PDA

View Full Version : Age 70 for international pilots?


Pages : [1] 2 3

7p3i7lot
1st Aug 2010, 00:00
Heard a rumor that some South American Airlines are lobbying for a change in pilot retirement age to 70.
Any truth to this?
Thanks:confused:

Airbubba
1st Aug 2010, 00:37
Age 70 is already being quietly discussed in the halls of the U.S. Congress and ALPA. There was a lot of whining about Age 65 but in the end, there was not one vote against it when it sailed through legislative approval in the States.

In the EU there is talk of eliminating the manditory retirement age for pilots altogether to comply with "human rights" laws.

As always, there will be a two phase process if the retirement age changes again.

Phase One:

Don't worry, that will never happen, the feds won't go for it, ALPA will block it.

Phase Two:

It's a done deal, our hands were tied, we had to go along with it to have some say in the matter.

Over the years this two phase process has been used many times to approve such things as CVR's, locked cockpit doors and drug and alcohol testing. And seniority list mergers...:)

protectthehornet
1st Aug 2010, 01:41
I hope it happens. it would help my finances out quite a bit

poina
1st Aug 2010, 01:51
Phase 3

Was that for us? I gotta pee. Can I take a nap. I remember when..............

411A
1st Aug 2010, 03:02
Can I take a nap.
Wrong.
It's normally...'you have control, time for my snooze...and don't break anything.':}

Captain-Crunch
1st Aug 2010, 03:07
Just Great. Sounds like another anti-labor law is coming down the pipe.

What this really means is Congress is going to steal our pension plans since we won't ever need them, since by the time we get to 70, they'll raise it to 80, 90...


Back when I worked for a scumbag outfit, an major airline pilot saw our bizjet come in and stared at the old fossil I was with. He asked us: "what kind of retirement plan do you guys have?"

I replied "FTD".

He asked, "FTD?"

I said yeah, "Fly-Till-ya-Die" :hmm:
.
.
.

Airbubba
1st Aug 2010, 04:33
HEY I AM BEING HELD BACK BY THESE OLD FARTS WHO REFUSE TO RETIRE !!!! Its not my fault you have 4+ ex wife's & 20 kids to support!!! I DO NOT want to fly until 70 hell 55 is too much for me I only have 1 wife & cannot support her on the crappy F/O pay! Do us all a favor & step aside !!!

Helluva first post.:D I'm sure all the folks ahead of you will be persuaded by your eloquent appeal.

Like I said, all these forum crybabies and whiners couldn't muster one vote in Congress against the Age 65 legislation. Not one.

I'm set to retire at 60 but after reading some of these idiotic rants I think I may stick around a while...:ok:

L337
1st Aug 2010, 06:06
I hope I have better things to do, at 60, than stay awake all night. I can think of nothing more hideous than still flying at 70.

Beyond 65 I suspect it will be no easy task to keep a medical.

411A
1st Aug 2010, 06:15
I can think of nothing more hideous than still flying at 70.




Strange.
I have friends who are still flying Gulfstreams at 70, and they have a great time.
No problems with medicals, either.

Old Fella
1st Aug 2010, 07:08
Age should never be the determining factor. Medical fitness and flying competence should be all that matters. I know plenty of guys well short of 70 who should be made to retire and many nearing 70 who are still as fit and competent as those younger.

stator vane
1st Aug 2010, 07:43
if any man or woman can pass the medical, can pass the checkrides, actually fly the airplane and most of all-actually still want to-he, or she, should be able to fly.

hell, look at the age of some of those who are really running the countries! Ha!

i never begrudged the older pilots-they had nothing whatsoever to do with 'holding' me back. hell, they showed me loads of 'jewels' never found in the books and now i am starting to be one, i don't begrudge the younger ones for increasing my workload with some of the things i see them do, or not do, due to lack of experience. it makes me laugh and i tell them there's no mistake they can do that i haven't seen or done several times myself.

but some people do think they are the center (or centre-depending upon where you are from) of the universe regardless of whatever industry is under consideration and everyone else is in their way!

Piltdown Man
1st Aug 2010, 08:41
Stator Vane has said it all. Personally, I'm sure I'll go past 60 but how much longer depends on how much fun it is, how much I'll make and what I'll replace flying with. Whilst staff discount at B&Q might be very generous, I don't think restocking the rivets, dealing with surely builders and mixing paint will have the same buzz. But there again, Domestic Control may attempt to get some jobs done around the house done - so maybe I won't retire - ever.

PM

djeskine
1st Aug 2010, 09:45
70, are you guys kidding? Who would ride in a plane flown geriatrics?

Darkman, You got it right man.

Time for these old generals to move out and get out of their Vietnam era dogfight mindsets in the cockpits. 65 is surely more than enough. I've known quite a number barely at 60 handing controls to the f/o after gear up. Just to wake up for the meals and an occasional fart and pee.
CRM as far as they are concerned means Captain Running the Mothership!

If they haven't got their money and retirement plans in place by 60, then they better plan to go rob a bank!
Just give the younger guys a break as well OK?

maggot738
1st Aug 2010, 10:01
You guys need to crawl back into whatever cave you crawled out of. Experience and expertise comes with age and maturity which I suspect you guys are surely lacking. Fitness to fly, medical status and ability should be all that counts to occupy the seat. Now sit back down sonny and wait your turn.

silvercare
1st Aug 2010, 10:14
True querido but at 65 you gave enough to aviation , don't worry we will miss you but we will move on without any problem :ok:.

I believe 65 is more than enough

4Greens
1st Aug 2010, 10:18
As long as they have an upper age limit for FO's. We don't need simultaneous heart attacks.

BrATCO
1st Aug 2010, 10:43
Congress has already decided 1500hrs minimum for FOs.
Why not age 60 minimum for captains, with no deadline for retirement ?
Then nobody could say pilots lack experience. (They could eventually "leak" experience...:O)

cirr737
1st Aug 2010, 12:43
Why not age 60 minimum for captains, with no deadline for retirement ?There certainly is one ;)

Honestly, even if you are still fit to fly at 70 - your chances of a sudden heart attack or a stroke rise exponentially with age, and I don't think we should accept the higher risk caused by that - it's like taking out a(nother) layer of swiss cheese

Btw: WCHC is no longer "Wheelchair Cabin" - it's now "Wheelchair Captain"

protectthehornet
1st Aug 2010, 12:44
darkman and djeskine...

you should advance and that's fine. but everyone promised a pension should get the whole thing...you see we can't go back in time and fix things retroactively. so, in your next contract say to your union: we will take a pay cut to make sure the people set to retire get their full pension. of course that would also work for YOU when you reach retirement age.

prior to 911, my airline would have paid me 132k a year in retirement...that's right...retirement at age 60. now, its pennies on the dollar...most of you guys know the deal so I won't repeat it.

put your money where your mouth is young guys. I'd say 2 out of 10 ''young guys'' that I flew with were worth their salt in the cockpit. the flight attendants thought the same thing in other departments!

RJSAviator76
1st Aug 2010, 12:52
I hate to say it, but if you feel these Vietnam War Admirals and Generals are being unsafe, start filling out FSAP/ASAP/FOQA/NASA/ROSI forms and point it all out to the proper authorities. Don't just go on the internet and whine about it.

djeskine
1st Aug 2010, 12:53
You guys need to crawl back into whatever cave you crawled out of.


Maggot.....

I sure would do if only you could get out of the way. It's you who need to get back to the easy chair on the porch sir!!!.

Statistically it's the older senior pilots who tend to be more involved in accidents as complacency sets in. Remember Tennerife?? Or the Olympic 737?
The AED's weren't meant for the crew, but if you guys are insist on being around there with your cane and all at 65-70, we will need one in the cockpit soon!

Guys, you've had enough experience.......so what more do you need other than egomania taking over your souls?

Ancient Observer
1st Aug 2010, 12:58
Stator vane has said it all.
However, since then people's prejudices have been aired.
Is there any danger that someone somewhere will have the metrics that will help a decision on this?
Would it be possible for the FAA/CAA to share their data on the relevant medical metrics?
Having a decision based on metrics and not on prejudice/politics would be good.

poina
1st Aug 2010, 13:01
Maggot 738,

Also with age comes dementia, apathy, and inability to adapt. Give me an experienced Capt < 50 anyday for my family to ride with.

My observation after 15 years as a check airman is this: very few above 55 have the drive and the gas to keep in the books and maintain the highest level of knowledge and professionalism, rather they rely on the old maxim of EXPERIENCE. I found this to be true of myself also, which was why I retired at 56. Glad I did and glad I was careful with stock selection.

md80fanatic
1st Aug 2010, 13:09
Fun in Honduras ....

Seasoned veteran at the helm.

loyKfeV7NFg

Not quite so confident.

CJoXMcehrYo


What will happen to TGU when all the old pilots retire? Sad day then. :sad:

pinkplanesgofaster
1st Aug 2010, 13:34
some of the over 70 pilots I see are very fit to fly, bungee jump etc and some are crumbling at 45, or even 25 for that matter. 70 seems to be the "new 60" these days, but I reckon the regulators are going to put in some pretty close medical scrutiny and probably a load of simulator testing as well if the age is extended. Doesn't the computer fly the plane these days? :\

His dudeness
1st Aug 2010, 13:36
All very nice and well...in Germany we had to retire at 65 (JAROPS) which was nice, cause the state pension would start at 65 (which I and my employers pay towards shiploads of money).

Now the state raised that age to be 67 and rumour has it that they plan to raise it to 70. What will I do in the 5 years in between? There is a lot of pilots without pensions from an airline, who need to cover this gap in one way or another...

Slasher
1st Aug 2010, 14:07
70? Are you kidding me? :eek:

If I had the financial means I wouldve got out years ago.
Ive already had a total gutfull - crappey fatigue-inducing
rosters, airlines run by bean-counters (with the ongoing
reduction in salarys), 400 hr computer-dependant kids in
the rhs, airplanes "run" by computers, the list goes on.

The glorius era of airline flying has gone and its gone
forever. And the general disposition of airline pilots is only
going to get far far worse - look whats happened since
1985.

Allright maybe financialy your locked in to an industry
youve had enough of, instead of enjoying retirement with
maybe an hour of aeros in a Stearman now and then. But
running around with your airline navbag till 70 will only
make retirement a helluvalot harder. Plan for 60 and use
the remainder years (if need be) to 65 or 70 to get your
act together in the shortest posible time. Then get out
before what enjoyment you have of airline flying (if any)
is eventualy destroyed.

7p3i7lot
1st Aug 2010, 17:17
The same feelings about age and pilots have been aired yet again. Sorta expected that but:
My question was does anyone KNOW of any airline/country that has changed or is actively trying to get the age limit pushed beyond 65?
Thanks again.

A-3TWENTY
1st Aug 2010, 23:01
In all professions people struggle to retire as earlier as possible. Just the f :mad: pilots struggle to retire later.

This is a proof that most of them have a chicken`s brain and awful personal life.

It`s when I read this kind of things , happily suported by pilots that I realize that our profession is really plummeting down in all aspects. And there is definitely no way back. Expect even poorer work and salary conditions.
In Europe , there are already big companies (with over 30 airplanes) paying 3300 NET to A320 Captains.
Don`t let to cross your mind that this is the bottom of the well. There`s more to come.
The future will be working untill 70 or more taking home a 2000 euro Net salary (for Captains of course) and having to move around all the time since the quality of jobs will be more and more volatile.

There was one time this was a gentlemen`s profession.

A-3TWENTY

:yuk::yuk::yuk::yuk::yuk:

MTOW
1st Aug 2010, 23:40
I haven't read the whole thread, so apologies if this question's been asked before, but upping the age to 70 begs the question: what will we do when the last baby boomer actually drops his clogs and departs this mortal coil?

The constant increasing of the retirement age "because we can't do without the experience" could have been used by every generation since before Pontious got his command in Air Judea. I really think we oldies should accept that we've had a damn fine time of it (and quite possibly, almost certainly, have seen the best of it) and we should pass the baton on at some stage. There's no right or wrong age for this, but 65 would seem to me to be a pretty good compromise for all concerned.

Intruder
2nd Aug 2010, 00:12
What will happen to TGU when all the old pilots retire? Sad day then.
IF these landings are supposed to have something to do with age, what are the ages of the 2 pilots involved? My first reaction is that the first one knows how to fly an airplane, but the second one is DANGEROUS! He stopped on the known short runway ONLY with a lot of luck after touching down more than half way to the end. A pilot who actually uses his experience would have rejected the landing rather than put his passengers at such risk.

hvydriver
2nd Aug 2010, 01:26
A3-Twenty,

Amen. That is why I got out when DHL downsized in the US. The profession is no longer what it once was, and I seriously doubt it will ever be so again. It's a pity.

jetcapt
2nd Aug 2010, 01:44
All you whining :{ gear pullers will most probably get to 60 then 65, then 70, and maybe more. Hope I'm still around to hear you change your tune. Have some respect for your elders who have paid their dues and spent more time in the air then you have wearing long pants. Try being fully qualified and current one day, then too old the next. Better be saving your pennies, your time will come.

Some things never change in aviation!

411A
2nd Aug 2010, 01:52
My question was does anyone KNOW of any airline/country that has changed or is actively trying to get the age limit pushed beyond 65?


Yes...not changed as yet, however actively thinking about it.

LeadSled
2nd Aug 2010, 02:12
411A,

Domestically, there has never been a legal age limit in Australia, as opposed to airline/union imposed limits.

However, the medical start to get very stiff after 60, now even for a PPL. Unfortunately, too much depends on the subjective judgment ( which should be objective) of certain medicos, the latest CASA head of Aerospace ( why Space, I wonder??) Medicine has very rapidly become known as Dr. No.

I don't know of any pilots over 70 still flying for major carriers, but there are certainly pilots over 70 flying for small non scheduled operators.

Tootle pip!!

stepwilk
2nd Aug 2010, 02:50
"In all professions people struggle to retire as earlier as possible."

Those of us who are in professions that we actually enjoy don't "struggle to retire."

I'm a freelance writer, though I've also been flying since 1966. I'm 74, still working, and to me, retirement would be equivalent to death. I enjoy writing. Some people enjoy flying.

Huck
2nd Aug 2010, 02:51
I'd say 2 out of 10 ''young guys'' that I flew with were worth their salt in the cockpit. the flight attendants thought the same thing in other departments!


Nice.

In my airline, there are no "young guys." Very few of us F/O's are under 40, and most (like me) have many thousands of hours. But whatever gets you through the night.

It's all whose ox is getting gored.....

surplus1
2nd Aug 2010, 02:56
I just have to ask all you young fellas that are whining about this. Are you old enough to remember when there was NO age 60 rule?

How did we ever manage to survive and develop and progress long enough for Quesada to arbitrarily invent and impose the age 60 limit? How many crashed and burned because there was no age 60 rule? Was it ever necessary or just somebody's power trip?

Whatever the limt or if there is no limit, the decision should not be arbitrary and political. Your ability to work as a pilot should be based only on sound medical health and demonstrated proficiency whether you're 25 or 75.

No more, no less.

dwade
2nd Aug 2010, 04:42
the man who taught me aerobatics was 73 at the time and could fly till I was sick. A few years later he lost his medical...but if you could help him into the plane he could still fly well. Best pilot I ever flew with.

free at last
2nd Aug 2010, 05:03
Why stop at any age!!!! GO AGE "80".

