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...

78 FR 48542 - Agency Information Collection Activities: Requests for Comments; Clearance of Renewed Approval of...

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2013-08-08

... Flight Requirements for Crew and Space Flight Participants AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA...-0720. Title: Human Space Flight Requirements for Crew and Space Flight Participants. Form Numbers... information collection. Background: The FAA has established requirements for human space flight of crew and...

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...

78 FR 29425 - Agency Information Collection Activities: Requests for Comments; Clearance of Renewed Approval of...

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2013-05-20

... Flight Requirements for Crew and Space Flight Participants AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA...-0720. Title: Human Space Flight Requirements for Crew and Space Flight Participants. Form Numbers... information collection. Background: The FAA has established requirements for human space flight of crew and...

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...

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.

78 FR 23458 - Airworthiness Directives; Dassault Aviation Airplanes

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2013-04-19

... aircraft flight manual (AFM); performing operational tests of the oxygen mask oxygen assembly; and... prompted by failure of the flight crew oxygen supply due to a potentially defective flight crew mask oxygen assembly. We are issuing this AD to prevent failure to supply oxygen upon demand to the flight crew in...

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...

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.

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.

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.

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...

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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

Flight crew health stabilization program

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

Wooley, B. C.; Mccollum, G. W.

1975-01-01

The flight crew health stabilization program was developed to minimize or eliminate the possibility of adverse alterations in the health of flight crews during immediate preflight, flight, and postflight periods. The elements of the program, which include clinical medicine, immunology, exposure prevention, and epidemiological surveillance, are discussed briefly. No crewmember illness was reported for the missions for which the program was in effect.

CEV Seat Attenuation System System Design Tasks

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

Goodman, Jerry R.; McMichael, James H.

2007-01-01

The Apollo crew / couch restraint system was designed to support and restrain three crew members during all phases of the mission from launch to landing. The crew couch used supported the crew for launch, landing and in-flight operations, and was foldable and removable for EVA ingress/egress through side hatch access and for in-flight access under the seat and in other areas of the crew compartment. The couch and the seat attenuation system was designed to control the impact loads imposed on the crew during landing and to remain non-functional during all other flight phases.

Flight Crew Health Stabilization Program

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

Johnston, Smith L.

2010-01-01

This document establishes the policy and procedures for the HSP and is authorized through the Director, Johnson Space Center (JSC). This document delineates the medical operations requirements for the HSP. The HSP goals are accomplished through an awareness campaign and procedures such as limiting access to flight crewmembers, medical screening, and controlling flight crewmember activities. NASA's Human Space Flight Program uses strategic risk mitigation to achieve mission success while protecting crew health and safety. Infectious diseases can compromise crew health and mission success, especially in the immediate preflight period. The primary purpose of the Flight Crew Health Stabilization Program (HSP) is to mitigate the risk of occurrence of infectious disease among astronaut flight crews in the immediate preflight period. Infectious diseases are contracted through direct person-to-person contact, and through contact with infectious material in the environment. The HSP establishes several controls to minimize crew exposure to infectious agents. The HSP provides a quarantine environment for the crew that minimizes contact with potentially infectious material. The HSP also limits the number of individuals who come in close contact with the crew. The infection-carrying potential of these primary contacts (PCs) is minimized by educating them in ways to avoid infections and avoiding contact with the crew if they are or may be sick. The transmission of some infectious diseases can be greatly curtailed by vaccinations. PCs are strongly encouraged to maintain updated vaccinations.

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...

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.

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.

What made Apollo a success?

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

1971-01-01

Spacecraft development, mission design planning, flight crew operations, and flight operations are considered. Spacecraft design principles and test activities are described. Determination of the best series of flights leading to a lunar landing at the earliest possible time, flight planning, techniques for establishing flight procedures and carrying out flight operations, and crew training and simulation activities are discussed.

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...

Exploring flight crew behaviour

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

Helmreich, R. L.

1987-01-01

A programme of research into the determinants of flight crew performance in commercial and military aviation is described, along with limitations and advantages associated with the conduct of research in such settings. Preliminary results indicate significant relationships among personality factors, attitudes regarding flight operations, and crew performance. The potential theoretical and applied utility of the research and directions for further research are discussed.

An on-orbit viewpoint of life sciences research

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

Lichtenberg, Byron K.

1992-01-01

As a Payload Specialist and a life science researcher, I want to present several issues that impact life science research in space. During early space station operations, life science and other experiments will be conducted in a time-critical manner and there will be the added duties of both space shuttle and space station systems operation (and the concomittent training overhead). Life sciences research is different from other science research done in space because the crew is involved both as an operator and as a subject. There is a need for pre- and post-flight data collection as well as in flight data collection. It is imperative that the life science researcher incorporate the crew members into their team early enough in the training cycle to fully explain the science and to make the crew aware of the importance and sensitivities of the experiment. During the pre-flight phase, the crew is incredibly busy with a myriad of duties. Therefore, it is difficult to get 'pristine' subjects for the baseline data collection. There are also circadian shifts, travel, and late nights to confound the data. During this time it is imperative that the researcher develop, along with the crew, a realistic estimate of crew-time required for their experiment. In flight issues that affect the researcher are the additional activities of the crew, the stresses inherent in space flight, and the difficulty of getting early in-flight data. During SSF activities, the first day or two will be taken up with rendezvous and docking. Other issues are the small number of subjects on any given flight, the importance of complete and concise procedures, and the vagaries of on-board data collection. Post flight, the crew is tired and experiences a 'relaxation.' This along with circadian shifts and rapid re-adaptation to 1-g make immediate post-flight data collection difficult. Finally, the blending of operational medicine and research can result in either competition for resources (crew time, etc.) or influence on the physiological state of the crew. However, the unique opportunity to conduct research in an environment that cannot be duplicated on Earth outweighs the 'challenges' that exist for space life researchers.

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.

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.

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

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.

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.

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.

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.

Aviation accidents and the theory of the situation

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

Bolman, L.

1980-01-01

Social-psychological factors effecting the performance of flight crews are examined. In particular, a crew member's perceptual-psychological constructs of the flight situation (theories of the situation) are discussed. The skills and willingness of a flight crew to be alert to possible errors in the theory become critical to their effectiveness and their ability to ensure a safe flight. Several major factors that determine the likelihood that a faulty theory will be detected and revised are identified.

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...

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.

Design Considerations for Attitude State Awareness and Prevention of Entry into Unusual Attitudes

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

Ellis, Kyle K. E.; Prinzel, Lawrence J., III; Arthur, Jarvis J.; Nicholas, Stephanie N.; Kiggins, Daniel; Verstynen, Harry; Hubbs, Clay; Wilkerson, James

2017-01-01

Loss of control - inflight (LOC-I) has historically represented the largest category of commercial aviation fatal accidents. A review of the worldwide transport airplane accidents (2001-2010) evinced that loss of attitude or energy state awareness was responsible for a large majority of the LOC-I events. A Commercial Aviation Safety Team (CAST) study of 18 worldwide loss-of-control accidents and incidents determined that flight crew loss of attitude awareness or energy state awareness due to lack of external visual reference cues was a significant causal factor in 17 of the 18 reviewed flights. CAST recommended that "Virtual Day-Visual Meteorological Condition" (Virtual Day-VMC) displays be developed to provide the visual cues necessary to prevent loss-of-control resulting from flight crew spatial disorientation and loss of energy state awareness. Synthetic vision or equivalent systems (SVS) were identified for a design "safety enhancement" (SE-200). Part of this SE involves the conduct of research for developing minimum aviation system performance standards (MASPS) for these flight deck display technologies to aid flight crew attitude and energy state awareness similar to that of a virtual day-VMC-like environment. This paper will describe a novel experimental approach to evaluating a flight crew's ability to maintain attitude awareness and to prevent entry into unusual attitudes across several SVS optical flow design considerations. Flight crews were subjected to compound-event scenarios designed to elicit channelized attention and startle/surprise within the crew. These high-fidelity scenarios, designed from real-world events, enable evaluation of the efficacy of SVS at improving flight crew attitude awareness to reduce the occurrence of LOC-I incidents in commercial flight operations.

Pilot-Configurable Information on a Display Unit

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

Bell, Charles Frederick (Inventor); Ametsitsi, Julian (Inventor); Che, Tan Nhat (Inventor); Shafaat, Syed Tahir (Inventor)

2017-01-01

A small thin display unit that can be installed in the flight deck for displaying only flight crew-selected tactical information needed for the task at hand. The flight crew can select the tactical information to be displayed by means of any conventional user interface. Whenever the flight crew selects tactical information for processes the request, including periodically retrieving measured current values or computing current values for the requested tactical parameters and returning those current tactical parameter values to the display unit for display.

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-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.

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.

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 younger crew had, and cabin crew with atopy had more complaints of dry air than other crew had. Current smokers had fewer complaints of stuffy air than non-smokers had. Airline crew that had been on a flight on which smoking was allowed in the week before the survey, had more complaints of stuffy air, dry air and passive smoking, than crew that had not been on such a flight in the preceding week had. Complaints on cabin air quality and health symptoms were common among commercial airline crew, and related to age, gender, atopy and type of work onboard. The hygienic measurements showed that the relative air humidity is very low on intercontinental flights, and particle levels are high on flights with passive smoking. This illustrates the need to improve the cabin air quality in commercial airlines. Such improvements could include better control of cabin temperature, air humidification, efficient air filtration with high efficiency particulate air filter (HEPA) filtration on all types of aircraft and sufficient air exchange rate in order to fulfil current ventilation standards.

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-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

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).

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.

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.

Group 2: Real time LOFT operations

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

Cavanagh, D.

1981-01-01

All LOFT scenarios should be constructed so as to provide the highest degree of realism that is economically, technically, and operationally feasible. The more realistic the situation, the faster the crew will adjust their thinking and provide reactions which would be typical of a line-flight orientation. The goal is to produce crew performance which would be typical of a crew on an actual line flight, given the same set of circumstances that were developed during the scenario. The briefing which is provided to the crew before entering the simulator for LOFT, the trip papers, the communications throughout the flight, the role played by the instructor, and so on, are important factors, crucial to the establishment and maintenance of a high degree of realism. Crews should have all manuals and other required equipment for a normal line-flight.

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...

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.

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.

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.

Exposure Assessment at 30 000 Feet: Challenges and Future Directions

PubMed Central

Grajewski, Barbara; Pinkerton, Lynne E.

2015-01-01

Few studies of cancer mortality and incidence among flight crew have included a detailed assessment of both occupational exposures and lifestyle factors that may influence the risk of cancer. In this issue, Kojo et al. (Risk factors for skin cancer among Finnish airline cabin crew. Ann. Occup. Hyg 2013; 57: 695–704) evaluated the relative contributions of ultraviolet and cosmic radiation to the incidence of skin cancer in Finnish flight attendants. This is a useful contribution, yet the reason flight crew members have an increased risk of skin cancer compared with the general population remains unclear. Good policy decisions for flight crew will depend on continued and emerging effective collaborations to increase study power and improve exposure assessment in future flight crew health studies. Improving the assessment of occupational exposures and non-occupational factors will cost additional time and effort, which are well spent if the role of exposures can be clarified in larger studies. PMID:23818455

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.

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.

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.

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.

Launch and Landing of Russian Soyuz - Medical Support for US and Partner Astronauts

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

Menon, Anil

2017-01-01

Launching, landing, flight route, expeditions, Soyuz, near Kazakhstan USOS Crew Surgeon -Quarantine and direct care to crew before launch, then present in close proximity to launch for abort. IP Crew Surgeon -same Deputy Crew Surgeon -Back up for crew surgeon, care for immediate family, stationed at airport for helicopter abort response Russian based US doctor -Coordinate with SOS staff USOS Crew Surgeon -Nominal helicopter response and initial medical care and support during return on gulfstreamIPcenter dotP Crew Surgeon -same Deputy Crew Surgeon -Ballistic helicopter support Russian based US doctor -Coordinate with SOS staff Direct return doctor -Direct medical care on return flight

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!

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 placards for flight. PA-1 flight data is shown, as well as a comparison of PA-1 flight data to nonlinear simulation Monte Carlo data.

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.

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.

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.

The Evolution of Extravehicular Activity Operations to Lunar Exploration Based on Operational Lessons Learned During 2009 NASA Desert RATS Field Testing

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

Bell, Ernest R., Jr.; Welsh, Daren; Coan, Dave; Johnson, Kieth; Ney, Zane; McDaniel, Randall; Looper, Chris; Guirgis, Peggy

2010-01-01

This paper will present options to evolutionary changes in several philosophical areas of extravehicular activity (EVA) operations. These areas will include single person verses team EVAs; various loss of communications scenarios (with Mission Control, between suited crew, suited crew to rover crew, and rover crew A to rover crew B); EVA termination and abort time requirements; incapacitated crew ingress time requirements; autonomous crew operations during loss of signal periods including crew decisions on EVA execution (including decision for single verses team EVA). Additionally, suggestions as to the evolution of the make-up of the EVA flight control team from the current standard will be presented. With respect to the flight control team, the major areas of EVA flight control, EVA Systems and EVA Tasks, will be reviewed, and suggested evolutions of each will be presented. Currently both areas receive real-time information, and provide immediate feedback during EVAs as well as spacesuit (extravehicular mobility unit - EMU) maintenance and servicing periods. With respect to the tasks being performed, either EMU servicing and maintenance, or the specific EVA tasks, daily revising of plans will need to be able to be smoothly implemented to account for unforeseen situations and findings. Many of the presented ideas are a result of lessons learned by the NASA Johnson Space Center Mission Operations Directorate operations team support during the 2009 NASA Desert Research and Technology Studies (Desert RATS). It is important that the philosophy of both EVA crew operations and flight control be examined now, so that, where required, adjustments can be made to a next generation EMU and EVA equipment that will complement the anticipated needs of both the EVA flight control team and the crews.

Studies on the flight medical aspects of the German Lufthansa non-stop route from Frankfurt to Rio de Janeiro, part 1

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

Wegmann, H. M.; Klein, K. E.; Goeters, K. M.; Samel, A.

1982-01-01

The problem of crew size for regularly scheduled flights between Frankfurt and Rio de Janeiro is discussed. Factors affecting crew performance are examined, comparisons are drawn to regulations of other countries and crew questionnaires and tests are presented.

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 ...

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...

Effects of visual, seat, and platform motion during flight simulator air transport pilot training and evaluation

DOT National Transportation Integrated Search

2009-04-27

Access to affordable and effective flight-simulation training devices (FSTDs) is critical to safely train airline crews in aviating, navigating, communicating, making decisions, and managing flight-deck and crew resources. This paper provides an over...

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 additional head down time to respond to Data Comm messages undesirable during these events. However, most crews also stated that Data Comm messages without an accompanying audio chime and no expectation of an immediate response could be acceptable even during these events.

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.

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.

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.

Quantifying Pilot Contribution to Flight Safety during Drive Shaft Failure

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

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

2017-01-01

Accident statistics cite the flight crew as a causal factor in over 60% of large transport aircraft fatal accidents. 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. The latter statement, while generally accepted, cannot be verified because little or no quantitative data exists on how and how many accidents/incidents are averted by crew actions. A joint NASA/FAA high-fidelity motion-base simulation experiment specifically addressed this void by collecting data to quantify the human (pilot) contribution to safety-of-flight and the methods they use in today's National Airspace System. A human-in-the-loop test was conducted using the FAA's Oklahoma City Flight Simulation Branch Level D-certified B-737-800 simulator to evaluate the pilot's contribution to safety-of-flight during routine air carrier flight operations and in response to aircraft system failures. These data are fundamental to and critical for the design and development of future increasingly autonomous systems that can better support the human in the cockpit. Eighteen U.S. airline 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 to safety of flight, crew complement was used as the experiment independent variable in a between-subjects design. Pilot actions and performance during single pilot and reduced crew operations were measured for comparison against the normal two-crew complement during normal and non-normal situations. This paper details the crew's actions, including decision-making, and responses while dealing with a drive shaft failure - one of 6 non-normal events that were simulated in this experiment.

Cockpit napping

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

Graeber, R. Curtis; Rosekind, Mark R.; Connell, Linda J.; Dinges, David F.

1990-01-01

The results of a NASA-sponsored study examining the effectiveness of a brief, preplanned cockpit rest period to improve pilot alertness and performance in nonaugmented long-haul flight operations are discussed. Four regularly scheduled trans-Pacific flight legs were studied. The shortest flight legs were about 7 h and the longest about 9.5 h, with duty periods averaging about 11 h and layovers about 25 h. Three-person B747 crews were divided randomly into two volunteer pilot groups. These crews were nonaugmented, and therefore no relief pilots were available. The rest group, consisting of four crews, was allowed a 40 min opportunity to rest during the overwater cruise portion of the flight. On a preplanned, rotating basis, individual crew members were allowed to nap. It is concluded that a preplanned cockpit nap is associated with significantly better behavioral performance and higher levels of physiological alertness and that this can be accomplished without disrupting normal flight operations or compromising safety.

14 CFR 23.251 - Vibration and buffeting.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2012 CFR

2012-01-01

... interfere with the satisfactory control of the airplane or cause excessive fatigue to the flight crew. Stall... flight condition, including configuration changes during cruise, severe enough to interfere with the satisfactory control of the airplane or cause excessive fatigue to the flight crew. Stall warning buffeting...

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 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...

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.

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.

14 CFR 460.3 - Applicability.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

2010-01-01

... TRANSPORTATION LICENSING HUMAN SPACE FLIGHT REQUIREMENTS Launch and Reentry with Crew § 460.3 Applicability. (a... have flight crew on board a vehicle or proposes to employ a remote operator of a vehicle with a human... vehicle or who employs a remote operator of a vehicle with a human on board. (3) A crew member...

Quantifying Pilot Contribution to Flight Safety during Hydraulic Systems Failure

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

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

2017-01-01

Accident statistics cite the flight crew as a causal factor in over 60% of large transport aircraft fatal accidents. 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. The latter statement, while generally accepted, cannot be verified because little or no quantitative data exists on how and how many accidents/incidents are averted by crew actions. A joint NASA/FAA high-fidelity motion-base 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 aircraft system failures. To quantify the human's contribution, crew complement (two-crew, reduced crew, single pilot) was used as the independent variable in a between-subjects design. This paper details the crew's actions, including decision-making, and responses while dealing with a hydraulic systems leak - one of 6 total non-normal events that were simulated in this experiment.

A testbed for the evaluation of computer aids for enroute flight path planning

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

Smith, Philip J.; Layton, Chuck; Galdes, Deb; Mccoy, C. E.

1990-01-01

A simulator study of the five airline flight crews engaged in various enroute planning activities has been conducted. Based on a cognitive task analysis of this data, a flight planning workstation has been developed on a Mac II controlling three color monitors. This workstation is being used to study design concepts to support the flight planning activities of dispatchers and flight crews in part-task simulators.

The Impact of Apollo-Era Microbiology on Human Space Flight

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

Elliott, T. F; Castro, V. A.; Bruce, R. J.; Pierson, D. L.

2014-01-01

The microbiota of crewmembers and the spacecraft environment contributes significant risk to crew health during space flight missions. NASA reduces microbial risk with various mitigation methods that originated during the Apollo Program and continued to evolve through subsequent programs: Skylab, Shuttle, and International Space Station (ISS). A quarantine of the crew and lunar surface samples, within the Lunar Receiving Laboratory following return from the Moon, was used to prevent contamination with unknown extraterrestrial organisms. The quarantine durations for the crew and lunar samples were 21 days and 50 days, respectively. A series of infections among Apollo crewmembers resulted in a quarantine before launch to limit exposure to infectious organisms. This Health Stabilization Program isolated the crew for 21 days before flight and was effective in reducing crew illness. After the program developed water recovery hardware for Apollo spacecraft, the 1967 National Academy of Science Space Science Board recommended the monitoring of potable water. NASA implemented acceptability limits of 10 colony forming units (CFU) per mL and the absence of viable E. coli, anaerobes, yeasts, and molds in three separate 150 mL aliquots. Microbiological investigations of the crew and spacecraft environment were conducted during the Apollo program, including the Apollo-Soyuz Test Project and Skylab. Subsequent space programs implemented microbial screening of the crew for pathogens and acceptability limits on spacecraft surfaces and air. Microbiology risk mitigation methods have evolved since the Apollo program. NASA cancelled the quarantine of the crew after return from the lunar surface, reduced the duration of the Health Stabilization Program; and implemented acceptability limits for spacecraft surfaces and air. While microbial risks were not a main focus of the early Mercury and Gemini programs, the extended duration of Apollo flights resulted in the increased scrutiny of impact of the space flight environment on crew health. The lessons learned during that era of space flight continue to impact microbiology risk mitigation in space programs today.

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.

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).

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-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.

PTM Along Track Algorithm to Maintain Spacing During Same Direction Pair-Wise Trajectory Management Operations

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

Carreno, Victor A.

2015-01-01

Pair-wise Trajectory Management (PTM) is a cockpit based delegated responsibility separation standard. When an air traffic service provider gives a PTM clearance to an aircraft and the flight crew accepts the clearance, the flight crew will maintain spacing and separation from a designated aircraft. A PTM along track algorithm will receive state information from the designated aircraft and from the own ship to produce speed guidance for the flight crew to maintain spacing and separation

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...

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...

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...

77 FR 40832 - Airworthiness Directives; The Boeing Company Airplanes

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2012-07-11

... ability of the flight crew to read primary displays for airplane attitude, altitude, or airspeed, and... displays for airplane attitude, altitude, or airspeed, and consequently reduce the ability of the flight...) malfunctions, which could affect the ability of the flight crew to read primary displays for airplane attitude...

KSC01pp0174

NASA Image and Video Library

2001-01-15

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

KSC01pp0173

NASA Image and Video Library

2001-01-15

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

Skin Temperatures During Unaided Egress: Unsuited and While Wearing the NASA Launch and Entry or Advanced Crew Escape Suits

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

Woodruff, Kristin K.; Lee, Stuart M. C.; Greenisen, Michael C.; Schneider, Suzanne M.

2000-01-01

The two flight suits currently worn by crew members during Shuttle launch and landing, the Launch and Entry Suit (LES) and the Advanced Crew Escape Suit (ACES), are designed to protect crew members in the case of emergency. Although the Liquid Cooling Garment (LCG) worn under the flight suits was designed to counteract the heat storage of the suits, the suits may increase thermal stress and limit the astronaut's egress capabilities. The purpose of this study was to assess the thermal loads experienced by crew members during a simulated emergency egress before and after spaceflight. Comparisons of skin temperatures were made between the preflight unsuited and suited conditions. between the pre- and postflight suited conditions, and between the two flight suits.

A Flight Deck Decision Support Tool for Autonomous Airborne Operations

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

Ballin, Mark G.; Sharma, Vivek; Vivona, Robert A.; Johnson, Edward J.; Ramiscal, Ermin

2002-01-01

NASA is developing a flight deck decision support tool to support research into autonomous operations in a future distributed air/ground traffic management environment. This interactive real-time decision aid, referred to as the Autonomous Operations Planner (AOP), will enable the flight crew to plan autonomously in the presence of dense traffic and complex flight management constraints. In assisting the flight crew, the AOP accounts for traffic flow management and airspace constraints, schedule requirements, weather hazards, aircraft operational limits, and crew or airline flight-planning goals. This paper describes the AOP and presents an overview of functional and implementation design considerations required for its development. Required AOP functionality is described, its application in autonomous operations research is discussed, and a prototype software architecture for the AOP is presented.

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.

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.

International Space Station (ISS)

NASA Image and Video Library

2001-01-01

This is the STS-102 mission crew insignia. The central image on the crew patch depicts the International Space Station (ISS) in the build configuration that it had 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 was 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 barner. The three ribbons swirling up to and around the station signify the rotation of these ISS crew members. The number 2 is for the Expedition 2 crew who flew up to the station, and the number 1 is for the Expedition 1 crew who then returned 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 Multipurpose Logistics Module, Leonardo, that flew for the first time on this flight. The flags of the countries that were 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.

Spacelab 3 mission

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

Dalton, Bonnie P.

1990-01-01

Spacelab-3 (SL-3) was the first microgravity mission of extended duration involving crew interaction with animal experiments. This interaction involved sharing the Spacelab environmental system, changing animal food, and changing animal waste trays by the crew. Extensive microbial testing was conducted on the animal specimens and crew and on their ground and flight facilities during all phases of the mission to determine the potential for cross contamination. Macroparticulate sampling was attempted but was unsuccessful due to the unforseen particulate contamination occurring during the flight. Particulate debris of varying size (250 micron to several inches) and composition was recovered post flight from the Spacelab floor, end cones, overhead areas, avionics fan filter, cabin fan filters, tunnel adaptor, and from the crew module. These data are discussed along with solutions, which were implemented, for particulate and microbial containment for future flight facilities.

Experiment M-6: Bone Demineralization

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

Mack, Pauline B.; Vose, George; Vogt, Fred B.; LaChance, Paul A.

1966-01-01

Densitometric evaluations of serial radiographs of "normal" subjects have often shown rather frequent changes in bone mass within relatively short periods of time. For this reason it was decided to make two pre-flight and two post flight radiographs of the Gemini V backup crew. In comparing the changes observed preflight and post flight as the conventional os calcis scanning site between the two crews, it was found that no changes greater than 4 percent were evident in either member of the backup crew. In comparing the changes observed preflight and postflight as the conventional o calcis scanning site between the two crews, it was found that no changes greater than 4 percent were evident in either member of the backup crew. This is in contract to the 15.1 and 8.9 percent losses observed in the prime crew. It has long been known that the skeletal system experiences a general loss of mineral under immobilization or extended bed rest. However, in both Gemini IV and Gemini V studies, bone mass losses were greater in both the os calcis and phalanx than were shown by the TWU bed-rest subjects during the same period of time. Although the bone mass losses in the 8-day Gemini V flight were generally greater than in the 4-day Gemini IV flight, the information to date is still insufficient to conclude that the losses tend to progress linearly with time, or whether a form of physiological adaptation may occur in longer space flights.

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.

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.

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.

Disrupting Aviation: An Exploratory Study of the Opportunities and Risks of Tablet Computers in Commercial Flight Operations

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Boyne, Matthew

2013-01-01

Commercial flight operational safety has dramatically improved in the last 30 years because of enhanced crew coordination, communication, leadership and team development. Technology insertion into cockpit operations, however, has been shown to create crew distractions, resulting in flight safety risks, limited use given policy limitations and…

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...

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.

Analysis of communication in the standard versus automated aircraft

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

Veinott, Elizabeth S.; Irwin, Cheryl M.

