UV exposure in the cockpit

[BE20 Driver]

Just curious if anyone knows if aircraft windows block out UV rays.

Does anyone wear "transition" lenses in the cockpit - if so, do they darken enough to work for regular sunglasses? They are supposed to be activated by exposure to UV and apparently some car windows block UV rays so they won't darken much in the car. Just wondering if it's the same at the pointy end of the plane.

[Tim]

ive known people that wear them when flying and they seem to work. IIRC though pilots are recommended against using them, because they can stay dark for a little bit after sunset, making it harder to see.

[Hiflyer2]

Lots of pilots I have flown with wear sunscreen in the Lears. I don't but probably should. A long day at FL400 and I will get a tan / burn.

[BE20 Driver]

IIRC though pilots are recommended against using them, because they can stay dark for a little bit after sunset, making it harder to see.

Leaving one's sunglasses on will have the same affect.

I didn't know you could tan in a Lear. I figured that all the tanned Lear pilots were just spending time at nice warm destinations.

[CpnCrunch]

Regular glass blocks 90% of UV, so bearing in mind that there is a lot more UV up at 40000 ft you will get a pretty good tan if you're sitting in the sun up there for a number of hours every day. You can think of the glass as factor 10 sunscreen.

[tired of the ground]

The self changing glasses do not get as dark as a real set of sunglasses. Believe it or not there is actually a max tint that is allowed due to driving regulations. They do however sell glasses for mountaineers at "high altitude" that are darker. Something about the sun being effectively brighter as you increase in altitude.

I wouldn't do it as I find I would like my glasses even darker. I should also point out that those glasses will darken due to heat. If it's too warm up front at night, you'll be wearing sunglasses.

[Airbrake]

Glass blocks UV B radiation. Not UV A.
UV B is the radiation that the body produces Vit D from.
Sunscreen is not a bad idea at all.
Pilots that I have seen are almost always Vit D deficient.

[hawker driver]

Wear the sun screen guys! I personally know of 6 pilots at our company who have had skin cancer removed from their heads or forearms. Sad to say that one of my buddy's just passed away from it a few months ago and another is going through Kemo now.

I read that pilots have a 25 times greater chance of getting skin cancer.

A lot of guys are refusing to fly above FL410. The company regularly files the citation X for flights up to FL490 and sometime they want the guys to go up to FL510.

Take care of yourselves.

[Cough Syrup]

I've heard you're supposed to take at least 1000 UI of vitamin D a day...I know some who take 2000 UI in the winter.

Prob not a bad idea to take some, supposed to help prevent cancer.

[teacher]

Wear your sunglasses even on a cloudy. A large percentage of UV rays still go through cloud (hence why you can still burn in the summer when it's cloudy). There is less light though so your pupils dilate to see better and therefore let in more UV rays! I also apply facecream with an SPF rating in it. I've also known of way to many pilots who've had skin cancer.

[iflyforpie]

Yes, the UV rays in an aircraft cockpit can be quite powerful.

I don't have any experience flying the upper flight levels, but I've got lots of experience maintaining planes that occupy the flight levels.

On most maintenance checks you remove the pilot and copilot seats; they are usually covered in grey sheepskin. When time comes to put them back in and you want to identify which one goes where; just look at the back cushion or headrest. If the grey sheepskin has turned pink on the left, it is the pilot's seat; if it has turned pink on the right, it is the copilot's seat.

These aren't old covers either, only a couple years old. You can see the same with cabin dividers and monuments that are by windows--they look like the interior of a car that spent 15 years in the Phoenix sun. Passenger seat covers get changed too often for them to bleach.

[Airbrake]

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21888274
A study about UV light and pilots, looking for more. Will report back when I find them.

Vit D supplementation should be based on where you live (Latitude), skin colour and base Vit D serum levels.

Vit d is Fat soluble. To say a 150lb Male should be taking the same amount of Vit D as a 300lb Male is not correct.
As well, Vit D taken orally last about 1/2 as long as produced from sun exposure.

Things to think about.

[Expat]

Interesting, as I now live at 8700 feet.
Every Friday and Saturday, I take one and half-hour sun bath. Even now, in December, when the sun is really low, and the temperature below freezing. I get red every time, and manage to maintain the tan. I feel much better also, from the vitamin intake. But up here, good sunglasses are a must.

[Airbrake]

The feeling better is caused by a different response than the UV b. It is actually
through the pineal gland (which is thought the eye & optic nerve)
Seratonin is the hormone that is increased and causes us to feel good in sunlight.

Be cautious in high elevations with sun exposure as well.
Minutes is all that is required sometimes to get Vit D exposure requirements. (especially if you are a pale complexion)

[Tim]

IIRC though pilots are recommended against using them, because they can stay dark for a little bit after sunset, making it harder to see.

Leaving one's sunglasses on will have the same affect.

right, but presumably you are wearing transition lenses because you have a prescription. whereas sunglasses can be taken off when it becomes darker, prescription glasses would still need to be worn no matter how over-tinted they were.

like i said, i know pilots who have done it. its only a recommendation to not wear them, just like its only a recommendation not to wear polarized lenses.

[swordfish]

Those photochromic (transition) lenses are totally useless in the cockpit as they depend on direct sunlight impinging on them to change the shade.

You rarely have this in the cockpit, and even if you DO, they darken asymmetrically, it takes a relatively long time to change, and a longer time to go back to normal which is hardly an option when your light values are changing rapidly (in & out of cloud).