Gulfstreamaviator
2nd Aug 2010, 05:40
Only because IPCO is not ZIMMER.

The frame is only 1g rated.

glf

free at last
2nd Aug 2010, 05:53
Did many 6+G flying in the last 40+plus years. Can you say me too?:ok:

LeadSled
2nd Aug 2010, 06:21
How did we ever manage to survive and develop and progress long enough for Quesada to arbitrarily invent and impose the age 60 limit? How many crashed and burned because there was no age 60 rule? Was it ever necessary or just somebody's power trip?Folks,
The whole story is now quite well known. It was Pete, as the very first FAA Administrator, doing a favour for his old mate, who was President of American Airlines, who had an industrial problem.

When Pete's term was up, he joined the Board if Directors of AA.

There never was any study to justify the "age 60 rule", later adopted by ICAO, and the rest, as "they" say, is history.

Tootle pip!!

PS: The oldest person I know still earing a living flying, as a "check airman" in US terms, will be 86 this year.

stilton
2nd Aug 2010, 08:07
This couldn't possibly be a wind up :ugh:

free at last
2nd Aug 2010, 09:52
Thanks for pointing out the real facts. That's they way it happenend we should all be glad that we are moving forward . :)

obie2
2nd Aug 2010, 10:53
With all due respect Stepwilk...

there's a big difference between writing an article on a computer in the comfort of your living room and being in command of a heavy high speed jet aircraft with 200+bods in the back when you're sitting over the Atlantic ocean at 39,000 ft at night! :confused:

MilPilot
2nd Aug 2010, 11:40
As long as they have an upper age limit for FO's. We don't need simultaneous heart attacks.


Please no upper limit for FO. Then some of us won't make it to Captain :}

KBPsen
2nd Aug 2010, 12:55
Today, in an average industrialized country, men can expect to live until they are 75 and women until they are 80. A hundred years ago those numbers were 50 and 55. Today around 13% of the population does not live beyond 60, a hundred years ago it was 63%.

So in the span of 100 years life expectancy has increased 50% and there is no reason to expect this trend not to continue, perhaps not at the same pace, but with continued improvements in living and working conditions, health care and nutrition people will continue to live longer. But, while people will live longer it does not necessarily follow that people will stay fit and healthy for longer.

Generally as societies get richer, life expectancy goes up while birth rates goes down. This causes a shift in demographics towards an ageing population and eventually a declining population. Keeping the current retirement ages will mean more people will need to be supported and for longer with fewer people to do it.

Raising the retirement age is inevitable

Genghis the Engineer
2nd Aug 2010, 13:38
Around 1950, people entered the workforce at 16-18 and shuffled off this mortal coil typically at around 70.

In 2010, people enter the workforce at 21-24, and shuffle off typically at about 85.

The medical profession has also come along an enormous way in its ability to tell you what's wrong with you (or not).

We all need somehow to have our retirements paid for out of some income, from somewhere.


Any way you look at it, retiring people at 60 or 65 makes absolutely no sense any more. It's an anachronism.

Personally, sat here in my 40s, I don't anticipate retiring this side of 70, but nor do I hope in the 21st century to die this side of 90. So I'll probably still have a longer retirement than my WW2-era grandad did, who retired about 65 and was dead by 70.

That said, make the ambitious co-pilots happy by replacing promotion through seniority by promotion through examined ability, and perhaps everybody gets what they want (or the old chaps will be proved right about the abilities of the young chaps...)

G

Bill Bader
2nd Aug 2010, 13:52
@cirr
your chances of a sudden heart attack or a stroke rise exponentially with agePerhaps your medical source for this fact would be appropriate.
—Please include comparison stats with age 40± smokers who sit for long hours.
—Please give us your best guess as to the meaning of "exponentially".

Just because you have readers seeking to learn from your wisdom. Thanks.

CD
2nd Aug 2010, 14:00
Times certainly have changed... To add to LeadSled's comment, here is the actual US rule change issued December 1, 1959 and effective March 15, 1960:

Civil Air Regulations Amendment 41-29 - Maximum Age Limitations For Pilots (http://ntl1.specialcollection.net/scripts/ws.dll?browse&rn=783")

More recently, here are links to the studies conducted by the FAA Civil Aerospace Medical Institute related to the "Age 60 Rule":

94/20 Age 60 Rule Research, Part I: Bibliographic Database - A (http://www.faa.gov/library/reports/medical/oamtechreports/1990s/media/AM94-20a.pdf)
94/20 Age 60 Rule Research, Part I: Bibliographic Database - B (http://www.faa.gov/library/reports/medical/oamtechreports/1990s/media/AM94-20b.pdf)
94/20 Age 60 Rule Research, Part I: Bibliographic Database - C (http://www.faa.gov/library/reports/medical/oamtechreports/1990s/media/AM94-20c.pdf)
94/21 Age 60 Rule Research, Part II: Airline Pilot Age and Performance A Review of the Scientific Literature (http://www.faa.gov/library/reports/medical/oamtechreports/1990s/media/AM94-21.pdf)
94/22 Age 60 Rule Research, Part III: Consolidated Database Experiments Final Report (http://www.faa.gov/library/reports/medical/oamtechreports/1990s/media/AM94-22.pdf)
94/23 Age 60 Rule Research, Part IV: Experimental Evaluation of Pilot Performance (http://www.faa.gov/library/reports/medical/oamtechreports/1990s/media/AM94-23.pdf)
04/8 Methodological Issues in the Study of Airplane Accident Rates by Pilot Age: Effects of Accident and Pilot Inclusion Criteria and Analytic Strategy (http://www.faa.gov/library/reports/medical/oamtechreports/2000s/media/0408.pdf)

leadingedge12
3rd Aug 2010, 01:50
Following this change the retirement ceremony with the ARFF truck showering the retiree will be replaced by a Hertz escort to the gate :)

Beires
3rd Aug 2010, 08:21
Probably there are some pilots able to fly with 70 or more.

But ask any airline instructor what they think about it...you'll see that they notice a very big breakdown in perfomance when we approach 60 years old. It's life, we get old, our brain and body doesnt give the same feedback it used to give when we were 20 years old. If I at 29 already feel it, I can only imagine at 60.

If the age is going to be 70, I dare the doctors to pass your medicals according to what is in the law. And the check captains to do the same as well. Because unfortunately the respect the old captains get(well desirved in my opinion), makes that doctors and check captains approve them just because they are close to retirenent age, closing the eyes to same medical problems or not so good sim checks.

Lets not get ourselves killed and lets live a good life, with time to enjoy our family or some other things we never had the time to do when we retire.

mary meagher
3rd Aug 2010, 09:00
A few years back, at Wycombe Air Park - not very far from LHR airspace, everything on the aerodrome came to a stop......a strange ghost from the past appeared and flew very very quickly indeed, wheels up, beating up 27 in time honoured fashion! It then climbed to circuit height, performed an impeccable circuit and landing. A deHaviland MKVI Mosquito fighter/bomber, no less, one of the most efficient of all WWII designs, and constructed mainly from plywood in what used to be furniture factories......

It taxied round to the apron, came to a halt, shut down. We were all in awe, waiting for those daring airmen to emerge. A hatch opened forward, a set of steps reached down to the ground......and all these OLD MEN CLIMBED OUT!

Of course, when they first started flying that particular type, they were a bit younger....

Whirlybird
3rd Aug 2010, 09:34
I have a very simple question...

Why do we actually need a mandatory retirement age, in aviation or anything else?

Answers on a postcard please, in words of one syllable, for a still flying/writing/earning 60+ who's quite obviously ga-ga. ;)

poina
3rd Aug 2010, 09:36
Beires, That was a great post! Enjoy retirement and live a little, sadly, what I have observed is there are many pilots are approaching their senior years with no retirement skills.

Gengis,
All well and good to go by ability, but then we have to do the same with the Capt's, they perform to the highest standard or be downgraded. Think that will work?

mrdeux
3rd Aug 2010, 11:00
No problem. Just put them on the bottom of the seniority list so they can see what they've made it like for everyone else.

Hell, I'm only 55, and I'm over it already.

zlin77
3rd Aug 2010, 11:25
In Australia we are able to continue past 65 as someone fought and won an age discrimination case against the old "age 60 rule", as many previous posters have said, some are good at 80 & some are stuffed at 50!! I myself am approaching 62 and so far have no problems medically & operationally. As I am a contract pilot I have to do 2 medicals at home and 2 overseas (JAA), my Australian one involves a stress ECG annually, these results are assessed by The CASA Medical Dept. so there is no way I can fool the system, my overseas medicals are carried out in a major hospital and once again I have no way in modifying any problem areas, my recurrent SIM checks are carried out by a third party operator, a respected British Airline, once again I am assessed impartially......I do take some offence that some posters imply that it is an "old boys club" that lets people like myself continue flying...nuff said!!

Beires
3rd Aug 2010, 11:46
Zlin77: that's your case and that's the way it should be done. And if that's the way it's done for everyone I dont have a problem with a no age limit.

I know some cases that they fool the system....and that's the reason I think it Will be unsafe to abolish the age limit.

But I know and did check rides with perfectly capable 60 year old captains. Where I can see them as a example to follow and try to be alike. But the world is far from perfect......

Beires
3rd Aug 2010, 11:54
Poina: the no retirement skills, I have seen it as well.And it is a very true problem as well.

CargoOne
3rd Aug 2010, 14:26
A reasonable approach would be to set a combined limit, like Capt+FO+airframe together should not be over a 100 years. :}

Huck
4th Aug 2010, 01:11
70?

Just retire already.

Some young guy with kids needs a job.....

411A
4th Aug 2010, 01:37
Some young guy with kids needs a job.....
Maybe those younger guys should have thought about those 'kids' before becoming a pilot...:ugh:

slamer.
4th Aug 2010, 02:10
Ahh yes... I want to fly until 75 so I can spend more quality time with my family and friends.

Taildragger67
4th Aug 2010, 07:29
So is the argument about whether a person of a certain age is fit (on objective criteria) to do a job, or about making way for younger people?

If the first, age is irrelevant (other than perhaps as a statistical yardstick);

if the second, then what other field does a Logan's Run-type cull simply so as to make room for newcomers? Why not just kill everyone on their 45th birthday? That'd solve the health and unfunded-pensions problems in one go. :ok:

obie2
4th Aug 2010, 07:35
So, let's take this nonsense to it's logical conclusion...

a mate of mine is 87, fit, active and plays good golf...

you reckon he should still be able to command a high speed heavy jet a/c if he can still pass a class one medical?

Old Mac
4th Aug 2010, 08:45
Can I take a nap.

Maybe more correctly "You microsleep whilst I megasleep"!

:zzz:

O.M.

obie2
4th Aug 2010, 09:50
So, what if he's 97 suitcase man?

Is that still ok!?

Huck
4th Aug 2010, 11:42
It's the saddest thing to see someone that absolutely loves flying forced to retire because they have reached the age of 65.

No, it's not.

The saddest thing is to see someone who loves the profession leave the profession because they can't support their family on what they make. It is happening right now by the thousands in the states, as we wait out the five-year freeze that Age 65 brought us.

I fly routinely with pilots who could draw well into the six figures in pension money every year. They had structured their finances to retire at sixty, but now are hanging out because "it's the greatest part-time job in the world."

Love of flying? pah. Love of lucre.

Meanwhile the entire food-chain sits beside the trail, waiting to advance, while the top increases their riches - while shortening their lives.

411A promoting abstinence? Should have told me that a few years ago, mate.

protectthehornet
4th Aug 2010, 13:16
Huck

I know what its like to have to give up things you love because you can't make a living at it.

the whole concept would be thrown out if you could develop an absolutely OBJECTIVE test of who does a good job as an airline pilot and who doesn't...with various degrees...throw out the seniority system and only go by who does the best.

and I would sure like to know how someone is getting a six figure retirement after so many legacy carriers had to give up their pension program. Before 911, I was on track to get a 132k pension. now, it will be pennies on the dollar.

Huck
4th Aug 2010, 13:26
and I would sure like to know how someone is getting a six figure retirement

FDX and UPS. That's about it. And I'm sure ours are short-lived.....

Phalconphixer
4th Aug 2010, 14:26
Give me an old wrinkly in the LH seat any day; think Chelsey Sullenberger and this (http://www.nydailynews.com/ny_local/2010/05/04/2010-05-04_capt_sullenberger_may_have_reached_laguardia_but_miracle_ on_the_hudson_still_mir.html) report...
How many young hotshots would have even considered this action...

poina
4th Aug 2010, 15:08
Did you ever consider that this was one time where it was good to have no other options than the river straight ahead? No doubt Sully and the FO did a great job, would not the majority of pilots made the same decision?

How about JAL when they blew all hydraulics, airport or Tokyo Bay? They had a choice.

Then consider Flying Tiger's 747 CFIT in Indonesia, if I remember correctly. Total cockpit age of the 3 was over 180, and they repeatedly ignored GPWS and flew into the ground.

And days ago, A-321 in Islamabad.

So wrinkly can go both ways and does not always mean competence.

BEA 71
5th Aug 2010, 16:49
Love of lucre, I like that, Huck. Does not only apply to pilots.

sky jet
5th Aug 2010, 18:15
I've made this point before, but I guess it has to be stated again. I watched these same people advocating a older retirement age gleefully check seniority list to see who retired or died to see how they had moved up every six months for years. They were also able to reasonably calculate the year in which they would upgrade with "zero growth" at their airline. If we are going to "right the wrong" it should be done in 15-20 years to take most actve pilots out of the equation. If those flying now want to stay they should be allowed to if they want to go to the bottom of the list. I am guessing that their "love of flying" would rapidly disappear if that were the case. What this really boils down to is " I GOT MINE, AND NOW I WANT YOURS".

Jet

411A
5th Aug 2010, 18:47
I GOT MINE, AND NOW I WANT YOURS".


Or, stated another way...'I have mine and you can wait your turn.'
In a rapidly growing airline (EK, excepted, unfortunately for the younger guys) this is normally not a problem.
The younger ones are promoted, with reasonable standards met.

Small air carriers such as ours, flying an older airplane...we train as rapidly as possible, all things considered.

Or, want a rapid Command?
Join a smaller carrier where your past accomplishments and experience are appreciated.
I did...a long time ago.
Grass is greener...etc.:}
IE: vote with your feet.
No, not your cup of tea?
Wait your turn.:ok:

NB.
I personally know one Captain who, being laid off as a First Officer with a very large major US airline, joined a small (but consistantly profitable) charter airline, where he was very rapidly promoted to Command.
Why?
He had the forethought to put his career in perspective, and did what he had to do...instead of crying here on PPRuNe.:ugh:

One Outsider
5th Aug 2010, 18:53
That horn of yours must be pretty worn by now with all that tootin'.

md80fanatic
5th Aug 2010, 19:03
Is this the disease of the day? To demand a fast track to everything, without putting forth even 20% of the time and effort that the previous generation had to struggle through, whilst simultaneously demanding the same pay + adjustments?

I wonder if this sense of entitlement and gross disrespect for knowledgeable elders extends into the cockpit? Those who complain should wait their turn and be thankful that they have a flying job at all in this economy.

