SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “Number of Crew”

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

SourceResearch connectionFrom yearThrough year

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

At least 19 records

All sources NASA NTRS DOE OSTI

NASA NTRS2024

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↗

NASA NTRS2024

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

Mars↗

NASA NTRS2024

Assessing the Number of Crew for Mars Against Trade Space Parameters

Missions to Mars will differ from all previous human spaceflight missions in that the onboard crew of astronauts will be required to operate in an Earth-independent manner given the long communication delays on Mars missions. Without a systematic, repeatable process to determine the number and composition of crew necessary to successfully accomplish these missions, NASA increases the risk in that crew sizes may be too small to meet primary mission objectives under nominal conditions and, more consequentially, the crewmembers may not have the expertise needed to successfully respond to unforeseen failures without the real-time expertise in the Mission Control Central (MCC) team on which NASA has come to rely. We present a framework for trade space analysis along with results from human-performance models developed in IMPRINT. We discuss the implications of model results on the trade space for number of crew for missions to Mars. This work was funded by the NASA Engineering and Safety Center (NESC) with support from NASA’s Human Research Program (HRP).

Donna Dempsey↗

NASA NTRS2000

Advances in Space Transportation Technology Toward the NASA Goals

NASA has set goals to increase safety by one hundred times while reducing cost tenfold over the next decade. This dramatic increase in safety will come by departing from a past emphasis on cost and performance to a new paradigm of safety and reliability, which, in turn, will drive down cost. To accomplish this, vehicle systems must be inherently reliable, functionally redundant wherever practical and designed to minimize or eliminate catastrophic failure modes. Over the next twenty-five years, NASA has set goals to increase safety ten thousand times while reducing cost one hundred fold. Safety will increase towards today's airline safety and the low price per flight has the potential to enable a 15-fold increase in the size of the current projected space launch market. This level of improvement is comparable to the developments in the 1970s in the computer microprocessor when microchips went from hundreds of thousands to tens of thousands of dollars - hailing the era of the personal computer. In order to achieve such ambitious cost goals, today's partial and fully expendable rockets must be replaced by fully reusable systems. A RLV can eliminate assembly and checkout of the large number of complex interfaces on today's Space Shuttle. Full reusability will eliminate the necessity to throw away expensive hardware and the need for on-going production. Systems in ten years will have to accommodate 50 to 100 missions per year and could be commercially certified for hundreds of flights. In twenty-five years, the number of flights per year could jump to over 1,000, which will require certification for thousands of flights. The large increase in flights per year will demand that current operations and maintenance procedures be revolutionized. Unlike the current shuttle, which requires several thousand personnel over five months to process, the next generation system must be turned around in one week with less than one hundred personnel. In contrast to the rigorous disassembly and inspections required for the Space Shuttle's subsystems, the next generation vehicle's on-board health monitoring systems will could tell the ground crews which systems need replacement before landing. In twenty-five years, vehicles will be re-flown within one with crews numbering less than one hundred. Fully automated ground processing systems must require only a handful of personnel to launch the vehicle. Due to the increased intelligence of on-board systems, only cursory walk-around inspections would be required between flights An assessment of the progress in breakthrough technologies toward these goals by the NASA Advanced Space Transportation Program is presented. These breakthrough technologies include combined rocket and air breathing propulsion, high strength lightweight structures, high temperature materials, vehicle health management, and flight operations.

Lyles, Garry M.↗

NASA NTRS1991

Environmental control and life support system evolution analysis

The Space Station Freedom Environmental Control and Life Support System (ECLSS) will have to accommodate the changes made to Freedom as it evolves over 30 years or more. Requirements will change as pressurized modules are added, crew numbers increase, and as the tasks to be performed change. This evolution will result in different demands on the ECLSS which will have to adapt to these changes. Technologies other than the baselined ones may be better able to perform the various ECLSS functions and technological advances will result in improved life support hardware better able to meet the new requirements.

