Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “Crewed”

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 145 records · Page 8

EVA Swab Kit: Tools and Techniques for Collecting Aseptic Samples from Crewed Space Missions

Introduction: When we send humans to search for life on other planets, we'll need to know what we brought with us versus what may already be there. To ensure our crewed spacecraft meet planetary protection requirements—and to protect our science from human contamination—we'll need to assess and verify whether micro-organisms may be leaking/venting from our spacesuits. This requires collecting samples under Extravehicular Activity (EVA) conditions. Detailed, systematic research on forward contamination from robotic spacecraft has been steadily progressing since the Viking missions, but systematic studies of contamination from space suits has not been conducted in many years. The modern EMU (Extravehicular Mobility Unit) suit used by NASA is designed to leak at rates as high as 100 cc/min. Before humans land on Mars there is a critical need to understand the types and quantities of microbes that could be introduced via space suits. The Human Forward Contamination Assessment team at NASA’s Johnson Space Center (JSC) has developed a prototype EVA swab tool [1,2,3,4] designed for use in space to sample cleaned and uncleaned space suits to determine the present day microbial load and eventually the rate of leakage. The ability to assess microbial leakage early in advanced space suit and life support system design cycles will help avoid costly hardware redesign later. Test Objectives: The primary objective of EMU testing was to characterize the type of micro-organisms typically found on or near selected suit pressure joints under suit differential pressure conditions. Most human-borne microbes can fit through a 0.5 to 1.0 µm gap. Knowing which joints are more likely to leak will inform hardware design decisions. Knowing which types of micro-organisms may leak from EVA suits provides a basis for subsequent studies to characterize the viability of those organisms under destination conditions, as well as how far they might spread through natural or human-influenced processes. That data, in turn, will inform exploration mission operations and hardware design. The secondary objective of testing was to evaluate the interface between a fully suited test subject and the EVA swab tool at vacuum. Bulky EVA suits can restrict movement and limit visibility through the helmet visor. Fully suited testing is important for identifying tool design issues prior to flight. At exploration destinations, such as Mars, suited crew may be required to periodically sample their suits as part of an environmental monitoring protocol. Suit Microbial Sampling Results: This report details results of microbial swabs collected from current flight suit configurations worn by crew members assigned to upcoming ISS expedition missions as well as swabs collected from prototype suits intended for use on the Orion spacecraft. These tests were intended to characterize the types of contaminants found on flight suits under current, typical handling conditions. No attempt was made to change suit handling procedures, provide additional sterilization, or to limit typical potential contaminant sources. Using culture based techniques, we cultivated 235 CFU (colony forming units) comprised of 26 bacterial species and one fungal species on the outside of the suits. The fungal species and 14 of the bacterial species were unique to the suit surfaces and were not detected in any of the background samples collected within the chambers. We sequenced 755,434 ribosomal fragments on all of the suit surfaces from swab samples. 557,016 of these sequences represent DNA that survived at least 4 hours at vacuum. These sequences formed 2,464 OTU's (Operational Taxonomic Units, 97% similarity) showing low diversity in the samples. The most abundant sequences that survived vacuum belong to the genera Staphyloccocus, Ralstona, Bacillus and Rhodobacter all of which are common to the human microbiome. [5] See Danko et al., (2021) for more complete details of these first analyses. Further analysis of EVA suit materials with respect to the efficacy of various cleaning protocols and engineered containment solutions is planned to inform suit design for NASA’s Artemis Moon to Mars program crew testing. Swab Tool Function Results: The kit was demonstrated