Spectacle prescription limits

[Andrew M]

can anybody please tell me in pure hard figures what the CAA class 1 + 2 limits is for corrective lenses for myopia (aka: Shortsightedness).

I think I am around a -4 d for both eyes.

thanks,

andrew

[Circuit Basher]

Andrew M - here is the text from JAR FCL3:

JAR–FCL 3.220 Visual requirements
(a) Distant visual acuity. Distant visual acuity, with or without correction, shall be 6/9 or better in each eye separately and binocular visual acuity shall be 6/6 or better (see JAR–FCL 3.220(h) below). No limits apply to uncorrected visual acuity.
(b) Refractive errors. Refractive error is defined as the deviation from emmetropia measured in dioptres in the most ametropic meridian. Refraction shall be measured by standard methods (see paragraph 1 Appendix 13 to Subpart B). Applicants shall be considered fit with respect to refractive errors if they meet the following requirements:
(1) At the initial examination the refractive error shall not exceed ±3 dioptres.
(2) At revalidation or renewal examinations, an applicant experienced to the satisfaction of the Authority with refractive errors up to +3/-5 dioptres and with a history of stable vision may be considered fit by the AMS (see paragraph 2 Appendix 13 to Subpart B).
(3) In an applicant with a refractive error with an astigmatic component, the astigmatism shall not exceed 2·0 dioptres.
(4) The difference in refractive error between the two eyes (anisometropia) shall not exceed 2·0 dioptres.

This is a non-medical recitation of the rules. I shall leave it to the assembled community to add the weight of personal experience and medical knowledge!!

[Ronbmy]

CB

It would appear that the CAA are applying a different standard of +/- 5.

http://www.caa.co.uk/srg/med/default.asp?page=537

I'm going to work before I get shot down.:ugh:

[Circuit Basher]

Ronbmy - I am aware of the inconsistencies between JAR-FCL3 and the CAA Web site, which is why I did not endeavour to apply any interpretation (as I got my ar$e toasted the last couple of times I posted anything about eyesight on PPRuNe ;) ).

I'm an engineer - I deal in facts. How people choose to interpret those facts or where they choose to get from them is up to them - caveat emptor applies at all times, however!! ;)

[Andrew M]

thanks for the replies - I didn't know that this information was available from the CAA as I would have went to their website.

I hope they do put into place the +/- 5d limit, as compared to the +/- 3 limit for the first medical.

I think my current prescription is above this. Then again, there is always laser eye surgery !

[gdnhalley]

Andrew M
Another option is to get a foreign CPL, then be treated as a renewal rather than initial medical.
gordon

[bingoboy]

Is there any rational logic behind the difference between initial limits and subsequent limits ???

[Andrew M]

Seems odd to me, suppose if you start at a low prescription then due to old age the eye sight doesn't decrease too much, than if you started with a high prescription.

gdnhalley - such as an FAA CPL ???

[Ronbmy]

Circuit Basher

I think you are correct in NOT putting an interpretation on it.

I am not an engineer but I also have to deal in facts in my business.

Andrew M

Search through PPrune and you will find various threads on the ways and means of gaining a class1 medical certificate by going the FAA route.

It may be worth contacting the CAA - if they reply - and asking them.

http://www.jaa.nl/licensing/licensing_longterm_frame.html is a good read. Particularly pages 32-34.

Once you have ALL the information then make a decision and go for it.

[gdnhalley]

Andrew M
FAA CPL worked for me.
My impression about the different standards is that everyones eyesight tends to slowly deteriate over the years, but experience tends to increase, one more or less cancelling the other out. So that an experienced pilot will still tend to be safer overall.
gordon.

[Andrew M]

thanks for the advice

have Guide to getting a CPL book - I'll take another look through that also as well as looking through the internet.

[Stratocaster]

Have I been drinking too much or what ?
I remember previous posts (a few months ago) saying that since the first of Januay 2003 the JAA limits are the following:

Initial: +/- 5
Renewal: +/- 8

And if you already hold an ICAO CPL with a 1st class medical (obviously), you can even bypass the initial JAA.

Is it me or the regulations changed again ?

[flightfocus]

As far as I can tell the ICAO standard should set the pace for the others to follow. From their website:

[quote]
Q: What are the visual requirements for commercial pilots?


A: The current international regulations came into force in November 2001. There is no longer any dioptrical limits, only visual performance is considered. Distant visual acuity with or without correction shall be 6/9 or better in each eye separately, and binocular visual acuity shall be 6/6 or better. No limits apply to uncorrected visual acuity. In cases where the uncorrected visual acuity is less than 6/60, a full ophthalmic examination is required, the purpose of which is (1) to ascertain normal visual performance, and (2) to identify any significant pathology. The new regulations allow the use of contact lenses, and applicants who have undergone refractive surgery such as keratotomy, LASIK, etc. may be assessed as fit if they are free from those sequelae which are likely to interfere with safe flying. Some Contracting States, most notably the European JAA countries, and some airlines have more stringent requirements.

IT IS ALWAYS RECOMMENDED THAT PROSPECTIVE APPLICANTS CONTACT (A) THE NATIONAL LICENSING AUTHORITY AND (B) THE MEDICAL DIRECTOR OF THE AIRLINE TO WHICH THEY WANT TO APPLY FOR TRAINING OR EMPLOYMENT.

[quote]

In Australia I can hold a Class 1 (CPL/ATPL) standard medical with myopia of -6 & -5. :ok:

Go for it - but check with local authorities first.......:8

[Bomber Harris]

Crikey....some of you guys get a bit hot under the collar about being right......good luck on your CRM courses!!!!!

Anyway, my understanding is that the new rule (-5 diopter limit for initial) has been passed but the JAA website hasn't been updated yet. The CAA are operating to the newly passed rule which is perfectly understandable.

For a bit of irresistable sarcasim......You may find that the super perfectly correct factual quote you recieved was utterly and completly correct....in Dec 2000. However, little old always wrong me justs thinks there maybe an amendment (no.2) due for release which those silly people in the CAA seem to have incorrectly adopted. Here's a link to a sniff of it but I've no idea where you'll find a copy....except maybe the CAA!!!

http://www.jaa.nl/catalogue/new_releases.html

I really don't have all the info as there always a mass of rules and amendments and proposals and all sorts of legal stuff floating around. If you're in the UK then the CAA at gatwick are the people to call. They can also help you with cavet emptor problems whatever the f?!"£$k that is


Anyway, bst of luck with your research and wish the best of luck in your aviation career. By the way, flying training will give you a great lesson in how to tell people they are wrong...in a nice way!!