Another thumbs up for serengettis. I was wearing raybans (not the aviator style) for the last two pairs and thought I would give serengettis a go.

Your eyes feel like a million dollars and flying around the tropics with the builds makes cloud definition second to none.

I'll be buying another pair when these ones break! (Try ebay if you don't want to pay up to $400 for a pair)

I use Randolf Aviator. I like the bayonet side arms because it doesn't disturb the headset seal. Bose headsets work much better with a full seal. Also they have glass lenses which have much better visual acuity. I'd go for glass lenses, neutral tint (military use AGX) and whatever frames feed your ego.

GG - I just got a pair of serengetis at DFO at moorabbin for $135 (its 50% off their lowest prices atm at the Bolle store, and I was told its always 40% off for pilots anyway)... so I saved about $200 off the original full price.

My original question still stands if anyone can answer it - regarding the link to the other forum thread I posted and the negative opinions regarding photochromatic lenses overseas.

CASA does have a recommendation for sunnies - DAME handbook sect 2.1.13 below. Mine are prescription and to the CASA suggested ND 15 tint. Excellent.

Quote:

---

2.1.13 Sunglasses

---

Quote:

---

Glare is often a cause of significant discomfort when flying above cloud or when flying into
the sun. Sunglasses may be required in such circumstances.
There are two basic factors to consider when selecting sunglasses, namely the frame and
the lenses.
Any spectacle frame reduces the field of vision. Narrow frames that carry large lenses are
desirable. The most critical problem with frames arises from the presence of wide sidearms
which significantly impair the peripheral visual field.
Sunglass lenses should protect the eyes from glare while not adversely affecting the visual
cues necessary for safe flight. Accordingly, lenses should not be too dark, and should
transmit at least 15% of incident light. The tint used should be "neutral density" (N.D.),
that is, a greyish tint that does not distort colour perception or adversely affect red signal
detection and recognition. The recommended tint is N.D.15.
Lenses of polycarbonate are preferred because of their impact-resistance and ability to
absorb ultra-violet and infrared rays. However, these lenses can scratch readily and any
scratched spectacles should be discarded.
To ensure that sunglasses provide adequate protection from solar radiation that may
damage the eyes, only those sunglasses that conform to the current Australian Standard
should be worn.
Sunglasses that conform to the current Australian Standard also meet acceptable
standards for lens quality, frame strength and lens retention.
For aviation use, those sunglasses marked "Specific Purpose Sunglasses" are
recommended, provided their frames are appropriate. The lenses of these sunglasses
have been specifically designed for use in conditions of intense glare, such as in flight
above cloud. At high altitude, atmospheric absorption of ultra-violet radiation is reduced.
Polarising sunglasses should not be used when flying. The polarising filter interacts with
the cockpit transparency to produce a distorted and degraded visual field that poses a
threat to air safety.
The pilot who already wears prescription spectacles for flying can choose from a number
of options for glare protection. Prescription sunglasses with N.D.15 lenses can be
obtained, or N.D.15 clip-on or flip-up sunglasses may be worn over prescription
spectacles.
Pilots who require correction of their near vision only and who wear "look-overs" are
advised to obtain bifocals and a plano upper segment. Clip-on or flip-up sunglasses can
then be worn. However, the dangers of flip-ups previously mentioned should be recalled.

2.1-14
Graduated lens tint is another option. This provides glare protection for distant vision
outside the aircraft, while near vision inside the aircraft is not impeded by the tint. It is
usually considered that the use of a single tinted segment in bifocal glasses should be

avoided as the visual effect of a "false horizon" may be disturbing and dangerous.

---

I got the Serengeti Navigators and from memory nothing on the labels said anything about the neutral density or the colour perception...

the lenses are light brown and to my surprise colours do change when putting them on... after reading that I am wondering if they're suitable? Any opinions of other guys here who have the brownish glass lenses?

Ive got the Serengeti Velocity ones with the brown photochromatic lenses and haven't found the adjustment of colour to be any problem (whilst completing my CPL training).

Also I have to say after using RayBan for a year previous to swapping to Serengeti (about 7 months ago) which I thought were great at the time, I have not looked back after swapping great pair of glasses and I find that the brown lenses are better as they don't block out as much light and the lenses also give a sharper image than the Ray Bans I previously used.

