What's new

Women not fit to fly combat jets: IAF boss

anant_s

SENIOR MEMBER
Joined
Aug 21, 2012
Messages
5,600
Reaction score
92
Country
India
Location
India
Women not fit to fly combat jets: IAF boss

NEW DELHI: From US and Russia to Turkey and Pakistan, countries around the globe have for long had women fighter pilots. Some even became "aces" with over five "kills", a few got killed in combat.
Many nations, including Malaysia, Sri Lanka and Bangladesh, also deploy women on warships. Women officers in the US even serve on ballistic missile submarines, and may be joined in the underwater nuclear arm by enlisted women sailors soon.
arup-raha.jpg

In India, the converse remains true. The top civilian leadership and military brass are steadfast about their objection to deploying women in combat roles. So, women here cannot tear into the skies as fighter pilots, serve on sea-faring warships or join the infantry, armoured corps or artillery.

Leave alone the combat role, even their battle to get permanent commission in the "support arms" is still to be fully won. Women have been allowed to join the armed forces as officers since the early-1990s but they currently number just 2,960 of the 59,400 officers in the 1.3-million strong armed forces. The defence establishment has repeatedly thwarted their demand for permanent commission due to "operational, practical and cultural problems".

The mental barriers are still up. IAF chief Air Chief Marshal Arup Raha, answering questions in Kanpur on Tuesday, said the capabilities of women "air warriors" in his force was never in doubt but biological and natural constraints precluded them from flying fighters.

"As far as flying fighter planes is concerned, it's a very challenging job. Women are by nature not physically suited for flying fighters for long hours, especially when they are pregnant or have other health problems,'' said ACM Raha, as per news reports.

Defence minister A K Antony, in turn, told Parliament just last month that two studies - by the integrated defence staff HQ in 2006 and a high-level tri-Service committee in 2011 - had both rejected induction of women in combat duties. A serving major-general said, "As a society, we are not ready for our women in combat roles. What if they are taken PoWs?"

Yes, there are some practical problems. Indian warships, leave alone the cramped submarines, do not have separate facilities for women in terms of cabins or bathrooms. A woman officer leading a platoon in the hot pursuit of militants in thick jungles or in a bunker with soldiers at the LoC is inconceivable as of now.

But equally, technology has virtually made attributes like physical toughness redundant. Moreover, women helicopters and transport aircraft pilots in IAF have been found as proficient as their male counterparts in flying high-risk rescue and other missions. Some women pilots have even flown sorties of AN-32 aircraft to Daulat Beg Oldi in Ladakh, the world's highest advanced landing ground at 16,500-feet, as well as IL-76 heavy-lift aircraft to Leh.

A major hindrance is that it takes over Rs 13 crore to train a single fighter pilot, with the huge investment being recovered over 13-14 years of active flying. "Women fighter pilots may get married, have children, disrupting our tight flying schedules. Fighter flying requires very high level of physical and mental fitness," said an officer.

But many feel there is a need to re-look the entire issue. "Women officers may be clamouring more for permanent commission. But they must also have the option to choose if they want combat duties, be it in a fighter or on a warship, even if the ground close-quarter combat is barred for them," said a senior officer.

Women not fit to fly combat jets: IAF boss - The Times of India
 
. .
Do Indian women even want such a role ? I am sure most don't. Anyway, the option should be open to them.
 
.
PAF has female pilots and Id assumed IAF would too. Surprising.
 
. . .
Pilots, yes. But not in combat roles.

Essentially not fighter pilots. women also fly transports in civilian life. Heck of a difference.
Although I don't disagree that women should not face combat unless absolutely needed(for the after effects of being shot down).. they should not be barred from flying fighters. the USAF faced this issue too initially of pregnancies and the lot... eventually as society evolved women learnt to cope around such issues.
Additionally, female pilots have been assigned to instructor roles and help fill in certain gaps in operational service.

