Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “Certification”

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 775 records · Page 43

Improved Benchmarking of Cohesive Elements in Abaqus Standard for Predicting Disbond and Delamination in Composite Structures

Traditional approaches for aircraft certification require the assumption of an initial flaw condition, either represented as barely visible impact damage (BVID) or through inclusion of a Teflon insert to serve as surrogate damage. Based on the initial composite damage state, the structure must be shown to demonstrate structural durability and damage tolerance (DaDT) according to the following criteria: a. Damage displays no detrimental growth under cyclic loading. The structure is able to sustain design limit load (DLL). Currently, the only available manner for validating structural performance is through test. Since damage can occur over a wide variety of areas within a structure, this approach has proven to be increasingly expensive and time consuming for composite airframes and acreage structure within the design-test-certification building block. A further complicating factor is the requirement to accurately capture the most critical damage morphologies as a starting condition. To understand the severity of the damage, it is either required to experimentally determine the most critical areas at tremendous expense or rely on legacy data of similar structural testing, which limits design space expansion. A preferred solution is to use advanced analysis to provide improved understanding of load margins for critical locations based on a wide variety of potential starting damage conditions.

Eric M. Roberts↗

ISS Payload Operations Training During the COVID-19 Pandemic: Impacts and Solutions

Introduction: The onset and the protracted duration of the COVID-19 pandemic brought a dramatic and rapid transformation to almost every aspect of humanity in 2020. The world’s space agencies and their missions were not immune to the unpredictable and wide-sweeping changes. One discipline principally affected was mission operations and the various groups supporting that critical function. Mission support teams, especially for complex and crewed missions like the International Space Station (ISS) were forced to rapidly rethink how and where control center staff performed their vital work. Operations training – an essential element to mission ops, had unique hurdles to overcome. Operations training is responsible for preparing astronaut crews for their scientific missions, providing recurring proficiency and currency material to flight controllers, as well as ensuring new team members are ready to join their colleagues on console. Every element of training was impacted by COVID restrictions. From orientation and introductory classes for new controllers, training for scientists and payload developers, to simulations and advanced lessons, critical On the Job Training (OJT) and final evaluations; all aspects faced new challenges. Operations trainers at NASA’s Marshall Space Flight Center (MSFC) in Huntsville, Alabama, were forced to rethink, retool, and become more efficient with trainees and training resources in order to continue supporting payload operations on the ISS. Impacts and Barriers to Operations Training: The pandemic started in the United States in early March 2020. Immediately, NASA mandated that the support for ISS real-time operations was critical. As a result, physical access to the ISS Payload Operations Center was restricted to only those people supporting console operations. Thus, use of on-site NASA facilities and any trainer to trainee face-to-face interaction was not authorized. Trainers and trainees had to quickly shift to 100% remote learning. In the short term, this was not a problem since NASA had already prepared Information Technology (IT) resources that facilitated remote access to mission resources like classes, documents and teleconferences. However, instructors quickly discovered the classes that they were accustomed to delivering in a large classroom environment did not translate well to remote teaching. The lack of non-verbal communication with the class became a major barrier to instruction. Another significant hurdle to operations training was the mandate that all simulations could only be held remotely. The logistics of planning and executing even small simulations proved to be challenging, almost impossible, due to IT technology and public internet limitations. With simulations essentially stopped, as well as the restrictions on most OJT training, trainees were essentially stopped in their advancement towards certification. An additional barrier that had to be overcome was the formal documentation of the curriculum objectives. Even though NASA had been deliberately transitioning to electronic documents for years, some organizations were still relying on “pen and ink” documents to formalize training completion. The logistics of implementing secure and controlled e-signature documents in a standardized, NASA approved format had to be addressed. Lesson Learned and Efficiencies: Once the various limitations were identified, ISS trainers at MSFC discussed, proposed, and prioritized new options and techniques. Transitioning to all electronic learning materials and certifications was a relevantly easy fix. Teaching courses to large and diverse groups took additional shifts in the NASA training paradigm. Likewise, methods and procedures for preparing astronauts for their missions were forced to be revised. Simulation supervisors and their teams were also forced to find more efficient techniques to provide realistic training experience. Communication and approvals from management was essential. In every case, the ISS payload operations instructors found novel and efficient solutions to all functions listed above. This paper will discuss the factors and solutions payloads operations trainers found to keep scientific research on the ISS flying forward to mission success.

