Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “Flight crew”

Search indexed NASA NTRS and DOE OSTI research on propulsion, heat transfer, battery materials and energy systems. Follow report and document links to the original sources.

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

At least 91 records · Page 5
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRS2015

Assessing and Promoting Functional Resilience in Flight Crews During Exploration Missions

NASA plans to send humans to Mars in about 20 years. The NASA Human Research Program supports research to mitigate the major risks to human health and performance on extended missions. However, there will undoubtedly be unforeseen events on any mission of this nature - thus mitigation of known risks alone is not sufficient to ensure optimal crew health and performance. Research should be directed not only to mitigating known risks, but also to providing crews with the tools to assess and enhance resilience, as a group and individually. We can draw on ideas from complexity theory and network theory to assess crew and individual resilience. The entire crew or the individual crewmember can be viewed as a complex system that is composed of subsystems (individual crewmembers or physiological subsystems), and the interactions between subsystems are of crucial importance for overall health and performance. An understanding of the structure of the interactions can provide important information even in the absence of complete information on the component subsystems. This is critical in human spaceflight, since insufficient flight opportunities exist to elucidate the details of each subsystem. Enabled by recent advances in noninvasive measurement of physiological and behavioral parameters, subsystem monitoring can be implemented within a mission and also during preflight training to establish baseline values and ranges. Coupled with appropriate mathematical modeling, this can provide real-time assessment of health and function, and detect early indications of imminent breakdown. Since the interconnected web of physiological systems (and crewmembers) can be interpreted as a network in mathematical terms, we can draw on recent work that relates the structure of such networks to their resilience (ability to self-organize in the face of perturbation). There are many parameters and interactions to choose from. Normal variability is an established characteristic of a healthy physiological response. Healthy coupling has been investigated less extensively, but there are cases in which too tight or too loose coupling can be problematic. This might be in inter-individual behaviors, such as sleep cycles, coordination of work and meal times, and coupled motions during communication. Less apparent are couplings of physiological systems, nevertheless examples abound of coupled systems which might be monitored: cardio-respiratory rhythms; circadian rhythms, body temperature, and sleep; stress markers and cognition, sleep, and performance; profiles of biochemical markers related to immune function and nutritional status; sensorimotor aspects such as motion sickness, ataxia, reaction time, and manual control. Tools for resilience are then the means to measure and analyze these parameters, incorporate them into appropriate models of normal variability and interconnectedness, and recognize when parameters or their couplings are outside of normal limits. What to do when a problem is identified depends on its nature. Changes can be made to crew procedures, work pacing, interpersonal interactions, sleep cycles, meal timing and content, as guided by the model. Use and continued development of these methods could not only provide tools for resilience, but also meaningful autonomous work for the crew on an extended flight.

Shelhamer, Mark↗
NASA NTRS2011

Autonomous, In-Flight Crew Health Risk Management for Exploration-Class Missions: Leveraging the Integrated Medical Model for the Exploration Medical System Demonstration Project

The Integrated Medical Model (IMM) captures organizational knowledge across the space medicine, training, operations, engineering, and research domains. IMM uses this knowledge in the context of a mission and crew profile to forecast risks to crew health and mission success. The IMM establishes a quantified, statistical relationship among medical conditions, risk factors, available medical resources, and crew health and mission outcomes. These relationships may provide an appropriate foundation for developing an in-flight medical decision support tool that helps optimize the use of medical resources and assists in overall crew health management by an autonomous crew with extremely limited interactions with ground support personnel and no chance of resupply.

