Millerscourt
The point I was trying to make is it doesn't matter what you or I think....what matters is what a few dozen politicos in Brussels/Strasbourg & the Hague think.
The rest of us are just trying to make the best of it. ;)

Hello 'Really Annoyed'. Well, the medical is one thing...but its not my experience in some 60 medicals by, I guess, a good 15 different medics...but there could always be a requirement that the CAA themselves have to conduct the medical at Gatwick; that would close any loopholes.

Your point on vanity at the end...I have missed that one completely. Maybe I am being a little slow here, but vain is defined as:
conceited, proud, narcissistic, vainglorious, arrogant, self-important, bigheaded (informal)

Now how in the world can wanting to work a few years longer fall under any of those descriptive words? I'd be quite happy to work on either side of the flight deck, part time, stand-by basis, what ever.
There are two fully qualified pilots...how can that possibly compromise safety?

Well, as someone who is a lot closer to 65 than I ever thought I would be, let me make an observation or two.

I've been flying for almost forty years with no accidents or major incidents as yet. Ten years ago I was sharper than I am now and my eyesight was a lot better - damn the small print on the Jepps ! I still enjoy the job but the longhaul returns and early starts are getting harder year by year. I get tired of the management constantly 're-inventing the wheel' and people telling me how clever they are and how big their pensions pots have become - must be in inverse proportions to their xxxxx. The prospect of another type rating and a 'few more years' does not fill me with a great deal of joy but my IFA says I need just a bit longer before taking the apron at B&Q.

It always seems to me that the people who spout on about flying up to and beyond 65 are the ones who earn the most in the first place. Sure, its their legal right but what about the next generation and the poor sods who are condemned to another ten years in the right hand seat. Oh sorry, I forgot, we are the 'me me me' baby boomers and the hell with anyone else.

If you are one of the 'immortals' who just get better, not to mention richer, year on year, well, good luck to you. Personally I look at the grey hairs falling from the barbers chair and know there is more to life than flying till you drop. Hell, guys, go and buy yourself a tiddler and turn yourself upside down for half an hour, lord knows you can afford it !

Beamer Just who are these millionaire playboy pilots that you seem to think are bed-blocking?
Virtually all of the older BA pilots that I know are on a 2nd or 3rd marriage , living outside of stockbroker belt with children in state schools, or are DEP's that have joined at 38-40 when they left the RAF. I doubt many of them will be in the LHS of a long haul fleet by the age of 60.

Hunter

Since when was this thread solely about BA pilots ?

Maybe I just always been 'low average' but in my view the older you get the harder it becomes and quite frankly the less competent many of us may well become. In my own experience, the majority who bleat about wanting the 'right' to go on and on are those who are best placed financially to leave early.
I cannot speak for BA pilots with multiple wives and second families.

A very good point Beamer... I can only imagine the state of pilots' finances that work for virtually all other airlines. Where is this nirvana airline that allows its pilots to retire on a decent pension at age 55 or 60?
More importantly, do they have any vacancies? :)

Out of interest, I gather that generally there is a drop in ability at 57 and at 62 years of age according to anecdotal evidence. However, the pilots that pass continue to pass, and the pilots that just used to scrape a pass fail.
Maybe other professions could do with similar competence checks?

There once was an occasion, moons ago, when diverting crew of Air Anglia could not rent a Hertz (the company's rental partner) to return to home base because the whole crew was <25 years old. Now we're expecting Derby & Joan airlines. Cabin crew will have the same financial needs as pilots. Imagine the time when the whole a/c crew could be >60, except perhaps the F/O. They'd be 59 just to feel at home somewhat. Pax reaction might be interesting.

I see quite a bit of stereotyping here.

I have flown with some pilots who were in their fifties who were overweight and somewhat, shall we say, "behind" the aircraft and who lacked motivation to keep abreast of revisions and changes.

On the other hand I have flown with pilots approaching 65 who run regular marathons, were word perfect on revised SOPs and who I would be quite happy to have my family sitting in the cabin going into Naples in the middle of a thunderstorm with an average first officer.

The answer is it all depends on the individual. As has been previously stated there are such items as medicals and checks which every pilot has to pass to remain on the line.

Also if you are over 60 years it is, I believe, a requirement that the other pilot is less than 60 years old.

Given the demographics of the post war baby boomers we are going to see a lot of very experienced pilots leaving the profession over the next few years.

I would suggest that offering continued employment to older competent pilots over 65 so they can pass on their skills and wisdom to those that are not so blessed would be an enhancement to the safety of flight operations rather than to it's detriment.

