Is it me, or is it my age lately :O
The issue here is: AGE DISCRIMINATION,

nothing more and nothing less.

This diversion about whether one is fit or not is accepted as a compulsory requirement and has never been an issue.

Skills shortage / moving over for younger ones - never heard that before :hmm:

The poll on the government web site and most other actions being carried out are about winning the case on the subject of age discrimination. The discrimination being that if one flies a multi crew a/c one can fly for an additional 5 years because of their age, that's all.

The other issues are interesting and in themselves may have kudos but don't get side tracked on this one.:eek:

Hey TC,

That is exactly what we have all been talking about. It’s just that some (me in particular) are keen to perhaps add a bit of background as to why we feel that age is not relevant to being a competent or safe pilot….

I think that’s fair enough isn’t it?

XD
:ok:

In 2005 The CAA medical licencing team had no problem with the concept of national single pilot PT work to age 65 (subject to some extra tests) and publically stated so, (but then the CAA bosses waited for the ICAO decision on international flights)

Medics happy but bosses not sounds like age discrimination to me.

Flying Single pilot over 60.
 

I have been in correspondance with the SRG ref single pilot over 60. I attach a copy of my last letter that may be of interest. I believe that the points that I raise are self explanatory.




Dear Mr Bell,

Single pilot over 60.

Thank you for your SS107 dated the 1st of November. I am sorry not to have contacted you earlier, but being semi-retired can be time consuming hard work!

Despite the power of Google the only reference I can find to the Chicago Convention is the original document, I cannot find Annex 1.

I note that the review carried out by ECAC was, as you state, over 15 years ago. Since then there have been considerable advances in the ability of medical science to conduct non-invasive testing. This provides an extra element of safety available from aircrew medical examinations. In my own experience my SAM has had at least two updates to his electic cardiogram equipment in that time. There still remains scope for the depth of investigation at an aircrew medical to be increased by, for example, requiring a stress ECG. Until all reasonable non-invasive procedures have been exhausted it is unreasonable to restrict a pilot due to age.

I believe that the data used to evaluate the age limits imposed is based on a fixed wing case, where, in the event of a pilot suffering an in flight medical incapacity, flight has to be continued for a considerable time to a suitable place of landing and then the pilot has to carry out what is the most stressful phase of the flight, the landing itself.

In considering the combination of different types of flight, flight conditions and flying machines it would appear too difficult to not treat them as one for regulatory purposes. Of fixed wing/rotary wing, day/night, on shore/off, shore IMC/VMC only two categories exist with regard to crew incapacity. In the case of all of them except rotary wing, day, VFR, onshore flight has to be continued to a suitable place of landing. In the case of rotary wing, day, onshore, VFR a landing can be affected almost immediately should the pilot suffer the effect of incapacity? For a helicopter such a landing is a relatively non-stressful event. There clearly is a quantum difference in the risk associated with these two cases thus making it not unreasonable for helicopters day VFR onshore to be considered as a separate case.

Clearly any age discrimination legislation has to be overruled if there is an overriding safety issue. It is the responsibility of any regulatory authority that wishes to overrule age discrimination legislation to have the necessary documented safety analysis to show that this is the case.

Under the terms of the Freedom of Information Act can you please provide me with the documented risk analyses that you have conducted that shows that there is an overriding safety case for not allowing a pilot to fly single pilot day VFR onshore in a helicopter?

In considering the risk associated with an individual pilot all factors relating to that individual have to be considered together. Even if there is an increase in risk associated with a pilot over the age of 60, that pilot’s age reduces the risks associated with inexperience or lack of maturity. I am sure that you have the relevant statistics that allow a comparison between age and human factors accidents that would support this.

There is already a built in safeguard to reduce the overall risk to the public for pilots flying single pilot, in that there is a weight limit on the flying machine that can be flown single pilot. This in itself restricts the overall risk to a relatively very small number of flights thus the overall risk to the public would remain very small even if the age limit were raised.

Yours faithfully,

Any attempt to extend the working envelope of the experienced pilot has to be a positive step towards enhancing safety and allowing the up and coming more time to consolidate. It must not be construed as a blockage preventing the advancement of the young thrusters. It will give the old salts the option of continuing to put something into the business they have been involved in for so long. Some, I know, will be only to glad to escape the likes of JimL and his cronies who, for so long, have struggled to trailblaze the CAA in Europe as the leading aviation authority at the expense of the small operator and the individual. By all means, lean on the BHAB to become more vociferous but do not expect any help from the CAA, their agenda was sealed many years ago with the drafting of many of the most nonsensical chapters of JAROPS.

The CAA will not budge unless challenged in the Courts and it is almost certain they will appeal any decision against them to the European Court level.

I have every intention of taking this to Court and am discussing with legal advisors the best route to take; e.g. could be Industrial Tribunal or judicial review.

What is certain is that funding such action is beyond my personal means. I am exploring various ways of funding legal action and may be fortunate enough to find a charity such as Age Concern (believe me it wasn't easy to ask them!) to help or, perhaps legal aid may be available.

The time may come when I have to ask those of us most affected to put their hands in their pockest to help. If there realy are 300 pilots out there likely to be affected £100 from each would go a long way to paying the costs.

If you're with me on this why not say so here ( no obligation obviously). It'll be far more effective than signing the petition (not that we shouldn't all do so; and all write to our MP).

It is just possible that the CAA, seeing that they have a fight on their hands that will cost them real money may take proper legal advice from an independant source and see that they cannot win this in the long run.

Go on, then. Commit to helping fund legal action against age discrimination by the CAA by saying so on this thread.

Thanks

Uncle Ian

Ian;

Check your PM's. At least you are well preserved, enhanced, pickled!

VH

Verticalhold,

Thanks for your support but the whole point is to make that support public on this forum. It'll have more effect than any petition if people make it clear they are prepared to fork out real money to fight the CAA on this.

Point taken Ian,

Both bosses and I will support you for the £ 100 each, and the your post has gone round all our freelancers some of who make you look as youthful as me:ok:

J

Uncle Ian,

You have my support and, should you require accounting assistance, my services as an ACA are also available.

Cheers

Whirls

I'm in!

I'll give Uncle Ian £100.00

XD

I,m in for £100. Good luck Uncle Ian
wassatboing?

Can anyone help me to upload a link to a pdf file which relates to this thread, please?

Old age thing
 

I am well outside any conceivable age change, but herewith my £100 pledge to see the wrong - righted.

DRK

Thanks for all those pledges guys and gals.

Can I ask you all to try to persuade all your contempories to sign up and publish teir support here? Anyone in their 50's ought to be supporting this.

Uncle Ian

'50s!!!!! Cheeky sod! I've got another 5 years to go to that!

Sorry, Verticalhold! Appearances can be deceptive...................anyway I should have written anyone over 40! The last 20 years have gone that quickly I've hardly noticed. Time flies when you're having fun.

Ian, my £100 is available when you need it.

Uncle Ian, when you're in a hole, stop digging! :}

Cheers

Whirls

My appearance does deceive. I'm looking bloody old today.

Uncle Ian; going to try and get this bought up at BHAB on Wednesday

Regards

J