View Full Version : Age limit to 70?

Sonny Hammond
7th Aug 2010, 09:37

"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."

Looks like all the airline managers can breathe easy and we can forget about a payrise and promotion eh?

Gas Bags
7th Aug 2010, 11:36
Everyone is different. I have worked with people over seventy and they have done things very well albeit slower than younger folk.

I have also worked with people slightly under 70 who were even worse because they wanted to prove to evrybody that age didnt matter, and made mistakes along the way whilst sprouting that their experience was more important than anything else, including the other personnel.

It is and always will be a fine line.


Sonny Hammond
7th Aug 2010, 12:41
I totally agree, some of the sharpest guys I've worked with and learnt the most from we're on the downhill run.

However, it would be hard to see this get up of there were an oversupply of younger pilots. It is driven by the ever present threat of a pilot shortage and continually defangs the pilot groups chance of reversing the race to the bottom for pay and conditions.

Big business wins, next gen of pilots lose again. Baby boomers get to pay for wife one, two and three.
There is a complete generation of pilots that basically have no hope of earning a meaningful living out of a career in flying.


7th Aug 2010, 22:55
If the trend in undercutting pilots wages continues, we will all need to work to 70 or look for another source of income.

7th Aug 2010, 23:19
Given the rate of change of technology and SOP's for that matter, I am not sure how keen I would be to have guys into their 70's operating. Whilst I'm sure there are always people who are capable at that age to make a rule for all pilots isn't necessarily the wisest option. 60 was a good number it should have stayed there.

Be thankful you are not employed by UPS. They recently laid off 60 odd pilots and the increase in the retirement age to 65 was cited as being one of the contributing factors

8th Aug 2010, 04:55
I've flown with 70 year olds long haul and I should've got most of their salary, because I did most of their job, they think they're onto it but they're not.
Unfortunately when they do their medicals there's no method of checking their brains for inability to stay awake and occasional confusion.

Capt Fathom
8th Aug 2010, 05:10
they think they're onto it but they're not

And that's exactly what they want you to think! :E

there's no method of checking their brains for inability to stay awake and occasional confusion

That could refer to any age group!

rescue 1
8th Aug 2010, 05:42
I'll wait till I'm 70 to respond...

That way I would have worked for 5 or 6 airlines that went broke because a new one started underneath offering lesser terms and conditions!

Actually - its looking more and more everyday that I'll need to be working till I'm 80! Can we get that on the agenda :)

8th Aug 2010, 05:59
Gotta pay for the 5 wives somehow don't they !

8th Aug 2010, 06:50
It shouldn't be any hassle provided the zimmer frame can be safely secured in the cockpit prior to take-off and landing.

Sonny Hammond
8th Aug 2010, 08:44
New step to evacuation checklist,

* CM2 take BCF, torch, NOTOC, throw ailing commander over shoulder and evacuate using first available exit
* Take command on ground (if he already wasn't running the show)

On a lighter (or not) note, have anyone seen the old data that used to do the rounds that showed life expectancy vs retirement age for pilots?
From that, pilot incapacitation (permanent) will be a memory item.

8th Aug 2010, 23:51
But they don't croak until they retire, right? All the more reason to up the retirement age to 90. Think of the tax contributions they could make with another 25 years.
We all know these automated airplanes fly themselves anyway, so what's the big deal if the Captain is asleep from V1 to the 80 knots call after landing?

9th Aug 2010, 00:56
Doesnt matter what age you make retirement. They all still have to pass the sim checks. And from what I've seen lately, it gets increasingly hard when in to your sixties.

Partnered one guy a while back who really shouldnt have got through. Hell of a nice guy but really felt like I was doing his job too.

I think a few would have already gone if the guts hadnt dropped out of their Super fund with the GFC.

Mach E Avelli
9th Aug 2010, 03:25
Charles Darwin rules in all things. Just as the old croc eventually gets driven away from the best part of the river, old pilots get driven out by the 'system'.
How it usually works is the older guys lose interest in checking and training and so it gets handed down to the younger more gung-ho types on their climb up the career ladder. The young guys have to make their mark. Some may even have an urge to re-invent aviation. The old guys either can't hack it, or feel that they should no longer have to prove anything. Then there are those who are good enough, but simply can't be bothered any more. Whatever, most develop a preference for the golf course or fishing etc.
There are a few exceptions, but these tend to be people with no life outside aviation. Types who can take the ops manual to bed every night and still find it fascinating reading.....

Capt Claret
9th Aug 2010, 03:53
It's interesting how in this thread, and those of a similar ilk, have lots of comments about how the youngsters better reflexes and modern systems knowledge have saved the day for the old codger in the left seat but very little comment on how the old codger's experience, wisdom and ability to perceive the coming threat, have helped avoid the need to demonstrate lighting reflexes, or recite some section of the OM, that doesn't quite deal with the situation at hand. :p

No one should vacate the left seat just because it is perceived by those looking longingly at said seat, believe it is their turn. Those us in the left seat had to wait until a vacancy occurred and then prove our ability to hold the position, and I see no reason why the younger generation shouldn't wait similarly. :}

What The
9th Aug 2010, 04:20
Because now that you have that seat the only people who benefit from an increase in the retirement age is you.

Everyone else has their careers put back 5 years.

Gen Boomer greed. Permeats the senior ranks at all airlines and dare I say, most industries other than I.T.. Wonder why?

9th Aug 2010, 04:44
Well said CC.

I recall info from safety articles and even the US Airmans Info manual that I read yrs ago that younger pilots I spoke to here several yrs ago didnt have a clue about.
Some of it basic info like wake turbulence, how to avoid it etc. They were operating small turboprops (<5700kg) alongside jet transports of all sizes at Perth.
Sorry to say for all the theory taught in ATPL schools now, there is still a frightening lack of basic knowledge out there among the younger "hotshots".

I am hardly ancient but I remember the old saying about simple and compound ignorance.
Simple ignorance is not knowing something, compound ignorance is not knowing that you dont know something (or that it even exists).:uhoh:

The former means you can go and find out and look it up or refresh your memory, the latter is far more insidious and dangerous as you may suddenly realize something you know nothing about does exist just as it is about to bite you in the ass.
Maybe the new generation needs to remember the old pilots and bold pilots phrase too.:ok:

Gas Bags
9th Aug 2010, 04:46
Mach E Avelli,

Your post is profound in that it is not confined to just pilot ranks....You are spot on.

If I am still working at 65 and not on the golf course, then I have screwed up big time!


Capt Claret
9th Aug 2010, 05:01
What The, assuming your response is to my post, I beg to disagree. If the retirement age is not specified but performance based, the only people who don't benefit are those forced to retire at a certain age in times gone.

Speaking only for myself, why is it greed if I enjoy my work and want to keep doing it for as log as I want.

If some one thinks I or any one should go and retire just to let some one else get a position, then that some one should first demonstrate their own altruism, by retiring now, and letting some wannabe lower on the totem pole get a leg up.

To reinforce Aussie027's post, a mate was in command of a jet recently, with Bloggs flying a visual night circuit. Bloggs (3 years as a jet F/O) didn't want any pre-programmed FMS assistance but was going to 'raw data it'.

When bloggs was told several times that he was low on profile, he acknowledged but did nothing to correct the situation. Eventually he was instructed to level off and told he would fly into the profile at 3 dme.

On the ground Bloggs asked, "how did you know what height I needed to be at 3 dme?"

What The
9th Aug 2010, 05:11
That just proves the training system at that company is lacking.

My point is YOU get to keep the seat for 5 years longer whilst everyone else has to wait 5 years longer to get it and then has to retire at the same age as you.

If you love flying that much buy a lightie, but don't bottleneck the system as YOU joined it.

It would be altruistic to realise that the pilots who joined airlines in the 70's and early 80's have had the greatest careers any pilot is ever likely to have. They should recognise such and maybe, just maybe, leave some scraps for the rest.

9th Aug 2010, 05:21
Try flying longhaul 744 with 70 year old F/O's. I've got some experience of it, but don't do it anymore thank goodness because I've just turned 60 myself. There's not to many upsides to turning 60 but that's the best one.
Routine, not bad, but when something out of the ordinary occurs these guys struggle and on one occasion I called in sick rather than do without any sleep in the bunk because I didn't trust a guy who should be in an old folks home.
There's no way of checking what's going on between their ears and nothing will be done until something bad happens.

9th Aug 2010, 06:13
What The,

I have to agree with Claret on this.

