SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “Crew”

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

SourceResearch connectionFrom yearThrough year

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

At least 307 records · Page 17

All sources NASA NTRS DOE OSTI

NASA NTRS1996

Investigation of Natural and Man-Made Radiation Effects on Crews on Long Duration Space Missions

Over the past several years, NASA has studied a variety of mission scenarios designed to establish a permanent human presence on the surface of Mars. Nuclear electric propulsion (NEP) is one of the possible elements in this program. During the initial stages of vehicle design work, careful consideration must be given to not only the shielding requirements of natural space radiation, but to the shielding and configuration requirements of the on-board reactors. In this work, the radiation transport code MCNP has been used to make initial estimates of crew exposures to reactor radiation fields for a specific manned NEP vehicle design. In this design, three 25 MW(sub th), scaled SP-100-class reactors are shielded by three identical shields. Each shield has layers of beryllium, tungsten, and lithium hydride between the reactor and the crew compartment. Separate calculations are made of both the exiting neutron and gamma fluxes from the reactors during beginning-of-life, full-power operation. This data is then used as the source terms for particle transport in MCNP. The total gamma and neutron fluxes exiting the reactor shields are recorded and separate transport calculations are then performed for a 10 g/sq cm crew compartment aluminum thickness. Estimates of crew exposures have been assessed for various thicknesses of the shield tungsten and lithium hydride layers. A minimal tungsten thickness of 20 cm is required to shield the reactor photons below the 0.05 Sv/y man-made radiation limit. In addition to a 20-cm thick tungsten layer, a 40-cm thick lithium hydride layer is required to shield the reactor neutrons below the annual limit. If the tungsten layer is 30-cm thick, the lithium hydride layer should be at least 30-cm thick. These estimates do not take into account the photons generated by neutron interactions inside the shield because the MCNP neutron cross sections did not allow reliable estimates of photon production in these materials. These results, along with natural space radiation shielding estimates calculated by NASA Langley Research Center, have been used to provide preliminary input data into a new Macintosh-based software tool. A skeletal version of this tool being developed will allow rapid radiation exposure and risk analyses to be performed on a variety of Lunar and Mars missions utilizing nuclear-powered vehicles.

Bolch, Wesley E.↗

NASA NTRS1999

STS-96 Crew Training

The training for the crew members of the STS-96 Discovery Shuttle is presented. Crew members are Kent Rominger, Commander; Rick Husband, Pilot; Mission Specialists, Tamara Jernigan, Ellen Ochoa, and Daniel Barry; Julie Payette, Mission Specialist (CSA); and Valery Ivanovich Tokarev, Mission Specialist (RSA). Scenes show the crew sitting and talking about the Electrical Power System; actively taking part in virtual training in the EVA Training VR (Virtual Reality) Lab; using the Orbit Space Vision Training System; being dropped in water as a part of the Bail-Out Training Program; and taking part in the crew photo session.

Source record↗

NASA NTRS2000

STS-99 Flight Crew Post-Landing Press Conference

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

Source record↗

NASA NTRS2000

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

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.

Woodruff, Kristin K.↗

NASA NTRS1994

Analysis of Crew Fatigue in AIA Guantanamo Bay Aviation Accident

Flight operations can engender fatigue, which can affect flight crew performance, vigilance, and mood. The National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) requested the NASA Fatigue Countermeasures Program to analyze crew fatigue factors in an aviation accident that occurred at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba. There are specific fatigue factors that can be considered in such investigations: cumulative sleep loss, continuous hours of wakefulness prior to the incident or accident, and the time of day at which the accident occurred. Data from the NTSB Human Performance Investigator's Factual Report, the Operations Group Chairman's Factual Report, and the Flight 808 Crew Statements were analyzed, using conservative estimates and averages to reconcile discrepancies among the sources. Analysis of these data determined the following: the entire crew displayed cumulative sleep loss, operated during an extended period of continuous wakefulness, and obtained sleep at times in opposition to the circadian disposition for sleep, and that the accident occurred in the afternoon window of physiological sleepiness. In addition to these findings, evidence that fatigue affected performance was suggested by the cockpit voice recorder (CVR) transcript as well as in the captain's testimony. Examples from the CVR showed degraded decision-making skills, fixation, and slowed responses, all of which can be affected by fatigue; also, the captain testified to feeling "lethargic and indifferent" just prior to the accident. Therefore, the sleep/wake history data supports the hypothesis that fatigue was a factor that affected crewmembers' performance. Furthermore, the examples from the CVR and the captain's testimony support the hypothesis that the fatigue had an impact on specific actions involved in the occurrence of the accident.

