Good for another 2 years

[Jay Honeck]

Got the 3rd class medical renewed a coupla days ago.

Blood pressure: NORMAL.

Yeah, baby -- and without meds! Whoo-hoo!

:-)
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

[Cecil Chapman]

Congrats on the renewal on the 3rd class! BTW (as I'm sure you may have
discovered), losing any gut you may have accumulated through the years can
affect blood pressure appreciably. Mine was never high, but when I recently
worked at losing about 20 lbs - the blood pressure went down appreciably.

I have my Class 2 renewal in January and have been wondering what a
difference the presbyopia that I started noticing in low light a couple of
years back will make in my vision test. Thankfully my distance vision has
thus remained 20/20 and except for the low-light small text presbyopia
thing,,, my near vision is quite good.

--
--
=-----
Good Flights!

Cecil E. Chapman
CP-ASEL-IA

Student - C.F.I.

Check out my personal flying adventures from my first flight to the
checkride AND the continuing adventures beyond!
Complete with pictures and text at: www.bayareapilot.com

"I fly because it releases my mind from the tyranny of petty things."
- Antoine de Saint-Exupery -

"We who fly, do so for the love of flying. We are alive in the air with
this miracle that lies in our hands and beneath our feet"
- Cecil Day Lewis -

[Jay Honeck]

> I have my Class 2 renewal in January and have been wondering what a
> difference the presbyopia that I started noticing in low light a couple of
> years back will make in my vision test. Thankfully my distance vision has
> thus remained 20/20 and except for the low-light small text presbyopia
> thing,,, my near vision is quite good.

Yeah, my near-vision has gone completely to crap in the last few years.
I still don't wear bi-focals, but both my eye and medical doctors told
me that my days are, indeed, numbered.

I can't see diddly on a sectional anymore without holding it four
inches from my eyes. Can anyone recommend "progressive" bi-focals?
How about TRI-focals? Any benefit there?
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

[jim rosinski]

Jay Honeck wrote:

> I can't see diddly on a sectional anymore without holding it four
> inches from my eyes. Can anyone recommend "progressive" bi-focals?
> How about TRI-focals? Any benefit there?

I have both progressives and lined bifocals. The progressives are
easier to get used to (no annoying line) and have a mid-range around the
middle of the lens that is good for things like looking at a computer
screen. The downside to progressives is the "sweet spot" for reading
(e.g. newspaper, sectional chart) covers a smaller area than the reading
part of a lined bifocal. For me this is a bigger problem than for most
because I lack binocular vision (learning how to land a plane took me
longer than most). Even though ophthamologists have told me that
progressives are a bad idea for folks like me with no depth perception,
I still use them because my job requires me to spend so much time
looking at a computer screen.

Can't beat a lined bifocal for reading. But I still don't use them
generally for walking around because the line is bothersome. Dunno how
some can get used to trifocals, but that's the only solution I know of
besides progressives for the "mid-range" (computer screen) issue.

Jim Rosinski

[J. Severyn]

"Jay Honeck" > wrote in message
oups.com...
>
> I can't see diddly on a sectional anymore without holding it four
> inches from my eyes. Can anyone recommend "progressive" bi-focals?
> How about TRI-focals? Any benefit there?
> --
> Jay Honeck
> Iowa City, IA
> Pathfinder N56993
> www.AlexisParkInn.com
> "Your Aviation Destination"
>
Jay,
I've tried bifocals and had a big problem with the "line" where the two
different focal length sections of the lens intersect. This was after using
Varilux lenses for about 10 years. I had my doc order both my new Varilux
set and a bifocal set with the same prescription. I am nearsighted with a
required correction of -2.25 in one eye and -2.75 in the other eye.

I never could get used to the bifocal line so I never tried tri-focals. I
stayed with the Varilux. It is a love-hate relationship. The variable
focal length lenses have a small "sweet spot". They must be positioned
carefully on my nose and they are poor performers "off-axis" to the left or
right of center.

To adjust for the proper focal length, you must learn to nod your head
slightly.

