As everyone in the aviation industry knows, pilots and atc have to have 20,20 vision w/ or w/o glasses or contacts. But has there ever been a documented incident where vision alone or in any way caused an FAA violation or crash? Or is it just for precaution?

Excuse the pun. i didn't know what else to title it that would fit.

Quoting Goblin211 (Thread starter): As everyone in the aviation industry knows, pilots and atc have to have 20,20 vision w/ or w/o glasses or contacts

They do? News to me, because its simply not true. Depending on the type of pilot, 20/20 vision is not mandatory.

-DiamondFlyer

Really? I was told by my eye doctor that it was mandatory. Since I'm studying to be an ATC soon do they have to have 20/20 vision or not? now i'm confused lol.   

Sound like your eye doctor should stick to eyes.  

Quoting Goblin211 (Reply 2): Really? I was told by my eye doctor that it was mandatory. Since I'm studying to be an ATC soon do they have to have 20/20 vision or not? now i'm confused lol.

Class 1 and 2 medical require 20 20. Class 3 only requires 20 40.

Quoting RoseFlyer (Reply 4): Class 1 and 2 medical require 20 20. Class 3 only requires 20 40.

This is correct, however those requirements are with or without correction. If your vision can be corrected to 20/20 with contacts or glasses, you're fine.

I wear glasses now and i have 20/20 vision so thx everyone for your input.

There was an accident where the color deficiency in the vision of the co-pilot was cited as a factor. FedEx 1478.
I don't necessarily agree with that conclusion, just passing the information.

The reason why you need 20/20 vision to be an air traffic controller is because you need to have a second class medical.

I have a first class medical and without contacts or glasses, I'm blind as a bat. Out of my right eye uncorrected, only things about the distance of the tip of my nose away are in focus. Corrected, I'm 20/15. No problem!

Quoting Goblin211 (Thread starter): But has there ever been a documented incident where vision alone or in any way caused an FAA violation or crash?

A Delta MD-88 at LGA.

If I recall, the Captain who was also the pilot flying, was wearing a type of contact lens that compromised his depth perception.

http://www.airlinesafety.com/editorials/Delta554.htm

I have 18/19 vision and was told it was pretty much as good as it gets without glasses or contacts, the optician said 20/20 was extremely rare without visual aids. (This was about 2 or 3 years ago)

The US is not the most stringent on this, there is this French guy that went to the US to become an airline pilot because he had some eye problem that was not accepted here.

Quoting 330Guy (Reply 11): I have 18/19 vision and was told it was pretty much as good as it gets without glasses or contacts, the optician said 20/20 was extremely rare without visual aids.

20/20 is the AVERAGE so I'm not sure why your optician would tell you it's extremely rare...!?

If what you say about your own is correct, then your eyesight is slightly worse than the average person... 'cos 18/19 means you can see detail from 18 feet away the same as a person with normal eyesight would see from 19 feet away ... so you have to be closer to see stuff' !!!

Perhaps it's the nature of aviation that it attracts those with good eyesight, but my eyesight has actually degraded to about 20/18 and I'm 43 later this year. My colleagues also have excellent eyesight despite age creeping up on us!

Quoting woodreau (Reply 8): The reason why you need 20/20 vision to be an air traffic controller is because you need to have a second class medical.

  

Also since we are discussing eyes and aviation, I found out that most types of eye drops are prohibited for use by pilots. They apparently affect color vision (red/green I think). There is a whole litany of every day over-the-counter medicine that pilots can't take.

Quoting Part147 (Reply 13): Perhaps it's the nature of aviation that it attracts those with good eyesight, but my eyesight has actually degraded to about 20/18 and I'm 43 later this year. My colleagues also have excellent eyesight despite age creeping up on us!

As a corollary perhaps, those of us in IT frequently wear glasses, and a factor is claimed to be sitting in front of monitors all day, not varying focal length and looking in the distance. Not a problem for pilots.

Quoting 330Guy (Reply 11): I have 18/19 vision and was told it was pretty much as good as it gets without glasses or contacts, the optician said 20/20 was extremely rare without visual aids. (This was about 2 or 3 years ago)

18/19 is not a meaningful measurement... even if you're eye doctor measure your vision from 18 feet, he would convert it to a 20/xx measurement.

20/20 is average as a few have pointed out - it's not uncommon to have better vision, however.

Quoting Part147 (Reply 13):

Quoting thegooddoctor (Reply 16):

Well I dont know how to explain that, I dont have a class 1 medical but the last medical I done was for sport, One of the reasons (although down the list compared with other abilities) I was signed for the team I ended up signing for was because of my vision. Maybe measurements are done different in my part of the world (althought its doubtful) and as was mentioned regarding seeing detail from a given distance I can certiantly see detail from a great deal further than 20ft.
Maybe someone can explain how eyesight is measured better as I honestly have no clue

On a small side note I never really understood why you can skip your medical for a Sport pilots licence if you have a valid US drivers license. There is no way on earth I would pass an FAA medical with my bad eyes. But I do have a valid and unrestricted drivers license. I am considering getting an SPL just for the heck of it. The Dutch government would have a fit if they found out, they think my eyes are so bad they will not even allow me to get a Dutch drivers license.

Gotta love the US and it's insane laws.

Quoting longhauler (Reply 10): If I recall, the Captain who was also the pilot flying, was wearing a type of contact lens that compromised his depth perception.

Can't help but think that depth perception is kind of critical when landing a plane at over a hundred miles an hour.

Quoting longhauler (Reply 10): A Delta MD-88 at LGA.

I flew from Norfolk to Atlanta once with a Delta MD-88 was probably the same pilot considering there is crater on an Atlanta runway with my name on it. Not like the delta pilot did any better trying to land at AMS -> that landing was more of a controlled crash than anything else. (maybe it was just a bad day for landings)

Quoting Goblin211 (Thread starter): As everyone in the aviation industry knows, pilots and atc have to have 20,20 vision w/ or w/o glasses or contacts.

It's not required. In fact, with waivers and SODAs you can do nearly anything. ATC does tend to be more strict that pilot medicals, however. For example, I can hold a 1st class flight medical but am unable to get a 2nd class through the FAA to be a controller. A blanket statement like "pilots have to have 20/20" is misinformed at best.

Quoting 330Guy (Reply 17): Maybe someone can explain how eyesight is measured better as I honestly have no clue

Without going into the physics of it all, 20 feet is pretty close to infinity in terms of retinal focus, and as such is used as the nominal distance against which eyesight is tested. The metric equivalent is 6 metres. 20/20 ( 6/6 in metric), also known as the Snellen fraction, is, as stated, the average. 20/40 would be half the average visual acuity- at 20 feet you can see what the average person can see at 40 feet. Whereas 20/10 would be twice the average visual acuity- at 20 feet you can see what the average person can only make out at 10 feet.

Quoting BDABOY (Reply 20):

Ah hahh, So that explains everything so... the whole 20ft thing had me confused. Thanks for the info. That clears a lot up (excuse the pun)