COCKPIT ANTHROPOMETRIC ACCOMMODATION AND THE JPATS PROGRAM

Gregory. F. Zehner Fitts Human Engineering Division Crew Systems Directorate Armstrong Laboratory Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, Ohio 45433-7022

ABSTRACT Currently, USAF pilot candidates must be between 64 and 77 inches in Stature, and between 34 and 40 inches in Sitting Height. These criteria prevent roughly 6% of male military population from entering flight training. Approximately 55% of female military are excluded. Complicating this issue is the traditional practice of designing aircraft to accommodate "5th through 95th percentile" male pilots. The intention of this practice is to reduce the cost and size of the cockpit (and, therefore, the aircraft). Individuals beyond the 5th and 95th percentile limits frequently are forced to "stretch" a little or "scrunch down" a little to be accommodated. For pilots representing these extreme body sizes, disaccommodation is most often the result of their Sitting Height, Sitting Eye Height, the length of the arms, and/or the length of the legs. If 5th percentile male values for all of these critical body measurements are used as design limits for an aircraft cockpit (as was done in nearly all existing USAF aircraft), 18% of military males and 81% of military females will fall outside the design limits on at least one of these parameters. Due to the unique design philosophy adopted for the Joint Primary Aircraft Training System (JPATS) program, the USAF may consider relaxing entrance requirements in order to make flight training more accessible to women. However, to do so will place some of these individuals at risk for mishap in aircraft other than the JPATS due to their inability to reach hand controls and rudder pedals, inadequate external vision, and possibly control stick interference with their legs. This paper will discuss the JPATS anthropometry program, how the multivariate “cases” were derived, and the cockpit evaluation method which was used to measure accommodation limits. BACKGROUND The Joint Primary Aircraft Training System (JPATS) will be the USAF's replacement for the T-37 and the USN's replacement for the T-34. Raytheon Aircraft Company (Beechcraft) was awarded the contract for the Beech Mk II turboprop in February 1996. One of the things that made this procurement unique was that, for the first time, anthropometric accommodation was as important a selection criteria as flying qualities - and more important than cost. At the outset, all contending aircraft were intended to be off-the-shelf designs. This strategy is often used to speed the procurement process and to save money. Initially, the main goal of the anthropometry evaluation was to assure that this primary trainer would not be a body size bottle neck. All USAF pilots will have to fly this aircraft, and the Air Force did not want its design to limit the body sizes of the pilot population. However, as the program progressed, high level interest in anthropometric accommodation increased. Eventually, the off-the-shelf philosophy, insofar as concerned the crewstations, almost completely disappeared. Nearly all of the proposed cockpits had been radically altered to accommodate a much wider range of body sizes than has ever been attempted in a military aircraft. In fact, the small pilots for which the aircraft was ultimately designed are far too small to be allowed into USAF flight training by current standards. A great deal of effort was expended to determine and to influence what the body size design requirements for this aircraft should be. The following sections describe the how and why of the JPATS anthropometry program.

THE ORIGINAL JPATS SPECIFICATION The US Army Air Corps began restricting pilot body sizes as early as 1936. The USAF has continued the practice. The purpose is to reduce cost and improve performance by limiting the size of the aircraft crewstation (and, therefore, the aircraft). In accordance with AFI 48-123, "Medical Examination and Standards," current USAF pilot candidates must have a Sitting Height between 34 and 40 inches, and Stature between 64 and 77 inches. Historically, the anthropometry of the pilot population and design requirements for aircraft have closely paralleled each other. Previous practice was to perform anthropometric surveys on the existing pilot population and to use summary statistics from those surveys as design requirements for aircraft. On the small end of the design range, 5th percentile values for critical body dimensions were used as minimum design points; on the large end, 95th percentile values were used. Those members of the population smaller than the minimum design values were expected to "stretch" in order to be accommodated. Those larger than the maximum design values sometimes found themselves cramped a little, and had to "scrunch" down to be accommodated. Figures 1 through 5 show examples of accommodation problems which are typically encountered due to this philosophy.

Figure 2. Inadequate Shin Clearance

Figure 3. Minimal Over the Nose Vision

Figure 4. Inadequate Elbow Clearance Figure 1. Inadequate Overhead Clearance

required) to accommodate individuals meeting the more generous body size entrance requirements of the US Navy. DoD WORKING GROUP ON ANTHROPOMETRY By the summer of 1993, USAF teams had already measured seven potential competitors for the JPATS contract. Classes on measuring techniques had been held for all interested manufacturers and handbooks for examining anthropometric accommodation had been sent to each. The government's intention was to thoroughly examine all cockpits to assure that essentially all USAF pilots would be accommodated in the aircraft. That summer, due to a congressional desire to expand the assignment of women in the military, a DoD working group was convened to examine the anthropometric specifications which were being considered for the JPATS program. This working group attempted to determine the effects of those specifications on accommodation of women in the cockpit. One of the main reasons this working group was needed was because a great deal of conflicting information had been circulating concerning the effects of the JPATS specifications on the number of military females who would be eligible to fly the aircraft. Therefore, one of the first tasks of the working group was to identify an appropriate anthropometric database that could be used by all involved, so that all anthropometric calculations would be comparable. The decision was made to use the 1988 US Army Anthropometric Survey (Gordon, et. al.), and cull from it a sample which represented those females with the potential to become pilots if the anthropometric restrictions to enter flight training were not in place. The sample was based on the following criteria. 1. Age must be greater than 22 years since pilots in the USAF and USN must be college graduates. (This also assured that nearly all subjects had achieved their full adult body size.) 2. Racial mix was constructed to match the US college-graduate population in 1992 - approximately 86% White, 6% Black, 4% Hispanic, and 4% Asian. These data were retrieved from the US Department of Education.

Figure 5. Inability to Reach to Full-Forward Stick The 5th and 95th percentile values that many of our existing aircraft were designed to accommodate were based on samples taken from a male pilot population. Our estimates are that as much as 42% of the current female pilot population falls below the male pilot 5th percentile value for Sitting Eye Height (related directly to vision over the nose of the aircraft), and 60 percent are smaller for leg lengths (related to ability to operate the rudder pedals). While stretching may be possible on one of these parameters, attempting to simultaneously stretch out the legs to reach the rudders while also trying to stretch up to see out of the aircraft, is a very difficult feat to perform while landing an aircraft. The initial specification for the JPATS program was written to give the manufacturers a set of anthropometric dimensions which would not require stretching by a small pilot and would assure adequate space for large ones (Meindl, Zehner, and Hudson 1993). This specification required manufacturer’s designs to accommodate a broader range of body sizes than any aircraft existing in the USAF inventory. Due to concerns that this level of accommodation could not be met by an off-the-shelf aircraft, government teams were sent out to measure potential contending aircraft to see if any could accommodate this wide range of body size variability. Many of these aircraft had difficulty accommodating this range. These assessments were completed before the Request for Proposals was released. However, it appeared that the specification could be met with some modification of the existing crewstations. This being the case, it was reasonable to specify that the JPATS aircraft should accommodate 99.5% of pilots (male and female) who were eligible to enter USAF undergraduate flight training as defined in AFI 48123. It was also a "stated" goal (desired but not

3. Height and Weight tables for the USAF and USN were used to screen all potential subjects to assure they were within appropriate limits. The resulting data sets consisted of 580 females and 1301 males. The next step was to determine the effect of the original JPATS specification on the percentage of females accommodated. Since the specification was based on the entire pilot population as defined by AFI 48-123, the real question was, "what are the effects of this regulation on the percentage of women eligible to become USAF pilots?" Figure 6 shows a bivariate plot of the JPATS female population and the entrance requirements spelled out in AFI 48-123.

were in place long before women were permitted to fly in the Air Force - and they were based on male anthropometric data. JPATS CASES ONE AND SEVEN When the Undersecretary of Defense for Acquisitions (Dr. John Deutch) was informed that the JPATS aircraft might eliminate approximately 55% of females from becoming pilots, he directed the working group to devise a solution that would permit at least 80% of eligible females (defined by the JPATS data sets) to operate the aircraft. Multivariate Case One was added to the JPATS specification to accomplish that directive. Sitting Height was reduced to 32.8 inches and arm and leg lengths were reduced by approximately one inch from what was previously indicated for the smallest person. Case One Stature can be approximately 61 inches. Soon after Case One was created, congressional interest intensified and potential requirements were again expanded. Now it was proposed to accommodate 95% of both males and females. This requirement was eventually reduced to a goal (desired but not required). Multivariate Case Seven was developed to satisfy this level of accommodation. Multivariate Case Seven Stature can be approximately 58 inches. Sitting Height is 31 inches. Figure 8 shows both JPATS populations (male and female) with Cases One through Six indicated. Figure 9 shows the same population with Case Seven included.

While all current USAF pilots would have been eligible under the original specification, only 45% of the JPATS female sample would have been eligible. Figure 7 is a plot of data for the JPATS male sample. Ninety-four percent of the males qualify.

While it is obvious that these restrictions have a severe effect on the percentage of the female population who are eligible to become USAF pilots, it is important to remember that these restrictions

The potential accommodation of smaller people in flight training has created a new problem. If the smaller body sizes accommodated in the JPATS forces the specification of smaller body size entrance requirements in AFI 48-123, the smallest USAF pilot could be six inches shorter than the current minimum. What aircraft are these people going to fly after training in the JPATS? Figure 10 shows the 5th to 95th percentile design population which was used to design nearly all current USAF aircraft. By overlaying the JPATS Case One through Case Seven, it becomes clear that some people accommodated in JPATS will be well outside the design range for nearly all the aircraft to which they could be assigned once primary training has been completed.

DESIGN EVALUATION Once the requirements for body size had been established it was necessary to determine if the competing aircraft met the specifications. The key was to define what the pilots must do in order to safely fly the aircraft (in other words, to define the term "accommodation"). The cockpit working group at the JPATS Program Office developed a list of controls that must be accessible with the seat restraint inertia reel locked. A minimum external visual requirement was also formulated to define how high in the cockpit the pilot must sit in order to safely land the aircraft. These and other functional requirements (such as escape clearances) were discussed, and the results of these discussions were listed in the Request for Proposal for the aircraft. Evaluation of the abilities of a group of subjects with body sizes representing the required multivariate cases was carried out on each contractor's cockpit mock-up (Kennedy and Zehner 1995). Any discrepancies were reported to the contractor for clarification, or as deficiency reports, and the contractor was given the opportunity to rectify/clarify any discrepancy. RESULTS By the end of the source selection process, Raytheon Aircraft’s Mock-up was able to accommodate Cases One through Seven. Ninetyseven percent of the female JPATS population are accommodated. However, the final figures for accommodation will be known only when an examination of the actual aircraft has been completed. Until then, accommodation levels must be considered estimates - derived from a mock-up of the cockpit. CONCLUSION

If such a revision of AFI 48-123 occurs, examinations similar to the JPATS evaluations will need to be conducted on all USAF aircraft types to determine the accommodation limits for each. This will involve establishing functional requirements and performing anthropometric evaluations on each aircraft. Once these data exist, we would be able to answer the following questions. 1) Should existing aircraft be modified to accommodate the JPATS cases, and are those modifications cost effective? 2) Should all new aircraft be designed to accommodate the JPATS cases? For example, if a new fighter aircraft is designed to accommodate those same seven cases, small pilots could not be assigned to it until they have completed training in the T-38. The T-38 will not accommodate the seven cases.

3) Will the USAF continue the "fly one - fly all" policy? Or will it, like the US Navy, begin to assign people to specific aircraft based on body size? It will be several years before the JPATS aircraft replaces the T-37, but the effects of its anthropometric accommodation requirements are already being felt. This is true not only in the procurement of new aircraft, but in aircraft modification programs and the development of personal protective equipment as well. The questions listed above must be answered soon. BIBLIOGRAPHY Air Force Instruction (AFI) 48-123, "Medical Examination and Standards," 15 November 1994. Gordon, C.C., Churchill, T., Clauser, C.E., Bradtmiller, B., McConville, J.T., Tebbetts, I., and Walker, R.A., 1988 Anthropometric Survey of U.S. Army Personnel: Summary Statistics Interim Report, NATICK/TR-89/027, United States Army Natick Research, Development and Engineering Center, Natick, MA, March 1989. Zehner, G.F., Meindl, R.M., and Hudson, J.S. A Multivariate Anthropometric Method For Crewstation Design: Abridged, Technical Report AL-TR-19920164, Crew Systems Directorate, Human Engineering Division, Armstrong Laboratory, Wright-Patterson AFB 1992 Kennedy, K.W. and G.F. Zehner, "Assessment of Anthropometric Accommodation in Aircraft Cockpits," SAFE Journal, Vol. 25, No. 1, January, 1995