Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “crew performance”

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 19 records
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRS1987

Theory underlying CRM training: Psychological issues in flight crew performance and crew coordination

What psychological theory and research can reveal about training in Cockpit Resource Management (CRM) is summarized. A framework is provided for the critical analysis of current approaches to CRM training. Background factors and definitions critical to evaluating CRM are reviewed, followed by a discussion of issues directly related to CRM training effectiveness. Some of the things not known about the optimization of crew performance and the research needed to make these efforts as effective as possible are described.

Helmreich, Robert L.↗
NASA NTRS2003

A Gold Standards Approach to Training Instructors to Evaluate Crew Performance

The Advanced Qualification Program requires that airlines evaluate crew performance in Line Oriented Simulation. For this evaluation to be meaningful, instructors must observe relevant crew behaviors and evaluate those behaviors consistently and accurately against standards established by the airline. The airline industry has largely settled on an approach in which instructors evaluate crew performance on a series of event sets, using standardized grade sheets on which behaviors specific to event set are listed. Typically, new instructors are given a class in which they learn to use the grade sheets and practice evaluating crew performance observed on videotapes. These classes emphasize reliability, providing detailed instruction and practice in scoring so that all instructors within a given class will give similar scores to similar performance. This approach has value but also has important limitations; (1) ratings within one class of new instructors may differ from those of other classes; (2) ratings may not be driven primarily by the specific behaviors on which the company wanted the crews to be scored; and (3) ratings may not be calibrated to company standards for level of performance skill required. In this paper we provide a method to extend the existing method of training instructors to address these three limitations. We call this method the "gold standards" approach because it uses ratings from the company's most experienced instructors as the basis for training rater accuracy. This approach ties the training to the specific behaviors on which the experienced instructors based their ratings.

Baker, David P.↗
NASA NTRS1990

Personality factors in flight operations. Volume 1: Leader characteristics and crew performance in a full-mission air transport simulation

Crew effectiveness is a joint product of the piloting skills, attitudes, and personality characteristics of team members. As obvious as this point might seem, both traditional approaches to optimizing crew performance and more recent training development highlighting crew coordination have emphasized only the skill and attitudinal dimensions. This volume is the first in a series of papers on this simulation. A subsequent volume will focus on patterns of communication within crews. The results of a full-mission simulation research study assessing the impact of individual personality on crew performance is reported. Using a selection algorithm described in previous research, captains were classified as fitting one of three profiles along a battery of personality assessment scales. The performances of 23 crews led by captains fitting each profile were contrasted over a one-and-one-half-day simulated trip. Crews led by captains fitting a positive Instrumental-Expressive profile (high achievement motivation and interpersonal skill) were consistently effective and made fewer errors. Crews led by captains fitting a Negative Expressive profile (below average achievement motivation, negative expressive style, such as complaining) were consistently less effective and made more errors. Crews led by captains fitting a Negative Instrumental profile (high levels of competitiveness, verbal aggressiveness, and impatience and irritability) were less effective on the first day but equal to the best on the second day. These results underscore the importance of stable personality variables as predictors of team coordination and performance.

Chidester, Thomas R.↗
NASA NTRS1986

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.↗
NASA NTRS1995

What ASRS incident data tell about flight crew performance during aircraft malfunctions

This research examined 230 reports in NASA's Aviation Safety Reporting System's (ASRS) database to develop a better understanding of factors that can affect flight crew performance when crew are faced with inflight aircraft malfunctions. Each report was placed into one of two categories, based on severity of the malfunction. Report analysis was then conducted to extract information regarding crew procedural issues, crew communications and situational awareness. A comparison of these crew factors across malfunction type was then performed. This comparison revealed a significant difference in ways that crews dealt with serious malfunctions compared to less serious malfunctions. The authors offer recommendations toward improving crew performance when faced with inflight aircraft malfunctions.

Sumwalt, Robert L.↗
NASA NTRS1983

A simulation study of crew performance in operating an advanced transport aircraft in an automated terminal area environment

A simulation study assessing crew performance operating an advanced transport aircraft in an automated terminal area environment is described. The linking together of the Langley Advanced Transport Operating Systems Aft Flight Deck Simulator with the Terminal Area Air Traffic Model Simulation was required. The realism of an air traffic control (ATC) environment with audio controller instructions for the flight crews and the capability of inserting a live aircraft into the terminal area model to interact with computer generated aircraft was provided. Crew performance using the advanced displays and two separate control systems (automatic and manual) in flying area navigation routes in the automated ATC environment was assessed. Although the crews did not perform as well using the manual control system, their performances were within acceptable operational limits with little increase in workload. The crews favored using the manual control system and felt they were more alert and aware of their environment when using it.