So I need to swivel my head to directly view an object or scene, then
slightly tilt to get the proper focus. They work well, but I do more head
movement than the average Joe. YMMV

http://www.varilux.com/

Regards,
John Severyn
KLVK

[Sylvain]

Jay Honeck wrote:
> Got the 3rd class medical renewed a coupla days ago.
>
> Blood pressure: NORMAL.
>
> Yeah, baby -- and without meds! Whoo-hoo!
>
> :-)

what did you do that worked?

--Sylvain

[Jay Honeck]

> > Got the 3rd class medical renewed a coupla days ago.
> > Blood pressure: NORMAL.
> >
> > Yeah, baby -- and without meds! Whoo-hoo!
>
> what did you do that worked?

Lost 25 pounds. It's amazing what NOT carrying around the equivalent
of two bowling balls does for ya!

:-)
--
Jay Honeck
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

[Jose]

> Can anyone recommend "progressive" bi-focals?
> How about TRI-focals?

I use a bifocal in one eye, with the line lower than usual by a few mm.
That way I have one eye with full distant vision and at one eye that
can read an approach plate. IT took some getting used to (both eyes
could use bifocals) and the optician did not want to give me that kind
of prescription (even though the doctor said it was fine). He died a
week later and the new optician gave me the lenses I wanted.

Progressives have a blurry area right in the middle, and trifocals have
narrow areas of good focus. That would bug me.

Jose
--
He who laughs, lasts.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

[Jose]

> Can't beat a lined bifocal for reading.

I use a single vision lens for that. Or rather, for computer work.
Actually I need another pair for reading. That inch or two makes a
difference.

Maybe progressives would be nice for reading; they could go from
"computer distance" to "reading distance" over the course of the lens,
which is what one normally has to do when reading (the top of the page
is further away than the bottom)

Jose
--
He who laughs, lasts.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

[Sylvain]

Jose wrote:
> He died a week later and the new optician gave me the lenses I wanted.

couldn't you be more subtle in your approach? such as trying to dead
horse head in the bed technique first?

:-))

--Sylvain

[Jose]

> such as trying to dead
> horse head in the bed technique first?

That's a new technique to me. What website do =you= visit? :)

Jose
--
He who laughs, lasts.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

[Deane Judd]

"Jay Honeck" > wrote in message
oups.com...

>
> I can't see diddly on a sectional anymore without holding it four
> inches from my eyes. Can anyone recommend "progressive" bi-focals?
> How about TRI-focals? Any benefit there?
> --

I use trifocals. Got them because I wanted to see the instrument panel for
IFR without having to twist my head from side-to-side (vertigo inducing) and
also see approach plates up close. I also spend a lot of time in front of a
large computer screen.

Two things make them work for me: 1) The middle lens is set to focus at
about 18" (~instrument panel and/or CRT distance), which I believe is a bit
non-standard, and 2) the middle lens is 10mm high, which is very
non-standard. They'll try to tell you that 7mm is all that is available, but
this is not true. Settle for nothing less than the 10mm height. That plus
insisting that the frames are adjusted perfectly so the left and right eyes
are always looking through the same near/middle/far lens makes them easy for
me to use and adjust to. The top of the middle lens appears about 10 degrees
below my horizon, which I find about right.

Deane Judd
1977 Cessna R172K (XP) N1514V

[Arnold Sten]

Jay Honeck wrote:
>>I have my Class 2 renewal in January and have been wondering what a
>>difference the presbyopia that I started noticing in low light a couple of
>>years back will make in my vision test. Thankfully my distance vision has
>>thus remained 20/20 and except for the low-light small text presbyopia
>>thing,,, my near vision is quite good.
>
>
> Yeah, my near-vision has gone completely to crap in the last few years.
> I still don't wear bi-focals, but both my eye and medical doctors told
> me that my days are, indeed, numbered.
>
> I can't see diddly on a sectional anymore without holding it four
> inches from my eyes. Can anyone recommend "progressive" bi-focals?
> How about TRI-focals? Any benefit there?
> --
I wear progressive TRI-focals and do not have any difficulty with the
constant shift of reading panel dials and outside scanning. The only
time I've had any discomfort is flying with foggles or under the hood.
After ten or fifteen minutes (as during a VFR review) I tend to get a
git nauseous(sp?). Don't know if that's a vision problem or an inner ear
problem. The good news is I have no intention of getting my instrument
rating.

