» Story
 
  SocialTwist Tell-a-Friend
Air Force: Pregnancy makes women pilots cost-inefficient
Sunetra Choudhary, Tuesday November 17, 2009, New Delhi

In a week's time, President Pratibha Patil will fly a half hour sortie on a Sukhoi. It's a feat also accomplished by her predecessor, President Kalam.

But setting a tone that could kill Patil's high, the Air Force has offered this startling opinion: in general, training women as pilots just isn't cost-efficient. Explaining that it costs about 11 crores to train a pilot, the Vice Chief of the Air Staff stated, "Nature's way of life is that you get married, bring up a family. Now the latest position on ladies flying is that if a lady goes into family way, she is off-duty for 10 out of 12 months. Now while we can always utilize... a lady in some other job, but in the pure profession in which we have invested so much if the poor lady herself who has contributed so much... if we cannot utilise... then it is not fruitful for either party. But we are looking at it and in a few more years we can see a change coming with certain pre-conditions."

Air Marshal PK Barbora is expected to confront a deluge of angry reactions from women activists, and from women in the Armed Forces, who point out that their careers entail daily battles against sexism.

Officially, defence forces say women are not psychologically fit for combat, but the fact that 75-year old Pratibha Patil has been declared fit to fly only adds insult to the injury.

In her defence, President Pratibha Patil's aides say she hops on the treadmill every morning and evening, and works out often with a yoga instructor.

"The President does want empowerment for women," said Archana Datta, OSD to President.

So, while China, Israel, America and even our neighbours Pakistan have all allowed women into combat, Indian forces remain shy. In their defence, India says only one out of 7 women remain in Pakistan's combat force but that's one more than us.

Air Force said that it was the President's desire to fly a fighter plane but for other women, who are not Supreme Commander of Chief, their wish to fly combat cannot be fulfilled just yet.
 
 
More »
 
SocialTwist Tell-a-Friend     
Comments: Read | Post
Tags: Air Force, India, pilots, women
Comments
Posted by rednib on Nov 20, 2009
Since the induction of the lady pilots in transport and helicopters there has been a continous evaluation of their performance. IAF has conducted many studies to look into the performance of these pilots, with an aim of making a long term policy on their employment and also to see if they can be used in combat roles. While I am not exactly privy to such studies but there are concerns about the real operational utilization of them. While I agree that in piloting and even in combat they would be as good as their male counterpart, but in their being used effectively as combat pilots there are doubts as suggested by the studies. It in no way reflects a sexist attitude or that women are inferior. Having been associated with the initial batches of women pilots I can assure evryone that they were as good as any other male pilot. What the Air Marshal is suggesting is that the women pilots can not be used optimally ( They can not be used optimally not bcos they are weak or lack something but only because of host of reasons beyond their control). IAF is the user and it is their responsibility to correctly tell about their experience with women pilots. Thats what exactly the Air Marshal has done.
Posted by Rajdeep on Nov 18, 2009
It's a different thing in being a joyrider and a pilot in charge of the controls. Patil is only flying as a passenger, not piloting a billion dollar aircraft, otherwise the airforce would have to invest 11 crores in her also before this flight. The Vice Chief has only stated the pragmatic. Typically a lady officer is only effectively available to the service for as long as she's single. Once she get's married she has certain family obligations such as looking after the children she has given birth to. Her risk taking ability is also severely curtailed by her basic instinct of motherhood. If you spend so much time and money to entrust a combat aircraft to a woman who would not be available when you really need her, what's the point? Does the Air Force have to make this choice only so that gender equality can be seen to have been enforced? Is gender equality more important than national security? I believe that right thinking citizens would have the correct answer. In any case no one is questioning the right of women to fly here. It's only about having to make the difficult choice between what's the right thing to do and what isn't.
Advertisement
Advertisement
On Facebook