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 91 records · Page 5
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Overview of an Exploratory, Real-Time, Multi-Pilot Simulation Study of Early eVTOL Operations at Non-Towered Vertiports

This paper provides a report out on an exploratory, multi-aircraft/multi-pilot, real-time simulation study conducted by NASA of early commercial powered-lift, Urban Air Mobility (UAM) operations at a non-towered vertiport. As used in this paper, vertiport refers to the primary ground and airspace elements facilitating the takeoff and landing of electric vertical takeoff and landing (eVTOL) aircraft with central emphasis on a vertipad, i.e. the physical touch-down and lift-off area and surrounding approach , departure, local pattern procedures. The study, known as the Piloted UML-2 ConOps Study (PUCS), had two high-level goals. The first goal was providing preliminary insights and observations relevant to the piloting and flight operations of early, commercial UAM operations aligned with the initial stage of the FAA’s Advanced Air Mobility (AAM) Implementation Plan and the second level NASA’s UAM Maturity Level (UML) scale. The second goal was evaluating a novel, medium-fidelity, extensible, many-pilot, real-time simulation capability known as the UAM Flyers developed by NASA. The Flyers are intended to allow rapid development, screening, evaluation, and demonstrations of potential Concepts of Operation (ConOps) for UAM flight operations and airspace management in a modular and low-cost, real-time, human-in-the-loop rapid simulation prototyping environment. For this study, ten Flyer cockpits were configured to evaluate flight operations through a non-towered vertiport with pilot interfaces and displays (external and in-cockpit) appropriate for operations under visual flight rules (VFR) and employing flight and communication procedures representative of current operations at non-towered airports. The presented results include an achieved operational tempo; durations of individual flight tasks for approaches and departures; off-nominal events and triggers; and pilot comments regarding potential procedural and technology improvements.

Urban Air Mobility↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Overview of an Exploratory, Multi-Pilot Simulation Study of Early eVTOL Operations at Non-Towered Vertiports

This paper provides a report out on an exploratory, multi-aircraft/multi-pilot, real-time simulation study conducted by NASA of early commercial powered-lift, Urban Air Mobility (UAM) operations at a non-towered vertiport. As used in this paper, vertiport refers to the primary ground and airspace elements facilitating the takeoff and landing of electric vertical takeoff and landing (eVTOL) aircraft with central emphasis on a vertipad, i.e. the physical touch-down and lift-off area and surrounding approach , departure, local pattern procedures. The study, known as the Piloted UML-2 ConOps Study (PUCS), had two high-level goals. The first goal was providing preliminary insights and observations relevant to the piloting and flight operations of early, commercial UAM operations aligned with the initial stage of the FAA’s Advanced Air Mobility (AAM) Implementation Plan and the second level NASA’s UAM Maturity Level (UML) scale. The second goal was evaluating a novel, medium-fidelity, extensible, many-pilot, real-time simulation capability known as the UAM Flyers developed by NASA. The Flyers are intended to allow rapid development, screening, evaluation, and demonstrations of potential Concepts of Operation (ConOps) for UAM flight operations and airspace management in a modular and low-cost, real-time, human-in-the-loop rapid simulation prototyping environment. For this study, ten Flyer cockpits were configured to evaluate flight operations through a non-towered vertiport with pilot interfaces and displays (external and in-cockpit) appropriate for operations under visual flight rules (VFR) and employing flight and communication procedures representative of current operations at non-towered airports. The presented results include an achieved operational tempo; durations of individual flight tasks for approaches and departures; off-nominal events and triggers; and pilot comments regarding potential procedural and technology improvements.

Urban Air Mobility↗
NASA NTRS2018

Gaps in Thermal Design Guidelines in the Goddard Space Flight Center GOLD Rules

The GSFC (Goddard Space Flight Center) GOLD Rules (Goddard Open Learning Design; GSFC-STD-1000) provide a reasonably comprehensive list of guidelines for the design and testing of spacecraft and instruments based on the long heritage of successful GSFC missions. In general, all GSFC missions are required to comply with the GOLD Rules across a number of subsystems or to seek waivers to particular GOLD rules where compliance is not practical, either due to the risk posture of a mission or the cost and/or schedule associated with compliance. In thermal subsystems, GOLD Rules are applied to design margins throughout the project life cycle and include temperature margins, heater power margins, and two-phase transport margins. However, no explicit guidance is provided for two thermal design aspects: heater control authority (for stability requirements) and cryogenic design margins (which are often not reasonable to express in terms of temperatures). This can lead to ambiguity and inconsistency among projects when demonstrating GOLD Rules compliance. Two current GSFC projects, TIRS-2 (Thermal InfraRed Sensor 2) and WFIRST (Wide Field InfraRed Survey Telescope), are both missions with cryogenic aspects and active thermal control for stability. This paper seeks to outline the characterization of cryogenic margins during the design process for TIRS-2 and WFIRST as well as the project derived guidelines for heater control authority margin. This effort serves as potential first steps for updating the GOLD Rules to address these two areas in guiding thermal designs at GSFC.

Modeling↗
NASA NTRS2005

Formal Safety Certification of Aerospace Software

In principle, formal methods offer many advantages for aerospace software development: they can help to achieve ultra-high reliability, and they can be used to provide evidence of the reliability claims which can then be subjected to external scrutiny. However, despite years of research and many advances in the underlying formalisms of specification, semantics, and logic, formal methods are not much used in practice. In our opinion this is related to three major shortcomings. First, the application of formal methods is still expensive because they are labor- and knowledge-intensive. Second, they are difficult to scale up to complex systems because they are based on deep mathematical insights about the behavior of the systems (t.e., they rely on the "heroic proof"). Third, the proofs can be difficult to interpret, and typically stand in isolation from the original code. In this paper, we describe a tool for formally demonstrating safety-relevant aspects of aerospace software, which largely circumvents these problems. We focus on safely properties because it has been observed that safety violations such as out-of-bounds memory accesses or use of uninitialized variables constitute the majority of the errors found in the aerospace domain. In our approach, safety means that the program will not violate a set of rules that can range for the simple memory access rules to high-level flight rules. These different safety properties are formalized as different safety policies in Hoare logic, which are then used by a verification condition generator along with the code and logical annotations in order to derive formal safety conditions; these are then proven using an automated theorem prover. Our certification system is currently integrated into a model-based code generation toolset that generates the annotations together with the code. However, this automated formal certification technology is not exclusively constrained to our code generator and could, in principle, also be integrated with other code generators such as RealTime Workshop or even applied to legacy code. Our approach circumvents the historical problems with formal methods by increasing the degree of automation on all levels. The restriction to safety policies (as opposed to arbitrary functional behavior) results in simpler proof problems that can generally be solved by fully automatic theorem proves. An automated linking mechanism between the safety conditions and the code provides some of the traceability mandated by process standards such as DO-178B. An automated explanation mechanism uses semantic markup added by the verification condition generator to produce natural-language explanations of the safety conditions and thus supports their interpretation in relation to the code. It shows an automatically generated certification browser that lets users inspect the (generated) code along with the safety conditions (including textual explanations), and uses hyperlinks to automate tracing between the two levels. Here, the explanations reflect the logical structure of the safety obligation but the mechanism can in principle be customized using different sets of domain concepts. The interface also provides some limited control over the certification process itself. Our long-term goal is a seamless integration of certification, code generation, and manual coding that results in a "certified pipeline" in which specifications are automatically transformed into executable code, together with the supporting artifacts necessary for achieving and demonstrating the high level of assurance needed in the aerospace domain.

Denney, Ewen↗
NASA NTRS2007

Spaceflight Decompression Sickness Contingency Plan

A viewgraph presentation on the Decompression Sickness (DCS) Contingency Plan for manned spaceflight is shown. The topics include: 1) Approach; 2) DCS Contingency Plan Overview; 3) Extravehicular Activity (EVA) Cuff Classifications; 4) On-orbit Treatment Philosophy; 5) Long Form Malfunction Procedure (MAL); 6) Medical Checklist; 7) Flight Rules; 8) Crew Training; 9) Flight Surgeon / Biomedical Engineer (BME) Training; and 10) DCS Emergency Landing Site.

