Best sunglasses
Today, I bought some Remaldi Harrison aviator sunspecs for the princely sum of eight quid. It turns out they were made by an optical firm just half a mile from here. If they protect my eyes and don't give me a headache (which my last ones did) then I'll be satisfied. I've had Foster Grant's in recent years - inexpensive and quite durable.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2015
Location: France
Posts: 507
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Most phones made since about 2012 have an integrated barometer...
But to me the problem seems to be that you don't have a definite list of requirements. You'll never manage to buy a satisfactory product if you just buy the one with the longest checklist of features.
Take your Garmin D2 watch; all those functions mean that it is not optimised for one single function. It doesn't have a thermally-stabilised quartz oscillator, for example, so it isn't accurate as a chronometer. Eventually I think you'll hit the limits of the compromised functions and become dissatisfied.
In general it's better to buy a single optimised product for each specific use-case and leave the all-in-ones on the shelf.
But to me the problem seems to be that you don't have a definite list of requirements. You'll never manage to buy a satisfactory product if you just buy the one with the longest checklist of features.
Take your Garmin D2 watch; all those functions mean that it is not optimised for one single function. It doesn't have a thermally-stabilised quartz oscillator, for example, so it isn't accurate as a chronometer. Eventually I think you'll hit the limits of the compromised functions and become dissatisfied.
In general it's better to buy a single optimised product for each specific use-case and leave the all-in-ones on the shelf.
My sunglasses just broke when I put them off and closed them.
I'm now considering to buy a new model, and I've been able to put down a definite list of requirements.
Any optician looks at me with goggly eyes when I list all 8 :
- Between 7 and 11% of transmittance, for optical comfort
- A curved mount, for the same reason
- A slightly adjustable mount, to increase the optical comfort and leave no place in the field of view unprotected
- Unpolarized glass, because it does not work very well in the 320 (doable, but not great, not great either with my tablet or phone)
- Correct width, just a bit larger than my head (that's for physical and audio comfort, with a headset such as the A20)
- Interior anti reflective coating, that's just mandatory, I do not want to have any visual parasite due to interior light reflections...
- Mineral glass or at least hardened plastic, since I want to keep high end sunglasses for a long time.
And
- Unmirrored glass, mount with a sober look (that's just looks so not definitive, but it still has to go with a pilot uniform, so nothing too fancy allowed..)
I looked into bigatmo, it seems pretty good, except the transmittance which they don't tell about.
Measuring the transmittance is very easy, just install an app like "light meter" on any smartphone, and divide the lighting value shown with the glasses on the sensor by the value shown without the glasses. Easy as pie, but it requires having the object in our hands.
And the critera "unmirrored" can be opposed to the critera 7-11% because the mirror can help reduce the transmittance..
It is not mineral glass but they claim it's extremely hard plastic, I think I have to give up a bit on my critera if I don't want to end up paying 600€ or more for "made to measure" glasses.
Any thoughts, since there are many users of bigatmo on this forum ? Thanks
I still have a couple of pairs of Air Ministry issue (yes, that long ago) and, obviously they are quite good but the best, for me, by far, were 'Renault Sea & Ski Spectaculars', bought in Vientiane in the early 60s. Don't know if they are still made , but their advantage was the distortionless wrap-around lenses - cutting out that side-lighting makes a huge difference. Sadly they were smashed at work in Cyprus.
Can't imagine such a thing! Admittedly, an overdose of Kokinelli (more than half a glass) could cause problems, but we used to go for the higher quality stuff from our local grocer - 1s 9d a bottle!
Whatever the make and model, it is most important to check that sunglasses are certified to be UV blocking.
If they are not, then owing to the dark lens tint, the pupils of the eyes open wider so actually more UV gets into the eye, where it can cause more damage
I personally found that sunglasses render the displays of A320 family too dark, (I think our company ran them dim to save money replacing them). I had better success seeing the screens with graduated tint, clear at the bottom. But sunglasses are too much of a pain for me to bother with : the Airbus blind or moveable brown perspex screen, depending on which aircraft, works for me 90% of the time.
If they are not, then owing to the dark lens tint, the pupils of the eyes open wider so actually more UV gets into the eye, where it can cause more damage
I personally found that sunglasses render the displays of A320 family too dark, (I think our company ran them dim to save money replacing them). I had better success seeing the screens with graduated tint, clear at the bottom. But sunglasses are too much of a pain for me to bother with : the Airbus blind or moveable brown perspex screen, depending on which aircraft, works for me 90% of the time.
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: I wouldn't know.
Posts: 4,499
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I use Zeiss Skylet glasses and usually a more wrap around frame with them that block out most of the light entering from the side. Have used them since my gliding days over 20 years ago, since they block most of the blue light they enable a much better cloud identification and a much clearer view. One thing to note is, on switching from the 737 to the A320 i had to switch from 90% absorbance to 75% as the airbus screens are so very bad compared to those used by Boeing. Not only size, but also the available range of brightness. In total those kinda glasses are not cheap, i usually pay from €600 upwards, my current set is over 1k as i am getting into the age where i need multifocal lenses...
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2015
Location: France
Posts: 507
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I use Zeiss Skylet glasses and usually a more wrap around frame with them that block out most of the light entering from the side. Have used them since my gliding days over 20 years ago, since they block most of the blue light they enable a much better cloud identification and a much clearer view. One thing to note is, on switching from the 737 to the A320 i had to switch from 90% absorbance to 75% as the airbus screens are so very bad compared to those used by Boeing. Not only size, but also the available range of brightness. In total those kinda glasses are not cheap, i usually pay from €600 upwards, my current set is over 1k as i am getting into the age where i need multifocal lenses...
I would be interested to see how it looks like !
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: In the sticks
Posts: 9,866
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'd prefer non polarized because polarized ones can black out cockpit displays. Go for neutral grey glass instead and pick the right size for your face.
https://aoeyewear.com/sizing/
https://aoeyewear.com/sizing/