It's no more arbitrary than any other age limit we see in society. Why can't a 20 year old responsibly consume alcohol? Why can't a 17 year old die for his country? Why can't a 66 old safely operate a regularly scheduled airliner? The fact is that we have age limits to encompass the statistical majority, with regard to risk/probability, of a given group. The majority of pilots past age 65 are statistically likely to no longer be able to safely operate jet equipment. Some will past this age, most won't. So we have rules...ask UAL, DAL, AA, etc. for further details.

The argument that not EVERYONE is unsafe immediately past this age is tired, rhetorical, dishonest, and poorly thought out. I've heard it many times before. It typically comes from those financially incentivized to ignore the medical certainty of aging and the undeniable health risks that accompany it.

And therein lies the problem. But first off, no...most pilots CANNOT safely operate past 65. These old timers are RELYING on the two-crew concept to keep their gravy train going. It usually sounds like this:

"Gee thanks fella...I'm sure glad you kept on eye me this week. I'm just not as fast at this as I used to be. Send me those four ASAP reports you had to write so I can put them in to my reports once I get my grand kid to show me how to fire up that fancy computer machine again. Sorry about your 25 upgrade here, but I just don't know what I'd do with myself if I had to retire. The money's too good! Have you tried Continental Airlines yet? I hear they're hiring."

There's only so much mileage NJ can get from this...one day soon, two gummers will be paired together and they'll put one into a mountain. Just watch. One will be sleeping and the other will be confused. Medicals and sim checks are far too subjective to be our only line of defense again this kind of reckless greed.