Posts: 2454
From: U.K.
Registered: Jul 2009

Posts: 3811
From: Midwest, USA
Registered: Jul 2005

posted 01-14-2010 12:11 PM               

---

I think the simplest explanation is that shuttle commanders (and pilots) tend to get chosen from the pool of military test pilots. And while the military is gradually accepting more women into their ranks as pilots, it's going to be a long time before true equality is achieved in all aspects of the armed forces.

Whereas, mission specialists are often chosen from a wider spectrum of professions... with many of those professions being historically quicker to accept women in their ranks than the military has.

Posts: 2169
From: McKinney TX (USA)
Registered: Aug 2005

posted 01-14-2010 05:33 PM               

---

As a 20 year career Air Force pilot, I can say without equivocation that the issue is not the military accepting women into the ranks as pilots (and test pilots), the issue is women wanting to be there in the first place.

It is a profession that tends to attract far more men than women, and when women do become military pilots they often end up serving out their time and then getting out of the military to raise kids (or continue other careers).

------------------
John Capobianco
Camden DE

Posts: 3811
From: Midwest, USA
Registered: Jul 2005

posted 01-15-2010 01:48 PM               

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by capoetc:
As a 20 year career Air Force pilot, I can say without equivocation that the issue is not the military accepting women into the ranks as pilots (and test pilots)

---

That might be true of today's military, but it hasn't always been that way. The USAF didn't start training the first female pilots until 1976. Eileen Collins and Pam Melroy represent some of the early Air Force pilots who completed their Undergraduate Pilot Training in the late 70s and early 80s. (They didn't have their first shuttle commands until 20+ years later, however.) As the numbers of females in military piloting positions grows, the number of female NASA commanders will also grow...but one should expect a time lag between those two numbers.

I do agree, however, that piloting jobs have generally attracted more men than women. But part of the reason behind that might be that women haven't always had the same opportunities as men have had. As that inequality goes away and more young women see role models (such as Collins and Melroy) in high profile piloting roles, I suspect more women will eventually be attracted to the pilot's seat.

Posts:
From:
Registered:

posted 01-15-2010 02:12 PM               

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by mjanovec:
That might be true of today's military, but it hasn't always been that way. The USAF didn't start training the first female pilots until 1976.

---

Might that have something to do with the physiological differences between men and women? (though not PC to say so, such differences do exist). Prior to the widespread integration of fly-by-wire systems into modern combat airframes, considerable upper-body strength would have been required to manage the aircraft flight control surfaces (perhaps under "dead-stick" conditions they still do)...

Posts: 3811
From: Midwest, USA
Registered: Jul 2005

posted 01-15-2010 03:19 PM               

---

While men might have some advantages in upper body strength, I have trouble believing that was the main reason that women were kept out of the cockpits of combat aircraft.

The WASPs in WWII proved that women were perfectly capable of flying all US military aircraft from that era...including the B-26 Marauder (which many male pilots declared unsafe...until they saw women flying them, that is). Many of those aircraft could be quite demanding in terms of strength required for control inputs.

And the Soviet Union went one step farther in WWII, placing women in the cockpit for combat assignments...some of whom became fighter aces.

Posts:
From:
Registered:

Posts: 3811
From: Midwest, USA
Registered: Jul 2005

posted 01-15-2010 04:50 PM               

---

The Soviet female fighter pilots surely encountered high G combat conditions... and it didn't stop them from being successful.

Even if strength was a cited factor to keep female pilots out of high performance fighter jets, there were still a number of piloting roles that didn't require high G handling, such as transport pilots, bomber pilots, etc. So why were women also excluded from those roles?

No... I think the real reason women weren't allowed as pilots until the 70s is far simpler to explain: sexism. Of course, those who fought to keep women out of the cockpit surely cited physiological reasons for doing so. But that was only done to hide their true motives.

Posts: 2454
From: U.K.
Registered: Jul 2009

posted 01-15-2010 05:58 PM               

---

A lot of interesting responses. However, if my original posting is correct, it's been 12 years since it was concluded by the DoD that women were the better pilots. So, I return to my original question - why, if they are theoretically better at docking, haven't NASA made more use of them when servicing the ISS?

How many qualified female astronauts does NASA have available?

Posts: 42988
From: Houston, TX
Registered: Nov 1999

Posts: 152
From: Peoria, AZ, USA
Registered: Oct 2009

Posts: 100
From: Batavia, Illinois
Registered: Aug 2007

Posts: 1042
From: UK
Registered: Apr 2005

posted 01-16-2010 02:55 AM            

---

Why does it matter there are few female shuttle commanders anymore? That programme is ending.

Orion capsules won't necessarily need to be "flown" by military pilots. In fact, I hope NASA will let civilian astronauts serve as commander as has happened with Soyuz.

That would mean more opportunities for women to be in charge.

Posts: 1506
From: Beverly Hills, Calif.
Registered: Nov 2000

posted 01-16-2010 03:02 AM               

---

A 1997 US Department of Defense study concluded beyond doubt [emphasis mine] that women pilots' reaction times and coolness under pressure are better than men's.

Not so sure I can agree with that statement; it kind of seems to defy common sense - why should women's reaction times be better and "coolness under pressure" (whatever that means, or however it was tested and "verified") be better than a man's? And second, we live in an awfully politically correct country and age - seems to me ANY study, under certain circumstances and pressures, can bring about results that may have more to do with directives or expectations than genuine accuracy.

I'm not saying that women aren't or couldn't innately be better pilots than men, ...only that I'd need to see reams of data, over a longer period of time, and replicated by other studies elsewhere, before concluding that women, "beyond doubt", are better suited than men to pilot air or spacecraft.

Posts: 3110
From: Paris, France
Registered: Aug 2003

posted 01-16-2010 03:21 AM               

---

If we're talking psychology, one of the strongest underlying motivations (conscious or subconscious) behind much male behaviour - and especially high-risk high-visibility behaviour - is to impress the opposite sex.

For this reason while there may well be a significant number of women with the ambition to become fighter pilots they will always be heavily outnumbered by men with the same ambition.

And yes, I know there are plenty of more noble reasons why men become fighter pilots, not least patriotism. I'm just saying that underlying everything there will always be the fact that it impresses the girls.

Posts: 2454
From: U.K.
Registered: Jul 2009

Posts: 3811
From: Midwest, USA
Registered: Jul 2005

posted 01-16-2010 07:29 AM               

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by moorouge:
As a rider to this topic - when, if ever, are we likely to see a woman on the Moon? Will the privacy problems of Apollo/LM type modules dictate that crews will be one sex only?

---

I would guess we'll see a woman on the moon on one of the next missions to land there. There are enough women in mission specialist roles that it would make sense that at least one will be on the first few missions to return.

Regarding privacy on board an Apollo-type capsule, I'm sure they can find a way to ensure some sort of privacy... perhaps by having a crew member go to the lower equipment bay to do their "business" while the others stay up above. And really, a small curtain is all the privacy one gets on the shuttle... so it's not all that different. Plus, I imagine most astronauts are willing to make some sacrifices in their privacy in order to fly in space.