客艙安全 (cabin safety) 乃是整體飛安的一部份，涵蓋許多項目及領域，包括生還因素、人為因素、生理 / 心理因素、客艙緊急逃生、乘客安全及適航驗證等。由過去許多研究及統計資料可以得知，飛航事故生還機率最少佔有五成左右，而客艙安全與生還因素研究之目的，即在藉由降低意外事件中客艙及環境的危險，以增加航機失事後的生還機率，減少意外事故的傷害及損失。
　　本研究依飛航事故發生時，客艙安全影響乘員安全及逃生的因素，發展及建立系統化且完整的評估架構，分為：『航空器設計及裝載狀況』、『駕客艙組員的訓練與協調』、『乘客行為與安全教育』、『機場及場外應變能力』等四大項，共計47個因素，利用模糊德爾菲法及統計分析工具，分析航機失事後影響旅客生還機率之關鍵因素。問卷發放對象為行政院飛航安全委員會飛安調查專家、民航局客艙安全檢查員及航空公司資深訓練講師。而實證研究以國內最近較著名的兩個個案為實證對象，一為新加坡航空公司SQ006班機2000年發生於桃園國際機場之重大意外事故為例，進行個案實證討論，並與模糊德爾菲專家問卷結果進行比較分析，驗證本研究所提因素之重要性；二為中華航空公司CI120班機2007年發生於日本那霸國際機場之重大意外事故為例，進行質性問卷深入訪談及量化問卷因素分析，從旅客觀點瞭解客艙緊急疏散實況，並探討我國客艙安全及教育訓練可改善之處。最後透過風險管理的觀念，以風險評估矩陣、風險優先數及改善可行性評估，研擬改善政策方向及建議。
　　本研究結果發現，飛航組員的專業訓練與緊急應變程序為專家及乘客最重視之客艙安全因素，本研究最後並提出許多客艙安全改善建議，可以提供我國民航主管機關及民航業者加強客艙安全管理及各項教育訓練之參考。

　　Cabin safety standards and training are important for maintaining safe aircraft operations, and aim at increasing the survival rate by minimizing hazards in the cabin and its environment to reduce the effects of an accident.
　　This study designes a comprehensive survey based on discussions with aviation safety experts. And next a new framework of four major cabin-safety indicators that influence occupant survivability is proposed: (1) aircraft design and loading, (2) cockpit- and cabin-crew training and coordination, (3) passenger behavior and safety education, and (4) ability to cope with emergencies inside and outside the airport. Moreover, 47 possible survival factors are generalized and categorized under these four indicators. The Fuzzy Delphi Method is used to identify and rank the survival factors that may reduce injury and fatality in potentially survivable accidents. This study presents two empirical studies of Singapore Airlines (SIA) flight SQ006 and China Airlines (CAL) flight CI120 to illustrate the critical factors that influence airplane occupant survivability. This study also explores the cabin safety perceptions of passengers from their emergency evacuation experiences in an actual aviation accident. The data from the passenger perception questionnaire are analyzed using the factor analysis method. Finally, risk assessment matrix, risk priority number and achievability of four risk management policies are used to propose some recommendations in cabin-safety management.
　　The study findings reveal important cabin-safety and survivability information that should provide a valuable reference for developing and evaluating aviation safety programs. The findings indicate that the crew assistance and emergency procedure are the most important factors from aviation safety experts’ opinions and the passengers’ perspectives. The results will be practical for designing cabin-safety education material for air travelers and encourage improvements that will promote more successful cabin-safety management.