[Wizard of Draws]

On 11/12/05 6:04 PM, in article
, "Jose"
> wrote:

>> such as trying to dead
>> horse head in the bed technique first?
>
> That's a new technique to me. What website do =you= visit? :)
>
> Jose

You haven't seen "The Godfather"?
--
Jeff 'The Wizard of Draws' Bucchino

Cartoons with a Touch of Magic�
http://www.wizardofdraws.com

More Cartoons with a Touch of Magic�
http://www.cartoonclipart.com

[Larry Dighera]

On Sat, 12 Nov 2005 23:30:49 GMT, "Deane Judd" >
wrote in >::

>
>I use trifocals. Got them because I wanted to see the instrument panel for
>IFR without having to twist my head from side-to-side (vertigo inducing) and
>also see approach plates up close. I also spend a lot of time in front of a
>large computer screen.
>
>Two things make them work for me: 1) The middle lens is set to focus at
>about 18" (~instrument panel and/or CRT distance), which I believe is a bit
>non-standard, and 2) the middle lens is 10mm high, which is very
>non-standard. They'll try to tell you that 7mm is all that is available, but
>this is not true. Settle for nothing less than the 10mm height. That plus
>insisting that the frames are adjusted perfectly so the left and right eyes
>are always looking through the same near/middle/far lens makes them easy for
>me to use and adjust to. The top of the middle lens appears about 10 degrees
>below my horizon, which I find about right.

I agree completely. During instrument training, I found trifocals
necessary to deal with my nearsighted and farsightedness. I had the
optician make the middle segment 12mm high and position it so that the
top of it is higher than normal, positioned where the windshield and
control panel meet while I'm looking out the windshield normally. The
bottom segment is only used for reading the finest print on the chart
in dim illumination.

[Michelle P]

Jay,
My General Physician warned me that if my blood pressure went any lower
that he would have to put me on medication. he declared open season on Salt!
Michelle ;-)

Jay Honeck wrote:

>Got the 3rd class medical renewed a coupla days ago.
>
>Blood pressure: NORMAL.
>
>Yeah, baby -- and without meds! Whoo-hoo!
>
>:-)
>
>

[George Patterson]

Jay Honeck wrote:

> Can anyone recommend "progressive" bi-focals?

The best results I've gotten are from these. I've tried the type of bifocals
that have a small circular reading section. Hated them because I had to move my
head back and forth to read. I tried trifocals. These were fine during the day,
but one of the lines went right across the brake lights of cars in front of me
at night, unless I held my head perfectly (and uncomfortably) upright.

The type I have are called by a name similar to "natural", but, of course, I
don't recall what it is.

From your post, though, it seems that your normal vision is ok -- you just need
reading glasses. If this is correct, you might consider getting a pair of half
glasses. Look straight out or up for distance vision; down through the lenses to
read. An A&P I know has these and swears by them. These would be a *lot* cheaper
than progressives.

George Patterson
Drink is the curse of the land. It makes you quarrel with your neighbor.
It makes you shoot at your landlord. And it makes you miss him.

[George Patterson]

Jose wrote:

> Progressives have a blurry area right in the middle, ....

Mine do not. Basically, you can look at a picture about the height of your chin
on a wall 20' away, hold your head in an upright position, and walk towards the
picture. It will stay in focus all the way to the wall.

What they *do* have is blurred areas on the sides. There's a band of distance
vision across the top of the lens, but the band of clear vision narrows as you
go down the lens. Can't look at the girls out of the corner of your eyes. :-(

It's hard to be a dirty old man with progressive lenses.

George Patterson
Drink is the curse of the land. It makes you quarrel with your neighbor.
It makes you shoot at your landlord. And it makes you miss him.

[George Patterson]

Sylvain wrote:

> what did you do that worked?

Jay has this fruit diet that's a real winner. Eat as much fruit as you want all
day long except for supper. Eat anything you want for supper, but only fruit the
rest of the day.

George Patterson
Drink is the curse of the land. It makes you quarrel with your neighbor.
It makes you shoot at your landlord. And it makes you miss him.

[Jose]

> You haven't seen "The Godfather"?

No. He made me an offer I couldn't refuse.

Jose
--
He who laughs, lasts.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

[Jay Honeck]

> From your post, though, it seems that your normal vision is ok -- you just
> need reading glasses.

