mshunter

Yes, and that was my whole point.

contrails

Your whole point was to tell Carl, a 20-30 year ALPA member, something he already knows?

The statement was, how do you suggest we change congressional mandates. It is assumed that lobbying is already going on, so beyond that, what is the solution?

Picture a highway that is congested with a train being built next to it to help out. Someone asks, how can we make this transit system better? The answer is not, "build a train." It's already in there; we're looking for more possibilities.

gettinbumped

Agreed about the financial planning comments, but you couldn't be more wrong about the numbers who are going to retire before 65.

ALPA fed us that line of bull when they tried to justify the fact that they went against the majority of the pilot's wishes and supported the change. They said that most would go out at 62. At UAL, the number that is going out at 62 is near 0, as we all knew it would be.

gettinbumped

Ummmm.. pretty much all of them.

gettinbumped

I've flown with an FO who has 2 hearing aids in. The medical is a joke.

gettinbumped

You don't think he has an "I Got Mine" attitude? He seems to have that in spades to me.

You just talked yourself in circles. If there are 30 and 40 year olds who can pass both but shouldn't be flying jets (true), then by extension the medical and PC's are inadequate to determine who is too old to fly safely anymore. Exactly the point that you are arguing against.

gettinbumped

A few points....

First, congrats on being an industry success story, and when you do finally put aside the wings, I wish you and your wife a long and well-deserved retirement.

Second, I think pretty much all pilots stink at judging our own ability. Not saying you aren't Ace of the Base, because you might very well be, but I don't think any of us can truly evaluate our own performance. That point was brought home to me by the Captain that crashed the Q400 in BUF that had some 5 failed checkrides.

Third, I'm a STRONG believer that the current Medical, PC, Line Check system is WOEFULLY inadequate to determine flight safety. I've flown with some weak pilots who have succeeded in getting through this daisy chain for years. I've also flown with some INCREDIBLE pilots who have flunked a checkride for some reason.

Last, and perhaps the big point. You might ease up on the "snot-nosed kid" comments. Realize that you won the freaking lottery. If you are over 60 right now, you couldn't have gotten a luckier break in this industry. To have benefitted from age 60 retirement RIGHT UP until you were getting ready to retire, and then be able to stay at $200k or so a year for another 5 years is a million dollar windfall. Don't for a SECOND forget that while you are enjoying that lucky break, there are THOUSANDS of people who are spending 5 years on the street because of it. At my airline, many of those "snot-nosed kids" are mid-40's with a family and kids going to school who were shown the door a second time because of zero retirements coming RIGHT at the beginning of a huge recession. A little tact might be in order here. I would expect them to be a little bitter, wouldn't you?

Red Forman

I just flew with my first over 60 captain, and I have never had to do more babysitting on the job. Not only that, he has been collecting military retirement for 20 years and flying for a regional that is about to be gutted by 60%. All he talked about the whole trip was his paid for house, two vacation homes, motorcycles, new cars, and I'm about to lose my job for the second time in three years.

FlyJSH

hmmmm

So, if someone needs mechanical assistance to hear satisfactorily, he should be disqualified.

Okay

Does that mean those who need glasses should be disqualified even if they reach 20/20? About 40 percent of Americans wear glasses

And color vision, should it be perfect? 10 percent of males have some form.


And how about those folks that take a blood pressure pill? That is about 20 percent of Americans.

Or carry 10 extra pounds? Roughly half of Americans are classified as overweight or obese.

So let's do the math (for males since this is still a male dominated industry)...

60% dont need glasses
of those 90% have normal color vision
of those 80% have normal blood pressure
of those half have their weight under control

That means .60 X .90 X .80 X.50 equals 21 percent of the population. And that is just four medical issues. If ALL issues were included, I bet only 10 percent of pilot aged people could be classified as completely within standards. That would be the pool we would BEGIN with... THEN we need to deal with the mental and kinesthetic aptitudes to see if they had the "right stuff" to fly.

OH yeah, and don't forget about the 50% of men that have male pattern baldness since the incidence of heart disease in them is much higher.



We are all playing the odds when we fly. One time in 10,000 there will be an engine failure. One time in 100,000 there will be a cabin fire. The odds of a generally healthy guy, who can pass the CURRENT first class medical, crapping out is pretty puny.... far less than a catastrophic fire. (if you don't believe me, look at the number of INFLIGHT crewmember deaths). In the big scheme of things, kidney stones are probably more likely to cause an incapacitation .... and they happen to PERFECTLY HEALTHY PEOPLE.

finis72

Some thoughts from an old guy: I think this age 70 thread was started by the same false rumor mill as the DALPA is giving up 100 seat flying for a 30% raise(pick the number), neither one is going to happen. It does however make reading some of these threads more interesting.ICAO passed the age 65 and it was then only a matter of time before it would happen in our country. If I was 40 or so I would be against age 65 and do not take some of the comments on here personally, actually some are quite entertaining because they are so ignorant that it defies logic. If any of you younger guys would like to pitch in and restore my pension to what it was pre-bankruptcy I would be the proverbial dot tomorrow.The age 65 rule helped me tremendously but it came at a cost to others, I get it. I still hope to retire "early" and have a set $ amount that when I reach it I'm gone, Too much golf,fishing,hiking,skiing to do to hang around here.
I commute hub to hub and most always on the j/s, I also fly on an a/c with lots of 60p pilots. Having had this opportunity to observe I can no more tell the difference between a 40/50 year old and a 60p than I can tell the difference between a military or civilian background(operational wise).Some of the 60p guys look lots younger and some look like my grand dad. I know personally my reflexes aren't what they used to be, I play lots or softball and my mind gets to lots of balls that my glove doesn't get near. I would not want to put NVG"s on and go downtown then return to the ship for a night landing,been there done that and concede to the young guys.However, operating a modern jetliner is a whole different ball game, more about managing than actual flying skills. Nuff said.
I think it will take at least 15 to 20 years for ICAO to get the medical data to support any increase in the age limit and who knows what the data will show. Let's get such a huge contract improvement in 2012 that we all can go when we choose and not have it be a financial issue and not one more outsourced seat. Peace