One option I have used is those large things they advertise on TV (I can't remember the name of them) and you wear your reading glasses under them. Not a perfect solution as they're not very comfortable over an extended period, and you don't get good sealing around the headset. But you can remove and replace them easily as your light conditions change. Also, finding a place to put them in the cockpit can be a challenge in a congested cockpit.

However, they lenses DO protect your eyes well, and I have used them for extended periods without eye strain or irritation (3 hours).

[co-joe]

I used "photo grey" prescription glasses years ago, they barely worked at all in the car and in the plane. Pretty much useless. The weird thing was they got incredibly dark on low overcast days. Go for clip ons or get a fighter pilot helmet with a cool visor.

[TTJJ]

While there is a lot of talk about UV rays in Canada I am amazed that there is not much said about Cosmic Radiation.

I fly a Bermuda registered aircraft. I am required by the OTARs (their CARs) to track the amount of Cosmic Radiation absorbed by our crews. One of our guys flew for China Airlines and they scheduled their crews around the calculated radiation absorbed by the crew every 90 days.

It is prevalent at night as well as during the day and as exposure increases with latitude, you would think that Canada would be all over this. There is a recommendation for carriers to track their employee’s exposure here, http://www.tc.gc.ca/eng/civilaviation/s ... r-1750.htm but my quick search found no rule regarding exposure. I hope I am wrong.

If you fly below 26,000 ft this should not be an issue. If I fly above FL490 I require radiation measuring equipment in the cockpit in full view of the crew. The story of the operator requesting their crews to fly above FL490 would seem to suggest ignorance of the dangers involved.

So once again from an “all information is good information” point of view, I am posting my relevant regulations (OTARs) and sites for your perusing pleasure. If this is old hat to you then please disregard this post as the ramblings of an old man. If not, it might just save your life.

Dosage Calculator: http://jag.cami.jccbi.gov/cariprofile.asp
Information about the topic: http://www.faa.gov/library/reports/medi ... a/0316.pdf

OTARs (CARs) under which I operate (Both for Private and Commercial operations)

125.143 Cosmic Radiation
(a) An operator shall ensure that:
(1) an assessment is made of the exposure to cosmic radiation of those crewmembers who are liable to an exposure in excess of 1 milliSievert per year; and
(2) the exposure to cosmic radiation is taken account of when planning flight schedules; and
(3) shall ensure that crewmembers are informed of the health risks their work involves; and
(4) any exposure to cosmic radiation of a pregnant crewmember shall be as low as reasonably can be achieved and that exposure should be unlikely to exceed 1 milliSievert during the remainder of her pregnancy.
(b) An operator shall ensure that for any flight operated above 49,000ft:
(1) procedures for operating above 49,000ft and for the use of monitoring equipment shall be specified in the Operations Manual; and
(2) an aircraft descent to a level of 49,000 feet or lower is initiated as soon as practicable if the limit values of cosmic radiation dose rate specified in the Operations Manual are exceeded.

125.563 Cosmic radiation

An operator shall ensure that any aeroplanes intended to be operated above 49,000 ft shall carry equipment to measure and indicate continuously the dose rate of total cosmic radiation being received and the cumulative dose on each flight. The display unit of the equipment shall be readily visible to a flight crew member.

125.913 Cosmic Radiation records

(a) An operator shall keep records of the assessment of the exposure of crewmembers to cosmic radiation for a minimum period of 12 months.
(b) An operator shall keep written records of the exposure to cosmic radiation of those crewmembers who are liable to an exposure in excess of 1 milliSievert per year for a minimum period of 24 months.
(c) Where crewmembers have been exposed to cosmic radiation in excess of 6 milliSieverts in one year, the operator shall keep written records of that persons exposure until the later of either:
(1) the 75th anniversary of his birth, whether or not that person survived to that date; or
(2) the 30th anniversary of the termination of his work which involved exposure to cosmic radiation
(d) where an operator assesses individual exposure to cosmic radiation, the records shall include:
(1) the names of the crewmember; and
(2) the detail of each assessment of exposure to cosmic radiation (in milliSieverts per year; and
(3) the date of the assessment.
(e) where an operator does not assess individual exposure to cosmic radiation but instead assesses the exposure of groups of crewmembers, the records shall include:
(1) the names of all crewmembers covered by the assessment; and
(2) the maximum dose of cosmic radiation (in milliSieverts per year) to which those crewmembers are likely to be exposed; and
(3) how the dose has been calculated; and
(4) the period of time that the assessment is valid.

[Hawkerflyer]

What was that about UV exposure in the cockpit?

[Airbrake]

TTJJ


I agree with you totally about CR. The issue I run into is that the majority of pilots will lose their medical and eventually die from issues totally unrelated to CR exposure.

I'm more concerned with pilots getting Diabetes, CVD, stroke. These issues unfortunately will take most pilots long before CR does.

IF every pilot were to eat significantly better (controlled their insulin better) slept more with quality sleep (lower cortisol), lowered emotional stress, didn't sleep so erratically (both length and time zones), exercised smarter (not just more - that has other negatives as well), got more appropriate amounts of Vit D (picture above a good example of a bad amount), then I'd say lets attack the CR issue.

It's 2011 and where in YYZ can you find a HEALTHY meal? Are there many options?

If you look at everything (CR & UV exposure included) it is all stress on your body. It cares not what the cause, only that there are huge amounts of it.
Picking on 1 stressor, in this case CR is kinda like tripping over dimes to pick up pennies. Which I'm certain pilots are good at.

If you carry too much weight around your belly, I hate to say it, but your issue is not going to be CR induced.

Now the million dollar question is, CAN CR cause other diseases to become more potent? Don't know that answer.

Fly healthy!