Houck, J. A.↗
NASA NTRS1977

Coordinated crew performance in commercial aircraft operations

A specific methodology is proposed for an improved system of coding and analyzing crew member interaction. The complexity and lack of precision of many crew and task variables suggest the usefulness of fuzzy linguistic techniques for modeling and computer simulation of the crew performance process. Other research methodologies and concepts that have promise for increasing the effectiveness of research on crew performance are identified.

Murphy, M. R.↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Performance Risk Model (PRisM) Proof-of-Concept: An Operational Decision Support Tool to Predict Crew Performance in Space from Available Performance Tests

The Crew Health and Performance-Probabilistic Risk Assessment (CHP-PRA) team at NASA Glenn Research Center has developed a range of tools to evaluate astronaut health during spaceflight and to optimize the medical set required for missions. Among these, the Performance Risk Model (PRisM) represents a novel advancement, extending CHP-PRA’s focus beyond medical systems into the domain of human performance. Such tool could be pivotal in optimizing astronaut capabilities during space travel, thereby enhancing overall mission success. PRisM leverages data from well-established performance assessments conducted during previous crewed space missions and Earth analogs to strategically predict outcomes for planned tasks, even when direct performance testing has not been conducted for those specific tasks. To evaluate performance, PRisM references the various metrics outlined in NASA-STD-3001 and employs a methodology to integrate different performance scales. This framework analyzes the contribution of various human system task categories (HSTCs) to task execution and compares these contributions to the HSTCs’ involvement in other known tests. The model further employs a Monte Carlo simulation to sample performance scores from their distribution in operationally relevant tests such as those in Mulavara et al. (2018) and, by leveraging similarities in HSTC involvement, transfers this knowledge to actual mission tasks, such as those outlined in the "Human Exploration of Mars: Preliminary List of Crew Tasks”. The current PRisM proof-of-concept includes analyses of the impact of exercise and specific medications on astronauts’ performance, with provisions to incorporate additional countermeasures as data becomes available. Furthermore, the tool is customizable to include any system necessary to fully encompass the domain of human systems and can be adapted to evaluate performance for any spaceflight activities as requested by operational stakeholders. PRisM has the potential to assist the Human Research Program in exploring the capabilities trade space for optimized crew performance.

performance modeling↗
NASA NTRS1991

Individual differences in airline captains' personalities, communication strategies, and crew performance

Aircrew effectiveness in coping with emergencies has been linked to captain's personality profile. The present study analyzed cockpit communication during simulated flight to examine the relation between captains' discourse strategies, personality profiles, and crew performance. Positive Instrumental/Expressive captains and Instrumental-Negative captains used very similar communication strategies and their crews made few errors. Their talk was distinguished by high levels of planning and strategizing, gathering information, predicting/alerting, and explaining, especially during the emergency flight phase. Negative-Expressive captains talked less overall, and engaged in little problem solving talk, even during emergencies. Their crews made many errors. Findings support the theory that high crew performance results when captains use language to build shared mental models for problem situations.

Orasanu, Judith↗
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 NTRS1987

A comparison of one- and two-person crew performance in a supervisory control task

One- and two-person crews performed a simulated supervisory control task in which they had to directly control a scout helicopter and indirectly control four friendly helicopters in a hostile environment. One-person crews relied on an autopilot more than two-person crews in order to deal with multiple task demands. However, two-person crews were superior in terms of overall performance, and on particular subtasks such as searching for cargo and enemy craft and destroying enemy craft after they were located.

Miller, R. Allen↗
NASA NTRS1993

Data link air traffic control and flight deck environments: Experiment in flight crew performance

This report describes an experiment undertaken in a full mission simulation environment to investigate the performance impact of, and human/system response to, data-linked Air Traffic Control (ATC) and automated flight deck operations. Subjects were twenty pilots (ten crews) from a major United States air carrier. Crews flew the Advanced Concepts Flight Simulator (ACFS), a generic 'glass cockpit' simulator at NASA Ames. The method of data link used was similar to the data link implementation plans for a next-generation aircraft, and included the capability to review ATC messages and directly enter ATC clearance information into the aircraft systems. Each crew flew experimental scenarios, in which data reflecting communication timing, errors and clarifications, and procedures were collected. Results for errors and clarifications revealed an interaction between communication modality (voice v. data link) and communication type (air/ground v. intracrew). Results also revealed that voice crews initiated ATC contact significantly more than data link crews. It was also found that data link crews performed significantly more extraneous activities during the communication task than voice crews. Descriptive data from the use of the review menu indicate the pilot-not-flying accessing the review menu most often, and also suggest diffulty in accessing the target message within the review menu structure. The overall impact of communication modality upon air/ground communication and crew procedures is discussed.

Lozito, Sandy↗
NASA NTRS1993

Position-specific behaviors and their impact on crew performance: Implications for training

The present study was motivated by results from a preliminary report documenting the impact of specific crewmembers on overall crew performance (Wilhelm & Law, 1992), and a cross-airline cross-fleet project investigating human factors behaviors of commercial aviation flightcrews (Helmreich, Butler, Whilhelm, & Lofaro, 1992). The purpose of the current investigation is to study how position-specific behaviors impact flightcrew performance, and how these position-specific behaviors differ between two airlines and two flying environments. Implications for training will also be addressed.

