UK - Eyesight Requirments

[Ben_NW]

I'm 25, a University Graduate, working as a Software Engineer and I'm considering applying for training as a controller.
My only concern is my vision, which in my weaker eye is down to -5.25 dioptres in my weaker eye (before correction). From what I can gather this is within the JAR Class 1 limits (but close (-6) ).
With this in mind, is becoming a controller a realistic choice?

[Ben_NW]

** bump **

[1985]

can you see? is it within the limits? both answers are yes so becoming a controller is a realistic choice. You'll have conditions on your licence if you validate ie only with corrective lenses but at the end of the day who cares?

[Spitoon]

Controllers in the UK still need a CAA Class 1 (not JAA). Although they are similar, there are different standards for eyesight - but I don't know what the differences are. See the CAA web site (http://www.caa.co.uk/default.aspx?catid=49&pagetype=90&pageid=529) for a bit more info.

[alfaman]

NATS careers (http://natscareers.co.uk/careers.asp?c=1&s=16)

Check here for NATS Trainne ATCO requirements, I believe they differ from the CAA, slightly.

[windneckin]

I recently went through both NATS medical and CAA Class 1 Medical. I did not check the CAA requirements but NATS said something along the lines of +-3 to be declared fit (there is a borderline region as well but I am not sure how large that is).

NATS link posted above is your best bet for information.

[lorna_b_1]

When I went through my medical I had a load of problems with my eyesight. I passed my Class 1 fine, but NATS had stricter requirements. I ended up having to get my optician to make my vision to the lowest NATS standard and then see what my prescription would be. Might be worth giving HR a call and finding out what the lowest vision requirement is and then having a chat with your optician. Once you've got the initial medical out the way, they aren't quite as strict about it.

[45 before POL]

Nats set +-3 for eyesight even though this falls well within a class1 requirement, I was 2.75 at the time and they said they set the limits based on a lot of peoples eyesight will deteriorate with age, but they do look at each case on its own merits ie age, any detioration in recent years.

[goatface]

NATS don't have stricter requirements:rolleyes::rolleyes:.

The CAA set the requirements for the initial Class One one and its the same for anyone wanting to be an ATCO anywhere.
Prior to the medical appointment tell your optician that you need to meet unaided CAA Class One Medical Requirements, if they stare blankley at you, go somewhere else.

At the moment, the CAA have slightly different requirements for ATCOs and Pilots with regard to the Class One but that will change and then the stricter JAA pilot requirement will also apply to ATCOs.

[Spitoon]

NATS don't have stricter requirementsI'm afraid you'll find they do - not, perhaps, for medical certification but for employment.

It's quite straightforward really. The CAA medical is intended to check that you meet the minimum standards and are likely to do so until your next renewal. NATS, at the point of initial certification, are thinking of investing many thousands of pounds in training an individual and wants also to have a reasonable chance of getting a return on that investment. If someone just scrapes through the medical exam, particularly in respect of something that is known to deteriorate over time, the liklihood of that person continuing to pass the medical in years to come is reduced.

So the stricter standards applied by NATS is a business decision rather than a regulatory/licensing decision.

[alfaman]

^ :ok: ^ - Spitoon has nailed it exactly.

[45 before POL]

Goatface. as stated.. and spittoon hit the nail on the head, basically you can pass a class one medical, but still be turned down by Nats.

[Bennyclub]

Basically, if you can read your pay cheque, you will be fine

[Ben_NW]

Cheers for the replies everybody.

I've got to admit that perhaps it isn't a career for me.

Sad .... but that's life.