First female F-35 pilot begins training

Production milestones, roll-outs, test flights, service introduction and other milestones.
  • Author
  • Message
Offline
User avatar

sferrin

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 5375
  • Joined: 22 Jul 2005, 03:23

Unread post08 May 2015, 13:40

disconnectedradical wrote:Looks like sexism is alive and well in the U.S. in 2015.


I know it's not fashionable to acknowledge reality but physically, in general, women aren't as strong as men. And yes, in many cases standards have been lowered to accommodate them all in the name of political correctness. How acknowledging that is considered "sexism" is anybody's guess. Maybe that's just your defense mechanism, who knows? That said, a pilot is unlikely to find themselves trying to bench 300 pounds while flying a plane, so absolute physical strength isn't as much as a factor here.
"There I was. . ."
Offline
User avatar

Dragon029

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1347
  • Joined: 22 Dec 2014, 07:13

Unread post08 May 2015, 15:46

sferrin wrote:
disconnectedradical wrote:Looks like sexism is alive and well in the U.S. in 2015.


I know it's not fashionable to acknowledge reality but physically, in general, women aren't as strong as men. And yes, in many cases standards have been lowered to accommodate them all in the name of political correctness. How acknowledging that is considered "sexism" is anybody's guess. Maybe that's just your defense mechanism, who knows? That said, a pilot is unlikely to find themselves trying to bench 300 pounds while flying a plane, so absolute physical strength isn't as much as a factor here.


I think the point though (and don't get me wrong, this isn't directed at you) is that in just about every role in practically every western military, fitness requirements are lowered for women only at a baseline; ie, to retain their job as an intelligence officer or administration officer, they only need to be able to do ~3/4 as many push ups or whatever as males, because the risk vs reward of being able to recruit more intelligent people for the modern military, where information, not bayonets win wars far outweighs the side affect of having members incapable of dragging a 500lb incapacitated male around. While the numbers would take years to dig up, I practically guarantee that the number of lives saved because a female soldier has been able to get vital intel on IED locations and enemy force movement from men-shy Afghani women far outweighs those lost (if any) because a female's reduced physical standards has left dieing men on the field or slowed down a team.

Plus, when it comes to 'frontline' combat units and special forces that allow female personnel, many have standards that are equal, which is why there have been (AFAIK) single digits of females passing Ranger selection, etc.
Offline

deadseal

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 561
  • Joined: 13 Jan 2008, 01:17

Unread post08 May 2015, 15:46

xt0xickillax wrote: Also, you have the fact that female pilots have higher accident rates than men. I would be surprised if this pilot wasn't given special treatment and pampering during training due her being a woman.



please back this up with proof. As to your other stupid comment, i have trained and given checkrides to female pilots and have never once given an ounce of leeway in upholding standards nor ever been asked to by my leadership. So for all you sexist retards....in the fighter community there is no "special treatment". This comes from me, a Sefe and IP.
Offline
User avatar

lamoey

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1065
  • Joined: 25 Apr 2004, 17:44
  • Location: 77550

Unread post08 May 2015, 16:59

So we know that females are underrepresented in most armed forced, but how about this forum? I have never even thought about it before, but after seeing the first female F-35 pilot, which I think is just as natural as a male pilot, it occurred to me that I have never become aware of any females in this forum. Perhaps that is good, but I'm still curious.
Former Flight Control Technican - We keep'em flying
Offline
User avatar

spazsinbad

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 23157
  • Joined: 05 May 2009, 21:31
  • Location: ɐıןɐɹʇsn∀¯\_(ツ)_/¯
  • Warnings: -2

Unread post08 May 2015, 18:10

Our RAAF has been angling for a female fighter pilot first for many years now. Although there are plenty of other RAAF aircraft female pilots, none have been able to get to fighters. So even though there is an emphasis on this aspect the RAAF have not 'allowed' a not capable female pilot to be a fighter pilot. I agree with all the positive comments about female pilots and I'll wager they will do well in the F-35s because of the new paradigm with sensor fusion and tactical / strategic thinking required - purely my guesswork however.

