VISION THREAD (other than colour vision)
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: essex
Posts: 412
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
SteeleGBR
May I formally offer my "condolences" and welcome you to the ever growing band of illustrious day time only Euroland flyers !
Bad luck but why not read this thread carefully as all of the information has already been posted
Maybe we should all chip in a TENNER and pay for a legal test case against the CAA. 10% of the male pilot population in UK might pay for a few hours
May I formally offer my "condolences" and welcome you to the ever growing band of illustrious day time only Euroland flyers !
Bad luck but why not read this thread carefully as all of the information has already been posted
Maybe we should all chip in a TENNER and pay for a legal test case against the CAA. 10% of the male pilot population in UK might pay for a few hours
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Uk
Posts: 110
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
VFR vs IFR
Count me in unfazed. We need to give them a wake up call!!!
They say due to glass cockpit etc. colour discrimination is very important but we all know (the colour unsafe people) this is not entirely true.
If you believe that colourvision is important I think colour discrimination is more important for VFR pilots then it is for IFR pilots. We fly perfect under VFR conditions so what will be the problem when we will fly under IFR conditions???
It is rather strange!
Let hope the JAA will do something (positive) for us.
They say due to glass cockpit etc. colour discrimination is very important but we all know (the colour unsafe people) this is not entirely true.
If you believe that colourvision is important I think colour discrimination is more important for VFR pilots then it is for IFR pilots. We fly perfect under VFR conditions so what will be the problem when we will fly under IFR conditions???
It is rather strange!
Let hope the JAA will do something (positive) for us.
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Neither Here Nor There
Posts: 1,121
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I am currently working on preparing a technical / legal argument against exclusion of CVD pilots from professional flying and here is something very interesting from the HSE.
http://www.hse.gov.uk/pubns/ms7.pdf
You will note on page 3, paragraph 15, that it clearly states that colour vision naturally deteriorates with age and potentially affects ability to differentiate colours.
Taking this into consideration, surely, if flight safety is dependent on a pilot's ability to correctly discriminate between colours, the authorities have a legal and moral duty to test colour vision not only at initial medical but also at certain intervals.
This is obviously something that has not been recently discovered so one asks the question why it isn't done. After all, flight safety does not cease to be an issue just because the flight crew is older.
However, introducing such testing under current testing standards may result in a significant number of professional flight crew suddenly being told they can't fly any more. I could see BALPA going right up the wall against the suggestion of introducing any further periodical medical testing that could potentially result in the exclusion of its members from the flight deck. Then again, maybe BALPA would then join in the argument against the exclusion of CVD persons.
The other issue alluded to above is that of discrimination. The Disability Rights Commission states on its website (and I paraphrase) that the CAA cannot refuse to issue a Class One Medical to a prospective pilot unless it could prove that it affected competence to operate an aircraft safely. The present testing methods (and these lantern machines were built at least 30 years ago) do not, in any way, shape or form, test an individual's competence to fly and therefore cannot be seen to be an objective measuring stick for such competence. In that respect I think the authorities may be on a sticky wicket should someone wish to take them on down this route.
But as for £ 10 each, probably add a couple of 00's.
HTH
2close
http://www.hse.gov.uk/pubns/ms7.pdf
You will note on page 3, paragraph 15, that it clearly states that colour vision naturally deteriorates with age and potentially affects ability to differentiate colours.
Taking this into consideration, surely, if flight safety is dependent on a pilot's ability to correctly discriminate between colours, the authorities have a legal and moral duty to test colour vision not only at initial medical but also at certain intervals.
This is obviously something that has not been recently discovered so one asks the question why it isn't done. After all, flight safety does not cease to be an issue just because the flight crew is older.
However, introducing such testing under current testing standards may result in a significant number of professional flight crew suddenly being told they can't fly any more. I could see BALPA going right up the wall against the suggestion of introducing any further periodical medical testing that could potentially result in the exclusion of its members from the flight deck. Then again, maybe BALPA would then join in the argument against the exclusion of CVD persons.
The other issue alluded to above is that of discrimination. The Disability Rights Commission states on its website (and I paraphrase) that the CAA cannot refuse to issue a Class One Medical to a prospective pilot unless it could prove that it affected competence to operate an aircraft safely. The present testing methods (and these lantern machines were built at least 30 years ago) do not, in any way, shape or form, test an individual's competence to fly and therefore cannot be seen to be an objective measuring stick for such competence. In that respect I think the authorities may be on a sticky wicket should someone wish to take them on down this route.