Why should said Capt vacate said seat at the age of 65-70 just to make room for the RHS to further his/her career. As long as the Capt can continually hold a Class 1 medical and is deemed proficient when under a Contolled Check environment ie Sim or Annual Route Check, then why should the Capt have to vacate their seat.
The problem with Today's Gen Y is that people expect everything now, and think that they have a right to it now. Patience is a virtue so I was told. All good things come to those who wait, so I was also told. Besides, as Claret elluded to, if said Capt still loves the thrill of flying, then he/she has every right to occupy that seat.

It was not that long ago(still exists at a particular major carrier) that the transition from RHS to LHS was an average of 12-13 years. Today, courtesy of the LCC and rapid expansion of said airlines, people joining these carriers think it is their right to hold a Command on the company aircraft within 3 years. This is certainly not the norm and should be realised as such.

Angle of Attack
9th Aug 2010, 07:30
Far out most guys between 60-65 are pretty hopeless I would hate to see 70 year old codgers flying commercial aviation.

:ok: Haha just kidding!

I think you can't really make generalizations on age, but at the end of the day most people are not going to go to 70, heaps get medically discharged so to speak around 65, so for people worried about it affecting their careers take a chill pill, think about it eventually this extending is going to hit a limit and there will be an avalanche of retirements, and an avalanche of promotions! Look forward to it! I for one am aiming for 55 but realistically it will probably be 60 but you never know! Got too many better things to do than work! :)

9th Aug 2010, 07:53
I find it funny (read depressing) that those in command at 60-65+ often talk about the younger generation just needing to wait their turn. In my airline those old guys often got into a widebody jet job in their twenties and had a command on a widebody in their thirties. Today its more like early to mid thirties to even get into the airline with an expected wait of about 20 years till your first widebody command.

The old guys tend to forget that their progression was a lot quicker, thanks in part to the fact that retirement ages when they would have joined were around 55. Now that retirement ages have gone out the window we have the old fellas hanging around long past the retirement age that was in place when they joined and which helped advance their career.

I also find it funny (depressing) when the old guys bring out the "experience" argument. Typical Second Officer age is mid thirties to mid forties with somewhere between 5-10k hours. First Officers anywhere from mid forties to late sixties or even early seventies thanks to Captains being forced bak into the right hand seat. The first time around FO will have say around 15-20k hours. Can you seriously make an argument that either of these guys is lacking in the experience that only a 65+ year old Captain can bring?

What The
9th Aug 2010, 08:50
The problem with Today's Gen Y is that people expect everything now

And the problem with you boomers is you honestly think that without you the whole show would fall on its head.

It is not about the love of flying.
It is not about the airline requiring your so valuable "experience".


9th Aug 2010, 09:32
What The,

According to your Avatar(handle if you don't get it), you are 50yrs of age, making you a boomer.

Oh and BTW , I have just turned 39 so way off the mark CHAMP!!

3 Holer
9th Aug 2010, 09:50
IT IS ABOUT MONEY AND THEREFORE GREED!!!! Oh shit yeah, the money in the aviation industry these days is HUGE!!!!!:mad:

Get with the program son or find another fishing hole! ;)

9th Aug 2010, 10:40
We all know these automated airplanes fly themselves anyway,
Classic response from the inept. If you can't do it, then denigrate it. :ugh:

Capt Fathom
9th Aug 2010, 12:14
In my airline those old guys often got into a widebody jet job in their twenties and had a command on a widebody in their thirties.

Then again, a lot didn't! :{

You cannot generalised! Some did. Most didn't!

9th Aug 2010, 12:19
Start working the old buggers at max hours, with min rest.
Then watch em start falling off the perch!
I can hear it now:
"Geez Doris, when I agreed to keep working till I reach 100, I meant age not hours per month!!!"

Capt Claret
9th Aug 2010, 13:19
Sorry What The I can't agree with your narrow premise that it is about money and therefore greed.

It may well be about money, in my case it is. I still love the flying but I've had a gut full of the rest of the shit that goes with it. However, as much as I'd love to be a grey nomad, I can't afford it. So while I can earn a dollar flying, I'll keep going.

You telling me I should get out because I'm greedy, is as unreasonable as I would be if I told you to keep going until you couldn't make the grade. To my knowledge we still live in a democracy and it is not legal to discriminate against people based on age.

