sunglasses

My syndicate partner I tested several different sunglasses
under a blue Duo canopy a couple of years ago and reported
here on RAS.
We used a variety of different lenses including darker
and lighter tint varieties of Suntigers. We also compared
visibility through haze looking through the clear
view panel and the canopy.

Basically, during flight, the brain adapts and the
blue canopy made no difference to the subjective perception
of colour, which was overwhelmingly that of the sunglass
lens rather than the canopy. Subjectively all of the
different sunglasses seemed to retain their own characteristics
through the blue canopy - the lenses are far stronger
colour filters than the canopy. I never noticed any
perceptible loss of light under a blue canopy and,
counterintuitively, my partner and I both found that
visibility through haze was marginally better looking
through the blue canopy compared with looking through
the open clear view panel.

So I would say choose the colour of lens that you prefer
for other reasons than the colour of the canopy.

Colour photographs through the blue canopy were surprisingly
blue - which shows the difference between a brain and
a camera.

Now that I have a glider with a clear canopy I notice
how much hotter direct sunlight is on me. I never
thought the blue canopy reduced heat build up inside
the cockpit (from the greenhouse effect) but it certainly
reduces direct IR transmission by absorption - which
is why they are blue not amber - and also why the blue
canopies expand more in hot weather.

I hate bifocals in the air and find the transition
line intrusive but progressive lenses are fine for
me.

I can't see that any of the other suggestions in this
thread are going to answer S6's problem as directly
as Scheyden prescripition lense flip ups like I use.
The inner clear prescription lense is fixed and the
outer amber tinted lens flips up when I need to see
in darker areas - both in low light conditions and
also in very bright into-sun conditions when the light
contrast makes LCD screens on the lower part my panel
unreadable to me with dark lenses.

John Galloway



At 16:24 21 January 2006, wrote:
Hi again ,
I forgot one question. No one mention flying with a
tinted coanopy and
the recommended glasses.
Any comment.
S6


wrote:
Hi all,
Thank you for your comment. I will talk with my optician
about
Suntiger, Rayban and Melanin.
Will see what he recommend.
Regards
S6


bumper wrote:
Progressive lenses are not 'progressive bifocals'.
I've been wearing and flying with progressive lenses
for years. Vision is corrected to 20-12. Progressives
do take some getting used to, however they allow distance
vision, close-up reading and everything in between
- like the panel.

Some people cannot adapt to progressives, too bad,
they sure are great if you can!

bumper
Minden NV
'01-- Zero One' wrote in message news:gq2dnWTWkJZ370zeRVn-pw@
comcast.com...
There are some very good reasons not to use progressive
bifocals for flying. Use lined bifocals instead.
This will optimize the visual acuity for what we need.
distance vision (to spot other aircraft, birds, etc.)
and arms length vision (charts, instruments, etc.).



Larry

'01' USA

I use progressive lenses for normal day wear and for flying airplanes.
I usually use suntigers with stick on reading lenses in the sailplane
but sometimes fly with the progressives. The only problem is that they
do not darken enough. My next set of suntigers will be progressive. My
first reaction to progressives was that it would be impossible to fly
with them. I may have had a bad prescription because after suffering
with line bifocals for a few years I went to progressives and will not
go back.

What good reasons do you gave against using them?

Andy

I tried progressives in 1997 for several months and found them
unsuitable for me for flying.

1. The distortion at the edge of the lenses produced a swimming effect
as I moved my head which I found unhelpful. I found it distorted my
distant vision so that runway slope was hard to judge, especially where
the slope varied significantly (eg Manchester). It also made 'black
hole' night visual approaches difficult to judge. This only affected
earning a living but the first problem applied to gliding also.

2. The reading (near vision) band was so narrow that I could only see a
newspaper column width of print clearly without moving my head. This
made rapid reference to a Jepp chart a major operation. I didn't like
it for daily living either since newspapers are only a small part of my
reading. It's also an inconvenience reading a map gliding (Yes, I don't
totally trust GPS).

I reverted to my previous trifocals with relief and continue to use them
with no problems - except they're rather stronger now than they were
then - but I guess that would happened with progressives too.

Graeme Cant

Andy wrote:
I use progressive lenses for normal day wear and for flying airplanes.
I usually use suntigers with stick on reading lenses in the sailplane
but sometimes fly with the progressives. The only problem is that they
do not darken enough. My next set of suntigers will be progressive. My
first reaction to progressives was that it would be impossible to fly
with them. I may have had a bad prescription because after suffering
with line bifocals for a few years I went to progressives and will not
go back.

