Mitigating and monitoring flight crew fatigue on a westward ultra-long-range flight.

PubMed

Signal, T Leigh; Mulrine, Hannah M; van den Berg, Margo J; Smith, Alexander A T; Gander, Philippa H; Serfontein, Wynand

2014-12-01

This study examined the uptake and effectiveness of fatigue mitigation guidance material including sleep recommendations for a trip with a westward ultra-long-range flight and return long-range flight. There were 52 flight crew (4-pilot crews, mean age 55 yr) who completed a sleep/duty diary and wore an actigraph prior to, during, and after the trip. Primary crew flew the takeoff and landing, while relief crew flew the aircraft during the Primary crew's breaks. At key times in flight, crewmembers rated their fatigue (Samn-Perelli fatigue scale) and sleepiness (Karolinska Sleepiness Scale) and completed a 5-min Psychomotor Vigilance Task. Napping was common prior to the outbound flight (54%) and did not affect the quantity or quality of in-flight sleep (mean 4.3 h). Primary crew obtained a similar amount on the inbound flight (mean 4.0 h), but Secondary crew had less sleep (mean 2.9 h). Subjective fatigue and sleepiness increased and performance slowed across flights. Performance was faster on the outbound than inbound flight. On both flights, Primary crew were less fatigued and sleepy than Secondary crew, particularly at top of descent and after landing. Crewmembers slept more frequently and had more sleep in the first 24 h of the layover than the last, and had shifted their main sleep to the local night by the second night. The suggested sleep mitigations were employed by the majority of crewmembers. Fatigue levels were no worse on the outbound ultra-long-range flight than on the return long-range flight.

14 CFR 91.1061 - Augmented flight crews.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

2010-01-01

... 14 Aeronautics and Space 2 2010-01-01 2010-01-01 false Augmented flight crews. 91.1061 Section 91...) AIR TRAFFIC AND GENERAL OPERATING RULES GENERAL OPERATING AND FLIGHT RULES Fractional Ownership Operations Program Management § 91.1061 Augmented flight crews. (a) No program manager may assign any flight...

14 CFR 91.1061 - Augmented flight crews.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2012 CFR

2012-01-01

... 14 Aeronautics and Space 2 2012-01-01 2012-01-01 false Augmented flight crews. 91.1061 Section 91...) AIR TRAFFIC AND GENERAL OPERATING RULES GENERAL OPERATING AND FLIGHT RULES Fractional Ownership Operations Program Management § 91.1061 Augmented flight crews. (a) No program manager may assign any flight...

Readiness for First Crewed Flight

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

Schaible, Dawn M.

2011-01-01

The NASA Engineering and Safety Center (NESC) was requested to develop a generic framework for evaluating whether any given program has sufficiently complete and balanced plans in place to allow crewmembers to fly safely on a human spaceflight system for the first time (i.e., first crewed flight). The NESC assembled a small team which included experts with experience developing robotic and human spaceflight and aviation systems through first crewed test flight and into operational capability. The NESC team conducted a historical review of the steps leading up to the first crewed flights of Mercury through the Space Shuttle. Benchmarking was also conducted with the United States (U.S.) Air Force and U.S. Navy. This report contains documentation of that review.

NASA Crew Launch Vehicle Flight Test Options

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

Cockrell, Charles E., Jr.; Davis, Stephan R.; Robonson, Kimberly; Tuma, Margaret L.; Sullivan, Greg

2006-01-01

Options for development flight testing (DFT) of the Ares I Crew Launch Vehicle (CLV) are discussed. The Ares-I Crew Launch Vehicle (CLV) is being developed by the U.S. National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) to launch the Crew Exploration Vehicle (CEV) into low Earth Orbit (LEO). The Ares-I implements one of the components of the Vision for Space Exploration (VSE), providing crew and cargo access to the International Space Station (ISS) after retirement of the Space Shuttle and, eventually, forming part of the launch capability needed for lunar exploration. The role of development flight testing is to demonstrate key sub-systems, address key technical risks, and provide flight data to validate engineering models in representative flight environments. This is distinguished from certification flight testing, which is designed to formally validate system functionality and achieve flight readiness. Lessons learned from Saturn V, Space Shuttle, and other flight programs are examined along with key Ares-I technical risks in order to provide insight into possible development flight test strategies. A strategy for the first test flight of the Ares I, known as Ares I-1, is presented.

14 CFR 415.131 - Flight safety system crew data.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2014 CFR

2014-01-01

... 14 Aeronautics and Space 4 2014-01-01 2014-01-01 false Flight safety system crew data. 415.131... Launch Vehicle From a Non-Federal Launch Site § 415.131 Flight safety system crew data. (a) An applicant's safety review document must identify each flight safety system crew position and the role of that...

14 CFR 135.99 - Composition of flight crew.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

2010-01-01

... 14 Aeronautics and Space 3 2010-01-01 2010-01-01 false Composition of flight crew. 135.99 Section... REQUIREMENTS: COMMUTER AND ON DEMAND OPERATIONS AND RULES GOVERNING PERSONS ON BOARD SUCH AIRCRAFT Flight Operations § 135.99 Composition of flight crew. (a) No certificate holder may operate an aircraft with less...

14 CFR 135.99 - Composition of flight crew.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2013 CFR

2013-01-01

... 14 Aeronautics and Space 3 2013-01-01 2013-01-01 false Composition of flight crew. 135.99 Section... REQUIREMENTS: COMMUTER AND ON DEMAND OPERATIONS AND RULES GOVERNING PERSONS ON BOARD SUCH AIRCRAFT Flight Operations § 135.99 Composition of flight crew. (a) No certificate holder may operate an aircraft with less...

14 CFR 135.99 - Composition of flight crew.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2012 CFR

2012-01-01

... 14 Aeronautics and Space 3 2012-01-01 2012-01-01 false Composition of flight crew. 135.99 Section... REQUIREMENTS: COMMUTER AND ON DEMAND OPERATIONS AND RULES GOVERNING PERSONS ON BOARD SUCH AIRCRAFT Flight Operations § 135.99 Composition of flight crew. (a) No certificate holder may operate an aircraft with less...

Integrated Approach to Flight Crew Training

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

Carroll, J. E.

1984-01-01

The computer based approach used by United Airlines for flight training is discussed. The human factors involved in specific aircraft accidents are addressed. Flight crew interaction and communication as they relate to training and flight safety are considered.

In-Flight Sleep of Flight Crew During a 7-hour Rest Break: Implications for Research and Flight Safety

PubMed Central

Signal, T. Leigh; Gander, Philippa H.; van den Berg, Margo J.; Graeber, R. Curtis

2013-01-01

Study Objectives: To assess the amount and quality of sleep that flight crew are able to obtain during flight, and identify factors that influence the sleep obtained. Design: Flight crew operating flights between Everett, WA, USA and Asia had their sleep recorded polysomnographically for 1 night in a layover hotel and during a 7-h in-flight rest opportunity on flights averaging 15.7 h. Setting: Layover hotel and in-flight crew rest facilities onboard the Boeing 777-200ER aircraft. Participants: Twenty-one male flight crew (11 Captains, mean age 48 yr and 10 First Officers, mean age 35 yr). Interventions: N/A. Measurements and Results: Sleep was recorded using actigraphy during the entire tour of duty, and polysomnographically in a layover hotel and during the flight. Mixed model analysis of covariance was used to determine the factors affecting in-flight sleep. In-flight sleep was less efficient (70% vs. 88%), with more nonrapid eye movement Stage 1/Stage 2 and more frequent awakenings per h (7.7/h vs. 4.6/h) than sleep in the layover hotel. In-flight sleep included very little slow wave sleep (median 0.5%). Less time was spent trying to sleep and less sleep was obtained when sleep opportunities occurred during the first half of the flight. Multivariate analyses suggest age is the most consistent factor affecting in-flight sleep duration and quality. Conclusions: This study confirms that even during long sleep opportunities, in-flight sleep is of poorer quality than sleep on the ground. With longer flight times, the quality and recuperative value of in-flight sleep is increasingly important for flight safety. Because the age limit for flight crew is being challenged, the consequences of age adversely affecting sleep quantity and quality need to be evaluated. Citation: Signal TL; Gander PH; van den Berg MJ; Graeber RC. In-flight sleep of flight crew during a 7-hour rest break: implications for research and flight safety. SLEEP 2013;36(1):109–115. PMID:23288977

In-flight sleep of flight crew during a 7-hour rest break: implications for research and flight safety.

PubMed

Signal, T Leigh; Gander, Philippa H; van den Berg, Margo J; Graeber, R Curtis

2013-01-01

To assess the amount and quality of sleep that flight crew are able to obtain during flight, and identify factors that influence the sleep obtained. Flight crew operating flights between Everett, WA, USA and Asia had their sleep recorded polysomnographically for 1 night in a layover hotel and during a 7-h in-flight rest opportunity on flights averaging 15.7 h. Layover hotel and in-flight crew rest facilities onboard the Boeing 777-200ER aircraft. Twenty-one male flight crew (11 Captains, mean age 48 yr and 10 First Officers, mean age 35 yr). N/A. Sleep was recorded using actigraphy during the entire tour of duty, and polysomnographically in a layover hotel and during the flight. Mixed model analysis of covariance was used to determine the factors affecting in-flight sleep. In-flight sleep was less efficient (70% vs. 88%), with more nonrapid eye movement Stage 1/Stage 2 and more frequent awakenings per h (7.7/h vs. 4.6/h) than sleep in the layover hotel. In-flight sleep included very little slow wave sleep (median 0.5%). Less time was spent trying to sleep and less sleep was obtained when sleep opportunities occurred during the first half of the flight. Multivariate analyses suggest age is the most consistent factor affecting in-flight sleep duration and quality. This study confirms that even during long sleep opportunities, in-flight sleep is of poorer quality than sleep on the ground. With longer flight times, the quality and recuperative value of in-flight sleep is increasingly important for flight safety. Because the age limit for flight crew is being challenged, the consequences of age adversely affecting sleep quantity and quality need to be evaluated.

14 CFR 417.311 - Flight safety crew roles and qualifications.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2012 CFR

2012-01-01

... crew roles and qualifications. (a) A flight safety crew must operate the flight safety system hardware... the knowledge, skills, and abilities needed to operate the flight safety system hardware in accordance... rules. (3) An individual who operates flight safety support systems must have knowledge of and be...

14 CFR 417.311 - Flight safety crew roles and qualifications.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2013 CFR

2013-01-01

... crew roles and qualifications. (a) A flight safety crew must operate the flight safety system hardware... the knowledge, skills, and abilities needed to operate the flight safety system hardware in accordance... rules. (3) An individual who operates flight safety support systems must have knowledge of and be...

14 CFR 417.311 - Flight safety crew roles and qualifications.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2014 CFR

2014-01-01

... crew roles and qualifications. (a) A flight safety crew must operate the flight safety system hardware... the knowledge, skills, and abilities needed to operate the flight safety system hardware in accordance... rules. (3) An individual who operates flight safety support systems must have knowledge of and be...

VIEW OF FLIGHT CREW SYSTEMS, FLIGHT KITS FACILITY, ROOM NO. ...

Library of Congress Historic Buildings Survey, Historic Engineering Record, Historic Landscapes Survey

VIEW OF FLIGHT CREW SYSTEMS, FLIGHT KITS FACILITY, ROOM NO. 1N12, FACING NORTH - Cape Canaveral Air Force Station, Launch Complex 39, Vehicle Assembly Building, VAB Road, East of Kennedy Parkway North, Cape Canaveral, Brevard County, FL

VIEW OF FLIGHT CREW SYSTEMS, FLIGHT KITS FACILITY, ROOM NO. ...

Library of Congress Historic Buildings Survey, Historic Engineering Record, Historic Landscapes Survey

VIEW OF FLIGHT CREW SYSTEMS, FLIGHT KITS FACILITY, ROOM NO. 1N12, FACING SOUTH - Cape Canaveral Air Force Station, Launch Complex 39, Vehicle Assembly Building, VAB Road, East of Kennedy Parkway North, Cape Canaveral, Brevard County, FL

Crew Exploration Vehicle Launch Abort System Flight Test Overview

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

Williams-Hayes, Peggy S.

2007-01-01

The Constellation program is an organization within NASA whose mission is to create the new generation of spacecraft that will replace the Space Shuttle after its planned retirement in 2010. In the event of a catastrophic failure on the launch pad or launch vehicle during ascent, the successful use of the launch abort system will allow crew members to escape harm. The Flight Test Office is the organization within the Constellation project that will flight-test the launch abort system on the Orion crew exploration vehicle. The Flight Test Office has proposed six tests that will demonstrate the use of the launch abort system. These flight tests will be performed at the White Sands Missile Range in New Mexico and are similar in nature to the Apollo Little Joe II tests performed in the 1960s. An overview of the launch abort system flight tests for the Orion crew exploration vehicle is given. Details on the configuration of the first pad abort flight test are discussed. Sample flight trajectories for two of the six flight tests are shown.

Group interaction and flight crew performance

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

Foushee, H. Clayton; Helmreich, Robert L.

1988-01-01

The application of human-factors analysis to the performance of aircraft-operation tasks by the crew as a group is discussed in an introductory review and illustrated with anecdotal material. Topics addressed include the function of a group in the operational environment, the classification of group performance factors (input, process, and output parameters), input variables and the flight crew process, and the effect of process variables on performance. Consideration is given to aviation safety issues, techniques for altering group norms, ways of increasing crew effort and coordination, and the optimization of group composition.

Flight deck crew coordination indices of workload and situation awareness in terminal operations

NASA Astrophysics Data System (ADS)

Ellis, Kyle Kent Edward

Crew coordination in the context of aviation is a specifically choreographed set of tasks performed by each pilot, defined for each phase of flight. Based on the constructs of effective Crew Resource Management and SOPs for each phase of flight, a shared understanding of crew workload and task responsibility is considered representative of well-coordinated crews. Nominal behavior is therefore defined by SOPs and CRM theory, detectable through pilot eye-scan. This research investigates the relationship between the eye-scan exhibited by each pilot and the level of coordination between crewmembers. Crew coordination was evaluated based on each pilot's understanding of the other crewmember's workload. By contrasting each pilot's workload-understanding, crew coordination was measured as the summed absolute difference of each pilot's understanding of the other crewmember's reported workload, resulting in a crew coordination index. The crew coordination index rates crew coordination on a scale ranging across Excellent, Good, Fair and Poor. Eye-scan behavior metrics were found to reliably identify a reduction in crew coordination. Additionally, crew coordination was successfully characterized by eye-scan behavior data using machine learning classification methods. Identifying eye-scan behaviors on the flight deck indicative of reduced crew coordination can be used to inform training programs and design enhanced avionics that improve the overall coordination between the crewmembers and the flight deck interface. Additionally, characterization of crew coordination can be used to develop methods to increase shared situation awareness and crew coordination to reduce operational and flight technical errors. Ultimately, the ability to reduce operational and flight technical errors made by pilot crews improves the safety of aviation.

14 CFR 135.99 - Composition of flight crew.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2011 CFR

2011-01-01

... REQUIREMENTS: COMMUTER AND ON DEMAND OPERATIONS AND RULES GOVERNING PERSONS ON BOARD SUCH AIRCRAFT Flight Operations § 135.99 Composition of flight crew. (a) No certificate holder may operate an aircraft with less...

Influence of the helicopter environment on patient care capabilities: Flight crew perceptions

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

Meyers, K. Jeffrey; Rodenberg, Howard; Woodard, Daniel

1994-01-01

Flight crew perceptions of the effect of the rotary wing environment on patient care capabilities have not been subject to statistical analysis. We hypothesized that flight crew perceived significant difficulties in performing patient care tasks during air medical transport. A survey instrument was distributed to a convenience sample of flight crew members from twenty flight programs. Respondents were asked to compare the difficulty of performing patient care tasks in rotary wing and standard (emergency department or intensive care unit) settings. Demographic data collected on respondents included years of flight experience, flights per month, crew duty position, and primary aircraft in which the respondent worked. Statistical analysis was performed as appropriate using Student's t-test, type 111 sum of squares, and analysis of variance. Alpha was defined as p is less than or equal to .05. Fifty-five percent of programs (90 individuals) responded. All tasks were rated significantly more difficult in the rotary wing environment. Ratings were not significantly correlated with flight experience, duty position, flights per month, or aircraft used. We conclude that the performance of patient care tasks are perceived by air medical flight crew to be significantly more difficult during rotary wing air medical transport than in hospital settings.

Influence of the helicopter environment on patient care capabilities: flight crew perceptions

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

Myers, K. J.; Rodenberg, H.; Woodard, D.

1995-01-01

INTRODUCTION: Flight crew perceptions of the effect of the rotary-wing environment on patient-care capabilities have not been subject to statistical analysis. We hypothesized that flight crew members perceived significant difficulties in performing patient-care tasks during air medical transport. METHODS: A survey was distributed to a convenience sample of flight crew members from 20 flight programs. Respondents were asked to compare the difficulty of performing patient-care tasks in rotary-wing and standard (emergency department or intensive care unit) settings. Demographic data collected on respondents included years of flight experience, flights per month, crew duty position and primary aircraft in which the respondent worked. Statistical analysis was performed as appropriate using Student's t-test, type III sum of squares, and analysis of variance. Alpha was defined as p < 0.05. RESULTS: Fifty-five percent of programs (90 individuals) responded. All tasks were significantly rated more difficult in the rotary-wing environment. Ratings were not significantly correlated with flight experience, duty position, flights per month or aircraft used. CONCLUSIONS: We conclude that the performance of patient-care tasks are perceived by air medical flight crew to be significantly more difficult during rotary-wing air medical transport than in hospital settings.

Fatigue in Flight Inspection Field Office (FIFO) flight crews.

DOT National Transportation Integrated Search

1981-04-01

Studies related to FIFO aircrew stress and fatigue were carried out at seven FIFO's in the Continental U.S. Forty-one men served as subjects and all crew positions were presented. Each crewmember was studied during flight activities and during office...

STS-88 in-flight crew portrait

NASA Image and Video Library

1998-12-14

S88-E-5169 (12-14-98) --- A pre-set electronic still camera (ESC) was used to take one of the traditional in-flight crew portraits for the STS-88 members on Endeavour's mid deck. From the left are Jerry L. Ross, James H. Newman, Robert D. Cabana, Frederick W. (Rick) Sturckow, Nancy J. Currie and Sergei K. Krikalev. Krikalev, representing the Russian Space Agency (RSA), has been assigned as one of the crew members for the first ISS crew. A banner representing the participating countries for ISS and a model of the connected Unity-Zarya modules are in the background. The photo was taken at 23:41:40, Dec. 14.

Research project evaluates the effect of national culture on flight crew behaviour.

PubMed

Helmreich, R L; Merritt, A C; Sherman, P J

1996-10-01

The role of national culture in flight crew interactions and behavior is examined. Researchers surveyed Asian, European, and American flight crews to determine attitudes about crew coordination and cockpit management. Universal attitudes among pilots are identified. Culturally variable attitudes among pilots from 16 countries are compared. The role of culture in response to increasing cockpit automation is reviewed. Culture-based challenges to crew resource management programs and multicultural organizations are discussed.

STS-88 in-flight crew portrait

NASA Image and Video Library

1998-12-14

S88-E-5170 (12-15-98) --- A pre-set electronic still camera (ESC) was used to take one of the traditional in-flight crew portraits for the STS-88 members on Endeavour's mid deck. From the left are Frederick W. (Rick) Sturckow, Jerry L. Ross, James H. Newman, Nancy J. Currie, Robert D. Cabana and Sergei K. Krikalev. Krikalev, representing the Russian Space Agency (RSA), has been assigned as one of the crew members for the first ISS crew. A banner representing the participating countries for ISS and a model (near Krikalev) of the connected Unity-Zarya modules are in the background. The photo was taken at 00:12:48 GMT, Dec. 15.

Return to Flight: Crew Activities Resource Reel 1 of 2

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

2005-01-01

The crew of the STS-114 Discovery Mission is seen in various aspects of training for space flight. The crew activities include: 1) STS-114 Return to Flight Crew Photo Session; 2) Tile Repair Training on Precision Air Bearing Floor; 3) SAFER Tile Inspection Training in Virtual Reality Laboratory; 4) Guidance and Navigation Simulator Tile Survey Training; 5) Crew Inspects Orbital Boom and Sensor System (OBSS); 6) Bailout Training-Crew Compartment; 7) Emergency Egress Training-Crew Compartment Trainer (CCT); 8) Water Survival Training-Neutral Buoyancy Lab (NBL); 9) Ascent Training-Shuttle Motion Simulator; 10) External Tank Photo Training-Full Fuselage Trainer; 11) Rendezvous and Docking Training-Shuttle Engineering Simulator (SES) Dome; 12) Shuttle Robot Arm Training-SES Dome; 13) EVA Training Virtual Reality Lab; 14) EVA Training Neutral Buoyancy Lab; 15) EVA-2 Training-NBL; 16) EVA Tool Training-Partial Gravity Simulator; 17) Cure in Place Ablator Applicator (CIPAA) Training Glove Vacuum Chamber; 16) Crew Visit to Merritt Island Launch Area (MILA); 17) Crew Inspection-Space Shuttle Discovery; and 18) Crew Inspection-External Tank and Orbital Boom and Sensor System (OBSS). The crew are then seen answering questions from the media at the Space Shuttle Landing Facility.

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

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

Crane, Barry W.; Prevot, Thomas; Palmer, Everett A.; Shafto, M. (Technical Monitor)

2000-01-01

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.

Management of Sea Sickness in Susceptible Flight Crews.

PubMed

Powell-Dunford, Nicole; Bushby, Alaistair

2017-11-01

Sea sickness may greatly impact the readiness of Service personnel deployed aboard naval vessels. Medications used in the treatment of sea sickness may have adverse effects, limiting their use as flight crew. Although the prevalence of sea sickness in flight crews remains unclear, individual susceptibility and high sea states are established risk factors. Literature review can guide optimized management strategies for this population. The first author conducted a PubMed search using the terms "sea sickness" "flight crew" "scopolamine," "hyoscine," and "cinnarizine," identifying 15 articles of 350 matches, which addressed potential impact to flight performance. Analysis also included two historic reports about motion sickness maintained within the U.K. Army Aviation Centre's aeromedical archives in Middle Wallop, Hampshire. Both authors reviewed aeromedical policy for the International Civil Aviation Organization, U.K. Civil Aviation Authority, U.S. Federal Aviation Authority, the National Aeronautics Space Administration, U.S. Army, U.S. Navy, and U.S. Air Force. Scopolamine, also known as hyoscine, has fewer operationally relevant side effects than cinnarizine or first-generation antihistamines. Although no aeromedical authorities endorse the unsupervised use of scopolamine, many will consider authorizing its temporary use following an initial assessment on the ground. Evidence supports the concomitant use of stimulant medication for augmenting antinausea effects and countering the potential sedative effects of scopolamine. Scopolamine should be considered as a first-line medication for flight crews at risk of sea sickness but such use must be guided by the appropriate aeromedical authority, ideally in conjunction with a ground trial to evaluate individual response. The limited evidence to support concurrent use of stimulants must be weighed against the challenges of maintaining accountability of controlled substances in the operational environment. Reprint

STS-67 in-flight crew portrait

NASA Image and Video Library

1995-03-03

The STS-67/ASTRO-2 crew members pose for their traditional inflight portrait on the aft flight deck of the Earth orbiting Space Shuttle Endeavour. Left to right in the front are astronauts Tamara E. Jernigan, payload commander; Steven S. Oswald, mission commander; and William G. Gregory, pilot. Left to right on the back row are astronaut Wendy B. Lawrence, flight engineer; payload specialists Ronald A. Parise and Samuel T. Durrance; and John M. Grunsfeld, mission specialist.

Flight data file: STS-4 crew activity plan

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

Pippert, E. B., Jr.

1982-01-01

The STS-4 Crew Activity Plan contains the on-orbit timeline, which is a flight data file article. Various time scales such as Mission Elapsed Time (MET), Greenwich Mean Time (GMT), and time until deorbit ignition as well as crew activities, day/night, orbit position, ground tracking, communication coverage, attitude, and maneuvers are presented in chart form.

STS-121: Discovery Pre-Flight Crew News Briefing

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

2006-01-01

The STS-121 crew is shown during this pre-flight news briefing. Steve Lindsey, Commander, begins with saying that they are only a few weeks from flight and the vehicle is in good shape. Mark Kelly, Pilot, is introduced by Lindsey and he discusses Kelly's main objective which is to direct the three spacewalks scheduled. Kelly introduces Mike Fossum, Mission Specialist. Kelly says that Fossum will be involved in three spacewalks. Fossum introduces Lisa Nowak, Mission Specialist, who is involved in robotics. Also Stephanie Wilson, Mission Specialist, will be involved in robotics. Piers Sellers, Mission Specialist, is introduced by Wilson, who is the lead spacewalker for this mission. Sellers then introduce Thomas Reiter, Mission Specialist, who is involved in spacewalks. The educational background of each crew member is given. Questions from the news media on the subjects of long term flights on the International Space Station, Ice frost ramp replacement, Orbiter Boom Sensor System (OBSS) stability, foam loss during STS-114 flight, duration of the mission, and mental preparation for test flights are addressed.

Flight Crew Health Maintenance

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

Gullett, C. C.

1970-01-01

The health maintenance program for commercial flight crew personnel includes diet, weight control, and exercise to prevent heart disease development and disability grounding. The very high correlation between hypertension and overweight in cardiovascular diseases significantly influences the prognosis for a coronary prone individual and results in a high rejection rate of active military pilots applying for civilian jobs. In addition to physical fitness the major items stressed in pilot selection are: emotional maturity, glucose tolerance, and family health history.

In-flight crew training

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

Gott, Charles; Galicki, Peter; Shores, David

1990-01-01

The Helmet Mounted Display system and Part Task Trainer are two projects currently underway that are closely related to the in-flight crew training concept. The first project is a training simulator and an engineering analysis tool. The simulator's unique helmet mounted display actually projects the wearer into the simulated environment of 3-D space. Miniature monitors are mounted in front of the wearers eyes. Partial Task Trainer is a kinematic simulator for the Shuttle Remote Manipulator System. The simulator consists of a high end graphics workstation with a high resolution color screen and a number of input peripherals that create a functional equivalent of the RMS control panel in the back of the Orbiter. It is being used in the training cycle for Shuttle crew members. Activities are underway to expand the capability of the Helmet Display System and the Partial Task Trainer.

STS-95 in-flight crew portrait

NASA Image and Video Library

1998-11-16

STS095-328-031 (29 Oct.-7 Nov. 1998) --- With their feet anchored in the hatchway, the seven STS-95 crew members pose for their traditional in-flight crew portrait. Astronaut Curtis L. Brown Jr., commander, appears at right center in the pyramid. Others, clockwise from there, are Steven W. Lindsey, pilot; Stephen K. Robinson, mission specialist; Pedro Duque, mission specialist representing the European Space Agency (ESA); payload specialist Chiaki Naito-Mukai, who represents Japan's National Space Development Agency (NASDA); Scott E. Parazynski, mission specialist; and United States Senator John H. Glenn Jr. (D.-Ohio), payload specialist.

STS-8 crew during post flight telephone conversation with President Reagan

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

1983-01-01

The STS-8 crew, all seated on a platform in a studio, respond to a comment made by President Ronald Reagan during a post flight telephone conversation. Richard Truly, center, is crew commander. Pilot for the flight was Daniel C. Brandenstein, second left. The mission specialists were Guion S. Bluford, left: Dr. William S. Thornton, second right, and Dale A. Gardner, right.

Flammability on textile of flight crew professional clothing

NASA Astrophysics Data System (ADS)

Silva-Santos, M. C.; Oliveira, M. S.; Giacomin, A. M.; Laktim, M. C.; Baruque-Ramos, J.

2017-10-01

The issue about flammability of textile materials employed in passenger cabins of commercial aircrafts is an important part of safety routines planning. Once an in-flight emergency initiated with fire or smoke aboard, time becomes critical and the entire crew must be involved in the solution. It is part of the crew functions, notably the attendants, the in-flight firefighting. This study compares the values of textile material of flight attendant working cloths and galley curtain fabric with regard to flammability and Limiting Oxygen Index (LOI). Values to the professional clothing material indicate that they are flammable and the curtains, self-extinguishing. Thus, despite of the occurrences of fire outbreaks in aircrafts are unexceptional, the use of other materials and technologies for uniforms, such as alternative textile fibers and flame retardant finishes should be considered as well as the establishment of performance limits regarding flame and fire exposing.

Flight crew aiding for recovery from subsystem failures

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

Hudlicka, E.; Corker, K.; Schudy, R.; Baron, Sheldon

1990-01-01

Some of the conceptual issues associated with pilot aiding systems are discussed and an implementation of one component of such an aiding system is described. It is essential that the format and content of the information the aiding system presents to the crew be compatible with the crew's mental models of the task. It is proposed that in order to cooperate effectively, both the aiding system and the flight crew should have consistent information processing models, especially at the point of interface. A general information processing strategy, developed by Rasmussen, was selected to serve as the bridge between the human and aiding system's information processes. The development and implementation of a model-based situation assessment and response generation system for commercial transport aircraft are described. The current implementation is a prototype which concentrates on engine and control surface failure situations and consequent flight emergencies. The aiding system, termed Recovery Recommendation System (RECORS), uses a causal model of the relevant subset of the flight domain to simulate the effects of these failures and to generate appropriate responses, given the current aircraft state and the constraints of the current flight phase. Since detailed information about the aircraft state may not always be available, the model represents the domain at varying levels of abstraction and uses the less detailed abstraction levels to make inferences when exact information is not available. The structure of this model is described in detail.

Crew systems and flight station concepts for a 1995 transport aircraft

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

Sexton, G. A.

1983-01-01

Aircraft functional systems and crew systems were defined for a 1995 transport aircraft through a process of mission analysis, preliminary design, and evaluation in a soft mockup. This resulted in a revolutionary pilot's desk flight station design featuring an all-electric aircraft, fly-by-wire/light flight and thrust control systems, large electronic color head-down displays, head-up displays, touch panel controls for aircraft functional systems, voice command and response systems, and air traffic control systems projected for the 1990s. The conceptual aircraft, for which crew systems were designed, is a generic twin-engine wide-body, low-wing transport, capable of worldwide operation. The flight control system consists of conventional surfaces (some employed in unique ways) and new surfaces not used on current transports. The design will be incorporated into flight simulation facilities at NASA-Langley, NASA-Ames, and the Lockheed-Georgia Company. When interfaced with advanced air traffic control system models, the facilities will provide full-mission capability for researching issues affecting transport aircraft flight stations and crews of the 1990s.

Multipurpose Crew Restraints for Long Duration Space Flights

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

Whitmore, Mihriban; Baggerman, Susan; Ortiz, M. R.; Hua, L.; Sinnott, P.; Webb, L.

2004-01-01

With permanent human presence onboard the International Space Station (ISS), a crew will be living and working in microgravity, interfacing with their physical environment. Without optimum restraints and mobility aids (R&MA' s), the crewmembers may be handicapped for perfonning some of the on-orbit tasks. In addition to weightlessness, the confined nature of a spacecraft environment results in ergonomic challenges such as limited visibility and access to the activity area and may cause prolonged periods of unnatural postures. Thus, determining the right set of human factors requirements and providing an ergonomically designed environment are crucial to astronauts' well-being and productivity. The purpose of this project is to develop requirements and guidelines, and conceptual designs, for an ergonomically designed multi-purpose crew restraint. In order to achieve this goal, the project would involve development of functional and human factors requirements, design concept prototype development, analytical and computer modeling evaluations of concepts, two sets of micro gravity evaluations and preparation of an implementation plan. It is anticipated that developing functional and design requirements for a multi-purpose restraint would facilitate development of ergonomically designed restraints to accommodate the off-nominal but repetitive tasks, and minimize the performance degradation due to lack of optimum setup for onboard task performance. In addition, development of an ergonomically designed restraint concept prototype would allow verification and validation of the requirements defined. To date, we have identified "unique" tasks and areas of need, determine characteristics of "ideal" restraints, and solicit ideas for restraint and mobility aid concepts. Focus group meetings with representatives from training, safety, crew, human factors, engineering, payload developers, and analog environment representatives were key to assist in the development of a restraint

STS-132 ascent flight control team photo with Flight Director Richard Jones and the STS-132 crew

NASA Image and Video Library

2010-06-08

JSC2010-E-090665 (8 June 2010) --- The members of the STS-132 Ascent flight control team and crew members pose for a group portrait in the space shuttle flight control room in the Mission Control Center at NASA's Johnson Space Center. Flight director Richard Jones (right) and NASA astronaut Ken Ham, STS-132 commander, hold the STS-132 mission logo. Additional crew members pictured are NASA astronauts Tony Antonelli, pilot; along with Garrett Reisman, Piers Sellers, Michael Good and Steve Bowen, all mission specialists. Photo credit: NASA or National Aeronautics and Space Administration

14 CFR 135.269 - Flight time limitations and rest requirements: Unscheduled three- and four-pilot crews.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

2010-01-01

... requirements: Unscheduled three- and four-pilot crews. 135.269 Section 135.269 Aeronautics and Space FEDERAL... four-pilot crews. (a) No certificate holder may assign any flight crewmember, and no flight crewmember may accept an assignment, for flight time as a member of a three- or four-pilot crew if that...

14 CFR 25.1523 - Minimum flight crew.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

2010-01-01

... 14 Aeronautics and Space 1 2010-01-01 2010-01-01 false Minimum flight crew. 25.1523 Section 25.1523 Aeronautics and Space FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION, DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION AIRCRAFT... sufficient for safe operation, considering— (a) The workload on individual crewmembers; (b) The accessibility...

14 CFR 29.1523 - Minimum flight crew.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2011 CFR

2011-01-01

... 14 Aeronautics and Space 1 2011-01-01 2011-01-01 false Minimum flight crew. 29.1523 Section 29.1523 Aeronautics and Space FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION, DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION AIRCRAFT... sufficient for safe operation, considering— (a) The workload on individual crewmembers; (b) The accessibility...

14 CFR 29.1523 - Minimum flight crew.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

2010-01-01

... 14 Aeronautics and Space 1 2010-01-01 2010-01-01 false Minimum flight crew. 29.1523 Section 29.1523 Aeronautics and Space FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION, DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION AIRCRAFT... sufficient for safe operation, considering— (a) The workload on individual crewmembers; (b) The accessibility...

14 CFR 25.1523 - Minimum flight crew.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2011 CFR

2011-01-01

... 14 Aeronautics and Space 1 2011-01-01 2011-01-01 false Minimum flight crew. 25.1523 Section 25.1523 Aeronautics and Space FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION, DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION AIRCRAFT... sufficient for safe operation, considering— (a) The workload on individual crewmembers; (b) The accessibility...

14 CFR 27.1523 - Minimum flight crew.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2011 CFR

2011-01-01

... 14 Aeronautics and Space 1 2011-01-01 2011-01-01 false Minimum flight crew. 27.1523 Section 27.1523 Aeronautics and Space FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION, DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION AIRCRAFT... safe operation, considering— (a) The workload on individual crewmembers; (b) The accessibility and ease...

14 CFR 27.1523 - Minimum flight crew.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

2010-01-01

... 14 Aeronautics and Space 1 2010-01-01 2010-01-01 false Minimum flight crew. 27.1523 Section 27.1523 Aeronautics and Space FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION, DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION AIRCRAFT... safe operation, considering— (a) The workload on individual crewmembers; (b) The accessibility and ease...

In-flight portrait of the STS-60 crew

NASA Image and Video Library

1999-04-09

STS060-31-009 (3-11 Feb. 1994) --- The six-member STS-60 crew pose for the traditional in-flight crew portrait, with American and Russian flags forming the backdrop on the space shuttle Discovery’s middeck. Left to right (front row) are N. Jan Davis, Charles F. Bolden Jr. and Franklin R. Chang-Diaz; and (back row) Ronald M. Sega, Sergei K. Krikalev and Kenneth S. Reightler Jr. Photo credit: NASA or National Aeronautics and Space Administration

Flight Crew Sleep in Long-Haul Aircraft Bunk Facilities: Survey Results

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

Rosekind, Mark R.; Miller, Donna L.; Gregory, Kevin B.; Dinges, David F.; Shafto, Michael G. (Technical Monitor)

1995-01-01

Modem long-haul aircraft can fly up to 16 continuous hours and provide a 24-hour, global capability. Extra (augmented) flight crew are available on long flights to allow planned rest periods, on a rotating basis, away from the flight deck in onboard crew rest facilities (2 bunks). A NASA/FAA study is under-way to examine the quantity and quality of sleep obtained in long-haul aircraft bunks and the factors that promote or interfere with that sleep. The first phase of the study involved a retrospective survey, followed by a second phase field study to collect standard polysomnographic data during inflight bunk sleep periods. A summary of the Phase I survey results are reported here. A multi-part 54-question retrospective survey was completed by 1,404 flight crew (37% return rate) at three different major US air carriers flying B747-100, 200, 400, and MD- 11 long-haul aircraft. The questions examined demographics, quantity and quality of sleep at home and in onboard bunks, factors that promote or interfere with sleep, and effects on subsequent performance and alertness. Flight crew reported a mean bunk sleep latency of 39.4 mins (SD=28.3 mins) (n=1,276) and a mean total sleep time of 2.2 hrs (SD=1.3 hrs) (n=603). (Different flight lengths could affect overall time available for sleep.) Crew rated 25 factors for their interference or promotion of bunk sleep. Figure I portrays the average ratings for each factor across all three carriers. A principal components analysis of the 25 factors revealed three areas that promoted bunk sleep: physiological (e.g., readiness for sleep), physical environment (e.g., bunk size, privacy), and personal comfort (e.g., blankets, pillows). Five areas were identified that interfered with sleep: environmental disturbance (e.g., background noise, turbulence), luminosity (e.g., lighting), personal disturbances (e.g., bathroom trips, random thoughts), environmental discomfort (e.g., low humidity, cold), and interpersonal disturbances (e

LOFT Debriefings: An Analysis of Instructor Techniques and Crew Participation

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

Dismukes, R. Key; Jobe, Kimberly K.; McDonnell, Lori K.

1997-01-01

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.

Acceptability of Flight Deck-Based Interval Management Crew Procedures

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

Murdock, Jennifer L.; Wilson, Sara R.; Hubbs, Clay E.; Smail, James W.

2013-01-01

The Interval Management for Near-term Operations Validation of Acceptability (IM-NOVA) experiment was conducted at the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) Langley Research Center (LaRC) in support of the NASA Next Generation Air Transportation System (NextGen) Airspace Systems Program's Air Traffic Management Technology Demonstration - 1 (ATD-1). ATD-1 is intended to showcase an integrated set of technologies that provide an efficient arrival solution for managing aircraft using NextGen surveillance, navigation, procedures, and automation for both airborne and ground-based systems. The goal of the IM-NOVA experiment was to assess if procedures outlined by the ATD-1 Concept of Operations, when used with a minimum set of Flight deck-based Interval Management (FIM) equipment and a prototype crew interface, were acceptable to and feasible for use by flight crews in a voice communications environment. To investigate an integrated arrival solution using ground-based air traffic control tools and aircraft automatic dependent surveillance broadcast (ADS-B) tools, the LaRC FIM system and the Traffic Management Advisor with Terminal Metering and Controller Managed Spacing tools developed at the NASA Ames Research Center (ARC) were integrated in LaRC's Air Traffic Operations Laboratory. Data were collected from 10 crews of current, qualified 757/767 pilots asked to fly a high-fidelity, fixed based simulator during scenarios conducted within an airspace environment modeled on the Dallas-Fort Worth (DFW) Terminal Radar Approach Control area. The aircraft simulator was equipped with the Airborne Spacing for Terminal Area Routes algorithm and a FIM crew interface consisting of electronic flight bags and ADS-B guidance displays. Researchers used "pseudo-pilot" stations to control 24 simulated aircraft that provided multiple air traffic flows into DFW, and recently retired DFW air traffic controllers served as confederate Center, Feeder, Final, and Tower

STS-106 Crew Activity Report / Flight Day Highlights Day 2

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

2000-01-01

STS-106 was launched on Sept 8, 2000 at 8:45 a.m. The crew was commanded by Terrence W. Wilcutt, the pilot was Scott D. Altman. The mission specialists were Daniel C. Burbank, Edward T. Lu, Richard A. Mastracchio, Yuri Ivanovich Malenchenko, and Boris V. Morukov. During the 11-day mission, the crew spent a week inside the International Space Station (ISS) unloading supplies from both a double SPACEHAB cargo module in the rear of the Atlantis cargo bay and from a Russian Progress M-1 resupply craft docked to the aft end of the Zvezda Service Module. The videotape shows the activities of the second day of the flight and the preparations for docking with the ISS. Shown on the video are shots of the flight deck on the shuttle, the shuttle payload arm, and shots of the crew eating lunch.

Piloted Simulator Evaluation of Maneuvering Envelope Information for Flight Crew Awareness

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

Lombaerts, Thomas; Schuet, Stefan; Acosta, Diana; Kaneshige, John; Shish, Kimberlee; Martin, Lynne

2015-01-01

The implementation and evaluation of an efficient method for estimating safe aircraft maneuvering envelopes are discussed. A Bayesian approach is used to produce a deterministic algorithm for estimating aerodynamic system parameters from existing noisy sensor measurements, which are then used to estimate the trim envelope through efficient high- fidelity model-based computations of attainable equilibrium sets. The safe maneuverability limitations are extended beyond the trim envelope through a robust reachability analysis derived from an optimal control formulation. The trim and maneuvering envelope limits are then conveyed to pilots through three axes on the primary flight display. To evaluate the new display features, commercial airline crews flew multiple challenging approach and landing scenarios in the full motion Advanced Concepts Flight Simulator at NASA Ames Research Center, as part of a larger research initiative to investigate the impact on the energy state awareness of the crew. Results show that the additional display features have the potential to significantly improve situational awareness of the flight crew.

The effects of Crew Resource Management (CRM) training on flight attendants' safety attitudes.

PubMed

Ford, Jane; Henderson, Robert; O'Hare, David

2014-02-01

A number of well-known incidents and accidents had led the aviation industry to introduce Crew Resource Management (CRM) training designed specifically for flight attendants, and joint (pilot and flight attendant) CRM training as a way to improve teamwork and communication. The development of these new CRM training programs during the 1990s highlighted the growing need for programs to be evaluated using research tools that had been validated for the flight attendant population. The FSAQ (Flight Safety Attitudes Questionnaire-Flight Attendants) was designed specifically to obtain safety attitude data from flight attendants working for an Asia-Pacific airline. Flight attendants volunteered to participate in a study before receiving CRM training (N=563) and again (N=526) after CRM training. Almost half (13) of the items from the 36-item FSAQ showed highly significant changes following CRM training. Years of experience, crew position, seniority, leadership roles, flight attendant crew size, and length of route flown were all predictive of safety attitudes. CRM training for flight attendants is a valuable tool for increasing positive teamwork behaviors between the flight attendant and pilot sub-groups. Joint training sessions, where flight attendants and pilots work together to find solutions to in-flight emergency scenarios, provide a particularly useful strategy in breaking down communication barriers between the two sub-groups. Copyright © 2013 National Safety Council and Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Flight crew sleep during multiple layover polar flights.

PubMed

Sasaki, M; Kurosaki, Y S; Spinweber, C L; Graeber, R C; Takahashi, T

1993-07-01

This study investigated changes in sleep after multiple transmeridian flights. The subjects were 12 B747 airline pilots operating on the following polar flight: Tokyo (TYO)-Anchorage (ANC)-London (LON)-Anchorage-Tokyo. Sleep polysomnograms were recorded on two baseline nights (B1, B2), during layovers, and, after returning to Tokyo, two recovery nights were recorded (R1, R2). In ANC (outbound), total sleep time (TST) was reduced and, sleep efficiency was low (72.0%). In London, time in bed (TIB) increased slightly, but sleep efficiency was still reduced. On return to ANC (inbound), there was considerable slow wave sleep (SWS) rebound and multiple awakenings reduced sleep efficiency to 76.8%. Sleep efficiency on R2 was significantly lower than on B1 (t-test, p < 0.05) but not different from R1. To sum up, sleep of aircrews flying multiple transmeridian flights is disrupted during layovers and this effect persists during the two recovery nights. As a result, there is a marked cumulative sleep loss during multi-legs polar route trip in comparison to single leg flights. These findings suggest that following such extensive transmeridian trips, crews should have at least three nights of recovery sleep in their home time zone before returning to duty.

