Virtual background of CAPSTONE spacecraft optimized for phone use (9:16). The CAPSTONE mission will demonstrate an innovative spacecraft-to-spacecraft navigation solution at the Moon from a near rectilinear halo orbit slated for Artemis’ Gateway. Illustration by Daniel Rutter.
Virtual background of CAPSTONE spacecraft optimized for phone use (9:16). The CAPSTONE mission will demonstrate an innovative spacecraft-to-spacecraft navigation solution at the Moon from a near rectilinear halo orbit slated for Artemis’ Gateway. Illustration by Daniel Rutter.
Virtual background of CAPSTONE spacecraft optimized for desktop use (16:9). The CAPSTONE mission will demonstrate an innovative spacecraft-to-spacecraft navigation solution at the Moon from a near rectilinear halo orbit slated for Artemis’ Gateway. Illustration by Daniel Rutter.
Virtual background of CAPSTONE spacecraft optimized for desktop use (16:9). The CAPSTONE mission will demonstrate an innovative spacecraft-to-spacecraft navigation solution at the Moon from a near rectilinear halo orbit slated for Artemis’ Gateway. Illustration by Daniel Rutter.
Virtual background of CAPSTONE spacecraft optimized for phone use (9:16). The CAPSTONE mission will demonstrate an innovative spacecraft-to-spacecraft navigation solution at the Moon from a near rectilinear halo orbit slated for Artemis’ Gateway. Illustration by Daniel Rutter.
Virtual background of CAPSTONE spacecraft optimized for phone use (9:16). The CAPSTONE mission will demonstrate an innovative spacecraft-to-spacecraft navigation solution at the Moon from a near rectilinear halo orbit slated for Artemis’ Gateway. Illustration by Daniel Rutter.
Virtual background of CAPSTONE spacecraft optimized for desktop use (16:9). The CAPSTONE mission will demonstrate an innovative spacecraft-to-spacecraft navigation solution at the Moon from a near rectilinear halo orbit slated for Artemis’ Gateway. Illustration by Daniel Rutter.
Virtual background of CAPSTONE spacecraft optimized for phone use (9:16). The CAPSTONE mission will demonstrate an innovative spacecraft-to-spacecraft navigation solution at the Moon from a near rectilinear halo orbit slated for Artemis’ Gateway. Illustration by Daniel Rutter.
Artemis II virtual background
NASA researchers Curt Hanson (background) and Saravanakumaar Ramia (foreground) control the air taxi virtual reality flight simulator from computers during a test at NASA’s Armstrong Flight Research Center in Edwards, California in March 2024.
JSC2011-E-006297 (24 Jan. 2011) --- NASA astronaut Michael Barratt (background), STS-133 mission specialist, uses the virtual reality lab in the Space Vehicle Mock-up Facility at NASA's Johnson Space Center to train for some of his duties aboard the space shuttle and space station. This type of computer interface, paired with virtual reality training hardware and software, helps to prepare crew members for dealing with space station elements. Photo credit: NASA or National Aeronautics and Space Administration
JSC2010-E-043668 (25 March 2010) --- NASA astronauts Mark Kelly (background), STS-134 commander; and Andrew Feustel, mission specialist, use the virtual reality lab in the Space Vehicle Mock-up Facility at NASA's Johnson Space Center to train for some of their duties aboard the space shuttle and space station. This type of computer interface, paired with virtual reality training hardware and software, helps to prepare crew members for dealing with space station elements.
JSC2010-E-043666 (25 March 2010) --- NASA astronauts Mark Kelly (background), STS-134 commander; and Andrew Feustel, mission specialist, use the virtual reality lab in the Space Vehicle Mock-up Facility at NASA's Johnson Space Center to train for some of their duties aboard the space shuttle and space station. This type of computer interface, paired with virtual reality training hardware and software, helps to prepare crew members for dealing with space station elements.
JSC2009-E-214338 (25 Sept. 2009) --- NASA astronauts James P. Dutton Jr., STS-131 pilot; and Stephanie Wilson, mission specialist, use the virtual reality lab in the Space Vehicle Mock-up Facility at NASA's Johnson Space Center to train for some of their duties aboard the space shuttle and space station. This type of computer interface, paired with virtual reality training hardware and software, helps to prepare the entire team for dealing with space station elements. Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency (JAXA) astronaut Naoko Yamazaki, mission specialist, is visible in the background.
JSC2009-E-214322 (25 Sept. 2009) --- NASA astronauts James P. Dutton Jr., STS-131 pilot; and Stephanie Wilson, mission specialist, use the virtual reality lab in the Space Vehicle Mock-up Facility at NASA's Johnson Space Center to train for some of their duties aboard the space shuttle and space station. This type of computer interface, paired with virtual reality training hardware and software, helps to prepare the entire team for dealing with space station elements. United Space Alliance crew instructor Stephan Kinstle (background) assisted the crew members.
