综合抗荷措施的防护效果与评价

评价了13名歼击机飞行员实施两种综合抗荷措施（措施Ⅰ.抗荷服＋加压呼吸＋改良M－1动作和措施Ⅱ．抗荷服＋加压呼吸＋L－1动作）的防护效果。措施Ⅰ与措施Ⅱ按计算出的耐力提高值无显著性差异（P＞0．05），但措施Ⅰ的呼气动作与加压呼吸相容性较好，比措施Ⅱ舒适，喜欢选用措施Ⅰ者为喜欢选用措施Ⅱ者的2．3倍。据此认为可推荐综合抗荷措施Ⅰ。     

新型侧管式抗荷装备与抗荷动作的综合防护性能

目的对新型侧管式抗荷装备与抗荷动作的综合防护性能进行研究, 探讨采用二者联合的方案对８ Ｇ１０ ｓ（增长率为２ Ｇ／ｓ）高Ｇ 进行防护的可行性。方法在离心机上, ＋ Ｇｚ 增长率为２ Ｇ／ｓ, 先测定９ 名飞行学员的基础＋ Ｇｚ 耐力, 其中５ 名飞行学员采用新型侧管式抗荷服（ＮＫＨ） ＋ 新型抗调器（ＮＫＴ）＋ Ｌ１ 动作（Ｌ１）、另４ 名飞行学员采用新型侧管式代偿服（ＮＤＣ） ＋ ＮＫＴ＋ Ｌ１,测定出其最大＋ Ｇｚ 耐力。结果５ 名飞行学员采用ＮＫＨ＋ ＮＫＴ＋ Ｌ１ 时的最大＋ Ｇｚ 耐力为８．８０±０ ．２７ Ｇ, 比基础＋ Ｇｚ 耐力高出４．６０±０．４２ Ｇ（Ｐ＜０．０１） ;４ 名飞行学员采用ＮＤＣ＋ ＮＫＴ＋ Ｌ１ 时的最大＋ Ｇｚ 耐力为８．７５±０ ．５０ Ｇ, 比基础＋ Ｇｚ 耐力高出４．５０±０．４６ Ｇ（ Ｐ＜０ ．０１） 。结论飞行员采用新型侧管式抗荷装备与抗荷动作能够对８ Ｇ１０ ｓ（ 增长率为２ Ｇ／ｓ） 的高Ｇ 进行有效防护。     

不同压力制度对大覆盖面抗荷服 G_Z防护作用的影响

目的探讨大覆盖面抗荷服所应采用的抗荷调压器压力制度。方法４名男性受试者参加了离心机试验，增长率为３Ｇ／ｓ、峰＋ＧＺ作用１０ｓ～１５ｓ。先测定受试者基础Ｇ耐力，然后测定穿ＧＺ－２大覆盖面抗荷服、分别以１０．０ｋＰａ／Ｇ、１１．３ｋＰａ／Ｇ及１２．７ｋＰａ／Ｇ三种压力制度充气时的Ｇ耐力，并对腹、大腿、小腿及足部的受压程度进行主观评价。结果上述三种压力制度充气所提高的Ｇ耐力分别为３．１３Ｇ、３．５９Ｇ和３．９０Ｇ（Ｐ＜０．０１）。＋ＧＺ暴露时的平均心率随压力制度的增加而显著下降（Ｐ＜０．０５）。各部受压程度的主观感觉以腹部为最大，但均可耐受。扎弹性腰带后腹部受压程度评分显著下降（Ｐ＜０．０１）。结论在扎弹性腰带条件下，对ＧＺ－２抗荷服采用１１．３ｋＰａ／Ｇ的压力制度是可行的。     

