Just got my results from City Uni :
Ishihara 38-Plate test - (25 numerical designs used) Score 3 out of 25 correct
CAD (Colour Assessment & Diagnosis Test) Classification: Protan deficiency Colour Vision Thresholds:Red-Green: 10.93 X “normal” mean threshold* Yellow-Blue: 0.98 X “normal” mean threshold*
Farnsworth D15 Test Pass
American Optical Company (H.R.R) Plates (2nd Edition) Score 18 out of 20 correct
City University Test, 2nd Edition Score 10 out of 10 correct
Nagel Anomaloscope Matching range: 60-65
Holmes Wright Lantern (type A) In Mesopic viewing with high brightness: 6 errors: 1st run: 2 errors 2nd and 3rd runs: 4 errors (Green called ‘White’, White called ‘Green’). In Scotopic viewing with high brightness: 6 errors.1st run: 2 errors 2nd and 3rd runs: 4 errors (Green called ‘White’, White called ‘Green’).

Don't really understand the Nagel Anomaloscope result, but I'm guessing that's a fail! Forwarded these to the CAA, now the waiting game begins...

the nagel will be a fail, sorry, 4 scale units or less..

lantern test result are very typical of the' white/green confusion,

only thing that will happen is that caa will look at the results of cad, and they should average your results with them to what you did at city, im sorry if this relpy is negative, i hope you get a positive result, but be prepared!!

Ahhh, thanks for the info on the nagel!
It's weird how the CAD suggests im red colour deficient yet the lantern suggests a green deficiency!

I'm prepared for the negative outcome - I shall go back to UCL and do the CAD again and hopefully bring my average down! (At least if I do badly there I don't have to submit my result and just do it until I get another pass to bring down the average!)

hey matt

the cad has diagnosed you as red deficient, but the lanterns say your green, i would have thought you would have had more errors with the red/green lights, again white green is more common for both sides..

the issue is sometimes with the Illuminance ie is Mesopic is not pitch black, nore a dusk/dawn and really the test is run in normal room lighting, and if you fail a run of the 9 lights, then you are night adapted..

the d15 and the city tests are less demanding, and easier to pass, transport canada have the 13/15 pass for the ishihara, but the accept the d15 test, as an alternative.

im supprised that they didnt do the PAPI simulator, its not a test as such bu what they used to test the cad on!!

im wondering if i should attend city and do a few runs, and see if i can reduce the results, still not sure, but when i did the test at gatwick the did the full test and not the short one to begin with, which i have gave them hell over..

Hey Scottish! I was never offered the PAPI test at city or at Gatwick...didn't know it was a valid test either looking at the requirements for colour vision... Either way, knowing now that I did manage to pass the CAD I'm definitely inclined to go to city and repeat the CAD a few times and use the results to get my average down (if this result doesn't drag it down enough). I'm sure if I asked city would allow me to come and do 2 or 3 CADs in one session to get a few results. Just a bit of a pain now; I've passed in my mind and that should be merited...it's quite costly travelling down from Manchester and having the test redone! I'm currently just waiting for the CAA to get back to me about whether they consider me a pass or fail after they perform some maths on my results Ugh ! (I've still only been told my average by them, I specifically requested each score individually off them, but they just sent me my average out again with a pretty little graph that makes little sense to me... ) God knows how long that will take...

ive just re-read the caa presentation on the cad, and from both our experiences, they say its 100 % accurate and % sensitive, so really come to think about it, you should have got the same reading as the first one at gatwick, because according to caa colour vision does not change lol..

and the way it reads, there is nothing in the standards that states if within a limit or boarderline, you need to redue the test and average the score, AGAIN CAA how the :mad: if that correct and factual..

haha Scottish! You are right! I have recently graduated with a degree in Biology and I can tell you now, a test that is 100% accurate doesn't exist...and the fact I got 2 different scores suggests the test may be open to external variables (thus unreliable and from a scientific standpoint open to being rejected as a trustworthy test).

And yeah, i also noticed they never mention anything about borderline...I'm still at a loss as to what that means! I asked at city and they didn't know either, they just say pass or fail and nothing about borderline!

gatwick says if you fall between let say for dutan, 6 and 7 units they can retest you!! ie to average out the score, so is it accurate!!!

if city is saying the latter ie, if you score 6.01 its still a fail, i was also told that any readings from previous tests ' must be taken into the averaging' stage, erm where does it say that, and there i no set procedure for cad, if you goto city let me know and ill get you to ask some questions lol

Ok i have been reading the EASA medical book, now im confused as to the wording of this, as we all know caa shows first 15 plates, ie no errors, but under the EASA guidliness as the below says,

to pass the ishihara test, nothing about the first 15 plates no errors.. to me that says to the standard of the ishihara test 13/15, CAA get a grip and stop arsing about, make this a fair standard...


MED.B.075 Colour vision
(a) Applicants shall be required to demonstrate the ability to perceive readily the colours that are necessary for the safe
performance of duties.
(b) Examination
(1) Applicants shall pass the Ishihara test for the initial issue of a medical certificate.
(2) Applicants who fail to pass in the Ishihara test shall undergo further colour perception testing to establish whether
they are colour safe.
(c) In the case of Class 1 medical certificates, applicants shall have normal perception of colours or be colour safe

Do we have different documents? This is from the EASA AMC to Part Med:-

My bold

The full AMC document is here:-

https://easa.europa.eu/agency-measur...bin%20crew.pdf

huh, ill check the document is got from EASA website Dobbin1

thanks mate..

