DOT/FAA/AM-01/14

Van B. Nakagawara

Ron W. Montgomery

Kathryn J. Wood

Civil Aerospace Medical Institute

Federal Aviation Administration

Oklahoma City, OK 73125

July 2001

Final Report

This document is available to the public

through the National Technical Information

Service, Springfield, VA 22161.

Aviation Accidents and

Incidents Associated With

the Use of Ophthalmic

Devices by Civilian Pilots

Office of Aerospace Medicine

Washington, DC 20591

U.S. Department

of Transportation

Federal Aviation

Administration
NOTICE

This document is disseminated under the sponsorship of

the U.S. Department of Transportation in the interest of

information exchange. The United States Government

assumes no liability for the contents thereof.
i

Technical Report Documentation Page

1. Report No. 2. Government Accession No. 3. Recipient's Catalog No.

DOT/FAA/AM-01/14

4. Title and Subtitle 5. Report Date

Aviation Accidents and Incidents Associated With the Use of July 2001

Ophthalmic Devices by Civilian Pilots 6. Performing Organization Code

7. Author(s) 8. Performing Organization Report No.

Nakagawara V.B., Montgomery R.W., and Wood K.J.

9. Performing Organization Name and Address 10. Work Unit No. (TRAIS)

FAA Civil Aerospace Medical Institute

P.O. Box 25082

Oklahoma City, OK 73125 11. Contract or Grant No.

12. Sponsoring Agency name and Address 13. Type of Report and Period Covered

Office of Aerospace Medicine

Federal Aviation Administration

800 Independence Ave, S.W.

Washington, DC 20591 14. Sponsoring Agency Code

15. Supplemental Notes

16. Abstract

Introduction. Approximately 54% of civilian pilots rely on ophthalmic lenses to correct defective vision and

maintain a valid airman medical certificate. The use of these devices can potentially create operational problems in

an aviation environment. This report reviews aviation accidents and incidents in which ophthalmic lenses used by

civilian pilots were contributing factors in the mishaps between 1 January 1980 and 31 December 1998.

Methods. The National Transportation Safety Board’s (NTSB’s) Aviation Accident/Incident Database and the

Federal Aviation Administration’s (FAA’s) Incident Data System were queried for terms related to ophthalmic

lenses for the period1980-98. All reports annotated with ophthalmic terms were reviewed and stratified based on

the type of ophthalmic correction used and if the device was determined to be a factor in the mishap.

Additionally, the Aviation Safety Reporting System (ASRS), which allows aviation personnel to report actual or

potential discrepancies and deficiencies involving the safety of aviation operations, was similarly queried and

reviewed for the period 1988-98. Results. The NTSB and FAA databases included 16 mishaps in which factors,

such as lost/broken eyeglasses, problems with sunglasses, incompatibility with personal protective breathing

equipment, adaptation difficulties, inappropriate ophthalmic prescriptions and contact lenses, were found to be

contributing factors in aviation accidents or incidents. Aviation personnel voluntarily submitted 26 ASRS reports

describing operational problems involving traditional ophthalmic devices that adversely affected aviation safety.

Conclusions. Ophthalmic devices used by pilots have contributed to aviation accidents and incidents. The review

and reporting of these mishaps and self-reported operational problems provide important information that may be

used to educate flight crewmembers, Aviation Medical Examiners, and eyecare practitioners about the potential

hazards of using inappropriate ophthalmic devices. Recommendations that can assist pilots in avoiding similar

hazardous situations and enhance aviation safety are discussed.

17. Key Words 18. Distribution Statement

Aviation, Accidents, Eyeglasses, Contact Lenses Document is available to the public through the

National Technical Information Service;

Springfield, VA 22161

19. Security Classif. (of this report) 20. Security Classif. (of this page) 21. No. of Pages 22. Price

Unclassified Unclassified 13

Form DOT F 1700.7 (8-72) Reproduction of completed page authorized

1

AVIATION ACCIDENTS AND INCIDENTS ASSOCIATED WITH THE USE OF

OPHTHALMIC DEVICES BY CIVILIAN PILOTS

INTRODUCTION

Civil aviation is a popular vocation and avocation.