一种新型囊式抗荷服的抗荷及实用性能

目的探讨一种新型囊式抗荷服（ＫＨ－ｘ）的抗荷性能及实用性能。方法①在离心机上测定了１８名受试者的基础＋ＧＺ耐力，以及分别采用ＫＨ－ｘ的Ｃ、Ｓ、Ｓ１、Ｓ２型时的＋ＧＺ耐力，确定其抗荷性能，并与ＫＨ－３、ＣＳＵ－ｘＢ／ｐ抗荷服进行对比；②４８名飞行员对ＫＨ－ｘ（Ｃ）、ＫＨ－ｘ（Ｓ）进行试穿，且有３名飞行员进行试飞。结果衣面为全覆盖式的ＫＨ－ｘ（Ｃ）、ＫＨ－（Ｓ）虽具有较高的抗荷性能，但夏天穿太热；衣面为露空式的ＫＨ－ｘ（Ｓ１）抗荷性能较低，对其改进后研制出的ＫＨ－ｘ（Ｓ２），配ＮＫＴ、ＫＴ－７Ａ、ＫＴ－２抗调器时的抗荷性能，分别达到２．５０Ｇ、２．２５Ｇ、２．２５Ｇ，明显高于ＫＨ－３及ＣＳＵ－ｘＢ／ｐ（Ｐ＜０．０１）。结论ＫＨ－ｘ（Ｓ２）配ＮＫＴ、ＫＴ－７Ａ、ＫＴ－２抗调器时的抗荷性能均达到２．１Ｇ以上，可满足现役战斗机＋ＧＺ防护的需要，并可实现通用化、系列化的要求；采用露空式结构将有利于散热。     

不同压力制度对大面抗荷有＋GZ防护作用的影响

目的 探讨大覆盖面抗荷服所应采用的抗荷调压器压力制度。方法 ４名男性受试者参加了离心机试验，增长度为３Ｇ／ｓ、峰＋ＧＺ作用１０ｓ－１５ｓ。行测定受试者基础Ｇ耐力，然后测定穿ＧＺ－２大覆盖面抗荷服、分别以１０．０ｋＰ／Ｇ、１１．３ｋＰａ／Ｇ有主１２．７ｋＰａ／Ｇ三种压力制度充气时的Ｇ耐力，并对腹、大腿、小腿及足部的受压程度进行主观评价。结果 上述三种压力制度充气所提高的耐力分别为３．１３Ｇ、３．９５     

新的抗荷动作:HP与PHP动作抗荷效果的评价

目的：检验新的抗荷动作－－HP与PHP动作的抗荷效果。方法：HP动作由两部分构成,第1部分为全身肌肉根据＋Gz大小进行用力收缩;第2部分为2．5s 1个周期的呼吸部分,即在0．5s内以口快吸气,同时发出汉语拼音“H”,再通过半闭的双唇用力进行慢呼气2．0s,同时发出汉语拼音“P”。PHP是在抗荷正压呼吸条件下做的HP动作。测试对象为20名飞行员和10名志愿者。在离心机上测定10名飞行员采用KH－7抗荷服与HP动作的抗荷耐力,另外10名飞行员采用KH－7抗荷服与L－1动作时的抗荷耐力作对照。在离心机上测定10名志愿者采用KH－5抗荷服、抗荷正压呼吸装备和做PHP动作时的＋Gz耐力。结果：分别采用HP动作、L－1动作的两组飞行员的抗荷耐力均可达到8G10s,但采用HP动作时心率、呼吸率显著低于L－1动作（P＜0．05）。志愿者采用装备做PHP动作的抗荷耐力均达到了9G10s,且完成得比较轻松。结论：HP、PHP动作具有良好的抗荷效果,心脏负荷较小,而且飞行员易于理解、掌握,易于抗荷正压呼吸结合。     

新型侧管式抗荷装置与抗荷动作的综合防护性能

目的 对新型侧管式抗荷装备与抗荷动作的综合防护性能进行研究,探讨采用二者联合的方法对８Ｇ１０ｓ（增长率为２Ｇ／ｓ）高Ｇ进行防护的可行性。方法 在离心机上,＋Ｇｚ增长率为２Ｇ／ｓ,行测量９名飞行学员的基础＋Ｇｚ耐力,其中５名飞行学员采用新型侧管式抗荷服（ＮＫＨ）＋新型抗调器（ＮＫＴ）＋Ｌ－１动作（Ｌ－１）、另４名飞行学员采用新型侧管式代偿服务（ＤＮＣ）＋ＮＫＴ＋Ｌ－１,测定出其最大＋Ｇｚ耐力。结果５     

