Is this Age 65 a done deal?
02-02-2007 | 08:49 AM
#3
Prime Minister/Moderator
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 45,149
Likes: 802
From: Engines Turn or People Swim
Technically, it has not passed and it is possible that the FAA may not change it, but the reality is that it is coming within a 2-3 years...this is inevitable and has been for some time.
There are two ways it could happen...
1) FAA administrative change...they own the rule and can do this at will. There is a required review and discussion process, the NPRM (12-18 months), but at the end the FAA can essentially do whatever they want.
2) Congress could pass a law and make it happen tomorrow.
The history is that the the FAA has always opposed the change, since it was controversial, and the FAA buerucrats had nothing to gain by making the change. Also the ATA and ALPA were opposed, which bolstered the FAA's position.
Congress on the other hand has been close to making the change several time over the last decade...the reason that congress had been inclined to overidde the FAA is because there is an underlying feeling that the age 60 rule is inherently unfair and corrupt:
1) Unfair because it was establsihed 50 years ago, when pilots (and everybody else) had bacon & eggs for breakfast, a cheeseburger for lunch, smoked two packs a day, ate steak and potatoes for dinner, then washed it down with a bottle of gin....and nobody exercised after their two year army stint was over. Well obviously health care and personal fitness has advanced by leaps and bounds, compared to the 1950's, the typical pilot has at LEAST an extra 5 years of health. You cannot argue with this one...even if 60 was appropriate back then, today's health advances are obvious and measureable.
2) Corrupt because the whole age 60 thing was actually invented by Juan Tripp (Pan Am) so as to move his highly-paid senior pilots on up and out. Trippe was known to "own" a number of congressmen, so it is easy to see how the whole age 60 thing was never squeeky-clean legitimate to begin with
Since the ICAO rule changed, the FAA finally decided to do a 180, so with congress leaning in favor and the FAA starting the change process, there are no opponents with any sort of horsepower...so it's gonna happen:
- If the FAA wasn't going to do it, they would have never started the NPRM process. They would have just sat on the status quo.
- Congress has always leaned in favor of the change, and will almost certainly not do a 180 and overide the FAA decision.
There are two ways it could happen...
1) FAA administrative change...they own the rule and can do this at will. There is a required review and discussion process, the NPRM (12-18 months), but at the end the FAA can essentially do whatever they want.
2) Congress could pass a law and make it happen tomorrow.
The history is that the the FAA has always opposed the change, since it was controversial, and the FAA buerucrats had nothing to gain by making the change. Also the ATA and ALPA were opposed, which bolstered the FAA's position.
Congress on the other hand has been close to making the change several time over the last decade...the reason that congress had been inclined to overidde the FAA is because there is an underlying feeling that the age 60 rule is inherently unfair and corrupt:
1) Unfair because it was establsihed 50 years ago, when pilots (and everybody else) had bacon & eggs for breakfast, a cheeseburger for lunch, smoked two packs a day, ate steak and potatoes for dinner, then washed it down with a bottle of gin....and nobody exercised after their two year army stint was over. Well obviously health care and personal fitness has advanced by leaps and bounds, compared to the 1950's, the typical pilot has at LEAST an extra 5 years of health. You cannot argue with this one...even if 60 was appropriate back then, today's health advances are obvious and measureable.
2) Corrupt because the whole age 60 thing was actually invented by Juan Tripp (Pan Am) so as to move his highly-paid senior pilots on up and out. Trippe was known to "own" a number of congressmen, so it is easy to see how the whole age 60 thing was never squeeky-clean legitimate to begin with
Since the ICAO rule changed, the FAA finally decided to do a 180, so with congress leaning in favor and the FAA starting the change process, there are no opponents with any sort of horsepower...so it's gonna happen:
- If the FAA wasn't going to do it, they would have never started the NPRM process. They would have just sat on the status quo.
- Congress has always leaned in favor of the change, and will almost certainly not do a 180 and overide the FAA decision.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
