Human Performance & Systems Integration Issues

Human Performance & Systems Integration Issues
LCDR Tom “Vegas” Jones 13 January 2015

Overview Identify the top Aeromedical issues associated with the Human Performance and Systems Integration. What is the number one Aeromedical issue concerning the Human Performance and Systems Integration today? How might we take care of the top Aeromedical issue sconcerning the Human Performance and Systems Integration today?

CNAF Aeromedical Priorities
Aeromedical Top 10 Priorities: Aeromedical Human Performance and Human Systems Integration Spatial Disorientation, Midair, Controlled Flight into Terrain Fatigue Operations 3. Hypoxia and Decompression Sickness (DCS) 4. Vibration, Neck, Back Pain and Injury 5. G-Induced Loss of Consciousness (G-LOC) prevention 6. Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAS) Manpower, Personnel, Training, and Education (MPT&E) 7. Motion Sickness 8. Vision Enhancement and Protection a. Refractive Eye Surgery b. Directed Energy Weapons (DEW) Hearing Protection and Performance MAGLEV / Magnetic Environment Exposure CNAF Aeromedical Priorities Top 5 Priorities Spatial Disorientation & Controlled Flight into Terrain (CFIT) Avoidance Fatigue Mitigation Hypoxia & Decompression Sickness (DCS) Awareness Whole Body Vibration Injuries, Neck & Back Pain Mitigation G-Induced Loss of Consciousness (G-LOC) Prevention TPP Top 5 – POM-15 Human Systems Integration (Partially Funded) Safety Technology Insertion (Not Funded) Sensory Enhancement / Maint (Not Funded) Fatigue (Not funded) Unmanned Aerial System Selection (Partially Funded) POM-14: To recap from last year’s cycle… Day/Night SA: PMA202 already had a funding line for an Advanced Helmet, but the Fleet’s requested pursuit of a more near-term solution for Rotary Wing operators. RADM Moran approved a restructure to this program the POM-14 review. Survival Radio – This issue was submitted during POM-14 as a ‘strongly desired’ Fleet issue, but not funded. This issue is back again this year with even stronger Fleet support, and is gaining imperative due to poor performance and functional obsolescence. It probably isn’t quite ready for prime time due to product maturity, but could be a solid business case player next year. Mission Endurance – Nothing was submitted because no specific shortfalls were identified, and there had been recent progress with high endurance seat cushions. O2 – Hypoxia issues were brought to light in POM-14, and OPNAV directed PMA265 (Hornets) to cover the fixes right away out of existing funding. EKB – A POM-14 issue was submitted and that program was funded and kicked off early. POM-15: The issues are basically the same, but in a different order of priority. We’re showing that 3 are already adequately funded. We explained to the Fleet reps that made up our Executive Steering Committee that those issues were already being addressed, but they still elected to keep this order to protect those lines and keep pressure on OPNAV and NAVAIR to deliver these solutions.

Aeromedical Causal Factors Reported in Mishaps & HAZREPs
Actual “Hypoxia – Like” Incidents CAPT L. Mandel; NAVSAFECEN data from Mr. John Scott; FY’s

Mishap Causal Factors

Fleet Data (Hypoxia/DCS)

TYCOM Support/Sister Service Efforts

NARG Process Aircrew Systems USN USMC Acquisition Alignment Dec - Feb
Mar - Jun Jul - Aug Aug - Oct Dec - Jan Aircrew Systems Enabler NARG USN Platform NARG Top 5 Platform Issues CNAF N8 CNAF TYCOM Priority Panel CNAF TYCOM Priority List Platform Top 5 ACS Issues ACSs ESC Top 5 Fleet ACS Issues OPNAV PRR Briefs N98 Rack & Stack FLIP Conference* Recommended ACS Priority Lists Fleet Feed Aviation SPP (to N8F) USMC Platform OAG Top 5 Platform Issues HQMC APW APW Council of Colonels DCA Rack & Stack COMNAVAIRFORCINST C Naval Aviation Requirements Group (NARG) Instruction ENARGs 1. Aircrew Systems 2. Air Launch Weapons 3. Cooperative Surveillance 4. Common Avionics 5. Airborne Electronic Warfare 6. Mission Planning 7. Support Equipment 8. Training Systems ACS = Aircrew Systems NARG = Naval Aviation Reqts Group OAG = Operational Advisory Group ESC = Executive Steering Committee CNAF = Commander Naval Air Forces DCA = Deputy Commandant Aviation APW = HQ USMC Aviation Pgms Weps PRR = Program Requirement Reviews FLIP = Flag Level Investment Priorities NALG = Naval Aviation Liaison Group SPP = Sponsor’s Program Proposal Aircrew Systems USN ACS & Platform ROs PMA202 USMC Platform PMAs Acquisition Alignment Program Offices Feed

ACS E-NARG Priorities POM-17
P O M p r i o r i t y i s s u e s : F l e e t s p r i o r i t y A C S i s s u e s # 1 – H y p o x i a P r o t e c t i o n – c o n t i n u e d i n c r e a s i n g h y p o x i c e v e n t s i n F A a n d T # 2 – M i s s i o n E n d u r a n c e – o p p o r t u n i t i e s w e a r e n o t t a k i n g a d v a n t a g e o f s m a r t e r w a y t o m a n a g e A L S S c a p a b i l i t i e s i m p r o v e m e n t s + p r o b l e m s e a t s ( M H , T H ) # 3 – S u r v i v a l R a d i o s u s t a i n m e n t – b u s i n e s s c a s e a n a l y s i s t o a d d r e s s r e a d i n e s s s u s t a i n m e n t a n d s i g n i f i c a n t c o s t a v o i d a n c e Back-up EVA: Healthy funding in place. ~ $50M in RDT&E to develop a current technology enhancement to NVGs that addresses deficiencies with low light conditions, halo effects, blooming, poor acuity due to scintillation, etc. The system will also incorporate improved flight parameter overlays that either provide a HUD the EVA has the ability to display HUD parameters, but only if the platform spends extra money to develop the capability to pump their data into the EVA. We have the procurement funds in place to start fielding approx units per year (dependent upon unit cost) starting in FY19. The current plan is to cover rotary wing operators first, but the benefits can also be applied for most fixed wing aircrew. Hearing Protection. This program is also adequately funded at approx $6M per year. It is currently providing improved protection to flight deck personnel, who are suffering the most over-exposure. It provides a Double Hearing Protection (DHP) solution that has improved ear cups with better seals and noise level reduction, and is still developing a Triple Hearing Protection system that is like a higher tech head cover that does a better job of deflecting noise energy and even eliminates some bone noise conduction. You may have heard about Active Noise Reduction, like you see in the commercial Bose head-sets, but that was determined to be ineffective in our environments. For Aircrew, we first need to evaluate the worst case environments and extent of protection needed, then we’ll start incorporating the flight deck system benefits into our helmets. We would qualify kits that those who need them can use to upgrade their helmets, and if cost effective, include them in all new production issue helmets. Not Funded means we DID submit an issue sheet but they chose not to fund it. No Submission means we either did not have a solution to request funding for, or felt that the issue had no chance. ACS E-NARG Priorities POM-17 CNAF Top Priorities: 1) Hypoxia Protection 2) Mission Endurance 3) Survival Radio Sustainment COUNCIL OF COLONELS BRIEF POM-14: To recap from last year’s cycle… Day/Night SA: PMA202 already had a funding line for an Advanced Helmet, but the Fleet’s requested pursuit of a more near-term solution for Rotary Wing operators. RADM Moran approved a restructure to this program the POM-14 review. Survival Radio – This issue was submitted during POM-14 as a ‘strongly desired’ Fleet issue, but not funded. This issue is back again this year with even stronger Fleet support, and is gaining imperative due to poor performance and functional obsolescence. It probably isn’t quite ready for prime time due to product maturity, but could be a solid business case player next year. Mission Endurance – Nothing was submitted because no specific shortfalls were identified, and there had been recent progress with high endurance seat cushions. O2 – Hypoxia issues were brought to light in POM-14, and OPNAV directed PMA265 (Hornets) to cover the fixes right away out of existing funding. EKB – A POM-14 issue was submitted and that program was funded and kicked off early. POM-15: The issues are basically the same, but in a different order of priority. We’re showing that 3 are already adequately funded. We explained to the Fleet reps that made up our Executive Steering Committee that those issues were already being addressed, but they still elected to keep this order to protect those lines and keep pressure on OPNAV and NAVAIR to deliver these solutions.

