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.

SourceResearch connectionFrom yearThrough year

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

At least 523 records · Page 29

All sources NASA NTRS DOE OSTI

NASA NTRS1997

STS-81 Flight Day 10

On this tenth day of the STS-81 mission, the flight crew, Cmdr. Michael A. Baker, Pilot Brent W. Jett, Mission Specialists, John M. Grunsfeld, Marsha S. Ivins, Peter J.K. Wisoff, and John Blaha, prepare for the return back to earth. The shuttle's key flight control systems are checked for entry and landing phase of the mission. Commander Mike Baker and Pilot Brent Jett activate one of Atlantis' three hydraulic power units to test the shuttle's aerosurfaces. Baker and Jett fire Atlantis' steering jets in a routine prelanding checkout. The astronauts also test a medical restraint system in the Spacehab module, placing two crewmembers in the device. Crewmembers then begin to stow items away in the crew cabin, initiate the scheduled deactivation of Spacehab systems and associated hardware.

Source record↗

NASA NTRS2011

Fatigue Management in Spaceflight Operations

Sleep loss and fatigue remain an issue for crewmembers working on the International Space Station, and the ground crews who support them. Schedule shifts on the ISS are required for conducting mission operations. These shifts lead to tasks being performed during the biological night, and sleep scheduled during the biological day, for flight crews and the ground teams who support them. Other stressors have been recognized as hindering sleep in space; these include workload, thinking about upcoming tasks, environmental factors, and inadequate day/night cues. It is unknown if and how other factors such as microgravity, carbon dioxide levels, or increased radiation, may also play a part. Efforts are underway to standardize and provide care for crewmembers, ground controllers and other support personnel. Through collaborations between research and operations, evidenced-based clinical practice guidelines are being developed to equip flight surgeons with the tools and processes needed for treating circadian desynchrony (and subsequent sleep loss) caused by jet lag and shift work. The proper implementation of countermeasures such as schedules, lighting protocols, and cognitive behavioral education can hasten phase shifting, enhance sleep and optimize performance. This panel will focus on Fatigue Management in Spaceflight Operations. Speakers will present on research-based recommendations and technologies aimed at mitigating sleep loss, circadian desynchronization and fatigue on-orbit. Gaps in current mitigations and future recommendations will also be discussed.

Whitmire, Alexandra↗

NASA NTRS1981

Zero gravity testing of flexible solar arrays

Zero gravity testing in the KC-135 aircraft of flat fold flexible solar array test specimens sufficiently demonstrated the adequacy of the panel design. The aircraft flight crew provided invaluable assistance and significantly contributed to the design and development of the flexible solar array, and ultimately to the potential success of the solar electric propulsion solar array shuttle flight experiment program.

Chung, D. T.↗

NASA NTRS1999

STS-88 Mission Highlights Resources Tape

The STS-88 flight crew, Commander Robert D. Cabana, Pilot Frederick W. Sturckow, and Mission Specialists Nancy J. Currie, James H. Newman, Jerry L. Ross, and Sergei Krikalev present a video overview of their space flight. Tape two of three includes the installation of an S-Band to help monitor the UNITY Connecting Module, the opening of UNITY's hatch, the opening of the main compartment hatch to ZARYA Control Module, and the repair of the inflight maintenance system.

Source record↗

NASA NTRS2018

Piloted Simulator Evaluation Results of Flight Physics Based Stall Recovery Guidance

In recent studies, it has been observed that loss of control in flight is the most frequent primary cause of accidents. A significant share of accidents in this category can be remedied by upset prevention if possible, and by upset recovery if necessary, in this order of priorities. One of the most important upsets to be recovered from is stall. Recent accidents have shown that a correct stall recovery maneuver remains a big challenge in civil aviation, partly due to a lack of pilot training. A possible strategy to support the flight crew in this demanding context is calculating a recovery guidance signal, and showing this signal in an intuitive way on one of the cockpit displays, for example by means of the flight director. Different methods for calculating the recovery signal, one based on fast model predictive control and another using an energy based approach, have been evaluated in four relevant operational scenarios by experienced commercial as well as test pilots in the Vertical Motion Simulator at NASA Ames Research Center. Evaluation results show that this approach could be able to assist the pilots in executing a correct stall recovery maneuver.

