Flying Blind

[kevin b]

There has been recently on one of the other threads a comment (or 2) regarding the printing of the magazine and being able to read it.

Much as I sympathise (and possibly agree) with many of the comments on this thread, it does cause me slight concern.

If we cannot read a magazine using modern lighting and modern optical assistance, how safe are we to fly model aeroplanes ?

When we get to 70 years of age we have to renew our driving licenses and that requires us to inform DVLA that our eyesight is ok (probably using glasses).

That is a legal obligation. However there is no such requirement for the flying of models, irrespective of size or weight. 

With our ever ageing membership it is only a matter of time in my opinion before the powers that be (ie the insurers) insist that as responsible people we provide evidence of the quality of our vision.

I am fully aware of my own limitations and before long will have to curtail my flying for a while due to needing cataract operations.

Unfortunately there are a lot of people who won't accept the situation and continue to fly models (and probably drive).

The question is do we wait for the worst situation occurring, or do we have the conversation now ?

 

Just my two pennorth.

[Martin Harris - Moderator]

Just an observation but I believe that we DO have a legal obligation to have eyesight sufficient to maintain control at the distance we’re flying at. 

 

Edit:

ANO Article 94

(3) The person in charge of a small unmanned aircraft must maintain direct, unaided visual contact with the aircraft sufficient to monitor its flight path in relation to other aircraft, persons, vehicles, vessels and structures for the purpose of avoiding collisions.

 

And before anyone queries, it has been clarified that wearing corrective eyewear does not constitute aided vision.

Edited November 19, 2022 by Martin Harris - Moderator

[leccyflyer]

Martin is correct IIRC.

 

It would appear to be a self-limiting problem, in any case. If you can't see to fly you aren't going to be flying for very long before mother nature and the rules of physics intervene.

[kevin b]

I think you are correct Martin, but how is it monitored ?

It wasn't just distance that concerned me, it was general eyesight and that as clubs maybe we should consider the potential problems of near vision as well as far vision.

Anybody notice another flier starting to have problems when landing when they haven't in the past ?

 

We have a longstanding elderly club member who will no longer fly by himself for this reason. and will only fly at hight buddied up for a short while.

He knows his limitations and so do we, so we do the best we can for him and he can continue to enjoy the hobby and company.

[kevin b]

9 minutes ago, leccyflyer said:

Martin is correct IIRC.

 

It would appear to be a self-limiting problem, in any case. If you can't see to fly you aren't going to be flying for very long before mother nature and the rules of physics intervene.

I agree. So why are people who are allegedly quite capable of flying complaining that they cannot see black text on a blue background ?

What happens when they fly their model against a tree line, or high hill in the background. Blink and it might be heading towards an innocent third party.

Maybe they just build models in dayglow colours.

[Martin Harris - Moderator]

I'm with you on the need for pilots to recognise their limitations and I've buddied up with a couple of our more senior members for just this reason. They have certainly recognised their limitations and asked for help.

 

Legally, it is the individual's responsibility but clubs can help their members to recognise difficulties. There is a danger of driving the less capable away from the relatively safe environment of the average club field.  One case comes to mind of a very longstanding member whose flying and decision making was visibly deteriorating.  After a careful approach suggesting a little refresher training and flying under informal supervision was rejected, he left the club in order to fly at another club at times when other members were unlikely to be there.

 

I would imagine there's a world of difference between reading small print in low light and flying in good daylight as the years go by.  Not many of us can fly directly into sun - so we avoid that situation.  Likewise, I often see older pilots packing away early as the light drops - they recognise their limitations and effectively comply with both the law and common sense.

 

Education may be the key - along with support where appropriate, which is where clubs can play an important role.

[leccyflyer]

40 minutes ago, kevin b said:

I agree. So why are people who are allegedly quite capable of flying complaining that they cannot see black text on a blue background ?

What happens when they fly their model against a tree line, or high hill in the background. Blink and it might be heading towards an innocent third party.

Maybe they just build models in dayglow colours.

Because it is completely different. As has been pointed out, it's recognised poor practice to use black, or near black, text on a dark blue background.

[leccyflyer]

32 minutes ago, Martin Harris - Moderator said:

I'm with you on the need for pilots to recognise their limitations and I've buddied up with a couple of our more senior members for just this reason. They have certainly recognised their limitations and asked for help.

 

Legally, it is the individual's responsibility but clubs can help their members to recognise difficulties. There is a danger of driving the less capable away from the relatively safe environment of the average club field.  One case comes to mind of a very longstanding member whose flying and decision making was visibly deteriorating.  After a careful approach suggesting a little refresher training and flying under informal supervision was rejected, he left the club in order to fly at another club at times when other members were unlikely to be there.

 

I would imagine there's a world of difference between reading small print in low light and flying in good daylight as the years go by.  Not many of us can fly directly into sun - so we avoid that situation.  Likewise, I often see older pilots packing away early as the light drops - they recognise their limitations and effectively comply with both the law and common sense.