#1. Hypoxia Protection Program Proposal / Description
Implementation of a holistic solution across three realms: Systems: T-45 concentrator improvements; leverage progress made with FA-18 concentrators. Training: Reduced Oxygen Breathing Device trainers. Physiological: pursuit of human performance monitoring solutions. Resource Sponsor/Cost/Seams Resource Sponsors: N98 Costs: (FY17 / FYDP) Systems: $1.1M / $11.6M (CNATRA #10 issue) Training: $.5M / (annual op & maint support) Physiological: (continued S&T sources pursuit) Seams: None Justification FA-18s are experiencing hypoxic episodes at all altitudes verified hypoxia/DCS events since 2000 (3 fatal). T-45s are experiencing episodes with increasing frequency (HAZREPS: FY11 = 5, FY12 = 19, FY13 = 31, FY14 = 32 as of 8Sep). Impact if not funded: Continued risk of losses of aircraft and aircrew. Continued high frequency of mission degrading hypoxic-related events. Supporting Documents/Analysis #2 ACS issue POM-16. #4 or #5 since POM-11. Platform priorities: #3 T-45. #1 F/A-18 SSWG issue. PMA265 Physiological Episodes Team working issue. Objective Prioritization Must Have / Should Have / Nice to Have Critical safety issue- potential loss of aircraft / life What: Currently there is no hypoxia “smoking gun”, as such a three pronged attack on hypoxia including system improvements, training and physiological is recommend Why:1 hornet hypoxia per every 24 days (and this does not include unconfirmed or unreported abnormalities). T-45 hypoxic-like episodes are also increasing. To better explain the scope of the hypoxia problem to aviators that normally do not wear Oxygen Masks if you go up in altitude (like in the chamber) less air molecules means less Oxygen in the tissues means hypoxia. In the Hornet and Goshawk cases nearly 50% of the incidents occurred at cockpit altitudes where oxygen is not required at all (<10k). Aviator confidence in equipment and ALSS is being compromised. Only 3 A/C lost to hypoxia since 2001, but sortie termination rate is very high as a result of hypoxia. Following a hypoxic like incident the COA is to search for: A- The aviator is experiencing Underlying physiological conditions B-Proper oxygen concentration and pressure. Hornet and T-45 are upgrading the CRU-99 solid state oxygen monitor to the CRU-123, which will incorporate a low pressure warning to alert crew of impending failure. C-Contaminated Breathing Gas.1.Improvements to the F-18 OBOBS concentrator underway. A little bit CO can jack you as a aviator and by adding a Carbon Monoxide catalyst hopefully most of the hypoxia producing Carbon Monoxide is converted to harmless Carbon Dioxide. CNATRA is working with PMA-202 to leverage the benefits of the catalyst to upgrade to the GGU-25 a the price of 1.1 in 2017 and 11.6 over the FYDP. Training: Dynamic Hypoxia training in the form of the Reduced Oxygen Breathing Device (ROBD) is seen as a proactive way for the vigilant aviator to overcome the system’s shortcomings. ROBD is a training tool that can be used with a simulator and allows you to experience hypoxia multiple times in an unpressurized environment without the risks of actually going to altitude in the chamber. VFA-25 “The aircraft gave no indications of a malfunction…and the HP stated that all systems appeared to be functioning normally. With no additional warning systems or monitors available, we must remain alert and continue to emphasize the importance of Av Phy training including the use of ROBD.” As such Strike Fighter Wing Lant and Pac signed a joint instruction dictating recurrent ROBD training that is required every 2 years. To meet the demand signal AMSOs are borrowing assets from survival training centers when the assets are available. For a minimal investment (estimated .5M) these products will be wing owned for TMS specific training. Physiological It is good to fix the system and provide training but the real test is if the aviator are getting enough oxygen is at the body. In order provide aviator’s indications of a pending physiological incident, a human performance monitoring solution should be explored. This is supported by signed letter from both CNATRA and Air Boss. This is still exploratory but we are looking to further the efforts of the F-22 and ONR projects like Hypoxia Alert and Mitigation systems (HAMS) NAVAIR / ONR have two active programs for physiologic monitoring. 1. A Phase II.5 SBIR with Orbital Research, Inc., that is developing a system that integrates sensors into an MBU-20/P series mask and hose. Parts of this system (respiratory gas sensors) have been flown in F-22. It is primarily a respiratory system monitor. They are still developing the underlying algorithm to generate the warning. The latest prototype is being tested in limited human trials in a centrifuge and altitude chamber. Some of its components are currently undergoing environmental testing at NAMRU-Dayton by Jeff Phillips. The program is currently in a no-cost extension of its one-year contract through 31 May 2015. 2. The ONR Force Health Protection Future Naval Capabilities Hypoxia Alert and Mitigation System (HAMS) is developing a system for high mountain operations and CASEVAC patients. This includes a suite of physiologic sensors (the emphasis is peripheral measurements of oxygen consumption and heart rate rather than mask-based) and warning algorithms. The project performers include Athena GTX, Drexel University, USARIEM, and NAVAIR Human Systems. The preliminary work has been focused on algorithm development. HAMS could be adapted for aviation, but would require a non-FNC funding line. The ONR Program Manager is LCDR Chris Steele. The program is currently in the second year of a five year effort. The USAF has its helmet mounted pulse oximeter behind the ear cup, but this is simply a COTS device with no warning algorithm. They have issued an RFI this spring to revisit developing a physiologic monitoring system. I'm not sure of the current status but will try to find out.

OPNAV N98 Prioritized pom-17 issue summary
FYDP TOTAL OVERHEAD FYDP PB 15/BES 16 EQUITY FLEET PRI FEA/ WSCP 1 Mission Endurance/Performance enhancements Enables ACS team to evaluate and certify technology and capability improvements demonstrated by other Services and Industry $5M $4.5M $5.3M 2 CSEL Survival Radio Sustainment Upgrade Modern technology insertion to address performance deficiencies, improve operational effectiveness, and afford significant cost avoidances ($40M in FYDP, $80M by 2030). $7.5M $4.1M $0.0M 3 Night Vision Cueing & Display Organic Depot Repair capability Title 10 Core Capability compliance $8.3M $.4M NA COUNCIL OF COLONELS BRIEF So we have 3 issues and 2 Technical Corrections to cover for POM-17. They support the Fleet’s top three priority Aircrew Systems issues as briefed to CNAL. We’ve also shown what we presented on the Council of Colonels side. Our issues never rise to Tier 1 level in their rack & stack, but the APP and APW senior Colonels provided us a Letter of Endorsement, supporting our submissions (of course, for YOU to fund for THEM – as Commodity systems supporting all aircrew). HQMC APW-1/APP-1 Endorsement Letter (13Oct14): “HQMC Aviation department highly endorses investments that ensure our aircrew’s safety.”