for fit and function in suited subject vacuum tests to determine how well the tool worked as an aseptic microbial sampling device as well as to identify any design elements that could be upgraded for EVA task specific improvement. It was found that sample acquisition efficacy could be enhanced by redesign of the sample canister to end-effector interface. Several modifications of the sample caddy assemblies to optimize EVA safety and functionality were also identified. Consequently, fabrication of the redesigned sample canister to end-effector assembly interfaces and and the sample caddy assemblies are required. Fabrication of sixteen flight sample canister assemblies (8 per each of two EVA Swab Kits) and two sample caddy assemblies are in process to be followed by hardware testing and certification to produce two flight-certified EVA Swab Kits for transport to ISS no earlier than summer of 2022. Sampling Strategy: The International Space Station is an ideal testbed for systematic studies of contamination from crewed vehicles since it has been continuously occupied for 20 years and exposed to non-terrestrial conditions. We will sample the exterior of the ISS during EVA using a purpose-built swab tool capable of maintaining sterility while undergoing temperature changes from -151 to +121°C under hard vacuum. Prior to each EVA, the project team will work with ISS mission managers to identify precise sampling locations, which will vary by EVA based on the translation paths and worksites scheduled for that particular EVA. Ideally, translation path handrails and areas near ECLSS (Environmental Control and Life Support System) external vent openings on a spacecraft would be assessed. There are currently more than a dozen ECLSS external vents on the ISS. Some are connected to systems that vent waste products, while others are intended to equalize cabin pressure. As EVA opportunity allows, microbial samples from any of these external vents would provide a valuable data point, though some will be more useful than others. Four criteria have been identified to help prioritize sampling sites near vents: • EVA Accessibility: To minimize cost, it is desired to piggy-back onto a planned EVA. Therefore, the sampling location must be readily accessible by an EVA crew • Type of Vented Products: Vent products that have been in direct contact with crew, such as cabin air, are more likely to contain microorganisms than vent products associated with isolated systems, such as experiment module combustion products. • Mass of Vented Products: Higher-flow vents are more likely to contain detectible levels of microbial contaminants than lower-flow vents. • Local Environment: Sample locations with relatively benign local conditions, such as warm surfaces shielded from direct ultraviolet (UV) radiation exposure, may be more likely to support microbial growth than locations with harsher local environmental conditions. Because EVA accessibility is the most important criteria, the proposal team worked with an astronaut and flight controllers using the Dynamic Onboard Ubiquitous Graphics (DOUG) tool. The DOUG virtual environment allows an operator to “fly” around the current ISS vehicle configuration to assess EVA translation paths, attach points, and keep-out zones. While analysis on station or rapid return to Earth would be preferable, samples collected from the exterior of the ISS have already been exposed to temperature variations between -157 and +121 °C as well as hard vacuum. Therefore, they should be fairly stable and robust. We hypothesize that samples collected from the ISS exterior could be stored for up to 6 months at -80°C without degradation. Sample canisters will be returned to Earth while frozen at -80°C for analysis, and sterilized canisters can be re-flown back to ISS to support additional sampling opportunities Relevance to NASA Exploration Objectives: These data will allow us to identify new or improved methods, technologies, and procedures for spacecraft sterilization and leakage mitigation to minimize the amount of contamination introduced to the environment by human explorers. This work is funded by NASA research grant: NNH18ZDA001N-PPR References: [1] Bell, M.S. et al. (2015) LPS XLVI, Abst. #1832 [2] Rucker et al. (2018) 42nd COSPAR (PPP.3) [3] Bell, M.S. et al. (2019) Mars Extant Life Conference, Abst. #5096.[4] Bell, M.S. et al., (2020) 43rd COSPAR (BO.2).[5] Danko D, et.al.,(2021)Front.Microbiol.12:608478.

Mary Suzanne Bell↗

ISS External Microorganisms: A Payload to Close Planetary Protection Knowledge Gaps for Crewed Missions

Before NASA or COSPAR is able to set planetary protection requirements for crewed missions to locations like Mars there are a number of critical knowledge gaps that must be addressed (1). One of the most important knowledge gaps is an understanding of microbial leakage from crewed habitats and space suits. Current ECLSS (Environmental Control and Life Support System) and PLSS (Portable Life Support System) requirements do not include any provisions to control microbes that may escape along with vented or leaked gasses. The current generation of NASA space suits can leak at rates as high as 100 cm2 /min. during nominal operation (2). ISS (International Space Station) intentionally vents atmospheric gases like CO2 to maintain habitable conditions for the crew. Furthermore, every time an airlock is used for EVA (extravehicular activity)there is an accompanying release of internal atmosphere. Since it is not possible to sterilize a crewed mission, it is important that we understand what if any microbes are entrained in these vented and leaked products. It is also important to understand if these microbes can survive on exterior surfaces. Recent sampling of the Russian segments of ISS suggest that bacteria and fungi from inside ISS may be capable of surviving on external surfaces(3). NASA is developing an aseptic sampling tool for use during EVA and plans to collect samples from vents on ISS to build on these results. The results of this work will be used to develop planetary protection requirements for vented and leaked gasses from crewed volumes. NASA has developed and tested a tool kit for collecting microbiological samples during EVA(4). This tool kit contains eight commercially available, 23 mm. diameter, foam swabs that can be used to aseptically collect samples while at vacuum. The swabs are individually housed in aluminum canisters that are equipped with 0.2 μm Teflon filters. These filters allow the canisters to equilibrate to pressure changes while preventing microbiological contamination. The canisters will be cleaned and sterilized before flight. Results from ground-based testing indicate that this tool kit is capable of aseptically collecting microbes while at vacuum without becoming contaminated during pressure changes(5). Based on the results of this ground testing we have modified the tool kit to meet NASA safety requirements and improve the ergonomics. We added additional mounting points to the tool kit to give astronauts more options for securing it during use. We also changed the opening mechanism to improve the precision with which swabs can be extracted from the tool kit. We plan to use this kit on an upcoming EVA to collect samples from non-propulsive vents and areas near the U.S. airlock on ISS. These samples will be frozen at -80 ̊C and stored on station until they can be returned to Earth. We will analyze these returned samples using next generation DNA sequencing to determine the community composition and function of external ISS environments. The results of this study will close planetary protection knowledge gaps for crewed missions and will help NASA determine appropriate planetary protection requirements for life support systems. The tool kit will also be useful for collecting aseptic samples on upcoming crewed or robotic missions and could easily be modified to collect samples with organic contamination control requirements as well.

A B Regberg↗

A Compact Electron-Proton Spectrometer for Moon / Mars Surface Space Weather Monitoring and Crew Protection (CEPS)

Small mass/low-power sensors are needed for autonomous Moon/Mars surface ops that provide alerts to impending adverse space weather conditions. In order to use current operational forecasting tools, a sensor capable of measuring both high-energy electrons and protons is needed. By combining high-TRL Timepix technology with a CdTe layer, this project leverages known technology to fill a critical gap for surface operations. Typical space weather sensors are at least an order of magnitude higher in mass than is expected from Timepix-based devices and are deployed on robotic assets away from human crews. High fidelity measurements at the crew location and subsequent ability are needed to provide warnings to crews to shelter with a device that can easily be carried on the Lunar and Martian surfaces.​ The aim of this project is the development of compact, low power space weather sensors for crew protection based on the combination of AES flight heritage Timepix hardware with novel CdTe (Cadmium Telluride) sensors. CdTe technology has only recently matured to a point where it can be reliably used with Timepix detectors. These detectors will be able to measure electron spectra in an energy range relevant to the RELEASE model, which is used operationally by NASA to provide crew early warning of Solar Energetic Particle Events as well as protons in the energy ranges relevant to human health allowing for event ‘nowcasting’ and total event crew dose prediction. Compared to existing solutions these detectors will be compact enough to travel with crew, providing a significant advantage to space environment situation awareness. Project results indicate that CdTe-based Timepix sensors respond well to energetic electrons, and particle tracks are sufficiently distinct to be able to measure in a mixed radiation field. Thermal testing results point to a needed design modification to mitigate high temperatures the detector will see in space. Radiation susceptibility testing was conducted to assess the radiation hardness of the CdTe-Timepix assembly. Overall, the assembly continued to operate up to 100 kRad of gamma-ray exposure. The system calibration did show drift over time but recovered once exposure was complete.

Dan James Fry↗

NASA Engineering and Safety Center Technical Bulletin No. 23-02: Safety Considerations when Repurposing Commercially Available Flight Termination Systems from Uncrewed to Crewed Launch Vehicles

Both uncrewed and crewed launch vehicles (LV) require Flight Termination Systems (FTS) for Range Safety to protect the public and ground assets in the event of a LV failure. Flight crew safety in this context is an added consideration for human spaceflight. The FTS is an electroexplosive system that activates destruct charges to rupture propellant tanks and shutdown engines during flight termination. Commercially available FTS units have been developed for uncrewed applications and are now being repurposed to crewed applications. A consequence of using these systems is that they are designed for public and ground crew safety, though inadequate for flight crew safety. Missing are Human Space Flight (HSF) design controls for inadvertent activation during crewed ascent and protection for crew emergency abort.

