Committee on Human Spaceflight Crew Operations

Aeronautics and Space Engineering Board

Division on Engineering and Physical Sciences

                          OF THE NATIONAL ACADEMIES


Washington, D.C.

The National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine
500 Fifth St. N.W. | Washington, D.C. 20001

Copyright © National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.
Terms of Use and Privacy Statement

Below are the first 10 and last 10 pages of uncorrected machine-read text (when available) of this chapter, followed by the top 30 algorithmically extracted key phrases from the chapter as a whole.
Intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text on the opening pages of each chapter. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.

Do not use for reproduction, copying, pasting, or reading; exclusively for search engines.

OCR for page R1
Committee on Human Spaceflight Crew Operations Aeronautics and Space Engineering Board Division on Engineering and Physical Sciences

OCR for page R1
THE NATIONAL ACADEMIES PRESS 500 Fifth Street, N.W. Washington, DC 20001 NOTICE: The project that is the subject of this report was approved by the Governing Board of the National Research Council, whose members are drawn from the councils of the National Academy of Sciences, the National Academy of Engineering, and the Institute of Medicine. The members of the committee responsible for the report were chosen for their special competences and with regard for appropriate balance. This study is based on work supported by Contract NNH10CC48B between the National Academy of Sciences and the National Aeronautics and Space Administration. Any opinions, findings, conclusions, or recommendations expressed in this publication are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the agency that provided support for the project. Cover: Design by Tim Warchocki. Images courtesy of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration. International Standard Book Number-13: 978-0-309-21869-6 International Standard Book Number-10: 0-309-21869-1 Copies of this report are available free of charge from: Aeronautics and Space Engineering Board National Research Council 500 Fifth Street, NW Washington, DC 20001 Additional copies of this report are available from the National Academies Press, 500 Fifth Street, NW, Lockbox 285, Wash- ington, DC 20055; (800) 624-6242 or (202) 334-3313 (in the Washington metropolitan area); Internet, Copyright 2011 by the National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved. Printed in the United States of America.

OCR for page R1
The National Academy of Sciences is a private, nonprofit, self-perpetuating society of distinguished scholars engaged in sci- entific and engineering research, dedicated to the furtherance of science and technology and to their use for the general welfare. Upon the authority of the charter granted to it by the Congress in 1863, the Academy has a mandate that requires it to advise the federal government on scientific and technical matters. Dr. Ralph J. Cicerone is president of the National Academy of Sciences. The National Academy of Engineering was established in 1964, under the charter of the National Academy of Sciences, as a parallel organization of outstanding engineers. It is autonomous in its administration and in the selection of its members, sharing with the National Academy of Sciences the responsibility for advising the federal government. The National Academy of Engineering also sponsors engineering programs aimed at meeting national needs, encourages education and research, and recognizes the superior achievements of engineers. Dr. Charles M. Vest is president of the National Academy of Engineering. The Institute of Medicine was established in 1970 by the National Academy of Sciences to secure the services of eminent members of appropriate professions in the examination of policy matters pertaining to the health of the public. The Institute acts under the responsibility given to the National Academy of Sciences by its congressional charter to be an adviser to the federal government and, upon its own initiative, to identify issues of medical care, research, and education. Dr. Harvey V. Fineberg is president of the Institute of Medicine. The National Research Council was organized by the National Academy of Sciences in 1916 to associate the broad com- munity of science and technology with the Academy’s purposes of furthering knowledge and advising the federal government. Functioning in accordance with general policies determined by the Academy, the Council has become the principal operating agency of both the National Academy of Sciences and the National Academy of Engineering in providing services to the gov- ernment, the public, and the scientific and engineering communities. The Council is administered jointly by both Academies and the Institute of Medicine. Dr. Ralph J. Cicerone and Dr. Charles M. Vest are chair and vice chair, respectively, of the National Research Council.

