Glasses - what do you use?

[Sunfish]

I am reaching the time of life where reading glasses are useful and maybe ordinary correction as well. I've tried multifocals but find them so disconcerting I haven't persevered with them. There is no way I want to add another source of visual illusions during approach and landing, plus, they are a nuisance with headphones, etc.

Will experiment next with bifocals.

What do you use and why?

[Metro man]

Bifocals are good in that you have a distinct cut off between intermediate for charts and instrument panel and distant for outside. I used them for quite a while but persevere with multifocal/progressives as they are more convenient, though they do take some getting used to.

Best start with them outside the flight deck as the runway turning blurred while trying to judge the flare isn't much fun.

[NoseGear]

I'm right with you Sunfish....I haven't tried the graduated lens yet, which I think is Multifocals by a different name? I went to an Optometrist here in Hong Kong where I live and had an eye check, sure enough, my sight is weaker in my left eye and causes blurring at things that are around half a metre and closer, i.e., everything in the cockpit! Its also quite a bit worse at night in low light conditions, I find reading taxi charts all but impossible now without my glasses. However my long sight is still fine and I can't land/Take off with them on, so I have a set of half glasses which I perch on the end of my nose, very useful to peer over the top of at my offsider like a very old man! I have a neck rope and drop them off when I'm flying the approach visually, seems to work well for now. Normal readers from a glasses shop should be fine at this stage, I would've got a pair of them however I found in Bejing at the markets they actually made my lenses to the script, while I waited, for the princely sum of 200RMB, which isn't much.

[Amiri01]

Hi Sunny,

I use multifocals and while they took a short time to get used to, they beat the reading glasses that I used previously hands down.

The problem I had with reading glasses is that my distance vision is fine so I had to perch my glasses on the end of my nose to look over the top of them when looking outside the cockpit which was very uncomfortable. Also, I really had 3 focal lengths that were important to me; outside the cockpit (distant), the instrument panel (EFIS type) which is about 3' away and my EFB which is fixed at a distance of about 18". If I had reading glasses that put the instrument panel clearly in focus, then I could not read my approach charts on the EFB and vice versa. Then I still had the end of the nose issue to look outside. Since there are 3 focal lengths that I need, bifocals would not have suited. At the end of the day, I was forced into trying multifocals and I now love them.

Sure, the peripheral vision is a bit distorted which is a bit of an irritant, but once I got used to the subtle movements of my head to bring where I was needing to focus into the sweet spot, their use became natural and the results were very pleasing.

My only real problem with them is when I need to read something on my overhead panel. Close in vision is through the bottom of the glasses so to read the overhead panel, I need to tilt my head a very long way back. This should not worry a rec/GA flyer.

I hope this feedback helps.

[triton140]

Sunny

I'd persevere with the multifocals - I switched to them from normal glasses (not bifocals) a few years ago and after getting used to them I wouldn't swap them for quids.

No issues with my flying, don't really notice anything switching back and forth from outside to inside on approach.

[Metro man]

There are different grades of progressive lenses as well, if it's for your livelihood go for Varilux lenses, Varilux multi-focal lens range | Essilor Singapore (http://www.essilor.com.sg/products/varilux)

The distortion is much lower and you can get transitions which darken in sunlight and clear indoors. In a decent frame, the price will take your breath away but when I go for my medical I'm glad I paid the extra.

Cheaper lenses are available but the degree of distortion is higher.

BTW I found an optician in India who will change the lenses on my reading glasses for $4, quality is quite acceptable so I'm taking a few old frames to him next month so I can have a few spare pairs lying around.

[Desert Duck]

I use a pair of half lenses - when you get the right spot on your nose / look over the top to see outside & thru the lens for the panel.
Have been using them with great satisfaction for at least 4 years - got sick & tired of glasses on & off

[ACMS]

Very Timely post Sunfish.

