Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “flight scheduling”

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 631 records · Page 35

A learning flight control system for the F8-DFBW aircraft

This report contains a complete description of a learning control system designed for the F8-DFBW aircraft. The system is parameter-adaptive with the additional feature that it 'learns' the variation of the control system gains needed over the flight envelope. It, thus, generates and modifies its gain schedule when suitable data are available. The report emphasizes the novel learning features of the system: the forms of representation of the flight envelope and the process by which identified parameters are used to modify the gain schedule. It contains data taken during piloted real-time 6 degree-of-freedom simulations that were used to develop and evaluate the system.

Montgomery, R. C.↗

Precision Departure Release Capability (PDRC) Concept of Operations

After takeoff, aircraft must merge into en route (Center) airspace traffic flows which may be subject to constraints that create localized demandcapacity imbalances. When demand exceeds capacity Traffic Management Coordinators (TMCs) often use tactical departure scheduling to manage the flow of departures into the constrained Center traffic flow. Tactical departure scheduling usually involves use of a Call for Release (CFR) procedure wherein the Tower must call the Center TMC to coordinate a release time prior to allowing the flight to depart. In present-day operations release times are computed by the Center Traffic Management Advisor (TMA) decision support tool based upon manual estimates of aircraft ready time verbally communicated from the Tower to the Center. The TMA-computed release is verbally communicated from the Center back to the Tower where it is relayed to the Local controller as a release window that is typically three minutes wide. The Local controller will manage the departure to meet the coordinated release time window. Manual ready time prediction and verbal release time coordination are labor intensive and prone to inaccuracy. Also, use of release time windows adds uncertainty to the tactical departure process. Analysis of more than one million flights from January 2011 indicates that a significant number of tactically scheduled aircraft missed their en route slot due to ready time prediction uncertainty. Uncertainty in ready time estimates may result in missed opportunities to merge into constrained en route flows and lead to lost throughput. Next Generation Air Transportation System (NextGen) plans call for development of Tower automation systems capable of computing surface trajectory-based ready time estimates. NASA has developed the Precision Departure Release Capability (PDRC) concept that uses this technology to improve tactical departure scheduling by automatically communicating surface trajectory-based ready time predictions to the Center scheduling tool. The PDRC concept also incorporates earlier NASA and FAA research into automation-assisted CFR coordination. The PDRC concept helps reduce uncertainty by automatically communicating coordinated release times with seconds-level precision enabling TMCs to work with target times rather than windows. NASA has developed a PDRC prototype system that integrates the Center's TMA system with a research prototype Tower decision support tool. A two-phase field evaluation was conducted at NASA's North Texas Research Station (NTX) in DallasFort Worth. The field evaluation validated the PDRC concept and demonstrated reduced release time uncertainty while being used for tactical departure scheduling of more than 230 operational flights over 29 weeks of operations. This paper presents the Concept of Operations. Companion papers include the Final Report and a Technology Description. ? SUBJECT:

tactical departure scheduling↗

National Space Transportation System (NSTS) technology needs

The National Space Transportation System (NSTS) is one of the Nation's most valuable resources, providing manned transportation to and from space in support of payloads and scientific research. The NSTS program is currently faced with the problem of hardware obsolescence, which could result in unacceptable schedule and cost impacts to the flight program. Obsolescence problems occur because certain components are no longer being manufactured or repair turnaround time is excessive. In order to achieve a long-term, reliable transportation system that can support manned access to space through 2010 and beyond, NASA must develop a strategic plan for a phased implementation of enhancements which will satisfy this long-term goal. The NSTS program has initiated the Assured Shuttle Availability (ASA) project with the following objectives: eliminate hardware obsolescence in critical areas, increase reliability and safety of the vehicle, decrease operational costs and turnaround time, and improve operational capability. The strategy for ASA will be to first meet the mandatory needs - keep the Shuttle flying. Non-mandatory changes that will improve operational capability and enhance performance will then be considered if funding is adequate. Upgrade packages should be developed to install within designated inspection periods, grouped in a systematic approach to reduce cost and schedule impacts, and allow the capability to provide a Block 2 Shuttle (Phase 3).

