The new airline thread

[HeloDude]

Seems like SWA continues to have some problems due to the Boeing issues…

https://www.usatoday.com/story/travel/airline-news/2024/04/26/southwest-airlines-leaving-airports/73465807007/

[AirGuardianC141747]

If they’re leaving four airports I wonder which ones? 

[nsplayr]

2 minutes ago, AirGuardianC141747 said:

If they’re leaving four airports I wonder which ones? 

It says directly in the article that was linked:

• Bellingham International Airport in Bellingham, Washington
• George Bush Intercontinental Airport in Houston, Texas
• Syracuse Hancock International Airport in Syracuse, New York
• Cozumel International Airport in Mexico

[AirGuardianC141747]

2 hours ago, nsplayr said:

It says directly in the article that was linked:

• Bellingham International Airport in Bellingham, Washington
• George Bush Intercontinental Airport in Houston, Texas
• Syracuse Hancock International Airport in Syracuse, New York
• Cozumel International Airport in Mexico

Thanks for the info. Goofing around internationally right now, the country only let me have the first part of the article from the link. Maybe if SWA impacted anything in this region they would have been gracious enough to provide the entire picture. Doh! Appreciate the catchup!

[SocialD]

Looks like Age 67 may be dead.  

 

 

[Blue]

2 hours ago, SocialD said:

Looks like Age 67 may be dead.  

Good.

The only airline flying I do is sitting in the back.  But I work with enough of the 65+ crowd on a daily basis to know that I don't want them flying me or my family around.

Age-related cognitive decline is real.  And those who deny it the most are typically the ones most affected by it.

Which is not to say you can't be 65+ and still be capable.  But for every 10 guys who think they're "running circles around all those young whipper-snappers," 9 of them are full of shit.

[HossHarris]

9 and 7/8ths of them are full of shit 

[MexicanHouseRULZ]

Didn't really add much to the pool of active pilots, but it gave a lot of pilots two more years on the long-term disability payroll.

[AirGuardianC141747]

Forget the extra two years being shot down. Didn’t anyone see the “25 hour cockpit voice recorder” requirement within the bill statement. No one will ever get close to the current 65 year max. Good luck to ya’ll. 

[SocialD]

4 hours ago, AirGuardianC141747 said:

Forget the extra two years being shot down. Didn’t anyone see the “25 hour cockpit voice recorder” requirement within the bill statement. No one will ever get close to the current 65 year max. Good luck to ya’ll. 

 

 

We already have something like 6-9 hour CVRs, what is going to 25 going to change?   I guess someone may hear my ramblings on how to best exploit the contract to get the most pay for the least amount of work.  

[nunya]

8 minutes ago, SocialD said:

We already have something like 6-9 hour CVRs, what is going to 25 going to change?   I guess someone may hear my ramblings on how to best exploit the contract to get the most pay for the least amount of work.  

I don't know how I feel about the change, but it's a response to their inability to hear audio from AS1282 (the holy 737) and others. 1282 only had a 2 hour CVR.

[SocialD]

49 minutes ago, nunya said:

I don't know how I feel about the change, but it's a response to their inability to hear audio from AS1282 (the holy 737) and others. 1282 only had a 2 hour CVR.

 

I hear the same about the AAL 777 runway incursion at JFK.  Lost the data because they then flew a leg to Europe.  

 

As long as it's not a video camera, which this isn't, then I don't see it as an issue.  

[HuggyU2]

21 hours ago, HossHarris said:

9 and 7/8ths of them are full of shit 

 

23 hours ago, Blue said:

But for every 10 guys who think they're "running circles around all those young whipper-snappers," 9 of them are full of shit.

The question is not "is there cognitive decline", but rather "how significant is it?"  
 

I would rather have a highly experienced 66 year old in the left seat than a 23 year old with no turbine PIC in the right seat (or left seat, as has been the case recently). 

[SurelySerious]

 
 
We already have something like 6-9 hour CVRs, what is going to 25 going to change?   I guess someone may hear my ramblings on how to best exploit the contract to get the most pay for the least amount of work.  

A 777 crossing a runway they weren’t cleared for, causing another aircraft to reject, and then still continuing to Europe YOLO leaving no voice recording despite knowing they made the mistake.

Edit: saw your follow on recognizing this. But it honestly probably was the single event driver.

[xaarman]

Pretty sure the catalyst for the 25 hour CVR was the Air Canada flight who lined up with the taxiway for landing at SFO. 

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Air_Canada_Flight_759

The NTSB published their final report in September 2018; five recommendations were made.^[16]

As the pilots were slow to report the incident, the airplane had made another flight and the cockpit voice recording was recorded over. The NTSB has stated that it wants faster incident reporting and considers recommending capturing the last 25 hours, an increase from two hours.^[28]

[tac airlifter]

8 hours ago, HuggyU2 said:

I would rather have a highly experienced 66 year old in the left seat than a 23 year old with no turbine PIC in the right seat (or left seat, as has been the case recently). 