Currently, there are approximately 590,000 active civil

airmen in the United States. All civilian pilots must

maintain a current aeromedical certificate (first-, second-, or third-class) for the type of flying performed (air

transport, commercial, or private pilot).

To qualify for an aeromedical certificate of a

particular class, pilot applicants must meet the minimum vision standards for that class. Eye and vision

problems are a major cause for administrative review

for initial and renewal of aeromedical certification.

Defective vision is the most frequent cause of medical

restrictions for pilots. In 1998, approximately 54%

of civilian pilots were required to use ophthalmic

lenses to correct defective vision while flying (1).

Use of ophthalmic devices may cause operational

problems in the aviation environment. For eyeglasses,

spectacle frames can reduce the field of vision and be

incompatible with headsets, other communications

devices, and personal protective breathing equipment (PPBE). Improperly fitting frames can cause

physical discomfort and be displaced during flight

maneuvers due to centrifugal and gravitational forces.

Additionally, spectacle lenses may become dislodged

in-flight and fog with changes in air temperature and

humidity. Furthermore, adapting to multifocal spectacle lenses may be difficult, as the older aviator often

requires special prescriptions for the unique visual

demands of the cockpit (2).

Operational problems may also result with the use

of contact lenses, due to the low relative humidity,

changes in barometric pressure and altitude hypoxia

that are indigenous to the cockpit environment. The

low humidity levels (10-15%) in an aircraft can

dehydrate hydrophilic (soft) contact lenses and result

in vision performance (low-contrast acuity) loss (3),

reduced lens movement, and increased conjunctival

injection (4). Nitrogen gas bubbles can form beneath

a contact lens affecting vision as a result of decompression (5). Furthermore, corneal edema has been

reported in well-fit contact lens wearers exposed to

altitude hypoxia, which can result in reduced visual

performance (6).

Aviation accidents and incidents associated with

the use of traditional ophthalmic devices have not

been well documented in the scientific literature. The

purpose of this report is to review actual in-flight

events where the use of ophthalmic correction by

pilots was found to have contributed to an aviation

accident or incident.

METHODS

The National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB)

Aviation Accident/Incident Database and the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) Incident Data

System were queried for terms related to ophthalmic

lenses for the period 1980-98. Search terms included

glasses, eyeglasses, and contact lenses. Additionally,

the Aviation Safety Reporting System (ASRS) was

similarly queried for the period 1988-98. (Note: The

ASRS was established in 1988 under a Memorandum

of Agreement between the FAA and the National

Aeronautics and Space Administration [NASA] to

lessen the likelihood of aviation accidents. Pilots, air

traffic controllers, flight attendants, mechanics,

ground personnel, and others involved in aviation

operations may submit reports to the ASRS when

they are involved in, or observe, a situation in which

aviation safety is compromised.)

The records collected from the three database

searches were organized by type of ophthalmic device

used. The narratives of each record were reviewed to

determine whether use or misuse of an ophthalmic

device was considered a contributing factor in the

aviation accident or incident. In this study, events

that did not involve the pilot-in-command of an air

transport or general aviation aircraft were omitted.
2

RESULTS

For the period 1 January 1980 to 31 December

1998, there were a total of 41,963 records (40,476

accidents, 1,497 incidents) in the NTSB Aviation

Accident/Incident Database. A search of ophthalmic

terms and review of causal factors found a total of 15

accidents in which the ophthalmic devices (11 spectacles, four contact lenses) used by the pilots were a

contributing factor in the mishap. For the same

period, 61,829 incidents in the FAA Incident Data

System were searched for ophthalmic terms and the

results reviewed. This review found only one incident

associated with the use of an ophthalmic device

(contact lenses).

For the period January 1988 to December 1998,

there were a total of 204,007 reports in the ASRS. A

search and review of these reports identified 26 events

where the use of spectacles was associated with operational problems.

Appendix A provides a complete tabulated listing

of the 42 records found in the NTSB, FAA, and ASRS

databases described above. This listing includes the

report number, date, event type, category of operation, aircraft type, and a brief narrative of each event.