Dervay, Joseph P.↗
NASA NTRS1996

A System Concept for Facilitating User Preferences in En Route Airspace

The Federal Aviation Administration is trying to make its air traffic management system more responsive to the needs of the aviation community by exploring the concept of 'free flight' for aircraft flying under instrument flight rules. A logical first step toward free flight could be made without significantly altering current air traffic control (ATC) procedures or requiring new airborne equipment by designing a ground-based system to be highly responsive to 'user preference' in en route airspace while providing for an orderly transition to the terminal area. To facilitate user preference in all en route environments, a system based on an extension of the Center/TRACON Automation System (CTAS) is proposed in this document. The new system would consist of two integrated components. An airspace tool (AT) focuses on unconstrained en route aircraft (e.g., not transitioning to the terminal airspace), taking advantage of the relatively unconstrained nature of their flights and using long-range trajectory prediction to provide cost-effective conflict resolution advisories to sector controllers. A sector tool (ST) generates efficient advisories for all aircraft, with a focus on supporting controllers in analyzing and resolving complex, highly constrained traffic situations. When combined, the integrated AT/ST system supports user preference in any air route traffic control center sector. The system should also be useful in evaluating advanced free-flight concepts by serving as a test bed for future research. This document provides an overview of the design concept, explains its anticipated benefits, and recommends a development strategy that leads to a deployable system.

Vivona, R. A.↗
NASA NTRS2019

Detect-and-Avoid Alerting Performance for High-Speed UAS and Non-Cooperative Aircraft

This paper presents a set of experiments designed to assess the viability of using a smaller Detect and Avoid (DAA) volume for large Unmanned Aircraft Systems (UAS) when they are trying to remain well clear of non-cooperative visual flight rules (VFR) aircraft, in compliance with Federal regulations. The current DAA volume was defined for both cooperative and non-cooperative VFR traffic by the work of RTCA (Radio Technical Commission for Aeronautics) Special Committee 228 in 2017, in what is referred to in this paper as the Phase 1 standards. Subsequent work by the committee has been focused on enabling operations by smaller UAS that cannot carry the heavy radars required for the Phase 1 DAA Minimum Operational Performance Standards (MOPS). The work discussed in this paper will explore whether a Phase 1 UAS using a Phase 1 radar can use the reduced non-cooperative DAA alerting volume being studied for smaller, slower Phase 2 UAS without significantly degrading system safety. The study uses UAS models and background traffic from previous Phase 1 and Phase 2 research to run an unmitigated simulation that will examine alerting performance using different DAA well clear definitions. The primary metrics are also tied to the alerting performance of the DAA system, and include average alerting times, probabilities of missed and late alerts, and the probability of a near mid-air collision given a loss of "well clear," as defined by the DAA system. Results are expected to help RTCA make the determination whether or not the DAA well clear definition for Phase 1 UAS can be reduced for non-cooperative VFR aircraft.

UAS↗
NASA NTRS2004

Managing Risk to Ensure a Successful Cassini/Huygens Saturn Orbit Insertion (SOI)

I. Design: a) S/C designed to be largely single fault tolerant; b) Operate in flight demonstrated envelope, with margin; and c) Strict compliance with requirements & flight rules. II. Test: a) Baseline, fault & stress testing using flight system testbeds (H/W & S/W); b) In-flight checkout & demos to remove first time events. III. Failure Analysis: a) Critical event driven fault tree analysis; b) Risk mitigation & development of contingencies. IV) Residual Risks: a) Accepted pre-launch waivers to Single Point Failures; b) Unavoidable risks (e.g. natural disaster). V) Mission Assurance: a) Strict process for characterization of variances (ISAs, PFRs & Waivers; b) Full time Mission Assurance Manager reports to Program Manager: 1) Independent assessment of compliance with institutional standards; 2) Oversight & risk assessment of ISAs, PFRs & Waivers etc.; and 3) Risk Management Process facilitator.

risk managment↗
NASA NTRS2011

Flight Deck-Based Delegated Separation: Evaluation of an On-Board Interval Management System with Synthetic and Enhanced Vision Technology

An emerging Next Generation Air Transportation System concept - Equivalent Visual Operations (EVO) - can be achieved using an electronic means to provide sufficient visibility of the external world and other required flight references on flight deck displays that enable the safety, operational tempos, and visual flight rules (VFR)-like procedures for all weather conditions. Synthetic and enhanced flight vision system technologies are critical enabling technologies to EVO. Current research evaluated concepts for flight deck-based interval management (FIM) operations, integrated with Synthetic Vision and Enhanced Vision flight-deck displays and technologies. One concept involves delegated flight deck-based separation, in which the flight crews were paired with another aircraft and responsible for spacing and maintaining separation from the paired aircraft, termed, "equivalent visual separation." The operation required the flight crews to acquire and maintain an "equivalent visual contact" as well as to conduct manual landings in low-visibility conditions. The paper describes results that evaluated the concept of EVO delegated separation, including an off-nominal scenario in which the lead aircraft was not able to conform to the assigned spacing resulting in a loss of separation.

