Navy / Army / AF pilot height restrictions?
 

I'm 200 cm tall - does that mean that my chances of being in ADF aviation are well and truly zero?

In other words - is the 193cm height limit strictly enforced? Or is selection done on more of a case-by-case basis, depending on which type of aircraft I want to fly and which job I apply for?

Cockpit of the MRH, for example, seems roomy compared with Kiowas et al, so if I raise that during the selection process, will I be able to duck *excuse the pun* the height limit?


Steven

Does the ADF pre-select aircrew to suit a particular aircraft? I doubt that.

However, the good news is: Sounds like you're the ideal bloke for looking out of trenches. :E

;)

Not a worry you had eh Shy? :E

CG

Cue LSH!

Funny you should say that - I was an infantry soldier a few years ago. Been in many trenches, but somehow managed to avoid having to dig one :p

Hi next,

Yes name is on the right track. Your 193cm limit for RAAF/RAN relate to your pathway, which now and the forseeable furture is the PC9. Part of that limit is sitting height, which if you have to eject means your nut hitting the canopy before the canopy breakers meaning " so long goose". The ARA has reduced its sitting height due to the constraints of available room in the Kiowa

RAAF Pilot Height Requirments
 

Hi,
I'm currently 17 years old and have completed my additional testing day for the role of a pilot in the RAAF. I understand that the maximum height for a pilot is 193cm and I am currently 190.5cm. I have been tracking my height for a while now and have only grown probably around 3mm in 3 months. Does anyone know what the DFR policy is on pilot applicants being near the height limit?
Cheers.

I'm taller than the height limit, I have my wings.

Not sure the process now, but it's been done.

Hmm. Let me tell you a tale about the RAF and height. In 1950 I was an engineering undergraduate and I applied to join the University Air Squadron. I was sent for the medical and aptitude tests, and passed them A1. I also passed the interview. That year there were more suitable applicants than places, so I had to do the 'white line test' which took place in the gymnasium where a white line had been painted on the floor next to a wall.You sat with your bum as close the wall as you could get it, and if your feet were beyond this line you were out. My feet were beyond the line. It appears that at that time training in the UAS was in Harvards which had an awkward seat adjustment if you were tall!! It saved them time if they didn't have to fiddle with the seats. I was given a chit to be given to the recruiting people when I was called up for compulsory military service, which said they were to send me straight to Cranwell to be trained as a pilot.

Alas, I never got there. On completion of my degree in 1954 (I got a First) and a graduate apprenticeship with Rolls-Royce Aero Engines I was transferred to their Special Projects design team in Derby to work on the Conway as an aircraft engine designer, and thus permanently deferred from military service! I did learn to fly later at my own expense.

I am only 183cm BTW.

There have been many over-tall RAAF pilots, despite the generally accepted idea that these people would lose their knees on the canopy bow of the Macchi and Mirage if they ejected. None ejected, so are still ambulant.

They are now retired Air Commodores and airline captains.

At your age, a RAAF recruiter told me I'd never get into flying at my height. I would've been about 195cm at the time. It was all to do with adding the helmet thickness to my torso height I think. This was the 80's of course but for your sake, I hope you get through! Good luck!

PS. Have you checked out if the same rules apply for Rotary?

I think you’ll find that sitting height and thigh length are more critical than overall height.
The folks on the RAAF Flight Screening thread will probably be able to give you the facts.

Depends on the aeroplane. In Harvards leg length was clearly the problem. My torso is average but my legs are long. I guess rotaries are less critical here.