Flight Termination Systems↗

Crew State and Risk Model Development to Predict Hydration Status During Extravehicular Activity Training Events

Introduction: Hydration is critical for optimal human health and performance and dehydration can lead to impaired cardiovascular function, thermal dysregulation, decreased blood plasma volume, and cognitive impacts, particularly during physical activity. Prolonged and repeated extravehicular activities (EVA) without sufficiently available drinking water may increase risk for dehydration, which could impair crew health and impact mission success. Understanding hydration needs and potential effects on health and performance are necessary to optimize crew well-being and enable successful EVA objectives. This study aims to develop a model of hydration status during EVA using water balance techniques. Methods: Water balance measures were collected on 15 healthy astronauts who performed ≈6-hour simulated microgravity extravehicular activity (EVA) training in the NASA Neutral Buoyancy Laboratory (NBL). Data collected included pre-and post-EVA nude body weight (BW), maximum absorption garment (MAG) weight, Disposable In-suit Drink Bag (DIDB) weight, urine specific gravity (USG), and extra pre-EVA intake (W). Variables were combined to create the water balance model as pre-EVA (Hn)= BWn+ MAGn+ DIDBn+ Wnand post EVA (Hn+1) = BWn+1+ MAGn+1+ DIDBn+1. Urine specific gravity values were used to refine water balance measures into hydration categories: Hydrated, Marginally Hydrated, and Dehydrated. Results: Pre-EVA modeling indicated53% of crew were hydrated, 20% were marginally hydrated, and 27% were dehydrated. Alternately, Hn+1 showed 13% of crew remained hydrated, 47% were marginally hydrated, and 40% were dehydrated at the end of the EVA. Furthermore, 75% of the crewmembers who started sufficiently hydrated finished the run marginally hydrated or dehydrated. According to USG indices presented by Casa and Lawrence, et al. (2000), only 25% of the crew started and remained hydrated throughout the EVA, and those who were dehydrated at the outset stayed dehydrated. Conclusion: Model outcomes assessing hydration status during 6-hour simulated microgravity EVAs demonstrate the necessity to further address hydration requirements for optimal human performance during spaceflight and EVA. This study enables additional baseline development of the Crew State and Risk Model Hydration, Nutrition, and Waste Management component that aims to provide individualized crew state and risk predictions during EVAs. Reference: Casa, D. J., Armstrong, L. E., et al. (2000). National Athletic Trainers’ Association Position Statement: Fluid Replacement for Athletes. Journal of Athletic Training, 35:212-224.

L Cooper↗

Crew Health and Performance Integrated Data System Platform Project Updates

Future human exploration missions introduce a new paradigm as crews move further from the resupply and near real-time ground support typical of Low Earth Orbit missions today. Without immediate support from ground-based personnel, exploration crews will be more reliant on inflight data and technology to respond to emergencies and anomalies. Today, in-flight data is often siloed, unsynchronized, and largely inaccessible in real time. Many data sets require manual entry and/or data transfer between vehicles and the ground. These issues contribute to risks in supporting crew autonomy for future exploration missions. An integrated data system platform is needed to mitigate these risks by supporting a new generation of technologies and employing advanced analytical and predictive modeling techniques to enable crew autonomy for future exploration missions. The Crew Health and Performance Integrated Data System Platform (CHP-IDSP) project is laying a foundation for future in-flight informatics by providing a back-end architecture for collecting, storing, and integrating multiple sources of data generated by and around the crew. This cohesive integration point will streamline the management of CHP data (e.g., environmental, exercise, medical, sleep, performance, etc.) and facilitate situation awareness and decision support required by the crew and remote support of exploration missions. This presentation will describe the ongoing development effort of the path-to-flight CHP-IDSP software and the demonstration of its core capabilities. This includes a brief history of the project, the human-centered process used to identify data needs and workflows feeding the development of scenarios and requirements, and current subsystem development status. Current integrations, including the Chiron exploration electronic health record application, will be discussed. Future work includes collaboration with additional CHP domains and a flight technology demonstration.

