I'm hoping to embark on flying training this year, either PPL or LAPL. I'd prefer the PPL, as it might be possible to add IFR, etc later if I decide to (assuming I understand correctly.)

Trouble is , my prescription for distance vision includes 'SPHERE' of -2.5 and -3.25 for right and left eye respectively.

I had to dig fairly deep in the CAA website before I found 'FinalspeccalcV6.6' (I'm not allowed to post the full URL here, apparently) which confusingly suggests I would be unfit for class 1 and 3 initial, and ok for class 2, because of my left eye's astigmatism - it's my 'CYL' figure of -2.25 that causes me to be 'unfit', according to the CAA calculator.

Do I stand any chance of getting through a medical for the PPL? Whats so terrible about astigmatism anyway, if it's 100% corrected?

Thanks,

Richard

Like the spreadsheet said you should be OK for class 2 which is all you need for PPL. I went for a class 1 but with 2.25 astigmatism I was just over the limit of 2.00 on the initial appointment but then the limit increases to 3.00 dioptres on a renewal for the class 1!! You are unfit for class 1 and class 3 due to astigmatism > 2.00 but a "fit assessment may be considered following review by an ophthalmologist" from the caa website.
Not sure why they view astigmatism so badly, from my last eye test the lady said that 2 dioptres of spherical correction are worse than 2 dioptres of cylindrical correction. I'm sure there is a reason behind it.
There is a huge thread about vision requirements on PPRUNE here

Ah, thats good to know, thanks miller745.

I'd read the bit about review by opthalmologist, and thought 'well that'll be my next port of call then', but I guess as I don't foresee ever needing class 1, then class 2 it is. An odd arrangement of requirements, I'd say, but there.

I spoke to an optometrist friend, he suggested that astigmatism is potentially a problem if it gets progressively worse, as it could be a sign of underlying problems. According to my prescription history, mine is improving slightly over the years, maybe that's the sort of fact that an opthalmologist review would want to clarify.

No idea how I missed the thread you suggested; maybe because it initially began with a discussion about lasik.

Thanks again,

R

That would be a last resort for me, but a useful idea for someone who might otherwise find themselves over the 3 diopter limit for renewal.

Interesting, was that done through your optician?