stuckindayton

Waivers after strabismus surgery are possible, but your eye alignment has to be essentially perfect. If there is any residual mis-alignment, then a waiver won't happen. There is at least one person on this board who was in your shoes. He may be interested in giving you some feedback. Sorry, I cannot identify him (privacy rules).

To clarify, Sit On Acorns meant building 840, not 860.

Speaking strictly for the Air Force, if your prescription is as you describe you are fine. You might need a waiver, however, that's no big deal. You do not need surgery based on the information you provided.

No, different situation. I'm guessing you were DQ'd because you had an abnormal cornea associated with thinning. There is a policy for that. LASIK won't change it. If you were DQ'd for the reason I suspect, LASIK would not be in your best interest. If you want more details on your specific situation PM me and I can look into it further.

Happy to help. Seen too many people make bad decisions based on bad information.

Do NOT get ICL's. Those would be non-waiverable. As far as flat corneas post PRK/LASIK, how flat are we talking? Less than 35 D? The AF has no standard for post op flat K's or corneal thickness for applicants (although we probably should), however, you may be risking your vision for the rest of your life and it's possible you may not meet the AF standards for vision if the outcome is really poor. Let me know if you want more details.

If you're on the schedule, you'll get seen.

Let me start by saying I haven't a clue about the regs regarding kidneys. But, I can answer the question about a trained asset. You are not a trained asset for pilot. A trained asset refers to someone who is already in the career field. In other words a current pilot is a trained asset for pilot. You are considered a trained asset only for the job you currently occupy. BTW- pilot applicants have to meet FCI standards, not FCII. You were likely given an IFC II (RPA) waiver simply because the requirements for RPA pilots are less stringent than IFC I. That's due to: 1) Less investment dollars and 2) Shorter commitment. Probably not what you were hoping to hear, but I hope that at least explains the situation.

Correct, no waiver for above -3.00. It's obviously a little bit of a gamble to put off PRK and LASIK and qualify as is, but your odds are very good.

The cycloplegic refraction was not done the way it would be done with an IFC I exam. This is a refractive surgery application where they measure your cycloplegic refraction to BEST acuity, in this case 20/15. During an IFC I we only go until you can see 20/20. It should be at least 0.25 diopters and often 0.50 D to 0.75 D less than your manifest refraction. Assuming no changes between this exam and your IFC I, your right eye meets criteria. I would expect your left eye would come down from -3.50 to -3.00, but that's not a guarantee, however highly likely. BTW- You would appear to be a very good refractive surgery candidate if your prescription is stable.

No....the pre-operative limit for refractive surgery is -8.00.

Mattey, Your refractive error, i.e. glasses prescription, is all that matters. If you are over -3.00, there is no waiver. So don't base it on 20/200 (better or worse) as that doesn't matter. You need to know if you exceed -3.00.

Kudos to those who bought the jerseys.

Kind of liked the Steelers before. Not any more..... Steelers' Alejandro Villanueva has highest-selling gear in past 24 hours. His actions weren't supported by all, including his own coach. Asked after the Steelers' 23-17 loss to the Chicago Bears what he thought of Villanueva's positioning for the anthem, Mike Tomlin responded, "I was looking for 100 percent participation. We were gonna be respectful of our football team."

The -3.50 would put you outside standards and there is no waiver beyond 3.00. However, if that is a manifest refraction to BEST acuity, you may be OK. The number that is documented is the cycloplegic refraction to 20/20. That benefits you in two ways. First, the drops used will force your focusing muscles to relax, which typically brings down the Rx (for nearsighted people) by 0.25 to 0.50. Also, if you are normally corrected to 20/15, it won't take quite as much lens power to get you to 20/20. I would bet you'd be OK.

Sorry, missed the first part of your question. The number of pilots getting PRK/LASIK is not that high. Mostly, it's because it's hard for them to take the time off. Around 40% of pilots wear glasses/contacts. That amounts to around 6,000 pilots in the AD pool. Of those, probably 50% could be PRK/LASIK candidates. We see about 150 getting surgery annually. The biggest hurdle is the ops tempo.

AF policy is that the minimum DNiF is one month. Average PRK DNiF is around 3 months, and average LASIK DNiF is around 2 months. These are averages. I've seen many pilots flying again well before then.

Has no impact. Go to whatever doc you feel is right for you.

GDAL, What kind of stats are you referring to? Numbers? Outcomes? Complications?

Based on what you said, I wouldn't sweat it.

Most people attribute low blue cone scores to acquired color vision problems. However, if the red/green scores for the eye that scored 80 are near 100, an acquired color vision problem is unlikely. Was the fellow eye low on blue? If you were only low on blue on one eye and all the other scores are 90+, I wouldn't sweat it.

Yes. Technically the color test is not part of an IFC I exam (it's a long historical explanation), although it is always done at the IFC I exam. You will take it at MFS.

If your only eye problem is that you are 20/100, you are probably wasting your time worrying about it. More than likely you meet standards. I agree with BEEP, just go get an exam. Post the numbers in the Aviation Medicine page and you will get feedback that may save you getting an eye surgery you likely don't need.

If your refraction is exactly -3.00, it is considered within standards. -3.25 would be outside of standards.

No clue as to that timeline. They just show up at my door and I do an eye exam.