- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 210
wonder when the common sense will hit about lasik.....seems odd that it's ok to protect your investment by letting pilot get lasik while you exclude a candidate who had it.
- Status
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 160
I heard from a few pilots at work, that the reason you cannot get Laser Eye Surgery, is that if you ever had to eject, then the force would rip your eyes apart, as they were sliced open during surgery! maybe someone here can deny or confirm?
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 410
Rowshambow said:
I'm no flight surgeon but an educated guess here would be that it has more to do with decompression at altitude and the possible halos at night than fear of ejecting from the less than 100 aircraft fitted with ejection seats.
If the seats were the only concern, then helo pilots would be able to have it done and, at present, we can't.
While the procedure is getting better with a higher success rate, it's still not perfect. So why would the military spend millions to train a pilot that may have problems with their eyes due to a less than perfect lasik procedure?
Just my thoughts though, don't take them as gospel.
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 160
I asked my eye Surgeon this exact question regarding Laser eye surgery and although he's not a CF Doc it was basically this.
There are various types of laser eye surgery. Lasik creates a flap above the cornea at the top of the eye. A thin layer of eye tissue well say to keep in simple is cut and rolled up. That flap stay's in place above the eye. PRK is an older type of eye surgery that basically cuts and thins some of the eye tissue, No flap. More invasive, more painful, longer recovery, more drops, meds etc. It's what I got and trust me it hurt and the recovery sucked. But it's more permanent and there is more of a chance of better than 20/20 vision and less of a chance of that flap I mentioned that is created with Lasik giving you problems. Lasik is heavily marketed as a simpler eye surgery, much less discomfort, much shorter recovery time more surgeons doing it etc.
The problem with Lasik is that the flap can come loose and cover the eye. A hard hit to the head playing sports, getting something in your eye, rubbing it after swimming etc. Especially after the first year can ruin that flap. So I can only imagine what an ejection seat would do.
When I researched all this for myself I found a few Police forces would not allow you to be hired the first year after Lasik. PRK was no problem.
I went with the PRK after my Surgeon openly told me that Lasik was truly a more cosmetic option. More easily marketed. He then suggested that I get the cheaper PRK if I could live with the recovery and take some time off work, and even recommended a better surgeon than himself to do the PRK. That kind of honesty was great.
It does however depend on your Corneal thickens, pupil size etc. to determine which surgery is best for individual patients. Shop around but I do believe that is the problem with Lasik.
There are various types of laser eye surgery. Lasik creates a flap above the cornea at the top of the eye. A thin layer of eye tissue well say to keep in simple is cut and rolled up. That flap stay's in place above the eye. PRK is an older type of eye surgery that basically cuts and thins some of the eye tissue, No flap. More invasive, more painful, longer recovery, more drops, meds etc. It's what I got and trust me it hurt and the recovery sucked. But it's more permanent and there is more of a chance of better than 20/20 vision and less of a chance of that flap I mentioned that is created with Lasik giving you problems. Lasik is heavily marketed as a simpler eye surgery, much less discomfort, much shorter recovery time more surgeons doing it etc.
The problem with Lasik is that the flap can come loose and cover the eye. A hard hit to the head playing sports, getting something in your eye, rubbing it after swimming etc. Especially after the first year can ruin that flap. So I can only imagine what an ejection seat would do.
When I researched all this for myself I found a few Police forces would not allow you to be hired the first year after Lasik. PRK was no problem.
I went with the PRK after my Surgeon openly told me that Lasik was truly a more cosmetic option. More easily marketed. He then suggested that I get the cheaper PRK if I could live with the recovery and take some time off work, and even recommended a better surgeon than himself to do the PRK. That kind of honesty was great.
It does however depend on your Corneal thickens, pupil size etc. to determine which surgery is best for individual patients. Shop around but I do believe that is the problem with Lasik.
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 210
Rowshambow said:
US Navy used to think the same thing, but now they've started experimenting with it on their current aviators http://www-nmcsd.med.navy.mil/news/news_view.cfm?nrid=258.