1993-01-01

Past research has shown crew communication patterns to be associated with overall crew performance, recent flight experience together, low-and high-error crew performance and personality variables. However, differences in communication patterns as a function of aircraft type and level of aircraft automation have not been fully addressed. Crew communications from ten MD-88 and twelve DC-9 crews were obtained during a full-mission simulation. In addition to large differences in overall amount of communication during the normal and abnormal phases of flight (DC-9 crews generating less speech than MD-88 crews), differences in specific speech categories were also found. Log-linear analyses also generated speaker-response patterns related to each aircraft type, although in future analyses these patterns will need to account for variations due to crew performance.

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.

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-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

STS-70 Flight: Day 5

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

1995-01-01

The fifth day of the STS-70 Space Shuttle Discovery mission is contained on this video. The crew continues working on experiments, such as the Space Tissue Loss Analysis and the Bioreactor Development System. CNN reporter, John Holliman, interviewed the flight crew and the crew also answered questions posed by Internet users while on NASA's Shuttle Web. There are brief views of Earth's surface included.

78 FR 46358 - Extension of Agency Information Collection Activity Under OMB Review: Security Programs for...

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2013-07-31

.... Specifically, TSA requires foreign air carriers to submit the following information: (1) A master crew list of all flight and cabin crew members flying to and from the United States; (2) the flight crew list on a..., 49 CFR part 1546. TSA uses the information collected to determine compliance with 49 CFR part 1546...

Strategies for the study of flightcrew behavior

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

Helmreich, Robert L.

1991-01-01

The performance of any flightcrew at any given time is determined by multiple factors ranging from characteristics of individual crewmembers to the regulations governing flight operations. Attention is given to microcoding of communications, survey data on crewmember attitudes as indicators of culture and crew resource management (CRM) training effects, and systematic observation of crew behavior. Consideration is given to advanced CRM training of evaluators, analyses of crew behavior by aircraft type and characteristics, and survey data on crew reactions to line oriented flight training.

STS-26 crewmembers pose for onboard portrait on middeck with 51L mementos

NASA Image and Video Library

1988-10-03

STS026-08-007 (29 Sept-3 Oct 1988) --- An in-space crew portrait on the middeck of Discovery. Left to right are Astronauts David C. Hilmers, George D. Nelson, Frederick H. (Rick) Hauck, John M. (Mike) Lounge and Richard O. Covey (front). The crew portrait for STS 51-L, its flight insignia and the STS 26 flight insignia are at top edge of the frame. This photo was shown by the STS 26 astronaut crew during its Oct. 11, l988 post-flight press conference.

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.

KSC-2013-3391

NASA Image and Video Library

2013-08-22

EDWARDS AFB, Calif. - ED13-0300-002 – An Erickson Air-Crane helicopter lifts Sierra Nevada Corporation's Dream Chaser flight vehicle during a captive-carry flight test. The test was a rehearsal for free flights at Edwards later this year. The spacecraft is under development in partnership with NASA's Commercial Crew Program. Although the spacecraft is designed for crew members, the vehicle will not have anyone onboard during the free flights. Photo credit: NASA/Carla Thomas

KSC-2013-3390

NASA Image and Video Library

2013-08-22

EDWARDS AFB, Calif. - ED13-0300-001 – An Erickson Air-Crane helicopter lifts Sierra Nevada Corporation's Dream Chaser flight vehicle during a captive-carry flight test. The test was a rehearsal for free flights at Edwards later this year. The spacecraft is under development in partnership with NASA's Commercial Crew Program. Although the spacecraft is designed for crew members, the vehicle will not have anyone onboard during the free flights. Photo credit: NASA/Carla Thomas

KSC-2013-3392

NASA Image and Video Library

2013-08-22

EDWARDS AFB, Calif. - ED13-0300-003 – An Erickson Air-Crane helicopter lifts Sierra Nevada Corporation's Dream Chaser flight vehicle during a captive-carry flight test. The test was a rehearsal for free flights at Edwards later this year. The spacecraft is under development in partnership with NASA's Commercial Crew Program. Although the spacecraft is designed for crew members, the vehicle will not have anyone onboard during the free flights. Photo credit: NASA/Carla Thomas

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.

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.

Reactions of Air Transport Flight Crews to Displays of Weather During Simulated Flight

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

Bliss, James P.; Fallon, Corey; Bustamante, Ernesto; Bailey, William R., III; Anderson, Brittany

2005-01-01

Display of information in the cockpit has long been a challenge for aircraft designers. Given the limited space in which to present information, designers have had to be extremely selective about the types and amount of flight related information to present to pilots. The general goal of cockpit display design and implementation is to ensure that displays present information that is timely, useful, and helpful. This suggests that displays should facilitate the management of perceived workload, and should allow maximal situation awareness. The formatting of current and projected weather displays represents a unique challenge. As technologies have been developed to increase the variety and capabilities of weather information available to flight crews, factors such as conflicting weather representations and increased decision importance have increased the likelihood for errors. However, if formatted optimally, it is possible that next generation weather displays could allow for clearer indications of weather trends such as developing or decaying weather patterns. Important issues to address include the integration of weather information sources, flight crew trust of displayed weather information, and the teamed reactivity of flight crews to displays of weather. Past studies of weather display reactivity and formatting have not adequately addressed these issues; in part because experimental stimuli have not approximated the complexity of modern weather displays, and in part because they have not used realistic experimental tasks or participants. The goal of the research reported here was to investigate the influence of onboard and NEXRAD agreement, range to the simulated potential weather event, and the pilot flying on flight crew deviation decisions, perceived workload, and perceived situation awareness. Fifteen pilot-copilot teams were required to fly a simulated route while reacting to weather events presented in two graphical formats on a separate visual display. Measures of flight crew reactions included performance-based measures such as deviation decision accuracy, and judgment-based measures such as perceived decision confidence, workload, situation awareness, and display trust. Results demonstrated that pilots adopted a conservative reaction strategy, often choosing to deviate from weather rather than ride through it. When onboard and NEXRAD displays did not agree, flight crews reacted in a complex manner, trusting the onboard system more but using the NEXRAD system to augment their situation awareness. Distance to weather reduced situation awareness and heightened workload levels. Overall, flight crews tended to adopt a participative leadership style marked by open communication. These results suggest that future weather displays should exploit the existing benefits of NEXRAD presentation for situation awareness while retaining the display structure and logic inherent in the onboard system.

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.

STS-113 Mission Highlights Resource Tape Flight Days 7-11. Tape: 3 of 4

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

2003-01-01

This video, part 3 of 4, shows the activities of the crew of Space Shuttle Envdeavour and the Expedition 5 and 6 crews of the International Space Station (ISS) during flight days 7 through 11 of STS-113. Endeavour's crew consists of Commander Jim Wetherbee, Pilot Paul Lockhart, and Mission Specialists Michael Lopez-Alegria and John Herrington. Footage of flight day 7 includes a change of command ceremony on board the ISS, and Endeavour dumping supply water through a nozzle. On flight day 8 the Space Station Mobile Transporter jams while traveling on the P1 truss of the ISS, and Herrington attempts to free it as part of a lengthy extravehicular activity (EVA) with Lopez-Alegria. Flight day 9 is the last full day the three crews spend together. Expedition 5 NASA ISS Science Officer Peggy Whitsun troubleshoots the Microgravity Glovebox on board the ISS with her successor Don Pettit. The undocking of Endeavour and the ISS is the main activity of flight day 10. Endeavour also deploys a pair of experimental tethered microsatellites for the Department of Defense. The footage from flight day 11 shows the Expedition 5 crew exercising, laying in recumbant seats to help them adjust to the gravity on Earth, and sleeping. The video includes numerous views of the earth, some with the ISS and Endeavour in the foreground. There are close-ups of Italy, Spain and Portugal, Tierra del Fuego, and Baja California, and a night view of Chicago and the Great Lakes.

Status of the National Space Transportation System

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

Abrahamson, J. A.

1984-01-01

The National Space Transportation System is a national resources serving the government, Department of Defense and commercial needs of the USA and others. Four orbital flight tests were completed July 4, 1982, and the first Operational Flight (STS-5) which placed two commercial communications into orbit was conducted November 11, 1982. February 1983 marked the first flight of the newest orbiter, Challenger. Planned firsts in 1983 include: use of higher performance main engines and solid rocket boosters, around-the-clock crew operations, a night landing, extra-vehicular activity, a dedicated DOD mission, and the first flight of a woman crew member. By the end of 1983, five commercial payloads and two tracking and data relay satellites should be deployed and thirty-seven crew members should have made flights aboard the space shuttle.

Cockpit data management

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

Groce, J. L.; Boucek, G. P.

1988-01-01

This study is a continuation of an FAA effort to alleviate the growing problems of assimilating and managing the flow of data and flight related information in the air transport flight deck. The nature and extent of known pilot interface problems arising from new NAS data management programs were determined by a comparative timeline analysis of crew tasking requirements. A baseline of crew tasking requirements was established for conventional and advanced flight decks operating in the current NAS environment and then compared to the requirements for operation in a future NAS environment emphasizing Mode-S data link and TCAS. Results showed that a CDU-based pilot interface for Mode-S data link substantially increased crew visual activity as compared to the baseline. It was concluded that alternative means of crew interface should be available during high visual workload phases of flight. Results for TCAS implementation showed substantial visual and motor tasking increases, and that there was little available time between crew tasks during a TCAS encounter. It was concluded that additional research should be undertaken to address issues of ATC coordination and the relative benefit of high workload TCAS features.

Medical Training Issues and Skill Mix for Exploration Missions

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

Janney, R. P.; Armstrong, C. W.; Stepaniak, P. C.; Billica, Roger (Technical Monitor)

2000-01-01

The approach for treating in-flight medical events during exploration-class missions must reflect the need for an autonomous crew, and cannot be compared to current space flight therapeutic protocols. An exploration mission exposes the crew to periods of galactic cosmic radiation, isolation, confinement, and microgravity deconditioning far exceeding the low-Earth orbital missions performed to date. In addition, exploration crews will not be able to return to Earth at the onset of a medical event and will need to control the situation in-flight. Medical consultations with Earth-based physicians will be delayed as much as 40 minutes, dictating the need for a highly-trained medical team on board. This presentation will address the mix of crew medical skills and the training required for crew health care providers for missions beyond low-Earth orbit. Both low- and high-risk options for medical skill mix and preflight training will be compared.

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., 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 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

APPROACH & LANDING TEST (ALT) - SHUTTLE PATCH

NASA Image and Video Library

1976-11-01

S76-30340 (1976) --- This circular, red, white and blue emblem has been chosen as the official insignia for the Space Shuttle Approach and Landing Test (ALT) flights. A picture of the Orbiter 101 "Enterprise" is superimposed over a red triangle, which in turn is superimposed over a large inner circle of dark blue. The surnames of the members of the two ALT crews are in white in the field of blue. The four crew men are astronauts Fred W. Haise Jr., commander of the first crew; Joe H. Engle, commander of the second crew; and Richard H. Truly, pilot of the second crew. ALT is a series of flights with a modified Boeing 747 Shuttle Carrier Aircraft (SCA) as a ferry aircraft and airborne launch platform for the 67,300 kilogram (75-ton) "Enterprise". The Shuttle Orbiter atmospheric testing is in preparation for the first Earth-orbital flights scheduled in 1979.

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

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.

The Use of the Integrated Medical Model for Forecasting and Mitigating Medical Risks for a Near-Earth Asteroid Mission

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

Kerstman, Eric; Saile, Lynn; Freire de Carvalho, Mary; Myers, Jerry; Walton, Marlei; Butler, Douglas; Lopez, Vilma

2011-01-01

Introduction The Integrated Medical Model (IMM) is a decision support tool that is useful to space flight mission managers and medical system designers in assessing risks and optimizing medical systems. The IMM employs an evidence-based, probabilistic risk assessment (PRA) approach within the operational constraints of space flight. Methods Stochastic computational methods are used to forecast probability distributions of medical events, crew health metrics, medical resource utilization, and probability estimates of medical evacuation and loss of crew life. The IMM can also optimize medical kits within the constraints of mass and volume for specified missions. The IMM was used to forecast medical evacuation and loss of crew life probabilities, as well as crew health metrics for a near-earth asteroid (NEA) mission. An optimized medical kit for this mission was proposed based on the IMM simulation. Discussion The IMM can provide information to the space program regarding medical risks, including crew medical impairment, medical evacuation and loss of crew life. This information is valuable to mission managers and the space medicine community in assessing risk and developing mitigation strategies. Exploration missions such as NEA missions will have significant mass and volume constraints applied to the medical system. Appropriate allocation of medical resources will be critical to mission success. The IMM capability of optimizing medical systems based on specific crew and mission profiles will be advantageous to medical system designers. Conclusion The IMM is a decision support tool that can provide estimates of the impact of medical events on human space flight missions, such as crew impairment, evacuation, and loss of crew life. It can be used to support the development of mitigation strategies and to propose optimized medical systems for specified space flight missions. Learning Objectives The audience will learn how an evidence-based decision support tool can be used to help assess risk, develop mitigation strategies, and optimize medical systems for exploration space flight missions.

STS-105 Expedition 2 Return

NASA Image and Video Library

2001-08-23

JSC2001-E-25809 (23 August 2001) --- The STS-105 and Expedition Two crews meet their families and friends during the crew return ceremonies at Ellington Field. Among the crowd are Johnson Space Center's (JSC) Acting Director Roy Estess (back left), astronaut Marsha S. Ivins (third from the left), cosmonaut Yury V. Usachev (fourth from the left), Expedition Two mission commander, Susan J. Helms (fifth from the left), Expedition Two flight engineer, James S. Voss (third from the right), Expedition Two flight engineer, and cosmonaut Vasili V. Tsibliyev. The STS-105 crew delivered the Expedition Three crew and supplies to the International Space Station (ISS) and brought the Expedition Two crew back to Earth.

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.

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.

Orion Launch Abort System Performance on Exploration Flight Test 1

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

McCauley, R.; Davidson, J.; Gonzalez, Guillermo

2015-01-01

This paper will present an overview of the flight test objectives and performance of the Orion Launch Abort System during Exploration Flight Test-1. Exploration Flight Test-1, the first flight test of the Orion spacecraft, was managed and led by the Orion prime contractor, Lockheed Martin, and launched atop a United Launch Alliance Delta IV Heavy rocket. This flight test was a two-orbit, high-apogee, high-energy entry, low-inclination test mission used to validate and test systems critical to crew safety. This test included the first flight test of the Launch Abort System preforming Orion nominal flight mission critical objectives. NASA is currently designing and testing the Orion Multi-Purpose Crew Vehicle (MPCV). Orion will serve as NASA's new exploration vehicle to carry astronauts to deep space destinations and safely return them to earth. The Orion spacecraft is composed of four main elements: the Launch Abort System, the Crew Module, the Service Module, and the Spacecraft Adapter (Fig. 1). The Launch Abort System (LAS) provides two functions; during nominal launches, the LAS provides protection for the Crew Module from atmospheric loads and heating during first stage flight and during emergencies provides a reliable abort capability for aborts that occur within the atmosphere. The Orion Launch Abort System (LAS) consists of an Abort Motor to provide the abort separation from the Launch Vehicle, an Attitude Control Motor to provide attitude and rate control, and a Jettison Motor for crew module to LAS separation (Fig. 2). The jettison motor is used during a nominal launch to separate the LAS from the Launch Vehicle (LV) early in the flight of the second stage when it is no longer needed for aborts and at the end of an LAS abort sequence to enable deployment of the crew module's Landing Recovery System. The LAS also provides a Boost Protective Cover fairing that shields the crew module from debris and the aero-thermal environment during ascent. Although the Orion Program has tested a number of the critical systems of the Orion spacecraft on the ground, the launch environment cannot be replicated completely on Earth. A number of flight tests have been conducted and are planned to demonstrate the performance and enable certification of the Orion Spacecraft. Exploration Flight Test 1, the first flight test of the Orion spacecraft, was successfully flown on December 5, 2014 from Cape Canaveral Air Force Station's Space Launch Complex 37. Orion's first flight was a two-orbit, high-apogee, high-energy entry, low-inclination test mission used to validate and test systems critical to crew safety, such as heat shield performance, separation events, avionics and software performance, attitude control and guidance, parachute deployment and recovery operations. One of the key separation events tested during this flight was the nominal jettison of the LAS. Data from this flight will be used to verify the function of the jettison motor to separate the Launch Abort System from the crew module so it can continue on with the mission. The LAS nominal jettison event on Exploration Flight Test 1 occurred at six minutes and twenty seconds after liftoff (See Fig. 3). The abort motor and attitude control motors were inert for Exploration Flight Test 1, since the mission did not require abort capabilities. A suite of developmental flight instrumentation was included on the flight test to provide data on spacecraft subsystems and separation events. This paper will focus on the flight test objectives and performance of the LAS during ascent and nominal jettison. Selected LAS subsystem flight test data will be presented and discussed in the paper. Exploration Flight Test -1 will provide critical data that will enable engineering to improve Orion's design and reduce risk for the astronauts it will protect as NASA continues to move forward on its human journey to Mars. The lessons learned from Exploration Flight Test 1 and the other Flight Test Vehicles will certainly contribute to the vehicle architecture of a human-rated space launch vehicle.

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-26 Mission Control Center (MCC) activity at JSC

NASA Image and Video Library

1988-10-02

STS26-S-103 (2 October 1988) --- A wide-angle view of flight controllers in the Johnson Space Center's mission control center as they listen to a presentation by the five members of the STS-26 crew on the fourth day of Discovery's orbital mission. Flight Director James M. (Milt) Heflin (standing at center), astronaut G. David Low (standing at right), a spacecraft communicator, and other controllers view a television image of the crew on a screen in the front of the flight control room as each member relates some inner feelings while paying tribute to the Challenger crew.

Space Station flight telerobotic servicer functional requirements development

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

Oberright, John; Mccain, Harry; Whitman, Ruth I.

1987-01-01

The Space Station flight telerobotic servicer (FTS), a flight robotic system for use on the first Space Station launch, is described. The objectives of the FTS program include: (1) the provision of an alternative crew EVA by supporting the crew in assembly, maintenance, and servicing activities, and (2) the improvement of crew safety by performing hazardous tasks such as spacecraft refueling or thermal and power system maintenance. The NASA/NBS Standard Reference Model provides the generic, hierarchical, structured functional control definition for the system. It is capable of accommodating additional degrees of machine intelligence in the future.

jsc2012e099557

NASA Image and Video Library

2012-07-04

Outside their Cosmonaut Hotel crew quarters in Baikonur, Kazakhstan, Expedition 32 prime crew member Flight Engineer Sunita Williams of NASA (left) and backup Flight Engineer Tom Marshburn of NASA (right) raise the Stars and Stripes on the 4th of July, 2012 in a traditional flag-raising ceremony that was part of the pre-launch activities leading up to the launch of the next crew to the International Space Station. Williams, Soyuz Commander Yuri Malenchenko and Flight Engineer Aki Hoshide of the Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency will launch to the station July 15 from the Baikonur Cosmodrome in their Soyuz TMA-05M spacecraft. NASA/Victor Zelentsov

The Soyuz Taxi crew adhere their logo to a wall in Node 1 during Expedition Three

NASA Image and Video Library

2001-10-23

ISS003-E-7056 (23-31 October 2001) --- The Soyuz Taxi crewmembers, Commander Victor Afanasyev (left), French Flight Engineer Claudie Haignere and Flight Engineer Konstantin Kozeev, add their crew patch to the growing collection, in the Unity node, of insignias representing crews who have worked on the International Space Station (ISS). Afanasyev and Kozeev represent Rosaviakosmos, and Haignere represents ESA, carrying out a flight program for CNES, the French Space Agency, under a commercial contract with the Russian Aviation and Space Agency. This image was taken with a digital still camera.

Advanced Caution and Warning System

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

Spirkovska, Lilly; Robinson, Peter I.; Liolios, Sotirios; Lee, Charles; Ossenfort, John P.

2013-01-01

The current focus of ACAWS is on the needs of the flight controllers. The onboard crew in low-Earth orbit has some of those same needs. Moreover, for future deep-space missions, the crew will need to accomplish many tasks autonomously due to communication time delays. Although we are focusing on flight controller needs, ACAWS technologies can be reused for on-board application, perhaps with a different level of detail and different display formats or interaction methods. We expect that providing similar tools to the flight controllers and the crew could enable more effective and efficient collaboration as well as heightened situational awareness.

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.

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.

The Integrated Medical Model: A Risk Assessment and Decision Support Tool for Human Space Flight Missions

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

Kerstman, Eric L.; Minard, Charles; FreiredeCarvalho, Mary H.; Walton, Marlei E.; Myers, Jerry G., Jr.; Saile, Lynn G.; Lopez, Vilma; Butler, Douglas J.; Johnson-Throop, Kathy A.

2011-01-01

This slide presentation reviews the Integrated Medical Model (IMM) and its use as a risk assessment and decision support tool for human space flight missions. The IMM is an integrated, quantified, evidence-based decision support tool useful to NASA crew health and mission planners. It is intended to assist in optimizing crew health, safety and mission success within the constraints of the space flight environment for in-flight operations. It uses ISS data to assist in planning for the Exploration Program and it is not intended to assist in post flight research. The IMM was used to update Probability Risk Assessment (PRA) for the purpose of updating forecasts for the conditions requiring evacuation (EVAC) or Loss of Crew Life (LOC) for the ISS. The IMM validation approach includes comparison with actual events and involves both qualitative and quantitaive approaches. The results of these comparisons are reviewed. Another use of the IMM is to optimize the medical kits taking into consideration the specific mission and the crew profile. An example of the use of the IMM to optimize the medical kits is reviewed.

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.

Communication variations and aircrew performance

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

Kanki, Barbara G.; Folk, Valerie G.; Irwin, Cheryl M.

1991-01-01

The relationship between communication variations and aircrew performance (high-error vs low-error performances) was investigated by analyzing the coded verbal transcripts derived from the videotape records of 18 two-person air transport crews who participated in a high-fidelity, full-mission flight simulation. The flight scenario included a task which involved abnormal operations and required the coordinated efforts of all crew members. It was found that the best-performing crews were characterized by nearly identical patterns of communication, whereas the midrange and poorer performing crews showed a great deal of heterogeneity in their speech patterns. Although some specific speech sequences can be interpreted as being more or less facilitative to the crew-coordination process, predictability appears to be the key ingredient for enhancing crew performance. Crews communicating in highly standard (hence predictable) ways were better able to coordinate their task, whereas crews characterized by multiple, nonstandard communication profiles were less effective in their performance.

A Flight Deck Perspective of Self-Separation

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

Lozito, Sandra; Rosekind, Mark (Technical Monitor)

1997-01-01

I will be participating on a Free Flight Human Factors Panel at the Ninth International Symposium on Aviation Psychology in Columbus, Ohio. My representation is related to the work that our group has conducted on flight deck issues associate with free flight. Our group completed a full-mission simulation study investigating procedural issues associated with airborne self-separation. Ten crews flew eight scenarios each in the B747-400 simulator at Ames. Each scenario had a representation of different conflict geometries with intruder aircraft. New alerting logic was created and integrated into the simulator to enable self-separation. In addition, new display features were created to help provide for enhanced information to the flight crew about relevant aircraft, The participants were asked to coordinate maneuvers for self-separation with the intruder aircraft. Data analyses for the many of the crew procedures have been completed.

X-38 sails to a landing at NASA Dryden Flight Research Center July 10, 2001

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

2001-01-01

The seventh free flight of an X-38 prototype for an emergency space station crew return vehicle culminated in a graceful glide to landing under the world's largest parafoil. The mission began when the X-38 was released from NASA's B-52 mother ship over Edwards Air Force Base, California, where NASA Dryden Flight Research Center is located. The July 10, 2001 flight helped researchers evaluate software and deployment of the X-38's drogue parachute and subsequent parafoil. NASA intends to create a space-worthy Crew Return Vehicle (CRV) to be docked to the International Space Station as a 'lifeboat' to enable a full seven-person station crew to evacuate in an emergency.

X-38 sails to a landing at NASA Dryden Flight Research Center July 10, 2001

NASA Image and Video Library

2001-07-10

The seventh free flight of an X-38 prototype for an emergency space station crew return vehicle culminated in a graceful glide to landing under the world's largest parafoil. The mission began when the X-38 was released from NASA's B-52 mother ship over Edwards Air Force Base, California, where NASA Dryden Flight Research Center is located. The July 10, 2001 flight helped researchers evaluate software and deployment of the X-38's drogue parachute and subsequent parafoil. NASA intends to create a space-worthy Crew Return Vehicle (CRV) to be docked to the International Space Station as a "lifeboat" to enable a full seven-person station crew to evacuate in an emergency.

HH-65A Dolphin digital integrated avionics

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

Huntoon, R. B.

1984-01-01

Communication, navigation, flight control, and search sensor management are avionics functions which constitute every Search and Rescue (SAR) operation. Routine cockpit duties monopolize crew attention during SAR operations and thus impair crew effectiveness. The United States Coast Guard challenged industry to build an avionics system that automates routine tasks and frees the crew to focus on the mission tasks. The HH-64A SAR avionics systems of communication, navigation, search sensors, and flight control have existed independently. On the SRR helicopter, the flight management system (FMS) was introduced. H coordinates or integrates these functions. The pilot interacts with the FMS rather than the individual subsystems, using simple, straightforward procedures to address distinct mission tasks and the flight management system, in turn, orchestrates integrated system response.

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...

Evaluating the effectiveness of cockpit resource management training

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

Helmreich, Robert L.

1989-01-01

The concept of providing flight crews with intensive training in crew coordination and interpersonal skills (cockpit resource management training - CRM) is outlined with emphasis on full mission simulator training (line-oriented flight training - LOFT). Findings from several airlines that have instituted CRM and LOFT are summarized. Four types of criteria used for evaluating CRM programs: observer ratings of crew behavior, measures of attitudes regarding cockpit management, self-reports by participants on the value of the training, and case studies of CRM-related incidents and accidents are covered. Attention is focused on ratings of the performance of crews during line flights and during simulator sessions conducted as a part of LOFT. A boomerang effect - the emergence of a subgroup that has changed the attitudes in the opposite direction from that desired is emphasized.

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

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.

Guidance system operations plan for manned CM earth orbital missions using program SKYLARK 1. Section 4: Operational modes

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

Dunbar, J. C.

1972-01-01

The operational modes for the guidance system operations plan for Program SKYLARK 1 are presented. The procedures control the guidance and navigation system interfaces with the flight crew and the mission control center. The guidance operational concept is designed to comprise a set of manually initiated programs and functions which may be arranged by the flight crew to implement a large class of flight plans. This concept will permit both a late flight plan definition and a capability for real time flight plan changes.

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

An Assessment of Reduced Crew and Single Pilot Operations in Commercial Transport Aircraft Operations

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

Bailey, Randall E.; Kramer, Lynda J.; Kennedy, Kellie D.; Stephens, Chad L.; Etherington, Timothy J.