Lombaerts, Thomas↗

NASA NTRS1997

STS-85 Day 07 Highlights

On this seventh day of the STS-85 mission, the flight crew, Cmdr. Curtis L. Brown, Jr., Pilot Kent V. Rominger, Payload Cmdr. N. Jan Davis (Ph.D.), Mission Specialists Robert L. Curbeam, Jr. and Stephen K. Robinson (Ph.D.), and Payload Specialist Bjarni V. Tryggvason continue to test the Manipulator Flight Demonstration experiment, or Small Fine Arm, supplied by the National Space Development Agency of Japan, which was powered up for a final day of operations. The tests today, however, center on the ability of the arm to be remotely operated from the ground instead of onboard by the crew. The ground-commanded maneuvers of the arm demonstrated the usefulness of conducting work in space even while the crew is asleep or busy with other tasks.

Source record↗

NASA NTRS1978

Formulation of consumables management models, executive summary

Future manned space programs that have increased launch frequencies and reusable systems require an implementation of new consumables and systems management techniques that relieve both the operations support personnel and flight crew activities. Analytical models and techniques were developed which consist of a Mission Planning Processor (MPP) with appropriate consumables data base, methods of recognizing potential constraint violations in both the planning and flight operations functions, and flight data files for storage/retrieval of information over extended periods interfacing with flight operations processors for monitoring of the actual flights. Consumables subsystems considered in the MPP were electrical power, environmental control and life support, propulsion, hydraulics and auxiliary power.

Torian, J. G.↗

NASA NTRS1996

Lessons learned: DC-X

The DC-X was conceived and developed specifically to lay the ground work for significantly lowering the cost of space operations. The system design was based on an initial set of program goals and a finite, limited set of resources. The goal in its simplest terms was to demonstrate vertical landing after rotation of the vehicle from a nose-first to an engines-first altitude. Finite resources actually drove the selection of a robust design to reduce fabrication and preflight testing costs. The result was a system with a large amount of flexibility which allowed expansion of the test goals as the system, and test program, evolved. The use of the vehicle flight computer interfacing with the ground control system for flight crew training was also not an initial concept. However, by defining an architecture for the system control modes which allowed additions and modifications as learning progressed, the 6 DOF codes used for flight controls software development were transported to the operating system to be used in a simulated flight mode. Flight data reduction was also greatly improved as the program progressed, and the data needs and presentation were refined. The software, avionics hardware, and the FOCC system development proceeded ahead of the vehicle, primarily because most of the hardware elements were existing at the outset of the program. The Built-in-Test (BIT) for avionics and propulsion systems were adequate. Particularly the flight readiness system which verified the vehicle health after engine start and before throttle-up for flight.

Steinmeyer, D. A.↗

NASA NTRS2006

Feeling Well Rested and Wide Awake When it Counts

Responding to a congressional concern about aviation safety, NASA's Ames Research Center created the Ames Fatigue/Jet Lag Program in 1980 to examine the extent to which fatigue, sleep loss, and circadian disruption affect pilot performance. The program s primary research was conducted in field settings, as well as in a variety of aviation, controlled laboratory, and full-mission flight-simulation environments, to study fatigue factors and circadian disruption in short-haul, long-haul, military, cargo, and helicopter operations. In 1990, NASA changed the program s name to the Fatigue Countermeasures Group, to provide a greater emphasis on the development and evaluation of countermeasures that would mitigate the adverse effects of fatigue and maximize flight crew performance and alertness. The research conducted by this group at Ames included field studies of cockpit rest, quantity and quality of onboard sleep, and performance changes associated with long-haul flights.

Source record↗

NASA NTRS2012

Simpler ISS Flight Control Communications and Log Keeping via Social Tools and Techniques

The heart of flight operations control involves a) communicating effectively in real time with other controllers in the room and/or in remote locations and b) tracking significant events, decisions, and rationale to support the next set of decisions, provide a thorough shift handover, and troubleshoot/improve operations. International Space Station (ISS) flight controllers speak with each other via multiple voice circuits or loops, each with a particular purpose and constituency. Controllers monitor and/or respond to several loops concurrently. The primary tracking tools are console logs, typically kept by a single operator and not visible to others in real-time. Information from telemetry, commanding, and planning systems also plays into decision-making. Email is very secondary/tertiary due to timing and archival considerations. Voice communications and log entries supporting ISS operations have increased by orders of magnitude because the number of control centers, flight crew, and payload operations have grown. This paper explores three developmental ground system concepts under development at Johnson Space Center s (JSC) Mission Control Center Houston (MCC-H) and Marshall Space Flight Center s (MSFC) Payload Operations Integration Center (POIC). These concepts could reduce ISS control center voice traffic and console logging yet increase the efficiency and effectiveness of both. The goal of this paper is to kindle further discussion, exploration, and tool development.

