Age 67?

[waveflyer]

You always sidestep Yip-
I am not paid to evaluate my captain's abilities as they age

 

[pilotyip]

You always sidestep Yip-
I am not paid to evaluate my captain's abilities as they age

I guess I misunderstood your post that "But I refuse to monitor someone who has authority over me and gets paid more than I do".

I thought that is why PM's are paid to be in the cockpit? To watch that Captain who makes more money than they do and has ultimate authority in the cockpit? Did not see anything about evaluating the aging process in that statement.

 

[Bringupthebird]

Pandora's Box has been opened. Fly 'til you die is the future.

No, the future is AMR's proposed sick policy - 2 sicks then STD. Once that gets put into effect (and it will be the young F/O's who will gladly trade the sick policy for a higher book rate) it will be the bellweather for all other carriers. The CAs that are truly a threat will see it's not worth it to stick around and get their pay wacked every month. The one's who remain fit to fly will do it.

I'd expect more stringent medical standards to come along as well tied to the dumping of pilots into ObamaCare.

So no one will Fly Till They Die, but they will likely reduce the number of firetruck salutes on retirement, since they rarely do that as you leave the doctor's office.

 

[waveflyer]

Try and keep up Yip.

 

[pilotyip]

Try and keep up Yip.

With you, no way possible, I mean no has worked as hard you, and driven their career to its present heights without one intervention of luck. No sir no way a lowely non-sked freight dawg like me could ever keep up with you. I am just an average guy who has been very lucky to be where I am now, and no way I could even think about comparing myself to an above average person such as you.

 

[Andy]

No, the future is AMR's proposed sick policy - 2 sicks then STD. Once that gets put into effect (and it will be the young F/O's who will gladly trade the sick policy for a higher book rate) it will be the bellweather for all other carriers. The CAs that are truly a threat will see it's not worth it to stick around and get their pay wacked every month. The one's who remain fit to fly will do it.

I'd expect more stringent medical standards to come along as well tied to the dumping of pilots into ObamaCare.

So no one will Fly Till They Die, but they will likely reduce the number of firetruck salutes on retirement, since they rarely do that as you leave the doctor's office.

We'll see. Obamacare has to get past the Supreme Court first; I'll wait to see how they rule.

I don't expect any changes to medical standards. Not that it matters; the current ones are a joke.

In Congress, both sides of the aisle will be in favor of higher retirement ages because it delays the Social Security meltdown.
AARP, the most powerful voice in DC, is in favor of abolishing any mandatory retirement age - it doesn't matter which profession we're talking about.

More medical outs? Very likely. And straight from airline medical coverage to medicare so Obamacare isn't even a part of the equation.
As for Fly Til You Die, that's already happening. We've had an increase in pilots dying while in active employment since late 2008. Not necessarily at the controls, but dying while still an active employee. Same thing in my book. With each bump in the age limit, we'll have higher incidence of active employee pilots ending their careers due to mortality.

If you think about it, this 'plan' works beautifully for saving the Social Security Trust Fund and for airline management because it reduces training costs. We are our own worst enemies.

 

[ackattacker]

More medical outs? Very likely. And straight from airline medical coverage to medicare so Obamacare isn't even a part of the equation.

Correct. Obamacare has nothing to do with it. Medicare covers folks 65 and over and has been around since 1965. Which is why I like to refer to it as "Johnsoncare". It just has a nice ring to it.

 

[flyboyike]

These guys benefited from age 60 retirements their entire careers and then were granted an additional five. Now they want more. We've been duped fellas...

No, you have it wrong. Those guys had a God-given right to the seats of the gummers of their day, but we don't have that right, because we're deeply inferior and are greedy bastards who just want everyone with more than five gray hairs to "get out of our seats".

Just ask yip.

 

[madjack]

everyone will be a gummer someday and they will want to work as long as possible

 

[R8J]

everyone will be a gummer someday and they will want to work as long as possible

I will be a gummer someday but I will not want to work as long as possible. I'm haven't yet given up hope of punching out early

 

[Bringupthebird]

You'm will.

 

[flyboyike]

everyone will be a gummer someday and they will want to work as long as possible

It's harder for me now at 37 than it was at 32 when I started. I won't make it until 60, let alone past that.

 

[CF34-3B1]

everyone will be a gummer someday and they will want to work as long as possible

I never wanted to fly past 60, but I'm going to have to, to make up the difference in my 401k caused by the current gummers.