And lest it appear that I'm ageist against younger pilots, Bloggs & I were caught a little short tonight into Cairns, as we were expecting a LOC but instead were cleared a VOR-A, which culminates in circling.

Passing showers meant we weren't visual and executed a missed approach and landed off the subsequent approach.

Bloggs, some 20 years my junior provided stirling support, as one would expect, and is hereby acknowledged.

9th Aug 2010, 15:52
Airline management isn't stupid...well...not always anyway.

It might not be apparent to many at present, but the western world is heading for a severe labor shortage by midway through this coming decade. The leading arc of the bell curve of baby boomers will be really hitting the retirement period in a big way. It will be an unprecedented period in history as, in general, the baby boomers will be retiring with a significant proportion of discretionary retirement funds from superannuation investments and other investments that both they and their parents made. These retirees will be wanting to spend it and there simply won't be enough in the labour pool to meet demand. The airline companies will need every able-bodied pilot they can get their hands on. If those same companies can act now to increase their prospective labour pool, they'll be in a much better position to control costs a few years down the line. "How?" you may ask. Look at the bickering that is already taking place on here as the up-and-comers feel they are being held back and the old farts feel like they are the objects of age discrimination. Typical pilots!

Types who can take the ops manual to bed every night and still find it fascinating reading.....

I don't take it to bed to read. It makes my wife happy reminiscing on how there used to be something firm between the sheets.

9th Aug 2010, 20:50
I realise your post is toungue in cheek Mince, but I can easily remember the days when I would check in for a long haul flight to be greeted by a weary looking FO (paired with me, the other two crew would be in the bunks), who would be the first to fall asleep, given the chance. Me, the 'old fart' had managed to grab a few hours peace and quiet in the afternoon and have some worthwhile rest, the FO, on the other hand, didn't get any rest due to having a young family!

Old 'Un
9th Aug 2010, 22:45
Why does there have to be a "retiring age" at all? Isn't the ability to perform a far better and safer yardstick? After all, there's a similar yardstick at the lower end of the industry as well.

How often have we seen posts on this site asking what the requirements are for XYZ Co to even consider a new hire? Usually it's hours related, with some requirement relating to type (endo or ability to gain one). That doesn't work at the upper end - the hours are usually there already as is the experience on type, i.e. a proven record.

So, as some have already commented, aren't the limiting factors the ability to pass checks and medicals?

I suspect therein lies the devil. There will always be a degree of inconsistency between the testing practitioners in the interpretation of what is and what isn't acceptable. The line between pass and fail is, I suspect, broader than most realise because some parameters are subjective and cannot be quantified.

Arguments over the speed of reflex are not always a good measure of ability. Ask around about the number of incidents where, having suffered an engine failure on a twin, the wrong engine has inadvertently been shut down in haste. Happens in fixed- and rotary-wing.

The bottom line for me is: Can the Commander continue to perform proficiently and safely? If then answers are "yes" and "yes", I'll fly with him/her, regardless of their age.

Le Vieux

9th Aug 2010, 23:48
Maybe we should rename the seniority list

Survivor list


Senilality list.

Sonny Hammond
10th Aug 2010, 05:40
This is great! go you good thing!- baby boomers vs x,y gen is always a sure bet!
The real answer is move to an airline that really needs pilots, like um Emirates. Retirement age doesn't factor then!!!

teresa green
10th Aug 2010, 12:59
Having flown until 65, and now 72, I have not the slightest interest of (1) ever sleeping in a hotel again (2) do not ever want another wakeup call, (3) ever put on a uniform again, (4) never want to read another manual or a notam unless it involves a "lighty" (5) 0500 sign ons, or even worse 2100 sign ons, (6) ever eat another crew meal, (7) spend the entire night at 30,000 ft (8) never lay my eyes on another simulater, (9) never drive home feeling like s#$t (10) ever having to listen to the crap, sh%t and drivel from management who would not know a APU from a camels arse. 70 yrs is to old for commercial flying, your eyes, your hearing, your plumbing, your brain are not functioning quick enough to do the job, (thank God) its time to go fishing, and be grateful for the great time and job you had, I started at TAA aged 19 years and finished in QF aged 65 enough is enough. Enjoy your time, but move on for the young guns coming behind.:D

10th Aug 2010, 14:18
The hypocrisy of the over 60's guys justifiying their greed, is quite breath- taking.

