The more vocal senior citizens on the company message boards are loud and angry for a reason. There are trying desperately to cling to what they've come to rely on as their "working retirement" plan. They need this because of [insert **** poor financial planning sob story] and will viciously oppose any suggestion otherwise - safety be damned, they only care about themselves. But reading their tripe is a waste of time. Just like their careers, their words wont matter soon anyway and should just be laughed at and ignored - its just a few harmless tired old codgers.

They had the chance to take the VSP....most (about 90%) chose not to. The need to be fire en masse immediately. That day is coming. They will cry age-discrimination and will lose (see Exxon case). They will demand compensation and will get nothing. Exactly what they deserve.

Their "experience" will soon only come in handy at the local fly-in pancake breakfast. Nothing more.

 

Winner, winner. Chicken dinner.

Why is it unsafe for a pilot to fly a 737 for Southwest the day after he turns 65 but he can trundle over to Clay Lacy, hop into a BBJ and go blasting around the planet until he croaks? Either it's safe or it isn't. PICK ONE.

The Fed missed a chance when they raised the age to 65 to make it the cutoff age for ALL COMMERCIAL FLYING.

And for those of you in the audience saying "you just want people out of a seat so you can move up," I'm ALREADY a large cabin PIC. I want the fossils to pull the plug because it is the SAFE and RIGHT thing to do.

 

In what way are pilots over 65 unsafe? I just flew with a 64.5 year old and he was squared away. 65 is just some arbitrary age. If you can get a first class medical then you can keep flying. Why anyone would want to keep working past 60, let only 65, is beyond my comprehension but at least I realize most pilots can operate past 65... Especially in a two crew environment. If Netjets was flying around single pilot then maybe I could see your point. The fact is they pass their checkrides and their medicals so why deny them? You'll get your upgrade one day, have some patience.

Just some 46 year old.

 

Ask the Fed. Apparently they think there is a problem with flying past 65. My point is: either apply it to ALL commercial flying or eliminate the age limit. PICK ONE.

It's unlikely the Fed will drop an age limit so they need to apply it EVENLY across the industry. One level of safety, right? Anything else is hypocritical.

Which is EXACTLY why I don't support the union PAC. They pound the table about "one level of safety" when it comes to Part 117 and rest requirements but then ignore the age limit question. BE CONSISTENT.

To ignore that advanced age WILL eventually impact safety is to whistle past the graveyard. Sure there are super sharp 65 year olds but regulations and policies are always aimed at the lowest common denominator. The Fed picked a number. We should adhere to it as well or get rid of it completely.

 

But what's the limit?

I can show you a 77 year old pilot tomorrow on a turbojet. The flying is only part of the issue. There's much more that happens on this side of the field than 121 that requires very good judgement and attention to detail.

Now do it 5 legs at a time or through 5 time zones.






Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

It's no more arbitrary than any other age limit we see in society. Why can't a 20 year old responsibly consume alcohol? Why can't a 17 year old die for his country? Why can't a 66 old safely operate a regularly scheduled airliner? The fact is that we have age limits to encompass the statistical majority, with regard to risk/probability, of a given group. The majority of pilots past age 65 are statistically likely to no longer be able to safely operate jet equipment. Some will past this age, most won't. So we have rules...ask UAL, DAL, AA, etc. for further details.

The argument that not EVERYONE is unsafe immediately past this age is tired, rhetorical, dishonest, and poorly thought out. I've heard it many times before. It typically comes from those financially incentivized to ignore the medical certainty of aging and the undeniable health risks that accompany it.

And therein lies the problem. But first off, no...most pilots CANNOT safely operate past 65. These old timers are RELYING on the two-crew concept to keep their gravy train going. It usually sounds like this:

"Gee thanks fella...I'm sure glad you kept on eye me this week. I'm just not as fast at this as I used to be. Send me those four ASAP reports you had to write so I can put them in to my reports once I get my grand kid to show me how to fire up that fancy computer machine again. Sorry about your 25 upgrade here, but I just don't know what I'd do with myself if I had to retire. The money's too good! Have you tried Continental Airlines yet? I hear they're hiring."

There's only so much mileage NJ can get from this...one day soon, two gummers will be paired together and they'll put one into a mountain. Just watch. One will be sleeping and the other will be confused. Medicals and sim checks are far too subjective to be our only line of defense again this kind of reckless greed.

 

If the argument is gummers are safe because they have a babysitter flying with them, then the babysitter should be the one signing for the airplane and getting PIC pay. Far too many SICs at NJA are having to wear PIC hats just to keep their tickets.

 

I took a nap this afternoon and had the dream that I was eating a can of Dean and DeLuca cashews waiting for an airline, then I noticed the tie and the 15 year wings on the second banana netjets uniform I was wearing, I woke up on a cold sweat screaming. It was horrible.

 

Guys , girls, may you be happy in your lives, and find the cockpits you aspire to, the airlines rock, big cargo rocks, and for a certain subset , the fracs rock too, cheers out : )

 

Nacho and others,
Safety has never been part of age limits. It was politics in the beginning (Crandal at AA and his buddy at the CAA) and it still is. If safety is your goal, tighten up the 1st class medical. There are some younger guys out there I would not want my family flying with.