ISS Operations↗

Practical Conceptual Design of Quieter Urban VTOL Aircraft

A toolchain and process for conceptual design of VTOL rotorcraft, employing low- and mid-fidelity tools is presented. The approach is capable of providing more quantitatively-credible trades between noise, size, and cost metrics than the methods commonly used for conceptual design. In addition to a general conceptual design tool, the approach employs comprehensive analysis for trim, blade motion, and airloads; these are then used by acoustic analysis software to develop source sound, propagate it, and calculate noise metrics. A key aspect of the approach is flexibility to assess varied aircraft types and different technologies and design features. Vehicles are sized using a representative Urban Air Mobility design mission. Demonstration cases are presented for a single main rotor helicopter, quadrotor, side-by-side helicopter, and lift+cruise aircraft. Noise metrics used for demonstration are the FAA/EASA certification Effective Perceived Noise Levels for takeoff, flyover, and approach. The concept aircraft in this study are shown to achieve reductions in noise relative the initial design points, with changes in mission performance and cost as a consequence. Many of the designs are predicted to be tens of EPNdB quieter in the certification metrics than existing helicopters.

Conceptual Design↗

GA-ASI Final Report and Program Wrap-up for NASA System Integration and Operationalization (SIO)

The NASA SIO demonstration flight of April 3, 2020 represents a successful culmination of 18 months of coordinated effort between GA-ASI, NASA, the FAA, Collins Aerospace, and Honeywell Aerospace to operate a Medium Altitude, Long Endurance (MALE) Unmanned Aircraft System (UAS) safely in the National Airspace System (NAS) using industry leading prototype technologies. The GA-ASI team consisted of technical experts, program managers, engineers, mechanics, flight technicians, flight crews, and numerous other subject matter experts. This final report describes the most significant and potentially impactful aspects of the planning, integration, test, and flight aspects of this effort. GA-ASI successfully integrated the key technologies needed for UAS to fly in the NAS onto our prototype SkyGuardian UAS, which was designed to meet the most stringent airworthiness standards applicable to an aircraft of its size category. A proven Detect and Avoid (DAA) system, developed by GA-ASI and utilizing Honeywell Aerospace technology was integrated onto SkyGuardian for the first time, along with datalink radios from Collins Aerospace that meet the new civil standard for Control and Non-Payload Communication (CNPC) links. GA-ASI also obtained approvals from the FAA and FCC to operate the reconfigured UAS. The SIO demonstration flight represented a commercial aerial surveying operation conducted at medium altitude (>10,000ft above mean sea level). The aircraft’s onboard sensors were used to capture photographic, infrared and radar imagery of public and commercial infrastructure and land, and to subsequently produce the types of data products that would provide business value to potential customers. These survey services would supplement or replace services currently provided by manned airplanes and helicopters, small drones or satellites. A “virtual” mission was also planned, to show what additional survey data could have been captured during the flight if additional sensors had been installed on the aircraft’s external hardpoints. This revision of the final report focuses on information of value to the wider UAS community, and avoids propriety data to facilitate broad dissemination. It also includes a description of GA-ASI’s engagement with the FAA following the SIO flight, which led to the award of an updated Special Airworthiness Certificate in the Experimental Category (SAC-EC) and a Certificate of Waiver or Authorization (COA) allowing operation of the SkyGuardian UAS using its DAA system to satisfy right-of-way rules, instead of a chase plane. The associated operational limitations are described to illustrate the further steps that would be needed to remove those limitations for unhindered commercial operations.

