While there are no doubt, exceptions, I fully agree with you on that.Shiny Side Up wrote:That said, I still stand by that you're more likely to get hurt in a homebuilt than a certified airplane. Especially the more common types of accidents that tend to happen in this sort of setting.
Young Eagles mid-air in Buffalo, 2 dead, 2 survive
Moderators: lilfssister, North Shore, sky's the limit, sepia, Sulako
Re: "Young Eagles" mid-air in Buffalo, 2 dead, 2 survive
Re: "Young Eagles" mid-air in Buffalo, 2 dead, 2 survive
For my 10th birthday present my neighbor took me up for a ride in a Beech Sundowner. My next flight was in a 1939 J-3. I'd still fly with either pilot and they are both over 78.
Too bad about the young eagles flight though. Brutal..
Too bad about the young eagles flight though. Brutal..
Drinking lots of coffee lately, at a nice safe jungle desk, wishing I were flying......
-
Old fella
- Rank 10
- Posts: 2526
- Joined: Mon Jan 29, 2007 7:04 am
- Location: I'm retired. I don't want to'I don't have to and you can't make me.
Re: "Young Eagles" mid-air in Buffalo, 2 dead, 2 survive
phillyfan wrote:I would not let my kids ride with a private pilot, in a homebuilt or with a 78 year old. Don't really care how great Bob Hoover was, or is.
When your at the gates of "80 yrs" old you are at, and in many cases exceeding your"best before" date. I see it plenty in some volunteering work I do on occasion. Sad fact, but it is a fact.
Re: "Young Eagles" mid-air in Buffalo, 2 dead, 2 survive
The 78-year-old pilot still had a commercial licence, for what it´s worth... according to the prelim report here
http://www.ntsb.gov/aviationquery/brief ... 2122&key=1
http://www.ntsb.gov/aviationquery/brief ... 2122&key=1
Re: "Young Eagles" mid-air in Buffalo, 2 dead, 2 survive
It might be an accurate *generalization*, but it's not a hard line for every person who hits 80. I know 50-year old pilots who I wouldn't get into an airplane with, and 80-year old pilots who fly better than I do at 43. What's lacking is a way to objectively measure competence and demonstrate capability, without serious inconvenience to the pilot. There are pilots in the US that have had medicals pulled by overly cautious ME's and they can spend years getting them back... Pulled with no medical evidence to support it, but requiring mountains of medical evidence to get it back.Old fella wrote:When your at the gates of "80 yrs" old you are at, and in many cases exceeding your"best before" date. I see it plenty in some volunteering work I do on occasion. Sad fact, but it is a fact.
-
Old fella
- Rank 10
- Posts: 2526
- Joined: Mon Jan 29, 2007 7:04 am
- Location: I'm retired. I don't want to'I don't have to and you can't make me.
Re: Young Eagles mid-air in Buffalo, 2 dead, 2 survive
Sorry sir, but your faculties and motor skills do indeed deteriorate with advancing age, that's a medical fact of life. You are indeed correct that some deteriorate slower that others, hence 80 yrs vs 50 yrs as you pointed out but they are headed downhill. When the downhill motion sets in on an 80 yr old for whatever reason, it moves quite rapidly and in most if not all cases, irreversable.
-
Cat Driver
- Top Poster
- Posts: 18921
- Joined: Sun Feb 15, 2004 8:31 pm
Re: Young Eagles mid-air in Buffalo, 2 dead, 2 survive
At what age should pilots quit flying because they are to old to fly safely?
The hardest thing about flying is knowing when to say no
After over a half a century of flying no one ever died because of my decision not to fly.
After over a half a century of flying no one ever died because of my decision not to fly.
Re: Young Eagles mid-air in Buffalo, 2 dead, 2 survive
I realize that in this day and age it seems perfectly acceptable to blurt out every thought, but it does seem a bit unfair in this case to be equating a pilot's age as a possible cause. He is not here to defend himself.
Is there ay evidence whatsoever to indicate age played a factor?
A fellow aviator, and two young children are dead. It just does not seem fair to speculate , when the speculations imply causation.
Is there ay evidence whatsoever to indicate age played a factor?
A fellow aviator, and two young children are dead. It just does not seem fair to speculate , when the speculations imply causation.
