# What MBTI types would turn out to be good airline pilots?



## SeanFCN (Oct 23, 2017)

I've always wanted to be a pilot. I was inspired by my father when i was still a child. Now that I am 15 years old, I am starting interested in different careers, such as Mechanical Engineer, Lawyer, and others. But I still want to be a pilot. So I wondered, what MBTI types would be a good airline pilot? I would appreciate if any if you out here answered. Feel free to ask more about me so you can assess me better. 

BTW, I'm an ENTP (still confused between ENTP, ESTP, and ISTP though, if I am not an ENTP, I'm most likely an ISTP)

UPDATE: I took the test several more times and most of my results were ISTP, so I am officially an ISTP.


----------



## Daiz (Jan 4, 2017)

I'd say ISTP or ISTJ, if I absolutely had to choose. But anyone could be, as you know.


----------



## Rydori (Aug 7, 2017)

ISTP, good awareness with Se and good analysis with Ti


----------



## soop (Aug 6, 2016)

Any ST type most likely. But please don't make your decision based on this. Any type can have any career and be brilliant at it if they dedication and natural talent for it. Btw I also used to think I was an ENTP.


----------



## jcal (Oct 31, 2013)

Daiz said:


> I'd say ISTP or ISTJ, if I absolutely had to choose. But anyone could be, as you know.


Agree... but the ISTP would probably have a difficult time suppressing their compulsion to perform barrel rolls and Cuban 8s "just to see what would happen". 

:wink: :laughing:

A college buddy of mine that I believe to be a fellow ISTJ graduated with his engineering degree, went on to be a decorated Navy pilot and ended up with a lifelong career as an airline pilot. He recently retired as chief pilot for a major airline after 30+ years with them.


----------



## Reila (Jan 17, 2017)

Daiz said:


> I'd say ISTP or ISTJ, if I absolutely had to choose. But anyone could be, as you know.


ISTJs are too grounded to be aircraft pilots.


----------



## SeanFCN (Oct 23, 2017)

You know, I would agree with what you said about doing barrel rolls in a plane, that would be awesome in my opinion &#55357;&#56834;


----------



## SeanFCN (Oct 23, 2017)

What do you think your type is now?


----------



## CultOfPersonality (Sep 12, 2017)

What?


any type, it doesn't matter which type you are.


----------



## Sour Roses (Dec 30, 2015)

I'm INFJ and got my private pilots license at 17 & promptly applied to schools for a career in aviation, before finding out finances / family credit issues weren't going to work for that. The loans are big - 90k plus. After that I was a flight attendant for a while. 
I can tell you definitively, all kinds of personalities are involved in aviation. 

The most important considerations are:

1. Do YOU, personally, like it enough to be motivated to sink your head down in it the way you need to? It's a highly mental job, there's no flying by the seat of your pants or horsing around (ever). 
In large jets, the computer flies the plane and the pilots input info into the computer. 
The most fun you will ever have is at the beginning when learning to fly small prop planes manually. After that it becomes more about calculations and performing by rote - following a checklist to a T, and filling out paperwork.
When I was a flight attendant, all the pilots complained about paperwork ad naseum. The bane of their existence.

2. Picture the lifestyle. Imagine what it's going to be like after graduating a school and being hired. International travel? NOPE! Entry level pilots have to earn their way for a long time. It's all about hours, there's nothing special you can do to jump ahead.

The same as flight attendants, airlines put junior pilots on reserve. Reserve means you sit in an airport for 12 hour shifts, being paid a minor hourly wage ($10 - $14), waiting for something to come up - a flight gets delayed or someone calls in sick or scheduling screws up, and then you get a phone call and are provided 10-15 mins to race over to the right gate and pair with a more senior pilot to take a flight out. The captain (senior) is going to give you mostly the scut work (paperwork) and maybe he might let you talk on the radio if he's in a great mood. 

Most of my time waiting around airports as a junior FA was pretty miserable, although I liked the job a lot in other ways so it was worth it. I did at times go an entire month stretch without being called for a flight, so I gave myself the job of directing lost looking passengers. 
FA's and Pilots share the lounge rooms - which are pretty much the same in every airport - a bunch of recliners and a tv with snoring, rumpled, occupants who are bored on their shifts too. There's never even half enough seats. Most sensible people abandon the stuffy lounge rooms and find a quiet empty gate or out of the way seating area and play online all day. But you can't sleep in uniform in the open. 

After paying your dues on Reserve, which ends only when enough personnel before you have filtered out of the line in one way or another, you finally get enough seniority to be put on a regular schedule. Then you have to work up your number of in-flight hours, and only when you reach a minimum threshold are you eligible (but not entitled) to captain flights. The most senior pilot will be captain, so if your schedule crosses paths with that of someone more senior, then you're back to second chair.

All regional service US airlines work this way, and most other countries do as well. The more desirable the airline (Delta, Jet Blue, ect) the longer everyone spends on Reserve... So most people go for the smaller airline carriers and wait until they have the kind of hours that's going to make them a desirable hire for bigger airlines.
The personnel given international flights not only have plenty of hours under their belt, but have likely paid dues at more than one airline before getting to that point. 

I'm not telling you all of this to put you off - it's a great career in the end... I'm just warning you not to imagine those long layovers in Paris or on a beach somewhere, that's pretty dang rare.

Also, the airport you serve at isn't exactly your choice. After hiring, the airline will show you a list that makes it seem like you have options... But then in reality they've already selected one for you. There's a bidding process for stations... Basically you and all other hires put your name in for the place you want, and the computer does a lottery selection. Only, the computer is only able to select from the places that have openings, and since senior personnel can bid for station transfers, they have usually filled up the most desirable locales.
For my FA class, we were supposed to have like ten options, right... But in reality we all were sent to either Chicago O'Hare, or Washington Dulles. I went to Dulles, and the local rents were so sky high in comparison to my $10/hr Reserve wage that I had to pick a room share a full hour drive away from the airport. All my pay went to just subsisting, I can't imagine having to repay student loans at the same time. Eek!

That said, for those with thr financial support from home to stretch by through the reserve period until they have a regular schedule, then with regular flight hours the pay is great. 
If you're curious why I kept mentioning the way things are done with FA's, it's only because the airlines handle both kinds of personnel the same.

So if you can picture the lifestyle after hiring, and think you can handle it, then the later rewards may be worth it to you.

As for pilot training, which runs at least two years, I'm certain there are individuals in every personality type who can handle it. It's a lot of technical knowledge, and following procedures in the right order at the right time.

Also keep in mind that aviation isn't conducive to party even on one's time off. There's regular scheduled testing as well as random surprise testing with low thresholds... So if you drank a bit too much the day before, your levels the next day can still be high enough to fail a test - which is career over, and can also result in the FAA pursuing criminal charges. Just saying, don't imagine being footloose and fancy free, there so man rules. But it's still fun.


----------



## Bunniculla (Jul 17, 2017)

Hugging Wabbits said:


> ISTJs are too grounded to be aircraft pilots.


Haha, that's what I thought too. I could never be a pilot. I would freak the fck out every single time. What if we went in the air and exploded? Even worse, what if I was responsible for hundreds of deaths?


----------



## Flaming Bassoon (Feb 15, 2013)

NOT ME (speaking as a specific ENFP). I hate driving a car because I am not well-attuned to my surroundings, and am constantly daydreaming, so it's an especially terrible idea for me to fly a plane.

I have an ISTP friend who got her pilot's license, and most people type Amelia Earhart as an ISTP as well (although she might not have been *that* good, since, you know...)


----------



## Bunniculla (Jul 17, 2017)

Flaming Bassoon said:


> NOT ME (speaking as a specific ENFP). I hate driving a car because I am not well-attuned to my surroundings, and am constantly daydreaming, so it's an especially terrible idea for me to fly a plane.
> 
> I have an ISTP friend who got her pilot's license, and most people type Amelia Earhart as an ISTP as well (although she might not have been *that* good, since, you know...)


Sadly, I, too, share your problem with driving. It sucks big time.


----------



## Froody Blue Gem (Nov 7, 2017)

I think ISTJs, ESTXs, and ENFJs have the potential to be good airplane pilot. ISTJs would be on top of things and make sure everything was in order. The same with ESTJ/Ps but they might be more vocal about things. An ENFJ would be very caring and would have what it takes in my book.