 

Education may be the key - along with support where appropriate, which is where clubs can play an important role.

Exactly.  It's commonplace to pack up and stop flying when the light is failing, or generally unfavourable and we certainly do avoid flying across the sun. As you said, that's nothing to do with reading small print which has been poorly compiled.

[john stones 1 - Moderator]

Regarding the mag, a few have commented they don't like it, no idea how many forumites think otherwise, change brings comment. Think it was Daniel (Admin) who stated, your comment is welcome and is noted (or words to that effect).

 

Regarding flying blind. I reckon after a long time in the hobby....Many are as blind as Bats and deaf as posts.

 

Yours truely High viz clipboard carrying Nazi.

[Martin Harris - Moderator]

Bats may be blind[ish] but their object acquisition and collision avoidance in low light conditions is legendary!  😝

[GrumpyGnome]

Dark text on dark background is akin to deliberately flying a camouflaged warbird against a background of trees. That's just bad practice and tends not to be a choice, but a necessity.

[Engine Doctor]

Surely reading " camouflaged " text is a bit different to flying a model ? Although flying a silver model against a grey sky is a near comparison, as is  flying a camouflaged model past trees.

Thats what camouflage does. 

 

Regarding club's helping , suggesting to some flyer that they need their eyes testing would I am sure get a brusque response. I would only intervene if a pilots flying was obviously dangerously below par or dangerous.

You can lead a horse to water etc ! 

As for getting your eyes sorted if you need cataract removing then get them done. It's painless and the results are usually incredible . 

Get the printing in the mag sorted and perhaps leave flyers eyesight for another post?

[Tim Kearsley]

Near vision and distance vision are two quite separate issues.  I've had myopia all my life and until a few years ago I could see much better to read without glasses than with.  Age has changed that slightly and I now need reading glasses.  However, I've never had a problem with seeing the model at distance - with glasses obviously.  The latest issue of the magazine, with several pages of black text on a darkish blue background is, frankly, appalling.  Why on earth make it so much more difficult to read just for "design" reasons?  I must admit, for this and other reasons, I'm for the first time considering whether I want to renew my subscription.

 

[John Lee]

12 hours ago, kevin b said:

 

When we get to 70 years of age we have to renew our driving licenses and that requires us to inform DVLA that our eyesight is ok (probably using glasses).

That is a legal obligation. However there is no such requirement for the flying of models, irrespective of size or weight. 

With our ever ageing membership it is only a matter of time in my opinion before the powers that be (ie the insurers) insist that as responsible people we provide evidence of the quality of our vision.

 

So you are saying that it is OK to drive to the field because you have declared that your vision is OK, but you won't be able to fly your model when you get there without medical evidence? 

 

Utter tosh.

[Robin Colbourne]

There are a lot of people who like to read model magazines even if their eyesight is no longer up to flying standard.
I have a friend who has been buying Aeromodeller since the mid-1940s.  He has to read it with a big magnifying machine (effectively a camera and a screen).  I would hate to see him depriived of this pleasure due to the whims of a graphic designer.
I've found instuction booklets for products printed in about size 2 font in dark grey on light grey that I really struggled to read.  To really rub salt into the wound, about 3/4 of each page was blank!

[Rich Griff]

and TV subtitles....

[john stones 1 - Moderator]

6 hours ago, Engine Doctor said:

 

Get the printing in the mag sorted and perhaps leave flyers eyesight for another post?

 

This is another post/thread ED.

[Engine Doctor]

Sorry can't read that 😀 need a separate thread. 

[Chris Walby]

20 hours ago, kevin b said:

 

When we get to 70 years of age we have to renew our driving licenses and that requires us to inform DVLA that our eyesight is ok (probably using glasses).

That is a legal obligation.

But its not just when you are 70, every driver who has a driving licence has a legal obligation to notify DVLA if their eyesight does not meet the required standard. If you have an accident and its proven you were driving with defective eyesight expect the worse. 

[john davidson 1]

Mobility provided by a car is so useful , especially when old, that is difficult to voluntarily give it  up. I have sat beside two neighbours who when younger were excellent drivers  and they both scared me. One exited every corner on the other side of the road, his daughter eventually persuaded him to give up but only after  reversing into cars regularly and swiping my other neighbours mirror without realising, I am now in my seventies and I think  I  will approach a driving school when eighty or so to get a rating

[Andy Gates]

Not entirely sure that driving on the wrong side of the white line is a feature of mature driving necessarily, as it seems that lane discipline / road markings are to be ignored now.

 

Sorry for going off thread with this comment.

 

Back on thread, why is it that people who struggle with orientation and / or visibility of a model at distance insist on continuing to fly the full length of the field when they could fly safer by cutting the distance down and turning earlier?