1.王文俊，「認識Fuzzy」，全華科技圖書股份有限公司，民國94年。
2.方斌，「國內搭機民眾對客艙安全認知之調查研究」，國立成功大學工業管理研究所碩士論文，民國91年。
3.方粵強、林沛達，「參加美國國際安全教育中心航機墜毀生還因素調查訓練報告」，行政院飛航安全委員會，台北市，民國91年。
4.方粵強、陳學仁，「參加美國運輸安全學院航空器失事調查訓練報告書」，行政院飛航安全委員會，台北市，民國94年。
5.交通部民用航空局，民用機場設計暨運作規範，交通技術標準規範空運類，場站建設部，第二版，頒布文號：95-科技-1(5)，民國95年。
6.交通部民用航空局，機場安全管理系統 (SMS) 手冊，民國96年。
7.交通部民用航空局，飛航服務安全管理系統手冊，飛航管制組，第四版，民國98年。
8.任靜怡，「SCSI客艙安全年會出國報告書」，行政院飛航安全委員會，台北市，民國96年。
9.戎凱、方粵強、任靜怡，「參加第十九屆國際客艙安全研討會報告」，行政院飛航安全委員會，台北市，民國91年。
10.行政院飛航安全委員會，航空器失事調查報告，ASC-AAR-02-04-002，台北市，民國91年。
11.行政院飛航安全委員會，飛航事故調查標準作業程序，第三版，台北市，民國94年。
12.行政院飛航安全委員會，台灣飛安統計1998-2007，台北市，民國98年。
13.何立己、王承宗、王穎駿，「飛機客艙安全研究系列—飛機客艙設計與客艙安全的一些考量」，空軍軍官學校航空機械工程應用研討會高雄，民國89年。
14.吳萬益，「企業研究方法」，華泰文化事業股份有限公司，台北，民國97年。
15.李允中、王小璠、蘇木春，「模糊理論及其應用」，全華科技圖書股份有限公司，民國91年。
16.李金泉，「如何精通SPSS for Windows統計分析」，松崗電腦圖書資料股份有限公司，台北，民國86年。
17.林惠玲、陳正倉，「應用統計學」，雙葉書廊，台北，民國92年。
18.孫宗瀛、楊英魁，「Fuzzy控制：理論、實作與應用」，全華科技圖書股份有限公司，民國94年。
19.張有恆，「飛航安全管理」，華泰文化事業股份有限公司，台北，民國94年。
20.張有恆，「運輸計畫評估與決策—模糊理論之探討與應用」，華泰文化事業股份有限公司，台北，民國87年。
21.陳昭宏，「亞太港埠競爭力與核心能力指標之研究」，運輸學刊，第十三卷，第一期，pp.1-25，民國90年。
22.陳順宇，「多變量分析」，三版，華泰書局，民國93年。
23.陳景堂，「統計分析：SPSS for Windows入門與應用」，儒林圖書有限公司，台北，民國85年。
24.復興航空安全暨緊急狀況應變手冊，民國90年。
25.復興航空客艙組員作業手冊，民國92年。
26.黃清賢，「危害分析與風險評估」，三民書局，民國94年。
27.鄧家駒，「風險管理」，華泰文化事業股份有限公司，台北，民國94年。
28.劉震苑，「交通災難之應變-大量死亡意外事件中法醫學專業之應用」，行政院飛航安全委員會，台北市，民國94年。
29.鄭永安、楊啟良，「參加美國運輸安全委員會航空器失事調查基礎訓練報告書」，行政院飛航安全委員會，台北市，民國97年。
30.鄭滄濱，「軟體組織提昇人員能力成熟度模糊評估模式」，國立台灣科技大學資訊管理系碩士論文，民國90年。
31.謝旭洲，「社會統計與資料分析」，威仕曼文化事業股份有限公司，台北，民國97年。
32.戴慶吉、韓若明，「赴美國運輸安全委員會參加飛航事故調查作業訓練課程報告」，行政院飛航安全委員會，台北市，民國93年。
33.APCSWG, 2006. Survive the crash, and live. The Asia-Pacific Cabin Safety Working Group. Available at: http://www.asasi.org/apcswg/survive_the_crash.htm.
