USAF / USA / USN / USMC Vision

[Guest Far sighted]

goducks,

How hard is it to get the far sighted wavier? I have been told that is far harder to get a wavier for hyperopia than it is for myopia.

Right Eye: +2.50

Left Eye: +1.25

(with glasses I am corrected to 20/20)

Edited December 31, 2009 by Far sighted

[Guest goducks]

goducks,

How hard is it to get the far sighted wavier? I have been told that is far harder to get a wavier for hyperopia than it is for myopia.

Right Eye: +2.50

Left Eye: +1.25

(with glasses I am corrected to 20/20)

Waivers for hyperopia are actually more lenient in terms of how much will be waivered, however they are also linked to normal ocular motility function. Up to +4.00 is waivered if you can pass the OVT depth perception (actually stereopsis) test, as well as other motility test such as red lens. The waiver guidelines allow hyperopia up to +3.00 if you can't pass the OVT, but can still pass the back up DP tests.

As always, these numbers are based on cycloplegia with two drops of 1% Cyclopentolate, which can result in measuring a lot more hyperopia than you would see without dilating the eyes and typically more than you would see when dilating with the "normal" drops such as Tropicamide or Phenylephrine.

Basically, at +2.50 you would simply have to meet the same vision, motility and acuity standards as anybody else. So things look good.

GD

[Guest Far sighted]

As always, these numbers are based on cycloplegia with two drops of 1% Cyclopentolate, which can result in measuring a lot more hyperopia than you would see without dilating the eyes and typically more than you would see when dilating with the "normal" drops such as Tropicamide or Phenylephrine.

I'm glad you brought this up. I actually passed a vision test with 20/20 (it was a civilian doctor, though) without dilation. It was after she dilated my eyes that she decided I should wear glasses. I am not sure which drops she used, though.

[Guest goducks]

I'm glad you brought this up. I actually passed a vision test with 20/20 (it was a civilian doctor, though) without dilation. It was after she dilated my eyes that she decided I should wear glasses. I am not sure which drops she used, though.

Probably not Cyclopentolate. It's rarely used in civilian practice, except on young children.

[Guest Far sighted]

How much more hyperopia is usually discovered when using Cyclopentolate? Will I probably still be under +4.00?

[Guest goducks]

How much more hyperopia is usually discovered when using Cyclopentolate? Will I probably still be under +4.00?

It's extremely variable. Sometimes very little and sometimes a lot. I would guess you'd still be under 4.00, but there's really no way to predict.

[Guest Far sighted]

Well then I guess there's only one way to find out. We'll see what happens, thank you very much goducks!

[boomer2pilot]

Hey there goducks,

Got a pretty specific question...

A few months back I went down to Brooks for my initial FC I (had a UPT slot), and got taken down for Optic Nerve Drusen. My vision is 20/15 uncorrected L&R, perfect color vision/depth perception, ect... Was told even though there was nothing wrong with my vision, that I cannot be an AF pilot. I was just wondering if you have ever had any experience with this? I know there are pilots out there actively flying with Drusen, but it was diagnosed after they had been through UPT, so of course it was waivered. The docs down at Brooks said that since I have not been through UPT yet, a waiver for me wasn't going to happen. I should also mention that I am a civilan pilot, and a guard boom operator, so I am a flyer with a current class III physical. If you have any input/advice I would greatly appreciate it, I'm having a hard time understanding how I can be a boom and touch 2 planes together inflight, but can't be a pilot...I also have had no luck in getting the Navy/Marines/Armys stance on this....they just keep telling me the vision requirements, which I meet, but I'm sure that their FC I's will include screening for dursen, is it possible they would give a waiver?

Thanks in advance!!!

Edited January 15, 2010 by boomer2pilot

[Guest goducks]

Hey there goducks,

Got a pretty specific question...

