Unlike the Qinetiq study, these two reports actually includes the results of controlled tests. However, the main goal of these papers is to show that the CAD test is a better test than ishihara etc for diagnosing ability to read a simulated PAPI. What's missing is evidence that the CAD test (or any other colour vision test) has a correlation to *flight safety*.
Folks,
That's the whole point, CAD is a just new testing method, and a small group of people, so I am told by a colleague in the UK, a now retired UK CAA FOI ( or whatever they call them now), stand to make a lot of money if it is adopted as the ICAO recommended test.
Nobody has yet come come up with anything that invalidates the Denison finding, and, I am informally advised, Denison stands, CASA cannot simply walk away from it. But that hasn't stopped CASA, who probably feel that, with limitless cash, they will be able to see off any challengers, through to the High Court if necessary, having convinced the Minister it is a vital matter of air safety.
Tootle pip!!