Best sunglasses

[KayPam]

Hello,

I recently broke my beautiful pair of sunglasses while unloading myself from an aircraft : the glasses unloaded themselves from my shirt's pocket.

I am looking for the best replacement possible, sunglasses that would be designed for aviation.
More precisely, I am looking for the equivalent of the Garmin D2 GPS watches :
A GPS watch can be expensive, but has reasons to justify the price : specific aviation functions (altimeter, compass, gps track and speed, track recording, etc..) which are not mandatory at all but are nice to have.

I am not talking about the looks only, I can find any shape or form I like on any brand's website.
I am looking for a pair of sunglasses which would be of specific interest to aviation : I don't know what that could be.
They could be polarized, or photochromic, or have more filtering for the more intense light at high altitude, or even have a rim designed not to interfere with a headset's ANR.

I understand any pair of sunglasses will do the job, but what is the model that you chose and what's it specific advantage over other models ?
What is it that you like about the sunglasses you own and that justifies buying them as such a high price ? (when compared with the basic 100€ ray ban model)

Thank you

[Hot 'n' High]

KayPam, the best glasses are ..... the cheapest!

I'm forever sitting down on them, dropping them, "putting them in safe places" which are even safe from me ever finding them again.....................

Average life expectancy of a set of H 'n' H shades? 2 to 3!

And we are talking hours here ............ :}

[AndoniP]

you don't need special 'aviation' sunglasses, just something you're comfortable with and your headset doesn't press on that much.

why not just get a pair of ray ban aviators if you want something aviationey?

sunglasses don't have special functions, they are just sunglasses.

[Pom Pax]

sunglasses don't have special functions, they are just sunglasses.
Pullin Power!

[bobward]

I bought a pair or Randolph sun glasses back in 1991. They're still going strong!

[treadigraph]

I used to know someone who acquired a pair of very expensive aviator sunglasses which were his pride and joy. On our way somewhere in his car he stopped for petrol, paid, then pulled away from the pumps in a typically flamboyant boy racer manner accompanied by a loud clatter as his shades departed the roof where he'd left them for some reason. The next noises were swearing, reversing car, a crunch as he ran over them, then some ill-concealed stifled laughter from me. Not much chat for a while after that...

[tremblerman]

I know of one posing a...hole, who, upon being invited to a trip on a rather large yacht, went out and got himself the most expensive Ray Bans he could find.
Questioned why there was a bit of string in the box, and on being informed it was to be attached to the shades and looped round the neck to prevent loss.
Only an idiot would need to do that, according to our man.
Moments later he confirmed what everbody thought and his expensive shades disappeared in to the Menai Straits!!!

[bafanguy]

I had good results with Serengeti Drivers. They don't darken as much as reduce glare thereby improving the visual distinction between objects:

https://www.serengeti-eyewear.com/en-us/uv-solar-lens/drivers-gradient

[BDAttitude]

I had good results with Serengeti Drivers. They don't darken as much as reduce glare thereby improving the visual distinction between objects:

https://www.serengeti-eyewear.com/en-us/uv-solar-lens/drivers-gradient
+1 for Serengeti... however they seen to offer mostly perspex glasses nowadays.
Does anybody know a company still doing high base curve (8 or 9) non polarized mineral glass lenses. My RE JAGs need replacement.

[Jn14:6]

Bigatmo, by a country mile. (Having previously used RayBan , Serengeti, and Randolph.)

[Fareastdriver]

I bought a pair of RayBams in China in 2004 and they are still going strong. Best fiver I have ever spent.

[KayPam]

I know of one posing a...hole, who, upon being invited to a trip on a rather large yacht, went out and got himself the most expensive Ray Bans he could find.
Questioned why there was a bit of string in the box, and on being informed it was to be attached to the shades and looped round the neck to prevent loss.
Only an idiot would need to do that, according to our man.
Moments later he confirmed what everbody thought and his expensive shades disappeared in to the Menai Straits!!!
I'm not interested in bragging with something whose price is so high only for the purpose of bragging.
That would be a Rolex : it costs thousands but delivers exactly the same service and looks as something possible ten or one hundred times cheaper.