$135 is more like the price range I can afford. May I ask what model of Serengetis did you get? And do they require proof that you're a pilot, like showing your license? (I don't go around wearing gold bars on my shoulders :) ).

And should I get polarised lenses or non-polarised lenses?

I was in uniform right after I finished flying so they knew. Otherwise some form of proof that you're in the industry and they'll give you the 40% discount... however right now the Bolle store at YMMB DFO is 50% off for everybody... so it wont matter.

I got the Navigators (photochromatic). From what I've read - polarized lenses aren't suitable for flying.

If you're a fan of the snow - stock up on the snow goggles too while you're there, nice and cheap for 50% off as well:}

So they have only a 200% mark up instead of 400%?:}

$15 from bp and get 3 cents of yer fuel

Gotta be Raybans...aviators are a bit "TOPGUN", particularly the mirror ones...but if they make you look as hot as this...
http://t1.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:G...r/image1xl.jpg
...then I'm all for them!!!:ok::}

United issue Serengetis to their aircrew. I wear Velocity but many in my company go for the bigger lense to block out glear, wich is any of the aviator range. Probable about 20 different nationalities here and the majority wear them. Can not do polaroid as the gold in the window for heating stops you from seeing out. Only my opinion and observations. No apology for spelling, I'm a pilot.

Folks,

Any pilot who uses cheap sunglasses is not smart enough to be a pilot -- you need to do everything you can to protect your eyes.

Do NOT use "glass" sunglasses, they all splinter under impact, some worse then others, but CR-8 never will.

CR-8 or similar polycarbonate ONLY, and they will be more scratch resistant than optical glass.

Likewise, only ever use polycarbonate "safety" glasses (including playing squash), never "glass". Never use the "glassless" glasses often promoted by Squash "experts", when playing squash, you can still lose an eye all too easily, as a mate of mine found out the hard way, terminating your aviation career is a huge price for a moment's neglect --- but you can lose an eye in that moment.

"Sun" glasses made for ground level use (including ASA Kite marked) will not necessarily have the correct tint for flying, either density or colour.

Undoubtedly the best are right here in Australia, Martin X Hogan, 14 Collins St., Melbourne. They have been leaders in the business of "professional" aviation, military and civil (as opposed to "fashion"), including supplying their products to NASA for the Apollo program, specialist visors (with correction, to the USAF and US Navy) and so on.

They have cockpit dimensions for all common civil types, and can make tailored glasses of all tints, including bi and tri focals, including being able to see the overhead panel, either right or left hand seat. They are aviation experts, and way ahead of designs that haven't really changed since WW11.

As users of RayBan and Randolph (they are glass, dummy) will know, lens can relatively easily fall out --- the design of the flying range from Hogan eliminate this problem ---- scrabbling around the cockpit floor looking for a lens is no fun, and doesn't do the lens much good, either.

I have trialled Serengeti, a whole bunch of us did did, for the manufacturer, a "new model" "optimized" for flying, they were good, but I went back to my Apollos, even though I use the Serengeti sometimes for driving.

If you intend to stay a pilot, your eyes are too precious to treat with other than the greatest care and respect.

Tootle pip!!

^^ to the few posts above... I've been using $20 plastic sunnies that apparently meet UV-A/B standards for the last few years but I aint too sure... my eyes still feel funny after flying for a while on sunny days - so it's either that or the air-vent blowing into my face dying my eyes off :ugh:

Either way, all the previous posts swear by their serengeti's and for that price I couldnt refuse... so far it's early days and I'm impressed mostly with the clarity. (yes they are glass, Leadsled).

In the end you can take peoples advice on what glasses suit them and try applying it to yourself - but only you can decide in the long run whether forking out a bit of money for eye wear is worth it or not. Maybe I'll "swear by the S" when it comes to my 3rd pair of sunnies... or maybe I'll go back to a $20 pair...

1013
If you want to play chicken with your eyesight, and you really are a pilot, all that does is say something about your basic intelligence.

Pilot or not, it's a pity that you have never attended a lecture on eyesight safety by the likes of the late Dr. John Colvin or his successors, whose slides of the eyes of pilots who had lost an eye (and a career) in entirely avoidable circumstances are really gruesome.

I can guarantee you haven't, otherwise you wouldn't take such a flippant attitude to your eyesight. The nasty thing about cumulative damage is that it can be years before you realize the extent of the damage, and CASA medicals, including CASA opthalmic checks, will not necessarily uncover it.