Rosekind, Mark R.↗

NASA NTRS2002

STS-111 Crew Interviews: Phillippe Perrin, Mission Specialist 1

STS-111 Mission Specialist 1 Phillippe Perrin is seen during this preflight interview, where he gives a quick overview of his mission before answering questions about his inspiration to become an astronaut and his career path. Perrin outlines his role in the mission in general, and specifically during the docking and extravehicular activities (EVAs). He describes what the crew exchange will be like (transferring the Expedition 5 crew in place of the Expedition 4 crew on the International Space Station (ISS)) and the payloads (Mobile Base System (MBS) and the Leonardo Multi-Purpose Logistics Module). Perrin discusses the planned EVAs in detail and outlines what supplies will be left for the resident crew of the ISS. He also provides his thoughts about the significance of the mission to France and the value of the ISS.

Source record↗

NASA NTRS2002

STS-113 Crew Interviews: Paul Lockhart, Pilot

STS-113 Pilot Paul Lockhart is seen during this preflight interview, where he gives a quick overview of the mission before answering questions about his inspiration to become an astronaut and his career path. Lockhart outlines his role in the mission in general, and specifically during the docking and extravehicular activities (EVAs). He describes the primary mission payload (the P1 truss) and the crew transfer activities (Expedition 6 crew will replace the Expedition 5 Crew). Lockhart discusses the planned EVAs in detail and mentions what supplies will be left for the resident crew of the International Space Station (ISS). He ends with his thoughts about the importance of the ISS as the second anniversary of continuous human occupation of the space station approaches.

Source record↗

NASA NTRS2002

STS-113 Crew Interviews: Michael Lopez-Alegria, Mission Specialist 1

STS-113 Mission Specialist 1 Michael Lopez-Alegria is seen during this preflight interview where he gives a quick overview of the mission before answering questions about his inspiration to become an astronaut and his career path. Lopez-Alegria outlines his role in the mission in general, and specifically during the docking and extravehicular activities (EVAs). He describes the payload (P1 truss) and the crew transfer activities (the crew of Expedition Six is replacing the crew of Expedition Five on the International Space Station (ISS)). Lopez-Alegria discusses the planned EVAs in detail and outlines what supplies will be left for the resident crew. He ends with his thoughts on the importance of the ISS as the second anniversary of human occupation of the Space Station approaches.

Source record↗

NASA NTRS2002

Crew Training STS-110

The crewmembers are shown being suited for the STS-110 flight. The STS-110 crews are shown in training for four EVA's on the International Space Station. The crewmembers consist of: Michael J. Bloomfield, mission commander; Stephen N. Frick, pilot; and mission specialists: Ellen Ochoa, Lee M.E. Morin, Rex J. Walheim, Steven L. Smith, and Jerry Ross. Crew ascent middeck operations and Orbiter Skills Training in a fixed Based Simulator are the training areas shown. The STS-110 crew and Expedition four are seen during training at the Johnson Space Center Space Station Training Facility (SSTF). A photo session of the crew is also presented.

Source record↗

NASA NTRS2002

STS-107 Crew Interviews: Rick D. Husband, Commander

STS-107 Commander Rick Husband is seen during this preflight interview, where he gives a quick overview of the mission before answering questions about his inspiration to become an astronaut and his career path. Husband outlines what his role in the mission will be, what training the crew received, what crew member responsibilities will be, particularly during launch and reentry, what day to day life will be like on an extended duration mission, and what science experiments are going to be conducted onboard. He discusses the following science experiments and instruments in detail: MEIDEX (Mediterranean Israeli Dust Experiment), SOLSE (Shuttle Ozone Limb Sounding Experiment, FREESTAR (Fast Reaction Enabling Science Technology and Research) and various student projects. Husband also touches on the importance of space research, the value of international cooperation, the reason for dual crew shifts on the mission and the role of crew members as research subjects.

Source record↗

NASA NTRS2002

STS-113 Crew Training Clip

The STS-113 crew consists of Commander Jim Weatherbee, Pilot Paul Lockhart, and Mission Specialists Michael Lopez-Alegria and John Herrington. The goal of the STS-113 mission is to deliver the Expedition Six crew to the International Space Station and return the Expedition Five crew to Earth. Also, the P1 Truss will be installed on the International Space Station. The STS-113 crew is shown getting suited for Pre-Launch Ingress and Egress. The Neutral Buoyancy Lab Extravehicular Activity training (NBL) (EVA), CETA Bolt Familiarization, and Photography TV instruction are also presented.

Source record↗

NASA NTRS2001

Issues in life support and human factors in crew rescue from the ISS

The design and development of crew emergency response systems, particularly to provide an unplanned emergency return to Earth, requires an understanding of crew performance challenges in space. The combined effects of psychological and physiological adaptation during long-duration missions will have a significant effect on crew performance in the unpredictable and potentially life-threatening conditions of an emergency return to Earth. It is therefore important that the systems to be developed for emergency egress address these challenges through an integrated program to produce optimum productivity and safety in times of utmost stress. Fundamental to the success of the CRV is the Environmental Control and Life Support System (ECLSS), which provides the necessary conditions for the crew to survive their return mission in a shirtsleeve environment. This article will discuss the many issues in the design of an ECLSS system for CRV and place it in the context of the human performance challenges of the mission.

