The best pilot sunglasses
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: LHR/EGLL
Age: 45
Posts: 4,392
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If anyone's interested, Sunglasses Time (there's one at Bicester Village, and one at MacArthur Glen Village Swindon) have an offer at the moment of buy one, get one free on Serengetis.
I just bought two pairs for £63.
I just bought two pairs for £63.
Last edited by Gonzo; 17th Nov 2005 at 21:41.
Join Date: May 2005
Location: here
Posts: 11
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well, seein' as we're all bein' unscientific an' unedumacated about it ..... when I wanted an answer for this in the '70s, I went to an optometrist who fitted me out with Carl Zeiss lenses. Yup, the same mob that make, amongst other things, the lenses fitted to professional cameras. An' das good enough fer me.
The beauty of having sunnies made up is that you can pick whatever frame you want. Sometimes, I'd get a cheaper frame, such as a Rodenstock, but hell, you can get any sort you want.
As was mentioned earlier: what price yer eyes?
An' das ma 5o cents worf!
The beauty of having sunnies made up is that you can pick whatever frame you want. Sometimes, I'd get a cheaper frame, such as a Rodenstock, but hell, you can get any sort you want.
As was mentioned earlier: what price yer eyes?
An' das ma 5o cents worf!
For the last 30 years I have used only Carl Zeiss Dark Umbral sunglass lenses, set in aviator teardrop frames with very thin side-wings so they don't become uncomfortable under a headset.
They'll see me out for the rest of my flying. They are optical glass and quite soft, so handle with care.
They'll see me out for the rest of my flying. They are optical glass and quite soft, so handle with care.
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: OMAN
Posts: 27
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Just wondering.....
If photocromatic lenses are not good because they don't get lighter fast enough when encountering cloud layers....how about the rest of regular sunglasses that don't change at all....Would those be better?
Serengeti's also have a what they call gradient lenses in which the bottom part of the lense has a lighter tone than the top improving your instrument view in this type of situations...
.....just my 50 cents.
Scube
If photocromatic lenses are not good because they don't get lighter fast enough when encountering cloud layers....how about the rest of regular sunglasses that don't change at all....Would those be better?
Serengeti's also have a what they call gradient lenses in which the bottom part of the lense has a lighter tone than the top improving your instrument view in this type of situations...
.....just my 50 cents.
Scube
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: OMAN
Posts: 27
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I just read this on a web page. This seems to give pretty accurate info about this topic.
Here it goes:
Relay-Version: B 2.11 6/12/87; site scorn
Path: uunet!clyde.concordia.ca!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!wuarchive!julius.cs.ui uc.edu!apple!voder!pyramid!leadsv!claude
From: [email protected] (Claude Goldsmith)
Newsgroups: rec.aviation
Subject: How Should Pilots Select Sunglasses?
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
Date: Thu, 08 Nov 90 08:32:21 PST
Reply-To: [email protected] (Claude Goldsmith)
Distribution: na
Organization: LMSC-LEADS, Sunnyvale, Ca.
Lines: 110
The newsletter published by USAIG in August has an interesting
article dealing with sunglasses for aviators. Since I don't have a
scanner handy and I'm a 2 finger typist, I'm not going to copy the
whole thing here. However some of the data and conclusions are
interesting and useful, so I'll extract a few things.
>From Aviation Insurance News; volume 21; number 4.
"There are several excellent reasons to wear sunglasses. It is
generally accepted that glare is harmful to the eye, and that
protection from glare is therefore therapeutic, even though studies
show that only 22 percent of the population reacts adversely to
glare."
"The older eye compares unfavorably with the younger one. Since
visual performance is directly related to image luminance, it follows
that the older eye, which is less responsive to changes in light
levels, is at a disadvantage. There are several reasons for this.
First, there is less increase in pupilary size with decreased
luminance. Second, changes in the lens and vitreous humor make the
older eye more sensitive to glare. Third, there is an overall
reduction in the transmission of light. This translates directly to
a need for more light to be able to see, and to age-related problems
with visual acuity in diminished light... Older pilots, therefore,
should wear sunglasses that allow the passage of more light to the
retina. It has been reported that to obtain the same contrast
detection performance as a 20-year-old, a 40-year-old needs 40
percent more light, and a 60-year-old needs 100 percent more light"
"A high-level light source, such as glare, causes pupilary
constriction. The smaller the aperature through which the eye must
see, the darker is the immage created on the retina... "
"The amount of light blocked by sunglasses is the key to how much
decrement takes place in visual acuity while the glasses are actually
in place. This adverse effect exists only while the glasses are
actually in place, and does not persist after the glasses have been
removed. Generally, the darker the lens, the larger the loss. This
is the reason why baseball players delay flipping down their
sunglasses from beneath their cap visors until they have located the
arcing ball."
