WOW, You do have a distorted perception of reality. You sound more and more like Karl Marx.

The most important consideration that you fail to address is that when people are forced to stop doing the activity that defines their identity, i.e. continuing in the profession that they love, this is unhealthy and leads to deterioration. Forced retirement for most airline pilots at age 60 is unnatural. I would say that least 95% of the pilots who could choose to fly past age 60 and if given the chance would remain exceedingly fit to fly to at least age 65. However, I would also say that at least 20% of all pilots in their 40s and 50s are miserable in their airline careers and are rapidly becoming physically unfit to fly.

I do not have documentation to this but I think that all of us who have been around the industry for awhile could agree with my observations.

AMEN Brother!

Age 65 -- good for a few and bad for the many.

AA767AV8TOR[/QUOTE]

It's no wonder they call AA'ers sky nazis:rolleyes:

the earlier i can retire, the better

Then get out now! This industry should only be for pilots who love their profession enough to fly for as long as their health would allow.

Age alone must not the issue. Screen all pilots with the same standard as the age 65 pilot. A person’s age must not be the sole determination of one’s ability to safely perform the duties of an airline pilot. No one has proven that physical and mental decline can be measured by age alone. We have all observed that some people decline in their physical and mental abilities faster that others. There is the experience factor to be considered also. Everyone since the Wright Brothers has known that the more experienced pilot is the safer pilot. Though highly experienced pilots may suffer some varying amount decline in physical abilities as they age, their experience will more than compensate for any slight physical decline in performance.
:cool:

I suggest that we increase the medical standards for every pilot regardless of age and make retirement a choice not an arbitrary age

1. Moving to "65" is just as arbitrary as 60 is now.

2. Having pairing restrictions betrays the "no safety issue here" question.

http://www.age60rule.com/docs/2005_I...l_Analysis.pdf

ICAO

PDF page 29-30 Secretariats Comments

older pilots do not present any particular risk to flight safety. Neither is the Secretariat aware of scientific research that dictates the maintenance of the current upper age limit. On the contrary, studies conducted in Japan (1990) and United States (1993) both gave indication that pilots’ retirement age could safely be increased by several years, and a very recent study of 165 commuter aircraft accidents in the United States between 1983 and 1997 points to no notable differences between the age groups except that the percentage of crashes involving pilot error decreased somewhat with age, being lowest for pilots between 58 and 63. The over-all conclusion was that neither the prevalence nor the pattern of aircraft accidents change significantly as age increases from the 40s to the SOs and early 60s. In another recent study in the United States, a cohort of more than 3 300 commuter and air taxi pilots, who were between 45 and 54 years old in 1987, were followed for eleven years. No age-related increase in crash risk was shown, but the risk of crash decreased by half among pilots with more than 5 000 flying hours at baseline. In Japan, in a study of its 60-63 year-old airline pilots, it was found that none had been involved in an accident during the ten-year study period (1992- 2001) while during the same period 323 accidents including twenty-seven airline accidents had been reported to the authorities. The purpose of simulator checks, line flying checks and regulatory health examinations is to contain the risk of pilot ‘failure’ during the period of validity of the rating or medical certificate; it appears from available evidence that such checks do ensure adequate protection of flight safety for those aged under 60 years. The Secretariat knows of no reason to believe that they will fail to do so for those aged 60 to 64 years. Moreover, there is still today, as stated by AsMA, insufficient medical evidence to support any restrictions based on age alone. In the JAA countries, the upper age limit of 60 has been maintained for pilots in single-crew operations, but since 1 July 1999, the JAA regulations have allowed airline pilots to continue flying until age 65 with limitation to multi-crew operations and with the proviso that no other member of the flight crew is older than 59. However, the Secretariat is aware that this proviso was not based on medical grounds but rather the result of a compromise between the different parties. Although recommended by IATA, the Secretariat does not consider this proviso safety relevant for the following reason: For the individual pilot engaged in multi-crew operations, it is today generally accepted that a medical incapacitation risk of one percent per annum (“The 1% Rule”) is fully compatible with the desired flight safety level for airline operations. This risk level corresponds to one medical incapacitation per 100 years or approximately one million hours. Male pilots from Scandinavia, United Kingdom and NorthAmerica are lilely to approach this risk level when they are around 65, female pilots three to four years later. The risk of two older pilots becoming medically incapacitated at the same time, during the same one-hour flight, is thus one per trillion hours (1 trillion — 1012 or one million x one million), a risk so low that it can safely he disregarded.

FoxH:
Are the "Secretariats" comments in response to my last post?

ok... im only 29

i do love my profession.

i still would rather retire at 60 than 65.

so no, i won't get out now.

Man, if you're only 29 now and longing for retirement in 30+ years, you might be in the wrong profession. Take a positive attitude and don't end up as a 55 yr old b!tchin about your miserable job/life to all the 29 yr olds.