----------



## DavidSaravia (Dec 16, 2017)

Yeah, its fun!


----------



## SeanFCN (Oct 23, 2017)

Thank you Rebecca, I understand these pieces of advice from you. I also think that it is fun to fly small planes in the beginning of your career as a pilot (about my post on doing barrel rolls, it was just a joke ). I certainly would love being a pilot for 2 reasons: 1, being able to travel (I dream of visiting Europe one day), and 2, controlling a machine that would help me fly. I can tell that you are dedicated to your job, so once again, thanks for the advice. 😀


----------



## jessicajones (Jun 15, 2021)

Flaming Bassoon said:


> NOT ME (speaking as a specific ENFP). I hate driving a car because I am not well-attuned to my surroundings, and am constantly daydreaming, so it's an especially terrible idea for me to fly a plane.
> 
> I have an ISTP friend who got her pilot's license, and most people type Amelia Earhart as an ISTP as well (although she might not have been _that_ good, since, you know...)


Intj here, it’s perfectly doable. The main thing is practicing awareness and planning if anything can go wrong in the future.


----------



## Sparky (Mar 15, 2010)

It feels like a Journeyman-primary Improvement-secondary job position (using Identity Temperament). Interestingly, many engineering and product, or scientific research positions also tend to be Journeyman-primary Improvement-secondary. So, if you can be an airline pilot, though you feel like society needs more scientists and researchers, then doing research is another option.


----------



## Catandroid (Jul 9, 2018)

For fighter plane Top Gun's star - ENFJ


----------



## 8080 (Oct 6, 2020)

”SeanFCN” said:


> good airline pilots


STJ types, ESTJ > ISTJ:

*Scott Driver*, Licensed Commercial Pilot & Aircraft Mechanic

Myers-Briggs notwithstanding, I’ll point out two traits that a person must have to be *both* *successful and happy* as an *airline pilot*.

*Very comfortable following the rules* — You’ll have very few opportunities to think outside the box. Even if you’re justified in doing so, don’t expect a sympathetic hierarchy. *No one wants a creative pilot*.
*Very comfortable with routine* — *Flying is 99% monotony* and 1% soul-piercing terror. If you’re an adrenaline junkie focused on the 1%, you’ll probably engage in self-defeating behaviors once the reality of the other 99% sinks in.
Source: Quora













> I am officially an ISTP


Single pilot operations for adrenaline junkies: Aerial firefighter, Alpine rescue pilot, bush pilot, agricultural pilot, transatlantic ferry pilot for poorly maintained small aircraft.


----------



## Sparky (Mar 15, 2010)

Sparky said:


> It feels like a Journeyman-primary Improvement-secondary job position (using Identity Temperament). Interestingly, many engineering and product, or scientific research positions also tend to be Journeyman-primary Improvement-secondary. So, if you can be an airline pilot, though you feel like society needs more scientists and researchers, then doing research is another option.


Considering this, airline pilot is also a Bank-primary Law-secondary Environment Temperament, meaning "you know what you want, primary, though also, can follow rules, like in an academic setting".

Finally, airline pilot requires strong assets in all three Intelligence Temperaments: Memory to remember all the buttons and operations, Analysis to know what to do during emergencies or figure out what's wrong, and Logic to know and understand the cause-and-effects of the operations.


----------



## ESFJMouse (Oct 13, 2020)

Many, many, many types! Well Sully I am quite sure if an ISTJ 1w9 so that is a good type to start with! Probably any type who has a good command of their emotions, and can think clearly and quickly in a difficult situation.


----------



## 8080 (Oct 6, 2020)

Fortunately, *Antoine de Saint-Exupéry (INFP)* did not kill any of his passengers. His long-range mail plane was relatively small, not much bigger than a Cessna 208 Caravan, which only has half the range. It only looks that big because it is a tail wheel aircraft. The manufacturer Latécoère is largely unknown but still based in Toulouse and builds doors and fuselage sections for Airbus, Boeing, Dassault and Embraer.









*Specifications (Latécoère 28.0)*

*General characteristics*

*Crew:* 2
*Capacity:* *Payload 925kg (2,039lb) or 8 passengers*
*Length:* 13.625 m (44 ft 8 in)
*Wingspan:* 19.25 m (63 ft 2 in)
*Height:* 3.58 m (11 ft 9 in)
*Wing area:* 48.6 m2 (523 sq ft)
*Empty weight:* 2,166 kg (4,775 lb)
*Gross weight:* 3,856 kg (8,501 lb)
*Powerplant:* 1 × Renault 12Jb V-12 liquid-cooled piston engine, 373 kW (500 hp)
*Performance*

*Maximum speed:* 222 km/h (138 mph, 120 kn) at sea level
*Cruise speed:* *200 km/h (120 mph, 110 kn)*
*Range: 4,685 km (2,911 mi, 2,530 nmi)*
*Service ceiling:* 5,200 m (17,100 ft)
*Rate of climb:* 2.04 m/s (402 ft/min)
*Time to altitude:* 4,000m in 59min 38s
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Latécoère_28
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Groupe_Latécoère


*Antoine de Saint-Exupéry: Adventures of the French Poet Pilot*

Stephan Wilkinson

Throughout his short life, *Saint-Exupéry was a puller of strings, a user of friends and acquaintances in high places, a conniver and a wangler*. Had he not been, he’d have nicely survived the war: Every U.S. Army Air Forces rule governing fitness to fly a P-38 had been broken to get an *overweight, overage, underskilled and disobedient Saint-Ex* into its cockpit. He even infuriated his superiors by using a photorecon flight over southern France to snap pictures of a relative’s chateau rather than the potential invasion beaches he’d been sent to shoot. […]

Little more than a year later, he had his *first major crash*. Sub-Lieutenant Saint-Exupéry took off from Le Bourget, outside Paris, in a Hanriot HD.14—an airplane he wasn’t rated to fly—and spun in from about 300 feet, having gotten too slow and steep on climb-out, nearly killing his passenger. He was grounded for what the accident report called “his too-lively interest in trying all types of planes,” though it went on to affirm that he apparently had an early version of the right stuff: “Made to be a fighter pilot. Excellent flyer. Inspired.”

As would happen throughout his flying career, *Saint-Ex was not always taken entirely seriously. He was arty, dreamy, capricious, famously clumsy and had little use for rules*. And of course he was an *aristocrat*; at one point he had to ask his mother to stop addressing her letters to “Count” Saint-Exupéry.

The more flying hours Saint-Exupéry logged, the more nonchalant he seemed to become. *It was never really clear whether he was brave or a fool*, but it soon became apparent that *the Line’s mechanics as frequently as possible elected not to fly with him* and that *his fellow pilots thought very highly of him as a writer, raconteur, companion and card-trickster* *… but not as a pilot when they were required to fly as his passenger*.

The Line stretched from Paris to the Mediterranean, then soon across to Africa and eventually to all of France’s colonies throughout that continent. Saint-Exupéry became a station chief in Africa, yet flew constantly as well. It was in the cockpit, especially at night and on perilously long flights, that he was at his most thoughtful. As Anne Morrow Lindbergh once wrote of him after Saint-Ex became a family friend: “*How is it possible that he kept his mind on the gas consumption while pondering the mysteries of the universe? How can he navigate by stars when they are to him ‘the frozen glitter of diamonds’?*” […]

Saint-Ex seemed *a brave, skilled but casual pilot*. He once landed a Latécoère so hard that he essentially broke its back, snapping two of the four metal fuselage longerons. After enlisting a local blacksmith to effect a repair using fence wire, Saint-Ex flew the airplane back to Buenos Aires, by which time a crack had opened that literally was visible from the ground. “You’re sick,” the chief mechanic at BA yelled at him after he landed. “The fuselage was about to break in half!”

Yet he flew no matter what the wind, for hours at a stretch and always got the mail through. For him, the idea of “the mail” was sacred. “What is inside has little importance,” he once wrote. That the Line, the system, existed was everything. What letter-writers used it for was their business.

