What cataract eye lens type does FAA dissaprove of?

C

Charlie Seagull

Guest
I was considering eye lense replacement for cataracts. Today I heard that there were implementations that the FAA would not approve of. Can anyone fill me in?
 
Don't know of any.

Either way, you need a report of eye examination (8500-7) from your treating doctor stating your vision is stable. If you get multifocal or accommodating IOLs, you'll need to wait three months (let the brain adapt) and have the 8500-7 state that you don't have any significant side effects (flares, etc...).
 
i’m not a med person.

I do have the “ distance “ lens and have no regrets as to wearing glasses to

read.The glasses do provide some measure of eye protection as well..

With some issues like glaucoma this may be the least problems.
 
Charlie: they don't disaprove of any. However you should know:

The concentric "micro fresnel" lens (far vision in the center, nearer further out) has the difficulty that if the center spot odes NOT end up right on top of the high vision portion, making acuity stanndards becomes very difficult.

And, that the "flexible" lesnes, the ones with the arms that embed in the ciliary muscle that bend the lens for near/far, are plagued with the arms (whther wire or plastic) working their way through the muscle and htem becoming dislogded. Not a great outcome.

And, "one correction near and once correction far" will require (unless one is exactly 20/40 and the other is exactly 20/20) will require three months down with a contact lens and cheaters together, to bring the "close vision" eye out to 20/20. And you'll end up flyin with that combiantion all the time. The reference is the Laguardia accident in ?1997, which is why "near vision" correction (as this is called) is immediately grounding. He had NO Depth perception and folks DIED in that one.

B
 
Last edited:
bbchien said:
Charlie: they don't disaprove of any. However you should know:

The concentric "micro fresnel" lens (far vision in the center, nearer further out) has the difficulty that if the center spot odes NOT end up right on top of the high vision portion, making acuity stanndards becomes very difficult.

And, that the "flexible" lesnes, the ones with the arms that embed in the ciliary muscle that bend the lens for near/far, are plagued with the arms (whther wire or plastic) working their way through the muscle and htem becoming dislogded. Not a great outcome.

And, "one correction near and once correction far" will require (unless one is exactly 20/40 and the other is exactly 20/20) will require three months down with a contact lens and cheaters together, to bring the "close vision" eye out to 20/20. And you'll end up flyin with that combiantion all the time. The reference is the Laguardia accident in ?1997, which is why "near vision" correction (as this is called) is immediately grounding. He had NO Depth perception and folks DIED in that one.

B
Click to expand...
About 1638 eastern daylight time, on October 19, 1996, a McDonnell Douglas MD-88, N914DL, operated by Delta Air Lines, Inc., as flight 554, struck the approach light structure and the end of the runway deck during the approach to land on runway 13 at the LaGuardia Airport, in Flushing, New York.

@bbchien Close! It was 1996., I remember that one because I was at LGA aboard a departing flight waiting pushback, and I happened to be looking out the window as Flight 554 slid by, belly on the runway. Airport closed, we deboarded, and I drove home. It was the worst weather imaginable. Heavy (!) rain. I was surprised that the NTSB report did not list the weather as a contributing factor.

-Skip
 
Last edited:
I knew a career B-52 pilot that was told he had no depth perception.

Could it be the tests are not measuring what you think?
 
bbchien said:
The reference is the Laguardia accident in ?1997, which is why "near vision" correction (as this is called) is immediately grounding. He had NO Depth perception and folks DIED in that one.
Click to expand...

If referencing Flight 554 (1996), depth perception issues caused by monovision contact lenses was reported as a factor but there weren't any fatalities so maybe you're thinking of a different incident?
 
I went to the Eye Specialty Group in Memphis, TN for screening. There were a few exchanges. I'm just sharing the info FWIW.

The Dr. examined me and gave me 2 options:

The Intra Ocular Lens (IOL) that insurance would cover for a far sight solution is the Tecnis Monofocal.
The second option was a lens that is adjusted for 20/20 by UV light after implant and sufficent healing.
Tech also told me;

There are no options within the light adjustable lenses we just choose which diopter power to place into the eye based upon the size and shape of your eye.

There are two multi-focal lenses that we can choose between the Panoptix and odyssey but we don’t recommend due to they can cause glare and halos which you are already experiencing currently. The multi-focal lenses can given intermediate and near vision as well but they just tend to cause more issues with glare and halos so we wouldn’t recommend it.

To be honest 20/20 for life seems worth the maybe $10k.
Thanks for the assistance.
 
Charlie Seagull said:
I went to the Eye Specialty Group in Memphis, TN for screening. There were a few exchanges. I'm just sharing the info FWIW.

The Dr. examined me and gave me 2 options:

The Intra Ocular Lens (IOL) that insurance would cover for a far sight solution is the Tecnis Monofocal.
The second option was a lens that is adjusted for 20/20 by UV light after implant and sufficent healing.
Tech also told me;

There are no options within the light adjustable lenses we just choose which diopter power to place into the eye based upon the size and shape of your eye.

There are two multi-focal lenses that we can choose between the Panoptix and odyssey but we don’t recommend due to they can cause glare and halos which you are already experiencing currently. The multi-focal lenses can given intermediate and near vision as well but they just tend to cause more issues with glare and halos so we wouldn’t recommend it.

To be honest 20/20 for life seems worth the maybe $10k.
Thanks for the assistance.
Click to expand...
for life....until it dislodges.
 
fwiw department.
Had coke bottle thick lenses most of my life. Wouldn't even get up to pee in the middle of the night without putting them on.

The 2? weeks between doing each eye were weird. Things were different sizes in each eye (I took one lens out of my old glasses). Semi fun to blink back and forth to see the differences between the eyes.

Got the plain "distance" lenses - they work great. I can drive car with no glasses. Amazing. Crazy. Bifocals for close up work just fine - mine have a slight correction up top for the distance stuff so I just wear them all the time - snot a big deal. It feels weird to not have glasses on anyhow.

The only issue is welding - bifocals don't line up with the window in the helmet so I use clip on cheaters. If I did it a lot, I would just get a lens to fit the helmet.

Couldn't be happier.
 
Capt. Geoffrey Thorpe said:
fwiw department.
Had coke bottle thick lenses most of my life. Wouldn't even get up to pee in the middle of the night without putting them on.

The 2? weeks between doing each eye were weird. Things were different sizes in each eye (I took one lens out of my old glasses). Semi fun to blink back and forth to see the differences between the eyes.

Got the plain "distance" lenses - they work great. I can drive car with no glasses. Amazing. Crazy. Bifocals for close up work just fine - mine have a slight correction up top for the distance stuff so I just wear them all the time - snot a big deal. It feels weird to not have glasses on anyhow.

The only issue is welding - bifocals don't line up with the window in the helmet
Click to expand...

Nearly the same experience (except for the 'middle of the night' bit ;) )-highly recommend the 'distance' lenses. Only thing is that I need bifocals to see the dash of the airplane, particularly for night flights.
 
Back
Top