Table 1 summarizes the events in Appendix A and

categorizes them by similar contributing factors. The

table includes a brief description of the contributing

factor as well as the number and type of event.

DISCUSSION

Air transport aviation accidents and incidents are

rare events, but general aviation mishaps occur with

much more frequency. Unfortunately, the available

resources to investigate these events are limited. The

NTSB employs some 50 investigators to study approximately 2,200 accidents and incidents each year.

Due to the shortage of resources, the majority of

investigations are limited in scope and much of the

Table 1: This is a summary of aviation accidents and incidents associated with ophthalmic

devices by probable cause categories.

Aviation Accidents and Incidents Associated

With Ophthalmic Devices by Probable Cause

Probable Cause Incident Accident Total

1. Eyeglasses were lost or broken during flight resulting in

impaired visual performance. 5 6 11

2. New or inappropriate refractive correction resulting in

impaired visual performance. 9 3 12

3. Required refractive correction was not worn. 4 4

4. The lack or misuse of sunglasses resulting in

diminished visual performance. 6 1 7

5. Eyewear interfered or prevented proper use of

protective breathing equipment resulting in hypoxia and/or

impaired vision.

6 6

6. Contact lens(es) became displaced or dislodged

resulting in impaired visual performance. 1 1 2

27 15 42
3

information must be obtained through telephone

and mail services (7). Many investigations are complicated by fragmented or faulty information and

potential liability concerns that can further hinder

the investigation process (8). Since the discovery of

human error can result in legal sanctions or loss of

employment, the individuals involved may choose to

omit or distort the facts (8). As a result, it is possible

that many human factor issues, including vision

problems that could have contributed to accident

causation are missed.

The NTSB and FAA databases contain official

reports of events classified as either aviation accidents

or incidents. As such, these reports are subject to

careful scrutiny to ensure that the information they

relate is as accurate as the known facts will allow. The

terms, accident and incident refer to events that are

defined, in part, as follows:

Accident. An occurrence associated with the operation of an aircraft, which takes place between the time

any person boards the aircraft with the intention of

flight until such time as all such persons have disembarked, in which:

a) a person is fatally or seriously injured,

b) the aircraft sustains major damage or structural

failure, or,

c) the aircraft is missing or completely inaccessible

(9).

Incident. An occurrence, other than an accident,

associated with the operation of an aircraft, which

affects or could affect the safety of operation (9).

The ASRS contains information that is voluntarily

and anonymously contributed. The reports represent

the perceptions of the reporter (e.g., pilots,

crewmembers, and air traffic personnel); therefore,

the objectivity of these accounts is not quantifiable.

Due to the anonymous nature of these reports, it is

unclear whether the FAA or the NTSB investigated

these events. However, the ASRS accounts appear to

fit the official definition of an aviation incident.

Therefore, to facilitate the analysis and discussion of

this data, all ASRS reports are, hereafter, referred to

as aviation incidents.

The NTSB, FAA, and ASRS databases included 42

reports of accidents and incidents associated with the

use of ophthalmic devices. Contributing factors to

these events, such as lost or broken eyeglasses, the

lack or misuse of sunglasses, incompatibility with

PPBE, adaptation difficulties or inappropriate prescriptions, failure to wear required corrective devices,

and the use of monovision contact lenses, have been

documented. In most instances, these events would

be considered minor inconveniences if they occurred

anywhere other than in the aviation environment.

However, what may be inconvenient to an individual

on the ground can quickly become a life-threatening

situation for a pilot in-flight.

In this study, almost 48% of the reported events

involved either air carrier (43%) or air taxi (5%)

pilots. In most cases, these individuals are responsible

for transporting passengers. Fortunately, 90% of

these events resulted in incidents, as opposed to

accidents, and none resulted in a passenger fatality.

Of the two reported aviation accidents, one involved

an airline pilot who was flying with monovision

contact lenses, which are prohibited by FAA regulations. The NTSB findings indicated that the use of

the monovision correction, and its inherent reduction in depth perception, contributed to the pilot’s

execution of a “short landing.” This resulted in

considerable damage to the McDonnell Douglas MD88 aircraft and led to three minor injuries of passengers during the ensuing emergency evacuation (10).