Astronaut Jeffrey A. Hoffman, one of four crewmembers for STS-61 that will conduct scheduled spacewalks during the flight, wears a special helmet and gloves designed to assist in proper positioning near the telescope while on the end of the robot arm. Crewmembers are utilizing a new virtual reality training aid which assists in refining positioning patterns for Space Shuttle Endeavour's Remote Manipulator System (RMS) (36890); Astronaut Claude Nicollier looks at a computer display of the Shuttle's robot arm movements as Thomas D. Akers and Kathryn C. Thornton, mission specialists look on. Nicollier will be responsible for maneuvering the astronauts while they stand in a foot restraint on the end of the RMS arm (36891,36894); Hoffman wears a special helmet and gloves designed to assist in proper positioning near the telescope while on the end of the robot arm (35892); Nicollier looks at a computer display of the Shuttle's robot arm movements as Akers looks on (36893); While (l-r) Astronauts Kenneth Bowersox, Kathryn Thornton, Richard O. Covey and Thomas D. Akers watch, Nicollier moves the Robot arm to desired locations in the Shuttle's payload bay using the Virtual Reality program (36895); Bowersox takes his turn maneuvering the RMS while mission specialist Hoffman, wearing the Virtual Reality helmet, follows his own progress on the end of the robot arm. Crewmembers participating during the training session are (l-r) Astronauts Akers, Hoffman, Bowersox, Nicollier, Covey, and Thornton. In the background, David Homan, an engineer in the JSC Engineering Directorate's Automation and Robotics Division, looks on (36896).
Astronaut Jeffrey A. Hoffman, one of four crewmembers for STS-61 that will conduct scheduled spacewalks during the flight, wears a special helmet and gloves designed to assist in proper positioning near the telescope while on the end of the robot arm. Crewmembers are utilizing a new virtual reality training aid which assists in refining positioning patterns for Space Shuttle Endeavour's Remote Manipulator System (RMS) (36890); Astronaut Claude Nicollier looks at a computer display of the Shuttle's robot arm movements as Thomas D. Akers and Kathryn C. Thornton, mission specialists look on. Nicollier will be responsible for maneuvering the astronauts while they stand in a foot restraint on the end of the RMS arm (36891,36894); Hoffman wears a special helmet and gloves designed to assist in proper positioning near the telescope while on the end of the robot arm (35892); Nicollier looks at a computer display of the Shuttle's robot arm movements as Akers looks on (36893); While (l-r) Astronauts Kenneth Bowersox, Kathryn Thornton, Richard O. Covey and Thomas D. Akers watch, Nicollier moves the Robot arm to desired locations in the Shuttle's payload bay using the Virtual Reality program (36895); Bowersox takes his turn maneuvering the RMS while mission specialist Hoffman, wearing the Virtual Reality helmet, follows his own progress on the end of the robot arm. Crewmembers participating during the training session are (l-r) Astronauts Akers, Hoffman, Bowersox, Nicollier, Covey, and Thornton. In the background, David Homan, an engineer in the JSC Engineering Directorate's Automation and Robotics Division, looks on (36896).
Astronaut Jeffrey A. Hoffman, one of four crewmembers for STS-61 that will conduct scheduled spacewalks during the flight, wears a special helmet and gloves designed to assist in proper positioning near the telescope while on the end of the robot arm. Crewmembers are utilizing a new virtual reality training aid which assists in refining positioning patterns for Space Shuttle Endeavour's Remote Manipulator System (RMS) (36890); Astronaut Claude Nicollier looks at a computer display of the Shuttle's robot arm movements as Thomas D. Akers and Kathryn C. Thornton, mission specialists look on. Nicollier will be responsible for maneuvering the astronauts while they stand in a foot restraint on the end of the RMS arm (36891,36894); Hoffman wears a special helmet and gloves designed to assist in proper positioning near the telescope while on the end of the robot arm (35892); Nicollier looks at a computer display of the Shuttle's robot arm movements as Akers looks on (36893); While (l-r) Astronauts Kenneth Bowersox, Kathryn Thornton, Richard O. Covey and Thomas D. Akers watch, Nicollier moves the Robot arm to desired locations in the Shuttle's payload bay using the Virtual Reality program (36895); Bowersox takes his turn maneuvering the RMS while mission specialist Hoffman, wearing the Virtual Reality helmet, follows his own progress on the end of the robot arm. Crewmembers participating during the training session are (l-r) Astronauts Akers, Hoffman, Bowersox, Nicollier, Covey, and Thornton. In the background, David Homan, an engineer in the JSC Engineering Directorate's Automation and Robotics Division, looks on (36896).
Astronaut Jeffrey A. Hoffman, one of four crewmembers for STS-61 that will conduct scheduled spacewalks during the flight, wears a special helmet and gloves designed to assist in proper positioning near the telescope while on the end of the robot arm. Crewmembers are utilizing a new virtual reality training aid which assists in refining positioning patterns for Space Shuttle Endeavour's Remote Manipulator System (RMS) (36890); Astronaut Claude Nicollier looks at a computer display of the Shuttle's robot arm movements as Thomas D. Akers and Kathryn C. Thornton, mission specialists look on. Nicollier will be responsible for maneuvering the astronauts while they stand in a foot restraint on the end of the RMS arm (36891,36894); Hoffman wears a special helmet and gloves designed to assist in proper positioning near the telescope while on the end of the robot arm (35892); Nicollier looks at a computer display of the Shuttle's robot arm movements as Akers looks on (36893); While (l-r) Astronauts Kenneth Bowersox, Kathryn Thornton, Richard O. Covey and Thomas D. Akers watch, Nicollier moves the Robot arm to desired locations in the Shuttle's payload bay using the Virtual Reality program (36895); Bowersox takes his turn maneuvering the RMS while mission specialist Hoffman, wearing the Virtual Reality helmet, follows his own progress on the end of the robot arm. Crewmembers participating during the training session are (l-r) Astronauts Akers, Hoffman, Bowersox, Nicollier, Covey, and Thornton. In the background, David Homan, an engineer in the JSC Engineering Directorate's Automation and Robotics Division, looks on (36896).