Accident speculation:
Those that post don’t know. Those that know don’t post
Those that post don’t know. Those that know don’t post
Re: Young Eagles mid-air in Buffalo, 2 dead, 2 survive
And this fact proves to you that the older pilots are less safe?Old fella wrote:Sorry sir, but your faculties and motor skills do indeed deteriorate with advancing age, that's a medical fact of life.
I call that jumping to conclusions.
Being safe in an airplane depends on many more factors than motor skills.
The younger less experienced, wise or prudent pilot might not be safer, even though he has better motor skills than the older one.
Anyway, in many areas of aviation, I'd even say that you don't need much motor skills to be safe.
Other things will very likely kill you in an aircraft before motor skills do.
Think ahead or fall behind!
Re: Young Eagles mid-air in Buffalo, 2 dead, 2 survive
I want to be clear here that this post is in no way referencing this accident or implying anything with regard to our deceased fellow aviator.
There have been studies done on the effects of aging as it applies to pilots.
Unfortunately, I dont have them handy so I am going to go from memory.
To no ones surprise, physical deterioration is a fact of aging.
When it comes to pilots, IIRC , older pilots ( which never was defined specifically) take longer to learn to fly based on typically slower reaction times, as certain skills such as landing allow faster reaction times to make up for judgement errors initially. However once learned their skill levels were comparable.
However, their accident rates were not. The one study did not speculate on the reason for this but did suggest other factors such as older pilots being more likely to fly only recreationally, and not keep as current. In any event, there was correlation, but not causation, which if you are an insurance company, for example ,is all you care about.
On the other hand, pilots that learned to fly at young ages, while suffering the same physical deterioration exhibited no higher accident rates than young pilots, and in certain segments lower.
Again, the authors stopped short of offering a reason, but suggested it may be that while we lose physical capability, as we age our cognitive abilities change and more than compensate. And once learned at a young age, the skills are retained.
regardless however, one has to be very careful before suggesting that age is a specific factor in an accident without any other information than the age of the pilot. Claims s like " I would not let my kids fly with....." Are short on fact, and long on emotion, even if they do seem to indicate a common sense approach.
The one off examples, are just that..they do not necessarily represent a majority, or even a significant minority in most cases.
in any event, my original post on this thread was focussed on posts that seemed to implyby innuendo, that age was a factor in this accident. And I just could not see that they were backing that up with anything, which makes it nothing more than disrespectful for a fellow lost aviator who was trying to promote aviation to the younger generation.
Rant over.
Now I must go any find my hearing aid and that stupid seeing eye dog, and remember to pick up some batteries for my pacemaker on the way to the airport...old pilots aren't fit to fly..balderdash!
There have been studies done on the effects of aging as it applies to pilots.
Unfortunately, I dont have them handy so I am going to go from memory.
To no ones surprise, physical deterioration is a fact of aging.
When it comes to pilots, IIRC , older pilots ( which never was defined specifically) take longer to learn to fly based on typically slower reaction times, as certain skills such as landing allow faster reaction times to make up for judgement errors initially. However once learned their skill levels were comparable.
However, their accident rates were not. The one study did not speculate on the reason for this but did suggest other factors such as older pilots being more likely to fly only recreationally, and not keep as current. In any event, there was correlation, but not causation, which if you are an insurance company, for example ,is all you care about.
On the other hand, pilots that learned to fly at young ages, while suffering the same physical deterioration exhibited no higher accident rates than young pilots, and in certain segments lower.
Again, the authors stopped short of offering a reason, but suggested it may be that while we lose physical capability, as we age our cognitive abilities change and more than compensate. And once learned at a young age, the skills are retained.
regardless however, one has to be very careful before suggesting that age is a specific factor in an accident without any other information than the age of the pilot. Claims s like " I would not let my kids fly with....." Are short on fact, and long on emotion, even if they do seem to indicate a common sense approach.
The one off examples, are just that..they do not necessarily represent a majority, or even a significant minority in most cases.
in any event, my original post on this thread was focussed on posts that seemed to implyby innuendo, that age was a factor in this accident. And I just could not see that they were backing that up with anything, which makes it nothing more than disrespectful for a fellow lost aviator who was trying to promote aviation to the younger generation.
Rant over.
Now I must go any find my hearing aid and that stupid seeing eye dog, and remember to pick up some batteries for my pacemaker on the way to the airport...old pilots aren't fit to fly..balderdash!
Accident speculation:
Those that post don’t know. Those that know don’t post
Those that post don’t know. Those that know don’t post
-
Old fella
- Rank 10
- Posts: 2526
- Joined: Mon Jan 29, 2007 7:04 am
- Location: I'm retired. I don't want to'I don't have to and you can't make me.
