Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “operations flight operations”

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

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

At least 595 records · Page 33
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

An Approach to Identifying Aspects of Positive Pilot Behavior within the Aviation Safety Reporting System

The National Airspace System (NAS) is constantly evolving as air traffic continues to ramp up to pre-pandemic numbers and projected to grow to unprecedented levels in the coming years. As well as increasing demand to the current system, emerging operations such as Unmanned Autonomous Systems are also expected to add to complexity in the airspace. To address these issues, the industry and government agencies supporting the NAS will need to rely upon additional automation and new technologies to address future operational requirements, while continuing to be a world-leading safe transportation system. As these new technologies are implemented, the system continues to rely on human pilots and controllers in the loop to monitor the system and intervene in situations the automation cannot handle. The goal of proactively addressing safety is of foremost concern to ensure passenger confidence. The industry has implemented various Safety Monitoring Systems to identify safety risks and proactively address them before they result in a serious incident or accident. One such program is the Aviation Safety Reporting System (ASRS). ASRS is a long-established system where pilots and controllers voluntarily and anonymously report safety incidents they experienced and observed during line operations by providing rich text narratives describing the events, the environment, and conditions leading to the safety event of concern. These narratives provide insight and context around events of interest and can be used to identify emerging problems. They can trigger investigations within Flight Operational Quality Assurance or Flight Data Monitoring programs. However, this process typically focuses on the adverse events and the unsafe aspects of the operations surrounding the reported or detected events. This perspective of investigating factors that went wrong around an adverse event is commonly referred to as Safety I. Alternatively, characterizing successful actions that operators perform every day under varying conditions that keep the system within safe operating bounds is a concept referred to as Safety II. The benefit of the Safety II view is that the scope is much larger than that of Safety I since a vast majority of the operations result in successful flights. Many of the successful techniques used to manage operational threats are not documented in standard operating procedures or taught during training. They are typically acquired over time by working with experienced pilots during line operations or in many cases after experiencing a problem for the first time and reacting to it in situ, drawing from years of experience to manage the threat. In an attempt to quantify these positive actions, we are proposing an approach to extracting key behaviors within ASRS reports that can support the Safety II concept. Our analysis assumes that ASRS reports contain some descriptions of corrective actions that operators performed to prevent a situation from leading to an accident. Leveraging recent advances in Natural Language Process modeling, we have developed an approach to extract positive sentiment from reports, embed these positive statements in a vector space where they can be numerically analyzed, and clustering these statements into similar contextual categories. From these contextualized categories we can attempt to summarized and distilled aspects of the positive behavior. The goal is to identify categories of behavior that describe consistent operator techniques that supports the Safety II concept. With this information, airlines may enable learning from these positive actions, or address procedures that need to be changed to avoid having pilots implement a workaround. These insights can provide a lens into what is “going right” in the operations that may otherwise not be known widely within the community. It is envisioned that this approach can be extended to other narrative programs such as Line Operation Safety Audit or Learning Improvement Team reports where similar observed behavior can be analyzed to extract positive actions and inform the overall operations.

NLP↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

An Approach to Identifying Aspects of Positive Pilot Behavior within the Aviation Safety Reporting System

