NASA Centrifuge Training Program for Commercial Crew Missions: Summary of Observations
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Craig Murphy↗
SEARCH · Engineering Papers
Results for “Commercial 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.
Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.
Commercial Crew Program Overview
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Lindsay Kirk↗
Commercial Crew Program and Considerations for Composites Reusability
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Christine Mills↗
Commercial Crew Program (CCP) Post-flight Reference Radiation Environments
The Nowcast of Aerospace Ionizing RAdiation System (NAIRAS) model version 3 is a coupled physics-based model that transports ionizing radiation through the heliosphere, Earth’s magnetosphere, the neutral atmosphere, and aircraft and spacecraft shielding. Ionizing radiation sources included in the model are: 1) galactic cosmic rays, 2) solar energetic particles including protons and heavy ions, and 3) the inner radiation belt trapped protons and electrons. NAIRAS predicts dosimetric quantities and differential and integral flux and fluence quantities for assessing human radiation exposure and single event effects in vehicle electronic systems from the Earth’s surface to the space environment.
Christopher J Mertens↗
Simulation Development and Analysis of Crew Vehicle Ascent Abort
NASA's Commercial Crew Program is an integral step in its journey to Mars as it would expedite development of space technologies and open up partnership with U.S. commercial companies. NASA reviews and independent assessment of Commercial Crew Program is fundamental to its success, and being able to model a commercial crew vehicle in a simulation rather than conduct a live test would be a safer, faster, and less expensive way to assess and certify the capabilities of the vehicle. To this end, my project was to determine the feasibility of using a simulation tool named SOMBAT version 2.0 to model a multiple parachute system for Commercial Crew Program simulation. The main tasks assigned to me were to debug and test the main parachute system model, (capable of simulating one to four main parachute bodies), and to utilize a graphical program to animate the simulation results. To begin tackling the first task, I learned how to use SOMBAT by familiarizing myself with its mechanics and by understanding the methods used to tweak its various parameters and outputs. I then used this new knowledge to set up, run, and analyze many different situations within SOMBAT in order to explore the limitations of the parachute model. Some examples of parameters that I varied include the initial velocity and orientation of the falling capsule, the number of main parachutes, and the location where the parachutes were attached to the capsule. Each parameter changed would give a different output, and in some cases, would expose a bug or limitation in the model. A major bug that I discovered was the inability of the model to handle any number of parachutes other than three. I spent quite some time trying to debug the code logically, but was unable to figure it out until my mentor taught me that digital simulation limitations can occur when some approximations are mistakenly assumed for certain in a physical system. This led me to the realization that unlike in all of the programming classes I have taken thus far that focus on pure logic, simulation code focuses on mimicking the physical world with some approximation and can have inaccuracies or numerical instabilities. Learning from my mistake, I adopted new methods to analyze these different simulations. One method the student used was to numerically plot various physical parameters using MATLAB to confirm the mechanical behavior of the system in addition to comparing the data to the output from a separate simulation tool called FAST. By having full control over what was being outputted from the simulation, I could choose which parameters to change and to plot as well as how to plot them, allowing for an in depth analysis of the data. Another method of analysis was to convert the output data into a graphical animation. Unlike the numerical plots, where all of the physical components were displayed separately, this graphical display allows for a combined look at the simulation output that makes it much easier for one to see the physical behavior of the model. The process for converting SOMBAT output for EDGE graphical display had to be developed. With some guidance from other EDGE users, I developed a process and created a script that would easily allow one to display simulations graphically. Another limitation with the SOMBAT model was the inability for the capsule to have the main parachutes instantly deployed with a large angle between the air speed vector and the chutes drag vector. To explore this problem, I had to learn about different coordinate frames used in Guidance, Navigation & Control (J2000, ECEF, ENU, etc.) to describe the motion of a vehicle and about Euler angles (e.g. Roll, Pitch, Yaw) to describe the orientation of the vehicle. With a thorough explanation from my mentor about the description of each coordinate frame, as well as how to use a directional cosine matrix to transform one frame to another, I investigated the problem by simulating different capsule orientations. In the end, I was able to show that this limitation could be avoided if the capsule is initially oriented antiparallel to its velocity vector.