In his six years as a mail pilot, Saint-Exupéry moved from a Breguet 14—equivalent to the de Havilland DH-4s in which the earliest U.S. airmail pilots died by the dozens—to more advanced Latécoère 25s and 26s and ultimately the closed-cockpit Laté 28. The 28 seemed to him incredibly advanced. “*Aéropostale has lost much of its charm*,” he wrote, “*since the advent of reliable motors and radiotelegraph*. Now our engines are foolproof, and there is no reason to know our route because the direction-finder indicates it for us. *Frankly, flying under these conditions is a bureaucrat’s affair*.” […]

For his part, Saint-Ex acquired a four-seat, 180-hp Caudron monoplane called a Simoun—French for sandstorm—that was quite advanced and fast for its time, much like the contemporaneous Messerschmitt Bf-108. It was almost certainly some sort of gift from the manufacturer, since *Saint-Ex never seemed to have two francs to rub together*, and when he did, he spent them taking all his friends out to dinner. He decided to use the Simoun to set a Paris-to-Saigon record, to win a 150,000-franc prize that the French air ministry had offered. But he made it no farther than Libya, where he somehow flew into the ground—an enormous sand dune, fortunately—at the airplane’s 170-mph cruise speed in low-visibility conditions. *The airplane was, of course, a complete write-off*.

Three years later, he had acquired another Simoun and was determined to use it to make a flight no other Frenchman had—the length of both North and South America. Why the nationality of the pilot mattered or why Montreal fairly constituted a starting point for “the length” of North America became irrelevant when Saint-Ex *turned the second Simoun into scrap in Guatemala* while making a short-field takeoff in classic high-density-altitude conditions, complicated by the fact that the airplane had unknowingly been overloaded with 20- percent-larger Imperial gallons of gasoline. […]









The *Lockheed F-5B* was an unarmed photo reconnaissance version of the Lockheed P-38J

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lockheed_P-38_Lightning
https://stephentaylorhistorian.file...eed-p-38-lightning-pilot-flight-operation.pdf

The end ultimately came in true Saint-Ex fashion. *He had often predicted and seemingly even hoped for his own death in flight*, and when he used every bit of influence he could muster to get himself posted in 1944 back to the French squadron for which he had briefly flown before the fall of France in 1940—the experience that led to one of his few nonfiction works, _Flight to Arras_—he virtually guaranteed it.

*For an aging, weary, 44-year-old intellectual with a body laced with half-healed fractures and bent bones to undertake a job that challenged well-trained fighter pilots half his age was madness*. Flying an unpressurized, barely heated Lockheed F-5B to 30,000 feet for hours on end while photo-mapping was crippling. To do it while watching constantly for Focke-Wulfs and Messerschmitts was impossible for a grouchy old man who had to be helped into his cockpit, never mind neck-swiveling constantly to check his six. Yet on July 31, 1944, he set out on a grueling photo-mapping mission over the Mediterranean. […]

What turned out to be Saint-Exupéry’s F-5B was initially found at the bottom of the Mediterranean in 2000 and positively identified in April 2004. The broken, corroded and encrusted aircraft hulk showed no obvious signs of combat—bullet holes or flak damage—so the inevitable rumors have raged ever since.

Perhaps Saint-Ex, known to be depressed and potentially suicidal at the time, put the yoke full forward intentionally. Amateur divers say the airframe is in so many pieces that it must have hit the water in a 500-mph dive, yet they also claim the wreckage is spread over half a mile—hardly the pattern of a vertical impact.

Maybe he mishandled the fuel and starved both engines. Possible, since he was by 1944 the aviation equivalent of those of us who can’t program a DVD player.

Possibly he depleted his oxygen supply and passed out. Not unlikely, since Saint-Ex was famous for turning his oxygen on even before takeoff; he didn’t want to have to remember to activate it later during climb-out, and he typically used twice as much O2 as any other squadron pilot.

Or, says Occam’s Razor, the simplest and most obvious answer is the correct one: He was shot down by a German fighter. There was no body in the cockpit to bear witness, and Luftwaffe records show no downing of a Lightning over the Med on that day, but military records on the losing side during the declining days of a war are a mess anyway. Though his story is impossible to substantiate, German ace Horst Rippert, today 88, recently claimed that he had been the unwitting killer. “If I had known it was him, I would never have fired,” Rippert said; he’d been an admirer of the Frenchman’s work ever since he was a schoolboy. Rippert claims to have caught a P-38 in the area where the Saint-Exupéry wreckage was found, flying so lazily that the pilot seemed to be begging to be dispatched. “He was looking around,” Rippert recalled. “He wasn’t bothered by my presence.”

Whatever caused it, the ensuing plunge into the sea closed the logbook of one of the most remarkable, talented, influential and complex aviators of the 20th century.

_Frequent contributor Stephan Wilkinson has flown nearly 120 different types of aircraft ranging from Stearmans to B-17s—as well as the Sequoia Falco F.8L two-seater that he built himself. For additional reading, he recommends _Saint-Exupéry_, by Stacy Schiff. _

Antoine de Saint-Exupéry: Adventures of the French Poet Pilot


At midday on *31 July 1944*, noted aviation pioneer and writer Antoine de Saint-Exupéry (_Night Flight_, _Wind, Sand and Stars_ and _The Little Prince_) vanished in his P-38 of the *French Armée de l'Air's *_*Groupe de Chasse II/33*_, after departing *Borgo-Porreta*, *Corsica*. *His health, both physically and mentally, had been deteriorating*. Saint-Exupéry was said to be *intermittently subject to depression and talk had arisen of taking him off flying status*. He was on a flight over the Mediterranean, from Corsica to mainland France, in an *unarmed F-5B photo-reconnaissance variant of the P-38J*, described as being a "war-weary, nonairworthy craft".

In 2000, a French scuba diver found the partial remnants of a Lightning spread over several thousand square meters of the Mediterranean seabed *off the coast of Marseille*. In April 2004, the recovered component serial numbers were confirmed as being from Saint-Exupéry's F-5B Lightning. *Only a small amount of the aircraft's wreckage was recovered*. In June 2004, the recovered parts and fragments were given to the *Air and Space Museum of France in Le Bourget*, *Paris*, where Saint-Exupéry's life is commemorated in a special exhibit.

In 1981 and also in 2008, two Luftwaffe fighter pilots, respectively Robert Heichele and Horst Rippert, separately claimed to have shot down Saint-Exupéry's P-38. Both claims were unverifiable and possibly self-promotional, as neither of their units' combat records of action from that period made any note of such a shoot-down.

*Adrian Warburton*

The RAF's notable photo-reconnaissance pilot, Wing Commander Adrian Warburton DSO* DFC** was posted as the RAF liaison officer to the USAAF 7th Photographic Reconnaissance Group. On 12 April 1944, he took off in a P-38 with others to photograph targets in Germany. Warburton failed to arrive at the rendezvous point and was never seen again. In 2003, his remains were recovered in Germany from his wrecked aircraft.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lockheed_P-38_Lightning#Antoine_de_Saint-Exupéry


*Return to war*

In April 1943, following his 27 months in North America, Saint-Exupéry departed with an American military convoy for Algiers, to fly with the Free French Air Force and fight with the Allies in a Mediterranean-based squadron. Then 43, soon to be promoted to the rank of commandant (major), he was far older than most men in operational units. Although *eight years over the age limit for such pilots*, he had petitioned endlessly for an exemption which had finally been approved by General Dwight Eisenhower. However, *Saint-Exupéry had been suffering pain and immobility due to his many previous crash injuries, to the extent that he could not dress himself in his own flight suit or even turn his head leftwards to check for enemy aircraft*.

Saint-Exupéry was assigned with a number of other pilots to his former unit, renamed _Groupe de reconnaissance 2/33 "Savoie"_, flying P-38 Lightnings, which an officer described as "war-weary, non-airworthy craft".[52] *The Lightnings were also more sophisticated than models he previously flew*, requiring him to undertake seven weeks of stringent training before his first mission. After wrecking a P-38 through engine failure on his second mission, *he was grounded for eight months*, but was then later reinstated to flight duty on the personal intervention of General Ira Eaker, Deputy Commander of the U.S. Army Air Forces.

