As I see it, the core of this issue revolves around what is to be done with pilots that shouldn't be flying for safety reasons.

Age was brought into the issue because of the experience the thread starter had on a particular day. I too have seen "mature" pilots take to the air when they could barely see well enough to drive to the field in the first place. I have also seen "mature" pilots that are quite skilled. However, I have also seen young pilots that make me run for cover.

I'm 35 years old, but I know I don't have the reflexes I did when I was 16 years old. In general, our reflexes over time deteriorate. There are always exceptions, but in general I don't see how anyone can argue with this. Testing based on age may seem like discrimination, but IMO it really isn't. There are many age related thresholds in out society, 16 to drive, 18 to vote, 21 to drink, etc. There is nothing magical that happens at 16 such that one can drive a car. It is that we consider most under the age of 16 to not have enough responsibility and/or proper reflexes to drive a car. The same idea (but in reverse, we lose the reflexes) applies to when we age.

However, while a age related test may take care of some of the unsafe pilots, I do not see it as a good solution. I think a better solution would be to have pilot proficiency levels that apply to ALL pilots regardless of age. I know several clubs that do this. No pilot is ever "grounded" with these setups unless they deliberately fly unsafely, however, ones flying may be restricted. For example, Level 1 - must be on buddy box system. Level 2 - must have Level 3+ spotter. Level 3 - can fly solo under 1 cu-in. Level 4 - can fly solo over 1 cu in, etc. I give the above as just an example. If someone is deemed unsafe via whatever retesting method is in place for that club, then the member is bumped down a level. Now this may be a big blow to ones ego, but which is more important? Your ego or your fellow pilots life?

Should the AMA consider legislating something like this? That depends. It would definitely increase the safety image of the AMA, its charted clubs and members. It might even lower insurance costs. There is a precedent for proficiency training with the turbine waiver system. Realistically, voluntary participation of charted clubs to enact a pilot proficiency program is probably a more viable option.