Data integration↗

A Crew Seat for Human Exploration in Multiple Gravity Environments

This work attempts to develop a single crew seating solution that is applicable across a range of gravity environments encountered by spacecraft proposed in several conceptual spacecraft architectures. All of these spacecraft will need to provide some sort of stationary accommodation for the crew for performing various activities such as work in science laboratories, maintenance and repair facilities, medical care facilities, and spacecraft operations centers, as well as for basic habitation in crew quarters, entertainment / relaxation facilities, and crew dining facilities. Depending on the spacecraft or architecture, this stationary accommodation may be experienced continuously in microgravity, such as would be the case for the Deep Space Exploration Vehicle. Alternately, it could be in continuous lunar or Martian gravity, such as the Common Habitat base camps. It could experience fractional gravity, such as a Pressurized Rover for In-Space Missions at a Near Earth Asteroid or one of the Martian moons. It could alternate between artificial gravity and microgravity, such as the Nautilus-X. It could alternate between microgravity and lunar or Martian gravity, such as the SpaceX Starship Human Landing System or the Blue Origin Blue Moon Block 2 Human Landing System. Or it could be in continuous Earth gravity, such as ground trainer systems. Prior human spaceflight systems for stationary accommodation have been focused on microgravity applications. These systems have their own limitations and cannot be used in a gravity environment. A public crowdsourcing campaign generated dozens of ideas, which ultimately generated a Gecko Mobility Aids system for crew translation and the Multi-Gravity Crew Seat (MGCS) for stationary accommodation. The MGCS functions in gravity as a traditional terrestrial seat, performing functions of load for the overall body and forearms, as well as head and neck load relief while positioning the body within range of an intended task. In microgravity, the MGCS functions as a body restraint, securing the body against inadvertent drifting by applying a restraining pressure at the front and back of the thighs, shoulders, and back. The initial MGCS concept was developed in a NASA hackathon and was refined through a review of dozens of terrestrial seating styles. Additionally, a review of anthropometry and biomechanics data related to the neutral body posture was conducted to help inform the microgravity configuration of the MGCS. A series of CAD models were iteratively developed, with subject matter expert reviews leading to design improvements. A scale model was constructed and used with a humanoid model to demonstrate MGCS accommodation of a human-like body in both gravity and microgravity modes. Work to develop a full-scale protype of the MGCS is discussed, including design and fabrication of the headrest, arm rest, seat back, seat pan, seat base, and the conversion mechanisms. A 1-g human-in-the-loop evaluation of the prototype assessed the acceptability of performing seated activities in the MGCS, collecting data on the usability, comfort, and ease of ingress/egress. Based on the evaluation results, design modifications needed for reduced gravity testing are documented and initial work is indicated for a reduced gravity test plan.

Restraints and Mobility Aids↗

ISS Crew Transportation and Services Requirements Document

Under the guidance of processes provided by Crew Transportation Plan (CCT-PLN-1100), this document with its sister documents, Crew Transportation Technical Management Processes (CCT-PLN-1120), Crew Transportation Technical Standards and Design Evaluation Criteria (CCT-STD-1140), and Crew Transportation Operations Standards (CCT-STD-1150), and International Space Station (ISS) to Commercial Orbital Transportation Services Interface Requirements Document (SSP 50808), provides the basis for a National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) certification for services to the ISS for the Commercial Provider. When NASA Crew Transportation System (CTS) certification is achieved for ISS transportation, the Commercial Provider will be eligible to provide services to and from the ISS during the services phase of the NASA Commercial Crew Program (CCP).

Commercial Crew Program↗

Human Factors Considerations for Pressurized Crew Transfer Between Ascent or Lander Spacecraft and Surface Assets

An option for pressurized crew transfer between surface assets and lander or ascent spacecraft offers multiple advantages. The most important are the loss of life risks due to crew member injuries or surface spacesuit failures. However, even in nominal scenarios pressurized crew transfer is advantageous, protecting lander and ascent spacecraft as well as launch and entry spacesuits from dust exposure and aiding in adaptation to gravity following prolonged periods of microgravity. Several examples of lunar and Mars lander or ascent spacecraft have been released publicly and can serve as examples of the range of potential vehicles that may benefit from pressurized crew transfer. There are also examples of surface assets that can be used to provide crew transfer, including both current surface mobility or crew transfer concepts and terrestrial examples that could be adapted to use on the Moon or Mars. In all cases, the resulting passageway must be acceptable for use and protected from itself experiencing dust contamination. Key design considerations will be discussed.

