to be a handy reference document, basically one page per flight, and care has been exercised to make it as error-free as possible. This document is basically "as flown" data and has been compiled from many sources including flight logs, flight rules, flight anomaly logs, mod flight descent summary, post flight analysis of mps propellants, FDRD, FRD, SODB, and the MER shuttle flight data and inflight anomaly list. Orbit distance traveled is taken from the PAO mission statistics.

Bennett, Floyd V.↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Analysis and Prediction of VFR Vs IFR Traffic Behavior to Support Uncrewed Aircraft Flight Operations at Regional Airports

Uncrewed Aircraft flight operations at a regional airport will be affected by the uncertainty in the Visual Flight Rules traffic around. This paper analyzes Visual Flight Rules traffic behavior, compares it with Instrument Flight Rules traffic and develops traffic prediction methods to support uncrewed aircraft flight operations. The spatio-temporal distribution of traffic operating under Visual Flight Rules and Instrument Flight Rules was analyzed from one month of historical track data around Fort Worth Alliance airport as a representative regional airport. The traffic behavior was visualized as occupancy maps generated at different altitudes. The Instrument Flight Rules traffic was concentrated in fewer regions of the airspace along structured routes where the risk of interacting with one or more flights reached close to fifty percent in some areas. Visual Flight Rules traffic was spread over more regions, mostly segregated from the Instrument Flight Rules regions, and the risk of interaction was lower reaching up to twenty-five percent on average over the month in some regions. The interaction risk was predicted using predictive occupancy maps over multiple time horizons and conditioned on time and partial observation of traffic in the vicinity. The month-to-month predictability of Visual Flight Rules risk was lower than that of the Instrument Flight Rules traffic, consistently over all the conditions analyzed. However, the prediction and its accuracy were demonstrated to be sensitive to the conditions used. The predictive models generated can be used to support both strategic planning and in-flight decision-making by uncrewed aircraft during flight operations while maintaining an acceptable risk of interacting with other traffic.

VFR↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Analysis and Prediction of VFR Vs IFR Traffic Behavior to Support Uncrewed Aircraft Flight Operations at Regional Airports

Uncrewed Aircraft flight operations at a regional airport will be affected by the uncertainty in the Visual Flight Rules traffic around. This paper analyzes Visual Flight Rules traffic behavior, compares it with Instrument Flight Rules traffic and develops traffic prediction methods to support uncrewed aircraft flight operations. The spatio-temporal distribution of traffic operating under Visual Flight Rules and Instrument Flight Rules was analyzed from one month of historical track data around Fort Worth Alliance airport as a representative regional airport. The traffic behavior was visualized as occupancy maps generated at different altitudes. The Instrument Flight Rules traffic was concentrated in fewer regions of the airspace along structured routes where the risk of interacting with one or more flights reached close to fifty percent in some areas. Visual Flight Rules traffic was spread over more regions, mostly segregated from the Instrument Flight Rules regions, and the risk of interaction was lower reaching up to twenty-five percent on average over the month in some regions. The interaction risk was predicted using predictive occupancy maps over multiple time horizons and conditioned on time and partial observation of traffic in the vicinity. The month-to-month predictability of Visual Flight Rules risk was lower than that of the Instrument Flight Rules traffic, consistently over all the conditions analyzed. However, the prediction and its accuracy were demonstrated to be sensitive to the conditions used. The predictive models generated can be used to support both strategic planning and in-flight decision-making by uncrewed aircraft during flight operations while maintaining an acceptable risk of interacting with other traffic.

VFR↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Digital Flight: Enabling the Era of Scalable Mobility in the National Airspace System