下体负压条件下抗荷动作训练的可行性

目的探讨利用下体负压模拟＋ＧＺ作用条件进行抗荷动作训练的可行性。方法７名健康男性受试者在坐位下体负压舱中做Ｌ－１抗荷动作,记录心率和血压的变化。结果－４０ｍｍＨｇ的下体负压作用可引起心率显著增加,收缩压及舒张压显著降低。在地面做Ｌ－１动作时心率、收缩压、舒张压及平均动脉血压分别为（８７．２９±９．２３）ｍｉｎ－１、（１８６．００±１１．１１）ｍｍＨｇ、（１４７．８６±９．９６）ｍｍＨｇ及（１６０．５７±８．５４）ｍｍＨｇ;而在－４０ｍｍＨｇ的下体负压作用下做Ｌ－１动作时则分别为（９２．７１±１０．９５）ｍｉｎ－１、（１６１．２９±１８．０２）ｍｍＨｇ、（１３０．７１±１３．３１）ｍｍＨｇ及（１４０．９１±１４．２１）ｍｍＨｇ。后者收缩压、舒张压及平均动脉血压较前者均显著降低（Ｐ＜０．０１）,心率则无显著性差异。结论坐位下体负压可模拟＋ＧＺ引起的心血管反应,利用下体负压模拟＋ＧＺ作用环境进行抗荷动作训练是可行的。     

新型综合抗荷措施的防护效果研究

目的 研究以新型囊式抗荷系统、无胸部代偿的抗荷加压呼吸及PHP动作组成的新型综合抗荷措施防护效果;探讨采用该措施进行防护时伴有的疲劳、疼痛等问题。方法 6名被试者在载人离心机上进行了5组＋Gz暴露试验,分别为：1）基础＋Gz耐力试验（relaxedtolerance）：测定被试者不使用抗荷装备,不做抗荷动作时的＋Gz耐力。2）FLH—X联合救生服配KT—X抗荷调压器试验（FLH—X＋KT—X）：测定被试者穿FLH—X联合救生服配KT—X抗荷调压器时的＋Gz耐力。3）FLH—X-I-KT—X＋PBG试验（PBG）：测定被试者穿FLH—X联合救生服配KT—X抗荷调压器,戴TK—X保护头盔、YM—X加压供氧面罩配YTQ—X氧气调节器进行抗荷加压呼吸时的＋Gz耐力。4）6．5G持续45S试验（6．5G45S）：被试者使用与第3组试验相同的抗荷装备,进行＋6．5Gz持续45S的暴露。5）9．0G持续15S试验（9．0G15S）：被试者使用与第3组试验相同的抗荷装备,做PHP动作,进行＋9．0Gz持续15S的暴露。在每次试验结束后用主观量表记录被试者疲劳及疼痛的程度。结果试验中没有发生G—LOC（G—inducedlose of consciousness）。FLH-X联合救生服配KT—X抗荷调压器的抗荷效果为2．5G;PBG的抗荷效果为1．67G;被试者均完成了6．5G持续45S及9．0G持续15S试验。试验中被试者的颈、腰、臂及手部在＋Gz暴露时均出现过疼痛。结论 新型综合抗荷措施可以满足现代高性能战斗机的高G防护需要;该措施还应在高G导致的疼痛及颈部损伤的防护方面加以改进。     

新研囊式抗荷装备的抗荷性能

目的：探讨新研制囊式抗荷装备的抗荷性能。方法：①在离心机（＋Gz增长率为1G／s）上测定了6名受试者的基础＋Gz耐力,分别采用45％、65％和90％扩大覆盖面积抗荷服（45％ECGS、65％ECGS、90％ECGS）与KT－9抗调器配套时的＋Gz耐力,确定其抗荷性能;②在离心机（＋Gz增长率为3G／s）上测定10名飞行员穿45％ECGS配KT－9抗调器、并穿代偿背心进行抗荷正压呼吸及做抗荷动作时的＋Gz耐力。结果：45％ECGS、65％ECGS和90％ECGS的抗荷性能分别为2．50、3．38和3．63G;飞行员穿45％ECGS进行抗荷正压呼吸及做抗荷动作时的＋Gz耐力可达到9G／10s。结论：新研囊式抗荷装备的抗荷性能比现役抗荷装备明显提高。     

Cerebral blood flow during acceleration in flight measured with SPECT

INTRODUCTION: Positive pressure breathing for G-protection (PBG) reduces the need for fighter pilots to use the fatiguing anti-G straining maneuver (AGSM) so that they can better endure high acceleration (+Gz). The aim of the study was to determine the differences in cerebral blood flow during flight with an extended-coverage anti-G suit (ECGS) with AGSM or with PBG. METHODS: Subjects were eight male members of the Finnish Air Force. Each was studied in the laboratory at +1 Gz and then during two identical flights in the back seat of the BAe Hawk Mk 51 jet trainer at +6 Gz, first with AGSM and second with PBG (24 mmHg). Regional cerebral blood flow (rCBF) was measured by injecting (99 m) Tc-ECD for deposition at +6 Gz, then scanning the subject in the laboratory an hour later using single photon emission computed tomography (SPECT). RESULT: The rCBF was 30% below baseline for both the AGSM and PBG. CONCLUSIONS: PBG maintained CBF at +6 Gz without the need for the fatiguing AGSM.     

