APAAD regrouping to challenge age 60

[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!

 

[Andy]

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”​

You need to read deeper. The CAMI reports point out the flawed logic in the Hilton Systems study.

 

[Andy]

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

Yes. I'm hoping to die peacfully in my sleep, like my uncle. I'd hate to be awake and die in an aircraft accident like his passengers.

 

[SOVT]

Boy, you guys must be a real joy to fly with.

Personally I don't give a damm if they raise the age or not, but on second thought I'd prefer thay leave it at 60 so I wouldn't have to fly with the self serving twits that seem to dominate this board.

Just out of curiosity do you guys have the guts to express these sentiments to the older Captains you fly with? I think not.

What a bunch of loser's

 

[luckytohaveajob]

Sovt

SOVT, some 57/67 operators fire people for having a position. I know of operators like that who's pilots move up the list monthly by the last five guys fired every month. Getting to captain is just a matter of how long you can keep your mouth shut and not get violated.

But as you said lets just keep age 60 and can this whole conversation.

 

[SOVT]

SOVT, some 57/67 operators fire people for having a position. I know of operators like that who's pilots move up the list monthly by the last five guys fired every month. Getting to captain is just a matter of how long you can keep your mouth shut and not get violated.

But as you said lets just keep age 60 and can this whole conversation.

As I said, just a bunch of gutless wonders. No fortitude, no conviction just a bunch of whining children hiding behind the skirts of internet anonymity. It is a casual observation the worst of these guys are regional kids, Southwest or Southwest wannabees, not the non-union folks you are talking about

 

[VABB]

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.]

​

If that is the case, then why not put two age 60+ guys in the cockpit together?

 

[Andy]

Just out of curiosity do you guys have the guts to express these sentiments to the older Captains you fly with? I think not.

I post all of this on the UAL ALPA webboard where anonyminity is NOT an option. In fact, a certain outspoken United captain who has been quoted in newspapers and posts regularly on this board has even sent e-mails to me. Any United pilot can easily find out my name. I will be more than happy to discuss my opposition to the change when I return to United from mil leave in June 2009. However, I doubt that this issue will register at that time since our contract becomes amenable in 2009.

I've offered up compromise solutions, but I do not get many responses from those who wish to change the rule. http://forums.flightinfo.com/showthread.php?t=88857 I'm not going to champion any change; I'm perfectly happy with the status quo.

 

[VABB]

Assuming they raise the retirement age to 65 (which I hope they don't), that would mean a 23 year-old who gets hired hired at GoJets would have a 42 year career with them.

 

[whymeworry?]

The other night, while standing in line at a local eating establishment, the couple behind me made the same order (two buffets) yet they paid a much lower price. When I asked the cashier why, she told me they get a senior citizen discount. They didn't look senior. Nonetheless, I told her, "that's age discrimination."

Both the couple and the cashier looked at me like I was from another planet.

 

[Falconjet]

That will teach you to go eating dinner at 4:30!

FJ