Jump to content
Baseops Forums
alwyn2d

For the Vertically Challenged

Recommended Posts

Posted (edited)

It's official, there is no longer a height requirement for flight school. Do they get extra pillows, if so, do they come in different sizes? 

Edited by alwyn2d

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It's official, there is no longer a height requirement for fight school. Do they get extra pillows, if so, do they come in different sizes? 
You serious Clark?

Wow... I went through hell trying to get a height waiver 17 some odd years ago. This was after I passed my FC1, got commissioned and then DQ'd at Brooks for being .3" too short on my standing height. Got the waiver, but it took 4 months and wound up getting Heavy-tracked from Day 1. So... you can be 4'10" and go to UPT?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
57 minutes ago, alwyn2d said:

It's official, there is no longer a height requirement for fight school. Do they get extra pillows, if so, do they come in different sizes? 

there's a school now? it was just a club back in my day, and we didn't talk about.

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is great news, especially for women. Is there something pushing this, as I've seen several Facebook postings touching this topic as well. 

(caveat before I get mowed down for being a SJW - which I am not, yes I'm aware of the risk associated with not being physiologically proportional for the design of many cockpits)

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

It's just more than for women. There are other ethic groups that can take advantage of the recent change.

Edited by alwyn2d

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, alwyn2d said:

It's just more than for women. There are other ethic groups that can take advantage of the recent change.

Women only came to the forefront because there is a Lt Col on facebook right now trying to collect statistics on women who were denied entry into flight training since 2002 based on height restrictions. Did not know that only 40% of women actually fit into the height profile  required, making it extremely narrow for them. But it makes sense if you think about it. Most of the ergonomics for these things were designed prior to women flying and were probably built around male proportions. 

Do you know if the height restriction works both ways? Because I believe you could also be denied for being too tall as well. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, FLEA said:

Women only came to the forefront because there is a Lt Col on facebook right now trying to collect statistics on women who were denied entry into flight training since 2002 based on height restrictions. Did not know that only 40% of women actually fit into the height profile  required, making it extremely narrow for them. But it makes sense if you think about it. Most of the ergonomics for these things were designed prior to women flying and were probably built around male proportions. 

Do you know if the height restriction works both ways? Because I believe you could also be denied for being too tall as well. 

I haven't heard if they've changed the max height restriction, but there are certainly limits for sitting height and butt to knee (with some wiggle room with waivers).  The latter limit being related to lower leg injuries in the event of ejection from certain aircraft.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It does still sound like there is a limit to what MWS you can get depending on height, even with getting rid of the initial height requirement 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, ToHoldShort said:

It does still sound like there is a limit to what MWS you can get depending on height, even with getting rid of the initial height requirement 

I dont know, I've seen some rather tall/large people cram into the Viper.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, FLEA said:

Did not know that only 40% of women actually fit into the height profile  required, making it extremely narrow for them. 

I find that very difficult to believe. I’ve flown with dudes that couldn’t have been over 5’3” all the way up to 6’6”+ in a variety of jets and way more than 40% of the women I know fit within those bookends. Admittedly, I’m from the upper Midwest with a bunch of Viking shield maidens running around, but that figure seems crazy low.

  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Danger41 said:

I find that very difficult to believe. I’ve flown with dudes that couldn’t have been over 5’3” all the way up to 6’6”+ in a variety of jets and way more than 40% of the women I know fit within those bookends. Admittedly, I’m from the upper Midwest with a bunch of Viking shield maidens running around, but that figure seems crazy low.

I just stole it from that Lt Col on FB I mentioned. So I can't justify it's accuracy. But she was working this issue on staff so I'm dangerously assuming she has some sort of accurate data to work from. 

I do have at least one female friend who was denied entry to pilot training for height and she never seemed that short to me. Maybe 5'4"? 

It also sounds like a lot of people were not approved waivers that should have been but that's speculation on my part. 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, alwyn2d said:

It's just more than for women. There are other ethic groups that can take advantage of the recent change.

Like midgets!

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, FLEA said:

I just stole it from that Lt Col on FB I mentioned. So I can't justify it's accuracy. But she was working this issue on staff so I'm dangerously assuming she has some sort of accurate data to work from. 

I do have at least one female friend who was denied entry to pilot training for height and she never seemed that short to me. Maybe 5'4"? 

It also sounds like a lot of people were not approved waivers that should have been but that's speculation on my part. 

Just read the AF times article. I had the stat backwards. 40% were unqualified without a waiver. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I just stole it from that Lt Col on FB I mentioned. So I can't justify it's accuracy. But she was working this issue on staff so I'm dangerously assuming she has some sort of accurate data to work from. 
I do have at least one female friend who was denied entry to pilot training for height and she never seemed that short to me. Maybe 5'4"? 
It also sounds like a lot of people were not approved waivers that should have been but that's speculation on my part. 
64" used to be the standing height requirement without a waiver. I forget what the min sitting height was. There were also butt-to-knee and armspan measurements taken on me at Brooks at the time and apparently they took those from people that didn't meet the height requirements. Wright-Patt was working on an anthropometrics database at the time, which could basically spit out which aircraft you could fly based on your measurements. Most of the fighters were "marginal" for me, but the T-38 was "red", which of course prevented me from getting to any of the fighters. Oddly enough, all of the heavies were green. Again, this was for being .3" too short on standing height (63.7"). I met the sitting height requirement.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...