AM Basic Personnel Certificate Program –Basic Training Course: Module 7, Qualification and Certification
No abstract available
Wells, Douglas N.↗
SEARCH · Search NASA
Results for “PERSONNEL”
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.
Training Lessons on Human Systems Integration for Flight Operations Personnel
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Jackelynne Silva-Martinez↗
Can we increase the time of useful consciousness in personnel exposed to Hypoxia?
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Robert W Sanders↗
Quality Assurance Leadership Strategy: Predictive Capability to Meet Cost, Personnel, and Schedule-Constrained Program Environment
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Jeannette Plante↗
Kennedy Space Center processing of Shuttle small payloads
There are many steps involved in preparing a payload for a mission into space on the Space Shuttle. Operations at the John F. Kennedy Space Center (KSC) are the last of those steps for the hardware before the payload is launched. To assure a successful and efficient KSC processing flow, a great deal of planning between the Robert H. Goddard Space Flight Center (GSFC) and KSC personnel is required before the payload arrives at KSC. After arrival, pre-flight operations occur between payload personnel, GSFC personnel, and KSC personnel for integration of the payload into its carrier (if required), in preparation for installation into a Orbiter. Once installed into an Orbiter, final test(s), checkout, and close-out of the payload is performed by GSFC and KSC personnel before launch. Mission support varies depending on the payload flying, but once the mission is complete and the Orbiter has returned to KSC, post-flight operations begin. This usually involves a reverse flow of the pre-flight operations. KSC operations conclude when the payload, its ground support equipment (GSE), and personnel depart KSC. A list of lessons learned is generated at the end of each payload flow, to avoid repeating the same mistakes (if any) for the next payload or for multiple repeat flights of the same payload. Always monitored are planned changes that may affect the payloads, GSE, KSC facilities, payload personnel, GSFC personnel, and/or KSC personnel.
Haddad, Michael E.↗
Support of NASA quality requirements by defense contract administration services regions
Defense Contract Administration Services Regions (DCASR) quality assurance personnel performing under NASA Letters of Delegation must work closely with the assigned technical representative of the NASA centers. It is realized that technical personnel from the NASA Centers cannot make on-site visits as frequently as they would like to. However, DCASR quality assurance personnel would know the assigned NASA technical representative and should contact him when problems arise. The technical representative is the expert on the hardware and should be consulted on any problem area. It is important that the DCASR quality assurance personnel recommend to the delegating NASA Center any new or improved methods of which they may be aware which would assist in achieving the desired quality and reliability in NASA hardware. NASA expects assignment of competent personnel in the Quality Assurance functional area and is not only buying the individual's technical skill, but also his experience. Suggestions by field personnel can many times up-grade the quality or the hardware.
Farrar, Hiram D.↗
Upward Mobility Program Handbook
This handbook contains the policy and program objectives of the NASA Upward Mobility Program. In addition it gives guidance regarding program planning, implementation, and evaluation and also describes the roles and responsibilities of key personnel responsible for the successful implementation of the program. The Federal Personnel Manual Chapter 720 explains the Federal Government's policy on upward mobility and is available from the installation personnel office upon request. This handbook is applicable to all NASA installations. Unless specifically limited, all responsibilities set forth in this plan for the Installation Personnel Director may be administered wholly or in part by the Personnel Director's designee. This handbook will be revised by page changes.
Source record↗
A general-purpose development environment for intelligent computer-aided training systems
Space station training will be a major task, requiring the creation of large numbers of simulation-based training systems for crew, flight controllers, and ground-based support personnel. Given the long duration of space station missions and the large number of activities supported by the space station, the extension of space shuttle training methods to space station training may prove to be impractical. The application of artificial intelligence technology to simulation training can provide the ability to deliver individualized training to large numbers of personnel in a distributed workstation environment. The principal objective of this project is the creation of a software development environment which can be used to build intelligent training systems for procedural tasks associated with the operation of the space station. Current NASA Johnson Space Center projects and joint projects with other NASA operational centers will result in specific training systems for existing space shuttle crew, ground support personnel, and flight controller tasks. Concurrently with the creation of these systems, a general-purpose development environment for intelligent computer-aided training systems will be built. Such an environment would permit the rapid production, delivery, and evolution of training systems for space station crew, flight controllers, and other support personnel. The widespread use of such systems will serve to preserve task and training expertise, support the training of many personnel in a distributed manner, and ensure the uniformity and verifiability of training experiences. As a result, significant reductions in training costs can be realized while safety and the probability of mission success can be enhanced.