Bwa-ha-haaaa!

I can't see ANYTHING without my glasses, beyond about 6 inches. 2000 years
ago, I'd be dead by now, simply because no one would want to hunt for me
anymore...

;-)
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"
"George Patterson" > wrote in message
news:Bhydf.664$CX1.61@trndny05...
> Jay Honeck wrote:
>
>> Can anyone recommend "progressive" bi-focals?
>
> The best results I've gotten are from these. I've tried the type of
> bifocals that have a small circular reading section. Hated them because I
> had to move my head back and forth to read. I tried trifocals. These were
> fine during the day, but one of the lines went right across the brake
> lights of cars in front of me at night, unless I held my head perfectly
> (and uncomfortably) upright.
>
> The type I have are called by a name similar to "natural", but, of course,
> I don't recall what it is.
>
>
> George Patterson
> Drink is the curse of the land. It makes you quarrel with your
> neighbor.
> It makes you shoot at your landlord. And it makes you miss him.

[Jay Honeck]

> Jay has this fruit diet that's a real winner. Eat as much fruit as you
> want all day long except for supper. Eat anything you want for supper, but
> only fruit the rest of the day.

Bingo!

It's sooo easy to stick to, as long as you keep an ample supply of apples,
bananas, and carmel-corn-flavored rice cakes around. I'm NEVER hungry, and
the weight has stayed off.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

[N93332]

"Jim Burns" > wrote in message
...
> Anyway, after it was all over, my glasses are fine and I left with my
> Class
> 2 in my pocket. Slight low freq hearing loss in my left ear, and blood
> pressure lower than average.

They should have measured the blood pressure after the vision check... ;-)

I went to a 'new' AME for my 3rd class a few months ago. I was also worried
about passing the 20/40 required for 3rd but was tested and passed at 20/20.

[Jim Burns]

Rofl! 2000 years ago I'd have been just as dead. You'd have been named
Marco, and I'd have been named Polo and I'm afraid we'd have been
vegetarians because plants would be the only things we could sneak up on.

I took my physical a week ago, and the only thing I was worried about was my
eyesight. Class 2 requires vision corrected to 20/20 and I hadn't been to
the eye doctor in ages, so I had no idea whether my current glasses were up
to par. I wasn't worried too bad, because I really don't need a class 2, so
I left the application blank and if I my glasses didn't correct to 20/20,
I'd simply get a class 3 medical.

So, the Dr has me lean into the vision device and asks me if, with my right
eye, glasses on, I can read the top row of letters, the huge ones....
Nope... can't see a dang thing. He says "hmmm" Ok, left eye... nope not a
dang thing. So I tell him, that I really didn't think that there were any
letters there and he says "hmmm OOPS!" click, try now. Scared the crap
out of me, here I had thought I was going blind and he didn't have the
device set up correctly.

Ok, now which musical note is the arrow over.... um... um... I don't see any
notes, just the bars. OOPS! click, try now. Once again I'm wondering if
I'm blinder than I thought I was.

Anyway, after it was all over, my glasses are fine and I left with my Class
2 in my pocket. Slight low freq hearing loss in my left ear, and blood
pressure lower than average.

Jim



"Jay Honeck" > wrote in message
news:ViIdf.570057$xm3.484345@attbi_s21...
> > From your post, though, it seems that your normal vision is ok -- you
just
> > need reading glasses.
>
> Bwa-ha-haaaa!
>
> I can't see ANYTHING without my glasses, beyond about 6 inches. 2000
years
> ago, I'd be dead by now, simply because no one would want to hunt for me
> anymore...
>
> ;-)
> --
> Jay Honeck
> Iowa City, IA
> Pathfinder N56993
> www.AlexisParkInn.com
> "Your Aviation Destination"
> "George Patterson" > wrote in message
> news:Bhydf.664$CX1.61@trndny05...
> > Jay Honeck wrote:
> >
> >> Can anyone recommend "progressive" bi-focals?
> >
> > The best results I've gotten are from these. I've tried the type of
> > bifocals that have a small circular reading section. Hated them because
I
> > had to move my head back and forth to read. I tried trifocals. These
were
> > fine during the day, but one of the lines went right across the brake
> > lights of cars in front of me at night, unless I held my head perfectly
> > (and uncomfortably) upright.
> >
> > The type I have are called by a name similar to "natural", but, of
course,
> > I don't recall what it is.
> >
> >
> > George Patterson
> > Drink is the curse of the land. It makes you quarrel with your
> > neighbor.
> > It makes you shoot at your landlord. And it makes you miss him.
>
>