Winterhalter, David L.↗

Precision Departure Release Capability (PDRC) Technology Description

After takeoff, aircraft must merge into en route (Center) airspace traffic flows which may be subject to constraints that create localized demand-capacity imbalances. When demand exceeds capacity, Traffic Management Coordinators (TMCs) often use tactical departure scheduling to manage the flow of departures into the constrained Center traffic flow. Tactical departure scheduling usually involves use of a Call for Release (CFR) procedure wherein the Tower must call the Center TMC to coordinate a release time prior to allowing the flight to depart. In present-day operations release times are computed by the Center Traffic Management Advisor (TMA) decision support tool based upon manual estimates of aircraft ready time verbally communicated from the Tower to the Center. The TMA-computed release is verbally communicated from the Center back to the Tower where it is relayed to the Local controller as a release window that is typically three minutes wide. The Local controller will manage the departure to meet the coordinated release time window. Manual ready time prediction and verbal release time coordination are labor intensive and prone to inaccuracy. Also, use of release time windows adds uncertainty to the tactical departure process. Analysis of more than one million flights from January 2011 indicates that a significant number of tactically scheduled aircraft missed their en route slot due to ready time prediction uncertainty. Uncertainty in ready time estimates may result in missed opportunities to merge into constrained en route flows and lead to lost throughput. Next Generation Air Transportation System (NextGen) plans call for development of Tower automation systems capable of computing surface trajectory-based ready time estimates. NASA has developed the Precision Departure Release Capability (PDRC) concept that uses this technology to improve tactical departure scheduling by automatically communicating surface trajectory-based ready time predictions to the Center scheduling tool. The PDRC concept also incorporates earlier NASA and FAA research into automation-assisted CFR coordination. The PDRC concept helps reduce uncertainty by automatically communicating coordinated release times with seconds-level precision enabling TMCs to work with target times rather than windows. NASA has developed a PDRC prototype system that integrates the Center's TMA system with a research prototype Tower decision support tool. A two-phase field evaluation was conducted at NASA's North Texas Research Station (NTX) in Dallas-Fort Worth. The field evaluation validated the PDRC concept and demonstrated reduced release time uncertainty while being used for tactical departure scheduling of more than 230 operational flights over 29 weeks of operations. This paper presents the Technology Description. Companion papers include the Final Report and a Concept of Operations.