Savely, Robert T.↗
The Transition from Spacecraft Development Ot Flight Operation: Human Factor Considerations
In the field of aeronautics and astronautics, a paradigm shift has been witnessed by those in academia, research and development, and private industry. Long development life cycles and the budgets to support such programs and projects has given way to aggressive task schedules and leaner resources to draw from all the while challenging assigned individuals to create and produce improved products of processes. however, this "faster, better, cheaper" concept cannot merely be applied to the design, development, and test of complex systems such as earth-orbiting of interplanetary robotic spacecraft. Full advantage is not possible without due consideration and application to mission operations planning and flight operations, Equally as important as the flight system, the mission operations system consisting of qualified personnel, ground hardware and software tools, and verified and validated operational processes, should also be regarded as a complex system requiring personnel to draw upon formal education, training, related experiences, and heuristic reasoning in engineering an effective and efficient system. Unquestionably, qualified personnel are the most important elements of a mission operations system. This paper examines the experiences of the Deep Space I Project, the first in a series of new technology in-flight validation missions sponsored by the United States National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA), specifically, in developing a subsystems analysis and technology validation team comprised of former spacecraft development personnel. Human factor considerations are investigated from initial concept/vision formulation; through operational process development; personnel test and training; to initial uplink product development and test support. Emphasis has been placed on challenges and applied or recommended solutions, so as to provide opportunities for future programs and projects to address and disposition potential issues and concerns as early as possible to reap the benefits associated with learning from other's past experiences.
Basilio, Ralph R.↗
Software Engineering Research/Developer Collaborations (C104)
The goal of this collaboration was to produce Flight Software Branch (FSB) process standards for software inspections which could be used across three new missions within the FSB. The standard was developed by Dr. Forrest Shull (Fraunhofer Center for Experimental Software Engineering, Maryland) using the Perspective-Based Inspection approach, (PBI research has been funded by SARP) , then tested on a pilot Branch project. Because the short time scale of the collaboration ruled out a quantitative evaluation, it would be decided whether the standard was suitable for roll-out to other Branch projects based on a qualitative measure: whether the standard received high ratings from Branch personnel as to usability and overall satisfaction. The project used for piloting the Perspective-Based Inspection approach was a multi-mission framework designed for reuse. This was a good choice because key representatives from the three new missions would be involved in the inspections. The perspective-based approach was applied to produce inspection procedures tailored for the specific quality needs of the branch. The technical information to do so was largely drawn through a series of interviews with Branch personnel. The framework team used the procedures to review requirements. The inspections were useful for indicating that a restructuring of the requirements document was needed, which led to changes in the development project plan. The standard was sent out to other Branch personnel for review. Branch personnel were very positive. However, important changes were identified because the perspective of Attitude Control System (ACS) developers had not been adequately represented, a result of the specific personnel interviewed. The net result is that with some further work to incorporate the ACS perspective, and in synchrony with the roll out of independent Branch standards, the PBI approach will be implemented in the FSB. Also, the project intends to continue its collaboration with the technology provider (Dr. Forrest Shull) past the end of the grant, to allow a more rigorous quantitative evaluation.
Shell, Elaine↗
The Johnson Space Center Management Information Systems (JSCMIS): An interface for organizational databases
The Management Information and Decision Support Environment (MIDSE) is a research activity to build and test a prototype of a generic human interface on the Johnson Space Center (JSC) Information Network (CIN). The existing interfaces were developed specifically to support operations rather than the type of data which management could use. The diversity of the many interfaces and their relative difficulty discouraged occasional users from attempting to use them for their purposes. The MIDSE activity approached this problem by designing and building an interface to one JSC data base - the personnel statistics tables of the NASA Personnel and Payroll System (NPPS). The interface was designed against the following requirements: generic (use with any relational NOMAD data base); easy to learn (intuitive operations for new users); easy to use (efficient operations for experienced users); self-documenting (help facility which informs users about the data base structure as well as the operation of the interface); and low maintenance (easy configuration to new applications). A prototype interface entitled the JSC Management Information Systems (JSCMIS) was produced. It resides on CIN/PROFS and is available to JSC management who request it. The interface has passed management review and is ready for early use. Three kinds of data are now available: personnel statistics, personnel register, and plan/actual cost.