I'll bet the vast majority of them were quite happy to accept their upgrades when others reached retirement age in years gone by. Not a peep was heard from them, in defence of the poor guys who were forced to retire.

Now they bleat 'discrimination' when anyone suggests they have had a fair innings.

They have had more than a fair innings, but they are going to ride that gravy train into the sunset....and everyone else be damned.

Van Gough
10th Aug 2010, 14:32
Having flown until 65, and now 72, I have not the slightest interest of (1) ever sleeping in a hotel again (2) do not ever want another wakeup call, (3) ever put on a uniform again, (4) never want to read another manual or a notam unless it involves a "lighty" (5) 0500 sign ons, or even worse 2100 sign ons, (6) ever eat another crew meal, (7) spend the entire night at 30,000 ft (8) never lay my eyes on another simulater, (9) never drive home feeling like s#$t (10) ever having to listen to the crap, sh%t and drivel from management who would not know a APU from a camels arse. 70 yrs is to old for commercial flying, your eyes, your hearing, your plumbing, your brain are not functioning quick enough to do the job, (thank God) its time to go fishing, and be grateful for the great time and job you had, I started at TAA aged 19 years and finished in QF aged 65 enough is enough. Enjoy your time, but move on for the young guns coming behind.:D

Great post! :ok:

10th Aug 2010, 17:24
Well if all the senior pilots want to continue flying to 65 and beyond for the 'love of flying' I say let them fly for the regionals! They could fill in for the upcoming pilot shortage from years of stagnant growth that has forced new pilots to leave the profession in search of livable wages. The new regulations requiring commuter pilots to have 1500 hours will also be solved since they would have 18000 hour pilots to fly 0:30 min legs all day. The regional pay scales would also be enough for someone drawing social security and retirement since they pay only enough to supplement one's living. Everyone will be happy since they 'love to fly' so much that they can fly 90+ hours each month!

After all they are flying for the 'love of flying' at that age, right?

10th Aug 2010, 21:48
Great post alright TG.
I've always thought that when pilots reach the age when they can no longer sit in the left seat then they should go to the bottom of the seniority list and become a librarian (S/O).
Then they could do the walk-arounds in the rain, order the after t/o refreshments, make up the bunk and do the paperwork. S/O pay of course.

11th Aug 2010, 00:43
Agree entirely TG

I'm on the downhill run from 60 and my medical's just gone west.

There's much, much more to life!

Gas Bags
11th Aug 2010, 02:07
I understand the average life expectancy following retirement is approx. 5 yrs. (My understanding only!!!).

I believe a major factor contributing to this is the fact that a large majority of people have minimal interests in life outside of their career.

I also believe that generally a large number of people in Aviation, and particularly Civil Aviation, have even less than the average interests in life outside of their careers. A lot of factors contribute towards this including the following:

The working life in Civil Aviation is very anti-social with regards to hours worked, when they are worked, time off etc.
Largely because of point 1 people in aviation tend to have a social base of others they work with in Aviation.
Because of both points 2, and 3, many people lose touch with what is going on around them with old friends, dont get to make new friends, and generally the career takes over as the major part of life, leaving not much else.The Police force is very similar in most respects.

So having read the inspiring post by Teresa Green, maybe instead of thinking about working longer and longer, we should be looking at developing interests outside of the career earlier and earlier, so that the transition from working, to retirement, and then maintaining a fullfilling, rewarding life goes way beyond the 5 year average.

Having a successful, challenging, and rewarding career is very important in life, but it is my belief that it is as important to seek fullfilment, and satisfaction, from as many areas as possible in life, other than work.

I have known too many people over the years who consider it extremely important, for their own well being, to be able to say that they worked for 'ABC' airlines for 40+ years, and it is my opinion that this is, in reality, only impressive at the reunion dinners and means very little else to anybody other than yourself, once retired, and does little to contribute to a long, rewarding life following retirement.

That said, if for some people what makes for a fullfilling, rewarding life is to be able to tell people how many years they spent at work, and they are capable of carrying on in the career, then best of luck to them. Most important of all is to make the decision to retire with your family, for yourself and your family, not because of the ideal of another.