The second accident involved an air taxi pilot. The

pilot lost her prescription eyeglasses when they blew

off her face as she looked out of the window to

visually inspect the landing gear. Upon landing the

Cessna CE-210-L, the main gear collapsed, resulting

in substantial damage to the aircraft. Fortunately, no

passengers were onboard this flight. The NTSB concluded that a contributing factor in the accident was

the pilot’s execution of a night landing without

proper corrective lenses (11).

The study results indicate the most common contributory factor in aviation accidents (n=3) and incidents (n=9) related to ophthalmic devices was the use

of new or inappropriate refractive correction. New

prescriptions often require a period of adaptation.

This period is particularly important for adjusting to

presbyopic corrections, such as bifocal, trifocal, and

progressive or “no-line” bifocal lenses. The cockpit is

not the appropriate place to adapt to a new prescription or any new form of ophthalmic correcting device. It is recommended that, after a period of

adjustment on the ground, a pilot enlist the assistance

of a qualified aviator on his/her first few flights when

using a new prescription or different corrective device. A pilot must be confident that the refractive

correction employed in the cockpit is appropriate for

the required visual tasks. Discovering a major
4

discrepancy between a visual demand in the cockpit

environment and the ophthalmic device being used

can seriously compromise aviation safety and should

be rectified before attempting to fly solo.

The second most common factor contributing to

aviation accidents (n=6) and incidents (n=5) was lost

or broken spectacles. A readily available back-up pair

of spectacles could have prevented most of these

mishaps. In other instances, a strap that secures the

glasses to the face or around the neck that kept the

eyewear from being misplaced when removed or

dislodged may have prevented the mishap.

Pilots often need sunglasses when flying during

daylight hours. Tinted lenses can reduce glare, visual

fatigue, and dark adaptation problems later in the

flight. However, sunglasses can compromise the readability of aircraft instruments and other aviation

materials, such as charts and maps, inside the cockpit. This study found that improper use or not using

sunglasses contributed to one aviation accident and

six incidents. When using sunglasses, a proper balance should be maintained between visibility of objects inside and outside the cockpit environment.

Sunglasses that distort color, such as “yellow-shooters” and “blue-blockers,” or those that prevent the

transmission of too much light (i.e., < 15% transmission) should be avoided (2). Polaroid sunglasses are

not recommended since they can reduce or effectively

eliminate the visibility of instruments that incorporate anti-glare filters, or they can interfere with visibility through an aircraft windscreen due to striations

in some laminated materials (12). In addition, polaroid

sunglasses can mask the sparkle of light that reflects off

shiny surfaces, such as another aircraft’s wing or

windscreen. This could drastically reduce a pilot’s reaction time in a “see-and-avoid” traffic situation.

To protect against low barometric pressure and the

resulting physiological effects of altitude hypoxia,

the pilot may need to use PPBE. In this study, there

were six reported incidents involving PPBE and the

use of spectacle correction. Before an emergency

situation arises, pilots should be certain that the

aircraft’s emergency equipment can be conveniently

and effectively used with their eyewear. A pilot should

consult an eyecare practitioner to help resolve any

incompatibility problems.

The failure to use required refractive correction

was found to have contributed to four aviation accidents. In occupational eye injuries, the affected individuals frequently do not wear their eye protection

due to inaccurate refractive correction that cause

clinical symptoms, such as eye fatigue, headache, eye

pain, or decreased visual acuity (13). In other instances, the devices were not used because they were

reportedly too uncomfortable to wear. An eye doctor

should be consulted to ensure that proper refractive

correction for the cockpit is prescribed, and spectacles are properly adjusted to ensure maximum comfort (2).

Contact lens use was associated with one aircraft

accident and one incident. While flying, contact

lenses can be dislodged, resulting in visual impairment (14), and inappropriate contact lenses can reduce visual performance (15). Improperly fitting

lenses can irritate the eye leading to physical discomfort or pain. Contact lenses can also contribute to

increased glare disability from the sun during the day

and from runway lighting at night. This condition is

particularly true for those individuals with lightcolored eyes and clinical photophobia. A pilot who

chooses to use contact lens correction should always

carry a back-up pair of spectacles in the event that the

contact lenses become dislodged, displaced, or if they

must be removed during an in-flight emergency.