In the days before the beancounters took over, QF even used to fly Dr.Colvin to Sydney to address new pilots on eyesight preservation.

The human eye has evolved at ground level, with the sun shining down, it is not well adapted to above ground level use. And it's far more than just "UV", even a perspex windscreen and windows will attenuate a large % of UVa and UVb, that is but a small part of the problem.

But Hey!!, you go right ahead, stupid isn't illegal, but is sure is dumb, but at least it is only your eyes.

Tootle pip!!

PS: The Serengeti we trialled were polycarbonate, otherwise we would not have participated, I have no idea whether they ever made it to market.

Leadsled,

thanks for the info on Martin X Hogan.

I have never been comfortable using plastic lenses; I feel that my vision becomes slightly distorted.

I am on to my second pair of Serengetti velocity, with a Ray Ban photochromatic in-between, and the Velocity are the best that I have worn.

They are clear and work well with change of lighting, especially low light.

Ray Bans, Gold Rim, Green Glass, Legen...........:}



p.s. sky supply are the cheapest supplier in oz I can find for these.

Nosign

Contrary to the CASA comment about polycarbonate lenses and scratching, the surface hardening of polycarbonate lens makes them more scratch resistant than the optical glass used in RayBan and similar. This is not true of the many crap "plastic" lens around.

The greater proportion of all glasses sold are now CR-8 or similar, "glass" glasses are becoming a smaller and smaller part of sales.

Whatever your choice, look very carefully at the way lens are retained, are they positively retained, or just sitting in grooves in the frame?

To see an eyeball that has been bisected by the edge of a displaced lens, after a relatively minor frontal impact (victim remained conscious, no concussion, only major injury loss of one eye) was not a pretty sight ---- quite apart from immediate loss of career.

Most commercial sunglasses transmit far too much light for flying, because the standard is based on some megatrendoid being able to see when driving in a road tunnel, the ASNZ standard assume sunglasses remaining on face, so not mussing up his/her/its coiffure by removing said sunnies.

The CASA 15% recommendation is about the maximum, as well as the minimum.

Tootle pip!!

Eh? :ugh:

I'm pretty sure the vast majority of pilots out there either wear glasses similar to mine that I wear now - or a cheap $20 pair that I used to wear from a servo... fair points you raised and I understand your points and believe me I don't want to take risks on my eyes but just because I have not attended these seminars you speak of or wear these exact sunnies you preach of which have been designed and tested by NASA specifically for flying doesn't make me "stupid" :ok:

have a look at www.opticsplanet.net/serengeti-sunglasses.html , may help with the prices .

A factor to consider in sunglasses purchase is the type of headset you wear. Glasses with thick side arms can be a problem if wearing a David Clark style of headset. The weight on the bridge of your nose also changes when wearing a headset so needs to be considered if you are buying glasses specifically for flying.

Just my thoughts.:ok:

1013,
Not what I said, NASA had nothing to do with designing a piece of Australian innovation. But they became a customer, as did the USAF and US Navy.

You don't need to go to a seminar to understand the importance of protecting your eyes, particularly if you are in a profession that needs two.

It's clear, from some of these posts, that a few pilots have a very cavalier attitude to eyesight self preservation, I hope they don't carry this through to their operations in general --- but my observations suggest all too many do.

Tootle pip!!

Had a pair of Ray Banns for 2 years and never had any or heard of problems with the lens falling out. The brown lenses seems to work fine. They are not aviators.

After reading Leadslead's post there I think he should declare if he's on the take or has any interest in Martin X Hogan, his post sounded a little too much like an advert. My optometrist says that any of the major brands are fine for flying. Differentiation between sunglasses these days really is more of a fashion statement than a technical one.

MAUI JIMS are the business

You all listen to LeadSled! You can always tell the good pilots from the dangerous, "too stupid to breath and talk" ones by what they are wearing on their face. I have watched Top Gun several times - and all of the best pilots were wearing good sunglasses! Nature never meant us to fly - so when in the sky sunglasses should be mandatory!


:rolleyes:

They are but I think all their lenses are polarised which doesn't make them suitable for flying unfortunately

Typical of so many posts on pprune, play the man, not the ball. I have been no more than a long term retail customer of said firm, full stop. Sadly, that type of rubbish above is all too expected.