tactical departure scheduling↗

Ares Launch Vehicles Overview: Space Access Society

America is returning to the Moon in preparation for the first human footprint on Mars, guided by the U.S. Vision for Space Exploration. This presentation will discuss NASA's mission, the reasons for returning to the Moon and going to Mars, and how NASA will accomplish that mission in ways that promote leadership in space and economic expansion on the new frontier. The primary goals of the Vision for Space Exploration are to finish the International Space Station, retire the Space Shuttle, and build the new spacecraft needed to return people to the Moon and go to Mars. The Vision commits NASA and the nation to an agenda of exploration that also includes robotic exploration and technology development, while building on lessons learned over 50 years of hard-won experience. NASA is building on common hardware, shared knowledge, and unique experience derived from the Apollo Saturn, Space Shuttle, and contemporary commercial launch vehicle programs. The journeys to the Moon and Mars will require a variety of vehicles, including the Ares I Crew Launch Vehicle, which transports the Orion Crew Exploration Vehicle, and the Ares V Cargo Launch Vehicle, which transports the Lunar Surface Access Module. The architecture for the lunar missions will use one launch to ferry the crew into orbit, where it will rendezvous with the Lunar Module in the Earth Departure Stage, which will then propel the combination into lunar orbit. The imperative to explore space with the combination of astronauts and robots will be the impetus for inventions such as solar power and water and waste recycling. This next chapter in NASA's history promises to write the next chapter in American history, as well. It will require this nation to provide the talent to develop tools, machines, materials, processes, technologies, and capabilities that can benefit nearly all aspects of life on Earth. Roles and responsibilities are shared between a nationwide Government and industry team. The Exploration Launch Projects Office at the Marshall Space Flight Center manages the design, development, testing, and evaluation of both vehicles and serves as lead systems integrator. A little over a year after it was chartered, the Exploration Launch Projects team is testing engine components, refining vehicle designs, performing wind tunnel tests, and building hardware for the first flight test of Ares I-X, scheduled for spring 2009. The Exploration Launch Projects team conducted the Ares I System Requirements Review (SRR) at the end of 2006. In Ares' first year, extensive trade studies and evaluations were conducted to refine the design initially recommended by the Exploration Systems Architecture Study, conceptual designs were analyzed for fitness, and the contractual framework was assembled to enable a development effort unparalleled in American space flight since the Space Shuttle. Now, the project turns its focus to the Preliminary Design Review (PDR), scheduled for 2008. Taking into consideration the findings of the SRR, the design of the Ares I is being tightened and refined to meet the safety, operability, reliability, and affordability goals outlined by the Constellation Program. The Ares V is in the early design stage, focusing its activities on requirements validation and ways to develop this heavy-lift system so that synergistic hardware commonality between it and the Ares I can reduce the operational footprint and foster sustained exploration across the decades ahead.

Cook, Steve↗

The International Space Station: Operations and Assembly - Learning From Experiences - Past, Present, and Future

As the Space Shuttle continues flight, construction and assembly of the International Space Station (ISS) carries on as the United States and our International Partners resume the building, and continue to carry on the daily operations, of this impressive and historical Earth-orbiting research facility. In his January 14, 2004, speech announcing a new vision for America s space program, President Bush ratified the United States commitment to completing construction of the ISS by 2010. Since the launch and joining of the first two elements in 1998, the ISS and the partnership have experienced and overcome many challenges to assembly and operations, along with accomplishing many impressive achievements and historical firsts. These experiences and achievements over time have shaped our strategy, planning, and expectations. The continual operation and assembly of ISS leads to new knowledge about the design, development and operation of systems and hardware that will be utilized in the development of new deep-space vehicles needed to fulfill the Vision for Exploration and to generate the data and information that will enable our programs to return to the Moon and continue on to Mars. This paper will provide an overview of the complexity of the ISS Program, including a historical review of the major assembly events and operational milestones of the program, along with the upcoming assembly plans and scheduled missions of the space shuttle flights and ISS Assembly sequence.

Fuller, Sean↗

Should’ve Could’ve: Progress in the Systems Engineering of the Mars2020 On-Board Planner

Mars rover operations has traditionally controlled behavior using meticulously compiled, so-called “Master” sequences that enforce deterministic timing and ordering of activities. While the approach is effective at managing risk and complexity, it can also be inefficient. Extended operations of the Mars2020 rover envisions a fundamentally different scheduling and execution approach. Atomic activities are constrained by mission operators in time, resource usage, and a structure of dependencies. The rover flight software will create and re-create schedules, responding to available energy, data volume, actual activity durations and execution status, observed temperatures, and other on-board state. Schedules are expected to change substantially in the course of execution. The solution space is prohibitively large and probabilistic in nature. A range of emergent behavior is accessible depending on the interaction between actual on-board state and a given formulation of constraints. For years, the specification and implementation of this capability have been considered and refined, as testing and analysis have mapped the contours of the system. Many concepts that could have been adopted were rejected, and in some cases, emergent properties have been exposed and beaten back with approaches to steer the behavior. This paper discusses some of the design history and underlying reasoning in the systems engineering of the first autonomous activity planner on Mars.

