Mr C Hinecap

If I told you that if you put them each into that google thingy, then the very first results were the answers, would that help?

mattb999

In addition to dave perry's post, there is the Digit Recall test that gives you a set of numbers to look at for about 5 seconds. You are then asked how many of a certain number appeared in the sequence. There can be up to 15 numbers in one sequence so it does get quite tricky!

I used the Nintendo DS brain trainer to help me with my arithmetic (which features heavily) and also memory. There are plenty of free resources to use on the internet to help you with your short term memory and your mental maths.

As airborne artist states, the medical is thorough. They take about 4 viles of blood, hook you up to an ECG for about 10 minutes, a full examination by the doctor, your weight, height, arms and legs are all measured. The optician then looks at your eyes, does some corneal mapping, field of vision tests, colour perception and 3D perception. It's in depth. I had to repeat a set of my blood tests (which is apparently quite common) at my GP, I am still waiting my ECG results from the 18th Feb so you don't go away knowing whether you're medically fit or not!!

stuart955

Not been here for a while, and I'd first like to apologise for the question I'm about to ask. It regards eye tests and eye sight requirements so feel free to ignore if you're sick to death of questions about entry standards etc. (I have tried google but my problem is pretty specific)

Some of you may remember me asking some questions about generally trying to be a pilot for the RAF a few months ago. Well, now it's changed to FAA and my application's well under way - got my sift interview on Friday morning and feeling reasonably confident, touch wood.

My question concerns eyesight. My scores have all come out quite well, my vision being 6/5 and ' near aided/unaided' N4, which I'm told is better than N5 (the required score).

Now for the bit I'm a bit concerned about.

Here's a link to the list of eyesight requirements which a lot of you have probably come across before.
http://www.assoc-optometrists.org/up...af_july_07.pdf

My scores in the refraction range column are as follows:
Sphere R +0.25 L +0.50
Cylinder R -0.50 L -0.25

So according to the requirements, my spherical component is fine, the limit range being -0.75 to +1.75
However, for my Cylinder scores, the requirement limit only mentions +1.25. Now, my scores are negative numbers, -0.50 & -0.25. There's no mention of what these scores mean! Is there no limit on negative readings?

I asked this question on good old yahoo answers and a user who claimed to be an optician told me there's a way of adding the Sphere and Cylinder components to form a positive number (This is a good sign, because adding my scores in any way won't ever produce a number above +1.25), but still I'm not totally sure how it all works

I'm 95% sure there's nothing to be worried about, but if anyone can give me that extra 5% certainty I'd be very grateful!

Thanks,
Stuart

airborne_artist

If applying for FAA then you need to use http://www.assoc-optometrists.org/up...df/04-navy.pdf

ChecklistPlease

I have heard from inside sources that the eyesight and age for the RAF are changing again!

The eyesight limits are coming down!....inline with the RN

The age limits are going up to be inline with the RN

What are the crabs playing at!!!

PM for more info if needed

stuart955

Thanks!

That chart actually has the same problem though. In the Standard I list, astigmatism is allowed up to +1.25 but my readings are negative numbers, which it mentions nothing about.

I'll just assume all is okay. According to the Standard 1A requirements pre1995 I'm okay so I reckon there's probably not too much changed in the new entry standards.

mattb999

This is from personal experience of my recent attendance at OASC and I don't know where they do the FAA medicals;

My fellow aircrew candidates and I were only asked to read the bottom line of the standard letter chart in a mirror. As long as we could do that then we were passed rather than doing the black circles in the red and green backgrounds which, I believe, among other tests give you those plus and minus figures in your sph and cyl. They then went onto test stereoscopy, colour perception, corneal mapping and field of vision.

muppetofthenorth

The best rumours are the ones that keep coming back year on year. Just like the one about how you'll have to be 18 to start to learning to drive, not 17.

I've heard this mentioned every year for the past 7. Hasn't happened yet and I doubt very much it will ever change! RAF has no reason to: it's never short of applicants who do meet the current requirements.

Until I see it on an official RAF site/letterhead, I'll not believe it, sorry.

