Class 2 Medical: Two Sets of Specs for Assessment
 

Hi There! First post and looking forward to using this great resource some more.

I'm looking to start towards RPL then PPL. However, I want to get my medical out of the way first before I spend a lot of money on training.

I wear specs and have been told I need to bring two pairs of glasses to my CASA Class 2 medical. I understand you require a spare when flying but didn't think I would need to present both pairs at the medical.

My prescription is pretty specialised (read expensive) so I was only planning on buying another set of specs once I was told I was OK from a medical perspective since I have no need for a spare in my daily life.

Can anybody confirm this is the requirement or whether the receptionist just got it wrong? I thought they were testing my eyesight, not my glasses!

Appreciate any advice you guys have!

Thanks,
Watson

You local optometrist should be able to tell you if you will pass. You should also be able to try some cheaper plair prescriptions to see if these allow you pass. This will tell you if you can use them for a backup pair.

You can read the DAME handbook on the CASA w3 site which will have the vision standards.

I confirm that it is now, unfortunately, a requirement.

My views on the requirement are at pages 20-21 (here: https://www.casa.gov.au/file/183126/...token=p6kNtcdK ) of my submission in response to CASA's medical certification DP.

Thanks for the response, I really appreciate it.

Because I have bifocals and my script is quite high, everything pretty much needs to be custom unfortunately.

I do have a need in my life for a spare pair of sunglasses and apparently they can be used as a backup so this might be an option. I also considered transition lenses, but just called AvMed to ask about whether they are allowed or not and the rep said they weren't. However I've seen other topics where pilots have been discussing using them!

The receptionist is merely passing on what is required at renewal time. People forget to bring in their spare glasses and this holds up the medical renewal.

When you go for your first medical, some may not be aware they even need glasses. That's what the medical is for. A fact finding mission for you and the DAME.

If you do need vision correction as determined by the DAME, it will be stated on your medical certificate you get back from CASA. The requirement to carry spare glasses is NOT stated on your medical certificate.
That little gem is found in CASR 67.20 (Civil Aviation Safety Regulations 1998 Volume 2).

It is a crock of ****.

You need a spare pair of spectacles to exercise the privileges of your licence. The requirement to take them to your medical is because some numpty in casa medical decided it would be a good idea to take them to make sure you had two pairs, that is all.

We have not had a pilot incapacitated as a result of spectacle failure since pontious was a cadet pilot, so this is just more australian nanny state bull****.

I have worn glasses since I was about 10 and have never had to take a second pair to a medical im 30 odd years, so this is just a self justification exercise from casa.

I've read that the most common cause of pilot incapacitation is.... choking.

I can see that conceivably you could drop your glasses behind the seat or out the door depending on the aircraft type. It's a risk.... but how much of a risk? There's lots of other things you could do too, but hard to draw a line eh.

I completed my assessments last month. I actually went to the Ophthalmologist before the DAME who did not request to see both pairs of glasses or even mentioned it. When it came time for the rest of my medical, he skipped over the vision part except colour vision as the details had already been entered.

As pilots we manage risk every day, thats what we do.

Over the past few years, in particular, the nanny state has really cranked it up and now we have the security theatre managing the risk of terrorism, we have part 61 managing the risk of someone actually getting something productive done, we have casa medical managing the risk of someone actually being able to earn a living.

As a society we appear to have abrogated our rights and accepted that we need to be wrapped in a shroud of protective legislation, oddly I feel less protected.

There are countries and jurisdictions where there is nowhere near enough protections, and that is equally as bad - i personally think we have gone too far the other way.

Somewhere in the middle would be nice, where there are actually consequences associated with personal actions and people hopefully learn from their mistakes and the mistakes of others - not the current situation where mistakes and errors are legislated out of existance.

PS Clinton, I liked your response to the discussion paper, well done

Sure is. I have been flying for 45 years and have NEVER used the spare set. Up till recently I just kept the most recently replaced set somewhere in the cockpit where they couldn't move and I could easily grope for them should that one really, really bad bump (no not my landings) remove my glasses so far away I couldn't retrieve them. Surely the old pair should be adequate to get you home in the highly unlikely case that you ever needed them.