OCR for page R1
OTHER RECENT REPORTS OF THE AERONAUTICS AND SPACE ENGINEERING BOARD An Interim Report on NASA’s Draft Space Technology Roadmaps (Aeronautics and Space Engineering Board [ASEB], 2011) Limiting Future Collision Risk to Spacecraft: An Assessment of NASA’s Meteoroid and Orbital Debris Programs (ASEB, 2011) Recapturing a Future for Space Exploration: Life and Physical Sciences Research for a New Era [prepublication ver- sion] (Space Studies Board [SSB] with ASEB, 2011) Summary of the Workshop to Identify Gaps and Possible Directions for NASA’s Meteoroid and Orbital Debris Pro- grams (ASEB, 2011) Advancing Aeronautical Safety: A Review of NASA’s Aviation Safety-Related Research Programs (ASEB, 2010) Capabilities for the Future: An Assessment of NASA Laboratories for Basic Research (Laboratory Assessments Board with ASEB, 2010) Defending Planet Earth: Near-Earth-Object Surveys and Hazard Mitigation Strategies: Final Report (SSB with ASEB, 2010) Final Report of the Committee to Review Proposals to the 2010 Ohio Third Frontier (OTF) Wright Projects Program (WPP) (ASEB, 2010) America’s Future in Space: Aligning the Civil Space Program with National Needs (SSB with ASEB, 2009) Approaches to Future Space Cooperation and Competition in a Globalizing World: Summary of a Workshop (SSB with ASEB, 2009) An Assessment of NASA’s National Aviation Operations Monitoring Service (ASEB, 2009) Final Report of the Committee for the Review of Proposals to the 2009 Engineering and Physical Science Research and Commercialization Program of the Ohio Third Frontier Program (ASEB, 2009) Fostering Visions for the Future: A Review of the NASA Institute for Advanced Concepts (ASEB, 2009) Near-Earth Object Surveys and Hazard Mitigation Strategies: Interim Report (SSB with ASEB, 2009) Radioisotope Power Systems: An Imperative for Maintaining U.S. Leadership in Space Exploration (SSB with ASEB, 2009) Assessing the Research and Development Plan for the Next Generation Air Transportation System: Summary of a Workshop (ASEB, 2008) A Constrained Space Exploration Technology Program: A Review of NASA’s Exploration Technology Development Program (ASEB, 2008) Launching Science: Science Opportunities Provided by NASA’s Constellation System (SSB with ASEB, 2008) Managing Space Radiation Risk in the New Era of Space Exploration (ASEB, 2008) NASA Aeronautics Research: An Assessment (ASEB, 2008) Review of NASA’s Exploration Technology Development Program: An Interim Report (ASEB, 2008) Science Opportunities Enabled by NASA’s Constellation System: Interim Report (SSB with ASEB, 2008) United States Civil Space Policy: Summary of a Workshop (SSB with ASEB, 2008) Wake Turbulence: An Obstacle to Increased Air Traffic Capacity (ASEB, 2008) Limited copies of ASEB reports are available free of charge from Aeronautics and Space Engineering Board National Research Council The Keck Center of the National Academies 500 Fifth Street, NW, Washington, DC 20001 (202) 334-2858/

OCR for page R1
COMMITTEE ON HUMAN SPACEFLIGHT CREW OPERATIONS FREDERICK D. GREGORY, Lohfeld Consulting Group, Inc., Co-Chair JOSEPH H. ROTHENBERG, SSC, Co-Chair MICHAEL J. CASSUTT, University of Southern California RICHARD O. COVEY, United Space Alliance, LLC (retired) DUANE W. DEAL, Stinger Ghaffarian Technologies, Inc. BONNIE J. DUNBAR, Dunbar International, LLC WILLIAM W. HOOVER, Independent Consultant THOMAS D. JONES, Florida Institute for Human and Machine Cognition FRANKLIN D. MARTIN, Martin Consulting, Inc. HENRY McDONALD, University of Tennessee at Chattanooga AMY R. PRITCHETT, Georgia Institute of Technology RICHARD N. RICHARDS, Boeing Corporation (retired) JAMES D. VON SUSKIL, NRG, Texas Staff DWAYNE A. DAY, Senior Program Officer, Study Director CATHERINE A. GRUBER, Editor LEWIS GROSWALD, Research Associate AMANDA R. THIBAULT, Research Associate DIONNA WILLIAMS, Program Associate MICHAEL H. MOLONEY, Director, Aeronautics and Space Engineering Board v