I've needed glasses for reading for about 6 years and it's getting further and further away. Now I need slight correction for distance as well. I have a pair of Tri-focals that work ok. The trouble is that I need 5 zones to see.....
1/ EFIS directly in front
2/ ENG instruments
3/ side panel for EFB/Paper charts
4/ outside.
5/ overhead panel

These Tri-focals work ok but the ENG instruments are not quite right and it annoys me.

I am thinking of trying progressives as well.

God getting old is a pain in the ass, come to think of it that area ain't good either!!

[HPSOV L]

A tip for progressives: Avoid slim fashion frames. For best results go for traditional frames that cover the full peripheries of your vision. The bigger and nerdier the better. My long range correction is 3.75 and with mid quality lenses I can read a Jepp, see the EFIS and read taxiway signs at night. The overhead panel I have to tilt my head back to read though.
Sure, you move like Robocop and are an aesthetic disaster but you get used to them. Work very well for me.

[Capt Claret]

I tried bi-focals and absolutely hated them. I'm now on my third or fourth prescription of multi-focals. I've been lucky that in the main, I've had no difficulty adapting to them. So much so, that I put them on when I wake, and take them off at bed time, and give them no more thought through the day.

[Metro man]

Avoid multi-focals with very curved lenses as the distortion and reflections at night are hard to deal with. Bright approach lights through a windscreen which has reflections from inside the cockpit and wrap around lenses aren't a good mix. I have a seperate night pair with relatively flat lenses which doubles as my spare, these are the ones I use when I do my medical.

It might be worth going to a CASA approved opthamologist rather than a high street opticians.

[Capn Bloggs]

Go the HBF bifocals. It will be a while before you won't be able to focus closeup and the instruments with the reading bit. Don't forget: if you need them for your licence, you need two pairs.

(I did try progressives and gave them a miss after a short time; I can see their advantage when you get to ACMS' position of needing 30cm (charts), 74cm (panel) and outside focus ranges).

[On eyre]

Schooners or pints if I'm really thirsty.

[Flopt]

Declaration of vested interest....I am an optometrist a CPL and have been accredited by CASA to do "aviation eye medicals " for about 10 years.


Firstly as a heads up to anyone seeing his DAME in the near future ,the new CASA medical reporting system REQUIRES you to present yourself with two pairs of glasses [if you need them to meet the standard] i.e. the ones you wear and the spare pair you carry while exercising the privileges of your licence....we all do don't we...the DAME or DAO or CO can't legally submit the results otherwise.


When I needed reading glasses at the age of 46 ,I still had perfect distance
vision ,so 1/2 eye glasses did the trick for about 6 years....the standard for near is n.5 size print readable to 30cm , also at 50cm and at least n.14 size print at 1m.


I am now 67yrs and 20 years ago my airline pilot mates were wearing the simplest solution either 1/2 eyes, bifocals or trifocals and some were starting on progressive multifocals.


Now nearly all of them who I prescribe for wear progressive multifocals...but you are taking a risk if you try the "cheap" ones...theyare usually old designs with lots of distortions....but....you don't need the dearest ones either....I wear Varilux 'S' series for comfort and minimal distortions but I am sure Zeiss,Rodenstock, Hoya,Shamir all make lenses of similar quality.


My next piece of advice is the most important.....make sure the optometrist sits you down and individually carefully measures the correct position for the optical centres....and checks them with the reference spots still on the lenses when you collect them....virtually everyone who says they could not wear them comfortably has not been measured carefully enough or had the frame adjusted correctly....after you have been wearing them for a while it does not seem to be quite that critical, but it is at the start.


Best of luck,


Flopt

[airtags]

Flopt - agree - multi-focals but definitely not from the market in Shanghai!! the key is certainly the measurements for the optical centres and making sure that in fitting you consider the active environment including the ubiquitous second glance down at the iPad.

AT

[Lead Balloon]

Firstly as a heads up to anyone seeing his DAME in the near future ,the new CASA medical reporting system REQUIRES you to present yourself with two pairs of glasses [if you need them to meet the standard] i.e. the ones you wear and the spare pair you carry while exercising the privileges of your licence....we all do don't we...the DAME or DAO or CO can't legally submit the results otherwise.You are ****ting me?

