Are female pilots as good?

Originally Posted by Air Force Brat

You may have been given a slanted impression blade, all pilots fly by the seat of their pants,

So thats the true meaning...interesting

the person that was telling me the story said he learn't to fly by the seat of his pants in his dads crop duster, using gut feeling and feel , rather than fandangled instruments. Mind you this guy learnt to fly in the 50's.. He went on to become a Wing Commander/Col in the RAF. He was in charge of aircraft maintenence ,chiefly the Lightnings that were charged with patrolling the North Sea and shooting down rockets or something at the height of the cold war.

I don't know whether to belive him but he me stories on how much one got of the pilot drank the previous evening, that there was no way he would have passed a sobriety test to drive a car let alone pilot a plane.

Like I said my reporter friend freaked on me, and she was a jock type, I'll try anything chick, she said "I can't do this." No you're doing fine, I keep burning film, I got some great shots, she said "I can't do this", about four octaves higher in pitch, No your doing fine, I keep burning film, still getting some great air to air shots, finally at the top of her lungs she screeches at me, "I can't do this"! Yes maam, I've got the airplane, heres the camera, a quick call to my wingman and he slides under my belly and forms up on my right wing and shes back in her comfort zone after a few minutes on the shutter, and she gets some great shots?

It's the socialization, isn't it? If we had put a man in that position that would have been absolutely unacceptable and embarrassing for a man to freak out like that. I think that women in general aren't socialized to have a certain fighter jock mentality; a certain obsession with excellence, with doing the job right, with examining every aspect of the craft to become an expert. Men can end up finding out that their self-worth is in a large capacity tied to their excellency in a craft, and they're socialized to have a certain degree of competitiveness, but for women this is less common and when it does occur occurs to a lesser degree.

Originally Posted by Inst

It's the socialization, isn't it? If we had put a man in that position that would have been absolutely unacceptable and embarrassing for a man to freak out like that. I think that women in general aren't socialized to have a certain fighter jock mentality; a certain obsession with excellence, with doing the job right, with examining every aspect of the craft to become an expert. Men can end up finding out that their self-worth is in a large capacity tied to their excellency in a craft, and they're socialized to have a certain degree of competitiveness, but for women this is less common and when it does occur occurs to a lesser degree.

Actually Inst the pressure on women to excell in the cockpit is through the roof, hence they may have trouble being one of the boys so to speak and being able to relax and fly the airplane. Now I'm not saying they can't, I'm saying its harder for them, and I really feel sorry for a women trying to break into this male world, if a woman likes men and is not threatened by them or a threat to them, she has a much higher likely hood of success. All pilot communities "rag on " each other to some extent if there is competition, and in a fighter squadron there will "always" be competition, a good thing and a bad thing. Girls are far more concerned with excellence, where the avg male fighter pilot knows he's good, and when he goes to fight, he is concerned about fighting and surviving the fight, whereas our girl might be more concerned about how she is perceived by the rest of the group, is she good enough and that alone plays with your head.

Originally Posted by bladerunner

That could be the case, the person that was telling me the story said he learn't to fly by the seat of his pants in his dads crop duster, using gut feeling and feel , rather than fandangled instruments.

Well its all a matter of perspective, if your head is in the cockpit watching the guages, you will miss the big picture, all pilots have to maintain an instrument scan, and most aircraft I have flown have the old "sacred six", airspeed, altitude, turn and bank, attitude gyro, vsi, and heading indicator. You have to maintain your scan, while maintaining situational awareness of the aircraft and a scan outside for other aircraft, obstructions, and navigating etc, etc. Hence the advent of the HUD on fighter aircraft, it is a game changer, although I really don't like it as well for basic instrument flying, and yes I have spent a little time under the hood. One of the basic flight test checks is "unusual attitude recovery", the drill is the student is under the hood, and lowers his visual scan to his lap, while the instuctor takes the airplane and puts it in an attitude from which it "must" be recovered, it could be a climb or dive or any combination of bank or pitch. The aircraft may be on the verge of a stall, with an extremely high nose up attitude, throttle at idle, or in a dive, in a steep bank, full throttle and airspeed approaching VNE. The instrutor then states, "you've got the airplane" and you must recover, referencing only your flight instruments. Now it is likely that the flight instructor went through several oscillations in order to confuse your sense of equilibrium and spatial orientation!

What your old head was trying to say was that he had an educated butt, and yes that definetly makes you a more capable pilot, you know what the airplane is saying, not just some instrument indications, and as my little tale of unusual attitude recovery illustrates, you have to process information on your main-frame from every source, in the case of the unusual attitude your inner ear will lie, due the fluid being sloshed around, thats why you may be dizzy after hitting your head, or having an inner ear infection. I had ear surgery to correct a broken ear drum, flying a friends Cherokee Arrow at altitude and couldn't valsalve, or clear the pressure due to summer allergies, in the process the Dr. nicked my inner ear, and my head spun for a week, even after he patched my inner ear, I had vertigo for months, so driveing I felt like I was constantly turning left, I had to retrain my brain by following my eyes instead of my inner ear, much the same as instrument flying. Rather than wait to get back in the airplane, I got right back in it, and yes it was very weird, but it was fine.

I really think female pilots have done more than enough to be taken seriously. Their excellent performance in WWII shows that they can compete with the best of men. I remember a story of an A10 over Iraq in 2003 which was hit by a SAM and badly damaged. The female pilot brought the aircraft back to base and made a successful landing. Female pilots have also flown British Apaches over Afghanistan and performed admirably. And that's a difficult aircraft to master.

I honestly believe that this thread in itself is flawed. Flying/controlling a piece of machine, like a plane, requires the kind of skills shared by all human beings. Gender is NOT a factor. Simply asking a question like this in the 1st place suggests discrimination...

Originally Posted by vesicles

I honestly believe that this thread in itself is flawed. Flying/controlling a piece of machine, like a plane, requires the kind of skills shared by all human beings. Gender is NOT a factor. Simply asking a question like this in the 1st place suggests discrimination...

No, we're not going to hire anyone, and its a more than fair question, while I appreciate your sensitivity, lets leave Political Correctness out of the picture. There is a great deal of pressure to feminize many elements of our world, and our own USAF is honestly suffering, and its capabilities are suffering, it is a much less capable fighting force that it was even 10 or 15 years ago. When political correctness overshadows real world performance and capabilities, and it does in the US military today, you are putting your future in the hands of also rans. I do have seven daughters, while I would be proud of any one of them being a pilot, I would not push a single one to fly who didn't have the flying "MOJO". While lots of folks are capable of driving an aircraft around the sky, many of those are not pilots in the sense that they are the masters of their trade, and when you put that person male or female in the left front seat of a nuclear weapon, if hes a guy, you wash him out, if that guys a girl, then it all gets real complicated in a hurry.

I suppose it's a tolerance for casualties; if you use sex-based discrimination you're conducting social engineering to achieve a policy result; but at least at the beginning, or the middle, or the end, inferior-grade assets will get people killed or result in the need to use higher quantities of assets to achieve the same result.

On the other hand, I do recall that women pilots are highly in demand if only as a way to increase the labor pool; they might not be best for the job, but that's Ricardo's Comparative Advantage for you.