Maxa
-
Posts
6 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Gallery
Blogs
Downloads
Wiki
Posts posted by Maxa
-
-
2 hours ago, stuckindayton said:
Yes, but it's not real common. Having an exophoria is normal, having an extremely large exophoria is a problem
What would be considered normal for exophoria?
-
4 minutes ago, stuckindayton said:
Sorry to potentially state the obvious, but. amblyopia means you have a "lazy" eye. It can mean an eye turn (which would also be labeled as an exotropia), but more correctly it means an eye that can't correct to 20/20. Either an eye turn or not correctable are show stoppers for a pilot slot.
Ok that makes sense I had other doctors say that I have no amblyopia or exotropia so this is why they are checking again. I must also ask is there any grounds for DQ for exophoria?
-
1 hour ago, stuckindayton said:
Based strictly on the 3.75 value, it is potentially waiverable (and it wouldn't be waiverable for FC I if you weren't to get refractive surgery so in this case if you want a shot, get surgery). Looking at the most recent waiver guide that Google provided me, Table 4 of the "Refractive Surgery" chapter says you can have up to 6.00 D of astigmatism treated with refractive surgery and be POTENTIALLLY eligible for waiver for FC I. There are lots of other factors (is your myopia/hyperopia within limits, is there any ocular pathology that may be causing 3.75 D of astigmatism, is the outcome optimal, etc), but it is POTENTIALLY waiverable. I stress the "potentially" because this was a monumental increase from the previous limit of 3.00 D and when the change was made the understanding among the policy makers was that your post-surgery vision and refractive error would have to be stone cold normal. The waiver guide I'm referencing is a year old so it's not most current guidance, but unless there has been a titanic change in direction, standards aren't getting more strict over time.
Ok thank you, I know for a fact that they could potentially give it to me as long I have a good outcome of this surgery. The doctor has stated that I could be having up to 3.00 D of astigmatism. They eye doc has also stated that I have amblyopia and exotropia although this is barely noticeable and insignificant to affect vision and is correctable. They most likely will have to look at it again. I looked through the waiver and there are mentions of both of these but they didn't state anymore about this according to me, but maybe I'm not reading enough. Are both of these grounds for disqualification or does this depend on their evaluation with them?
-
On 12/29/2021 at 9:18 PM, stuckindayton said:
Although astigmatism is written with a sign, in reality it is a difference of two powers and thus the magnitude is important, not the sign. It's not really a hard concept, but it's hard to explain without pictures.
Take an example where an eye needs a power of -3.00 Diopters in the vertical meridian and -1.00 Diopters in the horizontal meridian for optimal correction. The astigmatism would be 2.00 Diopters. There are two forms of writing this physical lens, and thus astigmatism can be written as either a positive or negative number, but it's the absolute value that is meaningful.
Oh ok this makes sense so would lets say for example -3.75 is my astigmatism in both eyes would this be considered disqualifying but waiver eligible? Or is this not enough information to tell?
-
Hello there, I had a question regarding with the Pre-RS Cycloplegic requirements for astigmatism under page 631 in table 3 of the AF waiver guide. It says that you must have less than or equal to 3.00 diopters for astigmatism however there is no + or - to indicate the limit unlike the other requirements for Myopia and Hyperopia. Is no sign indicating both, -, or +? Thanks.
2022 Active Duty Flying Training Board
in Pilot Selection Process
Posted
Incredible you got DQed in ROTC? How did you managed to get it back?