Efficacy evaluation of different anti-G physical training programs for pilots
10.16289/j.cnki.1002-0837.2024.01.007
- VernacularTitle:不同飞行员抗荷体能训练方案效果评价
- Author:
Jinghui YANG
1
;
Xichen GENG
;
Minghao YANG
;
Zhao JIN
;
Baohui LI
;
Jie YU
;
Yuhang LIU
;
Haixia WANG
;
Xiaoyang WEI
;
Ke JIANG
;
Lihui ZHANG
;
Yifeng LI
;
Qianyun ZHU
;
Xiaoxue ZHANG
;
Yan XU
Author Information
1. 空军特色医学中心加速度生理研究室,北京 100142
- Keywords:
anti-G physical training;
anti-G endurance;
pilot;
cardiopulmonary exercise testing;
respiratory quotient
- From:Space Medicine & Medical Engineering
2024;35(1):38-41
- CountryChina
- Language:Chinese
-
Abstract:
Objective To establish a scientific training program that takes into account both anaerobic and aerobic training for pilots,and to explore the appropriate ratio of aerobic and anaerobic training.Methods According to the physical examination standards for pilots,a total of 16 healthy subjects aged 18-24 were selected from two batches.The two batches of subjects were trained with different aerobic and anaerobic ratios.Training period was 3 months.The changes in cardiopulmonary function of the subjects before and after training were evaluated using the cardiopulmonary function exercise testing system(CPET),and the changes in anaerobic capacity were evaluated using changes in strength as an indicator.Results After training,the weight load of the subjects in the two training programs,including barbell squats,leg flexion and hard pull,and barbell under 10RM and 3RM,was significantly increased(P<0.001),and there was no statistically significant difference in anaerobic strength growth between the two groups.The results of CPET showed that the maximum load,maximum heart rate,and respiratory quotient in the two groups were significantly increased after than before the training(P<0.01).The maximum load(Experiment group 1:29.12±19.69,Experiment group 2:72.00±46.24)and respiratory quotient(Experiment grouop 1:0.11±0.09,Experiment group 2:0.28±0.16)of the subjects in experiment group 2 before and after training were greater than those in experiment group 1.The difference was statistically significant(P<0.05).Conclusion The anaerobic and aerobic capacities of the subjects in the experiment group 2 are effectively improved,indicating that ratio of aerobic and anaerobic of the training scheme is better.