But as for £ 10 each, probably add a couple of 00's.
HTH
2close
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: UK
Age: 36
Posts: 9
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
unfazed:
Yeah, I did a bit more research and my questions are answered.
Good point but they could pull the arguement about mis-understanding signals.
Maybe a test on an airfield (the CAA have one on their doorstep...) or a test flight would be more of a guide as to if you would be safe or unsafe to fly. That way you are in operational conditions. And if you can't operate in operational conditions...
Yeah, I did a bit more research and my questions are answered.
Originally Posted by 2close
The other issue alluded to above is that of discrimination. The Disability Rights Commission states on its website (and I paraphrase) that the CAA cannot refuse to issue a Class One Medical to a prospective pilot unless it could prove that it affected competence to operate an aircraft safely. The present testing methods (and these lantern machines were built at least 30 years ago) do not, in any way, shape or form, test an individual's competence to fly and therefore cannot be seen to be an objective measuring stick for such competence. In that respect I think the authorities may be on a sticky wicket should someone wish to take them on down this route.
Maybe a test on an airfield (the CAA have one on their doorstep...) or a test flight would be more of a guide as to if you would be safe or unsafe to fly. That way you are in operational conditions. And if you can't operate in operational conditions...
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Neither Here Nor There
Posts: 1,121
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The PAPI simulator is supposed to be a cutting edge bit of kit which has been developed by City University and by all accounts it has been accepted by the UK CAA and the FAA. They're now waiting for City Uni to release it for actual use.
Regarding light signals, this has been one area that I have looked at in my study and I feel it to be of very little, if any, consequence whatsoever to modern aviation. I will precis my findings below:
Firstly, the vast majority of aricraft these days have Comms equipment and thankfully the failure rate is very low (although I have personally experienced radio faiure twice).
An aircraft may not enter an ATZ without permission from ATC. The ATZ, at a minimum is 2 nm in diameter. I have used these lights in flight in daylight and they are (a) very small, (b) not that bright and (c) extremely difficult to discern from even 1 nm away, regardless of colour, even when you know where to look for them, therefore, seeing them from 2 - 2.5 nm away (i.e. outside the ATZ) in daylight is extremely difficult, if not impossible. At night, applying the same rules regarding entering the ATZ, when you would think that the light would be easier to see, in fact it gets lost from 2 - 2.5 nm away amongst (a) light pollution, (b) airport lights and (c) lights from other surrounding buildings and streets.
If an aerodrome does not have ATC and the issue of ATZ entry, circuit joining and landing is down to pilot discretion, of what consequence are light signals? None, apart form indicating to the aircraft that it may not land, for some reason. There are far easier and more identifiable ways of achieving this than firing coloured lights, e.g. placing a big 'X' or even a vehicle on the runway. Before anyone questions what would happen if the pilot didn't see the vehicle (a) what is the pilot doing operating an aircraft in the first place if he can't see a vehicle on the runway and (b) in that case, what guarantees are there that the pilot will see coloured light signals?
Regarding operation of signal guns in the cockpit, if operation of a mobile phone is considered a road safety hazard how can operation of a cumbersome signal gun not be considered a flight safety hazard? Also, it is not a legal requirement to carry coloured signal guns in the cockpit and I personally have never heard of anyone carrying such an instrument. Lastly, if a signal gun of sufficient luminance (to enable it to be seen from the ground) was carried and operated inside the cockpit, the light reflection off the inside of the cockpit perspex would in all probability cause serious impairment to the pilot's adapted night vision, thereby rendering any attempt at landing or continuing to fly extremely hazardous. Therefore, it is my contention that the use of colour signal guns from a closed cockpit should be banned as a flight safety risk.
Lastly, the many variations in colour controlled signals could be replaced by signals that are easier to identify and which mean the same on the ground as in the air. Get rid of all the variations and replace them with 3 different speed / duration flashing (easier to see than colours) lights that translate into GO/CONTINUE, STOP/WAIT, RETURN TO APRON/GO AWAY, e.g. Slow - long pulses for the first one, Medium - medium pulses for the middle one and Rapid - short pulses for the latter, similar to Marker Beacons. Use colours as well to aid the identification process but do not rely on one method of identification only.
I await constructive comments and debate eagerly, particularly those that will help develop the argument.
2close
Regarding light signals, this has been one area that I have looked at in my study and I feel it to be of very little, if any, consequence whatsoever to modern aviation. I will precis my findings below:
Firstly, the vast majority of aricraft these days have Comms equipment and thankfully the failure rate is very low (although I have personally experienced radio faiure twice).
An aircraft may not enter an ATZ without permission from ATC. The ATZ, at a minimum is 2 nm in diameter. I have used these lights in flight in daylight and they are (a) very small, (b) not that bright and (c) extremely difficult to discern from even 1 nm away, regardless of colour, even when you know where to look for them, therefore, seeing them from 2 - 2.5 nm away (i.e. outside the ATZ) in daylight is extremely difficult, if not impossible. At night, applying the same rules regarding entering the ATZ, when you would think that the light would be easier to see, in fact it gets lost from 2 - 2.5 nm away amongst (a) light pollution, (b) airport lights and (c) lights from other surrounding buildings and streets.
If an aerodrome does not have ATC and the issue of ATZ entry, circuit joining and landing is down to pilot discretion, of what consequence are light signals? None, apart form indicating to the aircraft that it may not land, for some reason. There are far easier and more identifiable ways of achieving this than firing coloured lights, e.g. placing a big 'X' or even a vehicle on the runway. Before anyone questions what would happen if the pilot didn't see the vehicle (a) what is the pilot doing operating an aircraft in the first place if he can't see a vehicle on the runway and (b) in that case, what guarantees are there that the pilot will see coloured light signals?
Regarding operation of signal guns in the cockpit, if operation of a mobile phone is considered a road safety hazard how can operation of a cumbersome signal gun not be considered a flight safety hazard? Also, it is not a legal requirement to carry coloured signal guns in the cockpit and I personally have never heard of anyone carrying such an instrument. Lastly, if a signal gun of sufficient luminance (to enable it to be seen from the ground) was carried and operated inside the cockpit, the light reflection off the inside of the cockpit perspex would in all probability cause serious impairment to the pilot's adapted night vision, thereby rendering any attempt at landing or continuing to fly extremely hazardous. Therefore, it is my contention that the use of colour signal guns from a closed cockpit should be banned as a flight safety risk.
Lastly, the many variations in colour controlled signals could be replaced by signals that are easier to identify and which mean the same on the ground as in the air. Get rid of all the variations and replace them with 3 different speed / duration flashing (easier to see than colours) lights that translate into GO/CONTINUE, STOP/WAIT, RETURN TO APRON/GO AWAY, e.g. Slow - long pulses for the first one, Medium - medium pulses for the middle one and Rapid - short pulses for the latter, similar to Marker Beacons. Use colours as well to aid the identification process but do not rely on one method of identification only.
I await constructive comments and debate eagerly, particularly those that will help develop the argument.
2close
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: essex
Posts: 412
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Just to chuck in my pennies worth
I fail to see why a CVD pilot is not allowed to fly paying passengers (for a company with an AOC) DURING DAYLIGHT HOURS VFR ?
I asked the question when restrictions were imposed and was told "because commercial pressures might mean that you would fly after sundown" - Nonsense - what if the AOC was for day VFR operations only? what if I might break all of the air navigation order (or is it just because CAA are bloody minded and inflexible)
Next question - why can I not teach on aircraft other than G reg and only in UK airspace?
Answer - because we have got around the JAR rules by issuing a UK JAR license with restrictions so they cannot be automatically accepted by others
But not everyone in the world is JAR you idiots ! and some of them have already said I can fly at night !
So if G on tail no night, If N on tail the night OK ,
Why am I dangerous teaching on a French registered Cessna but not a UK registered one? has it got any bearing on seeing colours? answer No - but our hands are tied bt regulations and this is a bit of a paperwork fudge to get aroung things - you should be grateful ! Well i'm not bloody grateful because you should change the regulations to make them logical, sensible and factual with basis on the condition.
OK to teach in UK but not in Ireland......
What the hell has all of this got to do with a very slight colour perception problem ????
Answer nothing !!!
And the ising on the cake???
UK only aircraft and UK only airspace restrictions can be removed when passing CPL exams OR gaining 700 hours......but I have passed the CPL exams that is why you have issued me this restricted license....ah but thats because you are cvd.....so I waited until I had 700 HOURS AND PAID THE FEE AND THEY REMOVED THE RESTRICTION FROM ONE AREA PAGE OF MY LICENSE BUT NOT ANOTHER ????