Astronaut Jeffrey A. Hoffman, one of four crewmembers for STS-61 that will conduct scheduled spacewalks during the flight, wears a special helmet and gloves designed to assist in proper positioning near the telescope while on the end of the robot arm. Crewmembers are utilizing a new virtual reality training aid which assists in refining positioning patterns for Space Shuttle Endeavour's Remote Manipulator System (RMS) (36890); Astronaut Claude Nicollier looks at a computer display of the Shuttle's robot arm movements as Thomas D. Akers and Kathryn C. Thornton, mission specialists look on. Nicollier will be responsible for maneuvering the astronauts while they stand in a foot restraint on the end of the RMS arm (36891,36894); Hoffman wears a special helmet and gloves designed to assist in proper positioning near the telescope while on the end of the robot arm (35892); Nicollier looks at a computer display of the Shuttle's robot arm movements as Akers looks on (36893); While (l-r) Astronauts Kenneth Bowersox, Kathryn Thornton, Richard O. Covey and Thomas D. Akers watch, Nicollier moves the Robot arm to desired locations in the Shuttle's payload bay using the Virtual Reality program (36895); Bowersox takes his turn maneuvering the RMS while mission specialist Hoffman, wearing the Virtual Reality helmet, follows his own progress on the end of the robot arm. Crewmembers participating during the training session are (l-r) Astronauts Akers, Hoffman, Bowersox, Nicollier, Covey, and Thornton. In the background, David Homan, an engineer in the JSC Engineering Directorate's Automation and Robotics Division, looks on (36896).
Astronaut Jeffrey A. Hoffman, one of four crewmembers for STS-61 that will conduct scheduled spacewalks during the flight, wears a special helmet and gloves designed to assist in proper positioning near the telescope while on the end of the robot arm. Crewmembers are utilizing a new virtual reality training aid which assists in refining positioning patterns for Space Shuttle Endeavour's Remote Manipulator System (RMS) (36890); Astronaut Claude Nicollier looks at a computer display of the Shuttle's robot arm movements as Thomas D. Akers and Kathryn C. Thornton, mission specialists look on. Nicollier will be responsible for maneuvering the astronauts while they stand in a foot restraint on the end of the RMS arm (36891,36894); Hoffman wears a special helmet and gloves designed to assist in proper positioning near the telescope while on the end of the robot arm (35892); Nicollier looks at a computer display of the Shuttle's robot arm movements as Akers looks on (36893); While (l-r) Astronauts Kenneth Bowersox, Kathryn Thornton, Richard O. Covey and Thomas D. Akers watch, Nicollier moves the Robot arm to desired locations in the Shuttle's payload bay using the Virtual Reality program (36895); Bowersox takes his turn maneuvering the RMS while mission specialist Hoffman, wearing the Virtual Reality helmet, follows his own progress on the end of the robot arm. Crewmembers participating during the training session are (l-r) Astronauts Akers, Hoffman, Bowersox, Nicollier, Covey, and Thornton. In the background, David Homan, an engineer in the JSC Engineering Directorate's Automation and Robotics Division, looks on (36896).
Astronaut Jeffrey A. Hoffman, one of four crewmembers for STS-61 that will conduct scheduled spacewalks during the flight, wears a special helmet and gloves designed to assist in proper positioning near the telescope while on the end of the robot arm. Crewmembers are utilizing a new virtual reality training aid which assists in refining positioning patterns for Space Shuttle Endeavour's Remote Manipulator System (RMS) (36890); Astronaut Claude Nicollier looks at a computer display of the Shuttle's robot arm movements as Thomas D. Akers and Kathryn C. Thornton, mission specialists look on. Nicollier will be responsible for maneuvering the astronauts while they stand in a foot restraint on the end of the RMS arm (36891,36894); Hoffman wears a special helmet and gloves designed to assist in proper positioning near the telescope while on the end of the robot arm (35892); Nicollier looks at a computer display of the Shuttle's robot arm movements as Akers looks on (36893); While (l-r) Astronauts Kenneth Bowersox, Kathryn Thornton, Richard O. Covey and Thomas D. Akers watch, Nicollier moves the Robot arm to desired locations in the Shuttle's payload bay using the Virtual Reality program (36895); Bowersox takes his turn maneuvering the RMS while mission specialist Hoffman, wearing the Virtual Reality helmet, follows his own progress on the end of the robot arm. Crewmembers participating during the training session are (l-r) Astronauts Akers, Hoffman, Bowersox, Nicollier, Covey, and Thornton. In the background, David Homan, an engineer in the JSC Engineering Directorate's Automation and Robotics Division, looks on (36896).