Flight crew sleep during multiple layover polar flights

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

Sasaki, Mitsuo; Kurosaki, Yuko S.; Spinweber, Cheryl L.; Graeber, R. C.; Takahashi, Toshiharu

1993-01-01

This study investigated changes in sleep after multiple transmeridian flights. The subjects were 12 B747 airline pilots operating on the following polar flight: Tokyo (TYO)-Anchorage (ANC)-London (LON)-Anchorage-Tokyo. Sleep polysmonograms were recorded on two baseline nights (B1, B2), during layovers, and, after returning to Tokyo, two recovery nights were recorded (R1, R2). In ANC (outbound), total sleep time was reduced and, sleep efficiency was low (72.0 percent). In London, time in bed increased slightly, but sleep efficiency was still reduced. On return to ANC (inbound), there was considerable slow wave sleep rebound and multiple awakenings reduced sleep efficiency to 76.8 percent. Sleep efficiency on R2 was significantly lower than on B1 but not different from R1. To sum up, sleep of aircrews flying multiple transmeridian flights is disrupted during layovers and this effect persists during the two recovery nights. As a result, there is a marked cumulative sleep loss during multilegs polar route trip in comparison to single leg flights. These findings suggest that following such extensive transmeridian trips, crews should have at least three nights of recovery sleep in their home time zone before returning to duty.

A predictive model of flight crew performance in automated air traffic control and flight management operations

DOT National Transportation Integrated Search

1995-01-01

Prepared ca. 1995. This paper describes Air-MIDAS, a model of pilot performance in interaction with varied levels of automation in flight management operations. The model was used to predict the performance of a two person flight crew responding to c...

14 CFR 417.311 - Flight safety crew roles and qualifications.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

2010-01-01

... 14 Aeronautics and Space 4 2010-01-01 2010-01-01 false Flight safety crew roles and qualifications. 417.311 Section 417.311 Aeronautics and Space COMMERCIAL SPACE TRANSPORTATION, FEDERAL AVIATION... the knowledge, skills, and abilities needed to operate the flight safety system hardware in accordance...

14 CFR 417.311 - Flight safety crew roles and qualifications.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2011 CFR

2011-01-01

... 14 Aeronautics and Space 4 2011-01-01 2011-01-01 false Flight safety crew roles and qualifications. 417.311 Section 417.311 Aeronautics and Space COMMERCIAL SPACE TRANSPORTATION, FEDERAL AVIATION... the knowledge, skills, and abilities needed to operate the flight safety system hardware in accordance...

Crew factors in flight operations IX : effects of planned cockpit rest on crew performance and alertness in long-haul operations

DOT National Transportation Integrated Search

1994-07-01

This report is the ninth in a series on physiological and psychological effects of flight operations on flight crews, and on the operational significance of these effects. Long-haul flight operations often involve rapid multiple time-zone changes, sl...

Crew factors in flight operations. Part 4: Sleep and wakefulness in international aircrews

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

Graeber, R. C.

1986-01-01

Physiological recordings of sleep and wakefulness in operating international (B-747) flight crews were obtained. Crews spent their first layover (48 h) of a trip in a sleep laboratory where standardized EEG, electro-oculograph (EOC), and electromyograph (EMG) sleep recordings were carried out whenever volunteers chose to sleep. During periods of wakefulness they underwent multiple sleep latency tests every 2 h in order to assess daytime drowsiness. The same standardized recordings were carried out at a home-based laboratory before departure. Approximately four crews each participated in flights over 7 to 9 time zones on five routes. All participants were encouraged to use whatever sleep-wake strategies they thought would provide them with the most satisfactory crew rest. Overall, layover sleep quality was not seriously disturbed, but eastward flights produced greater sleep disruption. The contributors of individual factors and the usefulness of various sleep strategies are discussed in the individual laboratory reports and in an operational summary.

Gemini 10 prime crew during post flight press conference

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

1966-01-01

At podium during Gemini 10 press conference are (l-r) Dr. Robert C. Seamans, Astronauts John Young and Michael Collins and Dr. Robert R. Gilruth (39895); Wide angle view of the Manned Spacecraft Center (MSC) News Center during the Gemini 10 prime crew post flight press conference (38786); Astronaut Young draws diagram on chalk board of tethered extravehicular activity accomplished during Gemini 10 flight (39897).

Crew factors in flight operations VI : psychophysiological responses to helicopter operations

DOT National Transportation Integrated Search

1994-07-01

This report is the sixth in a series on the physiological and psychological effects of flight operations on flight crews, and on the operational significance of these effects. Thirty-two helicopter pilots were studied before, during, and after 4- to ...

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

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

Sumwalt, Robert L.; Watson, Alan W.

1995-01-01

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.

Use of Data Comm by Flight Crew in High-Density Terminal Areas

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

Baxley, Brian T.; Norman, Robert M.; Ellis, Kyle K. E.; Latorella, Kara A.; Comstock, James R.; Adams, Cathy A.

2010-01-01

This paper describes a collaborative FAA and NASA experiment using 22 commercial airline pilots to determine the effect of using Datalink Communication (Data Comm) to issue messages in busy, terminal area operations. Four conditions were defined that span current day to future flight deck equipage levels (voice communication only, Data Comm only, Data Comm with Moving Map Display, Data Comm with Moving Map displaying taxi route), and each condition was used to create an arrival and a departure scenario at the Boston Logan Airport. These eight scenarios were repeated twice for a total of 16 scenarios for each of the eleven crews. Quantitative data was collected on subject reaction time and eye tracking information. Questionnaires collected subjective feedback on workload and acceptability to the flight crew for using Data Comm in a busy terminal area. 95% of the Data Comm messages were responded to by the flight crew within one minute; however, post experiment debrief comments revealed almost unanimous consensus that two minutes was a reasonable expectation for crew response. Eye tracking data indicated an insignificant decrease in head-up time for the Pilot Flying when Data Comm was introduced; however, the Pilot Monitoring had significantly less head-up time. Data Comm workload was rated as operationally acceptable by both crew members in all conditions in flight at any altitude above the Final Approach Fix in terms of response time and workload. Results also indicate the use of Data Comm during surface operations was acceptable, the exception being the simultaneous use of voice, Data Comm, and audio chime required for an aircraft to cross an active runway. Many crews reported they believed Data Comm messages would be acceptable after the Final Approach Fix or to cross a runway if the message was not accompanied by a chime and there was not a requirement to immediately respond to the uplink message.

Integrated Crew Health Care System for Space Flight

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

Davis, Jeffrey R.

2007-01-01

Dr. Davis' presentation includes a brief overview of space flight and the lessons learned for health care in microgravity. He will describe the development of policy for health care for international crews. He will conclude his remarks with a discussion of an integrated health care system.

14 CFR 121.509 - Flight time limitations: Four pilot crews: airplanes.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

2010-01-01

...: airplanes. 121.509 Section 121.509 Aeronautics and Space FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION, DEPARTMENT OF... Operations § 121.509 Flight time limitations: Four pilot crews: airplanes. (a) No certificate holder conducting supplemental operations may schedule a pilot— (1) For flight deck duty in an airplane that has a...

14 CFR 121.507 - Flight time limitations: Three pilot crews: airplanes.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

2010-01-01

...: airplanes. 121.507 Section 121.507 Aeronautics and Space FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION, DEPARTMENT OF... Operations § 121.507 Flight time limitations: Three pilot crews: airplanes. (a) No certificate holder conducting supplemental operations may schedule a pilot— (1) For flight deck duty in an airplane that has a...

14 CFR 121.509 - Flight time limitations: Four pilot crews: airplanes.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2012 CFR

2012-01-01

...: airplanes. 121.509 Section 121.509 Aeronautics and Space FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION, DEPARTMENT OF... Operations § 121.509 Flight time limitations: Four pilot crews: airplanes. (a) No certificate holder conducting supplemental operations may schedule a pilot— (1) For flight deck duty in an airplane that has a...

14 CFR 121.507 - Flight time limitations: Three pilot crews: airplanes.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2011 CFR

2011-01-01

...: airplanes. 121.507 Section 121.507 Aeronautics and Space FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION, DEPARTMENT OF... Operations § 121.507 Flight time limitations: Three pilot crews: airplanes. (a) No certificate holder conducting supplemental operations may schedule a pilot— (1) For flight deck duty in an airplane that has a...

14 CFR 121.507 - Flight time limitations: Three pilot crews: airplanes.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2013 CFR

2013-01-01

...: airplanes. 121.507 Section 121.507 Aeronautics and Space FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION, DEPARTMENT OF... Operations § 121.507 Flight time limitations: Three pilot crews: airplanes. (a) No certificate holder conducting supplemental operations may schedule a pilot— (1) For flight deck duty in an airplane that has a...

14 CFR 121.507 - Flight time limitations: Three pilot crews: airplanes.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2012 CFR

2012-01-01

...: airplanes. 121.507 Section 121.507 Aeronautics and Space FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION, DEPARTMENT OF... Operations § 121.507 Flight time limitations: Three pilot crews: airplanes. (a) No certificate holder conducting supplemental operations may schedule a pilot— (1) For flight deck duty in an airplane that has a...

14 CFR 121.509 - Flight time limitations: Four pilot crews: airplanes.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2014 CFR

2014-01-01

...: airplanes. 121.509 Section 121.509 Aeronautics and Space FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION, DEPARTMENT OF... Operations § 121.509 Flight time limitations: Four pilot crews: airplanes. (a) No certificate holder conducting supplemental operations may schedule a pilot— (1) For flight deck duty in an airplane that has a...

14 CFR 121.509 - Flight time limitations: Four pilot crews: airplanes.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2013 CFR

2013-01-01

...: airplanes. 121.509 Section 121.509 Aeronautics and Space FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION, DEPARTMENT OF... Operations § 121.509 Flight time limitations: Four pilot crews: airplanes. (a) No certificate holder conducting supplemental operations may schedule a pilot— (1) For flight deck duty in an airplane that has a...

14 CFR 121.509 - Flight time limitations: Four pilot crews: airplanes.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2011 CFR

2011-01-01

...: airplanes. 121.509 Section 121.509 Aeronautics and Space FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION, DEPARTMENT OF... Operations § 121.509 Flight time limitations: Four pilot crews: airplanes. (a) No certificate holder conducting supplemental operations may schedule a pilot— (1) For flight deck duty in an airplane that has a...

14 CFR 121.507 - Flight time limitations: Three pilot crews: airplanes.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2014 CFR

2014-01-01

...: airplanes. 121.507 Section 121.507 Aeronautics and Space FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION, DEPARTMENT OF... Operations § 121.507 Flight time limitations: Three pilot crews: airplanes. (a) No certificate holder conducting supplemental operations may schedule a pilot— (1) For flight deck duty in an airplane that has a...

29 CFR 825.801 - Special rules for airline flight crew employees, hours of service requirement.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2014 CFR

2014-07-01

... DIVISION, DEPARTMENT OF LABOR OTHER LAWS THE FAMILY AND MEDICAL LEAVE ACT OF 1993 Special Rules Applicable... personal commute time or time spent on vacation, medical, or sick leave. (c) An airline flight crew... service requirement. (a) An airline flight crew employee's eligibility for FMLA leave is to be determined...

29 CFR 825.801 - Special rules for airline flight crew employees, hours of service requirement.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2013 CFR

2013-07-01

... DIVISION, DEPARTMENT OF LABOR OTHER LAWS THE FAMILY AND MEDICAL LEAVE ACT OF 1993 Special Rules Applicable... personal commute time or time spent on vacation, medical, or sick leave. (c) An airline flight crew... service requirement. (a) An airline flight crew employee's eligibility for FMLA leave is to be determined...

76 FR 64960 - Extension of Agency Information Collection Activity Under OMB Review: Flight Crew Self-Defense...

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2011-10-19

... Information Collection Activity Under OMB Review: Flight Crew Self-Defense Training--Registration and... self-defense training class provided by TSA, the collection process involves requesting, the name.... Information Collection Requirement Title: Flight Crew Self-Defense Training--Registration and Evaluation. Type...

Apollo experience report: Simulation of manned space flight for crew training

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

Woodling, C. H.; Faber, S.; Vanbockel, J. J.; Olasky, C. C.; Williams, W. K.; Mire, J. L. C.; Homer, J. R.

1973-01-01

Through space-flight experience and the development of simulators to meet the associated training requirements, several factors have been established as fundamental for providing adequate flight simulators for crew training. The development of flight simulators from Project Mercury through the Apollo 15 mission is described. The functional uses, characteristics, and development problems of the various simulators are discussed for the benefit of future programs.

Advanced flight deck/crew station simulator functional requirements

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

Wall, R. L.; Tate, J. L.; Moss, M. J.

1980-01-01

This report documents a study of flight deck/crew system research facility requirements for investigating issues involved with developing systems, and procedures for interfacing transport aircraft with air traffic control systems planned for 1985 to 2000. Crew system needs of NASA, the U.S. Air Force, and industry were investigated and reported. A matrix of these is included, as are recommended functional requirements and design criteria for simulation facilities in which to conduct this research. Methods of exploiting the commonality and similarity in facilities are identified, and plans for exploiting this in order to reduce implementation costs and allow efficient transfer of experiments from one facility to another are presented.

STS-106 Crew Activities Report/Flight Day 04 Highlights

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

2000-01-01

On this fourth day of the STS-106 Atlantis mission, the flight crew, Commander Commander Terrence W. Wilcutt, Pilot Scott D. Altman, and Mission Specialists Daniel C. Burbank, Edward T. Lu, Richard A. Mastracchio, Yuri Ivanovich Malenchenko, and Boris V. Morukov are seen preparing for the scheduled space walk. Lu and Malenchenko are seen coming through the hatch of the International Space Station (ISS). Also shown are Lu and Malenchenko attaching a magnetometer and boom to Zvezda. Mastracchio operates the robot arm moving the extravehicular activity (EVA) crew outside of the ISS.

Understanding and Counteracting Fatigue in Flight Crews

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

Mallis, Melissa; Neri, David; Rosekind, Mark; Gander, Philippa; Caldwell, John; Graeber, Curtis

2007-01-01

The materials included in the collection of documents describe the research of the NASA Ames Fatigue Countermeasures Group (FCG), which examines the extent to which fatigue, sleep loss, and circadian disruption affect flight-crew performance. The group was formed in 1980 in response to a Congressional request to examine a possible safety problem of uncertain magnitude due to transmeridian flying and a potential problem due to fatigue in association with various factors found in air-transport operations and was originally called the Fatigue/Jet Lag Program. The goals of the FCG are: (1) the development and evaluation of strategies for mitigating the effects of sleepiness and circadian disruption on pilot performance levels; (2) the identification and evaluation of objective approaches for the prediction of alertness changes in flight crews; and (3) the transfer and application of research results to the operational field via classes, workshops, and safety briefings. Some of the countermeasure approaches that have been identified to be scientifically valid and operationally relevant are brief naps (less than 40 min) in the cockpit seat and 7-min activity breaks, which include postural changes and ambulation. Although a video-based alertness monitor based on slow eyelid closure shows promise in other operational environments, research by the FCG has demonstrated that in its current form at the time of this reporting, it is not feasible to implement it in the cockpit. Efforts also focus on documenting the impact of untreated fatigue on various types of flight operations. For example, the FCG recently completed a major investigation into the effects of ultra-long-range flights (20 continuous hours in duration) on the alertness and performance of pilots in order to establish a baseline set of parameters against which the effectiveness of new ultra-long-range fatigue remedies can be judged.

Flight Crew Workload Evaluation Based on the Workload Function Distribution Method.

PubMed

Zheng, Yiyuan; Lu, Yanyu; Jie, Yuwen; Fu, Shan

2017-05-01

The minimum flight crew on the flight deck should be established according to the workload for individual crewmembers. Typical workload measures consist of three types: subjective rating scale, task performance, and psychophysiological measures. However, all these measures have their own limitations. To reflect flight crew workload more specifically and comprehensively within the flight environment, and more directly comply with airworthiness regulations, the Workload Function Distribution Method, which combined the basic six workload functions, was proposed. The analysis was based on the different conditions of workload function numbers. Each condition was analyzed from two aspects, which were overall proportion and effective proportion. Three types of approach tasks were used in this study and the NASA-TLX scale was implemented for comparison. Neither the one-function condition nor the two-function condition had the same results with NASA-TLX. However, both the three-function and the four- to six- function conditions were identical with NASA-TLX. Further, the significant differences were different on four to six conditions. The overall proportion was insignificant, while the effective proportions were significant. The results show that the conditions with one function and two functions seemed to have no influence on workload, while executing three functions and four to six functions had an impact on workload. Besides, effective proportions of workload functions were more precisely compared with the overall proportions to indicate workload, especially in the conditions with multiple functions.Zheng Y, Lu Y, Jie Y, Fu S. Flight crew workload evaluation based on the workload function distribution method. Aerosp Med Hum Perform. 2017; 88(5):481-486.

Enroute flight-path planning - Cooperative performance of flight crews and knowledge-based systems

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

Smith, Philip J.; Mccoy, Elaine; Layton, Chuck; Galdes, Deb

1989-01-01

Interface design issues associated with the introduction of knowledge-based systems into the cockpit are discussed. Such issues include not only questions about display and control design, they also include deeper system design issues such as questions about the alternative roles and responsibilities of the flight crew and the computer system. In addition, the feasibility of using enroute flight path planning as a context for exploring such research questions is considered. In particular, the development of a prototyping shell that allows rapid design and study of alternative interfaces and system designs is discussed.

STS-106 Crew Activity Report/Flight Day 8 Highlights

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

2000-01-01

On this eighth day of the STS-106 Atlantis mission, the flight crew, Commander Terrence W. Wilcutt, Pilot Scott T. Altman, and Mission Specialists Daniel C. Burbank, Edward T. Lu, Richard A. Mastracchio, Yuri Ivanovich Malenchenko, and Boris V. Morukov move into the second half of preparing the International Space Station (ISS) for its first resident crew. Lu and Malenchenko are seen installing the power converters in the Zvezda module and components of the primary oxygen generation system. Mastracchio and Wilcutt moves supplies and logistics from the payload of Atlantis to the ISS. Wilcutt and Altman participate in several interviews and the crew wishes the Olympiads in Sydney good luck in their endeavors. Scenes also include external views of the ISS and images of Earth, including Sydney, Australia.

STS-66 Official pre-flight crew portrait

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

1994-01-01

The STS-66 Official crew portrait includes the following: Donald R. McMonagle (front right) is mission commander, and Curtis L. Brown (front center) is pilot. Other crewmembers include Ellen S. Ochoa, payload commander; Scott E. Parazynski (rear left), and Joseph R. Tanner (rear center), mission specialists, along with ESA astronaut Jean-Francois Clevoy (front left), mission specialist. Clervoy, Parazynski and Tanner, members of the 1992 astronaut class, are making their initial flights in space.

Summary of a Crew-Centered Flight Deck Design Philosophy for High-Speed Civil Transport (HSCT) Aircraft

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

Palmer, Michael T.; Rogers, William H.; Press, Hayes N.; Latorella, Kara A.; Abbott, Terence S.

1995-01-01

Past flight deck design practices used within the U.S. commercial transport aircraft industry have been highly successful in producing safe and efficient aircraft. However, recent advances in automation have changed the way pilots operate aircraft, and these changes make it necessary to reconsider overall flight deck design. Automated systems have become more complex and numerous, and often their inner functioning is partially or fully opaque to the flight crew. Recent accidents and incidents involving autoflight system mode awareness Dornheim, 1995) are an example. This increase in complexity raises pilot concerns about the trustworthiness of automation, and makes it difficult for the crew to be aware of all the intricacies of operation that may impact safe flight. While pilots remain ultimately responsible for mission success, performance of flight deck tasks has been more widely distributed across human and automated resources. Advances in sensor and data integration technologies now make far more information available than may be prudent to present to the flight crew.

Condensation on crew compartment aft flight deck window W10

NASA Image and Video Library

1982-03-30

STS003-24-211 (22-30 March 1982) --- Crew compartment aft flight deck viewing window W10 fogged with condensation. The condensation is a result of the spacecraft's position in relation to the sun. Photo credit: NASA

STS-106 Crew Activities Report/Flight Day 9 Highlights

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

2000-01-01

On this ninth day of the STS-106 Atlantis mission, the flight crew, Commander Commander Terrence W. Wilcutt, Pilot Scott D. Altman, and Mission Specialists Daniel C. Burbank, Edward T. Lu, Richard A. Mastracchio, Yuri Ivanovich Malenchenko, and Boris V. Morukov are shown transferring supplies and equipment. Equipment includes an exercise treadmill, for use by the first resident crew. Altman, Lu, Burbank and Morukov are seen installing the treadmill in the Zvezda module. Footage also shows Lu and Altman participating in a telecommunication interview. A beautiful night shot of the International Space Station (ISS) and Atlantis complex above the Earth is also shown.

STS-91 Flight Day 1 Highlights and Crew Activities Report

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

1998-01-01

On this first day of the STS-91 mission, the flight crew, Cmdr. Charles J. Precourt, Pilot Dominic L. Pudwill Gorie, and Mission Specialists Franklin R. Chang-Diaz, Janet Lynn Kavandi, Wendy B. Lawrence, Valery Victorovitch Ryumin and Andrew S. W. Thomas, can be seen performing pre-launch activities such as eating the traditional breakfast, crew suit-up, and the ride out to the launch pad. Also, included are various panoramic views of the shuttle on the pad. The crew is readied in the 'white room' for their mission. After the closing of the hatch and arm retraction, launch activities are shown including countdown, engine ignition, launch, and the separation of the Solid Rocket Boosters.

A crew-centered flight deck design philosophy for High-Speed Civil Transport (HSCT) aircraft

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

Palmer, Michael T.; Rogers, William H.; Press, Hayes N.; Latorella, Kara A.; Abbott, Terence S.

1995-01-01

Past flight deck design practices used within the U.S. commercial transport aircraft industry have been highly successful in producing safe and efficient aircraft. However, recent advances in automation have changed the way pilots operate aircraft, and these changes make it necessary to reconsider overall flight deck design. The High Speed Civil Transport (HSCT) mission will likely add new information requirements, such as those for sonic boom management and supersonic/subsonic speed management. Consequently, whether one is concerned with the design of the HSCT, or a next generation subsonic aircraft that will include technological leaps in automated systems, basic issues in human usability of complex systems will be magnified. These concerns must be addressed, in part, with an explicit, written design philosophy focusing on human performance and systems operability in the context of the overall flight crew/flight deck system (i.e., a crew-centered philosophy). This document provides such a philosophy, expressed as a set of guiding design principles, and accompanied by information that will help focus attention on flight crew issues earlier and iteratively within the design process. This document is part 1 of a two-part set.

Crew factors in flight operations 9: Effects of planned cockpit rest on crew performance and alertness in long-haul operations

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

Rosekind, Mark R.; Graeber, R. Curtis; Dinges, David F.; Connell, Linda J.; Rountree, Michael S.; Spinweber, Cheryl L.; Gillen, Kelly A.

1994-01-01

This study examined the effectiveness of a planned cockpit rest period to improve alertness and performance in long-haul flight operations. The Rest Group (12 crew members) was allowed a planned 40 minute rest period during the low workload, cruise portion of the flight, while the No-Rest Group (9 crew members) had a 40 minute planned control period when they maintained usual flight activities. Measures used in the study included continuous ambulatory recordings of brain wave and eye movement activity, a reaction time/vigilance task, a wrist activity monitor, in-flight fatigue and alertness ratings, a daily log for noting sleep periods, meals, exercise, flight and duty periods, and the NASA Background Questionnaire. The Rest Group pilots slept on 93 percent of the opportunities, falling asleep in 5.6 minutes and sleeping for 25.8 minutes. This nap was associated with improved physiological alertness and performance compared to the No-Rest Group. The benefits of the nap were observed through the critical descent and landing phases of flight. The nap did not affect layover sleep or the cumulative sleep debt. The nap procedures were implemented with minimal disruption to usual flight operations and there were no reported or identified concerns regarding safety.

The space flight of the Soviet-Indian crew

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

Nikitin, S. A.

1985-01-01

After a brief discussion of the Indian space program, the paper examines the flight of the Soyuz T-11, which included an Indian crew member. Particular attention is given to experiments conducted aboard Soyuz T-11, including the Optokinez vestibular experiment, the Vektor cardiac bioelectricity experiment, the yoga experiment for the counteraction of the negative effects of weightlessness, a supercooling experiment, and the Terra remote sensing experiment.

STS-79 crew on flight deck after launch

NASA Image and Video Library

1996-10-29

STS079-348-004 (16 Sept. 1996) --- Soon after the space shuttle Atlantis completed its rocket mode ascent to Earth-orbit, astronaut Terrence W. Wilcutt, pilot, begins to ready the Orbiter for ten days of orbiting Earth by activating switches on the flight deck's right overhead panel. Though the launch was a nocturnal one, the crew experienced its first sunrise just after Atlantis achieved its orbital posture.

Joint STS-79 & Mir 22 crew in-flight portrait

NASA Image and Video Library

1996-09-23

STS79-E-5289 (23 September 1996) --- Crew members of STS-79 and Mir-22 pose for final group portrait aboard Russia's Mir Space Station's Core Module before going separate ways in Earth-orbit, during Flight Day 8. Front row, left to right, are Aleksandr Y. Kaleri, Jerome (Jay) Apt, William F. Readdy and Shannon W. Lucid. On the back row are, left to right, Thomas D. Akers, Carl E. Walz, Valeri G. Korzun and Terrence W. Wilcutt. Note Blaha, the new cosmonaut researcher for Mir-22, is now wearing the uniform of that crew and Lucid's garment is uniform with the STS-79 astronauts.

STS-96 FD Highlights and Crew Activities Report: Flight Day 01

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

1999-01-01

On this first day of the STS-96 Discovery mission, the flight crew, Commander Kent V. Rominger, Pilot Rick D. Husband, and Mission Specialists Ellen Ochoa, Tamara E. Jernigan, Daniel T. Barry, Julie Payette, and Valery Ivanovich Tokarev are seen performing pre-launch activities such as eating the traditional breakfast, crew suit-up, and the ride out to the launch pad. Also, included are various panoramic views of the shuttle on the pad. The crew is readied in the 'white room' for their mission. After the closing of the hatch and arm retraction, launch activities are shown including countdown, engine ignition, launch, and the separation of the Solid Rocket Boosters.

STS 61-B crew portrait in-flight on the aft flight deck

NASA Image and Video Library

1985-11-26

61B-21-008 (26 Nov-1 Dec 1985) --- A fish-eye lens allows for the seven-member STS 61-B crew to be photographed on the flight deck of the earth-orbiting Atlantis. Left to right, back row, are astronauts Jerry L. Ross, Brewster Shaw Jr., Mary L. Cleave, and Bryan D. O'Connor; and payload specialist Rodolfo Neri. Front row, left to right, payload specialist Charles D. Walker and astronaut Sherwood C. Spring.

Flight Crew Workload, Acceptability, and Performance When Using Data Comm in a High-Density Terminal Area Simulation

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

Norman, R. Michael; Baxley, Brian T.; Adams, Cathy A.; Ellis, Kyle K. E.; Latorella, Kara A.; Comstock, James R., Jr.

2013-01-01

This document describes a collaborative FAA/NASA experiment using 22 commercial airline pilots to determine the effect of using Data Comm to issue messages during busy, terminal area operations. Four conditions were defined that span current day to future flight deck equipage: Voice communication only, Data Comm only, Data Comm with Moving Map Display, and Data Comm with Moving Map displaying taxi route. Each condition was used in an arrival and a departure scenario at Boston Logan Airport. Of particular interest was the flight crew response to D-TAXI, the use of Data Comm by Air Traffic Control (ATC) to send taxi instructions. Quantitative data was collected on subject reaction time, flight technical error, operational errors, and eye tracking information. Questionnaires collected subjective feedback on workload, situation awareness, and acceptability to the flight crew for using Data Comm in a busy terminal area. Results showed that 95% of the Data Comm messages were responded to by the flight crew within one minute and 97% of the messages within two minutes. However, post experiment debrief comments revealed almost unanimous consensus that two minutes was a reasonable expectation for crew response. Flight crews reported that Expected D-TAXI messages were useful, and employment of these messages acceptable at all altitude bands evaluated during arrival scenarios. Results also indicate that the use of Data Comm for all evaluated message types in the terminal area was acceptable during surface operations, and during arrivals at any altitude above the Final Approach Fix, in terms of response time, workload, situation awareness, and flight technical performance. The flight crew reported the use of Data Comm as implemented in this experiment as unacceptable in two instances: in clearances to cross an active runway, and D-TAXI messages between the Final Approach Fix and 80 knots during landing roll. Critical cockpit tasks and the urgency of out-the window scan made the

Ares I-X Flight Test Vehicle Similitude to the Ares I Crew Launch Vehicle

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

Huebner, Lawrence D.; Smith, R. Marshall; Campbell, John R., Jr.; Taylor, Terry L.

2008-01-01

The Ares I-X Flight Test Vehicle is the first in a series of flight test vehicles that will take the Ares I Crew Launch Vehicle design from development to operational capability. The test flight is scheduled for April 2009, relatively early in the Ares I design process so that data obtained from the flight can impact the design of Ares I before its Critical Design Review. Because of the short time frame (relative to new launch vehicle development) before the Ares I-X flight, decisions about the flight test vehicle design had to be made in order to complete analysis and testing in time to manufacture the Ares I-X vehicle hardware elements. This paper describes the similarities and differences between the Ares I-X Flight Test Vehicle and the Ares I Crew Launch Vehicle. Areas of comparison include the outer mold line geometry, aerosciences, trajectory, structural modes, flight control architecture, separation sequence, and relevant element differences. Most of the outer mold line differences present between Ares I and Ares I-X are minor and will not have a significant effect on overall vehicle performance. The most significant impacts are related to the geometric differences in Orion Crew Exploration Vehicle at the forward end of the stack. These physical differences will cause differences in the flow physics in these areas. Even with these differences, the Ares I-X flight test is poised to meet all five primary objectives and six secondary objectives. Knowledge of what the Ares I-X flight test will provide in similitude to Ares I as well as what the test will not provide is important in the continued execution of the Ares I-X mission leading to its flight and the continued design and development of Ares I.

STS 51-G crew photo on the flight deck

NASA Image and Video Library

1985-06-22

51G-21-011 (17-24 June 1985) --- Group portrait on flight deck of all seven STS-51G crew members. Left to right (front) are John O. Creighton, Shannon W. Lucid, Daniel C. Brandenstein; and (back row) are Sultan Salman Abdelazize Al-Saud, Steven R. Nagel, John M. Fabian and Patrick Baudry. Photo credit: NASA

Flight Crew Survey Responses from the Interval Management (IM) Avionics Phase 2 Flight Test

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

Baxley, Brian T.; Swieringa, Kurt A.; Wilson, Sara R.; Roper, Roy D.; Hubbs, Clay E.; Goess, Paul A.; Shay, Richard F.

2017-01-01

The Interval Management (IM) Avionics Phase 2 flight test used three aircraft over a nineteen day period to operationally evaluate a prototype IM avionics. Quantitative data were collected on aircraft state data and IM spacing algorithm performance, and qualitative data were collected through end-of-scenario and end-of-day flight crew surveys. The majority of the IM operations met the performance goals established for spacing accuracy at the Achieve-by Point and the Planned Termination Point, however there were operations that did not meet goals for a variety of reasons. While the positive spacing accuracy results demonstrate the prototype IM avionics can contribute to the overall air traffic goal, critical issues were also identified that need to be addressed to enhance IM performance. The first category was those issues that impacted the conduct and results of the flight test, but are not part of the IM concept or procedures. These included the design of arrival and approach procedures was not ideal to support speed as the primary control mechanism, the ground-side of the Air Traffic Management Technology Demonstration (ATD-1) integrated concept of operations was not part of the flight test, and the high workload to manually enter the information required to conduct an IM operation. The second category was issues associated with the IM spacing algorithm or flight crew procedures. These issues include the high frequency of IM speed changes and reversals (accelerations), a mismatch between the deceleration rate used by the spacing algorithm and the actual aircraft performance, and some spacing error calculations were sensitive to normal operational variations in aircraft airspeed or altitude which triggered additional IM speed changes. Once the issues in these two categories are addressed, the future IM avionics should have considerable promise supporting the goals of improving system throughput and aircraft efficiency.

Understanding Crew Decision-Making in the Presence of Complexity: A Flight Simulation Experiment

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

Young, Steven D.; Daniels, Taumi S.; Evans, Emory; deHaag, Maarten Uijt; Duan, Pengfei

2013-01-01

Crew decision making and response have long been leading causal and contributing factors associated with aircraft accidents. Further, it is anticipated that future aircraft and operational environments will increase exposure to risks related to these factors if proactive steps are not taken to account for ever-increasing complexity. A flight simulation study was designed to collect data to help in understanding how complexity can, or may, be manifest. More specifically, an experimental apparatus was constructed that allowed for manipulation of information complexity and uncertainty, while also manipulating operational complexity and uncertainty. Through these manipulations, and the aid of experienced airline pilots, several issues have been discovered, related most prominently to the influence of information content, quality, and management. Flight crews were immersed in an environment that included new operational complexities suggested for the future air transportation system as well as new technological complexities (e.g. electronic flight bags, expanded data link services, synthetic and enhanced vision systems, and interval management automation). In addition, a set of off-nominal situations were emulated. These included, for example, adverse weather conditions, traffic deviations, equipment failures, poor data quality, communication errors, and unexpected clearances, or changes to flight plans. Each situation was based on one or more reference events from past accidents or incidents, or on a similar case that had been used in previous developmental tests or studies. Over the course of the study, 10 twopilot airline crews participated, completing over 230 flights. Each flight consisted of an approach beginning at 10,000 ft. Based on the recorded data and pilot and research observations, preliminary results are presented regarding decision-making issues in the presence of the operational and technological complexities encountered during the flights.

A NASA technician paints NASA's first Orion full-scale abort flight test crew module.

NASA Image and Video Library

2008-03-31

A full-scale flight-test mockup of the Constellation program's Orion crew vehicle arrived at NASA's Dryden Flight Research Center in late March 2008 to undergo preparations for the first short-range flight test of the spacecraft's astronaut escape system later that year. Engineers and technicians at NASA's Langley Research Center fabricated the structure, which precisely represents the size, outer shape and mass characteristics of the Orion space capsule. The Orion crew module mockup was ferried to NASA Dryden on an Air Force C-17. After painting in the Edwards Air Force Base paint hangar, the conical capsule was taken to Dryden for installation of flight computers, instrumentation and other electronics prior to being sent to the U.S. Army's White Sands Missile Range in New Mexico for integration with the escape system and the first abort flight test in late 2008. The tests were designed to ensure a safe, reliable method of escape for astronauts in case of an emergency.

Crew interface specification development study for in-flight maintenance and stowage functions

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

Carl, J. G.

1971-01-01

The need and potential solutions for an orderly systems engineering approach to the definition, management and documentation requirements for in-flight maintenance, assembly, servicing, and stowage process activities of the flight crews of future spacecraft were investigated. These processes were analyzed and described using a new technique (mass/function flow diagramming), developed during the study, to give visibility to crew functions and supporting requirements, including data products. This technique is usable by NASA for specification baselines and can assist the designer in identifying both upper and lower level requirements associated with these processes. These diagrams provide increased visibility into the relationships between functions and related equipments being utilized and managed and can serve as a common communicating vehicle between the designer, program management, and the operational planner. The information and data product requirements to support the above processes were identified along with optimum formats and contents of these products. The resulting data product concepts are presented to support these in-flight maintenance and stowage processes.

Crew factors in flight operations II : psychophysiological responses to short-haul air transport operations

DOT National Transportation Integrated Search

1994-11-01

This report is the second in a series on the physiological and psychological effects of flight operations on flight crews, and on the operational significance of these effects. This overview presents a comprehensive review and interpretation of the m...

Evaluating Flight Crew Operator Manual Documentation

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

Sherry, Lance; Feary, Michael

1998-01-01

Aviation and cognitive science researchers have identified situations in which the pilot s expectations for the behavior of the avionics are not matched by the actual behavior of the avionics. Researchers have attributed these "automation surprises" to the complexity of the avionics mode logic, the absence of complete training, limitations in cockpit displays, and ad-hoc conceptual models of the avionics. Complete canonical rule-based descriptions of the behavior of the autopilot provide the basis for understanding the perceived complexity of the autopilots, the differences between the pilot s and autopilot s conceptual models, and the limitations in training materials and cockpit displays. This paper compares the behavior of the autopilot Vertical Speed/Flight Path Angle (VS-FPA) mode as described in the Flight Crew Operators Manual (FCOM) and the actual behavior of the VS-FPA mode defined in the autopilot software. This example demonstrates the use of the Operational Procedure Model (OPM) as a method for using the requirements specification for the design of the software logic as information requirements for training.

Apollo experience report. Crew-support activities for experiments performed during manned space flight

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

Mckee, J. W.

1974-01-01

Experiments are performed during manned space flights in an attempt to acquire knowledge that can advance science and technology or that can be applied to operational techniques for future space flights. A description is given of the procedures that the personnel who are directly assigned to the function of crew support at the NASA Lyndon B. Johnson Space Center use to prepare for and to conduct experiments during space flight.

Ares I-X Flight Test Vehicle Similitude to the Ares I Crew Launch Vehicle

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

Huebner, Lawrence D.; Smith, R. Marshall; Campbell, John R.; Taylor, Terry L.

2009-01-01

The Ares I-X Flight Test Vehicle is the first in a series of flight test vehicles that will take the Ares I Crew Launch Vehicle design from development to operational capability. Ares I-X is scheduled for a 2009 flight date, early enough in the Ares I design and development process so that data obtained from the flight can impact the design of Ares I before its Critical Design Review. Decisions on Ares I-X scope, flight test objectives, and FTV fidelity were made prior to the Ares I systems requirements being baselined. This was necessary in order to achieve a development flight test to impact the Ares I design. Differences between the Ares I-X and the Ares I configurations are artifacts of formulating this experimental project at an early stage and the natural maturation of the Ares I design process. This paper describes the similarities and differences between the Ares I-X Flight Test Vehicle and the Ares I Crew Launch Vehicle. Areas of comparison include the outer mold line geometry, aerosciences, trajectory, structural modes, flight control architecture, separation sequence, and relevant element differences. Most of the outer mold line differences present between Ares I and Ares I-X are minor and will not have a significant effect on overall vehicle performance. The most significant impacts are related to the geometric differences in Orion Crew Exploration Vehicle at the forward end of the stack. These physical differences will cause differences in the flow physics in these areas. Even with these differences, the Ares I-X flight test is poised to meet all five primary objectives and six secondary objectives. Knowledge of what the Ares I-X flight test will provide in similitude to Ares I - as well as what the test will not provide - is important in the continued execution of the Ares I-X mission leading to its flight and the continued design and development of Ares I.

Communications indices of crew coordination

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

Kanki, Barbara G.; Foushee, H. Clayton; Lozito, Sandra

1987-01-01

Verbal exchanges occuring during task execution during full mission two-person simulator flights are used to study the effect of the interactive communication process on crew coordination and performance. The ratio of initiator to response speech is calculated and speech variations are recorded. The results of this study are compared with the findings of Ginnett's (1986) study of leaders. It is shown that low-error crews adopt a standard form of communicating, allowing for the ability to predict one another's behavior, facilitating the coordination process. The higher performance of crews that have flown together before is believed to be due to the increased amount of time for establishing a conventional means of communication.

Evaluation of Flight Deck-Based Interval Management Crew Procedure Feasibility

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

Wilson, Sara R.; Murdoch, Jennifer L.; Hubbs, Clay E.; Swieringa, Kurt A.

2013-01-01

Air traffic demand is predicted to increase over the next 20 years, creating a need for new technologies and procedures to support this growth in a safe and efficient manner. The National Aeronautics and Space Administration's (NASA) Air Traffic Management Technology Demonstration - 1 (ATD-1) will operationally demonstrate the feasibility of efficient arrival operations combining ground-based and airborne NASA technologies. The integration of these technologies will increase throughput, reduce delay, conserve fuel, and minimize environmental impacts. The ground-based tools include Traffic Management Advisor with Terminal Metering for precise time-based scheduling and Controller Managed Spacing decision support tools for better managing aircraft delay with speed control. The core airborne technology in ATD-1 is Flight deck-based Interval Management (FIM). FIM tools provide pilots with speed commands calculated using information from Automatic Dependent Surveillance - Broadcast. The precise merging and spacing enabled by FIM avionics and flight crew procedures will reduce excess spacing buffers and result in higher terminal throughput. This paper describes a human-in-the-loop experiment designed to assess the acceptability and feasibility of the ATD-1 procedures used in a voice communications environment. This experiment utilized the ATD-1 integrated system of ground-based and airborne technologies. Pilot participants flew a high-fidelity fixed base simulator equipped with an airborne spacing algorithm and a FIM crew interface. Experiment scenarios involved multiple air traffic flows into the Dallas-Fort Worth Terminal Radar Control airspace. Results indicate that the proposed procedures were feasible for use by flight crews in a voice communications environment. The delivery accuracy at the achieve-by point was within +/- five seconds and the delivery precision was less than five seconds. Furthermore, FIM speed commands occurred at a rate of less than one per minute

Aircrew perceived stress: examining crew performance, crew position and captains personality.

PubMed

Bowles, S; Ursin, H; Picano, J

2000-11-01

This study was conducted at NASA Ames Research Center as a part of a larger research project assessing the impact of captain's personality on crew performance and perceived stress in 24 air transport crews (5). Three different personality types for captains were classified based on a previous cluster analysis (3). Crews were comprised of three crewmembers: captain, first officer, and second officer/flight engineer. A total of 72 pilots completed a 1.5-d full-mission simulation of airline operations including emergency situations in the Ames Manned Vehicle System Research Facility B-727 simulator. Crewmembers were tested for perceived stress on four dimensions of the NASA Task Load Index after each of five flight legs. Crews were divided into three groups based on rankings from combined error and rating scores. High performance crews (who committed the least errors in flight) reported experiencing less stress in simulated flight than either low or medium crews. When comparing crew positions for perceived stress over all the simulated flights no significant differences were found. However, the crews led by the "Right Stuff" (e.g., active, warm, confident, competitive, and preferring excellence and challenges) personality type captains typically reported less stress than crewmembers led by other personality types.

Cancer incidence in professional flight crew and air traffic control officers: disentangling the effect of occupational versus lifestyle exposures.

PubMed

dos Santos Silva, Isabel; De Stavola, Bianca; Pizzi, Costanza; Evans, Anthony D; Evans, Sally A

2013-01-15

Flight crew are occupationally exposed to several potentially carcinogenic hazards; however, previous investigations have been hampered by lack of information on lifestyle exposures. The authors identified, through the United Kingdom Civil Aviation Authority medical records, a cohort of 16,329 flight crew and 3,165 air traffic control officers (ATCOs) and assembled data on their occupational and lifestyle exposures. Standardised incidence ratios (SIRs) were estimated to compare cancer incidence in each occupation to that of the general population; internal analyses were conducted by fitting Cox regression models. All-cancer incidence was 20-29% lower in each occupation than in the general population, mainly due to a lower incidence of smoking-related cancers [SIR (95% CI) = 0.33 (0.27-0.38) and 0.42 (0.28-0.60) for flight crew and ATCOs, respectively], consistent with their much lower prevalence of smoking. Skin melanoma rates were increased in both flight crew (SIR = 1.87; 95% CI = 1.45-2.38) and ATCOs (2.66; 1.55-4.25), with rates among the former increasing with increasing number of flight hours (p-trend = 0.02). However, internal analyses revealed no differences in skin melanoma rates between flight crew and ATCOs (hazard ratio: 0.78, 95% CI = 0.37-1.66) and identified skin that burns easily when exposed to sunlight (p = 0.001) and sunbathing to get a tan (p = 0.07) as the strongest risk predictors of skin melanoma in both occupations. The similar site-specific cancer risks between the two occupational groups argue against risks among flight crew being driven by occupation-specific exposures. The skin melanoma excess reflects sun-related behaviour rather than cosmic radiation exposure. Copyright © 2012 UICC.

Flight crew interface aspects of forward-looking airborne windshear detection systems

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

Anderson, Charles D.; Carbaugh, David C.

1993-01-01

The goal of this research effort was to conduct analyses and research which could provide guidelines for design of the crew interface of an integrated windshear system. Addressed were HF issues, crew/system requirements, candidate display formats, alerting criteria, and crew procedures. A survey identified five flight management issues as top priority: missed alert acceptability; avoidance distance needed; false alert acceptability; nuisance rate acceptability; and crew procedures. Results of a simulation study indicated that the warning time for a look-ahead alert needs to be between 11 and 36 seconds (target of 23 seconds) before the reactive system triggers in order to be effective. Pilots considered the standard go-around maneuver most appropriate for look-ahead alerts, and the escape maneuvers used did not require lateral turns. Prototype display formats were reviewed or developed for alerting the crew; providing guidance to avoid or escape windshear; and status displays to provide windshear situational awareness. The three alerting levels now in use were considered appropriate, with a fourth (time-critical) level as a possible addition, although many reviewers felt only two levels of alerting were needed. Another survey gathered expert opinion on what crew procedures and alerting criteria should be used for look-ahead, or integrated, windshear systems, with a wide diversity of opinion in these areas.

