You see, this is the problem when logic is expounded using clever syllogisms.
First of all, If an empirical experiment expects me to only acknowledge something, then it will raise my suspicions higher for nefarious intentions of controlling what I should think or conclude. You laid out its intentions clearly here.
Second, you say talent pool will increase if opening this career for girls and at the same time say some boys aren't able to be pilots for lack of talent. Now combining these two, having more female women in this sector would benefit our economy. Tada!
You didn't consider the case where some women won't be pilots for lack of talent and with opening up of new generation of men to this sector, the talent pool expands just as much.
Look, here are one fact: The tech industry will do fine and surprise itself with high quality talent even without women in it. This is true had the industry been without men in it as well. It doesn't increase or decrease had one sex been not allowed. The economy doesn't benefit except for maybe by diversification and that too can be compensated by methods of reaching out to those spaces where only one class of people could have immensely benefited. So lets say sexual harassment apps. Most of them are made by men only teams in Google Play store and they get reviewed great! Lets say Periods and menstrual conscious exercises and diet. Men have designed great apps in this as well.
This in itself is not reason for discrimination of women or men either way. That is to say, neither women nor men should not be excluded by this reason.