Kuhn, Stephen R↗

Mission Operations, Cubed: NASA Marshall Operations Support for SmallSats

SmallSats have come a long way since the Huntsville Operations Support Center (HOSC) at NASA’s Marshall Space Flight Center supported its first “minisatellite” mission in 2010. And just as SmallSats themselves have evolved in those 12 years, so too has the HOSC’s mission support for SmallSats. Marshall Space Flight Center has a long history with payload and mission operations, including support for the Apollo missions to the moon, the Space Shuttle program, and 21 years of continuous around-the-clock science operations support for research aboard the International Space Station. Today, the HOSC is a multi-tenant facility, supporting not only ISS, but also NASA’s Commercial Crew program, the Space Launch System, the Hubble and Chandra observatories and others – including multiple SmallSat missions. Two SmallSat solar sail missions will be among those taking advantage of the HOSC’s resources for planning, training for and executing mission operations – the Near Earth Asteroid (NEA) Scout and Solar Cruiser missions. One of 10 6U CubeSats manifest on the Artemis I launch of NASA’s Space Launch System rocket this year, NEA Scout’s three-year mission will be supported through a more traditional operations concept, with a dedicated Flight Controller staff operating within the HOSC. Scheduled to launch as part of the Interstellar Mapping and Acceleration Probe (IMAP) in February 2025, Solar Cruiser’s 11-month mission will take a next-generation approach to operations by utilizing a multi-mission flight controller concept, as well as Marshall’s Telescience Resource Kit (TreK). TreK provides a suite of software applications and libraries that allow the Mission Operations Center to serve as an in-house ground system which incorporates remote and automation capability options for engineers and scientists. This presentation will compare the approaches the HOSC will use to support these two missions as a way of demonstrating the array of options NASA MSFC offers for operations support for CubeSat and SmallSat missions.

Darren S Wallace↗

Precision Departure Release Capability (PDRC): NASA to FAA Research Transition

After takeoff, aircraft must merge into en route (Center) airspace traffic flows which may be subject to constraints that create localized demand-capacity imbalances. When demand exceeds capacity, Traffic Management Coordinators (TMCs) and Frontline Managers (FLMs) often use tactical departure scheduling to manage the flow of departures into the constrained Center traffic flow. Tactical departure scheduling usually involves use of a Call for Release (CFR) procedure wherein the Tower must call the Center to coordinate a release time prior to allowing the flight to depart. In present-day operations release times are computed by the Center Traffic Management Advisor (TMA) decision support tool based upon manual estimates of aircraft ready time verbally communicated from the Tower to the Center. The TMA-computed release time is verbally communicated from the Center back to the Tower where it is relayed to the Local controller as a release window that is typically three minutes wide. The Local controller will manage the departure to meet the coordinated release time window. Manual ready time prediction and verbal release time coordination are labor intensive and prone to inaccuracy. Also, use of release time windows adds uncertainty to the tactical departure process. Analysis of more than one million flights from January 2011 indicates that a significant number of tactically scheduled aircraft missed their en route slot due to ready time prediction uncertainty. Uncertainty in ready time estimates may result in missed opportunities to merge into constrained en route flows and lead to lost throughput. Next Generation Air Transportation System plans call for development of Tower automation systems capable of computing surface trajectory-based ready time estimates. NASA has developed the Precision Departure Release Capability (PDRC) concept that improves tactical departure scheduling by automatically communicating surface trajectory-based ready time predictions and departure runway assignments to the Center scheduling tool. The PDRC concept also incorporates earlier NASA and FAA research into automation-assisted CFR coordination. The PDRC concept reduces uncertainty by automatically communicating coordinated release times with seconds-level precision enabling TMCs and FLMs to work with target times rather than windows. NASA has developed a PDRC prototype system that integrates the Center's TMA system with a research prototype Tower decision support tool. A two-phase field evaluation was conducted at NASA's North Texas Research Station in Dallas-Fort Worth. The field evaluation validated the PDRC concept and demonstrated reduced release time uncertainty while being used for tactical departure scheduling of more than 230 operational flights over 29 weeks of operations.