It's like the arseclowns sit around imagining the worst possible scenarios based on the presumption that everyone's stupidly dangerous.

Of course I only carry a fake spare pair to fool the ATO during BFRs and CASA during ramp checks. I'm as blind as a bat if I put them on, but why would I worry about that? If I've fooled the ATO during the BFR and CASA during the ramp check, surely I'm 'safe'.

Arseclowns. :ugh:

[YPJT]

I have been wearing reading glasses for just on 10 years now. Distance vision still meets the standard - just.
With the expense of a good pair of prescription reading glasses I am not about to fork out anything from $250 - $400 for a second pair. The best option I have found is the off the shelf reading glasses, just pick up the +1.5 ones and voila. Average cost for these is about $20. I'm sure there a million reasons that Flopt could tell us why this is perhaps not the best for our eyes.

[Capt Claret]

You are ****ting me?

The DAME I see warned me of this in Feb at my last renewal. I don't however expect he will inspect the lenses to ensure that they're identical. I do expect the sight test will take twice as long though.

And the way I'm managing it is, my current prescription (1 month old) is for he daily wearers, and the previous prescription are the backup glasses.

[Flopt]

The only danger is that you might get a bit of a headache if the optical centres are not in the correct position...or you may go slowly blind from glaucoma without being aware of it [like my local chemist ] because you are not smart enough to get someone to look in your eyes and check the intra-ocular pressures, optic nerves and visual fields every two or three years from the age of about 40 yrs or so .:ok:


CASA also prescribes that if they are reading lenses only , they must be 1/2 eye frames and not full sized lenses.


Flopt

[Lead Balloon]

So has there been a spate of accidents caused by pilots who aren't carrying a spare pair of glasses, or by the spare pair not correcting the pilot's vision sufficiently?

Why would a pilot, who's silly enough to fly without an adequate spare set of glasses, stop doing it just because once a year or once every two years the DAME makes him or her do an eye test using two different pairs of glasses?

Strikes me as just another manifestation of Avmed's messianic delusion that it's the last bastion between dangerously stupid and sick pilots and the travelling public.

Arseclowns. :ugh:

[Metro man]

I was told when I did my initial medical over 20 years ago that photo chromatic lenses weren't allowed because of a heavy landing by a DC9 Captain. He had been flying in bright sunlight over 8/8 low cloud, when he descended the lenses didn't have enough time to clear before he touched down in a fairly dim environment, misjudging the landing because he couldn't see properly.

Are modern lenses better or is the prohibition still in effect ?

[Flopt]

20 years ago 95% of photochromic /photochromatic lenses were "Photogrey" brand and were glass made by Corning Glass Co.


They were indeed slow to change back to clear especially as they got older...but in the cockpit environment a certain percentage of UV light which made them go dark is filtered out by Perspex screens or even the heat treated glass screens of a DC9...its a bit hard to believe they would be so dark as to cause an accident...another myth perhaps?


Unfortunately the CASA guidelines were written about 20 yrs ago ...so this myth is perpetuated...the guidelines disappeared off the website about 2 yrs ago pending re-writing and have not made it back yet!!!


I quite happily wear my Transitions brand photochromic lenses flying day and night and only put sunglasses on if landing directly into a low western sun...the tinting brand is available across several different lens making companies and works best if combined with a good quality anti-reflection coating...the coating makes them go darker faster ,lighten up faster, and makes any residual tint virtually disappear completely indoors or at night.


"Transitions" [a registered brand] is a "treatment" for most types of plastic used in lenses including so called "hi-index" materials which reduce thickness and weight in modern lenses[ which are 99% plastic these days] .


In the cockpit they are about 50% tinted behind the Perspex and go to 85% within 36secs of stepping out into daylight.


My 2 cents worth.:8


Flopt

[Metro man]

Thanks for the info, much appreciated.

[aerobatologist]

I'm also at the age where the old eyeballs are wearing out, I've needed reading glasses for the last 8 years or so. For work (I work in IT) I use prescription progressive lenses which cost a fortune (about $1k), they're excellent and I sometimes use them for flying, but they are wickedly expensive. They take getting used to - the area of good focus is a bit reduced and you need to move your head around a bit more - after a while it's not a problem.