A few months back I went down to Brooks for my initial FC I (had a UPT slot), and got taken down for Optic Nerve Drusen. My vision is 20/15 uncorrected L&R, perfect color vision/depth perception, ect... Was told even though there was nothing wrong with my vision, that I cannot be an AF pilot. I was just wondering if you have ever had any experience with this? I know there are pilots out there actively flying with Drusen, but it was diagnosed after they had been through UPT, so of course it was waivered. The docs down at Brooks said that since I have not been through UPT yet, a waiver for me wasn't going to happen. I should also mention that I am a civilan pilot, and a guard boom operator, so I am a flyer with a current class III physical. If you have any input/advice I would greatly appreciate it, I'm having a hard time understanding how I can be a boom and touch 2 planes together inflight, but can't be a pilot...I also have had no luck in getting the Navy/Marines/Armys stance on this....they just keep telling me the vision requirements, which I meet, but I'm sure that their FC I's will include screening for dursen, is it possible they would give a waiver?

Thanks in advance!!!

B2P,

I've seen a few cases of Optic Nerve Head Drusen in folks applying for UPT and you are correct, it's not considered to be waiverable. This is based on potential risk to your vision down the road. The drusen are tiny chunks of calcified protein that sit within the optic nerve. At your age, it's unlikely to be affecting your vision, however, over time the drusen become larger and most people will eventually have loss of peripheral vision to some degree. Fortunately, it's not typically severe (although it can be), but the risk is considered significant enough that the AF is not willing to spend the money to retrain someone with a known risk to their vision.

Your FCIII status is completely different. The money has already been spent to train you and as long as your current vision allows you to perform boom duties safely, you should expect to remain on status. If, however, there was a significant change to your vision, your FCIII status could be jeopardized. Your civilian pilot status would follow the same logic I would assume.

As far as other service branches are concerned, I can't say for sure. My time has been solely spent working for the AF. However, ONH Drusen is a potentially progressive pathological condition that can have significant visual impact. I don't think that any service branch would be likely to waiver such a condition under normal circumstances.

This is a tough one to swallow. It's one thing to go into the application process knowing about something that may be DQ'ing. It's different when it's totally unexpected and worse yet, when it's based on the likelihood of something happening down the road. But, that's what the whole FCI process is all about- trying to identify those folks who are most likely to be good investments.

Hopefully your vision will be stable for many years to come. That's what's most important.

GD

[boomer2pilot]

Thanks goducks,

I was afraid you were going to say that, but I guess thats the hand I got...I will keep trying the other branches, maybe I have a shot somewhere else, just sucks loosing a guard fighter slot!!!

[Guest VETTE277]

Can someone help me make sense of the info I got from my civ eye exam and tell me where it falls in terms of Air force qualification ?

Keratometry Auto/Manual

OD 42.75 / 43.25 @ 106

OS 42.50 / 43.25 @ 68

Retinoscopy Auto/Manual

OD - 1.25 - 0.25 x 122

OS - 1.25 - 0.25 x 178

Subjective Refraction

OD - 1.00 DS Va 20/20

OS - 1.00 DS Va 20/20

20/50 both eyes uncorrected

Thanks!

Edited January 24, 2010 by VETTE277

[Guest goducks]

Can someone help me make sense of the info I got from my civ eye exam and tell me where it falls in terms of Air force qualification ?

Keratometry Auto/Manual

OD 42.75 / 43.25 @ 106

OS 42.50 / 43.25 @ 68

Retinoscopy Auto/Manual

OD - 1.25 - 0.25 x 122

OS - 1.25 - 0.25 x 178

Subjective Refraction

OD - 1.00 DS Va 20/20

OS - 1.00 DS Va 20/20

20/50 both eyes uncorrected

Thanks!

Based on the info you've provided it meets standards. Were you told otherwise?

[Guest VETTE277]

Based on the info you've provided it meets standards. Were you told otherwise?

Wasn't told anything either way. Just wanted to ensure everything was in check thus far. Currently an AFROTC student, anything I should worry about according those numbers in terms of as I age over the next couple years until I get my flight physical ? Or anything I didnt provide that comes into play ?

