Here in the US it is – sadly – increasingly becoming a decision made by your insurance and not by you. It depends what you’re flying, the more complex the more likely. That said, I have a friend who is 81 and flies MEPs, but has to stay with his insurance company. No other insurance would accept him. He intends to fly for as long as he can. Another friend of mine, however, gave himself a hard cutoff date (80) and so far is sticking to it. I am quite a bit younger than these two guys, but am occasionally pondering the ‘hang up the headset’ time. So far, no plans to do so!
gallois wrote:
I wish I lived nearer.
Per TGV about 4 hours or so? Or while you still have your medical, about half that by GA? The offer stands.
gallois wrote:
I often thought thet I should get a really good sim at home and do what you suggest.
But looking at the costs it was cheaper to fly a ULM
You may well be right. I would never have been able to afford a sim like this. We were really lucky the way we got hold of this one. But I’ve met a lot of people flying it for the club now which I never would have otherwise. And many of them walked out of there a few inches higher than they walked in and with big smiles on their faces.
Dan wrote:
And that is certainly a good thing for us in the 60+ group…
Well, also post 60 you can actually no longer fly in command on airliners, so it virtually is the only alternative.
But while I enjoy that and will fly it probably longer than I can still fly real planes, I still enjoy both.
Peter wrote:
oday, 60+ is “young”.
Many AME’s think otherwise. And many insurers pull the rug from under owners once they reach 70, particularly in the US. I hear of many of them in the Mooney community.
There is of course a nice escape route Not only in the US but also in Germany and other European countries, as the ‘120 kg empty weight’ class. Believe it or not, Spain is going to sign up too. No medical, no registration. I wonder whether you could even use it legally from your back yard, if it’s a vehicle that is not legally registered, why not? Provided that at your old age you have enough biceps to pull the chute, pretty safe in case that 2-stroke announces that you’ll be a glider for the rest of the flight. Single seat of course, but who dares to go fly with an old fart anyway. Maybe I’ll buy one soon, so that I can make a smooth transition when the day comes.. 
Imagine, Dan’s pics of the Matterhorn etc would even get better without the plexiglass.
On sims. VR headset stuff is quite likely in my future too. Big fun and only will get better over the years.
aart are you talking of the paramoteur.
If so they are Class 1 ULM here and you can fly them frim yolur back garden or packe them in your car take them to somewhere like the Sarah Desert and go looking for Oases.
You can IIRC take a passenger.
This is one case where you are not entitled to enter CAS. 🙂
aart wrote:
Not only in the US but also in Germany and other European countries, as the ‘120 kg empty weight’ class. Believe it or not, Spain is going to sign up too. No medical, no registration.
Hang on, it’s not April 1st is it?
In Europe? Without a licence? Never….. but still intriguing.
Ah, and 120 kg empty, neat. So how about payload?
Empty weight: 113kg, 249lbs
Max. pilot weight: 124kg, 273lbs
Fuel tank capacity: 19l, 5US gal.
Max. take off weight: 250kg, 551lbs
Now I am really interested. And yea, from my back yard? Might even work. With this sound I am sure my neighbors would love it.
Range might be a tad limited though….
Now don’t tell me the Jetson One might be in this category….
So not the paramoteur. I think in France that would be class 6 ULM which is ultra light helicopters. Same conditions apply as for all other ULMs and there are 2 place variants.
Peter wrote:
in their super aerodynamic mamil outfit
Aren’t they oamils at that age?
Peter wrote:
Maybe true in Norway
I was thinking mostly of what I read on this board Most people flying IFR here (in Norway that is) are doing it in RVs. They tend to be mostly commercial pilots or retired commercial pilots, but the retired ones soon hang up their IR ratings is my experience. However, I didn’t think of, or even mentioned IFR, I said certified GA.
We fly in the winter too by the way, but the months December and January are dark and cold. In mid February it start getting nice again. That’s when “frozen lake and ski season” starts The CAA Norway even makes and updates a winter flying info thing about this, in cooperation with NLF, EAA and AOPA. Very similar to the more known “VFR Norway”, but targeted winter flying and in Norwegian.
Anyway, that wasn’t what I meant by “pilots are their own worst enemies”. What I meant was that people in general don’t like their dreams in life being wing clipped, even if those dreams will never happen in any case, like for instance cruising in your own biz jet. Easing up regulations, will also mean moving further away from those “high end” dreams. LAPL is perhaps the prime example. A simplified license that 95% of private pilots would be 100% satisfied with. They would never need anything else in their entire flying “career”. Still, LAPL has been (and still is) criticized by pilots (with PPL) as something utterly useless and a waste of time compared with PPL “with a PPL you can do so much more”. It’s very peculiar.
LeSving wrote:
Still, LAPL has been (and still is) criticized by pilots (with PPL) as something utterly useless and a waste of time compared with PPL
Really!? As you say, most leisure pilots would be perfectly happy with a LAPL — and it’s upgradable to a PPL if you need it.
Airborne_Again wrote:
and it’s upgradable to a PPL if you need it.
That’s 100% NOT the point of a LAPL It’s irrelevant. The interesting part of LAPL is a simpler (lighter) regime with simpler medical and simpler instructor qualifications. It’s really only the UL association in France that has understood and taken the consequences of this “more, faster, higher, larger” syndrome. They have said no to 600kg because they are happy with things as they are (super simple and accessible).
