Pilot Eyesight

[Maverick]

Does anyone know the eyesight requirements for pilots in the RAF?

I have been prescribed glasses which make my eyesight better than perfect but I've been told that my eyesight must be perfect without the use of glasses.

Also, whats the point in excluding people in my situation? If I can see perfectly with glasses on then what difference does it make?

[BigFatCivvy]

I must confess to not knowing a great deal about the RAF, but I thought I'd just give a reply, since nobody else seems to have done so.

By the way, this might sound like I'm taking the p##s but it is meant in the nicest possible way.

I'd have thought it was fairly obvious, that the MoD are not going to hand over a rather expensive big shiny plane to somebody who can't see properly. It's ok to argue, but it boils down to the fact that they can and will choose those who meet their every requirement, and that certainly goes for eyes. What would you do if your glasses fell off? I suppose they could make a prescription cockpit!!!!! :crazyeyes: :turn-l:

I'd set your sights slightly lower, I'm sure there might be other areas of the RAF where glasses would be ok. I wouldn't like to say for certain. BFC

[rabby]

I'd set your sights slightly lower

Ooooh, nice pun.
Anyway, yes your eyes must be perfect. Suppose you lose you glasses, contacts arent much use either, if you're based out the desert somewhere out of distance of the local optician's...
Also, glasses might not be compatible with helmets and all the breathing apparatus and suchlike. Other jobs in the RAF are suitable with glasses, but then if you want to be in the RAF to fly, what's the point...?

[Maverick]

The USAF allow pilots to have corrected vision.

Saying 'what if you lose your glasses' is like saying what if a soldier loses his gun.

You can buy contact lenses in packs of 30 so you'd have to be pretty unlucky to lose all 30...

..plus your glasses

..and your spare set

..and be in a country that doesn't sell glasses

As it is I'm now pretty sure that you can pilot RAF aircraft with glasses. However, its all down to the RAF optician.

[BigFatCivvy]

I disagree there. If a soldier loses his gun, he's not going to be the Sgt's best friend any more . I wasn't talking about contact lenses anyway, I was talking about glasses. If he was doing some kind of splendid loop the loop, or banking round for a bombing run or such like, and his glasses came off, or indeed, if a contact lense popped out, what's he going to do then??

I can't personally see why pilots, or potential pilots couldn't have LASIK, but I don't make the rules do I?

BFC.

[japslapper]

I can easily answer this one - (I studied 3 years of medicine before quiting and shacking up with my J-bird here in japan) -

When considering eyesight there are many features that need to be considered: Colours perception, visual acuity, refractive error , binocular fusion, and speed of focus.

In short you can be selected to pilot with a refractive error - assuming every thing mentioned above is A1. In my case I have 6/4 vision(that is can read bottom line of eye chart without specs) in both eyes. However my vison can be improved further with a + lens. I dont need specs but can have them if i want

To qualify as a pilot you should be able to do 6/6(20-20) with both eyes independantly - unaided - hopefully more. Colour vision has to be perfect, as does binocular fusion.

If you pass these requirements no problem. Once your in the RAF as a pilot you can then be prescribed specs for a minor error.

In the MOD pilots have the highest requirement - its suprising - many people including serving SAS will have something alot worse.

People like to go on about "20-20" vision - its not that simple.

Good Luck

Japslapper

[japslapper]

I can easily answer this one - (I studied 3 years of medicine before quiting and shacking up with my J-bird here in japan) -

When considering eyesight there are many features that need to be considered: Colours perception, visual acuity, refractive error , binocular fusion, and speed of focus.

In short you can be selected to pilot with a refractive error - assuming every thing mentioned above is A1. In my case I have 6/4 vision(that is can read bottom line of eye chart without specs) in both eyes. However my vison can be improved further with a + lens. I dont need specs but can have them if i want

To qualify as a pilot you should be able to do 6/6(20-20) with both eyes independantly - unaided - hopefully more. Colour vision has to be perfect, as does binocular fusion.

If you pass these requirements no problem. Once your in the RAF as a pilot you can then be prescribed specs for a minor error.

In the MOD pilots have the highest requirement - its suprising - many people including serving SAS will have something alot worse.

People like to go on about "20-20" vision - its not that simple.

Good Luck

Japslapper

[cglees]

The bottom line is, and I dont mean to be rude.
There are plenty of people who apply who have the aptitude to be a pilot and have perfect vision, so why would the RAF want to take someone who does not have perfect vision.
You can argue all you like but the RAF are fortunate enough to be able to select the very best. It is unfair, but thats life.
Get over it
I did.

[always go commando]

I can imagine glasses or contacts would be a big no no as turning a jet at daft 'o' gravity would probably shatter them into your face. Or at least make them fall of.


e.g. at about 8 g's most people will black out because all pressure pushes all of the oxygen out of their blood.
So I’m not sure about this, physics was never my favourite subject but I think this would mean a 70kg person would way about 560kg so a pair of glasses weighing about 200g would suddenly weigh 1.6kg, which may not sound much but there only thin.
Of course, I know nothing of aviation so I’m probably wrong.


from reading the previous posts I have visions of fighter pilots banking at daft hundred knots with there fingers stuck through there skull because they were trying to put the spare contacts in.

[stefanwurwal]

Having been through OASC at RAF Cranwell a few times now i have had this discussion with many people applying to fly for the RAF. Looking at it from the RAF´s point of view its simple, they have a large resource of very willing candidates to fly their aircraft so it makes sense to only select the best and least risky for them to train. In other words, even if you are an amazing PC pilot and have remarkable aptitude test scores, there is not much that can be done.