Use of Data Comm by Flight Crew to Conduct Interval Management Operations to Parallel Dependent Runways

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

Baxley, Brian T.; Hubbs, Clay; Shay, Rick; Karanian, James

2011-01-01

The Interval Management (IM) concept is being developed as a method to maintain or increase high traffic density airport arrival throughput while allowing aircraft to conduct near idle thrust descents. The Interval Management with Spacing to Parallel Dependent Runways (IMSPiDR1) experiment at NASA Langley Research Center used 24 commercial pilots to examine IM procedures to conduct parallel dependent runway arrival operations while maintaining safe but efficient intervals behind the preceding aircraft. The use of IM procedures during these operations requires a lengthy and complex clearance from Air Traffic Control (ATC) to the participating aircraft, thereby making the use of Controller Pilot Data Link Communications (CPDLC) highly desirable as the communication method. The use of CPDLC reduces the need for voice transmissions between controllers and flight crew, and enables automated transfer of IM clearance elements into flight management systems or other aircraft avionics. The result is reduced crew workload and an increase in the efficiency of crew procedures. This paper focuses on the subset of data collected related to the use of CPDLC for IM operations into a busy airport. Overall, the experiment and results were very successful, with the mean time under 43 seconds for the flight crew to load the clearance into the IM spacing tool, review the calculated speed, and respond to ATC. An overall mean rating of Moderately Agree was given when the crews were asked if the use of CPDLC was operationally acceptable as simulated in this experiment. Approximately half of the flight crew reported the use of CPDLC below 10,000 for IM operations was unacceptable, with 83% reporting below 5000 was unacceptable. Also described are proposed modifications to the IM operations that may reduce CPDLC Respond time to less than 30 seconds and should significantly reduce the complexity of crew procedures, as well as follow-on research issues for operational use of CPDLC during IM

Age, circadian rhythms, and sleep loss in flight crews

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

Gander, Philippa H.; Nguyen, DE; Rosekind, Mark R.; Connell, Linda J.

1993-01-01

Age-related changes in trip-induced sleep loss, personality, and the preduty temperature rhythm were analyzed in crews from various flight operations. Eveningness decreased with age. The minimum of the baseline temperature rhythm occurred earlier with age. The amplitude of the baseline temperature rhythm declined with age. Average daily percentage sleep loss during trips increased with age. Among crewmembers flying longhaul flight operations, subjects aged 50-60 averaged 3.5 times more sleep loss per day than subjects aged 20-30. These studies support previous findings that evening types and subjects with later peaking temperature rhythms adapt better to shift work and time zone changes. Age and circadian type may be important considerations for duty schedules and fatigue countermeasures.

Air concentrations of PBDEs on in-flight airplanes and assessment of flight crew inhalation exposure.

PubMed

Allen, Joseph G; Sumner, Ann Louise; Nishioka, Marcia G; Vallarino, Jose; Turner, Douglas J; Saltman, Hannah K; Spengler, John D

2013-07-01

To address the knowledge gaps regarding inhalation exposure of flight crew to polybrominated diphenyl ethers (PBDEs) on airplanes, we measured PBDE concentrations in air samples collected in the cabin air at cruising altitudes and used Bayesian Decision Analysis (BDA) to evaluate the likelihood of inhalation exposure to result in the average daily dose (ADD) of a member of the flight crew to exceed EPA Reference Doses (RfDs), accounting for all other aircraft and non-aircraft exposures. A total of 59 air samples were collected from different aircraft and analyzed for four PBDE congeners-BDE 47, 99, 100 and 209 (a subset were also analyzed for BDE 183). For congeners with a published RfD, high estimates of ADD were calculated for all non-aircraft exposure pathways and non-inhalation exposure onboard aircraft; inhalation exposure limits were then derived based on the difference between the RfD and ADDs for all other exposure pathways. The 95th percentile measured concentrations of PBDEs in aircraft air were <1% of the derived inhalation exposure limits. Likelihood probabilities of 95th percentile exposure concentrations >1% of the defined exposure limit were zero for all congeners with published RfDs.

STS-104 crew in-flight portrait in the Atlantis middeck

NASA Image and Video Library

2001-07-23

STS104-337-004 (12-24 July 2001) --- The STS-104 astronauts took a moment from a busy agenda to pose for their traditional in-flight crew portrait. In front are astronauts Steven W. Lindsey (left) and Charles O. Hobaugh, commander and pilot, respectively. From left in back are astronauts Michael L. Gernhardt, Janet L. Kavandi and James F. Reilly, all mission specialists.

Crew Factors in Flight Operations X: Alertness Management in Flight Operations

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

Rosekind, Mark R.; Gander, Philippa H.; Connell, Linda J.; Co, Elizabeth L.

1999-01-01

In response to a 1980 congressional request, NASA Ames Research Center initiated a Fatigue/Jet Lag Program to examine fatigue, sleep loss, and circadian disruption in aviation. Research has examined fatigue in a variety of flight environments using a range of measures (from self-report to performance to physiological). In 1991, the program evolved into the Fatigue Countermeasures Program, emphasizing the development and evaluation of strategies to maintain alertness and performance in operational settings. Over the years, the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) has become a collaborative partner in support of fatigue research and other Program activities. From the inception of the Program, a principal goal was to return the information learned from research and other Program activities to the operational community. The objectives of this Education and Training Module are to explain what has been learned about the physiological mechanisms that underlie fatigue, demonstrate the application of this information in flight operations, and offer some specific fatigue counter-measure recommendations. It is intended for all segments of the aeronautics industry, including pilots, flight attendants, managers, schedulers, safety and policy personnel, maintenance crews, and others involved in an operational environment that challenges human physiological capabilities because of fatigue, sleep loss, and circadian disruption.

Crew Factors in Flight Operations X: Alertness Management in Flight Operations

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

Rosekind, Mark R.; Gander, Philippa H.; Connell, Linda J.; Co, Elizabeth L.

2001-01-01

In response to a 1980 congressional request, NASA Ames Research Center initiated a Fatigue/Jet Lag Program to examine fatigue, sleep loss, and circadian disruption in aviation. Research has examined fatigue in a variety of flight environments using a range of measures (from self-report to performance to physiological). In 1991, the program evolved into the Fatigue Countermeasures Program, emphasizing the development and evaluation of strategies to maintain alertness and performance in operational settings. Over the years, the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) has become a collaborative partner in support of fatigue research and other Program activities. From the inception of the Program, a principal goal was to return the information learned from research and other Program activities to the operational community. The objectives of this Education and Training Module are to explain what has been learned about the physiological mechanisms that underlie fatigue, demonstrate the application of this information in flight operations, and offer some specific fatigue countermeasure recommendations. It is intended for all segments of the aeronautics industry, including pilots, flight attendants, managers, schedulers, safety and policy personnel, maintenance crews, and others involved in an operational environment that challenges human physiological capabilities because of fatigue, sleep loss, and circadian disruption.

NASA's first Orion full-scale abort flight test crew module was placed in NASA Dryden's Abort Flight Test integration area for equipment installation.

NASA Image and Video Library

2008-04-01

A full-scale flight-test mockup of the Constellation program's Orion crew vehicle arrived at NASA's Dryden Flight Research Center in late March 2008 to undergo preparations for the first short-range flight test of the spacecraft's astronaut escape system later that year. Engineers and technicians at NASA's Langley Research Center fabricated the structure, which precisely represents the size, outer shape and mass characteristics of the Orion space capsule. The Orion crew module mockup was ferried to NASA Dryden on an Air Force C-17. After painting in the Edwards Air Force Base paint hangar, the conical capsule was taken to Dryden for installation of flight computers, instrumentation and other electronics prior to being sent to the U.S. Army's White Sands Missile Range in New Mexico for integration with the escape system and the first abort flight test in late 2008. The tests were designed to ensure a safe, reliable method of escape for astronauts in case of an emergency.

14 CFR 121.505 - Flight time limitations: Two pilot crews: airplanes.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

2010-01-01

...: airplanes. 121.505 Section 121.505 Aeronautics and Space FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION, DEPARTMENT OF... Operations § 121.505 Flight time limitations: Two pilot crews: airplanes. (a) If a certificate holder... relieve that pilot of all duty with it during that rest period. (b) No pilot of an airplane that has a...

Evaluation of the Ventilated Flight Suit for OV-1 (Mohawk) Crews.

DTIC Science & Technology

the ’ greenhouse effect ’ increases the temperature in the cockpit to approximately 100F. These temperatures create undesirable operating conditions and decrease the overall crew efficiency. The ventilated flight suit system was evaluated by means of questionnaires and interviews of the commanders, aviators, and maintenance personnel to determine its operational

14 CFR 121.505 - Flight time limitations: Two pilot crews: airplanes.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2011 CFR

2011-01-01

...: airplanes. 121.505 Section 121.505 Aeronautics and Space FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION, DEPARTMENT OF... Operations § 121.505 Flight time limitations: Two pilot crews: airplanes. (a) If a certificate holder... relieve that pilot of all duty with it during that rest period. (b) No pilot of an airplane that has a...

14 CFR 121.505 - Flight time limitations: Two pilot crews: airplanes.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2013 CFR

2013-01-01

...: airplanes. 121.505 Section 121.505 Aeronautics and Space FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION, DEPARTMENT OF... Operations § 121.505 Flight time limitations: Two pilot crews: airplanes. (a) If a certificate holder... relieve that pilot of all duty with it during that rest period. (b) No pilot of an airplane that has a...

14 CFR 121.505 - Flight time limitations: Two pilot crews: airplanes.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2012 CFR

2012-01-01

...: airplanes. 121.505 Section 121.505 Aeronautics and Space FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION, DEPARTMENT OF... Operations § 121.505 Flight time limitations: Two pilot crews: airplanes. (a) If a certificate holder... relieve that pilot of all duty with it during that rest period. (b) No pilot of an airplane that has a...

14 CFR 121.505 - Flight time limitations: Two pilot crews: airplanes.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2014 CFR

2014-01-01

...: airplanes. 121.505 Section 121.505 Aeronautics and Space FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION, DEPARTMENT OF... Operations § 121.505 Flight time limitations: Two pilot crews: airplanes. (a) If a certificate holder... relieve that pilot of all duty with it during that rest period. (b) No pilot of an airplane that has a...

What went right: lessons for the intensivist from the crew of US Airways Flight 1549.

PubMed

Eisen, Lewis A; Savel, Richard H

2009-09-01

On January 15, 2009, US Airways Flight 1549 hit geese shortly after takeoff from LaGuardia Airport in New York City. Both engines lost power, and the crew quickly decided that the best action was an emergency landing in the Hudson River. Due to the crew's excellent performance, all 155 people aboard the flight survived. Intensivists can learn valuable lessons from the processes and outcome of this incident, including the importance of simulation training and checklists. By learning from the aviation industry, the intensivist can apply principles of crew resource management to reduce errors and improve patient safety. Additionally, by studying the impact of the mandated process-engineering applications within commercial aviation, intensivists and health-care systems can learn certain principles that, if adequately and thoughtfully applied, may seriously improve the art and science of health-care delivery at the bedside.

The Integrated Medical Model - Optimizing In-flight Space Medical Systems to Reduce Crew Health Risk and Mission Impacts

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

Kerstman, Eric; Walton, Marlei; Minard, Charles; Saile, Lynn; Myers, Jerry; Butler, Doug; Lyengar, Sriram; Fitts, Mary; Johnson-Throop, Kathy

2009-01-01

The Integrated Medical Model (IMM) is a decision support tool used by medical system planners and designers as they prepare for exploration planning activities of the Constellation program (CxP). IMM provides an evidence-based approach to help optimize the allocation of in-flight medical resources for a specified level of risk within spacecraft operational constraints. Eighty medical conditions and associated resources are represented in IMM. Nine conditions are due to Space Adaptation Syndrome. The IMM helps answer fundamental medical mission planning questions such as What medical conditions can be expected? What type and quantity of medical resources are most likely to be used?", and "What is the probability of crew death or evacuation due to medical events?" For a specified mission and crew profile, the IMM effectively characterizes the sequence of events that could potentially occur should a medical condition happen. The mathematical relationships among mission and crew attributes, medical conditions and incidence data, in-flight medical resources, potential clinical and crew health end states are established to generate end state probabilities. A Monte Carlo computational method is used to determine the probable outcomes and requires up to 25,000 mission trials to reach convergence. For each mission trial, the pharmaceuticals and supplies required to diagnose and treat prevalent medical conditions are tracked and decremented. The uncertainty of patient response to treatment is bounded via a best-case, worst-case, untreated case algorithm. A Crew Health Index (CHI) metric, developed to account for functional impairment due to a medical condition, provides a quantified measure of risk and enables risk comparisons across mission scenarios. The use of historical in-flight medical data, terrestrial surrogate data as appropriate, and space medicine subject matter expertise has enabled the development of a probabilistic, stochastic decision support tool capable of

STS-106 Crew Activity Report/Flight Day 1 Highlights

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

2000-01-01

On this first day of the STS-106 Atlantis mission, the flight crew, Commander Terrence W. Wilcutt, Pilot Scott D. Altman, and Mission Specialists Daniel C. Burbank, Edward T. Lu, Richard A. Mastracchio, Yuri Ivanovich Malenchenko, and Boris V. Morukov are seen performing pre-launch activities. They are shown sitting around the breakfast table with the traditional cake, suiting-up, and riding out to the launch pad. The final inspection team is seen as they conduct their final check of the space shuttle on the launch complex. Also, included are various panoramic views of the shuttle on the pad. The crew is readied in the 'white room' for their mission. After the closing of the hatch and arm retraction, launch activities are shown including countdown, engine ignition, launch, and the separation of the Solid Rocket Boosters.

STS-97 Crew Activity Report/Flight Day 10 Highlights

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

2000-01-01

On this tenth day of the STS-97 mission, Commander Brent W. Jett, Pilot Michael J. Bloomfield, and Mission Specialists Joseph R. Tanner, Carlos I. Noriega, and Marc Garneau are seen saying good-bye to the International Space Station's (ISS's) resident crew (Commander Bill Shepherd, Pilot Yuri Gidzenko and Flight Engineer Sergei Krikalev) and sealing the hatches between the Endeavour Orbiter and the ISS. Footage shows the ISS against a rotating Earth as it passes over China.

Crew Members - First Manned Apollo Flight - Unmanned Mission Launch - Cape

NASA Image and Video Library

1968-01-22

S68-18700 (22 Jan. 1968) --- Two prime crew members of the first manned Apollo space flight were present at Cape Kennedy for the launch of the Apollo V (LM-1/Saturn 204) unmanned space mission. On left is astronaut Walter M. Schirra Jr.; and on right is astronaut R. Walter Cunningham. In background is the Apollo V stack at Launch Complex 37 ready for launch.

Flying Schedule-Matching Descents to Explore Flight Crews' Perceptions of Their Load and Task Feasibility

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

Martin, Lynne Hazel; Sharma, Shivanjli; Lozito, Sharon; Kaneshige, John; Hayashi, Miwa; Dulchinos, Victoria

2012-01-01

Multiple studies have investigated the development and use of ground-based (controller) tools to manage and schedule traffic in future terminal airspace. No studies have investigated the impacts that such tools (and concepts) could have on the flight-deck. To begin to redress the balance, an exploratory study investigated the procedures and actions of ten Boeing-747-400 crews as they flew eight continuous descent approaches in the Los Angeles terminal airspace, with the descents being controlled using speed alone. Although the study was exploratory in nature, four variables were manipulated: speed changes, route constraints, clearance phraseology, and winds. Despite flying the same scenarios with the same events and timing, there was at least a 50 second difference in the time it took crews to fly the approaches. This variation is the product of a number of factors but highlights potential difficulties for scheduling tools that would have to accommodate this amount of natural variation in descent times. The primary focus of this paper is the potential impact of ground scheduling tools on the flight crews performance and procedures. Crews reported "moderate to low" workload, on average; however, short periods of intense and high workload were observed. The non-flying pilot often reported a higher level of workload than the flying-pilot, which may be due to their increased interaction with the Flight Management Computer, when using the aircraft automation to assist with managing the descent clearances. It is concluded that ground-side tools and automation may have a larger impact on the current-day flight-deck than was assumed and that studies investigating this impact should continue in parallel with controller support tool development.

NASA Dryden Flight Research Center personnel accompany NASA's first Orion full-scale abort flight test crew module as it heads to its new home.

NASA Image and Video Library

2008-04-01

A full-scale flight-test mockup of the Constellation program's Orion crew vehicle arrived at NASA's Dryden Flight Research Center in late March 2008 to undergo preparations for the first short-range flight test of the spacecraft's astronaut escape system later that year. Engineers and technicians at NASA's Langley Research Center fabricated the structure, which precisely represents the size, outer shape and mass characteristics of the Orion space capsule. The Orion crew module mockup was ferried to NASA Dryden on an Air Force C-17. After painting in the Edwards Air Force Base paint hangar, the conical capsule was taken to Dryden for installation of flight computers, instrumentation and other electronics prior to being sent to the U.S. Army's White Sands Missile Range in New Mexico for integration with the escape system and the first abort flight test in late 2008. The tests were designed to ensure a safe, reliable method of escape for astronauts in case of an emergency.

Developmental Flight Instrumentation System for the Crew Launch Vehicle

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

Crawford, Kevin; Thomas, John

2006-01-01

The National Aeronautics and Space Administration is developing a new launch vehicle to replace the Space Shuttle. The Crew Launch Vehicle (CLV) will be a combination of new design hardware and heritage Apollo and Space Shuttle hardware. The current CLV configuration is a 5 segment solid rocket booster first stage and a new upper stage design with a modified Apollo era J-2 engine. The current schedule has two test flights with a first stage and a structurally identical, but without engine, upper stage. Then there will be two more test flights with a full complement of flight hardware. After the completion of the test flights, the first manned flight to the International Space Station is scheduled for late 2012. To verify the CLV's design margins a developmental flight instrumentation (DFI) system is needed. The DFI system will collect environmental and health data from the various CLV subsystem's and either transmit it to the ground or store it onboard for later evaluation on the ground. The CLV consists of 4 major elements: the first stage, the upper stage, the upper stage engine and the integration of the first stage, upper stage and upper stage engine. It is anticipated that each of CLVs elements will have some version of DFI. This paper will discuss a conceptual DFI design for each element and also of an integrated CLV DFI system.

29 CFR 825.800 - Special rules for airline flight crew employees, general.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2013 CFR

2013-07-01

..., DEPARTMENT OF LABOR OTHER LAWS THE FAMILY AND MEDICAL LEAVE ACT OF 1993 Special Rules Applicable to Airline..., the calculation of leave for those employees, and the recordkeeping requirements for employers of those employees, and are issued pursuant to the Airline Flight Crew Technical Corrections Act (AFCTCA...

29 CFR 825.800 - Special rules for airline flight crew employees, general.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2014 CFR

2014-07-01

..., DEPARTMENT OF LABOR OTHER LAWS THE FAMILY AND MEDICAL LEAVE ACT OF 1993 Special Rules Applicable to Airline..., the calculation of leave for those employees, and the recordkeeping requirements for employers of those employees, and are issued pursuant to the Airline Flight Crew Technical Corrections Act (AFCTCA...

The Integrated Medical Model: A Decision Support Tool for In-flight Crew Health Care

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

Butler, Doug

2009-01-01

This viewgraph presentation reviews the development of an Integrated Medical Model (IMM) decision support tool for in-flight crew health care safety. Clinical methods, resources, and case scenarios are also addressed.

Crew Alertness Management on the Flight Deck: Cognitive and Vigilance Performance

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

Dinges, David F.

1998-01-01

This project had three broad goals: (1) to identify environmental and organismic risks to performance of long-haul cockpit crews; (2) to assess how cognitive and psychomotor vigilance performance, and subjective measures of alertness, were affected by work-rest schedules typical of long-haul cockpit crews; and (3) to determine the alertness-promoting effectiveness of behavioral and technological countermeasures to fatigue on the flight deck. During the course of the research, a number of studies were completed in cooperation with the NASA Ames Fatigue Countermeasures Program. The publications emerging from this project are listed in a bibliography in the appendix. Progress toward these goals will be summarized below according to the period in which it was accomplished.

Workshop on Flight Crew Accident and Incident Human Factors Proceedings (MS Word file)

DOT National Transportation Integrated Search

1995-06-01

On June 21 - 23, 1995, the Federal Aviation Administration's (FAA's) Office of : System Safety, as part of its Human Factors Data Project, convened the Workshop : on Flight Crew Accident and Incident Human Factors at The MITRE Corporation in : McLean...

Republic P-47G Thunderbolt and the NACA Flight Operations Crew

NASA Image and Video Library

1944-03-21

The Flight Operations crew stands before a Republic P-47G Thunderbolt at the National Advisory Committee for Aeronautics (NACA) Aircraft Engine Research Laboratory in Cleveland, Ohio. The laboratory’s Flight Research Section was responsible for conducting a variety of research flights. During World War II most of the test flights complemented the efforts in ground-based facilities to improve engine cooling systems or study advanced fuel mixtures. The Republic P–47G was loaned to the laboratory to test NACA modifications to the Wright R–2800 engine’s cooling system at higher altitudes. The laboratory has always maintained a fleet of aircraft so different research projects were often conducted concurrently. The flight research program requires an entire section of personnel to accomplish its work. This staff generally consists of a flight operations group, which includes the section chief, pilots and administrative staff; a flight maintenance group with technicians and mechanics responsible for inspecting aircraft, performing checkouts and installing and removing flight instruments; and a flight research group that integrates the researchers’ experiments into the aircraft. The staff at the time of this March 1944 photograph included 3 pilots, 16 planning and analysis engineers, 36 mechanics and technicians, 10 instrumentation specialists, 6 secretaries and 5 computers.

X-15 #3 being secured by ground crew after flight

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

1960-01-01

The X-15-3 (56-6672) research aircraft is secured by ground crew after landing on Rogers Dry Lakebed. The work of the X-15 team did not end with the landing of the aircraft. Once it had stopped on the lakebed, the pilot had to complete an extensive post-landing checklist. This involved recording instrument readings, pressures and temperatures, positioning switches, and shutting down systems. The pilot was then assisted from the aircraft, and a small ground crew depressurized the tanks before the rest of the ground crew finished their work on the aircraft. The X-15 was a rocket-powered aircraft 50 ft long with a wingspan of 22 ft. It was a missile-shaped vehicle with an unusual wedge-shaped vertical tail, thin stubby wings, and unique fairings that extended along the side of the fuselage. The X-15 weighed about 14,000 lb empty and approximately 34,000 lb at launch. The XLR-99 rocket engine, manufactured by Thiokol Chemical Corp., was pilot controlled and was capable of developing 57,000 lb of rated thrust (actual thrust reportedly climbed to 60,000 lb). North American Aviation built three X-15 aircraft for the program. The X-15 research aircraft was developed to provide in-flight information and data on aerodynamics, structures, flight controls, and the physiological aspects of high-speed, high-altitude flight. A follow-on program used the aircraft as a testbed to carry various scientific experiments beyond the Earth's atmosphere on a repeated basis. For flight in the dense air of the usable atmosphere, the X-15 used conventional aerodynamic controls such as rudder surfaces on the vertical stabilizers to control yaw and canted horizontal surfaces on the tail to control pitch when moving in synchronization or roll when moved differentially. For flight in the thin air outside of the appreciable Earth's atmosphere, the X-15 used a reaction control system. Hydrogen peroxide thrust rockets located on the nose of the aircraft provided pitch and yaw control. Those on the

STS-69 crew on flight deck during Wake Shield retrieval

NASA Image and Video Library

1995-09-22

STS069-355-023 (7-18 September 1995) --- Astronauts David M. Walker (right), mission commander, and Michael L. Gernhardt, mission specialist, busy themselves on Space Shuttle Endeavour’s flight deck during rendezvous operations involving one of two temporarily free-flying craft. Endeavour, with a five-member crew, launched on September 7, 1995, from the Kennedy Space Center (KSC). The multifaceted mission ended September 18, 1995, with a successful landing on Runway 33 at KSC.

STS-79 crew watches from aft flight deck during undocking from Mir

NASA Image and Video Library

1997-03-26

STS079-S-097 (16-26 Sept. 1996) --- Left to right, Terrence W. (Terry) Wilcutt, pilot; Shannon W. Lucid, mission specialist; and William F. Readdy, mission commander, are pictured on the space shuttle Atlantis' aft flight deck during undocking operations with Russia's Mir Space Station. Mir had served as both work and home for Lucid for over six months before greeting her American colleagues upon docking of Mir and Atlantis last week. Following her lengthy stay aboard Mir and several days on Atlantis, Lucid went on to spend 188 consecutive days in space before returning to Earth with the STS-79 crew. During the STS-79 mission, the crew used an IMAX camera to document activities aboard the Space Shuttle Atlantis and the various Mir modules. A hand-held version of the 65mm camera system accompanied the STS-79 crew into space in Atlantis' crew cabin. NASA has flown IMAX camera systems on many Shuttle missions, including a special cargo bay camera's coverage of other recent Shuttle-Mir rendezvous and/or docking missions.

USAF bioenvironmental noise data handbook. Volume 148. T-37B in-flight crew noise

NASA Astrophysics Data System (ADS)

Hille, H. K.

1981-11-01

The T-37B is a USAF two-seat primary trainer aircraft. This report provides measured data defining the bioacoustic environments at flight crew/passenger locations inside this aircraft during normal flight operations. Data are reported at one location for 19 different flight conditions and psychoacoustic measures: overall and band sound pressure levels, C-weighted and A-weighted sound levels, preferred speech interference level, perceived noise level, and limiting times for total daily exposure of personnel with and without standard Air Force ear protectors.

Changes in ocular and nasal signs and symptoms among air crew in relation to air humidification on intercontinental flights.

PubMed

Norbäck, Dan; Lindgren, Torsten; Wieslander, Gunilla

2006-04-01

This study evaluates the influence of air humidification in aircraft on symptoms, tear-film stability, nasal patency, and peak expiratory flow. Commercial air crew (N=71) were given a medical examination during eight flights from Stockholm to Chicago and eight flights in the opposite direction. Examinations were done onboard one Boeing 767 aircraft equipped with an evaporation humidifier in the forward part of the cabin. The investigators followed the air crew, staying one night in Chicago and returning with the same crew. Four of the flights had the air humidification device active in-flight to Chicago and deactivated when returning to Stockholm. The other four flights had the inverse humidification sequence. The humidification sequence was randomized and double blind. Hygienic measurements were performed. The humidification increased the relative air humidity by 10% in the 1st row in business class, by 3% in the last row (39th row) in tourist class, and by 3% in the cockpit. Air humidification increased tear-film stability and nasal patency and decreased ocular, nasal, and dermal symptoms and headache. The mean concentration of viable bacteria [77-108 colony-forming units (cfu)/m(3)], viable molds (74-84 cfu/m(3)), and particulate matter (1-8 microg/m(3)) was low, both during the humidified and non-humidified flights. Relative air humidity is low (10-12%) during intercontinental flights and can be increased by the use of a ceramic evaporation humidifier, without any measurable increase of microorganisms in cabin air. Air humidification could increase passenger and crew comfort by increasing tear-film stability and nasal patency and reducing various symptoms.

Coordination strategies of crew management

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

Conley, Sharon; Cano, Yvonne; Bryant, Don

1991-01-01

An exploratory study that describes and contrasts two three-person flight crews performing in a B-727 simulator is presented. This study specifically attempts to delineate crew communication patterns accounting for measured differences in performance across routine and nonroutine flight patterns. The communication patterns in the two crews evaluated indicated different modes of coordination, i.e., standardization in the less effective crew and planning/mutual adjustment in the more effective crew.

Apollo 11 Astronaut Collins Arrives at the Flight Crew Training Building

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

1968-01-01

In this photograph, Apollo 11 astronaut Michael Collins carries his coffee with him as he arrives at the flight crew training building of the NASA Kennedy Space Center (KSC) in Florida, one week before the nation's first lunar landing mission. The Apollo 11 mission launched from KSC via the Marshall Space Flight Center (MSFC) developed Saturn V launch vehicle on July 16, 1969 and safely returned to Earth on July 24, 1969. Aboard the space craft were astronauts Neil A. Armstrong, commander; Michael Collins, Command Module (CM) pilot; and Edwin E. (Buzz) Aldrin Jr., Lunar Module (LM) pilot. The CM, 'Columbia', piloted by Collins, remained in a parking orbit around the Moon while the LM, 'Eagle'', carrying astronauts Armstrong and Aldrin, landed on the Moon. On July 20, 1969, Armstrong was the first human to ever stand on the lunar surface, followed by Aldrin. During 2½ hours of surface exploration, the crew collected 47 pounds of lunar surface material for analysis back on Earth. With the success of Apollo 11, the national objective to land men on the Moon and return them safely to Earth had been accomplished.

Crew Factors in Flight Operations XII: A Survey of Sleep Quantity and Quality in On-Board Crew Rest Facilities

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

Rosekind, Mark R.; Gregory, Kevin B.; Co, Elizabeth L.; Miller, Donna L.; Dinges, David F.

2000-01-01

Many aircraft operated on long-haul commercial airline flights are equipped with on-board crew rest facilities, or bunks, to allow crewmembers to rest during the flight. The primary objectives of this study were to gather data on how the bunks were used, the quantity and quality of sleep obtained by flight crewmembers in the facilities, and the factors that affected their sleep. A retrospective survey comprising 54 questions of varied format addressed demographics, home sleep habits, and bunk sleep habits. Crewmembers from three airlines with long-haul fleets carrying augmented crews consisting of B747-100/200, B747-400, and MD-11 aircraft equipped with bunks returned a total of 1404 completed surveys (a 37% response rate). Crewmembers from the three carriers were comparable demographically, although one carrier had older, more experienced flight crewmembers. Each group, on average, rated themselves as "good" or "very good" sleepers at home, and all groups obtained about the same average amount of sleep each night. Most were able to sleep in the bunks, and about two thirds indicated that these rest opportunities benefited their subsequent flight deck alertness and performance. Comfort, environment, and physiology (e.g., being ready for sleep) were identified as factors that most promoted sleep. Factors cited as interfering with sleep included random noise, thoughts, heat, and the need to use the bathroom. These factors, in turn, suggest potential improvements to bunk facilities and their use. Ratings of the three aircraft types suggested differences among facilities. Bunks in the MD-11 were rated significantly better than either of the B747 types, and the B747-400 bunks received better ratings than did the older, B747-100/200 facilities.

Cause-specific mortality in professional flight crew and air traffic control officers: findings from two UK population-based cohorts of over 20,000 subjects.

PubMed

De Stavola, Bianca L; Pizzi, Costanza; Clemens, Felicity; Evans, Sally Ann; Evans, Anthony D; dos Santos Silva, Isabel

2012-04-01

Flight crew are exposed to several potential occupational hazards. This study compares mortality rates in UK flight crew to those in air traffic control officers (ATCOs) and the general population. A total of 19,489 flight crew and ATCOs were identified from the UK Civil Aviation Authority medical records and followed to the end of 2006. Consented access to medical records and questionnaire data provided information on demographic, behavioral, clinical, and occupational variables. Standardized mortality ratios (SMR) were estimated for these two occupational groups using the UK general population. Adjusted mortality hazard ratios (HR) for flight crew versus ATCOs were estimated via Cox regression models. A total of 577 deaths occurred during follow-up. Relative to the general population, both flight crew (SMR 0.32; 95% CI 0.30, 0.35) and ATCOs (0.39; 0.32, 0.47) had lower all-cause mortality, mainly due to marked reductions in mortality from neoplasms and cardiovascular diseases, although flight crew had higher mortality from aircraft accidents (SMR 42.8; 27.9, 65.6). There were no differences in all-cause mortality (HR 0.99; 95% CI 0.79, 1.25), or in mortality from any major cause, between the two occupational groups after adjustment for health-related variables, again except for those from aircraft accidents. The latter ratios, however, declined with increasing number of hours. The low all-cause mortality observed in both occupational groups relative to the general population is consistent with a strong "healthy worker effect" and their low prevalence of smoking and other risk factors. Mortality among flight crew did not appear to be influenced by occupational exposures, except for a rise in mortality from aircraft accidents.

A Full Mission Simulator Study of Aircrew Performances: the Measurement of Crew Coordination and Decisionmaking Factors and Their Relationships to Flight Task Performances

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

Murphy, M. R.; Randle, R. J.; Tanner, T. A.; Frankel, R. M.; Goguen, J. A.; Linde, C.

1984-01-01

Sixteen three man crews flew a full mission scenario in an airline flight simulator. A high level of verbal interaction during instances of critical decision making was located. Each crew flew the scenario only once, without prior knowledge of the scenario problem. Following a simulator run and in accord with formal instructions, each of the three crew members independently viewed and commented on a videotape of their performance. Two check pilot observers rated pilot performance across all crews and, following each run, also commented on the video tape of the crew's performance. A linguistic analysis of voice transcript is made to provide assessment of crew coordination and decision making qualities. Measures of crew coordination and decision making factors are correlated with flight task performance measures.

Commerical Crew Astronauts Evaluate Crew Dragon Controls

NASA Image and Video Library

2017-01-10

Astronaut Bob Behnken, work in a mock-up of the SpaceX Crew Dragon flight deck at the company's Hawthorne, California, headquarters as development of the crew systems continues for eventual missions to the International Space Station.

Understanding Cataract Risk in Aerospace Flight Crew And Review of Mechanisms of Cataract Formation

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

Jones, Jeffrey A.; McCarten, M.; Manuel, K.; Djojonegoro, B.; Murray, J.; Cucinotta, F.; Feiversen, A.; Wear, M.

2006-01-01

Induction of cataracts by occupational exposure in flight crew has been an important topic of interest in aerospace medicine in the past five years, in association with numerous reports of flight-associated disease incidences. Due to numerous confounding variables, it has been difficult to determine if there is increased cataract risk directly caused by interaction with the flight environment, specifically associated with added radiation exposure during flight. Military aviator records from the United States Air Force (USAF) and Navy (USN) and US astronauts at the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA)/Lyndon B. Johnson Space Center (JSC) were evaluated for the presence, location and age of diagnosis of cataracts. Military aviators were found to have a statistically significant younger average age of onset of their cataracts compared with astronauts, however the incidence density of cataracts was found to be statistically higher in astronauts than in military aviators. USAF and USN aviator s cataracts were most commonly located in the posterior subcapsular region of the lens while astronauts cataracts were most likely to originate generally in the cortical zone. A prospective clinical trial which controls for confounding variables in examination technique, cataract classification, diet, exposure, and pharmacological intervention is needed to determine what percentage of the risk for cataracts are due to radiation, and how to best develop countermeasures to protect flight crews from radiation bioeffects in the future.

Crew factors in flight operations. Part 3: The operational significance of exposure to short-haul air transport operations

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

Foushee, H. C.; Lauber, J. K.; Baetge, M. M.; Acomb, D. B.

1986-01-01

Excessive flightcrew fatigue has potentially serious safety consequences. Laboratory studies have implicated fatigue as a causal factor associated with varying levels of performance deterioration depending on the amount of fatigue and the type of measure utilized in assessing performance. These studies have been of limited utility because of the difficulty of relating laboratory task performance to the demands associated with the operation of a complex aircraft. The performance of 20 volunteer twin-jet transport crews is examined in a full-mission simulator scenario that included most aspects of an actual line operation. The scenario included both routine flight operations and an unexpected mechanical abnormality which resulted in a high level of crew workload. Half of the crews flew the simulation within two to three hours after completing a three-day, high-density, short-haul duty cycle (Post-Duty condition). The other half flew the scenario after a minimum of three days off duty (Pre-Duty) condition). The results revealed that, not surprisingly, Post-Duty crews were significantly more fatigued than Pre-Duty crews. However, a somewhat counter-intuitive pattern of results emerged on the crew performancemeasures. In general, the performance of Post-Duty crews was significantly better than that of Pre-Duty crews, as rated by an expert observer on a number of dimensions relevant to flight safety. Analyses of the flightcrew communication patterns revealed that Post-Duty crews communicated significantly more overall, suggesting, as has previous research, that communication is a good predictor of overall crew performance.

STS-114: Discovery TCDT Flight Crew Test Media Event at Pad 39-B

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

2005-01-01

The STS-114 Space Shuttle Discovery Terminal Countdown Demonstration Test (TCDT) flight crew is shown at Pad 39-B. Eileen Collins, Commander introduces the astronauts. Andrew Thomas, mission specialist talks about his primary responsibility of performing boom inspections, Wendy Lawrence, Mission Specialist 4 (MS4) describes her role as the robotic arm operator supporting Extravehicular Activities (EVA), Stephen Robinson, Mission Specialist 3 (MS3) talks about his role as flight engineer, Charlie Camarda, Mission Specialist 5 (MS5) says that his duties are to perform boom operations, transfer operations from the space shuttle to the International Space Station and spacecraft rendezvous. Soichi Noguchi, Mission Specialist 1 (MS1) from JAXA, introduces himself as Extravehicular Activity 1 (EVA1), and Jim Kelley, Pilot will operate the robotic arm and perform pilot duties. Questions from the news media about the safety of the external tank, going to the International Space Station and returning, EVA training, and thoughts about the Space Shuttle Columbia crew are answered.

Commerical Crew Astronauts Evaluate Crew Dragon Controls

NASA Image and Video Library

2017-01-10

Astronauts Eric Boe, right, and Bob Behnken work in a mock-up of the SpaceX Crew Dragon flight deck at the company's Hawthorne, California, headquarters as development of the crew systems continues for eventual missions to the International Space Station.

Commerical Crew Astronauts Evaluate Crew Dragon Controls

NASA Image and Video Library

2017-01-10

Astronauts Bob Behnken, left, and Eric Boe work in a mock-up of the SpaceX Crew Dragon flight deck at the company's Hawthorne, California, headquarters as development of the crew systems continues for eventual missions to the International Space Station.

Team Performance and Error Management in Chinese and American Simulated Flight Crews: The Role of Cultural and Individual Differences

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

Davis, Donald D.; Bryant, Janet L.; Tedrow, Lara; Liu, Ying; Selgrade, Katherine A.; Downey, Heather J.

2005-01-01

This report describes results of a study conducted for NASA-Langley Research Center. This study is part of a program of research conducted for NASA-LARC that has focused on identifying the influence of national culture on the performance of flight crews. We first reviewed the literature devoted to models of teamwork and team performance, crew resource management, error management, and cross-cultural psychology. Davis (1999) reported the results of this review and presented a model that depicted how national culture could influence teamwork and performance in flight crews. The second study in this research program examined accident investigations of foreign airlines in the United States conducted by the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB). The ability of cross-cultural values to explain national differences in flight outcomes was examined. Cultural values were found to covary in a predicted way with national differences, but the absence of necessary data in the NTSB reports and limitations in the research method that was used prevented a clear understanding of the causal impact of cultural values. Moreover, individual differences such as personality traits were not examined in this study. Davis and Kuang (2001) report results of this second study. The research summarized in the current report extends this previous research by directly assessing cultural and individual differences among students from the United States and China who were trained to fly in a flight simulator using desktop computer workstations. The research design used in this study allowed delineation of the impact of national origin, cultural values, personality traits, cognitive style, shared mental model, and task workload on teamwork, error management and flight outcomes. We briefly review the literature that documents the importance of teamwork and error management and its impact on flight crew performance. We next examine teamwork and crew resource management training designed to improve

29 CFR 825.803 - Special rules for airline flight crew employees, recordkeeping requirements.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2013 CFR

2013-07-01

... 29 Labor 3 2013-07-01 2013-07-01 false Special rules for airline flight crew employees, recordkeeping requirements. 825.803 Section 825.803 Labor Regulations Relating to Labor (Continued) WAGE AND HOUR DIVISION, DEPARTMENT OF LABOR OTHER LAWS THE FAMILY AND MEDICAL LEAVE ACT OF 1993 Special Rules...

29 CFR 825.803 - Special rules for airline flight crew employees, recordkeeping requirements.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2014 CFR

2014-07-01

... 29 Labor 3 2014-07-01 2014-07-01 false Special rules for airline flight crew employees, recordkeeping requirements. 825.803 Section 825.803 Labor Regulations Relating to Labor (Continued) WAGE AND HOUR DIVISION, DEPARTMENT OF LABOR OTHER LAWS THE FAMILY AND MEDICAL LEAVE ACT OF 1993 Special Rules...

Crew decision making under stress

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

Orasanu, J.

1992-01-01

Flight crews must make decisions and take action when systems fail or emergencies arise during flight. These situations may involve high stress. Full-missiion flight simulation studies have shown that crews differ in how effectively they cope in these circumstances, judged by operational errors and crew coordination. The present study analyzed the problem solving and decision making strategies used by crews led by captains fitting three different personality profiles. Our goal was to identify more and less effective strategies that could serve as the basis for crew selection or training. Methods: Twelve 3-member B-727 crews flew a 5-leg mission simulated flight over 1 1/2 days. Two legs included 4 abnormal events that required decisions during high workload periods. Transcripts of videotapes were analyzed to describe decision making strategies. Crew performance (errors and coordination) was judged on-line and from videotapes by check airmen. Results: Based on a median split of crew performance errors, analyses to date indicate a difference in general strategy between crews who make more or less errors. Higher performance crews showed greater situational awareness - they responded quickly to cues and interpreted them appropriately. They requested more decision relevant information and took into account more constraints. Lower performing crews showed poorer situational awareness, planning, constraint sensitivity, and coordination. The major difference between higher and lower performing crews was that poorer crews made quick decisions and then collected information to confirm their decision. Conclusion: Differences in overall crew performance were associated with differences in situational awareness, information management, and decision strategy. Captain personality profiles were associated with these differences, a finding with implications for crew selection and training.

STS-27 crew poses for inflight portrait on forward flight deck with football

NASA Image and Video Library

1988-12-06

STS027-11-012 (2-6 Dec. 1988) --- The crew members for the STS-27 space flight pose on the flight deck of the Earth-orbiting space shuttle Atlantis with a football free-floating in the foreground. Left to right are astronauts Robert L. Gibson, commander; Richard M. (Mike) Mullane, Jerry L. Ross and William M. Shepherd, mission specialists; and Guy S. Gardner, pilot. The football was later presented to the National Football League (NFL) at halftime of the Super Bowl in Miami. Photo credit: NASA

STS-96 FD Highlights and Crew Activities Report: Flight Day 05

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

1999-01-01

On this fifth day of the STS-96 Discovery mission, the flight crew, Commander Kent V. Rominger, Pilot Rick D. Husband, and Mission Specialists Ellen Ochoa, Tamara E. Jernigan, Daniel T. Barry, Julie Payette, and Valery Ivanovich Tokarev are seen performing logistics transfer activities within the Discovery/International Space Station orbiting complex. The crew transfers supplies, equipment, and water. Payette and Tokarev perform maintenance activities on the storage batteries in the Zarya module. Barry and Tokarev install acoustic insulation around some of the fans inside Zarya. Jernigan and Husband install shelving in 2 soft stowage racks. Husband and Barry troubleshoot and perform maintenance activities on the Early Communications System. At the end of the workday, Rominger, Jernigan, and Barry discussed the progress of the mission with NBC's "Today," CBS "This Morning," and CNN.

STS-96 FD Highlights and Crew Activities Report: Flight Day 04

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

1999-01-01

On this fourth day of the STS-96 Discovery mission, the flight crew, Commander Kent V. Rominger, Pilot Rick D. Husband, and Mission Specialists Ellen Ochoa, Tamara E. Jernigan, Daniel T. Barry, Julie Payette, and Valery Ivanovich Tokarev are seen performing final preparations for their space walk. Views of the crew helping Barry and Jernigan suit up for their mission is also presented. Ochoa uses the robot arm to maneuver Jernigan up to the space station module. During the space walk Barry and Jernigan move two cranes, and three bags containing handrails and tools to the outside of the Unity module. They also install a thermal cover on a Unity trunnion pin, inspect peeling paint on Zarya and one of the two Early Communications System antennas on Unity.

Initial Considerations for Navigation and Flight Dynamics of a Crewed Near-Earth Object Mission

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

Holt, Greg N.; Getchius, Joel; Tracy, William H.

2011-01-01

A crewed mission to a Near-Earth Object (NEO) was recently identified as a NASA Space Policy goal and priority. In support of this goal, a study was conducted to identify the initial considerations for performing the navigation and flight dynamics tasks of this mission class. Although missions to a NEO are not new, the unique factors involved in human spaceflight present challenges that warrant special examination. During the cruise phase of the mission, one of the most challenging factors is the noisy acceleration environment associated with a crewed vehicle. Additionally, the presence of a human crew necessitates a timely return trip, which may need to be expedited in an emergency situation where the mission is aborted. Tracking, navigation, and targeting results are shown for sample human-class trajectories to NEOs. Additionally, the benefit of in-situ navigation beacons on robotic precursor missions is presented. This mission class will require a longer duration flight than Apollo and, unlike previous human missions, there will likely be limited communication and tracking availability. This will necessitate the use of more onboard navigation and targeting capabilities. Finally, the rendezvous and proximity operations near an asteroid will be unlike anything previously attempted in a crewed spaceflight. The unknown gravitational environment and physical surface properties of the NEO may cause the rendezvous to behave differently than expected. Symbiosis of the human pilot and onboard navigation/targeting are presented which give additional robustness to unforeseen perturbations.