Scott, David W.↗

NASA NTRS2014

Investigation of HZETRN 2010 as a Tool for Single Event Effect Qualification of Avionics Systems

NASA's future missions are focused on long-duration deep space missions for human exploration which offers no options for a quick emergency return to Earth. The combination of long mission duration with no quick emergency return option leads to unprecedented spacecraft system safety and reliability requirements. It is important that spacecraft avionics systems for human deep space missions are not susceptible to Single Event Effect (SEE) failures caused by space radiation (primarily the continuous galactic cosmic ray background and the occasional solar particle event) interactions with electronic components and systems. SEE effects are typically managed during the design, development, and test (DD&T) phase of spacecraft development by using heritage hardware (if possible) and through extensive component level testing, followed by system level failure analysis tasks that are both time consuming and costly. The ultimate product of the SEE DD&T program is a prediction of spacecraft avionics reliability in the flight environment produced using various nuclear reaction and transport codes in combination with the component and subsystem level radiation test data. Previous work by Koontz, et al.1 utilized FLUKA, a Monte Carlo nuclear reaction and transport code, to calculate SEE and single event upset (SEU) rates. This code was then validated against in-flight data for a variety of spacecraft and space flight environments. However, FLUKA has a long run-time (on the order of days). CREME962, an easy to use deterministic code offering short run times, was also compared with FLUKA predictions and in-flight data. CREME96, though fast and easy to use, has not been updated in several years and underestimates secondary particle shower effects in spacecraft structural shielding mass. Thus, this paper will investigate the use of HZETRN 20103, a fast and easy to use deterministic transport code, similar to CREME96, that was developed at NASA Langley Research Center primarily for flight crew ionizing radiation dose assessments. HZETRN 2010 includes updates to address secondary particle shower effects more accurately, and might be used as another tool to verify spacecraft avionics system reliability in space flight SEE environments.

Rojdev, Kristina↗

NASA NTRS1976

Spacelab cost reduction alternatives study. Volume 1: Executive summary

Alternative approaches to payload operations planning and control and flight crew training are defined for spacelab payloads with the goal of: lowering FY77 and FY 78 costs for new starts; lowering costs to achieve Spacelab operational capability; and minimizing the cost per Spacelab flight. These alternatives attempt to minimize duplication of hardware, software, and personnel, and the investment in supporting facility and equipment. Of particular importance is the possible reduction of equipment, software, and manpower resources such as comtational systems, trainers, and simulators.

Source record↗

NASA NTRS1987

The determination of nutritional requirements for Safe Haven Food Supply System (emergency/survival foods)

The Space Station Safe Haven Food System must sustain 8 crew members under emergency conditions for 45 days. Emergency Survival Foods are defined as a nutritionally balanced collection of high density food and beverages selected to provide for the survival of Space Station flight crews in contingency situations. Since storage volume is limited, the foods should be highly concentrated. A careful study of different research findings regarding starvation and calorie restricted diets indicates that a minimum nutritional need close to RDA is an important factor for sustaining an individual's life in a stressful environment. Fat, protein, and carbohydrates are 3 energy producing nutrients which play a vital role in the growth and maintenance process of human life. A lower intake of protein can minimize the water intake, but it causes a negative nitrogen balance and a lower performance level. Other macro and micro nutrients are also required for nutritional interrelationships to metabolize the other 3 nutrients to their optimum level. The various options for longer duration than 45 days are under investigation.

