Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Friendliest aviation Ccmmunity on the web
  • Modern site for PC's, Phones, Tablets - no 3rd party apps required
  • Ask questions, help others, promote aviation
  • Share the passion for aviation
  • Invite everyone to Flightinfo.com and let's have fun

Age 60 rule

  • Thread starter Thread starter Andy
  • Start date Start date
  • Watchers Watchers 10

Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Modern secure site, no 3rd party apps required
  • Invite your friends
  • Share the passion of aviation
  • Friendliest aviation community on the web
Register   Log in
A

Andy

12/13/2012
Joined
Nov 28, 2001
Posts
3,101
I haven't seen any threads on this forum for a while, and am curious to hear the thoughts of others.
I personally want to see the rule remain unchanged, but given what is happening to pensions, I think that's wishful thinking on my part. I think that the age 60 rule will be gone within the next five years (I've been wrong plenty of times in the past and am hoping that I'm wrong again).

OK, let's go with the premise that the rule will change. How should it be implemented?

My thoughts:

1) Increase retirement age by one month per quarter until reaching age 65/67/70/75 (or whatever target you want). To illustrate, a pilot must retire at age 60 on 31 Dec 04. On Jan 1 05, make it 60 yrs 1 mo; on Apr 1 05, 60 yrs 2 mo. This would move up retirement age by 4 months per year, allowing for additional age-related safety data to be collected (because this all about safety, right?). This would also allow the system to dampen the effect of increasing the pilot retirement age.
Under this scenario, it would take 15 years to raise the retirement age to 65; 45 years to raise the retirement age to 75.

2) Do not allow any pilot over the age of 60 to act as pilot in command. This is for safety reasons, which is why the age 60 rule is currently in place.

Comments? Criticism? Ridicule?
 
This issue has been beaten to death. Want to know what everybody thinks about it? Do a search....you'll find enough to keep you busy for quite a while.
 
We could implement the same solution that they used on the movie "Logan's Run". . . .

After your last flight, off you go to Carnival. . . .
 
FracCapt said:
This issue has been beaten to death. Want to know what everybody thinks about it? Do a search....you'll find enough to keep you busy for quite a while.
Click to expand...
Thank you for your thoughtful inputs.
I did a search using '60' and came up with nothing. I did a search using 'age' and came up with nothing specific in the last 6 months; I stopped looking past that point.
I then opted to post this thread, specifically stating that I haven't seen anything for a while on this forum addressing this issue.

How about you provide me some links to recent threads?

652 posts in 8 months? Do you LIVE on this board?
 
The G-III, originally characterized by the NTSB as a G-II, was on its way to Houston Hobby from Dallas Love to pick up former President George HW Bush for a trip to Ecuador. Interviews with Hobby controllers who were on duty Monday indicated the crew aboard the Gulfstream was asked to check altitude when the aircraft descended to about 400 feet, according to NTSB Vice Chairman Mark Rosenker. He was quoted by the Houston Chronicle.

The investigation, still in its preliminary stages, has not yet revealed how far from the threshold the aircraft was when that transmission came from ATC, nor whether the crew reacted.

Names of the crewmembers have not been released by the Harris County medical examiner. But Rosenker described the captain as a 67-year old flight veteran with 19,000 hours' experience. The second officer, he said, was equally salty -- a 62-year old pilot with 19,000 hours of stick time



Age 67 and 62. I am sure that this will become part of the argument as time goes on. The fact that they were picking up GWB sr will no doubt come into play.

I am not judging them nor am I saying age had something to do with it. Just pointing out the fact that this will not help the folks who want to raise the limit
 
People should go out and enjoy retitrement, not work till the last day. And anybody that says that the law should be changed is full of KAKA, unless they are 59 and 364 days old. Happy Turkey day
 
Falcon Jet 1 said:
People should go out and enjoy retitrement, not work till the last day. And anybody that says that the law should be changed is full of KAKA, unless they are 59 and 364 days old. Happy Turkey day
Click to expand...
What if you don't have a retirement to retire to? The only answer may be soylent green.
 
