Some very good points you've raised there guys. Sadly they are highly unlikely (at this point in time imo) to even consider changing the colours of any approach lighting systems. I take your point about equality in the workplace too Soup Nazi, you are quite right. The thing is, despite what the academic tests deem us, we are (probably 99% of the time) fit for work on a professional flight deck anyway (statement based on the thousands of pilots passing the tower signal test). Now I know that ££££'s have been spent to research this area and to ultimately engineer a new colour perception testing method which will be more fair than previous contraptions...and I'm sure in light of this, many medical professionals in the industry are probably thinking "Christ! What more do they want?"...But if they were to look at it from our point of view, a study uncovered several core areas which are vital, in terms of the pilot being able to correctly discern the colours presented to them...Surely it is only right then, for the CVD candidate to be assessed for fitness by sitting some test which is based on these core areas (physically), and thus is directly relevant to/and reflective of "the tasks of an airman".
The test should basically replicate the pilot on the flight deck, perceiving these lights as they appear in reality, not in the form of little flashing lights on a screen, or tiny lights at a distance which have had the wavelengths altered. The emphasis should be on real world testing, we should be moving away from academic testing for practical tasks. Esepcially if the costs of implementing such a system are going to be high anyway, why not get our heads together and re-think the best way to do this for good. Ha, I wrote that as if I have a say in the matter, I wish I did.
I know it could be done, a practical solution to this lies out there waiting to be discovered, something convenient for all involved. Its just a matter of a willingness to find the solution.
Soup Nazi, coming back to the first point you made there, where you approximated that we only need one more ICAO state to come on board with a more positive approach to CVD before the new understanding of the condition can spread globally...How certain are you of this? I hope I haven't misinterpreted what you wrote.
The UK could potentially be that nation, if that is the case. I mean we're currently the only state in JAA land allowing CVD deviations right? And if it were up to the UK alone, we would probably keep those deviations for good. Surely this demonstrates some understanding of the reality of the condition, and that it's actually not really a flight safety hazard. If only we could show them that many of us are safe to fly at night too. A new test/practical demonstration would be the answer, but is that likely to come into fruition after all the endeavours to bring out the CAD
Well who cares what is likely, it's what is RIGHT that is important.