Except those aren't the choices.

The old guys I fly with are clearly very experienced and have a wealth of knowledge.  But most don't recognize how unsafe they can be, and arrogance is a hazard they are blind to.  
 

I'll take the young CA who taxis slow and asks for input over the 65 YO who has done this so many times he doesn't need to double check that last radio call.

 

[HossHarris]

13 hours ago, HuggyU2 said:

 

The question is not "is there cognitive decline", but rather "how significant is it?"  
 

I would rather have a highly experienced 66 year old in the left seat than a 23 year old with no turbine PIC in the right seat (or left seat, as has been the case recently). 

 

those are both terrible and not the only options ….

[AirGuardianC141747]

Very good discussions and definitely quite a bit off path from what I expected. Multiple perspectives regarding what we predominantly do in our specific realms in the world of aviation.  Here I was thinking, dang - they’re going to have all of the conversations we had on our flight. Flights in my little world range from a minimal six hours to 14 hours plus just the other day which is normal. 

*Bottom line for myself - I will almost always take the Capt/FO who has been with our outfit the longest as we are not a cookie cutter operation. Sometimes none of the crew have ever seen the destination we are headed for and I will once again fall on my sword to the longevity crowd as it’s worldwide experIence that brings the rain. As you can see it’s situational as most things and the “almost always” I mentioned before is because of the known flyers I have flown who are outliers at best. 
 

**I can see the various view points on all the sides when pertaining to those types of standard operations. Good stuff!

 

 

Edited May 1 by AirGuardianC141747

[ViperMan]

Certainly with all of our knowledge and technology we could devise a test to see if someone has declined, no? I just don't understand how people can be so itchy to discriminate based on just throwing down a blanket "no one is capable of flying after the age of 65" when it's clearly age discrimination. Which is exactly what it is.

All it is in actuality is a mask to kick people out of your "seat." Which is BS.

[BashiChuni]

12 minutes ago, ViperMan said:

Certainly with all of our knowledge and technology we could devise a test to see if someone has declined, no? I just don't understand how people can be so itchy to discriminate based on just throwing down a blanket "no one is capable of flying after the age of 65" when it's clearly age discrimination. Which is exactly what it is.

All it is in actuality is a mask to kick people out of your "seat." Which is BS.

kick people out of your seat? GMAFB.

 

[Lord Ratner]

51 minutes ago, ViperMan said:

Certainly with all of our knowledge and technology we could devise a test to see if someone has declined, no? I just don't understand how people can be so itchy to discriminate based on just throwing down a blanket "no one is capable of flying after the age of 65" when it's clearly age discrimination. Which is exactly what it is.

All it is in actuality is a mask to kick people out of your "seat." Which is BS.

No, it's a recognition that we aren't going to have a test, so we have to have an age.

 

If we have a test, a lot of the guys who really want to stay past 65 would have been kicked out by 55. No one wants to open that can of worms.

 

Air guardian has an interesting perspective from his particular operation. But the passenger airliners do not go to outfields once every few years, you simply don't need someone with 30 or 40 years of experience to safely operate. That doesn't mean they can't safely operate, but this argument that you need decades of experience to do this job is just laughable. It's a cookie cutter operation even at some of the "challenging" airfields. Yeah, I don't want to send a 23-year-old brand new Captain off to Guatemala on his own, but no one was arguing for that.

 

In the passenger carriers the biggest threat is a compound emergency that requires very quick decision making. Considering most 65-year-olds have never even had an engine failure, longevity does not contribute to that. A focus on training, and mental quickness is what will separate pilots after about 10 years of experience.

 

Like tac airlifter pointed out, slowing down and asking for clarification alleviates the majority of passenger carrier mishaps. You don't need 30 years of experience to do that.

 

If we really want to start down the cognitive testing route, the 60 plus crowd is not going to like it when they start showing the cognitive decline curve on a chart on CNN every time there's a mishap. At a certain point the people in the back of the plane are going to ask why their pilot is lower on the curve. Yes, initially there will be a threshold set based on the average 65-year-old, but that threshold will be a lower score than the average 55-year-old or 40-year-old or 35-year-old. Once you start quantifying something that costs billions of dollars when it goes wrong, people will ask "why are we settling for less than the best?"

 

No one cares when a few rich people die in a business jet, which is why everybody 65 and older can continue to fly in that career. This is a "problem" that does not need to be solved.

[AirGuardianC141747]

3 hours ago, ViperMan said:

All it is in actuality is a mask to kick people out of your "seat." Which is BS.

 

3 hours ago, BashiChuni said:

kick people out of your seat? GMAFB.