My Class2 medical specifies bifocals must be worn - according to my LAME progressives meet this because they're really just bifocal with the line smoothed out. My headset bag includes a cheap pair of off-the-shelf clear bifocals and a pair of bifocal sunglasses.

The sunglasses I use most of the time - these are normal sunnies with add-on hydrotac lenses that I've fitted myself. These are excellent gel lenses that cost around $20 and you fit to the inside of ordinary (non-focal) glasses and can position them to where they're right for your vision. For flying, I've got them adjusted so that the top bifocal line lines up with the top of the aircraft panel - higher than for most bifocals, so I've got perfect vision both outside and towards the panel. I wouldn't be without them now.

[spinex]

As someone said earlier, this getting older is a right pain in the tailpipe. Had to chuckle a bit about the spare glasses thing though, I've had a couple of mishaps over the years between flying and sailing, such that I'm pretty careful about ensuring I have a second pair about now. Eg. prescription sunnies whipped off my face when I stuck my head out of a doorless Aerobat to check on line of sight below for an impending photo shoot, a weird wind tunnel effect behind a wraparound pair of non-prescription sunnies that whipped an old fashioned stiff contact lens clean off the eyeball in an open cockpit type and most recently, an older pair of glasses that fell apart after a stray reefing line gave me a wake up slap in the face. Trying to replace these with prescription sunnies didn't work well in the dark and I quickly relinquished the helm to someone who had a better chance of seeing the waves and then leading lights. The benefits of a multi crew environment.

[PPRuNeUser0161]

Hi guys
I have had the medical requirement to where reading correction for a couple of years now. What I can add to this discussion is;

CASA require two pairs on deck, there are no restrictions on tinting so one can be sunnies.

I use graduated lenses and they take time to get used to, your brain has to learn how to read the signals from your eyes and it can be quite uncomfortable. Some people may never adapt and as such bi-focal may be your only choice.

Wrap around lenses will need to be of the highest quality to help reduce distortion at the peripherals. I have wrap around sunnies, to reduce light coming in from the sides, but not in my clear lenses that I wear at night. You can get some weird effects off these things especially at night.

If you want the clearest vision, do not buy polycarbonate lenses, you will need to use TRIVEX, CR39 or better still GLASS. You will need to go to one of the better quality outlets to get these. Believe it or not two of this countries most prominent and well regarded eyeglass suppliers do not supply the best stuff. The injection moulding process of polycarbonate lenses puts stress into the product basically distorts the vision and can create a slight milky look.

My sunglass lenses are made from TRIVEX (index 1.53) and have all the properties of polycarbonate however they have have a much better ABBE value of 45 Vs 29, i.e. they are virtually as clear as glass. CR39 is another option for good clarity but it may shatter if thrown at the concrete at high velocity. Glass will definitely shatter on contact with the hard stuff but is the best when it comes to scratch resistance.

About Trivex
http://www.x-celoptical.com/aris_trivex_pdf_files/TrivexUsersGuide2006TechFeatures.pdf


Serengeti sell prescription lenses in TRIVEX but you need to go to a Serengeti agent, and there are surprisingly few, and be sure to ask for genuine serengeti lenses. They are expensive, not much change from 1K! You can get TRIVEX from other good suppliers but when I worked it out the price was not much different, perhaps $100 cheaper with decent frames. I went for the serengeti, figured I wear then all day and want the best sun protection for my eyes and apparently the lenses are adapted best for the wrap around frames.

Choose AMBER, brown or if your completely obsessive about colour, grey lenses.

I can't believe they are not a TAX deduction for at least the sec on pair???

SN

[Flopt]

Mmm ...not quite correct Soupy......

Virtually no optical outlet wants to make glass lenses these days as they are too dangerous and heavy . We used to either chemically toughen them or heat anneal them but they were still dangerous,caused polarised phenomena in heat treated screens in older cars and airliners and you only see them these days in "old" sunglasses brands ,usually from the USA.