2017-01-01

Future reduced crew operations or even single pilot operations for commercial airline and on-demand mobility applications are an active area of research. These changes would reduce the human element and thus, threaten the precept that "a well-trained and well-qualified pilot is the critical center point of aircraft systems safety and an integral safety component of the entire commercial aviation system." NASA recently completed a pilot-in-the-loop high fidelity motion simulation study in partnership with the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) attempting to quantify the pilot's contribution to flight safety during normal flight and in response to aircraft system failures. Crew complement was used as the experiment independent variable in a between-subjects design. These data show significant increases in workload for single pilot operations, compared to two-crew, with subjective assessments of safety and performance being significantly degraded as well. Nonetheless, in all cases, the pilots were able to overcome the failure mode effects in all crew configurations. These data reflect current-day flight deck equipage and help identify the technologies that may improve two-crew operations and/or possibly enable future reduced crew and/or single pilot operations.

Operational radiological support for the US manned space program

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

Golightly, Michael J.; Hardy, Alva C.; Atwell, William; Weyland, Mark D.; Kern, John; Cash, Bernard L.

1993-01-01

Radiological support for the manned space program is provided by the Space Radiation Analysis Group at NASA/JSC. This support ensures crew safety through mission design analysis, real-time space environment monitoring, and crew exposure measurements. Preflight crew exposure calculations using mission design information are used to ensure that crew exposures will remain within established limits. During missions, space environment conditions are continuously monitored from within the Mission Control Center. In the event of a radiation environment enhancement, the impact to crew exposure is assessed and recommendations are provided to flight management. Radiation dosimeters are placed throughout the spacecraft and provided to each crewmember. During a radiation contingency, the crew could be requested to provide dosimeter readings. This information would be used for projecting crew dose enhancements. New instrumentation and computer technology are being developed to improve the support. Improved instruments include tissue equivalent proportional counter (TEPC)-based dosimeters and charged particle telescopes. Data from these instruments will be telemetered and will provide flight controllers with unprecedented information regarding the radiation environment in and around the spacecraft. New software is being acquired and developed to provide 'smart' space environmental data displays for use by flight controllers.

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 Visual Flight Rules (VFR) right of way rules when determining who should maneuver in a conflict situation; therefore, the scenarios were designed to test different applications of those recommendations, Data analyses include an evaluation of crew procedures and communication. The application of the VFR right-of-way rules are being explored. Timing variables are being examined to determine potential efficiency differences between scenarios and conflict types. Proximity of aircraft will be assessed as one indication of the operational safety. The intent of these evaluations is to help provide definitions and guidelines of negotiation procedures in a self-separation environment assuming automated data link technology (ADS-B). Also, definitions of likely flight crew maneuvers and application to current VFR right-of-way rules may be obtained, along with guidelines for negotiation procedures between flight crews.

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).

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.

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)

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...

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.

STS-111 Flight Day 2 Highlights

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

2002-01-01

On Flight Day 2 of STS-111, the crew of Endeavour (Kenneth Cockrell, Commander; Paul Lockhart, Pilot; Franklin Chang-Diaz, Mission Specialist; Philippe Perrin, Mission Specialist) and the Expedition 5 crew (Valery Korzun, Commander; Peggy Whitson, Flight Engineer; Sergei Treschev, Flight Engineer), having successfully entered orbit around the Earth, begin to maneuver towards the International Space Station (ISS), where the Expedition 5 crew will replace the Expedition 4 crew. Live video is shown of the Earth from several vantage points aboard the Shuttle. The center-line camera, which will allow Shuttle pilots to align the docking apparatus with that on the ISS, provides footage of the Earth. Chang-Diaz participates in an interview, in Spanish, conducted from the ground via radio communications, with Cockrell also appearing. Footage of the Earth includes: Daytime video of the Eastern United States with some cloud cover as Endeavour passes over the Florida panhandle, Georgia, and the Carolinas; Daytime video of Lake Michigan unobscured by cloud cover; Nighttime low-light camera video of Madrid, Spain.

Medical care delivery in the US space program

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

Stewart, Donald F.

1991-01-01

The stated goal of this meeting is to examine the use of telemedicine in disaster management, public health, and remote health care. NASA has a vested interest in providing health care to crews in remote environments. NASA has unique requirements for telemedicine support, in that our flight crews conduct their job in the most remote of all work environments. Compounding the degree of remoteness are other environmental concerns, including confinement, lack of atmosphere, spaceflight physiological deconditioning, and radiation exposure, to name a few. In-flight medical care is a key component in the overall support for missions, which also includes extensive medical screening during selection, preventive medical programs for astronauts, and in-flight medical monitoring and consultation. This latter element constitutes the telemedicine aspect of crew health care. The level of in-flight resources dedicated to medical care is determined by the perceived risk of a given mission, which in turn is related to mission duration, planned crew activities, and length of time required for return to definitive medical care facilities.

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.

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 optimizing in-flight medical systems based on crew and mission parameters. This presentation will illustrate how to apply quantitative risk assessment methods to optimize the mass and volume of space-based medical systems for a space flight mission given the level of crew health and mission risk.

Functional categories for future flight deck designs

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

Abbott, Terence S.

1993-01-01

With the addition of each new system on the flight deck, the danger of increasing overall operator workload while reducing crew understanding of critical mission information exists. The introduction of more powerful onboard computers, larger databases, and the increased use of electronic display media may lead to a situation of flight deck 'sophistication' at the expense of losses in flight crew capabilities and situational awareness. To counter this potentially negative impact of new technology, research activities are underway to reassess the flight deck design process. The fundamental premise of these activities is that a human-centered, systems-oriented approach to the development of advanced civil aircraft flight decks will be required for future designs to remain ergonomically sound and economically competitive. One of the initial steps in an integrated flight deck process is to define the primary flight deck functions needed to support the mission goals of the vehicle. This would allow the design team to evaluate candidate concepts in relation to their effectiveness in meeting the functional requirements. In addition, this would provide a framework to aid in categorizing and bookkeeping all of the activities that are required to be performed on the flight deck, not just activities of the crew or of a specific system. This could then allow for a better understanding and allocation of activities in the design, an understanding of the impact of a specific system on overall system performance, and an awareness of the total crew performance requirements for the design. One candidate set of functional categories that could be used to guide an advanced flight deck design are described.

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.

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.

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 operations.

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.

Countermeasures to Mitigate the Negative Impact of Sensory Deprivation and Social Isolation in Long-Duration Space Flight

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

Bachman, Katharine Ridgeway OBrien; Otto, Christian; Leveton, Lauren

2012-01-01

Long-duration space flight presents several challenges to the behavioral health of crew members. The environment that they are likely to experience will be isolated, confined, and extreme (ICE) and, as such, crew members will experience extreme sensory deprivation and social isolation. The current paper briefly notes the behavioral, cognitive, and affective consequences of psychological stress induced by ICE environments and proposes nine countermeasures aimed at mitigating the negative effects of sensory deprivation and social isolation. Implementation of countermeasures aims to maintain successful crew performance and psychological well-being in a long-duration space flight mission.

Expedition 6 flight engineer Donald Pettit suits up for launch

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

2002-01-01

KENNEDY SPACE CENTER, FLA. -- Expedition 6 flight engineer Donald Pettit relaxes during suitup for launch. Pettit will be making his first Shuttle flight. The primary mission for the crew 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 8:15 p.m. EST.

Technicians Ray Smith and Raphael Rodriguez remove one of the Extravehicular Mobility Units from the Space Shuttle Discovery after its landing at NASA Dryden

NASA Image and Video Library

2005-08-12

Flight Crew Systems Technicians Ray Smith and Raphael Rodriguez remove one of the Extravehicular Mobility Units, or EMUs, from the Space Shuttle Discovery after it's successful landing at NASA's Dryden Flight Research Center. The Space Shuttles receive post-flight servicing in the Mate-Demate Device (MDD) following landings at NASA's Dryden Flight Research Center, Edwards, California. The gantry-like MDD structure is used for servicing the shuttle orbiters in preparation for their ferry flight back to the Kennedy Space Center in Florida, including mounting the shuttle atop NASA's modified Boeing 747 Shuttle Carrier Aircraft. Space Shuttle Discovery landed safely at NASA's Dryden Flight Research Center at Edwards Air Force Base in California at 5:11:22 a.m. PDT, August 9, 2005, following the very successful 14-day STS-114 return to flight mission. During their two weeks in space, Commander Eileen Collins and her six crewmates tested out new safety procedures and delivered supplies and equipment the International Space Station. Discovery spent two weeks in space, where the crew demonstrated new methods to inspect and repair the Shuttle in orbit. The crew also delivered supplies, outfitted and performed maintenance on the International Space Station. A number of these tasks were conducted during three spacewalks. In an unprecedented event, spacewalkers were called upon to remove protruding gap fillers from the heat shield on Discovery's underbelly. In other spacewalk activities, astronauts installed an external platform onto the Station's Quest Airlock and replaced one of the orbital outpost's Control Moment Gyroscopes. Inside the Station, the STS-114 crew conducted joint operations with the Expedition 11 crew. They unloaded fresh supplies from the Shuttle and the Raffaello Multi-Purpose Logistics Module. Before Discovery undocked, the crews filled Raffeallo with unneeded items and returned to Shuttle payload bay. Discovery launched on July 26 and spent almost 14

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.g., bunk partner).

Challenger Anniversary Resource Tape

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

1996-01-01

This commemorative video marks the tenth anniversary, January 28, 1986, of the ninth Challenger flight and the seven astronauts onboard who died when the Challenger exploded 73 seconds into flight. The flight crew was comprised of Cmdr. Francis R. Scobee, Pilot Michael J. Smith, and Mission Specialists Judith A. Resnik, Ellison S. Onizuka, Ronald E. McNair, Gregory Jarvis (Hughes Aircraft representative), and S. Christie McAuliffe (teacher). The flight crew is shown performing preflight training, physiological tests, environmental tests, press conferences, prelaunch activities, and launch activities. The Challenger explosion is shown from both the launch site and from the control center. Various rescue operations, news coverage, and shots of the wreckage after salvage are also presented. President Ronald Reagan is shown giving a tribute at the memorial service for the flight crew. The video ends with a flyby salute and pictures of each of the members of the Challenger.

Flight tests with a data link used for air traffic control information exchange

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

Knox, Charles E.; Scanlon, Charles H.

1991-01-01

Previous studies showed that air traffic control (ATC) message exchange with a data link offers the potential benefits of increased airspace system safety and efficiency. To accomplish these benefits, data link can be used to reduce communication errors and relieve overloaded ATC voice radio frequencies, which hamper efficient message exchange during peak traffic periods. Flight tests with commercial airline pilots as test subjects were conducted in the NASA Transport Systems Research Vehicle Boeing 737 airplane to contrast flight operations that used current voice communications with flight operations that used data link to transmit both strategic and tactical ATC clearances during a typical commercial airflight from takeoff to landing. The results of these tests that used data link as the primary communication source with ATC showed flight crew acceptance, a perceived reduction in crew work load, and a reduction in crew communication errors.

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.

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 460.15 - Human factors.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2012 CFR

2012-01-01

... TRANSPORTATION LICENSING HUMAN SPACE FLIGHT REQUIREMENTS Launch and Reentry with Crew § 460.15 Human factors. An... layout of displays and controls; (b) Mission planning, which includes analyzing tasks and allocating...; and (d) Vehicle operation, so that the vehicle will be operated in a manner that flight crew can...

14 CFR 460.15 - Human factors.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2014 CFR

2014-01-01

... TRANSPORTATION LICENSING HUMAN SPACE FLIGHT REQUIREMENTS Launch and Reentry with Crew § 460.15 Human factors. An... layout of displays and controls; (b) Mission planning, which includes analyzing tasks and allocating...; and (d) Vehicle operation, so that the vehicle will be operated in a manner that flight crew can...

14 CFR 460.15 - Human factors.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2011 CFR

2011-01-01

... TRANSPORTATION LICENSING HUMAN SPACE FLIGHT REQUIREMENTS Launch and Reentry with Crew § 460.15 Human factors. An... layout of displays and controls; (b) Mission planning, which includes analyzing tasks and allocating...; and (d) Vehicle operation, so that the vehicle will be operated in a manner that flight crew can...

14 CFR 460.15 - Human factors.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

2010-01-01

... TRANSPORTATION LICENSING HUMAN SPACE FLIGHT REQUIREMENTS Launch and Reentry with Crew § 460.15 Human factors. An... layout of displays and controls; (b) Mission planning, which includes analyzing tasks and allocating...; and (d) Vehicle operation, so that the vehicle will be operated in a manner that flight crew can...

14 CFR 460.15 - Human factors.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2013 CFR

2013-01-01

... TRANSPORTATION LICENSING HUMAN SPACE FLIGHT REQUIREMENTS Launch and Reentry with Crew § 460.15 Human factors. An... layout of displays and controls; (b) Mission planning, which includes analyzing tasks and allocating...; and (d) Vehicle operation, so that the vehicle will be operated in a manner that flight crew can...

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

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.

Use of telescience for biomedical research during space flight

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

Huntoon, Carolyn L.; Schneider, Howard J.; Karamanos, Gayle M.

1991-01-01

When the U.S. first embarked on a manned space flight program, NASA's use of medical telescience was focused on crew health monitoring. In recent years, medical telescience use has been expanded to include support of basic research in space medicine. It enables ground support personnel to assist on-board crews in the performance of experiments and improves the quality and quantity of data return. NASA is continuing to develop its telescience capabilities. Future plans include telemedicine that will enable physicians on Earth to support crewmembers during flight and telescience that will enable investigators at their home institutions to support and conduct in-flight medical research. NASA's use of telescience for crew safety and biomedical research from Project Mercury to the present is described and NASA's plans for the future are presented.

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.

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.

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.

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

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

STS-107 Flight Day 12 Highlights

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

2003-01-01

This video shows the activities of the STS-107 crew (Rick Husband, Commander; William McCool, Pilot; Kalpana Chawla, David Brown, Michael Anderson, Laurel Clark, Mission Specialists; Ilan Ramon, Payload Specialist) during flight day 12 of the Columbia orbiter's final mission. The primary activities are spaceborne experiments in the SpaceHab RDM (Research Double Module). Experiments shown in the video include SOFBALL (Structure of Flame Balls at Low Lewis-Number), an experiment to grow cancer cells in microgravity, and the STARS (Space Technology and Research Students) experiments, including bees, ants, chemical gardens, fish, and spiders. Crew Members are shown working on MIST (Water Mist Fire Suppression), a commercial experiment. Red Team crew members (Husband, Chawla, Clark, Ramon) are shown conversing through a handset with the Expedition 6 crew (Kenneth Bowersox, Commander; Donald Pettit, Nikolai Budarin; Flight Engineers) of the ISS (International Space Station).

Expeditions Two, Three and STS-105 crewmembers in group portrait in U.S. Laboratory

NASA Image and Video Library

2001-08-17

STS105-717-032 (17 August 2001) --- The Expedition Three (white shirts), STS-105 (striped shirts), and Expedition Two (red shirts) crews assemble for this in-flight group portrait in the Destiny laboratory on the International Space Station (ISS). The Expedition Three crew members are, from bottom to top, astronaut Frank L. Culbertson, Jr., mission commander; and cosmonauts Vladimir N. Dezhurov and Mikhail Tyurin, flight engineers; STS-105 crew members are, from top left, Scott J. Horowitz, commander, Daniel T. Barry and Patrick G. Forrester (bottom left), both mission specialists, along with Frederick W. (Rick) Sturckow, pilot; Expedition Two crew members are, from bottom to top, are cosmonaut Yury V. Usachev, mission commander, and astronauts James S. Voss and Susan J. Helms, flight engineers. Dezhurov, Tyurin, and Usachev represent Rosaviakosmos.

KSC-01pp1118

NASA Image and Video Library

2001-06-11

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

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.

First flight test results of the Simplified Aid For EVA Rescue (SAFER) propulsion unit

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

Meade, Carl J.

1995-01-01

The Simplified Aid for EVA Rescue (SAFER) is a small, self-contained, propulsive-backpack system that provides free-flying mobility for an astronaut engaged in a space walk, also known as extravehicular activity (EVA.) SAFER contains no redundant systems and is intended for contingency use only. In essence, it is a small, simplified version of the Manned Maneuvering Unit (MMU) last flown aboard the Space Shuttle in 1985. The operational SAFER unit will only be used to return an adrift EVA astronaut to the spacecraft. Currently, if an EVA crew member inadvertently becomes separated from the Space Shuttle, the Orbiter will maneuver to within the crew member's reach envelope, allowing the astronaut to regain contact with the Orbiter. However, with the advent of operations aboard the Russian MIR Space Station and the International Space Station, the Space Shuttle will not be available to effect a timely rescue. Under these conditions, a SAFER unit would be worn by each EVA crew member. Flight test of the pre-production model of SAFER occurred in September 1994. The crew of Space Shuttle Mission STS-64 flew a 6.9 hour test flight which included performance, flying qualities, systems, and operational utility evaluations. We found that the unit offers adequate propellant and control authority to stabilize and enable the return of a tumbling/separating crew member. With certain modifications, production model of SAFER can provide self-rescue capability to a separated crew member. This paper will present the program background, explain the flight test results and provide some insight into the complex operations of flight test in space.

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 teamwork. This is followed by discussion of the potential influence of national culture on teamwork and crew resource management. We then examine the influence of other individual and team differences, such as personality traits, cognitive style, shared mental model, and task workload. We provide a heuristic model that depicts the influence of national culture and individual differences on teamwork, error management and flight outcomes. The results demonstrate the usefulness of the model for future research.

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

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.

The Space Shuttle Discovery receives post-flight servicing in the Mate-Demate Device (MDD) at NASA's Dryden Flight Research Center, Edwards, California

NASA Image and Video Library

2005-08-11

The Space Shuttle Discovery receives post-flight servicing in the Mate-Demate Device (MDD), following its landing at NASA's Dryden Flight Research Center, Edwards, California, August 9, 2005. The gantry-like MDD structure is used for servicing the shuttle orbiters in preparation for their ferry flight back to the Kennedy Space Center in Florida, including mounting the shuttle atop NASA's modified Boeing 747 Shuttle Carrier Aircraft. Space Shuttle Discovery landed safely at NASA's Dryden Flight Research Center at Edwards Air Force Base in California at 5:11:22 a.m. PDT, August 9, 2005, following the very successful 14-day STS-114 return to flight mission. During their two weeks in space, Commander Eileen Collins and her six crewmates tested out new safety procedures and delivered supplies and equipment the International Space Station. Discovery spent two weeks in space, where the crew demonstrated new methods to inspect and repair the Shuttle in orbit. The crew also delivered supplies, outfitted and performed maintenance on the International Space Station. A number of these tasks were conducted during three spacewalks. In an unprecedented event, spacewalkers were called upon to remove protruding gap fillers from the heat shield on Discovery's underbelly. In other spacewalk activities, astronauts installed an external platform onto the Station's Quest Airlock and replaced one of the orbital outpost's Control Moment Gyroscopes. Inside the Station, the STS-114 crew conducted joint operations with the Expedition 11 crew. They unloaded fresh supplies from the Shuttle and the Raffaello Multi-Purpose Logistics Module. Before Discovery undocked, the crews filled Raffeallo with unneeded items and returned to Shuttle payload bay. Discovery launched on July 26 and spent almost 14 days on orbit.

The Space Shuttle Discovery receives post-flight servicing in the Mate-Demate Device (MDD) at NASA's Dryden Flight Research Center, Edwards, California

NASA Image and Video Library

2005-08-11

The Space Shuttle Discovery receives post-flight servicing in the Mate-Demate Device (MDD), following its landing at NASA's Dryden Flight Research Center, Edwards, California, August 9, 2005. The gantry-like MDD structure is used for servicing the shuttle orbiters in preparation for their ferry flight back to the Kennedy Space Center in Florida, including mounting the shuttle atop NASA's modified Boeing 747 Shuttle Carrier Aircraft. Space Shuttle Discovery landed safely at NASA's Dryden Flight Research Center at Edwards Air Force Base in California at 5:11:22 a.m. PDT this morning, following the very successful 14-day STS-114 return to flight mission. During their two weeks in space, Commander Eileen Collins and her six crewmates tested out new safety procedures and delivered supplies and equipment the International Space Station. Discovery spent two weeks in space, where the crew demonstrated new methods to inspect and repair the Shuttle in orbit. The crew also delivered supplies, outfitted and performed maintenance on the International Space Station. A number of these tasks were conducted during three spacewalks. In an unprecedented event, spacewalkers were called upon to remove protruding gap fillers from the heat shield on Discovery's underbelly. In other spacewalk activities, astronauts installed an external platform onto the Station's Quest Airlock and replaced one of the orbital outpost's Control Moment Gyroscopes. Inside the Station, the STS-114 crew conducted joint operations with the Expedition 11 crew. They unloaded fresh supplies from the Shuttle and the Raffaello Multi-Purpose Logistics Module. Before Discovery undocked, the crews filled Raffeallo with unneeded items and returned to Shuttle payload bay. Discovery launched on July 26 and spent almost 14 days on orbit.

STS-109 Mission Highlights Resource Tape

NASA Astrophysics Data System (ADS)

2002-05-01

This video, Part 4 of 4, shows footage of crew activities from flight days 8 through 12 of STS-109. The crew included: Scott Altman, Commander; Duane Carey, Pilot; John Grunsfeld, Payload Commander; Nancy Currie, Richard Linnehan, James Newman, Michael Massimino, Mission Speicalists. The activities from other flights days can be seen on 'STS-109 Mission Highlights Resource Tape' Part 1 of 4 (internal ID 2002139471), 'STS-109 Mission Highlights Resource Tape' Part 2 of 4 (internal ID 2002137664), and 'STS-109 Mission Highlights Resource Tape' Part 3 of 4 (internal ID 2002139476). The primary activity on flight day 8 was an EVA (extravehicular activity) by Grunsfeld and Linnehan to install a cryocooler and radiator for the NICMOS (Near Infrared Camera and Multi-Object Spectrometer) on the HST (Hubble Space Telescope). Before returning to Columbia's airlock, the astronauts, with a cloudy background, hold onto the orbiter and offer their thoughts on the significance of their mission, the HST, and spaceflight. Footage from flight day 9 includes the grappling, unbearthing, and deployment of the HST from Columbia, and the crew coordinating and videotaping Columbia's departure. Flight day 10 was a relatively inactive day, and flight day 11 includes a checkout of Columbia's aerodynamic surfaces. Columbia landed on flight day 12, which is covered by footage of the crew members speaking during reentry, and their night landing, primarily shown through the orbiter's head-up display. The video includes numerous views of the HST, as well as views of the the Galapagos Islands, Madagascar, and Southern Africa with parts of the Atlantic, Indian, and Pacific Oceans, and part of the coast of Chile. The pistol grip space tool is shown in use, and the crew answers two messages from the public, including a message to Massimino from the Fire Department of New York.

Views of STS-5 crew during a training session in the SMS

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

1982-01-01

Views of STS-5 crew during a training session in the Shuttle Mission Simulator (SMS). Astronaut Robert F. Overmyer, STS-5 pilot, participates in training session wearing a communications kit assembly (ASSY). He is dressed in regular flight suit and is studying flight documentation.

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...

14 CFR Appendix E to Part 141 - Airline Transport Pilot Certification Course

Code of Federal Regulations, 2012 CFR

2012-01-01

... performance in normal and abnormal flight regimes; (11) Human factors; (12) Aeronautical decision making and judgment; and (13) Crew resource management to include crew communication and coordination. 4. Flight... contracting State to the Convention on International Civil Aviation. 3. Aeronautical knowledge areas. (a) Each...

14 CFR Appendix E to Part 141 - Airline Transport Pilot Certification Course

Code of Federal Regulations, 2013 CFR

2013-01-01

... performance in normal and abnormal flight regimes; (11) Human factors; (12) Aeronautical decision making and judgment; and (13) Crew resource management to include crew communication and coordination. 4. Flight... contracting State to the Convention on International Civil Aviation. 3. Aeronautical knowledge areas. (a) Each...

14 CFR Appendix E to Part 141 - Airline Transport Pilot Certification Course

Code of Federal Regulations, 2014 CFR

2014-01-01

... performance in normal and abnormal flight regimes; (11) Human factors; (12) Aeronautical decision making and judgment; and (13) Crew resource management to include crew communication and coordination. 4. Flight... contracting State to the Convention on International Civil Aviation. 3. Aeronautical knowledge areas. (a) Each...

Expedition 14 Crew and Backup Crew Training

NASA Image and Video Library

2006-05-24

JSC2006-E-20053 (24 May 2006) --- Astronaut Clayton C. Anderson, Expedition 14 backup flight engineer, participates in Journals experiment overview training in the Flight Operations Facility at Johnson Space Center. This type of training is a presentation format regarding the experiment objectives and tools. Training instructor Lindsay Kirschner assisted Anderson.

Oxygen regimen in the human peripheral tissue during space flights

NASA Astrophysics Data System (ADS)

Haase, H.; Kovalenko, E. A.; Vacek, A.; Bobrovnickij, M. P.; Jarsumbeck, B.; Semencov, V. N.; Sarol, Z.; Hideg, J.; Zlatarev, K.

A survey of the results of the experiment "Oxygen," carried out within the scope of the INTERKOSMOS program in members of the permanent crews and of international visiting expeditions to the Soviet orbital station Salyut-6, is given. During the 7-day space flights of the international visiting expeditions a significant decrease in pO 2 ic by 3.28 kPa was observed. Local oxygen utilization reduced significantly by 0.44 kPa. During hyperventilation testing after return to earth a statistically significant decrease in the peak value by 1.39 kPa was noted. In the long-term crews of the orbital station Salyut-6 the highest decrease in pO 2 ic of 3.8 kPa and the absolutely lowest value of 3.4 ± 0.5 kPa during space flight were observed. The decrease in local oxygen utilization during the flight of 0.8 kPa/min was greater than that of the visiting crews. The results indicate the importance of investigating the dynamics of the oxygen regimen for medical control of the crew members both during the space flight and during the readaptation phase after return to earth.

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.

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.

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.

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.

Autonomous Mission Operations Roadmap

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

Frank, Jeremy David

2014-01-01

As light time delays increase, the number of such situations in which crew autonomy is the best way to conduct the mission is expected to increase. However, there are significant open questions regarding which functions to allocate to ground and crew as the time delays increase. In situations where the ideal solution is to allocate responsibility to the crew and the vehicle, a second question arises: should the activity be the responsibility of the crew or an automated vehicle function? More specifically, we must answer the following questions: What aspects of mission operation responsibilities (Plan, Train, Fly) should be allocated to ground based or vehicle based planning, monitoring, and control in the presence of significant light-time delay between the vehicle and the Earth?How should the allocated ground based planning, monitoring, and control be distributed across the flight control team and ground system automation? How should the allocated vehicle based planning, monitoring, and control be distributed between the flight crew and onboard system automation?When during the mission should responsibility shift from flight control team to crew or from crew to vehicle, and what should the process of shifting responsibility be as the mission progresses? NASA is developing a roadmap of capabilities for Autonomous Mission Operations for human spaceflight. This presentation will describe the current state of development of this roadmap, with specific attention to in-space inspection tasks that crews might perform with minimum assistance from the ground.

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 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.

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.

STS-75 Mission Cmdr Andrew Allen talks to media

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

1996-01-01

STS-75 Mission Commander Andrew M. Allen talks to news media gathered at KSC's Shuttle Landing Facility for the flight crew's arrival. Altogether seven crew members are assigned to the second Shuttle flight of 1996, which will be highlighted by the re- flight of the Italian Tethered Satellite System (TSS-1R). Liftoff is slated to occur during a two-and-a-half window opening at 3:18 p.m. EST, Feb. 22.

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.

International Space Station (ISS)

NASA Image and Video Library

2001-05-08

This is the insignia for the STS-108 mission, which marked a major milestone in the assembly of the International Space Station (ISS) as the first designated Utilization Flight, UF-1. The crew of Endeavour delivered the Expedition Four crew to ISS and returned the Expedition Three crew to Earth. Endeavour launched with a Multi-Purpose Logistics Module (MPLM) that was berthed to the ISS and unloaded. The MPLM was returned to Endeavour for the trip home and used again on a later flight. The crew patch depicts Endeavour and the ISS in the configuration at the time of arrival and docking. The Station is shown viewed along the direction of flight as seen by the Shuttle crew during their final approach and docking along the X-axis. The three ribbons and stars on the left side of the patch signify the returning Expedition Three crew. The red, white and blue order of the ribbons represents the American commander for that mission. The three ribbons and stars on the right depict the arriving Expedition Four crew. The white, blue, and red order of the Expedition Four ribbon matches the color of the Russian flag and signifies that the commander of Expedition Four is a Russian cosmonaut. Each white star in the center of the patch represents the four Endeavour crew members. The names of the four astronauts who crewed Endeavour are shown along the top border of the patch. The three astronauts and three cosmonauts of the two expedition crews are shown on the chevron at the bottom of the patch.

KSC-2009-3603

NASA Image and Video Library

2009-06-05

CAPE CANAVERAL, Fla. – TIn Orbiter Processing Facility 3 at NASA's Kennedy Space Center in Florida, STS-128 crew members are lowered into space shuttle Discovery's payload bay to check equipment. At center is Mission Specialist John "Danny" Olivas. The crew is at Kennedy for a crew equipment interface test, or CEIT, which provides hands-on training and observation of shuttle and flight hardware. The STS-128 flight will carry science and storage racks to the International Space Station on Discovery. Launch is targeted for Aug. 7. Photo credit: NASA/Jim Grossmann

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

Analysis of sleep on Shuttle missions

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

Santy, Patricia A.; Kapanka, Heidi; Davis, Jeffrey R.; Stewart, Donald F.

1988-01-01

The sleep patterns of 58 Space Shuttle crew members are analyzed statistically on the basis of debriefing forms filled out within 3 days postflight. The data are compiled in a table, and photographs of typical sleep conditions on the Shuttle are provided. It is found that sleep disruption is relatively common on Shuttle missions, especially on the first and last days. Sleep medication was used by 19.4 percent of crew on single-shift flights and 50 percent of crew on dual-shift flights.

NASA Dryden technicians work on a fit-check mockup in preparation for systems installation work on an Orion boilerplate crew capsule for launch abort testing.

NASA Image and Video Library

2008-01-24

NASA Dryden technicians work on a fit-check mockup in preparation for systems installation work on an Orion boilerplate crew capsule for launch abort testing. A mockup Orion crew module has been constructed by NASA Dryden Flight Research Center's Fabrication Branch. The mockup is being used to develop integration procedures for avionics and instrumentation in advance of the arrival of the first abort flight test article.

NASA Dryden technicians take measurements inside a fit-check mockup for prior to systems installation on a boilerplate Orion launch abort test crew capsule.

NASA Image and Video Library

2008-01-24

NASA Dryden technicians take measurements inside a fit-check mockup for prior to systems installation on a boilerplate Orion launch abort test crew capsule. A mockup Orion crew module has been constructed by NASA Dryden Flight Research Center's Fabrication Branch. The mockup is being used to develop integration procedures for avionics and instrumentation in advance of the arrival of the first abort flight test article.

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.

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.

STS-111 Mission Highlights Resource Tape. Part 1 of 4; Flight Days 1 - 4

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

2002-01-01

This video, Part 1 of 4, shows the activities of the STS-111 crew (Kenneth Cockrell, Commander; Paul Lockhart, Pilot; Franklin Chang-Diaz, Phillipe Perrin, Mission Specialists) during flight days 1 through 4. Also shown are the incoming Expedition 5 (Valeri Korzun, Commander; Peggy Whitson, NASA ISS Science Officer; Sergei Treschev, Flight Engineer) and outgoing Expedition 4 (Yuri Onufriyenko, Commander; Carl Walz, Daniel Bursch, Flight Engineers) crews of the ISS (International Space Station). The activities from other flight days can be seen on 'STS-111 Mission Highlights Resource Tape' Part 2 of 4 (internal ID 2002139469), 'STS-111 Mission Highlights Resource Tape' Part 3 of 4 (internal ID 2002139468), and 'STS-111 Mission Highlights Resource Tape' Part 4 of 4 (internal ID 2002139474). The primary activity of flight day 1 is the launch of Space Shuttle Endeavour. The crew is seen before the launch at a meal and suit-up, and some pre-flight procedures are shown. Perrin holds a sign with a personalized message. The astronauts communicate with Mission Control extensively after launch, and an inside view of the shuttle cabin is shown. The replays of the launch include close-ups of the nozzles at liftoff, and the fall of the solid rocket boosters and the external fuel tank. Flight day 2 shows footage of mainland Asia at night, and daytime views of the eastern United States and Lake Michigan. Flight day three shows the Endeavour orbiter approaching and docking with the ISS. After the night docking, the crews exchange greetings, and a view of the Nile river and Egypt at night is shown. On flight day 4, the MPLM (Multi-Purpose Logistics Module) Leonardo was temporarily transferred from Endeavour's payload bay to the ISS.

Managing human error in aviation.

PubMed

Helmreich, R L

1997-05-01

Crew resource management (CRM) programs were developed to address team and leadership aspects of piloting modern airplanes. The goal is to reduce errors through team work. Human factors research and social, cognitive, and organizational psychology are used to develop programs tailored for individual airlines. Flight crews study accident case histories, group dynamics, and human error. Simulators provide pilots with the opportunity to solve complex flight problems. CRM in the simulator is called line-oriented flight training (LOFT). In automated cockpits CRM promotes the idea of automation as a crew member. Cultural aspects of aviation include professional, business, and national culture. The aviation CRM model has been adapted for training surgeons and operating room staff in human factors.

Expedition 6 flight engineer Nikolai Budarin suits up for launch

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

2002-01-01

KENNEDY SPACE CENTER, FLA. - Expedition 6 flight engineer Nikolai Budarin relaxes during suitup for launch. Budarin, who is with the Russian Space Agency, will be making his second Shuttle flight. The primary mission for the crew 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 8:15 p.m. EST.

Cockpit resource management training

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

White, Lawson C.

1987-01-01

The 6th General Flight Crew Training Meeting held in Montreal in May, 1984 was for most IATA member airlines the first time they had been exposed to what was then a relatively new aspect of flight crew training-resource management training. In reviewing the results of this meeting the IATA Flight Crew Training SubCommittee (FCTSC), which had been responsible for the agenda and the meeting itself, concluded that because very few airlines had implemented a program or even appeared to understand the term resource management, a member airline survey should be conducted and the results analyzed. This presentation shows the results of that survey in a form which can be related to the topics of the workshop.

Bone Density Following Three Years of Recovery from Long-Duration Space-Flight

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

Amin, S.; Achenbach, S. J.; Atkinson, E. J.; Sibonga, J.

2010-01-01

Bone loss during long-duration space flight is well recognized, but the long-term implications on bone health following return from flight remain unclear. Among US crew who were involved in long-duration missions in space (Mir and ISS), we have previously shown that at approximately 12 months following return, men, but not women, had BMD values at most sites that were still lower than would be expected had they not been exposed to a prolonged period of microgravity. We now extend our observations to 3 years of follow-up post-flight. Using their age, pre-flight BMD and follow-up time, post-flight BMD values for each US crew were predicted based on the model developed from the community sample. We found BMD measures to be either stable or improve by 3 years relative to their immediate post-flight BMD, however only total hip BMD still remains significantly lower than would be expected had they not been exposed to microgravity. Among male US crew, who have had their BMD measured following at least 3 years of recovery post long-duration flight, they continue to have lower BMD at the hip than would be expected, raising potential concerns regarding future hip fracture risk.

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.

KSC-97pc133

NASA Image and Video Library

1997-01-12

The STS-81 flight crew enjoys the traditional preliftoff breakfast in the crew quarters of the Operations and Checkout Building. They are (from left) Mission Specialist Marsha S. Ivins, Mission Commander Michael A. Baker; Pilot Brent W. Jett, Jr.; and Mission Specialists John M. Grunsfeld, Peter J. K. "Jeff" Wisoff; and J.M. "Jerry" Linenger. After a weather briefing, the flight crew will be fitted with their launch/entry suits and depart for Launch Pad 39B. Once there, they will take their positions in the crew cabin of the Space Shuttle Atlantis to await a liftoff during a seven-minute window that will open at 4:27 a.m. EST, January 12

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.

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-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.

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.

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.

STS-26 Preflight Press Briefing: 5 Man Crew. Part 6 of 9

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

1988-01-01

This NASA KSC video release presents part of a press conference held prior to Discovery flight STS-26, the first shuttle mission flown following the 51-L Challenger accident. The video opens with a statement from Commander Frederick H. Hauck, and the introductions of crew members, Richard O. Covey, Pilot, and mission specialists, John M. Lounge, George D. Nelson, and David C. Hilmers. Some of the questions posed by scientific journalists addressed the following subjects: launch preparation in the month prior to flight, astronaut family anxieties in light of the Challenger accident, extent of safety measures made prior to flight, flight readiness firing, the crew escape system, civilians in space, conservative mission design, astronaut selection, mission turnaround and launch rate, and the ability to maintain a high level of scrutiny regarding safety on future missions.

NASA - easyJet Collaboration on the Human Factors Monitoring Program (HFMP) Study

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

Srivistava, Ashok N.; Barton, Phil

2012-01-01

This is the first annual report jointly prepared by NASA and easyJet on the work performed under the agreement to collaborate on a study of the many factors entailed in flight - and cabin-crew fatigue and documenting the decreases in performance associated with fatigue. The objective of this Agreement is to generate reliable, automated procedures that improve understanding of the levels and characteristics of flight - and cabin-crew fatigue factors, both latent and proximate, whose confluence will likely result in unacceptable flight crew performance. This study entails the analyses of numerical and textual data collected during operational flights. NASA and easyJet are both interested in assessing and testing NASA s automated capabilities for extracting operationally significant information from very large, diverse (textual and numerical) databases, much larger than can be handled practically by human experts.

Rescue Shuttle Flight Re-Entry: Controlling Astronaut Thermal Exposure

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

Gillis, David B.; Hamilton, Douglas; Ilcus, Stana; Stepaniak, Phil; Polk, J. D.; Son, Chang; Bue, Grant

2008-01-01

A rescue mission for the STS-125 Hubble Telescope Repair Mission requires reentry from space with 11 crew members aboard, exceeding past cabin thermal load experience and risking crew thermal stress potentially causing cognitive performance and physiological decrements. The space shuttle crew cabin air revitalization system (ARS) was designed to support a nominal crew complement of 4 to 7 crew and 10 persons in emergencies, all in a shirt-sleeve environment. Subsequent to the addition of full pressure suits with individual cooling units, the ARS cannot maintain a stable temperature in the crew cabin during reentry thermal loads. Bulk cabin thermal models, used for rescue mission planning and analysis of crew cabin air, were unable to accurately represent crew workstation values of air flow, carbon dioxide, and heat content for the middeck. Crew temperature models suggested significantly elevated core temperatures. Planning for an STS-400 potential rescue of seven stranded crew utilized computational fluid dynamics (CFD) models to demonstrate inhomogeneous cabin thermal properties and improve analysis compared to bulk models. In the absence of monitoring of crew temperature, heart rate, metabolic rate and incomplete engineering data on the performance of the integrated cooling garment/cooling unit (ICG/CU) at cabin temperatures above 75 degrees F, related systems & models were reevaluated and tests conducted with humans in the loop. Changes to the cabin ventilation, ICU placement, crew reentry suit-donning procedures, Orbiter Program wave-off policy and post-landing power down and crew extraction were adopted. A second CFD and core temperature model incorporated the proposed changes and confirmed satisfactory cabin temperature, improved air distribution, and estimated core temperatures within safe limits. CONCLUSIONS: These changes in equipment, in-flight and post-landing procedures, and policy were implemented for the STS-400 rescue shuttle & will be implemented in any future rescue flights from the International Space Station of stranded shuttle crews.

Operator modeling in commerical aviation: Cognitive models, intelligent displays, and pilot's assistants

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

Govindaraj, T.; Mitchell, C. M.

1994-01-01

One of the goals of the National Aviation Safety/Automation program is to address the issue of human-centered automation in the cockpit. Human-centered automation is automation that, in the cockpit, enhances or assists the crew rather than replacing them. The Georgia Tech research program focused on this general theme, with emphasis on designing a computer-based pilot's assistant, intelligent (i.e, context-sensitive) displays, and an intelligent tutoring system for understanding and operating the autoflight system. In particular, the aids and displays were designed to enhance the crew's situational awareness of the current state of the automated flight systems and to assist the crew's situational awareness of the current state of the automated flight systems and to assist the crew in coordinating the autoflight system resources. The activities of this grant included: (1) an OFMspert to understand pilot navigation activities in a 727 class aircraft; (2) an extension of OFMspert to understand mode control in a glass cockpit, Georgia Tech Crew Activity Tracking System (GT-CATS); (3) the design of a training system to teach pilots about the vertical navigation portion of the flight management system -VNAV Tutor; and (4) a proof-of-concept display, using existing display technology, to facilitate mode awareness, particularly in situations in which controlled flight into terrain (CFIT) is a potential.

STS-103 Crew at Breakfast, Suiting, Departing O&C

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 for STS-103 are: Commander Curtis L. Brown (his sixth flight), Pilot Scott J. Kelly and European Space Agency (ESA) astronaut Jean-Francois Clervoy (his third flight) will join space walkers Steven L. Smith (his third flight), C. Michael Foale (his fifth flight), John M. Grunsfeld (his third flight) and ESA astronaut Claude Nicollier (his fourth flight). This current video presents a live footage of the seven STS-103 crewmembers eating breakfast, suiting, and departing the O&C (Operations and Checkout) before the 6:50 p.m. lift-off.

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...

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...

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...

Component-Level Electronic-Assembly Repair (CLEAR) System Architecture

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

Oeftering, Richard C.; Bradish, Martin A.; Juergens, Jeffrey R.; Lewis, Michael J.; Vrnak, Daniel R.

2011-01-01

This document captures the system architecture for a Component-Level Electronic-Assembly Repair (CLEAR) capability needed for electronics maintenance and repair of the Constellation Program (CxP). CLEAR is intended to improve flight system supportability and reduce the mass of spares required to maintain the electronics of human rated spacecraft on long duration missions. By necessity it allows the crew to make repairs that would otherwise be performed by Earth based repair depots. Because of practical knowledge and skill limitations of small spaceflight crews they must be augmented by Earth based support crews and automated repair equipment. This system architecture covers the complete system from ground-user to flight hardware and flight crew and defines an Earth segment and a Space segment. The Earth Segment involves database management, operational planning, and remote equipment programming and validation processes. The Space Segment involves the automated diagnostic, test and repair equipment required for a complete repair process. This document defines three major subsystems including, tele-operations that links the flight hardware to ground support, highly reconfigurable diagnostics and test instruments, and a CLEAR Repair Apparatus that automates the physical repair process.

STS-109 Mission Highlights Resource Tape. Part 4 of 4; Flight Days 8 - 12

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

2002-01-01

This video, Part 4 of 4, shows footage of crew activities from flight days 8 through 12 of STS-109. The crew included: Scott Altman, Commander; Duane Carey, Pilot; John Grunsfeld, Payload Commander; Nancy Currie, Richard Linnehan, James Newman, Michael Massimino, Mission Speicalists. The activities from other flights days can be seen on 'STS-109 Mission Highlights Resource Tape' Part 1 of 4 (internal ID 2002139471), 'STS-109 Mission Highlights Resource Tape' Part 2 of 4 (internal ID 2002137664), and 'STS-109 Mission Highlights Resource Tape' Part 3 of 4 (internal ID 2002139476). The primary activity on flight day 8 was an EVA (extravehicular activity) by Grunsfeld and Linnehan to install a cryocooler and radiator for the NICMOS (Near Infrared Camera and Multi-Object Spectrometer) on the HST (Hubble Space Telescope). Before returning to Columbia's airlock, the astronauts, with a cloudy background, hold onto the orbiter and offer their thoughts on the significance of their mission, the HST, and spaceflight. Footage from flight day 9 includes the grappling, unbearthing, and deployment of the HST from Columbia, and the crew coordinating and videotaping Columbia's departure. Flight day 10 was a relatively inactive day, and flight day 11 includes a checkout of Columbia's aerodynamic surfaces. Columbia landed on flight day 12, which is covered by footage of the crew members speaking during reentry, and their night landing, primarily shown through the orbiter's head-up display. The video includes numerous views of the HST, as well as views of the the Galapagos Islands, Madagascar, and Southern Africa with parts of the Atlantic, Indian, and Pacific Oceans, and part of the coast of Chile. The pistol grip space tool is shown in use, and the crew answers two messages from the public, including a message to Massimino from the Fire Department of New York.

Technicians inspect external tank attachment fittings on the Space Shuttle Discovery as part of its post-flight processing at NASA DFRC

NASA Image and Video Library

2005-08-12

Robert 'Skip' Garrett; main propulsion advanced systems technician, and Chris Jacobs; main propulsion systems engineering technician, inspect external tank attachment fittings on the Space Shuttle Discovery as part of it's post-flight processing at NASA's Dryden Flight Research Center. The Space Shuttles receive post-flight servicing in the Mate-Demate Device (MDD) following landings at NASA's Dryden Flight Research Center, Edwards, California. The gantry-like MDD structure is used for servicing the shuttle orbiters in preparation for their ferry flight back to the Kennedy Space Center in Florida, including mounting the shuttle atop NASA's modified Boeing 747 Shuttle Carrier Aircraft. Space Shuttle Discovery landed safely at NASA's Dryden Flight Research Center at Edwards Air Force Base in California at 5:11:22 a.m. PDT, August 9, 2005, following the very successful 14-day STS-114 return to flight mission. During their two weeks in space, Commander Eileen Collins and her six crewmates tested out new safety procedures and delivered supplies and equipment the International Space Station. Discovery spent two weeks in space, where the crew demonstrated new methods to inspect and repair the Shuttle in orbit. The crew also delivered supplies, outfitted and performed maintenance on the International Space Station. A number of these tasks were conducted during three spacewalks. In an unprecedented event, spacewalkers were called upon to remove protruding gap fillers from the heat shield on Discovery's underbelly. In other spacewalk activities, astronauts installed an external platform onto the Station's Quest Airlock and replaced one of the orbital outpost's Control Moment Gyroscopes. Inside the Station, the STS-114 crew conducted joint operations with the Expedition 11 crew. They unloaded fresh supplies from the Shuttle and the Raffaello Multi-Purpose Logistics Module. Before Discovery undocked, the crews filled Raffeallo with unneeded items and returned to Shuttle pa

Technicians Todd Viddle, Robert Garrett and Dan McGrath remove a servicing unit from the Space Shuttle Discovery during its post-flight processing at NASA DFRC

NASA Image and Video Library

2005-08-12

Todd Viddle; APU advanced systems technician, Robert 'Skip' Garrett; main propulsion advanced systems technician, and Dan McGrath; main propulsion systems engineer technician, remove a servicing unit from the Space Shuttle Discovery as part of it's post-flight processing at NASA's Dryden Flight Research Center. The Space Shuttles receive post-flight servicing in the Mate-Demate Device (MDD) following landings at NASA's Dryden Flight Research Center, Edwards, California. The gantry-like MDD structure is used for servicing the shuttle orbiters in preparation for their ferry flight back to the Kennedy Space Center in Florida, including mounting the shuttle atop NASA's modified Boeing 747 Shuttle Carrier Aircraft. Space Shuttle Discovery landed safely at NASA's Dryden Flight Research Center at Edwards Air Force Base in California at 5:11:22 a.m. PDT, August 9, 2005, following the very successful 14-day STS-114 return to flight mission. During their two weeks in space, Commander Eileen Collins and her six crewmates tested out new safety procedures and delivered supplies and equipment the International Space Station. Discovery spent two weeks in space, where the crew demonstrated new methods to inspect and repair the Shuttle in orbit. The crew also delivered supplies, outfitted and performed maintenance on the International Space Station. A number of these tasks were conducted during three spacewalks. In an unprecedented event, spacewalkers were called upon to remove protruding gap fillers from the heat shield on Discovery's underbelly. In other spacewalk activities, astronauts installed an external platform onto the Station's Quest Airlock and replaced one of the orbital outpost's Control Moment Gyroscopes. Inside the Station, the STS-114 crew conducted joint operations with the Expedition 11 crew. They unloaded fresh supplies from the Shuttle and the Raffaello Multi-Purpose Logistics Module. Before Discovery undocked, the crews filled Raffeallo with unneeded items

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...

Man-Machine Interaction Design and Analysis System (MIDAS): Memory Representation and Procedural Implications for Airborne Communication Modalities

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

Corker, Kevin M.; Pisanich, Gregory M.; Lebacqz, Victor (Technical Monitor)

1996-01-01

The Man-Machine Interaction Design and Analysis System (MIDAS) has been under development for the past ten years through a joint US Army and NASA cooperative agreement. MIDAS represents multiple human operators and selected perceptual, cognitive, and physical functions of those operators as they interact with simulated systems. MIDAS has been used as an integrated predictive framework for the investigation of human/machine systems, particularly in situations with high demands on the operators. Specific examples include: nuclear power plant crew simulation, military helicopter flight crew response, and police force emergency dispatch. In recent applications to airborne systems development, MIDAS has demonstrated an ability to predict flight crew decision-making and procedural behavior when interacting with automated flight management systems and Air Traffic Control. In this paper we describe two enhancements to MIDAS. The first involves the addition of working memory in the form of an articulatory buffer for verbal communication protocols and a visuo-spatial buffer for communications via digital datalink. The second enhancement is a representation of multiple operators working as a team. This enhanced model was used to predict the performance of human flight crews and their level of compliance with commercial aviation communication procedures. We show how the data produced by MIDAS compares with flight crew performance data from full mission simulations. Finally, we discuss the use of these features to study communications issues connected with aircraft-based separation assurance.

The Integrated Medical Model: A Risk Assessment and Decision Support Tool for Space Flight Medical Systems

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

Kerstman, Eric; Minard, Charles; Saile, Lynn; deCarvalho, Mary Freire; Myers, Jerry; Walton, Marlei; Butler, Douglas; Iyengar, Sriram; Johnson-Throop, Kathy; Baumann, David

2009-01-01

The Integrated Medical Model (IMM) is a decision support tool that is useful to mission planners and medical system designers in assessing risks and designing medical systems for space flight missions. The IMM provides an evidence based approach for optimizing medical resources and minimizing risks within space flight operational constraints. The mathematical relationships among mission and crew profiles, medical condition incidence data, in-flight medical resources, potential crew functional impairments, and clinical end-states are established to determine probable mission outcomes. Stochastic computational methods are used to forecast probability distributions of crew health and medical resource utilization, as well as estimates of medical evacuation and loss of crew life. The IMM has been used in support of the International Space Station (ISS) medical kit redesign, the medical component of the ISS Probabilistic Risk Assessment, and the development of the Constellation Medical Conditions List. The IMM also will be used to refine medical requirements for the Constellation program. The IMM outputs for ISS and Constellation design reference missions will be presented to demonstrate the potential of the IMM in assessing risks, planning missions, and designing medical systems. The implementation of the IMM verification and validation plan will be reviewed. Additional planned capabilities of the IMM, including optimization techniques and the inclusion of a mission timeline, will be discussed. Given the space flight constraints of mass, volume, and crew medical training, the IMM is a valuable risk assessment and decision support tool for medical system design and mission planning.

14 CFR 460.17 - Verification program.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2011 CFR

2011-01-01

... software in an operational flight environment before allowing any space flight participant on board during a flight. Verification must include flight testing. ... TRANSPORTATION LICENSING HUMAN SPACE FLIGHT REQUIREMENTS Launch and Reentry with Crew § 460.17 Verification...

14 CFR 460.17 - Verification program.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

2010-01-01

... software in an operational flight environment before allowing any space flight participant on board during a flight. Verification must include flight testing. ... TRANSPORTATION LICENSING HUMAN SPACE FLIGHT REQUIREMENTS Launch and Reentry with Crew § 460.17 Verification...

14 CFR 460.17 - Verification program.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2012 CFR

2012-01-01

... software in an operational flight environment before allowing any space flight participant on board during a flight. Verification must include flight testing. ... TRANSPORTATION LICENSING HUMAN SPACE FLIGHT REQUIREMENTS Launch and Reentry with Crew § 460.17 Verification...

14 CFR 460.17 - Verification program.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2013 CFR

2013-01-01

... software in an operational flight environment before allowing any space flight participant on board during a flight. Verification must include flight testing. ... TRANSPORTATION LICENSING HUMAN SPACE FLIGHT REQUIREMENTS Launch and Reentry with Crew § 460.17 Verification...

14 CFR 460.17 - Verification program.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2014 CFR

2014-01-01

... software in an operational flight environment before allowing any space flight participant on board during a flight. Verification must include flight testing. ... TRANSPORTATION LICENSING HUMAN SPACE FLIGHT REQUIREMENTS Launch and Reentry with Crew § 460.17 Verification...

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.

STS-109 Mission Highlights Resource Tape

NASA Astrophysics Data System (ADS)

2002-05-01

This video, Part 1 of 4, shows the activities of the STS-109 crew (Scott Altman, Commander; Duane Carey, Pilot; John Grunsfeld, Payload Commander; Nancy Currie, James Newman, Richard Linnehan, Michael Massimino, Mission Specialists) during flight days 1 through 3. The activities from other flight days can be seen on 'STS 109 Mission Highlights Resource Tape' Part 2 of 4 (internal ID 2002137664), 'STS 109 Mission Highlights Resource Tape' Part 3 of 4 (internal ID 2002139471), and 'STS-109 Mission Highlights Resource Tape' Part 4 of 4 (internal ID 2002137577). The main activity recorded during flight day 1 is the liftoff of Columbia. Attention is given to suit-up, boarding, and pre-flight procedures. The pre-launch crew meal has no sound. The crew members often wave to the camera before liftoff. The jettisoning of the solid rocket boosters is shown, and the External Tank is seen as it falls to Earth, moving over African dunes in the background. There are liftoff replays, including one from inside the cockpit. The opening of the payload bay doors is seen from the rear of the shuttle's cockpit. The footage from flight day 2 shows the Flight Support System for bearthing the HST (Hubble Space Telescope). Crew preparations for the bearthing are shown. Flight day 3 shows the tracking of and approach to the HST by Columbia, including orbital maneuvers, the capture of the HST, and its lowering onto the Flight Support System. Many views of the HST are shown, including one which reveals an ocean and cloud background as the HST retracts a solar array.

International Space Station (ISS)

NASA Image and Video Library

2001-02-01

These 10 astronauts and cosmonauts represent the base STS-102 space travelers, as well as the crew members for the station crews switching out turns aboard the outpost. Those astronauts wearing orange represent the STS-102 crew members. In the top photo, from left to right are: James M. Kelly, pilot; Andrew S.W. Thomas, mission specialist; James D. Wetherbee, commander; and Paul W. Richards, mission specialist. The group pictured in the lower right portion of the portrait are STS-members as well as Expedition Two crew members (from left): mission specialist and flight engineer James S. Voss; cosmonaut Yury V. Usachev, Expedition Two Commander; and mission specialist and flight engineer Susan Helms. The lower left inset are the 3 man crew of Expedition One (pictured from left): Cosmonaut Sergei K. Krikalev, flight engineer; astronaut William M. (Bill) Shepherd, commander; and cosmonaut Yuri P. Gidzenko, Soyuz commander. The main objective of the STS-102 mission was the first Expedition Crew rotation and the primary cargo was the Leonardo, the Italian Space Agency-built Multipurpose Logistics Module (MPLM). The Leonardo MPLM is the first of three such pressurized modules that will serve as the International Space Station's (ISS') moving vans, carrying laboratory racks filled with equipment, experiments, and supplies to and from the Station aboard the Space Shuttle. NASA's 103rd overall mission and the 8th Space Station Assembly Flight, STS-102 mission launched on March 8, 2001 aboard the Space Shuttle Orbiter Discovery.

Development and validation of the crew-station system-integration research facility

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

Nedell, B.; Hardy, G.; Lichtenstein, T.; Leong, G.; Thompson, D.

1986-01-01

The various issues associated with the use of integrated flight management systems in aircraft were discussed. To address these issues a fixed base integrated flight research (IFR) simulation of a helicopter was developed to support experiments that contribute to the understanding of design criteria for rotorcraft cockpits incorporating advanced integrated flight management systems. A validation experiment was conducted that demonstrates the main features of the facility and the capability to conduct crew/system integration research.

NASA Ames Contributes to Orion / EFT-1 Test Flight (Reporter Pkg)

NASA Image and Video Library

2014-12-03

NASA's Orion spacecraft is built to take humans farther than they've ever gone before. Orion will serve as the exploration vehicle that will carry the crew to space, provide emergency abort capability, sustain the crew during the space travel, and provide safe re-entry from deep space return velocities. NASA's Ames Research Center played a critical role in the development and preparation for the flight test designated Exploration Flight Test 1, or EFT-1.

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.

A Proposed Ascent Abort Flight Test for the Max Launch Abort System

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

Tartabini, Paul V.; Gilbert, Michael G.; Starr, Brett R.

2016-01-01

The NASA Engineering and Safety Center initiated the Max Launch Abort System (MLAS) Project to investigate alternate crew escape system concepts that eliminate the conventional launch escape tower by integrating the escape system into an aerodynamic fairing that fully encapsulates the crew capsule and smoothly integrates with the launch vehicle. This paper proposes an ascent abort flight test for an all-propulsive towerless escape system concept that is actively controlled and sized to accommodate the Orion Crew Module. The goal of the flight test is to demonstrate a high dynamic pressure escape and to characterize jet interaction effects during operation of the attitude control thrusters at transonic and supersonic conditions. The flight-test vehicle is delivered to the required test conditions by a booster configuration selected to meet cost, manufacturability, and operability objectives. Data return is augmented through judicious design of the boost trajectory, which is optimized to obtain data at a range of relevant points, rather than just a single flight condition. Secondary flight objectives are included after the escape to obtain aerodynamic damping data for the crew module and to perform a high-altitude contingency deployment of the drogue parachutes. Both 3- and 6-degree-of-freedom trajectory simulation results are presented that establish concept feasibility, and a Monte Carlo uncertainty assessment is performed to provide confidence that test objectives can be met.

Evaluation of crew skin flora under conditions of a full quarantine lunar-exploration mission.

PubMed

Carmichael, C; Taylor, G R

1977-08-01

Crew-members of the Apollo 14 lunar exploration mission underwent a pre-flight seclusion designed to stabilize their health by freeing them from exposure to potentially infectious agents. After the flight, the crew-members were quarantined to protect the biosphere from possible lunar contamination. These isolations, along with the complete isolation of the spaceflight itself, provided the opportunity for a skin flora survey which included the sampling of seven sites at five different times. Quantification and identification of all aerobic and anaerobic bacteria from each site were performed. The results indicated that the pre-flight quarantine measures resulted in a decrease in total numbers of isolates as well as a decrease in the anaerobes. This was followed by a continued decrease throughout the flight with a return to the pre-flight norm within 16 days after the flight. The quantitative load of aerobic bacteria increased during the flight, due largely to an increase in coryneforms and micrococcaceae. The quantitative load of anaerobic bacteria decreased before and during the flight. No instance of microbial shock or intercrew transfer of micro-organisms was demonstrated. These findings indicate that alterations in the skin flora do not pose any unusual problem during short duration space flights. Further, there are no indications that problems will arise on longer missions.

Handbook of Human Performance Measures and Crew Requirements for Flight Deck Research

DOT National Transportation Integrated Search

1995-12-01

The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) Technical Center envisions that their : studies will require standard measure of pilot/crew performance. Therefore, : the FAA commissioned the Crew System Ergonomics Information Analysis Center : (CSERIAC) to...

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...

Apollo 13 MCC - MSC

NASA Image and Video Library

1970-04-14

S70-34986 (14 April 1970) --- A group of six astronauts and two flight controllers monitor the console activity in the Mission Operations Control Room (MOCR) of the Mission Control Center (MCC) during the problem-plagued Apollo 13 lunar landing mission. Seated, left to right, are MOCR Guidance Officer Raymond F. Teague; astronaut Edgar D. Mitchell, Apollo 14 prime crew lunar module pilot; and astronaut Alan B. Shepard Jr., Apollo 14 prime crew commander. Standing, left to right, are scientist-astronaut Anthony W. England; astronaut Joe H. Engle, Apollo 14 backup crew lunar module pilot; astronaut Eugene A. Cernan, Apollo 14 backup crew commander; astronaut Ronald E. Evans, Apollo 14 backup crew command module pilot; and M.P. Frank, a flight controller. When this picture was made, the Apollo 13 moon landing had already been canceled, and the Apollo 13 crew men were in trans-Earth trajectory attempting to bring their damaged spacecraft back home.

KENNEDY SPACE CENTER, FLA. - In the Orbiter Processing Facility, STS-114 crew members look at the tiles underneath Atlantis. From left (in flight suits) are Mission Specialists Stephen Robinson and Andy Thomas, Commander Eileen Collins and, at right, Mission Specialist Soichi Noguchi, who is with the Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency, JAXA. Accompanying them is 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. - In the Orbiter Processing Facility, STS-114 crew members look at the tiles underneath Atlantis. From left (in flight suits) are Mission Specialists Stephen Robinson and Andy Thomas, Commander Eileen Collins and, at right, Mission Specialist Soichi Noguchi, who is with the Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency, JAXA. Accompanying them is 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.

STS-114 Flight Day 8 Highlights

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

2005-01-01

The major activities of Day 8 for the STS-114 crew of the Space Shuttle Discovery (Commander Eileen Collins, Pilot James Kelly, Mission Specialists Soichi Noguchi, Stephen Robinson, Andrew Thomas, Wendy Lawrence, and Charles Camarda) and the Expedition 11 crew of the International Space Station (ISS) (Commander Sergei Krikalev and NASA ISS Science Officer and Flight Engineer John Phillips) are a press conference and a conversation with President Bush. The two crews are interviewed by American, Japanese, and Russian media. Discovery crew members on the shuttle's mid-deck review paperwork regarding the impending extravehicular activity (EVA) to remove gap fillers from underneath the orbiter, and the Space Station Remote Manipulator System grapples the External Stowage Platform-2 in the Shuttle's payload bay. Finally, Mission control grants the shuttle crew some time off.

Challenges of assuring crew safety in space shuttle missions with international cargoes.

PubMed

Vongsouthy, C; Stenger-Nguyen, P A; Nguyen, H V; Nguyen, P H; Huang, M C; Alexander, R G

2004-02-01

The top priority in America's manned space flight program is the assurance of crew and vehicle safety. This priority gained greater focus during and after the Space Shuttle return-to-flight mission (STS-26). One of the interesting challenges has been to assure crew safety and adequate protection of the Space Shuttle, as a national resource, from increasingly diverse cargoes and operations. The control of hazards associated with the deployment of complex payloads and cargoes has involved many international participants. These challenges are examined in some detail along with examples of how crew safety has evolved in the manned space program and how the international partners have addressed various scenarios involving control and mitigation of potential hazards to crew and vehicle safety. c2003 Published by Elsevier Ltd.

STS-101: Flight Day Highlights / CAR

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 launch of STS-101, beginning with the pre-flight breakfast and the crew's introduction. The videotape next shows a pre-dawn view of the orbiter waiting the crew's arrival. The crew is shown getting into their space suits and then climbing onboard the shuttle. In this videotape we are shown a few of the crew getting into their places onboard the shuttle. We are also shown the newly designed "glass cockpit", which gives the pilot and the commander better views and are told that this is the first flight of the shuttle with the new design. After the hatch is closed, we see the shuttle launch into the night, followed by the Solid Rocket Boosters (SRB) separation.

[Observation on twins of cosmic radiation influence as a risk factor].

PubMed

Vişănescu, Magdalena

2009-01-01

During flight, cosmic radiation is capable to penetrate the walls of airplanes and produce mutations in human chromosomes. To evaluate the correlations between cosmic radiation and the pathology of flying personnel. Two twin patients, one with 15 years work as a flight crew member, and the other with regular work on the ground. The patients were examined clinically, biochemically and with imaging methods. The genetic and environmental contribution to their pathology was noted. The patient, working in flight, received additional genetic tests to refute or to confirm the presence of chromosome alterations induced by the cosmic radiation. The patient, member of the flight crew, presented hypercholesterolemia, more evident structure modifications of the mammary gland, but chromosome alterations were not present. Having a first grade relative with dyslipidemia and uterine cancer, the structural or blood homeostasis modifications of the flight crew member can be either due to a high, genetically transmitted, susceptibility to the effects of the plane's microclimate and possibly to effects of lifestyle.

Overview of Orion Crew Module and Launch Abort Vehicle Dynamic Stability

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

Owens, Donald B.; Aibicjpm. Vamessa V.

2011-01-01

With the retirement of the Space Shuttle, NASA is designing a new spacecraft, called Orion, to fly astronauts to low earth orbit and beyond. Characterization of the dynamic stability of the Orion spacecraft is important for the design of the spacecraft and trajectory construction. Dynamic stability affects the stability and control of the Orion Crew Module during re-entry, especially below Mach = 2.0 and including flight under the drogues. The Launch Abort Vehicle is affected by dynamic stability as well, especially during the re-orientation and heatshield forward segments of the flight. The dynamic stability was assessed using the forced oscillation technique, free-to-oscillate, ballistic range, and sub-scale free-flight tests. All of the test techniques demonstrated that in heatshield-forward flight the Crew Module and Launch Abort Vehicle are dynamically unstable in a significant portion of their flight trajectory. This paper will provide a brief overview of the Orion dynamic aero program and a high-level summary of the dynamic stability characteristics of the Orion spacecraft.

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.

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.

Commercial Airline In-Flight Emergency: Medical Student Response and Review of Medicolegal Issues.

PubMed

Bukowski, Josh H; Richards, John R

2016-01-01

As the prevalence of air travel increases, in-flight medical emergencies occur more frequently. A significant percentage of these emergencies occur when there is no certified physician, nurse, or paramedic onboard. During these situations, flight crews might enlist the help of noncertified passengers, such as medical students, dentists, or emergency medical technicians in training. Although Good Samaritan laws exist, many health care providers are unfamiliar with the limited legal protections and resources provided to them after responding to an in-flight emergency. A 78-year-old woman lost consciousness and became pulseless onboard a commercial aircraft. No physician was available. A medical student responded and coordinated care with the flight crew, ground support physician, and other passengers. After receiving a packet (4 g) of sublingual sucrose and 1 L i.v. crystalloid, the patient regained pulses and consciousness. The medical student made the decision not to divert the aircraft based on the patient's initial response to therapy and, 45 min later, the patient had normal vital signs. Upon landing, she was met and taken by paramedics to the nearest emergency department for evaluation of her collapse. WHY SHOULD AN EMERGENCY PHYSICIAN BE AWARE OF THIS?: Emergency physicians are the most qualified to assist in-flight emergencies, but they might not be aware of the medicolegal risks involved with in-flight care, the resources available, and the role of the flight crew in liability and decision making. This case, which involved a medical student who was not given explicit protection under Good Samaritan laws, illustrates the authority of the flight crew during these events and highlights areas of uncertainty in the legislation for volunteer medical professionals. Copyright © 2016 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

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.

KSC00pp0448

NASA Image and Video Library

2000-04-05

KENNEDY SPACE CENTER, FLA. -- 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 Yury 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

KSC-00pp0448

NASA Image and Video Library

2000-04-05

KENNEDY SPACE CENTER, FLA. -- 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 Yury 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

Lightning strikes in the distance as the Space Shuttle Discovery receives post-flight processing in the Mate-Demate Device, following its landing at NASA DFRC

NASA Image and Video Library

2005-08-14

Lightning strikes in the distance as the Space Shuttle Discovery receives post-flight processing in the Mate-Demate Device (MDD), following its landing at NASA's Dryden Flight Research Center in California. The gantry-like MDD structure is used for servicing the shuttle orbiters in preparation for their ferry flight back to the Kennedy Space Center in Florida, including mounting the shuttle atop NASA's modified Boeing 747 Shuttle Carrier Aircraft. Space Shuttle Discovery landed safely at NASA's Dryden Flight Research Center at Edwards Air Force Base in California at 5:11:22 a.m. PDT, August 9, 2005, following the very successful 14-day STS-114 return to flight mission. During their two weeks in space, Commander Eileen Collins and her six crewmates tested out new safety procedures and delivered supplies and equipment the International Space Station. Discovery spent two weeks in space, where the crew demonstrated new methods to inspect and repair the Shuttle in orbit. The crew also delivered supplies, outfitted and performed maintenance on the International Space Station. A number of these tasks were conducted during three spacewalks. In an unprecedented event, spacewalkers were called upon to remove protruding gap fillers from the heat shield on Discovery's underbelly. In other spacewalk activities, astronauts installed an external platform onto the Station's Quest Airlock and replaced one of the orbital outpost's Control Moment Gyroscopes. Inside the Station, the STS-114 crew conducted joint operations with the Expedition 11 crew. They unloaded fresh supplies from the Shuttle and the Raffaello Multi-Purpose Logistics Module. Before Discovery undocked, the crews filled Raffeallo with unneeded items and returned to Shuttle payload bay. Discovery launched on July 26 and spent almost 14 days on orbit.

A technician leaves the 'white room,' the access point for entering the Space Shuttle Discovery during post-flight processing at NASA DFRC in California

NASA Image and Video Library

2005-08-14

A technician leaves the 'white room', the access point for entering the Space Shuttle Discovery during post-flight processing in the Mate-Demate Device (MDD) at NASA's Dryden Flight Research Center in California. The gantry-like MDD structure is used for servicing the shuttle orbiters in preparation for their ferry flight back to the Kennedy Space Center in Florida, including mounting the shuttle atop NASA's modified Boeing 747 Shuttle Carrier Aircraft. Space Shuttle Discovery landed safely at NASA's Dryden Flight Research Center at Edwards Air Force Base in California at 5:11:22 a.m. PDT, August 9, 2005, following the very successful 14-day STS-114 return to flight mission. During their two weeks in space, Commander Eileen Collins and her six crewmates tested out new safety procedures and delivered supplies and equipment the International Space Station. Discovery spent two weeks in space, where the crew demonstrated new methods to inspect and repair the Shuttle in orbit. The crew also delivered supplies, outfitted and performed maintenance on the International Space Station. A number of these tasks were conducted during three spacewalks. In an unprecedented event, spacewalkers were called upon to remove protruding gap fillers from the heat shield on Discovery's underbelly. In other spacewalk activities, astronauts installed an external platform onto the Station's Quest Airlock and replaced one of the orbital outpost's Control Moment Gyroscopes. Inside the Station, the STS-114 crew conducted joint operations with the Expedition 11 crew. They unloaded fresh supplies from the Shuttle and the Raffaello Multi-Purpose Logistics Module. Before Discovery undocked, the crews filled Raffeallo with unneeded items and returned to Shuttle payload bay. Discovery launched on July 26 and spent almost 14 days on orbit.

NASA's modified 747 Shuttle Carrier Aircraft is positioned under the Space Shuttle Discovery to be attached for their ferry flight to the Kennedy Space Center

NASA Image and Video Library

2005-08-18

NASA's specially modified 747 Shuttle Carrier Aircraft, or SCA, is positioned under the Space Shuttle Discovery to be attached for their ferry flight to the Kennedy Space Center in Florida. After its post-flight servicing and preparation at NASA Dryden in California, Discovery's return flight to Kennedy aboard the 747 will take approximately 2 days, with stops at several intermediate points for refueling. Space Shuttle Discovery landed safely at NASA's Dryden Flight Research Center at Edwards Air Force Base at 5:11:22 a.m. PDT, August 9, 2005, following the very successful 14-day STS-114 return to flight mission. During their two weeks in space, Commander Eileen Collins and her six crewmates tested out new safety procedures and delivered supplies and equipment the International Space Station. Discovery spent two weeks in space, where the crew demonstrated new methods to inspect and repair the Shuttle in orbit. The crew also delivered supplies, outfitted and performed maintenance on the International Space Station. A number of these tasks were conducted during three spacewalks. In an unprecedented event, spacewalkers were called upon to remove protruding gap fillers from the heat shield on Discovery's underbelly. In other spacewalk activities, astronauts installed an external platform onto the Station's Quest Airlock and replaced one of the orbital outpost's Control Moment Gyroscopes. Inside the Station, the STS-114 crew conducted joint operations with the Expedition 11 crew. They unloaded fresh supplies from the Shuttle and the Raffaello Multi-Purpose Logistics Module. Before Discovery undocked, the crews filled Raffeallo with unneeded items and returned to Shuttle payload bay. Discovery launched on July 26 and spent almost 14 days on orbit.

The sun sets on the Space Shuttle Discovery during post-flight processing in the Mate-Demate Device (MDD), following its landing at NASA DFRC in California

NASA Image and Video Library

2005-08-14

The sun sets on the Space Shuttle Discovery during post-flight processing in the Mate-Demate Device (MDD), following its landing at NASA's Dryden Flight Research Center in California. The gantry-like MDD structure is used for servicing the shuttle orbiters in preparation for their ferry flight back to the Kennedy Space Center in Florida, including mounting the shuttle atop NASA's modified Boeing 747 Shuttle Carrier Aircraft. Space Shuttle Discovery landed safely at NASA's Dryden Flight Research Center at Edwards Air Force Base in California at 5:11:22 a.m. PDT, August 9, 2005, following the very successful 14-day STS-114 return to flight mission. During their two weeks in space, Commander Eileen Collins and her six crewmates tested out new safety procedures and delivered supplies and equipment the International Space Station. Discovery spent two weeks in space, where the crew demonstrated new methods to inspect and repair the Shuttle in orbit. The crew also delivered supplies, outfitted and performed maintenance on the International Space Station. A number of these tasks were conducted during three spacewalks. In an unprecedented event, spacewalkers were called upon to remove protruding gap fillers from the heat shield on Discovery's underbelly. In other spacewalk activities, astronauts installed an external platform onto the Station's Quest Airlock and replaced one of the orbital outpost's Control Moment Gyroscopes. Inside the Station, the STS-114 crew conducted joint operations with the Expedition 11 crew. They unloaded fresh supplies from the Shuttle and the Raffaello Multi-Purpose Logistics Module. Before Discovery undocked, the crews filled Raffeallo with unneeded items and returned to Shuttle payload bay. Discovery launched on July 26 and spent almost 14 days on orbit.

The Space Shuttle Discovery hitched a ride on a special 747 carrier aircraft for the flight from California to the Kennedy Space Center, FL, on August 19, 2005

NASA Image and Video Library

2005-08-19

The Space Shuttle Discovery hitched a ride on NASA's modified Boeing 747 Shuttle Carrier Aircraft for the flight from the Dryden Flight Research Center in California, to Kennedy Space Center, Florida, on August 19, 2005. The cross-country ferry flight to return Discovery to Florida after it's landing in California will take two days, with stops at several intermediate points for refueling. Space Shuttle Discovery landed safely at NASA's Dryden Flight Research Center at Edwards Air Force Base in California at 5:11:22 a.m. PDT, August 9, 2005, following the very successful 14-day STS-114 return to flight mission. During their two weeks in space, Commander Eileen Collins and her six crewmates tested out new safety procedures and delivered supplies and equipment the International Space Station. Discovery spent two weeks in space, where the crew demonstrated new methods to inspect and repair the Shuttle in orbit. The crew also delivered supplies, outfitted and performed maintenance on the International Space Station. A number of these tasks were conducted during three spacewalks. In an unprecedented event, spacewalkers were called upon to remove protruding gap fillers from the heat shield on Discovery's underbelly. In other spacewalk activities, astronauts installed an external platform onto the Station's Quest Airlock and replaced one of the orbital outpost's Control Moment Gyroscopes. Inside the Station, the STS-114 crew conducted joint operations with the Expedition 11 crew. They unloaded fresh supplies from the Shuttle and the Raffaello Multi-Purpose Logistics Module. Before Discovery undocked, the crews filled Raffeallo with unneeded items and returned to Shuttle payload bay. Discovery launched on July 26 and spent almost 14 days on orbit.

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 & Copyright © 2017 Association of Military Surgeons of the U.S.

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.

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.

STS 87: Meal - Suit Up - Depart O&C - Launch Columbia On Orbit - Landing - Crew Egress

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

1997-01-01

The STS-87 Space Shuttle Columbia mission begins with the introduction of the seven crew members. The seven crew members include: Commander Kevin R. Kregel, pilot Steven W. Lindsey, mission specialists: Winston E. Scott, Kalpana Chawla and Takao Doi and payload specialist Leonid K. Kadenyuk. The United States Microgravity Payload (USMP-4), Orbital Acceleration Research Experiment (OARE), the EVA Demonstration Flight Test 5 (EDFT-05), Shuttle Ozone Limb Sending Experiment (SOLSE), Loop Heat Pump (LHP), and Sodium Sulfur Battery Experiment (NaSBE) were all shown during this video presentation. The launch of the STS-87 from different Kennedy Space Flight Center (KSFC) areas and Pre-flight training at the Johnson Space Center is presented. The retrieve and recovery spot satellite are also shown. Also, the landing of the Space Shuttle Columbia is presented from different areas at Kennedy Space Flight Center.

Ares I-X Flight Test Vehicle: Stack 5 Modal Test

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

Buehrle, Ralph D.; Templeton, Justin D.; Reaves, Mercedes C.; Horta, Lucas G.; Gaspar, James L.; Bartolotta, Paul A.; Parks, Russel A.; Lazor, Danel R.

2010-01-01

Ares I-X was the first flight test vehicle used in the development of NASA's Ares I crew launch vehicle. The Ares I-X used a 4-segment reusable solid rocket booster from the Space Shuttle heritage with mass simulators for the 5th segment, upper stage, crew module and launch abort system. Three modal tests were defined to verify the dynamic finite element model of the Ares I-X flight test vehicle. Test configurations included two partial stacks and the full Ares I-X flight test vehicle on the Mobile Launcher Platform. This report focuses on the first modal test that was performed on the top section of the vehicle referred to as Stack 5, which consisted of the spacecraft adapter, service module, crew module and launch abort system simulators. This report describes the test requirements, constraints, pre-test analysis, test operations and data analysis for the Ares I-X Stack 5 modal test.

Space Shuttle Projects

NASA Image and Video Library

1989-11-27

The primary payload for Space Shuttle Mission STS-35, launched December 2, 1990, was the ASTRO-1 Observatory. Designed for round the clock observation of the celestial sphere in ultraviolet and X-ray astronomy, ASTRO-1 featured a collection of four telescopes: the Hopkins Ultraviolet Telescope (HUT); the Wisconsin Ultraviolet Photo- Polarimeter Experiment (WUPPE); the Ultraviolet Imaging Telescope (UIT); and the Broad Band X-ray Telescope (BBXRT). Ultraviolet telescopes mounted on Spacelab elements in cargo bay were to be operated in shifts by flight crew. Loss of both data display units (used for pointing telescopes and operating experiments) during mission impacted crew-aiming procedures and forced ground teams at Marshall Space Flight Center to aim ultraviolet telescopes with fine-tuning by flight crew. BBXRT, also mounted in cargo bay, was directed from outset by ground-based operators at Goddard Space Flight Center. This is the logo or emblem that was designed to represent the ASTRO-1 payload.

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.

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...

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

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.

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

Development and Execution of Autonomous Procedures Onboard the International Space Station to Support the Next Phase of Human Space Exploration

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

Beisert, Susan; Rodriggs, Michael; Moreno, Francisco; Korth, David; Gibson, Stephen; Lee, Young H.; Eagles, Donald E.

2013-01-01

Now that major assembly of the International Space Station (ISS) is complete, NASA's focus has turned to using this high fidelity in-space research testbed to not only advance fundamental science research, but also demonstrate and mature technologies and develop operational concepts that will enable future human exploration missions beyond low Earth orbit. The ISS as a Testbed for Analog Research (ISTAR) project was established to reduce risks for manned missions to exploration destinations by utilizing ISS as a high fidelity micro-g laboratory to demonstrate technologies, operations concepts, and techniques associated with crew autonomous operations. One of these focus areas is the development and execution of ISS Testbed for Analog Research (ISTAR) autonomous flight crew procedures intended to increase crew autonomy that will be required for long duration human exploration missions. Due to increasing communications delays and reduced logistics resupply, autonomous procedures are expected to help reduce crew reliance on the ground flight control team, increase crew performance, and enable the crew to become more subject-matter experts on both the exploration space vehicle systems and the scientific investigation operations that will be conducted on a long duration human space exploration mission. These tests make use of previous or ongoing projects tested in ground analogs such as Research and Technology Studies (RATS) and NASA Extreme Environment Mission Operations (NEEMO). Since the latter half of 2012, selected non-critical ISS systems crew procedures have been used to develop techniques for building ISTAR autonomous procedures, and ISS flight crews have successfully executed them without flight controller involvement. Although the main focus has been preparing for exploration, the ISS has been a beneficiary of this synergistic effort and is considering modifying additional standard ISS procedures that may increase crew efficiency, reduce operational costs, and raise the amount of crew time available for scientific research. The next phase of autonomous procedure development is expected to include payload science and human research investigations. Additionally, ISS International Partners have expressed interest in participating in this effort. The recently approved one-year crew expedition starting in 2015, consisting of one Russian and one U.S. Operating Segment (USOS) crewmember, will be used not only for long duration human research investigations but also for the testing of exploration operations concepts, including crew autonomy.

Thunderstorms, Indian Ocean

NASA Image and Video Library

1990-12-10

STS035-607-024 (2-10 Dec. 1990) --- This is one of 25 visuals used by the STS-35 crew at its Dec. 20, 1990 post-flight press conference. Space Shuttle Columbia's flight of almost nine days duration (launched December 2 from Kennedy Space Center (KSC) and landed December 10 at Edwards Air Force Base) carried the Astro-1 payload and was dedicated to astrophysics. The mission involved a seven-man crew. Crew members were astronauts Vance D. Brand, Guy S. Gardner, Jeffrey A. Hoffman, Robert A.R. Parker and John M. (Mike) Lounge; and payload specialists Samuel T. Durrance and Ronald A. Parise. Thunderstorm systems over the Pacific Ocean, with heavy sunglint, as photographed with a handheld Rolleiflex camera aimed through Columbia's aft flight deck windows.

Medical Operations Console Procedure Evaluation: BME Response to Crew Call Down for an Emergency

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

Johnson-Troop; Pettys, Marianne; Hurst, Victor, IV; Smaka, Todd; Paul, Bonnie; Rosenquist, Kevin; Gast, Karin; Gillis, David; McCulley, Phyllis

2006-01-01

International Space Station (ISS) Mission Operations are managed by multiple flight control disciplines located at the lead Mission Control Center (MCC) at NASA-Johnson Space Center (JSC). ISS Medical Operations are supported by the complementary roles of Flight Surgeons (Surgeon) and Biomedical Engineer (BME) flight controllers. The Surgeon, a board certified physician, oversees all medical concerns of the crew and the BME provides operational and engineering support for Medical Operations Crew Health Care System. ISS Medical Operations is currently addressing the coordinated response to a crew call down for an emergent medical event, in particular when the BME is the only Medical Operations representative in MCC. In this case, the console procedure BME Response to Crew Call Down for an Emergency will be used. The procedure instructs the BME to contact a Surgeon as soon as possible, coordinate with other flight disciplines to establish a Private Medical Conference (PMC) for the crew and Surgeon, gather information from the crew if time permits, and provide Surgeon with pertinent console resources. It is paramount that this procedure is clearly written and easily navigated to assist the BME to respond consistently and efficiently. A total of five BME flight controllers participated in the study. Each BME participant sat in a simulated MCC environment at a console configured with resources specific to the BME MCC console and was presented with two scripted emergency call downs from an ISS crew member. Each participant used the procedure while interacting with analog MCC disciplines to respond to the crew call down. Audio and video recordings of the simulations were analyzed and each BME participant's actions were compared to the procedure. Structured debriefs were conducted at the conclusion of both simulations. The procedure was evaluated for its ability to elicit consistent responses from each BME participant. Trials were examined for deviations in procedure task completion and/or navigation, in particular the execution of the Surgeon call sequence. Debrief comments were used to analyze unclear procedural steps and to discern any discrepancies between the procedure and generally accepted BME actions. The sequence followed by BME participants differed considerably from the sequence intended by the procedure. Common deviations included the call sequence used to contact Surgeon, the content of BME and crew interaction and the gathering of pertinent console resources. Differing perceptions of task priority and imprecise language seem to have caused multiple deviations from the procedure s intended sequence. The study generated 40 recommendations for the procedure, of which 34 are being implemented. These recommendations address improving the clarity of the instructions, identifying training considerations, expediting Surgeon contact, improving cues for anticipated flight control team communication and identifying missing console tools.

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-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.

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.

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.

KSC-07pd3565

NASA Image and Video Library

2007-11-30

KENNEDY SPACE CENTER, FLA. -- In the Orbiter Processing Facility, STS-123 crew members are lowered into space shuttle Endeavour's payload bay to check out the equipment. At right is Mission Specialist Garrett Reisman; at left is Mission Specialist Takao Doi. The crew is at NASA's Kennedy Space Center for a crew equipment interface test, a process of familiarization with payloads, hardware and the space shuttle. Doi represents the Japanese Aerospace and Exploration Agency. Reisman will join the Expedition 16 crew on the International Space Station, replacing flight engineer Leopold Eyharts. The STS-123 mission is targeted for launch on space shuttle Endeavour on Feb. 14. It will be the 25th assembly flight of the station. Photo credit: NASA/Kim Shiflett

KSC-07pd3566

NASA Image and Video Library

2007-11-30

KENNEDY SPACE CENTER, FLA. -- In the Orbiter Processing Facility, STS-123 crew members are lowered into space shuttle Endeavour's payload bay to check out the equipment. At right is Mission Specialist Garrett Reisman; at left is Mission Specialist Takao Doi. The crew is at NASA's Kennedy Space Center for a crew equipment interface test, a process of familiarization with payloads, hardware and the space shuttle. Doi represents the Japanese Aerospace and Exploration Agency. Reisman will join the Expedition 16 crew on the International Space Station, replacing flight engineer Leopold Eyharts. The STS-123 mission is targeted for launch on space shuttle Endeavour on Feb. 14. It will be the 25th assembly flight of the station. Photo credit: NASA/Kim Shiflett

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.

Orion’s first flight on This Week @NASA - December 8, 2014

NASA Image and Video Library

2014-12-08

The successful first flight test of NASA’s Orion spacecraft on Dec. 5 not only was a historic moment for the agency – but also was a critical step on NASA’s Journey to Mars. Orion rode to space from Cape Canaveral Air Force Station on a Delta IV heavy rocket with no crew, but loaded with about 1,200 sensors. The flight test basically was a compilation of the riskiest events that will happen when astronauts fly on Orion on deep space missions. Also, Journey to Mars briefing, 1st SLS flight barrel and Commercial crew milestone.

STS-105 Flight Control Team Photo

NASA Image and Video Library

2001-07-31

JSC2001-02115 (31 July 2001) --- The flight controllers for the Ascent/Entry shift for the upcoming STS-105 mission pose with the assigned astronaut crew for a team portrait in the Shuttle Flight Control Room (WFCR) of Houston's Mission Control Center (MCC). Flight director John Shannon (left center) and STS-105 commander Scott J. Horowitz hold the mission logo. Also pictured on the front row are spacecraft communicator Kenneth D. Cockrell and STS-105 crew members Daniel T. Barry, Frederick W. (Rick) Sturckow and Patrick G. Forrester. The team had been participating in an integrated simulation for the scheduled August mission.

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-95 Day 09 Highlights

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

1998-01-01

On this ninth day of the STS-95 mission, the flight crew, Cmdr. Curtis L. Brown, Pilot Steven W. Lindsey, Mission Specialists Scott E. Parazynski, Stephen K. Robinson, and Pedro Duque, and Payload Specialists Chiaki Mukai and John H. Glenn, spend a good part of their day checking out important spacecraft systems for entry and landing. The commander and pilot begin the flight control system checkout by powering up one auxiliary power unit and evaluating the performance of aerodynamic surfaces and flight controls. The flight crew conducts a reaction control system hot fire, followed by a test of the communications system.

Human aspects of mission safety

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

Connors, Mary M.

1989-01-01

Recent discussions of psychology's involvement in spaceflight have emphasized its role in enhancing space living conditions and incresing crew productivity. While these goals are central to space missions, behavioral scientists should not lose sight of a more basic flight requirement - that of crew safety. This paper examines some of the processes employed in the American space program in support of crew safety and suggests that behavioral scientists could contribute to flight safety, both through these formal processes and through less formal methods. Various safety areas of relevance to behavioral scientists are discussed.

The Role of Communications, Socio-Psychological, and Personality Factors in the Maintenance of Crew Coordination

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

Foushee, H. Clayton

1982-01-01

There is increasing evidence that many air transport incidents and accidents are the result of the improper or inadequate utilization of the resources accessible to flight dock crew members. These resources obviously include the hardware and technical information necessary for the safe and efficient conduct of the flight, but they also Include the human resources which must be coordinated effectively. The focus of this paper is upon the human resources, and how communication styles, socio-psychological factors, and personality characteristics can affect crew coordination.

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.

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.

Expedition 35 Landing

NASA Image and Video Library

2013-05-14

Expedition 35 NASA Flight Engineer Tom Marshburn, center, is attended to by his nurse and crew support personnel following his landing in the Soyuz TMA-07M spacecraft in a remote area near the town of Zhezkazgan, Kazakhstan, Tuesday, May 14, 2013. Marshburn and crew mates Expedition 35 Commander Chris Hadfield of the Canadian Space Agency (CSA) and Russian Flight Engineer Roman Romanenko of the Russian Federal Space Agency (Roscosmos) returned to earth from more than five months onboard the International Space Station where they served as members of the Expedition 34 and 35 crews. Photo Credit: (NASA/Carla Cioffi)

STS-114: Discovery Question & Answer with Joint Crew on ISS

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

2005-01-01

STS-114 Commander Eileen Collins, Pilot James Kelly, Mission Specialists Souichi Noguchi, Stephen Robinson, Charles Camarda, Andrew Thomas, Wendy Lawrence, and Expedition 11 Commander Sergei Krikalev and Flight Engineer John Phillips answers questions from United States, Japanese and Russian News media in the Destiny laboratory of the International Space Station. Risk, safety, extravehicular activities, spacewalks, re-entry, gap fillers, tiles, flight operations, flight crew activities, team work, and life in space are topics covered with the News media.

Captain upgrade CRM training: A new focus for enhanced flight operations

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

Taggart, William R.

1993-01-01

Crew Resource Management (CRM) research has resulted in numerous payoffs of applied applications in flight training and standardization of air carrier flight operations. This paper describes one example of how basic research into human factors and crew performance was used to create a specific training intervention for upgrading new captains for a major United States air carrier. The basis for the training is examined along with some of the specific training methods used, and several unexpeced results.

Mastracchio signs Mission Patch in A/L

NASA Image and Video Library

2014-05-13

ISS039-E-020704 (13 May 2014) --- NASA astronaut Rick Mastracchio, Expedition 39 flight engineer, signs a wall in the Quest airlock of the Earth-orbiting International Space Station after mounting his crew patch, continuing a Quest-based tradition of station crew members who have participated in space walks on their respective flights. A short time later, Mastracchio joined Expedition 39 Commander Koichi Wakata of the Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency and Flight Engineer Mikhail Tyurin of Roscosmos as they departed the orbital outpost in a Soyuz vehicle.

Design, Integration, Certification and Testing of the Orion Crew Module Propulsion System

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

McKay, Heather; Coffman, Eric; May, Sarah; Freeman, Rich; Cain, George; Albright, John; Schoenberg, Rich; Delventhal, Rex

2014-01-01

The Orion Crew Module Propulsion Reaction Control System is currently complete and ready for flight as part of the Orion program's first flight test, Exploration Flight Test One (EFT-1). As part of the first article design, build, test, and integration effort, several key lessons learned have been noted and are planned for incorporation into the next build of the system. This paper provides an overview of those lessons learned and a status on the Orion propulsion system progress to date.

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-111 crew exits O&C building on way to LC-39A

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

2002-01-01

KENNEDY SPACE CENTER, FLA. -- The STS-111 and Expedition 5 crews hurry from the Operations and Checkout Building for a second launch attempt aboard Space Shuttle Endeavour. 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.

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.

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?

Air Ground Integration Study

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

Lozito, Sandy; Mackintosh, Margaret-Anne; DiMeo, Karen; Kopardekar, Parimal

2002-01-01

A simulation was conducted to examine the effect of shared air/ground authority when each is equipped with enhanced traffic- and conflict-alerting systems. The potential benefits of an advanced air traffic management (ATM) concept referred to as "free flight" include improved safety through enhanced conflict detection and resolution capabilities, increased flight-operations management, and better decision-making tools for air traffic controllers and flight crews. One element of the free-flight concept suggests shifting aircraft separation responsibility from air traffic controllers to flight crews, thereby creating an environment with "shared-separation" authority. During FY00. NASA, the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), and the Volpe National Transportation Systems Center completed the first integrated, high-fidelity, real-time, human-in-the-loop simulation.

International Space Station (ISS)

NASA Image and Video Library

2001-10-08

The STS-108 crew members take a break from their training to pose for their preflight portrait. Astronauts Dominic L. Gorie right) and Mark E. Kelly, commander and pilot, respectively, are seated in front. In the rear are astronauts Linda M. Godwin and Daniel L. Tani, both mission specialists. The 12th flight to the International Space Station (ISS) and final flight of 2001, the STS-108 mission launched aboard the Space Shuttle Endeavour on December 5, 2001. They were accompanied to the ISS by the Expedition Four crew, which remained on board the orbital outpost for several months. The Expedition Three crew members returned home with the STS-108 astronauts. In addition to the Expedition crew exchange, STS-108 crew deployed the student project STARSHINE, and delivered 2.7 metric tons (3 tons) of equipment and supplies to the ISS.

Expedition Three, Expedition Two and STS-105 crews pose in the U.S. Laboratory

NASA Image and Video Library

2001-08-17

ISS003-E-5169 (17 August 2001) --- The Expedition Three (white shirts), STS-105 (striped shirts), and Expedition Two (red shirts) crews assemble for a group photo in the Destiny laboratory on the International Space Station (ISS). The Expedition Three crew members are, from front to back, Frank L. Culbertson, Jr., mission commander; and cosmonauts Vladimir N. Dezhurov and Mikhail Tyurin, flight engineers; STS-105 crew members are, front row, Patrick G. Forrester and Daniel T. Barry, mission specialists, and back row, Scott J. Horowitz, commander, and Frederick W. (Rick) Sturckow, pilot; Expedition Two crew members are, from front to back, cosmonaut Yury V. Usachev, mission commander, James S. Voss and Susan J. Helms, flight engineers. Dezhurov, Tyurin and Usachev represent Rosaviakosmos. This image was taken with a digital still camera.

Expedition Three, Expedition Two and STS-105 crews pose in the U.S. Laboratory

NASA Image and Video Library

2001-08-17

ISS003-E-5168 (17 August 2001) --- The Expedition Three (white shirts), STS-105 (striped shirts), and Expedition Two (red shirts) crews assemble for a group photo in the Destiny laboratory on the International Space Station (ISS). The Expedition Three crew members are, from front to back, Frank L. Culbertson, Jr., mission commander; and cosmonauts Vladimir N. Dezhurov and Mikhail Tyurin, flight engineers; STS-105 crew members are, front row, Patrick G. Forrester and Daniel T. Barry, mission specialists, and back row, Scott J. Horowitz, commander, and Frederick W. (Rick) Sturckow, pilot; Expedition Two crew members are, from front to back, cosmonaut Yury V. Usachev, mission commander, James S. Voss and Susan J. Helms, flight engineers. Dezhurov, Tyurin and Usachev represent Rosaviakosmos. This image was taken with a digital still camera.

Expedition Three, Expedition Two and STS-105 crews pose in the U.S. Laboratory

NASA Image and Video Library

2001-08-17

ISS003-E-5171 (17 August 2001) --- The Expedition Three (white shirts), STS-105 (striped shirts), and Expedition Two (red shirts) crews assemble for a group photo in the Destiny laboratory on the International Space Station (ISS). The Expedition Three crew members are, from bottom to top, cosmonauts Mikhail Tyurin and Vladimir N. Dezhurov, both flight engineers, and Frank L. Culbertson, Jr., mission commander; STS-105 crew members are, front row, Daniel T. Barry, mission specialist, and Scott J. Horowitz, commander, back row, Frederick W. (Rick) Sturckow, pilot, and Patrick G. Forrester, mission specialist; Expedition Two crew members are, from top to bottom, cosmonaut Yury V. Usachev, mission commander, James S. Voss and Susan J. Helms, flight engineers. Dezhurov, Tyurin and Usachev represent Rosaviakosmos. This image was taken with a digital still camera.

The Effects of Liquid Cooling Garments on Post-Space Flight Orthostatic Intolerance

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

Billica, Roger; Kraft, Daniel

1997-01-01

Post space flight orthostatic intolerance among Space Shuttle crew members following exposure to extended periods of microgravity has been of significant concern to the safety of the shuttle program. Following the Challenger accident, flight crews were required to wear launch and entry suits (LES). It was noted that overall, there appeared to be a higher degree of orthostatic intolerance among the post-Challenger crews (approaching 30%). It was hypothesized that the increased heat load incurred when wearing the LES, contributed to an increased degree of orthostatic intolerance, possibly mediated through increased peripheral vasodilatation triggered by the heat load. The use of liquid cooling garments (LCG) beneath the launch and entry suits was gradually implemented among flight crews in an attempt to decrease heat load, increase crew comfort, and hopefully improve orthostatic tolerance during reentry and landing. The hypothesis that the use of the LCG during reentry and landing would decrease the degree of orthostasis has not been previously tested. Operational stand-tests were performed pre and post flight to assess crewmember's cardiovascular system's ability to respond to gravitational stress. Stand test and debrief information were collected and databased for 27 space shuttle missions. 63 crewpersons wearing the LCG, and 70 crewpersons not wearing the LCG were entered into the database for analysis. Of 17 crewmembers who exhibited pre-syncopal symptoms at the R+O analysis, 15 were not wearing the LCG. This corresponds to a 21% rate of postflight orthostatic intolerance among those without the LCG, and a 3% rate for those wearing LCG. There were differences in these individual's average post-flight maximal systolic blood pressure, and lower minimal Systolic Blood pressures in those without LCG. Though other factors, such as type of fluid loading, and exercise have improved concurrently with LCG introduction, from this data analysis, it appears that LCG usage provided a significant degree of protection from post-flight orthostatic intolerance.

Enhancing the Flight Safety Culture Through Training

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

Kanki, Barbara G.; Rosekind, Mark R. (Technical Monitor)

1996-01-01

In the 1970's, flight safety professionals became profoundly concerned about the prevalence of crew-caused accidents and incidents, and the role of human error in flight operations. As result, they initiated a change in the flight safety culture which has grown to significant proportions today. At the heart of the evolution were crew concepts such as flightdeck management, crew coordination, and cockpit resource management, concepts which seemed to target critical deficiencies. In themselves, the concepts were not new but their incorporation into training as a direct means of changing the flight safety culture was an untried, almost 'grassroots' approach. The targeted crew concepts and skills were not an integral part of the typical training program; the methods, curriculum, media, and even course content itself, would have to be developed and implemented from the bottom up. A familiar truism in the pilot culture is that you should 'Train the way you fly; Fly the way you train'. In short, training was expected to provide the pilot with practical operational skills that were consistent with the performance standards they were required to maintain and the operational demands they met on a daily basis. In short, one could not simply command crews to use good CRM; one would have to research and define these skills operationally as well as develop and implement a consistent and effective training program. Furthermore, one would need active support and collaboration among the research, industry and government communities in order to ensure acceptance and continued commitment. Additional information is contained in the original extended abstract.

How HRP Research Results Contribute to Human Space Exploration Risk Mitigation

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

Lumpkins, S. B.; Mindock, J. A.

2014-01-01

In addition to the scientific value of publications derived from research, results from Human Research Program (HRP) research also support HRP’s goals of mitigating crew health and performance risks in space flight. Research results are used to build the evidence base characterizing crew health and performance risks, to support risk research plan development, to inform crew health and performance standards, and to provide technologies to programs for meeting those standards and optimizing crew health and performance in space. This talk will describe examples of how research results support these efforts. For example, HRP research results are used to revise or even create new standards for human space flight, which have been established to protect crew health and performance during flight, and prevent negative long-term health consequences due to space flight. These standards are based on the best available clinical and scientific evidence, as well as operational experience from previous space flight missions, and are reviewed as new evidence emerges. Research results are also used to update the HRP evidence base, which is comprised of a set of reports that provide a current record of the state of knowledge from research and operations for each of the defined human health and performance risks for future NASA exploration missions. A discussion of the role of evidence within the HRP architecture will also be presented. The scope of HRP research results extends well beyond publications, as they are used in several capacities to support HRP deliverables and, ultimately, the advancement of human space exploration beyond low-Earth orbit.

How HRP Research Results Contribute to Human Space Exploration Risk Mitigation

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

Lumpkins, Sarah; Mindock, Jennifer

2014-01-01

In addition to the scientific value of publications derived from research, results from Human Research Program (HRP) research also support HRP's goals of mitigating crew health and performance risks in space flight. Research results are used to build the evidence base characterizing crew health and performance risks, to support risk research plan development, to inform crew health and performance standards, and to provide technologies to programs for meeting those standards and optimizing crew health and performance in space. This talk will describe examples of how research results support these efforts. For example, HRP research results are used to revise or even create new standards for human space flight, which have been established to protect crew health and performance during flight, and prevent negative long-term health consequences due to space flight. These standards are based on the best available clinical and scientific evidence, as well as operational experience from previous space flight missions, and are reviewed as new evidence emerges. Research results are also used to update the HRP evidence base, which is comprised of a set of reports that provide a current record of the state of knowledge from research and operations for each of the defined human health and performance risks for future NASA exploration missions. A discussion of the role of evidence within the HRP architecture will also be presented. The scope of HRP research results extends well beyond publications, as they are used in several capacities to support HRP deliverables and, ultimately, the advancement of human space exploration beyond low-Earth orbit.

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.

X-38 - First Free Flight, March 12, 1998

NASA Image and Video Library

1998-03-12

The X-38 Crew Return Vehicle descends under its steerable parafoil over the California desert in its first free flight at the Dryden Flight Research Center, Edwards, California. The flight took place March 12, 1998.

Auditory effects of noise on air-crew personnel.

DOT National Transportation Integrated Search

1972-11-01

Hearing-threshold tests were made on flight personnel of several sorts, including aerial-application pilots, flight instructors, private pilots, stewardesses, and FAA flight inspectors. Excluding those people whose flight experience is of short durat...

Concurrent Pilot Instrument Monitoring in the Automated Multi-Crew Airline Cockpit.

PubMed

Jarvis, Stephen R

2017-12-01

Pilot instrument monitoring has been described as "inadequate," "ineffective," and "insufficient" after multicrew aircraft accidents. Regulators have called for improved instrument monitoring by flight crews, but scientific knowledge in the area is scarce. Research has tended to investigate the monitoring of individual pilots when in the pilot-flying role; very little research has looked at crew monitoring, or that of the "monitoring-pilot" role despite it being half of the apparent problem. Eye-tracking data were collected from 17 properly constituted and current Boeing 737 crews operating in a full motion simulator. Each crew flew four realistic flight segments, with pilots swapping between the pilot-flying and pilot-monitoring roles, with and without the autopilot engaged. Analysis was performed on the 375 maneuvering-segments prior to localizer intercept. Autopilot engagement led to significantly less visual dwell time on the attitude director indicator (mean 212.8-47.8 s for the flying pilot and 58.5-39.8 s for the monitoring-pilot) and an associated increase on the horizontal situation indicator (18-52.5 s and 36.4-50.5 s). The flying-pilots' withdrawal of attention from the primary flight reference and increased attention to the primary navigational reference was paralleled rather than complemented by the monitoring-pilot, suggesting that monitoring vulnerabilities can be duplicated in the flight deck. Therefore it is possible that accident causes identified as "inadequate" or "insufficient" monitoring, are in fact a result of parallel monitoring.Jarvis SR. Concurrent pilot instrument monitoring in the automated multi-crew airline cockpit. Aerosp Med Hum Perform. 2017; 88(12):1100-1106.

Reducing Secondary Insults in Traumatic Brain Injury

DTIC Science & Technology

2015-03-01

from external stimuli ( vibration , noise ) and from acceleration and deceleration forces. During transport, Critical Care Air transport Team crews...provide excess noise and vibration during flight. Hearing protection for patients and flight crew is required to avoid damage. Vibration experi- enced...decelerative forces. In addition, the noise , vibration , and patient agitation associated with the tactical takeoff and land- ing of military cargo

Social psychology on the flight deck

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

Helmreich, R. L.

1980-01-01

Social psychological and personality factors that can influence resource management on the flight deck are discussed. It is argued that personality and situational factors intersect to determine crew responses and that assessment of performance under full crew and mission conditions can provide the most valuable information about relevant factors. The possibility of training procedures to improve performance on these dimensions is discussed.

14 CFR Appendix F to Part 135 - Airplane Flight Recorder Specification

Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

2010-01-01

.... Heading (Primary flight crew reference) 0−360° and Discrete “true” or “mag” ±2° 1 0.5° When true or magnetic heading can be selected as the primary heading reference, a discrete indicating selection must be... synchronization reference On-Off (Discrete)None 1 Preferably each crew member but one discrete acceptable for all...

14 CFR Appendix E to Part 125 - Airplane Flight Recorder Specifications

Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

2010-01-01

... flight crew reference) 0-360° and Discrete “true” or “mag” ±2° 1 0.5° When true or magnetic heading can be selected as the primary heading reference, a discrete indicating selection must be recorded. 5... synchronizationreference On-Off (Discrete)None. 1 Preferably each crew member but one discrete acceptable for all...

Wernher von Braun

NASA Image and Video Library

1968-10-01

Dr. von Braun, Director of the Marshall Space Flight Center (MSFC), greets Commander of Apollo 7 mission, Walter M. Schirra, Jr., during the mission briefing at Kennedy Space Center (KSC). The Apollo 7 mission, boosted by a Saturn IB launch vehicle on October 11, 1968, was the first flight of the Apollo spacecraft with crew. Other crew members were Astronaut Donn Eisele and Astronaut Walter Cunningham.

Astronaut Kevin Chilton displays map of Scandinavia on flight deck

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

1994-01-01

Astronaut Kevin P. Chilton, pilot, displays a map of Scandinavia on the Space Shuttle Endeavour's flight deck. Large scale maps such as this were used by the crew to locate specific sites of interest to the Space Radar Laboratory scientists. The crew then photographed the sites at the same time as the radar in the payload bay imaged them.

STS-71 Pilot Charles J. Precort arrival in T-38

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

1995-01-01

STS-71 Pilot Charles J. Precourt arrives at the KSC Shuttle Landing Facility in one of the T-38 aircraft traditionally flown by the astronaut corps. The seven STS-71 crew members flew into KSC from Johnson Space Center as final preparations are under way toward the scheduled liftoff on June 23 of the Space Shuttle Atlantis on the first mission to dock with the Russian Space Station Mir. KSC-95EC-870 - Mir 19 Flight Engineer Nikolai M. Budarin arrives at KSC Mir 19 Flight Engineer Nikolai M. Budarin hitches a ride with STS-71 Pilot Charles J. Precourt in a T-38. Budarin, Precourt and the rest of the STS-71 crew arrived at KSC's Shuttle Landing Facility the same day the countdown clock began ticking toward a scheduled liftoff on Friday, June 23. During the historic flight of the Space Shuttle Atlantis on STS- 71, the crew will perform the first U.S. docking with the Russian Space Station Mir. Budarin and Mir 19 Mission Commander Anatoly Solovyev will transfer to Mir during the flight, and the three crew members currently on Mir will return to Earth in the orbiter.

Near-Earth Asteroid (NEA) Scout

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

McNutt, Leslie; Johnson, Les; Kahn, Peter; Castillo-Rogez, Julie; Frick, Andreas

2014-01-01

Near-Earth asteroids (NEAs) are the most easily accessible bodies in the solar system, and detections of NEAs are expected to grow exponentially in the near future, offering increasing target opportunities. As NASA continues to refine its plans to possibly explore these small worlds with human explorers, initial reconnaissance with comparatively inexpensive robotic precursors is necessary. Obtaining and analyzing relevant data about these bodies via robotic precursors before committing a crew to visit a NEA will significantly minimize crew and mission risk, as well as maximize exploration return potential. The Marshall Space Flight Center (MSFC) and Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL) are jointly examining a potential mission concept, tentatively called 'NEAScout,' utilizing a low-cost platform such as CubeSat in response to the current needs for affordable missions with exploration science value. The NEAScout mission concept would be treated as a secondary payload on the Space Launch System (SLS) Exploration Mission 1 (EM-1), the first planned flight of the SLS and the second un-crewed test flight of the Orion Multi-Purpose Crew Vehicle (MPCV).

Near-Earth Asteroid Scout

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

McNutt, Leslie; Johnson, Les; Clardy, Dennon; Castillo-Rogez, Julie; Frick, Andreas; Jones, Laura

2014-01-01

Near-Earth Asteroids (NEAs) are an easily accessible object in Earth's vicinity. Detections of NEAs are expected to grow in the near future, offering increasing target opportunities. As NASA continues to refine its plans to possibly explore these small worlds with human explorers, initial reconnaissance with comparatively inexpensive robotic precursors is necessary. Obtaining and analyzing relevant data about these bodies via robotic precursors before committing a crew to visit a NEA will significantly minimize crew and mission risk, as well as maximize exploration return potential. The Marshall Space Flight Center (MSFC) and Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL) are jointly examining a mission concept, tentatively called 'NEA Scout,' utilizing a low-cost CubeSats platform in response to the current needs for affordable missions with exploration science value. The NEA Scout mission concept would be a secondary payload on the Space Launch System (SLS) Exploration Mission 1 (EM-1), the first planned flight of the SLS and the second un-crewed test flight of the Orion Multi-Purpose Crew Vehicle (MPCV).

STS-81 Post Flight Presentation

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

1997-01-01

The flight crew of the STS-81 mission, Commander Michael A. Baker, Pilot Brent W. Jett Jr, and Mission Specialists John M. Grunsfeld, Marsha S. Ivins, Peter J.K. Wisoff, and Jerry M. Linenger present a video mission over-view of their space flight. Images include prelaunch 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 can be seen being 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. During the presentation the astronauts take turns discussing aspects of the mission including: the SPACEHAB a double module that provides additional middeck locker space for secondary experiments. During the five days of docked operations with Mir, the crews is seen transferring water and supplies from one spacecraft to the other.

Considerations for the retrofit of data link

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

Corwin, William H.; Mccauley, Hugo W.

1990-01-01

Human factors issues related to the retrofit of data link in commercial transport aircraft are discussed. Topics that must be considered for data link implementation include, the loss of the party line, (i.e., the availability to all aircraft of information transmitted on a common voice frequency), and the scheduling of information to the flight crew. This paper focuses primarily on the human factors issues related to retrofit of Mode S. Retrofits is a difficult task because panel space accessible to flight crew members is limited. As with all cockpit equipment, data link implementation will have to comply with Federal Aviation Regulation 25.1523, which requires the manufacturer to address the conspicuity and ease of use of the data link device, and to assess the impact on crew workload. Operational sequence diagrams are provided to illustrate a methodology that can be used to decompose the flight crew body channel utilization of candidate avionics configurations in order to optimize the pilot-vehicle interface.

Technical Aspects of Acoustical Engineering for the ISS [International Space Station

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

Allen, Christopher S.

2009-01-01

It is important to control acoustic levels on manned space flight vehicles and habitats to protect crew-hearing, allow for voice communications, and to ensure a healthy and habitable environment in which to work and live. For the International Space Station (ISS) this is critical because of the long duration crew-stays of approximately 6-months. NASA and the JSC Acoustics Office set acoustic requirements that must be met for hardware to be certified for flight. Modules must meet the NC-50 requirement and other component hardware are given smaller allocations to meet. In order to meet these requirements many aspects of noise generation and control must be considered. This presentation has been developed to give an insight into the various technical activities performed at JSC to ensure that a suitable acoustic environment is provided for the ISS crew. Examples discussed include fan noise, acoustic flight material development, on-orbit acoustic monitoring, and a specific hardware development and acoustical design case, the ISS Crew Quarters.

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.

STS-43 MS Adamson checks OCTW experiment on OV-104's aft flight deck

NASA Image and Video Library

1991-08-11

STS043-04-038 (2-11 Aug 1991) --- Astronaut James C. Adamson, STS-43 mission specialist, checks on an experiment on Atlantis? flight deck. Part of the experiment, Optical Communications Through the Shuttle Window (OCTW), can be seen mounted in upper right. The OCTW system consists of two modules, one inside the orbiter crew cabin (as pictured here) and one in the payload bay. The crew compartment version houses an optoelectronic transmitter/receiver pair for video and digital subsystems, test circuitry and interface circuitry. The payload bay module serves as a repeater station. During operation a signal is transmitted through the shuttle window to a bundle of optical fiber cables mounted in the payload bay near an aft window. The cables carry optical signals from the crew compartment equipment to the OCTW payload bay module. The signals are returned via optical fiber cable to the aft flight deck window, retransmitted through the window, and received by the crew compartment equipment.

Apollo 11 crewmen released from quarantine

NASA Image and Video Library

1969-08-07

Astronaut Neil A. Armstrong (center), is greeted by friends in the crew reception area of the Lunar Receiving Laboratory. Dr. Gilruth is pictured just to right of Armstrong. Donald K. Slayton, Director of Space Flight Crew Operations, is behind ArmstrongThe Apollo 11 crew left the crew reception area of the Lunar Receiving Laboratory at 9 p.m., Aug. 10, 1969.

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…

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.

Onboard Determination of Vehicle Glide Capability for Shuttle Abort Flight Managment (SAFM)

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

Straube, Timothy; Jackson, Mark; Fill, Thomas; Nemeth, Scott

2002-01-01

When one or more main engines fail during ascent, the flight crew of the Space Shuttle must make several critical decisions and accurately perform a series of abort procedures. One of the most important decisions for many aborts is the selection ofa landing site. Several factors influence the ability to reach a landing site, including the spacecraft point of atmospheric entry, the energy state at atmospheric entry, the vehicle glide capability from that energy state, and whether one or more suitable landing sites are within the glide capability. Energy assessment is further complicated by the fact that phugoid oscillations in total energy influence glide capability. Once the glide capability is known, the crew must select the "best" site option based upon glide capability and landing site conditions and facilities. Since most of these factors cannot currently be assessed by the crew in flight, extensive planning is required prior to each mission to script a variety of procedures based upon spacecraft velocity at the point of engine failure (or failures). The results of this preflight planning are expressed in tables and diagrams on mission-specific cockpit checklists. Crew checklist procedures involve leafing through several pages of instructions and navigating a decision tree for site selection and flight procedures - all during a time critical abort situation. With the advent of the Cockpit Avionics Upgrade (CAU), the Shuttle will have increased on-board computational power to help alleviate crew workload during aborts and provide valuable situational awareness during nominal operations. One application baselined for the CAU computers is Shuttle Abort Flight Management (SAFM), whose requirements have been designed and prototyped. The SAFM application includes powered and glided flight algorithms. This paper describes the glided flight algorithm which is dispatched by SAFM to determine the vehicle glide capability and make recommendations to the crew for site selection as well as to monitor glide capability while in route to the selected site. Background is provided on Shuttle entry guidance as well as the various types of Shuttle aborts. SAFM entry requirements and cockpit disp lays are discussed briefly to provide background for Glided Flight algorithm design considerations. The central principal of the Glided Flight algorithm is the use of energy-over-weight (EOW) curves to determine range and crossrange boundaries. The major challenges of this technique are exo-atmospheric flight, and phugoid oscillations in energy. During exo-atmospheric flight, energy is constant, so vehicle EOW is not sufficient to determine glide capability. The paper describes how the exo-atmospheric problem is solved by propagating the vehicle state to an "atmospheric pullout" state defined by Shuttle guidance parameters.

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 base-of-support translation were modeled as time invarient linear systems arrived at by Kalman adaptive filter techniques. Derived model parameters such as damping factor and fundamental frequency of the closed loop system showed significant modification between pre- and post-flight. This phenomenon is best characterized by movement of the poles toward increasing stability. While pre-flight data tended to show shoulders and hips moving in phase with each other, post-flight data showed a more disjoint behavior.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 400 WORDS).

KSC-2012-4887

NASA Image and Video Library

2012-09-05

CAPE CANAVERAL, Fla. – Inside the Operations and Checkout Building at NASA’s Kennedy Space Center in Florida, technicians monitor the progress as a crane is used to move the Orion Exploration Flight Test 1 crew module to the base of a birdcage tool. The birdcage will be used to continue installation of external components in preparation for Orion’s first uncrewed test flight in 2014 atop a Delta IV rocket. Orion is the exploration spacecraft designed to carry crews to space beyond low Earth orbit. It will provide emergency abort capability, sustain the crew during the space travel and provide safe re-entry from deep space return velocities. A second uncrewed flight test is scheduled for 2017 on NASA’s Space Launch System rocket. For more information, visit http://www.nasa.gov/orion. Photo credit: NASA/Kim Shiflett

Boeing's CST-100 Starliner Test Flight Vehicle Powers on for the

NASA Image and Video Library

2017-04-06

An engineer monitors a Boeing CST-100 Starliner spacecraft inside Boeing's Commercial Crew and Cargo Processing Facility at NASA's Kennedy Space Center in Florida. This was the first time "Spacecraft 1," as the individual Starliner is known, was powered up. It is being assembled for use during a pad abort test that will demonstrate the Starliners' ability to lift astronauts out of danger in the unlikely event of an emergency. Later flight tests will demonstrate Starliners in orbital missions to the station without a crew, and then with astronauts aboard. The flight tests will preview the crew rotation missions future Starliners will perform as they take up to four astronauts at a time to the orbiting laboratory in order to enhance the research taking place there

Boeing's CST-100 Starliner Test Flight Vehicle Powers on for the

NASA Image and Video Library

2017-04-06

An engineer works the switch to power on a Boeing CST-100 Starliner spacecraft inside Boeing's Commercial Crew and Cargo Processing Facility at NASA's Kennedy Space Center in Florida. This was the first time "Spacecraft 1," as the individual Starliner is known, was powered up. It is being assembled for use during a pad abort test that will demonstrate the Starliners' ability to lift astronauts out of danger in the unlikely event of an emergency. Later flight tests will demonstrate Starliners in orbital missions to the station without a crew, and then with astronauts aboard. The flight tests will preview the crew rotation missions future Starliners will perform as they take up to four astronauts at a time to the orbiting laboratory in order to enhance the research taking place there.

KSC-01pp1481

NASA Image and Video Library

2001-08-10

KENNEDY SPACE CENTER, Fla. - Expedition Three crew member Vladimir Dezhurov (left) is ready for his first space flight, under the guidance of STS-105 Commander Scott Horowitz (center). Helping with flight equipment before launch is (right) USA Mechanical Technician Al Schmidt. The payload on the STS-105 mission to the International Space Station includes the third flight of the Italian-built Multi-Purpose Logistics Module Leonardo, delivering additional scientific racks, equipment and supplies for the Space Station, and the Early Ammonia Servicer (EAS) tank. The EAS, which will be attached to the Station during two spacewalks, contains spare ammonia for the Station’s cooling system. Also, the Expedition Three crew is aboard to replace the Expedition Two crew on the International Space Station, who will be returning to Earth aboard Discovery after a five-month stay on the Station

[Causes of death among pilots: "acute myocardial infarction"--are the present examination methods for airworthiness sufficient?].

PubMed

Germerott, Tanja; Fieguth, Armin; Albrecht, Knut; Eidam, Joachim; Breitmeier, Dirk

2009-01-01

The European Union plans to harmonize the aviation requirements, in particular the flight crew licensing requirements. On 23 May 2007, the German Federal Ministry of Transport, Building and Urban Affairs published the Flight Crew Licensing Requirements, which are based on the Joint Aviation Requirements, Flight Crew Licensing 3, Amendment 5. These guidelines also list the examination methods to be used for testing the medical fitness of pilots. In this Amendment some examinations which were part of the routine tests before JAR-FCL3 became effective have been deleted, e.g. the exercise ECG. This article presents two cases from the autopsy material of the Institute of Legal Medicine in Hanover and discusses the problems associated with the new examination guidelines.

KSC-05PD-0811

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

2005-01-01

KENNEDY SPACE CENTER, FLA. At Kennedy Space Centers Shuttle Landing Facility, Center Director Jim Kennedy talks with STS-114 Commander Eileen Collins after her arrival. She and the rest of the crew are at KSC to take part in the Terminal Countdown Demonstration Test (TCDT) over the next three days. The TCDT is held at KSC prior to each Space Shuttle flight. It provides the crew of each mission an opportunity to participate in simulated countdown activities. The test ends with a mock launch countdown culminating in a simulated main engine cutoff. The crew also spends time undergoing emergency egress training exercises at the launch pad. This is Collins fourth space flight and second as commander. STS-114 is the first Return to Flight mission to the International Space Station. The launch window extends July 13 through July 31.

Human factors in aviation operations: The hearback problem

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

Monan, William P.

1988-01-01

This report covers a study of ASRS reports wherein ATC controllers failed to monitor adequately (hearback) incorrect readbacks of ATC clearances. A total of 417 reports received over a period of 29 months from April 1981 through July 1983 comprised the study data set. Factors examined were: the reasons for a flight crew's getting clearances incorrectly, the operating factors that caused controllers to mishear or not hear the correct readbacks, and consequences of the various types of hearback misses. The principle conclusion of the study takes the form of a precaution to flight crews that a controller's not challenging a readback does not necessariliy mean the readback is correct and that flight crews must explicitly question any doubtful or unusual aspects of clearances rather than depending on controllers to detect readback errors.

STS 51-L crewmembers at Ellington AFB for training flight in T-38

NASA Image and Video Library

1986-01-08

S86-25199 (September 1985) --- Three members of the STS-51L prime crew and a backup crew member walk away from the flight line at nearby Ellington Field following flights in the T-38 jet trainers seen in the background. Sharon Christa McAuliffe (center right), payload specialist/citizen observer for the Teacher-in-Space Project, and Barbara R. Morgan (center left), her backup, are flanked by astronauts Francis R. (Dick) Scobee (right), mission commander, and Michael J. Smith, pilot. The photo was taken by Keith Meyers of the New York Times. EDITOR?S NOTE: The STS-51L crew members lost their lives in the space shuttle Challenger accident moments after launch on Jan. 28, 1986 from the Kennedy Space Center (KSC). Photo credit: NASA

KSC01pd1113

NASA Image and Video Library

2001-06-11

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

KSC-01pp1114

NASA Image and Video Library

2001-06-11

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

KSC-2012-6105

NASA Image and Video Library

2012-11-01

CAPE CANAVERAL, Fla. – The Orion Exploration Flight Test 1 crew module is undergoing proof pressure testing at the Operations and Checkout Building at NASA's Kennedy Space Center in Florida. The test incrementally pressurizes the spacecraft with breathing air and is designed to demonstrate weld strength capability and structural performance at maximum flight operating pressures. Orion is the exploration spacecraft designed to carry crews to space beyond low Earth orbit. It will provide emergency abort capability, sustain the crew during the space travel and provide safe re-entry from deep space return velocities. The first unpiloted test flight of the Orion is scheduled to launch in 2014 atop a Delta IV rocket and in 2017 on a Space Launch System rocket. For more information, visit http://www.nasa.gov/orion Photo credit: NASA/Ben Smegelsky

KSC-2012-6103

NASA Image and Video Library

2012-11-01

CAPE CANAVERAL, Fla. – The Orion Exploration Flight Test 1 crew module is undergoing proof pressure testing at the Operations and Checkout Building at NASA's Kennedy Space Center in Florida. The test incrementally pressurizes the spacecraft with breathing air and is designed to demonstrate weld strength capability and structural performance at maximum flight operating pressures. Orion is the exploration spacecraft designed to carry crews to space beyond low Earth orbit. It will provide emergency abort capability, sustain the crew during the space travel and provide safe re-entry from deep space return velocities. The first unpiloted test flight of the Orion is scheduled to launch in 2014 atop a Delta IV rocket and in 2017 on a Space Launch System rocket. For more information, visit http://www.nasa.gov/orion Photo credit: NASA/Ben Smegelsky

KSC-2012-6104

NASA Image and Video Library

2012-11-01

CAPE CANAVERAL, Fla. – The Orion Exploration Flight Test 1 crew module is undergoing proof pressure testing at the Operations and Checkout Building at NASA's Kennedy Space Center in Florida. The test incrementally pressurizes the spacecraft with breathing air and is designed to demonstrate weld strength capability and structural performance at maximum flight operating pressures. Orion is the exploration spacecraft designed to carry crews to space beyond low Earth orbit. It will provide emergency abort capability, sustain the crew during the space travel and provide safe re-entry from deep space return velocities. The first unpiloted test flight of the Orion is scheduled to launch in 2014 atop a Delta IV rocket and in 2017 on a Space Launch System rocket. For more information, visit http://www.nasa.gov/orion Photo credit: NASA/Ben Smegelsky

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.

STS-107 Flight Day 15 Highlights

NASA Astrophysics Data System (ADS)

2003-01-01

This video shows the activities of the STS-107 crew on flight day 15 of the Columbia orbiter's final mission. The crew includes Commander Rick Husband, Pilot William McCool, Mission Specialists Michael Anderson, David Brown, Laurel Clark, and Kalpana Chawla, and Payload Specialist Ilan Ramon. The primary activities of flight day 15 are crew interviews, and operating the Water Mist Fire Suppression (MIST) experiment. Early in the video, astronauts McCool and Ramon respond together to a question. Much of the video is taken up by an interview of astronauts Brown, Anderson, and McCool. Two parts of the video show the MIST experiment in operation, operated the first time by astronaut Brown. Another part of the video is narrated by Mission Specialist Clark, who identifies views of Mount Vesuvius, and an atoll in the south Pacific. In this part, Payload Specialist Ramon is seen on an exercise machine, Commander Husband shows body fluid samples from the crew taken during the mission, and Clark demonstrates how the crew eats meals. The video ends with footage from earlier in the mission which shows a deployed radiator in the shuttle's payload bay that reflects an image of the Earth.

The evaluation of studies of flight personnel of the German Lufthansa on the question of stress during flights on the short European routes

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

Klein, K. E.; Bruener, H.; Kuklinski, P.; Ruff, S.; Wegmann, H. M.

1982-01-01

Medical studies were undertaken on the stress experience by the cockpit crew working the short routes in Europe and a special attempt was made to discover whether signs of a summation of stress due to flight work become visible during a circuit of several days. For this purpose the pulse and respiratory rates were determined for 22 crew members as an indication of the acute stress occurring during the flight and the amount of stress hormone in the urine as an indication of the extent of total stress in an extended study period.

Russian Countermeasure Systems for Adverse Effects of Microgravity on Long-Duration ISS Flights.

PubMed

Kozlovskaya, Inessa B; Yarmanova, E N; Yegorov, A D; Stepantsov, V I; Fomina, E V; Tomilovaskaya, E S

2015-12-01

The system of countermeasures for the adverse effects of microgravity developed in the USSR supported the successful implementation of long-duration spaceflight (LDS) programs on the Salyut and Mir orbital stations and was subsequently adapted for flights on the International Space Station (ISS). From 2000 through 2010, crews completed 26 ISS flight increments ranging in duration from 140 to 216 d, with the participation of 27 Russian cosmonauts. These flights have made it possible to more precisely determine a crew-member's level of conditioning, better assess the advantages and disadvantages of training processes, and determine prospects for future developments.

STS-26 Mission Control Center (MCC) activity at JSC

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

1988-01-01

A wide angle view shows flight controllers in JSC's Mission Control Center (MCC) Bldg 30 flight control room (FCR) as they listen to a presentation by STS-26 crewmembers on the fourth day of Discovery's, Orbiter Vehicle (OV) 103's, orbital mission. Flight Director James M. (Milt) Heflin (standing at center) and astronaut and spacecraft communicator (CAPCOM) G. David Low (standing at right) briefly look away from a television image of the crew on a screen in the front of the FCR. Heflin, Low, and other flight controllers listen as each member relates some inner feelings while paying tribute to the 51L Challenger crew.

STS-97 ascent team in WFCR

NASA Image and Video Library

2000-11-20

JSC2000-07294 (20 November 2000) --- The 40-odd flight controllers assigned to the STS-97 ascent team and some special guests pose for a group portrait in the shuttle flight control room in Houston's Mission Control Center (JSC). The five guests attired in the blue and white shirts are the flight crew members for the STS-97 crew, scheduled to be launched from Florida on the last day of this month. The astronauts are, from the left, Joseph R. Tanner, Carlos I. Noriega, Brent W. Jett, Jr., Michael J. Bloomfield and Marc Garneau, who represents the Canadian Space Agency (CSA). Ascent shift flight director Wayne Hale stands next to Tanner.

ULA's Atlas V for Boeing's Orbital Flight Test

NASA Image and Video Library

2017-10-24

The Atlas V rocket that will launch Boeing’s CST-100 Starliner spacecraft on the company’s uncrewed Orbital Flight Test for NASA’s Commercial Crew Program is coming together inside a United Launch Alliance facility in Decatur, Alabama. The flight test is intended to prove the design of the integrated space system prior to the Crew Flight Test. These events are part of NASA’s required certification process as the company works to regularly fly astronauts to and from the International Space Station. Boeing's Starliner will launch on the United Launch Alliance Atlas V rocket from Space Launch Complex 41 at Cape Canaveral Air Force Station in Florida.

[Aviation medicine laboratory of the North Fleet air base celebrates the 70th anniversary].

PubMed

Gavrilov, V V; Mazaĭkin, D N; Buldakov, I M; Pisarev, A A

2013-05-01

The article is dedicated to the history of formation and development of the oldest aviation medicine department and its role in a flight safety of the North Fleet naval aviation. The aviation medicine laboratory was created in the years of the Great Patriotic war for medical backup of flights, medical review board, delivering of combat casualty care, prophylaxis of hypothermia and exhaustion of flight and ground crew. In a post-war period the aviation medicine laboratory made a great contribution to development of medical backup of educational and combat activity of the North Fleet aviation. Participation in cosmonaut applicants selection (incl. Yu.A. Gagarin), optimization of flight services during the transmeridian flights, research of carrier-based aircraft habitability and body state of the contingent during the longstanding ship-based aviation, development of treatment methods for functional status of sea-based aviation crew are the achievements of aviation medicine laboratory. Nowadays medicine laboratory is performing a research and practice, methodic and consultative activity with the aim of improving the system of medical backup, aviation medicine, psychology, flight safety, improvement of air crew health, prolong of flying proficiency.

Simulation Study of Flap Effects on a Commercial Transport Airplane in Upset Conditions

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

Cunningham, Kevin; Foster, John V.; Shah, Gautam H.; Stewart, Eric C.; Ventura, Robin N.; Rivers, Robert A.; Wilborn, James E.; Gato, William

2005-01-01

As part of NASA's Aviation Safety and Security Program, a simulation study of a twinjet transport airplane crew training simulation was conducted to address fidelity for upset or loss of control conditions and to study the effect of flap configuration in those regimes. Piloted and desktop simulations were used to compare the baseline crew training simulation model with an enhanced aerodynamic model that was developed for high-angle-of-attack conditions. These studies were conducted with various flap configurations and addressed the approach-to-stall, stall, and post-stall flight regimes. The enhanced simulation model showed that flap configuration had a significant effect on the character of departures that occurred during post-stall flight. Preliminary comparisons with flight test data indicate that the enhanced model is a significant improvement over the baseline. Some of the unrepresentative characteristics that are predicted by the baseline crew training simulation for flight in the post-stall regime have been identified. This paper presents preliminary results of this simulation study and discusses key issues regarding predicted flight dynamics characteristics during extreme upset and loss-of-control flight conditions with different flap configurations.

The impact of cockpit automation on crew coordination and communication. Volume 1: Overview, LOFT evaluations, error severity, and questionnaire data

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

Wiener, Earl L.; Chidester, Thomas R.; Kanki, Barbara G.; Palmer, Everett A.; Curry, Renwick E.; Gregorich, Steven E.

1991-01-01

The purpose was to examine, jointly, cockpit automation and social processes. Automation was varied by the choice of two radically different versions of the DC-9 series aircraft, the traditional DC-9-30, and the glass cockpit derivative, the MD-88. Airline pilot volunteers flew a mission in the simulator for these aircraft. Results show that the performance differences between the crews of the two aircraft were generally small, but where there were differences, they favored the DC-9. There were no criteria on which the MD-88 crews performed better than the DC-9 crews. Furthermore, DC-9 crews rated their own workload as lower than did the MD-88 pilots. There were no significant differences between the two aircraft types with respect to the severity of errors committed during the Line-Oriented Flight Training (LOFT) flight. The attitude questionnaires provided some interesting insights, but failed to distinguish between DC-9 and MD-88 crews.