This is the same CAA that issued me a night rating aFTER CONVERSION TRAINING FROM faa AND THEN restricted license to night only and wouldn't refund the fee for the night rating
Where else would this nonsense prevail????? Want a test case I am your man !!!!
I fail to see why a CVD pilot is not allowed to fly paying passengers (for a company with an AOC) DURING DAYLIGHT HOURS VFR ?
I asked the question when restrictions were imposed and was told "because commercial pressures might mean that you would fly after sundown" - Nonsense - what if the AOC was for day VFR operations only? what if I might break all of the air navigation order (or is it just because CAA are bloody minded and inflexible)
Next question - why can I not teach on aircraft other than G reg and only in UK airspace?
Answer - because we have got around the JAR rules by issuing a UK JAR license with restrictions so they cannot be automatically accepted by others
But not everyone in the world is JAR you idiots ! and some of them have already said I can fly at night !
So if G on tail no night, If N on tail the night OK ,
Why am I dangerous teaching on a French registered Cessna but not a UK registered one? has it got any bearing on seeing colours? answer No - but our hands are tied bt regulations and this is a bit of a paperwork fudge to get aroung things - you should be grateful ! Well i'm not bloody grateful because you should change the regulations to make them logical, sensible and factual with basis on the condition.
OK to teach in UK but not in Ireland......
What the hell has all of this got to do with a very slight colour perception problem ????
Answer nothing !!!
And the ising on the cake???
UK only aircraft and UK only airspace restrictions can be removed when passing CPL exams OR gaining 700 hours......but I have passed the CPL exams that is why you have issued me this restricted license....ah but thats because you are cvd.....so I waited until I had 700 HOURS AND PAID THE FEE AND THEY REMOVED THE RESTRICTION FROM ONE AREA PAGE OF MY LICENSE BUT NOT ANOTHER ????
This is the same CAA that issued me a night rating aFTER CONVERSION TRAINING FROM faa AND THEN restricted license to night only and wouldn't refund the fee for the night rating
Where else would this nonsense prevail????? Want a test case I am your man !!!!
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Uk
Posts: 110
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Can anybody tell if it is possible to downloas a practical colour vision test.
I do not mean Ishihara but a Lanter software program like beyne or HW, anomaloscope etc.
I know that it exists! I saw screenshots on internet pages.
greetz
I do not mean Ishihara but a Lanter software program like beyne or HW, anomaloscope etc.
I know that it exists! I saw screenshots on internet pages.
greetz
Guest
Posts: n/a
Originally Posted by unfazed
UK only aircraft and UK only airspace restrictions can be removed when passing CPL exams OR gaining 700 hours......but I have passed the CPL exams that is why you have issued me this restricted license....ah but thats because you are cvd.....so I waited until I had 700 HOURS AND PAID THE FEE AND THEY REMOVED THE RESTRICTION FROM ONE AREA PAGE OF MY LICENSE BUT NOT ANOTHER ????
I've check the LASORS as well, but there so mention (maybe i need to check again) about us...
As i said many times on this forum, this is a pure discrimination against us... CAA knows very well that our conditions are good for flying... but there are 2 things that i really don't understand:
If we are so UNSAFE as they say, why they let us to fly VFR? they should know that IFR is safer and better than VFR!!!
and best of all... they don't let me fly IFR but i can get the IMC rating?!?!
.... .... .... .... ....
wf
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: essex
Posts: 412
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Windforce
I did get a UK night rating (when converting my FAA license) so I can get an IR and fly IFR
The joke is that I should not have a night rating (but hey they issued it and it was all legit), so the fact is that I can fly IFR but not at night
What a joke !!! And the fact is that any other CVD who tries to get a night rating from scratch whilst training in UK won't be able to and will be told that they are dangerous at night, will most likely accept that at face value and never know the joy of night flying.
Trouble is once you know that you can fly safely at night you don't take kindly to people telling you that you can't, or that you are a danger.
Never give up that's what I say ~~!!1
I did get a UK night rating (when converting my FAA license) so I can get an IR and fly IFR
The joke is that I should not have a night rating (but hey they issued it and it was all legit), so the fact is that I can fly IFR but not at night
What a joke !!! And the fact is that any other CVD who tries to get a night rating from scratch whilst training in UK won't be able to and will be told that they are dangerous at night, will most likely accept that at face value and never know the joy of night flying.
Trouble is once you know that you can fly safely at night you don't take kindly to people telling you that you can't, or that you are a danger.