Wieland, Paul↗

NASA NTRS1990

Environmental Control and Life Support System Evolution

Viewgraphs on Environmental Control and Life Support System (ECLSS) evolution are presented. The Space Station Freedom ECLSS will have to accommodate the changes to Freedom as it evolves over the design life of 30 years or more. Requirements will change as pressurized modules are added, crew numbers increase, and as the tasks to be performed change. This evolution will result in different demands on the ECLSS and the numbers ECLSS will have to adapt. Technologies other than the baselined ones may be better able to perform the various tasks and technological advances will result in improved life support hardware having better performance, increased reliability, reduced power consumption, weight, and volume, greater autonomy, and fewer resupply requirements. A preliminary study was performed to look at alternative technologies for life support and evaluate them for their integration requirements.

Wieland, Paul↗

NASA NTRS1990

Environmental Control and Life Support System Evolution

The Space Station Freedom Environmental Control and Life Support System (ECLSS) will have to accommodate the changes to Freedom as it evolves over the design life of 30 years or more. Requirements will change as pressurized modules are added, crew numbers increase, and as the tasks to be performed change. This evolution will result in different demands on the ECLSS and the ECLSS wilt have to adapt. Technologies other than the baselined ones may be better able to perform the various tasks and technological advances will result in improved life support hardware having better performance, increased reliability, reduced power consumption, weight, and volume, greater autonomy, and fewer resupply requirements. A preliminary study was performed to look at alternative technologies for life support and evaluate them for their integration requirements, focusing on the fluid line interface requirements. (A follow-on study will expand greatly on the scope of this preliminary study.) The integration requirements of the alternative technologies may be different from those of the baselined technologies. If this is the case, then by designing the initial space station to have the necessary fluid lines, etc. required by the selected alternative technologies then the task of replacing the baselined ones will be greatly simplified, thereby reducing the cost in on-orbit time as well as dollars.

Wieland, Paul↗

NASA NTRS2017

CDRA-4EU Testing to Assess Increased Number of ISS Crew

The International Space Station (ISS) program is investigating methods to increase carbon dioxide (CO2) removal on ISS in order to support an increased number of astronauts at a future date. The Carbon Dioxide Removal Assembly - Engineering Unit (CDRA-4EU) system at NASA Marshall Space Flight Center (MSFC) was tested at maximum fan settings to evaluate CO2 removal rate and power consumption at those settings.

Peters, Warren T.↗

NASA NTRS2016

Sizing a Common Habitat for Multiple Environments and Mission Durations

A human mission to Mars and other deep space destinations will require a consistent habitation strategy that applies to disparate environments preferably using multiples of identical hardware. The crew will endure high-g forces during launch, microgravity during transit, and various partial gravities on the destination planet, moon, or asteroid. Habitable volume will likely need to be broken up into smaller modules that do not exceed the capacity of launch vehicles and entry-descent-landing technologies. Though it may be possible to design a different unique, optimized habitat for each environment that the crew may encounter, it is more likely that space agencies and other mission sponsors will only have the resources to develop and produce single multi-use hardware that can be used equally well in all environments, with minimal adaptation by the crew. When sizing habitable volume, mission duration and number of crew become important factors to consider. For example, a pressurized rover cabin may only need to support two crew members for a few days at a time, requiring less volume than a habitat that must support the same number of persons for an entire year. In this study the authors consider constraining factors such as launch vehicle capacity, mission duration, crew size, and Mars lander capacity and study how to divide total pressurized volume, subsystems, equipment, consumables, and supplies into multiple manifests. Preference has been given to solutions that use multiples of identical modules over unique optimized volumes. For example at one extreme, can all the habitat pressure vessels, logistic modules, Mars ascent stage cabins, rover cabins, and airlocks be constructed from multiples of the same small-diameter cylindrical modules? On the other extreme, can logistics, habitation volume, mobility, all be enclosed in a single monolithic volume habitat design? Though there may be advantages and disadvantages to either extreme, the conclusion of this study is that most functions can be distilled into two sizes for hardware: multiples of large diameter modules that generally stay in one place, and multiples of smaller volume cabins that can be moved around or function as cockpits for ascent stages, support vehicles, rovers, airlocks, and logistics delivery.