The National Airspace System (NAS) is constantly evolving as air traffic continues to ramp up to pre-pandemic numbers and projected to grow to unprecedented levels in the coming years. As well as increasing demand to the current system, emerging operations such as Unmanned Autonomous Systems are also expected to add to complexity in the airspace. To address these issues, the industry and government agencies supporting the NAS will need to rely upon additional automation and new technologies to address future operational requirements, while continuing to be a world-leading safe transportation system. As these new technologies are implemented, the system continues to rely on human pilots and controllers in the loop to monitor the system and intervene in situations the automation cannot handle. The goal of proactively addressing safety is of foremost concern to ensure passenger confidence. The industry has implemented various Safety Monitoring Systems to identify safety risks and proactively address them before they result in a serious incident or accident. One such program is the Aviation Safety Reporting System (ASRS). ASRS is a long-established system where pilots and controllers voluntarily and anonymously report safety incidents they experienced and observed during line operations by providing rich text narratives describing the events, the environment, and conditions leading to the safety event of concern. These narratives provide insight and context around events of interest and can be used to identify emerging problems. They can trigger investigations within Flight Operational Quality Assurance or Flight Data Monitoring programs. However, this process typically focuses on the adverse events and the unsafe aspects of the operations surrounding the reported or detected events. This perspective of investigating factors that went wrong around an adverse event is commonly referred to as Safety I. Alternatively, characterizing successful actions that operators perform every day under varying conditions that keep the system within safe operating bounds is a concept referred to as Safety II. The benefit of the Safety II view is that the scope is much larger than that of Safety I since a vast majority of the operations result in successful flights. Many of the successful techniques used to manage operational threats are not documented in standard operating procedures or taught during training. They are typically acquired over time by working with experienced pilots during line operations or in many cases after experiencing a problem for the first time and reacting to it in situ, drawing from years of experience to manage the threat. In an attempt to quantify these positive actions, we are proposing an approach to extracting key behaviors within ASRS reports that can support the Safety II concept. Our analysis assumes that ASRS reports contain some descriptions of corrective actions that operators performed to prevent a situation from leading to an accident. Leveraging recent advances in Natural Language Process modeling, we have developed an approach to extract positive sentiment from reports, embed these positive statements in a vector space where they can be numerically analyzed, and clustering these statements into similar contextual categories. From these contextualized categories we can attempt to summarized and distilled aspects of the positive behavior. The goal is to identify categories of behavior that describe consistent operator techniques that supports the Safety II concept. With this information, airlines may enable learning from these positive actions, or address procedures that need to be changed to avoid having pilots implement a workaround. These insights can provide a lens into what is “going right” in the operations that may otherwise not be known widely within the community. It is envisioned that this approach can be extended to other narrative programs such as Line Operation Safety Audit or Learning Improvement Team reports where similar observed behavior can be analyzed to extract positive actions and inform the overall operations.

NLP↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

An Approach to Identifying Aspects of Positive Pilot Behavior within the Aviation Safety Reporting System

The National Airspace System (NAS) is constantly evolving as air traffic continues to ramp up to pre-pandemic numbers and projected to grow to unprecedented levels in the coming years. As well as increasing demand to the current system, emerging operations such as Unmanned Autonomous Systems are also expected to add to complexity in the airspace. To address these issues, the industry and government agencies supporting the NAS will need to rely upon additional automation and new technologies to address future operational requirements, while continuing to be a world-leading safe transportation system. As these new technologies are implemented, the system continues to rely on human pilots and controllers in the loop to monitor the system and intervene in situations the automation cannot handle. The goal of proactively addressing safety is of foremost concern to ensure passenger confidence. The industry has implemented various Safety Monitoring Systems to identify safety risks and proactively address them before they result in a serious incident or accident. One such program is the Aviation Safety Reporting System (ASRS). ASRS is a long-established system where pilots and controllers voluntarily and anonymously report safety incidents they experienced and observed during line operations by providing rich text narratives describing the events, the environment, and conditions leading to the safety event of concern. These narratives provide insight and context around events of interest and can be used to identify emerging problems. They can trigger investigations within Flight Operational Quality Assurance or Flight Data Monitoring programs. However, this process typically focuses on the adverse events and the unsafe aspects of the operations surrounding the reported or detected events. This perspective of investigating factors that went wrong around an adverse event is commonly referred to as Safety I. Alternatively, characterizing successful actions that operators perform every day under varying conditions that keep the system within safe operating bounds is a concept referred to as Safety II. The benefit of the Safety II view is that the scope is much larger than that of Safety I since a vast majority of the operations result in successful flights. Many of the successful techniques used to manage operational threats are not documented in standard operating procedures or taught during training. They are typically acquired over time by working with experienced pilots during line operations or in many cases after experiencing a problem for the first time and reacting to it in situ, drawing from years of experience to manage the threat. In an attempt to quantify these positive actions, we are proposing an approach to extracting key behaviors within ASRS reports that can support the Safety II concept. Our analysis assumes that ASRS reports contain some descriptions of corrective actions that operators performed to prevent a situation from leading to an accident. Leveraging recent advances in Natural Language Process modeling, we have developed an approach to extract positive sentiment from reports, embed these positive statements in a vector space where they can be numerically analyzed, and clustering these statements into similar contextual categories. From these contextualized categories we can attempt to summarized and distilled aspects of the positive behavior. The goal is to identify categories of behavior that describe consistent operator techniques that supports the Safety II concept. With this information, airlines may enable learning from these positive actions, or address procedures that need to be changed to avoid having pilots implement a workaround. These insights can provide a lens into what is “going right” in the operations that may otherwise not be known widely within the community. It is envisioned that this approach can be extended to other narrative programs such as Line Operation Safety Audit or Learning Improvement Team reports where similar observed behavior can be analyzed to extract positive actions and inform the overall operations.

