← Back to Squawk list
  • 29

US lawmakers strike deal to boost aviation safety, will not raise pilot retirement age

Enviado
 
WASHINGTON, April 29 (Reuters) - U.S. House and Senate negotiators said early Monday they had reached a deal to boost air traffic controller staffing and boost funding to avert runway close-call incidents, but will not increase the airline pilot retirement age to 67 from 65. The U.S. House of Representatives in July voted 351-69 on a sweeping bill to reauthorize the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) that would also raise the mandatory pilot retirement age to 67 but the Senate Commerce… (www.reuters.com) Más...

Sam Negrete
Fijador de tendenciasAdicto a las noticiasPromotorAutobiógrafo

Sort type: [Top] [Newest]


AirFed60
AirFed60 14
Look at the gang making the laws. Very few are under 60. Maybe they know something about upper age & cognition.

I think all elected officials should be subject to annual physicals & cognition tests.
Responder ↓•Permalink•Report
TimDyck
Tim Dyck 1
A cognition test? 3/4 of the lawmakers will fail.
Responder ↓•Permalink•Padre•Report
ThomasBlackburn
Thomas Blackburn 15
Some people are mentally aware into their 80's, others lose it in their 40's. Setting an absolute age limit is not a real answer.
Responder ↓•Permalink•Report
dodger4
dodger4 9
This arbitrary age limitation thing drives me up the wall. You are absolutely bang on with the cognitive differences, mental alacrity, intelligence, and all round clarity and keenness. It's a pity the law makers in both Canada and the US don't realize this.

Two persons aged 67 can have such divergent capabilities that you'd think there was a 30-year age difference between them.
Responder ↓•Permalink•Padre•Report
mikabjork
Mika Bjork 9
A 1000-page bill would be an automatic NO vote for me.
Responder ↓•Permalink•Report
dwiggins01
Scott Wiggins 0
Yep, we are no doubt going to be paying for abortions in Africa and sending technology to Iran and china and whoever else democrats sell us out to. These Omnibus bills are garbage and should be illegal.
Responder ↓•Permalink•Padre•Report
TimDyck
Tim Dyck 2
It’s not just a democrat thing. Both parties do it and the solution is to just ban them.
Responder ↓•Permalink•Padre•Report
mjarman2
Mike Jarman 8
With annual physicals they can add cognitive functions and easily increase retirement age. I think 70 is good if they pass all testing.
Responder ↓•Permalink•Report
Bayouflier
Bayouflier 10
Couldn't agree more. I got booted from the airlines at 65 and four years later, I'm still flying jets and loving every minute of it.
Responder ↓•Permalink•Padre•Report
deanbog1
Dean Bogdanowich 3
But a controller gets booted at 56 . You can have 1000s of pilots but if no one is separating the aircraft whats the point ?
Responder ↓•Permalink•Padre•Report
TimDyck
Tim Dyck 1
AI will take over that job.
Responder ↓•Permalink•Padre•Report
M20ExecDriver
M20ExecDriver 4
I know people that had physicals, given a clean bill of health and dropped dead a few months later. FAA physicals prove your ok that day.
Responder ↓•Permalink•Padre•Report
CCW1
John Prukop 4
Especially if they've taken ANY of those Clot Kill Shots! Check out Ft. Rucker's U.S. Army Senior Flight Surgeon Lt. Col. Theresa Long's testimony before the Idaho State Legislature: https://rumble.com/v1mo1kg-whistleblower-army-ltcol-theresa-long-md-tells-her-story-in-part-3-of-an-ex.html
Responder ↓•Permalink•Padre•Report
CCW1
John Prukop 1
Oh, and make sure to listen VERY CAREFULLY at abut 32"07 in that video where she talks about the FAA's complicity in this mess!
Responder ↓•Permalink•Padre•Report
scubaboy3c
Steven Williamson 3
I'd much rather have an old pilot up front as PIC than a bold pilot.
Responder ↓•Permalink•Report
briansfreeman
Brian Freeman 3
Why no cameras in the cockpits??? Even cops wear cameras these days.
Responder ↓•Permalink•Report
TimDyck
Tim Dyck 1
Would you like to be on camera for a while flight that lasts 12 or more hours?
Responder ↓•Permalink•Padre•Report
jkeifer3
Joe Keifer 7
Boosting ATC staffing in and of itself could actually reduce safety depending on what criteria they use to do the hiring and to what standards they accomplish the training.
Responder ↓•Permalink•Report
CAH747
CLARENCE HELLER 2
I did read some of the comments and why do you allow the political slant in the column? I am sure that you have strong feelings, but mine are different than yours so my VOTE will cancel your vote.
Responder ↓•Permalink•Report
RWSlater
Ron Slater 2
I bet that 1000 page bill would be fun to read by 20-30 year airline pilots
Responder ↓•Permalink•Report
churtak
Cheryl Hurtak 3
But the two candidates for arguably the most important job in the world are 80+ and in cognitive decline? Color me confused.
Responder ↓•Permalink•Report
CAH747
CLARENCE HELLER 2
Age is only an item in somebody's statement. Do not let that influence you. listen to what they say, not a newscast report. Do any make sense to you? You select, not some T V face trying to keep a job!
Responder ↓•Permalink•Padre•Report
TimDyck
Tim Dyck 1
What if neither one is making sense?
Seriously 350 million people and that’s the best the parties could come up with?
Responder ↓•Permalink•Padre•Report
jkeifer3
Joe Keifer 1
In other news, JAL cancelled a flight from the US to Japan because the flight crew were drinking and making noise even though the crew was over the JAL twelve hours from bottle to throttle rule. Probably good for their PR but…….

