TelBoy

Worth a go, but remember the CAA issues medicals acording to JAR FCL3 which state NO errors on ishihara or No errors on lanterns, Holmes Wright, Spectrolux or Baynes or the anomalascope. The tests have to be done at an AME ie Gatwick in the UK.

However all the ammo you can get is for the best.

Good luck to you.

colourblindgeek

Hi Stevieb1

Welcome to the funny farm. You are among some frustrated friends. We share a similar limitation. I say limitation, because its not a problem, disability or concern. It simply limits our ability to pass outdated and quite frankly irrelevant CVD tests. Why can I see all the colours on a runway (naming each one, where it is and what it does) and not pass an Ishihara test.
Why is it can spot the PAPI lights changing from 3 whites and 1 red to "2 and 2" quicker than my instructor?
Why can I get an IR rating to allow me to fly in shocking visability and yet I cant fly on a crystal clear night?
Why can CVD pilot fly into Heathrow in an American Airlines 777 yet I will never fly out of Heathrow in a British Airways 747?

Right..... off my soapbox.

And relax....

I went to Gatport Airwick about 4 years ago and did the Ishihara and lantern tests. Failed all.
City is a bit different. They make you do the following (FYI I have included my results)

Ishihara 38 plate test - Fail (mild cvd noted)
CAD Test - Mild protan colour deficiency
Farnsworth D15 test (passed)
City University Test (passed)
American Optical Company (HRR) Plates (Fail 19 out of 20)
Nagel Anomaloscope (Matching range 50-8 Protanomalous Trichromatism)
Holmes-wright lantern (Fail - 1st run 4 errors, 2nd and 3rd run 13 errors)
Diagnosis - Mild Protanomalous Trichromatism

You will see there is no pass/fail on the CAD
They are developing a PAPI light simulator that does the reds and whites on a runway. I was OK with this as the reds and whites arent a problem.
Interestingly they tried me on a revised PAPI simulator that shows all 4 lights in the same colour - a White, off white, yellow, red, blue, and green. I scored full marks.
The downside is that I feel that the CAA are no closer to introducing this new test.

To answer your question, I thought the City stuff was more comprehensive as at least they can give you an accurate idea of your limitation.

Well while this all goes on, the only thing to do is to get on with getting a PPL and enjoying flying.

My 2 best experiences are 1.) seeing a 737 pass below my Cessna 150 as it approached Luton; 2.) a real engine failure above Cranfield resulting in a Fire Engine escort down the runway.

Love it.

Thanks to all on this forum for keeping this fantastic thread going.

BTW 2close.... you are teasing us with that comment "watch this space"

Mark

colourblindgeek

Please be assured of my support if required. PM me if you think there is anything obvious that I could do to help.
Would certainly love to add my name to that list of Telboys
1) 2Close
2) TelBoy
3) Neo_RS14
4) Windforce
5) Shunter
6) east_sider
7) Ads212
8) gijoe
9) colourblindgeek (aka Mark!)
10)

kevinreidy1

Hi there;
Anyone know where I can get a beynes lantern test done in Germany.
i.e address or phone number. Need to organise one asap.

Blinkz

I assume you mean the colourvision lantern test. I don't have address or number but if you google it you should be able to find it. but DLR in cologne have one.

L.V. APP

Hey,


here you are JAR-FCl 3 (Medical) and chapter 13 (Ophthalmology) documents. Also Lantern test simulator acording protocol. Must be download before, for correct use.



SORRY, try now:

http://es.geocities.com/color_vision_dvc/


good luck.
low visibily Aproach.

outofwhack

There are lots of people wasting a lot of time and money trying to pass one of a battery of tests designed to weed out those with any CVD. The 'problem is the test' and not the practicality of flying.

Here's my proposal to the UK CAA as a streamlined and much fairer methodology. Still a bit discriminatory but it sa start.

I'd like to see all the Farnsworths/HolmesWright/Nagels/Spectrolux lanterns taken to the dump where they belong. Their time as 'good little earners' for you medical guys should come to an end.

As primary testing use Ishihara plates which is fine as a go/nogo test to determine if someone has a deficiency.
Issue restrictions of no scheduled charter to those failing Ishihara and allow the restrictions to be lifted if the person can name the coloured lights shone from the control tower (once in 24 years of flying I had a light shined at me - my radio was broke - it was day VFR I could see the runway was clear anyway).