Wong, Chi S.↗
Operating a Crewed Spacecraft in the Age of Commercial Space Using Private/Government Partnership
Fifty years after humans completed a large-scale United States government-funded and government-engineered effort of landing humans on the moon, human spaceflight has entered a new paradigm. Private companies are now investing their own money and taking on an ever-increasing role in human spaceflight, in partnership with the U.S. government. This paper will describe the development of one of these partnerships through the lens of its mission operations team. As part of the Commercial Crew Program (CCP), NASA selected Boeing’s CST-100 Starliner as one of the next generation of crewed vehicles. Boeing opted to partner with the US Government for their Starliner operations by contracting with NASA’s Mission Control teams in the Flight Operations Directorate (FOD) at the Johnson Space Center to create its own Mission Operations (MO) flight controllers. Partnering with FOD provided benefits to both Boeing and NASA while also creating new challenges. MO brought over 60 years of crewed spaceflight experience and infrastructure to Boeing’s new program. Within certain legal constraints, MO was able to work closely and efficiently with their FOD counterparts who were performing both integration duties and, under the auspices of the CCP, insight of the contractors, in this case Boeing. Involvement of NASA as the Boeing operations agent did lead to what management deemed a ‘healthy tension’ within FOD, challenging old processes and often creating better, more robust teamwork. Successful development of the framework and boundaries of both the legal aspects and the oversight tensions has been one of the keys to developing a successful corporate/government partnership. Due to the highly automated nature of the Starliner, the MO organization was designed to be much smaller than previous NASA’s flight control teams for past programs. NASA has learned through the decades that spacecraft design and operations need to be as flexible and forgiving as possible. NASA’s Commercial Crew Program was established to sponsor corporate development of economical vehicles that could get humans to and from low Earth orbit. These companies, of course, need to meet contractual obligations in providing a safe means of transporting astronauts to the International Space Station (ISS), but also need to do so in a manner that leads to the venture resulting in a profit at the same time. Through MO’s involvement in the development of this spaceflight paradigm shift, there are ample lessons to be conveyed to future teams and programs working to develop similar missions.
Robert C Dempsey↗
Operating a Crewed Spacecraft in the Age of Commercial Space Using Private/Government Partnership
Fifty years after humans completed a large-scale United States government-funded and government-engineered effort of landing humans on the moon, human spaceflight has entered a new paradigm. Private companies are now investing their own money and taking on an ever-increasing role in human spaceflight, in partnership with the U.S. government. This paper will describe the development of one of these partnerships through the lens of its mission operations team. As part of the Commercial Crew Program (CCP), NASA selected Boeing’s CST-100 Starliner as one of the next generation of crewed vehicles. Boeing opted to partner with the US Government for their Starliner operations by contracting with NASA’s Mission Control teams in the Flight Operations Directorate (FOD) at the Johnson Space Center to create its own Mission Operations (MO) flight controllers. Partnering with FOD provided benefits to both Boeing and NASA while also creating new challenges. MO brought over 60 years of crewed spaceflight experience and infrastructure to Boeing’s new program. Within certain legal constraints, MO was able to work closely and efficiently with their FOD counterparts who were performing both integration duties and, under the auspices of the CCP, insight of the contractors, in this case Boeing. Involvement of NASA as the Boeing operations agent did lead to what management deemed a ‘healthy tension’ within FOD, challenging old processes and often creating better, more robust teamwork. Successful development of the framework and boundaries of both the legal aspects and the oversight tensions has been one of the keys to developing a successful corporate/government partnership. Due to the highly automated nature of the Starliner, the MO organization was designed to be much smaller than previous NASA’s flight control teams for past programs. NASA has learned through the decades that spacecraft design and operations need to be as flexible and forgiving as possible. NASA’s Commercial Crew Program was established to sponsor corporate development of economical vehicles that could get humans to and from low Earth orbit. These companies, of course, need to meet contractual obligations in providing a safe means of transporting astronauts to the International Space Station (ISS), but also need to do so in a manner that leads to the venture resulting in a profit at the same time. Through MO’s involvement in the development of this spaceflight paradigm shift, there are ample lessons to be conveyed to future teams and programs working to develop similar missions.