Butler, D. J.↗
NASA NTRS1997

Automation Bias and Countermeasures in Flight Crews

Results of recent research investigating the use of automated systems have indicated the presence of automation bias, a term describing errors made when decision makers rely on automated cues as a heuristic replacement for vigilant information seeking and processing. Automation commission errors, i.e., errors made when decision makers take inappropriate action because they over-attend to automated information or directives, and automation omission errors, i.e., errors made when decision makers do not take appropriate action because they are not informed of an imminent problem or situation by automated aids, can result from this tendency. In a series of studies, participants who perceived themselves as "accountable" for their strategies of interaction with automation were significantly more likely to verify its correct functioning, and committed significantly fewer automation-related errors than those who did not report this perception. In this study, we focus on two manipulations to encourage verification behaviors within cockpit crews. The first, an information/training manipulation, will focus on explicit information on automation bias, and training for verification of automated functioning. The second manipulation will consist of display prompts to verify automated functioning. Participants (glass-cockpit crews) will fly a series of approaches on the Mini-ACFS, a two-person pan-task flight simulator. Approach scenarios include several automation "events," that is, glitches, malfunctions, or inappropriate recommendations, that can be caught if cross-checked with other cockpit indicators. We anticipate that these manipulations will ameliorate automation bias. Final data analysis will be completed prior to the OSU symposium, and is expected to support the hypotheses that: a) reduced errors are associated with verification behaviors; b) crews will be more likely to verify under training/display conditions than when in the control condition; and c) effects will persist when subjects return for a follow-up exercise 6-9 weeks after their first session. Implications for training and automation design will be discussed.

Mosier, Kathleen, L.↗
NASA NTRS1978

Methods for microbiological and immunological studies of space flight crews

Systematic laboratory procedures compiled as an outgrowth of a joint U.S./U.S.S.R. microbiological-immunological experiment performed during the Apollo-Soyuz Test Project space flight are presented. Included are mutually compatible methods for the identification of aerobic and microaerophilic bacteria, yeast and yeastlike microorganisms, and filamentous fungi; methods for the bacteriophage typing of Staphylococcus aureus; and methods for determining the sensitivity of S. aureus to antibiotics. Immunological methods using blood and immunological and biochemical methods using salivary parotid fluid are also described. Formulas for media and laboratory reagents used are listed.

Taylor, G. R.↗
NASA NTRS1990

Three input concepts for flight crew interaction with information presented on a large-screen electronic cockpit display

A piloted simulation study was conducted comparing three different input methods for interfacing to a large-screen, multiwindow, whole-flight-deck display for management of transport aircraft systems. The thumball concept utilized a miniature trackball embedded in a conventional side-arm controller. The touch screen concept provided data entry through a capacitive touch screen. The voice concept utilized a speech recognition system with input through a head-worn microphone. No single input concept emerged as the most desirable method of interacting with the display. Subjective results, however, indicate that the voice concept was the most preferred method of data entry and had the most potential for future applications. The objective results indicate that, overall, the touch screen concept was the most effective input method. There was also significant differences between the time required to perform specific tasks and the input concept employed, with each concept providing better performance relative to a specific task. These results suggest that a system combining all three input concepts might provide the most effective method of interaction.

Jones, Denise R.↗
NASA NTRS1999

STS-93 / Columbia Flight Crew Photo Op & QA at Pad for TCDT

The primary objective of the STS-93 mission was to deploy the Advanced X-ray Astrophysical Facility, which had been renamed the Chandra X-ray Observatory in honor of the late Indian-American Nobel Laureate Subrahmanyan Chandrasekhar. The mission was launched at 12:31 on July 23, 1999 onboard the space shuttle Columbia. The mission was led by Commander Eileen Collins. The crew was Pilot Jeff Ashby and Mission Specialists Cady Coleman, Steve Hawley and Michel Tognini from the Centre National d'Etudes Spatiales (CNES). This videotape shows a pre-flight press conference. Prior to the astronauts' arrival at the bunker area in front of the launch pad, the narrator discusses some of the training that the astronauts are scheduled to have prior to the launch, particularly the emergency egress procedures. Commander Collins introduces the crew and fields questions from the assembled press. Many questions are asked about the experiences of Commander Collins, and Mission Specialist Coleman as women in NASA. The press conference takes place outside in front of the Shuttle Columbia on the launch pad.