“The big thing is trying to figure out the best way to communicate. And to interact and engage. Being virtual is great, but there’s nothing like being able to sit down and talk to a parent or a senior who just wants to reflect on what it was like seeing Apollo. Or talking to someone who says, ‘I could never work for NASA,’ and telling them, ‘Yes, you can — I’m not from a science background. I graduated with a business marketing degree.’ We have to have communications — social media specialists, graphic designers, things like that. I think it’s very fulfilling, from my perspective, when we go out and engage with the public to show what NASA is really about. It takes twenty thousand people to run NASA — and we’re not all astronauts and scientists and engineers. I try to bring that perspective.” Derek Wang, Director of Communications for NASA’s Space Technology Mission Directorate, poses for a portrait, Thursday, Aug. 27, 2020 in Virginia. Photo Credit: (NASA/Joel Kowsky)
Senator John Glenn visit to Johnson Space Center (JSC). Views of Glenn sitting in cockpit of T-38 in Hangar 276 with John Young, George Abbey, David Leestma and Mark Polansky observing (11150). An engineer explains SPIFEX experiment hardware to Abby, Young and Glenn in Bldg 13 (11151, 11153). Glenn talks with astronaut Terrence T. Henricks and employees in Bldg 9C, Virtual reality lab (11152). Lunch in Bldg 17 Flight Crew support division with Dr. Ellen Baker, Robert "Hoot" Gibson and John Glenn (11154). Linda Godwin, Robert Cabana, Abbey, Young, Baker, Gibson and Glenn at lunch (11155). Astronaut Mark Lee shows Glenn and his aide how to use the virtural reality helmets (11156-7). Glenn shakes the hand of Franklin Chang-Diaz with his plasma rocket in the background in the Sonny Carter Training Facility (SCTF) (11158). Glenn in the Manipulator Development Facility (MDF) Remote Manipulator System (RMS) station mock-up in Bldg 9A with Abbey, Young and aide (11159, 11186). Glenn signs a book for Thomas D. Jones as Frederick Sturckow and Linda Godwin look on (11160). Glenn inside visual-vestibular trainer in Bldg 9B (11161). In conference room meeting with astronaut corps in Bldg 4S, Glenn shakes Robert Cabana's hand (11162). John Glenn and John Young pose for a group shot with Bldg 17 Food lab personnel (11163). Glenn thanks the food lab personnel (11164). Glenn visits Bldg 5 Fixed Base (FB) middeck simulator with astronauts Terrence Henricks and Mary Ellen Weber (11165). Glenn with Charles T. Bourland (11166). STS-70 crew Donald Thomas, Terrence Henricks, Mary Ellen Weber, Nancy Currie and Kevin Kregel with Glenn's advisor (11167). STS-70 crew Thomas, Henricks, Weber, Currie and Kregel with John Glenn (11175). Glenn with Thomas, Kregel, Weber, Henricks and trainer (11176-7). David J. Homan assists Glenn's aide with virtual reality goggles (11168) and Glenn (11174). John Young in Bldg 9C equilibrium trainer (11169). Glenn with Carl Walz in flight deck mock-up of MDF in Bldg 9NE (11170, 11187). Young, Abbey, aides, Glenn and Walz examine helium balloon in MDF (11171-2). Chang-Diaz shows Glenn's tour group the plasma rocket (11173). Glenn's presentation to astronaut corps (11178-81, 11184-5). Glenn is presented with framed picture of Sonny Carter Training Facility (SCTF) (11182) and framed picture of space station (11183).
![Astronaut James Lovell at the controls of the Visual Docking Simulator. From A.W. Vogeley, "Piloted Space-Flight Simulation at Langley Research Center," Paper presented at the American Society of Mechanical Engineers 1966 Winter Meeting, New York, NY, November 27-December 1, 1966. "This facility was [later known as the Visual-Optical Simulator.] It presents to the pilot an out-the-window view of his target in correct 6 degrees of freedom motion. The scene is obtained by a television camera pick-up viewing a small-scale gimbaled model of the target." "For docking studies, the docking target picture was projected onto the surface of a 20-foot-diameter sphere and the pilot could, effectively, maneuver into contract. this facility was used in a comparison study with the Rendezvous Docking Simulator - one of the few comparison experiments in which conditions were carefully controlled and a reasonable sample of pilots used. All pilots preferred the more realistic RDS visual scene. The pilots generally liked the RDS angular motion cues although some objected to the false gravity cues that these motions introduced. Training time was shorter on the RDS, but final performance on both simulators was essentially equal. " "For station-keeping studies, since close approach is not required, the target was presented to the pilot through a virtual-image system which projects his view to infinity, providing a more realistic effect. In addition to the target, the system also projects a star and horizon background. "](https://images-assets.nasa.gov/image/LRC-1963-B701_P-09093/LRC-1963-B701_P-09093~medium.jpg)
Astronaut James Lovell at the controls of the Visual Docking Simulator. From A.W. Vogeley, "Piloted Space-Flight Simulation at Langley Research Center," Paper presented at the American Society of Mechanical Engineers 1966 Winter Meeting, New York, NY, November 27-December 1, 1966. "This facility was [later known as the Visual-Optical Simulator.] It presents to the pilot an out-the-window view of his target in correct 6 degrees of freedom motion. The scene is obtained by a television camera pick-up viewing a small-scale gimbaled model of the target." "For docking studies, the docking target picture was projected onto the surface of a 20-foot-diameter sphere and the pilot could, effectively, maneuver into contract. this facility was used in a comparison study with the Rendezvous Docking Simulator - one of the few comparison experiments in which conditions were carefully controlled and a reasonable sample of pilots used. All pilots preferred the more realistic RDS visual scene. The pilots generally liked the RDS angular motion cues although some objected to the false gravity cues that these motions introduced. Training time was shorter on the RDS, but final performance on both simulators was essentially equal. " "For station-keeping studies, since close approach is not required, the target was presented to the pilot through a virtual-image system which projects his view to infinity, providing a more realistic effect. In addition to the target, the system also projects a star and horizon background. "
Walter (Wally) M. Schirra in Visual Docking Simulator From A.W. Vogeley, "Piloted Space-Flight Simulation at Langley Research Center," Paper presented at the American Society of Mechanical Engineers 1966 Winter Meeting, New York, NY, November 27-December 1, 1966. "This facility was [later known as the Visual-Optical Simulator. It presents to the pilot an out-the-window view of his target in correct 6 degrees of freedom motion. The scene is obtained by a television camera pick-up viewing a small-scale gimbaled model of the target. "For docking studies, the docking target picture was projected onto the surface of a 20-foot-diameter sphere and the pilot could, effectively, maneuver into contract. this facility was used in a comparison study with the Rendezvous Docking Simulator - one of the few comparison experiments in which conditions were carefully controlled and a reasonable sample of pilots used. All pilots preferred the more realistic RDS visual scene. The pilots generally liked the RDS angular motion cues although some objected to the false gravity cues that these motions introduced. Training time was shorter on the RDS, but final performance on both simulators was essentially equal. " "For station-keeping studies, since close approach is not required, the target was presented to the pilot through a virtual-image system which projects his view to infinity, providing a more realistic effect. In addition to the target, the system also projects a star and horizon background. "
![Astronaut Virgil "Gus" Grissom at the controls of the Visual Docking Simulator. From A.W. Vogeley, "Piloted Space-Flight Simulation at Langley Research Center," Paper presented at the American Society of Mechanical Engineers 1966 Winter Meeting, New York, NY, November 27-December 1, 1966. "This facility was [later known as the Visual-Optical Simulator.] It presents to the pilot an out-the-window view of his target in correct 6 degrees of freedom motion. The scene is obtained by a television camera pick-up viewing a small-scale gimbaled model of the target." "For docking studies, the docking target picture was projected onto the surface of a 20-foot-diameter sphere and the pilot could, effectively, maneuver into contract. this facility was used in a comparison study with the Rendezvous Docking Simulator - one of the few comparison experiments in which conditions were carefully controlled and a reasonable sample of pilots used. All pilots preferred the more realistic RDS visual scene. The pilots generally liked the RDS angular motion cues although some objected to the false gravity cues that these motions introduced. Training time was shorter on the RDS, but final performance on both simulators was essentially equal. " "For station-keeping studies, since close approach is not required, the target was presented to the pilot through a virtual-image system which projects his view to infinity, providing a more realistic effect. In addition to the target, the system also projects a star and horizon background. "](https://images-assets.nasa.gov/image/LRC-1963-B701_P-01515/LRC-1963-B701_P-01515~medium.jpg)
Astronaut Virgil "Gus" Grissom at the controls of the Visual Docking Simulator. From A.W. Vogeley, "Piloted Space-Flight Simulation at Langley Research Center," Paper presented at the American Society of Mechanical Engineers 1966 Winter Meeting, New York, NY, November 27-December 1, 1966. "This facility was [later known as the Visual-Optical Simulator.] It presents to the pilot an out-the-window view of his target in correct 6 degrees of freedom motion. The scene is obtained by a television camera pick-up viewing a small-scale gimbaled model of the target." "For docking studies, the docking target picture was projected onto the surface of a 20-foot-diameter sphere and the pilot could, effectively, maneuver into contract. this facility was used in a comparison study with the Rendezvous Docking Simulator - one of the few comparison experiments in which conditions were carefully controlled and a reasonable sample of pilots used. All pilots preferred the more realistic RDS visual scene. The pilots generally liked the RDS angular motion cues although some objected to the false gravity cues that these motions introduced. Training time was shorter on the RDS, but final performance on both simulators was essentially equal. " "For station-keeping studies, since close approach is not required, the target was presented to the pilot through a virtual-image system which projects his view to infinity, providing a more realistic effect. In addition to the target, the system also projects a star and horizon background. "
![Astronaut Virgil "Gus" Grissom at the controls of the Visual Docking Simulator. From A.W. Vogeley, "Piloted Space-Flight Simulation at Langley Research Center," Paper presented at the American Society of Mechanical Engineers 1966 Winter Meeting, New York, NY, November 27-December 1, 1966. "This facility was [later known as the Visual-Optical Simulator.] It presents to the pilot an out-the-window view of his target in correct 6 degrees of freedom motion. The scene is obtained by a television camera pick-up viewing a small-scale gimbaled model of the target." "For docking studies, the docking target picture was projected onto the surface of a 20-foot-diameter sphere and the pilot could, effectively, maneuver into contract. this facility was used in a comparison study with the Rendezvous Docking Simulator - one of the few comparison experiments in which conditions were carefully controlled and a reasonable sample of pilots used. All pilots preferred the more realistic RDS visual scene. The pilots generally liked the RDS angular motion cues although some objected to the false gravity cues that these motions introduced. Training time was shorter on the RDS, but final performance on both simulators was essentially equal. " "For station-keeping studies, since close approach is not required, the target was presented to the pilot through a virtual-image system which projects his view to infinity, providing a more realistic effect. In addition to the target, the system also projects a star and horizon background. "](https://images-assets.nasa.gov/image/LRC-1963-B701_P-01516/LRC-1963-B701_P-01516~medium.jpg)