It is estimated that over 80% of all aviation accidents result from human error. Since vision is the

most important sense a pilot possesses for maintaining control of the aircraft, it is logical to assume that

many accidents are vision related. It is suspected that

vision impairment, reduced visibility, and visual illusions play a greater role in aviation accidents and

incidents than statistics suggest. For example, central

vision can be diminished due to extraordinary physical stress from acceleration, vibrations, and the effects of high altitude (16). Additionally, visual

illusions occur when the visual information becomes

unrecognizable or is falsely perceived. The effect

most often occurs when ambient vision, which aids

spatial orientation and localization, is reduced or lost

entirely due to darkness or adverse atmospheric conditions (17). Visual illusions can result in disorientation and lead to loss of control. Accidents occur more

frequently at night and in poor environmental conditions, such as fog and haze, suggesting that optimal

vision and good visibility are important factors in

maintaining aviation safety and preventing accidents.

The combination of poor environmental conditions and diminished visual performance poses a

serious threat to aviation safety. This study found

that reduced visual performance from improper use
5

of ophthalmic devices or the use of inappropriate

lenses has resulted in aviation accidents. In many

cases, the investigation cannot determine an exact

cause of an aviation accident. Without evidence to

the contrary, the probable cause is often attributed to

human error without specifying an exact physical or

psychological effect as a contributing factor. Therefore, many more mishaps than are actually reported

may be attributable to missed visual cues or visual

illusions that resulted from ill-suited, lost, broken, or

inappropriate refractive corrections.

To improve aviation safety, the following recommendations concerning the use of ophthalmic devices are offered to Aviation Medical Examiners

(AMEs), pilots, and their eyecare practitioners:

• Eyeglasses should fit snugly on the head to prevent

being dislodged. A spectacle strap that fits tightly

around the head or a spectacle chain that allows the

eyeglasses to be easily replaced if dislodged should be

used while flying.

• All screws on the spectacle frame should be tight

and ophthalmic lenses should fit snugly in the

frame to prevent a lens from being dislodged. A

back-up pair of eyeglasses should be readily available for the pilot in the event spectacles are damaged or displaced in flight.

• The refractive prescription should be optimal for all

applicable distances for the current task at hand, and

the ophthalmic device should be comfortably fit to

ensure use by the pilot.

• Contact lenses should be properly maintained and

frequently replaced to ensure optimal comfort and

vision. When contact lenses are used, a back-up pair

of eyeglasses should be available in the event a

contact lens becomes dislodged, displaced, or requires immediate removal due to an emergency.

• An appropriate pair of sunglasses should be readily

available during daylight flying to prevent glare or

temporary flashblindness. Sunglasses should not be

worn in low-light conditions.

• Use of new ophthalmic devices may result in adaptation problems. A pilot may want to perform several

flights with another pilot or flight instructor to

ensure new devices perform well in the cockpit

environment.

• Ophthalmic devices should not interfere with the

use of PPBE or communication headsets in the

aircraft.

Accident investigations may often focus on a primary cause when, in fact, aviation accidents are the

result of a series of events. The identification and

study of all human factors in aviation accidents is

recommended. Creation and implementation of preventative strategies designed to break the chain of

events that lead to aviation accidents and incidents

may be an effective method to reduce or eliminate

such mishaps. A number of small improvements in dayto-day operations, including those recommended in

this study, can have a cumulative effect on flight safety.

In conclusion, this study presents evidence that

ophthalmic lenses used by pilots have contributed to

aviation accidents and incidents. The review and

reporting of these events provide important information that can be used to educate aviators, AMEs, and

eyecare specialists about the potential hazards of

using inappropriate ophthalmic devices. Implementation of the recommendations presented in this study

can prevent operational problems associated with the

use of such devices and improve aviation safety.

REFERENCES

1. U.S. Department of Transportation. Aeromedical certification statistical handbook. 1998. Washington, DC: Federal Aviation Administration.