AS FOR Hultgren: I have read many onesided reports (now many years ago) about how 'bad' Karen was at flying the F-14 - especially for carrier approaches. I do not myself believe that USN LSOs would allow a sub standard pilot to approach a carrier at any time. Sure Karen may have been at the low end of the standard BUT SO ARE MANY MALE PILOTS - hence the standard required. Karen had an engine failure at a critical point during the turn to finals whilst any pilot would have been pressed to deal with it. AFAIK she hesitated to eject which cost her life - many male pilots have made a similar error.
RAN FAA A4G Skyhawk 1970s: https://www.faaaa.asn.au/spazsinbad-a4g/ AND https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCwqC_s6gcCVvG7NOge3qfAQ/
Offline
User avatar

popcorn

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 7697
  • Joined: 24 Sep 2008, 08:55

Unread post09 May 2015, 00:28

Females in general seem to be particularly adept at multi-tasking which should serve them well in the cockpit of a 5Gen aircraft.

I'm just curious it took so long, female Raptor drivers were involved much earlier in that program.
"When a fifth-generation fighter meets a fourth-generation fighter—the [latter] dies,”
CSAF Gen. Mark Welsh
Offline

checksixx

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1525
  • Joined: 20 Jul 2005, 04:28
  • Location: Langley AFB, VA

Unread post09 May 2015, 01:52

I'm honestly surprised this is even news...there's been women in the cockpit since before I came in, in 1995. Saying this woman is learning to fly a 'F-35' is like saying you heard a woman is learning to drive a 'Mustang'. To the end that this conversation turned too, I've never met a female fighter pilot that would have a problem out performing most men at a PT test.....just sayin'. ;-)
Offline

disconnectedradical

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 723
  • Joined: 31 Dec 2010, 00:44
  • Location: San Antonio, TX

Unread post09 May 2015, 02:45

sferrin wrote:
disconnectedradical wrote:Looks like sexism is alive and well in the U.S. in 2015.


I know it's not fashionable to acknowledge reality but physically, in general, women aren't as strong as men. And yes, in many cases standards have been lowered to accommodate them all in the name of political correctness. How acknowledging that is considered "sexism" is anybody's guess. Maybe that's just your defense mechanism, who knows? That said, a pilot is unlikely to find themselves trying to bench 300 pounds while flying a plane, so absolute physical strength isn't as much as a factor here.


You're extrapolating too much from my statements. What I refer as sexism is xt0xickillax's attempt to diminish and mock Lt. Col. Mau's accomplishment as somehow being the result of politics or some "political correctness" agenda with no evidence. Certainly there have been cases where women were appoint positions they weren't qualified for just for publicity. But unless you can prove that Lt. Col. Mau's assignment was due to some systematic preferential treatment in the name of political correctness, then you shouldn't make these insulting allegations. Now it's true that an average woman doesn't have the physical capabilities of the average man, and I'm opposed to lowering standards in order to accommodate a minority group. But that shouldn't mean we should close off the opportunity for women to try for positions such as infantry and what not if she is qualified and can meet all the male standards.
Offline
User avatar

spazsinbad

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 23157
  • Joined: 05 May 2009, 21:31
  • Location: ɐıןɐɹʇsn∀¯\_(ツ)_/¯
  • Warnings: -2

Unread post09 May 2015, 04:41

When the Pentagon First Let Women Fly in Combat (1993)
28 Apr 2015 Jen DiMascio in From The Archives

"Twenty-two years ago, U.S. Defense Secretary Les Aspin ordered the chiefs of the military to drop the prohibition on women flying in combat missions....

...Congress approved the proposal in that environment. By 1995, Martha McSally became the first woman to fly in combat, flying an A-10 Thunderbolt II on a mission in Iraq....

...But perhaps the way Washington and the military operate will change, too.

