Comparative performance of a modified Space Shuttle Reentry Anti-G Suit (REAGS) with and without pressure socks

In a prior study, the Armstrong Laboratory (AL) demonstrated that +G(sub z) protection during simulated shuttle reentry could be improved with an extended coverage anti-G suit with pressure socks but no abdominal bladder (REAGS). In a subsequent study conducted at the NASA Johnson Space Center it was shown that REAGS had a down side which included restricted mobility (during simulated shuttle egress) and a larger boot size needed for the pressure socks. The present study was conducted using a modified REAGS to increase mobility during egress. The size of the crotch opening was increased, and the fabric covering the buttocks was replaced with more elastic material. Six healthy male members of the AL centrifuge panel served as subjects for the study. As in the earlier study, subjects received 20 to 35 mg of IV Lasix approximately 6 hours before being exposed to a simulated space shuttle reentry +G(sub z) profile on the AL centrifuge, which induced a mean weight loss of 2.8 percent, range 2.1 percent to 3.7 percent. The REAGS was inflated to 1.0 psig 10 minutes prior to G onset. The G-profile was identical to that used in the previous REAGS study. Physiologic parameters monitored were also the same, i.e., eye-level systolic blood pressure (ELBP) using the Finapres digital cuff technique and heart rate and rhythm. Subjective comments were obtained from questionnaires administered after the increased G exposure. Systolic ELBP was maintained at 60 mm Hg or above by pressurizing the anti-G suit in 0.5 psig increments up to a maximum pressure of 2.5 psig. There were no significant differences in mean G-suit pressure required to maintain systolic ELBP at 60 mm Hg or above between the REAGS worn with and without pressure socks. Maximum mean G-levels achieved during the GOR were also the same under both experimental conditions, i.e., 4.7 G with socks and 4.6 G without socks. These G-levels were essentially the same as recorded earlier with the unmodified REAGS. There were no significant differences in comfort rating during the G exposure assigned by subjects when they wore the modified REAGS with or without the pressure socks.