"eet is FRONCH… ferr 'woots'"
Skiles and Age 65+
- Thread starter BobDDuck
- Start date
"eet is FRONCH… ferr 'woots'"
///AMG
Well-Known Member
Your guess is probably more right, but I was gonna say that calling it the "jet" and telling ops you're "on deck" could also just be a carry over from mil flying. Those are/were common words, and at least in my little corner, weren't regarded as strange. I've tried to consciously remove them from my vocabulary, since you all have informed me that it is annoying
Roger Roger
Bottom of the list
The Navajo is still the most fun plane I’ve flown.
Richman
JC’s Resident Curmudgeon
Had some time in a Panther conversion. That thing hauled some serious tailfeathers, and the AC blew so cold you could hang meat in the cabin.
Recommend.
typhoonpilot
Well-Known Member
As someone born the very last year of the baby boom, and someone who has been adversely affected by all of those in front of me for my entire career, I have been wondering how this investment thing will actually turn out. It has been the boomers who have driven up all asset prices for the last 40 years. As they drop out of the workforce and start pulling their money from 401Ks (and by default, the stock market), how is that going to affect returns going forward? Similarly, how is it going to affect other asset prices that have seen huge runups?
Just like the stagnation we saw in seniority progression caused by boomers, I expect to see a stagnation in stock market returns as a result of their reduced contributions into the various investments.
I know, it is a pretty complex set of parameters that drive all of this, but my guy tells me investment returns are going to suck for us, just like seniority progression sucked for us.
The net net is, that while I will contribute to a 401K for the tax advantages now, I do not plan for it to be a viable source of cash in retirement. Having other assets that produce income is the plan.
You can totally say ass here!
lostplanetairman
Well-Known Member
Many in the generation have already retired and are well into their 70’s. Why are we suddenly going to destroy your investment returns? This generation began retiring quite a while ago and a very large number of holdouts retired due to the pandemic. Unlike the Great Recession, they are not returning. As of 9/2020, 40% retired. And about 1/3 have little or no retirement savings, meaning they rely on Social Security. For those with retirement accounts, the median is about $250,000. So many millions don’t have enough savings.
I don’t need to take withdrawals as long as I keep my part-time job. Even then, we don’t need all the income from RMDs no matter how many vacations I plan. So we will reinvest it.
Roger Roger
Bottom of the list
An elegant weapon, for a more civilized age. Before the single engine turbine became a thing.
poser765
Well-Known Member
I don’t think it’s annoying, necessarily. What it is is a tell that you might be one of “those guys” that can only talk about their time in the viper or whatever, or wears the super shiny polyester shoes.Your guess is probably more right, but I was gonna say that calling it the "jet" and telling ops you're "on deck" could also just be a carry over from mil flying. Those are/were common words, and at least in my little corner, weren't regarded as strange. I've tried to consciously remove them from my vocabulary, since you all have informed me that it is annoying
not all guys who say “the jet” are those guys, but all of those guys say “the jet”.
Baronman
Well-Known Member
I prefer to be called Mr Crusher.
poser765
Well-Known Member
How about acting ensign crusher?
ZapBrannigan
If it ain’t a Boeing, I’m not going. No choice.
Have you tried "Make it so number one"?
///AMG
Well-Known Member
haha fair enough. Love viper guys, especially retired O-6 viper guys. I think they have made a really good name for themselves
It is for this reason that I only talk about mil flying if specifically asked. Better for them to just think I'm an idiot, rather than to think I'm an idiot and also an a hole. Happy to talk about it if someone is interested, or has questions, but honestly, it is much more interesting hearing about the flying that I don't know about (if we're talking flying). We have some pretty interesting backgrounds at my shop. Flew not too long ago with someone who flew DC-8's.....thats really cool. Or some guys who flew as FE's in the 727. Or any number of really random types of lesser size, but more complexity of flying.
Last edited:
alaskadrifter
Landing gear operator
*snorts derisively in short wing*
Really? Why? This is (or should be) objective. If medicals are honest (oh! are you assuming they're NOT?!?), anyone should be allowed to fly until s/he can no longer hold a medical. Pretty simple.Well, there goes any respect I had for that guy. And he lived through the age 65 change too.
Hero Pilot Backs Easy Fix To Pilot Shortage: Just Let Us Fly Past Age 65
Pilot hero Jeff Skiles, first officer on US Airways Flight 1549 that landed in the Hudson River 13 years ago this week, sees a simple solution to the pilot shortage. Just let pilots who are over 65 keep flying, Skiles says.www.forbes.com
Also, I think you airline dudes (and other select few with pensions/high-grant 401Ks) are pretty narrowly biased in your assumptions about how life really is for anybody who does not possess the benefits that benefit those like you. It reminds me of listening to retired-with-full health care, full salary firefighters bitch and moan about the evils of unions. Oh! Really? Do tell.)
Last edited:
///AMG
Well-Known Member
I think mike's stories are probably more entertaining than mine. There is one guy who has done flying that Mike hasn't, but he drives the Goodyear blimp
BobDDuck
Island Bus Driver
They aren't honest. They test for mental degradation. And until they do (and start knocking out tons of guys in their early 50s as collateral), I think I'll stick with the system we have.
Trust me... I do. But Skiles (and everybody else) signed up to play the game with a set of rules. You don't get to change the rules (and screw over everybody else) just because it suddenly benefits you.
lostplanetairman
Well-Known Member
I agree that the medical tests don’t test for cognitive impairment and that the current limit should remain.
But the second statement has always irked me. Things change all the time for valid reasons. It’s life. To say that a rule or system or law or anything should remain because that’s the way we always did it is without merit to me. This excuse irks me as much as the stupid word “woke”