What good reasons do you gave against using them?

Andy

I've been using progressive lenses for the last 4 years and find that they
work well. There's a short period with a new prescription when straight
lines appear curved, but this has always disappeared within the first day of
wearing them. Although the adjustment from near to far and side to side
has been automatic for me, I'm told that this is not always the case. Some
users adjust more slowly and some never do.

For the last two years, I've been using self-darkening progressives; they
don't darken nearly as much as a good pair of regular sunglasses, but, at
least for me, provide more than adequate visual contrast and eye-strain
protection. I have them made big enough to provide good eye coverage since
the glare seems worse with smaller lenses.

Raphael Warshaw
1LK

"Graeme Cant" wrote in message
...
I tried progressives in 1997 for several months and found them unsuitable
for me for flying.

1. The distortion at the edge of the lenses produced a swimming effect as
I moved my head which I found unhelpful. I found it distorted my distant
vision so that runway slope was hard to judge, especially where the slope
varied significantly (eg Manchester). It also made 'black hole' night
visual approaches difficult to judge. This only affected earning a living
but the first problem applied to gliding also.

2. The reading (near vision) band was so narrow that I could only see a
newspaper column width of print clearly without moving my head. This made
rapid reference to a Jepp chart a major operation. I didn't like it for
daily living either since newspapers are only a small part of my reading.
It's also an inconvenience reading a map gliding (Yes, I don't totally
trust GPS).

I reverted to my previous trifocals with relief and continue to use them
with no problems - except they're rather stronger now than they were
then - but I guess that would happened with progressives too.

Graeme Cant

Andy wrote:
I use progressive lenses for normal day wear and for flying airplanes.
I usually use suntigers with stick on reading lenses in the sailplane
but sometimes fly with the progressives. The only problem is that they
do not darken enough. My next set of suntigers will be progressive. My
first reaction to progressives was that it would be impossible to fly
with them. I may have had a bad prescription because after suffering
with line bifocals for a few years I went to progressives and will not
go back.

What good reasons do you gave against using them?

Andy

Like Raphael, I wear progressives that self-darken. I also have a pair or
progressive sunglasses, but usually forget to change to 'em, as the newer
self-darkening lenses are much better than the ones made a few years ago.

It's important to have the progressives aligned and made properly. In the
US, I've had good results at Costco's optical department, but even they can
screw up. I had them do-it-again on one pair and they got it right.

bumper
"Raphael Warshaw" wrote in message
...
I've been using progressive lenses for the last 4 years and find that they
work well. There's a short period with a new prescription when straight
lines appear curved, but this has always disappeared within the first day
of wearing them. Although the adjustment from near to far and side to
side has been automatic for me, I'm told that this is not always the case.
Some users adjust more slowly and some never do.

For the last two years, I've been using self-darkening progressives; they
don't darken nearly as much as a good pair of regular sunglasses, but, at
least for me, provide more than adequate visual contrast and eye-strain
protection. I have them made big enough to provide good eye coverage
since the glare seems worse with smaller lenses.

Raphael Warshaw
1LK

"Graeme Cant" wrote in message
...
I tried progressives in 1997 for several months and found them unsuitable
for me for flying.

1. The distortion at the edge of the lenses produced a swimming effect
as I moved my head which I found unhelpful. I found it distorted my
distant vision so that runway slope was hard to judge, especially where
the slope varied significantly (eg Manchester). It also made 'black
hole' night visual approaches difficult to judge. This only affected
earning a living but the first problem applied to gliding also.

2. The reading (near vision) band was so narrow that I could only see a
newspaper column width of print clearly without moving my head. This
made rapid reference to a Jepp chart a major operation. I didn't like it
for daily living either since newspapers are only a small part of my
reading. It's also an inconvenience reading a map gliding (Yes, I don't
totally trust GPS).

I reverted to my previous trifocals with relief and continue to use them
with no problems - except they're rather stronger now than they were
then - but I guess that would happened with progressives too.

Graeme Cant

Andy wrote:
I use progressive lenses for normal day wear and for flying airplanes.
I usually use suntigers with stick on reading lenses in the sailplane
but sometimes fly with the progressives. The only problem is that they
do not darken enough. My next set of suntigers will be progressive. My
first reaction to progressives was that it would be impossible to fly
with them. I may have had a bad prescription because after suffering
with line bifocals for a few years I went to progressives and will not
go back.

What good reasons do you gave against using them?

Andy