Civil Aerospace Medical Institute, Aeromedical

Certification Division. Report No. AC 8500-1.

2. Nakagawara VB, Wood KJ, Montgomery RW.

Vision impairment and corrective considerations

of civil airmen. Washington, DC:Department of

Transportation/Federal Aviation Administration;

1993; FAA Report No. DOT/FAA/AM-93/21.

Available from: National Technical Information

Service, Springfield VA 22161. Order #

ADA275508.

3. Dennis RJ, Tredici TJ, Ivan DJ, Jackson WG Jr.

The USAF aircrew medical contact lens study

group: Operational problems. Aviat Space Environ

Med. Apr 1996; 67(4):3030-7.

4. Apsey DA, Barr JT. Corneal response and vision with Softperm lens in simulated aircraft

conditions. J Am Optom Assoc. March 1996;

67(3):151-9.
6

5. Flynn WJ, Miller RE III, Tredici TJ, Block MG,

Kirby EE. Contact lens wear at altitude:

Subcontact lens bubble formation. Aviat Space

Environ Med. Nov 1987; 58(11):1115-18.

6. Moore RJ, Green RP Jr. A survey of U.S. Air

Force flyers regarding their use of extended wear

contact lenses. Aviat Space Environ Med. Nov

1994; 65(11):1025-31.

7. Waldock WD. The quest for safety. Aviation

Safety. Sep 1,1994; XIV(17):10-11.

8. Billings CE, Reynard WD. Human factors in

aircraft incidents: Results of a 7-year study. Aviat

Space Environ Med. Oct 1984; 55(10):960-65.

9. International Civil Aviation Organization. International standards and recommendation

practices: Aircraft accident investigation, 6th

edition. Chapter 1: Definitions. March 1981.

26/11/81. P.9.

10. National Transportation Safety Board. Descent

below visual glidepath and collision with terrain,

Delta Air Lines flight 554, McDonnell Douglas

MD-88, N914DL, LaGuardia Airport, New York,

October 19, 1996. NTSB/AAR-97/03. 1997.

11. NTSB Report No. ATL98LA130.

12. Swearingen JJ, Johnson GR. Strain patterns in

aircraft windshield and visibility through polaroid

sun glasses. 1948. Oklahoma City, OK: United

States Civil Aeronautic Administration, Aeronautical Center, Civil Aviation Medical Research

laboratories. Report No. AC 8500-1.

13. Akbar-Khanzadeh F, Bisesi MS, Rivas RD. Comfort of personal protective equipment. Applied

Ergonomics. Jun 1995; 26(3):195-8.

14. Baldwin JB, et al. The 1995 aircrew operational

vision survey: Results, analysis and recommendations. USAF School of Aerospace Medicine, Aeromedical Clinical Science Division. May 1999.

SAM-AF-BR-TR-1999-0003.

15. Nakagawara VB, Véronneau SJH. A unique contact lens-related airline aircraft accident. Washington, DC:Department of Transportation/Federal Aviation Administration; 2000; FAA Report

No. DOT/FAA/AM-00/18. Available from: National Technical Information Service, Springfield

VA 22161. Order # ADA379287.

16. Echeverria D. et al. Vision: The effects of vibration. The impact of environmental conditions on

human performance. Sep 1994. NUREG/CR5680. 3/17-24.

17. Lorenz FH. Visual approaches. Air Line Pilot.

May 1992; 62(4):17-21.
A1

APPENDIX A

Tabulated Listing of the Records Found in the NTSB, FAA, and ASRS Databases
A2
A3

NTSB AVIATION ACCIDENT/INCIDENT DATABASE

REPORT NO. DATE EVENT

TYPE

CAT OF

OPERATION

AIRCRAFT

TYPE NARRATIVE

SEARCH WORD: EYEGLASSES

ATL98LA130 9/25/98 Accident1 Air Taxi Cessna

CE-210-L

When the pilot stuck her head out the

window to visually inspect the landing

gear, her eyeglasses blew off and affected

her night landing.

LAX91LA298 7/08/91 Accident3 General

Aviation

Cessna 152 Pilot became disoriented and was unable to

read the instrument panel because he could

not find his eyeglasses.