Flight demonstration↗

Applicability of a Framework for Estimating Performance and Associated Uncertainty for Modified Aircraft Configurations

As improvements are made to the accuracy and reliability of modeling and simulation techniques, certification by analysis becomes a more attractive alternative compared to traditional aircraft flight testing. Certification by analysis is especially cost-effective when one considers modifications to a previously certified aircraft. However, it is important that the models and methods used are applicable and accurate throughout the intended use domain. A framework for estimating the performance and associated uncertainty was introduced in an earlier paper. The factors and limitations of this framework for estimating the performance and associated model form uncertainty are explored to determine the range of applicability of the framework, particularly with respect to model form, process and sensor noise, and quality of available flight test data. This paper focuses on the general limitations and applicability of the framework and not the applicability of the individual methods to a range of modified configurations, which requires a large number of modified configurations and is an area for future work. The effects of these factors on the performance and uncertainty results are demonstrated using NASA’s Generic Transport Model aircraft.

uncertainty quantification↗

Toward Design Assurance of Machine-Learning Airborne Systems

In recent years, Artificial Intelligence (AI) systems, enabled by Machine Learning (ML)technology, have demonstrated impressive progress and provides historic opportunities for the aviation industry. However, several key aspects of ML technology are not compatible with existing design assurance standards and make certification problematic. In this paper, we present a case study of a visual system with a Deep Neural Network (DNN) intended to detect and identify airport runway signs. Different use cases and variants of this system exhibit different levels of criticality ranging from design assurance level (DAL) D to B. We use the case study to illustrate the challenges of certification according to the current standards, such asDO-178C. We present the system design, data generation, training, and verification in detail and describe how the design assurance objectives can be met for a DAL D variant of the system. We also discuss gaps and potential approaches for the higher design assurance levels.

Avionics↗

Simulation of Landing and Take-Off Noise for Supersonic Transport Aircraft at a Conceptual Design Fidelity Level

The German Aerospace Center has launched an internal project to assess the noise impact associated with supersonic transport aircraft during approach and departure. A dedicated simulation process is established to cover all relevant disciplines, i.e., aircraft and engine design, engine installation effects, flight simulation, and system noise prediction. The core of the simulation process is comprised of methods at the complexity and fidelity level of conceptual aircraft design, i.e., typical overall aircraft design methods and a semi-empirical approach for the noise modeling. Dedicated interfaces allow to process data from high fidelity simulation that will support or even replace initial low fidelity results in the long run. All of the results shown and discussed in this study are limited to the fidelity level of conceptual design. The application of the simulation process to the NASA 55t Supersonic Technology Concept Aeroplane, i.e., based on non-proprietary data for this vehicle, yields similar noise level predictions when compared to the published NASA results. This is used as an initial feasibility check of the new process and confirms the underlying methods and models. Such an initial verification of the process is understood as an essential step due to the lack of available noise data for supersonic transport aircraft in general. The advantageous effect of engine noise shielding on the resulting system noise is demonstrated based on predicted level time histories and certification noise levels. After this initial verification, the process is applied to evaluate a conceptual supersonic transport design based on a PhD thesis with two engines mounted under the wing, which is referred to as aircraft TWO. Full access to this vehicle’s design and performance data allows to investigate the influence of flight procedures on the resulting noise impact along approach and departure. These noise results are then assembled according to proposed Federal Aviation Agency regulations in their Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, e.g., speed limitations, for Supersonic transport noise certification and the regulations from Noise Chapters of the Annex 16 from the International Civil Aviation Organization in order to evaluate the resulting levels as a function of the flight procedure.