I can understand your sentiments. The problem is the authorities make blanket rules. Their interest is in the industry as a whole and not the individual. In the risk management case why take any risk. That could be their thinking. One unknown time bomb and it would blow up in their face. Sad, but true.

Quote Rat5

There once was an occasion, moons ago, when diverting crew of Air Anglia could not rent a Hertz (the company's rental partner) to return to home base because the whole crew was <25 years old.


I tried to rent a car not long ago,and was told that 'nobody over 65 could rent a car from all the major rental companies'. :mad:

Not so in the UK Crippen, they may 'up' the rate a bit in some companies, I recently rented from Alamo, (via Europecar), and at age 71 there were no extra charges.

As far as I can remember the 20t weight restriction that stopped pilots over 60 commanding a heavier aircraft came in during the early eighties, possibly late seventies even?

As far as passing sim checks every six months is concerned, I'm sure many of us will know people who are apparently able to 'up their game' in a simulator? Particularly when the format is one in which it is possible to Pre-study, or one has known the trainer for donkey's years.

That IMHE bears little relationship to standard of performance day in day out!

Personally (and on balance) I would much prefer to avoid being on board an aeroplane where the captain was in his late sixties. (Even if he has spent his life proving he can pull young birds to mess about with!!)

Even if the CRA is raised above 65 there is no guarantee the major airlines will keep the pilots on the payroll.. the " essentials" loss of licence insurance, private medical insurance etc are not always available to those over 60, let alone 70! Many Training Captains are themselves 55/60 which under the " combined 120 rule" negates training these older guys..and yes, the public perception of " safety" is not a silver surfer in the flight deck. Is there CRA for high court judges and MPs?

Looks like Pedds is not the only pilot doing his last flight:

BBC News - Final trip for Orkney shortest flight pilot

and the public perception of safety in the flight deck is just what, exactly, O knowledgeable one?

Parabellum, my comment was a "tongue in cheek" but on a serious note, I am sure the regulatory bodies would suggest that at " advanced ages" the crew have more frequent medicals etc. Technically if the age was raised to 70 then at 69 a person could start a type rating and OCC course, maybe do ditching and slide drills, flight deck window escapes etc.. is this really a sensible proposal? 65 is more than enough for most guys..I know from our company experience the guys over 60 tend to have longer periods off sick with " degenerative issues" , eyes, bones, bladder problems, kidney stones, back problems etc.. this is natural and not career related but the airlines have a choice to tolerate this or not, of course in the " civil service" it is expected!

It does strike me that some posters are not living in the present. Look at what is actually happening wrt regulation and EU and UK age legislation. Cast an eye over the demographics within the EU, bearing in mind that it takes a minimum of 18 years to grow a tax payer.
How would you keep society stable and avoid widespread poverty in old age? Remind me what the average pension pot is again?
The governments across the West are encouraging people to work longer as it solves many of their own and societies' problems.
Unless they pass a law that specifically exempts flag carrier Captains on their first marriages with grown up children and a final salary pension, then I think we are stuck with the scenario that pilots can work for as long as they keep passing the medicals & checks until the age of 65 (for the time being).

Agreed KirkGusset, 70 is way, way too long. Personally I think 65 should be a full stop for commercial airline flying, be it schedules or charters, pax or freight.

Living in the real world
 

Hunterboy, with respect, your analysis is incorrect. In an age of mass unemployment (not least amongst pilots) it is not in society's interest to increase working hours or the age of retirement, quite the contrary. The reason for doing so is driven by one issue and one issue only – maximising profit. And that issue is driven not by society, nor by governments but by industry. For the last 20 years or so the very measures which you support have been implemented and steadily increased and the result has not been less instability or poverty but the exact opposite. Despite this, you accuse others of not living in the present, testimony to how effective industry has been in clouding the real issue.

I started my professional flying career in 1960. The accepted retirement age for the next 20 years or so was 65 so everything was based upon that.

Suddenly, someone decided that we should all retire at 60 unless we flew aircraft of less than 20 tons. I did not want to retire at 60. I loved my flying and my job too much.

Luckily, we went back to 65 and I flew right up to my 65th birthday. It was the right time to go for me. I still had a Class One medical and my last LPC was just as bad as the first one!

My company then asked me to continue teaching and examining in the simulator. Believe it or not, in order to keep an SFE qualification, the CAA insist upon a Class One medical (not so for SFI) and an LPC/OPC and LOFT as per the usual proforma every six months.

I did this quite happily for another three years and it was actually an idiot in the Human Remains department asking me to sign a totally ridiculous contract that stopped me in my tracks and made me ask myself whether I really wanted to do this any more.

I didn't.

So, for me, it all ended at about the right time and I had a wonderful professional flying career.