We are lucky in Australia/NZ that even if you fail the colour tests badly (like me) you can still do everything except fly scheduled airlines which leaves all the other more interesting stuff. I could try the tower lights and if pass try for the airlines but I am too old now to bother (45). I wasted too much time in the UK trying to make headway in their system.
15 years back I was simply dissallowed commercial full stop. Thats nice!
I hear now I can have commercial but no charter (unscheduled or scheduled)

NZ is much the same way as Oz but they still wont let you fly at night for some strange reason.

I'd love to see a matrix of country versus what you can do with a moderate/severe CVD. I can fill in the Oz/NZ part but not sure of UK.
Might help some real keen people prepared to migrate tosolve the problem. I did.


OOW CPL(A) CPL(H)

2close

Hi Todalda and welcome to this forum,

Whilst I fully appreciate your philosophy I feel there is a little more to it than meets the eye.

What people are complaining about is an unfair system perpetuated by the JAA which is using outmoded methods of testing and rules that are based on assumptions rather than proven fact to place an outright ban on CVD pilots flying commercial air transport, whilst many other developed nations with exceptional safety standards and records use far less restricted methodology for testing and permit CVD pilots to fly commercially in certain circumstances. Unless of course the JAA member states would like to openly accuse those other countries of not operating safely, in which case why do they allow their pilots to operate in their airspace?

Like you, it is probably too late for any changes to make any difference for me and even if the rules changed overnight it is highly unlikely I would obtain an airline (even regional) job at my time of life, not that I would want one. However, I am firmly of the opinion that the authorities have no provable case that CVD pilots pose any greater risk to flight safety than any other pilot and that they rely entirely on spurious academic rationale to fortify their weak argument.

It is my belief that the CAA and other JAA national authorities is actively discriminating against a group of individuals without any justifiable cause.

If the authorities could prove their case using valid, real life practical examples, instead of constantly shifting the goalposts to argue their academic case, I am certain that the guys who presently feel very miffed would accept that it is in the interests of flight safety that they are not permitted to operate commercially. However, I really cannot see how the authorities could achieve this, based partly on the mechanisms in place in other countries but especially as the opposite has already been proven in the higher Courts of Law, using technical as well as social argument.

I agree to a certain extent with Outofwhack but in the first instance the Ishihara Test needs to be applied correctly, i.e. as per the test manufacturer's instructions and (so far as the UK is concerned) in accordance with the guidance published by the Health & Safety Executive, both of which clearly state that the pass criterion is no more than TWO errors and not NIL errors as applied by the JAA. I also have it on very learned authority that an organisation cannot manipulate a prescribed medical procedure to satisfy its own protocols without leaving itself wide open to legal challenge, which is exactly what the JAA has done.

Personally, I've had radio failure twice and joined circuits safely and made perfectly safe landings, without the tower even attempting to signal me. The one occasion where I did ask a controller to shine the light to me (for testing purposes) I was unable to see the light, even on final, because the light was not visible through the control tower windows - the controller had to go out on to the verandah whereby I was then able to identify the colours; lucky there was a verandah. How is the system supposed to work when you have controlled airfields with control towers with sloping tinted windows that do not open. There is a flaw in regulation there alone - the pilots must be able to recognise the light signals but to the best of my knowledge there is no legal design requirement for the control tower to be able to display the light signals. There is also no legal requirement for an aircraft to carry a signal light but there is a legal requirement for the pilot to know what signals to send to the ground.......derrr, hello, MacFly!!!!

TTFN

2close

L.V. APP

Hey,


The lantern simulator was only for understand the real condition.


The distance and the zize is in chapter 13 :

10.4 Tests of colour vision.
"The Holmes-Wright lantern [test] has an aperture size of [1,6] mm, corresponding to a visual angle of [0,9] minutes of arc."

Soon, 0.9 minutes = 1.6mm (H-W test), then 3 minutes of arc = 5.3 mm (Beyne test).

That´s my experience and the simulator is only a new tool for ckeck your own possibilities.

Enjoy.
Low Visibility Approach.

TelBoy

Does anyone know where you can do a spectrolux test, maybe in Holland or Germany??

Also interested in Nagel if anyone can give me an idea where they do that.

stevieb1

City Uni (www.city.ac.uk/avrc) will do the Nagel Anomolascope, they definately don't have the Spectrolux though.