noise↗

Machine-Learning for Safety Critical Airborne Applications Part II: Case Study

The exceptional progress in the field of Artificial Intelligence (AI) systems, enabled by Machine Learning (ML) technology in recent years provides historic opportunities for the aviation industry. Current certification standards for avionics were developed prior to the ML renaissance and have several fundamental incompatibilities with the ML technology. WG-114 is working hard to release a new standard as soon as possible but for now there is no recognized means of compliance for ML based systems even of low criticality. In this talk, we present the custom ML workflow that can be used comply with all objectives of the current certification standards for a low-criticality (DAL D and C) ML-based system. To illustrate the practical application of the custom ML workflow we present a case study of a system based on a Deep Neural Network (DNN) intended to detect and identify airport runway signs. We present the system design, data generation, training, and verification in detail and describe how the design assurance objectives can be met for a DAL D and DAL C systems.

Johann Schumann↗

Framework for Estimating Performance and Associated Uncertainty for Modified Aircraft Configurations

Flight testing has been the historical standard for determining aircraft airworthiness - however, increases in the cost of flight testing and the accuracy of inexpensive CFD promote certification by analysis to reduce or replace flight testing. A framework is introduced to predict the performance in the special case of a modification to an existing, previously certified aircraft. This framework uses a combination of existing flight test or high fidelity data of the original aircraft as well as lower fidelity data of the original and modified configurations. Two methods are presented which estimate the model form uncertainty of the modified configuration, which is then used to conduct non-deterministic simulations. The framework is applied to an example aircraft system with simulated flight test data to demonstrate the ability to predict the performance and associated uncertainty of modified aircraft configurations. However, it is important that the models and methods used are applicable and accurate throughout the intended use domain. The factors and limitations of the framework are explored to determine the range of applicability of the framework. The effects of these factors on the performance and uncertainty results are demonstrated using the example aircraft system. The framework is then applied to NASA’s X-57 Maxwell and each of its modifications. The estimated performance and associated uncertainties are then compared to the airworthiness criteria to evaluate the potential of the framework as a component to the certification by analysis process.

Uncertainty Quantification↗

Close out the Critical Commitment for System Wide Safety’s Technical Challenge 3 (TC 3)

- Deliver validated methods and recommended practices to reduce certification costs for ground and onboard vehicle guidance and control systems through expanded acceptability of analysis as evidence for certification FY 2022. - Communicate results to maximize public awareness of the research and transfer capabilities via a set of on-demand training seminars and supporting materials including reports, publications and open source software codes where applicable.

Joseph C Coughlan↗

HFE 7100 Compatibility with Orbiter Materials

Chlorofluorocarbon (CFC) 113 is currently specified as the precision cleaning and verification fluid for orbiter materials. The production ban of CFC 113, an ozone-depleting chlorofluorocarbon, has resulted in a search for a replacement cleaning fluid. Recently, the 3M Company announced the manufacture of a new class of cleaning fluids, hydrofluoroethers. The first in this class of cleaning fluids is HFE 7100, perfluorobutyl methyl ether. This cleaning fluid has been submitted for consideration as a replacement for CFC 113. One of the requirements of the certification process for a replacement cleaning fluid is compatibility testing. The Johnson Space Center (JSC) Materials and Manufacturing Division has requested that NASA JSC White Sands Test Facility perform the compatibility testing with HFE 7100 on selected orbiter materials. Most of the materials selected for testing were previously evaluated for compatibility with CFC 113. Some of the materials are new additions to the orbiter or were not available when the compatibility testing was performed with CFC 113. These materials were evaluated with both cleaning fluids and the results were used to compare the response to the cleaning fluid and to satisfy the certification process requirements. It was found that HFE 7100 is generally compatible with the materials tested.

