APAAD regrouping to challenge age 60

[Jim Smyth]

Jim Smyth and Fox Hunter,

Have a great retirement. The majority of the SWA pilots will not vote your way, and the democratic Congress will not either. Maybe Rick Santorum will. Wait, he lost. Get those golf clubs ready.

Outside looking in! Enjoy that Lear time!

 

[pilot141]

OK....let me try to understand this....

Some SWA guys are saying "See how lousy the upgrades are at the legacies? Vote for Age 65!". How exactly will this help the legacies?

He (or someone) then says "We hire a lot of retired military guys! They ALL want to fly to Age 65!"

Or did I miss something?

OK, I guess I did miss something: you APAAD guys, how come you are not fighting for a change to the air traffic controller age?

They retire at 55 with a full federal pension, for anyone who is wondering. I'm wondering why the guys who actually fly the metal are older and have less pension protection than the controllers.

Instead of increasing the AGE that we can work to, how about increasing the quality of the job we do.

How about an Age 55 for pilots: match it to the ATC guys.

 

[ferlo]

"We’re going to lose some good people through retirement. Hell, we already have. A number of those are still working with us, proof positive that it is not “all about me”. Those who have been hosed by this archaic rule are still in the fight, fighting for their fellow pilots.

Those guys are the heroes – those who have lost but continue to fight to right a wrong.

My hat’s off to all of you. It was a pleasure to work with you in ’06. I wish we were having a victory party instead of gathering on the Hill to fight again. But if we succeed, our party will merely be delayed until ’07.

See you in DC!

Paul Emens
Founder, APAAD"

If Mr. Emens is so impressed with these guys contribution, why is he adamant that they be legally barred from returning to the industry? Can a person speak out of both sides of their mouths this loudly? Apparently, Yes. Lets just call it what it is...GREED. Greed and a lifetime of poor financial planning. What's that saying about lying in the bed YOU made?

 

[GuppyWN]

For all my Southwest brothers who are pro change I ask you one question. What happens when we quit growing and upgrades stop. Will you still be a pro change guy?

The guys hired pre 9/11 upgraded in 4 years. It will take me 6.5 years plus.

Gup

 

[spinproof]

Continuing ---
​

​

Air Carrier Incident Rates (per 1000 pilots)
Involving Air Carrier Pilots: 1990-1999

FAA statistics show that air carrier pilots aged 60 and over have a superior safety record as compared to other pilot age groups within either Part 121 or Part 135.
[As reported in Chicago Tribune, July 11, 1999.]

​

 

[Andy]

FAA statistics show that air carrier pilots aged 60 and over have a superior safety record as compared to other pilot age groups within either Part 121 or Part 135.
[As reported in Chicago Tribune, July 11, 1999.]

That chart has been proven fallacious many times. It is based on number of pilots licensed, not number of hours flown. Accident statistics are ALWAYS presented in a per 100,000 flight hour ratio. When this standard is applied to the accident statistics, there is a sharp upward turn starting at age 55.

All of that sick time/vacation time skews the graph you presented.

 

[Andy]

For all my Southwest brothers who are pro change I ask you one question. What happens when we quit growing and upgrades stop. Will you still be a pro change guy?

The guys hired pre 9/11 upgraded in 4 years. It will take me 6.5 years plus.

Gup

Very good question. WN is maturing toward a pilot population similar to the legacies. The point at which more newhires are due to retirements than growth is rapidly approaching.

 

[spinproof]

That chart has been proven fallacious many times. It is based on number of pilots licensed, not number of hours flown. Accident statistics are ALWAYS presented in a per 100,000 flight hour ratio. When this standard is applied to the accident statistics, there is a sharp upward turn starting at age 55.

All of that sick time/vacation time skews the graph you presented.

With all due respect my source is stated. What would be your verifible source? There is nothing fallacious about a report stating accidents per age group. Either they happen or they don't. In any high hour graph the results would be skewed toward higher time pilots. More time in seat=more chances to screw the pooch.

Accident stats are presented in per 100,000 hr ratio because of equipment not operator.

 

[luckytohaveajob]

With all due respect my source is stated. What would be your verifible source?

Your source has used a false statistic. Number of pilots is not an indication of safety.

Accidents per 100,000 hours flown is how the industry is measured.

Your verifible source needs to use established standards which it has not, so your verifible source has no credibility.

 

[Andy]

With all due respect my source is stated. What would be your verifible source?

The FAA's four part CAMI reports. I've posted links multiple times. Page 24. http://www.faa.gov/library/reports/medical/age60/media/age60_3.pdf

 

[Andy]

Your source has used a false statistic. Number of pilots is not an indication of safety.

Accidents per 100,000 hours flown is how the industry is measured.

Your verifible source needs to use established standards which it has not, so your verifible source has no credibility.

The amazing thing about this, is that senior pilots tend to fly the long haul routes where there is a MUCH lower ratio of takeoffs and landings per flight hour.

 

[luckytohaveajob]

Very good question. WN is maturing toward a pilot population similar to the legacies. The point at which more newhires are due to retirements than growth is rapidly approaching.

And it will quicken if a recession occurs as indicated by the 10 year bond being less than the prime rate, housing slowing, the dollar falling, unemployment nationwide increasing, job growth slowing, a change in national leadership, high energy costs, and all the other indicators pointing towards recession.

 

[luckytohaveajob]

The amazing thing about this, is that senior pilots tend to fly the long haul routes where there is a MUCH lower ratio of takeoffs and landings per flight hour.

Cruise is the safest phase of flight. Plus putting the autopilot on at less than 500 feet after takeoff and doing an autoland at the destination helps.

 

[spinproof]

The FAA's four part CAMI reports. I've posted links multiple times. Page 24. http://www.faa.gov/library/reports/medical/age60/media/age60_3.pdf

This is from YOUR source:

In 1990, the FAA contracted with Hilton Systems,
Incorporated, for a study of accident rates, flying experience, and age. Accident rates for
the period 1976 through 1988 were analyzed for pilots holding Class 1, 2, or 3 medical
certificates and operating under Parts 91, 121, or 135. Kay, Hillman, Hyland, Voros,
Harris and Deimler (1994) reported "… no hint of an increase in accident rate for pilots
of scheduled air carriers as they neared the age of 60”​

 

[spinproof]

The amazing thing about this, is that senior pilots tend to fly the long haul routes where there is a MUCH lower ratio of takeoffs and landings per flight hour.

.[/quote]Cruise is the safest phase of flight. Plus putting the autopilot on at less than 500 feet after takeoff and doing an autoland at the destination helps..[/quote]


Using these premises it then becomes logical that they could continue to "nap in cruise" for at least five more years without consequence!