Two-Step Subjective Rating Technique of Pilot Evaluation in Q–Q Test for Aircraft Cockpit

Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Electrical Engineering book series (LNEE, volume 527)


A two-step subjective rating technique was constructed to refine and validate the responses of pilots in Q–Q test for aircraft cockpit as a means of subjective data collection and problem diagnosis of designs on the bases of pilot judgment from points of user’s view in the context of simulated flight tasks. Twelve male pilots participated in the Q–Q test for pilot evaluation of a new cockpit prototype as 5th, 50th or 95th percentile representatives in stature. Each user made a judgment firstly about the tested design on the index with acceptability scale and then indicated the deficiencies in the design or the problems in use they found if they complained as “not acceptable” or “not satisfactory” in satisfaction scale, while pilot comments were verified. It is not allowed that only a level or rating score was made without a problem arising because the list of questions is very important as well as suggestions for improvement in Q–Q test. The final list of questions and suggestions was based on the consensus of users, but how to improve is the responsibility of the designer. The results and the influences were also discussed.


Two-step subjective rating technique Q–Q test (Qualitative and Quantitative test) Pilot evaluation Aircraft cockpit Ergonomics Human factors 


Compliance with Ethical Standards

The survey was approved by the Academic Ethics Committee of Institute of Aviation Medicine PLAAF. All subjects who participated in the experiment were provided with and signed an informed consent form. All relevant ethical safeguards have been met with regard to subject protection.


  1. 1.
    Guo X, Wang Y, Liu Q et al (2016) Q-Q test for pilot evaluation of ergonomics in aircraft cockpit. In: Long S, Dhillon BS (eds) Man-machine-environment system engineering, vol 406. Lecture notes in electrical engineering. Springer, Singapore, pp 13–20CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Harper RP, Cooper GE (1986) Handling qualities and pilot evaluation. J Guid Control Dyn 9(5):515–529CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    GJB 4856-2003 Human dimensions of Chinese male pilot population. Military Standard Publishing House of the General Armament Department, BeijingGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    European Aviation Safety Agency (2016) Certification specifications and acceptable means of compliance for large aeroplanes CS-25Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    ISO7250-3:2015 Basic human body measurements for technological design—Part 3: Worldwide and regional design ranges for use in ISO product standards. International Organization for Standardization, SwitzerlandGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Civil Aviation Administration of China (2011) China Civil Aviation Regulations Part 25—Airworthiness standards: transport category airplanes (CCAR-25-R4)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Federal Aviation Administration (2018) Federal Aviation Regulations Part 25—Airworthiness standards: transport category airplanesGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Wang Y, Guo X, Liu Q et al (2018) Three-dimensional measurement applied in design eye point of aircraft cockpits. Aerosp Med Hum Perform 89(4):1–6CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Sun M, Liu Q, Guo X et al (2011) 3-D measurement of working eye position of pilots in simulated aircraft cockpit. In: Long S and Dhillon BS (eds) Proceedings of the 11th conference on man-machine-environment system engineering. SRP USA, pp 224–226Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Institute of Aviation Medicine PLAAFBeijingChina

Personalised recommendations