Chlorofluorocarbon↗

Application of Framework for Estimating Performance and Associated Uncertainty for Modified Aircraft Configurations Using NASA's X-57 Maxwell

A framework to estimate the performance and associated uncertainty of modified configurations of certified aircraft is applied to the X-57 Maxwell aircraft. In previous theoretical studies, the framework was shown to predict performance and uncertainty bounds accurately. The X-57 Maxwell is an experimental aircraft designed to demonstrate the benefits of distributed electric propulsion through a series of four incremental modifications to a Tecnam P2006T aircraft. The available models and data are first shown to be within the application domain of the framework. We then apply the framework to two X-57 Maxwell modifications. We compare the estimated performance and associated uncertainties against the airworthiness criteria. The results indicate that the framework is a promising tool for the certification by analysis workflow. We expect the framework to reduce and supplement the flight testing required to show compliance to airworthiness certification criteria for a modified configuration.

Uncertainty Quantification↗

Application of Framework for Estimating Performance and Associated Uncertainty for Modified Aircraft Configurations Using NASA's X-57 Maxwell

A framework to estimate the performance and associated uncertainty of modified configurations of certified aircraft is applied to the X-57 Maxwell aircraft. In previous theoretical studies, the framework was shown to predict performance and uncertainty bounds accurately. The X-57 Maxwell is an experimental aircraft designed to demonstrate the benefits of distributed electric propulsion through a series of four incremental modifications to a Tecnam P2006T aircraft. The available models and data are first shown to be within the application domain of the framework. We then apply the framework to two X-57 Maxwell modifications. We compare the estimated performance and associated uncertainties against the airworthiness criteria. The results indicate that the framework is a promising tool for the certification by analysis workflow. We expect the framework to reduce and supplement the flight testing required to show compliance to airworthiness certification criteria for a modified configuration.

Uncertainty Quantification↗

Safety Case for Small Uncrewed Aircraft Systems (sUAS) Beyond Visual Line of Sight (BVLOS) Operations at NASA Langley Research Center

This Technical Memorandum (TM) is written to provide for dissemination of the methods and safety considerations for operations of small Uncrewed Aerial Systems (sUAS) Beyond Visual Line-of-Sight (BVLOS)at NASA Langley Research Center. It includes the Safety Case used to acquire a BVLOS Certificate of Authorization (COA) from the FAA and is being published to enable others to benefit from this work. The intended operations, subject to approval from the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) and the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA), will include a combination of Within Visual Line of Sight (WVLOS) and Beyond Visual Line of Sight (BVLOS) flights, comprising of at most five sUAS operating concurrently, with no more than three operating BVLOS. Flights will occur in a subset of the Langley Air Force Base (LAFB) Class D airspace (KLFI) at a maximum altitude of 400 ft AGL. Most operations within this subset will take place in the City Environment Range Testing for Autonomous Integrated Navigation (CERTAIN) Range. The CERTAIN Range includes airspace inside the borders of NASA Langley Research Center (LaRC). Additional airspace over the northern section of CERTAIN will be requested as part of the Certificate of Authorization (COA). NASA LaRC BVLOS operations on the CERTAIN Range can be broken down into five critical components needed to meet the 14 CFR § 91.113 see and avoid requirement: 1) procedural deconfliction with LAFB for UAS operations at or below 400 ft and manned aircraft at or above 900’ AGL; 2) ground equipment for detection of intruder aircraft and to support communications between crewmembers ; 3) sUAS vehicles with advanced onboard automation capable of autonomously maintaining safe separation; 4) BVLOS standardized operating procedures (SOPs); 5) and personnel to execute the flight operations in accordance with the SOPs and respond to airborne contingencies. The introduction of new ground equipment includes the use of the Remote Operations for Autonomous Missions (ROAM) UAS Operations Center, development and use of an Integrated Airspace Display (IAD), use of the L-STAR and GA-9120 radars, and the incorporation of standardized Vertiports. The ROAM Operations Center will be the central point for all BVLOS sUAS operations. All command and control (C2), voice communications and airspace awareness displays will reside inside ROAM. The IAD will provide raw data from ADS-B, FLARM, radar tracks and telemetered GPS vehicle positions for interpretation by an Airspace Monitor. The radars will search the class D airspace around the CERTAIN Range and serve as a backup to procedural deconfliction procedures coordinated with LAFB. In the event of a procedural deconfliction breakdown, radar detections of non-participating aircraft will be available so that the 91.113 see and avoid requirement can still be safely met. Finally, the incorporation of Vertiports will have video and network connectivity that enables large numbers of sUAS launches and recoveries from a single location. This is a continuation of the remote command and control of unpiloted aircraft component focused on evaluating unpiloted aircraft flight crew roles and responsibilities, control interfaces and the associated data links needed to operate a fleet of aircraft within a UAM Ecosystem. This work supports the development of future aviation operational concepts based on an Urban Air Mobility Maturity Level (UML) 4 environment (Patterson, 2020). It is assumed that future airspace will include hundreds of simultaneous aircraft operations within the airspace, therefore scalable operations are essential for enabling this future airspace to become a reality. Follow on work includes envisioned flights that expand operations beyond the CERTAIN range and lead to an effective Maritime Surveillance capability.