Crew State Monitoring and Line-Oriented Flight Training for Attention Management

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

Stephens, Chad; Harrivel, Angela; Prinzel, Lawrence; Comstock, Ray; Abraham, Nijo; Pope, Alan; Wilkerson, James; Kiggins, Daniel

2017-01-01

Loss of control - inflight (LOC-I) has historically represented the largest category of commercial aviation fatal accidents. A review of worldwide transport airplane accidents (2001-2010) indicated that loss of airplane state awareness (ASA) was responsible for the majority of the LOC-I fatality rate. The Commercial Aviation Safety Team (CAST) ASA study identified 12 major themes that were indicated across the ASA accident and incident events. One of the themes was crew distraction or ineffective attention management, which was found to be involved in all 18 events including flight crew channelized attention, startle/surprise, diverted attention, and/or confirmation bias. Safety Enhancement (SE)-211, "Training for Attention Management" was formed to conduct research to develop and assess commercial airline training methods and realistic scenarios that can address these attention-related human performance limitations. This paper describes NASA SE-211 research for new design approaches and validation of line-oriented flight training (LOFT). Recent accident and incident data suggests that Spatial Disorientation (SD) and Loss-of-Energy State Awareness (LESA) for transport category aircraft are becoming an increasingly prevalent safety concern in all domestic and international operations (Commercial Aviation Safety Team, 2014a). SD is defined as an erroneous perception of aircraft attitude that can lead directly to a Loss-of-Control Inflight (LOC-I) event and result in an accident or incident. LESA is typically characterized by a failure to monitor or understand energy state indications (e.g., airspeed, altitude, vertical speed, commanded thrust) and a resultant failure to maintain safe flight.

Orbiter fire rescue and crew escape training for EVA crew systems support

NASA Image and Video Library

1993-01-28

Photos of orbiter fire rescue and crew escape training for extravehicular activity (EVA) crew systems support conducted in Bldg 9A Crew Compartment Trainer (CCT) and Fuel Fuselage Trainer (FFT) include views of CCT interior of middeck starboard fuselage showing middeck forward (MF) locker and COAS assembly filter, artiflex film and camcorder bag (26834); launch/entry suit (LES) helmet assembly, neckring and helmet hold-down assembly (26835-26836); middeck aft (MA) lockers (26837); area of middeck airlock and crew escape pole (26838); connectors of crew escape pole in the middeck (268390); three test subjects in LES in the flight deck (26840); emergency side hatch slide before inflated stowage (26841); area of below adjacent to floor panel MD23R (26842); a test subject in LES in the flight deck (26843); control board and also showing sign of "orbital maneuvering system (OMS) secure and OMS TK" (26844); test subject in the flight deck also showing chart of "ascent/abort summary" (26845).

STS-4 post flight crew debriefing in JSC conference room

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

1982-01-01

STS-4 Commander Ken Mattingly and Pilot Henry Hartsfield discuss mission events with astronauts and administrators during a post flight crew debriefing held in a JSC conference room. Seated around the conference table clockwise (from lower left) are astronaut William B. Lenoir, Hartsfield, Mattingly, astronaut Robert F. Overmyer, astronaut S. David Griggs, astronaut Karol J. Bobko, astronaut John W. Young, administrator George W. Abbey, and astronaut Vance D. Brand. On the perimeter of the room are astronaut George D. Nelson (left) and astronaut Francis (Dick) Scobee (right).

STS-26 crew on fixed based (FB) shuttle mission simulator (SMS) flight deck

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

1988-01-01

STS-26 Discovery, Orbiter Vehicle (OV) 103, Commander Frederick H. Hauck (left) and Pilot Richard O. Covey review checklists in their respective stations on the foward flight deck. The STS-26 crew is training in the fixed base (FB) shuttle mission simulator (SMS) located in JSC Mission Simulation and Training Facility Bldg 5.

Crew factors in flight operations. 8: Factors influencing sleep timing and subjective sleep quality in commercial long-haul flight crews

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

Gander, Philippa H.; Graeber, R. Curtis; Connell, Linda J.; Gregory, Kevin B.

1991-01-01

How flight crews organize their sleep during layovers on long-haul trips is documented. Additionally, environmental and physiological constraints on sleep are examined. In the trips studied, duty periods averaging 10.3 hr alternated with layovers averaging 24.8 hr, which typically included two subject-defined sleep episodes. The circadian system had a greater influence on the timing and duration of first-sleeps than second-sleeps. There was also a preference for sleeping during the local night. The time of falling asleep for second-sleeps was related primarily to the amount of sleep already obtained in the layover, and their duration depended on the amount of time remaining in the layover. For both first- and second-sleeps, sleep durations were longer when subjects fell asleep earlier with respect to the minimum of the circadian temperature cycle. Naps reported during layovers and on the flight deck may be a useful strategy for reducing cumulative sleep loss. The circadian system was not able to synchronize with the rapid series of time-zone shifts. The sleep/wake cycle was forced to adopt a period different from that of the circadian system. Flight and duty time regulations are a means of ensuring that reasonable minimum rest periods are provided. This study clearly documents that there are physiologically and environmentally determined preferred sleep times within a layover. The actual time available for sleep is thus less than the scheduled rest period.

76 FR 27656 - Intent To Request Renewal From OMB of One Current Public Collection of Information: Flight Crew...

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2011-05-12

... From OMB of One Current Public Collection of Information: Flight Crew Self-Defense Training... eligibility to participate in voluntary advanced self-defense training provided by TSA. Eligible training...), TSA is required to develop and provide a voluntary advanced self-defense training program for flight...

NASA Ares I Crew Launch Vehicle Upper Stage Overview

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

Davis, Daniel J.

2008-01-01

By incorporating rigorous engineering practices, innovative manufacturing processes and test techniques, a unique multi-center government/contractor partnership, and a clean-sheet design developed around the primary requirements for the International Space Station (ISS) and Lunar missions, the Upper Stage Element of NASA's Crew Launch Vehicle (CLV), the "Ares I," is a vital part of the Constellation Program's transportation system. Constellation's exploration missions will include Ares I and Ares V launch vehicles required to place crew and cargo in low-Earth orbit (LEO), crew and cargo transportation systems required for human space travel, and transportation systems and scientific equipment required for human exploration of the Moon and Mars. Early Ares I configurations will support ISS re-supply missions. A self-supporting cylindrical structure, the Ares I Upper Stage will be approximately 84' long and 18' in diameter. The Upper Stage Element is being designed for increased supportability and increased reliability to meet human-rating requirements imposed by NASA standards. The design also incorporates state-of-the-art materials, hardware, design, and integrated logistics planning, thus facilitating a supportable, reliable, and operable system. With NASA retiring the Space Shuttle fleet in 2010, the success of the Ares I Project is essential to America's continued leadership in space. The first Ares I test flight, called Ares 1-X, is scheduled for 2009. Subsequent test flights will continue thereafter, with the first crewed flight of the Crew Exploration Vehicle (CEV), "Orion," planned for no later than 2015. Crew transportation to the ISS will follow within the same decade, and the first Lunar excursion is scheduled for the 2020 timeframe.

NASA Ares I Crew Launch Vehicle Upper Stage Overview

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

McArthur, J. Craig

2008-01-01

By incorporating rigorous engineering practices, innovative manufacturing processes and test techniques, a unique multi-center government/contractor partnership, and a clean-sheet design developed around the primary requirements for the International Space Station (ISS) and Lunar missions, the Upper Stage Element of NASA's Crew Launch Vehicle (CLV), the "Ares I," is a vital part of the Constellation Program's transportation system. Constellation's exploration missions will include Ares I and Ares V launch vehicles required to place crew and cargo in low-Earth orbit (LEO), crew and cargo transportation systems required for human space travel, and transportation systems and scientific equipment required for human exploration of the Moon and Mars. Early Ares I configurations will support ISS re-supply missions. A self-supporting cylindrical structure, the Ares I Upper Stage will be approximately 84' long and 18' in diameter. The Upper Stage Element is being designed for increased supportability and increased reliability to meet human-rating requirements imposed by NASA standards. The design also incorporates state-of-the-art materials, hardware, design, and integrated logistics planning, thus facilitating a supportable, reliable, and operable system. With NASA retiring the Space Shuttle fleet in 2010, the success of the Ares I Project is essential to America's continued leadership in space. The first Ares I test flight, called Ares I-X, is scheduled for 2009. Subsequent test flights will continue thereafter, with the first crewed flight of the Crew Exploration Vehicle (CEV), "Orion," planned for no later than 2015. Crew transportation to the ISS will follow within the same decade, and the first Lunar excursion is scheduled for the 2020 timeframe.

STS-27 crew poses for inflight portrait on forward flight deck with football

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

1988-01-01

With WILSON NFL football freefloating in front of them, STS-27 astronauts pose on Atlantis', Orbiter Vehicle (OV) 104's, forward flight deck for inflight crew portrait. Crewmembers, wearing blue mission t-shirts, are (left to right) Commander Robert L. Gibson, Mission Specialist (MS) Richard M. Mullane, MS Jerry L. Ross, MS William M. Shepherd, and Pilot Guy S. Gardner. Forward flight deck overhead control panels are visible above crewmembers, commanders and pilots seats in front of them, and forward windows behind them. An auto-set 35mm camera mounted on the aft flight deck was used to take this photo. The football was later presented to the National Football League (NFL) at halftime of the Super Bowl in Miami.

Gemini 4 prime crew with Official medical nurse for Astronaut crew members

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

1965-01-01

Gemini 4 prime crew, Astronauts Edward H. White II, (left), and James A. McDivitt (right) are shown with Lt. Dolores (Dee) O'Hare, US Air Force, Center Medical Office, Flight Medicine Branch, Manned Spaceflight Center (MSC). Lieutenant O'Hare has served during several space flights as Official medical nurse for the astronaut crew members on the missions.

STS-69 Crew members display 'Dog Crew' patches

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

1995-01-01

Following their arrival at KSC's Shuttle Landing Facility, the five astronauts assigned to Space Shuttle Mission STS-69 display the unofficial crew patch for their upcoming spaceflight: the Dog Crew II patch. Mission Commander David M. Walker (center) and Payload Commander James S. Voss (second from right) previously flew together on Mission STS-53, the final dedicated Department of Defense flight on the Space Shuttle. A close comradery formed among Walker, Voss and the rest of the crew, and they dubbed themselves the 'dogs of war', with each of the STS-53 'Dog Crew' members assigned a 'dog tag' or nickname. When the STS-69 astronauts also became good buddies, they decided it was time for the Dog Crew II to be named. Walker's dog tag is Red Dog, Voss's is Dogface, Pilot Kenneth D. Cockrell (second from left) is Cujo, space rookie and Mission Specialist Michael L. Gernhardt (left) is Under Dog, and Mission Specialist James H. Newman (right) is Pluato. The Dog Crew II patch features a bulldog peering out from a doghouse shaped like the Space Shuttle and lists the five crew member's dog names. The five astronauts are scheduled to lift off on the fifth Shuttle flight of the year at 11:04 a.m. EDT, August 31, aboard the Space Shuttle Endeavour.

STS-103 Crew Training

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

1999-01-01

The Hubble Space Telescope (HST) team is preparing for NASA's third scheduled service call to Hubble. This mission, STS-103, will launch from Kennedy Space Center aboard the Space Shuttle Discovery. The seven flight crew members are Commander Curtis L. Brown, Pilot Scott J. Kelly, European Space Agency (ESA) astronaut Jean-Francois Clervoy who will join space walkers Steven L. Smith, C. Michael Foale, John M. Grunsfeld, and ESA astronaut Claude Nicollier. The objectives of the HST Third Servicing Mission (SM3A) are to replace the telescope's six gyroscopes, a Fine-Guidance Sensor, an S-Band Single Access Transmitter, a spare solid-state recorder and a high-voltage/temperature kit for protecting the batteries from overheating. In addition, the crew plans to install an advanced computer that is 20 times faster and has six times the memory of the current Hubble Space Telescope computer. To prepare for these extravehicular activities (EVAs), the SM3A astronauts participated in Crew Familiarization sessions with the actual SM3A flight hardware. During these sessions the crew spent long hours rehearsing their space walks in the Guidance Navigation Simulator and NBL (Neutral Buoyancy Laboratory). Using space gloves, flight Space Support Equipment (SSE), and Crew Aids and Tools (CATs), the astronauts trained with and verified flight orbital replacement unit (ORU) hardware. The crew worked with a number of trainers and simulators, such as the High Fidelity Mechanical Simulator, Guidance Navigation Simulator, System Engineering Simulator, the Aft Shroud Door Trainer, the Forward Shell/Light Shield Simulator, and the Support Systems Module Bay Doors Simulator. They also trained and verified the flight Orbital Replacement Unit Carrier (ORUC) and its ancillary hardware. Discovery's planned 10-day flight is scheduled to end with a night landing at Kennedy.

Descent and Landing Triggers for the Orion Multi-Purpose Crew Vehicle Exploration Flight Test-1

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

Bihari, Brian D.; Semrau, Jeffrey D.; Duke, Charity J.

2013-01-01

The Orion Multi-Purpose Crew Vehicle (MPCV) will perform a flight test known as Exploration Flight Test-1 (EFT-1) currently scheduled for 2014. One of the primary functions of this test is to exercise all of the important Guidance, Navigation, Control (GN&C), and Propulsion systems, along with the flight software for future flights. The Descent and Landing segment of the flight is governed by the requirements levied on the GN&C system by the Landing and Recovery System (LRS). The LRS is a complex system of parachutes and flight control modes that ensure that the Orion MPCV safely lands at its designated target in the Pacific Ocean. The Descent and Landing segment begins with the jettisoning of the Forward Bay Cover and concludes with sensing touchdown. This paper discusses the requirements, design, testing, analysis and performance of the current EFT-1 Descent and Landing Triggers flight software.

29 CFR 825.802 - Special rules for airline flight crew employees, calculation of leave.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2014 CFR

2014-07-01

..., calculation of leave. 825.802 Section 825.802 Labor Regulations Relating to Labor (Continued) WAGE AND HOUR DIVISION, DEPARTMENT OF LABOR OTHER LAWS THE FAMILY AND MEDICAL LEAVE ACT OF 1993 Special Rules Applicable..., calculation of leave. (a) Amount of leave. (1) An eligible airline flight crew employee is entitled to 72 days...

29 CFR 825.802 - Special rules for airline flight crew employees, calculation of leave.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2013 CFR

2013-07-01

..., calculation of leave. 825.802 Section 825.802 Labor Regulations Relating to Labor (Continued) WAGE AND HOUR DIVISION, DEPARTMENT OF LABOR OTHER LAWS THE FAMILY AND MEDICAL LEAVE ACT OF 1993 Special Rules Applicable..., calculation of leave. (a) Amount of leave. (1) An eligible airline flight crew employee is entitled to 72 days...

Expedition 6 Crew Interviews: Nikolai Budarin FEI (Flight Engineer 1)

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

2002-01-01

Expedition 6 Flight Engineer Nikolai Budarin is seen during a prelaunch interview. He provides details on the mission's goals and significance, his role in the mission, what his responsibilities will be, what the crew activities will be like (docking of a Progress unpiloted supply vehicle, maintaining the space station, conducting science experiments and performing one spacewalk), the day-to-day life on an extended stay mission, and the experiments he will be conducting on board. Budarin also discusses how his previous experiences on mir space missions will help him and ends his thoughts on how valuable the International Space Station has proven.

STS-102 Crew Activity Report/Flight Day 12 Highlights

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

2001-01-01

On this 12th day of the STS-102 mission, the crews of STS-102 (Commander James Wetherbee, Pilot James Kelly, and Mission Specialists Andrew Thomas and Paul Richards), Expedition 1 (William Shepherd, Yuri Gidzenko, and Sergei Krikalev), and Expedition 2 (James Voss, Susan Helms, and Yuriy Usachev) are seen during the in-flight ceremony where Commander Shepherd transfers control of the International Space Station (ISS) to Commander Usachev. The hatch between the ISS and the Discovery Orbiter is closed, and Discovery is seen undocking from the ISS. External views of the ISS are shown against a backdrop of Earth. The Great Lakes area and Chicago are seen from space during night, when lights outline the city.

ANTHROPOMETRIC CHARACTERISTICS OF FLIGHT PERSONNEL FOR DESIGNING DAMPERS FOR SHOCKPROOF SEATS OF HELICOPTER CREWS.

PubMed

Moiseev, Yu B; Ignatovich, S N; Strakhov, A Yu

The article discusses anthropometric design of shockproof pilot seats for state-of-the-art helicopters. Object of the investigation was anthropometric parameters of the helicopter aviation personnel of the Russian interior troops. It was stated that the body parameters essential for designing helicopter seat dampers are mass of the body part that presses against the seat in the seating position, and eye level above the seat surface. An uncontrolled seat damper ensuring shockproof safety to 95 % helicopter crews must be designed for the body mass contacting the seat of 99.7 kg and eye level above the seat of 78.6 cm. To absorb.shock effectively, future dampers should be adjustable to pilot's body parameters. The optimal approach to anthropometric design of a helicopter seat is development of type pilot' body models with due account of pilot's the flight outfit and seat geometry. Principle criteria of type models are body mass and eye level. The authors propose a system of type body models facilitating specification of anthropometric data helicopter seat developers.

Apollo 7 crew post-flight

NASA Image and Video Library

1968-10-28

S68-52542 (22 Oct. 1968) --- The Apollo 7 crew arrives aboard the USS Essex, the prime recovery ship for the mission. Left to right, are astronauts Walter M. Schirra Jr., commander; Donn F. Eisele, command module pilot; Walter Cunningham, lunar module pilot; and Dr. Donald E. Stullken, NASA Recovery Team Leader from the Manned Spacecraft Center's (MSC) Landing and Recovery Division. The crew is pausing in the doorway of the recovery helicopter.

STS-102 Crew Patch

NASA Image and Video Library

2001-04-24

STS102-S-001 (January 2001) --- The central image on the STS-102 crew patch depicts the International Space Station (ISS) in the build configuration that it will have at the time of the arrival and docking of Discovery during the STS-102 mission, the first crew exchange flight to the space station. The station is shown along the direction of the flight as will be seen by the shuttle crew during their final approach and docking, the so-called V-bar approach. The names of the shuttle crew members are depicted in gold around the top of the patch, and surnames of the Expedition crew members being exchanged are shown in the lower banner. The three ribbons swirling up to and around the station signify the rotation of these ISS crew members. The number two is for the Expedition Two crew who fly up to the station, and the number one is for the Expedition One crew who then return down to Earth. In conjunction with the face of the Lab module of the station, these Expedition numbers create the shuttle mission number 102. Shown mated below the ISS is the Italian-built Multi-Purpose Logistics Module, Leonardo, that will fly for the first time on this flight, and which will be attached to the station by the shuttle crew during the docked phase of the mission. The flags of the countries that are the major contributors to this effort, the United States, Russia, and Italy are also shown in the lower part of the patch. The build-sequence number of this flight in the overall station assembly sequence, 5A.1, is captured by the constellations in the background. The NASA insignia design for space shuttle flights is reserved for use by the astronauts and for other official use as the NASA Administrator may authorize. Public availability has been approved only in the forms of illustrations by the various news media. When and if there is any change in this policy, which is not anticipated, the change will be publicly announced. Photo credit: NASA

Flight deck automation: Promises and realities

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

Norman, Susan D. (Editor); Orlady, Harry W. (Editor)

1989-01-01

Issues of flight deck automation are multifaceted and complex. The rapid introduction of advanced computer-based technology onto the flight deck of transport category aircraft has had considerable impact both on aircraft operations and on the flight crew. As part of NASA's responsibility to facilitate an active exchange of ideas and information among members of the aviation community, a NASA/FAA/Industry workshop devoted to flight deck automation, organized by the Aerospace Human Factors Research Division of NASA Ames Research Center. Participants were invited from industry and from government organizations responsible for design, certification, operation, and accident investigation of transport category, automated aircraft. The goal of the workshop was to clarify the implications of automation, both positive and negative. Workshop panels and working groups identified issues regarding the design, training, and procedural aspects of flight deck automation, as well as the crew's ability to interact and perform effectively with the new technology. The proceedings include the invited papers and the panel and working group reports, as well as the summary and conclusions of the conference.

Assessing and Promoting Functional Resilience in Flight Crews During Exploration Missions

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

Shelhamer, Mark

2015-01-01

NASA plans to send humans to Mars in about 20 years. The NASA Human Research Program supports research to mitigate the major risks to human health and performance on extended missions. However, there will undoubtedly be unforeseen events on any mission of this nature - thus mitigation of known risks alone is not sufficient to ensure optimal crew health and performance. Research should be directed not only to mitigating known risks, but also to providing crews with the tools to assess and enhance resilience, as a group and individually. We can draw on ideas from complexity theory and network theory to assess crew and individual resilience. The entire crew or the individual crewmember can be viewed as a complex system that is composed of subsystems (individual crewmembers or physiological subsystems), and the interactions between subsystems are of crucial importance for overall health and performance. An understanding of the structure of the interactions can provide important information even in the absence of complete information on the component subsystems. This is critical in human spaceflight, since insufficient flight opportunities exist to elucidate the details of each subsystem. Enabled by recent advances in noninvasive measurement of physiological and behavioral parameters, subsystem monitoring can be implemented within a mission and also during preflight training to establish baseline values and ranges. Coupled with appropriate mathematical modeling, this can provide real-time assessment of health and function, and detect early indications of imminent breakdown. Since the interconnected web of physiological systems (and crewmembers) can be interpreted as a network in mathematical terms, we can draw on recent work that relates the structure of such networks to their resilience (ability to self-organize in the face of perturbation). There are many parameters and interactions to choose from. Normal variability is an established characteristic of a healthy

STS 41-G crew photo taken on the flight deck of the Challenger during flight

NASA Image and Video Library

1984-10-13

41G-19-006 (5-13 Oct. 1984) --- The seven-member 41-G crew assembles for a group shot on the flight deck of the Earth-orbiting space shuttle Challenger. Robert L. Crippen, commander, is in center of the back row. Others pictured are (front row, l.-r.) Jon A. McBride, pilot; Sally K. Ride, Kathryn D. Sullivan and David C. Leestma, all mission specialists; and Paul D. Scully-Power (left) and Marc Garneau, both payload specialists, on the back row. Garneau represents the National Research Council of Canada and Scully-Power is a civilian oceanographer with the U.S. Navy. Photo credit: NASA

Sporting a fresh paint job, NASA's first Orion full-scale abort flight test crew module awaits avionics and other equipment installation.

NASA Image and Video Library

2008-04-01

A full-scale flight-test mockup of the Constellation program's Orion crew vehicle arrived at NASA's Dryden Flight Research Center in late March 2008 to undergo preparations for the first short-range flight test of the spacecraft's astronaut escape system later that year. Engineers and technicians at NASA's Langley Research Center fabricated the structure, which precisely represents the size, outer shape and mass characteristics of the Orion space capsule. The Orion crew module mockup was ferried to NASA Dryden on an Air Force C-17. After painting in the Edwards Air Force Base paint hangar, the conical capsule was taken to Dryden for installation of flight computers, instrumentation and other electronics prior to being sent to the U.S. Army's White Sands Missile Range in New Mexico for integration with the escape system and the first abort flight test in late 2008. The tests were designed to ensure a safe, reliable method of escape for astronauts in case of an emergency.

Columbia Crew Survival Investigation Report

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

2009-01-01

NASA commissioned the Columbia Accident Investigation Board (CAIB) to conduct a thorough review of both the technical and the organizational causes of the loss of the Space Shuttle Columbia and her crew on February 1, 2003. The accident investigation that followed determined that a large piece of insulating foam from Columbia s external tank (ET) had come off during ascent and struck the leading edge of the left wing, causing critical damage. The damage was undetected during the mission. The CAIB's findings and recommendations were published in 2003 and are available on the web at http://caib.nasa.gov/. NASA responded to the CAIB findings and recommendations with the Space Shuttle Return to Flight Implementation Plan. Significant enhancements were made to NASA's organizational structure, technical rigor, and understanding of the flight environment. The ET was redesigned to reduce foam shedding and eliminate critical debris. In 2005, NASA succeeded in returning the space shuttle to flight. In 2010, the space shuttle will complete its mission of assembling the International Space Station and will be retired to make way for the next generation of human space flight vehicles: the Constellation Program. The Space Shuttle Program recognized the importance of capturing the lessons learned from the loss of Columbia and her crew to benefit future human exploration, particularly future vehicle design. The program commissioned the Spacecraft Crew Survival Integrated Investigation Team (SCSIIT). The SCSIIT was asked to perform a comprehensive analysis of the accident, focusing on factors and events affecting crew survival, and to develop recommendations for improving crew survival for all future human space flight vehicles. To do this, the SCSIIT investigated all elements of crew survival, including the design features, equipment, training, and procedures intended to protect the crew. This report documents the SCSIIT findings, conclusions, and recommendations.

USAF Bioenvironmental Noise Data Handbook. Volume 149: C-9A in-flight crew/passenger noise

NASA Astrophysics Data System (ADS)

Rau, T. H.

1982-05-01

The C-9A is a McDonnell Douglas DC-9 series 30 commercial transport modified to perform aeromedical evacuation missions. This report provides measured data defining the bioacoustic environments at flight crew/passenger locations inside this aircraft during normal flight operations. Data are reported for 56 locations in a wide variety of physical and psychoacoustic measures: overall and band sound pressure levels, C-weighted and A-weighted sound levels, preferred speech interference level, perceived noise level, and limiting times for total daily exposure of personnel with and without standard Air Force ear protectors.

Crew Factors in Flight Operations XIV: Alertness Management in Regional Flight Operations Education Module

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

Rosekind, Mark R.; Co, Elizabeth L.; Neri, David F.; Oyung, Raymond L.; Mallis, Melissa M.

2002-01-01

Regional operations encompass a broad range of pilots and equipment. This module is intended to help all those involved in regional aviation, including pilots, schedulers, dispatchers, maintenance technicians, policy makers, and others, to understand the physiological factors underlying fatigue, how flight operations affect fatigue, and what can be done to counteract fatigue and maximize alertness and performance in their operations. The overall purpose of this module is to promote aviation safety, performance, and productivity. It is intended to meet three specific objectives: (1) to explain the current state of knowledge about the physiological mechanisms underlying fatigue; (2) to demonstrate how this knowledge can be applied to improving flight crew sleep, performance, and alertness; and (3) to offer strategies for alertness management. Aviation Safety Reporting System (ASRS) and National Transportation Safety Board (NISH) reports are used throughout this module to demonstrate that fatigue is a safety issue in the regional operations community. The appendices at the end of this module include the ASRS reports used for the examples contained in this publication, brief introductions to sleep disorders and relaxation techniques, summaries of relevant NASA publications, and a list of general readings on sleep, sleep disorders, and circadian rhythms.

Crew workload in JASDF C-1 transport flights: I. Change in heart rate and salivary cortisol.

PubMed

Kakimoto, Y; Nakamura, A; Tarui, H; Nagasawa, Y; Yagura, S

1988-06-01

The physiological responses of heart rate and salivary cortisol for six paired captains and co-pilots during JASDF scheduled transport flights were compared to assess crew workload. The relative change of both responses showed similar patterns and were influenced significantly by whether pilots were controlling the aircraft. Moreover, differences in flying experience and responsibility of captains and co-pilots influenced the two physiological responses; heart rate and salivary cortisol measures increased more for both captains and co-pilots while they were in control of the aircraft than when they were not. Compared to captains, co-pilots showed much higher activation and variability in relative change of heart rate and salivary cortisol between periods of controlling and non-controlling the aircraft. On the other hand, captains showed relatively constant responses comparing aircraft controlling and non-controlling periods, especially in the cruise phase of flight. Salivary cortisol may be a useful, non-invasive method of assess crew workload.

Airline Crew Training

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

1989-01-01

The discovery that human error has caused many more airline crashes than mechanical malfunctions led to an increased emphasis on teamwork and coordination in airline flight training programs. Human factors research at Ames Research Center has produced two crew training programs directed toward more effective operations. Cockpit Resource Management (CRM) defines areas like decision making, workload distribution, communication skills, etc. as essential in addressing human error problems. In 1979, a workshop led to the implementation of the CRM program by United Airlines, and later other airlines. In Line Oriented Flight Training (LOFT), crews fly missions in realistic simulators while instructors induce emergency situations requiring crew coordination. This is followed by a self critique. Ames Research Center continues its involvement with these programs.

An analysis of the application of AI to the development of intelligent aids for flight crew tasks

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

Baron, S.; Feehrer, C.

1985-01-01

This report presents the results of a study aimed at developing a basis for applying artificial intelligence to the flight deck environment of commercial transport aircraft. In particular, the study was comprised of four tasks: (1) analysis of flight crew tasks, (2) survey of the state-of-the-art of relevant artificial intelligence areas, (3) identification of human factors issues relevant to intelligent cockpit aids, and (4) identification of artificial intelligence areas requiring further research.

STS-101: Crew Activity Report CAR/Flight Day 04 Highlights

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

2000-01-01

On this fourth day of the STS-101 Atlantis mission, the flight crew, Commander James D. Halsell Jr., Pilot Scott J. Horowitz, and Mission Specialists Mary Ellen Weber, Jeffrey N. Williams, James S. Voss, Susan J. Helms, and Yuri Vladimirovich Usachev are seen performing final preparations for the scheduled space walk. Horowitz, Williams and Voss are seen in the mid-deck before the space walk. Horowitz and Weber are also seen in the flight deck, powering-up the robot-arm. During the space walk Voss is seen checking the American Cargo Crane-Orbital Replacement Unit Transfer Device. Voss and Williams are shown securing the American-built crane that was installed on the station last year. They are seen as they install the final parts (boom extension) of a Russian-built crane on the station. Voss and Williams are also shown as they replace a faulty antenna for one of the station's communications systems on the Unity Module, and install several handrails and a camera cable on the station's exterior.

Crew Module Overview

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

Redifer, Matthew E.

2011-01-01

The presentation presents an overview of the Crew Module development for the Pad Abort 1 flight test. The presentation describes the integration activity from the initial delivery of the primary structure through the installation of vehicle subsystems, then to flight test. A brief overview of flight test results is given.

Some Aspects of Psychophysiological Support of Crew Member's Performance Reliability in Space Flight

NASA Astrophysics Data System (ADS)

Nechaev, A. P.; Myasnikov, V. I.; Stepanova, S. I.; Isaev, G. F.; Bronnikov, S. V.

The history of cosmonautics demonstrates many instances in which only crewmembers' intervention allowed critical situations to be resolved, or catastrophes to be prevented. However, during "crew-spacecraft" system operation human is exposed by influence of numerous flight factors, and beforehand it is very difficult to predict their effects on his functional state and work capacity. So, the incidents are known when unfavorable alterations of crewmember's psychophysiological state (PPS) provoked errors in task performance. The objective of the present investigation was to substantiate the methodological approach directed to increase reliability of a crewmember performance (human error prevention) by means of management of his/her PPS. The specific aims of the investigation were: 1) to evaluate the statistical significance of the interrelation between crew errors (CE) and crewmember's PPS, and 2) to develop the way of PPS management. At present, there is no conventional method to assess combined effect of flight conditions (microgravity, confinement, psychosocial factors, etc.) on crewmembers' PPS. For this purpose experts of the Medical Support Group (psychoneurologists and psychologists) at the Moscow Mission Control Center analyze information received during radio and TV contacts with crew. Peculiarities of behavior, motor activity, sleep, speech, mood, emotional reactions, well-being and sensory sphere, trend of dominant interests and volitional acts, signs of deprivation phenomena are considered as separate indicators of crewmember's PPS. The set of qualitative symptoms reflecting PPS alterations and corresponding to them ratings (in arbitrary units) was empirically stated for each indicator. It is important to emphasize that symptoms characterizing more powerful PPS alterations have higher ratings. Quantitative value of PPS integral parameter is calculating by adding up the ratings of all separate indicators over a day, a week, or other temporal interval (in

Evaluation of Cabin Crew Technical Knowledge

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

Dunbar, Melisa G.; Chute, Rebecca D.; Jordan, Kevin

1998-01-01

Accident and incident reports have indicated that flight attendants have numerous opportunities to provide the flight-deck crew with operational information that may prevent or essen the severity of a potential problem. Additionally, as carrier fleets transition from three person to two person flight-deck crews, the reliance upon the cabin crew for the transfer of this information may increase further. Recent research (Chute & Wiener, 1996) indicates that light attendants do not feel confident in their ability to describe mechanical parts or malfunctions of the aircraft, and the lack of flight attendant technical training has been referenced in a number of recent reports (National Transportation Safety Board, 1992; Transportation Safety Board of Canada, 1995; Chute & Wiener, 1996). The present study explored both flight attendant technical knowledge and flight attendant and dot expectations of flight attendant technical knowledge. To assess the technical knowledge if cabin crewmembers, 177 current flight attendants from two U.S. carriers voluntarily :ompleted a 13-item technical quiz. To investigate expectations of flight attendant technical knowledge, 181 pilots and a second sample of 96 flight attendants, from the same two airlines, completed surveys designed to capture each group's expectations of operational knowledge required of flight attendants. Analyses revealed several discrepancies between the present level of flight attendants.

Skylab crew health and changes related to space flight

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

Hawkins, W. R.; Burchard, E. C.; Hordinsky, J. R.

1974-01-01

All three manned Skylab missions were supported by a cadre of medical personnel who were responsible not only for the management and conduct of the medical experiments but also for the operational planning and crew health. The day-to-day medical care of the crewmen and their families was left to a team of flight surgeons who were responsible for the health care during all phases of the mission, as well as the development and use of the inflight medical support system. The preventive medicine aspects of the preflight and postflight health stabilization program are discussed. The clinical problems encountered are identified and the significance of these medical entities are reviewed. The inflight physiological changes of a clinical nature are discussed in light of the significance of these changes as result of the space environment.

Dummy left behind by Skylab 3 crew for the Skylab 4 crew

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

1973-01-01

This photograph is an illustration of the humorous side of the Skylab 3 crew. This dummy was left behind in the Skylab space station by the Skylab 3 crew to be found by the Skylab 4 crew. The dummy is dressed in a flight suit and placed in the Lower Body Negative Pressure Device. The name tag indicates that it represents Gerald P. Carr, Skylab 4 commander. In the background is a partial view of the dummy for William R. Pogue, Skylab 4 pilot, propped upon the bicycle ergometer (1586); This dummy is dressed in a flight suit and propped upon the bicycle ergometer. The name tag indicates that it represents William R. Pogue, Skylab 4 pilot (1587).

Crew Factors in Flight Operations 7: Psychophysiological Responses to Overnight Cargo Operations

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

Gander, Philippa H.; Gregory, Kevin B.; Connell, Linda J.; Miller, Donna L.; Graeber, R. Curtis; Rosekind, Mark R.

1996-01-01

To document the psychophysiological effects of flying overnight cargo operations, 41 B-727 crew members (average age 38 yr) were monitored before, during, and after one of two typical 8-day trip patterns. During daytime layovers, the average sleep episode was 3 hr (41%) shorter than nighttime sleeps and was rated as lighter, less restorative, and poorer overall. Sleep was frequently split into several episodes and totaled 1.2 hr less per 24 hr than on pretrip days. Each trip pattern included a night off, which was an effective countermeasure against the accumulating sleep debt. The organization of sleep during daytime layovers reflected the interaction of duty timing with circadian physiology. The circadian temperature rhythm did not adapt completely to the inverted wake-rest schedule on duty days, being delayed by about 3 hr. Highest subjective fatigue and lowest activation occurred around the time of the temperature minimum. On duty days, reports of headaches increased by 400%, of congested nose by 200%, and of burning eyes by 900%. Crew members also reported eating more snacks. Compared with daytime short-haul air-transport operations, the overnight cargo trips included fewer duty and flight hours, and had longer layovers. Overnight cargo crews also averaged 5.4 yr younger than their daytime short-haul counterparts. On trips, both groups lost a comparable amount of sleep per 24 hr, but the overnight cargo crews had shorter individual sleep episodes and more broken sleep. These data clearly demonstrate that overnight cargo operations, like other night work, involve physiological disruption not found in comparable daytime operations.

Flight Crew Responses to the Interval Management Alternative Clearances (IMAC) Experiment

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

Baxley, Brian T.; Wilson, Sara R.; Swieringa, Kurt A.; Roper, Roy D.

2016-01-01

Interval Management Alternative Clearances (IMAC) was a human-in-the-loop simulation experiment conducted to explore the efficacy and acceptability of three IM operations: CAPTURE, CROSS, and MAINTAIN. Two weeks of data collection were conducted, with each week using twelve subject pilots and four subject controllers flying ten high-density arrival scenarios into the Denver International Airport. Overall, both the IM operations and procedures were rated very favorably by the flight crew in terms of acceptability, workload, and pilot head down time. However, several critical issues were identified requiring resolution prior to real-world implementation, including the high frequency of IM speed commands, IM speed commands requiring changes to aircraft configuration, and ambiguous IM cockpit displays that did not trigger the intended pilot reaction. The results from this experiment will be used to prepare for a flight test in 2017, and to support the development of an advanced IM concept of operations by the FAA (Federal Aviation Agency) and aviation industry.

Dynamic modeling and ascent flight control of Ares-I Crew Launch Vehicle

NASA Astrophysics Data System (ADS)

Du, Wei

This research focuses on dynamic modeling and ascent flight control of large flexible launch vehicles such as the Ares-I Crew Launch Vehicle (CLV). A complete set of six-degrees-of-freedom dynamic models of the Ares-I, incorporating its propulsion, aerodynamics, guidance and control, and structural flexibility, is developed. NASA's Ares-I reference model and the SAVANT Simulink-based program are utilized to develop a Matlab-based simulation and linearization tool for an independent validation of the performance and stability of the ascent flight control system of large flexible launch vehicles. A linearized state-space model as well as a non-minimum-phase transfer function model (which is typical for flexible vehicles with non-collocated actuators and sensors) are validated for ascent flight control design and analysis. This research also investigates fundamental principles of flight control analysis and design for launch vehicles, in particular the classical "drift-minimum" and "load-minimum" control principles. It is shown that an additional feedback of angle-of-attack can significantly improve overall performance and stability, especially in the presence of unexpected large wind disturbances. For a typical "non-collocated actuator and sensor" control problem for large flexible launch vehicles, non-minimum-phase filtering of "unstably interacting" bending modes is also shown to be effective. The uncertainty model of a flexible launch vehicle is derived. The robust stability of an ascent flight control system design, which directly controls the inertial attitude-error quaternion and also employs the non-minimum-phase filters, is verified by the framework of structured singular value (mu) analysis. Furthermore, nonlinear coupled dynamic simulation results are presented for a reference model of the Ares-I CLV as another validation of the feasibility of the ascent flight control system design. Another important issue for a single main engine launch vehicle is

Boeing Unveils New Suit for Commercial Crew Astronauts

NASA Image and Video Library

2017-01-23

Boeing unveiled its spacesuit design Wednesday as the company continues to move toward flight tests and crew rotation missions of its Starliner spacecraft and launch systems that will fly astronauts to the International Space Station. Astronauts heading into orbit for the station aboard the Starliner will wear Boeing’s new spacesuits. The suits are custom-designed to fit each astronaut, lighter and more comfortable than earlier versions and meet NASA requirements for safety and functionality. NASA's commercial crew astronauts Eric Boe and Suni Williams tried on the suits at Boeing’s Commercial Crew and Cargo Facility at NASA’s Kennedy Space Center. Boe, Williams, Bob Behnken, and Doug Hurley were selected by NASA in July 2015 to train for commercial crew test flights aboard the Starliner and SpaceX’s Crew Dragon spacecraft. The flight assignments have not been set, so all four of the astronauts are rehearsingheavily for flights aboard both vehicles.

Surrounded by work platforms, the full-scale Orion AFT crew module (center) is undergoing preparations for the first flight test of Orion's launch abort system.

NASA Image and Video Library

2008-05-20

Surrounded by work platforms, NASA's first full-scale Orion abort flight test (AFT) crew module (center) is undergoing preparations at the NASA Dryden Flight Research Center in California for the first flight test of Orion's launch abort system.

Uncertainties that flight crews and dispatchers must consider when calculating the fuel needed for a flight

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

Trujillo, Anna C.

1996-01-01

In 1993, fuel accounted for approximately 15 percent of an airline's expenses. Fuel consumption increases as fuel reserves increase because of the added weight to the aircraft. Calculating fuel reserves is a function of Federal Aviation Regulations, airline company policy, and factors that impact or are impacted by fuel usage enroute. This research studied how pilots and dispatchers determined the fuel needed for a flight and identified areas where improvements in methods may yield measurable fuel savings by (1) listing the uncertainties that contribute to adding contingency fuel, (2) obtaining the pilots' and dispatchers' perspective on how often each uncertainty occurred, and (3) obtaining pilots' and dispatchers' perspective on the fuel used for each occurrence. This study found that for the majority of the time, pilots felt that dispatchers included enough fuel. As for the uncertainties that flight crews and dispatchers account for, air traffic control accounts for 28% and weather uncertainties account for 58 percent. If improvements can be made in these two areas, a great potential exists to decrease the reserve required, and therefore, fuel usage without jeopardizing safety.

STS-106 Crew Activities Report/Flight Day 07 Highlights

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

2000-01-01

On this seventh day of the STS-106 Atlantis mission, the flight crew, Commander Commander Terrence W. Wilcutt, Pilot Scott D. Altman, and Mission Specialists Daniel C. Burbank, Edward T. Lu, Richard A. Mastracchio, Yuri Ivanovich Malenchenko, and Boris V. Morukov are seen participating in several outfitting activities. Burbank and Morukov remove and replace a fourth battery in Zarya. Lu and Malenchenko finish installing the third and final battery and other electrical equipment inside the Zvezda Service Module. While Altman and Wilcutt perform a series of jet firings, Altman is shown as he narrates a tour of the Zvezda Service Module. Scenes also include Lu and Malenchenko unpacking the Russian-made Orlan space suits, Burbank and Wilcutt participating in an interview, and a beautiful night shot of the International Space Station (ISS) and Atlantis complex above the Earth.

Autoantibodies to nervous system-specific proteins are elevated in sera of flight crew members: biomarkers for nervous system injury.

PubMed

Abou-Donia, Mohamed B; Abou-Donia, Martha M; ElMasry, Eman M; Monro, Jean A; Mulder, Michel F A

2013-01-01

This descriptive study reports the results of assays performed to detect circulating autoantibodies in a panel of 7 proteins associated with the nervous system (NS) in sera of 12 healthy controls and a group of 34 flight crew members including both pilots and attendants who experienced adverse effects after exposure to air emissions sourced to the ventilation system in their aircrafts and subsequently sought medical attention. The proteins selected represent various types of proteins present in nerve cells that are affected by neuronal degeneration. In the sera samples from flight crew members and healthy controls, immunoglobin (IgG) was measured using Western blotting against neurofilament triplet proteins (NFP), tubulin, microtubule-associated tau proteins (tau), microtubule-associated protein-2 (MAP-2), myelin basic protein (MBP), glial fibrillary acidic protein (GFAP), and glial S100B protein. Significant elevation in levels of circulating IgG-class autoantibodies in flight crew members was found. A symptom-free pilot was sampled before symptoms and then again afterward. This pilot developed clinical problems after flying for 45 h in 10 d. Significant increases in autoantibodies were noted to most of the tested proteins in the serum of this pilot after exposure to air emissions. The levels of autoantibodies rose with worsening of his condition compared to the serum sample collected prior to exposure. After cessation of flying for a year, this pilot's clinical condition improved, and eventually he recovered and his serum autoantibodies against nervous system proteins decreased. The case study with this pilot demonstrates a temporal relationship between exposure to air emissions, clinical condition, and level of serum autoantibodies to nervous system-specific proteins. Overall, these results suggest the possible development of neuronal injury and gliosis in flight crew members anecdotally exposed to cabin air emissions containing organophosphates. Thus, increased

Intercultural crew issues in long-duration spaceflight

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

Kraft, Norbert O.; Lyons, Terence J.; Binder, Heidi

2003-01-01

Before long-duration flights with international crews can be safely undertaken, potential interpersonal difficulties will need to be addressed. Crew performance breakdown has been recognized by the American Institute of Medicine, in scientific literature, and in popular culture. However, few studies of human interaction and performance in confined, isolated environments exist, and the data pertaining to those studies are mostly anecdotal. Many incidents involving crew interpersonal dynamics, those among flight crews, as well as between flight crews and ground controllers, are reported only in non-peer reviewed books and newspapers. Consequently, due to this lack of concrete knowledge, the selection of astronauts and cosmonauts has focused on individual rather than group selection. Additional selection criteria such as interpersonal and communication competence, along with intercultural training, will have a decisive impact on future mission success. Furthermore, industrial psychological research has demonstrated the ability to select a group based on compatibility. With all this in mind, it is essential to conduct further research on heterogeneous, multi-national crews including selection and training for long-duration space missions.

USAF Bioenvironmental Noise Data Handbook. Volume 155. CH-3 in-flight crew noise

NASA Astrophysics Data System (ADS)

Hille, H. K.