411A
5th Aug 2010, 19:32
I wonder if this sense of entitlement and gross disrespect for knowledgeable elders extends into the cockpit? Those who complain should wait their turn and be thankful that they have a flying job at all in this economy.

So very true.:hmm:

parabellum
5th Aug 2010, 21:34
Is this the disease of the day? To demand a fast track to everything, without putting forth even 20% of the time and effort that the previous generation had to struggle through, whilst simultaneously demanding the same pay + adjustments?

md80fanatic - Afraid so, we have it here in the housing market, of all places. Young recently married couples constantly complain that housing is becoming unfordable etc. Truth is they want now what their parents now have, after a lifetimes work. No question of cutting their cloth according to their means and as for waiting to have children, forget it, often they have a couple of those before they even consider marriage and buying their first house!

MTOW
6th Aug 2010, 01:10
Have to agree with parabellum re the Australian Gen 'X' and 'Y' and housing. Start out with a three bedroom, one bathroom box in not the best suburb like the Boomers did? No way - it has to be the McMansion with home theatre and everything that opens and shuts - now - and a mortgage they'll never be able to repay.

Not sure what that has to do with the topic of this thread, but I for one wouldn't want to still be flying back of the clock long haul at age 70. I wouldn't want to be doing it at 65! However, I know there are quite a few out there who can expect to live quite a few more years who, thanks at least in part to the craziness that we have seen overtake our (once) profession with the introduction of deregulation, don't have the wherewithal to retire at 65.

If some studies I've seen are to be believed, the older you wait to retire, the shorter you'll survive in retirement, so there's a real conundrum facing us there, isn't there? Retire early and you won't have enough money to live on. Extend your working years and your money will last - if only because you'll die earlier. Screwed whichever way you go - which is a situation most airline pilots would be very familiar with!

Huck
6th Aug 2010, 01:24
Is this the disease of the day? To demand a fast track to everything, without putting forth even 20% of the time and effort that the previous generation had to struggle through, whilst simultaneously demanding the same pay + adjustments?


Do tell!

So how old were you when you made left seat, then? I'll be fifty....

protectthehornet
6th Aug 2010, 01:49
huck

when I hired on with one of the best airlines in the country (balance sheet wise), I was told on numerous occasions that I would upgrade to captain in about five years.

this was in 88.

well, we saw 9 passengers on our planes during the first gulf war and huge cutbacks...even paying off boeing to get out of a contract for planes and it took me 11 years to upgrade...oh and after 911 more furloughs and cutbacks so after 22 years I would be a junior copilot.

and I'm told my career expectations were terrible.

but my career expectations upon hiring were better than any other airline in the country.

blame me for wars, terrorists...sure, why not?

LabDad
6th Aug 2010, 01:55
Quote:
Is this the disease of the day? To demand a fast track to everything, without putting forth even 20% of the time and effort that the previous generation had to struggle through, whilst simultaneously demanding the same pay + adjustments?
Is this the disease of the day? To demand a fast track to everything, without putting forth even 20% of the time and effort that the previous generation had to struggle through, whilst simultaneously demanding the same pay + adjustments?
A question then.
What age were the captains who retired in order to make way for the hiring and upgrade of the "previous generation" who feel so entitled to 5 years of this generations advancement and employment opportunity? :rolleyes:

parabellum
6th Aug 2010, 11:22
The original retirement age for airline pilots in both the USA and the UK was 65 until sometime in the late seventies or early eighties when it was arbitrarily changed to 60 without any consultation with the workforce. In the USA it was said that the then CEO of AA wanted rid of the older guys on high salary and pensions etc. and a friend in the FAA obliged, don't know how true that is.

In the UK it was just a statement issued overnight, done deal. I was obliged to retire from a very good airline job at the age of 60 and I resent it very much. Probably wouldn't have gone to sixty five but a couple or three more years would have been good. I think 70 is pushing it a bit too far, but 65 is just getting back to the original 'normal' retiring age.

mary meagher
6th Aug 2010, 11:37
How good are the quacks after all at finding the hidden weakness that is ready to incapacitate without warning? Seems to me that if you survive past 60 you probably have been taking good care of yourself, diet, exercise, no beer belly, etc etc.

Anyway, my AME agrees that women last longer than men by aprox 10 years, so women should be allowed 10 extra years on the flight deck........

Huck
6th Aug 2010, 12:01
sometime in the late seventies or early eighties

March 15, 1960.

But all the major airlines already had company-imposed age limits of 60. The FAA just codified them into regulation.

I certainly understand your resentment. But understand that EVERY step in your career - the day you were hired, the day you upgraded, the day you went to the widebodies - happened five years earlier for you because of the old law.

Would you honestly choose to have your entire career timeline slid five years to the right?

Spooky 2
6th Aug 2010, 13:31
I believe that with al ittle research you will find that the Age 60 rule imposed by the FAA took hold in 1960.

gcap
6th Aug 2010, 16:15
Huck said

Do tell!

So how old were you when you made left seat, then? I'll be fifty....

I was fifty before I got the left seat in a major.
I was 27 when I got the call From American.
The interview was canceled due to the Oil Embargo.
I was assured that I would be called when the hiring started again.
I wasn't. Did you know that the majors wouldn't hire anyone over 31?
It was a very long time to the DL left seat, and I got there purely due
to luck. Right place-right time.
In 1977 I was too old to get hired.
In 2006 I was too old to fly.
Just think Huck; if it goes to age 70, you have 20 years in the left seat.

Huck
6th Aug 2010, 20:47
That's not accurate.

If it goes to 70, I'll have to wait to 55 then.

The group that is PIC now is the exceptionally lucky group that will get 5 more years of PIC time. No one got it before them, no one (including me) will get it after them.

FoxHunter
6th Aug 2010, 20:55
Huck
March 15, 1960.

But all the major airlines already had company-imposed age limits of 60. The FAA just codified them into regulation.

I certainly understand your resentment. But understand that EVERY step in your career - the day you were hired, the day you upgraded, the day you went to the widebodies - happened five years earlier for you because of the old law.



Three ALPA represented airlines imposed the age 60 retirement. Prior to that there was no retirement age mandated. ALPA took the issue to arbitration, and Won! C.R. Smith, CEO of American took his problem to Gen. Pete Quesada ret., the first Administator to the new FAA. General Quesada fixed his problem. Gen. Quesada was rewarded with a position of the Board of American after he left the FAA.

parabellum
6th Aug 2010, 21:17
March 15, 1960.

In the USA then, but not the UK, when I got my licence the retirement age was 65.

Lost in Saigon
6th Aug 2010, 21:50
Don't forget, in the U.S. it really wasn't an age 60 retirement age. It was an age 60 LICENSING age.

EDIT: You could not fly certain types of aircraft in certain operations after age 60. (basically International Airline Operations)

Spooky 2
6th Aug 2010, 22:48
Where did you come up with that rubbish. I was and still have an ATP and I'm north of of age 60. I have also added two type ratings in the last three years.

Lost in Saigon
6th Aug 2010, 23:17
Sorry, I live in Canada, and I just assumed it was licensing. Can you please explain why the FAA won't allow anyone over 65 (was 60) to fly large airliners.

CD
6th Aug 2010, 23:28
Here is the present FAA limitation from 14 CFR 61.3(j):
(j) Age limitation for certain operations

(1) Age limitation. No person who holds a pilot certificate issued under this part may serve as a pilot on a civil airplane of U.S. registry in the following operations if the person has reached his or her 65th birthday:

(i) Scheduled international air services carrying passengers in turbojet-powered airplanes;

(ii) Scheduled international air services carrying passengers in airplanes having a passenger-seat configuration of more than nine passenger seats, excluding each crewmember seat;

(iii) Nonscheduled international air transportation for compensation or hire in airplanes having a passenger-seat configuration of more than 30 passenger seats, excluding each crewmember seat; or

(iv) Scheduled international air services, or nonscheduled international air transportation for compensation or hire, in airplanes having a payload capacity of more than 7,500 pounds.

Requirement for certificates, ratings, and authorizations (http://www.airweb.faa.gov/Regulatory_and_Guidance_Library/rgFAR.nsf/0/4918FD0A30096B078625768D00562C92?OpenDocument)

Lost in Saigon
6th Aug 2010, 23:37
Here is the present FAA limitation from 14 CFR 61.3(j):

Does that mean that Domestic Airline pilots can fly past age 65? What age do Southwest Airlines pilots retire at?


Theoretically, could a pilot for an international airline continue to fly if he was restricted to Domestic flights only?

Spooky 2
7th Aug 2010, 02:12
This is a specific Part 121 / 135 rule. There is nothing to keep you from flying a B747 at age 65+ if you are a Part 91 or Part 125 operator. The French might give you some grief on the 125, but the fact is you can continue flying until your 100+ if your not doing it under 121/135 Ops.

obie2
7th Aug 2010, 07:19
Well, if that's true Spooky, and I don't doubt what you say, not knowing the Reg's as well as you do...

Isn't that just plain stupid?

100+ and still flying on domestic RPT services!

Gimme a break!

Spooky 2
7th Aug 2010, 12:20
Obie, it was just an example. Get over it....please.:}

asia757
7th Aug 2010, 13:46
I for one would love to continue to fly until I am unable to do so. If you are in a situation where you need a Captain to retire to see an upgrade then I would suggest looking for another career.

I spent years as an FO and never compalined about the crappy pay. I went and got another job and ran that small business to support my family and to continued to fly until I was able to hold a leftseat.

I bet you whiny one's are a real pleasure to fly with....and hope I never need to do so!

On a side note: If the old fart does die...you strap him in and continue to fly single pilot.....but maybe that is the real fear! Not having the experience to do it on your own in the right seat. Trust me, what I see from the leftseat, I understand why the passengers might not agree to be left alone with today's average first officer.

Cheers:bored:

411A
7th Aug 2010, 14:50
Trust me, what I see from the leftseat, I understand why the passengers might not agree to be left alone with today's average first officer.


Hmmm, a bit harsh perhaps...however, more that likely the norm, today in our brave new P2F world.:}

AnthonyGA
7th Aug 2010, 15:34
70, are you guys kidding? Who would ride in a plane flown geriatrics? I would. If he meets all the other requirements to keep his license, including the draconian first-class medical (which is already excessively stringent), I have no problem at all with him flying at age 70 (or even 80). Age isn't important. Health, experience, and attitude (not necessarily in that order) are all very important.

It saddens me that there are pilots so unhappy with their jobs that they cannot wait to retire. And it saddens me even more to think that arbitrary age limits destroy the careers of pilots who happen to love flying. Age is not a barrier to being a competent pilot, so why should someone who lives to fly be forced to abandon it all and sit watching television for the rest of his life just because he's past a certain age?

Pugilistic Animus
7th Aug 2010, 16:55
YouTube - &#x202a;Aerial Pilot 73 year old Female Pilot over Great Lakes&#x202c;&lrm; (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6Kz1jKAG8MM)
YouTube - &#x202a;Piper Cub Stunt Pilot - Charlie Kulp&#x202c;&lrm; (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A2BPcurREpo)


Just saying:)

beamender99
7th Aug 2010, 19:15
Flying Circus Aerodrome - Charlie Kulp (http://www.flyingcircusairshow.com/stars/Charlie_Kulp.html)

Still flying approaching 85
A recent report
Charlie Kulp to Fly Again July 18, 2010

Charlie Kulp is known throughout the airshow community as "The Flying Farmer". Until his retirement in 2007, he had been thrilling crowds as Silas Hicks, a country farmer who recklessly takes to the skies in a Piper J-3 Cub. Charlie puts his J-3 through maneuvers he's been quoted as saying the airplane "won't do". It's a family-friendly performance sure to impress anyone who sees it.

Charlie has announced that he will be coming out of retirement to make a special performance in honor of the Flying Circus Airshow's 40th anniversary, and also to help raise funds for the development of a new museum showcasing the history and collections of the Flying Circus.

Phantom Driver
7th Aug 2010, 20:21
We pray for him!!

Pugilistic Animus
7th Aug 2010, 21:41
'Cuz he knows that speed breaks airplanes:D:D:D

777fly
7th Aug 2010, 23:08
AnthonyGA
Your post sums up this argument perfectly.

ADFS
8th Aug 2010, 13:56
I´d love to fly on until 70.
But nobody will hire me after many years and hours.
Too old at 54 ?

kwateow
8th Aug 2010, 19:42
You've got two choices mate: die doing the job or retire before and find a new life.

I retired at 61 and can assure you it's easier to find a new life at 61 than at 71.

But everyone to his own.....

oldflybooi
8th Aug 2010, 19:58
Retired at 60, as I had seen enough, and had a good time while doing it. Now enjoying doing what I like to do, and help the young 'uns learning how to fly an aeroplane responsibly. At my own time and leisure. Yip, life is good! :D

skol
8th Aug 2010, 20:27
I've flown with 70 year old F/O's longhaul.
Got their medicals OK but unfortunately there's no means of checking their brains for ability to stay awake and mental confusion from time-to-time.

suninmyeyes
8th Aug 2010, 20:37
If the regulators think we are good to fly until 70 will someone please tell that to my Loss Of Licence insurance company who presently think that hitting 53 is a good time to double the premium.

Pugilistic Animus
8th Aug 2010, 21:26
I've flown with 70 year old F/O's longhaul.
Got their medicals OK but unfortunately there's no means of checking their brains for ability to stay awake and mental confusion from time-to-time.

I only can suppose that one must follow the Old Smokey Rule regarding your worry
"Trust nothing; Trust No One"


:)

skol
8th Aug 2010, 22:06
Pugilist,
Fair comment, but these guys were showing some very demonstrable signs of mental deterioration, and falling asleep, sometimes constantly.
On one occasion I chose to go sick rather than turn up for work, I find that my own rest is disrupted because I don't trust the guy up front.
Routine tasks are performed fairly well by 70 year olds but anything out of the ordinary and the response is sometimes a blank look, or inability to carry out a task that entails memory or is mentally taxing

Vic777
8th Aug 2010, 22:07
What this really means is Congress is going to steal our pension plans since we won't ever need them, since by the time we get to 70, they'll raise it to 80, 90...Obama's hyper-inflation will make all pensions worthless ...

protectthehornet
8th Aug 2010, 22:24
older guys falling asleep.

its funny, I had a 28 year old copilot about 9 years ago...he fell asleep on my leg (an offense that will get you fired at my line).

the new breed of pilots is more interested in the lifestyle of a pilot (travel, women, scuba diving, hobbies etc) than being a good pilot.
A good pilot will make sure he is alert from start to finish of his duty day...and his off duty time is spent making sure that he can be alert on his next duty day.

poina
8th Aug 2010, 22:50
Apparently you haven't flown too many north atlantic's with a 24 hour layover. Or 5 nights in a row night freight runs. Or better yet, 3 man crew, 12 hour block with short rest.

protectthehornet
9th Aug 2010, 00:25
no poina, Ihaven't flown the atlantic

and I chose a domestic line because I would rather overnight in chicago, or boston, or washington than in another country (though I had some very nice over nights in Canada at Ottawa, Montreal, and Toronto".)

I'd rather fly an hour and land than fly 12 hours and land...I prefer landings to cruising.

poina
9th Aug 2010, 09:33
As would I. But the point is, some don't have the choice. With fatigue, you can't just tough it. You also can't force yourself to sleep, no matter how good a trooper you were on the layover. Timezones take a toll and are a contributing factor in accident/incidence.

PanPanYourself
9th Aug 2010, 11:10
md80fanatic - Afraid so, we have it here in the housing market, of all places. Young recently married couples constantly complain that housing is becoming unfordable etc. Truth is they want now what their parents now have, after a lifetimes work. No question of cutting their cloth according to their means and as for waiting to have children, forget it, often they have a couple of those before they even consider marriage and buying their first house!
Sorry to jump in on your off-topic discussion, but I couldn't just let you elderly gentlemen get away with disparaging my generation.

I don't know how it is where you are, but in Belgium house prices have tripled since my parents bought their home 20 years ago. Salaries have certainly not tripled in the same time frame, so it is, by all accounts, much more difficult for a honest hard working college grad to buy a home today than it was when you were younger. Supply and demand gentlemen, my generation is competing against many more (better educated) people, for increasingly scarce resources. We face challenges in the modern world that you couldn't even imagine in your wildest dreams when you were younger. So give us a break.

In the U.S. I should add that my generation has much more cause to be upset with the elderly, just look at the massive public debt due in large part to social security entitlements, and wars started by your generation.

How disrespectful of me to question my elders, I'll stop now.

poina
9th Aug 2010, 12:29
To go a little further than that. I knew many ex Eastern pilots who were hired with Comm/IR, minimum time and then were happy to vote for higher time and Univ. degrees when same rules did not apply to them. This would have been in late 60's as they had 10 years on me. Makes me wonder how many "old school" posters who also slipped thru the cracks.
And you are right about the baby boomers (of which I am one), no generation has asked for more.

protectthehornet
9th Aug 2010, 13:45
panpanyourself

yes, things have gotten more expensive all over. when I soloed, in a pa 28-140 in 1975, it rented, wet, for $12US. yes, tweleve dollars. that was about 8 hours work at minimum wage.

and just a 3 years before that, the cost was much less as we hadn't faced our first oil embargo.

things do change and we have to adapt.

and just think, you will never have to fly an NDB approach. you will have excellent navigation devices that take your brain out of situational awareness.

and yes, I've seen things go up in price just as you have and my salary has not kept up with cost of housing.

but, fly safe and keep trying.

p51guy
9th Aug 2010, 23:29
PTH, I paid 3.50 plus 5.00 for instructor in 63. I soloed in 5 hrs and my total cost for student license and medical was 50.00. The hrs were on the tach so were less than real hours. I was soloing with 50.00 total expenditure. Try doing that today. The cool part was Art Scholl was our head of the aviation department so got to fly with him.

protectthehornet
10th Aug 2010, 00:32
p51 guy

way cool!

ExSp33db1rd
10th Aug 2010, 01:27
Only just come in on this, sorry if I repeat the obvious.

In 1958 ( age 23 ) my ExSp33db1rd contract stipulated retirement at 55 ( tho' the UK age was 60, I think ), I considered some of the Ex WW II pilots I flew with extremely old men, tho' I guess they were only late 40's - it's all relative.

I changed airline and flew to a compulsory 60, and still considered myself a young man, and was disappointed that a proposed extension to 65 hadn't taken place at that time, I didn't miss the long nights and hotel hassles but I did miss the flying.

I was often asked why I was still flying at my age, " because I'm still trying to get it right " I always replied, and on my very last 747 landing I KNOW I could have handled the cross-wind better. Now I'll never get the chance to prove it !

New Zealand has no age limit, and I think that had I already been licenced and employed there I could possibly have continued, but there was no way that a 60 yr. old Foreign Alien was going to be started, so I eventually turned to the recreational world, and I've only now had a temporary ( I hope ! ) restriction - to fly with a qualified pilot - put upon my licence.

As a Microlight (LSA) instructor one of my first 'students' was a 78 yr. old who admitted to having had a bit of previous flying experience. After 2 circuits I got out. I learned later that he had learnt to fly at age 10 ( I understand that not long after that some creative 'editing' of a Birth Cert. had occurred, but my lips are sealed ) - and never stopped until his G.A. medical started giving him issues that are not an issue for the Microlight certificate. A few years later, then over 80, he flew his bride of 60 years over their village at the precise minute, hour, and day of their Golden Wedding Anniversary, and he recently appeared in the local Press as N.Z.'s oldest pilot flying solo, as he " saluted " the commemoration of a re-sited War Memorial with a fly-past in his home town. Brings tears to the eyes, I would be satisfied to achieve even half of that.

I know the subject is commercial flying, but if one is capable, both professionally and medically, who has the right to stop us - other than the bureaucrats and doomsayers ?

protectthehornet
10th Aug 2010, 01:32
if it were truly a safety issue, I could believe in earlier retirement...but its not...its money...money...money.

and'that's the name of that tune

so, fly till you can't fly anymore...and I like exspeedbird's view...still trying to get it right.

in 35 years, I came close once...still can think of the virtually perfect flight. (maybe my standards are higher than yours...you naysayers)

shittykitty
10th Aug 2010, 12:38
you got it right its all about money, some have planned right and can retire enjoying ther golden years with family and friend. and the rest stay out with us and either annoy us or entertain us. i dont mean entertain in a bad way some of the old timers i truly love flying with. some where just always prick young or old

lambourne
11th Aug 2010, 17:30
If ALPA backs this change in the states you will see ALPA out of business quickly. The majority of pilots have been hammered by ALPA's shift to endorse Age 65. Raise it to 70 and the number of former ALPA carriers will be large. Would be interesting to see the Mustache Mafia from ALPA flying the line. Perhaps making their lives miserable would be my new pastime?

Age 65 was a land grab. Raise it to 70 and the gummers would never find their gate. Just listening to the old gompers in Europe on the radio is painful. They miss every handoff, misread every frequency and do various acts of embarrassment outside the cockpit.

Stop this lunacy. Age does matter when flying. These clowns are not getting better with age.

ExSp33db1rd
11th Aug 2010, 19:34
Stop this lunacy. Age does matter when flying. These clowns are not getting better with age


Note -I said medically and ' professionally ' , I agree that if they don't shape up, then they should be shipped out, but to tar everyone with the same " age " brush is " Age Discrimination " !! Illegal in many jurisdictions.

I agree I have a prejudice - many will say that I am " old " !! Tough, live with it.

( Later - took me 3 attempts to get the above to " send " - if it now appears 3 times I apologise - must be getting old !! )

411A
11th Aug 2010, 20:42
These clowns are not getting better with age.
Back in your cage, buster.
You (maybe) will get to advance when I say so....as senior Captains control the advancement portfolio now, make no mistake.:E
Like it, or not.
And..I could care less.:ok:

goldfish85
11th Aug 2010, 21:11
Honestly, even if you are still fit to fly at 70 - your chances of a sudden heart attack or a stroke rise exponentially with age, and I don't think we should accept the higher risk caused by that

Except that the number one cause of air carrier incapacitations is . . . . . .food poisoning and similar digestive problems. Doesn't seem to be age-related.


Goldfish

parabellum
11th Aug 2010, 21:13
Age 65 was a land grab.


No it wasn't, it was giving us back what had previously and arbitrarily been taken away. I am still 'owed' five more years flying , if I wanted it, I resent being denied the opportunity very strongly.

ManaAdaSystem
12th Aug 2010, 02:59
In my current airline we have had 2 serious incidents involving over 60 captains. We only have a few over 60 captains.
Airblue in Islamabad had an over 60 captain who ended his career (and some 150 lives) by flying into a mountain.
There is now a trend where pilots retire from their legacy carriers at 60, then continue flying in other areas/for other carriers. I expect to see more statistics from this rather small group of pilots.
Hopefully not as bad as the Airblue accident.

ExSp33db1rd
12th Aug 2010, 03:30
I'd rather fly with an old, experienced, Captain, than the young whizz kid computer ace who tried to turn me on to a 310 hdg. when leaving Singapore for Australia - get your Atlas out.

He'd mis-programmed the 'computer', can happen to anyone, but don't easily blame it all on age, young or old

Is flying into a mountain a function of age ?

Statistics pls.

ManaAdaSystem
12th Aug 2010, 03:51
And I would rather fly with an experienced, young captain, than the old, experienced one who, after take off forgot to engage the auto pilot, and was utterly confused as to why the aircraft was not following the heading bug.

Flying into a mountain is not necessarily a function of age, but that was what he did. Statistics will take some time to collect, as the number of over 60 airline pilots out there are much less than the rest. 5-10 years, if someone can be bothered to collect it.

I my small outfit, the experience with over 60 as of now, is not very good.

BTW, who did not cross check the FMC route on your ex SIN flight?

protectthehornet
12th Aug 2010, 04:30
maybe we should just get rid of all bad pilots, leaving only good pilots...in good health

and maybe a 24 hour rule should be used to stop alcohol use.

hmmm...maybe alcohol use finally breaks down the brains of over 60 year old pilots?

MidgetBoy
12th Aug 2010, 04:41
Wheelchair accessible cockpits with rudder controls on the control column?

free at last
12th Aug 2010, 05:15
Great Idea!!! I just can't remember the rest! I just love being over 29.:)

lambourne
12th Aug 2010, 15:33
I have almost 3 years of giving the over 60 pilots grief. Never ever ask them if they want ANYTHING: water, food,newspaper, etc. When they approach in ops stop any conversation. Wait til they shuffle onward and continue the previous pleasantries with other crew. Nothing says I have to be friends with these guys. The minimum is what they get from me and most of the other guys I work with.

Whenever, they make any type of complaint, it is my duty to remind them they should be in a retirement home instead of an airplane. If they don't like it here they should quit. Too hot on the crew bus: quit, too noisy in hotel:quit, too long of a trip: quit, too hard of a commute: quit.

These guys should thank their lucky stars they were able to jab the entire industry with their deeds. The sooner they are gone the better. In the meantime, "can I NOT get you anything?

Fangio
12th Aug 2010, 16:40
It would appear that you have not taken your medication today lambourne.
or alternatively, I feel that you should pay a visit to your nearest psychiatrist,
you certainly need help

md80fanatic
12th Aug 2010, 16:41
If you spent the same amount of time getting your necessary hours as you spend being highly disrespectful of your pilot elders, you'd be far happier with a more developed skill set than you have now.

Don't want to work hard enough to be a well rounded and safe pilot, quit. :rolleyes:

Spooky 2
12th Aug 2010, 16:48
I don't have a dog in this fight but lamborne...that is rather pitiful. :}

lambourne
12th Aug 2010, 17:05
These guys have caused great harm to many. Respect is earned, not a right of passage. These over 60 pilots have in no way earned respect. For the most part they like to think they are experts on everything from flying to painting a fence (even if they have never held a paintbrush). Longevity does not make you any more brilliant. Your ability to continue learning and staying abreast of the industry improves your knowledge. Not sitting in the left seat and taking the middle break.

Recently we were told to follow a certain species of Airbus. There were several varieties and the gummer in the left seat hadn't a clue which was which, even though they were all different. Of course on the crew bus ride to the airport he spoke as an expert on all things with wings, wheels, spinners, mast and powered or not. Yet, when his superior knowledge was needed he drew a blank stare. Followed by the "well they all look the same, how am I to know!". Nice job skipper. You really EARNED that extra 5 years !

These pilots have set an example of selfishness and everyman for themselves. By not offering to enjoin them in any niceities I am just living by the example they set.

If someone comes into your home and robs your family do you help them carry the loot to the getaway car? Hardly, that is the reason I dont support the thieves of age 65.

If you are still flying past 60, you are not liked by your co-workers. You are tolerated at best. These are the cold hard facts. If you don't want to accept such, then it is your prerogative, reality is elusive to the over 60 pilots. Just don't be surprised when no one signs your retirement photo in operations. There will be no "good luck" and " we will miss you". More of a "finally!" than anything else.

Fangio
12th Aug 2010, 17:49
Old pilots are still subjected to regular 'comp' checks and strict bi-annual medical checks. No other profession puts its skills up for scrutiny the same as pilots, this should be the criteria, and not the rantings of disgruntled young pilots. A relaxed cockpit is a safe cockpit. I would have hated to fly with you with such chip on your shoulder. Having said that, I do not agree with the proposal to extend the licence to 70.

JW411
12th Aug 2010, 17:59
This is a very interesting discussion. I am not quite 70 but I have just recently been made two offers to come out of retirement should the rules be changed.

What are the youngsters doing wrong I wonder?

lambourne
12th Aug 2010, 19:10
The line check is a laugh. They have over 60 pilots checking over 60 pilots. I've seen a few of these first hand. The over 60 check airman adamantly swearing we should be flying variable cost index Mach in MNPS airspace, where a Mach number was assigned. Pointed out the "mach number technique" from our manual. He said the book was wrong. That resulted in specific verbiage being added to the manual to state what myself and the other FO were telling him. This interpretation of his was his only, but he was over 60 and stopped learning and started creating SOP. This line check included several gross SOP errors by the gummer getting the check ride. Yet, he was given a pass.

The FAA medical is hardly a thorough evaluation. There are numerous, "cough, you pass" doctors collecting $100 bucks a pop. What is the reason to down someone? These docs want the income. We have pilots so fat they can hardly walk to the gate without breaking out in a full workout sweat. Most just keel over and the case of the CAL pilot recently some do it while at the controls.

In a bit of irony, atop this page for me was an advertisement for "senior housing". Must be targeted advertising!

lambourne
12th Aug 2010, 19:13
I would have hated to fly with you with such chip on your shoulder.

Had we flown together and you were over 60 I can gaurantee you wouldn't have liked it. Not my job to be your social companion.

lambourne
12th Aug 2010, 19:21
If you spent the same amount of time getting your necessary hours as you spend being highly disrespectful of your pilot elders, you'd be far happier with a more developed skill set than you have now.


I have plenty of hours, but thanks for taking the easy path of insult. Typed in Boeing and Airbus. Command time on both narrow and widebody. The greed of the over 60 pilots led to down bids at my carrier. Had the choice of narrow body Capt or wide body FO. Since the pay difference is a wash, seemed the best way to be a thorn in the sides of the gummers was to sit next to them. It is entertainment, much like cow tipping but without ruining your shoe shine.

ManaAdaSystem
12th Aug 2010, 19:31
I'm with lambourne.

PPRUNE is now getting dominated by retired pilots who can't let go, and hoping to get a leg back in.

This new (?) breed of pilots are pocketing a nice pension from their previous airlines, and at the same time driving down T&C's at their new outfits.
Double pay and straight into the mountain we go!

Sorry guys, it's time to say hello to your wife again. We don't want you. We don't need you. We don't like you. You are the oldest f@rt in the outfit, and you stink! To the rest of us!

:)

Artie Fufkin
12th Aug 2010, 19:55
In a perfect world,where everyone was treated fairly, the sun shone everyday and we acheived World Peace, then ability to fly would be based purely on a sound medical and last check ride, not on age.

However...

Surely the whole point of a fixed retirement age is to retire pilots whist they are still fit and competant so as to avoid pilots flying whilst unfit and incompetant until they finally failed medicals / check rides. One-size-fits-all isn't perfect but is the best compromise out there.