Funding Results TYCOM Priority List POM 16 POM 17
T-45 force retro-fit O2 Monitor CRU-123 (FY16 $3.2M, FYDP $13.9M) POM 17 T-45 forced retro-fit Concentrator GGU-25 (FY-17$1.2M, FYDP $13.3M) POM-16 Message (1) T-45C OBOGS System Improvement (Hypoxia Mitigation) - N98 CNATRA student Naval Aviators have had sustained exposure involving physiological symptoms to un-annunciated T-45 OBOGS failures during 24 of the 51 incidents since SEP The current CRU-99 O2 monitor warns of low O2 concentration but not low output pressure. Funding is required to replace the CRU-99 with the CRU-123 O2 monitor which is a common solution, and includes low pressure warning, internal self-test, and a quicker warning to aircrew of OBOGS issues. Without this funding, the current attrition replacement plan will not provide the CRU-123 in quantities to effectively reduce OBOGS related hypoxia, jeopardizing the safety of T-45 pilots. (FY16 $3.2M, FYDP $13.9M) POM-17 Message -----OFFICIAL INFORMATION DISPATCH FOLLOWS----- RTTUZYUW RUCOSSA UUUU--RHMCSUU. ZNR UUUUU R Z DEC 14 ZYB FM COMNAVAIRFOR SAN DIEGO CA TO CNO WASHINGTON DC COMNAVAIRSYSCOM PATUXENT RIVER MD INFO COMUSFLTFORCOM NORFOLK VA CNO WASHINGTON DC COMPACFLT PEARL HARBOR HI COMNAVSEASYSCOM WASHINGTON DC COMNAVSUPSYSCOM MECHANICSBURG PA COMNAVAIRFOR SAN DIEGO CA COMTHIRDFLT COMNAVAIRLANT NORFOLK VA NAVSTKAIRWARCEN FALLON NV CNATRA CORPUS CHRISTI TX PEOASWASM PATUXENT RIVER MD PEOTACAIR PATUXENT RIVER MD PEOSTRKWPNSUAVN PATUXENT RIVER MD PEO CARRIERS WASHINGTON DC PEO IWS WASHINGTON DC COMSPAWARSYSCOM SAN DIEGO CA PEO C4I SAN DIEGO CA ALNAVAIRFOR BT UNCLAS PASS TO OFFICE CODES: COMNAVAIRSYSCOM PATUXENT RIVER M//00/1.0/2.0/ 3.0/4.0/5.0/6.0/7.0/8.0/10.0// CNO WASHINGTON DC//N2/N6/N6F/N98// COMUSFLTFORCOM NORFOLK VA//N00/N01/N4/N8/N80/N40/N46// CNO WASHINGTON DC//N4/N43/N8/N80/N81/N82/N9/N9I// COMPACFLT PEARL HARBOR HI//N01/N6/N8/N83/N46// COMNAVSEASYSCOM WASHINGTON DC//N00// COMNAVSUPSYSCOM MECHANICSBURG PA//N00// COMNAVAIRFOR SAN DIEGO CA//N00/N1/N40/N41/N42/N43/N5/N8/ N8W// COMNAVAIRLANT NORFOLK VA//N00/N80// NAVSTKAIRWARCEN FALLON NV//N00/N5// CNATRA CORPUS CHRISTI TX//N00/N3// NAVICP PHILADELPHIA PA//N00/03/033/034// PEOASWASM PATUXENT RIVER MD//00// PEOTACAIR PATUXENT RIVER MD//00// PEOSTRKWPNSUAVN PATUXENT RIVER MD//00// PEO CARRIERS WASHINGTON DC//00// PEO IWS WASHINGTON DC//00// COMSPAWARSYSCOM SAN DIEGO CA//04/04F/04F2/05/07// PEO C4I SAN DIEGO CA//PMW140/150/160/170/PMW180/190/750/ 760/780/790// SECINFO/-/-// MSGID/GENADMIN,USMTF,2008/COMNAVAIRFOR SAN DIEGO CA// SUBJ/AVIATION TYCOM PRIORITY LIST (TPL) FOR POM-17// REF/A/MSGID:MSG/COMNAVAIRFOR/201200ZDEC13// NARR/REF A IS THE CNAF TYCOM PRIORITY LISTS (TPL) FOR POM-16// GENTEXT/REMARKS/1. This TYCOM priority list (TPL) identifies Commander, Naval Air Force's (CNAF) POM-17 priorities to OPNAV resource sponsors (OPNAV N98, N2N6, N96 and N46) and Navy aviation stakeholders. CNAF's priorities listed in paras 5 and 6 are based on the most important issues, acknowledging budgetary shortfalls, impacting the operation of the aviation fleet in training and equipping to meet GFM demand. 2. It is understood that POM-16 uncertainties present many challenges to Resource Sponsors in developing a budget to achieve readiness and sustain warfighting investments while maintaining force structure. POM-17 will be no less challenging and will likely have to endure further reductions to the Navy's budget. The proposed investments in this list are fiscally informed (based on BES-16) and strive to prioritize wholeness and readiness ahead of future capability and capacity. A community wholeness view was taken to identify the most critical community wholeness gaps and identify capability investments that deliver complete readiness kill chains across platform communities in support of CNAF's Naval Aviation Vision All investments listed follow the three tenets in CNO's Navigation Plan: Warfighting First, Operate Forward, and Be Ready. 3. Fiscal pressures are forcing DoD and DoN to make difficult choices regarding future investments and resulting offsets. In choosing offsets, Navy aviation must be careful not to sacrifice force structure without a corresponding reduction in demand and having considered all other options first. Resource Sponsors should make every effort not to go below force structure minimums, without demand reductions, or risk navy aviation's ability to complete its forward presence and power projections strategic missions. 4. POM-17 issues are listed un-prioritized by community but prioritized by issue in paras 5 and 6. Resource Sponsors will be indicated in each para. Funding values are based on best known data as of 01 DEC 14. 5. Communities assessed and their associated critical gaps A. Multi-Platform Issues (Readiness) (1) Flying Hour Program - N98/N2N6 (2) Spares (APN-6) - N98 (3) Depot Maint (A) Aviation (1A5A) - N98 (B) Ship (1B4B) and depot support (1B5B) - N98 (4) Air System Support (PRE/PRL) - N98 (5) Special Access Program (SAP)/Security Manpower - N98/N2N6 B. Cross platform (1) Civilian ILS - N98/N2N6 (2) JMPS Core Capabilities - N98 (3) MILCON P440 - Air Wing Simulator Facility (NAS Fallon) - N98/N2N6 C. Training Systems (1) Live, Virtual, Constructive (LVC) - N98 (2) NASMP Simulator Technology Refresh - N98 D. In-Service CVN (1) ALRE OMN - N98 (2) CV-TSC/CDLS - N98 (3) CVN self-defense: Fire Control Loop Improvement Program (FCLIP) - N96/N2N6 (4) CVN Refueling and Complex Overhaul (RCOH) Manpower - N98 E. CVN 78 Class (1) Advanced Arresting Gear (AAG) SDD Completion - N98 (2) AAG/EMALS Fleet Training Hardware and Courseware - N98 F. FA-18A-F & EA-18G (1) FA-18A-F (A) FA-18E/F SLEP - N98 (B) FA-18A-D Out of Reporting (OOR) - N98 (C ) GCU Reliability Improvement (G2/G3 TO G4) - N98 (D) Integrated Capability Package (ICP-2&3) Wholeness - N98/N2N6 (2) EA-18G (A) ALQ-99 Transmitter Consolidation - N2N6 (B) Next Generation Jammer (NGJ) Increments 1 and 2 - N2N6 (C ) ALQ-218 Complex Emitter Detect and ID - N98 G. E-2C/D & C-2A (1) Wing Center Section Modification - N98 & N2N6 (2) MIDS JTRS TTNT, Crypto Mod, BLOS SIPRNET - N2N6 (3) Counter Electronic Attack Phase I - N2N6 (4) ALQ-217 ESM CID - N2N6 H. MH-60R/S & MH-53E (1) MH-60R/S (A) Mission Computer Modernization & Retrofit- N98 (B) MH-60R/S Lethality (SUW) - N98 (C) MH-60S Service Life Assessment (SLAP) - N98 (2) MH-53E (A) Helicopter Mine Squadron (HM) Manpower - N98 I. P-3C/P-8A (1) MILCON P253 P-8A AAS Support Facility (NAS Whidbey Island) - N98 (2) MILCON P512 Aviation Support Center Security Facilities (Kadena AB) - N98 J. Training Command (1) T-45 SLAP-C/SLEP - N98 (2) TH-57B/C Simulator Obsolescence - N98 (3) T-45 VMTS Program Wholeness - N98 (4) T-45 Hypoxia Protection - N98 (5) MILCON P450 - Squadron Ops Facility (NAS Corpus Christi) - N98 K. Unmanned Aerial Systems (1) MILCON P240 Triton MCS Facility (NAS Whidbey Island) - N2N6 (2) MILCON Rephase P577 Triton FOB 3rd Fleet (NBVC Point Mugu) & P154 Triton FOB 4th Fleet (TBD / NS Mayport) - N2N6 (3) MQ-4C Air-to-Air Radar Subsystem (AARS) - N2N6 (4) MQ-8C Training Devices and Facilities - N2N6 L. Reserves/NSAWC (1) Adversary force life extension - N98 6. Areas Needing Attention (prioritized within each issue). The community wholeness view was taken to identify the most critical platform wholeness gaps and capability investments for each TMS across manpower, infrastructure, force structure, readiness/training, capability and maintenance/sustainment areas. Not every TMS has gaps or gaps in each area and only those where the risk to accepting the gap is not acceptable will be presented. (1) Flying Hour Program (FHP 1A1A/1A2A) - N98/N2N6 With the lingering impacts of the FY13 sequestration, transition to Optimized FRP, out of reporting impacts on FA-18 aircraft, and the reduced FY14 schedule there is a perception that 1A1A was significantly overfunded by its return of $778.6M in FY14. While it is true that FHP under-executed in FY14, it is imperative that the specifics are better understood before marks are applied in POM-17. In FY14, $147.5M of baseline under-execution was due to schedule changes (T-2.5 Budgeted and T-2.7 Executed), $216.5M to the overfunding of OCO (funded above the POM-14 OCO requirement), and approximately $354M to reduced OCO requirements due to fewer deployments and the draw down in OEF. In order to satisfy the future presence and sustainment at the prescribed readiness levels (FY17 GFMAP schedule FRP Ao of and T-2.49), sufficient funding must be maintained. To further complicate this issue, over the past few years the fleet has expended an average of 103% of the FO requirement to sustain the force while only being funded at 90%. Since FO consists of must pay bills, all shortfalls to FO will be filled in with 1A1A FHP dollars in the year of execution, which in turn will lead to even lower readiness levels. (Shortfall to baseline: FY17 $254.9M, FYDP $853.0M) (2) Spares (APN-6) - N98/N2N6 APN-6 is a readiness enabler account for the FHP and a major force readiness multiplier critical to fleet aircraft operational availability. The prolonged underfunding of the APN-6 account and reduced buy-out Obligation Authority (AO) is resulting in growth in spares backlogs and limits the ability to achieve and sustain deployed AVCAL range/depth goals for more than two CVNs. Insufficient spares have contributed to the inability to maintain RBA entitlement for FAD III non-deployed CVWs and FRSs who are lower priority for parts support, negatively impacting air crew training and proficiency. (Shortfalls FY17 $326M, FYDP $1080M) (3) Depot Maintenance (A) Aviation Depot Maintenance (ADM 1A5A) - N98 The FY14 shortfall, with previous sequester impact, carried over a $25.7M airframe and $49.2M engine production shortfall into FY15. That equates to 23 aircraft events, and 237 engine-and-module events. CNAF has projected an inability to meet aircraft and engine entitlements for FY15 deployers and beyond with increasing reductions in entitlements against units integrated and basic phases of the O-FRTP. FHP (1A1A) provided end of year $15M in FY14 to alleviate the further impacts of FA-18 OOR. Underfunding ADM amounts to a force structure reduction to the fleet. Current depot account funding is 80% increasing the projected shortfall. (FY16 shortfall $288M equates to 176 aircraft and 546 engine-and-module events; FY17 $289M 185 aircraft and 508 engine-and-module events, FYDP $1,418M) (B) Ship Depot Maintenance (1B4B) and depot support (1B5B) - N98 CVN force structure is a matter of national policy. Currently 11 CVN's, funded to meet their full 50-year service life, are required to meet presence demands. Depot maintenance (1B4B) must be funded and executed on time, with required maintenance and modernization complete, to ensure required readiness of installed systems to achieve combat capability. Current CVN depot support (1B5B) funding will not support achievement of those requirements and will leave insufficient force structure to meet demand. It provides inadequate engineering support and technical documentation resulting in increased equipment casualties, increased repair costs, further reducing the number of ready for tasking aircraft carriers to meet the GFM schedule. Inadequate 1B4B funding effectively transfers unplanned bills to the TYCOM, taking funds away from required maintenance and deferring it when equipment fails. CNAF remains committed to maintaining an 11 CVN force and requires CVN maintenance and depot support be properly funded to achieve a 50 year CVN service life. (1B5B shortfall to baseline: FY17 $23.4M, FYDP $131.2M) (4) Air Systems Support (PRE/PRL/NPRL/NPRE 1A4N) - N98 Air Systems Support funds the pertinent engineering needed to perform safety of operations and reliability improvements which can increase readiness and lower sustainment costs. PRE/PRL also assists in assessing the age of aircraft/systems and is crucial to resolving the backlog of Out of Reporting (OOR) airframes within the depot. These are primarily labor accounts and any requirements additions or fiscal reductions challenge the availability of unique technical skill sets which take time to develop. During this time lost, the fleet feels the impact through increased maintenance, lower Ao and higher FHP cost per hour. Historically, the account has been funded to 59% of the OPNAV N4 assessed requirement which is 48% of the executable fleet requirement. Dozens of components that could have had improved reliability have been set aside and added a drag to the FHP. (Shortfall to baseline: FY17 $391.1M, FYDP $1,924.0M) (5) Special Access Program (SAP)/Security Manpower - N98 Provides the Manpower to enforce security protocols driven by new aircraft capabilities and mission requirements, and management, oversight, and training of SAP, enabling aircrew to operate above collateral systems and weapons. Current USFF Command Manpower Analysis Team (CMAT) and NAVMAC Management Advisory study validation is underway supporting