Ahmed, Selina↗

NASA NTRS1991

Space Shuttle Program: Automatic rendezvous, proximity operations, and capture (category 3)

The NASA Johnson Space Center is actively pursuing the development and demonstration of capabilities for automatic rendezvous, proximity operations, and capture (AR&C) using the Space Shuttle as the active vehicle. This activity combines the technologies, expertise, tools, and facilities of the JSC Tracking and Communications Division (EE), Navigation, Control and Aeronautics Division (EG), Automation and Robotics Division (ER), and Structures and Mechanics Division (ES) of the Engineering Directorate and the Flight Design and Dynamics Division (DM) of the Mission Operations Directorate. Potential benefits of AR&C include more efficient and repeatable rendezvous, proximity operations, and capture operations; reduced impacts on the target vehicles (e.g., Orbiter RCS plume loads); reduced flight crew work loads; reduced ground support requirements; and reduced operational constraints. This paper documents the current JSC capabilities/tools/facilities for AR&C and describes a proposed plan for a progression of ground demonstrations and flight tests and demonstrations of AR&C capabilities. This plan involves the maturing of existing technologies in tracking and communications; guidance, navigation and control; mechanisms; manipulators; and systems management and integrating them into several evolutionary demonstration stages.

Jackson, William L.↗

NASA NTRS1996

STS-79 Flight Day 7

On this seventh day of the STS-79 mission, the flight crew, Cmdr. William F. Readdy, Pilot Terrence W. Wilcutt, Mission Specialists, Thomas D. Akers, Shannon Lucid, Jay Apt, and Carl E. Walz, share a brief video tour of the Mir Space Station with flight controllers, taking a break from the transfer activities that has occupied the astronauts' time during three days of docked operations. Readdy and Apt floated through several of Mir's modules and back into Atlantis' double Spacehab module during the tour pointing out the numerous transfer items stowed on both spacecraft. Readdy, Wilcutt, Lucid and Blaha are seen discussing their mission in an interview with CNN's John Holliman.

Source record↗

NASA NTRS1995

STS-84 Post Flight Presentation

The STS-84 mission flight crew, Cmdr. Charles J. Precourt, Pilot Eileen M. Collions, Payload Cmdr, Jean-Francois Clervoy (ESA), Mission Specialists Edward T. Lu; Carlos I. Noriega; Elena V. Kondakova; Jerry M. Linenger, present a post flight analysis of their mission through the use of color slides and video footage. Prelaunch and launch activities are shown and briefly discussed. The astronauts take turns talking about different aspects of their specific roles during the mission.

Source record↗

NASA NTRS2003

Enhancing the Human Factors Engineering Role in an Austere Fiscal Environment

An austere fiscal environment in the aerospace community creates pressures to reduce program costs, often minimizing or sometimes even deleting the human interface requirements from the design process. With an assumption that the flight crew can recover real time from a poorly human factored space vehicle design, the classical crew interface requirements have been either not included in the design or not properly funded, though carried as requirements. Cost cuts have also affected quality of retained human factors engineering personnel. In response to this concern, planning is ongoing to correct the acting issues. Herein are techniques for ensuring that human interface requirements are integrated into a flight design, from proposal through verification and launch activation. This includes human factors requirements refinement and consolidation across flight programs; keyword phrases in the proposals; closer ties with systems engineering and other classical disciplines; early planning for crew-interface verification; and an Agency integrated human factors verification program, under the One NASA theme. Importance is given to communication within the aerospace human factors discipline, and utilizing the strengths of all government, industry, and academic human factors organizations in an unified research and engineering approach. A list of recommendations and concerns are provided in closing.

Stokes, Jack W.↗

NASA NTRS1997

STS-85 Day 09 Highlights

On this ninth day of the STS-85 mission, the flight crew, Cmdr. Curtis L. Brown, Jr., Pilot Kent V. Rominger, Payload Cmdr. N. Jan Davis (Ph.D.), Mission Specialists Robert L. Curbeam, Jr. and Stephen K. Robinson (Ph.D.), and Payload Specialist Bjarni V. Tryggvason watch over the Manipulator Flight Demonstration (MFD) experiment while Japanese investigators again maneuvere the Small Fine Arm remotely from a control room near Mission Control. It is the final planned work with the arm during this mission. While MFD operations are ongoing, Robinson again uses the Southwest Ultraviolet Imaging System's ultraviolet imaging telescope to observe Comet Hale-Bopp and Curbeam continue his work with the Bioreactor Demonstration System designed to perform cell biology experiments under controlled conditions. Tryggvason spends his day supporting data gathering with the Microgravity Vibration Isolation Mount experiment. Before the crew's workday began, they discussed the mission's progress with reporters in the U.S. and Canada as part of the traditional crew news conference. Questions ranged from life in space for the first time space travelers to providing a report card on the more than 24 experiments being conducted throughout the mission.

Source record↗