NLP↗
NASA NTRS2024

Integration of Automated Systems Test Campaign NC-IAS

NASA’s 2022 strategic plan included the goal to catalyze economic growth and drive innovation in the aviation industry, and to address challenges in air transportation and airspace management within the National Airspace System (NAS). The Aeronautics Research Mission Directorate (ARMD) specifically was tasked with leading aviation innovation to enable safe and sustainable air transportation through revolutionary vehicle advances and efficient flight operations. As a part of meeting these objectives and advancing air mobility concepts, NASA initiated the National Campaign (NC) in the Advanced Air Mobility (AAM) Project within the Airspace Operations and Safety Program (AOSP). The NC was designed to support operational demonstrations with industry as well as the research and development needed to support NASA-led research flight demonstrations. Within NC, the Integration of Automated Systems (IAS), an NC activity, tested and evaluated flight deck automation and airspace operations management functions needed to enable Urban Air Mobility (UAM) operations. This was accomplished through a partnership with Sikorsky Aircraft (specifically Sikorsky Innovations), a Lockheed Martin company, and DARPA (Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency), by leveraging two automation-enabled helicopters equipped with unique capabilities that enabled NASA to develop and test two-ship conflict encounters to demonstrate flight path management and hazard avoidance technologies. The enabler in this testing was NASA-developed “Middleware” (MW) software (also known as Expandable Variable Autonomy Architecture, or EVAA), which among other things allowed multiple algorithms to be incorporated into one software build that was hosted on the dissimilar-type Sikorsky helicopters. The IAS test campaign period of performance was from March 2022 through October 2023 and was structured as a phased, or spiral, approach that ultimately led to the first-ever demonstration of two-ship UAM/AAM operations designed to safely choreograph specific conflict encounters and mission scenarios to test the research algorithms for strategic and tactical aircraft deconfliction. Lessons learned are included in the body of the report. Data collected will be used to inform FAA and industry standards groups on the increasingly automated systems needed for future AAM operations. The test encounters developed for these flight tests were proven to be highly predictable, repeatable, and safely exercised flight path planning and Detect and Avoid (DAA) algorithms. These same test encounters should be leveraged by future flight test campaigns to verify that operational safety is not compromised as the AAM architecture matures. Next steps include repeating similar encounters using unmanned aircraft carrying DAA sensors in the National Airspace.

AAM↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

CFD 2030 Grand Challenge: CFD-in-the-Loop Monte Carlo Flight Simulation for Space Vehicle Design