[Jim Burns]

I'm just about in the same boat, except I've always declared open season on
salt. My kids laugh at me constantly because I put salt on everything.
They simply won't even try salt on watermelon or apples, they think I'm
nuts.
Jim

"Michelle P" > wrote in message
ink.net...
> Jay,
> My General Physician warned me that if my blood pressure went any lower
> that he would have to put me on medication. he declared open season on
Salt!
> Michelle ;-)
>
> Jay Honeck wrote:
>
> >Got the 3rd class medical renewed a coupla days ago.
> >
> >Blood pressure: NORMAL.
> >
> >Yeah, baby -- and without meds! Whoo-hoo!
> >
> >:-)
> >
> >

[Chris]

"Jay Honeck" > wrote in message
oups.com...
>> I have my Class 2 renewal in January and have been wondering what a
>> difference the presbyopia that I started noticing in low light a couple
>> of
>> years back will make in my vision test. Thankfully my distance vision
>> has
>> thus remained 20/20 and except for the low-light small text presbyopia
>> thing,,, my near vision is quite good.
>
> Yeah, my near-vision has gone completely to crap in the last few years.
> I still don't wear bi-focals, but both my eye and medical doctors told
> me that my days are, indeed, numbered.
>
> I can't see diddly on a sectional anymore without holding it four
> inches from my eyes. Can anyone recommend "progressive" bi-focals?
> How about TRI-focals? Any benefit there?

With a correction of -6.50 my eyes are crap but the varifocals I wear are
excellent. Not bifocals not trifocals. Best thing I ever got.

[Private]

"Jay Honeck" > wrote in message
news:9nmdf.324625$084.308936@attbi_s22...
> Got the 3rd class medical renewed a coupla days ago.
>
> Blood pressure: NORMAL.
>
> Yeah, baby -- and without meds! Whoo-hoo!

Nicely done.

Remember, "everything in aviation requires maintenance".

Happy landings,

[Private]

"Cecil Chapman" > wrote in message
om...
> Congrats on the renewal on the 3rd class! BTW (as I'm sure you may have
> discovered), losing any gut you may have accumulated through the years can
> affect blood pressure appreciably. Mine was never high, but when I
> recently worked at losing about 20 lbs - the blood pressure went down
> appreciably.
snip

Nicely done.

Remember, "everything in aviation requires maintenance".

Happy landings,

[Sylvain]

Jay Honeck wrote:
> I can't see ANYTHING without my glasses, beyond about 6 inches. 2000 years
> ago, I'd be dead by now, simply because no one would want to hunt for me
> anymore...

2000 years ago, hunting & gathering was kindof passe in most parts;
i.e., you might have been running an Inn as well, with a few slaves
to boot which helps with keeping costs in check, and who you could
have sent to the local shop or market to buy your food like any
civilized person; you could also get a cataract operation done in
those days and some kind of corrective lenses as well. Even the
post office was running better than today in most parts of Europe.
Only snag really, is that flying was still limited to birds.

--Sylvain

[Montblack]

("Jim Burns" wrote)
> ....and blood pressure lower than average.


Lower average than the old numbers? Or, lower average than the new obesity
epidemic numbers? <g>


Montblack

[Jay Honeck]

> Anyway, after it was all over, my glasses are fine and I left with my
> Class
> 2 in my pocket. Slight low freq hearing loss in my left ear, and blood
> pressure lower than average.

Great story!

Interestingly enough, now that you mention it, my new AME didn't even check
my hearing. First time that's ever happened.

Of course, he was all excited about picking up his new '05 Mustang GT from
the paint shop that day (he was having racing stripes applied), and we
started talking Mustangs, and pretty soon 15 minutes had gone by....

I think he may have forgotten a few things...