I for one would much rather be able to tell people that I retired at a young age, have a single figure golf handicap, go fishing when I like, did 40+ years in retirement, and have the people I am telling it to be from all walks of life, including Aviation.

With a bit of luck I will make the single figure turn to scratch, and be turning my head skywards as a jet airliner disturbs my game, or should I have said disturbs my life!


teresa green
11th Aug 2010, 07:36
It is possible some of the blokes hanging on are 89ers. Some were not so lucky to get a job, after the "trainwreck" and basically went broke. In that era most of us had young families, and it was a hell of a struggle to survive, with mortgages, school fees etc so it was into the savings and super, and the nest egg turned into a bantams egg for many. You need a buck in the bank to retire without hardship these days, so rather than greed it might be more like they don't have a choice, just a thought.

Gas Bags
12th Aug 2010, 00:14
obie2 my good man,

From a post you made on the 2nd July 2010....

Sorry guys. Being a retired airline pilot and after 45 yrs in the business, having started at the age of 19, and progressing from SPL to PPL to CPL to Instructor rating to SCPL to 2nd class ATPL and then finally a 1st class ATPL and then 16 odd thousand hrs on a variety of piston, turbo prop and jet a/c including checking and training time, I thought I might be able to help out poor old 100 hrs with his dilemma!

Obviously not!

I shall leave "100 hrs" and the rest of you "experts" to it!

Best of british luck!

My bold...

And a reply to your post very shortly after on the same day...

yes, obviously not. You came across as rude and incapable of reading what 100 hours was asking. And your list of qualifications doesn't change a thing. Rude and unhelpful is still rude and unhelpful however many hours you have.

And yet another reply shortly after the one above, on the same day...

I am sick of comments by people like this who show a grandiose superiority about their own self-importance.

I don't care if you have a million hours and a type rating to fly Virgin Galactic into space. I would not want to be taught by someone like yourself.

And another...

Obie2. From your vast experience in aviation, I am sure you have forgotten things 30 years ago that I am still only going to learn 5 years from now.

You clearly are highly experienced (did I see right on your profile - you flew the Concorde? WOW!!!)

You can offer so much advice and share so many experiences with someone as unexperienced as myself.

May I ask you something though, just have another look at your first post (reply) to me. Is there honestly anything in this post that could have helped me with my question (except making me think that I am useless as a pilot and should rather quit?)

Anyways, congrats on a very successful career in aviation. Many young pilots aspire to have a career as great as yours. For me, I am content being PPL, but always try to improve my skills and learn something new

And another...

Good grief man, some of us simply do not want a CPL or an instructor's ticket. Is that a crime? Are we all allowed to be different?

And another...

Hmm, I wouldnt bother, looking at his other posts I think his only qualification is being troll, and not a very convincing one at that. http://images.ibsrv.net/ibsrv/res/src:www.pprune.org/get/images/smilies/thumbs.gif

And another...

Obie2 - comments like yours are what gives PPRuNe a bad name. They are uncalled for and arrogant nonsense to boot.

You have had a career in flying. Well good for you. You are in the wrong forum. This is for pilots who fly for pleasure. I am more than sure that flying with you would be anything but a pleasure you crusty old maggot. http://images.ibsrv.net/ibsrv/res/src:www.pprune.org/get/images/smilies/evil.gif

And another...

I thought that I had read just about every sort of crap on this forum.
then I read obie's post.
I reckon the nearest you have come to a real aircraft is looking at it over the fence!


I bet you have a handicap of 27 and can sometimes play to it.


12th Aug 2010, 03:46
Can't sack 'em 'cause they're senile 'cause you have to be senile to take up this career anyway :}

:*now why did I sit down at this computer again?

Capt Claret
12th Aug 2010, 03:56
I'm astounded at the accusations of greed and selfishness from people wanting to dictate how long some one holds a position, when for most of the advocates of such a position, their motivation is wanting a vacancy in the left seat.

The only person who should have input to retirement date/age, assuming competency, is the individual.

I might have to change my goal in life. To be the first centarian airline pilot. :E

And another thing, most reading & posting here will live to 70+. If your < 50' then that's 20+ years away and a lot can happen in those 20 years. It may eventuate that it doesn't suit you to retire as early as you advocate now, in the bloom of yoof. :8

And, Mrs C points out, the earlier us baby boomers retire, the greater tax burden on the subsequent generations.