Do you think it would be silly for me to under go LASIK or PRK with me meeting the standards now ? I'm under interested in not having to wear contacts or glasses, will it open up more worms than its worth ? That would require a waiver right ?

Thanks for the reply.

Edited January 26, 2010 by VETTE277

[Guest goducks]

Wasn't told anything either way. Just wanted to ensure everything was in check thus far. Currently an AFROTC student, anything I should worry about according those numbers in terms of as I age over the next couple years until I get my flight physical ? Or anything I didnt provide that comes into play ?

Do you think it would be silly for me to under go LASIK or PRK with me meeting the standards now ? I'm under interested in not having to wear contacts or glasses, will it open up more worms than its worth ? That would require a waiver right ?

Thanks for the reply.

I probably wouldn't get PRK or LASIK if it were me. At your age, there's a good chance your eyes haven't finished changing, so getting refractive surgery would only be a temporary fix. You certainly don't need to get the surgery as you have a lot of room to change before it would be a problem.

That said, if you really don't like wearing glasses or contacts, refractive surgery waivers are quite routine. Barring very unexpected circumstances, the waiver process is not a big deal.

[Guest VETTE277]

New issue arose from my follow up because I mention some near site correction concerns I have. Eye doc assessed that I have a very mild convergence excess symptoms. Is this a DQ for AF flying ? And he also recorded it in my medical records, is this something the AF will ever see or uncover ? It was never discovered during any of my eye exams until I mentioned I was having these problems.

Thanks

[Guest goducks]

New issue arose from my follow up because I mention some near site correction concerns I have. Eye doc assessed that I have a very mild convergence excess symptoms. Is this a DQ for AF flying ? And he also recorded it in my medical records, is this something the AF will ever see or uncover ? It was never discovered during any of my eye exams until I mentioned I was having these problems.

Thanks

I would doubt this will be an issue. There are standards regarding ocular alignment and they are assessed as part of the FCI physical. However, it is extremely unusual to fail for this reason. The standards are designed to identify those folks who may become diplopic (have double vision) with hypoxia or extreme fatigue. Small issues with convergence are rarely a big deal.

Edited February 1, 2010 by goducks

[Guest GringoBoy87]

I just went for my first LASIK consultation (with an eye for PRK) and got these figures:

right: -3.50 -0.25 x059

left: -4.25

Based on what I've read throughout the boards I am well within the pre-op limits for a pilot-slot, so I don't have any questions regarding this unless someone has new information.

What I'm concerned about is the following, and I'm just copying exactly what the doc wrote:

"cortical spoke, cataract in both eyes. (can't read word, looks like "inkior" which is probably wrong) does not cross visual axis"

My understanding is that the cataracts are small spikes in the bottom of my eyes, but they don't cross my pupils. She also mentioned that it was unlikely to be an issue for a very long time. Does anyone know whether these cataracts would DQ me from even getting close to an airplane?

Thanks,

Gringo

BTW, I qualified for wavefront PRK, which was what I wanted (if "qualified" is the right term to use)

Edited April 1, 2010 by GringoBoy87

[Guest goducks]

I just went for my first LASIK consultation (with an eye for PRK) and got these figures:

right: -3.50 -0.25 x059

left: -4.25

Based on what I've read throughout the boards I am well within the pre-op limits for a pilot-slot, so I don't have any questions regarding this unless someone has new information.

What I'm concerned about is the following, and I'm just copying exactly what the doc wrote:

"cortical spoke, cataract in both eyes. (can't read word, looks like "inkior" which is probably wrong) does not cross visual axis"

My understanding is that the cataracts are small spikes in the bottom of my eyes, but they don't cross my pupils. She also mentioned that it was unlikely to be an issue for a very long time. Does anyone know whether these cataracts would DQ me from even getting close to an airplane?