In the 21st Century, new aviation markets, vehicle types, and technologies are fast emerging, inspiring new operational concepts for the National Airspace System such as Unmanned Aircraft Systems Traffic Management and Urban Air Mobility. These novel operations envision a dramatic increase in aerial mobility, or the ability to navigate freely through the airspace with unprecedented access and operational flexibility. Implementing these concepts presents a major challenge to the existing operational modes of Visual Flight Rules (VFR) and Instrument Flight Rules (IFR), developed under the limitations of early 20th Century technology and procedures to ensure safe navigation and separation from traffic. To meet this challenge and to support the needs of operators in the 21st Century and beyond, this paper proposes that VFR and IFR be augmented by new flight rules – Digital Flight Rules (DFR) – that leverage modern and emerging technologies and are not bound by restrictions borne of the state of technology 75-100 years ago. The objective of DFR is to provide safe and unfettered access to the airspace to all participating vehicle operators under all visibility conditions without incurring the limitations in operational flexibility inherent to IFR and even VFR. Advancements in communications, navigation, surveillance, aircraft connectivity, information access, automation technology, and supporting ground infrastructure provide the opportunity for the vehicle operator to engage at an unprecedented level in managing their flights regardless of flight visibility. Under DFR, these advancements enable the vehicle operator to assume full responsibility for traffic separation and therefore full trajectory management authority in all visibility conditions and airspace regions. The changes in roles and responsibilities are expected to enable greater airspace access and operational flexibility than afforded by IFR and VFR, thus enabling the emergence of new operations and a new era of advanced aerial mobility.

Mobility↗
NASA NTRS2010

The Evolution of Utilizing Manual Throttling to Avoid Excessively Low LH2 NPSP at the SSME Inlet

In the late 1970s, years before the Space Shuttle flew its maiden voyage, it was understood low liquid hydrogen (LH2) Net Positive Suction Pressure (NPSP) at the inlet to the Space Shuttle Main Engine (SSME) could have adverse effects on engine operation. A number of failures within both the External Tank (ET) and the Orbiter Main Propulsion System (MPS) could result in a low LH2 NPSP condition, which at extremely low levels can result in cavitation of SSME turbomachinery. Operational workarounds were developed to take advantage of the onboard crew s ability to manually throttle down the SSMEs (via the Pilot s Speedbrake/Throttle Controller), which alleviated the low LH2 NPSP condition. Manually throttling the SSME to a lower power level resulted in an increase in NPSP, mainly due to the reduction in frictional flow losses while at the lower throttle setting. Early in the Space Shuttle Program s history, the relevant Flight Rule for the Booster flight controller in Mission Control did not distinguish between ET and Orbiter MPS failures and the same crew action was taken for both. However, after a review of all Booster operational techniques following the Challenger disaster in the late 1980s, it was determined manually throttling the SSME to a lower power was only effective for Orbiter MPS failures and the Flight Rule was updated to reflect this change. The Flight Rule and associated crew actions initially called for a single throttle step to minimum power level when a low threshold for NPSP was met. As engineers refined their understanding of the NPSP requirements for the SSME (through a robust testing program), the operational techniques evolved to take advantage of the additional capabilities. This paper will examine the evolution of the Flight rule and associated procedure and how increases in knowledge about the SSME and the Space Shuttle vehicle as a whole have helped shape their development. What once was a single throttle step when NPSP decreased to a certain low threshold has now become three throttle steps, each occurring at a lower NPSP threshold. Additionally the procedure, which for early Space Shuttle missions required a Return-to-Launch-Site abort, now results in a nominal Main Engine Cut Off and no loss of mission objectives.

Henfling, Rick↗
NASA NTRS2011

The Evolution of Utilizing Manual Throttles to Avoid Excessively Low LH2 NPSP at the SSME Inlet

In the late 1970s, years before the Space Shuttle flew its maiden voyage, it was understood low liquid hydrogen (LH2) Net Positive Suction Pressure (NPSP) at the inlet to the Space Shuttle Main Engine (SSME) could have adverse effects on engine operation. A number of failures within both the External Tank (ET) and the Orbiter Main Propulsion System (MPS) could result in a low LH2 NPSP condition, which at extremely low levels can result in cavitation of SSME turbomachinery. Operational workarounds were developed to take advantage of the onboard crew s ability to manually throttle down the SSMEs (via the Pilot s Speedbrake/Throttle Controller), which alleviated the low LH2 NPSP condition. Manually throttling the SSME to a lower power level resulted in an increase in NPSP, mainly due to the reduction in frictional flow losses while at the lower throttle setting. Early in the Space Shuttle Program s history, the relevant Flight Rule for the Booster flight controllers in Mission Control did not distinguish between ET and Orbiter MPS failures and the same crew action was taken for both. However, after a review of all Booster operational techniques following the Challenger disaster in the late 1980s, it was determined manually throttling the SSME to a lower power was only effective for Orbiter MPS failures and the Flight Rule was updated to reflect this change. The Flight Rule and associated crew actions initially called for a single throttle step to minimum power level when a low threshold for NPSP was met. As engineers refined their understanding of the NPSP requirements for the SSME (through a robust testing program), the operational techniques evolved to take advantage of the additional capabilities. This paper will examine the evolution of the Flight rule and associated procedure and how increases in knowledge about the SSME and the Space Shuttle vehicle as a whole have helped shape their development. What once was a single throttle step when NPSP decreased to a certain threshold has now become three throttle steps, each occurring at a lower NPSP threshold. Additionally the procedure, which for early Space Shuttle missions required a Return-to-Launch-Site abort, now results in a nominal Main Engine Cut Off and no loss of mission objectives.