Never give up that's what I say ~~!!1
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: UK
Posts: 62
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ok, here is the latest news.. I went to see my AMC Dr. and I told him that I mistakely omitted information in my initial medical certificate application form with them, specifically the box that refers to any medical certificate denial.. He told me that I never lied to him as I told him before the exam that I had a colour vision problem. He also told me that ticking the wrong box (saying no instead of yes) in my particular case was not a big deal because it wouldn“t make any difference in the examination process and that I passed and I shouldn“t worry. I even renewed my medical certificate with them.
My worry now is that the country that denied me the medical certificate once might do something for getting my new medical certificate revoked as they are apparently not accepting it. They are angry because finally I made it and now I have a valid JAA certificate.. Does anybody knows if they can really do something to get my medical certificate revoked? Do they have to accept my new medical certificate or no? If they don“t accept it, what happens if I get a JAA/CPL from other european country, can I fly in my country with that licence or I have to go through any accepting process?
My worry now is that the country that denied me the medical certificate once might do something for getting my new medical certificate revoked as they are apparently not accepting it. They are angry because finally I made it and now I have a valid JAA certificate.. Does anybody knows if they can really do something to get my medical certificate revoked? Do they have to accept my new medical certificate or no? If they don“t accept it, what happens if I get a JAA/CPL from other european country, can I fly in my country with that licence or I have to go through any accepting process?
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Newcastle, UK
Posts: 82
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Not sure what country you got your certificate in but if you omit information in the UK you are breaking the law. You sign a legally binding document stating you have not witheld any information.
Nothing might happen in your case. However, if you are ever involved in an aviation incident which is investigated then one of the things the investigators can do is pull your medical history. Then things get complicated for you.
Nothing might happen in your case. However, if you are ever involved in an aviation incident which is investigated then one of the things the investigators can do is pull your medical history. Then things get complicated for you.
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: UK
Posts: 62
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thanks waveydavey.. I know.. and because of that, I gave a written request to the AMC asking for ammendment of my medical form.. I forgot to tell it in my previous message. The Dr. told me that he will ammend it if neccessarily..
Join Date: May 2001
Posts: 794
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
PAPIs
Thanks for linking these pictures - I like the last one! That must have been some wide angle lens.
Don't forget that your PC screen may have been set up so that it is biased towards certain colours and, being a CVD, you may not notice this. It is therefore a bit hit and miss to say that you won't be able to see the colours on the new test. In a real aircraft they stick out to me like nothing else.
Two points:
1. The runway shape provides more clues than the PAPIs during the day. At night it is a different story but the lights at the side of the runway still provide a massive clue to the aircraft's position relative to the glideslope of the runway in front.
2. Some of the pilots that I know would have trouble even seeing the lights on a PC screen let alone in the cockpit as they are facing another challenge of the 6/4 in each eye kind. These pilots are a mixture of military, commercial and private.
Let's hope this new test is a winner and is adopted by the CAA as quick as possible. It could be the start of a practical assessment of a person's ability to fly and interpret information rather than reliance upon outdated medical tests.
Don't forget that your PC screen may have been set up so that it is biased towards certain colours and, being a CVD, you may not notice this. It is therefore a bit hit and miss to say that you won't be able to see the colours on the new test. In a real aircraft they stick out to me like nothing else.
Two points:
1. The runway shape provides more clues than the PAPIs during the day. At night it is a different story but the lights at the side of the runway still provide a massive clue to the aircraft's position relative to the glideslope of the runway in front.
2. Some of the pilots that I know would have trouble even seeing the lights on a PC screen let alone in the cockpit as they are facing another challenge of the 6/4 in each eye kind. These pilots are a mixture of military, commercial and private.
Let's hope this new test is a winner and is adopted by the CAA as quick as possible. It could be the start of a practical assessment of a person's ability to fly and interpret information rather than reliance upon outdated medical tests.
Guest
Posts: n/a
Cheers for the input gijoe.
I've come across the whole LCD screen and pixels versus actual filament bulbs before. To be honest I haven't done enough real world flying to effectively tell the difference. The last time I flew and experienced UK PAPIs was into EGHI (Southampton) where the sun was at our nose, the plexiglass was somewhat cracked in a few places and I had sunglasses on. So I couldn't really tell what the PAPI lights were showing.
However as you say looking at the shape of the runway is a very good indicator to your ideal vertical profile and I feel that I concerntrate more on this than guidance from PAPIS, VASIs and so forth. After all on every landing you can be sure that the same visual cue will be there; the runway. Not all airports and aerodromes have visual cues like PAPIs etc.