this growing capability requirement. Failure to fund would result in the inability to execute Joint COCOM OPLANS against multiple national security threats and to employ CVN Strike, AEA, C2 and MPR full-spectrum weapons and sensor system capabilities. (End Strength (ES/FTE)/Cost: FY17 (36/7)/$1.6M, FYDP (36/7)/$16.0M) B. Cross Platform Issues With the restructuring of the JPALS program and the eventual move away from PARs, Navy aviation aircraft need the capability to conduct precision approaches and continue the development of our platforms within the Precision Approach and Landing Capability (PALC) roadmap. In the near-term, continued investment is required to sustain shore-based precision approach capability, including: PAR, ACLS, ICLS, PALS, and Civil ILS (CILS) ashore. For the longer term, N98/N2N6 need to develop a comprehensive roadmap that covers the best course of action for each community/platform that can provide precision approach capability, both afloat and ashore, while maintaining compatibility with the civilian world. JMPS Core Capabilities supports re-architecting JMPS to include continued transition to 64-bit common architecture and components, addressing cyber security vulnerabilities identified by COTF; corrects mission planning deficiencies which includes enabling EA-18G AEA mission, AESA radar, and Next Generation Jammer existing capabilities; addresses hardware, processing, memory, and connectivity limitations currently impacting aircrews' ability to plan growingly complex missions. JMPS is a critical Blue Kill Chain enabler; if not funded, JMPS Increment 4 IOC in FY19 will not be met. (FY17 $18.3M, FYDP $67.3M) (3) MILCON P440 - Air Wing Simulator Facility (NAS Fallon) - N2N6/N98 Constructs facility with SCIF/SAPF spaces to support 44 simulators (32 desk-top aircraft simulators, 4 Aegis simulators, 4 F-35 mission rehearsal trainers, and 4 UAS simulators) which have already been acquired. Facility supports CSG NIFC-CA training and NSAWC's overall mission to better integrate air wing and surface warfare/ballistic mission defense training and operations. If not funded, simulation capability will be restricted and NSAWC will not be able to fully support USFF-driven training requirements. (FY17 $15.7M, FYDP $15.7M) Program funds a cross domain solution to enable distributed training at all levels of security across all requisite Type/Model/Series (T/M/S), specifically: installation of required equipment to enable training ranges to connect to the NCTE to enable full distributed LVC training; a modification to TCTS Inc II via an ECP to enable bi-directional message traffic across the TCTS system to allow implementation of full synthetic entity parameters; and integration of JSF instrumented aircraft into current range instrumentation capability via P5-Advanced Data Link TSPI ground station de-cryptor. Without funding, LVC distributed training will be stove-piped to a few TMS incurring greater use of more expensive live training and JSF will not be able to accurately train during integrated CVW exercise. (FY17 $15.29M, FYDP $61.39M) Addresses obsolescence and technical refresh (NASMP continuation) on T-45C, T-6A/B and P-8A simulators. Specifically: corrects T-45 critical obsolescence and information assurance (IA) issues on remaining two Meridian T-45C operational flight trainers (OFT); corrects critical obsolescence on seven T-6A OFTs and unit training devices (UTDs) simulators at NAS Pensacola and fifteen T-6B OFT and UTD simulators at NAS Whiting Field; and corrects P-8A simulator visual quality by replacing the obsolete image generators. Establishing this annual funding line will reduce cost and improve NASMP T&R execution. Without funding, Meridian T-45s will become unable to support PTR by FY17, T-6A simulators will become irreparable in FY17, and places all P-8A operator training devices at risk due to non-IA compliance. (FY17 $23.2M, FYDP $77.5M) D. In-Service Carriers (1) Aircraft Launch and Recovery Equipment (ALRE) O&M,N - N98 ALRE O&M,N is currently only funded to 33% of its requirement and initial stand up of EMALS/AAG support will consume almost all of this account. Continued lack of funding (33% reduction from FY08 to FY14) will impact safe flight operations beginning in FY16. Specifically, required annual safety certifications for afloat and ashore launch and recovery equipment (RAST, E-28) will be reduced (200 to 100), and critical engineering investigations of flight safety equipment will not be performed. Without required resources for EMALS/AAG to correct test deficiencies, repair components, increase reliability and sustain them after introduction to the fleet, the delivery of CVN 78 to the fleet will be delayed as will preparations for flight deck certification and scheduled deployment. (FY17 $32.9M, FYDP $162.6M) (2) CV-TSC/CDLS - N98/N2N6 Mission data collected by aircraft sensors must be transmitted to CVN/CV-TSC through a Common Data Link System (CDLS). This single data path is shared between multiple MH-60R, P-8A, P-3C, and in the future, TRITON and UCLASS. Recent link performance metrics indicate that CDLS operational availability remains below 0.60, which does not meet current demands and highlights the urgent need for improvements in CDLS communications infrastructure before throughput demand increases. Because NTCDL's FOC has moved right due to budget cuts, CDLS requires a tech refresh solution that includes obsolescence upgrades, interim multi-link capability and streamlined shipboard data dissemination. CDLS funding is required for In-Service Engineering Activity (ISEA) technical support, training and system-of-systems configuration management tasks, as well as technical refresh of obsolete non-supportable sub-components. (FY17 $3.3M, FYDP $12.4) - N2N6/N96 FCLIP is a coordinated effort to close operational gaps in ASCM defense in SSDS-equipped ships. SSDS, or Ship Self-Defense System, is a combat management system for aircraft carriers and amphibious ships designed to expedite the detect-to-engage sequence to defend against ASCM. SSDS links and automates standalone sensors and weapon systems to provide the required combat reaction. FCLIP improves in-service combat systems end-to-end fire control loop performance. Carrier self-defense systems have not kept pace with evolving threats. Delaying this capability increases the risk to in-service carrier and amphibious platforms in an operational environment. FY17 (N96 - $69.4M, N2N6 - $9.7M, Total: $79.1M) FYDP (N96 - $187.2M, N2N6 - $40.2M, Total: $227.4M) (4) CVN RCOH Manpower - N98 Previous RCOH schedules allowed for movement of billets from incoming to outgoing CVN with little impact. Current and future RCOH durations have been extended meaning there is now a schedule and manning overlap. Therefore the practice of moving billets is no longer viable and creates an untenable manpower challenge that negatively impacts the outgoing RCOH ship's ability to complete the ship's work force package and commence crew training in a timely manner to achieve crew certification prior to sea trials and commence O-FRTP on time. (End strength/Cost N98: FY17 298/$8.6M, FYDP 298/$82.5M) Completes SDD, including aircraft testing for CVN 78 aircraft recovery bulletins (ARB), training, logistics and maintenance product development. Without completion, CVN 78 will be unable to recover any FA-18C aircraft or full envelope of weights/loads for EA/FA-18E-G aircraft and in turn the program will not meet CVN 78 flight deck certification/system qualification requirements. (FY17 $38.3M, FYDP $77.6M) Provides interim schoolhouse training and formal training hardware/courseware to meet RFT in FY20. Initial hardware estimate is cost prohibitive. CNATT/PMA need to develop an affordable solution to support RFT. (FY17 $70.7M, FYDP $90.3M) (A) FA-18E/F Service Life Extension Program (SLEP) - N98 The first F/A-18E/Fs will approach end of service life starting in FY16. Initial Service Life Assessment Program (SLAP) efforts identified engineering requirements for extending the Super Hornet service life via a follow-on SLEP from 6,000 to 12,000 flight hours. RDT&E is needed to fund aircraft teardown/inspection to harvest SLAP data which in turn will be used in generating SLEP non-recurring engineering (NRE) for ECP development. Any delay will negatively impact life extension efforts of the platform and lead to even greater future inventory shortfalls. (FY-17 $27.5M, FYDP $215.2M) OOR aircraft are negatively affecting the available F-18A-C force required to meet operational demands. Depot level maintenance events have grown in duration, complexity, and beyond current capacity due to aging airframe issues and material procurement delays associated with HFH inspections, resulting in a serious RBA aircraft shortfall for the fleet. Sequestration induced furloughs and hiring freezes further increased production challenges and precluded COMFRC recovery efforts. A shortage of spares, FHP/FA and PRE/PRL to address aging platform issues exacerbate the inventory shortfall. With delays to the JSF program since 2003 and reductions in F-35C procurement in PB-15 and BES-16, USN's reliance on the FA-18A-D fleet has increased. OOR, coupled with JSF delays yield an unmanageable Strike Fighter inventory shortfall (SFSF). The Naval Synchronization Tool (NST) is modeling SFSF to be 89 aircraft in FY15, and a worse case of 133 in FY18. Although mitigation efforts are being pursued, the only major solutions are to ensure APN-6 spares, FHP/FA and critical PRE/PRL are fully funded for the VFA community and to procure additional strike fighter aircraft in sufficient quantities to match attrition (35 aircraft per year). This procurement may be best achieved by restoring F-35C procurement to PB-15 levels with a ramp to 20 in FY20 and purchasing an additional 48 FA-18E/F (24/year) in FY17 and FY18 to mitigate near-term readiness challenges. (FY-17 $2.5B, FYDP $7.7B) The current Generator Control Unit never achieved design specification for reliability and maintainability, resulting in significant impacts to fleet readiness. The GCU is the top readiness degrader, top component for cannibalization, and top AVDLR driver for the FA-18E/F & EA-18G. Funding is required to accelerate procurement and retrofit the generator control unit configuration four (G4) to the entire strike fighter fleet and to increase reliability of the GCU test equipment (AECTS) at the intermediate level. Time on wing for current GCU is approximately 109 hrs. G4 will double the reliability rate by redesigning and replacing seven targeted SRAs within the GCU. Without funding the GCU will continue to be the Achilles heel of the strike fighter community and negatively impact community readiness. (FY17 $37.9, FYDP $106.8M) (D) Integrated Capability Package (ICP-2&3) Wholeness - N98 Integrated capabilities are family of system-level approaches to achieve required warfighting capabilities. ICP-2 addresses the air-to-air kill chain required in a dense RF electronic attack environment and ICP-3 supports the ASuW mission via passive and active targeting. To complete these kill chains, funding is required for: the deployment of Block 1 IRST on 2 x CVWs by FY20 to provide passive weapons-quality targeting and to mitigate EA effects on RADAR, as well as support acceleration of Block 2 capability. ICP-3 provides NRE to transition ONR algorithm to provide all weather precision strike capability using Maritime Multiple Track and Engagement to provide detection and tracking of targets for Aided Target Recognition (AiTR) algorithms which provide target class and type and a quantity release function for JSOW on the F/A-18E/F permitting multiple JSOW launches on a reduced timeline with up to four releases on a single depression. Without these capabilities, USN will be hindered in its ability to perform its primary OCA, DCA, and ASuW missions in A2/AD environments. (IRST: FY17 $8.2, FYDP 457.7M; ASuW Active Kill Chain FY17 $35.8M, FYDP $168.0M; JSOW C-1: FY17 $19.0M, FYDP $39.2) The ALQ-99 Band 4 inventory is already insufficient to fully meet and maintain fleet readiness requirements and increase with the pending additional EA-18G inventory and no ability to procure new pods. A consolidation effort is required to address the current and projected critical parts obsolescence and replace aging legacy Band 4 transmitters with solid state amplifiers. If not funded, as legacy systems continue to fail and obsolescence increases, there will be a steady decline in mission capacity. (FY-17 $15.9M, FYDP $91.8M) (B) Next Generation Jammer (NGJ) Increment 1 and 2 - N2N6 The NGJ program is DoD's primary offensive airborne electronic attack (AEA) weapons system, replacing the aging EA-18G's AN/ALQ-99 Tactical Jamming System (TJS) pods. Inc 1 replaces the EA-18G'S AN/ALQ-99 mid-band capability while Inc 2 is an upgrade to the low-band pod system to provide electronic attack capability against current and emerging adversary low