While on the subject of eye tests the last one I did I nearly failed the test that has numbers and letters embedded in various pixilated colours.This has never happened before.
These days I wear those smart glasses that change colour to protect the eyes in bright light. Does anyone know if these types of glasses could in any way affect the ability to differentiate the numbers from the mess of colours on the test charts. Alternatively does old age have any effect on ability to do those tests?

I think it does, and that is why CASA have asked DAME's to dust off their Colour Books! I just did one. My DAME also got me to read with my spare pair of glasses. He has been doing my medicals for years and normally doesn't submit easily to CASA BS.

Vision inexorably deteriorates with age. Your optometrist can draw you the graph.

I am above the curve for my age and can pass the CASA vision requirements without glasses when I'm in a well lit medical consulting room. But I know as soon as the light deteriorates, that I struggle to read easily - ie an IFR approach in cloud. Therefore, I have a $20 pair of chemist reading glasses in my flight bag as well as my prescription reading glasses that I use intermittently for detailed reading. I'm not required to do this, but its safer and I feel more comfortable.

The spare pair don't need to be perfect, just adequate to pass the test. Thus they can be an old pair or, if the cheap Chemist glasses do it, it can be them. Primarily you only need to read something on your lap or on the instrument panel in front of you.

There's a fair chance your local optometrist will bulk bill you on medicare. There's also a fair chance he'll understand the CASA requirement (which is not as strict as some others). Go and see the optometrist. Take whatever old glasses you have, or borrow some chemist glasses and try them out.

Its easy to scoff at the vision requirement, and for a J3 Cub its probably overkill. But trying to read a map in difficult conditions, or an IFR approach plate in cloud or (as I have done) read through an aircraft flight manual after declaring an emergency and being able to read & comprehend clearly takes on new importance.

Once you know what your vision is, then go to your friendly neighborhood DAME armed with the answers before he submits anything to the unfriendly, untrustworthy, irrational, vindictive CASA Avmed.

No one's scoffing at the principle of a vision requirement.

Thanks for all your advice guys.

Since I've emigrated from the UK my old specs are in a box somewhere over there, or it wouldn't be much of an issue.

I went to an optometrist who is also a DAO who said I would be all good for eyesight. Just frustrating that I will have to wait for an extra pair of glasses before I can do my medical.

Looking at ordering some transitions but I called Avmed today who said CASA don't like them because they "don't adjust quickly enough to light conditions". Surely they adjust quicker than taking one pair of glasses off and putting another set on?! I've also seen some topics with pilots discussing them and having good success. Perhaps another conversation with the DAO is in order.

Yes, to clarify, i have no issues with carrying two pairs of specs, just the requirement to prove how trustworthy i am by taking both of them to my medical

You guys with glasses have it easy. I wear leave in contacts, 30 days at a time, $50 per eye. With good management I stretch their use to 60 days usually.

When I go in I have to also take my spare set of glasses. I do one test with contacts in, one with them out, and then one wearing the glasses.

At -2.75 I can pretty well tell them what the result with be without either contacts or glasses in, what is the point of that test.

I could also just have borrowed a mates set of glasses for the test and then given them back and flown without them, so what is the desire to have to see them.

Once I have taken the contacts out, there goes $100 bucks down the drain on top of all the costs of the medical, as I can't put them back in unless I take solution etc to put them in at the doctors.

What a pain in the....

I've never taken two pairs of glasses for a medical.

As someone said, you require two pairs while exercising the privileges of your licence.

Sounds like lowly admin staff gone mad.

No, it is a CASA Av Med requirement that you present with 2 pairs of specs for the medical. If you do not have them both on arrival, instruction is that DAME cannot proceed with the examination and you will be sent away. This is not the fault of the DAME.
So every DAME has been advised to get their booking staff to very clearly tell the person on the phone to bring in 2 pairs till at least enough time has elapsed for all current pilots/ATC to have been through it once and thus know about the new requirement.
Not "lowly admin staff" at either doctors or CASA gone mad.

Yes my DAME made it quite clear 2 medicals ago that I had to bring the 2nd pair and reiterated it at the last medical in May. At both medicals I was put through the rigorous testing procedure with my normal glasses, and then had to go through the whole thing again with the spare pair. Massive WOFTAM. Yes, I need vision correction to fly. No, I don't need to be tested twice to confirm this fact! :ugh:


Clinton nailed it in his submission (well done sir).


