Search Results

You are looking at 1-10 of 461

Fig. 2.; Capsule vehicle profiles. Run 2 was designed to simulate a nominal capsule launch with supine subjects. Maximum acceleration exposure was +3.2 Gx, with onset rates <1.5 G · s−1. No +Gz acceleration was experienced in this profile. Run 3 was designed to simulate a nominal capsule reentry, descent, and landing, with subjects supine in an orbiting capsule that decelerates during descent, followed by deployment of drogue and main parachutes, and finally, splashdown for a water landing. Maximum acceleration was +4.2 Gx with onset <0.5 G · s−1 in the +Gx direction, and total exposure sustained for approximately 4.5 min.

Rebecca S. Blue,

Karen M. Ong,

Kristi Ray,

Anil Menon,

Jaime Mateus,

Serena Auñón-Chancellor,

Ronak Shah, and

William Powers

Fig. 2.

Capsule vehicle profiles. Run 2 was designed to simulate a nominal capsule launch with supine subjects. Maximum acceleration exposure was +3.2 G_x, with onset rates <1.5 G · s⁻¹. No +G_z acceleration was experienced in this profile. Run 3 was designed to simulate a nominal capsule reentry, descent, and landing, with subjects supine in an orbiting capsule that decelerates during descent, followed by deployment of drogue and main parachutes, and finally, splashdown for a water landing. Maximum acceleration was +4.2 G_x with onset <0.5 G · s⁻¹ in the +G_x direction, and total exposure sustained for approximately 4.5 min.

Fig. 1.; Winged vehicle profiles. Run 1 was designed to simulate winged vehicle suborbital spaceflight where passengers would be seated upright during launch and supine during re-entry, with sequential +Gz/+Gx exposures on ascent and +Gx exposure on descent (max +3.8 Gz, +6.0 Gx). Run 4 was designed to simulate a winged vehicle suborbital spaceflight with an occupant seated upright for both launch and re-entry, resulting in combined simultaneous +Gx/+Gz during descent (max +4.0 Gz, +4.5 Gx, 6.1 G resultant).

Rebecca S. Blue,

Karen M. Ong,

Kristi Ray,

Anil Menon,

Jaime Mateus,

Serena Auñón-Chancellor,

Ronak Shah, and

William Powers

Fig. 1.

Winged vehicle profiles. Run 1 was designed to simulate winged vehicle suborbital spaceflight where passengers would be seated upright during launch and supine during re-entry, with sequential +G_z/+G_x exposures on ascent and +G_x exposure on descent (max +3.8 G_z, +6.0 G_x). Run 4 was designed to simulate a winged vehicle suborbital spaceflight with an occupant seated upright for both launch and re-entry, resulting in combined simultaneous +G_x/+G_z during descent (max +4.0 G_z, +4.5 G_x, 6.1 G resultant).

Layperson Physiological Tolerance and Operational Performance in Centrifuge-Simulated Spaceflight

Rebecca S. Blue,

Karen M. Ong,

Kristi Ray,

Anil Menon,

Jaime Mateus,

Serena Auñón-Chancellor,

Ronak Shah, and

William Powers

Article Category: Research Article

Volume/Issue: Volume 94: Issue 8

Online Publication Date: Aug 01, 2023

DOI: 10.3357/AMHP.6237.2023

Page Range: 584 – 595

, high-performance piloting activities) was considered exclusionary, though prior hypergravity experience if limited (for example, remote one-time prior experiential hypergravity exposure or a prior familiarization flight in high-performance aircraft) was considered acceptable. All participants signed informed consent before taking part in the centrifuge runs. Equipment and Materials The NASTAR Center STS-400 high-performance centrifuge is a sustained-G simulator that incorporates a traditional long-arm (arm length = 7.6 m) centrifuge motion base with a

Download PDF