Astronaut Virgil "Gus" Grissom at the controls of the Visual Docking Simulator. From A.W. Vogeley, "Piloted Space-Flight Simulation at Langley Research Center," Paper presented at the American Society of Mechanical Engineers 1966 Winter Meeting, New York, NY, November 27-December 1, 1966. "This facility was [later known as the Visual-Optical Simulator.] It presents to the pilot an out-the-window view of his target in correct 6 degrees of freedom motion. The scene is obtained by a television camera pick-up viewing a small-scale gimbaled model of the target." "For docking studies, the docking target picture was projected onto the surface of a 20-foot-diameter sphere and the pilot could, effectively, maneuver into contract. this facility was used in a comparison study with the Rendezvous Docking Simulator - one of the few comparison experiments in which conditions were carefully controlled and a reasonable sample of pilots used. All pilots preferred the more realistic RDS visual scene. The pilots generally liked the RDS angular motion cues although some objected to the false gravity cues that these motions introduced. Training time was shorter on the RDS, but final performance on both simulators was essentially equal. " "For station-keeping studies, since close approach is not required, the target was presented to the pilot through a virtual-image system which projects his view to infinity, providing a more realistic effect. In addition to the target, the system also projects a star and horizon background. "
![Astronaut Frank Borman at the controls of the Visual Docking Simulator. From A.W. Vogeley, "Piloted Space-Flight Simulation at Langley Research Center," Paper presented at the American Society of Mechanical Engineers 1966 Winter Meeting, New York, NY, November 27-December 1, 1966. "This facility was [later known as the Visual-Optical Simulator.] It presents to the pilot an out-the-window view of his target in correct 6 degrees of freedom motion. The scene is obtained by a television camera pick-up viewing a small-scale gimbaled model of the target." "For docking studies, the docking target picture was projected onto the surface of a 20-foot-diameter sphere and the pilot could, effectively, maneuver into contract. this facility was used in a comparison study with the Rendezvous Docking Simulator - one of the few comparison experiments in which conditions were carefully controlled and a reasonable sample of pilots used. All pilots preferred the more realistic RDS visual scene. The pilots generally liked the RDS angular motion cues although some objected to the false gravity cues that these motions introduced. Training time was shorter on the RDS, but final performance on both simulators was essentially equal. " "For station-keeping studies, since close approach is not required, the target was presented to the pilot through a virtual-image system which projects his view to infinity, providing a more realistic effect. In addition to the target, the system also projects a star and horizon background. "](https://images-assets.nasa.gov/image/LRC-1963-B701_P-09368/LRC-1963-B701_P-09368~medium.jpg)
Astronaut Frank Borman at the controls of the Visual Docking Simulator. From A.W. Vogeley, "Piloted Space-Flight Simulation at Langley Research Center," Paper presented at the American Society of Mechanical Engineers 1966 Winter Meeting, New York, NY, November 27-December 1, 1966. "This facility was [later known as the Visual-Optical Simulator.] It presents to the pilot an out-the-window view of his target in correct 6 degrees of freedom motion. The scene is obtained by a television camera pick-up viewing a small-scale gimbaled model of the target." "For docking studies, the docking target picture was projected onto the surface of a 20-foot-diameter sphere and the pilot could, effectively, maneuver into contract. this facility was used in a comparison study with the Rendezvous Docking Simulator - one of the few comparison experiments in which conditions were carefully controlled and a reasonable sample of pilots used. All pilots preferred the more realistic RDS visual scene. The pilots generally liked the RDS angular motion cues although some objected to the false gravity cues that these motions introduced. Training time was shorter on the RDS, but final performance on both simulators was essentially equal. " "For station-keeping studies, since close approach is not required, the target was presented to the pilot through a virtual-image system which projects his view to infinity, providing a more realistic effect. In addition to the target, the system also projects a star and horizon background. "
![Astronaut Charles Conrad at the controls of the Visual Docking Simulator. From A.W. Vogeley, "Piloted Space-Flight Simulation at Langley Research Center," paper presented at the American Society of Mechanical Engineers 1966 Winter Meeting, New York, NY, November 27-December 1, 1966. "This facility was [later known as the Visual-Optical Simulator.] It presents to the pilot an out-the-window view of his target in correct 6 degrees of freedom motion. The scene is obtained by a television camera pick-up viewing a small-scale gimbaled model of the target." "For docking studies, the docking target picture was projected onto the surface of a 20-foot-diameter sphere and the pilot could, effectively, maneuver into contract. this facility was used in a comparison study with the Rendezvous Docking Simulator - one of the few comparison experiments in which conditions were carefully controlled and a reasonable sample of pilots used. All pilots preferred the more realistic RDS visual scene. The pilots generally liked the RDS angular motion cues although some objected to the false gravity cues that these motions introduced. Training time was shorter on the RDS, but final performance on both simulators was essentially equal. " "For station-keeping studies, since close approach is not required, the target was presented to the pilot through a virtual-image system which projects his view to infinity, providing a more realistic effect. In addition to the target, the system also projects a star and horizon background. "](https://images-assets.nasa.gov/image/LRC-1963-B701_P-09519/LRC-1963-B701_P-09519~medium.jpg)
