This post is States Exhibit 1 in why this forum needs a like feature or upvoting!

You still haven't responded to my observation that you say a higher retirement age is a solution for poor pilot training rather than any thought of better pilot training or initial hire requirements.

Yes, the independent review did recommend the age remain at age 65, but ICAO, the FAA, and the other bodies are moving forward with the age change.

Go to the link below and look at slide 3-, 31, & 32 on ICAO's website from the May 7, 2019 meeting/presentation.

https://www.icao.int/safety/aviation...%20Study_c.pdf

FACT - These slides specifically state:

FACT - A reduction of the maximum monthly/yearly FTL to 80% of the maximum allowed for pilots over 65 performing CAT multi pilot operations (see presentation).

FACT - Development of options based on the feedback from the Workshop and Medical Examiner Group (MEG), etc.

FACT - The parties will work closely with ICAO and the International Authorities on the future steps to (simultaneously) coordinate (worldwide) actions.

FACT - EASA high-level decision - Impact assessment will be consulted with EASA Advisory Bodies.

FACT - Further feedback from the advisory bodies on the way forward.

FACT - Regulatory activities (to increase the mandatory CAT multi engine age) in congruence with the (aeromedical) decision.

Drone pilots are coming. I guess you know more than the FAA, Boeing, and Airbus who have invested billions of dollars in this program, which begins testing this year.

The reason is having more experienced pilots who have had better training and are more seasoned is an obvious answer. This a partial solution to the problem. There is not enough training devices and resources to manage the problem.

The pilots being developed today do not have the real time in aircraft experience as those pilots trained 39-40 years ago. To suggest otherwise is nonsense.

Airlines cannot train any more pilots any faster. Their simulators are running 24/7 and they cannot contract more. It takes 2 years to build a simulator and that does not solve the problem.

International companies who want to fly into the United States are putting pilots in Boeing and Airbus aircraft with 300 hours total time.

The Lions Air and Ethiopian Airlines accidents was a wake up call.

The retirement age is changing and the bills have already been created for a change in the U.S., which is simply waiting for ICAO's final work.

Perhaps we should allow pilots to work over 65 as long as they are only in the left seat of a narrow body or even an RJ to help mentor all these new pilots! (Sarcasm is high)


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

The problem with trying to making airplanes easier to fly is that it creates dumber pilots which then can't respond to basic system failures such as a trim runaway (MCAS issues) or frozen pitot tubes (AF 447).

The departure from the philosophy of designing airplanes to be flown by humans and to instead have computers fly them is what is causing the new wave of safety issues.

Statistics say we are much safer even with the occasional failure and crash.

There have been non fatal crashes recently caused by pilot error such as the 777 Asiana in SFO. Pilots make a ton of errors every day that the system captures either due to slop or technology. TCAS, GPWS, controllers noticing, etc.

The flip side of that is automation also makes errors (or just plain clicks off) which pilots correct without even thinking much about it. Current aircraft could in no way begin to function autonomously.

Contributing to pilot error was over-reliance on automation, but "landing short" in SFO also seems to a right of passage among far-east carriers.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Japan_Airlines_Flight_2