You are reading two different but connected documents.

MED B.075 is taken from EU Regulation 1178/2011 (Aircrew Regulation) Annex IV and this simply provides the regulatory framework for medical requirements.


AMC1 MED B.075 is taken from the Acceptable Means of Compliance, which is the document which tells the authority how they achieve compliance with the regulation.

This may seem like unnecessary duplication of effort and there is a lot of legroom in that argument.

Look at Part-FCL; the regulatory framework is in EU 1178/2011, attached to which is the AMC and on top of that you have the CAA's very own CAP 804. Between the three of them they present an absolute minefield of documentary, indecipherable crap which could have been easily combined into one document a fraction of the size of these three put together. The duplication is staggering, navigating them is an absolute nightmare, some essential areas were omitted from the original release and for extra effect, they've even managed to include some contradiction.

Surprised?

Collective Colour Vision Thread 4
 

Ah ok thanks

Collective Colour Vision Thread 4
 

Guys I'm not going to spend much more time on this subject, lets face facts that colour vision standards are unfair, I've read back on the previous threads and we could argue till we are blue in the face but its not going to change anything, and before anyone starts on the c.v.d pilots area it's not going to change anything sure Arthur pape changed a standard in that country but nothing will move the standard. To be brunt on you get a colour vision restriction after doing all the tests regardless of boarder line results, move on with your lives and alternative careers cause its not worth the hassle And heart ache, I should know. I don't apologise for my forwardness but its time to move on people.

Collective Colour Vision Thread 4
 

I'm sorry you feel this way Scottish but people should not give up on fighting for a crime that is being committed and has been for a long time. It is the basic reason why we have laws and courts, because injustice exists and people should fight for their rights. I know a lot of people that have not given up, are cvd's and fly. They are the example we should follow instead of allowing current obstacles to prevail.

yeah but that's in Australia via Arthur!

tell me about the crime being committed!!

If you have youth on your side then keep building your hours. I think we will see legal proceedings in Europe over this within a few years.

Believe me - the only obstacle is the money to run a legal case. Circa XEU500k i bet. The reason why all us CVDs can't get the money together is because we aren't synchronized in our frustration - you cant keep banging your head against the wall - so you switch off. I was devastated as a young man over this in the UK 30 years ago [and mildy p$$sed off ever since]. Moving to OZ was the option I took eventually.

If we could wake all those CVDs that switched off we would be much larger force. That is one thread of work being tackled by the CVDPA (Arthur) and associates.

Dr Arthur Pape is presenting a paper to a major aeromedical conference in Chicago in May which will question the NTSB findings on the Tallahasee accident which was partly blamed on a CVD copilot. These are all things that are going to be of value to our cause because it's the only 'so called evidence' the authorities have.

Individually we've all believed that if we just do that 'other test' we can pass it. What motivates us? We rightly suspected that colour discrimination doesnt come in to flying safely. It might have been used a bit before the advent of radio but it isnt used now. If only we hadn't all blown so much money trailing around the UK and Europe trying to pass any of a bunch of bogus tests we could have run and won the case years ago.

So, everybody, empower the man that has the experience of two legal wins againsts the aviation authorities [and they are all the same] and is willing to coordinate the fight beyond ozzie shores. Join the cvdpa.

dont get me wrong, im still interested in the whole area, i just tired of not seeing any resolve, and the continuous circle im seeing..

Be assured that Arthur is very determined to cause/assist change all over the globe.

He's a busy GP doctor but fighting the aviation colour standard has been a large part of his life. He's back on the case after his legal wins in the 80s and 90s - now that we have a large group of CVD airline copilots (that cant pass any colour test) each clocking up 6000+ hours by day and night in various airlines who want to make them captains. Hence setting up the CVDPA which is currently advising a legal case within Australia for these pilots.

As mentioned I am an ex pom, cvd commercial pilot and I might have to return to old blighty one day so I've met with him and know how devoted he is.

Hi Scottish,

I know how incredibly frustrating it can be, believe me. Although we're far more fortunate here in Australia that you poor guys in Europe, there is still discrimination occuring here. I've failed every colour vision test available and so my medical still restricts me & others like me from exercising the full privileges of our ATPL licences. There have been many times in my 15 years of flying when I have often thought it would be easier to give up as I am unable to fulfil my career goals. In doing that though, I would fail not only myself, but future generations of pilots who would continue to suffer the same injustices.

The most frustrating part for me is that I fly professionally for a living and so can see first hand just how irrelevant to the 'safe performance' of a pilots duties all these tests actually are. They prove absolutely nothing aside from the fact that we are colour defective, which we already know anyway!

Australian CVD's once also had similar restrictions to Europe and it was only due to Arthur's persistance to mount a legal challenge in the 1980's that we now enjoy a great deal more freedom in comparison to you guys. As OOW mentioned, the job is not quite finished here yet. We remain optimistic of a positive legal outcome in Australia sometime this year, which can then be used as evidence to prove to the rest of the world that the colour perception standard is a crock of BS!

I also speak with Arthur on a regular basis and I know he is extremely dedicated to help others internationally as are all CVDPA members including myself. To be successful though, we need to stop talking about all these irrelevant tests and start talking about ways to unite collectively and mount legal action. That is the only way we're going to win this fight!