Scottish.CPL

I feel the same with regards to the colour vision testing in the UK, I was able to get 13 plates out of the ishihara which is the criteria of a pass in the RAF, but JAA say 15 out of 15 so they are telling me that the armed forces have a lower standard

And the holmes wright lantern is a joke, I am hoping to have the nagel anomalscope done soon, for anyone interested the official pass on that test is under 4 units, JAA states that you need to get 4 unites or under to be classed as normal. I have details if interested.

I have an FAA medical unresitriced
and I had a medcial examiner at Gatwick state to me that he even feels that the standards for some of the test are to high, but it is the legal system, and parliment.

Email if you want information.

Scottish.CPL

i know that there is an nagel anomalscope up north here and the Caledinian university eye clinic, how back is your colour vision.

spindoctor83

Hi telboy,

at first sorry for my miserable english.
There´s an AMC in Dübendorf near Zürich/Switzerland, where you can do the Spectrolux-Test. Some experience is in that thread, I think "studi" wrote about the test.
I´ll do Spectrolux too in september because I failed Beynes and Holmes-Wright. I found H-w easier than Beynes because the light flashes (beynes) are too short for me. At H-W I had trouble with white and green.
Spectrolux is very similar to H-W, the difference is two intensities of white instead one at H-W.
I´m pretty sure that I would fail Spectrolux, but I would use all options to become Med 1. Another hope is the papi-simulator at city-Uni, but I´d read here that it would take years, to establish that test to a JAR-FCL lantern test.
I could give you the adress an phone number of the AMC in Dübendorf if you like.

regards

Peter

stevieb1

Telboy, did you find an AME in JAA land with a Spectrolux Lantern?

If it's only Dubendorf in Switzerland, any idea whether the CAA will accept say a written report confirming a pass there?

TelBoy

Stevieb1,

It seems that the spectrolux is only available in Switzerland as it is Swiss made. The place in Dubendorf is the Swiss AMC. The CAA "should" accept it as it is in the JAR's.

Good luck mate.

AdamLT

hi all

im new to the site and joined after reading all the posts about colour vision deficiency. i once took the test at junior shcool (some 12 years ago) and was told i was 'colour blind'. wanting to pursue my career as an airline pilot, i have done much reserach about condition.
i have done online tests with the ishihara 24 and 38 plates and i can see the majority of the plates but the trace plates cause a few problems. i have read on the CAA web site that if you fail these you have to take approved lantern tests. i have heard so many different varients of this, including the farnsworth lantern, holmes-wright lantern, giles-archer and many more.
i have heard many student pilot's failing these due to nerves and not knowing what to expect in the exam. i don't want to fail in the same situation. i feel confident i'll pass the lantern tests but who knows till the day.
i have heard of the Applied Vision Research Centre in London and see they do similar tests to that of the CAA. would it be worth going there to see what goes on??
i was wondering what advice, if any, you could offer.

cheers for your time

ad

stevieb1

Thanks mate, I suspect it will be similar to the H-W; but worth a punt nonetheless.

It's a shame it has to be Zurich. As far as I know, apart from the lantern there's all reason to go there!

Maybe some glacier skiing this time of year??

Shunter

Since it is 1 of the 4 accepted lantern tests, and the passing of any 1 of the 4 tests is considered acceptable, they have to accept it. They might argue the toss, but at the end of the day they are obligated to accept that you have passed an approved JAR colour vision test.

I'm planning on visiting there myself in the near future.

TelBoy

Hi AdamLT

Welcome to the mad house. The only real way to see if you can pass the tests is to actually do them. You can do just the colour vision tests at the CAA in Gatwick at £28 cost. If you pass you can go and do the full class 1 medical (on another day) and happy days. If you fail they will class you CP4 colour unsafe. You can still get a class 1 medical, but will be limited to air work such as instruction during the day - no public transport!! However the CAA only do the Baynes and Holmes Wright tests if you fail ishihara. There are anothe 2 tests acceptable to the JAA which are the Nagel Anomalascope and the Spectrolux. These you will have to go abroad for, but if you pass the CAA will remove your restriction and class you as CP3 colour safe.

The City Uni does not give the exact tests the CAA do, so I would say get to Gatwick and give them a go - you only have £28 to loose.

All the best mate