I see both sides in various ways, but kind of irrelevant at many airlines as it becomes a significant issue every bidding cycle. Just sat 2nd seat in a group of four to Korea three days ago. 19 year Capt giving me a bit of crap for not jumping left seat as usual until I showed him my schedule - I mentioned not to hold back as “if you haven’t noticed you’re flying with the top 2% or better senior FOs today, two of us are on open time.” He did say he could rest easy with the experience base on board and I did respond regarding the abnormal amount of complacency we bring collectively! 🤪

Bottom line: People are figuring out that doing a little pain in the beginning definitely brings its rewards at times just a few years down the road. Our seniority gains aren’t nearly as great as the Majors so ponder that for a moment as hundreds are making the same assumptions and living it. Easier for those not driven solely by the $, but you can easily make it up if you have a seniority based overtime system as needed. United is attempting to ratify better schedules, more pay, etc for new hire Captains to alleviate their conundrum.

 
*Focus: “United Airlines grapples with pilots avoiding the captain's chair”

”At American Airlines (AAL.O), opens new tab, more than 7,000 pilots have chosen not to take a captain's job, according to union-supplied data. Dennis Tajer, a spokesman for American's pilots union, said the number of pilots declining promotions has at least doubled in the past seven years.”

**I myself won’t consider left until within the top 10% on my equipment, but who am I kidding top 5% is more a reality so I won’t kick anyone out of their seat - perhaps knock someone out of base momentarily is more like it. Not stealing food from anyone’s kids mouths. What an eccentric profession we chose to live in.

Edited May 1 by AirGuardianC141747

[Lord Ratner]

26 minutes ago, AirGuardianC141747 said:

 

I see both sides in various ways, but kind of irrelevant at many airlines as it becomes a significant issue every bidding cycle. Just sat 2nd seat in a group of four to Korea three days ago. 19 year Capt giving me a bit of crap for not jumping left seat as usual until I showed him my schedule - I mentioned not to hold back as “if you haven’t noticed you’re flying with the top 2% or better senior FOs today, two of us are on open time.” He did say he could rest easy with the experience base on board and I did respond regarding the abnormal amount of complacency we bring collectively! 🤪

Bottom line: People are figuring out that doing a little pain in the beginning definitely brings its rewards at times just a few years down the road. Our seniority gains aren’t nearly as great as the Majors so ponder that for a moment as hundreds are making the same assumptions and living it. Easier for those not driven solely by the $, but you can easily make it up if you have a seniority based overtime system as needed. United is attempting to ratify better schedules, more pay, etc for new hire Captains to alleviate their conundrum.

 
*Focus: “United Airlines grapples with pilots avoiding the captain's chair”

”At American Airlines (AAL.O), opens new tab, more than 7,000 pilots have chosen not to take a captain's job, according to union-supplied data. Dennis Tajer, a spokesman for American's pilots union, said the number of pilots declining promotions has at least doubled in the past seven years.”

**I myself won’t consider left until within the top 10% on my equipment, but who am I kidding top 5% is more a reality so I won’t kick anyone out of their seat - perhaps knock someone out of base momentarily is more like it. Not stealing food from anyone’s kids mouths. What an eccentric profession we chose to live in.

I get the question all the time. I'm at about 15% in the right seat, and I think I'd be around 70 in the left. I easily make as much or a little more than a same seniority Captain stuck on reserve, and fly less. A line Captain will make more than me, but the difference in schedule is dramatic. I probably average 30 hours of flight time a month and get paid 90 to 120 hours. I regularly eat dinner at home, put my kids to sleep, then go fly 1 hour away and I'm back before my wife gets home from work. I'm rarely away from home more than one night in a row, and if I am it's because the trip pays a bunch and still doesn't have much flying to it (e.g. a 30 hour layover for premium pay). I fly only the days I want, no weekends or holidays unless I choose, as many vacations whenever I want. I do have the luxury of a wife who makes six figures as well, but even if she didn't it would be hard to give up on this schedule when I can just wait another five or so years to upgrade, then do it as a captain.

 

[Smokin]

If an airline pilot cannot comfortably retire by age 65, then I question his decision making abilities enough that I don't think he should be responsible for the lives of hundreds of people.

[AirGuardianC141747]

6 minutes ago, Smokin said:

If an airline pilot cannot comfortably retire by age 65, then I question his decision making abilities enough that I don't think he should be responsible for the lives of hundreds of people.

Interesting take on cognitive skills, etc. Try asking that to those have been divorced once, twice or more (now I see your point at thrice) - especially later in their career. I have been fortunate thus far and pray to never know, but having flown with many who have I can understand the desire for the option. No one knows if their career was what they wished it had been until it’s in the rear view mirror. 
 

*Pitfalls are well beyond divorce of course, just saying. 60 or 62 more likely sounds the best for myself financially, but for those that reach a point/goal prior to the mandatory age it will be interesting who will actually hang it up. I surmise it will be tough for many to walk away from the figures being pulled down unless the job is absolutely horrible. So far I can’t imagine an easier “job” and many of us have had some truly tenuous jobs/careers.