What is a waiver? The word doesn’t appear in the Regs. In the USA the FAA grants waivers against the colour vision standard if someone has demonstrated they can identify relevant lights in a practical test. They are issued with a “SODA” which stands for “Certificate of Demonstrated Ability”. The SODA is carried in the same wallet as the medical certificate, which still has a statement of not meeting the standard.
In contrast, in Australia, if a pilot has passed the control tower signal gun test or the “practical lantern test”, they are deemed to have met the standard, and the mention of CVD disappears from the medical certificate forever. Using my own case as an example, in spite of the fact I am severely colour vision defective, with a diagnosis of deuteranopia, I have passed the colour perception standard because I passed the signal gun test. I suspect that I would not be included in the PMO’s group of 400 CVD pilots. I have no mention of colour vison on my medical. The same goes for the many significantly CVD pilots who have passed one of the abovementioned tests and who are gainfully (and safely) employed in senior airline positions. They are not counted as CVD by the PMO.
So who are the 400 pilots and the 140 commercial pilots the PMO is quoting to us? Truth is, nobody knows, and likely, neither does the PMO. Does he mean that there are 260 private pilots, and 140 class 1 medical holders who have not met the standard? Do these numbers represent the pilots who have failed the CTSG and PLT? It seems unlikely, because there is absolutely no reason why a PPL would need to do either of the tests unless they had aspirations of going for the ATPL. In the PMO’s terminology, do these numbers refer to the CVD “unsafe” group?
My point is, the numbers are meaningless without definition.
Conservatively estimated, there should be at least 1980 pilots who have a clinical condition of colour vision defective (as defined by a “fail” on the Ishihara).The number is likely to be closer to 3000, depending on the ratio of male to female in the pilot population. What would be interesting would be the numbers who have done the Farnsworth Lantern Test and passed it. Of those who have failed the Farnsworth, how many have taken the CTSG and passed or failed, and likewise, how many have done the Practical Lantern Test and passed or failed. Then there is a group who have not taken either of these tests and who nevertheless have medical certificate enabling them to use their ATPL, and some have limitations while others don’t. What are the stats on this group?
These numbers should not be too complex for a computerised department like CASA to provide with clarity. Until that is done, we should treat the quoted numbers with great suspicion.
AP