Perhaps, GA Trojan, you might like to inform us of the particular specialist training your bloke has, in matters of aviation and eyesight.

I will bet it is none, and, indeed, there are quite important differences between the usual requirements for ground level versus flying. This even before we get to corrected lenses, where standard focal length guidelines used by optometrists are quite inappropriate for a pilot.

As I said in a previous post, the human head is optimised to see at ground level, not high up.

But, looking at so many of these posts, it seems like ignorance is bliss --- until you have eyes damaged or lost --- in entirely avoidable circumstances.

Stupid is as stupid does.

Tootle pip!!

OK time for a new set. Looking at the Serengeti Dante 7314, Serengeti Velocity GG6692 and the Randolph Jag with the new AGX Flash Mirror lens. Anyone had trouble with any of these models and headsets etc?

All have grey/ slight green non polarized lenses. I have had velocity's before, lasted 5-6 years, excellent frames. My current set is the Serengeto Pilot 1 with the drivers gradient lens, not overly happy with the cable temples as they keep breaking off where the cable attatches and parts are no longer available.
SN

Been trying some on here and there as I see them. Learned something about each brand along the way. Not all Seri's, Ray Ban's and Randolps are glass, they all make some PC.

My pick so far is the Serengeti Velocity GG6692, titanium frame with the grey/green glass lens. I have not yet seen a PC lens that comes close to the clarity of the glass. I have not yet been able to get hold of the Randolphs but I would like to try the Jag's.
SN

The best sunnies by far are the ones your predecessor left on the flt deck in his/her haste to go home...the price is unbeatable, however the quality does tend to be a bit inconsistent.
After a few weeks you may feel ravaged by guilt and return them to their rightful owner (the onset of guilt usually coincides with the discovery of a superior pair under similar circumstances)..i.e. "maaaate..saw some sunnies poking out from under the rudder pedals in ABC...looked a bit like the pair you said you lost the other month".:E

Anyone tried the Serengeti Dante under a headset? I can't try them on because I'm remote and no seri shop in my town. I like the look of the Dante 7314 with the 555nm lens.
SN

Bought a pair of Zeiss sunnies when I first started flying in 78 and they were expensive. Wore them flying and driving but they retired 4 years ago when one of the hinges died. Took some getting used to since they were made of actual glass and were heavy on the bridge of the nose, not like the light plastic items of today. If I can find a frame to fit them, they shall live again. Dropped several times during their life and they have ZERO scratches or chips.

Now forced to wear RayBans that are nice and light but the :mad:ing screws keep coming loose. :(

The ultimate "Mudguard Kit"

http://ny-image3.etsy.com/ialcr_fullxfull.21103.jpg

Oldtimers will know what that is... arr...arr..

Used to have a pair of Raybans which i thought were the sh&t until I woke up one morning to find they were broken... big night... just got my pair of Serengeti Saltos last week and will never touch Rayban again!! Amazing sunnies even with David Clarks and in a bongo!!

I am looking at the Aviator and the Jag. I can't seem to find a stockist in Adelaide.

Edit: Bit concerned that they let too much light in at the sides as well.
SN

Serengeti Velocity with Drivers lens. $160 from ebay.com shipped to Auz. Fantastic pair of sunnies.

1013, the reason why you may be having problems with the cheapo servo sunnies is not because of their filters but they may not be as optically true as the better brands.

I wear Oakley's with prescription lenses. Light weight, comfy, look good and arms don't conflict with the headset. My only criticism is that they are a bit too dark to see the screens easily.

I've had Ray Ban's (3394) for the last few months and haven't a single bad word to say about them. They fit comfortably under the headset with no pressure points. Would definitely recommend them. The ones I have also aren't too dark so when the sun does go behind a cloud you don't need to take them off! which I found with my previous pair (not Ray Ban's). Happy shopping. :ok:

Another vote for Serengeti Velocity. Was recommended them by a sales assistant at a sunglass store when I was pre solo and I'm still using that pair. I love the optical clarity (it feels like my eyes literally relax when I put them on), the automatic adjustment for changing light levels, the fact that the flat arms are snug against the side of your head so you do not get any sound leakage from your headset. I use them for both flying and driving so they kill two birds with one stone! :ok:

They are more expensive but worth the investment.

The only gotcha which I am sure has been said here is that the rims are fairly fragile and you must take extra care when you are not wearing them to put them back in their hard case.