However, saying this, you do get the odd exceptions! I applied for a Flying scholarship and 6th form Sponsorship during my 6th form at school. Unfortunately, my medical (eyesight) was the only thing that let me down and I wasnt deemed fit to fly (not even UAS) so I became an Air Traffic Control branch sponsored student. Anyway, later I applied for a University Bursary and this time I managed to get selected as a Navigator bursar granting me admission to a UAS and flying - Great!
On the UAS my instructors saw I wasnt all that bad in flying and on completing the UAS Nav syllabus I requested an eyesight test to change to Pilot. Amazingly I passed this too and have just completed EFT with my UAS!

So from initially applying and being told there wasnt a chance in hell to finally being told I can see, was quite unexpected! The optician at Cranwell was uncertain as to why my eyes had improved (especially during a 4 years Masters degree that involved a lot of reading and computer work).

I´m soon to start at IOT to become an RAF Pilot...a dream come true!

[stefanwurwal]

Hi,
Yes I´m fairly certain when I say that Cranwell will not allow any kind of corrective laser eye surgery. I think it just comes down to the fact that the person does not have the correct eyesight required, and also i fthe operation screws up then the candidate is left worse off than before and may try and take legal action.

Hope that helps

[sp10122]

I'm in the Army and have spent 6 months at Cranwell and was very surprised and disappointed by the place.

Yes the RAF will take people purely on pilot aptitude but that is their greatest flaw. You are an officer in HM forces but most of them aren't interested in that and the farce of IOT and the quality of some of the instructors doesn't help. I was in there in mess kit at a do and some chopper came up and said the Army are shit because Cranwell does in 6 months what it takes us a year to do at Sandhurst. I was shocked at the arrogance of this prat. My problem is that a lot of the pilot's I've met are immature, arrogant and only interested in getting what they can out of the service. There was no sense of duty or the qualities I would exepct of an officer. There are some good lads but they are sadly the minority.

That's why the Army Air Corps (and Navy) will take people who wear glasses for flying. Because you have to achieve standards at aptitude and grading (13 hourse testing flying which the RAF inexplicably don't do?) but the deciding factor is are you a good Army officer? That is compiled from your report at Sandhurst so after months of being beasted your true character and leadership abilities can be assessed. Because you've spent a week in the field in Wales in December (well, actually 3 by this stage), piss wet through, tired yet leading your platoon into an attack. If your vision corrects perfectly (within reason) the other qualities are far more important to producing the pilots the Army wants.

Of course IOT doesn't need to be a beasting and you don't have to be able to command a platoon on ops by the end of it (I commanded a pl on ops 3 weeks after leaving) but the emphasis is wrong. If you're not aircrew you're looked at as a lower class. Instead of wasting millions on UASs (why on earth do we bother training pilots to a basic standard before they've even joined.....? the course only takes 3- months, if anyone says recruitment, I'll cry) why don't you advertise and work on valuing all of your people, including the support staff. Without them you will not do anything.

Anyway, no, laser eye surgery is not allowed although research in the US is ongoing and we should have the results next year. The reason being that the procedure causes stepping in the cornea and there are concerns about night vision and 'flaring', especially on NVGs. The Navy and Army will accept you if you require glasses (within reason).

[stefanwurwal]

Some interesting points there I must say. Yes, I can say that often (although it shouldnt be so) aircrew in the RAF are looked upon as superior, which as you mention is immature and does not reflect the true nature of such an organisation. Without ALL the other branches of the RAF there would be no aircrew, however some still feel that they are above the rest.

The Navy/Army training you mentioned is very intresting. The fact that a lot more emphasis is placed on the officer qualities (in your opinion) seems a good idea. I´m sure that when a person is cold, wet, tired and having to work hard, the persons true character emerges.

I´m quite annoyed also by the remark someone gave to you while you were at Cranwell, all I can say is that not all RAF trainees think the same and I hope his/her stupid comment has not caused you to think badly of what I consider to be an excellent organisation.

Defenitely some interesting points made.

[sp10122]

Apologies for going off thread, I don't mean for this to be an anti RAF rant but I think a lot of people just don't come into contact with the professionalism and hard work required that is demonstrated to you by a Colour Sergeant who has 12+ years experience and instructs your platoon. He will be fit and amongst the best soldiers in the Army...he will give you the example of the standard of profssionalism and attitude required. IOT seriously needs to address areas like this as I was distinctly unimpressed by the quality of some of the officer instructors, out of IOT for a few years or so and most have never commanded anything. Yet they talk condescendingly down to me about leadership......

In any branch of the Army you are an Army/infantry officer first and Pilot/Engineer/Logistician secondly. I'd say the comment made to me by an isolated individual was symptamtic of the insulatory way that IOT works. I think ultimately all people commissioning should, as RN, Army and RMs do, do the same length of course at a similar intensity because it is the length and pressure of the course that hardens you and gives you the right to stand tall as a commissioned officer. The final exercise at IOT was spent in tents next to an airfield doing shifts. We spent 10 days in the field getting pissed on in Scotland fighting our own mini war. It was shit but at the end I could look around the men and women around me and say yep, you've all earnt this.

I'm sure no one goes into IOT thinking....'I'm going to be a condescending knob' but the product it produces seems to lack the humility, sense of professionalism and standards one would expect. Sandhurst is not perfect but at least it's a bit of a test and numptys are readily kicked out.