Flight qualification of space vehicles is markedly different from those typically employed for aircraft. The concept of an extensive flight test campaign for a space vehicle does not exist, and vehicle designers must look to alternative techniques for demonstrating robust and reliable performance of their vehicles prior to operational flight. A space vehicle may undergo only a handful of flight tests in its development cycle, with each flight representing a drastically different flight phase or flight configuration. For instance, NASA’s Space Launch System (SLS) launch vehicle and Orion spacecraft will only see a total of four flight demonstrations before flying a crew on its first operational mission, and each flight demonstrates a unique vehicle configuration and/or set of flight conditions. The SLS will be flown only one time before it becomes operational (Artemis 1). The Orion spacecraft Crew Module (CM) will have been tested twice, once on a Delta IV launch vehicle (Exploration Flight Test 1) and once as a fully integrated system with the SLS launch vehicle (Artemis 1). The Orion Launch abort system will have been tested twice, once in a pad abort scenario (Pad Abort 1) and once in an inflight abort scenario (Ascent Abort 2) on a modified Peacekeeper booster. Both of these latter tests involve only a boiler plate CM, not a functional Orion spacecraft. Thus, unlike aircraft, there is very little opportunity for engineers to assess and evaluate their preflight predictions. Instead, space vehicle designers rely on Monte Carlo flight simulations with detailed dispersions of predicted nominal flight behavior to determine how robust their design is to errors and uncertainties in the flight conditions their vehicle may encounter. These Monte Carlo analyses entail thousands of trajectory simulations to demonstrate that the vehicle can meet design requirements at a specified level of reliability. From an aerodynamics and aerothermodynamics perspective, these trajectory simulations are fueled by an extensive aerodynamic database that covers the complete range of expected flight conditions, vehicle configurations, and flight attitudes expected in a given mission. Today, these databases amount to a table of engineering parameters that can be quickly interrogated by the trajectory simulator. The aerodynamic and aerothermodynamic databases are assembled via a series of ground tests, empirical and analytical analysis, physics-based computational analysis, applicable past flight performance data, and in some cases, engineering judgment. These databases generally take years to assemble for a new space vehicle system and in the case of SLS/Orion, over a decade of test and analysis have been expended to develop the extensive databases required to cover the myriad of configurations and potential flight conditions required for the system. Recently, it has been proposed that Computational Fluid Dynamic (CFD) and computing capability may be reaching a point where it is foreseeable that CFD could be integrated directly into the production trajectory simulation tools used to design NASA’s space vehicles. To demonstrate this, NASA has embarked on two demonstrations of this type of capability, one where six degree of freedom flight trajectory simulation equations are embedded in an existing CFD solver and another where a production CFD solver is loosely coupled with a production trajectory simulation tool. These efforts represent an initial demonstration of a future approach to flight trajectory simulation, but they are a far cry from the capability required to perform a full-up CFD-in-the-loop Monte Carlo trajectory simulation. Therefore, this represents a viable grand challenge for computational methods addressing space vehicle design and development. The final paper/presentation will discuss the many hurdles, beyond simply raw computational power, to realizing this grand challenge and how they map directly to the CFD Vision 2030 ojectives. Among these are the wide range of flight conditions, including accelerating/decelerating flight, encountered by a space vehicle during launch and/or entry. The vehicle can also encounter numerous configuration changes, some of which can be quite drastic, during the course of its flight, so robust, automated geometry modeling, grid generation, and adaptation will play a huge role in reaching this goal. Multiply this by 1000’s of trajectory simulations occurring simultaneously in a given Monte Carlo analysis, and the problem readily scales to absorb virtually any size of supercomputer envisioned today. The concept of CFD-in-the-loop Monte Carlo trajectory simulation poses a formidable challenge for emerging and future computing systems, and it has the potential to shave years off the development cycle for aerodynamic and aerothermodynamic performance predictions as compared to today’s space vehicle design approach.

CFD 2030↗
NASA NTRS2016

Propellant Savings during Soyuz Undock from the International Space Station

As a vehicle continuously orbiting Earth for over a decade, the International Space Station (ISS) must be conscious of ways to conserve consumables to maximize the efficiency of cargo flights to ISS. One such consumable is propellant. As part of an ongoing effort to minimize propellant usage onboard ISS and use control moment gyroscopes as much as possible for ISS control, an effort was made in late 2014 to allow Soyuz manned vehicle undockings without requiring the use of thrusters. This method, which has been used for four Soyuz undockings, saves up to 160 kg of propellant each year. Fiona completed a B.S. is Mechanical Engienering at Washington University in St. Louis in 2009, after which she moved to Houston, TX to begin working at NASA Johnson Space Center. She currently works in the Flight Operations Directorate as an ADCO (Attitude Determination and Control Officer) flight controller and MCG (Motion Control Group) instructor. Her responsibilities include operating the motion control systems of the ISS in Mission Control, interfacing with Russian colleagues, mentoring and teaching flight controller trainees, and training astronauts for their missions to ISS.