Astronaut Charles Conrad at the controls of the Visual Docking Simulator. From A.W. Vogeley, "Piloted Space-Flight Simulation at Langley Research Center," paper presented at the American Society of Mechanical Engineers 1966 Winter Meeting, New York, NY, November 27-December 1, 1966. "This facility was [later known as the Visual-Optical Simulator.] It presents to the pilot an out-the-window view of his target in correct 6 degrees of freedom motion. The scene is obtained by a television camera pick-up viewing a small-scale gimbaled model of the target." "For docking studies, the docking target picture was projected onto the surface of a 20-foot-diameter sphere and the pilot could, effectively, maneuver into contract. this facility was used in a comparison study with the Rendezvous Docking Simulator - one of the few comparison experiments in which conditions were carefully controlled and a reasonable sample of pilots used. All pilots preferred the more realistic RDS visual scene. The pilots generally liked the RDS angular motion cues although some objected to the false gravity cues that these motions introduced. Training time was shorter on the RDS, but final performance on both simulators was essentially equal. " "For station-keeping studies, since close approach is not required, the target was presented to the pilot through a virtual-image system which projects his view to infinity, providing a more realistic effect. In addition to the target, the system also projects a star and horizon background. "
![Astronaut James Lovell at the controls of the Visual Docking Simulator. From A.W. Vogeley, "Piloted Space-Flight Simulation at Langley Research Center," Paper presented at the American Society of Mechanical Engineers 1966 Winter Meeting, New York, NY, November 27-December 1, 1966. "This facility was [later known as the Visual-Optical Simulator.] It presents to the pilot an out-the-window view of his target in correct 6 degrees of freedom motion. The scene is obtained by a television camera pick-up viewing a small-scale gimbaled model of the target." "For docking studies, the docking target picture was projected onto the surface of a 20-foot-diameter sphere and the pilot could, effectively, maneuver into contract. this facility was used in a comparison study with the Rendezvous Docking Simulator - one of the few comparison experiments in which conditions were carefully controlled and a reasonable sample of pilots used. All pilots preferred the more realistic RDS visual scene. The pilots generally liked the RDS angular motion cues although some objected to the false gravity cues that these motions introduced. Training time was shorter on the RDS, but final performance on both simulators was essentially equal. " "For station-keeping studies, since close approach is not required, the target was presented to the pilot through a virtual-image system which projects his view to infinity, providing a more realistic effect. In addition to the target, the system also projects a star and horizon background. "](https://images-assets.nasa.gov/image/LRC-1963-B701_P-09094/LRC-1963-B701_P-09094~medium.jpg)
Astronaut James Lovell at the controls of the Visual Docking Simulator. From A.W. Vogeley, "Piloted Space-Flight Simulation at Langley Research Center," Paper presented at the American Society of Mechanical Engineers 1966 Winter Meeting, New York, NY, November 27-December 1, 1966. "This facility was [later known as the Visual-Optical Simulator.] It presents to the pilot an out-the-window view of his target in correct 6 degrees of freedom motion. The scene is obtained by a television camera pick-up viewing a small-scale gimbaled model of the target." "For docking studies, the docking target picture was projected onto the surface of a 20-foot-diameter sphere and the pilot could, effectively, maneuver into contract. this facility was used in a comparison study with the Rendezvous Docking Simulator - one of the few comparison experiments in which conditions were carefully controlled and a reasonable sample of pilots used. All pilots preferred the more realistic RDS visual scene. The pilots generally liked the RDS angular motion cues although some objected to the false gravity cues that these motions introduced. Training time was shorter on the RDS, but final performance on both simulators was essentially equal. " "For station-keeping studies, since close approach is not required, the target was presented to the pilot through a virtual-image system which projects his view to infinity, providing a more realistic effect. In addition to the target, the system also projects a star and horizon background. "
![Astronauts Charles Conrad (left) and John W. Young (right) at the controls of the Visual Docking Simulator. From A.W. Vogeley, "Piloted Space-Flight Simulation at Langley Research Center," Paper presented at the American Society of Mechanical Engineers 1966 Winter Meeting, New York, NY, November 27-December 1, 1966. "This facility was [later known as the Visual-Optical Simulator.] It presents to the pilot an out-the-window view of his target in correct 6 degrees of freedom motion. The scene is obtained by a television camera pick-up viewing a small-scale gimbaled model of the target." "For docking studies, the docking target picture was projected onto the surface of a 20-foot-diameter sphere and the pilot could, effectively, maneuver into contract. this facility was used in a comparison study with the Rendezvous Docking Simulator - one of the few comparison experiments in which conditions were carefully controlled and a reasonable sample of pilots used. All pilots preferred the more realistic RDS visual scene. The pilots generally liked the RDS angular motion cues although some objected to the false gravity cues that these motions introduced. Training time was shorter on the RDS, but final performance on both simulators was essentially equal. " "For station-keeping studies, since close approach is not required, the target was presented to the pilot through a virtual-image system which projects his view to infinity, providing a more realistic effect. In addition to the target, the system also projects a star and horizon background. "](https://images-assets.nasa.gov/image/LRC-1963-B701_P-09520/LRC-1963-B701_P-09520~medium.jpg)
Astronauts Charles Conrad (left) and John W. Young (right) at the controls of the Visual Docking Simulator. From A.W. Vogeley, "Piloted Space-Flight Simulation at Langley Research Center," Paper presented at the American Society of Mechanical Engineers 1966 Winter Meeting, New York, NY, November 27-December 1, 1966. "This facility was [later known as the Visual-Optical Simulator.] It presents to the pilot an out-the-window view of his target in correct 6 degrees of freedom motion. The scene is obtained by a television camera pick-up viewing a small-scale gimbaled model of the target." "For docking studies, the docking target picture was projected onto the surface of a 20-foot-diameter sphere and the pilot could, effectively, maneuver into contract. this facility was used in a comparison study with the Rendezvous Docking Simulator - one of the few comparison experiments in which conditions were carefully controlled and a reasonable sample of pilots used. All pilots preferred the more realistic RDS visual scene. The pilots generally liked the RDS angular motion cues although some objected to the false gravity cues that these motions introduced. Training time was shorter on the RDS, but final performance on both simulators was essentially equal. " "For station-keeping studies, since close approach is not required, the target was presented to the pilot through a virtual-image system which projects his view to infinity, providing a more realistic effect. In addition to the target, the system also projects a star and horizon background. "