"...A lens that darkens or lightens according to the intensity of
ambient light, or truly photosensitive lens, would appear to be the
most desireable, especially since the pilot needs metered light
abatement that is based on the severity of the exposure. However
those lenses that require UV-B to make them darken will not darken
when worn inside the airplane since UV-B does not penetrate the
canopy or windows. Thus, what appears to be the best answer to the
changeable needs of the cockpit, photochromatic lenses, turns out not
to be an answer at all."
"The amount of light that passes through a lens is the most critical
factor in selecting sunglasses to effect a compromise between visual
decrement, color distortion and glare or high ambient light
protection. Lenses are catagorized as being between a one and a four
according to percent of light transmission and it's basic color.
Thus, you can have a brown 3, gray 4, yellow 1, green 2 or any
combination of a color and a number. A number 1 lens cuts 20 percent
of available light, barely enough to be noticed, and except for
yellow, useful only in the world of fashion. A number 2 lens blocks
70 percent. A number 3 lens blocks 85 percent and a number 4 lens
blocks 95 percent. There is no place in aviation for a number 4 lens
of any color because of the severe decrement in visual acuity,
(though such lenses are available). A pilot with 20/20 vision
wearing number 4 glasses has a visual acuity between 20/40 and 20/60
while airborne in the cockpit, even though he could be a comfortable
20/20 on the sunbathed ski slopes using the same glasses."
"A Number 3 lens has utility only in unusually high light situations
such as flying into the sun, or flying VFR just on top in bright sun.
Interestingly, it is Number 3 lenses that are in common usage without
regard for whether acuity suffers. Visual acuity while wearing
Number 3 lenses can be degraded to an average of 20/30."
"The Number 2 lens should be the aviators friend, and then only when
judiciously worn. A 30 percent light transmission presents the world
with the same amount of light as that found in a 70 percent eclipse
of the sun. That is what these glasses do. Subdued light is the
result. Visual acuity is reduced minimally. Wearing Brown 2
glasses, the 20/20 pilot remains almost 20/20. Looking for traffic,
the pilot should remove them. As soon as meteorological conditions
permit, they should be returned to the case or pocket. Wear Yellow 1
glasses in haze or in the soup, and then only if they improve
vision."
"The effect of even a small difference in acuity on visual performance
is commonly underestimated." So say the investigators at the U.S.
Naval Aerospace Medical Research Laboratory in their December 1986
report on the use of sunglasses and visors by U.S. Navy fighter
pilots. Visor wearers were at a 1.8 nautical mile disadvantage in
sighting a target compared to those not so encumbered."
"Sunglasses should not be worn merely because they are available.
Ambient light translates directly into visual acuity. Losses in the
former impact the latter."
"Aviators sunglasses should be glass or polycarbonate; should transmit
not less than 25 percent of available light; should not distort
colors, distances, or shapes; should nullify the bluring of shortwave
reflected blue; and should increase contrast without
misrepresentation. Their adverse effect of visual acuity must be
known and they should not be worn during conditions of diminished
light. There can be special times when an adjunct pair of Yellow 1
glasses (that are not sunglasses) can improve vision..."
--
note: photochromatic lenses would enter a number 2 type lense in their lighter tone stage but it seems that cockpit glass will affect the photochromatic ability of the lenses to get darker, to some point.
Here it goes:
Relay-Version: B 2.11 6/12/87; site scorn
Path: uunet!clyde.concordia.ca!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!wuarchive!julius.cs.ui uc.edu!apple!voder!pyramid!leadsv!claude
From: [email protected] (Claude Goldsmith)
Newsgroups: rec.aviation
Subject: How Should Pilots Select Sunglasses?
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
Date: Thu, 08 Nov 90 08:32:21 PST
Reply-To: [email protected] (Claude Goldsmith)
Distribution: na
Organization: LMSC-LEADS, Sunnyvale, Ca.
Lines: 110
The newsletter published by USAIG in August has an interesting
article dealing with sunglasses for aviators. Since I don't have a
scanner handy and I'm a 2 finger typist, I'm not going to copy the
whole thing here. However some of the data and conclusions are
interesting and useful, so I'll extract a few things.
>From Aviation Insurance News; volume 21; number 4.
