EASA research into Age limitations final report released

[helimutt]

Final report now released from the EASA Research Project on Age Limitations for Commercial Pilots. The recommendations might be good news for the single pilot 60-65 group.

https://www.easa.europa.eu/sites/default/files/dfu/EASA_REP_RESEA_2017_1.pdf

[Jonty]

Doesn’t look good if you want the age changed.

[parabellum]

I think that all contracts should only go to 65 with a voluntary option to continue beyond 65 subject to the extended testing recommended. Whether employers would agree to extensions beyond 65 is another matter, for years some companies had 55-56 as the retirement age when the limit was still 60. Personally I resented being forced into retirement at age 60 but would have gone quietly at 65. There will always be some who are fit and able to go beyond 65.

[icemanalgeria]

65 is ok But only if we are allowed state pensions at 65.

[Gordomac]

Para : Me too. I would have gone quietly to 65. In my outfit, we were cleared to do so but they really messed it up. I decided not to remain quiet and got right royally kicked in the ollies. Out at 61. Some others did stay quiet but got slung out a year later.

Any one know how Captain Bayley got on with his legal case with the UK CAA ? I would ask him myself but I think I upset him too as I didn't even get an Xmas card.

[Radgirl]

Interesting report based on only 7 articles and data from only 6 out of 18 participating authorities plus this data is based on effectively failed medicals not incapacitation.

The good news is that an extension of single pilot commercial operations to 65th birthday is safe enough for up to 6 passengers although for 7-9 passengers the safe age limit seems to be claimed as 45-54!!!

The worry is that the suggestion is to introduce risk assessment from age 40 with coronary angiography and calcium scores for risk that may be based on issues like stress, financial worries and commuting - something pilots never experience :confused:

It will be interesting to see how this is taken up, noting that the individual pilot must be compared with risk in the population of the country of issue :uhoh: but could lead to much more investigation and cost from age 40 and a number of pilots having medicals refused on the basis of perceived risk scores possibly in the absence of any pathology.

[Smythe]

Why on Earth would you want to fly past 65????

[Rated De]

Right around the European continent exasperated airline management come to the long denied, buried and ignored reality.

Human capital matters, pilots are as demographics foretold, retiring in ever increasing numbers.
Airline management has pushed regulatory limits, making them targets, in in the drive for 'efficiency'
Curiously though their 'work' is only weekday.

Aging and tiring pilots can't be fixed by endless increases in pensionable age.

Time for some investment airline management, you are going to need it and it isn't a new fleet!

[Majorbyte]

many airlines and recruitment agencies are living in the dark ages, Turkish Airlines have for a long time had an upper age of 45 years and many recruitment agencies think you're past it after 50.

​

[lederhosen]

I am pretty sure the Turkish Airlines limit is not 45 for captains. I know of people well over that age getting in (even non type rated).

[His dudeness]

Why on Earth would you want to fly past 65????


I would not want, but I will have to. Age 67 for the state pension in Germany.

[Heatseeker]

Hey Smythe. I once came across a flight engineer on an american freighter who showed up on the Gen Dec as 74 years old.
I asked the captain "he's 74 years old, how come he is still flying ?"
3 ex wives was the answer.

[bArt2]

Why on Earth would you want to fly past 65????

For example because the government in your country raised the minimum pension age for commercial pilots from 56 to 67, like over here in Belgium. You are no longer allowed to fly, but you are only allowed to retire two years later.

[Abel Coelho]

We shoul be able to fly wile medical and technical still ok.

[CaptainMongo]

For example because the government in your country raised the minimum pension age for commercial pilots from 56 to 67, like over here in Belgium. You are no longer allowed to fly, but you are only allowed to retire two years later.

That is true in the US as well for those born after 1960.

Assessing and managing the risk associated with the physical aspects of an aging pilot is good and continues to improve. The problem, in my view, is assessing cognitive decline. I come to the opinion that after a certain age a pilot should not be allowed to train in a new aircraft. What’s that age? 61, 62, 63, that I am not sure but it has become clear to me as a check and training airman that at a certain age the mental capacity of a pilot to successfully train in a new aircraft is diminished. Before all you old geezers start flaming me (I’m 57 BTW), I admit this is an annectodal observation.

[BGQ]

I am astounded that this report has used derived data from questionable sources to come to the conclusions that it has in particular data from an aging private pilot group in the USA. That group is not monitored medically or practically in the manner professional pilots are.

There are several nations that have increased age limits and some with no age limit (Australia and New Zealand etc) yet data on the actual events of incapacitation and other incidents that may be age related has not been used.

The other curious factor is that there are established criteria for acceptable rates of systems failures used in the design of just about everything on an aircraft. It appears to me that the standards being applied here are way above those required for other systems on the aircraft particularly on multi crewed aircraft.

Age limits are just another form of discrimination ..... Medical Standards and Cognitive testing are not discriminatory and that's where we should be. If safety is really the issue those standards should be improved and apply to all pilots no matter their age.