Artemis↗

NASA Support for Commercial Crew Launch Capabilities

Since the earliest days of U.S. human spaceflight, NASA’s Marshall Space Flight Center in Huntsville, Alabama, has played a key role in American crew launch capability, from engineering support for the first Mercury-Redstone launches, to the Saturn launches to the Moon, through Shuttle and now Artemis. Today, Marshall brings that expertise gained through decades of crewed space launches to NASA’s Commercial Crew Program (CCP), providing launch vehicle engineering and programmatic support. The team’s responsibilities have included human certification of commercial launch systems for the CCP missions, including Atlas V and Falcon 9, and verifying each launch vehicle complies with flight certification. MSFC provides expertise in nearly all aspects of launch vehicle design and performance including solid motors and liquid engines, stage propulsion, thrust vector control, structural and dynamics, safety and mission assurance. During each commercial crew launch, an engineering support team is on console at Marshall’s Huntsville Operations Support Center, which has provided launch operations support since Apollo, providing real-time oversight to safety standards for the vehicle and verifying data. Launch vehicle support for Commercial Crew has come as a paradigm shift for the MSFC team, inspiring new approaches that leverage expertise and best practices from past NASA-developed launch vehicle missions, while at the same time providing new synergies from work with commercial partners on CCP. This paper will explore the role that the Marshall launch vehicle services team plays in the Commercial Crew Program, as well as lessons learned from the program that will continue to benefit a new era of spaceflight partnerships.

Commercial Crew↗

Crew Health and Performance Integrated Data Architecture Project Update

Future Human Exploration missions will face new constraints as crews move further from terrestrial communication, resupply, and the real-time support enjoyed by Low Earth Orbit missions today. Exploration crews will need to be more self-reliant and able to respond to emergencies without immediate support from ground-based personnel. A new generation of technologies, employing advanced analytical and predictive modeling techniques, is needed to assist the crew’s work, help maintain their health, and inform the decisions they make on these future Exploration missions. The Crew Health and Performance Integrated Data Architecture (CHP-IDA) project is laying a foundation for these future technologies by integrating sources of data generated by and around the crew then providing them though common data models and Application Programming Interfaces to external systems. The combined data model makes comprehensive Crew Health and Performance data accessible and more meaningful to the decision-making process. This presentation will describe the currently ongoing effort to develop a path-to-flight concept of the CHP-IDA software, current integrations that have been developed, updates to the architecture, and examples of the corresponding exploration scenarios in which CHP-IDA would be used.

Exploration↗

Humans to Mars, But How Many? Using Training Qualification Modeling to Inform Number of Crew

Missions to Mars will differ from all previous human spaceflight missions in that the crew of astronauts will be required to operate in an Earth-independent manner due to the long communication delays, making the decision on crew size critical to mission success. To support National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) decision makers, NASA’s Engineering and Safety Center (NESC) developed a quantitative methodology for assessing the number of crew necessary to meet primary mission objectives and respond to unforeseen failures based on modeling of NASA’s crew training qualifications. We present results of a custom-built model of a Mars crew qualification and responsibility matrix (CQRM) and discuss the implications on trade space analysis of Mars mission crew size.

Mars↗

Humans to Mars, But How Many? Using Training Qualifications Modeling to Inform Number of Crew

Missions to Mars will differ from all previous human spaceflight missions in that the crew of astronauts will be required to operate in an Earth-independent manner due to the long communication delays, making the decision on crew size critical to mission success. To support National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) decision makers, NASA’s Engineering and Safety Center (NESC) developed a quantitative methodology for assessing the number of crew necessary to meet primary mission objectives and respond to unforeseen failures based on modeling of NASA’s crew training qualifications. We present results of a custom-built model of a Mars crew qualification and responsibility matrix (CQRM) and discuss the implications on trade space analysis of Mars mission crew size.