When I landed at Cairns in Oz in a Tiger Moth they have great visual landing aids. Its like a PAPI but in a T bar shape. Don't want to sound patronising but to people that haven't seen them, they're basically a line of white lights have white lights above and below the 'bar' If you're dead on glide scope you will just see a white bar. High and you'll see the white bar with incremental white dots above it, and below GS the reverse. I think if you go so low you should see complete red however you need to be driving into the airport to see that!
I looked at an optician report from last year and realised I had 6/4 vision in each eye. He said that theres no need for me to have a perscription but perhaps I will if I am to get the class 1.
I've come across the whole LCD screen and pixels versus actual filament bulbs before. To be honest I haven't done enough real world flying to effectively tell the difference. The last time I flew and experienced UK PAPIs was into EGHI (Southampton) where the sun was at our nose, the plexiglass was somewhat cracked in a few places and I had sunglasses on. So I couldn't really tell what the PAPI lights were showing.
However as you say looking at the shape of the runway is a very good indicator to your ideal vertical profile and I feel that I concerntrate more on this than guidance from PAPIS, VASIs and so forth. After all on every landing you can be sure that the same visual cue will be there; the runway. Not all airports and aerodromes have visual cues like PAPIs etc.
When I landed at Cairns in Oz in a Tiger Moth they have great visual landing aids. Its like a PAPI but in a T bar shape. Don't want to sound patronising but to people that haven't seen them, they're basically a line of white lights have white lights above and below the 'bar' If you're dead on glide scope you will just see a white bar. High and you'll see the white bar with incremental white dots above it, and below GS the reverse. I think if you go so low you should see complete red however you need to be driving into the airport to see that!
I looked at an optician report from last year and realised I had 6/4 vision in each eye. He said that theres no need for me to have a perscription but perhaps I will if I am to get the class 1.
Last edited by shgsaint; 29th Sep 2008 at 17:18.
Guest
Posts: n/a
Cool!
I never knew what it exactly meant.
This is my opticians card (from last year)
Right Eye:
Sphere: 8 (sideways?)
Cyl: 0.25 (line above the 0)
Axis: 80
Left Eye:
Sphere: same as right
Cyl: same as right
Axis: same as right
Va
Right:
Dist 6/4 -1
Near N4.5
Left:
Dist 6/4
Near N4.5
Unaided vision
Right 6/4 -3
Left 6/4 -2
Not too sure what most of it means however if I can see things at 6 feet what others can only see at 4 i'm a happy bunny!
I never knew what it exactly meant.
This is my opticians card (from last year)
Right Eye:
Sphere: 8 (sideways?)
Cyl: 0.25 (line above the 0)
Axis: 80
Left Eye:
Sphere: same as right
Cyl: same as right
Axis: same as right
Va
Right:
Dist 6/4 -1
Near N4.5
Left:
Dist 6/4
Near N4.5
Unaided vision
Right 6/4 -3
Left 6/4 -2
Not too sure what most of it means however if I can see things at 6 feet what others can only see at 4 i'm a happy bunny!
Last edited by shgsaint; 29th Sep 2008 at 17:15.
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Neither Here Nor There
Posts: 1,121
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
To respond to Eastsiders comment on the PAPI simulator, there appears to be some confusion here.
I have it directly from the horse's mouth that the CAA have 'approved' it and are only waiting on City University to pull their finger out and certify it for commercial use. In fact, they are quite frustrated about the length of time it is taking them, especially considering they have given them scores of names for testing over the past couple of years, my own included. That was in May 2005 and I have heard nothing from them.
2close
I have it directly from the horse's mouth that the CAA have 'approved' it and are only waiting on City University to pull their finger out and certify it for commercial use. In fact, they are quite frustrated about the length of time it is taking them, especially considering they have given them scores of names for testing over the past couple of years, my own included. That was in May 2005 and I have heard nothing from them.
2close
Join Date: May 2001
Posts: 794
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
PAPI test
The wheels of the research machine turn very, very slowly sometimes but it is occasionally worth the wait. This will, hopefully for all of those on here, be one of those occasions.
2close please could you expand on the exact state of play about the CAA approving the PAPI test? If you're not happy to here then please PM me.
Thanks
G
2close please could you expand on the exact state of play about the CAA approving the PAPI test? If you're not happy to here then please PM me.
Thanks
G