Colour Vision Issues!!!

[Fran92]

Hi Guys,

New to this forum business but I have some questions and I am hoping you guys have some answers. Fingers crossed.

I currently have completed an EASA Class 2 medical with a VCL - Valid by day only limitation.

After a chat with my AME I booked the Colour Vision Assessment in City University London. This assessment included;

1. Ishihara Colour Plates test (1-25 plates of 38-plate system)
2. American Optical Company (H.R.R) Plates (2nd Edition)
3. CAD (Colour Assessment & Diagnosis) test
4. Farnsworth D15 test
5. City University test, 2nd Edition
6. Nagel anomaloscope

The only test I was really interested in was the CAD test because I had already failed the Ishihara test during my medical which I had a fair idea was going to happen as I failed them before for jobs etc. After completing the CAD test I was given my score and unfortunately I was outside the threshold of 6 and I scored 13.5.

Basically that rules me out for an unrestricted EASA Class 1 medical cert.

My question is what are the colour vision testing methods used by CASA and is there any practical test such as the light gun signals etc.

Any extra information would be perfect also.

Cheers:ok:

[Lead Balloon]

Two words and one acronym:

New Zealand.

CVDPA.

Move to New Zealand. Join the Colour Vision Deficient Pilot Association.

[LeadSled]

Fran92,
Google Dr. A.M.Pape, and look up the old pprune threads on subject.
Just as an aside, in recent times I have several reports of pilots who have failed an Ishihara in an office, (artificial light) who have passed when repeating the test in natural light.
Sadly, all ICAO requires is that you demonstrate your ability to "do the job", not demonstrate a particular standard of colour perception.
Tootle pip!!

[CaptainMidnight]

My question is what are the colour vision testing methods used by CASA and is there any practical test such as the light gun signals etc.

https://www.casa.gov.au/licences-and-certification/aviation-medicine/information-dame-dao-co-and-medical-specialists/69-tests-colour-vision

[YPJT]

Interesting developments in NZ. I wonder I CASA will follow their lead?
https://www.casa.gov.au/licences-and-certification/publication/dame-newsletter-may-2019

[brissypilot]

As Lead Balloon mentioned, check out New Zealand. There’s been some very positive developments there this month thanks to years of hard work by the CVDPA and others. CASA is still a work in progress, but I wouldn’t hold my breath for any changes here in a hurry.

The NZ CAA website has all the info you need about their new assessment:
https://www.caa.govt.nz/colour-vision/

New Zealand Lifts Restrictions for Colour Vision Deficient Pilots (https://australianaviation.com.au/2019/05/new-zealand-lifts-restrictions-for-colour-vision-deficient-pilots/)

Restrictive rules placed on New Zealand’s colour vision deficient (CVD) pilots will end from 31 May 2019, ending six years of campaigning by pilots and the aviation industry.

The new rules will enable pilots with impaired colour vision to demonstrate competency through assessments and flight tests if they fail colour vision tests, whereas to date restrictions were placed on their medical certificate based on visual screening tests.

New Zealand Civil Aviation Authority (CAA) director Graeme Harris said the changes represented a shift in operational policy towards these pilots in that they could operate aircraft safely in spite of their colour vision deficiency (CVD).

“There is evidence that the majority of colour vision deficient pilots pose no greater safety risk than their normally sighted colleagues, as long as they are tested, and pass an appropriate assessment,” Harris said.

The new approach would align closely with that adopted by the US Federal Aviation Administration (FAA).

CVD is a condition where individuals are unable to distinguish differences between certain colours. It is commonly inherited and affects about eight per cent of men and 0.5 per cent of women.

Under the new rules, pilots with CVD can apply to undertake a new operational colour vision assessment (OCVA) and, if successful, have restrictions removed on their Class 1 and Class 2 medical certificates.

The new approach would include both a medical assessment and practical competency assessment in a three-stage process.

Pilots with the mildest form of CVD, as assessed by clinical testing, would be eligible for unrestricted medical certification in New Zealand.

Those with more severe CVD will still be able to fly with restrictions on their medical certificate that prevents them operating to and from controlled aerodromes without a radio, flying at night or carrying passengers on air operations.

The last two restrictions could be removed by passing a practical operational flight assessment.

The restriction of flying to an aerodrome without a radio cannot be removed because, without a radio, the control tower may use colour light signals to communicate with aircraft in an emergency and misinterpretation due to CVD could constitute a safety risk, the CAA said.

Pilots with CVD would be urged to take the new assessment from qualified instructors part way through their training when they had experience in piloting aircraft. They would have a choice of daytime or day and night assessment.