1982-09-01

The CH-3 is a USAF tactical combat transport helicopter. This report provides measured data defining the bioacoustic environments at flight crew/passenger locations inside this helicopter during normal flight operations. Data are reported for nine locations in a wide variety of physical and psychoacoustic measures: overall and band sound pressure levels, C weighted and A weighted sound levels, preferred speech interference level, perceived noise levels and limiting times for total daily exposure of personnel with and without standard Air Force ear protectors. Refer to Volume 1 of this handbook, USAF Bioenvironmental Noise Data handbook, Vol. 1: Organization, Content and Application, AMRL-TR-75-50(1) 1975, for discussion of the objective and design of the handbook, the types of data presented, measurement procedures, instrumentation, data processing, definitions of quantities, symbols, equations, applications, limitations, etc.

NASA paint shop technicians prepare the Orion full-scale flight test crew module for painting in the Edwards Air Force Base paint hangar.

NASA Image and Video Library

2008-03-29

A full-scale flight-test mockup of the Constellation program's Orion crew vehicle arrived at NASA's Dryden Flight Research Center in late March 2008 to undergo preparations for the first short-range flight test of the spacecraft's astronaut escape system later that year. Engineers and technicians at NASA's Langley Research Center fabricated the structure, which precisely represents the size, outer shape and mass characteristics of the Orion space capsule. The Orion crew module mockup was ferried to NASA Dryden on an Air Force C-17. After painting in the Edwards Air Force Base paint hangar, the conical capsule was taken to Dryden for installation of flight computers, instrumentation and other electronics prior to being sent to the U.S. Army's White Sands Missile Range in New Mexico for integration with the escape system and the first abort flight test in late 2008. The tests were designed to ensure a safe, reliable method of escape for astronauts in case of an emergency.

Planning for Crew Exercise for Future Deep Space Mission Scenarios

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

Moore, Cherice; Ryder, Jeff

2015-01-01

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.

The advancement of a new human factors report--'The Unique Report'--facilitating flight crew auditing of performance/operations as part of an airline's safety management system.

PubMed

Leva, M C; Cahill, J; Kay, A M; Losa, G; McDonald, N

2010-02-01

This paper presents the findings of research relating to the specification of a new human factors report, conducted as part of the work requirements for the Human Integration into the Lifecycle of Aviation Systems project, sponsored by the European Commission. Specifically, it describes the proposed concept for a unique report, which will form the basis for all operational and safety reports completed by flight crew. This includes all mandatory and optional reports. Critically, this form is central to the advancement of improved processes and technology tools, supporting airline performance management, safety management, organisational learning and knowledge integration/information-sharing activities. Specifically, this paper describes the background to the development of this reporting form, the logic and contents of this form and how reporting data will be made use of by airline personnel. This includes a description of the proposed intelligent planning process and the associated intelligent flight plan concept, which makes use of airline operational and safety analyses information. Primarily, this new reporting form has been developed in collaboration with a major Spanish airline. In addition, it has involved research with five other airlines. Overall, this has involved extensive field research, collaborative prototyping and evaluation of new reports/flight plan concepts and a number of evaluation activities. Participants have included both operational and management personnel, across different airline flight operations processes. Statement of Relevance: This paper presents the development of a reporting concept outlined through field research and collaborative prototyping within an airline. The resulting reporting function, embedded in the journey log compiled at the end of each flight, aims at enabling employees to audit the operations of the company they work for.

Autonomous, In-Flight Crew Health Risk Management for Exploration-Class Missions: Leveraging the Integrated Medical Model for the Exploration Medical System Demonstration Project

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

Butler, D. J.; Kerstman, E.; Saile, L.; Myers, J.; Walton, M.; Lopez, V.; McGrath, T.

2011-01-01

The Integrated Medical Model (IMM) captures organizational knowledge across the space medicine, training, operations, engineering, and research domains. IMM uses this knowledge in the context of a mission and crew profile to forecast risks to crew health and mission success. The IMM establishes a quantified, statistical relationship among medical conditions, risk factors, available medical resources, and crew health and mission outcomes. These relationships may provide an appropriate foundation for developing an in-flight medical decision support tool that helps optimize the use of medical resources and assists in overall crew health management by an autonomous crew with extremely limited interactions with ground support personnel and no chance of resupply.

STS-93 / Columbia Flight Crew Photo Op & QA at Pad for TCDT

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

1999-01-01

The primary objective of the STS-93 mission was to deploy the Advanced X-ray Astrophysical Facility, which had been renamed the Chandra X-ray Observatory in honor of the late Indian-American Nobel Laureate Subrahmanyan Chandrasekhar. The mission was launched at 12:31 on July 23, 1999 onboard the space shuttle Columbia. The mission was led by Commander Eileen Collins. The crew was Pilot Jeff Ashby and Mission Specialists Cady Coleman, Steve Hawley and Michel Tognini from the Centre National d'Etudes Spatiales (CNES). This videotape shows a pre-flight press conference. Prior to the astronauts' arrival at the bunker area in front of the launch pad, the narrator discusses some of the training that the astronauts are scheduled to have prior to the launch, particularly the emergency egress procedures. Commander Collins introduces the crew and fields questions from the assembled press. Many questions are asked about the experiences of Commander Collins, and Mission Specialist Coleman as women in NASA. The press conference takes place outside in front of the Shuttle Columbia on the launch pad.

Crew Recovery and Contingency Planning for a Manned Stratospheric Balloon Flight - the StratEx Program.

PubMed

Menon, Anil S; Jourdan, David; Nusbaum, Derek M; Garbino, Alejandro; Buckland, Daniel M; Norton, Sean; Clark, Johnathan B; Antonsen, Erik L

2016-10-01

The StratEx program used a self-contained space suit and balloon system to loft pilot Alan Eustace to a record-breaking altitude and skydive from 135,897 feet (41,422 m). After releasing from the balloon and a stabilized freefall, the pilot safely landed using a parachute system based on a modified tandem parachute rig. A custom spacesuit provided life support using a similar system to NASA's (National Aeronautics and Space Administration; Washington, DC USA) Extravehicular Mobility Unit. It also provided tracking, communications, and connection to the parachute system. A recovery support team, including at least two medical personnel and two spacesuit technicians, was charged with reaching the pilot within five minutes of touchdown to extract him from the suit and provide treatment for any injuries. The team had to track the flight at all times, be prepared to respond in case of premature release, and to operate in any terrain. Crew recovery operations were planned and tailored to anticipate outcomes during this novel event in a systematic fashion, through scenario and risk analysis, in order to minimize the probability and impact of injury. This analysis, detailed here, helped the team configure recovery assets, refine navigation and tracking systems, develop procedures, and conduct training. An extensive period of testing and practice culminated in three manned flights leading to a successful mission and setting the record for exit altitude, distance of fall with stabilizing device, and vertical speed with a stabilizing device. During this mission, recovery teams reached the landing spot within one minute, extracted the pilot, and confirmed that he was not injured. This strategy is presented as an approach to prehospital planning and care for improved safety during crew recovery in novel, extreme events. Menon AS , Jourdan D , Nusbaum DM , Garbino A , Buckland DM , Norton S , Clark JB , Antonsen EL . Crew recovery and contingency planning for a manned

Joint in-flight portrait of the STS-81 and Mir 22 crew on Mir

NASA Image and Video Library

1997-02-26

STS081-369-003 (12-22 Jan. 1997) --- Traditional inflight crew portrait of the combined Mir-22 and STS-81 crews in the Base Block Module aboard Russia's Mir Space Station. Front row: left to right, Michael A. Baker, commander; John M. Grunsfeld, mission specialist; and cosmonaut Aleksandr Y. Kaleri, Mir-22 flight engineer. Middle row: cosmonaut Valeri G. Korzun, Mir-22 commander; Marsha S. Ivins, mission specialist; and John E. Blaha, former cosmonaut guest researcher. Back row: Jerry M. Linenger, cosmonaut guest researcher; Peter J. K. (Jeff) Wisoff, mission specialist; and Brent W. Jett, Jr., pilot. Linenger is seen in a Russian jump suit, and Blaha now wears a Space Shuttle inflight garment as the two exchanged cosmonaut guest researcher roles on January 14, 1997, following the docking of the Atlantis and the Mir complex.

Cascading Delay Risk of Airline Workforce Deployments with Crew Pairing and Schedule Optimization.

PubMed

Chung, Sai Ho; Ma, Hoi Lam; Chan, Hing Kai

2017-08-01

This article concerns the assignment of buffer time between two connected flights and the number of reserve crews in crew pairing to mitigate flight disruption due to flight arrival delay. Insufficient crew members for a flight will lead to flight disruptions such as delays or cancellations. In reality, most of these disruption cases are due to arrival delays of the previous flights. To tackle this problem, many research studies have examined the assignment method based on the historical flight arrival delay data of the concerned flights. However, flight arrival delays can be triggered by numerous factors. Accordingly, this article proposes a new forecasting approach using a cascade neural network, which considers a massive amount of historical flight arrival and departure data. The approach also incorporates learning ability so that unknown relationships behind the data can be revealed. Based on the expected flight arrival delay, the buffer time can be determined and a new dynamic reserve crew strategy can then be used to determine the required number of reserve crews. Numerical experiments are carried out based on one year of flight data obtained from 112 airports around the world. The results demonstrate that by predicting the flight departure delay as the input for the prediction of the flight arrival delay, the prediction accuracy can be increased. Moreover, by using the new dynamic reserve crew strategy, the total crew cost can be reduced. This significantly benefits airlines in flight schedule stability and cost saving in the current big data era. © 2016 Society for Risk Analysis.

The Spacelab Instrument Pointing System (IPS) and its first flight

NASA Astrophysics Data System (ADS)

Heusmann, H.; Wolf, P.

1985-11-01

The development of the Instrument Pointing System (IPS) as part of Spacelab's experimental apparatus for open Pallet direct space exposure, and its test flight aboard the Shuttle Orbiter are discussed. The IPS is a three-axis-controlled platform with stellar, sun and earth pointing modes, and a better than 1 arcsec pointing ability. The development of an 'inside-out gimbal' configuration with the platform acting like a joint between the unstable Shuttle and the inertially stabilized payload facilitated close to hemispherical pointing and the adaptability for payloads of almost any size. Gimbal axes torquers counteract Orbiter acceleration due to crew movement and thruster firings, and facilitate target acquisition and precision pointing, by command from a crew-engaged computer preprogrammed for all possible control steps. Carrying an experimental solar-physics payload, the IPS correctly performed all intended functions and withstood launch and orbital loads. Several anomalies were detected and successfully corrected in-flight.

STS-71 crew addresses news media

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

1995-01-01

Following their arrival at KSC's Shuttle Landing Facility, the STS-71 flight crew takes a moment to address news media gathered to greet them. The journey from Johnson Space Center in Houston brings the flight crew one step closer to an historic spaceflight, the first docking of the U.S. Space Shuttle with the Russian Space Station Mir. The countdown clock already has begun ticking toward liftoff of the Shuttle Atlantis on that flight, currently scheduled for June 23 at 5:08 p.m. EDT.

STS-29 crew activities

NASA Image and Video Library

2000-04-19

STS029-04-029 (13-18 March 1989) --- Astronaut Michael L. Coats appears to like the status of the STS-29 flight as he offers a big smile from the commander's station on the flight deck. He takes a momentary break from updating the crew activity plan (CAP) to pose for the photo. This photographic frame was among NASA's third STS-29 photo release. Monday, March 20, 1989. Crew members were astronauts Michael L. Coats, John E. Blaha, James F. Buchli, Robert C. Springer and James P. Bagian. Photo credit: NASA

STS-111 Crew Training Clip

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

2002-01-01

The STS-111 Crew is in training for space flight. The crew consists of Commander Ken Cockrell, Pilot Paul Lockhart, Mission Specialists Franklin Chang-Diaz and Philippe Perrin. The crew training begins with Post Insertion Operations with the Full Fuselage Trainer (FFT). Franklin Chang-Diaz, Philippe Perrin and Paul Lockhart are shown in training for airlock and Neutral Buoyancy Lab (NBL) activities. Bailout in Crew Compartment Training (CCT) with Expedition Five is also shown. The crew also gets experience with photography, television, and habitation equipment.

USAF Environmental Noise Data Handbook. Volume 150: C-140 in-flight crew noise

NASA Astrophysics Data System (ADS)

Hille, H. K.

1982-09-01

The C-140 is a USAF transport aircraft used for operational support. This report provides measured data defining the bioacoustic environments at flight crew/passenger locations inside this aircraft during normal flight operations. Date are reported for seven locations in a wide variety of physical and psychoacoustic measures: overall and band sound pressure levels, C-weighted and A-weighted sound levels, preferred speech interference level, perceived noise level, and limiting times for total daily exposure of personnel with and without standard Air Force ear protectors. Refer to Volume 1 of this handbook, USAF Bioenvironmental Noise Data Handbook, Vol. 1: Organization, Content and Application, AMRL-TR-75-50(1) 1975, for discussion of the objective and design of the handbook, the types of data presented, measurement procedures, instrumentation, data processing, definitions of quantities, symbols, equations, applications, limitations, etc.

Modeling Relationships Between Flight Crew Demographics and Perceptions of Interval Management

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

Remy, Benjamin; Wilson, Sara R.

2016-01-01

The Interval Management Alternative Clearances (IMAC) human-in-the-loop simulation experiment was conducted to assess interval management system performance and participants' acceptability and workload while performing three interval management clearance types. Twenty-four subject pilots and eight subject controllers flew ten high-density arrival scenarios into Denver International Airport during two weeks of data collection. This analysis examined the possible relationships between subject pilot demographics on reported perceptions of interval management in IMAC. Multiple linear regression models were created with a new software tool to predict subject pilot questionnaire item responses from demographic information. General patterns were noted across models that may indicate flight crew demographics influence perceptions of interval management.

Expedition 31 Crew Press Conference

NASA Image and Video Library

2012-05-14

Quarantined Expedition 31 prime crew members, from left, NASA Flight Engineer Joe Acaba, Russian Soyuz Commander Gennady Padalka, and Russian Flight Engineer Sergei Revin pose for a group photograph during a prelaunch press conference held at the Cosmonaut Hotel on Monday, May 14, 2012 in Baikonur, Kazakhstan. The launch of the Soyuz spacecraft with the crew of three is scheduled for 9:01 a.m. local time on Tuesday, May 15. Photo Credit (NASA/Bill Ingalls)

Expedition 31 Crew Press Conference

NASA Image and Video Library

2012-05-14

Quarantined Expedition 31 prime crew members, from left, NASA Flight Engineer Joe Acaba, Russian Soyuz Commander Gennady Padalka, and Russian Flight Engineer Sergei Revin answer reporters questions from behind glass during a prelaunch press conference held at the Cosmonaut Hotel on Monday, May 14, 2012 in Baikonur, Kazakhstan. The launch of the Soyuz spacecraft with the crew of three is scheduled for 9:01 a.m. local time on Tuesday, May 15. Photo Credit (NASA/Bill Ingalls)

Crew roles and interactions in scientific space exploration

NASA Astrophysics Data System (ADS)

Love, Stanley G.; Bleacher, Jacob E.

2013-10-01

Future piloted space exploration missions will focus more on science than engineering, a change which will challenge existing concepts for flight crew tasking and demand that participants with contrasting skills, values, and backgrounds learn to cooperate as equals. In terrestrial space flight analogs such as Desert Research And Technology Studies, engineers, pilots, and scientists can practice working together, taking advantage of the full breadth of all team members' training to produce harmonious, effective missions that maximize the time and attention the crew can devote to science. This paper presents, in a format usable as a reference by participants in the field, a successfully tested crew interaction model for such missions. The model builds upon the basic framework of a scientific field expedition by adding proven concepts from aviation and human space flight, including expeditionary behavior and cockpit resource management, cooperative crew tasking and adaptive leadership and followership, formal techniques for radio communication, and increased attention to operational considerations. The crews of future space flight analogs can use this model to demonstrate effective techniques, learn from each other, develop positive working relationships, and make their expeditions more successful, even if they have limited time to train together beforehand. This model can also inform the preparation and execution of actual future space flights.

STS-101: Crew Activity Report / Flight Day 6

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

2000-01-01

The primary mission objective for STS-101 was to deliver supplies to the International Space Station, perform a space walk, and reboost the station from 230 statute miles to 250 statute miles. The commander of this mission was, James D. Halsell. The crew was Scott J. Horowitz, the pilot, and mission specialists Mary Ellen Weber, Jeffrey N. Williams, James S. Voss, Susan J. Helms, and Yuri Vladimirovich Usachev. This videotape shows the activities of the sixth day of the flight. The videotape begins with a shot of the Space Station. The narrator remarks that the transfer of supplies and equipment is continuing and the videotape shows the replacing of fans and smoke detectors. There is a group picture on board the station, after which a few questions were asked. The quality of the air inside the station is remarked on as being good. The quality of the air being a concern and one of the reasons for the mission. One of the new batteries was shown being installed in the Zarya Control Module.

Commercial Flight Crew Decision-Making during Low-Visibility Approach Operations Using Fused Synthetic/Enhanced Vision Systems

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

Kramer, Lynda J.; Bailey, Randall E.; Prinzel, Lawrence J., III

2007-01-01

NASA is investigating revolutionary crew-vehicle interface technologies that strive to proactively overcome aircraft safety barriers that would otherwise constrain the full realization of the next-generation air transportation system. A fixed-based piloted simulation experiment was conducted to evaluate the complementary use of Synthetic and Enhanced Vision technologies. Specific focus was placed on new techniques for integration and/or fusion of Enhanced and Synthetic Vision and its impact within a two-crew flight deck on the crew's decision-making process during low-visibility approach and landing operations. Overall, the experimental data showed that significant improvements in situation awareness, without concomitant increases in workload and display clutter, could be provided by the integration and/or fusion of synthetic and enhanced vision technologies for the pilot-flying and the pilot-not-flying. During non-normal operations, the ability of the crew to handle substantial navigational errors and runway incursions were neither improved nor adversely impacted by the display concepts. The addition of Enhanced Vision may not, unto itself, provide an improvement in runway incursion detection without being specifically tailored for this application. Existing enhanced vision system procedures were effectively used in the crew decision-making process during approach and missed approach operations but having to forcibly transition from an excellent FLIR image to natural vision by 100 ft above field level was awkward for the pilot-flying.

Cockpit and cabin crew coordination

DOT National Transportation Integrated Search

1988-02-01

Cockpit and cabin crew coordination is crucial not only in emergencies, but : also during normal operations. The purposes of this study were to determine the : status of crew coordination in the industry and to identify the implications for : flight ...

Cockpit and cabin crew coordination

DOT National Transportation Integrated Search

1988-02-28

Cockpit and cabin crew coordination is crucial not only in emergencies, but also during normal operations. The purposes of this study were to determine the status of crew coordination in the industry and to identify the implications for flight safety...

Crew health

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

Billica, Roger D.

1992-01-01

Crew health concerns for Space Station Freedom are numerous due to medical hazards from isolation and confinement, internal and external environments, zero gravity effects, occupational exposures, and possible endogenous medical events. The operational crew health program will evolve from existing programs and from life sciences investigations aboard Space Station Freedom to include medical monitoring and certification, medical intervention, health maintenance and countermeasures, psychosocial support, and environmental health monitoring. The knowledge and experience gained regarding crew health issues and needs aboard Space Station Freedom will be used not only to verify requirements and programs for long duration space flight, but also in planning and preparation for Lunar and Mars exploration and colonization.

Surrounded by work platforms, the full-scale Orion AFT crew module (center) is undergoing preparations for the first flight test of Orion's launch abort system.

NASA Image and Video Library

2008-05-20

Surrounded by work platforms, NASA's first full-scale Orion abort flight test (AFT) crew module (center) is undergoing preparations at the NASA Dryden Flight Research Center in California for the first flight test of Orion's launch abort system. To the left is a space shuttle orbiter purge vehicle sharing the hangar.

STS-102 crew members check out Discovery's payload bay

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

2001-01-01

Members of the STS-102 crew check out Discovery's payload bay in the Orbiter Processing Facility bay 1. Dressed in green, they are Mission Specialist Paul W. Richards (left) and Pilot James W. Kelly. The crew is at KSC for Crew Equipment Interface Test activities. Above their heads on the left side are two of the experiments being carried on the flight. STS-102 is the 8th construction flight to the International Space Station and will carry the Multi-Purpose Logistics Module Leonardo. STS-102 is scheduled for launch March 1, 2001. On that flight, Leonardo will be filled with equipment and supplies to outfit the U.S. laboratory module Destiny. The mission will also be carrying the Expedition Two crew to the Space Station, replacing the Expedition One crew who will return on Shuttle Discovery.

STS-93 Flight Day 1 Highlights and Crew Activities

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

1999-01-01

On this first day of the STS-93 Columbia mission, the flight crew, Commander Eileen Collins, Pilot Jeff Ashby and Mission Specialists Cady Coleman, Steve Hawley and Michael Tognini deployed the Chandra X-Ray Observatory into space. This was done after a full night of work and preparation. Chandra will study the invisible, and often violent mysteries of x-ray astronomy. Commander Collins maneuvered Columbia to a safe distance away from the telescope as an internal timer counted down to the first of a two-phase ignition of the Inertial Upper Stage. After switching to internal battery power until its solar rays are deployed, the telescope reaches an oval orbit one-third the distance to the Moon to conduct its astronomical observations. Since Chandra is safely on its way and the major objective of their mission is successfully completed, the astronauts end their long day and begin an eight hour sleep period.

Quantifying Pilot Contribution to Flight Safety During an In-Flight Airspeed Failure

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

Etherington, Timothy J.; Kramer, Lynda J.; Bailey, Randall E.; Kennedey, Kellie D.

2017-01-01

Accident statistics cite the flight crew as a causal factor in over 60% of large transport fatal accidents. Yet a well-trained and well-qualified crew is acknowledged as the critical center point of aircraft systems safety and an integral component of the entire commercial aviation system. A human-in-the-loop test was conducted using a Level D certified Boeing 737-800 simulator to evaluate the pilot's contribution to safety-of-flight during routine air carrier flight operations and in response to system failures. To quantify the human's contribution, crew complement was used as an independent variable in a between-subjects design. This paper details the crew's actions and responses while dealing with an in-flight airspeed failure. Accident statistics often cite flight crew error (Baker, 2001) as the primary contributor in accidents and incidents in transport category aircraft. However, the Air Line Pilots Association (2011) suggests "a well-trained and well-qualified pilot is acknowledged as the critical center point of the aircraft systems safety and an integral safety component of the entire commercial aviation system." This is generally acknowledged but cannot be verified because little or no quantitative data exists on how or how many accidents/incidents are averted by crew actions. Anecdotal evidence suggest crews handle failures on a daily basis and Aviation Safety Action Program data generally supports this assertion, even if the data is not released to the public. However without hard evidence, the contribution and means by which pilots achieve safety of flight is difficult to define. Thus, ways to improve the human ability to contribute or overcome deficiencies are ill-defined.

Monitoring and Managing Cabin Crew Sleep and Fatigue During an Ultra-Long Range Trip.

PubMed

van den Berg, Margo J; Signal, T Leigh; Mulrine, Hannah M; Smith, Alexander A T; Gander, Philippa H; Serfontein, Wynand

2015-08-01

The aims of this study were to monitor cabin crew fatigue, sleep, and performance on an ultra-long range (ULR) trip and to evaluate the appropriateness of applying data collection methods developed for flight crew to cabin crew operations under a fatigue risk management system (FRMS). Prior to, throughout, and following the ULR trip (outbound flight ULR; mean layover duration=52.6 h; inbound flight long range), 55 cabin crew (29 women; mean age 36.5 yr; 25 men; mean age 36.6 yr; one missing data) completed a sleep/duty diary and wore an actigraph. Across each flight, crewmembers rated their fatigue (Samn-Perelli Crew Status Check) and sleepiness (Karolinska Sleepiness Scale) and completed a 5-min Psychomotor Vigilance Task (PVT) at key times. Of crewmembers approached, 73% (N=134) agreed to participate and 41% (N=55) provided data of suitable quality for analysis. In the 24 h before departure, sleep averaged 7.0 h and 40% took a preflight nap. All crewmembers slept in flight (mean total sleep time=3.6 h outbound, 2.9 h inbound). Sleepiness and fatigue were lower, and performance better, on the longer outbound flight than on the inbound flight. Post-trip, crewmembers slept more on day 1 (mean=7.9 h) compared to baseline days, but there was no difference from day 2 onwards. The present study demonstrates that cabin crew fatigue can be managed effectively on a ULR flight and that FRMS data collection is feasible for cabin crew, but operational differences between cabin crew and flight crew need to be considered.

Orion Abort Flight Test

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

Hayes, Peggy Sue

2010-01-01

The purpose of NASA's Constellation project is to create the new generation of spacecraft for human flight to the International Space Station in low-earth orbit, the lunar surface, as well as for use in future deep-space exploration. One portion of the Constellation program was the development of the Orion crew exploration vehicle (CEV) to be used in spaceflight. The Orion spacecraft consists of a crew module, service module, space adapter and launch abort system. The crew module was designed to hold as many as six crew members. The Orion crew exploration vehicle is similar in design to the Apollo space capsules, although larger and more massive. The Flight Test Office is the responsible flight test organization for the launch abort system on the Orion crew exploration vehicle. The Flight Test Office originally proposed six tests that would demonstrate the use of the launch abort system. These flight tests were to be performed at the White Sands Missile Range in New Mexico and were similar in nature to the Apollo Little Joe II tests performed in the 1960s. The first flight test of the launch abort system was a pad abort (PA-1), that took place on 6 May 2010 at the White Sands Missile Range in New Mexico. Primary flight test objectives were to demonstrate the capability of the launch abort system to propel the crew module a safe distance away from a launch vehicle during a pad abort, to demonstrate the stability and control characteristics of the vehicle, and to determine the performance of the motors contained within the launch abort system. The focus of the PA-1 flight test was engineering development and data acquisition, not certification. In this presentation, a high level overview of the PA-1 vehicle is given, along with an overview of the Mobile Operations Facility and information on the White Sands tracking sites for radar & optics. Several lessons learned are presented, including detailed information on the lessons learned in the development of wind

Crew fatigue safety performance indicators for fatigue risk management systems.

PubMed

Gander, Philippa H; Mangie, Jim; Van Den Berg, Margo J; Smith, A Alexander T; Mulrine, Hannah M; Signal, T Leigh

2014-02-01

Implementation of Fatigue Risk Management Systems (FRMS) is gaining momentum; however, agreed safety performance indicators (SPIs) are lacking. This paper proposes an initial set of SPIs based on measures of crewmember sleep, performance, and subjective fatigue and sleepiness, together with methods for interpreting them. Data were included from 133 landing crewmembers on 2 long-range and 3 ultra-long-range trips (4-person crews, 3 airlines, 220 flights). Studies had airline, labor, and regulatory support, and underwent independent ethical review. SPIs evaluated preflight and at top of descent (TOD) were: total sleep in the prior 24 h and time awake at duty start and at TOD (actigraphy); subjective sleepiness (Karolinska Sleepiness Scale) and fatigue (Samn-Perelli scale); and psychomotor vigilance task (PVT) performance. Kruskal-Wallis nonparametric ANOVA with post hoc tests was used to identify significant differences between flights for each SPI. Visual and preliminary quantitative comparisons of SPIs between flights were made using box plots and bar graphs. Statistical analyses identified significant differences between flights across a range of SPls. In an FRMS, crew fatigue SPIs are envisaged as a decision aid alongside operational SPIs, which need to reflect the relevant causes of fatigue in different operations. We advocate comparing multiple SPIs between flights rather than defining safe/unsafe thresholds on individual SPIs. More comprehensive data sets are needed to identify the operational and biological factors contributing to the differences between flights reported here. Global sharing of an agreed core set of SPIs would greatly facilitate implementation and improvement of FRMS.

Expedition 19 Crew Training

NASA Image and Video Library

2009-03-20

Spaceflight Participant Charles Simonyi, left, Expedition 19 Commander Gennady I. Padalka, center, and Flight Engineer Michael R. Barratt along with the backup crew and flight doctors walk the grounds of the Cosmonaut Hotel, Saturday, March 21, 2009 in Baikonur, Kazakhstan. (Photo Credit: NASA/Bill Ingalls)

STS-114: Discovery Crew Arrival

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

2005-01-01

George Diller of NASA Public Affairs narrates the STS-114 Crew arrival at Kennedy Space Center aboard a Gulf Stream aircraft. They were greeted by Center Director Jim Kennedy. Commander Eileen Collins introduced each of her crew members and gave a brief description of their roles in the mission. Mission Specialist 3, Andrew Thomas will be the lead crew member on the inspection on flight day 2; he is the intravehicular (IV) crew member that will help and guide Mission Specialists Souichi Noguchi and Stephen Robinson during their spacewalks. Pilot James Kelly will be operating the shuttle systems in flying the Shuttle; he will be flying the space station robotic arm during the second extravehicular activity and he will be assisting Mission Specialist Wendy Lawrence during the other two extravehicular activities; he will be assisting on the rendezvous on flight day three, and landing of the shuttle. Commander Collins also mentioned Pilot Kelly's recent promotion to Colonel by the United States Air Force. Mission Specialist 1, Souichi Noguchi from JAXA (The Japanese Space Agency) will be flying on the flight deck for ascent; he will be doing three spacewalks on day 5, 7, and 9; He will be the photo/TV lead for the different types of cameras on board to document the flight and to send back the information to the ground for both technical and public affairs reasons. Mission Specialist 5, Charles Camada will be doing the inspection on flight day 2 with Mission Specialist Thomas and Pilot Kelly; he will be transferring the logistics off the shuttle and onto the space station and from the space station back to the shuttle; He will help set up eleven lap tops on board. Mission Specialist 4, Wendy Lawrence will lead the transfer of logistics to the space station; she is the space station arm operator during extravehicular activities 1 and 3; she will be carrying the 6,000 pounds of external storage platform from the shuttle payload bay over to the space station; she is also

Overview of crew member energy expenditure during Shuttle Flight 61-8 EASE/ACCESS task performance

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

Horrigan, D. J.; Waligora, J. W.; Stanford, J.; Edwards, B. F.

1987-01-01

The energy expenditure of the Shuttle Flight 61-B crewmembers during the extravehicular performance of Experimental Assembly of Structures in EVA (EASE) and Assembly Concept of Construction of Space Structures (ACCESS) construction system tasks are reported. These data consist of metabolic rate time profiles correlated with specific EASE and ACCESS tasks and crew comments. Average extravehicular activity metabolic rates are computed and compared with those reported from previous Apollo, Shylab, and Shuttle flights. These data reflect total energy expenditure and not that of individual muscle groups such as hand and forearm. When correlated with specific EVA tasks and subtasks, the metabolic profile data is expected to be useful in planning future EVA protocols. For example, after experiencing high work rates and apparent overheating during some Gemini EVAs, it was found useful to carefully monitor work rates in subsequent flights to assess the adequacy of cooling garments and as an aid to preplanning EVA procedures. This presentation is represented by graphs and charts.

USAF Bioenvironmental Noise Data Handbook. Volume 152: C-12A in-flight crew noise

NASA Astrophysics Data System (ADS)

Hille, H. K.

1982-09-01

The C-12A is a military version of the Beechcraft Super King Air 200. This report provides measured data defining the bioacoustic environments at flight crew/passenger locations inside this aircraft during normal flight operations. Data are reported for five locations in a wide variety of physical and psychoacoustic measures: overall and band sound pressure levels, C-weighted and A-weighted sound levels, preferred speech interference level, perceived noise level, and limiting times for total daily exposure of personnel with and without standard Air Force ear protectors. Refer to Volume 1 of this handbook, USAF Bioenvironmental Noise Data Handbook, Vol 1: Organization, Content and Application, AMRL-TR-75-50(1) 1975, for discussion of the objective and design of the handbook, the types of data presented, measurement procedures, instrumentation, data processing, definitions of quantities, symbols, equations, applications, limitations, etc.

USAF Bioenvironmental Noise Data Handbook. Volume 156. HH-1N In-flight Crew Noise

NASA Astrophysics Data System (ADS)

Hille, H. K.

1982-11-01

The HH-IN is a USAF multi-purpose utility helicopter providing support for various USAF missions. This report provides measured data defining the bioacoustic environments at flight crew locations inside this helicopter during normal flight operations. Data are reported for two locations in a wide variety of physical and psychoacoustic measures: overall and band sound pressure levels, C-weighted and A-weighted sound levels, preferred speech interference level, perceived noise level, and limiting times for total daily exposure of personnel with and without standard Air Force ear protectors. Refer to Volume 1 of this handbook, USAF Bioenvironmental Noise Data Handbook, Vol. 1: Organization, Content and Application, AMRL-TR-75-50(1) 1975, for discussion of the objective and design of the handbook, the types of data presented, measurement procedures, instrumentation, data processing, definitions of quantities, symbols, equations, applications, limitations, etc.

STS-113 crew breakfast before launch

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

2002-01-01

KENNEDY SPACE CENTER, FLA. -- The STS-113 crew enjoys a snack before suiting up for launch. Seated left to right are Mission Specialists John Herrington and Michael Lopez-Alegria, Pilot Paul Lockhart and Commander James Wetherbee; Expedition 6 flight engineer Donald Pettit, Commander Ken Bowersox and flight engineer Nikolai Budarin. STS-113 is the 16th American assembly flight to the International Space Station. The primary mission is bringing the Expedition 6 crew to the Station and returning the Expedition 5 crew to Earth. The major objective of the mission is delivery of the Port 1 (P1) Integrated Truss Assembly, which will be attached to the port side of the S0 truss. Three spacewalks are planned to install and activate the truss and its associated equipment. Launch of Space Shuttle Endeavour on mission STS-113 is scheduled for Nov. 11 at 12:58 a.m. EST.

Flight Crew Integration (FCI) ISS Crew Comments Database & Products Summary

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

Schuh, Susan

2016-01-01

This Crew Debrief Data provides support for design and development of vehicles, hardware, requirements, procedures, processes, issue resolution, lessons learned, consolidation and trending for current Programs; and much of the data is also used to support development of future Programs.

Mir 21 crew portraits

NASA Image and Video Library

1995-07-14

S95-16674 (14 July 1995) --- On the left is the Mir-21 crew consisting of cosmonaut Yuriy V. Usachov (standing), flight engineer; Yuriy I. Onufriyenko (seated), commander; and Shannon W. Lucid, cosmonaut guest researcher. On the right side is the Mir-23 crew consisting of John E. Blaha (standing), cosmonaut guest researcher; Vasili V. Tsibliyev (seated), commander; and Aleksandr I. Lazutkin, flight engineer. NASA astronauts Lucid and Blaha each will go into space to board Russia's Mir Space Station for lengthy research on their respective missions. Lucid will board the Mir during the STS-76 mission. Blaha will replace Lucid onboard the Mir during the STS-79 mission.

Preparing for the crewed Mars journey: microbiota dynamics in the confined Mars500 habitat during simulated Mars flight and landing.

PubMed

Schwendner, Petra; Mahnert, Alexander; Koskinen, Kaisa; Moissl-Eichinger, Christine; Barczyk, Simon; Wirth, Reinhard; Berg, Gabriele; Rettberg, Petra

2017-10-04

The Mars500 project was conceived as the first full duration simulation of a crewed return flight to Mars. For 520 days, six crew members lived confined in a specifically designed spacecraft mock-up. The herein described "MIcrobial ecology of Confined Habitats and humAn health" (MICHA) experiment was implemented to acquire comprehensive microbiota data from this unique, confined manned habitat, to retrieve important information on the occurring microbiota dynamics, the microbial load and diversity in the air and on various surfaces. In total, 360 samples from 20 (9 air, 11 surface) locations were taken at 18 time-points and processed by extensive cultivation, PhyloChip and next generation sequencing (NGS) of 16S rRNA gene amplicons. Cultivation assays revealed a Staphylococcus and Bacillus-dominated microbial community on various surfaces, with an average microbial load that did not exceed the allowed limits for ISS in-flight requirements indicating adequate maintenance of the facility. Areas with high human activity were identified as hotspots for microbial accumulation. Despite substantial fluctuation with respect to microbial diversity and abundance throughout the experiment, the location within the facility and the confinement duration were identified as factors significantly shaping the microbial diversity and composition, with the crew representing the main source for microbial dispersal. Opportunistic pathogens, stress-tolerant or potentially mobile element-bearing microorganisms were predicted to be prevalent throughout the confinement, while the overall microbial diversity dropped significantly over time. Our findings clearly indicate that under confined conditions, the community structure remains a highly dynamic system which adapts to the prevailing habitat and micro-conditions. Since a sterile environment is not achievable, these dynamics need to be monitored to avoid spreading of highly resistant or potentially pathogenic microorganisms and a

High level organizing principles for display of systems fault information for commercial flight crews

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

Rogers, William H.; Schutte, Paul C.

1993-01-01

Advanced fault management aiding concepts for commercial pilots are being developed in a research program at NASA Langley Research Center. One aim of this program is to re-evaluate current design principles for display of fault information to the flight crew: (1) from a cognitive engineering perspective and (2) in light of the availability of new types of information generated by advanced fault management aids. The study described in this paper specifically addresses principles for organizing fault information for display to pilots based on their mental models of fault management.

Various view with fish-eye lens of STS-103 crew on aft flight deck

NASA Image and Video Library

2000-01-28

STS103-375-019 (19-27 December 1999) ---.Six members of the STS-103 crew are seen in this "fish-eye" lens scene taken on Discovery's flight deck during the deployment of the Hubble Space Telescope (HST). From left are astronauts Jean-Francois Clervoy, C. Michael Foale, Claude Nicollier, Curtis L. Brown, Jr., John M. Grunsfeld and Scott J. Kelly. Brown and Kelly are commander and pilot, respectively. All the others are mission specialists, with international MS Nicollier and Clervoy representing the European Space Agency (ESA). Astronaut Steven L. Smith, payload commander, took the photo.

Free Flight and Self-Separation from the Flight Deck Perspective

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

Lozito, Sandra; McGann, Alison; Mackintosh, Margaret-Anne; Cashion, Patricia; Shafto, Michael G. (Technical Monitor)

1997-01-01

The concept of "free flight", while still being developed, is intended to emphasize more, flexibility for operators in the National Airspace System (NAS) by providing more separation responsibility to pilots, New technologies, procedures, and concepts have been suggested by the aviation community to enable this task; however, much work needs to be accomplished to help define and evaluate the concept feasibility. The purpose of this simulation was to begin examining some of the communication and procedural issues associated with self-separation in the enroute environment. A simulation demonstration was conducted in the Boeing 747-400 simulator at NASA Ames Research Center. Commercial pilots (from a U.S. domestic carrier) current on the B747-400 aircraft were the participants. Ten flight crews (10 captains, 10 first officers) flew in the Denver enroute airspace environment. A new alerting logic designed to allow for airborne self-separation was created for this demonstration. This logic assumes automatic dependent surveillance broadcast (ADS-B) capability and represented aircraft up to 120 nautical miles on the display. The new flight deck display features were designed and incorporated on the existing navigational display in the simulator to allow for increased traffic and maneuvering information to the flight crew. New tools were also provided to allow the crews to assess conflicts and potential maneuvers before implementing them. Each of the flight crews flew eight different scenarios in the Denver enroute airspace. The scenarios included eight to ten other aircraft, and each scenario was created with the intent of having one of the other aircraft become an operational conflict for our simulator aircraft. Different types of conflict geometries were represented across the eight scenarios. Also, some scenarios allowed for more time to detect a potential clearance, while others allowed for less time for'detection. Additionally, the crews were asked to a ply the

Crew Factors in Flight Operations. 11; A Survey of Fatigue Factors in Regional Airline Operations

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

Co, Elizabeth L.; Gregory, Kevin B.; Johnson, Julie M.; Rosekind, Mark R.

1999-01-01

This report is the eleventh in a series on the physiological effects of flight operations on flight crews. A 119-question survey was completed by 1,424 flight crewmembers from 26 regional carriers to identify factors contributing to fatigue in regional airline operations. Eighty-nine percent of crewmembers identified fatigue as a moderate or serious concern with 88% reporting that it was a common occurrence and 92% reporting that, when it occurs, fatigue represents a moderate or serious safety issue. However, 86% reported they received no company training addressing fatigue issues. Identified fatigue factors included multiple flight segments, scheduling considerations, varying regulations, and others. The two most commonly cited fatigue factors regarded flying multiple (more than four) segments. Scheduling factors accounted for nine of the ten most common recommendations to reduce fatigue in regional operations. Differing requirements among regulations were cited as contributing to fatigue. Other identified factors were the flight deck environment, automation, and diet. The data suggested specific recommendations, including education of industry personnel about fatigue issues and examination of scheduling practices. Education plays a critical role in any effort to address fatigue. Analyzing scheduling practices and identifying potential improvements may result in reduced fatigue as well as other benefits to operations.

A NASA painter applies the first primer coat to NASA's Orion full-scale abort flight test crew module in the Edwards Air Force Base paint hangar.

NASA Image and Video Library

2008-03-29

A full-scale flight-test mockup of the Constellation program's Orion crew vehicle arrived at NASA's Dryden Flight Research Center in late March 2008 to undergo preparations for the first short-range flight test of the spacecraft's astronaut escape system later that year. Engineers and technicians at NASA's Langley Research Center fabricated the structure, which precisely represents the size, outer shape and mass characteristics of the Orion space capsule. The Orion crew module mockup was ferried to NASA Dryden on an Air Force C-17. After painting in the Edwards Air Force Base paint hangar, the conical capsule was taken to Dryden for installation of flight computers, instrumentation and other electronics prior to being sent to the U.S. Army's White Sands Missile Range in New Mexico for integration with the escape system and the first abort flight test in late 2008. The tests were designed to ensure a safe, reliable method of escape for astronauts in case of an emergency.

Paint shop technicians carefully apply masking prior to painting the Orion full-scale abort flight test crew module in the Edwards Air Force Base paint hangar.

NASA Image and Video Library

2008-03-29

A full-scale flight-test mockup of the Constellation program's Orion crew vehicle arrived at NASA's Dryden Flight Research Center in late March 2008 to undergo preparations for the first short-range flight test of the spacecraft's astronaut escape system later that year. Engineers and technicians at NASA's Langley Research Center fabricated the structure, which precisely represents the size, outer shape and mass characteristics of the Orion space capsule. The Orion crew module mockup was ferried to NASA Dryden on an Air Force C-17. After painting in the Edwards Air Force Base paint hangar, the conical capsule was taken to Dryden for installation of flight computers, instrumentation and other electronics prior to being sent to the U.S. Army's White Sands Missile Range in New Mexico for integration with the escape system and the first abort flight test in late 2008. The tests were designed to ensure a safe, reliable method of escape for astronauts in case of an emergency.

Expedition 8 Crew Interview: Pedro Duque

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

2003-01-01

European Space Agency (ESA) astronaut Pedro Duque is interviewed in preparation for his flight to and eight day stay on the International Space Station (ISS) as part of the Cervantes mission. Duque arrived on the ISS with the Expedition 8 crew onboard a Soyuz TMA-3, the seventh Soyuz flight to the station. He departed from the ISS on a Soyuz TMA-2 with the Expedition 7 crew of the ISS. In the video, Duque answers questions on: the goals of his flight; his life and career path; the Columbus Module, which ESA will contribute to the ISS, the ride onboard a Soyuz, and the importance of the ISS.

Health and perception of cabin air quality among Swedish commercial airline crew.

PubMed

Lindgren, T; Norbäck, D

2005-01-01

Health symptoms and perception of cabin air quality (CAQ) among commercial cabin crew were studied as a function of personal risk factors, occupation, and work on intercontinental flights with exposure to environmental tobacco smoke (ETS). A standardized questionnaire (MM 040 NA) was mailed in February to March 1997 to all Stockholm airline crew on duty in a Scandinavian airline (n=1857), and to office workers from the same airline (n=218). During this time, smoking was allowed only on intercontinental flights. The participation rate was 81% (n=1513) by the airline crew, and 77% (n=168) by the office group. Statistical analysis was performed by multiple logistic regression analysis, controlling for age, gender, atopy, current smoking habits, and occupation. The most common symptoms among airline crew were: fatigue (21%), nasal symptoms (15%), eye irritation (11%), dry or flushed facial skin (12%), and dry/itchy skin on hands (12%). The most common complaint about CAQ was dry air (53%). Airline crew had more nasal, throat, and hand skin symptoms, than office workers did. Airline crew with a history of atopy had more nasal, throat, and dermal face and hand symptoms than other crew members did. Older airline crew members had more complaints of difficulty concentrating, but fewer complaints of dermal symptoms on the face and hands than younger crew members did. Female crew members reported more headaches than male crew members reported. Smoking was not associated with frequency of symptoms. Pilots had fewer complaints of most symptoms than other crew had. Airline crew that had been on an intercontinental flight in the week before the survey had more complaints of fatigue, heavy-headedness, and difficulty concentrating. Complaints of stuffy air and dry air were more common among airline crew than among office workers from the same airline. Female crew had more complaints of stuffy and dry air than male crew had. Older cabin crew had fewer complaints of dry air than

Results of an International Space Crew Debrief

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

Santy, P. A.; Holland, A. W.; Looper, L.; Marcondes-North, R.