Your thoughts?
Responder ↓•Permalink•Report
Hansh20050
J.N.M Heemskerk 1
Ik denk dat het belangrijk is dat de opname tijd verlengd wordt, beter onderzoek is mogelijk
Responder ↓•Permalink•Report
Bayouflier
Bayouflier 7
Easy for you to say.
Responder ↓•Permalink•Padre•Report
TimDyck
Tim Dyck 1
I tried to read that out loud. I got a cramp on my tongue.
Responder ↓•Permalink•Padre•Report
Porschadarling
Brenda Johnston 1
Really…..67 is definitely not old these days. The older pilots are the highly skilled and experienced pilots. I think this has more to do with allowing younger people to move along the ladder. I would not be terribly concerned about this if it wasn’t for the movement to put less experience people in due to DEI.
Responder ↓•Permalink•Report
Bayouflier
Bayouflier 0
Not sure I get the 25 hour recording devices. Can anyone think of an accident investigation in which a 25 hour recording device would have made a difference?
Responder ↓•Permalink•Report
dkenna
dkenna 12
To answer your question, the Alaska door plug incident data was overwritten, so none of the CVR was available. Not that adding 25 hour recording will change the outcome or make a difference in the moment; but like most implementations in aviation, it all happens AFTER the feces hits the fan…
Responder ↓•Permalink•Padre•Report
dkenna
dkenna 8
Recorders overwrite data after 2 hours (I believe) so on trans continent flights, more than half the data is gone. An issue that might cause a failure could go unknown, possibly an issue from a previous flight that hadn’t been noticed/reported. The more data investigators have to work with, the better.
Responder ↓•Permalink•Padre•Report
sparkie624
sparkie624 6
Yes.. On overseas flights.. Also, Sometimes planes have something that happens and not detected until later.. Many times that data is unretrievable.
Responder ↓•Permalink•Padre•Report
jkeifer3
Joe Keifer 2
Agreed. Any check is just a snapshot in time and is invalidated the moment the check is signed off or completed.
Responder ↓•Permalink•Padre•Report
jkeifer3
Joe Keifer 2
I can imagine one of the unions going berserk if the company decided to do random audits of data on the CVR sort of like random peeing in a bottle.
Responder ↓•Permalink•Padre•Report
TimDyck
Tim Dyck 1
Should be 48 hours so anything that happened to the aircraft for its last two days is captured.
Responder ↓•Permalink•Padre•Report
BillOverdue
Bill Overdue -1
It would be used to detect a pattern of incidents over time that "worked out" but wasn't the best method or procedure to use at that moment that could've had a very different outcome if the last hole in the swiss cheese lined up.
Responder ↓•Permalink•Padre•Report
jkeifer3
Joe Keifer 2
Love that “Swiss Cheese” model!
Responder ↓•Permalink•Padre•Report
BillOverdue
Bill Overdue -8
"boost funding to avert runway close-call incidents" ...
Throwing away taxpayer money is always the 1st reaction to glaze over a flawed hiring method.
Responder ↓•Permalink•Report
AirplaneC
C J 5
Do you need someone to respond to trigger your stale, racist, and sexist DEI rant, or can you just do it on your own now? Just want to make sure that you get the support you need in order to babble about stuff that isn't relevant to the topic.
