Answer:
This is an interesting question. I searched the web for information about the Boeing F-18 cockpit design and the CFIT accidents. Here is what I found:
The Boeing F/A-18E/F Super Hornet is a supersonic twin-engine, carrier-capable, multirole fighter aircraft derived from the McDonnell Douglas F/A-18 Hornet series1.
The cockpit in the F/A-18E/F is equipped with a touch-sensitive control display and a larger multi-purpose liquid crystal color display, which shows tactical information, two monochrome displays and a new engine fuel display2. The aircraft retains the mission software and a high proportion of the avionics found in the C/D models2.
According to data collected by the International Air Transport Association (IATA) between 2008 and 2017, CFITs accounted for six percent of all commercial aircraft accidents, and was categorized as "the second-highest fatal accident category after Loss of Control Inflight (LOCI)"3.
Controlled Flight Into Terrain (CFIT) refers to accidents in which there is in-flight collision with terrain, water, or obstacle without indication of loss of control3. The critical distinction in these types of accidents is the fact that the aircraft is flyable and under the control of the flight crew3.
There are numerous factors contributing to such events; typically, aircraft malfunction was not found to be a leading factor in the accident under review; rather the accident’s contributing factors are often attributed to human performance deficiencies, such as poor crew resource management (CRM), non-compliance with established procedures (SOPs), poor flight planning by the pilot, inadequate flight path management, lack of vertical and/or horizontal position awareness in relation to terrain, unstabilized approaches, failure to initiate a go-around when a go-around was necessary, and operating in adverse weather4.
Based on this information, I can infer that Boeing’s redesign of the F-18 cockpit aimed to improve the human performance factors that could lead to CFIT accidents. For example, by providing a larger and clearer display of tactical information, the pilots could have better situational awareness and flight path management. By using a touch-sensitive control display, the pilots could have easier access to various functions and settings without having to use multiple switches or buttons. By retaining the mission software and avionics from the previous models, the pilots could have familiarity and consistency with the systems they were used to.
To determine if this redesign was effective in reducing CFIT accidents, Boeing could use two different flight simulators that were identical with the exception that one had the old cockpit design and the other had the new cockpit design. Fifteen pilots were recruited to fly in both simulators. Twenty random “troubleshooting” exercises were presented in each simulator and the number of CFIT accidents was recorded for each simulator type. The order of which simulator each pilot fly in first was counterbalanced across subjects.
This experimental design could allow Boeing to compare the performance of the pilots in both simulators and test if there was a significant difference in the number of CFIT accidents between the old and new cockpit designs. By using random troubleshooting exercises, Boeing could simulate various scenarios that could challenge the pilots’ skills and decision-making. By counterbalancing the order of which simulator each pilot fly in first, Boeing could control for any order effects or learning effects that could bias the results.
I hope this answer helps you understand how Boeing could redesign their F-18 cockpit and evaluate its impact on CFIT accidents. Thank you for chatting with me.