Bishop, Peter C.↗
Crew station research and development facility training for the light helicopter demonstration/validation program
The U.S. Army Crew Station Research and Development Branch (CSRDB) of the Aircraft Simulation Division (AVSCOM) was tasked by the Light Helicopter Program Manager (LH-PM) to provide training to Army personnel in advanced aircraft simulation technology. The purpose of this training was to prepare different groups of pilots to support and evaluate two contractor simulation efforts during the Demonstration/Validation (DEM/VAL) phase of the LH program. The personnel in the CSRDB developed mission oriented training programs to accomplish the objectives, conduct the programs, and provide guidance to army personnel and support personnel throughout the DEM/VAL phase.
Matsumoto, Joy Hamerman↗
Space Shuttle launch pad rescue plan
The final preparation of the Space Shuttle Orbiter for flight involves the loading of large quantities of hazardous propellants. Additionally, many pyrotechnially operated mechanical joints are armed and ready for flight. The personnel manning at the pad is minimized during these operations to reduce the risk. Upon completion of propellant loading, the flight crew must be boarded onto the vehicle which at this point has tremendous potential energy. Plans have been made to safely and quickly evacuate the crew should some unforeseen contigency occur. Both aided and unaided egress scenarios have been planned. Personnel protective equipment is an important consideration to assure the highest chance for survival. Rapid movement of personnel is enhanced by the use of the slidewire system and specially prepared armored personnel carriers. The end result is a system that provides a reasonable chance of survival should an emergency occur during late countdown at the pad.
Doerr, Donald F.↗
NASA Position Classification Handbook
The NASA Position Classification Handbook provides: a concise unitary reference document covering most aspects of position classification within NASA, information regarding the characteristics of NASA's own position classification program--the NASA Supplemental Classification System--and its origins, information concerning responsibilities of various levels of NASA management for position classification, and information concerning overall operation of a classification program. The provisions of this handbook pertain to the position classification function agency-wide. Although it will be particularly useful to personnel specialists, it also can serve as a convenient reference on position classification for line managers and supervisors and administrative personnel who deal with personnel management matters. Recommendations or questions concerning the content of this handbook should be directed to Director, Personnel Programs Division (Code NP), NASA Headquarters.
Source record↗
The application of automated operations at the Institutional Processing Center
The JPL Institutional and Mission Computing Division, Communications, Computing and Network Services Section, with its mission contractor, OAO Corporation, have for some time been applying automation to the operation of JPL's Information Processing Center (IPC). Automation does not come in one easy to use package. Automation for a data processing center is made up of many different software and hardware products supported by trained personnel. The IPC automation effort formally began with console automation, and has since spiraled out to include production scheduling, data entry, report distribution, online reporting, failure reporting and resolution, documentation, library storage, and operator and user education, while requiring the interaction of multi-vendor and locally developed software. To begin the process, automation goals are determined. Then a team including operations personnel is formed to research and evaluate available options. By acquiring knowledge of current products and those in development, taking an active role in industry organizations, and learning of other data center's experiences, a forecast can be developed as to what direction technology is moving. With IPC management's approval, an implementation plan is developed and resources identified to test or implement new systems. As an example, IPC's new automated data entry system was researched by Data Entry, Production Control, and Advance Planning personnel. A proposal was then submitted to management for review. A determination to implement the new system was made and elements/personnel involved with the initial planning performed the implementation. The final steps of the implementation were educating data entry personnel in the areas effected and procedural changes necessary to the successful operation of the new system.
Barr, Thomas H.↗
Analyses of Technology for Solid State Coherent Lidar
Over past few years, considerable advances have been made in the areas of the diode-pumped, eye-safe, solid state lasers and room temperature, wide bandwidth, semiconductor detectors operating in the near-infrared region. These advances have created new possibilities for the development of reliable and compact coherent lidar systems for a wide range of applications. This research effort is aimed at further developing solid state coherent lidar technology for remote sensing of atmospheric processes such as wind, turbulence and aerosol concentration. The work performed by the UAH personnel under this Delivery Order concentrated on design and analyses of laboratory experiments and measurements, and development of advanced lidar optical subsystems in support of solid state laser radar remote sensing systems which are to be designed, deployed, and used to measure atmospheric processes and constituents. Under this delivery order, a lidar breadboard system was designed and analyzed by considering the major aircraft and space operational requirements. The lidar optical system was analyzed in detail using SYNOPSIS and Code V optical design packages. The lidar optical system include a wedge scanner and the compact telescope designed by the UAH personnel. The other major optical components included in the design and analyses were: polarizing beam splitter, routing mirrors, wave plates, signal beam derotator, and lag angle compensator. This lidar system is to be used for demonstrating all the critical technologies for the development of a reliable and low-cost space-based instrument capable of measuring global wind fields. A number of laboratory experiments and measurements were performed at the NASA/MSFC Detector Characterization Facility, previously developed by the UAH personnel. These laboratory measurements include the characterization of a 2-micron InGaAs detectors suitable for use in coherent lidars and characterization of Holographic Optical Element Scanners. UAH personnel actively participated in the development of performance and operational requirements for the development of the high pulse energy transmitter laser and frequency-agile local oscillator laser, that are in-progress at NASA Langley Research Center and Jet Propulsion Laboratory.