"There are several excellent reasons to wear sunglasses. It is
generally accepted that glare is harmful to the eye, and that
protection from glare is therefore therapeutic, even though studies
show that only 22 percent of the population reacts adversely to
glare."
"The older eye compares unfavorably with the younger one. Since
visual performance is directly related to image luminance, it follows
that the older eye, which is less responsive to changes in light
levels, is at a disadvantage. There are several reasons for this.
First, there is less increase in pupilary size with decreased
luminance. Second, changes in the lens and vitreous humor make the
older eye more sensitive to glare. Third, there is an overall
reduction in the transmission of light. This translates directly to
a need for more light to be able to see, and to age-related problems
with visual acuity in diminished light... Older pilots, therefore,
should wear sunglasses that allow the passage of more light to the
retina. It has been reported that to obtain the same contrast
detection performance as a 20-year-old, a 40-year-old needs 40
percent more light, and a 60-year-old needs 100 percent more light"
"A high-level light source, such as glare, causes pupilary
constriction. The smaller the aperature through which the eye must
see, the darker is the immage created on the retina... "
"The amount of light blocked by sunglasses is the key to how much
decrement takes place in visual acuity while the glasses are actually
in place. This adverse effect exists only while the glasses are
actually in place, and does not persist after the glasses have been
removed. Generally, the darker the lens, the larger the loss. This
is the reason why baseball players delay flipping down their
sunglasses from beneath their cap visors until they have located the
arcing ball."
"...A lens that darkens or lightens according to the intensity of
ambient light, or truly photosensitive lens, would appear to be the
most desireable, especially since the pilot needs metered light
abatement that is based on the severity of the exposure. However
those lenses that require UV-B to make them darken will not darken
when worn inside the airplane since UV-B does not penetrate the
canopy or windows. Thus, what appears to be the best answer to the
changeable needs of the cockpit, photochromatic lenses, turns out not
to be an answer at all."
"The amount of light that passes through a lens is the most critical
factor in selecting sunglasses to effect a compromise between visual
decrement, color distortion and glare or high ambient light
protection. Lenses are catagorized as being between a one and a four
according to percent of light transmission and it's basic color.
Thus, you can have a brown 3, gray 4, yellow 1, green 2 or any
combination of a color and a number. A number 1 lens cuts 20 percent
of available light, barely enough to be noticed, and except for
yellow, useful only in the world of fashion. A number 2 lens blocks
70 percent. A number 3 lens blocks 85 percent and a number 4 lens
blocks 95 percent. There is no place in aviation for a number 4 lens
of any color because of the severe decrement in visual acuity,
(though such lenses are available). A pilot with 20/20 vision
wearing number 4 glasses has a visual acuity between 20/40 and 20/60
while airborne in the cockpit, even though he could be a comfortable
20/20 on the sunbathed ski slopes using the same glasses."
"A Number 3 lens has utility only in unusually high light situations
such as flying into the sun, or flying VFR just on top in bright sun.
Interestingly, it is Number 3 lenses that are in common usage without
regard for whether acuity suffers. Visual acuity while wearing
Number 3 lenses can be degraded to an average of 20/30."
"The Number 2 lens should be the aviators friend, and then only when
judiciously worn. A 30 percent light transmission presents the world
with the same amount of light as that found in a 70 percent eclipse
of the sun. That is what these glasses do. Subdued light is the
result. Visual acuity is reduced minimally. Wearing Brown 2
glasses, the 20/20 pilot remains almost 20/20. Looking for traffic,
the pilot should remove them. As soon as meteorological conditions
permit, they should be returned to the case or pocket. Wear Yellow 1
glasses in haze or in the soup, and then only if they improve
vision."
"The effect of even a small difference in acuity on visual performance
is commonly underestimated." So say the investigators at the U.S.
Naval Aerospace Medical Research Laboratory in their December 1986
report on the use of sunglasses and visors by U.S. Navy fighter
pilots. Visor wearers were at a 1.8 nautical mile disadvantage in
sighting a target compared to those not so encumbered."
"Sunglasses should not be worn merely because they are available.
Ambient light translates directly into visual acuity. Losses in the
former impact the latter."
"Aviators sunglasses should be glass or polycarbonate; should transmit
not less than 25 percent of available light; should not distort
colors, distances, or shapes; should nullify the bluring of shortwave
reflected blue; and should increase contrast without
misrepresentation. Their adverse effect of visual acuity must be
known and they should not be worn during conditions of diminished
light. There can be special times when an adjunct pair of Yellow 1
glasses (that are not sunglasses) can improve vision..."