Maybe if the current gummers ever retire, and I get to upgrade, I can show my FO's pictures of all my Corvettes, just like they like to show us future gummers now.

I'll even explain to the FO how Age 90 is really a good thing, and "they'll get it back on the top end...."

 

[waveflyer]

Those are always your words Yip. Part of your distractions. But what I didn't need was to change the regs to achieve anything. I certainly hope and work to be financially independent well before 60. I'd suggest that for every pilot. It's a different job when you know you don't need it.
That said, I would love to fly forever. I love flying. I love airline flying. I simply don't believe it's right or physiologically prudent for any pilot to be a captain after 60. I'd choose to continue on as an FO, but I don't have the ego tied to my flying career that many do. And as I age, I'd give away a ton of flying- flying when it suits me- punching out if it ever doesnt. -that would be ideal for me.
What I know is I won't be good at knowing when to hang it up. I will believe with every breath that I can do this- if I can't, I'd believe it's just temporary. I can guarantee you I will NEED someone to force me to give up flying.
To not admit that is naive.

 

[Bringupthebird]

So if they had come out with a retirement age of 70 back in 1958, then you'd say no pilot should be CA after 70.

Why isn't there a mandatory retirement age for drivers, when the risk of an accident is many times higher in a car than in the regulated and disciplined environment of airline flying.

 

[waveflyer]

So if they had come out with a retirement age of 70 back in 1958, then you'd say no pilot should be CA after 70.

Why isn't there a mandatory retirement age for drivers, when the risk of an accident is many times higher in a car than in the regulated and disciplined environment of airline flying.

You see no increased responsibility in carrying hundreds of passengers for money in jet aircraft than driving a car? You would be the only one. That's the wrong side of the auto analogy

Besides- we live longer today than in the 60's , but 60 is still a LOT younger than 70- most with common sense would agree. Everything is not subjective.

 

[flyboyike]

You see no increased responsibility in carrying hundreds of passengers for money in jet aircraft than driving a car? You would be the only one. That's the wrong side of the auto analogy

Besides- we live longer today than in the 60's , but 60 is still a LOT younger than 70- most with common sense would agree. Everything is not subjective.

Somebody with six ex-wives and eight more cars than he needs is unlikely to have common sense as his strong suit.

I could be wrong.

 

[waveflyer]

Common sense appears to be the missing link

 

[livin'thesim]

An elderly driver can self-regulate the time of day and road conditions they drive in.

A better analogy would be commercial drivers.


Also, a driver (even a commercial one) can pull over and stop.

 

[Bringupthebird]

You see no increased responsibility in carrying hundreds of passengers for money in jet aircraft than driving a car? You would be the only one. That's the wrong side of the auto analogy

Besides- we live longer today than in the 60's , but 60 is still a LOT younger than 70- most with common sense would agree. Everything is not subjective.

You gotta stop flip flopping on this issue. Either the retirement age is subjective and related directly to safety or it's objective and related to making vacancies for F/O's.

And you can feign a lack of understanding, but you know full well that the connection to elderly drivers and pilots would be the lack of any legal limit on age should the age limit be abolished. There are maybe 50,000 total airline pilots in the country while there are 10 million or more drivers over age 65, so the total potential for loss of life is on the side of the drivers who have no legal limit on the age. The difference seems to lie with the pilot being part of a seniority system which limits the upward mobility of its members to 1)attrition and 2)growth.

No, if you want to enhance safety, you need to raise the standards for ALL pilots in the areas of performance and medical standards and accept that the results may not necessarily come without unintended consequences.

 

[waveflyer]

Or we could keep the system we've had for decades and not change bc baby boomers decided it was unfair for just them

 

[pilotyip]

Or we could keep the system we've had for decades and not change bc baby boomers decided it was unfair for just them

or we could back to the system we had for decades the before age 60 rule of 1958. No age restrictions, of course ALPA fought to repeal the age rule of 1958 until the early 70's.

 

[waveflyer]

Fair enough yip- my argument stands on it's own and there is plenty to disagree with on all sides.

I simply believe that no pilot should captain >60, but ought to be able to fly as long as they want.

 

[igneousy2]

Why does everyone think the old fart's AME is corrupt, but their's is spot-on accurate?

We all "know" the AME system is corrupt, that's why every few weeks there is a post on here "looking for an AME" in whatever city because some AME retired or whatever. Every major city in this country has got 2 dozen or more AME's, the names are easy to find...we are looking for the ones that keep the answer key to the vision chart taped to the table next to the vision test machine.

When you're in poor health, corrupt AME's allow you to keep flying when you probably shouldn't, when you're in pretty good health like me, using corrupt AME's mean you get the medical certificate faster than you can count the money for the exam.

We have hard rules in place to act as a backstop when it is hard to make a judgment when the thing you are trying to judge actually lowers your capability to make a judgment.

That's why we have rest rules and duty time limitations as a final back stop to prevent pilots flying fatigued. That's why we have 8 hours bottles-to-throttles as a backstop for pilots flying under the influence...and that's why we need an age limit as a backstop for pilots flying too old.

As far as elderly drivers, I would support an age limit on driving, I think the public would, and I also belive there is plenty of evidence to support this, there is just no political will to do this. Why piss of the demographic that votes in the highest numbers percentage-wise.

 

[waveflyer]

We have hard rules in place to act as a backstop when it is hard to make a judgment when the thing you are trying to judge actually lowers your capability to make a judgment.

That's why we have rest rules and duty time limitations as a final back stop to prevent pilots flying fatigued. That's why we have 8 hours bottles-to-throttles as a backstop for pilots flying under the influence...and that's why we need an age limit as a backstop for pilots flying too old.

Everyone read this again^^^^

I've been flailing out here with the half-cocked emotion of DALPAs unfortunate TA and in the years we've all been debating- I've never seen the argument stated as well as this.

Well done couple of paragraphs Ig

 

[pilotyip]

As far as elderly drivers, I would support an age limit on driving, I think the public would, and I also belive there is plenty of evidence to support this, there is just no political will to do this. Why piss of the demographic that votes in the highest numbers percentage-wise.

Senior drivers are self policing, they start to restrict their driving when they recognize their growing limitations. They are much saver drivers than young drivers under 24, and not much different than the 25-64 age group. The same applies to piltos I know, they hang it up when they feel they are not as good to meet potential challenges. This is all about get out of my seat. But when you use the word "Safety" then anyone who posts a different opinion, is now branded as anti-safety.

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2007/07/070719115903.htm

BTW This guy gets it. Originally Posted by X-rated

Human beings of all ages make mistakes; young, old, and everywhere in between. The question you really need to be asking is, what age group of professional multi crew pilots have the most fatal accidents. The NTSB documents the age of every airman involved in an accident or incident, so the data is available. Instead, you focus solely on pilot incapacitation, and conclude older pilots are more unsafe than younger pilots. The problem is, you failed to consider incidents that contradict your theory like the two youngsters who zoom climbed an RJ to FL410. The 31 year old Captain and 23 year old SIC flamed out and seized both engines, and then failed to find a single suitable place to land from FL410. I also must have missed it when you included the Colgan accident in Buffalo involving a 47 year old captain with 3300 TT and a 24 year old First Officer with 1400 hours TT. Do you really think it's likely two high time 65 year old pilots would have made the same mistakes? I think it highly unlikely.

I personally don't have the desire or time to do the kind of research required, but then again, I don't write Congressmen and the FAA railing against older pilots when I have no actual data to support my conclusions. In my opinion, you're just another nut with an agenda.

 

[flyboyike]

This is all about get out of my seat.

Say something enough times it becomes true, right, yip? I'll humor you for a minute, though, let's suppose it is strictly about "get out of my seat". When the current gummers (for instance, you, and by you I mean your kind, not necessarily you personally since we know you're sensitive to personal stuff) benefited from age 60 being in place and took the seats from the gummers of the time, that wasn't all about "get out of my seat", right? That was about "my time has come", right? It's only about "get of my seat" now, because now your kind are in a sling.

It's about greed, yip, plain and simple. I had a 63.5 year-old-fossil recently tell me "well, I got kids in college, I gotta keep working". So I asked if had age sixty stayed in place he would have pulled them kids out of college. The answer (not surprisingly) was no. Which means he doesn't have to work, he chooses to. As a result of that, at least one person got downgraded and one hit the street.

But we're the greedy ones, to hear you and your kind tell it. Any of you ever hear of integrity?

 

[pilotyip]

But we're the greedy ones, to hear you and your kind tell it. Any of you ever hear of integrity?

Greed is in the eyes of the beholder, one ones greed is another man's rightful compensation. BTW I know all about Integrity, it is the Aircraft Carrier tied up in the Hudson River, I landed on ones just like it.:laugh:

 

[Bringupthebird]

Intrepid?

 

[pilotyip]

Intrepid?

yea that is the one, I have always had trouble whit speeling