Age 60 rule catch 22

On Dec 19, 11:21 pm, "Robert M. Gary" wrote:
On Dec 19, 7:51 pm, "F. Baum" wrote:





On Dec 19, 10:38 am, "Robert M. Gary" wrote:

Not true, this applies to acting as PIC for a 121 carrier.

Which 121 reg says that the PIC holding a class 2 medical must be
under the age of 60 or 65? I don't see that reg. I'm not aware of any
121 operator that allows PICs not not be ATP but certainly many of
them allow first officers to not be ATPs. However, that I am aware of
require all flight crew to hold a class 1 medical (regardless of
rating). Those first officers would have to be under the age of 60/65
even if they only held a commercial simply because of their ops class
1 medical requirement.

-Robert

You're kidding, arent you ?

No, what reg under part 121 say you can't be age 60/65??

The reg says , no person who has reached his or her 60th birthday
(Soon to read 65th) can act as pilot in command of an aircraft
operated under part 121. There is no age limit to holding an ATP or a
first class medical.

On Dec 20, 6:41 am, Bob Moore wrote:

Here's the "real" regulation from 121.383

(c) No certificate holder may use the services of any person as a pilot
on an airplane engaged in operations under this part if that person has
reached his 60th birthday. No person may serve as a pilot on an airplane
engaged in operations under this part if that person has reached his
60th birthday.

Note that there is no distinction between PIC and SIC and Robert, there
are no part 121 PICs with only a Class 2 Medical Certificate, but there
are SICs with only a Second Class. Both must cease Part 121 operations
upon reaching their 60 (65) birthday.

Thanks Bob, we can always count on you to look this stuff up. I think
the reason that there is no distinction between PIC and SIC is because
of the old sole manipulator thing. The SIC is sole manipulator on
every other leg . As I understand it, the FO will have to be under 60
when the new rule comes out.

On Dec 20, 5:41 am, Bob Moore wrote:
"Robert M. Gary" wrote:

Note that there is no distinction between PIC and SIC and Robert, there
are no part 121 PICs with only a Class 2 Medical Certificate, but there
are SICs with only a Second Class.

That is what I said. I'm not aware of any specific 121 operation that
allow first officers to only hold a class 2 medical though. You may
know of some certificate holder who's ops manual allows for this but I
am not.

-Robert

"F. Baum" wrote in message
...
On Dec 20, 6:41 am, Bob Moore wrote:

Here's the "real" regulation from 121.383

(c) No certificate holder may use the services of any person as a pilot
on an airplane engaged in operations under this part if that person has
reached his 60th birthday. No person may serve as a pilot on an airplane
engaged in operations under this part if that person has reached his
60th birthday.

Note that there is no distinction between PIC and SIC and Robert, there
are no part 121 PICs with only a Class 2 Medical Certificate, but there
are SICs with only a Second Class. Both must cease Part 121 operations
upon reaching their 60 (65) birthday.

Thanks Bob, we can always count on you to look this stuff up. I think
the reason that there is no distinction between PIC and SIC is because
of the old sole manipulator thing. The SIC is sole manipulator on
every other leg . As I understand it, the FO will have to be under 60
when the new rule comes out.

Only on international ops, and only as long as ICAO keeps the over/under rule. And the
under-60 can be either pilot.

There is no over/under requirement for domestic flights.

On Dec 20, 8:35 am, "Robert M. Gary" wrote:

That is what I said. I'm not aware of any specific 121 operation that
allow first officers to only hold a class 2 medical though. You may
know of some certificate holder who's ops manual allows for this but I
am not.

-Robert

I sorta do. My employer requires a first class for FOs but only once a
year. (Without looking it up), I think this makes it a second class
for the last six months.

F. Baum wrote:
I sorta do. My employer requires a first class for FOs but only once a
year. (Without looking it up), I think this makes it a second class
for the last six months.


It does. Their policy also gives them a good shot at having a promotable FO.
While there are always exceptions, it's most likely that if you passed the
medical once, you will be able to do it again in 6 months. That way they don't
end up with permanent FOs.



--
Mortimer Schnerd, RN
mschnerdatcarolina.rr.com

On Dec 20, 1:09 pm, "Mortimer Schnerd, RN" mschnerdatcarolina.rr.com
wrote:

I sorta do. My employer requires a first class for FOs but only once a
year. (Without looking it up), I think this makes it a second class
for the last six months.

It does. Their policy also gives them a good shot at having a promotable FO.
While there are always exceptions, it's most likely that if you passed the
medical once, you will be able to do it again in 6 months. That way they don't
end up with permanent FOs.
Not sure how much of a policy it is as opposed to an Ops Spec. It is
interesting that out of all of the Majors, only AMR has an up or out
rule.
FB

--
Mortimer Schnerd, RN
mschnerdatcarolina.rr.com

On Dec 20, 9:07 am, "F. Baum" wrote:
On Dec 20, 8:35 am, "Robert M. Gary" wrote:



That is what I said. I'm not aware of any specific 121 operation that
allow first officers to only hold a class 2 medical though. You may
know of some certificate holder who's ops manual allows for this but I
am not.

-Robert

I sorta do. My employer requires a first class for FOs but only once a
year. (Without looking it up), I think this makes it a second class
for the last six months.

Sounds more like they are just being cheap.

-Robert