Over 60 can't land?
#11
That whole thing is ridiculous. So, you can fly til 65 as the head honcho, BMOC, Captain of the crew but you can't be trusted to do it unless there's someone under 60 with you? Sounds like this whole thing was really well thought out. What a mess.
#12
#13
Either the FAA has misread what ICAO has said or ALPA has misread what the FAA has said.
It is suggested that during high workload phases of flight (such as flight below 10,000 feet above ground level) at least one pilot seated at the controls should be under 60 years of age.
It is suggested that during high workload phases of flight (such as flight below 10,000 feet above ground level) at least one pilot seated at the controls should be under 60 years of age.
Our Mission
Our mission is to provide the safest, most efficient aerospace system in the world.
Our Vision
Our vision is to improve the safety and efficiency of aviation, while being responsive to our customers and accountable to the public.
If I were the FAA I would have questions also and not jusrt accept something because congress passed a law. Yes, at this time it's law but laws change or be can interpreted differently than our "out to lunch" congressmen think.
#16
Either the FAA has misread what ICAO has said or ALPA has misread what the FAA has said.
ICAO's standard for age 65 requires ONE pilot to be under the age of 60. The question was "What about three or four pilot crews?". The answer was that ONE pilot had to be under age 60. The other two or three could be age over age 60. It is suggested, not required, that one of the pilots in the left or right seats for T/O or Landing should be under age 60.
ICAO's standard for age 65 requires ONE pilot to be under the age of 60. The question was "What about three or four pilot crews?". The answer was that ONE pilot had to be under age 60. The other two or three could be age over age 60. It is suggested, not required, that one of the pilots in the left or right seats for T/O or Landing should be under age 60.
The FAA goes a little further.
From FAA InFO 0801, dated Jan 16, 2008:
"However, ICAO and the FAA suggest that a pilot under age 60 be at the controls (a crew duty position) during critical phases of the flight (such as below 10,000 feet). The FAA expects air carriers and PICs to use best scheduling practices and crew management to ensure maximum compliance with this recommendation to have a pilot under age 60 be at the controls (a crew duty position) during critical phases of the flight (such as below 10,000 feet). Issues such as pilot seniority are not considered valid reasons for noncompliance." (emphasis mine)
That wording, ladies and gentlemen, is the start of how one agency - the one in charge of safety - will be beginning to cover their rear end. Put it on the air carriers. Then have expectations of maximum compliance, and bring up '...reasons for noncompliance'.
FH can believe in the public stance. In reality, however, I imagine some in Washington are waking up at night with the cold sweats and nightmares of something we truly hope never happens, and trying to determine how to best protect their career and divert blame.
#18
My source tells me that good old FH will have to check out on the panel before he can go to the Front seat again since that is his current award. I can't wait to see how it works out for him.
#19
Just a stab in the dark here but, I'm guessing you'll receive the famous "WRONG!" from his highness, FH.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
LAfrequentflyer
Hangar Talk
0
09-29-2005 11:47 AM