Where is the evidence of any accident or incident that was a result of somebody's glasses mysteriously disintegrating in flight..?? Is there a record of anything that has caused CASA to adopt this..?


If you're in turbulence that is severe enough to knock the glasses off your head, I'd be more worried about the aircraft disintegrating than my glasses!!


I've been wearing glasses for well over 30yrs and have NEVER had a situation whereby I had to reach for the spare pair due to the main pair failing in some way. And I can't think of any situation that could arise in flight that would. Maybe others could enlighten me.


Then there's the expense of maintaining 2 identical sets. If you need full blown prescription glasses they are bloody expensive. Yes, you can put the eye test on Medicare, but the actual glasses are where they get you. Hundreds of $$ to upgrade the lenses, even if you re-use the same frames. And then if you want prescription sunglasses as well...http://cdn.pprune.org/images/smilies/boohoo.gif.


How's this for a scenario - somehow my main pair of glasses snap in half and fall off my face. Likelihood..? Infinitesimally small. I reach for my flight bag and pull out the 2nd pair. As I'm putting them on, they also snap in half. Likelihood..? About the same as before. Maybe I should be carrying a 3rd pair..?? Ridiculous I know, but no more so than the original rule. http://cdn.pprune.org/images/smilies/censored.gif

Totally agree.

I've always carried two pairs, (although never required the second pair in over 30 years of flying).

Must be middle admin staff gone mad

I doubt that, very much. However, I could be wrong. If I'm wrong, the more accurate statement would be that middle admin staff have been allowed to go "mad" (to use your term), thus casting substantial doubt in my mind upon the integrity of the arrangements for the governance of their activities.

It is something that has been niggling at me for ages. I've been trying to define, concisely, the CASA characteristic that is of most concern to the industry.

Over the years, many people have alleged 'corruption' against various people in CASA or CASA generally. But the word 'corruption' has a number of connotations. The word is usually understood to mean actions taken by an individual for the individual's personal gain. But corruption in that sense is a very rare occurrence and, I suggest, not the main cause of the problems about which the aviation industry generally complains.

Then I stumbled across the definition of a different kind of 'corruption', and I had an epiphany: Noble Cause Corruption.

From Wikipedia:I did not ponder long on who it is that fits these descriptions: "Convinced of their righteousness"; "will do anything within their powers to achieve the desired result"; "committed in the name of good ends"; "a moral commitment to make the world a safer place to live"; "arrogance and weak supervision".

The "safety of air navigation" is such a very, very noble cause.

Avoid the RPL. Do the PPL, and at an airfield which has air traffic control.

Clinton... what a fabulous find and timely nugget of info to put me straight about CAsA.

The CAsA Soviet is corrupt, their style of "governance" is corrupt, and there are people in the rotten place known to be corrupt.
The place is a Clusterfcuk of the 1st Magnitude.

But now I am wiser, thanks.. the correct terminology is then Noble Cause Corruption.

ps Just reading Bomber Command, memoir of Sir Arthur Harris.
Top read ...and I quote his comment of early 1943
"...the progressive multiplication of government regulations and controls, operated by 'civil servants', who themselves are multiplying fast, is leading the country to catastrophe...complete and perhaps irreparable."

Nearly there.

So a lot of us have heard of this, but nobody thus far can show us where it says to take two pair with you to the DAME? My last medical, I didn't get told, I didn't take two, guess what happened? Nothing.
While I do carry a spare pair, and I suspect most pilots do likewise, I also use a flight helmet, and while I could remove my glasses if say a lens fell out, there is not one chance in hell of getting the spare pair of specs back on in flight. I've also not had a spectacle failure in over 50 years. i.e. never.

Nice research Clint.

From the "DAME Newsletter - September 2016" here: https://www.casa.gov.au/licences-and...september-2016 Why are applicants "required to bring" a spare pair to the medical examination? Because someone in AVMED woke up one morning and decided it was a bright idea to help save the world, that's why.

AVMED just makes this **** up as they go along.