All three US combat arms offer it to their servicemen at government expense. http://www.medindia.net/news/view_news_main.asp?x=19701, http://www.usaeyes.org/lasik/library/free-lasik-soldiers.htm but that's a story for another thread.
hoorah.
Blackadder1916
Army.ca Fixture
- Reaction score
- 2,758
- Points
- 1,160
LASIK Eye Surgery for (United States) Air Force Aviator Applicants
http://usmilitary.about.com/od/airforce/a/pilotlasik.htm
The usual caveats apply that this refers to the United States Air Force and has no bearing on the requirements of the Canadian Forces. My experience has been that the CF is more conservative in its approach. Often that approach is more conservative due to a scientific basis but can also be due to fiscal/personnel/cultural/requirement differences.
The aviator referred to in the navy article is a NFO (a backseater not a pilot). Hopefully the USN will change its policy soon and (as stated in the article) he will have the opportunity to go to flight school.
As for military pers receiving refractive surgery at government expense that would be an interesting subject for a different thread, but a simple explanation would be that the procedures are available to US servicemen at certain US military medical facilities (and only there) because they have the military ophthalmologists already there and, let's face it, refractive surgeries have probably now become the most common surgical procedures (worldwide) performed by ophthalmologists. If the US military was paying for these procedures at civilian facilities I think the story would be different.
http://usmilitary.about.com/od/airforce/a/pilotlasik.htm
The usual caveats apply that this refers to the United States Air Force and has no bearing on the requirements of the Canadian Forces. My experience has been that the CF is more conservative in its approach. Often that approach is more conservative due to a scientific basis but can also be due to fiscal/personnel/cultural/requirement differences.
RetiredRoyal said:
The aviator referred to in the navy article is a NFO (a backseater not a pilot). Hopefully the USN will change its policy soon and (as stated in the article) he will have the opportunity to go to flight school.
As for military pers receiving refractive surgery at government expense that would be an interesting subject for a different thread, but a simple explanation would be that the procedures are available to US servicemen at certain US military medical facilities (and only there) because they have the military ophthalmologists already there and, let's face it, refractive surgeries have probably now become the most common surgical procedures (worldwide) performed by ophthalmologists. If the US military was paying for these procedures at civilian facilities I think the story would be different.
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 160
Inch, ya the guys I heard that from too, were also not gospel, just what they heard, prob some of your old flight school mates etc, but (my question and statement in regards to the 100 or so AC that have eject seats, and please correct me if I am wrong), do all pilots have to do Moose Jaw in the Harvard 2, and if so does it have an ejection seat, so if the ejection seat is the reason, and could cause your eye to peel apart, the reason being that all pilots can't have the procedure is because of their time in MJ and not necessarily what AC you will be flying for your career.
I do agree it is getting better, and if the change does happen from V1 to V2 I know there will be a very long line up and even more competition for the trade!
I do agree it is getting better, and if the change does happen from V1 to V2 I know there will be a very long line up and even more competition for the trade!
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 210
Blackadder1916 said:
Yeppers, he's a GIB..but I would imagine that he'd be subject to all the same physical stresses the pilot is during flight and or ejection.
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 410
All pilots currently go through Moose Jaw on the Harvard II which is equipped with a Martin Baker Mk 16 ejection seat. There are however, trials about to be done with an extended PFT course leading right into the Jet Ranger. I'm not going to debate the pros and cons of that, but I've been told the trial course will be running this fall.
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 110
I am heading to apply for pilot. I have already done the CFAT, PT test and medical last year to be pilot but i was V2 and couldn't continue with interview and test that follow. Not that I have the vision to apply, i'd like to know if there's any tips for the navigating personel test and the simulator. The recruiter told me that for the navigating 1/6 pass it and for the simulator I have 85% chances to fail it cause I don't have any experience of pilotage ???