1992-01-01

In order to identify potential multi-cultural and multinational problems for future International Space Station Freedom crew, a crew debrief questionnaire was developed for U.S. astronauts who flew on shuttle missions with one or more crew members from other countries. Methods: From 1981-90, a total of 20 U.S. astronauts flew on international space missions. Debriefs were mailed to all 20 with instructions not to identify themselves or their specific mission. The debrief focused primarily on preflight training and post flight incidents of misunderstanding, miscommunication, and interpersonal friction among crewmembers. Astronauts were also asked to rate the impact of the incident to the mission (low, medium, high). Results: Ten astronauts responded, but only nine responses were able to be scored, for a return rate of 45 percent. 42 incidents were reported, 9 in the preflight period, 26 inflight, and 7 in the postflight period. Most of the incidents were rated at a low or medium impact, but 5 of the inflight incidents were rated at a 'high' mission impact. A number of causes for the problems were listed, and are discussed. Conclusions: The debrief respondents provide useful and timely recommendations on preflight training which might help facilitate the integration of multinational crews and prevent multi-cultural or multinational factors from interfering with mission operations.

Orion Crew Module Move

NASA Image and Video Library

2017-11-17

The Orion crew module for Exploration Mission-1 was moved into the thermal chamber in the Neil Armstrong Operations and Checkout Building high bay at NASA's Kennedy Space Center in Florida. The crew module will undergo a thermal cycle test to assess the workmanship of critical hardware and structural locations. The test also demonstrates crew module subsystem operations in a thermally stressing environment to confirm no damage or anomalous hardware conditions as a result of the test. The Orion spacecraft will launch atop NASA's Space Launch System rocket on its first uncrewed integrated flight.

SpaceX Crew Dragon Ship

NASA Image and Video Library

2018-05-20

The SpaceX Crew Dragon spacecraft is in the anechoic chamber for electromagnetic interference testing on May 20, 2018, at NASA's Kennedy Space Center in Florida. The Crew Dragon will be shipped to the agency's Plum Brook Station test facility at Glenn Research City in Cleveland, Ohio, for testing in the Reverberant Acoustic Test Facility, the world's most powerful acoustic test chamber. Crew Dragon is being prepared for its first uncrewed test flight, targeted for August 2018.

USAF bioenvironmental noise data handbook. Volume 157: KC-10A in-flight crew noise

NASA Astrophysics Data System (ADS)

Hille, H. K.

1982-09-01

The KC-10A is a standard USAF tanker-transport aircraft with high-speed, high altitude refueling and long range transport capability. This report provides measured data defining the bioacoustic environments at flight crew/passenger locations inside this helicopter during normal flight operations. Data are reported for 24 locations in a wide variety of physical and psychoacoustic measures: overall and band sound pressure levels, C-weighted and A-weighted sound levels, preferred speech interference level, perceived noise level, and limiting times for total daily exposure of personnel with and without standard Air Force ear protectors. Refer to Volume 1 of this handbook, USAF Bioenvironmental Noise Data Handbook, Vol. 1: Organization, Content and Application, AMRL-TR-75-50(1) 1975, for discussion of the objective and design of the handbook, the types of data presented, measurement procedures, instrumentation, data processing, definitions of quantities, symbols, equations, applications, limitations, etc.

STS-87 crew participates in Crew Equipment Interface Test

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

1997-01-01

Participating in the Crew Equipment Integration Test (CEIT) at Kennedy Space Center are STS-87 crew members, assisted by Glenda Laws, extravehicular activity (EVA) coordinator, Johnson Space Center. Standing behind Laws are Takao Doi, Ph.D., of the National Space Development Agency of Japan, and Winston Scott, both mission specialists on STS-87. The STS-87 mission will be the fourth United States Microgravity Payload and flight of the Spartan-201 deployable satellite. During the mission, scheduled for a Nov. 19 liftoff from KSC, Dr. Doi and Scott will both perform spacewalks.

Evaluation of Flight Attendant Technical Knowledge

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

Dunbar, Melisa G.; Chute, Rebecca D.; Rosekind, Mark (Technical Monitor)

1997-01-01

Accident and incident reports have indicated that flight attendants have numerous opportunities to provide the flight-deck crew with operational information that may prevent or lessen the severity of a potential problem. Additionally, as carrier fleets transition from three person to two person flight-deck crews, the reliance upon the cabin crew for the transfer of this information may increase further. Recent research indicates that flight attendants do not feel confident in their ability to describe mechanical parts or malfunctions of the aircraft, and the lack of flight attendant technical training has been referenced in a number of recent reports. Chute and Wiener describe five factors which may produce communication barriers between cockpit and cabin crews: the historical background of aviation, the physical separation of the two crews, psychosocial issues, regulatory factors, and organizational factors. By examining these areas of division we can identify possible bridges and address the implications of deficient cockpit/cabin communication on flight safety. Flight attendant operational knowledge may provide some mitigation of these barriers. The present study explored both flight attendant technical knowledge and flight attendant and pilot expectations of flight attendant technical knowledge. To assess the technical knowledge of cabin crewmembers, 177 current flight attendants from two U.S. carriers voluntarily completed a 13-item technical quiz. To investigate expectations of flight attendant technical knowledge, 181 pilots and a second sample of 96 flight attendants, from the same two airlines, completed surveys designed to capture each group's expectations of operational knowledge required of flight attendants. Analyses revealed several discrepancies between the present level of flight attendant operational knowledge and pilots' and flight attendants' expected and desired levels of technical knowledge. Implications for training will be discussed.

Crew quarters for Space Station

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

Mount, F. E.

1989-01-01

The only long-term U.S. manned space mission completed has been Skylab, which has similarities as well as differences to the proposed Space Station. With the exception of Skylab missions, there has been a dearth of experience on which to base the design of the individual Space Station Freedom crew quarters. Shuttle missions commonly do not have sleep compartments, only 'sleeping arrangements'. There are provisions made for each crewmember to have a sleep restraint and a sleep liner, which are attached to a bulkhead or a locker. When the Shuttle flights began to have more than one working shift, crew quarters became necessary due to noise and other disturbances caused by crew task-related activities. Shuttle missions that have planned work shifts have incorporated sleep compartments. To assist in gaining more information and insight for the design of the crew quarters for the Space Station Freedom, a survey was given to current crewmembers with flight experience. The results from this survey were compiled and integrated with information from the literature covering space experience, privacy, and human-factors issues.

The STS-108 crew look over MPLM during Crew Equipment Interface Test

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

2001-01-01

KENNEDY SPACE CENTER, Fla. -- The STS-108 crew pause during their checkout of the Multi-Purpose Logistics Module Raffaello. From left are Commander Dominic L. Gorie, Mission Specialist Daniel M. Tani, Pilot Mark E. Kelly and Mission Specialist Linda A. Godwin. The four astronauts are taking part in Crew Equipment Interface Test (CEIT) activities at KSC. The CEIT provides familiarization with the launch vehicle and payload. Mission STS-108 is a Utilization Flight (UF-1), carrying the Expedition Four crew plus Multi-Purpose Logistics Module Raffaello to the International Space Station. The Expedition Four crew comprises Yuri Onufriyenko, commander, Russian Aviation and Space Agency, and astronauts Daniel W. Bursch and Carl E. Walz. Endeavour is scheduled to launch Nov. 29 on mission STS-108.

The STS-108 crew look over MPLM during Crew Equipment Interface Test

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

2001-01-01

KENNEDY SPACE CENTER, Fla. -- The STS-108 crew look into the hatch of the Multi-Purpose Logistics Module Raffaello. From left are Commander Dominic L. Gorie, Pilot Mark E. Kelly, and Mission Specialists Linda A. Godwin and Daniel M. Tani. The four astronauts are taking part in Crew Equipment Interface Test (CEIT) activities at KSC. The CEIT provides familiarization with the launch vehicle and payload. Mission STS-108 is a Utilization Flight (UF-1), carrying the Expedition Four crew plus Multi-Purpose Logistics Module Raffaello to the International Space Station. The Expedition Four crew comprises Yuri Onufriyenko, commander, Russian Aviation and Space Agency, and astronauts Daniel W. Bursch and Carl E. Walz. Endeavour is scheduled to launch Nov. 29 on mission STS-108.

14 CFR 460.9 - Informing crew of risk.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

2010-01-01

... 14 Aeronautics and Space 4 2010-01-01 2010-01-01 false Informing crew of risk. 460.9 Section 460.9 Aeronautics and Space COMMERCIAL SPACE TRANSPORTATION, FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION, DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION LICENSING HUMAN SPACE FLIGHT REQUIREMENTS Launch and Reentry with Crew § 460.9 Informing crew of...

14 CFR 460.9 - Informing crew of risk.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2011 CFR

2011-01-01

... 14 Aeronautics and Space 4 2011-01-01 2011-01-01 false Informing crew of risk. 460.9 Section 460.9 Aeronautics and Space COMMERCIAL SPACE TRANSPORTATION, FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION, DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION LICENSING HUMAN SPACE FLIGHT REQUIREMENTS Launch and Reentry with Crew § 460.9 Informing crew of...

FLYSAFE, nowcasting of in flight icing supporting aircrew decision making process

NASA Astrophysics Data System (ADS)

Drouin, A.; Le Bot, C.

2009-09-01

FLYSAFE is an Integrated Project of the 6th framework of the European Commission with the aim to improve flight safety through the development of a Next Generation Integrated Surveillance System (NGISS). The NGISS provides information to the flight crew on the three major external hazards for aviation: weather, air traffic and terrain. The NGISS has the capability of displaying data about all three hazards on a single display screen, facilitating rapid pilot appreciation of the situation by the flight crew. Weather Information Management Systems (WIMS) were developed to provide the NGISS and the flight crew with weather related information on in-flight icing, thunderstorms, wake-vortex and clear-air turbulence. These products are generated on the ground from observations and model forecasts. WIMS supply relevant information on three different scales: global, regional and local (over airport Terminal Manoeuvring Area). Within the flysafe program, around 120 hours of flight trials were performed during February 2008 and August 2008. Two aircraft were involved each with separate objectives : - to assess FLYSAFE's innovative solutions for the data-link, on-board data fusion, data-display, and data-updates during flight; - to evaluate the new weather information management systems (in flight icing and thunderstorms) using in-situ measurements recorded on board the test aircraft. In this presentation we will focus on the in-flight icing nowcasting system developed at Météo France in the framework of FLYSAFE: the local ICE WIMS. The local ICE WIMS is based on data fusion. The most relevant information for icing detection is extracted from the numerical weather prediction model, the infra-red and visible satellite imagery and the ground weather radar reflectivities. After a presentation of the local ICE WIMS, we detail the evaluation of the local ICE WIMS performed using the winter and summer flight trial data.

Expedition Crews Four and Five and STS-111 Crew Aboard the ISS

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

2002-01-01

Huddled together in the Destiny laboratory of the International Space Station (ISS) are the Expedition Four crew (dark blue shirts), Expedition Five crew (medium blue shirts) and the STS-111 crew (green shirts). The Expedition Four crewmembers are, from front to back, Cosmonaut Ury I. Onufrienko, mission commander; and Astronauts Daniel W. Bursch and Carl E. Waltz, flight engineers. The ISS crewmembers are, from front to back, Astronauts Kerneth D. Cockrell, mission commander; Franklin R. Chang-Diaz, mission specialist; Paul S. Lockhart, pilot; and Philippe Perrin, mission specialist. Expedition Five crewmembers are, from front to back, Cosmonaut Valery G. Korzun, mission commander; Astronaut Peggy A. Whitson and Cosmonaut Sergei Y. Treschev, flight engineers. The ISS recieved a new crew, Expedition Five, replacing Expedition Four after a record-setting 196 days in space, when the Space Shuttle Orbiter Endeavour STS-111 mission visited in June 2002. Three spacewalks enabled the STS-111 crew to accomplish additional mission objectives: the delivery and installation of the Mobile Base System (MBS), which is an important part of the station's Mobile Servicing System allowing the robotic arm to travel the length of the station; the replacement of a wrist roll joint on the Station's robotic arm; and unloading supplies and science experiments from the Leonardo Multi-Purpose Logistics Module, which made its third trip to the orbital outpost. The STS-111 mission, the 14th Shuttle mission to visit the ISS, was launched on June 5, 2002 and landed June 19, 2002.

Space shuttle orbiter test flight series

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

Garrett, D.; Gordon, R.; Jackson, R. B.

1977-01-01

The proposed studies on the space shuttle orbiter test taxi runs and captive flight tests were set forth. The orbiter test flights, the approach and landing tests (ALT), and the ground vibration tests were cited. Free flight plans, the space shuttle ALT crews, and 747 carrier aircraft crew were considered.

Orion Crew Module Move

NASA Image and Video Library

2017-11-17

Technicians assist as the Orion crew module for Exploration Mission-1 is moved toward the thermal chamber in the Neil Armstrong Operations and Checkout Building high bay at NASA's Kennedy Space Center in Florida. The crew module will undergo a thermal cycle test to assess the workmanship of critical hardware and structural locations. The test also demonstrates crew module subsystem operations in a thermally stressing environment to confirm no damage or anomalous hardware conditions as a result of the test. The Orion spacecraft will launch atop NASA's Space Launch System rocket on its first uncrewed integrated flight.

Orion Crew Module Move

NASA Image and Video Library

2017-11-17

A crane is being prepared for use during move operations of the Orion crew module for Exploration Mission-1 to the thermal chamber in the Neil Armstrong Operations and Checkout Building high bay at NASA's Kennedy Space Center in Florida. The crew module will undergo a thermal cycle test to assess the workmanship of critical hardware and structural locations. The test also demonstrates crew module subsystem operations in a thermally stressing environment to confirm no damage or anomalous hardware conditions as a result of the test. The Orion spacecraft will launch atop NASA's Space Launch System rocket on its first uncrewed integrated flight.

Orion Crew Module Move

NASA Image and Video Library

2017-11-17

Technicians prepare a crane for use during move operations of the Orion crew module for Exploration Mission-1 to the thermal chamber in the Neil Armstrong Operations and Checkout Building high bay at NASA's Kennedy Space Center in Florida. The crew module will undergo a thermal cycle test to assess the workmanship of critical hardware and structural locations. The test also demonstrates crew module subsystem operations in a thermally stressing environment to confirm no damage or anomalous hardware conditions as a result of the test. The Orion spacecraft will launch atop NASA's Space Launch System rocket on its first uncrewed integrated flight.

STS-83 Crew ride in M-113

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

1997-01-01

Members of the STS-83 flight crew pay attention to KSC instructor George Hoggard (center) as he gives them pointers about driving the M-113 rescue vehicle they are riding in during training that is a part of the Terminal Countdown Demonstration Test (TCDT) exercises at KSC for Shuttle flight crews prior to their mission. Pilot Susan L. Still is in the left foreground, while Mission Commander James D. Halsell Jr., is on the right. Other members of the STS- crew who will be aboard the Space Shuttle Columbia during the 16-day Microgravity Science Laboratory- Specialists Michael L. Gernhardt and Donald A. Thomas; and Payload Specialists Roger K. Crouch and Gregory T. Linteris.

Man in space - A time for perspective. [crew performance on Space Shuttle-Spacelab program

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

Winter, D. L.

1975-01-01

Factors affecting crew performances in long-term space flights are examined with emphasis on the Space Shuttle-Spacelab program. Biomedical investigations carried out during four Skylab missions indicate that initially rapid changes in certain physiological parameters, notably in cardiovascular response and red-blood-cell levels, lead to an adapted condition. Calcium loss remains a potential problem. Space Shuttle environmental control and life-support systems are described together with technology facilitating performance of mission objectives in a weightless environment. It is concluded that crew requirements are within the physical and psychological capability of astronauts, but the extent to which nonastronaut personnel will be able to participate without extensive training and pre-conditioning remains to be determined.

The Impact of Data Communications Messages in the Terminal Area on Flight Crew Workload and Eye Scanning

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

Comstock, James R., Jr.; Baxley, Brian T.; Norman, Robert M.; Ellis, Kyle K. E.; Adams, Cathy A.; Latorella, Kara A.; Lynn, William A.

2010-01-01

This paper, to accompany a discussion panel, describes a collaborative FAA and NASA research study to determine the effect Data Communications (Data Comm) messages have on flight crew workload and eye scanning behavior in busy terminal area operations. In the Next Generation Air Transportation System Concept of Operations, for the period 2017-2022, the FAA envisions Data Comm between controllers and the flight crew to become the primary means of communicating non-time critical information. Four research conditions were defined that span current day to future equipage levels (Voice with Paper map, Data Comm with Paper map, Data Comm with Moving Map Display with ownship position displayed, Data Comm with Moving Map, ownship and taxi route displayed), and were used to create arrival and departure scenarios at Boston Logan Airport. Preliminary results for workload, situation awareness, and pilot head-up time are presented here. Questionnaire data indicated that pilot acceptability, workload, and situation awareness ratings were favorable for all of the conditions tested. Pilots did indicate that there were times during final approach and landing when they would prefer not to hear the message chime, and would not be able to make a quick response due to high priority tasks in the cockpit.

Crew Transportation Plan

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

Zeitler, Pamela S. (Compiler); Mango, Edward J.

2013-01-01

The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) Commercial Crew Program (CCP) has been chartered to facilitate the development of a United States (U.S.) commercial crew space transportation capability with the goal of achieving safe, reliable, and cost effective access to and from low Earth orbit (LEO) and the International Space Station (ISS) as soon as possible. Once the capability is matured and is available to the Government and other customers, NASA expects to purchase commercial services to meet its ISS crew rotation and emergency return objectives.

STS-107 Crew Equipment Interface Test (CEIT)activities at SPACEHAB

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

2001-01-01

KENNEDY SPACE CENTER, Fla. -- At SPACEHAB, Cape Canaveral, Fla., the STS-107 crew takes part in Crew Equipment Interface Test (CEIT) activities. From left are Mission Specialist Laurel Blair Salton Clark, Commander Rick Douglas Husband, Payload Specialist Ilan Ramon, of Israel, and Payload Commander Michael P. Anderson. A trainer is at far right. As a research mission, STS-107 will carry the Spacehab Double Module in its first research flight into space and a broad collection of experiments ranging from material science to life science. The CEIT activities enable the crew to perform certain flight operations, operate experiments in a flight-like environment, evaluate stowage locations and obtain additional exposure to specific experiment operations. Other STS-107 crew members are Pilot William C. McCool and Mission Specialists Kalpana Chawla and David M. Brown. STS-107 is scheduled for launch May 23, 2002

STS-107 Crew Equipment Interface Test (CEIT)activities at SPACEHAB

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

2001-01-01

KENNEDY SPACE CENTER, Fla. -- At SPACEHAB, Cape Canaveral, Fla., STS-107 Mission Specialist Laurel Blair Salton Clark manipulates a piece of equipment. She and other crew members are at SPACEHAB, Port Canaveral, Fla., for Crew Equipment Interface Test (CEIT) activities that enable the crew to perform certain flight operations, operate experiments in a flight-like environment, evaluate stowage locations and obtain additional exposure to specific experiment operations. As a research mission, STS-107 will carry the Spacehab Double Module in its first research flight into space and a broad collection of experiments ranging from material science to life science. Other STS-107 crew members are Commander Rick Douglas Husband, Pilot William C. McCool; Payload Commander Michael P. Anderson; and Mission Specialists Kalpana Chawla, David M. Brown and Ilan Ramon, of Israel. STS-107 is scheduled for launch May 23, 2002

Expedition Two Crew photo in Quest airlock

NASA Image and Video Library

2001-07-20

STS104-E-5188 (20 July 2001) --- The Expedition Two crew poses for an in-flight portrait in the newly- delivered Quest Airlock on the International Space Station (ISS). Flanked by two extravehicular mobility unit (EMU) space suits, are, from left, Susan J. Helms, Yury V. Usachev and James S. Voss. Usachev is commander and Voss and Helms are both flight engineers. This image was recorded by one of the visiting STS-104 crew members using a digital still camera.

Crew Selection and Training

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

Helmreich, Robert L.

1996-01-01

This research addressed a number of issues relevant to the performance of teams in demanding environments. Initial work, conducted in the aviation analog environment, focused on developing new measures of performance related attitudes and behaviors. The attitude measures were used to assess acceptance of concepts related to effective teamwork and personal capabilities under stress. The behavioral measures were used to evaluate the effectiveness of flight crews operating in commercial aviation. Assessment of team issues in aviation led further to the evaluation and development of training to enhance team performance. Much of the work addressed evaluation of the effectiveness of such training, which has become known as Crew Resource Management (CRM). A second line of investigation was into personality characteristics that predict performance in challenging environments such as aviation and space. A third line of investigation of team performance grew out of the study of flight crews in different organizations. This led to the development of a theoretical model of crew performance that included not only individual attributes such as personality and ability, but also organizational and national culture. A final line of investigation involved beginning to assess whether the methodologies and measures developed for the aviation analog could be applied to another domain -- the performance of medical teams working in the operating room.

Crew Factors in Flight Operations. 8; A Survey of Fatigue Factors in Corporate/Executive A Viation Operations

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

Rosekind, Mark R.; Co, Elizabeth L.; Gregory, Kevin B.; Miller, Donna L.

2000-01-01

Corporate flight crews face unique challenges including unscheduled flights, quickly changing schedules, extended duty days, long waits, time zone changes, and peripheral tasks. Most corporate operations are regulated by Part 91 FARs which set no flight or duty time limits. The objective of this study was to identify operationally significant factors that may influence fatigue, alertness, and performance in corporate operations. In collaboration with the National Business Aircraft Association and the Flight Safety Foundation, NASA developed and distributed a retrospective survey comprising 107 questions addressing demographics, home sleep habits, flight experience, duty schedules, fatigue during operations, and work environment. Corporate crewmembers returned 1,488 surveys. Respondents averaged 45.2 years of age, had 14.9 years of corporate flying experience, and 9,750 total flight hours. The majority (89%) rated themselves as 'good' or 'very good' sleepers at home. Most (82%) indicated they are subject to call for duty and described an average duty day of 9.9 h. About two-thirds reported having a daily duty time limit and over half (57%) reported a daily flight time limit. Nearly three-quarters (71%) acknowledged having 'nodded off' during a flight. Only 21% reported that their flight departments offer training on fatigue issues. Almost three-quarters (74%) described fatigue as a 'moderate' or 'serious' concern, and a majority (61%) characterized it as a common occurrence. Most (85%) identified fatigue as a 'moderate' or 'serious' safety issue.

Activity Tracking for Pilot Error Detection from Flight Data

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

Callantine, Todd J.; Ashford, Rose (Technical Monitor)

2002-01-01

This report presents an application of activity tracking for pilot error detection from flight data, and describes issues surrounding such an application. It first describes the Crew Activity Tracking System (CATS), in-flight data collected from the NASA Langley Boeing 757 Airborne Research Integrated Experiment System aircraft, and a model of B757 flight crew activities. It then presents an example of CATS detecting actual in-flight crew errors.

Expedition One crew insignia

NASA Image and Video Library

2000-11-29

ISS001-S-001 (October 2000) --- The first International Space Station (ISS) crew patch is a simplified graphic of the station complex when fully completed. The station is seen with solar arrays turned forward. The last names of the Expedition One crew, Soyuz pilot Yuri Gidzenko, flight engineer Sergei Krikalev, and expedition commander William (Bill) Shepherd, appear under the station symbol. The insignia design for ISS flights is reserved for use by the astronauts and cosmonauts and for other official use as the NASA Administrator and NASA's international partners may authorize. Public availability has been approved only in the form of illustrations by the various news media. When and if there is any change in this policy, which we do not anticipate, it will be publicly announced.

Quantifying Pilot Contribution to Flight Safety During Dual Generator Failure

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

Etherington, Timothy J.; Kramer, Lynda J.; Kennedy, Kellie D.; Bailey, Randall E.; Last, Mary Carolyn

2017-01-01

Accident statistics cite flight crew error in over 60% of accidents involving transport category aircraft. Yet, a well-trained and well-qualified pilot is acknowledged as the critical center point of aircraft systems safety and an integral safety component of the entire commercial aviation system. No data currently exists that quantifies the contribution of the flight crew in this role. Neither does data exist for how often the flight crew handles non-normal procedures or system failures on a daily basis in the National Airspace System. A pilot-in-the-loop high fidelity motion simulation study was conducted by the NASA Langley Research Center in partnership with the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) to evaluate the pilot's contribution to flight safety during normal flight and in response to aircraft system failures. Eighteen crews flew various normal and non-normal procedures over a two-day period and their actions were recorded in response to failures. To quantify the human's contribution, crew complement was used as the experiment independent variable in a between-subjects design. Pilot actions and performance when one of the flight crew was unavailable were also recorded for comparison against the nominal two-crew operations. This paper details diversion decisions, perceived safety of flight, workload, time to complete pertinent checklists, and approach and landing results while dealing with a complete loss of electrical generators. Loss of electrical power requires pilots to complete the flight without automation support of autopilots, flight directors, or auto throttles. For reduced crew complements, the additional workload and perceived safety of flight was considered unacceptable.

Rehabilitation After International Space Station Flights

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

Chauvin, S. J.; Shepherd, B. A. S.; Guilliams, M. E.; Taddeo, T.

2003-01-01

Rehabilitating U.S. crew members to preflight status following flights on the Russian Mir Space Station required longer than six months for full functional recovery of some of the seven crew members. Additional exercise hardware has been added on the International Space Station as well as a rehabilitative emphasis on functional fitness/agility and proprioception. The authors will describe and present the results of the rehabilitation program for ISS and evaluate rehabilitative needs for longer missions. Pre- and in-flight programs emphasize strength and aerobic conditioning. One year before launch, crew members are assigned an Astronaut Strength and Conditioning specialist. Crew members are scheduled for 2 hours, 3 days a week, for pre-flight training and 2.5 hours, six days a week, for in-flight training. Crewmembers are tested on functional fitness, agility, isokinetic strength, and submaximal cycle ergometer evaluation before and after flight. The information from these tests is used for exercise prescriptions, comparison, and evaluation of the astronaut and training programs. The rehabilitation program lasts for 45 days and is scheduled for 2 hours during each crew workday. Phase 1 of the rehabilitation program starts on landing day and places emphasis on ambulation, flexibility, and muscle strengthening. Phase 2 adds proprioceptive exercise and cardiovascular conditioning. Phase 3 (the longest phase) focuses on functional development. All programs are tailored specifically for each individual according to their test results, preferred recreational activities, and mission roles and duties. Most crew members reached or exceeded their preflight test values 45 days after flight. Some crew members subjectively indicated the need for a longer rehabilitation period. The current rehabilitation program for returning ISS crew members seems adequate in content but may need to be extended for longer expeditions.

STS-51 onboard crew portrait

NASA Image and Video Library

1993-09-20

STS051-44-005 (12-22 sept 1993) --- The five crew members pose for the traditional inflight crew portrait on the Space Shuttle Discovery's flight deck. Left to right are astronauts William F. Readdy, Daniel W. Bursch, Frank L. Culbertson, Jr., Carl E. Walz and James H. Newman. Culbertson is mission commander, with Readdy serving as pilot and the others are mission specialists.

Casual crew and individual photos

NASA Image and Video Library

1997-08-28

STS085-326-016 (7 - 19 August 1997) --- An impromptu in-flight crew portrait was snapped while the crew members were setting up for a more balanced portrait on the Space Shuttle Discovery's mid-deck. Left to right are astronauts Kent V. Rominger, Robert L. Curbeam, Stephen K. Robinson, Curtis L. Brown, Jr., N. Jan Davis and Bjarni V. Tryggvason.

STS-111 Flight Day 8 Highlights

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

2002-01-01

On Flight Day 8 of STS-111 (Space Shuttle Endeavour crew includes: Kenneth Cockrell, Commander; Paul Lockhart, Pilot; Franklin Chang-Diaz, Mission Specialist; Philippe Perrin, Mission Specialist; International Space Station (ISS) Expedition 5 crew includes Valery Korzun, Commander; Peggy Whitson, Flight Engineer; Sergei Treschev, Flight Engineer; ISS Expedition 4 crew includes: Yury Onufrienko, Commander; Daniel Bursch, Flight Engineer; Carl Walz, Flight Engineer), the Leonardo Multi Purpose Logistics Module (MPLM) is shown from the outside of the ISS. The MPLM, used to transport goods to the station for the Expedition 5 crew, and to return goods used by the Expedition 4 crew, is being loaded and unloaded by crewmembers. Live video from within the Destiny Laboratory Module shows Whitson and Chang-Diaz. They have just completed the second of three reboosts planned for this mission, in each of which the station will gain an additional statutory mile in altitude. Following this there is an interview conducted by ground-based reporters with some members from each of the three crews, answering various questions on their respective missions including sleeping in space and conducting experiments. Video of Earth and space tools precedes a second interview much like the first, but with the crews in their entirety. Topics discussed include the feelings of Bursch and Walz on their breaking the US record for continual days spent in space. The video ends with footage of the Southern California coastline.

STS-111 Flight Day 8 Highlights

NASA Astrophysics Data System (ADS)

2002-06-01

On Flight Day 8 of STS-111 (Space Shuttle Endeavour crew includes: Kenneth Cockrell, Commander; Paul Lockhart, Pilot; Franklin Chang-Diaz, Mission Specialist; Philippe Perrin, Mission Specialist; International Space Station (ISS) Expedition 5 crew includes Valery Korzun, Commander; Peggy Whitson, Flight Engineer; Sergei Treschev, Flight Engineer; ISS Expedition 4 crew includes: Yury Onufrienko, Commander; Daniel Bursch, Flight Engineer; Carl Walz, Flight Engineer), the Leonardo Multi Purpose Logistics Module (MPLM) is shown from the outside of the ISS. The MPLM, used to transport goods to the station for the Expedition 5 crew, and to return goods used by the Expedition 4 crew, is being loaded and unloaded by crewmembers. Live video from within the Destiny Laboratory Module shows Whitson and Chang-Diaz. They have just completed the second of three reboosts planned for this mission, in each of which the station will gain an additional statutory mile in altitude. Following this there is an interview conducted by ground-based reporters with some members from each of the three crews, answering various questions on their respective missions including sleeping in space and conducting experiments. Video of Earth and space tools precedes a second interview much like the first, but with the crews in their entirety. Topics discussed include the feelings of Bursch and Walz on their breaking the US record for continual days spent in space. The video ends with footage of the Southern California coastline.

STS-96 FD Highlights and Crew Activities Report: Flight Day 06

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

1999-01-01

On this sixth day of the STS-96 Discovery mission, the flight crew, Commander Kent V. Rominger, Pilot Rick D. Husband, and Mission Specialists Ellen Ochoa, Tamara E. Jernigan, Daniel T. Barry, Julie Payette, and Valery Ivanovich Tokarev are seen performing logistics transfer activities within the Discovery/International Space Station orbiting complex. Ochoa, Jernigan, Husband and Barry devote a significant part of their day to the transfer of bags of different sizes and shapes from the SPACEHAB module in Discovery's cargo bay to resting places inside the International Space Station. Payette and Tokarev complete the maintenance on the storage batteries. Barry and Tokarev complete installation of the remaining sound mufflers over the fans in Zarya. Barry then measures the sound levels at different positions inside the module. Rominger and Tokarev conduct a news conference with Russian reporters from the Mission Control Center in Moscow.

Perception of cabin air quality in airline crew related to air humidification, on intercontinental flights.

PubMed

Lindgren, T; Norbäck, D; Wieslander, G

2007-06-01

The influence of air humidification in aircraft, on perception of cabin air quality among airline crew (N = 71) was investigated. In-flight investigations were performed in the forward part and in the aft part on eight intercontinental flights with one Boeing 767 individually, equipped with an evaporation humidifier combined with a dehumidifying unit, to reduce accumulation of condensed water in the wall construction. Four flights had the air humidification active when going out, and turned off on the return flight. The four others had the inverse humidification sequence. The sequences were randomized, and double blind. Air humidification increased relative air humidity (RH) by 10% in forward part, and by 3% in aft part of the cabin and in the cockpit. When the humidification device was active, the cabin air was perceived as being less dry (P = 0.008), and fresher (P = 0.002). The mean concentration of viable bacteria (77-108 cfu/m(3)), viable molds (74-84 cfu/m(3)), and respirable particles (1-8 microg/m3) was low, both during humidified and non-humidified flights. On flights with air humidification, there were less particles in the forward part of the aircraft (P = 0.01). In conclusion, RH can be slightly increased by using ceramic evaporation humidifier, without any measurable increase of microorganisms in cabin air. The cabin air quality was perceived as being better with air humidification. PRACTICAL IMPLICATION: Relative air humidity is low (10-20%) during intercontinental flights, and can be increased by using ceramic evaporation humidifier, without any measurable increase of microorganism in cabin air. Air humidification could increase the sensation of better cabin air quality.

STS-71 preflight crew portrait

NASA Image and Video Library

1995-03-05

STS071-S-002 (5 March 1995) --- Crew members for the STS-71 mission and the related Mir missions assemble for a crew portrait at the Johnson Space Center (JSC). In front are, left to right, Vladimir N. Dezhurov, Robert L. Gibson and Anatoliy Y. Solovyev, mission commanders for Mir-18, STS-71 and Mir-19, respectively. On the back row are, left to right, Norman E. Thagard, Gennadiy M. Strekalov, Gregory J. Harbaugh, Ellen S. Baker, Charles J. Precourt, Bonnie J. Dunbar and Nikolai M. Budarin. In a precedent-setting flight, Thagard later this month will be launched as a guest researcher along with Dezhurov, commander, and Strekalov, flight engineer, to Russia's Mir Space Station for a three month mission, designated as Mir 18. Then in late spring, as the assignment of STS-71, the Space Shuttle Atlantis will rendezvous with the Russian Mir Space Station to pick up the Mir 18 crew and transfer cosmonauts Solovyev and Budarin to the station for the Mir 19 mission. The STS-71 crew members are Gibson, commander; Precourt, pilot; and Harbaugh, Baker and Dunbar mission specialists.

Space Shuttle crew compartment debris-contamination

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

Goodman, Jerry R.; Villarreal, Leopoldo J.

1992-01-01

Remedial actions undertaken to reduce debris during manned flights and ground turnaround operations at Kennedy Space Center and Palmdale are addressed. They include redesign of selected ground support equipment and Orbiter hardware to reduce particularization/debris generation; development of new detachable filters for air-cooled avionics boxes; application of tape-on screens to filter debris; and implementation of new Orbiter maintenance and turnaround procedures to clean filters and the crew compartment. Most of these steps were implemented before the return-to-flight of STS-26 in September 1988 which resulted in improved crew compartment habitability and less potential for equipment malfunction.

Crewed Space Vehicle Battery Safety Requirements

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

Jeevarajan, Judith A.; Darcy, Eric C.

2014-01-01

This requirements document is applicable to all batteries on crewed spacecraft, including vehicle, payload, and crew equipment batteries. It defines the specific provisions required to design a battery that is safe for ground personnel and crew members to handle and/or operate during all applicable phases of crewed missions, safe for use in the enclosed environment of a crewed space vehicle, and safe for use in launch vehicles, as well as in unpressurized spaces adjacent to the habitable portion of a space vehicle. The required provisions encompass hazard controls, design evaluation, and verification. The extent of the hazard controls and verification required depends on the applicability and credibility of the hazard to the specific battery design and applicable missions under review. Evaluation of the design and verification program results shall be completed prior to certification for flight and ground operations. This requirements document is geared toward the designers of battery systems to be used in crewed vehicles, crew equipment, crew suits, or batteries to be used in crewed vehicle systems and payloads (or experiments). This requirements document also applies to ground handling and testing of flight batteries. Specific design and verification requirements for a battery are dependent upon the battery chemistry, capacity, complexity, charging, environment, and application. The variety of battery chemistries available, combined with the variety of battery-powered applications, results in each battery application having specific, unique requirements pertinent to the specific battery application. However, there are basic requirements for all battery designs and applications, which are listed in section 4. Section 5 includes a description of hazards and controls and also includes requirements.

STS-101 Commander Halsell and crew after arriving for TCDT

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

2000-01-01

At the Shuttle Landing Facility, STS-101 Commander James Halsell waves to the media as he and other crew members cross the tarmac to a waiting bus. At right is a film crew; in the foreground at left is Delores Green, flight crew support specialist lead for the astronaut crew quarters. Other crew members in the background are Mission Specialist Jeffrey Williams, Pilot Scott Horowitz, and Mission Specialists Mary Ellen Weber and Yuri Usachev. Not visible in the photo is Mission Specialist Susan Helms. During their mission to the International Space Station, the STS-101 crew will be delivering logistics and supplies, plus preparing the Station for the arrival of the Zvezda Service Module, expected to be launched by Russia in July 2000. Also, the crew will conduct one space walk to perform maintenance on the Space Station. This will be the third assembly flight for the Space Station. STS-101 is scheduled to launch April 24 at 4:15 p.m. from Launch Pad 39A.

Crew Transportation Operations Standards

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

Mango, Edward J.; Pearson, Don J. (Compiler)

2013-01-01

The Crew Transportation Operations Standards contains descriptions of ground and flight operations processes and specifications and the criteria which will be used to evaluate the acceptability of Commercial Providers' proposed processes and specifications.

STS-107 Crew Equipment Interface Test (CEIT)activities at SPACEHAB

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

2001-01-01

KENNEDY SPACE CENTER, Fla. -- At SPACEHAB, Cape Canaveral, Fla., members of the STS-107 crew discuss the experiments in the Spacehab module. Seated, in the foreground, is Mission Specialist Laurel Blair Salton Clark; standing behind her are Commander Rick Douglas Husband and Mission Specialist Kalpana Chawla. They and other crew members Pilot William C. McCool; Payload Commander Michael P. Anderson; and Mission Specialists David M. Brown and Ilan Ramon, of Israel, are at SPACEHAB for Crew Equipment Interface Test (CEIT) activities. The CEIT enables the crew to perform certain flight operations, operate experiments in a flight-like environment, evaluate stowage locations and obtain additional exposure to specific experiment operations. As a research mission, STS-107 will carry the Spacehab Double Module in its first research flight into space and a broad collection of experiments ranging from material science to life science. STS-107 is scheduled for launch May 23, 2002

STS-107 Crew Equipment Interface Test (CEIT)activities at SPACEHAB

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

2001-01-01

KENNEDY SPACE CENTER, Fla. -- At SPACEHAB, Cape Canaveral, Fla., STS-107 Payload Specialist Ilan Ramon (foreground), of Israel, and Mission Specialist Kalpana Chawla (background) check out experiments inside the Spacehab module. They and other crew members are taking part in Crew Equipment Interface Test (CEIT) activities that enable the crew to perform certain flight operations, operate experiments in a flight-like environment, evaluate stowage locations and obtain additional exposure to specific experiment operations. As a research mission, STS-107 will carry the Spacehab Double Module in its first research flight into space and a broad collection of experiments ranging from material science to life science. . Other STS-107 crew members are Commander Rick Douglas Husband, Pilot William C. McCool; Payload Commander Michael P. Anderson; and Mission Specialists Laurel Blair Salton Clark and David M. Brown. STS-107 is scheduled for launch May 23, 2002

STS-107 Crew Equipment Interface Test (CEIT)activities at SPACEHAB

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

2001-01-01

KENNEDY SPACE CENTER, Fla. -- STS-107 Payload Specialist Ilan Ramon, of Israel, manipulates a piece of equipment in the Spacehab module. He and other crew members are taking part in Crew Equipment Interface Test (CEIT) activities at SPACEHAB, Cape Canaveral, Fla. As a research mission, STS-107 will carry the Spacehab Double Module in its first research flight into space and a broad collection of experiments ranging from material science to life science. The CEIT activities enable the crew to perform certain flight operations, operate experiments in a flight-like environment, evaluate stowage locations and obtain additional exposure to specific experiment operations. Other STS-107 crew members are Commander Rick Douglas Husband, Pilot William C. McCool; Payload Commander Michael P. Anderson; and Mission Specialists Kalpana Chawla, Laurel Blair Salton Clark and David M. Brown. STS-107 is scheduled for launch May 23, 2002

Orion Crew Module Move

NASA Image and Video Library

2017-11-17

Technicians check a crane that will be used during move operations of the Orion crew module for Exploration Mission-1 to the thermal chamber in the Neil Armstrong Operations and Checkout Building high bay at NASA's Kennedy Space Center in Florida. The crew module will undergo a thermal cycle test to assess the workmanship of critical hardware and structural locations. The test also demonstrates crew module subsystem operations in a thermally stressing environment to confirm no damage or anomalous hardware conditions as a result of the test. The Orion spacecraft will launch atop NASA's Space Launch System rocket on its first uncrewed integrated flight.

Facilitating LOS Debriefings: A Training Manual

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

McDonnell, Lori K.; Jobe, Kimberly K.; Dismukes, R. Key

1997-01-01

This manual is a practical guide to help airline instructors effectively facilitate debriefings of Line Oriented Simulations (LOS). It is based on a recently completed study of Line Oriented Flight Training (LOFT) debriefings at several U.S. airlines. This manual presents specific facilitation tools instructors can use to achieve debriefing objectives. The approach of the manual is to be flexible so it can be tailored to the individual needs of each airline. Part One clarifies the purpose and objectives of facilitation in the LOS setting. Part Two provides recommendations for clarifying roles and expectations and presents a model for organizing discussion. Part Tree suggests techniques for eliciting active crew participation and in-depth analysis and evaluation. Finally, in Part Four, these techniques are organized according to the facilitation model. Examples of how to effectively use the techniques are provided throughout, including strategies to try when the debriefing objectives are not being fully achieved.

Crew activity and motion effects on the space station

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

Rochon, Brian V.; Scheer, Steven A.

1987-01-01

Among the significant sources of internal disturbances that must be considered in the design of space station vibration control systems are the loads induced on the structure from various crew activities. Flight experiment T013, flown on the second manned mission of Skylab, measured force and moment time histories for a range of preplanned crew motions and activities. This experiment has proved itself invaluable as a source of on-orbit crew induced loads that has allowed a space station forcing function data base to be built. This will enable forced response such as acceleration and deflections, attributable to crew activity, to be calculated. The flight experiment, resultant database and structural model pre-processor, analysis examples and areas of combined research shall be described.

Commercial Crew Astronauts Visit Kennedy on This Week @NASA – August 12, 2016

NASA Image and Video Library

2016-08-12

Two of the NASA astronauts training for the first flight tests for the agency’s Commercial Crew Program visited with employees during an Aug. 11 event at Kennedy Space Center. Astronauts Eric Boe and Suni Williams, alongside Commercial Crew Program Manager Kathy Lueders, responded to questions during a panel discussion, moderated by Kennedy Director Robert Cabana. NASA has contracted with Boeing and SpaceX to develop crew transportation systems and provide crew transportation services to and from the International Space Station. The agency will select the commercial crew astronauts from the group that includes Boe, Williams, Bob Behnken and Doug Hurley The first flight tests are targeted for next year. Also, Air Quality Flight over California Wildfire, CYGNSS Media Day, Putting NASA Earth Science to Work, and more!

STS-99 Flight Crew Post-Landing Press Conference

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

2000-01-01

The primary objective of the STS-99 mission was to complete high resolution mapping of large sections of the Earth's surface using the Shuttle Radar Topography Mission (SRTM), a specially modified radar system that will produced unrivaled 3-D images of the Earth's Surface. The mission was launched at 12:31 on February 11, 2000 onboard the space shuttle Endeavour. The mission was led by Commander Kevin Kregel. The crew was Pilot Dominic L. Pudwill Gorie and Mission Specialists Janet L. Kavandi, Janice E. Voss, Mamoru Mohri, the National Space Development Agency (Japanese Space Agency) and Gerhard P. J. Thiele, from DARA (German Space Agency). The shuttle landed at Kennedy on the February 22, 2000 at 5:22 CST. This tape shows a post landing press conference with the crew. Commander Kregel made a brief statement praising the crew for the mission's success and then introduced the crewmembers. The crew answered questions about the retraction of the mast. The retraction had been successful, but the latches to the canister had failed. The extreme cold may have caused the problem and a solution was proposed from ground control. If this had not worked, an EVA would have been required. The astronauts were confident in the solution to the problem, however they were ready to perform any required EVA. Mamoru Mohri answered questions from the Japanese press, speaking in English and Japanese.

Expedition 6 Crew Interviews: Don Pettit, Flight Engineer 2/ International Space Station (ISS) Science Officer (SO)

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

2002-01-01

Expedition 6 member Don Pettit (Flight Engineer 2/ International Space Station (ISS) Science Officer (SO)) is seen during a prelaunch interview. He answers questions about his inspiration to become an astronaut and his career path. Pettit, who had been training as a backup crewmember, discusses the importance of training backups for ISS missions. He gives details on the goals and significance of the ISS, regarding experiments in various scientific disciplines such as the life sciences and physical sciences. Pettit also comments on the value of conducting experiments under microgravity. He also gives an overview of the ISS program to date, including the ongoing construction, international aspects, and the routines of ISS crewmembers who inhabit the station for four months at a time. He gives a cursory description of crew transfer procedures that will take place when STS-113 docks with ISS to drop off Pettit and the rest of Expedition 6, and retrieve the Expedition 5 crew.