Seriously..? Two pairs to the medical renewal? Thank God I go to a DAME that see's things practically. Ticks the pointless boxes that need to be be ticked and then spends the majority of the time making sure I'm healthy.
A health care professional spending his time on my health and not mindless Casa bureaucracy... Who would of thought.

Next requirement will be for the glasses to be certified by the DAME so CASA can check that the designated glasses are in your possession when ramp checked..

Me? I just keep multiple pairs of cheap readers (which is all I need) in pockets, flight bags, etc. Luckily all I need is 'reading correction"/ i tried multifocals once and almost pranged the aircraft on landing. Glasses are now removed by final.

It's okay, it's not just CASA :) The JCAB (Japanese) LOVE this bull and they certainly do test the glasses as well as the person. At my last medical I did the eyesight test without glasses and passed. Well done me but it didn't end there. The girl saw that I had glasses in my hand (since I couldn't leave them anywhere else and was in the eyesight department) and I explained that at night I get a bit of short-sightedness but surely that's irrelevant. No, no!! Even more unfortunate was I had a pair of progressive glasses (since my near-sight is pretty much spot on) and a straight pair of glasses for the bit of short-sight. Well, first of all was the sucking of teeth to decide if that counted as two pairs of glasses....all the while ignoring the very fact that I did not need them....eventually, after raising my blood pressure a bit and suggesting the whole bloody thing was stupid and that I'd come back another day with NO glasses on my person, they relented and decided that it was almost okay. But wait, "now you have glasses you must do a test with the glasses". No, no kidding. Even though I'm fine without, I then had to do the whole thing again, TWICE, using the progressive and straight prescription (even though they're both the same strength). Near sight AND far sight, the whole gambit. 1:20 for the eyesight test!!! That was in addition to waiting for the girl to test the glasses....both pairs of course.

SO, maybe, taking two pairs of cheaters to the CASA doc isn't such a problem :}

Hi All,

Just wanted to update this post in case anybody is interested. I went for photochromatic lenses which have been great so far (though I read in DAME handbook that AvMed don't like them). But I have two pairs of glasses now which is great.

I had congenital cataracts as a child so AvMed requested more information which means I did the eye test for a Class 1 Medical even though I'm going for Class 2.

I had some issues with my contrast vision doing the sine wave tests at the most difficult level. Also, I completely flunked the stereo vision test though I understand from further reading that monocular pilots are OK. I actually didn't even know I had no depth perception (produced by my eyes at least) until the assessment so it was quite interesting. Both my eyes function at the same level from a visual acuity perspective but my brain only takes the signal from one eye at a time.

I'm a little nervous this will negatively impact my application but time will tell and fingers crossed. The RPC is still an option from me if this doesn't work out, or maybe I can do some further types of testing to verify my contrast vision is adequate. Not much i can do about the stereoscopic vision though!

I once had the screw holding one of the arms fall out during a flight so yes, a spare pair is necessary. CASA probably got wise to people just buying a $9.99 pair of reading glasses to show as a back up and decided to check that they were the correct prescription.

Back in the 1990s the opthalmologist doing my initial eye exam told me that photocromatic lenses weren't allowed because a DC9 Captain had a heavy landing after flying on top in bright sunshine and then descending through low cloud which didn't allow the lenses time to adjust before arrival

And when the screw fell out, did you have an adequate spare pair or an inadequate $9.99 set of inadequate reading glasses?

In the case of the people in the habit of not carrying adequate spare vision correction, how does making them turn up to a doctor’s surgery with it once every one or two years make them change that habit? The people whose thought processes result in them taking the risk of not carrying adequate spare vision correction apply the same thought processes to the problem of turning up at the doctor’s surgery with a spare that can be used to pass the test.

Policing an operational requirement in a non-operational environment is a nonsense.

Clinton,
You have correctly identified that the problem is noble cause corruption.
Once suffering from it a person may then be corrupt in other ways or the organisation operating under this culture is then vulnerable to a few bad actors within it.
The problem isn't confined to CASA, in RAAus to some extent and particularly GFA, the problem of noble cause corruption is embedded in the culture of the organisation.
It can result in unnecessary expense, very poor safety outcomes and bullying and vicious persecution of individuals and small groups within the organisation, made worse by the compulsory membership of the bodies which prevents the operation of market forces by people being able to walk away.
Part 149 will make this worse next year when implemented.

