Well, 5 more years in the right seat.

[FreightBumper]

Maybe you should fly cargo, so you can get that big ego of yours in the airplane!

He does fly cargo if I'm not mistaken. But as my wife points out, I'm mistaken quite often.

 

[Way2Broke]

Belch,

I actually support age 65, and my reasoning is pretty simple. Its just plain wrong to force someone into retirement before social security can be drawn. Heck, you can fly as long as you want as long as you truly can hold the medical required for the job. 50 or 65, who cares! The question is are you medically fit to fly? If you are have fun and make a buck.

Global warming will be over by then and we'll be in the coming Ice Age!

Jurrasic Jet must be on of those guys working for someone that still has defined benifits on retirement...if you want to go at 60 my man, I'm sure you could come up with a medical reason! I personally don't want to go to the bench any sooner than nessesary-I like what I do and it's pretty silly for an arbitrary rule that wasn't around till 1960 to make me do that. Perhaps you might look for another line of work if you're so anxious to get out!

 

[B737 Guy]

Belch,

I actually support age 65, and my reasoning is pretty simple.

Most are, and they're usually greed!

Its just plain wrong to force someone into retirement before social security can be drawn. Heck, you can fly as long as you want as long as you truly can hold the medical required for the job.

Piss poor planning has nothing to do with it either eh?
The biggest supporters of age 65 are the "I've got mine crowd!"

50 or 65, who cares! The question is are you medically fit to fly? If you are have fun and make a buck.

Just curious who you fly for?
Some of the older captains I've flown with in my career, should have retired at age 55! I see the ones getting closer to 60 being worse. That being said, it doesn't apply to ALL pilots, just some!
SO the question begs, where do you draw the line? IF the FAA felt that 65 was ok, then why put the caveat in there that "no 2 pilots in the cockpit can be over 60."
Just some observations/opinions from a "non supporter" of age 65

 

[countbat]

All these guys against 65 rule, when their time will come AND IT WILL COME SOONER THEN THEY THINK, will be the first ones to scream and hold their seats and want to work 'till droping dead. It is just human hypocrisy and individualism.
Majority of americans and pilots are part of it can not afford to retire our days. Life has too many ups and downs, too screwed.
However forced stop flying at 60, medicare at 62, and social security benefits at 65 shouldn't sound right to anybody. Majority of pilots stay and will stay in Social Security as only source of income at that age if they can not find a part 91 job or not flipping burgers at McDonald. Except the ones lucky enough to get a job with majors, but I have seen former majors screwing thei employees. Just to name few: Eastern, PanAm etc. One never knows. Tomorrow can be AA or UAL or any other.

 

[Way2Broke]

First of all I am closer to 30 than 60, so this is hardly greedy.

The most important and hardest to enforce part of my stand point is protecting the integrity of the certification of pilot medicals. Of course there are pilots not medically fit for flight that have a medical examiner that is just kinda passing them along. Making laws is easy, enforcing them is difficult.

I know over 60 pilots that still have all their brain function and some under 60 that never had it the first place.

My company has a 121 and a 135 side of the house. I am on the 135 side of the house and fly with pilots that are in their 60s all the time. Previously pilots have had to retire from the 121 side of the house at age 60, but have been allowed to come back to the 135 side as a captain until 65. At which point they can still stick around as a F.O. I think? I doubt many opt to take the move back to the right seat though. Instead they retire.

I wonder once this passes if the over 60 pilots will be allowed to bid back to the DC-9 (121 side)? I know a handful of them that would love that opportunity.

My long term career goals do not include part 121 airlines so this has little affect on me. As long as I still like flying and I am medically fit to fly I will be flying, but I hope not to have to work until 60 or 65. By then I hope to be taking it easy in a "little banger" flying for fun, when I want to and to where I want to.... not what and where my company tells me to go. Now that is the dream!

Most are, and they're usually greed!


Piss poor planning has nothing to do with it either eh?
The biggest supporters of age 65 are the "I've got mine crowd!"


Just curious who you fly for?
Some of the older captains I've flown with in my career, should have retired at age 55! I see the ones getting closer to 60 being worse. That being said, it doesn't apply to ALL pilots, just some!
SO the question begs, where do you draw the line? IF the FAA felt that 65 was ok, then why put the caveat in there that "no 2 pilots in the cockpit can be over 60."
Just some observations/opinions from a "non supporter" of age 65

 

[TWA]

As an outsider looking in (as I'm not quite flying professionally yet), the argument against the age 65 change honestly looks a little juvenile. The only way you can upgrade is for the government to force a more experienced and qualified pilot into early retirement? I'm not tryin to p!ss anyone off, just my $.02, an opinion.

 

[dontpost2]

Age 65 official

No sense arguing about it, Age 65 is effective today - Period!

http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2007/12/20071213-4.html

 

[Box-Hauler]

What happens in 5 years when all that great experience again reaches retirement age. I am sure we will have another pilot shortage.

As for the I want to continue to fly til I die crowd, ever hear of part 91. Go knock yourself out. I do think it is a little hypocritical. We all got into this gig knowing that at 60 we leave. We all should have been planning for that event. I personally would like it if we could get out after 25 years regardless of age. Beach here I come.

And anyone who says that they love their job that much is crazy. I agree with the loving to fly but is a round trip to MKC really the same as flying around in a cub or citabria on a nice clear cool morning.....

 

[Bitter]

We need to stop these selfish short sighted old farts from trying in four years, when they have a year to go, doing the same sh*t and getting it raised to 70!!

I still believe that it is a safety issue, a 60 year old does not have the reaction time, that a 40 year old does.

This sucks.......now I have to collectively bargin to allow retirement age at 60, to still be allowed with out being hammered. You can be sure the company will want to change it, and treat 60 as the old 55.

Thanks guys, how selfish. May be we should give up something that these selfish f'ers need, like retirement medical......h*ll lets just get it raised to death and give up the pension!

The vocal minority just hammered the majority!!

Rant out

 

[Jetsetter]

I wonder if we will see an increase in the number of crew medical emergencies ?

 

[transpac]

I still believe that it is a safety issue, a 60 year old does not have the reaction time, that a 40 year old does.

I believe you're on to something here! Reaction time definitely does increase with age. Further, a 40 year old doesn't have the the reaction time of a 20 year old. I'm guessing the optimum balance between reaction time and experience occurs somewhere around 30-35 years of age for most airline pilots. Therefore, to achieve maximum safety the mandatory retirement age should be no more than 40 years. A side benefit would be accelerated upgrades for FOs.

 

[Birddog]

How is AGE 60 considered age discrimination and AGE 65 NOT???

In 5 years, 10 years, 15 years, whats to these guys will push for AGE 70??
(maybe I am wrong).

Excellent question which I have not heard anyone address. Also, even though Europe allows Age 65, the other guy still has to be under 60. This suggests to me that there might be an age related concern. If not, why not put two 64 year olds up front?

 

[Captain Oveur]

No question, a 50 to 60 year-old's reaction time is
slowing down, I see it in myself, it's unmistakeable.
On the other hand, us old farts have a wealth of
experience the whippersnappers just don't have.
We've seen more and done more.....if you have a
safety oriented attitude (and good health) you'll
be as safe in the cockpit as a youngster (insert
Walter Brennan cackle here)

 

[OrionFE]

We need to stop these selfish short sighted old farts from trying in four years, when they have a year to go, doing the same sh*t and getting it raised to 70!!

I still believe that it is a safety issue, a 60 year old does not have the reaction time, that a 40 year old does.

This sucks.......now I have to collectively bargin to allow retirement age at 60, to still be allowed with out being hammered. You can be sure the company will want to change it, and treat 60 as the old 55.

Thanks guys, how selfish. May be we should give up something that these selfish f'ers need, like retirement medical......h*ll lets just get it raised to death and give up the pension!

The vocal minority just hammered the majority!!

Rant out

I don't know...I just recently flew with a young 30-something yearold who had the airplane taken from him on the approach from an alomost 60 yearold because he was sitting way back on the Horizontal Stab! The Whale was too much airplane for him. However, that old "cargo geeser" did a dam fine job of putting it on and tactfully showing the "youngin" how to do it!
Sounds like normal pilot "whining" to me. It's all about Meeeeeeeeeee!

 

[Citjok]

Seems like Australia is the only place with no age limit (maybe I am wrong).[/quote]

They preserve themselves in Fosters. Yum!