After Saint-Exupéry resumed flying, he also *returned to his longtime habit of reading and writing while flying* his single seat Lockheed F-5B (a specially configured P-38 reconnaissance variant). His prodigious studies of literature gripped him and on occasion he continued his readings of literary works until moments before takeoff, with mechanics having warmed up and tested his aircraft for him in preparation for his flight. On one flight, to the chagrin of his colleagues awaiting his arrival, *he circled the airport for an hour after returning, so that he could finish reading a novel*. Saint-Exupéry frequently flew with a lined notebook (_carnet_) during his long solitary flights and some of his philosophical writings were created during such periods when he could reflect on the world below him.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antoine_de_Saint-Exupéry#Youth_and_aviation


----------



## Mark R (Dec 23, 2015)

My father was a airline pilot and an air force veteran. He did very well in his job and flew the largest passenger jets from the United States to Europe. He was an ESTP.


----------



## Ohndot (Apr 12, 2015)

8080 said:


> STJ types, ESTJ > ISTJ:
> 
> *Scott Driver*, Licensed Commercial Pilot & Aircraft Mechanic
> 
> ...


That's interesting. I always found driving to be very boring. Too many bottlenecks, everyone with their phone in their face. More space would be nice, but unfortunately not in my parts.


----------



## 8080 (Oct 6, 2020)

“Mark R“ said:


> My father was a airline pilot and an air force veteran. He did very well in his job and flew the largest passenger jets from the United States to Europe. He was an *ESTP*.



*Erika Armstrong: Is There Such a Thing as a Pilot Personality?*





Is There Such a Thing As a Pilot Personality?


Why Are Pilots Like That? Have you ever talked to a cop who is off duty? There's something there...it still seeps through. You can't quite put your finger on it, but he seems cop-like. As I




disciplesofflight.com





_“From the front desk of an FBO [fixed-base operator] to the captain's seat of a commercial airliner, Erika Armstrong has experienced everything aviation has to offer.”_ 

*Erika Armstrong: What Characteristics Make a Pilot?*

When you think of a pilot, all the cliché images that flash across your brain do have some basis for truth; the suave, smiling pilot with twinkling eyes behind a pair of Ray Ban sunglasses is a predominant image

(if you don’t believe me, just Google “pilot”), but there is actually a lot going on behind those sunglasses. “Pilot” is one of those rare words that is both a noun and a verb, which is fitting because a pilot is also two things at once; a person who has also become a pilot. Once you become a pilot, you will never be that person you were before. It is two separate people. With the giant caveat that there are always exceptions to the rule, the question is; what traits do pilots have that make them a “pilot”?

There are many specific categories and career choices in aviation, but generally, the higher, faster and heavier the airplane, the more distinct the characteristics of pilots become. For our purposes, we have to start from the beginning since every pilot started out as a student. From the beginning, there are general traits for this entire group that separates them from the masses of ground pounders who will never even want to fly an airplane. The *basic characteristics of all pilots* begin with:

*Pilots in General (with any additional license, just not for hire)*

*1) Still Waters Run Deep: *First and foremost, pilots have a general ability to control their outward emotions, even if the world is falling apart around them. They have a low predisposition for psychological distress and have found a way to compartmentalize their emotions. This means that their general outward demeanor is controlled and calm, even if their mind is reeling during times of stress. This creates a balance that allows pilots to handle incoming information to be rationally translated in the mind. The result is a physical reaction which correlates properly to the emergency at hand. What you’ll see from the outside is a calm, cool pilot telling ATC [Air Traffic Control] that since all their engines are inoperable, they’re just going to set it down in the Hudson River. They aren’t screaming, “Oh my God, help!” They’re just calming rationalizing that there is only one choice – and that’s landing in the river.

*2) Elevated and Determined Curiosity:* Pilots as people start out with an elevated level of fascination and curiosity. Those with a higher level of curiosity tend to be more “present” in their daily lives and unknowingly seek a higher level of stimulation. Sure, hundreds of thousands of people come to airshows and they are all fascinated with aviation, but those with an innate and determined sense of wanting to understand and become something other than an observer will take the next step by walking into a flight school and asking for information. Just walking in the door takes confidence and this is where it all begins.

*3) Self-Discipline/Evaluation Skills: *Learning to transfer curiosity into applicable knowledge can give you brain overload, so the people who can handle this onslaught of information have a greater analytic ability, problem-solving skills and overall intelligence – but, like I said, there are exceptions. The more important aspect is that these people also have meaningful self-evaluation of those abilities. Safe and successful pilots internally accept when they make a mistake and will learn from it rather than denying it or placing blame elsewhere. Being honest with yourself and your abilities sometimes feels like defeat, but pilots that want to make this their profession will understand the importance of self-evaluation because they’ll want to operate within their circle of safety. They’ll admit to themselves when the situation (weather, equipment, difficult airport, etc.) is beyond their skillset. This is a form of self-discipline which is an important element of a pilot’s personality and keeps them safe as they progress through each level of licensing. Having self-discipline is doing the right thing when no one is looking. Pilots tend to incorporate self-evaluation and self-discipline throughout their entire lives to satisfy their own ego and the peripheral affect is confidence. They seek their own approval so that they can be proud of themselves.

*4) Spatial Orientation: *Besides being in good physical condition, pilots don’t usually make it to their private license unless they have spatial orientation. You either have it or you don’t and no matter how hard you study, it’s an innate ability you can’t learn. Spatial orientation is our natural ability to know where we are in space – which way is up or down, north or south – while moving through the air. 5 to 10% of all general aviation accidents are attributed to spatial _dis_orientation and 90% of those are fatal [Footnote 1: The FAA. Spatial Disorientation. Pilot Safety. faa.gov/pilots/safety]. For those that get airsick, or have difficulty judging if they are 5 feet or 50 feet off the runway, they will learn quickly that even though they are highly intelligent and passionately want to fly, they can’t overcome this limitation. Every pilot deals with spatial disorientation in IMC by using the information the instruments give them and can easily overcome the dizziness that comes with it, but for others, their ear canals will forever ground them.

There are a variety of external reasons why a pilot doesn’t continue on past their private license. Primarily, financial and family constraints place the largest barrier in front of many pilots. Other private pilots are excellent aviators, but they want aviation to just be a part of their lives rather than their entire life. The other segment of pilots that make the monumental decision that nothing can stop them from their seat in the sky, demonstrate the next level of integrated characteristics and it begins with: If there is a will, there is a way. Ever pilot sitting in the seat of an airliner has had obstacles to clear, but they’ve managed to find a way over.

*Commercial Pilots/Professional Pilots (with any additional license, but trying to make aviation their career)*

*1) A Cubicle Would Be a Slow Death.* While many people would cringe at the thought of working in a cubicle, the thought of working in a cubicle (without a view) would be hell on earth for most pilots. The irony is that the cockpit is one of the smallest cubicles you can work in, but the environment and view can’t be duplicated anywhere. Pilots seek high stimulation so the constant input of information found in a cockpit makes it their happy place. Pilots are mentally hyperactive so this constant change of input gives them satisfaction. Even though the autopilot takes care of the majority of hours sitting at altitude, no two moments are ever exactly the same and the pilot brain needs that kind of stimulation.

*2) Extroverts. *While pilots must have independent quiet time to recharge their brain and serenity, they tend to be outgoing and enjoy the company of others while at work. Airline pilots must work within inches of another person for hours at a time so at some point, they have learned how to get along with just about anyone. It might not have come naturally, but with Crew Resource Management training, they learn to play well with others. The dark side is that extroverts can exhibit more aggressive behaviors and hold true to their own identity so when two opposites are asked to fly together, sometimes there is a clash that can’t be worked out. All airlines should honor those pilots that speak up and ask not to be paired with another aviator. When pilots are done flying, you’ll usually find them alone and enjoying the company. They need sensory deprivation to balance the overload that they get at work.

*3) An Inch Deep, But a Mile Wide. *A Bachelor’s Degree doesn’t necessarily make you smarter; it just broadens your knowledge base to an inch deep and a mile wide. Pilots need degrees to get hired these days. Many pilots study something completely unrelated to aviation, but in this career path, it often doesn’t matter. Employers are simply looking at a person’s ability to put in the effort to study and learn at a higher level. It reinforces the self-discipline trait and those that can figure out how to make enough money, or be confident enough to take on six figure student loans, will thrive. The peripheral effect of all this education is that pilots are interesting people! They have a wide base of topics (besides aviation!) they can talk about and they aren’t afraid to add their opinion although they don’t spend too much time being intellectual.

