Excargodog

Even if we weren’t in a pilot shortage, it would be difficult to enforce and likely cost you real money in legal costs and damages to even try:

https://www.jdsupra.com/legalnews/ca...artment-89002/

BoilerUP

Many corporate departments instituted a mandatory retirement age after the Exxon ruling.

galaxy flyer

Eliminate over 65 pilots at corporate aviation and it’d be a real shortage there. My old department had half the pilots over 65.

GF

Falcondrivr

Then what would all the 121 guys with three alimony payments do when they hit 65?

GeeWizDriver

To me, corporate or private ownership is different. If you're willing to have a 75 year old fossil flying you around and you aren't worried he's going to stroke out and kill you and your family, well, have at it. After all, it'll will only be you and your family and hopefully nobody on the ground.

But 121, 135, and 91K hold out to the public. The person riding around in the back has little or NO say on who is up front. And those operations owe a higher duty of care to the public.

The fact that there is not a mandatory retirement age for 91K and 135 is an absolute TRAVESTY and a major headline waiting to be written. One that will have lasting repercussions for the entire industry.

The number of pilots over 70 at NJ would SHOCK you and we even have more than a handful between 78 and 85! That should scare the CRAP out of you because it sure scares me.

Absolute insanity.

hansinla

You're incredibly short sighted and narrow minded. I hope that you'll age well.

SonicFlyer

This shows a lack of critical thinking.

There is no magic age number which shows every individual is unfit. If they can pass a medical, then they should be good to go. Maybe the medical exams should be more strict after age 65? That would be a good solution. And also requiring that any crew with someone over 65 should require the 2nd crew member to not be green and to be under the age of 50, or something along those lines.

Packrat

The medical needs to be the same for everybody. Tighten up the requirements on the basis of age is discriminatory. Tighten up the medical and you might be surprised how many YOUNG people can't pass.

Besides, you don't even need a 1st class to fly Part 135. That is a Company requirement, not an FAA requirement. I can do all my Part 91 and Part 135 flying with a 2nd class medical.

SonicFlyer

It's not discrimination... older people are closer to death and have many more things wrong with their bodies in general. Just like younger people lack experience and thus wisdom about decision making because their frontal cortex isn't completely formed. PC culture has zero place in safety.

GeeWizDriver

Narrow minded? No, realistic.

You cannot legislate for the one-off 70 year old that can run rings around a 50 year old. You have to legislate for the 73 year old narcoleptic that derives his entire existence from being called "Captain" and falls asleep at the drop of a hat. Yes, I turned him in. No, the company wouldn't ground him despite a dozen corroborating statements.

As for aging well, I damn sure don't plan to be collecting Social Security from a cockpit like nearly THREE HUNDRED NetJets pilots. My wife has orders to ship my ID, license, medical, phone and ipad to Columbus the day I turn 65, if not sooner and that won't be long now.

You apologists for the geriatric set really crack me up. Age discriminators. Seat grabbers.

NO, you people are the ones with the problem. You just CAN'T. LET. GO.