Polarized- Good? Bad?
Anyone have a problem with polarized lenses? I heard some dribble about the instrument faces being polarized and not being able to see the bloody things. Also, a friend of mine, Matt R. (if you are out there email me!) said his Oakley's were "specially polarized" for flying. With a +500 price-tag they better be specially-gold-plated-for-flying as well!
Which sunglasses do you like best?
I'm finally going to invest in a decent pair. Looking for a comfortable pair that won't break the earseal of the headset too much. Lets hear your testimonies!
Ray Bans Are the best.
Serengetti's if you want coated lenses.Serengettis are interesting for flight in clouds as the provide some enhanceed definition of clouds
Get glass as they are easier to keep clean and do not scratch like the cheaper plastic ones.Less distortion with glass lenses = less eyestrain . Bite the bullet and spend the bucks get Ray Bans .I have had my last pair of Ray Bans five years now and i wonder how many pairs of cheap glass's i would have used by now. Ray bans
Used Ray-Bans for many years and had no probems. Converted to Seregetti's eons ago because they filter-out the blues and give me more definition of what I'm looking at. For some reason I cannot explain, the filtering-out of the color blue helps tremendously in poor visibility situations and heightens the range of visibility or lessons the bad visibility somewhat. You can't go wrong with Ray-Bans and I always carry a spare set which happen to be my old Ray-Bans. I now find that there is a distinct difference to me in the visibility mentioned above once I change over though. There are different styles of aviator Serengetti's so try them all and also watch the sales on them. You can get them as low as $95 if you pay attention to that fact or figure on dishing out $200-$300. One warning that many don't know about concerning Serengett's though. If you need a temple, nose pad or part of some sort, you'll end up having to probably order it out of their Toronto HQ. Few, if any, of the glass repair places across the country will have parts, but that is not the case with Ray-Bans. It's really a personal thing though and comfort, look, frames and a host of other things also play a part in one's decision. As mentioned, don't even give something with a plastic lens a second look.
I bought a pair of driving glasses from Marks Work Warehouse a while ago....$18.99.....no problems. plastic lenses excellent for flying. I don't understand why some people pay so much for sunglasses! The glasses are great for IFR when it is merky and bright...excellent definition of clouds and perfect for approahes when there is blowing snow and you break out at 400 above.
For me, my eyes are worth more that $18.99. I suggest that you avail yourself of the expertise of an eye specialist about the difference between cheap lens and more costly ones....and I say "lens"......not the frames. I'm ugly, so no kind of frame is going to improve my looks.
After dropping about $500 worth of glasses into the water off-of float planes I got the connections that clip onto each temple and hung them around my neck........good enough for "Magnum P.I."....good enough for me. I found putting them onto the seat didn't work either because placing a 200lb ass down on them doesn't do much for the longevity either. Agree on the "polarized" statement for floats also. Agree also that if all you can afford are the cheap ones then get them, but it's a valuable "tool of your trade" and over many decades you will come to regret going "cheap" on that "tool". Ditto for headphones. All one has to do is talk to many of the older pilots from another generation who had to put up with inferior headphones or didn't have ready access to good sunglasses and hear their cautions on this subject.
I used Raybans for years and just this winter switched over to Sarengetti and so far very happy with them!
There was an article a couple of years ago in the aviation safety letter which was written by a doctor and covers the areas of polerization and other factors, if you can't find it then PM and I'll see if I can find it for you.
Take your average lens and cut a series of parallel scratches across it: horizontally or vertically, it doesn't matter. That's what polarized a lens is. Period. The effect of polarization is to allow 50% of the visible light to be transmitted while 50% is blocked. More, or less, that's the science behind it.
What's the problem in aviation re these lenses? Depends on what you're flying.
If the direction of the polarization (scratches) on your glasses matches the direction of polarization on the glass you are observing: no problem. You will see less but not experience total blockage. If they meet at right angles, big problem: Polarization complements light that agrees with the direction of the "scratches". Light @right angles is not permitted to pass though.
Long story made short: My brother flies Beech aircraft and wears polarized lenses. No problem. An F/O coworker of mine tried polarized lenses on a B727 and could see nothing of the outside world through the flightdeck windows. It's all a question of a/c v sunglasses manufacturer.
My advice (for what it's worth)? Do what you want. Take the damned things off if they're a problem.
therubberjungle -------buy whatever one wants to buy. You'll know whether you made the right choice in 30 years max. If you bought the wrong ones, then maybe you won't even live that long to find out. Those aren't my thoughts....those are the thoughts of my ophamologist that I see about every 10 years.......and a trained doctor in aviation medicine.
Greenwich ---you'll wear sungalsses on a bright sunlit day after a fresh fall of snow and you're trying see and drive a vehicle at the same time. Then you'll find out who the "GEEKS" are. Maybe you don't drive......if so try skiing down some slope without them on the same type of day....you'll be surrrounded by a whole bunch of "GEEKS" there also.
My friend, you haven't been a pilot for very long because if you are and don't have a pair of sunglasses then you are either a fool or a liar.
I'll assume that the goggles you wear skiing aren't tinted then for the glare from the sun and snow. I believe that because each year I pick-up all kinds of hospital-bound "cool-looking" skiiers from the slopes of BC and take them, to hospital by helicopter for "snow blindeness".....they ain't so "cool-looking" then.
LH...You're very right about the combination of altitude and bright sunlight coming off the snow. I ski a lot, and I've got even more money invested in goggles than I do in sunglasses. I look like a ski-geek when I come back from a month of spring skiing with the world's worst goggles tan...but at least I can see.
---------- ADS -----------
Please don't tell my mother that I work in the Oilpatch...she still thinks that I'm the piano player at a whorehouse.
for some planes, a polarized lens is a bad idea, as mentioned earlier. I myself tried out a pair in the 737-200, and had the 'rainbow effect' and could barely see out the window... either the window was also polarized, causing interference, or the heating element in the window caused the interference... either way, it was trippy, and not a good view.
I'm looking at picking up a new pair of Serengeti's.
.80 has already mentioned his impression of the Sedona lens - does anyone else have any input on how various Serengeti lenses have worked for them? They've got quite the selection...
---------- ADS -----------
Please don't tell my mother that I work in the Oilpatch...she still thinks that I'm the piano player at a whorehouse.