Henfling, Rick↗
NASA NTRS2022

Applicability of Digital Flight to the Operations of Self-Piloted Unmanned Aircraft Systems in the National Airspace System

Unmanned Aircraft Systems (UAS) hold great promise for a new era of specialized missions, including personal air transportation, cargo flight operations, aerial surveys, inspections, firefighting and more. The anticipated market growth is significant. To unlock its scalability and incumbent benefits requires a human to oversee multiple flights simultaneously, focusing on multi-vehicle mission management and relinquishing to autonomous systems their active role in controlling the aircrafts’ flight paths. Key to the realization of these scalability benefits is minimally-encumbered access to the National Airspace System (NAS), which poses some unique challenges for self-piloted UAS aircraft operations. These include the requirement for compatibility with existing airspace structures and operations including Visual Flight Rules (VFR) and Instrument Flight Rules (IFR), neither of which were developed to accommodate the unique needs and capabilities of UAS. This paper explores the applicability of Digital Flight to the operations of self-piloted UAS. As proposed by NASA, Digital Flight is a flight operations capability, enabled by a set of cooperative procedures and digital technologies, in which flight operators ensure flight-path safety through automated separation and flight path management in lieu of visual procedures and Air Traffic Control separation services. Flights operating under potentially-forthcoming rules of Digital Flight employ advanced automation technologies, information sharing, connectivity to operational data, and cooperative behaviors through distributed decision-making to maintain safety and achieve mission objectives. Designed for integration with VFR and IFR operations in shared NAS airspace, potentially as a third set of flight rules, Digital Flight may provide the mechanism for UAS operators – and all aircraft operators – to scale and diversify their operations beyond what is achievable under current regulations.

DFR↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Introduction to Air Traffic Management

The presentation introduces students and faculty to air traffic management with focus on air traffic data for data-science. Starting with the common attributes of transportation systems — highway transportation, air transportation and data transportation, the initial set of slides discuss the purpose of data-science in air traffic management, reasons why air traffic management is challenging, and the multidisciplinary nature of air traffic management research. The history of flight from 1903 — Wright Flyer — to 1987 — formation of the National Air Traffic Controllers Association — is briefly discussed. The national airspace system is described in terms of airports in the U. S., air traffic control facilities (flight service stations, terminal, enroute and system command center), airspace geometry (sectors, airways and navaids), governing regulations and directives, airspace classification (Class A through G), special use airspace, visual flight rules and instrument flight rules. The contents of a flight-plan are described. Weather briefing is discussed. The surveillance equipment used for surface, terminal area and enroute are described, and the aircraft states obtained using the surveillance data are listed. Airline operations control functions — schedule development, flight planning, resource scheduling and flight following — are noted. Next, the roles and responsibilities of air traffic controllers and traffic flow managers are discussed. Separation standards and conflict resolution techniques are outlined. Finally, traffic flow management techniques are reviewed with an illustrative example.

Air Traffic Management↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Introduction to Air Traffic Management

The presentation introduces students and faculty to air traffic management with focus on air traffic data for data-science. Starting with the common attributes of transportation systems — highway transportation, air transportation and data transportation, the initial set of slides discuss the purpose of data-science in air traffic management, reasons why air traffic management is challenging, and the multidisciplinary nature of air traffic management research. The history of flight from 1903 — Wright Flyer — to 1987 — formation of the National Air Traffic Controllers Association — is briefly discussed. The national airspace system is described in terms of airports in the U. S., air traffic control facilities (flight service stations, terminal, enroute and system command center), airspace geometry (sectors, airways and navaids), governing regulations and directives, airspace classification (Class A through G), special use airspace, visual flight rules and instrument flight rules. The contents of a flight-plan are described. Weather briefing is discussed. The surveillance equipment used for surface, terminal area and enroute are described, and the aircraft states obtained using the surveillance data are listed. Airline operations control functions — schedule development, flight planning, resource scheduling and flight following — are noted. Next, the roles and responsibilities of air traffic controllers and traffic flow managers are discussed. Separation standards and conflict resolution techniques are outlined. Finally, traffic flow management techniques are reviewed with an illustrative example.

