Bad info has never stopped a good internet post.

The slide talks about an increase from age 60 to 65. I see nothing about an increase from 65 to 68.

Somebody created a new username in the wee hours of this morning, simply to copypasta a bunch of nonsense that they clearly had not themselves reviewed?

In Feb 2019 the Netherlands Organization for Applied Scientific Research did a study for EASA and concluded:

4.2.3 Age limit multi-pilot operations
Based on the outcome of Parts 1 and 2, it was concluded that allowing pilots older than 65 years in multi-pilot CAT operations would require additional risk-mitigation measures such as specific tests to support the aeromedical decision on the applicant’s fitness on an individual basis. We recommend keeping the age limit at 65 years as it is currently set by EASA (FCL.065; EASA, 2016).

The May 2019th EASA Powerpoint linked above even says, on slide 23, that the study recommends maintaining the age limit for multi-pilot operations as 65 years.

Later in the same powerpoint on slide 30 it says EASA is considering an increase in the limit beyond 65 years for multi-pilot commercial air transport operations as well as an 80% cap on FTL for pilots over 65 in multi-pilot ops, but there's an entire side after that stating "However, a final decision has not been made yet".

Makes me wonder what his angle is... And if he's the same person who posted it in the Delta forum.

Everything I posted is a fact including the ICAO PowerPoint presentations, the reference to the new age limit in American Airlines’ FOM, the new ICAO reg for above age 65 flying, and the New FAA reg, etc.

Yes the medical group contracted in 2017/18 to provide a risk assessment of flying over age 65 recommended to not increase the age limit. However, the regulators and AMEs are moving forward with the age change per the timeline I described from the different PUBLIC sources.

Expect the age change to occur simultaneously around the world in early 2020 with the change attached to a current bill in Congress.

Thanks...I’ll do just that.

Please, provide us with links to the public sources you've described, because the ones you've posted so far do not correspond with your stated conclusions.

ICAO is not EASA; as such, a link to ICAO documents would be especially helpful.

What you are suggesting is a coordinated, simultaneous, global change to the commercial air transport maximum age, across multiple regulatory bodies, happening in the next 3-4 months, when none of the major global players have publicly announced intention of such a change. And that such a change will come in the US via amendment to an existing bill, which again is different than how the change happened in December 2007...more than 10 months after the FAA publicly announced their intent to raise the mandatory retirement age in accordance with ICAO's change.

The last FAA authorization allowed no oxygen mask use up to FL410. That was 9 months ago. Still in our Ops Specs. There is no such thing as a "simultaneous change." It would have to go through NPRM at the very least.

OK, you do not seem to understand the difference between ICAO and EASA. They are quite a bit different; those are EASA presentations, not ICAO. And they're both different than the FAA and the legal process required to change the age limit in the US.

You have provided no documents indicating that an age change is on the cusp of being enacted.

I'm going to make a stab in the dark here … you turn 65 in 2020, correct?

Not happening anytime soon (in the US).

But I fully expect that we'll get to 67-68 in the US within ten years or so. I think it will be much harder to go beyond that for 121.

The rationale for age 65 doesn't change too much at age 67, and there will likely be a big political push, especially if airlines struggle to meet demand because of retirements.

Keep in mind that retirement-induced pilot shortages at the big boys probably has more to do with simulator/training capacity than age 65 itself. Creating a new source of ab initio pilots for example may not solve the problem...

If you retire a (typically very senior) guy at age 65 at a multi-fleet airline and replace him with a new guy you generate a LOT of training events across multiple fleets. In addition to sim capacity issues, you just took a bunch of pilots off line for several months. Even with a suitable noob waiting in the wings, you've still probably lost an effective man-year of pilot availability. Keeping the old guy dilutes that problem or at least kicks the can.

The industry will kick the can if they haven't come up with a better solution, and their political cronies will back them up unless there's some good high-profile reason not to.