Still.. the bone of contention is this main concern ...and I agree with it whole heartedly.

"As a society, we are not ready for our women in combat roles. What if they are taken PoWs?"
 
. .
Essentially not fighter pilots. women also fly transports in civilian life. Heck of a difference.
Although I don't disagree that women should not face combat unless absolutely needed(for the after effects of being shot down).. they should not be barred from flying fighters. the USAF faced this issue too initially of pregnancies and the lot... eventually as society evolved women learnt to cope around such issues.
Additionally, female pilots have been assigned to instructor roles and help fill in certain gaps in operational service.

Still.. the bone of contention is this main concern ...and I agree with it whole heartedly.

"As a society, we are not ready for our women in combat roles. What if they are taken PoWs?"

I believe that is up to the women to decide. When they sign up for combat ops, not just Fighter aircraft flying, they know the dangers they are getting into. The Airforce needs to provide the platform. If women still don't join, that's a different story. But taking away the choice because YOU ASSUMED that it is wrong, is i believe ignorance.
Same can be said of a female army medic who gets ambushed during wartime? What then?
 
.
Common reasons given..........

1)"Women cannot be used in combat scenarios as we can't afford to have them captured as prisoners of war,"
2)"operational, practical and cultural problems". (women in uniform still dont get salutes from soldiers...an issue that gets reported so often in Indian defence forces)
3) Borabora experience,US airforce:
We invest Rs.1.66 crore on training a fighter pilot and expect 12 to 14 years of service. If the air force doesn't recover that investment in the form of service, it's a waste of money and time for the organisation," he said. "Women have to go for their family duties after a certain period...for physiological reasons, are not available for duty all the time."
4) Mostly gender-related- women are physically unfit and the services cannot afford separate facilities for a handful of women combatants.



So those are practical reasons ONLY....if the governments had shown spunk then there would have been many women fighter pilots.
 
Last edited:
. . .
I believe that is up to the women to decide. When they sign up for combat ops, not just Fighter aircraft flying, they know the dangers they are getting into. The Airforce needs to provide the platform. If women still don't join, that's a different story. But taking away the choice because YOU ASSUMED that it is wrong, is i believe ignorance.
Same can be said of a female army medic who gets ambushed during wartime? What then?

Not entirely. It is essentially the countries budget that gets sunk in training a pilot. Now, if that pilot is shot down.. and divulges information in return for not being sexually assaulted or tortured.. who loses the most? Who has more to lose in terms of physical hardship and mental torture .. a man or woman? Can the mental torment of rape followed by illegitimate pregnancy ever be replicated for a man?

Men and women are not equal.. if they were equal they would have similar physical parts and psychology..which is proven to be not the same. Its clear that each was built for certain strengths. Now, that does not mean that there aren't common tasks they cannot carry out equally well. Flying is one. But there are aspects of combat that put women at greater risk compared to men. And yes, a female army medic that gets ambushed is also putting herself in similar danger.. which is why most army medics who are female are at the field hospital.
The first PAF experience with female pilots had many of them out of action after marriage and pregnancy..costing the PAF an asset literally wasting away. Most were unfit to fly after that.. leading to a total loss of investment.

Women can and have defended themselves against men coming out victorious. But that is only when men fail at their primary task.
A female flying CAPs should be encouraged.. but a female on interdiction puts her at risk.

Our society is not ready for women in combat or any role in which she may have to juggle with her family. Unless there is support from the family and they are ready to compromise. It should be disallowed. Western societies have much more independent women who decide their own fate.. that still has time to form here.

May he meant Indian women not firt for so and so .

Though its stupid of him even to say that .
Pakistani pilot Aysha farooq too part in recent operation against terrorists in Waziristan

What about when she gets married? and has a kid? even with one year maternity leave.. will she be able to return to full fitness?
recent PAF experiences in that regard have not been too positive.
 
. . .
Back
Top Bottom