Colour Blindness (merged)

[Yahtac Cificap]

I have a Category 1 medical, and when it comes to the color test, I always miss out on 2-4 of the colored cicrles. The doctor normally shows me about 12-14 samples. Though I am not color blind, I understand colour blindnes is genetic. Will my color vision deteriorate with age, or will it remain relatively the same throughout my career?

[redsnail]

Colour vision as far as I know doesn't deteriorate with age. Just plain old vision does...

[Constable Clipcock]

Believe it or not, one may actually experience a slight yellowing of the eyes' lens with advanced age, usually long after one has joined the bifocal-wearing set, which will slightly diminish one's ability to distinguish the more subtle differences between grey, blue and violet. The less vivid of the blues and violets start to look a trifle greyish instead.

Out of 14 trials, which is the usual number for the Pseudo-Isochromatic Plates (PIP) and Ishihara tests, a person with "normal" color perception is generally expected to get 10 of them correct. Those of us who can get through a PIP or Ishihara test with zero errors are those whose color perception is actually better than the norm.

I wouldn't worry about scores like that if I were you; it sounds like your altogether normal in that respect. If it's any consolation, while I've got a corrected visual acuity of 20/12 bilaterally and can pass every color-vision test ever devised with no errors, I'm myopic enough that I'd fail a JAA Class 1 renewal and couldn't get a Class 2 except with a waiver (refrac: OD -6.75 s -1.00 cyl, OS -5.25 s -0.50 cyl and an uncorrected DVA of 20/250). Fortunately, my own country (the US) has a different set of rules!

------------------
Anybody out after 2 AM is either a turd, a cop or a pilot. Or any combination of the three!

[inverted flatspin]

where is the logic in the JAA's position? I fortunatley pass the colour standard, but not by much I have to rely on the FALANT test here in the US. I am also lucky in the prescription area -2.5 ( I intend to convert my licence to a JAA version eventually). My question is this how can the JAA refuse somebody with lenses stronger than -3 diopters when every day pilots with much thicker lenses fly over their very heads in N registerd aircraft. this and a few other nonsense ideas have found their way into the JAR's, I hope it all works itself out someday.

[Luftwaffle]

There are some test plates for which numbers only show up for people with a particular colour deficiency. Or so I was told once by a tech, when I admitted that I couldn't see anything at all on a particular plate.

Some of the plates have two "answers": the one that is a different colour than the background, and another number that is distinguished from the background by differences in greyscale. People with normal colour vision see the coloured number effortlessly and go to the next page. People with a colour deficiency who hunt for the number using other clues, trying to pass the test, will fall into the trap and spot the grey number.

[FCL3]

Hi Folks!

I am a CVD (colour vision defective) in Europe. I have a deuteranomaly. In Europe especially in Germany it is really hard (nearly impossible) to get a medical with a colour vision deficiency !
Since the Germans will adapt to the "new" JAR-Regulation this year I was at the CAA in Gatwick for a Class 1 Med and I was assessed as unfit because I didn't pass the so called lanterntest.
But I didn't give up, so I went to the Aeromedical Institute in Soesterberg (NL) and I really passed the lanterntest, which was now very easy to pass because the way of testing was very different.
So in the next few days I will get my JAR-FCL3-Certificate for Class 1.

The only thing I REALLY don't understand is: Why do they have colour vision tests in their "extended ophtalmological examination" 5 yearly ?!

I'd like to know if there is anbody out there who is colour vision defective and passed the JAR tests (or didn't pass)?

For the American, Canadian and Australian pilots:
Here are the colour perception requirements for Europe:
------------------------------
JAR-FCL 3.225 Colour Perception
Date: February 28, 1997


(a) Normal colour perception is defined as the ability to pass the Ishihara test or to pass Nagel's anomaloscope as a normal trichromate (see paragraph 1 Appendix 14 to Subpart B).

(b) An applicant shall have normal perception of colours or be colour safe. Applicants who fail Ishihara's test shall be assessed as colour safe if they pass extensive testing with methods acceptable to the AMS (anomaloscopy or colour lanterns - see paragraph 2 Appendix 14 to Subpart B).

(c) An applicant who fails the acceptable colour perception tests is to be considered colour unsafe and shall be assessed as unfit.
------------------------------

Sincerly,

- FCL

-------------------
By the way, how's my English? ;)

[This message has been edited by FCL3 (edited 20 June 2000).]

[150Driver]

This is very interesting news...

I failed the lantern test at Gatwick last year for UK Class 2 medical, so I have a restricted class 2, which prevents me from flying at night etc. on my BCPL. This is fine at the moment as I am able to instruct.

However, next year when I come to renew CAA have informed me that I will be required to undertake class 1 JAR medical and they will issue a Class 1 restricted - £350 for instructing PPLs in C150s! Are they having a laugh? The really daft thing is I have an unrestricted UK class 3 (valid for 5 years), meaning I can fly exactly the same a/c with no restrictions whatsoever as a PPL. (The lantern test for class 3 is less stringent, and even for the class 2 they tested me 3 times before they were sure, so I think I am only just 'colour unsafe').

Can you tell me what was different about the test at Soesterberg (as opposed to Germany/UK) that enabled you to pass it? Incidentally, why did you try the UK medical before going to NL?

Also, if you aren't Dutch, are the authorities issuing your professional license happy to do so against the Dutch issued medical ?

[inverted flatspin]

Can anybody tell me if the Farnsworth Lantern (FALANT) test is acceptable to the JAA or is it just the Holmes Wright lantern.

The Falant is acceptable to the FAA and the US military.

[Moses]

I think the way we test for colour vision in aviation is somewhat arbitrary. I wonder what similarities there are between passing the Ishihara test or Nagel anomaloscope or this lantern test, or that - and flying the aircraft safely?

I've also often wondered how important 'normal' colour vision is in the flying task these days, especially when we're mostly IFR and have at least two radios?

It seems to me that p'raps a 'cockpit specific' test should be done (and failed) before anyone is ruled 'colour unfit/unsafe'?

[150Driver]

browse on over to http://www.aopa.com.au/topics/medical/denison.htm for details about some research the Australians did a few years ago, when considering the same question.

[Moses]

Thanks for that. Most interesting ref.
What they are presumeably now doing in Australia seems to make a lot of sense to me.
I wonder when the rest of the world will catch up!?
The Farnsworth Lantern I would suspect is more aviation/practical than the Holmes Wright - but I wonder how both compares to the real flying environment?

[FCL3]

Hi 150Driver!

I'm sorry for that late reply.
The reason why I first went to CAA was that I
didn't know the Dutch having the new JAR-FCL 3. http://www.pprune.org/ubb/NonCGI/frown.gif

In Gatwick the lanternbox was about 7 (or more?)
meters away and I had to (!) lean back on the chair.
He didn't accept any corrections. When I said:
"It's white - no, it's green" he wrote down that I said
white!
I had about 4 errors and I was assessed as unfit after 30 minutes.

In Soesterberg it was quite easier. The ophtalmologist
there was really friendly. The box was right to me and
and I looked into a mirror in which I saw the box.
The box was about 2 meters away from the mirror (this means
totally 4 meters). And after all I had 0 errors.

The Germans still have their old requirements. You have
to set the anomaloscopy to the value of 1,3.
I had the value of 3,0. This means a deuteranomaly (green area).
The Krauts will adapt to the knew regulation this year.
And then it will be possible to start my ATPL-Training
here. But not, if I have to do the ****ing lanterntest
again.

CU,

- Denis

-------------------
By the way, how's my English? ;)

[actionman]

FCL3 - Can you describe what is involved in a FALANT test as I've never heard of it ? Like you, I've been around the opticians trying to get the same answer from two of them

[Constable Clipcock]

actionman:

The Farnsworth Lantern (FALANT) Test is simply a series of exercises in which you're shown three lights - one each red, green and white - arranged is varying sequences over 9 trials. The examinee's task is to tell which light is which on each trial. It's been the test of choice in the US Navy for decades for one simple reason: it's widely regarded as the only color-perception test that is absolutely "cheat-proof"!

------------------
Anybody out after 2 AM is either a turd, a cop or a pilot. Or any combination of the three!

[inverted flatspin]

hello Lad's here is a very important link for anyone interested in this topic.
http://www.leftseat.com/colorvision.htm

It contains a very good downloadable article on how Colour (Color in America) Vision deficiency is dealt with by the FAA.
As we have come to expect from the americans it is a very commonsense and practical way of dealing with this issue.

Interestingly enough if you happen to pass one of the alternative tests listed by the FAA they then give you a letter certifiying that you meet the standard for colour vision which you present to the AME at all future medicals and you will never again be tested for colour vision. The same is true for the SODA (statement of demonstrated ablility) or signal light gun test, however this is the least desireable way of getting the restriction removed as it is considerd a waiver and if you apply for a professional flying job you will have to mention it on your application.

When I started learning to fly my AME gave me bad advice he sent me for the SODA straight away, I passed this test and was given an unrestricted medical right there and then, when I decided to begin my commercial training I found out about the alternative tests. I went to an eye specialist and he gave me the Devorine test and the Farnsworth Lantern test both of which I passed, The FAA then removed the waiver from my record and gave me the letter of competence. If only I had known about the alternative tests at the start it would have been a lot easier with a lot less paperwork but now that it is all sorted out, United airlines here I come.

[actionman]

Cheers - I've had a look at this sight and it looks good. The example plate tests that are on the site seem remarkably easy (but the site does warn you about this). It is also good to see that the FAA accepts a selction of tests whereas the CAA seems to think along the lines of 'Ishihara or Holmes lantern or bust'.

A previous message explained the FALANT test to me - but surely you will only ever see one of the following selections of nav lights ?

From behind, white, white, white.

From the front,left to right, green,white ( assuming the landing light's on), red.

And from port and starboard only the appropriate red or green and maybe the tail.

This asumes that you are not inverted and at the same altitude as the other aircraft but is the FALANT test a true representation ?

Any thoughts anyone (I haven't done it)?

[Yosser]

Anybody know where I can get a FALANT test done?

Failed the Holmes Wright already, the CAA AME stated "it simulates IMC conditions".

If you see a nav. light in IMC it doesn't matter what colour it is, it will be embedded in your forehead milliseconds later.

[This message has been edited by Yosser (edited 30 June 2000).]

[FCL3]

Hey Baby !

THAT'S an argument !

But as the CAA/JAA told me, thy don't argue about seeing the nav lights (or not). They are more concered about the displays IN THE cockpit.

[actionman]

Well, if the CAA told you that they are more concerned about seeing lights and colours on instruments etc then the test they use should reflect their argument... And should not rely on seing nav lights that they know you are not going to see in thick fog.

CAA get real - do you think we should start a campaign ?

[Uncle joe's mintballs]

Yes.I think a campaign should be started against the CAA for discrimination against pilots with a colour difficiency.I have over 2000 hrs on a PPL/IR and cannot progress further because of their intransigent attitude.I am allowed to fly on airways in zero visibility down to 250 feet on the ILS yet denied a CLP/ATPL.In U.S.A.or Australia I would have a class one but in the U.K. zilch.

[actionman]

FCL3 - who was it that said that the tests were all 'about lights in the cockpit' and not outside ?

[Hang On, I'm Busy]

I didn't even know I was "colour deficient" until the nice CAA Doctor told me so, and a bit of a shock it was.

When I explained that I really can see if I'm about to fly into something, the Doctor (no names) just told me "some cockpits have red lights in them, you know."

If it hadn't been for my career tumbling past me out of the window, I would have realised then that it was the most stupid, ill-informed palm-off that I have ever heard. Actually, colour defectives can see MORE in a monochromatic situation than colour normals and they also, generally, have more acute night vision

If you've got the time, it is worth following the wonderful Dr Pape's link to the Austrlian Appeals Tribunal Case, Re Denison. This shows the depth of science which was investigated to reach their decision, and included (for instance) test-pilots "flying" simulators with the colour turned off. It is, as far as I can find out, the only time the issue has been examined in a neutral forum, and the result speaks for itself. The Australian CAA were as intransigent as ours (UK) and they lost.

I also found a paper from the 1940s in the library at uni a few years ago, from the time when the RAF were investigating colour vision in their applicants, and before attitudes had hardened. They discovered that about 8% of their pilots then (about the percentage of males who are colour defective) were in fact colour defective, with no difference in performance. This was at a time when the now archaic coloured airfield signals and recognition lights were regularly relied upon. (I also recently heard of a then-current Tornado pilot who was totally blue-green colour blind. Still today, none of the tests the RAF use pick up on that.)

The old article also pointed to the real problem in this matter: that nobody (including non-flying doctors)can actually know what another person is seeing, and so cannot tell whether they are safe or not. As is unfortunately usual with this type of issue and regulatory bodies, the result is a totally exclusive system which, in the face of all logic and with self-sustaining prejudice, excludes all but those in the middle of a statistical curve.

There, that's off my chest. Did someone further up mention the lifting of eyesight regs next year? Anyone know any more?

(edited for cock-up)

[This message has been edited by Hang On, I'm Busy (edited 05 July 2000).]

[actionman]

Good one ! I've read in several books that during the Second World War colour blind RAF guys were employed to spot the camoflagued and hidden vehicles of the Germans. This was because the colour defective individuals were aware of their 'disability' and were extra keen to look for changes in shape and outline rather than colour - the 'normal' guys were often fooled !

As for the eye-doc, his comment about red lights in the cockpit sums up his understanding and level of ignorance about flying. Does he believe that you would try and land if the only two of the landing gear lights in front of you were green rather than red ? Does he think that you would ignore the red master warning caption that would be flashing to get your attention for another reason ? Does he think that the ringing bell, klaxxon etc would not grab your attention in event of something else happening ? Are you not able to see the white, green, yellow and red bits on the ASi of soemthing like a C172 ? After all, these things are all about three feet from your nose and not outside your cockpit, or not 7m away in a darkened room and about 3mm in diameter as per the Lantern business.

I feel that it may be worth contacting Dr Pape in Australia. I emailed him a few years back when I first read about his research and he said that someone needed to take up the reins in the UK. Opinions ?

Keep 'em coming - the file on the thread on the home page is burning up

[actionman]

FCL3 - Whereabouts in Holland is Soesterberg and is it easy to fly into from the UK ?

[actionman]

FCL3 - I've just found Soesterberg and am thinking about making a trip over there. Can you put some telephone numbers and contacts up on this BB ?

[Yosser]

Try their website at http://www.aeromed.nl/

This gives phone numbers, location and prices. At 985 guilders for an initial JAR Class One it is cheaper to go there than Handbrake House at £387.

Try Easyjet out of Liverpool for cheap flights, it is only 10/15 minutes by train from Schipol.

Good hunting..............

[This message has been edited by Yosser (edited 12 July 2000).]

[gemmie]

I recently undertook the Holmes Right Lantern Test at Heathrow airport. I passed, despite being colour blind. Is there an explanation for this? Before my test I was made to take an Ishihara test, which I failed. Does anyone know why I was able to pass my lantern test (ie. specific requirement for colour vision)and most importantly-WILL I HAVE TO TAKE IT AGAIN?

[actionman]

Yosser - cheers for that I'll have a look. Did you get a Class 1 over there as you are obviously familiar with where it is ?

[Yosser]

Actionman, not yet, but I am booked in.............!

[inverted flatspin]

gemmie you are not colour blind. the reason that you failed the ishihara test is straight forward. I am in the same position as you are (I passed the FALANT farnsworth lantern test) but fail the ishihara test. When I was initially misdiagnosed as being colour blind I did quite a bit of research into it as it was bit of a shock considering that I never had any trouble with colours. The problem is actually with the ishihara test itself, it works just fine if you pass it but if you fail it does not mean that you are colourblind. one out of every three failures is able to reliably distinguish between red and green which is what the test is supposed to be checking for. Basically ishihara is the defacto standard because it has been around for so long however it is based on bad science. It uses blue, yellow and shades of purple to confuse your brain. When people that pass the ishihara test are tested using an analmascope the results vary from person to person suggesting that everybody sees colours a bit differently the 30-40% who fail the ishihara test (but can still distinguish all the colours) are among this group, they just don't pass ishihara's standard which is from all the evidence an abritrary one. Only a very few people are really colour blind. Almost all of the people who fail ishihara can tell the difference between red and green however it comes down to the intesity of the colour, and some people can not do it reliably.

The US military recognised this problem years ago and instituted a policy of using ishihara's test only as a screening tool. the actual standard is determined by the farnsworth lantern (FALANT). This test is also acceptable to the FAA. The Holmes Wright lantern is supposedly harder to pass than the FALANT but I have no first hand experience of Holmes wright.

[actionman]

Yosser - did you get my emails about this lot ?

[Yosser]

Afraid not, actionman.

That "E" mail address will not let me in anymore.

Post yours and I will let you know how I get on.

[actionman]

Yosser - mine is [email protected]

I'd be very interested to hear about it all away from this BB.

Cheers

[inverted flatspin]

here is some good news for all concerned with this topic. I spoke to a professor of optometry just last week and he told me that there may well be a treatment in the not too distant future. The Human genome project was just finished recently (a year ahead of schedule) and this guy tells me that colour vision deficiency is a prime candidate for gene therapy. The technique used would be to use a suitable vector virus which would be used to infect the subject and in so doing a repair gene would piggyback along into the subjects cells. The cells in the retina would then begin producing normal colour pigments and all the evidence suggests that this would lead to normal colour vision. The guy that told me stressed that it was all theoretical but that once again ALL THE AVAILABLE EVIDENCE SUGGESTS THAT IT WILL WORK. Apparently the difficult bit is finding a suitable vector virus, some thing with no side effects.

This professor told me that in the last year he has changed his estimate of when there would be a treatment down from within 50 years to within 5 years or even sooner.

To all PPRUNERS interested in this topic please keep a careful eye out for any advertisments regarding clinical trials in the next few years.

Lets hope it works and we can all kiss this problem goodbye.

[Yosser]

With my luck the only suitable vector virus will turn out to be HIV..........

[FCL3]

Sorry for replying so late!!

inverted flatspin:
I don't really know, if the FALANT is acceptable to the
JAA.
Maybe you should ask the JAA by eMail. http://www.jaa.nl

actionman:
We are about to start a "campeign" in our new association here
in Germany. We will build up a new Internet-Site and soon
we will sue the German LBA.
We also try to get telecasted. And one of the Flight Schools in
Germany informs applicants about the colour vision standard after
we informed the school about the bad situation today and nearly anyone
who has a colour vision deficiency is visiting our site and getting subscribed
to our Listbot-Email-List.

actionman:
<< FCL3 - who was it that said that the tests were all 'about lights in the cockpit' and not outside ?

It was a JAA-Doc, actually it was the Assistant to Licensing Director.
The JAA once planned to make a new Sim-Test with common cockpit-displays but
as he/she/it told me they do not have enough money and engineers to develop
such a test.

actionman:
Soesterberg is about 15 km to the east of Utrecht and about 60 km southeastwards
to Amsterdam. But isn't the Utrecht-Airport just 2 km away??

You can get good information here: http://www.aeromed.nl

gemmie:
It is quite possible that you have a colour vision *deficiency*.
That means that you are not able to distinguish e.g. white from
green at certain conditions (mostly it's the distance).
The Ishihara is very sensitive. Even if you have an extrem "light
version" of a colour vision defect you will not be able to see
every plate.
The Holmes-Wright can be passed even when you have a deuteranomaly or
a protanomaly.
Have you ever been tested at the anomaloscope?

[FCL3]

gemmie:

I'm sorry, but as I know we have to do the Holmes-Wright test again. And that's why I'm still studying and fighting against the Colour Perception Standard.
I passed the HW and I have to do it again 5-yearly at the "extended opthalmological examinitaion".
The funny thing: The Aeromedical Institute wasn't able to give me any information about repeating the test. It was the JAA who told me.

[actionman]

FCL3 - thanks for your notes.

Don't know about all of you dudes but I don't know whether I like the idea of a white-coated professer messing around with the genes in my eyes ! The question is...is it worth messing with what is otherwise perfectly good sight to pass a medical?

By going down this road the likes of the CAA/JAA etc win because the likes of us lot end up seeking corrective treatment for an ailment that makes no difference in the air.

My thoughts: get rid of the stupid limitations and needless standards rather than trying to get colour vision genetically altered.

BTW...my wife's a clinical research nurse so I know what these profs are like !

[Uncle joe's mintballs]

FCL3

What is a "anomaloscope"?
I am seriously thinking of going to Holland to try the Holmes Wright test.I have been to Gatwick several years ago and failed this miserably and have been resigned to the fact that I will never get a class one.The problem was the large distance and the fact that it was doubled by the use of a mirror on the facing wall(the actual lights were behind you).I feel that if the device were nearer I could do it!!
Hope springs eternal.

[Uncle joe's mintballs]

FCL3

What is a "anomaloscope"?
I am seriously thinking of going to Holland to try the Holmes Wright test.I have been to Gatwick several years ago and failed this miserably and have been resigned to the fact that I will never get a class one.The problem was the large distance and the fact that it was doubled by the use of a mirror on the facing wall(the actual lights were behind you).I feel that if the device were nearer I could do it!!
Hope springs eternal.

[CVD Nils]

Dear folks!

I was just advised by a friend to check the ongoing discussion about color vision here and some answers are quite interesting.

Correcting a color vision defect with 'Viruses' and 'Vector-DNA' is surely a way to solve the medical problem in itself, but wouldn't it make more sense to find out, if a color vision defect poses any threat to the safety of air navigation?

This is a quite complicated question and it has allready been answered by three major court appeals in Australia. The Aviation-Color-Perception-Standard became totaly reassessed, and the conducted research projects, to justify the standard, were declared as flawed.

So, what I'm asking me again and again is: why is Europe still laboring for the highest color vision standards in aviation, and why do they tolerate foreign pilots from countries with remarkable lower color vision standards (Australia, USA, Canada...) to fly their airplanes into and out of the european airspace? Those possibly color vision defective pilots pose the same air safety risk then a color vision defective european would. But europeans are simply not allowed and the accepted color vision tests are nothing more then defacto color vision tests. Those tests just have one purpose: to show, that you ARE color vision defective.
"(...)colour discrimination is irrelevant to the multitude of tasks demanded of pilots. All the stuff about colour vision testing becomes irrelevant when that one truth is grasped. Does a pass or a fail on the Holmes-Wright lantern, the Ishihara, the anomaloscope and all the rest predict performance on actual flying tasks? No, without reservation, it does not." (Dr. Arthur Pape; some of you will know him.)

For my personal opinion: I think, that a color vision defect poses absolutely NO RISK to the safety of air naviagtion. My desire, to become a professional pilot in Germany, was not fulfilled in 1998 due too defective color vision. I would like to bring my matter for me - and all the others - to a german court room. Unfortunately it's very hard to find professional support.


-CVD Nils.

[CVD Nils]

Dear folks!

I was just advised by a friend to check the ongoing discussion about color vision here and some answers are quite interesting.

Correcting a color vision defect with 'Viruses' and 'Vector-DNA' is surely a way to solve the medical problem in itself, but wouldn't it make more sense to find out, if a color vision defect poses any threat to the safety of air navigation?

This is a quite complicated question and it has allready been answered by three major court appeals in Australia. The Aviation-Color-Perception-Standard became totaly reassessed, and the conducted research projects, to justify the standard, were declared as flawed.

So, what I'm asking me again and again is: why is Europe still laboring for the highest color vision standards in aviation, and why do they tolerate foreign pilots from countries with remarkable lower color vision standards (Australia, USA, Canada...) to fly their airplanes into and out of the european airspace? Those possibly color vision defective pilots pose the same air safety risk then a color vision defective european would. But europeans are simply not allowed and the accepted color vision tests are nothing more then defacto color vision tests. Those tests just have one purpose: to show, that you ARE color vision defective.
"(...)colour discrimination is irrelevant to the multitude of tasks demanded of pilots. All the stuff about colour vision testing becomes irrelevant when that one truth is grasped. Does a pass or a fail on the Holmes-Wright lantern, the Ishihara, the anomaloscope and all the rest predict performance on actual flying tasks? No, without reservation, it does not." (Dr. Arthur Pape; some of you will know him.)

For my personal opinion: I think, that a color vision defect poses absolutely NO RISK to the safety of air naviagtion. My desire, to become a professional pilot in Germany, was not fulfilled in 1998 due too defective color vision. I would like to bring my matter for me - and all the others - to a german court room. Unfortunately it's very hard to find professional support.


-CVD Nils.

[inverted flatspin]

CVD nils You are correct being colour deficient has no effect on air safety. To give you a rough idea between 1 in 8 and 1 in 12 men are colour deficient (depending on your racial background) Northern Europeans have the highest rate and curiously enough the closer you get to the equator the lower the rate among the populations. There was an interesting hypothesis a number of years ago that linked the differences in the rates to the differences in the amount of twilight at the various lattitudes and a correlation was established suggesting that colour vision deficiency is a selective advantage, giving our ancestors better vision during the twilight and dark hours and possibly better hunting ability. This would appear to have a basis in fact as I know quite a few colour deficients (myself included) who without exception see better in the dark than colour normals. However this does not mean that we are unable to distinguish colours as I'm sure all reading this topic will agree. With approx 1 out of every 10 men (global average)affected by this it would be a significant cause of auto accidents around the world if in fact as the aviation authorities would have you believe we are unable to tell the difference between red and green. In fact to my knowledge no car crash has ever been attributed to this and I have searched the NTSB database for north america on this one.

In the US the final test to decide if you are cabable of distinguishing the colours used in aviation signal lights is the aviation signal light itself. The FAA take you out onto an airfield and first at a distance of 1000ft they show you the signal lights in random order you name them as the show them and then they repeat the test at 1500ft again you name them as they show them. I took this test a few years ago and after I had passed I asked the guy who gave me the test two questions first how long had he been giving people this test and secondly how many people had failed the test? He told me that he had been doing this test for twenty years and in all that time NO ONE HAD EVER FAILED.

True Colour blindness is very rare indeed and is usually accompanied by very poor visual acuity due to other factors.

Ishihara's test is just an arbritrary test failing it does not mean you are colour blind. All the other tests are also arbritray they just draw the line in a different place.

The FAA are right about this one if you can tell the difference between the signal lights at an airfield (and from the evidence everybody can) then you should fly.

Good luck with your case if you go ahead and take one. Probably the best place to take a case maybee to the European Court which would have authority over the JAA. All the evidence is on your side and the precedents set by DR Pape in Australia are very strong, as well as the fact that many thousands of colour "defective" pilots are currently flying all over the world safely.

One Further note.

The JAA and The FAA are currently in negotiations to harmonise pilot licensing does anybody out there know if medical standards are on the table?

[inverted flatspin]

CVD nils You are correct being colour deficient has no effect on air safety. To give you a rough idea between 1 in 8 and 1 in 12 men are colour deficient (depending on your racial background) Northern Europeans have the highest rate and curiously enough the closer you get to the equator the lower the rate among the populations. There was an interesting hypothesis a number of years ago that linked the differences in the rates to the differences in the amount of twilight at the various lattitudes and a correlation was established suggesting that colour vision deficiency is a selective advantage, giving our ancestors better vision during the twilight and dark hours and possibly better hunting ability. This would appear to have a basis in fact as I know quite a few colour deficients (myself included) who without exception see better in the dark than colour normals. However this does not mean that we are unable to distinguish colours as I'm sure all reading this topic will agree. With approx 1 out of every 10 men (global average)affected by this it would be a significant cause of auto accidents around the world if in fact as the aviation authorities would have you believe we are unable to tell the difference between red and green. In fact to my knowledge no car crash has ever been attributed to this and I have searched the NTSB database for north america on this one.

In the US the final test to decide if you are cabable of distinguishing the colours used in aviation signal lights is the aviation signal light itself. The FAA take you out onto an airfield and first at a distance of 1000ft they show you the signal lights in random order you name them as the show them and then they repeat the test at 1500ft again you name them as they show them. I took this test a few years ago and after I had passed I asked the guy who gave me the test two questions first how long had he been giving people this test and secondly how many people had failed the test? He told me that he had been doing this test for twenty years and in all that time NO ONE HAD EVER FAILED.

True Colour blindness is very rare indeed and is usually accompanied by very poor visual acuity due to other factors.

Ishihara's test is just an arbritrary test failing it does not mean you are colour blind. All the other tests are also arbritray they just draw the line in a different place.

The FAA are right about this one if you can tell the difference between the signal lights at an airfield (and from the evidence everybody can) then you should fly.

Good luck with your case if you go ahead and take one. Probably the best place to take a case maybee to the European Court which would have authority over the JAA. All the evidence is on your side and the precedents set by DR Pape in Australia are very strong, as well as the fact that many thousands of colour "defective" pilots are currently flying all over the world safely.

One Further note.

The JAA and The FAA are currently in negotiations to harmonise pilot licensing does anybody out there know if medical standards are on the table?

[FCL3]

Hi Uncle joe's mintballs !

Yes, the CAA-Test was horrible! But I can't guarantee that the NLs didn't change anything by now. Maybe you should try a phonecall. Most of the docs are fine! And maybe the'll tell you more precise information about the test (distance...).

The anomaloscope is a device to test whether you are colour vision defective or not. If you are a CVD the anomaloscope tells you the grade an the "area" of your defect.
It's a very old system. You look through an eyepiece an you see two semicircles with different colour (upper yellow, lower red ore vice versa). And now you have to make both semicircles identical.
But it doesn't give you a real satisfactory answer. The value it put's out varies every time you use this device.

But I don't think that you will ever see this anomaloscope in Soesterberg because they don't use it anymore. If you fail the Ishiharas mostly you have to pass the Holmes-Wright.

In Germany the authorities STILL provide to test by anomaloscope. If the value is larger than 1.3 (NORMAL COLOUR PERCEPTION) you don't get a Class One Medical (even if you have 1.32)!!

And I don't think one is unable to fly an airplane if such a device gives a value of 1.35 or 4.00 or even more!

But the JAA-requirements aren't better!

I'd really like to know what PROFESSIONAL pilots think about colour perception and the actual requirements !! Please answer !!

[This message has been edited by FCL3 (edited 20 July 2000).]

[FCL3]

Hi Uncle joe's mintballs !

Yes, the CAA-Test was horrible! But I can't guarantee that the NLs didn't change anything by now. Maybe you should try a phonecall. Most of the docs are fine! And maybe the'll tell you more precise information about the test (distance...).

The anomaloscope is a device to test whether you are colour vision defective or not. If you are a CVD the anomaloscope tells you the grade an the "area" of your defect.
It's a very old system. You look through an eyepiece an you see two semicircles with different colour (upper yellow, lower red ore vice versa). And now you have to make both semicircles identical.
But it doesn't give you a real satisfactory answer. The value it put's out varies every time you use this device.

But I don't think that you will ever see this anomaloscope in Soesterberg because they don't use it anymore. If you fail the Ishiharas mostly you have to pass the Holmes-Wright.

In Germany the authorities STILL provide to test by anomaloscope. If the value is larger than 1.3 (NORMAL COLOUR PERCEPTION) you don't get a Class One Medical (even if you have 1.32)!!

And I don't think one is unable to fly an airplane if such a device gives a value of 1.35 or 4.00 or even more!

But the JAA-requirements aren't better!

I'd really like to know what PROFESSIONAL pilots think about colour perception and the actual requirements !! Please answer !!

[This message has been edited by FCL3 (edited 20 July 2000).]

[CVD Nils]

Dear inverted Flapspin!

I totally agree with your statement.

The Tower-Signal-Light-Test gives CVD's a fair chance to demonstrate their abilities in a situation where color is "used" to code information.

Otherwise I ask myself how often it happens, that airplanes have a total radio-com failure and need to be instructed by the tower-lantern? Normally they all have a second radio-com unit on board.
And what about real big airplanes? Would it make sense to give tower-signal-light instructions to a Boeing 747 approaching the airport 10 miles away? Those AT-Pilots normally just follow their "radio-communication-failure procedures", or?

So, Dr. Pape even demands, that the Aviation-Color-Perception-Standard should be totally removed from the regulations.

Kind Regards,

CVD Nils

[CVD Nils]

Dear inverted Flapspin!

I totally agree with your statement.

The Tower-Signal-Light-Test gives CVD's a fair chance to demonstrate their abilities in a situation where color is "used" to code information.

Otherwise I ask myself how often it happens, that airplanes have a total radio-com failure and need to be instructed by the tower-lantern? Normally they all have a second radio-com unit on board.
And what about real big airplanes? Would it make sense to give tower-signal-light instructions to a Boeing 747 approaching the airport 10 miles away? Those AT-Pilots normally just follow their "radio-communication-failure procedures", or?

So, Dr. Pape even demands, that the Aviation-Color-Perception-Standard should be totally removed from the regulations.

Kind Regards,

CVD Nils

[Uncle joe's mintballs]

Thanks FCL3 for the info.

I wonder how many Ishihara plates there are?Are there different sets with new ones produced annually or does every AME have the same set??
A previous mail on this thread did say that NL HW test did seem easier because the lights were much nearer.

[Uncle joe's mintballs]

Thanks FCL3 for the info.

I wonder how many Ishihara plates there are?Are there different sets with new ones produced annually or does every AME have the same set??
A previous mail on this thread did say that NL HW test did seem easier because the lights were much nearer.

[FCL3]

Yes, the lights in NL were much nearer. THAT'S what I would call "standard"! ;)

There are 3 sets of Ishiharas (the 12- 24- and 36-Plates-Edition). Normally the 24- an 36-Plates-Edition are used by the AMEs.
But don't even think about learning them, because you have to look at them 5-yearly !!
If you make ONE mistake you have to pass HW. And if you don't pass the HW you're gone! And I don't think you'd like to be unemployed after flying for several years ...

[FCL3]

Yes, the lights in NL were much nearer. THAT'S what I would call "standard"! ;)

There are 3 sets of Ishiharas (the 12- 24- and 36-Plates-Edition). Normally the 24- an 36-Plates-Edition are used by the AMEs.
But don't even think about learning them, because you have to look at them 5-yearly !!
If you make ONE mistake you have to pass HW. And if you don't pass the HW you're gone! And I don't think you'd like to be unemployed after flying for several years ...

[actionman]

I'm just flagging this one up to bring it to the top of the pile on the medical forum...

Anyone got anymore news about recent tests or changes in legislation ? We have to keep this very much in the 'news' if a similar campaign to the eyesight limits is to be run.

[actionman]

I'm just flagging this one up to bring it to the top of the pile on the medical forum...

Anyone got anymore news about recent tests or changes in legislation ? We have to keep this very much in the 'news' if a similar campaign to the eyesight limits is to be run.

[inverted flatspin]

At the moment the Colour signal light test is the final deciding factor used by the FAA. If you fail all other tests but pass this one then you are given a waiver. I am currently lobbying the AOPA (US) to lobby the FAA for this to become the standard as opposed to a waiver. The reasoning I am using is that the FAA have been issuing this same waiver for a long time (maybee as long as fifty years) and in all that time the NTSB has not one single accident/incident on file where someone with this waiver caused an accident or incident due to mistaking colours. Put simply it is a non issue when it comes to safety. I have been in contact with Dr Pape in Australia and he agrees that if we can get the FAA to do this It will be a "very big stick to beat the JAA with"(my words not his). This may take some time to accomplish but I will post any results here.

[inverted flatspin]

At the moment the Colour signal light test is the final deciding factor used by the FAA. If you fail all other tests but pass this one then you are given a waiver. I am currently lobbying the AOPA (US) to lobby the FAA for this to become the standard as opposed to a waiver. The reasoning I am using is that the FAA have been issuing this same waiver for a long time (maybee as long as fifty years) and in all that time the NTSB has not one single accident/incident on file where someone with this waiver caused an accident or incident due to mistaking colours. Put simply it is a non issue when it comes to safety. I have been in contact with Dr Pape in Australia and he agrees that if we can get the FAA to do this It will be a "very big stick to beat the JAA with"(my words not his). This may take some time to accomplish but I will post any results here.

[actionman]

One of the other threads says that there is going to be a meeting at the CAA in about 3 weeks time to discuss eyesight limits for med cats. Anyone know if this subject will be on the agenda ?

[actionman]

One of the other threads says that there is going to be a meeting at the CAA in about 3 weeks time to discuss eyesight limits for med cats. Anyone know if this subject will be on the agenda ?

[inverted flatspin]

Just like actionman I am also flagging this to get it back up to the top of the medical forum.

Has anybody got any new info on the subject.

[inverted flatspin]

Just like actionman I am also flagging this to get it back up to the top of the medical forum.

Has anybody got any new info on the subject.

[Localiser]

Hi everyone,

I failed my CAA Class one about 5 years ago but passed the RAF Holmes-Wright test. I used this to base on argument on CAA allowing me to re-test. Normally, if you fail it you aren't allowed a re-test. The reason for this is that "your colour perception will never change...".

I obtained a JAA Class One after passing the HW test at Gatwick earlier this year. It took a great deal of letter writing, phonecalls and visits to get them to agree to a re-test. Luckily for me, the RAF got involved and wrote to the CAA on my behalf with me HW results from Cranwell.

My understanding was that that was it. No colour perception test EVER again! However, this news of having to re-do it every 5 years is rather worrying... This completely contradicts their argument for not allowing people to re-sit the colour perception test - "your perception never changes?!". With my current progression (having instructed with a restricted class 2 before getting my class one) I am hoping to be in an airline F/O position by June(-ish) next year. I could be out of a job 4 years later if I failed the Holmes-Wright!

Incidentally, after the first 2 attempts at a set on the HW test, the optometrist sits you in the darkened room for 20 minutes to allow your cones to open up (?). This is the final attempt you are allowed. I passed at this. Close shave!

Make your minds up CAA! They are potentially ruining peoples careers and shattering peoples dreams. It seems so antiquated....

Don't give up everyone!

LOC :)

[Localiser]

Hi everyone,

I failed my CAA Class one about 5 years ago but passed the RAF Holmes-Wright test. I used this to base on argument on CAA allowing me to re-test. Normally, if you fail it you aren't allowed a re-test. The reason for this is that "your colour perception will never change...".

I obtained a JAA Class One after passing the HW test at Gatwick earlier this year. It took a great deal of letter writing, phonecalls and visits to get them to agree to a re-test. Luckily for me, the RAF got involved and wrote to the CAA on my behalf with me HW results from Cranwell.

My understanding was that that was it. No colour perception test EVER again! However, this news of having to re-do it every 5 years is rather worrying... This completely contradicts their argument for not allowing people to re-sit the colour perception test - "your perception never changes?!". With my current progression (having instructed with a restricted class 2 before getting my class one) I am hoping to be in an airline F/O position by June(-ish) next year. I could be out of a job 4 years later if I failed the Holmes-Wright!

Incidentally, after the first 2 attempts at a set on the HW test, the optometrist sits you in the darkened room for 20 minutes to allow your cones to open up (?). This is the final attempt you are allowed. I passed at this. Close shave!

Make your minds up CAA! They are potentially ruining peoples careers and shattering peoples dreams. It seems so antiquated....

Don't give up everyone!

LOC :)

[actionman]

Flag it up time - anyone got any more news ? Does anyone know if the CAA/JAA eyesight meeting ( see above ) took place ? If so - what outcomes ?

[actionman]

Flag it up time - anyone got any more news ? Does anyone know if the CAA/JAA eyesight meeting ( see above ) took place ? If so - what outcomes ?

[FatFlyer]

Thanks for the info about the good Dr Pape in Australia. He was very helpful in his reply but does not have the time or money for a long case in The Hague.
The only way to get the regulations changed is by taking the matter to the European court of human rights on the grounds that us "black and white" viewers are being denied our chosen career when there is no scientific evidence that the Ishihara or holmes-wright tests give an accurate or fair appraisal of one's ability to differentiate navigation lights or interprate EFIS displays.
The CAA/JAA will not accept a SODA (statement of demonstrated ability test)which the USA, Australia etc do, which is the only fair and accurate assessement of one's ability. I would happily fly around with a CAA inspector spotting nav lights or lights from the tower to prove my ability.
Any court case would have "experts" warning of mid-air collisions between airliners driven by colour defficient pilots, and be difficult to win. This is nonsense as many US, Canadian, Australian etc airliners fly into Heathrow and over europe every day with pilots who cannot pass the Holmes-Wright test.
Perhaps AOPA or a similar body could help fight the case as no individual could afford the legal costs.

[FatFlyer]

Thanks for the info about the good Dr Pape in Australia. He was very helpful in his reply but does not have the time or money for a long case in The Hague.
The only way to get the regulations changed is by taking the matter to the European court of human rights on the grounds that us "black and white" viewers are being denied our chosen career when there is no scientific evidence that the Ishihara or holmes-wright tests give an accurate or fair appraisal of one's ability to differentiate navigation lights or interprate EFIS displays.
The CAA/JAA will not accept a SODA (statement of demonstrated ability test)which the USA, Australia etc do, which is the only fair and accurate assessement of one's ability. I would happily fly around with a CAA inspector spotting nav lights or lights from the tower to prove my ability.
Any court case would have "experts" warning of mid-air collisions between airliners driven by colour defficient pilots, and be difficult to win. This is nonsense as many US, Canadian, Australian etc airliners fly into Heathrow and over europe every day with pilots who cannot pass the Holmes-Wright test.
Perhaps AOPA or a similar body could help fight the case as no individual could afford the legal costs.

[Dutch-pilot]

Hi,

is there anybody who knows if you can do your ATPL in the USA/Australia/... if you're colour unsafe in Europe? I haven't yet passed the Holmes Wright test at Soesterberg. What are the requirement in the USA with reference to colour blindness???

Gr. Dutch-pilot

[Dutch-pilot]

Hi,

is there anybody who knows if you can do your ATPL in the USA/Australia/... if you're colour unsafe in Europe? I haven't yet passed the Holmes Wright test at Soesterberg. What are the requirement in the USA with reference to colour blindness???

Gr. Dutch-pilot

[FatFlyer]

In the US and australia , if you fail the Ishihara tests, there are a number of alternative tests, the main one is the Falant lantern test.

If you cannot pass these, you can do a SODA test(staement of demonstrated ability) which usually involves identifying lights from a control tower at various distances.

Then you can get a SODA waiver with your medical which exempts you from further tests but must be showed to a prospective employer.

You can get an ATPL with this though if you are European, it might be difficult getting a green card/work permit.

[FatFlyer]

In the US and australia , if you fail the Ishihara tests, there are a number of alternative tests, the main one is the Falant lantern test.

If you cannot pass these, you can do a SODA test(staement of demonstrated ability) which usually involves identifying lights from a control tower at various distances.

Then you can get a SODA waiver with your medical which exempts you from further tests but must be showed to a prospective employer.

You can get an ATPL with this though if you are European, it might be difficult getting a green card/work permit.

[Dutch-pilot]

Check.
Do you know how that works with visum in countrys as Austria, Swiss, Sout Africa and so on??

Greetz,
Dutch-pilot

[Dutch-pilot]

Check.
Do you know how that works with visum in countrys as Austria, Swiss, Sout Africa and so on??

Greetz,
Dutch-pilot

[actionman]

Time for a resurrect this one - anyone got any more news on this ??

Any success stories ?

[actionman]

Time for a resurrect this one - anyone got any more news on this ??

Any success stories ?

[Hang On, I'm Busy]

Bloody hell Action, I'm working on the success, can't you wait wait for the story?

Have YOU got a story? ;)

[Hang On, I'm Busy]

Bloody hell Action, I'm working on the success, can't you wait wait for the story?

Have YOU got a story? ;)

[actionman]

...working on it...

[actionman]

...working on it...

[inverted flatspin]

I posted this under a different topic but here it is again.

according to the JAA the door may be open to the signal light test.

here are the relevant links.
http://www.jaa.nl/jar/jar/jar/jar.fcl.3.1.a.3.125.htm

and
http://www.jaa.nl/jar/jar/jar/jar.fcl.3.1.a.3.045.htm


The regs were written in general terms so they do not apply specifically to colour vision however here are the important points.

Under JAR 3.045 "Special Circumstances"

"An exemption may be granted where the application of JAR-FCL would have anamalous consequences."

Clearly the fact that a FAA licensed pilot with a SODA for colour vision can legally fly a N registered aircraft commercially in JAA airspace but would be denied the possibility of flying a JAA reg aircraft in the same airspace is an "Anamalous Consequence"

"An Exemption may be granted if it can be shown that an equivalent level of safety would exist."

The evidence of an equivalent level of safety is overwhelming. The FAA have been issuing SODA's for many many years and to date no one with a SODA has crashed or had an incident where the cause was determined to be poor colour vision. The FAA thorougly researched this before they began issuing SODA's and have a large body of evidence to support and validate the signal light test.

Dr Pape in Australia has taken it a step further and proved this to the satisfaction of the courts.

FCL 3.125 allows for the ability and skill of the applicant to be considered. It also suggests a medical flight test if appropriate.

I live in the USA an I am in the process of getting my instrument rating and I intend to get my commercial and multiengine ratings also. I have a current First Class medical with a SODA for Color vision.

Good luck to anyone who takes on the JAA I'm sure that you will meet a lot of resistance but keep at it.

[inverted flatspin]

I posted this under a different topic but here it is again.

according to the JAA the door may be open to the signal light test.

here are the relevant links.
http://www.jaa.nl/jar/jar/jar/jar.fcl.3.1.a.3.125.htm

and
http://www.jaa.nl/jar/jar/jar/jar.fcl.3.1.a.3.045.htm


The regs were written in general terms so they do not apply specifically to colour vision however here are the important points.

Under JAR 3.045 "Special Circumstances"

"An exemption may be granted where the application of JAR-FCL would have anamalous consequences."

Clearly the fact that a FAA licensed pilot with a SODA for colour vision can legally fly a N registered aircraft commercially in JAA airspace but would be denied the possibility of flying a JAA reg aircraft in the same airspace is an "Anamalous Consequence"

"An Exemption may be granted if it can be shown that an equivalent level of safety would exist."

The evidence of an equivalent level of safety is overwhelming. The FAA have been issuing SODA's for many many years and to date no one with a SODA has crashed or had an incident where the cause was determined to be poor colour vision. The FAA thorougly researched this before they began issuing SODA's and have a large body of evidence to support and validate the signal light test.

Dr Pape in Australia has taken it a step further and proved this to the satisfaction of the courts.

FCL 3.125 allows for the ability and skill of the applicant to be considered. It also suggests a medical flight test if appropriate.

I live in the USA an I am in the process of getting my instrument rating and I intend to get my commercial and multiengine ratings also. I have a current First Class medical with a SODA for Color vision.

Good luck to anyone who takes on the JAA I'm sure that you will meet a lot of resistance but keep at it.

[TooHotToFly]

Does anyone know of a petition, maybe an on-line one where pilots opposed to the current JAA colour defficiency regulations can register their support?

[TooHotToFly]

Does anyone know of a petition, maybe an on-line one where pilots opposed to the current JAA colour defficiency regulations can register their support?

[Dutch-pilot]

Hi,

is there anybody who initially failed a JAA "coulourblindness-examination" and eventually passed it? I would like to hear from you because I failed Holmes Wright and now I have the intention to do a re-examination.
I hope to hear from you ASAP!
Gr. Peter

[Dutch-pilot]

Hi,

is there anybody who initially failed a JAA "coulourblindness-examination" and eventually passed it? I would like to hear from you because I failed Holmes Wright and now I have the intention to do a re-examination.
I hope to hear from you ASAP!
Gr. Peter

[Hang On, I'm Busy]

Lacking as it does the pure entertainment value of other, recent, itchy-bollocks etc postings, I still think it's important. So here it is again.

I thank you.

[This message has been edited by Hang On, I'm Busy (edited 02 November 2000).]

[Hang On, I'm Busy]

Lacking as it does the pure entertainment value of other, recent, itchy-bollocks etc postings, I still think it's important. So here it is again.

I thank you.

[This message has been edited by Hang On, I'm Busy (edited 02 November 2000).]

[inverted flatspin]

Flag it up time lads. This one needs to stay at the top of the pile.

[inverted flatspin]

Flag it up time lads. This one needs to stay at the top of the pile.

[inverted flatspin]

Found this on the IAOPA website.
http://www.iaopa-eur.org/yipolctd.htm#pilot

It sets out IAOPA's position on the issue (ie that colour vision be an operational requirement)
I take this to mean that if you can show that you operate safely then you should be able to fly.

This is probably the best way to go about lobbying for a change (through IAOPA)

[inverted flatspin]

Found this on the IAOPA website.
http://www.iaopa-eur.org/yipolctd.htm#pilot

It sets out IAOPA's position on the issue (ie that colour vision be an operational requirement)
I take this to mean that if you can show that you operate safely then you should be able to fly.

This is probably the best way to go about lobbying for a change (through IAOPA)

[Dutch-pilot]

But that is the problem, isn't it??
How can you show that you are able to operate safely when you haven't passed H/W.?

Greetz.

[Dutch-pilot]

But that is the problem, isn't it??
How can you show that you are able to operate safely when you haven't passed H/W.?

Greetz.

[inverted flatspin]

If they allowed you to take the signal light gun test then you would be able to show that you could operate safely.

In the US this kind of waiver has been issued for many many years and not one single accident/incident has ever been attributed to a pilot with one of these waivers confusing colours. (according to the NTSB database)

A perfect record is hard to argue against.

[inverted flatspin]

If they allowed you to take the signal light gun test then you would be able to show that you could operate safely.

In the US this kind of waiver has been issued for many many years and not one single accident/incident has ever been attributed to a pilot with one of these waivers confusing colours. (according to the NTSB database)

A perfect record is hard to argue against.

[Dutch-pilot]

Yeahh, that is good news!!!

So, what are we intented to do now... :-)) Or what CAN we do??

Greetz!

[Dutch-pilot]

Yeahh, that is good news!!!

So, what are we intented to do now... :-)) Or what CAN we do??

Greetz!

[Hang On, I'm Busy]

A joke to keep it on top:

How can you spot John Prescott on an oil rig?

He's the one throwing bread to the helicopters.


I thank you.

BTW, I have discovered that if I photocopy the Ishihara plates, I can see all of them. Worth a try with the CAA?

[Hang On, I'm Busy]

A joke to keep it on top:

How can you spot John Prescott on an oil rig?

He's the one throwing bread to the helicopters.


I thank you.

BTW, I have discovered that if I photocopy the Ishihara plates, I can see all of them. Worth a try with the CAA?

[inverted flatspin]

Here is something I came across at the AME's just last week at my renewal. He used a device for checking eyes called the titmus vison tester. It is a compact machine that checks visual acuity and colour vision. It contains a sheet with six ishihara plates on it. However the difference is that the plates are correctly lighted. I passed the titmus vision tester which is by the way acceptable to the FAA but right afterwards he checked me with the same ishihara plates in a book and I failed that test. I must obviously be on the borderline but the point is that if the ishihara test is administerd in ideal conditions borderline people like me can pass it.

here is the website of the manufacturer

<A HREF="http://www.titmus.com" TARGET="_blank">http://www.titmus.com</A>

what can the JAA have against such a machine?

[inverted flatspin]

Here is something I came across at the AME's just last week at my renewal. He used a device for checking eyes called the titmus vison tester. It is a compact machine that checks visual acuity and colour vision. It contains a sheet with six ishihara plates on it. However the difference is that the plates are correctly lighted. I passed the titmus vision tester which is by the way acceptable to the FAA but right afterwards he checked me with the same ishihara plates in a book and I failed that test. I must obviously be on the borderline but the point is that if the ishihara test is administerd in ideal conditions borderline people like me can pass it.

here is the website of the manufacturer

<A HREF="http://www.titmus.com" TARGET="_blank">http://www.titmus.com</A>

what can the JAA have against such a machine?

[actionman]

150Driver,

I've just read an old posting of yours about a Class 3, BCPL instructing etc.

I'm in exactly the same position - how have you got on...or anyone else for that matter !!

[actionman]

150Driver,

I've just read an old posting of yours about a Class 3, BCPL instructing etc.

I'm in exactly the same position - how have you got on...or anyone else for that matter !!

[150Driver]

I decided after seeing several posts not to pursue the option of going for a medical in the Netherlands. I'll just wait and see what happens when I go for my renewal in May.

The CAA have never (to the best of my knowledge) taken away privilages once you have them, so they'll have to issue some kind of medical to allow me to continue to instruct. The fact that I can't do so once the sun's gone down doesn't particularly bother me.

Right now I'm happy working outside of full-time aviation, and many professional guys reckon that to be a fortunate position. I earn enough to go and play in the sky whenever I want, but at the same time I can keep current on 150s (wow) for free (+ of course instructing is rewarding + educational in itself).

If I thought it was worth my while making a career change, or if I have a mid-life crisis, then probably my (or your) best chance of success would be to get an FAA CPL/IR and find a light twin to build hours on (there are lots of N regs here, but alternativly the States or perhaps Australia). Then, with an FAA ATPL and lots of night hours it may be possible to convince the dear old CAA that I don't have a crippling condition. The Irish CAA might be another alternative - a friend tells me they may issue an Irish license in exchange for an FAA one. He can then get me on the Airbus (Irish register see) (sush-don't tell anyone).

BTW what medical have you been issued with & what does it entitle you to do ?

Any road up, I'm off to practise my aeros.
TTFN & good luck

[150Driver]

I decided after seeing several posts not to pursue the option of going for a medical in the Netherlands. I'll just wait and see what happens when I go for my renewal in May.

The CAA have never (to the best of my knowledge) taken away privilages once you have them, so they'll have to issue some kind of medical to allow me to continue to instruct. The fact that I can't do so once the sun's gone down doesn't particularly bother me.

Right now I'm happy working outside of full-time aviation, and many professional guys reckon that to be a fortunate position. I earn enough to go and play in the sky whenever I want, but at the same time I can keep current on 150s (wow) for free (+ of course instructing is rewarding + educational in itself).

If I thought it was worth my while making a career change, or if I have a mid-life crisis, then probably my (or your) best chance of success would be to get an FAA CPL/IR and find a light twin to build hours on (there are lots of N regs here, but alternativly the States or perhaps Australia). Then, with an FAA ATPL and lots of night hours it may be possible to convince the dear old CAA that I don't have a crippling condition. The Irish CAA might be another alternative - a friend tells me they may issue an Irish license in exchange for an FAA one. He can then get me on the Airbus (Irish register see) (sush-don't tell anyone).

BTW what medical have you been issued with & what does it entitle you to do ?

Any road up, I'm off to practise my aeros.
TTFN & good luck

[actionman]

I've got a Class III, then tripped up and have got a Class II Restricted which will run out in about 3 years time. So,like you, I may ask the anti-aviation campaigners what they intend to issue me with when it's renewal time.

[actionman]

I've got a Class III, then tripped up and have got a Class II Restricted which will run out in about 3 years time. So,like you, I may ask the anti-aviation campaigners what they intend to issue me with when it's renewal time.

[v2_radar_power]

Isn't it time that we all grouped together and formed an active independant group that faught this. I'm defective but safe but that does not mean that each and every medical isn't a nightmare. I know I can see colours correctly especially red-greeen, furthermore I know of my "problem" and am extra cautious even had to correct the odd normal guy who passes the red stop bars....."oh didn't see the red lights", I have a mate in the same boat and we were discussing that we don't look at colour subconsionsly (spelling??) but take a second or two to confirm when it's safty critical and it's a late night etc. and the performance level is at an all time low. I have passed both the FALANT and the Holmes (the Holmes was a disaster the person testing heard pilot and proceeded to do a NASA medical.... three hours long... the end result failed it the first time and took six months to fight CAA for a retest. Each medical is the same procedure, don't show me the book I can't read half of those pages give me the lantern or something else. I've now got the procedure down pat, I go to an eye doc first do the FALANT and take the test. But that's not the solution... I fully agree with colour vision testing and the ability to distinguish between some primaries but we need the following.

1. A test designed specifically for COMMERCIAL aviation not military that can be administered 100% correctly in the AV. Docs rooms.

2. Demonstrated ability must be accepted, even if the test standards are tougher... say a check pilot is allocated the honour and rides along for 5 sectors or so and looks for problems. I'm not saying he sits with you a 350 and says what colour is that street lamp. But we get given real practical testing. And a favorite from one of the past doctors I've had "It is important to see red because you need to see the red line at the top of the airspeed indicator". The clown was a PPL but even if you only saw grey you would be a fool if you could not tell if you were redlining any instrument.

How about that action group?

[v2_radar_power]

Isn't it time that we all grouped together and formed an active independant group that faught this. I'm defective but safe but that does not mean that each and every medical isn't a nightmare. I know I can see colours correctly especially red-greeen, furthermore I know of my "problem" and am extra cautious even had to correct the odd normal guy who passes the red stop bars....."oh didn't see the red lights", I have a mate in the same boat and we were discussing that we don't look at colour subconsionsly (spelling??) but take a second or two to confirm when it's safty critical and it's a late night etc. and the performance level is at an all time low. I have passed both the FALANT and the Holmes (the Holmes was a disaster the person testing heard pilot and proceeded to do a NASA medical.... three hours long... the end result failed it the first time and took six months to fight CAA for a retest. Each medical is the same procedure, don't show me the book I can't read half of those pages give me the lantern or something else. I've now got the procedure down pat, I go to an eye doc first do the FALANT and take the test. But that's not the solution... I fully agree with colour vision testing and the ability to distinguish between some primaries but we need the following.

1. A test designed specifically for COMMERCIAL aviation not military that can be administered 100% correctly in the AV. Docs rooms.

2. Demonstrated ability must be accepted, even if the test standards are tougher... say a check pilot is allocated the honour and rides along for 5 sectors or so and looks for problems. I'm not saying he sits with you a 350 and says what colour is that street lamp. But we get given real practical testing. And a favorite from one of the past doctors I've had "It is important to see red because you need to see the red line at the top of the airspeed indicator". The clown was a PPL but even if you only saw grey you would be a fool if you could not tell if you were redlining any instrument.

How about that action group?

[actionman]

V2 - if I saw grey on the ASI then even I would have to force my argumentative self to give up!

I'm off to the eye-doc for yet more tests (non-CAA type) but what your saying is absolutely right. 152Driver flagged up the Denison case in Australia in an earlier posting - it's well worth a read but written in fairly tiresome legaleeze. Unfortunately there is not a similar type of tribuanl authority in the UK but I'm open to ideas to form some sort of group. We could try and demand a meeting with the CAA on mass, or put together a proprosal for further testing. No doubt Dr Pape down under might take an interest.

Charles Guthrie's (Chief of Defence Staff) comments today make interesting reading if taken in context. If the Armed Forces are made to accept disabled people in front line roles then the CAA won't have a leg to stand on(no pun intended)...How can they deny a Class I on the grounds of a disability which has never been proven as the couse of an accident?

http://www.pprune.org/ubb/NonCGI/cool.gif

[actionman]

V2 - if I saw grey on the ASI then even I would have to force my argumentative self to give up!

I'm off to the eye-doc for yet more tests (non-CAA type) but what your saying is absolutely right. 152Driver flagged up the Denison case in Australia in an earlier posting - it's well worth a read but written in fairly tiresome legaleeze. Unfortunately there is not a similar type of tribuanl authority in the UK but I'm open to ideas to form some sort of group. We could try and demand a meeting with the CAA on mass, or put together a proprosal for further testing. No doubt Dr Pape down under might take an interest.

Charles Guthrie's (Chief of Defence Staff) comments today make interesting reading if taken in context. If the Armed Forces are made to accept disabled people in front line roles then the CAA won't have a leg to stand on(no pun intended)...How can they deny a Class I on the grounds of a disability which has never been proven as the couse of an accident?

http://www.pprune.org/ubb/NonCGI/cool.gif

[inverted flatspin]

I spoke to the head of the AMS Ireland (Dr Laffan) and he told me that if you pass the holmes wright test once then he will not require you to do the test again. His opinion is that if you are declared Colour safe then you are for life. I have passed the FALANT but have never taken the holmes wright. I will be taking the test in early jan and I'll post results here.

I mentioned this in an earlier post, I passed one of the FAA alternative tests called the Titmus vision tester. It uses Six selected ishihara plates but the difference is that they are lighted correctly. I was able to see the numbers in the testing machine but when the same six plates were shown to me out of the book I could'nt see them. It is possible that a lot of people are being declared colour deficient because the test is not being given properly.

[inverted flatspin]

I spoke to the head of the AMS Ireland (Dr Laffan) and he told me that if you pass the holmes wright test once then he will not require you to do the test again. His opinion is that if you are declared Colour safe then you are for life. I have passed the FALANT but have never taken the holmes wright. I will be taking the test in early jan and I'll post results here.

I mentioned this in an earlier post, I passed one of the FAA alternative tests called the Titmus vision tester. It uses Six selected ishihara plates but the difference is that they are lighted correctly. I was able to see the numbers in the testing machine but when the same six plates were shown to me out of the book I could'nt see them. It is possible that a lot of people are being declared colour deficient because the test is not being given properly.

[v2_radar_power]

The tests are almost never given properly, how often do you sit down the nurse throws the book at you and it's next, next, next. I've had tests under florescent lights, day light, dark rooms on grey days etc. the manufacturer says 75cm away at right angles to your field of vision. how often does the nurse hold the book on her lap or just above it.

That is my point we need specific tests drawn up for aviation that tell you right there and then pass fail, even if every test is the FALANT because once you fail the book and get sent for the FALANT or Lantern you already have a FAIL on your record and CAA etc al get suspicious remove the FAIL and everybody gets tested the same.

Going in mass to CAA? How about to ALPA, convincing them first because we don't have there 100% commitment, there is still the feeling I get from ALPA.... I'm fine I don't want to share my cockpit with a colour blind guy (forget the fact you are sharing the flight deck with a guy who hides the fact he boozes a dozen Scotches everynight and is grosly overweight and has a mild heart condition)!!! Once we have ALPA's support we then hit the CAA with some firm ALPA backing possible even with a few ALPA paid lawyers and medical experts from ALPAs side. I think having ALPA would also help because this is generally a new pilot problem you arrive at CAA as a student pilot to try convince them having a few solid grey haired old Captains in the team will give it more clout.

[v2_radar_power]

The tests are almost never given properly, how often do you sit down the nurse throws the book at you and it's next, next, next. I've had tests under florescent lights, day light, dark rooms on grey days etc. the manufacturer says 75cm away at right angles to your field of vision. how often does the nurse hold the book on her lap or just above it.

That is my point we need specific tests drawn up for aviation that tell you right there and then pass fail, even if every test is the FALANT because once you fail the book and get sent for the FALANT or Lantern you already have a FAIL on your record and CAA etc al get suspicious remove the FAIL and everybody gets tested the same.

Going in mass to CAA? How about to ALPA, convincing them first because we don't have there 100% commitment, there is still the feeling I get from ALPA.... I'm fine I don't want to share my cockpit with a colour blind guy (forget the fact you are sharing the flight deck with a guy who hides the fact he boozes a dozen Scotches everynight and is grosly overweight and has a mild heart condition)!!! Once we have ALPA's support we then hit the CAA with some firm ALPA backing possible even with a few ALPA paid lawyers and medical experts from ALPAs side. I think having ALPA would also help because this is generally a new pilot problem you arrive at CAA as a student pilot to try convince them having a few solid grey haired old Captains in the team will give it more clout.

[v2_radar_power]

There are so many different links to this same topic, I thought I'd bring this one up to the top so we can start to keep one thread running.

[v2_radar_power]

There are so many different links to this same topic, I thought I'd bring this one up to the top so we can start to keep one thread running.

[Red or green?!]

Has anybody tried the 'ColorMax Color Vision Enhancement Lenses' ( http://www.colormaxtech.com/ ) yet? Or know somebody who did? I have the same problem as many of you in this topic seem to have, and when I take a look at this product, it might be the answer to this problem. But... 'seeing is believing' :) and because it's not available in the Netherlands yet, I'm curious if any of you have any experience with it.

Rog?!

[This message has been edited by Red or green?! (edited 04 January 2001).]

[Red or green?!]

Has anybody tried the 'ColorMax Color Vision Enhancement Lenses' ( http://www.colormaxtech.com/ ) yet? Or know somebody who did? I have the same problem as many of you in this topic seem to have, and when I take a look at this product, it might be the answer to this problem. But... 'seeing is believing' :) and because it's not available in the Netherlands yet, I'm curious if any of you have any experience with it.

Rog?!

[This message has been edited by Red or green?! (edited 04 January 2001).]

[v2_radar_power]

Like all things in aviation the colour Max lenses/ sun glasses have not been around sufficiently long enough for long term testing or approval and have already been plain rejected by the FAA, Transport Canada, Jaa + others.

[v2_radar_power]

Like all things in aviation the colour Max lenses/ sun glasses have not been around sufficiently long enough for long term testing or approval and have already been plain rejected by the FAA, Transport Canada, Jaa + others.

[The Shiznit]

Im have tryed the colour lenses, they have been around in Aust for a number of years (apparently). I failed the Plates test but after putting in my wizz bang new $400 lenses I was able to see ALL of the numbers in the book. They are hard lenses and are coloured pink! (Dont expect to be pulling the women) They make some colours seem different when using them everyday. One I noticed wass the screen on my mobile phone was much greener than ever before. They are VERY uncomfortable to wear and I have stopped wearing them as they are not recognised by CASA.

Let me know if you want more info.

[gbnkr]

Intrested in the topic about colour blindness.I have a ppl with class2 jar medical but failed the isahara plates passed the giles lantern but failed holmes wright lantern. I would like to at least instruct or earn some money or even go to America and go commercial any thoughts?

[judy]

I would challenge the CAA via their legal dept. Many commercial pilots were passed fit with the good old giles lantern. However some years ago someone decided not to allow it anymore . Many good aviators are flying after only passing the giles lantern , so why not you and many others .

First step try and get the giles lantern
re instated .

This giles lantern was even the method used by the RAF .

[21712]

My thirteen year old son was crying yesterday... because it was just confirmed that he is "colour-blind" and he can't be an airline pilot... like his daddy.

My son is a "Deutan". Severe. His problem is the differentiation of green tones. And the medical regulations in my country are as restrictive as the rest.

I live in México, and am not familiar with all the terms that you people have been using on this thread. Regulations are slightly different, requirements are more or less the same. But I'm not going to let them screw my son's life.

This kid has been jump-seatting with me since he was barely able to talk, and his vision in the cockpit is better than most pilots I've known, myself included. He can spot a small traffic, day or night, even before the TCAS!!

He can differentiate EVERY single item in the cockpit of a B727, an A320, or an F100. He can tell the colours of the lights on an airplane (day or night), he can see the runway as well as I. And besides all that, his hearing is completely normal, and he can read!!!

I don't see a reason why he cannot become an airline pilot. So I'm going to start moving every single stone in our way, until the authorities realise that colour blindness is NOT necessarily an impediment to flying.

I don't know where I'll start, I don't know how long it'll take, but I DO know that I won't fail my son.

I want to thank you all for posting this thread and all the references on it, I'm sure they'll be of much needed use.

I'll keep you posted. Wish me luck.

21712

[FlameBoY]

it seems to me that CAA just cant make up their mind what passes as colour safe and what doesn't. The standards are different from all different parts of the world. Here in NZ for my class 1 i failed the ishihara test, but passed the holmes wright lantern test, but i was still slapped with a colour vision endorsement.. *odd*. Apparently i can work this endorsement off if i pass some other tests, but if i were to pass the holmes wright in other countries i would be sweet!
If ya ask me they really needa sort them selves out and get some international standard, if they really need one at all..
The idea of a test that actually relates to what a pilot might experience is a very good one indeed.

[JP5A]

Looking at my correspondance to the CAA going back 20 years (1981)to try and get help with my red/green difficiency.
It really is a brick wall with no compassion or consideration for one's experience or ability.
I have 1500 hrs,a night rating,an instrument rating and fly my twin engined aircraft weekly throughout Europe on airways at night!
How can they logically say that I am unsafe in the right hand seat of a commercial aircraft when I am up there on my own using the same airspace and the same holds and approach facilities as ATPL's.
Everyone in aviation needs to progress and I would like to take early retirement with an ATPL and do some flying.
I have lived in hope for 20+ years and am still no nearer.
What hope is there??

[actionman]

There is an interesting article in the latest issue of one of the flying mags ( Flyer or TodaysPilot - sorry can't remember) about eye medical standards.

The paragraph about colour vision is interesting because it mentions a practical test that could prove far more than a book full of dots. The author is an AvMed RAF doc and so I'm inclined to take his views quite seriously.

Any thoughts anyone ?

[The Shiznit]

I have had the same problems as most of you in this area, I am lucky and fortunate that I have passed a practical test (as I have describes on an earlier page) I got 17 out of 18 and the Australian CASA have issued me a medical with no restrictions. This is after failing the plates and the Ishihara tests. Australia has finally pushed forward into the 20th century
I think that most colourblind pilots are very frustrated because they know that their minor lack of colour vision by no way means that they are a unfit pilot. All I can say is keep getting tested you can take the tests as many times as you want in most cases, and all you have to do is pass it once!!!!!
Good luck

[JP5A]

Any more news on this topic??

[Speed Racer]

As I said on another thread in this forum, i recieved a letter from CAA about the removal of my colour vision endorsements. Accompanying my shiney plastic and CLEAN medical i also recieved a letter stating that "colour vision standards are likely to become less stringent with time (ICAO are developing testing procedures that should be universally adopted in the future)", and also it did state that in aussie CASA would of passed me without any need for lantern testing. Good to see at least one country is taking a step forward to help remove what I see as a very unfair requirement, especially when it has been demonstrated time and time again that colour deficiency does not make a pilot any less safe than one with "normal" vision.

21712 -
I know what your son must feel like. I too had the dream of becomming an airline pilot from when i was knee high to a grass hopper. But at the age of 10 i was tested by the state, and told "you are red-green colour blind and cannot be a electrician, pilot.. ra ra ra ... NEXT!" - not a nice way to learn that your future ambitions of flying are now down the toilet. Dispite this I fought on, learning as much as i could about my condition only to learn that i wasn't red-green colour blind, but in fact
Deutan, just like your son! For me, i wanted to fly commercially so bad that i was prepared to take things to CAA's disputes tribunal, or even goto australia just to get the damn medical! Luckily for me i passed the holmes wright A lantern test, so there was no need. If it helps your son when it comes to a lantern test, a friend of mine who was also in the same position as me with Deutan deficiency gave me the tip that in the test.. white will look yellow, red will look red, and green will look white. Cant say it turned out that way exactly for me, but i believe his deficiency was more severe than mine. But dont worry to all those out there who think someone cheated the lantern test.. he gave up flying after a year and is now a desk jockey with some IT firm. But to 21712 and your son, dont give up. Im sure if you try hard enough your son can be a pilot just like you! :)


edited because typo's suck :)

[This message has been edited by Speed Racer (edited 26 March 2001).]

[150Driver]

Just flagging this up for the previous topic.

The posts relating to colour testing at the Dutch Medical Centre seemed to me to be inconclusive; I simply went to the CAA for a class 1 and failed the Holmes Wright, so I'm stuck with a BCPL. I've not given up though, and am currently in the process of applying to the FAA for a 'color signal test' to validate my FAA Class One medical.

[gijoe]

This is has lots of good info on it which is why I've flagged it up again.

See the other thread.

http://www.pprune.org/ubb/NonCGI/cool.gif

[anengineer]

Don't know if you're still around here FCL3, but I would be very interested to know where you got the information that 5 yearly retests are required - I have been told exactly the opposite by the UK CAA.

[Flaps90!]

Why is everyone here trying to comply with the rules ? I've seen people talking legal challenges etc. Surely the easiest option is to CHEAT ! :) CVD(color vision defectives) wannabes know they are safe to fly, they just need the authorities to acknowledge that, which of course they wont, so screw them, cheat !

Now, how to cheat ? I heard there were different versions of the Ishihara plates ?
Anyone know if thats true ? If you could get yourself a copy of the one they use at the real medical, surely you could learn them. And so what if there are 5 year retests, if you havent got the brain power to memorise 24 patterns once every 5 years, you shouldnt be a pilot! - You wouldnt be the first to do it, how many pilots do you think are up there now only because they cheated somewhere along the line? They'll keep it quiet too, as you would !

Remember.. "Cheating - the choice of Winners" :) :)

[Nick Mahon]

Hi all.

Just over a year ago I was deemed to have a colour perception level 3 from the RAF at OASC RAF Cranwell. What that means is that I failed the Ishihara tests but passed the Lantirn. I phoned the CAA and found out that I could obtain a class 1 medical with my colour vision. Surely if I can be allowed to fly jets that can carry up to 400 people I should be fine for the RAF. Could someone let me know if there is anyway to put my arguement up against the Airforces psition. Is there any form of appeal that I could use in my case?

Thanks guys

[anengineer]

Hmmm.. I don't know, but were you trying to me a fast jet pilot ? I have heard of a couple of guys who were refused on non-perfect colour vision grounds. It's an interesting point, but I wonder if their justification may be based around the fact that in a 767, you tend not to have several thousand pounds of high explosives at your command. :) ...not that the enemy are in the habit of illuminating their strategic targets in red & green lights ! :)

[N2334M]

reply for FCL3:

Can you tell me more details about your HW lanterntest taken at the Netherlands Aeromedical Institute ??

How far where you located from the machine, standing or seated ?

Was it a type A or type B ??

How much did the examination cost totally ?

Was the examiner a specialized doctor or just a nurse ?

Did you take that in normal lighting conditions or at dark ?

Did you tell something to the UK CAA about taking again an initial certification at the Netherlands Aeromedical Institute ?

Could you provide your email, want to ask something about NL.

Thanks.

[Dutch-pilot]

Hello N2334M,

if you want some information about HW in The Netherlands, contact me by mail: [email protected] or [email protected] I've done HW and Ishihara in The Netherlands at the Aeromedical Institute Soesterberg. Unfortunately I failed.

Mail me, and maybe we'll find a "solution" for our problem.

Peter W.

[Dutch-pilot]

Just flagging it up!

[Twin-Engine]

Thanks to everyone that has added to this topic, especially Nick Mahon. I still remember the day in school when the teatcher held up these circles with different colour dots on. Most of my class mates saw the number 5 and I saw the number 9. My friends thought this was quite funny as all I have ever wanted to do was become a pilot. However I still joined the ATC and decided a flying schol was an excellent idea so off I went to cranwell. The optitian took out the book and I proceded to fail. He muttered under his breath that " theres another one that wont fly" however he set up the Latern test for me and I was told I was CP3 but due to the Eurofighter coming into service the RAF had raised their requirement to CP2 and I wouldent be able to join. I was understandably gutted, but I decided that if I could get paid a lot better and still fly around the world that becoming a commercial pilot would be fantastic! I have tried to find out if I would be ok to fly commercially but this is the fist place that I have found any substantial assistance. Thanks. :)

Nick Mahon
Who did you speak to in the CAA and what is their number?
Can you post if you get anywhere with the RAF (I wont be holding my breath!)

[Twin-Engine]

Thanks to everyone that has added to this topic, especially Nick Mahon. I still remember the day in school when the teatcher held up these circles with different colour dots on. Most of my class mates saw the number 5 and I saw the number 9. My friends thought this was quite funny as all I have ever wanted to do was become a pilot. However I still joined the ATC and decided a flying schol was an excellent idea so off I went to cranwell. The optitian took out the book and I proceded to fail. He muttered under his breath that " theres another one that wont fly" however he set up the Latern test for me and I was told I was CP3 but due to the Eurofighter coming into service the RAF had raised their requirement to CP2 and I wouldent be able to join. I was understandably gutted, but I decided that if I could get paid a lot better and still fly around the world that becoming a commercial pilot would be fantastic! I have tried to find out if I would be ok to fly commercially but this is the fist place that I have found any substantial assistance. Thanks. :)

Nick Mahon
Who did you speak to in the CAA and what is their number?
Can you post if you get anywhere with the RAF (I wont be holding my breath!)

[gijoe]

Interesting post on the wannabees thread about changes to eyesight limits including CP entitled 'How far on a Class 2?' Something about having to read first 15 of the cards correctly in a 24 ishihara book. Anyone know any more?

[gijoe]

Interesting post on the wannabees thread about changes to eyesight limits including CP entitled 'How far on a Class 2?' Something about having to read first 15 of the cards correctly in a 24 ishihara book. Anyone know any more?

[Saab 2000 Driver]

Hello folks,

I just found out that the Aeromedical Institute mentioned above has gone bankrupt over the last few days and appointments have been cancelled. For more info : +31-346-334 300

[Saab 2000 Driver]

Hello folks,

I just found out that the Aeromedical Institute mentioned above has gone bankrupt over the last few days and appointments have been cancelled. For more info : +31-346-334 300

[TAHIDA]

HI,
I HAVE JUST FOUND THIS SITE.
NOW READ THIS.
I HOLD A CPL(H) RESTRICTED TO AERIAL WORK AND INSTRUCTION ONLY.VFR DAY ONLY.I HAVE SOME 4000 HRS.I HOLD A CLASS 1(RESTRICTED)MEDICAL BECAUSE I AM COLOUR DEFECTIVE.
I AM ALSO TYPE RATING EXAMINER FOR THE CAA.
THE CAA WILL NOT LET ME FLY 'PUBLIC TRANSPORT SORTIE'S'BUT THEY WILL LET ME FLY THE FOLLOWING SORT OF TASKS.
1.CORPORATE FLIGHTS
2.LOW LEVEL SURVEY WORK
3.PHOTOGRAPHY
4.INSTRUCTION
5.EXAMINATIONS

CAN YOU BELIEVE THAT I CAN'T DO 'PUBLIC TRANSPORT'.

I AM ABOUT TO TRY AGAIN WITH THE CAA TO GET THIS RESTRICTION LIFTED.IT SEEMS THAT I AM THE ONE AND ONLY HELICOPTER PILOT WITH SUCH A LICENSE.I AM REALLY CLOSE TO BECOMING THE FIRST CPL VFR DAY ONLY PILOT WITH NO RESTRICTIONS.

IS THERE ANYONE ELSE IN A SIMILAR STATE.

CONTACT ME PLEASE. ;) ;) :mad:

[TAHIDA]

HI,
I HAVE JUST FOUND THIS SITE.
NOW READ THIS.
I HOLD A CPL(H) RESTRICTED TO AERIAL WORK AND INSTRUCTION ONLY.VFR DAY ONLY.I HAVE SOME 4000 HRS.I HOLD A CLASS 1(RESTRICTED)MEDICAL BECAUSE I AM COLOUR DEFECTIVE.
I AM ALSO TYPE RATING EXAMINER FOR THE CAA.
THE CAA WILL NOT LET ME FLY 'PUBLIC TRANSPORT SORTIE'S'BUT THEY WILL LET ME FLY THE FOLLOWING SORT OF TASKS.
1.CORPORATE FLIGHTS
2.LOW LEVEL SURVEY WORK
3.PHOTOGRAPHY
4.INSTRUCTION
5.EXAMINATIONS

CAN YOU BELIEVE THAT I CAN'T DO 'PUBLIC TRANSPORT'.

I AM ABOUT TO TRY AGAIN WITH THE CAA TO GET THIS RESTRICTION LIFTED.IT SEEMS THAT I AM THE ONE AND ONLY HELICOPTER PILOT WITH SUCH A LICENSE.I AM REALLY CLOSE TO BECOMING THE FIRST CPL VFR DAY ONLY PILOT WITH NO RESTRICTIONS.

IS THERE ANYONE ELSE IN A SIMILAR STATE.

CONTACT ME PLEASE. ;) ;) :mad:

[gijoe]

TAHIDA - like the post !!

4000hrs...but you're not safe in the eyes of the CAA - you might just fly into that Red light that you can't see.

Icebox in an email has told me that the CAA has on order some new colour testing kit which should arrive around Feb 02. At the moment they are unable to do the full gambit of JAA colour tests and are, therefore, selling people who cannot do the Ishiharas or HW lantern short.

Anyone know any more about this new kit that might be coming? <img src="cool.gif" border="0">

[gijoe]

TAHIDA - like the post !!

4000hrs...but you're not safe in the eyes of the CAA - you might just fly into that Red light that you can't see.

Icebox in an email has told me that the CAA has on order some new colour testing kit which should arrive around Feb 02. At the moment they are unable to do the full gambit of JAA colour tests and are, therefore, selling people who cannot do the Ishiharas or HW lantern short.

Anyone know any more about this new kit that might be coming? <img src="cool.gif" border="0">

[icebox]

To FCL 3

You mentioned in 1 of your messages that you went to the NL to get the Lantern test done and that it was at a much closer distance than that at Gatwick. Do you wear glasses normally, or did you just find that being closer to the lantern it enabled you to distinguish the colours better?
If this is the case, I am going to book the next flight to NL and do the test there.

One question though, Can I still do my training in UK or will I have to do it in NL??

Regards
Ice

[icebox]

To FCL 3

You mentioned in 1 of your messages that you went to the NL to get the Lantern test done and that it was at a much closer distance than that at Gatwick. Do you wear glasses normally, or did you just find that being closer to the lantern it enabled you to distinguish the colours better?
If this is the case, I am going to book the next flight to NL and do the test there.

One question though, Can I still do my training in UK or will I have to do it in NL??

Regards
Ice

[Hang On, I'm Busy]

Good to see this is still here. I haven't checked for months now but it's still on the first screen... Well done!

Esp. interested in new stuff about testing elsewhere in Europe - very well done Bosher(?) & if 10 years is what it takes then I'll pass mine in only another 6!

I would suggest that the best thing we can do to change things/ bring the issue to light (initially at least) is to set up an information pool, just like this is developing into. So let's continue this one & not break it up. Could there be a digest/archive of colour vision threads? There have been plenty of them.

I don't suppose the issue warrants it's own section but if it's near the top the FCL people will keep reading it. There will be enough people concerned to make it work later. More success/ inconsistency stories will be available to present officially later. Keep going.

There is a way of challenging these administrative decisions in the UK - judicial review. This is an expensive procedure though, and a bit iffy in this case. It may, again, be better to wait and to something later, possibly in a more European judicial context. It would be very interesting to collect contacts and stories from the whole area covered by JAA, however.

Hullo to all at the CAA...

I see red!

[Hang On, I'm Busy]

Good to see this is still here. I haven't checked for months now but it's still on the first screen... Well done!

Esp. interested in new stuff about testing elsewhere in Europe - very well done Bosher(?) & if 10 years is what it takes then I'll pass mine in only another 6!

I would suggest that the best thing we can do to change things/ bring the issue to light (initially at least) is to set up an information pool, just like this is developing into. So let's continue this one & not break it up. Could there be a digest/archive of colour vision threads? There have been plenty of them.

I don't suppose the issue warrants it's own section but if it's near the top the FCL people will keep reading it. There will be enough people concerned to make it work later. More success/ inconsistency stories will be available to present officially later. Keep going.

There is a way of challenging these administrative decisions in the UK - judicial review. This is an expensive procedure though, and a bit iffy in this case. It may, again, be better to wait and to something later, possibly in a more European judicial context. It would be very interesting to collect contacts and stories from the whole area covered by JAA, however.

Hullo to all at the CAA...

I see red!

[TAHIDA]

TO GIJOE,

THE NEW LANTERN SHORTLY TO ARRIVE AT GATWICK IS CALLED A 'BEYNE LANTERN'.I UNDERSTAND THAT IT IS EASIER THAN THE HW..DOES ANY ONE KNOW THE PARAMETERS FOR THIS LANTERN? THERE IS ALSO A 'SPECTROLUX' LANTERN WHICH IS ACCEPTABLE.ANYONE KNOW ABOUT THIS ONE? :)

[TAHIDA]

TO GIJOE,

THE NEW LANTERN SHORTLY TO ARRIVE AT GATWICK IS CALLED A 'BEYNE LANTERN'.I UNDERSTAND THAT IT IS EASIER THAN THE HW..DOES ANY ONE KNOW THE PARAMETERS FOR THIS LANTERN? THERE IS ALSO A 'SPECTROLUX' LANTERN WHICH IS ACCEPTABLE.ANYONE KNOW ABOUT THIS ONE? :)

[icebox]

To Tahida,

Any idea when this Beyne Lantern is arriving at Gatwick? I was told Feb. '02.

I wonder if this is the same test carried out in France? If it is, then it will be good news to a lot of people!

I will try to find out the details on this lantern test and get back to you.

Regards

Ice
[email protected]


What happens if I press this button? OOOPS!!!

[icebox]

To Tahida,

Any idea when this Beyne Lantern is arriving at Gatwick? I was told Feb. '02.

I wonder if this is the same test carried out in France? If it is, then it will be good news to a lot of people!

I will try to find out the details on this lantern test and get back to you.

Regards

Ice
[email protected]


What happens if I press this button? OOOPS!!!

[PPRuNeUser0161]

You guys wanna hope its the "final chance" lantern test they use here in Australia. Conducted only at the Melbourne Institute of Optometry. I failed the plates and the Farnsworth. Yet out of 3 sets of 90 pairs of lights I got only two wrong. You are allowed to get maximum 3 wrong. Thats three wrong in 270 sets of lights. Now I have a class 1, no restrictions or waivers. OH YEAH!!!!!. What a relief.

The test gives you a pair of lights, with 3 seconds to tell the examiner what they are from top to bottom. The distance is approx 15 feet. The examiner sits behind you with the lantern and you view the lights via a mirror mounted on the wall in front of you. The lights themselves seem like pin head size and I had to squint to see them properly. Only two colours used, red and green. These are the only two colours displayed to an aircraft in flight. The shades vary and they are modified to simulate dust in the atmosphere etc.

You all need to get together and establish an organisation to combat the law in your country. Use Australia as an example. Create a data base of prospective pilots, pool your resources and see if you can get a law firm to take it on. You'll get their, this standard is all crap. In my opinion this test should be abollished altogether, if you study the denisson case you'll agree.

Good luck. :)

[ 11 January 2002: Message edited by: Soup Nazi ]</p>

[PPRuNeUser0161]

You guys wanna hope its the "final chance" lantern test they use here in Australia. Conducted only at the Melbourne Institute of Optometry. I failed the plates and the Farnsworth. Yet out of 3 sets of 90 pairs of lights I got only two wrong. You are allowed to get maximum 3 wrong. Thats three wrong in 270 sets of lights. Now I have a class 1, no restrictions or waivers. OH YEAH!!!!!. What a relief.

The test gives you a pair of lights, with 3 seconds to tell the examiner what they are from top to bottom. The distance is approx 15 feet. The examiner sits behind you with the lantern and you view the lights via a mirror mounted on the wall in front of you. The lights themselves seem like pin head size and I had to squint to see them properly. Only two colours used, red and green. These are the only two colours displayed to an aircraft in flight. The shades vary and they are modified to simulate dust in the atmosphere etc.

You all need to get together and establish an organisation to combat the law in your country. Use Australia as an example. Create a data base of prospective pilots, pool your resources and see if you can get a law firm to take it on. You'll get their, this standard is all crap. In my opinion this test should be abollished altogether, if you study the denisson case you'll agree.

Good luck. :)

[ 11 January 2002: Message edited by: Soup Nazi ]</p>

[icebox]

To Soup Nazi

Congratulations on your Class1!!
I hope the test you did is similar to the one the CAA is getting.
If it is a test using only red and green lights, then I should stand a better chance.

You are right in what you are saying. We should form some sort of action group. There are a lot of people out there who have the potential to be a good pilot, but are unfortunately held back by some outdated set of rules.

Any chance of sending Mr Pape over here for a while????

Regards

Ice.

[ 14 January 2002: Message edited by: icebox ]</p>

[icebox]

To Soup Nazi

Congratulations on your Class1!!
I hope the test you did is similar to the one the CAA is getting.
If it is a test using only red and green lights, then I should stand a better chance.

You are right in what you are saying. We should form some sort of action group. There are a lot of people out there who have the potential to be a good pilot, but are unfortunately held back by some outdated set of rules.

Any chance of sending Mr Pape over here for a while????

Regards

Ice.

[ 14 January 2002: Message edited by: icebox ]</p>

[N2334M]

in reply to Soup Nazi, here's what JAA Manual of Aviation Medicine, page 42, states:

"The Beyne's lantern (lanterne chromoptométrique de Beyne) presents the colours green, red, blue, white, and yellow-orange with an aperture size corresponding to a visual angle of 3 minutes of arc. Each colour is shown for one second. The examinee is placed in front of the lantern at a distance of 5 meters. No errors are accepted."

I was wondering how UK CAA will operate this apparatus, provided that it can display the white light source and provided that it can have up to 6 aperture sizes...

Cheers !

[N2334M]

in reply to Soup Nazi, here's what JAA Manual of Aviation Medicine, page 42, states:

"The Beyne's lantern (lanterne chromoptométrique de Beyne) presents the colours green, red, blue, white, and yellow-orange with an aperture size corresponding to a visual angle of 3 minutes of arc. Each colour is shown for one second. The examinee is placed in front of the lantern at a distance of 5 meters. No errors are accepted."

I was wondering how UK CAA will operate this apparatus, provided that it can display the white light source and provided that it can have up to 6 aperture sizes...

Cheers !

[icebox]

Why so many colours as opposed to the Holmes Wright Lantern which has only red,green and white?

If you have failed the HW Lantern using these 3 colours, why are they offering another test which has the same colours and an additional 2? Seems strange. Maybe the colours are of a different intensity?

Has anyone out there taken this Beyne Lantern test; if so how did you do?

Regards

Ice. <img src="confused.gif" border="0">

Ideas people, I need ideas!!

[ 06 February 2002: Message edited by: icebox ]</p>

[icebox]

Why so many colours as opposed to the Holmes Wright Lantern which has only red,green and white?

If you have failed the HW Lantern using these 3 colours, why are they offering another test which has the same colours and an additional 2? Seems strange. Maybe the colours are of a different intensity?

Has anyone out there taken this Beyne Lantern test; if so how did you do?

Regards

Ice. <img src="confused.gif" border="0">

Ideas people, I need ideas!!

[ 06 February 2002: Message edited by: icebox ]</p>

[inverted flatspin]

adding extra colours is not really going to cause a problem for the vast majority of colour deficients. By far the most common type of colour deficiency is called deuteranamoly this is the green photopigment in the retina is not what everybody else has got, it still works fine but the wavelenght at which is works best is shifted towards the red end of the spectrum.

Deuteranamolous people see red just like every body else, they see yellow like everybody else and they see blue like everybody else the problem that most have is that green is not as distinct as the other colours and can be confused with the white light that the lantern test shines at you.

The lantern tests are unfair because the colours that have been seleced to represent red, green and white are not exactly red green or white they are reddish green, greenish red and greenish white.

However large differences exist between the various lanterns and it all depends on where the person who designed it thought that it would be a good idea to draw the line (not based on anything resembling scientific fact)

You may fail all the other tests and pass this one. .So try it.

[inverted flatspin]

adding extra colours is not really going to cause a problem for the vast majority of colour deficients. By far the most common type of colour deficiency is called deuteranamoly this is the green photopigment in the retina is not what everybody else has got, it still works fine but the wavelenght at which is works best is shifted towards the red end of the spectrum.

Deuteranamolous people see red just like every body else, they see yellow like everybody else and they see blue like everybody else the problem that most have is that green is not as distinct as the other colours and can be confused with the white light that the lantern test shines at you.

The lantern tests are unfair because the colours that have been seleced to represent red, green and white are not exactly red green or white they are reddish green, greenish red and greenish white.

However large differences exist between the various lanterns and it all depends on where the person who designed it thought that it would be a good idea to draw the line (not based on anything resembling scientific fact)

You may fail all the other tests and pass this one. .So try it.

[icebox]

To Palgia,

Very interesting stuff you have written there, as has Inverted Flatspin.

May I ask how come you know so much about this? I am currently waiting to hear from the CAA as to when I can try the Beyne Lantern. I have also spoke to Mr Chorley who told me the same thing, "it's currently under tests".

I think I am correct in saying that the French use the Beyne Lantern and have done for a long while now.

Why are the CAA not adopting the same test standards as the French? JAA harmonisation and all that.

Changes to the criteria on the Ishihara plates won't really help many more people realise their dreams of becoming a pilot. (You now can pass if you recognise the first 15 plates out of 24.). .As inverted Flatspin correctly stated, most colour deficient people have a problem with the colour green. The first 15 plates of the Ishihara test will weed these people out anyway - so where's the progress?

Yet again it may be a case of turning to the USA to realise our own 'American Dream'.

We wait with bated breath Mr Chorley.

Regards

Ice.

[ 06 February 2002: Message edited by: icebox ]

[ 06 February 2002: Message edited by: icebox ]</p>

[icebox]

To Palgia,

Very interesting stuff you have written there, as has Inverted Flatspin.

May I ask how come you know so much about this? I am currently waiting to hear from the CAA as to when I can try the Beyne Lantern. I have also spoke to Mr Chorley who told me the same thing, "it's currently under tests".

I think I am correct in saying that the French use the Beyne Lantern and have done for a long while now.

Why are the CAA not adopting the same test standards as the French? JAA harmonisation and all that.

Changes to the criteria on the Ishihara plates won't really help many more people realise their dreams of becoming a pilot. (You now can pass if you recognise the first 15 plates out of 24.). .As inverted Flatspin correctly stated, most colour deficient people have a problem with the colour green. The first 15 plates of the Ishihara test will weed these people out anyway - so where's the progress?

Yet again it may be a case of turning to the USA to realise our own 'American Dream'.

We wait with bated breath Mr Chorley.

Regards

Ice.

[ 06 February 2002: Message edited by: icebox ]

[ 06 February 2002: Message edited by: icebox ]</p>

[inverted flatspin]

Palgia

What is needed here is a deeper understanding of the mechanism of colour vision.

Colour vision is different for everybody. The supposed Gold standard for measuring red green discriminatory ability is the Nagel anomaloscope.

when a large group of colour normals are tested on the nagel anomaloscope each one will have a slightly different result. The anomaloscope is not per se a test it is a diagnostic tool the matching range is decided by statistical treatment of the results gathered from the "Normal" group anyone who falls within this number of standard deviations is considered normal and anyone who falls outside of this is considered abnormal the anomaloscope can actually tell you what you are seeing by giving you a red green ratio and from that you can approximate what percentage of green or red you are seeing relative to the normal sample.

All colour tests including the anomaloscope are prone to errors and misdiagnosis. In the FAA studies that you quoted they identified miss and false alarm rates for each test. The rates varied between the studies so reaching a conclusion about what they mean is difficult however one particular conclusion that can be reached is that somewhere in the order of 1 out of every 100 people who pass the ishihara test are unable to tell the difference between aviation signal lights (red green and white). This is surprising because the ishihara is thought to be 'bullet proof' by the JAA medical committee however it lets about 1% pass who should not.

There is conclusive evidence that the signal light test as administered by the FAA is a very good predictor of colour percetion. It has a 100% safety record stretching back to the days before the FAA even existed. According to the NTSB they are unaware of any accident where a colour deficient pilot flying without restrictions by virtue of the signal light test has every had an incident or accident where a causal or additional factor has been the pilot mistaking a safety critical colour.

When you consider the numbers (current estimates put the number of such pilots in the US in the order of 10000) the complete absence of accidents is very telling indeed.

There is circumstantial evidence that having a colour standard at all is redundant, however there is no hard evidence. Dr Pape in Australia is the expert on this. If true and it probably is it would explain why the colour deficient community is so damn safe.

In one of your posts you speak of common sense, I ask you when did the JAA ever give us any indication of having anything resembling common sense? Don't credit them with something that they don't have.

[inverted flatspin]

Palgia

What is needed here is a deeper understanding of the mechanism of colour vision.

Colour vision is different for everybody. The supposed Gold standard for measuring red green discriminatory ability is the Nagel anomaloscope.

when a large group of colour normals are tested on the nagel anomaloscope each one will have a slightly different result. The anomaloscope is not per se a test it is a diagnostic tool the matching range is decided by statistical treatment of the results gathered from the "Normal" group anyone who falls within this number of standard deviations is considered normal and anyone who falls outside of this is considered abnormal the anomaloscope can actually tell you what you are seeing by giving you a red green ratio and from that you can approximate what percentage of green or red you are seeing relative to the normal sample.

All colour tests including the anomaloscope are prone to errors and misdiagnosis. In the FAA studies that you quoted they identified miss and false alarm rates for each test. The rates varied between the studies so reaching a conclusion about what they mean is difficult however one particular conclusion that can be reached is that somewhere in the order of 1 out of every 100 people who pass the ishihara test are unable to tell the difference between aviation signal lights (red green and white). This is surprising because the ishihara is thought to be 'bullet proof' by the JAA medical committee however it lets about 1% pass who should not.

There is conclusive evidence that the signal light test as administered by the FAA is a very good predictor of colour percetion. It has a 100% safety record stretching back to the days before the FAA even existed. According to the NTSB they are unaware of any accident where a colour deficient pilot flying without restrictions by virtue of the signal light test has every had an incident or accident where a causal or additional factor has been the pilot mistaking a safety critical colour.

When you consider the numbers (current estimates put the number of such pilots in the US in the order of 10000) the complete absence of accidents is very telling indeed.

There is circumstantial evidence that having a colour standard at all is redundant, however there is no hard evidence. Dr Pape in Australia is the expert on this. If true and it probably is it would explain why the colour deficient community is so damn safe.

In one of your posts you speak of common sense, I ask you when did the JAA ever give us any indication of having anything resembling common sense? Don't credit them with something that they don't have.

[icebox]

To Palgia,

Yet another very interesting posting.

You are right in saying that the ICAO are ultimatley responsible for this colour perception standard which is based on science. Why the standard? Simple, no standard no safety. So one cannot argue with the intentions for the standard, but one can argue with the way each national aviation authority interprets as to 'how safe is safe'.

You wrote:

'The ICAO give a large amount of freedom to each individual aviation authority in determining who is actually colour deficient and who isn't.'

To me this seems an arbitary approach. The ICAO seem to be saying 'Ok guys do what you think is right within the standards we have set'. So countries have gone away and come up with their set of tests which fall within the criteria. The USA 'last chance' test is the signal gun test. A very sensible and relevant test. Of course these are the lights ALL pilots must be able to see properly. You are correct in saying that if there is radio failure a pilot must be able to see these lights. Carrying a hand held radio is an excellent idea because even a person with normal colour vision may not be able to see the lights from ATC in bad visibility. The chance of 2 radio failures is minute. But that's another topic for another day.

I have heard of people going to other countries within the JAA and getting their colour vision tested, passing and consequently getting the restrictions lifted from their licence. Isn't this what JAR harmonisation is all about?

Where do you draw the line? Good question. I don't think anyone knows the answer to that one yet. Each country seems to move the line to where THEY want it, as long it is still within the ICAO boundaries.

I don't think there is a conspiracy against us. As I said earlier the standards are set for safety reasons. These were not thought up overnight. They are scientifically researched. However I do believe they need to be reviewed again. The only way to beat these standards is with science - a long and hard task.

You said beat the ICAO and the rest will follow suit. This is very true but I think a more fundamental problem exists here. That is of the supposed harmonisation between the JAA countries.

As you may have guessed by now I am a cvd. I have been to the CAA and failed both the Ishihara and HW Lantern.

Under the regs. the HW Lantern, Anomolascope, Beyne Lantern and Spectrolux are accepted tests. Why couldn't I do all those tests before they decide to circle 'colour unsafe' on my medical? The obvious answer is cost. Too expensive to hold all that equipment to test 1/8 people who apply for the medical.

However shouldn't I be able to go to another JAA member state and have the remaining tests done there before a decision is made? If I do pass, it should be recognised by any other JAA country. But I have learned that this does not happen in practice. Also why different testing criteria for the same test? Where is the Spectrolux test available? Does anyone know?

So the next question is 'What now?'

I think a database of people in our situation should be started. And approaching Dr Pape for advice would be a good idea. This is a very tough, long and hard battle, so it is crucial that we start off on the right foot and tread carefully. It can be done though. Remember David beat Goliath!

So all you cvd 'Davids' out there lets start the first battle in a series of battles to win the war!

Anyway I'll stand down off my soapbox now because the Simpsons is on. (I wonder if Homer is a cvd? Hmmm... flying)

Regards

Ice.

[icebox]

To Palgia,

Yet another very interesting posting.

You are right in saying that the ICAO are ultimatley responsible for this colour perception standard which is based on science. Why the standard? Simple, no standard no safety. So one cannot argue with the intentions for the standard, but one can argue with the way each national aviation authority interprets as to 'how safe is safe'.

You wrote:

'The ICAO give a large amount of freedom to each individual aviation authority in determining who is actually colour deficient and who isn't.'

To me this seems an arbitary approach. The ICAO seem to be saying 'Ok guys do what you think is right within the standards we have set'. So countries have gone away and come up with their set of tests which fall within the criteria. The USA 'last chance' test is the signal gun test. A very sensible and relevant test. Of course these are the lights ALL pilots must be able to see properly. You are correct in saying that if there is radio failure a pilot must be able to see these lights. Carrying a hand held radio is an excellent idea because even a person with normal colour vision may not be able to see the lights from ATC in bad visibility. The chance of 2 radio failures is minute. But that's another topic for another day.

I have heard of people going to other countries within the JAA and getting their colour vision tested, passing and consequently getting the restrictions lifted from their licence. Isn't this what JAR harmonisation is all about?

Where do you draw the line? Good question. I don't think anyone knows the answer to that one yet. Each country seems to move the line to where THEY want it, as long it is still within the ICAO boundaries.

I don't think there is a conspiracy against us. As I said earlier the standards are set for safety reasons. These were not thought up overnight. They are scientifically researched. However I do believe they need to be reviewed again. The only way to beat these standards is with science - a long and hard task.

You said beat the ICAO and the rest will follow suit. This is very true but I think a more fundamental problem exists here. That is of the supposed harmonisation between the JAA countries.

As you may have guessed by now I am a cvd. I have been to the CAA and failed both the Ishihara and HW Lantern.

Under the regs. the HW Lantern, Anomolascope, Beyne Lantern and Spectrolux are accepted tests. Why couldn't I do all those tests before they decide to circle 'colour unsafe' on my medical? The obvious answer is cost. Too expensive to hold all that equipment to test 1/8 people who apply for the medical.

However shouldn't I be able to go to another JAA member state and have the remaining tests done there before a decision is made? If I do pass, it should be recognised by any other JAA country. But I have learned that this does not happen in practice. Also why different testing criteria for the same test? Where is the Spectrolux test available? Does anyone know?

So the next question is 'What now?'

I think a database of people in our situation should be started. And approaching Dr Pape for advice would be a good idea. This is a very tough, long and hard battle, so it is crucial that we start off on the right foot and tread carefully. It can be done though. Remember David beat Goliath!

So all you cvd 'Davids' out there lets start the first battle in a series of battles to win the war!

Anyway I'll stand down off my soapbox now because the Simpsons is on. (I wonder if Homer is a cvd? Hmmm... flying)

Regards

Ice.

[icebox]

Palgia

You will have to forgive my ignorance on this subject, I am a newcomer to the game but I am quickly learning the discrepancies in the system.

So maybe they have made a rod for their own back. Are they bound by their own rules to an extent where they HAVE to accept test results of another member country? Although when you approach the CAA they deny knowledge of this practice or discourage it. Mind you, their actions are understandable, otherwise it is a matter of 'opening the flood gates'.

Any comments?

Regards

Ice.

<img src="confused.gif" border="0"> <img src="confused.gif" border="0"> <img src="confused.gif" border="0">

[icebox]

Palgia

You will have to forgive my ignorance on this subject, I am a newcomer to the game but I am quickly learning the discrepancies in the system.

So maybe they have made a rod for their own back. Are they bound by their own rules to an extent where they HAVE to accept test results of another member country? Although when you approach the CAA they deny knowledge of this practice or discourage it. Mind you, their actions are understandable, otherwise it is a matter of 'opening the flood gates'.

Any comments?

Regards

Ice.

<img src="confused.gif" border="0"> <img src="confused.gif" border="0"> <img src="confused.gif" border="0">

[Zico]

ahhh, disregard

[Zico]

ahhh, disregard

[gehenna]

Hi Folks

I have been following these "Colour" pages for some time, with great interest and sympathy for those who have a problem. I believe it's our CAA who, as usual appear to be negative whenever possible. Look at the attitude in Australia and the US; far more helpful and positive.

I see that some of you have been to Holland and Switzerland, with success in obtaining medical Class1 certificates. Great news.

Can anyone who has been there recently please enlighten me as to the set-up; are they positive, on your side etc; any info on booking etc would be really appreciated.

Thanks very much to one and all, and good luck to those persevering.

[gehenna]

Hi Folks

I have been following these "Colour" pages for some time, with great interest and sympathy for those who have a problem. I believe it's our CAA who, as usual appear to be negative whenever possible. Look at the attitude in Australia and the US; far more helpful and positive.

I see that some of you have been to Holland and Switzerland, with success in obtaining medical Class1 certificates. Great news.

Can anyone who has been there recently please enlighten me as to the set-up; are they positive, on your side etc; any info on booking etc would be really appreciated.

Thanks very much to one and all, and good luck to those persevering.

[PPRuNeUser0161]

Icebox, Palgia

You guys are certainly talking the talk. I'm liking what I hear. Yes I agree there probably is a point at which a colour defective becomes unsafe to pilot an aircraft. However I think the time has come to give the current testing methods and standards a complete review.

As I said before I failed both the plates and the Farnsworth. CASA have designed a "last chance lantern test" which can be sat at the Melbourne university of optometry. I sat this and passed. I had no idea I had passed until they told me as it seemed no different to the Farnsworth. The difference was of course that it only tested red and green as these ar the only colours having significance to an aircraft in flight.

I will try and find out where this test is at these days as it was around 5 years ago when I gave it a try. I'll get back but it may be a while. In the mean time you should seriously try and get hold of Pape. I guess the standard is not really cr@p just not relevent in its current form. <img src="cool.gif" border="0">

[PPRuNeUser0161]

Icebox, Palgia

You guys are certainly talking the talk. I'm liking what I hear. Yes I agree there probably is a point at which a colour defective becomes unsafe to pilot an aircraft. However I think the time has come to give the current testing methods and standards a complete review.

As I said before I failed both the plates and the Farnsworth. CASA have designed a "last chance lantern test" which can be sat at the Melbourne university of optometry. I sat this and passed. I had no idea I had passed until they told me as it seemed no different to the Farnsworth. The difference was of course that it only tested red and green as these ar the only colours having significance to an aircraft in flight.

I will try and find out where this test is at these days as it was around 5 years ago when I gave it a try. I'll get back but it may be a while. In the mean time you should seriously try and get hold of Pape. I guess the standard is not really cr@p just not relevent in its current form. <img src="cool.gif" border="0">

[icebox]

Just keeping the thread alive.

[icebox]

Just keeping the thread alive.

[Elliot Moose]

Well, here's the story in the great white north (and yes it does look white to me, and yes I can easily discern whether or not I'm eating yellow snow!). .When I first went for a medical (circa 1992) I ended up at one of those friendly old family type docs who also happened to do medicals. I of course flunked the Ishihara plates miserably. That said, I knew that I had more than adequate colour vision for the needs of a pilot as I had just spent the past two years studying human factors and ergonomics in aviation as part of my Psychology degree. His only recourse was a lantern box type of test which was done in his office. Unfortunately for me the doc was older than Jesus and so was his lantern box kit. To compound my problems he left the flourescent lights on for the test. I could barely see the light at all let alone tell what colour it was! <img src="mad.gif" border="0"> . .Several tests later (at other docs, since the old guy cashed his check about a month after my medical) and I was able to say that I clearly have a mild case of deutanope (green only) colourblindness. About all I'm really incapable of is co-ordinating subtle shades of some colours (i.e. I get my wife to occasionally check to see if this shirt goes with that tie, and don't hire me to choose the colours when you redecorate--I can however generally mix the paint and even tell if it's not right), which is not really part of the pilot's job--we all wear uniforms right?. .In the end TC was able to accomodate me for a "practical" test at the nearest suitable centre--Winnipeg (only about 1500km away). <img src="rolleyes.gif" border="0"> . .They parked me on the end of the runway one night and flashed the landing signal at me 30 times and that was that--no mistakes. <img src="tongue.gif" border="0"> . .Well, now I have amassed several thousand hours of flight time in aircraft equipped with colour radar, and a large amount in EFIS aircraft. I have yet to see how colour vision can be a limiting fault for any facet of flying with the possible exception of landing by light signals. That of course is one of those nearly archaic bits of aviation rulemaking which is now almost on the level of the old "the pilot may not wear spurs while flying the aircraft...." type regulations. . .For every light coded signal that I have ever seen there has been some way of distinguishing that signal by other means. By this I mean that an amber light for a master caution MUST have printed on or beside it "master caution". Even on the latest full EFIS aircraft (I do instructing and production test flying on regional jets) where colour coded synoptic displays are the rule, all abnormalities are backed up with like coloured messages, and aural cues which are discrete for the colours. The only thing in a modern cockpit which relies solely on colour is the Wx radar. The nature of that display is such that all but the most profoundly colourblind can distinguish one colour from the other, and there the patterns make up for the lack of other cues (i.e. you never see the red stuff outside the green stuff). I even checked this one out with a guy who couldn't tell red light from green when driving unless they were arranged in the usual pattern-- and he could point out where the storm was!. .Colours in aviation are (and I'm speaking as one who has studied this) associative cues. They make things a bit easier to see and process (you can process better sometimes if you can say "damn it's the big RED light that's on" as opposed to "damn that light just came on"). It is a good thing, but certainly not the kind of thing that even remotely creates a dangerous situation by not being present. To say that "Elliot won't see it as fast as Bob because he has to read the message" may be valid, but then Ellion may also have better vision (doesn't need bifocals, or smoke), strength (I have seen women unable to manually extend the gear on a CRJ, and men who had to leave their seat to do it, while I can one-hand it and keep my other on the checklist), stamina, or whatever than the person who is next to me. Do we check for these things during medicals? Nope. Do we have to have lightning reflexes to pass? Nope. Do we have to have a min IQ? Nope (although I have seen more than a few pilots who would make me think it not a bad idea--I mean guys and girls who are, all kidding aside, not equipped to handle complex machinery). As long as you can drag yourself into the doc's office and prove passable a good heart,hearing, eyesight (WITH lenses, even if you can't pee without), BP within limits, etc. you get a pilot's ticket. BUT should you be even slightly deficient in the colour vision, which is generally not a factor, you are out. Thank you very much, have a nice day, don't let the doorknob hit your @ss on the way out.

Okay, I'm done now.

By the way. Does anybody know if there's a place in Spain where I can do a JAA initial? I'll need one for some flying over that way this summer, and I am headed to Madrid next week for a month. . .Thanks

[Elliot Moose]

Well, here's the story in the great white north (and yes it does look white to me, and yes I can easily discern whether or not I'm eating yellow snow!). .When I first went for a medical (circa 1992) I ended up at one of those friendly old family type docs who also happened to do medicals. I of course flunked the Ishihara plates miserably. That said, I knew that I had more than adequate colour vision for the needs of a pilot as I had just spent the past two years studying human factors and ergonomics in aviation as part of my Psychology degree. His only recourse was a lantern box type of test which was done in his office. Unfortunately for me the doc was older than Jesus and so was his lantern box kit. To compound my problems he left the flourescent lights on for the test. I could barely see the light at all let alone tell what colour it was! <img src="mad.gif" border="0"> . .Several tests later (at other docs, since the old guy cashed his check about a month after my medical) and I was able to say that I clearly have a mild case of deutanope (green only) colourblindness. About all I'm really incapable of is co-ordinating subtle shades of some colours (i.e. I get my wife to occasionally check to see if this shirt goes with that tie, and don't hire me to choose the colours when you redecorate--I can however generally mix the paint and even tell if it's not right), which is not really part of the pilot's job--we all wear uniforms right?. .In the end TC was able to accomodate me for a "practical" test at the nearest suitable centre--Winnipeg (only about 1500km away). <img src="rolleyes.gif" border="0"> . .They parked me on the end of the runway one night and flashed the landing signal at me 30 times and that was that--no mistakes. <img src="tongue.gif" border="0"> . .Well, now I have amassed several thousand hours of flight time in aircraft equipped with colour radar, and a large amount in EFIS aircraft. I have yet to see how colour vision can be a limiting fault for any facet of flying with the possible exception of landing by light signals. That of course is one of those nearly archaic bits of aviation rulemaking which is now almost on the level of the old "the pilot may not wear spurs while flying the aircraft...." type regulations. . .For every light coded signal that I have ever seen there has been some way of distinguishing that signal by other means. By this I mean that an amber light for a master caution MUST have printed on or beside it "master caution". Even on the latest full EFIS aircraft (I do instructing and production test flying on regional jets) where colour coded synoptic displays are the rule, all abnormalities are backed up with like coloured messages, and aural cues which are discrete for the colours. The only thing in a modern cockpit which relies solely on colour is the Wx radar. The nature of that display is such that all but the most profoundly colourblind can distinguish one colour from the other, and there the patterns make up for the lack of other cues (i.e. you never see the red stuff outside the green stuff). I even checked this one out with a guy who couldn't tell red light from green when driving unless they were arranged in the usual pattern-- and he could point out where the storm was!. .Colours in aviation are (and I'm speaking as one who has studied this) associative cues. They make things a bit easier to see and process (you can process better sometimes if you can say "damn it's the big RED light that's on" as opposed to "damn that light just came on"). It is a good thing, but certainly not the kind of thing that even remotely creates a dangerous situation by not being present. To say that "Elliot won't see it as fast as Bob because he has to read the message" may be valid, but then Ellion may also have better vision (doesn't need bifocals, or smoke), strength (I have seen women unable to manually extend the gear on a CRJ, and men who had to leave their seat to do it, while I can one-hand it and keep my other on the checklist), stamina, or whatever than the person who is next to me. Do we check for these things during medicals? Nope. Do we have to have lightning reflexes to pass? Nope. Do we have to have a min IQ? Nope (although I have seen more than a few pilots who would make me think it not a bad idea--I mean guys and girls who are, all kidding aside, not equipped to handle complex machinery). As long as you can drag yourself into the doc's office and prove passable a good heart,hearing, eyesight (WITH lenses, even if you can't pee without), BP within limits, etc. you get a pilot's ticket. BUT should you be even slightly deficient in the colour vision, which is generally not a factor, you are out. Thank you very much, have a nice day, don't let the doorknob hit your @ss on the way out.

Okay, I'm done now.

By the way. Does anybody know if there's a place in Spain where I can do a JAA initial? I'll need one for some flying over that way this summer, and I am headed to Madrid next week for a month. . .Thanks

[Dutch-pilot]

Hello,

I read all these posts but I still have some questions left!

last year I was examined for a Dutch JAA medical Class I at Soesterberg. I did Ishihara and Holmes Wright but failed both. I failed HW with only 1 fault. You guys say I would make a better chance to retest in Switserland. But if I retest there and so get my medical Class I, is that Swiss class I totally equal to a Dutch Class I?? Is it only a formality to get my Dutch Class I?? Or... what are the difficulties if I test in Switserland, get my Class I and want to fly in Dutch registered aircrafts??

What's the address of the Swiss Medical Aviation Department?? Do they have a web-page as well?? A peculiar doctor suggested?!

Adios!. .D-P.

[Dutch-pilot]

Hello,

I read all these posts but I still have some questions left!

last year I was examined for a Dutch JAA medical Class I at Soesterberg. I did Ishihara and Holmes Wright but failed both. I failed HW with only 1 fault. You guys say I would make a better chance to retest in Switserland. But if I retest there and so get my medical Class I, is that Swiss class I totally equal to a Dutch Class I?? Is it only a formality to get my Dutch Class I?? Or... what are the difficulties if I test in Switserland, get my Class I and want to fly in Dutch registered aircrafts??

What's the address of the Swiss Medical Aviation Department?? Do they have a web-page as well?? A peculiar doctor suggested?!

Adios!. .D-P.

[inverted flatspin]

just flagging this one up

[inverted flatspin]

just flagging this one up

[N2334M]

Dear Dutch Pilot,. .. .To apply for an initial first class medical your must pass the examination at an AMC (in Dubendorf for Switzerland).. .. .The colour vision test will be done there.. .. .An AME has no right to pass the specialized colour lantern test.. .. .An AME has no right to remove any limitation, that must be done by the AeroMedical Centre.. .. .I do not have any more details about Dubendorf, but I am pretty sure you can obtain some more information contacting them by their internet site, the url is:. .. .<a href="http://www.aviation.admin.ch/" target="_blank">http://www.aviation.admin.ch/</a>. .. .I do not know what kind of colour vision tests they are using in Dubendorf.. .. .I hope this helps you.. .. .Please let us know what they say.... .. .Best regards,. .N2334M

[N2334M]

Dear Dutch Pilot,. .. .To apply for an initial first class medical your must pass the examination at an AMC (in Dubendorf for Switzerland).. .. .The colour vision test will be done there.. .. .An AME has no right to pass the specialized colour lantern test.. .. .An AME has no right to remove any limitation, that must be done by the AeroMedical Centre.. .. .I do not have any more details about Dubendorf, but I am pretty sure you can obtain some more information contacting them by their internet site, the url is:. .. .<a href="http://www.aviation.admin.ch/" target="_blank">http://www.aviation.admin.ch/</a>. .. .I do not know what kind of colour vision tests they are using in Dubendorf.. .. .I hope this helps you.. .. .Please let us know what they say.... .. .Best regards,. .N2334M

[itsresidual]

I'm a UK CAA licensed aircraft engineer. I hold full certifying authority on several airliner types, including limited avionics authority.. .. .I'm currently looking into flying training for myself. However, I know from experience that I will fail both the Ishihara test and the Farnsworth Lantern test.. .. .I have read that one of the reasons cited by aviation authorities for the high colour perception standards currently in force, is the requirement to differentiate between coloured lights on the flight deck.. .. .My point is this-. .. .If my colour perception standard prevents me from operating aircraft at night as a pilot, why does the same aviation authority allow me to carry out high power engine runs, with all the attendant risks of fire, loss of aircraft, etc, at UK airports? I assume the lights I monitor are the same lights pilots use!. .Most transport aircraft have a multitude of lights on their warning panels, red, green and white. Amber and red attention getters on the glare shield inform the pilot to look at the master warning panel. If an amber attention getter flashes, would a pilot ignore it because it isn’t as important as a red attention getter? Of course not, be it red or amber, a pilot would look at the master warning panel. Again, on the master panel, colour vision does not help. There’s dozens of amber lights and almost as many red. You still have to read the legend on the light to find out what system you are supposed to action.. .. .And how about the safety aspect? The EFIS, weather radar and other colour using equipment that prevents you and I from flying, is serviced and certified by me!. .. .Fear not, although I am unable to pass a CAA colour test, I find no problem (as I suspect most of you do) in recognizing all colours in the flight deck, both at night and in daylight (I have confirmed this with other ‘normal’ engineers). I also find no problem in recognizing airfield lights, even PAPIs on my jumpseat rides.. .. .Now, I do of course realise that there is a difference between dealing with an engine fire in flight and on the ground, but I believe colour perception will play a negligible part in flight deck operations.. .. .As a note of interest, the CAA has no colour vision requirement for licensed aircraft engineers.

[itsresidual]

I'm a UK CAA licensed aircraft engineer. I hold full certifying authority on several airliner types, including limited avionics authority.. .. .I'm currently looking into flying training for myself. However, I know from experience that I will fail both the Ishihara test and the Farnsworth Lantern test.. .. .I have read that one of the reasons cited by aviation authorities for the high colour perception standards currently in force, is the requirement to differentiate between coloured lights on the flight deck.. .. .My point is this-. .. .If my colour perception standard prevents me from operating aircraft at night as a pilot, why does the same aviation authority allow me to carry out high power engine runs, with all the attendant risks of fire, loss of aircraft, etc, at UK airports? I assume the lights I monitor are the same lights pilots use!. .Most transport aircraft have a multitude of lights on their warning panels, red, green and white. Amber and red attention getters on the glare shield inform the pilot to look at the master warning panel. If an amber attention getter flashes, would a pilot ignore it because it isn’t as important as a red attention getter? Of course not, be it red or amber, a pilot would look at the master warning panel. Again, on the master panel, colour vision does not help. There’s dozens of amber lights and almost as many red. You still have to read the legend on the light to find out what system you are supposed to action.. .. .And how about the safety aspect? The EFIS, weather radar and other colour using equipment that prevents you and I from flying, is serviced and certified by me!. .. .Fear not, although I am unable to pass a CAA colour test, I find no problem (as I suspect most of you do) in recognizing all colours in the flight deck, both at night and in daylight (I have confirmed this with other ‘normal’ engineers). I also find no problem in recognizing airfield lights, even PAPIs on my jumpseat rides.. .. .Now, I do of course realise that there is a difference between dealing with an engine fire in flight and on the ground, but I believe colour perception will play a negligible part in flight deck operations.. .. .As a note of interest, the CAA has no colour vision requirement for licensed aircraft engineers.

[inverted flatspin]

I came across this while surfing, I have to admit that I am a bit of a sceptic regarding alternative treatments but you never know I guess it can't do any harm. I will take this to an acupunturist and see if there is any improvement.. .. .<a href="http://www.acuxo.com/meridianPictures.asp?point=BL1&meridian=Bladder" target="_blank">http://www.acuxo.com/meridianPictures.asp?point=BL1&meridian=Bladder</a>

[inverted flatspin]

I came across this while surfing, I have to admit that I am a bit of a sceptic regarding alternative treatments but you never know I guess it can't do any harm. I will take this to an acupunturist and see if there is any improvement.. .. .<a href="http://www.acuxo.com/meridianPictures.asp?point=BL1&meridian=Bladder" target="_blank">http://www.acuxo.com/meridianPictures.asp?point=BL1&meridian=Bladder</a>

[777AV8R]

Here is some information on the subject, from an FAA prospective that you all might find appropriate, accurate and up to date.http://www.aviationmedicine.com/colorvision.htm

[777AV8R]

Here is some information on the subject, from an FAA prospective that you all might find appropriate, accurate and up to date.http://www.aviationmedicine.com/colorvision.htm

[Dutch-pilot]

Hi N2334M and others,. .. .I checked the Swiss AME site. Unfortunately I cannot find any information about colour vision. I even cannot find anything about medical examinations! I sent them an e-mail.. .. .I'll keep you posted!. .. .Kind regards,. .PTR

[Dutch-pilot]

Hi N2334M and others,. .. .I checked the Swiss AME site. Unfortunately I cannot find any information about colour vision. I even cannot find anything about medical examinations! I sent them an e-mail.. .. .I'll keep you posted!. .. .Kind regards,. .PTR

[N2334M]

Any news regarding the new Beyne's lantern test at Gatwick CAA ? Are they still testing it ? Is it ready to sit ?. .. .Bye,. .N2334M.

[N2334M]

Any news regarding the new Beyne's lantern test at Gatwick CAA ? Are they still testing it ? Is it ready to sit ?. .. .Bye,. .N2334M.

[StephenRED]

I`m in the same boat as you guys..I just cannot understand the JAA/CAA..its obvious,the americans have got it right by allowing you to do a practical test on an airfield with the lights,if you pass getting the waiver etc etc..

Hopefully now they`ve decoded the human genome we might be in luck for treatment but..I`m still annoyed because it felt when I was at Gatwick they`d claimed a victory against me..I hated the doctors attitude,you not being invited back..your dangerous get out.

All you other guys that have been upto Gatwick for the lanten test..hmmm.what plane has a seat 10 ft behind the instrument panel and pencil tip wide warning lights??? It sucks big time and REALLY annoys me,such a bad way to test...

Is there anyone out there wanting to put the CAA/JAA on ice..if so,let me know :D

[StephenRED]

I`m in the same boat as you guys..I just cannot understand the JAA/CAA..its obvious,the americans have got it right by allowing you to do a practical test on an airfield with the lights,if you pass getting the waiver etc etc..

Hopefully now they`ve decoded the human genome we might be in luck for treatment but..I`m still annoyed because it felt when I was at Gatwick they`d claimed a victory against me..I hated the doctors attitude,you not being invited back..your dangerous get out.

All you other guys that have been upto Gatwick for the lanten test..hmmm.what plane has a seat 10 ft behind the instrument panel and pencil tip wide warning lights??? It sucks big time and REALLY annoys me,such a bad way to test...

Is there anyone out there wanting to put the CAA/JAA on ice..if so,let me know :D

[Elliot Moose]

Time to bring this important subject back to the top for the benefit of those who are still searching for answers!

[Elliot Moose]

Time to bring this important subject back to the top for the benefit of those who are still searching for answers!

[ETOPS773]

SR,you should see if the beynes lantern test has arrived yet.you`ll find that alot better.anyone know??

If not,pop down to euroland..do the test in each country..got at least 10 chances to get it right eventually!!!

[ETOPS773]

SR,you should see if the beynes lantern test has arrived yet.you`ll find that alot better.anyone know??

If not,pop down to euroland..do the test in each country..got at least 10 chances to get it right eventually!!!

[docstone]

The lantern tests are being run by City University, London for the CAA - part of a plethora of tests conducted by the department as part of post-doctoral research - very thorough, very professional, plus they are trying to debunk some of the nonsense that surrounds the current colour vision standards (ie white is a critical colour)

Contact number 0207 040 8939 (Dr Teresa Squires/Marisa Rodriguez-Carmona)

[docstone]

The lantern tests are being run by City University, London for the CAA - part of a plethora of tests conducted by the department as part of post-doctoral research - very thorough, very professional, plus they are trying to debunk some of the nonsense that surrounds the current colour vision standards (ie white is a critical colour)

Contact number 0207 040 8939 (Dr Teresa Squires/Marisa Rodriguez-Carmona)

[Nick Mahon]

Right guys, in civvy street, does passing the lantern test mean that you're ok for a class 1. I'm applying to RAF next year, I passed the Lantern test though failed the ishihara test. I could do a few of the dotted numbers, though further on I couldn't see ****** all.

My point is, whats the point in taking the Lantern test if they don't let you in for pilot/nav on the grounds of passing or failing the ishihara test. And is there any way around this.

Also, if anyone could confirm the current cp levels for pilot and Nav, that'd also be great.

Good luck guys aswell

Nick

[Nick Mahon]

Right guys, in civvy street, does passing the lantern test mean that you're ok for a class 1. I'm applying to RAF next year, I passed the Lantern test though failed the ishihara test. I could do a few of the dotted numbers, though further on I couldn't see ****** all.

My point is, whats the point in taking the Lantern test if they don't let you in for pilot/nav on the grounds of passing or failing the ishihara test. And is there any way around this.

Also, if anyone could confirm the current cp levels for pilot and Nav, that'd also be great.

Good luck guys aswell

Nick

[TheFlyingDJ]

hi fellow pilots!

Last week I had my medical test in holland for medical class1.
I also failed the ishihara test.
Now I must try to pass the falant lantern test.
It is described earlier but I have got a few questions!

It will be given in 9 different series. but if there are 3 different colors there are max 27 different combinations possible.
will the collors also be different in intensity??
or wil the collors have the same intensity each serie but only another sequence??

please let me know, it is really important!

greetz :( ;)

ist it possible to get 2 of the same colors in one serie?
and is it possible to do the test in another country if you failed in you own country?
that doesn't count??

[TheFlyingDJ]

hi fellow pilots!

Last week I had my medical test in holland for medical class1.
I also failed the ishihara test.
Now I must try to pass the falant lantern test.
It is described earlier but I have got a few questions!

It will be given in 9 different series. but if there are 3 different colors there are max 27 different combinations possible.
will the collors also be different in intensity??
or wil the collors have the same intensity each serie but only another sequence??

please let me know, it is really important!

greetz :( ;)

ist it possible to get 2 of the same colors in one serie?
and is it possible to do the test in another country if you failed in you own country?
that doesn't count??

[Hightower]

Flying DJ

I did the Lantern Test (Farnsworth), a couple of weeks ago here in Oz and yes there are different intensities of colour.

I was shown two lights at a time, which can be red, green, or white.
The bright coloured lights are easy enough, it's when the colours are so pale as to look off white that made it a little difficult.


Good luck.:)

[Hightower]

Flying DJ

I did the Lantern Test (Farnsworth), a couple of weeks ago here in Oz and yes there are different intensities of colour.

I was shown two lights at a time, which can be red, green, or white.
The bright coloured lights are easy enough, it's when the colours are so pale as to look off white that made it a little difficult.


Good luck.:)

[papercut]

To Nick Mahon

The current standards for GD(P) and GD(N) are CP2.

CP2 is normal colour vision.

Normal colour vision is getting 100% correct Ishihara plates (in daylight or daylight corrected light)

If you fail Ishihara and pass the Holmes-Wright lantern test you are CP3 ("colour-blind safe") and can hold an airfield driving permit for instance (traffic lights on airfield are not red amber green up a pole!)

Fail the H-W lantern you are CP4.

[papercut]

To Nick Mahon

The current standards for GD(P) and GD(N) are CP2.

CP2 is normal colour vision.

Normal colour vision is getting 100% correct Ishihara plates (in daylight or daylight corrected light)

If you fail Ishihara and pass the Holmes-Wright lantern test you are CP3 ("colour-blind safe") and can hold an airfield driving permit for instance (traffic lights on airfield are not red amber green up a pole!)

Fail the H-W lantern you are CP4.

[Flash0710]

Why is there no way of grading a pilots colour deficiency?

I hate when i have to admit to being colour blind people immediately think my world is black and white

I fly a retractable and i have had not one problem determining when its up or down

The CAA really need to look at a better system as i feel my personal state will not affect any operational flying

Is anyone elese of the same opinion ?

[ETOPS773]

So,if you fail the Farnsworth Lantern test,I hear you can do the Beynes Lantern.

So,if someone was to fail that,would they be able to do the test abroad,like in Holland or Belgium???

The stupid rules the CAA have in place make me chuckle,but I thought in Oz,you didn`t do any colour vision tests...you got rid of all this myth didn`t you???

So..suppose City University decide you can be monochrome and still fly safely..you really think the CAA will wake up and do something about it???Ease the rules???

[ETOPS773]

So,if you fail the Farnsworth Lantern test,I hear you can do the Beynes Lantern.

So,if someone was to fail that,would they be able to do the test abroad,like in Holland or Belgium???

The stupid rules the CAA have in place make me chuckle,but I thought in Oz,you didn`t do any colour vision tests...you got rid of all this myth didn`t you???

So..suppose City University decide you can be monochrome and still fly safely..you really think the CAA will wake up and do something about it???Ease the rules???

[TheFlyingDJ]

hi guys.

i didn't got the farnsworth lantern but the anamaloscope test.
in my opinion it was a strange test. I had to look throug a telescope. I saw a circel with one red half and a green half.

The lady said that the circel must be one colour. I had to correct the greenhalf(not colour but only intensity) with one turning knob.

IS IT EVER POSSIBLE TO TRANSMIT GREEN INTO RED??

i turned the knob into a configuration that the colour diffrence was as small as possible! (altough I could still see a red and green half)but if i turned the knob further it went to light and otherwise to dark but it stays green!!

strange??

When the test was finished see said i didnt pass and i can forget the dream!

is there anybody with a similar story?

The people at the aviation center were not nice to me either! iam also a dangerous man so please go! I could see it on thier faces.

[TheFlyingDJ]

hi guys.

i didn't got the farnsworth lantern but the anamaloscope test.
in my opinion it was a strange test. I had to look throug a telescope. I saw a circel with one red half and a green half.

The lady said that the circel must be one colour. I had to correct the greenhalf(not colour but only intensity) with one turning knob.

IS IT EVER POSSIBLE TO TRANSMIT GREEN INTO RED??

i turned the knob into a configuration that the colour diffrence was as small as possible! (altough I could still see a red and green half)but if i turned the knob further it went to light and otherwise to dark but it stays green!!

strange??

When the test was finished see said i didnt pass and i can forget the dream!

is there anybody with a similar story?

The people at the aviation center were not nice to me either! iam also a dangerous man so please go! I could see it on thier faces.

[LawMaker]

Hi all,

1 Background
----------------------------

Just joined pprune a few days ago in research of changing from lawyer to pilot at 31. (erm… was originally IT).

Now, reading this thread through since 2000, I’ve noticed some desire to take CAA/JAA to issue on their unreasonable requirements for colour vision standards.

Unfortunately, nothing has been followed through. If I’m mistaken, please mail me with the relevant links.

2 Plan of attack
----------------------------

In my hope to be a possible catalyst to any action, here’s my thoughts on the action required. You’ll have to correct me if I’ve got some of the technical facts/jargon wrong.

This needs to be a 2 pronged attack.

1. Lobbying.
2. Legal Action.

3 Lobbying
----------------------------

The first is free and would just require some organisation from the members on Pprune.

After a forum/organisation to tackle the lobbying has been created, they would enlist the support of external aviation organisations to emphasise the unreasonable and discriminatory stance adopted by the CAA/JAA.

Organisations including and under the umbrella of International Council of Aircraft Owner and Pilot Associations need to be contacted.

The more signatories you have backing you, by both quantity and quality, the more pressure your lobbying will have on the CAA/JAA.

Local MP's would also need to be taken on board to support the matter and air their concerns both in writing and even raise the issue in a Commons debate.

If the JAA/CAA are alleging that it is unsafe for CVD pilots to fly in European airspace, why do they permit US pilots who would fail the JAA colour vision tests to fly in European airspace.

In addition, experts such as Dr Arthur Pape could be contacted for their technical support. Also, Dr Theresa-Jane Squire (0207 040 0240 / [email protected]) who undertook research for the CAA on this issue at City University, may prove to be a useful source of argument.

4 Legal Action
----------------------------

Since 2000 and beyond, nobody has taken action against the CAA for what seems to be a rather straight-forward case.

I understand from other posts that the JAA cannot be taken to issue, although the EASA can. Would have to look into this deeper to come to a conclusion.

The reason for inaction is probably due to lack of private funds to pay for the solicitors, barristers, expert witnesses and potential costs if case is lost.

There are solutions to this funding problem.

1. Legal Aid.
2. Insurance
3. Conditional Fee Agreement

4.1 Legal Aid
----------------------------

The area of law we are discussing seems to be employment/aviation law. I am not an expert in this area (erm… no type rating I think you say), as I’m crime/family with a touch of civil.

This would require a single person to take an action against the relevant body. If more people wish to join in the action, that is ok but not completely necessary. However, it may be a consideration that damages by the client may be sought for loss of earnings due to the discriminatory decision taken by the CAA. The likelihood of this happening will depend on the facts of the client and cannot realistically be considered until a much later stage with the expertise of the employment/aviation solicitor.

He/She would go to an employment/aviation solicitor in the UK, providing the background of their complaint and how they have been discriminated against because of their disability, and the unreasonableness of the discrimination.

Information of the unreasonableness can be supported by the FAA and other standards and the fact that the JAA/CAA permit for example, American pilots to fly in UK airspace.

The person should be on income support or a low wage to qualify for legal aid under the means test. In respect of the merit test, I’m not 100% sure if employment law under this category permits legal aid to be granted. This would have to be checked with the employment solicitor. It shouldn’t be a problem to find out, as the initial meeting should be free.

If legal aid can be granted, then the client can employ the solicitor, barristers and expert witnesses all paid for by the legal services commission (i.e. The government).

The solicitor would seek a judicial review of the CAA’s decision on this matter with the supporting evidence/ expert reports. If it is deemed that the appropriate body is European JAA/EASA, then they can be joined in addition or replacement of the CAA. Legal aid will cover the case costs all the way to the European courts.

4.2 Insurance
----------------------------

If the employment solicitor determines that legal aid is not receivable under the circumstances, then the route of insurance can be used.

Here, the relevant background information and arguments supporting your case would be given to the solicitor. He would employ a barrister to prepare an ‘advice’ on this case, with the likelihood of success.

This would cost in the region of £1000.

With this advice, the solicitor would approach certain insurance companies who would view the advice by the barrister and decide whether to enter into a contract with the client.

If they decide to enter a contract, it may be of the type whereby they would pay the total cost of solicitor/barrister/expert witnesses/potential costs for you.

If you win the case, it is likely that all of the costs would be paid by the CAA/JAA. If you lose the case, your costs are covered by the insurance company.

4.3 Conditional Fee Agreement
----------------------------

In addition to 4.2, or in replacement of, a ‘no win, no fee’ agreement may be reached with the solicitor.

If he/she can see that this case is likely to succeed, they may agree not to charge you for the costs of the case if you lose.

If you win, the costs will be taken from the otherside. The exact details of the agreement can be negotiated with them.

5 Conclusion
----------------------------

I hope that the above suggestions are taken on board and this matter progressed further, as the current state of affairs need not be how they are and have been for quite some time to the detriment of many many dreams.

I can’t see any real hindrance to taking the action, with the suggestions outlined above and cannot even see much of a defence by the CAA for their unreasonable and discriminatory stance.

Unfortunately, if this action isn’t taken now, with this current level of support; this issue will continue as it is for no need whatsoever, which will be a real shame.

[LawMaker]

Hi all,

1 Background
----------------------------

Just joined pprune a few days ago in research of changing from lawyer to pilot at 31. (erm… was originally IT).

Now, reading this thread through since 2000, I’ve noticed some desire to take CAA/JAA to issue on their unreasonable requirements for colour vision standards.

Unfortunately, nothing has been followed through. If I’m mistaken, please mail me with the relevant links.

2 Plan of attack
----------------------------

In my hope to be a possible catalyst to any action, here’s my thoughts on the action required. You’ll have to correct me if I’ve got some of the technical facts/jargon wrong.

This needs to be a 2 pronged attack.

1. Lobbying.
2. Legal Action.

3 Lobbying
----------------------------

The first is free and would just require some organisation from the members on Pprune.

After a forum/organisation to tackle the lobbying has been created, they would enlist the support of external aviation organisations to emphasise the unreasonable and discriminatory stance adopted by the CAA/JAA.

Organisations including and under the umbrella of International Council of Aircraft Owner and Pilot Associations need to be contacted.

The more signatories you have backing you, by both quantity and quality, the more pressure your lobbying will have on the CAA/JAA.

Local MP's would also need to be taken on board to support the matter and air their concerns both in writing and even raise the issue in a Commons debate.

If the JAA/CAA are alleging that it is unsafe for CVD pilots to fly in European airspace, why do they permit US pilots who would fail the JAA colour vision tests to fly in European airspace.

In addition, experts such as Dr Arthur Pape could be contacted for their technical support. Also, Dr Theresa-Jane Squire (0207 040 0240 / [email protected]) who undertook research for the CAA on this issue at City University, may prove to be a useful source of argument.

4 Legal Action
----------------------------

Since 2000 and beyond, nobody has taken action against the CAA for what seems to be a rather straight-forward case.

I understand from other posts that the JAA cannot be taken to issue, although the EASA can. Would have to look into this deeper to come to a conclusion.

The reason for inaction is probably due to lack of private funds to pay for the solicitors, barristers, expert witnesses and potential costs if case is lost.

There are solutions to this funding problem.

1. Legal Aid.
2. Insurance
3. Conditional Fee Agreement

4.1 Legal Aid
----------------------------

The area of law we are discussing seems to be employment/aviation law. I am not an expert in this area (erm… no type rating I think you say), as I’m crime/family with a touch of civil.

This would require a single person to take an action against the relevant body. If more people wish to join in the action, that is ok but not completely necessary. However, it may be a consideration that damages by the client may be sought for loss of earnings due to the discriminatory decision taken by the CAA. The likelihood of this happening will depend on the facts of the client and cannot realistically be considered until a much later stage with the expertise of the employment/aviation solicitor.

He/She would go to an employment/aviation solicitor in the UK, providing the background of their complaint and how they have been discriminated against because of their disability, and the unreasonableness of the discrimination.

Information of the unreasonableness can be supported by the FAA and other standards and the fact that the JAA/CAA permit for example, American pilots to fly in UK airspace.

The person should be on income support or a low wage to qualify for legal aid under the means test. In respect of the merit test, I’m not 100% sure if employment law under this category permits legal aid to be granted. This would have to be checked with the employment solicitor. It shouldn’t be a problem to find out, as the initial meeting should be free.

If legal aid can be granted, then the client can employ the solicitor, barristers and expert witnesses all paid for by the legal services commission (i.e. The government).

The solicitor would seek a judicial review of the CAA’s decision on this matter with the supporting evidence/ expert reports. If it is deemed that the appropriate body is European JAA/EASA, then they can be joined in addition or replacement of the CAA. Legal aid will cover the case costs all the way to the European courts.

4.2 Insurance
----------------------------

If the employment solicitor determines that legal aid is not receivable under the circumstances, then the route of insurance can be used.

Here, the relevant background information and arguments supporting your case would be given to the solicitor. He would employ a barrister to prepare an ‘advice’ on this case, with the likelihood of success.

This would cost in the region of £1000.

With this advice, the solicitor would approach certain insurance companies who would view the advice by the barrister and decide whether to enter into a contract with the client.

If they decide to enter a contract, it may be of the type whereby they would pay the total cost of solicitor/barrister/expert witnesses/potential costs for you.

If you win the case, it is likely that all of the costs would be paid by the CAA/JAA. If you lose the case, your costs are covered by the insurance company.

4.3 Conditional Fee Agreement
----------------------------

In addition to 4.2, or in replacement of, a ‘no win, no fee’ agreement may be reached with the solicitor.

If he/she can see that this case is likely to succeed, they may agree not to charge you for the costs of the case if you lose.

If you win, the costs will be taken from the otherside. The exact details of the agreement can be negotiated with them.

5 Conclusion
----------------------------

I hope that the above suggestions are taken on board and this matter progressed further, as the current state of affairs need not be how they are and have been for quite some time to the detriment of many many dreams.

I can’t see any real hindrance to taking the action, with the suggestions outlined above and cannot even see much of a defence by the CAA for their unreasonable and discriminatory stance.

Unfortunately, if this action isn’t taken now, with this current level of support; this issue will continue as it is for no need whatsoever, which will be a real shame.

[gijoe]

Lawmaker,

Very good post.

Can you pm me a private email? I would like to ask you a couple of questions offline.

G

[gijoe]

Lawmaker,

Very good post.

Can you pm me a private email? I would like to ask you a couple of questions offline.

G

[gijoe]

After some consdieration I think it is about time that some lobbying, as suggested by Lawman, took place. I would like to compile a consolidated list of names and emails of people who find themselves in, as said in previous posts, this ridiculous position.

If you would like details of what I intend to do, or would like to add your name to a 'lobbying' list then send your name and email to:

[email protected]

G

[gijoe]

After some consdieration I think it is about time that some lobbying, as suggested by Lawman, took place. I would like to compile a consolidated list of names and emails of people who find themselves in, as said in previous posts, this ridiculous position.

If you would like details of what I intend to do, or would like to add your name to a 'lobbying' list then send your name and email to:

[email protected]

G

[JJT]

Lets hope we get a critical mass of people to get this sorted. On a related note, does anybody know where the CAA (or the law for that matter) stands on the use of colour vision 'correcting' contact lenses (ChromaGen and the like)? I asked the question a couple of years ago after failing the HW lantern test at Gatwick and was told (suprise suprise) that they were not permitted to be used in any tests. This leads to another intersting legal angle for us. If you are permitted to use ordinary eyesight correcting contact lenses (up to a maximum prescription), then why not colour vision correcting lenses? Both result in the test being passed (hopefully!) so, by the CAA's own definition, both cases are fit to fly. Anybody have any experience of using these lenses in a medical?

[JJT]

Lets hope we get a critical mass of people to get this sorted. On a related note, does anybody know where the CAA (or the law for that matter) stands on the use of colour vision 'correcting' contact lenses (ChromaGen and the like)? I asked the question a couple of years ago after failing the HW lantern test at Gatwick and was told (suprise suprise) that they were not permitted to be used in any tests. This leads to another intersting legal angle for us. If you are permitted to use ordinary eyesight correcting contact lenses (up to a maximum prescription), then why not colour vision correcting lenses? Both result in the test being passed (hopefully!) so, by the CAA's own definition, both cases are fit to fly. Anybody have any experience of using these lenses in a medical?

[Ralph the Bong]

Had an interesting experience a while ago: I have an Australian ATPL with a Class one medical issued on the basis of a Farnsworth Lantern test, which was conducted some 20 years ago. In order to recieve a validation for an overseas licence, I was told to have another lantern test. I failed. Given that color vision percecption does not change with age, I was agahst that this should happen. The test officer also told me that she intended to notify CASA. 2 days later, I had another test conducted by a different person at the same clinic. I passed easily. The difference between the two tests and my reason for failing the first one? Simple. The first test was conducted at a distance to the lantern of 12-13 feet the 2nd test was conducted at THE STANDARD DISTANCE OF 8 feet. This is appaling; I wonder how many people have failed because the optometrist has conducted the test under non-standard conditions. These are: A fully illuminated room and a dist. of 8' (do a web search for additional info.)(incidently,my test 20 years ago was done in a dark room). If any of you thinks that they may have been tested under non-standard conditions, demand a retest. If you pass, consider litigation. Good luck to all.:ok:

[Ralph the Bong]

Had an interesting experience a while ago: I have an Australian ATPL with a Class one medical issued on the basis of a Farnsworth Lantern test, which was conducted some 20 years ago. In order to recieve a validation for an overseas licence, I was told to have another lantern test. I failed. Given that color vision percecption does not change with age, I was agahst that this should happen. The test officer also told me that she intended to notify CASA. 2 days later, I had another test conducted by a different person at the same clinic. I passed easily. The difference between the two tests and my reason for failing the first one? Simple. The first test was conducted at a distance to the lantern of 12-13 feet the 2nd test was conducted at THE STANDARD DISTANCE OF 8 feet. This is appaling; I wonder how many people have failed because the optometrist has conducted the test under non-standard conditions. These are: A fully illuminated room and a dist. of 8' (do a web search for additional info.)(incidently,my test 20 years ago was done in a dark room). If any of you thinks that they may have been tested under non-standard conditions, demand a retest. If you pass, consider litigation. Good luck to all.:ok:

[gijoe]

Just flagging this one up again to highlight the email

[email protected]

Names are coming in...but there's never a better time to add yours !! :ok:

[gijoe]

Just flagging this one up again to highlight the email

[email protected]

Names are coming in...but there's never a better time to add yours !! :ok:

[LawMaker]

GIJoe,

It would be useful if you compiled full details of examples like Ralph has given, with name and dates of test, centre, tester, testee, irregularities etc.;

to support your case later on when the court is considering the competence and reasonability of CAA medical judgements.

It will permit the judge to realise that he can't just take this organisation prima facie to be one that can be relied upon to make sensible conclusions to an issue.

In addition, it will be useful when influencing your MP's and others to join with you on this matter. Of course, you will vote for them come next election ;)

Also, did you manage to contact that web designing pilot; as he could make a centre for the lobbying side of things; akin to how the 'stop the war coalition' used the internet as a logistical base for lobbying.

Just making trouble where I can.

LawBreaker. erm.. I mean Maker.

[LawMaker]

GIJoe,

It would be useful if you compiled full details of examples like Ralph has given, with name and dates of test, centre, tester, testee, irregularities etc.;

to support your case later on when the court is considering the competence and reasonability of CAA medical judgements.

It will permit the judge to realise that he can't just take this organisation prima facie to be one that can be relied upon to make sensible conclusions to an issue.

In addition, it will be useful when influencing your MP's and others to join with you on this matter. Of course, you will vote for them come next election ;)

Also, did you manage to contact that web designing pilot; as he could make a centre for the lobbying side of things; akin to how the 'stop the war coalition' used the internet as a logistical base for lobbying.

Just making trouble where I can.

LawBreaker. erm.. I mean Maker.

[LawMaker]

Just flagging this to the top again.

Any info on the lobbying/legal action yet to match the Australian example?

Also, here's a webiste for CVD pilots, with their own forum.

http://digilander.libero.it/cvdpilot/

[LawMaker]

Just flagging this to the top again.

Any info on the lobbying/legal action yet to match the Australian example?

Also, here's a webiste for CVD pilots, with their own forum.

http://digilander.libero.it/cvdpilot/

[N2334M]

Hello everybody,

I am the creator of the CVDPilot website.

I am sorry but I have to admit that the site has been unattended for ages, and the forum has not been working.

The email to contact me is also expired. If you need any information you can contact me privately via pprune messages.

I quit my project because I solved all my problems regarding colour vision and I started studying for the JAR ATPL, that's why I did not have time to continue...

If anybody is interested in building a new site or modifying and improving the existing, I would be very happy about it. Feel free to contact me to obtain more information.

-----------------------------------------

I just wanted to point out something and emphasize what Ralf the Bong just posted...

I also had the same problem... I failed ishihara in Gatwick (UK)and passed them in Barcellona (Spain)... Spain and UK are both JAR-FCL member Countries and they both release JAR-FCL medical certification of equivalent validity.

I currently hold a fully unrestricted JAR-FCL Class 1 medical certificate.

It really makes sense to analyze how the test is conducted by the doctor and make sure that is properly done.

I think a lot of factors could influence the score on a ishihara test, like for example the type of light source (neon - normal light bulb - sunlight), the distance it is showed to the patient, if it is showed with two eyes or covering just one and so on...

And then another critical issue is:
FAA standards state that the disqualifying number of errors for a 24plate ishihara edition are 7 or more.
JAA states that you must be able to identify all of them with no mistakes in less that 3 seconds per plate.

I personally think that this discrimination between FAA/JAA is very important.
It makes me think a lot... from a point of view of human discrimination.

Regards.

[N2334M]

Hello everybody,

I am the creator of the CVDPilot website.

I am sorry but I have to admit that the site has been unattended for ages, and the forum has not been working.

The email to contact me is also expired. If you need any information you can contact me privately via pprune messages.

I quit my project because I solved all my problems regarding colour vision and I started studying for the JAR ATPL, that's why I did not have time to continue...

If anybody is interested in building a new site or modifying and improving the existing, I would be very happy about it. Feel free to contact me to obtain more information.

-----------------------------------------

I just wanted to point out something and emphasize what Ralf the Bong just posted...

I also had the same problem... I failed ishihara in Gatwick (UK)and passed them in Barcellona (Spain)... Spain and UK are both JAR-FCL member Countries and they both release JAR-FCL medical certification of equivalent validity.

I currently hold a fully unrestricted JAR-FCL Class 1 medical certificate.

It really makes sense to analyze how the test is conducted by the doctor and make sure that is properly done.

I think a lot of factors could influence the score on a ishihara test, like for example the type of light source (neon - normal light bulb - sunlight), the distance it is showed to the patient, if it is showed with two eyes or covering just one and so on...

And then another critical issue is:
FAA standards state that the disqualifying number of errors for a 24plate ishihara edition are 7 or more.
JAA states that you must be able to identify all of them with no mistakes in less that 3 seconds per plate.

I personally think that this discrimination between FAA/JAA is very important.
It makes me think a lot... from a point of view of human discrimination.

Regards.

[Jet_A_Knight]

Does anyone have a link(s) to the standards of how a Farnsworth Lantern Test is to be conducted (ie conditions etc)

I am an OZ CPL. A couple of years ago I failed my Farnsworth Lantern Test. The test was conducted in a nearly completely dark (except for a dim desk lamp for the optometrist on the desk BEHIND the lantern unit!). I was required to view the lanterns via a mirror in FRONT of me reflecting the lanterns BEHIND me. Also, there was some white light leakage around some of the lanterns which I questioned and the optometris said that was normal and 'part of the test'.

I have been flying on the dispensation allowed bythe CASA up to ATPL so far 2900hrs single pilot, of that 780hrs night and 300+ single pilot IFR. I have flown into major terminal area airports with all the trimmings and 'black hole' airfields with no approach lights or approach path guidance without mishap. So I suppose I am testament to the fact that being colour vision 'deficient' is not so dangerous.

I would like to resit my Farnsworth under proper conditions, so any help is appreciated (and sorry if i missed the info if i missed it in the previous 10 pages!)

[Jet_A_Knight]

Does anyone have a link(s) to the standards of how a Farnsworth Lantern Test is to be conducted (ie conditions etc)

I am an OZ CPL. A couple of years ago I failed my Farnsworth Lantern Test. The test was conducted in a nearly completely dark (except for a dim desk lamp for the optometrist on the desk BEHIND the lantern unit!). I was required to view the lanterns via a mirror in FRONT of me reflecting the lanterns BEHIND me. Also, there was some white light leakage around some of the lanterns which I questioned and the optometris said that was normal and 'part of the test'.

I have been flying on the dispensation allowed bythe CASA up to ATPL so far 2900hrs single pilot, of that 780hrs night and 300+ single pilot IFR. I have flown into major terminal area airports with all the trimmings and 'black hole' airfields with no approach lights or approach path guidance without mishap. So I suppose I am testament to the fact that being colour vision 'deficient' is not so dangerous.

I would like to resit my Farnsworth under proper conditions, so any help is appreciated (and sorry if i missed the info if i missed it in the previous 10 pages!)

[Bad medicine]

I don't have a link, but the procedures I use are:

Operation of the Test. Points on the operation of the lantern are as follows:
(1) It is important that the FALANT be used through the step-down transformer supplied and not plugged directly into a 240 V power outlet.
(2) The test should be performed in a normally lighted room. The room should be screened from glare and exclude sunlight. The applicant should not face the source of room illumination.
(3) Only one applicant should be tested at a time (others should not be allowed to watch).
(4) The applicant should be positioned 2.5 metres from the lantern.
(5) The applicant may stand or sit. If glasses are used for distance, they should be worn. The aperture of the lantern should be directed at the head of the applicant and the adjusting screw should be tightened to hold the lantern in this position.
(6) The examiner must be CP1.

Conduct of the test. The test is to be conducted as follows:
(1) The examiner should inform the applicant that, ‘the lights you will see in this lantern are red, green or white. They look like signal lights at a distance. Two lights are presented at a time in any combination, one above the other. Call out the colours as soon as you see them, naming the colour at the top first and then
the colour at the bottom. Remember, only three colours, red, green and white—and top first’.
(2) The examiner should turn the knob at the top of the lantern to change the lights. To expose the lights, the button in the centre of the knob should be depressed. The examiner should maintain regular timing of about two seconds per exposure.
(3) The lights should be exposed in random order, starting with an RG (red, green) or GR (green, red) combination (Nos 1 or 5), continuing until each of the nine combinations has been exposed.
(4) If the applicant says ‘yellow’, ‘pink’, etc. the examiner should remind them that ‘there are only three colours—red, green and white’.
(5) If the applicant takes a long time to respond, the examiner should inform them ‘as soon as you see the lights, call them’.

Scoring of the test. The test is to be recorded and scored
as follows:
(1) An error is considered the miscalling of one or both of a pair of lights.
(2) If no errors are made on the first run of nine pairs of lights, the applicant is passed.
(3) If any errors are made on the first run, discard the results of the first run and give two more complete runs.
(4) Add the errors of these last two runs. Two errors or less represents a pass (CP2), more than two errors a fail (CP3).

Hope this helps.

Cheers,

BM

[Bad medicine]

I don't have a link, but the procedures I use are:

Operation of the Test. Points on the operation of the lantern are as follows:
(1) It is important that the FALANT be used through the step-down transformer supplied and not plugged directly into a 240 V power outlet.
(2) The test should be performed in a normally lighted room. The room should be screened from glare and exclude sunlight. The applicant should not face the source of room illumination.
(3) Only one applicant should be tested at a time (others should not be allowed to watch).
(4) The applicant should be positioned 2.5 metres from the lantern.
(5) The applicant may stand or sit. If glasses are used for distance, they should be worn. The aperture of the lantern should be directed at the head of the applicant and the adjusting screw should be tightened to hold the lantern in this position.
(6) The examiner must be CP1.

Conduct of the test. The test is to be conducted as follows:
(1) The examiner should inform the applicant that, ‘the lights you will see in this lantern are red, green or white. They look like signal lights at a distance. Two lights are presented at a time in any combination, one above the other. Call out the colours as soon as you see them, naming the colour at the top first and then
the colour at the bottom. Remember, only three colours, red, green and white—and top first’.
(2) The examiner should turn the knob at the top of the lantern to change the lights. To expose the lights, the button in the centre of the knob should be depressed. The examiner should maintain regular timing of about two seconds per exposure.
(3) The lights should be exposed in random order, starting with an RG (red, green) or GR (green, red) combination (Nos 1 or 5), continuing until each of the nine combinations has been exposed.
(4) If the applicant says ‘yellow’, ‘pink’, etc. the examiner should remind them that ‘there are only three colours—red, green and white’.
(5) If the applicant takes a long time to respond, the examiner should inform them ‘as soon as you see the lights, call them’.

Scoring of the test. The test is to be recorded and scored
as follows:
(1) An error is considered the miscalling of one or both of a pair of lights.
(2) If no errors are made on the first run of nine pairs of lights, the applicant is passed.
(3) If any errors are made on the first run, discard the results of the first run and give two more complete runs.
(4) Add the errors of these last two runs. Two errors or less represents a pass (CP2), more than two errors a fail (CP3).

Hope this helps.

Cheers,

BM

[Jet_A_Knight]

Thanks Bad Med.

The setup of my test was not like you describe, especially in the setup of the machine.

Would this contribute to a failure?? In real life I can see the differences in colours on the aprons, tower beacons etc - green/white is sometimes a little 'tricky'.

I see you are located inAustralia. Can I PM you for more details about where you conduct these tests and possible organise a 'resit'?

[Jet_A_Knight]

Thanks Bad Med.

The setup of my test was not like you describe, especially in the setup of the machine.

Would this contribute to a failure?? In real life I can see the differences in colours on the aprons, tower beacons etc - green/white is sometimes a little 'tricky'.

I see you are located inAustralia. Can I PM you for more details about where you conduct these tests and possible organise a 'resit'?

[Blinkz]

in austrailia you can take a practical test on the airfield looking at the tower to see the different colour lights, why don't you try this?

[Blinkz]

in austrailia you can take a practical test on the airfield looking at the tower to see the different colour lights, why don't you try this?

[Jet_A_Knight]

I want to use this as a 'last resort'.

By the sounds of things I don't think my Falant test was done correctly - going by the conditions Bad Med indicates.

Also, I have stopped smoking for the last 2 years and wonder if this makes any difference.

[Jet_A_Knight]

I want to use this as a 'last resort'.

By the sounds of things I don't think my Falant test was done correctly - going by the conditions Bad Med indicates.

Also, I have stopped smoking for the last 2 years and wonder if this makes any difference.