ste_js
26th Dec 2000, 18:15
I can't become a commerical airline pilot in Europe because of this stupid JAA rule on the refractive error which says that I can't fly because my refractive error is in excess of -5 dioptres even though my vision is corrected with contact lenses to 24/20 (6/5). My sight is good enough to fly in the USA but not in europe.
Why do the JAA have this rule? I asked them and pestered them and I eventally got this responce.
Myopia (short sight) ... "increases the risk to suffer from retinal ablation, to contract macular degeneration, glaucoma and/or cataract"
They are saying that, because I am short sited, I have "an increased risk" of developing conditions of the eye that would make me unfit to fly an aircraft in the future. There is no guarantee that I will develop these conditions!
People with HIV have an "increased risk" of developing health problems and if the JAA said to someone that they would not allow them to fly because they had HIV there would be a huge compensation case. It is exactly the same for me - I am short sited and they are not going to allow me to fly on the basis I have an "increased risk" of developing health problems. They have no right to do that.
"Wearing contact lenses contains the risk of developing a contact lens intolerance, the occurrence of inflammations, ulcers, corneal scars and other complications"
Again "contains the risk" - there is no guarantee that I would develop these conditions from wearing contact lenses.
Also, the above argument has nothing to do with my lens exceeding their limits. They will allow people to fly and wear contact lenses as long as those lenses don't exceed their strength limit of -3 dioptres.
"If glasses are lost during flight (e.g. in an emergency situation when putting on the oxygen mask), there is no possibility to read the instruments or to estimate the outside situation."
Well I wear contact lenses so this argument is invalid for me.
But if glasses were lost they could be picked up!
That is all!
I believe that it is perfectly safe for me to become an airline pilot - if you need proof, just look at all of the airline pilots in the USA who wear corrective lenses that exceed the -3 dioptre limit of the JAA.
There has never been an incident in the USA where a pilot couldn't function safely because he/she couldn't see properly.
The JAA is not enforcing this limit for safety reasons, as they try to argue, but simply to protect the airlines from employing someone who has an increased risk (but certainly NO guarantee) of developing eye problems in the future. This is discrimination and it is illegal.
do you agree with me? anyone else in the same situation?
Why do the JAA have this rule? I asked them and pestered them and I eventally got this responce.
Myopia (short sight) ... "increases the risk to suffer from retinal ablation, to contract macular degeneration, glaucoma and/or cataract"
They are saying that, because I am short sited, I have "an increased risk" of developing conditions of the eye that would make me unfit to fly an aircraft in the future. There is no guarantee that I will develop these conditions!
People with HIV have an "increased risk" of developing health problems and if the JAA said to someone that they would not allow them to fly because they had HIV there would be a huge compensation case. It is exactly the same for me - I am short sited and they are not going to allow me to fly on the basis I have an "increased risk" of developing health problems. They have no right to do that.
"Wearing contact lenses contains the risk of developing a contact lens intolerance, the occurrence of inflammations, ulcers, corneal scars and other complications"
Again "contains the risk" - there is no guarantee that I would develop these conditions from wearing contact lenses.
Also, the above argument has nothing to do with my lens exceeding their limits. They will allow people to fly and wear contact lenses as long as those lenses don't exceed their strength limit of -3 dioptres.
"If glasses are lost during flight (e.g. in an emergency situation when putting on the oxygen mask), there is no possibility to read the instruments or to estimate the outside situation."
Well I wear contact lenses so this argument is invalid for me.
But if glasses were lost they could be picked up!
That is all!
I believe that it is perfectly safe for me to become an airline pilot - if you need proof, just look at all of the airline pilots in the USA who wear corrective lenses that exceed the -3 dioptre limit of the JAA.
There has never been an incident in the USA where a pilot couldn't function safely because he/she couldn't see properly.
The JAA is not enforcing this limit for safety reasons, as they try to argue, but simply to protect the airlines from employing someone who has an increased risk (but certainly NO guarantee) of developing eye problems in the future. This is discrimination and it is illegal.
do you agree with me? anyone else in the same situation?