12th Aug 2010, 04:25
Maybe we are looking at this all wrong?

Restricting new entrants into jet jobs until they have reached 35yrs and at least, say, 8000 hrs and therefore reached maturity, allowing pilots to continue unrestricted as long as their medical allows may be a better option?

If the industry could retain more experience, older in yrs and hrs pilots and slow down the race to the bottom by keeping the younger, I'll do it for nothing, mob in light aircraft until they gain more life and aviation experience, we may all be better off.

12th Aug 2010, 07:33
Gas Bags, old son!...

did you sit up all night researching for that response?...

I am impressed!

Handicap is 12 actually!

You're still not a pilot!

You're a goose!

12th Aug 2010, 22:20
As previously quoted - "

Having flown until "nearly 60 and now 60", I have not the slightest interest of:
(1) ever sleeping in a hotel again,
(2) do not ever want another wakeup call,
(3) ever put on a uniform again,
(4) never want to read another manual or a notam unless it involves a "lighty"
(5) 0500 sign ons, or even worse 2100 sign ons,
(6) ever eat another crew meal,
(7) spend the entire night at xxxxx ft,
(8) never lay my eyes on another simulater,
(9) never drive home feeling like s#$t (10) ever having to listen to the crap, sh%t and drivel from management who would not know a APU from a camels arse. AND
(10) ever every have to deal with the morons from CASA ever again.

Now I see my long suffering wife, we do nice things together, I eat well, I do the things I like to do,


Never ever ever will I have to read the crap and deal with the drivel and deceit of a HR department ever ever again.

Love aviation for a while, life is much better!!

Arnold E
13th Aug 2010, 13:01
I are an pilot and and ingineer (cuoldnt barely spell it) wot does that make me?
(Jeez, leaving that open arn't I?)

distracted cockroach
13th Aug 2010, 21:34
There are plenty of guys out there who are now over 60 and who have had widebody commands for 20 plus years, and gained them with the anticipation of a compulsary retirement at 55 (or 58 or even 60) Lucky them.
I'm of the next generation...approaching 50, approaching 20,000 hours and still hundreds of seniority slots away from that widebody command. To have anything like the financial security in retirement of the current age 60 pluses, I'll probably HAVE to work until I'm 70.
If I had the money, I would retire now. I still enjoy my job, but I have a life and a whole bunch of things I want to do whilst I am still able. I actually feel sorry for the oldies who won't give it up because they don't have anything else to look forward to...there can't be any other reason....anyone who has done 20 plus years as a widebody captain with a carrier like Qantas or Air NZ has no-one to blame but themselves if they can't afford to retire.
I think it's selfish for them to stay on...especially given their retirement age expectation when they stated.

13th Aug 2010, 23:44
The reason why they can't afford to retire at 60 is the longhaul pilots disease..

..marry a hostie..give them a house
..marry another hostie..give them a house..
..do the "smart thing" and just live with a hostie..
..find out that the law still requires you to give them a house..

..contemplate retirement..find out that your ex wives own a quarter of your super each.
Haven't you heard the old boys in the crew room saying I'd love to retire but I don't want that @#$%& spending any more of my money!!

14th Aug 2010, 01:29
Question is ..... why so many wives?

Pamelah Andersen
14th Aug 2010, 02:40
Air New Zealand pisses very close to the wind "accomodating" old gits in their late 60s/70s and allowing them to fly as widebody FO's.

From ICAO:

" 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."

It is screwing every other pilot in the industry right down to Johnnie numb nuts doing his PPL busting his sack trying to get a job - any job.

Even worse these old fellas collect the New Zealand State Pension and clip a 200K plus package from the state owned airline. WTF?! HIDEOUS!

14th Aug 2010, 03:53
Great post TG.
Capt Claret, I think what you should be saying is " don't make the mistake of staying with low payers for any longer than you must. The're just tempory stops up the greasy pole of aviation".
The guy who retires with the least amount of hours and the most money wins.
We just went through this [email protected] at cx. The older guys who say the're doing heavy jet long haul for the love of flying are full of it.

14th Aug 2010, 09:13
And all the guys bitching and moaning now, how hard done by they are ,will be the ones that will be the target of the pilots that haven't been born yet. Nothing changes. Heard the same record for the last thirty plus years.