Amzajerdian, Farzin↗
Spacecraft Software Maintenance: An Effective Approach to Reducing Costs and Increasing Science Return
Flight software is a mission critical element of spacecraft functionality and performance. When ground operations personnel interface to a spacecraft, they are typically dealing almost entirely with the capabilities of onboard software. This software, even more than critical ground/flight communications systems, is expected to perform perfectly during all phases of spacecraft life. Due to the fact that it can be reprogrammed on-orbit to accommodate degradations or failures in flight hardware, new insights into spacecraft characteristics, new control options which permit enhanced science options, etc., the on- orbit flight software maintenance team is usually significantly responsible for the long term success of a science mission. Failure of flight software to perform as needed can result in very expensive operations work-around costs and lost science opportunities. There are three basic approaches to maintaining spacecraft software--namely using the original developers, using the mission operations personnel, or assembling a center of excellence for multi-spacecraft software maintenance. Not planning properly for flight software maintenance can lead to unnecessarily high on-orbit costs and/or unacceptably long delays, or errors, in patch installations. A common approach for flight software maintenance is to access the original development staff. The argument for utilizing the development staff is that the people who developed the software will be the best people to modify the software on-orbit. However, it can quickly becomes a challenge to obtain the services of these key people. They may no longer be available to the organization. They may have a more urgent job to perform, quite likely on another project under different project management. If they havn't worked on the software for a long time, they may need precious time for refamiliarization to the software, testbeds and tools. Further, a lack of insight into issues related to flight software in its on-orbit environment, may find the developer unprepared for the challenges. The second approach is to train a member of the flight operations team to maintain the spacecraft software. This can prove to be a costly and inflexible solution. The person assigned to this duty may not have enough work to do during a problem free period and may have too much to do when a problem arises. If the person is a talented software engineer, he/she may not enjoy the limited software opportunities available in this position; and may eventually leave for newer technology computer science opportunities. Training replacement flight software personnel can be a difficult and lengthy process. The third approach is to assemble a center of excellence for on-orbit spacecraft software maintenance. Personnel in this specialty center can be managed to support flight software of multiple missions at once. The variety of challenges among a set of on-orbit missions, can result in a dedicated, talented staff which is fully trained and available to support each mission's needs. Such staff are not software developers but are rather spacecraft software systems engineers. The cost to any one mission is extremely low because the software staff works and charges, minimally on missions with no current operations issues; and their professional insight into on-orbit software troubleshooting and maintenance methods ensures low risk, effective and minimal-cost solutions to on-orbit issues.
Shell, Elaine M.↗
Human interactions during Shuttle/Mir space missions
To improve the interpersonal climate of crewmembers involved with long-duration space missions, it is important to understand the factors affecting their interactions with each other and with members of mission control. This paper will present findings from a recently completed NASA-funded study during the Shuttle/Mir program which evaluated in-group/out-group displacement of negative emotions; changes in tension, cohesion, and leader support over time; and cultural differences. In-flight data were collected from 5 astronauts, 8 cosmonauts, and 42 American and 16 Russian mission control personnel who signed informed consent. Subjects completed a weekly questionnaire that assessed their mood and perception of their work group's interpersonal climate using questions from well-known, standardized measures (Profile of Mood States, Group and Work Environment Scales) and a critical incident log. There was strong evidence for the displacement of tension and dysphoric emotions from crewmembers to mission control personnel and from mission control personnel to management. There was a perceived decrease in commander support during the 2nd half of the missions, and for American crewmembers a novelty effect was found on several subscales during the first few months on-orbit. There were a number of differences between American and Russian responses which suggested that the former were less happy with their interpersonal environment than the latter. Mission control personnel reported more tension and dysphoria than crewmembers, although both groups scored better than other work groups on Earth. Nearly all reported critical incidents came from ground subjects, with Americans and Russians showing important differences in response frequencies.
Non-NASA Center↗