Re: Young Eagles mid-air in Buffalo, 2 dead, 2 survive
Must be some reason "best before" date on the major carriers is 65 yrs of age.............
Re: Young Eagles mid-air in Buffalo, 2 dead, 2 survive
You would think so, but then you would have to wonder why the best before date was 60 previously. Somebody probably had a reason for that as well.......until it was raised!
I think as the population ages there will be more and more research,and better ways of assessing ability than an arbitrary age...is it the middle of the bell curve, or one of the ends...to conservative...or two liberal.
I think as the population ages there will be more and more research,and better ways of assessing ability than an arbitrary age...is it the middle of the bell curve, or one of the ends...to conservative...or two liberal.
Accident speculation:
Those that post don’t know. Those that know don’t post
Those that post don’t know. Those that know don’t post
-
Schooner69A
- Rank 7
- Posts: 639
- Joined: Thu Nov 06, 2008 5:17 pm
- Location: The Okanagan
Re: Young Eagles mid-air in Buffalo, 2 dead, 2 survive
Before any of you armchair experts get to pontificating about age and skill sets, you might want to watch the following: http://www.yourepeat.com/watch/?v=F7LsbLeitTk.
The performer and I flew Sabres in the last century and, although I'm not into airshow-level aerobatics, I still fly whenever I can get my hands on an aircraft. There is no doubt that we're not as sharp as we were when we were twenty years old horsing F-86s around the sky, but let's say that you have to get somewhere ASAP that is six hundred miles away; with whom would you rather go: a newly minted private pilot with 65 hours in his log book or a retired airline captain with 25000 hours under his belt? Personally, I would choose the latter because I did a cross-continent flight with the former and it wasn't pretty...
The performer and I flew Sabres in the last century and, although I'm not into airshow-level aerobatics, I still fly whenever I can get my hands on an aircraft. There is no doubt that we're not as sharp as we were when we were twenty years old horsing F-86s around the sky, but let's say that you have to get somewhere ASAP that is six hundred miles away; with whom would you rather go: a newly minted private pilot with 65 hours in his log book or a retired airline captain with 25000 hours under his belt? Personally, I would choose the latter because I did a cross-continent flight with the former and it wasn't pretty...
-
Cat Driver
- Top Poster
- Posts: 18921
- Joined: Sun Feb 15, 2004 8:31 pm
Re: Young Eagles mid-air in Buffalo, 2 dead, 2 survive
Well lets examine that one.Must be some reason "best before" date on the major carriers is 65 yrs of age.............
If age is the only factor that determines when you must quit flying a for a major carrier then flying a big jet requires better aircraft handling skills and faster reflexes than flying airshow display aerobatics, correct?
The hardest thing about flying is knowing when to say no
After over a half a century of flying no one ever died because of my decision not to fly.
After over a half a century of flying no one ever died because of my decision not to fly.
Re: Young Eagles mid-air in Buffalo, 2 dead, 2 survive
He looks around a lot in that video, ... a constant effort towards situational awareness; so it that sense it can't be that much about age either.Schooner69A wrote:Before any of you armchair experts get to pontificating about age and skill sets, you might want to watch the following:
Going up at a young age, I remember my Uncle constantly encouraging us to look for other aircraft ... whoever was sitting up front ... but would always have them in sight first, until we all got better at spotting, on those Sunday afternoon trips around the zone and then over/past Niagara Falls.
Being able to identify a conflicting traffic that is crabbing more-quickly from left or right (or climbing / descending) onto your path is another thing too; the traffic below the horizon ... or the slightly blinding turn into the sun on a bright day like it appears to have been here (50-60miles SE from where I live).
The volunteer pilot takes up the young eagle for their first ever trip .. and some attention is given to make that first voyage memorable (showing them things in the aircraft etc). Here's two of these volunteering pilots that didn't see another coming in time to avoid, and each with two more front-seat eyes that may or may not have been prioritizing 'looking out' ... or at any rate .. not seeing the other aircraft in time either to make a difference in its avoidance.
-
Old fella
- Rank 10
- Posts: 2526
- Joined: Mon Jan 29, 2007 7:04 am
- Location: I'm retired. I don't want to'I don't have to and you can't make me.
Re: Young Eagles mid-air in Buffalo, 2 dead, 2 survive
Cat Driver wrote:Well lets examine that one.Must be some reason "best before" date on the major carriers is 65 yrs of age.............