The CAA said the practical assessment would involve an experienced instructor examiner who would look at the individual’s ability and skills to recognise navigational charts, maps, cockpit instruments and terrain when they are in the air.

“In all cases the objective is not to name colours but rather, to correctly interpret the meaning of information conveyed by charts, instruments or lights, or to assess terrain conditions or obstructions,” the CAA said.

“The assessment is not a check of aviation knowledge or flying ability; for example, the use of keys, notes and glossaries on maps, charts and plates is permitted.”

The move was expected to help ease a pilot shortage. It would also end a situation where Australian pilots, who operated under a similar regime being introduced in New Zealand, could fly in and out of New Zealand airspace, unimpeded by regulatory restrictions.

[LeadSled]

Folks,
Don't forget, NZ now is only what we had for many many years in Australia , thanks to Dr. Pape, and the two AAT cases.
All CASA has to do is "regress", not "progress" , to where we were before recent CEO/DAS and associated heads of the medical branch screwed it up.
Most times, CASA has no problem "regressing", why is this any different??
Tootle pip!!

[thorn bird]

Lead, as far as I can tell the only colour people see as far as CAsA is concerned is RED.
Maybe we are all colour blind!

[Fran92]

Guys thanks for your replies, I had a look on the CAA website and I took this extract off the website;The CAA has adopted a new approach that allows pilots to demonstrate competency through colour vision medical tests and operational flight assessments.

Who can take the colour vision assessment?

Current pilots holding class 1 and/or class 2 medical certificates with colour vision restrictions
Trainee pilots applying for a class 1 and/or class 2 medical certificate
People wanting to become a pilot who are yet to enter expensive pilot training

Bullet point 3 is relevant to me but do I need to have a certain mount of flight experience such as a PPL etc for an" operational flight assessment" or would it be conducted on the ground?

[LeadSled]

Fran92,
Call CAA NZ and ask --- as far as I know, the test can be conducted in a light aircraft or a sim.
Have you considered flying training in NZ instead of AU, everything about aviation in NZ is more simple and straightforward than AU, they do have their quirks, but nothing like here.
And, at the end, you have an ICAO compliant license which is widely recognized --- compared to the Australian equivalent.
Tootle pip!!

[brissypilot]

Fran92,

You need to have a read through all the information on the CAA website link that I provided in my previous post - it has all the answers you're after and is very self-explanatory. Have a look at the PDF attachments under the 'Resources' section, including the guidance for candidates and assessors. The assessment can only be conducted in an aircraft, not a simulator. It has been designed in such a way that anyone can undertake it regardless of experience level and consists of both a ground and airborne component (day and night).

Don't forget, NZ now is only what we had for many many years in Australia , thanks to Dr. Pape, and the two AAT cases.
All CASA has to do is "regress", not "progress" , to where we were before recent CEO/DAS and associated heads of the medical branch screwed it up.
Most times, CASA has no problem "regressing", why is this any different??
Tootle pip!!

LeadSled,

The new NZ policy actually goes beyond what Australia had for many years prior to the AvMed changes in 2014. CASA have never actually used a proper test that simulates an operational situation (despite the requirement of CASR 67.150(6)(c)). Instead, they used tests like the control tower signal gun test and for candidates who failed this, they were restricted up to CPL level and in Australian airspace only - hence the O'Brien AAT case. Of course, since 2014 they have been using the CAD test and we all know what a heap of garbage that is.

The NZ policy differs in that they actually allow CVD candidates to demonstrate proficiency in actual aircraft and in realistic operational situations. Once passed they can then fly at all levels including at ATPL, night/IFR and internationally and so it opens up even more doors for future career paths.

[thorn bird]

"opens up even more doors for future career paths."

Cant have that in Australia mate. We are trying to kill off aviation here.

[brissypilot]

"opens up even more doors for future career paths."

Cant have that in Australia mate. We are trying to kill off aviation here.

Agreed. I was talking about career paths in NZ where they have regulations and policies which encourage aviation. CASA have long closed the door on that in Australia, especially for CVD’s in recent years.

[LeadSled]

brissy.pilot,
Agreed, I was/am guilty of over simplification ---- but I wanted to make the point that CASA went backwards by leaps and bounds, and denied (after may years) an AAT case that was set up, by the Commonwealth, as a test case, refusing, after years, to decide to no longer abide by the original AAT decision was appealing thing for CASA to do.
And the present Australian "medical standard" for colour perception does not even comply with (original) AU CARs, which were actually ICAO compliant.
And certainly the NZ "rule" is ICAO compliant., as far as I can see.
Tootle pip!!