Flying Freddie said:
What if you don't have a retirement to retire to? The only answer may be soylent green.
Click to expand...
Freddie, the age 60 rule has been in effect since the 1950s; no one should be surprised at the prospect of retiring at age 60.
While I understand that the loss of a defined benefit pension will hurt some retirees (although the PBGC pays a monthly pension to those that have lost their pensions), IRAs have been around since 1974 and most companies have 401k plans. For those that haven't prepared for retirement, Walmart usually has openings for greeters. Unsympathic? Hell yes.
We can sugar coat this topic as much as like and wrap the issue around arguments about safety and discrimination, but it all comes down to self-interest.

I don't want to see the age 60 rule change. Just to make sure that I've fully disclosed my stats, I'm 44 years old and furloughed from United. I won't be recalled until 2007 at the very earliest, so I'll be 47 and at the bottom of the seniority list. I will probably just be getting to the left seat when I'm staring at retirement, but that's fine. I save as much as possible in my IRA and 401k, so an airline pension is not important to me. Besides, I'll get my military reserve pension at age 60.

We can bury our heads in the sand on this issue, but it is highly likely that the age 60 rule will be repealed well before I am retirement eligible; possibly before I get recalled (no sweat; I've got a good non-flying job). I'd like to see if there are any good ideas for implementing the change, other than the retirement age jumping from 60 to 65 in a blink of the eye.
At 44, I'll admit that I'm not as sharp as I was in my 20s and 30s (some could reasonably argue that I've never been sharp). While some pilots can safely fly well past 60, there are others that become increasingly hazardous past their mid-40s. I'm just hoping that I'm not excessively dangerous when I return to the cockpit.


G4G5, excellent post. I didn't know that both of the pilots were over age 60. Let's hope that the accident delays any changes for quite a while. My condolences to the families.
 
Andy said:
Besides, I'll get my military reserve pension at age 60.
Click to expand...
And once again the usual start to any argument against Age 60, Retiree Benefits or any other pilot issue that does not become self serving.:rolleyes:
 
Andy,

I was talking about those who thought they had a retirement. I wouldn't mind retiring at 60 if I had Social Security and a retirement. I need to work on my golf game, not on asking "Would you like that supersized." It would also give me time to spend with my teenage bride.;)
 
I can see that I should have phrased the title of this thread differently. I consider it a foregone conclusion that the age 60 rule will be amended.

Given that it will be amended sometime in the future, I was looking for inputs on how to implement the change. Thus far, it seems all threads have discussed a simple yes/no to age 60 (including the links kindly provided by FracCapt).

If the rule were to change, would everyone be OK with it going instantly to age 62/65/67/70/75, or would they want to see a gradual phase-in? What about PIC over age 60? Is it OK to be PIC at age 67? 70? 75?
 
Andy said:
Bitter? No. Smarta$$ response to your smarta$$ post? Yes. If you can't take it, don't dish it out. You seem to be very thin skinned.
Click to expand...
Actually, it wasn't a smartas$ post....at least, not intended to be that way. Sometimes I come across that way after a few beers....but, then again, after a few beers, I usually don't care. :D
 
Andy said:
If the rule were to change, would everyone be OK with it going instantly to age 62/65/67/70/75, or would they want to see a gradual phase-in? What about PIC over age 60? Is it OK to be PIC at age 67? 70? 75?
Click to expand...
I think that all depends on individual self interest, as usual. Interesting history behind the rule. ALPA fought the rule for 20+ years before switching positions. Now with the pension fiasco it looks like that will change back again. Congress will mandate the change, not the FAA. That may be the only solution to keep the PBGC solvent without taxpayer money.

http://www.ppf.org/chrono.htm

http://www.apaad.org/
 
FracCapt said:
Actually, it wasn't a smartas$ post....at least, not intended to be that way. Sometimes I come across that way after a few beers....but, then again, after a few beers, I usually don't care. :D
Click to expand...
It's all good, dude. We pilots are a real pain in the a$$, aren't we?
Happy holidays.
 

Share this page

Latest posts

Latest resources

Latest media

Carbon Cub FX-3 Shenandoah Valley
Carbon Cub at Kittyhawk
FX-3 in the backcountry
IFR Panel in a Carbon Cub FX-3
Cub-Provo-UT-c.jpg
Back
Top