STS-120 Crew Portrait

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

2007-01-01

These seven astronauts took a break from training to pose for the STS-120 crew portrait. Pictured from the left are astronauts Scott E. Parazynski, Douglas H. Wheelock, Stephanie D. Wilson, all mission specialists; George D. Zamka, pilot; Pamela A. Melroy, commander; Daniel M. Tani, Expedition 16 flight engineer; and Paolo A. Nespoli, mission specialist representing the European Space Agency (ESA). The crew members were attired in training versions of their shuttle launch and entry suits. Tani joined Expedition 16 as flight engineer after launching to the International Space Station (ISS) and is scheduled to return home on mission STS-122. STS-120 launched October 23, 2007 with the main objectives of installing the U.S. Node 2, Harmony, and the relocation and deployment of the P6 truss to its permanent location.

NASA Contingency Shuttle Crew Support (CSCS) Medical Operations

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

Adams, Adrien

2010-01-01

The genesis of the space shuttle began in the 1930's when Eugene Sanger came up with the idea of a recyclable rocket plane that could carry a crew of people. The very first Shuttle to enter space was the Shuttle "Columbia" which launched on April 12 of 1981. Not only was "Columbia" the first Shuttle to be launched, but was also the first to utilize solid fuel rockets for U.S. manned flight. The primary objectives given to "Columbia" were to check out the overall Shuttle system, accomplish a safe ascent into orbit, and to return back to earth for a safe landing. Subsequent to its first flight Columbia flew 27 more missions but on February 1st, 2003 after a highly successful 16 day mission, the Columbia, STS-107 mission, ended in tragedy. With all Shuttle flight successes come failures such as the fatal in-flight accident of STS 107. As a result of the STS 107 accident, and other close-calls, the NASA Space Shuttle Program developed contingency procedures for a rescue mission by another Shuttle if an on-orbit repair was not possible. A rescue mission would be considered for a situation where a Shuttle and the crew were not in immediate danger, but, was unable to return to Earth or land safely. For Shuttle missions to the International Space Station (ISS), plans were developed so the Shuttle crew would remain on board ISS for an extended period of time until rescued by a "rescue" Shuttle. The damaged Shuttle would subsequently be de-orbited unmanned. During the period when the ISS Crew and Shuttle crew are on board simultaneously multiple issues would need to be worked including, but not limited to: crew diet, exercise, psychological support, workload, and ground contingency support

STS-101: Crew Activity Report / Flight Day 5

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

2000-01-01

The primary mission objective for STS-101 was to deliver supplies to the International Space Station, perform a space walk, and reboost the station from 230 statute miles to 250 statute miles. The commander of this mission was, James D. Haslsell. The crew was Scott J. Horowitz, the pilot, and mission specialists Mary Ellen Weber, Jeffrey N. Williams, James S. Voss, Susan J. Helms, and Yuri Vladimirovich Usachev. This videotape shows the activities of the fifth day of the mission. The day's activities started with the opening of the hatch to the space station. Helms and Usachev then opened the hatch to the station's Unity Connecting Module. The crew also placed ducting throughout the Zarya Control Module to improve air circulation and prevent problems with stale air. Helms and Usachev are shown replacing two of six batteries to be replaced in this mission in the Zarya module. The crew began moving supplies into the space station. There are several shots of the interior of the space station.

The SOFIA flight crew descends the stairs after ferrying the 747SP airborne observatory from Waco, TX, to NASA's Dryden Flight Research Center in California

NASA Image and Video Library

2007-05-31

The SOFIA flight crew, consisting of Co-pilot Gordon Fullerton; DFRC, Pilot Bill Brocket; DFRC, Test Conductor Marty Trout; DFRC, Test Engineer Don Stonebrook; L-3, and Flight Engineer Larry Larose; JSC, descend the stairs after ferrying the 747SP airborne observatory from Waco, Texas, to its new home at NASA's Dryden Flight Research Center in California. NASA's Stratospheric Observatory for Infrared Astronomy, or SOFIA, arrived at NASA's Dryden Flight Research Center at Edwards Air Force Base, Calif. on May 31, 2007. The heavily modified Boeing 747SP was ferried to Dryden from Waco, Texas, where L-3 Communications Integrated Systems installed a German-built 2.5-meter infrared telescope and made other major modifications over the past several years. SOFIA is scheduled to undergo installation and integration of mission systems and a multi-phase flight test program at Dryden over the next three years that is expected to lead to a full operational capability to conduct astronomy missions in about 2010. During its expected 20-year lifetime, SOFIA will be capable of "Great Observatory" class astronomical science, providing astronomers with access to the visible, infrared and sub-millimeter spectrum with optimized performance in the mid-infrared to sub-millimeter range.

STS-101: Crew Activity Report/Flight Day 10 Highlights

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

2000-01-01

This video presents a report from the Space Shuttle Atlantis Crew. The crew consists of James D. Halsell, Jr., Mission Commander; Scott Horowitz, Pilot; and Mission Specialists Mary Ellen Weber, Jeffrey N. Williams, James S. Voss, Susan J. Helms, and Yuri Vladimirovich Usachev. The crew made preparations for the Space Shuttle Atlantis return to Earth. Weber gave a general overview of refurbishments done to the International Space Station such as maintenance of the electrical system, one to three thousands of pounds of new hardware supplied to I.S.S. and a supply of personal hygiene products. Also live animation of the Spacehab Module is given where supplies bound for the Space Station are stored.

STS-107 Crew Equipment Interface Test (CEIT)activities at SPACEHAB

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

2001-01-01

KENNEDY SPACE CENTER, Fla. -- At SPACEHAB, Cape Canaveral, Fla., STS-107 Mission Specialist Kalpana Chawla checks out items stored in the Spacehab module. Behind her, left, is Payload Specialist Ilan Ramon, of Israel, looking over a piece of equipment. At right is a trainer. The crew is taking part in Crew Equipment Interface Test (CEIT) activities at SPACEHAB, Port Canaveral, Fla. As a research mission, STS-107 will carry the Spacehab Double Module in its first research flight into space and a broad collection of experiments ranging from material science to life science. The CEIT activities enable the crew to perform certain flight operations, operate experiments in a flight-like environment, evaluate stowage locations and obtain additional exposure to specific experiment operations. Other STS-107 crew members are Commander Rick Douglas Husband, Pilot William C. McCool; Payload Commander Michael P. Anderson; and Mission Specialists Laurel Blair Salton Clark and David M. Brown. STS-107 is scheduled for launch May 23, 2002

Microgravity Flight - Accommodating Non-Human Primates

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

Dalton, Bonnie P.; Searby, Nancy; Ostrach, Louis

1994-01-01

Spacelab Life Sciences-3 (SLS-3) was scheduled to be the first United States man-tended microgravity flight containing Rhesus monkeys. The goal of this flight as in the five untended Russian COSMOS Bion flights and an earlier American Biosatellite flight, was to understand the biomedical and biological effects of a microgravity environment using the non-human primate as human surrogate. The SLS-3/Rhesus Project and COSMOS Primate-BIOS flights all utilized the rhesus monkey, Macaca mulatta. The ultimate objective of all flights with an animal surrogate has been to evaluate and understand biological mechanisms at both the system and cellular level, thus enabling rational effective countermeasures for future long duration human activity under microgravity conditions and enabling technical application to correction of common human physiological problems within earth's gravity, e.g., muscle strength and reloading, osteoporosis, immune deficiency diseases. Hardware developed for the SLS-3/Rhesus Project was the result of a joint effort with the French Centre National d'Etudes Spatiales (CNES) and the United States National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) extending over the last decade. The flight hardware design and development required implementation of sufficient automation to insure flight crew and animal bio-isolation and maintenance with minimal impact to crew activities. A variety of hardware of varying functional capabilities was developed to support the scientific objectives of the original 22 combined French and American experiments, along with 5 Russian co-investigations, including musculoskeletal, metabolic, and behavioral studies. Unique elements of the Rhesus Research Facility (RRF) included separation of waste for daily delivery of urine and fecal samples for metabolic studies and a psychomotor test system for behavioral studies along with monitored food measurement. As in untended flights, telemetry measurements would allow monitoring of

Crew Factors in Flight Operations XV: Alertness Management in General Aviation Education Module

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

Rosekind, Mark R.; Co, Elizabeth L.; Neri, David F.; Oyung, Raymond L.; Mallis, Melissa M.; Cannon, Mary M. (Technical Monitor)

2002-01-01

Regional operations encompass a broad range of pilots and equipment. This module is intended to help all those involved in regional aviation, including pilots, schedulers, dispatchers, maintenance technicians, policy makers, and others, to understand the physiological factors underlying fatigue, how flight operations affect fatigue, and what can be done to counteract fatigue and maximize alertness and performance in their operations. The overall purpose of this module is to promote aviation safety, performance, and productivity. It is intended to meet three specific objectives: (1) to explain the current state of knowledge about the physiological mechanisms underlying fatigue; (2) to demonstrate how this knowledge can be applied to improving flight crew sleep, performance, and alertness; and (3) to offer strategies for alertness management. Aviation Safety Reporting System (ASRS) and National Transportation Safety Board (NISH) reports are used throughout this module to demonstrate that fatigue is a safety issue in the regional operations community. The appendices at the end of this module include the ASRS reports used for the examples contained in this publication, brief introductions to sleep disorders and relaxation techniques, summaries of relevant NASA publications, and a list of general readings on sleep, sleep disorders, and circadian rhythms.

STS-26 Post-Flight Crew Press Conference

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

1988-01-01

This video tape contains footage selected and narrated by the STS-26 crew including launch, TDRS-C/IUS (Tracking and Data Relay Satellite C / Inertial Upper Stage) deployment, onboard activities, and landing.

STS-111 crew breakfast before launch

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

2002-01-01

KENNEDY SPACE CENTER, FLA. -- The STS-111 crew gather for the traditional pre-launch meal before the second launch attempt aboard Space Shuttle Endeavour. Seated left to right are Mission Specialists Franklin Chang-Diaz and Philippe Perrin (CNES); the Expedition 5 crew cosmonauts Sergei Treschev (RSA) and Valeri Korzun (RSA) and astronaut Peggy Whitson; Pilot Paul Lockhart and Commander Kenneth Cockrell. In front of them is the traditional cake. This mission marks the 14th Shuttle flight to the International Space Station and the third Shuttle mission this year. Mission STS-111 is the 18th flight of Endeavour and the 110th flight overall in NASA's Space Shuttle program. On mission STS-111, astronauts will deliver the Leonardo Multi-Purpose Logistics Module, the Mobile Base System (MBS), and the Expedition Five crew to the Space Station. During the seven days Endeavour will be docked to the Station, three spacewalks will be performed dedicated to installing MBS and the replacement wrist-roll joint on the Station's Canadarm2 robotic arm. Liftoff is scheduled for 5:22 p.m. EDT from Launch Pad 39A.

Crew/Automation Interaction in Space Transportation Systems: Lessons Learned from the Glass Cockpit

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

Rudisill, Marianne

2000-01-01

The progressive integration of automation technologies in commercial transport aircraft flight decks - the 'glass cockpit' - has had a major, and generally positive, impact on flight crew operations. Flight deck automation has provided significant benefits, such as economic efficiency, increased precision and safety, and enhanced functionality within the crew interface. These enhancements, however, may have been accrued at a price, such as complexity added to crew/automation interaction that has been implicated in a number of aircraft incidents and accidents. This report briefly describes 'glass cockpit' evolution. Some relevant aircraft accidents and incidents are described, followed by a more detailed description of human/automation issues and problems (e.g., crew error, monitoring, modes, command authority, crew coordination, workload, and training). This paper concludes with example principles and guidelines for considering 'glass cockpit' human/automation integration within space transportation systems.

The STS-95 crew and their families prepare for their return flight to JSC

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

1998-01-01

At the Skid Strip at Cape Canaveral Air Station, members of the STS-95 crew and their families prepare for their return flight to the Johnson Space Center in Houston, Texas. Shown are (left to right) Mission Specialist Scott E. Parazynski, Mission Specialist Stephen K. Robinson; Payload Specialist Chiaki Mukai, with the National Space Development Agency of Japan (NASDA); Pilot Steven W. Lindsey (with his daughter); Payload Specialist John H. Glenn Jr., a senator from Ohio and one of the original seven Project Mercury astronauts; Mission Commander Curtis L. Brown Jr.; and Mission Specialist Pedro Duque of Spain, with the European Space Agency (ESA). The STS-95 mission ended with landing at Kennedy Space Center's Shuttle Landing Facility at 12:04 p.m. EST on Nov. 7. The mission included research payloads such as the Spartan-201 solar-observing deployable spacecraft, the Hubble Space Telescope Orbital Systems Test Platform, the International Extreme Ultraviolet Hitchhiker, as well as a SPACEHAB single module with experiments on space flight and the aging process.

The STS-95 crew and their families prepare for their return flight to JSC

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

1998-01-01

At the Skid Strip at Cape Canaveral Air Station, STS-95 Pilot Steven W. Lindsey (left), Lindsey's daughter (front), and Payload Specialist John H. Glenn Jr. (right), a senator from Ohio and one of the original seven Project Mercury astronauts, give a thumbs up on the success of the mission. Members of the STS-95 crew and their families prepared for their return flight to the Johnson Space Center in Houston, Texas. The STS-95 mission ended with landing at Kennedy Space Center's Shuttle Landing Facility at 12:04 p.m. EST on Nov. 7. Others returning were Mission Commander Curtis L. Brown Jr.; Mission Specialist Scott E. Parazynski; Mission Specialist Stephen K. Robinson; Mission Specialist Pedro Duque, with the European Space Agency (ESA); and Payload Specialist Chiaki Mukai, with the National Space Development Agency of Japan (NASDA). The mission included research payloads such as the Spartan-201 solar-observing deployable spacecraft, the Hubble Space Telescope Orbital Systems Test Platform, the International Extreme Ultraviolet Hitchhiker, as well as a SPACEHAB single module with experiments on space flight and the aging process.

Expedition 34 Crew Lands

NASA Image and Video Library

2013-03-16

Cars carrying Expedition 34 Commander Kevin Ford of NASA, Russian Soyuz Commander Oleg Novitskiy and Russian Flight Engineer Evgeny Tarelkin pull up to the terminal at the Kustanay Airport a few hours after the crew landed their Soyuz TMA-06M spacecraft near the town of Arkalyk, Kazakhstan on Saturday, March 16, 2013. Ford, Novitskiy, and, Tarelkin returned from 142 days onboard the International Space Station where they served as members of the Expedition 33 and 34 crews. Photo Credit: (NASA/Bill Ingalls)

STS-118 Space Shuttle Crew Honored

NASA Image and Video Library

2007-09-10

NASA's Kennedy Space Center Education Specialists Linda Scauzillo and Christopher Blair take part in a special education session with local students at Epcot's Base21 Siemens VIP Center. The event was part of the day's activities honoring the space shuttle Endeavour crew of mission STS-118. The crew met with the media and paraded down Main Street. The event also honored teacher-turned-astronaut Barbara R. Morgan, who dedicated a plaque outside the Mission: Space attraction. The other crew members attending were Commander Scott Kelly, Pilot Charlie Hobaugh and Mission Specialists Tracy Caldwell, Dave Williams, Rick Mastracchio and Alvin Drew. Mission STS-118 was the 119th shuttle program flight and the 22nd flight to the International Space Station. Space shuttle Endeavour launched from NASA's Kennedy Space Center on Aug. 8 and landed Aug. 21. The mission delivered the S5 truss, continuing the assembly of the space station.

Operational Concept for Flight Crews to Participate in Merging and Spacing of Aircraft

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

Baxley, Brian T.; Barmore, Bryan E.; Abbott, Terence S.; Capron, William R.

2006-01-01

The predicted tripling of air traffic within the next 15 years is expected to cause significant aircraft delays and create a major financial burden for the airline industry unless the capacity of the National Airspace System can be increased. One approach to improve throughput and reduce delay is to develop new ground tools, airborne tools, and procedures to reduce the variance of aircraft delivery to the airport, thereby providing an increase in runway throughput capacity and a reduction in arrival aircraft delay. The first phase of the Merging and Spacing Concept employs a ground based tool used by Air Traffic Control that creates an arrival time to the runway threshold based on the aircraft s current position and speed, then makes minor adjustments to that schedule to accommodate runway throughput constraints such as weather and wake vortex separation criteria. The Merging and Spacing Concept also employs arrival routing that begins at an en route metering fix at altitude and continues to the runway threshold with defined lateral, vertical, and velocity criteria. This allows the desired spacing interval between aircraft at the runway to be translated back in time and space to the metering fix. The tool then calculates a specific speed for each aircraft to fly while enroute to the metering fix based on the adjusted land timing for that aircraft. This speed is data-linked to the crew who fly this speed, causing the aircraft to arrive at the metering fix with the assigned spacing interval behind the previous aircraft in the landing sequence. The second phase of the Merging and Spacing Concept increases the timing precision of the aircraft delivery to the runway threshold by having flight crews using an airborne system make minor speed changes during enroute, descent, and arrival phases of flight. These speed changes are based on broadcast aircraft state data to determine the difference between the actual and assigned time interval between the aircraft pair. The

Human Space Flight

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

Woolford, Barbara; Mount, Frances

2004-01-01

The first human space flight, in the early 1960s, was aimed primarily at determining whether humans could indeed survive and function in micro-gravity. Would eating and sleeping be possible? What mental and physical tasks could be performed? Subsequent programs increased the complexity of the tasks the crew performed. Table 1 summarizes the history of U.S. space flight, showing the projects, their dates, crew sizes, and mission durations. With over forty years of experience with human space flight, the emphasis now is on how to design space vehicles, habitats, and missions to produce the greatest returns to human knowledge. What are the roles of the humans in space flight in low earth orbit, on the moon, and in exploring Mars?

STS-63 crew insignia

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

1994-01-01

Designed by the crew members, the crew patch depicts the Orbiter maneuving to rendezvous with Russia's Space Station Mir. The name is printed in Cyrillic on the side of the station. Visible in the Orbiter's payload bay are the commercial space laboratory Spacehab and the Shuttle Pointed Autonomous Research Tool for Astronomy (SPARTAN) satellite which are major payloads on the flight. The six points on the rising sun and the three stars are symbolic of the mission's Space Transportation System (STS) numerical designation. Flags of the United States and Russia at the bottom of the patch symbolize the cooperative operations of this mission. The crew will be flying aboard the space shuttle Discovery.

Dynamic posture analysis of Spacelab-1 crew members

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

Anderson, D. J.; Reschke, M. F.; Homick, J. E.; Werness, S. A.

1986-01-01

Dynamic posture testing was conducted on the science crew of the Spacelab-1 mission on a single axis linear motion platform. Tests took place in pre- and post-flight sessions lasting approximately 20 min each. The pre-flight tests were widely spaced over the several months prior to the mission while the post-flight tests were conducted over the first, second, fourth, and sixth days after landing. Two of the crew members were also tested on the day of landing. Consistent with previous postural testing conducted on flight crews, these crew members were able to complete simple postural tasks to an acceptable level even in the first few hours after landing. Our tests were designed to induce dynamic postural responses using a variety of stimuli and from these responses, evaluate subtle changes in the postural control system which had occurred over the duration of the flight. Periodic sampling post-flight allowed us to observe the time course of readaptation to terrestrial life. Our observations of hip and shoulder position, when subjected to careful analysis, indicated modification of the postural response from pre- to post-flight and that demonstrable adjustments in the dynamic control of their postural systems were taking place in the first few days after flight. For transient stimuli where the platform on which they were asked to stand quickly moved a few centimeters fore or aft then stopped, ballistic or open loop 'programs' would closely characterize the response. During these responses the desired target position was not always achieved and of equal importance not always properly corrected some 15 seconds after the platform ceased to move. The persistent observation was that the subjects had a much stronger dependence on visual stabilization post-flight than pre-flight. This was best illustrated by a slow or only partial recovery to an upward posture after a transient base-of-support movement with eyes open. Postural responses to persistent wideband pseudorandom

STS-99 Crew Activities Report/Flight Day 1 Highlights

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

2000-01-01

Live footage shows the crew, Commander Kevin R. Kregel, Pilot Dominic L. Pudwill Gorie, and Mission Specialists Janet L. Kavandi, Janice E. Voss, Mamoru Mohri and Gerhard P.J. Thiele, seated in the dining room with the traditional cake. The crew is seen performing various pre-launch activities including suit-up, walk out to the Astro-van, and strap-in into the vehicle. Also seen are the retractions of the orbiter access arm and the gaseous oxygen mint hood, main engine start, booster ignition, liftoff, and separation of the solid rocket boosters. The Red Team (first of the dual shift crew) includes Kregel, Kavandi, and Thiele, who are shown conducting jet thruster firings, activating radar instruments, and deploying the boom (mass).

Gemini 6 crew during press conference

NASA Image and Video Library

1965-04-06

S65-19406 (6 April 1965) --- Astronauts Thomas P. Stafford (left), pilot; and Walter M. Schirra Jr., command pilot, have been named as the prime crew for the Gemini-Titan 6 spaceflight. Schirra and Stafford served as the GT-3 backup crew. Their selection for the GT-6 flight was announced at an MSC news conference on April 6, 1965.

Dummy left behind by Skylab 3 crew for the Skylab 4 crew

NASA Image and Video Library

1973-08-16

SL3-113-1587 (July-September 1973) --- This photograph is an illustration of the humorous side of the Skylab 3 crew. This dummy was left behind in the Skylab space station by the Skylab 3 crew to be found by the Skylab 4 crew. The dummy is dressed in a flight suit and propped upon the bicycle ergometer. The name tag indicated that it represents William R. Pogue, Skylab pilot. The dummy for Gerald P. Carr, Skylab 4 commander, was placed in the Lower Body Negative Pressure Device. The dummy representing Edward G. Gibson was left in the waste compartment. Astronauts Alan L. Bean, Owen K. Garriott and Jack R. Lousma were the Skylab 3 crewmen. Gibson is the Skylab 4 science pilot. Photo credit: NASA

Fatigue in trans-Atlantic airline operations: diaries and actigraphy for two- vs. three-pilot crews.

PubMed

Eriksen, Claire A; Akerstedt, Torbjörn; Nilsson, Jens P

2006-06-01

The aim was to compare intercontinental flights with two-pilot and three-pilot crews with respect to fatigue/sleepiness and sleep, as there is considerable economic pressure on the airlines to use two-pilot crews. Twenty pilots participated. Data were collected before, during, and after outbound and homebound flights using a sleep/wake diary (sleepiness ratings every 2-3 h) and wrist actigraphy. The duration of flights was approximately 8 h, and six time zones were crossed. The same pilots participated in both conditions. Napping during the outbound flight was 26 min for the two-pilot crew, and 48 min for the three-pilot crew. Napping during the homebound flight was 54 min and 1 h 6 min, respectively, and the difference was directly related to the time allotted for sleep. Subjective sleepiness was significantly higher for the two-pilot condition in both directions, peaking a few hours into the flight. Performance at top of descent for the two-pilot condition was rated as lower than the three-pilot condition. In the overall evaluation questionnaire there was a significant negative attitude toward two-crew operations. Sleep, sleepiness, subjective performance, boredom, mood, and layover sleep were assessed as having deteriorated in the two-pilot condition. The homebound flight was associated with considerably higher levels of sleepiness than the outbound flight. The study indicates that the reduction of crew size by one pilot is associated with moderately increased levels of sleepiness. It is also suggested that time allotted to sleep in the two-pilot condition might be somewhat extended to improve alertness.

STS-107 Crew Equipment Interface Test (CEIT)activities at SPACEHAB

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

2001-01-01

KENNEDY SPACE CENTER, Fla. -- During Crew Equipment Interface Test (CEIT)activities at Spacehab, Cape Canaveral, Fla., STS-107 Commander Rick Douglas Husband checks out a piece of equipment. As a research mission, STS-107 will carry the Spacehab Double Module in its first research flight into space and a broad collection of experiments ranging from material science to life science. The CEIT activities enable the crew to perform certain flight operations, operate experiments in a flight-like environment, evaluate stowage locations and obtain additional exposure to specific experiment operations. Other STS-107 crew members are Pilot William C. McCool; Payload Commander Michael P. Anderson; Mission Specialists Kalpana Chawla, David M. Brown and Laurel Blair Salton Clark; and Payload Specialist Ilan Ramon, of Israel. STS-107 is scheduled for launch May 23, 2002

STS-107 Crew Equipment Interface Test (CEIT)activities at SPACEHAB

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

2001-01-01

KENNEDY SPACE CENTER, Fla. -- During Crew Equipment Interface Test activities at SPACEHAB, Cape Canaveral, Fla., STS-107 Mission Specialist Kalpana Chawla trains on a glove box experiment. As a research mission, STS-107 will carry the SPACEHAB Double Module in its first research flight into space and a broad collection of experiments ranging from material science to life science. CEIT activities enable the crew to perform certain flight operations, operate experiments in a flight-like environment, evaluate stowage locations and obtain additional exposure to specific experiment operations. Other STS-107 crew members are Commander Rick Douglas Husband; Pilot William C. McCool; Payload Commander Michael P. Anderson; Mission Specialists Laurel Blair Salton Clark and David M. Brown; and Payload Specialist Ilan Ramon, of Israel. STS-107 is scheduled for launch May 23, 2002

STS-107 Crew Equipment Interface Test (CEIT)activities at SPACEHAB

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

2001-01-01

KENNEDY SPACE CENTER, Fla. -- At SPACEHAB, Cape Canaveral, Fla., Mission Specialist Laurel Blair Salton Clark practices an experiment while Commander Rick Douglas Husband and Mission Specialist Kalpana Chawla observe. They and other crew members Pilot William C. McCool; Payload Commander Michael P. Anderson; and Mission Specialists David M. Brown and Ilan Ramon, of Israel, are at SPACEHAB for Crew Equipment Interface Test (CEIT) activities. The CEIT enables the crew to perform certain flight operations, operate experiments in a flight-like environment, evaluate stowage locations and obtain additional exposure to specific experiment operations. As a research mission, STS-107 will carry the Spacehab Double Module in its first research flight into space and a broad collection of experiments ranging from material science to life science. STS-107 is scheduled for launch May 23, 2002

19 CFR 122.49b - Electronic manifest requirement for crew members and non-crew members onboard commercial aircraft...

Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

2010-04-01

... operation for the purpose of transporting cargo which has onboard only “crew members” and “non-crew members... aircraft in good faith in any capacity required for the normal operation and service of the flight (8 U.S.C...) Date of birth; (iii) Place of birth (city, state—if applicable, country); (iv) Gender (F = female; M...

19 CFR 122.49b - Electronic manifest requirement for crew members and non-crew members onboard commercial aircraft...

Code of Federal Regulations, 2012 CFR

2012-04-01

... operation for the purpose of transporting cargo which has onboard only “crew members” and “non-crew members... aircraft in good faith in any capacity required for the normal operation and service of the flight (8 U.S.C...) Date of birth; (iii) Place of birth (city, state—if applicable, country); (iv) Gender (F = female; M...

19 CFR 122.49b - Electronic manifest requirement for crew members and non-crew members onboard commercial aircraft...

Code of Federal Regulations, 2011 CFR

2011-04-01

... operation for the purpose of transporting cargo which has onboard only “crew members” and “non-crew members... aircraft in good faith in any capacity required for the normal operation and service of the flight (8 U.S.C...) Date of birth; (iii) Place of birth (city, state—if applicable, country); (iv) Gender (F = female; M...

19 CFR 122.49b - Electronic manifest requirement for crew members and non-crew members onboard commercial aircraft...

Code of Federal Regulations, 2014 CFR

2014-04-01

... operation for the purpose of transporting cargo which has onboard only “crew members” and “non-crew members... aircraft in good faith in any capacity required for the normal operation and service of the flight (8 U.S.C...) Date of birth; (iii) Place of birth (city, state—if applicable, country); (iv) Gender (F = female; M...

Crew procedures development techniques

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

Arbet, J. D.; Benbow, R. L.; Hawk, M. L.; Mangiaracina, A. A.; Mcgavern, J. L.; Spangler, M. C.

1975-01-01

The study developed requirements, designed, developed, checked out and demonstrated the Procedures Generation Program (PGP). The PGP is a digital computer program which provides a computerized means of developing flight crew procedures based on crew action in the shuttle procedures simulator. In addition, it provides a real time display of procedures, difference procedures, performance data and performance evaluation data. Reconstruction of displays is possible post-run. Data may be copied, stored on magnetic tape and transferred to the document processor for editing and documentation distribution.

STS-87 crew participates in Crew Equipment Interface Test

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

1997-01-01

STS-87 astronaut crew members participate in the Crew Equipment Integration Test (CEIT) in Kennedy Space Centers (KSC's) Vertical Processing Facility. From left are Mission Specialist Kalpana Chawla, Ph.D.; Pilot Steven Lindsey; Mission Specialist Takao Doi , Ph.D., of the National Space Development Agency of Japan; and Mission Specialist Winston Scott. The CEIT gives astronauts an opportunity to get a hands-on look at the payloads with which they will be working on- orbit. STS-87 will be the fourth United States Microgravity Payload and flight of the Spartan-201 deployable satellite. During the STS-87 mission, scheduled for a Nov. 19 liftoff from KSC, Dr. Doi and Scott will both perform spacewalks.

STS-87 crew participates in Crew Equipment Interface Test

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

1997-01-01

Participating in the Crew Equipment Integration Test (CEIT) at Kennedy Space Center are STS-87 crew members Winston Scott, at left, and Takao Doi, Ph.D., of the National Space Development Agency of Japan, both mission specialists on STS-87. The CEIT gives astronauts an opportunity to get a hands-on look at the payloads with which they will be working on-orbit. STS-87 will be the fourth United States Microgravity Payload and flight of the Spartan-201 deployable satellite. During the STS-87 mission, scheduled for a Nov. 19 liftoff from KSC, Dr. Doi and Scott will both perform spacewalks. STS-87 is scheduled for a Nov. 19 liftoff from KSC.

Integrated Testing Approaches for the NASA Ares I Crew Launch Vehicle

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

Taylor, James L.; Cockrell, Charles E.; Tuma, Margaret L.; Askins, Bruce R.; Bland, Jeff D.; Davis, Stephan R.; Patterson, Alan F.; Taylor, Terry L.; Robinson, Kimberly L.

2008-01-01

The Ares I crew launch vehicle is being developed by the U.S. National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) to provide crew and cargo access to the International Space Station (ISS) and, together with the Ares V cargo launch vehicle, serves as a critical component of NASA's future human exploration of the Moon. During the preliminary design phase, NASA defined and began implementing plans for integrated ground and flight testing necessary to achieve the first human launch of Ares I. The individual Ares I flight hardware elements - including the first stage five segment booster (FSB), upper stage, and J-2X upper stage engine - will undergo extensive development, qualification, and certification testing prior to flight. Key integrated system tests include the upper stage Main Propulsion Test Article (MPTA), acceptance tests of the integrated upper stage and upper stage engine assembly, a full-scale integrated vehicle ground vibration test (IVGVT), aerodynamic testing to characterize vehicle performance, and integrated testing of the avionics and software components. The Ares I-X development flight test will provide flight data to validate engineering models for aerodynamic performance, stage separation, structural dynamic performance, and control system functionality. The Ares I-Y flight test will validate ascent performance of the first stage, stage separation functionality, validate the ability of the upper stage to manage cryogenic propellants to achieve upper stage engine start conditions, and a high-altitude demonstration of the launch abort system (LAS) following stage separation. The Orion 1 flight test will be conducted as a full, un-crewed, operational flight test through the entire ascent flight profile prior to the first crewed launch.

14 CFR 460.7 - Operator training of crew.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2013 CFR

2013-01-01

... 14 Aeronautics and Space 4 2013-01-01 2013-01-01 false Operator training of crew. 460.7 Section 460.7 Aeronautics and Space COMMERCIAL SPACE TRANSPORTATION, FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION, DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION LICENSING HUMAN SPACE FLIGHT REQUIREMENTS Launch and Reentry with Crew § 460.7...

14 CFR 460.7 - Operator training of crew.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2012 CFR

2012-01-01

... 14 Aeronautics and Space 4 2012-01-01 2012-01-01 false Operator training of crew. 460.7 Section 460.7 Aeronautics and Space COMMERCIAL SPACE TRANSPORTATION, FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION, DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION LICENSING HUMAN SPACE FLIGHT REQUIREMENTS Launch and Reentry with Crew § 460.7...

14 CFR 460.7 - Operator training of crew.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2014 CFR

2014-01-01

... 14 Aeronautics and Space 4 2014-01-01 2014-01-01 false Operator training of crew. 460.7 Section 460.7 Aeronautics and Space COMMERCIAL SPACE TRANSPORTATION, FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION, DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION LICENSING HUMAN SPACE FLIGHT REQUIREMENTS Launch and Reentry with Crew § 460.7...

14 CFR 460.7 - Operator training of crew.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2011 CFR

2011-01-01

... 14 Aeronautics and Space 4 2011-01-01 2011-01-01 false Operator training of crew. 460.7 Section 460.7 Aeronautics and Space COMMERCIAL SPACE TRANSPORTATION, FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION, DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION LICENSING HUMAN SPACE FLIGHT REQUIREMENTS Launch and Reentry with Crew § 460.7...

The Ares I-1 Flight Test--Paving the Road for the Ares I Crew Launch Vehicle

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

Davis, Stephan R.; Tinker, Michael L.; Tuma, Meg

2007-01-01

In accordance with the U.S. Vision for Space Exploration and the nation's desire to again send humans to explore beyond Earth orbit, NASA has been tasked to send human beings to the moon, Mars, and beyond. It has been 30 years since the United States last designed and built a human-rated launch vehicle. NASA is now building the Ares I crew launch vehicle, which will loft the Orion crew exploration vehicle into orbit, and the Ares V cargo launch vehicle, which will launch the Lunar Surface Access Module and Earth departure stage to rendezvous Orion for missions to the moon. NASA has marshaled unique resources from the government and private sectors to perform the technically and programmatically complex work of delivering astronauts to orbit early next decade, followed by heavy cargo late next decade. Our experiences with Saturn and the Shuttle have taught us the value of adhering to sound systems engineering, such as the "test as you fly" principle, while applying aerospace best practices and lessons learned. If we are to fly humans safely aboard a launch vehicle, we must employ a variety of methodologies to reduce the technical, schedule, and cost risks inherent in the complex business of space transportation. During the Saturn development effort, NASA conducted multiple demonstration and verification flight tests to prove technology in its operating environment before relying upon it for human spaceflight. Less testing on the integrated Shuttle system did not reduce cost or schedule. NASA plans a progressive series of demonstration (ascent), verification (orbital), and mission flight tests to supplement ground research and high-altitude subsystem testing with real-world data, factoring the results of each test into the next one. In this way, sophisticated analytical models and tools, many of which were not available during Saturn and Shuttle, will be calibrated and we will gain confidence in their predictions, as we gain hands-on experience in operating the first

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

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

Orasanu, Judith

1991-01-01

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.

The role of communications, socio-psychological, and personality factors in the maintenance of crew coordination

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

Foushee, H. C.

1981-01-01

The influence of group dynamics on the capability of aircraft crew members to make full use of the resources available on the flight deck in order to maintain flight safety is discussed. Instances of crewmembers withholding altimeter or heading information from the captain are cited as examples of domineering attitudes from command pilots and overconscientiousness on the parts of copilots, who may refuse to relay information forcefully enough or to take control of the aircraft in the case of pilot incapacitation. NASA studies of crew performance in controlled, simulator settings, concentrating on communication, decision making, crew interaction, and integration showed that efficient communication reduced errors. Acknowledgements served to encourage correct communication. The best crew performance is suggested to occur with personnel who are capable of both goal and group orientation. Finally, one bad effect of computer controlled flight is cited to be the tendency of the flight crew to think that someone else is taking care of difficulties in threatening situations.

STS-90 Crew Breakfast in O&C building

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

1998-01-01

The STS-90 flight crew enjoy the traditional pre-liftoff breakfast in the crew quarters of the Operations and Checkout Building. They are, from left, Payload Specialist Jay Buckey, M.D., Mission Specialist Dafydd (Dave) Williams, M.D., with the Canadian Space Agency, Pilot Scott Altman, Commander Richard Searfoss, Mission Specialist Kathryn (Kay) Hire, Mission Specialist Richard Linnehan, D.V.M., and Payload Specialist James Pawelczyk, Ph.D. After a weather briefing, the flight crew will be fitted with their launch and entry suits and depart for Launch Pad 39B. Once there, they will take their positions in the crew cabin of the Space Shuttle Columbia to await liftoff during a two-and-a-half-hour window that will open at 2:19 p.m. EDT, Apr. 17. STS-90 is the launch of Neurolab, a nearly 17-day mission to examine the effects of spaceflight on the brain, spinal cord, peripheral nerves and sensory organs in the human body.

Habitability and Behavioral Issues of Space Flight.

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Stewart, R. A., Jr.

1988-01-01

Reviews group behavioral issues from past space missions and simulations such as the Skylab Medical Experiments Altitude Test, Skylab missions, and Shuttle Spacelab I mission. Makes recommendations for future flights concerning commandership, crew selection, and ground-crew communications. Pre- and in-flight behavioral countermeasures are…

Crew Medical Restraint System Inspection

NASA Image and Video Library

2013-05-22

ISS036-E-003301 (22 May 2013) --- In the Destiny lab aboard the International Space Station, NASA astronaut Chris Cassidy, Expedition 36 flight engineer, participates in a Crew Medical Restraint System (CMRS) checkout.

Crew Dragon Demonstration Mission 1

NASA Image and Video Library

2018-06-13

SpaceX’s Crew Dragon is at NASA’s Plum Brook Station in Ohio, ready to undergo testing in the In-Space Propulsion Facility — the world’s only facility capable of testing full-scale upper-stage launch vehicles and rocket engines under simulated high-altitude conditions. The chamber will allow SpaceX and NASA to verify Crew Dragon’s ability to withstand the extreme temperatures and vacuum of space. This is the spacecraft that SpaceX will fly during its Demonstration Mission 1 flight test under NASA’s Commercial Crew Transportation Capability contract with the goal of returning human spaceflight launch capabilities to the U.S.

Integrated System Test Approaches for the NASA Ares I Crew Launch Vehicle

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

Cockrell, Charles E., Jr.; Askins, Bruce R.; Bland, Jeffrey; Davis, Stephan; Holladay, Jon B.; Taylor, James L.; Taylor, Terry L.; Robinson, Kimberly F.; Roberts, Ryan E.; Tuma, Margaret

2007-01-01

The Ares I Crew Launch Vehicle (CLV) is being developed by the U.S. National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) to provide crew access to the International Space Station (ISS) and, together with the Ares V Cargo Launch Vehicle (CaLV), serves as one component of a future launch capability for human exploration of the Moon. During the system requirements definition process and early design cycles, NASA defined and began implementing plans for integrated ground and flight testing necessary to achieve the first human launch of Ares I. The individual Ares I flight hardware elements: the first stage five segment booster (FSB), upper stage, and J-2X upper stage engine, will undergo extensive development, qualification, and certification testing prior to flight. Key integrated system tests include the Main Propulsion Test Article (MPTA), acceptance tests of the integrated upper stage and upper stage engine assembly, a full-scale integrated vehicle dynamic test (IVDT), aerodynamic testing to characterize vehicle performance, and integrated testing of the avionics and software components. The Ares I-X development flight test will provide flight data to validate engineering models for aerodynamic performance, stage separation, structural dynamic performance, and control system functionality. The Ares I-Y flight test will validate ascent performance of the first stage, stage separation functionality, and a highaltitude actuation of the launch abort system (LAS) following separation. The Orion-1 flight test will be conducted as a full, un-crewed, operational flight test through the entire ascent flight profile prior to the first crewed launch.

Orion Crew Module Move

NASA Image and Video Library

2017-11-17

Technicians in clean-room suits attach a crane to the Orion crew module for Exploration Mission-1 for its move to the thermal chamber in the Neil Armstrong Operations and Checkout Building high bay at NASA's Kennedy Space Center in Florida. Orion will be lifted out of a test stand and lowered onto another stand to for the move. The crew module will undergo a thermal cycle test to assess the workmanship of critical hardware and structural locations. The test also demonstrates crew module subsystem operations in a thermally stressing environment to confirm no damage or anomalous hardware conditions as a result of the test. The Orion spacecraft will launch atop NASA's Space Launch System rocket on its first uncrewed integrated flight.

Liftoff and Time Equivalent Duration Data Evaluation of Exploration Flight Test 1 Orion Multi-Purpose Crew Vehicle

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

Houston, Janice

2016-01-01

The liftoff phase induces high acoustic loading over a broad frequency range for a launch vehicle. These external acoustic environments are used in the prediction of the internal vibration responses of the vehicle and components. There arises the question about time equivalent (Teq) duration of the liftoff phase and similarity to other launch vehicles. Vibroacoustic engineers require the fatigue-weighted time duration values for qualification testing inputs. In order to determine the Teq for the Space Launch System, NASA's newest launch vehicle, the external microphone data from the Exploration Flight Test 1 (EFT-1) flight of the Orion Multi-Purpose Crew Vehicle (MPCV) was evaluated. During that evaluation, a trend was observed in the data and the origin of that trend is discussed in this paper. Finally, the Teq values for the EFT-1 Orion MPCV are presented.

STS-107 Crew Equipment Interface Test (CEIT)activities at SPACEHAB

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

2001-01-01

KENNEDY SPACE CENTER, Fla. -- STS-107 Commander Rick D. Husband (left) and Pilot William C. McCool train in the SPACHEAB Double Module that will fly on their mission. Husband, McCool and other crew members Payload Commander Michael P. Anderson; Mission Specialists Laurel Blair Salton Clark and David M. Brown; and Payload Specialist Ilan Ramon, of Israel, are at SPACEHAB, Cape Canaveral, Fla., to take part in Crew Equipment Interface Test (CEIT) activities. The CEIT enables the crew to perform certain flight operations, operate experiments in a flight-like environment, evaluate stowage locations and obtain additional exposure to specific experiment operations. As a research mission, STS-107 will carry the SPACEHAB Double Module in its first research flight into space and a broad collection of experiments ranging from material science to life science. STS-107 is scheduled for launch May 23, 2002

STS-107 Crew Equipment Interface Test (CEIT)activities at SPACEHAB

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

2001-01-01

KENNEDY SPACE CENTER, Fla. -- STS-107 Payload Commander Michael Anderson trains on equipment in the training module at SPACEHAB, Cape Canaveral, Fla. Anderson and other crew members Commander Rick D. Husband, Pilot William C. McCool, Mission Specialists Kalpana Chawla, Laurel Blair Salton Clark and David M. Brown; and Payload Specialist Ilan Ramon, of Israel, are at SPACEHAB to take part in Crew Equipment Interface Test (CEIT) activities. The CEIT enables the crew to perform certain flight operations, operate experiments in a flight-like environment, evaluate stowage locations and obtain additional exposure to specific experiment operations. . As a research mission, STS-107 will carry the SPACEHAB Double Module in its first research flight into space and a broad collection of experiments ranging from material science to life science. STS-107 is scheduled for launch May 23, 2002

STS-107 Crew Equipment Interface Test (CEIT)activities at SPACEHAB

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

2001-01-01

KENNEDY SPACE CENTER, Fla. -- During Crew Equipment Interface Test (CEIT)activities at SPACEHAB, Cape Canaveral, Fla., STS-107 Mission Specialist Kalpana Chawla looks over equipment inside the Spacehab module. As a research mission, STS-107 will carry the Spacehab Double Module in its first research flight into space and a broad collection of experiments ranging from material science to life science. The CEIT activities enable the crew to perform certain flight operations, operate experiments in a flight-like environment, evaluate stowage locations and obtain additional exposure to specific experiment operations. Other STS-107 crew members are Commander Rick Douglas Husband; Pilot William C. McCool; Payload Commander Michael P. Anderson; Mission Specialists Laurel Blair Salton Clark and David M. Brown; and Payload Specialist Ilan Ramon, of Israel. STS-107 is scheduled for launch May 23, 2002

STS-107 Crew Equipment Interface Test (CEIT)activities at SPACEHAB

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

2001-01-01

KENNEDY SPACE CENTER, Fla. -- STS-107 Mission Specialist David M. Brown trains on equipment in the training module at SPACEHAB, Cape Canaveral, Fla. Brown and other crew members Commander Rick D. Husband, Pilot William C. McCool, Payload Commander Michael P. Anderson; Mission Specialists Kalpana Chawla and Laurel Blair Salton Clark; and Payload Specialist Ilan Ramon, of Israel, are at SPACEHAB to take part in Crew Equipment Interface Test (CEIT) activities. The CEIT enables the crew to perform certain flight operations, operate experiments in a flight-like environment, evaluate stowage locations and obtain additional exposure to specific experiment operations. As a research mission, STS-107 will carry the SPACEHAB Double Module in its first research flight into space and a broad collection of experiments ranging from material science to life science. STS-107 is scheduled for launch May 23, 2002

STS-107 Crew Equipment Interface Test (CEIT)activities at SPACEHAB

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

2001-01-01

KENNEDY SPACE CENTER, Fla. -- During Crew Equipment Interface Test (CEIT)activities at SPACEHAB, Cape Canaveral, Fla., STS-107 Mission Specialist Laurel Blair Salton Clark gets hands-on training on equipment inside the Spacehab module. As a research mission, STS-107 will carry the Spacehab Double Module in its first research flight into space and a broad collection of experiments ranging from material science to life science. CEIT activities enable the crew to perform certain flight operations, operate experiments in a flight-like environment, evaluate stowage locations and obtain additional exposure to specific experiment operations. Other STS-107 crew members are Commander Rick Douglas Husband; Pilot William C. McCool; Payload Commander Michael P. Anderson; Mission Specialists Kalpana Chawla and David M. Brown; and Payload Specialist Ilan Ramon, of Israel. STS-107 is scheduled for launch May 23, 2002

STS-107 Crew Equipment Interface Test (CEIT)activities at SPACEHAB

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

2001-01-01

KENNEDY SPACE CENTER, Fla. -- During Crew Equipment Interface Test activities at SPACEHAB, Cape Canaveral, Fla., STS-107 Mission Specialist Laurel Blair Salton Clark gets hands-on training on a glove box experiment inside the training module. As a research mission, STS-107 will carry the SPACEHAB Double Module in its first research flight into space and a broad collection of experiments ranging from material science to life science. CEIT activities enable the crew to perform certain flight operations, operate experiments in a flight-like environment, evaluate stowage locations and obtain additional exposure to specific experiment operations. Other STS-107 crew members are Commander Rick Douglas Husband; Pilot William C. McCool; Payload Commander Michael P. Anderson; Mission Specialists Kalpana Chawla and David M. Brown; and Payload Specialist Ilan Ramon, of Israel. STS-107 is scheduled for launch May 23, 2002

STS-107 Crew Equipment Interface Test (CEIT)activities at SPACEHAB

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

2001-01-01

KENNEDY SPACE CENTER, Fla. -- STS-107 Payload Specialist Ilan Ramon, of Israel, trains on equipment in the training module at SPACEHAB, Cape Canaveral. Ramon and other crew members Commander Rick D. Husband, Pilot William C. McCool, Payload Commander Michael P. Anderson; and Mission Specialists Kalpana Chawla, Laurel Blair Salton Clark and David M. Brown are at SPACEHAB to take part in Crew Equipment Interface Test (CEIT) activities. The CEIT enables the crew to perform certain flight operations, operate experiments in a flight-like environment, evaluate stowage locations and obtain additional exposure to specific experiment operations. As a research mission, STS-107 will carry the SPACEHAB Double Module in its first research flight into space and a broad collection of experiments ranging from material science to life science. STS-107 is scheduled for launch May 23, 2002

Nutrititional Status Assessment of International Space Station Crew Members

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

Smith, S. M.; Zwart, S. R.; Block, G.; Rice, B. I.; Davis-Street, J. F.