A further update: I have been referred to the AvMed Complex Case Management board because of my congenital cataracts. I'm not too surprised, it's pretty rare for a kid to have cataracts. However it adds another couple of weeks at least to a decision or the next step in any case.

I'm starting to realise that RAAus RPC might have been the way to go anyway (which doesn't require the CASA Class 2) but I will still see this process through to the end since I've sunk a fair bit of money into the affair (second pair of glasses, medical, ophthalmic report, CASA processing fee). Also, if I am successful I don't think I'll face the same barriers every 4 years as my condition is completely stable and I may want to get RPL or PPL in future (though reading some of these threads in here makes me wonder if it's worth it!)

Hope this info shows up someday for some "Cataracts Kid" like me when they do some Google searching on cataracts and medicals in the future.

Thanks for the reply Clearedtoenter. I currently hold a Victorian driver's permit and have been driving without a single bump for 10 years. However, I'm not sure about the requirements for a commercial driver's licence, though I do not believe my condition would prohibit me doing that.

Are you hinting at the RAMPC option? I have heard it mentioned but didn't really know the details.

Sorry for the delayed response, yes no problems at all driving and no restrictions.

Further update, I've been asked to get a report from an ophthalmologist to provide information on the risk of double vision (how is an ophthalmologist better placed than the owner of a set of eyes to say whether I get double vision) and for information on the effects of my reduced contrast sensitivity to operate at night or in dusk conditions.

Another $250 in the hole. So far CASA has had me spend:
- $1,000 on a second set of glasses (glasses are quite specialised).
- $200 for optometrist consultations.
- $275 for medical (I probably could have got it cheaper if I went out of the CBD).
- $75 for CASA processing fee.
- $250 for ophthalmic review.

And my medical has taken 1 and a half months so far.

They sure know how to take the shine off something that's supposed to be exciting and fun. I understand I shouldn't have these issues when I come to renew my medical but holy God this has been tedious.

You were going to have to buy, beg, borrow or steal the spare set in order to comply with the carriage requirement in any event. Whilst it may be mitigation for a very remote risk, few would argue that it’s overkill. However, given that you are allowed to drive in any conditions without restriction, the other specialist requirements are typical AVMED overreach.

The problem is that when any and every perceived risk is conjured into an aviation catastrophe, any and all purported mitigation actions can be justified in theory. Sadly, the practical effects can be adverse to safety. There are many other manifestations of this problem.

You are getting a clear (vision-corrected) insight into some of the things that are killing the Australian aviation industry.

I carry three sets of glasses. That way, if you break one far from home, you still have two! Just saying! :uhoh:

Provided the legal requirement of available adequate spare correction is at least met, individuals are of course free to take whatever extra precautions they consider appropriate.

I’m guessing you don’t take the third set to your medical examination? I’m also guessing that you consider yourself perfectly capable of determining whether the third set is adequate by, for example, using this complex procedure:

1. Don spare vision correction.

2. Confirm that you can see everything you need to see, properly.

If that’s what you’re doing, are you sure you’re not being irresponsibly dangerous?

If your second set is only adequate if it’s been confirmed adequate during your medical examination, as required by AVMED, it follows that your third set is not an adequate backup in the event of failure of the first two sets, unless the third set has been confirmed adequate during your medical examination. This is the inexorable conclusion of AVMED’s reasoning.

Soon they will have to be TSO’d

Hi All!

Just wanted to provide you with the final chapter of my saga with CASA:

I was asked by CASA to undertake an operational check to determine my ability to read instruments, line up on a runway and judge flare.

This accomplished I provided the report to CASA who have now issued me with a Class 2 Medical. The conditions are that the medical has to be renewed every two years (from the date of my medical which is now 3 months ago and 28 days before the renewal date which means it's basically only valid for 20 months).

It is predictably not valid for ag flying, choppers and specifies I don't meet ICAO Chapter 6. I'm also on audit.

I am really happy I have my Class 2 Medical but it is soured somewhat by the onerous conditions and the 3 months it took to get it. Do you think I should appeal these conditions now or wait until my renewal? With the upcoming changes to the medical system I think I'd be better off waiting to see what the new system looks like.

Cheers!