CAMI Altitude Chamber

[SkyHog]

In the chamber I endured the full duration of the max altitude without O2 and could sign my name, carry on a conversation and wasn't much worse at math than I normally am. I could tell I wasn't "normal" but didn't feel much different than after a couple beers.

The real heads up for me was during my checkout flights for the glider operation at Boulder. Early afternoon I went up with one check pilot and we soared around for about and hour and a half in strong conditions over the foot hills between 10 and 14K. We did NOT exceed the time limit above 12500 for no O2 but spent most of the flight close to 12. No problem.

About an hour and a half later I took another flight with the chief pilot. During tow he had me demonstrate maneuvering around the towplane wake, something I'd done countless times with total ease. We were no more than 7500msl and carrying on a conversation as I blithely maneuvered from one position to the next. I'm chatting away when he interrupts and says, "you're not impressing me here" as he takes control just as the rope breaks!

I'm seriously embarrassed and totally shocked that I've lost control of a maneuver I thought I could do in my sleep!

It took me weeks to realized I was suffering from cumulative hypoxia fatigue (and years to recover from the embarrassment).

After I'd worked and flown there for many weeks I saw a pattern in my fatigue level after work. If I'd flown a bunch below O2 levels I was wiped out in the evening. I repeatedly fell asleep on a hard wooden bench at dinner! I attributed it to the sun, dehydration, and workload. However, days when we'd be above 14k and using oxygen most of the time I felt fine in the evening.

It took a while to sink in. I was fit, and knew I was quite hardy in the chamber so why should oxygen have anything to do with it? Eventually I started using 02 whenever working above 10K and I felt like a new man.

So when ever I hear people talking about how they don't really need oxygen as much as the rest of us mortals, or that time they snuck up to 18k for a few minutes in a strong thermal, or fill in the blank... I think "BULL#$*t" Usually the person talking doesn't look as fit and healthy as I do.

Yea, you can do it, and you can get away with it, but does that make you smart and cool?

Not suggesting that anyone here has this attitude but many of us have run into this kind of talk.

I have that attitude and I'm offended that you think I'm full of ****.

Try living at an elevation that is already above "hypoxic" at night and see if you're hypoxic all night long while on the ground.

I'm also fat, and until recently, was a smoker. Apparently the FAA ain't right 100% of the time.

That said, I'd love to do one of these , so if a fly-in gets organized, I'm in. These tests aren't accurate, primarily because they go to 25,000ft. Who the hell flies at 25,000ft without a mask? If they'd do it at around 15,000ft, it'd be more eye-opening.

Excellent write up though Tristan. Sounds like an excellent experience for ya.

 

[Tristar]

Some of you showed interest in the other programs CAMI has. Here is a pdf. of what they offer.

http://www.faa.gov/other_visit/avia...ns/designee_types/ame/media/FAACAMITNGPR4.doc

 

[flyingcheesehead]

I have that attitude and I'm offended that you think I'm full of ****.

Uhh, Nick - read the whole post again. Look at how Matt felt after the chamber ride at 25K - Just fine. Probably similar to how you've felt when you went up high without O2.

Tell you what - At Gaston's I'll take you flying and we'll go to 17,500 for a bit and take a reading with the pulse oximeter. If you're better than 88, I'll buy you a beer.

 

[wby0nder]

If a person lives at high elevation there is no question they will adapt and subsequently do better at higher elevations. People have climbed everest with no 02. They live for years above 14k. Pilots that live above 5k can often function better without O2 then their lowly counterparts who live closer to the bottom of the atmosphere. Better does not mean optimal however. I guess it depends on the individual definition of optimal.

 

[gprellwitz]

If a person lives at high elevation there is no question they will adapt and subsequently do better at higher elevations. People have climbed everest with no 02. They live for years above 14k. Pilots that live above 5k can often function better without O2 then their lowly counterparts who live closer to the bottom of the atmosphere. Better does not mean optimal however. I guess it depends on the individual definition of optimal.

Agreed. I believe it has something to do with the body producing more hemoglobin to compensate. but I could be off there. In any event, the adaptation isn't something that happens in minutes; it takes days or weeks.

 

[john smith]

Agreed. I believe it has something to do with the body producing more hemoglobin to compensate. but I could be off there. In any event, the adaptation isn't something that happens in minutes; it takes days or weeks.

Partially true.
The body produces more red blood cells.
More red blood cells means more hemoglobin.

 

[SkyHog]

If a person lives at high elevation there is no question they will adapt and subsequently do better at higher elevations. People have climbed everest with no 02. They live for years above 14k. Pilots that live above 5k can often function better without O2 then their lowly counterparts who live closer to the bottom of the atmosphere. Better does not mean optimal however. I guess it depends on the individual definition of optimal.

Agreed. I believe it has something to do with the body producing more hemoglobin to compensate. but I could be off there. In any event, the adaptation isn't something that happens in minutes; it takes days or weeks.

Partially true.
The body produces more red blood cells.
More red blood cells means more hemoglobin.

See, if this was expressed in the original post, I wouldn't have been offended.