KENNEDY SPACE CENTER, FLA. - Members of the STS-114 crew look over flight equipment in the Orbiter Processing Facility. From left are Glenda Laws, EVA Task Leader, with United Space Alliance at Johnson Space Center, Mission Specialists Soichi Noguchi, Andy Thomas, Charles Camarda and Wendy Lawrence. Noguchi is with the Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency, JAXA. Not seen are Mission Commander Eileen Collins, Pilot James Kelly and Mission Specialist Stephen Robinson. 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. - Members of the STS-114 crew look over flight equipment in the Orbiter Processing Facility. From left are Glenda Laws, EVA Task Leader, with United Space Alliance at Johnson Space Center, Mission Specialists Soichi Noguchi, Andy Thomas, Charles Camarda and Wendy Lawrence. Noguchi is with the Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency, JAXA. Not seen are Mission Commander Eileen Collins, Pilot James Kelly and Mission Specialist Stephen Robinson. The STS-114 crew is at KSC to take part in crew equipment and orbiter familiarization.

[Some approaches to the countermeasure system for a mars exploration mission].

PubMed

Kozlovskaia, I B; Egorov, A D; Son'kin, V D

2010-01-01

In article discussed physiological and methodical principles of the organization of training process and his (its) computerization during Martian flight in conditions of autonomous activity of the crew, providing interaction with onboard medical means, self-maintained by crew of the their health, performance of preventive measures, diagnostic studies and, in case of necessity, carrying out of treatment. In super long autonomous flights essentially become complicated the control of ground experts over of crew members conditions, that testifies to necessity of a computerization of control process by a state of health of crew, including carrying out of preventive actions. The situation becomes complicated impossibility of reception and transfer aboard the necessary information in real time and emergency returning of crew to the Earth. In these conditions realization of problems of physical preventive maintenance should be solved by means of the onboard automated expert system, providing management by trainings of each crew members, directed on optimization of their psychophysical condition.

Person-to-person transfer of Candida albicans in the spacecraft environment

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

Pierson, D. L.; Mehta, S. K.; Magee, B. B.; Mishra, S. K.

1995-01-01

We assessed the exchange of Candida albicans among crew members during 10 Space Shuttle missions. Throat, nasal, urine and faecal specimens were collected from 61 crew members twice before and once after space flights ranging from 7 to 10 days in duration; crews consisted of groups of five, six or seven men and women. Candida albicans was isolated at least once from 20 of the 61 subjects (33%). Candida strains were identified by restriction-fragment length polymorphism (RFLP) after digestion by the endonucleases EcoRI and HinfI; further discrimination was gained by Southern blot hybridization with the C. albicans repeat fragment 27A. Eighteen of the 20 Candida-positive crew members carried different strains of C. albicans in the specimens collected. Possible transfer of C. albicans between members of the same crew was demonstrated only once in the 10 missions studied. We conclude that the transfer of C. albicans among crew members during Space Shuttle flights is less frequent than had been predicted from earlier reports.

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 in charge of the shuttle storage. Mission Specialist 2, Stephen Robinson is the flight engineer of the shuttle; he will be doing spacewalks with Mission Specialist Noguchi; he will set up the 11 lap top computers on board. Each crew member gave a brief message to the press. Commander Eileen later gave her final message and the crew walked back to the Astronaut Corps.

Air Force loadmasters oversee unloading of the full-scale Orion abort test crew module mockup from a C-17 cargo aircraft at Edwards Air Force Base March 28.

NASA Image and Video Library

2008-03-28

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.

Benefits of Using Pairwise Trajectory Management in the Central East Pacific

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

Chartrand, Ryan; Ballard, Kathryn

2016-01-01

Pairwise Trajectory Management (PTM) is a concept that utilizes airborne and ground-based capabilities to enable airborne spacing operations in oceanic regions. The goal of PTM is to use enhanced surveillance, along with airborne tools, to manage the spacing between aircraft. Due to the enhanced airborne surveillance of Automatic Dependent Surveillance-Broadcast (ADS-B) information and reduced communication, the PTM minimum spacing distance will be less than distances currently required of an air traffic controller. Reduced minimum distance will increase the capacity of aircraft operations at a given altitude or volume of airspace, thereby increasing time on desired trajectory and overall flight efficiency. PTM is designed to allow a flight crew to resolve a specific traffic conflict (or conflicts), identified by the air traffic controller, while maintaining the flight crew's desired altitude. The air traffic controller issues a PTM clearance to a flight crew authorized to conduct PTM operations in order to resolve a conflict for the pair (or pairs) of aircraft (i.e., the PTM aircraft and a designated target aircraft). This clearance requires the flight crew of the PTM aircraft to use their ADS-B-enabled onboard equipment to manage their spacing relative to the designated target aircraft to ensure spacing distances that are no closer than the PTM minimum distance. When the air traffic controller determines that PTM is no longer required, the controller issues a clearance to cancel the PTM operation.

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.

Training for life science experiments in space at the NASA Ames Research Center

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

Rodrigues, Annette T.; Maese, A. Christopher

1993-01-01

As this country prepares for exploration to other planets, the need to understand the affects of long duration exposure to microgravity is evident. The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) Ames Research Center's Space Life Sciences Payloads Office is responsible for a number of non-human life sciences payloads on NASA's Space Shuttle's Spacelab. Included in this responsibility is the training of those individuals who will be conducting the experiments during flight, the astronauts. Preparing a crew to conduct such experiments requires training protocols that build on simple tasks. Once a defined degree of performance proficiency is met for each task, these tasks are combined to increase the complexity of the activities. As tasks are combined into in-flight operations, they are subjected to time constraints and the crew enhances their skills through repetition. The science objectives must be completely understood by the crew and are critical to the overall training program. Completion of the in-flight activities is proof of success. Because the crew is exposed to the background of early research and plans for post-flight analyses, they have a vested interest in the flight activities. The salient features of this training approach is that it allows for flexibility in implementation, consideration of individual differences, and a greater ability to retain experiment information. This training approach offers another effective alternative training tool to existing methodologies.

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.

Expedition 8 and Expedition 9 Onboard

NASA Image and Video Library

2004-04-20

The Expedition 8 and 9 crews and European Space Agency astronaut Andre Kuipers of the Netherlands are viewed on the front screen of the Flight Control Room at the Russian Mission Control Center outside Moscow, Wednesday, April 21, 2004, in a televised welcoming ceremony following their docking to the International Space Station in a Russian Soyuz spacecraft. Under the televised view of the two crews is the insignia of the Expedition 9 crew, consisting of commander Gennady Padalka and Flight Engineer and NASA International Space Station Science Officer Michael Fincke, who will spend six months on the Station. Photo Credit: (NASA/Bill Ingalls)

The STS-92 crew is ready to leave KSC after CEIT

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

2000-01-01

STS-92 Commander Brian Duffy climbs into a T-38 jet aircraft at KSC's Shuttle Landing Facility for a flight back to Houston. He and other crew members were at KSC for Crew Equipment Interface Test (CEIT) activities, looking over their mission payload and related equipment. STS-92 is scheduled to launch Oct. 5 on Shuttle Discovery from Launch Pad 39A on the fifth flight to the International Space Station. Discovery will carry the Integrated Truss Structure (ITS) Z1, the PMA-3, Ku-band Communications System, and Control Moment Gyros (CMGs).

Expedition 18 Launch Day

NASA Image and Video Library

2008-10-11

Expedition 18 Commander Michael Fincke waves farewell from the crew bus as he and Flight Engineer Yuri V. Lonchakov and American spaceflight participant Richard Garriott depart the Cosmonaut Hotel to building 254 were they will don their flight suits prior to their launch, Sunday, Oct. 12, 2008, from the Baikonur Cosmodrome in Kazakhstan. The three crew members are scheduled to dock with the International Space Station on Oct. 14. Fincke and Lonchakov will spend six months on the station, while Garriott will return to Earth Oct. 24 with two of the Expedition 17 crew members currently on the International Space Station. Photo Credit: (NASA/Bill Ingalls)

Shuttle Abort Flight Management (SAFM) - Application Overview

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

Hu, Howard; Straube, Tim; Madsen, Jennifer; Ricard, Mike

2002-01-01

One of the most demanding tasks that must be performed by the Space Shuttle flight crew is the process of determining whether, when and where to abort the vehicle should engine or system failures occur during ascent or entry. Current Shuttle abort procedures involve paging through complicated paper checklists to decide on the type of abort and where to abort. Additional checklists then lead the crew through a series of actions to execute the desired abort. This process is even more difficult and time consuming in the absence of ground communications since the ground flight controllers have the analysis tools and information that is currently not available in the Shuttle cockpit. Crew workload specifically abort procedures will be greatly simplified with the implementation of the Space Shuttle Cockpit Avionics Upgrade (CAU) project. The intent of CAU is to maximize crew situational awareness and reduce flight workload thru enhanced controls and displays, and onboard abort assessment and determination capability. SAFM was developed to help satisfy the CAU objectives by providing the crew with dynamic information about the capability of the vehicle to perform a variety of abort options during ascent and entry. This paper- presents an overview of the SAFM application. As shown in Figure 1, SAFM processes the vehicle navigation state and other guidance information to provide the CAU displays with evaluations of abort options, as well as landing site recommendations. This is accomplished by three main SAFM components: the Sequencer Executive, the Powered Flight Function, and the Glided Flight Function, The Sequencer Executive dispatches the Powered and Glided Flight Functions to evaluate the vehicle's capability to execute the current mission (or current abort), as well as more than IS hypothetical abort options or scenarios. Scenarios are sequenced and evaluated throughout powered and glided flight. Abort scenarios evaluated include Abort to Orbit (ATO), Transatlantic Abort Landing (TAL), East Coast Abort Landing (ECAL) and Return to Launch Site (RTLS). Sequential and simultaneous engine failures are assessed and landing footprint information is provided during actual entry scenarios as well as hypothetical "loss of thrust now" scenarios during ascent.

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.

STS-26 Mission Control Center (MCC) activity at JSC

NASA Image and Video Library

1988-10-02

STS026-S-101 (2 Oct 1988) --- Flight controllers in the Johnson Space Center?s mission control center listen to a presentation by the five members of the STS 26 crew on the fourth day of Discovery?s orbital mission. Flight Directors Charles W. Shaw and James M. (Milt) Heflin (in the foreground) and other controllers view a television image of Earth on a screen in the front of the flight control room while each member relates some inner feelings while paying tribute to the Challenger crew.

Swanson signs Mission Patch in A/L

NASA Image and Video Library

2014-05-13

ISS039-E-020710 (13 May 2014) --- NASA astronaut Steve Swanson, Expedition 39 flight engineer about to become Expedition 40 commander, signs a wall in the Quest airlock of the International Space Station after mounting his crew patch, continuing a tradition of station crew members who have participated in space walks on their respective flights. A short time later, Swanson took over command of the orbital outpost upon the departure of Expedition 39 Commander Koichi Wakata of the Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency (JAXA) and Flight Engineers Mikhail Tyurin of Roscosmos and Rick Mastracchio of NASA.

STS-78 Flight Day 4

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

1996-01-01

On this fourth day of the STS-78 mission, the flight crew, Cmdr. Terence T. Henricks, Pilot Kevin R. Kregel, Payload Cmdr. Susan J. Helms, Mission Specialists Richard M. Linnehan, Charles E. Brady, Jr., and Payload Specialists Jean-Jacques Favier, Ph.D. and Robert B. Thirsk, M.D., discuss the flight during an interview with the Cable News Network (CNN). The crew then continues research concentrated on the Torque Velocity Dynamometer measurements of leg and arm muscle power, the Astronaut Lung Function Experiment, and effects of microgravity exercise with the bicycle ergometer and its associated instruments.

jsc2010e060725

NASA Image and Video Library

2010-04-29

JSC2010-E-060725 (29 April 2010) --- The members of the STS-131 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 Bryan Lunney and NASA astronaut Alan Poindexter, commander, (left center) stand on the second row. Additional crew members pictured are NASA astronauts James P. Dutton Jr., pilot; Clayton Anderson, Dorothy Metcalf-Lindenburger, Stephanie Wilson, Rick Mastracchio and Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency (JAXA) astronaut Naoko Yamazaki, all mission specialists.

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

View of the Soyuz carrying the Taxi crew after undocking taken during Expedition Three

NASA Image and Video Library

2001-10-31

ISS003-E-7096 (31 October 2001) --- A Soyuz spacecraft departs from the International Space Station (ISS) carrying the Soyuz taxi crew, Commander Victor Afanasyev, Flight Engineer Konstantin Kozeev and French Flight Engineer Claudie Haignere, ending their eight-day stay on the station. Afanasyev and Kozeev represent Rosaviakosmos, and Haignere represents ESA, carrying out a flight program for CNES, the French Space Agency, under a commercial contract with the Russian Aviation and Space Agency. This image was taken with a digital still camera.

View of the Soyuz carrying the Taxi crew during undocking from the ISS

NASA Image and Video Library

2001-10-31

ISS003-E-7129 (31 October 2001) --- A Soyuz spacecraft departs from the International Space Station (ISS) carrying the Soyuz taxi crew, Commander Victor Afanasyev, Flight Engineer Konstantin Kozeev and French Flight Engineer Claudie Haignere, ending their eight-day stay on the station. Afanasyev and Kozeev represent Rosaviakosmos, and Haignere represents ESA, carrying out a flight program for CNES, the French Space Agency, under a commercial contract with the Russian Aviation and Space Agency. This image was taken with a digital still camera.

View of the approach of the Soyuz carrying the Taxi crew taken during Expedition Three

NASA Image and Video Library

2001-10-23

ISS003-E-6840 (23 October 2001) --- A Soyuz spacecraft approaches the International Space Station (ISS) carrying the Soyuz taxi crew, Commander Victor Afanasyev, Flight Engineer Konstantin Kozeev and French Flight Engineer Claudie Haignere for an eight-day stay on the station. Afanasyev and Kozeev represent Rosaviakosmos, and Haignere represents ESA, carrying out a flight program for CNES, the French Space Agency, under a commercial contract with the Russian Aviation and Space Agency. This image was taken with a digital still camera.

View of the approach of the Soyuz carrying the Taxi crew taken during Expedition Three

NASA Image and Video Library

2001-10-23

ISS003-E-6849 (23 October 2001) --- A Soyuz spacecraft approaches the International Space Station (ISS) carrying the Soyuz taxi crew, Commander Victor Afanasyev, Flight Engineer Konstantin Kozeev and French Flight Engineer Claudie Haignere for an eight-day stay on the station. Afanasyev and Kozeev represent Rosaviakosmos, and Haignere represents ESA, carrying out a flight program for CNES, the French Space Agency, under a commercial contract with the Russian Aviation and Space Agency. This image was taken with a digital still camera.

View of the approach of the Soyuz carrying the Taxi crew taken during Expedition Three

NASA Image and Video Library

2001-10-23

ISS003-E-6851 (23 October 2001) --- A Soyuz spacecraft approaches the International Space Station (ISS) carrying the Soyuz taxi crew, Commander Victor Afanasyev, Flight Engineer Konstantin Kozeev and French Flight Engineer Claudie Haignere for an eight-day stay on the station. Afanasyev and Kozeev represent Rosaviakosmos, and Haignere represents ESA, carrying out a flight program for CNES, the French Space Agency, under a commercial contract with the Russian Aviation and Space Agency. This image was taken with a digital still camera.

View of the Soyuz carrying the Taxi crew after undocking taken during Expedition Three

NASA Image and Video Library

2001-10-31

ISS003-E-7101 (31 October 2001) --- A Soyuz spacecraft departs from the International Space Station (ISS) carrying the Soyuz taxi crew, Commander Victor Afanasyev, Flight Engineer Konstantin Kozeev and French Flight Engineer Claudie Haignere, ending their eight-day stay on the station. Afanasyev and Kozeev represent Rosaviakosmos, and Haignere represents ESA, carrying out a flight program for CNES, the French Space Agency, under a commercial contract with the Russian Aviation and Space Agency. This image was taken with a digital still camera.

View of the Soyuz carrying the Taxi crew during undocking from the ISS

NASA Image and Video Library

2001-10-31

ISS003-E-7130 (31 October 2001) --- A Soyuz spacecraft departs from the International Space Station (ISS) carrying the Soyuz taxi crew, Commander Victor Afanasyev, Flight Engineer Konstantin Kozeev and French Flight Engineer Claudie Haignere, ending their eight-day stay on the station. Afanasyev and Kozeev represent Rosaviakosmos, and Haignere represents ESA, carrying out a flight program for CNES, the French Space Agency, under a commercial contract with the Russian Aviation and Space Agency. This image was taken with a digital still camera.

View of the approach of the Soyuz carrying the Taxi crew taken during Expedition Three

NASA Image and Video Library

2001-10-23

ISS003-E-6841 (23 October 2001) --- A Soyuz spacecraft approaches the International Space Station (ISS) carrying the Soyuz taxi crew, Commander Victor Afanasyev, Flight Engineer Konstantin Kozeev and French Flight Engineer Claudie Haignere for an eight-day stay on the station. Afanasyev and Kozeev represent Rosaviakosmos, and Haignere represents ESA, carrying out a flight program for CNES, the French Space Agency, under a commercial contract with the Russian Aviation and Space Agency. This image was taken with a digital still camera.

View of the Soyuz carrying the Taxi crew during undocking from the ISS

NASA Image and Video Library

2001-10-31

ISS003-E-7127 (31 October 2001) --- Backdropped by the blackness of space, a Soyuz spacecraft departs from the International Space Station (ISS) carrying the Soyuz taxi crew, Commander Victor Afanasyev, Flight Engineer Konstantin Kozeev and French Flight Engineer Claudie Haignere, ending their eight-day stay on the station. Afanasyev and Kozeev represent Rosaviakosmos, and Haignere represents ESA, carrying out a flight program for CNES, the French Space Agency, under a commercial contract with the Russian Aviation and Space Agency. This image was taken with a digital still camera.

View of the Soyuz carrying the Taxi crew after undocking taken during Expedition Three

NASA Image and Video Library

2001-10-31

ISS003-E-7094 (31 October 2001) --- A Soyuz spacecraft departs from the International Space Station (ISS) carrying the Soyuz taxi crew, Commander Victor Afanasyev, Flight Engineer Konstantin Kozeev and French Flight Engineer Claudie Haignere, ending their eight-day stay on the station. Afanasyev and Kozeev represent Rosaviakosmos, and Haignere represents ESA, carrying out a flight program for CNES, the French Space Agency, under a commercial contract with the Russian Aviation and Space Agency. This image was taken with a digital still camera.

View of the approach of the Soyuz carrying the Taxi crew taken during Expedition Three

NASA Image and Video Library

2001-10-23

ISS003-E-6847 (23 October 2001) --- A Soyuz spacecraft approaches the International Space Station (ISS) carrying the Soyuz taxi crew, Commander Victor Afanasyev, Flight Engineer Konstantin Kozeev and French Flight Engineer Claudie Haignere for an eight-day stay on the station. Afanasyev and Kozeev represent Rosaviakosmos, and Haignere represents ESA, carrying out a flight program for CNES, the French Space Agency, under a commercial contract with the Russian Aviation and Space Agency. This image was taken with a digital still camera.

View of the approach of the Soyuz carrying the Taxi crew taken during Expedition Three

NASA Image and Video Library

2001-10-23

ISS003-E-6844 (23 October 2001) --- A Soyuz spacecraft approaches the International Space Station (ISS) carrying the Soyuz taxi crew, Commander Victor Afanasyev, Flight Engineer Konstantin Kozeev and French Flight Engineer Claudie Haignere for an eight-day stay on the station. Afanasyev and Kozeev represent Rosaviakosmos, and Haignere represents ESA, carrying out a flight program for CNES, the French Space Agency, under a commercial contract with the Russian Aviation and Space Agency. This image was taken with a digital still camera.

View of the Soyuz carrying the Taxi crew after undocking taken during Expedition Three

NASA Image and Video Library

2001-10-31

ISS003-E-7100 (31 October 2001) --- A Soyuz spacecraft departs from the International Space Station (ISS) carrying the Soyuz taxi crew, Commander Victor Afanasyev, Flight Engineer Konstantin Kozeev and French Flight Engineer Claudie Haignere, ending their eight-day stay on the station. Afanasyev and Kozeev represent Rosaviakosmos, and Haignere represents ESA, carrying out a flight program for CNES, the French Space Agency, under a commercial contract with the Russian Aviation and Space Agency. This image was taken with a digital still camera.

View of the Soyuz carrying the Taxi crew after undocking taken during Expedition Three

NASA Image and Video Library

2001-10-31

ISS003-E-7097 (31 October 2001) --- A Soyuz spacecraft departs from the International Space Station (ISS) carrying the Soyuz taxi crew, Commander Victor Afanasyev, Flight Engineer Konstantin Kozeev and French Flight Engineer Claudie Haignere, ending their eight-day stay on the station. Afanasyev and Kozeev represent Rosaviakosmos, and Haignere represents ESA, carrying out a flight program for CNES, the French Space Agency, under a commercial contract with the Russian Aviation and Space Agency. This image was taken with a digital still camera.

View of the Soyuz carrying the Taxi crew after undocking taken during Expedition Three

NASA Image and Video Library

2001-10-31

ISS003-E-7107 (31 October 2001) --- A Soyuz spacecraft departs from the International Space Station (ISS) carrying the Soyuz taxi crew, Commander Victor Afanasyev, Flight Engineer Konstantin Kozeev and French Flight Engineer Claudie Haignere, ending their eight-day stay on the station. Afanasyev and Kozeev represent Rosaviakosmos, and Haignere represents ESA, carrying out a flight program for CNES, the French Space Agency, under a commercial contract with the Russian Aviation and Space Agency. This image was taken with a digital still camera.

View of the approach of the Soyuz carrying the Taxi crew taken during Expedition Three

NASA Image and Video Library

2001-10-23

ISS003-E-6845 (23 October 2001) --- A Soyuz spacecraft approaches the International Space Station (ISS) carrying the Soyuz taxi crew, Commander Victor Afanasyev, Flight Engineer Konstantin Kozeev and French Flight Engineer Claudie Haignere for an eight-day stay on the station. Afanasyev and Kozeev represent Rosaviakosmos, and Haignere represents ESA, carrying out a flight program for CNES, the French Space Agency, under a commercial contract with the Russian Aviation and Space Agency. This image was taken with a digital still camera.

View of the approach of the Soyuz carrying the Taxi crew taken during Expedition Three

NASA Image and Video Library

2001-10-23

ISS003-E-6850 (23 October 2001) --- A Soyuz spacecraft approaches the International Space Station (ISS) carrying the Soyuz taxi crew, Commander Victor Afanasyev, Flight Engineer Konstantin Kozeev and French Flight Engineer Claudie Haignere for an eight-day stay on the station. Afanasyev and Kozeev represent Rosaviakosmos, and Haignere represents ESA, carrying out a flight program for CNES, the French Space Agency, under a commercial contract with the Russian Aviation and Space Agency. This image was taken with a digital still camera.

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.

Expedition 26 Crew Members in the Node 1

NASA Image and Video Library

2010-12-31

ISS026-E-013632 (31 Dec. 2010) --- Expedition 26 crew members are pictured in the Unity node of the International Space Station on New Year’s Eve. Clockwise from the left are Russian cosmonaut Oleg Skripochka, NASA astronaut Catherine (Cady) Coleman, Russian cosmonaut Alexander Kaleri, all flight engineers; NASA astronaut Scott Kelly, commander; Russian cosmonaut Dmitry Kondratyev and European Space Agency astronaut Paolo Nespoli, both flight engineers.

Expedition 26 Crew Members in the Node 1

NASA Image and Video Library

2010-12-31

ISS026-E-013631 (31 Dec. 2010) --- Five of the six Expedition 26 crew members are pictured in the Unity node of the International Space Station on New Year’s Eve. From the left are Russian cosmonaut Dmitry Kondratyev, flight engineer; NASA astronaut Scott Kelly, commander; NASA astronaut Catherine (Cady) Coleman, European Space Agency astronaut Paolo Nespoli and Russian cosmonaut Alexander Kaleri, all flight engineers.

Expedition 26 Crew Members in the Node 1

NASA Image and Video Library

2010-12-31

ISS026-E-013630 (31 Dec. 2010) --- Expedition 26 crew members are pictured in the Unity node of the International Space Station on New Year’s Eve. From the left are Russian cosmonauts Oleg Skripochka and Dmitry Kondratyev, both flight engineers; NASA astronaut Scott Kelly, commander; NASA astronaut Catherine (Cady) Coleman, European Space Agency astronaut Paolo Nespoli and Russian cosmonaut Alexander Kaleri, all flight engineers.

KENNEDY SPACE CENTER, FLA. - In the Vehicle Assembly Building, Jim Landy, NDE specialist, performs flash thermography on flight crew lockers. He is screening the lockers for hidden damage underneath dings and dents that might occur during handling.

NASA Image and Video Library

2003-09-04

KENNEDY SPACE CENTER, FLA. - In the Vehicle Assembly Building, Jim Landy, NDE specialist, performs flash thermography on flight crew lockers. He is screening the lockers for hidden damage underneath dings and dents that might occur during handling.

KENNEDY SPACE CENTER, FLA. - In the Vehicle Assembly Building, Jim Landy, NDE specialist, examines flight crew lockers using flash thermography. He is screening the lockers for hidden damage underneath dings and dents that might occur during handling.

NASA Image and Video Library

2003-09-04

KENNEDY SPACE CENTER, FLA. - In the Vehicle Assembly Building, Jim Landy, NDE specialist, examines flight crew lockers using flash thermography. He is screening the lockers for hidden damage underneath dings and dents that might occur during handling.

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.

GEMINI-TITAN (GT)-12 - TRAINING (PRIOR) - MISSION SIMULATOR

NASA Image and Video Library

1966-09-06

S66-45579 (6 Sept. 1966) --- Astronaut James A. Lovell Jr. (right), prime crew command pilot of the Gemini-12 spaceflight, talks with Burton M. Gifford (left) and Duane K. Mosel (center), both with the Simulation Branch, Flight Crew Support Division. Lovell was preparing to undergo flight training in the Gemini Mission Simulator in Building 5, Mission Simulation and Training Facility. Photo credit: NASA

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-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.

A Multiple Agent Model of Human Performance in Automated Air Traffic Control and Flight Management Operations

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

Corker, Kevin; Pisanich, Gregory; Condon, Gregory W. (Technical Monitor)

1995-01-01

A predictive model of human operator performance (flight crew and air traffic control (ATC)) has been developed and applied in order to evaluate the impact of automation developments in flight management and air traffic control. The model is used to predict the performance of a two person flight crew and the ATC operators generating and responding to clearances aided by the Center TRACON Automation System (CTAS). The purpose of the modeling is to support evaluation and design of automated aids for flight management and airspace management and to predict required changes in procedure both air and ground in response to advancing automation in both domains. Additional information is contained in the original extended abstract.

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...