Robert C. Dempsey↗
Operating a Crewed Spacecraft in the Age of Commercial Space Using Private/Government Partnership
Fifty years after humans completed a large-scale United States government-funded and government-engineered effort of landing humans on the moon, human spaceflight has entered a new paradigm. Private companies are now investing their own money and taking on an ever-increasing role in human spaceflight, in partnership with the U.S. government. This paper will describe the development of one of these partnerships through the lens of its mission operations team. As part of the Commercial Crew Program (CCP), NASA selected Boeing’s CST-100 Starliner as one of the next generation of crewed vehicles. Boeing opted to partner with the US Government for their Starliner operations by contracting with NASA’s Mission Control teams in the Flight Operations Directorate (FOD) at the Johnson Space Center to create its own Mission Operations (MO) flight controllers. Partnering with FOD provided benefits to both Boeing and NASA while also creating new challenges. MO brought over 60 years of crewed spaceflight experience and infrastructure to Boeing’s new program. Within certain legal constraints, MO was able to work closely and efficiently with their FOD counterparts who were performing both integration duties and, under the auspices of the CCP, insight of the contractors, in this case Boeing. Involvement of NASA as the Boeing operations agent did lead to what management deemed a ‘healthy tension’ within FOD, challenging old processes and often creating better, more robust teamwork. Successful development of the framework and boundaries of both the legal aspects and the oversight tensions has been one of the keys to developing a successful corporate/government partnership. Due to the highly automated nature of the Starliner, the MO organization was designed to be much smaller than previous NASA’s flight control teams for past programs. NASA has learned through the decades that spacecraft design and operations need to be as flexible and forgiving as possible. NASA’s Commercial Crew Program was established to sponsor corporate development of economical vehicles that could get humans to and from low Earth orbit. These companies, of course, need to meet contractual obligations in providing a safe means of transporting astronauts to the International Space Station (ISS), but also need to do so in a manner that leads to the venture resulting in a profit at the same time. Through MO’s involvement in the development of this spaceflight paradigm shift, there are ample lessons to be conveyed to future teams and programs working to develop similar missions.
Robert C. Dempsey↗
Crew Transportation Plan
The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) Commercial Crew Program (CCP) has been chartered to facilitate the development of a United States (U.S.) commercial crew space transportation capability with the goal of achieving safe, reliable, and cost effective access to and from low Earth orbit (LEO) and the International Space Station (ISS) as soon as possible. Once the capability is matured and is available to the Government and other customers, NASA expects to purchase commercial services to meet its ISS crew rotation and emergency return objectives.
achieving certification to transport NASA↗
High level organizing principles for display of systems fault information for commercial flight crews
Advanced fault management aiding concepts for commercial pilots are being developed in a research program at NASA Langley Research Center. One aim of this program is to re-evaluate current design principles for display of fault information to the flight crew: (1) from a cognitive engineering perspective and (2) in light of the availability of new types of information generated by advanced fault management aids. The study described in this paper specifically addresses principles for organizing fault information for display to pilots based on their mental models of fault management.
Rogers, William H.↗
Crew Transportation System Design Reference Missions
Contains summaries of potential design reference mission goals for systems to transport humans to andfrom low Earth orbit (LEO) for the Commercial Crew Program. The purpose of this document is to describe Design Reference Missions (DRMs) representative of the end-to-end Crew Transportation System (CTS) framework envisioned to successfully execute commercial crew transportation to orbital destinations. The initial CTS architecture will likely be optimized to support NASA crew and NASA-sponsored crew rotation missions to the ISS, but consideration may be given in this design phase to allow for modifications in order to accomplish other commercial missions in the future. With the exception of NASA’s mission to the ISS, the remaining commercial DRMs are notional. Any decision to design or scar the CTS for these additional non-NASA missions is completely up to the Commercial Provider. As NASA’s mission needs evolve over time, this document will be periodically updated to reflect those needs.
potential design reference↗
Catalyst for Expanding Human Spaceflight
History supplies us with many models of how and how not to commercialize an industry. This presentation draws parallels between industries with government roots, like the railroad, air transport, communications and the internet, and NASAs Commercial Crew Program. In these examples, government served as a catalyst for what became a booming industry. The building block approach the Commercial Crew Program is taking is very simple -- establish a need, laying the groundwork, enabling industry and legal framework.
Industry catalyst↗
Human Spaceflight Safety for the Next Generation on Orbital Space Systems
The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) Commercial Crew Program (CCP) has been chartered to facilitate the development of a United States (U.S.) commercial crew space transportation capability with the goal of achieving safe, reliable, and cost effective access to and from low Earth orbit (LEO) and the International Space Station (ISS) as soon as possible. Once the capability is matured and is available to the Government and other customers, NASA expects to purchase commercial services to meet its ISS crew rotation and emergency return objectives. The primary role of the CCP is to enable and ensure safe human spaceflight and processes for the next generation of earth orbital space systems. The architecture of the Program delineates the process for investment performance in safe orbital systems, Crew Transportation System (CTS) certification, and CTS Flight Readiness. A series of six technical documents build up the architecture to address the top-level CTS requirements and standards. They include Design Reference Missions, with the near term focus on ISS crew services, Certification and Service Requirements, Technical Management Processes, and Technical and Operations Standards Evaluation Processes.