OCR for page R1
AERONAUTICS AND SPACE ENGINEERING BOARD RAYMOND S. COLLADAY, Lockheed Martin Astronautics (retired), Chair LESTER LYLES, The Lyles Group, Vice Chair ELLA M. ATKINS, University of Michigan AMY L. BUHRIG, Boeing Commercial Airplanes Group INDERJIT CHOPRA, University of Maryland, College Park JOHN-PAUL B. CLARKE, Georgia Institute of Technology RAVI B. DEO, EMBR VIJAY DHIR, University of California, Los Angeles EARL H. DOWELL, Duke University MICA R. ENDSLEY, SA Technologies DAVID GOLDSTON, Harvard University R. JOHN HANSMAN, Massachusetts Institute of Technology JOHN B. HAYHURST, Boeing Company (retired) WILLIAM L. JOHNSON, California Institute of Technology RICHARD KOHRS, Independent Consultant IVETT LEYVA, Air Force Research Laboratory, Edwards Air Force Base ELAINE S. ORAN, Naval Research Laboratory ALAN G. POINDEXTER, Naval Postgraduate School HELEN R. REED, Texas A&M University ELI RESHOTKO, Case Western Reserve University EDMOND SOLIDAY, United Airlines (retired) MICHAEL H. MOLONEY, Director CARMELA J. CHAMBERLAIN, Administrative Coordinator TANJA PILZAK, Manager, Program Operations CELESTE A. NAYLOR, Information Management Associate CHRISTINA O. SHIPMAN, Financial Officer SANDRA WILSON, Financial Assistant vi

OCR for page R1
Preface The United States has been launching astronauts into space for five decades. During that period, the size of the Astronaut Corps has grown and shrunk periodically in accordance with various program demands. The training facilities required to support the Astronaut Corps have also changed over time to meet the new demands placed on it. NASA has retired the space shuttle but is still operating the International Space Station and adopting a new approach to transporting astronauts to low Earth orbit and eventually beyond. These changes are affecting the role and size of the activities managed by the Flight Crew Operations Directorate of NASA’s Johnson Space Center and of the ground training facilities and the fleet of training aircraft used by the Astronaut Corps. In May 2010, the National Research Council (NRC) was asked by NASA to address several questions related to the Astronaut Corps: 1. How should the role and size of the activities managed by the Johnson Space Center Flight Crew Opera - tions Directorate change after space shuttle retirement and completion of the assembly of the International Space Station (ISS)? 2. What are the requirements for crew-related ground-based facilities after the Space Shuttle program ends? 3. Is the fleet of aircraft used for training the Astronaut Corps a cost-effective means of preparing astronauts to meet the requirements of NASA’s human spaceflight program? Are there more cost-effective means of meeting these training requirements? The NRC was not asked to consider whether the United States should continue human spaceflight, nor whether there are better alternatives for achieving the nation’s goals than launching humans into space. Rather, the NRC’s charge was predicated on the assumption that U.S. human spaceflight would continue. The NRC was asked in its task to establish requirements for the role and size of the activities managed by the Flight Crew Operations Directorate and the crew-related ground-based test facilities but was not asked to conduct cost analysis of different requirements. That analysis can be performed by NASA as it chooses whether and how to implement any of the recommendations in this report. In response to the request, the NRC appointed the Committee on Human Spaceflight Crew Operations. The committee held its first meeting at Johnson Space Center in January 2011 and then met in Washington, D.C., in March and finally in Woods Hole, Massachusetts, in May. The committee received input from a diverse group that included NASA’s Astronaut Office, NASA Headquarters officials, and representatives of the Federal Aviation vii

OCR for page R1
viii PREFACE Administration, the commercial airline industry, the Navy Nuclear Propulsion Office, and companies seeking to provide commercial crew access to the ISS. NASA’s Astronaut Office responded to the committee’s many requests for information by providing extensive details on the office’s activities, on the Flight Crew Operations Directorate’s training resources, and on the role of high-performance aircraft training in the overall astronaut training portfo- lio. The committee acknowledges the extensive cooperation provided by the chief astronaut and the staff of the Astronaut Office.