一种新型囊式抗荷系统的+Gz防护作用

目的在离心机上,研究新型囊式抗荷系统的抗荷性能,评估其抗荷作用.方法 6名男性被试者采用本囊式抗荷系统不做抗荷动作(AGSM),暴露于10～15 s的梯形+Gz曲线后,再暴露于+5～9 Gz 模拟空战动作曲线(SACM) ,并伴随腿部适度收紧.结果得到了该先进囊式抗荷系统的+Gz防护作用和被试者的+Gz时间耐力.本抗荷系统的抗荷效果为5.33±0.26 G,均顺利通过了+5～9 Gz SACM,且用力程度和疲劳程度均较低.结论本抗荷系统+Gz防护效果良好,其配套方案可行.     

新型载人离心机在军事航空医学中的应用

目的 探讨在新型载人离心机上进行飞行员抗荷耐力选拔与训练、-Gx体验、动态飞行模拟(dynamic flight simulation,DFS)训练以及抗荷装备生理鉴定实验的方法,探索新型载人离心机的应用方法. 方法 ①24名飞行员在六三型载人离心机上进行基础+Gz耐力检查,然后按同样方法,在新型载人离心机上进行了对照检查.②100名飞行员进行了离心机训练,其中的42名飞行员为被动控制训练,58名飞行员为闭环控制训练.③8名飞行员体验-1.5 Gx及-2.0 Gx载荷.④18名飞行员进行DFS飞行体验,特技飞行动作包括左盘旋、右盘旋、半滚倒转、斤斗、半斤斗翻转和桶滚.⑤6名志愿者和9名飞行员在新型载人离心机上,分别进行服装、PBG、服装结合PBG、服装结合PBG及抗荷收紧动作(anti-G straining manoeuvre,AGSM)的抗荷效果试验. 结果 ①在新、老离心机上检查出的+Gz耐力结果平均值分别为(4.25±0.34)G及(4.41±0.14)G(t=3.03,P<0.01),其差异与连续检查所致的疲劳及飞行员对重复检查的主观重视程度有关,排除二者影响,在新离心机上可采用现有抗荷耐力选拔方法.②在进行被动控制训练的飞行员中,25人完成7 G持续10 s,9人完成8 G持续10 s,仅有2人完成9 G持续10 s.在进行闭环控制训练的58名飞行员中,48人完成7 G持续10 s,19人完成8 G持续10 s,23人完成9 G持续10 s.③飞行员在进行-Gx载荷体验时,反映在座舱俯仰、滚转过程中头晕、恶心的感觉比较明显.④飞行员认为DFS体验与实际飞行接近,对提高机动空战能力具有实用价值.⑤抗荷装备的抗荷性能达到了飞机性能的要求.结论 新型载人离心机在高性能战斗机飞行员抗荷耐力选拔训练、-Gx体验、DFS体验及抗荷装备生理鉴定试验等工作中获得广泛应用,形成了相关应用方法,取得了较好的效果,为进一步开展相关工作奠定了基础. Abstract： Objective To investigate the approaches and the application effects of acceleration tolerance screening and training for fighter pilots,-Gx experience,dynamic flight simulation (DFS) experience and physiological evaluation of anti-G equipment on new human centrifuge. Methods ①Twenty-four pilots underwent the relaxed+Gz tolerance examination on a single degree of freedom centrifuge (Model 63) and on new human centrifuge for comparison.②One hundred high performance fighter pilots carried out centrifuge training.Among them,42 pilots were in passive control mode while the other 58 pilots were trained by close-loop mode.③Eight pilots experienced -1.5 Gx and-2.0 Gx on the new centrifuge.④Eighteen pilots performed aerobatic maneuvers,such as left spiral,right spiraI,split S loop,immelmann,and barrel roll in DFS awareness.⑤Six volunteers and 9 pilots served as subjects.The tests of anti-G capability evaluation for suits,suits combined with pressure breathing for G (PBG),and suits combined with PBG and anti-G strainingmaneuver (AGSM) were conducted respectively. Results ①The mean relaxed+Gz tolerance of pilots obtained on the new and old centrifuge was (4.25±0.34) G and (4.41±0.14) G respectively (t=3.03,P<0.01).The difference would be relative to fatigue that caused by continuous running and pilots' endurance to the reduplicate riding.So the current+Gz tolerance screening method was applicable on the new centrifuge regardless of the influence of the above mentioned factors.②In the training under passive control mode,25 of 42 pilots completed the training of 7 G for 10 s,9 pilots for 8 G for 10 s and 2 for 9 G for 10 s.In the close-loop control training,48 pilots passed training of 7 G for 10 s,19 pilots for 8 G for 10 s,and 23 for 9 G for 10 s.③During-Gx experience,the feelings of dizzy and disgust were evident during the roll and pitch movements.④Pilots reported that DFS training was similar to actual flight and possessed great practical value in improving aerial combat ability.⑤The performance of anti-G equipments reached the functional requirement. Conclusions New human centrifuge can be applied in acceleration tolerance screening and training for high performance fighter aircraft pilots,-Gx experience,DFS training,and physiological evaluation for anti-G equipments.Relevant approaches have been established,and the application of new human centrifuge has acquired a satisfactory result.which lays the foundation for further work.     