Within the military, more women than ever before are reaching leadership roles—the Air Force is led by Deborah James. Vice Adm. Michelle Howard is the Navy’s second-in-command, Gen. Janet Wolfenbarger leads Air Force Materiel Command and Gen. Lori Robinson commands Pacific Air Forces.

On Capitol Hill, three of the four women elected to the Senate in 1992 are leading key committees. And Martha McSally, who became the first female fighter pilot to fly in combat as a result of Aspin’s 1993 policy, is now serving her first term in Congress."

Source: http://aviationweek.com/blog/when-penta ... ombat-1993
RAN FAA A4G Skyhawk 1970s: https://www.faaaa.asn.au/spazsinbad-a4g/ AND https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCwqC_s6gcCVvG7NOge3qfAQ/
Offline

neurotech

Elite 2K

Elite 2K

  • Posts: 2346
  • Joined: 09 May 2012, 21:34

Unread post09 May 2015, 04:52

xt0xickillax wrote:So you guys are too quick to forget about Lt. Kara Hultgreen? Given her landing performance she had absolutely no place in the front seat of a F-14.

Your way out of line.

I'm guessing you've never landed on a carrier? There are actually a few male pilots who have ejected out twice, and kept their wings. I have not seen a female pilot who has ejected more than once. Isn't there a female F-16 pilot, callsign "Lucky" who has never ejected out or had a major mishap?

The F-14A was a difficult jet to land aboard a carrier, and Lt. Hultgreen had a mishap. Flying jets is a dangerous business.

Lt. Hultgreen had a respectable record in EA-6s before her transition to F-14s. This included a safe emergency landing with a gear failure. Various organizational factors, along with technical issues with the F-14A engines, that contributed to the mishap.

I've personally seen a F/A-18 flown by a female test pilot land with multiple hydraulic failures, seriously degrading the controllability of the jet. The jet landed safely, and zero mention in the media.

There is a few pilots on this forum who have had major emergencies, that could easily result in loosing a jet, and they still landed safely.

And as for LTC. Mau, like most pilots in the USAF (& USN, USMC) are not known to the general public. After 15+ years of serving her country, without making the news, she earned the right to fly a F-35. I'd almost bet she's had at least one serious emergency in 15 years of flying, and safely landed the jet.
Offline

xt0xickillax

Newbie

Newbie

  • Posts: 13
  • Joined: 03 Jul 2013, 03:36

Unread post15 May 2015, 21:28

sferrin wrote:
disconnectedradical wrote:Looks like sexism is alive and well in the U.S. in 2015.


I know it's not fashionable to acknowledge reality but physically, in general, women aren't as strong as men. And yes, in many cases standards have been lowered to accommodate them all in the name of political correctness. How acknowledging that is considered "sexism" is anybody's guess. Maybe that's just your defense mechanism, who knows? That said, a pilot is unlikely to find themselves trying to bench 300 pounds while flying a plane, so absolute physical strength isn't as much as a factor here.


Hear hear. Finally someone reasonable.

Lowering of standards is an ugly fact that so many won't recognize. Again, look at the standards for firefighters and police force and see how they are lowered to allow women to pass. And here's something else for everyone to think about.

http://www.researchgate.net/publication ... ine_Pilots
Offline
User avatar

lamoey

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1065
  • Joined: 25 Apr 2004, 17:44
  • Location: 77550

Unread post15 May 2015, 22:41

xt0xickillax wrote:
sferrin wrote:
disconnectedradical wrote:Looks like sexism is alive and well in the U.S. in 2015.


I know it's not fashionable to acknowledge reality but physically, in general, women aren't as strong as men. And yes, in many cases standards have been lowered to accommodate them all in the name of political correctness. How acknowledging that is considered "sexism" is anybody's guess. Maybe that's just your defense mechanism, who knows? That said, a pilot is unlikely to find themselves trying to bench 300 pounds while flying a plane, so absolute physical strength isn't as much as a factor here.