Virtually all plastic lenses are injection moulded...stock lenses in single vision in the range+ or- 6.00/-2.00 usually come out of a packet at the optical lab. Doesn't matter if they are CR39 , Trivex, polycarbonate, or the latest 1.60 ,1.67, or 1.74 materials....all 'ground' i.e. individually made to your prescription lenses start as an injection moulded thick " blank".

The main difference in the cause of distortions and cloudy vision is the quality of manufacture , the quality of the research in the design of the curvatures and the quality of the coatings applied for scratch and reflection reduction.

With no-name brands coming out of China or other cheap labour countries ,for instance , you are taking pot luck ...and some chain groups repackage them with names that sound like quality.....surprised?

Companies like Zeiss, Rodenstock,Essilor , Shamir, Coburn,and a few others make lenses of roughly equal high quality probably also in China or Thailand but control and supervise their factories to 1st world standards.
I believe Serengeti lenses are made by Coburn.

I get to try all the materials at no charge and don't think Trivex is any better than polycarbonate except for slight colour dispersion at oblique angles....I can see a slight colour fringe on either side of a power line occasionally.
The newer 1.60 refractive index material is thinner, lighter than Trivex for the same power and has a similar Abbé number so less colour fringes than poly....probably better than Trivex....but I don't notice it much.
Lens design has improved rapidly in the last few years as computers have become more powerful so lens curves can be calculated to give clear vision as the eye looks obliquely through the edges of a lens.

We no longer lathe then grind with carborundum then polish with cerium oxide the way I was taught 43 years ago...now digital surfacing produces infinitely variable shapes for multifocals or "aspheric best form " peripheries....
I still need to go and see one of these machines.....$ 4.00 lenses from India are not of this standard...

My advice is find an optometrist who gives value by using good quality lenses ( they don't have to be the dearest)..
and takes the time to accurately take the optical centre measurements....like a broken record...
Cheers,

Flopt

[ACMS]

Does anyone know where you can get a good set of clip on sun glasses to go over your prescription glasses? Ones that aren't Polaroid.......

[djpil]

I started using these in preference to clip-ons many years ago:
Pre-Made With "Extreme Glare" Custom Non-Rx Lenses | Zurich Rx and Non Prescription Sunglasses Out-Perform Polarized (http://extremeglaresunglasses.com/t/pre-made-with-extreme-glare-custom-non-rx-lenses)

[Metro man]

There is an argument for not buying the most expensive lenses at the start as your eyes will deteriorate further before settling down.

[Capn Bloggs]

Does anyone know where you can get a good set of clip on sun glasses to go over your prescription glasses?
Don't go the flip-up route... I proposed to some of our FAs that I get flip-ups and they all said they wouldn't speak to me again... :{

Looking for "Fitovers" myself; non-polarised ones are few and far between.

[ACMS]

I see your problem, you proposed with a flip up and not a ring.......rookie mistake:}

Fitovers ey?

Mmmmmm ok

[cogwheel]

Good thread...

I was told back when I had excellent eyesight to expect a need for glasses around 45. Well at 46, I needed reading glasses and like others above got the half moon style that sat on the end of the nose or on a string around the neck when not required. Not long later further enhancements were required. Multifocals were not good in the cockpit for me. I tried Tri vocals for a while to read the panel above, but found it easier with the bi-foals and tilting the head back as mentioned above. I found it does not get any better as the years roll on, but that's the way it is!
My second pair has always been my "anti-glare" glasses. Used to be ok, but who knows now??
The danger now is screwing your old eyes trying to read your iPad or phone!!:ugh:

[PPRuNeUser0161]

Flopt
Glass is available you just have to specify it, remember we are the customer. Plenty of people still ask for glass which I'm sure frustrates those who dislike it with a passion. Yes it will shatter if smacked hard enough but then poly and other plastics will scratch just by looking at them. I've had glass sunnies for at least 10 years, broke a lens when I dropped them on a tile floor. That's the risk with glass, but it's a buyers choice, yes??? Yes they are heavier but not by much in the straight sunglasses, probably becomes a problem with a prescription I would imagine. Dangerous?, I try to take mine off before someone punches me in the eyeball.