--
note: photochromatic lenses would enter a number 2 type lense in their lighter tone stage but it seems that cockpit glass will affect the photochromatic ability of the lenses to get darker, to some point.
Join Date: Apr 1999
Posts: 96
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I want no unseemly mirth at this very informative posting.
Many years ago on Hong Kong TV there was an advert featuring a now long retired CX very senior pilot, (CXVSP)
The ad went something like this.
CXVSP, seated at the controls, turned round to the camera behind his seat with his hands raised and said something like
"I fly hundreds of thousands of passengers every year and their safety is in these hands. I need the best protection for my eyes I can get and I use Zeiss," (puts on sunglasses).
"Zeiss for my eyes!!"
There you have it ladies and gentlemen from the most impeccable of sources.
Remember now, no laughing (choke)
Many years ago on Hong Kong TV there was an advert featuring a now long retired CX very senior pilot, (CXVSP)
The ad went something like this.
CXVSP, seated at the controls, turned round to the camera behind his seat with his hands raised and said something like
"I fly hundreds of thousands of passengers every year and their safety is in these hands. I need the best protection for my eyes I can get and I use Zeiss," (puts on sunglasses).
"Zeiss for my eyes!!"
There you have it ladies and gentlemen from the most impeccable of sources.
Remember now, no laughing (choke)
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: THE MANGROVE SWAMPS (RETIRED)
Posts: 201
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I always wore Raybans, tried Oakleys and various other types at various times, then just a few years before I retired I discovered Serengetti Velocity sunglasses with titanium frames and drivers gradient lenses and wished I'd found them 20 years before. When my original pair were stolen I went straight out and bought an identical pair. I had a look in Sunglass hut today and they still sell them there. They're not cheap, but worth every penny in my opinion.
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Emerald, Vic, Aust
Posts: 183
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Only just noticed this thread and had a quick read.
Being in Australia and travelling Outback the topic of glare and sunnies is very topical for me. It's 42 degress here today and extreme UV.
One point that does not seem to have been stressed is the long term implications of glare. Answer = cataracts and vision deterioration. (And no laser surgery). Direct quote from a medical vision site - "Most cataracts occur as a result of ageing and long term exposure to UV light. Making sunglass wear very important as preventative measure."
Pilots are exposed to significant UV, with far less atmosphere layer protection, and the wearing of good sunglasses is vital to good vision in old age - particularly as life expectations are longer now. My father, aged 92, spent much of his life at open sporting functions without sunglasses - after several ops including large $ expenses he has peripheral vision but little else.
I wear Randolphs, purchased from the USA. Dropped and damaged my first pair, their response was top class. They have the flat sections sitting nicely under my headset and soft seats on the nose bridge. I wear them driving, flying, drinking. Only trap is the flat sides allow them to fall off if you bend over quickly - they are best worn with one of those grandfather cords arouns the neck, particularly as I have to revert to my prescription glasses about 5 minutes before landing to get my long distance vision spot on.
Main reason for this post is that anyone reading this thread who does NOT wear good sunglasses - not just in the cockpit but anywhere in the sun - needs to be aware that it can catch up in our grumpy old age.
Being in Australia and travelling Outback the topic of glare and sunnies is very topical for me. It's 42 degress here today and extreme UV.
One point that does not seem to have been stressed is the long term implications of glare. Answer = cataracts and vision deterioration. (And no laser surgery). Direct quote from a medical vision site - "Most cataracts occur as a result of ageing and long term exposure to UV light. Making sunglass wear very important as preventative measure."
Pilots are exposed to significant UV, with far less atmosphere layer protection, and the wearing of good sunglasses is vital to good vision in old age - particularly as life expectations are longer now. My father, aged 92, spent much of his life at open sporting functions without sunglasses - after several ops including large $ expenses he has peripheral vision but little else.
I wear Randolphs, purchased from the USA. Dropped and damaged my first pair, their response was top class. They have the flat sections sitting nicely under my headset and soft seats on the nose bridge. I wear them driving, flying, drinking. Only trap is the flat sides allow them to fall off if you bend over quickly - they are best worn with one of those grandfather cords arouns the neck, particularly as I have to revert to my prescription glasses about 5 minutes before landing to get my long distance vision spot on.
Main reason for this post is that anyone reading this thread who does NOT wear good sunglasses - not just in the cockpit but anywhere in the sun - needs to be aware that it can catch up in our grumpy old age.
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: -
Posts: 174
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Prescription?
