Constructive advice regarding options required please..

[Scoobster]

Replies are a bit thin on the ground in flight forum so thought I would post this here for anyone who may have been down this route.


Ok so here's the sketch..

I am after some constructive advice regarding whether it is worth going down the FAA/Canadian route (due to the problems I am facing with the beauracracy of the UK CAA/JAA).

Due to the typical beuracratic nature of the JAR's I am currently facing a dispute with the CAA in terms of obtaining a class 1 initial due to an extremely minor peripheral vision defect.

I took it upon myself to inform the CAA about this defect and I have never been denied an initial class 1. I have however been for eye assesments at LGW and seen the Ophtalmologist who put in a positive report. But still nothing became of this and I am still 'fighting' with the CAA. I did however write 2 letters for every one letter that the CAA sent me with a view to saying that I am within the current regulations. However, as you expect the CAA seem to disagree, even though it clearly states in the JAR's that I am eligible for an initial class 1.

My case has been described by one doctor as 'it appears that the CAA are being unfair to you' and by another Opthalmologist as 'a borderline candidate which the CAA don't know how to deal with because it is a bit of a 'grey' area'.

I have initiated the secondary review procedure and I expect the CAA are also going to be al about this.

I have an FAA Class 1 medical certificate with the requirement of taking a Medical Flight Test and I will be going for an initial Transport Canada Class 1 in the next couple of weeks.

No doubt the argument about 'training in the country in which you wish to reside' remains but at this point I am really thinking of any way that I can go all the way to CPL/ATPL and achieve this. It may be a while before the CAA realise that I am right and it may take some time for other doctors that I have utilised to help in my case deal with this.

By then I would have lost more years fighting with the CAA and before I know it I will hit the big 30 (not that its bad!) and still without a UK initial class 1 and back to square one again - assessing my options!

So I was just after some constructive advice as to the best way to progress forward with the FAA or Canadian route? Obviously this will (if I remain in the UK) require a conversion to JAA at the end - with what may be still no medical if the CAA remain about it?

What options are available? Living in the UK and having to train in Canada/U.S.A does make it slightly harder logistically. Any ways aroung this?

I only get 30 days vacation a year and currently do not have a PPL as my class 2 was also suspended by the white coat people. I do not envisage 30 days training even for PPL in U.S.A/Canada to be enough.

I do not expect anyone to wave a magic wand and am simply trying to stay optimistic and after some constructive advice by people who have maybe gone the FAA/TC/CASA/NZ route and managed to go JAA after.

Cheers

S

[7120]

Can you describe the "minor field defect", what testing machine was used and how many times have you been tested

[Scoobster]

Well, if you are referring to the initial consultation at LGW it was the comprehensive Opthalmic examination which used firstly examination by confrontation followed by the SITA II - Standard and SITA II - FAST which shines lights of various intensity and is really a test for Glucoma rather than visual fields.

I went back and fourth for a short while chasing up the report and so that he could see me again because his positive report was 'challenged' by the white coat people at the CAA.

After this, I researched the regulations and noted that a change in the requirements which clearly state that cases like this are eligible for an initial class 1 and it is clearly documented in the JAR's.

A short while after the change, I went to my Optometrist and was tested using the Esterman Test on the same Humphreys Machine, which should a significant improvement in the field of vision and that Binocular vision compensates for the slight loss in the field loss of my right eye. I contacted the CAA again and they came back with the same view that I am unfit - which :mad: me off as it is clearly there in black and white!

I also contacted a different JAA Aviation Authority and showed him the piece of the JAR which clearly dictates that I am eligible and let him test me as an 'independant'.

He also stated that this is a minimal defect.

PM for further details

[TelBoy]

I cannot comment about Transport Canada and NZ as I do not have any knowledge of them. However it is possible to obtain FAA ratings in the UK if time away from work is an issue. Most people do not go this way because of greater costs in the UK, but if it suites your circumstanses, then go for it.

You will still need TSA security clearance to do most ratings though, even if done here in the UK see https://www.flightschoolcandidates.gov/

Remember also there IS work available outside the US on an FAA ticket. Not saying it will be easy, but rise to the challange and you will suceed.

Good luck to you and never give up.

[7120]

It's a bit perpelxing why you should have a field defect in only one eye - unless you have a previous eye problem.
It may be that the defect is spurious and does not reflect any genuine abnormality. The examining doctor should be able to work this out easily.
If it is due to a previous eye problem then its location and size will be important. Unless you can demonstrate no functional problems relating to this defect then it looks as if you may have a problem.

[Scoobster]

7120- The visual defect is only present in one eye due to being run over whilst crossing the road when I was a teen. The impact was to the right side of the face and caused injury to the right optic nerve which was only discovered many years later and has not affected me in any way shape or form, whilst driving or in every day life.

The location is the very lower quadrant of the right eye.

If you PM me I can give further details.

Thanks

Scoobster

[7120]

Sorry for delay in reply. Sadly your field defect is likely to be permanent yet not progressive.
Although I do not know thw workings of the CAA medical side it's likely that the "onus of proof" will be on you to prove that your field defect has no impact on your normal functional vision.
Informal discussion with the CAA about what you can do to help them, or what tests they require, to quickly reach a decision may help.
I suspect you'r in for a bit of a long haul however unfair it may be.

[Scoobster]

I am afraid that long haul commenced around 4/5 years ago and has now become an 'extensive long haul' and is beyond the informal discussions stage.

I have supplied extensive medical evidence which suggests that it is not progressive and safety would still prevail! In the opinions of several medical professionals I am facing a beuracratic challenge in a 'grey area' of the JARs rather than a medical issue! :mad::mad: