Age limit will increase to 67 by years end.

[SIG600]

Again if it so bad why our former pilots call here when they are unemployed?

Because obviously your place is better than unemployment, congrats on meeting that lofty standard.

 

[jonjuan]

Because obviously your place is better than unemployment, congrats on meeting that lofty standard.

No kidding. Better than being dead, I suppose.

 

[flyboyike]

Now what exactly is meant by this? I am the the DA20 standards I don't set pay, days off or any of that stuff. But I fight everyday to make it a better place to work. I care greatly, I want to see them succeed, I want to give them the best training available at this level of the business. I want to see them move on to career jobs. Where else does a SE prop driver make it to 121 TJ PIC to get the resume fluff that lands a job at SWA, Atlas, DAL, etc? They are my friends and I do everything I can to help them make the next step. It is not about me it is about them reaching the promise land that I never got to see.

Again if it so bad why our former pilots call here when they are unemployed?

No worries, if you have your way, they will be your friends for life, as there will be nowhere for them to move on to.

 

[PBRstreetgang]

These accidents happened when there were no over 60 pilots in 121 flying. In addition, there have been huge advancements in CRM that were not there during Tenerife. I think the CRM advancements and technology like EGPWS, LLWS, TCAS, airfield surface radar and a host of others have helped prevent many accidents. The fact still remains that you as a captain have not flown with the older crowd and cannot comment on what happens. The FO is not paid to babysit, man the fort while the old guy sleeps or mitigate a host of other things that happen. Most pilots cannot fight the effects of aging and it shows to the FOs that fly with them. Not all, but enough to raise alarm.

And while I am in neither group, I am in the middle, not old, not young. I have seen F/Os who cannot combat the effects of inexperience, as well as Captains who shouldn't be in any seat, much less the left. This industry has moved from hiring the best and the brightest to hiring the candidate who has the credit rating that allowed them to progress through the process. Excellence in credit does not always make the best aviator. Seen the results myself personally, F/Os who would have been weeded out long before they got to the regionals, but because they went from the right seat of a 152 to the right seat of a CRJ, most do well enough, but there are a few FL410/Buffalo candidates waiting to show their stuff, probably in the same ratio as the old guys who have lost it.

 

[cldsfr79]

I fly with 65+ year olds on the 135 side of the fence and there are two types of guys I see. 1. Guys who have lost the edge and should retire but don't. 2. Guys who seem completely fine until there is an issue and then they fall far behind the plane and situation.

There are very few that are still fully capable beyond this age. Not speculation by me, but real world experience.

1. The guys who have lost the edge are the ones that have you do the night landings because they lost the optical acuity, the ones who you literally have to "talk down" even on a visual approach, the ones that make you "pucker up" and make you want to grab the controls on challenging environmental landings, and the ones that need a couple of attempts to make it through a routine recurrent sim check. They can be dangerous, but in the 135 world, you don't have to retire, they will sue if you fire them, and they will tell you that the omnipotent FAA medical is their badge of fitness.

2. The second batch of guys are equally a problem and I call them the "latent error" pilots. They are the ones that seem just fine, fly great but if anything out of the routine happens that requires quick thinking and quick reflexes, then you are in for a treat. All of a sudden you are not only monitoring the situation but you are monitoring your partner and assisting them to get through the situation.

This age thing is a problem. I, as well as hundreds of others, deal with the age threat on a daily bases. It adds to my flight tasks and I need my partner to be at a 100% during a situation, not having to babysit them and work on the problem.

I would only agree to an age increase if there was a cognitive and memory test required every 6 months done by, not the FAA, but a real cognitive specialist after the age 65. If you pass, then you are good to continue flying.

 

[texman]

cldsfr79,

Brother you get it and have seen it. The FAA needs to turn to the corporate and 135/91K to see the real danger of the AGE increase, if it does happen.

 

[pilotyip]

I would only agree to an age increase if there was a cognitive and memory test required every 6 months done by, not the FAA, but a real cognitive specialist after the age 65. If you pass, then you are good to continue flying.