If age is the only factor that determines when you must quit flying a for a major carrier then flying a big jet requires better aircraft handling skills and faster reflexes than flying airshow display aerobatics, correct?
Beats the shit outta me, then again AC doesn't have any 70-80 yr old Captains in their B777 flying the line. I can't compare airline operation skill set, in say a B777 vis-a-vis that of airshow aerobatics simply because I have experience in neither.
An 80 yr old isn't as sharp as he/she was when they wore a younger man's/ladies clothes - that's my point and it is a fact.
PS. Perhaps some of the airline posters can jump in on your comparisons on skill set flying.
-
Cat Driver
- Top Poster
- Posts: 18921
- Joined: Sun Feb 15, 2004 8:31 pm
Re: Young Eagles mid-air in Buffalo, 2 dead, 2 survive
I retired at age 70, not because I had to but because I wanted to.An 80 yr old isn't as sharp as he/she was when they wore a younger man's/ladies clothes - that's my point and it is a fact.
When I retired I was still flying as an air display pilot all over Europe and to hold the license I had to pass the same flight test as every other air display pilot.
I will soon be 80 and can not detect any difference in my reflexes nor has anyone questioned my cognitive ability.
Should I quit flying because my age makes me unsafe?
I flew for many years in both sectors of aviation and trust me flying in the air display business requires far better reflexes and airplane handling skills than flying for an airline.PS. Perhaps some of the airline posters can jump in on your comparisons on skill set flying.
So why do some people claim that age alone makes someone unsafe....even if that person passes the same medical as everyone else and passes the same flight tests?
Even more important for me is that my employer is planning on buying a Bell 206 for the company and wants me to fly it.
Am I to old to fly it?
The hardest thing about flying is knowing when to say no
After over a half a century of flying no one ever died because of my decision not to fly.
After over a half a century of flying no one ever died because of my decision not to fly.
-
Old fella
- Rank 10
- Posts: 2526
- Joined: Mon Jan 29, 2007 7:04 am
- Location: I'm retired. I don't want to'I don't have to and you can't make me.
Re: Young Eagles mid-air in Buffalo, 2 dead, 2 survive
First of all I didn't say anything about "unsafe", never mentioned the word. You say your cognitive abilities hasn't been questioned and your reflexes as you see them(and you should know) show no differences , well that's very good to hear and I am sincere in that. Your experiences in "both" sectors, I will certainly take that at face value cause, as mentioned, I have nil experience in either. You kept your body and mind well tuned, that is a credit to yourself and again, I commend you on that. Sadly there are many approaching your age who are not anywhere near the shape you are in for various reasons - I know many and feel sorry.
Be safe and hears hoping you continue to post here when you reach your 90th, I will certainly look forward to that(if I am around).
Cheers and all the best.
OF
Be safe and hears hoping you continue to post here when you reach your 90th, I will certainly look forward to that(if I am around).
Cheers and all the best.
OF
-
Cat Driver
- Top Poster
- Posts: 18921
- Joined: Sun Feb 15, 2004 8:31 pm
Re: Young Eagles mid-air in Buffalo, 2 dead, 2 survive
No problem old fella, what I was trying to point out is ability and ageing varies from individual to individual.
Some here state that they think anyone over 70 is not safe to fly with.
That is only their opinion and they give no valid reason to back up their opinion.
Some here state that they think anyone over 70 is not safe to fly with.
That is only their opinion and they give no valid reason to back up their opinion.
The hardest thing about flying is knowing when to say no
After over a half a century of flying no one ever died because of my decision not to fly.
After over a half a century of flying no one ever died because of my decision not to fly.
Re: Young Eagles mid-air in Buffalo, 2 dead, 2 survive
I've got some bad news.
The risk of stroke doubles every decade after age 55.
That is only one age-related risk statistic.... there are numerous others.
The risk of stroke doubles every decade after age 55.
That is only one age-related risk statistic.... there are numerous others.
Re: Young Eagles mid-air in Buffalo, 2 dead, 2 survive
The good news, is the medical validity intervals do not seem to reflect your implyed concern.
As to 70 year old 787 pilots. Lets wait and see. I am sure there were people that could claim that there were no 64 year old pilots flying for the majors not so long ago.