Matthew W Coldsnow↗

Ground Test Technology Demonstration for Nuclear Thermal Propulsion Engines

Nuclear Thermal Propulsion (NTP) engines have been deemed a key technology to enable human missions to Mars due to their high efficiency, also known as specific impulse (Isp). Ground testing the NTP engine is critical in maturing the technology and increasing the design’s Technology Readiness Level (TRL), thus mitigating risk from NTP engine performance/operations. NTP engine development began with open-air ground testing through the Rover/NERVA program back in the 1960s when regulatory requirements were not as stringent as they are today. Due to the formation of regulatory bodies, increase in oversight and environmental requirements, the exhaust gas released from NTP engines must be captured or processed to gain approval in the case that the exhaust gas contains fission products from the nuclear fuel elements within the reactor. Ground test campaigns following Rover/NERVA focused on the certification of a full scale NTP engine, which led to exhaust processing systems such as the Rocket Exhaust Capture System (RECS) and Real Time (RT) exhaust processing. These systems were deemed favorable for regulatory compliance but have a high initial investment cost. Reassurance on the feasibility of ground testing and the NTP engine technology likely need to be achieved before NASA invests in these systems. Recently the objectives for NTP engine ground testing have shifted from certification testing of a full scale engine to demonstration testing of a subscale engine. The shift to demonstration testing allows for a shorter testing duration and a lower operational thrust (for demo testing purposes only) to demonstrate the NTP engine (5k-12.5k lbf). Due to these factors, the infrastructure, consumables, total footprint, and exhaust system complexity are able to be drastically reduced, thus reducing cost significantly. The High-pressure Exhaust Capture System (HECS) concept was designed for a NTP engine ground test demonstration. The HECS concept greatly reduces cost compared to previous concepts and suggests favorable regulatory acceptance due to its ability to capture all of the exhaust gas from the NTP engine.

Nuclear Thermal Propulsion↗

Autonomy Verification & Validation Roadmap and Vision 2045

Advanced capabilities planned for the next generation of autonomous and increasingly autonomous air vehicles will include non-traditional components based on artificial intelligence, machine learning, and complex optimization and planning algorithms. These complex components will be used to provide enhanced safety and high-level decision-making functions. However, there are serious barriers to the deployment of autonomous aircraft in the National Airspace System (NAS). Current civil aviation certification processes are based on the concept that the correct behavior of a system or a component must be completely specified and verified prior to operation. This report from the Autonomy Verification and Validation (V&V) Roadmap and Vision 2045 project presents the most recent effort to build a comprehensive list of verification challenges and needs for autonomous aircraft, a roadmap to meet those autonomy V&V needs, the services they can enable, and point to the certification gaps they fill. To accomplish these goals, we assembled a team of world-class researchers from the aerospace industry (Boeing, Collins Aerospace, and GeneralElectric) and academia (University of Michigan, University of Texas, and Massachusetts Institute of Technology) with deep expertise in autonomy, aerospace systems, and assurance of Artificial Intelligence/machine learning systems.

