Return-Path: <marv@lancaironline.net>
Received: from [65.33.163.54] (account <marv@lancaironline.net>)
  by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro WebUser 4.0.1)
  with HTTP id 1871439 for <lml@lancaironline.net>; Fri, 15 Nov 2002 00:34:31 -0500
From: "Marvin Kaye" <marv@lancaironline.net>
Subject: Re: Pilot Size
To: lml
X-Mailer: CommuniGate Pro Web Mailer v.4.0.1
Date: Fri, 15 Nov 2002 00:34:31 -0500
Message-ID: <web-1871439@logan.com>
In-Reply-To: <Springmail.0994.1037309876.0.61352300@webmail.pas.earthlink.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit

Posted for " Bill Schleifer"<bschleifer@earthlink.net>:

When I went through USAF Nav training the important criteria was not overall
height, but sitting height.  I have at least one 6'5" friend who is not as
"long wasted" as I am at 6'1".  It sticks in my mind that the Air Force's
sitting height limit was 39" then.  The sarge doing the measurement liked to
say that any more than that and you'd lose the top of your head when the
canopy blows during an ejection.  I'm not sure that was true but the point was
made -- there are more factors to consider than overall body size.

Bill
Legacy 130