Prinzel, Lawrence J., III↗
NASA NTRS1979

Single pilot scanning behavior in simulated instrument flight

A simulation of tasks associated with single pilot general aviation flight under instrument flight rules was conducted as a baseline for future research studies on advanced flight controls and avionics. The tasks, ranging from simple climbs and turns to an instrument landing systems approach, were flown on a fixed base simulator. During the simulation the control inputs, state variables, and the pilots visual scan pattern including point of regard were measured and recorded.

Pennington, J. E.↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Detect and Avoid and Collision Avoidance Flight Test Results with ACAS Xr

In October 2023, the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) completed its Integration of Automated Systems flight test series, conducted under NASA’s Advanced Air Mobility project and in partnership with Sikorsky and the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA). The flight test effort included two crewed rotorcraft platforms. The first, a modified S-76B helicopter, served as the “ownship” for the duration of the flight test. The second vehicle, a modified S-70, served as the intruder aircraft. One Sikorsky pilot and one NASA test pilot was onboard each aircraft for every test point, with the NASA test pilot responsible for interacting with the research systems under test. Approximately half of the flight test was devoted to assessing the Federal Aviation Administration’s (FAA) next-generation collision avoidance system, the Airborne Collision Avoidance System X for Rotorcraft (ACAS Xr). The two configurations available within ACAS Xr – the Collision Avoidance System (CAS) configuration and the Detect and Avoid (DAA) configuration – were flown with an onboard pilot under Visual Flight Rules in controlled airspace over the Long Island Sound (Connecticut, USA). A total of 33 flight test cards were flown with ACAS Xr active. The ownship was equipped with ACAS Xr and the intruder was equipped with Automatic Dependent Surveillance-Broadcast (ADS-B). The test points were blocked by ACAS Xr configuration, with individual encounters varying the ownship speed (90 knots or 20 knots), the intruder designation (en-route, terminal area, or structured airspace), and method of RA execution (automated or manually executed). Results showed that the ACAS Xr alerting and guidance was largely effective and rated positively by the NASA test pilots, exemplified by zero instances of the pilots overriding an ACAS Xr Resolution Advisory (RA). Key areas of improvement, however, were noted, particularly with regards to the lack of an aural alert indicating a need to accelerate when receiving an RA at low speed and the occurrence of multiple RAs that the pilots found to be unacceptable.

detect and avoid↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

FT-01: Autonomous Helicopter Flight Testing Over Long Island Sound Special Session - Hazard Perception and Avoidance Tech Area

This presentation is included as part of a panel reporting on the Integration of Automated Systems (IAS) flight test series. The IAS series concluded in October 2023 and was conducted under NASA’s Advanced Air Mobility project and in partnership with Sikorsky and the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA). The flight test effort included two crewed rotorcraft platforms. The first, a modified S-76B helicopter, served as the “ownship” for the duration of the flight test. The second vehicle, a modified S-70, served as the intruder aircraft. One Sikorsky pilot and one NASA test pilot was onboard each aircraft for every test point, with the NASA test pilot responsible for interacting with the research systems under test. This portion of the panel presentation focuses on the results of the flight test that assessed the Federal Aviation Administration’s (FAA) next-generation collision avoidance system, the Airborne Collision Avoidance System X for Rotorcraft (ACAS Xr). The two configurations available within ACAS Xr – the Collision Avoidance System (CAS) configuration and the Detect and Avoid (DAA) configuration – were flown with an onboard pilot under Visual Flight Rules in controlled airspace over the Long Island Sound (Connecticut, USA). A total of 33 flight test cards were flown with ACAS Xr active. Results showed that the ACAS Xr alerting and guidance was largely effective and rated positively by the NASA test pilots, exemplified by zero instances of the pilots overriding an ACAS Xr Resolution Advisory (RA). Key areas of improvement, however, were noted, particularly with regards to the lack of an aural alert indicating a need to accelerate when receiving an RA at low speed and the occurrence of multiple RAs that the pilots found to be unacceptable.

detect and avoid↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Detect and Avoid and Collision Avoidance Flight Test Results with ACAS Xr