Great idea but we start administering it at age 40, just like the six month First Class Medical. We may fine more than a few under 60 piltos who are outperformed by their over 60 buddies

 

[Andy]

I would only agree to an age increase if there was a cognitive and memory test required every 6 months done by, not the FAA, but a real cognitive specialist after the age 65. If you pass, then you are good to continue flying.

Unlikely to happen. And if it did, we'd see posts with people shopping for the 'easy' cognitive specialist.
Why are AMEs so quick to sign off on marginal pilots? Because if they don't, someone else will AND word will get out to not go to that AME.

Looking for an easy AME? Find out the AME that Yip's buddies go to.

 

[pilotyip]

Unlikely to happen. And if it did, we'd see posts with people shopping for the 'easy' cognitive specialist.
Why are AMEs so quick to sign off on marginal pilots? Because if they don't, someone else will AND word will get out to not go to that AME.

Looking for an easy AME? Find out the AME that Yip's buddies go to.

You mean my buddies from DAL, Spirit, USAir, NJ, and JUS? Doc Gordon, Plymouth, MI it is a drive through, go to the first window, place your order, pay at the second, pick up your medical the front desk. does one every 10 minutes. Does most of the airline Medicals in the Detroit area.

 

[Andy]

You mean my buddies from DAL, Spirit, USAir, NJ, and JUS? Doc Gordon, Plymouth, MI it is a drive through, go to the first window, place your order, pay at the second, pick up your medical the front desk. does one every 10 minutes. Does most of the airline Medicals in the Detroit area.

Shack. That's why increasing the retirement age is such a great idea - we have an infallible medical screening process. ... no 400+lb pilots waddling around the aerodrome, eh? No borderline diabetics sliding through their medicals. No high blood pressure pilots who are one cheeseburger away from a stroke getting issued class Is.

 

[laker4284]

As has been stated before on this forum, the Federal Air Surgeon (at the Age 60 ARC held by the FAA in 2006) noted that the present aero medical was functioning without need for change - the system catches problems before they are cockpit issues. As was also previously noted, those talking of stricter medicals (for older pilots one presumes) are thus addressing a non-issue AND simultaneously opening the door for thousands of younger pilots being disastrously exposed to the same enhanced medical standards. I'm sitting on an aircraft right now (as a pax) and watched a very fit 55+ year-old Captain board standing tall and looking alert. The 30-ish co-pilot, on the other hand, is badly overweight (monster gut hanging over his belt) , shuffled when he walked? He was lacking in posture, fitness, attitude and alertness. Whom might you suppose is monitoring whom on this flight? If the Air Surgeon says there is no issue, why open Pandora's Box?

 

[flyboyike]

As has been stated before on this forum, the Federal Air Surgeon (at the Age 60 ARC held by the FAA in 2006) noted that the present aero medical was functioning without need for change - the system catches problems before they are cockpit issues.

With all due respect to the FAS, I don't think his saying that makes it true.

 

[laker4284]

With all due respect to the FAS, I don't think his saying that makes it true.

Well, it's nice to know that "expert" pilots on these forums are more knowledgeable than a doctor (who's also an accomplished pilot) sitting in the top aeronautical medical seat in the nation.

Perhaps you should send him a series of pithy e-mails to set him straight? ;-)

 

[pilotyip]

Well, it's nice to know that "expert" pilots on these forums are more knowledgeable than a doctor (who's also an accomplished pilot) sitting in the top aeronautical medical seat in the nation.

Perhaps you should send him a series of pithy e-mails to set him straight? ;-)

Again this is not about safety, it about greed and get out of my seat because I want your money. But that would sound greedy from the anti age 65 crowd, so they wave the safety flag because no one can be against safety. But they never want to apply the enhanced standards to anyone under 60 becuase it might effect them.

 

[kwick]

With all due respect to the FAS, I don't think his saying that makes it true.

And there lies the main truth about the danger of inexperience.

They don't know what they don't know.

And the scary part is they think that they do.