Mango, Edward J.↗
The Evolution of Payload Data Capabilities on the Commercial Visiting Vehicles that Service the International Space Station
In 2008, NASA awarded the first contracts to U.S. commercial companies to deliver cargo and supplies to the International Space Station (ISS). These contracts, called the first phase of Commercial Resupply Services (CRS1), were awarded to Space Exploration Technologies (SpaceX) and Orbital Sciences. Under the CRS1 contracts, commercial visiting vehicles not only provide a couple tons of cargo to the ISS each mission, but they also provide the ability for payloads to be transferred to the ISS in an active, powered state. Prior to the start of the CRS1 program, most vehicles that serviced the ISS transported science experiments as passive cargo. Therefore, the CRS1 program through offering frequent flight opportunities with powered payload transport capability ushered in a new era in which NASA and payload developers could reimagine operational concepts for payloads during the transit phase to and from the ISS. To take advantage of this powered payload transport capability, NASA first added requirements under the CRS1 program for the commercial vehicles to provide telemetry monitoring services for pressurized payloads to give payload developers situational awareness during the transport phase. Since then, payload developer use-cases for visiting vehicle data services during free-flight have evolved with each new commercial visiting vehicle contract to cover a variety of payload monitoring and control abilities. Additional commercial contracts include the Commercial Crew Transportation Capability (CCtCap) contracts that were awarded to SpaceX and Boeing, and the second phase of Commercial Resupply Services (CRS2) contracts that were awarded to SpaceX, Orbital ATK (formerly Orbital Sciences), and Sierra Nevada Corporation. Commercial crew flights will commence in 2018, and the first flight under the CRS2 program is currently planned for 2019.
Wiggins, Lindsay M.↗
NASA KSC Intern Final Report - Virtual Reality in STEM Engagement
For this internship, I was a part of the multi-center NextGen STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics) pilot. Specifically, I worked with the Developing Commercial Crew Program (CCP) Capabilities team that focuses on human spaceflight to the space station with NASA’s commercial partners. Composed of NASA employees and contractors (who are connected to KSC, JSC, and LaRC), they work to ensure that students will experience traditional classroom content and be immersed in emerging technologies in order to explore Commercial Crew missions and launch facilities. This group is in the process of creating educational products and resources to inspire the next generation to pursue STEM and to allow educators to have access to unique and enticing STEM activities. These products include: age-appropriate classroom lessons (including activity sheets and challenges) for kindergarten through twelfth grade; a CCP app and corresponding guide; learning experiences for students as well as educators; and virtual field trips and tours using NASA-created Virtual Reality (VR) videos and a custom VR app. My particular assignment was managing the VR equipment, developing an understanding of how to maximize the use of the equipment, creating documents that explain and convey the operations and procedures concerning the equipment (including lessons learned from equipment use), and training others to utilize the equipment effectively and correctly for conference events and group demonstrations. Over the course of this internship, I helped my team outline and learn essential procedures of operation for the VR equipment, solved technology problems that arose (due to the nature of creating unique products), and encouraged audiences at KSC and various conferences to consider using the CCP VR videos in their classrooms as an opportunity to engage and challenge the next generation to pursue STEM careers.
STEM↗
Automated Software for Crewed Spacecraft - Bridging the Gap from Sci Fi to Reality
With a voice command or a few taps on the console, the spacecraft pivots on a dime at high velocity and gently docks to an orbiting space platform. This is the image most people have of the complex software computations and integrated hardware performance necessary for a spacecraft to successfully perform an automated launch, rendezvous, and docking. Today’s reality is that while computer operations are advancing rapidly, science fiction over-simplifies and over-sells current capabilities. This paper discusses the integration of spacecraft computer automation into the operation of one of the United States’ new Commercial Crew vehicles - the Boeing CST-100 Starliner. Lessons learned by the Boeing Mission Operations team, a private-public partnership with NASA, from conceptual design through real-time operation of the first test flight will be discussed. Focus will center on how operations has learned to use the automated software to their advantage while also knowing how to adjust the automation in response to spacecraft or mission anomalies. One goal of advanced spacecraft automation is the ability to reduce both the crew workload and the ground control footprint while at the same time increasing spacecraft and mission flexibility. Historically, crewed spacecraft required a large number of operators on the ground to use a plethora of tools to compute nominal and contingency mission trajectories. Moving those sophisticated software tools to being onboard the vehicle can reduce the need for such complex ground support. Given that today’s spacecraft software is not yet as capable or as flexible in all circumstances as the computers depicted in movies, there is usually a trade-off between software automation cost and the flexibility of that software resulting in a trade-off between what is performed on the spacecraft and what is left to onboard crew or ground control. For missions that go beyond the Moon, software that autonomously controls nearly every aspect of a crewed mission will become a necessity given the long time delays between the spacecraft and Earth’s ground control teams. The lessons learned by Boeing and its Mission Operations team, through the design and implementation of Starliner’s hardware and software automation, will be able to inform future public and private spacecraft design. As the technologies and capabilities evolve, incorporating lessons learned in successful low Earth orbit commercial crew vehicle missions, spacecraft designs will continue to improve and be able to better enable safe execution of human missions to the Moon and beyond.
