Eyesite for Class 2

[daveh101]

I am looking for some clarification on a rumour i have heard

I am trying to gain my JAA Class 2 medical for a PPL licence and i have found that my vision in one eye is substandard (My vision in the good eye is better than most i.e. last line on the opticians chart) my optician has informed me that my 3D vision / Depth perception has been unaffected by this the roomer i have herd is that I can get a Flying Instructor to sign a form stating that I have demonstrated that my eye site is adequate to fly is the true please help as this has been an dream of mine for many years now and i would not like to think that this is it and it is over before it has begun

[Rugbyears]

Hi Dave....

I'm sure you will meet the requirments for the 2nd Class Medical needed for the PPL. Nevertheless, I would highly recommend you give the (CAA) Aeromedical Centre at Gatwick a call, they will happily provided you with advice and guidence which will put your mind at rest.

Telephone number 01293 573700,

I'm sure you'll be ok - Good luck!!!

[daveh101]

Thanks for your reply but i have already been informed by an AME at Sheffield that my eye site douse not meet the standard however this douse not take in to account my 3D vision just whether i can read a chart at 5 meters with my right eye witch as far as i can see has no bearing on whether i can fly so i would like to know if the roomer i have herd is true that a an instructor can sign off that i am ok to fly

[effortless]

An instructor is not competent to make a medical judgement. Only the CAA on the advice of your AME can, with the assistance of an optometrist, pass you fit for a class 1 medical. Your GP can issue you with a qualifying medical fon the NPPL which has different criteria.

[Mark 1]

There is some lattitude in the Class 2 standards. It may be worth talking to the medical section at Gatwick and sending in an optometrists report for preliminary assessment.

If all that fails it may be worth considering one of the NPPL options.

[alanmtc]

Send your exact eye prescription to the CAA and see if they can offer you anything through deviation.

Like you, I have 1 perfect eye, and 1 not so perfect.

When I went for my Initial Class 1, the difference between my left and right eye was over the limit! BUT - they still gave me my JAA Class 1, all I had to do was get my PPL first to prove that my eye sight did not affect my flying! (To get my PPL they gave me a Class 2 in the mean time) - since that is your overall goal, I hope you should be fine!

Check it out! You may find a soloution.

[planecrazy.eu]

I am no expert, far from it...

But, I sent my perscriptions into CAA Gatwick and they gave me a partial thumbs up, based on the data. They said, it will depend on if i can read a particual specified line on the chart with my glasses on...

My perscription is +4.25 and +4.75, so right on the border of +5, combined 20/20 and indivudual no less that 20/30.

There is a different, but i was aware it was -/+2 difference max?

As i say, i am no expert, and not 100% sure.

Think it might be astigmatism thats -/+ 2 difference on second thoughts

[Oh that's super!]

if the roomer i have herd is true that a an instructor can sign off that i am ok to fly

The rumour might have something to do with FAA's SODA. Not a UK CAA/JAR thing, as far as I know.

[Phororhacos]

try this link. it might be what you wanted...
http://www.caa.co.uk/docs/49/SRG_Med_Monocular_algorithm.pdf

[daveh101]

there are just a few thing i would like to clear up

1. who or what is a CFI
2. what limitations are the Limitations imposed if I am issued with a Monocular vision certificate

[AMEandPPL]

CFI = Chief Flying Instructor

Limitations would be as per link given above, ie wearing goggles if in
open cockpit single seat aircraft, especially doing aerobatics.

The RUMOUR you have HEARD that an instructor can sign you off medically is not true. You still need a medical certificate, signed by
an AME. Often, however, we liaise and consult with instructional
colleagues such as CFI's.

Hope that clarifies a little . . . . . . . . .