I have had Srengettis recommended before, also this thread indicates they are a a good choice.
I am slightly nearsighted, enough for it to be in my medical. So where can I get a pair of Serengettis with prescription glasses? Just to find the glasses themselves seems to be a problem, when I finally found some, they only had a small selection.
I am slightly nearsighted, enough for it to be in my medical. So where can I get a pair of Serengettis with prescription glasses? Just to find the glasses themselves seems to be a problem, when I finally found some, they only had a small selection.
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: SE UK
Posts: 199
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Perscription Sunny's
well the title says it. I currently have a pair of ray bans with perscription lenses from my local optician. But, since I am about to take to the skies once more, I think i can treat myself.
I know Oakleys do there own perscriptions, anyone know if serengeti does or any other good makes? Its just I think mine are not dark enough.
cheers
d2k
I know Oakleys do there own perscriptions, anyone know if serengeti does or any other good makes? Its just I think mine are not dark enough.
cheers
d2k
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Australia
Age: 44
Posts: 214
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: Perscription Sunny's
I have the prescription Ray Bans, but before I got them I was wearing a pair of Serengeti's. From what I was told, you can't have lenses that are too curved to be prescriptions because they'll just warp everything you see. But also with Serengeti's you probably don't wanna take those lenses out. That's what makes the glasses so good. I've just gotten my Ray Bans tinted to a darker shade.
Hope that helps!
Hope that helps!
Join Date: Jan 1999
Location: the state of denial
Posts: 68
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: Perscription Sunny's
If you look at the different threads dealing with sunnies you'll notice that Serengeties are recommended more often than not. Serengeties are available in prescription lenses even for their more curved frames (such as the Lassen frame).
http://www.serengeti-eyewear.com/support/rx_program.cfm
It did take some hunting on my part to find that authentic Serengeti lenses could actually be fitted to the more curved frames; one of the main dealers around here insisted that they cannot supply authentic lenses to, for example, the Lassen frame. I think you'll find that you have to locate a dealer that gets their lenses supplied from the States as the more curved lenses do not seem to be manufactured in Europe. Another alternative is to order them online.
http://www.athleticoptics.com/defaul...orts&MfgrID=60
On a personal note, based on all the discussion here, I'll definitely be ordering authentic prescription Serengeties for my next pair of sunnies.
Cosmo
http://www.serengeti-eyewear.com/support/rx_program.cfm
It did take some hunting on my part to find that authentic Serengeti lenses could actually be fitted to the more curved frames; one of the main dealers around here insisted that they cannot supply authentic lenses to, for example, the Lassen frame. I think you'll find that you have to locate a dealer that gets their lenses supplied from the States as the more curved lenses do not seem to be manufactured in Europe. Another alternative is to order them online.
http://www.athleticoptics.com/defaul...orts&MfgrID=60
On a personal note, based on all the discussion here, I'll definitely be ordering authentic prescription Serengeties for my next pair of sunnies.
Cosmo
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Canada
Age: 46
Posts: 67
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: The best pilot sunglasses
i posted this earlier in the thread but was modded. i'll try again.
private pilot magazine did a study a little while back on the best sunglasses for aviation. oakley came out on top for each category.
you can check out the results of the study here:
http://oakley.com/private_pilot/
obviously the results are on the oakley site seeing as they did very well. please keep in mind the original study was performed by private pilot magazine NOT oakley.
private pilot magazine did a study a little while back on the best sunglasses for aviation. oakley came out on top for each category.
you can check out the results of the study here:
http://oakley.com/private_pilot/
obviously the results are on the oakley site seeing as they did very well. please keep in mind the original study was performed by private pilot magazine NOT oakley.
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: UK
Posts: 550
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: The best pilot sunglasses
These guys are excellent if you need any prescription sunglasses including serengeti.
http://www.opticsplanet.net/sunglasses.html
http://www.opticsplanet.net/sunglasses.html
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: UK
Posts: 135
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I have lost a fantastic pair of ray-bans that I had. Don't know what model but they were the ones the guys had in men in black if thats any help. Was very sad to lose them but am looking to replace them. Oakleys are the current favourite for both their technical value and the nice design. Thinking a pair of wires 2.0 with either blue or fire lenses. Anyone have any experience of this model?
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: OMAN
Posts: 27
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Anybody knows about the difference between serenguetis made in Italy and Japan?
Are Japan's Serenguetis fake? It seems weird but sometimes I check on a website and the same internet shop has serengetis made in both countries and the price doesn't vary. Anybody knows?