Robert C Dempsey↗
Automated Software for Manned Spacecraft - Bridging the Gap from Sci Fi to Reality
With a voice command or a few taps on the console, the spacecraft pivots on a dime at high velocity and gently docks to an orbiting space platform. This is the image most people have of the complex software computations and integrated hardware performance necessary for a spacecraft to successfully perform an automated launch, rendezvous, and docking. Today’s reality is that while computer operations are advancing rapidly, science fiction over-simplifies and over-sells current capabilities. This paper discusses the integration of spacecraft computer automation into the operation of one of the United States’ new Commercial Crew vehicles - the Boeing CST-100 Starliner. Lessons learned by the Boeing Mission Operations team, a private-public partnership with NASA, from conceptual design through real-time operation of the first test flight will be discussed. Focus will center on how operations has learned to use the automated software to their advantage while also knowing how to adjust the automation in response to spacecraft or mission anomalies. One goal of advanced spacecraft automation is the ability to reduce both the crew workload and the ground control footprint while at the same time increasing spacecraft and mission flexibility. Historically, crewed spacecraft required a large number of operators on the ground to use a plethora of tools to compute nominal and contingency mission trajectories. Moving those sophisticated software tools to being onboard the vehicle can reduce the need for such complex ground support. Given that today’s spacecraft software is not yet as capable or as flexible in all circumstances as the computers depicted in movies, there is usually a trade-off between software automation cost and the flexibility of that software resulting in a trade-off between what is performed on the spacecraft and what is left to onboard crew or ground control. For missions that go beyond the Moon, software that autonomously controls nearly every aspect of a crewed mission will become a necessity given the long time delays between the spacecraft and Earth’s ground control teams. The lessons learned by Boeing and its Mission Operations team, through the design and implementation of Starliner’s hardware and software automation, will be able to inform future public and private spacecraft design. As the technologies and capabilities evolve, incorporating lessons learned in successful low Earth orbit commercial crew vehicle missions, spacecraft designs will continue to improve and be able to better enable safe execution of human missions to the Moon and beyond.
Robert C Dempsey↗
Automated Software for Manned Spacecraft - Bridging the Gap from Sci Fi to Reality
With a voice command or a few taps on the console, the spacecraft pivots on a dime at high velocity and gently docks to an orbiting space platform. This is the image most people have of the complex software computations and integrated hardware performance necessary for a spacecraft to successfully perform an automated launch, rendezvous, and docking. Today’s reality is that while computer operations are advancing rapidly, science fiction over-simplifies and over-sells current capabilities. This paper discusses the integration of spacecraft computer automation into the operation of one of the United States’ new Commercial Crew vehicles - the Boeing CST-100 Starliner. Lessons learned by the Boeing Mission Operations team, a private-public partnership with NASA, from conceptual design through real-time operation of the first test flight will be discussed. Focus will center on how operations has learned to use the automated software to their advantage while also knowing how to adjust the automation in response to spacecraft or mission anomalies. One goal of advanced spacecraft automation is the ability to reduce both the crew workload and the ground control footprint while at the same time increasing spacecraft and mission flexibility. Historically, crewed spacecraft required a large number of operators on the ground to use a plethora of tools to compute nominal and contingency mission trajectories. Moving those sophisticated software tools to being onboard the vehicle can reduce the need for such complex ground support. Given that today’s spacecraft software is not yet as capable or as flexible in all circumstances as the computers depicted in movies, there is usually a trade-off between software automation cost and the flexibility of that software resulting in a trade-off between what is performed on the spacecraft and what is left to onboard crew or ground control. For missions that go beyond the Moon, software that autonomously controls nearly every aspect of a crewed mission will become a necessity given the long time delays between the spacecraft and Earth’s ground control teams. The lessons learned by Boeing and its Mission Operations team, through the design and implementation of Starliner’s hardware and software automation, will be able to inform future public and private spacecraft design. As the technologies and capabilities evolve, incorporating lessons learned in successful low Earth orbit commercial crew vehicle missions, spacecraft designs will continue to improve and be able to better enable safe execution of human missions to the Moon and beyond.
Robert C. Dempsey↗