Thanks for your reply
Steven
Thanks for your reply
Steven
- Reaction score
- 1,720
- Points
- 1,140
Inch said:
I think it is running right now. I have a friend on PFT right now that was selected to do the Extended version to stream to Helos. A
And it's the Mk16L
Max
steven18 said:
Before you think about the cognitive screening in Trenton, you should concentrate on passing your interview. As it was pointed in another thread, the score needed for pilots is now much higher than it used to be so you need to be well above average if you want to be recommended.
You can always use the magical search button to find what you are looking for.
Good Luck
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 160
A friend of mine sent me this today!
there is a link, but couldn't post it from here!
In summary entry ( selection) vision standards for:
Pilots and SAR: V2-no refractive standard
ANAV, AEC and FEs V3 no refractive standard
The Chief of Air Staff approved these recommendations on 18 June 2007 and Flight Surgeon guidelines and Medical Standards for CF aircrew have been amended.
Hope this helps. Good luck on your trg!!
there is a link, but couldn't post it from here!
In summary entry ( selection) vision standards for:
Pilots and SAR: V2-no refractive standard
ANAV, AEC and FEs V3 no refractive standard
The Chief of Air Staff approved these recommendations on 18 June 2007 and Flight Surgeon guidelines and Medical Standards for CF aircrew have been amended.
Hope this helps. Good luck on your trg!!
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 110
ark said:
I did 1 interview to get in the reserve 4 years ago and 2 others last year to apply for other trades in reg force and for my transfert in army reserve and i was recommanded in all navo air force, G aero, airfield engineer and EME so i don't think i have to worry if i'll be recommanded...i know their shits lol and I know what they want to hear!
Anyway, i'll go the airport next to my city they give pilotage courses...i'll have a private license after 8 weeks of training and one writing exam as well as 1 pratical exam..so after that i think i'll be fine for their test!
- Reaction score
- 1,720
- Points
- 1,140
steven18 said:I did 1 interview to get in the reserve 4 years ago and 2 others last year to apply for other trades in reg force and for my transfert in army reserve and i was recommanded in all navo air force, G aero, airfield engineer and EME so i don't think i have to worry if i'll be recommanded...i know their shits lol and I know what they want to hear!
Anyway, i'll go the airport next to my city they give pilotage courses...i'll have a private license after 8 weeks of training and one writing exam as well as 1 pratical exam..so after that i think i'll be fine for their test!
First, I suggest you remove the wings as your avatar
You might be fine for the ACS, but also think long term. ACS is only the first step. There are many other steps before you get to your avatar....
Max
- Reaction score
- 79
- Points
- 680
New Vision Standards for CF Aircrew Candidates
News Release
New Vision Standards for CF Aircrew Candidates
Air Force / Force aérienne - NR 07.004 - July 25, 2007
OTTAWA – Canada’s Air Force has recently approved updated vision standards for aircrew candidates.
Under the new standards, applicants who wear glasses or contact lenses to provide modest correction to their vision are now eligible for consideration, whereas previously, applicants required uncorrected vision. The decision to adjust the minimum vision standard is based on the findings of a scientific review by a third party contractor with oversight from Defence Research and Development Canada (DRDC).
“The updated standards are based on scientific measurements that more accurately reflect the reality of operator requirements,” said Chief of Air Staff Medical Advisor, Captain (Navy) Cyd Courchesne. “This is good news for the Canadian Forces as well as for many aircrew candidates, who in the past did not quite meet the previous vision standards.”
The previous standards were based on a Second World War-era policy that uncorrected vision was necessary to fly combat aircraft, however, this policy was not substantiated by scientific research. It was decided that the vision standard for aircrew candidates should be based on modern scientific testing in order to be as fair and as inclusive as possible to all those desiring to become Canadian Forces aircrew.
Within the aircrew occupations, the new vision standards have the most impact for prospective pilots. There will be no change in the expected flying performance of pilots because of the adjusted standards.
Applicants who have had corrective (laser) eye surgery are not eligible for entry into the pilot occupation.
The Canadian Forces has not had any difficulty attracting pilot applicants in the past several years. In the future, the new vision standard will result in a larger pool of applicants and a more competitive selection process.