Thanks,

Gringo

BTW, I qualified for wavefront PRK, which was what I wanted (if "qualified" is the right term to use)

Gringo,

It's hard to give you a definitive answer since it may come down to a medical judgement based on the specific appearance of the opacities. If they are judged to be at risk for progression (within the near future, not when you are 70 years old) to the point where they impact the vision and require surgery, then it's most likely to be DQing without a waiver. If they are judged to be stable and do not interfere with vision, then it shouldn't be a problem. Having them documented now is actually a good thing as it could be evidence of stability.

Chances are that it won't be an issue, but again, it's impossible to say without seeing them first hand.

FYI- "inkior" is likely "inferior"

GD

[Guest GringoBoy87]

Gringo,

It's hard to give you a definitive answer since it may come down to a medical judgement based on the specific appearance of the opacities. If they are judged to be at risk for progression (within the near future, not when you are 70 years old) to the point where they impact the vision and require surgery, then it's most likely to be DQing without a waiver. If they are judged to be stable and do not interfere with vision, then it shouldn't be a problem. Having them documented now is actually a good thing as it could be evidence of stability.

Chances are that it won't be an issue, but again, it's impossible to say without seeing them first hand.

FYI- "inkior" is likely "inferior"

GD

Ok thanks GD. I'm going to get a few more opinions on the matter (still shopping around for a good refractive surgeon) and hopefully get some concrete answers.

[Guest BuckeyeFlyer]

I have been seeing some conflicting information with regards to the current uncorrected near vision requirement for the Air Force Class I physical. Some sources on the net are saying 20/30 and some are saying 20/20 uncorrected. I would assume that the standard might have recently changed and some info is outdated. If anyone could verify which is correct that would be wonderful.

Thanks for everyones help, this website looks to be an excellent resource!

[aquajam77]

you might want to try looking here as it is pinned and has everything on vision...

This website is a great resource, but it does help when you use the SEARCH FUNCTION, cuts down on A LOT of redundancy

[Guest BuckeyeFlyer]

you might want to try looking here as it is pinned and has everything on vision...

This website is a great resource, but it does help when you use the SEARCH FUNCTION, cuts down on A LOT of redundancy

I appreaciate your response, however the link provided did not provide the near vision requirements, only distance vision. I had previously searched that thread and several others before posting and was unable to find a definitive answer. I did find one thread with a link to the actual class 1 physical requirements from the AF website but the link was broken, numerous searches both here and elsewhere did not provide more definitive results.

[VFR800]

FAIL.

If you actually read the ROE you'll see that you should have posted your unanswered question in the existing vision thread.

[Bucket]

i scoured the past 7 pages and couldnt find an answer, so here goes:

I'm at USAFA and just had the eye part of my grad physical today.. My prescription has refractive errors as R -2.00 and L -1.25, and i know that the right eye is out of the -1.50 limit. But my doc congratulated me on being PQ (i passed my depth perception test on the OVT for the first time today, and i assume all my other eye measurements are w/in limits). So did my doc make a mistake, or do they only consider your best/worst eye? in my case, my left eye is w/in limits, but right eye isnt. thanks for your help

[Guest goducks]

i scoured the past 7 pages and couldnt find an answer, so here goes:

I'm at USAFA and just had the eye part of my grad physical today.. My prescription has refractive errors as R -2.00 and L -1.25, and i know that the right eye is out of the -1.50 limit. But my doc congratulated me on being PQ (i passed my depth perception test on the OVT for the first time today, and i assume all my other eye measurements are w/in limits). So did my doc make a mistake, or do they only consider your best/worst eye? in my case, my left eye is w/in limits, but right eye isnt. thanks for your help

I'm sure the info is posted, but I'm too lazy to search so:

-1.50 is the standard, but the waiverable limit is -3.00. This particular waiver is a formality, thus your doc is correct in saying that you are basically PQ.

To answer your other question, waivers are based on the worst eye. If one eye is waiverable and on isn't, then no waiver.