My understanding is that injection moulding is done at medium temperatures and under high pressure then rapidly cooled, whereas the cast process (TRIVEX and probably others) is done without pressure so the material can conform to the mould shape at its own pace and Cool slowly. Less inbuilt stress in the product is the result but it does take longer to produce the blank and as such it is more expensive.

I did try the 1.6 index material but still found it not as sharp as the TRIVEX, but certainly much better than the poly, perhaps it was the coatings but when I'm paying I want what I want, right????

I would agree that you should find a good optometrist who will measure your optical centres although I'm pretty sure they all do that??? Perhaps not for the online optical shops, buyer beware, cheaper is not necessarily just as good. My centres were measured and confirmed 3 times by three separate people in the establishment. If that is not right it will undermine even the best lenses I believe.

Im not an expert or optometrist but I did a fair bit of research before I purchased, I could have pretty much got the same frames and TRIVEX lenses from another manufacturer but it was only about $100 cheaper than the Serengeti product. They may be as good or even better I'm not sure, but I didn't read too much bad about the Serengeti prescription product so that is what swayed me in the end. I'm not saying everyone should head out and by what I bought, I'm just adding my experience to the conversation.

SN

[ForkTailedDrKiller]

Flopt
Glass is available you just have to specify it, remember we are the customer. Plenty of people still ask for glass which I'm sure frustrates those who dislike it with a passion. Yes it will shatter if smacked hard enough but then poly and other plastics will scratch just by looking at them. I've had glass sunnies for at least 10 years, broke a lens when I dropped them on a tile floor. That's the risk with glass, but it's a buyers choice, yes??? Yes they are heavier but not by much in the straight sunglasses, probably becomes a problem with a prescription I would imagine. Dangerous?, I try to take mine off before someone punches me in the eyeball.

My understanding is that injection moulding is done at medium temperatures and under high pressure then rapidly cooled, whereas the cast process (TRIVEX and probably others) is done without pressure so the material can conform to the mould shape at its own pace and Cool slowly. Less inbuilt stress in the product is the result but it does take longer to produce the blank and as such it is more expensive.

I did try the 1.6 index material but still found it not as sharp as the TRIVEX, but certainly much better than the poly, perhaps it was the coatings but when I'm paying I want what I want, right????

I would agree that you should find a good optometrist who will measure your optical centres although I'm pretty sure they all do that??? Perhaps not for the online optical shops, buyer beware, cheaper is not necessarily just as good. My centres were measured and confirmed 3 times by three separate people in the establishment. If that is not right it will undermine even the best lenses I believe.

Im not an expert or optometrist but I did a fair bit of research before I purchased, I could have pretty much got the same frames and TRIVEX lenses from another manufacturer but it was only about $100 cheaper than the Serengeti product. They may be as good or even better I'm not sure, but I didn't read too much bad about the Serengeti prescription product so that is what swayed me in the end. I'm not saying everyone should head out and by what I bought, I'm just adding my experience to the conversation.

SN

Well there ya go Floppy one - any questions?

Dr

[ACMS]

Well I'm confused........:sad:

So what is it boys? Which ones should I be getting?

I'm off to OPSM to get my eyes tested again and will look ( pardon the pun ) into getting progressive.........

[Capt Claret]

ACMS,

I don't think anyone can tell you what YOU should be getting because it's such a subjective thing.

I don't doubt that the folks who say don't go multifocals have problems with them, but I don't. So my recommendation based on my experience is that they're great.

I use Hoya lenses because the optometrist said that they have the widest (lateral) field of view in multifocal lenses. Is this true? I don't know, it could be the optometrical equivalent of Airbus v Boeing. But on my 4th pair now, I've not had any problems adjusting and find them excellent.

