They aren't artificial. A vast aftermarket too.

I was once told in all seriousness it was, Piles, or how to stop them. It was from a then experienced 747 skipper, and nobody who I know as current long haul, has said any different re Sheepskin, though not all have that type of seat I believe. I am sure more regular people sat in those seats will advise.
Cheers
Mr Mac

Well...whether they are faux or real sheepskin, I do hope that they can be removed on a regular basis otherwise they would be minging somewhat after hours or sweaty bodies and farts. I'm just curious as to why the seats are furry...and some look positively dogeared, tatty and matted. Is it tradition for pilots and co-pilots to have furry seats dating back to biplane times, perhaps - afterall biplanes were pretty chilly places to be and a furry seat would help keep the crew cosy.

Cockpit seats don't always have sheepskin covers, unfortunately.

They are for comfort because aircrew have to stay seated and alert for many hours. We cannot really get up and walk around the cabin to stretch our legs.

Passengers can, and passengers can also twist and loll in their seats to find a comfortable position. Pilots can't so they need comfortable seats.

By the way: As a passenger it is very useful to wear a fleece, which can be used as a pillow, a blanket or even to sit on :ok:

Unfortunately, passengers are sometimes sick or spill their drinks, and babies and young children have......accidents, so their seat covers need to be easily wipeable. (There are normally a few spare seat cushions carried on board in the event of a serious spill).

PS, sheepskin covers might also prevent uniform trousers getting shiny ? I don't know.

Thank you Uplinker for the honest review of aircraft seats..

It is really starting to feel that 2025 has been one of the worst years for aviation...yet another accident has occurred. This year there have been incidents and accidents on an almost weekly basis, what is going on?

I know there are some who blame DEI but surely it cannot be entirely down to that, just seems like we are going backwards to the late 70's and 80's. It has been an absolutely horrible year in aviation right across the board in all aspects and genre.

Has it been a bad year or is it due to the media taking more notice...or is there an element of DEI in the numbers?

DEI ? Oh right, just looked it up. Yes, quite possibly.

What I do know is that airlines are not interested in the mature pilot with years of experience - unless that pilot is a Captain.

I have now finally given up trying, but many airlines rejected my applications even though I have a proven 20 year record of TransAtlantic, European, African, Middle East flying, as a Senior First Officer, on narrow body and wide body aircraft, Airbus (mainly) and Boeing.

Virgin Atlantic keep popping up on my LinkedIn feed saying I am perfectly qualified for their Airbus fleet and routes, (yes, I know I am), and I have started their assessment process twice. Each time, part way through, they have worked out my probable age and decided not to bother going any further.

So I have lost about 8 years of airline employment, (and wages), since my last airline employer went bust.

Obviously, I might be a terrible pilot, but while acknowledging that I am not Chuck Yeager, I do know that I am fully competent and very experienced. My CV and flying record of seven commercial type ratings are solid proof. (I never made Captain because the two main airlines I flew for went bust before I had been at either long enough to apply).

But the airlines now concentrate very heavily on psychometric testing and for example expect us to complete 30 maths questions in 12 minutes.

I think this approach might well be selecting the wrong people. Pilots NEVER need to do 30 maths questions in 12 minutes. In fact the opposite is true: Experienced pilots take time, and make time, to work carefully through any situation, working as a team to resolve it.

We are now seeing "pilots" who fail to take off. "Pilots" who fail to fly a go-around. "Pilots" who overrun the runway. "Pilots" who cannot even manage a normal descent and approach, but who fatally crash the aircraft. "Pilots" who cannot even read their basic flying instruments and don't climb safely away after take-off.

So I think the airlines are looking for completely the wrong traits in pilot assessments these days, and they really need to go back to basics and consider the mature experienced pilots instead.
.

DEI is "diversity, equality and inclusion"...which, I guess, when you reach a certain age and have lots of knowledge and experience no longer qualifies as being part of the drive towards inclusive, equal or diverse.

Taking it from your perspective, I can understand why pilots give up or shift across to freight flying when despite the much (over) hyped DEI, you no longer fit into what airlines deem to be "the perfect fit". I find it both insane and insulting...insane that a pilot with experience and knowledge gets passed over or ignored, and insulting to pilots like yourself who have so much to offer along with many years of doing the job right.

You can stuff things up at any age and at all levels of knowledge / experience....however, as a pax, I much prefer the older and wiser aircrew as they tend to have a much better feel of what their backside is attached to........unlike the fresh out of flight academy box ticking exercise who, obviously, has passed all of the exams to get there but who has been fast tracked and not had the "hands on" experiences and not had the time to build knowledge over several years.

Perhaps thats why I prefer the older aircraft too.....the ones that the pilot actually has to fly rather than have a computer do almost everything, cos no matter how awesome technology gets a computer is only as good as the person who enters the information into it.

I think it is grossly unfair that pilots such as yourself are thrown on the scrapheap by virtue of age or simply not fitting into the DEI mould. I would take age, experience and real knowledge over the DEI box tickers any day.

Thank you, sincerely.

I have all but given up.

At one point, in desperation of not getting another airline job I decided to volunteer for the RNLI lifeboats, (we lived near the sea for a couple of years).

I have been on and around boats on the sea since the age of four. I've holidayed by the sea in the UK for years and years - swimming, snorkelling and going out on fast sailing boats on the sea. I am fit and trim and do a 10km run every week. The lifeboat station was literally a 5 minute jog from my house. I am out of work, so available 24/7 without having to get leave from work. I am used to using radio communications equipment and know about meteorology and tides. I don't need glasses, (which are a hindrance with sea spray), or any sight correction.

Guess what they said in the interview ?? Too old !! I tried to point out that a person one year younger than their arbitrary age limit, but who had only one leg, or was blind, would be useless on a lifeboat. But they rejected me, a fit active and experienced sea goer simply because of a stupid age limit.