Source record↗
NASA NTRS1997

Designing to Control Flight Crew Errors

It is widely accepted that human error is a major contributing factor in aircraft accidents. There has been a significant amount of research in why these errors occurred, and many reports state that the design of flight deck can actually dispose humans to err. This research has led to the call for changes in design according to human factors and human-centered principles. The National Aeronautics and Space Administration's (NASA) Langley Research Center has initiated an effort to design a human-centered flight deck from a clean slate (i.e., without constraints of existing designs.) The effort will be based on recent research in human-centered design philosophy and mission management categories. This design will match the human's model of the mission and function of the aircraft to reduce unnatural or non-intuitive interfaces. The product of this effort will be a flight deck design description, including training and procedures, and a cross reference or paper trail back to design hypotheses, and an evaluation of the design. The present paper will discuss the philosophy, process, and status of this design effort.

Schutte, Paul C.↗
NASA NTRS1983

A computerized, procedural aid for flight crews

A computer program for detecting pilot error is described. The program observes pilot actions through the aircraft controls and state, and the actions are compared to those of a procedural script which can be considered a prescriptive model of the procedural aspects of flight. Pilot error is a discrepancy between the pilot actions and the script. The script has a hierarchical structure consisting of a single script at the highest level, scripts for the major phases of flight at the next level, scripts for procedures to be executed during these phases, and procedure step scripts at the bottom. The program interprets the aircraft data base in terms of the script, detecting errors of commission from a set of allowed and disallowed changes stored with each script element.

Hammer, J. M.↗
NASA NTRS1990

A review of the habitability aspects of prior space flights from the flight crew perspective with an orientation toward designing Space Station Freedom

Habitability is a very important issue in long-duration spaceflight. With this concern, a review of much of the existing U.S. Skylab, Spacelab, and some Soviet literature on habitability aspects of long-duratioin space flight was completed for the Astronaut Space Station Support Office. The data were organized to follow as closely as possible the SSF distributed systems, such as Life Support, Data Management, etc. A new definition of habitability is proposed.

Stramler, J. H.↗
NASA NTRS1975

Apollo flight crew cardiovascular evaluations

The results of the lower body negative pressure (LBNP) and passive stand tests are presented, and the efficacy of the experimental antihypotensive garments is evaluated. Results of the tests are presented in tabular form. Postflight orthostatic evaluations during the Apollo program indicate that reduction in orthostatic tolerance is a consequence of space flight exposure. Heart rate, the most reliable index, was increased, while systolic and pulse pressures were decreased during immediate postflight evaluations using lower body negative pressure and passive standing as the orthostatic stress. Elevation in resting heart rate was a less frequent finding. There was considerable variability in the magnitude of these changes between individual crewmembers and in the persistence of the changes over subsequent postflight evaluations. Postflight changes in leg volume during LBNP were equal to or less than those seen during preflight baseline evaluations. Body weight, resting calf girth, supine leg volume, and cardiothoracic ratios were all diminished immediately postflight, and return to preflight values was not complete within the postflight testing time frame.

G.W. Hoffler↗
NASA NTRS1985

Human factors in cockpit automation: A field study of flight crew transition

The factors which affected two groups of airline pilots in the transition from traditional airline cockpits to a highly automated version were studied. All pilots were highly experienced in traditional models of the McDonnell-Douglas DC-9 prior to their transition to the more automated DC-9-80. Specific features of the new aircraft, particularly the digital flight guidance system (DFGS) and other automatic features such as the autothrottle system (ATS), autobrake, and digital display were studied. Particular attention was paid to the first 200 hours of line flying experience in the new aircraft, and the difficulties that some pilots found in adapting to the new systems during this initial operating period. Efforts to prevent skill loss from automation, training methods, traditional human factors issues, and general views of the pilots toward cockpit automation are discussed.