You've earned your retirement, enjoy it and hand over control to the next generation.:ok:

protectthehornet
12th Aug 2010, 20:02
wow. forget about age as a determining factor for flight...

time to use other tools...

Artie Fufkin
12th Aug 2010, 20:29
Take a 90 year old (retired!) Spitfire pilot and member of The Few.

I have huge respect for him, but would I want him flying my family down to Spain? At what point does he change from Moustachioed Ace to Retired Hero? Would the authorities be able to determine the exact moment of when he had seen better days? Would it be fair on all other members of the profession for him to continue rather than freeing up the bottom rung of the ladder? Would he have been able to become the experienced pilot that he was if someone up the ladder had obstinately refused to make way?

a330pilotcanada
12th Aug 2010, 20:49
Just to let you know I am retired and actually the only complaint I have is there is not enough hours in the day to do what I have always wanted to do.

If you want to look at a train wreck in the making drop down to Canada and take a look at the fly past 60 thread.

Only one suggestion bring kevlar and your "blue helmet with the U.N. stenciled on it's side...... "

parabellum
12th Aug 2010, 21:09
If you are still flying past 60, you are not liked by your co-workers. You are tolerated at best. These are the cold hard facts.


Facts are not your strong point are they lambourne? I've told you already, we are the ones who were robbed, not you young bucks, we had five years ripped away overnight, we now have been given back what is rightfully ours, not yours.

If you behaved to me the way you say you behave to over sixties I would off load you as a flight risk - go cry to your union rep, he's the only one who will listen. You are deliberately turning a two crew operation into a one man band and then sitting back and criticising, not very adult or safe and certainly not professional, you should feel ashamed of yourself.

ManaAdaSystem Your post is both rude and immature.

Fangio
12th Aug 2010, 21:21
I must agree with your comments. Putting my hand on heart,if I was in my late sixties, would I really still want to be up all night, trying to sleep during the day, with minimum rest, running the airport security gauntlet, a/c tech problems, ATC delays, weather diversions etc.,I think not. Let the young pilots (modern systems operators) progress through the seniority list more quickly.

Taking the stance of lambourne achieves nothing, and can generate an unsafe flightdeck. Lets hope that he is never faced with a major emergency situation and the captain is over sixty.

Fangio

lambourne
13th Aug 2010, 00:14
we had five years ripped away overnight

Ripped away? That is absolutely absurd. You were hired on with a retirement date at age 60. The rules were changed to give you a land grab, period. To show the honor among thieves, not one of the gummers I fly with give a rip about the guys that retired and were still under 65. You guys were not ringing the bell to get your fellow gummers back on the property. Nope you realized it would impact YOUR lifestyle if they came back. You guys were not willing to accept a 5 year career timeout like the rest of us. Nope, you all wanted it ALL.

How does me not engaging the Captain in small talk and offering him a cup of tea make me unsafe? I am offer these things to my friends. When my FOM spells out my requirement to cater to the needs of the elderly I will do it as required. In the meantime I think the flights I am on are probably safer than others. There are no distractions since I have nothing to discuss with the nursing home crowd. No chance of us being engaged in a conversation and being distracted....

We are down to about 2 years left. I am not convinced that they won't raise the age to 70. Perhaps they will move the over 65 guys back to the right seat but that is probably too much to ask for. The failure of ALPA to represent the interest of the majority on this issue has left a serious black eye for the associtaion. The rest of the pilots will not sit quietly as this one gets rammed down our throats.

I would certainly hope you threw me off the trip Cappy. With my company's policy I would get paid to stay home while you drag your carcass across 13 time zones. You get to do the dance on the carpet because the FO wouldn't bring you a coffee or newspaper. Please show us in the FOM what page that is on Captain....Now who looks like the child? I comply with the requirements set forth in my policy manual and flight handbook. You would sound even more like a delusional old man that demands respect. Something that he doesn't know how to earn.

Your move.......

protectthehornet
13th Aug 2010, 01:22
You mention offering tea and conversation to your elders...and a whole bunch about ...when the FOM requires me to talk to the elderly et. al.

I will bet that your FOM mentions CRM, or whatever your airline calls it. having taught CRM, there is a concept of crew building, of establishing a raport in which all crew members can speak up on safety.

by your own statements, not even offering the tiniest of pleaseantries, You are a hazard in the cockpit.

There are two ways to operate a cockpit. The old way and the newer ''crm'' way.
So, sit down, shut up and don't touch anything

or

It is nice to be flying with you. I've been on the plane about two years, how about you?
WEll, let's help each other be safe...speak up if you are uncomfortable or see something that isn't SOP. Always call traffic to me and don't report it to ATC until we both agree. Same with calling the airport.

Do you have anything to add?

ExSp33db1rd
13th Aug 2010, 01:26
ManaAdaSystem

BTW, who did not cross check the FMC route on your ex SIN flight?

FMC ? wot's that ? We didn't have such a gadget, just basic INS linked to PMS ( old hat now so don't bother to trouble yourself on Google) waypoints all loaded manually, SID cancelled "go direct to " they said as we lifted off - not an expected waypoint, so told trainee F/O to re-programme and insert, this he did ( incorrectly ) then screwed the heading bug to 310, night, black, me in a left turn, flight director commanding a right turn, so I ignored him, disconnected everything and used COMMON SENSE and EXPERIENCE ( sorry if that offends you ) and turned towards Jakarta, which, surprisingly, I remembered was on the way to Australia whereas a heading taking me towards Madras ( or whatever it's called now ) definitely wasn't.

When we reached top of climb, and had a coffee, I suggested that I wasn't cross with him for screwing up the INS / PMS, a new toy to him, but that as a pilot flying to Australia - he wanted to fly NorthWest ? ( maybe you need to look at your Atlas again ? )

I'm sorry for repeating what I have posted before, but as a trainee navigator, with a sextant, on a Stratocruiser, ( use Google, a Boeing-377 ) my instructor told me to stop trying to do a maths exam in a rattling steel cabinet and pretend that I was sat on the tail steering the beast over the map.

Commensense -not computers.

Now tell me about age.

QED.

Ex - I repeat Ex-Sp33db1rd

parabellum
13th Aug 2010, 02:57
Ripped away? That is absolutely absurd. You were hired on with a retirement date at age 60.


Total crap, 100% wrong! When I got my licence the retirement age was
65, OK? Simple facts seem to elude you. I haven't bothered to read the rest of your post as it is probably all crap too. It has occurred to me that you, lambourne, are just too young to even be discussing this subject?

EDITED: Well, I have read it now and guess what, I was right, even more total crap.

Well said protectthehornet, he wouldn't know anything about CRM or good manners if they got up and bit him.

A-3TWENTY
13th Aug 2010, 03:53
One proof the old carcass are old fashioned is their total ignorance about Viagra.
If they spent more time searching for new possibilities and or new challenges for their life instead of trying to fly till death they would be much happier.

Again , this is the unique profession where I see people fighting to retire later. Pilots have no idea how stupids they are. I understand that many want to keep flying because they have a lot of pensions to pay , but this just another proof of their stupidity.

Go Fish !!! and leave the airplanes to the younger people !!!It`s up to them now!!!

hunterboy
13th Aug 2010, 04:18
Go Fish !!! and leave the airplanes to the younger people !!!It`s up to them now!!!
Problem is...there is always someone younger than you coming into the industry. Who gets to decide when someone else is going to retire?
At the risk of sounding brutal...life ain't fair...deal with it....or lobby/bribe the politicians to change the law.

free at last
13th Aug 2010, 08:45
Lot's to be learned here! The meno-paused FO 's need to relax, other wise they will not make it to 60+. Fly safe.:)

Fangio
13th Aug 2010, 09:10
lambourne,I retired from flying at 65, during which time I have no recollection of asking the F/O to get me a coffee or a newspaper, which seems to be one of lambourne's gripes. I was interested in their career progression and have watched with interest as their careers have unfolded. Many are still in contact with me. The CRM training in the UK encourages cross checking actions in both directions across the cockpit.
The DH Trident accident report at LHR many years ago is still well worth a read. The crew relationship, regardless of age is paramount to safety. Your attitude to your colleagues lambourne is dreadful, and not condusive to the safety of the aircraft and the passengers. Have you forgotten the first time you went solo, the thrill of flying remains with most pilots into old age, in spite of the obstacles encountered every working day. Remember that you work in one of the most enjoyable professions, enjoy it, stop whingeing. I hope that your attitude will change when you are in the left hand seat.

I thouroughly enjoy retirement, but confess that I still look up with a feeling of pleasure when an aircraft goes overhead, but as they say "Been there, got the T-shirt" and no regrets.

Fangio

lambourne
13th Aug 2010, 12:27
Total crap, 100% wrong! When I got my licence the retirement age was
65, OK? Simple facts seem to elude you. I haven't bothered to read the rest of your post as it is probably all crap too. It has occurred to me that you, lambourne, are just too young to even be discussing this subject?

For this exercise I am speaking of the rules in the United States. There is not one person currently flying to 65 here that was not hired when the Age was 60. So I am not too YOUNG to discuss this subject. You are just too ill informed and unable to notice the location from which I post.

Fangio, not sure how you can make the correlation of not being the Flight Deck steward to the over 60 pilot as being unsafe. However, I do believe CRM is a two way street. Much like the over 60 Captain that sat down at the flight planning table recently. Only looked at the landing fuel and said, "I am adding 20,000#" The three other F/O's looked surprised as we had well over 2+ hours of fuel planned on arrival. Before I could ask the obvious question someone said, "Why?". His CRM Response;"Because I can". OK, thanks for letting us in on the deep secret you have in flight planning Cap'n. The fuel was not necessary it just helps him make up for being inept.

As for speaking to the Old Gompers, I do have exchanges with them. It is usually something like this, "That was for us!", "It is Shannon Control, not Shanwick. Shanwick is the over water portion", "The frequency is 132.250", "That is the SLP, do you want to start slowing?", "line up and wait after means they expect you to take the runway when he departs. you don't get a separate clearance", "He is asking for the registration number and destination"...well you get the picture. I am concerned for the safety of the flight. Just not the comfort of the thief sitting next to me. If you can not see the difference then you may just be too old to understand.

harryzimm
13th Aug 2010, 12:53
Wow, you've got some pent up anger there son.

You are a disgrace to the profession, not to mention the human race.

I suggest you grab a beer and head for the escape chute! :=

thegypsy
13th Aug 2010, 13:18
I cannot imagine any Captain whether over or under 60 wanting to socialise with F/O Lambourne:E

68+iou1
13th Aug 2010, 13:25
Lambourne,
I think you may be flying cargo?
If you are? Get out of there! It’s affecting your mental health!

FoxHunter
13th Aug 2010, 14:02
Much like the over 60 Captain that sat down at the flight planning table recently. Only looked at the landing fuel and said, "I am adding 20,000#" The three other F/O's looked surprised as we had well over 2+ hours of fuel planned on arrival. Before I could ask the obvious question someone said, "Why?". His CRM Response;"Because I can".

I think he was trying to tell you that he thought 21,000# would be too much.;)

I do have exchanges with them. It is usually something like this, "That was for us!", "It is Shannon Control, not Shanwick. Shanwick is the over water portion", "The frequency is 132.250", "That is the SLP, do you want to start slowing?", "line up and wait after means they expect you to take the runway when he departs. you don't get a separate clearance", "He is asking for the registration number and destination"...well you get the picture. I am concerned for the safety of the flight.

Jeez, I'm over age 60 and those are some of the problems I have with F/Os under age 40. I guess I could add having the RFO get the ATIS into CDG and writing it down as 29.82 or the F/O reading back the clearance to FL100 as cleared to ten thousand.

Lambourne, hope you enjoy what is left of your career. Your future looks dim for the long term:(

protectthehornet
13th Aug 2010, 14:39
if your flights are as you say, you have to report the captain for being inept, or for poor hearing.

and it is not a matter of age. I flew with an FAA examiner (designee) who was 70 and he was one of the best, sharpest pilots I've ever seen.

you may just have crummy pilots at your line, so why don't you report them?????

(I had someone who was four months from retirement (60) and his briefing was: if it seems like I don't care, its because I DON"T CARE...he managed to sit on his microphone, keying it and blocking radio for awhile...I finally figured it out and had to do some fancy flying to make up for his mistake. So, I reported him to the chief pilot, the CP called him in and let him retire ON THE SPOT)

there are old pilots, there are crummy pilots...you are confusing the issue. you have been flying with crummy pilots...just cuz they are old doesn't always make them crummy.

lambourne
13th Aug 2010, 14:42
I think he was trying to tell you that he thought 21,000# would be too much.

Typical....

All this chat about CRM but it seems to be looked at as a one way street. Tired of giving the antiques a pass. Accountability should be in all seats of the cockpit.

My other favorite is the CD arrival into LHR. It is not rocket science and we constantly reminded of lack of compliance. Since the Capt tends to always fly the first leg it seems they are the ones Mucking up the procedure. I get some unique excuses why they can't or won't comply with the procedure.

Speaking of LHR. Call "Xxx with your heading" seems to be something an over 60 mind can't comprehend. Advising the departure sid is also a difficult task, even after it has been briefed before dept!

Great fun flying with these guys! Yes getting older makes you better:sad:

Fangio
13th Aug 2010, 15:29
lambourne, you are a prime candidate for either a heart attack or a smoking hole in the ground, relax, chill out, enjoy whats left of your flying career.

When I was an F/O, I learned more from the old pilots with years of FLYING experience and not just being a 'machine minder'. Please grow up and if you feel so strongly about a captains performance, report the facts to the chief pilot, you are making yourself look a fool.

Fangio

sharpshooter41
13th Aug 2010, 17:00
Lambourne

I completely agree with you

Fangio

Actually most of the over 60 pilots today, got their command when they were in their late 20's or early 30's. So they have been in the left seat for well over 30 years. Secondly, while some have understood the benefits of CRM, others have not accepted it at all; calling it a stab at their authority.

Now coming to the present day FO. He/she has more hours total/on-type, then what presumeably you had, when you got your command. So here we have some of the over 60 Captains, trying to act all high and mighty, a mister know-all, and not knowing how to deal with the FO who is generally more at ease in this FMS/FMGS environment. This is where the friction comes in.

Additionally, today's FO is well into his 30's and with financial liabilities increasing, was hoping for a move over to the LHS alongwith the pay increase.

With the retirement age increasing from 60 to 65, his dreams of the LHS will remain just that, for the time being atleast.

It is sooo easy to say that as long as he/she passes the medical/ simulator he/she should be able to fly. Please speak from the heart and say that you find nothing wrong with this.

Take care

protectthehornet
13th Aug 2010, 18:47
sharpshooter...when I joined my airline, they promised me (and my peers) upgrade in five years....it took eleven (oh yeah, we had a couple of wars and terror attacks that threw a monkey wrency (adjustable spanner) into the works).