Scube.
Are Japan's Serenguetis fake? It seems weird but sometimes I check on a website and the same internet shop has serengetis made in both countries and the price doesn't vary. Anybody knows?
Scube.
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Western Australia
Age: 51
Posts: 70
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ray Bans for under $200(AUS)
Ray-Ban’s ‘Sidestreet - RB3183’. Colour Code - 014/73 (Frame – ‘Brown’, Lenses – ‘APX Brown’)
Metal, frameless lenses. Really thin arms so headset stays nice and snug (mine are David Clarke 13.4’s) and keep outside noise to an absolute minimum. Not a big fan of Ray-Ban till now, when I realised they did some nice sets, unlike those awful 70’s style Aviators! These are well made, light, really comfortable & wrapped to avoid light leaking into your peripheral vision. Non-polarised variety of course, and rated category 3 on Ray-Bans tint rating. (Darkest is 4, which RB do not recommend for driving or flying). I find the brown lens makes it much easier to see the instruments and makes the outside seem a shade lighter compared to Cat. 3 lens with a green or grey tint. Still dark enough to take the sting away from that harsh WA sun.
Would’ve loved titanium, super-thin armed Maui Jims, but these were way out of my budget. Sertengetis come highly recommended too, but again too pricey for me. Pooh. Killer Loop did some incredibly thin-armed frameless, good looking sets at a great price, but all the ones available to me had mirror lenses which are apparently not recommended.
Ray Bans have great lenses, great fit, take good care of your eyes and whilst they still cost a pretty penny, they’re a good choice for people without copious amounts of money to burn!
AUS $179.95. From Sunglass Hut – have 14 day return policy if you don’t like them or work as well as you’d expect. 1 year guarantee. If broken (I was told ‘I don’t care if you sit on them or run over them deliberately with a truck’!), they’ll give you a brand new replacement pair at half the price. Sweet.
Metal, frameless lenses. Really thin arms so headset stays nice and snug (mine are David Clarke 13.4’s) and keep outside noise to an absolute minimum. Not a big fan of Ray-Ban till now, when I realised they did some nice sets, unlike those awful 70’s style Aviators! These are well made, light, really comfortable & wrapped to avoid light leaking into your peripheral vision. Non-polarised variety of course, and rated category 3 on Ray-Bans tint rating. (Darkest is 4, which RB do not recommend for driving or flying). I find the brown lens makes it much easier to see the instruments and makes the outside seem a shade lighter compared to Cat. 3 lens with a green or grey tint. Still dark enough to take the sting away from that harsh WA sun.
Would’ve loved titanium, super-thin armed Maui Jims, but these were way out of my budget. Sertengetis come highly recommended too, but again too pricey for me. Pooh. Killer Loop did some incredibly thin-armed frameless, good looking sets at a great price, but all the ones available to me had mirror lenses which are apparently not recommended.
Ray Bans have great lenses, great fit, take good care of your eyes and whilst they still cost a pretty penny, they’re a good choice for people without copious amounts of money to burn!
AUS $179.95. From Sunglass Hut – have 14 day return policy if you don’t like them or work as well as you’d expect. 1 year guarantee. If broken (I was told ‘I don’t care if you sit on them or run over them deliberately with a truck’!), they’ll give you a brand new replacement pair at half the price. Sweet.
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: uk
Posts: 139
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Its been a while since I last graced a cockpit but I always used Randolph Aviators.
I'm amazed that so few have mentioned them?? The Randolph Aviator standard issue sunglasses for U.S. armed forces pilots, Top Gun Flying School and NASA.
Things mush of change since I've retired
Info
http://www.avidaviator.com/randolph_sunglasses.html
www.randolphusa.com
I'm amazed that so few have mentioned them?? The Randolph Aviator standard issue sunglasses for U.S. armed forces pilots, Top Gun Flying School and NASA.
Things mush of change since I've retired
Info
http://www.avidaviator.com/randolph_sunglasses.html
www.randolphusa.com
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 119
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
To Polarize or not to Polarize
Had 1000 hours of GA instruction time using some nice REVO polarized wraparounds which were fantastic, I only wish that I had invested as much on protecting my ears. However now fly A320/1s and the polarized sunnies cause distracting discolouration effects through the windshield and also completely black out the LCD display on the radio panel. I changed to some trendy narrow Revos but they let too much light in around the side and were soon disgarded. I still swear by the Revos and have some non polarized wraparounds which are great but pricey. In summary - Polarized are not helpful in an airliner!