:-)
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

[Jay Honeck]

> 2000 years ago, hunting & gathering was kindof passe in most parts;
> i.e., you might have been running an Inn as well, with a few slaves
> to boot which helps with keeping costs in check, and who you could
> have sent to the local shop or market to buy your food like any
> civilized person; you could also get a cataract operation done in
> those days and some kind of corrective lenses as well. Even the
> post office was running better than today in most parts of Europe.
> Only snag really, is that flying was still limited to birds.

Well, 2000 years ago my Germanic ancestors were busy fighting the Roman
Empire to a stand-still.

Given my less than stellar vision, I suspect I would not have been much of a
warrior, so perhaps you're right about running an inn?

:-)
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

[N93332]

"Jay Honeck" > wrote in message
news:HkRdf.540547$_o.259633@attbi_s71...
> Interestingly enough, now that you mention it, my new AME didn't even
> check my hearing. First time that's ever happened.
>
> I think he may have forgotten a few things...

I've had 4 3rd class medicals from 4 different AME's in the past 7 years. It
seems like each one was a bit different and each missed or added something
from what the others did. They all did the basics of filling a cup, hearing,
eye check, hearing, BP, height, weight, etc. A couple of them did color
blind check, a different couple did the 'turn-your-head-and-cough', and one
also checked reflexes.

I know the basics of 3rd class are listed in the FAR's, but each AME adds
more to it.

Next time, in 1-1/2 years, I'm going to go back to the second AME I had. He
was the most thorough and the cheapest, also a pilot...

[George Patterson]

Jay Honeck wrote:

> 2000 years
> ago, I'd be dead by now, simply because no one would want to hunt for me
> anymore...

Hey, if you'd been born 2,000 years ago, you'd be dead by now. Period.

George Patterson
Drink is the curse of the land. It makes you quarrel with your neighbor.
It makes you shoot at your landlord. And it makes you miss him.

[Cub Driver]

On Sun, 13 Nov 2005 09:18:08 -0800, "Jim Burns"
> wrote:

>Anyway, after it was all over, my glasses are fine and I left with my Class
>2 in my pocket.

That's wonderful as far as it goes, but what are we going to do about
your doctor? Sounds like he's the one needing a checkup.


-- all the best, Dan Ford

email: usenet AT danford DOT net

Warbird's Forum: www.warbirdforum.com
Piper Cub Forum: www.pipercubforum.com
the blog: www.danford.net
In Search of Lost Time: www.readingproust.com

[Cub Driver]

On Sun, 13 Nov 2005 20:57:37 -0600, "N93332" >
wrote:

>They all did the basics of filling a cup, hearing,
>eye check, hearing, BP, height, weight, etc. A couple of them did color
>blind check, a different couple did the 'turn-your-head-and-cough', and one
>also checked reflexes.

Did any one have you stand on each foot in turn to check your sense of
balance?


-- all the best, Dan Ford

email: usenet AT danford DOT net

Warbird's Forum: www.warbirdforum.com
Piper Cub Forum: www.pipercubforum.com
the blog: www.danford.net
In Search of Lost Time: www.readingproust.com

[Jay Honeck]

> Did any one have you stand on each foot in turn to check your sense of
> balance?

No, never.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

[Ron Natalie]

Jay Honeck wrote:
>> Anyway, after it was all over, my glasses are fine and I left with my
>> Class
>> 2 in my pocket. Slight low freq hearing loss in my left ear, and blood
>> pressure lower than average.
>
> Great story!
>
> Interestingly enough, now that you mention it, my new AME didn't even check
> my hearing. First time that's ever happened.
>
All he has to do is talk to you when you can't see his lips and it
suffices. The standard is to be able to hear a spoken voice.

-Ron

My AME says I'm cleared to go as long as I crash into buildings
no taller than two stories.

[N93332]

"Cub Driver" <usenet AT danford DOT net> wrote in message
...
> Did any one have you stand on each foot in turn to check your sense of
> balance?

One of the four did...

-Greg B.

[George Patterson]

Cub Driver wrote:

> Did any one have you stand on each foot in turn to check your sense of
> balance?

My first AME did this on at least one occasion.

George Patterson
Drink is the curse of the land. It makes you quarrel with your neighbor.
It makes you shoot at your landlord. And it makes you miss him.