Mars↗

Crew Autonomy Through Self-Scheduling: Operational Characterization

NASA’s future long-duration exploration missions (LDEMs) will encounter increasing communication transmission delays as they move farther from Earth-based ground stations. This necessitates a new approach, as crews can no longer rely on real-time support from ground planners and must self-schedule their own operational timelines effectively and efficiently. To enable this transition, our team has developed Playbook, a mission planning and scheduling tool. Our research focuses on quantifying scheduling performance using Playbook to inform the design and development of future features to streamline timeline creation. We also aim to propose standards and guidelines for autonomous crews in LDEMs. In the past year, we have focused on further validating and quantifying the effects of countermeasure aids on self-scheduling performance. There are two software aids in Playbook (self-scheduling platform): Suggested Fixes, which propose an edit to resolve violations within a timeline, and No-Go Zones, which highlight where activities should not be scheduled on a timeline. We have made significant progress in HERA Campaign 7 (C7) data collection, increasing the number of days crew must self-schedule from 4 to 8. As a result, almost 20% of the mission is self-scheduled by the analog astronauts. We have also started data collection on a controlled lab experiment designed to quantify performance effects due to the countermeasures. We expect to present the preliminary results from both efforts. Finally, we have conducted an exploratory analysis of NASA’s HERA Campaign 6 (C6), investigating the mission-level impacts of self-scheduling. We derived basic patterns and descriptive statistics to better characterize crew autonomy through self-scheduling. We also assessed if there are any individual indicators of preference for self-scheduling, such as experience or predilection for autonomy. Preliminary analysis indicates that the HERA C6 crew self-scheduled one out of four flexible activities, indicating unprompted adoption of self-scheduling as a concept of operation for crew autonomy.

analog↗

Payload crew activity planning integration. Task 2: Inflight operations and training for payloads

The primary objectives of the Payload Crew Activity Planning Integration task were to: (1) Determine feasible, cost-effective payload crew activity planning integration methods. (2) Develop an implementation plan and guidelines for payload crew activity plan (CAP) integration between the JSC Orbiter planners and the Payload Centers. Subtask objectives and study activities were defined as: (1) Determine Crew Activity Planning Interfaces. (2) Determine Crew Activity Plan Type and Content. (3) Evaluate Automated Scheduling Tools. (4) Develop a draft Implementation Plan for Crew Activity Planning Integration. The basic guidelines were to develop a plan applicable to the Shuttle operations timeframe, utilize existing center resources and expertise as much as possible, and minimize unnecessary data exchange not directly productive in the development of the end-product timelines.

Hitz, F. R.↗

Investigation of crew performance in a multi-vehicle supervisory control task

Crew information processing and decision making in a supervisory control task which is loosely based on the mission of future generation helicopters is measured and represented. Subjects control the motion and activities of their own vehicle and direct the activities of four additional craft. The task involves searching an uncertain environment for cargo and enemies, returning cargo to home base and destroying enemies while attempting to avoid destruction of the scout and the supervised vehicles. A series of experiments with two-person crews and one-person crews were performed. Resulting crew performance was modeled with the objective of describing and understanding the information processing strategies utilized. Of particular interest are problem simplification strategies under time stress and high work load, simplification and compensation in the one-person cases, crew coordination in the two-person cases, and the relationship between strategy and errors in all cases. The results should provide some insight into the effective use of aids, particularly aids based on artificial intelligence, for similar tasks. The simulation is described which is used for the study and some preliminary results from the first two-person crew study are discussed.

Miller, R. A.↗

Aerospace crew station design

Consideration is given to spacecraft cockpits and work stations, commercial aircraft cockpits and crew stations, high performance aircraft cockpits and crew stations, and space stations and habitat crew stations. Particular attention is given to an historical review of NASA manned spacecraft crew stations, ESA spacelab crew stations, the evolution of commercial aircraft flight station design, Boeing 757/767 flight deck, a historical review of Concorde flight deck design, trends in the cockpit design of new European fighters, and state-of-the-art applications for Space Station crew interface design.

Carr, Gerald P.↗

LOFT Debriefings: An Analysis of Instructor Techniques and Crew Participation

This study analyzes techniques instructors use to facilitate crew analysis and evaluation of their Line-Oriented Flight Training (LOFT) performance. A rating instrument called the Debriefing Assessment Battery (DAB) was developed which enables raters to reliably assess instructor facilitation techniques and characterize crew participation. Thirty-six debriefing sessions conducted at five U.S. airlines were analyzed to determine the nature of instructor facilitation and crew participation. Ratings obtained using the DAB corresponded closely with descriptive measures of instructor and crew performance. The data provide empirical evidence that facilitation can be an effective tool for increasing the depth of crew participation and self-analysis of CRM performance. Instructor facilitation skill varied dramatically, suggesting a need for more concrete hands-on training in facilitation techniques. Crews were responsive but fell short of actively leading their own debriefings. Ways to improve debriefing effectiveness are suggested.

Dismukes, R. Key↗