I have heard a rumour that the Depends folks are sponsoring a joint venture project with Boeing to put adult diaper dispensing stations in the cockpit
The real problem, as has been shown by the FAA changes is not old pilots, but inexperienced young ones. You know, the ones with the lightening reflexes, and healthy brains!
As to 70 year old 787 pilots. Lets wait and see. I am sure there were people that could claim that there were no 64 year old pilots flying for the majors not so long ago.
I have heard a rumour that the Depends folks are sponsoring a joint venture project with Boeing to put adult diaper dispensing stations in the cockpit
The real problem, as has been shown by the FAA changes is not old pilots, but inexperienced young ones. You know, the ones with the lightening reflexes, and healthy brains!
Accident speculation:
Those that post don’t know. Those that know don’t post
Those that post don’t know. Those that know don’t post
Re: Young Eagles mid-air in Buffalo, 2 dead, 2 survive
[quote][/quote][quote="JigglyBus"]
I've got some bad news.
The risk of stroke doubles every decade after age 55
That is only a relative statement if everyone is a stroke candidate. Most are not. If your genetics and lifestyle put you into the 0% chance of a stroke pile then 0 % X 100 is stll 0. I know, a useless statement but no more useless than the quote.
But it was written and on the Internet so it MUST be true.
I've got some bad news.The risk of stroke doubles every decade after age 55
That is only a relative statement if everyone is a stroke candidate. Most are not. If your genetics and lifestyle put you into the 0% chance of a stroke pile then 0 % X 100 is stll 0. I know, a useless statement but no more useless than the quote.
But it was written and on the Internet so it MUST be true.
Re: Young Eagles mid-air in Buffalo, 2 dead, 2 survive
Ah, you mean like this enlightened individual:Cat Driver wrote:Some here state that they think anyone over 70 is not safe to fly with.
That is only their opinion and they give no valid reason to back up their opinion.
phillyfan wrote:I would not let my kids ride with a private pilot, in a homebuilt or with a 78 year old. Don't really care how great Bob Hoover was, or is.
Re: Young Eagles mid-air in Buffalo, 2 dead, 2 survive
Given phillyfan's history, his comment it a little ironic (unless the Colonel was trolling us).AirFrame wrote: Ah, you mean like this enlightened individual:
phillyfan wrote:I would not let my kids ride with a private pilot, in a homebuilt or with a 78 year old. Don't really care how great Bob Hoover was, or is.
Re: Young Eagles mid-air in Buffalo, 2 dead, 2 survive
The NTSB preliminary report has the nearby KBUF's radar data for the location of this accidental collision (2 miles SE of the Lancaster NY Airport) at 1625ft. The Cessna is "slowly descending" at 90kts westbound on a similar track as the slower Searay (SR) at 70kts and slightly climbing. It depicts the C172 pilot approaching the airport while catching up to the 'gradually climbing' traffic in the time-frame it took him to lose 150ft altitude from 1774' (radar hits shortly before the accident) where-in the SR climbs 50ft up from 1575'. The SR's aft area and trailing edge of the right wing connects with the 172's engine/prop area, where the SR-pilot remains unaware (news report) that it is a midair until after his own forced-landing and rescue. Not stated yet is whether the SR is also approaching the airport then or not.
With ineveitably some lateral convergence, the only way the SR can go undetected from the Cessna pilot's scan is if (and since the SR arrives into this collision from its suggested upward approach-angle closing at 20kts) the climbing traffic up until contact is out-of-view ahead/below .. ie down/under the 172's engine's hood outline (all that is visible ahead/thru the windscreen).
The SR's actual angle of vertical convergence with the Cessna's position at their '20 knots' of speed-difference is not negligeable either. Recreating this real time slow motion setup into this tragic accident is likely to reveal a very steep converging angle between the 1774'msl origin and 1575'msl (across those pre-collision radar hits/times) and the potential hidden factor there.
With ineveitably some lateral convergence, the only way the SR can go undetected from the Cessna pilot's scan is if (and since the SR arrives into this collision from its suggested upward approach-angle closing at 20kts) the climbing traffic up until contact is out-of-view ahead/below .. ie down/under the 172's engine's hood outline (all that is visible ahead/thru the windscreen).
The SR's actual angle of vertical convergence with the Cessna's position at their '20 knots' of speed-difference is not negligeable either. Recreating this real time slow motion setup into this tragic accident is likely to reveal a very steep converging angle between the 1774'msl origin and 1575'msl (across those pre-collision radar hits/times) and the potential hidden factor there.