band radar and communication systems. FY17 funding keeps Inc 1 capability on IOC timeline and for Inc 2 key sub-system technology maturation and entry into full program execution. Without funding, IOC of Inc 1, the sole airborne electronic attack asset supporting strike warfare in the future, will be delayed until at least FY23 while Inc 2 will be unable to target critical IADS in the A2/AD environment. (Inc 1 FY17 $18.6M, FYDP $18.6M; Inc 2 FY17 $53.9M, FYDP $529.5M) In the high density, frequency diverse, agile threat systems expected in A2AD environments, the EA-18G ALQ-218 receiver will need hardware and software upgrades to significantly improve low band geo-location, signal detection, and ID capabilities necessary for complex emitters. This upgrade will enhance the reception and processing techniques within the ALQ-218 supporting both maritime and land-based operations. Without the upgrade, the ALQ-218 will not be able to perform its key enabler mission against emerging threats, precluding mission effectiveness of CVW strike fighters. (FY-17 $113.4M, FYDP $322.4M) Due to cracks found on E-2C and C-2As wing fold ribs, flight restrictions of 2G and 250 KIAS max speed were placed on the aircraft. Modification of 31 E-2C, 35 E-2D, and 34 C-2A aircraft are required to preclude further cracking and removal of flight restrictions. Failure to fund will result in CVW/CSG risk of reduced warfighting effectiveness due to inadequate E-2C/D and COD support. (FY-17 $12.6M, FYDP $143.7M) (2) MIDS JTRS TTNT, Crypto Mod, BLOS SIPRNET - N2N6 The E-2D is a critical contributor to the common operational/tactical picture and the cornerstone of NIFC-CA FTS & FTA. Link-16 and future networks (Link-16 CMN-4, TTNT, and SIPR Chat) are key enablers to the E-2D's future warfighting capability. Funding is required to: correct TTNT integration; address MIDS JTRS/Link-16 crypto mod and frequency remap to maintain E-2D Link-16 interoperability including CMN-4; retrofit obsolete Network File System (NFS); and align all efforts with DSSC 4 schedule. The E-2D TTNT integration will support NIFC-CA Inc 3 capabilities. SIPR Chat will provide a supportable BLOS IP Chat capability to the E-2D and improve command and control coordination. Without funding, the quarterback of the TACAIR fleet will only be able to perform a portion of the mission for which it's being counted on. (FY-17 $37.4M, FYDP $159.0M) Recently threats have targeted E-2D radar system performance, GPS accuracy, precision time source degradation, and tactical data link (TDL) connectivity. Continued attention must be directed toward improved electronic protection (EP) and enhancing survivability of critical systems, specifically the Advanced Radar Processor (ARP) to modernize the hardware within the Advanced Detection System (ADS) Processor and Towed Auxiliary Radar Antenna (TARA) Processor. Funding will mitigate obsolescence, simplify the design (70% reduction in circuit cards), double the radar processing power and save roughly $2M per aircraft in production. AEW detection and tracking as well as NIFC-CA engagements will be jeopardized in an A2AD environment without enhanced EP measures. (FY-17 $52.0M, FYDP $290.4M) Current E-2D ESM capability is limited regarding detection, ID, and geo-location of modern threat emitters, does not have processing fidelity to resolve modern emitter ambiguities, and is three generations behind other currently fielded DoD EW capabilities. E-2D Combat Identification (CID) upgrade integrates digital receiver and processing technology, enables E-2 multi-ship geo-location and TDOA with other sensors across L-16 and TTNT, and provides a precision internal clock source to enable netted detection of advanced threat radar systems. Connectivity to EW netted sensors will provide multiple node, real-time, enhanced CID capabilities. This digital upgrade will greatly enhance CID, battle space awareness, and overall effectiveness of blue forces. Not funding this upgrade will limit E-2D's ability to make timely CID declarations thereby making NIFC-CA less effective in A2AD environments. (FY-17 $32.4M, FYDP $232.5M) MH-60 Mission Computer (MC) will exceed peak capacity by FY16. Funded and planned upgrades for mission system improvements (includes Moving Map Integration, Data Fusion, CNS/ATM, TAWS II and Radar) require upgraded MC with higher processing capability and an Advanced Data Transfer System (ADTS) with a higher capacity and multi-level security data storage. If not funded, the MH-60 will not be able to utilize planned upgrades and will preclude future platform capability improvements. (FY17 $24.7M, FYDP $183.8M) Current kill-chain timing and weapon accuracy for MH-60 ASuW systems does not meet requirements in defending friendly High Value Units (HVU) operating in restricted waters against the FAC/FIAC threat. Funding is required to upgrade the existing Multi-spectral Targeting System (MTS/FLIR) to provide the capability to engage multiple maritime targets simultaneously with 2.75" rocket variants, Hellfire missile variants, and the 20MM Gun System, as well as implement Helmet-mounted Display and Tracking System (HDTS) phase 2 and incorporate Link-16 J12.6 SPI message. Without funding, the MH-60R/S cannot meet counter FAC/FIAC mission requirements, putting the HVU at risk. (FY17 $51.0M, FYDP $328.4M) (C ) MH-60S Service Life Assessment (SLAP) - N98 Given current utilization rates, the MH-60S is forecast to reach end of service life prior to the IOC of the MH-XX replacement. NAVAIR assessed MH-60S to have a conditional 10,000 hour life limit based upon a required 6,500 hour life assessment. SLAP is required to identify structure and subsystems that will not attain required service life and will determine if a service life extension program (SLEP) is required to address deficiencies. Without SLAP the HSC community will find itself with inventory gaps in the future similar to those in the strike fighter community. (FY17 $14.6M, FYDP $55.9M) (A) Helicopter Mine (HM) Squadron Wholeness - N98 The re-establishment of HM-12 FRS moves 100-level, primary mission area Mine Countermeasures (MCM) training from the fleet to the FRS overcoming a capability shortfall recognized since Manpower to re-establish HM-12 and bring HM-14 and HM-15 to 90% Billets Authorized, from their current levels of 86% and 81% respectively is required. This will support operations beyond FY25 until LCS Mine Mission Module is certified and deployed and it alleviates current manpower funding inconsistent with operational tasking that jeopardizes Ao, safety and training. Lack of funding results in an inability to meet COCOM counter-mine OPLAN requirements for the next 15 years due to decreased readiness, decreased Ao, and increased safety risk. (End Strength/Cost: FY17 193/$8.6M, FYDP 193/$81.7M) (1) MILCON P253 P-8 AAS Support Facility (NAS Whidbey Island) - N98 Expands existing P-3C LSRS storage warehouse to provide maintenance, operations, and storage spaces for AAS pod and associated equipment. If not funded, P-8 squadrons will not be able to fully execute AAS missions out of NAS Whidbey Island. (FY17/FYDP $10.1M) (2) MILCON P512 ASC Security Facilities (Kadena AB) - N98 Funding provides SCIF finish work in the Aviation Support Center (ASC) built by the Government of Japan and in support of Patrol and Reconnaissance Force Seventh Fleet detachment at Kadena (PRF7F Det Kadena). If not funded, PRF7F Det Kadena will be unable to execute missions requiring SCIF support. (FY17/FYDP $17.1M) Maintaining the T-45 in service beyond FY35 is required to meet CNATRA pilot throughput. Many subsystems are certified to less than 14.4k flight hours or 20 years of service and require SLAP/SLEP to meet the FY35 goal. Funding allows subsystem SLAP-C and SLEP to be done in conjunction with structural SLEP starting in FY18 resulting in cost and schedule benefits. Without this funding, aircraft subsystems will begin to reach end service life in 2019; impacting pilot throughput requirements beginning in (FY17 $9.9M, FYDP $58.3M) (2) TH-57B/C Simulator Obsolescence- N98 CNATRA's rotary training program faces significant challenges with the need to upgrade the rotary simulator training as the most urgent. Current devices face severe obsolescence issues and lack an adequate visual system and aero-model, rendering the simulator of little use to student naval aviators. Funding is needed to repurpose this 35+ year old training system via new OFTs, aero model, and collimated visual displays with night vision device capability. When completed, would allow CNATRA to move 7000 hours annually of flight time into the upgraded simulators. (3) T-45 Virtual Mission Training System (VMTS) Wholeness - N98 The VMTS program as a "system of systems" offers significant cost savings in flight hours, time-to-train and divestiture of the T-39 aircraft. In order to complete the family of systems and continue to realize the $25M annual cost savings the following must be funded: T-45 VMTS Part Task Trainer (PTT); alignment of VMTS aircraft & OFT software; and the corrections of major deficiencies in VMTS Instructor Ground Station (IGS). Failure to fund these three issues will require use of the more costly OFT or aircraft to meet the 31% total device training time at an additional $846K per year and incur a training degradation requiring an estimated 2 extra flights per student at a cost of $1.97M per year. (FY17 $21.8M, FYDP $21.8M) Since Jan 2009, there have been 75 T-45 OBOGS incidents, 14 involved solo students, 31 involved hypoxic symptoms and 14 had no oxygen warning light. Recent EIs detected carbon monoxide levels in 9 concentrators. In order to reduce the hypoxia rate, funding is required to provide a forced retro-fit of the current GGU-7 concentrator with a more capable and supportable GGU-25 concentrator for the T-45. Without funding, student naval aviators, the least experienced in the fleet, will continue to be at significant risk of hypoxia. (FY-17 $1.2M, FYDP $13.3M) (5) MILCON P450 - Squadron Ops Facility (NAS Corpus Christi) - N98/N46 First of two projects required to replace two nearly condemned hangars. This project constructs a new facility with operational and training spaces in support of TRAWING-4. If project not funded, CNATRA risks a disruption in student training and subsequent pilot shortages in the fleet due to high potential for condemnation of existing, inadequate hangars. (FY17/FYDP $35.7M) Funding constructs facility for two Mission Control Stations (MCS) for MQ-4B Triton. If not funded, VUP-11 will not be able to conduct its assigned missions and will not meet FY19 IOC timelines per MAP (FY17 $28.3M, FYDP $28.3M) P154 Triton FOB 4th Fleet (TBD) - N2N6 P154 constructs a new hangar, storage facility, and new apron to support C4F operations. In 2014, Triton program office accelerated C4F IOC to FY19 and deferred C3F IOC to FY21, thereby making the C4F MILCON a POM-17 priority. If not funded, Triton will be unable to establish C4F orbit and meet C4F ISR demands. (FY17 $34.8M, FYDP $34.8M) In order to comply with International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) "due regard" provisions and DoD "sense and avoid" restrictions, a system is needed to provide a self-contained sense and avoid functionality. The AARSS would allow full range of MQ-4C Triton operational employment and flexibility in global and national airspace without dependency on non-organic assets to provide safe separation from other aircraft. Failure to fund will incur expensive and restrictive operational work-arounds, severely restricting Triton's capability and utility. (FY-17 $50.0M FYDP $136.1M) The Nunn-McCurdy breach mandated restructuring of the MQ-8 POR, to include both MQ-8B and MQ-8C, and has impacted the POR training plan and the total number of devices that will be needed. Funding is already programmed for NAS North Island. Without funding there will be no MQ-8 operator or maintainer training available on the east coast. Therefore, MQ-8B/C training will be single sited in North Island, and unable to meet fleet training and readiness requirements. (FY-17 $6.9M, FYDP $13.9M) USN's adversary force has inadequate inventory to meet demands and therefore must make every effort to extend the service life of the current stable of aircraft. F-16s require a Falcon Up modification to extend their service life to 4250 hours and four NSAWC aircraft remain to be mod'd. Funding the structural improvements, combined with the added sustainability improvements of the mod, will permit all of NSAWC's F-16As to remain in service beyond FY23. F-5s need funding for service life extension initiatives to address wing fatigue life and emerging safety, fatigue, and obsolescence issues. Addressing the F-5 SLEP will extend the inventory until FY25. Without funding, the already pressurized inventory will further deplete, restricting CVWs ability to train against threat representative aircraft. (FY-17 $9.1M, FYDP $15.6M).//

