Chris Barker wrote:
>It's a recurring problem Mark.
I can believe it :) Something like 50-750f all people who fly the
KC-135 will vomit. Most get used to it, but some don't.
>It's one thing to have a strong enough constitution to resist honking
>your ring (slang for vomiting, in case this has a different meaning
Haven't heard that one before :)
>over in the US) on such a roller coaster ride, but it is quite
>another if you are not using your eyes normally. Your senses can be
>confused by violent motion, but it can be reconciled with your visual
>cues. If however, your visual cues disagree too much with for
>instance your motion detectors, the semi-circular canals in your
>ears, you get messages going to your vomit centre (I am told that
>there is such a thing).
We get the option to take industrial-strength anti-motion-sickness
medication (scopalamine, which also is an effective truth serum, I'm
told) which disconnects the inner-ear motion sensors. This is quite
effective during the flight, but leads to interesting effects while it is
wearing off. My experiment requires a rather high degree of operator
control, so I've always taken the drugs. Sometimes I have to do tasks in
the high-g part of the parabola. Moving around in low-g feels almost
natural to me, but walking around when I suddenly weigh over 400 lbs is
very tough, and any head motion sends me spinning! The really lucky ones
have experiments that require almost no intervention and are free to do
summersaults in low-g and lie quietly during high-g!
>Therefore, photogs have to be good to avoid
>honking when flying in small and agile aircraft, especially when
>there is a rate of roll on or under G. Not many owners will let
>someone into their aircraft if it will return from a flight covered
>in "technicolour yawn".
One of the first things you are told by the flight crew is that if you
miss the bag, they can legally kill you :) I won't mention the warnings
about using the plane's lavatory...
>I used to instruct navigators in a small jet called a Jet Provost (a
>Mk 5). You could tell when their map-reading was about to take
>second place when they went quiet, the oxygen mask came off and the
>bag came out of the pocket. Sometimes they had forgotten to bring a
>bag and the gloves were put to use! Some of these boys continued to
>be airsick throughout their flying careers - that's dedication I
>would say!
Sure is! Some astronauts spend their entire time aboard the shuttle sick
too. I'm told that even some fighter pilots become sick on the KC-135,
and I've seen some astronauts do so. So far, I've been lucky enough not
to, but I'm sure a fighter pilot could have me doing some serious ring
honking in a matter of seconds :) Of course, I'd be quite willing to let
one try!
then Gregg Iverson wrote:
>I wonder if a particular lens would cause more problems than
>another? Would a wide angle, for instance provide more confusing visual
>cues than a moderate telephoto?
I would guess that if you're not used to it first, either would be bad.
Your brain is trying to reprogram itself to ignore your ears and only get
motion cues from your eyes. Anything other than the normal perspective
could cause problems. One of the most nauseating things I've experienced
on the flights is landing in somewhat rough weather. We sit way in back
of the plane, but have a view all the way through the front windows.
This is like looking through a long telephoto lens, and seeing the clouds
careen around crazily is very weird! Especially since now your inner ear
is being ignored, and your vision is telling you that you are moving
around many times faster and farther than you actually are. We'll see
how I do with the 21/3.5! I'd really love to try an 8 or 16 fisheye if
someone would donate one -- all in the Name Of Science of course! :)
Mark.
< This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List >
< For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >
< Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html >
|