[Paul kgyy]

I've used progressives for years and like them a lot. I did try
bifocals for a while but they drove me crazy.

Not all progressives are the same - the middle or short distance
sections can be made larger or smaller depending on which is more
important. I do computer work all day, and the optician gave me a set
of progressives that have a pretty wide range at that distance. It
still requires more head movement than a true tri-focal, but that
becomes second nature after a month.

[Jim Burns]

Yep, did that.
Jim

"Cub Driver" <usenet AT danford DOT net> wrote in message
...
> On Sun, 13 Nov 2005 20:57:37 -0600, "N93332" >
> wrote:
>
> >They all did the basics of filling a cup, hearing,
> >eye check, hearing, BP, height, weight, etc. A couple of them did color
> >blind check, a different couple did the 'turn-your-head-and-cough', and
one
> >also checked reflexes.
>
> Did any one have you stand on each foot in turn to check your sense of
> balance?
>
>
> -- all the best, Dan Ford
>
> email: usenet AT danford DOT net
>
> Warbird's Forum: www.warbirdforum.com
> Piper Cub Forum: www.pipercubforum.com
> the blog: www.danford.net
> In Search of Lost Time: www.readingproust.com

[Jim Burns]

Actually, I think he's had several.... he's recovering from a triple
by-pass! :)
Jim

"Cub Driver" <usenet AT danford DOT net> wrote in message
...
> On Sun, 13 Nov 2005 09:18:08 -0800, "Jim Burns"
> > wrote:
>
> >Anyway, after it was all over, my glasses are fine and I left with my
Class
> >2 in my pocket.
>
> That's wonderful as far as it goes, but what are we going to do about
> your doctor? Sounds like he's the one needing a checkup.
>
>
> -- all the best, Dan Ford
>
> email: usenet AT danford DOT net
>
> Warbird's Forum: www.warbirdforum.com
> Piper Cub Forum: www.pipercubforum.com
> the blog: www.danford.net
> In Search of Lost Time: www.readingproust.com

[Margy]

Jay Honeck wrote:
>>I have my Class 2 renewal in January and have been wondering what a
>>difference the presbyopia that I started noticing in low light a couple of
>>years back will make in my vision test. Thankfully my distance vision has
>>thus remained 20/20 and except for the low-light small text presbyopia
>>thing,,, my near vision is quite good.
>
>
> Yeah, my near-vision has gone completely to crap in the last few years.
> I still don't wear bi-focals, but both my eye and medical doctors told
> me that my days are, indeed, numbered.
>
> I can't see diddly on a sectional anymore without holding it four
> inches from my eyes. Can anyone recommend "progressive" bi-focals?
> How about TRI-focals? Any benefit there?
> --
> Jay Honeck
> Iowa City, IA
> Pathfinder N56993
> www.AlexisParkInn.com
> "Your Aviation Destination"
>
I got nailed this year with "must possess for near vision", oh well,
getting old is hell.

Margy

[Margy]

Jay Honeck wrote:
>>From your post, though, it seems that your normal vision is ok -- you just
>>need reading glasses.
>
>
> Bwa-ha-haaaa!
>
> I can't see ANYTHING without my glasses, beyond about 6 inches. 2000 years
> ago, I'd be dead by now, simply because no one would want to hunt for me
> anymore...
>
> ;-)
I used to be like that (well, it was closer to 2 inches). A bit of
Lasik and I was glasses free for 5 years, now it's the reading glasses
routine. 2 pairs of nothing on top and 1.25 on the bottom for $49.95
(clear or sun) from readingglasses.com.

Margy

[Bob Noel]

In article >, Margy > wrote:

> I got nailed this year with "must possess for near vision", oh well,
> getting old is hell.

It beats the alternative. :-/

--
Bob Noel
no one likes an educated mule

[George Patterson]

Jay Honeck wrote:

> Can anyone recommend "progressive" bi-focals?
> How about TRI-focals?

Just had another thought or two (I'm done for the day). You might check out the
trifocals or bifocals first. The lenses are much cheaper than progressives, so
it's a good deal if they work for you and you haven't wasted that much money if
they don't.

The other thing you might consider is that the best progressives are made in France.