*4) Do As I Say And Do. *By the time a pilot makes it to the captain seat of an airliner, there isn’t much they haven’t seen, done or tried. All this knowledge gives them confidence with humility. Confidence with humility is the key to forging great leaders and the greatest leaders out there are sitting in captain’s seats. They’ve made mistakes, had close calls and each flight is safer for having done it. These captains have respect for aviation and can say “no” without hesitation if safety is going to be compromised. Copilots learn more from their captains than any textbook can teach – both the good and bad.

*The Dark Side of Aviation*

Every pilot has a different blend and balance of their own unique personality, but whatever the combination, it has tipped the scales enough to land them in a pilot seat. All pilots have some common denominator with the pilot sitting next to them which creates a deep comradery and trust. Pilots must trust each other with their lives, but they also learn to verify.

All pilots start out with dreams of magnificent flying machines. The glamour of that cool calm pilot with the Ray Bans calls to their soul. And in the beginning, it’s all that. The thrill of becoming a part of this society changes your perspective and personality. You _become_ a pilot, but it has its drawbacks and these issues are often kept out of the sunshine.

*1) Disenchanted. *It’s heartbreaking to see the growing number of pilots who finally make to the airlines only to find that their lives are in shambles and they become disenchanted by the entire industry. After a few years of grinding their way through low pay, horrible schedules, furloughs, the complete disregard to a pilot’s circadian rhythm, crew scheduling Nazis, and days and weeks on the road, it makes pilots forget what it was that made them want to “fly” in the first place. They are weary, exhausted and frustrated with airline life and negativity spreads like Ebola. Happy pilots work for happy airlines, but with accountants making decisions, there aren’t many airlines that fit that category anymore. With the growing corporate aviation industry, this segment of flying is seeing more pilots staying here and being happy. The airlines, which in another era was a pilot’s main goal, does not have the appeal that it once held.

*2) Tumbling Gyros. *Tell an 18-year old pilot that one day, they’ll get married and have children and want to have a work/life balance, and you’ll see their eyes glaze over like you just said the most impossible thing. But, then it happens. Pilots have children and families and suddenly, waking up in an airport hotel in Timbuktu for the four hundredth time doesn’t give you the pleasure that it once had. The nature of the aviation beast is that you must be away from home. Spouses also start out with the idea of aviation being a glamorous life, but as each Christmas, birthday and special event is spent alone, the novelty wears off. Aviation is wrought with divorce, unhappy marriages, and soul crushing loneliness that wasn’t taught in ground school. Those that have complete loyalty to their career are often from broken homes or broken marriages and aren’t able to have lasting relationships outside of their career. Their careers become everything to them and when their age or some external force requires them to retire; there is nothing left to live for.

*3) Weight and Balance. *While pilots must still pass flight physicals, the reality is that there are too many pilots that are beginning to bend the scales and dealing with health issues _[Footnote 2: Niles, R. (2013, November 17). FAA Medical Chief Targets Fat Pilots. Retrieved January 10, 2015]_. With the abundance of good but often unhealthy food found at airports, followed by hours of sitting, pilots struggle to find time to fit physical activity into their schedule. Exhausted once they get home, many pilots find themselves in a viscous cycle of being too tired to exercise because they don’t exercise. Once pilots make it to the point where they have a regular and consistent flight schedules, then you’ll see the scale lightening up and health issues fading. It’s those years without a schedule, sitting reserve, working redeyes or picking up whatever flight hours you can that beats up your body.

_For once you have tasted flight, you will walk the earth with your eyes turned skyward, for there you have been and there you will long to return._

This was spoken by Leonardo da Vinci, who would’ve been a pilot if he was born 470 years later. Aviation represents the best of mankind. As you see that shine in the sky, take a moment to honor the intelligent creativity that exemplifies what the human brain can do. Pilots are both born and created, but once they’ve left the earth for the first time, they will always rise above the crowd.

Source: What is a Pilot?








*Pilot Personality Profile Using the NEO-PI-R* (2004)

Amy Fitzgibbons, Donald Davis and Paul C. Schutte (NASA Langley Research Center, Hampton, Virginia)

*Results Big Five Dimensions*

There was an overwhelming trend of responses to many of the dimensions and facets of the NEO-PI-R. These trends were based on the responses of the *93 pilots*. First, on the *Neuroticism* scale, over 60% of the pilots scored low or very low. Only 13% reported a high level of neuroticism. This indicates that as a group, pilots tend to report being emotionally stable. For the *Extraversion* scale, 42% of the pilots reported high scores whereas 23% reported low scores. There was a trend towards high score but it was not as strong a trend as for neuroticism. For the *Openness* scale, the distribution was near normal, with 29% of the pilots scoring high and 37% scoring low on this dimension. The *Agreeableness* scale mimicked the Openness scale with 27% of the pilots scoring high and 32% scoring low. Finally, on the *Conscientiousness* dimension, there was an overwhelming trend towards high scores with 58% of the pilots scoring high or very high. Only 7.5% of the pilots scored low on this dimension. Pilots tend to be highly conscientious (See Table 1, See Figures 1-5).

These dimension scores indicate trends in pilot responses. To further examine these dimensions, the six facets of each dimension were investigated to further tease out these trends.

*Facet Scores*

In this section, the facets of each of the five dimensions will be explored. Only those facets with an atypical distribution will be detailed. We focus on these facets because they are more important in determining a pilot profile than the other facets. Table 1 gives a quick overview of the results detailed in this section.

*Neuroticism facets*. To begin with, the facet of *anxiety* showed a response pattern in which 61% of the pilots reported low levels of anxiety while 15% reported high levels of anxiety. Anxious individuals are more likely to be apprehensive, jittery, fearful, prone to worry, and nervous or tense. Low scores are calm and relaxed; they tend not to dwell on things that might go wrong. In a complex environment, such as a flight deck, it would be necessary for the operator to be calm and collected, especially in a crisis.

Sixty-two percent of the pilots reported low levels *of angry hostility* whereas 15% reported high levels. Angry hostility represents the tendency to experience anger and related states such as frustration and bitterness (Costa & McCrae, 1985). This scale represents and individual's readiness to experience anger. Low scorers on this dimension are easygoing and slow to anger. Having pilots that are slow to anger would be important for interpersonal relations in the cockpit. Studying this facet could be important for research concerning cockpit resource management.

Another interesting finding is that only 13% of the pilots reported high levels of *depression*. Over 60% (61%) scored low on this facet. Low scorers on this facet are less likely to experience feelings of sadness, hopelessness, and loneliness. They are not easily discouraged or dejected. Having populations that are not prone to depression is important. An example of speculation concerning suicide attempts is EgyptAir 990, which crashed in1999. In this recent tragedy, there has been conjecture that the pilot intentionally crashed the aircraft. If this were the case, then the mental health of this pilot would be relevant.

Forty-seven percent scored low on *self-consciousness* while 15% were high scorers. Self-consciousness refers to feelings of ease in social situations. Low scorers are not disturbed as much by awkward social situations. The relationship of this facet to the domain of aviation is less clear but could become important in teamwork and related areas.

For the facet of *impulsiveness*, 57% of the pilots were low while 17% were high. Impulsiveness in this domain refers to the inability to control cravings and urges. Low scorers have a higher tolerance for frustration. This facet is concerned more with controlling urges as related to drugs, food, etc. There has been evidence in the literature that even low levels of alcohol consumption are detrimental to flying ability (Ross, Yeazel, & Chau, 1992). Thus, it could be important to examine a person's susceptibility to such urges.

Finally, an amazing 71% of the pilots were low on *vulnerability* and only 2% scored highly on this facet. Low scorers perceive themselves as being able to handle difficult situations. This would be critical in a circumstance where there is an emergency while flying.

