'Fixed retirement age to be axed'
Guest
Posts: n/a
Although I can not vouch for the following story personally, it came from a friend within the airline concerned who is in a position where you could probably trust it's authenticity and if nothing else it's a good laugh.
Older crew member, took demotion to the RH seat to keep flying long haul routes past 65.
Large destination in the USA and the crew are preparing the aircraft for its longhaul flight homeward except where is the FO? Last seen around Duty Free. Passengers start boarding, where is the FO? Ground crew go searching. Didn't take them long to find him wandering around the terminal looking for the gate. Got a bit lost in the terminal.
I'm all for age and experience in the Flight Deck and some guys/gals could go on forever and should have the right to but what about the one's who don't know when to call it quits? Knowing Grandpa is going to fly me to my desitnation 13 hours away but has issues navigating a terminal is not particularly comforting.
Older crew member, took demotion to the RH seat to keep flying long haul routes past 65.
Large destination in the USA and the crew are preparing the aircraft for its longhaul flight homeward except where is the FO? Last seen around Duty Free. Passengers start boarding, where is the FO? Ground crew go searching. Didn't take them long to find him wandering around the terminal looking for the gate. Got a bit lost in the terminal.
I'm all for age and experience in the Flight Deck and some guys/gals could go on forever and should have the right to but what about the one's who don't know when to call it quits? Knowing Grandpa is going to fly me to my desitnation 13 hours away but has issues navigating a terminal is not particularly comforting.
Join Date: May 2001
Location: The Pointy End
Posts: 177
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well if we're going to generalise.
The flip side of the coin is apparent when you talk to line colleagues’. A significant number relay terrifying tales about some of you young Sky Gods.
Many young aces seem struggle to get the A/C safely descended to 1000' AAL without hitting something. The rest seem to go AWOL at an alarming speed when things don’t go as planned on that dark and dirty night. God forbid if you have to actually look out the window and perform a visual circuit to land without the FMC and A/P.
Sit in any sim check and watch the young super confident Sky God trail along sedately behind the A/C, oblivious to the carnage and mayhem occurring all around when multiple system failures start to queue up for attention.
Perhaps if we did judge ability and not potential to do the job, there would be no Co-pilots in a jet transport with less than 6000hrs of relevant experience and ability.
So what would the time to command be then?
Edited to add tongue firmly in cheek in case of a misunderstanding.
The flip side of the coin is apparent when you talk to line colleagues’. A significant number relay terrifying tales about some of you young Sky Gods.
Many young aces seem struggle to get the A/C safely descended to 1000' AAL without hitting something. The rest seem to go AWOL at an alarming speed when things don’t go as planned on that dark and dirty night. God forbid if you have to actually look out the window and perform a visual circuit to land without the FMC and A/P.
Sit in any sim check and watch the young super confident Sky God trail along sedately behind the A/C, oblivious to the carnage and mayhem occurring all around when multiple system failures start to queue up for attention.
Perhaps if we did judge ability and not potential to do the job, there would be no Co-pilots in a jet transport with less than 6000hrs of relevant experience and ability.
So what would the time to command be then?
Edited to add tongue firmly in cheek in case of a misunderstanding.
Last edited by max_cont; 30th Jul 2010 at 11:33.
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Canada
Posts: 1,306
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Max Cont, Thank you, took the words right out of my mouth, the hand flying skills of some of the "Sky Gods" is almost zero, they are computer literate and very bright but have been short changed by the training system, the worst ones over here are products of Government run schools, and I dont mean the Airforce!
Join Date: May 2001
Location: The Pointy End
Posts: 177
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Not everyone waiting for a dead-mans-shoes command is a 200hour newbie!
There is no automatic right to the LHS…something today’s youngsters seem to forget.
You’ll just have to wait until us old f@rts have finished playing in the sandbox.
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Deep South, UK
Age: 69
Posts: 110
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thread drift
I was at BA many years ago preparing a Trident for flight - it was going to fly the queen somewhere - and they got the most senior Management Flight Crew to fly the trip. It did make me wonder - if I was the Queen would I prefer to be flown by the most senior pilot who was probably 'getting on a bit' and spent more time driving a desk rather than an aircraft - or would I prefer a crew who are well down in the pecking order but are doing loads of sectors a day?
Just a thought
Just a thought
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Grrrr
Age: 17
Posts: 674
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The attitudes displayed by Max_cont and clunkdriver prove that there needs to be a set date for mandatory retirement as some will never let go of the helm despite rapid decrease in ability. The plane is not your toy. You are there to do a job. You got promoted to captains, but it is not up to you to decide when you are no longer fit to fill that role, despite your gargantuan egos.
Join Date: May 2002
Location: England
Posts: 247
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I shouldnt worry to much! If anything I would bet most airlines will lower the retirement age. Why do the want experienced senior crew? Vastly more expensive in salary and perks, I would have thought by now the bean counters would have replaced them with pay to fly types.
Join Date: May 2001
Location: The Pointy End
Posts: 177
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Don’t forget the gargantuan pay check.
Is there something about the term “tongue in cheek” confusing for you RA?
.
Who says?
Got any hard evidence to back that up RA?
Is this skill a pilot’s personal ability that varies between individuals, or an ability to pass the mandatory checks?
At what age does this alleged rapid decrease in ability occur?
Are the young exempt because they are young?
Do the young have an innate superior skill from birth or do they have to accrue training and experience like everyone else?
If a young Sky God fails an LPC/OPC, (happens) should we put them out to pasture and rip up their ATPL?
Since it’s usually the old f@rts running the LPC/OPC, do the odds of failure increase inversely with age?
Do we understand what “tongue in cheek” means yet, or shall we continue?
Is there something about the term “tongue in cheek” confusing for you RA?
A Rapid decrease in ability
Who says?
Got any hard evidence to back that up RA?
Is this skill a pilot’s personal ability that varies between individuals, or an ability to pass the mandatory checks?
At what age does this alleged rapid decrease in ability occur?
Are the young exempt because they are young?
Do the young have an innate superior skill from birth or do they have to accrue training and experience like everyone else?
If a young Sky God fails an LPC/OPC, (happens) should we put them out to pasture and rip up their ATPL?
Since it’s usually the old f@rts running the LPC/OPC, do the odds of failure increase inversely with age?
Do we understand what “tongue in cheek” means yet, or shall we continue?
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Duxbai
Posts: 122
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As I said in my earlier post, there are pros and cons to this, from both sides of the flight deck.
In an effort to remain balanced and not turn this into a zimmer pusher vs 'sky god' debate. Yes, there are many capable older pilots. The problem is them recognising when to hang up those goggles. Let's face it, a few years ago it was a given that they should retire at 60. Most should/ would have made arrangements for that. To stay on after was absolutely their prerogative but also a little lining of the nest. It certainly slowed up any advancement for those below them. Funnily something that never happened for these more senior pilots?
The flipside are the young sky gods. I have flown with many. They range from the inquiring mind, capable and recognising his/hers limitiations to those that think they are invincible. For the most, they are easily identified and dealt with.
I would not want to lose the body of senior experience, but I daresay the companies might. Fortunately, I am 'only' 39 so this is a long way off but it's going to be a mindfield to sort. Those of us with a string of ex wives and kids are always going to need a few extra years to offer a comfortable dotage.
In an effort to remain balanced and not turn this into a zimmer pusher vs 'sky god' debate. Yes, there are many capable older pilots. The problem is them recognising when to hang up those goggles. Let's face it, a few years ago it was a given that they should retire at 60. Most should/ would have made arrangements for that. To stay on after was absolutely their prerogative but also a little lining of the nest. It certainly slowed up any advancement for those below them. Funnily something that never happened for these more senior pilots?
The flipside are the young sky gods. I have flown with many. They range from the inquiring mind, capable and recognising his/hers limitiations to those that think they are invincible. For the most, they are easily identified and dealt with.