I made captain at 42.

if you want to advance faster...it might not happen...so try to learn something...you might be an old fart yourself sometime.

batsky2000
13th Aug 2010, 22:32
I think that the real point that is missed is that I don't care if a 70 year old passes his PC, we all know that the people at Flight Safety and Simuflight give lots of space when you screw up and sometimes just forget about it, so from what I have seen over the years, unless you really screw up, they will pass you. And I also don't care if they pass a medical. The real problem that is overlooked and I have seen it many times with some of the older over 65 year olds that I have flown with at my company is that their COGNITIVE Reasoning and thinking abilities are very weak. It takes them much longer to figure things out. In my last PC, I felt like I had to coach my partner who had twice as many hours as I did, sure he can fly the airplane, and sure he can pass his medical, but when faced with an emergency, the deer in the headlights look is the image I saw. All I can say is that it does not matter that they have 20+ years of experience and 20,000+ hours of flight time, there cognitive skills diminished over time, as will mine and yours. I for one would not want to be in a plane with two 70 year olds at the helm.....

protectthehornet
13th Aug 2010, 22:41
batsky

I had a guy with me who was 17 years younger than me...air force trained...and he had the deer in the headlights look in the sim...we were''on fire'' and had to make an emergency ILS...he didn't even follow the needles, so I had to take it from him ( in the sim).

it is not always an age thing.

stepwilk
13th Aug 2010, 22:56
It's really pointless for everybody to be telling stories--or, worse yet, passing on hearsay accounts--of this former young USAF Iraq ace unable to make an engine-out approach, or of that ancient mariner rescuing his 40-year-old F/O from a total screw-up.

It's all pointless story-telling. But there must be scientific evidence of cognitive decay--or of the lack thereof--in 70-year-olds. Anybody who can point to that has my attention. Otherwise it's just I-remember-the-time war-story telling. Sound and fury signifying nothing.

toooldtodieyoung
14th Aug 2010, 07:30
Remember my friend some day, god willing, YOU will be that old fart...

RetiredF4
14th Aug 2010, 10:07
Let me first state, that the way "lambourne" is performing in this thread is way below anything, i´ve expierienced in my lifetime. It is far away from any intellectual form of discussion with lots of personal agitation against older people, very similar to racism in its worst way.

I would not let my loved ones fly with such a person and i´m sure, there will be paybacktime some deay for such behavior in this world or the next one.

It is even worse, that due to this behavior the discussion lacks the necessary participation of knowledgable people (congrats to those who have not been offended off till now) to discuss the necessary points in regards to safe flying.

Let me also state, that i see no necessity in increasing the age limit to 70 (there are enough pilots out there who should be able to do the job), and it might get a safety issue due to degrading capabilities of body and brain.

It is out of question, that physical abilities degrade with increasing age. Therefore military pilots are phased out of active flying duty long before the age of 60. In my carreer i had to take checkrides (instruments and tactical) with young and unexpierienced pilots, with expierienced pilots and with old and expierienced pilots. The oldest one was 58 with lots of hours and lots of expierience, but his performance got worse from year to year. And i had a hard time to get his ear concerning his lacking decision- and handling abilities caused by bad eyesight and slower reaction time.

That is most probably not that much different to civilian aviation, the body and brain gets old regardless who is handing out the paycheck. In a functioning CRM environment there is probably lots of room to equalize such unwanted aging effects (tradeoff of expierience) up to a critical point, when it gets a safety issue.

The question being, who in aviation is defining that point? The standard medical? I don´t think so, as long as it is not focused on special items. And as long as you can choose your own familiar doctor, there is even missing some objectivity. A flight physical examination and training (like we had to do on a regular basis) could do it, but there is none, at least i dont know of one. Your employer kicking you out on hearsaying from the FO´s? The lawyers and courts will have high time and lots of money would be spent in fighting those layoffs. Busting Check-Sims? Come on, with year-long expierience it is easy to do those sims, and it is not the real world and no people behind your seat, you prepared for it, you slept well before and read some books. With luck your checker is well known to you. You could even arrange a simride before the actual checkride. The old pilot itself? Some sure will know their limits, but some will not for the obvious reasons (money, love of flying, ....you name it).

So at my present age of 57 i neither enjoy flying as a passenger with the young FO, who is paying his line training at the moment nor seing the captain of the flight some considerable years older than myself, regardless of his expierience.

I think this discussion should focus more to the question, wether there can be procedures installed to ensure, that pilots regardless of their age meet all necessary safety-standards not only for flying from A to B, but also being able to bring the people back when those few minutes of horror interrupt the long hours of boredom. And when the sh*t hits the fan, CRM might bring you nada and the left or right "seater" might have to handle such a situation on his own.

If those procedures are developed, installed and respected, we dont need to talk about an age limit any more.

And "lambourne" would probably not be eligable to flying passengers around the world with such an attitude.

franzl

ManaAdaSystem
14th Aug 2010, 11:39
It's OK to fly past 60, but not OK to put two over 60's in the same cockpit.

Why?

FoxHunter
14th Aug 2010, 12:32
It's OK to fly past 60, but not OK to put two over 60's in the same cockpit.

Why?

It is OK in the USA. I've done it a number of times. It is not approved for international flights because of the ICAO standard. ICAO actually has stated that iit is not required but maintains it because some authorities do insist on the requirement. The present law in the USA says that if ICAO drops the one pilot under 60 rule for international flights there is no longer any restriction for US crews on international flights.

protectthehornet
14th Aug 2010, 13:29
do you want to get rid of 70 year old pilots?

if you do...

allow 80 year old flight attendants!

;-)

ManaAdaSystem
14th Aug 2010, 15:11
It is OK in the USA. I've done it a number of times. It is not approved for international flights because of the ICAO standard. ICAO actually has stated that iit is not required but maintains it because some authorities do insist on the requirement. The present law in the USA says that if ICAO drops the one pilot under 60 rule for international flights there is no longer any restriction for US crews on international flights.

Thank you! Now can you give us a link to verify this, and who are "some authorities" in this concept?

Just curious.

Lost in Saigon
14th Aug 2010, 15:38
This is how I understand it. Please correct me if I am wrong........


Each country sets it's own rules for pilot licencing and also for foreign pilots flying through it's airspace.

This varies considerably. Canada has absolutely NO age restrictions. Any licenced pilot can fly into or through Canadian airspace at any age.

Other countries have restrictions which prevent pilots after certain ages from being licenced in that country or flying through their airspace.

What ICAO has done is set up a rule that all countries must abide by in order to maintain their ICAO status. This rule allows exceptions to any country's own rules or regulations.

You can fly with anywhere with older pilots and disregard the ICAO rule providing you don't fly though airspace where age limits are applied. In that case you must meet the ICAO age 65 over/under rule.

Correct?


ICAO | FLS | FAQs (http://www.icao.int/icao/en/trivia/peltrgFAQ.htm#30)

Age limit for flight crew

Amendment 167 to Annex 1

The ICAO Council adopted on 10 March 2006 an amendment to Annex 1 — Personnel Licensing that increases by five years the upper age limit for commercial pilots operating two-pilot aircraft, subject to conditions. The new provisions become applicable on 23 November 2006 and read as follows:

2.1.10.1 A Contracting State, having issued pilot licences, shall not permit the holders thereof to act as pilot-in-command of an aircraft engaged in international commercial air transport operations if the licence holders have attained their 60th birthday or, in the case of operations with more than one pilot where the other pilot is younger than 60 years of age, their 65th birthday.

2.1.10.2 Recommendation.— A Contracting State, having issued pilot licences, should not permit the holders thereof to act as co-pilot of an aircraft engaged in international commercial air transport operations if the licence holders have attained their 65th birthday.
1) Pilot-in-Command aged 60-64 years of age

In accordance with Article 33 of the Convention on International Civil Aviation, the amendment means that if a pilot-in-command (PIC) is 60 years of age or over but less than 65 years of age and is engaged in operations with more than one pilot, he/she cannot be prevented by reason of age from operating in airports or the airspace of any ICAO Contracting State as long as at least one other pilot is under 60 years of age. For single-pilot commercial air transport operations, the upper age limit remains at 60 years. A State may impose a lower maximum age limit than that specified by ICAO in § 2.1.10.1 for the licenses it issues but it cannot prevent, by reason of age, an aircraft from another State operated by a PIC holding a licence issued or validated by that State, who is below the ICAO upper age limit, from operating in the airspace above its territory.

2) Pilot-in-Command 65 years of age and over

Articles 39 and 40 of the Convention are also relevant to the age limit of pilots-in-command engaged in commercial air transport operations as they authorize international flights by flight crew who do not meet all international licensing Standards, provided that an authorization is given by each State into which the aircraft is operated. Those seeking information concerning States that may authorize pilots to fly in their airspace after reaching the age of 65 years are advised to contact individual Civil Aviation Authorities

3) Augmented crews

In commercial long-range air transport, the designated flight crew may be augmented, and can number three, four or even more pilots. In the case of flight crew comprising more than two pilots, the intent of § 2.1.10.1 is to ensure that, when the pilot-in-command is over 60 but less than 65 years of age, the operating flight crew includes at least one other pilot, who is licensed, appropriately rated for all phases of flight, current, and younger than 60 years of age. It is suggested that during high workload phases of flight (such as flight below 10,000 feet above ground level) at least one pilot seated at the controls should be under 60 years of age.

4) Medical Assessment

When over 60, a six-monthly medical assessment is necessary (ICAO specifies an annual medical assessment for those under 60 years who are engaged in two-pilot operations).

White Knight
14th Aug 2010, 19:16
if you do...

allow 80 year old flight attendants!

;-)

I may not agree with a lot you say PTH but this one made me laugh:} At the hotel in Venice recently the United (or was it Delta) Dragons arrived in the crewroom midday. I thought my old school matron had walked through the door:E

White Knight
14th Aug 2010, 19:28
Whenever, they make any type of complaint, it is my duty to remind them they should be in a retirement home instead of an airplane.

Hey Lambourne sweetie; try getting the grammar right to start with. We may take more notice of what you have to say!

Besides - as a young fart in my early 40s I intend to keep on flying 'til I drop. I couldn't care less about disgruntled F/Os like Larry the Lambourne:ok:

protectthehornet
14th Aug 2010, 19:36
white knight

and now you know why I prefer going to dumb domestic overnights...(in there day) akron, elmira, rochester (ny)...the youngest junior FA's got those overnights...the senior ones got paris. (sadly, regionals are doing more of those domestic overnights...but Boston,Chicago, Philly, and Washington are still sort of junior)

airjet
14th Aug 2010, 20:00
I have just retired after 44 years of flying 43 of which were with airlines, i started in 1966, i`m now 65, --the last 5 years flying A320`s my opinion is that 65 is quite old enough, there is no way a 65 year old is going to climb into a raft, (mind you at my final drill 1 year ago hardly anybody except the youngest and fittest F/O`s could do it either). At 65 most people are just physically not up to all the different drills etc, however most can easily pass the sim. of course there will be excecptions but they will be few.:ok:

FoxHunter
14th Aug 2010, 20:07
Thank you! Now can you give us a link to verify this, and who are "some authorities" in this concept?

Just curious.




http://www.age60rule.com/docs/AN%20Min.%20164-4_10-28-03.pdf

Page 7, Par.25

lambourne
14th Aug 2010, 22:16
If you are over 60 and wonder why you never get coffee, tea, water or asked if you want us to coorcindate with the FA's your meal, you are now brought up to speed. You are operating as an indpedent system with nothing but your own self preservation being the number one factor. You have not been accidentally overlooked by the rest fo the crew. The rest of the crew is operating outside of your needs or wants. You still get to sprout your wise words, but when it comes to keeping you fed and watered, you are own your own.

Sorry it has come to this. Just how it has worked out. There were many big talking over 60 pilots procrlaimig retirement was going to take place at 62. Still see ALL those faces. So the lies started early and keep on coming. Maybe you can snag another A/P approach next week. These guys are giving up landings to the computer as if they are part of the crew. Definitley demonstrating some fear of the airplane lately.

Coming up on 2 years till the thieves are released. I certainly hope no one at my company takes the time to acknowledge these events. Let these guys sliver under the door like the low life they really are. Good Riddiance and don't let the door hit you in the bum on the way out!

MarcK
14th Aug 2010, 22:33
lambourne: So, after all this ranting, are you going to hold fast to your principles and retire at 60 while all your compatriots are flying until 65 or 70?

MTOW
14th Aug 2010, 23:32
allow 80 year old flight attendants!It would be fifteen years ago now that I read a newspaper article about an 84 year old flight attendant still working for Delta. The article said she started on DC2s.

Looking at the United crew arriving in Sydney every morning, I'd be guessing that quite a few of the flight attendants on that trip are around (and either side of) the 70 mark. I've never seen so much blue rinse hair outside a bingo hall.

goldfish85
14th Aug 2010, 23:33
Question:

Would you rather ride in the back with a 68 year old Captain and a 65 year old F/O or in the back with a crew whose combined age is 53?



Goldfish

FoxHunter
14th Aug 2010, 23:37
If you are over 60 and wonder why you never get coffee, tea, water or asked if you want us to coorcindate with the FA's your meal, you are now brought up to speed. You are operating as an indpedent system with nothing but your own self preservation being the number one factor. You have not been accidentally overlooked by the rest fo the crew. The rest of the crew is operating outside of your needs or wants. You still get to sprout your wise words, but when it comes to keeping you fed and watered, you are own your own.

Sorry it has come to this. Just how it has worked out. There were many big talking over 60 pilots procrlaimig retirement was going to take place at 62. Still see ALL those faces. So the lies started early and keep on coming. Maybe you can snag another A/P approach next week. These guys are giving up landings to the computer as if they are part of the crew. Definitley demonstrating some fear of the airplane lately.

Coming up on 2 years till the thieves are released. I certainly hope no one at my company takes the time to acknowledge these events. Let these guys sliver under the door like the low life they really are. Good Riddiance and don't let the door hit you in the bum on the way out!

Lambourne, you are a fine piece of work. How much have you had to drink tonight? Your rants would be funny if they were not so sad.:{

Two years, and you think age 65 is over. My guess is 90% are staying past age 60. Age 62, you were told? Heck, my guess is they just wanted to shut you up. Oh! Landings? I have 22 in the last 90 days, and don't recall any being autoland. Meals, coffee, soda have never been a problem. We don't have FAs so we either get, cook our own or for all.

Funny guy! Please tell us ..................:ugh:

777fly
14th Aug 2010, 23:52
I'm really enjoying this thread! Not sure if Lambourne is serious, or just winding us up. but if his observations are true it's a worrying perspective on the standards of his current airline.
Maybe the decline in the ability of his older peers is that they are all 'good ole boys' who have spent years and years of their career being told what to do by the flight dispatcher and have been carried along by an operational system (company ops and ATC) which slowly erodes the decision making and perceptive capability. What is important is knowing or recognising the point where one's operating standards are falling short and it seems that Lambourne is flying with people who no longer acknowledge that.
I would like to know how Lambourne decides to act in the way he does. Does he look at company records, GD's, or peek at the guys passport to see if he's over 60 to select a behavioural mode, or is it simply on appearance or capability? I have flown with aged looking 45 year olds who have all of the degenerate attributes so detested by Lambourne. Conversely, I operate regularly with some over-60's who look 45 and would probably put you in the shade in every way. Some of them are ex US majors too, so no bias.
Please let me know what a CD arrival into LHR is. I seem to be having a senior moment........

obie2
15th Aug 2010, 01:03
I'm surprised that no one has picked up on the fact that Lambourne voluntarily chose to be an f/o rather than take a command on a narrow body jet? Lack of confidence perhaps? Lack of command potential? Hence the bitterness and vitriol?!

411A
15th Aug 2010, 01:15
I'm surprised that no one has picked up on the fact that Lambourne voluntarily chose to be an f/o rather than take a command on a narrow body jet? Lack of confidence perhaps? Lack of command potential? Hence the bitterness and vitriol?!

Without a doubt.

You are operating as an indpedent system with nothing but your own self preservation being the number one factor. You have not been accidentally overlooked by the rest fo the crew.

Sounds good to me (spelling excepted:eek:), as I don't take much notice of the rest of the crew, anyway.
As long as they do as I say, when I say it, I could care less.

parabellum
15th Aug 2010, 03:58
lambourne: So, after all this ranting, are you going to hold fast to your principles and retire at 60 while all your compatriots are flying until 65 or 70?


I doubt very much if lambourne will even get the opportunity to choose MarcK. Someone so full of bile, acid and hatred to the extent he shows here must surely lose their medical long before sixty, due to hypertension, assuming he is not carted off by men in white coats before that!

Yes obie2, as someone said to me a very long time ago, "A command on anything is better than a F/O on anything". One wonders.

ManaAdaSystem
15th Aug 2010, 04:23
Interesting reading.

He also concurred with C/MED that there was limited data available to allow a scientific
justification to change the age limits for pilots, adding that the age of sixty was as arbitrary as any other number that
might be selected. Therefore, he supported consulting States through a questionnaire. On the other hand, he did not
consider that the process of submitting a questionnaire along with a proposed amendment without giving due
consideration to the results from the questionnaire was the best course of action, especially since he could not see an
urgent need to do so, particularly since the existing provisions had stood the test of time and should not be amended
in haste.


Responding to the previous intervention, C/MED pointed out that, in the JAA context, there were
additional conditions attached to the upper age limit applied in the European countries, one being that an older pilot
could not function except in a multi-crew operation as well as the matter of the other member of the crew being
younger than sixty years of age.

Flightwatch
15th Aug 2010, 05:43
Please let me know what a CD arrival into LHR is. I seem to be having a senior moment........

Continuous Descent?

lambourne
15th Aug 2010, 05:47
Does he look at company records, GD's, or peek at the guys passport to see if he's over 60 to select a behavioural mode, or is it simply on appearance or capability?

Our seniority list has all the ages of the pilots listed. The general declaration has all ages listed. Combine that with 20 years of flying with the same people and you have a base of knowledge for their ages.

A CD arrival = constant descent. Leave the holding fix and don't level off from that point to touchdown. Something my company says we do a poor job of complying with.

As to my choice of WB F/O vs NB Capt. I did fly Capt on both the Boeing and the Bus for over about 10 years. However, thanks to age 65 and recession we had surpluss pilots. My choice work 18 days a month as NB Capt or 9 to 11 days a month as WB FO for basically the same pay. While I know that is a decision the power hungry gummer crowd can't comprehend since you guys have not suffered any setbacks during your career. For you guys it has only been upward movement and no stagnation or reversal. It was an easy decision for me. I like my time at home and don't define my life as being an airline pilot like many of the antiques I work with. Also, being in the same came cockpit with the thieves of 65 allows me to bust their ego bubbles at every opportunity. Appears many have their testicles locked in a jar by their wives at home. Coming to work they hope to exert some type, any type of power they can muster. Ultimately they will be off on a tangent and wrong, again. It would be sad to watch if it was for someone which I had even a modicum of sympathy. Instead it makes for some great laughs with the rest of the crew in the "debrief" at the hotel, while the old man is still roaming the hallways trying to find his room.

Ah the things that make this job fun.

Wingswinger
15th Aug 2010, 06:09
I think you should go and lie down in a darkened room, my friend, and take a psychiatrist along with you for a little chat.

Fangio
15th Aug 2010, 06:56
lambourne, which planet do you live on ?

parabellum
15th Aug 2010, 08:56
since you guys have not suffered any setbacks during your career.


Dangerous arrogance combined with unbelievable but absolute ignorance lambourne, every time you open your mouth you put your foot further in.

No setbacks indeed, so two substantial carriers, (UK), going bust over my head and having to revert to the RHS once, due 'cut backs', don't count then? Wake up and grow up. The behavior you are so proud of on the flight deck is worthy of a seriously spoiled little child having a tantrum.


the power hungry gummer crowd can't comprehend


I doubt if any of us older ones were even contemplating the 'power' thing, from what you have said here, you probably only have about five or six thousand hours 'in-command' on transport jets, our thoughts would be more along the lines of how about you building some valuable command experience, but then, being fat dumb and happy in a legacy carrier, you probably know it all already?

777fly
15th Aug 2010, 09:57
There is nothing termed a CD arrival at LHR. A LAM3A arrival, maybe, but not a CD arrival. However, there is a continuous descent noise abatement procedure so I guess you were referring to that. Maybe the guys in the other seat were wondering what you are on about.
I expect that CRM training featured at some time in your career, so its a shame that the principles of teamwork seem to have passed you by. Your antipathy and lack of support for the older captain is downright dangerous and completely unprofessional. Nobody is perfect, not even you, and your attitude is likely to make you and the guy unfortunate enough to fly with you another accident statistic.
Its also a completely arrogant assumption that the over 60 pilot never had a career setback or stagnation. The airline industry has been through frequent recessions, several before you appeared on the scene, so your present setbacks are nothing new. Get a life.

obie2
15th Aug 2010, 10:35
You disappoint me, Lambourne!...

I gave you the chance to give us a good reason for your f/o v Captain choice... and you blew it!

You're obviously psychologically unfit to be in command of anything, let alone a high speed heavy jet aircraft!

Go away, Junior, get some treatment!

You're not a pilot...

you're a goose!!

PS: Aren't the idiots like Lamington the things that make prune fun?

BEagle
15th Aug 2010, 11:11
Once upon a time, society taught respect for one's elders.

Whilst it is only reasonable for there to be a natural throughput of pilots, airlines will invariably prefer to retain rather than to recruit. Particularly should they ever have to face up to the responsibility of actually training their future workforce.

As for the childish comments made by lambourne, I can only surmise that the 'gummers', of whom he is so openly contemptuous, have considerably more patience and tolerance than he does.

Going out of your way to cause friction on the flight deck is utterly unnacceptable and wholly dangerous; this idiot should be removed from flying duties forthwith.

Fangio
15th Aug 2010, 11:34
Methinks that F/O Lambourne has recently failed his command course or sim check or maybe came last in the egg and spoon race at the nursery school he attends.



Light the blue touchpaper and stand back

PA-28-180
15th Aug 2010, 11:53
Just to chime in with my two cents worth.......

ALL the captains I flew with (part 135 / corporate, medium/heavy turbo prop and light jet) were at LEAST 10 years older than I. Everyday I flew with them I LEARNED something. Not to say that there weren't some who thought they were 'sky gods'....but THEY were the minority!! The attitude I've been reading here is absolutely incredible to me, and I really don't understand it....last I knew, didn't the airlines- especially the larger carriers - do psych tests?? Does "F/O Lambourne" REALLY think his 'gummer' Captains aren't reporting his behavior?? How long does he think HIS career is likely to last?

Some of "F/O Lambourne's" comments have revealed a down right hazard to flight safety....and I hope to God neither my family OR I are EVER on a flight with him! :ugh: :ugh:

Airclues
15th Aug 2010, 15:29
Having worked as a TRI/TRE for over 25 years, I have trained and checked pilots of all ages. From this, and from personal experience, the combination of skill and experience is at it's highest in the 40's. There is no doubt that reactions slow with age, and this accelerates when over 60.
I was fortunate, when checking pilots who were over 60, that most of them had started at a very high level of ability, so any slowing had no effect on their ability to pass a check. A small number, who had started at a lower level caused a few problems.
In my own case, I stopped flying six months before my sixtieth birthday. I had no problem passing checks or medicals, but I was finding that the long night flights and the timechange were having a far greater effect the older that I got, and I was concerned that this might eventually affect my ability. Much better to quit while you're ahead.

I think that we should cut lambourne some slack. There are many people who feel this way but don't have the forum to express their views. After I had spent 20 years in the RHS, I would have been rather upset if they had raised the retirement age just before I got my command.
Although I don't agree with the way that lambourne says that he is behaving, I don't think that it impacts on flight safety. Any pilot aged over 60 has been in the industry long enough to be able to cope with this attitude without losing any sleep. I would have had no worries about flying with him/her, and would have been happy to make my own tea.

Dave

411A
15th Aug 2010, 21:21
Once upon a time, society taught respect for one's elders.

Whilst it is only reasonable for there to be a natural throughput of pilots, airlines will invariably prefer to retain rather than to recruit. Particularly should they ever have to face up to the responsibility of actually training their future workforce.

As for the childish comments made by lambourne, I can only surmise that the 'gummers', of whom he is so openly contemptuous, have considerably more patience and tolerance than he does.

Going out of your way to cause friction on the flight deck is utterly unnacceptable and wholly dangerous; this idiot should be removed from flying duties forthwith.

Well said.
Should I be unlucky enough to have a guy like this as a First Officer, he would be booted out on his ear at the first opportunity....make no mistake.
And, what's more...the company would back me up one hundred percent.

Some of "F/O Lambourne's" comments have revealed a down right hazard to flight safety....and I hope to God neither my family OR I are EVER on a flight with him!
Amen to that.

Niallo
15th Aug 2010, 23:26
Here's a viewpoint that some might find irrelevant:

As a passenger, I have always been reassured to see a Captain aged around fifty with a FO aged around thirty.

This seems to me to represent the ideal mix of experience, maturity and current skills.

I would not be happy to see an elderly Captain in charge of my flight.

amos2
16th Aug 2010, 09:33
f/o lamington has been shown to be nothing more than fluffy cake, coco and fluffy coconut with a major head problem! He needs help.
He has, however, hijacked this thread and is probably having a laugh at our expense.
Could I suggest that we just ignore this loser and continue the debate re retirement age in a more civilized manner?

Che Xindamail
16th Aug 2010, 12:27
Raising the retirement age to 65 was a good and timely decision.

In the future it makes sense to review this age further upwards in view of life expectancy. If this delays the promotions of F/Os, so what? You'll get it back at the other end anyway.

The age change is good for us as a group. It benefits everybody long term.

When I started out in commercial aviation in my mid-20s I had the privilege of flying with guys that were approaching 60. These guys were knowledgeable, cool characters who were completely unfazed by anything thrown at them. It taught me the value of experience.

Those that oppose the higher retirement age are only thinking short term.

BitMoreRightRudder
16th Aug 2010, 12:46
When I started out in commercial aviation in my mid-20s I had the privilege of flying with guys that were approaching 60. These guys were knowledgeable, cool characters who were completely unfazed by anything thrown at them. It taught me the value of experience.



Agree 100%. In my airline the more senior guys also have the confidence and experience to, where possible, allow their F/Os' more time and space to make our own mistakes ( a/c handling or otherwise) and learn from them. I couldn't care less how old the boss is, if the respective airline and the authority consider them fit for the job then carry on regardless.

If a guy has the enthusiasm and desire to continue in the job 'till 70 and can pass a medical then where is the problem. As for a longer wait for command, well I'm happy to wait my turn. It's not like a command is a birth right anyway...

lambourne
16th Aug 2010, 18:01
Well said.
Should I be unlucky enough to have a guy like this as a First Officer, he would be booted out on his ear at the first opportunity....make no mistake.
And, what's more...the company would back me up one hundred percent.

That may be the case at your company but not mine. The rule is that if removed from a trip the pilot is paid. My company is at least wise to the fact that not everyone that calls to have someone removed from a trip is not the offending party themselves. Everyone gets paid and the PSC gets involved. So please throw me in that briar patch. Also, what is the complaint you will levy? I don't offer to fetch you items? I don't speak to you other than for cockpit duties and I would in no way associate with you on layover? The rest of the crew does not invite you to join them at the pub?

Please tell me you are going to have a better argument than that. When you go to the Chief Pilot and tell him you cost the company a few extra thousand dollars by having to pay TWO pilots for the same trip. He is going to want to know the details. Telling him your feeble, senile sense of self worth has not been acknowledged and the other kids at school don't let you play ball, may not make him appreciate your uniqueness either. Nice one old man, now that is going to make you look the fool. Also, if you are going to toss me from a trip can you make sure to do it on a weekend?

With any luck in 849 days you guys will start retiring again. That is the ones that actually live that long. Just read about one of our over 60 pilots almost croaking on a European layover last week. Almost 300 passengers inconvenienced by this guy due to the cancellation of the return trip. With any luck that was his last flight. Nice way to leave the profession, on a stretcher! Perhaps if more of you old guys start dropping at work, it will help keep any rumblings of Age 70 to rest, or should we say bury any thought of a change or my favorite ***throw dirt on raising it higher***

Had a nice chat with a fellow F/O about the rumored increase. His take was spot on. Said that he heard you old gompers were trying to organize an effort to increase the age. The only problem was every time you guys called a meeting. No one could remember what it was called for and you could never get a quorum due to over half the guys standing in the latrine willing something to happen.

lambourne
16th Aug 2010, 18:17
There is nothing termed a CD arrival at LHR

Really? So the chart I am now looking at in my Jeppesen manual titled 10-7E, "Vertical Speed for CDA" does not exist? Should I alert my company that they prepared a chart, they prepared text (Page 10-7A) and company NOTAMS about this procedure, yet someone on the internet says they don't exist! Someone stop the presses!!!

Of course with the level of compliance the over 60 crowd have for this procedure it seems to be wasted pages and resources. Is this the example we should all follow? Is this one of the learning experiences I should be soaking up? All I have learned from these guys is that greed is good, flying skills suck after 60, complying with company regulations and FAR's appears to be optional. :confused:

highcirrus
16th Aug 2010, 19:18
Hi lambourne

Enjoyed reading your stuff.

I’m an old dinosaur and, I guess, also an old “gummer”. I fly (at my pleasure) for an elephants' graveyard of an airline (south asian national carrier) and will do so until I’m 65, in eighteen months time. However, I have the immense privilege of being demographically and contractually grouped with a wonderful band of similar ex-pat fossils, whose achievements, records, professional skills (I double crew occasionally) and sheer humour, humanity and humility leave me in awe. These guys will run any mile to help guys on the way up and will proffer (if asked) the most apposite, accurate and heartfelt advice, to assist the next generation (our pleasure, …really).

Ok, maybe they (we) have a few ex-wives, lawyers and children (think disabled – either as very young kids or as valiant young men in recent wars) to support and need to squeeze the most out of an earning career and an industry that seeks our experience (25,000 – 30,000 heavy jet hours), wisdom and skill. These guys are solid, patriotic, reliable and the bedrock of their varied societies. They are, please, not to be trivialised or denigrated but to be admired for the providers and constant troopers that they are. Please, therefore, take a step back, gulp a little humility and realise the value of the senior colleagues you belittle.