Software Assurance↗

Nuclear Thermal Propulsion Engine Technology Demonstration Testing

Nuclear Thermal Propulsion (NTP) engines have been deemed a key technology to enable human missions to Mars due to their high efficiency, also known as specific impulse (Isp). Ground testing the NTP engine is critical in maturing the technology and increasing the design’s Technology Readiness Level (TRL), thus mitigating risk from NTP engine performance/operations. NTP engine development began with open-air ground testing through the Rover/NERVA program back in the 1960s when regulatory requirements were not as stringent as they are today. Due to the formation of regulatory bodies, increase in oversight and environmental requirements, the exhaust gas released from NTP engines must be captured or processed to gain approval in the case that the exhaust gas contains fission products from the nuclear fuel elements within the reactor. Ground test campaigns following Rover/NERVA focused on the certification of a full scale NTP engine, which led to exhaust processing systems such as the Rocket Exhaust Capture System (RECS) and Real Time (RT) exhaust processing. These systems were deemed favorable for regulatory compliance but have a high initial investment cost. Reassurance on the feasibility of ground testing and the NTP engine technology likely need to be achieved before NASA invests in these systems. Recently the objectives for NTP engine ground testing have shifted from certification testing of a full scale engine to demonstration testing of a subscale engine. The shift to demonstration testing allows for a shorter testing duration and a lower operational thrust (for demo testing purposes only) to demonstrate the NTP engine (5k-12.5k lbf). Due to these factors, the infrastructure, consumables, total footprint, and exhaust system complexity are able to be drastically reduced, thus reducing cost significantly. The High-pressure Exhaust Capture System (HECS) concept was designed for a NTP engine ground test demonstration. The HECS concept greatly reduces cost compared to previous concepts and suggests favorable regulatory acceptance due to its ability to capture all of the exhaust gas from the NTP engine.

Nuclear Thermal Propulsion↗

Ensuring Safety of Government Personnel During Suborbital Spaceflight

The NASA Suborbital Crew (SubC) project is focused on enabling flights by NASA civil servants, such as scientists and engineers conducting research, on suborbital vehicles. A broader goal is ensuring that commercial human spaceflight is both viable and safe. Within the Commercial Crew Program (CCP), the SubC project is exploring game-changing methods to perform safety assessments to enable NASA personnel to fly on suborbital missions. Commercial suborbital space flight capabilities are anticipated to be more accessible, affordable, and available than missions to the International Space Station and could provide additional opportunities for testing and qualification of space flight hardware, human-tended microgravity research, and further cutting-edge research enabled by the space environment. Although NASA currently permits human tended suborbital payloads for non-civil servants under auspices of NASA’s Flight Opportunities Program, the SubC effort will enable civil servant scientists, researchers, and even engineers to accompany their experiments and tests into the space microgravity environment. Figure 1 illustrates how the SubC program complements other microgravity experimental platforms. The targeted scope for SubC includes end-to-end suborbital capabilities reaching ~80km with several minutes of sustained microgravity (Table 1). The NASA SubC project office is working with the Federal Aviation Administration’s Office of Commercial Space Transportation (FAA-AST) and the commercial suborbital space transportation industry to develop an efficient and holistic approach to a safety review and eventual government participation in suborbital flight. The current FAA certification process for suborbital launches is congressionally mandated to only consider public safety. NASA is responsible for understanding the risks to its employees should they fly on a commercially available suborbital flight. The SubC project is employing a Safety Case approach, applied to commercial suborbital providers, which is not a traditional certification process as was used for the SpaceX Dragon and Boeing Starliner vehicles. Rather, it is an assessment using elements of NASA’s Risk-Informed Safety Case and the Armstrong Flight Research Center’s Airworthiness Assessment process.

Elizabeth C Blome↗