Go Back  Airline Pilot Central Forums > Airline Pilot Forums > Major
IATA Calls for Raising Pilot Age Limit to 67 >

IATA Calls for Raising Pilot Age Limit to 67

Search

Notices
Major Legacy, National, and LCC

IATA Calls for Raising Pilot Age Limit to 67

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 11-29-2025 | 05:52 PM
  #1661  
On Reserve
 
Joined: Sep 2023
Posts: 30
Likes: 10
Default

Originally Posted by NERD
Keep the faith!! By the midterms, November 2026 is the goal according that MF guy.
He was also on the record saying it “has to get done in the FAA reauthorization bill” and then he created EPAS as a task force because LEPF wasn't moving fast enough and “it has to get done in 2026.” Moral of the story, MF is a clown who will keep moving the goalpost and asking for money until 2028 when he retires. Then the just cause he is fighting for will suddenly not be nearly as important (unless he can keep skimming money off of other greedy pilots)
Old 11-29-2025 | 06:23 PM
  #1662  
Line Holder
 
Joined: Apr 2024
Posts: 625
Likes: 144
Default

Originally Posted by 180ToAJ
When you say “arbitrary”, do you actually mean “federal law”?
I’ll try that next time when they pull me over for an arbitrary speed or I don’t pay an arbitrary amount in taxes.
Federal law ooooo ahhhh lol

It changes with politicians and historically has been based on feelings more than facts

Im talking about the deeper thinking part of the subject, not the monkey rote “duh law sayz”
Old 11-29-2025 | 07:01 PM
  #1663  
Line Holder
 
Joined: Dec 2023
Posts: 536
Likes: 140
Default

Originally Posted by MELedMel
Come on man…

The Jr guys want to Sr guys off the roster for the exact same reason, moar seniority -> money (greed)


The “safety” argument BS is the only thing that’s honestly old and needs to be retired


If both sides honestly cared about safety we could fix that right quick by changing how we do recurrent rides, both in difficulty, making them less predictable, and making popping a ride an immediate termination.

Yet both sides crying “safety” aint about all that now are they 😆
You totally misunderstand FARs and safety - if lobbying to change a FAR, you have to be able to document that it’s safer. Otherwise why would we change it to less safe? That would be dumb! The proof that it is safer is incumbent on those trying to change it.

You’re also wrong in your assessment that both sides are the same when it comes to $. When you are asking for more of something at the expense of the majority of pilots - who are asking for absolutely nothing additional - YOU are the greedy one. Can’t be greedy if we’re not asking for any changes. Nice try at false equivalence, but that ain’t working here.
Old 11-29-2025 | 07:12 PM
  #1664  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined: Apr 2011
Posts: 3,489
Likes: 138
Default

Originally Posted by MELedMel
From what I’ve seen of most of the flying public, if they are concerned with “safety” they’d be better served with less servings and watching their waist line than worried about what we do in jets.


Same with plots, I’m more concerned with the 30yr old who looks 50 and I can’t even tell if he’s wearing a belt due to his gut, than some normal human looking 66yr old.
Comes off a little bitter. Otoh, cabin seats wouldn’t be any less safe a foot wider. More potties too now that you bring it up.

Old 11-29-2025 | 07:37 PM
  #1665  
Line Holder
 
Joined: Apr 2024
Posts: 625
Likes: 144
Default

Originally Posted by Clearedtocross
You totally misunderstand FARs and safety - if lobbying to change a FAR, you have to be able to document that it’s safer. Otherwise why would we change it to less safe? That would be dumb! The proof that it is safer is incumbent on those trying to change it.

You’re also wrong in your assessment that both sides are the same when it comes to $. When you are asking for more of something at the expense of the majority of pilots - who are asking for absolutely nothing additional - YOU are the greedy one. Can’t be greedy if we’re not asking for any changes. Nice try at false equivalence, but that ain’t working here.
Just because the FAA and dumb lemurs say it’s ok to have to prove your innocence, doesn’t make it anymore illogical or morally reprehensible.
Old 11-29-2025 | 07:42 PM
  #1666  
Line Holder
 
Joined: Feb 2018
Posts: 615
Likes: 145
Default

Originally Posted by MELedMel
Federal law ooooo ahhhh lol

It changes with politicians and historically has been based on feelings more than facts

Im talking about the deeper thinking part of the subject, not the monkey rote “duh law sayz”
Well, like it or not, duh law sayz age 65.

On deeper thinking, nobody after age 65 is getting better. Across the board, people peak much earlier. Look at any competition like chess champions, sports, etc.
Cognitive decline is real. Experience has long since peaked when you are in your 60’s and nobody gets sharper. Grandpa never volunteers his keys. The failsafe of a predictable simulator or pencil whipped medical to catch pilots happens well after the time they became unsafe. Just like grandpa getting his keys taken away.
Age 65 makes sense as a failsafe to catch most before they become unsafe.

Take emotions (and money) out of your opinions.
Also, duh law sayz 65.

Last edited by 180ToAJ; 11-29-2025 at 07:55 PM.
Old 11-29-2025 | 08:09 PM
  #1667  
Line Holder
 
Joined: Dec 2023
Posts: 536
Likes: 140
Default

Originally Posted by MELedMel
Just because the FAA and dumb lemurs say it’s ok to have to prove your innocence, doesn’t make it anymore illogical or morally reprehensible.
What do you think they should say? “Well it looks likely to be less safe and at best is not proven, but yeah let’s just run an experiment on the traveling public and see what happens”?
Old 11-30-2025 | 03:51 AM
  #1668  
Meme In Command's Avatar
Leaves Biscoff crumbs
Veteran: Army
Loved
On Reserve
Line Holder
 
Joined: Jan 2020
Posts: 3,265
Likes: 941
From: Blue Juice Taste Tester
Default

Originally Posted by MELedMel
Just because the FAA and dumb lemurs say it’s ok to have to prove your innocence, doesn’t make it anymore illogical or morally reprehensible.
It's "illogical or morally reprehensible" for the eXpErIeNcE mAtTeRs grifters to actually have to prove it?

Lol unclutch those pearls 😂

The ones that brought up the safety argument to begin with were the 67 guys. They made the assertion that sticking around longer made us safer. They made the assertion that junior makes us less safe. Cool, then prove it. Show your work. Because if you actually can't, all you're doing is talking sh!t about other pilots.
Old 11-30-2025 | 05:51 AM
  #1669  
Moderator
 
Joined: Jul 2006
Posts: 7,481
Likes: 477
Default

Originally Posted by MELedMel
Same with plots, I’m more concerned with the 30yr old who looks 50 and I can’t even tell if he’s wearing a belt due to his gut, than some normal human looking 66yr old.

The younger crowd does not have the market cornered on high BMI, that's an issue across the board.


Originally Posted by Meme In Command
The ones that brought up the safety argument to begin with were the 67 guys. They made the assertion that sticking around longer made us safer. They made the assertion that junior makes us less safe. Cool, then prove it. Show your work. Because if you actually can't, all you're doing is talking sh!t about other pilots.

It was pretty disturbing to see some of them on FB posting right after any accident/incident, trying to figure out the experience of the pilots.
Old 11-30-2025 | 04:25 PM
  #1670  
Line Holder
 
Joined: Mar 2015
Posts: 1,569
Likes: 67
Default

Nehls quits congress
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
satchip
Corporate
11
09-16-2009 07:22 PM
eFDeeeX
Cargo
59
01-31-2008 01:30 PM

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



Your Privacy Choices