Howe, A Scott↗

NASA NTRS2015

Final NASA Panel Recommendations for Definition of Acceptable Risk of Injury Due to Spaceflight Dynamic Events

A panel of experts was convened in 2010 to help define acceptable injury risk levels for space vehicle launches, landings, and abort scenarios. Classifications of spaceflight-relevant injuries were defined using four categories ranging from minor to severe injury. Limits for each injury category were agreed to, dependent on the expected number of crew exposures in a given vehicle and on whether the flight was considered nominal or off-nominal. Somers et al. captured the findings of this summit in a NASA technical memorandum. This panel was recently re-convened (December 1, 2014) to determine whether the previous recommended injury limits were applicable to newly-designed commercial space flight vehicles. In particular, previous limits were based in part on the number of crew exposures per vehicle and also were sensitive to a definition of nominal and off-nominal vehicle performance. Reconsideration of these aspects led to a new consensus on a definition of injury risk.

Somers, Jeffrey T.↗

NASA NTRS2000

Flight Crew Factors for CTAS/FMS Integration in the Terminal Area

Center TRACON Automation System (CTAS)/Flight Management System (FMS) integration on the flightdeck implies flight crews flying coupled in highly automated FMS modes [i.e. Vertical Navigation (VNAV) and Lateral Navigation (LNAV)] from top of descent to the final approach phase of flight. Pilots may also have to make FMS route edits and respond to datalink clearances in the Terminal Radar Approach Control (TRACON) airspace. This full mission simulator study addresses how the introduction of these FMS descent procedures affect crew activities, workload, and performance. It also assesses crew acceptance of these procedures. Results indicate that the number of crew activities and workload ratings are significantly reduced below current day levels when FMS procedures can be flown uninterrupted, but that activity numbers increase significantly above current day levels and workload ratings return to current day levels when FMS procedures are interrupted by common ATC interventions and CTAS routing advisories. Crew performance showed some problems with speed control during FMS procedures. Crew acceptance of the FMS procedures and route modification requirements was generally high; a minority of crews expressed concerns about use of VNAV in the TRACON airspace. Suggestions for future study are discussed.

Crane, Barry W.↗

NASA NTRS1993

Evaluating science return in space exploration initiative architectures

Science is an important aspect of the Space Exploration Initiative, a program to explore the Moon and Mars with people and machines. Different SEI mission architectures are evaluated on the basis of three variables: access (to the planet's surface), capability (including number of crew, equipment, and supporting infrastructure), and time (being the total number of man-hours available for scientific activities). This technique allows us to estimate the scientific return to be expected from different architectures and from different implementations of the same architecture. Our methodology allows us to maximize the scientific return from the initiative by illuminating the different emphases and returns that result from the alternative architectural decisions.

Budden, Nancy Ann↗

NASA NTRS2014

Exploration Medical System Demonstration

BACKGROUND: Exploration class missions will present significant new challenges and hazards to the health of the astronauts. Regardless of the intended destination, beyond low Earth orbit a greater degree of crew autonomy will be required to diagnose medical conditions, develop treatment plans, and implement procedures due to limited communications with ground-based personnel. SCOPE: The Exploration Medical System Demonstration (EMSD) project will act as a test bed on the International Space Station (ISS) to demonstrate to crew and ground personnel that an end-to-end medical system can assist clinician and non-clinician crew members in optimizing medical care delivery and data management during an exploration mission. Challenges facing exploration mission medical care include limited resources, inability to evacuate to Earth during many mission phases, and potential rendering of medical care by non-clinicians. This system demonstrates the integration of medical devices and informatics tools for managing evidence and decision making and can be designed to assist crewmembers in nominal, non-emergent situations and in emergent situations when they may be suffering from performance decrements due to environmental, physiological or other factors. PROJECT OBJECTIVES: The objectives of the EMSD project are to: a. Reduce or eliminate the time required of an on-orbit crew and ground personnel to access, transfer, and manipulate medical data. b. Demonstrate that the on-orbit crew has the ability to access medical data/information via an intuitive and crew-friendly solution to aid in the treatment of a medical condition. c. Develop a common data management framework that can be ubiquitously used to automate repetitive data collection, management, and communications tasks for all activities pertaining to crew health and life sciences. d. Ensure crew access to medical data during periods of restricted ground communication. e. Develop a common data management framework that allows for scalability, extensibility, and interoperability of data sources and data users. f. Lower total cost of ownership for development and sustainment of peripheral hardware and software that use EMSD for data management. g. Provide a better standard of healthcare for crew members through reductions in the time required by crew and ground personnel to provide medical treatment and the number of crew errors experienced during treatment.

