Despite the increasingly recognized importance of spatial ability in STEM (science, technology, engineering, and mathematics) fields, research to date has largely ignored distinctions in the criterion‐related validity and subgroup differences associated with theoretically distinct spatial abilities. This study aims to enhance practical understanding by spotlighting a prominent military context as an example wherein specific spatial abilities may be both differentially relevant and differentially apt to result in adverse impact. Analyses compared the relative importance of (i) spatial orientation, (ii) visualization, (iii) closure flexibility, and (iv) perceptual speed for predicting U.S. Air Force pilot performance (N = 1440), and compared subgroup differences in a large applicant sample (N = 10,643). Given that specific spatial abilities vary substantially in the extent to which gender differences exist, this study highlights the practical implications associated with the choice of particular spatial ability measures in personnel selection.