[Uplinker]

Why on Earth would you want to fly past 65????

a) You work for a good airline with good terms and conditions and sensible rosters.

b) You have kept yourself fit and healthy through lifestyle choices, diet and regular exercise, and feel more like 55 not 65.

c) You love the job and are still fully competent to perform your duties.

d) Your brain is still sharp and you still have lots of energy and a zest for life.

e) The routes you fly and the airports you fly to and from are largely stress free.

f) You have mortgages, children at University, parents in care homes, to pay for.

g) The UK government won’t pay your state pension until you are 67/68.

If a pilot was working for a low cost outfit that worked its pilots to the max, with 6-on, 2-off rosters and 4 sector days, very early starts or very late finishes, and/or terrible T’s and C’s, no food, no crew welfare etc, then one would probably not want to continue.

But others like Capt Bayley, who fly long-haul to the Caribbean four times a month or whatever, life might be very good and enjoyable; So why not continue - as long as one can still do the job competently.


@BGQ; Good post :ok:

[jumbomax11]

I would not want, but I will have to. Age 67 for the state pension in Germany.

I don't think you have to work until 67. If you retire earlier, there will be some deduction from the state pension, but not really much!
I retired at 62 a few years ago and had almost no reduction as I have worked almost 44years.
And by the way, the state pension isn't really high and if you haven't put some money aside during your career it will be a big
change of lifestile!
I for myself enjoy my retirement, playing golf almost everyday!

[jumbomax11]

That is true in the US as well for those born after 1960.

Assessing and managing the risk associated with the physical aspects of an aging pilot is good and continues to improve. The problem, in my view, is assessing cognitive decline. I come to the opinion that after a certain age a pilot should not be allowed to train in a new aircraft. What’s that age? 61, 62, 63, that I am not sure but it has become clear to me as a check and training airman that at a certain age the mental capacity of a pilot to successfully train in a new aircraft is diminished. Before all you old geezers start flaming me (I’m 57 BTW), I admit this is an annectodal observation.

Very true what you wrote about the cognitive decline, as I have experienced by myself!
I did a new typerating at 60 and for me it was really tough. A year later I experienced "burnout Symptoms" with sleep problems and after some
very tough sim sessions I decided to retire at age 62!
And, btw, a half year after retired I experienced a cancer in my throat ( as no smoker!) which I hardly survived!
So for all of you, take care and retire as early as you can, there is life after retirement which I enjoy a lot now!

[F104G]

Remember, in Germany you can claim unemployment benefit (arbeitslosengeld) until final retirement by law.
However, this process is very frustrating for an 65 year old captain

[ChickenHouse]

IMHO, sole age is not a valid parameter for forcing people to stop working! There are many old people able to work and many younger people simply unable to ... In the aviation business we do have all we need to overcome the bull**** regulations, so why don‘t we use it? We have checkflights and we have medicals, so if both is ok and somebody wants to continue, why not?

I envy people able to live on the sole expense of others in distribution systems, like the German, but I am mentally unable to rip the younger ones off their wallets.

[six string]

for example full medical/mental check every 6 months: full sim/mental/skill/decision making ability check every 6 mths...evenly staggered...basically a serious check every 3 months.

[NoelEvans]

Why on Earth would you want to fly past 65????


a) You work for a good airline with good terms and conditions and sensible rosters.

b) You have kept yourself fit and healthy through lifestyle choices, diet and regular exercise, and feel more like 55 not 65.

c) You love the job and are still fully competent to perform your duties.

d) Your brain is still sharp and you still have lots of energy and a zest for life.

e) The routes you fly and the airports you fly to and from are largely stress free.

f) You have mortgages, children at University, parents in care homes, to pay for.

g) The UK government won’t pay your state pension until you are 67/68 66.

If a pilot was working for a low cost outfit that worked its pilots to the max, with 6-on, 2-off rosters and 4 sector days, very early starts or very late finishes, and/or terrible T’s and C’s, no food, no crew welfare etc, then one would probably not want to continue.

But others like Capt Bayley, who fly long-haul to the Caribbean four times a month or whatever, life might be very good and enjoyable; So why not continue - as long as one can still do the job competently.


@BGQ; Good post :ok:


Uplinker, Excellent post! I have amended your list to suit my circumstances. And my life is very good and enjoyable.

[Alpine Flyer]

Why on Earth would you want to fly past 65????
Because your state pension is reduced when you retire at 65 rather than 67 or maybe even older in a decade or two?
Because you still like flying better than feeding birds in the park?
Because you prefer earning more money to your pension?
Because you made some poor investment decisions or your pension plan didn't turn out as expected?

There are numerous reasons and the report is cautiously moving in the right direction, making this a matter of health and proficiency, thought he aspect that increased age will result in more careers ending with failure is certainly not something to be taken lightly.