|
Author
|
Topic: Hoot Gibson joins Benson Space
|
Robert Pearlman
Editor Posts: 42988
From: Houston, TX
Registered: Nov 1999
|
posted 12-14-2006 08:06 AM
   
From The Wall Street Journal: quote:
Former astronaut and high-performance aircraft racer Robert "Hoot" Gibson is the latest aviator smitten with the promise of space tourism, becoming chief operating officer and head test pilot for a fledgling California rocketship maker.Benson Space Co. hopes to gain some cachet by hiring Mr. Gibson, who gained prominence as the first Space Shuttle commander to dock with the Russian Space Station Mir and also ran the astronaut office for the National Aeronautics and Space Administration.
Full article here, requires subscriptionBenson Space Company website: http://bensonspace.com/ |
ejectr
Member Posts: 1751
From: Killingly, CT
Registered: Mar 2002
|
posted 12-14-2006 10:24 AM
.....But he's too old to fly a commercial jet.GIVE ME A BREAK! |
taneal1
Member Posts: 230
From: Orlando, FL
Registered: Feb 2004
|
posted 12-14-2006 10:43 PM
Gibson could legally go back to NASA and command another Shuttle mission despite his 60+ years. It appeared for a while that Vance Brand would fly his final shuttle mission at age 60+ due to the many delays. He came within a few months of that milestone, and is the oldest Shuttle CDR. So far... ;-) Mike Melvill won the first civilian astronaut wings at age 63. So the 60th birthday doesn't keep you from piloting a mission into space. The mandatory age 60 pilot retirement applies only to operations conducted under Part 121 of the Federal Air Regulations. i.e. Airline operations by US Air carriers. Airline pilots from all other major nations (except France!)will soon be allowed to operate into and out of the USA up to age 65... If safety actually WAS the issue, why is the USA allowing foreign pilots to operate within US airspace up to age 65? [Edited by taneal1 (December 14, 2006).] |
ejectr
Member Posts: 1751
From: Killingly, CT
Registered: Mar 2002
|
posted 12-15-2006 06:10 AM
Unfortunately there is no way to inject an audible tone of sarcasm in a post, for that is how my last post was supposed to be intended.Actually, I'd rather see Hoot involved in space travel than carting around a bunch in the back that could care less about the guy in the left seat. It's about time the FAA changed that ridiculous rule. [Edited by ejectr (December 15, 2006).] |
John Youskauskas
Member Posts: 126
From:
Registered: Jan 2004
|
posted 01-30-2007 01:55 PM
Any passenger carrying operations to space sanctioned by the FAA will likely be subject to the same age limitations that Part 121 carriers are. Fortunately, it looks like the age may be raised soon...
http://www.cnn.com/2007/US/01/30/faa.pilots.ap/index.html |
ejectr
Member Posts: 1751
From: Killingly, CT
Registered: Mar 2002
|
posted 01-30-2007 02:17 PM
It's about time they started thinking right on this one.[Edited by ejectr (January 30, 2007).] |
thump
Member Posts: 575
From: washington dc usa
Registered: May 2004
|
posted 01-30-2007 02:22 PM
quote:
Originally posted by ejectr:
Fear not...the FAA is raising the age limit of commercial pilots to 65.I read it on CNN WEB page just a moment ago.
Actually, the FAA is proposing to raise the age limit rule, known as Age 60. The FAA plans to issue a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) later this year, which would then be followed by a public comment period, then the FAA would review the comments, then take their time, and then publish a Final Rule. In another words, even if Hoot would want to fly commercially again, he would be 65 or right close to 65 by the time it would take affect. [Edited by thump (January 30, 2007).] |
Robert Pearlman
Editor Posts: 42988
From: Houston, TX
Registered: Nov 1999
|
posted 01-30-2007 03:12 PM
quote:
Originally posted by John Youskauskas:
Any passenger carrying operations to space sanctioned by the FAA will likely be subject to the same age limitations that Part 121 carriers are.
In December 2006, the FAA Office of Commercial Space Transportation released its Human Space Flight Requirements for Crew and Space Flight Participants. Under these requirements, a pilot of a launch or reentry vehicle must possess and carry an FAA pilot certificate with an instrument rating, but neither the certificate nor rating need be specific to a category of aircraft. Pilots must carry a second-class airman medical certificate issued within 12 months of the launch or landing. The rules make no specific mention of an age limit (though there is discussion in regards to passengers under the age of 18) and unless I am mistaken, the above requirements do not preclude someone older than 65 from qualifying. |
ejectr
Member Posts: 1751
From: Killingly, CT
Registered: Mar 2002
|
posted 01-30-2007 06:38 PM
quote:
Originally posted by thump:
Actually, the FAA is proposing to raise the age limit rule, known as Age 60. The FAA plans to issue a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) later this year, which would then be followed by a public comment period, then the FAA would review the comments, then take their time, and then publish a Final Rule. In another words, even if Hoot would want to fly commercially again, he would be 65 or right close to 65 by the time it would take affect.[Edited by thump (January 30, 2007).]
They already had the NPRM and public comment period a long time ago. I left a comment regarding the current law. I believe this is the actual issuance of the law coming later this year. |
thump
Member Posts: 575
From: washington dc usa
Registered: May 2004
|
posted 01-31-2007 08:14 AM
quote:
Originally posted by ejectr:
They already had the NPRM and public comment period a long time ago. I left a comment regarding the current law.I believe this is the actual issuance of the law coming later this year.
Sorry, but that wasn't a NPRM, it was just a request for comments, dated in the Federal Register 10/25/2006, to which 5,819 comments were received. Yesterday's FAA press release states that the formal NPRM will be released later this year (which by the speed the FAA rules move, and dealing with DOT and FAA on a daily basis, will probably be end of this year). After it is released, it will be another year + before anything is finalized. To view the FAA release, http://www.faa.gov/news/press_releases/news_story.cfm?newsId=8027
[Edited by thump (January 31, 2007).] |
ejectr
Member Posts: 1751
From: Killingly, CT
Registered: Mar 2002
|
posted 01-31-2007 09:02 AM
Oh...I see. They have to do things the same way three times before they get it right.I don't pay too much attention to how they formulate their rules....I just fly the planes and unfortunately have to live by some of the stupid ones they make. |
thump
Member Posts: 575
From: washington dc usa
Registered: May 2004
|
posted 01-31-2007 09:11 AM
quote:
Originally posted by ejectr:
Oh...I see. They have to do things the same way three times before they get it right.I don't pay too much attention to how they formulate their rules....I just fly the planes and unfortunately have to live by some of the stupid ones they make.
In government, it does take 3 times sometimes. What's interesting to note is that the Airline Pilots Assoc. (ALPA) presently backs the current rule of retirement at 60. FAA Sec. Blakey also stated that if the Age 65 rule does take place, that there will be no retroactive policy in place, so if you've reached 60 before it's enacted, then you're out of luck. Airlines have for the most part sat on the sidelines. Either way, this will probably become a dog fight, with Congressional hearings taking place, and Congress taking sides.
|
Rodina
Member Posts: 836
From: Lafayette, CA
Registered: Oct 2001
|
posted 01-31-2007 10:07 AM
quote:
Originally posted by thump:
What's interesting to note is that the Airline Pilots Assoc. (ALPA) presently backs the current rule of retirement at 60.
Quite. The pilots union has always supported the rule, presumably because it gets more pilots to the most senior pilot slots sooner. |
advertisement