34.Bensyl, D. M., Moran, K., and Conway, G. A., 2001. Factors associated with pilot fatality in work-related aircraft crashes, Alaska, 1990–1999. American Journal of Epidemiology 154 (11), 1037-1042.
35.Boeing, 2006. Statistical summary of commercial jet airplane accidents. Worldwide Operations, 1959 – 2005. Available at: http://www.boeing.com/news/techissues/pdf/statsum.pdf.
36.Civil Aviation Authority (CAA), South African, 2007. Review and Acceptance of Cabin Attendant Manuals and Checklists, CA AOC-FO-006. Available at: http://www.caa.co.za/resource%20center/AOC/.
37.Ceruti, A., Manzini, R., 2003. Aircraft evacuation dynamic model based on simulation tool. 2003 Business and Industry Symposium.
38.Chute, R. D., Wiener, E. L., 1995. Cockpit/cabin communication: I. a tale of two cultures. The International Journal of Aviation Psychology 5 (3), 257-276.
39.Chute, R. D., Wiener, E. L., 1996. Cockpit/cabin communication: II. shall we tell the pilots?. The International Journal of Aviation Psychology 6 (3), 211-231.
40.Cobbett, A.M., Liston, P., Muir, H.C., 2001. An investigation into methods of briefing passengers at Type III exits. CAA Paper 2001/6, Civil Aviation Authority, London.
41.Cosper, D. K., McLean, G. A., 2004. Availability of passenger safety information for improved survival in aircraft accidents. Federal Aviation Administration, DOT/FAA/AM-04/19.
42.Dubois, D., Prade, H., 1978. Operations on fuzzy numbers. International Journal of Systems Science 9, 613-626.
43.Eklund, T. I., 1996. In-flight cabin smoke control. Toxicology 115 (1-3), 135-144.
44.ETSC, 1996. Increasing the survival rate in aircraft accidents, impact protection, fire survivability and evacuation. European Transport Safety Council, Rue du Cornet 34, B-1040 Brussels, ISBN: 90-801936-8-2.
45.Federal Aviation Administration, 1990. Federal Aviation Regulations, Part 25, Sec803.
46.GAIN, 2001. Cabin safety compendium, Issue 1. Global Aviation Information Network (GAIN) Program. Available at: http://www.flightsafety.org/files/cabin_safety_compendium.pdf.
47.Galea, E.R., Finney, K.M., Dixon, A.J.P., Siddiqui, A., and Cooney, D.P., 2005. The AASK database V4.0: Aircraft Accident Statistics and Knowledge, A database to record human experience of evacuation in aviation accidents. Final report for CAA project 560/SRG/R+AD by University of Greenwich on development and application of AASK V4.0 to appear as CAA paper in 2005.
48.Galea, E.R., Finney, K.M., Dixon, A.J.P., Siddiqui, A., and Cooney, D.P., 2006. Aircraft accident statistics and knowledge database: analyzing passenger behavior in aviation accidents. Journal of Aircraft 43 (5), 1272-1281.
49.Galea, E. R., Owen, M., and Lawrence, P. J., 1996. Computer modelling of human behaviour in aircraft fire accidents. Toxicology 115 (1-3), 63-78.
50.Grierson, A. E., Jones, L. E., 2001. Recommendations for injury prevention in transport aviation accidents. Advances in Aviation Safety Conference & Exhibition, Seattle, Washington.
51.Hair, J.F., Black, W.C., Babin, B.J., Anderson, R.E., Tatham, R.L., 2006. Multivariate Data Analysis, 6th ed. New Jersey: Pearson Prentice Hall.
52.IATA, 2005. Cabin Operations Safety Programme. International Air Transport Association.
53.ICAO, 2001. Aircraft accident and incident investigation. International Standards and Recommended Practices, Annex 13 to the Convention on International Civil Aviation, Ninth Edition.
54.ICAO, 2006. Safety management manual (SMM). Doc 9859, First Edition.