OCR for page R1
Acknowledgment of Reviewers This report has been reviewed in draft form by individuals chosen for their diverse perspectives and technical expertise, in accordance with procedures approved by the Report Review Committee of the National Research Council (NRC). The purpose of this independent review is to provide candid and critical comments that will assist the institution in making its published report as sound as possible and to ensure that the report meets institutional standards for objectivity, evidence, and responsiveness to the study charge. The review comments and draft manuscript remain confidential to protect the integrity of the deliberative process. We wish to thank the following individuals for their review of this report: Michael Bloomfield, Oceaneering Space Systems, Kenneth D. Bowersox, Space Exploration Technologies, John E. Boyington, Jr., DRS Technologies, Daniel C. Brandenstein, United Space Alliance, LLC, Eileen Collins, U.S. Air Force (retired), N. Wayne Hale, Jr., Special Aerospace Services, Scott Pace, Space Policy Institute and George Washington University, Richard H. Truly, National Renewable Energy Laboratory (retired), Jim Voss, Sierra Nevada Corporation, and Steven Weinberg, University of Texas, Austin. Although the reviewers listed above have provided many constructive comments and suggestions, they were not asked to endorse the conclusions or recommendations, nor did they see the final draft of the report before its release. The review of this report was overseen by Alton D. Slay, Slay Enterprises Incorporated. Appointed by the NRC, he was responsible for making certain that an independent examination of this report was carried out in accordance with institutional procedures and that all review comments were carefully considered. Responsibility for the final content of this report rests entirely with the authoring committee and the institution. ix

OCR for page R1

OCR for page R1
Contents SUMMARY 1 1 THE EVOLUTION OF THE U.S. ASTRONAUT PROGRAM 9 History of the Size of the NASA Astronaut Corps, 9 Crew Redundancy and Back-Ups, 10 History of Astronaut Corps Selection Criteria and Aviation Experience, 13 History of the Organizational Structure and Role of the Astronaut Office, 27 History of NASA Ground Training Facilities and Allocation for Spaceflight Readiness Training, 28 Summary, 32 2 NASA’s HUMAN SPACEFLIGHT: THE ROLE AND SIZE OF ACTIVITIES MANAGED BY THE FLIGHT CREW OPERATIONS DIRECTORATE 37 NASA Human Spaceflight Mission Requirements, 37 Current Astronaut Corps Staffing, 39 International Space Station Training Requirements, 44 Evolution to Post-Shuttle Operations, 47 Crew Training in the Post-Shuttle Era, 50 Future Staffing, 50 Potential Impacts on Requirements for the Astronaut Corps and Facilities in the Future, 55 Commercial Crew Operations Models, 56 NASA Development Programs, 57 Summary, 62 Findings and Recommendations, 62 3 POST-SHUTTLE SPACEFLIGHT CREW TRAINING RESOURCES: GROUND-BASED FACILITIES AND T-38N TALON AIRCRAFT 65 Transition to a Post-Shuttle Astronaut Corps, 65 Training and Proficiency Requirements, 66 Crew Training Ground Facilities and the Space Shuttle’s Retirement, 67 xi

OCR for page R1
xii CONTENTS High-Performance Aircraft and Astronaut Training, 70 International Partners and Commercial Aviation Training, 79 Current and Post-Shuttle T-38N Assets, 80 Post-Shuttle Simulator Capability, 83 Differences Between Simulators and High-Performance Flight Environments, 83 Evolving Training Methods in Other Fields, 85 Summary, 85 Findings and Recommendations, 87 APPENDIXES A Appropriate Training Methods and Technologies 91 B Acronyms and Glossary 95 C Committee and Staff Biographical Information 97