Turett, Fiona↗
NASA NTRS2006

Moving from Bilateral to Multilateral Medical Operations

When the ISS Integrated Medical Group moved to a multilateral configuration for the ASTROLAB mission, several challenges were encountered and overcome that allowed for a streamlined operational experience. Dating back to the early 1990s, the European Space Agency (ESA) has sent flight surgeon and Biomedical Engineering (BME) personnel to NASA-JSC and Russia to train for space flight operational support. This training was tailored towards the needs of particular Shuttle/Soyuz missions, and more generally for eventual ISS support. With the announcement of the ASTROLAB mission, NASA and ESA personnel worked together to develop a detailed training template for ESA BMEs to ensure successful support of the mission from the European Astronaut Center (EAC). This training included the deployment of ESA BMEs to JSC, as well as the development of a rotation of ISS-certified NASA BMEs to the EAC. In addition to training, NASA, ESA, and the Russian Federal Space Agency (FSA) worked together preflight to develop multilateral flight control support concepts and implementation plans. This resulted in flight control support schedules, operational rules of engagement, and the delineation of responsibilities. NASA also assisted ESA with the development and deployment of workstation displays to allow the ESA medical flight control team to monitor ISS telemetry from the EAC. The goal of this presentation is to provide details of the preflight preparation and in-flight support of the ASTROLAB mission by the ESA, NASA, and FSA medical support teams. In addition, it will identify lessons learned that will be implemented for future multilateral endeavors.

Roden, S.↗
NASA NTRS2006

Zero to Integration in Eight Months, the Dawn Ground Data System Engineering Challenge

The Dawn Project has presented the Ground Data System (GDS) with technical challenges driven by cost and schedule constraints commonly associated with National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) Discovery Projects. The Dawn mission consists of a new and exciting Deep Space partnership among: the Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL), manages the project and is responsible for flight operation; Orbital Sciences Corporation (OSC), is the spacecraft builder and is responsible for flight system test and integration; and the University of California, at Los Angeles (UCLA), is responsible for science planning and operations. As a cost-capped mission, one of Dawn's implementation strategies is to leverage from both flight and ground heritage. OSC's ground data system is used for flight system test and integration as part of the flight heritage strategy. Mission operations, however, are to be conducted with JPL's ground system. The system engineering challenge of dealing with two heterogeneous ground systems emerged immediately. During the first technical interchange meeting between the JPL's GDS Team and OSC's Flight Software Team, August 2003, the need to integrate the ground system with the flight software was brought to the table. This need was driven by the project's commitment to enable instrument engineering model integration in a spacecraft simulator environment, for both demonstration and risk mitigation purposes, by April 2004. This paper will describe the system engineering approach that was undertaken by JPL's GDS Team in order to meet the technical challenge within a non-negotiable eight-month schedule. Key to the success was adherence to fundamental systems engineering practices: decomposition of the project request into manageable requirements; integration of multiple ground disciplines and experts into a focused team effort; definition of a structured yet flexible development process; definition of an in-process risk reduction plan; and aggregation of the intermediate products to an integrated final product. In addition, this paper will highlight the role of lessons learned from the integration experience. The lessons learned from an early GDS deployment have served as the foundation for the design and implementation of the Dawn Ground Data System.

Ground Data System (GDS)↗
NASA NTRS2016

Space Suit Portable Life Support System (PLSS) 2.0 Unmanned Vacuum Environment Testing

For the first time in more than 30 years, an advanced space suit Portable Life Support System (PLSS) design was operated inside a vacuum chamber representative of the flight operating environment. The test article, PLSS 2.0, was the second system-level integrated prototype of the advanced PLSS design, following the PLSS 1.0 Breadboard that was developed and tested throughout 2011. Whereas PLSS 1.0 included five technology development components with the balance the system simulated using commercial-off-the-shelf items, PLSS 2.0 featured first generation or later prototypes for all components less instrumentation, tubing and fittings. Developed throughout 2012, PLSS 2.0 was the first attempt to package the system into a flight-like representative volume. PLSS 2.0 testing included an extensive functional evaluation known as Pre-Installation Acceptance (PIA) testing, Human-in-the-Loop testing in which the PLSS 2.0 prototype was integrated via umbilicals to a manned prototype space suit for 19 two-hour simulated EVAs, and unmanned vacuum environment testing. Unmanned vacuum environment testing took place from 1/9/15-7/9/15 with PLSS 2.0 located inside a vacuum chamber. Test sequences included performance mapping of several components, carbon dioxide removal evaluations at simulated intravehicular activity (IVA) conditions, a regulator pressure schedule assessment, and culminated with 25 simulated extravehicular activities (EVAs). During the unmanned vacuum environment test series, PLSS 2.0 accumulated 378 hours of integrated testing including 291 hours of operation in a vacuum environment and 199 hours of simulated EVA time. The PLSS prototype performed nominally throughout the test series, with two notable exceptions including a pump failure and a Spacesuit Water Membrane Evaporator (SWME) leak, for which post-test failure investigations were performed. In addition to generating an extensive database of PLSS 2.0 performance data, achievements included requirements and operational concepts verification, as well as demonstration of vehicular interfaces, consumables sizing and recharge, and water quality control.