The time I did try bi-focals, I couldn't get past the delineation between the two focal lengths and the subsequent bluring when I looked through the wrong lens. Yet with the multi-focals, and no delineating line, my brain/eyes have just naturally adapted and I automatically look with the subject in focus.

Welcome to spectacle world.

[cattletruck]

Welcome to spectacle world.

Buggah, I've just entered the "can't comfortably see things up close when wearing glasses" brigade. It's not too bad right now but I imagine it will get worse with age.

My optometrist is an old salt who has handed the business down to his son but still works part time to help out. Lot's of things have changed since he started, with the dearth of bad/cheap prescriptions being the order of the day. One thing they no longer do is grind the lenses themselves.

The glasses I have are only for long distance only, they are plastic for light weight and coated with glass to prevent scratches. I have two pairs one with a brown tint for the day time and the other is clear for night time with an anti-glare coating which needs constant cleaning.

One thing I've noticed when holidaying in the country for months on end is that my long distance eyesight improves to the point that I don't need to wear glasses. This is I believe due to the eyes getting some long distance focus exercise that is just not possible in the city. That or there is something NOT in the water supply.

I guess it's only a matter of time that someone eventually develops a lens that quickly adapts to the object near or far being looked. This will be a godsend and will dispense with the need for bifocals altogether.

[Capt Claret]

CASA require two pairs on deck, there are no restrictions on tinting so one can be sunnies.

My DAME told me the opposite of this, when he warned me that on my renewal in 2017 I'd have to present the second pair of specs as part of the medical renewal process.

[ACMS]

Thanks Clarrie:--- I've had glasses for reading for nearly 7 years now. I've had tri-focals made up for 2 years but I only used them when quite tired ( mainly for distance when tired ). I use the cheap chemist readers and look over the top for distance, but they no longer do the job as well as I now need. The trouble is that the expensive tri-focals are annoying me a bit ( can read the PFD clearly but not the ENG instruments ) , that's why I'm going to look at progressive glasses now.
I'm told they take a bit of getting used to..........especially in peripheral vision during landing?

It's all these different types of lens that's confusing that Flopt and Soup Nazi were talking about earlier in link 26 and 27.

[cooperplace]

I wear multifocals, with quite large lenses, not fashionable, and they work very well for distance, viewing the instruments, and for looking at maps. Before I got the m'focals I tried bifocals but the transition line at the top of the reading zone seemed to always be in the way of where I wanted to look, drove me mad. A couple of years ago at home the lens in the right side of my glasses (my better eye) just popped out without warning. The screws holding it in had got loose. I thought, thank god that didn't happen on short final. I now always have a spare pair close at hand in the cockpit. So I can see the rationale behind having two pairs. it's not an issue $$-wise because I get a new pair every couple of years on my health insurance so I have quite a few old pairs lying around.

[JimR]

Interesting observation Cattletruck. Many years ago in my forties I noticed that my distant vision was beginning to degrade. I was spending a lot of time in front of the computer and I guess I was straining my eyes without realizing it. I eventually went for an eye test and was given a prescription for bifocals. At my annual medical the doc confirmed that I was only just passing the distant vision requirement. The distant correction was quite weak and consequently I rarely used the bifocals but I did buy some cheap reading glasses. I then always used the reading glasses when in front of the computer and of course for reading. At my next annual the doc was quite surprised when he found my distant vision had improved considerably. Obviously, straining to read had started to permanently deform my eye lenses and it wasn't until they were able to relax that my distant vision returned. Of course that was many years ago and I now need glasses for both near and distant. I use bifocals but that's just my preference.

[Metro man]

I believe that a change of glasses during the eye test is forbidden and you have to pass the whole thing on one pair.

[PPRuNeUser0161]

Claret
Thats interesting, my DAME couldn't tell me although he did say that from now on I need to present my spec's for the medical. Last week I asked the question at a line check and the check captain said one of each covers it. Not sure if there is anything in writing that specifically covers it so I guess we can take it as read, two set of glasses with corrective lenses.

The DAME sent an email to CASA medical asking the question, should get an answer by 2025 I would think.

