Improved anti-G protection boosts sortie generation ability.

Background: There is a need for evaluation of new G protection equipment.
Hypothesis: There is no difference between the two anti-G ensembles on affecting subjects' ability to tolerate multiple simulated aerial combat sorties.
Methods: There were 15 subjects wearing the standard CSU-13 B/P anti-G ensemble (STD) or COMBAT EDGE/ATAGS (CE/ATAGS) ensemble who were exposed to 3 centrifuge-based simulated air combat sorties during a 2-h period. Each sortie consisted of four different G-profiles: 1) a gradual onset profile; 2) simulated air combat maneuver consisting of +4.5 to +7 Gz plateaus (4.5-7 SACM); 3) simulated air combat maneuver derived from actual fighter maneuvers with peaks up to +9 Gz (TACM); 4) simulated air combat maneuver consisting of +5.0 to +9.0 Gz plateaus (5-9 SACM). Each sortie was separated by a 20-min rest period. We measured heart rate, peripheral light loss (PLL), subjective effort level, subjective fatigue level, and reported recovery time.
Results: There were no incidents of unintended G-induced loss of consciousness (G-LOC) with CE/ATAGS. There were four incidents of unintended G-LOC with STD. At the end of the third sortie, with CE/ATAGS, mean heart rate was lower during the 4.5-7 SACM (p < 0.001) and the TACM (p < 0.001); PLL was less during all three rapid onset profiles (p < 0.01); subjects reported less effort during the 4.5-7 SACM (p < 0.001), the TACM and the 5-9 SACM (p < 0.01); reported fatigue was significantly lower (p < 0.001); and reported recovery times were nearly halved (p < 0.01).
Conclusion: CE/ATAGS provided significantly greater G-protection than the standard anti-G ensemble. There was no G-LOC with CE/ATAGS. This greater protection should be of significant operational value in enhancing sortie generation capability by increasing fighter aircrew G-tolerance and decreasing aircrew fatigue.