In October 2023, the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) completed its Integration of Automated Systems flight test series, conducted under NASA’s Advanced Air Mobility project and in partnership with Sikorsky and the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA). The flight test effort included two crewed rotorcraft platforms. The first, a modified S-76B helicopter, served as the “ownship” for the duration of the flight test. The second vehicle, a modified S-70, served as the intruder aircraft. One Sikorsky pilot and one NASA test pilot was onboard each aircraft for every test point, with the NASA test pilot responsible for interacting with the research systems under test. Approximately half of the flight test was devoted to assessing the Federal Aviation Administration’s (FAA) next-generation collision avoidance system, the Airborne Collision Avoidance System X for Rotorcraft (ACAS Xr). The two configurations available within ACAS Xr – the Collision Avoidance System (CAS) configuration and the Detect and Avoid (DAA) configuration – were flown with an onboard pilot under Visual Flight Rules in controlled airspace over the Long Island Sound (Connecticut, USA). A total of 33 flight test cards were flown with ACAS Xr active. The ownship was equipped with ACAS Xr and the intruder was equipped with Automatic Dependent Surveillance-Broadcast (ADS-B). The test points were blocked by ACAS Xr configuration, with individual encounters varying the ownship speed (90 knots or 20 knots), the intruder designation (en-route, terminal area, or structured airspace), and method of RA execution (automated or manually executed). Results showed that the ACAS Xr alerting and guidance was largely effective and rated positively by the NASA test pilots, exemplified by zero instances of the pilots overriding an ACAS Xr Resolution Advisory (RA). Key areas of improvement, however, were noted, particularly with regards to the lack of an aural alert indicating a need to accelerate when receiving an RA at low speed and the occurrence of multiple RAs that the pilots found to be unacceptable.

detect and avoid↗
NASA NTRS1997

Free Flight and Self-Separation from the Flight Deck Perspective

The concept of "free flight", while still being developed, is intended to emphasize more, flexibility for operators in the National Airspace System (NAS) by providing more separation responsibility to pilots, New technologies, procedures, and concepts have been suggested by the aviation community to enable this task; however, much work needs to be accomplished to help define and evaluate the concept feasibility. The purpose of this simulation was to begin examining some of the communication and procedural issues associated with self-separation in the enroute environment. A simulation demonstration was conducted in the Boeing 747-400 simulator at NASA Ames Research Center. Commercial pilots (from a U.S. domestic carrier) current on the B747-400 aircraft were the participants. Ten flight crews (10 captains, 10 first officers) flew in the Denver enroute airspace environment. A new alerting logic designed to allow for airborne self-separation was created for this demonstration. This logic assumes automatic dependent surveillance broadcast (ADS-B) capability and represented aircraft up to 120 nautical miles on the display. The new flight deck display features were designed and incorporated on the existing navigational display in the simulator to allow for increased traffic and maneuvering information to the flight crew. New tools were also provided to allow the crews to assess conflicts and potential maneuvers before implementing them. Each of the flight crews flew eight different scenarios in the Denver enroute airspace. The scenarios included eight to ten other aircraft, and each scenario was created with the intent of having one of the other aircraft become an operational conflict for our simulator aircraft. Different types of conflict geometries were represented across the eight scenarios. Also, some scenarios allowed for more time to detect a potential clearance, while others allowed for less time for'detection. Additionally, the crews were asked to a ply the Visual Flight Rules (VFR) right of way rules when determining who should maneuver in a conflict situation; therefore, the scenarios were designed to test different applications of those recommendations, Data analyses include an evaluation of crew procedures and communication. The application of the VFR right-of-way rules are being explored. Timing variables are being examined to determine potential efficiency differences between scenarios and conflict types. Proximity of aircraft will be assessed as one indication of the operational safety. The intent of these evaluations is to help provide definitions and guidelines of negotiation procedures in a self-separation environment assuming automated data link technology (ADS-B). Also, definitions of likely flight crew maneuvers and application to current VFR right-of-way rules may be obtained, along with guidelines for negotiation procedures between flight crews.

Lozito, Sandra↗
NASA NTRS1983

Primary separation between three aircraft using traffic displays

The use of a sophisticated traffic and map display termed electronic flight rules (EFR) by general aviation pilots for primary seperation in low density airspace is studied. The experimental flights were made under four conditions: with and without sensor noise in the traffic information and with and without communications for traffic coordination. Pilots were required to maintain two miles horizontal and 500 ft vertical separation from other aircraft for 24 different traffic situations repeated randomly for each of the four experimental conditions. Of 1152 aircraft encounters 12.8 percent were in violation of separation minimums. In general, the effects of sensor noise were minimal, communications affected some of the measures, and the group effect was quite significant. When pilots were able to communicate and coordinate their maneuvers, the time to resolve conflict was reduced.

Chappell, S. L.↗
NASA NTRS2003

XV-15 Tiltrotor Aircraft: 1999 Acoustic Testing - Test Report

An XV-15 acoustic test is discussed, and measured results are presented. The test was conducted by NASA Langley and Bell Helicopter Textron, Inc., during October 1999, at the BHTI test site near Waxahachie, Texas. As part of the NASA-sponsored Short Haul Civil Tiltrotor noise reduction initiative, this was the third in a series of three major XV-15 acoustic tests. Their purpose was to document the acoustic signature of the XV-15 tiltrotor aircraft for a variety of flight conditions and to minimize the noise signature during approach. Tradeoffs between flight procedures and the measured noise are presented to illustrate the noise abatement flight procedures. The test objectives were to support operation of future tiltrotors by further developing and demonstrating low-noise flight profiles, while maintaining acceptable handling and ride qualities, and refine approach profiles, selected from previous (1995 & 1997) tiltrotor testing, to incorporate Instrument Flight Rules (IFR), handling qualities constraints, operations and tradeoffs with sound. Primary emphasis was given to the approach flight conditions where blade-vortex interaction (BVI) noise dominates, because this condition influences community noise impact more than any other. An understanding of this part of the noise generating process could guide the development of low noise flight operations and increase the tiltrotor's acceptance in the community.

Edwards, Bryan D.↗
NASA NTRS2003

XV-15 Tiltrotor Aircraft: 1997 Acoustic Testing

XV-15 acoustic test is discussed, and measured results are presented. The test was conducted by NASA Langley and Bell Helicopter Textron, Inc., during June - July 1997, at the BHTI test site near Waxahachie, Texas. This was the second in a series of three XV-15 tests to document the acoustic signature of the XV-15 tiltrotor aircraft for a variety of flight conditions and minimize the noise signature during approach. Tradeoffs between flight procedures and the measured noise are presented to illustrate the noise abatement flight procedures. The test objectives were to: (1) support operation of future tiltrotors by further developing and demonstrating low-noise flight profiles, while maintaining acceptable handling and ride qualities, and (2) refine approach profiles, selected from previous (1995) tiltrotor testing, to incorporate Instrument Flight Rules (IFR), handling qualities constraints, operations and tradeoffs with sound. Primary emphasis was given to the approach flight conditions where blade-vortex interaction (BVI) noise dominates, because this condition influences community noise impact more than any other. An understanding of this part of the noise generating process could guide the development of low noise flight operations and increase the tiltrotor's acceptance in the community.

Edwards, Bryan D.↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

NASA Commercial Crew Program and Medical Operational Challenges

This abstract is submitted as part of the USSPACECOM Command Surgeon’s panel demonstrating the medical capabilities and challenges involved in human space flight support operations. BACKGROUND: NASA embarked on the Commercial Crew Program to launch astronauts into low-earth orbit from US soil and dock with the International Space Station (ISS). The eventual industry providers selected were SpaceX (SpX) and Boeing. These commercial transportation systems are vital to ensure crew availability on ISS for research and discovery. OVERVIEW: NASA/SpaceX Demo-2 (DM2) mission launched from the Kennedy Space Center in 2020 as the historic first crewed test-flight of the Crew Dragon spacecraft with two NASA Astronauts onboard. DM2 represented the first flight in 9-years from US soil since STS-135 in 2011. The 63-day mission ended with splashdown in the Gulf of Mexico, the first US water recovery in 45-years since Apollo-Soyuz. Validation of system hardware and operations allowed four-person crews to launch on subsequently missions (Crew-1, Crew-2, Crew-3, Crew-4, Crew-5 to date), which included International Partner crewmembers. DISCUSSION: A multitude of operational, training, medical, and technical issues needed to be addressed between NASA Medical Operations, the commercial provider SpaceX, and the Department of Defense. These included Flight rule development, occupant protection, pressurized suit testing, communication plans during mission phases, and emergency simulations for supporting Flight Surgeons and Biomedical Engineers. In providing crew experience with expected launch and entry G-force profile, Centrifuge training was established. Preventive health measures via the Health Stabilization Program were especially vital during the global COVID-19 pandemic. Unique aspects arise for SpX Dragon parachute splashdown and shipboard recovery operations in the Atlantic Ocean and Gulf of Mexico. The new Commercial Crew Program is indeed a wonderfully challenging and exciting era for human spaceflight.

Joseph Dervay↗