If I get my eye poked out by some snotty-nosed kid with a rubber band and paper clip, I will lose my FAA medical. Is that descrimination? No, it just means I probably can't fly as well as I could before this hypothetically happened. If I live to be as old as 60, I ALSO can't fly as well as I could before that age. There's no descrimination. Just accepting the law's of nature. People grow old, that's why we retire. Let's keep it at 60!!

So it's an age thing? All of the above are beginning ages for the above situations, with the one exception of Social Security. None of the above have not-greater-than ages, like the arbitrary Age 60 retirement of pilots. Why is that? Because in all of the above cases, it's assumed that a person both matures and gets smarter with age (IMHO). Maybe that's why they've put the lower age limits in place for many of the above. Personally I don't think that it's age discrimination to not allow someone under the age of 18 to drink and/or drive. I think it's common sense, and if you don't believe me, just check with your insurance carrier and ask why insurance for younger drivers is so high. It's because they are, as a group, bad drivers. Maybe that's the same reason why there are beginning age limits on other aviation-related licenses. But the same can't be said for the Age 60 rule.

So my question to you is: Why must "society find an age that can be accepted to define when someone is or isn't fit to hold some position." Wouldn't it be better to come up with tests, both physical and cognitive, that would be better predictors as to when someone should retire from a given job? In an environment where people are living 10 and even 20 years longer than they did just a century ago, wouldn't it be better for all society to keep corporate knowledge and experience, working, for the better good of society?

Agreed. I also think there should be regular physical and cognitive tests for people driving over the age of, say, 65 or so. If they pass, let 'em drive. If not, too bad. Same should go for pilots.

dis
 

The govt takes your job at age 60.

Age discrimination at its finest.

I have a 3 month old baby. The FAA would never allow him to fly a plane solo. So does that mean they are discriminating against him. I'll take it up with Congress !!!

What about motor skills, health issues the list is endless. I'm not so sure some of the old guys I used to fly with were any better, smarter ect. at all.

60 and out. End of story.

Because SS starts at 65 I guess we expect to be discriminated against at that age. Whoever suggested testing probably has the right idea...as long as you are bright and fit...

I like to see gray hair in cockpit when I fly. probably would not like canes though!:D

Social security starts at 62.

How do you account for the fact that some older guys are better than some young guys ever were or ever will be? Not saying all, but some. I know guys that are in their late 50s that could lose quite a lot of ability and still be above the average. What about them? One size does not fit all. There are guys that should quit at 60, there are others that should have never started in the first place. Does the term "professional co pilot ring a bell?" I'll take a good old guy over somebody that's never been better than marginal regardless of his age.

There is a 68 yr. old pilot at my 121 airline that still does pt.91 flights and MTC test and acceptance(including manual reversion at 35,000ft.)flights. He is sharper, knows more, and forgotten less, about the 737 AND flying, than nearly ALL of the pilots under the age of 60. I guess that is why he is a sim instructor and does almost all the upgrades at my company. Even at his age, if he could fly revenue flights, I would not even think twice about putting my entire family on his airplane. Age has nothing to do with the ability to operate an aircraft safely. Just follow the money.