*Extraversion facets*. Forty-four percent of the pilots reported being gregarious while 24% reported low levels of this trait. This facet concerns the preference for others' company. Those who are high in the area tend to seek out and enjoy others. Low scorers avoid or do not seek social stimulation. Again, it is unclear how this facet relates to aviation, however, it may become important in a team/group flying environment.

Seventy-one percent of the pilots reported high levels of *assertiveness* while only 4 % reported low levels of this trait. High scorers are dominant, forceful, and socially ascendant. These people often speak without hesitation and can become group leaders. This trait could be useful in a flying environment, but since the majority of pilots responded highly to being assertive, it could cause conflict amongst those in the cockpit. Thus, being assertive could conflict with the successful handling of the flight environment. This facet is one often addressed in CRM _[Crew Resource Management]_.

For the facet of *activity*, 56% of the pilots scored high while only 9% scored low. Active people lead fast paced lives with a rapid tempo and vigorous movement. For the facet of *positive emotions*, 54% were high while 29% were low in this area. This facet concerns the tendency to experience positive emotions such as joy, love, and excitement. High scorers are optimistic and cheerful. Low scorers are less exuberant and high-spirited. These two facets have a less discernable relationship to flying.

*Agreeableness facets*. For the facet of *trust*, 53% of the pilots reported high levels of trust while only 19% reported low levels of trust. High scorers tend to believe that others are honest and well intentioned. Low scorers are cynical and skeptical. Since trusting one's co-workers is a critical element for successful flight operation, this facet may be important when in a highly ambiguous situation and depending on co-workers is critical.

For the facet of *straightforwardness*, over 45% of the pilots scored high on this facet while 23% scored low. High scorers on this facet are frank, sincere, and ingenuous. Low scorers are more willing to manipulate others through flattery, craftiness, or deception. This facet could be important for open communication and group relations.

Pilots tended towards immodesty with 45% of them scoring low on *modesty* while only 27% scored highly. Low scorers believe they are superior people and may be considered arrogant by others. This dimension could be important, especially in relation to the pilot's assertiveness level. Forty-five percent of the pilots were low on *tendermindedness* while 25% were high on this facet. This scale measures attitudes of sympathy and concern for others. Low scorers are more hardheaded and less moved by appeals to pity. These individuals see themselves as realists who make rational decisions based on logic. This dimension could be relevant in studying pilot decision making styles and information processing.

*Conscientiousness facets*. Over half the respondents scored high on the facet of *competence* (65%) while only 4% reported low levels of competence. Competence is the sense that one is capable, sensible, and effective. High scorers feel well prepared to deal with life. Having a sense of competence is important in a complex environment, such as a flight deck. Pilots need to be sure of their capabilities to fly the aircraft in any type of situation. Forty-one percent of the pilots reported high levels of *order*. Only 12% reported low levels of this trait. High scorers tend to be neat and tidy. They are well organized. Having order could be important when a pilot needs to find information quickly should the need arise.

For the facet of *dutifulness*, 55% of the pilots scored highly while 11% reported low scores. Dutifulness refers to the adherence to ethics and morals. High scorers adhere strictly to their ethical principles, whereas low scorers are more casual in such matters. Although there is a trend in the response of pilots on this facet, an apparent relationship to aviation is not evident.

Sixty-five percent of the pilots scored highly on the *achievement-striving* facet. Only 9% were low on this facet. High scorers are individuals who have high aspiration levels and work hard to achieve their goals. They are diligent and have a sense of direction. However, very high scores can invest too much in their careers and become workaholics.

Forty percent of these pilots were high in *self-discipline* while 11% were low. Self-discipline is the ability to begin tasks and carry them out to completion despite boredom or distractions. This dimension could be important with high levels of automation in the cockpit. Boredom is a concern. Those individuals who can make safety checks and keep vigilant will be more likely to catch any abnormalities before they turn into major disasters.

In the area of *deliberation*, 61% of the pilots were high while 14% were low. Deliberation is the tendency to think carefully before acting. High scorers are cautious and deliberate. This facet may be appropriate in a normal flying environment but could be impeding in an emergency. Our future work will address this issue.

*Pilot Profile *

Upon review of this information, we have developed a "pilot profile" that seems appropriate given the data. This is a purely descriptive profile and is not based on empirical investigation. Future investigations should empirically validate this profile.

The basic "pilot personality profile" is of an emotionally stable individual who is low in anxiety, vulnerability, angry hostility, impulsiveness, and depression. This person also tends be very conscientious; being high in deliberation, achievement-striving, competence, and dutifulness. He also tends to be trusting and straightforward. Finally, he is an active individual with a high level of assertiveness.

This profile parallels Hormann and Maschke's (1996) characteristics of successful pilots, as well as Picano's (1991) first personality type. Our findings may be construed as convergent validation of previous pilot models of personality. It is also important to point out that this data came from commercial pilots. Yet, Picano studied experienced military pilots, and his profile coincides with the profile we ascertained. This finding could indicate that there is a universal pilot personality, irrespective of experience or position.

Another important distinction is that both measures were pilot-specific. The NEO is a general personality measure used with a variety of populations. The data from all of these measures indicate that pilots have a certain profile regardless of the type of personality measure used. It is interesting to note that pilots are scoring differentially from the general population (as indicated by their responses to the NEO-PI-R).

https://ntrs.nasa.gov/api/citations/20040191539/downloads/20040191539.pdf


*Personality Traits in Clinically Referred Aviators: Two Clusters Related to Occupational Suitability* (2009)

Justin S. Campbell, Jeffrey L. Moore, Norman G. Poythress and Carrie H. Kennedy

*Discussion*

The *cluster analysis* conﬁrmed the research hypothesis by producing two NEO-PI-R personality cluster groups that provided a good ﬁt to the NAMI data. These *cluster groups* called Group 1 (N 5 291) and Group 2 (N 5 665) were distinguished from each other by comparing their scores on the clustering variables, contrasting their NEO-PI-R scores with those from a nonclinical sample of military aviators and the NEO normative sample, and lastly exploring group differences with respect to clinical determination of ﬂight status.

Descriptively Group 1 was a younger group, comprised mostly of student naval ﬂight ofﬁcers and aviators whose deﬁning feature was emotional instability and a signiﬁcantly higher likelihood of being found NAA [‘*Not Aeronautically Adaptable*’] (roughly 1 in 3). By contrast Group 2 had a greater percentage of older and more experienced winged aviators and ﬂight ofﬁcers, and despite being clinically referred, Group 2 was strikingly similar in personality to emotionally stable and highly extroverted nonclinical USAF student pilots. With respect to ﬂight status, Group 2 was signiﬁcantly more likely than Group 1 to retain their ﬂight status and be found AA [‘_*Aeronautically Adaptable or Adapted*’_] (9 of 10).

The nature of the NEO differences between the clusters, the contrasts with other samples, and the divergent likelihood of favorable clinical outcomes converge to indicate that of the two NAMI cluster proﬁles, Group 1 is most consistent with what may be considered the “wrong stuff” for a career in naval aviation. Keeping in mind that the descriptions here are being used to describe relative, rather than absolute trait differences, applying the lexicon of the FFM, a *NAA or “wrong-stuff” personality for naval aviation* could be described as anxiety-prone, given to angry and hostile interpersonal interactions, often depressed in mood, overly self-conscious, behaviorally impulsive, and vulnerable to stress. Conversely, the *AA personality or “right stuff”* would appear to be the absence of neurotic disposition, but more importantly, the addition of a protective veneer of extroverted personality facets (i.e., warmth, gregariousness, assertiveness, activity, excitement-seeking, and positive emotions). In sum, the clear majority of clinic-referred naval ﬂight ofﬁcers were emotionally stable extroverts who might be considered the right personality “ stuff ” to adapt to military aviation, as they were cleared to proceed with careers in naval aviation. In contrast, members of Group 1 seemed to possess the wrong stuff, that is, they were on average neurotic introverts with a signiﬁcantly higher likelihood of being found not aeronautically adaptable.