I'm not big on being called a bull****ter.

 

[jesse]

See, if this was expressed in the original post, I wouldn't have been offended.

I'm not big on being called a bull****ter.

Or a ----------. That one gets you upset as well.

 

[SkyHog]

Or a ----------. That one gets you upset as well.

LOL. Very true.

 

[gismo]

Isn't 25,000 the maximum altitude for cannulas for the same reason? I'm pretty sure that I'd need a mask before 25,000.

Kent, AFaIK cannulas are only allowed up to 18,000 and ordinary masks don't work above 25,000. For higher altitudes you need a pressure feed mask. Also I believe that it's not uncommon for some folks to have trouble getting enough O2 with a cannula below 18,000. This is an excerpt from MountainHigh's website:

Q:
I fly cross country a lot just below class 'A' airspace with my EDS and recently got a portable pulse oxymeter. I’ve noticed that my saturation rate frequently falls below 90% at altitudes around 16K to 18K ft. However, if I breathe a few times deeper the saturation goes well over 90%. I had my system tested and it checked out okay. What is going on? A:
We have found that about 60~80% of pilots and passengers reduce their respiration effort while at high altitudes thus causing a compromise in the effectiveness of an oxygen system while at moderate to high altitudes.
The respiratory volume and rate is determined by the detection of carbon dioxide (CO2) in the blood, not the lack of oxygen (O2). CO2 is principally generated by spent energy yielding carbohydrates during muscular activity. However, while one is at high altitudes both the CO2 and O2 are at lower absolute levels where the lack of CO2 pressure causes your respiration system to decrease in volume and rate because there is very little CO2 to purge. This causes you to breathe shallowly at a time you need to breath normally or greater.
In an effort to increase the relative amount of oxygen with respect to the air at altitudes, portable oxygen systems were developed. All oxygen systems will have to cope with the physiological fact. Pressure-demand oxygen masks compensate by trying to keep the tracheal and lung pressures at some pressure higher than ambient. Quite uncomfortable to many. The EDS was developed with this fact in mind to help compensate this by increasing tracheal pressures during the pulse delivery where the oxygen is delivered at the most useful point of the inhalation phase.
The problem, however, still remains that the body is fooled into thinking that no CO2 needs to be purged and therefore, not enough oxygen is inhaled because you are breathing more shallowly than you normally would at a lower altitude. Until pulse oxymeters became used by many while in-flight, no one knew much about this fact.

BTW, that just made me curious. It seems like my O2sat on the ground is usually 96 or 97. Would that change during exercise? If so, would it go up or down? Would a more physically fit person normally have a higher O2sat than a less physically fit person?

I'm pretty sure that physical condition has some effect as does long term exposure to high altitude but I also believe these things affect different people differently. It's also my understanding that well conditioned athletes endurance is more about efficient use of blood O2 than it is about saturation levels. O2sat only tells you what percentage of available O2 carriers is actually carrying oxygen into your organs and muscles. If you have half as many carriers you could have adequate saturation but low utilization. Same thing could happen if your cells are only able to use half the oxygen in the blood.

 

[gismo]

Uhh, Nick - read the whole post again. Look at how Matt felt after the chamber ride at 25K - Just fine. Probably similar to how you've felt when you went up high without O2.

Tell you what - At Gaston's I'll take you flying and we'll go to 17,500 for a bit and take a reading with the pulse oximeter. If you're better than 88, I'll buy you a beer.

If he's below 85% he won't need a beer.

 

[gismo]

If a person lives at high elevation there is no question they will adapt and subsequently do better at higher elevations. People have climbed everest with no 02. They live for years above 14k. Pilots that live above 5k can often function better without O2 then their lowly counterparts who live closer to the bottom of the atmosphere. Better does not mean optimal however. I guess it depends on the individual definition of optimal.

It is true that your body can adapt somewhat to less O2pp but there's more to it than that. The difference between the O2 available at 5000 and sea level is very small compared to the difference between 12,000 and 17,000 so living in Denver doesn't give one much of a leg up on us flatlanders WRT hypoxia susceptibility. Living above 10,000 would probably make a more noticeable difference but even then I'd expect the high-altitude native to perform at 17,000 about as well as a "normal" person would at 14-15k. And then there's the possiblity that anyone who lives above 10,000 MSL is simply already stupid, why else would they live up there?

 

[wby0nder]

See, if this was expressed in the original post, I wouldn't have been offended.

I'm not big on being called a bull****ter.

No one called you a bull.....ter.

You apparently assumed that title.

to each their own I guess

 

[flyingcheesehead]

Wow - Here's why it's important to recognize hypoxia:

http://www.natca.org/mediacenter/Archie09-GreatLakes.msp

The 2nd story is the one I'm referring to - Click the audio links above the stories (there's two sets: One is for an emergency at Midway, the second is the hypoxia event).

The pilot seriously sounds retarded at the beginning. Talking really sloooooooowwwwww. You can hear at the end of the recording (when he gets down to 11,000 feet) he sounds completely different. They are damn lucky that a controller recognized what was going on and told them to descend!