You may be interested to know that the carrier we serve, recently staved off two catastrophes following the intervention of two “gummers”, rostered as P2 on double crew operations. First case involved P1 erroneously selecting Auto Pilot at the start of the T/O roll when auto thrust did not engage. P1 seemed not to notice until ex-pat P2’s screams to disengage eventually got through to him just before VR. Second case concerned a very heavy weight T/O (17 hour flight) when P1 disengaged auto thrust (paddle switches - for reasons unknown) following a low-level altitude capture. Subsequent ATC climb and turn instructions were executed by the auto flight system, minus auto thrust. Net result, stick shaker at around 1000 AGL, just as ex-pat P2 had unstrapped and firewalled the thrust levers prior to a fully developed stall.

Could be the old timers can still cut it?

poina
16th Aug 2010, 19:28
Lambourne,
I for one really enjoy your posts! You are certainly correct that cognitive skills begin to deteriorate with age, sometimes slowly and sometimes fast.
What I have observed is the ones who want to stay past 60 are classified into 2 groups.
Group 1: 3 ex's, 3 sets of kids, and no money.
Group 2: no retirement skills, they define their lives on their supposedly superior cockpit skills.
Take a look at the MD-11 accident in RUH and hear all the sages trying to bring temp and unfamiliarity as an excuse.
Give me a Capt in his late 40's early 50's who is willing to listen and work together any day.
When they advocate dive and drive on non precision app's, just reaffirms their inability to adapt to tech changes in new generation A/C.

lambourne
16th Aug 2010, 20:43
Thanks poina. Feel it is ripe time for the majority to speak about what age 65 has done ro this profession. I agree with your grouping. After many years of continuing to pay the price for the gummers mistakes in life (ex-wives, Bad business decisions, etc) enough is enough. I'm tired of having to change their diapers every time they poop their "life" pants.

The only good thing to come from this, is many of my fellow pilots vow to never act or treat the job like these clowns have. If anything it has made more of us want to reitre early or at 60, so we don't wind up hanging on like these miserable losers.

poina
17th Aug 2010, 00:09
Highcirrus,
What a great post! Refreshing to read something that's written with humility instead of arrogance.

obie2
17th Aug 2010, 00:45
You don't consider bidding down to an f/o position classifies you as a loser Lambourne?

p51guy
17th Aug 2010, 01:51
Lambourne could not be as stupid and insulting of his captains as he sounds. All the FO's in the industry don't show as much hate and disrespect for senior captains as he does. With his low post count I think he is having immature fun with professional pilots to look for a reaction. He probably is signed on with a different name when he isn't acting like a teenager. Either way he has to grow up a lot. Also, maybe he is a teenager with a dad that flies.

asia757
17th Aug 2010, 02:20
If flying is "just a career", I understand why you want to stop at age 60 or 65. If flying is a passion and a love then you will do it until you are no longer able to do so, regardless of age or equipment or seat position.

Those who "need" the leftseat at any cost will never listen to the voice of reason, see the desire or absorb the wisdom that will make them a better person or a better pilot.

"Good luck" in your "just a career" choice.

411A
17th Aug 2010, 02:54
...will never listen to the voice of reason...

We don't need a reason, we have seniority.
And, as we all know, seniority rules.
The 'younger ones' can like it or lump it, makes no difference to me.
IE: they will just have to await their turn....whenever that might be.:}
IF ever.:E

Baywatcher
17th Aug 2010, 05:18
411A

Well said. It's going to happen anyway!

ManaAdaSystem
17th Aug 2010, 06:32
70 years will not happen, of that I'm sure, and a few more over 60 pilots who don't need to listen to reason and then fly with their seniority into a mountain may cause a revised age limit to 60 again.

Airclues
17th Aug 2010, 07:37
An excellent post by highcirrus. I'm sure that he and his 'dinosaur' friends would have absolutely no problem dealing with lambourne. After decades in aviation he will have developed the social and leadership skills to cope with a rich variety of fellow crewmembers. If any captain does not possess these skills and relies on four gold bars for his authority then offloading is the safest option.

Dave

obie2
17th Aug 2010, 07:58
Any Captain, any where, who deliberately bids down to an f/o position rather than continue in command has a major, major problem!

Lambourne has a major, major problem!

We know it, he doesn't!

Sad, Isn't it?!

harryzimm
17th Aug 2010, 08:11
Lambourne, are you still here?

I thought I told you to grab a beer and head for the escape chute!

Do you have "Daddy issues"? I suspect your pathological views go way beyond the flight deck.

ManaAdaSystem
17th Aug 2010, 08:44
Lambourne must have hit the nail right on its head to trigger all you antiques to fall out of your wheel chairs. Most of you have probably stopped flying years ago.

Sorry guys, you don't find a lot of younger pilots lining up to support your flying after 60, not to mention after 65.

amos2
17th Aug 2010, 08:44
At an airline that I worked at some years ago we had what were called ' permanent F/Os'.
Not a term that I particularly liked, but it referred to F/Os who were unable to upgrade to Captain status due to some inability on their part to make the transition from the RHS to the LHS.
Lambourne is obviously in this category and I sympathize with the situation he finds himself in.
However, presenting as a bitter and twisted disgruntled F/O achieves nothing for him other than pity and sympathy plus a lot of anger from the Captains who have to pull him into line to operate to a suitable standard. It probably means also that he wont be given a second chance to upgrade to command.
Hopefully, Lambourne will moderate his attitude so that one day he may truly be a member of what we proudly call the "Profession of Airline Pilots "

By George
17th Aug 2010, 09:10
Sad to see the bitterness amongst the younger generation. It has always been 10 years to command, longer with the Legacy Carriers. Your turn will come, especially if the Industry keeps this recovery going. I'm a "gummer" by your definition Lamborne, nobody holds my hand, I work with a crew who work to look after each other and have fun doing it. By the way I have my original teeth and they are fine thank you.

L337
17th Aug 2010, 09:14
Sorry guys, you don't find a lot of younger pilots lining up to support your flying after 60, not to mention after 65

The young become old. And when you are old your opinions will change, and surprise surprise, you to will also want to work beyond 60.

free at last
17th Aug 2010, 11:09
Lets shoot for 90, maybe in that time lambourne will learn to be a well ,CRM, adjusted FO.:)

lambourne
17th Aug 2010, 12:05
At an airline that I worked at some years ago we had what were called ' permanent F/Os'.If you can still read and comprehend you will find that I did fly Captain for 10 years on both the A and B at my company. Thanks to the FTD's (Fly till I die) group our retirements stopped. Combine Age 65 with the recession and quality of life transitioned from mid line holder Captain to reserve Captain. While being a Captain was enjoyable and I can still bid back when I wish, it just doesn't define my existence.

Any Captain, any where, who deliberately bids down to an f/o position rather than continue in command has a major, major problem!I really like when you old gompers make statements such as this. It presents a complete lack of knowledge of what goes on at the airline anywhere, but in your dementia laden mind. As a Captain I worked 18 days flying 4 day trips that started at 0600 and usually returned at 2300 all for 75 to 85 hours. As a senior FO I fly 9 days total, the trips start and finish in the afternoon and my pay is 85-89 each month. The pay difference in hourly rates is so small and the international perdiem high enough that I get paid MORE to fly less days than I did as Captain.

Now I may not have that unique vision and insight that such esteemed gummers like yourself have. But if I can get paid more to fly LESS then that makes quite a bit of sense to me. Perhaps if I was so caught up in my self worth like you guys, then I would not be able to see sanity of my argument. If I was only defined by being an airline Captain and unable to function in normal social settings like yourself then I too would probably be unable to comprehend the logic of this situation. You sound a lot like the average old pilot I know that is too cheap to buy a newspaper but blows his money on ridiculous watches, boats, ex-wives and my favorite, the can't miss investment. So many times I have heard you clowns whine about bad investments. Of course these guys were 59 and still heavily invested in stocks during the last down turn. If you guys had an ounce of sense and were able to relinquish control to a fund manager you wouldn't be penniless in your B fund. Nope, you guys are full speed ahead in always being right. Just too bad you are always WRONG.....Just like your assessment of my bidding. Only a egotistical, maniacal Captain like yourself would rather work twice as much for less pay. Yep, that is some real genius you got there Cap'n. Can you tell me what stocks you are invested in?

lambourne
17th Aug 2010, 12:36
We don't need a reason, we have seniority.

Did you learn that reasoning in CRM School? 411A you are the epitome of the mindset that I am talking about.

I am very sure that the majority of you over 60 gummers do make at least one person happy each week. Your current wife (probably the 3rd or 4th Mrs. Capt) jumps for joy when you car backs out of the driveway.

You are a box of contradictions. Putting those forth for everyone to see is a new hobby.

ManaAdaSystem
17th Aug 2010, 13:08
The young become old. And when you are old your opinions will change, and surprise surprise, you to will also want to work beyond 60.

Nope. I'm set to go at 60, 55 if I have the chance.
Problem is, new pilots may have to fly until 65 (or God forbid 70), in order to get the full pension. For those of you who fly permanently bent over with no pension scheme in sight (FR and the like), you can disregard my latest statement. You will probably be dead or burnt out before 60 anyway.

To Highcirrus in Korea, have you tried to hang out with other people than your fellow dinosaurs? Effohs? They don't want to? Strange!
How much pension from your previous employer do you pocket on top of your current salary while you block upgrades and/or a expat job for another pilot with family and children to take care of?
Any expat in Korea have a lot of war stories to tell. No matter what age.

lambourne
17th Aug 2010, 13:10
I would like to see some more statistically valid argument in favour or against raising that age, like the "Hilton study" that FAA commissioned many years ago.

There was plenty of evidence against raising the age. However, it was a political football and was rushed through the senate by that dead SOB Ted Stevens. The real irony is that Stevens DIED at the hands of an OVER 60 Pilot. You can't make this stuff up!

MTOW
17th Aug 2010, 13:22
Whilst I'm definitely in the camp with lambourne in thinking that at 65, it's time we should give it away, I have to say that if an FO was to carry on with me the way he says he does with the 'old gummers' he flys with, I couldn't (and wouldn't) give a tuppeny you-know-what about his wounded emotions until they - in my opinion - inflicted themselves on flight safety.

Then - on the ground - we'd have a serious talk where I'd offer him the chance to change his ways, and if that did not have the effect I felt it should, the aeroplane would remain at the stand until a replacement FO was found - and FO lambourne would be the one to explain to the Fleet Manager or the psychs at HR why the 'old gummer' turfed him off the flight deck. (In 40+ years in the business, 20+ of which spent in the left seat, I've had one such conversation with an FO.)

lambourne, if it bothers you as much as you say it does, for your own health, you really would be far better off working twenty days a month as 'the man' on a narrow body than six or eight days a month in the right (which for you -in your head at least - is the wrong) seat on a widebody.

Life ain't fair mate, and never has been, and if you can't get your head around that, put yourself somewhere where the unfairness doesn't cause the bile to overflow as your current situation seems to be doing to you. It's unhealthy - for you and for everyone forced to endure your company.

ManaAdaSystem
17th Aug 2010, 13:36
No, of course you don't Mr i Ford. It's all about me, me, me, and then me. The rest is Communism.

On those very few occasions where I'm paired with an over 60, he gets exactly what the book (and lambourne) prescribes. Nothing more, nothing less.
If I get him in the right seat, he better stay within our SOP. Some find that hard to do, because, as was said earlier, over 60's try to float on experience, not company SOP.
"This is the way I have always done it" does not work with me if it is not our SOP.

Dive and drive? I don't think so!

411A
17th Aug 2010, 14:15
I can assume then that your fellow crewmembers are allowed to disrispect SOPs as long as they are below 60?

Hmmm, interesting.
Now, if the shoe was on the other foot, and we had Manaadasystem
in the RHS, it would correctly be...gear up and shut up, for him.;)

Old timers positively know how to deal with oafs like him, let alone lambourne.

ManaAdaSystem
17th Aug 2010, 14:55
Old farts always have a hard time keeping the drawer shut, so that would work the other way, I'm afraid.
I'm perfectly OK with a dark & silent cockpit as long as the job gets done.

You can discuss your prostate with somebody else.

PA-28-180
17th Aug 2010, 15:14
ok....oK.....OK!!!
I would TRULY like to know if this is REALLY the current state in today's cockpits vis a vis "older vs. younger" pilots??!!!!

Because....if it is.....then my future flights will be range limited to my Archer! :ugh:

As I previously wrote, when I was flying part 135 and corporate.....ALL my captains were older by at LEAST 10 years, and virtually everytime I flew with them I LEARNED something. So....what the heck is going on "up there" today? When I began flying as a first officer, I was in my late 20's / early 30's.....my captains ranged from early to late 40's. One of the BEST captains I ever flew with was in his late 50's...had a fixed wing and rotary ATP and about 20,000 flight hours....this guy had forgotten more about flying than most EVER know. I realize that at least in SOME cases , cognitive abilities sometimes drop as we age....however, experience and PASSION for the job generally makes up for this. (For those that don't fully read this statement....I wrote SOMETIMES!).

Is todays cockpit REALLY the battle zone depicted by some posters here?? Inquiring minds would REALLY like to KNOW!! :eek: :ugh:

sharpshooter41
17th Aug 2010, 15:20
MAS

Ha ha ha ha. I couldn't agree with you more. I also have had my share of stories from the 60+. Some of the stories are sooo downright ........, they even put me off the meal which had been brought over.

leadingedge12
17th Aug 2010, 15:22
Bottom line moving up the retirement age again and again hurts everyone in aviation that wants to retire early and enjoy their golden years. Every pilot with good pay and schedules will stay on till forced out leaving only the ****ty jobs to fight for at the bottom. It's already happening all over the world from the US raising 60 to 65. Stagnant job growth has made pilots do incredibly foolish things like paying for type ratings or working for substandard wages. Pilots staying on even when they have the financial means to retire are simply selfish!

PA-28-180
17th Aug 2010, 15:29
"Pilots staying on even when they have the financial means to retire are simply selfish!"

So.....a doctor, in complete and total control of his faculties - AND finances - ....should 'make way' for the younger doctors with less real world experience? An engineer? A Designer???

Where is the line to be drawn? When does ones level of actual experience in doing a particular job....no longer 'count'? :sad:

ManaAdaSystem
17th Aug 2010, 15:40
Manaadasystem
I can assume then that your fellow crewmembers are allowed to disrispect SOPs as long as they are below 60?

No, you can't. The younger guys know what SOP means. They also are well in line with the way aviation has progressed, so dive and drive is a no no, 320 knots below FL 100 is not standard procedure and stabilized at 1000/500 ft means exactly that. Oh, I forgot, they also mean what minimums mean.

IFLy4Free
17th Aug 2010, 15:47
I know plenty of captains over the age of 60 that have had only one wife, no kids, great retirement planning...but lets see the airlines are getting rid of pension plans... Oh am maybe these guys just like their job!

poina
17th Aug 2010, 22:24
Well not to argue but......All the guys I came up with are now in their late 50's and not one of them want to go past 60. Most are jealous that I was able to go at 56. There was NO pension where I was as an expat, so mine was financed entirely by me. As far as reduction in pensions....well it didn't take a brain surgeon to see which way the wind was blowing so maybe some personal responsibility is in order. However, we're part of the boomer generation that seems to believe that it's our right to have THAT house, boat, car, etc.
And we were planning our future based on the seniority above us leaving at 60.