Wiener, E. L.↗
NASA NTRS1994

Variations in Party Line Information Requirements for Flight Crew Situation Awareness in the Datalink Environment

Current Air Traffic Control communications use shared very high frequency (VHF) voice frequencies from which pilots can obtain 'Party Line' Information (PLI) by overhearing communications addressed to other aircraft. A prior study has shown pilots perceive this PLI to be important. There is concern that some critical PLI may be lost in the proposed datalink environment where communications will be discretely addressed. Different types of flight operations will be, equipped with datalink equipment at different times, generating a 'mixed environment' where some pilots may rely on PLI while others will receive their information by datalink. To research the importance, availability and accuracy of PLI and to query pilots on the information they feel is necessary, a survey was distributed to pilots. The pilots were selected from four flight operation groups to study the variations in PLI requirements in the mixed datalink environment. Pilots perceived PLI to be important overall. Specific information elements pertaining to traffic and weather information were identified as Critical. Most PLI elements followed a pattern of higher perceived importance during terminal area operations, final approach and landing. Pilots from the different flight operation groups identified some elements as particularly important. Pilots perceived PLI to be only moderately available and accurate overall. Several PLI elements received very low availability and accuracy ratings but are perceived as important. In a free response question designed to find the information requirements for global situation awareness, pilots frequently indicated a need for traffic and weather information. These elements were also frequently cited by them as information that could be presented by a datalink system. The results of this survey identify specific concerns to be addressed when implementing datalink communications.

Pritchett, Amy R.↗
NASA NTRS1995

Summary of a Crew-Centered Flight Deck Design Philosophy for High-Speed Civil Transport (HSCT) Aircraft

Past flight deck design practices used within the U.S. commercial transport aircraft industry have been highly successful in producing safe and efficient aircraft. However, recent advances in automation have changed the way pilots operate aircraft, and these changes make it necessary to reconsider overall flight deck design. Automated systems have become more complex and numerous, and often their inner functioning is partially or fully opaque to the flight crew. Recent accidents and incidents involving autoflight system mode awareness Dornheim, 1995) are an example. This increase in complexity raises pilot concerns about the trustworthiness of automation, and makes it difficult for the crew to be aware of all the intricacies of operation that may impact safe flight. While pilots remain ultimately responsible for mission success, performance of flight deck tasks has been more widely distributed across human and automated resources. Advances in sensor and data integration technologies now make far more information available than may be prudent to present to the flight crew.

Palmer, Michael T.↗
NASA NTRS1974

Probability of illness definition for the Skylab flight crew health stabilization program

Management and analysis of crew and environmental microbiological data from SMEAT and Skylab are discussed. Samples were collected from ten different body sites on each SMEAT and Skylab crew-member on approximately 50 occasions and since several different organisms could be isolated from each sample, several thousand lab reports were generated. These lab reports were coded and entered in a computer file and from the file various tabular summaries were constructed.

Source record↗
NASA NTRS1977

Analysis of the Skylab flight crew health stabilization program

Isolation periods were established prior to launch as well as postflight in order to reduce the number of infectious illness contacts between crewmen. The most frequently reported illness contacts were upper respiratory infections. Enteric illnesses represented the next most common illness, but these were relatively rare compared to upper respiratory infections.

Ferguson, J. K.↗
NASA NTRS1982

PROCRU: A model for analyzing flight crew procedures in approach to landing

A model for the human performance of approach and landing tasks that would provide a means for systematic exploration of questions concerning the impact of procedural and equipment design and the allocation of resources in the cockpit on performance and safety in approach-to-landing is discussed. A system model is needed that accounts for the interactions of crew, procedures, vehicle, approach geometry, and environment. The issues of interest revolve principally around allocation of tasks in the cockpit and crew performance with respect to the cognitive aspects of the tasks. The model must, therefore, deal effectively with information processing and decision-making aspects of human performance.

Baron, S.↗