This country needs to shake itself up. We keep being told that we have an ageing population, so we need to encourage all these asylum seekers to come here to work, but what about those of us over 50 who want to work but are ignored and rejected ?

We must be living in different times if you honestly belive 2025 is similar in safety to the 70s.

Sorry about your current situation.

I have some sympathy with RNLI rules, with physical nature of the task, guess they need to set a sensible limit which is easily enforceable.

As for flying, that isn’t forgivable. it’s probably impossible to prove age discrimination they just need to rig the selection process. There does seem to be a bias against elder folks these days, not sure why. Maybe drive and ambition are better than experience. Who knows what companies think. However in your line of work I would have thought experience would be a very desirable asset.

Dont give up. Even if you don’t get back into commercial flying there is plenty of things to do, which maybe not as lucrative are still fulfilling.


good luck.

Thank you for your kind words. The reason for ageism is, I think, that mangers don't want to employ anyone older than they are. I am not sure why that would be a concern for them.

And I disagree about the RNLI. Their age limit, (55), is arbitrary and extremely out of date, and takes no account of the person: Their fitness, their experience, their skills or abilities whatsoever.

That is blatant ageism.

They could very easily have met me in person and even taken me out on a boat to assess me. They could also have imposed a 6 week or 6 month probationary period to see if I was up to the job.

To just dismiss me on the basis of age without any reference to abilities, fitness or knowledge, during a Zoom meeting is blatant ageism.

The UK literally cannot afford to be ageist.

You are correct about the RNLI it’s not fair ro all, but the military, as an example, also have age limits and they have the wherewithal to conduct physical fitness tests. I doubt the RNLI have the resources to do that, hence the age limit, keeps it simple for them. Can you not still volunteer just not on the boat itself? That still helps them.

Uplinker
I saw this when I was in my mid-late 30s, that was around 1988-91. I can only surmise that they think the older person will show them up or want their job. For the most part, I think that we would make them look good! We've climbed the greasy pole before and have found a comfortable balance.

Whether this kind of ageism is more generated by males than females, I do not know.

Yes, that's my suspicion too. Older folk might know more, or be better at certain things than the younger managers and CEOs, owing to longer experience, and more years in which to have acquired skills. The managers and CEO's don't want the risk of being shown up in a meeting, for example, and don't want an embarrassing situation where the employee knows more than the manager.

But that's the stupid thing. I wouldn't be any good at running a company, or managing a workforce. Small teams, yes, but not a whole company. A CEO could employ me for a specific role and delegate me to perform that function.

And mature people are also more.....mature. They don't have that thrusting need to be seen to be the best or outsmart their colleagues. They tend to be more relaxed about such things.

And if the UK government needs workers, and are having to allow thousands of asylum seekers and boat people into the UK just to provide those workers, while putting millions of our own over 50's on the scrap heap, that is an utterly ridiculous situation and is unsustainable. The UK has a debt of almost £3 TRILLION, and the interest payments on that are £100 BILLION per annum. We desperately need to become a lot more productive as a nation to get that borrowing down.

Also, since they have extended the State retirement age to 67 or more, they need to raise the old 65 limit and allow those folk to work longer if they want to - to bridge the gap until their State pension starts.

Airline pilots, for example are very carefully assessed every 6 months; for our flying ability, dealing with emergencies, and our medical condition, including eyesight and hearing; so there is no reason why a pilot who continues to pass all the tests and exams should not continue in their job until 67 as well - if they want to.

As far as working for the RNLI on the shore; they said that too, but my skills and experience are on the sea and best suited for an active search and rescue role, not standing around manning a charity stall or shaking a tin at the local street market. I can be out there manning a boat. The 54 year old who passes the RNLI age restriction but only has one leg, would be more suited to the shore role, since they couldn't go on the boats.

60 need not be old any more. If a person has kept themselves fit and trim and active, their bodies can be just as fit and capable as a 40 year old's. I have done daily exercises and a weekly 10 km run almost continuously since leaving school. My waist is the same size as when I left school. I have no joint problems and my eyesight is good and needs no correction. Physically, I could easily pass for a 40 something.

I hope that S.o.S. will forgive me developing this a little more...

The behaviour about mature people, retirement and so forth - has built up steadily throughout my generation [Boomer], something Iike a good six decades. To change it will take an almost equally long period of time as the changed attitude has to be built in before people enter work, or in their early experience. We can see how slow it has been for generations to adopt new ways of thinking about many social aspects. Therefore we have to start the change now. Sadly, results not to be seen in my lifetime.

The first time this was brought to my attention was around 1988/89. I was in telecommunications in the City of London. Hiring another engineer, the perfect candidate was in his mid-late 40s about 10/12 years older than me, although I have never looked my age and, at the time could have passed for late 20s.

I knew that he would be ideal for a number of reasons, not least his career in Navy signals. Happily I was proved correct. About six months after he joined my team, we were at a work function and he thanked me for hiring him. I simply said that he had proved me correct. He then said, "When I walked into the interview and saw how young you were - I knew that I would not get the job." That was my first real wake-up call about this problem. I then looked around me and found it to be correct. In my varied working life since then (35+ years in different areas and occupations) I have seen it in many places, not just in the UK.

When I was a manager, "old and reliable" was definitely a virtue - and that was for people developing computer systems.

The system itself, surely!

Spring cleaning my computer, I found an item clipped from another site in 2023.

Why Didn’t Boeing Install Dimmable Windows On The 737 MAX?
Obviously, and as was pointed out in the comments, adding that kind of window to the Max would have created another whole range of certification and complexity. My personal hope is that, now that it has been done, they will not be repeated on ANY other airframe EVER.

Unfortunately Airbus has on A350s