Rubin, D. A.↗

NASA NTRS2008

Lunar Architecture Team - Phase 2 Habitat Volume Estimation: "Caution When Using Analogs"

The lunar surface habitat will serve as the astronauts' home on the moon, providing a pressurized facility for all crew living functions and serving as the primary location for a number of crew work functions. Adequate volume is required for each of these functions in addition to that devoted to housing the habitat systems and crew consumables. The time constraints of the LAT-2 schedule precluded the Habitation Team from conducting a complete "bottoms-up" design of a lunar surface habitation system from which to derive true volumetric requirements. The objective of this analysis was to quickly derive an estimated total pressurized volume and pressurized net habitable volume per crewmember for a lunar surface habitat, using a principled, methodical approach in the absence of a detailed design. Five "heuristic methods" were used: historical spacecraft volumes, human/spacecraft integration standards and design guidance, Earth-based analogs, parametric "sizing" tools, and conceptual point designs. Estimates for total pressurized volume, total habitable volume, and volume per crewmember were derived using these methods. All method were found to provide some basis for volume estimates, but values were highly variable across a wide range, with no obvious convergence of values. Best current assumptions for required crew volume were provided as a range. Results of these analyses and future work are discussed.

Rudisill, Marianne↗

NASA NTRS2015

Planning for Crew Exercise for Future Deep Space Mission Scenarios

Providing the necessary exercise capability to protect crew health for deep space missions will bring new sets of engineering and research challenges. Exercise has been found to be a necessary mitigation for maintaining crew health on‐orbit and preparing the crew for return to earth's gravity. Health and exercise data from Apollo, Space Lab, Shuttle, and International Space Station missions have provided insight into crew deconditioning and the types of activities that can minimize the impacts of microgravity on the physiological systems. The hardware systems required to implement exercise can be challenging to incorporate into spaceflight vehicles. Exercise system design requires encompassing the hardware required to provide mission specific anthropometrical movement ranges, desired loads, and frequencies of desired movements as well as the supporting control and monitoring systems, crew and vehicle interfaces, and vibration isolation and stabilization subsystems. The number of crew and operational constraints also contribute to defining the what exercise systems will be needed. All of these features require flight vehicle mass and volume integrated with multiple vehicle systems. The International Space Station exercise hardware requires over 1,800 kg of equipment and over 24 m3 of volume for hardware and crew operational space. Improvements towards providing equivalent or better capabilities with a smaller vehicle impact will facilitate future deep space missions. Deep space missions will require more understanding of the physiological responses to microgravity, understanding appropriate mitigations, designing the exercise systems to provide needed mitigations, and integrating effectively into vehicle design with a focus to support planned mission scenarios. Recognizing and addressing the constraints and challenges can facilitate improved vehicle design and exercise system incorporation.

Moore, Cherice↗

NASA NTRS1982

Flight crew performance when pilot-flying and pilot-not-flying duties are exchanged

This study compares reports from the ASRS database depicting operational anomalies related to flight crew performance when pilot-flying and pilot-not-flying duties were exchanged. A greater number of near midair collisions, takeoff anomalies, and crossing altitude deviations were reported when the Captain was flying. More altitude deviations, near midair collisions during approach, and landing incidents occurred when the First Officer was flying. There were differences in monitoring effectiveness and in the type and distribution of information transfer problems associated with the anomalies. In addition, a number of crew performance factors were noted that were not affected by the exchange of duties. Several of these were deemed important enough to be included as matter of general interest.

