[NSRCA-discussion] DriveWear Glasses

[Peter Vogel]

Polarized is definitely better for *some* things, anytime you have to deal
with reflective glare (skiing, road cycling, water sports, etc.)
polarization is *awesome*.  If you are looking up at the sky the whole time
(flying RC) reflective glare is a non-issue and the downsides of
polarization become obvious.  With the right angle looking into the sky
polarization can add depth to clouds, etc. which makes for some very
striking photography (polarized filter on the lens) but I know from
experience that the angle of polarization to get that depth is NOT the
angle that is needed to cut glare from ground reflection, which is what
polarized sunglasses are designed to do -- so you actually lose depth
(unless you tilt your head about 60 degrees and keep it tilted) and the
"shift" that happens during flight when you do tilt your head can be very
disorienting.

Peter+

On Tue, Feb 7, 2012 at 9:08 AM, astropuppy <astropuppy at gmail.com> wrote:

> Thanks, I had never thought of polarization in a head tilting way; it
> makes total sense. Thank you for the explanation.
>
> As a Sidebar I do remember when polarized sunglasses first came on the
> market. They where all the rage. Guess until now I assumed them to be
> better.
>
>
> On Tue, Feb 7, 2012 at 9:47 AM, Scott McHarg <scmcharg at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> I've tried flying with polarized.  If you don't consider the LCD portion
>> and just look at the flying portion, it's fine....if you don't move your
>> head (aka tilt).  If you maintain a perfectly straight head, it's not bad
>> but let me just say that I don't know a single person that doesn't tilt
>> their head when flying.  When you tilt, it changes the polarization "look"
>> and the sky totally changes.  Try this just looking up at the sky and
>> tilting your head side to side.  You'll see the difference.  Any of these
>> companies you decide to go with can get you non-polarized lenses but
>> sometimes you have to specify.
>>
>> On Tue, Feb 7, 2012 at 10:20 AM, Bob Richards <bob at toprudder.com> wrote:
>>
>>> I tried - and rejected - using polarized lenses for flying pattern. I
>>> thought it would be a good idea, but ended up not liking it. Can't really
>>> explain why, just remember not liking it.
>>>
>>> Bob R.
>>>
>>>
>>> --- On *Tue, 2/7/12, Scott McHarg <scmcharg at gmail.com>* wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> From: Scott McHarg <scmcharg at gmail.com>
>>> Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] DriveWear Glasses
>>> To: "General pattern discussion" <nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>
>>> Date: Tuesday, February 7, 2012, 10:21 AM
>>>
>>>
>>> I bought a pair of Oakley prescription glasses.  For our purposes (model
>>> aviation), I was told NOT to get the polarized version.  Mine are amazing
>>> and worth the money paid.
>>>
>>> Scott
>>>
>>> On Tue, Feb 7, 2012 at 9:11 AM, Peter Vogel <vogel.peter at gmail.com<http://us.mc1616.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=vogel.peter@gmail.com>
>>> > wrote:
>>>
>>>  Polarized lenses often make it difficult, if not impossible, to read
>>> the LCD display on our radios because the direction of polarization in
>>> glasses is 90 degrees opposite the polarization of the LCD film.
>>>
>>> Peter+
>>>
>>> Sent from my iPhone4S
>>>
>>> On Feb 7, 2012, at 6:45 AM, astropuppy <astropuppy at gmail.com<http://us.mc1616.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=astropuppy@gmail.com>>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>  Does anybody have experience wearing DriveWear lens while flying?
>>>
>>> http://www.drivewearlens.com/home.php?flashchange=8
>>>
>>> I am going to be buying new prescription glasses soon and would like to
>>> consider all possibilities.
>>>
>>> Mike
>>>
>>>  _______________________________________________
>>> NSRCA-discussion mailing list
>>> NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org<http://us.mc1616.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=NSRCA-discussion@lists.nsrca.org>
>>> http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> NSRCA-discussion mailing list
>>> NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org<http://us.mc1616.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=NSRCA-discussion@lists.nsrca.org>
>>> http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> *Scott A. McHarg*
>>>
>>>
>>> -----Inline Attachment Follows-----
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> NSRCA-discussion mailing list
>>> NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org<http://us.mc1616.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=NSRCA-discussion@lists.nsrca.org>
>>> http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> NSRCA-discussion mailing list
>>> NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org
>>> http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> *Scott A. McHarg*
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> NSRCA-discussion mailing list
>> NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org
>> http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion
>>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> NSRCA-discussion mailing list
> NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org
> http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion
>



-- 
Director, Fixed Wing Flight Training
Santa Clara County Model Aircraft Skypark
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.nsrca.org/pipermail/nsrca-discussion/attachments/20120207/a68aabd3/attachment.html>