-30-
For further information, please contact:
Lieutenant Paul Finnemore
Air Force Public Affairs
613-944-5841
News Release
New Vision Standards for CF Aircrew Candidates
Air Force / Force aérienne - NR 07.004 - July 25, 2007
OTTAWA – Canada’s Air Force has recently approved updated vision standards for aircrew candidates.
Under the new standards, applicants who wear glasses or contact lenses to provide modest correction to their vision are now eligible for consideration, whereas previously, applicants required uncorrected vision. The decision to adjust the minimum vision standard is based on the findings of a scientific review by a third party contractor with oversight from Defence Research and Development Canada (DRDC).
“The updated standards are based on scientific measurements that more accurately reflect the reality of operator requirements,” said Chief of Air Staff Medical Advisor, Captain (Navy) Cyd Courchesne. “This is good news for the Canadian Forces as well as for many aircrew candidates, who in the past did not quite meet the previous vision standards.”
The previous standards were based on a Second World War-era policy that uncorrected vision was necessary to fly combat aircraft, however, this policy was not substantiated by scientific research. It was decided that the vision standard for aircrew candidates should be based on modern scientific testing in order to be as fair and as inclusive as possible to all those desiring to become Canadian Forces aircrew.
Within the aircrew occupations, the new vision standards have the most impact for prospective pilots. There will be no change in the expected flying performance of pilots because of the adjusted standards.
Applicants who have had corrective (laser) eye surgery are not eligible for entry into the pilot occupation.
The Canadian Forces has not had any difficulty attracting pilot applicants in the past several years. In the future, the new vision standard will result in a larger pool of applicants and a more competitive selection process.
-30-
For further information, please contact:
Lieutenant Paul Finnemore
Air Force Public Affairs
613-944-5841
- Reaction score
- 1
- Points
- 410
CANFORGEN 128/07 CAS 033 251550Z JUL 07
CHANGES TO AIRCREW SELECTION STANDARDS
UNCLASSIFIED
REFERENCES: A. RODS APSC JULY 2005
B. 1150-29 (AIR MED ADVISOR) 28 NOV 05
C. 1150-1 (SSO AV MED) 10 JAN 07
D. 6600-1 (AMA) 18 JUN 07
E. A-MD-154-000/FP-000 (CFP 154) ANNEX A
THE PURPOSE OF THIS MESSAGE IS TO COMMUNICATE RECENT CHANGES MADE TO AIRCREW SELECTION STANDARDS
AT REF B, CAS ENDORSED THE RECOMMENDATION FROM THE AEROMEDICAL POLICY AND STANDARDS COMMITTEE (APSC) (REF A) TO APPROVE THE PILOT ANTHROPOMETRIC SELECTION TOOL (PAST) AS THE NEW METHODOLOGY TO DETERMINE PILOT CANDIDATE ANTHROPOMETRIC MEASUREMENTS. THIS REMOVED MANY OF THE RESTRICTIONS, ESPECIALLY FOR FEMALE APPLICANTS, THAT EXISTED WITH THE OLD ANTHROPOMETRIC STANDARDS. THIS METHODOLOGY HAS BEEN IN PLACE SINCE JAN 2006 WITH VERY POSITIVE RESULTS