Rescue Work↗

NASA NTRS1990

Space Station Freedom crew training

The nature of the Space Station Freedom Program presents an array of new and enhanced challenges which need to be addressed en route to developing an effective and affordable infrastructure for crew training. Such an infrastructure is essential for the safety and success of the program. The three major challenges that affect crew training are the long lifetime of the program (thirty years), the interdependence of successive increments, and the participation of the three International Partners (Canada, European Space Agency, and Japan) and a myriad of experimenters. This paper addresses these major challenges as they drive the development of a crew training capability and the actual conduct of crew training.

Space Flight/education/organization & administrati↗

NASA NTRS1986

Dynamic posture analysis of Spacelab-1 crew members

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).

Non-NASA Center↗

NASA NTRS1989

Communication indices of crew coordination

The relationship between communication patterns and performance in 10 two-person flightcrews is explored with the aim of identifying speech variations which differentiate low- and high-error full mission simulator flights. Verbal data, transcribed from the videotaped performances, are treated as interactive sequences of speech events in which statements spoken by one crewmember are considered within the context of the other crewmember's prior and subsequent speech. Specific speech patterns characterized each crew, but the overriding findings included: a) marked homogeneity of patterns characterizing low-error crews, interpreted as the adoption of a standard form of communicating, and b) heterogeneity of patterns characterizing high-error crews, interpreted as the relative absence of a conventionalized form. Because conventions are regularities which confirm the expectations of those involved, predictability of crewmember behavior should be greater when standard conventions are followed. We conclude that such a practice can facilitate the coordination process and enhance crew performance.

Aerospace Medicine↗

NASA NTRS2005

Crew Configures ISS

European Automated Transfer Vehicles (ATVs) can begin sending tons of logistics supplies to the International Space Station as early as 2006, now that the U.S./Russian crew has outfitted the exterior of the ISS with the final communications and GPS antennas needed for ATV rendezvous and docking. During their extravehicular activity (EVA) on Mar. 28, Expedition 10 commander astronaut Leroy Chiao and Russian flight engineer cosmonaut Salizhan Sharipov also coordinated the hand-launch by Sharipov of a small Russian technology satellite. The crew wore Russian Orlan space suits during the 4 hr. 30 min. EVA, which they completed an hour earlier than expected. The EVA was the sixth for Chiao and the second for Sharipov. Both Expedition 10 crewmen had been outside together on Jan. 25 at the start of their six- month mission. The Expedition 11 replacement crew is to launch to the ISS Apr. 15, enabling the current crew to return to Earth Apr. 25. A detailed discussion about Chiao and Sharipov's EVA is presented.

Covault, Craig↗

NASA NTRS2005

Crew-Centered Operations: What HAL 9000 Should Have Been

To date, manned space flight has maintained the locus of control for the mission on the ground. Mission control performs tasks such as activity planning, system health management, resource allocation, and astronaut health monitoring. Future exploration missions require the locus of control to shift to on-board due light speed constraints and potential loss of communication. The lunar campaign must begin to utilize a shared control approach to validate and understand the limitations of the technology allowing astronauts to oversee and direct aspects of operation that require timely decision making. Crew-centered Operations require a system-level approach that integrates multiple technologies together to allow a crew-prime concept of operations. This paper will provide an overview of the driving mission requirements, highlighting the limitations of existing approaches to mission operations and identifying the critical technologies necessary to enable a crew-centered mode of operations. The paper will focus on the requirements, trade spaces, and concepts for fulfillment of this capability. The paper will provide a broad overview of relevant technologies including: Activity Planning and Scheduling; System Monitoring; Repair and Recovery; Crew Work Practices.

Korsmeyer, David J.↗

NASA NTRS2003

STS-114: Crew Training Clip from JSC

STS-114 Discovery crew is shown in various training exercises at Johnson Space Center. The crew consists of Eileen Collins, Commander; James Kelley, Pilot; Charles Camarda, Mission Specialist; Wendy Lawrence, Mission Specialist; Soichi Noguchi, Mission Specialist; Steve Robinson, Mission Specialist; and Andy Thomas, Mission Specialist. The exercises include: 1) EVA training in the VR lab; 2) Neutral Buoyancy Laboratory (NBL) EVA Training; 3) Walk to Motion Base Simulator; 4) EVA Preparations in ISS Airlock; and 7) Emergency Egress from Crew Compartment Trainer (CCT). A crew photo session is also presented. Footage of The Space Shuttle Atlantis inside the Kennedy Space Center Vehicle Assembly Building (VAB) after its demating from the Solid Rocket Booster and External Tank is shown. The video ends with techniques for inspecting and repairing Thermal Protection System tiles, a video of external tank production at the Michoud Assembly Facility (MAF) and redesign of the foam from the bipod ramp at Michoud Assembly Facility (MAF).

Source record↗