Responder ↓•Permalink•Padre•Report
dkenna
dkenna -1
I don’t think Bill wants a single taxpayer dollar spent unless it is to re-elect Cheeto Mussolini, send everyone who isn’t of his ethnicity back across the boarder, bail out Russia, enrich North Korea, impeachment of (whatever democrat they wanna pick this week), denying access to healthcare, education, and of course…voting.
Responder ↓•Permalink•Padre•Report
jkeifer3
Joe Keifer 4
TDS flaring up?
Responder ↓•Permalink•Padre•Report
dwiggins01
Scott Wiggins 0
I don't need a trigger. DEI hiring is discriminatory on its face. Didn't we try to eliminate discrimination a half century ago? Now, our institutions are failing across the board. I can't mail a letter with any assurance that it will get to the destination. My bank makes mistakes every month. I've noticed that ATC controllers are getting worse. Blah blah blah. This country is having a crisis of competence.
Responder ↓•Permalink•Padre•Report
Richmond2000
Jason Riddell 1
now is it "hiring" or training and mentoring
I doubt you would do a job mistake free without proper training before hand and everywhere there is a staffing / budget shortfall and training is the first thing to get cut
Responder ↓•Permalink•Padre•Report
gfonternel
Gary Fonternel 2
Well said, Bill. Diversity hiring is garbage hiring. Those who are best for the job judged by education standards and aptitude should get the opportunity to work in their chosen field.
Responder ↓•Permalink•Padre•Report
CCW1
John Prukop 1
How about "SEE AND AVOID" by looking out the window! No taxpayer cost whatsoever!!!
Responder ↓•Permalink•Padre•Report
jkeifer3
Joe Keifer 0
There are a lot of manufacturers of technology that have already designed and built things, probably with their own R&D dollars but maybe not, that simply are in need of a "need" to be purchased and deployed.
Responder ↓•Permalink•Padre•Report
sparkie624
sparkie624 -1
I am not really surprised by that...
Responder ↓•Permalink•Report
flybd5juan
Juan Jimenez -6
Keep the retirement age as it is. Over 65 is a safety issue, period. Let them fly cargo if they still want to work.
Responder ↓•Permalink•Report
Richmond2000
Jason Riddell 1
how old are the military generals - people that directly decide people living?
how about most of the people making the laws in the USA OR most "western" countries
Responder ↓•Permalink•Padre•Report
CCW1
John Prukop 1
Just check the AGE of the most senior CONgress folks... MOST ARE FEATHERBEDDED AND NEED TO GO TO A RETIREMENT HOME WITH MORPHINE ON THE HOUR!
Responder ↓•Permalink•Padre•Report

Entrar

¿Olvidaste tu contraseña?
¿No tienes cuenta? ¡Regístrate ahora (gratis) para acceder a prestaciones personalizadas, alertas de vuelos y mucho más!
Únete a FlightAware
¿Sabías que el rastreo de vuelos de FlightAware se sostiene gracias a los anuncios?
Puedes ayudarnos a que FlightAware siga siendo gratuito permitiendo que aparezcan los anuncios de FlightAware.com. Trabajamos arduamente para que nuestros anuncios sean discretos y de interés para el rubro a fin de crear una experiencia positiva. Es rápido y fácil whitelist ads en FlightAware o por favor considera acceder a nuestras cuentas premium.
Descartar