SN

[Capn Bloggs]

My DAME told me the opposite of this, when he warned me that on my renewal in 2017 I'd have to present the second pair of specs as part of the medical renewal process.
Precisely what I was advised today for my medical renewal coming up soon.

[PPRuNeUser0161]

Its appears the JAR medical requires two pairs of un-tinted glasses, I can't find find anything in our reg's although I must admit it proved to be an excellent sleeping tablet last night and I only looked for about 5 minutes.

SN

[Capt Claret]

I know one shouldn't talk common sense with regard to rules 'n regs, but.

I'd be stunned if one was ramp checked and when asked to present two pairs of specs, that a tinted pair and non tinted pair would cover one's derriere.

From a practical point of view, these boards are full of criticism of folk who are deemed to do something foolhardy, or lacking in airmanship. I can just HEAR the howls of criticism if Bloggs (not Capn) was to bust his glasses during a STAR say, then go on to cock up the ensuing landing because in the pitch black, Bloggs couldn't see properly whilst wearing his Serengetis. :D:D:D:D

[Metro man]

There are a number of virtual glasses apps available for iPhone and android which could be useful in a pinch. Basically hold the camera over the text and read at your desired level of magnification on the screen.

Precision Eye Care - Richard G. Davis, MD develops iRead Smart Phone Application (http://precision-eyecare.com/iread/)

[Capt Claret]

Basically hold the camera over the text and read at your desired level of magnification on the screen.

Not quite so useful if the problem is properly identifying the PAPI/VASIS, or if one's not got autoland in howling crosswind - phone in one hand, and what'll I grab throttles or control column?

[ACMS]

So, if we are now REQUIRED to have a second pair then surely we can now claim the second pair as a tax deduction. Bugger it, I'm going to claim...

[PPRuNeUser0161]

ACMS
I share your frustration. There has been a specific tax office ruling on this. Basically says pilots cannot deduct the cost of prescription glasses. You can however claim an infinite amount of sunglasses it seems. I can understand the first pair not being deductible but it's a licensing requirement that we carry the second pair.

SN.

[swh]

I prefer Zalto Denk'Art glasses myself, the red smells, looks, and feels better in them. Always carry a backup or three in case of breakage.

[777cae]

I'm 42 and recently underwent my CASA class 1 medical. Passed with flying colours apart from my eye test which was just short of 6/9. Is this the end? Are there ground for an AAT Application?

[Capn Bloggs]

Get some specs/see your friendly ophthalmologist. You have to be 6/6 in at least one eye, 6/9 in the other, and 6/6 with both eyes open. Plenty of exploring to do before the AAT...

[Ramjet555]

Thanks for the Tip on Bifocals
I assume HBF is a local Australian name?
I'm in Canada where Costco is the name of the game.
At my last two FAA medicals I've struggled with the 20 ft Distant vision test for 20/20
where one eye has deteriorated distant vision that now just passes 20/20 but it has been more difficult on the last test
and I need to assume that I will need glasses for distance in the future.

I just wear readers for close up vision. There are some minor differences between the left and right eye
that prescription would assist.
I mainly need to some glasses to ensure that I can pass the distant vision requirements in the future.
Any direction as to glasses for this purpose would be appreciated.


Go the HBF bifocals. It will be a while before you won't be able to focus closeup and the instruments with the reading bit. Don't forget: if you need them for your licence, you need two pairs.

(I did try progressives and gave them a miss after a short time; I can see their advantage when you get to ACMS' position of needing 30cm (charts), 74cm (panel) and outside focus ranges).

[mustafagander]

When it comes to bifocals, do some homework. I have a "low cut" for the reading part of mine. I can see out the window and read the instruments OK so I moved the top of the bifocal reading part down a couple of mm. It takes a few minutes to become accustomed to physically looking down with eyes only to read the charts clipped to the yoke and deck logs etc but very quickly it normalises.

[gassed budgie]

The $10 plastic 2.5 magnifiers/readers from the local discount chemist work well at my place.

[27/09]

When I needed reading glasses in the cockpit I went the progressive way. Like all options there are compromises but they work best for me.