The results of this study, namely the adaptive role of extroversion and the deleterious impact of neuroticism with respect to careers in naval aviation, are consistent with other attempts to link personality to military aviation outcomes. To begin, a recent meta-analysis of personality traits as predictors of success in military aviation training (4) found a small but signiﬁcant negative relationship between success and neurotic facets and a slightly larger positive correlation between extroversion facets and success. Perhaps the common thread between successful completion of aviation training and clinical evaluation of ﬁtness for aviation duty is the inherent occupational stress imparted by military ﬂight duty and training (25). Studies have shown that some aspects of naval aviation, such as night-carrier landings, induce more stress than actual combat (14). Given that one of the facets of neuroticism is vulnerability to stress, it is not surprising to ﬁnd that people possessed of this trait, regardless of their work ethic or cognitive ability, may be at elevated risk for failing to complete the stressful cauldron of training in naval aviation, not to mention the more demanding rigors of operational ﬂying. Such a ﬁnding is not limited to aviation aspects of military service, as indicated by a meta-analysis conducted by Hough (12), who reported that of the ﬁve dimensions analogous to the FFM in her study, the only dimension predictive of combat effectiveness was adjustment (0.19)—a dimension directly opposed to N.

DOI: 10.3357/ASEM.2491.2009

https://www.researchgate.net/profil...sters-Related-to-Occupational-Suitability.pdf


*Personality Trends in the Pilot Population* (2020)

Maria E. Chaparro, Meredith Carroll and Shem Malmquist

Personality has been acknowledged since the 1970’s as an influencing factor in pilot performance and training outcomes (King, 2014; Bartram, 1995). Since the late 1940’s, pilot selection techniques have included personality related questions (Olson, Walker, & Phillips, 2009; Callister, King, Retzlaff, & Marsh, 1999; Dolgin & Gib, 1988; Fiske, 1947). Unfortunately, despite the large number of different personality indexes used within this line of research, there has not been an aggregation of all aviation studies examining pilot personality and its impact on performance and success. In the current effort, a literature review was conducted to identify research that examined pilot personality traits, and a high-level summary of the findings related to trends in pilot personality traits is provided. The summary includes an examination of personality traits across the differing pilot categories (i.e., commercial, student, and military pilots) and pilot genders. When examining pilots, in general, compared to a general population, consistent with past research, pilots tend to exhibit personality traits lower in neuroticism, higher in extraversion, equivalent in openness, lower in agreeableness, and higher in conscientiousness. However, when different pilot categories are examined, the trends are not as ubiquitous. For instance, commercial pilots research consistently shows pilots to have higher levels of conscientiousness than the general population; however, for military and student pilots the results are not equivocal. We present here the methods and results associated with our review of the literature and provide a discussion of what can be gleaned and future research needed. […]

*The goal of this paper is to aggregate the pilot personality research that has been conducted to date*, draw conclusions regarding key questions and identify research gaps to guide future research. Of particular interest are the following research questions:

(1) Are pilot’s personality traits different from the general population?
(2) Are there differences in the personality traits of commercial, military and pilots-in-training?
(3) Are there differences in the personality traits of female and male pilots?

[…]

*Discussion *

When looking at the pilot population compared to the general population, the trend that emerged is lower Neuroticism, higher Extraversion, equivalent Openness, lower Agreeableness, and higher Conscientiousness. When pilots were separated into commercial, pilot-in-training, and military, the trends were slightly different. The only consistent finding across all pilot categories was with respect to Neuroticism, which trended towards lower than the comparison populations. In terms of Extraversion, commercial and military pilots tended to be higher than their comparison populations while in the student population, the two studies found them to be equal or lower in Extraversion. In terms of the Openness factor, commercial and pilots-in- training yielded mixed results, while military pilots tended towards equivalence with the general population. With respect to the Agreeableness factor, commercial pilots had mixed results with two studies finding them lower than the general population and another two finding them higher than the general population. However, military and pilots-in-training trended towards lower in Agreeableness. Finally, when examining the Conscientiousness factor, commercial pilots scored higher in all studies on Conscientiousness, while mixed results were found for the military and pilot-in-training populations. Half of the military studies found pilots to be higher and the other half equivalent in the factor. Pilots-in-training were found to be lower or equal to their comparison populations in Conscientiousness. When looking at the difference in personality factors among genders, females and males were equivalent in all factors except Openness to experience, for which females trended higher.

*Low Neuroticism was the most consistent trend found in the studies*, with 17 of 19 studies examining Neuroticism finding pilots were lower in Neuroticism than the general population. Neuroticism is associated with anxiety, sensitivity, anger, irritability, and insecurity, among other emotions (Helton & Street, 1992; Barrick & Mount, 1991). Low levels of Neuroticism are associated with calmness, even-temperedness, and the ability to easily deal with stress (Castaneda, 2007). The finding that pilots tend to be low in Neuroticism could be due to the need to be more emotionally stable and less reactive to stress as aviation is a high stakes/high stress environment (Fitzgibbons et al., 2004). Therefore, individuals with low Neuroticism and high emotional stability may be drawn to the aviation industry and succeed/persist as they are better able to handle the stress (Campbell et al., 2009). Individuals who score high in Neuroticism can become easily anxious and potentially struggle in an environment with high stress and stakes (Cooper, 2015). This finding is consistent with the extant literature and indicates that including Neuroticism in the pilot selection battery may lead to more effective pilot selection (Hormann & Maschke, 1996; Ramachandran, Wadhawan, Kumar, Chandramohan, 1983; Jessup & Jessup, 1971).

*With respect to Extraversion*, our findings indicate that military and commercial pilots are higher in Extraversion than the general population. High Extraversion, is related to sociability, gregariousness, impulsivity, and an action orientation (Goeters, Timmermann, &

Maschke, 1993). Furthermore, past studies have found that Extraversion is positively related to pilot training success in military aviators (Chang et al., 2018; Campbell, 2009). Given the requirement for military pilots to, at times, be able to depart on a moment’s notice, the activeness and impulsivity associated with Extraversion would be beneficial in this career choice. Sociability is of importance to the commercial pilot domain in which pilots are continually performing in a team context (Fitzgibbons et al, 2004). Commercial pilots must communicate effectively over the radio to other individuals, socialize with continually changing co-pilots with whom they may be confined on the flight deck for over 24 hours, and travel to new places where communication is required to operate. When looking at pilot-in-training Extraversion, the trend is different. However, due to the presence of only two pilot-in-training studies this interpretation should be accepted with caution. The current study found mixed results with respect to pilots-in- training extraversion levels, which was typically found to be equivalent to or lower than the general student population. This is not surprising as pilots-in-training are in a very different environment than commercial and military pilots. Pilots-in-training must not only succeed in their flight program, but additionally in their college courses to attain their degree. A study by Schurer, Kassenboehmer, and Leung (2015) found that low levels of Extraversion strongly predicted the probability of obtaining a university degree. This may be due to the need to be more focused on the long-term goals (i.e., degree attainment) rather than impulsivity or action orientation. Additionally, although socializing with peers is an important aspect to success in the university, there is a limit, and too much socialization can be detrimental (Schurer et al., 2015). Therefore, due to their university environment, pilots-in-training Extraversion levels may be different than those of the typical military and commercial pilots. Further, the difference may stem from the period of time in the students life, wherein they are young adults, a time when many changes in personality occur (Lüdtke, Trautwein, & Husemann, 2009; Caspi et al., 2005).

*The results related to the Openness domain* show no clear pattern in commercial and pilots-in-training; however, in the military domain pilots trended towards equivalence with the general population. These findings suggest that this may not be a facet that differentiates pilots from the general population. This may be due to the highly proceduralized nature of piloting. That is, there are clear checklists and rules that have to be mandatorily followed before, during, and after flight by the crew (Schwaitzberg et al., 2009; Rockliff, 2003). Therefore, there may be less need for a pilot to be adaptive to changes and creative, on a day-to-day basis as the regulators create the terms in which pilots can operate (Rockliff, 2003). Additionally, a common trait associated with Openness is the yearning to move up in position and move around between different job opportunities (Nieß & Zacher, 2015). Given the limited variability in types of jobs available to pilots (e.g., other than flying different types of aircraft), those high in openness may be less drawn to this career.