AT REF D, CAS ENDORSED NEW AIRCREW ENTRY VISION STANDARDS. THE NEW VISION STANDARDS FOR ENTRY INTO THE PILOT, NAVIGATOR, AEROSPACE ENVIRONMENT CONTROLLER AND FLIGHT ENGINEER OCCUPATIONS HAVE BEEN ADJUSTED. UNDER THE NEW STANDARDS, APPLICANTS WHO WEAR GLASSES OR CONTACT LENSES TO PROVIDE MODEST CORRECTION TO THEIR VISION ARE NOW ELIGIBLE FOR CONSIDERATION. PREVIOUSLY, APPLICANTS WERE REQUIRED TO HAVE UNCORRECTED VISION. PERSONNEL WITH CORRECTIVE (LASER) EYE SURGERY ARE NOT ELIGIBLE FOR ENTRY INTO THE CF PILOT OCCUPATION
THOSE WHO HAVE APPLIED IN THE PAST BUT DID NOT MEET THE PREVIOUS VISION STANDARD ARE ENCOURAGED TO CONTACT THEIR PERSONNEL SELECTION OFFICER AND INQUIRE WHETHER THEY NOW QUALIFY TO RE-APPLY TO BECOME AIRCREW
QUESTIONS ON THIS MATTER CAN BE DIRECTED TO CAS MED ADVISOR CAPT (N) COURCHESNE AT 613 995-4742 OR LCOL BAIN HEAD OF AEROSPACE AND UNDERSEA MEDICAL SECTION AT CFEME AT 416 635-2024
__________________
CHANGES TO AIRCREW SELECTION STANDARDS
UNCLASSIFIED
REFERENCES: A. RODS APSC JULY 2005
B. 1150-29 (AIR MED ADVISOR) 28 NOV 05
C. 1150-1 (SSO AV MED) 10 JAN 07
D. 6600-1 (AMA) 18 JUN 07
E. A-MD-154-000/FP-000 (CFP 154) ANNEX A
THE PURPOSE OF THIS MESSAGE IS TO COMMUNICATE RECENT CHANGES MADE TO AIRCREW SELECTION STANDARDS
AT REF B, CAS ENDORSED THE RECOMMENDATION FROM THE AEROMEDICAL POLICY AND STANDARDS COMMITTEE (APSC) (REF A) TO APPROVE THE PILOT ANTHROPOMETRIC SELECTION TOOL (PAST) AS THE NEW METHODOLOGY TO DETERMINE PILOT CANDIDATE ANTHROPOMETRIC MEASUREMENTS. THIS REMOVED MANY OF THE RESTRICTIONS, ESPECIALLY FOR FEMALE APPLICANTS, THAT EXISTED WITH THE OLD ANTHROPOMETRIC STANDARDS. THIS METHODOLOGY HAS BEEN IN PLACE SINCE JAN 2006 WITH VERY POSITIVE RESULTS
AT REF D, CAS ENDORSED NEW AIRCREW ENTRY VISION STANDARDS. THE NEW VISION STANDARDS FOR ENTRY INTO THE PILOT, NAVIGATOR, AEROSPACE ENVIRONMENT CONTROLLER AND FLIGHT ENGINEER OCCUPATIONS HAVE BEEN ADJUSTED. UNDER THE NEW STANDARDS, APPLICANTS WHO WEAR GLASSES OR CONTACT LENSES TO PROVIDE MODEST CORRECTION TO THEIR VISION ARE NOW ELIGIBLE FOR CONSIDERATION. PREVIOUSLY, APPLICANTS WERE REQUIRED TO HAVE UNCORRECTED VISION. PERSONNEL WITH CORRECTIVE (LASER) EYE SURGERY ARE NOT ELIGIBLE FOR ENTRY INTO THE CF PILOT OCCUPATION
THOSE WHO HAVE APPLIED IN THE PAST BUT DID NOT MEET THE PREVIOUS VISION STANDARD ARE ENCOURAGED TO CONTACT THEIR PERSONNEL SELECTION OFFICER AND INQUIRE WHETHER THEY NOW QUALIFY TO RE-APPLY TO BECOME AIRCREW
QUESTIONS ON THIS MATTER CAN BE DIRECTED TO CAS MED ADVISOR CAPT (N) COURCHESNE AT 613 995-4742 OR LCOL BAIN HEAD OF AEROSPACE AND UNDERSEA MEDICAL SECTION AT CFEME AT 416 635-2024
__________________
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 160
I saw that on DIN this morning but didn't have a chance to post it. (I told you someone would be me to it) I imagine there will be a sudden surge in Pilot applications in the next little while! Good luck to those who apply; they have waited a long time for this change.
- Status
Similar threads