ATM↗

Innovative Development of a Cross-Center Timeline Planning Tool

The Payload Operations Integration Center (POIC) at Marshall Space Flight Center (MSFC) supports planning, coordination and scheduling of science activities for the International Space Station (ISS) in coordination with other NASA centers, international partners, and payload developers. The ability to efficiently plan and re-plan in response to change is critical to the flight planning teams. With the achievement of supporting a fourth crew member aboard the ISS and an increasing amount of payload science activities, came the need for a dynamic, more efficient way of building timeline planning reports that could be readily updated as fast as payload science plans could change. This paper addresses software architecture considerations in the successful cross-center development of an automated planning tool with multiple data sources. It also discusses the practical implementation of a time-boxed, hybrid Agile Software Development (ASD) approach to deliver customer-driven value despite changing requirements with respect to low-Earth orbit operational planning activities. The goal of this paper is to open discussion with members of the international community and trade effective strategies for cross-center architectural and customer-developer driven collaborations, to support increasing utilization of planning and conducting science activities in space.

Pedoto, Ramon W.↗

The Wallops Flight Facility Rapid Response Range Operations Initiative

While the dominant focus on short response missions has appropriately centered on the launch vehicle and spacecraft, often overlooked or afterthought phases of these missions have been launch site operations and the activities of launch range organizations. Throughout the history of organized spaceflight, launch ranges have been the bane of flight programs as the source of expense, schedule delays, and seemingly endless requirements. Launch Ranges provide three basic functions: (1) provide an appropriate geographical location to meet orbital other mission trajectory requirements, (2) provide project services such as processing facilities, launch complexes, tracking and data services, and expendable products, and (3) assure safety and property protection to participating personnel and third-parties. The challenge with which launch site authorities continuously struggle, is the inherent conflict arising from projects whose singular concern is execution of their mission, and the range s need to support numerous simultaneous customers. So, while tasks carried out by a launch range committed to a single mission pale in comparison to efforts of a launch vehicle or spacecraft provider and could normally be carried out in a matter of weeks, major launch sites have dozens of active projects separate sponsoring organizations. Accommodating the numerous tasks associated with each mission, when hardware failures, weather, maintenance requirements, and other factors constantly conspire against the range resource schedulers, make the launch range as significant an impediment to responsive missions as launch vehicles and their cargo. The obvious solution to the launch site challenge was implemented years ago when the Department of Defense simply established dedicated infrastructure and personnel to dedicated missions, namely an Inter Continental Ballistic Missile. This however proves to be prohibitively expensive for all but the most urgent of applications. So the challenge becomes how can a launch site provide acceptably responsive mission services to a particular customer without dedicating extensive resources and while continuing to serve other projects? NASA's Wallops Flight Facility (WFF) is pursuing solutions to exactly this challenge. NASA, in partnership with the Virginia Commercial Space Flight Authority, has initiated the Rapid Response Range Operations Initiative (R3Ops). R3Ops is a multi-phased effort to incrementally establish and demonstrate increasingly responsive launch operations, with an ultimate goal of providing ELV-class services in a maximum of 7-10 days from initial notification routinely, and shorter schedules possible with committed resources. This target will be pursued within the reality of simultaneous concurrent programs, and ideally, largely independent of specialized flight system configurations. WFF has recently completed Phase 1 of R3Ops, an in-depth collection (through extensive expert interviews) and software modeling of individual steps by various range disciplines. This modeling is now being used to identify existing inefficiencies in current procedures, to identify bottlenecks, and show interdependencies. Existing practices are being tracked to provide a baseline to benchmark against as new procedures are implemented. This paper will describe in detail the philosophies behind WFF's R3Ops, the data collected and modeled in Phase 1, and strategies for meeting responsive launch requirements in a multi-user range environment planned for subsequent phases of this initiative.

Underwood, Bruce E.↗

System/360 Computer Assisted Network Scheduling (CANS) System

Computer assisted scheduling techniques that produce conflict-free and efficient schedules have been developed and implemented to meet needs of the Manned Space Flight Network. CANS system provides effective management of resources in complex scheduling environment. System is automated resource scheduling, controlling, planning, information storage and retrieval tool.