Air Traffic Management↗
NASA NTRS1974

Apollo experience report: The role of flight mission rules in mission preparation and conduct

The development of flight mission rules from the mission development phase through the detailed mission-planning phase and through the testing and training phase is analyzed. The procedure for review of the rules and the coordination requirements for mission-rule development are presented. The application of the rules to real-time decision making is outlined, and consideration is given to the benefit of training ground controllers and flightcrews in the methods of determining the best response to a nonnominal in-flight situation for which no action has been preplanned. The Flight Mission Rules document is discussed in terms of the purpose and objective thereof and in terms of the definition, the development, and the use of mission rules.

Keyser, L. W.↗
NASA NTRS2016

Extended Bright Bodies - Flight and Ground Software Challenges on the Cassini Mission at Saturn

Extended bright bodies in the Saturn environment such as Saturn's rings, the planet itself, and Saturn's satellites near the Cassini spacecraft may interfere with the star tracker's ability to find stars. These interferences can create faulty spacecraft attitude knowledge, which would decrease the pointing accuracy or even trip a fault protection response on board the spacecraft. The effects of the extended bright body interference were observed in December of 2000 when Cassini flew by Jupiter. Based on this flight experience and expected star tracker behavior at Saturn, the Cassini AACS operations team defined flight rules to suspend the star tracker during predicted interference windows. The flight rules are also implemented in the existing ground software called Kinematic Predictor Tool to create star identification suspend commands to be uplinked to the spacecraft for future predicted interferences. This paper discusses the details of how extended bright bodies impact Cassini's acquisition of attitude knowledge, how the observed data helped the ground engineers in developing flight rules, and how automated methods are used in the flight and ground software to ensure the spacecraft is continuously operated within these flight rules. This paper also discusses how these established procedures will continue to be used to overcome new bright body challenges that Cassini will encounter during its dips inside the rings of Saturn for its final orbits of a remarkable 20-year mission at Saturn.

Sung, Tina S.↗
NASA NTRS2022

Preliminary Analysis of Separation Standards for Urban Air Mobility using Unmitigated Fast-Time Simulation

This research provides a preliminary analysis of various separation standards for Urban Air Mobility (UAM) operations. This study focuses on understanding and analyzing potential conflicts between UAM flights and conflicts between UAM and conventional aircraft. Fast-time simulations are conducted with a projected high-density of UAM traffic scenario and historical conventional non-UAM traffic flying under Instrument Flight Rules (IFR) or Visual Flight Rules (VFR) in Dallas Fort Worth (DFW) airspace. The conflicts are analyzed by examining losses of separation and near mid-air collisions of UAM flights and unmitigated risk of collision. A set of varied separation standards are used to investigate the impact of the new UAM operations on safety. The preliminary conflict analysis results will help inform separation standards development and in airspace and route design activities for future UAM operations.

Urban air mobility↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Preliminary Analysis of Separation Standards for Urban Air Mobility using Unmitigated Fast-Time Simulation

This research provides a preliminary analysis of various separation standards for Urban Air Mobility (UAM) operations. This study focuses on understanding and analyzing potential conflicts between UAM flights and conflicts between UAM and conventional aircraft. Fast-time simulations are conducted with a projected high-density of UAM traffic scenario and historical conventional non-UAM traffic flying under Instrument Flight Rules (IFR) or Visual Flight Rules (VFR) in Dallas Fort Worth (DFW) airspace. The conflicts are analyzed by examining losses of separation and near mid-air collisions of UAM flights and unmitigated risk of collision. A set of varied separation standards are used to investigate the impact of the new UAM operations on safety. The preliminary conflict analysis results will help inform separation standards development and in airspace and route design activities for future UAM operations.

Urban Air Mobility↗