4 ms·

Is there documented scientific evidence demonstrating that pilots, surgeons, etc over 40 crash more with statistical significance? 50? 70? I’m sure there is a d

Is there documented scientific evidence demonstrating that pilots, surgeons, etc over 40 crash more with statistical significance? 50? 70? I’m sure there is a date when that does happen, but if you are going to be slapping age related restrictions on everyone, you had better come in with guns blazing on your numbers demonstrating that statistically this is bad for society

deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
stametseater 4y ago
In short, yes. It's an evidence-based qualification. FAA takes this stuff seriously.
- SOLAR_FIELDS 4y ago
  Cool. Makes sense. Where is the evidence that was used to make this determination and the document released by FAA using that evidence to make said determination?
  - just_steve_h 4y ago
    two comments above this one?
    - SOLAR_FIELDS 4y ago
      The “two comments above this one” you reference didn’t exist when I made the original comment
  - joebob42 4y ago
    Its easy to find. This tone suggests that the person's argument is somehow invalid because they reference easy to find documents without linking them. Perhaps this isn't the intent, but it reads to me as combative, which seems unnecessary.
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
slapshot 4y ago
There's lots of room to nitpick the evidence, but the studies are published: > The relationship between age and job performance for Air Traffic Control Specialists (ATCSs) is an issue that has been revisited many times over the past few decades (Trites, 1961; Trites & Cobb, 1962; Cobb, 1968; VanDeventer & Baxter, 1984). Researchers have consistently found a negative relationship between controller age and performance across studies that have used different ATCS options (enroute, terminal), career stages (age at entry into training,current age on the job), and criterion measures (on-the-job ratings, academy performance) (Trites, 1961;Trites & Cobb, 1962; Cobb, 1968; VanDeventer & Baxter, 1984). Via https://www.tc.faa.gov/its/worldpac/techrpt/AM99-18.pdf https://www.tc.faa.gov/its/worldpac/techrpt/AM99-18.pdf
- SOLAR_FIELDS 4y ago
  Thank you! This is the kind of data and study I was looking for. In this rather large thread you are the only one as of the time of this posting actually answering the original question I asked, “why does the rule exist?” I don’t really see a problem with discrimination like this in this context as long as there is a well published scientific background of studies demonstrating why it makes sense, and there aren’t confounding variables (like a history of discrimination) that would skew the results. In this case it looks legitimate and well studied. My only beef/complaint otherwise is that these papers should be front and center on the application page explaining why only 30 and unders are accepted.

deleted 4y ago

[deleted]

stametseater 4y ago

In short, yes. It's an evidence-based qualification. FAA takes this stuff seriously.

SOLAR_FIELDS 4y ago
Cool. Makes sense. Where is the evidence that was used to make this determination and the document released by FAA using that evidence to make said determination?
- just_steve_h 4y ago
  two comments above this one?
  - SOLAR_FIELDS 4y ago
    The “two comments above this one” you reference didn’t exist when I made the original comment
- joebob42 4y ago
  Its easy to find. This tone suggests that the person's argument is somehow invalid because they reference easy to find documents without linking them. Perhaps this isn't the intent, but it reads to me as combative, which seems unnecessary.
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]

slapshot 4y ago

There's lots of room to nitpick the evidence, but the studies are published: > The relationship between age and job performance for Air Traffic Control Specialists (ATCSs) is an issue that has been revisited many times over the past few decades (Trites, 1961; Trites & Cobb, 1962; Cobb, 1968; VanDeventer & Baxter, 1984). Researchers have consistently found a negative relationship between controller age and performance across studies that have used different ATCS options (enroute, terminal), career stages (age at entry into training,current age on the job), and criterion measures (on-the-job ratings, academy performance) (Trites, 1961;Trites & Cobb, 1962; Cobb, 1968; VanDeventer & Baxter, 1984). Via https://www.tc.faa.gov/its/worldpac/techrpt/AM99-18.pdf https://www.tc.faa.gov/its/worldpac/techrpt/AM99-18.pdf

SOLAR_FIELDS 4y ago
Thank you! This is the kind of data and study I was looking for. In this rather large thread you are the only one as of the time of this posting actually answering the original question I asked, “why does the rule exist?” I don’t really see a problem with discrimination like this in this context as long as there is a well published scientific background of studies demonstrating why it makes sense, and there aren’t confounding variables (like a history of discrimination) that would skew the results. In this case it looks legitimate and well studied. My only beef/complaint otherwise is that these papers should be front and center on the application page explaining why only 30 and unders are accepted.