*With respect to agreeableness*, when looking at pilots in general, they tended to be less agreeable. This could be due to pilots’ need to prioritize performance and goals at hand rather than relationships (Grice and Katz, 2006). However, commercial pilots tended to be more agreeable than the general population in two of the four commercial pilot studies. This trend was not found in military and pilot-in-training categories. Agreeableness is related to traits such as warmth, sympathy, altruism, cooperation, courtesy, flexibility, and having a disposition toward interpersonal trust and consideration of others (Helton & Street, 1992; Barrick & Mount, 1991; McCrae & Costa, 1986). Agreeableness is also an important personality facet in team settings as more agreeable individuals tend to work cooperatively and are better able to resolve conflict (Morgeson, Reider, & Campion, 2005). Agreeableness is also closely tied to trust (Mooradian, Renzl, & Matzler, 2006). Agreeableness in commercial pilots may be due to the constant change in a commercial pilot’s crew requiring commercial pilots to be trusting of their crew and straightforward with their needs (Civil Aviation Authority, 2014). However, in the other two commercial studies, as well as most of the military and pilot-in-training studies, pilots were found to be lower in Agreeableness. Low Agreeableness is associated with less empathetic and co-operative attributes (Driskell, Goodwin, Salas, & O’Shea, 2006). Pilots, specifically military pilots, may be less agreeable due to being more concerned with aspects of mission performance over relationships (Grice & Katz, 2006).

*With respect to Conscientiousness*, the current study found a mix of studies that report pilots being higher or equal to the general population in Conscientiousness. The Conscientiousness factor is related to purpose, mindfulness and drive to accomplish goals, which is extremely important in the military domain (Siem & Murray, 1997) and may be less so in commercial and pilot-in-training domains. Studies on the Conscientiousness domain have found that much of the variance in Conscientiousness is attributable to environmental influences, such as environments that foster or allow the trait to be expressed (Roberts, Lejuez, Krueger, Richards, & Hill, 2014; Krueger & Johnson, 2008). A great example of this is the military population. The military works to break down civilian identity and mold recruits towards the desired military identity (Jackson et al., 2012; Roberts, Wood, & Caspi, 2008). Differences in the sample’s military environment across studies may have led to the equivocal results within the military samples. For example, some military training programs may foster more teamwork whereas other sectors may be less focused on this aspect (i.e., single-pilot vs. multi-pilot operations). Interestingly, Air Force pilots have rated conscientiousness as the most important aspect of personality (Siem & Murray, 1997). Conscientiousness is important for working well and thoroughly. The findings that pilots-in-training are lower in Conscientiousness may be due to their age. Contrary to popular belief, personality can change over time (Corker, Oswald, & Donnellan, 2011; Caspi et al., 2005). One period with emotional intense growth is young adulthood, which aligns with the time period in college. Conscientiousness is relevant to many changes during this time period, such as impulse control, which facilitates task‐ and goal‐ directed behavior, such as thinking before acting, delaying gratification, following norms and rules (Corker et al., 2011). College students have recently just left home and are being presented with multiple options and trying to find their own way, and learning to prioritize, test rules, andwork through impulsivity.

When looking at the *gender differences* in pilots, it appears that the differences typically found between genders in the general population are not present within the aviation domain. When looking at gender in the general population, studies have found that women, across most nations typically have higher levels of Neuroticism, Extraversion, Agreeableness, and Conscientiousness than men (Chapman, Duberstein, Sörensen, & Lyness, 2007). However, the only factor in our analysis which seemed to differentiate female pilots from male pilots, is that female pilots tend to be more open to experience than male pilots. This suggests that female pilots may be more receptive to input from other individuals and sources of information than their male counterparts (Costa & McCrae, 1992). Another facet of those high in Openness to experience is related to adaptability (Escolas, Ray, & Escolas, 2016). Female pilots have been found to have less accidents than their male counterparts, even those with more experience (Walton & Politano, 2016). This may be due to their ability to adapt to novel situations. Another plausible reason is that women with this personality type may be more attracted to the aviation domain due to it being amore adventurous occupation not typical for most women. Additionally, women tend to be higher in neuroticism, therefore the typical female personality may not be attracted to the high-stakes and potential risks associated with a piloting career while those who are low in neuroticism do not see it as a high-stakes career. Additionally, similarities between male and female pilots may be due to environmental factors. The piloting job requires that the individuals spend a large amount of time with their fellow co-pilots, which is unlike work environments that women typically find themselves, wherein the individual spends eight hours at work and then goes home to their family every weekday (Roberts et al., 2008; Novello & Youssef, 1974). Given this, female pilot personalities are shaped to a larger degree, by their colleagues and work environment, than is typical for most females in the work force (Roberts et al., 2008).

There are several *practical implications* of this research. First, it provides insight into personality traits that may be necessary to achieve a successful piloting career. There was a clear difference between pilot-in-training and commercial pilot personality, especially with respect to Conscientiousness. Commercial pilots were found to be high in Conscientiousness whereas pilots-in-training were found to be equal or lower than the general population. This finding could elude to the fact that high levels of Conscientiousness are needed to succeed as a commercial pilot, or that conscientiousness is developed as a pilot’s career progresses. This is consistent with the literature that has found conscientiousness to correlate with successful job performance (Halim, Zainal, Khairudin, Shahrazad, Nasir, & Fatimah, 2011). Therefore, looking into environmental aspects which promote Conscientiousness in the classroom could be a helpful tool to foster pilots-in-training. As stated earlier, this also may be a facet of age, that is, students entering a collegiate aviation program are in an age where they are just learning how to be self- sufficient and their Conscientiousness is developing (Roberts et al., 2008). Commercial pilots also trended towards more extraverted than the general population compared to pilots-in-training who trended towards equal/lower Extraversion. This may elude to an environmental change occurring between training and commercial, that is as pilots-in-training spend time in a commercial setting they become more extraverted. Interestingly, some studies have pointed to college students who score lower in Extraversion being more likely to have successful program completion (Schurer et al., 2015; Lunderberg, 2013). Therefore, collegiate aviation programs may not need to be concerned with students who are lower in extraversion, however, they should provide opportunities for them to exercise traits associated with extraversion. This could be done by collegiate aviation programs encouraging pilots-in-training to get involved in extracurricular activities such as aviation groups to help cultivate more Extraversion. Given the current study’s findings, successful pilots seem to be low in neuroticism. Low neuroticism may therefore be both a good predictor of success and selection parameter for pilots. The literature lends support as low neuroticism has been found to be positively related to performance in jobs involving interpersonal interactions (Mount, Barrick, & Stewart, 1998) and success in commercial and military pilots. Personality may also be a parameter to consider in pilot training to aid in improving pilot success (i.e., training completion). Understanding the personality of pilots in training may provide instructors with a way to adapt their instructional techniques for individual trainees or students. For example, the results of personality assessments could be used to individualize the learning context, such as in the case that an instructor encounters a pilots-in- training who is very low in extraversion, he can provide problem-based training which encourages the trainee to be assertive, or group work that provides the opportunity for them to take the lead. Finally, diversity in personality could be beneficial in performance (Van Knippenberg & Schippers, 2007; Neuman, Wagner, & Christiansen, 1999; Mount, Barrick, & Stewart, 1998) and used as a tool to improve CRM. A study by Neuman et al. (1999) found that differing levels of extraversion and emotional stability (neuroticism) were positively related to team performance. Additionally, a study by Gorla and Lam (2004) found that differing personality types between leaders and personnel lended itself to better team performance. Therefore, differing personality types may work better than a homogeneous pilot type. […]

*Conclusion*

The goal of this paper was to amass the pilot personality research that has been conducted to date in order to draw conclusions regarding whether (1) pilot’s personality traits are different from the general population; (2) there are differences in the personality traits of commercial, military and pilots-in-training, (3) there are differences in the personality traits of female and male pilots. In regards to the first question there are clear differences in pilot levels of Neuroticism, Extraversion, Agreeableness and Conscientiousness, compared to the general population. With regards to our second question, there appear to be differences in personality traits across military, commercial and pilot-in-training population; however, inferences should be interpreted with caution due to the limited number of studies involving commercial and pilots-in-training. The final, question regarding the differences in gender, points to female and male pilots having equivalent personality in all factors except Openness to experience.

DOI: 10.22488/okstate.20.100219

https://ojs.library.okstate.edu/osu/index.php/CARI/article/download/8025/7423



https://www.faa.gov/jobs/abbreviations


----------