I will get great satisfaction when I get past 60 that I am pissing these guys off. They are the ones that will drown in their own self interest.

The whole topic is a bloody bore.

Angle of Attack
14th Aug 2010, 10:17
I'm of the next generation...approaching 50, approaching 20,000 hours and still hundreds of seniority slots away from that widebody command.

What? 20,000 hours and not a widebody command? Either you cant cut it or you have stayed in a legacy carrier with a real slow promotion regime. If you are not prepared to move overseas for a command dont winge about your so called lack of prospects! I can guarantee there is thousands of pilots with widebody commands at less than 20k hours!

14th Aug 2010, 11:27
The older guys who say they're doing heavy jet long haul for the love of flying are full of it.

If you haven't done 'heavy jet long haul ' from the LHS how would you know?

15th Aug 2010, 04:31
Been looking at it from 5 feet away for the last 10 years. I've got a pretty good idea. You love flying, you fly regional. You love money and time off, you fly long haul.

15th Aug 2010, 07:44
Some joined a reputable Oz-based company which, let's say, had an expected and historically consistent time to command of 10-15 years: viewed by new joiners as tolerable given the company's reputation. For a myriad of unforeseeable reasons, discussed on PPRuNe every second day, it stopped growing. :hmm:

Distracted 'Roach didn't say he wasn't a captain; just that a widebody command was a long time away. Now, I suspect you would have to agree that overseas widebody DECs are available only to those with widebody commands already. Do you imply too that a non-widebody command is somehow less prestigious? And to go overseas without that widebody command, joining the bottom of another seniority list, is a calculated gamble; but it has worked for some.

But if an aspirational pilot feels that the overseas route offers merely a 'guestimated' similar time-to-promotion, widebody or otherwise, as staying where they are then the choice is a little more complicated. Factor in the big influences in opting for that reputable Oz-based company in the first place and the decision is not hard for many to understand.

The points you've potentially missed are that:
- it is each pilot's decision to make without being judged by others,
- it is ok to want to balance life and work,
- promotion does not, in and of itself, make the wo/man, and
- slow promotion is not an indicator that a pilot "can't cut it". :rolleyes:

Ego is a necessary thing, but not the only thing when it comes to command choices for some. :ok:

teresa green
15th Aug 2010, 13:25
Have to say Grip Pipe, the missus was not always so delighted to have me around all the time, but the dog was! Since I have retired I have learnt to do year 7 homework, go to swimming lessons with a 14 month old, (scary) and take a granddaughter to ballet class, just me, and 30 mothers looking at me, (really scary) it crossed my mind it was easier to go into OOL on a black and windy night, then sit there like a dirty old man, but hey, thats retirement, enjoy yourself!

distracted cockroach
15th Aug 2010, 19:13
From AoA
"What? 20,000 hours and not a widebody command? Either you cant cut it or you have stayed in a legacy carrier with a real slow promotion regime. If you are not prepared to move overseas for a command dont winge about your so called lack of prospects! I can guarantee there is thousands of pilots with widebody commands at less than 20k hours!"

Yes old chap, but not so many at airlines anyone would want to work for. Certainly used to be the case at the legacy carriers that you got your widebody command after 10 years (maybe 5-6000 hours) or whatever, but that doesn't happen any more because the retirement age keeps increasing...that's the whole point of the thread.
Excuse me for enjoying living in the country I was born. Travelled the world and I'm happy where I am thanks....I accepted the fact that a widebody command would be a while coming (and yes, Jetsbest is right....I have over 10 000 hours jet command time) but the point is that the goalposts are continually moving due to increasing age limits and old guys staying on.
I consider that I have a right to whinge, because that's what we do on these forums....and because when I joined the airline, I had an expectation based on a particular retirement age...as did the old guys who have had commands for 20 years. The problem is their expectations keep getting better, and mine (and my colleage's) keep getting worse. The few are benefitting, and the majority are losing...so are we whinging...HELL YES!!!

Gas Bags
16th Aug 2010, 09:39

Does this mean we are not friends, or are you just trying to make me cry?

You remind me of something an old friend told me years ago....Still relevant today.

'If you start to thinking you are someone of importance try telling someone elses dog what to do!'

I would urge you to practice with your own dog first but I am afraid it may bite you....

12 indeed...Hahahaha.....I would like to see that with your temperament!!!