Orlady, H. W.↗

NASA NTRS2002

Factors in International Space Station Integration Feasibility Assessments

The International Space Station, ISS, is a growing vehicle. The ISS configuration changes internally and externally with each ISS flight. Each flight adds resources and capabilities such as docking/berthing ports, power, stowage volume, heat rejection, and data processing capability. The configuration, capabilities and performance characteristics of the vehicle will be in flux until assembly complete. At the same time the knowledge about what is required to support humans involved in long duration space flight is also being greatly expanded. In addition to the changes occurring on-orbit, the situation on the ground is also very dynamic. Proposals for new ISS elements, proposed deletions of elements, changes to the ISS requirements, and changes to the planned configuration are always under evaluation. Furthermore, budgetary issues have driven the need to explore alternative options for the ISS . This environment has made the role of the technical integrator in the ISS program unique in that the baseline against which proposals are evaluated is always changing. The nature of the International Space Station Program adds another dimension to the integrators task. ISS program activities are spread across several centers: KSC, MSFC, GRC, DFRC, ARC and JSc. There are six International Partners/participants each with their own unique organizations. The prime contractor is in Texas, California and Alabama. And, the Space Shuttle Program as the launch vehicle provider is another major interface. In spite of the fluidity of the technical baseline, projections and organizational complexity, in the course of evaluating proposals and producing feasibility assessments there are factors, which frequently emerge as significant. These factors tend to be the limiting conditions when they come into play. The finite resources, which tend to limit the options for ISS are: upmass, life support and crew rescue capability, crew time, utilities, exercise equipment, and docking/berthing ports. Upmass requirements need to be developed for each option proposed. Short term and long term impacts to upmass are the result of the implementation and long term operations. The upmass requirements need to be met by the existing launch vehicles and any change in flight rate will be a significant cost driver. In addition, when any item is brought to the ISS careful consideration must be given to the on-board stowage and crew time available to unpack, transfer, stow and use these items. If stowage is not available then something must be returned, use of non-standard stowage negotiated or the item in question stays on the ground. Additional crew time requirements will impact available utilization time or crew off-duty time. When the human element is affected, such as, by increasing the number of crew members or changing the duration of the crew stay (longer or shorter) there is an additional set of factors that come into play. The main considerations are: rescue capability, exercise requirements and availability of equipment, resupply, and life support capability.

Watson, Patricia M.↗

NASA NTRS2022

NASA’s Strategic Analysis Cycle 2021 (SAC21) Human Mars Architecture

The National Aeronautics and Space Administration’s (NASA) Mars Architecture Team (MAT) was challenged to develop a mission architecture capable of transporting humans to the surface of Mars and back as fast—and as soon—as practical. This challenge represented a significant departure from previous approaches that minimized Earth-launched mass and maximized in-space transportation efficiency, often resulting in roundtrip missions of three years or more in duration. In the interest of crew health, MAT’s cross-Agency team of subject matter experts was challenged to develop an architecture capable of shortening crew time away from Earth to about two years. MAT was given specific mission constraints, such as number of crew, as well as mandates to minimize surface infrastructure as much as possible and to incorporate nuclear transportation options. The resulting MAT-developed concept, referred to here as the Strategic Analysis Cycle 2021 (SAC21) architecture, leverages Artemis elements and emerging commercial capabilities for cargo and logistics launches, and features a hybrid Nuclear Electric Propulsion (NEP)/Chemical transportation system able to complete the 1.8 billion kilometer round-trip journey to Mars and back in 760 to 850 days transit time for the 2039 Earth departure opportunity. Three Mars Descent Systems (MDS), each capable of landing about 25 metric tons of useful cargo on the surface of Mars, would be pre-deployed in advance of crew departure from Earth; two of these MDS’s would deliver a partially fueled Mars Ascent Vehicle (MAV), a fission power system, surface mobility, and additional MAV propellant. To minimize surface infrastructure, only two of the four Mars crew would descend and live in an MDS-landed pressurized rover, exploring the martian surface for 30 martian days, or sols, before returning to Mars orbit aboard their MAV and rejoining the other two crew on the Deep Space Transport for the Earth return voyage. Specifics of many of these architecture elements are detailed in separate technical publications; this paper outlines the end-to-end integrated architecture performance and concept of operations, including synergies with Artemis lunar architecture elements. It is important to note that NASA does not have a formal human Mars program and no decisions have been made; the architecture described here is intended to fill in an often-overlooked corner of the trade space, helping to complete the menu of options available to decision-makers as they chart the course for humans to Mars.

exploration↗