SPECIFIC eyesight requirements for the role of an RAF or RN pilot

[iRaii]

Hi,
After doing my research into looking at various different threads, as well as viewing through various different sources, I was unable to understand the requirements for eye sight.
Many threads openly state that it is perfect vision required, however some also say their are specific boundaries in terms of how far Sph, Cyl, Axis, Prism, Base can be out by.
After recently being made aware that my vision has gone from whats considered perfect to -0.25 Sph for both eyes with everything else still normal or 'perfect'. I wanted to ask whether it would deem me as void for the role of a pilot within the RAF or RN after an officer of course, or would this stop me? I was told by the optometrist that this had meant very slight short vision, which has brought me to question.

Apologies in advance if I repeated threads, however I simply could not sought to a conclusion over different situations and different views, which I had wished to make this thread.

[airborne_artist]

I am pretty sure that standard 1 of http://www.aop.org.uk/uploads/uploaded_files/royal_navy_vs.pdf still applies.

To check ask at any AFCO.

[iRaii]

It seems from that document that I still have a chance! I shall however also check with my local AFCO to confirm.

[mymatetcm]

Just need to send you opticians report with your MSL when you apply, and OCC med will decide your fate. The AFCO staff will be unable to tell you any more than this

[Pontius Navigator]

iRaii, your real problem is that the intake numbers are so low that things like less than perfect vision can be an easy option for filtering equally good candidates.

Still you may be the best so . . .

[Milo Minderbinder]

It may also help your case if you change your pen name before applying.......I'm sure its just coincidence, but the first three letters of your name, and one of the more likely ways of pronouncing it are, shall we say, potentially disturbing given past problems

[iRaii]

mymatetcm & Pontius Navigator, I understand where you both come from and thank you for your replies.
As for Milo Minderbinder, its interesting what the human mind can find if a phrase lets say is unrecognizable!

[Hummingfrog]

isn't Pprune clever - this advert was at the bottom of this thread!!

Opticians Glasses
caledonianopticalaberdeen.co.uk
Local Knowledge, Reliable Service. Looking for a Local Optician?
Quick Contact Lenses
mcpherson-optician.co.uk
Need Professional Contact Lenses? Patient Satisfaction Assured.
Optician in Barry
Find the local optician your eyes would choose | SPECS network (http://www.specsnetwork.co.uk)
Opticians your eyes would choose! Local opticians you can trust

HF

[Wensleydale]

I understand that the RN has lower eyesight standards, as some of its pilots seem to be encouraged to use rose tinted spectacles......:hmm:

[NDW]

airborne_artist,

You are correct in fact that Standard 1 is still required for Royal Navy Aircrew.

I am not one to comment, due to the copious amounts of threads I posted about eyesight requirements :\ but has been mentioned, take your form to your local AFCO who in return will forward it off to the Medical Officers.

I did the exact same for the RAF around a year ago and had a response back from RAF Cranwell Medical Board about 3 weeks later confirming what trades you are/aren't optically viable for.

Best of Luck,

NDW

[HongKongCargoPilot]

Hey guys,

I'm sorry for this post but my local opticians is shut at the moment and I'm too impatient to wait until tomorrow having just located my most recent eye test results!!

Using this document as reference: http://www.aop.org.uk/uploads/uploaded_files/royal_navy_vs.pdf

How do my results fit? I'm not clear on whether the numbers in the above document refer to maximum or minimum tolerance levels, so I was hoping someone could help:

RIGHT:
Sph: +2.75
Cyl: -0.25
Axis: 10

LEFT:
Sph: +2.25
Cyl: -0.25
Axis: 20

That's all I have.. I do currently wear spectacles, so I'd be over the MOON if these results are positive. For the record, these test results are from the 9th of February last year, with any hope they will have improved since!!

Many thanks

HKCP :)

[5 Forward 6 Back]

It doesn't matter what anyone says here; if you go to OASC and fail, are you going to say "but this guy on PPRuNe said I'd be fine!"

Likewise, if someone here says you're not fit, are you not going to try?

Go and apply and let the experts tell you if you meet the standard or not. It's the only way you can be certain, regardless of consulting .pdfs or asking on a forum.

[HongKongCargoPilot]

Valid point, I do however have to exaggerate my impatience :8

[Pontius Navigator]

HKCP, while what 5F6B says is quite correct, if you don't apply you don't want . . . bear in mind that the chances of being selected for pilot training are vanishingly small. So small in fact, against a still substantial pool of applicants, that you would need to be outstanding in every other respect if you are less than 100% fit.

The belief would be that everyone will age and deteriorate and if you are not now 100% you won't get better.

By all means apply but do bear in mind the odds are stacked against you (and everyone else too).

[Tom061991]

Hi all, it appears the RAF has changed its requirements for pilot. Have a look at this RAF College Cranwell - FAQs (http://www.raf.mod.uk/rafcollegecranwell/selection/faqs.cfm)
If you scroll down to the bit about laser eye treatment (something that is now excepted under certain criteria) it says the minimum standard for pilot is now 6/12 or better uncorrected! ( as apposed to 6/6 ) i have sent an email to double check this is the case, and that its not a typo. Will post on here when i hear back! any comments?