Hypoxia/DCS Mitigation
Continuing Efforts Hypoxia/DCS Mitigation - In parallel with aircraft improvements Man-mounted Hypoxia Alert System Dynamic Hypoxia Training - Procure fleet hypoxia training devices - Support fleet refresher requirement Increased Aeromedical Manpower - Operational Physiologists at TW-1/TW-2 NAE PET involvement

Summary Identify the top Aeromedical issues associated with the Human Performance and Systems Integration. What is the number one Aeromedical issue concerning the Human Performance and Systems Integration today? How might we take care of the top Aeromedical issue sconcerning the Human Performance and Systems Integration today?

Commander Naval Air Force, Pacific Aeromedical Safety Officer
Question LCDR Tom “Vegas” Jones Commander Naval Air Force, Pacific Aeromedical Safety Officer

Back-up slides

The New CNAF Top Priorities List:
Aeromedical Human Performance and Human Systems Integration 1. Spatial Disorientation and CFIT Mitigation (Folga) 2. Fatigue Operations (Caldwell) 3. Hypoxia and Decompression Sickness (DCS) (Folga/Phillips) 4. Vibration, Neck, Back Pain and Injury (Patrey) 5. G-Induced Loss of Consciousness (G-LOC) prevention (Folga) Unmanned Aircraft Systems (UAS) and Manned Manpower, Personnel, Training, and Education (MPT&E) (Foster/ Arnold/Williams) 7. Motion Sickness (Folga) 8. Vision Enhancement and Protection (Reddix) a. Refractive Eye Surgery b. Directed Energy Weapons (DEW) 9. Hearing Protection and Performance (Hayes) EMALS / Magnetic Environment Exposure (If an issue (?) need a champion) CBRNE Operations (If an issue (?) need a champion) War fighter Performance (Aeromedical Human Performance and Human Systems Integration) 1. Midair, Controlled Flight into Terrain, Spatial Disorientation 2. Fatigue Operations 3. Hypoxia and Decompression Sickness (DCS) 4. Vibration, Neck, Back Pain and Injury 5. G-Induced Loss of Consciousness (G-LOC) prevention 6. Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAS) Manpower, Personnel, Training, and Education (MPT&E) 7. Motion Sickness 8. Vision Enhancement and Protection a. Refractive Eye Surgery b. Directed Energy Weapons (DEW) Hearing Protection and Performance MAGLEV / Magnetic Environment Exposure CBRNE

1. Spatial Disorientation/CFIT Mitigation
Develop R&D-based knowledge, technology and training solutions to mitigate Spatial Disorientation (SD) in flight SD Countermeasures Training System Field of View Evaluation for SD Sim Training Proposed: Full motion evaluation of applied SD countermeasures (spatial strategies, advanced displays, HMD) SD modeling, degraded visual environments (USAARL, NAMRU-D and USAFSAM) FY15 start Resource Sponsor: PMA-205, DHP Cost: FY-13/14 – $1.05M combined Seams: Rotary-wing/NVG specifics still not funded Motion-based studies needed to validate concepts/mitigation strategies SD mishaps degrade warfighting capability. Training courseware/methods are antiquated. State of the art supports simulation based training to teach SD concepts in classroom environment. CFIT, Brownout and Hard Landings significant Class B/C mishap causal factors IMPACT if not funded: Failure to fund will fail to address the longest standing aeromedical threat in aviation while aircraft and operating costs soar. 296 SD related ASAP reports from Jan 09 to Apr 14 Safety Center cited SD as #1 aeromedical causal factor in Class A mishaps between VAQ-129 Mar 13 SIR indicated $60M loss/3 crew due to SD SD trainer CNAF Letter of endorsement 12 Sep 12 -In terms of Naval Aviation (and all DoD) Class A mishaps, loss of lives, loss of aviation assets, SD is the top Human Factors/Aeromedical-related causal factor: From , SD was causal in 28.6% of Naval Aviation Class A Mishaps. The Naval Safety Center cites SD as the number one Aeromedical causal factor in Aviation Class A mishaps between Rotary-Wing gap: Current sim/courseware effort focused on fixed wing aircraft. Tri-Service Safety Center data indicate the SD rate for rotary-wing aircraft has historically mirrored that of fixed-wing aircraft. Since 1990, SD has been as great of a threat to Naval helicopters in combat zones as direct enemy action (DEA). During Desert Shield/Desert Storm, seven helicopters were lost to SD with zero losses due to DEA. In Operation Enduring Freedom and Operation Iraqi Freedom (OIF) nearly as many DOD helicopters have been lost to controlled flight into terrain and inadvertent entry into instrument meteorological conditions as to DEA. The single largest loss of American lives in OIF occurred in 2005 when a CH-53E with 31 Marines onboard crashed as a result of SD (Heintz, 2012). -Recent SD work has largely involved SD training development, incorporating findings from recent research – Navy training had been very much out of date -SD research will be re-invigorated at NAMRU-Dayton – unique research capabilities, with DRD as centerpiece, will be able to provide very robust, realistic flight research environment – acceleration forces, reconfigurable visual displays, reconfigurable cockpit in capsule, controllable through subject input, payload area to mount research equipment (physio monitoring, ROBD, etc) -Co-location and joint use with AF (incl AF high-g centrifuge and hypobaric chambers) provides robust research capability. -Need strong push and high level support to develop new programs. ``` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` ` Critical safety issue

2. Fatigue Mitigation Enhance recognition, prevention and mitigation of fatigue Applies to all platforms – manned and unmanned Operationalize existing knowledge to the fleet (e.g., train PXOs / PCOs / ASOs) Update 2000 Performance Maintenance Manual Resource Sponsor: ONR, USAF, JPC-5 (DHA) Cost: $927K on board at NAMRU-D; Five year budget for $2.645M Seams: ??? Fatigue is a major contributor to accidents, lost productivity, and poor quality of life As op tempo increases and manpower decreases, the potential for fatigue-related problems will only become more serious Reduction of fatigue will increase mission effectiveness and improve safety IMPACT if not funded: Failure to fund will prevent potential mitigation of the number 1 factor which contributes to aeromedical mishaps. NSC 70-90% Mishaps Due to Human Error NSC #1 A,B,C, HAZREP for Fatigue implicated in up to 40% of all mishaps Total of 335 “Fatigue” ASAP reports from Jan 09 to Aug 13 Fatigue is #1 aeromedical causal factor across all categories (A,B,C) of Naval Aviation flight mishaps Commander, NAVSAFCEN identified fatigue mitigation as one of his top five focus areas for 2013. Mitigation of fatigue is important not just in aviation, but in military operations generally However it is the number 1 listed contributing factor across all categories (A,B,C) of aviation mishaps Pharmacological and behavioral countermeasures have been identified for the average response to inadequate sleep. The focus of current research involves the identification of individual response to sleep deprivation and implementation of the best countermeasures to address individual needs. This information will allow identification of individuals less vulnerable to fatigue and selection of these individuals for particularly demanding missions. It will also help tailor current fatigue countermeasures to individual needs based on susceptibility to inadequate sleep. Further information into individual differences in fatigue vulnerability will lead to improvements in models of cognitive performance which will aid in developing proper work schedules. Completed NAMRU-D research: 1. Armodafinil for sustained vigilance (funded by Cephalon, manufacturer of armodafinil (Nuvigil®) SG award at NMR&D Research Symposium 2. Validate readiness-to-fly assessment tools for fleet transition. NAVSAFCEN and TRAWING-6 proponency; funded by BUMED - Individualized assessment and modeling 3. Identification of stable individual differences in fatigue susceptibility to develop individualized fatigue modeling tools; funded by ONR Current NAMRU-D research: 1. Assessment of the combined effects of modafinil (go-pill) with caffeine 2012 AFSG award. "The Effects of Modafinil and OTC Stimulants on Physical and Cognitive Performance". The 3-year funding total is $927K. 2. The 3-study effort is titled "Optimization of Fatigue Countermeasures for the Individual Warfighter: Nutritional, Behavioral & Pharmacologic Approaches" with a 5-year budget total of $2.645K. Funding is from JPC5 (DHA). NAMRU-Dayton has fatigue research laboratory space to include 4 cognitive testing stations, 2 bedrooms with capability to sleep 2 people per room or 1 person per room with full polysomnography assessment, lounge with kitchen to sustain 24-hour/day studies Critical safety issue

3. Hypoxia and DCS Mitigation
Enhance recognition, prevention and mitigation of hypoxia and DCS Non-aviation Hypoxia Alert. & Mitigation (HAMS) NAVAIR SBIR phase II.5 (PMA-202) man-mounted monitoring (PPAS) Helmet Mtd PulseOx (USAF only) NAMRU-Dayton sensors and O2 scheduling studies Resource Sponsor: ONR, NAVAIR, USAF Costs: $5.3M (Budgeted for ground/aero-evac with HAMS) and $300K USAF funded work FY14 Seams: need transition path for new technologies and better characterization of DCS incidents #1 Aeromed hazard; #2 POM-15 ACS ENARG Priority. Impact: reduced aircrew reasoning and decision-making (long term effects of CNS DCS) Mission abort and potential mishaps due to hypoxia a threat Monitoring technology mature and ready for validation In-flight OBOGS degrades an issue across platforms 62 hypoxia-related ASAP reports with crew symptoms in 12 different platforms Jan 09 – May 14. IMPACT if not funded: Failure to fund may lead to further loss of aircrew, aircraft, mission degradation and confidence is life support equipment readiness. 187 Hypoxia-like HAZREP & Mishaps in FA-18 series since 01’; 30 reports in T-45 since 07’; 5 JSF incidents As of 2010 researchers estimated only 20% of incidents reported to SAFECEN 22 Diagnosed or Suspected cases of aviation DCS since 2005 Developing a monitoring solution will require HSI considerations and empirical research validation. T-45 has 27 incidents since 2007, four lack safety reports. DCS: 22 Diagnosed or Suspected cases of aviation DCS since 2005 Numerous incidents where hypoxia was diagnosed though neurological DCS was not effectively ruled out Low Pressure Chamber training risk omnipresent Sub-threshold risk from rapid-D and hypobaric exposure a concern? USAF U-2 DCS peer-reviewed studies High incidence of rapid decompressions as reported in WESS Recent AFRL retro study showing evidence of aviation DCS cases below 18K’ Navy and Marine Corps DCS incidents: 05 Jan 05 VMAQ-1 (possible) RD from 8K' to 24K' in one second! Crew were on 100% O2. Pain only - resolved on deck 20 Mar 06 (FA-18) Rapid D to 27K’ and repeated cycling Delayed diagnosis and delayed treatment 02 Dec 07 VFA-137 (diagnosed - serious/neurological) At 43K' had ECS surges noted cabin alt cycle between 18 and 38K' several times. Used 100% O2/descended Pilot had delayed DCS one hour later - recompressed for 4.5 hours on Navy Treatment Table 6 13 Nov 08 VFA-86 (diagnosed - serious/neurological) Lost 18K' - rode 100% O2 until depleted Recompressed for six hours at 60 FSW 21 Jan 09 VFA-147 (possible) Pilot noted cabin altitude climbed to 20K' and had delayed symptoms of short-term memory loss, eye discomfort and reduced visual acuity 08 Jun 10 VFA-195 (diagnosed - serious/neurological) At 30K' had ECS and OBOGS surges. Became hypoxic, used 100% O2/descended Pilot had delayed DCS one hour later - recompressed for 5 hours where symptoms resolved 30 Aug 10 VFA-125 (diagnosed - serious/neurological) At 40K' had loss of cabin pressurization and saw cabin pressure as high as 30K'. Began experiencing what was described as "disorientation" had difficulty focusing and panic Pilot had a headache and disorientation on deck and diagnosed by a FS with serious neurological DCS. Recompression treatment provided. 29 Dec 10 VFA-2 (diagnosed - serious/neurological) At 26K' had ECS and OBOGS surges and cabin rapidly spiked to 26K'. Both crew began feeling hypoxic but elected not to use emergency 100% O2 as they descended. Symptoms continued, including visual changes, lightheadedness and difficulty concentrating. Crew was ordered to use 100% O2 because they were still feeling impaired prior to recovery on the boat. Both crew were later determined to have mild neurologic symptoms of Serious/Neurologic DCS and returned to flight status in 24 hrs!!! 10 Jan 12 VMFA-323 FA-18C (diagnosed DCS and AGE!) At 29K' experienced multiple cabin pressure fluctuations resulting in decompression sickness and hypoxia like symptoms. Experienced ear block on rapid descent, cognitive dysfunction and nausea. 13 Feb 12 F-18F VX-9 Pilot diagnosed with Type II DCS 18 Apr 12 EA-6B DCS after rapid D 30 Sep 12 FA-18E DCS after loss of cabin pressurization 06 Nov 12 VFA-147 FA-18E Pilot experienced cabin pressurization failure causing type II neuro decompression sickness (DCS) 13 Mar 13 VFA-146 FA-18C 30K’ treated for DCS 27 Mar 13 VMFA-115 FA-18A decompressed to 33K’ and needed recompression therapy 2x 14 May 13 FA-18C VFA-87 ECS surges to 24K’ presented with persisting symptoms and recompressed for 8 hrs 20 Jun 13 VMFAT-101 DCS squeezed at 32nd st dive chamber 29 Jul 13 VMFA-225 F/A-18D 21K’ DCS 22 Aug 13 VMFA-251 F/A-18C 24K’ DCS 13 Dec 13 VMFA-225 F/A-18D 19.5K’ DCS 06 May 14 F-35C VMC failure caused an IPP FAIL while the aircraft was at 35kft. During an IPP Fail the cabin pressurization will leak down and OBOGS supply lost, pilot experienced a physiological event noting a change in cabin pressure and feeling symptoms similar to those during ROBD/hypoxia training. Pilot was receiving BOS 8 seconds after failure (BOS manually selected per EPs) and cabin pressure was considered off schedule 31 seconds after failure. Peak cabin altitude was 21,770ft. Pilot was diagnosed with Type 2 DCS and treated in hyperbaric chamber; 2 weeks no-fly status. 28 July 14 VFA-131 F/A-18C: Hours after landing, pilot suffered from DCS due to cabin pressure fluctuations, Local Serial #09-14 dated , RAC: SERIOUS RISK 28 July 14 VFA-2 F/A-18F: Rapid cabin depressurization at night during CV ops resulting in Type 2 DCS, Local Serial #12-14 dated , RAC: CRITICAL RISK 31 July 14 VMFA-533 FA-18D both crew were diagnosed and treated. One had delayed symptoms, one immediate – the pilot. Loss of cabin press and ECS surges – under 18K’! 03 Sep 14 VMFA(AW)-225 Pilot and WSO experience symptoms of DCS with no cockpit indication or warning., Local Serial # dated , RAC: CRITICAL RISK. 12 Sep 14 VMFAT-101 F/A-18D 16K’ DCS Prevents loss of current critical warfighting capability Critical safety issue