Watts, Carly↗
NASA NTRS1985

STS retrieval of satellites

The Space Transportation System (STS) provides the capability to retrieve satellites from space. This capability was demonstrated on flights STS 41-C and STS 51-A, and will be demonstrated again on a future flight with the retrieval of the Long Duration Exposure Facility (LDEF). This paper describes the activity required to ensure a successful retrieval from initial flight planning to actual flight operations. Attention is given to retrieval hardware necessary for success and manifest. Discussion of flight design to meet all constraints placed on the manifested cargo is included. Flightcrew and flight control team training are addressed. Flight rules, techniques, and procedures development are described and examples given. Mission Control Center (MCC) and Payload Operations Control Center (POCC) operations for integrated testing and actual flight support will be presented.

Bruce, T. N.↗
NASA NTRS2022

Natural Language Understanding and Extraction of Flight Constraints Recorded in Letters of Agreement

This paper presents an automated information extraction and inference technique using natural language processing for extracting flight operational procedures and constraints embedded in heritage air traffic management documents. The extracted flight constraints can be digitized and fit into existing airspace information exchange models such as the Aeronautical Information Exchange Model (AIXM). This approach offers a digitized solution to disseminate airspace operating conditions to diverse air users and stakeholders in the National Airspace System (NAS). Furthermore, the digitized flight procedures can provide operational flexibility for emerging advanced air mobility providers and reduce traffic controller workload while maintaining current safety standards. To demonstrate this process, 1,972 Letters of Agreement (LOAs) have been selected for processing, named entity extraction, constraint identification and extraction. This dataset is derived from a subset of documents related to Air Route Traffic Control Centers (ARTCC) operations. We experimented with various traditional information extraction techniques, state-of-the-art machine learning and deep learning models to perform named entity recognition and pattern recognition on our dataset. We present the results from our experiments and demonstrate 99.0% F-1 score for named entity recognition, and a 96.6% accuracy for our entire workflow up to named entity recognition. We also discuss constraint definitions using generic patterned templates and extensions to this work in applying entity linking to digitally extracting relevant constraints.

Natural Language Processing↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Natural Language Understanding and Extraction of Flight Constraints Recorded in Letters of Agreement

This paper presents an automated information extraction and inference technique using natural language processing for extracting flight operational procedures and constraints embedded in heritage air traffic management documents. The extracted flight constraints can be digitized and fit into existing airspace information exchange models such as the Aeronautical Information Exchange Model (AIXM). This approach offers a digitized solution to disseminate airspace operating conditions to diverse air users and stakeholders in the National Airspace System (NAS). Furthermore, the digitized flight procedures can provide operational flexibility for emerging advanced air mobility providers and reduce traffic controller workload while maintaining current safety standards. To demonstrate this process, 1,972 Letters of Agreement (LOAs) have been selected for processing, named entity extraction, constraint identification and extraction. This dataset is derived from a subset of documents related to Air Route Traffic Control Centers (ARTCC) operations. We experimented with various traditional information extraction techniques, state-of-the-art machine learning and deep learning models to perform named entity recognition and pattern recognition on our dataset. We present the results from our experiments and demonstrate 99.0% F-1 score for named entity recognition, and a 96.6% accuracy for our entire workflow up to named entity recognition. We also discuss constraint definitions using generic patterned templates and extensions to this work in applying entity linking to digitally extracting relevant constraints.

Natural Language Processing↗
NASA NTRS1984

Status of the National Space Transportation System

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.