Brewer, A. C.↗

Nonlinear flight test trajectory controllers for aircraft

Flight test trajectory control systems are designed to enable the pilot to follow complex trajectories for evaluating an aircraft within its known flight envelope and to explore the boundaries of its capabilities. Previous design approaches were baed on linearized aircraft models necessitating a large amount of data storage along with gain schedules. In this paper, the synthesis of nonlinear flight test trajectory controllers for a fixed-wing aircraft is described. This approach uses singular perturbation theory and the recently developed theory of prelinearizing transformations. These controllers do not require gain scheduling for satisfactory operation, can be used in arbitrarily nonlinear maneuvers, and are mechanized with a direct, noniterative analytic solution.

Menon, P. K. A.↗

An Induced Environment Contamination Monitor for the Space Shuttle

The Induced Environment Contamination Monitor (IECM), a set of ten instruments integrated into a self-contained unit and scheduled to fly on shuttle Orbital Flight Tests 1 through 6 and on Spacelabs 1 and 2, is described. The IECM is designed to measure the actual environment to determine whether the strict controls placed on the shuttle system have solved the contamination problem. Measurements are taken during prelaunch, ascent, on-orbit, descent, and postlanding. The on-orbit measurements are molecular return flux, background spectral intensity, molecular deposition, and optical surface effects. During the other mission phases dew point, humidity, aerosol content, and trace gas are measured as well as optical surface effects and molecular deposition. The IECM systems and thermal design are discussed. Preflight and ground operations are presented together with associated ground support equipment. Flight operations and data reduction plans are given.

Miller, E. R.↗

Experiments for dedicated life science missions

Over 80 investigations were selected recently as candidate experiments for Life Science Spacelab Missions in the 1983-1985 time frame. A payload consisting of perhaps 20 of these experiments will be selected in 1981, approximately two years before the first dedicated Life Sciences Spacelab Mission. Implementation of a carefully designed management process will be a prerequisite for accomplishing the development, flight, and post-flight analysis of a maximum number of these investigations, working within currently approved resources and schedules. This paper provides an overview of the Life Sciences Flight Experiments Program, and describes the approach being taken at NASA Headquarters in its planning and implementation.

Farrell, R. M.↗

Student's experiment to fly on third Shuttle mission

A spaceborne student experiment on insect motion during weightlessness scheduled to fly on the third flight of the space shuttle is described. The experiment will focus on the flight behavior in zero gravity of two species of flying insects with differing ratios of body mass to wing area, the velvetbean caterpillar moth and the honeybee drone. Ten insects of each species will be carried in separate canisters. The crew will remove the canisters from the storage locker and attach them to the mid-deck wall, where the insects will be observed and filmed by a data acquisition camera.

Source record↗

Functional integration of vertical flight path and speed control using energy principles

A generalized automatic flight control system was developed which integrates all longitudinal flight path and speed control functions previously provided by a pitch autopilot and autothrottle. In this design, a net thrust command is computed based on total energy demand arising from both flight path and speed targets. The elevator command is computed based on the energy distribution error between flight path and speed. The engine control is configured to produce the commanded net thrust. The design incorporates control strategies and hierarchy to deal systematically and effectively with all aircraft operational requirements, control nonlinearities, and performance limits. Consistent decoupled maneuver control is achieved for all modes and flight conditions without outer loop gain schedules, control law submodes, or control function duplication.

Lambregts, A. A.↗

National Aero-Space Plane

An account is given of the technology development management objectives thus far planned for the DOD/NASA National Aero-Space Plane (NASP). The technology required by NASP will first be developed in ground-based facilities and then integrated during the design and construction of the X-30 experimental aircraft. Five airframe and three powerplant manufacturers are currently engaged in an 18-month effort encompassing design studies and tradeoff analyses. The first flight of the X-30 is scheduled for early 1993.

Piland, William M.↗