Author Block: Conrad L. Woolsey1, William W. Edwards1, Ron C. Woolsey2, Marion W. ... FACSM3, Drew Pringle, FACSM4, Fred Cromartie1, William Steffen1.
Session Viewing Date/Time: Thursday May 30, 2013 7:30 AM - 12:30 PM Session Number: C-26 Presentation Time: 8:00am - 9:30am
The Effect of Energy Drink Ingestion on Flight Skill Performance Relative to Pilot Experience 1
1
2
1
Author Block: Conrad L. Woolsey , William W. Edwards , Ron C. Woolsey , Marion W. Evans , Bert H. Jacobson, FACSM3, Drew Pringle, FACSM4, Fred Cromartie1, William Steffen1, Thomas E. Sather, CAsP5 1
United States Sports Academy, Daphne, AL. 2University of Central Missouri, Warrensburg, MO. 3Oklahoma State University, Stillwater, OK. Wright State University, Dayton, OH. 5Naval Aerospace Medical Institute, Pensacola, FL.
4
Sport psychology research on the arousal-performance relationship (Inverted-U, Zone of Optimal Functioning) indicate that more experienced athletes are better able to maintain performance of technical skills at higher levels of arousal. Energy drink (ED) studies have reported improved performance on variables such as reaction time. However, the effect of ED ingestion on the performance of coordinated and technical flight skills relative to pilot experience is unclear. PURPOSE: To examine the effects of ED ingestion on technical flight skill performance. METHODS: This double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled study used a counterbalanced design to test the effects of ED ingestion (16oz) on flight skill. Twenty-eight student pilots were grouped by hours (h) of flight experience (MED, 50-149h, n=14; HI, 150+, n=14) based on the 40h minimum requirement for a private pilot license (FAA, 2012). Performance on straight and level flight (ability to hold constant airspeeds, altitudes, and headings) and time (seconds, s) to complete complex turns (CT) was measured using two distinct MOTUS 622i flight simulator sessions. Four straight and level flight (SLF) segments of 30s were measured on a point system. One point deductions were assigned on SLF for 5 knots± on airspeed, 100ft± on altitude, or 5 degrees± in heading. Total time (s) for CT was recorded across 3 segments. RESULTS: There were a higher number of total penalty points on SLF with the ED vs. the placebo (P) in the MED (ED 58.4±9.2 vs. P 34.0 ±6.6, p .05, respectively). Time to complete CT was higher for P in MED vs. HI (349.4±26.5s vs. 279.1±17.5s, p 0.05) in time to complete CT between ED and P or MED vs. HI. CONCLUSIONS: With highly technical flight skills requiring precision, coordination and sequencing of movements, EDs may reduce overall performance. Athletes and pilots should cautiously interpret claims for the performance enhancing effects of energy drinks when shifting focus and technical motor skills are involved.