George Patterson
Drink is the curse of the land. It makes you quarrel with your neighbor.
It makes you shoot at your landlord. And it makes you miss him.

[Larry Dighera]

On Tue, 15 Nov 2005 04:15:34 GMT, George Patterson
> wrote in <Ghdef.1069$Rb.1009@trndny01>::

>the best progressives are made in France.

And here I thought they were made by Nikon.

[Jay Honeck]

> The other thing you might consider is that the best progressives are made
> in France.

Well, then I've certainly got nothing Toulouse...

(Sorry... :-)
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

[Kevin Kubiak]

Jay Honeck wrote:

>>I have my Class 2 renewal in January and have been wondering what a
>>difference the presbyopia that I started noticing in low light a couple of
>>years back will make in my vision test. Thankfully my distance vision has
>>thus remained 20/20 and except for the low-light small text presbyopia
>>thing,,, my near vision is quite good.
>
>
> Yeah, my near-vision has gone completely to crap in the last few years.
> I still don't wear bi-focals, but both my eye and medical doctors told
> me that my days are, indeed, numbered.
>
> I can't see diddly on a sectional anymore without holding it four
> inches from my eyes. Can anyone recommend "progressive" bi-focals?
> How about TRI-focals? Any benefit there?
> --
> Jay Honeck
> Iowa City, IA
> Pathfinder N56993
> www.AlexisParkInn.com
> "Your Aviation Destination"
>
Jay,

As one who is required to wear corrective lenses for driving/flying,
I too noticed my near vision was going down hill. Switched to
progressive lenses a couple of years back. You will either love them
or hate them. I found them to be quite easy to get used to. Others
never can get used to them. You will never know unless you try them.
One word of caution. I had to have my glasses remade because they set the
focal point for reading to dang low. It turned out to be a problem when
glancing at a sectional chart while flying and trying to look up and out as
well. Solution. I brought my sectional with me and had them set the focal
point higher based on a simulation of me looking straight ahead as if I were
flying and I would occasionally look down at the sectional. Problem solved
and they work great.

Just part of the passage of time to being middle aged I guess.

Good Luck!

Kevin Kubiak PP-ASEL

[Jaap Berkhout]

On 12-Nov-2005, "Jay Honeck" > wrote:

> Yeah, my near-vision has gone completely to crap in the last few years.
> I still don't wear bi-focals, but both my eye and medical doctors told
> me that my days are, indeed, numbered.
>
> I can't see diddly on a sectional anymore without holding it four
> inches from my eyes. Can anyone recommend "progressive" bi-focals?
> How about TRI-focals? Any benefit there?


I use bi-focal glasses with a straight horizontal division between the
"far" and "near" parts. This division is positioned rather high, just below
the point through which I look when looking straight ahead. In a plane it
more or less coincides with the upper edge of the glare shield, so when
looking at the instruments I use the "near" part.
I bought these glasses some years ago primary for my flying, but nowadays I
use it almost exclusively. For computer work only (staring at a monitor for
long periods) I have full vision reading glasses.
At the start it took some getting used to. In particular when turning your
head sideways the lower part of your field of vision seems to move relative
to the upper part. However I got used to it fast and nowadays I do not
notice it anymore.
The only drawback of these glasses is using it while riding a motor cycle.
This does not feel good, it seems in this case you use the lower part of
your field of vision for positioning. For this activity I have full vision
"far" seeing glasses.

Things I think are important:
- Use glass for better scratch resistance and a better quality of the
anti-reflection layer;
- The division between far- and near sight portion has to be perfectly
horizontal and be at the same position for both glasses;
- The optical center of the lenses has to coincide as perfectly as possible
with the center of your pupils.

[Jay Honeck]

> Things I think are important:
> - Use glass for better scratch resistance and a better quality of the
> anti-reflection layer;
> - The division between far- and near sight portion has to be perfectly
> horizontal and be at the same position for both glasses;
> - The optical center of the lenses has to coincide as perfectly as
> possible
> with the center of your pupils.

Thanks for your input.

My far-vision prescription is way too bad for real "glass" lenses anymore,
so I'm stuck with the super-expensive poly-carbonate --or the 14-ounce Coke
bottle lenses...

I'll keep your other advice in mind when the time comes. I'm still fighting
getting them.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"