 

[madjack]

There is plenty of greed on BOTH sides of the issue...really if 65 years is not enough time, 67 won't be either...the younger pilots need a shot...

 

[Mamma]

Again this is not about safety, it about greed and get out of my seat because I want your money. But that would sound greedy from the anti age 65 crowd, so they wave the safety flag because no one can be against safety. But they never want to apply the enhanced standards to anyone under 60 becuase it might effect them.

You don't see it as greed from the older crowd? Take your blinders off man! You say a young guy with a family and college debt is greedy because he wants to move up from an RJ after 10 years? The system is built around guys moving on at age 60. They got 5 more years and the young guys paid for it with stagnation, crappy pay and furloughs. Now the gummers say its not enough. They want the young guys to pay again for their greed. To top it all off, the young guys have to babysit many of them. You have some nerve to call the young guys greedy.

 

[PBRstreetgang]

You don't see it as greed from the older crowd? Take your blinders off man! You say a young guy with a family and college debt is greedy because he wants to move up from an RJ after 10 years? The system is built around guys moving on at age 60. They got 5 more years and the young guys paid for it with stagnation, crappy pay and furloughs. Now the gummers say its not enough. They want the young guys to pay again for their greed. To top it all off, the young guys have to babysit many of them. You have some nerve to call the young guys greedy.

Your greed is somehow different than any of the other greed? How's that entitlement thing working out for you?

 

[SIG600]

Again this is not about safety, it about greed and get out of my seat because I want your money. But that would sound greedy from the anti age 65 crowd, so they wave the safety flag because no one can be against safety. But they never want to apply the enhanced standards to anyone under 60 becuase it might effect them.

Bull********************. You guys knew your entire careers that 60 was where you were done. You built your career expectations on it, you always knew it was coming. Then when the goal posts get moved, you guys get a 5 year/multi million dollar windfall, you don't get to say "it was always mine you greedy little turds" It was never yours, it ALWAYS belonged to the guys behind you until. Just like it belonged to you when the guys ahead were forced out at 60. Nevermind the ruined careers and families of those guys behind you that were planning on the same progression who were then furloughed.

 

[PBRstreetgang]

Bull********************. You guys knew your entire careers that 60 was where you were done. You built your career expectations on it, you always knew it was coming. Then when the goal posts get moved, you guys get a 5 year/multi million dollar windfall, you don't get to say "it was always mine you greedy little turds" It was never yours, it ALWAYS belonged to the guys behind you until. Just like it belonged to you when the guys ahead were forced out at 60. Nevermind the ruined careers and families of those guys behind you that were planning on the same progression who were then furloughed.

Do you need a hug? Ribbon?

Here's an excerpt from the recent Time Magazine article entitled "The Me Me Me Generation":

"The incidence of narcissistic personality disorder is nearly three times as high for people in their 20s as for the generation that?s now 65 or older, according to the National Institutes of Health; 58% more college students scored higher on a narcissism scale in 2009 than in 1982. Millennials got so many participation trophies growing up that a recent study showed that 40% believe they should be promoted every two years, regardless of performance."

You want the brass ring, stomp your feet and whine like a puppy fresh off the teat, that will make it happen quicker.....

 

[Mamma]

Your greed is somehow different than any of the other greed? How's that entitlement thing working out for you?

What have I been entitled to? I've served 20 hard years in the military so I think I've earned my way Sport. What about you? It's all perspective anyway. The younger guys want to move up and the gummers want to stay. It's not about entitlement or greed its just the way our system is set up. If gummers want to stay longer, someone's gotta pay for it. That's all. Kind of hard to call young guys greedy or entitled when they have to pay.