I'm interested in the equivalent of the Garmin D2 : a GPS watch that delivers many functions that cannot be easily replaced by any other individual device, and even if they are not really necessary, they still are a plus.
For example, right now I'm learning to glide. The "nearest" function of my watch gives me distance and bearing to my home airfield. I even have an app that computes my remaining height assuming a given gliding ratio. Obviously my instructor does not need a watch to know the distance to the airfield. But I could never know it so easily on my very first flight.

My phone could not do that (it does not have a barometer). Even if it could, I could not use it easily since it's in my pocket, not accessible.

If you know a feature of sunglasses that could be useful, any, now and here is the time to tell me :)

Thanks for the bigatmo suggestion. I'll look into it, preferably with a store retailer.

[BDAttitude]

And need to know the features to look out?
Why don't you say so :8

Most glider pilots prefer brown orangeish tinted glasses because they improve cloud contrast by attenuating the blue spectrum. It is believed that you can observe thermal activity better with them especially at the edges of cumulus where you definitely see haze threads you would not see with greenish tints. The grandfather of those are Zeiss Skylet glasses. But those Serengeti Drivers or others are probably not so bad as well.

Often glider pilots prefer not so dark tints, because you sometimes have some twilight underneath bigger clouds. Those Skylets are for example available in 70% reduction of transmission whereas 85% are default in most other applications.

As there are no possibilities to shade from above or the sides big, curved and tight wearing frames are preferred.

Big no are thick temples, because they restrict your field of view when circling in thermal with other gliders. You can detect motion in this area surprisingly well.

Big no is polarization due to LCD compatibility. You might want to get a fancy moving map ... No problems to be expected with the hood though.

Personally I found some ruggedness useful on airfields as well - well not only on airfields so that might be a peronal thing :ouch:. Hence my preference of mineral glass - but that's not compatible with high base curve and exotic tints unfortunately.

I am afraid gliding sunglasses are rather special and you won't score with them on the beach :}.

Cessna drivers have other specific needs (eg they are well shielded from above but have uncomfy headsets to wear) so probably have airline pilots. So there are no generic aviation sunglasses although some are called aviator.

[flap15]

Professional use in a commercial flight deck, Bigatmo. Wish I had brought them earlier, perfect tint for a glass cockpit. Designed by a pilot for pilots.

[chevvron]

I had good results with Serengeti Drivers. They don't darken as much as reduce glare thereby improving the visual distinction between objects:

https://www.serengeti-eyewear.com/en-us/uv-solar-lens/drivers-gradient
You should never wear photochromatic sunglasses while flying.
Research at RAE Farnborough concluded that whilst they might darken quickly, it takes a very long time for them to clear again and hence the evaluators (then known as the Institute of Aviation Medicine) sent out a big NO to both the RAF and the CAA.
Likewise, polarised glasses should not be used while flying as without realising it, you may have polarised glass on some of your instruments rendering them unreadable if the glass gets 'rotated' or if you tilt your head by more than a certain amount.

[Dubaian]

You should never wear photochromatic sunglasses while flying.

Photochromatics do NOT work inside cars. Do they work behind cockpit windshields?

[bafanguy]

You should never wear photochromatic sunglasses while flying.
Research at RAE Farnborough concluded that whilst they might darken quickly...

chevv,

The Serengeti sunglasses to which I referred had a fix gradient tint( darker at the top of the lens, lightening toward the bottom) vs a degree of tint that changed in relation to ambient light levels.

I wore them for many years with no difficulty while looking through quite a few cockpit windshields. In fact, I was able to get my Rx lenses done by Serengeti in the same configuration. I don't think Corning Glass does Rx lenses any longer.

Horses for courses ! :ok:

[Hot 'n' High]

.....

If you know a feature of sunglasses that could be useful, any, now and here is the time to tell me :)

......

