Nice backpedal. Guess what? They won't.

 

Easily said when you're 30. Let's see how you feel when someone orders you to give up something you love on an arbitrary date. Your perspective may change.

 

Backpedal?

What I wrote is 100% factually accurate, but you inferred something from it that was not intended - that's your problem not mine. Clarifying as to avoid misunderstanding and false conclusions like you obviously made is hardly a "backpedal".

Exxon obviously has a mandatory retirement age...as have a number of other Fortune 500 flight departments.

Your local company operating a Citation or King Air, yeah, probably not.

 

Don't people fly GA anymore??? I really don't understand that argument. Age 65 ain't enough?

 

This is what you said.

I inferred nothing...just read what YOU typed.

OK, so you have ONE example. With the airlines hiring hundreds of pilots and the regionals going begging, what do you want to bet the fractionals will be hiring more and more retiring airline pilots, especially if they have large numbers of airplanes on the order books.

 

I think your playing this slightly naive, it's the same on the interstate commercial drivers have to keep logs and can be stopped with out cause. The general public is not subjected to the same laws as a commercial operator. Part 91 represents the general public in aviation. If you think the retirement age should be the same than a 18 year old should be able to Captain an A380 with 500 people on board takeoff in ZeroZero without an alternate and we should use single engine airplanes to cross oceans without carrying life preservers.

Many items in aviation are life limited do you propose the mechanic runs the engine for an unlimited amount of time or years as long as it passes "his" inspection once a or twice a year. Besides AMEs really don't carry the same liability inspecting you as the mechanic does inspecting the hot section.

 

Never flew GA much. You don't get too excited putting around in a C172 when you learned to fly in a T-28.

I prefer flying multi-million dollar jets and getting paid for it. But, that's just me.

 

Yes, and if you had critica reading skills you would realize that is exactly what the Exxon ruling in the NBAA link I posted did - it upheld Part 91 flight departments having the same mandatory retirement age as 121 airlines.

One might note I did not write that the court required or regulated the 121 retirement age on 91 flight departments.

I have more than one example, but its not my business to discuss what the policy of operations other than my own.

As to frax hiring retired airline pilots, you're probably right.

But for the third time, 91K isn't public common carriage and fractionals are NOT growing airframes with their orders - they are recapitalizing their existing fleets.

 

Well you should just fly that 172 with a young person, it'll get real exciting real quick.

 

Also, if they do grow it would have to be new aircraft users. They might grow as pilots are harder to find, but it would be at the expense of a traditional 91 flight department. IE a CJ2 owner sells his jet lays-off pilots and buys a share of a Hawker 800. Total pilots required would not increase.