 

[waveflyer]

As has been stated before on this forum, the Federal Air Surgeon (at the Age 60 ARC held by the FAA in 2006) noted that the present aero medical was functioning without need for change - the system catches problems before they are cockpit issues. As was also previously noted, those talking of stricter medicals (for older pilots one presumes) are thus addressing a non-issue AND simultaneously opening the door for thousands of younger pilots being disastrously exposed to the same enhanced medical standards. I'm sitting on an aircraft right now (as a pax) and watched a very fit 55+ year-old Captain board standing tall and looking alert. The 30-ish co-pilot, on the other hand, is badly overweight (monster gut hanging over his belt) , shuffled when he walked? He was lacking in posture, fitness, attitude and alertness. Whom might you suppose is monitoring whom on this flight? If the Air Surgeon says there is no issue, why open Pandora's Box?

Laker- I actually agree with this- and man, if I'm still as fit as I am now when I'm 60, and as sharp, then I sure wouldn't want a regulation telling me I have to retire if I didn't want to. And at 42, I can't tell you I would-
But as to your example- that's not unusual- food and food habits in america are awful- if that FO was 40-ish then I'd give you more credence- but flying is mental- his danger is of flat out H.A./stroking out, and looking like a slob- not in mentally staying up with the aircraft.
And truly, the problem does not lay with 80% of 60+ pilots- it's the 10-20% that are being carried.
Again, I ask- what percentage of pilots is it acceptable for me to DO THEIR JOB, in that awkward realm of captain defensiveness and FO lack of authority, for LESS money? If its not a problem for you guys at 20%_ what does it take? Half?
Or would you even admit it then?

Human beings are not good at assessing their age related decline-

I say fly til you die if that's what you want- but no captains after 60.

 

[Mamma]

So, this young fat slob is probably going to only get worse over time. Wonder what he will look like at 66 and captaining a A380.

 

[PBRstreetgang]

What have I been entitled to? I've served 20 hard years in the military so I think I've earned my way Sport. What about you? It's all perspective anyway. The younger guys want to move up and the gummers want to stay. It's not about entitlement or greed its just the way our system is set up. If gummers want to stay longer, someone's gotta pay for it. That's all. Kind of hard to call young guys greedy or entitled when they have to pay.

The system is what it is, whining and sniveling will not change it. I find no small amount of amusement that so many in this industry think that airplanes and the airline industry is their personal merry-go-round and that it exists to provide them with non-stop fun and games. If the 'gummers" want to stay until the legislated retirement age, so be it. All the sniveling and foot stomping will not change anything, and in fact might make you look immature.
So buck up, square your hat, snap to and say "yes sir, I will take the fat one, because I like them that way" In return, the gummer just might have a stroke while playing "hide the sausage" with the 26 year old F/A, and bingo you will be one seniority number closer to climbing on that 27 year old F/A.

Kind of hard to call young guys greedy or entitled when they have to pay.

What are they paying? Last time I checked they get paid to swing the gear. This statement is the very essence of the entitlement concept. If you went into the airline game instead of serving "20 hard years" you would be one of those gummers you hate so much.
If you want "credit" for your "20 hard years", its called a pension, not seniority entitlement.

 

[flyboyike]

The system is what it is, whining and sniveling will not change it. I find no small amount of amusement that so many in this industry think that airplanes and the airline industry is their personal merry-go-round and that it exists to provide them with non-stop fun and games. If the 'gummers" want to stay until the legislated retirement age, so be it.

In other words, it's OK for the industry to be the gummers' personal merry-go-round, just not mine.

 

[PBRstreetgang]

In other words, it's OK for the industry to be the gummers' personal merry-go-round, just not mine.

You just don't get it, it is what it is, and all the foot stomping and whining will not change anything. You want change, change the law through the legislative process, until then, the whining and sniveling may make you feel better but won't change anything. If you want validation then you have come to the right place, F/I provides some of the best, maybe the Genny will give you a big double breasted hug....

 

[Flopgut]

Do you need a hug? Ribbon?

Here's an excerpt from the recent Time Magazine article entitled "The Me Me Me Generation":

"The incidence of narcissistic personality disorder is nearly three times as high for people in their 20s as for the generation that?s now 65 or older, according to the National Institutes of Health; 58% more college students scored higher on a narcissism scale in 2009 than in 1982. Millennials got so many participation trophies growing up that a recent study showed that 40% believe they should be promoted every two years, regardless of performance."

You want the brass ring, stomp your feet and whine like a puppy fresh off the teat, that will make it happen quicker.....

The system is what it is, whining and sniveling will not change it. I find no small amount of amusement that so many in this industry think that airplanes and the airline industry is their personal merry-go-round and that it exists to provide them with non-stop fun and games. If the 'gummers" want to stay until the legislated retirement age, so be it. All the sniveling and foot stomping will not change anything, and in fact might make you look immature.
So buck up, square your hat, snap to and say "yes sir, I will take the fat one, because I like them that way" In return, the gummer just might have a stroke while playing "hide the sausage" with the 26 year old F/A, and bingo you will be one seniority number closer to climbing on that 27 year old F/A.

Your thesis does not match the reality of our specific situation. The old guys weren't going to get their "ribbon" [pension], so they stomped their feet, bawled and cried, until they got their way. They got the exact age increase they wanted. The rest of the profession absorbed the ill effects (which were vast) with admirable decorum. And now we're seeing that 65 was not enough for these old bastards. They want more.

At some point we have to cut the rope on these old guys. Money, seniority, extra years. It's all being wasted by them.

 

[flyboyike]

You just don't get it, it is what it is, and all the foot stomping and whining will not change anything. You want change, change the law through the legislative process, until then, the whining and sniveling may make you feel better but won't change anything. If you want validation then you have come to the right place, F/I provides some of the best, maybe the Genny will give you a big double breasted hug....

Well, the gummers are the ones trying to change it (again), not me. And they're doing it by whining about how five more years wasn't enough, but two more will be for sure. But again, it's okay for them, because they've earned it, right?

 

[Mamma]

The system is what it is, whining and sniveling will not change it. I find no small amount of amusement that so many in this industry think that airplanes and the airline industry is their personal merry-go-round and that it exists to provide them with non-stop fun and games. If the 'gummers" want to stay until the legislated retirement age, so be it. All the sniveling and foot stomping will not change anything, and in fact might make you look immature.
So buck up, square your hat, snap to and say "yes sir, I will take the fat one, because I like them that way" In return, the gummer just might have a stroke while playing "hide the sausage" with the 26 year old F/A, and bingo you will be one seniority number closer to climbing on that 27 year old F/A.


What are they paying? Last time I checked they get paid to swing the gear. This statement is the very essence of the entitlement concept. If you went into the airline game instead of serving "20 hard years" you would be one of those gummers you hate so much.
If you want "credit" for your "20 hard years", its called a pension, not seniority entitlement.

Based on your apathetic take on things, I take it you don't vote either. Probably a good thing. I did reserves my last 10 so no pension for awhile if ever. So lets discuss this "one way" entitlement you like to bring up. Just who feels they are entitled? The young FO at Skywest who will be stagnated or the older Delta FO who will enjoy 5-10 years of stagnation caused by age increases? OR, maybe the old guy who just can't hang it up like all those before him did. Just maybe the age 65 guy, who got a 5 year windfall feels entitled to another 5 years on the backs of those behind him. In case you didn't know, this is a bulletin board designed to discuss issues. If you are upset over what you perceive as whining, go somewhere else where everyone plays with unicorns and dances in green fields under bright rainbows. Or come here for reality and listen to what others are thinking. For the record, I am ok with age 65. Just not an extension.

 

[Flopgut]

The system is what it is, whining and sniveling will not change it.


What are they paying? Last time I checked they get paid to swing the gear. This statement is the very essence of the entitlement concept. If you went into the airline game instead of serving "20 hard years" you would be one of those gummers you hate so much.
If you want "credit" for your "20 hard years", its called a pension, not seniority entitlement.

Not hard for me to recall the effort to change 60 to 65. Talk about "whining and sniveling". The second part? Can't believe you wrote that. Yip mentioned the 95 year old WW2 veteran earlier. Other than many decades, what's the difference between Mamma and a WW2 vet?! Why in the hell is ok that we cherish one and kick the other in the teeth?!