No Age Limit Freighter Flying
 

Just been talking to a colleagues father who reckons he has just obtained a job
in Europe Flying heavy aircraft on freight operations and he is 67 years old.

He also mentioned that there was no age limit to fly freight and that the 65 age limit was for passengers only. Is this accurate?

Hope so ! I will never have saved enough dosh to retire at 65 :rolleyes: but, I fear you are wrong, think 65 is Max for Class1 medical, and you need one of these to Command/ be a crew member on a "Frightener" just as a pax A/C AFAIK.

Nope! I have a Class 1 and am over 65 and hold an ATPL to enable me to keep TREing without flying.
mcdhu

catatplay
I thought that there is no age limit to the Class 1 medical as I understand there are a few instructors over that age.

Class 1 depends on country, and generally, thankfully, your health. Healthy and happy, you should be ok.

Yes, definitely a 747 frtr crashing into downtown Paris, London, or New York etc., is much better than a pax 747 doing the same... :ugh:

I thought they always avoided schools, orphanages, hospitals, children's playgrounds and old folks homes........often by several hundred miles!;)

mcdhu,
Well, I used to be pretty much as knowledgeable as necessary to do my business so, are you saying that you're still flying as PiC or FO or working in the sim?

The 65 limit in the US is the same for any Part 121 operation, passenger or freight. What kind of operator is he working for?

I think you will find it is Sim-only for the over-65s on commercial ops in the UK.

As we all know, the licence for flying freight is very different and inferior to that for pax. At least I assume that's the case based on the number of times I get asked when I'll be able to get a licence to fly pax and not just parcels.

I can only comment about myself. I had to stop flying on my CAA (JAR) ATPL in 2006 at age 65. I was allowed to carry on as an SFI in the sim without any medical or any other condition ad infinitum.

However, in order to continue as an SFE, I had to maintain a Class 1 medical so that I could keep my ATPL current.

In other words, if I wanted to take a crew into the sim and teach them, I didn't need a medical but if I wanted to examine the same two people, I had to have a Class1 medical!

I carried on along those lines until I was 68 and came to the conclusion that I didn't need the hassle any more.

deltahotel . . .
 

Having flown pax and cargo B747s, I have noticed no operational handling differences that would necessiate separate pax and freight licences. :confused:

GlueBall.

Sorry, feeble attempt at humour on my part - please read my second sentence again. FWIW I've done both and know which I prefer (the non talking/walking type of freight for me).

Pilot or Engineer?

I'm surprised... 15 responses and not one has quoted any specific CAA laws that state positively the ruling on age limits.
In the US a pilot can continue operating even as PIC on any Part 135 operation (non-scheduled pax ops.. ie air-taxi/ aerial work of various nature) provided that he/she qualifies for a class 2 medical... Anything other than Part 121..(Scheduled Ops whether pax or freight)...
So what is the rule in Europe ? Can a pilot continue to earn money flying after the magic 65 ? Aerial survey maybe ? Or even if it's only ferrying ?

The reason why this whole topic is so controversial is obvious:

A whole generation of pilots,originally on a much lower planned retirement age, ( 55-60 usually) got their extension until 65 on the back of those younger pilots,
stuck in the right seat with pathetic pay. Those who had the benefit of working in this profession in the golden 70's and 80's did not care, just selfish and ruthless behavior. Now you want to go even beyond 65, of course in the left hand seat.

Shame on you.

I think 711 rather than see those guys as being selfish you might better view them as being victims of the industry... and you'd be better off campaigning for extensions to age limits rather than opposing them... you're on the same train, just a few carriages back !
Most of us thought of being able to retire on a reasonable pension by 60 yrs of age only to find it a complete joke.... and that's the lucky ones that hadn't been furloughed 4 times or been the victims of company failures. Add to that the all too common AIDS involving maintenance payments and college fees and the vision of some wealthy, selfish, aging crews soon dissipates.
You need to start looking over your shoulder... fate is creeping up on you.
As for the younger ones wanting to move into the left seat, that's perfectly understandable and no doubt frustrating ... unfortunately it's just one more sad side effect of today's industry... there are many more and people who are considering a career as a pilot will just have to take that into account.

Mungo, if it wasn't so sad in the first place to even have the desire to fly over 65, I would laugh at your cynical and proposterous suggestions.

Feel free to sit on your undoubtly massive bottom as long as you wish. In the right hand seat ,without seniority (regarding any requests like leave,trips etc), and under the premise you leave first should the company struggle.

There is always one on these threads, bitter & wingeing on about how their command is being delayed by some old fart who should just gracefully p1ss off & vacate the seat for him. . . . . . . sometimes there are "other" reasons why they are stuck in the RHS, but easier to blame the old fogeys Eh ?

So, all you lovers of rules & regs, any definitive answer ? I think in Europe it is a No No, but if the ship was registered/on the AOC of , some "dodgier" country, that would be another thing.
Well, the way things are going in general, it will probably be revised upwards anyhow, and before you start bleating again 711, most of the impetus for it being revised upwards, comes not from the population demanding to work longer, but from companies/govts desire to have us all drop dead ASAP after retiral, to avoid claiming any pension.
This is happening to the general population in most European countries, & is purely & simply a cynical action by the politicians, to avoid paying back any of the loot we contributed for 40+ years.