Return-Path: Sender: (Marvin Kaye) To: lml Date: Sun, 09 Feb 2003 11:29:15 -0500 Message-ID: X-Original-Return-Path: Received: from smtp.perigee.net ([166.82.201.14] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 4.0.5) with ESMTP id 2013493 for lml@lancaironline.net; Sun, 09 Feb 2003 11:24:15 -0500 Received: from John_Study (dsl-208-29-27-88.dsl.perigee.net [208.29.27.88]) by smtp.perigee.net (8.12.2/8.12.2) with SMTP id h19GODsD003152 for ; Sun, 9 Feb 2003 11:24:14 -0500 From: John Schroeder X-Original-To: "Lancair Mailing List" X-Original-Date: Sun, 09 Feb 2003 11:24:20 -0500 X-Priority: 3 (Normal) In-Reply-To: X-Original-Message-Id: Subject: Re: [LML] Re: Loss of Pressurization, [Time of Useful Consciousness] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" X-Mailer: Opera 6.05 build 1140 Rob - My recollection is that it is not linear and generally follows the pressure map of the atmosphere. It also varies a bit with ones's physical condition and basic physiology. Paine Stewart and his crew were flying above 40,000 ft and the TUC is measured in seconds up there. Any cabin altitude above about 33,000 would get you automatic pressure breathing from the regulator in fighters. Perhaps someone on this net has an Air Force training manual that they could copy the TUC chart for your. Allen Konkel are you lurking on this net? Cheers, John 2/9/2003 10:54:10 AM, "Rob Logan" wrote: >> (TUC) ..is.. 20-30 minutes at 18000', 3-5 minutes at 25000' >> I think anyone flying w/o O2 willingly above 12500 is really asking for disaster >is TUC linear or exponential?