Abrahamson, J. A.↗
NASA NTRS2005

New Directions in Space Operations Services in Support of Interplanetary Exploration

To gain access to the necessary operational processes and data in support of NASA's Lunar/Mars Exploration Initiative, new services, adequate levels of computing cycles and access to myriad forms of data must be provided to onboard spacecraft and ground based personnel/systems (earth, lunar and Martian) to enable interplanetary exploration by humans. These systems, cycles and access to vast amounts of development, test and operational data will be required to provide a new level of services not currently available to existing spacecraft, on board crews and other operational personnel. Although current voice, video and data systems in support of current space based operations has been adequate, new highly reliable and autonomous processes and services will be necessary for future space exploration activities. These services will range from the more mundane voice in LEO to voice in interplanetary travel which because of the high latencies will require new voice processes and standards. New services, like component failure predictions based on data mining of significant quantities of data, located at disparate locations, will be required. 3D or holographic representation of onboard components, systems or family members will greatly improve maintenance, operations and service restoration not to mention crew morale. Current operational systems and standards, like the Internet Protocol, will not able to provide the level of service required end to end from an end point on the Martian surface like a scientific instrument to a researcher at a university. Ground operations whether earth, lunar or Martian and in flight operations to the moon and especially to Mars will require significant autonomy that will require access to highly reliable processing capabilities, data storage based on network storage technologies. Significant processing cycles will be needed onboard but could be borrowed from other locations either ground based or onboard other spacecraft. Reliability will be a key factor with onboard and distributed backup processing an absolutely necessary requirement. Current cluster processing/Grid technologies may provide the basis for providing these services. An overview of existing services, future services that will be required and the technologies and standards required to be developed will be presented. The purpose of this paper will be to initiate a technological roadmap, albeit at a high level, of current voice, video, data and network technologies and standards (which show promise for adaptation or evolution) to what technologies and standards need to be redefined, adjusted or areas where new ones require development. The roadmap should begin the differentiation between non manned and manned processes/services where applicable. The paper will be based in part on the activities of the CCSDS Monitor and Control working group which is beginning the process of standardization of the these processes. Another element of the paper will be based on an analysis of current technologies supporting space flight processes and services at JSC, MSFC, GSFC and to a lesser extent at KSC. Work being accomplished in areas such as Grid computing, data mining and network storage at ARC, IBM and the University of Alabama at Huntsville will be researched and analyzed.

Bradford, Robert N.↗
NASA NTRS1986

Assessing fatigue

Despite impressive advances in aircraft technology over the past several decades and an overall decline in the airline accident rate since the introduction of turbine-powered aircraft, flight crew performance problems continue to dominate air transport accident statistics. Researchers have offered many hypotheses to explain this finding, and interest in pilot fatigue has stimulated a large volume of laboratory research. Much of this work, however, is difficult to generalize and to apply to the real world of flight operations, and researchers disagree about the extent and operational significance of fatigue-related reductions in pilot performance. As a result, in 1980 Congress asked the National Aeronautics and Space Administration to undertake a comprehensive research program to assess whether fatigue-related problems are prevalent in long- and short-haul flying. The two major goals of this project are: (1) to assess the psychophysiological effects on pilot performance of flying various types of flight and duty cycles, and (2) to determine the operational significance to flight safety and efficiency of flying these flight and duty cycles.

NASA Discipline Space Human Factors↗
NASA NTRS1982

Cost effective development of a Shuttle-based astronomical instrument control system

The high level language FORTH is used for the electronic control of the Space Shuttle-based Ultraviolet Imaging Telescope, in a flight computer system which minimizes costs. The greater part of the breadboard version of the flight computer is assembled from commercially available components, reducing novel circuit design features and permitting simultaneous development of both hardware and software. The commercial boards are then refabricated on aluminum core heat conducting stock, using high reliability parts to produce the flight versions of the system. The system's ground support equipment employs a MINC-25 minicomputer which performs such functions as flight computer software development, PROM programming, test and integration support, and flight operations support. The implementation of these concepts in flight computer telescope controls is described.

Parise, R. A.↗
NASA NTRS1986

Operations and support for the next-generation space transportation system

The role of operations and support in the design of future space transportation systems (STSs) is studied. There is a need to reduce launch and operation costs for future space systems. Methods for reducing the cost of ground operations and supports for a STS are described. Technological advances such as expert systems, robotics, and sensors, and reduction in management of operations are discussed. Changes in the management of flight operations and control, from a manpower intensive monitoring to a strong vehicle autonomy, are examined. The development of equipment and procedures to improve space operations and reduce costs is analyzed. The use of a clean sheet approach for building a STS is proposed.

Sawaya, G. J.↗