Hear hear. Finally someone reasonable.

Lowering of standards is an ugly fact that so many won't recognize. Again, look at the standards for firefighters and police force and see how they are lowered to allow women to pass. And here's something else for everyone to think about.

http://www.researchgate.net/publication ... ine_Pilots


Most of us have moved out of the middle ages where brut strength was the only thing that meant anything, so get used to it, or be miserable. Either way, keep it off this forum :twisted:
Former Flight Control Technican - We keep'em flying
Offline
User avatar

spazsinbad

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 23157
  • Joined: 05 May 2009, 21:31
  • Location: ɐıןɐɹʇsn∀¯\_(ツ)_/¯
  • Warnings: -2

Unread post16 May 2015, 09:18

Howard: Goal is 25 percent women in each Navy ship, squadron
15 May 2015 Wyatt Olson Stars and Stripes

" JOINT BASE PEARL HARBOR-HICKAM, Hawaii — The Navy is proceeding with its plan to increase the number of women in the service to 25 percent with a similar goal of attaining that ratio in each ship and squadron, the vice chief of naval operations said Thursday.

Women currently make up about 17 percent of the Navy, said Adm. Michelle Howard, who made a stop in Honolulu on her way to the International Maritime Defense Exhibition in Singapore, where she will meet with her counterparts from other nations in the region.

Howard, who became vice chief last year, told an all-hands call that women made up only 5 percent of the Navy when she joined in 1978.

“The reason women were such a small percentage of the Navy was that up until 1967, women could only be 2 percent of the armed forces; it was the law,” Howard said. “And up until 1967, women could only be the rank of captain or colonel, and there could only be one of them at a time. That was the law.”

Air Force Secretary Deborah Lee James said last fall during a stop at Pearl Harbor that the Air Force is made up of about 20 percent women but said she wanted to increase that number, possibly to 30 percent.

Howard said women make up about 46 percent of the civilian workforce, and studies by the Department of Labor have found that an organization achieves optimal performance when its workforce maintains at least 25 percent of whatever the minority ***** [S E X] might be.

Without that, there “are always accusations of tokenism” and “stereotyping,” she said.

For that reason, Howard proposed to the secretary of navy that the service “ought to be shooting for a Navy that’s about 25 percent women,” she said. At that level “workplace relationships get normalized,” she said.

Howard’s plan, however, goes beyond an overall number and seeks to specifically increase the number of women serving on each ship and squadron.

Because the Navy is globally distributed, a higher percentage of women is needed overall if they are to be represented in greater numbers in ships around the world, she said....

... Asked about overcoming a belief among some men that women aren’t physically up to the task of filling these elite combat positions, Howard said, “I can’t speak to the male perspective. I’m not a guy.”

After a pause she added: “I’ve served at sea for 30 years. I’ve been in command of a ship, know my community. I’ve been their leader, and my sailors have responded to that. And I believe I and my team have been successful in every mission we’ve been given.”"

Source: http://www.stripes.com/news/pacific/how ... n-1.346307
RAN FAA A4G Skyhawk 1970s: https://www.faaaa.asn.au/spazsinbad-a4g/ AND https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCwqC_s6gcCVvG7NOge3qfAQ/
Offline

thomonkey

Enthusiast

Enthusiast

  • Posts: 74
  • Joined: 26 Dec 2014, 21:11

Unread post16 May 2015, 20:17

I have no problem with women being in the military, but physical standards should not be lowered.
Offline
User avatar

KamenRiderBlade

Elite 2K

Elite 2K

  • Posts: 2635
  • Joined: 24 Nov 2012, 02:20
  • Location: USA

Unread post17 May 2015, 02:19

thomonkey wrote:I have no problem with women being in the military, but physical standards should not be lowered.


I concur, when a task requires physical strength as a core requirement, then the standards should be kept.

If it's a non physical role, then the physical standards should be kept appropriate for the gender.
PreviousNext

Return to F-35 milestones

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests