Post #4441437
2026-08-08 06:32 UTC
Replies (1)
-
@drahardja@sfba.social 2026-08-08 06:42
I’m reminded of an Air Force experiment around World War II to redesign the cockpit to accommodate contemporary pilots. They measured 4000+ pilots to determine the target dimensions of the new design. After designing the new theoretical cockpit to the average height, average arm length, average leg length, etc., they tried to fit their existing group of pilots in it and found that they could fit…zero people. Because no one is exactly average. The science of ergonomics instead correctly assumes that equipment need to accommodate a *wide range* of human dimensions to be most useful. This principle applies to our built environment and tools as well: their designs accommodate some range of human existence, but not others. Our goal should be to make our world accommodate the widest variety of human conditions, not to draw a line that says “no participation beyond this point” and exclude entire populations of people. Or worse, label and blame those excluded for their condition. https://www.thestar.com/news/insight/when-u-s-air-force-discovered-the-flaw-of-averages/article_e3231734-e5da-5bf5-9496-a34e52d60bd9.html