Law, J. Randolph↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Crew Performance Support System to Aid in Anomaly Resolution: Concept of Operations

As missions progress into deep space, communication delays and disruptions will disenable the crew’s reliance on Earth experts. There are also limitations in the amount of data that can be downlinked to the ground. It is prudent to assume that critical, complex vehicle or habitat sub-systems will malfunction at a time when a lunar or Mars’ crew cannot rely on the Earth-Support team to detect, diagnose and resolve the problem and it is impractical to expect a small crew to step-in with the same level of expertise as 50+ authorities. The crew will need novel processes and advanced technological support to independently identify and resolve safety- and time-critical anomalies. That a self-reliant crew is unable to respond appropriately to time-critical anomalies is a significant risk to crew safety and mission success. This risk is driven by several factors; novel and unanticipated anomalies would not have been trained pre-flight, the crew could forget their pre-flight training or spaceflight stressors could impair the crew’s problem-solving ability. At last year’s IWS, Beard reported that a single spaceflight stressor (elevated CO2) could undermine the crew’s ability to independently respond to emergencies. Concept of Operations (ConOps) provide a common view of future system functions to all stakeholders. For the current project, a ConOps was developed that describes the operational processes, practices and capabilities needed by a crew of astronauts on deep space missions to autonomously respond to anticipated and unanticipated anomalies. It is crucial to recognize that, as of August 2018 existing technologies are unable to effectively support crew anomaly response to unanticipated events. “Intelligent technology” has not reached a maturity level that permits generalizing a solution to novel situations. For example, to train intelligent technology requires volumes of data that do not exist. The complexities involved in a manned mission to Mars cannot be compared to sending rovers to Mars using scripted software. This ConOps proposes a Crew Performance Support System (CPSS) that will push NASA and its industry partners toward what will be required for a safe and successful manned mission to Mars. Anomaly resolution during a deep space mission will take place within a dynamic, or changing, context. The figure to the left shows five broad contextual variables: the organizational culture, mission context, system characteristics, team characteristics and individual characteristics. The yellow arrow indicates that spaceflight and task-related stressors can affect system, team and individual crewmember characteristics and therefore anomaly response potential. The figure depicts a protective umbrella of Human-System Integration (HSI) principles that should be instituted during CPSS development including a balanced workload, shared situation awareness and building an appropriate level of trust in the automation. The figure also depicts two interrelated and cooperative components, an HSI Data System and other Enabling Capabilities will be required to support crew anomaly response and Earth-Support situation awareness. As we journey from ISS to Gateway to Mars, multiple, simultaneous and integrated research and development efforts (i.e., support systems co-evolution) must be implemented to meet the problem-solving challenges a self-reliant crew will face on a Mars’ mission. The crossovers between the capabilities are just as important as the discrete capabilities themselves. As the capabilities mature, the lines between the support subdomains will blur and an integrated system will emerge. The ConOps summarizes current knowledge about how highly trained people solve anomalies in safety- and time-critical situations, describes a group of capabilities that could help to reduce the extant risk and documents requirements levied on additional systems that provides critical inputs to the CPSS. Scenarios are used to promote a shared understanding of processes, practices and technological goals needed for safe and productive manned missions beyond LEO.

HSIA risk↗
NASA NTRS2015

Survey and Assessment of Crew Performance Evaluation Methods Applicable to Human Spacecraft Design

Space is an unforgiving environment where the actions of the crew play a critical role in their health and safety. Given the limited number of crewmembers typically onboard a spacecraft and the multitude of complex systems they must operate, the performance of each individual is of paramount importance. Spacecraft habitat layout and operations are two main drivers affecting crew performance efficiency. Having the capability to analyze and compare crew performance across various spacecraft configurations can help identify improvements early in the conceptual design process where changes are less costly to implement, ultimately reducing overall project costs and improving long-term operations of the system. Currently, there are few comprehensive methods readily available for evaluating crew integration within a spacecraft in the conceptual design phase. In order to address this shortcoming, the goal of this work was to analyze various specialized evaluation methods found in analogous industries that have potential application to human spacecraft design. A survey of more than 400 human performance evaluation methods was completed. Over twenty different attributes were identified for each method and a variety of analyses were conducted to characterize and evaluate their potential use for assessing human spacecraft design options. The analysis revealed a particular deficiency of quantitative evaluation methods that are applicable early in the systems engineering design phase. It also identified five existing methods that could be supplemented to achieve the needs of an early design evaluation method. Additional discussion describes potential issues that must be overcome when developing a method specific for use in human spacecraft evaluations.

crew performance↗