Originally Posted by Soup Nazi
CRG, Forget it, stay in OZ. Period.
Go do the practical lantern or the tower lights test and get your restriction lifted. We are lucky enough to have the best when it comes to colour vision rules, lets hope it stays that way.
Interesting.
Should Australia, the USA and Canada, to name but a few which have far more relaxed CVD standards than the UK and JAA land, move the goalposts and start removing the livelihoods of working commercial pilots they'd best have a big slush fund of cash ready to pay out the numeorus class action claims that will be flooding into their Courts.
I think this is one of the CAA's major stumbling blocks with their CAD Test, getting other countries to come on board, which MANY of them do not want to do! The CAD Test MAY be easier to pass than the Holmes-Wright or Beynes Tests but it is still far more restrictive than the Farnsworth or Spectrolux Tests and on that point MANY presently UN-RESTRICTED FAA, TC or CASA licenced CPL/ATPLs could potentially lose their jobs if they were forced into taking this new test. And you can't go issuing grandfather rights to existing licence holders because that immediately destroys the safety argument and makes a mockery out of testing.
Now, you may call me cynical and conspiratorial but does it not sound odd to anyone else that a major driving force behind the worldwide adoption of the CAD Test is the very same person who started the research project that resulted in the CAD Test being developed? A little food for thought..............
What really annoys me about this whole issue is that the authorities can not supply one item of substantiated evidence that CVD pilots pose any greater a risk than any non-CVD pilot. ALL they have to rely on are a battery of lab rat tests which only determine whether or not a person has CVD not whether or not they are safe to operate commercial aircraft in a highly regulated, radar-controlled and often very automated IFR flight environment. Oh, yes, and one non-fatal incident in amongst many hundreds of millions of flying hours which fails to identify CVD as the primary cause; in fact, if you read the whole report carefully (and not just the bits which support the anti-CVD argument) you will find many issues which question CVD as being the cause.
This whole debacle is all about elitism, kudos and job protectionism by a very small group of individuals and s** all to do with aviation safety; that's only my opinion, for what it's worth.
Rant over! Soapbox away. Hat, coat, TAXI!!!