Apologies for my seemingly rather flippant reply above at #2 - but, seriously, I'm a complete disaster-area when it comes to glasses so if I have to spend £5 on a pair I tend to regret it as I just know the outcome. That tends to limit my choices somewhat! :cool: But, as others have said, good shades are a great help! But, never having used anything "good" I can't help in any useful way - apart from cost! :uhoh:

H 'n' H

[AeroSpark]

I drive coaches fora living so rely on a decent pair of sunglasses. Personally I would avoid polarised lenses, I find they make looking through glass a bit strange, and can also do odd things to lcd screens. Oakley are my brand of choice, look good, work well and are tough with it

[El Bunto]

My phone could not do that (it does not have a barometer). Even if it could, I could not use it easily since it's in my pocket, not accessible.


Most phones made since about 2012 have an integrated barometer...

But to me the problem seems to be that you don't have a definite list of requirements. You'll never manage to buy a satisfactory product if you just buy the one with the longest checklist of features.

Take your Garmin D2 watch; all those functions mean that it is not optimised for one single function. It doesn't have a thermally-stabilised quartz oscillator, for example, so it isn't accurate as a chronometer. Eventually I think you'll hit the limits of the compromised functions and become dissatisfied.

In general it's better to buy a single optimised product for each specific use-case and leave the all-in-ones on the shelf.

[G-ARZG]

For Aviating, definitely Bigatmo. Unsurpassed.

[KayPam]

For Aviating, definitely Bigatmo. Unsurpassed.
What is it that makes them so suitable for aviation ?

[Mooncrest]

Today, I bought some Remaldi Harrison aviator sunspecs for the princely sum of eight quid. It turns out they were made by an optical firm just half a mile from here. If they protect my eyes and don't give me a headache (which my last ones did) then I'll be satisfied. I've had Foster Grant's in recent years - inexpensive and quite durable.

[KayPam]

In the end, I chose cat 3 polarized maui jim glasses, and another pair for summer, maui jim frames with cat 4 lenses.

[KayPam]

Most phones made since about 2012 have an integrated barometer...

But to me the problem seems to be that you don't have a definite list of requirements. You'll never manage to buy a satisfactory product if you just buy the one with the longest checklist of features.

Take your Garmin D2 watch; all those functions mean that it is not optimised for one single function. It doesn't have a thermally-stabilised quartz oscillator, for example, so it isn't accurate as a chronometer. Eventually I think you'll hit the limits of the compromised functions and become dissatisfied.

In general it's better to buy a single optimised product for each specific use-case and leave the all-in-ones on the shelf.
One year later, I figure out you were completely right.

My sunglasses just broke when I put them off and closed them.
I'm now considering to buy a new model, and I've been able to put down a definite list of requirements.
Any optician looks at me with goggly eyes when I list all 8 :

- Between 7 and 11% of transmittance, for optical comfort
- A curved mount, for the same reason
- A slightly adjustable mount, to increase the optical comfort and leave no place in the field of view unprotected
- Unpolarized glass, because it does not work very well in the 320 (doable, but not great, not great either with my tablet or phone)
- Correct width, just a bit larger than my head (that's for physical and audio comfort, with a headset such as the A20)
- Interior anti reflective coating, that's just mandatory, I do not want to have any visual parasite due to interior light reflections...
- Mineral glass or at least hardened plastic, since I want to keep high end sunglasses for a long time.
And
- Unmirrored glass, mount with a sober look (that's just looks so not definitive, but it still has to go with a pilot uniform, so nothing too fancy allowed..)

I looked into bigatmo, it seems pretty good, except the transmittance which they don't tell about.
Measuring the transmittance is very easy, just install an app like "light meter" on any smartphone, and divide the lighting value shown with the glasses on the sensor by the value shown without the glasses. Easy as pie, but it requires having the object in our hands.
And the critera "unmirrored" can be opposed to the critera 7-11% because the mirror can help reduce the transmittance..
It is not mineral glass but they claim it's extremely hard plastic, I think I have to give up a bit on my critera if I don't want to end up paying 600€ or more for "made to measure" glasses.

Any thoughts, since there are many users of bigatmo on this forum ? Thanks

[Cornish Jack]

I still have a couple of pairs of Air Ministry issue (yes, that long ago) and, obviously they are quite good but the best, for me, by far, were 'Renault Sea & Ski Spectaculars', bought in Vientiane in the early 60s. Don't know if they are still made , but their advantage was the distortionless wrap-around lenses - cutting out that side-lighting makes a huge difference. Sadly they were smashed at work in Cyprus.

[G-ARZG]

Weren't we all, weren't we all! (smashed at work in Cyprus, that is)

[Cornish Jack]

Can't imagine such a thing! Admittedly, an overdose of Kokinelli (more than half a glass) could cause problems, but we used to go for the higher quality stuff from our local grocer - 1s 9d a bottle! :D

[Uplinker]

Whatever the make and model, it is most important to check that sunglasses are certified to be UV blocking.

If they are not, then owing to the dark lens tint, the pupils of the eyes open wider so actually more UV gets into the eye, where it can cause more damage :bored:

I personally found that sunglasses render the displays of A320 family too dark, (I think our company ran them dim to save money replacing them). I had better success seeing the screens with graduated tint, clear at the bottom. But sunglasses are too much of a pain for me to bother with : the Airbus blind or moveable brown perspex screen, depending on which aircraft, works for me 90% of the time.

[Denti]

I use Zeiss Skylet (https://www.zeiss.co.uk/vision-care/better-vision/work-life/spectacles-for-pilots-perfect-vision-even-above-the-clouds.html) glasses and usually a more wrap around frame with them that block out most of the light entering from the side. Have used them since my gliding days over 20 years ago, since they block most of the blue light they enable a much better cloud identification and a much clearer view. One thing to note is, on switching from the 737 to the A320 i had to switch from 90% absorbance to 75% as the airbus screens are so very bad compared to those used by Boeing. Not only size, but also the available range of brightness. In total those kinda glasses are not cheap, i usually pay from €600 upwards, my current set is over 1k as i am getting into the age where i need multifocal lenses...

[KayPam]

I use Zeiss Skylet (https://www.zeiss.co.uk/vision-care/better-vision/work-life/spectacles-for-pilots-perfect-vision-even-above-the-clouds.html) glasses and usually a more wrap around frame with them that block out most of the light entering from the side. Have used them since my gliding days over 20 years ago, since they block most of the blue light they enable a much better cloud identification and a much clearer view. One thing to note is, on switching from the 737 to the A320 i had to switch from 90% absorbance to 75% as the airbus screens are so very bad compared to those used by Boeing. Not only size, but also the available range of brightness. In total those kinda glasses are not cheap, i usually pay from €600 upwards, my current set is over 1k as i am getting into the age where i need multifocal lenses...
Can you find glasses already built with this lens type ?
I would be interested to see how it looks like !

[BCMG CAVOK]

I have tried them, and they are amazing.

[Geezers of Nazareth]

Best pair I ever had were from McDonalds, and cost me £1.

[LTNman]

Let these be your guide

https://www.aircraftcompare.com/blog/best-sunglasses-for-pilots/

https://www.caa.co.uk/Aeromedical-Examiners/Medical-standards/Pilots-(EASA)/Conditions/Visual/Guidance-on-the-use-of-sunglasses-for-pilots/

https://transair.co.uk/pilot-supplies/pilot-sunglasses

[MATELO]

KayPam, the best glasses are ..... the cheapest!



Or Free. I found a pair of spring loaded Ralph Lauren back in 1999. I still have them and use them for driving.

[Less Hair]

I'd prefer non polarized because polarized ones can black out cockpit displays. Go for neutral grey glass instead and pick the right size for your face.
https://aoeyewear.com/sizing/

[zoigberg]

Another one here for Serengeti drivers gradient. Not polarised. Just lighter at the bottom of the lens so you can see your instruments at night.