2005-01-01

Defining optimal nutrient requirements is imperative to ensure crew health on long-duration space exploration missions. To date, nutrient requirement data have been extremely limited because of small sample sizes and difficulties associated with collecting biological samples. In this study, we examined changes in body composition, bone metabolism, hematology, general blood chemistry, and blood levels of selected vitamins and minerals after long-duration (128-195 d) space flight aboard the International Space Station. Crew members consumed an average of 80% of the recommended energy intakes, and on landing day their body weight had decreased (P=0.051). After flight, hematocrit was less, and serum femtin was greater than before flight (P<0.01). Serum iron, ferritin saturation, and transferrin had decreased after flight. The finding that other acute-phase proteins, including ceruloplasmin, retinol binding protein, transthyretin, and albumin were not changed after flight suggests that the changes in iron metabolism may not be strictly due to an inflammatory response. Urinary 8- hydroxy-2'-deoxyguanosine concentration was greater and superoxide dismutase was less after flight, indicating that oxidative damage had increased (P<0.05). Despite the reported use of vitamin D supplements during flight, serum 25-hydroxyvitamin D was significantly decreased after flight (P<0.01). Bone resorption was increased after flight, as indicated by several urinary markers of bone resorption. Bone formation, assessed by serum concentration of bone-specific alkaline phosphatase, was elevated only in crew members who landed in Russia, probably because of the longer time lapse between landing and sample collection. These data provide evidence that bone loss, compromised vitamin D status, and oxidative damage remain critical concerns for long-duration space flight.

Dummy left behind by Skylab 3 crew for the Skylab 4 crew

NASA Image and Video Library

1973-08-16

SL3-113-1586 (July-September 1973) --- This photograph is an illustration of the humorous side of the Skylab 3 crew. This dummy was left behind in the Skylab space station by the Skylab 3 crew to be found by the Skylab 4 crew. The dummy is dressed in a flight suit and placed in the Lower Body Negative Pressure Device. The name tag indicates that it represents Gerald P. Carr, Skylab 4 commander, in the background is a partial view of the dummy for William R. Pogue, Skylab 4 pilot, propped upon the bicycle ergometer. The dummy representing Edward G. Gibson, Skylab science pilot, was left in the waste compartment. Astronauts Alan L. Bean, Owen K. Garriott and Jack R. Lousma were the Skylab 3 crewmen. Photo credit: NASA

Symptom-based categorization of in-flight passenger medical incidents.

PubMed

Mahony, Paul H; Myers, Julia A; Larsen, Peter D; Powell, David M C; Griffiths, Robin F

2011-12-01

The majority of in-flight passenger medical events are managed by cabin crew. Our study aimed to evaluate the reliability of cabin crew reports of in-flight medical events and to develop a symptom-based categorization system. All cabin crew in-flight passenger medical incident reports for an airline over a 9-yr period were examined retrospectively. Validation of incident descriptions were undertaken on a sample of 162 cabin crew reports where medically trained persons' reports were available for comparison using a three Round Delphi technique and testing concordance using Cohen's Kappa. A hierarchical symptom-based categorization system was designed and validated. The rate was 159 incidents per 106 passengers carried, or 70.4/113.3 incidents per 106 revenue passenger kilometres/miles, respectively. Concordance between cabin crew and medical reports was 96%, with a high validity rating (mean 4.6 on a 1-5 scale) and high Cohen's Kappa (0.94). The most common in-flight medical events were transient loss of consciousness (41%), nausea/vomiting/diarrhea (19.5%), and breathing difficulty (16%). Cabin crew records provide reliable data regarding in-flight passenger medical incidents, complementary to diagnosis-based systems, and allow the use of currently underutilized data. The categorization system provides a means for tracking passenger medical incidents internationally and an evidence base for cabin crew first aid training.

NASA's Commercial Crew Program, the Next Step in U.S. Space Transportation

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

Mango, Edward J., Jr.

2013-01-01

The Commercial Crew Program (CCP) is leading NASA's efforts to develop the next U.S. capability for crew transportation and rescue services to and from the International Space Station (ISS) by the middecade timeframe. The outcome of this capability is expected to stimulate and expand the U.S. space transportation industry. NASA is relying on its decades of human space flight experience to certify U.S. crewed vehicles to the ISS and is doing so in a two phase certification approach. NASA certification will cover all aspects of a crew transportation system, including: Development, test, evaluation, and verification. Program management and control. Flight readiness certification. Launch, landing, recovery, and mission operations. Sustaining engineering and maintenance/upgrades. To ensure NASA crew safety, NASA certification will validate technical and performance requirements, verify compliance with NASA requirements, validate that the crew transportation system operates in the appropriate environments, and quantify residual risks. The Commercial Crew Program will present progress to date and how it manages safety and reduces risk.

STS-111 crew exits the O&C Building before launch

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

2002-01-01

KENNEDY SPACE CENTER, FLA. - The STS-111 and Expedition 5 crews eagerly exit from the Operations and Checkout Building for launch aboard Space Shuttle Endeavour. It is the second launch attempt in six days. From front to back are Pilot Paul Lockhart and Commander Kenneth Cockrell; astronaut Peggy Whitson; Expedition 5 Commander Valeri Korzun (RSA) and cosmonaut Sergei Treschev (RSA); and Mission Specialists Philippe Perrin (CNES) and Franklin Chang-Diaz. This mission marks the 14th Shuttle flight to the Space Station and the third Shuttle mission this year. Mission STS-111 is the 18th flight of Endeavour and the 110th flight overall in NASA's Space Shuttle program. On mission STS-111, astronauts will deliver the Leonardo Multi-Purpose Logistics Module, the Mobile Base System (MBS), and the Expedition Five crew to the Space Station. During the seven days Endeavour will be docked to the Station, three spacewalks will be performed dedicated to installing MBS and the replacement wrist-roll joint on the Station's Canadarm2 robotic arm. Endeavour will also carry the Expedition 5 crew, who will replace Expedition 4 on board the Station. Expedition 4 crew members will return to Earth with the STS-111 crew. Liftoff is scheduled for 5:22 p.m. EDT from Launch Pad 39A.

A survey of selected aviators' perceptions regarding Army crew endurance guidelines.

PubMed

Caldwell, J A; Caldwell, J L; Hartnett, T C

1995-01-01

A 59-item questionnaire was administered to Army helicopter pilots from a variety of Army units to assess crew endurance issues. Analysis of 653 completed questionnaires indicated that respondents felt that the maintenance of aviator proficiency was more important than the fulfillment of only currency requirements in improving flight endurance. Approximately three-quarters of the respondents said that physical training was important to them personally, and 63% said that improved physical fitness reduces flight-related fatigue. With regard to the current crew endurance guide, only 1% of the respondents thought that the guide was exceptional and 65% said that they thought it should be rewritten. Adjustments were suggested for some of the recommended flight time limitations, to include liberalizing the factor associated with night-vision device flight. A majority of respondents indicated that data from either in-flight endurance evaluations or questionnaires administered to personnel in the field should be used to develop a new guide. Most respondents did not feel comfortable delegating responsibility for total crew endurance planning to unit commanders.

STS-114 Crew Training Clip

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

2003-01-01

The crew of Space Shuttle Atlantis on STS-114 is seen conducting several training exercises in preparation for their mission. The crew consists of Commander Eileen Collins, Pilot James Kelly, and Mission Specialists Soichi Noguchi and Stephen Robinson. With them are Yuri Malenchenko, Sergei Moschenko, and Edward Lu, the intended Expedition 7 crew of the International Space Station (ISS). During extravehicular activity (EVA) training in the virtual reality (VR) laboratory, crew members explore the exterior of the ISS, seen on a monitor. Suiting up with VR equipment is also shown. More EVA training takes place in the Neutral Buoyancy Laboratory (NBL). Here the astronauts are suited up for the NBL pool, and lowered into the water on a platform. After a crew photo session, the astronauts are seated in the Motion Base Simulator in their flight suits. The simulator is shown rocking side-to-side. The crew also hears a hands-on explanation of EVA preparations in the ISS airlock, and practices emergency egress from the CCT, a simulator shaped like an orbiter.

Orion Pad Abort 1 Crew Module Inertia Test Approach and Results

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

Herrera, Claudia; Harding, Adam

2010-01-01

The Flight Loads Laboratory at the Dryden Flight Research Center conducted tests to measure the inertia properties of the Orion Pad Abort 1 (PA-1) Crew Module. These measurements were taken to validate analytical predictions of the inertia properties of the vehicle and assist in reducing uncertainty for derived aero performance results calculated post launch. The first test conducted was to determine the Ixx of the Crew Module. This test approach used a modified torsion pendulum test step up that allowed the suspended Crew Module to rotate about the x axis. The second test used a different approach to measure both the Iyy and Izz properties. This test used a Knife Edge fixture that allowed small rotation of the Crew Module about the y and z axes. Discussions of the techniques and equations used to accomplish each test are presented. Comparisons with the predicted values used for the final flight calculations are made. Problem areas, with explanations and recommendations where available, are addressed. Finally, an evaluation of the value and success of these techniques to measure the moments of inertia of the Crew Module is provided.

Commerical Crew Program (CCP) Astronauts Speak To Employees

NASA Image and Video Library

2016-08-11

Astronauts selected to train for the flight tests of NASA’s Commercial Crew Program participated in a panel discussion with employees at NASA’s Kennedy Space Center in Florida. From left, are Kennedy Center Director Bob Cabana, Commercial Crew Program Manager Kathy Lueders, and astronauts Eric Boe and Suni Williams.

STS-74 Flight Day 5

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

1995-01-01

On this fifth day of the STS-74 mission, the flight crew, Cmdr. Kenneth Cameron, Pilot James Halsell, and Mission Specialists William McArthur, Jerry Ross, and Chris Hadfield, were awakened to the theme from the movie '2001: A Space Odyssey.' The Mir 20 cosmonauts, Cmdr. Yuri Gidzenko, Flight Engineer Sergei Avdeyev, and Cosmonaut-Researcher (ESA) Thomas Reiter, and shuttle astronauts are shown giving each other plaques and presents to commemorate their historic docking event and the start towards the development of the International Space Station. There is a press conference from Moscow by a one of the officers of the Russian Space Agency with both flight crews and an additional separate press interview of the crews by Canadian reporters. There is video footage of the two docked spacecraft taken from various angles.

STS-74 flight day 5

NASA Astrophysics Data System (ADS)

1995-11-01

On this fifth day of the STS-74 mission, the flight crew, Cmdr. Kenneth Cameron, Pilot James Halsell, and Mission Specialists William McArthur, Jerry Ross, and Chris Hatfield, were awakened to the theme from the movie 2001: A Space Odyssey'. The Mir 20 cosmonauts, Cmdr. Yuri Gidzenko, Flight Engineer Sergei Avdeyev, and Cosmonaut-Researcher (ESA) Thomas Reiter, and shuttle astronauts are shown giving each other plaques and presents to commemorate their historic docking event and the start towards the development of the International Space Station. There is a press conference from Moscow by a one of the officers of the Russian Space Agency with both flight crews and an additional separate press interview of the crews by Canadian reporters. There is video footage of the two docked spacecraft taken from various angles.

STS-113 crew breakfast before second launch attempt

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

2002-01-01

KENNEDY SPACE CENTER, FLA. - On the second launch attempt, the STS-113 crew enjoys a snack before suiting up for launch. The launch was scrubbed on Nov. 22 because of poor weather in the Transoceanic Abort Landing sites. Seated left to right are Mission Specialists Michael Lopez-Alegria and John Herrington, Pilot Paul Lockhart and Commander James Wetherbee; Expedition 6 flight engineer Nikolai Budarin, Commander Ken Bowersox and flight engineer Donald Pettit. STS-113 is the 16th American assembly flight to the International Space Station. The launch will carry the Expedition 6 crew to the Station and return the Expedition 5 crew to Earth. The major objective of the mission is delivery of the Port 1 (P1) Integrated Truss Assembly, which will be attached to the port side of the S0 truss. Three spacewalks are planned to install and activate the truss and its associated equipment. Launch of Space Shuttle Endeavour on mission STS-113 is now scheduled for Nov. 23 at 7:50 p.m. EST.

Irregular working hours and fatigue of cabin crew.

PubMed

Castro, Marta; Carvalhais, José; Teles, Júlia

2015-01-01

Beyond workload and specific environmental factors, flight attendants can be exposed to irregular working hours, conflicting with their circadian rhythms and having a negative impact in sleep, fatigue, health, social and family life, and performance which is critical to both safety and security in flight operations. This study focuses on the irregular schedules of cabin crew as a trigger of fatigue symptoms in a wet lease Portuguese airline. The aim was to analyze: what are the requirements of the cabin crew work; whether the schedules being observed and effective resting timeouts are triggering factors of fatigue; and the existence of fatigue symptoms in the cabin crew. A questionnaire has been adapted and applied to a sample of 73 cabin crew-members (representing 61.9% of the population), 39 females and 34 males, with an average age of 27.68 ± 4.27 years. Our data indicate the presence of fatigue and corresponding health symptoms among the airline cabin crew, despite of the sample favorable characteristics. Senior workers and women are more affected. Countermeasures are required. Recommendations can be made regarding the fatigue risk management, including work organization, education and awareness training programmes and specific countermeasures.

The role of flight planning in aircrew decision performance

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

Pepitone, Dave; King, Teresa; Murphy, Miles

1989-01-01

The role of flight planning in increasing the safety and decision-making performance of the air transport crews was investigated in a study that involved 48 rated airline crewmembers on a B720 simulator with a model-board-based visual scene and motion cues with three degrees of freedom. The safety performance of the crews was evaluated using videotaped replays of the flight. Based on these evaluations, the crews could be divided into high- and low-safety groups. It was found that, while collecting information before flights, the high-safety crews were more concerned with information about alternative airports, especially the fuel required to get there, and were characterized by making rapid and appropriate decisions during the emergency part of the flight scenario, allowing these crews to make an early diversion to other airports. These results suggest that contingency planning that takes into account alternative courses of action enhances rapid and accurate decision-making under time pressure.

Expedition 4 Crew Interviews: Carl Walz

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

2001-01-01

Expedition 4 Flight Engineer Carl Walz is seen during a prelaunch interview. He gives details on the mission's goals and significance, his role in the mission, what his responsibilities will be, what the crew exchange will be like (transferring the Expedition 4 crew in place of the Expedition 3 crew on the International Space Station (ISS)), the day-to-day life on an extended stay mission, the experiments he will be conducting on board, and what the S0 truss will mean to ISS. Walz ends with his thoughts on the short-term and long-term future of the International Space Station.

Expedition 4 Crew Interviews: Dan Bursch

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

2001-01-01

Expedition 4 Flight Engineer Dan Bursch is seen during a prelaunch interview. He gives details on the mission's goals and significance, his role in the mission, what his responsibilities will be, what the crew exchange will be like (transferring the Expedition 4 crew in place of the Expedition 3 crew on the International Space Station (ISS)), the day-to-day life on an extended stay mission, the experiments he will be conducting on board, and what the S0 truss will mean to ISS. Bursch ends with his thoughts on the short-term and long-term future of the International Space Station.

Women's Learning and Leadership Styles: Impact on Crew Resource Management.

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Turney, Mary Ann

With an increasing number of women becoming members of flight crews, the leadership styles of men and women are at issue. A study explored three basic questions: (1) How do male and female learning and leadership styles differ? (2) What barriers to gender integration and crew teamwork are perceived by pilot crew members? and (3) What…

NASA's Commercial Crew Program, The Next Step in U.S. Space Transportation

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

Mango, Edward J.; Thomas, Rayelle E.

2013-01-01

The Commercial Crew Program (CCP) is leading NASA's efforts to develop the next U.S. capability for crew transportation and rescue services to and from the International Space Station (ISS) by the mid-decade timeframe. The outcome of this capability is expected to stimulate and expand the U.S. space transportation industry. NASA is relying on its decades of human space flight experience to certify U.S. crewed vehicles to the ISS and is doing so in a two phase certification approach. NASA Certification will cover all aspects of a crew transportation system, including development, test, evaluation, and verification; program management and control; flight readiness certification; launch, landing, recovery, and mission operations; sustaining engineering and maintenance/upgrades. To ensure NASA crew safety, NASA Certification will validate technical and performance requirements, verify compliance with NASA requirements, validate the crew transportation system operates in appropriate environments, and quantify residual risks.

KENNEDY SPACE CENTER, FLA. - STS-82 crew members examine part of the Flight Support System during the Crew Equipment Integration Test (CEIT) in KSC's Vertical Processing Facility. From left are Mission Specialists Steven L. Smith and Gregory J. Harbaugh and Payload Commander Mark C. Lee. Liftoff of STS-82, the second Hubble Space Telescope (HST) servicing mission, is scheduled Feb. 11 aboard Discovery with a crew of seven.

NASA Image and Video Library

1997-01-22

KENNEDY SPACE CENTER, FLA. - STS-82 crew members examine part of the Flight Support System during the Crew Equipment Integration Test (CEIT) in KSC's Vertical Processing Facility. From left are Mission Specialists Steven L. Smith and Gregory J. Harbaugh and Payload Commander Mark C. Lee. Liftoff of STS-82, the second Hubble Space Telescope (HST) servicing mission, is scheduled Feb. 11 aboard Discovery with a crew of seven.

The effects of expressivity and flight task on cockpit communication and resource management

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

Jensen, R. S.

1986-01-01

The results of an investigation to develop a methodology for evaluating crew communication behavior on the flight deck and a flight simulator experiment to test the effects of crew member expressivity, as measured by the Personal Attributes Questionnarie, and flight task on crew communication and flight performance are discussed. A methodology for coding and assessing flight crew communication behavior as well as a model for predicting that behavior is advanced. Although not enough crews were found to provide valid statistical tests, the results of the study tend to indicate that crews in which the captain has high expressivity perform better than those whose captain is low in expressivity. There appears to be a strong interaction between captains and first officers along the level of command dimension of communication. The PAQ appears to identify those pilots who offer disagreements and inititate new subjects for discussion.

KENNEDY SPACE CENTER, FLA. - STS-114 Mission Commander Eileen Collins looks over flight equipment in the Orbiter Processing Facility, along with Glenda Laws, EVA Task Leader, with United Space Alliance at Johnson Space Center. The STS-114 crew is at KSC to take part in crew equipment and orbiter familiarization.

NASA Image and Video Library

2003-10-30

KENNEDY SPACE CENTER, FLA. - STS-114 Mission Commander Eileen Collins looks over flight equipment in the Orbiter Processing Facility, along with Glenda Laws, EVA Task Leader, with United Space Alliance at Johnson Space Center. The STS-114 crew is at KSC to take part in crew equipment and orbiter familiarization.

X-15 flight crew - Engle, Rushworth, McKay, Knight, Thompson, and Dana

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

1966-01-01

The X-15 flight crew, left to right; Air Force Captain Joseph H. Engle, Air Force Major Robert A. Rushworth, NASA pilot John B. 'Jack' McKay, Air Force Major William J. 'Pete' Knight, NASA pilot Milton O. Thompson, and NASA pilot Bill Dana. These six pilots made 125 of the 199 total flights in the X-15. Rushworth made 34 flights (the most of any X-15 pilot); McKay flew 29 times; Engle, Knight, and Dana each flew 16 times; Thompson's total was 14. The X-15 was a rocket-powered aircraft 50 ft long with a wingspan of 22 ft. It was a missile-shaped vehicle with an unusual wedge-shaped vertical tail, thin stubby wings, and unique fairings that extended along the side of the fuselage. The X-15 weighed about 14,000 lb empty and approximately 34,000 lb at launch. The XLR-99 rocket engine, manufactured by Thiokol Chemical Corp., was pilot controlled and was capable of developing 57,000 lb of rated thrust (actual thrust reportedly climbed to 60,000 lb). North American Aviation built three X-15 aircraft for the program. The X-15 research aircraft was developed to provide in-flight information and data on aerodynamics, structures, flight controls, and the physiological aspects of high-speed, high-altitude flight. A follow-on program used the aircraft as a testbed to carry various scientific experiments beyond the Earth's atmosphere on a repeated basis. For flight in the dense air of the usable atmosphere, the X-15 used conventional aerodynamic controls such as rudder surfaces on the vertical stabilizers to control yaw and canted horizontal surfaces on the tail to control pitch when moving in synchronization or roll when moved differentially. For flight in the thin air outside of the appreciable Earth's atmosphere, the X-15 used a reaction control system. Hydrogen peroxide thrust rockets located on the nose of the aircraft provided pitch and yaw control. Those on the wings provided roll control. Because of the large fuel consumption, the X-15 was air launched from a B-52

Post flight press conference for the STS-7 mission

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

1983-01-01

Two of the three mission specialists for STS-7 field questions from the press during the post-flight press conference in JSC's main auditorium on July 1, 1983. Left to right are John M. Fabian and Dr. Norman E. Thagard (35419); Portrait view of Fabian during the STS-7 post-flight press conference (35420); Portrait view of mission specialist Dr. Sally K. Ride during the STS-7 post-flight press conference (35421); Portrait view of STS-7 pilot Frederick H. Hauck during the post-flight press conference (35422); Portrait view of STS-7 crew commander Robert L. Crippen during the post-flight press conference (35423); Three STS-7 crew members listen to questions from news reporters. They are, left to right, Crippen, Hauck, and Ride (35424); The first five person shuttle crew and first woman crew member greet the news media. Members are, left to right, Crippen, Hauck, Ride, Fabian and Thagard (35425).

Expedition 5 Crew Insignia

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

2002-01-01

JOHNSON SPACE CENTER, HOUSTON, TEXAS -- EXPEDITION FIVE CREW INSIGNIA (ISS05-S-001) -- The International Space Station (ISS) Expedition Five patch depicts the Station in its completed configuration and represents the vision of mankind's first step as a permanent human presence in space. The United States and Russian flags are joined together in a Roman numeral V to represent both the nationalities of the crew and the fifth crew to live aboard the ISS. Crew members' names are shown in the border of this patch. This increment encompasses a new phase in growth for the Station, with three Shuttle crews delivering critical components and building blocks to the ISS. To signify the participation of each crew member, the Shuttle is docked to the Station beneath a constellation of 17 stars symbolizing all those visiting and living aboard Station during this increment. The NASA insignia design for Shuttle flights is reserved for use by the astronauts and for other official use as the NASA Administrator may authorize. Public availability has been approved only in the forms of illustrations by the various news media. When and if there is any change in this policy, which is not anticipated, the change will be publicly announced.

Orion Exploration Flight Test Post-Flight Inspection and Analysis

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

Miller, J. E.; Berger, E. L.; Bohl, W. E.; Christiansen, E. L.; Davis, B. A.; Deighton, K. D.; Enriquez, P. A.; Garcia, M. A.; Hyde, J. L.; Oliveras, O. M.

2017-01-01

The multipurpose crew vehicle, Orion, is being designed and built for NASA to handle the rigors of crew launch, sustainment and return from scientific missions beyond Earth orbit. In this role, the Orion vehicle is meant to operate in the space environments like the naturally occurring meteoroid and the artificial orbital debris environments (MMOD) with successful atmospheric reentry at the conclusion of the flight. As a result, Orion's reentry module uses durable porous, ceramic tiles on almost thirty square meters of exposed surfaces to accomplish both of these functions. These durable, non-ablative surfaces maintain their surface profile through atmospheric reentry; thus, they preserve any surface imperfections that occur prior to atmospheric reentry. Furthermore, Orion's launch abort system includes a shroud that protects the thermal protection system while awaiting launch and during ascent. The combination of these design features and a careful pre-flight inspection to identify any manufacturing imperfections results in a high confidence that damage to the thermal protection system identified post-flight is due to the in-flight solid particle environments. These favorable design features of Orion along with the unique flight profile of the first exploration flight test of Orion (EFT-1) have yielded solid particle environment measurements that have never been obtained before this flight.

Commerical Crew Astronauts Visit Launch Complex 39A

NASA Image and Video Library

2018-03-27

Commercial Crew Program astronauts, from the left, Suni Williams, Eric Boe, Bob Behnken and Doug Hurley take in the view from the top of Launch Complex 39A at Kennedy Space Center. The astronauts toured the pad for an up-close look at modifications that are in work for the SpaceX Crew Dragon flight tests. Tower modifications included l removal of the space shuttle era rotating service structure. Future integration of the crew access arm will allow for safe crew entry for launch and exit from the spacecraft in the unlikely event a pad abort is required.

Commerical Crew Astronauts Visit Launch Complex 39A

NASA Image and Video Library

2018-03-27

Commercial Crew Program astronauts, from the left Doug Hurley, Eric Boe, Bob Behnken and Suni Williams, pose just outside Launch Complex 39A at NASA's Kennedy Space Center in Florida. The astronauts toured the pad for an up-close look at modifications that are in work for the SpaceX Crew Dragon flight tests. The tower modifications included removal of the space shuttle era rotating service structure. Future integration of the crew access arm will allow for safe crew entry for launch and exit from the spacecraft in the unlikely event a pad abort is required.

STS-113 crew group photo at SLF before launch

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

2002-01-01

KENNEDY SPACE CENTER, FLA. - After their arrival at the KSC Shuttle Landing Facility, the crews of mission STS-113 pause for a group photo. From left are STS-113 Commander James Wetherbee, Pilot Paul Lockhart, and Mission Specialists Michael Lopez-Alegria and John Herrington; and the Expedition 6 crew, Flight Engineer Nikolai Budarin, Commander Ken Bowersox and Flight Engineer Donald Pettit. Budarin represents the Russian Space Agency. The primary mission of STS-113 is bringing the Expedition 6 crew to the Station and returning the Expedition 5 crew to Earth. In addition, the major objective of the mission is delivery of the Port 1 (P1) Integrated Truss Assembly, which will be attached to the port side of the S0 truss. Three spacewalks are planned to install and activate the truss and its associated equipment. Launch of Space Shuttle Endeavour on mission STS-113 is scheduled for Nov. 11 between midnight and 4 a.m. EST.

Flight Crew Training: Multi-Crew Pilot License Training versus Traditional Training and Its Relationship with Job Performance

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Cushing, Thomas S.

2013-01-01

In 2006, the International Civil Aviation Organization promulgated requirements for a Multi-Crew Pilot License for First Officers, in which the candidate attends approximately two years of ground school and trains as part of a two-person crew in a simulator of a Boeing 737 or an Airbus 320 airliner. In the traditional method, a candidate qualifies…

John Glenn and rest of STS-95 crew exit Crew Transport Vehicle

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

1998-01-01

Following touchdown at 12:04 p.m. EST at the Shuttle Landing Facility, the mission STS-95 crew leave the Crew Transport Vehicle. Payload Specialist John H. Glenn Jr. (center), a senator from Ohio, shakes hands with NASA Administrator Daniel S. Goldin. At left is Center Director Roy Bridges. Other crew members shown are Pilot Steven W. Lindsey (far left) and, behind Glenn, Mission Specialists Scott E. Parazynski and Stephen K. Robinson, and Payload Specialist Chiaki Mukai, Ph.D., M.D., with the National Space Development Agency of Japan. Not seen are Mission Commander Curtis L. Brown Jr. and Mission Specialist Pedro Duque of Spain, with the European Space Agency (ESA). The STS-95 crew completed a successful mission, landing at the Shuttle Landing Facility at 12:04 p.m. EST, after 9 days in space, traveling 3.6 million miles. The mission included research payloads such as the Spartan solar-observing deployable spacecraft, the Hubble Space Telescope Orbital Systems Test Platform, the International Extreme Ultraviolet Hitchhiker, as well as the SPACEHAB single module with experiments on space flight and the aging process.

Design and Development of a Flight Route Modification, Logging, and Communication Network

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

Merlino, Daniel K.; Wilson, C. Logan; Carboneau, Lindsey M.; Wilder, Andrew J.; Underwood, Matthew C.

2016-01-01

There is an overwhelming desire to create and enhance communication mechanisms between entities that operate within the National Airspace System. Furthermore, airlines are always extremely interested in increasing the efficiency of their flights. An innovative system prototype was developed and tested that improves collaborative decision making without modifying existing infrastructure or operational procedures within the current Air Traffic Management System. This system enables collaboration between flight crew and airline dispatchers to share and assess optimized flight routes through an Internet connection. Using a sophisticated medium-fidelity flight simulation environment, a rapid-prototyping development, and a unified modeling language, the software was designed to ensure reliability and scalability for future growth and applications. Ensuring safety and security were primary design goals, therefore the software does not interact or interfere with major flight control or safety systems. The system prototype demonstrated an unprecedented use of in-flight Internet to facilitate effective communication with Airline Operations Centers, which may contribute to increased flight efficiency for airlines.

Skylab medical experiments altitude test crew observations.

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

Bobko, K. J.

1973-01-01

The paper deals with the crew's observations during training and the SMEAT 56-day test. Topics covered include the crew's adaptation to the SMEAT environment and medical experiments protocol. Personal observations are made of daily activities surrounding the medical experiments hardware, Skylab clothing, supplementary activities, recreational equipment, food, and waste management. An assessment of these items and their contributions to the Skylab flight program is made.

Orion Pad Abort 1 Crew Module Mass Properties Test Approach and Results

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

Herrera, Claudia; Harding, Adam

2012-01-01

The Flight Loads Laboratory at the Dryden Flight Research Center conducted tests to measure the inertia properties of the Orion Pad Abort 1 (PA-1) Crew Module (CM). These measurements were taken to validate analytical predictions of the inertia properties of the vehicle and assist in reducing uncertainty for derived aero performance coefficients to be calculated post-launch. The first test conducted was to determine the Ixx of the Crew Module. This test approach used a modified torsion pendulum test setup that allowed the suspended Crew Module to rotate about the x axis. The second test used a different approach to measure both the Iyy and Izz properties. This test used a Knife Edge fixture that allowed small rotation of the Crew Module about the y and z axes. Discussions of the techniques and equations used to accomplish each test are presented. Comparisons with the predicted values used for the final flight calculations are made. Problem areas, with explanations and recommendations where available, are addressed. Finally, an evaluation of the value and success of these techniques to measure the moments of inertia of the Crew Module is provided.

High Level Rule Modeling Language for Airline Crew Pairing

NASA Astrophysics Data System (ADS)

Mutlu, Erdal; Birbil, Ş. Ilker; Bülbül, Kerem; Yenigün, Hüsnü

2011-09-01

The crew pairing problem is an airline optimization problem where a set of least costly pairings (consecutive flights to be flown by a single crew) that covers every flight in a given flight network is sought. A pairing is defined by using a very complex set of feasibility rules imposed by international and national regulatory agencies, and also by the airline itself. The cost of a pairing is also defined by using complicated rules. When an optimization engine generates a sequence of flights from a given flight network, it has to check all these feasibility rules to ensure whether the sequence forms a valid pairing. Likewise, the engine needs to calculate the cost of the pairing by using certain rules. However, the rules used for checking the feasibility and calculating the costs are usually not static. Furthermore, the airline companies carry out what-if-type analyses through testing several alternate scenarios in each planning period. Therefore, embedding the implementation of feasibility checking and cost calculation rules into the source code of the optimization engine is not a practical approach. In this work, a high level language called ARUS is introduced for describing the feasibility and cost calculation rules. A compiler for ARUS is also implemented in this work to generate a dynamic link library to be used by crew pairing optimization engines.

STS-109 Crew Return Ceremony at Ellington Field

NASA Image and Video Library

2002-03-13

JSC2002-E-09329 (13 March 2002) --- Astronaut Duane G. Carey (right foreground), STS-109 pilot, shakes hands with Johnson Space Center’s (JSC) Acting Director Roy Estess during the crew return ceremonies at Ellington Field. Also pictured are astronaut Scott D. Altman (left background), mission commander, and astronaut Steven A. Hawley, Director of Flight Crew Operations.

ASTRONAUT GROUP - GT-6 AND GT-7 CREWS - WELCOME

NASA Image and Video Library

1965-12-19

S65-66728 (19 Dec. 1965) --- This happy round of handshakes took place in the Manned Spacecraft Operations Building crew quarters, Merritt Island, as the Gemini-6 crew (left) welcomed the Gemini-7 crew back to the Kennedy Space Center. Left to right, are astronauts Walter M. Schirra Jr., Gemini-6 command pilot; Thomas P. Stafford, Gemini-6 pilot; Frank Borman, Gemini-7 command pilot; James A. Lovell Jr., Gemini-7 pilot; and Donald K. Slayton (partially hidden behind Lovell), assistant director for Flight Crew Operations, Manned Spacecraft Center, Houston. Photo credit: NASA

STS-112 Crew Training Clip

NASA Astrophysics Data System (ADS)

2002-09-01

Footage shows the crew of STS-112 (Jeffrey Ashby, Commander; Pamela Melroy, Pilot; David Wolf, Piers Sellers, Sandra Magnus, and Fyodor Yurchikhin, Mission Specialists) during several parts of their training. The video is arranged into short segments. In 'Topside Activities at the NBL', Wolf and Sellers are fitted with EVA suits for pool training. 'Pre-Launch Bailout Training in CCT II' shows all six crew members exiting from the hatch on a model of a shuttle orbiter cockpit. 'EVA Training in the VR Lab' shows a crew member training with a virtual reality simulator, interspersed with footage of Magnus, and Wolf with Melroy, at monitors. There is a 'Crew Photo Session', and 'Pam Melroy and Sandy Magnus at the SES Dome' also features a virtual reality simulator. The final two segments of the video involve hands-on training. 'Post Landing Egress at the FFT' shows the crew suiting up into their flight suits, and being raised on a harness, to practice rapelling from the cockpit hatch. 'EVA Prep and Post at the ISS Airlock' shows the crew assembling an empty EVA suit onboard a model of a module. The crew tests oxygen masks, and Sellers is shown on an exercise bicycle with an oxygen mask, with his heart rate monitored (not shown).

STS-112 Crew Training Clip

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

2002-01-01

Footage shows the crew of STS-112 (Jeffrey Ashby, Commander; Pamela Melroy, Pilot; David Wolf, Piers Sellers, Sandra Magnus, and Fyodor Yurchikhin, Mission Specialists) during several parts of their training. The video is arranged into short segments. In 'Topside Activities at the NBL', Wolf and Sellers are fitted with EVA suits for pool training. 'Pre-Launch Bailout Training in CCT II' shows all six crew members exiting from the hatch on a model of a shuttle orbiter cockpit. 'EVA Training in the VR Lab' shows a crew member training with a virtual reality simulator, interspersed with footage of Magnus, and Wolf with Melroy, at monitors. There is a 'Crew Photo Session', and 'Pam Melroy and Sandy Magnus at the SES Dome' also features a virtual reality simulator. The final two segments of the video involve hands-on training. 'Post Landing Egress at the FFT' shows the crew suiting up into their flight suits, and being raised on a harness, to practice rapelling from the cockpit hatch. 'EVA Prep and Post at the ISS Airlock' shows the crew assembling an empty EVA suit onboard a model of a module. The crew tests oxygen masks, and Sellers is shown on an exercise bicycle with an oxygen mask, with his heart rate monitored (not shown).

Expedition 6 crew group photo at SLF before launch

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

2002-01-01

KENNEDY SPACE CENTER, FLA. -- The Expedition 6 crew poses for a photo after their arrival at the KSC Shuttle Landing Facility to prepare for launch on mission STS-113. From left are Flight Engineer Nikolai Budarin, Commander Ken Bowersox and Flight Engineer Donald Pettit. The primary mission of STS-113 is bringing the Expedition 6 crew to the Station and returning the Expedition 5 crew to Earth. In addition, the major objective of the mission is delivery of the Port 1 (P1) Integrated Truss Assembly, which will be attached to the port side of the S0 truss. Three spacewalks are planned to install and activate the truss and its associated equipment. Launch of Space Shuttle Endeavour on mission STS-113 is scheduled for Nov. 11 between midnight and 4 a.m. EST.

STS-87 crew participates in Crew Equipment Interface Test

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

1997-01-01

STS-87 astronaut crew members participate in the Crew Equipment Integration Test (CEIT) with the Spartan-201 payload in Kennedy Space Centers (KSC's) Vertical Processing Facility. From left are Pilot Steven Lindsey; Mission Specialist Takao Doi, Ph.D., of the National Space Development Agency of Japan; Mission Specialist Kalpana Chawla, Ph.D.; Commander Kevin Kregel; and Payload Specialist Leonid Kadenyuk of the National Space Agency of Ukraine. The CEIT gives astronauts an opportunity to get a hands- on look at the payloads with which they will be working on-orbit. STS-87 will be the fourth United States Microgravity Payload and flight of the Spartan-201 deployable satellite. During the mission, Dr. Doi will be the first Japanese astronaut to perform a spacewalk. STS-87 is scheduled for a Nov. 19 liftoff from KSC.

Crew Roles and Interactions in Scientific Space Exploration

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

Love, Stanley G.; Bleacher, Jacob E.

2013-01-01

Future piloted space exploration missions will focus more on science than engineering, a change which will challenge existing concepts for flight crew tasking and demand that participants with contrasting skills, values, and backgrounds learn to cooperate as equals. In terrestrial space flight analogs such as Desert Research And Technology Studies, engineers, pilots, and scientists can practice working together, taking advantage of the full breadth of all team members training to produce harmonious, effective missions that maximize the time and attention the crew can devote to science. This paper presents, in a format usable as a reference by participants in the field, a successfully tested crew interaction model for such missions. The model builds upon the basic framework of a scientific field expedition by adding proven concepts from aviation and human spaceflight, including expeditionary behavior and cockpit resource management, cooperative crew tasking and adaptive leadership and followership, formal techniques for radio communication, and increased attention to operational considerations. The crews of future spaceflight analogs can use this model to demonstrate effective techniques, learn from each other, develop positive working relationships, and make their expeditions more successful, even if they have limited time to train together beforehand. This model can also inform the preparation and execution of actual future spaceflights.

Increment 18 crew photo

NASA Image and Video Library

2009-02-19

ISS018-E-033765 (19 Feb. 2009) --- Astronaut Michael Fincke (right), Expedition 18 commander; astronaut Sandra Magnus and cosmonaut Yury Lonchakov, both flight engineers, pose for a crew photo between a Russian Orlan spacesuit and an Extravehicular Mobility Unit (EMU) spacesuit in the Harmony node of the International Space Station.

Increment 18 crew photo

NASA Image and Video Library

2009-02-19

ISS018-E-033767 (19 Feb. 2009) --- Astronaut Michael Fincke (right), Expedition 18 commander; astronaut Sandra Magnus and cosmonaut Yury Lonchakov, both flight engineers, pose for a crew photo between a Russian Orlan spacesuit and an Extravehicular Mobility Unit (EMU) spacesuit in the Harmony node of the International Space Station.

STS-70 crew inspects nose wheel tires after landing

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

1995-01-01

STS-70 Mission Commander Terence 'Tom' Henricks bends over to inspect a tire on the landing gear of the Space Shuttle Orbiter Discovery after the spaceplane touched down on KSC's Runway 33 at the unofficial time of 8:02 a.m. EDT July 22, 1995 to conclude the nearly-nine day space flight. Mission Specialist Donald A. Thomas is in the foreground, with Pilot Kevin R. Kregel in the background. KSC Shuttle launch director James F. Harrington, in the Orlando Magic Basketball team hat, is helping the crew with the post-landing inspection. The orbiter traveled some 3.7 million statute miles during the flight, which included a one-day extension because of fog and low visibility conditions at KSC's Shuttle Landing Facility on July 21. This was the 24th Shuttle landing at KSC and the 70th Space Shuttle mission. During the space flight, the five-member crew deployed the NASA Tracking and Data Relay Satellite-G (TDRS-G). The other crew members were Mission Specialists Nancy Jane Currie and Mary Ellen Weber.

STS-118 Space Shuttle Crew Honored

NASA Image and Video Library

2007-09-10

At Walt Disney World in Orlando, the crew members of space shuttle mission STS-118 answer questions from the student audience during a special event to honor the Endeavour crew. Seated from left are Mission Specialists Alvin Drew, Barbara R. Morgan, Dave Williams, Rick Mastracchio and Tracy Caldwell; Pilot Charlie Hobaugh; and Commander Scott Kelly. The event also honored teacher-turned-astronaut Morgan, who dedicated a plaque outside the Mission: Space attraction. Other activities included meeting with the media and a parade down Main Street. Mission STS-118 was the 119th shuttle program flight and the 22nd flight to the International Space Station. Space shuttle Endeavour launched from NASA's Kennedy Space Center on Aug. 8 and landed Aug. 21. The mission delivered the S5 truss, continuing the assembly of the space station.

STS-83 Crew Arrival for TCDT

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

1997-01-01

Members of the STS-83 flight crew pose alongside a T-33 jet trainer aircraft after arriving at the KSC Shuttle Landing Facility for Terminal Countdown Demonstration (TCDT) exercises for that space flight. They are (left to right) Payload Specialist Roger K. Crouch; Pilot Susan L. Still; Mission Commander James D. Halsell, Jr.; Mission Specialist Michael L. Gernhardt; Payload Specialist She is the second woman to fly in this capacity on the Space Shuttle. The Microgravity Science Laboratory-1 (MSL-1) Spacelab module is the primary payload on this 16-day mission. The MSL-1 will used to test some of the hardware, facilities and procedures that are planned for use on the International Space Station, while the seven-member crew conducts combustion, protein crystal growth and materials processing experiments.

STS-111 Expedition Five Crew Training Clip

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

2002-01-01

The STS-111 Expedition Five Crew begins with training on payload operations. Flight Engineer Peggy Whitson and Mission Specialist Sandy Magnus are shown in Shuttle Remote Manipulator System (SRMS) procedures. Flight Engineer Sergei Treschev gets suited for Neutral Neutral Buoyancy Lab (NBL) training. Virtual Reality lab training is shown with Peggy Whitson. Habitation Equipment and procedures are also presented.