4. Whole Body Vibration Injuries, Neck & Back Pain
Identify or develop technologies to mitigate neck and back pain and injury in Naval Aviation Establish epidemiological studies to better define exposure limits and occupational health issues related to WBV in military helicopters. Design equipment that creates less vibration while in operation, as well as incorporating technologies to attenuate vibration at the human–system interface. Resource Sponsor: TBD Cost: Need to conduct analysis and solution definition before a program effort can be pursued. Seams: ??? Results of 3 surveys between 2010 to 2012: 88% experienced back and/or neck pain during or immediately after flight 82% will not see a flight doc until pain was extreme 76% have pain greater than 50% of the time 60% state pain is distracting 34% admit it is affecting their situational awareness IMPACT if not funded: Reduced combat readiness, aircrew performance, situational awareness, habitability and safety. Increased attrition & long-term physiologic impacts. $56M – mil and civ med appts for physician, chiro. & phys. therapy $25.5M – lost-time costs for medical visits $24.8M in mishap & $8.4M in training costs 109 ASAP reports of severe neck and back pain from Jan 2009 to Aug 2013 1. The WBV standards in MIL-STD 1472G and ISO do not apply in a helicopter environment because they do not account for other factors such as awkward postures, helmet, night vision goggles, survival vest, body armor, etc. Therefore, the health guidance caution zone which defines the safe vibration exposure limit is lower than the current established standard. Refine existing standards related to whole-body vibration exposure based on research, measurement, and analysis. Cockpits are design with minimal emphasis on ergonomics. Equipment exists that reduces the distribution of vibration to the human, but is not included in requirements for new system design or acquisitions. To address this deficiency, the cockpit will require a complete redesign to incorporate flight controls that are more ergonomically placed and seating systems designed to effectively support crewmembers donning flight equipment during long missions. 2. In the past 3 years, 3 widely distributed surveys were conducted Kadix, Inc January 2010 by – 1800 Navy and Marines rotary wing pilots responded Naval Postgraduate School Lt Andrea Phillips April 2011 – 648 Navy pilots responded R-Cubed (most recent survey) - most comprehensive study to date, distributed to all branches of the military services and Coast Guard, over 9000 respondents Each revealed a high likelihood of pilots and aircrew suffering pain and discomfort during and after missions Most helicopter pilots and aircrew frequently complain of lower back, neck, and upper back or shoulder pain. Discomfort or pain locations and frequency remain consistent across all services. Pain can affect a pilot’s situational awareness and can cause a greater hazard than just sore legs and backs. Pilots and aircrew say they will not report the issues until it is extreme, by that time the prolonged exposure may cause permanent physical damage that affects the lower spinal region. 64% of pilots are concerned about ‘downing’ themselves 81.8% say they would wait until pain was at least mildly extreme before seeing the flight doc TRICARE Management Activity $51.2M – military medical appointments (physician/therapist/chiropractor) $4.9M – military personnel using non-military doctor/chiropractor Armed Forces Health Surveillance Center $25.5M – lost-time costs for medical visits Business Case Analysis: Improve Combat Readiness and Mission Effectiveness by Eliminating Avoidable Helicopter Seating-Related Injuries $24.8M – Mishap Costs Combined total from each service’s Personnel Command $8.4M - Training costs of replacement pilots/aircrew permanently grounded and/or medically discharged/retired personnel Prevents manpower degrade which would affect ability to accomplish primary mission Non-critical safety issue

5. G-LOC Prevention IMPACT if not funded:
Develop the capability to Identify, Warn and Prevent G-Induced Loss of Consciousness (G-LOC) Resource Sponsor: TBD Cost: Need to conduct analysis and solution definition before a program effort can be pursued. Seams: Navy CFET in limbo; USAF CFET at least a year away from I/FOC and six months beyond for Navy students. A 45 yr. old contract centrifuge is our current option. 4th largest cause of Class A mishaps 11 FA-18 HAZREPS and 7 Class A mishaps due to G-LOC between 37 REPORTED physiologic episodes of G-LOC from FY Huge gap between Centrifuge Flight Env. Trainer (CFET) and an annual awareness lecture IMPACT if not funded: Failure to fund will fail to address a persistent and costly aeromedical threat in aviation while aircraft and operating costs soar. SAFCEN reports do not indicate a decline in rate of incidents (fleet having mishaps; trainers have more PHYSEPs) 37 G-related ASAP reports since Jan 09 27 G-related HAZREPs since Apr 04 Reduced flight hours = reduced G tolerance Developing a monitoring solution will require HSI considerations and empirical research validation. G-Suit hose disconnection a common cause, followed by dehydration. ASAP since 2009: F/A-18 (11 events); T-45 (10 events); T-34 (10 events); T-6 (3 events); F-5 (3 events) Capability and training enhancement important to the community

6. Unmanned Crew Selection, Training, and Control Interface
Unmanned Aerial Systems Interface, Selection, & Training Technologies (U-ASISTT) Selection for UAS Personnel (SUPer) – UAS Version of Aviation Selection Test Battery Simulation Based Training - simulation based forces built from raw data with rapid generation of large entity numbers in realistic scenarios (First adopter – NGTS & UCLASS) Common Control Station Design display Req’s Sponsor: CNAF Acq Sponsor: NMOTC S&T Sponsor: ONR $X.XM FY14-16 UAS operations different from manned flight USAF analysis projects training attrition rates for unmanned aviation will be 4 times that of manned aviation without a validated selection system 63% of UAS mishaps attributed to Human Factors (19% cognitive, 14% psycho-behavioral) that can be reduced by improved selection and training $38M/year training cost savings through improved selection UAS Human System Errors (Williams, 2004; Thompson, 2005; Tvaryanas, 2005; Herz 2008) UAS KSAs (McKinley, et al, 2011) Naval Safety Center analysis shows that Control Interface, Decision making, Skills & Know, SA, and Teamwork are major and contributing factors in almost all Class-A UAS mishaps Developing a monitoring solution will require HSI considerations and empirical research validation. T-45C SNA GLOC VT-7 T-45A SNA Blackout VT U-ASISTT approved. Continued support essential to future safety & cost effectiveness of UAS ops

7. Motion Sickness To provide countermeasures to and amelioration of Motion Sickness (MS) in all Naval platforms Desensitization research coupled with field trials using low dose intranasal scopolamine (INSCOP) Resource Sponsor: CNAF, BUMED - NAMRU-D is conducting FDA clinical trial with low-dose INSCOP FY14 Known impact on performance across platforms due to motion sickness – no solution ID’d Between Oct 05-Aug 13, there were 5387 MS incident reports across 3 aviation training wings—approximately 2 incidents per day. Jan 09-Aug 13, 45.5% of MS-related ASAP reports indicated at least some objectives not met and/or performance affected due to MS. Primary attrition cause in 5% and 16% contributing in Naval Aviation New non-pharm tech approach in works Arnold & Phillips (2009) technical review of CNATRA attrition. Simmons, Phillips & Lojewski (2008) report on efficacy of intranasal scopolamine for aviation candidates -In Naval Aviation MS is a cost drain, contributing to training attrition – though more difficult to quantify, effects of MS on mission performance can be severe under certain circumstances (eg amphib landing) – an effective, fast acting MS countermeasure is desirable In collaboration with NASA and sponsored by BUMED NAMRL demonstrated efficacy of INSCOP gel -In comparison with scopolamine patch or pill, INScop gell required much lower dose to reduce MS symptoms, with fewer side effects -Follow-on research to be transitioned to and performed at NAMRU-D will investigate the efficacy of an even lower dose in an intranasal spray formulation -This new work is in collaboration with NASA and Univ of Dayton Research Inst, and will run through FY12 -If successful, the potential may exist for a “rescue” or “just in time” application to combat MS Capability or training enhancement important to the community