LAX89DUG03 3/21/89 Accident1 General

Aviation

Unknown After takeoff, the canopy departed the

aircraft and the pilot's eyeglasses were lost.

BFO87LA029 4/09/87 Accident1 General

Aviation

Cessna

CE-210-5 (205)

Just before touchdown, the pilot's

eyeglasses broke and fell off. When his

spare pair of eyeglasses that were on the

instrument panel fell to the floor, he

became distracted.

SEARCH WORD: GLASSES

MIA94LA051 1/13/94 Accident1 General

Aviation

Helicopter

ROBSIN R-22-22

While flying with the cabin door removed,

the pilot's glasses blew off.

CHI90DER06 8/12/90 Accident3 General

Aviation

Mooney-20-C Pilot was not wearing required corrective

glasses while flying.

CHI85LA330 8/02/85 Accident1 General

Aviation

Mooney-20-J Pilot's eye became irritated while

attempting to land. He scratched his eye

and became distracted, which resulted in a

hard landing and loss of his glasses.

FTW84FA220 5/05/84 Accident3 General

Aviation

Unknown Pilot was not wearing required corrective

glasses while performing aerobatics in an

air show.

ATL84LA070 12/20/83 Accident1 General

Aviation

Piper PA-28-181 While retrieving a flashlight from his

briefcase, the pilot lost his glasses and was

unable to find them.

DEN83FA156 7/2/83 Accident3 General

Aviation

Piper PA-18-150 Pilot was not wearing required corrective

glasses during aerial application.

LAX83LA079 1/23/83 Accident4 General

Aviation

Cessna

CE-140-140

The sun blinded the pilot and, while

reaching for his sunglasses, the aircraft

struck a mountain.

SEARCH WORD: CONTACT LENSES

CHI96LA089 2/15/96 Accident2 General

Aviation

Cessna

CE-210-B

While wearing monovision contact lenses,

the pilot had a tendency to flare too late

during landing

NYC97MA005 10/19/96 Accident2 Air Carrier McDonnell

Douglas

MD-88-88

While wearing monovision contact lenses,

the pilot was unable to overcome visual

illusions from an approach over water in

limited visibility conditions.

SEA87LA176 8/25/87 Accident2 General

Aviation

Cessna

CE-150-L

To alleviate stinging from uncomfortable

contact lenses, the pilot closed his eyes

during final approach and fell asleep.

LAX86LA015 10/13/85 Accident6 General

Aviation

Piper

PA-28R-201-T

When approach lights were turned up to

full bright, the pilot experienced excessive

glare with her contact lenses, which

distracted her.

FAA INCIDENT DATA SYSTEM

REPORT NO. DATE EVENT

TYPE

CAT OF

OPERATION

AIRCRAFT

TYPE

NARRATIVE

SEARCH WORD: CONTACT LENSES

19830908065429G 9/08/83 Incident6 General

Aviation

Cessna

CE-152

Pilot's contact lens became dislodged.
A4

AVIATION SAFETY REPORTING SYSTEM

REPORT NO. DATE EVENT

TYPE

CAT OF

OPERATION

AIRCRAFT

TYPE

NARRATIVE

SEARCH WORD: EYE GLASSES

420267 98/11 Incident2 Air Carrier Large Transport Pilot experienced difficulty during landing

while wearing eyeglasses with progressive

lenses.

299204 95/03 Incident5 Air Carrier Commercial Fixed

Wing

Pilot was unable to wear eyeglasses and

oxygen mask at the same time.

299094 95/03 Incident1 General

Aviation

Commander 114 Minor aircraft damage occurred during

landing when the pilot hit his eyeglass

frame knocking out the right lens while

attempting to adjust his headset.

101416 88/12 Incident1 General

Aviation

Unknown Minor aircraft damage occurred during

landing when the pilot lost his glasses

while trying to visually ascertain if the

landing gear was down.

82308 88/02 Incident5 Air Carrier Large Transport While using an oxygen mask, the pilot

found it difficult to put the mask over

eyeglasses and earpiece.