Pressure breathing without a counter-pressure vest does not impair acceleration tolerance up to 9 G

INTRODUCTION: This study was to determine whether safe and adequate G-protection by pressure breathing during G (PBG) could be maintained if the COMBAT EDGE counter-pressure vest were eliminated to ensure aircrew do not unnecessarily endure a possible in-flight discomfort or distraction. METHODS: Centrifuge exposures up to +9 Gz were completed by 11 subjects, including 5 F-15 aircrew, using PBG at 60 mmHg pressure with and without the counter-pressure vest. Additional G-exposures using pressures of 0, 30, and 45 mmHg were performed without the vest. RESULTS: Elimination of the COMBAT EDGE counter-pressure vest did not significantly reduce G-tolerance. During gradual onset G exposure, the mean G level reached with PBG was 8.4 G without the vest and 8.2 G with the vest. In comparison, 6.7 G was reached without PBG. Mean times at G with rapid onset G exposure were 59 and 60 s, respectively, compared with 49 s without PBG. PBG, with or without the vest, was preferred by all test subjects. PBG at 60 mmHg produced the highest G protection and was preferred by the test subjects over lesser pressures. Subjects reported no adverse effects from the use of PBG without chest counter-pressure. CONCLUSION: The use of PBG and the anti-G straining manuever (AGSM) together enhances G tolerance and comfort more than AGSM alone. Elimination of the counter-pressure vest during use of PBG does not hinder an individual's ability to reach +9 Gz or complete a short duration simulated aerial combat maneuver G exposure. Further research is needed to determine if use of PBG without chest counter-pressure increases fatigue during multiple sorties or produces other aeromedical problems in operational environments.     

Maximum intra-thoracic pressure with anti-G straining maneuvers and positive pressure breathing during +Gz.

Positive pressure breathing during +Gz (PBG) and anti-G straining maneuvers (AGSM) each improve +Gz tolerance by increasing blood pressure through increases in intra-thoracic pressure, but the maximal intra-thoracic pressure from their combined effect is not known. Six subjects performed the following: 1) maximal AGSM at +1 Gz; 2) assisted PBG (constant 60 mm Hg) at +Gz; 3) submaximal AGSM at +Gz (enough to maintain peripheral vision); 4) maximal AGSM at +Gz; and 5) combined PBG and maximal AGSM at +Gz. They wore TLSS mask/helmet ensemble, CSU-15/P G-suit, and TLSS-style jerkin. Intra-thoracic pressure was measured with a catheter-tip pressure transducer in the esophagus (Pes). The change in gastric pressure was also measured (delta Pga). For both Pes and delta Pga, there were no significant differences among experimental conditions (1), (4) and (5), as above. Group mean Pes and delta Pga in these three conditions were 139 and 197 mm Hg, respectively. The similar results between maximal AGSM, and maximal AGSM and PBG are explained by limited support from the thoracic counter-pressure garment, and the characteristics of the respiratory system.     

不同压力制度抗荷正压呼吸的+Gz防护作用

目的探讨抗荷正压呼吸(PBG)系统中最佳的PBG压力制度. 方法 5名被试者穿GZ-2抗荷服及中囊代偿背心,在快增长率(3.0 G/s)离心机+Gz暴露时分别进行了1.6、2.4及 3.2 kPa/G 3种压力制度PBG实验.分别测定了3种压力制度PBG的抗荷性能,并对主观感觉进行评分.结果 1.6、2.4及 3.2 kPa/G 3种压力制度PBG的抗荷性能分别为2.00±0.31、2.54±0.32及2.44±0.31G;主观感觉评分表明,2.4 kPa/G压力制度PBG优于其它两者. 结论 PBG系统的压力制度以采用2.4 kPa/G为最佳.这样,既可保证PBG的抗荷性能,又可减轻PBG的副作用.     

机载分子筛制氧氧气系统及其配套抗荷装备的抗荷性能

目的 探讨机载分子筛制氧氧气系统及其配套抗荷装备的抗荷性能。方法 在载人离心机上对机载分子筛制氧氧气系统及礤配套抗荷装备进行物理试验，并有10名被试者参加人体生理试验，测定其抗荷性能。结果 各物理指标达到要求。抗荷服、抗荷正压呼吸、抗荷系统装备的抗荷性能分别为2．08、1．92和3．92G。6名进行抗6．5G／10s试验的被试者和3名进行抗9G／10s试验的被试者均顺利通过。结论 机载分子筛制氧氧气系统及其配套抗荷装备的抗荷性能可满足飞机性能要求。     

A new hydrostatic anti-G suit vs. a pneumatic anti-G system: preliminary comparison

HYPOTHESIS: A newly developed hydrostatic anti-G suit is now commercially available. The suit is said to offer a high level of protection against +Gz acceleration. However, past experience shows that it is difficult to produce a hydrostatic suit with effective high-G protection. Careful testing is, therefore, needed to verify its efficacy. METHODS: The G-protective properties of the hydrostatic anti-G suit (Libelle; L) were compared with those of a pneumatic anti-G ensemble (AGE-39) used in the Swedish JAS 39 Cripen aircraft. Three pilots were studied during vertical (+Gz) acceleration in a centrifuge using the following: 1) the L-suit with varied straining maneuvers; 2) the AGE-39 in combination with full anti-G straining maneuvers (AGSM) throughout each high-G exposure (full maneuver; FM); and 3) the AGE-39 in combination with AGSM during the initial part of each high-G exposure (reduced maneuver; RM). G-intensity tolerance was established during exposures to rapid onset rate (ROR) profiles with G-plateau levels ranging from +6.0 to +9.0 Gz. G-endurance was studied during simulated aerial combat maneuvers (SACM) consisting of 10 cycles of 5.5 to 7.5 G. RESULTS: All three pilots tolerated 9.0 G with the pneumatic system both in the RM and FM conditions; their tolerances averaged 6.3 G (range 6.0 to 7.0 G) for the L suit. Thus, during the ROR exposures only the 6.0 G profile was completed by all subjects in all three conditions. At this G-load both muscle straining (as indicated by electromyographic activity in thigh and abdomen) and heart rate were higher in the L than in the RM condition. Mean arterial pressure at eye level was higher in the FM than in the L and RM conditions. Only one subject was able to complete the SACM profile in the L condition. In the RM condition all subjects completed the SACM profile and in the FM condition two subjects completed the SACM. CONCLUSIONS: Whether the AGE-39 was used in combination with maximal AGSM throughout the duration of each high-G exposure or with AGSM only during the initial part of the high-G exposure, G-intensity tolerance was 9.0 G. While wearing the L-suit, G-tolerance was 6.3 G. Thus, under the conditions tested, the G-protection afforded by the L-suit is not adequate for use in a 9-G aircraft.     

抗荷正压呼吸对下体正压模拟推拉效应的防护作用

目的利用下体正压在单轴向离心机上模拟推拉动作,观察抗荷正压呼吸对推拉效应的防护效果。方法受试者5名,均参加过载人离心机试验并掌握了正确的抗荷正压呼吸方法。第1天测定受试者的基础 Gz耐力、穿KH-x抗荷服时的 Gz耐力和实施抗荷正压呼吸时的 Gz耐力;第2天依次测定受试者的基础耐力、下体正压作用后穿KH-x抗荷服 Gz耐力和抗荷正压呼吸时的 Gz耐力。结果与第1天的试验结果相比,下体正压作用后受试者穿着KH-x抗荷服的 Gz耐力显著降低(P<0.05);但是进行抗荷正压呼吸时的 Gz耐力没有变化。结论抗荷正压呼吸可以减轻推拉效应对 Gz耐力的影响。关于抗荷正压呼吸的压力制度及其训练方法还有待进一步优化。