I would not want to lose the body of senior experience, but I daresay the companies might. Fortunately, I am 'only' 39 so this is a long way off but it's going to be a mindfield to sort. Those of us with a string of ex wives and kids are always going to need a few extra years to offer a comfortable dotage.
Join Date: May 2001
Location: The Pointy End
Posts: 177
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The bottom line is that new law has been enacted. It’s a persons right to decide when they retire. That decision will be subject to an ability to pass the checks and personal circumstance.
The key word in all this is ability. Just because it delays an F/Os promotion by 5yrs or so is no reason to discriminate against age.
The F/O when he/she does get command will probably need to work until there’re in their 70’s by then anyway, especially in light of the governments track record on savaging personal pensions when they get short of cash to squander. Try getting to the end of a long hard working life, to discover you can’t afford to live on what’s left of your pension without the years left to make up the loss.
The key word in all this is ability. Just because it delays an F/Os promotion by 5yrs or so is no reason to discriminate against age.
The F/O when he/she does get command will probably need to work until there’re in their 70’s by then anyway, especially in light of the governments track record on savaging personal pensions when they get short of cash to squander. Try getting to the end of a long hard working life, to discover you can’t afford to live on what’s left of your pension without the years left to make up the loss.
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Canada
Posts: 1,306
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Really Annoyed, your reading comprehension, like my spelling, needs a bit of work, I RETIRED EARLY, went on to run my own flying outfit, sold two years ago, now just fly one aircraft for a friend, my lady, myself, and training of some deserving kids who gain REAL time, not some frigin P2F crap {by the way, they are well paid as well] So how the hell you can read into this that I belong to the bunch who want to spend their whole lives working for some mega company beats the hell out of me! My agreement with the poster pointing out that some of those bitching about senior pilots abilities not being up to snuff may also apply to some of the right seaters is just that, agreement with that point, can I make it any clearer? {PS, Regarding "the plane is not my toy?" How about if I own the frigin thing? whos toy is it, yours?}
Last edited by clunckdriver; 30th Jul 2010 at 21:56. Reason: Its my toy, not yours buddy!
Join Date: May 2008
Location: With the Care Bears.......
Posts: 42
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The 'age 60 rule' was adopted by ICAO in 1972 and implemented in 78, after having been in force in some way in the US since 1958 (correct those dates if I'm incorrect).
Robin Wilkening summarised the main concerns very well in his 'Age discrimination in Commercial Aviation' article in 2002, stating that the main concerns surrounding the rule were risk of sudden incapacitation, undetected cognitive decline and the risk of medical investigations not identifying medical problems that could potentially cause incapacitation.
Of course 2006 saw the start of the 'age 65 rule'....... and that is subject of some of the debate here, along with the knock on effect that it had on the junior generations, not something i know a great deal about.
However, all of the concerns addressed in the initial rule are valid, but to what extent now? I am of the opinion that if the regulatory bodies are going to implement a rule, they should make sure that it is based on solid scientific evidence and that this evidence can be translated into a sound and fair system within which to assess pilots and their fitness to fly. We know that cardiovascular deaths rates in the under 75's have decreased by around 25% since 1996, and we also know that memory and information processing decreases with age, but it may be suggested that as a pilot ages, he or she may have some protective effect from their level of experience.
Those who impose and implement such rules really have a responsibility to keep the regulations current to the changing times. I think that there is call for a system that allows each pilot to be assessed as an individual and to have an individual risk score calculated based on their age but also on the entire medical history, presence of risk factors and the role they are in, but also incorporating performace scores as well. Incorporated into the consideration as well would be the potential loss as an outcome of incapcitation. This would of course by a dymanic process and on-going scores can be compared and acted upon if mecessary. This would allow that older but more physically and mentally fit pilot to fly for longer based on a safety assessment set on firm scientific grounding and vice versa.
Using this system may not mean that a pilot who is not fit to fly certain operations with a higher potential loss as an outcome, may not be able to fly other operations and can therefoe be likened to Dame Carole Black's report on work and health, with it's emphasis on the 'fit note', which concentrates on what a person is fit to do rather than what they are not fit to do.