SEARCH WORD: GLASSES

420938 98/11 Incident1 Air Carrier Medium Transport After bumping his glasses and having a

lens fall out, the pilot misread the chart.

420087 98/11 Incident2 Air Carrier Medium Large

Transport

Pilot, who normally wore contact lenses

for flying, was wearing new bifocal glasses

for a night landing, which he felt

contributed to inadequate peripheral

vision.

409722 98/07 Incident2 Air Carrier Large Transport Pilot had difficulty reading manuals, due to

his glasses and darkness in the cockpit.

367378 97/04 Operation

Problem

(incident) 5

Air Carrier Large Transport While using an oxygen mask, the pilot

reported it forced his glasses away from

his face so they were of no use.

355875 96/12 Incident4 General

Aviation

Cessna Citation Pilot, while flying into the sun and not

wearing sunglasses, was involved in a near

mid-air collision.

331090 96/03 Incident1 General

Aviation

PA-28 Cherokee

Archer

Pilot, who lost the left lens of his

corrective sunglasses, became disoriented.

328100 96/02 Operation

Problem

(Incident)4

General

Aviation

DC-9 While flying into the bright sun with

sunglasses, the pilot had to use flood lights

and lower his head to see Very High

Frequency Omnidirectional Radio Range

(VOR) needles. This resulted in

overshooting the assigned altitude, since he

was unable to see his altimeter.

303370 95/04 Incident2 Air Carrier DC-9 Slightly presbyopic pilot, who had no

restriction for glasses, misread the

instruments.

301558 95/04 Incident2 Air Carrier B767-300 Pilot, flying with new trifocal glasses, had

difficulty during landing.

265458 94/03 Incident1 General

Aviation

Unknown Pilot became sick during flight. When he

leaned out of window to vomit, he lost his

glasses.

258014 93/11 Incident5 Air Carrier Widebody

Transport

During an emergency landing, the pilot,

who needed bifocals to see instruments,

was unable to wear his glasses while

wearing an oxygen mask.

233187 93/02 Incident4 Air Carrier Medium Transport Pilot did not have prescription sunglasses.

While looking for something to block the

sun, he overshot the assigned altitude.
A5

AVIATION SAFETY REPORTING SYSTEM

REPORT NO. DATE EVENT

TYPE

CAT OF

OPERATION

AIRCRAFT

TYPE

NARRATIVE

SEARCH WORD: GLASSES (continued)

218514 92/07 Incident4 Air Carrier Light Transport Pilot reported that, while wearing blue

blocking sunglasses, he was unable to see

the blue light from the engine anti-ice light

system.

216039 92/07 Incident5

Emg

Personal

Business

Light Transport During an in-flight emergency, the pilot was

unable to read his instruments correctly. He

had put on his oxygen mask and it had

pushed his glasses off his face.

213213 92/06 Incident4 Air Taxi Small Transport Pilot was reaching for his sunglasses and

overshot the altitude.

208639 92/04 Incident5 Air Carrier Widebody

Transport

Pilot's trifocal glasses did not fit properly

while wearing an oxygen mask.

198701 92/01 Incident2 General

Aviation

Unknown Pilot misread final approach charts due to

poor lighting, aging eyes and glasses.

194848 91/11 Incident2 General

Aviation

Unknown Pilot had difficulty reading charts with new

glasses when instrument panel lights went

out.

182436 91/06 Incident4 Air Carrier Medium Large

Transport

While changing from his sunglasses to clear

lenses, pilot overshot his altitude.

153558 90/08 Incident2 Air Carrier Large Transport Pilot could not see charts very well, and a

subsequent eye exam revealed the need for

reading glasses.

151596 90/07 Incident2 Air Carrier Medium Large

Transport

Pilot, who was adjusting to a new glass

prescription, developed a headache, which

distracted him while flying.

NTSB, FAA, and ASRS reports of ophthalmic devices associated with aviation accidents, incidents, and

operational problems. This table includes the report number, date of occurrence, event type, category of

flight operation, aircraft type and narrative of probable cause. (Note: Subscript in the Event Type column

indicates the Probable Cause category found in Table 1.)
A6