This image depicts a vast canyon of dust and gas in the Orion Nebula from a 3-D computer model based on observations by NASA's Hubble Space Telescope and created by science visualization specialists at the Space Telescope Science Institute (STScI) in Baltimore, Md. A 3-D visualization of this model takes viewers on an amazing four-minute voyage through the 15-light-year-wide canyon. Credit: NASA, G. Bacon, L. Frattare, Z. Levay, and F. Summers (STScI/AURA) Go here to learn more about Hubble 3D: <a href="http://www.nasa.gov/topics/universe/features/hubble_imax_premiere.html" rel="nofollow">www.nasa.gov/topics/universe/features/hubble_imax_premier...</a> or <a href="http://www.imax.com/hubble/" rel="nofollow">www.imax.com/hubble/</a> Take an exhilarating ride through the Orion Nebula, a vast star-making factory 1,500 light-years away. Swoop through Orion's giant canyon of gas and dust. Fly past behemoth stars whose brilliant light illuminates and energizes the entire cloudy region. Zoom by dusty tadpole-shaped objects that are fledgling solar systems. This virtual space journey isn't the latest video game but one of several groundbreaking astronomy visualizations created by specialists at the Space Telescope Science Institute (STScI) in Baltimore, the science operations center for NASA's Hubble Space Telescope. The cinematic space odysseys are part of the new Imax film "Hubble 3D," which opens today at select Imax theaters worldwide. The 43-minute movie chronicles the 20-year life of Hubble and includes highlights from the May 2009 servicing mission to the Earth-orbiting observatory, with footage taken by the astronauts. The giant-screen film showcases some of Hubble's breathtaking iconic pictures, such as the Eagle Nebula's "Pillars of Creation," as well as stunning views taken by the newly installed Wide Field Camera 3. While Hubble pictures of celestial objects are awe-inspiring, they are flat 2-D photographs. For this film, those 2-D images have been converted into 3-D environments, giving the audience the impression they are space travelers taking a tour of Hubble's most popular targets. "A large-format movie is a truly immersive experience," says Frank Summers, an STScI astronomer and science visualization specialist who led the team that developed the movie visualizations. The team labored for nine months, working on four visualization sequences that comprise about 12 minutes of the movie. "Seeing these Hubble images in 3-D, you feel like you are flying through space and not just looking at picture postcards," Summers continued. "The spacescapes are all based on Hubble images and data, though some artistic license is necessary to produce the full depth of field needed for 3-D." The most ambitious sequence is a four-minute voyage through the Orion Nebula's gas-and-dust canyon, about 15 light-years across. During the ride, viewers will see bright and dark, gaseous clouds; thousands of stars, including a grouping of bright, hefty stars called the Trapezium; and embryonic planetary systems. The tour ends with a detailed look at a young circumstellar disk, which is much like the structure from which our solar system formed 4.5 billion years ago. Based on a Hubble image of Orion released in 2006, the visualization was a collaborative effort between science visualization specialists at STScI, including Greg Bacon, who sculpted the Orion Nebula digital model, with input from STScI astronomer Massimo Roberto; the National Center for Supercomputing Applications at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign; and the Spitzer Science Center at the California Institute of Technology in Pasadena. For some of the sequences, STScI imaging specialists developed new techniques for transforming the 2-D Hubble images into 3-D. STScI image processing specialists Lisa Frattare and Zolt Levay, for example, created methods of splitting a giant gaseous pillar in the Carina Nebula into multiple layers to produce a 3-D effect, giving the structure depth. The Carina Nebula is a nursery for baby stars. Frattare painstakingly removed the thousands of stars in the image so that Levay could separate the gaseous layers on the isolated Carina pillar. Frattare then replaced the stars into both foreground and background layers to complete the 3-D model. For added effect, the same separation was done for both visible and infrared Hubble images, allowing the film to cross-fade between wavelength views in 3-D. In another sequence viewers fly into a field of 170,000 stars in the giant star cluster Omega Centauri. STScI astronomer Jay Anderson used his stellar database to create a synthetic star field in 3-D that matches recent razor-sharp Hubble photos. The film's final four-minute sequence takes viewers on a voyage from our Milky Way Galaxy past many of Hubble's best galaxy shots and deep into space. Some 15,000 galaxies from Hubble's deepest surveys stretch billions of light-years across the universe in a 3-D sequence created by STScI astronomers and visualizers. The view dissolves into a cobweb that traces the universe's large-scale structure, the backbone from which galaxies were born. In addition to creating visualizations, STScI's education group also provided guidance on the "Hubble 3D" Educator Guide, which includes standards-based lesson plans and activities about Hubble and its mission. Students will use the guide before or after seeing the movie. "The guide will enhance the movie experience for students and extend the movie into classrooms," says Bonnie Eisenhamer, STScI's Hubble Formal Education manager. The Hubble Space Telescope is a project of international cooperation between NASA and the European Space Agency (ESA) and is managed by NASA’s Goddard Space Flight Center (GSFC) in Greenbelt, Md. The Space Telescope Science Institute (STScI) conducts Hubble science operations. The institute is operated for NASA by the Association of Universities for Research in Astronomy, Inc., Washington, D.C.