The inevitable question of cost to develop such a system is raised and that is of course a big issue because it's not just the set up cost, but the price of implementing on an on-going basis as well. One could also argue that at some point relatively early inthe implementation process, certain areas for screening programmes would be identified as good prevention schemes. Of course, why should an organisation go to so much effort and so much cost to develop and implement such a scheme when really, the financial benefit in letting some pilots work for longer, and some not etc, would not be worth it. Therefore the costs would be passed on, directly or indirectly to the crew themselves.
I think we're in an age where we have so much information regarding health risk, that simply setting a seemingly arbitrary figure as an age limit is a little short sighted. Surely setting a relative risk per individual in a certain situation is a more reliable thing to do from a safety point of view?
I am all for the age to be relaxed but only if it's done in a safe and controlled way.
B
Robin Wilkening summarised the main concerns very well in his 'Age discrimination in Commercial Aviation' article in 2002, stating that the main concerns surrounding the rule were risk of sudden incapacitation, undetected cognitive decline and the risk of medical investigations not identifying medical problems that could potentially cause incapacitation.
Of course 2006 saw the start of the 'age 65 rule'....... and that is subject of some of the debate here, along with the knock on effect that it had on the junior generations, not something i know a great deal about.
However, all of the concerns addressed in the initial rule are valid, but to what extent now? I am of the opinion that if the regulatory bodies are going to implement a rule, they should make sure that it is based on solid scientific evidence and that this evidence can be translated into a sound and fair system within which to assess pilots and their fitness to fly. We know that cardiovascular deaths rates in the under 75's have decreased by around 25% since 1996, and we also know that memory and information processing decreases with age, but it may be suggested that as a pilot ages, he or she may have some protective effect from their level of experience.
Those who impose and implement such rules really have a responsibility to keep the regulations current to the changing times. I think that there is call for a system that allows each pilot to be assessed as an individual and to have an individual risk score calculated based on their age but also on the entire medical history, presence of risk factors and the role they are in, but also incorporating performace scores as well. Incorporated into the consideration as well would be the potential loss as an outcome of incapcitation. This would of course by a dymanic process and on-going scores can be compared and acted upon if mecessary. This would allow that older but more physically and mentally fit pilot to fly for longer based on a safety assessment set on firm scientific grounding and vice versa.
Using this system may not mean that a pilot who is not fit to fly certain operations with a higher potential loss as an outcome, may not be able to fly other operations and can therefoe be likened to Dame Carole Black's report on work and health, with it's emphasis on the 'fit note', which concentrates on what a person is fit to do rather than what they are not fit to do.
The inevitable question of cost to develop such a system is raised and that is of course a big issue because it's not just the set up cost, but the price of implementing on an on-going basis as well. One could also argue that at some point relatively early inthe implementation process, certain areas for screening programmes would be identified as good prevention schemes. Of course, why should an organisation go to so much effort and so much cost to develop and implement such a scheme when really, the financial benefit in letting some pilots work for longer, and some not etc, would not be worth it. Therefore the costs would be passed on, directly or indirectly to the crew themselves.
I think we're in an age where we have so much information regarding health risk, that simply setting a seemingly arbitrary figure as an age limit is a little short sighted. Surely setting a relative risk per individual in a certain situation is a more reliable thing to do from a safety point of view?
I am all for the age to be relaxed but only if it's done in a safe and controlled way.
B
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: london
Posts: 17
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
soon, we will start our career at 45-50, and work until 90-100!!
old papy pilots are cheap to maintain, they don't eat, don't drink, don't complain, sleep behind the yoke,don't strike...
old papy pilots are cheap to maintain, they don't eat, don't drink, don't complain, sleep behind the yoke,don't strike...
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Arizona USA
Posts: 8,571
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Why should somebody who is fit and healthy one day be deemed unsuitable to act as PIC the next? As long as you are physically and mentally fit enough to hold a Class 1 then you should be able to continue beyond 65.
This will happen, sooner or later.
old papy pilots are cheap to maintain, they don't eat, don't drink, don't complain, sleep behind the yoke,don't strike...