8. Vision Enhancement / Protection
Endorse Refractive Eye Surgery FLEX, RELEX, SmILE Improve/identify Laser Eye Protection (LEP) with NVD compatible glare protection Ensure NVG compatibility lighting in an out of cockpit (LEP, FAA lighting) Color Vision standards update Resource Sponsor: BUMED, USAF 711th HPW, private industry, DHP Refractive Eye Surgery Research: i-Design for LASIK and PRK Long-term outcomes Enhanced techniques to achieve super-vision Laser illum hazard incidents on the rise: 17,726 FAA incidents 336 Navy reports FY09-FY14 100 USCG incidents since 2007 712 USAF incidents LEP rarely compatible with spectacles, NVGs and HMDs LED obstruction hazard lighting visibility with NVGs concerning LEP critical to Counter Dir. En. Weapons operations (LaWS HEL) NMCSD leads the way for DoD (50,000 surgeries/year) in refractive eye surgery FAA Laser Illumination of Aircraft Advisory Circular- 70-2A NAVSAFECEN HAZREP Led obstruction lighting dtd 21 Mar 13 Issues: JSF LEP and Stray Laser Energy Airborne and surface Blue threat from our own shipboard High Energy Laser Civilian and other rogue laser illumination incidents on the rise ASAP In Plane View Oct/Nov 13 Newsletter: Your ASAP reports clearly indicate a significant rise in lasing incidents. The FAA’s latest reports indicate that aircraft illuminations by handheld lasers are primarily green (91%) in color, as opposed to red (6.3%), which was more common a few years ago. This is significant because the wavelength of most green lasers (532 nm) is close to the eye’s peak sensitivity when they are dark-adapted. A green laser may appear as much as 35 times brighter than a red laser of equal power output. Due to this heightened visibility and increased likelihood of adverse visual effects, illumination by green lasers may result in more events being reported. Illumination reports often describe several types of adverse effects. These include visual effects (8.2%), pain and/or possible injury (1.6%), and operational problems (3.2%). Operational problems include momentary distraction, disorientation resulting in another pilot assuming control, aborted landings, loss of depth perception, and shutting down of runways due to multiple laser strikes. While only 16.5% of all cockpit illuminations occurred below 2,000 feet (Laser-Free Zone), these incidents accounted for 31% of all visual effects, 42% of all pain or injuries, and 42% of all operational problems reported. Low-attitude illuminations, therefore, result in a greater risk to aviation safety. Laser events can occur anywhere but have been noted most frequently in the Western Pacific and Southern regions of the United States. They are most frequently reported near airports and are often observed in clusters. Cluster laser attacks are multiple strikes on one or several aircraft that appear to originate from a specific location. These attacks may last a few minutes or be spread out over several days or weeks. Studies have also shown that almost 70% of all incidents occurred between 2,000 and 10,000 feet AGL, 22% occurred in November and December, and 70%happened between the hours of 7 and 11 pm. Possible Countermeasures…. Continuing research and interviews with pilots who were victims of lasing events have provided a list of recommended actions to minimize the effects of laser illumination:  Anticipate – When operating in a known or suspected laser environment, the non-flying pilot should be prepared to take control of the aircraft.  Aviate – Check aircraft configuration and (if available) consider engaging the autopilot to maintain the established flight path.  Navigate – Use the fuselage of the aircraft to block the laser beam by climbing or turning away. To date, Naval Aviators and Crewmembers have done an excellent job of reporting lasing incidents to the ATC and law enforcement. Keep up the great work and be sure to seek medical attention if you are personally illuminated by a laser. Capability or training enhancement important to the community

9. Hearing Protection and Performance
Program Proposal /Description Introduce Active Noise Attenuation (i.e., frequency spectrum enhancement and noise cancellation) in legacy helmets (HGU-68 and HGU-84). Introduce ear cup enhancements that optimize Passive Noise Attenuation while decreasing “hot spots.” Introduce in-ear dosimeters to measure effectiveness of hearing protection. Update Manual of Medicine to enhance hearing threshold standards in aircrew. Resource Sponsor/Cost/Seams Resource Sponsors: N98 Costs: FY-16 – $1.5M FYDP – $2.5M Seams: None Justification Speech intelligibility is a safety of flight issue. Address deficiencies that reduce mission endurance, situational awareness, safety of flight and mission success. . Introducing Active and Passive Attenuation options will create an optimal signal to noise ratio. Introducing in-ear dosimeters will allow objective assessment of hazardous noise exposure on aircrew. Impact: Noise-induced hearing loss and tinnitus will continue to be the leading medical injuries to aircrew. Continued communications intelligibility shortfalls will lead to reduced situational awareness and decreased safety of flight. Supporting Documents/Analysis CNAP Requirements Letter Dec12. HQMC Requirements Letter Jun12. HSC-2 HAZREP Aug11. Objective Prioritization Must Have / Should Have / Nice to Have Critical safety issue/addresses gap that affects aircrew performance (auditory processing time, fatigue, reaction to critical maneuver and return fire calls).

9. Hearing Protection and Performance
Resource Sponsor: N98 / TYCOMS Cost share / Lead and collaborate on ONR / NAVAIR / NSMRL / AFRL / USAARL projects and SBIR/STTRs endorsed by PMA202 Aircrew Systems / F-35 / F-18 / H-60 / H-53 PMA/POs Actively endorse Technology Transition for in-ear / on-person noise datalogging To comprehensively quantify noise issues / solution effectiveness, requiring improved communications intelligibility and improved hearing protection Aircrew Hearing Protection: A meeting was held with OPNAV and PMA-202 to review the draft requirements letter and to discuss a two phase approach. The first phase is to improve the fit of the HGU-84 helmet ear cups with COTS or GOTS products and the second phase is to improve speech intelligibility for the HGU-84 and 68 helmets. The IPT has taken an action to develop a ROM for the effort. A draft requirements letter was sent out by OPNAV to PMA202 to review. The requirements letter directs PMA202 to provide improved across the board hearing protection as able to address deficiencies in current systems. PMA202 and PMA261 have signed an MOA on providing an improved hearing protection system for the CH-53K. According to DOD hearing conservation program studies conducted in FY 2009, tinnitus and hearing loss compensation to veterans was $1.1 billion. The FY 2010 VA annual benefits report has revealed a total of 744,871 tinnitus claims and 672,410 hearing loss claims made in FY Of all VA claims for 2010, tinnitus (10.7%) and hearing loss (7.3%) were the top two most prevalent service-connected disabilities. Studies performed by the Veterans Affairs Administration show that between FY 2009 and FY 2010 Impairment of Auditory Acuity claims (all forms of hearing loss to include middle ear pathology and tinnitus) increased by 11.4%. At HSC-2, from July 2006 to August 2011, there were 138 cases of permanent hearing loss. These cases represent 6% of aircrew assigned to HSC-2 which could translate into hundreds of thousands in future VA claims. Sample Case: The physiological impact of inadequate hearing protection on rotary wing aircrews is significant. The American Conference on Governmental Industrial Hygienists (ACGIH) has placed a Threshold Limit Value on rotary aircraft of 120dB. The HGU-84 helmet with properly fitted custom CEP reduces aircraft noise levels by up to 30 dB. ACGIH also states that speech must be at least 12dB louder than the surrounding noise in order to be intelligible from background noise. The Communications Earplug manufactured by Communications & Ear Protection Inc. has made improvements in speech intelligibility by moving output from ear cup speaker in the aviator helmet, placing it closer to the tympanic membrane using foam or custom earpiece inserted in the ear canal. These improvements in speech to noise ratios have improved safety of flight for aircrew, but still fall short of creating a 12dB difference for all users. The CEP system is a passive hearing protection option which relies heavily on the earpieces fitting correctly in the user's ear canal. Current CEPs available to fleet consist of four size options for the ear tips. Furthermore, these tips are one additional item for squadrons to stock and are typically not available for replacement of unserviceable tips. In order to address this weakness, the next generation of CEPs are molded to the users ear canal. This process is time consuming, expensive, and requires specifically trained personnel that are not available outside of CONUS. Additionally, the invasive nature of the CEP leads to hot spots which degrade aircrew performance over time. At 30 Db of protection, CEP is an improvement over the 21 dB protection provided by the HGU-84 alone; however, according to the ACGIH this is only sufficient protection for aircrew to operate for two hours without suffering permanent hearing loss. FRS operations at HSC-2 are typically four hour flights, which exceed the ACGIH limits by 100%. Navy Requirement: OPNAVINST & .19 8 hr. time weighted avg exposure should not exceed 85 dBA & for every 3 dB above, cut exposure by 50% Nearly all aircraft carrier work and living areas exceed 85 dB with 24/7 exposure durations Hearing loss and ringing in the ears two most prevalent and costly VA claims for 15 yrs. Warfighters “remove hearing protection so they can hear better?” Impact: Ensure high-performance hearing through USN/USMC career ACS ENARG (POM-15) #2, 4, & 8 in Top 10 USMC 1-3rd MAW 2013 ENARG #5 avg in Top 10 all platform types CMC Hearing Conservation & Readiness Z Jan 12 HSC-2 HGU-84 HAZREP Aug 2011 F-18E VFA-105 JHMCS noise HAZREP Sep 2007 Ltrs, audits from CNO, VCNO, SG, DASN Safety, ASNs RDA & IE, GAO, Naval Audit, Inst. of Med…

10. EMALS / Magnetic Environment Exposure
Until recently there has been little interest in the hazards posed by intense magnetic fields in the Naval community because few sources of magnetic field radiation capable of producing hazards have existed. That view, however, has changed because of intense magnetic field levels expected from new systems under development which will generate unprecedented levels of magnetic field radiation (Naval Sea Systems Command E3). One such system, in operational testing, is the U.S. Navy's new Ford-class aircraft carriers which will use the Electromagnetic Aircraft Launch System (EMALS) replacing the steam catapults and arresting gear used on current and previous generations of aircraft carriers. The EMALS system used on the Ford-class will meet the Navy’s fixed-wing launch capability, while offering the flexibility to support future carrier air wings. EMALS technology was evaluated and validated by the Navy in 2004 using a full-scale, half-length prototype, where more than 1,500 launches were conducted. Shipboard design has been underway, including full scale/full power tests of all components. The EMALS concept utilizes a linear electric motor to propel aircraft to launch speed. This system will use high power electric currents and will produce strong pulsed magnetic fields near the EMALS. Capability or training enhancement important to the community

11. CBRN Capability or training enhancement important to the community

Human Performance & Systems Integration Issues

Similar presentations

Presentation on theme: "Human Performance & Systems Integration Issues"— Presentation transcript:

Similar presentations

About project

Feedback

Log in

Auth with social network:

Human Performance & Systems Integration Issues

Similar presentations

Presentation on theme: "Human Performance & Systems Integration Issues"— Presentation transcript:

Similar presentations

About project

Feedback