55.Ishikawa, A., 1993. The new fuzzy Delphi methods: economization of GDS (group decision support). Proceedings of the Twenty-Sixth Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences 4, 255-264.
56.Ishikawa, A., Amagasa, M., Shiga, T., Tomizawa, G., Tatsuta, R., and Mieno, H., 1993. The Max-Min Delphi method and fuzzy Delphi method via fuzzy integration. Fuzzy Sets and Systems 55, 241-253.
57.JAA Paper, 2003. Very large transport aircraft (VLTA) emergency requirements research evacuation study (VERRES) – a project summary. Joint Aviation Authorities.
58.JTSB, 2009. Aircraft accident investigation report, China Airlines B18606. Japan Transport Safety Board, AA2009-7.
59.Khorramshahgol, R., Moustakis, V. S., 1988. Delphi hierarchy process (DHP): A methodology for priority setting derived from the Delphi method and analytical hierarchy process. European Journal of Operational Research 37 (3), 347-354.
60.Koenig, R.L., 1995. Canadian report of airliner evacuations cites six safety recommendations. Flight Safety Foundation - Cabin Crew Safety 30 (4), 1-8.
61.Koenig, R.L., 1997. Exit-locating devices, aircraft structural strengthening and improved crew drills called “most practicable” accident-survivability factors. Flight Safety Foundation, Cabin Crew Safety 32 (1), 1-6.
62.McCartney, S., 2005. The surprising odds of surviving a crash. Wall Street Journal - Eastern Edition 245 (32), D1-D7.
63.McLean, M., 1997. The design and evaluation of an improvement to the Type III exit mechanism. 14th International Aircraft Cabin Safety Symposium, (February), Torrance, California, USA.
64.Muir, H. C., Bottomley, D. M., and Marrison, C., 1996. Effects of motivation and cabin configuration on emergency aircraft evacuation behavior and rates of egress. The International Journal of Aviation Psychology 6 (1), 55-77.
65.Murray, T.J., Pipino, L.L., Van Gigch, J.P., 1985. A pilot study of fuzzy set modification of Delphi. Human Systems Management 5, 76-80.
66.NTSB, 2001. Safety Report: Survivability of accidents involving Part 121 U.S. air carrier operations, 1983 through 2000. NTSB/SR-01/01, PB2001-917001, Notation 7322.
67.NTSB Training Center, 2008. Survival factors in aviation accidents, Available at: http://www.ntsb.gov/academy/CourseInfo/AS302_2008.htm.
68.Nunnally, J.C., 1978. Psychometric Theory. 2nd ed. New York: McGraw-Hill, Inc.
69.Purser, D., 1996. Behavioural impairment in smoke environments. Toxicology 115 (1-3), 25-40.
70.Sarkos, C. P., 1996. Application of full-scale fire tests to characterize and improve the aircraft postcrash fire environment. Toxicology 115 (1-3), 79-87.
71.Snow, C.C., Carroll, J.J., and Allgood, M. A., 1970. Survival in emergency escape from passenger aircraft. Technical Report, DOT/FAA/AM-70/12.
72.Speitel, L. C., 1996. Fractional effective dose model for post-crash aircraft survivability. Toxicology 115 (1-3), 167-177.
73.Toyama, K., 2006. Factors related to passenger and crew survivability in aircraft accidents in the United States. A Thesis submitted to the Faculty of the Graduate School of Arts and Sciences of Georgetown University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Public Policy.
74.Transport Canada Civil Aviation, 2006. Available at: http://www.tc.gc.ca/CivilAviation/commerce/CabinSafety/program.htm.
75.Trimble, E. J., 1996. The management of aircraft passenger survival in fire. Toxicology 115 (1-3), 41-61.
76.Williams, F., 1992. Reasoning with statistics: How to read quantitative research. Fort Wroth, Texas: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich.
77.Zadeh, L. A., 1965. Fuzzy sets. Information and Control 8 (3), 338-353.