ChecklistPlease

I should have rephrased my last post better. The changes in the eyesight are short and long refraction limits. Not 6/6 etc

But, We'll see in the future!

larss123

While we are on the subject of medicals. I am applying for Air Traffic Control, not aircrew unfortunatly. I have passed my filter interview and am waiting on an Oasc date. I was just enquiring about the medical at Oasc. I do have in my past records when I was younger that I attended a priory hospital for some counselling regarding slight ocd/bdd. I have now fully recovered from it and there is no longer any problem. Will this stop me from getting in, I know it will come up in the medical and Im fully prepared for this however what I want to know is if it is a straight no after they see this in the records??

airborne_artist

By OCD/BDD are you referring to what is more commonly called anorexia?

ScrumpyJ

Stuart, doont worry about your eyesight. All you can do is go and see. i went having been told i couldnt be pilot, but when i got there i passed all branches, so dont put 100 percent stock in a commercial assesment. What they do there is far better, all you can do is go.

ScrumpyJ

Also about CDD/BDD i would be very surprised if that stopped you getting in, they make their own judgements about your mental state I believe.

Amnesia180

Hi all,

There has been some interesting posts on here since my last reply, especially the information regarding the 'digit tests' etc.

Anyway, I'm back looking for some more guidance with regards to reading material.

At the moment I'm getting my 'current operations' knowledge from the RAF website, reading through bbc.co.uk daily and also reading the Daily Mail (which I'm not overly impressed with) and newsnow.co.uk.

However, can anyone suggest any further reading material? The RAF website and MOD news section is great for giving the basics about ops and where in the world we are, but doesnt really get too opinionated.

I've been advised on reading 'The Week', 'RAF News' (from WH Smiths) and Flight International.

Any expansion to this list would be great.

Thanks all,

Wader2

Your comment shows that you are not entirely without judgement and taste, but with that confession I would change my pseudonym if you wish to be taken seriously.

Seriously though, you ought to read a quality broadsheet, but not the Guardian

airborne_artist

The Economist magazine is one of the best IMHO. By no means all finance-centric stuff, and very good geo-politics coverage. The weekly publication makes the articles more considered, and less sensationalist. If you were able to read, understand, and talk about its content/coverage you'd make a good impression at any interview.

Wader2

Indeed, as a student, you can get an advantageous discount for a subscription.. Downside it that when you get into Cranwell, or wherever, you won't have time to read it!

Amnesia180

Thanks for the updates, I have found newsnow.co.uk to be very helpful, but I'll be switching to the Independent or the Times Online.

It's funny you should mention the Economist, as I stumbled across this when looking at 'The Week'. I think a big part of what you choose relies on what you are comfortable reading. Anyway, The Economist is 12 issues for 12pound and 'The Week' is offering 6 issues free with no subscription, so it wouldn't hurt to try both!

Regarding choosing 'Current Affairs', I've been advised to choose 3 or 4 International, and 3 or 4 UK. The problem is, I'm only on my filter interview (and havent been told whether or not I'm being reccomended for OASC), it sounds silly but what if one of my choices become 'out-of-date' by the time OASC comes round? I wouldnt want to be left with the standard answers that I'm guessing most people give (such as just Afghan and Iraq).

Thanks,
Dan

airborne_artist

I doubt they'll crash and burn that fast - topics such as the Middle East, Somalia/Iran/N Korea/Pakistan will be with us for the rest of my life...

Think slightly off the wall - I read a fascinating article about water not long ago. Could be far worse than an oil crisis in some regions.

Amnesia180

You've made an interesting point AA. I'm assuming that as long as my topics relate to the country/military operation (in a political sense) it doesn't have to be directly linked to something that the RAF IS currently involved in, but something that could cause the neeed for them to step-in, or something that could affect their operational effectiveness?

I was having a discussion with a friend (who is also looking to join the RAF and she mentioned that she isn't going to start subscribing to any magazine, or getting involved in broadsheets until closer to her OASC date (she's ineterested in being a Phys Ed Office) anyway, I've advised her that she doesn't need to memorise the previous weeks news bulletins straight before her interview, because the news that could have triggered anything she reads during that time may have happened weeks or months ago. I told her she is slightly missing the point and that gaining a knowledge of current affairs (whether it be scientific, political, financial) can only strengthen her overall knowledge. Was that advice right? or are you all firm believers of 'cram revision'?

(Apologies if it seems like I've hi-jacked the thread, but hopefully the replies here will also help other candidates in their time management when coming to prepare, including myself!)

Thanks,
Dan