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


Notices
Major Legacy, National, and LCC

IATA Calls for Raising Pilot Age Limit to 67

Old 09-03-2025 | 08:59 AM
  #341  
rickair7777's Avatar
Prime Minister/Moderator
Veteran: Navy
 
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 45,107
Likes: 793
From: Engines Turn or People Swim
Default

Originally Posted by Werjower
Also, not sure controlled rest is the move either. Ask our brothers to the north how they like doing 2-man Europe TURNS on the widebody. Had a former AC guy on the jumpseat once telling me all about taking the controlled rest, only to wake up and find the other guy asleep too and next thing you know, they're being intercepted by a foreign military.
I certainly wasn't suggesting controlled rest as a workaround to existing duty limits.

Rather a means to mitigate the natural circadian challenges we experience.
Old 09-03-2025 | 09:18 AM
  #342  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined: Mar 2021
Posts: 2,847
Likes: 212
Default

Originally Posted by Meme In Command
Doesn't the nap thing allow them to fly with less pilots? Like 3 man crew with a nap as opposed to 4 man crew? Legit asking, honestly don't know.
Multi-crew ops already have rest/nap breaks. This would be for two person crews. The one negative I could see is this could lead credence to single pilot ops.
Old 09-03-2025 | 09:32 AM
  #343  
rickair7777's Avatar
Prime Minister/Moderator
Veteran: Navy
 
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 45,107
Likes: 793
From: Engines Turn or People Swim
Default

Originally Posted by ImSoSuss
Multi-crew ops already have rest/nap breaks. This would be for two person crews. The one negative I could see is this could lead credence to single pilot ops.
The first hint of movement to single pilot ops was an EASA study on eMCO.

They concluded that current technology does not support doing that safely, and have abandonded the concept.

https://www.flyingmag.com/easa-pause...ilot-research/


I don't like eMCO (where one pilot takes rest out of the cockpit, leaving only one pilot minding the store). But I like controlled napping at a flight crew station. It's a think and has been for a while in some countries, and I think many of of us have seen it action as well It's restorative, and if the chit hits the fan you're right there in the seat.
Old 09-03-2025 | 10:47 AM
  #344  
Line Holder
 
Joined: Dec 2023
Posts: 536
Likes: 140
Default

Originally Posted by rickair7777
The first hint of movement to single pilot ops was an EASA study on eMCO.

They concluded that current technology does not support doing that safely, and have abandonded the concept.

https://www.flyingmag.com/easa-pause...ilot-research/


I don't like eMCO (where one pilot takes rest out of the cockpit, leaving only one pilot minding the store). But I like controlled napping at a flight crew station. It's a think and has been for a while in some countries, and I think many of of us have seen it action as well It's restorative, and if the chit hits the fan you're right there in the seat.
I think it’s best for us to all stand together on the sleep issue in saying that the solution is not routine naps on the flight deck, but rather better duty/rest requirements and/or augmented crews.

As for single pilot ops, every version of that includes a control from the ground and it’s all hackable. Until the hacking problem is solved - not sure that’s even possible - there can be no override from the ground without a serious compromise in safety.
Old 09-03-2025 | 10:59 AM
  #345  
rickair7777's Avatar
Prime Minister/Moderator
Veteran: Navy
 
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 45,107
Likes: 793
From: Engines Turn or People Swim
Default

Originally Posted by Clearedtocross
I think it’s best for us to all stand together on the sleep issue in saying that the solution is not routine naps on the flight deck, but rather better duty/rest requirements and/or augmented crews.
That's a reasonable point.

Originally Posted by Clearedtocross
As for single pilot ops, every version of that includes a control from the ground and it’s all hackable. Until the hacking problem is solved - not sure that’s even possible - there can be no override from the ground without a serious compromise in safety.
Yes. Among many other issues.
Old 09-03-2025 | 11:43 AM
  #346  
symbian simian's Avatar
Line holder
 
Joined: Nov 2013
Posts: 4,178
Likes: 255
From: Aircraft & Seat: old & hard
Default

Originally Posted by Meme In Command
Doesn't the nap thing allow them to fly with less pilots? Like 3 man crew with a nap as opposed to 4 man crew? Legit asking, honestly don't know.
When I worked in the EU it was all time in uniform, not time in motion. Longest trip I did was 9 days, 4 legs per day, all over 2:15 hours. I am sure subpart Q changed some of that, but I do know Virgin does the whole easy coast with 2 man crew. AFAIK naps are allowed, but not required to be given to make the flight legal.
Old 09-03-2025 | 11:59 AM
  #347  
PineappleXpres's Avatar
Line Holder
 
Joined: Apr 2022
Posts: 1,776
Likes: 130
Default

Originally Posted by Sliceback
Life expectancy for all males in the U.S. at 65 is 18 yrs. So 83. Assume a bit of additional longevity to adjust for the lifetime 5-7 yrs greater longevity and it's probably mid 80's or slightly higher.
How about Cargo pilots?
Old 09-03-2025 | 12:00 PM
  #348  
PineappleXpres's Avatar
Line Holder
 
Joined: Apr 2022
Posts: 1,776
Likes: 130
Default

Originally Posted by rickair7777
I'd hazard a guess that the general population is more readily accessible to study, just by virtue of being numerous.

And in many cases the study data already exists, and the aeromedical folks just have to parse it.

The benefit of doing a pilot-specific study is that it would account accurately for our specific circumstances, health benefits of socioeconomic status and lifestyle, and also any potential detrimental affects from job environment, circadian disruption, etc.

If the government is going to set boundaries on our livelihood, they owe us an accurate number, not just something that evolved over time. Might even be a lower number, in which case you can move up and FIRE even faster.
Or just get rid of HIPPA, disqual those on disability, and no age limit. Grandfathered of course. Boom!
Old 09-03-2025 | 02:18 PM
  #349  
rickair7777's Avatar
Prime Minister/Moderator
Veteran: Navy
 
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 45,107
Likes: 793
From: Engines Turn or People Swim
Default

Originally Posted by PineappleXpres
How about Cargo pilots?
Include them in the study, identify them as such. Maybe their situation is so much worse that they need different (better) rest rules and a different retirement age.

Yes I know their rest rules are currently not 117.

But the reality is that the retirement age is about pax safety, not cargo or crew safety. Yeah they might crash into a building, but so might many other non-121 airplanes.
Old 09-03-2025 | 04:30 PM
  #350  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined: Dec 2007
Posts: 6,430
Likes: 124
From: Window seat
Default

Originally Posted by PineappleXpres
How about Cargo pilots?
My guess is they're genetically similar to other airline pilots. Pan Am's BK process put their pilots medical records into the public eye because the company provided the physicals in house. BK? The records became available. The records were used to look at life expectancy, longevity, etc. Same stuff despite the long haul/night flying operations they did - they lived longer than the average person. Researchers loved it because they had medical records of a select group (pilots) going back decades.
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


Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Your Privacy Choices